Upload
buitram
View
222
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
i
Draft Baseline Survey Report
“Sustainable Livelihoods for 1500 Smallholder
Farming Households (7,500 People) in the Extreme
North of Bangladesh”(Equalitea III) Project
Submitted by
Innovision Consulting Private Limited
Research | Technical Assistance | Project Management
ii
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
June 06, 2016
Dhaka, Bangladesh
Kazi Shahed H Ferdous
Country Director
Traidcraft Exchange (TX)
Apartment-5/A, House-11
Road-13(New), Dhanmondi R/A,
Dhaka-1209, Bangladesh
Re: Final Report on the Baseline Study of “Sustainable livelihoods for 1,500 smallholder
farming households (7,500 people) in the extreme north of Bangladesh” (EqualiTEA III)
Project
Dear Mr. Ferdous
Innovision Consulting Private Limited is pleased to submit the draft report on the baseline
study of “Sustainable livelihoods for 1,500 smallholder farming households (7,500 people) in
the extreme north of Bangladesh” (EqualiTEA III) Project. As always, we have put in careful
efforts in ensuring the highest quality in research design, implementation, and report
presentation.
We hope that the findings will be helpful to your team in terms of future decision on the
activities of the project. We thank you for your support and cooperation.
Sincerely,
Sadruddin Imran Chairman & CEO Innovision Consulting Level 6 Suite 106 House 62 Road 3 Block B Niketon, Gulshan-1 Dhaka 1212, Bangladesh
Baseline Study of “EqualiTEA II: Pro-poor Market Access for Small Tea Growers for Sustainable livelihoods” Project iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This document was developed by Innovision Consulting Private Limited under the
“Sustainable livelihoods for 1,500 smallholder farming households (7,500 people) in the
extreme north of Bangladesh” (EqualiTEA III) Project managed by Traidcraft Exchange.
We acknowledge the support provided by Mr. Kazi Shahed H Ferdous- Country Director,
Traidcraft Bangladesh and Ms. Ismat Jahan- Project Advisor, Traidcraft Bangladesh who
provided consistent supervision and guidance on the report.
We thank the implementation team of Bikash Bangladesh for facilitating the field assessment.
We acknowledge the contribution of all the reviewers of the draft report who took the time in
providing feedback that helped in the development of this work. We also thank all the
respondents and the local communities who gave their valuable time to the research team and
helped in the obtaining of area specific information that helped shape the report.
Baseline Study of “EqualiTEA II: Pro-poor Market Access for Small Tea Growers for Sustainable livelihoods” Project iv
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
AWD Advanced Wet and Dry
BDT Bangladesh Taka
BTB Bangladesh Tea Board
BTRI Bangladesh Tea Research Institute
DAE Department of Agricultural Extension
DCM Decimal
DLO District Livestock Office
FGD Focus Group Discussion
GPF Gratuity Provident Fund
HSC Higher Secondary Certificate
ICM Integrated Crop Management
IPM Integrated Pest Management
KG Kilogram
KII Key Informant Interview
LFW Logical Framework
NGO Non-Governmental Organization
OVI Objectively Verifiable Indicator
SSC Secondary School Certificate
STG Small Tea Grower
TX Traidcraft Exchange
ULO Upazilla Livestock Office
Baseline Study of “EqualiTEA II: Pro-poor Market Access for Small Tea Growers for Sustainable livelihoods” Project v
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Project Name Sustainable livelihoods for 1,500 smallholder farming households (7,500 people) in the extreme north of Bangladesh (EqualiTEA III)
Project Location Bangladesh – Panchagarh District (Tetulia and Panchagarh Sadar sub-district) and Thakurgaon District (Baliadangi sub-district)
Project Duration 36 months (from October 2015to September 2018)
Project Budget £614,565
Donors UK AID
Implementing Agency and Partners
The project is managed by Traidcraft Exchange (TX) and co-implemented by Bikash Bangladesh1
The EQUALITEA III project plans to support small and marginal farmers in Northern
Bangladesh to grow tea to give farmers a diversified, sustainable source of income and reduce
poverty. The project will work with 1,500 small and marginal households in Panchagarh
(Tetulia and Panchagarh Sadar sub-district) and Thakurgaon District (Baliadangi sub-district)
area. The project aims to build an inclusive value chain and to encourage smallholder farmers
to work collectively and collaboratively.
Innovision Consulting were contracted to conduct a baseline study of the households targeted
by the project. The baseline study aims to provide an independently assessed information
base relevant to the project against which the project’s progress and effectiveness can be
monitored and assessed during the implementation of the project’s activities and after the
completion of the project. The study has attempted to capture the current condition of the
project beneficiaries against all the Objectively Verifiable Indicators (OVIs) up to the output
level (which are relevant to the beneficiaries) of the Logical Frame Work Analysis (LFA)
document. The study also provides useful background detail on the project recipients which
may help inform future project design and approach. A summary of the findings related to
these indicators can be found at the end of the executive summary section.
The methodology used for the study involved both primary and secondary research. Primary
research consisted of Sample survey, Key Informant Interviews (KIIs), Focus Group
Discussions (FGDs) and Case Studies.
Innovision developed a questionnaire tool on the basis of the terms of reference (ToR)
supplied by Traidcraft for the IDIs. Data from 199 respondents was analysed. Innovision also
undertook 12 FGDs and 18 KIIs evenly divided across the three sub-districts. A scoping study
was carried out to test and refine all tools which were used with sample respondents from the
project areas. Our gender consultant also provided input to ensure that the tools used were
gender-sensitive and gender-aware.
Baseline Study of “EqualiTEA II: Pro-poor Market Access for Small Tea Growers for Sustainable livelihoods” Project vi
For the secondary research, Innovision has reviewed key project documents such as project
proposal, ToR for the study, logical framework, list of target beneficiaries and project
stakeholders. Innovision Consulting also made use of its own repository of agricultural
knowledge and expertise in-house.
Findings reveal that the average age was 39 for male respondents and 34 for female
respondents. About 77% of male and 88% of female respondents have literacy below
Secondary School Certificate level and 16% of male respondents and 26.3% of female
respondents are illiterate. The average family size is 5 persons, and each family has one man
and one woman who generate income on average. Two thirds of families have school-going
children. The vast majority (92.5%) of respondents are Bengali Muslims, with the remaining
largely being Hindu, or indigenous peoples (Santal).
All respondents conduct agricultural farming. Agriculture is the primary source of income for
60% of surveyed households, with other respondents saying their primary income was from
working as a day laborer2 (25%), in their own business (8.5%), in a full-time job3 (2.5%), as an
auto-rickshaw/rickshaw puller (2.5%), as a private tutor (1%) or as a homeopathic practitioner
(0.5%).
Farmers stated that they had diverse sources of income with 77% having secondary sources
of income other than just agriculture. Day labor was the most common secondary source of
income. According to our Focus Group Discussion, women are paid less (BDT 50 to 100) for
agricultural day labor than men. The average agricultural day labor wage for men is BDT250-
300 but only BDT 200 for women. Stone extracting is a job done exclusively by men and pay
is based on the amount of stone collected. In practice the amount received will range from
BDT 500 – 700. Stone crushing is similarly based on the square feet of stone crushed- but
this activity is undertaken by both men and women. A man or woman working at stone crushing
for a day could expect to earn between BDT 300 and 500.
The mean income for all respondents was BDT 89,412 (median BDT 87,900). In Tetulia, the
mean income for respondents was highest at BDT 96,755 (median BDT 96,095). Panchagarh
had a mean income of 89,278 (median 90,275) while Baliadangi had the lowest mean income
of 83,119 (median 77,485).
Households reported their top priority for expenditure was food which accounted for 54.7% of
their expenditure. Other elements of their expenditure included loan repayments (9.0%),
medicine/health costs (6.5%), children’s education (6.2%), clothing (5.8%) and entertainment
(5.3%).
Half of respondents had savings of some sort, with two thirds of those with savings using
‘micro-savings’ schemes. However, findings from the FGD suggest that most of those using
micro-savings schemes are forced to do so under the terms of a micro-credit loan they have
taken. It is questionable then whether these should really be considered as savings- since the
farmers can only access the money once the loan is repaid. This money does not therefore
2Day laborer responses were predominantly stone workers and agricultural workers on other people’s land. 3Such as working for a local NGO.
Baseline Study of “EqualiTEA II: Pro-poor Market Access for Small Tea Growers for Sustainable livelihoods” Project vii
fulfill the function of providing protection from income shocks- since it cannot be accessed
when it is needed.
Just under a third (29%) of respondents with savings use a fixed deposit account in banks like
RAKUB and Agrani Bank. These are conventional savings which yield a rate of interest and
money can be withdrawn when needed (although there may be a penalty of interest lost for
early withdrawal). Respondents were also asked whether they had any other kind of safety
measure apart from savings. Most (69%) said that they did- but their responses tended to
involve selling assets such as the sale of a cow (55.8%) or land (32.6%).
Access to loans was found to be almost universal (98%) although fewer (41%) actually have
an outstanding loan at the time of the project. By far the most popular source of loans was
micro-credit organizations (78%) followed by commercial banks (18%). The most popular loan
providers were ASA (31%), Grameen (21%) and BRAC (15%).
The average amount of an outstanding loan is BDT 21,162. About half of these loans are used
for agricultural investment (49%) while other popular uses are business (15%), purchase/lease
land (14%) and build/maintain housing (13%). Those with a regular income stream (such as
day laborers) appear to prefer micro-credit schemes which require weekly installments and
have a lower rate of interest than money lenders. Detailed figures were not collected- but the
FGDs suggest micro-credit interest rates of approximately 12.5-15%. The interest rates for
money lenders can be much higher- one case study respondent claimed to be paying an
interest rate of 120%. Money lenders however enable farmers to borrow and repay once they
have gathered their harvest. Early marriage is prevalent within all three regions and daughters
tend to be married off between fourteen and eighteen years of age. Dowries are common and
can cost from BDT 20,000 to BDT 100,000 – many respondents have to borrow to afford these
costs.
The role of women in income generation may differ between Baliadangi and the other two
regions, Panchagarh and Tetulia. Although the sample was small, it suggested that in
Baliadangi women tend to work in agriculture doing activities such as planting, weeding and
harvesting in their own fields. By contrast- in Tetulia and Panchagarh, women may tend to
work as laborers (stone sorting/conveying) or as tailors. This might be because of cultural
differences as Baliadangi has a higher proportion of Hindus- and may be more comfortable
with women working in the fields. In all communities, it is predominantly women who do post-
harvest related activities. Women stated that they do not have full control over the income they
earn as day labor- however they also said that earning an income makes them feel more
empowered and accepted within the family.
Rice is the most common crop grown- and the vast majority is Aman rice. Wheat is also very
common in Baliadangi and in Panchagarh to a lesser extent. The average cultivable land per
respondent was 131 decimals in Baliadangi, 110 decimals in Panchagarh and 109 decimals
in Tetulia. Farmers consistently claimed that agriculture is not profitable but that they are
forced to grow crops because purchasing food would be even more expensive. Most farmers
do not use improved cultivation techniques or integrated pest management except for a few
common techniques such as placing sticks or bushes near fields to attract birds to naturally
reduce pests. Most farmers had little knowledge of tea cultivation although some have friends,
relatives or neighbors who have grown tea.
Baseline Study of “EqualiTEA II: Pro-poor Market Access for Small Tea Growers for Sustainable livelihoods” Project viii
Farmers do not currently have any membership of collective groups. They expressed a clear
preference for groups to provide them with knowledge on collective selling (80%), tea
cultivation techniques (60%) and livestock rearing training (50%). Other popular preferences
were to provide tea saplings (39%), irrigation facilities (39%), and tea leaf marketing (24%).
Farmers are generally unaware of the services the Government of Bangladesh is supposed
to provide and do not have access to these services. They also have little faith in public sector
service providers and complained that Department of Agricultural Extension (DAE) officials
rarely visited and (Sub-Assistant Agricultural Officers) SAAOs were hard to find when solutions
are needed. Instead they tend to rely on the private sector particularly input sellers who may
give them incorrect information and sometimes have perverse incentives to do so.
Generally speaking farmers are open to crop and income diversification and were keen to
begin the project and grow tea. There was greater enthusiasm for tea growing in Panchagarh
and Tetulia than in Baliadangi however because there are small holder tea growers available
in Panchagarh and Tetulia. Nevertheless most respondents were confident that tea growing
represented a good opportunity for their livelihood, particularly since it would utilize land that
might otherwise be left fallow and because they see it as much more profitable than traditional
crops.
Baseline Study of “EqualiTEA II: Pro-poor Market Access for Small Tea Growers for Sustainable livelihoods” Project ix
Summary of Baseline Survey Results for Logical Framework Logframe Indicator Indicator Description Baseline Value
Impact Indicator 1
Percentage change in the proportion of population below national poverty line in target districts (or region depending on information available)
No data collected. (Already existing figure for baseline)
Outcome Indicator 1 Average increase in annual household income of target farmer households
(2015) Overall Household income- BDT 89,412 Panchagarh- BDT 89,278 Tetulia- BDT 96,755 Baliadangi- BDT 83,119 (all figures are mean)
Outcome Indicator 2 Number of farmers who perceive an improvement in their wellbeing
No data collected.
Output Indicator 1.1
Number of farmer groups that are negotiating with local government and local tea companies/factories for better services and support
0
Output Indicator 1.2 Proportion of target households that perceive benefits from group membership
0
Output Indicator 2.1 Average yield (in kg) of tea (before processing) per acre
0
Output Indicator 2.2 Proportion of target household income earned from tea cultivation
0
Output Indicator 3.1 Proportion of target households that are satisfied with the services/support provided by barefoot service providers
0
Output Indicator 3.2
Number of households assisted with agricultural services
14.1% (28/199) These are comprised of: Govt Institutions such as DAE and Livestock (13), MFI (8), Anondo School (2), Krishi Bank: (2), Union Parishad (1), Agroni Bank (1), Tea Factory (1).
Output Indicator 3.3
Number of acres (tea and non-tea) benefiting from agricultural improvements (fertilizers, irrigation etc.)
Respondents saying they used this: Soil Test – 0% Organic Fertilizer – 93% Planting bush/stick – 21.1% Pheromone Trap – 0% Leaf Color Chart – 0% Improved Irrigation – 0.5% Advanced Wet & Dry – 0% Follow advice of local agricultural officers on amount of fertilizer used – 5.5%
Baseline Study of “EqualiTEA II: Pro-poor Market Access for Small Tea Growers for Sustainable livelihoods” Project x
Output Indicator 4.1
Proportion of target households that have adopted a new income-generating activity (in addition to tea)
0%. But note that 77% of households already have an additional income-generating activity.
Output Indicator 4.2 Amount of savings mobilized from target households
0
Output Indicator 4.3 A group savings and investment fund is available to invest in new income-generating activities
0
Baseline Study of “EqualiTEA II: Pro-poor Market Access for Small Tea Growers for Sustainable livelihoods” Project xi
Table of Contents
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL ....................................................................................................................... ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................................................................................ iii
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ......................................................................................................... iv
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................ v
List of Tables .........................................................................................................................................xiv
List of Figures ........................................................................................................................................xiv
1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 16
1.1. Background of the Project .................................................................................................... 16
1.2. Objective of the Baseline Study ............................................................................................ 17
2. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................................ 18
2.1. Desk Review .......................................................................................................................... 18
2.2. Tools Development (Sample Size, Sampling and Questionnaire) ......................................... 18
2.3. Sampling Technique .............................................................................................................. 19
2.4. Questionnaire Development ................................................................................................. 19
2.5. Field Investigation ................................................................................................................. 19
2.6. Data Collection ...................................................................................................................... 20
2.7. Data Processing, Data Analysis and Preparation of Baseline Report .................................... 20
3. BASELINE DATA ............................................................................................................................. 21
3.1. General Information ............................................................................................................. 21
Target Respondents ............................................................................................................ 21
Age Group .......................................................................................................................... 21
Educational Background ..................................................................................................... 22
Family Size and Number of Income Generating Members .................................................... 22
Ethnic Minority and Female Headed Household .................................................................. 23
Agriculture ......................................................................................................................... 24
3.2. Economic Status of the Beneficiaries .................................................................................... 25
3.2.1 Household Income ............................................................................................... 25
3.2.2 Household Expenditure ........................................................................................ 29
3.2.3 Household Expenditure- Ethnic Minority and Female Headed Household .............. 31
3.2.4 Savings ................................................................................................................ 32
3.2.5 Credit/Loan ......................................................................................................... 33
3.3. Gender Involvement ............................................................................................................. 34
Baseline Study of “EqualiTEA II: Pro-poor Market Access for Small Tea Growers for Sustainable livelihoods” Project xii
3.4. Agricultural Practices and Status of Production ................................................................... 36
Agricultural Practices .......................................................................................................... 36
Status of Production: .......................................................................................................... 38
Tea Related knowledge ....................................................................................................... 40
3.5. Existing Market and Relationship with Various Market Actors ............................................ 41
3.6. Existing Producers’ Groups in the Project Vicinity and Group Activities .............................. 42
3.7. Policy and Services ................................................................................................................ 43
Knowledge on the availability of Government Services ........................................................ 43
Services Rendered by Various Agencies ............................................................................... 44
3.8. Vulnerability from Natural Disasters .................................................................................... 45
4. CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................... 47
Annex 1 Focus Group Discussion Summary .......................................................................................... 48
4.1. Module 1: Status of Income and Expenditure ...................................................................... 49
Sadar Upazilla, Panchagarh ................................................................................................. 49
Tetulia Upazilla, Panchagarh ............................................................................................... 50
Baliadangi Upazilla, Thakurgaon ......................................................................................... 51
Distinguishing features among the sub-districts: .................................................................. 51
4.2. Module 2: Agricultural Practices and Production Detail ....................................................... 51
Sadar Upazilla, Panchagarh ................................................................................................. 52
Tetulia Upazilla, Panchagarh ............................................................................................... 53
Baliadangi Upazilla, Thakurgaon ......................................................................................... 53
Distinguishing features among the sub-districts: .................................................................. 53
4.3. Module 3: Women and Gender Involvement ....................................................................... 54
Differences among the sub-districts: ................................................................................... 54
4.4. Module 4: Savings and Loans ................................................................................................ 54
4.5. Module 5: Group/Collective Action ...................................................................................... 55
4.6. Module 6: Status of Services Received ................................................................................. 55
4.7. Module 7: Market Details ..................................................................................................... 56
4.8. Module 8: Government Policies and Awareness .................................................................. 56
4.9. Module 9: Crop and Income Diversification ......................................................................... 57
4.10. FGD Details ........................................................................................................................ 58
ANNEX 2: Key Informant Interview Report ........................................................................................... 59
Bangladesh Tea Research Institute (BTRI) ........................................................................................ 59
Upazilla Agriculture Office ................................................................................................................ 61
Baseline Study of “EqualiTEA II: Pro-poor Market Access for Small Tea Growers for Sustainable livelihoods” Project xiii
Sadar Upazilla, Panchagarh ................................................................................................. 61
Tetulia Upazilla, Panchagarh ............................................................................................... 62
Baliadangi Upazilla, Thakurgaon ......................................................................................... 62
Upazilla Fisheries Office .................................................................................................................... 63
Upazilla Social Welfare Office ........................................................................................................... 64
Upazilla Cooperatives Office ............................................................................................................. 64
Upazilla Women Affairs Office .......................................................................................................... 64
Union Parishad Chairman (Local Government) ................................................................................ 65
4.11. Input Seller ........................................................................................................................ 65
4.12. Tea Factory ........................................................................................................................ 66
4.13. Upazilla Livestock Office ................................................................................................... 66
ANNEX 3: Case Studies .......................................................................................................................... 68
ANNEX 4: Terms of Reference .............................................................................................................. 68
Annex 5 Logical Framework Matrix ...................................................................................................... 82
Baseline Study of “EqualiTEA II: Pro-poor Market Access for Small Tea Growers for Sustainable livelihoods” Project xiv
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Project at a Glance ............................................................................................................ 16
Table 2 Sample distribution .............................................................................................................. 21
Table 3 Gender split among the respondents ................................................................................ 21
Table 4: Average Age of the Respondents .................................................................................... 22
Table 5 Literacy levels of the Survey Respondents ...................................................................... 22
Table 6 Detail of respondents family .......................................................................................... 22
Table 7 Secondary Sources of Income ........................................................................................... 26
Table 8 Household Income of Surveyed Respondents ................................................................ 28
Table 9Household Expenditure of Surveyed Households ........................................................... 30
Table 10 Expenditure in Female-headed Households ................................................................. 31
Table 11 Amount of savings ............................................................................................................. 32
Table 12 Amount and Purpose of Loan .......................................................................................... 33
Table 13 Secondary Sources of Income for Women .................................................................... 34
Table 14 Who makes the decisions in your households? ............................................................ 35
Table 15 Expense in Dowry .............................................................................................................. 36
Table 16 Agriculture at a glance ...................................................................................................... 36
Table 17 Funding for Agriculture ..................................................................................................... 38
Table 18 Cost Benefit Analysis of top five crops ........................................................................... 38
Table 19 Membership of the Respondents .................................................................................... 43
Table 20 Services from Various Institutions ................................................................................... 44
Table 21 Agriculture at a glance ...................................................................................................... 61
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 FGD being conducted .............................................................................................................. 19
Figure 2 Where the project works ........................................................................................................ 21
Figure 3 Families having school going children ............................................................................ 23
Figure 4 Ethnic Concentration of Respondents .................................................................................... 23
Figure 5 Source of income for respondents ................................................................................... 25
Figure 6 Share of Expenditure ......................................................................................................... 29
Figure 7Savings tendency by the respondents ..................................................................................... 32
Figure 8Scheme preferences by respondents ...................................................................................... 32
Figure 9Percentage of Respondents Affected by Natural Disasters in the Last 5 Years ....... 46
Figure 10 Target Area of the Study ....................................................................................................... 48
Figure 11 Jotsna Begum with her Sons ............................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 12 Abul Hossen is in his lychee garden with his family ...... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 13 'Jorina Beoya with her grand-son' ..................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 14 Firoja Begum with her grand-child .................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 15 Firoja Begum with her daughter and son-in-law ..................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 16 Biswanath outside his home with his wife ....................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 17 Bulbuli with her family ......................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Baseline Study of “EqualiTEA II: Pro-poor Market Access for Small Tea Growers for Sustainable livelihoods” Project xv
Figure 18 Sobeda Begum is with her son ......................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 19 Nasirul with his family .............................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
16
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background of the Project
“Sustainable livelihoods for 1,500 smallholder farming households (7,500 people) in the
extreme north of Bangladesh” (EqualiTEA III) project aims to work with small tea growers
through facilitating tea cultivation among small and marginal farmers in Northern Bangladesh. The
project, funded by UK AID, is managed by Traidcraft Exchange (TX) and co-implemented by
Bikash Bangladesh. This project will work with 1,500 small and marginal farming households in
Panchagarh (Tetulia and Panchagarh Sadar sub-district) and Thakurgaon District (Baliadangi
sub-district) area and will try to facilitate tea growing among small and marginal farmers and
develop an inclusive value-chain for small tea growers with the assumption that the tea cultivation
can help the farmers have sustained source of income and reduce poverty. The small farmers in
the target area are isolated by geographic location- in the extreme north of the country and
consequentially have very few livelihood options which are the major challenges faced by the
communities.
