PHM/SSA Presentation FANRPAN High Level Policy Dialogue
description
Transcript of PHM/SSA Presentation FANRPAN High Level Policy Dialogue
Postharvest Management in SSA (GPFS / SDC)
Background of the PHM-SSA project
Three projects under SDC’s “Global Programme Food Security” (GPFS):
one overall goal : “Food security of smallholder farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa is increased
through reduced postharvest losses at farm and community level”
Intervention logic (3 projects): identify, test, replicate and improve experiences on
postharvest management on the basis of good practices derived from national PHM
projects (HSI pilots, SDC, African Union, FAO, among others)
Regional Project
FAO/IFAD/WFP
• Uganda, Congo,
Burkina Faso
• 6 years
• Start: end of 2013
Regional Project
HSI/FANRPAN/AFAA
S/AGRIDEA
• Benin, Mozambique
• 6 years
• Start: April 2013
National project
SDC/FAO
• Ethiopia
•10 years
• Start: Oct. 2013
Main partners of our programme
Consortium HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation – FANRPAN (Food, Agriculture and
Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network)
AFAAS (African Forum of Agricultural Advisory Services) and AGRIDEA as associated
partners
Context Benin and Mozambique
Food losses in SSA are high…
120 – 170 kg food /capita
15-20 tons resp.15-30% of all grains (cereals, dry pulses) are lost = US$4 billion
40% of losses happen at the postharvest and processing levels!
Benin: Self-sufficient in roots, tubers and most cereals, however 25% of households in
Benin are food insecure or at risk of food security.
Mozambique: net importer of staple food; less than 25 % of smallholder families are able
to cover their food needs throughout the year.
Average PHL of maize: 15 - 30%, mainly due to precarious, non-hermetic storage
conditions, storage at the open air, improper drying etc.
Dry grains are vital for food security in most areas, especially in the North
Project areas Benin / Moz.
BENIN
Common granaries in North Benin : traditional . clay silo (“banco” granary)
Typical granaries in South Benin: conical granary, straw/bamboo granary
Common granaries: North of Mozambique
Challenges identified – technologies, practices
Big losses in traditional granaries: prone to humidity
and pest attacks, not air-tight.
Stocks in super bags: often not well sealed, exposed
to rain, dust etc. and also not air-tight.
Harvest that is left (“stored”) in the fields (lack of
storage facility or means of transport) Losses
Inadequate drying: losses and secondary
infestation, lack of hygienic precautions losses
during storage !
Challenges identified …….
Improper use of chemicals, lack of
knowledge
Theft – some farmers keep stocks indoors.
Collective storage is not popular (cultural
reasons, mismanagement in earlier
projects…)
Well performing techniques such as triple
bags and metal silo: not available on local
markets, not promoted (anymore)…
Challenges identified …….
Collective storage is not popular (cultural reasons,
mismanagement in earlier projects…)
Well performing techniques such as triple bags and
metal silo: not available on local markets, not
promoted (anymore)…
Post harvest market systems………
Challenges identified – postharvest market system
Raw materials
and inputs
Advisory
services,
extension
Information &
dissemination Financial
services
Transport
Regulation,
standards
Handling of
stocks
Storage
traditions
Support functions
Rules
Offer of
technology
Fix and apply rules
Demand of
technology
Core
functions
Inform and communicate
Price of
stocked
products
Warrantage
Theft
Gender
Challenges identified – postharvest market system
Raw materials
and inputs
Advisory
services,
extension
Information &
dissemination Financial
services
Transport
Regulation,
standards
Handling of
stocks
Storage
traditions
Support functions
Rules
Offer of
technology
Fix and apply rules
Demand of
technology
Core
functions
Inform and communicate
Technical and
financial partners
Producer
organisations
Price of
stocked
products
Warrantage
Local NGOs &
consultants
International NGOsProjects
Micro-finance
institutes (CLCAM,
PADME etc.)
Traders
Distributors
Retailers
Transporter
Ministery of
Agriculture
Processors (maize
mills, oil mills)
Communal
administration
Radio
Theft
Farmers
Artisans (e.g. banco
granary)Gender
Roles & Responsibilities
• Overall coordination of initiative and the
implementation of the initiative in focus countries,
linkage of partners
• Technical advice/backstopping on postharvest and
food security
• Linkage of project with other 2 PHL projects of GPFS
• Convening local level, national and regional policy
dialogue platforms
• Establish link between initiative and other national
and regional processes/frameworks (e.g. CAADP, /
NEPAD, etc.)
• Ensure that PHL issues are addressed at level of
policy dialogue
Roles & Responsibilities (cont.)
