MilkIT2nd Advisory Council Meeting
Almora 18/12/2012
Activity ReviewIndia
Thanammal Ravichandran, Nils Teufel
Topics
• Site selection• Data collected
– Village census– Value chain assessment– Household census– Development documentation
• Innovation platforms
Site Selection
• Districts – 2 (IFAD)• Blocks – 1 in each block (IFAD, dairy, partners)• Max clusters – partner long-list (40 vill / block)• Mini clusters – 2-4 villages close together• Mid clusters – 2-3 mini-clusters, field worker, IP• IPs: 2 mid-clusters -> 2 feed IPs -> 1 DVC IP
Selection of mid-cluster
• Village census data used for comparison• Criteria
– Road accessibility (dist_road and town dist)– Dairy animal population– Institutional base (SHG or Federation activity-milk marketing)– Feed availability (cultivated land, grassland, cropping pattern)
• 1 feed innovation platform for each selected mid-cluster• 1 marketing innovation platform in each block for
2 selected mid-clusters (feed innovation platforms)
Sult mid cluster
Bageshwar mid-cluster
Village census
• For characterisation of villages for selection • 30 villages in Sult and 12 villages in Bikyasain• 39 villages in Bageshwar• Information on
– Dairy animals– Land details/feed sources– Accessibility to market– Marketing channels– Institutional base
• Limitations– Asking to one or two key person– Use of existing data by partners
Village census - results
Comparison of mid-clusters-Sult
Barkinda Gahnaheet Nailwalpali Titoli Kunidhar0
50
100
150
200
250
Dairy animal population-Sult mid-cluster
Midcluster Dist_Pavedroad [km] Num_SHGs
Barkinda 1 6
Gahnaheet 1 9
Nailwalpali 1 6
Titoli 2 9
Kunidhar 2.5 6
Barkinda Gahnaheet Nailwalpali Titoli Kunidhar0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Households sell milk-Sult mid cluster
Table: Road accessibility and institutions- Sult mid-clusters
Chhona Chouganchina Garikhet Chani Saing Khabra Pagna0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Households sell milk-Bageshwar mid cluster
Midcluster Dist_Pavedroad[km] Num_SHGs
Chhona 0.1 14Chouganchina 0.2 16Garikhet 0.2 9Chani 0.3 5Saing 0.5 13Khabra 1.5 8Pagna 3.6 8
Table 28: Road accessibility and Institutions - Bageshwar mid-clusters
Midcluster Neighbours[#]
Localshop[#]
townshop/hh[#]
Anchal[#]
SHG/Fed[#]
Chhona 94 15 0 0 7Chouganchina 71 21 0 0 0Garikhet 69 17 0 0 0Chani 32 19 0 0 0Saing 0 0 0 41 74Khabra 33 0 0 0 0Pagna 10 0 5 0 0
Table 27: Households sell milk by type of buyer - Bageshwar mid-clusters
Chhona Chouganchina Garikhet Chani Saing Khabra Pagna0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Dairy animal population-Bageshwar mid-cluster
Considerations - Sult
• Select on near-road and one far-away mid-cluster• Barkinda
– Better road connectivity (<1km)– Favourable to connect formal milk marketing ie Anchal– More dairy animals and more cultivated land
• Titoli– Far-away road (2 km)– More dairy animals, more cultivated land– Farmers selling milk near congregation point
Considerations-Bageshwar
• Pagna excluded (>3.5km distance to road)• Saing included
– Formal milk marketing (Anchal and federation level)
– More dairy animals, more cultivated land– Strong institutional set-up (SHG)
• Chhona included– Good base for marketing platform– KVK is in between this two clusters
Household census
• All selected cluster villages including the settlements
• To characterise/classify the cluster• Information
– Dairy animals– Production details– Milk selling pattern– Transaction feed and animals
Hh census - results
Hh census – milk yield & sale
S.No Block Mean milk yield/hh (ltr)
1 Sult 1.92
2 Bageshwar 1.42
S.No Block Avg milk sale/hh (ltr)
1 Sult 0.17
2 Bageshwar 0.37
S.No
Cluster Mean milk yield/hh
(ltr)
Mean milk sale/hh
(ltr)
Total milk yield/day
Total; milk sale/day
1 Saing-B1 1.41 0.47 533 179
2 Chhona-B2 1.43 0.15 557 58
3 Barkinda-S1 1.75 0.16 388 36
4 Saknana-S2 2.04 0.17 630 54
Hh census – own fodder
S.No. Block Cluster Trees in own land/hh
Private grass land [nalli]
1 Bageshwar Saing-B1 4 0.48
2 Chhona-B2 6 4.23
3 Sult Barkinda-S1 14 0
4 Saknana-S2 11 1.1
Hh census – fodder purchase
S.No. Block Cluster Avg grass purchase (Quintol)/hh
1 Bageshwar Saing-B1 0.84
2 Chhona-B2 7.43
3 Sult Barkinda-S1 0.56
4 Saknana-S2 2.35
Invasive grass species in Chhona cluster vs grass purchase?
