Farmers on the move
Activity report 2009

• Prologue
• Introduction
• Achievements
• Advisory Services
• Projects: the building blocks
  • Introduction
  • Approaches
  • Work areas: management and clustering
• FFP: Funding & Expenditure
• Conclusions and recommendations
• Download Activity Report 2009

Projects: the building blocks

Introduction

Projects are the way in which we shape our support to farmers’ organisations. As such they are the building blocks towards farmers’ organisations becoming stronger. They consist of financial support, advisory support or both. Each agri-agency has its specific approach in the projects they implement. Although the differences are celebrated, the work of all agri-agencies needs to be geared towards each other to a certain degree. One of the tasks of AgriCord is the coordination and harmonisation of the work of the agri-agencies. The governance structure is composed of a General Assembly, a Board of Directors and a Project Committee (PC). For a description of the way these bodies are organised we refer to annexes 5 and 5b, describing their composition and general activities. By means of examples we will illustrate the different approaches and their results.

In view of the fact that the number of projects increased from 153 contracted projects in 2007 to 298 in 2008 to 389 in 2009 (on 2008 and 2009 these numbers include the so-called micro-projects and 18 institutional projects related to work area management), it is impossible to give a solid overview of the narrative results of all projects. Therefore this chapter will present some activities that are representative of the projects carried out during 2009

When looking at the figures in the table above we see the programme goal to direct 60% of project funds to Africa has been achieved. In 2007 (55%) and 2008 (59,5%) this target was within reach, but the trend continued and by 2009 65% of funds went to Africa.

Comparing the numbers of projects over the three years per continent, the chart below shows a clear increase in Africa and Latin America.

Chart 4: Number of projects per continent in 2007-2008-2009

Source: http://www.agro-info.net/

We selected a few reports on project results that give an impression of the diversity of topics the producer organisations work on with assistance of the agri-agencies. These project reports are presented throughout this activity report, and can be recognised by the header ‘project report’. The reports on all projects can be found on www.agro-info.net. Please consult Annex 3 for the list of projects in 2009 and Annex 3b for an explanation on how to find them online.

Approaches

As said before, every agri-agency has a specific approach in the support of projects. In the following paragraphs an overview is given of specific project related elements. Below each element the way of working of one or more of the agri-agencies is highlighted.

Starting economic initiatives- micro-projects

All agri-agencies support the farmers’ organisations on improved market access. Agriterra does this amongst others through so-called micro-projects.

A central idea of the Farmers Fighting Poverty programme revolves around reaching the members of farmers’ organisation at local level as much as possible. They should be involved in the activities of their organisation and encouraged to develop economic initiatives and entrepreneurship. These three elements are the basic criteria for assessing requests for support at local level. Agriterra united this direct support to economic initiatives at local level in the concept of micro-projects. It is interesting to see how groups with 100 to 250 members can make a difference by organising activities together.

In Kenya the primary motive of the national farmers’ organisation (KENFAP) to support micro-projects is to generate income to sustain operations of the farmers’ organisation at regional level and trigger the process of financial self sustainability. By giving support to farmer groups in developing economic initiatives, we see membership numbers increase and generated increase in income for small farmers. Increasing membership fees leads to more support of the regional organisation. KENFAP is developing itself into a strong farmers’ organisation by increasing the income they generate from within themselves. E.g. through offering services, economic activities and sponsorship. The organisation changed from an institution that focused mainly on representation of members’ interests at national and regional levels into a service-oriented institution that focuses on needs of the members by providing tangible benefits.

ACWW supports micro-projects focussed only on women. These were interesting initiatives with a focus on income generating activities for women in three countries (Cameroon, Tanzania and India). Besides an increase in income there were also results such as empowerment of women in terms of working collectively, learning new skills and increased confidence.

In Madagascar the statistics show a significant discrepancy between the incomes of rural women and men. It is therefore interesting to see that most micro-projects in Madagascar are organised by women. They started income generating projects in poultry raising, collectively selling their products , breeding and selling zebu’s (together with their husbands) and improving rice production. The women in Madagascar are able to take their responsibility and power into their own hands through the micro-projects application for funds.

