2014

MALIS

Improving food security and

market linkages for

smallholders in Oddar

Meanchey and Preah Vihear

Input Trade Fairs in Cambodia

Acknowledgments

The views expressed in this publication are solely attributable to FAO and to Project Staff

working in the MALIS project in Cambodia (OSRO/CMB/101/EC). The contents can in no

way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union. This publication and the MALIS

project are funded by the European Union.

This report reflects the efforts of the entire MALIS team. In addition to the grateful

acknowledgement of the funding from the European Union, I would like to acknowledge the

hard efforts of the entire MALIS team who worked tirelessly to ensure the success of the fairs.

We are grateful for the support of colleagues from TCE, especially David Calef for his

guidance and training; Ms Nina Brandstrup, FAO Representative; Ms Lebun Botumroath,

Communications Officer; and the Operations Team from Phnom Penh; and all those members

of the FAO team who gave so much of their time and worked long into the nights to meet a

punishing schedule of work. Our Government partners from the General Directorate of

Agriculture and the Provinces of Preah Vihear and Oddar Meanchey and assisted every step

of the process and continue their support for the farmer groups involved. I wish to thank the

NGO Partners who facilitated the activity, through training, planning, setting up and

supervising the implementation of the fairs and recovery of credit. The outcomes are a clear

testimony to your hard work and dedication to the well-being of the smallholder farmers

involved. Thanks to Buddhism for Development (BFD), Community Integrated Development

Organization (CIDO), Farmer Livelihood Development (FLD), Khmer Buddhist Association

(KBA), Malteser International and Rural Community and Environment Development

Organization (RCEDO) for your commitment. Thanks also to those members of the

management committees of the farmer organizations and agricultural cooperatives who

worked hard on behalf of their members to understand the scheme, convince the members of

its worth and hold them to the promises of repayment. This is a tribute to your collective

social capital.

I would also like to thank all the traders and organizations who participated in the fairs.

Without your trust and commitment we would not achieve the outcomes intended in

promoting market access and healthy competition in remote areas.

Iean Russell

Project Manager EU-FAO MALIS

31 January 2015.

Kim Davin, Harold Gray, Kaing Chanlen, Chea Chanthan, Khim Charya, Duong

Chansereivisal, Keo Rasmei, Lek Pheara, Yann Phanith, Etienne Careme, Bun Sieng, Khin

Narin, Tyler Whitley, Vann Kimsan, Mok Kona, Khim Ravy, Yok Keo, Eng Tengsorng, Phorn

Yoeum, Theresa Jeremias, Tek Kimsong, Khorn Sdok, Pel Chivita, Pen Polin, Bun Sokhen,

Duk Seyha, Thoang Sokha.

Front and back cover photography @FAO/Cambodia. Russell

1

Table of Contents Disclaimer and Acknowledgments ..................................................................................... 3

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... 3

1. Input Trade Fairs as a strategy for provision of inputs and sustainability ............................. 6

1.1 Purpose, Objectives and Outcomes .................................................................................. 7

1.2 MALIS Input credit and voucher system ......................................................................... 8

1.3 Process for conduct of Input Trade Fairs ......................................................................... 8

1.4 Activities and Outputs .................................................................................................... 10

2. Voucher Design .................................................................................................................... 14

3. Expenditure Patterns ............................................................................................................ 15

4. General observations on the conduct of the fairs ................................................................. 18

5. Feedback from participants .................................................................................................. 22

5.1 Exit surveys .................................................................................................................... 22

Level of satisfaction over the conduct of the fairs: .......................................................... 22

Problems encountered by the participants ........................................................................ 23

Farmers' impressions on the pricing of inputs .................................................................. 24

5.2 Feedback from CBO Management ................................................................................. 25

5.3 Feedback from Input Suppliers ...................................................................................... 26

6. Quality Assurance ................................................................................................................ 27

7. Accountability to Affected populations ............................................................................... 28

Leadership and Governance ............................................................................................. 28

Transparency .................................................................................................................... 28

Feedback and complaints ................................................................................................. 29

Participation ..................................................................................................................... 29

8. Visibility ............................................................................................................................... 29

Annexes .................................................................................................................................... 31

Reference documents ............................................................................................................... 31

Annex 1: Detailed statistics for participation in the fairs ......................................................... 34

Table 1: Participation and value of vouchers in fairs conducted in Oddar Meanchey ..... 34

Table 2: Participation and value of vouchers in fairs conducted in Preah Vihear ........... 37

Annex 2: Sample of Supplier Contract .................................................................................... 40

Disclaimer ........................................................................................................................ 47

Acknowledgement ............................................................................................................ 47

2

3

Input Trade Fairs in Cambodia

Executive Summary The EU-funded MALIS project ran a series of nine input trade fairs in Oddar Meanchey and

Preah Vihear Provinces in north-west Cambodia during 2014. The purpose of these fairs was

to provide quality inputs to farmers, at the time when they were most needed, and to ensure

that families had access to basic kitchen equipment for food preparation and feeding. The fairs

proved to be highly effective as a mechanism for achieving the purpose.

Participants for the fairs were smallholder farming families who were registered members of

selected Community-Based Organizations (CBOs) operating in the target districts. Women

made up almost 70% of the participants issued vouchers and were strongly involved in the

organization of the fairs. Many of the CBOs involved were formally registered agricultural

cooperatives (AC) and many were working with the MALIS farmer business schools.

The fairs were run in conjunction with a voucher system and input credit. Under this system,

participants registered with each of the selected CBOs were able to apply for credit up to a set

limit per household (generally USD 150), with the requirement that 60% of the amount

borrowed was to be repaid to the CBO after harvest, plus interest according to the rules of the

CBO. This combination of mechanisms – the fairs, vouchers, input credit and collective

action – ensured that the system was well regulated, transparent, socially accepted, favourable

to smallholders and incorporated sustainability.

The key statistics for the total number of participating households, input suppliers and value

of vouchers traded in both provinces are shown in tables below. A total of 3,777 households

participated in the fairs, taking input credit and trading an average of USD 142 per household

for a total volume of USD 535,080 traded. The farmers were required to pay 60% of the value

of the vouchers received to the agricultural cooperative or farmer group they belonged to.

The management committees kept accurate records on credit issue and repayments and

achieved average repayment rates of 99.3% at the completion of the harvest period (as of 31

Jan 2015). This was a remarkable achievement given that credit was issued without collateral

and the institutional arrangements to secure repayment were based on the integrity of the

farmers, the commitment of management committees and project staff and an appreciation of

the shared benefits of collective action. The complete cycle of preparation, credit issue,

purchases at the fairs, use of the inputs for crop and livestock production, harvest, sale and

repayment of debt was undertaken in the face of all normal risks and with sufficient

safeguards to achieve success.

The feedback from participants at the fairs was strongly positive, with the most common

requests being for the conduct of more fairs and for more credit to be made available.

4

Suppliers were also keen to be involved once they saw the commercial opportunities. Traders

were not pleased by the long delays on payments that occurred after conclusion of the fairs.

This is an aspect of the organization of the fairs that could be improved with a more effective

payment system. However, the careful management of vouchers and payments in the whole

process ensured tight financial control in accordance with FAO standards of accountability.

The MALIS project structure is based on teams from FAO, government and NGO

implementing partners working closely with target communities through CBOs. The teams

involved in the preparation for the fairs were principally the agribusiness team, the farmer

field school teams and the nutrition teams, working in close collaboration with operations and

administrative staff for contracting and financial affairs. The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry

and Fisheries (MAFF), the Provincial Departments of Agriculture, Women’s Affairs and

Health, district and local governments provided assistance for quality assurance, technical

guidance and strengthening of CBOs. The NGO partners identified eligible CBOs, provided

training, and assisted CBOs to identify participants in the input credit scheme associated with

the trade fairs. The NGO implementing partners prepared the site for the fairs and organized

the issue of vouchers with FAO staff. The NGOs also provided nutrition education as a

complementary activity at the fairs with staff from the Health Departments and Women’s

Affairs. The NGOs involved were Buddhism for Development (BFD), Community Integrated

Development Organization (CIDO), Farmer Livelihood Development (FLD), Khmer

Buddhist Association (KBA), Malteser International and Rural Community Environment

Development Organization (RCEDO). The fairs conducted for MALIS were the first

experience for the implementing partners in the conduct of input trade fairs. Government

representatives, NGO partners and participating CBOs overwhelmingly supported the fairs

and praised the outcomes, despite the hard work involved in the preparation and management

of each event.

Location of MALIS input trade fairs, partners responsible for implementation and value

of vouchers traded.

