Responding to the needsof marginal farmers:A review of selected District Agricultural Development

Plans in Tanzania

This report was prepared for Concern Worldwide by the following team of consultants under the guidance of

Mr. Audax Rukonge, Governance Manager, Concern Tanzania:

Mr. Meliki M. Msuya, Ph.D., Agricultural and Development Economist, Lead Consultant and Author

Mrs. Imelda K. Ndamugoba, M.Sc. Agricultural Plant Sciences, Research Consultant

Mr. Godwill G. Wanga, M.A. Economics, Research Consultant

Ms. Margareth Henjewele, M.A. Political Science & Public Administration, Research Consultant

September 2008

List of abbreviations and acronyms iv

Executive summary v

1: Context and methodology 1

1.1 Recent trends in Tanzania’s agriculture 1

1.2 The Agriculture Sector Development Strategy and Programme 2

1.3 Tanzania Assistance Strategy 2

1.4 Way forward: from production expansion to productivity enhancement 3

1.5 Research methodology 3

2: Challenges faced by marginal farmers 6

2.1 The big picture – increasing agricultural production but continuing food insecurity 6

2.2 Marginal farming: the challenges and effects 7

2.3 Marginal farming: responses to the challenges 10

3: The effectiveness of government and donor support 14

3.1 DADP implementation in the research districts 14

3.2 DADP response to challenges over expanding food production 16

3.3 DADP response to challenges over enhancing productivity 17

3.4 DADP response to challenges limiting ability to ensure food security

from outside the household 18

3.5 Donor funded programmes outside of the basket funds 19

3.6 NGO and other non-state interventions 20

4: Recommendations 22

4.1 DADP planning and implementation 22

4.2 DADP implementation and review 23

4.3 Development partners, CSOs and the private sectors 24

4.4 Recommendations for addressing DADP gaps 25

Tables

Table 1: Research area basic data 4

Table 2: Farmers’ estimation of status of village household food security 6

Table 3(a): DADP financial implementation during 2006/07 – 2007/08 15

Table 3(b): DADP financial performance: 2006/07 – 2007/08 15

Annexes

Annex 1: Map of the selected districts 27

Annex: 2 Marginal farmers challenges and DADP activities:

Annex 2.1 (Iringa Rural district) 28

Annex 2.2 (Kilosa district) 30

Annex 2.3 (Lindi Rural district) 31

Annex 2.4 (Mtwara Rural district) 32

iii

Contents

iv

List of abbreviations and acronyms

AfDB ............................African Development Bank

ASDP ..........................Agricultural Sector Development Programme

ASDS ..........................Agricultural Sector Development Strategy

CBO ..............................Community Based Organisations

CRDB ..........................CRDB Bank formally called Cooperative and Rural Development Bank

CSO ..............................Civil Society Organisations

DADP ..........................District Agricultural Development Plan

DANIDA ....................Danish International Development Agency

EAC................................East African Community

EU ..................................European Union

GBS ..............................General Budget Support

GDADPI ....................Guidelines for District Agricultural Development Planning and Implementation

HI ....................................Heifer International

IA......................................Irish Aid

IFAD..............................International Fund for Agricultural Development

IDA ................................International Development Association

JICA ..............................Japan International Cooperation Agency

LGA................................Local Government Authorities

MARTI ........................Ministry of Agriculture Training Institute

masl ..............................Metres Above Sea Level

MDG ............................Millennium Development Goal

MKUKUTA ............Mkakati wa Kupunguza Umaskini na Kukuza Uchumi Tnzania

NGO ..............................Non-Governmental Organisation

NMB ............................National Microfinance Bank

NSGRP ......................National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty

O&OD..........................Opportunities and Obstacles to Development

SACCOS ..................Savings and Credit Cooperative Society

SADC ..........................Southern African Development Community

SPFS ..........................Special Programme for Food Security

SWISSAID ............Switzerland International Development Agency

TAMISEMI ............Tawala za Mikoa na Serikali za Mitaa

TAS ................................Tanzania Assistance Strategy

TASAF ........................Tanzania Social Assistance Fund

Annex 2.1. – Iringa Rural District

DMT ..............................district Management Team

DFT ................................district Facilitation Team

WFT ..............................Ward Facilitation Team

VAP................................Village Agricultural Plan

SCULT ........................Savings and Cooperative Union League of Tanzania

OTC................................Oxen Training Centre

LMU ..............................Livestock Management Unit

CBPP ..........................Contagious Bovine Pleuropneumonia

BOQ ..............................Bill of Quantity

QDS ..............................Quality Declared Seeds

ASPS ..........................Agricultural Sector Private Support

Annex 2.2. – Kilosa district

VEO ..............................Village Executive Officer

NCD ............................Newcastle Diseases

RVF................................Rift Valley Fever

CBPP ..........................Contagious Bovine Pleuropneumonia

Annex 2.4. – Mtwara rural district

TOT ..............................Training of Trainers

VHQ ..............................Village Head Quarters

Background

This research provides evidence of the challenges faced by marginal farmers in four districts (Iringa Rural,

Kilosa, Lindi Rural, and Mtwara Rural) in Tanzania. It assesses the extent to which government and donor

policies and practices are helping marginal farmers meet those challenges through District Agricultural

Development Plans (DADPs), and makes recommendations on increasing the effectiveness of these plans.

The challenges faced by poor farmers

Farmers interviewed in the four districts highlighted the following issues:

Land: Competition for fertile and irrigated land is intense, especially amongst extremely poor households

including those headed by lone parents, orphans or elderly people.

Gender: Women are probably the most marginalised of farmers. Single women who are heads of

households are particularly vulnerable as they often have no one to help them in their farming activities.

Hand-hoe technology: In many areas, there is no tradition of using animal power and the use of

mechanical power – power tillers, tractors and the accompanying equipment – is restricted by limited

availability and the inability of most farmers to afford the high cost of such equipment.

Labour: Labour constraints are particularly acute for unmarried and widowed women with children, and

families affected by HIV and AIDS, where older siblings or grandparents take care of younger orphans.

Livestock: Families with no livestock are relatively more marginalised as they are more exposed to

livelihood shocks than those with some livestock. Livestock is an important source of power for cultivation

and transportation of goods to and from markets and are important means of generating additional family

income to meet unexpected social and economic obligations.

Remoteness and infrastructure: The absence, or extremely poor state, of feeder and access roads

increases the cost of farm inputs and agricultural equipment while at the same time lowering prices of farm

outputs. In the rainy season some roads become impassable.

Farm inputs: The use of improved seeds, fertilisers, herbicides and pesticides is constrained by their limited

availability and high cost.

Accessing credit: Access to credit is one of the most common ways of improving farmers access to inputs.

Efforts to establish Savings and Credit Cooperative Societies (SACCOS) have had mixed success.

Extension services: Most farmers have very limited access to extension advice. The farmer-extension

officer ratio presently ranges from 10,000-20,000:1. Farmers in more remote areas are least likely to see an

extension worker as most extension workers only have bicycles.

Support to farmers through District Agricultural Development Plans

In some cases, there have been delays in the release of funds for DADP implementation – both from central

government to region, and from region to district. The consequences of delayed funds for project activities,

particularly for agricultural activities that are season-sensitive, can be very severe.

All four DADPs include investments in improving irrigated agriculture, mostly rehabilitating existing canals

by cleaning up and concreting the floors and walls to prevent loss of irrigation water through seepage.

These investments should increase the availability of irrigated land but they will not guarantee that marginal

farmers will have a better deal.

Each of the DADPs in the districts studied has invested in the acquisition, equipping and training of oxen

and farmers in using oxen for cultivation. The popularisation of this technology is likely to be more

appropriate to the scale of operation and within the financial reach of the average marginal farmer than more

expensive techniques, such as the use of tractors.

To increase the effectiveness of the current extension team, the DADPs are purchasing more motorcycles

for the extension staff to improve their mobility and ability to reach the maximum number of farmers.

v

Executive summary

vi

The DADPs strongly advocate SACCOS as a way of enabling farmers and other low income groups to access

credit. While the performance has been mixed across the districts and villages, the SACCOS appears to have a

future as the institution that will enable most marginal farmers to escape the vicious cycle of poverty and food

insecurity.

With differences in scale, all the DADPs have some alternative income generating activities, mostly livestock

e.g. dairy cattle, pig and chicken. As regards chicken, there are major programmes for vaccination against

Newcastle disease in Lindi and Mtwara Rural districts. In the Kilosa DADP 2007/08 there is an activity for

introducing horticultural crops in villages.

None of the 2006/07 DADPs in the districts studied included activities to improve or construct roads or

market infrastructure for crops. Of the 2007/08 DADPs, only that for Iringa rural had some crop-related road

and market infrastructural works. This means that the existing infrastructural impediments to farmers’ ability

to ensure their food security from outside the household will persist.

Recommendations

(A) Improving the DADP process so that the voices of marginal farmers are heard

The Government should strengthen the planning process by: (i) directly consulting with marginal farmers and

ensuring that the results of those consultations are included in plans (ii) reducing delays in disbursements

by simplifying the planning process and building on existing plans (iii) instigating a system of regular

monitoring and review of implementation to ensure that plans stay on-track and to allow changes to be made

Development partners should ensure their influence, advice and procedures support DADP implementation

by: (i) using their influence to ensure that the plans address the needs of marginal farmers, and

implementation is regularly reviewed (ii) reviewing their own reporting requirements and financial

disbursement arrangements to ensure that funds are provided in a timely manner

Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) should support the development and implementation of DADPs by: (i)

increasing the awareness of marginal farmers of their rights and responsibilities and supporting their

engagement in the DADP process (ii) demonstrating effective approaches to supporting marginal farmers

(iii) highlighting key issues to government at local and national level.

The private sector has a key role in ensuring that marginal farmers obtain the tools and inputs they need. In

fulfilling this role, private sector organisations should (i) cooperate with government and other stakeholders

in providing the special community services needed to ensure that marginal farmers are assisted to move

out of poverty and become regular participants in the market place (ii) advise government on ways of

incentivising the private sector to engage in remote areas and with marginal farmers.

(B) Addressing gaps in current plans

There is a need to ensure that all land resources are utilised effectively to make maximum contribution to

enhanced food security, poverty reduction and economic growth. This requires: (i) proper land use planning

(ii) resolving land use conflicts between crop and livestock farmers in particular, and between large, medium,

small and marginal users (iii) land reform and (iv) equitable allocation of irrigated land to vulnerable groups.

The Government should take steps to reduce reliance on hand-hoe technology, particularly by improving

access to credit. This should include subsidised credit to enable farmers and private business people to

acquire appropriate equipment – especially oxen, donkeys, power tillers, tractors and other relevant

equipment – for their own use and for providing equipment hire services to other farmers. The government

should ensure the proper functioning of the credit and extension advisory services and enforce a strict code

of conduct for SACCOS leadership.

Steps are needed to improve the use of seeds, fertilisers, herbicides and pesticides in order to raise

agricultural productivity. This requires: (i) improvements in extension services, including (a) ensuring

extension workers go to remote areas and (b) expansion of the Farmer Field School Programme (ii) a system

of properly targeted subsidies, along with measures to prevent the subsidised supplies from being accessed

by those for whom they are not intended (iii) investments in produce storage, enabling farmers to store farm

produce during the harvest season when prices are very low for sale later in the year when prices are better

(iv) steps to encourage private inputs dealers to open input supply outlets in all production centres (v)

publicly-funded input supply depots in areas where it would not make financial sense for private operators

to open input outlets, either because the demand is too low or set-up is too costly.

1

1.1 Recent trends in Tanzania’s agriculture

1.1.1 In 2001 the Government of Tanzania prepared the Agriculture Sector Development Strategy

(ASDS). Two years later the five lead agriculture sector ministries1

prepared the Agricultural Sector

Development Programme (ASDP) as the implementing document for the strategy. The ASDP was to be

implemented at the district levels under District Agricultural Development Plans (DADPs) with coordination

and monitoring carried out by the sectoral ministries. The ASDP is consistent with National Strategy for

Growth and Reduction of Poverty (NSGRP)2

and the Agriculture Sector Development Strategy which

together seek to:

• improve productivity, raise agricultural growth and profitability;

• reduce poverty;

• decentralise public sector responsibilities to local government authorities;

• increase the involvement and participation of local communities in decision-making;

• encourage a shift towards private sector leadership in production, marketing, processing and service

delivery.

1.1.2 To support the implementation of the ASDP, six of the country’s major development partners3

agreed to put most of their support to the agriculture sector in a multi-donor basket fund. This was in line

with the principles of the Joint Assistance Strategy (JAS) and the Tanzania Assistance Strategy (TAS) which

emphasise: national ownership, harmonisation, alignment, managing for results and mutual accountability.

1.1.3 Tanzania, like most developing countries, has defined a national strategy for reducing poverty and

food insecurity, the first of the eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The National Strategy for

Growth and Reduction of Poverty4

is the Tanzanian blueprint charting the path towards the first MDG target

of halving the level of poverty and food insecurity by the year 2015. Tanzania relies on agriculture for about

50% of its gross domestic product (GDP) and for 75% of foreign exchange earnings. Most of the 82% of

Tanzanians who live in rural areas earn a living from agriculture. The attainment of the first MDG is, therefore,

heavily dependent on the performance of the agricultural sector.

1.1.4 During the 1990s Tanzania’s agricultural production grew by 3.6% annually compared to 2.9% and

2.1% during the 1970s and 1980s respectively. Between 2000 and 2005 the growth rate increased to 4.8%,

reaching a peak of 6% in 2004. During the 1990s agricultural exports, which account for about 10% of the

country’s agricultural GDP, grew by 7%, but export earnings declined somewhat as a result of declining world

market prices. Over the same period food crops, which account for about 65% of agricultural GDP, grew by

3%, about the same rate of growth as the national population. This notwithstanding, while agriculture only

grew by 4.8%5

between 2000 and 2005, because of its dominance in the economy it contributed 2.3% to

the overall GDP growth rate of 6% – compared to contributions of 2.1% from services, 1.6% from industry

and 0.4% from mining

1.1.5 The source of recent growth in Tanzania’s agricultural production has largely been expansion in the

cropped area and improvements in market incentives that have resulted from improvements in the policy

framework that began in the mid 1980s. These policy changes came about as a consequence of policy and

programme dialogue between the Tanzanian Government and its principal development partners, which

resulted in a long-term commitment by the partners to support development activities in the country subject

to an agreed policy framework. Tanzania undertook to pursue a market-led economic development strategy

encompassing the liberalisation of the economy and a progressive removal of price and other market

controls, including foreign exchange and interest rates. These measures were followed later in the 1990s

with reforms seeking to attain macroeconomic stability and more prudent monetary and fiscal policies. One

key result of these reforms was the reduction of inflation rates from well over 30% when the reforms began,

to single digits from the end of the 1990s to the present. The resulting business and overall economic

environment provided incentives for new investment capital and increased aid inflows.

1. Context and methodology

Tanzania relieson agriculturefor about 50% of its grossdomesticproduct (GDP)and for 75% of foreignexchangeearnings

1Ministries of Agriculture, Food

Security and Cooperatives; Livestock

Development; Industry, Trade and

Marketing; Water; and the Prime

Minister’s Office – Regional

Administration and Local

Government

2NSGRP is commonly referred to in

its Swahili translation as Mkakati wa

Kukuza Uchumi na Kupunguza

Umaskini Tanzania (MKUKUTA).

