post-activity assessment

This document was produced for the United States Agency for International Development by Social Impact, Inc. under USAID Contract/Order No. AID-268-C-15-00001. It was prepared by Bashar Berro with the support of Carine Khoury, Joanna Khater, and Samar Safar from Social Impact, Inc. Note: Limited redactions have been made to this version of the report in accordance with the principled exceptions to the presumption in favor of openness established in OMB Bulletin 12-01, “Guidance on Collection of U.S. Foreign Assistance Data.”

POST-ACTIVITY ASSESSMENT LEBANON INDUSTRY VALUE CHAIN DEVELOPMENT (LIVCD) FINAL REPORT

January 2021

POST-ACTIVITY ASSESSMENT LEBANON INDUSTRY VALUE CHAIN DEVELOPMENT (LIVCD) FINAL REPORT

January 2021

Prepared by Social Impact, Inc. for the United States Agency for International Development under USAID Contract/Order No. AID-268-C-15-00001: Performance Management and Support Program for Lebanon (PMSPL II).

This document is not available in print. Documents of this nature are made available to the public through the Development Experience Clearinghouse repository (dec.usaid.gov). For additional information, please contact:

Social Impact, Inc. Corporate Office 2300 Clarendon Boulevard Arlington, VA 22201 Tel: (703) 465-1884 Fax: (703) 465-1888 [email protected]

Or

Social Impact, Inc. Lebanon Office Arz Street Librex Bldg. Bloc B – 3rd Floor Zalka, Metn, Lebanon Tel: +961-1-879260

DISCLAIMER

The authors’ views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government.

Cover Photo: PMSPL II consultant (right) speaking to an LIVCD beneficiary in Menjez

Photo Credits: All photos by PMSPL II

mailto:[email protected]

i | LIVCD POST-ACTIVITY ASSESSMENT USAID/LEBANON JANUARY 2021 - FINAL REPORT

CONTENTS Acronyms ...................................................................................................................................................................... ii

Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................ 1

LIVCD Description ............................................................................................................................................... 1

Purpose .................................................................................................................................................................... 1

Data Collection Methods ......................................................................................................................................... 2

Document Review................................................................................................................................................. 2

Key Informant Interviews (KIIs)......................................................................................................................... 2

Field visits / Direct Observations ...................................................................................................................... 2

Pome Fruit (Apple) VC – Grant to Brih Cooperative ...................................................................................... 3

Findings .................................................................................................................................................................... 3

Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................................. 4

Avocado VC – Grant to Menjez Cooperative .................................................................................................... 5

Findings .................................................................................................................................................................... 5

Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................................. 6

Beekeeping VC – Grant to Golden Queen Center........................................................................................... 8

Findings .................................................................................................................................................................... 8

Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................................. 9

ANNEXES ................................................................................................................................................................. 10

Annex 1 - Detailed Interview Notes .............................................................................................................. 10

Annex 2 – Site Visit Photos .............................................................................................................................. 16

ii | LIVCD POST-ACTIVITY ASSESSMENT USAID/LEBANON JANUARY 2021 - FINAL REPORT

ACRONYMS AT Assessment Team DAI Development Alternatives, Inc. DEC Development Experience Clearinghouse DV Data Verification ESS Electrostatic Spraying System KII Key Informant Interview LIVCD Lebanon Industry Value Chain Development LL Lebanese Lira MSMEs Micro-, Small-, and Medium-sized Enterprises PMSPL II Performance Management and Support Program for Lebanon II TA Technical Assistance USAID United States Agency for International Development USD United States Dollar VC Value Chain

1 | LIVCD POST-ACTIVITY ASSESSMENT USAID/LEBANON JANUARY 2021 - FINAL REPORT

INTRODUCTION

LIVCD DESCRIPTION

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID)’s Lebanon Industry Value Chain Development (LIVCD) was a $46.2-million activity that was implemented by Development Alternatives, Inc. (DAI) from September 2012 to January 2019. It sought to develop inclusive and competitive value chains (VCs) and raise the incomes of the rural population in Lebanon, including micro-, small-, and medium-size enterprises (MSMEs). LIVCD was comprised of three components:

1) Component One: Initial Assessment—Analyze Prospects and Select Value Chains;

2) Component Two: Value Chain Activities to Increase the Competitiveness of Lebanese Value Chains; and

3) Component Three: Accessing Value Chain Finance.

LIVCD’s implementation commenced in October 2012 with Component One, a six-month phase of VC assessment. First, DAI selected several VCs for in-depth assessment, using the following selection criteria:

1) Competitiveness, i.e., which of the value chains have the potential during the period of the project to be fully upgraded and compete successfully in domestic and international markets;

2) Development impact. i.e., which of the value chains offer broad based positive impacts in the rural sector in Lebanon and have the potential to integrate small and medium farmers and businesses into larger more competitive value chains; this set of criteria also includes gender and youth; and

3) Feasibility, i.e., which value chains offer the opportunity for LIVCD to facilitate positive and real change within the life of the project and within the contract budget.

