On 1 June, members of the MilkIT project advisory council held their first meeting in Dehradun. Nils Teufel of the International Livestock Research Institute introduced the project and its intended activities.

View the presentation:

 

The subsequent question and answer session generated lively exchanges; the main questions – with answers – included:

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.

2. What will be the project output in Dec 2014 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.

3. 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.

4. 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.

5. How can MilkIT improve green fodder supply when the project is only 32 months and most green fodder comes from trees which yield only after 3-5 years?

  • 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).

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. 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.
  • 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.

9. 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.

After reviewing work plans, members formed three groups discussing:

  • Innovation platforms: “How can innovation platforms support development and dissemination of new technologies for dairy development?”
  • Marketing constraints: “What are you most interested in for overcoming institutional and marketing constraints in the dairy sector?”
  • Feeding constraints: “What should MilkIT produce to help with improving productivity of dairy animals among small holders through better feeding, breeding & health?”

The project is funded by the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD). It started in January 2012 and runs for three years

Basic project information

Project brochure

News on the project

Outputs from this project

Project wiki

This project is part of the CGIAR Research Program on Livestock and Fish.

Following completion of the IFAD-funded Fodder Adoption Project, IFAD recently agreed to fund a further project on feed enhancement for dairy value chains in India and Tanzania. The project will be implemented by ILRI with CIAT as a major partner. We are calling the project MilkIT (Milk in India and Tanzania) and the grant agreement was signed in October 2011. We expect activities to start in earnest in early 2012 with a pre-inception meeting in Nairobi. See the project flyer.

We will again be experimenting with innovation and value chain approaches to feed development. The project will be embedded within the new CGIAR Research Programme 3.7: More milk, meat and fish, for and by the poor.

The overall goal of the project will be to contribute to improved dairy-derived livelihoods in India and Tanzania via intensification of smallholder production focusing on enhancement of feeds and feeding using innovation and value chain approaches.

The objectives of the project are three-fold:

1.     Institutional strengthening: To strengthen use of value chain and innovation approaches among dairy stakeholders to improve feeding strategies for dairy cows.

2.       Productivity enhancement: To develop options for improved feeding strategies leading to yield enhancement with potential income benefits.

3.       Knowledge sharing: To strengthen knowledge sharing mechanisms on feed development strategies at local, regional and international levels

Activities on this project will start in earnest in early 2012 but already a number of preparatory steps have been taken to ensure rapid project start up. These have mainly related to scoping missions to the two study countries with a view to identifying project sites and partners. The main activities are summarized below:

Scoping visits:

Tanzania: A project team including Alan Duncan (Project Co-ordinator) and Brigitte Maass (Tanzania Country Co-ordinator) along with Ben Lukuyu and Amos Omore of ILRI visited Tanzania in August and conducted a 5 day tour of potential sites and partners. The visit began in Arusha and went by way of Tanga and Morogoro to Dar-es-Salaam. Meetings were arranged with a wide range of potential partners and stakeholders. The process was useful in raising awareness among potential partners about the incoming project. The visit also provided some pointers to potential project sites and these will be firmed up in a pre-inception meeting in Jan 2012.

Uttarakhand, India: a similar scoping visit was made to Uttarakhand by Alan Duncan and Nils Teufel (India Country Co-ordinator) in December 2012. The visit centred around two main locations, Dehra Dun and Almora. Stakeholder mini-workshops were held in each location introducing the project and gathering information on ongoing dairy activities and key current issues around dairy value chain development.

Meetings with IFAD country staff

During the scoping visit to Tanzania, a meeting was held with Dr Mwatima Juma,  Country Officer for IFAD Tanzania on 26 Aug, 2011. We discussed IFAD country priorities and introduced the MilkIT project to the country office. A similar meeting was held in the IFAD India country office on 23 Sept 2011.  Again the MilkIT project was introduced and its integration with the forthcoming Integrated Livelihood Support Programme in Uttarakhand was discussed.

