View
2.815
Download
2
Category
Tags:
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Presentation by Jo Cadilhon and Isabelle Baltenweck at an Africa Union - Interafrican Bureau for Animal Resources (AU-IBAR) meeting on the role of public and private sector in livestock service delivery in Africa held at Naivasha, Kenya on 5 December 2012.
Citation preview
AU-IBAR meeting on the role of public and private sector in livestock services
delivery in Africa, 5 December 2012, Naivasha Sopa Lodge, Kenya
Delivery of advisory and technical
services for dairy smallholder production
systems: the concept of dairy hubs
Jo CADILHON and Isabelle BALTENWECK
ILRI in brief
ILRI
a member of the CGIAR Consortium which conducts food and
environmental research
to help alleviate poverty and increase food security
while protecting the natural resource base
700 staff
100 scientists and
researchers
more than 30 scientific
disciplines
Two large campuses
(Kenya, Ethiopia).
2012 budget USD 60 mill.
ILRI works with a range of
partners
Mali
Nigeria
Mozambique
Kenya
Ethiopia
India
Sri
Lanka
China
Laos
Vietnam
Thailand
ILRI’s vision: A world made better for poor people in developing countries by
improving agricultural systems in which livestock are important. 2
Outline of presentation
1. Using hubs for pro-poor livestock value chains
development
2. The East Africa Dairy Development Project
EADD background, vision and objectives
EADD hubs model
Assessment results: provision of extension services
by EADD hubs
3. Way forward for extension services by dairy
hubs
3
Pro-poor livestock development and value chains
ILRI fosters a demand-led development model
Informal markets provide substantial opportunities and can
be made to function well
Market access and utilisation can be improved by: Access to inputs
Access to services
Training and institutional capacity building
Reduced transaction costs
Better risk management
Improved market access and utilisation improve the
livelihoods of the poor Involving multiple actors
With benefits to women
4
The role of hubs in pro-poor livestock development
Collective action is a knee-jerk response by
development actors
Hubs show promise:
As an intervention
As a means of intervening
What are appropriate organizational and
institutional mechanisms in various contexts?
Intensive versus extensive production systems
Strong versus poor government support
Dynamic versus low private sector involvement
5
What do hubs do?
Hubs provide a critical mass of producers, products or
inputs use, thus attracting other market actors
Hubs provide a contact point
They reduce communication
costs
They reduce transactions costs
Hubs enable countervailing
market power
They provide for network effects:
knowledge, technology and
innovation
Hubs facilitate peer pressures
Etc.
6
ILRI contributions to dairy hubs projects
Design, implement and analyse baseline survey
Support the design and implementation of a monitoring
and evaluation system for hubs
Analyse results from monitoring system
Collate and document lessons learned, including on
issues related to gender and youth
Design, pilot test and monitor selected interventions
related to feed, animal production and marketing
Support projects’ technical activities on extension,
breeding and improving milk quality, etc.
7
EADD background
A large proportion of the farming population in East
Africa consists of subsistence farmers with low market
orientation for both farm inputs and outputs
Smallholders are limited by low levels of production,
product quality and market infrastructure:
Low feed and fodder quality
Post-harvest losses
Lack of processing equipment
ILRI partnered with Heifer International and other
organizations to pilot test a new dairy development
model in East Africa: the East Africa Dairy Development
Project was launched early 2008 with financial support
from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
8
EADD vision and objectives
Vision
Transform the lives of 179,000 smallholder farming
families (approximately 1 million people) by doubling
their household dairy income in 10 years
Objectives
Harness information for decisions and innovation
Expand access to markets
Increase productivity and
efficiencies of scale
9
EADD1 pilot phase – Factsheet
Scope
Duration: Jan 2008-Jun 2012
Budget: USD42.85m (BMGF)
Investment fund: USD5.0m
BMGF: USD2.5m
Heifer: USD2.5m
Partners
BMGF
HI – lead
TNS – business development
ILRI – knowledge-based learning
ABS – genetics & breeding
ICRAF – feeds & feeding
Structure (>120 staff)
Country offices
Kenya
Rwanda
Uganda
Regional office
10
EADD hubs
At the heart of EADD is the hub approach which aimed to increase dairy
income of poor dairy farmers through various interventions along the value
chains so as to improve farm productivity and market access
Dairy hubs serve as community anchors for industry knowledge sharing,
business services and market access
The hub approach as implemented by EADD facilitates the emergence or
strengthening of a network of inputs and services providers and the set up
of a credit facility mechanism
Progressively the hub becomes a platform used by other inputs and
services providers to reach smallholder farmers
Possible add-ons include inputs for activities other than dairy, savings and
credit facilities, household expenses (food, medical and school expenses),
energy saving solutions (bio-gas and solar panels)
When fully functioning, the dairy hub is a dynamic cluster of services and
activities that generate greater income for dairy farmers
11
EADD hubs
TRANSPORTERS
TESTING
FARMERS
FIELD DAYS
FEED
SUPPLY
AI &
EXTENSION
OTHER RELATED
MEs
CHILLING or BULKING
FACILITIES
HARDWARE SUPPLIERS
VILLAGE BANKS
12
1. Beneficiaries are selected based on need, opportunity and initiative
2. Farmers are mobilized into cooperatives, associations or producer
companies
3. Companies are assisted to set up infrastructure to market milk and
deliver inputs to members through the ‘Dairy Hub.’
