VCD

=**Stakeholders’ Consultative Workshop**= =**Addis Ababa**= =**24-25 August 2010**=

=**Value Chain Development**=

Tom Randolph shared a presentation on the criteria and the strategy ([|download the powerpoint])

The current rationale for selecting the focus value chains was developed from a two-step process:

Identify high-potential regional value chains, based on:
 * Growth and market opportunities
 * Pro-poor potential
 * Supply constraints

Choose target countries, based on
 * Enabling environment
 * Existing momentum

Questions posed on the criteria for deciding focus included:
 * is there enough diversity?
 * need to engage the extension world
 * need to be able to have impact in a VC at the end of 10 years, so can move to others if needed.
 * need to include some assessment of winners and losers
 * how do you score pro-poor potential? has a number of dimensions, producer and consumer side
 * these all seem to be the low hanging fruits; how much can you upscale if you picked the low-hanging fruits only
 * looks like an interesting project, but will it really get thru to the partners
 * the low hanging fruits are the best bets, with most likely impacts, is this the best?

Tom Randolph then outlined a value chain development research agenda that participants were asked to react to, by addressing the question below.


 * ** Proposed Value Chain Development Research Agenda **

1. Sectoral analysis Ø Understanding value chain strategy within § overall economy § specific livestock/fish sector § trade opportunities Ø Identifying potential resource trade-offs Ø Spatial analysis for locating value chain enterprises Ø Modeling productivity gaps Ø Creating enabling policies

2. Assessment Ø Value chain analysis § Measuring value chain performance § Identifying opportunities for upgrading Ø Assessing demand (quantity & quality) Ø Diagnostic function

3. Implementation Ø Design and evaluation of intervention strategies to reduce transaction costs § clustering services § contract arrangements § business development services Ø Testing processes for ‘growing’ value chain § innovation systems based approaches, e.g. innovation platforms § stimulating private sector development ||

Does this look like an appropriate research agenda for understanding how to transform value chains? Why or why not?
'groups' here are more likely to be 'sheets'

Group 1:

 * At what state does technology development come in?
 * When do we test introduce it? Circular process
 * Need stakeholder analysis from pro-poor perspective
 * What are resource-trade-offs and how do we measure them?
 * Linkage among 3 components not clear i.e enabling policies under 1

Group 2:

 * Not a linear process more of ...... process
 * Diagnostic function is not clear
 * Analysis and assessment would go parallel
 * Assessment should include constraints on supply
 * How do you assess the pro-poor focus?

Group 3:

 * More efficient and quick assessment of VC
 * Value web analysis?
 * Influencing enabling policies
 * Modeling productivity gaps should be done under different production systems

Group 4:
Sectoral analysis:
 * Power analysis
 * Horizon scanning
 * Other VC substituting

Assessment:
 * Provision of extension
 * Roles of the private sector
 * VC structure - actors
 * Networks
 * Organization VS individuals

Group 5:

 * Where it should be in 10 years down the line VC
 * VC resilience (susceptibility of food scares)
 * Access to credit/who is getting it
 * Nutrient resilience metric - social, economic and environmental

Group 6:

 * Understanding value chains within the economy sector, trade
 * Identifying potential resource trade-offs
 * Spatial analysis for locating value chain enterprise
 * Modelling policy
 * Creading policy
 * Policy nanalysis - linked to global, regional and national
 * N.B. CGIAR may not be able to create policy
 * CGIAR can generate policy information to support policy formulation processes

Group 7:

 * Macro-leval analysis (including policy)
 * Micro-level analysis (value chain)
 * SWOT- efficiency- gaps
 * Priority frame work (value chain) - develop implementaion - final product(output) - impac. Linkage with global MDGs retional CAADD national

Group 8: 4 areas needing further thought:
Yes, but
 * Multiple values chains and tradeoffs
 * Process of implementing the 3 components, needs to be together with partners on the ground – which helps develop the resilience of the ‘project’, co-management, co-development with partners
 * Issues of food safety, disease risk, and risk in general need greater attention. In case our efforts expose smallholder to more risk
 * Climate change and livestock

Group 9:
Yes it is an agenda for research but we think it better include:
 * Local value chains impact will sometimes go beyond local, regional aspect is important (esp. livestock tech can easily cross borders) / Regional effects of value chains and related policies e.g. cross boundary livestock movement
 * Social aspects were not clearly delineated. How do the people view the VC? They need to be on board and engaged early / Identifying the social aspect, consideration for social values and indigenous knowledge
 * Under assessment, is not just strengths and weaknesses…?/ Assessment: It better include also bottlenecks (gaps) in order to enhance implementation capacity of the value chains

Birgit's group

 * Struggling to understand what is meant by ‘resource tradeoffs’, could just be semantics
 * Stakeholder analysis needs to be pro-poor
 * Feeling of a lack of integration between the different levels of assessment?
 * Where does the VCD and the tech development really engage and come together in this process?