Table 1: Project at a Glance
Project Name Sustainable livelihoods for 1,500 smallholder farming households (7,500 people) in the extreme north of Bangladesh (EqualiTEA III)
Project Location Bangladesh – Panchagarh District (Tetulia and Panchagarh Sadar sub-district) and Thakurgaon District (Baliadangi sub-district)
Project Duration 36 months (from October 2015to September 2018)
Project Budget £614,565
Donors UK AID
Implementing Agency and Partners
The project is managed by Traidcraft Exchange (TX) and co-implemented by Bikash Bangladesh4
All respondents conduct agricultural farming. Agriculture is the primary source of income for 60%
of surveyed households, with rice being the dominant food crop followed by wheat. However, as
the soil composition of this area is sandy, acidic in nature which is not suitable for many crops,
traditional crops yield poor harvests or low profitability. The acidic sandy soil on the other hand is
suitable for growing tea; however, there is no comprehensive programme to promote small-scale
tea growing among small and marginal farmers. Moreover, farmers also lack the necessary skills
and knowledge about technologically improved, environment-friendly agricultural practices.
Additionally, small and marginal farmers do not have the capacity to invest which further restricts
their option to apply good agricultural practices, diversify crop and increase their income.
The project’s beneficiaries include only the small and marginal farmers’ household, (both male
and female), who own a small piece of land ideal for tea cultivation but cannot start cultivating tea
17
due to a lack of capital, and technical skills. The project will also raise awareness about the
government services/support available to small-scale tea farmers whilst also supporting
groups/associations to lobby for the proper implementation of existing policies.
The project attempts to achieve this through:
▪ Encouraging smallholder farmers to work collectively and collaboratively. This will involve:
1.1) Organising smallholder farmers into local groups and a regional farmer association;
1.2) Building the capacity of the groups and regional association; and 1.3) Conducting tea
sector research (with a focus on smallholder tea growers) and developing a policy position
paper and action plan.
▪ Developing strong agricultural enterprises through better farming and business practices
and diversification into tea. This will involve: 2.1) Raising awareness with prospective
smallholder tea growers; 2.2) Training smallholder farmers on tea and agricultural
cultivation; 2.3) Providing loans for saplings and facilitating buy-back agreements with tea
factories; and 2.4) Facilitating access to other inputs. Once the loans for saplings are repaid
they will be used to establish a revolving fund that will be used to facilitate new entrants
into tea cultivation and scale up impact.
▪ Ensuring smallholder farmers have access to appropriate ongoing agricultural services.
This will include: 3.1) Training 120 barefoot service providers; and 3.2) Building linkages
between farmers and private/public service providers.
▪ Developing systems to support smallholder farming households to diversify their income.
This will include: 4.1) Capacity building of groups on group savings and investment
schemes; 4.2) Building links with financial institutions; and 4.3) Capacity building for
additional income-generating activities. This activity will have a particular focus on
empowering women as experience has shown that as women start to contribute more to
household income they will become more confident and gain more respect within their
family and community
1.2. Objective of the Baseline Study
This baseline study “Sustainable livelihoods for 1,500 smallholder farming households (7,500
people) in the extreme north of Bangladesh“(EqualiTEA III) Project was commissioned to
Innovision Consulting Private Limited by Traidcraft Exchange. The baseline study aims to provide
an independently assessed information base relevant to the project against which the project’s
progress and effectiveness can be monitored and assessed both during the implementation of
the project’s activities and after the completion of the project. The baseline study, an early
element of the project monitoring framework, is in effect the first step in the project monitoring and
evaluation system. The study seeks to provide the basis for subsequent assessments on how
efficiently the activity of the project is being implemented and the eventual results of the project.
The study has attempted to capture the current condition of the project beneficiaries against all
the Objectively Verifiable Indicators (OVIs) up to the output level (which are relevant to the
beneficiaries) of the Logical Frame Work Analysis (LFA) document.
18
2. METHODOLOGY
2.1. Desk Review
Innovision has reviewed the project documents, logical framework, and secondary literatures on
small-scale tea cultivation to understand sector, project objectives, beneficiaries’ details, and clear
understanding about LFA indicators. Desk review has been instrumental in developing the study
tools and in revising the research plan when required. The key documents that were reviewed
include:
• The approved project proposal document
• The approved project Logical Framework
• List of target beneficiaries
• List of other project stakeholders
2.2. Tools Development (Sample Size, Sampling
and Questionnaire)
Sample Size
As per TOR, the project is working with 1,500
smallholder farming households (7,500 people) in the
extreme north of Bangladesh. Since the population size
that is total number of beneficiaries is known but the
degree of variability is unknown, the following formula is
used to determine the optimum sample size.
n = N / (1+ND2)
By using the formula we obtained at 95% confidence
interval and 6.5% allowable error, the optimum sample
size is 219, where N=3,000, D=0.065. This sample is
very close as compared with the sample size stated in
TOR i.e. 225. Therefore, we proposed conducting the
farmer survey with a total of 225 farmers.
So at first the sample size was determined at 225. However after data collection, it was observed
that the demographic profile of 3 respondents did not match. Following data analysis and
discussion with Traidcraft, a further 23 respondents were removed from the sample. The reason
for their removal is that the information provided by these respondents was inconsistent between
Innovision’s initial survey, follow-up phone calls from Innovision and follow-up questioning by
Traidcraft field office. Given this, and the importance of using reliable information, it was decided
to exclude these individuals from the survey. This does not represent a finding that these 23
people are necessarily ineligible for the project.
Box 1: Formula for sample size
calculation
Finite Population:
n=N / (1+ND2)……………………1
n = Sample size
N = Population Size
D = Allowable degree of error
Note: This formula is from Kish, Survey
Sampling, (Wiley, 1965)
19
The error margin for this sample therefore increases to 6.8%.
2.3. Sampling Technique
Modified systematic random sampling technique was used for sample selection which is widely
used as a probability sampling method. The rationale for choosing this technique is its simplicity
and it also gives assurance that the population is evenly sampled.
In using the random sampling technique, the needed sample size was first identified. Then the
total number of the population was divided by the sample size to obtain the sampling fraction. The
sampling fraction was then used as the constant difference between subjects.
2.4. Questionnaire Development
A structured questionnaire was developed for the small scale tea growers based on the literature
review and also in consultation with the project staffs. The questionnaire was pretested through
ten in-depth interviews with the small scale tea growers in the project areas.
2.5. Field Investigation
Field plan was prepared and finalized
after consultation with the project team
members. Consultants and hired
enumerators conducted field
investigation for the questionnaire-
based farmer survey through individual
interviews with 199 EqualiTEA III
farmers, – 86 farmers from Panchagarh,
53 from Tetulia and 60 farmers from
Baliadangi sub-district. Respondents
were selected using simple random
sampling method, 119 (60%) among the
interviewees were males and 80 (40%)
were females. It was more challenging to
find women who had sufficient knowledge of their circumstances to answer the questionnaire. For
instance the women often said they do not handle the money and are not aware of how much
revenue is generated by their crops.
12 focus group discussions (3 FGDs in Panchagarh Sadar, 4 in Tetulia and 5 FGDs in Baliadangi
sub district) and 18 key informant interviews with the stakeholders like government agencies, tea
board officials and market actors etc. were also conducted. A total of 116 STGs (77 male and 39
female, 30 respondents from Panchagarh Sadar, 39 from Tetulia and 47 from Baliadangi sub-
districts) participated in each of the FGDs and we followed screening method for choosing
participants to ensure there was no overlap among the participants in FGD and sample survey.
Figure 1 FGD being conducted
20
Traidcraft selected the STG groups with whom FGDs were conducted. The STG leaders provided
a selection of individuals, and Innovision ensured that no more than 8-10 people were used in the
FGD. Innovision did not select the FGD respondents.
Mixed-sex groups were used for the FGDs since the survey was not considered to include ‘gender
sensitive’ topics. The FGDs were chosen in such a way to ensure they included a minimum of
30% female respondents. A total of 116 respondents participated in the FGDs. The list of
respondents for the KIIs is attached as Annex 5. The gender consultant has also developed in-
depth case studies and conducted 3 FGDs.
2.6. Data Collection
Six investigators were recruited to collect data from the project areas. Each field investigator
interviewed 37 respondents with the structured questionnaires. The respondents were selected
through the purposive random sampling method. Minor changes were made to the work plan
when required in consultation with the project staffs. Owing to a miscommunication- some of the
surveys were originally carried out individually but in a communal place- this was later corrected
to ensure that they were all carried out in the respondents’ homes.
2.7. Data Processing, Data Analysis and
Preparation of Baseline Report
The completed questionnaires were scrutinized and data coding was done through the proper
code plan for the qualitative responses. The collected data was entered into the Statistical
Package for Social Science (SPSS) database and the data was analysed by this software. The
report was prepared according to the ToR guideline and the sections have been organized
accordingly.
21
Figure 2 Where the project works
3. BASELINE DATA
3.1. General Information
Target Respondents
The baseline survey covered three sub-districts named Tetulia and Sadar Upazilla of Panchagarh
and Baliadangi Upazilla of Thakurgaon districts. The sample distribution among the upazillas is
shown below-
Table 2 Sample distribution
Panchagarh Tetulia Baliadangi Total
Percentage of sample 43% 27% 30%
Number of sample 86 53 60 199
Total Households in Project 450 425 625 1500
Small Tea Growers (STG) groups formed under the project comprises of households as members
of the project. Every household again comprises of one male and one female representative. The
sample distribution according to gender is shown below-
Table 3 Gender split among the respondents
Male Female
Respondent (%) 60% 40%
Number of respondent 119 80
Age Group
The average age for the male respondents is 39 whereas the average age for the female
respondents is 34. Majority of the respondents belong to the age group of 30-40 years.
22
Table 4: Average Age of the Respondents
Male Female
Average Age 39 34
Standard Deviation 13 11
Educational Background
From the sample survey findings we can see that rate of illiteracy is higher in female respondents
(26.3%) compared to male respondents (16%). About 77% of male and 87% of female
respondents have literacy below Secondary School Certificate (SSC) level. A greater percentage
of male respondents passed SSC and Higher Secondary School Certificate (HSC) (approximately
18.5%) than female respondents (approximately 7.6%)5. This could be explained from our findings
from FGDs that, rural small farmers tend to marry their daughter off under aged i.e. 15 to 18 years
old. This tendency exists partly because as the girl grows up the dowry required by the groom’s
family increases.
Table 5 Literacy levels of the Survey Respondents
Family Size and Number of Income Generating Members
Analyzing the data collected from sample survey we can understand that respondent households
have an average family of 5 members. And an average family has one male as well as one female
generating income.
Table 6 Detail of respondents family
Number Family Member 5*
Male Female
Gender split of family member Mean 2.3 2.2
Standard Deviation 1.0 1.0
Number of income generating member in family Mean 1.2 1.0
Standard Deviation 0.5 0.5
5Note that this figure is for those that pass SSC/HSC but do not go further in education.
Status of Education Male (%) Female (%)
Illiterate 16.0 26.3
Primary School Completion 26.1 21.3
Class 6th to 10th pass 35.3 40.0
SSC (Secondary School Certificate) 10.9 6.3
HSC (Higher Secondary School Certificate) 7.6 1.3
Graduate 3.4 5.0
Above graduate 0.8 0.0
23
Number of school going children Mean 1.3 1.3
Standard Deviation 0.5 0.6
*Note: This number has been rounded up
There are also one boy and a girl who go to school. About 67% of the respondents stated that
they have school-going children in the family.
Figure 3 Families having school going children
Ethnic Minority and Female Headed Household The report aims to understand changes in targeted indicators among the Muslim majority group
and different ethnic minority groups. By ethnic minority groups we mean respondents from Hindu
low caste, indigenous (Santal) people. We found ethnic minority people are of 7.5% of the total
sample size.
Figure 4 Ethnic Concentration of Respondents
We found 2 respondents from Panchagarh and 13 from Baliadangi Upazilla who belong to ethnic
minority groups. Out of the ethnically diverse respondents, 6 are male and 9 are female. We have
provided some tentative analysis of these ethnic subgroups- but should be careful before drawing
conclusions given the very small sample size.
From the sample survey we also found 5 households which are headed by women members. Of
those 3 households are from Panchagarh, and 1 each is from Tetulia and Baliadangi Upazilla.
67%
33%
Families with schoolgoing children
Families with noschool going children
92.5
7.5
Ethnic Concentration of Respondents
Bangali MuslimMajority(%)
Ethnic Minority (%)
24
Agriculture Agriculture is the main source of income in these three
targeted upazillas and rice is the prominent food crop.
Rice is cultivated in Aman season mainly. Soil in this
region has low water retention nature which eventually
restricts farmers from cultivating Boro season rice. Other
than rice maize, potato, jute, wheat, sesame etc. are
cultivated in this region. High land in which water clogging
does not happen is suitable for sugarcane, Robi season
crop like vegetable, chili and relatively new crop to the area tea. However, most of those high
lands are kept fallow for most of the year after one crop cultivated. Farmers find it burdensome to
invest such a long tenure crop like sugarcane (15 to 18 months) or vegetables which account for
lower profit due to low price in the local markets. Almost 90% of the cultivable lands have access
to irrigation, however, people irrigate less than required times as it increases cost of cultivation
and farmers do not get good results due to lower market price. However if farmers are growing a
profitable crop- then they may be more prepared to invest in irrigation or improved inputs. As one
farmer told us using a traditional rural expression:
“I can tolerate a kick from a cow that gives me milk”
Participants of the FGD are keen to diversify from traditional cultivation to tea cultivation in high
lands which kept otherwise fallow for most of the year (6-8 months). They also anticipate
increasing their income through tea cultivation as well as appropriate agricultural practices and
improved linkages with different market actors and stakeholders.
Crops Season
Rice (Aman) Jun/Jul – Nov/Dec
Rice (Boro) Dec/Jan – Apr/May
Wheat Nov/Dec – Mar/Apr
Maize Nov/Dec – Feb/Mar
Jute Apr/May – Aug/Sep
Sugarcane Sep/Oct – Aug/Sep
Potato Aug/Sep – Jan/Feb
Chili Jan/Feb – Nov/Dec
25
3.2. Economic Status of the Beneficiaries
3.2.1 Household Income
One of the key objectives of the baseline study is to establish a validated and extensive baseline
for measurements of future income impacts due to project activities. As such, heavy emphasis
was put on this topic to capture the true characteristics of a household’s expenses and income
behavior. The field survey has shown that, agriculture is the primary source of income for the
majority (60%) of households, although all of the respondent households undertake some
agricultural farming.
Figure 5 Source of income for respondents
Farmers stated that they had diverse sources of income with 77% having secondary sources of
income other than just agriculture. Day labour (made up of Agricultural and non-agricultural labor)
was the most common secondary source of income for males. After day labor, running a business
is common among the respondents. Examples of such businesses include stone business (like
buying stones from extractors and selling them to crushers), raw material business, stock
business, transport business etc. These findings were supported by the FGDs- where 70% of
households said they have at least one member of their household selling their physical labour.
Among female respondents who have secondary source of income other than agriculture tailoring
and day labor in stone crushing plants is common in Panchagarh and Tetulia. In Baliadangi we
received some responses that female household members have salaried jobs such as working
as house-maids in urban areas or in garment industry.
There are significant difference between wages in agricultural labor and non-agricultural labor.
According to our Focus Group Discussion, women are paid less (BDT 50 to 100) for agricultural
day labor than men. The average agricultural day labor wage for men is BDT 250-300 but only
59.8
25.1
8.5
2.5 2.51.5
Agriculture
Day Labourer
Business
Job
Rickshaw
Other
26
BDT 200 for women. Stone extracting is a job done exclusively by men and pay is based on the
amount of stone collected. In practice the amount received will range from BDT 500 – 700
although because the work is so physically demanding only the young can do it. Stone crushing
is similarly based on the square feet of stone crushed- but this activity is undertaken by both men
and women. A man or woman working at stone crushing for a day could expect to earn between
BDT 300 and 500.
