IInntteeggrraatteedd BBiiooeeccoonnoommyy SSyysstteemm

FFoorr LLiivveelliihhoooodd IImmpprroovveemmeenntt aanndd

CClliimmaattee CChhaannggee AAddaappttaattiioonn

iinn EEtthhiiooppiiaa

November, 2011

Bio-Economy Africa and the Integrated

Bioeconomy System

Aims and Objectives,

with a Case Study of Community Empowerment and

Impact Assessment in Benishangul Gumuz Regional State

3

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 1 Background ..................................................................................................................................... 2 Bio-Economy Africa, BEA ............................................................................................................. 4 The Integrated Bioeconomy System (IBS) ...................................................................................... 5 Implementation of the IBS approach; the importance of entry points ............................................. 6 The IBS approach; scaling up and scaling out ................................................................................ 8 BEA/IBS system development; Learning from the Past, Preparing for the Future ......................... 9 Background to the Study Area ...................................................................................................... 10 Conceptual framework for the Impact Assessment (opportunities and challenges for BGRS) ..... 12 Objectives of the Assessment Work .............................................................................................. 14 Preliminary Assessment Report .................................................................................................... 14

Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 14

Methods............................................................................................................................... 14

Data collection ................................................................................................................ 14

Analysis and interpretation ............................................................................................. 15

Results ................................................................................................................................. 16

Demographic and basic agricultural practice data .......................................................... 16

Income change ................................................................................................................ 18

Evidence for improvements in agricultural practice ....................................................... 19

Farmers‟ perceptions of improvements ........................................................................... 20

Long-term prospects ....................................................................................................... 20

The economics of IBS training ....................................................................................... 21

Discussion ........................................................................................................................... 22

Direct and immediate benefits ........................................................................................ 22

Long-term prospects ....................................................................................................... 23

Environmental and social benefits .................................................................................. 23

Cost-benefit balance ........................................................................................................ 23

Further work ........................................................................................................................ 24

Summary ............................................................................................................................. 24

Acronyms

BGRS Benishangul Gumuz Regional state

BEA Bioeconomy Africa

IBS Integrated Bioeconomy System

FTC Farmer Training Centers

ATVETC Agricultural Training and Vocational Education

Center

FGD Focus Group Discussion

TOT Training of trainers

IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development

PASDEP Plan for Accelerated and Sustainable Development to End

Poverty

Executive Summary

This report is divided into two parts. The first gives an overview of the origins and objectives of

Bio-Economy Africa (BEA) and of the Integrated Bioeconomy System (IBS) developed for

farmer training. The second part of the Report provides a quantitative analysis of one of

BEA/IBS‟s farmer training programmes in Ethiopia.

The objectives and scope of Bio-Economy Africa‟s (BEA) Integrated Bioeconomy System (IBS)

are presented. BEA aims to integrate and thus maximize social, economic and ecological capital

through capacity development, education, technological innovation, research, monitoring and

evaluation. IBS farmer training is designed to develop the capacity of poor rural farmers and

enable them to enhance their productivity, improve their livelihood, diversify their economic

base/activities, generate increased incomes, wisely and sustainably utilize natural resources and

protect the environment. IBS training and education therefore focuses on sustainable agricultural

efficiency, conservation and restoration, sensitivity to gender and age, entrepreneurship, problem-

solving, and the promotion of an holistic rather than narrowly-directed approach.

The preliminary report on IBS activities in the Benishangul Gumuz Regional State provides an

introduction to the BEA and IBS in that Region. A set of 200 farmers, chosen randomly from

among 500 trained in 2009 and 2010 at BEA facilities in Assosa and Addis Ababa, were

interviewed using standardised questionnaires before and after training in order to assess the

effectiveness of the training in terms of economic, environmental and social parameters. This

initial examination of the results reveals the following:

After correction for national inflation, training improved monthly income by an

average of 102.6% (i.e. slightly more than a doubling). Figures were similar for male

and female farmers, who constituted 78% and 22% of the sample, respectively.

The financial benefit accrued by each individual farmer in the first year after being

trained is equivalent to 245% of the specific cost involved in their training (i.e. a net

financial benefit of 145%), a figure that is likely to increase year-on-year.

„Horizontal‟ knowledge transfer has resulted in the indirect training of many times

more farmers than the 500 originally trained, with a currently unquantified impact on

productivity.

This report is necessarily brief and is designed to highlight the most important results from the

questionnaire data. Many of these data consist of discursive responses that do not readily lend

themselves to rapid quantitative analysis. Further interrogation will reveal more information and

provide greater insights into the effectiveness of IBS training. In particular, future work will

focus on social factors that may affect livelihoods, and the extent to which variable uptake of the

full range of IBS techniques influences its overall impact.

2

Background

The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) can be stated briefly as follows:

1. Eradication of extreme poverty and hunger

2. Provision of universal primary education

3. Promotion of gender equality and the empowerment of women

4. Reduction of child mortality

5. Improvement of maternal health

6. Reduction of HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases

7. Promotion of environmental sustainability and

8. Promotion of global partnerships for development.

Clearly the MDGs are destinations without a route map, and each country and region is

developing its own approach to these desirable objectives. Progress on some fronts has been

significant (e.g. in HIV and malaria reduction); on others it has been slow or even non-existent

(e.g. extreme poverty and hunger reduction); whilst on others still it could be argued that the

situation is worse now than it was before (e.g. environmental sustainability). The absence of a

very clear route map to the MDGs may help to explain this patchy progress. In one sense, unless

all the MDGs are achieved (or, at least, equal progress is made on all fronts) then none of them

has been achieved. Reducing HIV in an environment which is increasingly unsustainable is like

winning a noble battle, but in a lost war. Clearly we do not need to re-define the MDGs but we

should perhaps be more critical of the ways we have set about achieving them. The need for a

route map is clear, but the map should be a single map to all the MDGs, not a series of highways

to only a few of them. This requires an holistic approach to development, and such an approach

has been evolved in recent years in Ethiopia.

