Post-Harvest Technology Commercialization Initiative...

Post-Harvest Technology Commercialization Initiative

Concept Note

Innovations for Agricultural Value Chains in Africa

August 17, 2010

Executive Summary

Meridian Institute is working with diverse partners and experts to explore options for an

initiative to support commercialization and adoption of post-harvest agricultural

technologies to improve smallholder farmer food security and income in sub-Saharan

Africa. This Concept Note describes Meridian’s current draft recommendations.

Meridian is continuing to seek input, in particular from organizations and stakeholders

in Africa, on the proposed Initiative during the second half of 2010.

Based on extensive consultations and analysis of challenges in agricultural technology

commercialization and adoption in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), Meridian is proposing the

creation of a Post-Harvest Technology Commercialization Initiative (Initiative) that

would focus on enhancing existing capacity in SSA to commercialize sustainable and

scalable technologies that benefit smallholder farmers and other agricultural value chain

actors. In particular, the proposed Initiative would:

• Catalyze technology commercialization processes by engaging key partners and

structuring effective product development, commercialization, and adoption

partnerships between technology developers, private sector partners (entrepreneurs,

SMEs, MNCs), sources of financing, and smallholder farmers, processors, and other

value chain actors.

• Strengthen and scale up design and commercialization practices that focus on

technology adoption through early and on-going engagement of relevant

stakeholders across the value chain including but not limited to farmers, product

manufacturers and distributors.

Much important and relevant work is taking place across SSA. The proposed Initiative

would connect existing and new activities, create a hub for assessing promising

technologies and attracting investments, and create a common approach to share

Post-Harvest Technology Commercialization Initiative Concept Note • August 17, 2010 of 16

learning and enhance current design and commercialization practices.1 Although the

Initiative would focus on creating impact in SSA, it would explore strategic

opportunities worldwide (e.g., identifying proven technologies from countries such as

Brazil, India, and China; and looking for global market opportunities to create appealing

value propositions for investors).

The proposed Initiative would consist of the following three structural elements. It

would rely on the capacity of existing organizations in SSA to the greatest extent

possible.

• A Core Team to provide leadership, identify and vet specific technology concepts,

strengthen networks, aggregate and share knowledge, develop a communications

strategy.

• Project Teams to implement projects in areas where the technologies will be

deployed. These teams operate for the duration of specific technology design,

development, and commercialization projects to conduct design and

commercialization activities with local partners and stakeholders.

• Virtual Resources to efficiently link product development partners with various

experts, as needed, in the areas of: design, finance, market analysis, policy, and

gender issues. Virtual Resources would also be used to facilitate knowledge sharing

about effective commercialization and adoption strategies (including lessons from

failures).

Project Background

The recommendations described in this paper are part of Meridian Institute’s

Innovations for Agricultural Value Chains in Africa project (http://merid.org/value-

chain-innovations/), which is funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The initial

purpose of the project was to bring together leading scientists and innovators with key

players in the maize, cassava, and dairy value chains in Africa in order to identify

innovative post-harvest management and processing technologies that would add

significant value for smallholder farmers by reducing inefficiencies in these value chains

in Africa. The successful concept generation process involved interactions among

leading scientists and innovators, African farmers and processors, agricultural experts,

businesses, and government agencies, and resulted in nearly 200 technology ideas.

1 Including Design for Adoption practices that engage manufacturers, distributors, and end users

in the concept generation, prototyping, design, development, and commercialization stages to

create a product with a viable business proposition and impact for smallholder farmers. These

practices would also enhance efforts to understand and mitigate gender inequalities by ensuring

that at critical decision-making points along the commercialization pathway, the impact of

potential technologies are weighed against the potential benefits and consequences to men’s and

women’s time use, income patterns and health and nutrition outcomes.


Meridian and our partners developed concept descriptions for 22 ideas that are

technically feasible, have potential for improving smallholder farmers’ incomes, and

have been reviewed for a full range of issues that are critical for adoption. A subset of

these concepts is now being further developed.

