Homeour worksaveactoutline of agricultural enterprise monitoring

Outline of Agricultural Enterprise Monitoring

Download PDF
Outline of Agricultural Enterprise
Monitoring; April 2015
Background and Definitions
Smallholder chains can present complex social, economic and environmental questions
relating to sustainability. They are characteristically diverse, containing manyproducers who
may or may not keep written records and often include a wide range of farm sizes and
livelihood statuses. For these reasons, an affordable way to measure sustainability and
progress is critical for increasing transparency about the conditionsand needs of producers.
Performance Measurement is an approach that assesses current status and tracks change
over time. The goal is a simple, cost effective way to measure performance that can
complement more expensive in-depth assessment. Performance measurement approaches
are not designed to measure attribution between specific interventions and specific
outcomes
1
.Performance measurement could be used to regularly track progress between
an initial study and occasional in-depth assessment.
Performance measurement can be useful for a single study to measure current conditions of
producers within a supply chain (such as average farm productivity at the farm level or
average household revenue), and for repeated measurements to monitor whether activities
are being accomplished as expected, and whether the main outcomes are moving in the
right direction. Attribution questions—how much change can be attributed to a specific
intervention—require more rigorous methods, including counterfactual groups for
comparison. These approaches can be complementary.
Impact Area: The broad category of social or environmental results to track (e.g.,
livelihood)
Indicator: A quantitative or qualitative descriptor of condition. Indicators are typically
selected to track changes in a system over time or to monitor the effects of a specific
intervention. Good indicators are SMART: Specific (clearly linked to purpose), Measureable
(can be quantified), Achievable (can be changed by the activities of the project), Relevant (to
how success is defined), and Time-bound (show change over time).
Metric: The means of measure; the specific quantification of an indicator; how the
indicators are defined (e.g., price x volume = gross crop income).
Survey Question: The specific questionthat is asked to the interviewee to collect data on
the metric, which will inform the indicator. Survey questions can also be accompanied by
important guidance on who should ask the question and why it is being asked
1
Don Seville, Emily Shipman, Stephanie Daniels. December 2013. Towards a Shared Approach for
Smallholder Performance Measurement: Common indicators and metrics.Sustainable Food Lab
Targets: For change programs, where investments are being made to achieve outcomes,
also defining clear targets.
Overall Aim:
Good access to services, will lead farmers to improve their agricultural practices, increase
their productivity and improve their net income and quality of life. Andwhere good
agricultural practices include conservation practices, adoption will also lead to better
environmental outcomes. Access to services in this context refers to agricultural services like
training, financing, inputs like fertilizer and seedsand market development.
To assess the impact on livelihoods of SaveAct beneficiaries involved in agricultural
enterprises
•Some of the specific outcomes of involvement in Agricultural Enterprise
Development process are seen to be the following;
oIncreased production for home consumption and sales
oIncreased availability of a range of food/products for home consumption and
sale
oIncreased sales and income
oBetter Management of financial resources for agricultural enterprises and
compared to overall livelihoods
oIncreased use of SCG resources (loans and share outs) for agricultural
enterprises
Outputs and Outcomes
Outputs are directly related to the activities (inputs) and can be quantified through a process/
performance monitoring system that is ongoing and managed byfield staff. Indicators here
include gender involvement, attendance at training and meetings, no of people involved in
different enterprises, bulk buying records, use of loans and share outs for AE activities,
SCGs focussed on AE, etc.
Theory of Change
Impact pathways have causal assumptions
IMPACT AREAS
ACTIVITIES
Outputs
Short term Outcomes
Long(er) term outcomes
(impact)
Engagement in
agricultural
enterprise
development
-Engage and re-engage in agricultural
enterprises as part of household livelihood
strategy
-Engagement in local organisations to
support individual and group activities
-Collective actions around agricultural
enterprises negotiated and initiated
-Participants commit a larger proportion of
their resources (time, skill and money) to
agricultural enterprises
-Agricultural enterprises contribute to
local livelihoods strategies
-Local organisation supports
individual agricultural enterprise
activities
-increased skill and informed
decision making
-Increased economic and social
commitment by participating
individuals in agricultural enterprises
-Agricultural enterprises
contribute substantially to
local livelihoods strategies
increasing social and
economic sustainability
Learning questions:
-Which AEs arethe household engaged in(and or
you as an individual)
- Which AEs have youstarted or re-started through
engagement in CIGS (new)
-Participation in CIGs;which activities, what
outcomes, what improvements/learning for you
individually, what group activities
-How are your AEs linked to your SCG activities
-What savings, loans, share outs have you used for
your AEs (and other financial resources)
-How do your AEs contribute to your
livelihood-food, income, fodder, fibre,
other(Yield, or proportion of yield
-How has CIG involvement supported your
AEs
-What opportunities/benefitsand what issues
-How much have you paid for inputs for
different AEs, what proportion of your income
is this? Has this changed (incr/dec) since
your involvement?
