Identifying Market Opportunities for Rural Smallholder Producers to support agencies implementing a participatory approach to rural agroenterprise development
This guide is the third in a series from CIAT designed to support agencies implementing a participatory approach to rural agroenterprise development.
Transforming Gender Relations Through the Market: Smallholder Milk Market Participation and Women's Intra-household Bargaining Power in Ethiopia
Dairy in Ethiopia was traditionally a woman's industry and male involvement was considered taboo. Increases in the use of contracting to enter formal markets required the participation of the usually male head of household. Using a quasi-expiriment and propensity-score matching, the authors find that income is higher for smallholder milk market participants and men control more of the income compared with non-market participants
Reality of Food Losses: A New Measurement Methodology
Measuring food loss, identifying where in the food system it occurs, and developing effective policies along every stage of the value chain are essential first steps in addressing the problem of food loss in developing countries. Food loss has been defined in many ways, and disagreement remains regarding proper terminology and measurement methodology. Although the terms “post-harvest loss,” “food loss,” and “food loss and waste” are frequently used interchangeably, they do not refer consistently to the same aspects of the problem. In addition, none of these classifications includes pre-harvest losses. Figures regarding food loss remain highly inconsistent, precise causes of food loss remain undetected, and success stories of decreasing food loss remain few. We improve over this measurement gap on food losses by developing and testing the methodology traditionally used with three new methodologies that aim to reduce the measurement error in assessing the magnitude of food loss. The methods account for losses from the pre-harvest stage through product distribution and include both quantity loss and quality deterioration. We apply the instrument to producers, middlemen, and processors in seven staple food value chains in five developing countries. Throughout the different estimation methodologies, losses at the producer level represent between 60 and 80 percent of total value chain losses, while the average loss at the middleman and processor level lies around 7 and 19 percent, respectively. Differences across methodologies are salient, especially at the producer level. While the estimation results from the three new methods implemented are close and the differences are mostly not statistically significant, the aggregate self-reported method reports systematically lower loss figures. Finally, our results show the major reasons behind the losses identified for each commodity and country. Specifically, we find that they included pests and diseases and lack of rainfall. When looking at the produce left in the field, the major reason for the loss is a lack of appropriate harvesting techniques. Finally, the loss reported at the post-harvest level is due mostly to damage done during selection, as a result of workers’ lack of training and experience in selecting the produce. Therefore, technology, improved seeds and the proper soil management techniques together with better market access could help to substantially reduce the losses at the producer level.
You can read the full text here --> https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/80378/3/MPRA_paper_80378.pdf
Featured best practice
SUPPORTING SMALLHOLDER COMMERCIALISATION BY ENHANCING INTEGRATED COORDINATION IN AGRIFOOD VALUE CHAINS: EXPERIENCES WITH DAIRY HUBS IN KENYA
Recent literature suggests that to make value chains in changing agrifood systems in sub-Saharan Africa more inclusive, intermediary institutions should foster coordination. The hub concept has been applied as such an intermediary institution that coordinates advisory services, input supply and smallholder access to markets. This study unravels hub coordination in smallholder dairy in Kenya, conceptualising the hub as a mix between a broker of relationships, a one-stop-shop for services and a cluster of producers and service providers, enabling horizontal coordination (between smallholders) and vertical coordination (between smallholders and value chain actors and service providers). Findings indicate that, in resolving challenges that limit smallholders’ integration in value chains, synergies emerged as the hub combined different types of horizontal and vertical coordination. This was done by simultaneously organising clusters of farmers and input and service providers (clustering role) and actively facilitating delivery (broker and one-stop-shop role), where the hub structure stimulated the matching of demand (better articulation) to supply (better organised access). However, tensions emerged in the combination of horizontal and vertical coordination as farmer organisations as hub operators had to balance a role as an honest broker between farmers with the intent of enhancing collective action and as a business-oriented entity which resulted in the exclusion of some farmers who cannot deliver the quantity and quality required to minimise coordination costs. Given these tensions and capacity problems of farmers’ organisations, complementary intermediary arrangements may be necessary to fulfil some coordination roles.
You can read the full text here:https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/914AC97823FE27AA86DDF88651DA5779/...