Net-Map analysis of Value Network for Maize and Aflatoxin Information Flow in Kenya

Submitted by Marites Tiongco, IFPRI

1

STRUCTURE

Objectives 2

List of Participants 2

Actors of Maize Value Chain 2

Description of Major Actors And Their Roles Along the Maize Value Chain 4

Position of Actors in the Network 6

Flow of the Product 6

Flow of the Information 8

List of Tables

Table 1 List of participants in the Net-Map exercise, Kenya 2

Table 2 List of actors in the groundnut value chain and Aflatoxin risk information network 3

Table 3 Degree Centrality 6

Table 4 Closeness & Farness Centrality for selling maize and byproducts in the value chain 7

List of Maps

Map 1. Flow of maize along the value chain 7

Map 2. Information and product flow links and most influential actors in case of an aflatoxicosis

outbreak

8

Map 3. Information and product flow links and most influential actors in changing behavior to

adopt drought resistant variety in order to reduce risk of Aflatoxin contamination

9

Map 4. Information and product flow links and most influential actors in changing behavior to

adopt a postharvest technology in order to reduce risk of Aflatoxin contamination

10

Map 5. Information and product flow links and most influential actors in case of communicating

research findings

11

Appendix: Pictures from exercise 12

2

Objectives The objective of this exercise was to identify the actors, information flows along the maize value chain,

and the institutional responses to Aflatoxin contamination. The following questions were asked:

• What/who are the formal and informal actors, private/public involved in the value chain?

• What are their roles? Who in the value chain is influential in terms of managing risk of Aflatoxin contamination?

• How does information flow in the value chain?

List of Participants

Twenty participants from different institutions took part in the net-mapping exercise (Table 1).

Table 1: List of participants in the Net-Map exercise, Kenya

Name Affiliation

1 Archileo N. Kaaya Makerere University

2 Briget Okumu East Africa Grain Council

3 Clare Narrod International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)

4 Diana Grusczynski Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

5 Felicia Wu University of Pittsburgh

6 Francis Nangayo African Agricultural Technology Foundation

7 George Mahuku International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT)

8 Gerald Mumma Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)

9 Hugo De Groote CIMMYT

10 Jonathan Hellin CIMMYT

11 Judith Chambrelin Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences

12 Kevin Manyara Lesiolo Grain

13 Marties Tiongco IFPRI

14 Ranajit Bandyopadhyay International Institute of Tropical Agriculture

15 Rebecca Nelson Cornell University

16 Sila Nzioki Kenya Agricultural Research Institute

17 Sophie Walker Agricultural Cooperative Development International/ Volunteers in Overseas Cooperative Assistance (ACDI/VOCA)

18 Steve Collins ACDI/VOCA

19 Vivian Hoffmann University of Maryland

20 Zippy Mbati World Food Program

Actors of Maize Value Chain

The actors identified by the participants include farmers, service providers, and institutions involved in

managing the risk of Aflatoxin contamination in maize (Table 2).

3

Table 2. List of actors along the maize value chain in Kenya

Actors Code

Government Agencies/policy makers/regulators

Government extension workers GOVTEXT

Saved seed company SAVEDSD

Certified seed companies CERTIFIEDSD

City council cess collectors CESS

Village Leaders/Chiefs/Local opinion leaders LOCLEADERS

KAB Standards KAB

Government research centers GOVRESEARCH

Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate Services KEPHIS

Government service providers GOVSERVICE

Ministry of Agriculture MOA

Ministry of Health MOH

Int’l organization/non-government/sources of information

CIMMYT CIMMYT

World Food Program WFP

NGO extension workers NGOEXT

NGO service providers NGOSERVICE

NARS including Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI) NARS

Eastern Africa Grain Council EAGC

Universities-academicians-scientists UNIV

Media Mass media includes TV,

radio, newspapers

Input providers

Government seed companies GOVSEED

Commercial seed companies COMSEED

Fertilizer producers FERTPROD

Agro dealers AGRODEALRS

Producers

Large-scale farmers LSFARMERS

Medium scale farmers MSFARMERS

Small-scale farmers includes subsistence farmers SSFARMERS

Storage (post-harvest)