Planning for implementation

Dates and agenda have been set for a pre-inception planning meeting in Nairobi on Jan 24/25, 2012. The meeting will develop site selection criteria, work on details of initial project activities, agree on partners and explore links with a sister project on dairy in Tanzania funded by Irish Aid.

We will continue to post updates about this project on this blog.


The project is funded by the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD). It started in January 2012 and runs for three years

Basic project information

Project brochure

News on the project

Outputs from this project

Project wiki

This project is part of the CGIAR Research Program on Livestock and Fish.

Under the title ‘Enhancing Livelihoods of Poor Livestock Keepers through Increased Use of Fodder’, the goal of this IFAD-funded Programme was to improve the livelihoods of poor livestock keepers in Ethiopia, Syria and Vietnam in a sustainable manner through increased access to and adoption of fodder interventions.

With activities in Ethiopia, Syria and Vietnam and linking with a project implemented in Nigeria and India, the project aimed to better understand the factors and processes that determine the success of fodder interventions in developing countries. This understanding was used to strengthen the capacity of poor farmers and service providers to better meet their needs for fodder.

The project completion report has just be published, providing information on four project output areas:

  • Mechanisms for strengthening and/or establishing multi-stakeholder alliances that can enable scaling up and out of fodder technologies.
  • Options for effective delivery systems including innovative communication strategies and on farm interventions to improve fodder supply.
  • Enhanced capacity of project partners to experiment with and use fodder innovations through effective communication, technical information and training in diverse aspects placing fodder interventions in the context of systems of innovation.
  • Generic lessons with wide applicability on innovation processes and systems, communication strategies and partnerships that provide an enabling environment to enhance scaling up and out of fodder innovations.

In addition, outcomes and lessons are drawn together around three major strands: Innovation, Scaling Out and Market Development

Innovation

The assimilation of innovation systems thinking into project activities was an emerging theme of the project and played out in different ways in the three project countries. In Ethiopia, the project pro-actively established and facilitated local innovation platforms at study sites and used these as the central mechanism for bringing about change in farming practice. Innovation platforms were combined with introduction of planted fodder early in the project. This combination of technology introduction and a focus on enhancing stakeholder networking was a hallmark of activities in Ethiopia. The result was modest adoption of forage technologies at farm level accompanied by significant change in stakeholder attitudes and behaviour which we anticipate will lead to more substantial long-term change at farm level.

In Syria the approach was similar although perhaps with greater emphasis on introducing new technologies to farmers. In Syria there was a more challenging external environment with a strong extension service, heavy government intervention in pricing of agricultural commodities and few NGO or private sector actors. This scarcity of non-government actors limited the diversity actors involved in innovation platforms. Within these constraints we noted strong farmer adoption of technologies introduced by the project and a greater connectedness of key actors including the Ministry of Agriculture and Agrarian Reform and the Aga Khan Rural Support Programme.

In Vietnam we saw widespread system change in farming practice from subsistence based cattle system to a market-oriented system in which breeding and feeding practices were substantially changed with strong benefits for farmer livelihoods. This change was facilitated by the Fodder Adoption Project and, in the case of the more advanced learning site Ea Kar, predecessor projects led by CIAT. In Vietnam a coalition of local key stakeholders was formed at each learning site and these took responsibility for driving and facilitating cattle development. While national project partners were initially instrumental in facilitating local coalitions, this responsibility quickly evolved to local partners, the district extension of agriculture offices. Also, the composition of local coalitions changed as the project progressed. These stakeholder changes were described in detail in a paper by Khanh et al (2009). “Actor-oriented” approaches were a strong element of project activities.

As in Ethiopia, there was an early emphasis on introduction of promising forage technologies using participatory approaches. “Village learning activities” were used to great effect to develop farmer capacity to experiment with new feeding and breeding practices. Following early pockets of success in introducing new technologies there was strong emphasis on working with local government extension workers to bring about sustained change, link farmers with markets and upscale adoption. As the project progressed the range of actors reached by the project widened; actors from across the value chain became involved, notably traders and buyers of cattle from distant markets. The link between promising technologies and linking farmers to markets through facilitation of stakeholder linkages was a key element of success in Vietnam and in many ways, the example of Vietnam provided the project with a flagship model for livestock development, elements of which were tried in the other countries.

