Zambia Country
Assessment and Strategy
(Final Draft, Version 4.0, 4 October 2008)
prepared by the
RIU Zambia Country Assessment and Strategy Development Team
ii
Zambia Country
Assessment and Strategy
Team Managers:
Dr. David Cownie (Team Leader and Poverty and Livelihoods Specialist), [email protected]
(Namibia)
Dr. Ben Sekamatte (Zambia RIU Task Manager), [email protected] (Uganda)
Team Specialists:
Ms.. Sarah Carriger (Communications), [email protected] (Netherlands)
Mr. Ebbie Dengu (Innovations), [email protected] (Zimbabwe)
Mr. Steen Joffe (Information Markets), [email protected] (England)
Dr. Diana Banda (Agricultural Policies, Institutions, and Information Systems) (Zambia)
Ms. Monica Munachonga (Cross-Cutting Themes), [email protected] (Zambia)
Technical Support:
Dr. Jurgen Hagmann (Facilitation), [email protected] (South Africa)
RIU Support Team:
Members of the Innovations Resource Group
Members of RIU Programme Management
iii
Table of Contents
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................... viii
I. Background ................................................................................................................................................. 1
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 1
Team Composition and Personnel ........................................................................................................... 1
The RIU Approach ..................................................................................................................................... 1
Country Background ................................................................................................................................. 3
Agriculture and Rural Livelihoods .......................................................................................................... 5
II. Analysis of the Innovation Systems of Relevance to Getting Research Into Use ............................ 8
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 8
The Innovation System in Zambia ........................................................................................................... 8
The Main Stakeholders in the Innovation Systems of Relevance to RIU ........................................... 9
Summary of Innovations System ........................................................................................................... 21
Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................... 23
III. Proposed RIU Strategy in Zambia....................................................................................................... 25
Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 25
Framework for the RIU Programme in Zambia ................................................................................... 25
Strategic Thrusts ................................................................................................................................... 26
Innovation Coalition ............................................................................................................................ 27
Value Added ............................................................................................................................................. 33
Sustainability ............................................................................................................................................ 34
Results ........................................................................................................................................................ 35
Further Analysis Required ...................................................................................................................... 35
IV. RIU Programme Development ............................................................................................................ 36
Materials Consulted ..................................................................................................................................... 38
Annex A: Any Further Country-Specific Considerations ...................................................................... 43
Annex B: Specialist Sub-Report on Innovation Systems ........................................................................ 44
Annex C: Specialist Sub-Report on Communications ............................................................................ 72
Annex D: Specialist Sub-Report on Information Markets ..................................................................... 83
Annex E: Specialist Sub-Report on Policy Context and Information and Knowledge Flows .......... 95
Annex F: Specialist Sub-Report on Cross-Cutting Themes ................................................................. 105
Annex G: Terms of Reference .................................................................................................................. 128
iv
Abbreviations
ABF Agriculture Business Forum
ACF Agricultural Consultative Forum
ADB African Development Bank
ADP Agricultural Development Programme
ADSL Asymmetric Digital Subscriber Line
AIDS Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome
ARENA-SA Agroforestry Research Network for Southern Africa
ART Anti Retroviral Therapy
ASP Agricultural Support Programme
AU African Union
CAADP Comprehensive African Agriculture Development Programme
CASDT Country Assessment and Strategy Development Team
CAZ Communication Authority of Zambia
CBO Community Based Organisation
CBPP Contagious Bovine Pleuropneumonia (livestock disease)
CCA Common Country Assessment
CDMA Code Division Multiple Access
CDT Cotton Development Trust
CEDAW Conference on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women
CFU Conservation Farming Unit
CGIAR Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research
CIAT Centre for International Tropical Agriculture
CIMMYT International Centre for Maize and Wheat
CIFOR International Centre for Forestry Research
COMESA Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa
COSOP Country Strategic Opportunities Paper (of the International Fund for
Agricultural Development)
CSO Central Statistical Office
DfID Department for International Development (United Kingdom)
DSL Digital Subscriber Line
ECAPAPA Eastern and Central African Programme for Agricultural Policy Analysis
ECF East Coast Fever (livestock disease)
ECZ Environmental Council of Zambia
EDGE Enhanced Data rates for GSM Evolution
EASSy East African Submarine Cable System
EU European Union
FAAP Framework for African Agricultural Productivity
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
FARA Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa
FANRPAN Food Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network
FANR Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Directorate of the Southern African
Development Community
FBO Faith Based Organisation
GART Golden Valley Agricultural Research Trust
GDP Gross Domestic Product
v
GRZ Government of the Republic of Zambia
GSM Global System for Mobile communications
GPRS General Packet Radio System
HIPC Heavily Indebted Poor Country
HIV Human Immuno-deficiency Virus
ICRAF International Centre for Research on Agro-Forestry
ICRISAT International Centre for Research in Semi-Arid Tropics
ICT Information and Communication Technology
IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development
IICD International Institute for Communication and Development
IITA International Institute on Tropical Agriculture
IKSM Information and Knowledge Service Markets
IMR Infant Mortality Rate
IRG Innovation Resources Group
ISP Internet Service Provider
KATC Kasisi Agricultural Training Centre
Kbps Kilobits per second
LCMS Living Conditions Monitoring Survey
LDT Livestock Development Trust
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MACO Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives
Mbits/s Megabytes per second
MAPP Multi-country Agricultural Productivity Programme
MCDSS Ministry of Community Development and Social Services
MDG Millennium Development Goals
MOE Ministry of Education
MENR Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources
MFI Micro-Financed Institution
MOFNP Ministry of Finance and National Planning
MOH Ministry of Health
MIS Management Information System
MLGH Ministry of Local Government and Housing
MMMD Ministry of Mines and Mineral Development
MSTVT Ministry of Science, Technology and Vocational Training
NAP National Agricultural Policy
NARS National Agricultural Research System
NCSR National Council for Scientific Research
NDP National Development Plan
NEAP National Environmental Action Plan
NEPAD New Partnership for Africa’s Development
NGO Non-Governmental Organisation
NGP National Gender Policy
NIC National Innovation Coalition
NISIR National Institute for Scientific and Industrial Research
NPE National Policy on the Environment
NSTC National Science and Technology Council
NSTP National Science and Technology Policy
vi
OPPAZ Organic Producers Association of Zambia
OVC Orphans and Other Vulnerable Children
PAVIDIA Participatory Village Development in Isolated Areas
PLHIV People Living with HIV/AIDS
PPP Public-Private Partnership
PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal
PROFIT Production, Finance and Improved Technologies Project
PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
RNRRS Renewable Natural Resources Research Strategy
S&T Science and Technology
SADC Southern African Development Community
SHEMP Smallholder Enterprise Development and Marketing Programme
SMT Senior Management Team (of the RIU Programme)
TOR Terms of Reference
U5MR Under Five Mortality Rate
UN United Nations
UNAIDS United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS
UNDAF United Nations Development Assistance Framework
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNFPA United Nations Fund for Population Activities
UNHCR United Nations High Commission for Refugees
UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund
UNIDO United Nations Industrial Development Organisation
UNZA University of Zambia
USAID United States Agency for International Development
VSAT Very Small Aperture Terminal
WAN Wide Area Network
WAP Wireless Application Protocol
WB World Bank
WFP World Food Programme
WHO World Health Organisation
WiFi Wireless Fidelity
WiMaX Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access
ZABS Zambia Bureau of Standards
ZACSMBA Zambia Chamber of Small and Medium Business Associations
ZAMTEL Zambia Telecommunications Company Limited
ZARI Zambia Agricultural Research Institute
ZBCA Zambia Business Coalition on HIV/AIDS
ZCA Zambia College of Agriculture
ZESCO Zambia Electricity Supply Corporation
ZNBC Zambia National Broadcasting Corporation
ZNFU Zambia National Farmers Union
CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS
USD 1.00 = Zambia Kwacha 3,621
(October 2008)
vii
Map of Zambia Showing Provinces and Neighbouring Countries
The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this map do not imply the expression of
any opinion whatsoever on the part of RIU, NR International, NIDA or DFID concerning the delimitation
of the frontiers or boundaries, or the authorities thereof.
viii
Executive Summary
i. Introduction: The Research Into Use (RIU) Programme is designed to help address the
widespread concern that most agricultural research is not utilised effectively to reduce poverty
and support improved rural livelihoods. The purpose of the Research Into Use (RIU) Programme
is:
o To maximise the poverty reducing impact of previous natural resources research, including
Renewable Natural Resources Research funded by the UK Department for International
Development.
o To significantly increase an understanding of how the promotion and widespread use of such
research can contribute to poverty reduction and economic growth.
ii. The purpose of this Country Assessment and Strategy Report is to assist in the on-going
process of consensus building and implementation planning associated with the establishment of
the RIU Programme in Zambia. Of particular importance in this regard is to gain agreement
within RIU management on the proposed Innovation Platforms, so that the National Innovations
Coalition, the proposed Sub-District Innovations Coalition, and the RIU Programme in Zambia can
proceed with implementation planning and implementation.
iii. Approach: A RIU Country Assessment and Strategy Development Team (CASDT) conducted
an initial visit to Zambia in April and May, with follow-up visits in June and July, 2008, and
management visits thereafter. The team was comprised of the members noted on the inside cover
page. Two consultative workshops were held during these visits, field visits took place, and key
informant interviews were conducted. In addition, the Team Leader met with the Innovations
Resources Groups and RIU management personnel in England and Uganda in May and
September, 2008. Terms of Reference (TOR) for the CASDT are included in Annex G, including
revisions to these TOR.
iv. An initial mapping of the Zambia innovation system was conducted, and the drivers of
poverty assessed. This mapping was later confirmed in a follow-up visit, up to a level sufficient
for strategy development, and for further consideration during implementation planning.
v. RIU Focus: The RIU Programme in Zambia will be centred around the drivers of poverty
affecting rural households. Poverty and poverty alleviation, in this respect, are at the core of the
RIU Programme in Zambia. Key drivers of poverty in this respect comprise: 1) remoteness and
isolation, and the consequent lack of access to services and markets and means to improve
livelihoods; 2) household diversity, which yields a maldistribution of influence and economic
empowerment that undermines poverty alleviation; 3) socio-cultural determinants, key elements
of which also yield a maldistribution of influence and economic empowerment across women and
men, those facing stigma, and other factors; and 4) a dominant development paradigm that does
not prioritise investment in rural livelihoods. These development challenges have worsened in
recent years, with the loss of labour due to chronic illness and premature death (largely, but not
exclusively, associated with HIV&AIDS), and the narrowing of livelihood strategies. These
challenges offer RIU an important strategic advantage specifically associated with Renewable
Natural Resources Research Strategy (RNRRS) processes and products.
ix
vi. Opportunities and Constraints: An initial diagnostic of the agricultural Innovations System in
Zambia was included in this RIU Country Assessment and Strategy Report. The considerable
weaknesses, gaps and market failures in the agricultural Innovations System in Zambia, identified
in the Country Assessment and Strategy Report, provide important opportunities for the RIU
Programme to add value, and have the potential to yield a strong return-on-investment. The Team
therefore recommends that RIU proceed with Programme activities in Zambia.
vii. Framework conditions in Zambia highlight constraints associated with the following:
a weak regulatory and policy implementation environment;
insufficient investment in agriculture and other areas that would support improved rural
livelihoods;
a history of top-down service delivery and consequent dependency and lack of support for
local initiatives;
socio-cultural framework conditions that undermine poverty alleviation impacts;
historic corruption and market control that have undermined market development and
weakened intermediaries;
severe infrastructure challenges;
fragmented and expensive communications environment with limited reach of services to
remote rural areas;
high business transaction costs;
high interest rates;
the lack of community-level institutions that represent the interests of the disenfranchised
and the poor; and
entrenched rural poverty.
viii. There are nevertheless framework conditions in Zambia that offer important opportunities for
RIU programming. These include:
a positive policy environment for innovation in the rural development arena, albeit not
supported by investments in the sector;
a communications environment increasingly conducive to the establishment of functioning
information markets;
the presence of well resourced programmes with ‘good ideas’ conducive to an innovations
approach;
a continued inability to reach the very poor, strengthening their role in the economy and
therefore alleviating poverty, resulting in a desire to align programmes with activities that
show some promise in this regard; and
recognition that current models are not getting research into use.
ix. To effectively work in ways that will maximise the poverty alleviation impacts through an
innovations systems approach, the RIU Programme in Zambia should consider the following:
x
o The innovations system mapping has pointed out a number of actors involved in innovative
approaches to rural livelihoods enhancement initiatives. Virtually all of these actors have
noted severe weaknesses in demand for research, and dysfunctions in terms of its supply.
Stakeholders noted that approaches still tended to emphasise ‘push’ approaches towards
‘getting research into use’, and that the research itself often bore little relevance to how
particular innovations might affect livelihoods overall. Consistent with Government policy,
some of the programmes had been experimenting with applied research linked with extension
activities, reflecting a pragmatic approach to research influenced by demands from other
actors in the system.
o Other actors in the innovations system had integrated research into the framework of a
broader commitment to a programme objective, such as conservation farming. In these cases,
the research was driven more by the programme’s needs, rather than influences from other
actors in the system. A number of the programmes have, nevertheless, been assessed as open
to such innovation, and therefore represent important partners.
o The Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) represents the
primary strategic framework for agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa. The focus is on improving
agricultural productivity, of which Pillar 4 is ‘improving agricultural research, technology
dissemination, and adoption’. There is high level commitment to CAADP in a number of
countries, Zambia included. Despite some operational problems in respect to CAADP in
Zambia, there is no doubt that alignment with CAADP, and engagement with the CAADP
process, will be central to the success of the RIU Programme in Zambia.
o The specialist sub-reports for communications and information and knowledge service
markets highlight important opportunities for RIU engagement that will strengthen the
innovations system. This requires engagement with a mix of private, non-governmental, and
public actors in the Innovations System, the elimination of disincentives to co-operate, and
clarity and focus that will yield returns on investment for private sector actors.
o Innovation Platforms have been identified that are intended to engage with existing
commercial farming operations in a profitable manner, as important actors in the Innovations
System in Zambia.
o The team’s review of relevant Government policies suggests a broadly positive policy
environment, and a flexible Government approach to innovative ideas. There are particular,
and serious, weaknesses in terms of research. While presenting a challenge, the virtual
collapse of the system and its reconstruction through a number of progressive interventions
offers a solid foundation for engaging with research service providers (public and private,
local and national).
o In considering the drivers of poverty identified during the assessment, it is evident that the
ways in which people would engage with the Programme will be important in determining
the success of the poverty alleviation potential of the RIU Programme in Zambia. Despite
sound consultative strategies, they tend to engage with a broad range of households at
programme start-up, and rarely over time, as less poor households emerge to dominate
programme activities. On the other hand, a number of non-governmental organisations have
experience in working on livelihood support initiatives that reach very poor households and
persons, but tend to mix social welfare initiatives with income generating initiatives in a
manner that can undermine viability. This will require an iterative process that carefully
reflects on approach and impacts, underlining the key role to be played by MIL in the
Zambian RIU Programme.
xi
x. An emphasis (although not exclusive) on poorly-reached persons and households in semi-
remote areas obviously raises a number of challenges for the RIU Programme in Zambia. In
addition to establishing the right partnership arrangements, there are particular challenges
associated with the very drivers of poverty that the Programme needs to respond to, factors that
make it more difficult to reach people, and factors that yield lower returns on investment. It is not,
in this respect, the ‘easy road’, but it does mean RIU engagement with the very farmers who are
the Programme’s target group, avoiding a social welfare approach, and concentrating on economic
enhancement.
xi. Strategic Thrusts: Two integrated strategic thrusts are recommended for the RIU Programme in
Zambia, both intended to get research into use via strengthening demand:
(a) Enhancing capacity to demand services and participate in value/market chains by farmers
and intermediaries.
(b) Strengthening of knowledge market mechanisms and services.
xii. Hypothesis: The hypothesis of the RIU Programme in Zambia is that, by focusing on the drivers
of poverty and responding to gaps in the innovations system, the RIU Programme in Zambia will
improve the coherence of the system itself in a manner that will enhance the demand for services,
including research outputs, and in so doing strengthening and diversifying rural livelihoods.
xiii. Strategic Objectives: The RIU Programme has three strategic objectives in Zambia:
(a) Influence Agenda-Setting: At the national level, the RIU Programme seeks to influence the
decision-making environment in a manner that supports an improved match between a
positive rural development policy and strategy environment, on the one hand, with a
decision-making and resource allocation environment that does not reflect these stated
commitments. A first strategic objective is therefore to influence agenda-setting within
the Innovations System in Zambia.
(b) Support ‘Good Ideas’: The CASDT identified a number of actors engaged in innovative
activities, and clear gaps were identified where the RIU Programme in Zambia would
have a strategic advantage. A second strategic objective is therefore to engage with these
actors as part of a National Innovations Coalition to influence agenda-setting, and to
integrate RNRRS and other research outputs into a more coherent innovations system in
Zambia.
(c) Direct Response to the Drivers of Poverty: After due consideration of the drivers of poverty
in Zambia, the CASDT has identified a sub-district approach that would bring together a
number of strands of RIU Programme support, and the involvement of a number of actors
in the Innovations System, to serve as a catalyst for local market development. The third
strategic objective is therefore to respond directly to the drivers of poverty in a selected
location in a semi-remote rural area, with intended demonstration impacts elsewhere.
xii
xiv. Innovation Platforms: To support attainment of the strategic objectives noted above, a first
platform (“Building Trust and Co-Learning and Strengthening the Functioning of the System
Across Domains”) for the RIU Programme in Zambia will focus on working with a number of
national actors in the Innovations System to improve the functioning of the system itself, and to
strengthen its ability to influence decision-makers. It would also allow effective engagement with
those involved in implementing ‘good ideas’ to improve effective demand for research and other
information services. This is primarily intended to meet the first two objectives (influence agenda-
setting and support good ideas), but it is also intended to facilitate the strengthening of the sub-
district platform.
xv. The second platform (“Sub-District Based Semi-Remote Area Initiative”) for the RIU
Programme in Zambia will focus at the sub-district level. It will involve working with strong
national and sub-national partners to effectively engage with a variety of service providers, other
intermediaries and infomediaries, and farming households with and without the current capacity
to produce a surplus and engage productively with the local economy in an identified sub-district.
Such a geographical emphasis will: 1) focus RIU Programme attention on its core mandate of
poverty alleviation, with actions and activities approached keeping in mind that poverty alleviation
is the point of departure; 2) allow the RIU Programme to provide an environment within which key
actors in the system will undertake activities and work in a manner that will strengthen the system
overall; and 3) focus attention on supporting the use of past RNRRS and other research outputs in
the Zambian programme, as well as supporting the effective integration of research into the
innovations system in Zambia.
xvi. While not in themselves ‘low-hanging fruit’, there are aspects of the first platform that can
yield early wins. These early wins arise from the team’s assessment of opportunities for rapid
progress:
(a) Development of a knowledge market strategy.
(b) Building trust and co-learning among key national actors.
xvii. Concluding Comment: It should be underlined that the Country Strategy is not intended to
describe, in detail, how the RIU Programme will operationalise activities in Zambia. Rather, the
Country Strategy is intended to provide a framework within which implementation planning will
do exactly this. As implementation planning proceeds, therefore, some if not all of the ideas put
forward in this Country Strategy Report will need to be retooled to meet the realities of the
situation, the objectives of those involved in the National Innovations Coalition, and the realities of
the to-and-fro of programme design. This process is also intended to yield alternative or additional
activities under the two platforms for the RIU Programme in Zambia. At the same time, activities
that are carried out during implementation planning and implementation will deepen the analysis
contained herein, learning as the process moves forward.
1
I. Background
Introduction
1. This report presents findings from an assessment of opportunities for RIU engagement in
Zambia. It is based on multiple visits to Zambia by technical team members, the Team Leader, and
the Country Manager, stakeholder engagement by the team members as well as a facilitation
agency, a review of country-specific and innovations literature, and the prior experience of team
members in pilot RIU countries.
Team Composition and Personnel
2. The team was comprised of international specialists in innovation systems, poverty and rural
livelihoods, communications, information markets, monitoring, impact assessment and learning,
and stakeholder engagement, as well as national specialists in policy and institutions and cross-
cutting themes. The work of the team was facilitated by a Country Task Manager and a Process
Facilitator, overseen by RIU management based in Uganda and England, and facilitated by an
Innovations Resource Group comprised of leaders in the field of innovation systems. (Team
member names and contact details were included on the inside cover sheet to this report.)
The RIU Approach
3. The Research Into Use (RIU) Programme is designed to help address the widespread concern
that most agricultural research is not utilised effectively to reduce poverty and support improved
rural livelihoods. The hypothesis of the RIU Programme is that “an innovation systems approach
is more effective in achieving the increased use of new knowledge (in the sense of up- and out-
scaling) for the benefit of resource-poor communities than approaches which focus on formal
research or linear extension services”.
4. Innovation in this context refers to the first significant use of new ideas, technologies or new
ways of doing things in a place where it has not been done before. The emphasis is on the
commercial use of ideas/technologies/mechanisms to advance a pro-poor agenda. Innovation
enables more goods or services to be produced with less effort or resources, producing better of
different goods or services.
5. Innovation Systems refer to all the actors and their interactions involved in the production
and use of knowledge as well as the institutional and policy context that shapes the processes of
knowledge access, sharing and learning.
6. The hypothesis of the RIU Programme is that “an innovation systems approach is more
effective in achieving the increased use of new knowledge (in the sense of up- and out-scaling) for
the benefit of resource-poor communities than approaches which focus on formal research or
linear extension services”.
2
7. The RIU Programme is guided by an Innovations System Approach. The RIU Implementation
Plan (2007-2011) outlines the RIU approach, and notes that “An innovation system is usually seen
as a network of organisations and individuals involved in generating, modifying, and using new
knowledge. These activities are collectively called an ‘innovation process’. The networks might be
national, sub-national, regional or international. It comprises not only the users of the knowledge
(farmers, consumers, artisans, labourers and traders) and the producers of new knowledge
(researchers) but a host of intermediary organisations including extension workers, information
brokers, enterprises in the supply chain, credit agencies and government.” The RIU Programme in
Zambia includes an innovation process that involves key links at the regional, national, and sub-
national levels.
8. The probability of achieving innovation is most likely to be increased by:
a. Undertaking a diagnostic of the innovation system as a whole to establish where
constraints lie, which of these constraints can be removed, and the location of the most
vibrant and dynamic actors which can be supported to innovate.
b. Identifying those parts of the system where intervention is most viable, and which is most
likely to result in successful innovation. This involves investing in research, improving the
policy environment, building capacities to innovate, and encouraging a wider and more
diverse range of actors necessary for innovation to interact with each other more
effectively, building trust between actors in the system.
c. Enabling the potential users of new knowledge to articulate their needs more effectively,
and to translate these needs into effect demand, amplifying the voice of users throughout
the system.
d. Strengthening organisations and individuals who perform the intermediary functions that
enable the suppliers of new knowledge to interact with the users of such new knowledge,
and to enhance systemic learning.
9. The RIU Programme in Zambia will be implemented in a manner consistent with the overall
aims of the RIU Programme, and also consistent with the development Vision 2030 and the Fifth
National Development Plan of Zambia, as well as the Comprehensive African Agriculture
Development Programme (CAADP) of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD).
Specifically, the RIU Programme recognises CAADP’s emphasis in Zambia on improving
agricultural1 productivity, overcoming problems of poor agricultural infrastructure that
undermines the commercialisation of agriculture, creating a more robust agro-industry sector, and
supporting actionable research results.
10. The RIU Programme in Zambia will be adapted to meet the particular situation in Zambia, but
will be consistent with the RIU Programme internationally. This will ensure alignment with
DfID’s Research Funding Framework and the Strategy for Research on Sustainable Agriculture,
and the stated commitment therein to an innovations system approach. It also reflects the
objectives of the 2007-2011 RIU Implementation Plan, and its specific commitment to greater
ownership of the process by the poor and disenfranchised.
1 Reference to the agricultural sector in this document is employed in a broad sense to include a range of livelihoods support activities
associated with the renewable natural resources sector, including crops, livestock, fisheries, and forestry and all other activities
associated with farming, agricultural processing, post harvest, trade, and input provision.
3
11. The purpose of the Research Into Use (RIU) Programme is:
o To maximise the poverty reducing impact of previous natural resources research, including
Renewable Natural Resources Research funded by the UK Department for International
Development.
o To significantly increase an understanding of how the promotion and widespread use of such
research can contribute to poverty reduction and economic growth.
12. The outputs of the RIU Programme in Zambia, adjusted to accommodate the start-time of RIU
in Zambia, are as follows:
o Substantially increased numbers of poor people indirectly benefiting from RIU research
outputs by 2011.
o More than 50% by value of RIU (use of research and learning outputs) initiatives to be ‘largely
or completely achieved’ by the end of two years of implementation.
o More than 50% of likely beneficiaries of RIU-supported initiatives independently assessed as
likely to be poor women by the end of 2008.
Country Background
9. Geography: Zambia, which gained its independence on 24
October, 1964, is located in central southern Africa, with a total
land area of 752,614km2. Zambia borders Angola, the Democratic
Republic of the Congo, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, Tanzania,
Zimbabwe, and Botswana, with the border with the Congo the
longest. The country is landlocked, with considerable distances to
ports in Namibia, Angola, South Africa and Tanzania, with most
trade via South Africa. The country is divided into nine provinces,
comprising Central, Copperbelt, Eastern, Luapula, Lusaka,
Northern, North-Western, Southern and Western.
10. Population: According to the most recent census, the Zambian population stood at 9.9 million in
2000 (CSO, 2002), and is projected at 11.7 million as of mid-2008 (US Bureau of the Census, 2008).
Forty-five percent of the population is aged fifteen and under. Two-thirds of the population lives
in rural areas, with some evidence of out-migration from urban to rural areas during the 1990s.
Almost one-fifth of all households are female-headed (18.9%), with lower levels of income than
male-headed households (Living Conditions Monitoring Survey; CSO, 2003).
11. Economy: Zambia’s economy has been in secular decline since the mid-1970s. Economic
performance only started to improve in the past decade, largely due to improvements in the
mining, construction and transport sectors. As a middle income country at independence in 1964,
with a per capita income of US$800, Zambia’s economic decline resulted in a per capita income
drop to half that amount, at US$405 by 2002. Structural adjustment and a high debt burden has
had a negative impact on investments in human capital, with Zambia ranked as 165th out of 174
countries in terms of human development by 2004. Debt relief in recent years has reduced
Zambia’s external debt burden, from near US$7.1 billing at the end of the 1990s to US$0.5 billion
by 2006 (see DFID.org), allowing increased investment in human capital.
4
12. Poverty: Levels of poverty have remained high, despite recent improvements in the economy.
While only one-third of Zambians were below the poverty line in the mid-1970s, this rose to two-
thirds (68%) by 2003. Most were classified as ‘extremely poor’ (46%), and the rest as ‘moderately
poor’ (21%). Poverty is highest and most severe in Northern Province, followed by North-Western
Province. In Northern Province, 63% of the households are ‘extremely poor’, and 18% ‘moderately
poor’, followed by North-Western Province, where 51% are ‘extremely poor’, and are 21%
‘moderately poor’. While some provinces are poorer than others, levels of poverty are high across
all rural areas, at 74% (compared to 52% for urban areas), reflected in higher poverty levels among
the more rural provinces (CSO, 2004). Remoteness covaried with higher levels of poverty, with
remote rural areas having a higher proportion of their population living in poverty (see Thurlow
and Wobst, 2004). While poverty rates remain very high, it is encouraging to note that the poverty
rate has fallen from 73% in 1998 to 68% in 2004, in part due to improvements in the mining sector
and expanded employment in commercial agriculture, coupled with diversification in staples
production with the removal of subsidies that incentivised the production of maize as opposed to
other crops.
13. In 2002 Government issued their Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP). The strategy
covered the period 2002-2004, with an update every three years. Prepared following broad-based
consultations, the PRSP is focused on sustained growth and employment generation through:
Economic development (particularly agricultural diversification, mining, tourism, and
manufacturing).
Infrastructure improvements (roads, communications, and energy).
Social sector development.
Cross-cutting initiatives to address HIV&AIDS, the environment, and gender.
Better macro-economic management, public sector reform, and improved governance.
14. The PRSP goes on to note key challenges associated with narrow economic growth affecting
only a few sectors, numerous barriers to private enterprise development, a lack of
commercialisation in the agricultural sector and poor market development, and reducing key
vulnerabilities arising from HIV&AIDS, gender inequality, and chronic food insecurity. The
National Gender Policy (GRZ, 2000) also highlights the constraints on poverty alleviation arising
from gender inequality.
15. Zambia has made progress on some Millennium Development Goals, with primary school
gross enrolment rates rising from 63% in 2000 to 89% in 2005, and the expansion of anti-retroviral
treatment for HIV positive Zambians. However, one-in-six Zambian children still die before their
fifth birthdays, and hunger is a persistent problem, affecting 51% of Zambia’s population (Living
Conditions Monitoring Survey; CSO, 2006). Life expectancy is only 38.4 years, and only 43% of the
rural population has access to safe water supplies (see DFID.org).
16. HIV&AIDS: As with the rest of southern Africa, HIV seroprevalence rates are high in Zambia,
at 14.3% (Demographic and Health Survey; CSO, 2007), with an estimated 920,000 people living
with HIV/AIDS. Despite the high seroprevalence rates and continued high levels of infection,
rates have actually declined in the past ten years, from a peak of 16% in 2002. With a mature
epidemic, Zambia is now faced with the consequences of chronic illness and premature death,
5
with high orphan and vulnerable children caregiving burdens, and the secular economic decline of
affected households, expanding the number of households in poverty, and entrenching poverty in
these households and communities.
Agriculture and Rural Livelihoods
17. It is estimated that agriculture contributes between one-fifth and one-quarter of gross domestic
product in Zambia, and is the main source of livelihoods for over half of the country’s population.
Food crops comprise some 40% of the this total value, while livestock contributes 35% towards the
total value of agricultural production. Most rural households rely on crop production as their
main source of livelihoods. It is estimated that 58% of the land area is suitable for agriculture, but
only 14% of the total land area is currently under cultivation. Approximately 85% of all farms are
comprised of smallholder producers who are producing crops on communal land. The remaining
15% of farms are commercial enterprises on private, leasehold land, producing some 25% of all
agricultural produce.
18. Economic liberalisation in the past fifteen years has improved the returns on investment from
agricultural investment, and has resulted in the diversification of agricultural production,
including most notably cotton, as well as flowers, sugar, tobacco, and vegetables. Smallholder
farmers contribute to these non-traditional crops through out-grower schemes, but these have
tended to benefit middle-income farming households more than others.
19. A number of factors affect the success of smallholder agriculture. Deininger and Olinto (2002)
highlight the importance of labour shortages during the planting season that constrain production,
worsened by HIV&AIDS, coupled with low wages/inadequate in-kind payment for on-farm
services. Input supply was also noted as a key constraint, coupled with the lack of credit facilities
for purchasing inputs. Lack of access to markets and crop spoilage in transport also limited the
value of produce sold; distance to markets was greatest in Western Northern, Eastern, and North-
Western provinces, all at over twenty kilometres, compared to a national average of 14.8kms
(Thurlow and Wobst, 2004; see also UNDP, 2003). More generally, Government, in the Fifth
National Development Plan (GRZ, 2005: 62) identifies a number of challenges affecting the ability
of agriculture to reduce poverty, notably low productivity, high post-harvest losses (estimated at
30%), poor infrastructure and high transport costs, poor access to credit, poorly functioning
agricultural grain markets, insecurity arising from poor land use planning, poor environmental
management, and limited gender mainstreaming in the sector.
20. Access to livestock is particularly important in enabling rural households sufficient flexibility
to meet contingencies caused by the loss of labour or other productive resources, and natural
disasters. Cattle, owned by a minority of smallholders, are essential to mixed farming operations,
providing both draught power and fertiliser. Cattle ownership is increasingly concentrated in
fewer hands, in part due to the effects of livestock diseases (most importantly East Coast Fever and
Contagious Bovine Pleuropneumonia, the latter of which is concentrated in Western, North-
Western and Northern provinces) which have hit smaller herd owners especially hard, but also
because of the effects of HIV&AIDS and consequent asset disposal, and herd size too small to yield
sustainable offtake.
21. Veld product harvesting forms an important component of rural livelihoods, especially for
poorer households, and particularly during times of economic stress. The Living Conditions
6
Monitoring Survey (LCMS; CSO, 2003), for example, noted that one-quarter of all female-headed
households relied on veld products to meet basic food and other household needs in times of
stress. For those in chronic poverty, wild fruits and vegetables and the harvesting of other veld
products was central to their livelihoods. However, this is rarely sufficient to meet needs, and
poorer households tend to cut back on food intake, substitute foods of lesser nutritional value, and
defer other purchases.
22. One of the main resources that poor households rely on, especially in times of stress, are social
capital networks comprising extended family members, friends and neighbours. Indeed,
according to the LCMS (CSO, 2003), relying on these social capital networks was a key coping
strategy in times of particular need, affecting 71% of all rural households (and higher for female-
headed households). These support networks have been weakened in recent years due to the
impacts of HIV&AIDS, with particularly severe impacts on elderly caregiving households with
high dependency ratios.
23. The Government of Zambia regards improvements in agriculture as central to poverty
reduction, coupled with attention to HIV&AIDS, gender and the environment. Improving rural
infrastructure, strengthening linkages between smallholders and larger farmers as well as
commercial producers and agribusiness, expanding non-farm opportunities, and assisting the
poorest households through improved food production techniques, coupled with strengthened
social service provision, are key objectives to reduce levels of poverty (MACO, 2004; also see IFAD,
2005). Thurlow and Wobst (2004) note that a pro-poor growth strategy will necessarily rely
heavily on improvements in agriculture, and that it represents the only strategy that would
achieve a halving of poverty to below 50% in rural areas within the next thirty years. And this
would only occur if the focus was less on cash-crop production and more on improving the
production of staple crops, and improved market access for these goods (see Haggblade and
Tembo, 2003).
24. Government’s long-term development objectives are captured in its National Vision 2030. One
key goal of Vision 2030 was to ‘significantly reduce hunger and poverty’. The emphasis is on
economic growth and pro-poor engagement in the economy, taking note that economic growth
that is concentrated in urban areas does little to reduce poverty overall, and that pro-poor growth
requires a focus on agriculture and rural development (see GRZ, 2005).
25. Substantial agriculture sector reform has taken place since the early 1990s focusing, as the
National Agricultural Policy (NAP; MACO, 2004) notes, on liberalisation, commercialisation, the
promotion of public-private partnerships, and improving gender equity in access to resources and
services, and benefits from agricultural activities. Agricultural sector objectives under the current
(fifth) national development plan, covering the period 2006-2010, are improved food security at the
household and national levels, linking agricultural production to agro processing industries,
increased agricultural exports, enhanced production and productivity, and protecting the
agricultural resource base.
7
26. Unfortunately, while various policy documents recognise the strong connection between the
development of the agricultural sector and poverty reduction, resource allocation to the sector
remains extremely low. Only 4% of Zambia’s national budget is devoted to the agricultural sector,
and the bulk of these funds are allocated to the Fertiliser Support Programme and the Food
Reserve Agency, both focused largely on maize production.
27. Natural Environment: Zambia is relatively sparsely populated, and has substantial and diverse
natural resources. Some 40% of the country’s land surface area comprises wildlife protection areas,
including community-based initiatives that give local communities limited management and use
rights over animals. There are nevertheless a number of localised environmental threats, notably
in mining areas and peri-urban locations, while over 20% of flood plains and swaps have been
degraded due to human settlement, situation, and the development of dams (GRZ, 2005).
28. With regard to smallholder farming, there are particular problems associated with the
depletion of soils through overuse, and depletion of natural resources in areas proximate to major
settlements, particularly firewood and species used for charcoal production.
29. Environmental planning is guided by the National Environmental Policy (NEP, MENR, 2006)
and the National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP). However, co-ordination of activities is
hampered by the plethora of agencies involved in environmental and natural resource
management, coupled with a dearth of skills in the sector and a weak regulatory environment.
The absence of a coherent land use planning framework and conflicting mandates over land use in
communal areas hampers effective planning. Recently-strengthened Environmental Impact
Assessment Regulations are intended to help overcome some of these deficiencies, but
considerable challenges remain.
8
II. Analysis of the Innovation Systems of Relevance to Getting
Research Into Use
Introduction
30. In this chapter, an analysis of the innovation systems relevant to opportunities in the natural
resource arena is provided. The information contained herein is derived from the “Background
Report: Zambia” prepared by the Natural Resources Institute in early 2007, team member reports
in their areas of specialisation, and other assembled materials.
The Innovation System in Zambia
31. Although Zambia has no specific national policy on innovation, the processes of innovation in
the natural resources sector are largely framed by the Fifth National Development Plan, the
National Agricultural Policy, and the Science and Technology Policy and Act. These development
frameworks seek to harness science and technology resources to enhance productivity and
improve livelihoods through a variety of institutions, including the National Institute for Scientific
and Industrial Research (NISIR), the Zambian Agricultural Research Institute, extension services
and the university system, and strengthening linkages between these institutions and the private
sector, as well as other stakeholders. The national science and technology policy is currently under
review with the aim of updating the policy to accommodate changes in technology and on the
ground in Zambia, and the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives has stated its commitment to
(but has yet to operationalise) strengthening institutional arrangements that enhance an
innovation systems approach to development.
32. The agricultural sector consists of only about 700 large-scale commercial farmers and 1,500
small- to medium-scale commercial farmers, but over a million smallholder farming households.
The commercial farmers are generally able to take advantage of available technologies, unlike
smallholder farmers, where less than 20% are well placed to take advantage of opportunities. For
the remainder, the combination of weak market linkages and a lack of effective co-ordination of
activities between service providers, intermediaries, and the smallholder agricultural sector,
together limit interactive learning and development of the adaptive capacities necessary for a
vibrant innovations system with poverty alleviation potential.
33. Various national policies and Vision 2030 all reflect Government recognition of the central role
agricultural development and broader livelihoods support play in poverty reduction. However,
the policy objectives of achieving accelerated growth and competitiveness in the agricultural sector
are not matched by commensurate resource allocation. There is considerable misalignment
between policy intent and resource allocation. For example, under the Comprehensive African
Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP), Zambia and other African states have committed
themselves to an annual agricultural growth rate of 6%, predicated on the allocation of at least 10%
of the national budget to agriculture. However, over the past few years, Zambia has only
committed 4% of its budget to agriculture, and most of this is consumed by recurrent costs, the
Food Reserve Agency, and the Fertiliser Support Programme, largely focused on expanded maize
production.
9
34. As a result of under-investment in the agricultural sector and in rural livelihoods more
generally over the past few decades, Zambia has witnessed a continued deterioration of research,
extension, and other institutional services from Government. Indeed, some key informants have
characterised public research and extension services as having ‘virtually collapsed’. At this
juncture, there are no clear indications that this situation will change in the near future.
Nevertheless, there are some grounds for optimism. Consultations carried out by the team during
the assessment have underlined that, where public research and extension services have been
aligned with sound projects and clear objectives, considerable progress can be made (e.g., the
Agricultural Support Programme), but only for the duration of the particular project, with little
demonstration effect on other institutions.
The Main Stakeholders in the Innovation Systems of Relevance to RIU
35. A mapping of the Zambian ‘innovation system’ was conducted. It was decided to use an
innovations framework adapted from Arnold and Bell (2001), because it allows the deconstruction
of the Innovations System in Zambia in a manner useful for programme development purposes,
providing both ‘snapshot’ information for broad strategy development and decision-making, and
more detailed insights for operationalising the implementation plan.
36. For each area, the status has been broadly grouped into ‘negative’, if the situation is not
positive’, ‘mixed’, if it contains a mixture of positive and negative situations, and ‘positive’ if,
overall, the situation is positive.
37. Using Arnold and Bell (2001), adapted by Whiteside (2007), the following categories were
used:
Framework Conditions - considering broader ‘environmental’ considerations
Demand Domain - considering the demand for goods and services (both intermediate
and final)
Enterprise Domain - considering enterprise activities within the Innovations System
Intermediary Domain - considering intermediaries
Research Domain - considering providers of research services (research and education?)
Infrastructure - considering where facilitating infrastructure is in place or not
38. This initial mapping is derived largely from the results of team member investigations, as well
as the results of the two workshops, converted into the Arnold and Bell framework. This allows
for non-institutional actors to be considered on the innovations map, avoiding the problem
focusing too much on formal institutions.
39. The initial mapping discusses, in general terms, how Zambia fares in each area. This is
followed by a more detailed mapping of the problems and opportunities around how these
organisations act and interact.
10
Table 1: Initial Mapping of the Agricultural Innovations System
Framework Conditions
Area
Policy and governance
Incentive environment
Trust
Other
Assessment
Positive - Vision 2030, Fifth National Development Plan,
Agricultural Development Policy, communications policies, Rural
Development Policy, CAADP. Strong voice for commercial
farmers via the ZNFU. But, lack of implementation of policies, lack
of understanding of policies and priorities.
Mixed - In agriculture, mis-direction of resource allocation, under-
allocation of public resources, focus on subsidies and largely on
maize production. Support for private sector development in the
agricultural sector. In rural development, openness to
experimentation, flexibility.
Positive - Examples of collaboration that have worked, high
stakeholder willingness to build relationships, strong systems of
social capital. Private sector willing to take risks if returns are
sufficient, willing to cooperative if in their interest.
Positive - Reduced levels of corruption, improvements in education
and health status, labour mobility, peace and security (Angolan
war over; unstable parts of the DRC do not border Zambia; high
but unknown numbers of economic migrants from Zimbabwe)
Demand Domain
Area
Consumers (final demand)
Local, regional, international markets
Research incentives
Producers (intermediate demand)
Research funders
Assessment
Negative: Aside from farmers proximate to urban markets, weak
purchasing power.
Negative: Poor access to overseas markets, competition with same
products as neighbouring countries. Inaccessible local markets due
to poor infrastructure.
Negative: Weak demand for research outputs
Negative: Poor local market development, outside of limited areas
proximate to larger markets
Negative: Weak systems of demand for research results, low levels
of investment in the system
11
Table 1: Initial Mapping of the Agricultural Innovations System (continued)
Enterprise Domain
Area
Smallholder farmers and other natural
resource users
Commercial farmers
Farmer organisations
Agro-industries
Assessment
Negative: Weak demand, very weak systems for enhanced demand.
Only a relatively small proportion of these farmers regularly link
with services and markets (perhaps up to 20%).
Positive: Vibrant commercial farming system, albeit small, and only
partially integrated into wider farming systems. Access to
information services via membership organisations.
Mixed: Strong farmers union (ZNFU) open to new ideas, but little
indication that it represents the interests of the majority of
smallholder farmers
Mixed: Some agro-processing in urban areas, but limited to a few
products. Difficulty in competing in local markets with imports
from South Africa.
Intermediary Domain
Area
Extension
Non-governmental organisations
Community-based organisations
Communications (press, radio, TV,
internet, mobile phone operators, etc.)
and Infomediaries (membership based
organisations, business service
providers, training organisations,
government information services)
Assessment
Negative: Public extension services very weak, under-utilised,
poorly supported, weak links to research institutions.