In Indonesia, activities in the micro-projects focussed on building partnerships between farmers’ groups and private enterprises. Through these partnerships small farmers get the opportunity to develop themselves as entrepreneurs. The income of the small farmers increases, while business becomes more sustainable and the quality of the products increases. Outcomes of the programme are:

1. improved access to markets. Access to additional markets has given the producers more options in spreading risks. There were at least 92 new market channels opened by the partnerships, mostly to the domestic modern markets (82 channels), other to export markets (5 channels), industry (3 channels) and other segmented markets (2 channels).
2. improved services through cooperation with service providers such as research and development institutes, universities and businesses. In total, 63 links to solution service providers were built, making the existing knowledge accessible and applicable to the farmers.

banana nursery - Kenya

Market access

An example of the cooperation between FERT and a farmers organisation is shown in the project with Mviwata regarding increased access to markets. In 1996 Mviwata organised forums with farmers from all over Tanzania. During the forums the Tanzanian farmers clearly expressed the need for access to the resources necessary to fairly compete in the free market economy and to obtain a paying outlet for their agricultural produce. To address the challenge of marketing Mviwata asked FERT to bring its technical and financial assistance for the implementation of pilot activities in the field of marketing.

FERT opened an office in Morogoro town in late 2001 and the Rural Markets Development Project (RMDP) officially started in January 2002 for 3 years. It eventually ended in June 2005, after a six-month extension.

FERT and GRET (Groupement de Recherche et d’Echanges Technonologiques) mobilised through their permanent office (the Project Coordination Unit) and through short-term missions, their expertise on project monitoring and evaluation, as well as on the building and strengthening of producers’ organisations and on farmer-led economic initiatives.

The main RMDP achievement was the construction of four bulk markets in rural areas and the set-up of local groups to manage the new markets: the market boards. After the end of the RMDP project, FERT and MVIWATA gathered new funds and implemented the Support to Rural Marketing project (SRM). Project implementation was much more internalised within MVIWATA’s network than for the previous project. In fact during the past years MVIWATA has been associated with all project activities and a transfer of skills from FERT and GRET to MVIWATA’s Market Unit and regional networks built the capacities of the latter and made it possible for them to implement many activities. The main SRM achievement was the construction of two new rural markets on the same model as the ones built during the RMDP project.

Results of ten years of partnership (1999-2009) with Mviwata, Tanzania’s national network organisation, which allowed the realisation of six rural markets, are demonstrated in the publication “Capitalisation of rural market development”. In this document concrete examples are presented which can be used by others to improve market conditions and increase livelihood of farmers.

Participation of farmers’ organisations in agricultural policies

After twenty years in which the States disregarded agriculture, and after the recent food crisis, many African governments have renewed their awareness that agricultural and rural development are key. Africa wants pro-active policies in this field, and many countries are now preparing and proclaiming new agricultural legislation and rural development strategies.

Thus, the question arises how farmers’ organisations position themselves in this process. The increasing influence that they are having in their national context urges them to put this influence to the best use, rethinking the forms of social dialogue that are best suited to contribute to national and regional policies.

An active participation in policy debates and elaboration requires that the influence of these organisations expresses itself in real political weight, and to do that, both the elected leaders and the staff of the farmers’ organisations need to acquire new competences.

Afdi gives ‘how to do’-advice to these leaders and staff: in terms of gaining access to information, increasing the capacity to analyze and to formulate proposals. Much work is also done on the cohesion of the group or organisation and the multiplication of mobilising power, informing members and promoting internal debate. Finally, much effort is dedicated to defining the public image of the organisation, which depends on sound communication strategies.

In Senegal (2004) and Mali (2006), the state has renewed its formulation of rural and agricultural policies, developing and proclaiming so-called LOA : agricultural orientation laws. From of 2007, at the request of CNCR-Senegal and AOPP-Mali, Afdi participated in organising workshops and expert missions with AgriCord support. Lawyers, French union leaders and resource persons have been mobilised to transmit information on these laws from the grassroots of the organisations to their leadership, and to give advice on how best to influence the debate on these LOA: workshops, analysis of draft texts, writing widely circulated policy notes… All this has made it possible to define the themes in which the farmers really wish the LOA to become reality soon.

