milkit in india: background, current status and outlook
DESCRIPTION
Presented by Nils Teufel at the 1st MilkIT India Advisory Council Meeting, Dehradun, India, 1 June 2012TRANSCRIPT
Background, current status and outlook
1st Advisory Council MeetingDehradun 01/06/2012
Nils Teufel
MilkIT in India
This is based on the presentation given at the advisory council meeting, but block selection data and conclusions have been updated based on new milk procurement data.Notes on plenary and group discussions have also been added.
Topics
• Background– ILRI’s activities in South Asia– History of the MilkIT proposal– Major structure
• Current status– Collaboration with Ajeeveeka/IFAD– Selection of sites & partners– Detailed work-plans– Preparations for implementation
• Outlook– Next activities in 2012– Plans for 2013
01/06/2012 2/35
Background – ILRI in South Asia
• Feed improvements (fodder, food-feed crops, processing)
• Market development• Work on innovation
01/06/2012 3/35
Background – History of MilkIT
• Fodder Innovation Project/Fodder Adoption Project
• OPEC dairy feeding & marketing project• EU/IFAD call
01/06/2012 4/35
Background – major structure
• Institutional strengthening– Value chain assessments– Stakeholder involvement– Innovation platforms for improved dairy marketing
• Productivity improvements– Feed assessments– Technology matching– Innovation platforms for productivity improvements focussing on
feeding• Knowledge sharing
– Communication outputs– Meetings between partners, stakeholders, countries
01/06/2012 5/35
Status – Collaboration Ajeeveeka
• IFAD aim of linking loan programmes to grants• Building on base laid by ULIPH• Alignment with development of ILSP
– Site selection– M&E framework (base-line survey)– Support for value chain activities
• Comparison with Tanzania
01/06/2012 6/35
Status – Site selection, districts
01/06/2012 7/35
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
DUNDA
TIUNAHATAR
JADAR
POKHRI
KAPKOT
LAKSAR
PUROLA
BAIJRO
BHARKOT
THARALI
CHAMOLI
DIDIHAT
KHATIMA
CHHOLMI
TILWARA
ROORKEE
KOTDWARA
HALDWANI
SRINAGAR
OKHIMATH
PHURKIYA
MUNSYARI
KASHIPUR
RAMNAGAR
RANIKHET
GANGOTRI
BHATWARIRAJGARHI
HARKIDUN
BHATWARI
DHUMAKOT
CHAKRATA
SITARGANJ
THALISAIN
RISHIKESH
DHARCHULA
GHANSYALI
BADRINATH
JOSHIMATH
LANSDOWNE
GANGOLIHAT
VIKASNAGAR
DEVAPRAYAG
PRATAPNAGAR
BHIKIYASAIN
KARNAPRAYAG
NARENDRANAGAR
CHAURANGI KHAL
CHAMOLI
UTTARKASHI
GARHWAL
PITHORAGARH
NAINI TAL
ALMORA
DEHRA DUNTEHRI GARHWAL
HARIDWAR
BAGESHWAR
CHAMPAWAT
UDHAM SINGH NAGAR
RUDRAPRAYAG
BHATWARI
JOSHIMATH
LANSDOWNE
PAURI
MUNSYARI
PUROLA
DHARCHULA
NAINI TAL
RANIKHET
TEHRI
BAGESHWAR
CHAMOLIDEHRA DUN
KASHIPUR
ALMORA
HALDWANI
DEVAPRAYAG
CHAMPAWAT
KARNAPRAYAG
OKHIMATH
CHAKRATA
DIDIHAT
DUNDA
KICHHA
KHATIMA
PITHORAGARH
ROORKEE HARIDWAR
PRATAPNAGAR
RAJGARHI
SITARGANJ
Districts
IFAD
0
IFAD_ILSP
• Ajeeveeka activity
• Either Kumaon or Garhwal
• Mid-hills• Dairy
dynamics
Status – Partners 1
01/06/2012 8/20
HIMMOTHAN
IFAD
INHERE
LCM (Loke chetna manch)
CHIRAG
CHEA
• Which type of partners (December workshop)?
