WFP engagement with “structured trading systems”

Engagement with “structured trading

systems” is one of the four P4P ap-

proaches being tested to reach small-

h o l d e r f a r m e r s w i t h W F P ’ s

procurement footprint. The four

approaches are:

1. Buying directly from Farmers’

Organizations (FOs) receiving supply

side support on production and

marketing: 64% of the 150,000mt

contracted under P4P by end 2010 was

procured directly from FOs [in all pilot

countries except Zambia].

2. Engaging with emerging structured trading systems including Commodity Exchanges

(CEX) and Warehouse Receipt Systems (WRS): 27% was purchased through CEX and

WRS by end 2010 [Ethiopia, Malawi, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia].

3. Buying through small and medium traders and agents to enhance competitiveness

and provide alternative markets for farmers’ surpluses: 8% was purchased from traders

and agents by end 2010 [Kenya and Mozambique]; and

4. Developing local food processing capacity by connecting FOs to established food

processors and buying processed foods including Corn Soya Blend, fortified maize meal

and high energy biscuits [Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Guatemala, Mozambique and Zambia].

The type of approach or “entry point” depends on the country context. Where structured

trading systems exist, WFP may play a key role in catalyzing partner and government

investment, by channelling a portion of its local purchase through these systems; by assist-

ing to rehabilitate or equip warehouses; and by providing training to facilitate FOs to en-

gage with these systems.

ISSUE 7

PURCHASE FOR PROGRESS

STRUCTURED TRADING SYSTEMS

MARCH UPDATE

ISSUE 30

MARCH 2011

P4P Pilot Countries

AFRICA

HIGHLIGHTS OF THE MONTH

Ghana Country Implementation Plan (CIP) approved by WFP Executive Director on

March 29.

WFP participated in the ACTESA Development Partners’ Meeting on March 16 and

ACTESA Advisory Committee Meeting on March 17 in Lusaka, Zambia. Discussion

focused on ACTESA’s draft Ten-Year Strategic Plan (2011-2020).

P4P staff participated in the School Feeding Consultation held in WFP Rome on

March 1-4. Opportunities and challenges to link P4P to Home Grown School Feeding

programmes were discussed.

WFP and the Rwanda Ministry of Agriculture organized a commodity trade fair

for smallholder farmers in Kigali on 22 March. Firm agreements were reached for sale of

5,000 metric tons (mt) by farmers’ cooperatives. The Government of Rwanda plans to

purchase 40% of the requirement for the national strategic grain reserve from small-

holder farmers' cooperatives in 2011, and is looking to WFP for technical capacity

building.

This newsletter focuses on “structured trading systems”, specifically Warehouse

Receipt Systems and Commodity Exchanges.

CENTRAL AMERICA

ASIA

IMPLEMENTATION STATUS

21 P4P Pilots:

21 Country Assessments

Missions.

20 Approved Country

Implementation Plans

(CIP): Afghanistan, DRC,

El Salvador, Ethiopia,

Honduras, Ghana,

Guatemala, Kenya,

Nicaragua, Burkina Faso,

Liberia, Mali, Malawi,

Mozambique, Rwanda,

Sierra Leone, Sudan,

Tanzania, Uganda and

Zambia.

Laos: CIP under develop-

ment (still unfunded).

Traders & Agents

12,4068%

CEX & WRS39,981

27%

Farmers' Org. 95,031

64%

Processors1,089

1%

P4P entry points [tot. contracted Sept 2008-31 Dec 2010, mt]

Page 2 ISSUE 30

RENEWED ATTENTION TO “STRUCTURED TRADING SYSTEMS” IN AFRICA

The last few years have witnessed renewed attention to efforts to facilitating agricultural trade through a series of reforms,

with an emphasis on linking smallholder farmers to “structured” systems, including staple food crops.

