009 cho-1

e-Agriculture for Improved Livehoods and Food Security!

Assessing the Requirements for
Electronically Linking Farmers with Markets

KHIN MAR CHO & DONALD TOBIAS
Cornell University Cooperative Extension New York City

IAALD Africa Chapter Conference
21-23 May 2012
Johannesburg, South Africa

Assessing the Requirements for
Electronically Linking Farmers with Markets
USAID-MEAS: Action Research Project (Ethiopia, Rwanda, Bangladesh)

Background,
Goal
and
Objec3ves

v  The
MEAS
project
is
funded
by
USAID
through
a
collabora=ve
grant
to
the

University
of
Illinois,
Michigan
State
University
and
Cornell
University

v  This
project
is
under
the
auspices
of
Cornell
University
and
based
on
the

successful
implementa=on
of
the
MarketMaker
program

v  Determine
what
marke=ng
and
distribu=ng
issues
could
be
addressed
by

developing
a
SMS
mobile
device
plaDorm
for
farmers,
brokers,
and

agricultural
extension
specialists
in
three
countries

v  Preliminary
assessment
of
farmers’
marke=ng,
distribu=on,
and
produc=on

needs
that
can
be
addressed
by
the
use
of
mobile
phone
device

What’s MarketMaker?

v  MarketMaker
is
a
na=onal
network
of
state
Websites,
currently
available

in
23
states,
connec=ng
producers/farmers
and
processors
with
food

distributors,
retailers,
consumers
and
others
in
the
food
supply
chain.

v  MarketMaker
is
a
comprehensive
interac=ve
database
of
food
industry

marke=ng
and
business
data.

v  It’s
one
of
the
most
extensive
collec=ons
of
searchable
food
industry
data

in
the
United
States
(8000+
producers,
600,000+
food
businesses).

v  A
FREE
web-‐based
mapping
resource
that
brings
market
intelligence
to

small
and
medium-‐sized
producers.

v  Helps
farmers
and
other
food
related
enterprises
connect
with
other

members
of
the
food
supply
chain.

v  Helps
consumers
ﬁnd
healthier,
fresher
and
more
ﬂavorful

locally
grown

food.

v  Educates
users
on
food
marke=ng
and
value-‐added
agriculture
marke=ng

topics
and
regula=ons.

http://national.marketmaker.uiuc.edu

MEAS Project and Stakeholders
Ethiopia, Rwanda, Bangladesh
v  Successfully
conducted
the
project
in
Ethiopia,
Rwanda,
and
Bangladesh
in

Summer
2011

v  Assisted
by
Agricultural
University,
Ministry
of
Agriculture,
and
NGOs
in

iden=fying
rural
farmers
and
food
related
businesses
groups
for
the
purpose

of
determining
needs
and
desires
related
to
marke=ng
and
distribu=on
of

food
products

v  Conducted
mee=ngs
and
Concept
Mapping
workshops
with
farmers,

middlemen,
representa=ves
from
food
related
businesses,
representa=ves

from
private
Agro
enterprises,
extension
specialists,
and
faculty
members

v  Par=cipants
volunteered
informa=on
regarding
issues
that
would
improve

marke=ng
and
distribu=on
of
products
as
well
as
technology
features
that

would
assist
in
marke=ng

What is Concept Mapping?

A method that...

Focuses
and
helps
objec-fy
the
group
planning

process

Helps
individuals
think
as
a
group...

...without
losing
their
individuality

Helps
groups
to
manage
complexity...

...without
trivializing
or
losing
detail

Definition of Concept Mapping

“Concept mapping is a structured process, focused
on a topic or construct of interest, involving input
from multiple participants, that produces an
interpretable pictorial view of their ideas and
concepts and how these are interrelated. The
process is participatory in that it is inherently a
mixed methodology that integrates high-quality
qualitative and quantitative techniques.”

Trochim, 1989

In
about
4
hours
of
par=cipant
=me
a
group
can...

