Innt teeggrraateedd yBBiiooeeccoonnoommyy SSysstteemm F ...
Transcript of Innt teeggrraateedd yBBiiooeeccoonnoommyy SSysstteemm F ...
IInntteeggrraatteedd BBiiooeeccoonnoommyy SSyysstteemm
FFoorr LLiivveelliihhoooodd IImmpprroovveemmeenntt aanndd
CClliimmaattee CChhaannggee AAddaappttaattiioonn
iinn EEtthhiiooppiiaa
November, 2011
Bio-Economy Africa and the Integrated
Bioeconomy System
Aims and Objectives,
with a Case Study of Community Empowerment and
Impact Assessment in Benishangul Gumuz Regional State
3
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 1 Background ..................................................................................................................................... 2 Bio-Economy Africa, BEA ............................................................................................................. 4 The Integrated Bioeconomy System (IBS) ...................................................................................... 5 Implementation of the IBS approach; the importance of entry points ............................................. 6 The IBS approach; scaling up and scaling out ................................................................................ 8 BEA/IBS system development; Learning from the Past, Preparing for the Future ......................... 9 Background to the Study Area ...................................................................................................... 10 Conceptual framework for the Impact Assessment (opportunities and challenges for BGRS) ..... 12 Objectives of the Assessment Work .............................................................................................. 14 Preliminary Assessment Report .................................................................................................... 14
Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 14
Methods............................................................................................................................... 14
Data collection ................................................................................................................ 14
Analysis and interpretation ............................................................................................. 15
Results ................................................................................................................................. 16
Demographic and basic agricultural practice data .......................................................... 16
Income change ................................................................................................................ 18
Evidence for improvements in agricultural practice ....................................................... 19
Farmers‟ perceptions of improvements ........................................................................... 20
Long-term prospects ....................................................................................................... 20
The economics of IBS training ....................................................................................... 21
Discussion ........................................................................................................................... 22
Direct and immediate benefits ........................................................................................ 22
Long-term prospects ....................................................................................................... 23
Environmental and social benefits .................................................................................. 23
Cost-benefit balance ........................................................................................................ 23
Further work ........................................................................................................................ 24
Summary ............................................................................................................................. 24
Acronyms
BGRS Benishangul Gumuz Regional state
BEA Bioeconomy Africa
IBS Integrated Bioeconomy System
FTC Farmer Training Centers
ATVETC Agricultural Training and Vocational Education
Center
FGD Focus Group Discussion
TOT Training of trainers
IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development
PASDEP Plan for Accelerated and Sustainable Development to End
Poverty
Executive Summary
This report is divided into two parts. The first gives an overview of the origins and objectives of
Bio-Economy Africa (BEA) and of the Integrated Bioeconomy System (IBS) developed for
farmer training. The second part of the Report provides a quantitative analysis of one of
BEA/IBS‟s farmer training programmes in Ethiopia.
The objectives and scope of Bio-Economy Africa‟s (BEA) Integrated Bioeconomy System (IBS)
are presented. BEA aims to integrate and thus maximize social, economic and ecological capital
through capacity development, education, technological innovation, research, monitoring and
evaluation. IBS farmer training is designed to develop the capacity of poor rural farmers and
enable them to enhance their productivity, improve their livelihood, diversify their economic
base/activities, generate increased incomes, wisely and sustainably utilize natural resources and
protect the environment. IBS training and education therefore focuses on sustainable agricultural
efficiency, conservation and restoration, sensitivity to gender and age, entrepreneurship, problem-
solving, and the promotion of an holistic rather than narrowly-directed approach.
The preliminary report on IBS activities in the Benishangul Gumuz Regional State provides an
introduction to the BEA and IBS in that Region. A set of 200 farmers, chosen randomly from
among 500 trained in 2009 and 2010 at BEA facilities in Assosa and Addis Ababa, were
interviewed using standardised questionnaires before and after training in order to assess the
effectiveness of the training in terms of economic, environmental and social parameters. This
initial examination of the results reveals the following:
After correction for national inflation, training improved monthly income by an
average of 102.6% (i.e. slightly more than a doubling). Figures were similar for male
and female farmers, who constituted 78% and 22% of the sample, respectively.
The financial benefit accrued by each individual farmer in the first year after being
trained is equivalent to 245% of the specific cost involved in their training (i.e. a net
financial benefit of 145%), a figure that is likely to increase year-on-year.
„Horizontal‟ knowledge transfer has resulted in the indirect training of many times
more farmers than the 500 originally trained, with a currently unquantified impact on
productivity.
This report is necessarily brief and is designed to highlight the most important results from the
questionnaire data. Many of these data consist of discursive responses that do not readily lend
themselves to rapid quantitative analysis. Further interrogation will reveal more information and
provide greater insights into the effectiveness of IBS training. In particular, future work will
focus on social factors that may affect livelihoods, and the extent to which variable uptake of the
full range of IBS techniques influences its overall impact.
2
Background
The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) can be stated briefly as follows:
1. Eradication of extreme poverty and hunger
2. Provision of universal primary education
3. Promotion of gender equality and the empowerment of women
4. Reduction of child mortality
5. Improvement of maternal health
6. Reduction of HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases
7. Promotion of environmental sustainability and
8. Promotion of global partnerships for development.
Clearly the MDGs are destinations without a route map, and each country and region is
developing its own approach to these desirable objectives. Progress on some fronts has been
significant (e.g. in HIV and malaria reduction); on others it has been slow or even non-existent
(e.g. extreme poverty and hunger reduction); whilst on others still it could be argued that the
situation is worse now than it was before (e.g. environmental sustainability). The absence of a
very clear route map to the MDGs may help to explain this patchy progress. In one sense, unless
all the MDGs are achieved (or, at least, equal progress is made on all fronts) then none of them
has been achieved. Reducing HIV in an environment which is increasingly unsustainable is like
winning a noble battle, but in a lost war. Clearly we do not need to re-define the MDGs but we
should perhaps be more critical of the ways we have set about achieving them. The need for a
route map is clear, but the map should be a single map to all the MDGs, not a series of highways
to only a few of them. This requires an holistic approach to development, and such an approach
has been evolved in recent years in Ethiopia.