Considering the range of interesting post-harvest technology concepts and the high

transaction costs associated with pursuing them on a project-by-project basis, the

foundation asked Meridian Institute to investigate options for a structure and strategy

for accelerating the commercialization of a broad array of technologies in SSA including,

but not necessarily limited to, innovations developed by participants in the Meridian

project. Since late 2009, Meridian Institute has been working with partner organizations

and a steering committee and soliciting input from a broad range of experts (from more

than 40 different organizations, many based and operating in SSA) to develop the draft

set of recommendations for the Initiative.

Rationale for the Proposed Initiative

Post-harvest losses of crops and livestock products (including milk) that are of crucial

importance to food security and income generation opportunities of smallholder farmers

in Africa continue to be extremely high. For example, currently available data suggests

that 15-30% of maize, 25% of milk, and 50% of bananas and plantains are lost after

harvest. Better post-harvest handling and management practices, infrastructure, as well

as technology and technological innovation can play a significant role in reducing these

post-harvest losses. With the increasing attention focused on and investment in

agricultural development in SSA, in particular investments to improve agricultural

productivity, post-harvest handling and management needs to be improved in order to

reap the full benefits for food security and incomes of smallholder farmers in sub-

Saharan Africa. Reducing post-harvest losses and improving market opportunities will

have a direct impact on smallholder farmers’ food security and incomes.

Furthermore, focusing attention on post-harvest technologies creates the opportunity to

increase investments at points in the value chain where women are concentrated.

Women are widely recognized as important drivers of agricultural development. While

women’s contributions to agricultural production are often highlighted, their inputs into

other activities along the value chain including processing, value addition and post-

harvest handling are often overlooked. Improving access to relevant and well-designed

post-harvest technologies creates opportunities to ease labor- and time- intensive tasks

that women undertake as unpaid family and wage workers. This would create

opportunities for women to spend time on other (income-generating or other) activities

to improve their and their families’ well-being.

Past failures and limited scaling of successful agricultural technology introductions

indicate a need for systemic change in research, design, development, and deployment

of technological solutions to help address the problems of poverty in developing


countries. Challenges are related to a range of factors, including: difficulty coordinating

diverse partners needed to successfully develop and deploy new technologies; market

failures resulting in lack of private sector investment; lack of access to financing; limited

end user engagement in product development; and poor alignment of complementary

roles for public and private sectors.2

Although many good post-harvest management technologies exist, their adoption by

smallholder farmers and other value chain actors has been limited due to a range of

supply and demand side constraints, including: broad diversity of needs and conditions;

limited R&D capacity, resources, institutions; weak agricultural extension systems;

limited engagement of the private sector (local, SMEs, MNCs) and end users in

innovation, manufacturing, and dissemination; poor infrastructure, inappropriate

policies; low profitability of technology innovation; inadequate financial resources; lack

of access to capital; lack of information about markets and impact of available

technologies; lack of

ready markets for

excess production;

and lack of

understanding of end

users needs,

incentives, and

preferences.

Much work is being

done by African

institutions and stakeholders to address these constraints. However, investment in post-

harvest technologies is limited and post-harvest technology commercialization projects

are often conducted as ad-hoc efforts. As a result, adoption of relevant technologies is

limited and significant value continues to be lost as a result of post-harvest losses.

Meridian is proposing a targeted initiative to complement and strengthen existing

activities by focusing on reducing existing bottlenecks in post-harvest technology

commercialization processes. It would focus on addressing the following constraints:

• End users’ needs are not incorporated in product design (i.e., acceptability,

accessibility, affordability, adoptability).

• High transaction costs of finding the right partners – technology developers,

funders/financiers, commercial implementers, and other partners needed to

successfully commercialize technologies.

• Poor alignment of objectives and incentives among partners, including incentives for

private sector engagement and investment.

2 PIPRA, 2010, Getting Better Technologies to the Poor: A Landscape of Commercialization

Challenges & Opportunities; Sara Boettiger and Sarah Alvarez.