Status – Partners 2
• Medium NGO with – local experience and– capacity for research– INHERE in Almora
• Would new federations be a more sustainable structure?– Bageshwar – Chamoli?– CHIRAG in Bageshwar
01/06/2012 9/20
Status, block selection - ILSP
01/06/2012 10/35
Partner activities
Status, block selection,intensified livestock
01/06/2012 11/35
Syaldey
Chaukhutiya
Bhikiyasain Sult
Bhageswar
Garud
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
BuffFem/BovFem %
Syaldey
Chaukhutiya
Bhikiyasain Sult
Bhageswar
Garud
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
CbFem/BovFem %
Status, block selection,conclusion
• Bageshwar– Chirag only active in Bageshwar block– Dairy development indicators (milk procurement,
forest share) also support Bageshwar block• Almora
– Chaukutia excluded: high forest & irrigation– Syaldeh excluded: low milk procurement– Bhikyasen and Sult both possible – more data
required
01/06/2012 12/35
Status, site selection, clusters
• Bageshwar block – Chirag is active in two clusters– Kathpuryachina– Dewaldar
• Bhikyasen & Sult – Inhere has links to both blocks– Cluster overviews for Bhikyasen & Sult
01/06/2012 13/35
Status, site selection, sub-clusters
• Village census at cluster level• Classification of sub-clusters by milk marketing
(formal/informal)• Defined by field facilitator reach (4-6 villages)• Base for feed innovation platform?• Dairy innovation platform at cluster level?• Control sites within cluster?
01/06/2012 14/35
Preparations for implementation
• Office• Secondary data collection• Local contacts• Detailed work-plans• Partner agreements• Value chain assessment tools
01/06/2012 15/35
Outlook – activities 2012(work plan)
Steps Topics Tools TimeSite selection Block data for cluster Secondary data June
Cluster data for sub-cluster Village census JuneCharacterisation Villages Village survey July
Value chains VCA SeptemberDevelopment Actor mapping AugustFeeding & feed gaps FEAST October
Innovation Dairy market platform formed OctoberFeeding platform formed NovemberMarket interventions identified DecemberFeed interventions identified January ‘13
01/06/2012 16/35
Outlook – activities 2013
01/06/2012 17/35
Steps Topics Tools Time
Innovation Intervention trials round 1 Jan-Apr
Intervention trials round 2 May-Aug
Moving on Scaling-up of interventions Jul-Oct
Platform sustainability Sep-Nov
Documentation Reports Sep-Nov
Publicity WorkshopsDemonstrationsMedia
Sep-Nov
Impact assessment Oct-Nov
Thank You!
01/06/2012 18/35
• Notes on plenary and group discussions during the meeting
01/06/2012 19/35
Discussion on presentation - 1• What is the meaning of “innovation platform”?
– It’s about to bringing together experiences of a variety of stakeholders on– dairy marketing, feed support , knowledge sharing and innovation/change– regarding how to test & adapt these innovations.– Innovation platforms are not only a discussion forum and not just an extension activity.
• What will be the project output in Dec 2013 and who will receive it?– As a research project, papers and reports will be major outputs, with IFAD being the
first recipient.– Research outputs will be aligned with the demands of donors and partners. – Documentation of processes and results will enable global and local use. – Documentation of establishment and success/failure of innovation platforms will be a
major output. Induced changes will be a main indicator.• What will be language of dissemination?
– Main audience will be institutions. Therefore, first language will be English. – However, for local institutions documents in Hindi will also be prepared.
01/06/2012 20/35
Discussion on presentation - 2• What will be done to reduce livestock impact on forests?
– Feed requirements, current sources & opportunities will be assessed with FEAST– General land-use change will not be a focus of MilkIT because of its short
duration– More efficient use of existing resources will probably emphasise farm products
and labour efficiency (reducing forest use)– Himmothan has already experience with introducing winter fodder. Forest use
has already decreased.• How can MilkIT improve green fodder supply when the project is only 20
months and most green fodder comes from trees which yield only after 3-5years?– MilkIT will prioritise technologies (with the help of Techfit) which yield fast
effects (no planting campaigns, no focus on breed improvement).– More efficient use of existing feeds will be focus (supplementation, chopping)
and wider use of under-utilised resources (grass-lands).
01/06/2012 21/35
Discussion on presentation - 3• How will feed-related problems be identified? How will local capacity &
willingness for adoption be considered?– Innovation platforms will improve communication.– Specific tools (e.g. Techfit) will enable efficient discussion.
• What will be main project indicators, milk yield?– Milk yield will be important, but profitability and labour returns will also be main
indicators.– Improved productivity will decrease pressure on forests.
• How will other aspects of productivity be considered (breed, health) and who will be doing this?– Within the project period no major breed improvement effects can be expected.– But we know that local cows are being replaced with buffaloes.– Feed improvements offer greater effect in improved animals with less labour.– Where health issues are important we include local institutions in platform.
01/06/2012 22/35
Discussion on presentation - 4• How will the variation between households and animals be
considered?– MilkIT will only target groups (e.g. SHGs), not individual households/animals– At the platform level discussions will have to consider for which type of
households/animals technologies are suitable.– When documenting effects we will have to collect household/animal data.
