2

Table of contents

Table of contents...........................................................................................................2 Acronyms .....................................................................................................................4 Executive summary .......................................................................................................5 1. Introduction.......................................................................................................6 2. Literature sources ..............................................................................................6 3. The eru value chain ............................................................................................6 4. Harvesters.........................................................................................................9 4.1 Numbers of men and women involved................................................................. 10 4.2 Task division.................................................................................................... 10 4.2.1 Traditional gender roles ............................................................................. 10 4.2.2 Changes in traditional roles ........................................................................ 11 4.2.3 Tasks, time allocation and efforts required ................................................... 12

4.3 Income generated ............................................................................................ 13 4.3.1 Who earns, quantities commercialized, income levels and profit margins ......... 13 4.3.2 Eru and other livelihood activities................................................................ 13 4.3.3 Harvesters’ bargaining position................................................................... 14 4.3.4 Income from external harvesters ................................................................ 14 4.3.5 Expenditure of income from eru trade ......................................................... 15

4.4 Constraints...................................................................................................... 15 5. Traders ........................................................................................................... 18 5.1 Numbers of men and women involved................................................................. 18 5.2 Task division.................................................................................................... 18 5.3 Income generated ............................................................................................ 19 5.4 Constraints...................................................................................................... 19

6. Retailers.......................................................................................................... 20 6.1 Numbers of men and women involved................................................................. 20 6.2 Task division.................................................................................................... 21 6.3 Income generated ............................................................................................ 21 6.4 Constraints...................................................................................................... 22

7. Processors....................................................................................................... 22 7.1 Processors engaged in selection ......................................................................... 22 7.2 Processors operating restaurants........................................................................ 23 7.3 Processors engaged in drying............................................................................. 23

8. Exporters ........................................................................................................ 24 8.1 Numbers of men and women involved ................................................................ 24 8.2 Task division.................................................................................................... 24 8.3 Income generated ............................................................................................ 24 8.4 Constraints...................................................................................................... 25

9. Nigerian traders ............................................................................................... 26 9.1 Numbers of men and women involved and task division ........................................ 26 9.2 Income generated ............................................................................................ 26

10. Indirect and support actors................................................................................ 27 11. The international market ................................................................................... 28 12. Summarising the data....................................................................................... 29 12.1 Numbers of men and women and task division ................................................. 29 12.2 Income generated ........................................................................................ 29 12.3 Constraints .................................................................................................. 30

13. Discussion ....................................................................................................... 32

3

13.1 Culture and gender ....................................................................................... 32 13.1.1 Socio-economic status of eru...................................................................... 32 13.1.2 Land and resource tenure .......................................................................... 33 13.1.3 Domestication .......................................................................................... 33 13.1.4 Other gender issues .................................................................................. 34

13.2 Policy and governance...................................................................................34 13.2.1 Knowledge of the resource base ................................................................. 34 13.2.2 Land tenure and forest management ........................................................... 35 13.2.3 Research and development priorities and funding ......................................... 35 13.2.4 Multi-stakeholder platform ......................................................................... 35 13.2.5 Governance.............................................................................................. 36

13.3 Domestication .............................................................................................. 36 13.4 Processing ................................................................................................... 37 13.5 Market structure........................................................................................... 38 13.6 Placing solutions in the context of the eru value chain ....................................... 39

14. Recommendations ............................................................................................ 41 15. Conclusion....................................................................................................... 47 Literature ................................................................................................................... 48

4

Acronyms

MINADER Ministère de l’agriculture et du développement rural MINFOF Ministère de la forêt et de la faune MINPROFF Ministère de la promotion de la femme et de la famille LCB Local Capacity Builder NTFP Non-timber forest product SNV Netherlands Development Organisation spp. Species VC Value chain

5

Executive summary This report presents an analysis of the Gnetum spp value chain in Cameroon, based on a review of secondary sources. The analysis is done from a gender perspective and in the context of training on value chain development. Gnetum is locally known as “eru”. Information was gathered on three indicators: the numbers of men and women involved, their task division and the income generated. Constraints faced by actors were inventoried and the data analysed through a problem tree to facilitate identification of strategic intervention areas. The latter were further analysed to produce recommendations for strengthening the value chain. Recommendations where SNV could play a role, if it was to become involved with eru, are identified and a quick (non-exhaustive) assessment of their leverage quality was conducted to indicate priorities. The actors considered included harvesters, traders, retailers, processers and exporters as well as Nigerian traders operating at the regional level, actors operating at an international level, and indirect actors. The eru value chain is dominated by women at all levels. Harvesters, traders and retailers were found to be 80 to 100 % female while amongst exporters and regional traders women were found to comprise roughly half the actors. At least 15 000 people (comprising an unknown percentage of all actors) operating in just the Southwest and Littoral regions are directly involved in the trade. In addition there are a significant number of indirect actors gaining a livelihood from support activities to the trade; they are primarily male. There is a well-defined task division between men and women. Harvesting, shredding and cooking eru are gender roles assigned to women in accordance with their role as family food providers; commercialisation of eru products by women is seen as an extension of these roles. Particularly in the eru source areas there is a heavy dependence by women and their families on the resource for a livelihood. Eru was found to be profitable to all actors in the market chain allowing for returns above the poverty line. The income is used to satisfy basic needs including food, education, clothing, health and housing and is therefore important in the fight against poverty. The literature reviewed reveals that the value chain has and is undergoing profound changes as a result of pressure on the resource in the face of high market demand and lack of market structure and governance. The current functioning of the value chain is unsustainable and characterised by a very low status, exploitation of the most vulnerable and depletion of the resource base resulting in promotion of a situation of female poverty and entanglement in a downward poverty spiral. Against this background a vision for a sustainable eru value chain is one that recognises women’s roles and stakes in eru and their value as responsible NTFP collectors, entrepreneurs and family providers. It seeks an increase in women’s influence and control over the livelihood and the value chain upon which their survival and that of their families depend. The analyses, done with such a vision in mind, yielded specific recommendations to improve the value chain in the following areas: lifting the socio-economic status of eru, introducing a policy framework and governance, promoting conservation and domestication, structuring the eru market, actors’ capacity building, developing technological improvements and promoting enterprise development.

6

1. Introduction

This paper is the result of a limited review of secondary information sources available on the commercialization of Gnetum spp (locally known as “eru” or “okok”) in Cameroon. The paper focuses on the roles played by men and women, constraints and the implications these may have for development initiatives to improve the value chain. This study was done as an assignment in the context of an e-training on “Value Chain Development”. It was constrained to exploring data pertaining to three gender indicators and applied to direct actors at all levels of the value chain. These indicators were:

- The number of men and women involved. - The division of tasks between men and women. - Income levels and other benefits obtained from actors’ involvement in the

activity (including the relative importance of income from eru with respect to income from other livelihood activities).

Constraints were inventoried and subjected to a cause-effect analysis; solutions for value chain development are proposed.

2. Literature sources

Many of the more recent studies on the eru value chain focus on the Southwest and Littoral regions of Cameroon. A reason for this could be that it is here that the product is most visible with much of it being bulked up in markets and ports from where it is traded at an international level (especially Nigeria). Although the Centre region is reported to be an important source area (Ndumbe et al, 2009, personal communication in the port of Idenau), and destined to becoming more so since the resource is becoming less abundant in the Southwest and Littoral regions, yet little information is available about the actors and the market environment in this region. The current report relies heavily on studies conducted during the last ten years, most of which focused on the Southwest and Littoral regions. Older literature, dating to the nineties, offers a useful historical perspective on the eru trade. Literature sources accessed were mainly from international organizations and scientific articles.

3. The eru value chain

The map below shows the trade routes for eru in Cameroon (CIFOR, 2009). It shows that the major source areas lie in the Southwest, Littoral and Centre regions, that there are specific trade routes depending on the origin of the resource and that Nigeria is a very important destination both over land and through sea ports.

7

Figure 1: Map of eru trade routes in Cameroon and Nigeria (CIFOR, 2009)

The eru value chain was mapped by CIFOR in their 2009 baseline. The figure below is from their report and presents the eru value chain, market channels and actors.

8

Figure 2: Eru value chain and market channels (CIFOR, 2009)

9

The same report identifies 7 main channels and actors in the eru value chain (see table below).

Table 1: Channels and actors in the eru value chain (CIFOR, 2009)

Direct actors in the value chain in the Southwest and Littoral regions of Cameroon are further defined as:

- Harvesters (producers) - Traders (including buying agents, or bulkers, wholesalers or “buy’ am sell’

am”) - Retailers in local markets who buy and shred the leaves (shredders or “buy

and cut”) - Processers (selective harvesters, drying enterprises and restaurant operators) - Exporters - Consumers (households).

To this list can be added those actors involved with international trade (mainly to Nigeria):

- Managers who negotiate purchases in Cameroonian border markets and Nigerian distribution markets on behalf of Cameroonian exporters and Nigerian traders

- Nigerian traders.

Indirect actors in the chain include: - Traditional authorities, local councils (regulating access to the resource) - Transporters (by vehicle, motor bike, head load) - Labourers (loaders, off-loaders, tiers, counters, waterers, stackers) - Government officials including those from MINFOF, police, gendarmes,

quarantine and from the “Programme de Sécurisation de Recettes Forestiers”. The gender indicators mentioned in the introduction of this report were used to obtain a more detailed description of the actors. The results are presented in the sections below.

4. Harvesters

Harvesters are the first actors in the value chain. The CIFOR study characterises a typical harvester as a middle aged woman, married with a 5 member household and a level of education at the primary level. This typology is corroborated by Nkembi (2001) where harvesters were found to be between 31 and 50 years of age, with an education level ranging from none to primary level. Nlend (2009) however reports that in certain parts of Mungo Division (Littoral) the

10

autochthon population is hardly involved in commercial harvesting of eru. Instead, the activity is exercised by Cameroonians from the Northwest, and by Nigerians. This is potentially a disturbing fact since external actors tend to be driven by short-term gain rather than long-term sustainability of the resource.

4.1 Numbers of men and women involved

Most of the literature reviewed indicates that harvesters of eru are principally women. The CIFOR study in the Southwest and Littoral regions reports that amongst a total of 759 harvesters interviewed (constituting a sample of 25% of harvesters in a total of 18 villages selected in high production areas) almost 80% was found to be female. In certain areas (e.g. Ndian Division) harvesting was even found to be exclusively a women’s activity.

4.2 Task division

This section discusses task division in the harvesting of eru. Included are presentations on gender roles and perspectives, changes in those roles and the consequences as well as specific tasks related to harvesting, the time allocation and effort required to carry them out.

4.2.1 Traditional gender roles

The table below (Nkembi, 2001) gives the results of a survey on perceived gender roles of NTFP collectors; it indicates that eru in contrast to most other NTFPs is regarded as entirely a woman’s activity.