Ethiopia is a country historically beset with droughts and famines, the problems of which were

compounded by civil and international strife, and a doubling of population size in the last 20

years. Despite these significant problems, Ethiopia has shown remarkable progress in recent

years, amongst which has been a quiet revolution in addressing the pressing MDG of hunger and

poverty alleviation within an holistic system that addresses virtually all other MDGs at the same

time.

BioEconomy Africa (BEA) is an Ethiopian NGO that has, in the last 30 years, gradually put

together an Integrated Bioeconomy System (IBS) that begins with training subsistence farmers

during short intensive periods on one of several IBS biofarms now scattered across the country in

different agro-ecological zones. The key to the IBS system is to re-cycle as much energy as

possible, in ecologically friendly ways, whilst minimizing external inputs in the form of chemical

fertilizers and pesticides. On-biofarm training of farmers increases their skills and knowledge

base, and they return home to achieve remarkable increases in crop yields, and also committed to

sharing their experience by each training 10 more farmers within their local communities. To

date 30,000 farmers have been trained directly and IBS skills have therefore now spread to up to

300,000 families across the country.

3

Key elements of the IBS training are instruction in the following:

1. Crop production

2. Livestock production

3. Integrated pest management

4. Alternative energy through biogas production

5. Compost production and use

6. Soil and water conservation and irrigation

7. Tree farming and agro-forestry

8. Poultry

9. Apiculture (bee-keeping)

10. Sericulture (silk production)

11. Health education and intervention

12. Entrepreneurship/marketing

Training is carried out with an emphasis on both integration of each activity into a sustainable

whole and on adaptive management, which means responding flexibly to situations as they

change. Whilst making farmers more independent of external inputs, BEA/IBS training also

results in fewer pressures on natural resources (e.g. a reduction in cutting down trees for

firewood); an improvement in soil fertility, soil structure and the ability of soils to retain moisture;

a reduction in human and animal health hazards through waste re-cycling and use in biogas units;

and diversification of farm income sources through bee-keeping, silk production etc..

Collectively, these increase the sustainability of farming activities, and increase farm income,

thereby improving the resilience of the farmers‟ ways of life, something that is essential for food-

producers faced with the uncertainty of the impacts of future climate change on natural

environments. Whilst it is not possible to predict the exact degree and distribution of future

changes in global temperatures and rainfall, any changes are best overcome by systems that are

more rather than less resilient to natural variation in climates. The BEA/IBS training provides the

sorts of instruction and experience to increase farmers‟ resilience to natural climate variability.

This document gives some of the background to the BEA/IBS experience within Ethiopia and

then addresses key issues that are raised by the success of BEA/IBS activities so far.

1) To what extent can the experience of the BEA/IBS bio-farms now operating within

different agro-ecological zones of Ethiopia be applied to much larger areas within

Ethiopia (the „scaling up‟ problem)?

2) To what extent can the Ethiopian experience be applied to other countries of Africa and

beyond (the „scaling out‟ problem)?

3) What are the best ways to measure the full extent of the impact of BEA/IBS training on

agricultural production in particular and on the social, economic and ecological

dimensions of development in general?

These key issues are explored in this document by describing in some detail the BEA/IBS

philosophy, approach and achievements to date and by giving a case study example of BEA/IBS

activities in the Benishangul Gumuz Region of Ethiopia, with a preliminary analysis of farmer

questionnaire data collected before and after farmer training. These allow us to examine within a

quantitative framework the considerable benefits of bio-farm training and to show that it amply

deserves the label of „better practice‟, and possibly even „a route map to achieving the MDG

goals‟.

4

Bio-Economy Africa, BEA

Bio-Economy Africa (BEA), formerly known as the Bio-Economy Association, is a non-

governmental, secular, non profit-making organization legally established in 2003. BEA

envisages seeing Africa in general and Ethiopia in particular emerge as a green, peaceful,

prosperous trading region/nation, evolving through innovative knowledge-based progress. BEA

adopts a science-based approach to capacity development which builds Social, Economic and

Ecological capital at household and community levels. The specific objectives of BEA include:

Capacity development of the community and its institutions through the provision of

practical and problem-solving bioeconomy training, resulting in sustainable human,

animal, plant and environmental health improvement,

Recognition and promotion of the importance of gender, implementing specific women-

only projects where appropriate,

Targeting critical human health issues (HIV/AIDS, family planning and blindness)

through education and awareness,

Transfer of innovative and proven technologies focusing on biogas and organic fertilizer

production & utilization, food security, soil fertility, water conservation, solid waste

management and composting, income generation, job creation and environmental

rehabilitation,

Development of practical, interactive and dynamic learning and experience-sharing

programs based on the IBS model,

Promotion and implementation of integrated pest and vector management,

Establishment of high quality and rigorous monitoring and backstopping systems,

Problem analysis and livelihood monitoring,

Dissemination of techniques for cutting, dressing and preparing stone, where available

(e.g. Mekele), for engineering purposes,

Promotion of marketing and entrepreneurship (through the promotion of market-oriented

agri-business activities),

Promotion and facilitation of farmer-to-farmer training through Farmers' Academies, and

Development of efficient monitoring, evaluation, operational research and innovation

approaches through the BEA/Yeha B.Sc., M.Sc. and PhD programs.

These strategic objectives of BEA are in line with those of IFAD which focus on addressing poor

rural communities (women and men and youth groups) to empower them to reduce poverty,

achieve higher incomes and improve food security.

Unlike many organizations that use linear (sometimes called „silo-based‟) approaches to mitigate

individual socio-economic and environmental problems, BEA adopts integrated and holistic

approaches that address many problems simultaneously. These approaches are people-centred

and therefore demand-driven, where the target community assumes leadership and ownership.

They focus on both indigenous and experimental scientific knowledge applied through hands-on

interactive training resulting in integrated capacity development that strengthens the Social,

Economic and Ecological capital of societies.