Ethiopia is a country historically beset with droughts and famines, the problems of which were
compounded by civil and international strife, and a doubling of population size in the last 20
years. Despite these significant problems, Ethiopia has shown remarkable progress in recent
years, amongst which has been a quiet revolution in addressing the pressing MDG of hunger and
poverty alleviation within an holistic system that addresses virtually all other MDGs at the same
time.
BioEconomy Africa (BEA) is an Ethiopian NGO that has, in the last 30 years, gradually put
together an Integrated Bioeconomy System (IBS) that begins with training subsistence farmers
during short intensive periods on one of several IBS biofarms now scattered across the country in
different agro-ecological zones. The key to the IBS system is to re-cycle as much energy as
possible, in ecologically friendly ways, whilst minimizing external inputs in the form of chemical
fertilizers and pesticides. On-biofarm training of farmers increases their skills and knowledge
base, and they return home to achieve remarkable increases in crop yields, and also committed to
sharing their experience by each training 10 more farmers within their local communities. To
date 30,000 farmers have been trained directly and IBS skills have therefore now spread to up to
300,000 families across the country.
3
Key elements of the IBS training are instruction in the following:
1. Crop production
2. Livestock production
3. Integrated pest management
4. Alternative energy through biogas production
5. Compost production and use
6. Soil and water conservation and irrigation
7. Tree farming and agro-forestry
8. Poultry
9. Apiculture (bee-keeping)
10. Sericulture (silk production)
11. Health education and intervention
12. Entrepreneurship/marketing
Training is carried out with an emphasis on both integration of each activity into a sustainable
whole and on adaptive management, which means responding flexibly to situations as they
change. Whilst making farmers more independent of external inputs, BEA/IBS training also
results in fewer pressures on natural resources (e.g. a reduction in cutting down trees for
firewood); an improvement in soil fertility, soil structure and the ability of soils to retain moisture;
a reduction in human and animal health hazards through waste re-cycling and use in biogas units;
and diversification of farm income sources through bee-keeping, silk production etc..
Collectively, these increase the sustainability of farming activities, and increase farm income,
thereby improving the resilience of the farmers‟ ways of life, something that is essential for food-
producers faced with the uncertainty of the impacts of future climate change on natural
environments. Whilst it is not possible to predict the exact degree and distribution of future
changes in global temperatures and rainfall, any changes are best overcome by systems that are
more rather than less resilient to natural variation in climates. The BEA/IBS training provides the
sorts of instruction and experience to increase farmers‟ resilience to natural climate variability.
This document gives some of the background to the BEA/IBS experience within Ethiopia and
then addresses key issues that are raised by the success of BEA/IBS activities so far.
1) To what extent can the experience of the BEA/IBS bio-farms now operating within
different agro-ecological zones of Ethiopia be applied to much larger areas within
Ethiopia (the „scaling up‟ problem)?
2) To what extent can the Ethiopian experience be applied to other countries of Africa and
beyond (the „scaling out‟ problem)?
3) What are the best ways to measure the full extent of the impact of BEA/IBS training on
agricultural production in particular and on the social, economic and ecological
dimensions of development in general?
These key issues are explored in this document by describing in some detail the BEA/IBS
philosophy, approach and achievements to date and by giving a case study example of BEA/IBS
activities in the Benishangul Gumuz Region of Ethiopia, with a preliminary analysis of farmer
questionnaire data collected before and after farmer training. These allow us to examine within a
quantitative framework the considerable benefits of bio-farm training and to show that it amply
deserves the label of „better practice‟, and possibly even „a route map to achieving the MDG
goals‟.
4
Bio-Economy Africa, BEA
Bio-Economy Africa (BEA), formerly known as the Bio-Economy Association, is a non-
governmental, secular, non profit-making organization legally established in 2003. BEA
envisages seeing Africa in general and Ethiopia in particular emerge as a green, peaceful,
prosperous trading region/nation, evolving through innovative knowledge-based progress. BEA
adopts a science-based approach to capacity development which builds Social, Economic and
Ecological capital at household and community levels. The specific objectives of BEA include:
Capacity development of the community and its institutions through the provision of
practical and problem-solving bioeconomy training, resulting in sustainable human,
animal, plant and environmental health improvement,
Recognition and promotion of the importance of gender, implementing specific women-
only projects where appropriate,
Targeting critical human health issues (HIV/AIDS, family planning and blindness)
through education and awareness,
Transfer of innovative and proven technologies focusing on biogas and organic fertilizer
production & utilization, food security, soil fertility, water conservation, solid waste
management and composting, income generation, job creation and environmental
rehabilitation,
Development of practical, interactive and dynamic learning and experience-sharing
programs based on the IBS model,
Promotion and implementation of integrated pest and vector management,
Establishment of high quality and rigorous monitoring and backstopping systems,
Problem analysis and livelihood monitoring,
Dissemination of techniques for cutting, dressing and preparing stone, where available
(e.g. Mekele), for engineering purposes,
Promotion of marketing and entrepreneurship (through the promotion of market-oriented
agri-business activities),
Promotion and facilitation of farmer-to-farmer training through Farmers' Academies, and
Development of efficient monitoring, evaluation, operational research and innovation
approaches through the BEA/Yeha B.Sc., M.Sc. and PhD programs.
These strategic objectives of BEA are in line with those of IFAD which focus on addressing poor
rural communities (women and men and youth groups) to empower them to reduce poverty,
achieve higher incomes and improve food security.
Unlike many organizations that use linear (sometimes called „silo-based‟) approaches to mitigate
individual socio-economic and environmental problems, BEA adopts integrated and holistic
approaches that address many problems simultaneously. These approaches are people-centred
and therefore demand-driven, where the target community assumes leadership and ownership.