These figures were supported by our discussions with the FGDs although rates may vary
somewhat across areas. Some of our FGDs suggested number of laborers can be higher for
female workers in Hindu majority areas compared to Muslim majority areas. The FGDs also
reported women near Tetulia working in tea gardens- although our sample survey did not report
this in significant numbers6.
Table 7 Secondary Sources of Income
Secondary Sources of Income
Source of Income for Male Panchagarh Tetulia Baliadangi
Agricultural laborer 20% 45% 29%
Non-agricultural laborer 15% 16% 11%
Business 31% 16% 23%
Service 8% 16% 23%
Auto/Rickshaw/Van/Trolley 5% 2% 3%
Others 24% 6% 20%
[Base Population- Respondents] 66 51 35
Source of Income for Female
Tailors work 2 2 0
Job 0 0 2
Stone workers 2 1 1
[Base Population- Respondents] 4 3 3
The mean household yearly income of surveyed respondents is BDT 89,412.From table 8 below
it can be seen that respondents in Tetulia Upazilla earn the highest yearly income (BDT 96,755
per year). Panchagarh respondents earn BDT 89,278 per year (mean) while Baliadangi
respondents earn the least- BDT 83,119 per year (mean).
Our preferred method for calculating income assigns the market value to crops which are
produced, even if they are consumed by the household. Thus if 100 kg of rice is produced, but 50
kg is consumed and 50kg is sold, we will consider the ‘potential income’ from the 50kg consumed
as part of the household total. This additional value is also added to the expenditure of the
household.
Traidcraft Bangladesh raised this as a potential concern- feeling that this might overstate the
income and expenditure of respondents. For this reason- we have calculated a separate row in
the Table 8 which assesses the income of respondents excluding crops grown for personal
consumption. To calculate this, we reduced both the cost of production of crops and the total
6This is not especially surprising given the small size of the sub-sample of women in Tetulia.
27
potential revenue proportionally to the amount of crop consumed. So if 50% of a crop was
consumed, we reduced both costs and revenues of the crop by 50%.
In the FGDs, respondents were reluctant to admit that their farming was profitable and contributed
significantly to their income. They responded that, about 30% of an average household income
comes from agriculture (food crops and cash crops) and 10% from rearing livestock and poultry.
Whereas, about 50%, (and in some FGDs up to 80% share of income) by small farmers’
household reported to be earned by selling physical labor. Our view is that the survey is a more
accurate source of information since it forced farmers to provide figures for their costs and
revenues and calculate profits, rather than merely relying on their impressions/perceptions of how
profitable their activities are.
28
Table 8 Household Income of Surveyed Respondents
Tetulia Panchagarh Baliadangi Total
Mean Med STD N Mean Med STD N Mean Med STD N Mean Med STD N
Food Crop Income with consumption included
18,293
12,080 18,676 53 21,804 15,964 23,674 82 24,202 21,180 15,128 59 21,574 17,230 20,076 194
Food crop income without consumed crops
10,539
6,098 16,461 50 16,024 9,425 22,042 77 14,771 11,337 12,469 57 14,145 9,258 18,085 184
Cash crop Income with consumption included
7,572 6,535 5,438 24 12,110 8,586 10,776 60 5,940 5,205 5,477 29 9,563 7,430 9,081 113
Cash crop income without consumed crops
7,572 6,535 5,438 24 12,073 8,586 10,726 60 5,941 5,205 5,476 29 9,543 7,430 9,044 113
Livestock 7,730 5,000 9,165 40 12,623 9,000 11,238 64 23,399 20,000 16,315 44 14,504 10,000 13,856 148
Service 70,776
78,000 27,925 8 50,000 60,000 28,355 3 49,400 48,000 15,778 10 57,629 60,000 24,023 21
Business 70,625
72,000 25,983 8 58,000 60,000 27,918 25 48,111 40,000 25,896 9 58,286 60,000 27,474 42
Wages 64,333
67,200 21,557 33 60,832 64,183 27,721 36 46,280 48,000 20,695 15 59,609 60,000 24,841 84
Rickshaw 48,000
48,000 . 1 108,000 108,000 - 2 48,000 48,000 . 1 78,000 78,000 34,641 4
Others 24,353
20,000 23,008 15 23,307 23,200 20,810 15 38,233 40,500 24,395 18 29,231 24,000 23,490 48
Total with consumption
96,755
96,095 29,895 53 89,278 90,275 33,562 86 83,119 77,485 28,747 60 89,412 87,900 31,480 199
Total without consumption
88,404
87,875 29,628 53 82,810 82,349 32,175 86 73,353 69,318 28,424 60 81,448 78,622 30,811 199
29
3.2.2 Household Expenditure
The small and marginal farmers we surveyed have limited resources and are forced to prioritize
their household expenditure. The respondents we surveyed list food as their top most priority in
their expenditure behavior.
Mean total annual expenditure per household was 87,959 BDT (Median 85,700). This differed
slightly across the three regions with Tetulia spending the most (Mean 91,743 and Median 89,600)
followed by Panchagarh (Mean 87,398 and Median 85,875) and then Baliadangi (Mean 85,420
and Median 81,050).
Figure 6 Share of Expenditure
Findings from the survey suggest that respondents spent 54.7% of their yearly expenditure on
food items. Other major expenditures are loan repayments (9.0%), medicine (6.5%), children’s
education (6.2%), clothing (5.8%) and entertainment (5.3%).
It should be noted that only 67/199 (34%) respondents make loan repayments, so for these
individuals the repayments represent much more than 9% of total expenditure. Average loan
repayments per individual with repayments was 23,453 BDT. Similarly the average expense on a
dowry was 26,667 BDT- but only 3 of our sample had paid a dowry in the past year.
FGDs were also asked to make an estimate of what constitutes their expenditure. These results
were very consistent with those of the survey (albeit less precise) with estimates of food
expenditure at 60%, and other factors such as clothing, health care, education, housing all around
5-10% each.
Food
Medicine
Clothing
Travel
Religious event
Education of Children
House Repairs
Dowry
Loan payment
Entertainment
Others
Category Percentage
Food 54.7
Medicine 6.5
Clothing 5.8
Travel 1.9
Religious event 4.8
Education of Children 6.2
House Repairs 2.0
Dowry 0.4
Loan payment 9.0
Entertainment 5.3
Others 3.7
30
Table 9Household Expenditure of Surveyed Households
The average of total household expenditure greater for Tetulia (BDT 91,743) and low for Baliadangi (BDT 85,420).The average of
household expenditure on food is almost similar for the three upazillas.
Tetulia Panchagarh Baliadangi Total
Mean Med STD N Mean Med STD N Mean Med STD N Mean Med STD N
Food 47,766 48,000 16,329 53 47,672 48,000 12,024 86 49,181 48,000 15,728 60 48,152 48,000 14,362 199
Exclude Home Grown Food
32,791 30,000 18,204 53 32,556 31,880 14,927 86 29,757 30,415 16,192 60 31,775 31,160 16,204 199
Medicine 4,917 4,000 3,662 53 5,713 4,900 4,607 86 6,415 5,000 4,833 60 5,713 4,000 4,463 199
Clothing 5,362 5,000 2,582 53 5,088 5,000 2,320 86 4,987 4,900 2,125 60 5,130 5,000 2,330 199
Travel 1,908 2,000 1,129 40 2,391 2,000 1,775 66 2,336 2,000 1,662 45 2,246 2,000 1,597 151
Religious event 4,868 5,000 2,796 53 4,385 4,000 3,095 86 3,457 4,000 1,753 60 4,234 4,000 2,717 199
Education of Children
8,815 5,500 10,059 40 7,235 6,000 9,867 57 8,721 5,000 10,699 38 8,121 6,000 10,115 135
Repair of house
2,424 2,000 2,299 29 4,016 2,000 4,994 49 2,544 2,000 1,956 32 3,168 2,000 3,743 110
Dowry 30,000 30,000 28,284 2 . . . 0 20,000 20,000 . 1 26,667 20,000 20,817 3
Loan payment 30,603 27,500 18,012 16 21,882 16,375 20,403 36 19,596 11,500 23,166 15 23,453 15,750 20,627 67
Entertainment 4,957 3,000 5,734 51 4,219 2,600 3,447 85 5,585 6,000 4,297 57 4,818 3,000 4,414 193
Others 8,311 2,000 14,741 28 3,129 2,400 2,219 63 6,982 3,600 17,103 32 5,311 3,000 11,410 123
Total 91,743 89,600 33,379 53 87,398 85,875 28,753 86 85,420 81,050 29,535 60 87,959 85,700 30,222 199
Total Exclude Home Grown
Food
76,889 71,990 34,750 53 72,282 68,937 28,967 86 67,509 65,250 27,592 60 72,070 67,310 30,278 199
31
3.2.3 Household Expenditure- Ethnic Minority and Female Headed Household
Average of total expenditure made by ethnic people (BDT 87,959) is the same as for the total
sample, however when we exclude home grown food- it is considerably lower (BDT 61,669 vs.
72,070). Although the sample size is small, this suggests that ethnic minority households may
depend more on crops they grow for their own consumption.
Ethnic Minority Male Female
Mean Med STD N Mean Med STD N
Food 46,492 48,000 15,679 6 58,701 50,000 20,483 9
Exclude Home Grown Food 11,415 7,500 13,669 6 29,780 27,720 17,333 9
Medicine 3,667 3,250 983 6 3,089 3,000 1,968 9
Clothing 3,550 4,000 1,560 6 4,500 4,000 1,561 9
Travel 2,060 2,000 1,165 5 1,371 1,200 335 7
Religious event 4,083 4,000 1,021 6 5,000 5,000 2,236 9
Education of Children 13,000 9,000 9,644 3 18,167 4,000 23,127 6
Repair of house 1,250 1,250 354 2 1,667 2,000 577 3
Dowry . . . 0 . . . 0
Loan payment 15,690 15,690 1,146 2 14,233 11,500 6,824 3
Entertainment 4,850 3,900 3,797 6 3,288 1,200 3,684 8
Others 100,000 100,000 . 1 3,000 3,000 . 1
Total 88,080 82,740 46,159 6 87,878 79,600 36,293 9
Total Exclude Home Grown Food
58,095 46,210 38,064 6 64,102 59,320 33,586 9
Table 10 Expenditure in Female-headed Households
Average of expenditure made by
female headed household is BDT
90,840 which is higher than the sample
average (BDT 87,959). With only five
female-headed households however
this is too small a sub-sample to draw
firm conclusions however.
Mean Med STD N
Food 53200 48000 10545 5
Exclude Consumption 40052 45840 11219 5
Medicine 3220 2800 3037 5
Clothing 3700 4000 975 5
Travel 4500 4500 2121 2
Religious event 2700 2000 1483 5
Education of Children 21275 5000 34247 4
Repair of house 1500 1500 707 2
Dowry . . . 0
Loan payment 1200 1200 . 1
Entertainment 7650 6000 8047 4
Others 2800 2700 1575 4
Total 90840 84400 34667 5
Total Exclude Consumption 77692 60400 33865 5
32
3.2.4 Savings
The small and marginal farmers surveyed responded that half of them have some form of savings.
When asked what savings scheme they use, we found that the majority of people (67%) use
micro-savings schemes by Micro-Finance Institutes (MFI) followed by 29% in fixed deposits in
banks (RAKUB, Agrani Bank etc.).
Table 11 Amount of savings
Amount of Savings Mean Median Standard Deviation
Savings account 4,378 1,700 5,785
Fixed deposit 7,923 3,500 10,090
Micro-savings scheme 5,600 3,000 6,312
Others7 10,174 6,000 9,078
The average of amount of savings those who save in different savings scheme are shown by the
table above. Findings from the FGDs suggest that most of the savings in ‘micro-savings the
scheme’ are mandatory savings8 saved along with repayment of micro-credit loan. These savings
are required by MFIs to secure any future loan.
It should be noted however that there is controversy about whether the micro-savings scheme
should be considered as savings. This money can only be accessed once the loan is repaid. In
effect- this plays the role of giving a deposit for the loan, rather than acting as savings. Farmers
are only able to access their money once the loan is repaid- and therefore it cannot protect them
from income shocks.
We were not able to assess the extent to which these micro-savings scheme (or indeed other
savings schemes) allow for flexible access to money to prevent income shocks. In some cases-
7Others consists of Local Life Insurance Policy (Loko Bima), Local Community Co-operatives, Cash and Ekti Bari Ekti Khamar, a government project for rural development. 8 An obligatory amount is saved with the repayment of loan instalments by loan taker.
47%53%
Do you have savings
Yes
No
15%0%
29%
67%
15%
11%
Savings SchemesSavings account
Sanchay Patra
Fixed deposit
MicrosavingsSchemeCash in Hand
Other
Figure 7Savings tendency by the respondents Figure 8Scheme preferences by respondents
33
the farmers themselves may not be aware of the exact terms. A conservative estimate of the
amount of savings available that could be used for this purpose would be to discount all money
placed in micro-savings schemes. If this were done- then only 11% of respondents have savings
that fulfill these criteria (22/199).
Among MFIs present in the target area ASA, Grameen Bank, BRAC and national NGOs working
with micro-credit schemes RDRS, TMSS, and ESDO etc. are popular by the respondents. RAKUB
and Agrani bank are also found to be preferred by people for saving in the area. Among others
form of savings, there are cash in hand, savings in local community co-operatives,
3.2.5 Credit/Loan
From the sample survey conducted we found almost all of the respondents (98%) have access to
loan. By access, we mean respondents can get loan from an institute if they intend to. 41% of the
respondents have outstanding loan currently. The average of outstanding loan amount
respondents have currently is BDT 21,162.
Table 12 Amount and Purpose of Loan
About half (49%) of the respondents who have outstanding loan took the loan to invest in
agriculture. Substantial numbers of people also take loan for purchasing or leasing lands, for
starting or expanding business, for building or maintaining houses or for buying cattle. Other
reasons for taking loan includes wedding cost or dowry for daughter’s wedding, legal costs in
case of disputes among the communities, medical expenditures etc.
Findings from the FGDs suggest that, people who have regular in-flow of income i.e. day laborers
prefer micro-credit schemes which require weekly installments by MFIs; on the other hand people
who cannot afford weekly installments go for bank loans or loan from money lender and repay
98%
41%
2%59%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Have Access to Loan Have outstanding loan
No
Yes
Outstanding Loan Amount (BDT) Mean St. Dev.
Loan Amount 21,162 15,019
Purpose of Taking Loan Responses
Agricultural investment 49%
Purchase/lease land 14%
Business 15%
Build/maintain housing 13%
Buy cattle 8%
Other 22%
34
after harvesting their crop. Among different sources of loan people avail, ASA is the most popular
source of loans, followed by Grameen Bank and BRAC.As asked about the reason behind this
preference, respondents stated that, flexibility of loan repayment is partly a reason. People do not
prefer MFIs which are not flexible in collection of repayment installment and do not give any space.
However, respondents hardly mentioned if there is any difference in interest rate; it seems
complex for them to calculate.
Source of Loan
Micro-finance Institutes Response
ASA 31%
Grameen Bank 21%
BRAC 15%
RDRS 3%
TMSS 2%
ESDO 2%
Grameen Shokti 1%
Polli Daridro Bimochon Prokolpo 3%
Bank
Krishi Bank 12%
Agroni Bank/Janata Bank 6%
Others
Ekti Bari Ekti Khamar 6%
Grocery store 4%
Neighbor 3%
Mohajon (Money Lender) 2%
3.3. Gender Involvement
Post-harvest related activities in the agriculture are pre-dominantly done by women in these three
targeted sub-districts. This was confirmed both by the survey and by the FGDs. Women are also
responsible for raising and looking after livestock and poultry. In some cases, women also work
as day laborers. Respondents of Tetulia stated that in about 30% of household contain female
day laborer working as non-agricultural laborer for instance in stone crushing. This figure is higher
than the survey data would suggest. Female agricultural day laborers receive lower wages than
men by between BDT 50 and BDT 100 per day.
Table 13 Secondary Sources of Income for Women
Secondary Sources of Income
For Female Panchagarh Tetulia Baliadangi
Tailors work 2 2 0
Job 0 0 2
Stone laborer 2 1 1
Tea garden laborer 0 0 0
Number of respondents 4 3 3
35
Women in Baliadangi are seen working in agriculture for instance planting, weeding, harvesting
etc. on their own fields. This might be because of cultural differences. In Baliadangi, Hindu people
are common for which it is more acceptable for them to work in the field. From the FGDs we
conducted it was found however that, there is no women day laborer there in Baliadangi. However,
women do not have full control over the income they earn as day labor although female
respondents said that generating income makes them more empowered and accepted in their
family.
From the sample survey it was found that, majority (88%) of the respondents said that decisions
are made jointly about major family affairs. There was a small difference in responses between
men and women. No men stated that the women make the decisions in their household, although
some women stated that they make the decisions (note that this is not necessarily a contradiction
since it will in part be due to the existence of female-headed households where no man is
present).
Broadly speaking- the results are similar whether men or women answer. However clearly this
question may not fully capture the complex dynamics around actual decision-making- particularly
given the fact that many women were less informed about the finances of their farming practices
and did not know the price received for their crops. It may be that respondents answered that they
make decisions jointly because there is a negative perception around saying that the man makes
all the decisions, or that they assumed this is what the researchers wanted to hear. Given
background knowledge of the rural context- it seems unlikely that the women are as empowered
as the headline 88% figure would suggest.
Table 14 Who makes the decisions in your households?
Decision made by Male Respondents Female Respondents
Husband 10% 8%
Wife 0% 6%
Husband and wife together 90% 86%
Payment of dowries is still common in the targeted region and the rate is excessively high. For
example families have to pay a dowry of BDT 20,000 to 100,000 or more for each wedding
depending on the qualification of the groom9. Survey respondents were asked whether they had
paid a dowry in the past year- and so many of them had not since they may not have had a
daughter married in that time period.
However from the FGD findings, we found that early marriage is prevalent in the targeted region
and that dowries are required always. People marry their daughter off at the age between 14
years to 18 years. As we asked about the reason for doing that responses from one of the FGD
in Baliadangi were like below,
9Note that this upper end was reported in FGD discussions- not through the survey.
36
“As any girl grows up, the amount of the dowry increases. We cannot marry any of our daughters
off without dowry.”
Table 15 Expense in Dowry
3.4. Agricultural Practices and Status of
Production
Agricultural Practices
In the targeted three upazillas where the survey was conducted, agriculture is the main source of
income for majority (60% of the surveyed respondents) of the respondents. Highland and middle-
high lands hold the majority of total cultivable land of the upazillas. Rice is the prominent food
crop followed by wheat and maize is the cash crop. A snapshot of the targeted three upazillas is
shown by the below table-
Table 16 Agriculture at a glance
Sadar Upazilla,
Panchagarh (In
hectare)
Tetulia Upazilla,
Panchagarh (In hectare)
Baliadangi Upazilla, Thakurgaon (In hectare)
Total cultivable land 25,800 18,919 28,425
High land 20,640 8,513 15,000
Middle-high land 3,870 9,459 10,080
Middle-low land 1,290 947 3,345
Acreage (hectare) in different crop
Crops Panchagarh Sadar Tetulia Baliadangi
Rice (Aman season) 23,220 12,755 25,000
Boro (Boro season) 2,400 2,580 5,960
Wheat 7,000 1,485 15,000
Chili 2,000 - 2,000
Potato 2,000 786 2,500
Maize 6,000 53 -
Sesame/Mustard 2,000 91 1,200
Jute 3,000 195 1,500
Vegetable 3,500 262 1,000
Source: Key informant interview Note: Data not found for blank fields.