BEA research has developed and validated different technologies for energy and organic

fertilizer/compost production and utilization, food production and income generation, soil

fertility, environmental protection and ecological restoration. It has promoted and transferred

technologies, skills and production techniques that address the problems of food insecurity in

Ethiopia and in other East, West, Central and Southern African countries and that offer solutions

to some of the anticipated problems of climate change.

5

The Integrated Bioeconomy System (IBS)

BEA developed an integrated bio-economy system (IBS) which is a science-led, nature-based,

demand/community-driven holistic approach designed to improve livelihoods, incomes and

assets whilst at the same time restore degraded environments and preserve and enhance

biodiversity. It does this by improving agricultural outputs (food crops, organic vegetables, dairy

products, meat and eggs, honey, silk, etc.) for direct consumption and income generation by the

local community whilst, at the same time, minimizing external inputs (e.g. scarce water, or

chemically-based fertilizers). Sometimes these apparently competing requirements are met with a

single solution. For example, the production of biogas and fertilizer in biogas digesters of human

and animal waste not only improves productivity in the absence of chemical fertilizers but has

additional benefits (biogas is used for both cooking and lighting) that both reduce the human

impact on the local environment (fewer trees are cut down for fuel-wood) and improve human

health (less waste around homes reduces nuisance flies that transmit diseases).

The IBS capacity development system builds Social, Economic and Ecological capital at

household and community level, shown diagrammatically below.

IBS has tested many different technologies including biogas, solar panels, organic fertilizers,

biointensive production techniques, and water harvest and utilization techniques, hydroponics,

modern beekeeping, botanicals, vermiculture, viticulture, sericulture, horticulture, mushroom

production, Spirulina production and integrated pest and vector control management. IBS can

therefore play an important role in reducing vulnerability to food insecurity and diseases,

increasing the resilience of the agricultural systems and buffering rural poor households (farmers

and pastoralist communities) against risks posed by climate change.

One of the possible impacts of climate change is to reduce the social, economic and ecological

capital of societies, thereby reducing society‟s resilience to natural climatic variation (this

EEccoo--ssoocciiaall SSyysstteemm SSuussttaaiinnaabbiilliittyy && EEnnhhaanncceemmeenntt iinn tthhrreeee DDiimmeennssiioonnss

((GGooooddllaanndd,, 11999955))

Economic dimension

Social dimension

Ecological dimension

6

resilience indicated by the areas of overlap, coloured green in the diagram below). The IBS

approach potentially provides adaptation and mitigation mechanisms that maintain and enhance

societal resilience, both now and into the future.

External and mitigation effects on the integration of social, economic and ecological capital.

The BEA/IBS centres established to date in Ethiopia are exploring how to develop these

adaptation and mitigation mechanisms within four main agro-ecological zones:

A. Arid-dry land zone

B. Wetland zone

C. Highland watershed zone

D. Lowland tropical disease-infested zone.

Implementation of the IBS approach; the importance of entry

points

IBS is a collection of approaches, techniques and expertise which fall under the following six

headings:

1. Alternative Energy (use of biogas and solar panels) and composting/organic fertilizer

production

2. Soil and Water,

3. Food and Fibre,

4. Health (Human, Animal, Plant and Environmental Health - the 4H-paradigm)

5. Environment/sanitation and

6. Economic-Social subsystems.

7

Involving local communities in IBS programs is a two-way process. The community knows its

own problems and can therefore articulate them better than any other body. The initial dialogue

between the local community and IBS seeks to identify a problem of major concern to the

community that might be addressed under one of the above headings and this becomes the „entry

point‟ for the IBS approach being adopted by that community. Entry points obviously vary; in

one place it might be the lack of water throughout the cultivation cycle, in another a debilitating

disease such as malaria, and the following provides a concrete example of the application of this

entry point approach.

In many highlands regions of Ethiopia tsetse-transmitted trypanosomiasis prevents the keeping of

domestic animals such as oxen that are an essential ingredient in the traditional agricultural

systems of that country. Hence tsetse have been the entry point in a number of IBS projects to

date, particularly in the west and south. Over the last ten years BEA/IBS, in collaboration with

international partners from ICIPE and Biovision, have developed a community-based adaptive

management system for tsetse, illustrated below (from Sciarreta et al., 2005; Tikubet et al., 2006).

Briefly an initial widespread system of tsetse traps is sampled to establish the local distribution of

tsetse flies in the area. Thereafter a series of control traps is maintained and moved periodically

to areas of greatest tsetse abundance, thereby achieving the greatest impact, whilst a series of

fixed monitoring traps measures the remaining fly population.

The results of the adaptive management approach are shown below, in terms of fly numbers and

disease prevalence. Decreasing levels of disease resulted in increased productivity of the cattle

populations in terms of calving rates and milk yields.

8

Trends in bi-weekly tsetse fly catches in odour-baited monitoring traps (pale bars and solid line, expressed in

log[(catches per trap and day)+1]) and occasional recordings of trypanosomiasis prevalence (dark bars and

dashed line, expressed as proportion of examined cattle). Data from:- months 1-30: Rowlands et al. (2000)

in the Ghibe valley, near Luke, south-western Ethiopia (tsetse catches) and Gurage zonal administration

(disease prevalence); months 30-80: Herren et al., 2004 (ICIPE ‘BioVillage project, Luke); after month 80:

Baumgärnter et al., 2003; Sciarretta et al., 2005 (ICIPE adaptive management project in Luke). ICIPE =

International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology, Nairobi.