Figure 1: Elements of a Technology Commercialization Pathway


• Lack of access to appropriate financing to support and limited planning for market

development and scaling up of technology adoption.

• Lack of knowledge and knowledge sharing to increase the success rate of post-

harvest technology commercialization projects.

Meridian Institute’s current experiences with the development of several post-harvest

technologies demonstrates the large transaction costs of an ad-hoc approach to

technology design, development, and commercialization (i.e., the need to identify

partner organizations, sources of funding, appropriate best practices, etc. from scratch).

Our analysis and consultations suggest opportunities for gaining efficiencies by

connecting multiple projects with similar characteristics, leveraging relevant networks,

and applying and strengthening best practices.

Objectives

The objective for a Post-Harvest Technology Commercialization Initiative is to accelerate

commercialization and increase successful adoption of post-harvest technologies that

can help smallholder farmers increase their incomes by facilitating progress at key steps

along the commercialization pathway. The Initiative would focus on:

• Catalyze technology commercialization processes by engaging key partners and

structure effective product development, commercialization, and adoption

partnerships between technology developers, private sector partners (entrepreneurs,

SMEs, MNCs), sources of financing, and smallholder farmers, processors, and other

value chain actors.

• Strengthen and scale up design and commercialization best practices that focus on

technology adoption through early and on-going engagement of relevant

stakeholders across the value chain including farmers, product manufacturers and

distributors.

• Knowledge generation, documentation, and learning to ensure that best practices are

captured and broadly disseminated and implemented.

Benefits and Value Proposition

Meridian Institute envisions the following benefits resulting from the proposed

Initiative:

Beneficiaries Benefits

Technology Users in Sub-Saharan

Africa – E.g., Smallholder Farmers,

Processors, Transporters, Warehouse

Operators)

• Appropriate and relevant technologies are available and

readily accessible to help reduce post-harvest losses,

increase food security, improve food quality, and

improve nutrition.


• Appropriate and relevant technologies are available and

more easily accessible to facilitate product marketing

and generate income.

Public and Private Sector Investors –

E.g., Foundations, Bilateral

Institutions, Multilateral Institutions,

Banks, Governments, Fund Managers

• African institutions have increased capacity to turn

technology concepts into products that are appropriate,

accessible, and adoptable.

• There is more effective public-private collaboration to

support design, development and commercialization of

post-harvest technologies.

• Investments in post-harvest technologies have greater

impact on smallholder farmers and other value chain

actors in SSA through a robust framework for

technology commercialization and greater ability to take

projects to scale.

• Post-harvest technology design, development,

commercialization, and adoption activities in support of

continent-wide (e.g., Comprehensive Africa Agriculture

Development Programme), regional, and national (e.g.,

Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers) agricultural

development objectives are more effective.

Technical and Commercial Partners –

E.g., Scientists, Companies, National

Agricultural Research Systems, and

Entrepreneurs

• Creation of a focal point for identifying promising

technologies and attracting investments in product

development, manufacturing and distribution capacity.

• An increased pipeline of appropriate post-harvest

technologies and partnership opportunities resulting in

new market opportunities.

• Increased access to finance to support technology

design, development and commercialization.

Activities

The proposed Initiative would focus on the following set of activities to help address

key challenges in commercialization of agricultural technologies in SSA as described

earlier.


Figure 2: Strategic Activities

A: Catalyze relevant technology design and commercialization processes

• Build strong relationships with organizations that can provide information on

technology and innovation needs, opportunities for technologies to improve

value chain efficiencies and improve market linkages for smallholder farmers

(e.g., farmers’ organizations, NGOs, and private sector associations).

• Work with the wide array of institutions and individuals from which technology

concepts might be derived (e.g., universities and polytechnics, companies,

international agricultural research centers, government agencies). This includes

the ability to:

o Identify institutions with existing technologies that could be adapted.

o Engage institutions and individuals that could be sources of new ideas.

o Find complementary technologies, partners and other resources that can

help individuals who are developing technology concepts and

prototypes.