Location by District Date NGO

Partners

Value of vouchers

traded (USD)

Oddar Meanchey Province

Chongkal 17 May 2014 RCEDO 38,933

Samrong 19 May 2014 RCEDO, Malteser

International

73,276

Banteay Ampil 21 May 2014 CIDO, Malteser

International

86,224

Anlong Veng 23 May 2014 KBA, Malteser

International

64,943

Trapeang Prasat 25 May 2015 KBA 37,575

Preah Vihear Province

Kuleaen 27 May 2014 BFD, FLD 50,709

Tbeng Meanchey 29 May 2014 BFD, FLD 36,530

Rovieng 31 May 2014 BFD, FLD 67,848

Chey Sen 2 June 2014 BFD, FLD 78,963

5

The various goods available for trade at the fairs included seed, fertilizer (both organic and

inorganic), tools, pumps and related equipment, small machinery, postharvest equipment such

as tarpaulins and seed storage drums and kitchen equipment.

Key statistics for the nine fairs

Total number of participating CBOs 49

Total number of input suppliers participating 107

Total number of CBO members issued vouchers 3,777

Women participants (percentage of the total) 69%

Total number of visitors 7,226

Total value of vouchers traded USD 535,080

Average repayment rate (as at 31 Jan 2015) 99.3%

Average value of vouchers per household USD 142

Quality Assurance (QA) for the fairs was conducted by a joint team from FAO and the

Provincial Departments of Agriculture (PDA), with additional involvement from a Ministry of

Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF) team in some locations and for laboratory

analysis.

Preparing vouchers for distribution

Issue of vouchers in Oddar Meanchey

6

1. Input Trade Fairs as a strategy for provision of inputs and

sustainability The EU funded project ‘Improving food security and market linkages for smallholders in

Oddar Meanchey and Preah Vihear’ (MALIS) conducted a series of agricultural fairs in the

target provinces in late May 2014. FAO Cambodia conducted the fairs under innovative

arrangements that allow cash transfers to beneficiaries, as described in FAO (2012) policy

guidelines for input trade fairs and voucher schemes. This was the first time that FAO has

conducted input trade fairs using a voucher system in Cambodia, although the mechanism has

been used extensively in other countries in recent years.

The scheme was based on the combination of input credit and the use of vouchers; working

through existing and proven farmer groups; and supported by Farmer Business School (FBS)

activities and trained FBS Facilitators. Traders, CBOs and farmer participants were required

to meet specific criteria for participation in the fair and to follow set guidelines. These

guidelines have been produced in a separate booklet produced for training purposes.

Selected traders were invited to display their goods for sale at the fairs, subject to quality

assurance of the goods on display, and provided goods directly to the participating farmers in

exchange for the vouchers. FAO arranged payment to the traders for the value of goods

traded during the fair, with immediate cash payments for amounts less than $500 and by

cheque for larger amounts.

The items for sale at the fairs will include rice seed, vegetable seeds, fertilizers, hand tools,

small machinery and pumps, postharvest equipment and miscellaneous kitchen equipment. No

pesticides or herbicides were allowed in the fairs and spraying equipment was also banned

because FAO could not ensure that the use of such chemicals and equipment would be within

guidelines for responsible use and best practice.

The implementation strategy for the MALIS fairs was to:

Keep the design simple

Train partners well

Ensure thorough consultation and wide dissemination of information

Carefully select participants

Ensure voluntary participation by all actors, in full knowledge of their

responsibilities

Follow up on success elsewhere in the project by rewarding motivated farmers

and capable CBOs

Provide a 40% incentive for input credit to motivate farmers

Conduct a single round of credit issue and recovery of capital by the CBOs,

not to create a micro-credit scheme.

7

This strategy proved effective and the take up of the credit and participation of traders

exceeded expectations. Although it was planned that up to three rounds of fairs might be

conducted in the target districts, the bulk of the available funds were expended in the first

round. The work was intense but the direct outcome was substantial.

1.1 Purpose, Objectives and Outcomes The purpose of the agricultural fairs was to provide quality inputs to farmers at the time when

they are most needed and to ensure that families have access to basic kitchen equipment for

food preparation and feeding.

The specific objectives of the MALIS agricultural fairs were to:

1. Provide a venue for the exchange of vouchers for agricultural inputs and

services;

2. Promote market linkages between smallholders and firms as part of supply

chain development in target districts;

3. Stimulate provision of quality agricultural inputs at a local level

4. Promote responsible business practices for the agricultural sector;

5. Provide opportunities for dissemination of technical information and field

demonstrations by both public sector and private enterprises;

6. Promote key messages for the project for improvement of farming systems,

market linkages and nutrition;

7. Provide opportunities for information flows and project benefits outside the

direct beneficiary groups;

8. Promote cooperation between development partners at a local level.

The success of the MALIS fairs is measured in terms of four outcomes:

1. Satisfaction of the farmers who participated in the fairs in terms of the choices

available and the price and quality of the good available.

2. Good outcomes for the farmer beneficiaries in terms of the cropping and

livestock enterprises where the inputs are invested.

3. Successful recovery of the 60% of credit and the associated interest charged by

the farmer groups.

4. Preparation by the CBO of a plan for re-investment of the capital for the

sustained benefit of the members.

At the date of reporting (Jan 2015), all outcomes have been successfully achieved for all

CBOs involved. As the CBOs charged interest on the amount outstanding, the members have

a motivation for prompt repayment and by 31 January 2015 the repayment rate across all

CBOs was 99.3%. Reinvestment of funds recovered from previous rounds of input credit was

evidence of the suitability of the plan and the commitment of the CBOs. Ongoing

monitoring, impact surveys and case studies will establish longer term impacts.

8

1.2 MALIS Input credit and voucher system Participating farmers were given credit by the MALIS project to purchase approved

agricultural inputs and household items, for the purposes of improved farming and family

feeding practices. The fairs operated through a voucher system, which entitled farmers to

purchase agricultural goods and services of their choice. This was extended as a form of input

credit, with the requirement that a fixed proportion (60%) of the credit be repaid after harvest

to the issuing CBO. The increased capital for the CBO provides a sustainable benefit for the

group. Vouchers were exchanged with traders at the agricultural fairs in a controlled

environment, where attendance was mainly limited to members of the selected CBOs, the

qualified traders and to goods that had been cleared for exchange by FAO and MAFF.

Vouchers were strictly controlled during printing, issue, trade and redemption. The fairs were

run for a single day in each specific location and vouchers were only valid on the day of issue.

The agricultural fairs were part of a broader program of input credit under the MALIS project

that resulted in approximately 100 tonnes of quality rice seed being purchased for the 2014

wet season crop by farmer groups using input credit. It was expected that the provision of

inputs, combined with the FFS and FBS, would result in substantial production increases in

the target provinces during 2014.

The object of the system was not to establish a microcredit scheme for the beneficiaries. The

objective was to use the capacities of farmer groups to recover the main part of the value of

the project inputs and to secure this capital under group management, for re-investment,

according to the needs and interests of the members of the group. Thus the objective was

limited to the conduct a single cycle of credit and partial recovery of the costs. The project

will ensure that farmer groups are strengthened in decision making, record keeping and the

operation of savings and credit schemes as ongoing activity. This objective has been fully

achieved.

1.3 Process for conduct of Input Trade Fairs The process for running the fairs commenced over one year before the conduct of the first

fair. Because input trade fairs and a voucher scheme had not been used by the FAO team in

Cambodia, there was much research and preparation required before launching the fairs. This

long lead time included the training of the FAO team before the wider announcement and

preparations for the fairs by partners and beneficiary organizations.

The general process and the roles and responsibilities for each partner and the participants

were detailed in the project document Vouchers and Agricultural Input Credit for MALIS:

Guidelines for Project Staff, Implementing Partners, Input Suppliers and Participating

Farmer Groups.

9

Market survey and quality assurance assisted by PDA Officer in Preah Vihear Province

Table 1: The timeline in preparing for and running the fairs for MALIS

Timing Actions Critical considerations for success

-6 months Planning Consultation and thorough understanding of the policy and

implementation guidelines

-6 months Production of

training materials

Adapt general guidelines to the specific situation

-6 months

to -1 week

Training participants Including FAO staff, suppliers, NGO partners, management

committees for farmer groups, farmers

-3 months Technical clearances

-3 months Market survey Create catalogues for farmers and traders and set price ranges

for the fairs

-2 months Announcement Attract sufficient numbers of suppliers; clearly state selection

procedures and criteria, brief widely and give guidelines in

writing. Ensure support from provincial and local governments.

