a multi-stakeholder governance framework for improved ... · pdf filea multi-stakeholder...
TRANSCRIPT
A multi-stakeholder governance framework for improved value chain support policies, Food and Nutrition Security
Hernan Manson* and Antonio Lopez-Montes**
For any quetsions or comments please contact: [email protected] and [email protected]
*International Trade Centre (ITC) ** International Institute for Tropical Agriculture (IITA)
Workshop on Global Value Chains for Food and Nutrition Security 25-26 September, 2014 - Roma Tre University
Introduction Complex Issues & Participatory processes
• Social, human and economic development: there is growing recognition that many problems in design and implementation of development policies and projects are complex and need to be treated as such (Rihani, Samir 2005, Beinhocker, Eric 2006).
• Complexity means that design and implementation must deal with interdependent problems and actors, navigating non linear and unpredictable change processes and involving various stakeholders who have conflicting interests and and are interdependent (Jones, Harry 2011).
• By failing to draw on knowledge and to achieve buy in -or collective action- from lower levels, good policies that seem to provide a possible solution to a problem may turn out not to respect the reality of the varied contexts where they are supposed to be applied. Furthermore, they may be irrelevant to the ways the issue is experienced by the affected actors (Ostrom, Elinor 1990, 2009).
• Consequently, the question of how policy draws on available knowledge -and in which ways it is linked to decision making- becomes a determinant of success of policy design, implementation and output (Jones, Harry 2011).
• More inclusive Governance mechanisms are central. Participation in design and implementation of projects and policies results in better and more efficient outcomes. (Adams and Rietbergen-Mccracken 1994, Aycrigg 1998, Mc Dermott 1999 & 2009, Mansuri and Rao 2012).
2
Problem
• Taking into consideration the implications of complex problems at national, sector, or local levels, most value chain and food security development interventions fail to integrate new or experimentalist governance frameworks, in order to factor the interests, needs and knowledge of beneficiary or pretended groups.
• In fact, rather than working with value chain actors – including vulnerable populations and rural actors- by fostering negotiation and exploration of problems and solutions between actors at multiple interlinked levels in response to problems that manifest themselves simultaneously at different levels, actors at lower levels are treated as a means to an end (Jones, 2011).
• This means that identification of problems and policy formulation and implementation takes place from the agent’s perspective: the development or funding partner and the policymaker and as a consequence there is no collective problem identification, negotiation and solving (or ownership) and implementation fails or does not achieve the impact required (Rochet, et al.; 2005).
3
Towards Experimentalist Governance as a possible framework?
• The emergence of new governance systems can be seen as a response to two conditions. (Sabel and Zeitlin 2007)and (de Burca 2004 & de Burca et al. 2013)
1. strategic uncertainty or the need to address complex policy problems which cannot be solved through hierarchy or market
2. a multipolar distribution where actors are interdependent to solve common issues
Five conditions for experimentalist governance institutions to emerge 1. Openness to participation of relevant entities (‘stakeholders’) in a non- hierarchical
process of decision making; 2. Articulation of a broadly agreed common problem and the establishment of a
framework understanding setting open-ended goals; 3. Implementation by lower-level actors with local or contextualized knowledge; 4. Continuous feedback, reporting, and monitoring; 5. Established practices, involving peer review, for revising rules and practices.
4
The key feature of experimentalist governance is ‘’the gradual institutionalization of practices involving continual updating and revision, open participation, an agreed understanding of goals and practices, and monitoring, including peer review’’ (de Burca et al 2013).
Objectives • To present a case study in Ghana which relies on experimentalist
frameworks and illustrates an evidence based participatory process that informs and influences policymakers through the development of an agricultural sub sector strategy to achieve goals that necessitate crosscutting policies, collective action and collaboration;
• To explore empirical applications of experimentalist frameworks that can enable the right type of participation for policy development and implementation in the context of complex problems associated to smallholder farmer participation, food security and value chain articulation and;
• To demonstrate that collective or stakeholder driven problem identification, analysis and response formulation -and the linkage with governance frameworks that promote it- can be a more inclusive and effective approach to top down derived interventions.
5
Methodology
• Eight methodological steps were applied in this case study as follows: a) Assessment of the political, social and macro
background; b) Identification and types of actors; c) Sensitization on proposed interventions; d) Facilitation of a stakeholder led coordinating committee; e) Research and information gathering; f) Evidence based decision making; g) Formulation of a sector strategy for yam and associated
crops and h) Official policy endorsement.
6
Definitions
• Governance means the process through which economic and political institutions manage their interdependencies by coordinating their deriving interests (Doner, Richard F. 2009).
• Most of the literature exploring governance tends towards a broader
definition of governance; as a sort of steering (hierarchal and non-hierarchical) and acknowledges that various actors can exert it, including i) individuals, ii) private organizations and iii) public institutions and of course the state. Governance seems to be a way of managing the actors common affairs and to produce social order in markets, institutions, nation states and networks.