Table 2: Perceived gender roles of resource collectors (Nkembi, 2001)

This categorization as a woman’s activity can be explained when viewed from a cultural context where production, cooking and marketing of vegetables and spices is commonly performed by women. The perception is extended to eru, which is traditionally regarded as a subsistence food product. The CIFOR study mentions that

11

men who participate in eru harvesting are regarded as those who have no alternative (income generating) activity. For NTFPs in general, those tasks which require significant physical strength for short periods of time are reserved for men whereas time consuming tasks tend to be part of women’s domain. This general task division has a strong impact on how NTFPs are managed although other influencing factors include the arduousness of the task and the value of the product (IRAD, 1999). Nlend (2007), reports that in one area studied, while men may accompany women to the forest and take part in support activities, they will not take part in the actual harvesting of eru. Their role is to perform physically more demanding tasks such as felling the tree used by the eru plant as support or cutting vines which are more difficult to reach. When asked, men and women said that eru harvesting is a woman’s job and that men do not exhibit the necessary degree of endurance and perseverance or the needed agility in postures and gestures required for eru harvesting. While children, both boys and girls, frequently take part in harvesting activities, boys are restricted from embarking on harvesting trips by their mothers after a certain age. Nlend suggests that this reinforces the traditional division of tasks dictating that eru harvesting is a woman’s role; at the same time this reasserts women’s control over the activity and the resource. Interestingly, Nlend also reports that amongst harvesters and their families the activity of harvesting eru is not considered to even merit the term “work”; this shows the low status accorded to the activity in spite of the monetary gains associated with it. It is likely that the association of eru with women’s traditional food production role and the subsistence economy of the poor and marginalized, contributes to the persisting image of eru as a minor and insignificant product.

4.2.2 Changes in traditional roles IRAD (1999), Nkembi (2001) and USAID (2004) indicate that ever since NTFPs have entered the market economy, what used to be the reserve of women is becoming important for men too. In eru collection it has been reported that young men (in addition to male and female children during school holidays) join the ranks of women in the collection of the resource. Literature suggests that not only are men joining women in harvesting the resource, they are joining women at many places along the value chain. IRAD (1999) warns that this increasing trend of men’s involvement constitutes a menace to the resource base with exploitation now having become excessive and destructive. Compared with other countries in the Congo Basin where the eru trade is practically exclusively a women’s affair the management of eru is relatively sustainable in spite of possible overexploitation locally. The report suggests that men tend to care less about the sustainability of the resource and to employ more destructive harvesting habits; it makes mention of the fact that women, as they pass through forest fallows on an intermittent basis, carefully tend eru plants and occasionally harvest them even long after a field has been abandoned. USAID (2004) citing Henkemans (1995) also describes the different ways that women and men harvest eru. Women tend to be meticulous in their harvest of leaves, carefully picking each leaf, large and small, as well as pulling the vines from the canopy and cutting small trees if necessary. Men, on the other hand, are in

12

more of a hurry and concentrate on picking large leaves, leaving small ones behind. Both men and women cut small trees or vines from the canopy when necessary and climb larger trees to access the vines high up in the canopy. A worrying fact is that non-local people harvesting in the forest are often observed to have no regard at all for the regeneration of exploited eru plants. The CENDEP study reported of an unconfirmed case (in the high production Mundemba – Ekondo Titi area) where traditional authorities had disallowed women access to the eru resource base for commercial purposes as a punitive measure. Women were said to be arrogant towards the men when they became financially viable from income earned through eru harvesting. As a consequence they were banned from harvesting for commercial purposes. It may be interesting to probe into this situation to establish the facts and to advocate for sustainable solutions.

4.2.3 Tasks, time allocation and efforts required The consulted literature specifies the tasks related to eru harvesting as the following:

- Constitution into small groups and preparation to embark on a forest trip in search of eru.

- Travelling to the source area on foot. The CIFOR study mentions that harvesters travel on average 5 km into the forest to harvest.

- Harvesting by cutting the whole vine using knives or cutlasses or by picking the leaves from the vine.

- Sorting and tying the produce into bundles of around 1kg. - Transporting the produce back to the village and/or a point of sale (on

average the CIFOR study mentioned a travel distance of 2 km to the market with 82% of harvesters transporting the eru using a motorbike and 18% using a car).

- Selling the produce at the farm gate or in the market. In the CIFOR study the average time spent in harvesting was found to vary widely (form 40 minutes to 9 hours) with an average of 2.7 hours/day. Some harvesters were found to stay in the forest ("sleeping bush") for 2-3 days. The latter tend to be full time harvesters working 5 to 6 days per week. Those who also farm and have other livelihood activities spend on average 3 days per week harvesting. Nlend reports that harvesters and their families consider eru harvesting a difficult job especially considering that ever greater distances are to be covered, the physical effort required for harvesting, the risk of accidents and the limited knowledge of out-lying forest areas and thus the danger of getting lost. In spite of the fact that these “inconveniences” are accepted by harvesters (they have few if any alternatives), women indicated that they are still uncertain of obtaining the product because they may be restricted from access to the resource, or be subject to extortion by forest owners. Due to these difficulties and uncertainties, respondents in the production areas studied say they are interested in domesticating eru. Harvesters operate individually, no union of harvesters was identified in any of the studies and harvesters stated that they saw no advantages in belonging to a group (CIFOR, 2009). Eru is harvested on an on-going basis throughout the year although the rainy season sees a decline in collection due to competition with agricultural activities. One study mentioned that because eru collection is an intensive activity, it is not generally

13

combined with other activities, nor is it generally combined with the collection of other NTFPs (Nkembi, 2001). The majority of studies, if not all studies, reported that harvesters declared they need to go further and further into the forest to access the resource. All the producers interviewed in the CIFOR study noticed a steady reduction in the volume of eru harvested from the forest during the past decade. This perception is supported by figures showing a reduction in the total production from 2007 to 2008 of 336 tons in the area.

4.3 Income generated

This section deals with the following topics: who earns income from eru harvesting, how much of the harvest is commercialised, how much cash is earned, profit margins, what the proportion of eru income is relative to the total income and how the income is expended.

4.3.1 Who earns, quantities commercialized, income levels and profit margins

Eru represents an important source of income for women; it is especially valuable to unmarried, young and poor women with little education, because they have few other means by which to support themselves (USAID, 2004). While some of the eru harvested is consumed by households, the vast majority of it (CIFOR cites 83%, FAO 2002 cites 95%) is sold, showing its commercial importance. The CIFOR study showed that on average in the area studied, a harvester produces 3.3 tons of eru annually earning an equivalent of 1365 FCFA per day, or around 500 000 FCFA annually. A profit margin of 57% of the selling price was calculated (this probably does not include some or all of the costs for materials, depreciation of equipment, transport, and labour). Where labour was considered an input in the calculation of profit margins, eru sales showed a net negative return on labour (Nkembi, 2001 calculated this to be -59 FCFA). Eru production and sale is generally considered profitable by producers. The daily income is just over $2 a day which is recognised by UNDP as being the “poverty line”. Most harvesters have diversified incomes and do not rely purely on eru for their income. However the profits from eru trade are important, contributing on average to up to one third of income and serving as a safety net for harvesters particularly during low seasons of agricultural output. A study by FAO (2002) in Elig-Nkouma 1 village, showed an average sale of 760kg of eru per household worth a total of 129 920 FCFA (at 168 FCFA/kg), or a daily average income of 356 FCFA/household.

4.3.2 Eru and other livelihood activities

The relative importance of eru with respect to other livelihood activities was measured in the CIFOR study. It showed that eru, at 33%, stood first as an NTFP contributor to household income. In the Littoral and Southwest regions more income was found to be earned from eru than from any other NTFPs including bush mango and njangsang (see table below).

14

Table 3: Contribution of NTFPs to harvesters’ income (CIFOR, 2009)

Interestingly the same study showed that when all NTFPs harvested are considered together, they provided 46.8% of household income, slightly more than agriculture which stood at 43.6% (see table 4). Income from other livelihood sources than NTFPs and agriculture was found to be negligible (see table below).

Table 4: Harvesters’ sources of household income (CIFOR, 2009)

4.3.3 Harvesters’ bargaining position The literature studied notes the fact that harvesters are not organised and that this contributes to a weak bargaining position when it comes to selling bundles of eru. For example, Nlend draws attention to the fact that harvesters are mostly at the mercy of buyers who haggle to get the lowest price possible. Harvesters consider that “we need the money - that is why we have to sell at their price”. Nlend notes the humbleness and apparent resignation shown by harvesters who appear incapable of bringing about changes to improve operations and benefits at their own level even though the eru trade lies at the very centre of their survival. Apart from harvesters’ attitude and need for instant cash income, another factor undoubtedly at play is the perishability of eru and therefore the requirement to sell it fresh or lose all.

4.3.4 Income from external harvesters In some villages groups of young Nigerian men and women were found harvesting eru (CENDEP, 2006). Such harvesters may stay in the forest for weeks on end after

15

having paid a fee to local authorities of 10 000 to 20 000 FCFA per week or month entitling them to enjoy unlimited harvest rights. These fees, applied by local councils and traditional authorities, are commonly criticized by community members who do not see a direct benefit from these revenues. Some reports however stated that the money earned in this way was sometimes used for village development.

4.3.5 Expenditure of income from eru trade

Nlend remarks the significance of the eru trade for harvesters, noting that income in some cases has allowed construction and furnishing of homes. The table below (from the CIFOR study) shows that the income generated from eru enables harvesters to pay for basic needs; with food, education, clothing, health care and house rental constituting over 90% of expenditures of eru generated income.

Table 5: Harvesters’ use of eru generated income (CIFOR, 2009)

It is clear that the very significant level of cash income provided by eru sales, and the way this income is expended, contributes to meeting multiple Millennium Development Goals.

4.4 Constraints

Constraints faced by harvesters are presented in this section. A cause-effect analysis of these constraints was done as a means to identify possible solutions. The results of the analysis are given in the following table.

16

Constraint Cause Effect on (female) harvesters Mitigation measures

Depletion of the resource base

Unsustainable exploitation combined with high market demand

- Increase in time spent to reach the resource base and to identify harvestable plants

- Decrease in harvested amount - Decreased productivity - Decreased income - In the long term: cessation of the activity

- Planting in the forest - Planting on private land (domestication)

- Improved forest management with regulation of harvesting

- Regulate forest access Difficult conditions to harvest and sell eru

- Depletion - Distance to new resource bases - Unfamiliarity with distant forests - Bad road infrastructure: forest-market, farm-market - Harvesters at the mercy of buyers

- Time consuming and laborious activity - Getting lost in the forest - Cuts and accidents during harvesting

(e.g. snake bites) - Sales at low prices

- Bring resource base closer to home (domestication)

- Unite to find a solution to transport and sales problems

Low and even negative harvesters’ profit margins when labour is taken into account in calculations

- Increased travelling time due to low density of the resource caused by depletion

- CERUT and AIDEnvironment (1999) NTFP survey report that the producer price for a bundle of eru is one quarter the price of that of the urban consumer

- In some cases exploitation by buyers

- Low level of benefits - Cessation of activity - Increased poverty

- Increase the resource availability through sustainable management, planting and domestication

- Optimise efficiency in the value chain through uniting, aggregation, selection, value adding, pricing.