Farmers’ proposals have been made about the what exactly is a farm and a farmer, about the definition of different agricultural professions, about social protection, agricultural development funds…

Based on the experiences in Senegal and Mali, AFDI has organised information and training workshops on LOA for 70 leaders and staff of farmers´ organisations in Ivory Coast, Burkina Faso and Benin, with much/appreciated input from their peers from Senegal and Mali. The acquired experiences are recorded so that they can be of use in later projects of a similar nature: both on the employed methods (workshops etc.) and on the topics as such (position of farmers, development funds etc.).

The Farmers Knowledge Program

Training of farmers is part of or the main activity in many projects. Training is a core activity of UPA DI. The Farmers Knowledge Program (TFKP) is an integrated program of training and agricultural development that reduces poverty by increasing farmers’ incomes. Through this program, UPA DI works with farmers’ organisations to aid in the development of small farm operations. This is achieved by training farmers at the grassroots level, by helping them to set up economic projects and by strengthening farm groups and organisations so they can deliver services to their members. This integrated approach allows farmers to assert themselves individually and collectively as agents of change, and thus to become a driving force in the development of agriculture and that of the entire rural community.

Experience has taught us that agricultural development cannot be accomplished by isolated or individual actions alone. The Farmers Knowledge Program thus operates simultaneously at three levels of the farm community: 1) the farmer and his or her family in their farm business, 2) the local farmers’ group of which the farmer is a member, and 3) the farmers’ organisation combining a number of groups, unions or associations. The synergy created between these three levels guarantees sustainable results.

The strategy is the same at all three levels of intervention: assisting the principal stakeholders while alternating between training and action. By integrating reflection (in the context of training sessions) and action (supported by development funds), TFKP helps build not only the individual and collective consciousness of farmers and their leaders, but their skills as well.

Based on individual diagnosis a series of training sessions of short duration is given, focussing on building knowledge, know-how and life skills. During the training seeking solutions and building on local potential are most important.

Three development funds support the implementation of economic projects. These development funds serve as an economic lever for creating a new dynamic both at the village level and in farmers’ organisations. The projects are planned and carried out by participants in response to needs they have identified themselves, all in a context of better communication between the rank and file of their organisations and their officials. In all cases, the funds must be replenished after each operation and they remain the property of the organisations, allowing them to support additional projects and services for the benefit of members. This ensures that actions taken under the TFKP program are sustainable well beyond the program itself.

Another essential element of TFKP’s intervention strategy is to create a local group of trainers. Building the capacities of these human resources, and involving them in planning, execution and evaluation throughout the program cycle, facilitates both appropriation by the community and the sustainability of results.

Lastly, the program makes use of North-South and South-South exchanges in which farmers discuss their common problems. Although strategies developed in the North can rarely be exported without modification, knowledge sharing between farmers from South and North is a source of inspiration for all.

The TFKP approach was first applied in Senegal in 2004, with two farmer organisations and two groups. While this first experience continues with the two original organisations and four new groups, TFKP has extended its reach to Benin, where since the end of 2007 UPA DI has been collaborating with two additional farmer organisations and six groups. In 2009, the program started in Haiti with four local farmers group and a new component was developed to address the need for community-based natural resource management.

As an example of the results obtained with this program, farmers could adopt an improved technical itinerary with quality inputs, while the organisation to which they belong set up a service for seed multiplication and bulk purchases of inputs. In Senegal, the funds entrusted to the Fédération des périmètres autogérés (FPA) for their collective project grew from € 18 500 to € 46 875 (250% increase) in just three years. In 2009, the eight farmers unions participating in the seed multiplication program have generated net profits of € 66 235 while the farmers multiplying the seeds have earned gross profits of € 135 102. The average cumulative net profit generated by the farm-based projects after three years was € 71 (95% of the funds invested). The average annual income of participating household tripled during the same period. Many qualitative results have also been observed, including better functioning farmers’ organisations with respect to democracy, better internal communications and more effective advocacy strategies.

