the case study€¦ · chapter 2: the case study 33 2.3 the phases of the case study the case study...
TRANSCRIPT
2Chapter
The Case Study
Cha
pter
2:
The
Cas
e St
udy
29
2.1 Introduction
The relationships between growth in fooddemand, urban spatial expansion, urbanpoverty and FSDS efficiency and dynamismare analysed by means of a case study.
Aim
The case study intends to facilitate theformulation of technically sound food supplyand distribution (FSD) policies, strategies andprogrammes, at regional, metropolitan, urbanand local level (or at urban, periurban and rurallevel) with clear institutional responsibilitiesand in a spirit of partnership between theprivate and public sectors combined withcollaboration between central and localgovernment institutions. These include specificprivate-sector, low-cost FSD arrangements totarget the urban poor,
Objectives
The case study sets the following immediateobjectives:1. identify current and future constraints to
FSDS efficiency and dynamism in the cityconcerned;
2. define the remedial measures needed topromote the development and modernizationof food supply and distribution systems(FSDSs).
Basic assumptions
1. Present constraints affecting FSDSs areeither the cause of additional FSD costs ormissed opportunities for economies;
2. urban growth and the growth of urban foodneeds will lead to a further rise in FSDcosts;
3. direct or indirect measures on FSDSs areimplemented by public (e.g. central or localgovernment) or para-statal institutions withinsufficient knowledge of FSDSs, and withan inadequate policy and strategic approach.
The above assumptions may be accompaniedor replaced by others. For instance, a city’sgrowth may fall second to market control bythe traders, lack of infrastructure, barriers toentry, lack of private initiative, and legal aswell as regulatory restrictions to trade.
Table 2.1Who is Interested in
an FSDS Case Study?
• The mayors, city administrators, policy makers andplanners, who will use the study findings to support theirformulation of urban FSD policies, programmes andinvestment decisions;
• the central and sectoral institutions involved inimproving those aspects of FSDSs and food securitywhich do not fall within the local authorities’ mandate;
• national and international funding institutions whosedecisions regarding investment funding will be based ontechnically reliable information;
• the private institutions and governing bodies (e.g.Chambers of Commerce as well as consumers, traders,producers associations) likely to be involved inimplementing FSD development programmes;
• international cooperation institutions and NGOs whoserole is to provide technical assistance to raiseawareness and to channel resources;
• the urban families who will benefit from the measurestaken.
30
Stud
ying
FSD
Ss t
o C
itie
s ...
Cha
pter
1T
he u
rban
, soc
ioec
onom
ican
d in
stitu
tiona
l con
text
Tab
le 2
.2S
tru
ctu
re o
f th
e C
ase
Stu
dy
The
urb
an c
onte
xt:
• sp
atia
l des
crip
tion;
• th
e ur
ban
popu
latio
n;•
the
grow
th o
f ot
her
urba
nar
eas.
The
soc
io-e
cono
mic
,in
stitu
tiona
l and
legi
slat
ive
cont
ext:
• ur
ban
popu
latio
ndi
stri
butio
n;•
urba
n po
vert
y;•
FSD
S-ge
nera
ted
empl
oym
ent:
• pu
blic
ser
vice
s;•
polit
ical
and
mac
ro-
econ
omic
con
text
s;•
inst
itutio
nal c
onte
xt;
• on
-goi
ng p
olic
ies
and
prog
ram
mes
;•
the
offi
cial
and
uno
ffic
ial
legi
slat
ive
and
regu
lato
ryco
ntex
t.
Urb
an f
ood
dem
and
and
food
inse
curi
ty:
• qu
antit
ies
of f
ood
cons
umed
in th
e ci
ty;
• ur
ban
cons
umer
s’fo
odha
bits
;•
urba
n co
nsum
ers’
purc
hasi
ng p
atte
rns;
• na
ture
and
ext
ent o
f ur
ban
hous
ehol
d fo
od in
secu
rity
and
its c
ause
s.