Following this assessment phase, the project selected eight VCs to target: i) pome fruits, ii) stone fruits (cherries and avocados), iii) table grapes, iv) olive oil, v) rural basket of products (including honey, eggs, pine nuts, and herbs), vi) processed foods, vii) rural tourism and handicrafts, and viii) floriculture. In 2014, floriculture and handicrafts were excluded from LIVCD’s portfolio.

To achieve its objective, LIVCD collaborated with private sector actors within the selected VCs by providing technical assistance (TA), equipment, grants, and access to investment for VC financing to overcome constraints to competitiveness and inclusiveness.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this post-activity assessment is to assess LIVCD’s interventions’ sustainability beyond the project’s lifetime. It looks at interventions related to the pome fruit VC (one grant with the Agricultural Cooperative Association in Brih), the avocado VC (one grant with the Agricultural Cooperative Association in Menjez), and the beekeeping/honey VC (one grant with Golden Queen Center).

This assessment will generate learning to improve the development of outcomes in situations where tangible results were not captured during LIVCD’s lifetime due to a delay in implementation and/or in the completion of activities before the project’s end date. All data collection took place over a three-month period extending from September to November 2020.

This exercise complements several data verification (DV) exercises and two performance evaluations that PMSPL II performed on LIVCD during its lifetime.


DATA COLLECTION METHODS

DOCUMENT REVIEW

The assessment team (AT) first collected documents produced by DAI that are publicly available on the DEC repository, such as case studies, and other documents available on PMSPL II’s server, such as the list of equipment by grant, beneficiary databases, feasibility studies, and progress reports. The AT also reviewed LIVCD-related reports produced by PMSPL II between 2012 and 2019, such as DVs and performance evaluations.

KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS (KIIS)

The AT identified a number of KII candidates from each grant based on initial interviews conducted with the presidents of the cooperatives and on various literature reviews.

The team conducted a total of 16 KIIs, as shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Key Informants by Type and Gender

Type Total

Brih Cooperative Grant President of the cooperative 1 M

Listed as beneficiaries 4 M/1 F

Menjez Cooperative Grant Menjez Mayor/Former president of the cooperative

1 M

Land owners/Farmers 3 M

Golden Queen Center Grant Owner of the center 1 M

Beekeepers / cited as the center’s clients

3 M

Total 15 M / 1 F

(M=male, F=female)

FIELD VISITS / DIRECT OBSERVATIONS

The AT conducted site visits to Brih and Menjez to observe the plots cultivated by the beneficiaries. During the visit to Brih, the AT also checked the equipment delivered by LIVCD to the cooperative. This was not possible during the site visit to Menjez however, as the equipment was no longer present at the cooperative’s premises. The focal point who accompanied the AT on their tour in Menjez said the cooperative had disposed of this equipment.


POME FRUIT (APPLE) VC – GRANT TO BRIH COOPERATIVE The targeted beneficiary for the apple VC is the Agricultural Cooperative in Brih, which received a grant, TA, and training sessions with the aim of reaching and engaging 134 farmers in Brih and the nearby villages.

LIVCD’s assistance started in July 2016 and concluded in August 2017 (13 months). It had a total value of $89,252.20, of which USAID awarded $55,025.15 in the form of TA and equipment (four electric pruning shears, a laptop, a wood shredder, and an electrostatic sprayer).

PMSPL II’s AT visited the Brih Cooperative’s focal point at his house in Brih and explored LIVCD’s interventions at the technical level as well as at the infrastructural level in the nearby neighborhood where he lives and manages his orchards (apple and other fruits). The team also spoke to a number of people from LIVCD’s list of beneficiaries for this grant.

FINDINGS

RELEVANCE

Following the October 2019 revolution, apple farmers who were keeping their apples in storage at that time noticed that apple imports began to decline and the demand for local apples was increasing. The ensuing devaluation of the Lebanese Lira (LL) placed fruit importers in Lebanon in an embarrassing and tough position that led to zero importation of apples in 2020. As a result, many apple farmers sold their produce at acceptable prices both locally and for export. Others preferred to keep their apples in storage in the hope of selling them at better prices in the future.

None of the farmers were able or interested to invest in trellis systems like the ones installed in Brih demo plot, due to the fact that all input materials and fittings are priced in US dollars (USD) and they can’t afford that.

EFFICIENCY

If well monitored and the weather conditions were favorable, apple trees do not require a lot of fertilizers and pesticides to produce fruit. Moreover, medium aged orchards are in an increasing production manner, where all other remaining costs that a farmer pays like labor and fuel are still in LL. In addition, the devaluation of the LL limited and almost stopped all types of fruit imports, including apples from Europe and other countries, which increased the demand locally and made apple farmers in Lebanon more satisfied with the prices and sales returns where they are expected to cover their costs, and the season also expected to be profitable. Regarding the provision of equipment to the cooperative in Brih, the focal point confirmed that around 15 farmers benefitted from each type of the material that had been provided. For different factors, not many farmers were able to benefit from the equipment provided under this grant. One of the main factors is that the cooperative is facing legal issues and internal conflicts among its members that led to the suspension of its work.