-2 months Consultation with

beneficiary

communities

-2 months Contracting

suppliers

In conjunction with quality assurance, especially for analysis of

fertilizers

-2 months Determination of the

value of vouchers to

be issued

Determine total amount available, amounts per household

(maximum allowable). Ensure accurate records on standardized

forms

-2 months Voucher design and

printing

Denominations required and security considerations

-1 month to

-1 day

Site selection and

preparation

Consider size of fair, position of booths, delivery access,

parking, security, control measures, hygiene, opening ceremony

and briefings. Booth spacing and arrangements have

commercial value and may be contested by suppliers.

-1 month Briefing paper Released to media and partners

-2 weeks Finalization of lists

of beneficiaries and

amounts to be issued

Intensive consultation with beneficiaries to meet specified

deadlines

10

-1 week Preparation of

vouchers for issue

Various denominations to be bundled for ease of distribution

and to facilitate exchange. issue suppliers with small

denomination vouchers for change

Day of the

fair

6:00 am

Issue of vouchers Concurrent activity needed. Allow viewing of the displays by

farmers and quality assurance procedures to police displays

8:00 am Final briefings Ensure all participants understand the characteristics of the

vouchers and the denominations. Restate the rules of trade and

specify the complaints and questions procedures

8:30 am Open trade Continuous monitoring of prices, products and trading

behaviour. Conduct exit surveys

Midday Close trade For 250-500 farmers, approximately $150 per farmer and 10-15

traders, with over 100 items on sale.

1-4pm Reconciliation of

vouchers issued and

redeemed

Cash payments for traders where possible (less than $500)

+1 day Sire restoration

+30 days Clearance and

payment of suppliers

Rapid payment required to maintain supplier goodwill

+40 days Interim Reporting To project management and back to participants

+6 months Monitoring and

Evaluation of results

In terms of successful outcomes listed below

1.4 Activities and Outputs MALIS ran nine input trade fairs in Oddar Meanchey and Preah Vihear Provinces in north-

west Cambodia over a three week period.

In preparing for the fairs, a comprehensive program of consultation, briefing, selection and

training was run over a period of approximately six-months. In the year prior to conduct of

the fairs, the partners and some participating CBOs practiced the management of input credit

through direct purchases made on behalf of the members, using the same concessional credit

arrangements and repayment arrangements. This was useful preparation for the fairs for

organising staff, participating CBOs, farmers and selected traders. The FBS were the

mechanism used for the organisation of the input credit schemes and also served as the basis

for providing experienced staff and organising the full activity. The Agribusiness team

consisting of FAO, NGO, PDA and PDOWA staff was the core team responsible for the

organisation of the fairs, ably supported by technical, administrative and operations teams.

During the actual conduct of the fairs, the two-day spacing between events was based on the

minimal time required to set up for the next event and the roster ran through week-ends to

ensure that the inputs would be available to farmers in all target districts before the main

planting season. The pressure on staff was substantial, particularly for the FAO staff who

sustained the efforts for a period of almost three weeks. NGO partners were heavily involved

for those districts they were responsible for, although they all cooperated to gain experience

and share workloads. Government staff supported each fair in their respective provinces.

Partners were consulted on the schedule and agreed to the workload, bearing in mind that they

would work through government holidays and week-ends. The commitment of the partners to

the deadline for provision of inputs was much appreciated.

11

Table 2: Location of input trade fairs, partners responsible for implementation and value of

vouchers traded.

Location by District Date NGO

Partners

Value of vouchers

traded (USD)

Oddar Meanchey Province

Chongkal 17 May 2014 RCEDO 38,933

Samrong 19 May 2014 RCEDO, Malteser

International

73,276

Banteay Ampil 21 May 2014 CIDO, Malteser

International

86,224

Anlong Veng 23 May 2014 KBA, Malteser

International

64,943

Trapeang Prasat 25 May 2015 KBA 37,575

Preah Vihear Province

Kuleaen 27 May 2014 BFD, FLD 50,709

Tbeng Meanchey 29 May 2014 BFD, FLD 36,530

Rovieng 31 May 2014 BFD, FLD 67,848

Chey Sen 2 June 2014 BFD, FLD 78,963

Participants for the fairs were smallholder farming families who were registered members of

selected CBOs operating in the target districts. FAO staff and NGO partners engaged in

intensive consultations with CBOs and selected eligible CBOs based on their goals, their

record of achievement and enthusiasm for project activities.

The management committees of the selected CBOs canvassed members to determine the

amount of credit members wanted to borrow for the fairs, sharing information on the products

available at the fairs and the approximate price ranges expected. This information provided

the detailed lists used for the issue of vouchers to each CBO and the distribution to members

on the morning of the fair. The determination of the total value of vouchers to be issued and

the credit limits for individuals and CBOs was a difficult balance and planning proceeded on

the basis of the best available data at the time decisions had to be made (such as the number of

vouchers to be printed).

Input suppliers were briefed, asked to make expressions of interest, selected and then trained

in the conduct of the fair. The suppliers became more experienced with each fair as they

developed routines for setting up their stalls, managing the demand and recording trade.

12

Trade fair in Preah Vihear Province.

The key statistics for the total number of participating households, input suppliers and value

of vouchers traded in both provinces are shown in Table 3. A total of 3,766 households

participated in the fairs, taking input credit and trading an average of USD 142 per household

for a total volume of USD 535,080 traded.

Table 3: Key statistics for the nine fairs

Total number of participating CBOs 49

Total number of input suppliers participating 107

Total number of CBO members issued vouchers 3,777

Women participants (percentage of the total) 69%

Total number of visitors 7,226

Total value of vouchers traded USD 535,080

Average repayment rate (as at 31 Jan 2015) 99.3%

Average value of vouchers per household USD 142

The nutrition NGOs provided free porridge to children under five years and information on

complementary feeding of infants and young children. The Nutrition NGOs (Malteser

International and FLD) attended seven of the nine fairs and fed almost 500 children. This was

a useful extension of nutrition education to a wider population than the mothers and

caregivers trained in the target villages.

Table 4: Number of children aged 6 months to 5 years fed enriched porridge at fairs

NGO Province District Date Total children

aged 6 mnths to

5 yrs

Female

children

Malteser OMC Samrong 19-May-2014 150 94

Banteay 21-May-2014 150 95

13

Ampil

Anlong Veng 23-May-2014 170 101

Sub total OMC 470 290

FLD PVR Kulen 27-May-2014 82 49

Tbeng

Meanchey

29-May-2014 78 47

Rovieng 31-May-2014 115 61

Chey Sen 02-Jun-2014 82 49

Sub total PVR 357 206

Total 827 496

Staff from Malteser International giving enriched porridge to children

attending the fair at Anlong Veng District

At the conclusion of each fair, the list of members and the amounts owing were transferred

back to the CBOs and the project staff continued with follow up actions to ensure that the

CBOs managed their records and repayment process effectively. FAO and partner staff were

debriefed at the conclusion of each fair to ensure lessons learned were applied in each

subsequent fair.

14

FAO team taking a well-earned break from running the fair in Banteay Ampil District

2. Voucher Design The vouchers were designed and managed by the FAO Administration and Operations teams

on the basis of information provided in the policy guidelines and brainstorming of design

features with the team. It was decided that the vouchers would be printed in several

denominations including 100,000; 25,000; 5,000; and 1,000 riel (equivalent to USD 25; 6.25;

1.25 and 0.25). The smaller notes were required as change for the traders to issue. Three sets

of vouchers were printed, using different colours and the same design features so that

different colours could be selected for each fair to minimize opportunities for fraud. The

vouchers were printed on both sides and each voucher had an individual code number to also

reduce fraud and allow for control over the voucher series eligible for trade at each fair.

The design of the vouchers is illustrated for the 5,000 riel note show below. Each voucher

showed EU and FAO logos and included a statement that it was valid on the day of issue only

and at the specific location at which it was issued.

15

Example of the voucher design used for MALIS fairs

Vouchers were printed in colour on semi-gloss paper with a similar weight to normal printing

paper for the office (80g/m2). The identifying features of the vouchers, the colours used and

the value of each note were explained in the briefing to all participants at the start of each fair.

3. Expenditure Patterns The expenditure patterns for the fairs were determined from supplier invoices and categorized

under the following headings: fertilizer, (by type), seed, tools, pumps, small machinery,

kitchen items, and postharvest equipment. The expenditure patterns reveal the needs and

priorities of farmers at the time and reflect some underlying differences in farmer needs in the

various districts. For all the fairs in aggregate, the largest expenditure item was fertilizer,

followed by pumps and small machinery and post-harvest equipment. Purchase of hand tools,

chicken feed and equipment and kitchen equipment was modest and purchase of seed was

least of all.