• Support processes that generate new technology concepts, on an as needed basis,

to complement existing technologies.

• Screen technology concepts against a set of criteria to identify appropriate

technologies and build a diverse portfolio of technology concepts that would

appeal to a range of investors.3

3 The Initiative might use the following draft criteria to select technologies and build its portfolio:

income generation potential for smallholder farmers; scalability (i.e., number of smallholder

farmers impacted); geographic reach; needs addressed by the technology; reduction in women’s

time spent on post-harvest or processing activities; improved labor conditions; maintenance or

increase in women’s access to income; return on investment for manufacturer; time to market;

scale of investment.


B: Strengthen and scale up successful design and commercialization processes

• Engage partners and structure partnerships to successfully commercialize post-

harvest technologies, including: end users, “Champions,” financial institutions,

technology developers.4

• Facilitate access to service providers that can assist Champions and other

partners in the commercialization process. The Initiative should provide efficient

access to existing resources and services needed for the successful

commercialization of technologies (e.g., regulatory and policy support, market

analysis, and analysis of adoption requirements).

• Deepen and broaden knowledge about successful design and commercialization

processes. The Initiative would create strong links to practitioners and theorists

to identify, share, and enhance successful design practices and

commercialization approaches as well as share lessons learned from failed

technology introductions. Through its involvement in multiple projects, the

Initiative would create a learning community of practitioners and theorists. The

Initiative could develop communication and outreach tools to expand the use of

best practices.

Organizational Structure

The proposed approach builds on lessons learned from organizations and initiatives that

facilitate technology development and commercialization in developing countries. Some

important organizational principles can be drawn from those lessons. For instance, the

organizational structure should be:

• Operationally lean – operate with small staff with core technical, legal, business,

communication and regulatory expertise.

4 Engagement of stakeholder categories would include:

• End Users: Engage smallholder farmers, processors, and other value chain actors early in the

product design, development, and commercialization process.

• Champions: Identify and engage “champions” (entrepreneurs, SMEs, MNCs) who have the

ability to deploy, manufacture and distribute post-harvest technologies in SSA and have a

financial incentive in commercialization as early as possible in the technology development

process.

• Financial Institutions: Facilitate access to appropriate finance mechanisms depending on the

stage of the product development process (e.g., prototyping and field testing, scale up

manufacturing and distribution) and the need to support technology adoption by end users

(e.g., microfinance).

• Technology Developers: Network with technology developers (e.g., companies, research

organizations, and others that may have existing technologies that could be adapted or could

develop new technology concepts.


• Heavily networked – leverage expert advisors/service providers who can

provide customized expert services to specific projects.

• Geographically relevant – connect to partners with strong community

connections, and to global resources for technology knowledge support and

finance mechanisms.

• Able to manage partnerships and align partnership incentives – includes:

negotiating agreements, technical project management, and partnership

management.

Meridian and its Partners believe that the activities described in the previous section can

be carried out by a combination of the following structural elements: a small Core Team,

Project Teams that exist for the duration of the project (i.e. finite duration) and are based

in different parts of Africa, and Virtual Resources. The intent is to create stability and

continuity while maintaining flexibility to respond to project specific requirements. The

ability to build strong local relationships is, however, critical for long-term sustainability

and success.

The organizational model might look like the following:

Figure 3: Organizational Structure

Project

Team

D

Project

Team A

Project

Team B

Project

Team C

Numerous

post-harvest

technology

concepts

Advisory Committee includes:

• Farmers and other value chain actors

• Private sector

• Technology developers

• African agricultural initiatives

• Funding and finance institutions?

Project teams are based in country to be close to

development, implementation, and adoption partners.

Project teams involve tech developers, users,

Champions, and potentially but not necessarily Core

Team members.

Investor Committee:

• Separate or incorporated in Advisory

Committee?

• Private and public funding institutions

that support the Core Team and may

opt to support specific projects.