Financial management and financial services

All agri-agencies believe that technical assistance in financial management enhances management capacity, accountability, good governance and leads to organisational development. Compliance monitoring is a key mechanism to mitigate, detect and minimise corruption, fraud and mismanagement of funds. SCC provides technical and methodological support for the development of well functioning financial management and internal control systems within the partner organisations. In the financial management projects the collaboration between partners and other relevant organisations within the field of finance and administration is strengthened. An important step has been to strengthen collaboration between programme and finance officers as a way to work more holistically with the organisational development of partner organisations. SCC has well-established systems for financial administration and internal control and has been able to detect and handle instances of fraud and corruption. One of the results of the acquired experience has been the further integration of programme and financial aspects of development work. This more holistic approach to organisational development, combined with local presence, made SCC fit to not only focus on technical aspects, but also to address corruption as a challenge in the development of an organisation itself.

Overall, the promotion of access to financial services within the different projects had great impact on the groups involved in terms of wealth creation in various forms. SCC invested in building the capacity of partner organisations and their members in terms of: resources to finance and facilitating activities, training for staff as well as members, participation in existing networks within the sector, and to a lesser extent development of infrastructure.

The projects within the financial services sector, provided financial support to the targeted communities, thereby creating employment opportunities, improving their livelihoods i.e. education for their children, improvement of their shelter as well as boosting their local economy. In terms of gender affirmative action is taken. Within the SACCOs (East Africa) for example, it is a requirement that at least 3 out of the 9 board members should be women. All this is meant to give credence and voice to the often marginalised (mostly women) in the decision making processes. On average 40% of the total members were women, which is an improvement compared to the original representation

Both Savings and Credit Cooperatives (SACCO) and Village Savings and Loan Association (VSLA) methodologies extensively used in the Eastern Africa region in the preceding period have been outstanding in offering financial services to the underserved communities, especially in the rural areas. A lesson learned is that once methodologies are given a form and structure that is congruent with the levels at which the target population is located, the degree of participation and transformation is very high.

Multi-stakeholder and multi-level approach

Support to farmers at the local level is another issue important for all agri-agencies. This already became clear in the description of the micro-projects and training of farmers at grassroots level. Trias sees as one of the important characteristics of their work the conscious combination of its multi-stakeholder and multi-level approach. An important focus of the work of Trias is the concept of ‘local economical development’ and to reach this, structural consultation between different kinds of players at the local level like producers’ organisations and private companies, local authorities and NGO’s is stimulated. The search for an optimal combination of concrete services to benefit their target group is the starting point. The specific role of farmers’ organisations is the centre of attention. As a result, it is observed that farmers’ organisations become more active players at the local level, and assume their responsibility in defending the interests of their members better and join their forces with other development actors to guarantee the delivery of quality services to the family farmers.

At the same time, the multi-level approach aims at linking-up local producers’ networks and organisations with national, regional and international levels that are relevant for their work. Among others, so called North-South partnerships between farmers’ organisations in the South and the Belgian constituency are implemented. This gives the Southern farmers’ organisations very often a clearer view of the organisational development process they need to go through. At the same time it offers the Northern organisation the opportunity to reactivate the essential components of cooperative work within their own structure. A win-win situation that stimulates international solidarity. This will be described in more detail in Chapter II.5.

Mainstreaming issues

AIDS is the leading cause of death in Sub-Saharan Africa and is thus one of the greatest challenges to the achievement of poverty reduction. The epidemic has a negative impact on social and economic development with poverty being both a cause and an effect of the HIV pandemic. Both SCC and Agriterra focus on mainstreaming HIV-AIDS and integrate this in projects and programmes of partners. High prevalence of HIV-AIDS has a major impact on farmers’ organisation, both on their staff as well as on their members, and on the objectives of all interventions. To meet the challenge, interventions must respond to the indirect factors that perpetuate vulnerability to HIV infection and the effects of AIDS. SCC supported activities related to HIV-AIDS problems with technical assistance from the Regional Office for Eastern and Southern Africa. Since 2007 Agriterra has supported the training of four staff members of farmers organisations in East Africa (one year training at Larenstein-Wageningen). Besides that Agriterra organised, together with Agri-ProFocus, workshops in East Africa for the partners on the topic of HIV/AIDS. Increased knowledge through the workshop and trained staff members gives the organisations approach a better insight into who to involve within the internal and external HIV/AIDS mainstreaming process.