16

The various types of fertilizer for the aggregate of all fairs showed that the most popular

fertilizer was Di-Ammonium Phosphate (DAP), followed by mixed NPK fertilizers and Urea,

with only limited amounts of organic fertilizer and Potassium Chloride (KCl) sold. Organic

fertilizer was available at each fair so that farmers could make their own choices about the

type of fertilizer they wished to buy.

There is marked variation in the pattern of expenditure at the individual fairs. For example, at

the first fairs, conducted in Chongkal and Samrong Districts in Oddar Meanchey, there was a

strong preference for purchase of fertilizer. Demand exceeded the supply onsite and

arrangements had to be made for delivery to specific farmer groups after the fair. This

arrangement is not desirable from control purposes and introduces the need for dispersed

monitoring and control procedures and increases the possibility of unauthorized trade.

17

There was limited pumping equipment and small machinery on sale and little demand for the

items that were available. In Preah Vihear, in Kuleaen district, there was roughly equal

expenditure on fertilizer and pumps and machinery and greater diversity of expenditure on

other items such as the chicken feed and equipment, postharvest equipment, kitchen

equipment and tools.

In Chey Sen District in Preah Vihear Province, which is more recently settled and cleared,

there was negligible expenditure on fertilizer and greatest interest in pumps and small

machinery postharvest equipment, kitchen equipment and tools in diminishing order. These

variations show the clear benefit of the fairs as a mechanism for input distribution and the

usefulness of diverse inputs to meet local needs.

18

4. General observations on the conduct of the fairs The following observations are made on the basis of close observation of the fairs, debriefing

sessions after each fair and participation in all phases of preparation. The observations are

presented in the sequence of preparation, conduct and post-fair activities.

Running the fairs with a project team, implementing partners, beneficiaries and traders who

had no experience with input trade fairs was challenging. The lead time for launching the

fairs under these circumstances was approximately six months, taking into account the

simultaneous conduct of other project activities. The briefing, selection, contracting and

training activities were very time consuming, although the contracting arrangements under the

FAO policy guidelines are quite streamlined and tailored specifically for these activities.

The catalogues for produced for farmers and traders were very important and there was scope

for greater efficiency to be achieved using these documents. The information in the

catalogues must be written in English for technical clearance, but the catalogues themselves

should be in Khmer to ensure the participants clearly understand the detail. Approved price

ranges should be calculated from market surveys and allow for transport costs for the fairs.

These must be included in the catalogue and contract to regulate price inflation, especially in

situations where traders have limited competition. It is important to have two or three traders

for each category of inputs so that competitive behaviour on the part of traders is encouraged.

The traders’ catalogues are most detailed and contain all the technical detail used for

clearance of the specifications as well as allowable price ranges. These are used as an annex

to the supplier contracts. The farmers’ catalogues can contain less detail but they must also

contain price ranges so farmers can judge best value for money. Given the very large number

of items included in the fairs, the team struggled to keep the catalogues up to date, to include

the price data and to translate the detail. This was one aspect of the management of the fairs

19

that could be improved and would add to the smoother conduct of the fairs, including the

regulation of higher prices.

Use of role plays was a useful training activity for the FAO staff, implementing partners, the

CBO management committees and for farmers. The use of video materials will also increase

understanding of the basic concepts. For this purpose a video record of a fair was created and

can be viewed via a link available on the FAO Cambodia web site.

It was difficult to convince traders of the real opportunity they had to make significant trading

volumes and profits from the fairs. The traders preferred a voucher system they could operate

from their own market stall or shop but this raised too many problems for monitoring trader

behaviour. They were particularly concerned with the prospect of transporting goods to the

site of the fairs, the need to use additional staff and the prospect of delayed payment due to

the FAO payment system. There was a risk of low trader participation for the first fair first

fair, but word quickly spread that participation in the events was beneficial for the

participating traders for the most part. Several traders reported that traded as much stock in a

single day at a fair as they would normally trade in a one-month period.

Rice seed producers generally were unwilling to participate in the trade fairs because they ran

a risk of losing contracts for sale or being left with a large volume of seed and little time to

sell it before planting season. For this reason, the project ran a large input delivery for rice

seed using a credit scheme similar to the terms and conditions for voucher issue at the fairs.

There were several instances where traders sold all their stock at the fair and then entered into

arrangements with farmers to deliver after the fair. Some traders told farmers to collect the

goods from their store, but the management team prevented this from occurring whenever

possible. In the event that traders have insufficient stocks, a decision must be made whether

the inputs can be delivered in a short time frame, to a specified location and under the

supervision of the organising team. This creates additional workload and complicated an

already tight implementation program. If post-fair delivery is allowed, the date and timing of

delivery the list of individuals and the goods outstanding must be recorded and the delivery

monitored by project staff. It was not clear whether traders sought to create these situations

in order to deliver non-approved goods (such as fuel or pesticides) or whether the

arrangements were a genuine attempt meet demand for the authorized products. For this

reason the practice was discouraged or disallowed.

The voucher design and plan for distribution and redemption of the vouchers prevented fraud.

Some mistakes occurred in counting and CBO management followed up individuals to get

them to redeem all vouchers issued. The vouchers but the amount involved is a very small

fraction of the total amount traded. The accounting team managing voucher issue and

redemption were remarkably accurate in their work.

Generally the farmers and the traders behaved honestly. There were few attempts to cheat on

the rules by traders and farmers. One trader was found to be exchanging vouchers for

unauthorized goods from a vehicle parked outside the fair. Staff observed the activity and

investigated and closed down the trade. The items being traded were small parts for tractors

20

and other small hardware items. The trade was not particularly harmful, but the goods had

not been cleared. In a few cases traders concealed unauthorized items amongst the goods in

the stand and traded these clandestinely with farmers. When this was discovered the traders

were ordered to remove the items from the fair and warned that their trade would be shut

down if they were guilty of a second breach of the trade rules. The close scrutiny of trade by

FAO and partner staff helped to keep such breaches of the rules to a minimum.

One trader reported that more than USD 1,000 worth of equipment had been stolen from his

stand during the fair. The team considered that this was most unlikely and the PDA Director

spoke to the trader to verify the veracity of the claim. It was judged that this claim was

fraudulent and motivated by an attempt to obtain compensation from FAO. The trader was not

involved in any further fairs. Other traders reported minor losses of stock. Their stocktaking

was loose and the veracity of the claims could not be determined.

The system of issuing vouchers valid on the day of issue only, of limiting fair access mostly

to the members of the selected CBOs, recovering any unspent vouchers from farmers before

they left the fair and redeeming vouchers from traders immediately trade ceased helped to

regulate the trade situation and prevent fraud.

The mixing of colours of vouchers to more clearly identify the different denominations was

not entirely successful because there were three available colours to choose from and four

different denominations for the vouchers. In any future event it will be important to have a

different design or colour for each denomination to make trade easier for farmers and traders

and the counting of the vouchers more efficient at the conclusion of trade.

The provision of an information stall for FAO as a reference point for questions, suggestions

and complaints was important. Organising staff were given distinctive shirts to make it easier

for participants to see that the fair was closely monitored and to ensure that they had a ready

reference for any questions or problems arising in the fair.

Staff needed a stock of small denomination notes on hand in order to issue change to traders

or to change larger notes for farmers occasionally. The lack of small denomination vouchers

affected trade by creating frustration for participants and giving an incentive to traders to

provide change in cash or kind. Whilst cash trade was allowable and a sign of healthy market

prices, the rule that cash must never be issued as trade for vouchers must be strictly enforced

to avoid fraud.

The NGO implementing partners were encouraged to send their staff to the fair preceding

their own in order to pass on experience. The partners did this very effectively and helped

each other to share the burden of work. This was the best preparation for running the fair

themselves. Important lessons, such as the need to assist every CBO table with one NGO

staff member to help with counting and issue of vouchers were passed on from fair to fair in

this manner. The issuing of vouchers to farmers was done with increasing efficiency at each

event.

21

NGO staff assisting CBOs with the issue of vouchers to farmers

The counting of vouchers before issue to the CBOs before each event and the counting of

vouchers redeemed by traders was time consuming and added substantially to the working

hours for every event. A small team of three or four staff often worked late into the night

before each fair and a larger team of six or eight staff worked for approximately four hours

after close of trade to count vouchers. To speed the process a counting machine was

purchased and this machine worked with reasonable accuracy for new vouchers. However,

the finance team determined that hand counting was still necessary, with double checking for

accuracy. If the voucher paper was the same thickness as currency, the counting machine

may have worked with greater accuracy and saved a great deal of time. Big savings in

workload could be achieved with electronic vouchers.