• Innovate on appropriate rural advisory services for
PHM
• Capitalise and disseminate successful PHM
experiences through national and regional networks of
rural advisory services.
• Link initiative PHM with other African networks.
• Strengthen/backstop AFAAS & ensure link with
GFRAS
• Technical & conceptual advice to include PHM in rural
advisory services
• Capitalization of experiences related to rural advisory
services for PHM
What we want to achieve....
GOAL
Food security of smallholder farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa is increased
through reduced postharvest losses at farm and community level
Outcome 1:
Improved handling and
storage options within
the grains and pulses
value chains are
benefitting smallholder
farmers in pilot
countries.
Lead: HELVETAS
Swiss Intercooperation
Outcome 2:
Good practice
options for reducing
postharvest losses
are compiled,
disseminated and
scaled up.
Lead: AFAAS /
Agridea
Outcome 3
Appropriate regulatory
frameworks on
reducing post-harvest
losses in fod supply
chains are introduced
and implemented at
national and regional
levels and financing is
secured.
Lead: FANRPAN
Our intervention strategy....
Two levels:
1. Rural households and communities:
Promotion of PHL management schemes for food self-sufficiency,
market development and income generation
2. Linkage of national, regional and continental (SSA) level by:
a) organizing and promoting learning and sharing
b) developing innovative approaches for rural advisory services
(RAS)
c) contributing to advocacy an policy dialogue
Our intervention strategy....
Validation /
Compilation of
effective, available,
affordable PHM
technologies /
practices
Bring in PHM topic in
- Policies
- Innovative RAS
- Communities of
Practices
Evidence !
• We are not a local project, but a regional project with local
pilots
• Our objective is scale through systematisation and replication of
successful technologies and practices (We do not re-invent the
wheel…)
Progress after 1,5 years
?
?
?
• In-depth analysis of local PHM market systems in Ben/Moz., key
constraints identified (technologies, grain markets, input markets, RAS
systems, policies)
• Assessment of key technologies / practices in terms of PHL, cost-
benefit, availability etc.: clay silo, metal silo, triple bags, Zero Fly bag,
drying / cleaning practices (trials)
• Participatory evaluation of these techniques started in 2014, with 200
farmers resp. demonstration fields in each country.
Progress after 1,5 years (2)
?
?
?
• Metal silo: analysis of input supply chains (import of raw material,
artisans, costs) by PHM expert ongoing; prototypes of metal silos
produced
• Training of artisans and farmers on production of storage
technologies (120 in each country)
• Sensitization of communities on PHM by radio dissemination,
events at village level, leaflets
• Assessment of warehouse receipt systems, pilots started in Benin
Progress after 1,5 years (3)
?
?
?
• Existing RAS systems, methodologies and tools
analysed through 2 national (Ben,Moz), 1 regional
(E-Africa) and 1 local studies (Benin)
existing materials compiled
• First dissemination material for farmer sensitization
developed (posters, leaflets, radio emissions)
• Collaboration with Access Agriculture formalized for
production of didactic videos in local languages
• Curricula for RAS agents, Trainer of Trainers,
artisans in elaboration in both countries
• Building up of national PHM networks – GO, NGOs,
RAS agents, companies etc.
• Virtual platform on PHM for regional (SSA) RAS
community launched
Progress after 1,5 years (4)
?
?
?
• Current national policies reg. PHM
analysed in each country (2 studies)
• «Policy briefs» published based on
findings of studies, addressing decision
makers & national/local governments
• Analysis of national PHM norms and
standards conducted (both countries,
road map for improvements proposed)
• Yearly national policy dialogue events
organized on PHM in each country, with
key actors from GO, NGOs, private
sector
• PHM prominently put on the agenda of
the yearly regional FANRPAN policy
dialogue event (Lesotho, Madagascar)
• Access database on PHM related policy
messages under construction.
First learnings and conclusions
• Input markets for PHM technologies (even simple ones..) are
quasi non existant in Ben./Moz. and generally in SSA.
High costs for technologies…
• PHM has been and is being neglected in national policies and
programmes
• Only a few RAS tools & materials on PHM exist; in national
extension services PHM is hardly tackled
• A lot has been done on PHM in the last two decades, but mostly
small, isolated initiatives (NGOs); no systematic approach
We are at the very beginning in SSA (compared to Latin Amer.)
There are a lot of small success stories around to build on
• Storage is important, but pre-storage steps are at least as crucial!
– timely harvesting, drying, sorting, …
• Strong focus nedds to be on grain quality & nutrition
Relevance for nutrition / health in national policies!
Markets ask and pay for better quality
Thank you your attention