In summary, across all three project countries our approach was to combine the introduction of promising technologies with a pro-active emphasis on bringing key actors together at important points in the development process. In Ethiopia and Syria this was done through innovation platforms while in Vietnam the same end was achieved through facilitation of ad hoc interactions among important stakeholders. In Vietnam a tipping point was reached and we saw widespread system change following continuous engagement by CIAT and local partners in project sites for a number of years. In Ethiopia and Syria the tipping point has yet to be reached but we see promising signs of change in actor behaviour which will need to be followed to assess whether they are sustained and lead to widespread change in farmer practice.

Scaling Out

Scaling out activities were somewhat different in the three project countries partly because project activities were at a different point in the development trajectory in each country.

The most advanced scaling out activities were in Vietnam where a strong strategy for scaling out early successes was developed. The general approach was to focus at village level to begin with through introduction of new practices through Village Learning Activities. Some of this had happened before FAP began. Having established early pockets of success local extension workers were brought on board through site visits and interactions with farmers. The project then provided technical support for scaling out of successful technologies but the scaling out was led by the local extension department. Such scaling out approaches were still relatively local involving the local district extension workers. An important activity of FAP was to extend project activities to a completely new site, Ha Tinh. This was achieved through exchange visits early in the project. A key element success was allowing government officials to hear first hand from their counterparts in the advanced learning site about how things had progressed in their site. This led to rapid adoption of new feeding practices in the new learning site over project life.

In Ethiopia, scaling out of technologies did not progress beyond district level (woreda) during the lifetime of FAP. However, the project did have some impact in terms of scaling out of innovation systems approaches to actors beyond project sites. This was achieved through regular meetings of a national Ethiopian Fodder Roundtable at which innovation approaches were presented. At district level we found considerable enthusiasm for scaling out of planted fodder by local extension offices. The scaling out was achieved through conventional government mechanisms rather than through spontaneous adoption and it remains to be seen how sustainable such efforts are and whether they continue beyond the project lifetime. One issue we encountered was the question of what was being scaled out: technologies or innovation approaches. We tended to find that government extension officers were keener on the former and it is too early to say whether we see sustained use of innovation approaches in study districts and beyond.

In Syria, again we saw scaling out of successful technologies at district level but as in Ethiopia it is as yet unclear whether the use of local stakeholder platforms has been taken on by local stakeholders and will persist beyond project life.

Market development

Market development activities varied by country partly because of the different stages of maturity of project efforts in the three locations.

In Ethiopia, the project started by introducing planted forages at district level. Early successes were used to build stakeholder engagement. Towards the end of the project we saw local stakeholders turning attention to marketing issues in at least one of our sites. Thus in Ada’a, by the end of the project local stakeholders were negotiating arrangements for procurement of milk rather than focusing on fodder production issues. In all three countries a similar pattern was observed: using fodder as an entry point but maintaining a strong focus on stakeholder processes led naturally to dealing with bottlenecks further along the value chain.

In Vietnam, this process had reached maturity so that much of the project effort was focused on developing market arrangements with traders, re-orienting production to meet market demands, dealing with credit provision and so on.

In Syria, there was limited work on market development perhaps because livestock production systems are already relatively mature and market linkages for farmers are already well established.

Download the report

On September 28, I joined Andre Van Rooyen (ICRISAT) and Ranjitha Puskur (ILRI) in a session on innovation platforms in agricultural research for development at the Rome AgriKnowledge share fair. For my presentation, I used experiences of the ‘Fodder Adoption Project in Ethiopia to illustrate how using the innovation systems approach shifted the focus of the project from animal feeding ‘technologies’ to actors and their emerging needs over time.

More on the Ethiopia project

View the presentation:

Development projects can often point to local pockets of success: examples of where a project has had real impact on smallholder livelihoods through some successful interventions. However the real challenge comes in taking such success to scale – this involves somehow embedding the processes that led to success into the ways of working of local stakeholders who will remain after the project reports have been written.