The IBS approach; scaling up and scaling out

The great success of the IBS system has captured the attention and enthusiasm of a wide variety

of visitors to the IBS foundation site in Addis Ababa, including Ministers within Ethiopia,

national and international NGOs, Ambassadors and members of international agencies such as

WHO, FAO and UNDP. This year, for example, the IBS site was uniquely selected for a visit by

HE Ban Ki Moon, Secretary General of the UN, who said that he wished to see the principles and

practices of BEA/IBS developed within the region, and spread to other countries. These

initiatives have already begun. Through the commitment of the Ambassador to Ethiopia,

Mozambique has already established its first IBS site. IFAD brought about the establishment of

the first IBS site in Côte d‟Ivoire; and, most recently, the Minister of Agriculture in the

Democratic Republic of the Congo has enthusiastically facilitated the establishment of a BEA/IBS

presence in the DRC. Developments in both Côte d‟Ivoire and the DRC are receiving strong

support from UNDP.

IBS has also been recommended as the way forward to sustainable agricultural development in

Africa at an international organic agriculture training course in Makerere University in Uganda,

run in partnership with Boku University in Austria and the BioVision Foundation of Switzerland,

9

a long-established and dedicated BEA supporter. At the 10th anniversary of the establishment by

the African Union (AU) of the Pan-African Tsetse and Trypanosomiasis Eradication Campaign

(PATTEC), held in Kampala in July 2010, 28 African countries passed a resolution to adopt the

IBS approach for the land-use component of the PATTEC programme. Land newly freed of the

tsetse menace can be put to productive use quickly and sustainably using the BEA/IBS approach.

BEA/IBS system development; Learning from the Past, Preparing

for the Future

Undoubtedly the major actors in all of the BEA/IBS developments to the present time are the

farmers – both male and female – who struggle under what many would regard as impossible

situations to feed their families and the nation. The enthusiasm of farmers for new knowledge,

new techniques, new and appropriate technologies is both exciting and humbling. Why have

national and international agencies taken so long to deliver to the grass roots the means whereby

agricultural productivity can be so dramatically increased?

BEA/IBS is not content to rest on its current successes and is aware that expansion to new sites

and new countries brings with it whole sets of new problems. In the next 10 years BEA seeks to

do the following:

Improve the technical and human capacity of the IBS Model Biofarms

Provide new training and demonstration on IBS sites

Provide improved and enhanced backstopping services to trained beneficiaries

Improve compost and biogas production and distribution

Consolidate further on the vector (tsetse, ticks, mosquitoes) management projects

Provide health services (e.g. reproductive health and cataract surgery)

Develop new nurseries at IBS Biofarm sites

Develop a Master Farmer training system, and a set of Master Farmer Academies

Provide increased and appropriate support for disadvantaged groups (unemployed

youth, single-parent families, women fuel-wood carriers etc.)

Develop micro-credit facilities for farmers to incorporate IBS ideas more quickly

Investigate small-scale on-farm processing to keep added-value within the farming

community

Launch a farmer-driven MSc and PhD program whereby students are given research

problems by farmers who face such problems on a day-to-day basis; scientifically-

determined solutions to those problems go straight back to the farming community.

Develop innovative ways of making IBS Biofarming self-sustaining through income

generation, for example through on-biofarm sales, or seed production and sales.

Extension of BEA/IBS activities to other countries.

These are exciting challenges for the future that will require new ideas, new techniques, new

approaches, new expertise and continuing support from the national and international

communities. Collectively they address many of the MDG challenges.

10

Background to the Study Area

Benishangul Gumuz Regional State (BGRS) is one of the regional states of the Federal

Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, some 660Km North West of Addis Ababa. It stretches between

9O 35''N and 11

O 39''N latitude and between 34

O 20''E to 36

O 30'' E longitude. The region has an

international boundary with Sudan to the west and is bordered by the Amhara region in the north

and northeast, Oromiya in the southeast and Gambella in the south.

BGRS is situated between the catchments of the Blue Nile and Baro Akobo rivers. The total land

mass of the region is approximately 50,380 km2 and ranges in altitude from about 580 to 2731

masl. There are a few mountains and gorges created by the Abay river and its major tributaries

including the rivers Dabus, Dedesa and Beles, but most of the region consists of lowlands and

plains with altitudes ranging from 1000m in Pawe to about 600m near the Ethio-Sudan border.

Annual rainfall varies considerably from year to year and also across the region, from 800 to 2000

mm, and occurs between May and October with a peak in August. The temperature reaches a

daily maximum of 200C to 25

0C in the rainy season and rises to 35

0C to 40

0C in the dry season.

The hottest period is from February to April. The minimum daily temperatures range from 120C

to 200C, depending on season and altitude.

Administratively, BGRS is divided into three zones and twenty woredas, two of which (Pawe and

Mao-Komo) are designated as special woredas based on their ethnic uniformity.

According to the 2007 census the total population of the Region is 670,847, 50.72% male and

49.28% female. 85.4% of people live in rural areas and 14.6% in urban areas. There are five

indigenous ethno-linguistic groups: Berta (26.7%), Gumuz (23.4%), Shinasha (7.0%), Mao

11

(0.6%) and Komo (0.2%). Significant numbers of Amhara (22.2%), Oromo (12.8%) and others

(7.1%) also reside in the region (BGRS, 2003).

The major part of the region is still covered by natural vegetation, especially bamboo thickets,

which are able to grow in areas where soil fertility is low, broad leaved species-rich deciduous

woodlands and acacia woodlands. Recent surveys suggest land coverage of 64.5% shrub, 9.82%

tropical bamboo, 6.5% cultivated land, 3.28% grassland, 2.26% woodland, 2% rock and 1.6%

forest (BGRS BOARD, 2009 ). Of the total gross potential of 911,876 ha of cultivable land, only

33% is currently cultivated.

The region is rich in mineral resources that are used for industrial and construction purpose and

has a large untapped potential for natural tourism because of its diverse flora and fauna.

Agro-ecologically the region is divided into Kolla (about 75% (lowlands below 1500 masl)),

Woina Dega (about 24% (midlands between 1,500-2,500 masl)) and Dega (about 1% (highland

above 2500 masl)).

The mainstays of the economy are agriculture, hunting, gathering wild food and fishing, providing

69% of the income of the population. The remainder comes from a variety of activities including

livestock-raising, honey production and collection, traditional gold mining, handicrafts, petty

trade, charcoaling, mining, quarrying, forest resource harvesting and marketing.