Low policy interest in the eru sector

At all levels, eru has a low status with harvesting considered to be a “woman’s” profession in the subsistence economy hampering its recognition as a commercial product of high value

- Inappropriate legal framework - Unregulated harvesting of the resource including by external harvesters (Cameroonians and Nigerians)

- Little or no control on trading at other levels in the value chain (resulting in sustained high market demand)

- Raising awareness in policy circles

- Improving the legal framework

- Regulating the issue of harvest/trade permits*

- Improved control of trading

Customary rules do not recognise eru as a product requiring sustainable management

- Non-recognition of the commercial value of eru - Unawareness of the depletion of the resource - Unawareness of sustainable management techniques - Non-recognition of women’s particular interest in eru

- Rights of access to the forest are given indiscriminately and at low payment rates with no limits on amounts harvested

- Disregard of the fact that eru is the most important income generation resource of women in production areas contributing to meeting basic needs and ensuring family well-being

- Raising awareness among customary rulers and generally at village level

The absence - Harvesters are not aware of the benefits and - Poses a threat to the integrity of the Raise awareness and assist in

17

*) The CENDEP study compared the permits issued to the quantities traded in just 5 Southwest markets and to Idenau It was clear that the permits cover only at most 50% of the local Southwest market trade.

Table 6: Cause-effect analysis and mitigation measures for constraints faced by harvesters

of a union to protect the interests of harvesters

strengths of uniting resource base and harvesters’ source of income

- Reduces the bargaining power of harvesters who play a negligible role in price fixation

creating and building capacity of a harvesters’ union

Weak marketing system

Eru trade is part of the informal sector, there exist few united efforts between actors, especially between harvesters and higher levels in the chain

- Low harvester margins Improve the marketing system to ensure greater profitability for harvesters through a market information system, value adding (e.g. by drying) and collaboration between horizontal and vertical actors

Resource tenure and access

- Traditionally women have no right to inherit land. - Women have access to (family and forest) land for

harvesting NTFPs, but no control of it - Women are denied access when:

• Husbands or in-laws want to establish cash crop plantations

• Communities restrict their own access to the forest due to growing awareness of eru’s commercial value

• Harvesters have to pay village councils to access the forest

• Forest owners prohibit access • Forest owners levy fees for access • Forest is turned into a protected area

- Most communities in Cross River State, Nigeria, have clear regulations for the harvest of eru from their forests; the high market demand in Nigeria may therefore press Nigerians to come to Cameroon for harvesting the resource (USAID 2004, citing Sunderland 2001)

- All harvesters in Littoral and some in the Southwest have observed changes in their access to the forest (CIFOR, 2009)

- Women’s traditional access rights to the resource are not always respected; this could be a trend in the face of continued high market demand, depletion of resources, the need to establish protected areas

- Lack of women’s control and ownership over land to which they have access may be a contributing reason for the lack of progress in domesticating eru

- External harvesters (whether Cameroonians or Nigerians), paying access fees, have no long-term interest to protect the resource resulting in reckless, unrestrained and unsustainable harvesting

- In the long term loss of income for traditional harvesters

- Improve the legal framework

- Improve management of eru

- Regulate access - Improve governance in

the value chain

18

5. Traders

The CIFOR study identifies traders as those persons who either travel to production villages to buy directly from harvesters or their representatives, or who buy from transporters who have travelled into town to the trader’s place of business. Traders are also known as middlepersons, wholesalers (“buy and cuts”), intermediaries, agents (who are usually residents of villages buying on behalf of wholesalers), buyers and “buy’am-sell’ams”. Traders may sell direct to retailers, exporters or importers or sell on to another trader or agent, often performing a storage and wholesale function by bulking-up the product. The CIFOR study indicates that buy’am sell’am’s usually live in production areas and buy on behalf of wholesalers or may buy to resell to wholesalers. One particular type of trader is known as a “manager”. These are commissioned middle-persons who operate within the Nigerian union system. Each Nigerian wholesale buyer contracts a manager, who is often Cameroonian, who collects the product and sells to the Nigerian importer at the border markets or in Nigeria. Nigerian buyers send money from Nigeria by boat or money transfer agencies to their managers. Traders play an important role in getting eru to markets, especially as many harvesters find it difficult to leave their production zones due to lack of transport, high costs and long distances, combined with unwillingness to travel due to farm and family commitments and responsibilities. Traders also often act as an informal social network, passing on news whilst doing business. CIFOR (2009) describes the typical profile of a trader as a married woman with education to secondary school level. The majority are local women from the Southwest, with 9% Nigerian and 5% women from the Northwest. The main difference compared to producers is the higher level of education, reflecting the ability to organise the logistics of the trade.

5.1 Numbers of men and women involved

Ndoye (1997) indicates that in that year 94% of eru traders operating in the humid forest zone of Cameroon were women. The CENDEP study indicates that women dominate both national and trans-border wholesale eru trade in Cameroon, with only a few men being involved, but there were no exact figures. CIFOR reports the difficulty of obtaining figures on the number of traders involved in the eru trade but estimates, based on reports from key informants, interviews and literature, that in the Southwest at least 221 traders are active in the eru value chain.

5.2 Task division

None of the literature sources consulted specified the tasks involved in trading.

19

5.3 Income generated

According to the CIFOR study a buy’am-sell’am in the Southwest and Littoral regions earns a profit of on average 60 000 FCFA per month (2000 FCFA/day) while a manager earns on average 120 000 FCFA per month (4000 CFA/day) plus possibly extra benefits resulting from price bargaining. For the majority of traders, the eru business is their main source of income. However most traders had up to 6 other sources of income, and traded in a range of other common and complementary food products that are both seasonal and year round staple commodities (such as garri, fufu, beans, palm oil, rice). Similar to harvesters, 83% of traders’ income from eru is used to pay for basic family needs including food, education, clothing, health care and housing. One female trader in Etodie market in Yaoundé (personal communication) indicated that she bought eru sourced from Boumnyebel, Makak, Eseka, Bafia, Obala and Sa’a at 500 FCFA/bundle (weighing about 1kg). She sold the merchandise at 800 FCFA/bundle to retailers or 1000 FCFA to consumers. Literature indicates that prices vary from place to place with the lowest farm gate prices reported from villages that are least accessible. The mean buying price of eru in the markets surveyed in the CIFOR study was 827 FCFA and the mean selling price was 1357 FCFA after incurring some costs for transport and taxes. Traders make an average profit margin of 497 FCFA per kg of eru.

5.4 Constraints

The cause-effect analysis of constraints faced by traders is presented in the table below.

Constraint Cause Effect on (female)

traders Mitigation

measures Widespread existence of informal taxes and harassments by police officers, forestry officials, customs, councils, commerce and quarantine officers

- Procedures for obtaining a commercial permit tends to disfavour small-scale traders

- Many traders indicate that even when they do have permits, hassles are common and amount to 14 % of their costs (CIFOR)

- Traders are forced to operate illegally, leaving them in a vulnerable position

- High levels of trading costs

- Drives up prices

- Policy to favour permits for small scale traders

- Strong trader unions

- Governance to control hassles at checkpoints

Lack of a structured market information system (MIS)*

- Traders depend on information from colleagues (only one third of traders in the CIFOR study had direct market knowledge from selling in other markets)

- Market volumes remain low

- Efficiency is low

Introduce a market information system

Stock losses (average 13%/trader)**

- Accidental fire - Deterioration due to perishable

nature of the product

- Missed income - Improve efficiency e.g. through MIS

- Improved storage techniques

20

Low bargaining power of Cameroonian traders compared to Nigerian counterparts

Inability to present a united front even though some traders’ unions exist

Little influence in price fixation

- Increased union membership

- Strengthen unions

*) Although almost all traders in the CIFOR study (89%) confirmed they had access to some market information about prices and performance in up to 9 other markets, information on Nigerian markets was less available.

**) All traders reported stock losses. Eru needs to be sold in 5 days. Almost all traders have techniques for storage, including sprinkling water on the leaves and spreading eru on the floor at night.

Table 7: Cause-effect analysis and mitigation measures for constraints faced by

traders

6. Retailers

Retailers, or shredders, of eru are found mainly in local markets. These are women who buy a limited number of bundles of eru from traders and proceed to shred the leaves for sale in small quantities (e.g. a small bowl of eru weighing 50g is sold between 50 and 100 FCFA in Yaoundé depending on the market). Shredding is done in the market, at the place of sale. The process is manual with the woman sitting on the ground or on a traditional low bench, holding a fistful of tightly packed leaves and using a sharp knife to slice the product. Nlend makes mention of retailers’ complaints of fatigue and back pain due to the position adopted in order to carry out their activity.

Retailers sell shredded eru directly to processors (e.g. restaurant operators) and consumers who are mainly female heads of households. The average profile of a retailer is a married woman in her mid thirties with education up to primary school level and travelling on average 2,2km to her place of work. About 70% of the shredders in the CENDEP study carried out their profession combined with other livelihood activities including farming, selling other foodstuffs and/or selling cooked food. Some retailers were found to sell daily in the local markets while others sell only on market days. Almost half of the retailers belong to a commercial union or organisation, most having been members for on average 4 years. The major services provided by the unions are credit, social support, solidarity and settling conflicts. The majority (77%) of the retailers did not belong to other organisations.

6.1 Numbers of men and women involved

All the retailers interviewed in all the markets sampled in the CIFOR study were women, indicating the female domination of this trade. A total of 539 retailers were counted in the CIFOR area of study. The CENDEP study also counted the number of retailers resulting in the following statistics:

21

Market No. of retailers (shredders)

Limbe >100 Buea Town market 12 Great Soppo market 45 Wone market 1 Manyemen market 7 Mamfe market 35 Ekondo Titi >10 Kumba main market 60 Fiango market in Kumba 80

Total >350

Table 8: Number of retailers in selected markets (from CENDEP, 2006)

There was mention of a few isolated instances where eru shredding was done by harvesters but this does not seem to be a trend. Shredders in the CENDEP study included Cameroonians and Nigerians, with equal opportunities and privileges.

6.2 Task division

Tasks associated with the retail trade include: - Buying supplies: in the CIFOR study all retailers obtained their supplies from

traders and did not buy directly from harvesters. Their supplies were sourced from a range of areas, with the majority coming from the Southwest (51%), followed by 20% from Littoral and 29% from the Centre region.

- Shredding the product: all retailers interviewed shredded eru themselves. - Selling the product: the majority (85%) of retailers exclusively sold shredded

eru, with the remainder also re-selling the whole leaves. In the literature consulted no mention was made of a task division between men and women in the context of the retail trade.