EFFECTIVENESS

It can be concluded from the field visits and phone calls that the farmers benefited mostly from the pruning assistance they received from LIVCD, both in terms of technique and equipment (electric shears). However, other services like training on fertilization and irrigation, wood shredders to produce organic fertilizer, and electrostatic spraying systems (ESSs) to cut spraying costs were not as beneficial. This was due to insufficient training tools and follow-up/validation during the project life cycle or to a lack of communication between the cooperative and the beneficiaries (and internal conflicts among the cooperative’s members).


SUSTAINABILITY

The trellis system is very sustainable and successful in general for small farmers like ones in Brih who own orchards averaging one hectare in surface. However, it did not seem like a sustainable approach in Brih as such small-sized orchards need to be maintained and sustained after the adoption of systems, but the initial cost in addition to access to financing was always a challenge in Lebanon for farmers in general and for apple ones in specific. Recently, there might be a window of opportunity for apple growers as demand grew very fast after the crisis, and apple farmers were approached by direct buyers (retailers and exporters) who used to source their apples from wholesale markets before these witnessed a sharp shortage of supply.

CONCLUSION

The provision of trellis systems, shredders, ESSs, and shears supplemented with intensive training on pruning, general management, pesticide reduction, and the production of organic fertilizer proved to be a successful approach in Lebanon in general. But for this intervention in specific, there are two main outcomes to look at and draw conclusions from. First, the Agricultural Cooperative in Brih is currently not operating, and that it was not active for a long period prior to receiving the USAID assistance and also due to intermittent holds and bankruptcies. Second, without access to finance, small farmers are unable to upgrade regardless of whether the validation and follow-up were done or not.

The focal point pushed to get the USAID grant from LIVCD including funds for providing training sessions. However, the results and duration of the grant intervention do not reflect accurately the observations noted on site. Furthermore, the random calls that the assessment team conducted proved inaccurate.

Cooperatives are a good entry point, however, a cooperative’s history should always be assessed and reviewed before working with it. Moreover, follow-up and validation with the beneficiary members should be continuously conducted at all times during the implementation.


AVOCADO VC – GRANT TO MENJEZ COOPERATIVE The targeted beneficiary for the avocado VC is the Agriculture Cooperative in Menjez, Akkar which received a grant (equipment), TA (through experts), and training sessions with the aim of introducing the avocado tree to the region.

LIVCD’s assistance started in December 2015 and concluded in December 2016 (12 months). It had a total value of $160,448, of which USAID awarded $102,608 in the form of TA and equipment (four trimmers, 17 tanks of 6,000- and 10,000-liters capacity, one submersible pump, and one drilling tool for land preparation).

Avocado was first introduced to Lebanon in the 1990s with a focus on coastal areas in the south where the soil was favorable for the growth of the trees. However, the total annual production is still limited, approximating 8,000 metric tons.

Common avocado varieties grown in Lebanon are Ettinger, Fuerte, Hass, Lamb Hass, Reed, Pinkerton, Zotano, in addition to other varieties cultivated on a much smaller scale such as Bacon and Maloma.

Avocado is both a tropical and a Mediterranean tree that originated in Mexico, Guatemala, and Eastern India. It is very sensitive to several factors that might damage it and reduce its fruit production, such as high altitudes, cold winds, hot summers, water scarcity, and soil contaminants. It is also sensitive to soil type and soil pH. As such, when selecting an avocado variety and root stock, these factors should be taken into consideration in order to sustain the production and physiological stability of the tree.

Unlike most fruit trees, the avocado tree’s roots are shallow in comparison to its large canopy and height. They are mostly located in the upper soil levels where they can absorb just enough water to meet the tree’s needs while avoiding deep-ground excess moisture which leads to the destructive phytophthora disease.

LIVCD delivered two batches of equipment to Menjez. The first went directly to the beneficiary farmers and consisted of irrigation pipes and 17 water tanks of 10,000- or 6,000-liter capacity in addition to a submersible pump. The second consisted of ESSs and handheld weed mowers and went to the cooperative to be rented to the beneficiary farmers.

PMSPL II’s AT contacted the cooperative’s former president to arrange three field visits to avocado orchards that benefitted from LIVCD’s assistance in the town.

FINDINGS

RELEVANCE

Avocado is fast becoming a popular fruit in Lebanon, with people becoming more aware of its health benefits and consuming it at an increasing rate.

At just 8,000 metric tons per year, Lebanon’s production of avocado is still limited. As such, the country is unable to meet all the demand from the Gulf countries which usually rises in November and May when African and Latin American suppliers witness shortages.

In the past, exporters used to buy avocado at LL 2,000-3,000 per kilogram ($1.5-2) from the local market and sell it at $3-4 to international markets. In 2020, the export price is still at $3-4, but the exporters are now buying avocado at LL 6,000-8,000 (equivalent to $1 on the black market). While local farmers are satisfied with this new price they’re getting, exporters can propose a different range of price to sell (more flexible price). Local consumers, however, are now finding avocado too expensive.


Since farmers can leave avocadoes on the trees for a long period of time (the fruit doesn’t ripen unless harvested), they consider this fruit as a good investment.

