1 / 19

Documentation of Lessons Learnt: Implementation of the 2011-12 Input Support Programmes

Documentation of Lessons Learnt: Implementation of the 2011-12 Input Support Programmes. B.T. Hanyani-Mlambo Dumisani Dube Fungai Felistus Gamu Admire Mbundure Joshua Zvoutete. Overview. Background Evaluation Purpose & Objectives Approach & Methodology

rae-beard
Download Presentation

Documentation of Lessons Learnt: Implementation of the 2011-12 Input Support Programmes

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Documentation of Lessons Learnt:Implementation of the 2011-12 Input Support Programmes B.T. Hanyani-Mlambo Dumisani Dube Fungai Felistus Gamu Admire Mbundure Joshua Zvoutete

  2. Overview • Background • Evaluation Purpose & Objectives • Approach & Methodology • Overview of the 2011-12 Input Support Programmes • Type of Inputs & Level of Support • Input Distribution Mechanisms & Modalities • Adequacy, Efficiency and Appropriateness • Performance Assessments • Impact on the Markets • Recommendations on the Best Options

  3. Background • Input support programs (2011/12) designed to:- • Increase the level of support. • Free direct distribution to MBIAMs. • 2011/12 guidelines:- • Group A: DSW + WFP + PRIZE. • Group B1/B2: subsidized OVs @ $160 (crops), $200 (livestock) + 10% farmer contributions. • Group C: $400 – $550, 100% repayment + 0% int.

  4. Specific objectives (2011/12) programmes:- (i) Target surplus production. (ii) Enable “graduation”. (iii) Decrease dependency. (iv) Ensure efficiency of inputs use, (v) Provide livestock support (NRs IV + V).

  5. Evaluation Purpose, Approach & Methodology Purpose of the Evaluation:- • Assessment:- (i) Phase 1 (review 2011/12 input programme processes). (ii) Phase 2 (empirical analysis of impact past 8 years). • Phase 1 purpose:- (i) Adherence to guidelines, (ii) Reasons for such actions, (iii) Performance of past programmes, (iv) Preliminary insights 2011/12 season. Approach & Methodology:- • Integrated phases. • Triangulation of information and data sources. • Desk study, KIIs + Consultative Workshop.

  6. Overview of the 2011-12 Input Support Programmes

  7. Possibility of double dipping. • Incremental support package: 75 – 256% (significant improvement). • 2011/12 expanded direct support for livestock production. • Donor programmes quite diverse:- * Crop/livestock. * CA up-scaling. * Value chain support. * Training and extension (crops & livestock).

  8. Type of Inputs & Level of Support • Type of inputs – programme specific but common patterns apparent. • Determinants (i) NR, (ii) enterprises. • FAO programmes (fertilizers). • CWW (ploughs/plough parts, tools/farming equipment, seed, fertilizers/chemicals). • Alternative view – delayed programming. • Input support for crop/livestock:- US$30 – US$320. • Value of CF support: type of enterprise/hectarage ($3 – $355). • Majority of programmes failed to follow set guidelines. • Recommended minimum package. • Distribution modalities (e.g. free direct distributions).

  9. Illustrative input purchase patterns during the 2011/12 season (adapted from FAO, 2012).

  10. Input Distribution Mechanisms & Modalities Proportional utilization of input support models (donor programmes)

  11. Electronic vouchers – up-scaled but proved problematic. • Late start to the programme. • Delayed activation. • Multiple/deduction failures. • Weak mobile network signal. • Failure e.g. switch 13,050 (39%) open paper – major mechanism. • Cost effective comparison of mechanisms:-

  12. Adequacy, Efficiency & Appropriateness • Adequacy US$160:- • Support 0.5ha. • Yield 0.7mt/ha (national average) – HH (0.35mt). • Enough HH food security BUT no marketable surplus. • Contract farming – total package/partial packages – laudable. • For livestock – US$200 are commendable but not everyone achieved this. • Training and extension – was intensified, but with challenges. • Farmer contributions improved resource use efficiency (KIIs). • Electronic/open paper (choice) – more appropriate. • Small stock projects appropriate BUT challenges in grain deficit areas (grain-based rations).

  13. Performance Assessments • Highlight – improved coordination. • Contracting IPs delayed. • Majority inputs/vouchers distributed late (December/January). • Some suppliers adopted wait & see attitude (stocked late). • For CF - Bulk of farmers received inputs late. • Training and extension – cases of delayed technical support (coordination and contractual arrangements). • Farmer contributions:- • PRP: Crop Fs (ADs) 10% as a commission. • FAO: 10% in-built. • CWW used a 50:50 model. • Livestock 10% managed differently:- (i) livestock fairs, (ii) veterinary chemicals, (iii) community projects. • Some IPs – sustainability – gradual farmer contributions (e.g. US$0.50/month/bird) – savings fund for buying replacement stock.

  14. Impact on the Markets • MBIAMs + improved package:- • Participation. • Boosted AD enterprises. • AD cash flows. • Revitalized linkages. • Resuscitation of input supply chains. • Ripple effects – improved capacity Ads:- • Restocking. • Upgrading of retail outlets. • Expansion. • BUT some communities not transacting beyond input supply season/outside target value chains. • Where CF/market linkages (win-win situations) – improved incomes + market for surplus grain.

  15. Prices: introduction crop vouchers (inflationary pressures). • Prices II: livestock fairs (appreciation value breeding stock). • Notable supply failures – AN and legume seeds (crops) + goats and point of lay pullets (livestock). • Impact – indiscriminate application of the 90% subsidy. • Impact II - mix-up in approach inputs for economic recovery and HH food security. • Farmer graduation ?? (phase 2).

  16. Recommendations on the Best Options • MBIAMs – open paper and electronic vouchers. • Farmer contribution: 20 – 50%. • 10% - no challenges. • Government programmes 50% subsidy. • CWW 50:50 – over subscribed. • Fs buy inputs using own resources (2nd RCA). • Multiple-year programming (phase-out phase-in) – complete private sector supply mechanisms + risk taking by the farmer.

  17. Combined promotion of appropriate technologies. • E.g. mechanized CA/hybrid seeds/herbicides/micro-irrigation technologies. • Appropriately targeting + CB + full cost recovery. • Focus: viable enterprises (market insights) e.g. comparative advantage (value chain development approach). • Training and extension: capacity built & support existing systems. • Sustainable exit strategy:- • GOZ/Donors channel support – existing pvt sector driven input supply channels (capacity building).

  18. Group Discussion Issues • Guideline development process. • Recommended 2012/13 input distribution mechanisms (with justification). • Targeting & coverage. • Type & level of support. • Farmer contributions. • Sustainable exit strategy.

More Related