• Food security in this context is considered as the availability and affordability of yam food -raw and processed- at farmer’s household and urban level, and also how this crop can generate income that can funds farming of other important crops like maize, rice, groundnut and cassava. 7
The material related to the content of the Strategy is presented in slides 13, 14 and 15. It has not been formally edited and does not represent ITC or IITA official position. All other material has been developed for this research and represents the author’s point of view.
8
The work in Ghana was funded by the International Trade Centre (ITC) and the International Institute for Tropical Agriculture. The opinions in the study are those of the author and do not reflect the views of ITC or IITA.
Results
A. Background
9
• 23 million people (2009). Agriculture accounts for 1/3 of GDP and employs more than 50% of the workforce, mainly small land holders.
• Yam, Cassava, Cocoa and Plantain account for 65% of crops produced (average 2005-2009). The main system of farming is multi-crops (small holder). BA and Northern Regions: 62% of the total yam cropped area.
• 70% of Export value accounted by Cocoa beans, Gold, Timber and concentrated in few target countries. National priority: Diversification of products and markets.
• Complex Framework: National Development Policy Framework, Industrial Development Policy, Private Sector Development Strategy II, Poverty Reduction Strategy, National Export Strategy, National Trade Policy, Agriculture sector Investment plan, Food and Agriculture sector development policy. (Each one with a Management Framework).
• Agriculture: extensive network of Support Institutions and programs but not enough coordination (Joint Sector Review of Agriculture ,2011). Ghana: More than 1.2 billion USD disbursed by Donors in 2010 & 2011 (including infrastructure development support) (Source AidData, February 2012).
• Yams and Cassava alone account for up to 40% of daily food intake (kcal per capita per day, average 2007) as per FAOSTAT. They are import substitution alternatives for wheat and rice.
• Rapid urbanization has modified food consumption patterns in urban areas, with an increasing demand for imported food, especially wheat and rice.
Background (cont.)
10 YAM MAP OF GHANA
• 48.1 million tons of yams produced annually in West Africa’s “Yam Belt” – 90% of world production
• Ghana is 2nd largest producer of yams, after Nigeria: over 6.3 million tons in 2012 (est.)
• Yam, is the first food crop produced in value (average 2005-2012).
• 2012: Ghana's exports of yam 32.85% of world exports. Approx. 20,000 MT
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
WESTERN
CENTRAL
EASTERN
GREATERACCRA
VOLTA
ASHANTI
BRONGAHAFO
NORTHERN
UPPER WEST
UPPER EAST
TOTAL
Yam area (ha) by Region 2007-2011
YAM FARMERS in Northern Region : 4 TYPES….
TYPE 1. TYPE 2. TYPE 3. TYPE 4.
B. Actors characterisation
13
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
FT 1 FT 2 FT 3 FT 4
Yam
Maize
Groundnut
Rice
Others
Farmer Type %
*Other crops: Millet, Beans, Sorghum, Cassava, Soya bean, Pepper, sweet-potato, okro, tomatoes, Bambara groundnut, and Melon
Crops cultivated by farmers and consumed without value added
14
Farmer Type
N Obs Variable % Std Dev
FT 1 53 Seed 39 22.20
House Hold Consumption 31 22.56
Sales 26 21.51
Other (Gift, Commission etc) 4 6.73
FT 2 24 Seed 25 16.87
House Hold Consumption 29 24.09
Sales 42 22.74
Other (Gift, Commission etc) 4 6.70
FT 3 26 Seed 36 18.54
House Hold Consumption 23 20.79
Sales 37 20.48
Other (Gift, Commission etc) 3 3.36
FT 4 17 Seed 42 30.90
House Hold Consumption 18 16.13
Sales 37 21.85
Other (Gift, Commission etc) 3 4.33
Proportion of yam tubers dedicated for food security and other uses by farmers types
c
Example CONDITIONS TO INCREASE YAM AREA
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
TYPE 1 TYPE 2 TYPE 3 TYPE 4
ACCESS TO BANK, LOAN, FINANCIAL SUPPORTOTHERSCULTIVATION OF LARGE FARMSEED AVAILABILITY,TRACTOR FOR PLOUGHING ,CREDIT CASH
Mapping of Value Chain Actors
16
Value Chain - Governance
17
NGO’s
Arrows reflect Main Governance relations Source: H. Manson
Importers in UK, USA
C. Sensitization on proposed interventions
18
• once the actors were identified and sector representation was understood, IITA and ITC presented a proposal of the approach and methodology for developing a strategy for the sector.
• 40 Public sector officials and 50 Private sector actors where present and participated in deciding what to do and how to do it.
• Results: validate the objectives of the process, scope and jointly define (and redefine as needed) the methodology, participants, roles and information components required.