Commodity exchanges (CEX) take a number of forms from country to country, but all strive to provide an open market

where buyers and sellers come together to discover a true market price, and where these trades are regulated by fair and

concrete arbitration mechanisms. The first and highest volume exchange, the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (whose

commodity trading arm is SAFEX), has set the pace for a recent boom in emerging CEX across Africa, from Ethiopia to

Zambia. In some instances these initiatives are driven by the private sector, in some by donors, and in other countries by

proactive government efforts.

A complementary structure to commodity exchanges is the warehouse receipt system (WRS), a network of licensed

certified warehousing facilities where commodities can be certified for both quantity and quality. Upon delivery of

commodities to a warehouse, the depositor receives a receipt certifying the quantity and quality of the deposited stocks,

which can be sold at a later date. The receipt, which is a “document of title”, can be exchanged, and serves as financial

collateral to access credit. For this to function effectively, the receipts must be widely recognized, and banks prepared to lend

against these.

In some cases, certified warehouses (usually large district level warehouses) are linked to community/village level depots

or sheds, where farmers can deposit their commodities (even in very small lots). For this model to work, improving

smallholder farmers’ bulking capacity at the community level through group marketing is key.

Together, these two broad systems comprise a structured trade system that can provide real benefits to participants. The

emergence of these structures is not identical in any two countries; some approaches have begun with CEX, while others have

started with WRS.

WHY WFP IS ENGAGING WITH

STRUCTURED TRADING SYSTEMS

WFP engagement is premised on the

expect a t i on th a t , g i v en WFP’s

procurement footprint in countries where

CEX and WRS are under development

(Ethiopia, Malawi, Uganda and Zambia), WFP

engagement will attract more buyers and

sellers, building confidence in the system and

contributing to the increased turnover of

trade in staple commodities that is required to

make the system sustainable.

In addition, as a large quality buyer, WFP

can help address other challenges such as the

weak enforcement of quality standards.

In Africa, WFP/P4P looks for ways to link

smallholder farmers to these structured platforms

in sustainable ways, while at the same time

providing a demand signal to the private sector

through purchases that these mechanisms stand to

benefit all market actors. The P4P pilot aims to

identify:

whether such engagement holds promise and

should be continued after the pilot phase;

whether smallholder farmers are benefitting;

and

what external conditions are required to

make these systems sustainable beyond WFP.

Expected benefits

For the farmers/sellers: increased transparency in weighing of

commodities; secure storage facilities that improve quality and

add value; possibility to sell at a later date (and hence receive a

better price); access to credit through the receipt; reduced

transaction costs; reduced price volatility; more direct access to

different national and regional markets, thus transferring a larger

margin back to the farmer.

For buyers (private sector, WFP or Government): assured

quantity and quality (from the WRS), thus reducing the risk of

purchasing directly from small-scale farmers; assured delivery

duration; increased transparency and competition (when buying

through exchanges) and fair market prices.

At macro-level: enhanced market efficiency from reduced length

of the marketing chain; improved market information and trans-

mission; reduced post-harvest losses (from WRS); more

transparent trade; efficient price discovery mechanism; and re-

duced price volatility.

The challenges Structured trading systems in Africa have to date had limited traction

marketing staple crops, due to:

Government price setting in staple food markets which, in

part contributes to lack of buy-in from private operators and

banks.

Low turnover (for staples), which does not always cover

running costs, raising concerns about sustainability and

dependence on external (donor) funding. The turnover will need

to increase substantially for these systems to generate reliable

profits, attract private sector buyers, and reduce dependency on

external funding.

Weak legal and policy frameworks.

Elite capture by larger traders and problems of traceability of

benefits for smallholder farmers (when purchasing through

exchanges).

Page 3 ISSUE 30

Ethiopia ECX

Established 2008.

Government owned and

governed by a private-public

Board of Directors.

Focused on coffee (78% of all

trades) and sesame (17%).

as of 2010 extended to maize

and peas, spurred by WFP’s

engagement.

First WFP purchase in June

2010, following the signature

of an MoU with the ECX.

The Ethiopian Grain Trade

Enterprise (EGTE) contracted

as Intermediary Member to

represent WFP on the trading

floor.

By end 2010: over 5,000mt

of maize procured through

ECX.