They focus on both indigenous and experimental scientific knowledge applied through hands-on
interactive training resulting in integrated capacity development that strengthens the Social,
Economic and Ecological capital of societies.
BEA research has developed and validated different technologies for energy and organic
fertilizer/compost production and utilization, food production and income generation, soil
fertility, environmental protection and ecological restoration. It has promoted and transferred
technologies, skills and production techniques that address the problems of food insecurity in
Ethiopia and in other East, West, Central and Southern African countries and that offer solutions
to some of the anticipated problems of climate change.
5
The Integrated Bioeconomy System (IBS)
BEA developed an integrated bio-economy system (IBS) which is a science-led, nature-based,
demand/community-driven holistic approach designed to improve livelihoods, incomes and
assets whilst at the same time restore degraded environments and preserve and enhance
biodiversity. It does this by improving agricultural outputs (food crops, organic vegetables, dairy
products, meat and eggs, honey, silk, etc.) for direct consumption and income generation by the
local community whilst, at the same time, minimizing external inputs (e.g. scarce water, or
chemically-based fertilizers). Sometimes these apparently competing requirements are met with a
single solution. For example, the production of biogas and fertilizer in biogas digesters of human
and animal waste not only improves productivity in the absence of chemical fertilizers but has
additional benefits (biogas is used for both cooking and lighting) that both reduce the human
impact on the local environment (fewer trees are cut down for fuel-wood) and improve human
health (less waste around homes reduces nuisance flies that transmit diseases).
The IBS capacity development system builds Social, Economic and Ecological capital at
household and community level, shown diagrammatically below.
IBS has tested many different technologies including biogas, solar panels, organic fertilizers,
biointensive production techniques, and water harvest and utilization techniques, hydroponics,
modern beekeeping, botanicals, vermiculture, viticulture, sericulture, horticulture, mushroom
production, Spirulina production and integrated pest and vector control management. IBS can
therefore play an important role in reducing vulnerability to food insecurity and diseases,
increasing the resilience of the agricultural systems and buffering rural poor households (farmers
and pastoralist communities) against risks posed by climate change.
One of the possible impacts of climate change is to reduce the social, economic and ecological
capital of societies, thereby reducing society‟s resilience to natural climatic variation (this
EEccoo--ssoocciiaall SSyysstteemm SSuussttaaiinnaabbiilliittyy && EEnnhhaanncceemmeenntt iinn tthhrreeee DDiimmeennssiioonnss
((GGooooddllaanndd,, 11999955))
Economic dimension
Social dimension
Ecological dimension
6
resilience indicated by the areas of overlap, coloured green in the diagram below). The IBS
approach potentially provides adaptation and mitigation mechanisms that maintain and enhance
societal resilience, both now and into the future.
External and mitigation effects on the integration of social, economic and ecological capital.
The BEA/IBS centres established to date in Ethiopia are exploring how to develop these
adaptation and mitigation mechanisms within four main agro-ecological zones:
A. Arid-dry land zone
B. Wetland zone
C. Highland watershed zone
D. Lowland tropical disease-infested zone.
Implementation of the IBS approach; the importance of entry
points
IBS is a collection of approaches, techniques and expertise which fall under the following six
headings:
1. Alternative Energy (use of biogas and solar panels) and composting/organic fertilizer
production
2. Soil and Water,
3. Food and Fibre,
4. Health (Human, Animal, Plant and Environmental Health - the 4H-paradigm)
5. Environment/sanitation and
6. Economic-Social subsystems.
7
Involving local communities in IBS programs is a two-way process. The community knows its
own problems and can therefore articulate them better than any other body. The initial dialogue
between the local community and IBS seeks to identify a problem of major concern to the
community that might be addressed under one of the above headings and this becomes the „entry
point‟ for the IBS approach being adopted by that community. Entry points obviously vary; in
one place it might be the lack of water throughout the cultivation cycle, in another a debilitating
disease such as malaria, and the following provides a concrete example of the application of this
entry point approach.
In many highlands regions of Ethiopia tsetse-transmitted trypanosomiasis prevents the keeping of
domestic animals such as oxen that are an essential ingredient in the traditional agricultural
systems of that country. Hence tsetse have been the entry point in a number of IBS projects to
date, particularly in the west and south. Over the last ten years BEA/IBS, in collaboration with
international partners from ICIPE and Biovision, have developed a community-based adaptive
management system for tsetse, illustrated below (from Sciarreta et al., 2005; Tikubet et al., 2006).
Briefly an initial widespread system of tsetse traps is sampled to establish the local distribution of
tsetse flies in the area. Thereafter a series of control traps is maintained and moved periodically
to areas of greatest tsetse abundance, thereby achieving the greatest impact, whilst a series of
fixed monitoring traps measures the remaining fly population.
The results of the adaptive management approach are shown below, in terms of fly numbers and
disease prevalence. Decreasing levels of disease resulted in increased productivity of the cattle
populations in terms of calving rates and milk yields.
8
Trends in bi-weekly tsetse fly catches in odour-baited monitoring traps (pale bars and solid line, expressed in
log[(catches per trap and day)+1]) and occasional recordings of trypanosomiasis prevalence (dark bars and
dashed line, expressed as proportion of examined cattle). Data from:- months 1-30: Rowlands et al. (2000)
in the Ghibe valley, near Luke, south-western Ethiopia (tsetse catches) and Gurage zonal administration
(disease prevalence); months 30-80: Herren et al., 2004 (ICIPE ‘BioVillage project, Luke); after month 80:
Baumgärnter et al., 2003; Sciarretta et al., 2005 (ICIPE adaptive management project in Luke). ICIPE =
International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology, Nairobi.
