improving tree product marketing and extension for smallholders
DESCRIPTION
Improving tree product marketing and extension for smallholdersTRANSCRIPT
GRP3 Improving tree product
marketing and extension for smallholders
GRP3 Improving tree product marketing and extension for smallholders
Our four themes/challenges and leaders:
Value chain analysis and development: How can value chain analyses better inform market actors for improved marketing strategies and performance? Amos Gyau
Standards and certification systems: How and under what circumstances can standards and certification help the poor and contribute to environmental services? Dagmar Mithöfer
Enterprise development: How can rural enterprise development better contribute to developing value chains and strengthening livelihoods for the poor and women? Jason Donovan
Innovative extension approaches: How can innovative extension approaches foster entrepreneurship and improve farmers’ access to Information and capacity to innovate? Steve Franzel
Farmers
ConsumersValue chainEnterprise
viability
Processing,value added Standards
Technology
Livelihoods
Environ-ment
Cooperatives
Extension
governance
Conceptual Framework for Agricultural Extension
Germplasm and other
inputs
Knowledge and
informationHuman
capabilities
Product Demand
Policy support
Enabling environ-
ment
Institutional Develop-ment and
linkages
Farmers and farming systems
Improved productivity
Improved livelihoods
Highlights• GRP3 Writeshop-Planshop, January, 2011, Nairobi, brought together 25 staff
from 5 regions to review draft journal articles and plan research.• We are co-organizers of the annual Global Forum for Rural Advisory Services
(GFRAS) and the CTA-GFRAS-FARA international conference on agricultural extension in November
• New projects – Assessing innovative extension approaches funded by MFA Finland,
beginning 2012 in EA and WCA– Sustainable Suluwesi funded by CIDA Canada, beginning 2012 in SEA– Improving smallholder market participation, phase 2 funded by Ford in EA– Toolkit for assessing poverty impacts of value chain development Ford in LA
2011 Publications of wide interest
Nang’ole EM, Mithöfer D and Franzel S. Review of guidelines and manuals for value chain analysis for agricultural and forest products. ICRAF Occasional Paper No. 15.
Kiptot, E. and Franzel,S. Gender and agroforestry in Africa: Are Women Participating? ICRAF Occasional Paper No.13.
Mithöfer D Framework for economic impact assessment of production standards and empirical evidence. In Mithöfer and Waibel (Eds) Vegetable Production and Marketing in Africa. CABI
Tool for assessing the poverty impact of value chain development
Tool for assessing the poverty impact of value chain development
Problem: Persistent rural poverty, limited options for adding value to primary production
Solution: Value chain development
But…does value chain development live up to expectations for poverty reduction?
– We don’t know!
– Existing tools measure success based on few indicators (price, output), with limited attention to causality
– Asset-based assessment tools can provide insights into changes in productive capacities and resilience
Collaboration with the Ford Foundation for tool development
Collaboration with the Ford Foundation for tool development
Build partnerships for tool design and testing in Africa, India, and Latin America: Bioversity, MEDA, Swisscontact, Technoserve, CIP, LRW, CRS, local NGOs
Phase 1: 2009-2010– Build consensus about conceptual and methodological
base for tool design– Draft tool (version 1)– 12 case studies
Phase 2: 2010-current– Revise tool (version 2) – 11 case studies– Identify lessons learned– Revise tool (final version)
Case study: certified coffee, NicaraguaCase study: certified coffee, NicaraguaCase study context
Soppexcca: cooperative 500+ members
Strong buyer support for initial organization
$2.1 M support from NGOs during coffee crisis
Strong pre-existing levels of human and social capital at cooperative level
Households recovering from asset erosion during coffee crisis
Methodology
4-year assessment period (2005-2009)
Household level: 292 interviews, key informants
Coop level: key informants, secondary info
Clustering for analysis
Case study resultsCase study resultsHousehold level
Cluster 1 (25%): limited asset building
Cluster 2 (58%): incomplete asset building
Cluster 3 (17%): major improvements in endowments
Cooperative level
Expansion of credit portfolio, staff, infrastructure
But…high risk of asset erosion, social goals limit growth
Implications
Asset thresholds and vulnerability: major factors in determining the ability of the poor to participate
Investments in VC readiness: Pro-poor VCD depends on interventions addressing asset gaps and vulnerably
Lessons learned in tool designLessons learned in tool design
Tool can provide meaningful insights for improved value chain design
But …addressing changes over time and at two levels adds depth and complexity
…and many case study teams were reluctant to critically assess the interventions
Tool is not an all-in-one solution: need for complementary tools (e.g., gender issues)
Tool best for in-depth assessment : potential need for lighter tool as entry point
The road ahead…The road ahead…Products for 2011:
Final version of assessment tool (Nov 2011)
Edited volume of case studies (Dec 2011)
Journal articles in progress:
Donovan & Poole: Inter. J. of Ag. Sustainability
Stoian et al.: Enterprise Dev. and Microfinance
Donovan & Poole: World Development
Proposals under consideration:
Chain assessment and monitoring tool (CATIE, SFL, ICRAF, CRS)
Follow up work to current tool and development of other tools (ICRAF-CATIE)
Producers’ motivation for collectiveaction in kola in Cameroon
Amos Gyau
Background• Collective action defined as “an action taken by a group
(either directly or on its behalf through an organization) in pursuit of members’ perceived shared interest” has been promoted as important to link farmers to markets.
• Despite its demonstrated benefits, not all producers are involved in the collective initiatives.
Objective Examines producers’ motivation towards collective action in the production and marketing of kola in the Western highlands of Cameroon
Why do we have to understand farmers’ motivation?Understanding of farmers’ attitudes, opinions and motivation would enable promoters to design more effective messages and techniques which can enhance farmers’ decision to adopt and get committed to collective action
Methodology:
• Technology acceptance model was used as framework for analysis
• Interviews with 216 farmers who have been involved in Collective action
• Data analysed using structural equation modelling (SEM) with partial least squares software
Theoretical frameworkTechnology Acceptance Model
External values
Perceived usefulness
Perceived ease of use
Attitude Behavioural intention
System Usage
Collective Action Behaviour Model
Perceived usefulness of CA
Perceived ease of use of CA
Behavioural intent
Intrinsic motivation
H1 +
H2 +
H3+
H4 +
H5 +
ResultsTable 5: Results of the structural model
Hypotheses Constructs Expected sign Path coefficients
H1 IM-->PU + 0.2278** Accepted
H2 IM-->PEU + 0.5086** Accepted
H3 PEU-->PU + 0.6667** Accepted
H4 PU-->BI + 0.1592 Not accepted
H5 PEU-->BI + 0.5411** Accepted
**=Significant at 1%
Key lessons and implications
Lessons learned• Intrinsic motivators are important to enhance group activities• Ease of involvement is necessary to facilitate acceptance• Perceived usefulness (PU) does not significantly influence
behavioural intentionKey implications• Economic benefits are not enough to enhance farmers’ intention
and subsequent adoption of group activities• The marginal cost (additional work/efforts) involved in group
activities should not outweigh the marginal benefits