Theme: Evaluation of Food security in Navoi region

Theme: Evaluation of Food security in Navoi region

Plan

Introduction

1. Resource capacity in Agricultural system, sustainable management of natural resources and its productivity

2. The concept of Food security

2.1 Food safety and nutrition in developing countries

2.2 Monitoring and evaluating the food security nutrition effects in Uzbekistan

2.3 Main factors of food security supply among regions. (Navai)

3. Food access,poverty and household food security.

3.1 Food availability, agricultural production and productivity

3.2 National food consumption, import and export rates, regional analysis.

3.3 Methods of strengthening national food safety and current disciplines of food production.

4. Causes and effects of food insecurity.

Summary and proposals

References

1 Recourse capacity in Agricultural system, sustainable management of natural resources and its productivity

Uzbekistan is predominantly a rural society and agriculture has been and still the dominant sector of the Uzbek economy. While two third of Uzbekistan’s population, approximately 15 million people, live in rural areas, agriculture employs about 60% of the rural population and 35% of the total active population in the country. The share of agriculture is nearly a third of Uzbekistan’s GDP, and agricultural exports (in particular cotton fiber) account for approximately 40 percent of total exports. Agriculture is also the key source of government revenue, primarily through cotton production and taxation. Moreover, the processing of primary agricultural output (food processing, dairy products production, cotton processing, etc.) represents a significant part of industrial activities and contributes to about 5% of the GDP. Agriculture is based on irrigated farming. Uzbekistan covers about 450,000 square kilometers. The climate is arid and continental and rainfall is limited to the winter months. The largest category of land use (53 percent) is unimproved natural pastures for grazing and hay; 36 percent is non-agricultural and about 10 percent is cultivated, of which 82 percent is irrigated (4.4 million ha, about 0.3 hectares per rural inhabitant). Main agricultural areas are located in the basins of the Amu Darya and the Syr Darya rivers which supply about 70% of irrigation water. Large expansion of irrigated lands during 1960s to late 1980s resulted in excessive water take-off from these rivers causing drying out of the Aral Sea, increasing soil salinity, and other adverse environmental impacts. Crop sector is dominated by cotton and, to less extent, by wheat. Approximately 60 percent of the value of agricultural production comes from the crop sector and the remainder from the livestock sector. Cotton is the most important crop economically. This "strategic crop", produced in irrigated areas throughout the country, accounts for about 40 percent of cultivated land and makes up about 40 percent of export earnings. It makes Uzbekistan the fifth largest cotton producer and second largest cotton exporter in the world. Since independence, and as a result of the self-sufficiency food policy adopted by the Uzbek Government, wheat has become the second "strategic crop". It accounts for about 30 percent of the cultivated area. The rest of the cultivated area is used for growing fruits and vegetables (Uzbekistan continues to be one of the major suppliers of fresh and processed fruits and vegetables in the region), in addition to potatoes, tobacco and fodder crops. Animal husbandry in Uzbekistan is specialized not only in production of foodstuffs (meat, diary products, eggs) but also in the production of raw materials that include cocoons of mulberry silkworms and karakul that are highly demanded in the world markets. Very slow land reform and maintenance of state control over the agriculture sector Since independence, Uzbekistan’s agricultural policy has been determined by several objectives: stabilization of cotton export revenues; achieving self-sufficiency in wheat production; insuring government revenues through implicit taxation of agricultural products (cotton and wheat) and keeping food prices low in the local market. To achieve these objectives, the Uzbekistan Government has adopted a slow and regulated approach to land reform, and has maintained state controls over the production, procurement, pricing and marketing of the two "strategic crops" -cotton and wheat - which account for about 80 percent of cultivated land. The Government has also maintained the state monopoly on supply and marketing of agricultural input, and restricted trade by banning exports of key agricultural commodities (cereals and livestock) and importing most key foods (sugar, vegetable oils) in a centralized manner through a state trading company (World Bank, 2003 and 2005; ADB, 2006). Thus, the liberalization of production and domestic markets has been limited to some agricultural sub-sectors such as livestock, fruits and vegetables.