Programmatic examples of significantly improved public extension,
but limited in scope.
Positive: Wide variety of NGOs with long experience, including in
remote areas. Many have development experience, rather than just
emergency experience. Some problems in mixing livelihoods
support with social protection, but limited.
Negative: Despite these strengths, there are numerous NGOs, and
some of these do not necessarily work in tandem with other
agencies. In other cases, agendas are externally driven, and these
may or may not coincide either with needs in Zambia, or priorities
in Zambia.
Positive: Strong presence of faith-based organisations and churches
throughout rural Zambia. Competitive atmosphere, innovative
approaches to support local communities. Numerous, active
community ratio initiatives. Schools and health facilities exist in
even very remote areas, but not well resourced.
Mixed: Improved presence and reach of numerous communications
agencies, and largely positive policy environment. However,
limited reach in remote areas, little incentive to expand operations
to cover consumers with lower abilities to pay. For infomediaries,
various actors supplying demand-driven services to large and
medium scale farmers. However, poor links to national research
system, and limited reach into remote areas. Little incentives to
expand services to cover consumers with lower abilities to pay.
Further, weak incentives for knowledge flows between information
/knowledge service providers and sources of research-based
knowledge.
12
Table 1: Initial Mapping of the Agricultural Innovations System (continued)
Intermediary Domain (continued)
Area
Private sector suppliers of services
Informal knowledge transfer systems
Assessment
Negative: Weak private sector suppliers outside of main road
arteries and commercial farming operations.
Mixed: Generational transfer of information, experimentation,
knowledge. But, HIV&AIDS have impacted generational
knowledge transfer. Localised initiatives to support these systems,
mostly by donor financed initiatives (e.g., farmer field schools) and
NGOs.
Research Domain
Area
Research institutes
Universities
Private sector
NGOs
International and regional
organisation research
Assessment
Negative: Under-resourced, not market oriented, poorly linked to
demand.
Negative: Under-resourced, not market oriented, poorly linked to
demand.
Mixed: Commodity-focused research in key areas (most especially
cotton).
Negative: Limited in scope, focused on commodities. However,
usually solid participatory appraisal work at project start-up, but
limited in scope, and not demand driven.
Positive: Linked to a number of international/regional
organisations, particular emphasis on CG centre networks. Zambia
committed to CAADP and FARA.
13
Table 1: Initial Mapping of the Agricultural Innovations System (continued)
Infrastructure
Area
Transport and marketing
Banking, savings and credit, informal
finance
Risk insurance
Regulations and standards
Innovation and business support
systems
Information systems
Assessment
Negative: Aside from areas proximate to major infrastructure,
transport infrastructure is poorly developed, and markets are
weak
Negative: Poor commercial reach into rural areas. Weak
agricultural bank. Long history of non-repayment of loans. Some
examples of small-scale, localised credit initiatives.
Negative: Poor outreach, inadequate insurance infrastructure.
Negative: Lack of enforcement of regulations and standards.
Negative: Weak infrastructure, little business support system
outreach into rural areas. However, programme-specific
examples of successful outreach.
Mixed: Expanding coverage of internet/cell phone coverage, some
strong internet service providers, but weak regulatory
environment, limited public sector capacity to implement
information communication technology policy and related high
costs are contributory factors limiting access in remote areas and
for the poorest. Lack of workable (public-private) business
models to support services to small farmers, especially those in
remote areas also linked to weak effective demand.
40. The initial mapping of the Agricultural Innovations System suggests a mixed picture, with
positive framework conditions, weak demand structures and systems, mixed results in terms of
the enterprise domain and intermediaries, a poor research environment, and entrenched
‘infrastructure’ constraints.
41. Considering these positive and negative factors, key actors associated with possible entry
points and constraints to the effective functioning of the Agricultural Innovations System in
Zambia are noted in the following table, along with overarching opportunities and challenges
associated with each domain and actor.
42. It should be noted that no breakdown has been made between strengths and opportunities, or
between weaknesses and threats, along the lines of a SWOT analysis. At this juncture, for the
purposes of the assessment and strategy, it is felt that this is sufficient to inform implementation
planning. With implementation planning and implementation, those factors within the ability of
agencies to change (strengths and weaknesses) may be disaggregated from broader,
environmental factors that can only be changed over time by higher level actors (opportunities and
threats), and become part of the process of RIU Programme implementation in Zambia.
43. Finally, it should also be noted that more detail is provided in the specialist sub-reports, and in
the 2007 background report:
14
Table 2: Initial Mapping of Organisations and Opportunities and Challenges Domain Key Actors Opportunities Challenges
Framework
Conditions
Government of Zambia
Policy-related forums, such as the Agricultural
Consultative Forum, Community Natural Resources
Consultative Forum, Agriculture Sector Advisory Group
Policies are largely in place, including
covering key cross-cutting themes
Commitment to CAADP
Openness to innovation
Interest in RIU
Lack of financial commitment to the
agricultural sector, emphasis on maize and
subsidies
History of loan write-offs
Politicization of co-operatives
Culture and society Strong systems of social capital
Strong systems of local leadership
Strong presence of churches and other
forums for social organisation
High levels of poverty
History of dependency, lack of support for
local initiatives. Lack of history of
innovation and entrepreneurship
Some social constraints affecting the ability
of women to fully benefit from farming
activities
Other Population has a history of seeking
economic opportunities anywhere in the
country
Improving levels of education
Lessening in problem of corruption
Education standards remain constrained by
under-financing and high levels of poverty,
limited ability to pay for secondary and
higher education
Demand
Domain
Consumers Reasonably strong urban demand for
farm produce.
Indications of strong urban demand for
certain types of produce (e.g., organic
produce)
Weak purchasing power
Poorly developed markets in rural areas
Consumer preferences for imported goods
(China, South Africa)
Local, regional, international markets Examples of export-oriented production
(particularly cotton, but also coffee,
flowers)
Poorly developed markets in rural areas
No clear regional competitive advantage for
agricultural produce
Uncertain Government commitment to
expanding agricultural exports
Research funders and incentives
Donor support to ZARI, NISIR, universities
Government support to ZARI, NISIR, universities
Commodity focused research by private
sector (e.g., cotton)
Some, albeit limited, research by non-
state actors
Very inadequate and mistargeted financing
of natural resources research. Lack of
public financing, lack of private alternatives
Poor incentives for researchers in public
institutes and universities.
Producers - local entrepreneurs involved in on-farm
production
Markets active when attention
concentrated in an area
Poor market infrastructure weakens
position of producers
15
Domain Key Actors Opportunities Challenges
Enterprise
Domain
Farmers and other natural resource users - smallholders Some farmers with surplus show
responsiveness to initiatives
Very poor farmers show responsiveness
to income-generation initiatives
History of subsidies, loan write-offs
Restricted market activity
Constrained production
Gender division of labour not
commensurate with benefits from labour
provision
HIV&AIDS has worsened labour shortages.
On-farm smallholder production low wages
Severe poverty, especially in remote areas
Stakeholder mapping showed weak
linkages of any agencies to smallholder
farmers, except NGOs
Commercial farmers Very responsive to market opportunities
Out-grower employment potential
Suggest willingness to work with
smallholder farmers, but uncertain
Limited out-growers, problems facing
quality control, market price, etc.
Limited horizontal integration with
smallholder farmers
In some areas, affected by poor
infrastructure, inadequate transport
Farmer and producer organisations
Zambia National Farmers Union
National Peasants and Small-scale Farmers Association
Organic Producers and Processors Association of Zambia
Zambia Dairy Producers Association
Poultry Producers Association
Coffee Growers Association
Zambia Export Growers Association
Co-operative societies
Politically influential ZNFU
Active ZNFU membership, some
250,000 members in district associations
and commodity associations (the latter
mostly in cotton)
Represented in consultative forums
Most smallholder producers are not
involved in any farmers union
Co-operatives are often weak and
ineffective
Peasant Farmers Association weak
Agro-industries in cotton, tobacco, sugar, maize, stock
feed and beer brewing also important
Cotton sector most well developed (Dunavant, Clark
Cotton, China-Mulungushi)
Tobacco (Tombwe Processing, Zambia Leaf Company,
Standard Commercial Tobacco Services, Tobacco
Development Company, Daimon)
Largely successful in some commodity
chains, notably cotton
Interests represented in consultative
fora.
Mixed success in some commodity chains
(e.g., coffee)
Limited agro-processing takes place in
Zambia
Markets for processed good limited in
Zambia
Preference for imported products with low
prices (e.g., China) or preferred quality (e.g.,
South Africa)
16
Domain Key Actors Opportunities Challenges
Intermediary
Domain
Extension Services
Government extension NGO extension officers - – KATC,
others who employ extension agents
Private sector extension affiliated with outgrower
schemes or employed by seed companies, processors or
organised groups of farmers
Government extension system has good
coverage on the ground
When government extension officers
have been provided with additional
resources and incentives through ADPs
have been able to perform well
Government extension system weak.
Institutional linkages between research and
extension weak
Public extension officers have no economic
or institutional incentives to seek new
knowledge or transmit it to farmers
NGOs – PAM, World Vision, CARE, Swedish
Cooperative Centre, Conservation Farming Unit, etc.
Providing some working models for
enhancing local innovation systems
(e.g., local agrodealer agent farmer-to-
farmer service system).
Catalysing and nurturing innovations in
value addition (e.g., cassava processing
and product development)
Largely weak connections to national
research institutions
Quality of extension messages variable
Lack of coordination with government and
other NGOs
Weak linkages with private sector
companies
Short-term initiatives that are not
sustainable
Community-based Organisations – churches, schools,
Radio Listening Clubs, Study Circles, Farmer
Organisations (20 – 50 members), community radio
stations
Demonstrated efficacy in improving
access to and uptake of new information
Can provide an entry point for services
Lack of access to demand driven services;
inability to pay for service
Limited organisational and institutional
capacity to articulate their own needs
Training institutions - Kasisi Agricultural Training
Institute (KATC), Zambia Forestry College, the Natural
Resources Development College, Zambia College of
Agriculture, Popota Tobacco Training College, Zambia
Institute of Animal Health, Katete College of
Agricultural Marketing, Chapula Horticultural Training
Institute, Kasaka Fisheries Training Institute
KATC in particular has been successful
in improving the uptake of organic
farming technologies
Weak linkages with mainstream research
and extension systems to bring about more
widespread uptake of research-based
knowledge and poverty reduction
Infomediaries
National Agricultural Information Service (NAIS),
National Technology Business Centre, journalists (Panos,
farmer-agents (through PROFIT and Dunavant). Also see
NGOs, Farmer and Producer organisations
Positive Government attitudes towards
greater private sector involvement in the
sector
Providing good service to better off
farmers
Lack of appropriate business models to
support sustainable information services to
small-scale farmers, particularly those in
remote areas
17
Domain Key Actors Opportunities Challenges
Intermediary
Domain (continued)
ICT sector (radio, mobile phone, internet
services)Communications Authority of Zambia
Internet service providers (11 in total), of which 6
provide services in rural areas
Mobile telephone providers (MTN, Cell Z, CELTEL)
National Science and Technology Council (NSTC)
Telecentre operators
eBrain
Community radio stations
LinkNet
ZNFU SMS market information service Radio Farm
Forum (operated by NAIS)
Rapid advances in the ICT sector.
Actors in the system know each other,
scope for improved co-ordination
LinkNet intends to help improve
communications infrastructure and
services for groups in rural areas
High cost, heavily regulated internet
environment, poor quality service provision
to rural areas
eBrain (a forum for advancing the use of
ICTs to promote development) is weak in
the agricultural and natural resources arena
Private sector intermediaries - Cotton (Dunavant, Clark
Cotton, China-Mulungushi); paprika (Cheetha, Bimzi);
tobacco (Tombwe Processing, Zambia Leaf Company,
Standard Commercial Tobacco Services, Tobacco
Development Company, Daimon); Horticulture (York,
Lusaka Agricultural Cooperative Union); Sugar (Zambia
Sugar Co.); Livestock Products (Land O’ Lakes)
Private sector intermediaries likely to
reach more smallholder farmers than
anyone else, mostly in cotton and
paprika, if it supports the business
Provide more sustainable approaches to
service delivery
Cost reductions in service delivery over
time as efficiency improves and services
expand
Engagement largely with better-off farmers
Dealing with small and spread-out
transactions that lack economies of scale
Poor infrastructural services
Business development intermediaries - donor supported
intermediaries and forums, most notably PROFIT
Agri-Business Forum
Zambia Chamber of Small and Medium Business
Associations
Food Security Research Project
Zambia Agribusiness Technical Assistance Centre
MACO’s Agribusiness Unit
National Technology Business Centre
Zambia Association of Chambers of Commerce and
Industry (ZACCI)
Various small initiatives
The recent formation of two new
government agencies dealing with
business issues suggest increasing
awareness on the part of government of
the importance of business development
services (BDS)
ADPs such as ASP and SHEMP have
demonstrated that once farmers have
access to market and market info and
understand value of BDS, they are
willing to pay
Business development services not reaching
poorer farmers
Many small-scale farmers’ are risk adverse
when it comes to business development
services (usually with good cause, and a
lack of capital for investment), and lack
access to markets needed to profit from
enterprises
Current project-based business
development service approaches are not
sustainable
No history of paying for business
development services in the smallholder
sector
18
Domain Key Actors Opportunities Challenges
Commodity and Trade Associations - Cotton Association
of Zambia; Zambia Association of High Value Crops;
Tobacco Association of Zambia; Livestock Processors
Association; Millers Association of Zambia; Bankers
Association of Zambia; Association of Micro-Financing
Institutions; Zambia Chamber of Commerce and
Industry; Coffee Board of Zambia; Zambia Seed Traders
Association; Grain Traders Association.
Effective interest groups with (varied)
influence at the national and sub-
national levels
Associations are providing a forum for
increasing trust and transparency in
commodity value chains
A framework for building common
standards and spreading best practices
For some producer associations, lack of
influence on activities by out-growers
Weak linkages between associations and
grassroots producers
The voice of the smallholder communities is
weak in these associations
Returns to the farmer are low due to poor
productivity and low prices
Research
Domain
Research institutes - ZARI, NISIR, Golden Valley
Agricultural Research Trust, NRDC, FSRP, NAIRC,
Central Valley Research Institute, Cotton Development
Trust, Livestock Development Trust. Also research
services offered by Department of Research and
Specialist Services, Department of Agriculture and Field
Services, Fisheries Department, Forestry Department.
Universities - UNZA system, agricultural colleges. At
UNZA, School of Agriculture, School of Veterinary
Medicine, Department of Agricultural Engineering
ZARI has a network of nine research
stations covering all nine provinces and
is working to strengthen links between
research stations and extension
providers (public, private, NGO) at the
district level
Good collaboration between ZARI,
NISIR and UNZA
GART has a working relationship to the
ZNFU and Commercial Farmers Union,
as well as ZARI
Formation of the public private trusts
has increased responsiveness of research
institutions to some segments of the
innovation system (agribusiness,
commercial farmers)
In general poor linkages with extension and
other information service providers
Lack of market oriented research
Farmers have little input into setting
research agenda. Mechanisms that are
supposed to feed farmer demand back up
the line are not functioning
Difficulty tapping farmer knowledge
Universities - UNZA system, agricultural colleges. At
UNZA, School of Agriculture, School of Veterinary
Medicine, Department of Agricultural Engineering
Existing collaboration relationships with
other research institutions
Research capacities currently under-
utilised
Universities suffer from resource
constraints and low morale
Private sector - ZNFU, FEWSNET, DUNAVANT,
Agricultural Business Forum, Grain Milling Association,
co-operatives, ZEGA, input suppliers
If research supports the advancement of
economic interests, private sector would
likely be quick to respond
These stakeholders offer opportunities
for shaping the research agenda and
help make it more relevant to
smallholder farmers
Few of these organisations offer research
services
Few incentives to conduct research
The diversity of interests with no facilitation
limits the contribution of these stakeholders
to shaping the research agenda that is of
benefit to smallholder communities
19
Domain Key Actors Opportunities Challenges
Research
Domain (continued)
NGOs - CARE, World Vision, Programme Against
Malnutrition, International Development Enterprises
(IDE) are most active in the natural resources arena in
rural Zambia. Others include Heifer International,
Harvest Help, Oxfam, Women in Agriculture, the
Cooperative League of the United States Overseas
(CLUSA), Total Land Care, Pelum.
Zambia Association for Research and Development.
Considerable experience in working
with especially poor households
Extensive experience in integrating
livelihoods support, food security, and
social protection
IDE and CLUSA experienced in
programmes targeting small-scale
producers and various commodities
Very limited agricultural research carried
out by NGOs
Some NGOs that work in livelihoods
support lack the experience to do so, and
may approach income generation in the
agricultural sector from a social protection
perspective
Considerable confusion about how to mix
social protection and income generation,
lack of recognition that the two can be well
integrated. Tendency of some state actors
to consider very poor farming households
as not relevant to market developments
International and regional organisation research -
CGIAR, CIAT (African Network on Soil Biology and
Fertility; Pan-African Bean Research Alliance; Southern
African Bean Research Network); Southern Africa Root
Crops Research Network, CIMMYT (Soil Fertility
Consortium for Southern Africa), CIFOR, World Fish
Centre, World Agro-forestry Centre (Agro-forestry
Research Network for Southern Africa), IFPRI, Alliance
for Green Revolution in Africa, African Agricultural
Technology Foundation
CAADP - FARA, co-ordinating the Regional Agricultural
Information and Learning System, and Dissemination of
New Agricultural Technologies in Africa
Aligned with CAADP
Active in Zambia, linked with research
agencies and programmes
No clear examples of international
organisation support for Zambian
initiatives to link research funding with
partnerships with farmers, NGOs, farmer
organisations, and the private sector
Infrastructure
Transport and marketing For some areas, excellent access to
transport and markets
For areas near Lusaka, access to
international markets
To a limited extent, ICTs are easing
some of the major communication and
marketing problems in rural areas
For most areas, including focal areas for
RIU in Zambia, poor transport
infrastructure and limited access to national
and regional markets
Lack of economies of scale for marketable
surpluses for smallholder communities
Limited local market opportunities, low
purchasing power
20
Domain Key Actors Opportunities Challenges
Infrastructure
(continued)
Land tenure system Land tenure system largely culturally
accepted
Land tenure system functions effectively
through local systems
land tenure system is in part there for
political control, rather than innovation and
investment
lack of industrial development zones falling
under land boards for business investments
Land dispossession of widows
Banking, savings and credit, informal finance Numerous rural finance initiatives in
place
Experience with pro-poor membership
groups organised around access to
credit and technical training/services
Emergency of contract farming and
support services from business
development services agencies as the
Agricultural Business Forum focuses on
building trust between the banks and
smallholder producers
History of loan defaults
Weak bank sector because of poor
repayment
Limited financial service outreach in rural
areas, very limited access in remote areas
High interest rates through informal system
Regulations and standards Effective regulatory environment in
place
Opportunities for self-regulation
through commodity and trade
associations
Development of domestic markets (e.g.,
for organic produce) whose standards
are within the reach of smallholder
farmers
Lack of consistency in enforcement
Lack of standards in place for new products
Innovation and business support systems - donor
supported intermediaries and forums, most notably
PROFIT
Agri-Business Forum
Zambia Chamber of Small and Medium Business
Associations
Food Security Research Project
Zambia Agribusiness Technical Assistance Centre
MACO’s Agribusiness Unit
National Technology Business Centre
Zambia Association of Chambers of Commerce and
The recent formation of two new
government agencies dealing with
business issues suggest increasing
awareness on the part of government of
the importance of business development
services (BDS)
ADPs such as ASP and SHEMP have
demonstrated that once farmers have
access to market and market info and
understand value of BDS, they are
willing to pay
Limited remote-area outreach
Business development services not reaching
poorer farmers
Many small-scale farmers’ lack the mindset
and the access to markets need to profit
from BDS
Limited infrastructural services (tele-
communications and electricity) to support
innovation and business support systems
21
Domain Key Actors Opportunities Challenges
Infrastructure
(continued)
Industry (ZACCI)
Various small initiatives
Limited but expanding coverage of ICTs
Existing working models (e.g., the
ZNFU cell phone-based market
information services)
Information systems -
ICT sector (radio, mobile phone, internet
services)Communications Authority of Zambia
Internet service providers (11 in total), of which 6
provide services in rural areas
Mobile telephone providers (MTN, Cell Z, CELTEL)
National Science and Technology Council (NSTC)
Telecentre operators
eBrain
Community radio stations
LinkNet
ZNFU SMS market information service Radio Farm
Forum (operated by NAIS)
Rapid advances in the ICT sector.
Actors in the system know each other,
scope for improved co-ordination
LinkNet intends to help improve
communications infrastructure and
services for groups in rural areas
Limited but expanding coverage of ICT
infrastructural services
High cost, heavily regulated internet
environment, poor quality service provision
to rural areas
eBrain (a forum for advancing the use of
ICTs to promote development) is weak in
the agricultural and natural resources arena
Cost of accessing ICT services still
prohibitive for smallholder communities
44. In considering the extent to which the Innovations System functions in a manner that currently or potentially can support poverty alleviation, the
detailed mapping that took place has been abbreviated and considered in general, so that priority actions affecting different parts of the system can
be considered. The following figure shows each of these components of the system, and for each gives summary information the overall character of
that element of the Innovations System (i.e., positive, mixed, negative’), key actions required that warrant RIU attention, and key constraints that will
affect success.
Summary of Innovations System
45. Many of the key challenges in the Innovations System are in areas that RIU may have a competitive edge, but it requires proceeding in a number
of different domains, and influencing the system at policy, networking, strategic, and sub-district levels:
22
Figure 1: Summary of Agricultural Innovations System Status, Key Constraints, Needed Actions
Enterprise
Domain
Research
Domain
Demand
Domain
Infrastructure
Intermediary
Domain
Framework
Conditions
Research Into
Use for
Poverty
Alleviation
Status: Positive
Key Actions: Build on trust and social capital; strengthen
systems; link to CAADP
Key Constraints: Weak policy implementation
System Interaction Weakenesses: Development paradigm
does not emphasis agricultural development
Status: Negative, Internally Weak
Key Actions: Demand-led research
Key Constraints: System very weak
System Interaction Weakenesses: With the exception of
project-specific examples, lack of links especially with
the enterprise and intermediary domains, lack of
demand-driven research needs from the demand
domain
Status: Mixed, Internally Somewhat Weak
Key Actions: Strengthen intermediaries and expand range
Key Constraints: Missing inter-mediary functions, weak
information services market
System Interaction Weakenesses: Not linked to other domains
due to poorly developed inter-mediary functions
Status: Negative
Key Actions: Area-focused interventions
Key Constraints: Poor service provision
System Interaction Weakenesses: Lack of linkages with
ICT sector, poor purchasing power among demand
domain, research not linked to infrastructure domain
Status: Negative, Internally Weak
Key Actions: Strengthen demand
Key Constraints: Limited infrastructure for enhancing
demand
System Interaction Weakenesses: Poorly linked to any
domain, especially research
Status: Mixed, Internally Somewhat Weak
Key Actions: Strengthen local level organisation and
support structures
Key Constraints: Poor market access, lack of
market/business-oreinted history for smallholders
System Interaction Weakenesses: Poor access to
information services, lack of demand information,poor
access to financial markets, limited by poor infrastructure
23
Conclusions
46. The international consensus that research is not contributing sufficiently to poverty alleviation
as intended was shared by stakeholders in the natural resources arena, and this yielded
considerable support for the establishment of the RIU Programme in Zambia.
47. Similarly, the notion of an innovations system approach to responding to problems facing the
agriculture and natural resources arena in Zambia was well-received, with practical partnerships
and the engagement of private, public, and non-governmental actors especially valued.
48. An assessment of the Innovations System in the natural resources arena in Zambia has
highlighted strategic opportunities associated with initiatives that respond to framework
conditions, the demand domain, the enterprise domain, the intermediary domain, and the research
domain. These opportunities are, in many respects, intended to complement each other, and are
organised around two strategic thrusts:
(a) Enhancing capacity to demand services and participate in value/market chains by
farmers and intermediaries
(b) Strengthening of knowledge sharing mechanisms and services
49. The assessment also identified the main strengths and weaknesses in the agricultural
Innovations System in Zambia at this time:
Table 3: Main Strengths and Weaknesses in the Agricultural Innovations System
Strength/Weakness Comment
Strengths
Strong demand for RIU in Zambia Stakeholder discussions clearly reflect high demand for RIU in
Zambia. Assessment findings suggest that many stakeholders see
RIU as able to fill an important gap that is undermining progress in
the agricultural sector
Positive policy environment for
innovations
A review of Government policies, and a consideration of how
Government has responded to various initiatives, suggest that the
policy environment in Zambia is positive for strengthening the
Innovations System
Existing networking Existence of stakeholder forums and networks trying to work
together, providing an important network for RIU to influence
ICT infrastructure Despite constraints, ICT infrastructure is improving rapidly
Recognition that current models are
not getting research into use
Stakeholder discussions highlight particular concerns about the lack
of a responsive, relevant, and demand-driven research environment,
and a commitment to ‘getting research into use’
Working models While there are clear problems, there are existing working models
with potential for Innovations System strengthening
24
Strength/Weakness Comment
Weaknesses
A weak policy implementation
environment
While there are a number of very solid policies in Zambia, and while
many of these are supported by relevant legislation, policy
implementation is weak. Measurements of progress in terms of
cross-sectoral issues (e.g., the PRSP, the national development plan)
reflect this lack of clarity in how to link policies with clear actions
A development model that does not
see smallholder agriculture as a key
engine of development
While agricultural is stated as a priority sector, and while
development in the agricultural sector is noted as central to poverty
alleviation, investment and attention is largely focused elsewhere
Length of time RIU will operate in
Zambia
A concern was expressed, on more than one occasion, that what RIU
was trying to accomplish in Zambia would require longer than three
years
Difficulty in reaching poorer
smallholder farmers
Most opportunities for effective innovation platforms focus on
programmes that currently reach households with some access to
capital. While there are a number of cogent reasons for reaching
these farming households, there is an urgent need to bring NGOs
into the innovation platforms that would help to reach very poor
farmers and farming households
Information communication
technology
High cost, heavily regulated internet environment, poor quality
service provision to rural areas
Policy-practice gap Gap between policy and practice, especially in resource allocation to
smallholder service sectors. Although key stakeholders would see
value and buy into an Innovations System approach, overall
commitment is to enhanced minerals development, and less of a
focus on agriculture
Vulnerability Most smallholder farmers are vulnerability to natural disasters, the
narrowing of livelihoods, and labour loss
25
III. Proposed RIU Strategy in Zambia
Introduction
50. The previous chapter included a mapping of the agricultural Innovations System in Zambia,
based on a framework put forward by Arnold and Bell (2001) as adapted by Whiteside (2007).
This mapping highlighted positive framework conditions, a weak demand domain, a mixed enterprise
domain, a mixed intermediary domain, a negative research domain, and a negative infrastructure
environment. It also underlined a number of weaknesses in the functioning of the relationships
between these different domains in a manner than weakened the Innovations System overall.
51. The mapping yielded insights into how to approach RIU Programme design and
implementation in Zambia, with particular attention to how to strengthen the effectiveness of links
across the various domains in a manner consistent with a strengthened Innovations System. The
RIU Programme’s competitive edge is in strengthening the Innovations System that engages
various actors over time, so that the RIU Programme leaves behind a stronger, better functioning
system that can continue to function more effectively in its absence. There are particularly
opportunities in this regard in the information and knowledge market.
52. Key drivers of poverty that were relevant to RIU’s strategic advantages were concluded as the
following:
(a) Narrow livelihoods among poorer households, and lack of resources to diversity to
decrease risk and expand opportunity.
(b) Socio-cultural factors that limit choice, and therefore constrain opportunities for
strengthened livelihoods.
(c) Remoteness and isolation, and consequent lack of access to broader factors that
enhance choice and opportunity, and lack of access to inputs and markets.
(d) A dominant development model that does not prioritise investment in rural
livelihoods.
Framework for the RIU Programme in Zambia
53. Based on the CASDT’s assessment findings and recommendations on strategic opportunities,
and considering the drivers of poverty, the following were identified:
(a) Strategic Thrusts - identifying broad areas for RIU Programme engagement in Zambia.
(b) Innovation Leadership - considering how the RIU Programme in Zambia can be structured,
so that implementation is consistent with the intentions noted in the strategic thrusts.
Innovation leadership rests on a common interest across actors in the coalition.
(c) Innovation Platforms - Indicating platform ideas that are consistent with the intentions of
the strategic thrusts. Innovation Platforms represent actors involved in common actions.
26
Strategic Thrusts
54. Two inter-related Strategic Thrusts have been identified:
(a) Strategic Thrust 1: Enhancing capacity to demand services and participate in value/ market
chains by farmers and intermediaries.
(b) Strategic Thrust 2: Strengthening of knowledge market mechanisms and services.
55. Strategic Thrust 1: Bearing in mind RIU’s poverty alleviation mandate, the extent to which RIU
can add value in Zambia relies on its ability to respond to four key drivers of poverty: 1)
remoteness and isolation; 2) recognising the varied socio-economic circumstances of households; 3)
understanding the socio-cultural determinants that heighten vulnerability and reinforce poverty;
and 4) recognising the difficult decision-making environment around rural livelihoods responses.
In these respects, the point of RIU departure is not a particular commodity or technology, but
rather an inability to diversify and increase economic activity, better share the benefits of this
activity, reduce risk, and take advantage of opportunities as they arise. Commodity chains and
innovative technologies have a roll to play, indeed important ones, but only if they emerge as
opportunities in the implementation of these two platforms.
56. Partnership arrangements should be guided by the following considerations:
(a) Building trust between partners in a National Innovations Coalition, in a Sub-District
Innovations Coalition, and across the two levels (as equal partners), and strengthening
their ability to influence the national and sub-national agendas.
(b) Identifying partners who are experienced in the rural livelihoods arena in semi-remote
areas, and who do not focus only on arable agriculture, but rather consider broader rural
livelihood strategies. The intent is to expand the middle ground, getting the majority of
resource poor to participate in livelihood value chains.
(c) Ensuring the involvement of agencies that are competent in working with very poor
farmers, and who are cognizant of intra-household dynamics, socio-cultural barriers to
economic advancement, and socio-cultural opportunities to improve the magnitude and
distribution of positive economic impacts.
57. Strategic Thrust 2: Strategic Thrust 2 refers to strengthening information and knowledge service
markets. The rationale is that a central element in the effective functioning of the innovations
system of relevance to RIU in Zambia will be to improve the flows of information and knowledge
between actors. This will be undertaken through two linked sets of activities: (a) nationally, and at
sub-national levels, to facilitate and incentivise joint actions and knowledge flows between key
public and private sector actors; and (b) at platform and sub-platform level, to strengthen demand
for and use of information and knowledge services within and across platforms. This Strategic
Thrust would, in part, be a key element of Strategic Thrust 1, but has broader implications for the
RIU Programme in Zambia.
58. Partnership arrangements should be guided by the following considerations:
(a) Private sector engagement should be at the core of Strategic Thrust 2. There are a number
of commercial enterprises of relevance identified by the information markets specialist.
(b) At the meso and local levels, there are a number of intermediaries that could provide
important services, including local entrepreneurs, economic groupings of producers and
apex organisations such as the Zambian National Farmers Union (ZNFU) and the Zambia
Chamber of Small and Medium Business Associations (ZACSMBA), etc.
27
Innovation Coalition
59. There are five key factors that would warrant formation of a National Innovation Coalition
(NIC):
(a) The proposed innovation platforms are diverse and complex, and are set at two levels:
(i) national, focusing on policy issues and operational matters; and (ii) sub-district,
geographically focused in at least one remote area. Supporting these platforms will
need broader guidance, and advocacy, from a national coalition.
(b) The proposed activities for RIU will entail fairly diverse actors working together,
notably communication service providers, input suppliers, research and training
institutions, and non-governmental organisations. The country assessment suggests
that a number of these actors are not necessarily comfortably working together on
matters that affect operations and, for the private sector, the bottom line.
(c) The demand for research outputs will need to come from users of these outputs, with
supply driven by informed demand as a commercial product. The Strategic Thrust for
knowledge markets, and the integration of knowledge markets into the sub-district
geographic Strategic Thrust, will focus on enhancing demand. The Information and
Knowledge Service Markets assessment report has pointed out difficulties that can be
anticipated in this regard, and the need to bring together actors who may not be used
to working together. As with these previous points, supporting these platforms will
require broader guidance, and advocacy, from a national coalition.
(d) Despite a ‘crowded’ rural livelihoods arena, despite shared interests, and despite the
presence of a number of forums for joint action, there is a weak culture of interactive
learning and collaborative action among stakeholders. This process needs to be guided
within a learning framework that reflects how various interests can continue to be
advanced.
(e) An ‘innovation systems approach’ is by no means a logical outcome of these different
actors working together. Instead, it is quite easy to shift to supply driven responses, to
only work with farmers who can engage easily with the market, to shift from economic
enhancement to social protection (particularly an issue with NGOs), and to simply
drop out of the process quite quickly (which may especially be a problem for the
private sector).
60. As noted, work has already started on the formation of a NIC, so that the NIC can assist with
implementation planning. It is important that the NIC be composed of organisations and
businesses that stand to advance their interests through a pooling of their talents, and this means
that the NIC membership needs to be consistent with the platform activities ultimately decided
upon by those involved in the RIU Programme.
61. The question arises as to whether an RIU-supported Innovation Coalition will function
effectively, given that there are already examples of joint action across different organisations. The
short answer is no, unless the interests of these actors can be advanced through their collaboration.
For the private sector, beyond those involved in the communications arena, it is not clear at this
juncture whether the platforms will attract, and retain, their interests, because the return on
investments may be quite low, and very localised in a remote area. This needs to be further
considered during implementation planning.
28
62. A National Innovation Coalition (NIC) is necessary to effectively bring together actors at the
national level to strengthen the Innovations System. The country assessment found a number of
actors that clearly view the RIU approach as consistent with their aims and objectives, but who are
now not working together in a fashion that would yield a more coherent, stronger Innovations
System. While the overall ‘environment’ around the Innovations System is currently quite
challenging, there are organisations and programmes in Zambia that, in the positive policy
environment, can advance the objectives of the RIU Programme in Zambia. In these respects,
partnerships are a logical outcome, engendering trust as activities progress.
63. Given that the Innovations System involves private, public, and non-governmental actors, it is
important to ensure that the NIC reflects the membership necessary to advance the programme in
Zambia. Of particular importance is the involvement of private sector agencies that, acting in their
own interests, can sustain activities into the future. Of equal importance will be the strengthening
of local interest groups that strengthen the influence and role of entrepreneurs at the local level.
64. It is equally important, given RIU’s poverty alleviation mandate, to ensure the engagement of
non-governmental organisations with economic empowerment credentials and working experience with
especially poor households and populations, coupled with avoidance of the common problems facing
most NGOs -- duplication and lack of co-ordination, ill-designed projects, and start-stop actions.
There is a particular need to avoid a social welfare approach in engaging with these especially
poor populations, but ‘going the extra distance’ in engaging with these populations to support
their involvement in the emergent Innovations System.
65. At the national level, the NIC will be instrumental in integrating RNRRS and other research
outputs into the Innovations System in Zambia, with one of the priorities under the National
Innovation Platform focused on supporting this as a component of a broader focus on
strengthening the Innovations System. A review of some research outputs in Zambia, and
consideration of RNRRS research outputs (including cassava as a commodity, but also including
engagement with especially poor households), yielded grounds for optimism; other examples are
contained in the specialist reports contained as annexes to the Assessment Report.
66. In addition to the establishment of a National Innovations Coalition, there is a need to establish
a Sub-District Innovations Coalition (SDIC)2 in the focal area for RIU engagement in rural Zambia.
In part the establishment of the SDIC would help to serve as a countervailing influence to the NIC,
supporting a continued focus on poverty alleviation and, equally importantly, giving voice to
those in the Innovations System that are least likely to influence the process. This means
strengthening organisations involving very poor households and persons, their effective
engagement with the SDIC as influential actors, and their strengthened role as intermediaries in
the Innovations System.
67. The working relationship between the NIC and the SDIC will need to be elaborated during
implementation planning. It is hoped that the existence and actions of the SDIC would serve as an
important countervailing influence to the NIC, in particular in terms of supporting the voice of
those who will not have had any influence on national decision-making processes. But it is
especially important that the establishment and actions of the SDIC influence the direction and
priorities of the NIC, and that the NIC does not view itself as a ‘senior partner’ of, or manager for,
2 The recommendation for the establishment of an SDIC is based on conclusions drawn from the work of the CASDT.
However, during implementation planning and implementation, it may be that strong actors are already working in
ways that will allow a focus on these actors, rather than the establishment of a coalition.
29
the SDIC. The Implementation Plan therefore needs to agree a structure that reflects this
partnership arrangement, and a system of co-learning across the two bodies.
68. SDIC member organisations and other actors at the sub-national level in the Innovations
System are not, of course, simply consumers of research. The very success of the SDIC and the sub-
platforms it will be engaged with relies on the improved demand for knowledge and knowledge
services, and the provision of such services by local actors where possible (and increasing over the
life of RIU).
Innovation Platforms
69. A total of seven Innovation Platforms were identified by the CASDT. After discussions with
the IRG and SMT, it was felt that these should be organised under two platforms. Each of these
platforms and sub-platforms are classified by the area they concentrate in, in the Innovations
System. Three sub-platforms are noted in italics, as they need consideration during
implementation planning:
(a) Framework Condition: Building Trust and Co-Learning, and Strengthening the
Functioning of the System Across Domains
(i) Intermediary Domain: Development of a Knowledge Market Strategy
(ii) Intermediary Domain: Strengthening Radio and Radio Listening Clubs and
Community Radio as Mechanisms for Farmers to Access and Demand Information
(b) Demand Domain/Research Domain/Intermediary Domain: Sub-District Based Semi-
Remote Area Initiative
(i) Intermediary Domain: Development of a Knowledge Market Strategy
(ii) Intermediary Domain: Strengthening Radio and Radio Listening Clubs and
Community Radio as Mechanisms for Farmers to Access and Demand Information
(iii) Enterprise Domain: Conservation Farming
(iv) Intermediary Domain/Research Domain: Agro-Dealer/Farmer-to-Farmer Scheme Support
(v) Demand Domain/Enterprise Domain: Cassava Task Force
70. There are two potential ‘early wins’: 1) Intermediary Domain: Development of a Knowledge
Market Strategy; and 2) Framework Conditions: Building Trust and Co-Learning at the National
Level. Both of these are process wins, the former intended to bring actors together to develop a
common vision about the development of a knowledge market strategy, and the latter intended to
strengthen the Innovations System overall. The remaining platform and sub-platform ideas will
take more time, and need to be preceded by the start-up of the two early win activities.
71. The two early win activities can begin in 2008, and can be part of implementation planning, as
both are consistent with RIU principles. The main platform, focused on building trust and co-
learning, is fully consistent with implementation planning activities, but will eventually require
the formalisation of arrangements under the Implementation Plan. The CASDT believes that the
Agricultural Consultative Forum (ACF) offers the best opportunity for advancing the Innovation
Platform: Building Trust and Co-Learning, and Strengthening the Functioning of the System
Across Domains. During implementation planning, the viability and desirability of this
arrangement needs to be confirmed and, if agreed, RIU would need to make arrangements to effect
the ACF’s involvement in co-ordinating this Innovations Platform.
30
72. For the second early win, RIU will need to provide the services of specialists in the knowledge
market arena to work with the NIC on the development of the strategy. This would have the
added benefit of supporting the involvement of knowledge market actors in the NIC. The strategy
should ensure that it considers how the sub-platform would function under the ACF.
73. Ideally, the Sub-Platform: Development of a Knowledge Market Strategy would yield
important information of relevance to the Sub-Platform: Strengthening Radio and Radio Listening
Clubs and Community Radio as Mechanisms for Farmers to Access and Demand Information.
74. The issue of prioritisation of platforms versus engaging in early wins is complicated by the fact
that the second Innovations Platform: Sub-District Based Semi-Remote Area Initiative is
instrumental in showing how an Innovations System approach can yield actions that have poverty
alleviation outcomes, and in showing how an Innovations System approach can strengthen local
markets and local service provision, rather than just focusing on linking an area to national and
international markets. Nevertheless, the success of this Innovations Platform is fundamentally
based on the success of the first Innovations Platform (and particularly the effectiveness of the
ACF’s co-ordinating role) and the two sub-platforms on knowledge markets and radio listening
clubs/community radio. It is also linked to the establishment and effective functioning of the NIC.
75. ‘Building trust’ under the first Innovations Platform, of course, needs to yield practical outputs.
In early discussions with stakeholders, conservation farming, agro-dealer/farmer-to-farmer
schemes, an support to the activities of the Cassava Task Force were noted as important
opportunities, and as effective vehicles to building relationships. And this is where there are
important links between the two innovation platforms. As avenues for collaboration emerge, these
should be considered in terms of the SDIC as a priority location for activities. This has important
benefits in three respects: 1) it underlines the RIU Programme’s emphasis on actions that set into
motion processes for poverty alleviation; 2) it brings together actors who are experienced in
working with ‘progressive farmers’ with those who are used to working with disadvantaged
households, yielding better spread effects of these activities; and 3) it offers fertile ground for
implementation of the Knowledge Markets Strategy.
76. The intended operations of the two innovation platforms, as well as the key actors ACF, the
SDIC, and the NIC, are summarised in the following figure:
31
Figure 2: Intended System Function and the Operations of Actors in the System
77. The figure reflects the involvement of a number of stakeholders under the NIC, some of whom
(but not necessarily all) would be involved in the two platforms. Similarly, for some actors (but
not necessarily all) working within and with the SDIC, they would be chapters of the same
organisations linked to the NIC and, in some cases, also involved in the first innovations platform.
These are, of course, strategic alliances, and decisions made by various actors in the Innovations
System will guide who is involved and how.
78. The overall functioning of the system, outlining its intentions and accomplishments, is
illustrated in the following figure:
Innovations Platform 1
ACF
Innovations Platform 2
National Innovations Coalition
SDIC
NOTE: Shape denotes stakeholder actor
32
Figure 3: Overview of the RIU Programme Operations in Zambia
Innovation Guidelines
79. Reflecting the approach and principles of RIU, in considering areas of strategic advantage, and
noting threats arising, the following should guide RIU Programme development and
implementation in Zambia:
(a) There is a risk that RIU could support very innovative and worthy activities in Zambia,
but in its mission to support ‘good ideas’, the Programme may lose site of its principle
mandate of alleviating poverty. The core focus should therefore remain poverty
alleviation, with MIL systems in place to ensure that the activities are proceeding in the
requisite manner, and that they are having the desired impacts. However, this does
not mean that RIU directly engages in poverty alleviation. Indeed, while poverty
alleviation will necessarily drive the Zambian programme, this does not mean that all
actions should individually focus specifically in poverty alleviation. Rather, RIU needs
to set into motion a process that will eventually yield poverty alleviation benefits.
Poverty alleviation is therefore the ‘destination’, rather than the ‘point of departure’.