Respondents’ families expense in Dowry (for the last year)
Panchagarh Tetulia Baliadangi
Response Mean Std.
Dev.
Response Mean Std.
Dev.
Response Mean Std.
Dev.
Dowry 0 2
30,00
0 28,284 1 20,000 0
Number
of
Respon
dents
86 53 60
Note: Figures are in BDT
37
From the sample survey it was found that the average of total cultivable land possessed by the
respondents is higher in Baliadangi (131 decimal) than in Panchagarh (110 decimal) and Tetulia
(109 decimal). The survey also determines how much land farmers keep fallow. Findings from
FGDs suggest that, farmers define fallow land both as land kept fallow around the year, but also
in some cases include lands which cultivate vegetables, Robi season crops as subsistence crops
only once in a year and kept fallow for rest of the year, lands with bamboo bush etc.
Tetulia Panchagarh Baliadangi
Average Decimal
Base Average Decimal
Base Average Decimal
Base
Own land 111 32 105 64 114 39
Family Land 123 53 117 86 141 60
Leased in land 58 10 71 20 40 15
Leased out land 33 2 67 2 0 0
Mortgaged land 44 8 55 3 42 7
Total Land 109 53 110 86 131 60
Cultivable Land 39 53 35 84 33 60
Fallow Land 126 24 129 42 147 23
Tea Cultivable (Previously fallow)
39 25 33 36 33 20
Tea Cultivable (Previously other
crop)
44 39 44 62 35 46
Total Tea Cultivable Land
51 53 45 86 39 60
The average of total tea cultivable lands is higher for respondents in Tetulia but lower in
Baliadangi. This may be the effect from the confidence farmers got from seeing other small holder
tea growers whereas, in Baliadangi it is not common.
Almost all (96%) of the respondents replied that, they mainly invest from agriculture from their
own findings. About 9% of the respondents take loan from MFIs. Note that farmers may invest in
their agriculture from more than one source.
38
Table 17 Funding for Agriculture
Status of Production:
There is a common saying we heard repeatedly as we interviewed any farmer during the survey,
“Agriculture does not provide with any profitability rather we incur losses for every other year;
however, we continue cultivating crops as purchasing food instead would cost higher. Moreover,
our investment in agriculture is in fractions of time and money rather than in bulk amount; so as
we harvest and get the return in bulk, it is something useful.”
Detailed examination of their costs and revenues through our survey- suggests that actually
farmers are profitable. Farmers’ appear to perceive their agricultural activities to be less profitable
than they actually are.
To know the extent of losses (if any) incurred by farmers, the cost benefit analysis of top five crops
is given below. Please note that net profit was calculated by combining revenue from the crop in
question with revenue from by-products and then subtracting the total cost.
Table 18 Cost Benefit Analysis of top five crops
Rice Tetulia Panchagarh Baliadangi
Land size (dec) 84 103 101
Total cost (BDT) 10792 15469 11776
Total production (Kg) 1371 1846 1572
Sale Volume (Kg) 462 735 383
Average sales price (BDT) 14 14 14
Total Rice Revenue (BDT) 19122 25581 21568
Revenue from By-products 2473 1435 1991
Net profit (BDT) 10803 11547 11782
Profit/decimal 129 113 117
Wheat Tetulia Panchagarh Baliadangi
Land size (dec) 59 41 71
Total cost (BDT) 8126 6729 10890
Total production (Kg) 934 564 980
Sale Volume (Kg) 840 504 840
96%
2.30% 0.50% 3.20% 9% 6.30% 0.50% 0.90%0%
20%40%60%80%
100%120%
39
Average sales price (BDT) 16 16 16
Total Wheat Revenue (BDT) 15031 8761 15488
Revenue from By-products 418 192 646
Net profit (BDT) 7324 1936 5244
Profit/decimal 125 55 74
Maize Tetulia Panchagarh Baliadangi
Land size (dec) 28 63 44
Total cost (BDT) 7874 14274 8656
Total production (Kg) 1060 2268 1459
Sale Volume (Kg) 1060 2268 1459
Average sales price (BDT) 11 11 10
Total Maize Revenue (BDT) 11660 26141 14173
Revenue from By-products 0 522 590
Net profit (BDT) 3786 12389 6106
Profit/decimal 138 196 138
Chili Tetulia Panchagarh Baliadangi
Land size (dec) 36 36 45
Total cost (BDT) 9844 9097 8612
Total production (Kg) 280 450 233
Sale Volume (Kg) 242 420 198
Average sales price (BDT) 82 76 86
Total Chili Revenue (BDT) 16720 27662 19864
Revenue from By-products 187 89 423
Net profit (BDT) 7063 18654 11676
Profit/decimal 195 521 262
Jute Tetulia Panchagarh Baliadangi
Land size (dec) 37 28 26
Total cost (BDT) 5589 4307 5105
Total production (Kg) 557 279 234
Sale Volume (Kg) 557 279 233
Average sales price (BDT) 35 35 36
Total Jute Revenue (BDT) 13794 9356 9171
Revenue from By-products 1066 203 217
Net profit (BDT) 9271 5244 4288
Profit/decimal 253 185 167
Whilst there are regional differences between the three areas, a general pattern emerges from
the survey findings that while all crops are profitable, the most profitable are cash crops like chili
and jute. Wheat is the crop which gives the most disappointing return in all three regions.
The data from the survey can be compared with the data taken from the FGD discussions. In
some cases, the FGDs presented a range rather than a definite figure. As can be seen- the data
are consistent from FGD to survey. There appears to be a small tendency for the survey to
suggest higher profitability/at the upper end of profitability compared to the FGD.
Comparison of FGD and Survey Data on Profitability
40
Crop Low-FGD (BDT/decimal)
High-FGD (BDT/decimal)
Survey (BDT/decimal)
Aman Rice 61 91 119
Wheat 76 76 85
Maize 121 121 157
Chili 242 333 326
Jute 181 181 201
As we surveyed the behavioral practices for improved cultivation techniques and access to those,
we found that the vast majority of respondents apply organic fertilizers. By organic fertilizers,
people meant cow-dung and poultry litter. Farmers of the region also sometimes plant some
bushes or sticks near the farm land to attract birds and to reduce pest attacks naturally- which is
one Integrated Pest Management method. However no farmers were found to use soil testing,
pheromone trap or other improved techniques to farming.
Improved Agricultural Method Tetulia (%) Panchagarh (%)
Baliadangi (%)
Use of Soil Test 0.0 0.0 0.0
Use of Organic Fertilizer 100.0 86.0 96.7
Planting bush/stick/small tree in field to attract birds to kill pests. 24.5 27.9 8.3
Pheromone Trap 0.0 0.0 0.0
Leaf colour chart (for urea use) 0.0 0.0 0.0
Improved Irrigation (drainage system) 0.0 0.0 1.7
AWD (Advanced Wet and Dry) 0.0 0.0 0.0
Did you follow the advice of local agricultural officers on amount of fertilizer used?
3.8 9.3 1.7
Only a very small number of farmers were found to use improved techniques of irrigation as
defined as irrigation with drainage system and none used Advanced Wet and Dry (AWD).
However from the FGD findings and KII with the agriculture office we see that almost all (95%) of
the cultivable land have access to irrigation. Farmers in the targeted region do not use optimum
amount of irrigation to their lands as it increases production cost and the higher production cost
does not necessarily lead to higher profitability. Farmers however, agreed that they will irrigate in
required volume while cultivating tea as tea is a highly profitable crop. Distinguished respondent
from one of the FGDs conducted in Tetulia said,
“We cannot irrigate in optimum volume as we do not have money. We will obviously irrigate tea
garden as it will reward us with higher profit. One farmer used the rural expression, ‘It is good to
tolerate the kick of a cow which gives milk’ (Jei goru dudh dey tar latthi khawa jai)”. This
expression is intended to convey the impression that even though something may have a
downside (in this case that tea requires irrigation which is expensive) – if there is a great enough
benefit (i.e. profit from the tea), then the downside can be tolerated.
Tea Related knowledge
Few of the farmers of the targeted upazillas are familiar with tea farming as small and marginal
farmers around them are growing tea for years. However, by knowledge on tea cultivation it was
41
meant that farmers can do tea cultivation of their own. As we asked about the sources of this
knowledge, they responded that, they learnt from neighboring farmers, some of them working in
the tea garden as labor and learnt from there etc. So for most of the time it was informal.
3.5. Existing Market and Relationship with Various
Market Actors
Respondents of the FGDs opined that they all have access to quality inputs like seeds, fertilizer
and pesticide. All of them go to local markets for buying inputs and selling agricultural produce.
Output traders may provide them with the transportation if they are bulk selling produce.
Prominent input sources and output destinations in the targeted Upazilla are listed below-
Upazilla Local markets
Panchagarh Sadar Jogodol haat, Kazir haat,
Tetulia Shalbahan haat, Tetulia haat,
Baliadangi Lahiri haat, Pariya haat
Source: Key Informant Interview
The prospective tea growers of Panchagarh have poor co-ordination with public sector support
service providers. Farmers rely more on private sector market actors like input sellers or traders
of agricultural produces than public sector service providers like livestock officers or the SAAOs.
For any solution regarding cultivation, input sellers play a vital role regardless of their expertise
or level of knowledge on the matter. For problems that aren’t typical or common, sometimes the
farmers suffer because of incorrect advice. Some of the respondents in FGDs also alleged that
input sellers sometimes give incorrect advice deliberately because they (input sellers) want to sell
more.
From the key personnel interviews under this study, some of the stakeholders opined that small
holder tea gardening is increasing at rapid pace. It will eventually come up with scarcity of efficient
workers. Respective personnel of Bangladesh Tea Board (BTB) discoursed that, quality of leaf
mostly depends on the timing and way of plucking. Efficiency of workers matters in this regard.
So it will be important to build workers’ and growers’ capacity to grow better quality of tea and
harvest it correctly.
11.8% 4.6%
88.2% 95.3%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Male Female
No
Yes
Have you been given any training or knowledge in tea cultivation?
42
Tea Factory Bought/own leaf Production in 2015 (made
tea, Kg)
Usual capacity/year (made tea KG)
Highest capacity/year (made tea KG)
Tetulia Tea Company Ltd. (TTCL)
Bought leaf 2,54,531 3,00,000 5,00,000
Korotoa Tea Factory
Bought leaf 7,17,367 6,00,000 10,00,000
Green Care Agro Bought leaf 3,13,634 3,50,000 6,00,000
North Bengal Central Tea Factory
Bought leaf 7,52,272 6,00,000 10,80,000
Green Energy Tea Factory Ltd.
Bought leaf 53,000 Experimentally functioning, capacity yet to set
Kazi & Kazi Own leaf 4,31,117 3,50,000 6,00,000
Celalan Tea Factory Bought leaf Yet to start operation in Tetulia
Green Field Tea Factory
Bought leaf Yet to start operation in Baliadangi
Source: Key Informant Interview
Tea processing factories in Panchagarh are the buyers of green leaves produced by the small
tea growers. Processing factories prefers two and a half leaves in a bud which allows ensuring
the highest quality of tea. To provide good quality leaves, the growers have to pluck every 15
days. However, sometimes growers pluck only once in a month when leaves become five to even
seven leaves in a bud. This creates more yield than plucking in 10 days cycle. So, there is a gap
between expectations of factories and growers. From the key personnel interview, it was revealed
that, tea factories want to initiate directives on offering different prices for different grades of
leaves so that farmers are forced to maintain the quality of leaves. However, the price is fixed by
the consortium comprising members from all the stakeholders.
The quality of tea produced by farmers has the potential to become a source of tension between
factories and farmers. The representatives of the Tea Board claimed that factories sometimes
dishonestly claim that tea offered is low quality to garner price reductions. They also stated that
in the rainy season (when production is high) factories effectively reduce10 the price offered to
farmers even though the price should be fixed according to law.
3.6. Existing Producers’ Groups in the Project
Vicinity and Group Activities
Findings from the survey and FGDs suggest that the respondents do not have membership to
any formal groups whatsoever before the start of the project. In fact, none of the participants of
the FGDs reported there being any kinds of development project that worked with them. However,
from the sample survey we found one respondent in Tetulia involved in one of the local community
co-operatives. The co-operative provides with loan for purchasing cattle and the respondent is
10Factories do not reduce prices explicitly; rather what they do is pay for discounted (less) volume of produce for sake
of below quality leaves supplied by farmers.
43
moderately satisfied with the loan. However, the co-operative does not facilitate any collective
action or any group savings.
Table 19 Membership of the Respondents
If there is any society/group Yes No (%)
Tetulia 0.5% 99.5%
Panchagarh Sadar 0.0% 100%
Baliadangi 0.0% 100%
Typically, there are micro-finance institutions operating in the project vicinity, but according to the
participants, none of those organization have formed any kinds of formal groups. Respondents
reported that they are member of micro-finance institutions’ and NGOs working with microfinance
schemes.
We also asked about expectations and services that farmers’ need from any group and received
diverse responses. The most popular response was help with collective selling, followed by
respondents seeking training on cultivation related techniques for tea cultivation. Other
respondents asked for help with livestock rearing, tea sapling and irrigation facilities. The table
below shows the full responses from the sample survey.
Facilities/services seek from any group Responses
Tea cultivation technique 60%
Tea saplings 39%
Credit/loan facilities 16%
Savings opportunity 17%
Financial support on tea cultivation 20%
Tea leaves marketing 24%
Irrigation facility 39%
Livestock rearing training 50%
Collective selling 80%
Improved agriculture knowledge 21%
Land fill-up (plinth raise) 5%
Interest-free loans 5%
3.7. Policy and Services
Knowledge on the availability of Government Services
Findings from the FGDs suggest that many of the participant farmers are unaware of their rights
and entitlements and of relevant government services that they can demand. To refer
Government services, farmers say that, SAAO does not visit field and give solutions for crop
disease and pest management. This statement is towards livestock offices as well. Farmers
attribute their lack of knowledge on entitlements and services from Government to absence of
44
coordination with the Government service providers. However, many of the respondents of FGD
were aware about the regulatory role of BTB in setting price for green tea leaves.
Services Rendered by Various Agencies
From our sample it was found that the vast majority of respondents do not receive services from
government or other agencies (85.9%). From those respondents that do receive services, about
half (46.4%) report getting them from government institutions, with others receiving services from
MFIs (28.6%), a community school (7.1%), Krishi Bank (7.1%), Union Parishad, Agroni Bank and
a Tea Factory (all 3.6% each). By services farmers mean solutions on cultivation practices and
diseases, disease of livestock and poultry and subsidy on seed or other inputs and livestock.
However, findings from the FGDs conducted suggest that, in case of agricultural solutions,
farmers rely on input sellers.
Table 20 Services from Various Institutions
Service Provider Response
BTB (Bangladesh Tea Board) 0.0%
Govt. Institutions (DAE, Livestock) 46.4%
Private Sector (input sellers, buyers, livestock drug sellers) 0.0%
Anondo School (Community school) 7.1%
Union Parishad 3.6%
Agrani Bank 3.6%
Tea Factory 3.6%
Krishi Bank (RAKUB) 7.1%
MFI* 28.6%
Number of Respondents who received services 28
Number of Respondents who did not receive services 171
Some of the private sector market actors such as the dealers and retailers extend credit facilities
to the farmers on fertilizer. The below table shows received services-
Received Services Responses
Advice/Technology sharing 52.8%
Loan 41.7%
Knowledge sharing 10.6%
Sanitation 2.8%
Savings 2.8%
Many of the FGD participants opined that public sector service providers provide sub-optimal
services. Opinion of one of the respondents from a FGD says,
“Once my cattle were affected by disease and the government livestock office provided with the
treatment, however, the treatment did not work and my cattle died. There are others in this
meeting who lost their cattle as well.”
Note: * Grameen Bank, BRAC, ASA, NGOs having micro-finance scheme
45
Level of satisfaction with existing services Response
Highly satisfied 5.6%
Moderately satisfied 63.9%
Not Satisfied 30.5%
Source: Sample survey
Participants complained that DAE officials rarely visit their farms. SAAOs are hard to find when
solutions are needed. Whenever any farmer visit livestock offices for solution to disease, they
need to pay for availing the services even though solutions from livestock officers are supposed
to be offered for free. However, while interviewing various government officials such as the
Upazilla Agriculture Officers and Upazilla Livestock Officers, they admitted that the number of
Government service providers is not sufficient enough to offer complete coverage of services in
all the areas under their jurisdictions. Moreover, the long distance between farmers’ farm lands
and Upazilla Sadar restricts farmers’ incentive to go for government services and incur higher
cost for such services. In the sample survey, interviewees mentioned about the following services
provided by the government and private sectors.
Required Services by Respondents All
Technical know-how on agriculture 1.5
Savings facility 4.1
Provide tea saplings 45.5
Tea cultivation training 67.1
Loan/credit 27.0
Healthcare/health awareness 2.3
Collective actions 0.9
Form cooperatives/society 2.7
Education program 0.5
Monitoring/solve tea cultivation 2.3
Financial support 12.2
Irrigation for tea cultivation 4.5
Fertilizer/pesticides for free 12.2
Provide electricity 1.4
Build School/hospital 1.5
Livestock rearing training 3.2
3.8. Vulnerability from Natural Disasters
11% of the survey respondents reported to have been affected by drought and 1% by flooding in
the last 5 years. However, the FGD responses differed somewhat. Respondents in almost all the
FGDs stated that drought causes harm to agriculture every year. The reasons for this discrepancy
are not clear- but it may be that in the FGD setting people replied thinking about themselves- but
also their friends/neighbors, whilst for the survey they only answered in response to their own
circumstances. Consequences of drought include, increase in cost of irrigation, decrease in yield,
reduction in quality of produces etc.
46
Figure 9 Percentage of Respondents Affected by Natural Disasters in the Last 5 Years
Among the sample survey respondents who have been affected by natural disasters in the last
five years reported additional cost incurred due to excessive irrigation and loss of yield. The
average of additional cost incurred in BDT 6,183 in 33 decimal of land.
Additional cost (33 decimal) incurred for natural disaster
Average 6,183
Standard Deviation 2,533
Responses from the sample survey revealed that
about 69% of the respondents have safety
measures other than savings for vulnerability
against natural disasters or in need. The below table
shows the means of safety measures respondents
have. Predominantly their safety measures consist
of selling off assets such as livestock or land.
Means of safety measures Responses
Cow sales 55.8%
Savings 14.0%
Land sales 32.6%
Tree sales 7.8%
Stipends 16.3%
Old age allowance 11.7%
Goat Sales 1.0%
11.01.0
88.0
Effect of Natural Disaster
Affected indraught
Affected in flood
Not Affected innatural disaster
69%
31%
Respondents have other safety measures
Yes
No
47
4. CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, the baseline survey demonstrates that farmers and their families in the targeted
areas have a genuine need for a project of this sort to increase their earnings and make their
agricultural activities more profitable. At present they state they make little profit- and
predominantly grow rice to eat rather than sell. Farmers already grow a range of crops such as
chili, sugar cane and jute alongside staples such as rice, wheat and maize and seemed keen to
try a new crop. Many farmers mentioned that they had heard of the success of tea growing through
various other sources and were keen to learn how to grow it.
The three districts are similar in many respects- although Baliadangi has some differences to
Panchagarh and Tetulia. These should be accounted for in the project design. It will be particularly
important to determine which agricultural activities women will be expected to undertake when
considering the training that is provided. In all three districts women were involved in post-harvest
activities- which are particularly important for tea since tea factories seek higher quality produce
which has to be picked by hand and more regularly.