...Brainstorm a large set of issues...

•  innovations in way network is delivered
•  (investigate) corporate/structural alignment
•  assist in the development of non-traditional partnerships (Rehab with the
Medicine Community)
•  expand investigation and knowledge of PSN'S/PSO's
•  continue STHCS sponsored forums on public health issues (medicine
managed care forum)
•  inventory assets of all participating agencies (providers, Venn Diagrams)
•  access additional funds for telemedicine expansion
•  better utilization of current technological bridge
•  continued support by STHCS to member facilities
•  expand and encourage utilization of interface programs to strengthen
the viability and to improve the health care delivery system (ie
teleconference)
•  discussion with CCHN

brainstorm
Medicine Community)
managed care forum)
•  expand and encourage utilization of interface programs to strengthen the
viability and to improve the health care delivery system (ie teleconference)

…”map” the issues...
organize
sort
Decide how to
manage multiple
tasks.
20
Manage resources effectively.
4

Work quickly and
effectively under
pressure
49

Organize the work
when directions are
not specific.
39

Technology
Information Services

rate Community & Consumer Views

Regionalization

Management STHCS as model
Financing

•  better utilization of current technological bridge (8)
•  expand and encourage utilization of interface programs to strengthen
the viability and to improve the health care delivery system (ie
teleconference) (10)
•  patient information system to be shared by all members (19)
•  the STHCS will assess the status of all participant organization interface
technology development and needs (20)
•  teleconference board meeting (21)
•  development of interface technology (30)
•  continued advancement of tech interface (44)
•  assure 100% board member access to wide area network (46)
•  utilize the televideo telecommunication, telemedicine to share resources/
strengths (50)
•  establishment of a virtual network -- as an intranet originally and
eventually an internet solution (61) Technology

Community & Consumer Views

Regionalization

Financing Management STHCS as model

brainstorm
Medicine Community)
managed care forum)

organize Technology

sort

Decide how to
manage multiple
tasks.
20
4

Work quickly and
effectively under
pressure
49

Organize the work
when directions are
not specific.
39

Regionalization
rate

map Information Services
Technology


Regionalization

Financing Management Mission & Ideology
Financing

...prioritize the issues...

brainstorm


5
Medicine Community)
managed care forum)

organize

Feasibility
sort 76

33

Decide how to
manage multiple
tasks.
20

75

4

Organize the work
Work quickly and
effectively under
pressure
49

25 34
37

when directions are
not specific.
39

2.6
22

10
62
1

17
45

1.8

rate
1.2
2.47
Importance
4.8

map
Technology
…and
“drill
back
down”
to
details

for
priori=zing
ac=on


Regionalization
prioritize Information Services Technology

Community & Consumer Views 4.23 4.4
Financing

Regionalization

3.55 r = .72 3.56
Financing Management Mission & Ideology

Utility for Evaluation
Concept
map
Needs
Measurement
Implementa3on
Outcome

features
Assessment
Development
Evalua3on
Evalua3on

Points
Specific
needs
Specific
Ques=ons
Specific
ac=vi=es
Specific
results

Clusters
Categories
of
Measurement
Program
Outcome

need
constructs
components
constructs

Point
ra=ngs
Importance
of
Relevance
of
Expected
or
Expected
or

needs
ques=ons
to
observed
observed
outcomes

construct
implementa=on
of

ac=vi=es

Cluster
ra=ngs
Importance
of
Average
relevance
Expected
or
Expected
or

areas
of
need
of
construct
observed
observed
outcome

implementa=on
of
constructs

components

Go-‐zones
Target
most
Consistency
on
Target
specific
Match
expected

important
needs
ques=on
ac=vi=es
and
and
observed

relevance
components
to
outcomes

address

Concept Mapping Workshops
Ethiopia, Rwanda, Bangladesh

Brainstorming
Prompt

“I
would
be
much
beSer
able
to
market
and

distribute
my
products
if…”