-
ASSUMPTIONS:
1. Contribution of AE’s to
livelihoods increases through
involvement in the SaveAct
interventions.
Support services
in inputs supply
-Increased and easier availability and
access of inputs across a range of
agricultural commodities
-Know about and use bulk buying
opportunities
-Set up local support around inputs
-Linkages with buyers and local
businesses
-increasing viability and profitability
of enterprises
-decreasing expenditure
-increasing income and profitability
-decreasing opportunity costs
-increasing local economic activities
and linkages
-Sustainable local
agricultural enterprises are
embedded in viable
agricultural supply chains,
appropriate to smallholder
farmers.
Learning questions:
-Are inputs available? How and where? Are they
easy to access? Has involvement made this easier?
-Are your AEs more viable than before –
(When did you start, can you continue, are
-Do you feel that your needs as a
smallholder farmer are being
-Do you know of bulk buying options? Have you
made use of these? How has this helped, or Not?
What improvements/suggestions?
-Have you set up or been involved with any local
processes around inputs (e.g. joint transport, joint
buying and sharing, ...)
-Do you have linkages with buyers? Has
involvement increased you involvement with buyers
and businesses? Please describe
you likely to continue and or
increase/decrease this activity)
-What income or profit have you realised
from your AEs this season?
-Has the income/profit increased through
your involvementin SCGs and CIGs? If not,
why?
-Has your expenditure changed (increased/
decreased) Why?
-Has it become easier to engage inAEs’ –
please specify and explain
-
catered for?
What needs are being met? What
gaps are still there?
ASSUMPTIONS
AEs are moreviablebecause of
SaveAct interventions
Participants increase expenditure
nad also income from AEs.
Production
support
-Uptake of improved farming
practices(Adoption of good agricultural
practices)
-Increased access to information for
informed decision making
-Increased skill for decision making
-Increased production
-Increased access to appropriate
infrastructural support
-Increased diversity of agricultural
activities for a range of purposes-
food, fodder, fibre, eco-system
services and income
-Increased productivity
-increased food security
-Increased environmental
and economic sustainability
of agricultural activities
Learning questions:
-What training and mentoring activities in AEs have
you been involved in?
-What did you learn?
-What changes have you made to your farming
practices?
-What new ideas have you tried out and how have
these helped or changed your farming practices
-How much have you produced from your EAs?
How much used as food and how much sold?
-Has your production increased? How much?
-Have you had access to more and a wider range
of food over a longer period?
-Increased/decreased access to land and or
labour?
-Has your involvement in different AE’s
changed (increased/decreased).
-Have you changed the way these AEs work
and work together?
-Have you managed to produce more food?
-Have you made an income from your AEs –
specify for each enterprise
-Other source of hh income and how does
AE relate to this?
-Has your income from AEs increased?
-What have you used the income for? –
Please specify
ASSUMPTIONS
-Increased food production through
the SaveAct interventions are
quantifiable andmeasurable and
different enough to clearly indicate
causality.
-Variability in production due to
environmental factors cna be
differentiated for SaveAct
interventions and support
-Improvements in productivity lead
to improvement in food security and
improved household income
Micro business
development
-Increased ability(learning and skill)to do
budgeting, pricing and secure (local)
buyers
-Increased ability(learning and skill)to
create and implementabusiness plan
-Increased ability to plan and
implement agricultural enterprises for
income generation
-Increased capacity to save(asset-
based)and engage in formal
financial transactions
-Sustainable local
agricultural enterprises
supported by appropriate and
robust financial mechanisms
Learning questions
-Have you participated in Isiqalo training? For
which enterprises?
-What did you learn during these trainings?
-Have you implemented any ideas from the
-Have you made a plan for your enterprise?
Have you implemented this plan? If not, why?
-Have you used any other financial services
to run and manage your enterprise?
ASSUMPTIONS
-Increase in profitability through
budgeting and planning is enough to
make a visible difference in income
trainings?