6.3 Income generated

Figures on the level of income of retailers were not found in the literature studied. However a rough estimation on the profit margin can be made as follows:

- A retailer buys a bundle (1kg) of eru leaves in Etodie (Yaoundé) from a buy’am-sell’am at 800 FCFA.

- The eru is shredded assuming that a 1kg bundle of eru yields 700g of shredded eru and 300g of waste (twigs, stems).

- The product is sold at 75 to 100 FCFA a small bowl (weighing around 50g). - The profit margin works out at 250 to 600 FCFA per kg of raw eru (30-75%).

Prices at Mokolo market in Yaoundé are said to be lower. For the majority of eru retailers, the eru business is their main source of income (76% according to the CIFOR study). Most retailers however had other sources of income, and often traded in a range of other common, complementary food products. Agriculture was found to bring in only 2% of the total income of retailers.

22

Similar to harvesters and traders more than 80% of retailers’ income from eru was found to be used to pay for basic needs, with food, education, clothing, health care and house rent rated as the most important in that order.

6.4 Constraints

The cause-effect analysis of constraints faced by retailers is presented in the table below.

Constraint Cause Effect on female retailers Mitigation

measures Perishability of eru

Lack of good storage techniques

Loss in income Improved storage and preservation techniques

Increasing scarcity

Unregulated off-take from forests in the face of high market demand

- Decreasing ease in finding the raw materials

- Long-term loss of income

- Plantation - Forest management

No barriers for entry into the trade

Informal market - An increase in retailers - Increased competition - Lower returns for those

already in the trade

- Increased union membership

- Strengthen retailer unions to create trade barriers

Increase in the price of a kg of leaves (reported from Fako)

Government had increased taxes on suppliers who are large-scale exporters with permits

- Decreased profit margins - Drives up price - Loss of income

- Regulation of the market e.g. through strong unions

- Multi stakeholder platforms to develop eru value chain

Table 9: Cause-effect analysis and mitigation measures for constraints faced by

retailers

7. Processors

In the literature studied three types of processors, practicing 3 different processing techniques, were identified. These techniques were: selection, cooking in the restaurant trade and drying. A description of the actors practicing these techniques is presented below.

7.1 Processors engaged in selection

Selective picking of leaves is an improved, non-destructive, harvesting technique. It is practiced where eru has been domesticated. Selection is also the simplest form of product differentiation. The CIFOR study observed harvesters applying this technique in Takpe in the Akwaya sub-division and Ekenge in the Nguti sub-division.

23

Bundles of eru leaves from selective picking were found to be sold at 500 FCFA rather than the usual price in the area of 200-300 FCFA/bundle. The added value thus amounted to 200-300 FCFA per bundle. No mention was made of constraints in applying this technique.

7.2 Processors operating restaurants

Restaurant operators, often known as ‘mammy’, cook and sell eru in a dish commonly known as “eru and water-fufu” in the Southwest. All of the restaurant operators identified and interviewed in the CIFOR study were women. It was calculated that a restaurant operator makes an average profit (value addition) of 550 FCFA per kilogram of unprocessed eru. All the income generated from the sale of cooked eru by restaurant operators was used to fulfil basic needs including purchase of food (35%), clothing (30%), school fees (20%) and health care (15%).

7.3 Processors engaged in drying

Drying in a traditional way was reported by Nkembi (2002) to be practiced by a small percentage (<5%) of harvesters. Drying is also practiced by a number of small enterprises. Tools used include: files, knives and shredding boards. Zinc sheets and electric drying machines were used for drying the shredded eru. Plastic sheeting and electric sealing machines were used to package the dried product. The CIFOR study collected information from 3 such enterprises; details are presented in the table below.

Enterprise Source area Market Price

CIG Manyu Indigenous Spice Processing Ekemco Group (MISPEG)

Bachuo-akagbe in Upper Bayang

- Douala, Limbe, Buea, Yaoundé

- Export to the Netherlands, Belgium, Britain, Germany, USA

4000 FCFA/kg Value addition 150 CFA/kg

Taless Centre and Littoral regions

Yaoundé 6000-6500 FCFA/kg

Forest House (CENDEP)

No information No information Value added: 500 CFA/kg

Table 10: Eru drying enterprises, sources, markets and prices of dried eru.

In the case of MISPEG, members collect the resource from the forest; presumably the harvesters would be mostly women. There was no information regarding whether those working in the processing of the resource were harvesters or rather specialised persons but presumably the returns from sale of processed eru would eventually benefit the members of MISPEG. The available data indicates that processing through drying is very profitable.

24

Problems faced by drying enterprises include: - Lack of shredding machines - Poor product labels - A lack of dedicated transport - Low levels of publicity and marketing - Limited market information on international markets for eru.

A constraint analysis for these problems is given in the table below. Constraint Cause Effect on

enterprises

Mitigation measures

Lack of shredding machines

- Unavailability? - Price?

Manual shredding - Investigate availability and profitability of using shredding machines

- Develop one if necessary

Poor product labels

Lack of awareness/ know-how on labelling

Decreased - Visibility - Marketability

Assistance to improve labelling

Low levels of publicity and marketing

Lack of awareness/ know-how

Decreased - Visibility - Marketability

Assistance to improve publicity and marketing

Limited market information on international markets for eru

Lack of network / contacts

Limited market outlets in spite of high profitability of the activity

Improve market information

Table11: Cause-effect analysis and mitigation measures for constraints faced by

processing enterprises

8. Exporters

A typical eru exporter in the Southwest is married, with a secondary level of education and is most likely to be a female in her mid thirties (CIFOR, 2009).

8.1 Numbers of men and women involved

The majority of exporters are women; the CIFOR study identified 265 exporters of whom 58% were female and 42% male.

8.2 Task division

No information was found on the tasks and division of labour in the group of exporters.

8.3 Income generated

The CENDEP study estimates that small scale eru exporters had a monthly profit margin averaging 120 000 FCFA with a range from 80 000 FCFA to 200 000 FCFA a month. Average profit margins of eru exporters in the CIFOR study were calculated

25

to range between 82 and 365 FCFA/kg of the product depending on the source area and Nigerian destination market. In the CIFOR study exporters were found to be taxed by various parties: they have to pay forest tax, council tax, quarantine tax, custom tax and police tax (the latter constituting bribes). The CIFOR study indicated that on average eru contributed to 58% of an exporter’s household income. The greater part of this income (66%) was used to pay for basic needs with the following breakdown: education (26%), food (22%), health care (11%) and clothing (7%).

8.4 Constraints

The analysis of constraints faced by exporters are presented in the table below.

Constraint Cause Effect on exporters Mitigation

measures Rotting or drying causing an average stock loss of 26% per exporter (CIFOR)*

Perishability of eru Missed income Improved storage and preservation techniques

Competition between full-time and opportunistic exporters

- High demand in Nigeria attracts opportunistic exporters with diversified income streams

- Full-time exporters are not sufficiently united

Loss of business opportunities and income for full-time exporters whose sole income source is from their business

- Create (or strengthen existing) unions

- Create entry barriers into the trade

Fluctuations in the exchange rate with the Nigerian Naira

Incurred by exporters who accompany their product to Nigeria

Missed income - Sell in Cameroon - Improve market information

Poor condition of roads Many reasons Up to 100% loss when transport vehicles get stuck for 3 or more days

Difficult to influence

Commercial permits are difficult to obtain for small scale exporters

- Procedures favour large economic operators and enterprises

- Requires presence, experience and connections in Yaoundé

- Small exporters forced to operate without permits

- Exporters vulnerable to harassment by officials for payment of informal taxes

- Improve policy for permit attribution

- Create strong unions - Improve governance - Multi-stakeholder platform

Nigerians do not permit Cameroonians to sell eru beyond the border markets of Ikom, Ikang**

- Nigerians have a strong bargaining position

- Cameroonian exporter unions are weak

Nigerians are able to dominate the market

Create/strengthen Cameroonian unions

*) In spite of 86% of exporters applying storage techniques (spreading on floor, sprinkling water, holes in bags for air circulation) **) In contrast, the Nigerians have access to harvest and buy directly from Cameroonian villages and forests.

Table 12: Cause-effect analysis and mitigation measures for constraints faced by

eru exporters.

26

9. Nigerian traders

The CIFOR study reports that almost 100% of eru marketed in Nigeria in 4 markets studied (Ikom, Ikan, Calabar and Oran) originates from Cameroon and that more than 90% of eru consumed in Nigeria is of Cameroonian origin (the remainder originating from domesticated eru in Nigeria). One Nigerian trader (personal communication) overseeing loading of a consignment of eru in the port of Idenau indicated that he bought eru 3 times a week (Sundays, Tuesdays and Thursdays) and that the final destination of his product was Lagos where there is a large unmet demand.

9.1 Numbers of men and women involved and task division

In contrast to Cameroonian actors, the Nigerian traders are highly organized. The CIFOR study gathered data from 3 trader associations in 3 Nigerian markets and highlighted the number of men and women in the eru trade as well as their division of tasks. The study showed that there were at least 152 traders active in these markets (plus an unknown number of buy’am-sell’ams, traders and indirect labourers). Details of the data collected are shown in the table below.

No of members Association Market

Male Female

Task division

Association of Afang Dealers (ASOFAD)

Oron 38* 4* No information

Association of Afang Dealers (ASOFAD) (??)

Ikom 30 50 Women shred and retail. Men are wholesalers with their own shed or visit other areas to supply customers.

Calabar Union Calabar 23 7 Women shred and retail. Men are wholesalers with their own shed.

TOTAL 91 61 - *) Includes 1 Cameroonian member

Table 13: Number of male and female traders in the eru trade and their division

of tasks in 3 Nigerian markets

9.2 Income generated

The price of a bundle of eru in Calabar and Ikang was found to be equivalent to around 1500 FCFA (CIFOR, 2009). The average level of profit of an importer in Nigeria was found to be just over FCFA 3 million annually (or 250 000 FCFA monthly). There was no information on the constraints faced by Nigerian traders but the following “advantages” of Nigerian traders when compared with their Cameroonian counterparts were reported:

27

- Nigerian wholesalers make higher profit margins than their Cameroonian counterparts. The CIFOR study revealed “buyer-driven” governance within the eru value chain with much of the bargaining power concentrated at the level of Nigerian traders. A reason for this is the high level of organisation of Nigerian traders and the low level of organisation of their Cameroonian suppliers whose organisations are either weak or absent. Nigerian traders benefit by having control of the market and are able to determine the price of eru at the borders and thus influence their own profit margins.

- Being organised also helps the Nigerians to solve many major and minor problems like for example controlling thieving in their markets of operation.

- Nigerian traders do not suffer from bad road conditions. - Transportation costs in Nigeria are considered “reasonable”. - Taxation (whether official or unofficial) does not appear to be an issue on the

Nigerian side of the border. .