All agri-agencies pay attention to gender issues. Not only is 70% of all poor people female. It is also women who experience poverty most. They often do not have access to resources and are materially deprived, and do not have control over resources/factors for production or the power to do something about it. Gender sensitivity became an important element in the interventions in all projects. Gender sensitivity became interwoven in project activities, study visits, training sessions, elections of leaders, etc. Through work area 14 focus is on increased women participation in project activities, as well as on addressing gender issues in the farmers’ organisations in order to improve both the position within the organisation and the livelihood of rural women. By mainstreaming the participation of women in AgriCord projects, we hope to increase women’s participation in mixed organisations. Focus on micro-projects and local economic activities support female entrepreneurship. The need for and usefulness of gender workshops was also expresses by the participants of the IFAP women’s committee meeting in Dublin (July 2009), representing African and Asian farmers’ organisations.

Work areas: management and clustering

As has been explained in previous occasions, the Farmers Fighting Poverty programme is organised in work areas: every project carried out by a client (a farmers’ organisation) pertains to one of 17 work areas. In addition, there are two ‘institutional’ work areas, accommodating projects carried out by the agri-agencies themselves. Every work area is managed by an agri-agency staff member (see Annex 2). Their complete reports on the work areas can be found on agro-info.net (Programmes > Farmers Fighting Poverty > Targets: Files. An overview of the targets reached and expenditure is found in Annex 8.

In the present chapter we will discuss some overall salient results of the work areas. But first we have a small look into the future, by presenting the organisation of work areas in Farmers Fighting Poverty II. a lesson learnt regarding the way the work areas were set-up was that it is time consuming and also complicated to explain to the outside world. Taking this lesson, we decided to bring the number of work areas down to just four areas. These areas in itself are composed of so-called deliverables.

We will not bother you with this new division, but will make the changeover easier by presenting the results on the current work areas grouped by the ‘new’ work areas. Work areas 1 (Organisational strengthening and inclusiveness) and 2 (Institutional development) have to do with strengthening the functioning of the organisation as such, regardless of its mission. Work area 3 (Policy elaboration and advocacy) and 4 (Business development) include the activities dealing with services to the members, i.e. the output of the organisation, which certainly depends on its mission.

Organisational strengthening and inclusiveness

(Work areas 2: Financial management; 3: Organisational strengthening; 5: Grassroots participation; 6: Training; 14: Gender; 15: ICT)

Helping organisations to become stronger and more inclusive, i.e. truly representative is a complicated and lengthy process. Agri-agencies have to take the long term approach and make firm commitments. They also need to be creative in finding new solutions to fit very specific circumstances.

There is clear evidence that organisations participating in the Farmers Fighting Poverty programme have become stronger. They have also reached out to those who are often excluded from development, such as women and the younger generation, as well as those affected by HIV and AIDS. The reports do not show the economic impact of the project but in all reports it is mentioned that the activities resulted in enhanced income for the women, but not quantified. In India 40 children attend school thanks to the income their mothers earn with their new activities. India reports that marketing channels are the main challenge for the women. Tanzania reports that the women can now provide three meals to their families and children can attend school. The women have also started a saving scheme. Empowerment of women in terms of working collectively, learning new skills and increased confidence are other important results of the micro-economic projects.

For instance, regarding financial management, 22 organisations demonstrably improved their financial management (as judged by the projects officer). This was made possible by, among others, advisory missions related to the improvement of financial management that have involved UOSPA in Uganda, FEPA/B in Burkina Faso, ANOPACI in Ivory Coast, Ingabo and Imbaraga in Rwanda, PFPN, AREN, FCMN, FUCOPRI, MOORIBEN, CSA-OCP in Niger. In total 151 farmers’ organisations have benefited from financial and advisory services in the field of financial management. These include 43 organisations from Africa, 97 from Latin America, 9 from Asia and 2 from Eastern Europe.

