Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Delivery systems designed to meet the needs of women and the poor
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Delivery systems designed to meet the needs of women and the poor


Published on

Published in: Technology, Business

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide


  • 1. Delivery systems designed to meet the  Delivery systems designed to meet the needs of women and the poor Louise Sperling Workshop in celebration of the lives of Dr María Jesús ("Chusa") Ginés and Ms Verónica Mera
  • 2. Last of three Ds? Last of three Ds? Discovery Deployment Discovery Deployment Delivery Delivery
  • 3. WHY should public sector research be  interested in Delivery? i t t d i D li ?
  • 4. WHY should public sector research be interested in  Delivery? Reason 1:   Costly NOT to deliver Reason 1: Costly NOT to deliver 1) Single bean variety  cost $ US 1,000,000  to develop– Single bean variety cost $ US 1 000 000 to develop not to deliver, waste 1) Not  delivering  in ‘development’ means  $ US billions in  emergency  aid 
  • 5. WHY should public sector research be interested in  Delivery? Reason 2:  There exist few truly  equitable  effective delivery systems across technologies effective delivery systems across technologies Designing, testing and catalyzing ‘ best bet’ delivery  systems  is a RESEARCH ISSUE t i RESEARCH ISSUE
  • 6. Three central queries Can Research identify strategic features of Delivery  Systems:   pro poor , pro women?  Can Research catalyze the implementation  of such   Delivery Systems‐ through testing and evaluating  approaches? Can Research provide the key evidence needed for  high level policy change– to promote  more  h hl l l h effective Delivery  Systems?
  • 7. EXAMPLE:   EXAMPLE: Delivery of Seed‐based technologies  li f db d h l i
  • 8. EXAMPLE:  Seed‐based technologies   Based on breeding/genetic resources Production increases Production increases Nutritional enhancement Stabilizing environment tress Stabilizing environment tress > 60% of budget of NARS Africa‐‐‐‐ seed based technologies > 60% f b d t f NARS Af i db dt h l i
  • 9. FARMERS EAGER TO TRY NEW VARIETIES   ( (seed‐based technologies) g ) Testing novel bean varieties Rwanda: 40-70 during a lifetime DRC: 20-30 during a lifetime
  • 10. Status of Delivery  Systems seed‐based  Status of Delivery Systems seed‐based technologies? 
  • 11. Conventional Model  C i lM d l Bean NARS led centralized seed systems A few released popular On farm variety testing varieties Parastatal seed producers/ Farmer research groups/individual farmers suppliers GO/NGOs (for development projects + as seed relief) Farmers Farmers Traders
  • 12. Research Dynamism. vs. Seed Supply (beans) Country # var. # var.supplied by Seed released formal seed channels coverage by (96-04) formal seed supply (%) DRC 18 4 <2 Ethiopia 23 3 0.8 Rwanda 20 5 2 Uganda U d 11 2 5
  • 13. Common sites of seed sale Common sites of seed sale Town centers Town centers Formal agro‐dealer shops g p
  • 14. Common sizes of  seed sale : large ! 100 kg 2‐20 kg
  • 15. Use of certified seed in percent area sown in a selection of African countries (DANAGRO 1988, CIAT 2002, 2004 SSN 2005) 1988 2002 2004, Maize Sorghum Wheat Rice Common Bean Angola 15 0 50 0 0 Lesotho L h 75 5 38 4 - Malawi 10 5 19 4 0 Mozambique 10 5 13 - - Rwanda - - - - 1 Tanzania 14 9 15 0 0 Zambia 75 0 97 <1 <1 Zimbabwe 83 25 97 <1 <1
  • 16. until 2007:  Stalemate until 2007: Stalemate Massive amount of research going into product  Massive amount of research going into product development side‐‐‐ successes Ineffective (circumscribed) delivery systems for seed  Ineffective (circumscribed) delivery systems– for seed based technologies
  • 18. Research into seed  delivery systems :  key features for women/poor key features for women/poor Variety has to be REALLY good Seed has to be available‐ qtes, in geographic  proximity, in time for  planting      (lots and near!) Seed has to be ‘accessible’’ “low” cost    or via exchange/barter networks Quality: acceptable to end‐users (trusted sources) Information sufficient for farmers to make informed decisions Information sufficient for farmers to make informed decisions Ongoing supplies (responding to demand) (Sperling+ Loevinsohn, 1993; Buruchara + David 1994 Sperling, Scheidegge + Burchara 1996;, David + Sperling 1999 ;Rubyogo et al. 2010)