National Cereals and Produce Board (also a market outlet) NCPB

Commercial warehouse COMWAREH

Storage builders STOREBUILDRS

Silo makers SILOBUILDRS

Distribution and marketing agents

Farm level stores in small market place FARMSTORE

Small assemblers SMASSEMBLERS

Small scale transporters SMTRANSPORTRS

Large scale transporters LSTRANSPORTRS

4

Primary traders PRIMTRADERS

Secondary traders SECTRADERS

Wholesale traders WHOLESALERS

Processed product retailers PROCSDRETAILRS

Grain retailers GRAINRETAILRS

Contract traders CONTRADERS

Export-Import Traders XMTRADERS

Large farm-level stores big market place LSTORES

Paid stores PDSTORES

Processors

Food processors PROCESSORS

Corn oil processors CORNOIL

Kumi-kumi producers- moonshine produced with rejected grain KUMI2

Formal commercial millers COMILLERS

Large posho millers LSPOSHO

Small posho millers SSPOSHO

Animal feed millers FEEDMILRS

CPC starch/flour processors CPCFLOUR

Alcohol producers ALCOHOL

Consumers

Rural consumers including maize farmers RURALCON

Urban Consumers URBANCON

Supermarkets SUPERMKTS

Community health workers HEALTHWORKRS

Hospital workers HOSPITALW

Schools(public) SCHOOLS

Livestock LIVESTOCK

Catholic Diocese; Church leaders & groups CHURCH

Description of major actors and their roles along the maize value chain

Small-scale farmers—these are maize producers producing small amount of maize (from less than 5

acres of land) and sell them to farm level stores; usually they run out of maize so they purchase for

home consumption. They do not produce enough grains for home consumption and are actually net

buyers of grain over the course of the year.

Medium-scale farmers—these are farmers producing medium volume of maize (from 5-20 acres of

land).

Large-scale farmers—these are farmers producing large volumes of maize (from more than 30 acres of

land) and sell their grain to NCPB and large commercial millers.

Small Assemblers –these are the first commercial purchasers of maize from the maize field. They buy

maize directly from several farmers in bulk to capture economies of scale in transport to local markets,

5

and sell it to wholesalers and retailers, and sometimes directly to consumers. In some cases, they also

act as purchasing agents of large commercial millers.

Wholesalers –are traders who buy maize from assemblers and sell it to retailers or millers. They usually

buy maize from surplus areas and sell it to deficit areas, and in large market places.

Primary and secondary traders–these are local maize traders who buy maize from large wholesalers and

assemblers and sell it to smaller-scale retailers and final consumers. Secondary traders are also retailers

in small market places where maize was stocked and sold in small volumes.

Formal commercial millers—these are large-scale millers who deal with large volumes of maize and do

their own packaging. These millers are capital intensive and use roller-milling technology that produces

a more refined meal. They acquire maize from wholesalers, NCPB stores, and large farmers.

Posho millers—these are also under the category of traders who acquire maize directly from farmers

but are involved in processing maize grain into whole maize meal (posho). Posho millers use simple

hammer milling technology where the germ and bran of the maize grain are milled together with the

kernel to produce flour. Small-scale posho millers are involved in custom milling where the customer

provides the maize grain and mill it for a fee. Large-scale posho millers are involved in production milling

with bigger capacity than small-scale posho millers and are also involved in packaging and retailing

maize meal. They also stock maize for resale to consumers.

Farm level stores—are market outlets located in small market places.

Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate Services (KEPHIS)—is an independent regulatory agency to ensure

quality of agricultural inputs, such as seeds and fertilizer produce in Kenya. It undertakes Plant Variety

Protection, Seed Certification, Phytosanitary Inspection of Imports and Exports and Analysis of Soil,

Water, Agricultural Produce, Fertilizers and Pesticides.

National Cereals and Produce Board (NCPB)—is a cereal purchasing, marketing, and price regulatory

agency that ensures a whole year round supply of cereals for the nation.

Eastern Africa Grain Council (EAGC)—is a regional organization for the grain value chain stakeholders

whose members are farmers, traders, millers and service providers such as banks, warehouse operators

and input suppliers from the East African Community (EAC), Common Market for Eastern and Southern

Africa (COMESA) and Southern Africa Development Cooperation (SADC) regional trading blocs

(http://www.eagc.org/section.asp?ID=39).

Extension service providers—these are extension workers responsible for the delivery of extension

service including dissemination of technology

6

Position of actors in the network

Flow of the product:

Maize is produced using several inputs such as seeds, fertilizer, capital, and labor. Once harvested, maize

move from the farmer/producer to the middlemen, which include assemblers, primary and secondary

traders, and transporters, then to processors, millers, wholesalers, retailers, and finally to

consumers/end users. All these actors stock maize either for consumption or retail, thus they use grain

storage facilities such as warehouse and silos. Consumers include rural and urban consumers (including

farmer/producers of maize), regional and international markets, supermarkets, livestock (fed with reject

grains), and relief organizations (such as WFP).

Degree centrality reveals the number of links an actor have in the network. Figure 1 shows that medium-

scale farmers, secondary traders, farm level stores, wholesalers, and commercial millers are among the

value chain actors that exhibited the highest degree of centrality (10-13 links). In particular, the critical

points of intervention in reducing the risk of Aflatoxin contamination are where there are medium-scale

farmers and secondary traders.

