civil society and value chains v4
DESCRIPTION
Studies of Danish NGOs promoting income generation and pro-poor growth highlight that there is a widespread uncertainty about the role of NGOs in private sector development and to which extent the civil society strategy can allow NGOs to engage with market actors in their efforts to alleviate poverty (CISU 2012; NGO Forum 2012). Also there is a sense that the private sector is the opponent to development rather than a necessary source of income to the poor themselves. This paper seeks to clarify the role of the Danish civil society in the area of income generation and pro-poor growth based on existing policies and studies and particularly on the overall approach of value chain development (VCD) and making Markets work for the Poor (M4P). The paper starts out by examining the civil society strategy of the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs which forms the basis for public NGO financing in Denmark. The assessment of the Danish policy environment includes extensive reference to a paper on the role of civil society in pro-poor growth initiatives prepared by CISU, an umbrella and fund for smaller Danish NGOs. Secondly, a couple of studies on the experiences of Danish NGOs working with the private sector are presented. Starting from a short reference to the role of NGOs in the area of microfinance, the paper then presents the role of the NGO in the development of pro-poor value chains including the planning and analysis process. Interventions are further specified in terms of a number of areas in which NGOs can work with lead firms and small producers and how to organize farmers in value chains. The paper also touches a number of ways that NGOs can ensure that working with the private sector indeed benefits the very poor. Finally, I would like to stress that this short paper is only a presentation of relevant policies and practices in the area of value chain development as seen from the perspective of the civil society in Denmark. It hopes to provide an overview but is not an analysis or a review as such.TRANSCRIPT
Civil Society and Value Chains
An overview of policies and practices
Edited by Peter Blum Samuelsen
Based on materials from Action for Enterprise, International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movement, Practical Action and World Vision International
October 2013
2
Table of Contents
Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1
The Civil Society Strategy ........................................................................................................ 1
The Danish experience ............................................................................................................. 3
The role in microfinance ..........................................................................................................4
The role in value chains ........................................................................................................... 5
Participatory Market System Development ........................................................................... 6
Areas of intervention ............................................................................................................... 8
Organizing producers .............................................................................................................. 9
Very poor producers ............................................................................................................... 10
References: ............................................................................................................................. 14
1
Introduction
Studies of Danish NGOs promoting income
generation and pro-poor growth highlight that
there is a widespread uncertainty about the role of
NGOs in private sector development and to which
extent the civil society strategy can allow NGOs to
engage with market actors in their efforts to
alleviate poverty (CISU 2012; NGO Forum 2012).
Also there is a sense that the private sector is the
opponent to development rather than a necessary
source of income to the poor themselves. This
paper seeks to clarify the role of the Danish civil
society in the area of income generation and pro-
poor growth based on existing policies and studies
and particularly on the overall approach of value
chain development (VCD) and making Markets
work for the Poor (M4P).
The paper starts out by examining the civil society
strategy of the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs
which forms the basis for public NGO financing in
Denmark. The assessment of the Danish policy
environment includes extensive reference to a
paper on the role of civil society in pro-poor
growth initiatives prepared by CISU, an umbrella
and fund for smaller Danish NGOs. Secondly, a
couple of studies on the experiences of Danish
NGOs working with the private sector are
presented. Starting from a short reference to the
role of NGOs in the area of microfinance, the
paper then presents the role of the NGO in the
development of pro-poor value chains including
the planning and analysis process. Interventions
are further specified in terms of a number of areas
in which NGOs can work with lead firms and
small producers and how to organize farmers in
value chains. The paper also touches a number of
ways that NGOs can ensure that working with the
private sector indeed benefits the very poor.
Finally, I would like to stress that this short paper
is only a presentation of relevant policies and
practices in the area of value chain development
as seen from the perspective of the civil society in
Denmark. It hopes to provide an overview but is
not an analysis or a review as such.