In addition, in terms of relevance, the irrigation equipment delivered by LIVCD was beneficial since avocado trees need regular watering. The ESSs were also a good investment since the trees need to be sprayed with pesticides and foliar fertilizers repeatedly. The same goes for the weed mowers which allow farmers to rid their avocado orchards of weeds that compete with the trees on water and nutrients and reduce fertilization by attracting pollinating bees during the flowering stage.

EFFICIENCY

If well maintained and managed, especially in terms of irrigation and fertigation, an avocado tree can bear in excess of 300 fruits averaging 200 grams in weight each, which means that one tree can easily produce 60 kilos per season, and since the fruits can be left on the tree for a long time, the sales window is extended. In some cases, with careful management and pruning, a tree can bear up to 500 fruits averaging 250 grams in weight each.

LIVCD’s intervention in Menjez lacks proper efficiency due to three main factors: (i) Location: some trees were planted in inappropriate locations, which limited their production and development; (ii) water availability: drought can cause direct damage to the tree in the summer; and (iii) the delivery of equipment to the cooperative, which was not the right choice because beneficiary farmers are not members at cooperative and have no signatory authorization in cooperative’s decisions.

EFFECTIVENESS

Menjez farmers received different technical and equipment support from LIVCD. On the technical level, they were introduced to avocado farming through TA. In terms of equipment, they partially benefited from sprayers and mowers but still they didn’t have any concern resulting from the lack of the equipment’s availability. They also received water tanks, pumps, and irrigation pipes that they are using effectively, with a few adjustments sometimes as the trees grew bigger and their watering requirements changed.

The intervention almost achieved the desired result since the avocado trees in many sites are growing and producing fruit and the farmers are satisfied with their orchards since they are providing them with an additional source of income. However, not all orchards were planted in the right site nor are receiving adequate quantities of water. Equipment provided to the cooperative is no longer available to the farmers because the new cooperative management disposed of all equipment.

SUSTAINABILITY

Avocado farming is a good approach for the area so long as beneficiary farmers maintain good management of their orchards, and new farmers learn from the mistakes made in previous interventions.

Farmers in Menjez have small-sized orchards ranging between 2 and 10 dunums in surface that they mostly cultivate themselves to make a living (some of them also have parallel jobs elsewhere). Avocado can therefore be a good investment for their future especially with the foreseen increase in demand and pricing, locally and regionally.

CONCLUSION

To ensure the success and viability of an avocado tree, there are important factors to take into consideration before planting it such as the root stock, the variety, and the location.


Since avocado is an evergreen tree, it needs little to no pruning and the farmer can monitor its health just by looking at its leaves and canopy. The monthly application of fertilizers coupled with proper irrigation and regular weeding can guarantee a productive orchard.

A farmer who owns one hectare of land hosting 25 avocado trees per dunum can produce 12 tons of avocadoes on average per annum. These are worth around LL 70 million today, a respectable sum to provide for his family especially if he has another business or employment on the side.

In order to continue managing their orchards properly, farmers should be provided with practical guides on fertigation, nutrition, and irrigation after receiving TA from experts.

Seeing as the assisted farmers have kept the irrigation equipment that they received from LIVCD well maintained, it is recommended to grant them other equipment as well such as mowers and sprayers instead of giving these machines solely to the cooperative.

Farmers in rural and relatively distant areas and villages would better produce a fruit that needs no storage and has extended harvest time and window, so they could choose the season that is most profitable for them. Moreover, fruits with a relatively high financial value compared to their weight and volume, like avocadoes, allow farmers to easily cover their operation and logistics costs. For example, transporting 500 kilos of any fruit to Beirut costs LL 150,000. But since 500 kilos of avocado are worth LL 4,000,000, the profit margin remains high as this is only 4 percent of the price. In comparison, 500 kilos of citrus fruit are worth LL 1,000,000, and as such, their transportation cost eats up 15 percent of the price.

Farmers in rural areas should also be introduced to consolidated business (linkage to buyers). They should be put in touch with reputable buyers since those farmers are able to provide the buyers with an adequate supply of avocadoes to meet the demand of exporters and retail chains. This would ensure a market for these farmers’ produce and allow them to increase their profits.


BEEKEEPING VC – GRANT TO GOLDEN QUEEN CENTER Beekeeping has been historically practiced by many rural farmers around the globe. It was commercialized over the years and reached an international scale. There are around 6,000 beekeepers in Lebanon who own 250,000 hives that produce 3,000 tons of honey each year.

Beside the common managerial and marketing challenges that beekeepers face, caring for and ensuring the reproduction of the queen bee remains an important part of honey production. The queen bee produces consecutive generations of female bees that harvest pollen and of male bees (drones) that fertilize potential queen bees.

The queen bee defines the general behavior of the colony, and the characteristics that the worker bees inherit from her (such as resistance, aggressivity, and honey production) determine whether the beekeeping is profitable or not. Queen bees have a short 16-day incubation period (egg to bee) and live for three years on average. This makes importing queen bees from faraway places an unreliable option and favors inseminating queen bees domestically.

The female worker bee has an incubation period of 21 days and lives for up to six months in normal conditions. This is another important reason for enhancing local queen bees in terms of quantity and quality in order to sustain the count of female worker bees. On the other hand, the male bee has an incubation period of 24 days and lives for up to 55 days that it spends inside the hive with the sole role of fertilizing the queen.