The allocation of the booths for suppliers was the responsibility of the Agribusiness team

leader. At each fair the traders observed the pattern of farmer behaviour and they became

increasingly interested in the allocation of specific booths with a view to maximizing trade.

The allocation of the booths has commercial value and must be conducted in a manner that is

transparent to all participants and free from interference and vested interest. Booths should be

placed strategically to allow for the most even flow of customers and a mix of store types so

the crowd is spread around the site.

For the most part the amount of credit requested by individuals was determined accurately in

advance. In some few cases farmers sought additional credit and CBOs asked for permission

to redistribute credit that had been requested but not collected. There were also some farmers

who attended who had not been assigned any credit. Each case was considered on its merits

and in consideration of the wishes of the CBO management committees involved. Despite

these precautions, the issue of the additional vouchers led to complications for the

management committees and accounts team because the changes were not consistently

recorded. In hindsight, it would be best not to allow any changes because the CBO staff and

implementing partners were not able to cope.

22

When there is limited competition, traders in the fairs have a captive market. To ensure the

traders do not achieve price setting power in the market, the farmers should be told clearly

that the decision to purchase is their own decision. If they do not consider that the fairs offer

good value for money, farmers should understand that they can return the vouchers and the

project must guarantee that the same allocation of funds for inputs will be delivered using an

alternative mechanism.

5. Feedback from participants The feedback from participants was strongly positive, with the most common requests being

for the conduct of more fairs and for more credit to be made available. Suppliers were also

keen to be involved once they saw the commercial opportunities, although they would

strongly prefer a more immediate payment system than payment by cheque.

5.1 Exit surveys Exit surveys were conducted by the NGO partners at each fair, providing a sample of 200

responses from beneficiaries. The results of the survey reflect very high levels of satisfaction

with the fairs on the part of the farmers. Even at the Rovieng fair where some issues were

reported concerning higher prices, over 85% of the beneficiaries surveyed reported that they

were either satisfied or very satisfied with the fair. Most of the farmers recognized the price of

inputs was appropriate, with the exception of 3% of farmers in Rovieng District who reported

dissatisfaction due to higher price of inputs compared to the local market. These results show

that the majority of farmers were well pleased with the fairs. In the general comments made

by the farmers surveyed, 32% requested more fairs, 27% wished for an increase in the amount

of vouchers available for the beneficiaries, 23% asked for more types of inputs (fuel, chemical

substance and pesticide sprayers) and 10% requested that more stock of inputs should be

brought to the fairs.

Level of satisfaction over the conduct of the fairs:

Dissatisfaction occurred mostly in Rovieng where the beneficiaries made their complaints

over the high price of goods compared to what they used to know.

23

Problems encountered by the participants

There was a relatively high occurrence (20% of those surveyed) of problems in trading

vouchers reported by participating farmers in the first two fairs in Chongkal and Samrong

Districts Mostly, these problems related to slow service and limited numbers of traders to

match the demand. As the organising staff and traders became more experienced in the

conduct of the fairs these issues dropped off substantially and in most fairs there were very

few problems. The problems encountered were remarkably low, given the difficulties in

anticipating what level of demand was likely.

Most problems reported were related to the few suppliers contracted to run the fairs and the

slow trading at those booths where there was high demand for goods. In some cases the

farmers were required to wait for a delay of several days for follow-up deliveries by the

trader.

As the fairs moved to Preah Vihear, the problems reported were related to the high prices of

goods and limited bargaining power of farmers. Some farmers felt they needed to buy the

inputs at the fair as they feared that the vouchers would be taken back and there would be no

alternative means of input delivery by the project.

24

Farmers' impressions on the pricing of inputs

Most farmers perceived the price of inputs as either cheap or appropriate, except in Rovieng

District, where some few farmers (3%) complained about the high prices.

Farmers gave various other comments about the fairs, with the most common request being

for the conduct of more fairs and then for greater variety of inputs for purchase. More types of

inputs refer to organic fertilizer, water pipes, spare-parts for machinery and pumps or to the

request for fuel, chemicals and spray equipment. On the whole, these comments are

overwhelmingly positive.

25

5.2 Feedback from CBO Management The management Committees of the CBOs assisted with the organization of the fairs and

were in a good position to make comment on the planning and conduct of the events. In

informal feedback, they reported that generally, the farmers were happy with the organization

of the events and the support from MALIS. They received necessary inputs according to the

requirements and in a timely manner for the approaching wet season. Moreover, they were

happy to pay for some inputs from the fairs with their own cash to top up the amounts issued

by voucher. The farmers can get a grant of 40% of total value of the credit for the fair and will

repay the other 60% to their group as working capital that will be very useful of revolving

fund for their group members. Through the fairs, farmers have been linked to local input

suppliers and products because new suppliers attended the fairs coming from various

provinces.

They appreciated the preparation of documents for CBO members to use for the issue of

vouchers. They thought the fairs were well organized that they have never seen events like

this before. All of items in booths were clearly marked with prices that made it easier for them

to make purchase decisions. The MALIS team and Implementing Partners supported the

farmers during the fair transactions and the range of inputs available through the fairs was

sufficient and accepted by participants.

The CBO management suggested that there should be more training of CBO members before

the fair. They also suggested that the value of the vouchers issued per CBO member should

be clarified in advance and should not be adjust at the commencement of the fair. This would

avoid disappointed or different outcomes from their expectations. This comment was related

to some adjustments made to satisfy requests from CBO members and with the express

consent of the management committees concerned. In hindsight, it would be better not to

make any adjustments of this sort, because the workload of the organizers is increased and the

beneficiaries tend to view blame the organizers for making changes, rather than recognizing

the effort made to satisfy the members of the CBOs.

I am very happy that my community and members joined the fair and received the vouchers to

exchange for inputs, especially all kind of fertilizers and other material to meet their need. It is

good that FAO and partners meet with each community to ask about their needs.

Mr. Dy Yurn, Director of Agricultural of Development Kok Ovlok Community in Banteay Ampil

District.

Our committee and members are very excited and happy, as we had received training from

Farmer Business Schools of MALIS and joined this fair. What I want to request for all supplier to

have better plan as farmers had to stand in line to buy fertilizers but there was not enough.

Mr. Kouy Keup, Director of Agricultural Ta Ham Mean Chey at Kok Moun Commune, Banteay

Ampil District.

26

Like the other beneficiary farmers, the management committees also asked that fuel should be

provided as this is their major expense for agriculture.

They suggested that suppliers with poor quality products should be banned and sent from the

fair as farmers were not good at judging quality. They cited poor rice seed as an example

although the germination tests for this seed showed very high germination rates in laboratory

tests. They asked if more fairs could be organized in future.

5.3 Feedback from Input Suppliers Generally, input suppliers were happy to joining the fairs organized by MALIS as was evident

from the number of traders who attended several fairs. They earned benefits from large sales

volumes, from building networks and for understanding of the market in each district. Most

would be happy to join again if there are more agricultural input trade fairs and they are

invited to join in future.

Some concerns raised by traders included:

limited availability of vouchers in small denominations disrupting the flow of

trade

difficulty in differentiating the various denominations for the vouchers

delays in payment for traders

traders not understanding the limitation on the authorized inputs for the fairs

a desire on the part of traders to sell any type of fertilizers, pesticides and fuel

complexity of enrolment in the fairs and the suggestion that Cambodia was not

ready for this and the rules are not applicable in Cambodia yet.

…on behalf of my team I would to thank you and all the MALIS team who have done a

great job during the fair, even though ACAO has not sold as much as other traders. What

we can see for every fair was well planned and well organized event; good schedule with

good team work; as well as your facilitating support to the trader such as allocating the

booth and the visiting from your team every booth as part of motivating to serve all the

farmer the best.

Chantha Uy, Executive Director, After Crops Affiliation Organization (ACAO).

I am very happy and have good feeling that I can join the fair, and sell the kitchen

materials to farmers in Banteay Ampil District. I can sell more of my products in Banteay

Ampil than in Samrong District. I’d like FAO to settle the payment as soon as possible.

Mr Chon Kong, kitchen materials supplier, Oddar Meanchey.