3(Denmark – DANIDA, Japan – JICA,

the EU, Irish Aid – IA, IFAD, and

IDA)

4Commonly referred in Swahili as

MKUKUTA (Mkakati wa Kupunguza

Umaskini na Kukkuza Uchumi

Tanzania)

5Over the same period other sectors

grew by: 8.7% for industry, 5.9% for

services, mining 15.2%, construction

10%, manufacturing 7%, trade,

2

1.2 The Agriculture Sector Development Strategy and Programme

1.2.1 As part of the groundwork for the new economic environment the government, in consultation with

local stakeholders and members of the international development community, conducted studies and

consultations seeking to isolate the factors contributing to the stagnation of the performance of the

agricultural sector. Consultations that began in 1998 within the ministries concerned with agriculture, and

later expanded to involve international development partners, resulted in the adoption in 2001 of the

Agricultural Sector Development Strategy (ASDS). The objective of the ASDS is to create an enabling and

conducive environment for improving profitability of the sector as a basis for improved farm incomes and

rural poverty reduction in the medium and long term. The strategy singles out five strategic priority areas of

intervention:

a) strengthening the institutional framework for managing agriculture in the country by delineating the

respective roles of national and local governments, and the private sector;

b) creating a favourable climate for commercial activities assuming stability in the macroeconomic

framework;

c) clarifying the respective roles of the public and private sectors in improving support services, including

research, extension, training, regulation, information;

d) improving input and output markets and marketing;

e) mainstreaming planning for agricultural development in other sectors to take into account

such cross-cutting issues and investments as infrastructure, impact of HIV/AIDS and malaria,

gender, youth, environment.6

1.2.2 To implement the ASDS the five agriculture sector lead ministries7

developed the Agriculture Sector

Development Programme (ASDP) setting out the framework and processes for implementation by the

national ministries and Local Government Authorities (LGAs). Implementation is based on District

Agricultural Development Plans (DADPs) to be developed through an iterative participatory process from

village levels, through wards and districts.

1.2.3 ASDS implementation is organised in three sub-programmes:

i) Sub-programme A: comprising activities directly supporting agricultural production and processing is to

be implemented by the LGAs and assigned 75% of ASDP resources.

ii) Sub-programme B: national level sector institutions will be responsible for policy and regulatory

functions, research, advisory services, private sector development, financing.

iii) Sub-programme C: agriculture related cross-cutting and cross-sectoral issues.

1.3 Tanzania Assistance Strategy

1.3.1 In the spirit of the Tanzania Assistance Strategy (TAS), several of the country’s development

partners8

worked together with government officials in consolidating their development interventions into the

ASDP Basket Fund. This approach is aimed at facilitating the harmonisation of national development efforts,

easing coordination at all stages, from programme design to implementation monitoring, and to ensure

national ownership of all development programmes. It is the intention of government to continue the dialogue

with the development partners concerned with a view to the possible integration of these operations into the

Basket Fund or the GBS system.

1.3.2 True to the spirit of the TAS, the ASDP was prepared and its implementation and financing

arrangements are to be monitored jointly by the national, district and community level representatives and by

members of the development assistance community contributing to the agricultural Basket Fund.

The objective ofthe ASDS is to

create anenabling and

conduciveenvironment

for improvingprofitability

6 United Republic of Tanzania:

Agricultural Sector Development

Strategy, October 2001, p. 19

7Ministries of: Agriculture, Food

Security and Cooperatives;

Livestock Development; Industry,

Trade and Marketing; Water; and

the Prime Minister’s Office –

Regional Administration and Local

Government (PMO-RALG).

8Danish International Development

Agency (DANIDA), Japan

International Cooperation Agency

(JICA), the European Union (EU),

Irish Aid (IA), the International Fund

for Agricultural Development (IFAD),

the International Development

Association (IDA). Others members

of the development community

including … have joined the Basket

Fund more recently.

1.4 Way forward: from production expansion to productivity

enhancement

1.4.1 As noted above, the improved performance in agriculture in the recent past has been as a result of

expansion in the cropped area and not increasing productivity as happened in other regions of the world –

especially South Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean. The recent trends in the rate of growth of Tanzania’s

agricultural production are encouraging in that they approach the target set for the ASDS of 5% annually for

the medium term (2001-2003). However, although this is significantly higher than the national population

growth rate of 3.6%, it still compares poorly with the target of 10% set in the NSGRP as being necessary for

Tanzania to attain its goal of eradicating poverty by 2015. To reach these higher rates of growth the country has

to invest in the enhancement of productivity and improving market efficiency. This will enable the country to

realise its significant comparative advantage in the production of virtually all of its traditional cash crops (coffee,

cotton, tea, cashew nuts, and tobacco), and some non-traditional products, such as fish from Lake Victoria,

horticultural crops, wheat and rice. Additional market opportunities are opening up internally with improvements

in domestic incomes and opportunities created by growing cooperation between Tanzania and its neighbouring

countries in the context of the East African Community (EAC) and the Southern African Development

Community (SADC). In addition, the country still has a relative abundance of arable and rangelands that may

be developed for additional production.

1.4.2 With respect to smallholder agriculture, an estimated 3.6 million rural, largely marginal, farming

households dominate agricultural production in Tanzania. These subsistence farmers operate on plots of land

averaging less than one hectare and rely mostly on rain-fed agriculture. It is estimated that 82% of the poor

in Tanzania live in rural areas where agriculture accounts for about 75% of family incomes9

and 80% of

employment. A World Bank study has concluded that growth in agricultural production has higher multiplier

effects on living standards in rural and urban areas than growth in other sectors.10

This implies that any

significant improvement in the incomes of marginal farmers accruing from improved agricultural production

and productivity would have significant backward and forward linkages to the rest of the economy. Such

multiplier effects result from increased purchasing power of farmers for agricultural inputs, outputs and

services from other sectors, and from increased supplies of food and other farm products helping to lower the

cost of living for both rural and urban dwellers.

1.4.3 However, three critical constraints stand in the way of improved productivity for smallholder

agriculture in the short term. Firstly, the predominance of hand-hoe technology, combined with the relative

shortage of labour in the rural areas, suggests that it will take a long time to bring about changes in the

farming system or increased mechanisation on a sufficiently large scale to raise the labour productivity

significantly. Secondly, the combination of the ongoing Local Government Reform Programme, the transfer

of operational responsibility from the central government to LGAs, and the current shortages of the relevant

capacities within the LGAs will for some time constrain implementation efficiency. Thirdly, the unpredictability

of world commodity exports and farm input markets are causes of uncertainty in terms of the affordability of

such inputs and resulting returns from produce. It is because of these constraints that the ASDS annual

growth rate target for the interim period of 2005-2007 was set at 5% increasing to 10% for 2008- 2015.

1.5 Research methodology

1.5.1 In accordance with the terms of reference, this research assignment has been carried out in the

following four districts and regions; Iringa Rural district in Iringa region, Kilosa district in Morogoro region,

Lindi Rural district in Lindi region, and Mtwara Rural district in Mtwara region.

1.5.2 Iringa Rural district is one of the seven LGAs in Iringa region. The district has six divisions, 23 wards,

and 125 villages. The district has three agro-ecological zones: highlands with altitude of over 1,600 metres

above sea level (masl), the midlands with altitude ranging from 1,200-1,600 masl, and lowlands with altitude

of 900-1,000 masl. The soil, topography and temperature conditions make the district suitable for a wide

range of temperate and tropical crops. The principal crops produced in the district include: hybrid and

composite maize, wheat, peas, beans, sunflower, Irish potatoes, temperate and tropical fruits, coffee, cotton,

tobacco, paprika, vegetable crops, irrigated rice, groundnuts, cashew nuts, cocoa nuts, palm oil. Farmers also

raise dairy and indigenous cattle, goats and sheep.

3

An estimated 3.6 million rural,largely marginal,farminghouseholdsdominateagriculturalproduction inTanzania.

9Income from other sources for the

rural poor is very low when

compared to other groups in the

country. A World Bank study

(Tanzania: A Poverty Profile, 1993)

estimates that the rural poor

receive only 5% of their income

from wages, compared to 7% for

all Tanzania, 9% from business

activities compared to 35% for all

Tanzania.

10World Bank (2000) Agriculture in

Tanzania since 1986: Follower or

Leader in Growth. World

Bank/IFPRI, Washington DC.

4

1.5.3 Kilosa district is one of the six districts of Morogoro region. The district is presently divided up into

nine divisions, 37 wards and 164 villages. The district has several big permanent rivers that together account

for 32,000 ha of irrigable land of which only 11,000 ha are being exploited. The principal crops grown in the

district are: maize, rice, sorghum, beans, onions, sweet potatoes, bananas, simsim (sesame), sunflower,

cashew, cotton, sugar cane and sisal.

1.5.4 Lindi Rural district has ten divisions, 28 wards, and 125 villages. It has three agro-ecological zones:

coastal lowland; intermediate lands; and highland plateau. The soils and rainfall in the various agro-ecological

zones facilitate the production of a variety of crops including maize, cassava, beans and Irish potatoes in the

highlands; maize, simsim, sorghum, cashew, cassava and fruit in the intermediate altitude areas; and cassava,

sorghum, legumes, maize, cashew, paddy and simsim in the coastal lowlands.

1.5.5 Mtwara Rural district has 18 wards, and 118 villages. The district has a total land area of 358,700

ha of which 250,000 ha is arable. Of this, 88,859 ha are under food crop production and 66,859 ha under

cash crops. The district receives on average 1,000 mm rainfall per year over an average period of 60 days.

Mtwara Rural district has an average temperature of 28°C. The principal crops produced are rice/paddy,

maize, horticultural crops, cassava, sorghum.

Table 1: Research area basic data

1.5.6 For this research a review of relevant literature was conducted, including background documents

concerning the history of DADPs, their formulation guidelines and procedures for review, adoption and

funding. The research team also reviewed essential literature relating to the basic concepts of marginal

farmers (who they are, where they are and why they are in this situation). It also reviewed documents on the

concept of poverty and its various dimensions, but mostly with regard to its relationship with food security,

production and productivity and the manner in which it affects marginal farmers.

1.5.7 Consultations were held with officers concerned with DADP planning and implementation; with the

Local Government Reform Programme at TAMISEMI;11

and with the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and

Cooperatives in Dodoma and Dar es Salaam, and in the districts studied. Members of the research team also

met with officers of the Cooperative and Marketing Departments of the Ministry of Industry, Commerce and

Marketing and related agencies (e.g. SACCOS) and agencies involved in the provision of goods and services

(input and output traders, processors, NGOs and CBOs). Individual team members held structured interviews

with DADP beneficiaries, senior district officers involved in various aspects of DADP planning and

implementation and representatives of interested development partners. These consultations sought to

obtain information relating to:

• the history of DADPs and their relationship with the Agricultural Sector Development Strategy and the

Agricultural Sector Development Programme;

• planning, processing & execution of DADPs with a view to understanding the extent of participation or

involvement of various stakeholders, comparing stated guidelines and actual practice;

• the implementation record of the DADPs with a view to assessing the extent to which procedures and

guidelines on implementation supervision, monitoring, evaluation and review are adhered to. The focus

here is to ascertain the quality, quantity and effectiveness of implementation monitoring and to assess

the extent of stakeholder participation, transparency and accountability;

Land Area (‘000 ha)

Research Population Total Arable Cropped Grazing Game & Rainfall (mm) Altitude (masl)

District (2002 census) Forestry Reserves

Iringa Rural 259,892 2,030 440 164 100 1,153 n.a. 900-1,600

Kilosa 489,513 1,430 537 97 480 400 400-1400 n.a.

Lindi Rural 204,770 572 n.a. 101 n.a. n.a. 600-1000 0-750

Mtwara Rural 214,882 359 250 156 n.a. n.a. 1000 n.a.

11Tawala za Mikoa na Serikali za

Mitaa (Swahili for Prime

Minister’s Office, Regional

Administration and Local

Government)

5

• assessment of achievements against set DADP goals and targets, especially those relating to production,

food security, and poverty reduction;

• assessment of the impacts on beneficiaries’ wellbeing, especially as regards their levels of production and

productivity, poverty status, food security and living standards generally.

1.5.8 The interviews with beneficiary groups, district officials and development agencies were based on

respective standard questions moderated by individual members of the consulting team, one each per district

and development partner. With respect to beneficiaries, interviews were organised with groups of farmers

and village officials. Interviews were held in at least three villages per district and two groups in each village.

Wherever possible, separate interviews were held with women’s groups to ensure that the specific concerns

of women are properly reflected in the findings.

1.5.9 The team also made a special effort to consult officers involved in non-DADP interventions in the

various districts. This was based on the understanding of government’s intention to have all interventions in

agriculture and related sectors integrated into the relevant DADP; this process has not yet been fully

attained. The review of these interventions provided opportunities to compare the efficiency and

effectiveness of activities under the DADPs and those implemented by agencies of development partners.

6

2.1 The big picture; increasing agricultural production but continuing

food insecurity

2.1.1 Over the past several years Tanzania has witnessed increasing agricultural production. In addition

producer prices have increased significantly for most crops and livestock. Despite this progress, it is

estimated that 42% of households in Tanzania regularly have inadequate food supplies.12

The bulk of these

food insecure households are in rural areas where there is high reliance on agriculture as a source of income.

Crop failure that leaves a family unable to meet household food requirements from their own production also

reduces income, which undermines the capacity of the family to access food from the market. Improved food

security therefore, be it from household production or purchased supplies, is reliant on agricultural growth

performance.

Table 2: Farmers’ estimation of status of village household food insecurity

* Youth leave village for town at cultivation and return after harvest adding to the pressure on limited food stocks.

It is estimatedthat 42% of

households inTanzania

regularly haveinadequate food

supplies.

2. Challenges faced by marginal farmers

FFoooodd IInnsseeccuurree HHoouusseehhoollddss %%

DDiissttrriicctt && VViillllaaggee NNooww ((22000088)) PPrree--DDAADDPP ((pprree--22000055)) CCaauussee ooff CChhaannggee

KKiilloossaa

Ilonga Msalabani 25 50 Improved irrigation management and expanded market

Chanzulu 5 20 Farmers obtain better prices due to better market information

Kilangali 60 70 Farmer field schools, Special Fund for Food Secuirity &

Tanzania Social Assistance Fund interventions

IIrriinnggaa RRuurraall

Nzihi 15-25 20-40 Technology improvement (seed & fertilisers)

Idodi 20 40 Farmer field schools & new technologies

Itunundu Kimande 50 50+ Farmer field schools, diversification & irrigation

MMttwwaarraa RRuurraall

Mbawala 50 30 Bad weather & vermin infestation

Njengwa 60 Less than 60 More dependants*

Lilido 20 20+ New crops & good rains

Ntiniko 75 75+ Farmer motivation

LLiinnddii RRuurraall

Kilangala 90 Less than 90 More dependants*

Mchinga 1 90 Less than 90 More dependants*

Matimba 90 65 More dependants*

Likwaya 99 Less than 99 More dependants *

Nyengedi 10 10 Reliable irrigated rice production

12United Republic of Tanzania

(October 2001), Agriculture Sector

Development Strategy, Dar es

Salaam, p. 2.

7

2.1.2 This national picture, of overall progress but continuing food insecurity, is mirrored in the districts

visited. There is ample evidence of improving farmers’ incomes in some of the villages. Only in a few villages,

especially in Lindi Rural and Mtwara Rural districts, are there indications that food insecurity has not

changed, or has increased, over the past three years (see Table 2). For Lindi Rural the lack of evidence of

increasing production might be a reflection of the fact that DADP implementation is only now beginning in

the district. Rainfall in Mtwara Rural district tends to be less reliable and was inadequate last year thus partly

explaining the reported persistent food insecurity.

2.2 Marginal farming: the challenges and effects

2.2.1 A number of factors contribute to the marginalisation of farmers including: lack of access to

productive land; discrimination, particularly on the basis of gender; lack of labour to help on the farm; lack of

livestock; remoteness combined with poor roads; difficulties in accessing inputs; and lack of access to credit,

markets and extension advice. Marginal farming households also face difficulties accessing adequate health

care and education for their children. Even parents, because of limited labour, fail to attend courses for

improved farming practices because they have to remain working the fields.

2.2.2 Small size holdings: subsistence marginal farmers meet most of their food requirements from

their own production. One of the most severe constraints faced by such farmers is the size of land holdings,

averaging between 0.2 and 2 ha per household. Land size is smaller in areas of high demand. For example,

where there are irrigation schemes, the size of plots tends to be towards the lower end of this range. As a

result of small farm size and limited financial and human resources, most marginal farmers rely on rain-fed

agriculture, do not use productivity enhancing farm inputs, and use hand hoes for tilling the land.