Farmers are currently not members of collective groups- although are interested in many of the
possibilities this could bring. Farmers’ responses also showed that they are interested in the
groups providing a wide range of services- many of which are applicable outside the scope of
only growing tea. This supports Traidcraft’s approach that farmers groups will have additional
benefits such as farmers using collective selling to get a better price for non-tea produce.
Farmers were generally positive to learn about tea cultivation and keen to receive support from
Traidcraft. Many farmers have already experimented with crop diversification into other crops
such as chilies or sugarcane. Most farmers already have alternative income streams such as
working as a day laborer or some other business interest. Tea cultivation will need to be seen as
a profitable enough activity to merit the time they spend on it therefore- since their crop will need
to be sold to factories to become a final product.
Page | 48
ANNEX 1 FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION
SUMMARY
S/N Date of FGD Conducted
Address/ Venue Number of Participant
Number of Male: Female
Number Ethnic Minority*
1 March 28, 2016 Bamon Para, Sadar,
Panchagarh 10 6:4 None
2 March 25, 2016 Talma, Sadar Panchagarh 10 5:5 None
3 March 26, 2016 Banagaon (Jotpara), Baliadangi, Thakurgaon
10 8:2 All
4 March 26, 2016 Sholapukur, Baliadangi, Thakurgaon
8 4:4 All
5 March 25, 2016 Mohigaj, Tetulia,
Panchagarh 9 7:2 None
6 March 25, 2016 Sonarban, Tetulia, Panchagarh
10 9:1 None
7 March 25, 2016 Bakshipara, Tetulia,
Panchagarh 10 7:3 None
8 March 25, 2016 Uttar Talma, Sadar, Panchagarh
10 6:4 None
9 March 28, 2016 Narayangaj, Tetulia, Panchagarh
10 5:5 None
10 March 26, 2016 Nitaldoba, Baliadangi, Thakurgaon
9 7:2 None
11 March 26, 2016 Nitaldoba, Baliadangi, Thakurgaon
10 8:3 None
12 March 28, 2016 Pariya, Baliadangi, Thakurgaon
10 6:4 None
Total 116 77:39
* By Ethnic Minority we mean low caste Hindu, indigenous people (Santal).
A total of twelve Focused Group Discussions (FGDs) have been conducted in which respondents
were the members of different Small Tea Growers (STG) group formed by the project “Sustainable
Figure 10 Target Area of the Study
Page | 49
livelihoods for 1,500 smallholders farming households (7,500 people) in the extreme north of
Bangladesh-”. FGDs were conducted to study the baseline condition of farmers grouped under
the project. Bikash Bangladesh/Traidcraft Exchange have been facilitating these groups of Tetulia
and Sadar Upazilla of Panchagarh district and Baliadangi Upazilla of Thakurgaon district to
provide sustainable support to the disadvantaged small farmers of the region to build the capacity
of growing tea, improve cultivation practices, increase income and access to services and
entitlements.
4.1. Module 1: Status of Income and Expenditure
Sadar Upazilla, Panchagarh Small farmers participated in the FGDs conducted in Panchagarh reported that about 95% of
them earn their living from agricultural farming. Very small portion of household (approximately
5%) do services within the district or outside the district, own small business, and some small
landless live by selling physical labor. They also mentioned that about 70% of the household have
at least one member who sells physical labor alongside agricultural farming. Remaining 30% of
the households live entirely by agricultural income. Labor includes both agricultural and non-
agricultural labor. Among non-agricultural labor includes extracting under-ground riverine stone,
working in stone crushing plants. Very few groups situated near Tetulia members are working in
tea garden and factory as well.
When we discussed about share of income
earned from different sources, small farmers
participated in the FGDs were not keen to
admit notable portion of income earned from
agricultural farming. They responded that,
about 30% of an average household income
comes from agriculture (food crops and cash
crops) and 10% from rearing livestock and poultry. Whereas, about 50%, in some FGDs 80%
share of income by small farmers’ household reported to be earned by selling physical labor.
Interestingly there is remarkable difference between earning from agricultural labor and labor in
stone extracting and stone crushing plants. Agricultural labors could earn about BDT 300 whereas
extracting under-ground stone could make about BDT 500 or even up to BDT 800 a day, however,
working in stone is much hard work for which relatively young can do it. About 20% to 30% of the
households in the targeted area have female members selling physical labor. There are some
culture issues; this rate higher in Hindu majority areas compared to Muslim majority areas. Female
day laborers typically work in sorting section of stone crushing plants and tea garden and could
earn about BDT 200 to BDT 250 a day.
Source of Household Income Income Share
Food and Cash crop 30%
Livestock and Poultry 10%
Selling physical labor 50%
Others (salary, business income, selling tree etc.)
10%
Note: This is an average of responses from FGDs in Panchagarh.
Source of Household Expenditure
Share of Expenditure
Food 60%
Clothing 5%
Health care 5%
Children education 5%
Page | 50
Among expenditures of a typical small farmer
household in Panchagarh, expenditure on
food items accounts for the majority share.
Respondents of different FGDs responded
that, majority of yearly expenditure consist of
spending on food. Responses ranged from 50% to 80% respective of different FGD. It indicates
the priorities of a typical rural small farmers’ family. Among food item rice, potato, vegetables etc.
are grown as subsistence crop, cost of which we took as the family expenditure. A typical small
farmer family expends about 5% to 10% of family income in clothing. Respondents opined that
they buy clothing twice a year. Cost of children education accounts for 5% to 10% of the family
expenditure. Respondents of Panchagarh reported that about 80% of families have school-going
children and the cost includes cost of education materials, tuition, school fees etc. Among ‘other’
household expenditure, farmers reported the cost of entertainment and gift of relatives on different
religious and social occasions.
Tetulia Upazilla, Panchagarh Resembling respondents of FGDs in
Panchagarh small farmers from Tetulia
responded also that agriculture is the prime
source of income for about 95% of them.
However, respondents from Tetulia opined
that, about 80% to 90% of the household sell
physical labor alongside agriculture and
about 50% of households have their women working as day laborer. Moreover, a majority portion
of their household income 60% of their household income for example comes from selling physical
labor; in some of the FGDs respondents even reported that 80% of their household income comes
from selling physical labor. However, labor in Tetulia is somewhat a bit different from those in
Panchagarh. The majority of labor in Tetulia consisted of labor in stone extraction and stone
crushing. There are some laborers working in tea gardens and factories also. People from the
region concentrate on non-agricultural labor because agricultural labor could earn about BDT 300
a day (BDT 200 for tea garden and factory labor), extracting stone on the other hand (under-
ground stone and riverine stone) could earn from BDT 500 up to BDT 800. Working in stone
crushing plants and stone sorting could make about BDT 300 a day. This is why income share
from physical labor holds the majority and that from agriculture shrinks for respondents in Tetulia.
Stone extracting season goes for 6 months a year (rainy season) however, crushing plants run
all year round.
As we discussed about the household expenditure, responses were largely similar to that of
Panchagarh Sadar Upazilla. Unlike Panchagarh, respondents in Tetulia opined that they incur
10% of their income on clothing.
Housing 5%
Others (entertainment, relatives, religious cost, transportation etc.)
10%
Note: This is an average of responses from FGDs in Panchagarh
Source of Household Income Income Share
Food and Cash crop 20%
Livestock and Poultry 10%
Selling physical labor 60%
Others (salary, business income, selling tree etc.)
10%
Note: This is an average of responses from FGDs in Tetulia.
Page | 51
Baliadangi Upazilla, Thakurgaon As we discussed income and expenditure in
FGDs conducted in Baliadangi Upazilla,
scenario are a bit different from that in
Panchagarh districts. Income from food and
cash crops holds half of the household
income share in Baliadangi. Agriculture over
there is somewhat profitable as cost of labor
is relatively cheaper compared to Panchagarh district. About 20% of their household income
comes from selling physical labor, however, in Baliadangi we found basically agriculture labor and
a very small portion (2% to 3%) consists of working as porter and tea garden labor. There are
some small growers’ tea garden and two estates in Baliadangi which employs very small number
of labor (about 200 persons in a 65 acres tea estate owned by local entrepreneur Mr. Foyzul Islam
Hiru, 130 acres estate owned by local parliament member Mr. Dobirul Islam and about 33 acres
of small growers’ garden). Cost of labor in Baliadangi Upazilla is about BDT 200 to BDT 300 a
day.
As we discussed about household
expenditure in the FGDs, we found that
responses in the FGDs differed only slightly
between Baliadangi and the other districts.
FGD respondents were only making
approximate estimates of their expenditure-
so this small variation is likely not significant.
Distinguishing features among the sub-districts: • Agricultural income in Baliadangi have the highest portion of household income share
whereas, day laborer holds the highest portion in Tetulia.
• Tetulia have the largest percentage of non-agricultural labor. About 80% to 90%of
households have members who sell physical labor in stone extracting and stone crushing
and in tea garden and factories.
• Day laborer in Baliadangi Upazilla is mostly of agricultural day laborer. Non-agricultural
day labor found to be very small in number i.e. approximately 2% reported to work in tea
garden or as porter.
• In Panchagarh and Tetulia Upazilla almost all of the day laborer work in stone extracting
and stone crushing plants and in tea garden as well.
4.2. Module 2: Agricultural Practices and
Production Detail
Source of Household Income Income Share
Food and Cash crop 50%
Livestock and Poultry 20%
Selling agriculture labor 20%
Others (salary, business income, selling tree etc.)
10%
Note: This is an average of responses from FGDs in Baliadangi.
Source of Household Expenditure
Share of Expenditure
Food 60%
Clothing 10%
Health care 5%
Children education 10%
Housing 5%
Others (entertainment, relatives, religious cost, transportation etc.)
10%
Note: This is an average of responses from FGDs in Baliadangi.
Page | 52
Among cultivable lands in targeted regions there are of three types of lands i.e. high lands, middle
high lands and middle low lands. The high lands which accounts for the highest in portion followed
by middle high lands. Very few are middle low lands where Boro season rice is cultivated pre-
dominantly as it requires less irrigation. Aman season rice, wheat, maize, chili, sugarcane,
vegetable are cultivated in High lands and middle high lands. A brief of cost benefit analysis are
given below-
1. Table: Cost Benefit Analysis of Major Crops
Prominent Crop (33 decimal) Total Cost (BDT) Total Yield (Kg) Total Revenue (BDT)
Net Profit (BDT)
Rice (Boro) 7,000 - 10,000 640 - 800 8,000 - 10,000 0 - 1,000
Rice (Aman) 4,000 - 6,000 480 - 640 7,000 - 8,000 2,000 - 3,000
Wheat 4,500 - 6,000 400 - 480 7,000 - 8400 2,500
Maize 6,000 – 8,000 1,000 - 1, 200 10,000 – 12,000 4,000
Chili 6,000 – 9,000 180 - 400 14,000 – 20,000 8,000 – 11,000
Sugarcane 8,000 – 11,000 7,000 – 10,000 18,000 – 22,000 10,000 – 11,000
Jute 4,000 – 6,000 300 - 400 10,000 – 12,000 6,000
Sadar Upazilla, Panchagarh There is a total of 25,800 hectares11 of cultivable land in Panchagarh Sadar Upazilla. About 80%
of these cultivable lands are high land, 15% are middle-high and rests 5% are middle low land.
Small farmers in Panchagarh Sadar Upazilla produce rice, wheat, chili, potato etc. as prominent
food crops. However, about 80% to 90% of the produced rice is kept for family consumption.
Maize is the prominent cash crop in the region followed by jute. Some of the farmers cultivate
sugarcane as they get seedling and fertilizer on credit from local sugar mills which they repay by
providing produces to the particular sugar mill. However, this crop is losing its share as it is a long
term crop for which farmers consider the investment to be burdensome for them.
Respondents of the FGD opined that about 90% of the cultivable lands have access to irrigation
facility. Only a very small number of respondents, (3-5%) reported having their own shallow
machine and pump. Farmers who do not have shallow machines hire from nearby to irrigate their
land. Usually large farmers possess their own shallow and pump and lend those for an hourly fee.
However, farmers do not irrigate in required extent as they deem irrigation to increase the cost of
the production and not having good profitability in return. For example they irrigate wheat field
once or twice in a season whereas they know that for good yield it requires 4 to 5 times of irrigation
in such high lands they cultivate. About 90% of the farmers use bought seed and rest 10% use
retained seed. However, crops like maize, chili, jute, vegetable seeds used are rarely retained
seed. Farmers have access to quality fertilizer and pesticide of nationally recognized brands like
Auto Crop Care, Syngenta, ACI, Petrochem, SEMCO/NAAFCO group, Bayer Crop Science etc.
However, small farmers present in FGDs opined that they use relatively cheaper fertilizers and
pesticides of not renowned brands. From prior experience of implementing agricultural projects
Innovision deems these to be of sub-optimal quality. As we discussed about the reasons for such
practices responses were that, making agricultural investment is to some extent challenging for
11Source: DAE, Panchagarh Sadar Upazilla.
Page | 53
small farmers we targeted as cost of inputs are high and return on investment is low due to low
market price for produces. For selecting brands and dosage of fertilizer and pesticide, farmers as
common practice rely on the local input sellers available in local markets. Inputs farmers purchase
are on credit and they repay the amount after harvesting crops. Almost all of the FGDs responded
that farmers use power-tiller for land preparation, diesel powered threshing machines for rice and
wheat.
Tetulia Upazilla, Panchagarh
There is a total of 18,919 hectares12 of cultivable land in Tetulia Upazilla. About 8,513 hectares
of these cultivable lands are high land, 9,459 hectares are middle-high land and rests 947
hectares are middle low land. Among agricultural crops, rice, wheat chili is the prominent in Tetulia
and jute is the major cash crop followed by sugarcane. Among others potato, onion also cultivated
in the region. Agricultural labor in Tetulia is relatively costly and unavailable compared to
Baliadangi. This increases cost of production and makes agricultural farming less profitable and
subsistence cultivation for farmers in Tetulia. In Tetulia, farmers use organic fertilizer like cow
dung, chicken litter, kitchen ash etc.
Baliadangi Upazilla, Thakurgaon
There is a total of 25,000 hectares13 of cultivable land out of a total of 28,400 hectares of land in
Baliadangi Upazilla. About 10,000 hectares of these cultivable lands are high land, another 10,000
hectares are middle-high land and rests 5,000 hectares are middle low land. Rice is cultivated as
the main food crop in Baliadangi followed by wheat. Other than rice potato, wheat chili is also
cultivated in the Upazilla. Maize is the cash crop followed by jute. Some of the farmers cultivate
sugarcane as well as they get seedling and fertilizer on credit from local sugar mills and pay off
the loan after harvest. Agricultural labor is cheaper and available in Baliadangi compared to
Tetulia and Panchagarh as stone extracting and stone crushing labor is not accessible in the
region. This reduces the production cost and makes agricultural farming more profitable
compared to Tetulia and Panchagarh. From the FGDs conducted in Baliadangi we found that,
farmers in this region are more dependent on agricultural farming then those of Tetulia and
Panchagarh.
Distinguishing features among the sub-districts:
• Crop preferences among the respondents of FGDs conducted in different Upazillas are
shown below-
2. Table: Crops grown by different Households
Crop Panchagarh Baliadangi Tetulia
Rice (Aman) 95% 90% 95%
Rice (Boro) 10% 35% 10%
12Source: DAE, Baliadangi Upazilla, Thakurgaon. 3Source: DAE, Baliadangi Upazilla, Thakurgaon.
Page | 54
Wheat 77% 35% 50%
Maize 42% 40% 2%
Chili 29% 21% 27%
Jute 10% 20% 40%
Sesame 11% 16% 17%
Potato 26% 2% 5%
Sugar cane 3% 5% 10%
Vegetable 8% 14% 2%
• Summer tomato is grown to some extent in Panchagarh and Baliadangi whereas; it is not
a grown in Tetulia. Very small fraction of farmers in Tetulia grow vegetable merely for
family consumption. This is because required transportation cost is higher for farmers
producing summer vegetables in Tetulia.
• Availability of agricultural labor in Baliadangi is relatively higher compared to two sub-
districts in Panchagarh which eventually reflects in the labor cost. For example labor cost
is higher by approximately BDT 50 to 100 in Tetulia compared to that in Baliadangi.
4.3. Module 3: Women and Gender Involvement
Post-harvest related activities in the agriculture are pre-dominantly done by women in these three
targeted sub-districts. Women also do the work of raising and looking after livestock and poultry.
Women also work as day laborers. Respondents of Tetulia suggested that in about 30% of
households women work as day laborers in areas such as agriculture and stone crushing. This is
lower than was suggested in the survey and we do not have a clear explanation for this
discrepancy.
Female day laborers receive lower wages i.e. BDT 50 to BDT 100 per day compared to male
labor in agricultural day labor; the difference in wages is because male laborers do jobs which
require extensive physical strength i.e. digging soil and extracting stone. Female members in
Baliadangi are seen largely working in planting, weeding, harvesting etc. on their own field. In
Baliadangi Upazilla it is not a common scenario for women to work as agricultural or non-
agricultural day laborers.
From the FGDs we conducted it was found that women have less control in the income they earn
as day labor. Their male counterparts normally make the decisions around spending the money
earnt. In some cases, respondents claimed there is a joint decision made by the family.
Differences among the sub-districts: • There are more female agricultural laborer prevailing in Baliadangi Upazilla compared to
Tetulia and Panchagarh.
• In Tetulia and Panchagarh female laborers are found to work in stone crushing plants and
in tea estates. In Tetulia and Panchagarh about 30% of female household work in stone
crushing plants.
4.4. Module 4: Savings and Loans
Page | 55
Small farmers participated in the FGDs conducted in targeted region reported that they have
access to loan as and when they require. We found 50% to 60% to some extent, of the
respondents take loan. However, the sources of loan are micro-credit organizations namely
BRAC, ASA, Grameen Bank etc. and national NGOs having micro-credit scheme like RDRS,
TMSS etc. The common loan scheme popular among the respondents is one having repayment
schedule of 44 weekly installments. Interest rates ranges from 12.5% to as much as 15%.
Whoever prefers to take loan and invest in agriculture and repay the loan after harvesting, take
loan from Rajshahi Krishi Unnayan Bank-RAKUB. Other than RAKUB, taking loan from
commercial banks is found to be very minimal in number in the targeted region. People save in
mandatory savings in MFIs. While repaying the loan installment, a portion of the loan repayment
installment is saved in their account as mandatory savings. Small farmers withdraw those savings
and use for agricultural cost and buying livestock. Other than mandatory savings, very few
(approximately 3% to 5%) suggested that they save in formal institutions. People invest their
excess amount of income and profitability from agriculture on buying livestock and taking lease
lands. They consider these investments as savings and a means of cushion against vulnerability
and financial crisis.
4.5. Module 5: Group/Collective Action
Small farmers participated in the FGDs conducted in the targeted regions reported that there is
no farmers or community group or society formed by any NGO or organization. Collective activity
is thus not common in communities. However, participants responded that they understand the
benefits of collective action. They said that they will gain bargaining power over agricultural market
actors if they practice collective purchase and selling. They also mentioned that there will be cost
effectiveness through reduction in transportation cost and price reduction in bulk purchase.
People are enthusiastic to practice collective action in agriculture. However, participants in some
of the FGDs reported that though they understand advantages of collective actions, it cannot be
practiced because of two reasons. Respondents from FGDs in Baliadangi said,
“We cannot be able to practice collective actions, as all of us do not buy in a single point of time.
Everybody buy inputs on their convenience as somebody might have the money to spend in
different time. Somebody might get a credit from the input seller.”