The Civil Society Strategy
The objective of the Danish Civil Society Strategy
(CSS) emphasizes the importance of economic
development and the private sector as a central
force of society which the civil society needs to
relate to and engage with. The Strategy states as
follows:
The overarching objective of Danish development
assistance is to reduce poverty by promoting
sustainable development through - broad-based,
pro-poor economic growth with equal
participation by men and women… The long term
overarching objective of Danish Civil Society
Support is to contribute to the development of a
strong, independent and diversified civil society
in developing countries… A strong civil society
creates a necessary balance in the development of
society that would otherwise be dominated by the
private sector’s economic resources and the
state’s wish to uphold supervisory control and
authority. (MOFA 2008, p 7)
The Strategy emphasizes the need for Danish civil
society to work with the private sector for mutual
benefits:
Denmark will support initiatives promoting
dialogue and cooperation between civil society
organizations and the business community ....
The ambition is not simply that the business
community should finance the organisations’
activities. In many contexts, there is much to gain
by mutual sharing and utilisation of each other’s
competencies within technological, technical,
administrative and management-related areas
(MOFA 2008, p. 17 – 18).
Thus, the strategy clearly emphasize that fulfilling
core human rights to food, education, health etc.
requires overall structural change, including the
market conditions. A rights-based approach for
the poor is not just about the development of
democratic structures and the mobilization for
access to public services. Sustainable poverty
reduction requires that the poor are included as
2
actors in economic development and that
inefficiency and inequality in market structures
are addressed notably through evidence based
advocacy. Such market structures can be caused
e.g. by lack of market information, conflicts
between market actors such as buyers and
transporters, lack of pro poor policies and
infrastructure. This notion is emphasized by key
organizations such as the ILO, and also in the new
Danish development strategy focusing on rights,
social sectors and green growth.
CISU being a Danish umbrella organization (250
members) administering Danida funding under
the Civil Society Strategy on behalf of Danida did a
study in 2012 on “Poverty oriented growth and the
role of civil society” which clearly concludes on the
role of the civil society in pro-poor growth (CISU
2012):
Civil society organizations are contributing to
poverty oriented growth in a number of different
ways. This is nothing new, and it draws on a
tradition of combining different approaches to
development – i.e. a rights based approach with
growth for the target group, or a capacity
building approach with supporting growth for
local cooperatives.
Civil society has a potential that reaches beyond
that of the private sector. Our approach and our
purpose are different – and this gives us a
number of advantages when it comes to working
with marginalised and vulnerable groups which
we simply have a better chance of reaching.
Civil society has a history and a tradition of
building on the local context and starting with
the people and building from there. This
approach is valuable and has a set of inherited
advantages when it comes to promoting income
generation that is distributed and reaches
marginalized people.
Civil society in Denmark and south should
become better at looking at synergies with the
private sector where it makes sense. At the same
time it is important to acknowledge that now all
CSO’s should be collaborating with PS and the
role of “watchdog” which is not that apparent in
this investigation should also be recognized and
supported.
Civil society organizations should build capacity
regarding access to markets and value chain
approaches and entrepreneurship training in
south. CISU could play a role in this.
CISU should continue to work with poverty
oriented growth and through exchanges of
experiences among members and development of
promising practices, enhance and support the
knowledge and initiatives among members.
3
The Danish experience
According to a study done by NGO Forum on the
experiences of Danish NGOs in the area of growth
and employment in 2012, seventeen percent of
Danish NGOs allocates between 20 and 50% of
their budget for activities that seek to promote
growth and employment in developing countries.
Other seventeen percent allocates more than half
of their budget (NGO Forum 2012). The vast
majority of NGOs estimate that there is a growing
trend for private sector orientation in the NGO
environment (72%), the Danish NGOs should do
more to prioritize growth and jobs (67%) and that
the Danish NGOs should seek out business
partnerships in development work (61 %). At the
same time, there is a growing interest among
Danish companies to involve NGOs in their work
in the south.
According to this study, Danish NGOs working
with growth and jobs typically include: (1 ) the
strengthening of civil society organizations in the
South ( 2 ) promotion of income-generating
activities through training and microfinance ( 3 )
cooperate with companies in donor countries (4 )
advocacy around public frameworks and
standards for business operations in the south.
Danish NGOs are not clear about the technical
area and its development in the years to come.
Market knowledge and business development is
far from the Danish NGO competence. Danish
companies are interested in CSR and sustainable
growth, but have difficulties integrating the social
dimension in the south. Danish NGOs often have
problems in cooperation with companies due to
divergent objectives. Few Danish NGOs play an
active role as a watchdog and advocate for
responsible framework conditions and sustainable
growth model.