Responded
Statements

Ethiopia
(85)-‐50+
par3cipants

Rwanda
(90)-‐100+
par3cipants

Bangladesh
(90)-‐100+
par3cipants

Point Map (ETHIOPIA)
26

54
43
85 58 66 79 4
72 84
67 56 40 10
82 61
78 14
77 51
41
9
73

11
7
19 50
27 5 64
3 33
6
42 39
60
18 32
71 53 38
81
83 46 20
22
59 35 21 23 12
37 24
75 57 48 8
29 69 52 28
2
76 45
62
36 30
68 63 70
74
1
65 44 49 34
15 13 47
17
55 25
31
80

16

Cluster Labeled Map

Mobile Phone & Agriculture

Training

Agricultural Information

Transportation
Market Coordination
Increased Production
Market Analysis

Capital

Producer/Market Linkage

Point Cluster Rating Map (Imp.)


Training

Agricultural Information

Transportation
Market Coordination
Market Analysis

Capital


Point Cluster Rating Map (Fesb.)

Training

Market Information

Transportation
Market Coordination
Market Analysis

Capital


Point Cluster Rating Map
(Ethiopia)

Importance
Feasibility

(Rwanda)

Importance
Feasibility

(Bangladesh)

Importance
Feasibility

Go-Zone: Mobile Phone & Agriculture (ETH)

r = -.03
3.95

79
4

Mobile
phone
marke=ng
informa=on
technology

84
was
slowly
introduced
into
the
market
place

40
41

I
can
receive
marke=ng
messages
on
my
cellular

10
phone

26 41

3.48
54
4
61
79

Telecommunica=on
industries
encouraged
the

43
77

use
of
mobile
phone
marke=ng
technology

84

Farmers’
use
of
mobile
technology
increased

Feasibility

51

66
14
43

Mobile
phone
usage
costs
were
affordable
for

farmers

51

Mobile
phone
marke=ng
informa=on
was

coordinated
with
exis=ng
marke=ng

informa=on
resources

61

Mobile
phone
messages
were
simple
and
clear

2.59
3.27 3.79 4.59
Importance

66

Literacy
levels
of
mobile
informa=on
were

appropriate

77

Farmers’
had
access
to
mobile
phone
for

marke=ng
informa=on

10

I
can
use
my
mobile
phone
with
simplified
text

14

A
mobile
phone
applica=on
for
marke=ng

messaging
system

informa=on
was
inexpensive/free
26

Mobile
phone
marke=ng
was
introduced
with

54  Mobile
phone
for
farmers
were
affordable

only
one
or
two
popular
commodi=es

40

Mobile
phone
marke=ng
informa=on
was
tested

in
the
areas
around
Addis
Ababa

Go-Zone: Market Analysis (ETH)

Market Analysis
r = .51
3.95
24
2

I
knew
the
current
prices
of
different

37
2

commodi=es

32
8
20
8

I
knew
the
up-‐to-‐date
agricultural
commodi=es

45
28
prices
informa=on

3.48
83
53 20

I
knew
market
informa=on

24

I
know
current
market
price
informa=on

30
12
70

28

I
knew
when/where
products
are
available

39
Feasibility

60
23 21
38

32

There
was
improvement
in
exis=ng
sources
of

marke=ng
informa=on

46

30

I
knew
consumers
preferences

38

Daily
price
fluctua=on
informa=on
was
available

2.59

to
everyone

3.27
Importance
4.1 4.59
46

Market
informa=on
was
available
to
farmers

distant
from
urban
centers

53

There
was
more
market
informa=on
organized

12

I
knew
new
marke=ng
channels

by
commodi=es

21

I
had
access
to
business
profiles
60

There
was
marke=ng
informa=on
by
geographic

23

I
had
informa=on
about
smaller
producers

loca=ons

39

Real
=me
market
informa=on
is
accessible
for

70  Farmers
knew
consumers’
preferences

middlemen

83  Access
to
current
informa=on
about
interna=onal
37

I
knew
the
different
market
loca=ons

market
was
available
45

I
knew
the
urban
market
prices

Go-Zone: Mobile Phone Technology (RWD)