“And the reason for which we cannot practice collective sale is all of us do not have the uniformed
quality of produces. He who has better quality of produces would not choose a collective sale.”
4.6. Module 6: Status of Services Received
Almost all of the FGDs concluded that small
farmers rely on private sector market actors for
services and entitlements they require. For
agricultural solutions and best practices farmers
seek opinion from input sellers in the markets in
their vicinity. However, some of the participants
confirmed that representative of DAE (Sub-
Brief Synopsis
Majority rely on private sector market actors and service providers, i.e. Input sellers, private veterans etc.
SAAO is found on local haat day in input sellers’ shop
Most of the farmers seems satisfied with solutions from input sellers, but not with private veterans.
Input sellers provide farmers with credit facilities while purchasing inputs, farmers repay after harvest.
Page | 56
assistant Agriculture Officer-SAAO) is available in input sellers shop during local haat day (weekly
market day). Respondents also reported that they seek for fertilizer and crop protection solutions
from agro-input company representatives found in input sellers shop during local haat day. SAAO
visit farm land on call as well. People seek agricultural solutions from their fellow lead farmers as
well. However, majority of farmers rely on information they get from input sellers while purchasing
inputs. This is because small farmers opined that DAE representative is not available in need.
However, people seem to be satisfied with information and agricultural solutions they get from
input sellers. Other than agricultural information farmers also get credit facilities from the input
sellers and repay after harvesting crops.
For solutions of livestock and poultry diseases, farmers call local veterinarians available in local
market and seek for solutions though it costs higher than government livestock department.
Government livestock offices are entitled to provide with free treatment (if treatment received in
the livestock office and minimal charge if at farmers place) and stated price for vaccines, drugs
and artificial insemination (AI). There are specific price chart for veterinary drugs, vaccine and
artificial insemination. However, respondents participated in the FGDs claimed that Government
livestock offices charge for the treatment though services are taken at livestock offices and charge
higher than stipulated price for drugs and vaccine. Distance from Upazilla level livestock office
from farmers place and associated transportation costs are another reason farmers mentioned
for relying on local veterinarians.
4.7. Module 7: Market Details
Respondents of the FGDs opined that all of them have access to quality inputs like seeds, fertilizer
and pesticide. All of them go for local markets for buying inputs and selling agricultural produces.
Output traders may provide with the transportation in case of bulk selling of produces. Prominent
input sources and output destinations in the targeted Upazilla are listed below-
Upazilla Local markets
Panchagarh Sadar Jogodol haat, Kazir haat,
Tetulia Shalbahan haat, Tetulia haat,
Baliadangi Lahiri haat, Pariya haat
People participated in the FGDs opined that they ease their selling behavior by using information
through mobile phone. They decide and choose among markets by just a phone call. Some times
when they sell a bulk amount buyer may provide with transportation from the farm gate, or farmers
send through. In case of farm gate sale, traders could not deceive by low price than market
because information through mobile phone is available now a day. However, people seem not
happy with prevailing low market price for agricultural produces.
4.8. Module 8: Government Policies and
Awareness
For agricultural good practices and solutions, the Department of Agriculture Extension (DAE) is
responsible for disseminating improved agricultural practices among farmers. DAE has field level
Page | 57
staff designated as Sub-Assistant Agriculture Officer (SAAO) who will popularize improved high
yielding varieties among farmers, show good results through demonstrations and farmers field
day, provide with information on appropriate fertilizers and crop protection solutions. Small
farmers participated in the FGDs reported that they have the awareness on the entitlements,
however, very few large and lead farmers have direct communication with SAAO or DAE.
Although, the information passes through lead farmers, small farmers get deceived sometimes
by wrong information. Sometimes they lose because of in-appropriate information and inputs.
Input sellers have the incentive to sell sub-optimal quality of inputs, as profitability of those are
high and input sellers get credit facility for inputs which are of sub-optimal quality. Respondents
from one of the FGD in Tetulia say,
“Yes, we lose sometimes, because inputs often do not work. But what else can we do rather keep
faith on input sellers. We do not have lot of options to explore, there are few other input sellers
but not everybody will provide me a credit facility”
For information on livestock and poultry rearing, Government livestock offices are entitled to
provide with free treatment (if treatment received in the livestock office and minimal charge if at
farmers place) and stated price for vaccines, drugs and artificial insemination (AI). There are
specific price chart for veterinary drugs, vaccine and artificial insemination. People have the
awareness on the entitlements, however, majority of participants have the impression that
government livestock offices are entitled to provide with free vaccines and drugs etc. Communities
who are near to the Upazilla Sadar avail government services most as transportation cost is
minimal for them.
4.9. Module 9: Crop and Income Diversification
People are open to crop and income diversification. People cultivate high priced cash crops
instead of low-profit traditional crops in turn. For example maize is cultivated in Panchagarh and
Baliadangi and vegetable in Baliadangi extensively. People change the crop if they find it less
profitable. Farmers participated in the FGDs conducted in Tetulia on the other hand reported that,
about 90% of the household sell physical labor in stone extracting and stone crushing because it
gives higher income than agriculture. This has a market implication; cost of labor (agricultural and
non-agricultural) in Tetulia Upazilla is higher compared to that of Baliadangi. FGD participant
groups in Panchagarh and Tetulia are more open to tea cultivation as they saw higher profitability
made by small growers of their vicinity. However, people from Baliadangi are relatively less open
to that as small holder tea growing is not that prevailing in Baliadangi. We found in some of the
FGDs conducted in Baliadangi that people are in dilemma whether they should go for such a long
term investment. However, they get ready to diversify crops and cultivate tea, as their fellow
farmers are trying to do so in a group. Some of the participants say,
“We were not sure about the profitability of tea. However, all my neighbors are planning to cultivate
it; that is why I will take the risk. If every other could make money from it, I will not be a difference.”
Most of the respondents reported that they do not have technical know-how on tea cultivation. If
they are provided with technical knowledge on tea cultivation they can do it.
Page | 58
4.10. FGD Details
Information removed for the purposes of data protection. Please contact Traidcraft
Exchange head office in the UK for further information on this.
Page | 59
ANNEX 2: KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEW
REPORT
Some information removed for the purposes of data protection. Please contact Traidcraft
Exchange head office in the UK for further information on this.
S/N Name of the Respondent Designation Department/ Organization
Date of Interview
1 Senior Farm Assistant Bangladesh Tea Board March 23rd, 2016
2 Upazilla Agriculture Officer- Tetulia
Department of Agriculture Extension
March 24th, 2016
3 Upazilla Agriculture Officer- Panchagarh
Department of Agriculture Extension
March 23rd, 2016
4 Upazilla Agriculture Officer- Baliadangi
Department of Agriculture Extension
March 27th, 2016
5 Upazilla Fisheries Officer-Tetulia
Department of Fisheries Office
March 24th, 2016
6 Upazilla Fisheries Officer-Baliadangi
Department of Fisheries Office
March 27th, 2016
7 Upazilla Social Welfare Officer
Department of Social Services-Baliadangi
March 27th, 2016
8 Upazilla Social Welfare Officer
Department of Social Services-Tetulia
March 23rd, 2016
9 Upazilla Cooperatives Officer
Department of Cooperatives- Tetulia
March 28th, 2016
10 Upazilla Cooperatives Officer
Department of Cooperatives-Baliadangi
March 27th, 2016
11 Upazilla Women Affairs Officer-Tetulia
Ministry of Women and Children Affairs
March 24th, 2016
12 Chairman, Dhontola Union Parisad
Union Council, Local Government Division
March 26th, 2016
13 Proprietor (Input Seller)
M/s. U.K. Traders March 27th, 2016
14 Asst. Manager Korotoa Tea Associates March 28th, 2016
15 Upazilla Livestock Officer- Tetulia
Department of Livestock March 23rd, 2016
16 Upazilla Livestock Officer- Panchagarh
Department of Livestock March 23rd, 2016
17 Upazilla Livestock Officer- Baliadangi
Department of Livestock March 27th, 2016
18 President Small Tea Growers Association
March 28th, 2016
Bangladesh Tea Research Institute (BTRI)
Mr. Jayed, Senior Farm Assistant of the office of Bangladesh Tea Research Institute (BTRI) was
interviewed to assess the current situation, future prospects; and steps needed to improve the
cultivation practices and market dynamics for the small tea growers of the targeted regions in
Panchagarh and Thakurgaon districts. Mr. Jayed informed that there are six functional tea
factories and two more to come into the market. The detail of the factories is given below:
Page | 60
Tea Factory Bought/own leaf Production in 2015 (made
tea, Kg)
Usual capacity/year (made tea KG)
Highest capacity/year (made tea KG)
Tetulia Tea Company Ltd. (TTCL)
Bought leaf 2,54,531 3,00,000 5,00,000
Korotoa Tea Factory Bought leaf 7,17,367 6,00,000 10,00,000
Green Care Agro Bought leaf 3,13,634 3,50,000 6,00,000
North Bengal Central Tea Factory
Bought leaf 7,52,272 6,00,000 10,80,000
Green Energy Tea Factory Ltd.
Bought leaf 53,000 Experimentally functioning, capacity yet to be determined
Kazi & Kazi Own leaf 4,31,117 3,50,000 6,00,000
Celalan Tea Factory Bought leaf Yet to start operation in Tetulia
Green Field Tea Factory
Bought leaf Yet to start operation in Baliadangi
According to Mr. Jayed; Panchagarh has good future prospects for tea growing as the yield is
higher relative to the prominent tea growing zone Sylhet, although tea produced in Sylhet is
currently of a better quality. He stated that small growers of Panchagarh can produce a higher
yield as their management of their gardens can be more intensive compared to large tea estates.
He described the current picture of tea growing in Panchagarh districts as below-
Category Criterion Number
Small growers 0 to 5 acres 498
Small holder 5 to 19 acres 15
Estate Above 20 acres 9
While talking about the price fluctuation and marketability of tea, Mr. Jayed opined that, the market
and price of green leaves are more stable in Bangladesh. The price is set with the participation of
Bangladesh Tea Board along with representatives of the small tea growers and workers.
Marketability of green leaves is not a problem according to Mr. Jayed as there are six functioning
tea factories in Panchagarh, with an additional two more factories set to join the market. Moreover,
national demand of tea is increasing 2.4% every year. In 2014 national demand for tea was 66.77
million kg.
According to Mr. Jayed, cultivation of tea by small growers is growing fast as there is more tea
cultivable land in Panchagarh where only one crop is cultivated and kept fallow for the rest of the
season. According to him, there is about 16,000 hectares of tea cultivable land of which in 2014
tea is cultivated on 1,683 hectares of land. Farmers are aware about greater return of tea
compared to other opportunity crops cultivable in high lands like sugarcane or vegetable. An acre
of land of tea cultivation can produce approximate revenue of BDT. 2,70,000 against a total
approximate cost of BDT. 70,000. Mr. Jayed stated a statistic of tea production of Panchagarh as
follows; in 2014 Panchagarh produced 14,23,767 kg of made tea and 63,27,727 kg of green leaf.
Whereas, in 2015 the production of made tea was 25,21,912 Kg which is close to double the
previous year.
While talking about financial support to small scale tea growers, Mr. Jayed recalled that,
previously financing support was provided to small tea growers sourced from Rajshahi Krishi
Page | 61
Unnayan Bank (RAKUB), however, most of those loans turned into bad debt for which RAKUB
revoked the scheme for small scale tea growers.
According to Mr. Jayed, small scale tea growers often disregard quality of leaf for the sake of
higher yield. Tea growers pluck leaves in less frequency than is required. Plucking 3.5 leaves to
4.5 leaves a bud is accepted by the factories while farmers often practice plucking when there are
5 to 8 leaves in a bud which give them higher yield and weight but compromises quality. To
motivate small growers to improve quality, factories should offer extra price for better quality of
leaves, Mr. Jayed suggested.
Upazilla Agriculture Office
The survey team interviewed Upazilla agriculture officers of all three sub-districts.
Table 21 Agriculture at a glance
Sadar Upazilla,
Panchagarh (In
hectare)
Tetulia Upazilla,
Panchagarh (In hectare)
Baliadangi Upazilla, Thakurgaon (In hectare)
Total cultivable land 25,800 18,919 28,425
High land 20,640 8,513 15,000
Middle-high land 3,870 9,459 10,080
Middle-low land 1,290 947 3,345
Acreage (hectare) in different crop
Crops Panchagarh Sadar Tetulia Baliadangi
Rice (Aman season) 23,220 12,755 25,000
Boro (Boro season) 2,400 2,580 5,960
Wheat 7,000 1,485 15,000
Chili 2,000 - 2,000
Potato 2,000 786 2,500
Maize 6,000 53 -
Sesame/Mustard 2,000 91 1,200
Jute 3,000 195 1,500
Vegetable 3,500 262 1,000
Note: Data not found for blank fields. Source: Key Informant Interview of DAE official.
Sadar Upazilla, Panchagarh
The Upazilla has a total of 25,800 hectares of cultivable land majority of which are high lands. In
high lands, irrigation is required extensively to cultivate. Moreover, the soil is sandy and acidic in
nature. Rice and wheat are the prominent food crops and maize as the cash crop. Rice in Aman
season is cultivated on about 90% of the cultivable lands whereas Boro is only on about 9% of
cultivable lands. Vegetable is cultivated on 3,500 hectares of land of which 2,000 hectares are
summer tomato as the weather is suitable. The agriculture office stated that about 95% of the
cultivable lands are under irrigation and with proper irrigation; farmers can cultivate three crops a
year. However, the farmers in the Upazilla cultivate two crops a year mostly. He also mentioned
that in about 15% of cultivable lands, only one crop is cultivated a year and the land are kept
fallow for rest of the year. As we asked he explained that the reason behind that is that in sandy
Page | 62
soil, high lands require much irrigation which farmers are not inclined to do. He added that farmers
deem low prices will not pay for the higher cost of production. Moreover, the agriculture office
suggests farmers to sidestep Boro cultivation and do other Robi season crops instead, as Boro
requires higher irrigation and the cultivation cost raises.
The agriculture office also stated that there are numerous government projects working on
developing rural agriculture. He named some such as: The Seed Production Project, The Farm
Mechanization Project, Integrated Farm Management Component (IFMC). However, the
agriculture office did not name any confirmed private sectors project working on agricultural
development.
As we discussed about the prospect of tea cultivation, the agriculture office stated that, about
80% of the high lands are suitable for tea cultivation. The small farmers are inclined to cultivate
tea more as it is a profitable crop. Though, the agriculture office works for improvement of
traditional crops being cultivated by farmers; the higher profitability will stretch farmers from
traditional crops to tea inevitably, he stated.
Tetulia Upazilla, Panchagarh
The agriculture office in Tetulia gave us a detailed picture of agriculture in the Upazilla. He stated
that rice is the prominent crop in the Upazilla followed by wheat. Other than rice and wheat, other
crops are cultivated in lower acreage compared to other two sub-districts. He pointed out the
cropping intensity is important and stated that, people tends to cultivate subsistence crops for
family consumption only. The high price of agricultural labor is one of the reasons behind this.
Laborers working in stone extracting and crushing plants can earn high wages which also raises
the cost of agricultural labor. Traditional cultivation is not profitable after these higher costs.
Moreover he added, about 30% of lands are cultivated with just one crop in a year and kept fallow
for rest of the year for similar reasons to those in Panchagarh Sadar Upazilla.
On the topics of transfer of information on good practices and on-field solutions to crop disease
and pests, he mentioned similar government funded/affiliated projects as Panchagarh Sadar
Upazilla. However, he agreed with the allegation that government services and entitlements are
not reaching farmers properly due to lack of work-force in the office. There are scarcities of
resources which mean the office cannot provide door-to-door services to the farmers.
Baliadangi Upazilla, Thakurgaon
The survey team discussed agriculture in Baliadangi with the Upazilla agriculture office. Mr.
Shafiyar Rahman stated that agriculture in Baliadangi is developing well with technology and good
practices. Farmers use quality inputs i.e. high yielding varieties, quality fertilizer and pesticide.
Lands are cultivated with power-tiller and tractor, not with outdated bulls and ploughs. Improved
and time-efficient threshing machines are used. Moreover, about 100% of the cultivable lands are
under irrigation facility, he added. However, people who lack the investment use sub-optimal
quality fertilizer and pesticide. The agriculture office stated that tea is a new crop to the area and
Page | 63
people are gradually starting to cultivate it. There are about 110 hectares of lands currently
cultivated tea.
Upazilla Fisheries Office
Tetulia Upazilla, Panchagarh Baliadangi Upazilla, Thakurgaon
Cultivable pond (number) 1,909 1,853
Total pond area (hc.) 173.96 742.08
Area of canal/Bill (hc.) 90 142.44
Area of flood plains (hc.) 500 1,764
Number of fish farmer 1,860 1,730
Number of fishermen 350 1,293
Number of fingerling seller/nursery 32 38
Demand for fingerling (piece) 37,50,000 70,00,000
Production of fingerling (piece) 36,72,000 24,00,000
Demand for fish (M.T.) 2,245.53
Supply of fish (M.T.) 1,362.66
Note: Data not found for blank fields. Source: KII of Upazilla Fisheries Office
The Fisheries sector in the targeted upazillas is still in subsistence stage compared to other
regions of Bangladesh like Mymensingh and Jessore. Commercial culture of fish is not popular in
the targeted region. The fisheries office stated that people in the region culture only carp fish and
most of the culture is for family consumption. As the survey team discussed about reasons for not
happening of commercial culture, we found that there are no hatcheries around the targeted
districts. Farmers have to collect high-valued commercial species i.e. Mono-sex Tilapia, Koi,
Pangus etc. from Dinajpur and Rangpur. For fry and fingerling people in the targeted areas rely
largely on wild sources have a lower yield and profitability than fish culture. Moreover, almost 60%
to 70% of the ponds remain dry in the summer (for 6 months) which further lowers the fish culture
in the area, especially given the fact that the culture technique is not as developed as in
commercial culture. By culture technique, we mean the use of high valued species, use of
commercial ready feed, appropriate pond management, disease control etc. Farmers use
handmade feed as ready feed is not available in Tetulia Upazilla. For feed and chemicals, farmers
have to go to the district level market which further increases cost. Moreover, the fingerling
farmers tend to use are often infected or diseased fingerling which have a higher mortality rate.
As we discussed about the current projects of government working with fisheries sector
development, the fisheries office mentioned some i.e.
▪ Integrated fish and livestock development in flood plain areas program.
▪ Fresh water prawn extension program.
▪ Fish culture technology extension program around Union level.
▪ Registration for fishermen program.
▪ Micro-credit in fisheries sector program etc.
We discussed about whether there is any scope for collaboration and partnership between the
department of fisheries and EqualiTEA. The fisheries office welcomed this and stated that formed
Page | 64
groups by the project will work as a platform for the department to extend services and
entitlements.
Upazilla Social Welfare Office
The Upazilla Social Welfare Office under the Department of Social Services has numerous
programs for the inclusion of rural ultra-poor. The office mentioned about some of the programs-
• The old age allowance program
• Pro-poor allowance program
• Allowance for differently able citizens program
• Allowance for acid victims program
• Extending loan program for pro-poor (family income below BDT 50,000 a year) etc.
• Extend micro-credit loan program for pro-poor citizens (currently the program is not in
action, will resume soon)
The offices have a program which give an allowance in kind equivalent to BDT 5,000 to the tea
workers. The social welfare offices confirmed that they will expend such allowances to 60 families
in current fiscal year and will extend the program in the next fiscal year.