Knowledge and Learning –Connecting Project Teams and Researchers

Core

Team

Virtual

Resources

Private funding


It is critically important that the technology commercialization projects are needs-

driven. The Initiative should, therefore, be structured to engage beneficiaries early and

throughout the process to identify (evolving) technology needs and requirements and

evaluate opportunities that could have a positive impact.

The Initiative would solicit a broad array of technology concepts, which would be

narrowed through a rigorous and systematic vetting process (i.e., a “funnel approach”)

using a clear and consistent set of criteria (see above); the vetting process brings a

“stamp of approval” to the concept. Once the technologies are vetted by the Core Team,

they are deemed ready for serious consideration by private sector entity(ies) that would

be responsible for commercialization; initial due diligence would have been done for

private sector entities.

Organizational Elements – Key Responsibilities

Core Team Project Teams Virtual Resources

• Provide leadership.

• Identify and vet specific

technology concepts.

• Build strong networks

with local (business)

leaders and potential

project partners.

• Ensure that lessons

learned are exchanged

between projects and

linked to expert networks.

• Develop an evidence-

based communications

strategy (i.e., to

demonstrate the value of

the Initiative and engage

Champions).

• Help maintain Virtual

Resources, as needed.

• Implement projects in

areas where the

technologies will be

deployed.

• Conduct design and

commercialization

activities with local

partners and stakeholders.

Project Teams are set up for

the duration of specific

technology design,

development, and

commercialization projects.

• Rather than building “in-

house” capacity where it

already readily exists, the

Core Team will connect

Product Development

Partners with experts, as

needed, in the areas of:

design, finance, market

analysis, policy, and

gender issues.

The Core Team could be supported by an Advisory Committee and/or an Investor Committee to

ensure appropriate positioning and linkages with key stakeholders and constituents, including

representation of women’s needs and interests.5

An independent Advisory Committee would provide high level expertise and guidance on the

Initiative’s project portfolio. The Committee would include individuals who could ensure that

5 Each organizational element will be responsible for ensuring that gender commitments are

upheld. This entails initial and ongoing capacity building on gender issues for core and project

teams and the representation of gender issues and women’s needs and interests within the

Advisory Committee.


the Initiative is well aligned with other relevant activities and initiatives. The Advisory

Committee and/or an Investor Committee would provide a mechanism for investors’ to provide

advice and guidance to the Initiative and to engage, as appropriate, in the development of

individual technology concepts.

The Project Teams and the Virtual Resources will rely on existing organizations with significant

relevant expertise.

The Core Team would play a crucial role in strengthening knowledge and learning

about successful design and commercialization processes by: engaging practitioners and

theorists in the design, commercialization, and adoption fields to identify, share, and

enhance successful design practices and commercialization approaches; supporting

Project Teams to implement an efficient process to capture, implement, and share

lessons learned; and building a learning community of practitioners and theorists

supported by communication and outreach tools. These activities would include

engaging partners in other regions ( in particular emerging economies such as Brazil,

China, India) who can share lessons and provide information about potentially relevant

technologies.

The proposed Initiative should include appropriate ways to engage in policy issues and

decisions affecting the enabling environment. In particular, a strong business policy

environment is critical for success. The Initiative will depend on advisors and strong in-

country partners to help it engage with relevant policy issues. Both the Core Team and

Project Teams will play a role in addressing these issues.

Financial Model

A solid financial model is needed that supports the Core Team’s day-to-day operations

and provides sufficient investment to take technology concepts to the point in the

commercialization process where public and private investors will buy into the concept

and support further development and commercialization.

Although the Core Team may not become fully self-sustaining (i.e., it may need some

ongoing funding from foundations and other funders), it may be possible to generate

revenues by charging fees for its services and/or create modest revenue streams from

successful projects.6 However, this needs to be structured carefully in order to maintain

the Core Team’s independence.

