IAG KIT ReDeMePl v 6 by zq1h2e69

VIEWS: 5 PAGES: 23

									Strengthening Women’s Livelihoods through
Collective Action: Market Opportunities in
Smallholder Agriculture

Research Design & Methodology

Bertus Wennink & Thea Hilhorst

International Advisory Group Meeting
28 – 29th June 2010, Oxford
      Outline
      1. Research Steps & Planning (recall)
      2. Resources available for research
      3. Selection of Sub-sectors
      4. Inventory of Collective Action
      5. Gendered mapping of sub-sectors
      6. Survey
      7. Focus Group Discussions & Case studies




Amsterdam, The Netherlands   www.kit.nl
Research steps (as in proposal)
Step 1 Selection of sub-sectors (markets) for in-depth analysis
   –informed by SD; gendered sub-sector and supply chain
   analysis (2010)

Step 2 Primary data collection:
• Analysis of existing forms of collective action; costs and
   benefits for male and female members, and identification of
   gender-specific barriers of access to collective action (2010
   + case studies 2011)
• Assessment of interventions for enabling gender equitable
   collective action to improve market access and bargaining
   power (2011: outcome mapping)
Step 3 Identification of new practices for effective collective
   action of women around market access informed by
   research findings (2011)
Resources available for research
Total budget: $410.000
 •    BMGF: $390.000 (40% of total project budget)
 •    KIT own resources:+/- $30.000

Allocation/division of resources:
• KIT Research team: 23% (132 days in total)
• Country research teams 49% : ( 2 pp/country each team
   has 210 days in total) –about 50 already used
• Travel budget: 14% (= about 3 field visits)
• Survey: 14% (3 countries) $18700/ country

Period available for research: 18 months (January 2010– July
   2011)
      Research Steps –phase 1                                     Choice of Countries &
                                                        2009
                                                                        Regions

               I. Selection of Sub-sectors                   Completed April 2010

                                                                  Gendered Mapping of
                                          Start April 2010        Selected Sub-sectors

                 II. Inventory of Types of
                      Collective Action                         Mapping of Primary Level
                                                                  CA in ‘Districts’ etc.
                                          May - June 2010
                                                                  Listing & Sampling of
                                                                           CAs
                             III. Survey
                                                                                              Literatur
              100 Coll. Acts & 10% Members/Non-mbs     Planning Sep - Nov 2010                e Review

                                                                Identification of Issues &
                                                                Cases for FGDs & Studies     Start Feb 2010
             IV. Focus Group Discussions
                         2010
                                                                            Start-up phase 2:
                   Case studies 2011                    2011             effective interventions
Amsterdam, The Netherlands   www.kit.nl
Process for Selection of sub-sectors
(February - April 2010)
Steps
     •   Inventory of sub-sectors by researchers (secondary data)
          long list
     •   Inventory of sub-sectors by participants in stakeholder
         dialogue  new long list or add to long list
     •   Assessment of sub-sectors by SD participants according to:
         • Actual women’s participation (labor and income)
         • Actual market size (expectations on sustained growth)
     •   Crossing of the two criteria for each sub-sector (matrix)
     •   Selection of actual ‘high potential’ sub-sectors by the
         stakeholders with presence of collective action  short list
      Selection of Sub-sectors (ctd)
      Matrix for selection of sub-sectors


                                           Level of women’s participation
                                             Low        Medium      High
                                    Low
                Level of
                market
                demand &
                potential           Medium


                                    High




Amsterdam, The Netherlands   www.kit.nl
      Selected Sub-sectors
                             Ethiopia                  Mali                           Tanzania
                             Amhara        Oromia      Koulikoro        Sikasso       Shinyanga    Tanga
   Staple food                             Maize       Millet &         Rice*+/-      Rice         Maize
                                                       Sorghum