Training is of course essential to improve and make the strength of an organisation more sustainable. It is therefore great to observe that a large variety of courses is being set up in many organisations. And on top of that more women and youth participate in these training. We also see self-help groups being set up for joint economic activities at the local level and, last but not least, the increased access of farmers to internet through the setting-up of telecenters: in Kenya, Bolivia, Ivory Coast and Ghana as well as in some of the countries that participate in the 1000+ project (see chapter 1.4).

Institutional Development: Learning how to connect

(work area 4: Institutional development)

In order to work successfully with other organisations, farmer groups need to have reached a certain level of development. Their internal democracy needs to be strong and they need a professional approach. If these conditions are met, results are likely. Institutional development is about collaboration and competition of producers’ organisations with other actors/stakeholders in the arena of agricultural development or the value chain.

The analyses of the project results within this work area shows that organisations are progressing in their positioning and an enhanced capability to establish functional relations and coordination with important players in the agricultural arena or agribusiness value chain development (buyers, suppliers and governments). It is important that advisory support will be increasingly focussed on the positioning of farmers organisations and value chain development.

On the other hand, a good example of the positioning of farmers’ organisations in relation to the government is the case of the Congolese farmers’ organisations Sydip (Farmers’ Syndicat in North Kivu) and FOPAC (Congolese Federation of Farmers’ Organisations). They participated in the team responsible for drafting the Agricultural Development Policy Document of the Congolese government (the Code Agricole). Their position gave them the opportunity to influence the government policy on land issues and to assure tenure security for small holders and family agriculture. On initiative of the FOPAC, a consultation platform for different stakeholders in agricultural development has been introduced in the Northern Kivu. The Ministry of Agriculture used this model nationwide for the Agricultural Advisory Platforms in which, for each district, the different stakeholders in the agricultural arena are represented.

In Burkina Faso, Fepa B signed a marketing contract with the World Food Program (Purchase for Progress program) for 200 ton cowpeas / sorghum. The national level was responsible for the negotiation and three regional unions supplied the demanded quantity. The federation and the members of the three unions yielded interesting profit from this collaboration with this important buyer. A number of other farmers’ organisations also have this relation with WFP (e.g. Coocenki and Sydip in RDC).

Policy elaboration and advocacy

(Work areas 1: Participatory policy formulation; 12: Research for Development in Agriculture (ARD); 13: Other services incl HIV/AIDS)

Changes to policy are rarely introduced quickly. At national and regional levels, the wheels of bureaucracy can grind slowly. Persistence and clear vision are needed to set policy that works in favour of the poorest, including small farmers and those working the land. Because of the time needed to affect such changes, evidence of impact is slow to emerge.

The current work area 1 is the only one (see Annex 8) in which the accomplishment of the main target is not on track. Though measures have been taken to address this problem, for now it must be concluded that the elaboration, let alone the successful negotiation of sound proposals has not succeeded to the degree expected.

Nevertheless, when we look at more concrete topics such as research for market policies for agriculture and the contribution of farmers’ organisations to rural policies to address the HIV/AIDS problem, we certainly see results. The start-up of ESFIM projects (empowering smallholder farmers in markets) meant that four out of five projects are on their way. All these projects are about research on how producer organisations can get better access to markets.

In the Philippines an Agricultural Commodity Exchange System (ACES) is to be established with strong involvement from the Free Farmers’ Federation. In Kenya (KENFAP) a national research proposal was developed on value chain analysis and the risk management capacity of farmers. In Peru eight farmers organisations developed a national agenda on access to markets for producer organisations. Specifically, for coffee (by JNC) a study on quality criteria has been executed. In Uruguay a broad analysis has been done on the opportunities in various agricultural productions and in different regions (e.g. biofuel, adaptation to climate change).