2.2.3 In some areas of Lindi Rural district farmers have to rent their lands from a few large land owners

who often leave large areas uncultivated. Additional problems arise from the fact that in many areas the soil

is not fertile. Competition for fertile and irrigated land is intense, especially amongst extremely poor

households, including those headed by lone parents, orphans or elderly people. These households are often

forced to take up plots at the far end of the irrigation canal where water is less dependable.

2.2.4 The shortage of land, especially irrigated land is reported by arable farmers as one of the most

serious constraints they face. It has five principal origins:

• competition among arable farmers for the limited developed irrigation infrastructure;

• competition from, and conflicts with, livestock keepers, especially Wamasai and Wasukuma herdsmen;

• absentee estate owners who hold titles for large areas of land that lie unutilised;

• large areas of land currently under national parks, wildlife and forest reserves, and public institutions

such as research and training institutions;

• and the ineffectiveness of government and political leadership at all levels to resolve resulting conflicts

equitably and clarify matters to farmers.

2.2.5 Gender Discrimination: women generally, but particularly those who are vulnerable on account

of being lone parents, are probably the most marginalised of farmers in the districts studied. Men often

control family resources, especially those from the major income earning activities. In some cases, alcohol

consumption limits the ability of men to contribute to productive work.

2.2.6 Single women who are heads of households are particularly vulnerable. They have no one to help

them in their farming activities – often older, able-bodied children have migrated to urban centres, and other

members of the family are too young, too old or too sick to be productive. Therefore single women cannot, for

example, apply the highest yielding technique of planting their paddy fields in straight lines as to do so one

needs to have a second person to help straighten the lines. Consequently, they are forced to plant in a zigzag

fashion which compromises yields. The situation is even worse for single women who are themselves sick, for

example those with HIV/AIDS. Single women also report that they face discrimination in the allocation of

irrigation rights. Women, especially single women, are disadvantaged in that, in many of the cultures in the

districts studied, women do not own livestock – especially big stock like cattle. A married woman whose

husband dies is often denied the chance to retain family livestock. Other marginalised groups that present

particular challenges are children and the elderly who have lost parents or family support as a result of

HIV/AIDS or other illnesses.

Competition for fertile andirrigated land is intense,especiallyamongstextremely poorhouseholds,including thoseheaded by loneparents, orphansor elderlypeople.

8

2.2.7 Members of the research team, suspecting that women might have different sets of constraints to

men and that these challenges might not be expressed in joint male/female meetings, decided to consult

women members of the communities separately, without husbands or male co-farmers present. The

meetings with women vindicated this suspicion. Women members of the Ilonga Msalabani irrigation scheme

stated that they were disadvantaged in three major ways:

i) they are often assigned smaller plots of irrigated land than their male counterparts with comparable

income and dependants (in the Ilonga irrigation scheme in Kilosa district, women’s average holdings

range from 0.2 to 0.5 hectares);

ii) they are allowed less irrigation time than men with equal size of land, and felt unable to insist on equitable

shares of irrigation time – especially if they were single;

iii) they are often assigned irrigation time at night, which is often unsafe and unfair considering child-care

responsibilities at home.

2.2.8 Constrained access to production-enhancing technologies: in the short term the most

severe constraints to increased productivity in Tanzanian agriculture are the reliance on hand-hoe technology and

a shortage of labour in rural areas. Efforts to introduce modern tilling machinery (animal drawn equipment, power

tillers and tractors) are hampered in most areas by the absence of a tradition of using animal power or lack of

skill in using machinery. The use of mechanical power – power tillers, tractors and the accompanying equipment

– is restricted by limited availability and the inability of most farmers to afford the high cost of such equipment.

2.2.9 Inadequate labour is also a major constraint for poor farming families. There is a tendency for

able-bodied young people to leave the villages to seek work or business opportunities in towns, leaving the

elderly, ill and young children in the villages to carry out farming activities. During the field work for this

research it was found that in areas of Mtwara and Lindi some young people routinely leave the villages to

go to towns during the farming season and return after harvest to add to the demand for limited food stocks.

Labour constraints are particularly acute for unmarried and widowed women with children, and families

affected by HIV/AIDS, where older siblings or grandparents have been left to take care of younger orphans.

2.2.10 Lack of livestock: for marginal farmers, owning livestock of any kind is an important sign of

prosperity. Livestock is an important source of power for cultivation and transportation of goods to and from

markets. Livestock constitute an important means of accumulating capital for rural households: they perform

important social roles in marriage for instance. Livestock, especially small stock such as goats, sheep, pigs and

poultry, are important means of generating additional family income to meet unexpected social and economic

obligations. Families with no livestock are relatively more marginalised as they are more exposed to livelihood

shocks than those with some livestock.

2.2.11 Remoteness and poor physical infrastructure: the absence, or extremely poor state, of

feeder and access roads was one of the most serious constraints to agricultural development in the districts

studied. The situation is particularly lamentable for feeder roads but also in some cases access roads linking

villages and towns, including district headquarters. This results in the increased cost of farm inputs and

agricultural equipment while at the same time lowering prices of farm outputs. The latter is a consequence

of the fact that it is very costly to transport farm outputs from the centres of production in the villages.

2.2.12 Remoteness is accentuated in the rainy season. For example, the 70 km access road from Kilosa

to Lumuma village in Kidete division takes about one hours driving in the dry season. During the rainy season

it is not reachable except through Dodoma – a distance of about 200 km. Kilangali village, also in Kilosa

district, is 36 km from Kilosa but during the rainy season can only be reached by four wheel drive vehicles.

As a consequence there are no farm input outlets in Kilangali and Lumuma. Supplies have to be procured in

Kilosa and after additional transportation the cost to the farmer is prohibitive – even for subsidised fertilisers.

2.2.13 The location of Kilangali, and the state of roads and market infrastructure, means that farm produce

is sold at much lower prices than in more accessible villages. For instance, an 80 kg bag of paddy sells at

TSh25,000-30,000 in Ilonga Msalabani during the harvest period. In Kilangali such a bag sells at

TSh18,000-20,000. During the hungry season, a similar bag would sell at up to TSh90,000 in Ilonga, while

in Kilangali it would not exceed TSh50,000.

There is atendency forable-bodied

young people toleave the

villages to seekwork or business

opportunities in towns.

9

2.2.14 Access to, and cost of, farm inputs: in the areas covered by this research, the use of improved

seeds, fertilisers, herbicides and pesticides is constrained by limited availability, high cost, and limited user advisory

services resulting from the relatively small numbers of extension personnel.13

In the villages visited during the field

work, distances to the nearest inputs suppliers ranged from between 25km and 56km in Lindi Rural district, to

between 25km and 70km in Mtwara Rural and Iringa Rural districts. These are prohibitive distances, especially

considering the very poor state of rural feeder roads and lack of reliable means of transport.

2.2.15 Apart from the difficulties resulting from shortcomings of the physical infrastructure, there is a

general trend of rising prices of most farm inputs. In Mtwara and Kilosa, for instance, over the past 3 years,

the price of a 50kg bag of fertilisers has risen by over 150 per cent from TSh18,000 to TSh50,000. As of

May 2008, the price of 50kg fertiliser in Iringa (Idodi division) ranged from TSh40,000 to TSh90,000. The

cost of subsidised fertiliser in Ilonga Msalabani is TSh23,000. Subsidised fertiliser is not delivered to

Kilangali, so farmers who want to use fertiliser must buy it at the commercial rate of TSh50,000 per bag.

2.2.16 Credit institutions and policies: problems of accessing farm inputs would not be as severe if

there were functioning agricultural credit systems. Unfortunately efforts made to initiate such systems

through the organisation of Savings and Credit Cooperative Societies (SACCOS) have so far achieved

limited success in most of the areas visited.

2.2.17 The greatest success has occurred in Mtwara Rural district where the number of registered

SACCOS has increased from ten to 21 over the last three years. Increasing numbers of users are taking

advantage of the institution to expand their businesses. SACCOS were started in Ilonga, Kilangali and

Chanzulu villages in Kilosa district to ease the problem of lack of credit for financing agricultural activities.

Unfortunately members’ subscriptions were deposited in the National Microfinance Bank (NMB) which has

no experience in lending for small-holder agriculture. As a consequence the purpose for which the initiative

was set up was defeated and the members – those who have not been discouraged and left – are working

on ways to transfer the funds from NMB to CRDB which has experience in lending for SACCOS operations

for smallholder agriculture. Unfortunately, at the moment, the nearest CRDB bank branch is in Morogoro, two

to three hours bus ride from Kilosa and hardly reachable from Kilangali. In Iringa among the three villages

visited there was a SACCOS working in only one village. In one of the other villages farmers had been

discouraged from organising another savings cooperative after a CBO defrauded the village SACCOS of TSh2

million. The money has never been returned.

2.2.18 Quality of extension services: the farmer-extension officer ratio presently ranges from 10,000-

20,000:1. This means that most farmers have very limited access to extension advice. In Ilonga in Kilosa

district where the extension agent has gone away for further training, farmers receive extension advice from

students from the local Ministry of Agriculture Training Institute (MARTI). They offer extension advice to

farmers as part of their field training. In the steep mountain areas of Kilangali the roads are not passable,

even with motorcycles. To date most field-level extension agents are only supplied with bicycles for travelling

around their mandated territories. In areas that are more accessible there have been improvements in the

availability of extension services. This is the case for some villages in Mtwara where extension agents have

been provided with working gear bicycles and spraying equipment. However, the small number of extension

workers constrains the number of farmers accessing the service. Most farmers could not recall when they

last saw their extension agent. In some cases, because of lack of regular refresher courses, extension agents

are not in a position to supply farmers with up to date advice on production and related techniques.

2.2.19 Markets and marketing systems for inputs and outputs: the lack of suitable marketing

infrastructure and efficient marketing systems both for inputs and outputs places farmers at a disadvantage.

Following the collapse of the old cooperative marketing structures after the introduction of free market

operations in the country, areas that are easily accessible have experienced improvements: rising returns

from farm produce as the markets for their produce have attracted traders and other buyers from near and

far. This is the case, for instance, in Ilonga where the average price for paddy has increased from about

TSh15,000 to TSh50,000 – even rising to TSh90,000 during the peak period. At the same time farmers in

remote areas have seen demand for their produce fall, resulting in low prices dictated by the few traders who

travel to these areas. They know that, eventually, farmers will be obliged to sell their produce at virtually

whatever price is offered. By the same token, farm inputs are not available in these difficult to reach areas.

The farmer-extensionofficer ratioranges from10,000-20,000:1

13The average ratio of

farmers:extension staff in most of

the districts covered by this

research ranges from 10,00 to

20,000:1

10

2.2.20 It is interesting to note that the FAO Special Programme for Food Security (SPFS) has, with

cooperation from the local people, built a shop that will stock and sell farm inputs in the Kilangali area. It is

intended that the shop will be stocked by supplies shipped in using government transportation, therefore

moderating the cost of the inputs to the producers. In Mtwara Rural district farmers have benefited from the

operations of the Cashew Board, which markets cashew and supplies subsidised agro-chemicals to cashew

farmers. This has facilitated increased output prices and lowered input costs for cashew farmers, helping

them boost their incomes.

2.3 Marginal farming: responding to the challenges

2.3.1 The previous section outlined the challenges that marginal farmers face. This section outlines ways

in which farmers, together with the local government, are responding to those challenges. Where appropriate,

recommendations are made with respect to how the response to the challenges could be strengthened.

2.3.2 Enhancing production by improving technology: in Kilosa and Iringa Rural districts most

farmers have livestock (cattle or donkeys) that can be trained for tilling the land. In Mtwara and Lindi there

are few indigenous cattle so the respective DADPs include activities to procure oxen and the requisite

equipment from outside the district. To facilitate this many DADPs in the districts studied include activities

relating to the training of oxen and donkeys, and of farmers, and the procurement of equipment for animal

powered farming activities. The plans also include activities for strengthening SACCOS in order to, among

other things, provide farmers – groups or individuals – with credit for acquiring power tillers and tractors.

Government at all levels needs to ensure the proper functioning of SACCOS so that they provide the

requisite credit to members for the acquisition or hiring of mechanisation services.

2.3.3 Land deployment and use: government should play a more active role in ensuring the rational

and efficient use of available arable land and in resolving land-related conflicts. This should be based on

efficiency in terms of contributing to the country and community’s wellbeing and prosperity, as well as on

equity and the need to ensure food security at the national and household levels. In Kilosa and Lindi districts,

areas of potential arable land held by title-holders or traditional owners are underutilised. In such cases, the

government could consider playing a role in acquiring such lands and reallocating them to local communities

who would ensure their efficient use for the benefit of the economy. The government should hold discussions

with the owners with a view to encouraging them to commercialise lands through long-term leasing or

outright sale, to make land available for landless farmers. Clearly, a fair and transparent process for such

reallocation would be needed whereby title-holders would be guaranteed a fair price for lands.

2.3.4 Land use planning and the application of proper land husbandry practices are an important means

for ensuring that every piece of land is used in a way that will be most productive for the economy while

sustaining biodiversity and the environment. Land use planning would help determine which lands are best

suited for livestock grazing, crop production, natural resources, and environmental conservation.

2.3.5 Competition between arable farmers for the limited developed infrastructure is best resolved by the

farmers themselves, through their group committees with the help of those public agencies responsible for the

development of infrastructure. Such agencies, collaborating with the group committees and, if necessary, the

village government, should have the clout to stand firm and ensure that the utilisation of infrastructure is shared

equitably amongst beneficiaries. With regard to conflicts between livestock keepers and arable farmers, fairness

and firmness from government and political leadership at the national, regional, district and local levels in

allocating lands to crop farmers and livestock keepers are necessary. Leadership will need to be resolute in

ensuring that each party stays in allocated areas, and when trespassing occurs prompt and equitable penalties

are imposed and enforced. According to arable farmers in most areas, both government and political leaders are

not robust in handling natural resource conflicts, often to the disadvantage of arable farmers. In the area of

Kilangali in Kilosa district, farmers complained that the excessive trampling of the land around rivers by Masai and

Sukuma herds has resulted in changes to the course of the river, increasing the frequency and severity of floods.

2.3.6 Farmers, especially in Kilosa district, complain that government at all levels has not been serious in

working at finding solutions to conflicts between crop and livestock farmers. They point out that cases

reported by crop farmers of Masai or Sukuma cattle destroying crops or irrigation infrastructure are either not

taken seriously, or the sanctions applied are insufficient and do not act as a deterrent – for example fines of

TSh20,000 for an infraction that destroys a whole crop. Farmers also complain that their community leaders

and district authorities are influenced by conflicts of interest and corruption. Examples were given of farmers

Farmers,especially in

Kilosa district,complain that

government atall levels has not

been serious inworking at

finding solutionsto conflicts

between cropand livestock

farmers.

11

being jailed for pressing for action to be taken against herdsmen whose cattle destroy crops and irrigation

infrastructures. In one case local political and government officials expropriated proceeds from fines paid by

herdsmen for their own use. The government at the community, district/local and national levels, should take

firm steps to resolve conflicts between various land users. The government should hold discussions with the

owners with a view to encouraging them to commercialise lands through long-term leasing or outright sale, to

make land available for landless farmers. Natural resource disputes between herdsmen and crop farmers

(around issues such as trespassing on irrigation fields and destruction of crops, denial of access to watering

points, grazing rights etc.) are not new in Tanzania. Legislation must address this and sensitive conflict

management techniques must be employed. The participation of the two parties – arable farmers and

herdsmen – in negotiating and establishing boundaries between arable and grazing land, relevant bylaws for

ensuring observance of these agreed boundaries and sanctions for contravention is essential for the

achievement of the desired results.

2.3.7 Irrigation and rainwater harvesting: irrigation is one important but expensive way of

enhancing the productivity of land. To make the investment worthwhile, irrigation infrastructure must be

regularly maintained and used with maximum efficiency. In the irrigation sites visited, it was reported that

irrigation efficiency is deteriorating as a result of water being lost through seepage along the walls and floors

of the canals. There is an acute need for cleaning up and plastering the canal walls and floors, followed by

regular and meticulous maintenance to ensure smooth water flow.