In this Technical Advisory Note from the Fodder Adoption Project, Werner Stur draws some lessons on how to scale out local success using a case from Ea Kar District in Vietnam. The local success was described in a previous post – it involved using planted fodder as a catalyst to enable subsistence cattle keepers to make the transition into keeping cattle for cash income.

According to Werner Stur “The key to successful up-scaling” was to:

(i) have a convincing example that showed that it was possible for comparable smallholder farm families to produce high-quality cattle competitively

(ii) build local coalitions for development which facilitated the adoption and development process

(iii) strengthen the capacity of local stakeholders in facilitating the fodder and cattle development process, supporting farmers in technical issues, and developing market access, and

(iv) support stakeholders at new sites by linking them with experienced counterparts in a site where things are working as well as linking them with other project participants in an informal network of professionals.

Read the full account here:

and you can watch a video where Werner Stur talks about up-scaling local successes in a previous post.

Feed scarcity in smallholder systems is a key constraint to improved livestock production in developing countries. However, development efforts which have taken a narrow technology-focused approach to dealing with feed scarcity have had limited success. In the Fodder Adoption Project, we experimented with the use of local stakeholder forums in our sites in Ethiopia to bring local stakeholders together to deal with feed scarcity issues.

In this Technical Advisory Note we describe our experiences in combining stakeholder forums with introductions of improved forage varieties at farm level. The note shows how innovation approaches worked well in a site with good market potential for dairy and where diverse actors were present. In a food insecure site dominated by public sector actors things were more challenging.

We draw a number of lessons from our experiences:

  • Local stakeholder forums required some practical action on the ground to stimulate interest and enhance credibility – in our case the “engine of change” was planted forage but other practical entry points could work equally well.
  • Diversity of actors seems to be a key element of successful stakeholder forums.
  • Enhancing productivity at farm level is a good first step but needs to be quickly accompanied by actions to deal with other value chain constraints such as input provision and marketing arrangements.
  • In food insecure environments the use of local stakeholder forums for value chain development can be challenging. In such cases a different thematic focus such as food-security, capacity building or improving livelihoods might be more appropriate; this may also require a different set of actors including social welfare and health actors.
  • Establishing a coherent livestock innovation system requires experimentation, learning from mistakes and careful adaptation. During the pilot phase some external resources may be required to cover the costs of workshops and meetings, training and other support and to underwrite new interventions that carry some risk until proven.

Read the full account here.

See previous posts on cattle fattening and novel arrangements for credit through traders in Vietnam for some parallel similar experiences.

Across the developing world, millions of smallholders keep livestock as a means of storing capital and as an insurance against hard times. This is a vital function for livestock – but it is associated with poverty. As demand for livestock products increases and systems become more intensive there are opportunities for subsistence livestock keepers to make the transition from being “cattle keepers” to “cattle producers”. Deriving some cash income from livestock production helps farmers to transition out of poverty.

In this Technical Advisory Note from the Fodder Adoption Project, Werner Stür (formerly of the International Center for Tropical Agriculture, CIAT) describes the way in which scientists from CIAT and Tay Nguyen University worked with local farmers and other stakeholders to bring about widespread change in cattle production in Ea Kar District in Vietnam.

According to Werner Stür “The key to success was the combination of a convincing technology – farm-grown fodder – and an innovation process that was participatory, actor-oriented, and both production and market focused. The immediate benefits of easy access to fodder stimulated stakeholders’ interest and provided an entry point for innovation. As cattle production improved and stakeholders realised that they could produce high-quality animals, market opportunities became the key driver for change”.

Read the full account here

Today we had a session to try and distil some cross-cutting findings from FAP, thinking specifically about Innovation, Feed Assessment and Scaling out issues. Here I highlight one key point I took from each session

Ranjitha Puskur led the session on innovation: we spoke about the challenges of embedding innovation approaches within national systems. Taking Ethiopia as a case, before long we were talking about “mandates”, “pushing the concept”, “assigning roles and responsibilities”…. It struck me that such terminology is at odds with the whole innovation approach – what we have been aiming for in FAP is loose, responsive networks that form to deal with specific issues and are driven by the personal interests of those involved – trying to institutionalize this informality within a national system would surely kill the informality which makes these things work.

