4650 file SEEP AGM Contract Farming panel

Information about 4650 file SEEP AGM Contract Farming panel

Published on December 28, 2007

Author: Nikita

Source: authorstream.com

Content

Contract Farming Integrating Small Farmers into Productive Value Chains :  Contract Farming Integrating Small Farmers into Productive Value Chains SEEP Annual Conference / Oct 2006 What is Contract Farming? :  What is Contract Farming? Contract farming can be defined as an agreement between farmers and companies for the production and supply of agricultural products under forward agreements, frequently at predetermined prices. The arrangement also invariably involves the purchaser in providing a degree of production support through, for example, the supply of inputs and the provision of technical advice. Basis of Arrangements:  Basis of Arrangements Commitment on the part of the farmer to provide a specific commodity in quantities and at quality standards determined by the purchaser Commitment on the part of the company to support the farmer’s production and to purchase the commodity What are the different types of contract farming? :  What are the different types of contract farming? Centralized Model Intermediary Model The centralized model :  The centralized model Involves a centralized company contracting directly with large number of individual farmers Is typically used for high value export crops, tree crops, poultry, and dairy. Products often require a high degree of quality and need to meet international specifications Slide6:  Company Contract Farmer Contract Farmer Contract Farmer Contract Farmer Contract Farmer Centralized Model The intermediary model :  The intermediary model Company contracts with lead farmers (intermediaries) who in turn contract with individual farmers Slide8:  Company Lead Farmer Lead Farmer Lead Farmer Contract Farmers (10-20) Contract Farmers (10-20) Contract Farmers (10-20) Intermediary Model Slide9:  Choice depends on: the product the resources of the company, and the intensity of the relationship between farmer and company that is necessary What are different strategies that companies can use to set purchase prices with contract farmers? :  What are different strategies that companies can use to set purchase prices with contract farmers? Fixed prices Spot market pricing Split pricing Fixed prices :  Fixed prices Price specified in the contract at the beginning of the season Different rates for different grades can be specified Prices determined on spot- market price:  Prices determined on spot- market price Determined by a price fixing committee at specific times after the harvests In many cases the price that is fixed is slightly higher than the market price Split pricing :  Split pricing An agreed base price is paid at the time of purchase Final price is calculated (and paid) once the commodity is sold by the company Slide14:  CONTRACT FARMING APPROACH (from agribusiness company perspective) Ready market/need for targeted product(s) Selection of geographic area Selection of contract farmers Signing of agreements with contract farmers Distribution of inputs Technical assistance + monitoring of production Procurement of production Payment Storage and Shipment Panelist Cases:  Panelist Cases Bill Grant – Tanzania (paprika) Frank Lusby – Bangladesh (groundnuts, chilies, potatoes) Contract Farming Case Study:  Contract Farming Case Study DAI PESA Project What is Paprika?:  What is Paprika? Tanzania Spices Limited, Iringa:  Tanzania Spices Limited, Iringa Spanish buying company established in 2001, based in Iringa Works with smallholder and commercial farmers in Iringa, Mbeya, Tabora, Ruvuma Buys all paprika output for processing in Spain Grade A: Tsh. 1,020/kg Grade B: Tsh. 580/kg Grade C: Tsh. 130/kg High profitability under good management practices Income/ha: 2,000 kgs x Tsh. 850/kg = Tsh. 1.7million Production costs/ha: Tsh. 720,000 Profit/ha: Tsh. 1million DAI PESA Paprika Activities:  DAI PESA Paprika Activities Following subsector study, project activities began in Iringa (October 2003) and Ruvuma (March 2004) Iringa Rural District 9 village level associations (1,415 MSEs - 34% women) Association of Iringa High Quality Farmers Products Company Limited Roles of apex company: marketing, advocacy, address member needs Songea Rural & Namtumbo Districts 19 village level associations (2,707 MSEs – 17% women) 2 apex companies: Association of Songea/Namtumbo High Quality Farmers Products DAI PESA Paprika Activities, Contd.:  DAI PESA Paprika Activities, Contd. Business and technical training: Business awareness, cash management/budgeting, record keeping, SACCOS sensitization Technical training on pre- and post harvest TSL provides training and limited extension services Market linkages All paprika sold to TSL (3 grades) Seeds provided by TSL, initially on credit, now for cash Farmers linked to RPMS (Rural Participatory Microfinance Scheme) to finance inputs, production DP Farmer Association Model, Iringa :  DP Farmer Association Model, Iringa Quantitative Indicators:  Quantitative Indicators In Iringa 1,415 farmers produced 315 tons in 2005 Average yield per farmer: 568kgs/hectare Average income per farmer: Tsh. 403,000/hectare In Ruvuma, 2,707 farmers produced 305 tons in 2005 Average yield per farmer: 348kgs/hectare Average income per farmer: Tsh. 247,000/hectare % of different grades sold (A/B/C) Target: 70/20/10 Achieved 2005: 55/20/25 Well-Maintained Smallholder Farm:  