LIVCD’s assistance to Golden Queen Center started in May 2015 and concluded in March 2016 (12 months) and had a total value of $167,219 of which USAID awarded $83,530 in the form of TA and equipment related to bee insemination.

PMSPL II’s AT spoke with Golden Queen Center’s owner who also provided us with the contact details of some of his clients whom we later contacted to inquire about their experience with the center.

FINDINGS

RELEVANCE

The introduction of new honey bee breeds like Apis mellifera ligustica and Apis mellifera carnica is highly relevant to the beekeeping and honey production sector in Lebanon, mainly because the local Apis mellifera syriaca bee presents some limitations that have been preventing Lebanon’s honey production from surpassing the yearly 3,000 tons, as many data have shown. Since the syriaca spp bee is aggressive, many beekeepers opt for the less aggressive liguistica and carnica species which are more easily manageable. These new breeds have more than doubled honey production in comparison to domestic species.

EFFICIENCY

LIVCD’s intervention has had limited efficiency since the establishment of Golden Queen Center, mainly for two reasons. First, the center doesn’t have sufficient data about the beekeepers who benefited from the new queen breeds (per KII with the owner) – the owner did confirm though that only four beekeepers had purchased inseminated queen bees during the past year. Second, the newly-introduced Apis mellifera ligustica breed did not demonstrate the needed efficiency, according to the beneficiaries that the assessment team interviewed. Since Golden Queen Center is still actively operating and a new breed – Apis mellifera carnica – has just been introduced (due to liguistica’s defects), efficiency is expected to increase and become more evident as of spring 2021.


EFFECTIVENESS

The main services that Golden Queen Center provided to beekeepers were TA and input material including the Queen bees. Many beekeepers benefited from training sessions and remote assistance upon request and are still receiving support from the center, as confirmed by the KIIs. Despite the limited number of beneficiaries that Golden Queen Center supported, the increase in honey production (cited in the KIIs) confirms that this intervention was effective.

SUSTAINABILITY

Since the current selling price of honey is relatively low in view of the devaluation of the LL and since most needed materials are priced in USD, the sustainability of this intervention is at risk especially if the importation of fraudulent honey (from China for example) is not prohibited. On the technical level, to ensure sustainability, the beekeepers need intensive technical support and follow-up regarding the placement and management of new queens.

CONCLUSION

There are 6,000 beekeepers in Lebanon, the majority of whom produce small to medium quantities of honey per hive. Because introducing new breeds of queens are a must and the first step in developing colonies and thus increasing honey production, LIVCD’s intervention can be considered a successful approach if future USAID projects built on the grant they already offered (and the investment they already made) and continue delivering TA to the beekeepers.

Quality seals are also an important factor to consider because international (and even local) consumers will not purchase Lebanese honey as a niche or gourmet product unless it carried a quality certification.

While the domestic syriaca breed is resistant to climatic factors, its aggressivity limits its management and the expansion of its colonies. The newly-introduced, less aggressive liguistica breed on the other hand has failed to adapt to Lebanon’s climate. The current carnica breed is expected to succeed as it is resistant to mites, can adapt to Lebanon’s climate, and is less aggressive.


ANNEXES

ANNEX 1 - DETAILED INTERVIEW NOTES *Note: The names of the interviewed beneficiaries (except for the direct grantees) are coded with the letters B, M, and G to indicate Brih Coop, Menjez Coop, and Golden Queen Center respectively.

BRIH COOPERATIVE

Insights (Brih Cooperative’s focal point)

The cooperative is not active any more, as the location which was on the main road of Brih has moved to ground floor storage (garage) space under the focal points’ house. Moreover, the focal point didn’t host the evaluation team at the new cooperative location, but at his home, as a clear indication that the cooperative is not functional anymore.

As evaluation team moved to the Trellis farm that LIVCD relied its intervention on, the size of the plot is relatively small and dropped Apples of Monilia (monilia fructigena) were evident, although this is a very common disease which is easy to avoid, and proper interventions by such a specific project should have absolutely resulted in avoiding or absence of such pest.

At the end of the net covered Apple trellis, there is another small Pears trellis plot which is not covered where the focal point claimed here that financing has limited the action of installing covers to the extending part of the Apple Farm. As the evaluation team walked the Apple farm again, they noticed that Apple trees are older than project initiation date, so the focal point confirmed it by stating that the trellis farm was built prior to LIVCD interventions.

Along the walk and chats through the Apple Farm, the focal point repeatedly spoke about clashes in business with nearby farmers/clusters (Example Batloun and Barouk) as well as others in Bekaa, and unintentionally, he asked the evaluation team to guide him for new upcoming USAID projects as he is willing to support and invest in a cooperative in Bekaa and never in Brih cooperative.

As the team crossed the road above the farm, the wood shredder granted by LIVCD was parked and covered. The shredder is intended for organic material production from pruned trees, but the focal point stated that he is offering such services to Citrus farms in South Lebanon. Last but not least noticeable fact, was the LIVCD Ford SUV parked at the entrance of the farm, and the focal point stated that it was offered for free by LIVCD at the end of the project.