The IBS approach; scaling up and scaling out
The great success of the IBS system has captured the attention and enthusiasm of a wide variety
of visitors to the IBS foundation site in Addis Ababa, including Ministers within Ethiopia,
national and international NGOs, Ambassadors and members of international agencies such as
WHO, FAO and UNDP. This year, for example, the IBS site was uniquely selected for a visit by
HE Ban Ki Moon, Secretary General of the UN, who said that he wished to see the principles and
practices of BEA/IBS developed within the region, and spread to other countries. These
initiatives have already begun. Through the commitment of the Ambassador to Ethiopia,
Mozambique has already established its first IBS site. IFAD brought about the establishment of
the first IBS site in Côte d‟Ivoire; and, most recently, the Minister of Agriculture in the
Democratic Republic of the Congo has enthusiastically facilitated the establishment of a BEA/IBS
presence in the DRC. Developments in both Côte d‟Ivoire and the DRC are receiving strong
support from UNDP.
IBS has also been recommended as the way forward to sustainable agricultural development in
Africa at an international organic agriculture training course in Makerere University in Uganda,
run in partnership with Boku University in Austria and the BioVision Foundation of Switzerland,
9
a long-established and dedicated BEA supporter. At the 10th anniversary of the establishment by
the African Union (AU) of the Pan-African Tsetse and Trypanosomiasis Eradication Campaign
(PATTEC), held in Kampala in July 2010, 28 African countries passed a resolution to adopt the
IBS approach for the land-use component of the PATTEC programme. Land newly freed of the
tsetse menace can be put to productive use quickly and sustainably using the BEA/IBS approach.
BEA/IBS system development; Learning from the Past, Preparing
for the Future
Undoubtedly the major actors in all of the BEA/IBS developments to the present time are the
farmers – both male and female – who struggle under what many would regard as impossible
situations to feed their families and the nation. The enthusiasm of farmers for new knowledge,
new techniques, new and appropriate technologies is both exciting and humbling. Why have
national and international agencies taken so long to deliver to the grass roots the means whereby
agricultural productivity can be so dramatically increased?
BEA/IBS is not content to rest on its current successes and is aware that expansion to new sites
and new countries brings with it whole sets of new problems. In the next 10 years BEA seeks to
do the following:
Improve the technical and human capacity of the IBS Model Biofarms
Provide new training and demonstration on IBS sites
Provide improved and enhanced backstopping services to trained beneficiaries
Improve compost and biogas production and distribution
Consolidate further on the vector (tsetse, ticks, mosquitoes) management projects
Provide health services (e.g. reproductive health and cataract surgery)
Develop new nurseries at IBS Biofarm sites
Develop a Master Farmer training system, and a set of Master Farmer Academies
Provide increased and appropriate support for disadvantaged groups (unemployed
youth, single-parent families, women fuel-wood carriers etc.)
Develop micro-credit facilities for farmers to incorporate IBS ideas more quickly
Investigate small-scale on-farm processing to keep added-value within the farming
community
Launch a farmer-driven MSc and PhD program whereby students are given research
problems by farmers who face such problems on a day-to-day basis; scientifically-
determined solutions to those problems go straight back to the farming community.
Develop innovative ways of making IBS Biofarming self-sustaining through income
generation, for example through on-biofarm sales, or seed production and sales.
Extension of BEA/IBS activities to other countries.
These are exciting challenges for the future that will require new ideas, new techniques, new
approaches, new expertise and continuing support from the national and international
communities. Collectively they address many of the MDG challenges.
10
Background to the Study Area
Benishangul Gumuz Regional State (BGRS) is one of the regional states of the Federal
Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, some 660Km North West of Addis Ababa. It stretches between
9O 35''N and 11
O 39''N latitude and between 34
O 20''E to 36
O 30'' E longitude. The region has an
international boundary with Sudan to the west and is bordered by the Amhara region in the north
and northeast, Oromiya in the southeast and Gambella in the south.
BGRS is situated between the catchments of the Blue Nile and Baro Akobo rivers. The total land
mass of the region is approximately 50,380 km2 and ranges in altitude from about 580 to 2731
masl. There are a few mountains and gorges created by the Abay river and its major tributaries
including the rivers Dabus, Dedesa and Beles, but most of the region consists of lowlands and
plains with altitudes ranging from 1000m in Pawe to about 600m near the Ethio-Sudan border.
Annual rainfall varies considerably from year to year and also across the region, from 800 to 2000
mm, and occurs between May and October with a peak in August. The temperature reaches a
daily maximum of 200C to 25
0C in the rainy season and rises to 35
0C to 40
0C in the dry season.
The hottest period is from February to April. The minimum daily temperatures range from 120C
to 200C, depending on season and altitude.
Administratively, BGRS is divided into three zones and twenty woredas, two of which (Pawe and
Mao-Komo) are designated as special woredas based on their ethnic uniformity.
According to the 2007 census the total population of the Region is 670,847, 50.72% male and
49.28% female. 85.4% of people live in rural areas and 14.6% in urban areas. There are five
indigenous ethno-linguistic groups: Berta (26.7%), Gumuz (23.4%), Shinasha (7.0%), Mao
11
(0.6%) and Komo (0.2%). Significant numbers of Amhara (22.2%), Oromo (12.8%) and others
(7.1%) also reside in the region (BGRS, 2003).
The major part of the region is still covered by natural vegetation, especially bamboo thickets,
which are able to grow in areas where soil fertility is low, broad leaved species-rich deciduous
woodlands and acacia woodlands. Recent surveys suggest land coverage of 64.5% shrub, 9.82%
tropical bamboo, 6.5% cultivated land, 3.28% grassland, 2.26% woodland, 2% rock and 1.6%
forest (BGRS BOARD, 2009 ). Of the total gross potential of 911,876 ha of cultivable land, only
33% is currently cultivated.
The region is rich in mineral resources that are used for industrial and construction purpose and
has a large untapped potential for natural tourism because of its diverse flora and fauna.
Agro-ecologically the region is divided into Kolla (about 75% (lowlands below 1500 masl)),
Woina Dega (about 24% (midlands between 1,500-2,500 masl)) and Dega (about 1% (highland
above 2500 masl)).