10. Indirect and support actors

A number of indirect or support actors are active in the eru value chain. A summary of these actors and the tasks they perform are given in the table below. Type of actor Name Description Task

Transporter Truck pushers, bike riders, vehicle and boat drivers

Transport eru as negotiated with the owner

Loader Load and unload trucks and carts

Stacker Fill large sacks Counter Count sacks

Support actor

Waterer

150 to 250 young men (18-35 years old) employed 3x per week in Idenau

Keep sacks moist Knife and cutlass sharpener

Presumably based in village and market

Provide service to harvesters and retailers

Market manager No information found Provide service to traders/retailers

Village chiefs and council members

Based at local level Regulate forest management, eru harvest and sales at farm gate

Indirect actor

Officials* Civil servants Apply rules and regulations, law enforcement

*) Police officers, gendarmes, quarantine officers, Ministry of Commerce officials, Customs officials and Ministry of Forestry and Wildlife officials Table 14: Types of support actors, characteristics and tasks performed (CIFOR,

2009)

Judging from the tasks and information found in the reports it appears that the majority of indirect and support actors are male. The studies did not divulge on the levels of income or the constraints faced by these actors.

28

11. The international market

This study would not be complete without a section on the international market. An FAO report dating to 1999, reports that eru is among the most frequently imported NTFPs in Europe and the United States. Actors in those markets include importers, wholesalers, retailers, processors (restaurant operators) and consumers. In most cases importers buy their products in Central Africa through a local partner or purchasing agent who is in contact with the national/local markets and suppliers. The commercial links with the latter are usually exclusive. In many cases importers are also wholesalers. For importers the main constraints concern the Central African side of the market:

- Absence of an institutional structure for managing supply and demand and the poor organisation of the production side.

- The absence of transportation infrastructure (notably roads) for rapid shipment of the product to limit spoilage.

- The lack of other infrastructure e.g. cold storage facilities at airports. - The irregularity of supply. - The non-compliance of products to European regulations. - The absence of quality control by exporters. - Administrative inefficiency in the export departments.

These constraints can be tackled through improved organisation of the production and export side as well as the involvement of certain indirect actors such as forwarding agents, air transporters, etc.

Retailers include people who have their origins in Central Africa and participate in neighbourhood tropical markets or ethnic markets and/or hold local tropical grocery shops. They specialise in the retail sale of products from their country, including eru. This “local factor” is considered important for attracting consumers as they target people from Central Africa. This ethnic link also allows for sale of products in the absence of any kind of label indicating quality and origin of the product. Consumers shop at market stalls and grocery shops owned by fellow nationals, in whom they have confidence. Similarly, marketing is done without any advertising other than word-of-mouth and the display of the product in market or shop. Many shops, notably those run by Africans, have signs indicating the country of origin of the manager and the origin of the products.

Opportunities for improving the eru market on the European side are the following: - Harmonising regulations on the imports of NTFPs into Europe. - Increased regularity of fresh product supplies. - Processing the product (drying, freezing). - Improving packaging and labelling. - Certification such as organic and fair trade.

African restaurants in larger cities in France and Belgium were reported to have eru on their menu.

29

12. Summarising the data

This section summarises the data from previous sections under paragraphs on the numbers of men and women involved in the eru sector and their task division, the income generated and constraints felt.

12.1 Numbers of men and women and task division

A summary of the number of persons and the percentage of women involved in the eru value chain (CIFOR, 2009) is given in the table below.

Number Actor

Total % women

Remarks

Harvester 13662 80 Calculated as 100% of harvesters in 18 sample villages in Southwest and Littoral

Trader 221 94 In Southwest Retailer >350 100 In 9 markets in the Southwest Processer ? ? Few drying enterprises, few selective

harvesters, restaurant operators were not counted

Exporter 265 58 In Southwest and Littoral Nigerian trader 152 40 In 3 markets in Nigeria International trader ? ? No information

Table 15: Number of persons and percentage of women involved in the eru value

chain (CIFOR, 2009)

In addition to the above persons a large number of indirect actors are involved in the eru trade, most of them male. Apart from at the level of the harvesters where traditionally a well-defined task division between men and women is reported, none of the literature consulted studied this aspect. A number of literature sources speak of an increasing trend of men’s involvement in the eru value chain. However in some areas harvesting remains an exclusively female activity. At the level of traders and exporters it appears there is an increasing involvement of men as noted by some studies.

12.2 Income generated

Eru as an economic crop was found to be profitable to all actors in the market chain with those earning the least still have monthly returns above the poverty line. The income is used to satisfy basic needs. The product thus plays an important role in the fight against poverty. A summary of the income related information obtained from the literature review is given in the table below. In some instances deductions were made to provide more complete information.

30

Table 16: Annual income from eru, percentage contribution to total income,

percentage expenditure on basic needs, profit margins and prices per kg for actors

at every level of the value chain.

The CENDEP study reports that traders and processers make higher profit margins than harvesters and exporters. This is not supported by the CIFOR study which indicates that harvesters, especially selective harvesters make the highest profit margins. This can be explained by the fact that labour was not taken into account in the calculations (where it was taken into account, by Nkembi 2001, there was a negative return). Roughly, profit margins lie in the range of 20 and 50% for traders, restaurant operators and exporters and between 30 and 75% for retailers.

12.3 Constraints

The results of the cause-effect analyses of constraints presented in earlier sections were used to prepare a problem tree. This problem tree (figure below), shows clearly the interrelatedness of the many causes and effects of constraints faced by actors in the value chain. The problem tree was used to identify strategic intervention areas; these are presented as colours in the problem tree in accordance with the following legend. Legend: Strategic intervention areas

Culture and gender Policy and governance Domestication and sustainable harvesting Processing Market structure Other factors, difficult to influence

A discussion on each area, including actions to improve the value chain, are given in the chapter following this one.

Profit margin Actor Annual income from eru

(FCFA)

Percentage contribution of eru to

total income

Percentage expenditure of income

from eru on basic needs

FCFA %

Selling price FCFA/kg

Harvester 500 000 33 90 100 57 >200 Trader 720 000 to

1 440 000 Main source of

income 83 497 35 1357

Retailer ? 76 80 250-600 30-75 1050-1400 Selective harvester ? ? ? 400 80 500 Drying enterprise ? ? ? Profitable 4000-6500

Processer

Restaurant ? ? 100 550 28 1950 Exporter 1 440 000 58 66 82-365 20-55 400-750 Nigerian trader 3 000 000 ? ? ? ? 1200-1500 International trader ? ? ? ? ? ?

31

Depletion of the resource base

Resource base confined to more and more remote areas

Low profitability

Low policy interest

Customary rules do not recognize eru as a commercial product

High market demand, notably in Nigeria

Unsustainable exploitation in Cameroonian forests

Bad roads

Women do not own land (have access but no control)

Decreased productivity

Inappropriate legal framework

External and foreign harvesters

Deficient control on trading

Widespread culture of informal tax levying

Permit allocation favours large enterprises

Access rights to forest given indiscriminately against low payments

Negligible role in price fixation by Cameroonian actors

Women experience obstacles in accessing the resource

Harvesters do not see need for union

Actors lack awareness of actual eru value and potential

Women’s decreasing income levels

Low status of eru (associated with women’s traditional food production role and subsistence economy of the poor and marginalized)

Absence harvesters’ union

Small traders’ trade is illegal

Incentive for harassment

High additional costs for traders

Drives up prices

Traders vulnerable

Lack of market info

Weak traders’, retailers’ and exporters’ associations

Traders unaware of potentials of the trade

Market lacking structure and organisation

Lack of concerted efforts at domestication/ conservation

Low market efficiency

Lack of efforts to diversify eru products, incl. processing, preservation

Increased competition

Spoilage and losses

No trade barriers

Increased female poverty, basic family needs not met

Important cultural value of eru

Increased time and costs of women to harvest eru

Weak positions of Cameroonian actors, VC domination by Nigerians

Cessation of women’s eru trade

Figure 3: Problem tree analysis for eru

Good regulation of eru harvest in Nigerian forests pressing Nigerians to come to Cameroon

32

13. Discussion

From previous sections it is clear that in the eru source areas where there is an absence of economic alternatives, there is a heavy dependence by women and their families on the eru resource for livelihoods and meeting basic needs. The same holds true for women at higher levels in the chain. However, this study shows that the current functioning of the eru value chain is characterised by exploitation of the most vulnerable, it promotes depletion of the resource base and poverty and suffers from a lack of governance. This chapter proposes ways to improve the value chain through sustainability of the resource base and the livelihoods which depend on it. Such an improved value chain needs to be based on a strong recognition of women’s roles and stakes in eru as well as women’s value as knowledgeable and responsible NTFP collectors, entrepreneurs and providers for their families. The improved value chain aims to give women the tools to become instruments of their own development by influencing the value chain in which they operate. The discussions in this chapter envision reduced poverty through transparency, participation by and collaboration between actors, strengthened bargaining positions, sustained livelihoods through a sustainable resource base and fairness in benefit sharing. Each of the strategic intervention areas identified in the previous chapter is discussed below and solutions are proposed. At the end of this chapter the solutions are placed in the context of the eru value chain and presented visually.

13.1 Culture and gender

This strategic intervention area looks at culture and gender aspects in relation to such issues as the socio-economic status of eru, land and resource tenure and domestication.

13.1.1 Socio-economic status of eru Eru, being a food product which is traditionally collected from the wild by poor women as part of their gender role as family food providers, is generally accorded a low status at all levels of society. This low status persists in spite of increasing market demand and the move of the product from a subsistence context to one of significant commercial value, attracting large numbers of external and foreign actors. While the opposite is true, the image among all the actors in the eru value chain endures as one of a readily available product of little consequence. The clear discrepancy between perception and reality has far-reaching consequences. The trade in eru is conducted quite openly yet in the margins of the formal market economy and has failed to catch the attention of policy makers. As a consequence opportunities for safe guarding the resource base, earning state revenue, and improving livelihoods by reducing female poverty are entirely ignored. Eru needs to be put in its true context so that the status of eru professions can gain in socio-economic importance, thereby drawing attention to the threats and

33

potentials of the product and its trade. This should result in allocation of resources to implement some of the solutions presented in other sections of this chapter. Lobbying and advocacy targeted at policy makers can help to initiate a change in the perception of eru as a low value product. Useful tools to raise the profile include actively disseminating the results of research on eru, raising the issue at appropriate forums, and implementing activities for the development of the value chain.

13.1.2 Land and resource tenure Land tenure and resource rights for NTFPs tend to be unclear to forest communities. While the 1994 Forestry Law (94/01) stipulates that all forested resources in Cameroon belong to the state, with adjacent communities granted forest user rights for non-commercial use of the resources, many local communities believe that the forests belong to them by right of inheritance and that governance is a matter of customary rule. Customary rules vary from one community to another according to the local customs governing inheritance and land ownership. Coupled with a low level of forest governance and law enforcement by the state this creates, at best, a confused situation. In many communities in the eru source areas, women according to customary rule cannot inherit land. While they do traditionally have access to family farms and forests and to village forests they cannot own these resources. Many of the respondents in the CIFOR study indicated they had experienced changes in forest access. Loss of access occurs due to population pressure (conversion of forest to agricultural land), recognition of the commercial value of eru (resulting in prohibited or restricted access sometimes requiring payment to local authorities and owners) and conversion of forest land to conservation and protected areas for environmental reasons. In some cases external harvesters occupy resource areas. The lack of control by women, the restrictions felt, and the uncertainty experienced favours unsustainable exploitation of the resource where harvesters gather what they can while the opportunity is there. On the other hand this situation also favours domestication where women gain control by planting and managing eru in their own fields. The question of resource tenure is an important one and merits careful consideration in the design and monitoring of interventions, not in the last place in the management of wild eru populations.