According to the CISU study mentioned above,
working with poverty oriented growth is not new
to Danish CSO’s and their partners. It is
something that they have been doing for long, as a
natural part of a strategy for working with poor
and marginalized people. The participating CSOs
in this study promotes growth that is distributed;
CS has a multitude of different strategies for
working with poverty oriented growth reflecting
the very diverse context that CS works in; CS in
most cases connects the growth orientation with
working with organization, capacity building,
rights and advocacy; CS has an outreach beyond
that of the private sector. The challenges are that
CS does not always base work with income
generation on proper market analyses and
business plans; CS is not good at measuring how
to contribute beyond the “good stories”; CS can
have difficulties in engaging with the market, and
is in some cases still not perceived as a relevant
and competent stakeholder; CSO’s shall be careful
not to end up as a mere service provider, without
linkage to rights, capacity building (CISU 2012).
.
4
The role in microfinance
Danish Forum for Microfinance has issued some
basic microfinance guidelines (DFM 2011) for its
members. These guidelines are structured into
three sections: provide, promote, protect. They
describe the different roles a Danish organisation
can play when working with microfinance. The
determining factor behind the decision on anyone
of these roles is the analysis of the market demand
and supply situation.
Provide: A provider of microfinance supplies
financial services either directly to the client at the
retail level or via wholesale loans and equity
investments. Providers of microfinance include all
types of organisations providing financial services
to clients as well as the institution providing loan
capital to these organisations in terms of grants,
revolving funds, loans, or equity investments.
Promote: An organisation promoting
microfinance does not provide financial services
neither directly at a retail level nor indirectly as
wholesale loans. Promoters seek to give
beneficiaries access to financial services by
building on existing structures; by linking with an
MFI to reach a specific target group; by improving
service provision through capacity building and
training; or by establishing community based
structures, where financial services are offered
through independent savings and credit groups.
Protect: To protect refers to organisations
seeking to protect microfinance clients by
advocating and supporting implementation of
consumer protection principles; by providing
information and education about the costs and
benefits of financial services; and by advocating
for the establishment of proper national
regulations and support systems.
The figure below is a visualization of this.
Loans disbursed
CLIENT
Savings deposited and
recycled to fund portfolio
(Banks, MDIs, SACCOs, and
savings and credit groups)
IMMEDIATE
PROVIDER
PROMOTE
PROTECT
SECONDARY
PROVIDER
Flow of funds
Other relation
5
Public sector Private sector
Donor Facilitator(project, NGO)
Lead Firm
Lead Firm
Lead Firm
Facilitation of Market-based Solutions
Among VC Actors
MSME
MSME
MSME
MSME
MSME
Legend:
: market-based solutions
: facilitation activities
The role in value chains
NGO Forum's study on growth and employment
also points to international experience amongst
NGOs. The reference is mainly to some specific
British, American and Dutch experiences with
market-based approaches or "Making Markets
Work for the Poor" (M4P), which has wide
international support from donors, including
Danida through The Donor Committee for
Enterprise Development. M4P highlights that the
poor are depending on market systems for their
survival. By understanding why market systems
fail to include the poor on fair terms, NGOs can
facilitate structural improvements in market
conditions and thereby help to ensure sustainable
change to the livelihoods of the poor.
Typically, NGOs fail to carry out in-depth analyzes
of market conditions before they take action
(CISU 1989). This can result in market distortion
e.g. by providing subsidized services that already
exist on the market thereby undermining the long
term availability of such services. Without market
analysis, NGOs also tend to promote products
(crops or handicraft etc.) that fail in the market
and thus create more harm than good to the small
producers. This also goes for microfinance
services which sometimes is provided by NGOs at
subsidized rates and without due assessment of
the clients demand and capacity to repay.
Before considering any form of intervention to
support micro enterprise, NGOs need to analyze
the markets in which their target group is
operating, and on that basis identify sustainable
and market-based solutions that meet their rights
(CISU 1989). NGOs should not be commercial
actors, but may work temporarily as change
agents for sustainable change by supporting
mobilization and organization of the target group
or by facilitating private sector collaboration,
advocacy, technical assistance etc. The following
graph presented by AFE depicts the role of NGOs
as the facilitator (AFE 2012):
6
Participatory Market System
Development
Civil society with the agenda to foster pro poor
economic development can play an important role
at every step in the development of value chains. A
number of leading international NGOs,
government and UN agencies are promoting best
practices in the area of pro poor value chain and
market development. Danish Forum for
Microfinance has teamed up with Practical Action
who has been developing an approach called
Participatory Market System Development
(PMSD) to make markets more inclusive, reduce
poverty on a large scale and protect the
environment (Practical Action 2013).