A process of farm restructuring without privatization The Soviet agricultural system in Uzbekistan was characterized by the dominance of large collective and state farms (kolkhozes and sovkhozes). Land reform consisted in dismantling the large state farms, by introducing shirkat collective farms (5,000 hectares or less) and private family farms (10–250 hectares) and by expanding the program of dekhan or household plots. However, land reform did not institute the right of private ownership. The state continued to own the land and farmers were given time-bound usufruct rights (right to use). Moreover, the command and control system was preserved: the state heavily regulated the size and types of activities, severely limiting the amount of land that could be devoted to particular activities.

1. Collective farms (Shirkat). The shirkat is essentially a new version of the old Soviet collective farm. In theory, Shirkats are independent entities, which are technically joint-stock companies that the former workers hold shares in. However, in most cases the Shirkat is basically a continuation of the kholkoz, including the same leadership. Most of the shirkat farms are generally devoted to the production of cotton and grains. In 2003, shirkat farms (about 1,740) occupied 52 percent the cultivated land and produced 62% of cotton and 49% of wheat.

2. The shirkhat provides little incentive for workers who are paid very small wages, and sometimes only receive goods, such as cotton-oil, in kind. According to the ADB, in 2003, shirkat workers received 23% of their salaries in kind. Moreover, in order to be paid (in some combination of cash and in kind), the shirkat should met its procurement target. However, since most shirkats tend to be loss making or only marginally profitable, the cash income of their workers tends to be very low. Worse, sometime it is withheld for months before it is actually paid out. (ADB 2005, ICG 2004) In most cases, workers remain in the collective because they also receive small plots on short leases, on which they grow vegetables and other crops, and/or because they benefit from informal arrangements such as permissions to use extra land,diversion of inputs, fuel, and services to their household plots, grazing their livestock on shirkat lands, etc.

3. Private family farms. Private farmers receive land on a lease of 30 to 50 years. Most of these farms are small, with an average size of 25 hectares but some are as large as 150-250 ha. In 2003, Uzbekistan had about 100,000 private family farms occupying 37 percent of cultivated land. These are usually obliged to grow a certain percentage of cotton and/or grains (wheat, rice) and sell their production to the state at procurement prices. Failure to comply with the mandatory cropping plans may result in the expropriation of the private farm land by the state. In addition, they are heavily dependant on the shirkhat for irrigation and inputs. Private family farms account for about 38% of cotton and 52% of wheat production. They are marginally profitable, because of their lower than shirkats production costs and their relatively greater freedom to cultivate and sell other crops on the remaining 10–20% of lands that are not dedicated to cotton and wheat. However, private livestock farmers are significantly more independent than private crop farmers as they do not depend on the state farms for irrigation and other essential inputs. They occupy an average of 65 hectares and possess an average of 400 heads of livestock.

4. Dekhan Farms or Household plots. During the Soviet era, such plots were allocated by the state for all rural and a limited number of urban households for constructing dwellings and for having a supplementary source of food. However, since the independence in 1991, the number of these farms increased from 2.3 to 4.3 million. This dramatic increase is certainly one of the most important social and economic features of the agricultural sector. According to the 2001 FBS, 82 percent of all households (at the national level) and 97 percent of all rural households have access to household plots. In urban areas the size of the land is small, and more than half of this is covered by buildings or housing. Rural inhabitants on the other hand, access more land on average, and a larger fraction (about 60 percent) is useable for agricultural purposes. The average size of Dekhan farms is about 0.17 ha and are limited by law to less than 0.35 ha each. However, despite being very small (average 0.1 ha) and occupying only 11 percent of total cultivated land, they play a major role in terms of agriculture production and, more importantly, in household food security. Dekhan Farms are vital for the survival of farm workers as well as for many poor and unemployed urban households as they provide more than a quarter of the food consumption of rural households and 7 percent of the food consumption of urban households (2001 HBS). Trend in Agricultural Production: The major role of Dekhan Farms in agricultural production and food supply After independence, total agricultural output dropped significantly in Uzbekistan, so that by 1996, it was about 84 percent of its 1991 level. However, and as a result of the land distribution and of the engagement of a growing number of households in agriculture,agricultural production had significantly increased since 1996. According to official data it has surpassed, starting from 1999, its 1991 level, reaching, in 2005, 140% of the 1991 level. Thus, according to official statistics again, the agricultural sector in Uzbekistan had performed better than the same sector in all of the FSU countries. (See Figure below) However, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and other international sources estimate that the real growth rate of the agricultural output as well as that of the GDP were significantly lower than the official rates. According to analysis by the World Bank, output in agriculture, since 1996 had grown modestly and in 2005 was at levels with that of 1990 (World Bank, EM, 2005). Figure1. 1.1