Food
sup
ply
sto
citie
ssu
bsys
tem
:•
food
pro
duct
ion
in r
ural
and
peri
urba
n ar
eas
upon
whi
ch th
e ci
ty d
epen
ds f
orits
foo
d su
pplie
s;•
food
pro
duct
ion
with
in th
eur
ban
area
s;•
food
impo
rt lo
gist
ics
and
proc
edur
es;
• fo
od a
ssem
bly,
han
dlin
g,pa
ckag
ing
and
tran
spor
t to
citie
s (i
nfra
stru
ctur
e,fa
cilit
ies
and
serv
ices
);
• fo
od p
roce
ssin
g fa
cilit
ies
and
slau
ghte
rhou
ses;
• le
gisl
atio
n an
d re
gula
tions
.
Cos
ts, p
rofi
ts a
nd m
argi
ns.
Soci
al c
osts
and
neg
ativ
eex
tern
aliti
es.
Urb
an f
ood
dist
ribu
tion
subs
yste
m:
• w
hole
sale
mar
kets
;•
reta
il ou
tlets
: pla
nned
mar
kets
, foo
d sh
ops,
supe
rmar
kets
, str
eet
vend
ors;
•
spec
ific
low
-cos
t foo
ddi
stri
butio
n ar
rang
emen
ts;
• st
reet
foo
d an
d in
form
alac
tiviti
es;
• in
tra-
urba
n tr
ansp
ort;
• se
rvic
es to
urb
an m
arke
tus
ers;
•
mar
ket t
rade
r, sh
opke
eper
and
cons
umer
ass
ocia
tions
and
orga
niza
tions
; •
priv
ate
inve
stm
ent i
nur
ban
mar
kets
and
sho
ps;
• le
gisl
atio
n an
d re
gula
tions
.
Cos
ts, p
rofi
ts a
nd m
argi
ns.
Soci
al c
osts
and
neg
ativ
eex
tern
aliti
es.
Polic
ies,
pro
gram
mes
and
inst
itutio
ns:
• pu
blic
or
priv
ate
sect
orFS
Dde
velo
pmen
tpr
ogra
mm
es;
• in
stitu
tiona
l asp
ects
.
The
city
in te
n ye
ars
time.
The
“st
atus
quo
” sc
enar
io.
The
“de
sira
ble”
sce
nari
o.
Com
pari
son
of th
esc
enar
ios.
Cha
pter
4C
oncl
usio
ns a
nd r
ecom
men
datio
ns
Cha
pter
2Pr
esen
t-da
y ur
ban
food
de
man
d, f
ood
inse
curi
ty a
nd F
SDSs
Cha
pter
3T
he c
ity a
nd it
s FS
DS
in th
e fu
ture
Content of the chapters of the case study (see Table 2.2)
CHAPTER 1: THE URBAN, SOCIO-ECONOMIC
AND INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT
Content: description of the urban, socio-economic, institutional and regulatory contextof the issues concerned.
CHAPTER 2: PRESENT-DAY URBAN FOOD DEMAND
AND FSDSS
Description of present-day urban food demand,types of FSDS structures and players (publicand private), their organization, operation,stability, fragility, performance and efficiencyin meeting urban consumers food requirements.
In principle, all the food groups are to be takeninto account: cereals, fruits and vegetables,roots and tubers, meat and dairy products, freshand dried fish, and products processed anddried by traditional methods. Groups ofproducts will be included in the analysis on thebasis of their importance in consumers’ dietsand the financial and human resourcesavailable for implementing the study.
CHAPTER 3: THE CITY AND ITS FSDS THE FUTURE
Projections of the city ten years into the futureand analyses of whether and how the FSDSswill be able to meet the urban consumers’ foodrequirements (in terms of volume, quality,stability, services and costs). It analyses thepossible implications of urban growth and thesocio-economic factors on FSDS structure,organization and performance.
The aims of this analysis are:1. determine whether there is a correlation
between urban growth and socio-economicfactors on the one hand, and FSDSefficiency and dynamism on the other;
2. identify the processes of change, adaptationand modernization (exogenous andendogenous, spontaneous and induced)which the FSDSs must adopt in the short,medium and long terms in order to meeturban food requirements adequately.
This analysis will be based on simpleassumptions which will help to define twoscenarios:1. a “status quo” scenario which projects
current trends concerning the city (urbanspace, poverty mapping, urban fooddemand) and FSDSs into the future (say tenyears) assuming no corrective interventions;
2. a “desirable” (but realistic) scenario whichsimulates the situation in an FSDS in tenyears. It outlines which structure, which typeof spatial and functional organization, whichsystem of operation (infrastructure, facilitiesand services) and which level ofperformance of FSDSs will best meet urbanfood demand at a given time and with agiven spatial urban development.