(b) Having noted the centrality of a focus on the eventual impacts of activities on poverty
alleviation, it is important to note that there are numerous actors in the Innovations
System that are key to the effectiveness of poverty alleviation activities, but who are
not themselves poor. This includes in particular farming households and
intermediaries that have the potential to employ others. Specific recommendations
have been made about how to engage with the very poor in such a manner that they
enter the market with more bargaining power (e.g., in terms of labour provision), and
more economic power. Poverty alleviation should be viewed from the point of view of
Strategic Intent
RIU research outputs (RNRRS)-based support to enhance capacity to demand services RIU research outputs (RNRRS)-based support to strengthen information and knowledge market services
Mechanisms
Denotes links between stakeholders within the platforms/NIC
Intended Outcomes In Zambia
Improved functioning of the Innovations System
Alignment with CAADP
Response to the drivers of poverty
Advancing ‘good ideas’
Agenda setting to advance the agricultural sector In RIU
Use of RNRRS/other research outputs through the strength- ening of demand
Testing a poverty-focused approach to country program- ming
Linking RNRRS outputs with system strengthening for poverty alleviation
NIC
IP 1
IP 2
33
livelihoods strengthening and diversification in a broader sense, and not narrowly defined
as activities that yield a focus only on the very poor.
(c) The RIU Programme’s competitive edge is in strengthening the Innovations System that
engages various actors over time, so that the RIU Programme leaves behind a stronger,
better functioning system that can continue to function more effectively in its absence.
There are particularly opportunities in this regard in the information and knowledge
market.
(d) The RIU Programme in Zambia should be guided by a National Innovations Coalition,
comprising an appropriate balance between private, non-governmental, and public
stakeholders.
(i) However, power should not be concentrated only in the hands of the NIC.
While the dynamics of the RIU Programme in Zambia can only be elaborated
during implementation planning, there is a need to establish a Sub-District
Innovations Coalition (SDIC) in the main geographical area reached by the RIU
Programme to strengthen the voice of the most disenfranchised, and to enhance
the influence of local actors. The SDIC should not be seen as a ‘younger
brother’ to the NIC, but instead an equal partner intended to inform the actions
of the NIC.
(e) There is widespread agreement that agricultural research is not serving its intended
purpose in Zambia, and that existing models of ‘getting research into use’ are
ineffective. A key task of the NIC and the SDIC will therefore be to strengthen the
influence of effective demand on knowledge generation within the context of a
learning environment. For the NIC, this may include a systematic review of existing
RNRRS and related research to consider its relevance to activities supported by RIU in
Zambia, and for the SDIC systems to engage with partners on demand for knowledge.
However, this should by no means reinforce supply-driven approaches and supply-
driven demands for ‘more research’. Instead, the review should be conducted in a
manner that demand is enhanced as ideas of relevance to the Zambian situation
emerge, and are seen as useful by local actors.
(f) The ‘capture’ of RIU Programme support is a threat in any country. In Zambia, the key
risk is a shift away from the Programme’s poverty alleviation focus to the support of
‘good ideas’ that, tacitly or overtly, divert the Programme’s activities away from its
mandate.
(g) It is especially important for MIL to ensure that the RIU Programme in Zambia
includes a number of process indicators designed to establish improvements in the
functioning of the Innovations System. In particular, there is a need to measure
whether the processes of engagement during RIU Programme implementation will
yield a continuation of the process following completion of RIU.
Value Added
80. The RIU Programme in Zambia has the potential to add particular value to the agricultural
Innovations System in Zambia as follows:
(a) Strengthen the functioning of the Innovations System itself, thereby supporting the
sustainability of interventions in the agricultural arena.
34
(b) Yield a demonstration effect,
particularly in terms of the sub-
district Innovations Platform.
(c) Serve as a catalyst for demand-
driven research in Zambia.
(d) Help to shift information and
knowledge market service provision
from a few-to-many model to a
many-to-many model.
(e) Help refocus agricultural
interventions in Zambia in a manner
that includes very poor farmers as
effective, economically viable actors
in the Innovations System.
(f) Support gender mainstreaming as a
natural and integral element of programme implementation, rather than as an add on
component.
(g) Recognise labour constraints as a key livelihoods challenge, and the particular problems
association with HIV&AIDS in this regard.
Sustainability
81. The process of implementation planning will need to focus attention on the sustainability
associated with RIU Programme results in Zambia. The involvement of MIL in implementation
planning is especially important in this regard.
82. Related to this, but referring to RIU Programme matters specifically, this would also include
the identification and operationalisation of programme indicators associated with the RIU
Programme’s exit strategy for Zambia. How, in short, will RIU proceed to wind down its
operations in Zambia, and how will it keep actions in this regard ‘in sight’ during implementation?
83. The principles supporting the sustainability of RIU impacts and RIU processes in Zambia were
considered by the CASDT, as were practical issues around how to maximise these impacts. These
principles are as follows:
(a) That RIU Programme implementation in Zambia be closely linked with the CAADP
process in Zambia, and that it work with CAADP and its structures to build alliances as
part of its efforts to strengthen the agricultural Innovations System.
(b) That RIU Programme implementation in Zambia be guided by the NIC, that
implementation of relevant sub-district platforms be guided by the SDIC, and that the
SDIC informs the NIC.
(c) That RIU Programme implementation in Zambia place particular emphasis on enhanced
demand. Given the poverty alleviation mandate of RIU, it is especially important that
local systems that engage with the poor and disenfranchised strengthen the voice of these
persons/households in a manner that strengthens effective demand over time.
(d) That MIL establish its sub-programme presence in Zambia by the end of 2008, through
extended involvement in implementation planning.
(i) Particular attention would need to be paid to the poverty alleviation mandate of the
RIU Programme.
Sub-district
platform
35
(e) That the RIU Programme strengthen information and knowledge markets to a significant
extent during Programme implementation, given its centrality to Programme success. It
is also a particularly ‘weak link’ in the Innovations System, not in terms of the actors per
se, but rather in terms of their experience in working together, and in terms of market
provision of these services.
(f) That the RIU Programme be especially cognizant of the impacts of gender, chronic illness
and premature death (with particular reference to malaria, HIV&AIDS, and maternal
morbidity and mortality), and food insecurity.
(g) That the Implementation Plan for the RIU Programme in Zambia include a clear exit
strategy.
Results
84. The specific results for the RIU Programme in Zambia will emerge from the development of
the logframe with MIL, and as the implementation plan is finalised. These will be derived from
the results as per the RIU logframe. Nevertheless, based on the results of the Country Assessment,
provisional results can be identified. Specifically, it is the intention of the RIU Programme in
Zambia that, by 2011, it will have produced the following:
(a) Improved collaboration among actors in the agricultural Innovations System, and the
continued functioning of a Zambian National Innovations Coalition and a Sub-District
Innovations Coalition.
(b) Strong innovation platforms functioning at the national and sub-national levels.
(c) Integration across innovation platforms, and integration of sub-platforms into the two
main platforms.
(d) Clear examples of the economic and social empowerment of the poor and
disenfranchised.
(e) Clear examples of ‘demonstration impacts’ due to the RIU Programme’s operations in
Zambia.
Further Analysis Required
85. Following approval of the strategy, implementation planning needs to include further analyse
of key aspects of the Innovations System in Zambia. The following should be considered:
(a) The mapping of the Innovations System was completed sufficient for the needs of the
strategy. However, a more detailed mapping is required for implementation purposes. If
possible, this mapping should take into consideration accepted Innovation Platforms/Sub-
Platforms.
(b) The centrality of information markets to the success of the RIU Programme in Zambia
suggests that further diagnosis is required, particularly after Innovation Platforms are
approved.
(c) An MIL diagnostic is required for the RIU Programme in Zambia.
(d) Finally, more detailed consideration needs to be devoted to a detailed exploration of
RNRRS outputs and other materials in terms of approaches to development that do yield
poverty alleviation impacts. There are processes described in a number
36
IV. RIU Programme Development 86. Between now and the end of 2008, a number of implementation planning activities need to take
place. These activities are included in this section of the Country Assessment and Strategy Report.
87. While processes are underway to establish a NIC, consideration should still be given during
implementation planning to other models. One example is the ACF serving as a hub around
which various interest groups are formed, with ACF consultative structures managing broader
interactions.
88. Implementation planning processes should extend beyond stakeholder workshops to increase
smaller group fora as partnerships are identified. Further, stakeholders who have not yet been
engaged in the RIU process need to be brought into the process. The reasons for non-engagement
to date likely vary, and securing their involvement will necessitate one-on-one contacts as well. In
addition, there is a specific need to improve the engagement of NGOs who are involved in
livelihoods initiatives.
89. One particularly important matter is how various Government agencies engage in
implementation planning, the NIC, and the SDIC. To date, these agencies have been insufficiently
involved, yet remain central in particular to the success of the agenda-setting objectives of RIU,
and the sustainability of the SDIC. At this juncture, the Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of
Agriculture and Co-operatives is the national ‘link person’ for RIU, which offers RIU an important
opportunity to effectively engage with the various actors within agriculture. However, there are
other important ministries who need to be effectively involved, and at this juncture there is no
effective mechanism for this to occur.
90. There are three donors that have an especially strong influence in the agricultural arena in
Zambia. It remains unclear how these agencies view RIU and its activities, but their support for
RIU is central to programmatic success. This requires specific engagement, through mechanisms
to be identified during the early stages of implementation planning.
91. There are a number of difficult decisions that need to be made regarding the NIC, the two
platforms, and the various sub-platforms. There are also difficult decisions to be made about
identification of a sub-district, as well as the various actors that need to be involved in that
particular process. As these decision processes proceed, it is likely that various differences of
opinion will emerge, highlighting where RIU needs to focus attention in terms of building trust
and strengthening the Innovations System. In particular, challenges will emerge in terms of the
role of the ACF in managing Innovations Platform 1, membership of the SDIC, the relationship
between the NIC and the SDIC, and other challenges.
92. It is easy to lose site of the fact that the purpose of the RIU programme is to strengthen the use
of RNRRS outputs in alleviating poverty, and not just poverty alleviation. In implementation
planning, this focus cannot get lost in the detail and complexity that such planning entails. Care
must be taken to ensure that this does not simply yield a strongly supply-push for research,
whether this be RNRRS or other existing research, or new research.
37
93. Attention should also be devoted to consideration of how RNRRS outputs can be used as part
of the process of partnership building, both at the national and sub-national levels. There are
process lessons to be learned from RNRRS and other research outputs in terms of engagement with
various actors in the system, including farming households (and especially poor farming
households), as well as working with local organisations to strengthen the voice of those
disadvantaged in the process. There are also process lessons associated with commodity chains,
farming approaches, and livelihoods approaches. Importantly, there are outputs associated with
products and approaches that can offer important insights for Zambia. This needs to be described
in some detail in the Implementation Plan.
94. The detailed RIU Programme in Zambia should be developed through a process of systematic
stakeholder engagement in workshop format and through other consultative approaches, with the
timing and level of engagement dependent on decisions made by the Zambia RIU Task Manager
and the availability of facilitation services. This should be coupled with early meetings of the
nascent NIC, facilitated by to-be-identified persons from the CSPDT, the Zambia RIU Task
Manager, and the emergent RIU Programme in Zambia.
(a) Timeline: September - November 2008
95. Initial MIL involvement in the CASDT was withdrawn due to scheduling conflicts. There is
therefore an urgent need for MIL engagement in the Zambian programme design process. This
would be integrated into the Zambian Implementation Plan.
(a) Timeline: September - November 2008
96. It is expected that the implementation plan will be completed by November 2008. RIU support
to ‘early wins’ would mean that implementation planning would parallel the design of the three
priority Innovation Platforms. This would ideally include a more detailed mapping of the
Innovations System.
(a) Timeline: September 2008 - December 2008
38
Materials Consulted ACF (2006). ACF Stakeholder Survey Report 2006, prepared by K. Droppelmann, Monitoring and
Evaluation Section, the Agricultural Consultative Forum Secretariat, Lusaka.
ACF (2007). Gender Equity and Gender Monitoring in the ACF, prepared by J. Kapembwa and M.
Simfukwe for the Agricultural Consultative Forum, Lusaka.
ACF (2008). Agricultural Consultative Forum Breakfast Meeting: What is in the 2008 National Budget for
Zambian Agriculture?, 2008 Agricultural Sector Budget Analysis, comments from FSRP in co-
operation with MACO/ACF/CSO/MSU, Agricultural Consultative Forum, Lusaka.
Albright, K. (2008). “Research Into Use: Linking scientists and users in innovation system”, (mimeo),
National Resources International, United Kingdom.
Albu, M. and A. Griffith (2005). Mapping the Market: A Framework for Rural Enterprise Development
Policy and Practice, Practical Action, Bourton on Dunsmore, Rugby, Warwickshire, England.
Allen, D. and M. Ochs et. al. (2008). Building Pathways out of Rural Poverty through Investments in
Agricultural Information Systems, prepared by the WorldAgInfo Design Team, Cornell University,
United States.
Arnold, E. and M. Bell (2001). Some New Ideas About Research for Development, Technology Policy
Research, United Kingdom.
ASP (2007). Stakeholder Analysis: Final Report, post-ASP Consultative Process Report, Agricultural
Support Programme, Lusaka.
Barnett, A. (2007). “RIU Country Level Interventions”, (mimeo), the Policy Practice (Ltd), Brighton, United
Kingdom.
Barnett, A. (2008a). A Summary of the National Systems of Innovation Approach, adapted with updates
from Journeying from Research to Innovation: Lessons from the Department for International
Development’s Crop Post-Harvest Research Programme ‘Partnerships for Innovation’, the Policy
Practice (Ltd), Brighton, United Kingdom.
Barnett, A. (2008b). “The key elements of a systems approach to innovation”, (mimeo), the Policy Practice
(Ltd), Brighton, United Kingdom.
Barnett, A. (2008c). “Research and Innovation: from a political economy perspective to action”, Draft
Discussion Note, the Policy Practice (Ltd), Brighton, United Kingdom.
Barnett, A. (2008d). “A check list of RIU country level interventions”, (mimeo), the Policy Practice (Ltd),
Brighton, United Kingdom.
Beintema, N., E. Castel-Magalhaes, H. Eliot and M. Mwala (2004). Zambia Agricultural Science and
Technology Indicators, ASTI Country Brief No. 18, International Food Policy Research Institute,
Washington, United States.
Bongaglia, E. (2008). “Zambia: Sustaining Agricultural Diversification”, Organisation for Economic
Cooperation and Development, Geneva, Switzerland.
Campbell, K. (2008). “E-learning and e-reference: an overview”, mimeo.
39
Chileshe, R. (2005). Land Tenure and Rural Livelihoods in Zambia: Case Studies of Kamena and St. Joseph,
a thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Ph.D. in Development
Studies, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa.
Chipeta, S., R. Kamona, J. Skagerfelt, and E. Maluba (2008). Extension as a Tool for Farming as a Business.
Learning from 5 Years of Project Experience, Agricultural Support Programme (ASP) Zambia.
Chomba, G. et. al. (2002). “Improving the transfer and use of agricultural market information in Zambia: A
user needs assessment”, Working Paper No. 6, Food Security Research Project, Lusaka.
COMESA (2007a). Progress Report on the Implementation of the Comprehensive Africa Agricultural
Program (CAADP) In COMESA (February 2006-February 2007), Common Market for Eastern and
Southern Africa, Lusaka.
COMESA (2007b). Fourth Meeting of Ministers of Agriculture, Khartoum Sudan, 22nd-23rd March 2007,
Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa, Lusaka.
CSO (2003). 2000 Census of Population and Housing, Central Statistical Office, Lusaka.
CSO (2004). Living Conditions Monitoring Survey (2002-2003), Central Statistical Office, Lusaka.
Deininger and Olinto (2002). “Why Liberalisation Alone Has Not Improved Agricultural Productivity in
Zambia: The Role of Asset Ownership and Working Capital Constraints”, mimeo, World Bank,
Washington, United States.
DfID (2004). “Zambia Country Assistance Plan”, Department for International Development (mimeo).
Education Development Centre (2004). “EDC spearheads radio project that taps village-level expertise and
innovation”, http://main.edc.org/newsroom/features/zambia_radio.asp.
FARA (2006). Securing the Future for Africa’s Children. The FARA Sub-Saharan Africa Challenge
Programme. Annual Report 2005, Accra, Ghana.
GART (2004). 2004 GART Yearbook, Golden Valley Agricultural Research Trust, Chisamba, Zambia.
Govereh, J. and M. Weber (2007). “New Agriculture and Implications for Information Development and
Diffusion. Perspectives from Zambia”, FSRP/MSU Zambia, presentation to the WorldAgInfo
Workshop, Livingstone, Zambia.
GRZ (2005). National Gender Policy, Government of the Republic of Zambia, Lusaka.
GRZ (2005). Fifth National Development Plan 2006-2010. Broad Based Wealth and Job Creation through
Citizenry Participation and Technological Advancement, Ministry of Finance and National Planning,
Government of the Republic of Zambia, Lusaka.
Haantuba, H., M. Hichaambwa, and M. Nawiko (2007). “Zambia: Trends in growth of modern retail and
wholesale chains and related agribusiness”, http://www.regoverningmarkets.org.
Haggblade, S. and G. Tembo (2003). Conservation Farming in Zambia, Environment and Production
Technology Division Working Paper No. 108, International Food Policy Research Institute,
Washington.
40
Hall, A. (2007). “Challenges to strengthening agricultural innovation systems: Where do we go from here?”,
United Nations University Working Paper # 38, United Nations University, Maastricht, the
Netherlands.
Hall, A., R. Sulaiman, M. Dhamankar, P. Bezkorowajnyj and L. Prasad (2008). “Reframing technical change:
Livestock fodder scarcity revisited as innovation capacity scarcity”, United Nations University
Working Paper, United Nations University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Hoorik, P. and F. Mweeta (nd). “Use of internet in rural areas of Zambia”, LinkNet Multi-Purpose Co-
operative Society, http://www.icdev.info.
IFAD (1999). Report and Recommendation of the President to the Executive Board on a Proposed Loan to
the Republic of Zambia for the Smallholder Enterprise and Marketing Programme, International Fund
for Agricultural Development, Rome.
IFAD (2005). Report and Recommendation of the President to the Executive Board on a Proposed Loan to
the Republic of Zambia for the Smallholder Livestock Investment Project, International Fund for
Agricultural Development, Rome.
IFPRI (2004). Science and Poverty. An Interdisciplinary Assessment of the Impact of Agricultural Research,
prepared by R. Meinzen-Dick, M. Adato, L. Haddad and P. Hazell, International Food Policy Research
Institute, Washington, United States.
IFPRI (2005). Improved Fallows in Eastern Zambia: History, Farmer Practice and Impacts, Environment and
Production Technology Division Discussion Paper 130, prepared by F. Kwesiga et. al., International
Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, United States.
IFPRI (2008). “RENEWAL: The regional network on AIDS, livelihoods and food security”, International
Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, United States.
IICD (2008). “Rural access: Options and challenges for connectivity and energy in Zambia”, findings of a
study carried out for the International Institute for Communication and Development (IICD) by D.
Mulozi, Zambia Association for the Advancement of Information and Communication Technology.
Jointly published by eBrain Forum of Zambia and IICD, Lusaka.
IMF (2005). Zambia: Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper Progress Report, International Monetary Fund,
Washington.
International Institute for Communication and Development (2008). “ICT in Zambia”,
http://www.iicd.org/countries/zambia.
Joffe, S. (2008). “Information and knowledge services markets and their role within agricultural innovation
systems”, a paper commissioned by the Research Into Use Programme for discussion at an
‘Information Markets’ think tank meeting on 26th and 27th February, 2008 at the Grange Strathmore
Hotel, Kensington, London, United Kingdom.
Kaplinsky, R. and M. Morris (2006). “The structure of supply chains and their implications for export
supply”, paper prepared for the African Economic Research Consortium, United Kingdom.
MENR (2006). National Environmental Policy, Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, Lusaka.
Ministry of Communications and Transport (2006). National Information and Communications Technology
Policy, Ministry of Communications and Transport, Lusaka.
41
Ministry of Community Development and Social Services (2007). Final Evaluation Report: Kalomo Social
Cash Transfer Scheme, prepared by W. Colenbrander, E. Schüring, E. Boonstoppel and S. Michelo for
the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services and German Technical Cooperation,
Lusaka.
Ministry of Health (1992). National Health Policy, prepared by the Ministry of Health, Lusaka.
Ministry of Health (2003). Zambia Demographic and Health Survey, prepared by the Ministry of Health in
collaboration with MACRO, Lusaka.
MOAC (2004a). Zambia National Agricultural Policy: 2004-2015, Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives,
Government of the Republic of Zambia, Lusaka.
MOAC (2004b). Agricultural Market Development Plan, Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives,
Government of the Republic of Zambia, Lusaka.
MOH and the National AIDS Council (2008). Zambia Country Report. Multi-Sectoral AIDS Response
Monitoring and Evaluation Biennial Report 2006-2007, Submitted to the United Nations General
Assembly Special Session on AIDS. Declaration of Commitment. Reporting Period: January 2006 -
December 2007, prepared by the Ministry of Health and the National AIDS Council, Lusaka.
Mulozi, D. (nd). “The important role of telecentres and/or community ICTs in Zambian rural development”,
mimeo, Zambian Association for the Advancement of ICTs, Lusaka.
Musanshi, M. (2004). “Spreading the impact of community radio stations across Zambia”, International
Institute for Communication and Development, http://www.iicd.org/articles.
Mutamba, M. (2007). “Farming or Foraging? Rural livelihoods in Mafulira and Kabompo districts of
Zambia”, Center for International Forestry Research and Rhodes University, UK.
Mweemba, G., A. Pais, G. van Stam (2007). “Bringing internet connectivity to rural Zambia using a
collaborative approach”, LinkNet, http://link.net.zm.
National AIDS Council (2005). National HIV/AIDS/STI/TB Policy, prepared by the National AIDS Council,
Lusaka.
Natural Resources Institute (2007). Background Report: Zambia, Research Into Use, Natural Resources
Institute, University of Greenwich, Chatham Maritime, Kent, United Kingdom.
Ngandwe, T. (2008). “Critics question worth of Zambian science”, SciDevNet, http://scidev.net/news.
NR International (2007). Implementation Plan July 2007-June 2011, Research Into Use, United Kingdom.
Panos Southern Africa (2006). Mixed Signals: The State of Broadcasting in Southern Africa, Panos Southern
Africa, Lusaka.
SHEMP (2008). “Agriculture Commercialisation: Lessons Learnt from SHEMP”, Smallholder Enterprise
and Marketing Programme, Lusaka.
Sibalwa, D. (2006). “Zambia: The Radio Farm Forum”, The Communication Initiative,
http://www.comminit.com/en/node/147725.
42
SHEMP (2008). “Agriculture Commercialisation: Lessons Learnt from SHEMP”, Smallholder Enterprise
and Marketing Programme”, Lusaka.
Swedish Cooperative Centre (2006). “Chongwe farmers get new learning method”,
http://www.sccportal.org.
Thurlow, J. and P. Wobst (2004). “A Country Case Study on Zambia”, submitted to the Department for
International Development as part of the Operationalising Pro-Poor Growth Initiative of AFD, BMZ
(GTZ, KfW Development Bank), DFID, and the World Bank, prepared by J. Thurlow and P. Wobst of
the International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington.
UNDP (2003). Zambia Human Development Report 2003, United Nations, New York.
Whiteside, M. (2007). “Preliminary guidelines for RIU innovation context assessment”, mimeo.
Whiteside, M. and A. Mosha (2008). Demand Lead Innovation Process (DLIP). A study on the feasibility of
a demand led process and zonal competitive fund to support demand lead innovation by research
users, Research Into Use, National Resources International, United Kingdom.
World Bank (2005). Zambia: Poverty and Vulnerability Assessment, Human Development 1, Africa Region,
World Bank, Washington, United States.
Zambia Community Media Forum (2006). “Community media in Zambia”, http://www.researchsea.com.
43
Annex A: Any Further Country-Specific Considerations
46. No additional country-specific considerations were identified.
44
Annex B: Specialist Sub-Report on Innovation Systems
RIU ZAMBIA COUNTRY
ASSESSMENT--INNOVATION
SYSTEMS REPORT
BY
Ebbie Dengu & Diana Banda
MAY-JULY 2008
45
1. BACKGROUND
The purpose of the Research into Use (RIU) Programme is to maximize the poverty reducing impact of the
DFID funded natural resources research produced under the Renewable Natural Resources Research
Strategy (RNRRS) in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. In so doing the programme also aims to increase
understanding of how widespread use of research can be promoted. The Programme will also invest in
getting into use knowledge from research undertaken by others if this is demanded by users and is
complementary/ synergistic to use of outputs from research knowledge previously supported by DFID.
The hypothesis of the RIU is that
an innovation systems approach will prove more effective than linear approaches at getting research
outputs into use for the benefit of the poor.
Definitions and Understanding of innovation systems approach
Innovation
� Innovation is defined as the first significant commercial use of new ideas, new
technologies or new ways of doing things in a place, or by people, where they have
not been used before.
� It is also important to extend the use of pre-existing innovations (that is, systems are
in place, but use is limited geographically or otherwise).
� Not all innovations include commercial use (e.g., innovations in how demand
enhancement is approached).
� Innovation enables more goods or services to be produced with less effort or
resources, and / or produces better or different goods or services.
Innovation Systems
� All innovation takes place within a social, economic, technological “space” in which a
number of actors interact within constraints set by “framework conditions” (policies,
wealth, custom and practice, regulatory and legal frameworks, culture, taxation and
incentives, distribution of political power etc) and “infrastructure” (Banking and
venture capital, transport, telecoms, innovation and business support etc). These
interactions can usefully be considered as part of a “system” which is complex and
evolving through time.
� Network of organizations, enterprises and individuals focused on bringing new
products, new processes, and new forms of organization into productive use.
� it extends beyond the creation of knowledge to include the institutional and policy
context that shapes the processes of knowledge access, sharing and learning.
Innovation Platforms
� A network of partners, working on a common theme and using research knowledge
in ways it has not been used before to generate goods and services for the benefit of
the poor.
� The probability of achieving innovation is likely to be increased by
a. undertaking a “diagnosis” of the “innovation system” as a whole to determine
46
where the constraints lie, which can be most easily removed, and the location
of the most vibrant and dynamic actors which can be supported to innovate.
b. Identifying those parts of the system where intervention is most possible and
most likely to result in successful innovation. This will involve investing in
much more than just “research”. It is likely to involve intervening to improve
the policy environment, building capacities to innovate, and encouraging a
wider and more diverse range of actors necessary for innovation to interact
with each other more effectively and probably build trust- relations between
them. This is referred to as changing the institutional arrangements (the ‘rules
of the game’) and building social capital between the various actors.
c. Enabling the potential users of new knowledge to articulate their needs more
effectively, and to translate these needs into “effective demand” – that is to
strengthen the demand side by amplifying the users’ “voice”.
d. Strengthening organisations and individuals who perform the “intermediary
functions” that enable the suppliers of new knowledge to interact with the
users of such new knowledge, iteratively.
This report is a result of the stakeholder consultation process designed to assess the innovation system in
Zambia and identify key bottlenecks and opportunities for the RIU engagement in Zambia. The RIU
engagement seeks to complement (not to establish new projects) and add value to efforts aimed at enhancing
capacities and effectiveness of the innovation systems in the agriculture and natural resource sector of
Zambia.
2. ZAMBIA MACRO-ENVIRONMENT
Zambia is well endowed with an abundance of natural resources and a rich biodiversity. The country has a
conducive climate, labour, water resources and a landmass of 752,000 square km, 58% of which is suitable
for arable use although only 14% is currently under cultivation.
According to the National Agricultural Policy (2004-2015), agriculture currently contributes 18-20% to GDP,
provides livelihood to 50% of the country’s population. Agriculture also employs 67% of the working
population and 65% of these are women. Agriculture is therefore a critical component of the Zambian
economy and is one of the most powerful vehicles to drive overall economic growth and poverty reduction.
The country has achieved sustained growth of about 6% over the past three years; however the growth in
GDP has not been accompanied by a significant growth in the living standards of the Zambian people nor
growth in employment.
Zambia a country with a population of 11.7 million (World Bank, 2006) is one of the poorest countries in the
world and ranks low on the UNDP 2006 Human Development Index, at 165 out of 177 countries. Infant
mortality rates are among the worst in Sub Sahara Africa. Although the poverty levels have improved in the
recent years, from 73% in 1998 to 68% in 2008, it is estimated that 80% of the population live in conditions of
acute poverty. Zambia has over two-thirds (i.e. around 7 million) of its population living below the national
poverty line of less than a $1 per day, progress on the poverty, hunger, child and maternal mortality and
environmental sustainability targets for the Millennium Development Goals is also poor and a big effort is
required if Zambia is to achieve these targets by 2015 (DFID, 2006).
Although the reforms Zambia has embarked on over the years have achieved economic growth of 6% for
three consecutive years (2005-7) this has to a great extent failed to translate into significant growth in
employment and reduction in poverty especially among the majority rural people, it has ushered in an
enabling policy environment for the provision of goods and services. A number of clearly articulated
policies, strategies and key institutional reforms that focus on poverty reduction in the country have been
47
formulated. These policy commitments include Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP), Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs), National Agricultural Policy (NAP), Fifth National Development Plan (FNDP),
Commerce and Trade Policy, Infrastructure- Transport policy; Science and Technology Policy. (App 1
provides a summary of each of these policies). The main thrust of these policy objectives is to facilitate and
support the development of a sustainable and competitive agricultural sector that supports food security at
national and household levels and maximizes the sector’s contribution to Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
However the main concern with these policies is the wide gap between articulation at the national level and
implementation on the ground.
3. THE INNOVATION SYSTEM IN ZAMBIA
3.1 Innovation context
Although Zambia has no specific national policy on innovation, the processes of innovation in the
agriculture and natural resources sector are largely framed by the fifth national development plan, the
agriculture policy framework and the Science and Technology Policy and the Science and Technology Act.
These developmental frameworks seek to harness science and technology resources to enhance productivity
and improve livelihoods of the Zambian population through such institutions as NISIR, ZARI, Extension,
universities and strengthening linkages with the private sector and other market players. The national
science and technology policy is currently under review, and with the increased understanding of the role of
innovation systems approach in development the Ministry of Agriculture and Co-operatives plans to give
special attention to policy and institutional arrangements that enhance innovation for development
(especially in smallholder value addition/processing, livestock, tree crops, fisheries & bio-safety).
The agricultural sector, which is the mainstay of the rural economy, consists of about 700 large scale
commercial farmers, about 1500 ‘boma farmers’ (small to medium scale farmers) and over a million
smallholder farming households. The large scale and boma farmers are relatively well off and able to take
advantage of available technologies, unlike smallholder farmers, where less than 20% are able take
advantage of available technologies and services. There are a variety of reasons why smallholder farmers are
not able to access and utilize available technologies. Even in similar agro-ecological zones small-scale
farmers differ considerably in their resources, ability to make investments and take risks, and in their
knowledge, highlighting the need to accommodate such diversity. Differences in resource endowment and
knowledge-related constraints of small-scale farmers explain to some extent why so many smallholder
farmers do not use fertilizers and improved seeds, despite their availability in relatively “high-potential”
and “well-connected” areas (Govera et al, 2002). The combination of weak market linkages and lack of
effective coordination between service providers in the smallholder sector limit interactive learning and
development of adaptive capacities that are necessary for a vibrant innovation system in the agriculture and
natural resources sector.
The Zambia national policy objectives recognize the strong connection between agricultural development
and poverty reduction. However the policy objectives of achieving accelerated growth and competitiveness
in the agricultural sector are not matched by commensurate resource allocation. There is significant
misalignment between policy and resource allocation priorities. For example Zambia under Comprehensive
African Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP), like other African states, committed to an annual
agricultural growth of 6% through the allocation of 10% of the national budget to the agriculture sector by
the year 2008. (although the commitment is still not signed, it was planned to be signed early 2008, but this
has been put-off). However, since committing itself to the CAADP target, Zambia has averaged an
approximate 4% per annum allocation to the sector. Further, the bulk of the 4% is taken up by the Food
Reserve Agency (FRA) and the Fertiliser Support Programme (FSP) programmes which are designed to
promote maize production despite the government policy priority on crop diversification to include other
crops in addition to maize.
48
As a result of public under investment over the years, Zambia’s agricultural sector has witnessed
deterioration of research, extension and other institutional services from government. There are no
indications that this situation will change in the immediate future given the current resource allocation
patterns. In fact some stakeholders describe the public research and extension services as having “virtually
collapsed”. Nevertheless, there are grounds for optimism. The consultation process showed that where the
Research and Extension services have been appropriately aligned with donor funded agricultural
development programmes (e.g., the Agricultural Support Programme (ASP), they have delivered effectively.
The challenges are in the sustainability of improvements from such short term donor funded programmes.
Strong evidence from southern Africa as well as throughout the world indicates that long–term public
investment in research and development, extension services, rural infrastructure, and food safety and
quality systems have high pay-offs and are among the most important drivers of agricultural growth and
competitiveness (see for example Working Paper 20 of the Food Security Research Project (FSRP), (Dec 2006).
The agriculture sector is also dominated by a large number of donor/grant and loan funded agricultural
development programmes. The majority of these programs have a short to medium–term operational span.
For example among the twenty or so projects in the sector only three projects have been running for about
five years. These are Smallholder Enterprise and Marketing Project (SHEMP), Agriculture Sector Investment
Programme/Zambia Public Investment Programme (ASIP/ZAMPIP), both of which are operating in the
Eastern Province of Zambia, and the Small-scale Irrigation Project (SIP), which operates in Sinazongwe,
Mazabuka, and Chongwe districts.
Both SHEMP and ASIP/ZAMPIP project objectives are similar and aim to improve smallholder incomes by
improving smallholder access to input and output markets and other services from the private sector.
Other programmes running since 2006 include the Agricultural Development Support Programme (ADSP),
the Agricultural Diversification and Food Security Project (ADFSP), and the Kwando-Zambezi Tsetse and
Trypanosomiasis Eradication Project. The ADSP is aimed at advancing smallholder agricultural
commercialization in a number of provinces. The ADFSP seeks to improve agricultural diversification in
Western and North Western provinces, while the Kwando-Zambezi Tsetse and Trypanosomiasis Eradication
Project operates in Southern, Lusaka and Eastern provinces.
A number of challenges that arise from managing this large number of development programmes have been
identified. From the stakeholder consultations the key challenges may be described as lack of effective
coordination, lack of sharing and interactive learning, and consequently limited development of adaptive
capacities that would lead to sustainable improvements in smallholder farm communities as a result of these
development interventions.
3.2 Key Stakeholder Categories
The Country Assessment identified a wide range of stakeholder categories in the agriculture and natural
resources sector for pro-poor innovation in Zambia. (See fig 1)
3.2.1 Research and Extension Services
The research and extension service are dominated by government through ZARI, MACO-Extension and now
there are complementary services by private public partnerships and the private sector especially through
seed and agro-chemical industry companies.
The Zambia Agricultural Research Institute (ZARI) is the main government agricultural research arm and it
has a network of nine research institutes covering all the provinces of Zambia. Its main focus is on soils and
crops research to generate and adapt technologies that increase productivity of farming communities.
Through its farming systems and social science division it facilitates identification of farmer training needs
and linkages with extension services. Historically, it also produced a wide range of written materials for the
49
extension service and farmer audiences in English, although in recent years these publications have been
quite few in number. ZARI collaborates with the universities in Zambia, as well as the National Institute of
Scientific and Industrial Research (NISIR) on specific projects, for example the development of disease free
improved planting materials.
For almost twenty years, the government-supported research systems (ZARI, NISIR, University of Zambia
(UNZA) etc.) have suffered from declining public investment which has reduced their effectiveness and
impact of their research outputs on the smallholder in particular and agriculture in general. In addition the
NARS suffers from institutional and policy constraints. For example, stated research priorities are generally
not matched with resource allocation sufficient to attain even priority results. Current institutional
arrangements have also not encouraged strong linkages between farmers, extension services, markets and
research organisations, and development of various fora for sharing, learning and collective accountability.
The science and technology council (NSTC) for example has a science and technology mandate that cuts
across all sectors but reports to a sector ministry which limits its ability to influence
performance/effectiveness in agricultural research which is under a different ministry. Lack of strong
horizontal and vertical stakeholder linkages mean that research may not be well informed by the situation
on the ground and may not be demand driven. This would point to the need for an appropriate innovations
forum that encourages linkages between different stakeholders and sectors at different levels.
ZARI is currently developing an outreach programme designed to strengthen farmer, extension services,
market and research linkages by bringing together stakeholders at the district level. All research officers are
required to allocate 25-30% of their time to the outreach programme. For example, Mochipapa Research
station in Choma brought together stakeholders that included farmers, organisations, NGOs, seed
companies, agro-dealers, and MACO-extension service and came up with a resolution affirming the need for
stakeholder meeting facilitation capacity (liaison officer) in December 2007. However this process is also
constrained by resources required to bring together stakeholders on a regular basis, and reflects the under
financing noted above.
There are public private partnerships (PPP) that have developed in response to resource and capacity
challenges in public research and extension services in Zambia and these include Golden Valley Research
Trust (GART), the Livestock Development Trust (LDT) and the Cotton Development Trust (CDT). GART is
the most established and effective of these PPP’s and focuses on crop and livestock research for development
in the smallholder sector working closely with ZNFU and CFU as well as ZARI. It has managed to tap into
some of the donor-supported agriculture development programmes to promote some of its technologies e.g.
oxen based tillage systems and conservation farming.
ZARI also works with international research centres like the Centre for International Tropical Agriculture
(CIAT), International Centre for Maize and Wheat (CIMMYT), International Centre for Research on Agro-
Forestry (ICRAF) and International Institute on Tropical Agriculture (IITA) to increase productivity and crop
diversity in the smallholder sector. There are, for example, programmes promoting improved beans, open
pollinated maize varieties, agro-forestry and cassava. The programmes bring together research scientists,
NGO’s (e.g. PAM) extension staff, agro-processors (e.g. for cassava) and smallholder farmers.
3.2.2 Government Extension Services
The MACO extension service has a decentralised system that goes from national, provincial and district to
the camp level. Although the system has been described by some stakeholders as having “virtually
collapsed” it still retains a presence in the smallholder communities, is seen as a key actor in the agriculture
sector, and therefore represents a major knowledge resource to these communities. Camp officers are the
frontline contact persons between these communities and government services.
There is evidence that where agricultural development programmes (e.g., ASP) have worked with and
invested in the MACO extension officers they have been able to deliver effective services. This is an
50
indication that where appropriate arrangements are put in place it is possible to realise the potential of the
“currently demoralized and under-resourced” extension services for the benefit of the development
programmes and communities. However the challenge is the sustainability of such approaches given the
short term funding horizons of these development programmes.
There is also evidence from the consultation process that in an extension camp or block area there is a
multiplicity of NGO and government programmes targeted at the farmer. Where the programmes had
contradictory messages they had potential to cause significant levels of confusion on farmers in smallholder
communities. However where there is close collaboration across the interventions, the camp officer would
serve as a knowledge resource for these programmes and therefore reduce confusion and contradictions in
messages promoted and mobilisation systems used in the smallholder community.
The MACO-extension services collaboration with Kaluli Development Foundation (KDF) in Southern
province provides a good example of collaborations that have worked well. The KDF intervention used
MACO extension staff to train community based farmer agents in crops and livestock as community
auxiliaries with good results. The farmer agent system has potential for replication to cover a wide area if an
appropriate incentive structure (transport, uniforms, and recognition) is put in place.
The MACO extension services suffer from a number of operational, policy and institutional constraints:
• The resource allocation at the national budget level and within the MACO do not always reflect the
policy objectives and priorities on the ground. The district services get a fraction of their submitted
budgets and are consequently confined to their offices rather than going out to meet farmers.
• The institutional arrangements in the ministry do not encourage strong farmer/extension and
research linkages as the different directorates at head quarters focus more on territorial priorities
than linkages that enhance effective use of research based knowledge.
• At the district level it was felt that the research/extension linkage was virtually non-existent and
consequently formal information flows between research, extension and farmers were not working.
The market linkages which encourage uptake of improved technologies are often missing except
where extension officers are funded to participate for example in seed company demonstrations.
• “Government policies are elaborate but implementation is very limited mainly due to poor
understanding of priorities at farmer level and misaligned resource allocation and not the lack of
resources!” added a concerned and long serving district stakeholder.
• There was a sense (from the district perspective) that some of the research is not relevant to the
smallholder communities and that potentially useful research is not packaged in accessible forms.
This would point to the need for mechanisms and intermediaries for packaging research based
knowledge for use by farmers. MACO field officers were concerned that basic “how to” manuals for
a variety of crops were no longer available or accessible to both extension staff and farmers. The
liaison unit and NAIS were possible candidates for capacity building to provide such services as
were some of the Agri-BDS providers like ABF and commodity associations.
There was a contested view from the stakeholder consultations that research and extension should recognise
the need for segmenting farmers for more effective targeting of their efforts. It is estimated that about 50% of
the smallholder households are in the survival mode (very poor) and barely participate in the value/market
chains. The view was that these are perhaps more appropriately targeted by social protection programmes
while the transitional and empowered farmers are the appropriate target for productivity enhancing
innovations. The later category is more likely to access and make use of research based knowledge to
improve their situation than the very poor category.
51
Fig 1: Zambia Agric Innovation Systems Stakeholders
Domain Key Actors Opportunities Challenges
Framework
Conditions
Government of Zambia
Policy-related forums, such as
the Agricultural Consultative
Forum, Community Natural
Resources Consultative
Forum, Agriculture Sector
Advisory Group
Policies are largely in place,
including covering key cross-
cutting themes.
Commitment to CAADP.
Openness to innovation.
Interest in RIU.
Lack of financial commitment
to the agricultural sector,
emphasis on maize and
subsidies.
History of loan write-offs.
Politicization of co-
operatives.
Culture and society Strong systems of social
capital.
Strong systems of local
leadership.
Strong presence of churches
and other forums for social
organisation.
High levels of poverty.
History of dependency, lack
of support for local
initiatives. Lack of history of
innovation and
entrepreneurship.
Some social constraints
affecting the ability of women
to fully benefit from farming
activities.
Other Population has a history of
seeking economic
opportunities anywhere in the
country.
Improving levels of education.
Lessening in problem of
corruption.
Education standards remain
constrained by under-
financing and high levels of
poverty, limited ability to pay
for secondary and higher
education.
Demand
Domain
Consumers Reasonably strong urban
demand for farm produce.
Indications of strong urban
demand for certain types of
produce (e.g., organic produce)
Weak purchasing power.
Poorly developed markets in
rural areas.
Consumer preferences for
imported goods (China,
South Africa).
Local, regional, international
markets
Examples of export-oriented
production (particularly
cotton, but also coffee,
flowers).
Poorly developed markets in
rural areas.
No clear regional competitive
advantage for agricultural
produce.
Uncertain Government
commitment to expanding
agricultural exports.
Research funders and
incentives
Donor support to ZARI,
NISIR, universities
Government support to
ZARI, NISIR, universities
Commodity focused research
by private sector (e.g., cotton).
Some, albeit limited, research
by non-state actors.
Very inadequate and
inappropriate financing of
natural resources research.
Lack of public financing, lack
of private alternatives.
Poor incentives for
researchers in public
institutes and universities.
Producers - local
entrepreneurs involved in on-
farm production
Markets active when attention
concentrated in an area.