Mobile Phone Technology
r = .53

1

There
was
a
mobile
phone
based
market

4.03

informa=on
system
to
access
to
urban
markets

73
27
1
40

57
75

38
2

Literacy
levels
of
mobile
phone
informa=on

90
14
71

were
appropriate

3.49 85
2
14

Mobile
phones
for
farmers
are
aﬀordable

43
27

There
were
improved
system
for
delivering

important
informa=on
to
farmers

Feasibility

5
31

38

I
had
the
ability
to
recharge
mobile
phone

79
39
71

Farmers
preference
for
local
language
instead
of

French
on
mobile
phone

84
69

73

I
had
a
mobile
phone
with
a
user
friendly
system

75

I
had
mobile
phone
system
that
connected

buyers
and
sellers

2.44
3.47 4.04 4.85 90

There
was
a
mobile
phone
text
message
system

Importance

with
language
easy
to
understand
by
Farmers

5

Farmers
had
geographically
speciﬁc
weather
informa=on
using
mobile
phone
43

Mobile
phone
text
messages
were
simple
&

31

I
had
short
and
simple
informa=on
about
best
prac=ces
of
crop
technology
on

clear

my
mobile

39

I
had
access
to
variety
of
mobile
phones

69

There
was
training
for
small
farmers
who
seldom
use
internet
and
mobile
40

I
had
training
for
both
purchasing
and
using

phone

79

There
was
a
web
site
available
to
create
virtual
buyer
and
seller
connec=on

mobile
phone

84

Telecommunica=on
industries
encourage
the
use
of
mobile
phone
marke=ng
57

Mobile
phone
marke=ng
informa=on
was

technology

coordinated
with
the
exis=ng
marke=ng

85

Mobile
phone
marke=ng
was
introduced
ini=ally
with
only
one
or
two
popular

commodi=es

informa=on
resources

Go-Zone: Market Analysis (RWD)

Market Analysis
r = .69
4.17

35
15

I
knew
the
consumers
preferences

35

There
were
more
market
opportuni=es
for
rural

88 72
farmers

42
74
15
52

I
knew
consumer
preferences
I
can
get
a
higher

3.67
82
61
20
81
8352

price

44

34 55
72

I
knew
current
market
informa=on

74

I
knew
what
surplus
exists
that
can
be
sold

87
Feasibility

rather
than
consumed
locally

25
83

There
was
an
opportunity
for
small
scale

farmers
to
par=cipate
in
the
market

88  I
knew
the
different
market
loca=ons

2.7
3.46 4.33 4.67
Importance
81

I
knew
the
current
prices
of
different

commodi=es

87

There
were
reliable
suppliers

20

I
had
beker
interac=on
with
traders
and
dealers

25

I
had
more
informa=on
about
future
market
trends

34

I
had
the
availability
to
do
direct
sale
to
market
to
increase

42

Farmers
knew
market
loca=ons

profits

44

I
could
iden=fy
community
with
enough
money
to
buy
61  I
knew
market
informa=on

products

55

I
knew
how
to
collaborate
to
take
products
to
market:

trucking,
marke=ng,
etc.

