Human Development Index of 172 (UNDP 2009). Trying to recover after nearly three
decades of war, it became a donor darling, and aid has been rising steadily for the past decade
(see Figure 1). Mozambique receives significantly more aid than neighbours at a similar level
(see Table 1) – Malawi (GDP rank 172, HDI 160) and Tanzania (GDP 157, HDI 151) receive
only 60 percent per capita of the aid of Mozambique. This may be because Mozambique is
one of the few countries to be loyally following a neo-liberal, free market development policy
and is apparently also reducing poverty (Hanlon and Smart 2008; De Renzio and Hanlon
2009). Both Malawi and Tanzania have publicly opposed donor economic policies.
A national family-consumption survey (IAF, Inquérito aos Agregados Familiares) in 1996-97
showed that 69 percent of the population lived below the poverty line. A similar study six
years later offered two alternative figures: 63 percent based on the same poverty line; or 54
percent based on changed consumption patterns which effectively lowered the poverty line
(MPF/IFPRI/PU, 2004). Poverty lines were based on food baskets; between the two surveys,
poor people switched to cheaper, lower quality food, which, it was claimed, allowed the
poverty line to be lowered. Perhaps not surprisingly, government and donors accepted the
lower percentage, which appeared to show a dramatic fall in poverty in only six years. In
keeping with this, Mozambique’s Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper, the Action Plan to
Reduce Absolute Poverty 2006-2009 (Plano de Acção para a Redução da Pobreza Absoluta,
PARPA II), called for a further cut to 45 percent by 2009. Some of us argued that the higher
poverty figure was more realistic, because the reduction in the number of people below the
poverty line came about mainly by lowering the line, and because no other survey showed
such a dramatic fall in poverty (Hanlon and Smart 2008: 61). This provoked a fierce debate
with the authors of the IAF report (Savana, January 25, 2008). The 45 percent target has
proved a hostage to fortune. Both donors and government staked their prestige on a
continuing huge fall in poverty, but the National Agricultural Survey (Trabalho de Inquérito
Agrícola, TIA), a nationally representative household-income survey, indicates that far from
declining, poverty is actually increasing, as is the gap between rich and poor.
Officially, 70 percent of the Mozambican population is rural and agriculture is the
predominant economic activity in Mozambique. The smallholder sector accounts for 99
percent of all farms, which means that the further reduction in poverty called for in PARPA II
is dependent on enhancing farmers’ incomes. PARPA II recognises this and prioritises
agricultural development to increase rural incomes and reduce absolute poverty. PARPA II
calls for a transformation of agriculture through the promotion of agrarian services, and
increased productivity and production. We argue here that this has not happened.