Upazilla Cooperatives Office
The office of Upazilla cooperatives aims for inclusion of under-privileged and pro-poor under a
common umbrella by forming cooperatives so that rights and entitlements are ensured for them.
The department of cooperatives in Tetulia facilitated a cooperative including small tea growers of
Tetulia named “Majhipara Krishi-Khamar Khudro Cha Chashi Samity”. The cooperative facilitated
the settlement of 314 acres of Khas land of which 180 acres have been cultivated tea. This is a
separate project to the Traidcraft project with no overlap among farmers. The cooperative was
formed to ensure farmers received a fair price from the factories, and to help small tea growers
access services and entitlements. The department confirmed us that the cooperative is in action
and negotiating with government and private bodies to ensure the rights of their members. The
Upazilla cooperatives office informed us that they will work together with EqualiTEA to register
the groups formed by the project under cooperatives directives. Note that the price of tea is set
centrally by the Government of Bangladesh- the cooperative does not affect this price. However
there are sometimes disputes between tea factories as to the amount and quality of tea provided-
which the cooperative can help with.
Upazilla Women Affairs Office
The office of women affairs in Tetulia is currently having some program for the development and
inclusion of under-privileged women. The office named such program for instances-
Page | 65
▪ Vulnerable Group Development (VGD) program- under the program 30 Kg of rice is
distributed to each of 2,167 under-privileged women in the Upazilla.
▪ Training program on livestock and poultry rearing, entrepreneurial training for initiating
small and micro enterprises, training on small scale vegetable gardening etc.
▪ Extending micro-credit for under-privileged women an amount of BDT 5,000 to 15,000 for
minimal interest rate to start small scale farming.
The office informed us that while women in the region are working in different income generating
activities nowadays; their vulnerability remains high. Income generated by women is not
necessarily eliminating their vulnerability. This is because women have to depend on their male
counterpart for making decisions and daily affairs. The office stated that the dowry practice is still
prevalent in Tetulia and the whole district and people are burdened with high amounts of money
required for a dowry.
Union Parishad Chairman (Local Government)
The Chairman of Dhontola Union Parishad stated that there are about 40% of total 22,500 people
living under poverty. About 90% of the people depend on agricultural income leaving rest 10%
solely dependent on day laborer, porter, rickshaw/van puller and business persons. The Upazilla
contains about 20% of landless people. However, cultivation of small scale tea growing is
stretching people out of poverty, he added. Local entrepreneur Mr. Foyzul established an estate
and also motivated and facilitated small farmers with small scale tea growing. Currently there are
about 70 small tea growers and two estates in Baliadangi. 65 acres of tea estate owned by Mr.
Foyzul, 130 acres estate owned by local parliament member Mr. Dobirul Islam and about 33 acres
of small growers’ garden. The Chairman stated that areas close to India boarder have higher
amount of tea cultivable high land as well as a higher proportion of poverty.
As we discussed drawbacks for agriculture and technology, he suggested that, lack of agriculture
investment is a prime weakness for small and marginal farmers. Small and marginal farmers seem
happy with sub-optimal yield as they consider agriculture as low-input-low-output subsistence
farming. Another fact contributing to lower yield is farmers do not have the opportunity to test soil
and apply appropriate fertilizer and micro-nutrients. Moreover, DAE representatives-SAAOs do
not reach to door to door of small farmers. As we discussed opportunities of agriculture, he pointed
out that, farmers nowadays use high yielding varieties, power tiller for land preparation and
mechanized thresher for agricultural farming which indicates behavioral change of farmers. About
95% of the cultivable lands are under irrigation facility.
4.11. Input Seller
The U.K. Traders is a fertilizer and pesticide dealer in Lahiri bazaar of Baliadangi Upazilla. The
enterprise has the dealership of BADC (government body for extension of macro nutrients), SAMP
Ltd., MAP Agro Ind. Ltd., Krishok Bondhu Aqua Ltd. etc. The enterprise ensured us that all the
pesticides needed for tea cultivation are available there in his shop or to other input sellers in
Lahiri bazaar. There are about 100 fertilizer and pesticide selling shops in the market. The retailer
Page | 66
confirmed that it can provide supplies of pesticide for red-spider, Aphid, Jasid, tea mosquito etc.
The shop also has stock of fungicide for fungal attack and all kind of macro-fertilizer.
The retailer informed us that he extends credit facilities to the farmers for 3 to 4 months period.
He does not charge any interest for this informal credit service. Intriguingly he added that, people
invest in and apply sufficient inputs for tea cultivation whereas they seem reluctant to do so for
other traditional crops. As we asked about the reasons behind this, he replied that, tea is a
profitable crop and gives farmers with much higher profitability. The shop has 10 to 15 permanent
customers.
4.12. Tea Factory
Korotoa Tea Factory is the bought leaf factory located at Baniapara of Sadar Upazilla,
Panchagarh. The factory informed us that it has a capacity of producing 6,00,000 Kg of made tea
a year in normal operation and it can increase its capacity up to 10,00,000 Kg with optimum
utilization of capacity. As 4.5 Kg of green leaf is required for producing 1 Kg of made tea, the
demand for green leafs stands at 27,00,000 Kg and can process up to 45,00,000 Kg of green leaf
a year. The factory has about 60 acres of own garden from which about 5% of the green leaf is
procured leaving the rest bought from small tea growers. However, in the peak season, (April-
May to October-November) the factory is supplied with over excessive volume of green leaves
than the capacity. In such circumstances, the factory tries to avoid buying leaves; however, if the
factory forced to, the quality of made tea is compromised. The factory does not stated any definite
number of permanent customer, however, in the peak season about 400 to 500 small growers
sell their green leaves to Korotoa tea factory. The factory stated that, price in auction market is
so low that sometimes factories make a loss. He detailed that, to produce 1 Kg of made tea it
costs about BDT 180 (including cost of green leaf, processing cost, carrying cost to auction
market) whereas, price in auction market sometimes get as low as BDT 105 per Kg which forces
the factory to lose money. However, this is not the common scenario, the manager assured us.
Moreover, the manager informs that the reason behind such low price in auction market is the
import of made tea from neighboring countries.
As we discussed about the gap between expectation and reality faced by the factory, the manager
stated that, it is ideal to pluck 2.5 leaves a bud which ensures highest standard of quality. 3.5
leaves or even 4.5 leaves a bud can give good quality of made tea. And that would require a
garden to pluck in every 8 to 10 days plucking cycle. However, small farmers in the area usually
provide green leaves with 5 to even 8 leaves a bud which increases the weight grower gain but
decreases the quality of made tea. Small growers take a 30 to 40 days cycle for plucking. The
factory manager thinks that it is necessary to educate small tea growers and plucking workers on
appropriate methods of plucking.
4.13. Upazilla Livestock Office
Tetulia Upazilla, Panchagarh Sadar Upazilla, Panchagarh
Number of Cow 72,267 95,685
Number of Buffalo 404 846
Page | 67
Number of Goat 44,608 77,048
Number of Sheep 233 125
Number of Chicken 2,81,127 2,34,450
Number of Duck 17,554 27,324
Number of Pigeon 16,339
Number of dairy farm 5
Number of poultry farm 20
Note: Data of 2014-15; data not found for blank fields. Source: Key Informant Interview with Upazilla Livestock Office.
The upazilla livestock office is authorized to work for the development of the livestock in the
upazilla under which there are numerous programs which are mentioned by the upazilla livestock
office. Among them Artificial Insemination (AI) is the program which requires very minimal amount
of stated rate set by the government. The office also works for motivating farmers in livestock
farming, farm registration program, vaccination program for livestock etc. The office also stated
that there are micro-credit facilities extended by the livestock department on livestock farming.
Any farmer can get up to BDT 20,000 for poultry farming, BDT 15,000 for goat farming and BDT
15,000 for dairy farming. This scheme currently only runs in one livestock office- but is being
extended to all in the project areas. There is no interest charged on the money borrowed, but
there is a 3% service charge. The money has to be repaid in three, equal installments, at a yearly
interval.
The most common diseases for livestock in the area are foot and mouth disease for cattle, PPR
for goat, Plague disease for poultry etc. The office stated that farmers are entitled for getting free
services for livestock disease if the service takes place in the livestock office; however, the service
does not remain free if any farmer calls livestock officials to his place. We discussed the farmers’
allegations that they do not receive services and entitlements and thus have to depend more on
private service providers. The livestock officer agreed that there is a shortage of sufficient human
resource which means it is not possible to ensure services and entitlements to door to door. In
addition, the distances between the livestock office and rural areas where farmers reside also
contributes to the dependence on private service providers.
Page | 68
ANNEX 3: CASE STUDIES
Information removed for the purposes of data protection. Please contact Traidcraft
Exchange head office in the UK for further information on this.
ANNEX 4: TERMS OF REFERENCE
Baseline Study of “Sustainable livelihoods for 1,500 smallholder farming households (7,500 people) in the extreme north of Bangladesh” Project
1. Introduction to Traidcraft
For more than 30 years, Traidcraft has been fighting poverty through trade, believing in the
positive and transformational potential of trade to bring hope to millions trapped in poverty. We
believe that trade affects the life of every person and can provide the most sustainable way of
overcoming poverty. Yet markets do not always work in favour of the poor, and often work against
them. This is a major factor contributing to their poverty.
In all our areas of work, Traidcraft plays a key role as catalyst and convenor, encouraging different actors to work together to develop approaches that lead to inclusive economic growth. We have a particularly strong track record of constructive engagement with the private sector as both trading and development partners.
Working with local partners and communities, and engaging with the private sector, other non-
governmental and governmental bodies, our interventions revolve around three inter-related
areas:
• Trade: facilitating access to local, regional and international markets for small enterprises. • Support: building the capacity of poor producers to trade effectively, helping them form
enterprises and collaborative groups and equipping them with business skills. • Influence: challenging injustice and encouraging changes in government policies, corporate
practices and public attitudes to trade, development and poverty.
We assist those who are economically marginalised and the communities in which they operate.
We pay particular attention to women, rural communities, and small enterprises (including
smallholder farmers).
2. Project Background and Context
Project Name Sustainable livelihoods for 1,500 smallholder farming households (7,500 people) in the extreme north of Bangladesh (EqualiTEA III)
Project Location Bangladesh – Panchagarh District (Tetulia and Panchagarh Sadar sub-district) and Thakurgaon District (Baliadangi sub-district)
Project duration 36 months (from October 2015to September 2018)
Project budget £614,565
Donors UK AID
Page | 69
Implementing agency and partners
The project is managed by Traidcraft Exchange (TX) and co-implemented by Bikash Bangladesh
Despite making good progress, Bangladesh is still one of the world’s least developed countries, ranking 146 out of 187 countries on the 2013 Human Development Index. According to the 2013 Human Development Report, 58% of the population lives in multi-dimensional poverty. Research also shows that economic conditions have not improved for much of the population (World Bank).
Our target communities are isolated with few livelihood options. Farming households are classed as ‘extreme’ poor as average per capita income per day is about 50 BDT (£0.42) based on average annual household income of 90,416 BDT (£753) and a family size of 5. This is well below international and national poverty lines. People also fare poorly with regard to other socio-economic indicators; 71% live in multi-dimensional poverty, over 60% are illiterate, 63% are in debt and there are high levels of malnutrition (about 43%). Families spend about 50% of their income on food.
Communities in the extreme north of Bangladesh are isolated with few livelihood options. Research has shown that tea is one of the few crops suitable for cultivation in the target areas. The sandy acidic soil is problematic for many crops but perfect for tea cultivation. Domestic demand for tea is also growing. Smallholder tea growing therefore provides an opportunity to reduce poverty in these very remote areas. Through provision of tea saplings and technical training, encouraging farmers to work together and ensuring a critical support network, the project will directly benefit 7,500 people.
Tea cultivation can also help improve the ecology by reducing landslides, soil erosion and ground water depletion and increasing soil fertility. However, smallholder tea growing is fairly new in Bangladesh, and there is no comprehensive programme to promote smallholder tea growing in the region. This project will therefore promote tea cultivation as a sustainable livelihood option in a region which has limited agricultural production, and high levels of unemployment and migration, alongside encouraging crop diversification, improving general agricultural practices and encouraging the adoption of additional livelihood generating activities. Thus the project can help to increase resilience through reducing dependence on any one source of income.
Since 2006-07 Bangladesh started importing tea, in 2010-11 traders imported 5.79 million Kg tea. Low priced imported tea caused price of tea in auction to drop and large quantity of tea remained unsold due to withheld of auctions in 2014 in Bangladesh. In recent years the STG sector has grown in numbers, acreage, and production in Bangladesh. As per BTB, around 40,000 acres of sandy and acidic land in three northern districts can be cultivated for growing small-scale tea. This is where the EqualiTEA III project could make an impact by increasing number of STGs and thereby increasing tea production.
This project will create sustainable income source for 1500 small tea growers through tea cultivation in small gardens in Northern Bangladesh and also from other income generating activities. It is a proven option for poor and marginalised communities to get permanently out of poverty and the project also try to develop an inclusive value-chain for small tea growers.
Problem faced by the small farmers in this region:
• Smallholder farmers lack know-how about good agricultural practices that could help them get the most out of their sandy, acidic soil. They also lack access to services or support.
• Smallholder farmers have very few resources to invest in their agriculture. A lack of access to proper sources of credit prevents farmers from improving their agricultural practices, purchasing quality inputs such as fertilisers and irrigation, and entering/expanding into tea
Page | 70
cultivation.
• Because of their remote location and poor soil composition, smallholder farmers depend on a limited number of crops. Failure to get a decent yield or a fair price therefore has a significant and negative impact on their ability to afford basics such as food and healthcare.
The target communities are remote and lack any sort of collective identity. Without this small-
holder farmers are even more vulnerable, and unable to benefit from shared learning, economies
of scale (through group purchasing/selling), collective negotiation and lobbying/advocacy etc. In
order to address these problems several approaches will be taken simultaneously:
1. Encouraging smallholder farmers to work collectively and collaboratively. This will involve: 1.1) Organising smallholder farmers into local groups and a regional farmer association; 1.2) Building the capacity of the groups and regional association; and 1.3) Conducting tea sector research (with a focus on smallholder tea growers) and developing a policy position paper and action plan.
2. Developing strong agricultural enterprises through better farming and business practices and diversification into tea. This will involve: 2.1) Raising awareness with prospective smallholder tea growers; 2.2) Training smallholder farmers on tea and agricultural cultivation; 2.3) Providing loans for saplings and facilitating buy-back agreements with tea factories; and 2.4) Facilitating access to other inputs. Once the loans for saplings are repaid they will be used to establish a revolving fund that will be used to facilitate new entrants into tea cultivation and scale up impact (see 4.8).
3. Ensuring smallholder farmers have access to appropriate ongoing agricultural services. This will include: 3.1) Training 120 barefoot service providers; and 3.2) Building linkages between farmers and private/public service providers.
4. Developing systems to support smallholder farming households to diversify their income. This will include: 4.1) Capacity building of groups on group savings and investment schemes; 4.2) Building links with financial institutions; and 4.3) Capacity building for additional income-generating activities. This activity will have a particular focus on empowering women as experience has shown that as women start to contribute more to household income they will become more confident and gain more respect within their family and community (see 4.10)
The project will work to provide sustained support to the disadvantaged small farmers for
enhancing skills and capacity for growing tea, increasing income, increased access to
entitlements and services. The interventions will facilitate inclusive economic growth of small and
marginal tea growers by promoting potential economic activities to strengthen resilient livelihoods.
The project will build a partnership between small growers and tea companies in delivering
positive and long term benefits for both sides. The project is designed for a specific region where
tea growing for small farmers provides a sustainable solution for poverty alleviation.
This project attempts to take advantage of market opportunities to find solutions to extreme
poverty in Northern Bangladesh. Very small and marginal farmers have the opportunity to enter
a new supply chain and engage effectively with other market players to deliver win-win outcomes
for everyone involved. The project is working to ensure income to the extreme poor, profits to
business partners, availability of tea to meet strong market demand, and deliver a model of
poverty alleviation that can be scaled up for other poor communities.
Page | 71
The target group for this project are the most marginal and small men and women farmers who
own a small piece of land which is ideal for tea cultivation but cannot start tea garden due to lack
of capital and technical skills.
The project will also raise awareness about the government services/support available to small-
scale tea farmers whilst also supporting groups/associations to lobby for the proper
implementation of existing policies.
The project will work to achieve the following Outcomes:
• Output 1: 1,500 smallholder farming households are working collectively and collaboratively to increase their resilience.
• Output 2:1,500 smallholder farming households improve their agricultural practices and start cultivating tea in order to increase their income and reduce their vulnerability.
• Output 3: 1,500 smallholder farming households have appropriate ongoing services/support for agricultural cultivation.
• Output 4: Systems in place to support smallholder farming households to diversify their income and increase their resilience
The project log frame is attached as Annex 2 and will be considered as an integral part of the TOR.
3. Purpose and Objectives of the Baseline Study
The purpose of this baseline study is to provide an independently assessed information base against which to monitor and assess the project’s progress and effectiveness during implementation and after project completion.
Being effectively the first step in the project monitoring and evaluation system, the baseline study is an early element of the project monitoring framework. The framework is based on the project log frame (attached as annex2), which includes the expected project outputs, the indicators of achievement and the potential sources of information. The baseline study gathers the information to be used in subsequent assessments of how efficiently the activity is being implemented and the eventual results of the project. The mid-term review and final project evaluation will judge progress largely by comparing recent data with the information of the baseline study.
Key project indicators and data to be gathered:
Please see the Annex 1
4. Audience for the baseline study
This independent baseline study is commissioned by Traidcraft and will be shared with project staff and participants, management and staff of Traidcraft and its partners, project associates, project donors, other relevant actors.
5. Geographical Coverage
The project is being implemented in two north most districts of Bangladesh i.e. Panchagarh (specifically Tetulia and Panchagarh Sadar sub-districts) and Thakurgaon (Baliadangi sub-district).
Page | 72
6. The Baseline Study Process and Methodology
The baseline study should be conducted in a participatory manner to bring the multiple perspectives from key stakeholders in assessing the current situation of the target beneficiaries and the context within which the project is located.
A Project Monitoring & Evaluation Group will be established to both inform and support the project monitoring and evaluation processes. This will comprise key project staff from Traidcraft and its partners in country, as well as key staff from Traidcraft’s UK office.
It is envisaged that the baseline study methodology will include:
• A desk review/research of project information including the key documents listed in these terms of reference.
• A planning meeting with the project management team to gain a deeper understanding of the project and to review the project log frame to ensure clarity and shared understanding of what needs to be measured and the most appropriate and effective means of gathering the data (including identification of any known key informants).
• An initial 2-3 day scoping visit to the project location to :
i. gain an understanding of the conditions in which the baseline study will be undertaken – for example, the season of the year, the prevailing political conditions, the state of the economy, any cultural divisions, and recent or expected extraordinary events such as natural disasters, political upheavals or economic shocks.
ii. conduct a mapping exercise to inform the selection of interviewees for the farmer survey, focus group discussions, in-depth case studies, and key informant interviews
iii. identify what information already exists that can feed into the baseline study.
• Following this initial scoping visit, a further meeting with the project management team to present and discuss the detailed plan and methodology for gathering and analyzing the baseline data required, including the process for selecting interviewees.
• Design and preparation of the farmer survey including: preparation of a clear, logical and simple questionnaire, which will include all required information and can be encoded without difficulty; pre-testing in the project location and finalization of the questionnaire; organizing logistics in the field.
• Design and preparation of farmer focus group discussions and key informant interviews as agreed with the Project management Team.
• Conduct questionnaire-based farmer survey (through individual interviews with 225 EqualiTEA III farmers; 12 focus group discussions and 18 key informant interviews (6 from each sub-district).