The mainstays of the economy are agriculture, hunting, gathering wild food and fishing, providing
69% of the income of the population. The remainder comes from a variety of activities including
livestock-raising, honey production and collection, traditional gold mining, handicrafts, petty
trade, charcoaling, mining, quarrying, forest resource harvesting and marketing.
Major rivers support medium and large irrigation projects; Beles (163,200 ha), Dabus (51,000 ha),
Gilgel Beles (88 ha) and Selga (360 ha) (BGRS, BoA, 2003). About 28 out of 40 other rivers
support small-scale irrigation covering an area of about 1,687 ha. (Merkorewos Hiwet, 2008).
The major crops grown in the region include cereals (sorghum, maize, millet, teff, rice and
wheat), oil crops (Niger seed, groundnuts, rapeseed, flax and sesame), pulses (chickpeas,
soybeans and haricot), fruit (mango, banana, oranges, lemon, yam and bull heart), vegetables
(onion, garlic, cabbages, potatoes, tomatoes, carrot, pepper, pumpkin and anchoret) and spices
(ginger, cardamom, cumin and turmeric). Other cash crops currently grown in small quantities are
coffee and cotton. Coffee is grown on 165ha in three woredas (Wombera, Assosa and Mao
Komo) and yields 7109qt/ha (BGRS, Rural Development Coordination office, 2006). 72% of the
coffee is consumed at home and 28% is sold in local markets.
Most agriculture occurs through a system of shifting cultivation with „virgin‟ land being brought
into the agricultural cycle every two to three years. The cycle is a short one because there is a
rapid decline in productivity due to poor utilisation of technologies and traditional farming
practices. Only 44% of farmers use animal power to plough (the traditional system on the
highlands of Ethiopia), the remainder cultivating land using only hoes (local Palle) (BGRS,
2005).
There are 88 Farmer Training Centres (FTC) in the region (Regional BOARD, 2009) and most
woredas each have 2-4 FTCs. Despite this, very few farmers are involved with the agricultural
extension services and are therefore able to make use of access to agricultural advice and credit
facilities. Agricultural markets are weak, with no institutions to support and facilitate either
agricultural production or marketing.
12
Conceptual framework for the Impact Assessment (opportunities
and challenges for BGRS)
Despite the huge potential in terms of land availability and regional water resources, crop
production and productivity are both very low. The following are some of the key challenges
which impede production and productivity:
Use of labour-intensive rudimentary farming tools (shifting hoe cultivation
practised by indigenous people),
High prevalence of crop diseases, pests (especially termite) and weeds (especially
Striga), and poor storage facilities resulting in high post-harvest losses,
Poor working culture of the indigenous communities and high work load on women,
High prevalence of human diseases (particularly endemic malaria, which affects
40% of the labour force in a given season),
Degradation and reduction of natural resources such as soil fertility and fuel-wood,
Poor rural infrastructures (especially roads and markets),
Lack of market infrastructure and credit facilities,
Erratic nature and variability of rainfall,
Poor extension services and inequity in distribution of existing manpower,
Subsistence nature of production or a low share of commercial production.
Due to the combined effects of these problems, the people in the region - especially the
indigenous populations - suffer from food deficit both in quantity and quality.
The Region‟s great potential for livestock production is not currently achieved because of animal
trypanosomiasis (locally known as “Gendi”)1. Trypanosomiasis control is a top priority in BGRS.
According to an ethno-veterinary survey of June 2004, the relative mean herd incidence of
trypanosomiasis in the year 2003 was 33% and mean herd mortality due to this disease was 22%.
The depletion of basic assets of livestock is leading households to extreme poverty and
vulnerability; the same surveys showed an estimated annual total mortality of 46% of cattle and
38% of sheep and goats. Those animals that survive direct mortality give reduced yields, are less
able to be used for draught purposes, and have low market value. Indigenous people who for
centuries practised land preparation using oxen are forced to turn to direct use of hoes.
The effects of animal diseases are further exacerbated by the shortage of drugs, vaccines and
equipment for their prevention and control, and by the costs of each even when they are available.
Money spent on an animal that eventually dies is wasted, along with the asset (the animal) the
drugs or vaccine were meant to protect.
1 Infectious and contagious animal diseases include contagious bovine pleuro-pneumonia (CBPP), contagious
ovine pleuro-pneumonia (COPP), peste des petites ruminants (PRR), lumpy skin disease (LSD), blackleg, anthrax, and
pasteurellosis.
13
Livestock owners in remote and inaccessible areas use the services of traditional healers, mainly
due to their accessibility and low, or no, service fee. This highlights the need to take the service
to the people, which can only be achieved by establishing numerous village centres staffed by one
AHA or AHT.
Although the region planned to achieve 63% of animal health coverage during the Plan for
Accelerated and Sustainable Development to End Poverty (PASDEP) period, the realized animal
health coverage by 2008/09 was only about 49% (Regional BOARD, 2009), demonstrating a wide
gap between planned and achieved targets.
Ethiopia is currently implementing its second PASDEP2. The strategic vision of this plan is one of
rapid and sustained growth primarily through scaled-up investments in social and physical
infrastructures targeted at eliminating the poverty traps that have hindered the development of the
country. PASDEP is based heavily upon the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The main
elements of pastoral/agro-pastoral livelihood and development programs in the PASDEP include:
improving the asset base and reducing the impacts of drought; livestock marketing; veterinary and
livestock feed; water development and environment protection; reduction of natural resource
degradation, and development of infrastructure (PASDEP, 2008). The regional PASDEP includes
a plan to increase the productivity of milk, meat, egg, honey and wax by 9% annually from the
baseline.
Grazing land comprises 3.28% of the Region‟s land area. The main source of animal feed is
communal land and the main type of feed is green fodder (87.82%), followed by crop residues
and hay. Animal feed deficit is a common phenomenon in the region from March to May. Over-
grazing, poor land use management and conversion of grazing land to crop land are all major
factors contributing to the shortage of animal feed.
The BGRS has much untapped potential for grazing. 64.5% of the land area is covered by
shrubland vegetation, implying a large reserve that could be turned over to grazing.