Poor market infrastructure
weakens position of
producers.
Enterprise
Domain
Farmers and other natural
resource users - smallholders
Some farmers with surplus
show responsiveness to
initiatives.
Very poor farmers show
responsiveness to income-
generation initiatives.
History of subsidies, loan
write-offs.
Restricted market activity.
Constrained production.
Gender division of labour not
commensurate with benefits
from labour provision.
52
Domain Key Actors Opportunities Challenges
HIV&AIDS has worsened
labour shortages.
On-farm smallholder
production low wages.
Severe poverty, especially in
remote areas.
Stakeholder mapping showed
weak linkages of any
agencies to smallholder
farmers, except NGOs.
Commercial farmers Very responsive to market
opportunities.
Out-grower employment
potential.
Suggest willingness to work
with smallholder farmers, but
uncertain.
Limited out-growers,
problems facing quality
control, market price, etc.
Limited horizontal
integration with smallholder
farmers.
In some areas, affected by
poor infrastructure,
inadequate transport.
Farmer and producer
organisations
Zambia National Farmers
Union
National Peasants and Small-
scale Farmers Association
Organic Producers and
Processors Association of
Zambia
Zambia Dairy Producers
Association
Poultry Producers
Association
Coffee Growers Association
Zambia Export Growers
Association
Co-operative societies
Politically influential ZNFU.
Active ZNFU membership,
some 250,000 members in
district associations and
commodity associations (the
latter mostly in cotton)
Represented in consultative
fora.
Most smallholder producers
are not involved in any
farmers union.
Co-operatives are often weak
and ineffective.
Peasant Farmers Association
weak.
Agro-industries in cotton,
tobacco, sugar, maize, stock
feed and beer brewing also
important.
Cotton sector most well
developed (Dunavant, Clark
Cotton, China-Mulungushi).
Tobacco (Tombwe Processing,
Zambia Leaf Company,
Standard Commercial
Tobacco Services, Tobacco
Development Company,
Daimon).
Largely successful in some
commodity chains, notably
cotton.
Interests represented in
consultative fora.
Mixed success in some
commodity chains (e.g.,
coffee).
Limited agro-processing
takes place in Zambia.
Markets for processed good
limited in Zambia.
Preference for imported
products with low prices
(e.g., China) or preferred
quality (e.g., South Africa).
Intermediary
Domain
Extension Services -
Government extension NGO
extension officers - – KATC,
others who employ extension
agents?
Private sector extension
affiliated with outgrower
schemes or employed by seed
Government extension system
has good coverage on the
ground
When government extension
officers have been provided
with additional resources and
incentives through ADPs have
been able to preform well.
Government extension
system weak.
Institional linkages between
research and extension weak.
Public extension officers have
no economic or institutional
incentives to seek new
knowledge or transmit it to
53
Domain Key Actors Opportunities Challenges
companies, processors or
organised groups of farmers
farmers.
NGOs – PAM, World Vision,
CARE, Swedish Cooperative
Centre, Conservation
Farming Unit, etc.
Providing some working
models for enhancing local
innovation systems e.g. local
agro dealer agent farmer to
farmer service system.
Catalyzing and nurturing
innovations in value addition
e.g. cassava processing and
product development.
Largely weak connections to
national research institutions
Quality of extension
messages variable
Lack of coordination with
government and other NGOs
Weak linkages with private
sector companies.
Short term initiatives that are
not sustainable
Community-based
Organisations – churches,
schools, Radio Listening
Clubs, Study Circles, Farmer
Organisations (20 – 50
members), community radio
stations
Demonstrated efficacy in
improving access to and
uptake of new information
Can provide an entry point for
services
Lack of access to demand
driven services; inability to
pay for service
Limited organizational and
institutional capacity to
articulate their own needs.
Training institutions - Kasisi
Agricultural Training
Institute (KATC), Zambia
Forestry College, the Natural
Resources Development
College, Zambia College of
Agriculture, Popota Tobacco
Training College, Zambia
Institute of Animal Health,
Katete College of Agricultural
Marketing, Chapula
Horticultural Training
Institute, Kasaka Fisheries
Training Institute
KATC in particular has been
successful in improving the
uptake of organic farming
technologies
Weak linkages with
mainstream research and
extension systems to bring
about more widespread
uptake of research based
knowledge and poverty
reduction.
Infomediaries
National Agricultural
Information Service (NAIS),
National Technology
Business Centre, journalists
(Panos, farmer-agents
(through PROFIT and
Dunavant). Also see NGOs,
Farmer and Producer
organisations,
Positive Government attitudes
towards greater private sector
involvement in the sector.
Providing good service to
better off farmers
Lack of appropriate business
models to support
sustainable information
services to small-scale
farmers, particularly those in
remote areas
ICT sector (radio, mobile
phone, internet
services)Communications
Authority of Zambia
Internet service providers (11
in total), of which 6 provide
services in rural areas
Mobile telephone providers
(MTN, Cell Z, CELTEL)
National Science and
Technology Council (NSTC)
Telecentre operators
eBrain
Community radio stations
Rapid advances in the ICT
sector.
Actors in the system know
each other, scope for improved
co-ordination.
LinkNet focused on improving
communications infrastructure
and services for groups in rural
areas.
Most advances that are
central to significant
improvement in ICT will not
be available during the life of
the RIU supported initiatives
in Zambia.
High cost, heavily regulated
internet environment, poor
quality service provision to
rural areas.
eBrain (a forum for
advancing the use of ICTs to
promote development) is
weak in the agricultural and
54
Domain Key Actors Opportunities Challenges
LinkNet
ZNFU SMS market
information serviceRadio
Farm Forum (operated by
NAIS)
natural resources arena.
Private sector intermediaries -
Cotton (Dunavant, Clark
Cotton, China-Mulungushi);
paprika (Cheetha, Bimzi);
tobacco (Tombwe Processing,
Zambia Leaf Company,
Standard Commercial
Tobacco Services, Tobacco
Development Company,
Daimon); Horticulture (York,
Lusaka Agricultural
Cooperative Union); Sugar
(Zambia Sugar Co.); Livestock
Products (Land O’ Lakes).
Private sector intermediaries
likely reach more smallholder
farmers than anyone else,
mostly in cotton and paprika
They provide more sustainable
approaches to services
Dealing with small and
spreadout transaction that
lack of economies of scale.
Poor infrastructural services
Business development
intermediaries - donor
supported intermediaries and
forums, most notably
PROFIT.
Agri-Business Forum.
Zambia Chamber of Small
and Medium Business
Associations.
Food Security Research
Project
Zambia Agribusiness
Technical Assistance Centre
MACO’s Agribusiness Unit
National Technology
Business Centre
Zambia Association of
Chambers of Commerce and
Industry (ZACCI)
Various small initiatives.
The recent formation of two
new government agencies
dealing with business issues
suggest increasing awareness
on the part of government of
the importance of business
development services (BDS).
ADPs such as ASP and SHEMP
have demonstrated that once
farmers have access to market
and market info and
understand value of BDS, they
are willing to pay.
Business development
services not reaching poorer
farmers.
Many small-scale farmers’
lack the mindset and the
access to markets need to
profit from BDS.
Current project based BDS
approaches are not
sustainable
No culture of paying for BDS
in the smallholder sector.
Commodity and Trade
Associations - Cotton
Association of Zambia;
Zambia Association of High
Value Crops; Tobacco
Association of Zambia;
Livestock Processors
Association; Millers
Association of Zambia;
Bankers Association of
Zambia; Association of Micro-
Financing Institutions;
Zambia Chamber of
Commerce; Coffee Board of
Zambia; Zambia Seed Traders
Association; Grain Traders
Association.
Associations are providing a
forum for increasing trust and
transparency in commodity
value chains
A framework for building
common standards and
spreading best practices.
Weak linkages between
associations and grassroot
producers.
The voice of the smallholder
communities is weak in these
associations.
Returns to the farmer are low
due to poor productivity and
low prices.
55
Domain Key Actors Opportunities Challenges
Research
Domain
Research institutes - ZARI,
NISIR, Golden Valley
Agricultural Research Trust,
NRDC, FSRP, NAIRC,
Central Valley Research
Institute, Cotton
Development Trust, Livestock
Development Trust. Also
research services offered by
Department of Research and
Specialist Services,
Department of Agriculture
and Field Services, Fisheries
Department, Forestry
Department
ZARI has a network of nine
research stations covering all
nine provinces and is working
to strengthen links between
research stations and extension
providers (public, private,
NGO) at the district level.
Good collaboration between
ZARI, NISIR and UNZA.
GART has a working
relationship to the ZNFU and
Commercial Farmers Union, as
well as ZARI.
Formation of the public private
trusts has increased
responsiveness of research
institutions to some segments
of the innovation system
(agribusiness, commercial
farmers)
In general poor linkages with
extension and other
information service
providers.
Lack of market oriented
research
Farmers have little input into
setting research agenda.
Mechanisms that are
supposed to feed farmer
demand back up the line are
not functioning.
Difficulty tapping farmer
knowledge
Universities - UNZA system,
agricultural colleges. At
UNZA, School of Agriculture,
School of Veterinary
Medicine, Department of
Agricultural Engineering
Existing collaborative
relationships with other
research institutions.
Research capacities currently
under utilized
Universities suffer from
resource constraints and low
morale.
NTSC The National Science
and Technology Council
With a mandate that cuts
across all sectors of the
economy its well placed to
provide leadership in setting
an enabling science &
technology policy framework
Despite being responsible for co-
ordinating research in Zambia, the
NSTC is accountable under a
single sectoral ministry, limiting
its ability to influence research
that falls under other ministries.
- It has a bureaucratic control
rather than a sharing and learning
culture.
Private sector - ZNFU,
FEWSNET, DUNAVANT,
Agricultural Business Forum,
Grain Milling Association, co-
operatives, ZEGA, input
suppliers.
These stakeholders offer
opportunities for shaping the
research agenda and help
make it more relevant to
smallholder communities
The diversity of interests with no
facilitation limit the contribution
of these stakeholders to shaping
the research agenda that is of
benefit to smallholder
communities.
NGOs - CARE, World Vision,
Programme Against
Malnutrition, International
Development Enterprises
(IDE) are most active in the
natural resources arena in
rural Zambia. Others include
Heifer International, Harvest
Help, Oxfam, Women in
Agriculture, the Cooperative
League of the United States
Overseas (CLUSA), Total
Land Care, Pelum.
Zambia Association for
Research and Development.
Considerable experience in
working with especially poor
households.
Extensive experience in
integrating livelihoods
support, food security, and
social protection.
IDE and CLUSA experienced
in programmes targeting
small-scale producers and
various commodities
Some NGOs that work in
livelihoods support lack the
experience to do so, and may
approach income generation
in the agricultural sector from
a social protection
perspective.
Considerable confusion about
how to mix social protection
and income generation, lack
of recognition that the two
can be well integrated.
Tendency of some state actors
to consider very poor farming
households as not relevant to
market developments.
56
Domain Key Actors Opportunities Challenges
International and regional
organisation research -
CGIAR, CIAT (African
Network on Soil Biology and
Fertility; Pan-African Bean
Research Alliance; Southern
African Bean Research
Network); Southern Africa
Root Crops Research
Network, CIMMYT (Soil
Fertility Consortium for
Southern Africa), CIFOR,
World Fish Centre, World
Agro-forestry Centre (Agro-
forestry Research Network
for Southern Africa), IFPRI,
Alliance for Green Revolution
in Africa, African
Agricultural Technology
Foundation.
CAADP - FARA, co-
ordinating the Regional
Agricultural Information and
Learning System, and
Dissemination of New
Agricultural Technologies in
Africa.
Aligned with CAADP.
Active in Zambia, linked with
research agencies and
programmes.
No clear examples of
international organisation
support for Zambian
initiatives to link research
funding with partnerships
with farmers, NGOs, farmer
organisations, and the private
sector.
Infrastructure
Transport and marketing
Agro-dealer and processing
companies, FRA
_ To a limited extent ICT’s are
easing some of the major
communication and marketing
problems in rural areas.
land tenure system is in part there
for political control, rather than
innovation and investment
lack of industrial development
zones falling under land boards
for business investments
-the lack of or poor state of
physical infrastructure for
transport & marketing in
smallholder communities.
-lack of economies of scale in the
marketable surpluses of
smallholder communities.
Banking, savings and credit,
informal finance
Micro-Bankers Trust,
Commercial Banks
Emergence of contract farming
and support services from such
BDS agencies as ABF help
build trust between the banks
and producers.
Poor loan repayment culture
About seven banks have gone
broke in the past 30yrs due to
non performing
Regulations and standards
Opportunities for self
regulation through commodity
& trade associations
Development of domestic
markets e.g. for organic
produce whose standards are
within the reach of smallholder
communities.
Economic Partnership
Agreements considered by
ZNFU and ESAFF to have
negative impact on
smallholder farmers.
Innovation and business
support systems
Limited but expanding
coverage of ICT’s
Existing working models e.g.
Limited infrastructural
services (tele-
communications & electricity)
57
Domain Key Actors Opportunities Challenges
the ZNFU cellphone based
market information services.
to support innovation and
business support systems
Information systems Limited but expanding
coverage of ICT infrastructural
services
Cost of accessing the ICT
services is still prohibitive for
smallholder communities.
3.2.3 Farmer Organisations
The Zambia National Farmers Union is the main farmers’ organisation and is viewed as strong and
influential especially at national level. Its membership is comprised of:
• 54 District Associations with a combined total of some 40-50,000 members;
• 13 commodity associations (with about 200,000 members, of which 180,000 of these are in cotton);
• Some 700 large scale commercial farmers and 18 corporate members and agro-businesses.
This ZNFU membership structure reflects its strong business and commercial representation. The ZNFU is
also well linked and represented in research and policy arenas, for example it is a key member of ACF and
GART. It has also a decentralised structure linked with MACO extension service through its District
associations and the rural information resource centres initiative in all districts that ZNFU is operational. Its
commodity associations are able to deal with sector specific issues, of which the cotton growers association
is the most active.
Despite broad membership and its strong policy influence, it is still perceived by some stakeholders as not
adequately catering for the majority of smallholder farmers in Zambia who are trapped in poverty, low
productivity and risky production systems. At the community level farmers are weakly organised to
articulate their needs to research and extension services or to ZNFU. A Peasant Farmers Association is
emerging to represent the bottom half of the smallholder communities. The peasant association initiative is
relatively new and lacks capacity. There is need for mechanisms for strengthening farmer organization at the
community level as part of enhancing demand for research knowledge and building innovation capacities at
that level.
Cooperatives are another form of farmer organization that is active in the smallholder sector. The MACO
has promoted cooperatives in smallholder communities for a long time and these input/output marketing
cooperatives provide the main entry points for such PRP programmes as FSP. There was a sense that these
cooperatives have been politicised and tend to be active towards national parliamentary elections. They are
also perceived to be promoting a culture of dependency as they are recipients of heavily subsidized inputs
from government and have poor repayment records. The subsidized inputs not only distort the
development of local input markets but also cause farmers who can otherwise afford to purchase
commercial inputs to wait for the FSP and loose out on planting time and therefore yield potential of their
crops.
3.2.4 Agro-industry companies.
There are a number of input/output and processing companies providing services to the farming
community. These companies also belong to associations that are part of the Zambia National Farmers
Union and this should enhance their understanding of the challenges and opportunities in the smallholder
communities.
The agri-input/output companies are particularly active in cotton, tobacco, sugar and maize sectors. Cotton
and maize are the main commercial crops of the smallholder sector. Although the number of cotton
producers has shrank over the past few years by up to 40%, investment into the cotton sector is increasing as
four more ginneries opened in the past two years. Cotton and agri-input companies have developed their
own farmer agent and input credit systems designed to increase productivity and secure produce for their
58
own markets. These farmer based local support systems provide potential entry points for efforts aimed at
enhancing knowledge flows and use of improved technologies to increase productivity and improve
livelihoods.
The grain milling, stock feed and beer brewery companies are also major players in agriculture sector with
potential to enhance the diversification thrust in the smallholder sector by providing a market for alternative
crops like sorghum/millets and cassava.
3.2.5 Business Development Services (BDS)—intermediaries
There is a wide range of service providers that provide advice and information services to farming
communities and these include private sector agro-companies, commodity and trade associations and sector
forums e.g. ABF, PROFIT. Some of the associations are affiliated to the Zambia Chamber of Small and
Medium Business
Associations (ZCSMBA) and ZNFU. Their main aim is to improve the competitiveness and the operating
environment of their members.
The agri-business forum (ABF) provides facilitation services in contract farming which include access to
information and knowledge as well as access to financial and business support services. ABF is also engaged
in advocacy to improve the policy environment of contract farming.
PROFIT is a donor (USAID, SIDA &EU) funded business development support service programme. It
facilitates/catalyzes value chain development through development of a network of rural village farmer
agents and productivity enhancement in smallholder agriculture. It identifies opportunities for linking
farmers with commercial service providers that lead to viable business transactions. It provides a cost
sharing mechanism between farmers and agro-dealers/suppliers in the training of farmers and farmer agents
(who sell products & services on commission). To date it has a reach of 100 000 households with input agent
scheme and 20 000 herd of cattle through its vet services.
Although there are a number of BDS initiatives supporting SME’s and the agricultural sector, it was clear
from the stakeholder consultation that there was little sharing and learning between the different initiatives.
Some stakeholders even suggested that there were cultural constraints to sharing experiences in the
Zambian context. However its more likely that the different stakeholder agendas, funding and institutional
arrangements are the major constraints to more effective collaborative ways of working, sharing and
development of adaptive capacities.
3.2.6 Policy related Intermediaries
There a number of policy related forums which include Community Natural Resources Consultative Forum,
the Agricultural Consultative Forum and the Agriculture Sector Advisory Group (AgSAG) which was
established during PRSP process and is chaired by the Permanent Secretary of the ministry of Agriculture.
The AgSAG is used as a forum to engage with government, agree on policy direction.
The ACF is a membership organization bringing together a wide range of institutional stakeholders from
farmer organizations, private sector, government, research organisations and NGO’s. It facilitates policy
dialogue, advice and building of social capital among stakeholders. The Food Security Research Programme
which provides support for ‘evidence based policy formulation’ is one of the main collaborating partners of
ACF. In addition the ACF hosts other initiatives like the cassava working Groups exploring opportunities for
commercialization of cassava in collaboration with Programme Against Malnutrition (PAM).
Despite the existence of policy related forums in the agriculture and natural resource sector there is still a
weak culture of sharing, learning and collective accountability on what is working or not working in
smallholder development intervention. For example the mis-alignment between policy priorities and
59
resource allocation continues in the agricultural sector. One of the key missing ingredients to effective
sharing and learning is lack of facilitation capacities to support this interactive way of working.
3.2.7 Non Government Organizations (NGO’s)
Zambia has a vibrant NGO sector with most of the major international NGO’s represented, for example
CARE, WVI, Africare, PLAN, CRS, Oxfam and SNV.
In addition there are well established local NGO’s e.g. PAM; natural resource based NGO’s such as Kasisis
and PELUM, and a network of faith based organizations delivering services to smallholder communities.
The main thrust of NGO’s is humanitarian activities that range from relief and recovery activities in times of
emergencies like floods, drought; and HIV/AIDS and advocacy to development activities that support
capacity building and income generation in smallholder communities. NGO’s play an important role in
smallholder communities that are largely marginalized and trapped in low productivity and poverty.
However the NGO sector face challenges of coordination, fragmentation and duplication of services, short
term planning and funding horizons that do not allow sufficient time for development of social capital and
capacities necessary for sustainable development of these communities.
In order to deal with some of the coordination challenges, most NGOs or network representatives participate
in key government related stakeholder forums at national and district levels and have also developed a
number of sector NGO forums where they meet and share experiences of their programmes. For example
there are NGO forums on agriculture, water and sanitation, advocacy and education and members take
turns to convene these coordination meetings.
4. INFORMATION AND KNOWLEDGE FLOWS (Also see a separate report by Steen Joffe and Sarah Carriger)
The key stakeholders in the innovation systems – ZARI, MACO, agro-industry companies and BDS
intermediaries including NGO’s, farmers and farmer organizations, commodity/sector associations and
forums are the main actors in information and knowledge flows in the smallholder sector. Although
stakeholders face sector specific challenges in the supply and demand information & knowledge chain as
outlined in section 3, it is clear that communication between stakeholders and access to relevant information
are critical bottlenecks to vibrant innovation systems in the Zambian agricultural and natural resources
sector. ZNFU emphasised the need for infrastructural and information services that facilitate production and
marketing decision making in the smallholder sector.
There are opportunities for RIU to build on existing initiatives in rural information centres, community
radios, rural farmer/agro-dealers schemes to enhance capacities in packaging and dissemination of demand
driven information in the smallholder sector. Some of the stakeholders already involved include ZNFU,
ABF, MACO/NAIS; GART and ZARI.
5. KEY CONSTRAINTS/BOTTLENECKS IN THE ZAMBIA AGRIC INNOVATION SYSTEMS
The stakeholder consultation identified a wide range of bottle necks in the agriculture and natural resource
innovation systems for smallholder communities. These include policy, institutional, farmer organization
and markets; and they are summarised below:
• There is a significant gap between policies articulated in the agriculture sector and implementation
on the ground for example on budget investment targets and support to livelihood diversification.
This is largely due to misalignment between priorities of policy objectives and resource allocation at
national level and within the sector ministries which do not adequately reflect realities in the field.
The misaligned resource allocation priorities have severely degraded market, technical and
infrastructural services to the smallholder communities.
60
• Institutional arrangements in the innovations value chain do not encourage effective collaboration,
sharing and interactive learning between institutions and their programmes. Territorial priorities
limit linkages and communications between key stakeholders in the value chain. In addition there is
a weak or no culture of sharing lessons and experience and as result initiatives are always starting
and not building on past experiences.
• Productivity in smallholder communities is very low with maize yields of less than a ton and cotton
yields of 600kg per hectare. In addition there is lack of recognition of farmer’s indigenous
knowledge and diverse livelihood activities. The main focus is on maize and cotton at the expense of
other alternative crops, livestock especially small stock and fisheries.
• There are weak innovation systems approaches in smallholder value chains—instead there is
fragmentation of initiatives and services to the sector and limited market integration.
• The majority of the smallholder farmers are resource-poor and weakly organized at the grassroots
level to deal with rapid changes and emerging economic (e.g. strengthening of the ZMK), social,
(HIV/AIDS) governance (managing contests for political power) and environmental (drought &
floods) challenges. While ZNFU is strong at the policy level, at the grassroots levels farmers lack the
capacity to negotiate competitive conditions and terms with markets and other service providers
(govt & NGO’s). As result some intervention programmes are inappropriate and in fact keep
smallholder communities busy but poor and promote a culture of dependency.
• Information markets in the smallholder sector are generally dysfunctional and farmers are not able
to access information that they need to make informed decisions. Government extension services in
the smallholder sector are severely curtailed except where they are working closely with an ADP.
• Low population densities spread out over vast territories make transaction costs of service provision
very high. This is further worsened by poor infrastructural services in the rural areas.
6. OPPORTUNITIES TO BUILD ON- FOR VIBRANT INNOVATION SYSTEMS IN THE NATURAL
RESOURCES SECTOR.
The Zambian environment has many opportunities that the RIU can build on to achieve its purpose of
widespread use of research outputs and poverty reduction. The stakeholder consultation identified some
these opportunities that are summarised below.
• Zambia has a conducive investment environment as evidenced by investment inflows especially into
the mining sector that have contributed to the significant increase in the national revenue base. The
challenge is on capacities and innovative ideas to use the resources effectively to improve
livelihoods of the majority smallholders.
• There are already a number of networks and forums that bring stakeholders together and there are
opportunities to make this function effectively as part of the innovation system.
• ZNFU launched a cell-phone based market information system which offers opportunities for
expansion to cover other information and advisory services.
• Community radios have been tried in a number of districts and there are opportunities to review
effectiveness and potential for scaling up.
• There are existing systems and working models for example the PROFIT rural farmer agent scheme
and thematic initiatives e.g. conservation agriculture which offer opportunities for scaling up islands
of success.
• The gaps between policy priorities and implementation provides an opportunity for developing
mechanisms for stakeholder sharing, learning and development of collective accountability in the
development arena.
61
7. EMERGING PRIORITY ENTRY POINTS FOR RIU
There a number of opportunities that the RIU Programme can use to engage in the Zambia innovation
system and the country assessment identified the following as priority areas.
• Building a culture of sharing, interactive learning and collaborative action: Explore the
opportunity of convening a national forum or mechanism designed to catalyze the innovation
system in Zambia by building on existing innovation related platforms. This would involve bringing
together existing platforms and stakeholders to address policy and institutional bottlenecks in the
agricultural innovation systems of Zambia.
• Operationalizing innovation systems approach in a district or thematic platform: The country
assessment process identified conservation agriculture (CA) and the agro-dealer farmer agent
schemes as entry points for building geographic and thematic innovation platforms for practical
action and building adaptive capacities in utilizing research outputs. These two schemes (CA &
agro-dealer/farmer to farmer services) are particularly attractive as they bring together different
stakeholders and existing networks and allow stakeholders to identify new ways of doing things
and adapt them to their circumstances.
The two schemes are linked to resource intensive programmes that have economies of scale and
would facilitate scaling up of emerging lessons. Conservation agriculture is appropriate as it
addresses key issues of low productivity and low input farming in the light of rising costs of inputs.
In addition there is debate and energy around the two subjects of 1) conservation agriculture and
sustainable livelihoods 2) the need to reinvent public/private extension services as key components
to transform smallholder communities in sustainable ways. These are strategies that promote
production and market linkages, secure rural livelihoods and do not condemn rural households to
peri-urban slums in search of better but limited opportunities in the urban areas.
• Building capacities for transforming information & knowledge into practical and accessible
forms for smallholder communities. This would involve bringing together stakeholders (technical,
market info services etc) in this sector to collectively identify bottlenecks and develop options for
removing these and enhancing capacities for more effective info and knowledge flows in the sector.
8. STRATEGIC THRUSTS FROM THE ZAMBIA CONSULTATIVE WORKSHOP
The strategic thrusts developed through the Zambia workshop process resonate well with the key entry
points identified by the assessment team. The strategic thrusts provide a useful framework for guiding the
Zambia RIU engagement which would in turn further clarify priorities within these thrusts. We provide
below indicative areas to focus on within each strategic thrust, clearly further engagement with stakeholders
would be required to elaborate specific activities as part of the Zambia RIU implementation process.
8.1 Strategic Thrust 1: Facilitation of Coalitions of Interests or Platforms
One of the critical bottlenecks identified in the Zambia innovation systems is a weak culture of interactive
learning and joint or collaborative action among stakeholders. This is despite the existence of a number of
forums that bring stakeholders together, e.g. ACF and sector advisory groups (SAG’s). Facilitation for
collective action and change is the key ingredient that is missing (not more single agency conventional
projects). Facilitation allows stakeholders to engage with each other & themselves in open ways that enhance
their ability to learn from, work with each other and hold each other accountable for example on what works
and what does not work in subsidized inputs, maize production and marketing policies and conservation
agriculture. These multi-stakeholder platforms would be more effective if they are linked to resource-
intensive sector programmes and/or Innovation Funds that allow stakeholders to creatively pursue
identified bottlenecks in the system. This strategic thrust would, through facilitation, contribute to:
62
• Sharing, interactive learning and collective action in the innovation system
• Mind set shift from supply driven mode to enhancing innovation systems approaches. For example
a systems thinking approach would allow stakeholders to put into context conservation agriculture
versus what smallholder farming systems they envisage 10, 20, 30 yrs down the road in Zambia.
Hopefully this would throw up questions on what policies, resource allocation and dominant
approaches are required to move in the selected direction.
• Development of specialised innovation platforms which are linked to each other nationally and
regionally (e.g. agro-BDS; CA)
8.2 Strategic Thrust 2: Enhancing capacity to demand services and participate in value/market chains by
farmers and intermediaries.
The basis for this strategic thrust is the recognition by stakeholders of weak representative and producer
structures at the community level and a sense that communities are regarded as beneficiaries and recipients
of services rather than people who have a right to those services. This dominant way of thinking has resulted
in supply driven approaches, very weak demand pull for services and limited participation of smallholder
communities in value/market chains. The challenge therefore is how to increase knowledge of available
options, voice and participation of farmers in the value chain. This would in turn increase demand for
knowledge as smallholder representative voices and engagement with the market increase. There are a
number of possible activities that build on existing initiatives that can be used as vehicles to achieve the
underlying aim of this strategic thrust. These would include interlinked thematic and geographical
platforms that allow stakeholders to come together to identify systemic bottlenecks and find solutions to
these. The table below indicates some of the actors already engaged in one way or another to enhance
demand for services and participation by farmers in the value chain.
ZNFU Farmer mobilization, market
information services
KATC Research, demos, training in
conservation agriculture.
and organic farming,
extension
MACO Policy, extension, training,
research, etc.
ASP Farmer mobilization,
farming as a business,
linkages
ABF Facilitating contract farming
PROFIT Facilitation of farmer
commercial linkages;
Farmer based services
GART, LDT, CDT, CFU Research, training,
extension, conservation
agriculture.
Commercial agricultural
companies
Supply products and
services and buy produce,
transportation processing
8.2.1 Capacity Facilitation:
Facilitate organizations working on agro-BDS initiatives (aimed at enhancing capacity of farmers and their
organizations to participate in value chains) to come together into a platform or learning group to share and
learn new ways of enhancing capacity of farmers & producer groups to demand services. The platform
63
would need to be linked to specific learning geographical (district) and/or thematic sites. While selection of
thematic learning sites would depend on stakeholders, it is more appropriate to select those that allow
smallholder communities to participate actively and for their voices to be heard. This is particularly
important for this thrust which is aimed at enhancing capacity of farmers and intermediary groups to
demand services and opportunities to participate in value chains. This strategic thrust would effectively:
• Build facilitation capacities in key stakeholders to enhance demand by farmers and their
organizations.
• Support capacity building initiatives for effective participation in value chains (e.g. through
conservation stakeholder learning groups/platforms; agribusiness service centres e.g. by Zambia
chamber of MSME
• Identify and support initiatives that enhance market linkages (e.g. contract farming, agribusiness
services)
8.2.2 Scaling-up working models
The country assessment process identified some working models that can be reviewed and scaled up
through RIU support. For example Farmer-Farmer based services are used by many agro-dealers and agro-
industry companies for input supplies and for produce procurement. Although in general companies are
reluctant to share their incentive structures in their schemes there is scope to learn about the potential of this
way of service delivery to expand participation in value chains and increase demand for knowledge by rural
communities. There is potential to drive rural non-farm enterprises by building on the current efforts of
agro-dealers and processors.
This thrust would effectively:
• Identify and review working models of service provision through the innovation platform processes
• Facilitate linkages for scaling-up working models of smallholder service provision.
8.3 Strategic Thrust 3: Knowledge sharing mechanisms and services
This strategic thrust cuts across the other thrusts and some of the components under this thrust would be
integrated into the first two. However there is scope to bring together actors in knowledge management and
services to share experiences, identify good practices and working models. This would include identifying
market based information and knowledge services and seeking ways to strengthen and scale them up.
9. THE CONSULTATION PROCESS
• Review of key policy and programme documents of the agriculture and natural resources sector of
Zambia- May
• Inception meeting and consultation with key informants & stakeholder interviews - May
• Assessment of the agric & NR innovation systems context- -bottlenecks & opportunities.
• Field visits – May-June
• National consultative workshop & feedback – June
• Innovation systems assessment report and strategy outline – July
64
10. APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Zambia Policy Context:
Zambia Policy context and Information and Knowledge Flow
D.J.Banda
June 2008
1.0 Zambia Context
1.1 Policy Environment
The Government of the Republic of Zambia has since 1991 made significant strides in restructuring its
economy that for a long time was characterized by copper monoculture. Over the years, and as a result of
Zambia’s preference for an open market system, momentous changes in terms of priority setting and
resources allocation has been brought about. The general policy of the Government since 1991 has been to
provide an enabling policy environment for the provision of services and goods. The development of
sectoral strategies by the various public institutions has therefore resulted in the existence and adoption of
legal policy frameworks. A number of strategies, policies and key reforms that focus on poverty reduction in
the country have been formulated. This section provides a summary of the relevant legal instruments used
in addressing issues of poverty reduction namely; Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP), Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs), National Agricultural Policy (NAP), Fifth National Development Plan (FNDP),
Commerce and Trade Policy, Infrastructure- Transport policy; Science and Technology Policy.
a) Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP-2000)
The Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) introduced in the year 2000 was used by the Government in
its attempt to move the economy towards a higher growth rate of between 6-8% per annum and in assisting
the government reduce poverty by intensifying its effort to remove obstacles to private sector development.
Such growth scenario entailed undertaking capital-intensive and investment driven growth in key economic
sectors with a special focus on agriculture and rural development. The main elements of the strategy were to
improve rural infrastructure; create rural employment opportunities through the promotion of large –scale
enterprises; strengthen the linkage of smallholder farmers to commercial producers and agribusinesses;
stimulate smallholder rural enterprises; help poor people improve food production techniques and
strengthen social services in education, health and sanitation. There were also attempts to integrate policies
related to HIV/AIDS, gender and protection of the environment into all rural poverty reduction initiatives
and across the main sectors of the economy.
(http://ruralpovertyportal.org/English/regions/Africa/zmb/approaches.htm).
b) Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)
The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) ushered in an era which opened up the whole process of
having rich and poor countries declare their solidarity and determination to ridding the World of poverty by
2015. Zambia is a member to the Millennium Declaration which has paved a way to ensuring that world
leaders worked together to promote human dignity and equality to achieve peace, democracy and
environmental sustainability (HDR, UNDP, 2003). The Government as a condition to the MDGs remains
committed to tackling issues of extreme poverty and hunger; achievement of universal primary education;
reduction of child mortality; improving maternal health, combating HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases;
ensuring environmental sustainability and developing a global partnership for development
(http://www.milleniumcompaign.org/site/pp.asp). To a larger extent, the indigenization of the MDGs
presents a human development challenge not only to the government but also to the Zambian people and all
its cooperating partners. Zambia’s major initiative to realizing the MDGs presently has been through the
development of an MDG-based National Development and the undertaking of an intensive publicity
campaigns since 2003 by the MDG Task Force comprising Government, civil society, academia, private
65
sector and the UN System. This includes holding the established Government and the UN system MDGs
Race every year until 2015 (http://www.mdgmonitor.org/factsheet_00.cfm?c=ZMB).
c) National Agricultural Policy (NAP, 2004-2015)
The Government also recognises the need to strengthening and expanding emerging opportunities in the
country and indeed the important role agricultural sector plays in an economy. According to the current
National Agricultural Policy (NAP,2004-2015), the overall policy objective is to facilitate and support the
development of a sustainable and competitive agricultural sector that secures food security at national and
household levels and maximizes the sector’s contribution to Gross Domestic Product (GDP). In principal,
agricultural sector is expected to contribute to the economy in terms of increased production, sector
liberalization, and commercialization, promotion of public and private sectors partnerships and provision of
effective services that will ensure sustainable agricultural growth.
Within the policy of the liberalization of the agricultural sector, the Government is mandated to ensure
private sector participation in inputs distribution, output marketing, agro–processing and to encourage agri-
business strengthen linkages with smallholder farmers. Under these institutional reforms, the role of the
public sector is being confined to policy formulation, enforcement of legislation, provision of market
information, regulation and inspection, maintenance of the national strategic food reserves, financing and
control of pest and diseases of national importance control, and providing rural and agricultural
infrastructure needed for efficient sector growth etc. In partnership with private sector, the provision of
agricultural services i.e. research and extension, (NAP, 2006).
d) Fifth National Development Plan (FNDP2006-2010)
The President of the Republic of Zambia President Levy Mwanawasa S.C. in 2007 officially launched the
Fifth National Development Plan (FNDP2006-2010) and the Vision 2030. As a legal instrument, the FNPD
focuses on issues of good governance, improving health, education and the infrastructure, and encouraging
foreign investment. The FNDP embraces the PRSP which until very recently used to be the main instrument
for poverty reduction in the country, the Transitional National Development Plan (TNDP, 2002) and
domesticates the millennium Development Goals and all other international development initiatives. The
theme of the FNDP is “Broad Based Wealth and Job Creation through Citizenry Participation and
Technological Advancement”. The major focus will be on 1) pro-poor growth-oriented sectors that create
employment and income opportunities for the poor, including in particular rural development, agriculture
and manufacturing, and 2) economic infrastructure and human resources development. The FNDP draws
attention to those sectors that maximise growth stimulation as well as those, such as agriculture, education
and health, that best address the plight of the poor.
The primary objective of Vision 2030 is to make Zambia a prosperous middle income nation that would
provide opportunities for the improvement of its people’s lives. It is also stipulated that both the FNDP and
the Vision should lead to the consolidation of district development plans as articulated by the people of
Zambia through the District Development Coordinating Committees (DDCCs), Provincial Development
Coordinating Committees (PDCC) and Sector Advisory Groups (SAG) and other civic organisations.
Apart from the FNDP being a broad based approach that seeks the means to improve the standards of living
of people and to provide interactive ways of fostering development, The FNDP is currently well received
and perceived to have been very consultative having involved stakeholders from diverse occupations and
all areas of the country (i.e. at grassroots, district, province and national levels). Its major focus that of
identifying of growth areas in the districts, identifying priority development areas and obtaining key
recommendations that would ensure economic growth and wealth creation is also a positive development.
66
e) Commerce and Trade Policy.
The commerce and trade policy is committed to ensuring that Zambia benefits from various trade links. The
country is a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO) at multilateral level and a member of the
Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) and the Southern African Development
Community (SADC) at the regional level. The country also benefits from the various preferential trade
arrangements providing access to foreign markets such as EU Everything-But-Arms initiative (EBA) and the
USA and ‘Canadian Initiative’ African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) including its participation in
the European Union- African Caribbean Pacific Cotonou Trade Protocol and current negotiations to
Economic Partnership Agreements- an outfit of the Eastern and Southern Africa. It is the Government desire
through the Private Sector Development Programme(PSDP) to continue with the identification of
appropriate trade expansion measures while, the promotion of domestic trade, investment and export issues
shall continue to be worked on using the Multi-Facility Economic export Zones (MFEZ) (FNDP, 2006-2010).
f) Infrastructure- The Transport policy
The Government in 1995 adopted the Construction Industry Policy and constituted through the Act of 2003
the National Council for Construction (NCC) which is now the legal body for the registration and regulation
of all contractors and consultants in the sub-sector and enforces construction standards
The Transport policy of 2002 in particular, instituted the Road Development Agency (RDA) as unit under
the Ministry of Works and Supply. RDA manages all roads in Zambia. It is expected that the policy, will
during the FNDP period help the sector address the challenges of poor state of infrastructure, low private
sector participation, slow pace of sector restructuring and poor funding for infrastructure, vandalism and
the like. In this vein , the Ministry of Works and Supply will continue to review and develop appropriate
policy and legal frameworks that promote public–private partnerships in the construction and maintenance
of public infrastructure while, a comprehensive Information Management System is to be established and
maintained for tracking and storing of the operations of the sector at the same time acting as an information
provision for clients and stakeholders.
In conformity with the Decentralisation (i.e. seeks to devolve power to the lower levels) Policy of 2002, the
implementation of FNDP is expected to take on board the district and province concerns as expressed in
regional plans to catalyze the whole process of mobility and quality of life of communities by providing
access to education and health amenities (FNDP, 2006-2010).
.
g) Science and Technology Policy
The1996 formulated National Science and technology policy currently under review generally allows the
promotion and exploitation of science and technology as an instrument for developing environmentally,
friendly and indigenous technology aimed at improving the quality of life in Zambia while, the objective of
research and development is to embed science and technology as part of the culture of the key economic
sector and to promote competitiveness in the production of a wide range of quality goods and services.
There are a number of research centres established namely Zambia Agricultural Research Institute (ZARI),
National Institute for Scientific and Industrial Research ( NISIR)-formerly National Council for Scientific
Research (NCSR), National Malaria Control Centre (NMCR), Golden Valley Agricultural Research Trust
(GART), Universities, and the Tropical Diseases Research Centre (TDRC) to undertake science and related
research.
Following the rationalisation programme of the science and technology, two units have been created. The
National Science and Technology Council with a view to coordinate, monitor and implement science and
technology policies as well as to advise the Government on the same and; the National Technology Business
Centre (NTBC) whose function is to promote research and development products to the end users - i.e.
industry and the commercial sector (FNDP, 2006-2010).
67
h) Information
Information service sector has as its goal the mandate to increase media and access and out reach throughout
the country in order to promote free information on development programmes as well as to have a well
informed citizenry fully utilizing Information and Communication Technology for national development.
During the PRSP/TNDP, a number of programmes were implemented most significant of these being the
improvement of radio reception in the country. The Government procured 56 FM radio transmitters that
have since been installed in a number of districts and therefore the existence of Community radios.
The sector currently operates under a number of statutes such as the Independent Broadcasting Authority
(IBA) Act of No. 17of 2002; Zambia National Broadcasting Corporation (ZNBC) Amendment Act No. 20 of
2002 Cap. 154. It is however expected that more harmonisation and review and work still will continue to be
operationalised through the FNDP.(FNDP, 2006-2010).
i) Social protection
With reference to policies and practices that protect the livelihoods and welfare of people suffering from
critical levels of poverty and deprivation and/or vulnerable to risks and shocks, the social protection seeks
through the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services (MCDSS) during the FNDP place
emphasis on the asisting the most vulnerable with basic services that enhance their standard of living.
It is expected that relevant Ministries will in collaboration with the affected communities handle some of the
interventions aimed at addressing the challenges of vulnerability in general and in particular the social
protection. The Government has put in place the Disaster Management structure with its Secretariat as a hub
for coordination mechanism and promotes the vision of “safety net” (FNDP, 2006-2010).
1.2 Socio-economic context
Zambia is a country well endowed with an abundance of natural resources and a rich biodiversity. The
country has a conducive climate, labour and a landmass of 752,000 square km (58% of which is suitable for
arable use though only 14% is currently under cultivation), and water resources. Zambia is considered one
of the country’s among the wettest in Southern Africa Approximately 13% of Zambia’s total land area is
wetland. Agriculture in Zambia therefore is of high potential for it offers enormous unrealized potential that
needs to be fully exploited that can have positive impact on national food security, incomes for the majority
of the population, the balance of payments account and economic growth at the same time generate export
earnings.
The spurred growth in the mining, construction and transport sectors including economic reform measures
taken have over the years led to the country attain a tolerable level of stability in major macro economic
indicators. The country’s economy is for instance, reported to be enjoying a sustained growth of around 5.5%
per annum in 2005 and 6.2% per annum in 2006 (UNDP Report, 2006 and World Bank (2006). The economic
growth scenario is being planned to average 6.1% per annum during the period of 2006-2011.
The institutionalised reforms that aimed at liberalising the agricultural markets especially, have recorded
some positive results. The Zambia-European Community Country Strategy Paper and National Indicative
Programme for the period 2008-2013 report, states that substantial increases have been achieved in primary
agricultural commodities, floricultural products, horticultural products and processed foods while, the net
enrolment rates for primary education have improved from 71% in 2000 to 85% in 2004. Good progress is
also being made in the fight against HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases with services becoming widely
available for the Mother to Child Transmission (PMTCT) of HIV. Currently, over 90% of the districts are
having some PMCT service sites (DFID, 2008).