Last spot of the tour was back again to the focal point’s house, and at the garage where the new location of the cooperative is supposed to be, there was the electric pruning shears and the Electrostatic Sprayer (ESS) offered by LIVCD as well, with a focus on the shears and less attention on the function of the ESS due to uneasiness of relocating it between orchards, as the focal point stated.

Insights (Random Interview Calls to beneficiaries listed in the LIVCD/Brih Grant database)

The calls from the list of 134 farmers listed as beneficiaries from Brih cooperative interventions were randomly selected, and summary of conducted interviews is as follows:

-B1 (Wrong Mobile Number)

-B2 Has bad experience with Brih cooperative, as he was promised with equipment as a return on his participation and membership with the cooperative, due to the fact that he didn’t join Barouk cooperative and got expectations from Brih cooperative instead. He attended 2 or 3 trainings at Brih offered by LIVCD as part of his commitment.

-B3 from Barouk is a beneficiary from Brih cooperative but didn’t receive a single TA or Training offered by LIVCD, while he did receive an irrigation equipment from another donor through Brih cooperative.

-B4 stated that he received nothing from LIVCD or Brih cooperative, neither invitations to any event although he was listed.


-B5 is a grower of Apples and Olives, stated that he received couple trainings in pruning and organic fertilization, and made efficient use of the electric pruning shears. He also mentioned that he used the ESS only during winter time as he can spray liquid pesticides, but as for other spring and summer powder pesticides, the ESS was not workable or available due to incompatibility with powder as he said.

What was noticeable in this interview, is that he mentioned the training about organic fertilizer, and as the LIVCD offered the cooperative a wood shredder, the farmer was supposed to be making good use out of this shredder and transforming his pruned wood into organic fertilizer, but when asked about achieving this, he stated that he has no space, and that was not understandable as shredded organic wood is placed under trees.

-B6 was just a name on list, where his mother is the owner of the phone number and his father is a member of the Brih Municipality. The Lady upon answering the interview call, has appraised clearly and positively the Brih cooperative activities and anything asked about their implementation for LIVCD development grant, TAs, and Trainings.

MENJEZ COOPERATIVE

Insights (M1 Avocado Farm Field Visit)

The unsuccessful case

This is considered as the unsuccessful case or trial plot. Despite the fact that at this plot lot of varieties are planted (Fuerte, Pinkerton, Hass, and Lamb Hass), the outcome after two years is not encouraging as most of the trees are not growing properly, many are dead, and general overview at the orchard is not satisfactory by evaluation team as well as the farmer himself.

The spacing at the plot is respected and followed, as well as proper ridging at plantation where trees are planted at top of ridge to avoid water logging. The farmer claims that irrigation system installed has no enough water from source, and this led to drought in many periods especially during summers. This is an indication that quantities of water available were not addressed before making a decision on the size of tank or number of trees to be planted.

Another important fact, is that farmer didn’t receive proper or direct guidance and instruction for irrigation, or at least to know how to calculate application versus needs.

The farmer claimed that he didn’t receive any use or service from the ESS sprayers and the weed mowers provided by the project to the cooperative, for a reason that upon delivery of equipment, some beneficiaries took a position with the Municipality for political reasons in the village, so afterwards the COOP which is against the Municipality, refused any offerings or service from LIVCD equipment to farmers in good relation with Municipality and M1 was one of them.

Fertigation and nutrition aspects seems acceptable, although farmer showed misunderstanding of fertigation after project closure which is two years, and this is critical as first two years of Avocado plantation are fertigated different from third year and onwards.

This spot and plot in specific, was subject to cold air circuits during winter, drought and warm micro climate during summer as a result of wrong location assessment in the beginning, as well as some significant ignorance by farmer to many practices which all led to death and shortage in growth for many trees and made the plot to look like not successful.


The mildly successful case

This pilot plot is considered as acceptable plot regardless of evident wrong spacing between trees (4 meter instead of 6 meters), and as claimed by the farmer this was done upon his request as a consideration for speedy winds in his spot and by this way, condensed plantation breaks speedy winds down. Mortality rate in this farm is low, probably less than 10%, and only two varieties are grown there, Pinkerton and Hass.


As Pinkerton don’t grow high as Hass and its canopy is more condensed, the farmer planted Pinkerton on the edge so he could protect the Hass the first few years from wind during critical growth period.

General practices on the farm are well maintained, the farmer is making good use of water from Municipality artificial lake nearby his farm at higher point which makes water available at all times by gravity.

The farmer mentioned that he can’t remember if he made use of the equipment offered by LIVCD to the cooperative, as he claims that might have been for a very short period after the cooperative took a space from Municipality, and refused offering service to farmers who are close to Municipality like M2 in this case, who is a Municipality police member, as he also mentioned that up to his knowledge, equipment are still effectively used by cooperative as a service for farmers who are still in tight relation with the cooperative.

One main and important concern is admitted by the farmer, is the wind especially in the spot where his farm is, as he claimed also it is the worst in Menjez in terms of speed and cold air circuits during winter. This is caused direct damage to production as flowering stage cannot withstand cold wind and lot of potential fruit drop. This is assumed to be a continuous issue for future as this part of Lebanon has all year-round wind circuits from the East and get chilling in the winter.

