Bertus Wennink & Thea Hilhorst International Advisory Group Meeting 28 – 29th June 2010, Oxford

2. Strengthening Women’s Livelihoods through Collective Action: Market Opportunities in Smallholder AgricultureResearch Design & Methodology Bertus Wennink & Thea Hilhorst International Advisory Group Meeting 28 – 29th June 2010, Oxford

3. Outline • Research Steps & Planning (recall) • Resources available for research • Selection of Sub-sectors • Inventory of Collective Action • Gendered mapping of sub-sectors • Survey • Focus Group Discussions & Case studies Amsterdam, The Netherlands www.kit.nl

4. 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)

5. 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)

6. Research Steps –phase 1 Choice of Countries & Regions I. Selection of Sub-sectors Gendered Mapping of Selected Sub-sectors II. Inventory of Types of Collective Action Mapping of Primary Level CA in ‘Districts’ etc. Literature Review Listing & Sampling of CAs III. Survey 100 Coll. Acts & 10% Members/Non-mbs Identification of Issues & Cases for FGDs & Studies IV. Focus Group Discussions 2010 2009 Completed April 2010 Start April 2010 May - June 2010 Planning Sep - Nov 2010 Start Feb 2010 Start-up phase 2: effective interventions 2011 Case studies 2011 Amsterdam, The Netherlands www.kit.nl

7. 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 oradd 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

8. Selection of Sub-sectors (ctd) Matrix for selection of sub-sectors Amsterdam, The Netherlands www.kit.nl

9. Selected Sub-sectors * Gender segregation; but changing + implications of market demand/ technology change Amsterdam, The Netherlands www.kit.nl

10. Selected Sub-sectors (ctd) Tiger nuts Green gram Allan blackia nuts Amsterdam, The Netherlands www.kit.nl

11. 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

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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

16. Some findings Ethiopia

17. Mali

18. Tanzania

19. Initial Proposal: Sequencing of Survey, FGDs & Case Studies Gendered mapping Survey Hypotheses Hypotheses -Focus Group Discussions -case Studies Amsterdam, The Netherlands www.kit.nl

20. 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

21. 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?

22. 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

23. 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?