WFP share is limited,

though it represents almost all

trade of maize)

WRS: currently establishing

“primary markets”. Plan is to

create 100,000 “primary

markets” or “collection

Malawi ACE

Established 2005.

NGO status, not for profit enterprise.

First WFP purchase February 2010.

By Dec 2010: WFP contracted 10,558mt of

maize, maize-meal, pulses and CSB through

ACE (for WFP Malawi operations).

As of 2011: WFP started regional purchases

through ACE (Zimbabwe, Mozambique,

Lesotho), giving ACE users access to larger

markets and to the WFP regional market.

WFP share is substantial: in 2010, WFP

BVOs represented 45% of all trade on ACE.

Trade commission: 0.05% increased to 0.2%

in 2011 on all BVO contracts.

So far, a few P4P FOs won bids through ACE

for WFP contracts e.g. (Mwandama Grain Bank,

a P4P and MVP supported FO, won a contract

for 105mt of maize). Other non P4P supported

FOs have also won bids through ACE.

WRS under development and will be rolled out

in 2011, with funding from the EU and the

Common Fund for Commodities (CFC), with

different arrangements for urban and rural

areas:

Urban: ACE agreed with a number of small

scale farmers to deposit 5,000mt, and with

2 large traders to deposit 20,000mt of

maize in Farmers World silos. Farmers

World will issue receipts and Opportunity

Bank will provide financing against these

receipts. NASFAM plans to do a similar

exercise with their members using the

National Food Reserve Agency silos.

Rural: CFC/EU will upgrade several rural

aggregation sites supported by NASFAM,

World Vision and the USAID/MLI initiative.

NASFAM will issue receipts.

Zambia ZAMACE

Established 2007.

Private limited liability company.

First WFP purchase end 2008.

By end 2010: WFP contracted

18,723mt of maize, pulses and

maize meal through ZAMACE (for

both WFP Zambia and regional

operations in Zimbabwe and

DRC).

So far, mainly larger traders

have won bids for WFP contracts.

Difficult to trace origin.

WFP’s share is limited: 10% of

all trades since ZAMACE launch

in 2007.

WRS (private sector operated

district warehouses certified by

ZAMACE and Community Sheds)

under development. Started in

2009 and rolled out in 2010 in 3

regions with the support of WFP

and USAID/COMPETE.

311mt of maize bought from

2 district certified ware-

houses in Lundazi and Chama

districts in July 2010.

HOW WFP IS ENGAGING :

By channeling a portion of local purchases (and, more recently, some regional purchases) through these systems;

By supporting the development of a network of warehouses to be linked to the CEX, investing in building or

rehabilitating warehouses (Uganda) as well as village level depots/collection points (Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia), and

equipping such warehouses or collection points with cleaning and drying equipment on a cost-sharing basis with the pri-

vate sector.

By supporting capacity building for targeted FOs to meet quality requirements necessary to access certified

warehouses and helping to link FOs to these systems (Ethiopia, Malawi, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia);

By engaging in policy dialogue with governments and regional bodies such as COMESA and ACTESA and advocating

for the reduction of government intervention in staple food markets, as well as harmonization of regional quality stan-

dards and grading systems; all necessary ingredients to improve the policy environment if these systems are to thrive in

the future.

HOW IS WFP BUYING FROM COMMODITY EXCHANGES

WFP procurement procedures have been adapted to allow for purchases through the Zambian Commodity Exchange

(ZAMACE); the Agricultural Commodity Exchange for Africa (ACE) and the Ethiopian Commodity Exchange (ECX).

Authorizing WFP to appoint a broker to trade on the Exchange on its behalf, against a commission (Ethiopia and Zam-

bia), or have the Exchange act as a broker (Malawi).

Adopting a “Reverse auction” consisting of a “Bid Volume Only” (BVO), where WFP expresses a desire to buy a

specified amount of a commodity of a specified grade at a specified delivery location, but without specifying price, and

suppliers compete on price in an open trading session.