CHAPTER 4: CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
Clear, succinct and operational conclusions andrecommendations.
Steps in developing the case study
1. Define the organization of the present FSDSand the way it functions;
2. translate the perception of the variousproblems currently observed into a numberof specific questions about the city and itsFSDSs;
3. identify and prioritize the constraintsaffecting the FSDS;
4. collect, organize and analyse informationand data using an interdisciplinarymethodology;
5. identify, analyse, select and assign priority tothe possible solutions;
6. define the development objectives andstrategies;
7. recognize, choose and designate the requisiteaccompanying selected measures.
To undertake the above steps, it is necessary to:• prepare the terms of reference (TORs)
of the case study (see § 2.2);• develop a research strategy;• obtain the necessary resources (see § A3.1);• identify and select the required specialists
(see § A3.1.1);• prepare work programmes (see § A3.2.7).
Cha
pter
2:
The
Cas
e St
udy
31
32
Stud
ying
FSD
Ss t
o C
itie
s ...
Interinstitutional cooperation
Improvement measures on the FSDSs willinterest urban, periurban and rural areas (orlocal, urban, metropolitan and regional levels)in which numerous institutions intervene (seeTable 2.3).
Effective interinstitutional cooperation isimperative if one is to:• identify the study’s objectives and prepare
appropriate TORs;• facilitate access to existing information and
data;• provide all the required human, financial and
logistical resources;• encourage the various social and economic
groups to participate in the achievement ofthe study and incorporate recommendationsinto their institutional programmes;
• facilitate the assignment of specificinstitutional responsibilities for theimplementation of specific elements of FSDdevelopment programmes.
Interinstitutional cooperation could be easedthrough the establishment of interinstitutionalstudy groups (ISG) (see § A3.2.5) to focus onspecific issues and an interinstitutional steeringcommittee (ISC) (see A5.2).
2.2 The terms of reference
The TORs contain all the information neededto implement the study (see Table 2.4). It ispossible to map out an efficient research pathsuited to the city and its FSDSs. This is adynamic process requiring continuous reviewof the TORs.
The general TORs in Annex 2 need to beadapted to local conditions by the bodyresponsible for the study and/or by the ISC andby the interdisciplinary team members.
Table 2.3Example of Institutional Responsibilities by Geographic Area
As responsibility for the development of each geographicarea is usually shared between different institutions (seefollowing), the preparation of geographic subprogrammesfacilitates the assignment of specific institutionalresponsibilities for the implementation of the developmentprogramme.
Urban areas• Urban food production: municipality, Ministry of Urban
Development, Ministry of Agriculture;• urban food marketing: municipality, Ministry of Urban
Planning, Ministry of Commerce, Ministry of Health,associations of market traders, transporters andconsumers; Standards organization;
• health and environment: municipality, Ministry of theEnvironment, Ministry of Health, Standards organization.
Periurban areas• Periurban food production: Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry
of Rural Development, periurban farmers associations;• food processing: Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Rural
Development, Ministry of Health; Standards organization;• periurban-urban linkages: municipalities in periurban
areas; Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of RuralDevelopment, Ministry of Transport; Standardsorganization;
• health and environment: municipalities in periurban areas;Ministry of the Environment, Ministry of Health.
Rural areas• Rural food production: Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of
Rural Development, rural farmers associations;• food processing: Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Rural
Development, Ministry of Health;• rural-urban linkages: municipalities in rural areas, Ministry
of Agriculture, Ministry of Transport;• health and environment: municipalities in rural areas,
Environmental Protection and Public Health Bodies.
Table 2.4Terms of Reference
The terms of reference must include:• the objective of the case study;• the main topics;• the issues to be developed within the context of the
topics;• the hypotheses to be tested;• the questions to be answered;• the information to be collected and analysed;• the method of work and the methodological
approaches;• the expected results;• the presentation of the results;• the organization of the study.
Cha
pter
2:
The
Cas
e St
udy
33
2.3 The phases of the case study
The case study is carried out in two phases: the“pre-case study” (phase 1) with an overall viewof the issues, and a more in-depth analysiscalled: “the case study proper” (phase 2) (seeFigure 2.1).