27

6. Quality Assurance The Quality Assurance role for the agricultural inputs supplied during the agricultural fairs

was a joint responsibility of the FAO, the General Directorate of Agriculture (GDA), the PDA

and farmers themselves.

The partners worked together as a Quality Assurance Team organized under FAO leadership,

but with separate operational groups in each province. The ultimate responsibility for QA in

lay with FAO, as the contracted partner of the EU for the MALIS project. Compliance with

relevant Cambodian laws and the policies of the MAFF and the conduct of laboratory

analyses of seed and fertilizer were the responsibility of the GDA. The PDA assisted with the

technical inspection of inputs, sampling for laboratory analysis, the general compliance of the

traders with the contract conditions laid down for the fairs. QA activities were conducted prior

to the fairs as part of the contracting, during the fairs and in follow up analyses with findings

delivered after the fairs were completed.

The QA team also supervised the trading activities of the fair to ensure that the suppliers

participating in the fair observed the contractual requirements for the fairs. They were

responsible for ensuring:

The suppliers only supplied items listed their contract and that all items were

in accord with the technical specifications provided by FAO.

The agricultural inputs traded complied with all applicable agricultural laws,

standards and norms.

Any items not in compliance with technical specifications, quality standards,

national laws, standards or norms were removed.

Prices offered were in line with prevailing market prices for the type and

quality of goods, including costs of packaging, transportation and handling.

The suppliers did not engage in any corrupt, fraudulent, collusive or coercive

practices.

Pesticides and herbicides and spray equipment were not displayed or traded in

the fairs.

The identity of the trader and contact details were clearly shown for each

participating supplier.

Products available for trade were listed in front of the display and prices

clearly marked.

A detailed report on the Quality assurance for the fairs is available as a separate document.

We generally found good results from the laboratory analyses of the fertilizers on sale

including Five Stars, Buffalo Head, Field Owner, Triangle, (Phkay Pram, Kbal Kro Bey, Ta

Mjes Sre, Trey Korn, Khorng Bey and most of Kbal Ko brands). However, there were low

results for fertilizers sold with Dragon King, One Heron, Globe, Chicken Five Stars Organic

and Cows head 15-15-15 (Sdach Neak, Kok, Phen Dey, Moan Pkay Pram (organic) and Kbal

Ko 15-15-15). These variable results, with variable quality of the lesser brand names point to

28

the risks inherent in using a fair or voucher approach unless there is sufficient background

experience and testing of fertilizers prior to the fair.

Scrutiny of prices showed that the prices of some items were subject to an inflationary effect

in the course of the nine fairs. This may have occurred as traders understood that the farmers

displayed a lower degree of price elasticity of demand in the fairs, as compared to buying

behaviour outside the fairs. Farmers felt that they needed to spend the funds provided during

the fair or risk having no alternative support for input credit. The table below shows the trade

prices for the main categories of fertilizers at three consecutive fairs and reveal that there was

reasonable price stability for fertilizer.

Table 5: Average prices of fertilizer per bag at fairs in Oddar Meanchey Province

Type of Fertilizer Average price/bag – Riel

N-P-K Ratio Banteay Ampil Anlong Veng Trapeang Prasat

18-46-00 130,000 130,000 123,750

15-15-15 123,000 123,000 124,500

20-20-15+TE+13S 135,000 129,333 127,750

46-00-00 100,000 100,000 101,600

16-20-00 103,333 112,500

7. Accountability to Affected populations Accountability to Affected Populations (AAP) was applied to the input trade fairs process as

discussed in respect to leadership and governance, transparency, participation, feedback and

complaints and in design, monitoring and evaluation.

Leadership and Governance

Roles and responsibility for each partner were discussed among MALIS partners and farmer

organizations and documented for their use.

Gender was mainstreamed in the project activities as set in the project logframe. Every effort

was made in the selection of CBOs and farm households to ensure that women had access to

information about the scheme and opportunity to participate. The PDOWA were employed to

assist with gender mainstreaming in all MALIS activities. Capacity building was conducted

for the government and NGO partners, CBOs, and CBO members before the fairs.

Leadership of the QA team (QA) was by FAO staff, assisted by staff from the GDA, MAFF

and the PDA. Farmers and CBOs were encouraged to join the QA and to give feedback on the

quality of the goods traded.

Transparency

Relevant government institutions, NGOs, CBOs, farmers, and suppliers were involved in the

fair arrangement. They were trained on the operation of the voucher system and input credit

as well as on how to recognize valid vouchers for each fair. Farmer catalogues of items sold

in the fairs were developed for farmers to make the decision on what they want to buy and to

provide feedback on any missing items needed.

29

The Supplier’s Catalogue including item photos and specifications was developed for input

suppliers and to assist the Quality Assurance Team. Farmers’ feedback on quality of the

inputs bought from the fairs was consolidated with the QA team report which was shared with

all relevant key stakeholders. An exit survey was conducted to gather opinions of farmers as

they left each fair.

International and local media were invited to the fairs and 20 different media representatives

participated in the fairs and broadcasted information about the fairs. Farmers, partners, local

authorities, suppliers, and FAO were interviewed about the fair arrangement.

Donor representatives, relevant government offices, partners, other agencies working on

similar development projects in the target provinces were also invited to the fairs.

Feedback and complaints

MALIS had its own response mechanism for any complaints from farmers, partners, and

suppliers; for example they had briefings with partners, farmers, and suppliers before the

fairs, and meeting with them again after the fairs for feedback. During the fairs, a booth was

set for any complaints and suggestions. The NGO partners gave feedback to FAO from the

CBOs and followed up on any problems to ensure these matters were properly finalized.

Participation

The targeting of project activities was ‘top-down’ to the level of the communes and then

‘bottom-up’ in terms of individuals and CBOs who sought to join the activities.

CBOs and their members for the voucher scheme were selected through a participatory and

transparent process with selection criteria discussed and shared with all the stakeholders,

NGO monitoring to check and finalize the lists, local authorities were informed and involved

in the selection process.

Women were encouraged to participate in the fairs and to make decision on what to buy from

the fairs. Women were strongly represented in all planning and in the conduct of the fairs as

is evident from sex-differentiated data collected.

Farmer groups determined their members’ needs for specific farming inputs and then submit a

combined request to the project for purchase according to standard FAO procedures and

quality controls.

8. Visibility The media attended fairs especially when senior representatives of Government participated

in the opening events. Over twenty different journalists attended the fairs representing

national television, radio and newspapers and web-based news organizations. Radio Australia

broadcast from the site of two fairs for an international audience.

FAO has produced a short documentary film showing a farm household experience at the fair

in Anlong Veng District.

30

Examples of media coverage are shown in the material below.

31

Annexes Annex 1: Detailed statistics for participation in fairs

Annex 2: Sample contract for suppliers

Reference documents FAO, 2013, Guidelines for Input Trade Fairs and Voucher Schemes, FAO, Rome.

http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/aq418e/aq418e.pdf

FAO Cambodia, 2014, Vouchers and Agricultural Input Credit for MALIS: Guidelines for

Project Staff, Implementing Partners, Input Suppliers and Participating Farmer Groups.

32

33

34

Annex 1: Detailed statistics for participation in the fairs

Table 1: Participation and value of vouchers in fairs conducted in Oddar Meanchey

SN Name of CBO/AC

Registered

Members

CBO members

issued vouchers % of CBO

members

issued

vouchers

Total

visitors

Total

value of

vouchers

issued

(USD)

Number of

input

suppliers Total Female Total Female

1 Cheung Tien Meanchey AC 57 55 51 46 89

397 $38,933 10

2 Samaki Rong Roeung at Pong Ro CBO 32 29 32 29 100

3 Tapen CBO 55 52 44 29 80

4 Srer Brang CBO 70 50 54 37 77

5 Kouk Rang CBO 44 30 44 35 100

6 Kouk Sanker CBO 32 29 30 27 94

Total in Chongkal district 290 245 255 203 88 397 $38,933 10

1 Ponleu Thmey Pha Aung AC 183 156 81 59 44

840 $73,276 10 2 O'Pouk Ponlok Kaksekaim AC 53 36 44 29 83

3 Koun Khmer Akpivat Kaksekaim AC 350 280 330 227 92

4 Kaksekor Akpivat Kaksekaim AC 43 32 23 14 54

35

SN Name of CBO/AC

Registered

Members

CBO members

issued vouchers % of CBO

members

issued

vouchers

Total

visitors

Total

value of

vouchers

issued

(USD)