Experimentalist approach used
We reconsider our work as something beyond a planning or training tool. The strategy and sector development is a process that triggers development and
institutional evolution generating networks and alliances around actors.
Participatory Strategy design
Participatory Implementation
Participatory Monitoring
Participatory Impact
Evaluation
1
• Private sector led
• Participatory & inclusive (stakeholder ownership and decision)• Integrating local knowledge and systems
2
• Holistic approach considering buyer & producer perspectives
• Private Public Governance mechanism / Platforms• Re-defining: Policy, Institutional support and coordination based on
agreed priorities
3
• Commercially driven business model: Multi product, Multi market
• Sustainable Development• Human and social (food security, local capacity building, gender)
• Economical• Environmental
Source. H. Manson & A. Lopez
19
Intervention Timeline and Requirements
2 months 12 months 16 months 36 months
Network Consolidation
Design
Implementation Government
Private Sector
Institutions
Donors
Management & Evaluation
Scoping tour
Government/NGO’s/ Institutions: FACILITATOR Private Sector: ACTOR
Food Security Production
Value Addition Commercialization
DEVELOPMENT
Support POLICIES
Institutional Support •NGO
•Government •Donors / Dev. Partners
Private-Public Sector led Strategy Committee
Ne
eds Su
pp
ort
Networks Networks
Networks
FINANCE Development & Investment Fund
Banks - Commercial Government 21
Source: H. Manson, A. Lopez (2011)
Value Chain Stage Sector/Institution Elected – Appointed Representatives
Farmers Private Sector
Mr. James Kpajal
Mr. George Batu
Mr. Ezekiel Danna
Mr. Ransford Attatsi
Traders Private Sector Mr. Samuel Jaji Jalley
Exporters FAGE
GROCTEU
Mr. Anthony Sikpa
Mr. Abraham Siaw
Mr. Sarkodie Osei
Mr. Kwabena Taylor
Processors Private Sector Mr. John Mantey
Mrs. Janet Gyimah-Kessie
Government MOFA
E. Asante-Krobea
A. Manu Addae
S. K. Nyamekye
MOTI Mr. Nana Kodwo Adentwi
MOFEP-NDPC Mr. William D. Asare
Financial Institutions
EDAIF Mr. Frank Dan Enyinmayew
Support Institutions
GNCC Mr. Stephen Oteng
GEPA Mr. Peter Obeng
GSA Mrs. Felicia Adam
Research and Development
CSIR
Dr. Rose Mamaa Entsua-Mensah
Dr. Felix Anno-Nyako
Dr. Emmanuel Otoo
Dr. Stella Ennin
D. Facilitation of a stakeholder led coordinating committee. (Multi-stakeholder platform)
Example of Participation in National and Rural Workshops
E. Research and information gathering
Domestic market characterization Regional and
International market
Characterization
Yam Production, Social and market
Systems characterization
Biophysical and Commercial
suitability for district
prioritization
Food safety and standard
compliance Policy
environment analysis
Gender and VC analysis
Value Addition potential
CSIR-CRI MOFA Farmers IITA
CSIR-FRI MOTI GSA GEPA Processors
MOWAC Farmers Univ. GSA ITC and IITA
MOTI MOFEP MOFA EDIAIF Committee P. Sector Univ. ITC
MOTI MOFA GEPA Private Sector ITC and IITA
Access to Finance analysis
F. Evidence based negotiation
Domestic market characterisation
Regional and International market
Characterisation
Yam Production and market Systems characterisation
Biophysical suitability for district
prioritization
Food safety and standard compliance
Policy environment analysis
Gender analysis
Value Addition potential
DECISION MAKING ON Policy Issues Objectives
Targets Vision
Implementation Plan
• Facilitation of public-private dialogue at the national, provincial sub-regional levels;
• Interest based Negotiation process that was informed by evidence and allowed a common understanding by private and public stakeholders of sector’s issues and opportunities;
• Development of a common set of goals based on industry’s challenges and market priorities;
• Definition of support structures and alignment of international agency programs with validated market targets and development priorities identified by the private sector;
• Increase influence and negotiation power for policy-making and resource allocation.
