1 / 10

Findings of the Starter Pack and TIP M&E Programmes

Findings of the Starter Pack and TIP M&E Programmes. Implications for Policy in 2002-03 and Beyond Sarah Levy & Carlos Barahona May 2002. The evidence. Findings are based on 2 ½ years of research Consultants from University of Reading (UK) working with Malawian teams

nami
Download Presentation

Findings of the Starter Pack and TIP M&E Programmes

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Findings of the Starter Pack and TIP M&E Programmes Implications for Policy in 2002-03 and Beyond Sarah Levy & Carlos Barahona May 2002

  2. The evidence • Findings are based on 2 ½ years of research • Consultants from University of Reading (UK) working with Malawian teams • The 2000-01 study had 6 teams, employed 25 researchers & around 180 field staff, etc. • The 2000-01 study visited 329 villages in 27 districts; interviewed some 8,000 households

  3. Production Of total smallholder maize production: • 1998-99: SP1 contributed around ¼; • 1999-2000: SP2 contributed 15-30%; • 2000-01: TIP contributed only 5% • Total smallholder maize output fell by 40% in 2001 compared with 2000 • Prices rose sharply after the 2001 harvest

  4. Food security impact • SP contributes 300,000-500,000 tonnes • Key to success of SP1 & SP2 = scale • Output… Prices  • Smallholder farmers are net purchasers of maize – especially in January-April • A small-scale, Safety Net-type SP (TIP) will not  output and  prices • Only a universal SP will  food security

  5. But is it SP or the weather? • SP1 and SP2 = A • TIP = D

  6. Inputs – a key constraint • 2/3 farmers that did not receive TIP used NO fertiliser or improved seed in 2000-01 • SP has BIG production impact, although the pack is tiny • Demand for inputs is weak because of high prices & low purchasing power, NOT SP • Need to boost farmers’ income: • cash crops; sale of livestock; trade; small business and crafts; employment opportunties • Higher demand for inputs, benefits for private traders

  7. Medium-term Strategy • Supply-side • Universal SP to combat under-production and food insecurity • Demand-side • Marketing channels for cash crops • Credit for small business development • Infrastructure, esp. roads (+ employment) • … a balanced approach

  8. Value for money (1)

  9. Value for money (2) • If we accept less than optimal production and food insecurity as ‘the norm’, we can cut costs – no SP and fewer maize imports • But this leads to: • High prices of food • Malnourished people, hunger crises • Slow growth and development

  10. Content of the pack OPV vs. hybrid maize Other things (medium term), to diversify food sources The technology (intercropping) Extension system Written messages Timing of procurement Co-ordination with food aid effort, including radio campaign Update register of recipients Looking ahead

More Related