13.1.3 Domestication Domestication of eru is discussed in one of the following sections but warrants some attention here because of certain gender implications. The production of leafy vegetables, primarily for home consumption, occurs generally within a mixed-crop system managed by women. This fact, together with the fact that eru appears to grow best under shade in mixed farming situations favours its introduction into mixed-crop systems and its maintenance in the domain of women farmers. However, if due to its increasing commercial value, eru were to be domesticated on a large scale it is difficult to predict what effect an increase in men’s involvement with the product may have on women farmers. A possible trend could

34

be that of a move from female-dominated mixed-crop agriculture, to male-dominated mono-cropping for market sale; thereby shifting the benefits of eru away from women. Distance to the market is another factor potentially affecting benefit sharing from cultivated eru. USAID (2004), citing Gockowski and Ndumbe (1997), makes mention of the tendency that the closer a farmer lives to a market town, the greater is the percentage of the farmer’s crops that are sold. Leafy vegetables play an increasingly commercial role for people living less than 20 km from a market. While the introduction of eru into farming systems could lead to a greater income for women living near market towns (as they benefit from the ability to provide fresher leaves more regularly, incurring lower transportation costs than women who harvest from the wild) at the same time this could greatly reduce the market share of those (poorer) women living in more remote locations, having fewer alternatives and who therefore rely more heavily on the sale of eru for a cash income. It is important to carefully monitor tendencies and trends related to domestication and to seek innovative ways to prevent poor women from losing their livelihoods.

13.1.4 Other gender issues Women as the main actors in the eru value chain necessarily need to be involved at all stages of interventions undertaken. However, since it appears that men are increasingly involved at all levels of the value chain they should not be overlooked. Developing women’s technical, economic and organisational capacities are important areas to improve functioning of the chain leading to improved benefits for women, decreased female poverty and thereby increased family wellbeing. Technology to ease women’s workload and prolong shelf life through improved storage and processing can bring about further important improvements and benefits in terms of existing livelihoods and new ones.

13.2 Policy and governance

Despite nomination of eru as a “Special Forest Product” (signifying the need for special attention) in 2006, this has resulted in very little policy interest and a continued low level of governance of the value chain. As outlined in earlier sections of this report lack of a policy framework and inadequate governance contributes in significant terms to serious degradation of the resource base and exploitation of local populations. It also contributes to a significant level of missed state revenue. Elements of an eru policy framework are presented in the following paragraphs.

13.2.1 Knowledge of the resource base Knowledge of the country’s resource base is both patchy and limited. While the Southwest and Littoral regions have been the object of some research initiatives, much less is known about eru in other areas. To acquire a solid foundation of knowledge on eru, mapping of the resource base and production of botanical inventories are needed. This information should provide the basis for formulating policy as well as a baseline for monitoring resource take-off.

35

13.2.2 Land tenure and forest management

The proposed policy framework should include a section focusing on eru harvesting rights in relation to land tenure and the classification of resources as protected areas, national parks, buffer zones, community forest, village forest, private forest or otherwise. Policies must subsequently be clarified to actors, especially those pertaining to the interaction of official and customary rules governing land and resource tenure. Studies suggest that where resource tenure is clear and the value of NTFPs is recognised, village councils and forest owners assert control and regulate access to the eru resource in an effective way, thereby enhancing management and sustainability. Management of wild eru populations is another area requiring attention in the policy framework. Instruments for management need to be developed, including harvesting standards and regimes, closing areas for regeneration purposes and designating conservation areas to safeguard the genetic resource. It appears such management is already in operation on the Nigerian side of the border where it is benefitting local people and effectively excluding external actors.

13.2.3 Research and development priorities and funding Many research and development initiatives for developing the eru value chain are identified and need to be prioritized through a leadership role assumed by the government. Channelling government revenue, obtained through issuing eru permits and taxation, back into the value chain would create a source of funding for prioritized initiatives. In the context of the importance and potential of eru in reducing poverty it is clear that many benefits can be gained. Priority initiatives could span the areas of regeneration, conservation, domestication, processing and market structuring.

13.2.4 Multi-stakeholder platform A multi-stakeholder platform could bring together key players at the national level including MINFOF, MINADER, MINPROFF, research and development agencies, and representatives of actors in the value chain. Such a network could give valuable contributions to the preparation of a policy framework but also be instrumental in developing common approaches and synergies, for example with respect to policy and governance issues. It is important that such a platform have regional links, especially with Nigeria which represents the biggest market but constitutes also a destabilizing factor for the eru value chain in terms of the unsatisfied demand emanating from that market, the influx and influence of Nigerian actors in Cameroon and the pressure this puts on Cameroonian actors and the Cameroonian resource base. Regional links with other countries in the Congo Basin are also of great interest for example to create synergy and capitalize on experiences and results obtained in the domain of eru in other countries (e.g. in domestication, governance, market structuring).

36

13.2.5 Governance

Institutional dysfunction, responsible for the lack of governance, needs to be addressed at the highest level of government through concerted efforts at establishing a “climate of good governance”. More specifically for the eru value chain, the introduction of a formalized, streamlined and functioning taxation system for the product as it moves from level to level in the value chain and particularly across national borders, is important. This would allow more efficient and effective capturing of tax revenues, at the same time facilitating monitoring of volume and destination of the product as well as capturing other important trade statistics necessary for entry into the formal market sector. Besides a taxation system, a number of other instruments to assist governance in the eru trade are identified in the literature studied. These include: - A system to distinguish cultivated (sustainably harvested) eru from wild-

harvested (unsustainably produced) eru. One approach for achieving this would be a harmonized framework for national and regional monitoring using customs and taxation systems.

- An equitable system of permit allocation based on knowledge of the resource base rather than demand from large scale entrepreneurs and favouring small scale enterprises and individuals.

- A system to monitor and enforce harvest and trade permits through the services of trained field personnel.

- A database of actors in the resource areas including harvesters and other actors in the value chain. Such a database could support not only control and enforcement roles but also research, extension and monitoring roles of institutions.

The above instruments have the additional benefit of facilitating movement of eru from the informal to the formal sector as they help to structure the market which in turn allows Cameroonian entrepreneurs to strengthening their position by gaining more control of the value chain.

13.3 Domestication

Studies indicate that not only is there an ever increasing demand for eru, also the source areas are shifting as former source areas become depleted. Plantation in the forest as part of forest management regimes and domestication on private land are two ways to relieve pressure on wild eru populations and create alternative sources of the product. Increased efforts in eru domestication, coupled with efforts to structure the market and strong governance, constitutes a big potential to enhance sustainability of the eru trade and prevent women and their families, whose livelihoods depend on the resource, from slipping into a vicious poverty cycle. Although work on domestication has been the topic of research in Cameroon for some time, the activity is still at an immature stage. Increased efforts through an integrated regional approach to ex situ and in situ conservation efforts are needed.

37

This should include the development of effective propagation methods, domestication programs, and (national and village) gene banks (USAID 2004). Appropriation of the concept of “eru farms”, whether in a mixed-crop agroforestry system on private land, or in the forest, has so far met with limited success. However, there are some indications that in the face of a depleting resource and the difficult work conditions faced by women in many areas, there is an increasing interest among harvesters to domesticate eru. This subject warrants in depth study to uncover the reasons why domestication is not already applied on a larger scale. Various factors may be at play including ignorance, issues relating to access and control of the resource, the extended establishment period of an eru farm requiring over 2 years, the absence of specific cultivation requirements including shade, adequate rainfall, suitable soil etc (CIFOR, 2009). Advantages of eru farms include that once established and exploited in a sustainable fashion they potentially have a long lifetime featuring a once-only planting phase, a high regenerative capacity, low maintenance and year-round availability. The CENDEP study estimated that as much as 9.5 tons/hectare/year can be harvested from an established eru plantation. Farming eru has the advantage that it ensures greater control over the resource by individual farmers, brings the resource closer to home and thereby renders its collection easier and more time efficient. Extension services of ministries (it seems there is much room for collaboration between MINFOF, MINADER, and MINPROFF) should focus on promoting domestication and non-destructive eru harvesting techniques in which leaves are plucked selectively rather than techniques involving uprooting or cutting the vine or felling the tree on which it grows. Research and development could support sustainable harvesting by developing appropriate harvesting tools.

In order to achieve some success in domestication and sustainable harvesting, resources need to be allocated for raising awareness, extension, training and demonstration. An awareness raising campaign on the cultural, nutritional and economic value of eru, not only in Cameroon but across the Congo Basin, could go some way in raising the status of the product and muster interest at all levels for increasing efforts at domesticating the plant.

13.4 Processing

The perishable nature of eru leads to losses, sometimes as high as 100%; it is one of the major constraints voiced by actors in the value chain. Processed eru (dried and frozen) is in demand in Europe and the United States and could become more important locally in Cameroon and Nigeria. Currently, eru processing enterprises are few and they limit processing to shredding and drying the product. There is good potential for introducing appropriate drying techniques, especially at the village level. Drying the product gives harvesters greater control over their income because they can now store the product and sell it when prices are higher or to buyers of their choice rather than selling immediately and haphazardly at the price fixed by a buyer happening to pass by on the day of harvest. Drying eru gives women additional entrepreneurial opportunities and helps to increase impact in poverty reduction.