2.3.8 There is also a need for steps to be taken to ensure that land developed for irrigation is distributed

equitably between the benefiting farmers. This should be done mainly at village level, with the involvement of

agencies responsible for putting irrigation infrastructures in place. Beyond the distribution of land developed

for irrigation, community leaders need to ensure that transparent and fair irrigation water user rights and

responsibilities, including scheduling of irrigation frequency, duration and hour of day, are instituted and

observed, taking into account special needs and circumstances of various categories of farmers. For instance,

for reasons of personal security and social responsibilities, women should not be assigned to irrigate during

the night, and they should be assigned equitable irrigation duration and frequency. Special consideration

should be given to making adequate provisions for the youth to access irrigated land to encourage them to

engage in productive agriculture.

2.3.9 Apart from rivers and streams as sources for irrigation, rain water harvesting and conservation for

irrigation and drinking by humans and livestock is another way of improving productivity. To this end, the

government, communities and development partners should encourage and invest in the development of

charco dams and other structures for the efficient harvesting and utilisation of rainwater.

2.3.10 Agro-chemicals and yields improvement: the most frequently used method of enhancing

productivity is through the application of yield-boosting and plant-protecting chemicals. These include

fertilisers, pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, improved high yielding seed and plant varieties that are resistant

or tolerant to particular diseases, pests or climatic conditions. However marginal farmers are often unable to

access these products for two main reasons: (i) they are too costly; (ii) for marginal farmers in areas that are

difficult to reach such inputs are inaccessible, as is the case with Kilangali in Kilosa district.

2.3.11 Agricultural credit for accessing farm inputs: access to credit is one of the most common

ways of improving the financial accessibility and profitability of farm inputs for farmers. The SACCOS model

is being strongly promoted through the DADPs. There is a need to review experience to date in order to learn

from the successes in Mtwara Rural district, which seems to have the most vibrant SACCOS movement, and

to address the challenges faced in the other districts.

2.3.12 For success, agricultural credit schemes depend on the commitment of members to deploy credit

resources for the purpose for which they were contracted and to refund the loan according to the agreed

schedule. It is therefore important that those who are promoting the credit scheme, in this case SACCOS,

undertake measures to ensure the close monitoring of the SACCOS resourced activities to pre-empt the

diversion of funds to consumption or other non-productive uses. In promoting borrowing it must always be born

in mind that the primary purpose of providing a loan is to enable the borrower to increase production and income

and thereby ensure that the loan can be repaid. With this in mind, it is advisable for SACCOS credit supervision

and advisory services to go hand in hand with agricultural extension services: the latter seeking to advise the

borrower on ensuring the success and profitability of the undertaking, while the former ensuring that accounting

and other records are kept properly.

2.3.13 Agricultural credit when used properly is the best means available to marginal farmers to raise the

capital necessary to carry out income-generating activities. The critical importance of SACCOS members

adhering to the rules and respecting credit terms, including credit repayment schedules, must always be borne in

mind. In a number of villages the research team found that care had not been taken in advising SACCOS

members as to which banks would be ideal for depositing their SACCOS resources. Clearly if SACCOS are to

succeed and become sustainable the government will need to support this initiative by: enforcing the rule of law

to ensure people do not abuse SACCOS resources and mandate; providing a sufficient number of credit advisors;

and facilitating close linkages between the work of credit advisors, extension workers, community workers and

any other agents providing technical support to marginal farmers in respect of their income generating activities.

2.3.14 Effective agricultural extension services: in order for the extension service to perform its role

of ensuring increased productivity, continuous contact must be maintained with farmers. Such contact

enables the extension agent to deliver advice on production techniques to farmers, and to hear production

and related problems from the farmers. Unfortunately, regular contact between extension agent, farmer and

research is not feasible given the small number of extension agents. However, while the number of SACCOS

borrowers remains small, it should be possible for extension agents to pay particular attention to active

borrowers. It is important that both SACCOS and agricultural staff win the confidence of the farmer so that

there can be frank discussion of problems and solutions. This situation is likely to change for the better fairly

quickly given the on-going government drive to recruit and train a large number of extension agents for

deployment to the districts.

2.3.15 A critical requirement for an effective extension system is to ensure that extension agents have the

appropriate means of commuting to and from the target farmers and research stations to perform their

responsibilities. The practice now is to provide junior extension agents with bicycles, mid-level subject matter

specialists with motorcycles, and senior management personnel with motor cars. There is a planned

programme in most districts to provide the motorcycles on a user purchase basis so that, in time, the

motorcycles become fully owned by the officers. This approach, if properly organised and accompanied with

allowances for fuel and maintenance, will serve the double purpose of enabling the agents to gain maximum

access to target farmers, while providing them with the incentive of eventually owning the motorcycle or

vehicle. User owner schemes also tend to ensure the equipment lasts longer than when provided as

government owned.

2.3.16 In order to maintain close contact with farmers, extension workers should be resident in their

assigned area. However, for the time being, because of the lack of housing in the work stations this may not

be possible. This means that extension agents have to travel long distances and may have to spend nights

away from their residence. It is therefore necessary that, in the short-term, funds should be budgeted for

accommodation allowances for agents. In the longer term, resources will have to be made available to

construct or otherwise acquire living quarters for extension staff in the field.

2.3.17 In order to reach marginal farmers located in very remote areas, extension agents have to put in

extra effort – travelling long distances, sometimes on foot where terrain prevents motorcycle riding, or

spending a number of nights away from their residence. This may discourage field workers from serving such

areas. It may therefore be worthwhile for the government to conceive incentive schemes for workers serving

in such difficult areas, a hardship allowance for instance, in the same manner as medical professionals are

paid high risk allowances when dealing with excessively dangerous situations. In the absence of such

incentives some marginal farmers may be further marginalised by never receiving extension advice.

2.3.18 A ‘carrot and stick’ approach is ideal for managing extension workers who can not be supervised

on regular basis. This would entail the granting of significant reward for extraordinary performance and

sanctions for underperformance. Other useful incentives could include periodic refresher training, seminars

where extension workers could exchange experiences, and structured workshops and seminars with

research personnel for updates on new research findings. In addition to equipping extension workers with

new knowledge and skills, they should be provided with a set of basic tools and relevant literature on basic

technological guidelines, field camping gear, a health and safety kit and measuring equipment relevant to

their operating area.

The farmer fieldschool has beenpraised by most

farmers aseffectively

complementingextension

workers’ efforts.

12

2.3.19 In the course of the field mission, the research team found that the farmer field school has been

praised by most farmers as effectively complementing extension workers’ efforts. Farmers who have gone

through these schools become extension agents to their colleagues. In most villages visited farmers have

urged that the schools be continued to cover all important crops and livestock, a desire that should be

acknowledged by ministry, donor and other development actors.

2.3.20 Small livestock and household food security: apart from improving food security through

increased production and productivity, a household or community may also improve its food security by

increasing income, from whatever source, so that people are able to procure enough food to meet their

requirements. However, with most rural income coming from agriculture, decreased crop production also

means shortage of income. In the villages visited by the research team marginal farmers keep some

livestock, mostly small stock (pigs, goats, and poultry), as a source of supplementary income and food

security. Such livestock is very useful for providing income at short notice for essential economic and social

obligations, including procurement of food stuffs, farm inputs, paying school fees and the like. Several of the

DADPs include the raising of small stock. There are also donor and NGO initiatives outside of the DADPs

supporting the development of small stock. Generally these initiatives are highly appreciated by farmers.

More of these activities should be encouraged in future DADPs.

2.3.21 Market information: more needs to be done by the government, in the short-term, to publicise

market information on prevailing prices for various products in neighbouring towns. This will enable farmers

to better negotiate with traders coming to buy their farm outputs. Information on available supplies should

also be made available to traders in the nearest towns, thereby enabling farmers and traders to make

informed decisions as to when, where, and at what price to sell and buy farm produce. This would encourage

more traders and producers to come forth, enlarging the markets for available produce and increasing

competition for products, which would boost prices.

2.3.22 Storage and agro-processing facilities: the government needs to institute policies and

programmes aimed at enabling marginal farmers to obtain remunerative prices for their farm outputs. As

reported above most marginal farmers sell their produce soon after and even before harvest at very low

prices, partly to raise funds for pressing obligations such as school fees, and partly because they do not have

suitable storage facilities to keep the produce to sell out of season when prices improve. Since individual

farmers would not be in a position to construct such facilities the government should, through the DADPs,

facilitate the construction and management of produce market stores for major farm products at strategic

points. Arrangements would be made for farmers to deposit their produce for storage at a fee. The produce

would then be sold later when prices have risen sufficiently.

2.3.23 Alternatively arrangements could be made through SACCOS, once sufficiently established in terms

of resources and management ability, to lend funds to farmers’ groups to construct their own produce and

inputs stores. Markets for minor products are likely to develop spontaneously around the market stores

constructed for the principal products. More traditionally, farmers may be aided to improve the value of their

output by helping them process and improve the packaging of their produce. This support may be in the form

of enabling private entrepreneurs to invest in grain milling plants, giving farmers the option of selling their

grain in raw or processed form. Value addition activities may also extend to processing and packaging other

products, including fruit and vegetables, targeting domestic as well as foreign markets.

2.3.24 Continued produce market liberalisation: in much of the research area improvements in the

prices at which farmers are able to sell their goods is attributable to the market liberalisation policies pursued

by the government in recent years. The freedom of movement of products and traders of agricultural

products has greatly helped expand the market for farm produce, where distance and infrastructure is

reasonable. Farmers interviewed in Iringa and Kilosa acknowledge that the only reason prices for rice have

improved so much (from less than TSh20,000 a bag up to TSh90,000) over recent years is because traders

have come from as far a field as Dar es Salaam, Zanzibar and Pemba to procure it.

The governmentneeds to institutepolicies andprogrammesaimed at enablingmarginal farmersto obtainremunerativeprices for theirfarm outputs.

13

3. The effectiveness of government and donor support

3.1 DADP implementation in the research districts

3.1.1 The discussion in chapter two has shown that to tackle food insecurity and poverty amongst

marginal farmers, development efforts must deal with challenges that limit the capacity of these farmers to

produce or otherwise access enough food to satisfy their food security requirements. These challenges may

therefore be conveniently grouped into two categories: those that limit the farmer’s capacity to produce

enough quantities of food; and those that limit the farmer’s capacity to access enough supplies from outside

the household. Challenges limiting the farmer’s capacity to produce enough food may themselves be divided

into two sub-groups: physical and policy/statutory constraints that limit capacity to expand the size of the

farm; and factors that limit capacity to increase the productivity of existing production units. Constraints that

limit the farmer’s ability to access sufficient supplies also fall into two principal categories: physical and

policy/statutory constraints including lack of roads, excessive distances to sources of supplies, absence of

supplies and statutory regulations; and financial and related policy and statutory regulations that limit the

farmer’s ability to buy sufficient supplies.

3.1.2 In this chapter we analyse the experience of implementing DADPs in the research districts to

assess the extent to which the activities built into these plans have contributed to improving food security

and reducing poverty amongst marginal farmers. DADPs are an integral part of the Agriculture Sector

Development Programme (ASDP), implementation of which began in 2003/04. In the research districts

DADP planning began in 2003/04 and implementation started on pilot a scale in 2004/05 until 2005/06.

In Mtwara Rural district, for instance, for the period 2003/04-2006/07 the annual DADP budget averaged

TSh35 million for a very limited number of interventions and administrative expenses. For the research

districts, it is only following the 2006/07 obstacles and opportunities to development (O&OD) exercise that

larger interventions were funded.

3.1.3 As was largely the case in Mtwara Rural district, DADP implementation in the other research

districts began in earnest in 2006/07, following the adoption of the multi-donor and government agreement

to fund agricultural development activities in the country under a Basket Fund arrangement. This

arrangement brought together contributions from a group of six bi-lateral and multi-lateral development

partners14

and the Government within the framework of the country’s on-going Local Government Reform

Programme. Because of the inadequacy of data on the initial three years of DADP implementation, the

discussion that follows focuses on DADP implementation during 2006/07-2007/08. In Annex 2 we

summarise the principal activities funded under the DADPs during this period in the four research districts,

together with the lists of the principal challenges reported by the communities in the villages visited during

the field research, for purposes of analysing the extent to which DADP activities have responded to meeting

the challenges faced by marginal farmers as they strive to attain their food security objectives. We group the

challenges into the two categories and four sub-categories discussed above:

i) Challnges that limit the farmer’s capacity to produce enough food, including:

• physical and policy/statutory constraints that limit the farmer’s capacity to expand the size of the

production unit; and

• constraints that limit the farmer’s capacity to increase productivity in the existing production unit.

ii) Challenges that limit the farmer’s capacity to access, mostly through the market, enough

supplies, including:

• physical and policy/statutory constraints; and

• financial and related policy and statutory regulations that limit the farmer’s ability to

buy sufficient supplies.

3.1.4 Table 3(a) presents the funding of DADPs from the central government for the four research districts

during the period 2006/07-2007/08 (up to the second quarter). The first four columns in this table represent

government’s actual approval and disbursement to the LGAs. The next four columns represent what the LGAs

14

14Danish International Development

Agency (DANIDA). Japan

International Development Agency

(JICA), the European Union (EU),

Irish Aid (IA), the International

Fund for Agricultural Development

(IFAD), and the International

Development Association (IDA) of

the World Bank.

spent from all sources – government, other bilateral and multilateral funded interventions not channelled

through the Basket Fund, LGA own funds, etc. Table 3(b) attempts to assess the rate of expenditure and

financial implementation relative to the amount of funds approved and disbursed. It should be read with

caution since the latter includes unknown but significant contributions from interventions funded from outside

the government budget and the Basket Fund and, in some cases, funds carried forward from the previous

year. This notwithstanding, for the purposes of the present report the data in Table 3(b) may be useful for

making general observations, bearing in mind this weakness.

3.1.5 The data in Table 3(a) attempts to compare the rate of implementation with the amounts of the

approved and disbursed funds for the planned development activities in the respective research LGAs.

In essence this should be a measure of the efficiency with which funds approved and disbursed are deployed

to the planned development activities. The data indicates that Lindi Rural district had the worst record both

in terms of approved and disbursed funds averaging 35.45% compared to over 100% expenditure for the

other districts. This somewhat corroborates the observation made by the research mission that, in the district,

very little of the planned activities are being implemented. One of the reasons performance during 2006/07

was poor could have been that funds were disbursed by the central government at the end of the calendar

year, November/December, about half-way through the financial year, and when for many areas one growing

season would have been lost already. The funds were late for all districts, but the reason Lindi would have

done so much worse than the other districts appears to be the fact that the district has much less human

resources than the others.

3.1.6 Consultations with government officials indicate that the principal reason for delays in the release

of funds for DADP implementation is the government’s failure to prepare and submit to the Development

Partners the draft Annual Action Programme (AAP) on the basis of which the partners request funding from

their governments. The delay in the submission of the AAP is partly a consequence of the complex learning

process involving the concurrence of the implementation of the Local Government Reforms (LGRs) and the

fundamental shift in the responsibility for implementing agricultural development activities from central

government to the district governments (Local Government Authorities – LGAs) and village government

authorities. It is encouraging though that even with only the one and a half year data that we have been able

to access, there are signs that the performance during 2007/08 will be better all-round than the previous

year. For instance already this year by the end of the second quarter 49% of all approved funds have been

disbursed to the LGAs, contrary to last year when by the same period funds were just beginning to arrive at

Table 3 (b): DADP financial performance – 2006/07-2007/08 (Percentages)

15

Table 3 (a): DADP financial performance – 2006/07- 2007/08 (TSh Million)

Approved Received at District Spent Implementation

District 06/07 07/08 06/07 07/08 06/07 07/08 06/07 07/08

Iringa 162.50 1,298.48 116.51 1,293.40 115.80 770.15 162.53 n.a.