Michael Blummel led the Feed Assessment session: We began by talking about methods of assessing feed gaps. Something we have learned through application of the FEAST (Feed Assessment Tool) we have been developing within FAP is that feed assessment can be too narrow – usually better to start with a more general enquiry among farmers about key constraints within the livestock system. In some cases this will point to issues other than feed, for example problems with marketing livestock products, problems with sourcing decent genetic stock etc. Even when feed is identified as a primary constraint, a wider assessment can identify other issues that will soon become key constraints once better quality feed is available.

Werner Stur led a session on scaling out: we asked the question “what are we scaling out”? Very often scaling out refers only to the scaling out of successful technologies. However, the success of such technologies is usually dependent on a whole suite of accompanying factors: local market demand for livestock products, availability of credit, the labour situation, local expertise etc. Simply scaling out the technology without scaling out the processes that led to the technology becoming successful in a particular locality tends not to work. We need to find ways of scaling out innovation processes that lead to successful technologies in given circumstances rather than a narrow focus on the technologies themselves.

Today, the country teams from the IFAD-supported ‘Fodder Adoption Project’ met in Luang Prabang Laos to review and assess what was achieved during the project.

The workshop opened with an overview presentation by project coordinator Alan Duncan.

He introduced the goal of the project: to improve the livelihoods of poor livestock keepers through increased access to, and adoption of, fodder.

According to Duncan, the ‘heart’ of the project is the ‘smallholder livestock enterprise’ – with a main focus on feed inputs. This involves different types of interventions targeted to technical, organizational, and policy issues.

The central questions of the research are: Why does innovation occur so slowly in the livestock/fodder sector, and what can be done to accelerate innovation in this area?

The project has concentrated on three main areas: innovation, scale, and markets:

Duncan argues that innovation is not something we impose. Rather, systems are always changing, and innovation is a natural state: “farmers”, he noted “are naturally innovative individuals.” Since innovation and ideas can come from many directions or sources, enhancing innovation means building capacity for change (at community level, among different actors in innovation systems, though knowledge management).

In reality, this has required that project participants take an “actor oriented approach” that balances three activities: Addressing technology gaps through research, building capacities for innovation among the different actors, and facilitating multi-actor platforms where different people come together to make change happen.

Scale means “taking small scale pockets of success and working out ways of scaling them up and out.” The key to being able to scape up and out, according to Duncan, is to work at multiple scales, connecting them together. Thus the different countries have worked at the micro level (site level, likely to be technical interventions), the meso level (district level, likely to be institutional interventions), and at the macro level (provincial, national, international, likely to be policy interventions). When scaling up and out, he added “it’s a case of using local pockets of technical success as engines of change” at the system level.

Questions and discussion focused on ways the project handles the balance between technology push and market demand, the sequencing of activities, ‘who’ articulates the challenges that such innovation systems or platforms will address, and how the lessons of such research feed into larger-scale development interventions.

According to Duncan, the wider scaling out issues only come into play when the project has a technology that works; or as Werner Stür put it: “The question still is how you get something started.” Adds Duncan: “the real challenges are to scale out the innovation processes rather than the technologies themselves.”

More on the project:

The Fodder Adoption Project is drawing to a close at the end of 2010. Next week (15-19 Nov, 2010) we will hold our final co-ordination meeting in Laos PDR to review research findings and draw out some lessons. Some 30 participants from around the world will participate. As well as reviewing FAP we have also arranged a mini-symposium on “Feed in Smallholder Systems” where we will consider livestock feeding issues in smallholder systems and what some of the constraints are to enhancing feed availability, market orientation and livelihoods among poor livestock keepers.

Details of the programme are here: Laos meeting programme

We will be using the blog to report on what is discussed at the meeting including posting of presentations, video clips and reflections from participants. Please feel free to comment on any postings so that your views can also be added to the mix. We will keep posting on this blog beyond the end of FAP on issues related to feed in smallholder systems.

Watch this space…

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.