Major rivers support medium and large irrigation projects; Beles (163,200 ha), Dabus (51,000 ha),

Gilgel Beles (88 ha) and Selga (360 ha) (BGRS, BoA, 2003). About 28 out of 40 other rivers

support small-scale irrigation covering an area of about 1,687 ha. (Merkorewos Hiwet, 2008).

The major crops grown in the region include cereals (sorghum, maize, millet, teff, rice and

wheat), oil crops (Niger seed, groundnuts, rapeseed, flax and sesame), pulses (chickpeas,

soybeans and haricot), fruit (mango, banana, oranges, lemon, yam and bull heart), vegetables

(onion, garlic, cabbages, potatoes, tomatoes, carrot, pepper, pumpkin and anchoret) and spices

(ginger, cardamom, cumin and turmeric). Other cash crops currently grown in small quantities are

coffee and cotton. Coffee is grown on 165ha in three woredas (Wombera, Assosa and Mao

Komo) and yields 7109qt/ha (BGRS, Rural Development Coordination office, 2006). 72% of the

coffee is consumed at home and 28% is sold in local markets.

Most agriculture occurs through a system of shifting cultivation with „virgin‟ land being brought

into the agricultural cycle every two to three years. The cycle is a short one because there is a

rapid decline in productivity due to poor utilisation of technologies and traditional farming

practices. Only 44% of farmers use animal power to plough (the traditional system on the

highlands of Ethiopia), the remainder cultivating land using only hoes (local Palle) (BGRS,

2005).

There are 88 Farmer Training Centres (FTC) in the region (Regional BOARD, 2009) and most

woredas each have 2-4 FTCs. Despite this, very few farmers are involved with the agricultural

extension services and are therefore able to make use of access to agricultural advice and credit

facilities. Agricultural markets are weak, with no institutions to support and facilitate either

agricultural production or marketing.

12

Conceptual framework for the Impact Assessment (opportunities

and challenges for BGRS)

Despite the huge potential in terms of land availability and regional water resources, crop

production and productivity are both very low. The following are some of the key challenges

which impede production and productivity:

Use of labour-intensive rudimentary farming tools (shifting hoe cultivation

practised by indigenous people),

High prevalence of crop diseases, pests (especially termite) and weeds (especially

Striga), and poor storage facilities resulting in high post-harvest losses,

Poor working culture of the indigenous communities and high work load on women,

High prevalence of human diseases (particularly endemic malaria, which affects

40% of the labour force in a given season),

Degradation and reduction of natural resources such as soil fertility and fuel-wood,

Poor rural infrastructures (especially roads and markets),

Lack of market infrastructure and credit facilities,

Erratic nature and variability of rainfall,

Poor extension services and inequity in distribution of existing manpower,

Subsistence nature of production or a low share of commercial production.

Due to the combined effects of these problems, the people in the region - especially the

indigenous populations - suffer from food deficit both in quantity and quality.

The Region‟s great potential for livestock production is not currently achieved because of animal

trypanosomiasis (locally known as “Gendi”)1. Trypanosomiasis control is a top priority in BGRS.

According to an ethno-veterinary survey of June 2004, the relative mean herd incidence of

trypanosomiasis in the year 2003 was 33% and mean herd mortality due to this disease was 22%.

The depletion of basic assets of livestock is leading households to extreme poverty and

vulnerability; the same surveys showed an estimated annual total mortality of 46% of cattle and

38% of sheep and goats. Those animals that survive direct mortality give reduced yields, are less

able to be used for draught purposes, and have low market value. Indigenous people who for

centuries practised land preparation using oxen are forced to turn to direct use of hoes.

The effects of animal diseases are further exacerbated by the shortage of drugs, vaccines and

equipment for their prevention and control, and by the costs of each even when they are available.

Money spent on an animal that eventually dies is wasted, along with the asset (the animal) the

drugs or vaccine were meant to protect.

1 Infectious and contagious animal diseases include contagious bovine pleuro-pneumonia (CBPP), contagious

ovine pleuro-pneumonia (COPP), peste des petites ruminants (PRR), lumpy skin disease (LSD), blackleg, anthrax, and

pasteurellosis.

13

Livestock owners in remote and inaccessible areas use the services of traditional healers, mainly

due to their accessibility and low, or no, service fee. This highlights the need to take the service

to the people, which can only be achieved by establishing numerous village centres staffed by one

AHA or AHT.

Although the region planned to achieve 63% of animal health coverage during the Plan for

Accelerated and Sustainable Development to End Poverty (PASDEP) period, the realized animal

health coverage by 2008/09 was only about 49% (Regional BOARD, 2009), demonstrating a wide

gap between planned and achieved targets.

Ethiopia is currently implementing its second PASDEP2. The strategic vision of this plan is one of

rapid and sustained growth primarily through scaled-up investments in social and physical

infrastructures targeted at eliminating the poverty traps that have hindered the development of the

country. PASDEP is based heavily upon the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The main

elements of pastoral/agro-pastoral livelihood and development programs in the PASDEP include:

improving the asset base and reducing the impacts of drought; livestock marketing; veterinary and

livestock feed; water development and environment protection; reduction of natural resource

degradation, and development of infrastructure (PASDEP, 2008). The regional PASDEP includes

a plan to increase the productivity of milk, meat, egg, honey and wax by 9% annually from the

baseline.

Grazing land comprises 3.28% of the Region‟s land area. The main source of animal feed is

communal land and the main type of feed is green fodder (87.82%), followed by crop residues

and hay. Animal feed deficit is a common phenomenon in the region from March to May. Over-

grazing, poor land use management and conversion of grazing land to crop land are all major

factors contributing to the shortage of animal feed.

The BGRS has much untapped potential for grazing. 64.5% of the land area is covered by

shrubland vegetation, implying a large reserve that could be turned over to grazing.