Household plots and private farms are the driving engine for the increase in crop production

Whatever its importance, the overall growth of agricultural output masks, in fact, the structural changes that occurred in the sector and the contribution of the different types of farms to the recovery of the agricultural sector. For the most part, recent growth is in fact limited to dekhan farms. In spite of their very low share of cultivated land (11 percent), they account for almost 60% of agricultural output (40% of crop and almost 90% of livestock output). Dekhans’ increased share in crop output reflects, in particular, higher yields. On the other hand, the output of the Collective farms (Shirkat) in crop output declined from over 80% to about 48%, with a more dramatic drop in their share of livestock output to approximately10%. In fact, livestock production in most shirkats was liquidated, which grossly aggravated their cash flow. The drop in the share of shirkats’ crop output reflects both a decline in land and more importantly a decline in yields. In total, Collective farms with a 52 percent share of arable land account for only 23 percent of agricultural output.The new private family farms are also characterized by low productivity: with a 37 percent of share of arable land, they account for only 14 percent of agricultural output.

The productivity of irrigated land is about 1.5 times higher on dekhkan farms than on shirkats and family farms. Shirkats’ output is steadily declining for a number of reasons including: difficulty to respond to fast changing conditions; lack of management and other resources; lack of incentives and conflicting interests of members; and frequent management changes.

Dekhan farms are the only private and dynamic segment of the Uzbek agriculture. Despite the fact that most of these farms operate on the basis of primitive manual labour, there has been rapid and strong productivity gains leading to increases in household incomes. Thus the overall growth in production witnessed since the mid 1990s has been impelled by the private farms, and more particularly by household plots and small farms, which were in fact the driving engine for the overall growth since 1996 and for the relative recovery of the agricultural production. Most smallholders are part-time private farmers, and they grow a wide variety of crops. Some cultivate for subsistence while others produce cash crops for income. They account for about 75 percent of food other than wheat that is produced in the country. Table1. 1.1

Crop sector is dominated by cotton and, to a lesser extent, by wheat. Approximately 60 percent of the value of agricultural production comes from the crop sector and the remainder from the livestock sector. Cotton is the most economically important crop. This "strategic crop", produced in irrigated areas throughout the country, accounts for about 40 percent of cultivated land and makes up about 40 percent of export earnings. It makes Uzbekistan the fifth largest cotton producer and second largest exporter of cotton in the world. Since the independence, and as a result of self-sufficiency food policy adopted by the Uzbek Government, wheat had become the second "strategic crop". Itaccounts for about 30 percent of cultivated area. The rest of the cultivated area is used for growing fruit and vegetables (Uzbekistan continues to be one of the major suppliers of fresh and processed fruit and vegetables in the region), in addition to potatoes, tobacco and fodder crops.