82

Local
economy
is
stronger
I
can
get
a
beker
price

Go-Zone: Mobile Phone & Agriculture (BGDH)

r = .83
4.65
21
20
26
20

I
could
use
mobile
phone
to
inform
the
retailer

4.25
76
44
34

24

before
harves=ng
my
product

13
28
21

I
could
use
mobile
phone
to
communicate
to
the

54

33
retailer
before
marke=ng
my
poultry

23
24

I
could
talk
to
diﬀerent
middlemen/retailers

using
mobile
phone
before
ﬁxing
price
of
my

product

Feasibility

26

I
could
use
mobile
phone
to
know
the
latest

market
price
and
availability
of
seasonal
fruits

34

There
was
a
mobile
phone
system
that
provide

honest
and
accurate
market
informa=on

44

I
had
access
to
internet
based
market

informa=on
system
in
combina=on
with
mobile

1.65
2.53
Importance
4.93 5

phone
system

76  Mobile
phone
marke=ng
technology
was
slowly

introduced
into
the
market
place

13

I
could
receive
more
advice
from
a
veterinary

surgeon
by
using
mobile
phone

23

I
received
fair
price
through
direct
marke=ng
in
28

More
training
and
informa=on
about
‘mobile

Mymensingh

marke=ng’
and
or
‘internet
marke=ng’
was

33

There
was
internet
facility
to
know
accurate
market

available

informa=on

54

Government
and
NGO
support
for
SMS
and
mobile

X
x
x
x
x
x
x

device
agricultural
informa=on
system
existed

Go-Zone: Market Analysis (BGDH)

Market Analysis
r = .8
4.65

22

I
could
sell
my
vegetables
and
rice
in
local

25
8184
75
22
market
directly

4.03
49
65
77 75

I
knew
the
up-‐to-‐date
agricultural
commodi=es

price
informa=on

89
42
87 85

40 65

Small
farmers
had
direct
access
to
market

90
77

I
knew
the
current
prices
of
different

commodi=es

Feasibility

84

I
knew
the
different
market
loca=ons

81

Retailers
had
direct
access
to
farmers

25  I
could
buy
fruits
from
different
retailer
market

directly

1.65
2.53 4.84 5

85

Daily
price
fluctua=on
informa=on
was
available

Importance

to
everyone

42

I
had
access
to
the
same
market
informa=on
that
89  There
was
marke=ng
informa=on
by
geographic

big
merchants
have

loca=ons

40

I
had
access
to
more
informa=on
about
market

changes
in
future
direc=on

87

Wholesalers
wishing
to
increase
profits
could
49  Current
market
and
price
informa=on
at
local

contact
farmers

and
district
levels
was
available

90

I
had
more
informa=on
about
expor=ng
my

products

Conclusion
MOBILE
TECHNOLOGY

Mobile
Phone
&
Agriculture

MARKET
ANALYSIS
&
ACCESS

Market
Analysis

Market
Coordina8on

Producer/Market
Linkage

CONTEXTUAL
ISSUES

Training
&
Technology

Agricultural
Informa8on

Increased
Produc8on

MB

AMIS

Capital

Framer
Awareness

Government
ini8a8ve

Increased
Capacity

Sourcing
Quality
Products

Seed
&
Pes8cide
Regula8ons

Climate
and
Weather

Transporta8on

Mobile
Phone
Based
Agricultural
Market
Informa=on
System
(MBAMIS)

Conclusion
The
results
of
this
study
can
be
examined
from
three
perspec=ves.

u  First,
there
is
a
high
degree
of
similarity
in
the
features
that
farmers

consider
most
desirable.
Issues
of
aﬀordability,
ease
of
use,
language

preferences,
daily
commodity
prices
at
the
market
and
weather
informa=on

are
common
desires.

u  Secondly,
there
are
common
issues
around
the
type
of
market
informa=on

that
farmer’s
desire.
While
most
want
basic
commodity
prices
at
the
market

on
a
daily
basis,
there
are
addi=onal
expecta=ons
around
market
loca=on

informa=on,
ability
to
deal
via
cell
phone
with
brokers
and
retail

representa=ves
as
well
as
informa=on
about
product
quality,
consumer

preferences,
and
contact
informa=on.

u  Lastly,
there
are
contextual
issues;
many
farmers
wanted
to
use
technology

as
a
means
of
organizing
themselves
into
co-‐ops,
and
inﬂuence
policy
in

regard
to
quality
and
price
of
storage,
pes=cides,
seeds
and
equipment.

