Downloaded 37 times
Public Sector Value for Value Chain Development
- 1. Public Sector Valuefor Value Chain Development: The role of the Public Sector in the long-term sustainability and scaling up of Value Chain Development Initiatives Marco Bartholdy 54252 Lavanya Katyal 49375 Amaka Ogbonna 57656 Andrew Mutegi Paito 48556 This presenta,on is based on research conducted on behalf of the LSE for CARE Interna,onal UK THE LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS AND POLITICAL SCIENCE
- 2. Structure 1. Conceptual framework • The role of the public sector • BoRom-‐up approach • Value Chain Development • Scaling up 2. Methodology 3. Case studies • Cocoa Life • Strengthening the Dairy Value Chain • Pathways 4. Discussion and consolidaUon of findings
- 3. Conceptual framework 1. The role of the public sector 2. BoRom-‐up approach 3. Value Chain Development 4. Scaling up
- 4. The role ofthe public sector • Free market • Addressing government failure • Economic efficiency • Need for government support • Addressing market failures • Reduce inequaliUes • Delivering public goods • Rodrik’s diagnosUc approach (2010) • Need to choose “the right model (and remedy) for specific realiUes” Sources: Rodrik (2010); Krugman and Wells (2006); Sen (1999)
- 5. Bottom-up approach • State-‐led, top-‐down policies can create inequaliUes • E.g. East Asia (Ali, 2007) • Need to support small and informal enterprises • Inclusive growth • Huge economic opportunity (Prahalad, 2006) • Poverty reducUon • PosiUve effects along the enUre supply chain
- 6. Value Chain Development • CARE’s approach • Strengthen the weakest links in the chain • Establish partnerships with other value chain actors (McKague & Siddiquee, 2014) • CreaUng Shared Value (Porter and Kramer, 2011) • The public sector is able to: • Create sustainability • Scale up iniUaUves • Our research has looked at this in 3 case studies Consumers Retailers Distributors Processors Coops, Traders Small-‐holders Input suppliers
- 7. Scaling up • The extension of a VCD iniUaUve to more people and communiUes acUve in the value chain QuanUtaUve • Expansion by increasing the scope of acUvity FuncUonal • PosiUve engagement with poliUcal processes and other stake-‐holder groups PoliUcal • The involvement of exisUng insUtuUons or the creaUon of new insUtuUons. InsUtuUonal Source: Uvin (1995)
- 8. Methodology • Research methods • 10 interviews with CARE staff • Analysis of project documents • Broader literature review • 3 case studies of VCD iniUaUves vary across: • Scope of project objecUves • Key drivers of the projects • Level of decentralizaUon • Land access • Income level Programme First round interviewees Cocoa Life Programme Administrator SDVC Project Manager Pathways Project Manager Programme Second round interviewees Cocoa Life Project Coordinator (Ghana) Project Manager (Côte d’Ivoire) Governance Advisor (West Africa) SDVC Extension Agent (Bangladesh) Pathways Project Manager (Tanzania) Project Manager (Malawi) Project Manager (India)
- 9. Case study overview Cocoa Life SDVC Pathways Country Côte d’Ivoire Ghana Bangladesh India Tanzania Malawi Value chain Cocoa Dairy Agriculture (various) Key Drivers CARE; CCC; Mondelēz CARE; COCOBOD; Mondelēz CARE; Ministry of Agriculture CARE; LANDESA; Dept. of Agriculture CARE; Seed CerUficaUon InsUtute CARE; TradiUonal leaders PopulaAon density* 64 114 1,203 421 56 174 GDP/capita PPP (current int’l $)* $31.06 billion $48.14 billion $150 billion $1.875 trillion $43.65 billion $3.705 billion Income level* Lower-‐middle income Lower-‐middle income Low income Lower-‐middle income Low income Low income Public sector engagement ** High High Low High High Low *Source: World Bank Development Indicators (2013) **Source: First round interviews
- 10. Case Studies 1. Overview 2. Public sector acUviUes 3. Key findings
- 11. Cocoa Life: Overview • Countries: Ghana, Cote d’Ivoire • Project objecUves: • Avoid structural supply deficit • Improve the lives of farmers and their communiUes • Farming; community; livelihoods; youth; environment • Mondelēz invest heavily in small-‐holder farmers • Shared Value • Partners with various NGOs and public sector agencies Source: CARE Project Report 2014
- 12. Technical acAviAes Social development acAviAes Technical assistance • Farm rehabilitaUon Community consultaAon • Community AcUon Plans Infrastructure • Schools Community-‐based development • Youth engagement Research and Development • Improved seedlings DeliberaAve governance • Reinvestment of cerUficaUon bonuses Policy frameworks • Minimum farmgate price Health educaAon • Family Planning Services Cocoa Life: Role of the public sector