Government self-sufficiency food policy and its effects on crop production Before independence, agriculture was mainly oriented towards cotton, fruits and vegetables, food crops were far from satisfying the local needs. As a result Uzbekistan was also net food deficient and relied for a major part of its food needs on imports. This is in particular the case of wheat: the amount of imported wheat was more than four times as much as the local production. Thus, in 1992, while the local production of wheat was less than one million tons, the country imported about 4.5 million tons. Wheat was imported mainly from Kazakhstan, which was the most important wheat producer in Central Asia. In addition the country relied on imports for almost all of its needs in sugar (437 thousand tons), an important part of its needs in potatoes (290 thousand tonnes imported and 365 thousand tonnes produced in 1992). However, needs in animal products, vegetables and fruit were satisfied by the local production. Following the collapse of regional trade and the disruption of food supply, particularly related to wheat, Uzbekistan, like the other Central Asian countries, adopted a strategy of food self-sufficiency. Thus, the Government decided to increase the wheat cropping area in order to produce the amount needed by its population. As a result wheat areas and production grew from 627 thousand hectares in 1992 (964 th tons) to 1,328 thousand hectares in 1997 (3,073 th tons) and to 1440 thousand hectares in 2003 (5,928 th tons). The country achieved self-sufficiency in wheat by 1998. It is noteworthy that this increase took place, under mandatory state orders, firstly in the State and Collective farms and, later on, following the land reform, in the Family Farms. Today, more than 80 percent of wheat production is taking place in these tow types of farms.

However, the opportunity cost of this self-sufficiency has been high.

The increases in wheat acreage and production had a large effect on crop production. Winter wheat areas increased from about 4% in 1991 to 37% in 2003 and partly replaced cotton and maize, fodder crops and vegetables. Fodder areas declined by two thirds between 1991 and 2004. Detrimental to soil fertility, over 80% of irrigated cropped land is planted by cotton (40%) and grains (40%) subject to mandatory production targets. This has caused significant reduction of areas planted to potatoes, vegetables, melons and other crops (7%). In addition, it has resulted in serious land fertility degradation and added to environmental problems. Area planted to fodder declined by two thirds to 9% during 1991 – 2004. Moreover, the yearly wheat sowing in autumn over the growing cotton without proper treatment and salt leaching have increased soil salinity and contributed to increased groundwater level. Additionally, the conversion of land from feed crops to wheat (fodder area is now one-third its level of 1991) also reduced fodder production which, together with a sharp decline in the imports of mixed fodder, has reduced livestock productivity.

The average yields of cotton and wheat are low and the cost of production is high by international standards. Due to good weather, cotton yield increased to 2.65 t/ha in 2004. However, cotton yields have been declining steadily from about 2.7 t/ha in 1991 to about 2.1 t/ha in 2003. While cotton yields declined by 23% during this period, the cost of production increased by 23%. The comparison with China is of interest. With climatic conditions similar to those of Uzbekistan during 2000-2004 China achieved average yields of 3.3tonnes/ha, against 2.2 tonnes/ha in Uzbekistan. Wheat yields increased from about 2.3 t/ha to about 4.2 t/ha. However, this level of productivity remains extremely low for irrigated agriculture.

The low yields of cotton and wheat are related to the very low state procurement prices. The typical price received by farmers lies considerably below export parity under market conditions. This, in addition to direct taxes such as VAT on cotton ginning, and excise taxes on cotton seed oil, represents the main source of tax revenue from agriculture. According to the Asian Development Bank estimates, the net implicit tax for 2004 was about US$1.04 billion or about US$350 per ha for cotton/wheat farmed on over 80% of cropped land. For years, the net implicit taxation of agriculture oscillated at around 10% of the GDP. The annual average net implicit tax over 2002-04 is US$1.13 billion. The decline of cotton and wheat yields is thus reflecting, in particular, the lack of producer incentives, deteriorating land quality, lack of equipment, poor quality seed, lack and chemical imbalance of fertilizers, and lack of other resources.