In general, productivity of livestock in the region remains low due to poor management (and high
prevalence) of animal disease and a shortage of proper pasture and water supply. An extensive
veterinary service and improved feeding system both need to be in place in order for the region to
benefit from its present resource potential.
The key challenges of the livestock sector are as follows:
Low animal health coverage and inequity in the distribution of animal health centres among
woredas in the region;
Inadequate and expensive drug and vaccine supplies;
Lack of transport and funds to purchase fuel and drugs to get out to meet with farmers‟
requests;
2 PASDEP built upon the first PRS (SDPRP, the Sustainable Development and Poverty Reduction Program), but
contains several new elements, including an explicit link with the Millennium Development Goals, as well as a new
focus on growth. The PASDEP also includes a specific section on development issues and approaches in pastoral areas
of Ethiopia.
14
Inadequate budgets to provide veterinary health coverage for all livestock requiring it;
Limited training opportunities for professional staff to update their familiarity with new
advances in science and technology. No in-service training has been offered for many years,
and no reference books are provided for use in clinics;
The purchase, by farmers, of illegal/expired drugs from vendors (sometimes including
antibiotics from human disease clinics) to treat their sick animals; and
The continued inclination towards traditional medicines and practices such as superficial
branding, particularly among farmers who live more than 10 km from a clinic. Many
farmers do not understand the value of modern medicines.
Objectives of the Assessment Work
To evaluate the outcome of IBS training
To analyze and determine important factors for the scaling up and scaling out operations
To develop a proto type model for capacity building and knowledge sharing
The Preliminary Report below covers just the first of these three points and is based on an
analysis of data collected before and after IBS training. The second and third points will depend
upon a critical assessment of a series of reports of the following type, derived from assessments in
each of the agro-ecological zones where training is currently taking place.
Preliminary Assessment Report
Introduction
This report describes the methods used to assess the effectiveness of farmer training at BEA
biofarm facilities in Assosa and Addis Ababa. We also present a preliminary analysis of the
resultant large volume of data in order to demonstrate the effectiveness of the IBS training and to
identify areas that require greater attention. Certain aspects of the IBS programme are necessarily
still awaiting direct assessment; further results from existing databases (and further information-
gathering interviews/surveys) will follow this initial appraisal.
Methods
Data collection
Face-to-face interviews based upon standardised questionnaires were made with a randomly
selected subset (n = 200) of 500 farmers that were trained at the BEA biofarm facilities in Assosa
(n = 340) and Addis Ababa (n = 160). Questions were designed to gather quantitative information
on economic, agricultural and social parameters. Interviews were conducted before training and
up to ten months afterwards for the purpose of comparing answers and thereby ascertaining the
effects of training on these key parameters. A sample questionnaire is included in the Annex to
this document. Baseline interviews were carried out between the 14th September and 9
th October
15
2009, and training was given between November 2009 and March 2010. Follow-up interviews
were conducted between the 10th and 27th September 2010.
Analysis and interpretation
All data from questionnaires were entered and organised in Microsoft Excel. Where appropriate,
simple non-parametric statistics were calculated using R statistical software.
We can easily demonstrate a change in farmers‟ absolute income after training, but we also want
to be sure that the training was the cause, rather than some other factor that we have not measured
or considered. A conventional way would be to survey simultaneously an independent group of
farmers that received no training between the two interviews. This would be a classic „control‟
group. Future surveys are likely to include such a group, but this is an expensive and time-
consuming process, and there are other, more indirect methods.
Firstly, we want to assess whether the absolute income increase is due simply to inflation of the
currency. Does the improvement in income represent an improvement in actual buying power, or
simply reflect the changing financial situation? To answer this question, we adjust the final
incomes downwards by the appropriate amount to account for inflation. It should be noted that
the change in value of crops between sampling periods does not affect these statistics, since the
income was typically calculated post-hoc by multiplying the net produce by the current market
value. In other words, inflation of crop price is already accounted for.
Secondly, if we are to assume that any increases in income are attributable to training, we need to
understand how the training might have achieved this postulated improvement – i.e., we will want
to identify a mechanism. To begin to investigate this question, we assess changes in farm
diversity in terms of the numbers of different kinds of vegetables grown, and compare these
figures for each farmer before and after training. We also look at time spent in plot preparation,
as a basic indicator measure of farming efficiency.
A key factor, which cannot be controlled in this design, is the potential for inter-annual variability
in crop yields, which is likely to be present in a consistent manner across the region. In a future,
more detailed version of this report, retrospective data on crop yields (available from the Central
Statistical Authority or the Ministry of Agriculture) will be used to elucidate such inter-annual
patterns and thereby calibrate in a general fashion the results shown in the current survey. Future
survey work will involve the monitoring of regional crop yields in order to compare IBS-
augmented farming profits with those of the region as a whole. A more immediately available
clue to the role of IBS training in observed changes in income comes from the direct questions
addressed to farmers regarding their opinion on the effects that training has had on their
livelihood.
Potential wider benefits of training (i.e. not just immediate income generation) are investigated by
reference to the way in which profits are used by farmers, and the extent to which trainees have
passed on their newly-gained expertise to other farmers in the region. The economic balance
between investment in the training programme and financial outputs in terms of agricultural
produce is assessed by comparing the per-farmer cost of training with immediate financial gains.
Environmental and social benefits (i.e. those without inherent and/or calculable financial value)
are discussed.
16
Results
Demographic and basic agricultural practice data
A large volume of demographic data was produced, the full details of which are beyond the scope
of this preliminary report. The same applies to all aspects of the data; this section will therefore
present only the most salient and immediately interpretable results. Further outputs should be
expected from a more thorough and detailed future analysis.
78%
22%
Male
Female
Figure 1. Gender of farmers interviewed (n = 200).
78% of the farmers interviewed were male (Figure 1), making the survey subset (n = 200)
almost exactly representative of the full group of 500 trained farmers (male = 77.7%).