• Develop in-depth case studies - the field work should include in-depth interviews with 10-12(number to be agreed with project management team) participating farmers to provide the basis for individual case studies that can be tracked throughout the life of the project so that we can better understand how their situations change as a result of the project. The case studies should include photographs of the farmers and their households.
• Data analysis (including data masking and database development). The consultant would normally present a preliminary overview of their findings to the project management team in-country and receive comments from them before preparing the draft evaluation report. Subsequently, the consultant submits the draft report to the project management team for
Page | 73
written comment before finalizing the report, to minimize the chance of inaccuracies and to maximize ownership of the findings.
The methodology should ensure that:
• both quantitative and qualitative methods should be incorporated into the baseline study and that more visual forms of information are included, for example, photographs, maps, diagrams
• the extent to which the daily life of the farmers being studied is disrupted is minimised – from the perspective of both men and women
• questions included in the survey provides information that will enable more effective analysis (for example, gender of farmer, age, ethnicity, level of education, size and gender make-up of household, size of land holding, types of crops grown, assets owned) – the specific information required should be agreed with the project management team during the planning meetings.
7. Documents that we will provide
▪ The approved project proposal document ▪ The approved project Logical Framework ▪ List of target beneficiaries ▪ List of other project stakeholders
8. Expected Deliverables
The main deliverables will be a final report of the baseline. The content of the report will be in the following:
▪ Contents page
▪ Abbreviations and acronyms page
▪ Executive Summary
▪ A short introduction to the project
▪ Methodology (including a clear explanation of the data collection methods used so that these can be effectively replicated during subsequent monitoring and evaluation processes)
▪ Baseline findings
▪ Small case studies/anecdotes and quotes from project beneficiaries and other stakeholders on relevant topics under baseline report
▪ Conclusions
▪ Annexes including: TOR, list of interviewees, survey questionnaire, focus group and key informant interview guides, raw data sheet, the final version of the Logical Framework with the baseline figures inserted, in-depth case studies on 10-12 participating farmers.
A concise power point presentation of the final baseline report should also be prepared (to be submitted in a CD/ DVD form). All documents, papers and data produced during the assessment are to be treated as the property of Traidcraft and Bikash Bangladesh and restricted for public use. The contracted agency/consultant will submit all original documents, materials and data to the contracting organization.
Page | 74
9. Budget
Total Fees and expenses: up to £ 5,000 (including Vat and Tax)
10. Timetable for Baseline Study
The baseline study should be completed by March 2016.There is a tight timeframe for the
research of this project and the consultant would need to work around the following dates:
Activity Deadlines
Sending TOR to Consultants/ Agencies no
later than
27th January 2016
Receipt of Proposals (EOI) 9thFebruary 2016
Selection of Consultant & Communication of
Results
14th February 2016
Completion of contracting formalities 15th February 2016
Work commences 16th February 2016
Submission of Questionnaire and FGD Tool 23rd February 2016
Submission of draft Report 20thMarch 2016
Comments on the draft report ( From TXHQ
and TXBD) and sending to consultant
24thMarch 2016
Submission of final report 28thMarch 2016
11. Application Process
Interested organizations, individuals are requested to submit their Expression of Interest (EoI)
either in hard copy or electronically to the following address on or before 9th February 2016:
Md. Haroon-Or-Rashid Sarker
Project Coordinator
Sustainable livelihoods for 1,500 smallholder farming households (7,500 people) in the extreme north of Bangladesh (EqualiTEA III) Traidcraft Exchange, Bangladesh Country Office
Flat 1B, House 11, Road 13 (new)
Dhanmondi, Dhaka-1209, Bangladesh
Tel: +88 02- 9119555
M+: 8801743969760
Page | 75
The EoI should include
▪ Contact details ▪ Up to date and detailed CV of the consultant(s)with brief descriptions of similar assignments ▪ A clear overview of how this piece of work will be approached, the methodology proposed and
the outputs generated, with a clear timeline for each of the specified activity and a budget apportioned for the assignment
▪ Two references
The EOI, excluding the consultant CVs, should not be more than 10 pages long, should have
single spacing, and use Arial typeface with a minimum font size of 10.
For any queries on the TOR please contact Md. Haroon-Or-Rashid Sarker,
(Project Coordinator), Traidcraft Exchange, Bangladesh Country Office)
12. Selection Criteria
On receipt of the EOI designated project management team will study the proposals including an interview, and take a decision about the consultant/s/ agency for the study. Selection of the consultant/s/ agency will be based on:
Selection Criteria Scores
Quality of the proposed plan – well thought out, logical, strong methodology and approach, well-timed, level of details, would meet objectives
10
Experience of conducting baseline studies of livelihoods projects 10
Knowledge / Experience on agriculture sector especially small-scale agriculture, farmer group and association management, public and private service provisions, vulnerability to natural disaster and climate change, etc.
10
Availability during the period of the project 10
Costs – value for money 10
TOTAL 50
At the beginning of the evaluation process, project staff will meet and hold a briefing session with the consultant/consulting firm to agree on the overall study methodology and highlight any key issues to be addressed.
13. Mode of Payment
Total fees for the evaluation will be paid in three installments:
1. 30 percent of the total fee will be paid on signing the contract
2. 40 percent of the total fee will be paid after submission of the draft report
Page | 76
3. The remaining amount (30 percent) will be paid upon acceptance of the final report.
For each installment, the payments would be made in crossed cheque by the name of the organization / individual.
General terms and conditions
▪ Traidcraft and Bikash Bangladesh reserve the right to accept or reject any proposal without giving any verbal and/or written rationale;
▪ All reports and documents prepared during the assignment will be treated as property of Traidcraft and Bikash Bangladesh
▪ The reports/documents or any part, therefore, cannot be sold, used and reproduced in any manner without prior written approval of Traidcraft and Bikash Bangladesh;
▪ Traidcraft and Bikash Bangladesh reserve the right to monitor the quality and progress of the work during the assignment.
Page | 77
Key project indicators and data to be gathered
Project indicators (from the project log frame)
Information that needs to be collected at the baseline
Methods of collection to be considered
Goal
The proportion of people whose income is less than national poverty level in the target districts
• Annual household income Survey of farmers
Purpose
1500 smallholder farming households in the extreme north of Bangladesh have reduced poverty and more sustainable livelihoods through tea cultivation
• Annual household income
• Sources of income – where does it come from?
Survey of farmers (Might be useful to use a seasonal calendar approach to assessing sources of income at different times of the year.)
Number of farmers who perceive an improvement in their wellbeing
• A wellbeing survey will be carried out as an integral part of the baseline. Traidcraft will train selected firms’ survey team on wellbeing concept, methodology and data collection tools.
Output 1
1,500 smallholder farming households are working collectively and collaboratively to increase their resilience.
• Are there any existing farmers groups? How many? What types / functions.
• How many of the farmers (part of the baseline) are members of groups
• If so, how many of these groups are currently taking collective actions? What issues, what results/
• Survey of farmers (question on whether or not they are currently a member of a group and what type)
• Key informant interviews& focus group discussions with farmers on issues/ results
Number of farmer groups that are negotiating with local government and local tea companies/factories for better services and support
• Are any existing farmers groups currently negotiating with local stakeholders? If so, how many? What types of services / resources, to what result?
• Key informant interviews
• Focus group discussions with farmers
Proportion of target households that perceive benefits from group membership
• If there are any existing farmers groups, do they perceive any benefits from belonging to a group? What benefits?
• Focus group discussions with farmers
• Survey of farmers (if a member of a group, ask if they perceive any benefits)
Output 2
1,500 smallholder farming households improve their agricultural practices and start cultivating tea in order to increase their income and reduce their vulnerability.
• Current level of production costs (baseline team may need to develop a matrix that asks for costs for each input and the quantity they use per bigha) across crops
• Survey of farmers
• Farmer focus group discussions with farmers
Average yield (in kg) of tea (before processing) per acre
• Current levels of productivity [define unit to be used–by year, by bigha?]
• Survey of farmers
• Farmer focus group discussions with farmers
Page | 78
(disaggregated by male/female headed households)
• How much fallow land and how much land used for other crops are farmers using for tea cultivation?
• Key informant interviews
Proportion of target household income earned from tea cultivation (disaggregated by male/female headed households)
• Current levels of yield per acre for existing crops per season [define period to be used.]
• Background information on potential for increase in productivity for different crops to assess where farmers are currently in relation to this.
• Survey of farmers
• Farmer focus group discussions with farmers
(Might be useful to use a seasonal calendar approach to help farmers relate more details.)
Output 3:
1,500 smallholder farming households have appropriate ongoing services/support for agricultural cultivation.
• Existing policies, practices or resources in place that support farmers.
• Issues around policies (gaps, information, implementation, attitude of officials)
• Mapping exercise of support services and policies exist
• Key informant interviews
• Focus group discussions with farmers (e.g. how much do they know about the policies being developed and the gaps.)
Proportion of target households that are satisfied with the services/support provided by barefoot service providers
• What services do farmers need, where do they get them from, what services are missing, quality of services, what does it cost (affordability).
• Level and nature of existing provision of public and private services to target farmers
• Mapping exercise of support services and policies exist
• Interviews with key informants
• Focus groups discussions with farmers
(Need to differentiate between services provided by the private sector and the government and discuss separately.)
Number of households assisted with agricultural services
• How many farmers received services from public and/or private service providers?
• Expectations from these service providers? What types of services they need?
• If any farmers are currently receiving services, how satisfied are they with these services? What needs to change?
• Mapping exercise
• Interviews with key informants
• Focus groups discussions with farmers
Number of acres (tea and non-tea) benefiting from agricultural improvements (fertilisers, irrigation etc.) (disaggregated by male/female headed households)
• How much land farmers at present cultivating with improved agricultural practices? (conducting soil test, using required amount of fertilizers and pesticides, etc.)
• Survey of farmers
• Farmer focus group discussions with farmers
• Where possible observation
Page | 79
Output 4
Systems in place to support smallholder farming households to diversify their income.
• Number and type of crops currently grown by farmers / which ones are better (in terms of return)/ analysis of cash vs. food crops.
• Number and type of environmentally friendly alternative income generating activities farmers are presently using. [For the survey we might need to provide a checklist of the main practices involved.]
Mapping (so that researchers are familiar with the range of agricultural practices in the area.) Survey of farmers
Proportion of target households that have adopted a new income-generating activity (in addition to tea)
• Currently how many households have adopted an alternative income-generating activity?
• Survey of farmers
• Farmer focus group discussions with farmers
• Interviews with key informants
Amount of savings mobilised from target households (disaggregated by male/female headed households)
• How much savings the farmers have currently?
• How many and what type of Investment Schemes (Sanchay Patra, Fixed Deposit, etc.) the farmers using now?
• Number and type of safety (other sources of income or savings) measures currently used by farmers.
Develop questions to cover main measures involved, e.g.:
• Do farmer households have savings, insurance, etc.
• What do they do in event of drought, flash floods?
• Have they experienced any of these in the last 5 years? With what impact?
• What suggestions do they have in terms of dealing with climate change?
• Are they open to crop changes? Are they aware of farmers who have changed crops, done any other thing to reduce negative impact of climate change?
• Survey of farmers
A group savings and investment fund is available to invest in new income-generating activities
• How many farmers have access to finance?
• How many farmers have own fund?
•
Page | 80
• How many farmers have existing loans and what is the amount of loan?
Page | 81
Page | 82
ANNEX 5 LOGICAL FRAMEWORK MATRIX
Sustainable livelihoods for 1,500 smallholder farming households (7500 people) in the extreme north of Bangladesh
Impact Indicator 1 Baseline Milestone 1 Milestone 2 Target (date)
Percentage change in the proportion of population below national poverty line in target districts (or region depending on information available)
Planned 38% (2013) 28% (2018)
Achieved
Source
Local government statistics and records (if available)
Impact Indicator 2 Baseline Milestone 1 Milestone 2 Target (date)
Planned
Achieved
Source
Outcome Indicator 1 Baseline Milestone 1 (2016)
Milestone 2 (2017)
Target (date) (2018)
Assumptions
Average increase in annual household income of target farmer households (disaggregated by male/female headed households)
Planned (2015) Mean Household income- BDT 89,412 Panchagarh- BDT 89,278 Tetulia- BDT 96,755 Baliadangi- BDT 83,119
10% 40% 70% Economic conditions are stable and conducive to small-scale agriculture and tea cultivation Bangladesh Government continues to promote small scale tea growing, agricultural growth and food security Natural disasters do not undermine project impact
Achieved
Source
Baseline and project progress report, focus group discussions, smallholder tea growers record, annual and final project evaluations
Outcome Indicator 2 Baseline Milestone 1 (2016)
Milestone 2 (2017) Target (date) (2018)
Number of farmers who perceive an improvement in their wellbeing
Planned To be assessed 10% (300 of 3000) (150 men and 150 women)
40% (1200 of 3000) (600 men and 600 women)
80% (2400 of 3000) (1200 men and 1200 women)
Achieved
Source
Page | 83
Baseline and project progress report, annual and final project evaluations
DFID (£) Appeal income (£) Other (£) Total (£) DFID SHARE (%)
614565 0 0 614565 100%
Output Indicator 1.1 Baseline Milestone 1 (2016)
Milestone 2 (2017) Target (date) (2018)
Assumption
Number of farmer groups that are negotiating with local government and local tea companies/factories for better services and support
Planned 0 (2015) 15 60 60 Smallholder farmers, groups and associations are willing to work together Strong leaders are available for the groups and associations Local authorities and other stakeholders engage with the project Government bodies and officials recognise the associations as farmer representative bodies
Achieved
Source
Baseline and project progress report, focus group discussions, smallholder tea growers group register, annual and final project evaluations
Output Indicator 1.2 Baseline Milestone 1 (2016)
Milestone 2 (2017) Target (date) (2018)
Proportion of target households that perceive benefits from group membership
Planned 0 (2015) 40% (600 households of a total of 1500) (480 male headed HHs and 120 female headed HHs)
75% (1125 households of a total of 1500) (900 male headed HHs and 225 female headed HHs)
90% (1350 households of a total of 1500) (1080 male headed HHs and 270 female headed HHs)
Achieved
Source
Baseline and project progress report, focus group discussions, smallholder tea growers group register, annual and final project evaluations
Output Indicator 1.3 Baseline Milestone 1 Milestone 2 Target (date)
Planned
Achieved
Source RISK RATING
Low
DFID (£) Appeal income (£) Other (£) Total (£) DFID SHARE (%)
102103 0 0 102103 100%
DFID (FTEs)
2.25
Output Indicator 2.1 Baseline Milestone 1 (2016)
Milestone 2 (2017) Target (date) (2018)
Assumptions
Page | 84
Average yield (in kg) of tea (before processing) per acre (disaggregated by male/female headed households)
Planned 0 (2015) 951 2167 3,901 (6,174 by 2020, i.e. after 5 years)
Smallholder farmers see the benefits of tea cultivation Smallholder farmers do not want to convert all their land to tea Smallholder farmers are willing to adapt practices and use new knowledge and skills
Achieved
Source
Baseline and project progress report, focus group discussions, smallholder tea growers production record, annual and final project evaluations
Output Indicator 2.2 Baseline Milestone 1 (2016)
Milestone 2 (2017) Target (date) (2018)
Proportion of target household income earned from tea cultivation (disaggregated by male/female headed households)
Planned 0 (2015) 10% 23% 42%
Achieved
Source
Baseline and project progress report, focus group discussions, smallholder tea growers production record, annual and final project evaluations
Output Indicator 2.3 Baseline Milestone 1 Milestone 2 Target (date)
Planned
Achieved
Source RISK RATING
Low
DFID (£) Appeal income (£) Other (£) Total (£) DFID SHARE (%)
325300 0 0 325300 100%
DFID (FTEs)
2.7
Output Indicator 3.1 Baseline Milestone 1 (2016)
Milestone 2 (2017) Target (date) (2018)
Assumptions
Proportion of target households that are satisfied with the services/support provided by barefoot service providers
Planned 0 (2015) 40% (600 households of a total of 1500) (480 male headed HHs and 120
75% (1125 households of a total of 1500) (900 male headed HHs and 225 female headed HHs)
90% (1350 households of a total of 1500) (1080 male headed HHs and 270 female headed HHs)
Smallholder farmers see the value of technical and business services Tea companies see a business case for
Page | 85
female headed HHs)
working with smallholder tea growers Service providers have adequate technical expertise and knowledge Achieved
Source
Baseline and project progress report, focus group discussions, smallholder tea growers group register, annual and final project evaluations
Output Indicator 3.2 Baseline Milestone 1 (2016)
Milestone 2 (2017) Target (date) (2018)
Number of households assisted with agricultural services
Planned
14.1% (28/199)
750 (600 male headed HHs and 150 female headed HHs)
1200 (960 male headed HHs and 240 female headed HHs)
1500 (1200 male headed HHs and 300 female headed HHs)
Achieved
Source
Baseline and project progress report, focus group discussions, smallholder tea growers group register, annual and final project evaluations
Output Indicator 3.3 Baseline Milestone 1 (2016)
Milestone 2 (2017) Target (date) (2018)
Number of acres (tea and non-tea) benefiting from agricultural improvements (fertilisers, irrigation etc.) (disaggregated by male/female headed households)
Planned Respondents saying they used this: Soil Test – 0% Organic Fertilizer – 93% Planting bush/stick – 21.1% Pheromone Trap – 0% Leaf Colour Chart – 0% Improved Irrigation – 0.5% Advanced Wet & Dry – 0% Follow advice of local agricultural officers on amount of fertilizer used – 5.5%
1200 2400 3,000
Achieved
Source RISK RATING
Page | 86
Baseline and project progress report, focus group discussions, smallholder tea growers Production record, smallholder tea growers group register, annual and final project evaluations
Low
DFID (£) Appeal income (£) Other (£) Total (£) DFID SHARE (%)
73285 0 0 73285 100%
DFID (FTEs)
1.8
Output Indicator 4.1 Baseline Milestone 1 (2016)
Milestone 2 (2017) Target (date) (2018)
Assumptions
Proportion of target households that have adopted a new income-generating activity (in addition to tea)
Planned 0 %(2015) [Note: 77% of surveyed respondents have secondary source of income other than agriculture]
10% (150 households of a total of 1500) (120 male headed HHs and 30 female headed HHs)
40%(600 households of a total of 1500) (480 male headed HHs and 120 female headed HHs)
80% (1200 households of a total of 1500) (960 male headed HHs and 240 female headed HHs)
Farmers see the benefits of group savings Farmers willing to adapt and invest alternative income-generating options
Achieved
Source
Baseline and project progress report, focus group discussions, smallholder tea growers group register, annual and final project evaluations
Output Indicator 4.2 Baseline Milestone 1 (2016)
Milestone 2 (2017) Target (date) (2018)
Amount of savings mobilised from target households (disaggregated by male/female headed households)
Planned 0 (2015) £7,512 £22,539 £37,566
Achieved
Source
Baseline and project progress report, smallholder tea growers savings record, bank statements, annual and final project evaluations
Output Indicator 4.3 Baseline Milestone 1 (2016)
Milestone 2 (2017) Target (date) (2018)
A group savings and investment fund is available to invest in new income-generating activities
Planned £0 (2015) £0 £18,000 £18,000
Achieved
Source RISK RATING
Baseline and project progress report, smallholder tea growers savings record, bank statements, annual and final project evaluations
Low
DFID (£) Appeal income (£) Other (£) Total (£) DFID SHARE (%)
Page | 87
113877 0 0 113877 100%
DFID (FTEs)
2.25
Page | 88