Livestock Production. Since independence, nearly all livestock had shifted to dekhan farms that account for over 90% of the value of livestock production. This includes 90% of cattle, 72% of sheep and goats, and 64% of poultry (2003). Poor diet, with low fodder supply, and only 40-45% of requirements of feed concentrate limit development of livestock production in Uzbekistan. The quality of feed concentrate is poor and it comes at a high price. Cattle productivity – milk yield (1,684 kg) and fertility per 100 cows (45), as well as the daily gain in weight (421 g) are low. Livestock production, like horticulture, function within the framework of a free market economy. The Government interferes little and provides limited research and extension services. On the other hand, livestock and horticulture inputs are usually available at reasonable prices. The production is sold either directly through local markets for fresh products or to small private enterprises specializing in fruit, vegetable, meat, wool, and leather processing. Animal husbandry in Uzbekistan is specialized, not only in production of foodstuffs (meat, diary products, eggs) but also in production of raw materials that include cocoons of mulberry silkworms and karakul that are highly demanded in the world markets.

2.The concept of Food security. Food security is a flexible concept as reflected in the many attempts at definition in research and policy usage. Even a decade ago, there were about 200 definitions in published writings.Whenever the concept is introduced in the title of a study or its objectives, it is necessary to look closely to establish the explicit or implied definition.

The continuing evolution of food security as an operational concept in public policy has reflected the wider recognition of the complexities of the technical and policy issues involved. The most recent careful redefinition of food security is that negotiated in the process of international consultation leading to the World Food Summit (WFS) in November 1996. The contrasting definitions of food security adopted in 1974 and 1996, along with those in official FAO and World Bank documents of the mid-1980s, are set out below with each substantive change in definition underlined. A comparison of these definitions highlights the considerable reconstruction of official thinking on food security that has occurred over 25 years. These statements also provide signposts to the policy analyses, which have re-shaped our understanding of food security as a problem of international and national responsibility.

Food security as a concept originated only in the mid-1970s, in the discussions of international food problems at a time of global food crisis. The initial focus of attention was primarily on food supply problems - of assuring the availability and to some degree the price stability of basic foodstuffs at the international and national level. That supply-side, international and institutional set of concerns reflected the changing organization of the global food economy that had precipitated the crisis. A process of international negotiation followed, leading to the World Food Conference of 1974, and a new set of institutional arrangements covering information, resources for promoting food security and forums for dialogue on policy issues.

The issues of famine, hunger and food crisis were also being extensively examined, following the events of the mid 1970s. The outcome was a redefinition of food security, which recognized that the behaviour of potentially vulnerable and affected people was a critical aspect. A third, perhaps crucially important, factor in modifying views of food security was the evidence that the technical successes of the Green Revolution did not automatically and rapidly lead to dramatic reductions in poverty and levels of malnutrition. These problems were recognized as the result of lack of effective demand.

Official concepts of food security. The initial focus, reflecting the global concerns of 1974, was on the volume and stability of food supplies. Food security was defined in the 1974 World Food Summit as:

“availability at all times of adequate world food supplies of basic foodstuffs to sustain a steady expansion of food consumption and to offset fluctuations in production and prices”

In 1983, FAO expanded its concept to include securing access by vulnerable people to available supplies, implying that attention should be balanced between the demand and supply side of the food security equation: “ensuring that all people at all times have both physical and economic access to the basic food that they need”

In 1986, the highly influential World Bank report “Poverty and Hunger” focused on the temporal dynamics of food insecurity. It introduced the widely accepted distinction between chronic food insecurity, associated with problems of continuing or structural poverty and low incomes, and transitory food insecurity, which involved periods of intensified pressure caused by natural disasters, economic collapse or conflict. This concept of food security is further elaborated in terms of: “access of all people at all times to enough food for an active, healthy life”. By the mid-1990s food security was recognized as a significant concern, spanning a spectrum from the individual to the global level. However, access now involved sufficient food, indicating continuing concern with protein-energy malnutrition. But the definition was broadened to incorporate food safety and also nutritional balance, reflecting concerns about food composition and minor nutrient requirements for an active and healthy life. Food preferences, socially or culturally determined, now became a consideration. The potentially high degree of context specificity implies that the concept had both lost its simplicity and was not itself a goal, but an intermediating set of actions that contribute to an active and healthy life. The 1994 UNDP Human Development Report promoted the construct of human security, including a number of component aspects, of which food security was only one. This concept is closely related to the human rights perspective on development that has, in turn, influenced discussions about food security. (The WIDER investigation into the role of public action into combating hunger and deprivation, found no separate place for food security as an organizing framework for action. Instead, it focused on a wider construct of social security which has many distinct components including, of course, health and nutrition). The 1996 World Food Summit adopted a still more complex definition: “Food security, at the individual, household, national, regional and global levels [is achieved] when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life”. This definition is again refined in The State of Food Insecurity 2001:

“Food security [is] a situation that exists when all people, at all times, have physical, social and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life”. This new emphasis on consumption, the demand side and the issues of access by vulnerable people to food, is most closely identified with the seminal study by Amartya Sen. Eschewing the use of the concept of food security, he focuses on the entitlements of individuals and households. The international community has accepted these increasingly broad statements of common goals and implied responsibilities. But its practical response has been to focus on narrower, simpler objectives around which to organize international and national public action. The declared primary objective in international development policy discourse is increasingly the reduction and elimination of poverty. The 1996 WFS exemplified this direction of policy by making the primary objective of international action on food security halving of the number of hungry or undernourished people by 2015. Essentially, food security can be described as a phenomenon relating to individuals. It is the nutritional status of the individual household member that is the ultimate focus, and the risk of that adequate status not being achieved or becoming undermined. The latter risk describes the vulnerability of individuals in this context. As the definitions reviewed above imply, vulnerability may occur both as a chronic and transitory phenomenon. Useful working definitions are described below.

Food security exists when all people, at all times, have physical, social and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food which meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life. Household food security is the application of this concept to the family level, with individuals within households as the focus of concern. Food security is a multi-dimensional phenomenon. National and international political action seems to require the identification of simple deficits that can be the basis for setting of targets, thus necessitating the adoption of single, simplistic indicators for policy analysis. Something like the “State of global food insecurity” analysis has to be undertaken. Since food insecurity is about risks and uncertainty, the formal analysis should include both chronic sub-nutrition and transitory, acute insecurity that reflects economic and food system volatility. Such formal exploration is usefully complemented by multi-criteria analysis (MCA) of food security. This should lead to qualitative, if not quantitative, comparisons. Where the focus of investigation is on sub-nutrition, then the linkages between sub-nutrition and inadequate food intake need to be carefully explored. Some elements that need to be considered are:

sources of dietary energy supply - taking account, for example, of different foods, trends in the acquisition of food from subsistence to marketing;

climatic variability as a source of volatility and short-term nutritional stress;

health status, especially changes in the incidence of communicable diseases, most obviously HIV/AIDS;

spatial distribution within countries of poverty and forms of food insecurity, drawing on evidence from vulnerability assessment and mapping supported by the Food Information and Vulnerability Mapping Systems (FIVIMS), the FAO and the World Food Programme (WFP) interagency initiative. It is sometimes suggested that there should be more practical use of Sen’s entitlement theory. If this were to involve the re-labelling of indicators of food needs as entitlements, it would be less useful than, for example, reflecting entitlement failure in a formal MCA. Entitlement as a construct introduces an ethical and human rights dimension into the discussion of food security. There has been a tendency to give food security a too narrow definition, little more than a proxy for chronic poverty. The opposite tendency is international committees negotiating an all-encompassing definition, which ensures that the concept is morally unimpeachable and politically acceptable, but unrealistically broad. As the philosopher, Onora O’Neill, recently noted: “It can be mockery to tell someone they have the right to food when there is nobody with the duty to provide them with food. That is the risk with the rights rhetoric. What I like about choosing the counterpart, the active obligation of duties rather than the rights, you can’t go on and on without addressing the question who has to do what, for whom, when”.