17
97%
3%Married
Single
83%
17% Literate
Illiterate
Figure 2. Marital status and literacy among male farmers (n = 156).
Figures 2 & 3 show that literacy was higher among male than female farmers (83% vs. 61%).
The frequency of female literacy was significantly lower than that of males (chi-squared test; χ21 =
14.5, P < 0.01).
93%
7%Married
Single
61%
39%
Literate
Illiterate
Figure 3. Marital status and literacy among female farmers (n = 44).
Cereals are the most important crops for the survey group, grown by 96% of male and 98% of
female farmers (Figure 4). Proportions of produce raised by male and female farmers were
similar.
18
0
20
40
60
80
100
Larg
e liv
esto
ck
Pou
ltry
Cere
al
Fruit/ve
getab
le
Nurs
ery
Perc
enta
ge o
f fa
rmers
Male
Female
Figure 4. Agricultural activities of the farmers surveyed, split by gender. Note that percentages are not
mutually exclusive; an individual farmer may raise more than one type of produce.
Income change
After accounting for 3.5% inflation (Central Statistics Office, 2010), mean monthly income
increased after training by an average of 102.6% when all farmers are considered together (Figure
5, which is separated by gender). The difference in median income was highly statistically
significant (Wilcoxon signed-rank test; V = 113, n = 150, P < 0.001). (Note that the sample size
is reduced from 200 to 150 by the presence of 50 interviewees whose income was not recorded
before and/or after training).
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
Before After (with
3.5% infl.)
After (with
7% infl.)
After (with
10% infl.)
Avera
ge m
onth
ly incom
e (
Birr)
Male
Female
Figure 5. Mean income change for male and female farmers after training, accounting for 3.5% inflation.
Results for hypothetical 7% and 10% inflation levels are also shown. Error bars represent 99% confidence
intervals.
When male and female farmers are considered separately, the results are similar (Figure 5). Male
income increased by an average of 104.2%, while female income increased by an average of
96.2%. Both median increases are highly significant (Wilcoxon signed-rank test; male: V = 83, n
19
= 118, P < 0.001; female: V = 3, n = 32, P < 0.001). Whilst male income was greater both before
and after training than the respective values for females, neither median difference is significant
(Wilcoxon rank-sum test; W > 1978, n1 = 118, n2 = 32, P > 0.4).
Evidence for improvements in agricultural practice
As can be inferred from Figure 6, the diversity of crop plants grown was significantly higher after
training (Wilcoxon signed-rank test; V = 605.5, n = 200, P < 0.001). Because the final category is
not a real number („more than 5‟), the mean cannot be calculated, but the median shows an
improvement from „4 kinds‟ to „more than 5‟.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
0 1 2 3 4 5 More
than 5Number of types of vegetables grown
Num
ber
of
farm
ers
Before
After
Figure 6. Change in numbers of vegetables grown by farmers before and after training.
After training, farmers were able to spend less time preparing plots (nearest-integer averages:
before, 30 days; after, 22 days). The data are summarised in Figure 7. The reduction in time was
not large, but it was highly statistically significant, and therefore consistent among farmers. Most
experienced a similar, small reduction in time (Wilcoxon signed-rank test; V = 15016, n = 194, P
< 0.001).
20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0-15 days 16-30 days More than 30 days
Time taken to prepare plots
Fre
quency (
num
ber
of
farm
ers
)
Before
After
Figure 7. Time taken to prepare plots, before and after training, from all respondents (n = 194).
Farmers’ perceptions of improvements
90% of interviewees indicated a perceived improvement in living conditions as a result of the
training. Of these responses, the factors cited in evidence of the improvement are shown in
Figure 8. The most common factor, mentioned by 93% of respondents, was coverage of
household expenditure, i.e. an increase in financial profit available for covering living expenses.
0
20
40
60
80
100
Coverage of household
expenditure
Sending children to
school
Increase in household
assets
Perc
enta
ge o
f fa
rmers
Figure 8. Stated indicators of improvement in living condition among farmers who gave a positive
response when asked if they had experienced such an improvement as a result of training (90% of
interviewees). The factors are not mutually exclusive; i.e. interviewees may list more than one factor.
Long-term prospects
83% of farmers indicated that more than half of their profits would be reinvested in business
diversification.
21
The desired „horizontal‟ spread of information was demonstrated by the number of farmers that
had been indirectly trained by trainees after the programme. The 200 interviewed farmers
collectively indicated that they had trained a further 6870 farmers in their region – an average of
34 each (though see Discussion, below). The potential for such indirect, secondary training to
cause a ripple effect of information transfer is illustrated in Figure 9.
Figure 9. Exponential spread of farm technology is achieved through indirect training by the original
trainees. 200 farmers selected at random from the Assosa training program claimed to have collectively
trained a further 6870 farmers in the region.
The economics of IBS training
The specific cost of training each individual farmer is equivalent to $100 (or approximately Birr
1600 at current exchange rates). Our results indicate that the average monthly income increase
after training was just over Birr 330, which translates as Birr 3967 over the course of a year. The
financial benefit accrued - in the first year - by each individual farmer is therefore equivalent to
245% of the cost involved in their training (i.e. a net financial benefit of 145%; variable exchange
rates make it inappropriate to be more accurate).
22
Discussion
Direct and immediate benefits
The financial benefits that an individual farmer can expect to accrue upon receipt of IBS training
are significant and, apparently, immediate. So far, monthly income of trainee farmers has
increased by an average of 102.6% in rather less than a year since training. It seems also that the
effect of training is not gender-specific, meaning that the potential benefits to male and female
farmers are similarly great. Although the survey design lacks a control group, and thus absolute
statistical robustness (as described more fully in the methods section), we can still be confident
that the income improvements revealed by the survey have resulted from a boom in agricultural
profit that was made possible by the training.