In general, productivity of livestock in the region remains low due to poor management (and high

prevalence) of animal disease and a shortage of proper pasture and water supply. An extensive

veterinary service and improved feeding system both need to be in place in order for the region to

benefit from its present resource potential.

The key challenges of the livestock sector are as follows:

Low animal health coverage and inequity in the distribution of animal health centres among

woredas in the region;

Inadequate and expensive drug and vaccine supplies;

Lack of transport and funds to purchase fuel and drugs to get out to meet with farmers‟

requests;

2 PASDEP built upon the first PRS (SDPRP, the Sustainable Development and Poverty Reduction Program), but

contains several new elements, including an explicit link with the Millennium Development Goals, as well as a new

focus on growth. The PASDEP also includes a specific section on development issues and approaches in pastoral areas

of Ethiopia.

14

Inadequate budgets to provide veterinary health coverage for all livestock requiring it;

Limited training opportunities for professional staff to update their familiarity with new

advances in science and technology. No in-service training has been offered for many years,

and no reference books are provided for use in clinics;

The purchase, by farmers, of illegal/expired drugs from vendors (sometimes including

antibiotics from human disease clinics) to treat their sick animals; and

The continued inclination towards traditional medicines and practices such as superficial

branding, particularly among farmers who live more than 10 km from a clinic. Many

farmers do not understand the value of modern medicines.

Objectives of the Assessment Work

To evaluate the outcome of IBS training

To analyze and determine important factors for the scaling up and scaling out operations

To develop a proto type model for capacity building and knowledge sharing

The Preliminary Report below covers just the first of these three points and is based on an

analysis of data collected before and after IBS training. The second and third points will depend

upon a critical assessment of a series of reports of the following type, derived from assessments in

each of the agro-ecological zones where training is currently taking place.

Preliminary Assessment Report

Introduction

This report describes the methods used to assess the effectiveness of farmer training at BEA

biofarm facilities in Assosa and Addis Ababa. We also present a preliminary analysis of the

resultant large volume of data in order to demonstrate the effectiveness of the IBS training and to

identify areas that require greater attention. Certain aspects of the IBS programme are necessarily

still awaiting direct assessment; further results from existing databases (and further information-

gathering interviews/surveys) will follow this initial appraisal.

Methods

Data collection

Face-to-face interviews based upon standardised questionnaires were made with a randomly

selected subset (n = 200) of 500 farmers that were trained at the BEA biofarm facilities in Assosa

(n = 340) and Addis Ababa (n = 160). Questions were designed to gather quantitative information

on economic, agricultural and social parameters. Interviews were conducted before training and

up to ten months afterwards for the purpose of comparing answers and thereby ascertaining the

effects of training on these key parameters. A sample questionnaire is included in the Annex to

this document. Baseline interviews were carried out between the 14th September and 9

th October

15

2009, and training was given between November 2009 and March 2010. Follow-up interviews

were conducted between the 10th and 27th September 2010.

Analysis and interpretation

All data from questionnaires were entered and organised in Microsoft Excel. Where appropriate,

simple non-parametric statistics were calculated using R statistical software.

We can easily demonstrate a change in farmers‟ absolute income after training, but we also want

to be sure that the training was the cause, rather than some other factor that we have not measured

or considered. A conventional way would be to survey simultaneously an independent group of

farmers that received no training between the two interviews. This would be a classic „control‟

group. Future surveys are likely to include such a group, but this is an expensive and time-

consuming process, and there are other, more indirect methods.

Firstly, we want to assess whether the absolute income increase is due simply to inflation of the

currency. Does the improvement in income represent an improvement in actual buying power, or

simply reflect the changing financial situation? To answer this question, we adjust the final

incomes downwards by the appropriate amount to account for inflation. It should be noted that

the change in value of crops between sampling periods does not affect these statistics, since the

income was typically calculated post-hoc by multiplying the net produce by the current market

value. In other words, inflation of crop price is already accounted for.

Secondly, if we are to assume that any increases in income are attributable to training, we need to

understand how the training might have achieved this postulated improvement – i.e., we will want

to identify a mechanism. To begin to investigate this question, we assess changes in farm

diversity in terms of the numbers of different kinds of vegetables grown, and compare these

figures for each farmer before and after training. We also look at time spent in plot preparation,

as a basic indicator measure of farming efficiency.

A key factor, which cannot be controlled in this design, is the potential for inter-annual variability

in crop yields, which is likely to be present in a consistent manner across the region. In a future,

more detailed version of this report, retrospective data on crop yields (available from the Central

Statistical Authority or the Ministry of Agriculture) will be used to elucidate such inter-annual

patterns and thereby calibrate in a general fashion the results shown in the current survey. Future

survey work will involve the monitoring of regional crop yields in order to compare IBS-

augmented farming profits with those of the region as a whole. A more immediately available

clue to the role of IBS training in observed changes in income comes from the direct questions

addressed to farmers regarding their opinion on the effects that training has had on their

livelihood.

Potential wider benefits of training (i.e. not just immediate income generation) are investigated by

reference to the way in which profits are used by farmers, and the extent to which trainees have

passed on their newly-gained expertise to other farmers in the region. The economic balance

between investment in the training programme and financial outputs in terms of agricultural

produce is assessed by comparing the per-farmer cost of training with immediate financial gains.

Environmental and social benefits (i.e. those without inherent and/or calculable financial value)

are discussed.

16

Results

Demographic and basic agricultural practice data

A large volume of demographic data was produced, the full details of which are beyond the scope

of this preliminary report. The same applies to all aspects of the data; this section will therefore

present only the most salient and immediately interpretable results. Further outputs should be

expected from a more thorough and detailed future analysis.

78%

22%

Male

Female

Figure 1. Gender of farmers interviewed (n = 200).

78% of the farmers interviewed were male (Figure 1), making the survey subset (n = 200)

almost exactly representative of the full group of 500 trained farmers (male = 77.7%).

17

97%

3%Married

Single

83%

17% Literate

Illiterate

Figure 2. Marital status and literacy among male farmers (n = 156).

