Discussion paper 02
Dear RIU,
Please find attached my comments on the article.
Best regards
David
Comments on RIU Paper on Development Relevant Enterprises
We have been informed by some of our development partners that the international donor community continue to see FIPS as being primarily about small packs and not much else. While small packs continues to be a major part of our methodology, over the last few years FIPS has evolved way beyond small packs but the outside world doesn't seem to realise this. We have been advised that we need to begin to counter this view and let people realise just how big and diverse we have become.
I feel that the article does not fully capture our evolved state and may reinforce the small pack image of FIPS. I would encourage a few additions to the text to reflect this.
Some key points that require more emphasis:
As described in the article, farmers are encouraged to experiment with new inputs (seed, fertilizer, agro-chemicals, planting methodologies, soil health interventions). However, they are also trained on HOW TO USE THEM TO BEST EFFECT. Improved seed/fertilizer without proper use will not give the yield increases required.
FIPS employs a multi-technology approach, which both decreases cost of dissemination/uptake per technology but also increases likelihood of adoption. This is because if a farmer has successfully experimented with sweet potato or a chicken vaccine and it has improved their quality of life, they are much more enthusiastic to experiment with additional technologies. This way we would get improved sweet potato, maize, cassava, legumes (beans, cowpea, pigeon pea, dolichos lablab, soya), chicken vaccines, chicken breeds, rabbit breeds etc into a village. In addition to creating demand for inputs, FIPS village advisors also sell agronomic services including contract spraying, cockerel mating, goat mating, soil health and water interventions.
FIPS success (in part) comes from treating farmers as consumers who want to exercise choice and manage risk. This began as choice among maize varieties (from a range of private sector companies), but has now expanded to choice of technologies including maize varieties and also all the other crops, animals and agronomic services. Different farmers in the village will be able to adopt different technologies with maize and fertilizer more easily adopted by the wealthier famers and sweet potato and cassava more easily adopted by the poorest. The small pack approach is totally linked with the need of farmers in Africa (and across the world) to manage their risk. Since the small pack can be planted on a small area of land, the farmer can try out the technology without risking losing money and/or food supply for the next year on something unknown. Once they have seen it perform well (or not) on a small portion of their own land, they are then able to invest in scaling up in successive seasons with incrementally bigger small-ish packs.
FIPS village based advisors are motivated to reach more households in part due to their ability to earn income from selling/ disseminating inputs and services. Thus if a village based advisor earns 2 shillings profit from each chicken vaccinated, they will get 200 shillings from vaccinating 100 birds, but 2000 shillings from vaccinating 1000 birds.
This began as a way to motivate village based advisors, but under RIU we are aiming to turn these young people in the villages into fully self employed entrepreneurs. We believe that our VBAAs can earn more from provision of services and inputs than they earn from FIPS. This is the exciting part of the FIPS Development Relevent Enterprise!
 |
Bottom-up bottom line business models and the role of development-relevant enterprises Authors: Andy Hall, Norman Clark and Andy Frost July 2010 (PDF 610KB) Published as: a UNU-MERIT Discussion Paper |
|
Comments
|
| Comment from | David Priest, FIPS-Africa |
| Date submitted | September 2010 |
Dear RIU,
Please find attached my comments on the article.
Best regards
David
Comments on RIU Paper on Development Relevant Enterprises
We have been informed by some of our development partners that the international donor community continue to see FIPS as being primarily about small packs and not much else. While small packs continues to be a major part of our methodology, over the last few years FIPS has evolved way beyond small packs but the outside world doesn't seem to realise this. We have been advised that we need to begin to counter this view and let people realise just how big and diverse we have become.
I feel that the article does not fully capture our evolved state and may reinforce the small pack image of FIPS. I would encourage a few additions to the text to reflect this.
Some key points that require more emphasis:
As described in the article, farmers are encouraged to experiment with new inputs (seed, fertilizer, agro-chemicals, planting methodologies, soil health interventions). However, they are also trained on HOW TO USE THEM TO BEST EFFECT. Improved seed/fertilizer without proper use will not give the yield increases required.
FIPS employs a multi-technology approach, which both decreases cost of dissemination/uptake per technology but also increases likelihood of adoption. This is because if a farmer has successfully experimented with sweet potato or a chicken vaccine and it has improved their quality of life, they are much more enthusiastic to experiment with additional technologies. This way we would get improved sweet potato, maize, cassava, legumes (beans, cowpea, pigeon pea, dolichos lablab, soya), chicken vaccines, chicken breeds, rabbit breeds etc into a village. In addition to creating demand for inputs, FIPS village advisors also sell agronomic services including contract spraying, cockerel mating, goat mating, soil health and water interventions.
FIPS success (in part) comes from treating farmers as consumers who want to exercise choice and manage risk. This began as choice among maize varieties (from a range of private sector companies), but has now expanded to choice of technologies including maize varieties and also all the other crops, animals and agronomic services. Different farmers in the village will be able to adopt different technologies with maize and fertilizer more easily adopted by the wealthier famers and sweet potato and cassava more easily adopted by the poorest. The small pack approach is totally linked with the need of farmers in Africa (and across the world) to manage their risk. Since the small pack can be planted on a small area of land, the farmer can try out the technology without risking losing money and/or food supply for the next year on something unknown. Once they have seen it perform well (or not) on a small portion of their own land, they are then able to invest in scaling up in successive seasons with incrementally bigger small-ish packs.
FIPS village based advisors are motivated to reach more households in part due to their ability to earn income from selling/ disseminating inputs and services. Thus if a village based advisor earns 2 shillings profit from each chicken vaccinated, they will get 200 shillings from vaccinating 100 birds, but 2000 shillings from vaccinating 1000 birds.
This began as a way to motivate village based advisors, but under RIU we are aiming to turn these young people in the villages into fully self employed entrepreneurs. We believe that our VBAAs can earn more from provision of services and inputs than they earn from FIPS. This is the exciting part of the FIPS Development Relevent Enterprise!
| Nik Wood introduces RIUtv News end of RIU phase 1: Special Report (20:00). RIU highlights newsletter links to the latest items in the RIU website: SUBSCRIBE HERE |  |