WFP Headquarters pre-authorizing a purchase based on a ceiling price proposed by the Country Office prior to float-

ing the BVO.

Page 4 ISSUE 30

WFP’s EXPERIENCE OF BUYING THROUGH WAREHOUSE RECEIPT SYSTEMS

The Uganda Model The strengthening of the warehouse receipt system (WRS) is at the centre

of WFP’s contribution towards structured trade in Uganda.

WFP Uganda is supporting the development of the WRS by:

1. Channelling a share of its purchases through the WRS.

WFP procured almost 5,000mt of maize through the WRS between

late 2008 and December 2010. WFP is making it a priority to pur-

chase commodities deposited in licensed warehouses, if depositors

agree to sell at the prevailing market prices.

This has encouraged others to buy through the WRS. Over 4,500mt

of maize have so far been purchased by local traders, as well as by

traders from Southern Sudan, Kenya and Rwanda through the four

operational licensed warehouses (Agroways in Jinja, Masiga in

Masindi and Nyakatonzi Cooperative Union and El Shaday warehouse in Kasese district). There is an increased interest

from traders, breweries and schools to buy grain through the WRS.

WFP’s support to the WRS resulted in increased deposits in the four operational licensed warehouses. Farmers in the

Busoga and Misindi sub-regions were able to access up to US$ 500,000 of agricultural credit from the Housing and

Finance Bank using their receipts as collateral.

2. Constructing/rehabilitating nine Central Market Collection Points (1,000 to 6,000mt storage capacity each), to be

licensed by the Uganda Commodity Exchange (UCE) to operate a WRS; 58 satellite collection points (100 to 300mt

storage capacity) to feed into the large warehouses; and 230 km of feeder roads to connect farming communities to

markets. Of all planned market infrastructure activities, 50% are completed.

3. Equipping the warehouses with processing equipment (cleaning, drying, bagging and grading) to help them meet WRS

licensing requirements (on a cost-sharing basis with private sector operators).

4. Equipping satellite collection points with basic post-harvest handling equipment and providing training to FOs to

enhance productivity, and assist farmers to meet quality standards and reduce losses.

WFP Uganda is working with the private sector to expand and strengthen the WRS and build the business skills of

smallholder farmers and small and medium scale traders.

The Tanzania model

The term WRS is used interchangeably to describe two distinct

models in Tanzania:

The regulated system, established by the WRS Act and

which the Government wishes to see implemented;

The village hybrid model being rolled out by financial

institutions and federations of Savings & Credit Cooperatives

(SACCOs).

The regulated system requires considerable investment and

therefore a large turnover to be sustainable. Previous attempts to

establish a formal WRS have produced mixed results, partly due

to the Government’s requirement of having a professional

collateral manager, which is unaffordable for most farmers’

groups. In addition, under the WRS Act, SACCOs are a financial entity

not legally allowed to market commodities. This latter function

should be undertaken by AMCOs (Marketing Cooperatives).

Given that SACCOs are the only functional structures, a hybrid

system has been developing between SACCOs and financial

institutions, which hire local warehouse operators. WFP is working with financial institutions and SACCOs to

support this hybrid WRS. Financial institutions wish to see WFP

play a role as warehouse/collateral manager, but this is not

possible given WFP’s legal status. By the beginning of 2011, WFP

had purchased 1,478mt through the Tanzania WRS.

FURTHER READING

Overview of WRS in East Africa: www.nri.org/projects/

wrs/index.htm.

S. Rashid, A. Winter-Nelson, P. Garcia: “Purpose and

Potential for Commodity Exchanges in African Econo-mies”, IFPRI Discussion Paper 01035, Nov 2010 [http://

www.reliefweb.int/rw/lib.nsf/db900sid/EGUA-

8CCNAV/$file/ifpri-commodity-exchanges-in-african-

economies-nov2010.pdf?openelement]

J. Coulter: “Review of Warehouse Receipt System and

Inventory Credit Initiatives in Eastern & Southern Africa”,

Report commissioned by UNCTAD under the All ACP

Agricultural Commodities Programme (AAACP), Sep-

tember 2009 [http://www.unctad.info/upload/SUC/

LusakaWorkshop/Coulter_WarehouseReceipt.PDF]