Regarding mainstreaming of HIV/AIDS policies, the second workshop in the learning trajectory ‘Towards more HIV/Aids competent producer organisations’ was organised in May 2009 in Nairobi, Kenya. The farmers’ organisations involved (Mviwata, Unffe, Kenfap and Uospa) now have a clearer picture of their role and mandate resulting in a revision of their strategies. Before the first workshop some organisations were quite strongly involved in direct responses to the HIV/AIDS issue. After the workshops all organisations shifted their focus more into the direction of indirect responses. This coincides better with the role of the farmers’ organisations in relation to their members with HIV/AIDS. The organisation should find ways to to create an environment that finds support for the people affected by the disease.

An area of attention, which was identified by the workshop participants, is that of partnerships and resource mobilisation: more support is needed to effectively mainstream the HIV/AIDS issue in the organisation, which also will help to answer the question: how to anchor and sustain the concept of HIV/AIDS within my organisation? The following workshop in 2010 will pay attention to both issues.

Alpaca farmer - Bolivia

Business Development: Stepping out of subsistence

(Work area 5: Grassroots participation; 6: Training; 7: Agricultural development; 8: Insurance and finance; 9: Inputs for agriculture; 10: Agricultural extension; 11: Market and chain development; 16: Diversification in agriculture (agro-tourism); 17: Setting up a cooperative)

One of the most important strengths of farmers’ organisations is that they can help small farmers become rural entrepreneurs. Moving away from subsistence agriculture to a level where cash income can be generated. This is a big step for the poorest in society, but with carefully planned support it can be done successfully. This is a core activity of farmers’ organisations, and Farmers Fighting Poverty has contributed to many projects focusing on business development, in very diverse ways.

The projects range from projects at grassroots level that work on the facilitation of improved seed material or on the set-up of small economic activities, to ambitious programmes that aim at creating cooperative societies or develop of comprehensive tourism programmes (in Vietnam, Madagascar, Benin, Tanzania, Peru and Bolivia).

In terms of financial services, a Loan Protection and Life Saving (LPLS) scheme in Cambodia turned out to be very attractive to the members of the local savings federation CCSF. This scheme is also an important tool in the competition of CCSF with commercial banks. But setbacks were also reported: where in 2007 over 70% of all project participants in this work area (financial services) was female, in 2009 this number has decreased to 56%. The allocated expenditure for involving women has decreased accordingly. This is particularly regretful, because this work area proved to be very effective in reaching women.

The unity in this diversity of approaches to concrete livelihood improvement stems from the fact that all these programmes are about creating or developing ways to directly increase the well-being and income of farmers and their families. Other cases in point are the project “Mujeres y jovenes inciden en la agricultural sostenible y seguridad alimentaria” by the Peruvian CNA. Thanks to this project, farmers of five CNA member organisations have started to use sustainable farming practices on their farms and achieved more livelihood security.

The future

As stated in an evaluation by the Royal Tropical Institute (KIT) , many agri-agencies do have a good track record on economic development at grassroots level, but experiences and results are not always shared within and amongst agri-agencies. It is equally striking that only few experiences are known of farmers’ organisations and agricultural cooperatives that really have succeeded in getting a larger share in the value chain, so we learn from an analysis in work area 17. This is likely to be an important item in Farmers Fighting Poverty II.

The KIT study also mentioned above did not come out of the blue. Within AgriCord much discussion is going on about how to support economic activities that benefit farmers in the most effective and efficient way. There is a feeling, among others within Agriterra, that more efforts on this topic are needed. When we divide the actual expenditures of agri-agencies over the ‘new’ work areas, we see a picture of underspending on the area of business development and overspending on institutional development.

The figures speak for themselves, but how to interpret them? The bottom line question is whether we are dealing with a supply problem (the agri-agencies do not offer enough support for business development) or one of demand (the farmers’ organisations do formulate less proposals than expected in this realm). In Agriterra the feeling is that it is a little of both: we are not completely equipped to deal swiftly with economic propositions that need quick decision-making. On the other hand, business development is not the first and foremost mission of most farmers’ organisations, especially the general national organisations for advocacy. In this sense, a partial reshuffling of the client portfolio might be an outcome of this analysis.