According to the National Agricultural Policy (2004-2015), agriculture currently contributes 18-20% to GDP,
provides livelihood to 50% of the country’s population. Agriculture also employs 67% of the working
68
population and 65% rural of the women. In this way, agriculture has very strong links to the economy and is
therefore one of the most powerful vehicle to generating overall economic growth and to the reduction of
overall poverty.
However, the growth in GDP has not been accompanied by a significant growth neither in the living
standards of the Zambia people nor in the growth in employment.
Zambia a country with a population of 11.7 million (World Bank, 2006) is one of the poorest and ranks low
on UNDP 2006 Human Development Index, at 165 out of 177 countries. Infant mortality rates are among the
worst in Sub Sahara Africa. The poverty levels though have improved in the recent years, 73% in 1998 to
68% in 2008, it is estimated that 80% of the population live in conditions of acute poverty. Zambia still is one
of the poorest country with over two-thirds (i.e. around 7 million) of its population living below the national
poverty line of less than a $1per day. The current MDG progress on the poverty, hunger, child and maternal
mortality and environmental sustainability targets is also poor and a big effort is required if Zambia is to
achieve these targets by 2015 (DFID, 2006). The implication being that the reforms have to a great extent
failed to translate into higher economic growth and reduction in poverty especially among majority rural
people.
1.3 Information and Knowledge flows
a) The environment
The Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives has a National Agriculture Information Service (NAIS) as its
outreach army in ensuring that the flow of agricultural information takes place between information
producers and information consumers. NAIS is mandated to provide an information link between the
farming community and agricultural technocrats and is being encouraged to disseminate agricultural
information of all kinds through the radio, print and electric media to promote improved farming
knowledge among rural households. The well established agricultural extension department of, MACO
throughout the country including the farmer to farmer and out - grower schemes interfaces being
encouraged at the village level are all involved in the dissemination of information to end users.
Information sharing more especially at national levels takes place through established networks, fora e.g.
where various stakeholders from different sectors such as water and sanitation, education, advocacy, child
protection, agriculture and energy sectors meet. Facilitation of sector meetings usually rotates between
members. Networking is currently a popular media for information sharing among NGOs such as World
Vision and Profit as well as holding of monthly or quarterly meetings. Information flow is also taking place
through community radios and through the contact farmer approach anchored in the current extension
approach. ASP is on record as one of those very successful programmes using the contact farmer approach
on the ground in promoting “farming as a business” among small scale farmers in rural communities.
In addition, there are donor funded programs that encourage innovative field days and demonstrations
including the usage of (most of which though is dilapidated) Farmer Training Institutes as outreach points
for farmer programs. Technical staff linkages between NGOs and MACO staff at the field level during the
promotion of agro-products to farmers during field days and establishment of associations (e.g. Veterinary
Associations) have started becoming very good avenues for sector interactions and sharing of information
while, training resource manuals, booklets and leaflets continue to be other sources of information reaching
to end-users. Croppack input supply provides manuals and fliers to their farmers through the Community
Agents.
b) The issues
Indications from the field discussions are that scientific research findings rarely gets to end users for the
reason that most researchers prefer carrying out more of the adaptive research on their own without asking
consumers what their research needs are. Even where good research outputs are generated, the researchers
are not in the habit of publishing any of their research findings. As such, there is no information coming
69
through pamphlets, guides or any such to be given to farmers for knowledge and guidance on correct
practices. For example, it is recommended in some of the past manual guides that fertilizer must always be
applied at ploughing (where maize crop is concerned) but farmers up to now do so after plant has
germinated - sometimes fertilizing their crops when it is at knee high level.
The current policy does not seem to support research in terms of budget allocation as usually very small
budgetary amounts are allocated towards research activities and this poses a serious constraint to research
and development activities. The investment that goes into research in terms of cost and implementation of
innovation is a disincentive to many end users and cannot by far be met by smallholder farmers. Coupled
with this, is the poor funding of research institutions, poor rewarding system of researches, poor marketing
strategies for research and the unfair placement of research/innovation. Despite there being lots of good
research outputs, due to recent institutional reforms very weak linkages between research and extension
now exist. It was also observed that the isolated way in which researchers are developing technologies
without the involvement of extension workers at farm trials stage has further contributed to the existing
weak linkages, the communication chain between generators of research and end users becoming too long
thus, hindering the flow of information from reaching farmers. The research – extension – farmer linkage
was identified to be a major constraint to information dissemination. To some extent, this has led to the
highly compromised ability of the farmer to making a choice with regard to best agricultural practices.
Though most researchers prefer carrying out more of the adaptive research, the Intellectual Property Rights
(IPS) that is silent on benefit sharing procedure for instance for the role played by plant breeders, continues
to be a disincentive to research undertakings. Researchers feel there is no mandate for them to brag about
their successes in coming up with research outputs. Besides, there is neither up to date specific policy on
innovation nor a legally constituted forum for research institutions to come together and share research
/technology information as was the case in the past when a national committee under the former National
Scientific Research Council (NRSC) existed. During then, regular meetings for sharing information used to
be held.
c) Public/private partnerships in info markets
The Government policies in place have all been passed through an Act of Parliament and therefore provide
an enabling environment in which public/private partnerships have both the political and government
support to exist. Evidence in the districts reveals that some private partnerships between the public and
private sector with sometimes some element of suspicion have been successfully forged. For instance,
Croppack agents get trained by extension officer from the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives
(MACO) while joint field days among farmers with regard to the promotion of agro-products being
promoted by the private sector take place in collaboration with the public sector workers.
However, there is evidence of such partnerships duplicating each others effort or work in the catchment
areas. Likewise NGOs who tend to work directly with farmers have sometimes collided in these catchments
with other service providers offering similar services. Many NGOs operating in the SIMILAR catchment
areas, do not know what each one of them does and generally, the coordination of efforts is usually weak
among them. Such situations are actually compounded by the fact that there is no policy that provides a
guiding framework to linking various stakeholders. As a result, emerging practical issues at ground level
remain unaddressed. For instance, even though the current advocacies on use of lime in farmers’ fields by
ASP seem to be contrary to MACO’s research recommendations, there is no forum to bring this and iron it
out. Despite there being an elaborate policy that stipulates the importance of monitoring and evaluation of
the implementation of the Agricultural programmes and activities to determine the rate of implementation
impact, the implementation of the National Agriculture Policy is weak. When consultative meetings are
called to discuss implementation, such meetings called have been poorly attended by especially high
profiled people such as the Directors.
Through the public restructuring processes, MACO has continued to lose experienced staff most of who
have left for greener pastures. This move has affected both the block and camp levels in terms of staffing,
70
coverage areas and farmer targets. To a large extent staff morale has been lowered, coverage distances have
increased and very little information trickle to farmers is taking place. Transport is also still a great challenge
in the way dissemination of information to farmers by extension agents is concerned. Farmers are in fact
reported to be complaining that the extension and the whole liberalization process are not responsive to
their needs e.g. the presence of briefcase maize traders has not provided the much needed Maize market
links while plenty wrong things (e.g. knowledge gap in plant spacing) continue to be done without
extension advices.
While it can be said that there generally is no policy constraint on forging of links with farming
communities, majority farmers continue to be constrained in terms of resource such as inputs, labour,
financial, information and knowledge. Farmers still display some rather high dependency syndrome where
they still want to be given agro-products on credit or things free of any charge. They also seem not to grasp
the concept of pulling of resources together to meet for instance transport costs for their goods and services.
Instead, they expect free service deliveries to be made or to be engaged in out-grower scheme arrangements.
Such farmers’ environment is making it slightly difficult to convincing service providers to believe that
smallholder farmers are a viable group and presents a readily available good market for agri-business. The
policy contradictions inherent especially in the Fertilizer Support Programme (FSP) whereby it is now
supposed to be weaning off cooperatives that seem to have started acquiring agricultural inputs on their
own and the continued display of weak mechanisms for phasing out such co-operators has not helped in
trying to encourage farmers to stand on their own.
Researchers feel that the major constraint at the farmers’ level pertaining to use of research and thus forging
of partnerships is the farmers’ attitude towards technology. Farmers’ social cultural perception to
technology is that of suspicion and both their tradition and lack of knowledge hinders them from adopting
innovations. Coupled with this is the element of technological benefits or in economic terms “opportunity
costs”. Farmers prefer adopting technologies with short term benefits to long term yielding benefits such as
growing of trees. Farmers also tend to be resistant to new technology the first time e.g. Conservation
Farming upon its introduction was associated with cultural interference with some farmers being scared of
the new ways of farming as they were not prepared to take up risks.
d) Specific Case
Profit facilitate service providers that are willing to engage in models that enable smallholders access to
agro-inputs targeting mainly farmers above just ‘surviving’ levels and are relatively secure and are aspiring
to create wealth or reap profits. Profit is currently working with 3 input suppliers (i.e. Croppack Ago
Services, Mineland Agricultural Development Services and AgiVet Africa) and in their collaboration, a
Community Agent concept has been introduced in Mumbwa.
Service providers work directly with community based suppliers i.e. farmers who have been catalyzed into
being agents chosen based on the following selection criteria:-
Steps in Selection process –
1) Gives information to input suppliers
2) A meeting is held to introduce willing agents to the community- meant to seek acceptance of
agents by community people
3) Once selected (based on agents credibility, trustworthiness business mindedness i.e. traders),
agent undergoes training to be able to translate information to farmers
4) Agents encouraged to sale 3-4 products of the approved 7 products and presents product
knowledge to farmers in a community meeting
Upon selection, farmers place orders with agent on pre-paid arrangements and the main focus of the model
is that farmers must receive product knowledge before or on delivery of ordered products. Agents work on
commission basis ranging from 10% mainly for crops to 20% for mainly livestock products.
Farmers incentives are through:-
71
• Inputs are delivered to farmers by agent thereby cutting on farmers transport, time and
effort to securing the same
• Product knowledge is provided to farmers unlike when they purchase products off shelf in
shops-normally will purchase without obtaining proper information
• Agents sell products throughout the seasons unlike where retailers only sell products
during peak season
• Farmers allowed to make payments on agro inputs in two instalments first as advance
payment during the first 6months and the other after another 6 months at an agreed upon
period.
Input suppliers have technical staff on the teams who provide the technical information to agents. Some
agents are also into sprayer services so far 17 such agents have received training and are certified sprayers.
This group is expected to increase in June during the planned training sessions being organized by Profit.
Agents working on livestock products are expected to graduate into Community Livestock Workers
(minimum qualification required grade 9). Presently, there are 90 community based agents in Mumbwa.
These offer service in delineated catchment areas. Sometimes due to distances, agents have sub contracted
other sub-agents to assist in the promotion activities.
The common modes of Information Flow include technical staff interacting with MACO staff at ground level
during the promotion of products to farmers especially during field days, Coordinators meetings being held
on monthly basis, belonging to Veterinary Association established where doctors meet and share ideas,
through Agro associations, field days for Agro-inputs and provision of training resource manuals and
leaflets including holding Community promotion events, event that affords input suppliers get feedback on
promoted products, collaboration through other fora such as through the established laboratory located in
the show ground in Lusaka and during
Strategic planning meetings that on individual basis are held every 6 months with Profit. Individual service
providers also conduct on regular meetings, produce monthly work plans and may seek the services of a
consultant
Through the Fertilizer Support Program (FSP) most input suppliers have been linked up with MACO and
this has motivated input suppliers. Agri-Veterinary staff goes through government veterinary on cattle
population and submits monthly report of activity to be undertaken while government veterinary explains
which diseases are handled by government such as foot and mouth. MACO also trains Agric Veterinary’s
Community Livestock Agents,
The main feedback loop in all this is through the community promotion events, consumer surveys carried on
maize variety called bullet-being promoted by Croppack and carrying out contact reviews after 12 months.
d) Information markets
A number of respondents indicated not knowing of any known established Information markets but are
aware of the direct links being forged between agro dealers and farmers. The Farmers National Farmers
Union (ZNFU) was identified as one such an institution on the ground trying to establish some kind of a
market information system. Through their facilities one could access and purchase agricultural products via
a mobile phone service.
72
Annex C: Specialist Sub-Report on Communications
RIU Zambia Programme
Communication to Support Agricultural Innovation
Assessment and Strategy (DRAFT)
July 2008
Sarah Carriger
73
Introduction
At the country-level, RIU’s communication activities focus on:
• promoting an information markets approach to improve sustainable, demand-driven provision of
research-based NR knowledge;
• strengthening capacity of information intermediaries to source, package and deliver knowledge to
meet demand;
• identifying and resolving communication gaps in innovation platforms to remove bottlenecks, build
trust, and encourage common action;
• and documenting and sharing lessons learned with partners and the larger development community.
As a foundation for these activities, this report focuses on mapping knowledge flows between different actors in
the Zambian innovation system, analysing the factors that influence those flows, and identifying possible entry
points for RIU to add value to existing initiatives.
The potential role of ICTs in improving knowledge flows and the prospects for fostering an information and
knowledge services market in Zambia are treated in more detail in the report on information and knowledge
services markets.
Communication for innovation
RIU’s approach considers communication—the transfer of information from one person or organisation to
another—within an agricultural innovation systems context. This means looking at the flows of information
among the different actors necessary for innovation—researchers, farmers, processors, traders, buyers,
consumers, credit institutions—with particular attention to intermediary organisations that facilitate the flow of
information between other actors. Such “infomediaries” might include NGOs, farmer organisations, public and
private extensionists, training organisations, schools.
To improve communication for innovation requires developing more holistic communication models that
address the incentives and constraints for different actors to demand and supply new knowledge. In contrast to
the traditional research communication model where information is transferred from researcher to extensionist
to farmer, RIU takes the perspective that:
• Everybody in the system is both a potential provider and user of information.
• Different types of information are required for innovation—not just research-based information, but
also farmer knowledge, market information, etc.
• Information and knowledge services that will support pro-poor innovation can be stimulated
through market-making arrangements and improved financial and other incentives.
Mapping knowledge flows in the Zambian innovation system
Poorly functioning innovation systems often suffer from two communications-related problems: limited flow of
appropriate information between actors (because of infrastructural, institutional, social or economic factors) and
limited ability of actors to use information received. Zambia’s innovation system suffers from both of these
problems to a degree.
Gaps and blockages in the knowledge flow in the Zambian innovation system:
• In general there are poor linkages between Zambia’s infomediaries and its knowledge generating
institutions. The result is that little new knowledge enters the system and what little does enter is either
not adapted to the Zambian smallholder context or is not of good quality.
• The vast bulk of Zambia’s small farmers—an estimated 85%—do not have access to the information
they need to improve their livelihoods. Channels for farmers to convey demand are for the most part
absent, and most small farmers do not have the mindset or incentives to demand information.
74
• The public extension system is poorly resourced and extension agents have no economic or institutional
incentive to seek new knowledge or transmit it to farmers.
• Knowledge users have little input into research agendas. Mechanisms that are supposed to feed
farmers’ research needs back up the line are not functioning.
• With few exceptions (e.g. KATC) researchers and knowledge infomediaries have not been able to
effectively tap farmer knowledge, including indigenous knowledge.
Several reasons for hope:
• Some of the government agencies (e.g. ZARI and the NAIS) are aware of these gaps and are looking for
solutions and new partnerships.
• Zambian agricultural researchers do publish their results, which means knowledge is captured and
could be repackaged for other audiences.
• The creation of the public-private trusts has made research more responsive to certain segments of the
innovation system—primarily large-scale agribusiness.
• There are a number of private infomediaries servicing large- and medium-scale farmers, agribusinesses
and organised groups of small farmers—suggesting that there is an emerging information and
knowledge services market in Zambia.
• Agricultural Development Programmes (ADPs) have had some success in sensitizing farmers to the
value of information and linking them to service providers. Farmers who have seen the value of
information are willing to pay for it, if it meets their specific needs and can be clearly linked to market
opportunities.
a. Knowledge Generators
In the formal sector, agricultural knowledge generation is dominated by the Zambia Agricultural Research
Institute, followed by the three public-private trusts, and the University of Zambia. Other players include:
Copperbelt University; several specialized departments under the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives
(MACO); the National Institute for Scientific & Industrial Research (NISIR) under the Ministry of Science,
Technology & Vocational Training; and the Forestry Department under the Ministry of Tourism, Environment
& Natural Resources.
In addition to the two major universities, there are a number of small colleges and training institutes, many of
which engage in some degree of collaborative research. These include the Zambia Forestry College, the Natural
Resources Development College, Zambia College of Agriculture, Popota Tobacco Training College, Zambia
Institute of Animal Health, Katete College of Agricultural Marketing, Chapula Horticultural Training Institute,
Kasaka Fisheries Training Institute, and Kasisi Agricultural Training Centre.
There are also several private companies engaged in research, including: Dunavant (cotton production),
Zamseed (breeding, seed production), and the Maize Research Institute (breeding).
Table 1: Primary formal knowledge generating institutions
Organization Area of research Communication channels/links
Government agencies
Zambia Agricultural Research
Institute (ZARI)
applied & adaptive research in
crops & livestock production,
post-harvest, socio-economics &
farming systems
outreach through provincial
research centres, training, field
days, publications (bulletins,
brochures, crop production
guides), website (in progress)
Department of Research &
Specialist Services, MACO
veterinary services & tsetse fly
control outreach
75
Fisheries Research Branch,
Fisheries Department, MACO
capture fisheries & aquaculture
extension (through 19 aquaculture
stations, 5 of which do research),
training, demonstrations,
publications
Central Veterinary Research
Institute, MACO
diseases, animal health services, publications
Forest Research Unit, Forestry
Department, MTENR
forestry management,
utilization, appropriate
technologies
publications, extension, training
National Institute for Scientific
& Industrial Research, MSTVT
food technology, livestock &
pests, water resources training, publications
Public-Private Trusts
Golden Valley Agricultural
Research Trust (GART)
conservation farming,
smallholder livestock systems,
technologies (production &
post-harvest)
field days, field schools, training,
publications (technical manuals,
fact sheets), workshops, radio, TV,
website
Livestock Development Trust livestock production & diseases,
breeding training, outreach, publications
Cotton Development Trust production technologies outreach
Universities
University of Zambia (UNZA),
School of Agriculture
crops, soils & animal
production BSc & MSc programme, in-service
training, partnerships (project-
based), consultancies, publications
UNZA, School of Veterinary
Medicine
animal health—livestock, fish BSc & MSc programmes,
veterinary services, publications
UNZA, Dept. of Agricultural
Engineering
land and water management
technologies, food processing BSc programme, in-service
training, consultancies,
workshops, publications
UNZA, Institute for Economic
& Social Research, Ag. & Rural
Development Programme
policy, socio-economics,
farming systems publications, workshops,
partnerships (project based)
Copperbelt University, School
of Natural Resources &
Environmental Sciences
forestry biology &
management, fisheries
management
BSc programme in forestry,
extension, consultancies
i. Research networks
Research in Zambia is ostensibly coordinated by the National Science and Technology Council. However, what
this means in practice is unclear. Annual research meetings used to be held by the National Commission of The
National Research Council, but this institution no longer exists. Researchers from different institution share
knowledge with each other primarily through scholarly publications, participation in workshops and
conferences, and through direct collaboration on specific projects.
Zambia’s research institutions are linked to others in the region through the activities of SADC’s Food
Agriculture and Natural Resources Directorate. Specific networks and projects involving Zambian researchers
include: the Seed Security Network, the Information Core for Southern African Migratory Pests, the
Management of Indigenous Forests Project, and the Domestication and Commercialization of Indigenous Tree
Fruits Project.
76
Zambian researchers also participate in a number of regional networks managed by CGIAR Centres (CIAT,
IITA, CIMMYT and the World Agroforestry Centre). These include:
• African Network on Soil Biology and Fertility (AfNET)
• Pan-African Bean Research Alliance (PABRA)
• Southern African Bean Research Network (SABRN).
• Southern Africa Root Crops Research Network (SARRNET);
• Soil Fertility Consortium for Southern Africa (SOFESCA);
• Agro-forestry Research Network for Southern Africa (ARENA-SA).
ii. Communication channels/links from knowledge generators to knowledge users
Zambia’s research institutions use a variety of channels (see Table 1) to communicate their knowledge to other
actors in the innovations system—including farmers, infomediaries, and agribusinesses. Main channels for
knowledge flow include: publications, extension, field days and other types of demonstrations.
In general, research institutions do not employ staff specialized in packaging information for non-scientific
audiences. At ZARI, the capacity of the Central Services department, which is responsible for packaging, is
oriented towards providing documentation and library services rather than producing materials for non-
scientific audiences.
Publication: Most of the research institutions produce publications—although the budget for this type of
activity is declining. Publications aimed at farmers and extension providers include crop production guides,
bulletins, pamphlets, manuals, and posters. Very few of these are available in local languages. The majority of
publications are produced on an ad hoc basis as outputs of specific (often donor-funded) projects, rather than as
part of a systematic process of packaging research findings.
Extension: ZARI and many of the other institutes transfer knowledge to extension providers and farmers
through training courses and collaboration on specific projects. In addition, several research institutes provide
some degree of extension and/or advisory service directly to farmers, for example, the Livestock Development
Trust and the Cotton Development Trust.
On the whole, institutional linkages between Zambian agricultural research institutions and public and private
extension are weak. They are slightly stronger in fisheries and forestry, since both research and extension fall
under the purview of the same department. Due to restructuring or lack of budget, a number of the institutional
linkages that connected research and extension under MACO have been lost.
In theory, the NAIS is supposed to facilitate transfer of knowledge from research institutions to the public
extension system; in practice the budget and institutional mechanisms for this are absent. ZARI is attempting to
remedy this situation by restructuring its research stations to focus more on outreach to extension providers
(public, private, NGO) at the district level.
Field days: Most of the research institutes and private sector entities engaged in research hold field days to
publicise new varieties and technologies to farmers and extension providers. GART’s in particular were praised
by informants. GART also has a network of contact farmers who assist in conducting on-farm demonstrations
and field schools.
Field demonstrations seem to be an effective channel for technology transfer in Zambia—the most effective
according to GART (2004). But the reach of this channel is limited since most farmers and extension agents
cannot afford the expense of travelling outside of their immediate area.
ICTs—radio, TV, internet: Researchers from ZARI, GART, and UNZA contribute regularly to radio
programmes produced by the National Agricultural Information Service and the Zambia National Farmers
Union (ZNFU). These programmes reach large numbers of farmers and their efficacy is increased by long-
standing radio listening groups, many of which are driven by women. There are also examples of research
institutions disseminating findings through community radio stations operating in project areas.
ZARI and GART both have functioning websites and ZARI is the process of making its website an information
hub. However, internet access is still limited for the vast majority of farmers and extension providers.
77
b. Infomediaries
The main types of information service providers operating in Zambia include membership-based organisations,
public and private extension providers, NGOs, farmer-agents, business service providers, and government
agencies tasked with disseminating information produced by the national research system. Although media
outlets do not provide information services per se, they do serve as important infomediaries—community radio
stations in particular.
Membership-based organisations, e.g. the Agribusiness Forum, the Organic Producers and Processors
Association (OPPAZ), ZNFU, provide a range of services to their members—primarily large and medium scale
commercial farmers, organized groups of small-scale farmers, and agribusinesses. Such services include
sourcing and packaging production information to meet member needs; printing and distributing information
of potential interest to members in the form of e-bulletins, magazines, position and research papers; and linking
members to other service providers. Most of these services are provided from Lusaka, although ZNFU has
information centres at the district level.
Private extension: The vacuum caused by the failure of public extension has opened up a market for private
extension services to farmers. Private extension agents are employed by seed companies, processors, and
organized groups of commercial small-scale farmers.
NGOs: Many NGOs also provide extension information, although few provide regular, on-going services. The
Kasisi Agricultural Training Institute (KATC) is an exception—providing a range of information services to
farmers in the Chongwe district and beyond. These include training, extension, a school-based demonstration
programme, and a radio programme. The Swedish Cooperative Centre and the Conservation Farming Unit are
also quite active in this area, as well as PAM through its work with the Cassava Task Force.
Public extension: MACO has an extensive public extension network that spans national, provincial, district,
block and camp levels. The network is poorly resourced and considered by many to be dysfunctional. However,
when camp and district extension officers were linked to ADPs who provided additional resources and
incentives, they were able to perform well.
Farmer-Agents: The cotton ginner Dunavant and the ADP PROFIT have facilitated the training of farmer agents
who provide extension information as well as serving as agents for the ginner in the case of Dunavant and agro-
dealers in the case of PROFIT.
Government agencies responsible for disseminating information: The NAIS is tasked with packaging and
disseminating agricultural information and serving as a liaison between ZARI and extension, primarily through
District Agricultural Information Officers. The national-level link appears to have broken during the
restructuring process that eliminated the post of Research Liaison Officer. The National Technology Business
Centre (NTBC) is a newly formed agency under the Ministry of Science, Technology & Vocational Training to
promote R&D products and facilitate technology transfer.
c. Knowledge users and access to information services
The country’s 1,500 large- and medium-scale farmers and agribusinesses have relatively good access to
information services. They are able to demand information through membership organizations such as the
Agribusiness Forum (ABF) and the Zambia National Farmers Union (ZNFU), and they have the facility to
contract research directly from the public-private research trusts—The Golden Valley Development Trust
(GART), The Livestock Development Trust (LDT) and The Cotton Development Trust (CDT)—and engage
consultants from the university research system.
Better-off smallholders—generally those farming from 5 – 20 ha—are also able to access many of these services
by banding together in cooperatives and associations. These so called “cell-phone farmers” are able to access
market information (and markets) through ZNFU’s SMS-based market information system. They are able to
demand and access information and link to other service providers through group memberships in
organizations such as ABF, ZNFU, and OPPAZ. Through ZNFU’s contract with GART, they are able to demand
research. They are able to access business development services, microfinance, and market linkages through
organisations such as Zambia Agribusiness Technical Assistance Centre (ZATAC) and the Zambia Chamber of
Small and Medium Business Associations (ZCSMBA). A number of the associations also employ their own
78
extension officers. These farmers are well-situated to take up and apply new technologies and to benefit from
internet and cell-phone based interventions.
Zambia’s poorer farmers—generally those farming less than one hectare—do not have good access to
information services. These farmers, who account for approximately 85% of Zambia’s smallholders, are cut off
from information flows by poor transportation and communication infrastructure and are forced to rely on the
dysfunctional public extension system for information. Because of lack of access to input and output markets
and other types of services (financial, business development), they have little incentive to demand and apply
new knowledge. The National Association for Peasant and Small-Scale Farmers of Zambia has emerged to meet
the needs of this group, but currently it has no capacity to provide regular information and knowledge services
to its members.
Agricultural Development Programmes (ADPs) such as SHEMP, ASP and PROFIT have had some success in
reaching poorer farmers (although not the poorest) and enabling them to participate in knowledge services.
These programmes have provided evidence that poor farmers are willing to pay for services, even information
services (although most consider such services MACO’s responsibility), if the information provided meets their
specific needs and can be linked to market opportunities. In general, the ADPs worked by encouraging farmers
to approach farming as a business (rather than a subsistence activity) and by helping them to link to input and
output markets and service providers (information, financing, business development). ASP and the farmer agent
schemes run by Profit and Dunavant have also had some success in supporting the development of local service
providers.
Opportunities
d. Radio and other ICTs
The potential of cell phones and the internet to connect different actors and improve the delivery of demand-
driven information is discussed in the report on information and knowledge services markets. These
technologies do offer exciting opportunities, but in terms of achieving significant impact within the project
timeframe and reaching women and poorer farmers, radio offers the best opportunity in Zambia for the
following reasons:
• Radio reaches more farmers than all other ICTs combined (internet, TV, and cell phones) and unlike
other ICTs, it is readily accessible to women and poorer farmers.
• Farmers are accustomed to using radio as medium for accessing information and learning—radio
listening clubs affiliated with Radio Farm Forum (RFF) have been active since the 1960s. Sibalwa (2000)
reports that 52% of 240 farmers interviewed reported that they had learned new methods of farming
and had increased their yields through RFF Listening Groups.
• Community radio stations are strong in Zambia, providing localized, community-driven content in all
nine of Zambia’s provinces. These stations have helped to empower local communities and connect
them to government and other services. For example, Musanshi (2004) documents examples of farmers
using community radio to demand information on inputs and women using their local radio station to
demand literacy classes.
There are several projects focused on the use of radio for development that are already operating in Zambia. The
most significant for RIU is the Panos/NAIS project to improve the interactivity of Radio Farm Forum. The project
has supplied listening clubs, over half of which are driven by women, with mini-discs so that they can record
their questions after listening to the programme. These recordings are collected, and the questions are addressed
at the beginning of the following week’s programme. Panos also provides three day training for the clubs,
including leadership, thematic issues and technical training. They are also training District Agricultural
Information Officers to work with the listening clubs. RIU could add value to this initiative by working with
Panos and NAIS to include a focus on use of the clubs as platforms for farmers to demand information and
access services.
There are also two USAID programmes that offer potential lessons:
79
• Zambia Quality Education Services Through Technology (QUEST) - uses the Interactive Radio
Instruction methodology to teach life skills and AIDS education to out-of-school children through
community radio stations.
• Zambia Community Radio Project (ZCR) - is partnering with community radio stations to create a
series of village-based radio programmes. Entitled Our Village, the programmes are designed by
communities to address their development needs and tap local technical knowledge.
e. Projects to improve knowledge flows
There are a number of programmes and projects in Zambia aimed at improving information flows in
agriculture. These programmes offer opportunities for cooperation and lesson learning for RIU.
National:
• Development of an Effective Information Flow System—focuses on Misamfu, Northern Province and
Mount Makulu near Lusaka (IICD)
• Strengthening the Agricultural Information Flow and Dissemination System of the National Agricultural
Information Services (IICD)
• Communicating Research (implemented by Panos with support from DFID) – strengthens links between
researchers and journalists
Regional:
• Regional Agricultural Information & Learning System (RAILS)
• Dissemination of New Agricultural Technologies in Africa (DONATA)
Both of these are coordinated by the Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA) and have timelines
(2007-2012) that roughly coincide with RIU’s. These initiatives are still fairly new and have yet to engage widely
with Zambian researchers. However, the potential for RIU to feed into these programmes or vice versa is worth
exploring.
• Strategic Analysis Knowledge Support System (SAKSS) coordinated by IFPRI
f. Functioning innovation platform on cassava
The Cassava Task Force is an existing innovation platform that could offer a quick win for RIU. The Task Force
brings together innovation system actors (research institutions, farmer organisations, NGOs, government
agencies, processors and other private sector companies) to accelerate commercialization of cassava, a high
potential crop in Zambia. The Task force has already gone a long way in identifying gaps and blockages and
working towards common solutions. Research-based knowledge was one of the key gaps identified.
RIU could add value by facilitating the evaluation and possible promotion of RNRRS outputs (10 deal
specifically with cassava) and by building communications capacity within the platform—this was identified as
a key need by the task force coordinator. Specifically the Task Force needs support to develop and implement a
communication strategy targeted at different audiences (farmers, industry, policy makers and consumers) and
to document and share lessons learned.
The Task Force offers a significant learning opportunity for RIU. By documenting the process RIU could provide
a convincing example of the innovations system approach and potential lessons for RIU Zambia and the larger
RIU programme.
g. Information-related constraints to agricultural innovation
• Weak linkages between information and knowledge service providers (including public extension) and
research institutions. Most of the information and knowledge service providers interviewed reported that
the country’s research institutions were unresponsive to requests for information and that they source most
of the information they provide to their clients through the internet, international partners, and private
sector commercial entities.
80
• Much of the information produced by the Zambian research system is not packaged appropriately for small-
scale farmers or even information service providers. The vast bulk of publications produced by research
institutions are aimed at other researchers. Of publications aimed at farmers and extension providers (crop
production guides, bulletins, pamphlets, manuals, posters), very few are available in local languages. The
majority are produced on an ad hoc basis as outputs of specific (often donor-funded) projects, rather than as
part of a systematic process of communicating research findings.
• Knowledge users have little input into setting research agendas. Mechanisms that are supposed to feed
farmer information needs back up the line don’t work. ZARI and other public research institutions are
struggling to find cost-acceptable methods of soliciting stakeholder input in an environment where their
funding is decreasing.
• Policy makers do not value research (at least when it comes to budget allocations) nor do they appreciate the
role of information and knowledge services (particularly private sector services) in fostering innovation and
economic growth in the agricultural sector.
• The vast majority of poor farmers are not able to access the information services. They also do not have the
mindset or capacity necessary to use information to improve their livelihoods.
h. Strategy
To have the biggest impact on poverty, RIU needs to concentrate on reaching small-scale farmers farming less
than one hectare. Improving knowledge flows to these farmers will not be enough; poor farmers also need to be
turned on to the value of information and given the capacity to articulate demand and plug information into
decision-making frameworks—enabling them to make decisions that will improve their livelihoods, not merely
their productivity.
Strategically, given the programme’s short timeframe, it makes sense to build on initiatives that are already
having some impact on the ground, such as the ADPs (particularly the ones that are coming to an end this
year—SHEMP and ASP), and to take advantage of communication technologies that are already widespread
and that have proved acceptable and accessible to both men and women and the poorer segments of the
population—i.e. radio.
To improve the functioning of the agricultural innovation systems as a whole, RIU needs to explore ways of
fostering local information service markets—for example, through the farmer-agent model used by Dunavant
and PROFIT and the lead farmer model established by ASP. And it needs to strengthen the capacity of existing
service providers to source, package, and deliver information to smallholders. This would include:
• Strengthening linkages to research institutions,
• Identifying business models to make service provision to smallholders financially sustainable, and
• Finding ways of using ICTs to reduce transaction costs.
Finally, RIU could help to create an enabling environment for improved knowledge flows by publicising success
stories and contributing evidence to support existing advocacy efforts—for example, those led by ACF, FSRP
and the Zambia Community Media Forum.
The specific entry points/opportunities described in the next section contribute to all three strategic thrusts
identified during the stakeholder consultation process:
Thrust 1: Facilitating coalitions of interest or platforms
Thrust 2: Enhancing the capacity of farmers and intermediaries to demand services and participate in value
chains
Thrust 3: Developing knowledge sharing mechanisms and services
In terms of operationalising the strategy, most of the communications activities described could be carried out
under a platform on information and knowledge services. This platform could bring together different actors
into task groups—for example, one focused on internet/cell phone-based mechanisms for strengthening linkages
among service providers and potential clients (including other service providers) and one using radio to
81
strengthen farmer demand for and access to information. Where possible, RIU should link to other programmes
(regional and national) aimed at improving knowledge flows in agriculture.
i. Entry points/opportunities for RIU to add value
Opportunity 1: Facilitating a platform (or task group under a larger platform on information and knowledge
services) to strengthen radio as a channel for farmers to demand and access information and for infomediaries
to market services. Possible activities include:
• Working with community radio stations to improve the quality of their agricultural programming.
Could include knowledge sharing and capacity building on how to involve the community, source and
package information, highlight farmer knowledge and success stories, and attract advertisers of
agricultural goods and services.
• Working with Panos and NAIS to make Radio Farm Forum more responsive to farmer demand and
build the capacity of Farmer Listening Groups to demand information and access services.
• Developing a radio-based distance learning package that would give farmers the skills and decision-
making frameworks they need to source information and use it to improve their livelihoods. Could be
linked to Radio Farm Forum Listening Clubs and Swedish Cooperative Centre Study Circles, many of
which have retired teachers as facilitators. Also this is a possible mechanism for scaling up some of the
training provided by the successful Agricultural Development Programmes, such as SHEMP and ASP.
Potential partners: Panos, Zambia Community Media Forum, Zambia Media Trust, NAIS, ZNFU (particularly
district information centres), SCC, NTBC, community radio stations
Links to other programmes: Zambia Community Radio Project (USAID), PANOS/NAIS project (DANIDA), ADPs
Potential outputs, outcomes and results: Better provision of farmer-driven information, farmers able to demand and
use information to improve livelihoods, farmers better able to access service providers.
Risks/constraints: Poaching of community radio staff by commercial stations, possibility of government control
through threats to revoke license (risk is slight unless content is politicised)
Opportunity 2: Capacity building for information service providers on sourcing and packaging information to
meet client needs (drawing on RNRRS models and outputs), marketing their services, and developing business
models for extending service to poorer farmers (could also be an activity under a platform on information and
knowledge services)
Potential Partners: ZNFU, NAIS, OPPAZ, ABF, KATC
Potential outputs, outcomes and results: Capacity of information service providers to source and package
information and to participate in information and knowledge service market improved, expansion of services to
poorer farmers
Opportunity 3: Building communications capacity in the Cassava Task Force and documenting lessons
learned. Specifically building communications capacity of staff from one or more task force members and
providing MIL support.
Potential partners: PAM, ACF, Zambia Association of Chambers of Commerce & Industry (ZACCI), FreshPict,
Tiger Feeds, MACO (Agribusiness Unit), NSRI, UNZA, FRSP
Links to other projects and programmes: FAO cassava project and JICA food diversification project, FRSP, Cassava
Transformation in Southern Africa project (covers Malawi, Mozambique, Tanzania & Zambia), CAADP
(through pillar 4 objective: To mobilize the large potential of cassava to contribute to food security and income).
Potential outputs, outcomes and results: RNRRS outputs put into use, evidence for innovations system hypothesis
generated, lessons on facilitating commodity-based innovations platform documented and shared, increased
participation of farmers in cassava value chain.
Risks/constraints: Trained communications staff poached by another organisation or prevented from working on
task force activities
82
Opportunity 4: Improving knowledge flows between research institutions and infomediaries and farmers. In
particular building on RNRRS outputs documented in the “Spreading the Word section of the database, e.g.
CPP58: Capturing farmer’s demands and involving them in research and CPP37: Finding better ways of
disseminating research results, LPP28: Helping people access the information they need.
Potential partners: ZARI, MACO, NSIR, GART, CDT, LDT
Links to other projects and programmes: see section e above on projects to improve knowledge flows
Potential outputs, outcomes and results: use of RNRRS outputs to improve knowledge flows in the Zambian
innovations system
Risks: partner interest, willingness to institutionalise new approaches, human/financial resource constraints
Opportunity 5: Communicating to policy makers and farmers the importance of research-based information.
RIU could add value to existing efforts by providing evidence and success stories to support advocacy.
Potential partners: ACF, FRSP, ZARI, NTSC, ZNFU (Institute for Economic & Social Research), ADPs, Panos
Links to other projects and programmes: Communicating Research (the DFID-funded Panos project) could be a way
of linking to a network of journalists who have been sensitised to research into use issues.
Potential outputs, outcomes and results: Budget allocated for research increased; role of information and knowledge
services in fostering innovation and the role of the private sector in providing those services considered in the
revision of the National Science and Technology Policy and MACO policy and institutional arrangements.
Risks/constraints: Policy changes not made or made on paper but not implemented
j. Other issues/constraints with implications for RIU’s success in Zambia
• Literacy in Zambia is fairly high according to official statistics, with around 80% of the population over
the age of 15 able to read and write in English (CIA Factbook). However, informant interviews suggest
that in rural areas the percentage is significantly lower. Since the literacy level is lower for women than
for men according to both official statistics and informant interviews, fewer women than men are able
to directly access knowledge through text-based mediums (publications, internet, SMS).
• In 2002, the government passed the Zambia National Broadcasting Corporation Act, which would in
effect restructure ZNBC into an authentic public service broadcaster, with an independent board of
directors and ultimate regulation by an Independent Broadcasting Authority (IBA). The IBA would
govern all forms of broadcasting under the aegis of a transparently recruited board of directors.
Implementation, which is to be carried out by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting Services
(MIBS), has been held up by the Ministry’s opposition to nominations for the Boards of Directors.
• To reach communities, getting the support of the local headperson or chief is critical. These traditional
authority figures have the power to spread new knowledge and mobilise communities or, if they aren’t
brought on board, to block knowledge flows and participation.
83
Annex D: Specialist Sub-Report on Information Markets
RIU ZAMBIA PROGRAMME
INFORMATION AND KNOWLEDGE SERVICE MARKETS
ASSESSMENT AND STRATEGY
September 2008
Steen Joffe
84
Introduction
The Zambia CSPDT Terms of reference include an element shared between the Communications Consultant
and the Information Markets Consultant.
This report focuses in particular on the role of ICTs in Zambia to network different actors, the opportunities
for intermediaries in such networks and the prospects for emergence of an information and knowledge
services marketplace that works to deliver benefits for the rural poor. The separate Communications report
focuses on mapping information and knowledge flows and modes of communication; also on identifying the
main 'knowledge generating' agencies and networks.
Information and Knowledge Service Markets (IKSM)
In the context of an innovation systems approach, the information and knowledge services market can be
thought of as operating between innovation system actors; in other words the interactions between these
actors and the services that enable flows of information and knowledge between them.
These interactions and flows are often weak in low income emerging economies, and the rural poor
particularly disadvantaged : Thus, the Knowledge Markets approach:
� Works through existing development initiatives at the community and small enterprise level to
strengthen effective demand for, and use of, knowledge services.
� Supports initiatives that build networks between rural service providers, their clients, and other
actors – facilitating ‘many-to-many’ exchanges of information.
� Promotes sustainable business models to pay for the provision of information, content and
brokerage services through these networks using smart subsidies where necessary.
Such actions strengthen rural markets as more and better information becomes available about the
availability, nature, price and quality of essential services that can make markets work for small farmers. The
result is a better coordinated system that complements existing local knowledge through interactions with
advisory and training services, credit providers, and input and output market intermediaries, bringing
together value-chains and strengthening demand ‘pull’ on research agencies.
IKSM in Practice : methodology
� Understand the existing structure of the knowledge economy : how knowledge flows and what
factors influence these flows in relation to rural/nr livelihoods
� Understand major drivers of change : economic, social, policies and programmes that influence
these flows and the people/enterprises involved, with particular attention to the intermediary
services sector
� Identify (potential) services, providers and institutional/networking arrangements that will enable
these key people/enterprises to be better connected, informed, knowledgeable, and make optimum
use of research based knowledge
� Assess conditions for the provision of these services and networks and help to bring them about
making best use of public-private partnerships and alliances between ICT service providers and
other actors based on sustainable business models that incentivise information flows.
85
Zambia ICTs Sector : Mapping
Policy and Regulation
Zambia recognises ICT as a priority sector within the Poverty Reduction Strategy Programme and the Fifth
National Development Plan 2006-2010, where-in "ICT shall be integrated in the agricultural sector reform
process in order to contribute to the social and economic revival of the country." At the sub-regional level
Zambia has been an active player in ICT initiatives under COMESA and SADC. The UN ECA's Sub-Regional
Development Centre for Southern Africa (SRDC-SA) is located in Lusaka.
A new ICT Policy was agreed in 2006. The Ministry of Communications and Transport is charged with
coordination, oversight and implementation. Within agriculture, the policy makes a number of
commitments oriented towards improving productivity and competitiveness of the agricultural sector
through increased use of ICTs, including facilitating private sector investment in infrastructure and services
in all Farming Blocks and Farm Resettlement Schemes, and instituting necessary supportive policy
measures.