USAID Seminar on WRS, 2010: http://kdid.org/sites/

kdid/files/media/articulate/agsector_101110/player.html

The history of BVOs at www.bidvolumeonly.org

Ethiopia Commodity Exchange: www.ecx.com.et

Malawi Commodity Exchange: www.aceafrica.org;

www.ideaamis.com;

Uganda Commodity Exchange: www.uce.co.ug;

Zambian Commodity Exchange: www.zamace.com;

The Agroways Warehouse in Jinja

A FO CHAIRMAN SPEAKS ABOUT HOW HE SEES THE WAREHOUSE RECEIPT SYSTEM IN UGANDA

Sosimu Twesiga, Chairman of Farm Uganda, a P4P-supported

Farmers’ Organization founded in 2008 to promote bulking and

group marketing, shares his view of how his group came to know

of the WRS, and what have been the benefits and challenges of

using the system for his fellow farmers.

“We first learnt of the Uganda Commodity Exchange (UCE) and the

Warehouse Receipt System (WRS) in 2009 during the search for

markets for our bulked maize grain. We had taken our maize grain to

Agroways (a private grain trader), hoping that this private grain dealer

would automatically buy it. Instead, we were advised to deposit it and

register our association as depositors. Members were excited because

we had a serious problem of inadequate storage space. We never had

a chance to sell to big buyers and final consumers who could offer

better prices without middle men”.

Sosimu speaks of the benefits of selling through the WRS...

“Ever since we registered as depositors at Agroways, our members have been able to sell to other markets apart from WFP. For

example, just recently, we sold our maize to Export Trading Company which offered a good price to our members. In addition, we were

able to access credit using the Warehouse Receipt financing through Housing Finance Bank, despite the interest rates being high

(22%). WFP purchased our maize at UGX500 per kg, while other farmers were selling at UGX200 per kg at farm gate for

unprocessed/ungraded grain. The system has a lot of benefits. It has eliminated the old system were a trader would carry a sack of

money to villages looking for commodities and problems of middle men who cheat both farmers and traders”.

… and of the challenges

“First, our farmers still lack adequate training on post-harvest handling (PHH) and some basic equipment. If the two are provided, it

would help reduce costs incurred at the warehouse when the grain is delivered there. Second, credit access through the Warehouse

receipt financing comes with high interest rates. For example, the 22% per annum charged by Housing Finance Bank is too high for

an average smallholder farmer. This discourages depositors from accessing credit and limits their capacity to expand the acreage under

cultivation. There is also a problem of unreliable market opportunities even with use of the WRS. For example, although WFP is

one of the key buyers, it does not normally respond every time farmers wish to sell their commodities. Thus, sometimes, the grain spends

a long time in the warehouse which in turn increases storage costs paid by farmers.

Sometimes, the process one goes through before selling to WFP is long and tedious. First, Agroways calls depositors for a price

negotiation at Jinja three or four times before the two parties agree on the selling price. Occasionally, farmers have disagreed with WFP

on the purchase price, thinking WFP is offering low prices, only to discover later that it was actually the best one would get in the

market. With increased capacity building on market information, our members are confident that the situation will improve”.

Page 5 ISSUE 30

Concluding remarks

The role of WFP’s procurement as a “catalyst” for partners and Government investment in these systems has been

highlighted in numerous fora, including ACTESA Stakeholders’ meetings and the Maputo P4P Annual Review meeting in

December 2010.

Ethiopia, Malawi and Zambia have operational Commodity Exchanges through which WFP is already buying for both its na-

tional and regional programmes and all plan to develop Warehouse Receipt Systems. WFP Uganda has purchased through the

WRS, and plans to purchase through the Uganda Commodity Exchange in 2011. Kenya, Ghana, Rwanda and other countries

are exploring options to establish Warehouse Receipt Systems, and are looking to WFP to support these systems.