Another important concern by the evaluation team, is the spacing which will have definite impractical impact in the very near future as trees will grow as a fence and Avocados won’t be able to grow and produce proper sizes or weights even.


The successful case

This pilot plot is considered as a successful Avocado plot as an evaluation by Social Impact team and in comparison to other implemented plots. Two varieties are grown on this plot, Hass and Lamb Hass.

What made this plot be a successful one, is the location on the edge of wild forest cliff, reducing any chance of speedy or cold winds throughout the year, so the growth of the trees is well noticed and the healthy leaves as well as Avocado fruits are evident.

Another factor that made trees perform better, is the topography of the land as it is terraced, and this plays a big role in water drainage and keeping roots safe from serious diseases.

The farmer who is an architect, mentioned that he attended some trainings and technical sessions to know more about this plantation as he is highly interested, and he admitted also that he received the first whole year a service from the cooperative equipment from sprayers and mowers before they stopped offering it.

The spacing and ridging of this plot as well as irrigation and fertigation seem very good, and if the farmer keeps on good management, this plot will keep on producing and growing better.

GOLDEN QUEEN CENTER

Insights (Golden Queen Center’s owner)

The Golden Queen Center received a grant from USAID through LIVCD project in order to produce two types of Queen Bees, the F0 (Inseminated) and F1 (Non inseminated) Queens, and this to import better behavioral Queens which can transfer 100% of its genetics upon insemination.

The center succeeded in introducing two types of Queen Bees to Lebanon, which are the Apis mellifera ligustica and Apis mellifera carnica, as a replacement to domestic Apis mellifera syriaca.

The center is still in operation despite the challenges of lockdowns as preparing a queen needs around 6 weeks and various locations in the country to relocate hives.

November to March is relatively cold in mountains so coastal areas are more suitable, and during hot summer mountains are a better place. Some unexpected conditions happened like this years’ month of May, as hot waves occurred and decreased reproduction and fertilization process of Queen Bees.


Sometimes conditions and climate are not helpful and suitable for Queen Bees and colonies, as this was one of the main challenges of domestic Apis mellifera syriaca and was obvious in new Apis mellifera ligustica as well.

There is a big demand and consumption of sugar to feed bees during preparation of queen and fertilization, lately sugar is expensive and not available which also decreased the center activity and productivity.

The owner of the center is a member at the national honey committee, which gave him wide connection with beekeepers in Lebanon.

As owner of the Center stated, Bee breeds in Lebanon are now better because of this center and Honey production has increased to more than 5 times where new Queen Bees were introduced and new colonies been hatched.

In the past, Regular hives used to produce around 3 to 4 kilos where new ones have reached 20 Kg on average.

Queen bees of this Center are being exported to Jordan, Syria, Iraq, and Egypt, and trials on Syrian coast were much successful than middle and eastern part which are more or less like desert weather.

The center is still importing tools for its laboratory from outside Lebanon, and that’s through Air freight couriers and paying in fresh USD which is costing the center five times more as honey is still being sold in LL.

Honey sales was affected a lot, where it was sold before crisis and Lebanese devaluation for 40,000 LL or 25 USD and now it is sold for 70,000 LL which is less than 10 USD, where this s a breakeven cost for honey upon buying material in USD (Queens, Wax, Pesticide, and Hives).

At the launching stage of the Center, inseminated queen bees were sold for 500 USD and now 300 USD.

Non-inseminated F1 queen bees were sold for 10 USD and now for 5 USD, so many prefer buying 100 non-inseminated queens and place them in hives instead of buying an inseminated F0 queen for 500 USD and taking that risk at such a high initial cost.

Honeybee raising needs full time job, so amateurs and employed people cannot have this as a hobby or business aside from their beekeeping.

Before the Lebanese pound devaluation, the Apivar pesticide which is used to control mites on bees, was imported from France and UK, so right after devaluation, many started to import similar pesticide from China and Turkey which is not competent as Apivar and has lot of residues which was evident on honey samples from Lebanon, and that was detected in many laboratory tests.

The beneficiary mentioned that many cooperatives received grants and assistance which were not eligible for that, as many of the equipment that they received were sold later after delivery and he bought many of it.

Statistics and surveys were not accurate, even sampling which targeted Lebanese samples which were tested in Italy were not accurate and led to bad reputation about Lebanese honey, as the funded project to accomplish that was managed by the Ministry of Agriculture who made the selection of samples, shipped them, and conducted the results. The owner mentioned that employees of the ministry selected beekeepers from their circle and this made the survey and results not representative to the Lebanese case.

Lot of imported bulk honey is being packed in Lebanon under Lebanese honey branded origin, and that is mainly from China.

There is 7 USD customs on imported honey while honey products like honey with nuts are not subject to customs, so many import the honey with nuts which is not subject to 7 USD customs, but only 25% customs on original invoice, which is customized to be very little at origin, so importers tend to import honey, remove out the nuts, then sell the honey again under Lebanese brand.