Lindi 45.00 392.42 45.00 209.69 48.70 45.58 13.70 n.a.

Kilosa 318.67 2,006.43 318.67 345.12 323.46 252.80 318.66 n.a.

Mtwara 57.42 757.254 52.39 206.13 52.39 n.a. 61.59 n.a.

Totals 583.58 4,454.59 532.56 2,054.34 540.36 1,068.52 556.48 0.00

Implem./Approved Implem./Received Expend./Approved Expend./Received Receiv./ Approved

District 06/07 07/08 06/07 07/08 06/07 07/08 06/07 07/08 06/07 07/08

Iringa 100.02 n.a. 139.50 n.a. 71.26 59.31 99.39 59.31 71.70 99.61

Lindi 30.45 n.a. 30.45 n.a. 108.22 11.62 108.22 11.62 100.00 53.44

Kilosa 100.00 n.a. 100.00 n.a. 101.51 12.60 101.51 12.60 100.00 17.20

Mtwara 107.26 n.a. 117.55 n.a. 91.24 n.a. 100.00 n.a. 91.24 27.22

Average 84.43 0.00 96.88 0.00 93.06 20.88 102.28 20.88 90.74 49.37

Source: Calculated from Table 3 (a)

the Treasury from the Development Partners. Interestingly, expenditure for Lindi Rural district is shown to be

108% compared to the approved and disbursed funds. For the other districts expenditure averaged 88% and

100% of the approved and disbursed funds. Lindi Rural appears to have spent more than the approved and

disbursed funds because it has most of its approved and disbursed funds committed for future expenditures

but not actually spent.

3.1.7 Another interesting comparison is between approved funds and disbursement to the LGAs. It is

pointed out time after time that funds are often late arriving at the district headquarters or in the

beneficiaries’ bank accounts. Table 3(b) shows that during 2006/07 on average 90% of funds approved

were released to the research districts. Iringa had the lowest disbursement rate of 30%. Shortfall in

disbursement to Iringa was reflected in the failure to complete a number of plan activities. The problem of

late disbursement of funds to the LGAs is vindicated by the figures in the last column of Table 3(b) which

indicate that, on average, by the end of the second quarter the research districts had received 49.37% of

their respective approved budgets. For Kilosa district only 17% of its approved budget had been disbursed

to the district. The effect of this is to virtually paralyse the district.

3.1.8 The consequences of delayed funds for project activities, particularly for agricultural activities that are

season sensitive, can be very severe. Delayed funding often spells inability to acquire inputs or pay for other

essential services, including paying salaries and wages and failure to honour essential obligations that may

seriously damage trust from business collaborators. Delays in DADP funding have several origins. Sometimes

one or other donor or the government delays in releasing their portion of the funding into the basket. When

the delaying contributor is the government, the situation becomes more complicated as donors may hold back

release of their contributions.

3.2 DADP response to challenges over expanding food production

3.2.1 The discussion in chapter 2 indicates that limited supply of land is paradoxically one of the common

challenges to marginal farmers’ efforts to achieve food security. In most districts, the proportion of cropped

area is small relative to total arable land (e.g. 17% in Kilosa and 37% in Iringa Rural districts). Part of the

problem is that much of the remaining arable land is under alternative use, including livestock grazing, natural

resource (wildlife and forestry) conservation areas, and high value land that is held by absentee former estate

owners who have title on such lands even though they are not now using it. Other arable lands are marginal

(not being sufficiently fertile or with low rainfall). To make a living out of cultivating marginal land one would

need to cultivate a large area or invest heavily in irrigation or fertility-enhancing inputs. Such options are out

of the question for marginal farmers whose labour force is very small, often one or two able-bodied adults,

and unable to invest in farm inputs. As noted in chapter two, marginal farmers’ ability to access enough high

quality irrigated land is constrained by their relatively weak social standing, especially single women farmers.

In Kilosa district the competition for land between arable farmers and herdsmen is particularly serious as

livestock not only graze on crops, but also destroy irrigation infrastructure and, in the case of Kilangali village,

alter the flow of the river causing frequent floods.

3.2.2 Government action in rationalising the use of available land between various uses would contribute

to optimising the utilisation of the district’s land resources. It should be possible under the relevant legal and

legislative processes to revoke titles on underdeveloped lands held by absentee title holders, or negotiate

leasing or outright purchase of lands held by private landowners, as in Lindi. With regard to intrusion by herds

of livestock for grazing, the Kilosa DADP for 2007/08 incorporates an activity to demarcate agro-pastoral

land in two villages not visited by the research team. This is a good initiative, but land specifically earmarked

for livestock grazing already exists, and herdsmen continue to drive their herds into crop farming areas.

Experience shows that there is a serious lack of commitment on the part of local, district and even national

government to take firm action against livestock keepers who contravene existing land boundaries. For

instance, farmers have reported that when cases against livestock grazing on crops or damaging irrigation

infrastructure are taken to court, the sanctions on the culprits are minimal (e.g. TSh20,000) and not enough

to discourage continued infractions. In some cases farmers’ complaints are dismissed without much

consideration. Government at all levels clearly needs to demonstrate greater effectiveness in ensuring that

livestock keepers confine their animals to designated areas.

3.2.3 Consultations with members of the irrigation committee at Ilonga revealed that the committee was

taking appropriate steps of its own to deal with the problems raised by women farmers regarding the

equitable allocation of plots, where women farmers tend to get smaller plots than men. The committee was

Theconsequences

of delayedfunds for

projectactivities,

particularly foragricultural

activities thatare season

sensitive, canbe very severe.

16

also taking steps to address the issues of the frequency of irrigation and assigning irrigation times to women

during the night.

3.2.4 All four DADPs have invested in improving irrigated agriculture, mostly rehabilitating existing canals

by cleaning up and concreting the floors and walls to prevent loss of irrigation water through seepage. These

measures should improve the flow of water, making it possible for increased volumes to reach plots that are

further from the main canals, where marginal farmers’ plots are most likely to be located. In Iringa some

construction of new irrigation canals has been funded under the current DADP, though not in villages visited

by the researcher. These measures will increase irrigation water and area but they will not guarantee that

marginal farmers will have a better deal. To ensure marginal farmers’ improved access to the available lands,

more equitable access to irrigation water and reasonable scheduling of irrigation time, particularly for women

farmers, the government especially at the village level needs to be specifically sensitive to the special needs

of marginal farmers and vulnerable groups. One way of ensuring this is to ensure that these farmers and

vulnerable members are adequately represented in the various decision making committees.

3.2.5 The dearth, and excessive cost, of tractor hire services is a major constraint to marginal farmers’

ability to expand production, as it condemns them to reliance on limited family labour. It is not likely that the

cost of tractor hire will fall soon. In any case, at the scale of operation of the marginal farmer, it is more

practical to consider more appropriate technologies such as using ox ploughs or, at best, power tillers. Each

of the DADPs in the research districts has invested in the acquisition, equipping and training of oxen and

farmers in using oxen for cultivation. The popularisation of this technology is likely to be more appropriate to

the scale of operation and within the financial reach of the average marginal farmer. The government needs

to put more emphasis on promoting this more appropriate technology in order to satisfy the power needs of

marginal farmers. In parallel to this, considering the success of SACCOS, individuals and groups of farmers

and entrepreneurs could be encouraged to borrow funds and procure tractors and power tillers to offer hire

service in the project areas. More robust incentives such as cheaper credit, microfinance programmes and

farmer-friendly banking products would facilitate such growth in hire services.

3.3 DADP response to challenges over enhancing productivity

3.3.1 The very poor state of road infrastructure in much of the farming areas in the research districts is

the single most important constraint with the most far reaching implications on efforts to improve

productivity. Because of bad or non-existent roads agricultural inputs do not reach farmers in time, if at all,

and the little that arrive become very expensive and often out of reach for most marginal farmers. In Kilangali

village, for instance, there is no shop selling fertilisers and even the subsidised fertilisers are not available.

As a consequence, farmers are not able to realise increased productivity and the increase in income that

would have resulted from increased productivity. Bad roads also prevent markets for farm outputs.

Impassable roads prevent the expansion of markets, both for inputs and outputs, as few traders make it to

these difficult-to-reach areas to sell inputs or buy outputs.

3.3.2 The current subsidy on fertilisers seeks to reduce the high cost of fertilisers to farmers. On

interviewing farmers in Ilonga, some 20km away, it was found that many of the farmers were not aware of

the existence of subsidised fertilisers. There is need therefore for more intensive publicising of the availability

of the fertiliser subsidy. Another issue with the fertiliser subsidy is that some of the agents appointed to sell

the subsidised fertilisers do not make much effort to sell it, since their return is low compared to sales of

commercial supplies. The government’s extension services should help seriously promote this fertiliser. On

visiting Kilangali village in Kilosa district it was found that subsidised fertiliser has never been delivered there

because of bad roads and the concern that such fertiliser, if delivered there, would have to be sold at a price

considerably higher than the announced price for the subsidised inputs. It has been reported that the

government intends to use the nearly completed farm inputs shop, built under the SPFS, to stock subsidised

fertilisers transported there using government vehicles. This should help mitigate the problem of transport

costs and therefore cause the price to the user to remain at, or close to, that announced by the government.

3.3.3 In each of the research districts, the inadequacy of the extension services is a major constraint

hampering farmers’ efforts to increase productivity. The quality of extension service delivery to farmers

depends on the frequency of contact between the extension agents and farmers. With the current extension

agents to farmers ratio of 20,000:1 it is virtually impossible to ever reach a significant proportion of the

farmers in any given period. The government is acting to improve the situation. One step being taken at the

national level is to crash-train and recruit additional agents. Other options available include making greater

Impassableroads prevent theexpansion ofmarkets, both forinputs andoutputs, as fewtraders make itto these difficult-to-reach areas.

17

use of private extension service providers. For the time being to increase the effectiveness of the current

extension team, the DADPs are purchasing more motorcycles for the extension staff to improve their mobility

and ability to reach the maximum number of farmers.

3.3.4 Among the recent extension initiatives that have found great success in improving productivity has

been the introduction of the farmer field schools.15

Farmers who have gone through the schools are expected

to be teachers of those who have not gone through the schools. In this way the services of the limited

extension workers reach a much greater number of farmers than would otherwise be possible.

3.3.5 To increase the effectiveness of the extension services, especially in the hard-to-reach villages that

are inaccessible because of rough terrain, two other options may be considered: i) providing official housing

for extension agents in their assigned work stations, on account of long distance or rough terrain; and ii)

providing special hardship allowances for agents serving particularly difficult stations. The justification for

such special consideration is somewhat similar to that made in respect of using government transportation

to ensure that marginal farmers in the difficult-to-reach villages obtain subsidised fertilisers at a price not

too different to that announced by the government.

3.3.6 The inadequacy and high cost of agricultural credit has been repeatedly reported as one of the major

hindrances to improving productivity. Presently in Tanzania most formal sources of credit shun lending to small-

sale agriculture. In any case the interest rates charged (often over 20% annually) are so high that it would be

difficult for farmers to afford. Presently the only lending institutions that remains credible for small-scale

agriculture is the SACCOS. The DADPs strongly advocate SACCOS as a way of enabling farmers and other

low income groups to mobilise savings from their limited resources and lend themselves for productive

investments. All DADPs in the research districts have activities seeking to promote SACCOS. While the

performance has been mixed across the districts and villages, the SACCOS appears to have a future as the

institution that will enable most marginal farmers escape the vicious cycle of poverty and food insecurity.

3.3.7 The SACCOS has made a good start in Mtwara Rural district. In the other research districts

progress has been mixed. In Kilosa SACCOS accounts were opened in the NMB bank which has proven to

be a false start since the bank does not lend for small scale agriculture. The funds deposited are in the

process of being moved to the CRDB bank which has experience with SACCOS operations. Efforts to

promote SACCOS should continue. However, recalling the country’s disappointing experience with past

cooperative savings and credit institutions, special care should be taken to protect the population against

fraudulent officials. To this end SACCOS operations should be closely monitored and severe penalties

applied on officials that misappropriate or otherwise destroy the trust people have in SACCOS.

3.4 DADP response to challenges limiting ability to ensure food

security from outside the household

3.4.1 A number of factors have been listed in chapter 2 as restricting marginal farmers’ ability to access

food from outside the household. These include factors such as the state of physical and social infrastructure

(especially roads, markets, and related institutions, policies and regulations), the family’s economic resource

base (including livestock, especially small stock), and access to credit with which the family may carry out

income generating activities and therefore augment its income and improve food security. The poor state and

non-existence of roads and market infrastructure have been identified in all the research districts as being

among the most important constraints. Yet as may be seen in annex 2, none of the 2006/07 DADPs in the

research districts included activities to improve or construct roads or market infrastructure for crops, and of

the 2007/08 DADPs only that for Iringa rural had some crop related road and market infrastructural works.

There are infrastructure works in both DADPs for livestock-related infrastructure which is not of primary

importance to marginal farmers. This means that the existing infrastructural impediments to farmers’ ability

to ensure their food security from outside the household will persist. Surprisingly, in interviews with district

and local leadership, and even villagers no one mentioned any plans for self-help efforts to alleviate the

infrastructural constraints. Villagers were heaping all the blame on their elected officials (MPs and

councillors) for doing nothing.

3.4.2 The persistence of bad roads and lack of markets and market infrastructure will continue to restrict

the capacity of farmers to generate income by limiting the availability and increasing the cost of inputs while

reducing the price of outputs. The continuing absence of markets and market stores will continue to compel

farmers to sell their produce at throw away prices immediately after harvest because they have no way of

holding the produce for sale off season at almost five times the prices that prevail at the time of harvesting.

18

15The Farmer Filed School entails

the training by the extension

agent of a group of farmers

husbandry practices of a given

crop through out the growing

season from planting to harvest.

3.4.3 Farmers interviewed complained that there are few significant opportunities apart from crop

farming for generating income. They noted that as most of their cash crops are also food crops, there is a

tendency to oversell or over consume (e.g. for ceremonial functions) and run out of food supplies before the

ensuing crop is due. With differences in scale, all the DADPs have some alternative income generating

activities, mostly livestock e.g. dairy cattle, pig and chicken. As regards chicken, there are major programmes

for vaccination against Newcastle disease in Lindi and Mtwara Rural districts. In Kilosa DADP 2007/08 has

an activity for introducing horticultural crops in villages.

3.5 Donor funded programmes outside of the basket fund

3.5.1 While many of the donor-funded interventions in the agricultural sector are progressively being

absorbed into the basket fund arrangement, a few conspicuous exceptions remain. Among these is the World

Bank funded Participatory Agricultural Development Programme (PADEP) which is under implementation in

Iringa Rural district. While funded outside of the basket fund arrangement and implemented outside of the

DADP framework, PADEP works closely with the DADPs. It acts as a pilot project for the DADPs by

demonstrating: i) best practices for investing in community level development activities; and ii) participatory

techniques in planning, implementing and monitoring development activities. The implementation of PADEP

began in 2003. The programme finances: i) community development activities including, infrastructure

development (construction of roads, irrigation structures and cattle dips, establishment of market centres); ii)

capacity building for farmers and staff training in entrepreneurial and procurement skills; and iii) technical

support through contract agents to help carry out specific activities, e.g. tendering, training on entrepreneurial

skills and procurement rules, and hiring contractors for infrastructural works.

3.5.2 With respect to capacity building: for farmers, PADEP assists individual farmers and farmers’

groups in planning and implementing crop and livestock projects; for the government, the programme helps

sustain government capacity for supporting demand driven community projects and helps facilitate the

transfer of technology in response to specific farmers’ needs; in addition, PADEP promotes increased

participation by the private sector in the supply of agricultural inputs and crop marketing.