38

Other processing techniques, requiring a higher level of technology but which create employment, are also worth exploring. These include freezing the fresh product, freezing the cooked product and freezing the cooked and prepared ready-to-eat eru dish. Research and extension in processing techniques and technology, entrepreneurial training as well as support in packaging, labelling, marketing and market development help to increase the opportunities for actors in the eru value chain. A campaign to inform consumers about the nutritional value of eru and the possibilities and potential of processed eru would further raise the visibility of alternative eru products and facilitate emergence of an increasing number of small scale processing enterprises and eru products. 13.5 Market structure

This report highlights the fact that despite providing employment and income to large numbers of actors and the classification of eru as a “special forest product”, its trade remains an informal one, suffering from drawbacks due to its low status, perishable nature, high regional demand, low organisational level of actors, poor transport infrastructure, deficient policy and regulatory framework and lack of governance. Previous sections of this chapter deal with many of these drawbacks, and solutions facilitating market structuring are presented (including policy development, regulation through permits and taxation, enforcement, raising the socio-economic status and processing to deal with perishability). Strong actor organisation is a very important tool for facilitating structuring of the market by gaining influence and bargaining power. Organisation and collaboration between actors can be promoted by raising awareness on the advantages of association. Association and collaboration can occur at a horizontal level (e.g. in cooperatives, harvesters’ unions, traders’ unions, federations etc.) and between actors at different levels (for example links between associations and village authorities, a trade union, a multi-stakeholder platform). To initiate a process of increased organisation, actors should be brought together in workshops, trainings or other events to discuss and address common issues and problems such as domestication and harvesting techniques, drying methods, solving transport problems, addressing market access and fixing a minimum price for a bundle of eru leaves. Once organisations begin to take shape, capacity building services become key and must be made both available and accessible. Such services can be diverse, depending on the nature and needs of organisations and can include services for organisational and institutional development, services to aggregate and standardise products, services to process, package, certify and label products as well as services to explore, develop and access markets. A host of support actors have the potential to support the eru value chain and thereby influence gradual movement of the market from the informal to the formal sector. Such actors include training institutions (delivering training in technologies, entrepreneurship, organisational strengthening), research institutions, private sector service providers (services in financing, product development and innovations,

39

marketing etc.), government institutions (services in the areas of forestry, agriculture, women development) and projects and programmes. A market information system is another powerful tool to facilitate market structuring. It increases actors’ bargaining power through access to information on supply and demand in terms of quantities and prices of eru, thereby enhancing the potential for networking and strengthening links between suppliers and buyers. It is important that the communication channel is appropriate. In other parts of Cameroon the services of local radio stations are used to disseminate market information. Such a market information system can help to create a level playing field through equitable access to information, it can increase chain efficiency and it is useful to actors at all levels of the chain. Due to the close trade links between Cameroon and Nigeria, an eru market information system should target both the national and Nigerian market. A market information system has great potential to positively influence the relative bargaining power of Cameroonian actors with respect to their Nigerian counterparts.

13.6 Placing solutions in the context of the eru value chain

In Figure 4 the solutions discussed under the various strategic intervention areas in this section have been put in perspective in the context of the eru value chain. Text in black denotes existing institutions, actors and activities while purple text denotes those that need to be created.

40

Local forestry office: � Eru domestication � Community forestry

� Conservation and regeneration of wild populations

� Sustainable harvesting techniques

Traders Retailers Processers Exporters Nigerian traders

Retailers’ union: �Fix prices �Create trade barriers �Defend interests

Exporters’ union: �Fix prices �Create trade barriers � Defend interests � Explore advantages of increased collaboration with other actors in the chain

� Increase membership

Traders’ unions: � Explore advantages of increased collaboration with other actors in the chain

� Increase membership � Improve market structure

Consumers

LCB � Raise awareness

� Promote collaboration

� Build capacity of local organisations

ERU VALUE CHAIN

Local women development office � Promote women’s organisation

� Address female poverty in eru VC

� Defend women’s interest

� Promote drying as SME

In black: Existing structures and activities

In purple: New structures and activities

Research and development agencies: � Raise awareness, lobbying and advocacy among policy makers

SERVICE ENVIRONMENT

Local agriculture office: � Agroforestry systems integrate eru

� Sustainable harvesting techniques

Figure 4: Overview of an improved eru value chain

Training institutions: �Technical, economic and organizational training

Microfinance orgs. �Finance women’s small scale business

Customary rulers: � Create improved rules for access and off-take

� Regulate sales at farm-gate

� Promote domestication

Harvesters

Harvesters union: � Raise awareness, lobbying, advocacy

� Solve common problems � Explore opportunities for pricing, aggregation, selection, value adding, institutional links with other actors in chain

Government of Cameroon �Establish a climate of good governance

�Control informal taxes by all players, at all levels

�Earn state revenue

ENABLING

ENVIRONMENT

MINFOF � Mapping and inventory of the eru resource � Clarify and disseminate policy guideline on land tenure in relation to harvesting rights � Prepare guidelines for managing wild eru populations sustainably � Establish and fund research and development priorities � Establish governance in the VC through permits, taxation, monitoring and enforcement � Establish a framework to trace and distinguish wild from cultivated eru in the market � Improve the system for permit allocation (more equity, based on actual resource base) � Create a database of eru actors � Collect data and create a database for eru statistics, including trade statistics � Actively promote transition of the eru trade from the informal to the formal sector � Support establishment of a multi-stakeholder platform for eru with regional links

Market information system �Addressing demand and supply � Prices � Quantities � National/international levels

Multi-stakeholder platform: �Sustainability approach �Improve efficiency of and equity in the chain

�Regional integration

Business advisory services: � Enterprise development support � Standardisation, packaging, labeling � Visibility, publicity, marketing � Product development e.g. based on medicinal values

Research and development agencies: � Lobbying and advocacy � Research on domestication incl. gene banks � Support development of the value chain � Improve technology for harvesting, storage, shredding and drying

� Research with a gender perspective e.g. on: o Domestication o Land and resource tenure

�Eru baseline in Centre region

41

14. Recommendations

This section presents an overview of the recommendations discussed in the previous section. Recommendations have been grouped into 8 different intervention areas namely:

- Socio-economic status of eru - Policy framework and governance - Conservation - Domestication - Structuring the eru market - Actors’ capacity building - Technological improvements - Enterprise development

Each recommendation is accompanied by suggestions and remarks for implementation. Also, for each recommendation actors are proposed, both for the short and long-term. Where it is felt that SNV could play a role in implementing recommendations, this has been indicated. Clearly, this is on the assumption that SNV has the willingness, capacity and resources to initiate work in the eru value chain. The recommendations are presented in tabular form (see table 17 below).

42

Table 17: Intervention areas and specific recommendations to improve the eru value chain, including proposed actors and

indicating where SNV could play a role.

Who Intervention

area

Recommendation Some remarks on implementing the

recommendation Short term

(1-5 years)

Long term

(>5 years)

Socio-economic status of eru

Raise awareness on depleting resource base, poverty context, cultural, nutritional and economic value and potential of eru

- Target policy-makers through lobbying and advocacy

- Disseminate results of research in appropriate quarters and at appropriate forums

- Research and development institutions to join efforts

Research and development organizations,

MINFOF

Generate knowledge on the eru resource base

- Mapping - Produce botanical inventories

MINFOF, research institutions

MINFOF, research institutions

Monitor take-off in source areas - Use mapping information as a baseline for monitoring take-off

- Use information generated from taxation system to document trends in take-off

MINFOF MINFOF

Clarify land/resource tenure in relation to access and control, customary rights, harvesting rights and land classifications

Raise awareness at local level MINFOF, local actors

MINFOF

Develop eru management tools - Harvesting standards - Harvesting regimes - Designation of conservation areas - Closing areas for regeneration - Learn from efforts in Nigeria

MINFOF, research and development institutions,

MINFOF

Introduce eru taxation and customs system to: - Earn state revenue - Fund eru sector development efforts - Monitor volume and destination of

product - Distinguish cultivated from wild product - Collect other trade statistics - Contribute to market structure

Harmonise with regional efforts MINFOF, research and development institutions,

MINFOF

Policy framework and governance

Introduce an equitable allocation system for harvesting and trade permits to: - Favour and protect livelihoods of small

traders by creating barriers

Base on knowledge of the resource base and areas

MINFOF, research and development institutions

MINFOF

43

- Control influx of external harvesters - Contribute to market structure Enforcement of permits, taxation and other regulation

- Address current dysfunction of enforcement role including informal tax levying

- Train field personnel

MINFOF MINFOF

Allocate resources for eru sector development including conservation, regeneration, domestication, processing and market structuring efforts

Channel revenue from permits and taxation MINFOF MINFOF

Create a multi-stakeholder eru platform to: - Assist in developing policy framework - Create synergy between actors

Ensure regional links with Nigeria and Congo Basin countries

MINFOF and other stakeholders,

MINFOF and other stakeholders

Create a database of actors in resource areas to: - Facilitate enforcement and control roles - Facilitate research and extension roles

- Use information from permit and taxation systems

- Involve customary authorities

MINFOF (decentralised)

MINFOF (decentralised)

Raise awareness on depleting resource base and the cultural, nutritional, medicinal and economic value of eru

- Disseminate results of research - Raise the issue at forums - Undertake lobbying and advocacy targeted at

regional and national policy makers

Research and development institutions

MINFOF

Introduce a regional approach to conservation to harness synergies between Congo Basin countries

- Establish a regional gene bank holding genetic material from all source areas in the Congo Basin

- Harmonised customs and taxation systems - Harmonised trade monitoring

Research and development institutions, MINFOF,

Research and development institutions, MINFOF

Conservation

Introduce conservation efforts at village level

- Raise awareness with customary authorities, women, men, children

- Regulation and governance at local level - Establish village gene banks (in-situ, ex-situ)

Decentralised MINFOF, local NGOs, local authorities,

Decentralised MINFOF, local NGOs, local authorities

Technical research to increase knowledge base

- Research on propagation methods - Research on appropriate cultivation practices

Research institutions

Research institutions

Socio-economic research - Investigate obstacles to domestication (why is it not already occurring?)

- Investigate likely consequences of domestication for women’s livelihoods, esp. for women living in source areas

Research, development institutions

Research, development institutions

Domestication

Promote eru farming - Ensure access to propagated material (seeds, seedlings, tissue culture), establish nurseries

- Raise awareness, extension, training,

Decentralised MINFOF, MINADER,

Decentralised MINFOF, MINADER,

44

demonstration through model farms MINPROFF, Research and development institutions,

MINPROFF

Promote a move from the informal to the formal market

- Enforce permit requirements for the eru trade - Enforce formal taxation and customs - Control informal tax levying

MINFOF MINFOF

Introduce a market information system on supply and demand at local level and in Nigeria with a focus on quantity and prices

- Use local actors for compiling information from demand and supply side

- Use radio for broadcasting

Development institutions, local NGOs, radio stations,

Local NGOs, radio stations

Structuring the eru market

Generate knowledge on the eru value chain in the Centre, South and East regions

Similar to the CIFOR study covering the Southwest and Littoral regions, ensure solid gender focus

Research institutions,

-

Promote actors’ organisation, association and collaboration

Organise workshops/training to address common issues such as transport, pricing…

Local NGOs,

- Actors’ capacity building Provide capacity building services In organisational and institutional development Local NGOs,

-

Improved tools For harvesting and shredding so as to make the burden of work easier for women

Private sector

- Technological improvements

Improved methods, techniques, technologies - Improved storage methods for the fresh product

- Appropriate drying methods at the village level

- Other processing technology e.g. freezing.