Insights (G1 Interview, Hasbaya)

Bought F1 queens from Golden Queen Center from Apis mellifera ligustica species and didn’t claim any evidence of success from this approach.

The main cause of failure was due to long transit time from breeding center which is in Jbeil district and took around 3 hours to reach Hasbaya, and that caused trouble to queens in terms of egg laying.


Trial was in 2019 with the Apis mellifera ligustica, he claimed that it performed well in the mountains only with good resistance to mites and he noticed that it is very quiet and easier for farmers to deal with as it is less aggressive than domestic Apis mellifera syriaca.

G1 has 450 hives and noticed that Apis mellifera ligustica has doubled the quantity of honey he used to produce before.

He repeated what the center’s owner stated that as much as farmer takes care and attention about hives, the less the mortality is and the better the production is.

G1 faced some difficulties upon introduction of Apis mellifera ligustica as old bees of syriaca spp didn’t adapt with ligustica spp easily.

G1 confirmed that the center’s owner had helped him technically to induce new species of queen bee into new hives and other management practices.

At last, he mentioned that there was a bad experience with a trial of queen bees from Eqypt as they showed high aggressivity and less adaptation to Lebanese conditions.

Insights (G2, Kadmous, South Lebanon)

G2 bought both the F0 and F1 breeds from the Golden Queen Center.

The F1 breed was bought 2 times, and the F0 breed for twice as well, once at 300 USD/Queen and second time at 200 USD/Queen.

After introduction of Apis mellifera ligustica, G2 stated that it is a good breed, although it is not so tolerant to weather interruptions that usually occur in Lebanon with four seasons and transitional interruptions between the seasons.

As mentioned by G2, the ligustica needs all year-round flowering season which is not available in Lebanon, as during the non-flowering season, it gets lot of stress and mortality rate increases as a result of this stress.

Apis mellifera ligustica is sensitive to mites and needs more time and management than other breeds although the Golden Queen Center developed and introduced as a resistant species to mites.

G2 stated that this year he decreased his production to 150 hives due to the crisis and devaluation which made it hard to buy input material.

G2 repeated the fact of previously selling honey for 45,000 LL/Kg which is equivalent to 30 USD, and now it is sold for 70,000 LL/Kg which is equivalent to less than 10 USD, a non-profitable revenue to cover production costs.

During winter, he commonly feeds sugar and now the price is 3 to 4 times which is another main challenge. Moreover, Apivar Mites pesticide is still sold at 20 USD/bottle which now costs 5 times more than before due to devaluation.

In addition to many challenges, is the honey jar which was bought for 500 LL/Pc and now for 3000 LL/pc.

After some difficulties with ligustica species, G2 introduced the carnica F0 species, that was a month before the interview and he has a good expectation and promises from the center’s owner in regards of spring production.

G2 was definite about the center’s owner’s technical assistance and readiness to support at all times.

As there are tons of honey imported from China and not competent at all, there is a serious and urgent need for certification seal and good linkage between certified honey and domestic beekeepers from one side, and on the other side the buyers on different levels whether retail or individual consumer, so keepers could reach higher selling prices.


Insights (G3, Ras Baalback)

He got the ligustica F0 and F1 for free from Golden Queen Center. The F0 breed was only introduced once but the F1 breed induction was more than one time as he mentioned.

Raising the liguistica has some concerns with its adaptability to weather interruptions and noticed mortality as a result to this issue in specific. The mortality rate of liquistica was recorded in different locations over the country (1 in Cedars, 1 Ainata,1 Kaa, 2 Oyoon Orghosh, 3 Donieh).

The liguistica consumes lot more sugar than domestic syriaca but this is not a challenge according to G3 as honey production is higher.

The syriaca used to produce 10 Kg per hive on average while the liquistica produced up to 15 Kg on average in return.

G3 has 500 hives and this is a main source of income to him. He produced some F1 breeds and sold for 5 USD/Queen to keepers in his region.

G3 confirmed that inducing the queen in the hive is very critical along with its diet, and as technical people are scarce in the country, he usually do it personally and this what takes time from him.

G3 has a continuous cooperation with the Golden Queen Center and its owner and he is satisfied with the technical services that the center is providing.


ANNEX 2 – SITE VISIT PHOTOS

VISIT TO BRIH AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE

PMSPL II consultant visiting the trellis system demo plot in Brih


PMSPL II consultant conducting site observation of the trellis system demo plot in Brih


A banner listing the services provided by Brih Cooperative placed in the garage of the coop’s president


The electrostatic sprayer provided by LIVCD to Brih Cooperative in the garage of the cooperative’s president


The wood shredder provided by LIVCD to Brih Cooperative stationed on the side of the road


VISIT TO MENJEZ AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE

PMSPL II consultant visiting one of the avocado farms supported by LIVCD in Menjez


PMSPL II consultant (left) visiting the land of an LIVCD beneficiary in Menjez


An avocado tree bearing fruits grown by an LIVCD beneficiary in Menjez

Social Impact, Inc. 2300 Clarendon Boulevard

Arlington, VA 22201 Suite 1000

Tel: (703) 465-1884 Fax: (703) 465-1888

www.socialimpact.com