Table 3: Degree Centrality

Actors Degree

MSFARMERS 13

SECTRADERS 12

FARMSTORE 11

WHOLESALERS 10

COMILLERS 10

SSFARMERS 9

PRIMTRADERS 9

MEDIA 9

SMASSEMBLERS 8

AVG: 4.323

STD: 3.042

MIN: 1

MAX: 13

Closeness Centrality indicates how many steps it takes from one actor to every other actor in the

network. High closeness value means that the actor is closer to other actors (fewer steps to reach other

actors) and hence if they are contaminated, they might be epicentres of aflatoxin contamination. Among

the value chain actors that have been identified to have high closeness are primary and secondary

traders, small to medium-scale farmers, farm level stores, and wholesalers.

7

Table 4: Closeness & Farness Centrality for selling maize and byproducts in the value chain

Actors Far Close

SECTRADERS 58.0 0.017

MSFARMERS 59.0 0.017

FARMSTORE 59.0 0.017

WHOLESALERS 59.0 0.017

PRIMTRADERS 62.0 0.016

SSFARMERS 63.0 0.016

AVG: 84.7 0.012

STD: 16.6 0.002

MIN: 58.0 0.007

MAX: 141.0 0.017

Maximum possible closeness: 0.02

Map 1. Flow of maize along the value chain

8

Flow of information:

Figure 2 shows the most influential actors (with bigger nodes) in terms of managing risk of Aflatoxin

during an outbreak. The most influential actors, as represented by the size of the nodes, are the

Ministry of Health, government and non-government service providers, followed by the media such as

radio to get the message out and then the Ministry of Agriculture, and NCPB. It is important to note that

mobile phones (particularly text messaging) are effective means of communicating information related

to price and other market information.

Map 2. Information and product flow links and most influential actors in case of an aflatoxicosis

outbreak

Legend: links red information on knowledge, technology, and market

green poultry product flow

Figure 3 shows the most influential actors in facilitating changes in behavior or when communicating

knowledge and awareness of ways to mitigate risk of Aflatoxin contamination, for example using

9

drought resistant varieties. The most influential actor is CIMMYT, followed by commercial seed

distributors, media, then agro dealers, medium-scale farmers, urban and rural consumers, non-

government service providers, local leaders, Ministry of Agriculture, and feed millers and commercial

millers. It should be noted that CIMMYT works very closely with Kenya Agricultural Research Institute

(KARI) who is involved in technology development, adoption and dissemination to farmers and other

actors. Hence, KARI should, in principle, also should be considered as most influential actor. This

however did not appear during the net-mapping exercise as KARI was not explicitly identified by the

participants.

Map 3. Information and product flow links and most influential actors in changing behavior to adopt

drought resistant variety in order to reduce risk of Aflatoxin contamination

Legend: links red information on knowledge, technology, and market

green poultry product flow

Figure 4 shows the most influential actors when communicating knowledge and awareness of ways to

minimize the risk of Aflatoxin contamination, for example adopting a postharvest technology that would

minimize harvest losses such as metal silos for storage. At the village and community levels, the most

10

influential actors identified are local leaders, followed by media, then agro dealers and non-government

extension workers.

If the risk mitigation strategy is destroying all contaminated maize and maize found within a certain

kilometer radius, then millers and traders will be the most influential actors in the whole chain. It is

interesting to note that post-harvest technology providers (such as silo makers) did not turn out to be

influential actors.

Map 4. Information and product flow links and most influential actors in changing behavior to adopt a

postharvest technology in order to reduce risk of Aflatoxin contamination

Legend: links red information on knowledge, technology, and market

green poultry product flow

Figure5 shows map of actors who are most influential in communicating research findings from this

project. The most influential actors identified are local leaders, followed by media, then agro dealers

and non-government extension workers. Research findings therefore need to be communicated to local

leaders, but most importantly to those who provide information to local leaders. The media could be the

11

most critical, in terms of acquiring the information from scientists, packaging and translating it to local

leaders and other actors.

The critical points of intervention would be wherever there is a storage or store, particularly at the farm level.

Map 5. Information and product flow links and most influential actors in case of communicating

research findings

Legend: links red information on knowledge, technology, and market

green poultry product flow

The net maps shown above are a result of perceptions of participants (mainly representing research

institutions) of the net-mapping exercise. They make look messy and complex at a glance, but the net

maps imply that all participants actively participated and discussed their ideas about the topic. It is also

possible that these net maps will vary if other actors along the value chain were present during the

exercise. Qualitative research at the beginning of the project (using participatory value chain analysis

12

and market mapping) will rapidly help the project team and its partners identify the key actors in the net

maps shown above where they can focus their efforts to prevent and control Aflatoxin contamination.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and are not necessarily endorsed

by or representative of IFPRI or of the co-sponsoring or supporting organizations. This brief is intended

for discussion. It has not yet undergone editing.

For more information visit: http://www.ifpri.org/afla/afla.asp

APPENDIX: Pictures from exercise

13