4. EADD staff provide technical assistance to producer companies to
achieve farmer goals in a sustainable manner
EADD approach
13
Some lessons learned from
the EADD hub approach
Hubs should be seen as an approach, rather than a model, with
various ‘options’ to choose from, depending on farmers’ capacity,
state of the industry and external environment:
Hubs centered around provision of inputs and services
Hubs centered around bulking without cooler
Hubs centered around chilling plants
In some locations, the chilling plants were not successful to catalyse
farmers around the hub but other services provided were useful to
farmers
Provision of inputs and services, including advisory services can be
done in-house, like in the case of a cooperative, or out-sourced
For advisory services, it is important to embed services in the hub
for accountability and sustainability issues
14
Assessment of extension services
provision by hubs
Overall, 82 dairy farmer business association (DFBAs) were
supported in three countries and their progress monitored in early
2012
EADD-supported sites were assessed on 5 dimensions:
Feeding
Breeding
Animal health
Milk quality
Extension services structures
Scores can vary between 0 (low level of development) and 100 (fully
developed sites which no longer require external assistance)
Sites with scores above 60% are considered ‘mature’ and require
only minimal external support
15
Sites of EADD hubs assessment exercise
Number of DFBAs staged List of DFBAs staged
16
Actual development scores are distributed from 7.5 to 62 (%)
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
35.00
40.00
45.00
50.00
55.00
60.00
65.00
70.00
- 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 70.0 75.0 80.0 85.0 90.0 95.0 100.0
Sco
re
Percentile
Kenya Rwanda Uganda
Lowest
7.5 (NSAMBYA, Uganda)
25% quartile
27.3 (KIBOGA WEST, Uganda)
Median
34.8 (ZIGOTI, Uganda)
75% quartile
42.0 (GASI,Rwanda)
Highest
62.0 (TANYIKINA, Kenya)
Source: 2012 Stage Gate Assessment Data, May 2012 17
Results for advisory services indicators
Source: 2012 Stage Gate Assessment Data, May 2012
Most producers’ organizations in Kenya
have extension units, unlike in Uganda
and Rwanda where the organizations
are less mature and capacity is lower
Less than half the sites are able
or willing to spend own funds on
supporting extension, meaning
that other sources of funding
are required
18
Results for advisory services indicators
Source: 2012 Stage Gate Assessment Data, May 2012
• Most producers’ organizations in
Uganda and Rwanda found it difficult
to attract and retain qualified
managers
• Most organizations have linkages with
governments and other institutions
• Strategies to reach women partial in
the majority of sites; no strategies in
the rest of the sites 19
Way forward: capacity building models
for hubs in EADD2
Focus on provision of advisory and technical services
Assess effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability of four main
extension approaches using hubs in various environments
What approach works best to reach out to women, youth and poor
farmers?
Bundled services by private extension agents
Private extension agents contracted by hub
Value chain partner provides extension to farmers
Use public service extension services
Assess whether the approach can be used in other livestock value
chains (pigs and small ruminants)
Compare hubs with other capacity building models: cooperative,
private franchised system (SIDAI), etc.
20
Thank you for your attention
Feedback welcome
Email: j.cadilhon@cgiar.org
i.baltenweck@cgiar.org
21
Recommended