- 13. Cocoa Life: Keyfindings Ghana Cote d’Ivoire Decentralized Centralized BoRom-‐up Top-‐down Social cohesion Social conflict 1 CAP, 1 community 1 CAP, 8 communiUes Local poliUcal accountability Steering a common agenda Source: CARE Project Report 2014
- 14. SDVC: Overview • Country: Bangladesh • Project objecUves: • Enhancing producUvity of smallholder farmers • Women’s empowerment • Strategies: • Improving producUvity • Increasing access to inputs and markets • Strengthening value chain relaUonships • Improving the policy environment
- 15. SDVC: Role ofthe Public Sector Public sector acAviAes Livestock assistance • Training Livestock Health Workers • Serng up Livestock Research InsUtute Improving animal geneAcs • ArUficial inseminaUon • Breeding facility Agriculture extension programme • Agriculture extension centres • Improving farmer return Establishing milk collecAon centres Improving policy framework • Import tariffs – to reduce milk dumping
- 16. SDVC: Key findings • Limited government presence/capacity • AI services • Technical advice • Land constraint • Lack of naUonal level policy discussion • Need to reconsider some policies • Lack of public sector manpower • 4 staff members for 10,000-‐12,000 farmers • Not enough livestock volunteers • AECs important to ensure sustainability and scalability • Public dialogue • M&E mechanism
- 17. Pathways: Overview • Countries: India, Malawi and Tanzania • Value chains : Various agricultural value chains • ObjecUves: • To empower women in agricultural value chains • Increase farmer producUvity Source: Pathways website
- 18. Role of thepublic sector Public sector acAviAes Policy and law • Forest rights • Land laws • Minimum procurement pricing Input provision • Seedlings • Credit • Research and development Capacity building • Seed producAon • CommercializaAon • FFBS Gender relaAons • Police gender desk • Advocacy Source: Pathways website
- 19. Key findings: • Formal vs tradiUonal authoriUes • E.g. Land laws, gender roles • Women’s economic empowerment • VSLA • CSI • Farmer Field and Business School (FFBS) • Gender relaUons • Police gender desk • Male change agents Source: Pathways website
- 20. Discussion of findings 1. Scaling up 2. Challenges 3. Strengths 4. RecommendaUons 5. Conclusion
- 21. Scaling up Cocoa Life SDVC Pathways Countries Côte d’Ivoire Ghana Bangladesh India Tanzania Malawi Scaling up QuanUtaUve Yes Yes Yes Intended Intended Intended FuncUonal No No No No No No PoliUcal Yes Yes No No No No InsUtuUonal Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
- 22. Challenges Challenges Examples DecentralisaUon • CAPs in CDI vs Ghana • IneffecUve decentralizaUon in Malawi Public sector mandates • CCC and MoA limited to technical concerns • Gender relaUons in India and Malawi Local poliUcal economy dynamics • Social fragmentaUon in CDI • Gender discriminaUon IneffecUve policy environments • Transparency of minimum price policies • Land laws
- 23. Strengths Strengths Examples Mobilizing collecUve acUon • CAPs • CooperaUves • VSLAs Building alliances • Mondelēz and Cocoa Boards • Seed CerUficaUon InsUtute • BRAC dairy Evidence-‐based results • CAPs • AECs
- 24. Recommendations 1. Measure outcomes • Measure outcomes (quanUtaUve) • Explicitly track sustainability and scale • Measurable near-‐term outcomes for long-‐term objecUves • Measure risk and resilience (qualitaUve) • Analyse the resilience of iniUaUves to risks that may arise auer project closure • Consider poliUcal forces that drive or oppose long-‐term outcomes • Measure partnership impact (counterfactual) • Compare the impacts of a partnership approach to a similar non-‐partnership approach to ensure that the project benefits from the contribuUon of all partners
- 25. Recommendations 2. Understand public sector incenAves • Demonstrate project value • Cost-‐benefit analysis • Policy dialogue 3. Adapt to local government capacity • Distribute responsibiliUes across sectors • ImplemenUng capacity
- 26. Recommendations 4. CAPs 2.0 • Community parUcipaUon • Flexibility and adaptability 5. Target mulAple dimensions of scaling up • IdenUfy opportuniUes • Current focus is on quanUtaUve and insUtuUonal scaling up • PoliUcal and funcUonal scaling up require more aRenUon
- 27. Concluding remarks • State engagement correlates with: • Resource capaciUes at the naUonal and local government level • The policy focus of each governments (the importance they aRach to each value chain or agency) • Progress could be made in understanding local poliUcal economies • Ensuring that marginalized people benefit equally
- 28.