3.5.3 The Danish International Development Agency (DANIDA) has made a major contribution to the

country’s development efforts in the areas of agribusiness, natural resources development, and

empowerment of human resources, thereby helping to build the foundation for development planning at the

district and community levels. Like the World Bank, DANIDA has activities funded outside of the basket fund

and implemented in various districts outside of the DADP framework but that are also closely related and

that support DADP operations. More specifically, DANIDA has assisted in:

i) building a foundation for planning rural development activities in various areas;

ii) training of LGA counsellors on agriculture and livestock policies,

iii) training of farmers and extension staff in agricultural production and productivity enhancement

techniques;

iv) setting up Agricultural Resource Centres at the Division level and installing radio call facilities in each

centre;

v) facilitating quarterly District Agricultural Development Strategy (DADS) quarterly workshops for District

Business Councils to support Public/Private Sector partnerships involving all sectors.

3.5.4 At the regional level the Business Council brings together from the government: the Regional

Administration Secretary (RAS), Regional Agricultural Advisor (RAA), representatives from the Ministries of

Agriculture, Food Security and Cooperatives, and of Livestock Development, Regional Planning Officer

(RPLO), and Regional Cooperative Officer; and from the private sector leading members of the business

community. At the district level the Business Council would involve, among others, the District Executive

Director (DED), District Agricultural and Livestock Development Officer (DALDO), and District Planning

Officers (DPLOs). The Council is proposed to have a representation of 50% public and 50% private sector.

The specific details, including constitution of each Council will have to be worked out following a review or

the proposal. A decision has been taken to adopt this model in the Iringa DADP as of the next financial year.

Programmatically DANIDA has had interventions in infrastructure development including the construction of

marketing centres, bridges, and roads. It has extensively supported the Farmer Field Schools, and the Ward

Farmers’ Forum (WFF). Through its various contributions, DANIDA has helped refine and strengthen the

planning of Village Agricultural Development Plans (VADPs and the DADPs).

The continuingabsence ofmarkets andmarket storeswill continue tocompel farmersto sell theirproduce at throwaway prices.

19

3.5.5 The African Development Bank (AfDB)/FAO funded Special Programme for Food Security (SPFS)

is a relatively small but significant programme that operates in collaboration with but independent of the

DADPs. The SPFS programme in Tanzania started in the mid-1990s with the expressed objective of helping

ensure that people access sufficient, safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs for an active

and healthy life all year round. Operationally, the programme focuses on:

• capacity building in farmer field schools and water user associations;

• crop intensification by promoting improved crop practices under rain fed and irrigated agriculture;

• empowering poor farmers through micro grants to carry out crop intensification programmes and, through

the farmer field schools, empowering the farmers attending the schools to spread the lessons learned to

their colleagues who did not attend the field schools – graduating farmers are provided with the basic kit,

including seeds and fertilisers in order to pass on the training and to demonstrate to their neighbours the

improved techniques learned at the field schools;

• diversification – introduction of small livestock such as chicken, dairy goats and pigs targeting the very

poor and HIV positive cases in order to improve their incomes and nutrition;

• training of farmers and Extension Workers on HIV.

3.5.6 In Iringa and Kilosa districts SPFS began operations in 2002. In Iringa the programme has run 61

Farmer Field schools involving a total of 1,211 farmers, and trained 11 extension workers. A total of 880

participating farmers’ groups were equipped with improved post harvest techniques, including construction of

storage structures at household level. 30 participating farmers’ groups with 616 Farmer Field School graduates,

after meeting project conditions, mobilised resources, opened bank accounts and were given grants totalling

TSh25.6m for various enterprises. In Kilosa district the SPFS has a programme which, among other things,

promotes the production of improved small stock (goats, pigs, and chicken) targeting the very poor and

vulnerable groups including orphans and widows. Its programme of promoting the production of improved cattle,

pigs and milk goats seeks to work with relevant groups to build their capacity for improving incomes among

villagers.

3.6 NGO and other non-state interventions

3.6.1 Apart from donor government related interventions related to the DADPs, there are a number of

NGO and other non-state sponsored agencies that fund operations that also directly support or are closely

related to DADP activities. Concern Worldwide’s own programme in Mtwara, Iringa, Lindi and Kigoma

Regions is one such programme. True to its guiding principle of facilitating peoples’ empowerment and their

right to control their own development in the alleviation of absolute poverty, Concern’s programmes in these

regions focus on: capacity building and empowering the poor and their communities appreciate and realise

their rights in agriculture, to land and to food. To these ends, Concern in its operations focuses on building

the capacity of the client communities, and of the relevant local government agencies, to put into practice

good governance, implement practices that are compatible with the desire to encourage the client

communities to be aware of and to pursue their rights to food and to free themselves from absolute poverty.

3.6.2 More specifically in Iringa, for instance, Concern’s programme supports CSOs contributing to the

implementation of DADPs in their respective areas. To this end, Concern provides small grants and advisory

services to enable them to improve their irrigation infrastructure and agricultural productivity by facilitating

access to farm inputs, being fully mindful of the unique circumstances of each farmer and farmer group.

Concern begins its intervention by identifying the most marginalised farmers and targets its intervention to

address their needs. In Mtwara Rural district Concern and the Japan International Cooperation Agency

(JICA) assist in supporting irrigation schemes in eight wards of the district. Among Concern’s activities in

Lindi Rural district is its programme to supply agricultural inputs and facilities for farming and education.

3.6.3 The Heifer International (HI) programme started as a church programme for the Evangelical

Lutheran Church of Tanzania, seeking to help members of the church improve their incomes so that they

may, in turn, help their churches perform their functions. The programmes objective is to enable participants

(the very poor) to achieve food security, alleviate poverty and contribute to the conservation of the

environment. In particular the programme targets the youth, orphans, the disabled, the elderly, and the

absolute poor. The programme has now expanded to involve members of the Anglican church. The technical

advisory service for the programme is provided by government extension officers from the district agricultural

office. The extension officers are paid a transport allowance and fuel by HI with salaries paid by their district

In Iringa theprogramme

has run 61farmer field

schoolsinvolving a

total of 1,211farmers, and

trained 11extensionworkers.

20

agriculture office. Under its motto of “kopa n’gombe lipa n’gombe”16

the qualifying beneficiaries get a

pregnant heifer. On calving, the beneficiary keeps the milk and gives the offspring to the next member of the

beneficiary-group. If the offspring is male it is sold and the proceeds are shared 50/50 between the church

and the beneficiary group. The second offspring is given to the next member but if it is male it is sold and

the group keeps the proceeds. At this stage the initial beneficiary keeps the mother and all the offspring that

follow. The other beneficiaries continue the system of passing on the offspring to other members of the

group and selling males.

3.6.4 The HI programme started in Kilosa district in 2000. To date the programme has given 206 heifers

to beneficiaries in 13 villages. The programme has also supplied 120 milk goats to beneficiaries in four

villages. It also provides local chickens to school children from poor families to keep and raise funds to help

with costs of school requirements. Under the chicken programme each qualifying child gets five chickens

and passes on five to other qualifying children. The chicken programme started with 31 children in two

villages and now has 44 children. HI also runs fish farming and bee keeping operations. The fish farming

operation started with two villages operating three ponds with a fish seed stock of 200. There are now four

villages operating 78 ponds with 81 fish farmers. The bee keeping operation has just started with one village

and three hives.

3.6.5 There are several other operations run by various national and international NGOs and donors.

These include those operating under TASAF’s programme of support for poverty reduction and

environmental conservation in the research districts. SWISSAID runs a programme which supports groups

of fishermen, vegetable farmers, and environment protection groups in Mtwara Rural district. The NGO

enables technical officers of the District Agriculture Office to provide support in the form of seeds, essential

equipment and funds to help with training and field allowances.

Concern beginsits interventionby identifyingthe mostmarginalisedfarmers andtargets itsintervention toaddress theirneeds.

21

16Translated “borrow a cow pay a cow”.

4.1 DADP planning and implementation

4.1.1 The Guidelines for District Agricultural Development Planning and Implementation (GDADPI) detail

the DADP planning process. The process begins with the identification, at the village level, of the ‘focus

group’ that will identify and articulate the development needs at the level of the grassroots. It is likely that

such a group would comprise the elite of the community and not such disadvantaged people as marginal

farmers or other vulnerable persons. It is also likely that the focus group so composed will not be able to

adequately articulate the challenges that face marginal farmers and identify measures to address the

challenges. To ensure that challenges facing marginal farmers are understood, articulated, and measures to

address them properly presented and prioritised, these farmers and other vulnerable groups should be

directly consulted. They should be assisted by experienced facilitators to explain the nature of their

challenges and articulate what is required and what activities should be prioritised to address these

challenges.

4.1.2 The DADP planning process is time consuming and, given existing human resources constraints,

difficult to complete in time. This contributes to the yearly delays in the release of the development partner

funding of the plans. Although there is the possibility of funds that are released but not used during a given

financial year being carried over for use during the ensuing financial year, the late release of funds tends to

create confusion on expenditure priorities and pressure to quickly spend the budgeted funds before the end

of the financial year. In this environment budget discipline is often compromised. To avoid this, it is

recommended that at the time funds are actually received at the district level, planners and implementers

should confer to review expenditure priorities and decide what can/must be done, and what may be

postponed until ensuing periods. In particular, this review would decide on what is to be done with funds for

agricultural activities whose season lapsed before the funds arrived.

4.1.3 Annex two indicates major deviations between the principal challenges identified by marginal

farmers and DADP activities. This demonstrates either failure of the O&OD process to identify these

challenges or a deliberate tendency by the planning process to replace priorities identified in the O&OD

process with other priorities. In either case, this defeats the whole purpose of decentralisation and the quest

for participatory planning to involve the beneficiaries in development efforts. The findings of this research

clearly indicate that the government needs to review its planning process to ensure that the DADP activities

correspond to what the farmers see as their principal concerns. Once implementation has begun, there is

also the need for regular monitoring and reviewing of the DADPs to ascertain that the plans stay on track

and, when necessary, plans are adjusted to suit changing realities. To facilitate this, a scheme of periodic

(quarterly, half-yearly, yearly, and mid-term) progress reviews is recommended.

4.1.4 It has been observed that at times the amounts of funds for individual DADP activities ultimately

received at the point of implementation are less than sums released for particular activities. It is reported, for

instance, that district counsellors tend to treat funds released to the councils as theirs to spend as they wish,

tampering with budgets and introducing items that are politically appealing but that have not been budgeted

for, or shifting funds between budgeted items to suit particular interests. The result is that planned activities

become starved of funds and can not be completed. To avoid this, it is recommended that DADP budgets

should not be altered except on regular reviews as proposed in 4.1.3.

22

4. Recommendations

Onceimplementation

has begun,there is also the

need forregular

monitoring andreviewing of

the DADPs toascertain thatthe plans stay

on track

4.2 DADP implementation, monitoring and review

4.2.1 The late completion and submission of the Annual Action Programme (AAP) to the Development

Partners (DPs) by the national authorities is a principal contributor to delays in funding of DADPs. This delay

is partly a consequence of the complex and lengthy process followed in preparing and processing the

DADPs which form the building blocks for the AAPs. To shorten the process of DADP preparation, it is

recommended that:

• instead of going through the entire process described in the GDADPI every year, once the initial DADP

for a particular district has been created, preparation of ensuing DADPs should involve a process of

building on the preceding DADP. This should be facilitated by a system of regular implementation

progress reporting combined with periodic all-stakeholder reviews and updating of the plans, involving:

(i) quarterly progress reporting connected to a six monthly all-stakeholder reviews and updating of

DADPs;

(ii) annual review of all DADPs to introduce necessary changes in DADP activities in the light of the

implementation experience;

(iii) comprehensive mid-term review of each DADP to ascertain the continued relevance of various activities

– replacing completed activities with new ones, reformulating continuing activities or completely

reformulating DADPs, or aspects thereof, that have been rendered obsolete by changes in

circumstances.

• at the national level there should be a bi-annual all-stakeholder review of the DADP process to draw

lessons from experience to inform future DADP planning.

4.2.2 Consultations with stakeholders in the research districts raised serious questions regarding the

effectiveness of the O&OD participatory approach that forms the backbone of the DADP approach. For

instance, this research has indicated that bad roads and the lack of crop marketing infrastructure are among

the most serious challenges to the attainment of food security for marginal farmers. Yet none of the

2006/07 DADPs in the research districts had activities on road or marketing infrastructure for crops. For

2007/08 only the Iringa Rural DADP has road works. DADP guidelines state that the funding of

infrastructure development is the principal mandate of the Local Government Capital Development Grant.

Among the infrastructure qualifying for support under this facility are those serving crop development.

Additionally, the guidelines state that the District Agriculture Development Grant (DADG), the principal

funding source for agricultural activities, may also invest in crop related infrastructure development. It is

inconceivable that, when consulted, crop farmers would have failed to list roads and market infrastructure

among the activities to be included in the DADPs. Rather it is likely that farmers’ priorities were overridden

by priorities imposed by government and political leadership at the district, regional or national levels. This

defeats the participatory approach that is at the core of the decentralisation objective of the Local

Government Reforms programme, and seriously compromises the development goals of improving food

security and reducing poverty amongst the poorest. To attain maximum improvement in food security and

poverty reduction amongst marginal farmers and the very poor, priorities for development financing must

address the needs of these farmers and not be exclusively set by the government, political leaders or

technical officers.

23

Priorities fordevelopmentfinancing mustbe those set bythese farmersand not by thegovernment,politicalleaders ortechnicalofficers.

4.3 Development partners, CSOs and the private sector

4.3.1 In accordance with the Tanzania Assistance Strategy agreement between Tanzania and its

development partners, the DPs are full partners in reviewing and monitoring implementation progress of the

DADPs. It is important in this regard that the DPs assist in urging the responsible government agencies to

report regularly, and assist in ensuring the implementation report is of high quality, addressing the key

development challenges. DPs should also help ensure that DADP resources are used efficiently for the

purposes stipulated in the plan documents thereby ensuring that DADPs attain their development objectives.

The results shown by the small but very noteworthy donor and NGO interventions carried out alongside the

DADPs that seek to improve incomes and food security by, among other things, helping marginal farmers

diversify from their current activities, are impressive. It is expected that the approaches demonstrated by

these donor and NGO initiatives will in time be integrated into DADPs.

4.3.2 Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) have a very important role as spokespersons of the voiceless.

Since the participatory development approach is relatively new, there will be a continuing tendency by the

various stakeholders to fall back to the old ways in planning or execution of programmes. CSOs should play

the role of alerting the poor and vulnerable to their rights and responsibilities, and advising them and the

development community on how to ensure that the interests of the marginal farmers remain at the centre of

the development agenda.

4.3.3 Operators in the private sector have major roles to play in ensuring that marginal farmers obtain the

tools and inputs they need to increase production and productivity. Private sector agents will also have major

roles to play in buying, transporting and processing farm outputs. In performing these functions it will be

necessary for these operators to cooperate with government and other stakeholders in providing the special

community services needed to ensure that marginal farmers are assisted to move out of poverty and become

regular participants in the market place. Special services include cooperating with government and

development agencies in providing such services as the supply of government subsidised inputs to farmers

– an operation that, while not as profitable as trading in commercial stocks of inputs, is necessary to create

future business opportunities in the form of increased production.

24

4.4 Recommendations for addressing DADP gaps

4.4.1 Land issues: To ensure that all land resources are utilised to make maximum contribution to

enhanced food security, poverty reduction and to ensure equitability, productivity and sustainable benefit to

the national economy, the government at all levels should:

• undertake proper land use planning, using the results to re-deploy available land resources accordingly;

• take firm action, including establishing clear borders and corresponding bylaws to ensure that borders

are respected, with a view to resolving land use conflicts between crop and livestock farmers in particular,

but also between large, medium, small and marginal users;

• undertake the requisite land reform measures, including discussing with the title holders and traditional

owners possibilities of converting land titles and traditional ownership rights to specific lease duration

agreements allowing for use of the land by farmers on specific term sub-leases thus ensuring that all

productive lands are put into use according to their inherent potential;

• in allocating land resources and other resources, including land developed for irrigated agriculture and

water user rights, care should be taken to ensure equitable allocation and convenient water use scheduling

to vulnerable groups including, youth, women (especially single women heads of households), orphans and

the elderly.