Well-Maintained Smallholder Farm Smallholder Farm, Iringa Poorly-Maintained Smallholder Farm:  Poorly-Maintained Smallholder Farm Smallholder Farm, Songea Commercial Farm:  Commercial Farm Selous Farming, Iringa Promotion of Contract Farming in Bangladesh:  Promotion of Contract Farming in Bangladesh Katalyst Project – large market development project in Bangladesh (AFE is subcontractor) After value chain analysis - identified large buyers in three sectors with significant backward linkages to small scale farmers / interest in direct procurement with small-scale farmers Slide28:  Company profiles: Company A – Largest domestic producer/distributor of snack foods (also exports) Company B – Chili based spices for domestic / export market Company C – Potatoes for export All companies interested in expanding local sourcing to reduce imports, control quality/content, develop secured source of production Slide29:  Project worked with company to narrow down products and geographic locations for contract farming production MOUs were signed with companies and project in early 2006 after several months of negotiation Work plans/ implementation Currently in the first season with each crop Company Development of Chili Seeds for CF Operations:  Company Development of Chili Seeds for CF Operations Choosing the best seed:  Choosing the best seed Company reps signing agreement with lead farmers:  Company reps signing agreement with lead farmers Company Orientation with Contract Farmers:  Company Orientation with Contract Farmers What contract farming models were used in the cases? How were operations structured between the companies and the farmers? :  What contract farming models were used in the cases? How were operations structured between the companies and the farmers? What were advantages and disadvantages of these models for the agribusiness companies? :  What were advantages and disadvantages of these models for the agribusiness companies? Advantages and disadvantages of the different models :  Advantages and disadvantages of the different models Centralized model provides greater control over the production process but is more expensive to implement Intermediary model is less expensive and entails less investment and financial risk but ability to control quality and production is less (also difficult to control what goes on with the individual farmers) How were lead farmers or individual contract farmers identified? What criteria were used?:  How were lead farmers or individual contract farmers identified? What criteria were used? Illustrative Selection Criteria for Contract Farmers: Practical experience on the targeted crop Resources to cultivate selected crop Residence in the target area Suitability of land for targeted crop Good reputation in the community Slide40:  Contract farmers must have their own land or acceptable leasing arrangement (not arrangement where farmer must give percentage of production to owner) Not involved with competing companies for targeted crop Have time to devote to contract farming activities What inputs / services were provided or facilitated by the companies to participating farmers? :  What inputs / services were provided or facilitated by the companies to participating farmers? What were the advantages of contract farming for farmers? :  What were the advantages of contract farming for farmers? Advantages for contract farmers: Inputs often supplied by the sponsor Introduces new technology and varieties (resulting in improved yields and income) Enables farmers to learn new skills (that can be also be applied to other crops) Price risk reduced Assured market Opens up new markets which would otherwise be unavailable to small farmers Slide43:  Risk of market failure and production problems Inefficient management from sponsor company or changes in markets can result in manipulation of quotas Sponsoring companies may be unreliable or exploit a monopoly position Staff of sponsoring organizations may be corrupt Farmers may become indebted because of production problems and excessive advances What were the potential risks facing contract farmers? What were the advantages for the agribusiness companies?:  What were the advantages for the agribusiness companies? More consistent quality can be obtained than if purchases were made on the open market More reliable source of supply than with open-market purchases or imports Working with farmers overcomes land constraints Production risk is shared with the contract farmers Contract farming with small farmers can be more politically acceptable than estate farming What were the potential risks for agribusiness companies?:  What were the potential risks for agribusiness companies? Farmers may sell outside the contract Farmers may divert inputs supplied on credit to other purposes, thereby reducing yields Poor management and lack of consultation with farmers may lead to farmer discontent and jeopardize the CF operations Contracted farmers without control of the land may run into problems with landowners that can affect sales to the company What did the development project learn about facilitating contract farming relationships?:  What did the development project learn about facilitating contract farming relationships? Thank-you:  Thank-you Ken Smarzik / Emerging Markets Group [email protected] www.emergingmarketsgroup.com Bill Grant / DAI [email protected] www.dai.com Frank Lusby / Action for Enterprise [email protected] www.actionforenterprise.org