PMSD has evolved with the frameworks of value
chain development and Making Markets Work for
the Poor (M4P). PMSD is designed to bring all of
the key people within a particular market
together. These people are known as stakeholders,
or market actors. The PMSD process works to
build trust and a joint vision of change between
these market actors, and helps them to collectively
identify obstacles and opportunities affecting their
market system.
NGOs trained in PMSD techniques support the
group of market actors to come up with joint
strategies and action plans that will overcome
these obstacles, and take advantage of potential
opportunities to improve market conditions for
everyone. It is based on Practical Action’s field
experience across Africa, South Asia and Latin
America, and four decades of learning about the
best ways to build sustainable enterprises in rural
contexts. It is based on three broad principles:
participation, systems thinking, and facilitation:
Systems thinking: Markets are complex
systems that adapt to new information
constantly. They are made up of large
numbers of actors who are connected to one
another and whose decisions are influenced
by, and have an influence on each other.
These “complex and adaptive” systems behave
in ways that achieve more than the sum of
their parts. In other words, we cannot predict
how the system will behave by looking at the
individual people or parts; we need to
understand the relationships and the
interactions.
Participation: Applying systems thinking to
markets forces us to recognise that no single
actor can determine how the system will
change. Some very powerful actors can
influence the trends or general direction of
change, but how this change manifests in
reality is a product of the decisions of all the
actors. As a consequence, if we want to
influence how a market system develops, we
need to bring strategic players together to gain
an understanding of the whole system, to
jointly assess blockages and opportunities and
to implement collaborative strategies and
actions that will improve how the system
functions.
Facilitation: Facilitation can be understood
here as creating the conditions for public and
private market actors to drive change
themselves. If we want to become effective
facilitators, we have to therefore avoid
becoming actively involved in the market as
market actors. Facilitators can provide
support, and even use subsidies as a way to
build trust and joint visions, and to contribute
to the introduction and dissemination of new
ideas, practices or business models; however
this must always be as part of an exit strategy.
Good facilitation is at the heart of
sustainability, because it is underpinned by
the ownership that the key actors have over
their own process of change.
The process
The above principles shape how we work on the
ground. Whilst the reality of the process is messy,
organic, and interactive, the following describes
7
the typical sequence of steps that field staff follows
when carrying out PMSD.
The PMSD process starts with field staff analysing
factors such as the potential to reach those most in
need, and a particular market’s potential for
growth, so that they can establish which markets
within an area (for example, dairy or rice) provide
the best opportunities for reducing poverty on a
large scale. The next step is to get a better
understanding of that market system, and the
problems within it, by mapping out how the
system fits together, and researching each
connection and market actor in detail.
Facilitators then work to engage the key public
and private actors within that market who can
drive change – i.e. actually make the system work
better – and find “hooks”, which are essentially
just a set of convincing incentives that can
motivate them to attend participatory workshops
with all the actors within the market chain.
At the same time, the facilitators work to empower
representatives of the marginalised actors so that
they can engage with the rest of the actors in a
meaningful way in these participatory workshops.
By improving their business language and helping
them to better understand the market, it puts
them on a more capable and even footing to have
an influence on how the process of change will
take place.
Within the workshops, tools and activities are
used to help the actors to visualise the market,
and staff facilitate the market actors in
understanding where the opportunities and
blockages are within the market system. It is
through these interactions that the market actors
can develop a joint vision, to build trust, and to
coordinate their actions and collaborate, to
achieve positive changes within the market
system.
As facilitators we support the actors throughout
the process of strategic thinking, planning and
action, in ways that help them to overcome
potential conflict and risks. Throughout this time,
we work to ensure that they steadily gain
ownership of the process, so that once our
intervention has come to an end, they can
continue driving change in the future without us.