The Communications Authority of Zambia (CAZ) is responsible for regulating the provision of
telecommunications products and services in the country : issuing licences, promoting competition,
promoting the interests of consumers and other users of ICT services/ products etc. Additionally, CAZ is
responsible for administering the utilisation of the Radio Frequency Spectrum. CAZ administers a Rural
ICT Development Basket financed through a 5% levy on licensed operators in the communications sector,
which is intended to subsidies the provision of ICT services in rural and underserved areas.
International Gateway for Satellite Access
The International Gateway is terrestrial and based at Mwambeshi Satellite Station. under the control of the
Zambia Telecommunications Company (ZAMTEL). Both the voice and data international gateways are
liberalised, however a $12 million license fee is payable by licensees; this situation has led to complaints by
GSM mobile companies and ISPs about unfair competition.
National and Regional Optical Fibre Cable Network Projects
Zambia is not yet linked to the and The East African Submarine Cable System (EASSy) fibre optic project is
intended to connect Zambia and five other countries in Sub-Saharan Africa to the global internet backbone;
this will improve access and reduce costs for connectivity, but it is unlikely to be effective within the next
five years. In the interim the country depends on foreign satellites for its Internet and fixed telephone line
communications. There are initiatives underway to establish a fibre optic backbone for national use and in
preparation for international fibre link. These are being carried out by the Copperbelt Energy Corporation
and the Zambian institutions, ZAMTEL and ZESCO. The ZESCO fibre network is likely to reach a theoretical
coverage of 80% of real population within a year.
Internet Service Providers
In the early 1990s Zambia was, after South Africa, the first country in Sub-Saharan Africa to pioneer the use
of Internet services. The driving force behind this was the University of Zambia (UNZA) which, in 1994,
spun-off ZAMNET, which is now a separate ISP Company. However, this advantage has not been exploited
and the country now lags behind many African countries that started Internet services in a more liberalised
and low cost environment. There are eleven registered Internet Service Providers (ISPs) in Zambia. Out of
these, six provide services to rural areas with an estimated 17,800+ clients, these are:
� ZAMTEL Online
� Zamnet Communication Systems
86
� Coppernet Solutions
� Microlink Technologies
� UUNet Zambia
� Africonnect
Over 50% of services provided by the ISPs are concentrated in the major towns along the line of rail where
there is relatively good telecommunication infrastructure, lower capital and operations costs and a high
number of potential customers. Services available for the rural areas include CDMA, offered by ZAMTEL,
and GPRS, offered by CELTEl and MTN, as well as VSAT satellite systems offered by some ISP companies.
VSAT systems are more frequently used in the rural areas than in the towns. Wireless broadband is
predominantly available to urban users. WiMaX and MESH are also being introduced and will further the
potential for rural connectivity solutions.
Mobile telephone providers
MTN, Cell Z and CELTEL are the main mobile telephone service providers in Zambia. Celtel have
approximately 80% of the market, with circa 2 milllion subscribers (AfricConnect pers comm). Celtel and
MTN offer internet conectivity via mobile phones, using GPRS and EDGE, while WiMaX is being
considered.
The access speed ranges from 30 to 160 kbps. To use GPRS with Celtel one needs to have a PC-card (ZMK
950,000) or USB-card (ZMK 1,170,000), referred to as ‘SAMBA’. Cost of usage are ZMK 1,600/ MB and one
can also purchase bundles of 100 MB for ZMK 85,000.
Telecentres and other localised ICT initiatives
Internet cafés and business bureaus offer telephone, email/Internet access in major urban centres; much less
so in rural towns. There were about 300 licensed telecenters across the country by 2004 against 108 in the
year 2000. There are a number of local projects aimed at integrating use ICT initiatives in rural Zambia. The
Zambia Association for Advancement of Information and Communication Technologies (ZAA-ICT), is an
active NGO in this area; the International Institute for Communication and Development (IICD) has
supported a number of such initiatives.
The Macha Mission multipurpose community telecentre, supported by LinkNet(www.linknet.zm), is using
Ku-Band and C-band VSAT for its connectivity services. This centre is linked with the South African Meraka
Institute, a leading wireless technlogy R&D centre, and also has a Memorandum of Undertanding with TNO
in Holland for the application of research outputs from that organisation. It has ambitious plans to establish
additional centres in other Districts of Zambia. Another community access initiative operates in Namwala in
Southern Province where AfriConnect is supporting a rural connectivity business outlet in partnership with
a local entrepreneur. The Namwala project uses the CELTEL mast on a rental basis (www.namwala.com).
Another multipurpose teleentre, at Chinyunyu, Chongwe District is was established by the Kasisi
Agricultural Training Centre (KATC) with technical and financial assistance from UNIDO. This centre uses
50 * 50 watt solar panels for it’s energy supply.
Other initiatives are the Lusaka’s peri-urban Chawama Youth Project that offers of ICT skills to local youths
in the Chawama Compound; similarly the Kalomo Women’s Group in Kalomo, Southern Province. The
Kachabe Youth enterprise that was supported by IICD through partnerships to use ICT in its business is now
reported to be ‘a growing small scale manufacturing enterprise in Lusaka’. Other community projects are in
Ndola, Copperbelt province. There are also upcoming telecenter initiatives in Lusaka Matero compound and
University of Zambia supported by UNESCO and Microsoft respectively.
87
Overview of connectivity in Zambia : issues and constraints
� There are estimated to be approximately 12,000 Internet subscribers in Zambia and an additional
30,000 Internet users mainly patronising Internet cafes.
� The quality of internet services is variable; poor in rural areas. Much of rural Zambia has no
landlines; local copper is poor and won't carry adsl broadband. Private and community information
centres, telecentres and Internet cafés are beginning to enhance access for populations in rural areas,
however rural mobile and wireless services are also subject to outages due to poor electricity
infrastructure.
� Within the last 10 years Cell Z, CELTEL and MTN have extended their services and coverage to
rural districts with technologies such as GPRS and EDGE. However, the cost of using the Internet
through the mobile phone services is still relatively high.
� The cost accessing the Internet cafes in rural areas is five times higher than in the urban areas. In
some cases, it costs between ZMK 500 – ZMK 1,000 to access the Internet (about 0.10-0.25 USD) in
the rural areas compared to an average of ZMK 100.00 (0.025 USD) per minute in Lusaka and the
Copperbelt.
� Connectivity is relatively expensive in Zambia compared to other countries in the region. In 2007, a
typical monthly cost of domestic internet access varied from ZMK 200,000 to ZMK 20,000,000 (40-400
US dollars). The cost of a 1 mbs fibre connection is currently approximately $6,000/month versus
$300/month for a similar service in Kenya. The minimum total investments for Ku-Band V-SAT
range from $25,000 to $30,000, with monthly rates starting at around $770 for 256 kbps download.
� It is expensive to operate as an ISP; each wireless transmitter cost about $40 - 50k and can serve
approximately 200 access points within a radius of 30km. Relatively high import tariffs and taxes
are imposed on ICT products and services ; there is a 5% duty on all PCs and 15 - 25 % duty on other
computer hardware (routers, servers etc).
� The current regulatory framework in telecommunications and broadcasting sub-sectors is widely
seen as failing in important respects to address the challenge of expanding access and provision of
services required to meet National ICT policy goals. One oft-cited issue is ZAMTEL’s monopoly and
de facto exclusion from the sector regulator’s jurisdiction (CAZ). This is seen as raising costs and
weakening competition in fixed, mobile and internet services, while the prohibitive IGW licence fee
of US$ 12 million is estimated by the World Bank to be depriving 30,000 households of access to
telephone services.
� The National ICT Policy has drawn criticism from those who say it should emphasise private-sector
involvement. For example the policy does not address Zambia's involvement in the East African
Submarine Cable (EASSy) project. The only telecommunications company so far signed up to
EASSy, ZAMTEL, is state-run and enjoys a near monopoly over the project in Zambia, leaving little
room for private sector involvement.
Intermediaries in the Information and Knowledge Services Market
In a thriving agricultural sector, farmers utilise a range of services that provide access to knowledge across
all fronts – indeed their success and outlook in the modern world is increasingly defined by their uptake of
such services. In innovation system terms such services and their providers are often termed
‘intermediaries’. The interactions between these organisations form the distribution channels and linkages
that enable research based knowledge to circulate and mix with other forms of knowledge and flow within
the innovation system. The extent to which these interactions are supported by relevant services to enable a
dynamic exchange, and the incentives to engage in such interactions, are key elements of the scope for
supporting IKSM.
It is possible to distinguish key types of intermediaries and examples in the Zambian context :
88
Note : more specific detail on these organisations and initiatives is provided elsewhere within this
Assessment report.
Public sector/NGO Information 'outreach'
� The main government mandated body is the National Agricultural Information Service (NAIS), this
is fundamentally an information dissemination service, primarily by broadcasting via ZNBC, but
also through literature, and as an advisory service.
� MACO extension services including field days with research agencies.
� Many NGOs and faith-based organisations engaged in providing information (Women for Change,
PAM, Envirogreen, PELUM etc).
Market linkage services and intermediaries : technical advisory, credit, business development, agents,
buyers, processors etc.
� Various programmes such as ASP and PROFIT that are operating as market linkage schemes,
embodying a value chain approach and providing a structured programme through organised
groups to train/develop capacity of lead farmers/services providers to operate as rural
entrepreneurs.
� Those operating as technical services and market linkage providers within a specific sub-sector, e.g
OPPAZ and KATC for organics, or value chain, e.g. Dunavant in cotton outgrowing and others in
tobacco, sugar etc.
� Those providing market information services, e.g. the ZNFU SMS (text message) price and buyer
information services.
� Those operating within input and output distribution channels.
� Small enterprise networks and BDS such as via the Zambia Chamber of Small and Medium Business
Associations and the new BDS voucher scheme to be operated through District Agricultural
Business Associations
Telecentres, (rural) ICT initiatives, and other interactive communications services
� As discussed above there is much going on in this area. Telecentres have the potential to be further
involved in market linkage and knowledge services but often struggle to develop sustainable
business models.
� Community radios also have potential to operate as an interactive medium for rural communities.
� In Zambia there is also an (inter)active 'blogosphere' which are a useful source of information,
discussion and contacts; some of the main ones are o Maravi o Mine Watch Blog o Gershom Ndlovu o Mwankole o Zambia Landsafe Investment o Zambia Chronicle o Zambia Conservation o Zambia Forests o Lusaka Sunrise o Manena o Mweshi o Young African Leaders
89
Coordination/Learning
� 'top level' policy forums such as ACF; apex organisatations such as ABF and OPPAZ
� The eBrain Agriculture Thematic Group
� IICD supported networks between NAIS/ZARI/eBrain
� Study circles supported by Swedish Cooperation Centre
� Other research and technology networks
Some Factors Affecting Development of the Information and Knowledge Services Market for Pro-Poor
Innovation in Zambia
ICT service environment
This dimension was discussed extensively above : a combination of high costs; weak regulatory
environment; limited incentives for private operators; lack of capacity to implement the new ICT Policy. One
of the evident factors is the difficulty that the relevant public sector elements of the communications sector :
the Ministry of Transport and Communications, MACO, CAZ, and forums such as eBrain, are having in
coordinating initiatives to support expansion of rural services and particularly the interface with and relative
roles of these bodies and private sector operators such as Celtel and others. The lack of a common vision or
'gameplan' is very evident.
'Demand side' for knowledge services
Some of the 'empowerment' dimensions affecting demand are discussed in other sub-reports. A key issue is
the necessary transition between decades of dependency on public services towards the capacity of farmers
to make land use and production decsions geared towards markets. This change of mindset and attitude to
risk will not come quickly or easily, although (apparently) successful programmes such as the ASP are
demonstrating ways forward, at least for some section of the one million or so village households in
Zambia.
One factor not covered in the sub-report but nonetheless essential is an understanding of the relationship
between the farm and non-farm economy and livelihoods, and linkages between these and other sectors;
also social and political economic drivers influencing knowledge flows. The orientation of any new
information services that may be proposed by RIU in Zambia must take these in to account.
Intermediary Services
As the rural economy becomes more market oriented then the nature of the knowledge requirements
changes; becomes more dynamic and more specialised. At the moment the 'intermediary knowledge
services' sector, including NAIS and the many NGO initiatives, is not well geared up to respond to such
demands; they are generally supply driven and have problems of sustainability in the absence of links into
centres of effective demand for Knowledge. There seems to be a lack of coordination or clear policy
concerning agricultural services (a vital knowledge intermediary function); multiple parallel initiatives exist;
initiatives such as : ASP, PROFIT, CFU, various outgrower schemes, etc. ‘go their own way’ with limited
evidence of lesson learning or institutional development at the 'centre'. Indeed some of the initiatves are
effectively parallel extension serivces and some also overlap with each other. Without coordination and
competition in the market for such services such duplication and a lack of specialisation is inevitable.
90
Policy Environment
The political nature of the maize production system and the related subsidy regime has a number of knock-
on effects for the knowledge market. For one thing this environment undermines incentives for low input
mixed agricultural systems and thus also demand for new knowledge to raise productivity of these systems.
The same distorted environment, inefficiencies in the distribution, timing and pricing of inputs, allied to
information asymmetries, increases opportunity for rent seeking behaviour of 'brief case' traders with the
knock on effect of undermining trust in the private sector intermediary system.
The Other Side of the Coin : Positive Factors
Note : no account taken here of potential effects of the President's illness or of short-medium term impacts
of rising world food prices on the Zambian economy.
� Zambia has a relatively stable and fast growing economy. The recent Euromoney conference in
Lusaka is evidence of the interest in this economy within international finance markets. Within the
agriculture sector slow but steady market reforms are taking place.
� There is long term commitment from donors including DFID to continue to support economic
development in Zambia.
� There is a great deal of tacit 'how-to' knowledge within a variety of existing actors operating within
the agriculture sector.
� Within the ICT sector there is also evidence of an accelerating pace of change. The government has
recently called for greater participation of the private sector in expansion of services into rural areas
and the CAZ rural development fund is allocated specifically to this end. There has been recent
discussion about additional incentives including tax-breaks for rural expansion; also some progress
re: the intrenational gateway license, and restructuring of ZAMTEL. The recently announced
investment by Malysian firm M-mobile in the first mobile-phone handset manufacturing plant in
Zambia, should be good for the sector.
� Notwithstanding the constrained environment, there are some centres of strong capacity in the ICT
sector and strong linkages with regional centres of expertise. The successful ZNFU price/buyer
information services is evidence of the potential for existing actors (in this case ZNFU, Celtel,
AfriConnect and the SHEMP programme) to coordinate activities to good effect.
RIU Zambia Information Markets Strategy
There are many existing component elements of an information and knowledge services market within the
Zambian innovation system. These are outlined and discussed in table 1. Existing actors already have
capacity and access to capital and could identify/implement solutions; by and large these actors already
know each other; viable service solutions almost certainly exist technically and even commercially through
an appropriate public-private partnership. Essentially all the necessary ‘pieces’ exist, however there is
coordination problem in that no player acting alone has has either individual incentive or in some cases an
appropriate mandate or implementation capacity.
RIU potentially has a role to play in facilitating common ground between the key actors in this area. On the
basis of discussions to date these would seem to be : the regulator CAZ; MACO and the Ministry of
Communications; one or more mobile phone companies (initial discussions with Celtel illustrate a degree of
interest); one or more ISPs, such as Africonnect; one or more farmers organisations such as ZNFU and strong
programmes working with them such as SHEMP, ASP; one or more agribusiness apex organisations such as
ZCSMBA, ABF, OPPAZ; one or more of the telecentre initiatives particularly Macha and Chiniyunyu; one
one or more technical service providers with an existing 'clientele' or potential users of such a service such as
KATC, PROFIT; additionally, from a capacity development perspective : NAIS and eBrain.
91
An Innovation Platform in this area could be charged with developing/enabling:
� opportunities for networking/information service that would work well in Zambia to link
innovation system actors including rural actors, technical and market linkage service providers,
research agencies, credit providers and others;
� the basis for public-private partnerships where the provision of such services is not commercially
viable;
� enhanced institutional capacity at the interface of agriculture and communications sectors to resolve
coordination problems and overcome bottlenecks in implementation of existing ICT policy including
'unlocking' the Rural Development Fund currently administered by CAZ.
Capacities required for IKSM in Zambia and availability of relevant services
Services that strengthen capacity of rural communities and/or service providers to participate beneficially in IKSM and exert an
effective demand for knowledge through an intermediary network.
Organisation and prorammes such as KATC and ZACSMBA, ASP, SHEMP, PROFIT, and some of the telecentre inittiatives,
notably LinkNet, making some headway; however cultural elements of the rural 'knowledge system' and dependency issues
mitigate against rapid progress.
Services that offer low cost communications in rural areas.
ISPs and ICT providers but are currently constrained by high costs and weak regulatory system.
Services that help AIS actors to ‘find’ each other, and find out about each other, puts them in touch, and enables them to
identify themselves as part of an innovation system.
'Offline' fora such as ACF, OPPAZ, Agriculture Business Forum and eBrain; community radio, telecentre services and other
interactive services; the existing science, technology and research networks all provide this role to some extent. However
there is little ‘horizontal’ information flows between these networks.
Services that facilitate and support low cost peer to peer communications for information and knowledge exchange between
innovation system actors.
The ZNFU SMS price/buyer information services is one good partial solution. Discussions with Celtel and others suggest
that there is interest and potential to develop further.
Services that enable low cost transactional exchanges of agricultural information and services including cashless payment
mechanisms.
Again ZNFU is one mechanism (to the extent that the service is paid for via the price of the SMS) but there is no current
service operating for financial transfers via mobile phones in payment for services. AfriConnect (and probably others) are
working on an m-banking scheme.
Services that actively broker information and knowledge flows within the market (that might otherwise not take place,
including promoting linkages with other regional/international knowledge services).
This independent brokerage role is essentially missing. The District Agribusiness Centres (ZACSMBA) and perhaps the ZNFU
information centres (not clear)) provide elements of this function if effective as a 'clearing house' for problems faced by
farmers and potential solutions. Forums such as OPPAZ and ABF are also partial solutions within their own networks.
Services that selectively subsidise participation in IKSM transactions through provision or administration of electronic vouchers
or other suitable mechanism
No service available via ICT service but an offline equivalent is starting up via the voucher scheme for business development
services to be administered by ZACSMBA
Services to generate suitably packaged content for farmers
The classic 'knowledge on the shelf' problem is pervasive. The bottleneck in Zambia is probably not capacity to generate
such material, but the lack of coordinating market mechanisms to link people that can generate such content with clearly
articulated demands, distribution networks and adequate financial/professional rewards.
92
Note : within Zambia, unlike some other RIU focus countries, the potential exist for a distributed approach
to the provision of information market services, rather than necessarily via a single provider or service. The
key issue is to address incentives for the private sector to offer services, rather than, necessarily, to 'pick a
winner'. Any public funding or subsidy element should be directed at (i) coordination activities, (ii) demand
side support and capacity development, and potentially (iii) supporting development of generic underlying
technologies, such as mobile software interfaces that will be easily utilised by (farmers/)service providers in
local language. The means to direct any demand side subsidy must be thought through carefully as the long
tradition of subsidised services in Zambia has been a contributing factor in the slow progress towards a
market economy benefitting the smallholder sector.
Note : such a platform MUST be practically oriented and private sector friendly otherwise it will be
ineffective. The facilitation skills to work with such a platform should include technical/business experience
within the ICT sector.
It will be important for any IKSM initiative/platform that it is linked into parallel activities that help to
develop specific capacity and effective demand within rural communities to ‘pull’ on ICT based information
networks. Note : Existing DFID-financed work from Bolivia may be highly relevant here.
The means to implement a suitable, targeted voucher-based demand subsidy for information or information
brokerage services should be explored. The existing ZACSMBA voucher mechanism may provide an entry
point to look at innovations in this area, including potentially use of mobile phone airtime transfers.
Involvement of NAIS may potentially help to reorient and capacitate NAIS towards a more service/demand
oriented approach.
Strategically, the main focus should be to work at the intermediary level with service providers and meso
organisations rather than directly with farmers (except lead/commercial farmers). Graduates from
programmes such as ASP, or PROFIT, or agents within the Cotton value chain, are fledgling rural
enterprises that need support.
The approach should be to work in an action research mode to pilot use of service within existing activities
(or platforms RIU supports) with emphasis on horizontal networking between these rather than
centralisation : e.g. demonstrate cross exchange of knowledge and development of services between
intermediaries already working with or linked to KATC and/or Chinyunyu plus the Macha Community,
ZCSMBA District Agribusiness Centres, relevant research agencies etc.
93
SOURCES
Pers communications : meetings (see Annex)
Haantuba, H., Hichaambwa, M., Nawiko, M. 2007. “Zambia : Trends in growth of modern retail and
wholesale chains and related agribusiness. Information Sheet. April 2007.
http://www.regoverningmarkets.org
Hoorik, P and Mweeta, F. (Date?) “Use of internet in rural areas of Zambia. LinkNet Multi-Purpose Co-
operative Society. http://www.icdev.info/contributions/328.pdf
IICD 2008. “Rural Access: Options and Challenges for Connectivity and Energy in Zambia”. Findings of a
study carried out for the International Institute for Communication and Development (IICD) by Dean L.
Mulozi, Zambia Association for Advancement of Information and Communication Technology (ZAA-ICT),
Zambia. Jointly published by eBrain Forum of Zambia/IICD. 1st edition: January 2008 – KEY SOURCE
Mulozi, D (undated) “The important role of telecentres and/or community ICTs in Zambian rural
development”. Zambian Association for the Advancement of ICTs (ZAA-ICT).
Mweemba, G. Pais, A.V. Stam, G van. 2007. “Bringing Internet connectivity to rural Zambia using a
collaborative approach”. Linknet. http://link.net.zm/files/Macha_Paper_for_ICTD2007.pdf
Zambia Ministry of Communications and Transport 2006. National Information and Communications
Tecnology Policy. Ministry of Communications and Transport. Lusaka April, 2006.
Miscellaneous Links and Articles on the Net
SciDev 2007. “Zambian ICT policy 'fails to address key issues”. April 2007.
http://www.scidev.net/en/news/zambian-ict-policy-fails-to-address-key-issues.html
Zambian Economist (blog) 2007 “Zamtel's monopoly....why I oppose it”. Posted Sunday, 22 July 2007.
http://zambian-economist.blogspot.com/search?q=zamtel+monopoly
IDG News Service 2008 “First Zambian mobile-phone plant to open in August”.07/07/2008.
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/070708-first-zambian-mobile-phone-plant-to.html?hpg1=bn
eBrain - http://www.ebrain.org.zm/
AfriConnect - http://www.africonnect.co.zm/
Celtel Zambia appeals to lawmakers for cheap IGW :
http://www.telecompaper.com/news/article.aspx?cid=614902
Zambia raises US$4 million for rural ICT fund : IDG News Service Daily Stories - http://www.idgns.com
Zambia invites private sector for ICTs. Jun. 06, 2008. http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/060608-
zambia-invites-private- sector-for.html
World Bank Economist gives Zambia's IGW fee thumbs-down. Monday, April 14, 2008.
http://www.postzambia.com/post-read_article.php?articleId=40296
94
Annex E: Specialist Sub-Report on Policy Context and
Information and Knowledge Flows
DRAFT REPORT D.J.Banda
June 2008
1.0 Zambia Context
1.1 Policy Environment
The Government of the Republic of Zambia has since 1991 made significant strides in restructuring
its economy that for a long time was characterized by copper monoculture. Over the years, and as
a result of Zambia’s preference for an open market system, momentous changes in terms of
priority setting and resources allocation has been brought about. The general policy of the
Government since 1991 has been to provide an enabling policy environment for the provision of
services and goods. The development of sectoral strategies by the various public institutions has
therefore resulted in the existence and adoption of legal policy frameworks. A number of
strategies, policies and key reforms that focus on poverty reduction in the country have been
formulated. This section provides a summary of the relevant legal instruments used in addressing
issues of poverty reduction namely; Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP), Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs), National Agricultural Policy (NAP), Fifth National Development
Plan (FNDP), Commerce and Trade Policy, Infrastructure- Transport policy; Science and
Technology Policy.
a) Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP-2000)
The Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) introduced in the year 2000 was used by the
Government in its attempt to move the economy towards a higher growth rate of between 6-8%
per annum and in assisting the government reduce poverty by intensifying its effort to remove
obstacles to private sector development. Such growth scenario entailed undertaking capital-
intensive and investment driven growth in key economic sectors with a special focus on
agriculture and rural development. The main elements of the strategy were to improve rural
infrastructure; create rural employment opportunities through the promotion of large –scale
enterprises; strengthen the linkage of smallholder farmers to commercial producers and
agribusinesses; stimulate smallholder rural enterprises; help poor people improve food production
techniques and strengthen social services in education, health and sanitation. There were also
attempts to integrate policies related to HIV/AIDS, gender and protection of the environment into
all rural poverty reduction initiatives and across the main sectors of the economy.
(http://ruralpovertyportal.org/English/regions/Africa/zmb/approaches.htm).
b) Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)
The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) ushered in an era which opened up the whole
process of having rich and poor countries declare their solidarity and determination to ridding the
World of poverty by 2015. Zambia is a member to the Millennium Declaration which has paved a
way to ensuring that world leaders worked together to promote human dignity and equality to
achieve peace, democracy and environmental sustainability (HDR, UNDP, 2003). The Government
95
as a condition to the MDGs remains committed to tackling issues of extreme poverty and hunger;
achievement of universal primary education; reduction of child mortality; improving maternal
health, combating HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases; ensuring environmental sustainability
and developing a global partnership for development
(http://www.milleniumcompaign.org/site/pp.asp). To a larger extent, the indigenization of the
MDGs presents a human development challenge not only to the government but also to the
Zambian people and all its cooperating partners. Zambia’s major initiative to realizing the MDGs
presently has been through the development of an MDG-based National Development and the
undertaking of an intensive publicity campaigns since 2003 by the MDG Task Force comprising
Government, civil society, academia, private sector and the UN System. This includes holding the
established Government and the UN system MDGs Race every year until 2015
(http://www.mdgmonitor.org/factsheet_00.cfm?c=ZMB).
c) National Agricultural Policy (NAP, 2004-2015)
The Government also recognises the need to strengthening and expanding emerging opportunities
in the country and indeed the important role agricultural sector plays in an economy. According to
the current National Agricultural Policy (NAP,2004-2015), the overall policy objective is to
facilitate and support the development of a sustainable and competitive agricultural sector that
secures food security at national and household levels and maximizes the sector’s contribution to
Gross Domestic Product (GDP). In principal, agricultural sector is expected to contribute to the
economy in terms of increased production, sector liberalization, and commercialization, promotion
of public and private sectors partnerships and provision of effective services that will ensure
sustainable agricultural growth.
Within the policy of the liberalization of the agricultural sector, the Government is mandated to
ensure private sector participation in inputs distribution, output marketing, agro–processing and
to encourage agri-business strengthen linkages with smallholder farmers. Under these
institutional reforms, the role of the public sector is being confined to policy formulation,
enforcement of legislation, provision of market information, regulation and inspection,
maintenance of the national strategic food reserves, financing and control of pest and diseases of
national importance control, and providing rural and agricultural infrastructure needed for
efficient sector growth etc. In partnership with private sector, the provision of agricultural services
i.e. research and extension, (NAP, 2006).
d) Fifth National Development Plan (FNDP2006-2010)
The President of the Republic of Zambia President Levy Mwanawasa S.C. in 2007 officially
launched the Fifth National Development Plan (FNDP2006-2010) and the Vision 2030. As a legal
instrument, the FNPD focuses on issues of good governance, improving health, education and the
infrastructure, and encouraging foreign investment. The FNDP embraces the PRSP which until
very recently used to be the main instrument for poverty reduction in the country, the Transitional
National Development Plan (TNDP, 2002) and domesticates the millennium Development Goals
and all other international development initiatives. The theme of the FNDP is “Broad Based
Wealth and Job Creation through Citizenry Participation and Technological Advancement”. The
major focus will be on 1) pro-poor growth-oriented sectors that create employment and income
opportunities for the poor, including in particular rural development, agriculture and
manufacturing, and 2) economic infrastructure and human resources development. The FNDP
96
draws attention to those sectors that maximise growth stimulation as well as those, such as
agriculture, education and health, that best address the plight of the poor.
The primary objective of Vision 2030 is to make Zambia a prosperous middle income nation that
would provide opportunities for the improvement of its people’s lives. It is also stipulated that
both the FNDP and the Vision should lead to the consolidation of district development plans as
articulated by the people of Zambia through the District Development Coordinating Committees
(DDCCs), Provincial Development Coordinating Committees (PDCC) and Sector Advisory Groups
(SAG) and other civic organisations.
Apart from the FNDP being a broad based approach that seeks the means to improve the
standards of living of people and to provide interactive ways of fostering development, The FNDP
is currently well received and perceived to have been very consultative having involved
stakeholders from diverse occupations and all areas of the country (i.e. at grassroots, district,
province and national levels). Its major focus that of identifying of growth areas in the districts,
identifying priority development areas and obtaining key recommendations that would ensure
economic growth and wealth creation is also a positive development.
e) Commerce and Trade Policy.
The commerce and trade policy is committed to ensuring that Zambia benefits from various trade
links. The country is a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO) at multilateral level and a
member of the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) and the Southern
African Development Community (SADC) at the regional level. The country also benefits from the
various preferential trade arrangements providing access to foreign markets such as EU
Everything-But-Arms initiative (EBA) and the USA and ‘Canadian Initiative’ African Growth and
Opportunity Act (AGOA) including its participation in the European Union- African Caribbean
Pacific Cotonou Trade Protocol and current negotiations to Economic Partnership Agreements- an
outfit of the Eastern and Southern Africa. It is the Government desire through the Private Sector
Development Programme(PSDP) to continue with the identification of appropriate trade
expansion measures while, the promotion of domestic trade, investment and export issues shall
continue to be worked on using the Multi-Facility Economic export Zones (MFEZ) (FNDP, 2006-
2010).
f) Infrastructure- The Transport policy
The Government in 1995 adopted the Construction Industry Policy and constituted through the
Act of 2003 the National Council for Construction (NCC) which is now the legal body for the
registration and regulation of all contractors and consultants in the sub-sector and enforces
construction standards
The Transport policy of 2002 in particular, instituted the Road Development Agency (RDA) as unit
under the Ministry of Works and Supply. RDA manages all roads in Zambia. It is expected that
the policy, will during the FNDP period help the sector address the challenges of poor state of
infrastructure, low private sector participation, slow pace of sector restructuring and poor funding
for infrastructure, vandalism and the like. In this vein , the Ministry of Works and Supply will
continue to review and develop appropriate policy and legal frameworks that promote public–
private partnerships in the construction and maintenance of public infrastructure while, a
comprehensive Information Management System is to be established and maintained for tracking
97
and storing of the operations of the sector at the same time acting as an information provision for
clients and stakeholders.
In conformity with the Decentralisation (i.e. seeks to devolve power to the lower levels) Policy of
2002, the implementation of FNDP is expected to take on board the district and province concerns
as expressed in regional plans to catalyze the whole process of mobility and quality of life of
communities by providing access to education and health amenities (FNDP, 2006-2010).
.
g) Science and Technology Policy
The1996 formulated National Science and technology policy currently under review generally
allows the promotion and exploitation of science and technology as an instrument for developing
environmentally, friendly and indigenous technology aimed at improving the quality of life in
Zambia while, the objective of research and development is to embed science and technology as
part of the culture of the key economic sector and to promote competitiveness in the production of
a wide range of quality goods and services. There are a number of research centres established
namely Zambia Agricultural Research Institute (ZARI), National Institute for Scientific and
Industrial Research ( NISIR)-formerly National Council for Scientific Research (NCSR), National
Malaria Control Centre (NMCR), Golden Valley Agricultural Research Trust (GART), Universities,
and the Tropical Diseases Research Centre (TDRC) to undertake science and related research.
Following the rationalisation programme of the science and technology, two units have been
created. The National Science and Technology Council with a view to coordinate, monitor and
implement science and technology policies as well as to advise the Government on the same and;
the National Technology Business Centre (NTBC) whose function is to promote research and
development products to the end users - i.e. industry and the commercial sector (FNDP, 2006-
2010).
h) Information
Information service sector has as its goal the mandate to increase media and access and out reach
throughout the country in order to promote free information on development programmes as well
as to have a well informed citizenry fully utilizing Information and Communication Technology
for national development. During the PRSP/TNDP, a number of programmes were implemented
most significant of these being the improvement of radio reception in the country. The
Government procured 56 FM radio transmitters that have since been installed in a number of
districts and therefore the existence of Community radios.
The sector currently operates under a number of statutes such as the Independent Broadcasting
Authority (IBA) Act of No. 17of 2002; Zambia National Broadcasting Corporation (ZNBC)
Amendment Act No. 20 of 2002 Cap. 154. It is however expected that more harmonisation and
review and work still will continue to be operationalised through the FNDP.(FNDP, 2006-2010).
i) Social protection
With reference to policies and practices that protect the livelihoods and welfare of people suffering
from critical levels of poverty and deprivation and/or vulnerable to risks and shocks, the social
protection seeks through the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services (MCDSS)
during the FNDP place emphasis on assisting the most vulnerable with basic services that enhance
their standard of living.
98
It is expected that relevant Ministries will in collaboration with the affected communities handle
some of the interventions aimed at addressing the challenges of vulnerability in general and in
particular the social protection. The Government has put in place the Disaster Management
structure with its Secretariat as a hub for coordination mechanism and promotes the vision of
“safety net” (FNDP, 2006-2010).
1.2 Socio-economic context
Zambia is a country well endowed with an abundance of natural resources and a rich biodiversity.
The country has a conducive climate, labour and a landmass of 752,000 square km (58% of which is
suitable for arable use though only 14% is currently under cultivation), and water resources.
Zambia is considered one of the country’s among the wettest in Southern Africa Approximately
13% of Zambia’s total land area is wetland. Agriculture in Zambia therefore is of high potential for
it offers enormous unrealized potential that needs to be fully exploited that can have positive
impact on national food security, incomes for the majority of the population, the balance of
payments account and economic growth at the same time generate export earnings.
The spurred growth in the mining, construction and transport sectors including economic reform
measures taken have over the years led to the country attain a tolerable level of stability in major
macro economic indicators. The country’s economy is for instance, reported to be enjoying a
sustained growth of around 5.5% per annum in 2005 and 6.2% per annum in 2006 (UNDP Report,
2006 and World Bank (2006). The economic growth scenario is being planned to average 6.1% per
annum during the period of 2006-2011.
The institutionalised reforms that aimed at liberalising the agricultural markets especially, have
recorded some positive results. The Zambia-European Community Country Strategy Paper and
National Indicative Programme for the period 2008-2013 report, states that substantial increases
have been achieved in primary agricultural commodities, floricultural products, horticultural
products and processed foods while, the net enrolment rates for primary education have improved
from 71% in 2000 to 85% in 2004. Good progress is also being made in the fight against HIV/AIDS,
malaria and other diseases with services becoming widely available for the Mother to Child
Transmission (PMTCT) of HIV. Currently, over 90% of the districts are having some PMCT service
sites (DFID, 2008).
According to the National Agricultural Policy (2004-2015), agriculture currently contributes 18-
20% to GDP, provides livelihood to 50% of the country’s population. Agriculture also employs
67% of the working population and 65% rural of the women. In this way, agriculture has very
strong links to the economy and is therefore one of the most powerful vehicle to generating overall
economic growth and to the reduction of overall poverty.
However, the growth in GDP has not bee accompanied by a significant growth neither in the
living standards of the Zambia people nor in the growth in employment.
Zambia a country with a population of 11.7 million (World Bank, 2006) is one of the poorest and
ranks low on UNDP 2006 Human Development Index, at 165 out of 177 countries. Infant mortality
rates are among the worst in Sub Sahara Africa. The poverty levels though have improved in the
recent years, 73% in 1998 to 68% in 2008, it is estimated that 80% of the population live in
conditions of acute poverty. Zambia still is one of the poorest country with over two-thirds (i.e.
around 7 million) of its population living below the national poverty line of less than a $1per day.
99
The current MDG progress on the poverty, hunger, child and maternal mortality and
environmental sustainability targets is also poor and a big effort is required if Zambia is to achieve
these targets by 2015 (DFID, 2006). The implication being that the reforms have to a great extent
failed to translate into higher economic growth and reduction in poverty especially among
majority rural people.
1.3 Information and Knowledge flows
c) The environment
The Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives has a National Agriculture Information Service
(NAIS) as its outreach army in ensuring that the flow of agricultural information takes place
between information producers and information consumers. NAIS is mandated to provide an
information link between the farming community and agricultural technocrats and is being
encouraged to disseminate agricultural information of all kinds through the radio, print and
electric media to promote improved farming knowledge among rural households. The well
established agricultural extension department of, MACO throughout the country including the
farmer to farmer and out - grower schemes interfaces being encouraged at the village level are all
involved in the dissemination of information to end users.
Information sharing more especially at national levels takes place through established networks,
fora e.g. where various stakeholders from different sectors such as water and sanitation, education,
advocacy, child protection, agriculture and energy sectors meet. Facilitation of sector meetings
usually rotates between members. Networking is currently a popular media for information
sharing among NGOs such as World Vision and Profit as well as holding of monthly or quarterly
meetings. Information flow is also taking place through community radios and through the
contact farmer approach anchored in the current extension approach. ASP is on record as one of
those very successful programmes using the contact farmer approach on the ground in promoting
“farming as a business” among small scale farmers in rural communities.
In addition, there are donor funded programs that encourage innovative field days and
demonstrations including the usage of (most of which though is dilapidated) Farmer Training
Institutes as outreach points for farmer programs. Technical staff linkages between NGOs and
MACO staff at the field level during the promotion of agro-products to farmers during field days
and establishment of associations (e.g. Veterinary Associations) have started becoming very good
avenues for sector interactions and sharing of information while, training resource manuals,
booklets and leaflets continue to be other sources of information reaching to end-users. Croppack
input supply provides manuals and fliers to their farmers through the Community Agents.
d) The issues
Indications from the field discussions are that scientific research findings rarely gets to end users
for the reason that most researchers prefer carrying out more of the adaptive research on their own
without asking consumers what their research needs are. Even where good research outputs are
generated, the researchers are not in the habit of publishing any of their research findings. As such,
there is no information coming through pamphlets, guides or any such to be given to farmers for
knowledge and guidance on correct practices. For example, it is recommended in some of the past
manual guides that fertilizer must always be applied at ploughing (where maize crop is
100
concerned) but farmers up to now do so after plant has germinated - sometimes fertilizing their
crops when it is at knee high level.
The current policy does not seem to support research in terms of budget allocation as usually very
small budgetary amounts are allocated towards research activities and this poses a serious
constraint to research and development activities. The investment that goes into research in terms
of cost and implementation of innovation is a disincentive to many end users and cannot by far be
met by smallholder farmers. Coupled with this, is the poor funding of research institutions, poor
rewarding system of researches, poor marketing strategies for research and the unfair placement
of research/innovation. Despite there being lots of good research outputs, due to recent
institutional reforms very weak linkages between research and extension now exist. It was also
observed that the isolated way in which researchers are developing technologies without the
involvement of extension workers at farm trials stage has further contributed to the existing weak
linkages, the communication chain between generators of research and end users becoming too
long thus, hindering the flow of information from reaching farmers. The research – extension –
farmer linkage was identified to be a major constraint to information dissemination. To some
extent, this has led to the highly compromised ability of the farmer to making a choice with regard
to best agricultural practices.
Though most researchers prefer carrying out more of the adaptive research, the Intellectual
Property Rights (IPS) that is silent on benefit sharing procedure for instance for the role played by
plant breeders, continues to be a disincentive to research undertakings. Researchers feel there is
no mandate for them to brag about their successes in coming up with research outputs. Besides,
there is neither up to date specific policy on innovation nor a legally constituted forum for research
institutions to come together and share research /technology information as was the case in the
past when a national committee under the former National Scientific Research Council (NRSC)
existed. During then, regular meetings for sharing information used to be held.
e) Public/private partnerships in info markets
The Government policies in place have all been passed through an Act of Parliament and therefore
provide an enabling environment in which public/private partnerships have both the political and
government support to exist. Evidence in the districts reveals that some private partnerships
between the public and private sector with sometimes some element of suspicion have been
successfully forged. For instance, Croppack agents get trained by extension officer from the
Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives (MACO) while joint field days among farmers with
regard to the promotion of agro-products being promoted by the private sector take place in
collaboration with the public sector workers.
However, there is evidence of such partnerships duplicating each others effort or work in the
catchment areas. Likewise NGOs who tend to work directly with farmers have sometimes
collided in these catchments with other service providers offering similar services. Many NGOs
operating in the SIMILAR catchment areas, do not know what each one of them does and
generally, the coordination of efforts is usually weak among them. Such situations are actually
compounded by the fact that there is no policy that provides a guiding framework to linking
various stakeholders. As a result, emerging practical issues at ground level remain un addressed.
For instance, even though the current advocacies on use of lime in farmers’ fields by ASP seem to
be contrary to MACO’s research recommendations, there is no forum to bring this and iron it out.
Despite there being an elaborate policy that stipulates the importance of monitoring and
101
evaluation of the implementation of the Agricultural programmes and activities to determine the
rate of implementation impact, the implementation of the National Agriculture Policy is weak.
When consultative meetings are called to discuss implementation, such meetings called have been
poorly attended by especially high profiled people such as the Directors.
Through the public restructuring processes, MACO has continued to lose experienced staff most of
who have left for greener pastures. This move has affected both the block and camp levels in terms
of staffing, coverage areas and farmer targets. To a large extent staff morale has been lowered,
coverage distances have increased and very little information trickle to farmers is taking place.
Transport is also still a great challenge in the way dissemination of information to farmers by
extension agents is concerned. Farmers are in fact reported to be complaining that the extension
and the whole liberalization process are not responsive to their needs e.g. the presence of briefcase
maize traders has not provided the much needed Maize market links while plenty wrong things
(e.g. knowledge gap in plant spacing) continue to be done without extension advices.
While it can be said that there generally is no policy constraint on forging of links with farming
communities, majority farmers continue to be constrained in terms of resource such as inputs,
labour, financial, information and knowledge. Farmers still display some rather high dependency
syndrome where they still want to be given agro-products on credit or things free of any charge.
They also seem not to grasp the concept of pulling of resources together to meet for instance
transport costs for their goods and services. Instead, they expect free service deliveries to be made
or to be engaged in out-grower scheme arrangements. Such farmers’ environment is making it
slightly difficult to convincing service providers to believe that smallholder farmers are a viable
group and presents a readily available good market for agri-business. The policy contradictions
inherent especially in the Fertilizer Support Programme (FSP) whereby it is now supposed to be
weaning off cooperatives that seem to have started acquiring agricultural inputs on their own and
the continued display of weak mechanisms for phasing out such co-operators has not helped in
trying to encourage farmers to stand on their own.