Figures 2 & 3 show that literacy was higher among male than female farmers (83% vs. 61%).

The frequency of female literacy was significantly lower than that of males (chi-squared test; χ21 =

14.5, P < 0.01).

93%

7%Married

Single

61%

39%

Literate

Illiterate

Figure 3. Marital status and literacy among female farmers (n = 44).

Cereals are the most important crops for the survey group, grown by 96% of male and 98% of

female farmers (Figure 4). Proportions of produce raised by male and female farmers were

similar.

18

0

20

40

60

80

100

Larg

e liv

esto

ck

Pou

ltry

Cere

al

Fruit/ve

getab

le

Nurs

ery

Perc

enta

ge o

f fa

rmers

Male

Female

Figure 4. Agricultural activities of the farmers surveyed, split by gender. Note that percentages are not

mutually exclusive; an individual farmer may raise more than one type of produce.

Income change

After accounting for 3.5% inflation (Central Statistics Office, 2010), mean monthly income

increased after training by an average of 102.6% when all farmers are considered together (Figure

5, which is separated by gender). The difference in median income was highly statistically

significant (Wilcoxon signed-rank test; V = 113, n = 150, P < 0.001). (Note that the sample size

is reduced from 200 to 150 by the presence of 50 interviewees whose income was not recorded

before and/or after training).

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Before After (with

3.5% infl.)

After (with

7% infl.)

After (with

10% infl.)

Avera

ge m

onth

ly incom

e (

Birr)

Male

Female

Figure 5. Mean income change for male and female farmers after training, accounting for 3.5% inflation.

Results for hypothetical 7% and 10% inflation levels are also shown. Error bars represent 99% confidence

intervals.

When male and female farmers are considered separately, the results are similar (Figure 5). Male

income increased by an average of 104.2%, while female income increased by an average of

96.2%. Both median increases are highly significant (Wilcoxon signed-rank test; male: V = 83, n

19

= 118, P < 0.001; female: V = 3, n = 32, P < 0.001). Whilst male income was greater both before

and after training than the respective values for females, neither median difference is significant

(Wilcoxon rank-sum test; W > 1978, n1 = 118, n2 = 32, P > 0.4).

Evidence for improvements in agricultural practice

As can be inferred from Figure 6, the diversity of crop plants grown was significantly higher after

training (Wilcoxon signed-rank test; V = 605.5, n = 200, P < 0.001). Because the final category is

not a real number („more than 5‟), the mean cannot be calculated, but the median shows an

improvement from „4 kinds‟ to „more than 5‟.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

0 1 2 3 4 5 More

than 5Number of types of vegetables grown

Num

ber

of

farm

ers

Before

After

Figure 6. Change in numbers of vegetables grown by farmers before and after training.

After training, farmers were able to spend less time preparing plots (nearest-integer averages:

before, 30 days; after, 22 days). The data are summarised in Figure 7. The reduction in time was

not large, but it was highly statistically significant, and therefore consistent among farmers. Most

experienced a similar, small reduction in time (Wilcoxon signed-rank test; V = 15016, n = 194, P

< 0.001).

20

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

0-15 days 16-30 days More than 30 days

Time taken to prepare plots

Fre

quency (

num

ber

of

farm

ers

)

Before

After

Figure 7. Time taken to prepare plots, before and after training, from all respondents (n = 194).

Farmers’ perceptions of improvements

90% of interviewees indicated a perceived improvement in living conditions as a result of the

training. Of these responses, the factors cited in evidence of the improvement are shown in

Figure 8. The most common factor, mentioned by 93% of respondents, was coverage of

household expenditure, i.e. an increase in financial profit available for covering living expenses.

0

20

40

60

80

100

Coverage of household

expenditure

Sending children to

school

Increase in household

assets

Perc

enta

ge o

f fa

rmers

Figure 8. Stated indicators of improvement in living condition among farmers who gave a positive

response when asked if they had experienced such an improvement as a result of training (90% of

interviewees). The factors are not mutually exclusive; i.e. interviewees may list more than one factor.

Long-term prospects

83% of farmers indicated that more than half of their profits would be reinvested in business

diversification.

21

The desired „horizontal‟ spread of information was demonstrated by the number of farmers that

had been indirectly trained by trainees after the programme. The 200 interviewed farmers

collectively indicated that they had trained a further 6870 farmers in their region – an average of

34 each (though see Discussion, below). The potential for such indirect, secondary training to

cause a ripple effect of information transfer is illustrated in Figure 9.

Figure 9. Exponential spread of farm technology is achieved through indirect training by the original

trainees. 200 farmers selected at random from the Assosa training program claimed to have collectively

trained a further 6870 farmers in the region.

The economics of IBS training

The specific cost of training each individual farmer is equivalent to $100 (or approximately Birr

1600 at current exchange rates). Our results indicate that the average monthly income increase

after training was just over Birr 330, which translates as Birr 3967 over the course of a year. The

financial benefit accrued - in the first year - by each individual farmer is therefore equivalent to

245% of the cost involved in their training (i.e. a net financial benefit of 145%; variable exchange

rates make it inappropriate to be more accurate).

22

Discussion

Direct and immediate benefits

The financial benefits that an individual farmer can expect to accrue upon receipt of IBS training

are significant and, apparently, immediate. So far, monthly income of trainee farmers has

increased by an average of 102.6% in rather less than a year since training. It seems also that the

effect of training is not gender-specific, meaning that the potential benefits to male and female

farmers are similarly great. Although the survey design lacks a control group, and thus absolute

statistical robustness (as described more fully in the methods section), we can still be confident

that the income improvements revealed by the survey have resulted from a boom in agricultural

profit that was made possible by the training.