Research institution, private sector

-

Increase livelihood opportunities in eru processing

- Entrepreneurial training - Training in appropriate technologies - Create financing opportunities - Support packaging, labelling

Training and micro-finance institutions, private sector,

Training and micro-finance institutions, private sector

Enterprise development

Increase visibility of alternative eru products - Marketing initiatives - Campaign to raise awareness on nutritional

value and processed eru products

Private sector

Private sector

45

For those recommendations where SNV has been identified as potentially having a role to play, the SNV-contribution was identified in more explicit terms and an assessment done to gauge the leverage quality each recommendation has for promoting development of the eru value chain in such a way that it is beneficial to women. To assess the leverage quality, four criteria were used, namely impact, likelihood of achievement, time investment and fund investment. Each criterion was rated and roughly averaged to obtain an indication of the recommendations’ power to influence positive change in the value chain. The criteria were assessed on a high-medium-low basis in accordance with the following guideline:

Table 18: Criterion, description and ranking guideline

Ranking Criterion Description

+ ++ +++

Impact Expected impact in terms of number of people positively affected

Impact doubtful

Average impact

Much impact

Achieve Likelihood of achieving Not likely Possibly Very likely Time Time investment needed High

investment Medium investment

Low investment

Money Fund investment needed High investment

Medium investment

Low investment

Leverage Power to influence positive change for women

Little power Some power Much power

The results of applying the assessment are presented in table19 below.

Table 19: Assessment of recommendations where SNV could play a role

Intervention

area

Recommendation SNV contribution Criterion Rating Leverage

quality

Socio-economic status of eru

Raise awareness on the depleting resource base, poverty context, cultural, nutritional and economic value and potential of eru

Join ranks with other institutions for lobbying and advocacy targeted at national and regional policy makers

Impact Achieve Time Money

++ + +++ +++

++

Develop eru management tools

Facilitate development of such tools in a regional context

Impact Achieve Time Money

++ +++ + +

++

Introducing an eru taxation and customs system

Facilitate reform / development of the system, with a regional context

Impact Achieve Time Money

++ ++ +++ +++

++

Creating a multi-stakeholder eru platform

Lobby for and facilitate creation of the platform support the start-up phase

Impact Achieve Time Money

++ ++ ++ +

++

Policy framework and governance

Creating a database of actors in resource areas

Develop the concept and facilitate creation of the database

Impact Achieve Time Money

++ +++ ++ ++

++

46

Conservation Introduce conservation efforts at village level

Promote awareness on need for conservation and develop local governance capacity and tools

Impact Achieve Time Money

+ ++ ++ ++

++

Domestication Promote eru farming Facilitate training, extension, nursery establishment

Impact Achieve Time Money

++ ++ ++ +++

++

Technological improvements

Improved tools Fund private sector to develop appropriate harvesting and shredding tools

Impact Achieve Time Money

++ +++ +++ +++

+++

Introduce a market information system on supply and demand at local level and in Nigeria; focus on quantity and prices

Establishment along the lines of earlier SNV initiatives in other parts of Cameroon

Impact Achieve Time Money

++ +++ ++ +++

+++ Structuring the eru market

Generate knowledge on the eru value chain in the Centre, South and East regions

Similar to the CIFOR study covering the Southwest and Littoral regions, strong gender orientation

Impact Achieve Time Money

++ +++ +++ +++

+++

Promote actors’ organisation, association and collaboration

Organise workshops/training

Impact Achieve Time Money

+++ +++ ++ ++

+++ Actors’ capacity building

Provide capacity building services

In organisational and institutional development

Impact Achieve Time Money

++ ++ +++ +++

+++

Increase livelihood opportunities in eru processing

Organise training and support to enterprise development, facilitate linkage with micro-finance institutions

Impact Achieve Time Money

++ + ++ ++

++ Enterprise development

Increase visibility of alternative eru products

Support marketing activities

Impact Achieve Time Money

+ +++ +++ ++

++

While it is clear that the assessment method used here is intuitive and subjective and can hardly be termed exhaustive, it serves to give an indication of priority areas for gaining results. These areas are:

- Improving harvesting and shredding tools. - Introducing a market information system. - Generating knowledge on the eru value chain in the Centre, South and East Regions of

the country. - Promoting actors’ organisation, association and collaboration. - Providing capacity building services.

Each of these areas has a clear gender context, implications and potential impact for making a difference to women who constitute the majority of actors in the eru value chain. It is

47

evident that these recommendations are not stand-alone but need to be seen in an integrated fashion and with a chronological perspective. It is also evident that before intervening in the eru value chain SNV should conduct a much more rigorous assessment.

15. Conclusion

This report studied the eru value chain from a gender perspective, using information gathered on three indicators: the numbers of men and women involved, their task division and the income generated. Constraints were inventoried and the data analysed through a problem tree. Strategic intervention areas and solutions were identified and subjected to further (gender) analysis in order to produce recommendations for strengthening the value chain. Lastly, areas where SNV could potentially play a role were identified and a quick (non-exhaustive) assessment of their leverage capacity conducted to indicate priorities. From the data studied, there is a fairly strong case to be made of the direct relationship between the lack of interest in eru at policy level on the one hand and the low socio-economic status of eru on the other hand, where that low status is attributed by society on the basis of a false but persisting perception of the product as one of lesser economic value associated with poor and marginalised women operating in the context of the subsistence economy. The data also revealed how biased perceptions, supported by other factors, are contributing to trapping women and their families in a vicious poverty cycle from which extrication is difficult given their context of limited (economic) alternatives. Domestication is one of few solutions to the rapid depletion of the eru resource base, the measure potentially allowing sustainability of women’s livelihoods. Yet, care must be taken through frequent monitoring and innovation to ensure that what seems beneficial in first instance does not prove to be the opposite in the longer term, leaving the most poor and vulnerable in an even more precarious position. For example, domesticated eru could be viewed as a cash-crop and on that basis enter men’s domain, taking traditional benefits away from women. Or, domesticated eru could benefit women living close to markets, leaving those living in remoter and forested areas where there are fewer alternatives, without a valuable livelihood. Innovations could take the form of new enterprise opportunities including those aiming to add value to the eru product through for example processing or certification. The eru value chain, because it touches the lives of many people, especially poor women, and because of its significance in terms of quantity of produce traded and monetary value, generates many reasons for investing in development of the value chain. These reasons include, among others, poverty reduction, livelihoods for women, conserving a food crop under serious threat, structuring a profitable market to increase benefits for Cameroonian actors and earning state revenue. This report provides some indications on how the value chain can be developed; it is hoped that it contributes to on-going initiatives and discussions to strengthen the eru value chain, especially for the benefit of female actors.

48

Literature

CENDEP Centre for Nursery Development and Eru Propagation. A Rapid Market Appraisal on Eru in the Support Zone of the Korup National Park. W. Atanga, L. Choh, M. Fru, G. Y. Koleoko, P. E. Lingondo, O. M. Meliko, D. Tsianghang and Wirsiy E. F., 2006. CERUT and AIDEnvironment, 1999. The Wealth of forests in Cameroon: Results of field testing a methodology for the valuation of non-timber forest products (NTFPs) in Northwest and Southwest Cameroon. CERUT, Limbe. CIFOR, Centre for International Forestry Research, 2009. Eru market chain baseline (Gnetum spp.) in the Southwest and Littoral regions, Cameroon. L. Ndumbe, V. Ingram and A. Awono. FAO, 1999. Current Research Issues and Prospects for Conservation and Development. Edited by T. Sunderland, L. Clark and P. Vantomme. Based on the outcome of the International Expert Meeting on Non-Wood Forest Products in Central Africa, 1998.

- H. Tabuna. The markets for central African non-wood forest products in Europe.

FAO, 1999. Unasylva - No. 198 - Non-wood Forest Products and Income Generation, An international journal of forestry and forest industries Vol. 50,1999/3, editors: S.A. Dembner, A. Perlis

- Marketing of non-wood forest products in the humid forest zone of Cameroon by M. Ruiz Pérez, O. Ndoye and A. Eyebe

FAO, Département des Forêts, 2002. La collecte et l’analyse des données statistiques sur les produits forestiers non ligneux, une étude pilote au Cameroun by Dr. M. Mbolo, Département de Biologie et Physiologie Végétales, Faculté des Sciences, Université de Yaoundé I. Gockowski, J. & M. Ndumbe. 1997. The transformation of leafy vegetable cropping systems along the humid forest margins of Cameroon. In R.R. Schippers & L. Budd (eds.). African indigenous vegetables. Workshop Proceedings. January 13–18, 1997, Limbe, Cameroon. IPGRI and NRI, pp. 46–51. Henkemans, A.B. 1995. Forest products are a free gift of nature: gender issues in the exploitation and trade of non-timber forest products in the Korup Project Area, Southwest Province, Cameroon. The Netherlands: Wageningen Agricultural University. ILEIA, Centre for learning on sustainable agriculture. Documenting the eru management project in Cameroon. CENDEP, Centre for Nursery Development and Eru Propagation. http://documentation.leisa.info/cases/CENDEP/introduction.htm IRAD Institut de la Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement (IRAD), 1999. Produits forestiers autres que le bois d’œuvre (PFAB): place dans l’aménagement

49

durable des forêts denses humides d’Afrique Centrale. M. Tchatat, O. Ndoye et R. Nasi. Ndam N., Poteh Nkefor J. and Tekwe C., 2003. Gnetum domestication for livelihood improvement and conservation. Paper submitted to the XII World Forestry Congress, 2003, Quebec City, Canada.

Ndoye O. and M. Tchatat, 2006. Étude des produits forestiers non ligneux d’Afrique centrale : réalités et perspectives. Bois et Forêts des Tropiques, 2006, N° 289 (3). 2 Nkembi, L. and D. Hoyle D., 2001. The non-timber forest product status in the Banyang-Mbo Wildlife Sanctuary: a survey of household use, options for adding value and economic viability. The Wildlife Conservation Society. 1 Nlend V G. B., 2007. L’exploitation de l’okok (Gnetum africanum) par les femmes au Cameroun. Analyse sociologique de l’émergence d’une cueillette de rente et de ses implications socioéconomiques et environnementales dans la région forestière de Sa’a. Mémoire rédigé en vue de l’obtention du Diplôme d’Etudes Approfondies de sociologie, Université de Neuchâtel. Nlend V G.B. 2009. Research trip report to Littoral Region (Mungo Division), CIFOR. Nlend V G.B. 2009. Southwest research trip report, CIFOR. Nlend V G.B. Sans date. Projet de thèse de doctorat: Gouvernance, développement durable et gender, à travers l’exploitation du Gnetum africanum au Cameroun. Analyse des mécanismes institutionnels opératoires et conditions de durabilisation de l’économie de l’okok dans les régions de production, CIFOR. Sunderland, T.C.H. 2001. Cross River State Community Forest Project: non-timber forest products advisor report. Department for International Development/ Environmental Resources Management/ Scott Wilson Kirkpatrick & Co Ltd. USAID, Office of Sustainable Development, 2004. SD Publication Series, Technical Paper No. 122: The Key Non-Timber Forest Products of Central Africa: State of the Knowledge, edited by: L. E. Clark and T. C. H. Sunderland.

- Eru (Gnetum africanum and G. buchholzianum) by L.Clark, S. Asaha, N.Ndam and P. Blackmore.