Female Graduate Student
translates for Women
Farmers

Sorting and Rating by Farmers, Traders,
Middlemen, Retailers, Wholesalers, Extension
Specialists, and Faculty Members

More Information about Concept Mapping?
www.conceptsystems.com

Contact:

Donald
Tobias,
Ph.D.
(djt3@cornell.edu)

William
Trochim,
Ph.D.
(wmt1@cornell.edu)

Khin
Mar
Cho,
Ph.D.
(kc458@cornell.edu)

Resources:

•  Kane,
M.
and
Trochim,
W.
(2007).
Concept
mapping
for
planning
and

evalua=on.
Applied
social
research
methods
series.
Volume
50,
SAGE

publica=ons.

•  Trochim,
W.
and
Kane,
M.
(2005).
Concept
mapping:
An
introduc=on
to

structured
conceptualiza=on
in
health
care.
Interna8onal
Journal
for
Quality

in
Health
Care,
17
(3),
June
2005,
187-‐191.

•  Trochim,
W.
(1989).
An
introduc=on
to
concept
mapping
for
planning
and

evalua=on.
Evalua8on
and
Program
Planning,
12(1),
1-‐16.

If
you
still
have
questions
or
want
more

Information,
contact:

Khin
Mar
Cho,
Ph.D.

Donald
Tobias,
Ph.D.

Cornell
University
Cooperative
Extension-‐NYC

212-‐340-‐2918
(t)/212-‐340-‐2908
(f)

kc458@cornell.edu/djt3@cornell.edu

http://nymarketmaker.cornell.edu

http://nyc.cce.cornell.edu

Food Industry MarketMaker
http://national.marketmaker.uiuc.edu

Na3onal
MarketMaker:

23
States
Live

8000+
Producers

600,000+
Food
Businesses

New
York
MarketMaker:

2000+
Producers

85,000
Food
Businesses

150,000
Hits
a
month

hSp://nymarketmaker.cornell.edu

MarketMaker Mobile

ny.foodsearcher.com

Find
farmers,
ﬁsheries,
and
other
food

industry
businesses
near
you!

New
York
MarketMaker:

u  2000+
Producers

u  85,000
Food
Businesses

u  150,000
Hits
a
month

Who Register with MarketMaker?

Agritourism
Farmers/

Buyers
Producers

Ea=ng
&
Drinking
Places
Dairy

Farmers/Producers
Fruits
&
Nuts

Farmers
Markets
Grains

Fishery
Herbs

Food
Retailers
Meat
&
Poultry

Processors
Specialty
Products

Wholesalers
Vegetables

Wineries

How MarketMaker can work for
FARMERS/PRODUCERS!

v FREE
Registra=on

v Locate
processors,
retailers,
restaurants,
farmers
markets
…

any
food-‐related
business
in
New
York
state!

v Iden=fy
markets
by
demographics.

v Access
proﬁles
of
target
markets.

v Easily
research,
locate
and
map
new
markets.

v Map
the
highest
concentra=ons
of
consumers
by
product.

v Post
Ads
of
available
or
needed
food
products
at
the

MarketPlace
(Buy
&
Sell
Forum).

How MarketMaker can work for
BUYERS!

v 

FREE
Registra=on

v 

Access
farmers’
business
proﬁles

v 

Locate
farm
fresh
products

v 

Locate
and
map
any
food-‐related
business

v 

Post
ads
of
needed
food
products
at
the

MarketPlace
(Buy
&
Sell
Forum)

Are you a farmer
looking for a
niche market!

http://nymarketmaker.cornell.edu

009 cho-1

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (8)

Similar to 009 cho-1

Similar to 009 cho-1 (20)

More from Nawsheen Hosenally

More from Nawsheen Hosenally (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

009 cho-1