These steps are collectively known as the PMSD
Roadmap. The PMSD Roadmap is not a recipe
that has to be followed step by step. Rather, it is
intended to provide practitioners with the tools
and inspiration to build the capacity of their staff
and partners to become effective facilitators of
PMSD. The following flow chart depicts the steps
as developed by Practical Action:
8
Areas of intervention
NGOs can help address barriers to pro-poor
growth through facilitation of change in a number
of areas such as access to markets, sale of products
or services needed by MSMEs, procurement from
MSMEs, access to finance, technology /
operations / product development, management
and organization, resolution of policy and
regulatory issues. Action for Enterprise presents
seven areas of value chain constraints within
which NGOs can facilitate and support Lead Firms
(LFs) or value chain actors to initiate
interventions that can address these constraints
on a long term market based and sustainable
basis. The following list holds a number of
examples of interventions (AFE 2012):
1. Access to Markets
participate in trade shows or exhibitions
visit potential buyers
receive visits from potential buyers
gain certifications (organic, ISO, HACCP)
develop websites / online marketing
conduct market assessments and develop
marketing strategies
2. Sale of Products or Services to MSMEs
develop demand for their MSME products
or services
conduct market research for MSME
markets they sell to
adapt products or services to specific
needs of targeted MSMEs
develop/improve distribution networks
develop alternative financing or payment
mechanisms that promote MSME access
to their products/services
3. LF Procurement from MSMEs
identify MSME suppliers
develop outgrowing operations
build capacity of MSME suppliers through
training, technical assistance,
demonstrations, field days, etc
develop aggregation models /
procurement models (for purchasing in
economies of scale)
develop credit programs for MSME
suppliers
develop seed multiplication programs and
introduction of higher yielding varieties
(seeds can be provided/sold to LF’s
MSME suppliers)
4. Access to Finance
create linkages with financial institutions
work with financial institutions to adapt
their lending products
business plan development
develop tripartite arrangements between
LF, banks and MSME producers they
source from
develop crop insurance schemes with
insurance companies
5. Technology/Product Development
access technical specialists (e.g. product
design, processing, storage, etc.)
conduct learning/exposure visits to
companies with exemplary operations
conduct visits to suppliers of needed
equipment and inputs
develop improved IT skills
optimize product development processes
conduct strategic review of product
portfolios
develop R&D capacity
identify sources of finance for new
equipment and materials
6. Management and Organization
develop improved management
information systems
develop business plans
develop management systems (financial,
inventory, HR, administration etc.)
develop quality control / quality
assurance / traceability systems
build capacity of staff
9
7. Resolution of Policy and Regulatory Issues
establish or revise industry standards for
products or services
establish or revise industry codes of
conduct
create or strengthen coalitions or
associations
lobby for specific changes in policy or
regulation
carry out industry-wide assessments, etc.
Organizing producers
NGOs facilitating pro-poor value chains typically
help producers to organizing themselves in
groups, cooperatives, associations or similar. This
is to ensure economies of scale, low transaction
costs, sharing of risks, collective learning,
bargaining power, as well as to increase social
capital and offset shocks. Producers can also be
organized and contracted by a company or trade
house which buys and sells the product. Both set-
ups have their advantages and disadvantages. The
following outline of pros and cons is from the
Organic Business Guide (IFOAM 2010):
Producer cooperatives
A producer cooperative is a marketing
organization that is owned by the farmers who are
the members of the cooperative. The management
and staff hired by the cooperative organise
production, extension, the internal control system
and sales, and possibly also processing of the
product. As the cooperative is the owner of the
certificates, it is free to sell to whichever buyer it
wants. The advantages of a producer-based set-up
are that farmers are involved in decision making
and that the profits of the operation belong to
them. Equally, in case of losses farmers risk
getting paid less than what had been planned.
As it is their own organisation, farmers could be
expected to adhere to the rules and to sell their
produce to the cooperative only. This is not always
the case. Many cooperatives lack management
skills and entrepreneurial spirit. Due to the
cooperative structure, decision making may be
slow. In addition, there is a tendency that
imbalanced focus is given to farmers' interests,
especially when it comes to pricing, which can put
the profitability and competitiveness of the
operation at risk. Quality differentiated pricing is
not always possible as farmers expect the
cooperative to take all produce for the same price.
Inefficiently managed cooperatives can be quite
expensive intermediaries through which farmers
may earn less than when selling to private buyers.