Actor mapping -Development history
• Interviews with variety of actors for collecting information on development history
• Change of officials over years so they are not aware of previous activities
• Have to ask other actors for history of other activities
Actors-Sult
• Dairy development board (DDB)-Anchal and Mahila dairy Vikas Prayojna
• Block development office (BDO)• Agricultural information centre
(agriculture department• Animal husbandry department (veterinary clinic)• Forestry department• INHERE• BAIF-(active in neighbouring block)
Actors-Bageshwar
• DDB – ULDB?• IFAD - Ajeevika• Animal husbandry department• CHIRAG• BAIF• Krishi Vikas Kendra (KVK) - VPKAS• BDO
Value chain assessment
• Formal– Aanchal– Federation level milk co-operative– Women’s dairy?
• Informal– Neighbours– Tea shops in village or near market– Milk traders
VCA Tools
• VC rapid assessment tools– ILRI is developing for wide use– We are currently testing and adapting– Mix of qualitative and quantitative data– Village, trader, processer, retailer etc.– Full day
Participatory VCA-NetMap - Regina Birner
• Visualisation of links/relationships• Entry point for VCA• Third dimension: importance of actors and
their influencing factors• Easy to visualize the power factors• Tried in Gahnaheet village – participants
enjoyed the exercise• Lots of farmer participation
Net map example
IP meetings - basics
• First dairy value chain meetings last week– 21/11/2012 Sult - Bhikyasain– 24/11/2012 Baheshwar – Dewaldar
• Participants– Village representatives (ca. half female)– Admin representatives (BDO, vet)– IFAD/Ajeeveka– Buyer representatives (Aanchal, shopkeeper)
IP meetings - agenda
• Introductions• Reports from constraint analysis in villages• Constraint analysis by other stakeholders• Group discussion on solutions/actions• Plenary on solutions/actions• Definition of activities
DVC IP – Sult – Participants
DVC IP – Sult – Group discussions
IP meetings – agreed activities
• Generate lists of farmers within villages interested in selling to Aanchal
• Discuss payment issues with Aanchal• Aanchal is willing to support exposure visits• Next meetings in 1-2 month
IP meetings - lessons
• More emphasis to make the meetings attractive for buyers (Aanchal, shop-keepers)
• Need to develop ownership of IP (who?)• Include service providers (e.g. BAIF)• Include/inform local councils• Assess admin involvement
IP – contrast to Tanzania
• Existing regional dairy development platforms• Tanga – running; Morogoro – collapsed• Initiated by DFID project• Regional-level institutions• Constitution - members
IP experience – INHEREGC Pant
• Discussion:– Involvement of institutions– How to link the sellers with buyers-livelihood improvements?– All actors shared the experience –constraints discussion and possible solutions– AHD-Feed is big constraint, availability of quality feed is limited, rate of feed, over the years feed
quality decreased– Connectivity of village to market is another constraint, how to connect discussed– Water scarcity-was another problem in village-quality of water-health problem– Health problem-accessibility to village is limited-remote areas-– Commercial milk selling or income through milk selling not felt by farmers-access to market
limited– BDO- how can other schemes can help for dairy development – Aanchal-how to connect farmers, how Aanchal gives input support
• Action:– How to connect with formal institutions-Aanchal-marketing start-– Follow up meeting in villages– List of farmers willing to sell milk- will forward request letter to MD, Aanchal for starting the co-
operative society- will send in a week
IP experience – CHIRAGKuldeep
• 3 actors participated- Ajeevika, KVK, AHD and buyer (private)• Constraints discussed-farmers felt a good platform to share issues-and can take
some solutions• AHD-explained what are schemes available for dairy development-feed, MNREGA
etc• Chhona cluster: invasive species-KVK promised short research on this• Farmers discussed about the issues in selling milk- payments, quality issue: fat
measurement is not done only lactometer measurement• Milk given is not reaching same to Bageshwar in same quality so less price• Farmers get disturbed with price difference from collection point to chilling centre
or outlet• Decided with all villages- milk samples will be tested• Grass improvement has been planned• Chirag and BAIF will promote AI and ayurvedic treatment…• Will try for dairy-connect with local shops
IP experience - discussion• How can be IP be successful with only small quantities of milk? Can we also focus on other options or milk
products?• Organisation of members is important:
– Aanchal will collect milk only from societies– Village-level organisation is crucial– Documentation of follow-up is important
• Farmer clubs can be made – in combination with NABARD initiative• Inhere-also having climate change innovation programme? Sharing experience and connecting with relevant
institutions (e.g. VPKAS) is important.• Stakeholders involvement is crucial in IP• It is important for the development of IPs that the support through formal institutions (e.g. Aanchal) benefits the
group and not individuals. Many support schemes exist (e.g. credit for buying animals) but struggle with this issue.
• Aanchal get even little quantity of milk, but private buyers depends on the demand• Aanchal can help raising supply through supporting transportation (head-load, animal load)• All the institutions (e.g. Aanchal, Ajeevika) should work together for dairy development • Chairperson (Ravi Shankar, CDO)
– Camps can be done in clusters– Cattle shed model can be made– Selling milk-to be promoted- support mechanisms subsidy, by all institutions-facilitate milk sales– IP-involve SHGs-Aanchal; restrictions can be discussed