Researchers feel that the major constraint at the farmers’ level pertaining to use of research and
thus forging of partnerships is the farmers’ attitude towards technology. Farmers’ social cultural
perception to technology is that of suspicion and both their tradition and lack of knowledge
hinders them from adopting innovations. Coupled with this is the element of technological
benefits or in economic terms “opportunity costs”. Farmers prefer adopting technologies with
short term benefits to long term yielding benefits such as growing of trees. Farmers also tend to be
resistant to new technology the first time e.g. Conservation Farming upon its introduction was
associated with cultural interference with some farmers being scared of the new ways of farming
as they were not prepared to take up risks.
f) Specific Case
Profit facilitate service providers that are willing to engage in models that enable smallholders
access to agro-inputs targeting mainly farmers above just ‘surviving’ levels and are relatively
secure and are aspiring to create wealth or reap profits. Profit is currently working with 3 input
suppliers (i.e. Croppack Ago Services, Mineland Agricultural Development Services and AgiVet
Africa) and in their collaboration, a Community Agent concept has been introduced in Mumbwa.
Service providers work directly with community based suppliers i.e. farmers who have been
catalyzed into being agents chosen based on the following selection criteria:-
102
Steps in Selection process –
5) Gives information to input suppliers
6) A meeting is held to introduce willing agents to the community- meant to seek
acceptance of agents by community people
7) Once selected (based on agents credibility, trustworthiness business mindedness i.e.
traders), agent undergoes training to be able to translate information to farmers
8) Agents encouraged to sale 3-4 products of the approved 7 products and presents
product knowledge to farmers in a community meeting
Upon selection, farmers place orders with agent on pre-paid arrangements and the main focus of
the model is that farmers must receive product knowledge before or on delivery of ordered
products. Agents work on commission basis ranging from 10% mainly for crops to 20% for mainly
livestock products.
Farmers incentives are through:-
• Inputs are delivered to farmers by agent thereby cutting on farmers transport, time
and effort to securing the same
• Product knowledge is provided to farmers unlike when they purchase products off
shelf in shops-normally will purchase without obtaining proper information
• Agents sell products throughout the seasons unlike where retailers only sell
products during peak season
• Farmers allowed to make payments on agro inputs in two instalments first as
advance payment during the first 6months and the other after another 6 months at
an agreed upon period.
Input suppliers have technical staff on the teams who provide the technical information to agents.
Some agents are also into sprayer services so far 17 such agents have received training and are
certified sprayers. This group is expected to increase in June during the planned training sessions
being organized by Profit. Agents working on livestock products are expected to graduate into
Community Livestock Workers (minimum qualification required grade 9). Presently, there are 90
community based agents in Mumbwa. These offer service in delineated catchment areas.
Sometimes due to distances, agents have sub contracted other sub-agents to assist in the
promotion activities.
The common modes of Information Flow include technical staff interacting with MACO staff at
ground level during the promotion of products to farmers especially during field days,
Coordinators meetings being held on monthly basis, belonging to Veterinary Association
established where doctors meet and share ideas, through Agro associations, field days for Agro-
inputs and provision of training resource manuals and leaflets including holding Community
promotion events, event that affords input suppliers get feedback on promoted products,
collaboration through other fora such as through the established laboratory located in the show
ground in Lusaka and during
strategic planning meetings that on individual basis, are held every 6 months with Profit.
Individual service providers also conduct on regular meetings, produce monthly work plans and
may seek the services of a consultant
Through the Fertilizer Support Program (FSP) most input suppliers have been linked up with
MACO and this has motivated input suppliers. Agri-Veterinary staff goes through government
veterinary on cattle population and submits monthly report of activity to be undertaken while
103
government veterinary explains which diseases are handled by government such as foot and
mouth. MACO also trains Agric Veterinary’s Community Livestock Agents,
The main feedback loop in all this is through the community promotion events, consumer surveys
carried on maize variety called bullet-being promoted by Croppack and carrying out contact
reviews after 12 months.
d) Information markets
A number of respondents indicated not knowing of any known established Information markets
but are aware of the direct links being forged between agro dealers and farmers. The Farmers
National Farmers Union (ZNFU) was identified as one such an institution on the ground trying to
establish some kind of a market information system. Through their facilities one could access and
purchase agricultural products via a mobile phone service.
104
Annex F: Specialist Sub-Report on Cross-Cutting Themes
SPECIALIST SUB-REPORT ON CROSS CUTTING ISSUES:
ENVIRONMENT, LIVELIHOODS, POVERTY, HIV/AIDS, GENDER
JULY 2008
SUBMITTED TO
DR DAVID COWNIE, PhD
TEAM LEADER – LIVELIHOODS/POVERTY SPECIALISTS
RESEARCH INTO USE PROGRAMME
BY
MONICA MUNACHONGA, MPhil
GENDER SPECIALIST & MANAGING CONSULTANT
JULE DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL (JUDAI)
P O BOX 51097 LUSAKA ZAMBIA
CELL: 260 977 773309; e-mail: [email protected]
105
1.0 INTRODUCTION
According to the Terms of Reference, the purpose of the assignment under Research Into Use
(RIU) Programme is to assess the development context in Zambia and opportunities that exist for RIU
engagement and, based on the assessment, to propose a strategy that will contribute, among other things, to
promotion of environmentally sound management practices and production of improved livelihoods for a
range of stakeholders including those of the vulnerable poor. This is based on recognition that there is a
close relationship between environmentally sound management and sustainable livelihoods
Chidumayo (2002), defines environment as “the totality of the surroundings within which humans live
and exploit resources for their welfare and development....poverty can contribute to environmental
degradation…and environmental degradation can contribute to poverty”.
This Sub-Report focuses on cross cutting issues (gender, environment, livelihoods, poverty) within
the country context of Zambia. It critically analyses the cross cutting issues in an inter-related
manner with gender being an over-riding cross cutting issue that acts as an intervening social
variable in terms of the other cross cutting issues of concern to RIU. The report is placed in both
broad and agriculture-specific context around the following aspects that are considered key to
understanding factors for trends of change in livelihood patterns and experiences. These include
the following:
•••• Demographic characteristics,
•••• Socio-cultural and legal factors,
•••• Macroeconomic factors;
•••• Poverty levels
•••• Human development indicators
•••• Other public services provision
•••• Gender roles in agriculture and related activities
•••• Government policies and measures to address poverty and gender inequalities,
•••• Conclusions: trends of change and impact on cross cutting issues.
•••• Suggestions on what RIU can consider for action
2.0 COUNTRY CONTEXT
2.1 Demographic characteristics
a) Population size, composition and distribution
Zambia’s population has grown from 3.1 million in 1969, to 5.7 million in 1980, 7.8 million in 1990,
and 9.9 million in 2000. In terms of sex composition, in 2000, women constituted 51 percent of total
population. Another feature of Zambia’s population is that it is youthful. In 2000, for example, 45
percent of the total population was below 15 years, indicating a very high dependency ratio, which
negatively impacts national economic development. The high dependency ratio has been
worsened by the increasing number of orphans and vulnerable children due to HIV/AIDS and
high poverty levels. In terms of geographical distribution, 65% of total population lives in rural
areas. The rural population has increased from 60 percent in 1980 to 65 percent in 2000 implying
an urban-rural migration trend (CSO, 2000 Census).
106
b). Headship of households and gender implications
Headship of a household is a very important role as it entails responsibilities such as finding
housing/shelter for family members and food or cash provisioning to support the family. In urban
areas, ownership of a house can also provide a means of income-generation, to run a business from
or rent. The head also has the role of being the link between the domestic or care economy, on the
one hand, and, on the other hand, the market economy. In the case of Zambia, three categories of
female-headed households (FHHs) have been identified – i.e. those headed by divorced and
widowed women and single mothers (de jure FHHs), those headed by women whose husbands
have temporarily migrated for wage employment (de facto FHHs), and those headed by women in
polygynous marriages (autonomous polygynous FHHs) (JUDAI 2002). This suggests the need for
different strategies to address women in different situations. Available statistics indicate that the
proportion of female-headed households has been fluctuating – it was17% in 1985; 20% in 1991;
18% in 1993; 24% in 1996; and 19% in 2000, and that the incidence of female-headed households
(FHHs) is higher in rural than urban areas (CSO, 2003). Table 1 presents details on heads of
households by sex, residence and marital status.
Table 1: Household headship by sex, marital status, and residence, Zambia 2000
Residence/marital
status
No. of
Households
heads
Total % of
Household
heads
Male Female
Residence:
Zambia
Rural
Urban
1,884,741
1,241,534
643,207
100.0
100.0
100.0
81.1
80.5
82.4
18.9
19.5
17.6
Marital status:
Married
Separated
Divorced
Widowed
Never married
Living together -
(cohabiting)
1,412,764
57,484
102,489
200,339
107,839
3,826
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
95.7
35.2
28.2
19.2
81.1
46.4
4.3
64.8
71.8
80.8
18.9
53.6
Source: Compiled from CSO (2003), 2000 Census of Population, Table 3.8, page 36
c). Fertility rates
Many factors combine to negatively affect women’s fertility and reproductive health status in
Zambia, including predominant pro-natal values, the tendency to perceive children as having
multiple functions (source of labour and social security, etc). Consequently, the ZDHS 2001-2002
Report revealed that Total Fertility Rate was higher in rural areas (6.9 births) than in urban areas
(4.3 births). For women with little or no formal education, childlessness is associated with stigma
and may a ground for divorce or a man taking additional wives. The incidence of adolescent
childbearing was also reported to be higher in rural areas than in urban areas, which is largely
explained in terms of predominance of traditional values and low levels of education. Teenage
pregnancies have negative consequences, not only in terms of pregnancy and delivery
107
complications as well as high morbidity and mortality for teenage mother and their children, but
also in terms of teenage mothers’ inability to pursue educational and employment opportunities.
This makes it difficult for women to move out of the cycle of poverty.
d). Rural-Urban migration
Internal migration (within the country) usually arises primarily for economic reasons, though
other factors may play a part. Available data on population movements (2000 Census Report;
Zambia Demographic Health Survey 2002-2003 Report) indicate that 35% of total population live
in urban areas, compared to the majority (65%) who still lives in rural areas and are engaged in
small-scale farming as the main economic activity for their livelihoods.
Rural-urban migration has a gender differentiated impact. Men have a long history of migration
to urban centres for wage employment under the colonial migrant labour policy. By contrast,
women have migrated to towns for economic and, mainly, social reasons – e.g. to join husbands
already working in towns, to join relatives, or to escape from abusive marriage relationships
(Schlyter 1988). Since Independence in 1964, female migration has also been facilitated by the
introduction of gender-responsive policy and legislation in favour of free movement of people,
and increase in educational attainments by females. However, although there are no longer legal
restrictions regarding migration from villages to towns or across borders for income earning
activities, women’s mobility and movement continue to be constrained by the cultural division of
labour between females and males. Consequently, there are gender differentials against females in
terms of participation in livelihood activities that involve travelling away from home.
3.0 SOCIO-CULTURAL AND LEGAL FACTORS
The importance of the existence of relevant legal and institutional frameworks for promoting social
and gender equality in development cannot be over-emphasized. This section looks at legal and
socio-cultural factors considered relevant to achievement of poverty reduction.
a) The Constitution
The constitution of any country is of critical importance, both as a reflection of national values
(including gender values and ideology), norms, as well as the fact that all other laws derive their
legitimacy from it. From a gender perspective, the Zambian Constitution contains contradictions
in that, while Article 11 prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex, among other grounds, Article
23(4) negates this guarantee by allowing application of customary law in matters of personal law
(marriage, divorce, inheritance, devolution of property). This means that the Constitution lays the
foundation for discrimination against women in terms of access to and control over productive
resources. Customary law (which is unwritten and varies according to the 73 ethnic groups)
governs areas of economic and social life and operates to the detriment of women who are treated
as minors irrespective of their age or marital status. The dual legal system undermines women’s
financial and property rights. Therefore, in matters of personal law, the Zambian Constitution has
defined a power relationship between men and women that disadvantages women in the private
sphere, which is translated into gender-based inequalities in the public sphere (education, skills
training, employment, business enterprise development, access to and ownership of agricultural
land, participation in decision making, access to agricultural information and knowledge).
108
b) Gender and law
Zambia has a dual legal system comprising civil and customary law, inherited from the British
colonial government. Examples of options individuals make between either civil or customary law
systems exist in specific areas e.g. marriage, inheritance, property rights, and access to and
ownership of land. However, although the existing legal framework is based on the assumption
that men and women have a choice of law, in actual practice, customary laws still influence men’s
and women’s behaviour.
In the context of this report, land is one of the key natural resources for earning a livelihood. Land
is important for its central function in production relations, and also has special significance in
other aspects of life (socio-cultural, political). For instance, land is not only valued where it is
scarce (e.g. urban/industrial areas), but also where it is in plentiful supply (e.g. rural areas). In
traditional subsistence economies, the abundance of land and its multiple functions (in support of
human and other life) made land a priceless commodity. The dual land tenure system provides
for traditional land (no title) and statutory land (titled). In terms of gender and access to/control
over land, although the Land Act of 1995 does not discriminate on the basis of sex and gender, in
practice, women are disadvantaged by many factors (including predominant patriarchal attitudes
against married women and young women of marriageable age, high costs involved in acquisition
of title to land, and conditions for developing such land) (Himonga and Munachonga, 1991).
Other aspects of life where the dual systems has a gender differentiated impact include:
a). The Intestate Succession Act Cap 59 of 1989, which, although it provides for women’s share
of a deceased spouse’s estate, still disadvantages women more than men as confirmed by
the distribution pattern: 50% to children; 20% to the widow (or all the widows in case of a
polygamous marriage; 20% to parents; and 10% to dependants (World Bank Report,
2004:3). The incidence of polygamy tends to increase with men’s progression into
commercial farming due to increased demand for family labour.
b). The Zambian Government recognizes the legality of marriages under both the customary
law and statute, both of which operate to the detriment of women in terms of ambivalence
in their legal status and access to and control over resources. The dual marriage system
has contributed to ambivalence in the legal status and rights of married women.
4.0 MACRO-ECONOMIC SITUATION.
a) Trends of change
Literature available indicates that since Independence in 1964, Zambia has moved from being one
of the middle income countries in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), with US $1200 per capita at
Independence in 1964, to being one of the poorest, its human development ranked at 165 out of 174
countries in 2004. The downward trend has been due to both internal and external factors – e.g.
decline in terms of trade for copper, economic mismanagement, acceleration of the implementation
of structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) measures since 1991. The SAP measures introduced
entailed, among other things, implementation of a rapid privatization programme, resulting in
many closures of former parastatal companies and loss of jobs, which has contributed to increased
poverty levels. Consequently, Zambia came to be classified as a Highly Indebted Poor Country
109
(HIPC). Even under this status, however, the country still had to make substantial foreign debt
repayments, so that repayments relief through HIPC has not really altered the adverse economic
conditions affecting the majority of the people.
SAP measures have had a gender-differentiated impact. For example, gender inequalities have
been reflected in terms of access to formal employment where male participation increased from
80% in 1996 to 88% in 2000, compared to female participation which declined from 20% in 1996 to
only 12% in 2000 (CSO, 2000 Census).
b) Poverty levels
In terms of income poverty, the Fifth National Development Plan 2006-2010 indicates that 68% of
the country’s population fell below national poverty line in spite of the implementation of the
Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper. The literature indicates that the sections of the population who
were below the national poverty line included: (i) small-scale farming households (84%) of whom
72.1% were below extreme poverty line; and (ii) female-headed households (60.4%) compared to
those headed by males (51.5%). High poverty levels continue to be associated with more remote
provinces – i.e. Western Province (83%), Luapula (79%), and North Western Province (76%).
Extreme poverty was at 64% in Luapula Province. In general, poverty levels tend to be more
severe in rural than urban areas. The country profile of poverty levels is presented in Table 3.
Table 3: Incidence of Poverty by Residence, Province and Poverty Status, Zambia, 2002-2003
Poverty Status Residence Extremely
poor
Moderately
poor
Total poor Non Poor Total Total
population
All Zambia 46 21 67 33 100 10,757,192
Rural/Urban
• Rural
• Urban
52
32
22
20
74
52
26
48
100
100
7,002,932
3,754,260
Provinces
Central 50 19 69 31 100 1,097,632
Copperbelt 38 20 58 42 100 1,707,843
Eastern 49 22 71 29 100 1,440,604
Luapula 47 23 70 30 100 852,351
Lusaka 36 21 57 43 100 1,496,428
Northern 63 18 81 19 100 1,371,234
North Western 51 21 72 28 100 637,112
Southern 40 23 63 37 100 1,335,538
Western 38 27 65 35 100 818,450
Source: Compiled from CSO (2004) Living Conditions Monitoring Survey, 2002-2003, page 115
c) Gender-differentiated impact of poverty
Available literature emphasizes that poverty has a gender differentiated impact. For example,
food poverty tends to be more prevalent among female-headed households (61%) compared to
male-headed households (52%). Factors identified in the PRSP (2001) as contributing to higher
poverty levels among females as include:
110
• Low levels of education among women – e.g. in 1996, 29% of females had no education
compared to only 8.5% of males; 15.6% of males had completed Grade 10 or higher
compared to only 8.5% of females
• The very small and declining share of formal sector employment held by women (12% in
2000 compared to 88% by men);
• The higher risk women face in contracting HIV and other opportunistic infections due to
biological factors, lack of access to resources, gender roles that leave them more
vulnerable, and cultural norms and practices relating to sexuality.
Literature also show that household coping strategies tended to vary according to sex of head of
the household.
Table 4: Percentage distribution of Households by Main Type of Coping Strategy Used in times
of need, rural/urban and sex of head, Zambia 2002/2003
Coping strategies All Zambia Rural Urban Male heads Female heads
Number of households 2,005,677 1,329,702 675,975 1,541,437 464,240
Piecework on farms 37 49 13 36 42
Other piecework 37 43 26 38 35
Food for work/assets
programs
13 17 5 13 14
Relief food 26 37 3 24 30
Eating wild fruits only 20 27 7 19 25
Substituting ordinary meals 64 69 56 63 71
Reducing number pf meals 75 78 67 74 77
Reducing other h/hold items 73 75 68 72 74
Informal borrowing (e.g.
Kaloba)
34 29 42 35 30
Formal borrowing 7 5 13 8 5
Church charity 6 6 5 5 7
NGOs charity 7 9 3 7 9
Pulling children out of
school
7 7 8 7 9
Sale of assets 19 20 16 19 16
Petty vending 14 12 17 13 14
Asking from
friends/relatives/ neighbours
69 71 65 68 73
Begging from streets 1 1 1 1 1
Other 1 1 1 1 1
Source: Compiled from CSO/LCMS, 2002/2003, page 125
d) Environmental and natural resources management and livelihoods
In rural Zambia, agriculture is the main source of people’s livelihoods; the majority of rural
households are involved in crop production in which women predominate. Forestry is treated as
part of agriculture in official statistics, thus emphasizing the complementarities of agricultural
production and forestry. In terms of performance, available literature indicates that agricultural
production has declined due to liberalization, which has negatively impacted livelihoods of rural
population, particularly female-headed households. Reduced agricultural production in the
context of rising poverty levels means that for many rural households. as indicated above, coping
strategies among the poor include engaging in hunting for meat and gathering wild from the
111
forests for survival. Therefore, loss of forests can undermine further rural livelihoods and food
security for the vulnerable poor, women and children. Private ownership of land, which is
associated with commercial agriculture, contributes to permanent deforestation because land
clearing involves uprooting of trees and deep ploughing with machinery. By contrast, traditional
shifting cultivation systems and charcoal production are associated with temporary deforestation
and are, therefore, destructive of the forests because stumps, roots, seeds, etc are not completely
destroyed by the activities.
It should be pointed out that forests have other important uses to rural people – e.g. as sources of
medicinal plants (which has increasingly become common due to deterioration in health services
provision), as well as fuel wood. The majority of urban households use charcoal (produced from
indigenous woodlands in rural areas, for cooking and heating (Chidumayo, 2002). Other forest
products that are often traded include carvings, carpentry, basketry, weaving, fishing, etc) with
people from urban areas in order to generate incomes. Therefore, the importance of the
environment and natural resources to rural livelihoods cannot be over-emphasized. It is mainly
for this reason that the Government has identified five priority environmental problems in Zambia
– namely, water pollution and inadequate sanitation; soil degradation; air pollution in the
Copperbelt towns; wildlife (fish and game) depletion; and deforestation. To address the problem
of imbalances between environment and development, the Government adopted a National
Conservation Strategy (1984) and a National Environment action Plan (1994), as well as enacted
wildlife and forestry laws. However, despite these policy and legal initiatives, not much has been
achieved in terms of reducing poverty.
To conclude, the challenge facing Government is that of reconciling between the interests and
human rights of the rural poor, on the one hand, and those of the commercial enterprises stressing
profit-making from agricultural production.
5.0 GENDER ROLES IN AGRICULTURE IN RURAL ZAMBIA
a) Introduction
Women play an important role in agricultural production, providing over 80% of labour in
subsistence production and over 70% in cash crop production. Available official statistics indicate
that the proportion of women involved in agricultural activities as their main economic activity
has remained higher than that of men, and increased from 71.8% in 1990 to 91.5% in 2000,
compared to that of men which increased from 70.1% in 1990 to 87.6% in 2000 (CSO, 2000 Census).
This section of the paper critically analyzes issues relating to socio-economic roles of men and
women and female/male access to productive resources in agriculture, as well as the situation
relating to human development indicators (education, health care, decision-making power,
HIV/AIDS) and other public services provision .
b) Gender roles at rural household level
Available literature indicates that both men and women participate in all types of roles/work (i.e.
productive, reproductive, and community-linked work within the context of a disproportionate
sexual/gender division of labour against women and girls). Women and girls tend to predominate
in performance of household chores, in particular care-giving and other activities related to the
112
maintenance of the household and its members. In the rural socio-economic system, household
chores include the following:
•••• Grain processing (foe example of maize, sorghum, millet, groundnuts), which is extremely
time-consuming, is predominantly a female activity, even where labour-saving
technologies such as hammer mills have been introduced;
•••• Transportation of harvested crops to homesteads and storing the grain involves both
sexes. However, shelling for marketing purposes is also predominantly a female activity,
while transportation to markets tends to be mainly a male activity arising from the fact that
grain marketing is generally done through male heads of households;
•••• Collection of water (for different uses: cooking, bathing, laundry, drinking) and firewood
are activities whose transportation is mainly through head-loading, and are predominantly
performed by women and girls. With increasing deforestation, women and girls have to
walk long distances to collect these items. The tendency is for men to get involved when
improved technology such as ox-carts is applied.
•••• Cooking meals and sharing food among family members, governed by cultural norms and
taboos on food consumption, which tend to operate in favour of males, is done by women
and girls;
•••• Cleaning the house and surroundings (ensuring environmental hygiene) is a female
responsibility;
•••• Care-giving, which covers a number of aspects including: childcare (minding, growth
monitoring at under-five clinics), education (moral education, providing survival skills),
caring for sick family members (within the home, bedside nursing, preparing patients’ food
and feeding them) is predominantly a female responsibility,
Most of the above tasks are time-consuming, thereby contributing to women’s time poverty.
c) Agricultural crop production
Maize production
Maize is the staple food crop in Zambia. The proportion of households that were engaged in
agricultural production during the period 2002-2003 varied by province – it was highest in Eastern
Province (94%), followed by Luapula and Western Provinces (93%), Northern and North Western
Provinces (92%). Lusaka Province had the lowest proportion (21%). A variety of food crops are
grown, but maize predominates and is grown widely in all the nine provinces. However, Eastern
Province had the highest proportion of households (97%) that grew maize during 2002-2003,
followed by Southern Province (93%), while Luapula recorded the lowest proportion (33%)
(CSO/LCMS, 2002-2003).
Production of other food crops
Other staple food crops grown in different parts of Zambia are:
•••• Cassava grown in many parts of the country but mostly grown in Luapula, Northern and
North western Provinces
•••• Sorghum with production highest in Northern and North Western Provinces, followed in
second place by Western Province
•••• Millet mostly grown in Northern, western and Central Provinces with Northern Province
having had the highest production
113
•••• Rice, with highest number of households that grew rice reported in Western Province
•••• Groundnuts are widely grown in Zambia
•••• Sweet potatoes grown mostly in Northern Province, central and Copperbelt provinces
•••• Mixed beans, with highest production in Northern Province (50.7%).
Labour inputs in crop production by men and women
Various food and cash crops are grown around the country, with maize being the predominant
crop as both cash and food crop. Research findings on gender roles in agriculture from various
parts of the country including Central, Northern and Southern Provinces emphasize gender
differentials in terms of participation rates by men in household chores and farming activities.
Women tend to work longer hours than men once agricultural and non-agricultural tasks are
added up. Data from Northern Province illustrates variations in labour inputs by men and women
in agricultural production (Table 6).
Table 6: Division of Labour by Crop and Activity (Values in Hours per Lima) Activity Maize F/millet Cassava Beans G/nuts Total
M F M F M F M F M F
Soil prep. 32 2 102 12 70 10 23 3 63 23 340
Ridging 39 20 - - 30 11 14 14 - - 128
Planting &
sowing
4 5 4 5 9 9 - 16 4 20 76
Basal
dressing
3 2 - - - - - - - - 5
Top
dressing
2 1 - - - - - - - - 3
Weeding 9 17 4 12 6 20 2 11 6 33 120
Harvesting 10 10 - 121 - - 5 9 61 82 298
Total
labour
99 57 110 150 115 50 44 53 134 158
% labour 63 36 42 58 70 30 45 55 46 54
Source: Keller_herzog and Munachonga (1995), Gender and the Micro-Meso-Macro Linkages of structural Adjustment:
Zambia Case Study, page 40. Adapted from Adaptive Research Planning Team (ARPT), Table 10, page 18.
Table 6 above indicates that women experience more labour constraint (time poverty) than men
especially during the growing season. Within the disproportionate sexual/gender division of
labour, against females, men and women allocate their labour time to both subsistence and
market-directed production.
d) Non-farm enterprises and type of activities
According to the CSO/LCMS Report 2002-2003, 30% of all households in Zambia operated a non-
farm enterprise of one sort or another. The proportion of non-farm businesses was higher in urban
households (37%) than in rural households (26%). In general, the most common non-farm
enterprise was trading, which occurs between rural and urban areas (54%), followed in second
place by manufacturing, forestry and fishing activities (28% together). In terms of comparison, the
proportion of businesses in forestry and fishing was higher in rural areas (21%) than in urban areas
(4%).
114
A comparison by province shows that Luapula Province had the highest percentage of households
with non-farm enterprises (57%), while North Western Province had the lowest (5%) (CSO/LCMS
2002-2003, Table 9.1, page 75). The major constraints identified in running non-farm enterprises
varied between rural and urban households; it was lack of technical know-how for rural
households and lack of capital for urban households. The common major constraints identified for
both rural and urban households related to ‘Government regulation in establishing a business’,
and lack of access to credit facilities which means that the majority of entrepreneurs rely on their
own savings (ILO/GIDD, 2003). In terms of main sources of capital used to set up a non-farm
enterprise, statistics indicate that in both rural and urban areas, household savings constituted the
main sources though to varying extents. For example, in rural areas the sources were reported, in
priority order, as household savings (32%), proceeds from family farm (27%) and relatives (19%),
while for urban households it was household savings (42%), relatives (32%) and other sources
(11%).
e) Livestock-raising
During the 2002-2003 Living Conditions Monitoring Survey, 30% of households in Zambia were
engaged in raising livestock of various types and to varying extents: 55% owned goats; 52% owned
cattle; 25% owned pigs, and 4% owned sheep. A comparison by province indicated that the
proportion of households that owned livestock was highest in Southern Province (48%), followed
in second place by Eastern Province (39%), in third place by Western and Lusaka (32% each),
Central Province (31%), and Copperbelt Province (7%). Both cattle and goat populations were
highest in Southern Province (32.4% cattle, 32.1% goats). Sheep population was highest in Central
Province, while pig population was highest in Eastern Province. In terms of owning poultry,
Northern Province had the highest proportion of households that owned poultry (21.5%) while
North Western Province had the least (5.5%).
Management and ownership of livestock by men and women
Available literature indicates that both women and men can own livestock (cattle, small livestock).
Findings of a study on “Women and Livestock Management in Mazabuka and Namwala, Southern
Province” revealed that women as a social category tended to own fewer cattle than men, while
they compared favourably with men in terms of small livestock (goats, pigs, chickens, ducks,
guinea fowls) (Kyewalabye and Munachonga (1993). The findings indicated that the most
common mode of acquisition of cattle for men was ‘purchase’, while for women it was through
gifts or inheritance or share of own marriage payments. The predominant herding arrangements
for cattle whereby women tend to entrust their cattle with male relatives (as a security measure
against property grabbing by in-laws in the event of death of husband) undermines women’s
situation – e.g. decision-making power about sale of their animals, use of their cattle for
production purposes, access to veterinary knowledge, and other benefits derived from ownership
(nutritional, manure).
6.0 HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDICATORS
Human development encompasses many indicators that are key to poverty reduction and
economic growth. The term ‘human development’ refers to the process of enlarging people’s
choices (United Nations Human Development Report, 1995). Although in principle, these choices
can be infinite and can change over time, the three essential ones are for people to lead a long
and healthy life, to acquire knowledge and to have access to the resources needed for a decent
115
standard of living. This section focuses on four critical human development indicators – i.e.
education, health care, decision-making, and HIV/AIDS, and from a gender perspective.
a) Education
Education (which is the starting point of human development and acts as the springboard of all
professional and technical training) is recognized as the key human development indicators with
strong connections to other human development indicators (e.g. enhanced health status, poverty
reduction, low fertility rates, participation in decision-making, poverty reduction). The level of
education attained is an important indicator of well being and is key to ensuring access to other
human development indicators referred to above. However, available data, not only indicate that
the majority of Zambians including those in formal employment have only primary or no formal
education, but also indicate that there are gender inequalities in favour of males at all levels of
education (primary, secondary, tertiary/university) and, particularly in the fields of science,
mathematics and technology (World Bank, Zambia Strategic Country Gender Assessment Report 2004).
Although Government policy since independence has emphasized education for personal and
national development with affirmative action in favour of females, in actual practice, female
enrolments at primary and secondary levels have continued to be below 50% and about 20% as
university level (Kelly 1994 and 1999). This indicates that Government still faces practical
problems of mainstreaming gender for achievement of gender equality. For example, in 2000,
male literacy was much higher at 76.6% compared to 58.3% for females (CSO, 2000 Census).
Disparities against females in education are explained in terms of both generic and gender-specific
factors – i.e. generic factors (poverty, insufficient school places, inadequate government funding)
and gender-specific factors (cultural sexual/gender division of labour at household level against
girls, teenage pregnancies, early marriages, negative expectations of girls’ performance among
teachers). Low levels of education and literacy among females is one of the contributing factors
that make it difficult for women to move out of the cycle of poverty.
Reduced Government funding to education and introduction of user fees has further reduced
access to education particularly for the poor, mostly living in rural areas. This has given rise to
mushrooming of Community Schools, providing basic education and skills training programmes
targeted at vulnerable groups (orphans, girl children, persons with disabilities, poorest people,
and children with special needs) (ILO Report Work-Family Conflict, 2004). However, previous
study findings indicate that Community Schools have tended to be concentrated in urban areas. In
general, Community Schools play an important role of filling in the gap created through
macroeconomic policies in favour of cuts in social sector spending. Their establishment, though
likely to reinforce class and gender disparities, they can be seen as a response of NGOs and
churches to reduced Government funding to education.
b) Health care
Zambia’s Health Policy (1992) stresses equity of access and quality of services as close to the family
as possible. However, provision of health services has been negatively affected by macroeconomic
measures such as cuts in social sector spending and introduction of medical fees (which have
contributed to the shift in health costs from public institutions to the family, and particularly to
women and girls). Home-based care in the context of HIV/AIDS has negatively affected women
and girls, who are the traditional care givers. Illness in the family is a common reason for
women’s absence from economic activities and for school girls not attending school or dropping
out of school. Not only do chronic illnesses increase women’s and girls’ domestic responsibilities,
116
but they also place them in a vulnerable position in terms of contracting the diseases (JUDAI 2002).
Deterioration in provision of health care services and the health care provision has also negatively
impacted on women more than men, arising from their biologically determined gender needs
(ante-natal, maternity, postnatal, and under-five clinics which are utilized by women). In rural
areas, people have to walk long distances to health care facilities, drugs are not often available, and
health personnel are not well trained. All this contributes to rural people resorting to use of wild
medicinal plants for health care.
c) HIV and AIDS Prevalence
HIV/AIDS is acknowledged as the most serious public health, social and economic challenge faced
in Zambia today – it viewed as the biggest tragedy taking toll on all sectors of economy and
society. HIV and AIDS national prevalence rate stood at 16% in 2000, with the prevalence being
higher among women (18%) than among men (13%) (CSO, 2000 Census). Table below shows
differentials by sex. The recently completed Zambia Demographic Health Survey (2007) has
revealed a slight drop in the national HIV/AIDS prevalence at 14.3% down from 16% for 2002. The
pandemic has a gender-differentiated impact and is essentially a gender issue in terms of
prevalence rates (see Table 7), burden of care for sick family members, (which exacerbates poverty
levels among women and girls.
Table 7: HIV prevalence by age and sex, 2001-2002
Age Group Females Males
15-19 6.6 1.9
20-24 16.3 4.4
45-49 13.6 20.2 Source: Central Statistical Office (2002); ZDHS 2001-2002
d) Participation in decision making
Participation in decision-making at national level
Politics and government are critical institutions because of the central role they play in decision-
making about allocation of development resources and benefits derived from development process
among various sections of the population. Available literature for Zambia emphasizes that
development policies and plans have generally been unfavourable to women’s participation and
benefit (Munachonga 1989; JUDAI 2002). Under both the one-party and multi-party governments,
the State and political party structures have continued to be male-dominated, which suggests a
negative relationship between women and the State. Under-representation of women in national
decision-making structures is one of the issues for advocacy by the Women’s Movement in the
country. Statistics indicate that Parliament, which is expected to be the mirror of society, does not
in actual practice represent reality in terms of population composition (NB: women outnumber
men). This means that the interests of women are not adequately represented at that level. Table 8
below illustrates participation rates in national politics by men and women from 1964 to 2006.
117
Table 8: Elected Members of Parliament by sex, 1964-2001
Year Members of Parliament Total Elective
Seats
Females
F M % of Total % Incr./Decr.
1964-1968 5 70 75 6.7 -
1968-1972 2 103 105 1.9 - 4.8
1973-1978 7 118 125 5.6 3.7
1978-1983 6 119 125 4.8 - 0.8
1983-1988 4 121 125 3.2 - 1.6
1988-1991 6 119 125 4.8 1.6
1991-1996 10 140 150 6.7 1.9
1996-1999 16 134 150 10.7 4.0
2001 19 131 150 12.7 2.0
2006 22 128 150 14.6 2.0
Source: M. Munachonga & E. Mbozi (2003), Evaluation of Zambia National Women’s Lobby;
Elections Commission of Zambia (2006)
In terms of women’s participation at local government level, in 2002, men predominated as
Councillors (93%) and Mayors (94%). The trend applies to decision making positions in the whole
Public Service (line ministries, commissions, etc).
Participation in decision-making at community and household levels
Participation in decision making structures such as parliament and cabinet is a wider national role
that men and women can play. It is important to note that the issue of participation in decision-
making is not confined to the national level, but it is also relevant at the household and community
levels. Gender roles are of three broad types – i.e. (i) productive roles/work involving the
production of goods and services for consumption and for the market; (ii) reproductive roles/work
involving the care and maintenance of the household and its members; and (iii) community-linked
roles/work which involves the management of resources for collective use/interest e.g. water,
forests, as well as participation at events aimed at holding the community together (politics and
decision making).
Research findings indicate that women’s participation in decision-making at community and
household levels, where women patriarchal norms and values are much stronger than in urban
areas, women are expected to defer to men (husbands or male relatives) in terms of decision
making on various types of issues, including decision on what to crop to plant, when to plant,
where to plant, and whether or not to sell surplus crop. With regard to community based activities
including those relating to community based natural resources management programmes, women
tend to be more easily mobilized to provide voluntary labour or to work on community
programmes for food (payment in kind), while men tend to participate as supervisors who are
paid cash.
118
7.0 OTHER SOCIAL SERVICES PROVISION
a) Water and sanitation
Although the Government stresses the importance of providing safe drinking water and sanitation
through local authorities and private sector enterprises, implementation of the policy is
problematic (Changa Management Services Ltd, 2005). Statistics show that in 2000, the proportion
of households with access to safe drinking water was 49.1% and that access to safe water was more
pronounced in urban areas (86.1%) than in rural areas (29.5%) (CSO, 2003). In the absence of
protected water sources near homes, women especially in rural areas have to travel long distances
to collect water for various household uses. Lack of safe drinking water, which mostly affects
people living in rural and peri-urban areas often results in break up of water borne diseases (such
as cholera and dysentery), which in turn increases women’s burden of care for sick family
members.
b) Energy sources supply factors
Provision of electricity is an important labour saving technology (which is more critical for women
arising from their multiple roles). However, statistics available show that only 17% of total
households in Zambia had access to electricity in 2000, and that access was even much lower in
rural areas (2.2%) (CSO, 2003). This means that the overwhelming majority of households,
particularly in rural areas, depends on fuel wood (for which responsibility for collection rests with
women) or charcoal whose production threatens forests. Deforestation due to factors such as
increased human settlements, charcoal burning and commercial farming has, not only negatively
affected economic development, but also impacted on rural women more than men arising from
their traditional role of collecting fire wood for cooking and heating. .
c) Infrastructure (roads, transport and marketing facilities)
In most parts of rural Zambia, roads are in very bad condition and are impassable during the rainy
season due to lack of Government funds for road rehabilitation. The majority of local authorities
are unable to fulfil their role of maintaining feeder roads, due to lack of funding. Poor road
networks in rural areas contribute to agricultural marketing problems e.g. high costs for
transportation of produce by small-scale farmers, the majority of whom are women.
Government’s withdrawal subsidized agricultural services, which was not accompanied with an
orientation programme for village farmers, also resulted in neglect and, consequently, dilapidation
of Farmers Training Centres and Institutes (which previously served as important channels of
imparting farming technologies) countrywide. Although the present Government has recognized
the importance of agricultural cooperatives for mobilizing and increasing productivity among
small-scale farmers, the implementation of the policy with regard to agricultural input supply and
crop marketing is still problematic. From a gender perspective, women’s participation in the
agricultural cooperative movement and travel for purposes of marketing agricultural produce
have historically been low.
119
8.0 GOVERNMENT POLICIES AND MEASURES TO ADDRESS POVERTY
Various policies and measures have been introduced reflecting national response to poverty and
related issues. With regard to sectoral policies that derive from the PRSP, TNDP and FNDP, there
are a number of approved policies relevant to the Sub-Report – e.g. on gender, youth, agriculture,
education, population, health, land, environment, forest, etc. these are highlighted below.
Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (2002-2004), which will roll over every three years, is
coordinated by the Ministry of Finance and National Planning. Prepared after broad based
consultations, the PRSP stands as the overarching national development policy on which all sector
policies will be pivoted for sustainable development. The PRSP is premised on broad coordination
and harmonization of various economic growth and other development interventions. The basic
strategy of poverty reduction is economic growth and employment creation, which will entail
improvements in national resources management, sectoral performance in identified key sectors
including agriculture and social services, infrastructure, governance and public service delivery
capacity. The PRSP aims at assisting the poor and vulnerable people in order to prevent, mitigate
against, and cope with poverty vulnerability risks. This is being done by supporting community
based and managed initiatives (social services infrastructure improvements) as prioritized by the
communities themselves.
The special focus of the PRSP is on economic management ministries and social sector ministries –
to enable them become more effective in reducing poverty. Both the Transitional National
Development Plan (TNDP) 2002-2005 and the Fifth National Development Plan (FNDP) 2006-2010
built on the PRSP and have provided the most comprehensive national framework for sectoral
policies and priorities in implementing activities. Both the TNDP and FNDP have focused on
improved natural resources management and have the guiding theme of sustainable growth,
employment creation and poverty reduction, with agricultural development viewed as the engine
of income expansion and economic growth.
Although gender is recognized as an important cross cutting issue that has to be mainstreamed to
achieve poverty reduction, the PRSP is weakened in this regard in that it does not adequately
address and analyze the gender dynamics of the many complex barriers to poverty reduction (i.e.
huge foreign debt, misdirection of public resources, non-prioritization of human development,
general economic decline, HIV/AIDS). Secondly, gender mainstreaming into the PRSP, TNDP and
FNDP have not been systematic and, therefore, not being effectively implemented.
The National Population Policy introduced in 1989 was revised in 2000 to bring it in line with the
foals of the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) of 1995. The policy
is Ministry of Finance and National Planning This provided for the institutionalization of
reproductive health rights, safe motherhood, adolescent sexual and reproductive health, and
family planning. However, available literature indicates that although Zambia has performed well
with regard to adult literacy, the country is still below the threshold in the other indicators
including maternal mortality rates and infant mortality rates (UNFPA Fifth Country Programme
Evaluation Report, 2007:26). The impact of the policy has also been constrained by, among others,
socio-cultural factors in favour of high fertility rates that limit opportunities for formal
employment and business enterprise development, particularly for women (JUDAI 2002).
National Agricultural Policy (2004), executed by Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives, has
specific objectives of improving household and national food security, promoting better use of
120
natural resources, generating income and employment, and increasing export earnings, and
contributing to balance of payments. Strategies include liberalization of agricultural markets,
support to private sector, diversification of crop production, service delivery to small-scale
farmers, and improving the economic status of women. In order to promote mainstreaming of
cross cutting issues, Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives has Focal Points for gender and
HIV/AIDS as well as specific strategies. However, liberalization which has meant reduced
government funding has contributed to failure to control animal diseases such as corridor, which
in many cases has wiped out whole herds of cattle especially in Central and Southern Provinces.
This has also contributed to decline in a traditional source of wealth and social status and,
consequently, to increasing poverty levels among small-scale farmers (Munachonga and
Whitehead 2001).
Natural Policy on Environment (2006), executed by the Ministry of Tourism Environment and
Natural Resources, seeks to integrate environmental concerns into the social and economic
national development planning process. The Government treats environment as one of the cross
cutting issues, along with gender, HIV/AIDS, as it cuts across various sectors – e.g. agriculture,
forestry, land, energy, water, wildlife, population, etc. This has important gender implications,
given the fact that men and women interact and manage the environment and natural resources
differently arising from differences in the traditional roles they play in society. However, the
National Policy on Environment (2006) does not incorporate gender (JUDAI 2007)
Land Administration and Management Policy (2006), executed by the Ministry of Lands,
incorporates a quota system – i.e. 30% of all available land for allocation specifically to women, in
addition to their participation in the remaining 70%. However, there are a number of constraints
to implementing the policy. One of the constraints, particularly for women (who are more
financially and economically disadvantaged) is related to the short period of eighteen (18) months
required by the Government for developing the land. Secondly, Zambia has a dual land tenure
system providing for traditional land (no title) and statutory land (titled), which operates to the
detriment of women because they are treated as minors under customary law and, therefore, lack
equal access with men to land. Further, predominant patriarchal attitudes against married women
and young women of marriageable age contribute to rural women’s lack of access to agricultural
land (Himonga and Munachonga, 1995).
National Forest Policy (1996), executed by the Ministry of Tourism Environment and Natural
Resources, has the objective of conserving indigenous forests, protection of water catchment areas,
and promotion of viable forestry through training, research, extension, regeneration and wood
processing programmes. However, in practice, certain livelihood activities such as charcoal
burning, which occurs in rural areas, for sale in urban areas, are having a negative impact on
conservation of forests.