There is also a risk that farmers do not really have
a say in their cooperative, because board members
may not represent their interests. Not all board
members always understand how the business
works.
Contract farming
A second model is that a company contracts
farmers for the supply of raw material. It
organises input supply, extension, certification
(ICS), first level processing and sales. As the
company feels that they take all the risks, they also
take the profit. Any commercial enterprise will
have a strong risk reduction strategy. What that
means for the farmers is that the company will
buy the produce for as little premium as they can
10
get away with. They may be willing to share some
of the profits after the business is done to build
loyalty among the farmers, but this is the
exception rather than the rule. As a result, farmers
often sell a significant part to other buyers (at
least the low quality part). They may also try to
link up with other companies that can offer a
better price as they did not have to invest in the
development of the farmers.
The advantages of a company set-up are that the
entire operation is strongly focused on
competitiveness and profitability. The owners
therefore have an interest in hiring a professional
director and staff, and decisions are usually taken
in a quick and flexible way. If they are not efficient
and competitive and profitable, they usually do
not stay in business for very long.
Which structure to choose?
Because of the traditional standoff between
farmers and buyers, it is necessary to look for new
ways of cooperating. Unfortunately, there are still
too many mutual apprehensions between
entrepreneurs and companies on the one side, and
farmer organisations and development agencies
on the other side. Many development agencies and
farmer organisations have a very exclusive focus
on the farmers.
On the other hand, companies tend to focus too
much on their own profit rather than on paying
farmers a good price. As their main business is to
trade, they may not be very familiar with
agricultural production. Organizing farmers,
training and guiding them in organic methods,
and building internal control systems which
involve farmers is alien to many entrepreneurs.
These are two very different worlds, and require
quite different sets of skills and mind sets. A
reasonable division of tasks could be that the
producer organisation is in charge of production,
extension, ICS and bulking, and then sells the raw
material to a company that covers trade finance,
packaging, marketing and export. Certain
functions like the provision of inputs, quality
management and first-level grading can also be
initially covered by the company, and then
transferred to the farmer organisation.
Whatever set-up you chose, it is crucial that the
management is professional and experienced,
financial matters are managed in a professional
way, the overall responsibility for the ICS is clearly
defined, skilled staff is in charge of sales and
marketing.
Exit strategy
Development agencies need to have a clear exit
strategy for their support to organic initiatives.
They need to communicate clearly to the partners
in which way and for how long they are going to
support them. The exit strategy needs to ensure
that by the end of the project intervention
businesses are established that are institutionally
and economically sustainable. The support should
therefore not only be limited to funding part of the
operational costs and investments, but also to
ensuring that necessary capacities and skills are
developed, that the entire value chain is
functioning well, and that an enabling
environment is created. Some level of donor
coordination is needed to avoid donors coming in
where others go out because of lack of progress.
Very poor producers
For each step in the value chain development
process, NGOs / civil society has a critical role.
The following list of specific roles comprises
examples of what NGOs could do to facilitate the
process for sustainable pro-poor value chain
development.
World Vision has published a field guide with FHI
360 and USAID support entitled “Integrating Very
Poor Producers into Value Chains Field Guide”.
This guide specifically focus on this step of
addressing the many constraints of very poor
producers (Limited capacity and resources;
Vulnerability and over-indebtedness; Strong risk
11
aversion; Inadequate access to products and
services; Limited mobility and freedom; Unequal
distribution of entitlements; Limited knowledge of
market; Social exclusion/lack of empowerment.
The guide includes lots of ways of working with
producer groups helping very poor producers to
overcome barriers to market entry, share assets,
information, and risk, as well as obtain easier
access to a variety of services and inputs.
Operating as part of a group can build the
confidence necessary to be active participants in
markets (WVI 2012).