2.1 Food safety and nutrition in developing countries

2.2 Monitoring and evaluating the food security nutrition effects in Uzbekistan

Uzbekistan (the Republic of Uzbekistan, RUz) is a country of Central Asia. It shares borders with Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Kirghizia and Afghanistan. It has a coastline of the Aral Sea in the northwest. The total area is 447.4 thousand sq.km. The capital is Tashkent with a population of 2.3 million people.

Political system

The head of state is the president, elected for 7 years. The President of the Republic of Uzbekistan is Islam A. Karimov. The supreme state representative body shall be the Oliy Majlis of the Republic of Uzbekistan that exercises legislative power. The Oliy Majlis of the Republic of Uzbekistan shall consist of two chambers — the Legislative Chamber (the lower chamber) and the Senate (the upper chamber). The term of powers of the Legislative chamber and the Senate of the Oliy Majlis of the Republic of Uzbekistan — five years.

Population

More than 100 nations and nationalities live in the territory of Uzbekistan. The population of the country is more than 26.5 million people (Uzbeks - 71.4 %, Russians - 8.3 %, Tajiks - 4.7 %, Kazakhs - 4.1 %, Tatars - 2.4 %, Karakalpaks - 2.1 %, others - 7 %). The state language is Uzbek. Russian is a language of interethnic dialogue. The monetary unit is Sum.

Regions and districts

The Republic of Uzbekistan consists of the Karakalpak Autonomous Republic and twelve regions (viloyats). They are Tashkent, Bukhara, Fergana, Namangan, Andijan, Guliston, Djizak, Samarkand, Navoi, Kharezm, Surkhandarya, Kashkadarya.The regions are further divided into Districts (tuman).

Tashkent Region is divided into 15 administrative districts. The capital is Tashkent (Toshkent), which is also the capital city of the country, and is governed separately from the region as an independent city. Other major cities of Tashkent Region include Angren , Olmaliq, Ohangaron, Bekobod, Chirchiq, Gazalkent, Keles, Parkent, Tuytepa, Yangiobod and Yangiyul. Navoiy Region is divided into 8 administrative districts. The capital is Navoi. Other major towns include Qiziltepa, Nurota, Uchquduq, Zarafshon and Yangirabot. Economy Uzbekistan is rich in mineral resources, about 100 types of mineral resources found in its territory. The Republic is also a leader in production of gold. It ranks No.4 worldwide in terms of its explored reserves. Uzbekistan is one of the ten largest gas producers in the world. Other larger deposits of mineral resources include deposits of coal, uranium ore, nonferrous and rare-earth metals (silver, copper, lead, zinc, tungsten and molybdenum). The major part of Uzbekistan's industrial potential remains associated with the agriculture and processing of cotton. Other important industries of the national economy include the metallurgy, motor industry, chemical, food-processing industry and manufacture of construction materials. The most important agricultural branch in Uzbekistan is the cotton growing. Besides, fruits, vegetables, grain (wheat, rice and corn) are raised.

2.3 Main factors of food security supply among regions (Navai)

Navoi Region is the largest region of Uzbekistan. Located at the heart of the country, the area totals to 110.8 thousand square kilometers or 24.8% of total area with population of 880 thousand people, of which 400 people residing in cities and 480 thousand living in rural areas.

Population of Navoi Region is 880 thousand people, total area of region is 110 800 sq.km.Population of Navoi city (administrative center of region) is 125 thousand people (73.2%- Uzbeks, 16.5%- Russians, 1.3%- Kazahs, 9%- other nations).

History

The Sogdian civilization, which is one of the most ancient world civilizations, was born in Zarafshan River valley. If you ever have a chance to take a tour to historical places such as Rabat Malik, Sarmishsay, Chashma you will be admired how far the history of the region will take you.The modern Navoi region was founded in 1958 by uniting parts of Bukhara and Samarkand regions, and named after the great Uzbek poet and statesman Alisher Navoi. From ancient times territory of the province was considered as a significant place due to its strategic location and natural resources. The region was on important trade route - The Great Silk Road and served as dialogue of cultures and communication for people of East and West.