Number of

input

suppliers Total Female Total Female

Total in Samrong district 629 504 478 329 75 840 $73,276 10

1 Taham Agriculture Cooperative 233 220 233 104 100

2 Kokmon Meanchey Reasmey Kaksekor

AC 205 205 114 73 56

3 Kok Ovlok AC 79 52 79 51 100

4 CBO Salaraang village, Kok Morn

Commune 25 16 25 16 100

5 CBO Thnal village, Kok Khpos

Commune 33 19 31 14 94

6 CBO Cheu Slab village, Kok Khpos

Commune 22 15 22 15 100

Total in Banteay Ampil district 597 527 504 273 84 760 $86,224 10

1 Tuol Sala AC 175 99 117 71 67

2 Samaki Thorma Cheat Srah Chhouk AC 225 102 170 93 76

3 Aphiwat Satrey CBO 20 18 20 19 100

4 Chamreun Phal CBO 19 19 19 13 100

36

SN Name of CBO/AC

Registered

Members

CBO members

issued vouchers % of CBO

members

issued

vouchers

Total

visitors

Total

value of

vouchers

issued

(USD)

Number of

input

suppliers Total Female Total Female

5 Satrey Samaki Sansam Prak CBO 15 15 15 14 100

6 Yuveak Vey Tuol Prasat Khla Han CBO 15 15 15 14 100

7 Chok Chey Chhnaim Thmey CBO 15 14 15 14 100

8 Satrey Chamreun Chhnaim Thmey CBO 15 15 15 11 100

9 Sahak Kar La Or CBO 15 15 15 13 100

10 Satrey Rong Roeung CBO 11 11 11 8 100

11 Daim Banlei Samaki CBO 15 13 15 10 100

Total in Anlong Veng District 540 336 427 280 79 742 $64,943 15

1 Prasat Chey Raksmey Karksekar AC 250 143 114 68 46

2 Samaki O'Svay AC 314 184 135 77 43

Total in Trapeang Prasat District 564 327 249 145 44 471 $37,575 12

TOTAL IN OMC 2,620 1,939 1,913 1,230 73 3,210 $300,950 57

37

Table 2: Participation and value of vouchers in fairs conducted in Preah Vihear

SN Name of CBO/AC

Members CBO members

issued vouchers

% of CBO

members

issued

vouchers

Total

visitors

Value of

vouchers

issued

(USD)

Number

of input

Suppliers Total Female Total Female

1

Krabao Prumtep AC 260 223 201 180 77

Leuk Kamporsh Kasekar AC 93 69 81 59 87

Ker Lum Or Chiveak Pheap CBO 96 71 94 56 98

Total in Kuleaen District 449 363 376 295 84 836 $50,709 12

2

Ker Lum Or Chiveak Pheap Rosnov AC 66 56 66 53 100

Pramer Senchey AC 79 59 36 28 46

O'Khlengpor Meanchey AC 273 140 154 82 56

Total in Tbeng Meanchey District 418 255 256 163 61 680 $36,530 12

3

Samaky Rohas Meanchey AC 139 103 139 103 100

Leuk Kamporsh Satrey AC 410 377 410 292 100

Rumtum Samaky Meanchey AC 158 97 118 66 100

Total in Rovieng District 708 577 667 461 94 1,453 $67,848 14

4 Satrey Rattanak AC 340 333 290 255 85

38

SN Name of CBO/AC

Members CBO members

issued vouchers

% of CBO

members

issued

vouchers

Total

visitors

Value of

vouchers

issued

(USD)

Number

of input

Suppliers Total Female Total Female

Tasou Senchey AC 102 91 100 90 98

Kyang Saing Samaky AC 140 56 85 52 61

Ker Lum Or Chiveak Pheap CBO 125 78 90 50 72

Total in Chey Den District 707 558 565 447 80 1,047 $78,976 12

TOTAL IN PVR 2,282 1,753 1,864 1,366 82 4,016 $234,051 50

TOTAL STATISTICS FOR BOTH OMC & PVR PROVINCES:

9 Districts, 27 Communes, 99 Villages,

23 ACs and 26 CBOs 4,902 3,692 3,777 2,596 77 7226 $535,001 107

39

40

Annex 2: Sample of Supplier Contract

Ref.: FAO/CMB/Agreement/14/….. Project: OSRO/CMB/101/EC

Agreement

between the

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)

and the

[Complete name of Supplier]

[City and Country]

For the provision of

Agricultural Inputs and kitchen items in an Input Trade Fair

for the

MALIS Project (OSRO/CMB/101/EC)

This is an agreement between the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

(FAO) its offices located at Taneuy Street, Watbo Village, Sala Kamroeuk Commune, Siem

Reap City, Cambodia and [Name of Supplier] (“Supplier”) established under the laws of the

Kingdom of Cambodia, with its offices located at [Address of Supplier] (collectively “the

Parties”) for the “Supply of Agricultural Inputs through an Input Trade Fair” for which the

Supplier will supply Agricultural Inputs (including kitchen items) as set out in Annex I.

ARTICLE 1 – SCOPE OF AGREEMENT

a) The Supplier will participate in an Agricultural Inputs Voucher Scheme and supply

Agricultural Inputs to beneficiaries at specified locations for Trade Fairs against

payment through vouchers, as set out in Annex I “Conditions of supply of Agricultural

Inputs”.

b) The Supplier will accept and honour all vouchers issued to the beneficiaries by FAO

under this particular scheme.

c) The Supplier acknowledges that this Agreement does not guarantee that any minimum

quantities of Agricultural Inputs will be sold through this Input Trade Fair.

d) The Supplier and FAO will execute this Agreement in a spirit of mutual cooperation.

ARTICLE 2 – SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE AND DURATION

41

(a) This Agreement is valid immediately upon signature by both Parties and will remain

in force until [date].

(b) All vouchers will be considered void, whether they have been redeemed or not on

[date].

ARTICLE 3 – PROVISION OF AGRICULTURAL INPUTS

(a) The Supplier will only supply Agricultural Inputs that are included in the categories

listed in Annex I “Conditions of supply of Agricultural Inputs” and meet the FAO technical

specifications and quality standards set out in Annex II “Technical specifications and quality

standards”. FAO may contract an inspection company or any other institution to control the

quality of the inputs and to verify that they conform to FAO’s specifications and quality

standards. The Supplier further guarantees that the Agricultural Inputs comply at a minimum

with any applicable national laws, standards and norms. The Supplier agrees that any

Agricultural Inputs that do not conform to the specifications, quality standards or national

laws, standards or norms will be replaced during the fair under penalty of exclusion from the

Input Trade Fair.

(b) The Supplier will use its best efforts to make available at the Input Trade Fair the

quantity of Agricultural Inputs agreed upon during the Supplier selection process.

(c) If the supplier is unable to meet the demand for goods at the fair, the Supplier may

accept payment in vouchers and register the names of beneficiaries and their Farmer Group to

deliver the shortfall in goods within three days to the same location or an alternative agreed in

writing with FAO.

ARTICLE 4 – AGRICULTURAL INPUTS NOT LISTED IN ANNEX I

(a) If FAO requires Agricultural Inputs normally sold by the Supplier but not included in

Annex I, these additional inputs may be incorporated in Annexes I and II through a formal

written Amendment that will include the specifications/quality standards to be signed by the

Parties.

ARTICLE 5 – PRICES

The prices offered by the Supplier should be in line with the prevailing market prices for the

type, quality including any transportation and handling costs, of the Agricultural Inputs on

offer.

The Supplier will offer the Agricultural Inputs at prices that are in line with the prices in

Annex I which reflect the general market price and include the costs of adequate packaging to

protect the Agricultural Inputs during transport, storage and handling by the beneficiaries.

ARTICLE 6 – SELLING PROCEDURE

The Supplier will:

42

a) carry out identification checks of beneficiaries (physically check identity card number

against ID number on list of beneficiaries) to ensure that the designated beneficiary

has the voucher and nobody else;

b) not discount the vouchers for cash and will provide the famers the full value of the

vouchers presented;

c) supply the Agricultural Inputs as per conditions set out in Annex I and II;

d) issue invoices to the beneficiaries, as evidence of the sale and for record keeping.

ARTICLE 7 - PARTICIPATION OF FAO

FAO will distribute vouchers to the beneficiaries in the amounts of 100,000 riel, 25,000 riel,

5,000 riel and 1,000 riel. Suppliers will also be briefed before the start of the fairs on how to

recognize valid vouchers.