25
Purple boxes reflect studies and inputs undertaken in support of the experimentalist process
Source: H. Manson
Lead Firms and Buyers
G. Formulation of a sector strategy
for yam and associated crops
26
Prioritized Market Positioning
2013 – 2020
Market Fresh YAM Processed Yam
Food
Processed Yam
Industry
ingredients
EXPORT High (1) Medium (3) Medium High (2)
DOMESTIC High (1) High (1) High (1)
NICHE, HIGH VALUE High (1) Medium High (2) Medium (3)
• Identification by private sector of new opportunities
• Involvement by research and support institutions • Participation of lead firms and International
processors and factory yam product development trials : Flour, Pasta, Bread and Modified Starch
Enable a private sector-led framework for effective policy design. Impl
evaluation
Food Security, Improved quality, consistency and returns by professionalizing FBO’s and providing service to farmers
Improve commercialization strategies and explore product diversification
for value addition
Improve access to finance across the VC and promote investments
Develop demand driven Research & Development and
capacity building
Improve compliance and Logistics
Six OBJECTIVES were defined (support functions) 1. Policy & Sector Coordination
2. Production, Quality & losses
3. Commercialization & Value Addition
4. Finance & Investment
5. R&D and Capacity Building
6. Compliance & Logistics
28 Source: Ghana Sector Strategy (ITC-IITA-Government of Ghana)
Policy outputs and recommendations
29
Source: Ghana Sector Strategy (ITC-IITA-Government of Ghana)
H. Official policy endorsement and replication of
framework for implementation of each objective at national and local levels.
30
Official endorsement and adoption into the Policy framework
31
Source: Ghana Sector Strategy (ITC-IITA-Government of Ghana)
Key lessons from CASE study
1. Towards innovative associativism: Value chain actors are working together to improve and generate support networks.
2. Important to facilitate participation of all value chain actors with particular attention to farmer representation.
3. Enabling the creation of policy networks (at territorial level) for the identification of priorities and provision of support to value chains and new associations.
4. A clear shift from TOP down to bottom up (or a combination of both).
5. A clear need for BRIDGING institutions that generate support networks.
6. Institutions must adopt more inclusive governance rules that use participation of actors and exploration as ways to innovate and to generate learning platforms for collective problem detection and solving.
7. International partners as ORCHESTRATORS, or trusted advisers. Provision of information, brokerage among actors, facilitation of participation and inclusive governance.
Conclusions The hypothesis or necessary conditions for experimentalist governance frameworks to work (de Burca, Grainne de 2010) are present in the case study.
• the issues, opportunities and interdependencies confronted by the sector stakeholders provided enough incentives for negotiation and deliberation leading to collective action and effective experimentalist process.
• A framework for private-public driven information generation and decision making for policy processes.
1. Strategic planning and policy processes are based on agreed and negotiated plans with (and
between) several agents that are involved in translation of policy into measures and actions
2. It also generated mutual learning across different policymaking institutions and other affected stakeholders because they were facing common problems and were provided a space for participation towards the common process of problem identification and solving. Strong linkage with innovation and upgrading.
3. The creation of public-private partnerships is similarly a joint confession by both parties that each is incapable of acting unilaterally: neither can issue instructions except in consultation with the other. These breaches of the strict principal-agent relationship are significant: Working in alliances.
33
Conclusions (cont.)
4. The Value Chain and the Sector were used as an anchor for the creation of the private public platform and for the experimentalist process (In this case Value chain includes business actors as well as enabling environment institutions, Civil Society and Government).
5. Appropriate experimentalist governance frameworks for informing policymaking, implementing
policies and for defining institutional roles are possible ways for dealing with collective action problems, institutional responses, and for adapting problem solving in the face of complexity and strategic uncertainty. Can be used for Food Security, Value Chain Development and many other interventions.
6. Decision making is enabled at lower levels in a way that allows for flexibility, experimentation and exploration. The role of any central agency is restricted to providing collaborative leadership, brokerage, orchestration or facilitation, trusted advice and technical assistance in support of the platform.
7. International Organisations can also be part of the ‘peer review’ mechanisms once the implementation experimentalist institutions/platform is sustainable.
34
Final Remarks
• A system which has all the elements of a new governance architecture in place will remain an architecture only if it does not operate in an experimentalist way. This can happen if stakeholder participation is limited, or not representative or if problems are not identified by accurate data and supplemented by effective and continuous monitoring.
• Dynamic process: New actors that emerge out of participation or that are affected by possible externalities need to be incorporated into the platform so their interests are factored in the decision-making.
• Importance of using the Value Chain and associated support institutions (the sector) as the anchor for the process. Move towards Value Chain Councils (in the form of private public platforms).
• Importance of Orchestration, network facilitation and intermediation of interests: Subject to national and International institution capacities. Linked to orchestration: trusted adviser role as well as evidence or information provision.
• Countries facing the same development pressures and similar collective action problems with different institutional capacities will differ in their development outcomes (Doner, Richard F. 2009, Richard F. Doner, Allen Hicken, Bryan K. Ritchie 2009). Importance of Institutions operating (or learning how to) in experimentalist ways.
35
A multi-stakeholder governance framework for improved value chain support policies, Food and Nutrition Security
Hernan Manson* and Antonio Lopez-Montes**
For any quetsions or comments please contact: [email protected] and [email protected]
*International Trade Centre (ITC) ** International Institute for Tropical Agriculture (IITA)
THANK YOU