Alisher Navoi. "Mind, you peoples of the Earth,

Enmity is an evil state.

Live in friendship,

one and all -

Man can have no kinder fate."

Alisher Navoi (1441-1501 ) is the founder of Uzbek literature and the statesman, the patron of scientists, painters and craftsmen. Alisher Navoi was not famous for being a great conqueror as Alexander the Great, Caesar or Chengiskhan. He was a King’s Adviser in a palace. Being a wealthiest man in the kingdom after the King he spent all his life and wealth to educate and improve the living conditions of his countryman. For that cause he even sacrificed his personal life and did not get married in order to dedicate himself fully to the call of his life, help people. Justice was the law and there was no village where he did not build a school or improved water supplying facilities. He dreamed of a state where all men equal and all nations would live in peace and accord. Keeping this notion in mind and believing from their hearts Uzbek people named Navoi city after the great thinker Alisher Navoi.

Navoi City

The administrative center of the region is Navoi City which is the youngest administrative center in Uzbekistan, established in 1958 in the area of Malik Desert. The City holds a compact construction and possesses efficient modern engineering concept. Indeed, to provide air humidity system, designers projected large artificial pool/lake in the center of the city surrounded by parks and carousels. Worth to note architects, who built the city, were awarded as winners of International Union of Architects of Patrick Abercrombe.

Almost 125 thousand people reside in Navoi City.

Social Infrastructure

Navoi is multinational. For more than 80 nationalities live here in peace and accord. Average age of population reaches 25.2 years. Most of young people in here keep themselves busy in sport and educational facilities. Navoi State Pedagogical Institute, Navoi State Mining Institute, 362 secondary schools, 48 academic lyceums and colleges, specialized sport and musical schools are functioning in Navoi Province. There are 40 clinics, more than 120 clubs, 300 libraries and 2 museums in the province.

Climate

The climate of the province is sharply continental with dry and hot summer, cold winter with some snow, green spring and rainy autumn. One can really enjoy the features of each season of the year.

 The climate data for Navoi Region

 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Mean Maximum

Temperature (deg. C) 6.1 7,9 13,5 20,8 16,4 32,0 33,8 32,2 27,9 21.0 14,9 9,2

Mean Temperature

(deg. C) 0.6 2,2 7,8 14,5 19,5 24,5 26,2 24,2 19,3 12,7 7,5 3,3

Mean Minimum

Temperature (deg. C) -3.3 -1,4 3,2 8,9 12,7 16,4 17,8 15,9 11,2 6,0 2,0 -1,9

Rainfall Amount (mm) 44.0 39,0 71,0 63,0 33,0 4,0 4,0 0,0 4,0 24,0 28,0 41,0

Business and Economy

Modern Navoi region is large industrial and cultural center of the country; and plays an important role in the country’s economic development. The region is rich with raw material resources with availability of such fields as Muruntau gold-bearing field, silica sand field, deposits of granite and marble, as well as phosphorites, precious and rear-earth metals, betonitic clay, basalts, kaolin rocks, limestones, dolomites, wollastonites and feldspar.

The economy of the region is based on the following large enterprises:

· Navoi Mining and Metallurgical Combinat, which is a large producer of 9,999 carat gold in the world. The plant mines uranium, produces marble slabs, super phosphorite metals and other variety of products.

· Industrial Union NavoiMachine Building Plant, which deals with repair of mining equipment and produces metal working machine tools with programmed operation.

· Open Joint Stock Company Navoiazot produces more than seventy different views of organic and non-organic chemicals.

· Joint Stock Company Qizilqumcement, with its high cement brands, does not have any analogs in Central Asia region.

More than 44 investment enterprises operate on the territory of Navoi region. Most of these enterprises are located in Navoi and Zarafshan cities and they are established with participation of investors from USA, Switzerland, China, Russia and Ukraine.