-Has this changed how you vies your clients or how
you ‘find’ clients? What new ideas do you have re
your enterprise?
-Have you been able to do more effective
budgeting?
-Do you save money from your enterprise for
buying more inputs?
-Have you managed to separate your enterprise
income from your general household income?
-Can you determine how much profit you have
made?
-How do you decide on the prices for your
products?
generated.
-Input supply and marketing
support is enough to make a visible
difference in income generated
-It is possible to differentiate the
SaveAct interventions from changes
in the value chain.
Market
development and
support
-Increased and expanded local sales and
sales options
-Joint activities to promote sales and
markets
-Experimentation with new market
avenues and value chain options
-Increased understanding of markets
and market access
-Increasedaccess to and
linkages with markets in the
broader environment (local
towns, regions ...)
Learning questions:
-How do you market/ sell your produce?
-Have you made any changes to what and how you
sell?
-Have you sold more of your produce? Has your
market increased or changed?
-Have you ‘found’ new markets or new marketing
options?
-How have you worked together to increase your
marketing/ marketing efficiency?
-Have you negotiated with agribusiness
stakeholders to sell your produce?
-What have you learnt about marketing
through your involvement?
-How has this changed how you market your
produce?
ASSUMPTIONS
-Increased collaboration between
producers cna increase marketing
options and market share for them
on a local level
-The local market can
accommodate increased production
and more sellers without undue
competition
-Agribusiness stakeholders are
willing to engage in a way that is
beneficial to smallholders
What to measure/ Indicators
Ongoing livelihood monitoring in agricultural enterprise work in order to complement impact assessments,
improve learning and effectiveness, and to help communicate development gains. The aim is to measure
common indicators in farm/ household level sustainability in smallholder agricultural supply chains that
include key social, economic and environmental sustainability indicators. A focus on poverty and food
security outcomes is also required. This can be done using a modified PPI type index and a household food
access scale. Dietary diversity is also a good proxy indicator.
It is possible to disaggregate the livelihood indicators for different socio-economic groups if more in-depth
work is conducted
Livelihoods indicators
A focus on livelihoods should include indicators that relate to:
Income; overall, household per capita, and agricultural (related to overall), household expenditure
and enterprise expenditure
assets; land ownership, land for cropping, proportion used, labour, water sources, access to
electricity(and a television), accessto a mode of transportation, ownership of a cell phone, type of
cooking fuel...
Food security; food availability, accessibility and utilization (potentially include diversity, food
consumption score and nutrition?) 9We have worked with these scores for the vegetable production
group)
Productivity
Productivity is an important measure inssmallholder systems. It relates to adoption of good practise as well
as environmental performance. Typical indicators could include better access to planting materials, training
and increased access to affordable inputs. Constraints include the perennial difficulty in obtaining accurate
production information and farm size. For performance measurement it is most practical to look at farmer
estimated productivity rather than measured outcomes. Cross check this with sales nad average yield data
for the particular enterprise
To understand productivity results in a given year, it is important to collect additional information to provide
context on the farming system and weather conditions:
A reference yield for the area for a given year.
Weather’s contribution to productivity
Use of good management practices and inputs
Varieties planted
Farming system; such as planting density, inter cropping, mechanization, production of other crops
Changes in the farm over time; balance between different agricultural enterprises over the years
Typical environmental indicators that could be looked at include; soil health and conservation, water quality
and conservation, biodiversity and habitat protection, energy use, waste management and input use.
Generally it is easier to usepractice based indicators such as adoption rather then outcome based
indicators with direct measurement of envrionmental parameters. The visual soil assessment(VSA) process
is one that shows promise on a performance management level.(We have used it in the CA work on
maize)
Typically a representative sample of farmers will be surveyed using practise based indicaotrs and a few
easily measurable outcome indicators.
Access to services
This has a large impact on farming options and possibilities. Key services to include would be:
Access to credit at a reasonable rate
Access to training and agricultural information
Access to inputs
Access to planting and production material
Access to markets
In this context is is generallyimportant also to look at involvementin farmers’ organisations. And also asking
participants aobut their satisfaciton withtheir access to services such as technical assistance –this
combines the particpants’ perceptions around physical access, affordability and qaulity.
Trading relationships
It is important to gather contextual information about how trade functions within each agricultural enterprise
chain. Potential indicators relate to this overview of the chain or simple mapping of the process. Surveys of
buyers or the larger process, along with farm surveys may be required.
