Case study 4: Regional policy change in seed trade and dairy marketing policy

1. Case study 4:Regional policy change in seed trade and dairy marketing policy

2. Additional case study • ‘Quick and dirty’ • But yielded important perspectives on regional policy-making processes compared with local and national • Engagement with ECAPAPA and analysis of activities • Information through interviews with key stakeholders and workshop session with regional dairy regulators

3. Regional policy harmonisation • Agricultural policies in East Africa are predominantly set at national level. • But harmonisation encouraged given close ties • Role of EAC • ECAPAPA support for harmonisation and rationalisation of policies in two key areas • Seed trade • Dairy sector.

4. Figure 1: ECAPAPA’s way of working

5. ECAPAPA approach • Regional and national-level resource-persons engage with all key sector actors • Identify key issues, collect and carefully analyse data in individual countries. Facilitate in-country discussions for feedback on findings • Facilitate regional discussions on findings, appropriate actions and further research • Ongoing process of engagement • Also positive activities to help developing private sector – e.g. support of seed trade associations

6. Regional seed trade • Seed supply relies on several steps • development and testing of new varieties • certification and release of seeds • marketing and distribution of seeds • Historically controlled by public bodies • Few incentives for efficiency • Liberalisation – many more private actors now • But affected by restricting, inefficient, policy environment • Few linkages between actors • Need to rationalise/harmonise recognised • ECAPAPA project 2002 to present

7. Policy change • Some key areas of change since 2002: • agreement on more efficient variety release procedures • strengthened plant variety protection measures in some countries • more efficient seed certification procedures • more appropriate phytosanitary controls and • more efficient import/export procedures. • Marked change in attitude and behaviour between key actors • positive dialogue towards more change c.f. previous distrust

8. Regional dairy policy • Issue similar to described in Case study 1 in Kenya • Situation is similar in other countries in the region. • Policies designed for a western industrialised dairy model inappropriate for the informal sector which supports most of the livelihoods in the sector • Small-scale milk vendors (SSMVs) unable to access training nor be certified to operate. • Genuine quality and public health concerns cannot be addressed • Harassment of SSMVs increases consumer price decreases farm gate price for milk. • Regional milk trade determines that harmonisation of dairy policies beneficial

9. Policy Change • Following on from the policy change in Kenya described in Case Study 1 • Rationalisation: Regulators across the region are now more proactively engaging to train and certify SSMVs. • Harmonisation: In 2006 dairy regulators from Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda and Rwanda agreed: • A common approach to the training and certification of SSMVs, including a common syllabus for training. • Procedures to facilitate cross border trade.

10. Influences on change 1 • Facilitation of discussions has been key • Bringing together of key actors for facilitated discussions – over a number of meetings. • SPS agreements based on 3 key people chatting • Evidence collected and analysed with care • Also drew heavily on evidence from Kenya’s Smallholder Dairy Project. • Evidence effectively communicated through sharing and discussion of this evidence on multiple occasions with key stakeholders

11. Influences on change 2 • Effective linkage-brokering: Wide engagement encouraged ‘buy-in’ to the whole process of policy reform, with stakeholders recognizing their role in the process. • Now better transparency and collaboration between actors in private & public sectors. • Difference in levels of engagement: • Formal seed • Informal dairy • Implication? Poverty relevance?

12. Key lessons 1 • Regional policymaking is a very different process from local or national processes. • Policymakers are further removed from grassroots stakeholders affected by the decisions. • Technocrats and higher-level actors play a key role. • The interests of the poor may be difficult to feed to such processes other than via well-placed organisations with a pro-poor focus. • Facilitating linkages and enabling dialogue is the most critical element for influencing change.

13. Key lessons 2 • Barriers to change include sensitivities between similar actors in different countries, and between different actor types. • Use of evidence is important, and collection and analysis of such evidence should be done in the context of this close collaboration with the key policy actors. • Evidence may have to be handled sensitively if particular actors face reduced roles.