GRP3 Improving tree product

marketing and extension for smallholders

GRP3 Improving tree product marketing and extension for smallholders

Our four themes/challenges and leaders:

Value chain analysis and development: How can value chain analyses better inform market actors for improved marketing strategies and performance? Amos Gyau

Standards and certification systems: How and under what circumstances can standards and certification help the poor and contribute to environmental services? Dagmar Mithöfer

Enterprise development: How can rural enterprise development better contribute to developing value chains and strengthening livelihoods for the poor and women? Jason Donovan

Innovative extension approaches: How can innovative extension approaches foster entrepreneurship and improve farmers’ access to Information and capacity to innovate? Steve Franzel

Farmers

ConsumersValue chainEnterprise

viability

Processing,value added Standards

Technology

Livelihoods

Environ-ment

Cooperatives

Extension

governance

Conceptual Framework for Agricultural Extension

Germplasm and other

inputs

Knowledge and

informationHuman

capabilities

Product Demand

Policy support

Enabling environ-

ment

Institutional Develop-ment and

linkages

Farmers and farming systems

Improved productivity

Improved livelihoods

Highlights• GRP3 Writeshop-Planshop, January, 2011, Nairobi, brought together 25 staff

from 5 regions to review draft journal articles and plan research.• We are co-organizers of the annual Global Forum for Rural Advisory Services

(GFRAS) and the CTA-GFRAS-FARA international conference on agricultural extension in November

• New projects – Assessing innovative extension approaches funded by MFA Finland,

beginning 2012 in EA and WCA– Sustainable Suluwesi funded by CIDA Canada, beginning 2012 in SEA– Improving smallholder market participation, phase 2 funded by Ford in EA– Toolkit for assessing poverty impacts of value chain development Ford in LA

2011 Publications of wide interest

Nang’ole EM, Mithöfer D and Franzel S. Review of guidelines and manuals for value chain analysis for agricultural and forest products. ICRAF Occasional Paper No. 15.

Kiptot, E. and Franzel,S. Gender and agroforestry in Africa: Are Women Participating? ICRAF Occasional Paper No.13.

Mithöfer D Framework for economic impact assessment of production standards and empirical evidence. In Mithöfer and Waibel (Eds) Vegetable Production and Marketing in Africa. CABI

Tool for assessing the poverty impact of value chain development

Tool for assessing the poverty impact of value chain development

Problem: Persistent rural poverty, limited options for adding value to primary production

Solution: Value chain development

But…does value chain development live up to expectations for poverty reduction?

– We don’t know!

– Existing tools measure success based on few indicators (price, output), with limited attention to causality

– Asset-based assessment tools can provide insights into changes in productive capacities and resilience

Collaboration with the Ford Foundation for tool development

Collaboration with the Ford Foundation for tool development

Build partnerships for tool design and testing in Africa, India, and Latin America: Bioversity, MEDA, Swisscontact, Technoserve, CIP, LRW, CRS, local NGOs

Phase 1: 2009-2010– Build consensus about conceptual and methodological

base for tool design– Draft tool (version 1)– 12 case studies

Phase 2: 2010-current– Revise tool (version 2) – 11 case studies– Identify lessons learned– Revise tool (final version)

Case study: certified coffee, NicaraguaCase study: certified coffee, NicaraguaCase study context

Soppexcca: cooperative 500+ members

Strong buyer support for initial organization

$2.1 M support from NGOs during coffee crisis

Strong pre-existing levels of human and social capital at cooperative level

Households recovering from asset erosion during coffee crisis

Methodology

4-year assessment period (2005-2009)

Household level: 292 interviews, key informants

Coop level: key informants, secondary info

Clustering for analysis

Case study resultsCase study resultsHousehold level

Cluster 1 (25%): limited asset building

Cluster 2 (58%): incomplete asset building

Cluster 3 (17%): major improvements in endowments

Cooperative level

Expansion of credit portfolio, staff, infrastructure

But…high risk of asset erosion, social goals limit growth

Implications

Asset thresholds and vulnerability: major factors in determining the ability of the poor to participate

Investments in VC readiness: Pro-poor VCD depends on interventions addressing asset gaps and vulnerably

Lessons learned in tool designLessons learned in tool design

Tool can provide meaningful insights for improved value chain design

But …addressing changes over time and at two levels adds depth and complexity

…and many case study teams were reluctant to critically assess the interventions

Tool is not an all-in-one solution: need for complementary tools (e.g., gender issues)

Tool best for in-depth assessment : potential need for lighter tool as entry point

The road ahead…The road ahead…Products for 2011:

Final version of assessment tool (Nov 2011)

Edited volume of case studies (Dec 2011)

Journal articles in progress:

Donovan & Poole: Inter. J. of Ag. Sustainability

Stoian et al.: Enterprise Dev. and Microfinance

Donovan & Poole: World Development

Proposals under consideration:

Chain assessment and monitoring tool (CATIE, SFL, ICRAF, CRS)

Follow up work to current tool and development of other tools (ICRAF-CATIE)

Producers’ motivation for collectiveaction in kola in Cameroon

Amos Gyau

Background• Collective action defined as “an action taken by a group

(either directly or on its behalf through an organization) in pursuit of members’ perceived shared interest” has been promoted as important to link farmers to markets.

• Despite its demonstrated benefits, not all producers are involved in the collective initiatives.

Objective Examines producers’ motivation towards collective action in the production and marketing of kola in the Western highlands of Cameroon

Why do we have to understand farmers’ motivation?Understanding of farmers’ attitudes, opinions and motivation would enable promoters to design more effective messages and techniques which can enhance farmers’ decision to adopt and get committed to collective action

Methodology:

• Technology acceptance model was used as framework for analysis

• Interviews with 216 farmers who have been involved in Collective action

• Data analysed using structural equation modelling (SEM) with partial least squares software

Theoretical frameworkTechnology Acceptance Model

External values

Perceived usefulness

Perceived ease of use

Attitude Behavioural intention

System Usage

Collective Action Behaviour Model

Perceived usefulness of CA

Perceived ease of use of CA

Behavioural intent

Intrinsic motivation

H1 +

H2 +

H3+

H4 +

H5 +

ResultsTable 5: Results of the structural model

Hypotheses Constructs Expected sign Path coefficients

H1 IM-->PU + 0.2278** Accepted

H2 IM-->PEU + 0.5086** Accepted

H3 PEU-->PU + 0.6667** Accepted

H4 PU-->BI + 0.1592 Not accepted

H5 PEU-->BI + 0.5411** Accepted

**=Significant at 1%

Key lessons and implications

Lessons learned• Intrinsic motivators are important to enhance group activities• Ease of involvement is necessary to facilitate acceptance• Perceived usefulness (PU) does not significantly influence

behavioural intentionKey implications• Economic benefits are not enough to enhance farmers’ intention

and subsequent adoption of group activities• The marginal cost (additional work/efforts) involved in group

activities should not outweigh the marginal benefits