A. Effective buyer and supplier relationships
The NGO should facilitate linkages with buyers
and suppliers that:
facilitate the development of long-term, win-
win business relationships, rather than
focusing on increasing once-off sales
facilitate continued access to appropriate
information – such as what appropriate
quality standards and specifications are and
how to meet them, knowledge on how to use
inputs most effectively, or how to use specific
equipment to improve a product in a way that
the buyers want
facilitate beneficial embedded service
arrangements – such as linkages to businesses
that prepay for crops before they are
harvested to reduce initial cash needed by
very poor producers
support everyone in getting higher profits,
more stable income, or more consistent
income – such as ensuring that producers can
earn a living from what they get paid while
buyers are still able to make enough profits to
stay in business
support processes that increase trust – such
as taking small steps to slowly demonstrate
trustworthiness from both sides
B. Embedded support from buyers and
suppliers
Support services provided by buyers and
suppliers to very poor producers in return for
their business are known as ‘embedded
services.’
Buyers provide a much-needed service to
producers, with the expectation that the
producers will sell the higher quality products
in return.
Suppliers provide a much needed service to
producers, with the expectation that the
producers will buy their inputs, resulting in
increased sales.
Producers adopt the new technology or
practice, or make the new investment, feeling
secure that they will have a market in which to
sell their improved goods at a fair price.
These services aren’t entirely without cost:
buyers and suppliers will cover their costs by
paying a slightly lower price for the products
or charging a slightly higher price for the
inputs.
If done well, embedded services can be a very
useful win-win situation for producers and
buyers in terms of access to finance, training
and skills building assistance, certification /
compliance and technical assistance, market
access, assured supply and demand,
equipment access and maintenance.
C. Trust between very poor producers and
their buyers and suppliers
Trust can be built through:
Continuous dialog between producers and
other market actors
Low risk and early return activities to show
that each side will follow through on
commitments.
Incrementally expand depth and outreach as
stakeholders become more open.
Repeated exposure to other businesses and
cross visits between each partner in the
relationship
Contracts: Formal, written agreements that
stipulate all aspects of the business
relationship
Checks and balances: If there are government
or NGO officials that very poor producers can
go to if they feel taken advantage of by
suppliers or buyers, then they may feel more
trust
12
Recognise that it takes time: Building real
trust and long-term business relationships
often take years.
Price incentives, payment terms, and other
support for producers
Loans to producers: Providing loans and
training to farmers will tie them to the
contract. Loans are used by the producers to
buy inputs, and training is provided by the
buyer up front. When it is time to sell, farmers
are obligated to sell to the buyer because of
the loans they received.
D. Learning & information flow to and from
buyers & suppliers
Ensure access to explanation and
interpretation of information.
Ensure information is presented visually
where appropriate.
Support access to other selling options.
Support system that provides ongoing,
updated information.
Facilitate access to appropriate
communication technology where
appropriate.
Support access to information in close
proximity to producers.
E. Working with the private sector
NGOs should select Lead Firms that have the
following qualities: They should ideally be lead in
innovation and technology; have links to large
number of poor producers; able to provide
technical assistance, credit, inputs, and other
support as part of the business relationship. The
LF is financially stable, can make the needed
investments, and are willing to be patient in
waiting for results to materialize. They have
strong demand for their products to ensure a
steady market for the producers; are respected
thought leaders in the business community; have
a good business reputation; can influence others
in the industry to enter into similar relationships
with producers; have shown interest in working
with very poor producers.
NGOs can use smart subsidies in order to build
capacity or incentivize other businesses to provide
products and services to very poor producers on a
long-term, sustainable basis. Types of subsidies
include: Cost share, Vouchers, Community-level
assets, Cash or asset transfers. Subsidies should
ideally be unknown to the producers, mimic real-
life market interactions, gradually withdraw or
phase out (e.g. slowly decreasing value of
vouchers), decrease risk to businesses of taking on
full cost or taking time to build demand for
products, only used when absolutely necessary,
used to increase the supply of and demand for
products and services, used to build human and
social capital to enable the very poor to start
participating in markets etc.
Market offer – dialogue and Partnering with the
private sector: Practitioners often need to
facilitate initial relationships between producers
and their buyers or suppliers. This involves
identifying key businesses to partner with, sharing
the vision of a partnership, and supporting the
initial steps in partnering. This initial support
could comprise some type of shared investment by
the NGO in order to incentivize businesses to start
acting in a certain way or taking on certain roles.
Approaching businesses about this type of
investment and partnership is often referred to by
practitioners as “making a market offer.”
Contracting for very poor producers with their
buyers and suppliers in the form of immediate
sale, forward contracting, regular sub-contracting,
outgrower schemes, contract farming etc. Such
contracts should produce positive results quickly,
strengthen social relationships (e.g. savings
groups), include a clear understanding of
expectations and how relationship will work, take
into account informal rules and norms.