Furthermore, the intent is that this Initiative would phase out over time. By supporting

and strengthening existing capacity in SSA, the leadership and knowledge vested in the

6 As illustrated by the diagnostic to detect heat and pregnancy in dairy cows

(http://merid.org/value-chain-innovations/technologies.html) that is under development, some

technologies may have large commercial markets and could generate royalty income,


Core Team would gradually become obsolete as local and regional capacity and

knowledge increases. Meridian thinks that the Initiative’s Strategic Plan should specify a

target date for the Initiative to be phased out (e.g., 10-15 years from its inception).

Meridian envisions the following financial model to create an efficient, low-cost

approach to finance the proposed Initiative. As noted above, the Virtual Resources

would largely rely on existing organizations. The Core Team would require ongoing

funding for project selection and initiation, best practice evaluation and implementation,

communication and other responsibilities, while Project Teams would typically require

an initial subsidy, for instance for R&D and prototyping, that would phase out as the

product proves to be effective and corporate funders step in to take on more risk.

Figure 4: Financial Model

As described in the organizational model, the Initiative could set up an Advisory

Committee and possibly separate Investor Committees that would include donors and

investors. Investor Committees could provide a mechanism for investors to provide

advice and guidance to the Initiative and to engage, as appropriate, in the development

of individual technology concepts.

Pro

ject

Inve

stm

en

t $

R&

D

Pro

toty

pin

g

Be

ta T

est

ing

Co

mm

erc

ializ

ati

on

- Most likely requires grants and other

public/charitable funding to support Core

Team activities, including knowledge

sharing.

- Possibly generate fee-based revenues

and royalty income, depending on the

technology and potential for developed

country markets.

- Explore possibility of a “franchise” model,

which would establish a branded

commercialization process and

supporting resources; individual projects

would pay a fee to use the branded

process and resources.

- Core Team could possibly fade out over

time as capacity, processes, and systems

to support post-harvest technology

commercialization in SSA become more

robust.

Sample Project Funding

Corporate Funding

Grants, Donations, Etc.

Core Team Funding

Partial subsidy


Timeline

Meridian is planning the following activities to further develop this Concept Note and

proposed Initiative:

Figure 5: Timeline

The main objectives of the near-term activities are to seek input and buy-in from key

stakeholders in Africa, identify potential implementation partners, and build support

among potential funders. If there is significant buy-in from key stakeholders,

implementation partners, and funders, the next step would be for a lead institution to

recruit Advisory Committee members, develop a partnership policy, develop a

communications strategy, develop a strategic plan, and lead the organizational start-up

(including determining a location and recruiting staff).

In the mean time, Meridian remains committed to supporting our partners who are

leading the further development of specific technology concepts (e.g., modified plastic

tank for grain and feed storage and drying; milk container with anti-microbial

properties; diagnostics for reproductive health; and milk safety diagnostic) and which

can demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed design, development, commercialization,

and adoption process and the value that a broader Initiative could bring to everyone

with an interest in successful commercialization and adoption of post-harvest

technologies.

Continue development of specific concepts

to create pilot/demo projects

Seek stakeholder input on recommendiatons

for a proposed Initiative*

Identify and engage proposed

implementation partners

Finalize recommendations for distribution to

funders and stakeholders

Submit recommendations to funders and

share w ith stakeholders

Continue to follow up w ith potential funders

and stakeholders

Assess project outcomes and next steps

planned ongoing engagement

milestone

M ar-2011Activity/Tasks Sep-2010 Oct-2010 N o v-2010 D ec-2010 Jan-2011 F eb-2011

* Including: Africa Green Revolution Forum

2010 in Accra, Ghana; Agribusiness Forum

2010 in Kampala, Uganda; and individual


Questions for Input

Meridian Institute is sharing this Concept Note with the broad range of stakeholders the

Initiative is intended to serve. These consultations are aimed to ensure that an Initiative,

should it move forward, receives broad support and provides the greatest possible

value. The following questions are intended to solicit targeted input and strengthen the

proposed approach to account for the risks associated with the proposed Initiative,

including:

• Multiple donors required to establish the Core Teams and Project Teams;

associated burden for attribution of results and reporting;

• Need for a sound financial model that limits the need for ongoing subsidies and

includes the creation of revenue streams from successful projects;

• Establishing a solid Core Team reputation to attract projects, partners, and

finance, especially if not tied to an established and well-regarded institution;

• Developing a structure with broad reach and ability to achieve scale, while being

connected to local conditions and requirements;

• Creating incentives within the organizational structure to create successful

projects and attract and retain quality staff.