ARTICLE 8 – PAYMENT

a) Except in cases outside the control of FAO, FAO will pay the Supplier in USD an

amount equivalent to the total value of the vouchers exchanged for goods at the fair

after each fair, at maximum 30 days after submission of an invoice accompanied by

associated vouchers for the Agricultural Inputs provided to the beneficiaries by the

Supplier. The exchange rate from Cambodian Riel to USD will be the FAO official

exchange rate at the time of the fair.

b) In addition, payment against invoices is subject to receipt by the FAO of:

Clear/detailed banking instructions;

Invoices listing the name of the Supplier, location and date of Input Trade Fair, the

quantity and value of the Inputs sold and corresponding Vouchers being redeemed;

Vouchers redeemed by the beneficiaries;

List of beneficiaries, the serial numbers of the vouchers that were redeemed and

the signatures of the beneficiaries who redeemed the vouchers.

(c) FAO will not reimburse the Supplier for any Agricultural Inputs that are not part of the

categories of inputs listed in Annex I, or that do not match the FAO specifications or quality

standards as described in Annex II, or for Vouchers that do not correspond to FAO’s records.

ARTICLE 9 - SUPPLIER’S RESPONSIBILITIES

(a) The Supplier is an independent contractor, responsible for the actions of its employees

or representatives. The Supplier, its employees, or representatives shall not be considered

employees or agents of FAO.

(b) The Supplier has the sole and full responsibility to perform under this Agreement and

will not enter into any sub-contract or transfer to any third party any of its rights or

obligations under this Agreement.

ARTICLE 10 - PROHIBITED PRACTICES

43

The Supplier will observe the highest standard of ethics in executing this Agreement and will

not engage in any corrupt, fraudulent, collusive or coercive practices.

ARTICLE 11 - CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The Supplier guarantees that no official, staff member or representative of FAO or any family

member, has any interest in, or derives any benefit from, this Agreement. The Supplier will

take all reasonable measures to avoid any conflict of interest in the implementation of the

services and will immediately inform FAO of any potential conflict of interest.

ARTICLE 12 – CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS

Any changes to this Agreement will be in writing and agreed by FAO and the Supplier.

ARTICLE 13 – DELAYS AND LIABILITIES

(a) If the Supplier fails to make delivery or perform in the time required, FAO may

suspend or cancel all or part of this Agreement and reserves the right to exclude the Supplier

from participation in future FAO sponsored activities.

(b) The Supplier assumes all responsibility and liability for any and all claims, damages

and losses, including any related costs, for any injury to its employees or third parties or

destruction of property of third parties, arising out of or connected to the Supplier’s work or

performance under this Agreement and will not hold FAO responsible.

ARTICLE 14 - TERMINATION

(a) FAO may terminate this Agreement in the following cases:

(i) for causes beyond the control of the Organization;

(ii) bankruptcy, insolvency, transfer of business of the Supplier;.

(iii) repeated and/or serious non compliance with laws and regulations related to

social contribution, safety measures, pollution, prevention of injuries in the

work place;

(iv) serious breaches of the Agreement compromising the normal performance of

the services under this Agreement;

(v) transfer to third parties of all or part of the rights and obligations pertaining to

the services under this Agreement;

(vi) gross negligence.

(b) If this Agreement is terminated, the following will apply:

(i) FAO will complete payments which may be due up to the effective date of

termination;

(ii) Adjustments to consideration and any claims arising from or connected with

the termination of the Agreement will be handled as per the provisions of this

Agreement.

44

(c) Notice of Termination will specify the reasons for termination and termination will

take effect immediately upon receipt of the Notice. The provisions of this Agreement

applicable to the winding up of the Agreement, the settlement of claims and disputes shall

remain in force for such additional period as may be necessary.

ARTICLE 15 - SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES

(a) Any dispute between the Parties concerning the interpretation and the execution of the

Agreement shall be settled by negotiation between the Parties. If the dispute is not settled by

negotiation between the Parties, it shall, at the request of either party, be submitted to one

conciliator. Should the Parties fail to reach agreement on the name of a sole conciliator, each

party shall appoint one conciliator. The conciliation shall be carried out in accordance with

the Conciliation Rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, as at

present in force.

(b) Any dispute between the Parties that is unresolved after conciliation shall, at the

request of either party be settled by arbitration in accordance with the Arbitration Rules of the

United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, as at present in force.

(c) The conciliation or the arbitration proceedings shall be conducted in the language in

which the Agreement is drafted provided that it should anyway be one of the six (6) languages

of the Organization (Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish). In cases in

which the language of the Agreement is not an official language of FAO, the proceedings

shall be conducted in English.

(d) The Parties may request conciliation during the execution of the Agreement and

anyway not later than twelve (12) months after the completion, expiry or termination of the

Agreement. The Parties may request arbitration not later than ninety (90) days after the

termination of the conciliation proceedings.

(e) The arbitral tribunal shall have no authority to award punitive damages. The Parties

shall be bound by any arbitration award rendered as a result of such arbitration as the final

adjudication of any such dispute.

ARTICLE 16 - PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES

Nothing in this Agreement or in any document or arrangement relating thereto shall be

construed as constituting a waiver of the privileges or immunities of FAO, nor as conferring

any privileges or immunities of FAO on the Supplier or its employees. Nothing in this

Agreement shall imply acceptance by FAO of the jurisdiction of the courts of any country

over disputes arising out of this Agreement.

ARTICLE 17 - CHILD LABOUR, MINES, TERRORISM AND SEXUAL EXPLOITATION

45

(a) The Supplier represents and warrants that it is not engaged in any practice inconsistent

with the rights set forth in the Convention on the Rights of the Child, including Article 32

thereof, which, inter alia, requires that a child shall be protected from performing any work

that is likely to be hazardous or to interfere with the child’s education, or to be harmful to the

child’s health or physical, mental, spiritual, moral, or social development.

(b) The Supplier further warrants and represents that it is not engaged in the sale or

manufacture of anti-personnel mines or components utilized in the manufacture of anti-

personnel mines.

(c) The Supplier agrees to undertake all reasonable efforts to ensure that none of the funds

received from FAO under this Contract are used to provide support to individuals or entities

associated with terrorism, as included in the list maintained by the Security Council

Committee established pursuant to Resolution 1267 (1999) located at

http://www.un.org/sc/committees/1267/consolist.shtml. This provision must be included in all

subcontracts or sub-agreements entered into under this Contract.

(d) The Supplier shall take all appropriate measures to prevent sexual exploitation or

abuse of any beneficiary of the services provided under this Agreement, or to any persons

related to such beneficiaries, by its employees or any other persons engaged and controlled by

the Supplier to perform any services under the Agreement. For these purposes, sexual activity

with any person less than eighteen years of age shall constitute the sexual exploitation and

abuse of such person. In addition, the Supplier shall refrain from, and shall take all reasonable

and appropriate measures to prohibit its employees or other persons engaged and controlled

by it from exchanging any money, goods, services, or other things of value, for sexual favors

or activities, or from engaging in any sexual activities that are exploitive or degrading to any

beneficiary of the services provided under this Agreement or to any persons related to such

beneficiaries.

(e) The Supplier acknowledges and agrees that the provisions of this Article constitute

essential terms of the Agreement and that any breach of these provisions shall entitle FAO to

terminate the Agreement immediately upon notice to the Supplier, without any liability for

termination charges or any other liability of any kind.

ARTICLE 18 - APPLICABLE LAW

This Agreement and any dispute arising from it shall be governed by general principles of

law, to the exclusion of any single national system of law. General principles of law shall be

deemed to include the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Agreements of

2010.

ARTICLE 19 - NOTICES

(a) All notices will be in writing and delivered in person or by registered mail to the

addresses given below:

(i) To FAO:

46

Contract Manager

(ii) To the Supplier:

At the Supplier's address indicated above.

(b) Notice shall be considered as effected on the date of delivery to the addressee.

Signed on behalf of:

THE FOODAND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS

Signed: .................................................

Name & Title:

Date: ...................................................

Signed on behalf of:

...................................................................................................................................................

Signed: ...............................................

Name & Title: ....................................

Date:...................................................

Annex: I Conditions of supply of agricultural inputs

Annex II: Technical specifications and quality standards (attach Suppliers’ Catalogue with list

of authorised items, photographs, key technical specifications and allowable price range for

the items).

47

For further information contact Iean Russell, Project Manager MALIS, iean.russell@fao.org or the

FAO Representation at #5 Street 370, Boeung Keng Kang 1, Phnom Penh. Email: fao-kh@fao.org

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this publication are solely attributable to FAO and to Project Staff

working in the MALIS project in Cambodia (OSRO/CMB/101/EC). The contents can in no

way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union.

Acknowledgement

This publication and the MALIS project are funded by the European Union.