• How is MilkIT going to compete with strong local dairy organisations?– We will map which institutions are working on which issues.– The innovation platforms will bring all relevant and willing actors together as
a complementary activity.– We are aware that compared to local institutions MilkIT will only show a
brief appearance and cannot compete.
01/06/2012 23/35
Group discussions1. Innovation platforms:
– “How can innovation platforms support development and dissemination of new technologies for dairy development?”
– Himmothan, GBPIHED, Elks, AHD
2. Marketing constraints:– “What are you most interested in for overcoming institutional
and marketing constraints in the dairy sector?”– Aanchal, Ajeeveeka, ULDB, Chirag
3. Feeding constraints:– “What should MilkIT produce to help with improving productivity
of dairy animals among small holders through better feeding, breeding & health?”
– GBPUAT, FD, VPKAS01/06/2012 24/35
Grp 1: Innovation platforms
01/06/2012 25/35
M. ChauhanR.S. Negi
R.S. Rawat S. JarialR.C. Rajaguru
Grp1 Innovation platforms• Value of innovation platforms
– Contribute by bringing in technologies, pilot them, scale it up– By creating platform at different levels, knowledge sharing at right levels– By creating awareness, demonstration wider audience, feedback, knowledge
documentation– Difficulties & risk:– Sustainability, ownership, scope – Compendium of successful experiences– Malavika: Ownership for sustainability (who owns)– Negi: What about the costs for maintaining platform– Malavika: which scale?
block level officers/ paravets/ ext. workers don’t talk to each other, maybe that would be useful
– NGOs do talk to each other– Padma: what is the actual income contribution of milk, what can actually be
improved through more milk
01/06/2012 26/35
Most important
Additional input on innovation platforms (later)
• Padma: expand the innovation platforms to include other actors who work in different fields (e.g. breeding, health, small ruminants etc.). Offer the platform as a useful and efficient approach to get collaboration & knowledge exchange going.
• Malavika: Support communication between local government officials and practitioners. They have only few opportunities for exchange.
01/06/2012 27/35
Grp 2: Inst. & mrktng constraints
01/06/2012 28/35
Atul Shah Pankaj Kumar
Pawan Kumar A.K. Negi
Grp 2: Institutional constraints• Baseline survey
– Market research (Milk production groups)• demand/supply gap• production, status/potential
Tiwari: consider own consumption requirements (nutritional security)Others: but we are just talking about selling surplus
• Awareness of group formation– Benefits– Approach (evaluation of form of organisational structure)– Business plan (economics of group activities for sustainability)
Malavika: Use federations to market more products.Pawan: Develop a variety of successful business models; MilkIT can bring together knowledge of successful innovations, compendium (specific examples)
– Marketing– Incentives
• Capacity building– NGOS can be roped in
01/06/2012 29/35
Most important
Grp2: Marketing constraints• Infrastructure
– cold-storage/chain– collection points (suggestions for linking remote villages)
• Value addition (Amul example)(Lepcha: think of cheese as in Sikkim)(Malavika: Minimum amount is so low that any processing is difficult, starting dairies with 50l/d) as soon as area is increased, transport becomes too expensive)
• Pricing (amount, quality)• Identification of markets• Collection process• Standardisation• Up-scaling01/06/2012 30/35
Most important
Grp 3: Feed constraints
01/06/2012 31/35
V. PadmakumarT. Ravichandran
S.T.S. LepchaT.P. Tiwari
J.K. Bisht
Grp 3: Feed constraints• Feeding
– Choice of fodder • For lean period (Apr-Jun, Dec-Feb)• Fodder trees (Bhimal, oak)• Perennial grasses (broom, napier, congo)
– Dual purpose crops: wheat, barley, paddy (suitability), depends on area– Use of weeds (Natal grass?)– Improvement of existing feeds
• Urea treatment, UMB, suppl green fodder, concentrates, suppl with area specific minerals
– Reduce wastage/feeding– Fodder banks (Negi: GoU is putting fodder banks in each block)
• Breeding– cross-breeding– red. calving interval– red. AFC
• Health– Deworming, ext. parasites– Promotion of EVM (ethnoveterinary system)– Vaccination (FMD, HS) (Negi: cold chain); Negi: improve evidence-based veterinary services, not
effectively targeted, also information links (helpline).01/06/2012 32/35
Most important
Chairman’s conclusions• In livestock development
consider 3 types– Milk animals (5l milk/d)– Tea animals (1l milk/d)– Dung animals (no milk/d)
01/06/2012 33/35