It may also be helpful to measure and track broader exogenous factors such as the global price of the
commodity, local agro-ecological zones, seasonal crop calendars, the political and local social situations,
land tenure, GDP and overall population (and distribution). Toher contextual information to include:
Baseline
The question is whether a baseline is possible for horizontal comparison of the same people’s situation
over time. And or whether a baseline should compare counterfactual groups such asSCG members not
involved in the SaveAct interventions.
Some assumptions we are making:
1. It will be possible to notice trends in and differences between SCG members who have been
involved in agricultural enterprise interventionsfrom SaveActand SCG memberswho have not in
terms of their sales and income.
2. It will be possible to attribute increased sales and income to the enterprise interventions e.g. more
production due to bulk buying, better production due to production support, more sales and or better
quality so better prices through business start up support
Interviewees:
1. Control group:
a. SCG members not involved in agricultural enterprises –in the same localities
b. SCG members not involved with CIGs and who have not undergone Isiqalo trainingbut who
are involved in agricultural enterprises
c.Community members involved in agricultural enterprises who are not SCG members
2. Target interviewees:
a. SCG members who are part of CIGs
b. SCG members who have undergone Isiqalo training
c.SCG members who are part of CIGs and have undergone Isiqalo training
d. Community members part of CIGs not part of SCGs
QUESTIONSin thepresentQUESTIONNAIREthat relate directly to livelihoods concerns
1. Areas, villages, gender, age (thru date of birth),name surname (or respondent no linked to that), no
of SCGs,-summary for all interviewees-differentiating between control and target
2. No and names of SCGs, share out dates and yr of joining –For all target interviewees
3. Sources of income, main source ofincome, average monthly income–summary for all
interviewees-differentiating between control and target
4. No of and amount of loans for previous and present cycle of savings-summary for all target
interviewees-
5. What loans have been used for-summary for all target interviewees-differentiating between those
participating in CIGs and those not
6. Amount for share outs for previous cyclesummary for all target interviewees--differentiating
between those participating in CIGs and those not
7. Amount and Use of share outs for previous and present cyclesummary for all target interviewees-
differentiating -differentiating between those participating in CIGs and those not
8. Other sources of income; amount and uses, for previous and present cycles –summary for all
interviewees –differentiating between control , SCGs members and CIG members
9. Involvement in CIGs, including yr started, enterprise and incomes generated from each enterprise -
tables for all involved in agricultural enterprises-differentiated for those in CIGs and those not
10. Summary of activities involved in within CIGs–with descriptions of new activities (Count, sum)
11. Improvementin small business since involvement with CIGs–Count diff categories for those
involved
12. Participation in bulk buying and amountsper commodity–summarised for those involved
13. Issues with small business and support required–Count different categories for those involved
14. No of Isqialo trainees, year and theme of training , rating of training in terms of helpfulness–
summarise for those involved
15. Interest in future training –new, more – village, name, surname…. – this list should make it possible
to contact people…
16. Business plans filled in, for which enterprises, implementation thereof –Summary for those involved
17. Business plans not filled in and reasons –Summary for those that answered
18. Income from enterprise in business plan –summary
Some of the questions can be answered by summing, counting, averaging the actual question in Excel.
Some are more comparative and need to be presented in tabular format.
Research questions(Analysed with pivot tables,); possibly with all differentiated between male and female
and separate for Matatiele and Bergville if possible..
Some ideas of comparative analysis are given below.
1. Average income for people involved in agricultural enterprises and those not; link this to numberof
SCGs people are involved in and how long they have been members; for the different control and
interviewee groups
2. Link incomes from business plan enterprise with incomes from agric enterprises and commodities…
or combine side by side in a table –so that differences in income can be clearly seen and analysed.
3. Compare no of enterprises people are involved in and the incomes there with their average monthly
income –for those involved in CIGsthose not in CIGsbut in SCGs and those not in SCGs.
4. Compare the Maize information for Matatiele and Bergville –CIG members, incomes, ….
5. Tabulate percentage of people using production for household consumption only for all CIGs across
male, female and Bgvl and Matat
6. Tabulate involvement in bulk buying and loan amounts against incomes in those enterprises
7. Tabulate share-out amounts, and what used for all interviewee groups and then link this to incomes
from agric enterprises -summarise as proportion of share out used for agric enterprises linked to
income made. (this may or may not work or be useful – let’s see)
8. Tabulate proportion of loans used for agric enterprise against other activities and link to enterprise
incomes( As above)