2.3.1 Phase 1: the pre-case study
Objectives
The objectives of the pre-case study are:1. to understand the overall structure and
operation of the FSDS to the city and assessits overall efficiency and dynamism;
2. to identify the major issues, constraints andpossible solutions at urban, periurban andrural level, bearing in mind the city’santicipated growth;
3. to identify those aspects requiring a moredetailed examination during phase 2;
4. encourage interinstitutional participation inphase 2.
Expected outputs
Phase 1 should produce:
1. general assessment of FSDS structure,performance, constraints, their causes andpossible solutions
The results should be:• logically arranged in parts and sections;• concise (strictly necessary details shall go in
the annexes);• specific and pertinent1;• clear: the language must be simple (avoid
highly technical vocabulary);• graphically supported (i.e. drawings, maps
and photographs).
2. issues for further investigation
A list will be compiled of the problems, criticalpoints and constraints surrounding FSDSsabout which information is lacking, and the adhoc studies required to be undertaken in phase2. It will therefore be necessary to pinpointsuch issues:
• at functional level, specifying whichfunctions are concerned and theirinterrelationships;
• at geographical level, specifying where theproblem occurs;
• at commercial level, specifying the playersand food products involved.
Proposals will contain:• the justification;• the objectives;• the expected results;• the preliminary TORs, work programme and
an estimate of the resources for each requiredad hoc study.
Stages
The pre-case study may commence bycategorizing past and expected urban physicalexpansion, poverty distribution, urban foodneeds, extent of urban household foodinsecurity; location, using maps, of mainsupply areas, food transport axes and urbanmarkets. The process gradually expands tocover institutional responsibilities as well aspast, present and planned interventions.Although it may not be possible to cover allthe items included in the general TORs, thedescription and analysis should suffice to showthe complexity and interrelationships betweenthe various FSDS elements. Major constraintsare identified as well as problems requiringimmediate solution. Problems and constraintsshould not simply be listed but presented assets interconnected at critical points. Key areasfor further investigation should also beidentified.
Phase 1 comprises five main stages:1. collection of information and data
(see § 2.4.1);2. analysis of information and data
(see § 2.4.2);3. analysis of FSDSs, identification of
constraints, critical points and solutions(see § 2.4.3);
4. identification of specific issues for furtherinvestigation (see § 2.4.2);
5. external review (see § 2.5).
34
Stud
ying
FSD
Ss t
o C
itie
s ...
Specificissues for
in-depthanalysis
Phase 1:
The Pre-Case Study
Phase 2:
The Case Study Proper
Consolidated case study
General assessment ofFSDS structure, perfor-mance, constraints and
causes
Figure 2.1How the Phases of the Case Study are Linked
Analysis of urbanization, urban poverty, foodhabits, food insecurity and FSDS
Specific low-costFSD arrangementsto target the urban
poor
Expansion ofthe generalanalysis of
FSDSs
Ad hocstudies on
specifictopics
Pre-feasibility ofproposed
investments
Remedial measures
Proposals for FSDpolicy, strategies and development programmes
Duration
Phase 1 should not exceed twelve weeks/man.
2.3.2 Phase 2: the case study proper
During phase 2, there will be:1. an expansion of the general assessment of
FSDSs undertaken during the pre-case study;2. studies of specific topics, the need for which
was identified during the pre-case study;3. pre-feasibility assessments of proposed
major infrastructure investments.
Objectives
The aims of the case study proper are to:1. facilitate consensus by all concerned
institutions on proposed interventions;2. facilitate the formulation of urban FSD
policies, strategies and developmentprogrammes, at regional, metropolitan,urban and local level (or at urban, periurbanand rural level) based on a technically soundanalytical framework.
Expected outputs
Phase 2 should produce:1. technically sound and sustainable remedial
measures to address the constraints affectingFSDSs and support their development tomeet growing urban food needs;
2. a document consolidating the FSDSconstraint analysis and selected remedialmeasures;
3. proposals for specific low-cost FSDarrangements to target the urban poor.