   Traditional                             Coffee*     Ground
   bulk                                                nuts*
   commodities
   Traditional               Milk *-                                    Shea*+/-      Local        Vegetables
   high-value                                                                         chicken
   products                  Vegetables
   New high-                 Honey *+      Spices*-    Sesame           Tiger         Green gram   Allan blackia
   value                                                                nut*-
   products


      * Gender segregation; but changing + implications of market demand/ technology change




Amsterdam, The Netherlands    www.kit.nl
      Selected Sub-sectors (ctd)




               Tiger nuts                 Green gram   Allan blackia nuts

Amsterdam, The Netherlands   www.kit.nl
Remarks on process SS selection
• In project design: SS selection informed by SD participants (to
  comment on/add to proposal by researchers); change at AA workshop
  SS selection decided by participants SD (researchers narrowed down
  from 4 to 3) – more engagement, but implications for research design;
  research into SS had to start later than anticipated
• Existence of Collective to be key criteria – but was it always sufficiently
  taken into account?
• Intention: Actual economic importance => discussion more on potential
  economic importance? – Also because difficult in practice to obtain
  secondary data on economic potential and women participation (at the
  regional level)
• SD was much more time & resource consuming than anticipated; during
  workshop: not enough time left for full inventory CA and gendered
  mapping, identifying locations);
• Communications lines/ planning became “complex”: confusing for
  research team regarding who was deciding on what; mixed messages
     Inventory of Types & Forms of Collective
     Action
            According to the chain functions:
             •
             • Operators/operations: production, processing &
               transport, and marketing
             • Supporters/support services: groupings around inputs;
               training & advice (e.g. farmer field schools), and credit
               & savings
         • According to forms:
             • Status: formal & informal
             • Gender: men-only, women-only or mixed
         • Location (geographic)
         • Numbers (estimates of total no. CA per type/form, no. of
            female & male members)
       inventory started during SD + extra follow up work in
        selected sites by field assistants (not in workplan)
Amsterdam, The Netherlands   www.kit.nl
      Gendered Mapping of the Sub-sectors
      Gendered mapping:
             •     Visualization of the selected sub-sectors & existing value chains
             •     Identification of all chain operations, support services (incl. pilots
                   to promote women’s access to markets)
             •     Assessment of policy & institutional environment
             •     Highlighting the position of women in the sub-sector
             •     Highlighting the collective action in the sub-sector; presence of
                   women


      The gendered sub-sector map allows for
             •     understanding of actual position of women in sub-sector
             •     Identifying potentials and barriers for women producers,
                   processors & traders to access markets and improve revenues
             •     Assessing options for using collective action to enhance gender
                   equitable benefits in the sub-sector and empowerment


Amsterdam, The Netherlands   www.kit.nl
      Gendered Mapping of the Sub-sectors (ctd)
      Steps
      •  Collect of information during Stakeholder Dialogues &
         identification of resource persons & additional sources of
         information
      •  Continued collect of information (during 2010) and complete
         map & analysis (2011)
          •  Collect information during field visits for the survey (see
             next step; features of the regions & villages, gendered
             mapping of the selected sub-sectors)
          •  Collect information during field visits the Focus Groups
             Discussions
          •  Etc.



