Post on 25-May-2015
description
Innovation Platforms: a new approach to market development and technology uptake in southern Africa
Andre F. van Rooyen and S. Homann-Kee Tui ICRISAT – Bulawayo, Zimbabwe
25-28 October, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Why this approach?
• Low input systems
• Inefficient systems (high risk systems)
• Continued need for external support
• Farmers remain caught in poverty
• VERY low adoption of technologies
• Need to include other Value Chain players to increase overall efficiency
Working hypothesis
(i) only when farmers engage in markets will they invest in more productive management technologies, including feed, veterinary support and breeding
(ii)poorly developed markets for livestock products and services are the main constraint limiting the intensification of small-scale livestock based farming systems
It facilitates dialogue between the main local market players to collectively identify challenges and opportunities to improve production and marketing of livestock:
Farmers, input suppliers, traders, transporters, processors,
wholesalers, retailers R&D fraternity, regulators and policymakers
Platforms are established around local specific production and marketing systems, and ideally merge into larger networks for improved coordination of livestock commercialization processes (geographical, institutional).
The Innovation Platform
Identify and promote technologies that will improve livestock production at the house-hold level which will make products more “marketable” - and thereby increase the adoption of technologies.
Identify and implement strategies that will improve market efficiency and reduce transaction costs along the value chain – and thereby increasing the efficiency of the system, allowing more money to flow to the producer and thereby increasing the incentive for improved farming practices.
Objectives of the IP
IP Participants
Farmer
Trader
Processor
R&D CommunityWholesaler
Retailer
Consumer
Input SupplierRegulators
Central/Core PartnersMain Stakeholders; Continuous
participation{Farmers (ZFU), RDC, Buyers, AREX, DLPD, VET,
ZRP, Traditional leaders, Meat inspectors}
Input and support
ProcessorsMarket Intermediaries
Producers
Pol
icy
mak
ers
Con
sum
ers
Research
Developm
ent
Secondary PartnersIntermediate Stakeholders
Regular participation
Peripheral PartnersOutsider StakeholdersOccasional participation
Structure of the Innovation Platform
DevelopmentProcess
Activities & Outputs
Time
Establish IP and define roles and responsibilities
Workshop
Workshop
Workshop
Workshop
Workshop
Activities implemented by members
Activities implemented by members
Activities implemented by members
Project
Driven
Stakehold
er D
riven
Activities implemented by members
Sustainability M&E
M&E
M&E
M&E
Set Impact Indicators
Functioning of the Innovation platform
IP Development Process• Focus area, and entry points • Stakeholder Analysis – Who should be there?• Roles and responsibilities – Why should they participate?• Development Objectives – What do we want to achieve?
• Data Collection; – PRA, HH surveys, – VCA Mapping and Analysis
• ID Production Challenges - What needs to change at farm level?– (All stages of production, harvesting post harvesting)
• ID Market Challenges - What needs to change at market/processing level?• ID Opportunities: Implement and test different options – MAKE the
changes!• Feedback to IP• M&E
Stakeholder analysis
A Value Chain Approach
A value chain describes the full range of activities which are required to bring a product from conception, through the different phases of production, (involving a combination of physical transformations and the input of various producers services) to the final consumer and disposal.
Generic scheme of value chain functions
SpecificInputs
Provide- equipment- inputs
Production
ProduceHarvestDry etc.
Trans-formation
ClassifyProcessPack
Trade
TransportDistributeSell
Con-sumption
PrepareConsume
Basic functions in a value chain
Product flow
Information flow
Flow of money from the consumer
Challenges Namibia Zimbabwe Mozambique
Production
High Mortalities X X X
Lack of inputs X X X
Need improved breeds - X X
Lack of info - X X
Dry season feed X X -
Markets
Market infrastructure - X X
Processing infrastructure - X X
Low Prices - X X
Information incl prices X X X
Inadequate market systems/types
X X X
Identified Challenges
Namibia - Production
• Mortalities and Pharmaceutical Inputs– PPP to facilitate inputs to farmers– Trained community-based animal health
workers (CAHWs) on diagnosis and treatment on major diseases
– Vaccination days were organized
Mozambique – Infrastructure
• IP facilitated the establishment of a small slaughter facility in Mapai with funding from the FAO.
• As well as the construction of sales pens in Changara through a government tender– Both these initiatives resulted from the
awareness created by the IP at national government level.
Zimbabwe - Production
• Dry season feed– Extension officers and farmers were
trained in improved use of crop residues using a FFS process (storage and value addition)
– NGOs were involved to include input delivery into their agro-dealer programs
Zimbabwe - Market
• No market infrastructure– IP facilitated provision of funds to build
goat sales facilities– Arranged with buyers to progress from
farm gate sales to monthly auctions– Goats to a total value of USD 53,000 were
sold during the first year 2009 & the 2010 figures looks even better!
Some interesting observations from this market.
• Very large proportion of women selling goats
• 1-3 per household sold at a time
• Local goat prices tripled!!!
• Larger number of buyers are attracted to these auctions because of reduced transaction costs and number of goats available.
Goat value chain analysis
IPs improve productivity by
Identifying and promoting technologies that will improve production at the household level and address both quantity and quality of livestock products
Aligning the requirements of production and demand to develop strategies that bring producers closer to market demands
IPs improve markets by
Improving institutions related to the marketplace which will ensure organized, transparent markets and grading systems
Improving infrastructure including facilities such as sales pens, loading ramps, scales and transport
Improving access to markets which will improve physical access as well as removing institutional and policy-related barriers
Improving information flow which promotes participation and confidence in markets
Providing access to credible information by vetting it before dissemination through alternative pathways of information exchange
IPs improve policy by
Engaging policymakers at local and national levels to increase understanding of livestock-related issues
Identifying shortcomings of existing policies and proposing new policies
What are the disadvantages of this approach?
• “We” don’t decide the agenda• Its not our (or institutional) agenda• Its time consuming and “transaction costs” are high• It may create expectations beyond the project
objectives• The solutions are often simple and while we want to
deal with complex issues• Policy issues are often the most difficult challenges
but can be overcome through information and awareness.
Conclusions1. The IP approach generates context-specific solutions to
issues affecting the livestock sector as a whole
2. Results of this process indicates that there is an improved efficiency of the system as a whole and greater alignment of production with market requirements.
3. This means that there is greater flow of information (from sources that farmers seem to be willing to listen to) and ultimately money to producers.
4. Thus the IP is an effective process to jumpstart market led processes and also benefits the resource-poor farmer.
5. Using IP creates the right environment for technology adoption, and by commercializing the livestock sector farmers are rewarded (at the marketplace) for their investments.
Appreciate your attention.