1945–1950s: (Marketing Boards, the Groundnut Scheme, and the Seeds of Colonial Self-Destruction — State-Run Boards Paying Farmers a Fraction of Export Value,…

1945–1950s: (Marketing Boards, the Groundnut Scheme, and the Seeds of Colonial Self-Destruction — State-Run Boards Paying Farmers a Fraction of Export Value, Surpluses Channeled into Grand Schemes Rather Than Returned to Producers, the Tanganyika Groundnut Disaster, the French Sudan Cotton Failure, Forced Soil Erosion Trenches and Cattle-Culling Provoking Rural Resentment, and the Colonial State Sowing the Seeds of Its Own Destruction): The immediate postwar period witnessed increased interventionism, with governments becoming more closely involved in crop production through state-run marketing boards. In British West Africa, the Produce Marketing Board sought to maximize production and bring stability, and substantial government funds were made available for colonial development for the first time. African producers quickly recognized that marketing boards did not benefit them — while boards fixed prices to avoid the problems of the 1930s, the controls meant Africans were only ever paid a small percentage of their labor’s value, and surpluses accumulated in good years were not returned to farmers but channeled into grand capital development schemes. Some attention was also given to capital-intensive projects that marginalized African farmers in favor of mechanized equipment and settler experts — the groundnut scheme in Tanganyika envisioned huge plantations on North American prairie-style lines. It was a large-scale and expensive disaster: the ground was too dry, the soil too thin, and the machinery vulnerable to the climate, costing British taxpayers millions. Similar disillusionment followed in French Sudan, where investment in Niger River dams for cotton production fell far short of expectations as local farmers grew sugar and rice for the domestic market instead. Interventionist policies extended to forcing farmers to dig soil-erosion trenches, enforcing crop rotation, and culling cattle in communities believed to have too many — all perceived as intrusive evidence of Europeans’ misunderstanding of the cultural as well as economic value of livestock. These policies politicized peasants across the continent, creating a groundswell of anti-colonial grievance into which nationalist leaders tapped from the late 1940s. The colonial state, in pursuing policies aimed at retaining its colonies, was actually sowing the seeds of its own destruction.