4.4.2 Production expansion: Over reliance on hand-hoe technology combined with a shortage of

labour seriously limits possibilities of increasing production through area expansion. To relieve these

constraints, it is recommended that the government take steps, e.g. availing targeted subsidised credit, to

enable farmers and private business people to acquire appropriate modern equipment – especially oxen,

donkeys, power tillers, tractors and other relevant equipment – for their own use and for providing equipment

hire services to other farmers. The availability and utilisation of such equipment would enhance the capacity

of the limited labour force enabling it to further increase production through area expansion. Where farmers

lack experience in using particular types of equipment special training programmes and relevant extension

services will need to be provided.

4.4.3 Facilitating production intensification: The use of improved seeds, fertilisers, herbicides and

pesticides in order to raise agricultural productivity in the research districts is constrained by:

• unavailability of user advisory services due to the small numbers of extension personnel;

• lack of local supply centres for inputs and prohibitive distances to supply centres, combined with non-

existent or very bad roads and lack of means of transport;

• high prices of available supplies combined with low output prices.

To overcome these constraints it is recommended that:

a) Extension services: government should in the short-term take steps to improve the mobility of the

existing extension agents (for instance by supplying them with motorcycles on user owner basis17

). Other

inducements to improve the efficiency of extension services include provision of housing allowances or staff

houses at workers’ stations, night allowances, training opportunities as part of an incentive package. In the

longer term, the government will need to train more agents. Intensification and expansion of the Farmer Field

School programme will greatly help bridge the gap between the increasing demand for extension services

and the limited supply of extension agents. The government should therefore take steps to ensure this

programme is fully implemented to encompass all important farming activities, crops and livestock.

b) Physical accessibility of input supplies: the government needs to take steps to encourage private

inputs dealers to open input supply outlets in all production centres. In areas that are further away or difficult to

reach, or otherwise too costly for private interests to deliver inputs, the government should treat the supply of

essential farm inputs as public goods to be provided to farmers in such areas at subsidised rates by, for instance,

providing free/government funded transportation of the inputs to such areas. In the long-term the government,

especially at the district down to village levels, should use funds allocated by central government for

infrastructure development, as well as mobilise local efforts through self-help schemes to improve roads and

enable local private businesses and farmers to acquire vehicles and other appropriate transport equipment to

relieve the transport constraints.

Over relianceon hand-hoetechnologycombined witha shortage of labourseriously limitspossibilities ofincreasingproductionthrough areaexpansion.

25

17The agent is provided with a

motorcycle on loan on condition that

s/he uses it to perform his/her

functions and at the end of the loan

repayment period the motorcycle

reverts to his/her ownership.

c) Financial accessibility of input supplies: the cost of inputs is in many cases prohibitive for marginal

farmers. To enable such farmers to access these inputs it will be necessary for the government to put in place a

system of properly targeted subsidies, along with measures to prevent the subsidised supplies from being

accessed by those for whom they are not intended. More appropriately, government should put in place strategies

to help farmers improve their earnings from crop sales, enabling them to afford to buy some inputs to improve

future crop yields. One way to do this is for government, farmers and private business to invest in produce storage,

enabling farmers to store farm produce during the harvest season when prices are very low for sale later in the

year when prices are better.

d) Public owned input supply depots: it is recommended that government should run public funded

input supply depots in areas where it would not make financial sense for private operators to open input

outlets, either because the demand is too low or set-up is too costly.

4.4.4 Farming credit: the SACCOS model has been adopted as the universal credit system for small

and medium scale credit in the country. Success of this, as any other credit system, depends on the

commitment of the borrower to use the proceeds so that the credit may be profitable to the borrower,

enabling him/her to repay the loan while having a profit to continue the business. To be successful, the credit

system must be combined with properly functioning credit and technical advisory services. Success also

depends on the integrity of the leadership of the credit system. It is recommended that the government

ensure the proper functioning of the credit and extension advisory services and enforce a strict code of

conduct for SACCOS leadership, imposing severe sanctions against abuse of trust by the leadership.

4.4.5 Agricultural markets: in view of the prevailing market imperfections, including poor infrastructure

(lack of roads, markets and functioning institutions) and limited incomes, the scope for meeting the food

security needs of marginal farmers from market supplies is limited. However, this scope could improve with

progressing implementation of the DADPs to the extent that the plans focus on the key challenges facing

marginal farmers – especially improvements of road networks, construction of produce marketing structures,

such as market stores and markets. To this end, government should take steps to ensure that DADPs do

indeed focus on the key challenges identified by farmers, especially marginal farmers. The supply of market

information is crucial to an efficient produce marketing system. Such a system facilitates decisions on when

and where to buy and sell by providing information on market supplies and prevailing prices.

26

ANNEX 1: MAP: SELECTED DISTRICTS

Lake Victoria

NA

EC

O

NAI

DNI

Lake

Tanganyika

Lake

Nyasa

B u k o b aU r b a n

B u k o b aR u r a l

K a r a g w e

M u l e b a

N g a r aB i h a r a m u l o

G e i t a

K w i m b a

M i s u n g w i

M e a t uM a s w a

K a h a m a

B u k o m b e

N z e g aI g u n g a

S h i n y a n g aR u r a l

S h i n y a n g aU r b a n

K i s h a p u

M a g uI l e m e l aN y a m a g a n a

U k e r e w e

S e n g e r e m a

T a r i m e

N g o r o n g o r o

M b u l u

K a r a t u

B a b a t i

H a n a n g

M o n d u l i

K i t e t o

S i m a n j i r o

H a n d e n i

K i l i n d i

B a g a m o y o

M o r o g o r oU r b a n

M o r o g o r oR u r a l

M v o m e r o

K i l o s a

K i s a r a w e M k u r a n g a

Ila la

Kinondoni

Temeke

R u f i j i

L i w a l e

T u n d u r u

N a c h i n g w e a

L i n d iR u r a l

L i n d iU r b a n

R u a n g w a

M t w a r aR u r a l

M t w a r aU r b a n

N e w a l a T a n d a h i m b a

M a s a s i

U l a n g a

S o n g e aR u r a l

S o n g e aU r b a n

N a m t u m b o

M b i n g a

L u d e w a

N j o m b e

M u f i n d i

I r i n g aU r b a n

I r i n g aR u r a l

K i l o l o

M a k e t e

K y e l a

R u n g w e

I l e j e

M b o z i

S u m b a w a n g aU r b a n

S u m b a w a n g aR u r a l

N k a n s i

M p a n d a

S i k o n g e

U y u iU y u i T a b o r aU r b a n

U r a m b oK i g o m a

R u r a l

K i g o m aU r b a n

K a s u l u

K i b o n d o

C h u n y a

M b a r a l i

M b e y aU r b a n

M b e y aR u r a l

K i l w a

K i b a h a

K i l o m b e r o

P a n g a n i

T a n g a

M u h e z aK o r o g w e

L u s h o t o

S a m e

M w a n g a

M o s h iR u r a l

M o s h iU r b a n

R o m b oH a iA r u

M e r u

A r u s h a

S e r e n g e t i

B a r i a d i

M u s o m aR u r a l

M u s o m aU r b a n

B u n d a

I r a m b a

S i n g i d aR u r a l

S i n g i d aU r b a n

K o n d o a

D o d o m aR u r a l

D o d o m aU r b a n

M a n y o n iM p w a p w a

K o n g w a

M a f i a

Bukoba

Mwanza

Shinyanga

Tabora

Kigoma Singida

DODOMA

ArushaMoshi

TangaWete

Chake Chake

Musoma

Mahonda

Zanzibar

Dar esSalaam

Kibaha

Lindi

Mtwara

Songea

Morogoro

Iringa

Mbeya

Sumbawanga

Koani

Babati

T A B O R A

R U K W A

K I G O M A

S H I N Y A N G A

M W A N Z A

K A G E R A

M A R A

A R U S H A

M A N Y A R A(MANYARA)

K I L I M A N J A R O

T A N G A

D O D O M A

S I N G I D A

P W A N I

M O R O G O R O

I R I N G AM B E Y A

R U V U M A

L I N D I

M T W A R A

P E M B ANORTH; SOUTH

U N G U J ANORTH;

SOUTH & CENTRAL;TOWN & WEST

D A R E SS A L A A M

R W A N D A

B U R U N D I

U G A N D A

D . R .C O N G O

Z A M B I A

M A L A W I

M O Z A M B I Q U E

K E N Y A

.R.

DO

GN

OC

AdministrativeDivisions

0 100 200 kmScale 1:5,000,000

Digital Cartography by M C ShandUniversity of Glasgow 2007.

International boundaryRegional boundaryDistrict boundary

National capitalRegional capital

International trunk roadNational trunk roadRailway

DODOMA

Moshi

KIGALI

BUJUMBURA

NAIROBI

Tanzania

DADP impact on marginal farmers in selected districts (of Tanzania)

27

© Mike Shand, University of Glasgow 2007

ANNEX 2: MARGINAL FARMERS’ CHALLENGES AND DADP RESPONSE

Annex 2.1: (Iringa Rural district)

Marginal farmers’ challenges/constraints and DADP budgeted activities 2006/07 and 2007/08

1. Rehabilitation of Ibumila oxen training

centre

2. Construction of cattle shed and latrine

3. Rehabilitation of Ulongambi traditional

Irrigation scheme at Ugwachanya

village

• Conduct survey and design

• Rehabilitation of the scheme

• Facilitation formation of water users

Association

4. Conduct retraining to DMT, DFT and

WFT on DADPs planning and M & E

5. To retrain 14 members of DFT on O &

OD method and village planning

6. To conduct retraining course on M & E

to DMT, DFT and 40 WFT members

7. To conduct follow-up and back

stopping to WFT facilitation to VAP

planning

8. Strengthening extension on service

delivery in the district

9. To conduct 2 days training to 30

farmers on paprika production at Ifunda

centre

10. To conduct 2 days training to 36

extension staff on paprika production

at Ifunda centre

11. To conduct 5 days training study tour to

Arusha on integrated and conservation

farming to 13 farmers 3 staff and 2

leaders

12. To conduct 2 days training to 66

dipping groups from 22 rehabilitated

cattle dip tanks at Nzihi MTC

13. To conduct 2 days learning study visit

to 22 dip tank user leaders and 4 staff

in Mufindi district

14. Rehabilitation of 6 dip tanks of Itgutwa,

Ikengeza, Magubike, Tanangozi and

Magunga

15. Rehabilitation of the 6 dip tanks

16. Facilitate formation of 5 user groups –

to train 270 livestock keepers on dip

management and dipping

17. Construction of 1 cattle trough at

Mafuruto village

• Conduct survey and design

• Construction of cattle trough

• Make follow up and supervision

18. Training of 115 livestock keepers from

Malinzanga and Mafuruto villages on

cattle trough and rangeland

management

1. To provide vaccines against New Castle and quality cockerels to 105

trained farmers

2. Completion of Magunga dip tank rehabilitation

3. Rehabilitation of the dip tank at Nyamihuu village

4. Formation of 3 dip tank user associations

5. Construction of cattle dip tank at Ikungwe village

6. Construction of cattle dip tank at Izazi village

7. Rehabilitation of cattle dip tank at Nyabula village

8. Construction of dip tank at Winome village

9. Construction of dip tank at Kitayawa village

10. Construction of dip tank at Kising’a village

11. Construction of dip tank at Magulilwa village

12. Construction of dip tank at Ndolela village

13. To construct Migoli charco - dam

14. Completion of Mafuruto cattle trough

15. Construction of cattle trough at Igula village

16. Rehabilitation of cattle shade in Ilambilole village Introducing 10 boran bulls

from Sao hill LMU

17. To conduct training to 48 SACCOS board members and 16 treasurers

18. Conduct staff training on SACCOS establishment and management

principles to 48 extension staff

19. Conduct community awareness creation meetings on SACCOS

establishment, management and benefits in 12 villages

20. Facilitate 2 extension staff to undergo long team training

21. Conduct supervision, monitoring and evaluation of staff performance trained

22. Support promotion of district business council

23. Facilitated farmers Nane Nane competition in 119 villages

24. Facilitate farmers Nane Nane agricultural competition at ward level in 20

wards

25. Facilitate farmers participation in the zonal Nane Nane agricultural shows in

Mbeya

26. Facilitate District Officials conduct visits to Mbeya for Nane Nane

preparations

27. Carry out quarterly field inspection visits on project activities (12 visits)

28. Conduct training for 440 members of WDC on roles and responsibilities in

20 wards

29. Carry out farmers training on animal draft technology improvement in 21

villages of Kihorogota and Nduli wards by June 2008

30. Conduct ward markets leaders training on markets utilization and

management

31. Ward market construction at Muwimbi, Itunundu and Tungamalenga villages

32. Construction of ward market centre at Ilolo Mpya village

33. Support construction of livestock market at Kimande village

34. Ward market construction at Ifunda village

35. Construction of Tagamenda crop market

36. Construction of Luganga crop market

37. Construction of Kihesa Mgagao crop market

38. Construction of Lukani crop market

39. Construction of Ng’uruhe crop market

40. To construct 1 crop market at Migoli

41. Support quarterly office operations, maintenance & management

1. Inadequate extension

services: one officer per

10,000-20,000 farmers

2. Late delivery of seed and

fertilisers

3. Lack of reserve dams to

hold water during the

rainy season which could

serve as a source of

irrigation water during dry

season, one dam is being

constructed at Nzihi

4. Farmers field schools still

not enough both in crop

and animal production

5. Farmers’ failure to adapt

to drought resistant crops

such as sorghum, cassava

and sweet potatoes; they

still prioritize rice and

maize

6. More efforts on

mechanisation by

providing more draft

animals, (donkey & ox

ploughs and training

centres)

7. Mechanisms to effect

efficient credit system

(loans to increase

farmers’ capital) to enable

farmers to access power

tillers, ox ploughs and

tractors, in order to

increase acreage not

available

8. Farmers at Nzihi efforts

for SACCOS was

undermined by SCULT

which made pay TSh2

million from their account

and never returned.

Farmers are demoralised

and lost confidence in

SACCOS. Such CSOs

should be discouraged

9. There ia a need to improve

cooperative ventures

(Farmers groups,

SACCOS, Farmers

Associations) awareness

creation

Budgeted DADP activities

during 2006/07 Budgeted DADP activities during 2007/08

Identified farmers’

challenges and

constraints to attaining

food security

IRINGA RURAL DISTRICT

28

19. To establish bull centre at Ilambilole

village

• Rehabilitation of cattle shed at

Ilambilole OTC

20. Purchase of 10 boran breeding bulls

from Sao hill LMU

21. Training of 150 livestock keepers on

animal health and husbandry

22. Conduct vaccination campaign against

CBPP and disease surveillances.