Stages
Phase 2 comprises seven stages:1. collection of information and data (see §
2.4.1);2. analysis of scenarios (see § 2.2.2);3. in-depth analysis of specific FSD issues (see
§ 2.4.2) including present and future FSDspecific issues and constraints and theircauses (see § 2.5.3);
4. identification and pre-feasibility of publicand private infrastructure investment needsand opportunities (see A5.3, 5.7 and 5.8 andTracey-White, 1999);
5. external review (see § 2.6).
Duration
The duration of phase 2 depends on the workto be done, the size of the city, the complexityof its FSDS, the amount and quality of the datarequired, the surveys to be completed, thefunds available and the available technical andfinancial resources.
Cha
pter
2:
The
Cas
e St
udy
35
Non motorized transport helps keep food prices low,provides employment for young and poor people
and does not pollute but contributes to trafficcongestion in and around markets.
The lack of adequate food containers can encumber thedevelopment of micro and small food processingenterprises in hygienic conditions.
36
Stud
ying
FSD
Ss t
o C
itie
s ...
2.4 Stages of the case study
2.4.1 Collection of information and data
Required information can be collected by:• bibliographical research2 (see A5.4.1);• interviews (see A5.4.2);• direct observation (see A5.4.3);• mini-surveys3 (see A5.4.4).
2.4.2 Analysis of information and data
This guide does not review the several methodsof analysis. An interdisciplinarymethodological approach is introduced inAnnex 1. Those responsible for carrying outthe study will develop individual and groupmethodologies.
If the problems are identified without assessingtheir relative importance or urgency, solutionsput forward without assessing feasibility orsustainability in time, remedial measuresproposed without adequate knowledge of theirefficiency, impact and realism, the team’sefforts will be rendered null. The proposals forFSDS policies, strategies and programmes willbe left on the shelf. The validity, acceptance,implementation and impact of the proposals onfood security depend on this process. It isimperative to adopt appropriate, selectivecriteria.
Information is handled as follows:• the problems, critical points and constraints
affecting FSDSs, plus their immediate andfuture causes and consequences, are analysedto identify the factors restricting thedevelopment of FSDSs, likewise the internaland external factors as well as the conditionsrequired to bring about change;
• the problems, constraints and critical pointsare listed in order of priority (see A5.5.1);
• general strategies for the long, medium andshort term development of FSDSs are definedwith the intent to gradually achieve thedesired FSDSs;
• necessary remedial measures (see A5.5.2 andA5.5.3, Table 2.5 and 2.6), expected results(see A.4.5.4) and support measures areidentified, described, selected and listed inorder of priority.
2.4.3 Analysis of problems, constraints,critical points and remedial measures
The analysis of the problems, constraints andcritical points follows the relationship:
PROBLEM -> CAUSES -> CONSEQUENCES -> REMEDIAL MEASURES
The criteria to be adopted for problem analysis,selecting and prioritizing remedial measuresare relative and not absolute. A5.6.1 and A5.6.2suggest a pragmatic approach to problemidentification and how to grade the problemsby priority.
There are a number of criteria for selectingremedial measures, investment projects andsupport measures. These shall depend on thecomplexity of any given remedial measure.Some general criteria are suggested in A5.5.3See A.4.7 and A5.8 and Tracey-White (2000)for criteria relating to decisions in marketinfrastructure investment.
Table 2.5Time Required to Implement
Remedial Measures
In order to judge the time needed for each group ofremedial measures, or each individual measure, thefollowing elements must be borne in mind:• the operational capacity of the persons and
institutions involved in the implementation of themeasures;
• the country’s level of economic development;• political and institutional constraints;• implementation costs and actual funding opportuni-
ties.
Source: Seck et al., 1997b.
Cha
pter
2:
The
Cas
e St
udy
37
2.5 External review
There will be external reviews so the team cansubmit its analysis as well as preliminary andfinal proposals. External reviews are anopportunity to obtain the opinions of theconcerned social groups, the eventual “official”approval by the interested institutions and pavethe way for beneficiaries and institutions toparticipate in the implementation of theproposed programmes.
For details about: • organizing external reviews, see A5.9;• workshop participants, see A5.9.3;• managing workshop discussions, see A5.9.4;• resources, facilities, equipment and material
required during workshops, see A5.9.5;• workshop agendas, see A5.10.1 and A5.10.2;• workshop reports, see A5.10.3 and A5.10.4.