National Gender Policy (2000), executed by Cabinet Office, reflects the national vision stated as
“attainment of gender equality and equity”. The policy advocates increased active participation of
women in the market economy as well as the promotion of shared roles and responsibilities
through influencing change in patterns of socialization and the sexual/gender division of labour.
However, it is has not yet been widely circulated and publicized, or understood even within line
ministries, and many ministries do not have sectoral policies with gender incorporated. Most of
the sectoral institutions that have incorporated gender in their policy frameworks have not done it
in a systematic manner due largely to lack of adequate knowledge and skills in gender analysis
and mainstreaming.
121
National Youth Policy (1996), executed by Ministry of Sport Youth and Child Development, seeks
to promote self-employment among youth through entrepreneurship development, provide basic
skills training facilities (infrastructure, finance, business advisory services), to reduce youth
unemployment. However, implementation of the policy has been constrained by lack of
Government funding and ineffective management of programmes (JUDAI 2002:29). Further, most
facilities need rehabilitation.
National Education Policy: Educating Our Future (1996), executed by Ministry of Education,
addresses the entire educational system, from pre-school to tertiary and adult education, and pays
attention to current global acceptable tenets such as capacity and partnership building, curriculum
relevance, and efficient management of resources. The policy’s cornerstone has four guiding
principles: access, equity, democracy, and quality. The policy also identifies areas of special
concern including gender issues in education, special needs education, and education for poor and
vulnerable. Strong emphasis on gender and social equity is reflected through implementation of
programmes and measures such as Basic Education Sector Support Investment Programme
(BESSIP) which has a gender component, Programme for Advancement of Girls Education
(PAGE), bursary scheme which incorporates 25% allocation specifically to females entering
University, etc. However, in spite of these initiatives, gender inequalities at all levels of education
have persisted against females, with negative implications for women’s welfare.
National Health Policy (1992), executed by the Ministry of Health, stresses access and quality of
services ‘as close to the family as possible’. However, macro-economic policy and measures (i.e. cuts
in social sector spending) have negatively affected implementation of the health reforms. The
policy stresses mainstreaming of gender with guidelines developed for the purpose. However,
implementation of the policy has been negatively affected by, among other factors, SAP measures
which have led to introduction of medical fees and de-institutionalization of health care provision
towards home-based care for chronic illnesses such as TB and HIV/AIDS. This policy change has
negatively affected the family, and, within the family, women and girls – the traditional care
givers. Illness in the family is a common reason for women’s absence from both formal and
informal employment and for girls not attending or dropping out of school to look after sick
members or siblings in the event of death of both parents.
National HIV/AIDS Policy and Strategic Intervention Plan
National HIV/AIDS Policy (2005) and Strategic Intervention Plan (2002-2005, executed by the National
AIDS Council, define the country’s response to HIV/AIDS epidemic – a continuum of prevention,
mitigation, care and treatment of people living with HIV). The policy stress the need for a legal
framework; appropriate national coordination and advocacy framework; treating HIV/AIDS as a
public health, social and economic problem; Information, Education and Communication for
behavioural change, protection of human rights of the infected and affected. Both the Policy and
the Strategy stress, among other things, “gender mainstreaming as a central element in the fight against
the epidemic”. However, it is worthy noting that the policy and the strategic frameworks are
operating in a difficult environment that undermines their effective implementation– e.g. lack of
legislation, cultural norms and practices, economic hardships, stigmatization and discrimination
which contribute to people’s reluctance to go for voluntary counselling and testing (VCY). .
SUMMARY OF KEY GENDER ISSUES
122
9.0 SUMMARY OF KEY GENDER ISSUES IN ZAMBIA & THE AGRICULTURAL SECTOR
a) Government policy and measures
Available literature emphasizes the following factors as contributing to gender inequalities:
•••• The gender equality principle is not adequately incorporated in the Republican
Constitution, which is to the detriment of women in all economic and social spheres of life.
•••• The Intestate Inheritance Act (1989) is still inadequate in terms of addressing women’s
property rights arising from the polygamous nature of marriage. Because customary law
does not provide for joint ownership of property between husband and wife, women are
often victims of property grabbing by deceased husbands’ relatives.
•••• Women’s small and declining share of formal sector employment and concentration in
subsistence production (regulated by traditional norms), while men dominate the market
economy (highly monetized with segmented labour , productive resources systematically
concentrated in it, and regulated by statutory law).
•••• Negative attitudes against women doing business or producing for the market, which
reduces their access to development services. For example, Government policy has not
effectively supported women farmers despite the fact that they grow a wider variety of
crops than men – e.g. local maize, sorghum, millet, beans, groundnuts, cow peas, which do
not depend on chemical fertilizer;
•••• The dominant ideology (patriarchy) is very powerful in agricultural production (food and
cash crops) that shapes the roles and work patterns of men and women.
•••• Agricultural marketing policy has not effectively supported women farmers in terms of
marketing their crops arising from emphasis on maize production and marketing.
•••• When interventions focus on traditionally ‘female crops’ for purposes of commercializing
them, men appropriate such crops and get involved in growing them e.g. groundnuts, to
the disadvantage of women farmers – e.g. in Eastern Province and Copperbelt Province
(Mpongwe Districts.
•••• The persistence of the official and general perception that views men as ‘farmers’ and
women as ‘wives of farmers’ reinforces the tendency to marginalize women and to restrict
them to care-giving related production, which has not received attention in terms of
technological innovation.
•••• Technological innovations have not been directed at activities that are traditionally defined
as ‘women’s activities or tasks’, resulting in women’s reliance on traditional technologies
that are time-consuming (no access to labour saving technologies).
•••• Disproportionate burden of HIV infection and care for the sick in the context of HIV/AIDS,
against women and girls (the traditional care-givers) with negative implications for
women’s economic activity and girls’ school attendance.
•••• Women’s lack of equal access to/control over productive resources (e.g. land, credit,
information and knowledge, etc). Results of a gender analysis of arming households may
be used here to illustrate the extent of this gender issue (see Annex 1, for illustration).
123
10.0 CONCLUSIONS: TRENDS OF CHANGE & IMPACT ON LIVELIHOODS
The foregoing analysis, with specific reference to the agricultural situation indicates that between
1991 and 2002, Government planning shifted from long-term planning that was characteristic of
Socialist orientation of the First and Second Republics to short-term and medium planning
characteristic of the Free Market system adopted after change of government in 1991. However,
since 2002, Government reverted to the long-term planning strategy through the transitional
National Development Plan (TNDP) 2002-2005 and the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (which
will roll over every three years). Sectoral policies discussed above, including the National
Agricultural Policy, National Policy on Environment and National Gender Policy, are derived
from the PRSP and the National Development Plans (TNDP and FNDP).
The discussion above has also highlighted that, in line with the Socialist approach to development,
the post-independence agricultural policy emphasized provision of subsidies to small-scale
farmers in terms of input supply and crop marketing. This was reinforced by a strong agricultural
Cooperative Movement, agricultural training and extension services provision system targeted at
village farmers through Farmers Training Centres that were established throughout the country.
The policy before 1991 was, therefore, supply-driven which means that small-scale farmers were
responsive to government interventions aimed at improving standards of living of the people.
This promoted a dependency syndrome among small-scale farmers, which is one of the factors
that have contributed to increasingly rising poverty levels in rural areas.
Agricultural policy change since 1991 in favour of the liberalization of the agricultural sector
meant that Government was no longer to channel public resources to large-scale fertilizer
subsidies, provision of transport for inputs for small-scale farmers, as well as the cost of organizing
a market and distribution network. This has had a negative impact on agricultural production
particularly by small-scale farmers who were now expected to meet costs of services. With
change in policy, “agriculture has moved from a system of State supply and subsidy of inputs, subsidized
credit and stat marketing to a liberalized system where inputs are expensive, credit largely unavailable and
markets unreliable” (Whitehead and Munachonga, 2001). Liberalization has also resulted in lack of
government funding and failure to control animal diseases such as corridor, which in many cases
has wiped out whole herds of cattle especially in Central and Southern Provinces.
Despite evidence that nearly one third of households in the country are headed by women,
Government policy has continued to be based on the assumption that the predominant type of
household in Zambia is that which headed by a male, and the perception that men are ‘farmers’
and women ‘wives of farmers’. This has contributed to marginalization of rural women and to
higher poverty levels among women than men, which are particularly pronounced in rural than
urban areas. In the agricultural sector, women provide over 80% of labour to food and cash crop
production. The initiatives to incorporate gender issues (through affirmative action) into the
agricultural policy and strategies have not been effective.
The key gender issues emerging from the analysis of the whole country context and specifically of
the agricultural sector, around which recommended interventions may be based are highlighted
below.
a) Gender is an economic issue in Zambia, given the different roles men and women play
in both household and market economies, as well as in the managing the environment
and natural resources. Women tend to predominate in agriculture and micro-
124
enterprises, as well as in household tasks, while men dominate the industrial sector and
medium-enterprises. However, there are inequalities in favour of men in terms of
access, ownership and control of productive resources, time and family labour.
Gender based disparities have economic costs to households, communities, and the
country as a whole.
b) Women experience time poverty or constraint as a result of the combination of
reproductive and productive tasks for which they are responsible – e.g. rural women
work longer hours(12-13 hours per day) than men (6-7 hours per day), they carry a
disproportionate burden of care for the sick and orphans due to HIV/AIDS. Despite
this, tasks and activities undertaken by women within the household economy have not
been targeted for technological innovations. Labour saving technologies can free
women’s time for more productive work and their own recreation.
c) Zambia’s legal framework is discriminatory against women - the National Constitution
contains contradictions that undermine women’s rights because the issue of gender
equality adequately addressed due to accommodation of customary law.
d) Poverty reduction is essentially about addressing the issues of power (of men and the
rich) and powerlessness (of women and the poor), which are the focus of the Gender
and Development Framework. Unequal social and gender relations of power are the
main causes of development problems including low participation of women in
decision-making structures, vulnerability to poverty and HIV/AIDS. While poverty
levels continue to be high in the country, and higher among women than men, the
gender dimensions of poverty are not adequately understood mainly because they are
not adequately captured in socio-economic analysis that have tended to be based on
disaggregation by sex of heads of households alone.
e) Gender disparities in human development indicators persist especially in the aspect of
education which has strong connections to the other critical human development
indicators (health, fertility rates, maternal mortality rates, participation in decision-
making, HIV/AIDS).
f) HIV/AIDS had gender differentiated risks and vulnerabilities, with more young women
than men in their age-group get infected and more older men than women in their age-
group get infected. Gender differences also apply in terms of the burden of care for the
sick, although both men and women suffer the social and economic effects of
HIV/AIDS. HIV/AIDS is strongly connected to poverty because it tends to affect the
able-bodied, productive and educated sections of the population.
125
11.0 SUGGESTIONS FOR WHAT RIU CAN CONSIDER
This Specialist Sub-Report, therefore, makes suggestions that are perceived as fundamental to
making mainstreaming of cross cutting issues (especially gender which unique because it a over-
riding cross cutting social variable) and effective tool for poverty reduction and development tool
among small-scale farmers. The suggested interventions would assist in improving understanding
of gender relations of power in the context of the other cross cutting issues (i.e. poverty,
HIV/AIDS, environment and natural resources management, livelihoods) and the linkages
between the cross cutting issues. This suggests the need for engendering of agricultural research
methodologies and analytical tools for the benefit of vulnerable groups (the poor, women and
children).
The suggested interventions focus on:
a). Building and strengthening skills in research, analysis and mainstreaming of cross cutting
issues, particularly gender because it is an over-riding cross cutting issue, into
programmes. This can facilitate the engendering of key agricultural and environmental
research instruments or tools and analysis of research data, to institutionalize generation
of relevant data disaggregated by age, sex, gender, etc., to feed into project/program
design and planning. To achieve this, there is need for capacity building for institutions
and organizations involve in implementing the RIU Programme in Zambia.
b). Strengthening mainstreaming of cross cutting issues into in the implementation of the
PRSP and the FNDP as well as the review processes.
c). Promotion of investments in technologies targeted at household tasks and activities
performed by women, to reduce women’s workload.
d). Integration of gender dynamics into livelihood, HIV/AIDS and environment programmes,
building on on-going initiatives within the agricultural and related sectors
126
ANNEX 1: MEN AND WOMEN’S ACCESS TO AND CONTROL OVER RESOURCES IN
RURAL HOUSEHOLDS
RESOURCES ACCESS
W M
CONTROL
W M
Land L H L H
Labour L H L H
Machinery (tractors, etc) L H L H
Animal draft power (oxen) M H L H
Tools (e.g. hoes, shovels) M H M H
Time L H L H
Inputs (hybrid seed, fertilizer) M H L H
Education & information L H L H
Technical skills M H L H
Management skills L H L H
Credit/loans L H L H
Finances L H N H
TOTALS: H
M
L
N
0 11
0 1
8 0
0 0
0 12
1 0
10 0
1 0
H = high (68-99%); M = medium (34-67%); L = low (1-33%); N = none ()%)
NOTE:
The agricultural extension staff involved in the assessment of male and female access to and
control of resources came up with three categories/values which were divided into 100% to arrive
at the average percentage for each category. Also note that women’s access to/control over labour
is low since men, especially husbands, control women’s time and labour.
Source: World Bank, Zambia Strategic Country Gender Assessment, 2004:20.
127
Annex G: Terms of Reference
RESEARCH INTO USE PROGRAMME
Draft Terms of Reference for
Zambia Country Assessment and Strategy Development
Background to the RIU Programme
The purpose of the Research into Use (RIU) Programme is to maximize the poverty reducing
impact of the DFID funded natural resources research produced under the Renewable Natural
Resources Research Strategy (RNRRS) in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. In so doing the
programme also aims to increase understanding of how widespread use of research can be
promoted. The Programme will also invest in getting into use knowledge from research
undertaken by others if this is demanded by users and is complementary/ synergistic to use of
outputs from research knowledge previously supported by DFID.
The hypothesis of the RIU is that
an innovation systems approach will prove more effective than linear approaches at getting
research outputs into use for the benefit of the poor.
For ease of reference the key elements of the innovation systems approach are outlined in Text Box
1.
Text Box 1: Key Elements of the Innovation Systems Approach
• Involving the suppliers and users of knowledge in some form of partnership on a common platform
• Genuine and continuous involvement of suppliers of knowledge, intermediaries, policy makers,
“enablers”, all "end-users" (producer, consumer or processor) to assist in the determination of the
innovation bottlenecks.
• Putting as much emphasis on promoting technologies as promoting approaches and processes that
have been proven to be effective in getting research into use
• Investing in strengthening capacities where they are needed in the "innovation system" (not just
R&D organizations but also in intermediary functions that enable communications between
knowledge suppliers and users)
• Developing financially sustainable delivery systems/ viable business models (this often involves
manufacturers, service providers, credit suppliers, and providers of technical assistance to users)
• Investing in an iterative process that enables the organisations within the system to learn from
experience and improve their performance
• Introducing new technologies and/or new ways of doing things in a financially, socially and
environmentally sustained basis
• Evolving new institutional arrangements by which the various organisations in the system operate
128
The RIU has identified eight values that will underpin its work and these are: strategic focus;
openness; transparency; fairness; innovation; accessibility; inclusiveness; and empowerment. As
part of its focus on ‘fairness’, it will aim to promote access to knowledge, participation, equal
opportunities, and inclusive partnerships for all social groups with a particular focus on the
disadvantaged. It will also work to value cultural diversity and to reduce exclusion and the
disadvantages that stakeholders face.
The RIU will adopt a positive and pragmatic approach to the ‘environment’. It will promote
environmentally sound management practices and the production of improved, stable livelihoods
for a range of stakeholders including those of the vulnerable poor. This approach recognizes that
environmentally sound management and sustainable livelihoods have a close relationship, in that
one strengthens and reinforces the other.
In order to achieve its purpose, RIU will deliver three major outputs:
1. Output 1: Significant use of RNRRS and other natural resources research outputs for the
benefit (direct/indirect) of poor men and women in diverse contexts;
2. Output 2: Research-into-use evidence generated with evaluation partners; and,
3. Output 3: Policy processes enabled by research-into-use principles, lessons and discourse.
Through these three inter-linked outputs RIU will attempt to apply innovation systems thinking in
an experimental way to use research-based knowledge to achieve a poverty-reducing impact at the
country level (this is output 1), It will learn the lessons from these and other experiments (this is
output 2); and it will communicated these lessons to others (output 3).
More specifically in relation to output 1, the RIU programme will apply the innovation systems
approach and its values to attain significant use of RNRRS and other natural resources research
outputs for the benefit3 (direct/ indirect) of poor people in diverse contexts through mechanisms
that:
• Improve access to RNRRS and other research outputs ( Component 1.1)
• Enhance demand for RNRRS and other research outputs (Component 1.2)
• Lead to development of enterprises using RNRRS and other research outputs (Component
1.3)
3 “Benefit” means poverty reduction as assessed using the sustainable livelihood framework
129
The general indicators of performance against which the three components will be assessed are:
• Substantially increased numbers of Renewable Natural Resource (RNR) dependent poor
people4 –directly using RIU research outputs in all categories of PSA countries by 2011
• Substantially increased numbers of RNR dependent poor people indirectly benefiting from
RIU research outputs in all categories of PSA countries by 2011
• More than 65% by value of ongoing RIU initiatives related to outputs 1 and 2 (Use of research
and learning outputs) assessed as “likely to be largely or completely achieved” by 2008
• By 2008 more than 50% of likely beneficiaries of RIU supported initiatives independently
assessed as likely to be poor women
The general indicators have been further elaborated in the RIU Performance and Learning
Framework (PLF) at the level of the three programme outputs.
The overall implications of the above are that the strategies and programmes for all the
components of the RIU Outputs must not only show how they are contributing to the output
indicators but they must also be explicit on how they are applying the innovation systems
approach to whatever interventions are being undertaken.
Component 1.2: ENHANCING DEMAND FOR RNRRS AND OTHER RESEARCH
OUTPUTS
The two generic approaches through which Output 1.2 will be achieved are (i) the National
Coalition Approach and (ii) the Partnership approach.
In the National Coalition approach the RIU shall facilitate the emergence/ consolidation of a
coalition bringing together national actors that are already implementing RIU-like activities. The
national coalition shall become the RIU partner through which national actors would pool their
resources with those of RIU to demand and ultimately get research outputs into use. In essence the
RIU Programme shall be owned and operated by these coalitions.
In the partnership approach the RIU shall work through national partners. A national partner shall
be an organization such as an international NGOs, a public institution, a donor-funded
programme etc that are already implementing innovation programmes to which the RIU could
add value by introducing RNRRS or other research outputs including new ways of doing
‘business’. Such a partner organisation would have been assessed as having the vision and mission
that embrace the principles and objectives of the RIU and as possessing strong links with local
level innovation platforms capable of demanding and using research outputs
The implementation of research into use activities shall be undertaken by “innovation platforms”
using RIU resources channelled through these coalitions or partners. The RIU defines an
innovation platform as “a network of partners working on a common theme and using research
4 as disaggregated by gender and social group in RIU plans
130
knowledge in ways it has not been used before to generate goods/ services for the benefit of the
poor”.
General purpose of the assignment
The purpose of the assignment is to assess the development context in Zambia and the
opportunities that exist for RIU engagement and, having done this, propose a strategy which the
RIU can use to develop a strategy which the RIU should implement to make the greatest
contribution to achieving RIU Purposes 1 & 2. The strategic plan will need to comply with the
principles of the RIU outlined above. In particular, it should complement and strengthen existing
initiatives in the country and be implemented through country-based organisations.
Terms of Reference
These ToR cover the work of the team that shall undertake the country assessment and develop
the country strategy.
1. Country Assessment
i. Identify the existing national policies and country strategy frameworks relevant to getting
research into use and pinpoint the key elements with which RIU will need to align
ii. Provide an overview of the national agricultural and natural resources innovation system/
context and identify the systemic blockages that hinder pro-poor innovation
iii. Identify the areas of focus (geographical/categories of people/commodity value chains/
drivers of change, etc) where innovation using RNRRS or other research outputs are likely
to make greatest impact on disaggregated groups of poor people
iv. Identify and prioritise specific opportunities in the areas of focus. The opportunities should
result in impacts on the livelihoods of significant numbers of disaggregated categories in
poor people and/or on specific learning opportunities5
v. Make a detailed analysis of the innovation sub-systems relevant to particular opportunities
including:
• analysis of the principal multi-sectoral constraints (e.g. policies, institutions,
infrastructure, communications, capacity, corruption, gender and social exclusion,
HIV/AIDS, etc) to the identified opportunities in these resource-poor communities and
assessment of their impact on natural resource innovation
• the effectiveness of the demand environment for innovation, particularly with regard
to the involvement and influence of the poor
vi. Make a preliminary identification of existing and potential innovation platforms6 that
provide avenues for linking knowledge suppliers and innovation demanders in the
5 There is a provisional split in ‘effort’ between Purpose 1 & 2 of 70:30 – however ideally choices will maximise both poverty impact
and learning impact.
131
innovation sub-systems and an outline analysis of how RIU participation can add value to
these platforms
vii. Identify potential national and regional partners and propose ways of working with them
which address needs of the poor and which fit the RIU purpose and principles
viii. Identify other country specific contextual issues that the RIU should take into consideration
ix. Offer recommendations that will enhance the learning environment in Zambia
2. Country Strategy
ii. Outline the approach used in developing the strategy
iii. Articulate the strategic implications for RIU of the findings of the country assessment
iv. State the strategic principles on which the strategy is based
v. Propose the key elements of innovation system (or sub-systems/context) within which the
programme will operate
vi. Outline how the innovation systems approach shall be mainstreamed into the Zambia RIU
Programme
vii. Show how the RIU shall be positioned within the context of the Zambia national policy &
strategy processes and wider pan African CAADP process, identifying potential points and
approaches for engagement
viii. Consider ‘early win’ opportunities for RIU engagement in Zambia
ix. Propose the strategic options and underlying rationale for enhancing demand for research
outputs. The options should be aligned with the results spelt out for RIU component 1.2 in
the Performance and Learning Framework (PLF). The PLF results require Component 1.2 to
specifically focus on:
• How national coalitions/partnerships shall be developed and effectively ‘plugged into’
the national change dynamic
• How innovation platforms shall emerge/be identified and be supported
• How information markets (serving platform level indicators) shall be supported and
developed
• How the RIU communication strategy shall be implemented
• How capability change (individual and collective) will be enhanced in all platform
activities and more broadly
• How lessons will be learnt and documented in all the above
6 Definition of Innovation platform:‘ a network of partners, working on a common theme, and using research knowledge in ways it
has not used it before, to generate goods and services for the benefit of the poor’
132
x. Clearly spell out the expected outputs from the strategic options, their potential impact on
the poor and the expected contribution to the more general lessons to be learned by RIU
from the activities RIU finances in Zambia. This should be supported by a strategy logical
framework
xi. Show how cross-cutting issues - especially gender, social exclusion, and environment- will
be addressed
xii. Outline the principles by which RIU monitoring, impact and learning processes and
objectives (MIL) will be integrated into the country programme
xiii. Outline how MIL will contribute to the IRU Programme in Zambia
xiv. Propose how the interests of RIU Component 3 will be integrated within the Zambia
country Programme
xv. Propose the governance and management of the RIU in Zambia
xvi. Propose the principles for establishing the sustainability of the research into use
programme activities and the use of the innovation systems approach can be sustained
beyond the life of the RIU
xvii. State the risks and assumptions
xviii. Propose the process and timetable (including further investigations/visits required) to
develop a detailed implementation and to ensure national and local ownership
xix. Elaborate an exit strategy
Team Composition
The team shall consist of the following:
Managers
1. David Cownie - Livelihoods and Poverty, Team Leader
2. Ben Sekamatte, Zambia RIU Task Manager
Specialists
3. Ebbie Dengu – Innovations
4. Sarah Carriger - Communications
5. Steen Joffe – Information Markets
6. Diana Banda, Zambian Resource Person on Natural Resources and Policy/Institutional
Analysis
7. Monica Munachonga, Zambian Resource Person on Cross-Cutting Themes
Technical Support
8. Jurgen Hagmann, Facilitation
9. Vera Mugittu, Monitoring, Impact and Learning (MIL)
133
Time Inputs
At this juncture, it is anticipated that the input of the Team Leader would be 48 person days, and
the input of the specialists would be 30 person days.
Timeframe
Details to be agreed but to be in the period between mid-April and mid-July (Assessment), and
mid-May - early October (strategy). It is anticipated that operationalisation activities that will lead
to implementation planning (which does not form part of these TOR) can begin during strategy
development. Overall, the intention is to accelerate assessment and strategy development without
compromising design or implementation. The timeframe is therefore indicative, and it may be that
activities take longer.
Support for the Team
The Team shall be supported by:
1. The Zambia RIU Task Manager, Dr. Ben Sekamatte in the following areas:
• Handling all organisational and logistical matters associated with team activities.
• Making formal approaches to the relevant authority within the National Government and
the DFID Country Office regarding the RIU programme proceeding in the country.
• Sensitization of stakeholders to the aims of RIU.
• Formal introduction of RIU to the wider donor community in Zambia through a one page
briefing document covering the overall objectives, and envisaged spread of RIU
engagement in the country.
• Obtaining relevant documentation from RIU for the team.
• Organising RIU materials for distribution to stakeholders in Zambia.
• Expediting the contracting process.
• Securing operational funding.
• Establishing necessary links with RIU components.
• Overseeing the work of the Process Facilitator.
• Co-ordinating all aspects of the RIU Programme design in Zambia.
• Organising funds for RIU Programme design in Zambia in a timely manner.
2. A member of the MIL team, Ms. Vera Mugittu, shall ensure that the team has a good grasp of
the MIL requirements, and shall herself identify how MIL can benefit the Zambian RIU
Programme. Terms of Reference for the MIL person were considered by the team, and
discussed as follows:
a. Provide all team members with the information needs from MIL, to the extent that
these are relevant for assessment, strategy development, and implementation planning.
134
To the extent relevant, the MIL Consultant will be responsible for direct information
collection, and co-ordinating information collection, with various team members.
b. Assist with the identification of possible targets and mechanisms for pro-poor
innovations, and explore these as a member of the RIU assessment team. This will be
through materials review, key informant interviews, and participation in stakeholder
engagement processes.
c. Assess the way in which learning takes place in the policy environment in Zambia, and
consider avenues to support learning of relevance to RIU. Consider innovative ways in
which learning can be supported by RIU, and ways in which efficiency can be
improved.
d. Provide insights, in the assessment annex on MIL, lessons learned from other MIL
activities in the pilot countries, and draw lessons for Zambia. From there, through the
strategy process, elaborate recommendations on the way forward for MIL in Zambia.
e. Ensure that the Zambian logframe is consistent with the requirements of the RIU
logframe, and Performance and Learning Framework provided by MIL (December
2007).
f. Engage in the assessment and country strategy processes in such a way that support
ownership among those engaged in the RIU Programme in Zambia. In addition,
through involvement in this process, the consultant will support the overall objectives
of MIL.
g. Review of the requirements of the assessment and strategy development documents
noted above, and support those aspects of the process relevant to MIL.
h. Provide a brief specialist sub-report for the Assessment Report.
i. Contribute comments into the Assessment Report itself from the perspective of MIL.
j. Work with other team members, including the Zambian consultants, to ensure the
integration of MIL concepts into team activities.
Overall, the intended result of this engagement with MIL is to support the effective design
of MIL activities in Zambia, and help meet MIL information needs as possible during
assessment and country strategy development.
3. The International Process Facilitator, Dr. Jurgen Hagmann, shall guide the participatory
interactions between the team and national stakeholders in ways that initiate the development
of stakeholder ownership. As relevant, he will prepare written inputs in support of the
assessment and strategy development documents, and arrange documentation of participatory
interactions. The TOR for the International Process Facilitator are, in part, dependent on how
the process itself emerges over the duration of design. It is nevertheless anticipated that these
will include the following:
a. Support the activities of the Zambian Project Facilitator.
b. Oversee organisation of all conferences and workshops. This shall include both
logistical as well as substantive matters, in the latter respect referring to attaining the
objectives of RIU around stakeholder engagement.
135
c. The stakeholder consultative process must focus on meeting the objectives of RIU,
ensuring that the process yields a sound basis for making decisions about coalitions
and platforms. Care must be taken not to accelerate the stakeholder engagement
process such that it undermines the effectiveness of RIU in Zambia. The stakeholder
consultation process must therefore be driven by the needs of the programme, and be
timed to meet the needs of the programme in this respect.
d. Organise all note-taking and report submission associated with all conferences and
workshops.
e. Assist the team with various strategic planning activities.
Process during and after the country assessment and strategy development
General
• Initial review of the proposed way forward by NR International (12 May).
• Initial review of the key elements of the country assessment, aspects of the strategy, and the
proposed way forward by the Innovations Resources Group (IRG) (13 May).
• Discussion of lessons learned from other countries on the way forward with Zambia with
the IRG (13 May).
Assessment Report
• Review of the Assessment Report by key RIU Programme officers.
• Review of the Assessment Report by the IRG.
• Review of the Assessment Report by the SMT.
• Refinement of the Assessment Report following receipt of comments from RIU Programme
officers and the IRG.
Country Strategy
• Review of the Country Strategy by key RIU Programme officers.
• Review of the Country Strategy by the IRG.
• Refinement of the Country Strategy following receipt of comments from RIU Programme
officers and the IRG.
• Presentation of the Country Strategy to the SMT.
• Submission of the Country Strategy to the SMT for review.
• Review of the Country Strategy by the SMT.
• Feedback on the Country Strategy from the SMT.
• Finalisation of the Country Strategy to address SMT feedback.
• Submission of the Final Country Strategy.
Reporting
The team shall report to the Component 1.2 Task Manager.
136
Initially, a series of drafts of the Assessment Report will be prepared and submitted for
consideration, with initial drafts considered by the Country Assessment and Strategy
Development Team, and thereafter by RIU management through the Component 1.2 Task
Manager. The Assessment Report shall be reviewed by the Senior Management Team (SMT) and
the Innovation Resource Group (IRG). Following receipt of comments from the SMT and the IRG,
the Assessment Report will be finalised. The Assessment Report does not need to be accepted in
final version prior to work beginning on the Country Strategy.
A separate Country Strategy Report will be prepared and submitted for consideration, with initial
drafts considered by the Country Assessment and Strategy Development Team, and thereafter by
RIU management through the Component 1.2 Task Manager. The Country Strategy Report shall
be reviewed by the Senior Management Team (SMT) and the Innovation Resource Group (IRG).
Following receipt of comments from the SMT and the IRG, the Country Strategy Report will be
finalised.
Following acceptance of the two reports, the two will be merged into a single document. This
single document shall be no longer than 40 pages, comprising approximately 25 pages for the
assessment component, and 15 pages for the strategy. It is possible that this will mean shortening
each of the two separate reports for merger, at which time new annexes would be created to
include this information.
137
General Terms of Reference for the Team
1. Each team member will make contributions towards relevant sections of the Assessment
Report. This will be provided, as possible, directly into electronic copies of the report. Draft
inputs are due by mid-June, and final inputs by the end of June, following the key informant
workshop.
2. Each team member will prepare a specialist sub-report as an annex to the Assessment Report.
Draft inputs are due by late June, with final inputs by mid-July.
3. Each team member will make contributions towards relevant sections of the Country Strategy.
This will be provided, as possible, directly into electronic copies of the report. Draft inputs are
due by mid-July, with final inputs by the end of August. This will include assisting with some
aspects of operationalisation of the strategy, associated with advice and inputs on:
a. The establishment and operations of the Secretariat.
b. Advice on the establishment of a National Innovations Coalition (NIC).
c. The establishment and operations of the NIC (if one is established).
d. The identification of activities for the Process Facilitator for implementation (with
particular inputs from MIL).
e. The elaboration of platforms as possible prior to development of the
implementation plan.
4. Each team member will prepare a bibliography of documents consulted, using the format
provided by the Team Leader in May.
5. Each team member will prepare a list of interviews conducted.
6. Each team member will prepare brief notes from interviewed conducted.
7. Each team member will support the work of the two Zambian consultants by advising on
information needs, strategies to collect data, identification of gaps, and offering direct support
to the consultants as possible.
Terms of Reference for the Zambia Assessment and Strategy Development Team Leader and
Poverty and Livelihoods Specialist (David Cownie)
1. In consultation with the C1.2 Task Manager and the RIU Zambia Task Manager (1) identify
consultants for the design team and (ii) develop the Terms of Reference for the Team members
2. Develop the approach for the assessment and strategy development process
3. Lead the team in:
i. Planning the assessment and strategy development process
ii. Undertaking the assessment
iii. Conceptualising the strategy
iv. Developing the strategy
v. Drafting the reports at the different stages
vi. Presenting the draft reports to the in-country stakeholders, the IRG and the SMT
138
As the Social Scientist on the team, ensure that:
vii. socio-economic aspects (especially gender and poverty) are mainstreamed in the
assessment
viii. formulate the strategy on how socio-economic considerations should be addressed
in the Zambia Programme
Terms of Reference for the Innovation Systems Specialist (Ebbie Dengu)
The innovation systems approach is central to the RIU Programme. The primary roll of the
Innovation advisory is to strengthen all aspects of “innovation thinking” within the Zambia
assessment and strategy. The advisor will:
1. With the backstopping of the C1.2 Task Manager and the RIU Southern Africa Task Manager
ensure that the whole team translates innovation system thinking in all aspects of the
assessment and strategy. This shall involve identifying and providing access to relevant
literature on innovation for the use of the team and the stakeholders
2. Undertake a general mapping of the national innovation context for pro-poor natural
resources-based development in Zambia
3. Assess at the general level the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats for enhancing
the use of natural resources for pro-poor innovation
4. Outline a possible future trajectory of the innovation systems in Zambia
5. Participate in the process of identifying the opportunities for intervening in the innovation
system in ways that can, within the RIU timeframe, generate the maximum benefits for the
poor and especially strengthen the demand side for research knowledge
6. Participate in prioritisation of the opportunities identified and in particular provide the
innovation systems perspective in the process
7. For the priority opportunities identified lead in deepening the innovation sub-system
pertinent to them and identifying areas for development of innovation platforms
8. Participate in the conceptualisation and developing an overarching strategy for the
approaches that should be used to bring about the emergence of institutional arrangements
that can be effective in nurturing an innovation systems approach to enhancing demand for
RNRRS and other research outputs in the Zambian context
9. In the stakeholder interactions that the team may hold, ensure that participants develop an
adequate and shared understanding of the innovation systems approach
10. Work closely with the Zambian resource person on natural resources and policy/institutional
analysis and produce a joint assessment report on the policy, institutional arrangements and
innovation systems for pro-poor natural resources-based development in Zambia
139
Terms of Reference for the Communications and the Information and knowledge services
markets Consultants (Sarah Carriger and Steen Joffe, respectively)
The RIU has a specific definition for Information and Knowledge Service Markets (IM) which is:
Information and Knowledge Service Markets are financially (and otherwise)
sustainable arrangements to enable many-to-many exchanges of information and
knowledge for innovation based on public/private market making collaborations and
dynamic private sector business and ICT service models.
The programme aims to show how information markets can be strengthened, by exploring the
following hypothesis:
Information and knowledge services that will support programme-poor innovation
can be stimulated through market-making arrangements and improved financial (and
other) incentives.
The RIU also has a communication strategy that has been agreed with the Client (DFID). This
major cross-cutting strategy aims to demonstrate how supporting improved access to (research)
information and use of appropriate communication channels by infomediaries, combined with
addressing the incentives for demanding information by users can stimulate wide-scale uptake of
research outputs. This approach includes elements of improved marketing of appropriately
packaged research products for discreet audiences including practitioners, decision makers and
the general public and the use of innovative channels for reaching large numbers of resource-poor
communities and associated networks.
The scoping work on communication and IM should be seen as components of the wider Zambia
agricultural innovation systems. The assessment of the wider system maps relevant actors and
initiatives from the perspective of potential coalitions /partnerships and innovation platforms. The
communication and Information markets analyses have a similar starting point but focus explicitly
on all factors that influence the flows of information and knowledge between these actors. The
analysis embraces both ‘enabling’ institutional factors (and lack of them) including the transaction
costs of information exchanges and structural aspects of the agricultural knowledge economy; and
the institutional arrangements by which information and knowledge flows within the AIS. Within
this framework, the IM and Communications Consultants on the team shall have the following
TORs:
Shared TORs
1. Mapping the main actors, national potential and existing capacity for multi-actor
communication and IM relating to agricultural innovation relevant to the poor. In addition
to the traditional channels, he should make special effort to look for channels and
140
partnerships that may not be obvious or currently operating in the market, but could have
potential to do so i.e. look for innovators.
2. Through consultations with a range of stakeholders including but not limited to key public
and private agencies involved in or supporting research & technology generation,
extension and other rural services, (rural) telecommunications and ICTs, as well as
potential intermediaries, and demand-side farmer/community based organizations:
i. Identify the means by which different elements of the agricultural innovation
system ‘talk to each other’ and exchange information and knowledge, and identify
the constraints and opportunities in doing this.
ii. Identify the linkages that exist between the various actors and the rural
communities and public and private rural development initiatives
iii. Identify and characterise the communications sector, the current trends and factors
influencing its development.
iv. Identify the ‘Knowledge generators’: public and private research and higher
education bodies, and the regional/international frameworks/networks within
which they operate.
v. Identify the public and private intermediary ‘information and knowledge service
providers’ (infomediaries) and the constraints and opportunities for them to engage
in information markets
vi. Collect information on other relevant aspects to IM that should be taken into
consideration in developing a communication and an IM strategy for Zambia
3. Produce a background report on the communications and information market context in
Zambia based on the information collected in the activities under points 1 and 2 above.
Specific TORs for the Information Markets Consultant
1. Contribute the information markets perspective during stakeholder interactions that may be
organized as part of the assessment and strategy design process and in general lead the
interactions with stakeholders that are aimed at identifying the predominant blockages/gaps
and opportunities for information markets.
2. Analyse the issues identified within the background assessment (Shared ToR, above) and distil
specific (potential) opportunities for RIU and Zambian stakeholders to be further validated and
worked up during the Strategy development phase. Based on this analysis, contribute towards
relevant sections of the Country Assessment Report and also prepare a specialist sub-report as
an Annex to the Assessment.
3. Recommend a strategy that the RIU should adopt for IM in Zambia. The strategy should be
consistent with the RIU definition of IM and also contribute to validating/ nullifying the RIU
hypothesis on IM. It should also be aligned with the policies of the Government of Zambia. The
strategy should be integrated and consistent with the broader innovation systems approach
and contributions of other specialists. It should aim to be no more than 2 pages in length, but
may be associated with detailed annexes.
141
4. Provide technical inputs and supervision as may be needed in the area of information markets
relating to contributions of Zambian resource persons.
5. Take part in ongoing team and stakeholder interactions as may be needed (consistent with
availability) in order to see the Assessment and Strategy through in to a viable agreed
Programme ready to proceed to detailed implementation planning.
Specific TOR for the Communications Consultant
1. Contribute the communication perspective during stakeholder interactions that may be
organized as part of the assessment and strategy design process and in general lead the
interactions with stakeholders that are aimed at identifying the predominant blockages/ gaps
and opportunities for communication
2. Produce a communication assessment report that analyses the communications issues
identified within the background report (Shared ToR, above) and identifies specific (potential)
opportunities to:
a. Add value to existing activities by increasing the capacity of infomediaries to source
and package information, documenting and publicising successful demand-driven
models, and encouraging improved communication between innovation system actors.
b. Identify partners for communicating RNRSS outputs to potential users – quick wins
which can fuel interest in the programme.
c. Raise awareness of RIU activities and the innovation system and information markets
approach.
3. Recommend a strategy that the RIU should adopt for communication in Zambia. The strategy
should be integrated with the larger RIU Zambia Strategy, particularly the information
markets component, and should be consistent with the global RIU communication strategy and
with the policies of the Government of Zambia. The strategy should not be more than 2 pages
in the main text but may be associated with the detailed annex in 2 above.
4. Take part in ongoing team and stakeholder interactions as needed (consistent with availability)
in order to see the Assessment and Strategy through in to a viable agreed Programme ready to
proceed to detailed implementation planning.
5. Provide inputs into the main Assessment Report and the main Country Strategy.
Terms of Reference Zambian Resource Person on Natural Resources and Policies/Institutions
Be a resource for all the team on:
1. The current status of national agricultural and natural resources system in Zambia including
relevant policies, strategies, programmes and institutional landscape for agricultural and
natural resources research and development
2. Identification of key actors in the agricultural and natural resources innovation system that
services the poor
142
3. Identifying, collecting and participating in the review of key documents relevant to agriculture
and natural resources development
4. Initial validation of the assessment and strategy from a natural resources perspective
5. Interacting with key stakeholders in the agricultural natural resources sectors
6. Political and socio-economic assessment of the Zambian innovation system
7. Identification of key policies, trends and strategies for socio-economic development in the
context of supporting pro-poor innovation
8. Identifying, collecting and participating in the review of key documents relevant to Zambian
national development policies, strategies and programmes
9. Linking with policy makers and the development community
10. Initial validation of the assessment and strategy from a policy and socio-economic perspective
Interactions with key stakeholders
11. Help organise and conduct 10-15 key informant interviews
12. Assist with one district-level field visit
13. Any other duties as may be assigned by the Team Leader
In addition, the Consultant will also prepare additional inputs associated with the following:
14. Provide an overview of the development context in the country
15. To the extent that data are available, indicate the extent to which rural producers are receiving
services, are linked to markets, and provide information on similar variables
16. Outline any challenges that may face RIU in terms of issues such as dependency, the lack of
space for local initiative, and challenges facing working directly with rural households
17. Outline any opportunities that RIU may support in terms of local initiatives
18. Give an overview of the socio-economic and environmental aspects of the assessment
19. Review the Assessment Report and the Country Strategy with an eye to environmental issues
20. Help organise and conduct 10-15 key informant interviews. The focus should be on NGOs
with an eye towards how RIU can link with NGOs as possible partners to ensure that the poor
and disenfranchised are engaged in platforms as partners with influence
National Resource Person on Cross-Cutting Issues (Gender, Poverty and Livelihoods)
1. Assemble relevant materials and provide electronic and hard copies to the Team Leader
(checked against the documents already held by the team)
2. Provide an overview of rural livelihoods, and the diversity of livelihoods across the country. It
is especially important to ensure that the report includes a discussion of changes over time,
and what the current situation is
3. Outline gender roles in terms of rural livelihoods, and indicate diversity in this respect across
the country
143
4. Describe linkages between agriculture and other aspects of rural livelihoods (e.g., forestry,
community-based natural resource management, eco-tourism, environment, small enterprises,
trading, rural-urban linkages and the formal economy, etc.)
5. Identify key trends, polices and strategies relating to gender, poverty and the environment
6. Identify and collect key documents relevant to gender, poverty, environment and rural
livelihoods
7. Prepare a specialist sub-report on cross-cutting issues
8. Review the Assessment Report and the Country Strategy with an eye to gender, poverty, and
rural livelihoods issues
9. Any other duties as may be assigned by the Team Leader
Top Related