  • 19. Implementation tests:  Variety really  good :   Implementation tests: Variety really good : Women Experts involved in selection process   
  • 20. Implementation tests:  good quantities in  p g q geographic proximity (2008) – trusted sources          Sold in open markets and country stores
  • 21. Implementation tests: low cost small packs (pro‐poor / pro women marketing) Test sizes:  70 g      10Ksh  ($ 0.15= cup of tea) 500g      50ksh 2000g     180Ksh  Leldet Ltd, Kenya
  • 22. Results‐ small packs seed experiments High volume sales Niger  groundnut 6,908  packs Niger ‐ groundnut‐ 6,908 packs Kenya‐ beans           28,000  “ Ethiopia beans           11,750   “ Ethiopia‐ beans 11 750 Nigeria‐ soybeans        7,980 Mozam    cowpea         12 Tons in packs Nigeria    cowpea         15  “ Nigeria cowpea 15 Farmers purchase certified legume seed  F h tifi d l d > 75,000 farmers   (2 seasons)
  • 23. Results: small pack purchase by gender KARI/FIPS, eastern Kenya : Sept‐Dec 2008 / 5404 Customers 2265 (42%) men 3139 (58%) women 3139 (58%) women female male
  • 24. Developing IPGs: delivery systems Small P k S ll Packs Get new varieties to farmers (80g 250g 500g, kg, kg (80 250 500 1 k 2 k , 5 k kg Uncover demand Varieties Seed Expand market for certified Leldet Seed Company:, Kenya
  • 25. New small pack model adopted: wide scale AGRA   AGRA Nat l programs (legumes): Nat’l programs (legumes): $US  150 million Mali Kenya Private seed companies Ethiopia Leldet; Kenya Leldet; Kenya Nigeria Dimitri‐ Malawi Mozambique Niger
  • 26. Small pack: Proof of Concept; with BMGF Small pack: Proof of Concept; with BMGF Small pack concept cross cuts BMGF: Small pack concept cross cuts BMGF: Agriculture Market Access Extension Gender Profitable– yet  wealth  + gender sensitive
  • 27. Three central queries Can Research identify strategic features of Delivery  Systems:   pro poor , pro women?  Can Research catalyze the implementation  of such   Delivery Systems‐ through testing and evaluating  approaches? Can Research provide the key evidence needed for  high level policy change– to promote  more  h hl l l h effective Delivery ? Yes Research can !
  • 28. Moving forward in the research field of ‘Delivery’ Concrete suggestions
  • 29. Proposed action 1. Research has to  sharpen delivery visions (all profitable) h d li ii ( ll fi bl ) Private Sector Public Sector Public Sector Maximize profit Maximize profit Sustainable profits + equity Sustainable profits + equity focus best clientele Focus broad range clientele move only big winners move range of varieties Sell in high population  Sell geographically dispersed  areas areas
  • 30. Proposed action 2. Donors/Project  managers have to ‘demand’ positive impact h ‘d d’ ii i Delivery  R+D has to be built into project  Clear initial targets should be set for l l h ld b f ID of : gender‐ neutral /wealth neutral delivery  ID f d l/ lh l d li processes Actual target thresholds should be set (to push  the bounds))
  • 31. Proposed action 3.  Fields programs need  to test and evaluate  range of ‘promising  delivery options’– as well as wild cards
  • 32. Proposed action 4: Donors/Research  Directors need to make hard decisions ($$$) Di d k h dd i i ($$$) Refuse to fund: programs with no delivery R+D Refuse to fund: programs with no delivery R+D (unless delivery strategy fully ‘solved)’ Stop programs  in which delivery  is biased– leaving out  the poor and women  (no matter how productive,  the poor and women (no matter how productive, lucrative) Promote/recommend, scaling up – with partners only  if delivery options are gender neutral, wealth neutral   y p g
  • 33. Time to plan delivery  strategy at the highest  Time to plan delivery strategy at the highest levels ‐‐for more effective agricultural  R+D More food security More food security More economic growth More economic growth Greater empowerment of women  and the poor