Inflation is ruled out very quickly and easily; the increase in income is so dramatic that we could

specify a hypothetical 30% inflation rate and still obtain a statistically significant result - the

income rise represents a rise in real buying power. The heightened diversity of crops grown and

the consistent reduction in plotting time (and therefore the postulated increase in efficiency)

shown in the results suggest mechanisms by which agricultural profits might have been improved,

though this preliminary survey really only reveals the tip of the iceberg. IBS training has the

potential to strengthen farm businesses not only by maximising diversity and time efficiency, but

also by encouraging economy in resources and space, and by reducing disease burdens in humans

and livestock.

The likelihood that such an agricultural mini-revolution might have come about by chance during

the study period is vanishingly small, but there is always the possibility that fluctuations in

environmental conditions might have caused a regional surge in crop productivity, something that

cannot be detected in the current survey. This is an important caveat – a point that will be

addressed in a more detailed version of this report and in future surveys - but in the meantime we

can nonetheless conclude that farmers themselves feel that it is the training that has catalysed such

a positive transformation in their businesses; 90% of interviewees reported an improvement in

living conditions as a result of IBS training. Such an interview question may evoke a positive

response simply on grounds of politeness, but the fact that 10% of interviewees did not respond

positively suggests that there is no over-whelming cultural propensity for absolute tact and

unreserved gratitude! In other words, we can certainly have confidence that the farmers generally

felt that a direct benefit came from the training.

It must be noted that the short-term nature of this survey means that the results reflect only the

minimum potential benefit likely to result from training. Many farmers admit that they have not

yet had the time or capital necessary to implement all of the new techniques that they have learnt;

technologies such as biogas digesters are expensive and cannot be integrated into a farm business

immediately, but require time, planning and investment. Since 83% of farmers have been

spending more than half of their profits on business diversification, we can safely expect more

and more IBS techniques to be employed as time goes on. We will carry out follow-up surveys in

future years to evaluate the uptake of such techniques.

23

Long-term prospects

Investment of profit in agriculture has already been mentioned. The indirect training of additional

farmers by trainees (so-called „horizontal‟ knowledge transfer) is another powerful means by

which the IBS scheme will contribute to long-term prosperity in rural regions. The figure of 6870

farmers indirectly-trained by the 200 trainees may well reflect a certain degree of exaggeration,

but even if one assumes a rather cynical five-fold over-estimation of such prowess, indirect

training will still spread knowledge almost seven times as far as the direct training.

Environmental and social benefits

The surveys revealed a need to provide guidance on a range of environmental issues that

contribute to ecosystem health and therefore the sustainability of agriculture. These issues

include the management (and positive utilisation) of waste, efficient use of rainwater, and the

creation and application of compost – all key features of the IBS syllabus (see section above;

„Implementation of the IBS Approach‟). Female literacy falls behind that of males in this study;

further work is required to assess how accurately this figure represents the region as a whole, and

therefore the extent to which the problem needs to be addressed. Literacy is a key skill for

farmers wishing to expand their businesses and operate competitively in new markets. A more

detailed treatment of this and other issues is beyond the scope of this preliminary report, but will

follow in due course.

Cost-benefit balance

The aspect by which IBS thrives or fails is that of the cost-benefit balance. Do the outputs of the

system justify the financial inputs? The answer is an emphatic „Yes‟. Simple inspection of the

most directly measurable parameter – increase in farmer income – reveals a benefit to the farmer

equivalent to 245% of the financial investment of their training within the first year. Given that

income enhancement is likely to rise in subsequent years, when farmers have had the time and

capital to invest in the more long-term technologies and techniques (biogas production, apiculture,

etc.), there is every reason to suppose that the return will increase year-on-year. Furthermore, the

brief cost-benefit analysis carried out above did not consider the effects of indirect training of

other farmers in the region. Even in the first year, 245% must be considered an absolute

minimum estimate of investment return; as discussed above and illustrated in Figure 9, the direct

economic benefit accrued in a single year by training a single farmer may in fact be half an order

of magnitude larger.

This 245% figure above excludes two important factors, one of which represents extra benefit,

and one of which represents extra cost. The added value comes from farmer profit in future years,

which is likely to remain at the same gross level (approximately Birr 4000 per annum) or to

improve as each individual farmer assimilates more and more IBS techniques into his or her farm

business (e.g. biogas, apiculture, sericulture). This is profit without further input of specific

training expense. The cost comes in two forms: firstly, the set-up, administration and

maintenance expenses of the training facility; secondly, the cost of back-stopping, support and

monitoring. When more information becomes available, these factors will be incorporated in a

detailed economic report.

It is important to note that whilst „cost‟ in this sense refers to the financial element – the $100

input required to train a farmer, plus the initial and running costs of the system as a whole -

„benefit‟ incorporates more than simply the financial aspect. The environmental and social

24

benefits accrued by educating farmers in the judicious use of resource and by instilling in them an

enlightened approach to family-planning and healthcare provide tangible gains that are

nonetheless difficult to quantify. We are at pains to emphasise those aspects of the training that

promote environmental stewardship and social responsibility.

Further work

This report is necessarily concise. Much of the body of data consists of discursive responses that

do not readily lend themselves to rapid quantitative analysis. Further interrogation of the existing

dataset will reveal more information and provide greater insights into the effectiveness of IBS

training. In particular, future work will focus on social factors that may affect livelihood, and the

extent to which variable uptake of IBS techniques influences its overall impact. Finally, an

appraisal of inter-annual variability in crop yields in the region will be a key factor in all future

studies.

Summary

Responses from 200 farmers who were trained at IBS facilities in Assosa and Addis Ababa were

analysed to determine the effects of training on agricultural practices and measures of economic

status.

After correction for national inflation, training improved average monthly income by an average

of 102.6%. Figures were similar for male and female farmers, who constituted 78% and 22% of

the sample, respectively.

The financial investment involved in training each farmer offers an approximately 145% annual

return within the first year alone, which is likely to increase year-on-year.

IBS training encourages agricultural business diversity and efficiency whilst minimising resource

use.

„Horizontal‟ knowledge transfer has likely resulted in the indirect training of many times more

farmers than the 500 originally trained.