Inflation is ruled out very quickly and easily; the increase in income is so dramatic that we could
specify a hypothetical 30% inflation rate and still obtain a statistically significant result - the
income rise represents a rise in real buying power. The heightened diversity of crops grown and
the consistent reduction in plotting time (and therefore the postulated increase in efficiency)
shown in the results suggest mechanisms by which agricultural profits might have been improved,
though this preliminary survey really only reveals the tip of the iceberg. IBS training has the
potential to strengthen farm businesses not only by maximising diversity and time efficiency, but
also by encouraging economy in resources and space, and by reducing disease burdens in humans
and livestock.
The likelihood that such an agricultural mini-revolution might have come about by chance during
the study period is vanishingly small, but there is always the possibility that fluctuations in
environmental conditions might have caused a regional surge in crop productivity, something that
cannot be detected in the current survey. This is an important caveat – a point that will be
addressed in a more detailed version of this report and in future surveys - but in the meantime we
can nonetheless conclude that farmers themselves feel that it is the training that has catalysed such
a positive transformation in their businesses; 90% of interviewees reported an improvement in
living conditions as a result of IBS training. Such an interview question may evoke a positive
response simply on grounds of politeness, but the fact that 10% of interviewees did not respond
positively suggests that there is no over-whelming cultural propensity for absolute tact and
unreserved gratitude! In other words, we can certainly have confidence that the farmers generally
felt that a direct benefit came from the training.
It must be noted that the short-term nature of this survey means that the results reflect only the
minimum potential benefit likely to result from training. Many farmers admit that they have not
yet had the time or capital necessary to implement all of the new techniques that they have learnt;
technologies such as biogas digesters are expensive and cannot be integrated into a farm business
immediately, but require time, planning and investment. Since 83% of farmers have been
spending more than half of their profits on business diversification, we can safely expect more
and more IBS techniques to be employed as time goes on. We will carry out follow-up surveys in
future years to evaluate the uptake of such techniques.
23
Long-term prospects
Investment of profit in agriculture has already been mentioned. The indirect training of additional
farmers by trainees (so-called „horizontal‟ knowledge transfer) is another powerful means by
which the IBS scheme will contribute to long-term prosperity in rural regions. The figure of 6870
farmers indirectly-trained by the 200 trainees may well reflect a certain degree of exaggeration,
but even if one assumes a rather cynical five-fold over-estimation of such prowess, indirect
training will still spread knowledge almost seven times as far as the direct training.
Environmental and social benefits
The surveys revealed a need to provide guidance on a range of environmental issues that
contribute to ecosystem health and therefore the sustainability of agriculture. These issues
include the management (and positive utilisation) of waste, efficient use of rainwater, and the
creation and application of compost – all key features of the IBS syllabus (see section above;
„Implementation of the IBS Approach‟). Female literacy falls behind that of males in this study;
further work is required to assess how accurately this figure represents the region as a whole, and
therefore the extent to which the problem needs to be addressed. Literacy is a key skill for
farmers wishing to expand their businesses and operate competitively in new markets. A more
detailed treatment of this and other issues is beyond the scope of this preliminary report, but will
follow in due course.
Cost-benefit balance
The aspect by which IBS thrives or fails is that of the cost-benefit balance. Do the outputs of the
system justify the financial inputs? The answer is an emphatic „Yes‟. Simple inspection of the
most directly measurable parameter – increase in farmer income – reveals a benefit to the farmer
equivalent to 245% of the financial investment of their training within the first year. Given that
income enhancement is likely to rise in subsequent years, when farmers have had the time and
capital to invest in the more long-term technologies and techniques (biogas production, apiculture,
etc.), there is every reason to suppose that the return will increase year-on-year. Furthermore, the
brief cost-benefit analysis carried out above did not consider the effects of indirect training of
other farmers in the region. Even in the first year, 245% must be considered an absolute
minimum estimate of investment return; as discussed above and illustrated in Figure 9, the direct
economic benefit accrued in a single year by training a single farmer may in fact be half an order
of magnitude larger.
This 245% figure above excludes two important factors, one of which represents extra benefit,
and one of which represents extra cost. The added value comes from farmer profit in future years,
which is likely to remain at the same gross level (approximately Birr 4000 per annum) or to
improve as each individual farmer assimilates more and more IBS techniques into his or her farm
business (e.g. biogas, apiculture, sericulture). This is profit without further input of specific
training expense. The cost comes in two forms: firstly, the set-up, administration and
maintenance expenses of the training facility; secondly, the cost of back-stopping, support and
monitoring. When more information becomes available, these factors will be incorporated in a
detailed economic report.
It is important to note that whilst „cost‟ in this sense refers to the financial element – the $100
input required to train a farmer, plus the initial and running costs of the system as a whole -
„benefit‟ incorporates more than simply the financial aspect. The environmental and social
24
benefits accrued by educating farmers in the judicious use of resource and by instilling in them an
enlightened approach to family-planning and healthcare provide tangible gains that are
nonetheless difficult to quantify. We are at pains to emphasise those aspects of the training that
promote environmental stewardship and social responsibility.
Further work
This report is necessarily concise. Much of the body of data consists of discursive responses that
do not readily lend themselves to rapid quantitative analysis. Further interrogation of the existing
dataset will reveal more information and provide greater insights into the effectiveness of IBS
training. In particular, future work will focus on social factors that may affect livelihood, and the
extent to which variable uptake of IBS techniques influences its overall impact. Finally, an
appraisal of inter-annual variability in crop yields in the region will be a key factor in all future
studies.
Summary
Responses from 200 farmers who were trained at IBS facilities in Assosa and Addis Ababa were
analysed to determine the effects of training on agricultural practices and measures of economic
status.
After correction for national inflation, training improved average monthly income by an average
of 102.6%. Figures were similar for male and female farmers, who constituted 78% and 22% of
the sample, respectively.
The financial investment involved in training each farmer offers an approximately 145% annual
return within the first year alone, which is likely to increase year-on-year.
IBS training encourages agricultural business diversity and efficiency whilst minimising resource
use.
„Horizontal‟ knowledge transfer has likely resulted in the indirect training of many times more
farmers than the 500 originally trained.