1 / 19

SMALLHOLDER IRRIGATION PROJECT (SHIP) CAADP AFRICAN FORUM 2012

SMALLHOLDER IRRIGATION PROJECT (SHIP) CAADP AFRICAN FORUM 2012. PRESENTED BY: ZINHLE FAITH DLAMINI TUNIS, TUNISIA NOVEMBER 2012. The Sugar Industry in Swaziland. 2 nd largest employer after govt Contributes 18% to GDP

jerica
Download Presentation

SMALLHOLDER IRRIGATION PROJECT (SHIP) CAADP AFRICAN FORUM 2012

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. SMALLHOLDER IRRIGATION PROJECT (SHIP)CAADP AFRICAN FORUM 2012 PRESENTED BY: ZINHLE FAITH DLAMINI TUNIS, TUNISIA NOVEMBER 2012

  2. The Sugar Industry in Swaziland 2nd largest employer after govt Contributes 18% to GDP Large scale (Millers and Estates) and smallholder growers (FC’s and Associations) About 50, 000, ha of land under sugar 122 Smallholder growers in total

  3. SMALLHOLDER FARMERS

  4. WHAT WERE THE MAJOR CHALLENGES? • Low yields and high production costs- poor husbandry practices, insufficient and/or late application of farm inputs • Irrigation system management- no maintainance, poor irrigation scheduling • High operating costs- transportation/haulage costs, electricity, fertiliser and labour costs

  5. MAJOR CHALLENGES contd’ • Debt servicing-high initial capital costs, inappropriate repayment schedules, high interest rates • Non availability of working capital- poor performing loans background, banks delayed provision of operational loans or lesser amounts • Poor Management of farms and social conflicts- Rapid turnover in leadership, unwillingness of members to undertake activities, unrealistic expectations- loans for dividends

  6. THE PROJECT AND APPROACH • The EU provided financial assistant as a grant amounting to 70% of each Farmer Company's development costs in the first year. • Farmer Companies were expected to source a Loan amounting to 30% for the operational costs in the first year. • SHIP was tasked with giving technical assistance to farmers i.e. Supervising works and providing trainings, coaching and mentoring

  7. STAKEHOLDERS AND THEIR ROLES

  8. STAKEHOLDERS AND THEIR ROLES CONTD’

  9. WHAT IS BEING IMPLEMENTED BY SHIP? Two major development goals • Investment and capital costs are reduced for sugar cane growing small holders • Smallholders farms are competitively managed as businesses

  10. 1. Investment and capital costs are reduced • Develop farm plans, review and approval of irrigation designs and business plans • Prepare tender documents • Supervise works-contractors conformity to quality standards, then commissioning • Financial overview

  11. Technical training in irrigation • Training in irrigation management • Mentoring on system management • Long term support and mentoring

  12. 2. Smallholders farms are competitively managed as businesses • Preparation of business plans • Conduct Business and Training needs assessment • Design and implementation of business planning and management planning • Conduct trainings • Contract specialist service providers to assist FC’s

  13. Smallholders farms are competitively managed as businesses contd’ • Provide assistance to Farmer Company management (Trainings, Systems and structures) • Foster linkages between private sector service providers and FC’s • Monitor Management performance of FC’s • Ensuring Statutory requirements are met

  14. SUCCESSES • Registration as farmers companies • “Land rights” acquired • 30 DESIGNS APPROVED • 30 BUSINESS PLANS APPROVED • 24 FC’s developed (1788 ha), 6 more (584ha) being developed • Business development trainings conducted • Irrigation management trainings conducted • Business management systems and structures in place • Adherence to statutory requirements • Mentoring and coaching going on well • Harvesting groups in place- economies of scale • Weaning of 3 FC’s and 7 set to be weaned in January

  15. IMPACT and BENEFITS- 13 FC’S • Improved productivity of farms- from 100 to 115 tch • Proper management of farms-systems and structures • Improved debt/loan management- from 6 to 2 or 3 years • household income increased- from 90 to 300 € • Availability of working capital –from proceeds • Maintained irrigation system • Operation costs manageable • Willingness of financiers to give out loans

  16. IMPACT and BENEFITS- 13 FC’S • Other businesses- diversification, supply of farm inputs • Infrastructure development • WEANING OF FC’S

  17. CHALLENGES • High interest rates • Lack of trust • Key cost drivers high- labour , energy, haulage • Poor management of farms • Land ownership issues- social • Poor contracts management • Taxes?????

  18. Conclusion • 70% or no 70% grant • Is the grant enough to ensure sustainability in Agriculture Growth? • 100 % debt financed……….are the trainings, mentoring and coaching enough to ensure sustainability? • Low productivity, indebtedness, high operational costs, unavailability of working capital and poor management of farms…..has/is the project addressing this? TO THE FUTURE??????

  19. SIYABONGA THANK YOU

More Related