Related presentations


Other presentations created by Nikita

Modems
28. 11. 2007
0 views

Modems

Intro to CMMI
02. 10. 2007
0 views

Intro to CMMI

Mantsch Mazur Tank Insulation
06. 11. 2007
0 views

Mantsch Mazur Tank Insulation

embrapa2
27. 11. 2007
0 views

embrapa2

G050249 00
28. 11. 2007
0 views

G050249 00

csw06 lord
25. 10. 2007
0 views

csw06 lord

AboutCaravaggio
31. 10. 2007
0 views

AboutCaravaggio

THE RENAISSANCE
31. 10. 2007
0 views

THE RENAISSANCE

HeWhoLaughs LastsPlenary
02. 11. 2007
0 views

HeWhoLaughs LastsPlenary

JavaScript UE1
05. 11. 2007
0 views

JavaScript UE1

buchner
05. 11. 2007
0 views

buchner

6 3 Ship Framing System
06. 11. 2007
0 views

6 3 Ship Framing System

NOROVIRUSESpres
07. 11. 2007
0 views

NOROVIRUSESpres

Volkswagen Stiftung
14. 11. 2007
0 views

Volkswagen Stiftung

Trigonometry examples
15. 11. 2007
0 views

Trigonometry examples

Lufthansa
16. 11. 2007
0 views

Lufthansa

pipeline to the pros updated
20. 11. 2007
0 views

pipeline to the pros updated

tango in a nutshell
22. 11. 2007
0 views

tango in a nutshell

en what is turtle f2f
19. 12. 2007
0 views

en what is turtle f2f

Qatar 2005
28. 12. 2007
0 views

Qatar 2005

butterflydance
23. 11. 2007
0 views

butterflydance

H3NPSmall
02. 01. 2008
0 views

H3NPSmall

nano5
02. 01. 2008
0 views

nano5

flex components slides
28. 11. 2007
0 views

flex components slides

jmcmorrow
06. 12. 2007
0 views

jmcmorrow

fishing
07. 01. 2008
0 views

fishing

Dormancy
07. 01. 2008
0 views

Dormancy

TE Tutorial ACL07
31. 10. 2007
0 views

TE Tutorial ACL07

Knots A
25. 10. 2007
0 views

Knots A

Tutorial AOD 100305
29. 10. 2007
0 views

Tutorial AOD 100305

38006461
21. 11. 2007
0 views

38006461

helioseismology
14. 11. 2007
0 views

helioseismology

Knoblock p123
15. 11. 2007
0 views

Knoblock p123

Lt2 BusiPortfoAnalysis
20. 02. 2008
0 views

Lt2 BusiPortfoAnalysis

Guidaversione19 0SistemaDRG
30. 10. 2007
0 views

Guidaversione19 0SistemaDRG

Modern Ideas
24. 02. 2008
0 views

Modern Ideas

Lotrel and Diovan Talk
05. 03. 2008
0 views

Lotrel and Diovan Talk

BusinessBuddyPresent ation
03. 10. 2007
0 views

BusinessBuddyPresent ation

DFASColumbusConferen ce
01. 11. 2007
0 views

DFASColumbusConferen ce

student movement
25. 12. 2007
0 views

student movement

elettivo2006
04. 12. 2007
0 views

elettivo2006

akshaya friends
21. 12. 2007
0 views

akshaya friends

lctpcremarks
27. 03. 2008
0 views

lctpcremarks

AUTNZFuturesDWYER
30. 03. 2008
0 views

AUTNZFuturesDWYER

Lecture24 07
09. 10. 2007
0 views

Lecture24 07

Lesko Homestake Minn
05. 12. 2007
0 views

Lesko Homestake Minn

2005 FX PAL VS
01. 11. 2007
0 views

2005 FX PAL VS

Deadlock 1941
13. 11. 2007
0 views

Deadlock 1941

20070615 POLICY grid
24. 12. 2007
0 views

20070615 POLICY grid

NYU Brownbag
06. 11. 2007
0 views

NYU Brownbag

Meow
05. 11. 2007
0 views

Meow

ahm2004 workflow
14. 12. 2007
0 views

ahm2004 workflow

08Tirpak
07. 11. 2007
0 views

08Tirpak

UNFFOlgas website
26. 11. 2007
0 views

UNFFOlgas website

rtd Jul24 03
30. 11. 2007
0 views

rtd Jul24 03

Princeton Oct05
05. 11. 2007
0 views

Princeton Oct05