F. Effective producer-to-producer linkages
Linkages between producers can include linkages
promoted by a leading producer, or linkages
through formal producer groups, informal
producer groups, or cooperatives / federations.
NGOs should ensure that producers encouraged
13
and incentivized to link with other producers to
leverage easier and cheaper access to buyers,
suppliers, and support through benefitting from
economies of scale; improve bargaining power by
negotiating with traders or transporters as a
group, or exerting increased bargaining power
when they buy or sell in bulk; lower costs (for
buyers and for the producers), through sharing
transportation costs to be able to access more
formal buyers, and by-pass informal traders, who
often pay very low prices, or deliver products from
multiple producers to one central point; improve
quality control by obtaining support in meeting
appropriate quality standards to increase
efficiency; increase production because they can
afford the necessary inputs through bulk-buying;
access savings or credit such as lump sums of cash
through savings or credit, or loans from financial
institutions; purchase equipment and services
together etc.
G. Increase trust
Within a producer group setting, encourage clear
communication of members’ roles and
expectations, clear understanding of the group’s
goals and vision; shared vision of a business plan;
conducting business-like meetings, following a
clear agenda and having written minutes; regular
rotation of group leadership to lessen potential for
corrupt practices.
H. Addressing limited ability to take on risk
Encourage multiple sources of income, so that if
one fails, or is not as lucrative at a certain time,
there will still be income coming to the family
from another source; promote crops for
consumption and the market; start with small, low
risk activities; connect to markets with low
barriers to entry and low risks; focus on activities
with short-term, frequent returns, rather than
having long periods without income etc.
I. Addressing limited access to resources
NGOs need to work through local businesses and
institutions to allow very poor producers to access
provisions from safety net programs – such as
advocacy with government or NGOs to include
extremely poor families in their safety net
programme; form groups to access government
services – such as Ministry of Agriculture
extension programs; use in-kind rotating schemes
such as seed banks or animal banks. At harvest
time or after reproduction of animals, the initial
beneficiary has to ‘pay back’ the assets received,
with interest, to other members of the community
etc.
J. Addressing lack of confidence
Choose initial activities that are simple, have a
high chance of success; foster social relationships
that can be called on in times of need, building on
what already exists to improve self-esteem,
confidence, and opportunities for reciprocity,
rather than assuming social exclusion. Build basic
skills such as training in functional literacy and
numeracy that build confidence and prepare very
poor producers to better participate in markets;
build understanding of the market such as
building group capacity to access and maintain
information on prices, trends, and buyers to
improve confidence in bargaining with buyers.
K. Addressing exclusion of women
The NGO can try to reduce the cultural barriers to
women’s participation by sharing market
information using communication channels used
by women; identify labour-saving technologies;
encourage community discussions amongst men
and women about gender inequalities and the
barriers for women; promote value chain selection
that favours women’s participation with lower
barriers to entry; link women with support
structures and networks that build their social
capital, skills, and business confidence; facilitate
women-only meetings where appropriate if it is
not possible to create women-only groups etc.
14
References:
AFE 2012: Value Chain Program Design:
Promoting Market-based Solutions for
Micro, Small, and Medium-Scale Enterprises
(MSMEs)
CISU, 2012: Poverty oriented growth and the role
of civil society - Report based upon CISU’s Danish
member organizations experiences
DFM 2011: Danish Forum for Microfinance,
Microfinance Guidelines, Lone Søndergaard,
IFOAM 2010: The Organic Business Guide,
Developing sustainable value chains with
smallholders
NGO Forum, 2012: Vækst og Beskæftigelse.
Undersøgelse af danske miljø- og udviklings-
NGOers erfaringer med vækst og
beskæftigelsestiltag og eksempler til inspiration
Practical Action 2013: The PMSD Roadmap –
facilitating market systems. See also website:
http://practicalaction.org/pmsd
Project Counseling Services 2000: Handbook on
Income-Generating Activities for the use of
Danish NGOs and their partners in the South
Project Counseling Services 1989: Review of
Income Generation activitis of Danish NGOs
WVI 2012: Integrating Very Poor Producers into
Value Chains Field Guide