• To vaccinate 120,000. needs of cattle

against CBPP in the district

23. To conduct disease surveillance and

vaccination against disease outbreaks

24. Construction of 1 charco dam in Migoli

village

• Conduct survey and design and BOQ

preparation

• Construction of charco

25. To train 40 livestock keepers on dam

and rangeland management

26. Rehabilitation of slaughter house at

Kalenga village

27. Rehabilitation of slaughter slab and

hide/skin shed

28. Retraining of 15 extension staff on law

and regulations on meat inspection and

hygiene

29. Formation and strengthening of

SACCOS and economic group in the

district

30. To train 16 treasurers from 16 new

SACCOS on book keeping laws and

good governance from SACCOs of

Nduli, Muungano, Kimande, Mboliboli,

Tuugane, Mtafikago, Magubike,

Mtazamo, Jikwamue, Ipeda, Kikombwe,

Muwimbi and Mlowa, Magulilwa

31. To train 48 board members from the 16

new SACCOS

32. To conduct sensitisation-meeting 3

wards 3 villages and 5 livestock

keepers groups

33. To conduct follow up and supervision

42. Construction of 2 bridges along Wasa Ihomasa road and

Magunga-Lumuli road

43. Support rehabilitation of 1st bridge along Usolang – Mkulula road

44. Support rehabilitation of 2nd bridge along Usolanga – Mkulula road

45. Construction of bridge along Ifunda Ihemi road

46. Kitisi rehabilitation of 1 road of 8.0 km long

47. Lupalama construction

48. Kibebe construction of 1 bridge and rehabilitation of road of 5.5 km long

49. Construction of 1.6 km main canal in Weru village

50. Construction of 1 intake and 1 main canal in Tungamalenga village

51. Rehabilitation/construction of irrigation canal in Idodi village

52. To conduct 10 site visits and supervision on farm seed multiplication to 22

villages under irrigation

53. To dress 6,667 kg of QDS with super cymbush to 13 farmers

54. To conduct study visit on seed vegetable production to 16 farmers and for

extension staff at Hort. Tengeru

55. Conduct training for 20 farmers and 10 extension staff on – farm seed

multiplication

56. Conduct training for 23 2nd year field crop seed producers and 10

vegetable seed farmer producers in 15 villages

57. To conduct supervision for 55 QDS producers in 16 wards

58. Communication with the ASPS Headquarters

59. To conduct field inspection for QDS seed producers in 9 villages of Pawaga

and Idodi Division

60. Sensitisation and establish and run 71 FFS on crop intensification, small

stocks production in order to increase yield and empower farmers

economically

61. Training to 15 VAEOs on FFS philosophy, concept and methodology

62. Supervision on SPFS activities in the SPFS villages

63. Sensitization and establishment of 8 FFS groups (participatory farmer

groups) in 8 villages (Itunundu, Magozi, Mbuyuni, Luganga, Nyamahana,

Malinzaga, Idodi and Mapogoro) involving 200 farmers participants of whom

100 females and 100 males

64. Supervision and seed distribution of inputs to 22 QDS seed producers in 11

villages of Kising’a (Is), Mgama, Uhambingeto, Mahuninga, Magulilwa, Image

No. 8, Idodi, Tungamalenga, Tagamenda, Irindi and Kising’a (K)

65. Supervision to 38 QDS seed producers in 15 villages of Itunundu, Luganga,

Magozi, Mkombilenga, Mbuyuni, Idodi, Mapogoro, Makifu, Malinzanga,

Mahuninga, Nyamahana, Mafuruto, Ilolompya, Kimande and Tungamalenga

in Field Preparation, Germination and Management sampling

66. To conduct farmers field days (FFD) in 5 villages of Luganga, Nyamahana,

Malinzanga, Idodi and Mahuninga

67. To conduct sensitisation meeting in 8 villages, Itunundu, Mbuyuni, Magozi,

Luganga, Nyamahana, Malinzanga, Mapogoro, Idodi, Kitisi, Tungamalenga

on FFS, QDS, Home Gardens SACCOs and Horticultural mother orchard

68. To conduct survey design and preparation of BOQs (bill of quantity) by

June 2008

69. To train 2400 farmers in the project villages on the proper management

of 120 farmer group investment sub project and 15 community

investment sub projects

70. Construction/rehabilitation of 15 community investment project of Idodi,

Kitisi, Tungamalenga, Ng’enza, Kilambo, Kibebe, Lupalama, Weru,

Ibangamoyo, Luganga, Mlanda, Winome, Tagamenda, Nyabula and Ikuvilo

71. To facilitate procurement and distribution of agro-inputs for 120 farmer

groups investment sub project by June 2008

72. To conduct quarterly supervision of the project

10. Marketing of crops

(tomato, maize) a big

problem, crop banks not

established yet, stores not

available, therefore

farmers are forced to sell

at a low price during the

harvesting season. Some

take loans from

middlemen before crops

mature

11. Need for empowerment

of farmers and extension

staff through training and

provision of working

gearing

12. Mechanisation by

providing and training

draft animals (donkey &

ox ploughs training

centres)

13. Credit (loans to increase

farmers’ capital)

14. Improve marketing of

crops, ward and village

facilitation

15. Need for improvement of

cooperative ventures

(farmers groups,

SACCOS, farmers

associations)

29

1. Improvement of Chanzuru

irrigation scheme

2. Production of quality

declared seeds by small

holder farmers

3. Control of army worm and

quelea quelea

4. Establishment of farmer

ffield schools

5. Construction of zoosanitary

centre at Dumila

6. Prevention of livestock

infectious diseases

7. Construction of Dumila

abattoir

8. Demarcation of agro-pastoral

areas Ihombwe and Kwambe

villages

9. Facilitation of O&OD

participatory needs

assessment

10. Training of ten staff on

computer skills

11. Support of higher learning

students

12. Servicing of the computer 2

printers and 1 photocopier

13. Rehabilitation of office WC

14. Installation of water system

15. Purchase of stationery

16. Establish efficient

communication system

through internal connection

and deliver high quality

information management

17. Training of agricultural

service provider & agri staff

on ASDP activities

18. Support Agric shows 9 Nane

Nane)

19. Purchase of one motorcycle

for District Extension Officer

20. Inventory and register of

private ASPS

1. Army Worm and rodent control

2. To produce 80,600kg of QDS seeds

3. To produce 80,600kg of QDS seeds

4. To facilitate farmers to develop land use plan

5. To improve and increase access to support farmers in

particular focus on research and extension

6. Support 200 farmers to adopt new farming production

technology

7. To establish 40 Farmer's Field Schools

8. To introduce new horticultural crops in 5 villages at the end

of 07/08

9. Construction Chogwe irrigation scheme

10. Construction Mvumi scheme

11. Construction Chanzuru irrigation scheme

12. Construction Ilonga irrigation scheme

13. Construction Kilangali irrigation scheme

14. Construction Mwasa irrigation scheme

15. Construction Madizini irrigation scheme

16. Rehabilitation of Lumuma irrigation scheme

17. Construction Lengewaha irrigation scheme

18. To conduct topographical at Chabi scheme

19. To conduct topographical survey at Mwasa scheme

20. To conduct topographical survey at Lumbiji scheme

21. To conduct topographical survey at Ludewa scheme

22. To conduct topographical survey at Kisanga scheme

23. To construct dam for irrigation at Ukwamani

24. To support farmers association in 5 schemes

25. To promote SACCOS in the district

26. To construct abattoir at Gairo

27. To construct livestock market at Parakuyo

28. To construct cattle dip at Kiduhi and Kitange

29. To control livestock diseases by vaccination NCD, RVF,

CBPP and rabies in 9 divisions.

30. To construct abattoir at Kimamba

31. To construct zoo sanitary check point at Gairo

32. To demarcate grazing land at Ndogomi, Kitaita and Leshata

33. Construction of 2 chaco dam at Mbwade and Godes

34. To facilitate farmers to become resource producers of dairy

cattle and goats

35. To conduct O&OD to 104 villages

36. To support long term training for the department staff

37. To support short term training for the department staff

38. To purchase 63 motorcycle for agriculture extension workers

39. To purchase car for the department

40. To purchase land survey equipments

41. To instal internet

42. To purchase 7 computers and printers

43. To conduct FFS training for VEO'S at MATI Ilonga

44. To carry out awareness to district councils about DADP

45. To facilitate Nanennane exhibition

46. Farmers study tour to Mkindo for FFS studies

47. To conduct training for FFS approach at Mkindo

48. To create awareness of non governmental organisations on

DADP

49. To construct 3 agriculture ward centers

50. Rehabilitation of Iyogwe VEO's house

51. To purchase stationary service for: motorcycles, cars, &

computers

1. Competition by farmers for the limited supply of

the land developed for irrigation agriculture

2. Crowding out effect of intruding livestock herds

breaking out of areas set aside for livestock

grazing

3. Massai herdsmen letting their livestock graze on

crops

4. Unproductive lands held by absentee former

estate owners

5. High cost of tractors for land preparation

6. Absence or bad roads limit availability of farm

inputs

7. High cost of farm inputs and limited publicity of

availability of subsidised fertiliser

8. Difficult terrain renders some villages unreachable

for delivery of inputs

9. Irrigation canals in Ilonga and Chanzulu seeping

water through the walls and floor. Need flooring

and walling

10. Need irrigation water use training

11. Women farmers given water less frequently than

men

12. Women farmers being assigned smaller irrigation

plots than their male counterparts with

comparable circumstances

13. Women given watering at night – unsafe

14. Increasing floods as river in Kilangali loosing

direction due to livestock trampling

15. Massai herdsmen allow livestock to destroy

irrigation infrastructure

16. Few extension staff, long distances to reach

farmers and bad terrain result in poor quality

reporting and inadequate services to farmers due

to few visitations

17. SACCOS disappointed by NMB bank not lending

villagers trying to shift SACCOS account to CRDB

18. Traders licensed to supply subsidised fertilisers do

not supply as profit low

19. Rats and quelea birds

20. Need for rehabilitation of the 36 km Kilosa-

Kilangali road currently only passable with much

difficulty using 4-wheel drive vehicles, prevents

evacuation of output to markets outside the village

21. Bad roads and mountainous terrain limit access to

some villages for traders limiting the size of output

market and lowering producer prices and

increasing prices of food brought in from outside.

Indirect road via Dodoma is 200km long

22. Lack of market stores for producers to stock food

for off season sale at better prices compel

producers to sell at low prices at harvest

23. Absence of alternative income generating

activities compels producers to sell outputs at low

prices at harvest

Annex 2.2: (Kilosa district)

Marginal farmers’ challenges/constraints and DADP budgeted activities 2006/07 and 2007/08

Budgeted DADP

activities during 2006/07 Budgeted DADP activities during 2007/08

Identified farmers’ challenges and

constraints to attaining food security

KILOSA DISTRICT

30

1. Field visit for 9 farmers and

4 extension agents to

Mkindo, Morogoro to learn on

paddy production

2. Purchase of 12 pairs of oxen

3. Purchase of 6 ploughs,

4 harrows, 5 chains,

2 wheelbarrows

4. Purchase of vet drugs for

oxen

5. Completion of oxen shed,

store and resting parlour

6. Purchase of 375 vials of

vaccine

7. Vaccinate 150,000 chickens

in 28 wards

8. Survey and feasibility study

of a project site

9. Site clearing

10. Soil sampling and analysis

1. Construction of wards resource

centres at Mchinga and Mtama wards

2. Establishment and management of

10 demonstration plots

3. Training of 95 ward facilitation team

members on participatory monitoring

& evaluation (PM & E) of community

and group projects

4. Training of agriculture service

providers on ASDP and their role in

the programme

5. Training of 95 WFT and 10 DFTs for

Agriculture village Development Plans

6. Equip 50 primary cooperative society

leaders from 5 primary cooperative

societies on cooperative management

and laws

7. Purchase of one 4WD vehicle

8. Purchase or one motorcycle

9. Rehabilitation of office premises

1. Inadequacy and inaccessibility of extension and veterinary officers living

in the village (they live away) + lack of means of transportation

2. Lack of permanent market structures

3. Feeder roads only passable part of the year =>farms and markets link

restricting agric marketing

4. Pest and disease

5. Poor soil fertility

6. Unreliable rainfalls

7. Crime and theft

8. Shortage of land in irrigation schemes

9. Education for self reliance and adopting new technologies

10. High prices of inputs and low prices of products

11. Weak governance in facilitating farmers and trainers (e.g., the oxen are

not working because of the bureaucratic reasons by village leadership

authority)

12. Top down approach limited participation of communities in planning of

DADPs and other projects/ programmes.

13. Poor governance in managing government interventions for addressing

food insecurity

14. Poverty incidence is increasing

15. Primitive farming technologies + resistance to change

16..Lack of appropriate agro-processing facilities

17. Poor involvement or reluctance of the community in sharing the efforts

(labour power)

18. Land ownership problems very few own the land and the rest have to

hire at a high cost (financial and in-kind) per acre

Annex 2.3: (Lindi Rural district)

Marginal farmers’ challenges/constraints and DADP budgeted activities 2006/07 and 2007/08

Budgeted DADP

activities during 2006/07

Budgeted DADP activities

during 2007/08

Identified farmers’ challenges and constraints to

attaining food security

31

LINDI RURAL DISTRICT

1. To control Newcastle disease

2. To conduct training to 200 WDCs

members

3. To conduct training to 508

vaccinators (CIBETs)

4. To conduct training to 10,200

community members in 54 villages

5. Procurement of: drugs, diesel and

stationery

6. To conduct training to SACCOS:

• To conduct training to 850 SACCOS

members

7. Procurement of: diesel and stationery

8. Mayembechini Paddy Irrigation

project:

• Technical labour

• Plant hiring

• Diesel

• Supervision work

9. Capacity Building:

• Conducting training to TOT in 18

wards

10. Conducting O & OD to 118 villages

11. Procurement of diesel and stationery

12. Procurement of laptop & flash discs

13. Preparation of 118 project write ups

14. Cassava & cashew processing

• Training of community members in 10

villages

15. Procurement of diesel and stationery

16. Kitere Irrigation Project

1. To conduct 52 meetings of

26 AMCOS & 26 SACCOS

on Co-operative

Management

2. To establish 2 AMCOS. To

conduct 30 meetings to 850

members and establish 15

SACCOS

3. To conduct training for 900

farmers on cassava

processing technology of 28

SACCOS

4. To conduct formation

meeting of 4 other Co-

operative Societies

5. To conduct follow-up

supervision and visit

6. To construct 1 godown

7. To support livestock keepers

with Implements (breeding

stock)

8. Supervising monitoring and

evaluation poultry keepers.

9. Supporting 100 dairy goat

keeper with breeding stock

10. Training 200 farmers and 5

extension officers

11. Conduct 24 supervisions to

200 dairy goat keepers.

12. To support vaccination of

5,600 livestock (breeding

stock)

13. To conduct vaccination

campaign

1. Lack of affordable credit facilities for farmers

2. Lack of reliable markets, market information and market infrastructure

3. Low prices at which farmers often sell their produce at the time of

harvesting

4. Lack of storage facilities to store produce while waiting for better prices

5. Difficulties in accessing agricultural inputs in remote areas or areas far

removed from supply points: absence of shops selling agro-chemicals

6. High cost of agricultural inputs (including herbi-, pesti- and fungicides,

and fertilisers)

7. Lack of reliable and properly managed water sources to support an

efficient irrigation system

8. Some villages receive little and unreliable rainfall and as a result they

suffer from inadequate water for domestic and sanitary use

9. Poor roads

10. Low prices for agricultural produce (especially when compared to total

production cost)

11. Difficulties in accessing agricultural inputs. No shops available at the

village

12. High cost of agricultural inputs (chemicals and fertilizers)

13. Unpredictable weather

14. Lack of credit facilities for farmers

15. Lack of well developed water infrastructure

16. Development of Kitere Irrigation Scheme is not completed yet thus the

project only benefits few farmers

• Poor infrastructure (roads) makes it difficult for farmers to access

markets and farm inputs

• Low prices for agricultural produce

• High cost of agricultural inputs (chemicals and fertilizers)

• Difficulties in accessing agricultural inputs. All inputs were usually from

Mtwara Municipality (about 50 Kms from VHQ)

17. Lack of reliable sources of water both for domestic and agricultural

purposes

Annex 2.4: (Mtwara Rural district)

Marginal farmers’ challenges/constraints and DADP budgeted activities 2006/07 and 2007/08

Budgeted DADP activities

during 2006/07

Budgeted DADP

activities during 2007/08

Identified farmers’ challenges and constraints

to attaining food security

MTWARA RURAL DISTRICT

32

Concern Worldwide

13 & 14 Calico House,

Clove Hitch Quay,

London. SW11 3TN

Tel: +44 20 7801 1850

Email: londoninfo@concern.net

Concern Worldwide

169 Regent Estate

PO Box 6370 Dar es Salaam

Tanzania

Tel: +258 222 700 679

Email: concern.tanzania@concern.net

Concern Worldwide

52-55 Lower Camden Street

Dublin 2

Republic of Ireland

Tel: +353 1417 7700

Email: info@concern.net

Concern Worldwide is an international organisation dedicated to reducing suffering and working towards the

elimination of extreme poverty. Registered Charity No. 1092236.

www.concern.net