Workshops should last no more than one day.Workshop reports should be widely distributedamong all concerned institutions, organizationsand associations.
2.5.1 Phase 1: submission of results
At the end of phase 1, a short issues paper willbe prepared summarizing and outlining thecontent of all the documents prepared. Thispaper should be distributed to the participants afew days before each workshop.
Participants will:• learn about the problems affecting FSDSs.
This will give them an objective view of whatis wrong with the FSDSs to their city;
• express their own perception of the problemsand their willingness to take an active part inresolving them;
• define each social group’s contribution to theimplementation of phase 2 and the frameworkfor institutional cooperation.
Table 2.7Layout of the Final Version
of the Case Study
• Abstract of the study (250 words maximum);• presentation of the authors (maximum 100 words per
author);• table of contents;• list of acronyms of institutions and abbreviations used;• list of tables, boxes, figures (maps, diagrams, graphs
and drawings) and pictures;• analytical summary (1500 words maximum);• introduction;• chapter 1: the urban, socio-economic and institutional
context;• chapter 2: present-day urban food demand and
FSDSs;• chapter 3: the city and FSDSs in the future;• chapter 4: conclusions and recommendations;• annexes;• bibliography;• list of persons met.
Table 2.6Direct and Indirect Beneficiaries of Remedial Measures
The «direct beneficiaries» of an intervention could be thestaff of the public and private institutions directly involvedin the programme.
The «indirect beneficiaries» are the groups of peoplewhose situation it is hoped to improve, e.g. the mostdeprived urban consumers, food traders and transporters.
It is important to identify the target groups and describetheir main characteristics (socio-economic, demographicand occupational) and most urgent needs, and show howbeneficiaries will effectively reap the benefits.
38
Stud
ying
FSD
Ss t
o C
itie
s ...
2.5.2 Phase 1 and 2: discussion of specifictopics
During both phases, there should be technicaldiscussions on specific topics (e.g.: SMEdevelopment; FSD legislation and regulations;wholesale market development, retail outletsdevelopment, urban and periurban foodproduction). The aim of each workshop is toshow the progress made, submit the interimresults of the team’s work and present themeasures proposed in relation to a specifictopic. Direct and indirect beneficiaries will beinvited to attend, particularly policy makersand senior planners and representatives ofconcerned private sector organizations.
Maximum time will have to be devoted toobtaining the views of different interest groups.
2.5.3 Phase 2: submission of results
The final version of the case study could bestructured as suggested in Table 2.7.
A final workshop should review the diagnosisand the FSD policy, strategy and developmentprogramme proposals. The aim is to:• raise awareness of national institutions of the
need to support FSDS development;• pave the way for the effective and sustainable
remedial measures by submitting a carefullyreasoned framework to encourage concrete,effective, interinstitutional actions.
Recommendations
• The TORs must be sufficiently detailed so as to provide guidance for the study team on specific
points of interest, at the same time leaving them free to look at other points and use other
approaches;
• the tasks must be feasible and realistic in relation to the resources (human, logistical and financial)
and the time available. The delimiting criteria governing the study subjects must be clearly defined;
• particular attention shall be paid to political considerations (e.g. choice of beneficiaries, criteria on
which scenarios are to be based and choice of sites) which may emerge during the study’s
implementation phase. These aspects must be discussed and clarified with the ISC;
• those responsible for the study must provide an effective way of communicating with the ISC.
Meetings must be properly organized and minutes regularly distributed in order to avoid
subsequent misunderstandings;
• the TOR subject matter must follow a logical and progressive order (e.g. past situation, present
situation and future analysis of current trends). This will allow scenarios, based on specific
timeframes and assumptions, to be prepared.
• precede every external review by an internal review in order to test the content and improve on
the presentation of the information and on arrangements for the external discussions.
Endnotes
1. A general, standard formulation of the type: “Therelevant authorities are urged to take all necessaryaction in order to...” must be avoided. It says nothing.
2. For an annotated bibliography on FSDSs, seeAragrande and Farolfi, 1997 and Aragrande, 1997.
3. Should more detailed surveys be necessary, they shouldbe proposed as an aspect for further analysis to beundertaken during phase 2, or as an activity in the FSDdevelopment programme.