To develop a strong set of recommendations that aims to achieve the intended benefits

and limits these and other risks, we will be seeking input on the following set of

questions.

Need

• Would the proposed Initiative provide sufficient value to draw support from the

broad range of stakeholders needed to make the Initiative a success, including:

farmers organizations, companies, African agricultural development initiatives,

African regional and national government institutions, universities, research

institutions, civil society organizations and NGOs?

• If not, what should be different?

Scope

• Should the proposed Initiative start with an explicit focus on post-harvest

technologies or more broadly (i.e., agriculture)?

• Could it be scaled to extend beyond the post-harvest agriculture sector into other

areas of agriculture and even beyond the agriculture sector to, for instance, energy

and health?

Independence

The Core Team should be established as an independent entity and have incentives to

catalyze projects on an ongoing basis and to remain with the Initiative for an extended


period of time.

• How could the Initiative best organize a Core Team of individuals with strong

business acumen, financial skills and the ability to take technologies through a

rigorous product development and commercialization process?

• What are the appropriate incentives (financial and otherwise) for members of the

small Core Team? Should they have “skin in the game” (i.e., benefit personally or

institutionally from successful commercialization of specific technology concepts)?

Or, does that create perverse incentives (e.g., commercialize products that bring

them the greatest financial return, not the largest benefit to smallholder farmers)?

Location and Scale

• Should the Core Team be set up as a collocated entity? Or, should the Core Team be

a virtual team?

• Where should the Core Team be located? Should it be based in Africa in order to be a

credible African initiative or should it be located in the USA or Europe to be close to

sources of funding and sources of innovation)?

• Given the need to build credibility and deep local networks, could the small Core

Team realistically be set up to reach key geographic regions in sub-Saharan Africa?

Partners

• Which organizations have strong relevant experience and expertise and could be

part of an Initiative? Some of the expertise needed includes:

� Experts in building partnerships for agricultural technology commercialization

in African agriculture

� Entities with good overviews of and access to funding/finance mechanisms

� Organizations that have strong relationships with local companies and

entrepreneurs that could play a role in post-harvest technology

commercialization

� Experts in design aimed at developing products that add value for smallholder

farmers.

• Given the range of existing experts, should the Core Team be housed in an existing

institution or set up in a new location in order to achieve independence?

• Should the Initiative set up a separate Advisory Committee and separate Investor

Committee, or should representatives of (Core Team and Project) investors be

included in the Advisory Committee?

• Which organizations or institutions should be included in an Advisory and/or

Investor Committee (including organizations to strengthen the commitment to

gender)?

Financial Model

• What would it cost to set up and operate the Core Team and a typical Project Team?

Note: an initial “order of magnitude” estimate suggested that a USD15 Million over


10 years would be required (i.e., Core Team and operations: $1M/year; Project

Teams: 10 projects at $250,000/project; projects to be leveraged to raise additional

25%/project)

• How likely is it that the Core Team can eventually be supported in part or

completely through revenue from commercializing technologies (i.e., generate

revenues by charging fees for its services and/or create modest revenue streams from

successful projects)? Would this jeopardize the Core Team’s independence?

• If the Core Team will require on-going funding from donors, how will this be

received by donors?

• If the Initiative can demonstrate it is leveraging other resources, will that justify on-

going investment by donors?

• Could the Core Team fade out over time as capacity, processes, and systems to

support technology commercialization in SSA become more robust?

Post-Harvest Technology Commercialization Initiative...

Documents

Transcript of Post-Harvest Technology Commercialization Initiative...