Amsterdam, The Netherlands   www.kit.nl
Some findings Ethiopia
Sub-           No. producer    No. CA         No. CA         No. CA
sector/prod    % women         production     marketing      services
uct                            /collection                   only for
                               only                          SS
Milk           5660 (17%       45             103
               ♀)
Honey          > (1% ♀ trad;   6-10           36 + 1 union
               10% ♀ modern
Vegetables     5000                           400 ♀
                                              retailers
Spices - red   “many                          25
pepper         women”
Coffee         >Household;     160 -labour
               fallen beans    Gathering
               for women       fallen beans
Maize          > household     labour         5 ass; 6 gen
               (5% ♀?)                        coop
Mali
Sub-          No.        No. CA              No. CA    No. CA
sector/prod   producer   production          marketing services
uct           % women    /collection                   only for SS
                         only
Shea          >>         >> processing       5
                                             identified
Tiger nuts    8703(68%                       41 + 2
              ♀)                             unions
Millet –      >>> 35%    Coop/assoc. > 50    3 unions
sorghum       Des ♀
Rice          >>         >> riz bas-fonds
                         8 coop product; 3
                         transformation
Sesame        >          64                  3 unions
              (15000?)
groundnuts    >>         5
Tanzania
Sub-           No. producer      No. CA        No. CA      No. CA
sector/prod    % women           production    marketing   service
uct                              /collection               s only
                                 only                      for SS
Rice           36% all HH        Labour        Union
               (136.000 S)       groups;
                                 COOP?
Maize          93% all HH                      union
               (190.000 T)
Local          260.000HH S
chicken        mostly ♀
Green gram 4% all area
Or chick pea leguminous(1500
             chick pea S)
Allanblackia   4500 producersT                 NGO/
               (40% women)                     project
vegetables     2277 HHT
      Initial Proposal: Sequencing of Survey,
      FGDs & Case Studies



                                          Survey                Gendered mapping


                                                   Hypotheses
                                                        Hypotheses
                        -Focus Group Discussions
                        -case Studies




Amsterdam, The Netherlands   www.kit.nl
      Initial proposal Survey
      Object of survey
             •     Formal & informal types of collective action in selected SS
             •     Women inside & outside collective action
             •     (understanding differences between female and male members on
                   costs/ benefits: FGD /case study- not in survey
      themes
             •     ‘Characteristics’ of women inside & outside collective action
             •     Costs; benefits; risks from collective action for women
             •     Empowerment as a result of CA

      Methods for data collection
         • questionnaires with individual women (members & non-
            members of collective action but active in sub-sector living in
            same community)
         • questionnaires with leaders/resource persons of collective action
            “types”
Amsterdam, The Netherlands   www.kit.nl
Initial proposal Survey planning
Develop detailed questionnaires (mid Aug 2010)
   • Country level translation
   • Pre-testing
   • Finalize questionnaire
Prepare site & case selection
   • Full list of Collective action; members; non-members in
      selected sites (Aug 2010)
   • Sampling
   • Train research teams
• Data collection (Sep - Oct 2010 given rainy season &
   availability of farmers)
• Data entry & processing (start Nov 2010)
• Analysis (Dec 2010)

•   FGD simultaneously (planning) or following survey analysis in
    2011?
      Cases and sampling
      Sampling strategy
             •     2 Districts/ woreda/ commune with 2 or 3 of the selected sub-
                   sectors)
             •     100 cases of CA/ country: => 16 cases per Subsector or weighted
                   (based on total CA or membership in population in selected sites)?
             •     Female Members/ non-members in subsector in same community
                   (characteristics; cost-benefit; empowerment)
                    • Establish list of members of CA and lists of women outside CA
                       but active in sub-sector working in the same locality
                    • Selection (at random) of 5 women inside & 5 women outside
                       CA

             •     Collective action questionnaire: via leaders/resource persons of CA.




Amsterdam, The Netherlands   www.kit.nl
However – is the initial plan still the right
approach?
•   Some sub-sectors selected seem to have very limited collective
    action directly related to market access (seems limited to labour
    sharing --Tanzania- Ethiopia-coffee/ vegetables)
•   Tanzania; all reported CA seem externally induced- is this correct?
•   In some SS very limited numbers of CA until now
•   Higher than expected variation types of CA: is it possible to analyse
    cost; benefit, risks or empowerment (strategic interests) using a
    survey as main methodology?
•   Sampling & logistics: Sub-sectors seem spread out over large area/
    limited overlap.
•   It may be better to postpone survey: continue with more qualitative
    work for each SS starting at community level (gender biases to
    enter and to stay; full inventory and typology CA, economics); –
    only then followed by a survey (reconsider sampling and counter
    factual)
What is the most optimal use of limited resources and time to achieve
  quality?

								
To top