Establishing a Commodity Exchange is not a quick fix to agricultural marketing, but rather requires a complex set of factors to

converge to create the environment. A successful Exchange requires buy-in from all stakeholders (Governments, FOs, private

sector and financial institutions), and a limited intervention by Governments in markets. This remains a challenge in Africa,

however, if it can be made to work, it has huge potential to catalyse the development of the agricultural sector for farmers

and bring liquidity to the market.

The P4P pilot aims to determine whether WFP engagement with these systems holds promise and should be continued after

the pilot phase, and what external conditions are required to make this work for the benefit of smallholder farmers.

Copyright: WFP/Marco Frattini

RESOURCING UPDATE

Food costs for P4P purchases are included in regular projects (EMOPs, PRROs or CPs), but instability of WFP’s funding for

regular operations and limited availability of long-term funding may hamper the strategic use of WFP procurement in some

countries.

Funding for Capacity building and operational costs for P4P implementation, including sub-grants to partners are required for:

Laos for five years (approximately US$6.5 million).

Sierra Leone (US$3 million) and Liberia (US$ 3 million) to enable P4P to continue through 2013.

Honduras (US$2 million) and southern Sudan (US$2 million) to extend P4P through 2013.

Funds are also sought for the Data Analysis and Knowledge Management Hub (2012-2014) (US$3.2 million).

Page 6 ISSUE 30

P4P Country Coordinators/Focal Points

Asia Afghanistan: Stephane Meaux <Stephane.Meaux@wfp.org>

Laos: Sengpaseuth <Sengpaseuth.simmanivong@wfp.org>

Regional Bureau Focal Point: Francois Buratto

<Francois.Buratto@wfp.org>

Eastern, Southern & Central Africa Democratic Republic of Congo: Melanie Jacq <Melanie.Jacq@wfp.org>

Ethiopia: Enrico Pausilli <Enrico.Pausilli@wfp.org>

Kenya: Martin Kabaluapa <Martin.Kabaluapa@wfp.org>

Malawi: Tobias Flaemig <Tobias.Flaemig@wfp.org>

Mozambique: Billy Mwiinga <Billy.Mwiinga@wfp.org>

Rwanda: Emmanuela Mashayo <Emmanuela.Mashayo@wfp.org>

Sudan: Marc Sauveur <Marc.Sauveur@wfp.org>

Tanzania: Dominique Leclercq <Dominique.Leclercq@wfp.org>

Uganda: Elvis Odeke <Elvis.Odeke@wfp.org>

Zambia: Felix Edwards <Felix.Edwards@wfp.org>

Regional Bureau Focal Point: Simon Denhere

<Simon.Denhere@wfp.org> WFP’s secondee to ACTESA: Simon Dradri <Simon.Dradri@wfp.org>

West Africa Burkina Faso: Veronique Sainte-Luce <Veronique.Sainte-Luce@wfp.org>

Ghana: Hassan Abdelrazig <Hassan.Abdelrazig@wfp.org>

Liberia: Lansana Wonneh <Lansana.Wonneh@wfp.org>

Mali: Isabelle Mballa <Isabelle.Mballa@wfp.org>

Sierra Leone: Miyuki Yamashita <Miyuki.Yamashita@wfp.org>

Regional Bureau Focal Point: Jean-Martin Bauer

<Jean-Martin.Bauer@wfp.org>

Latin American & Caribbean El Salvador: Hebert Lopez <Hebert.Lopez@wfp.org>

Guatemala: Sheryl Schneider <Sheryl.Schneider@wfp.org>

Honduras: Nacer Benalleg <Nacer.Benalleg@wfp.org>

Nicaragua: Francisco Alvarado <Francisco.Alvarado@wfp.org>

Regional Bureau Focal Point: Laura Melo <Laura.Melo@wfp.org>

KEY P4P CONTACTS IN ROME

P4P COORDINATION UNIT

Ken Davies, P4P Coordinator: Ken.Davies@wfp.org

Sarah Longford, Snr Programme Adviser, Partnerships:

Sarah.Longford@wfp.org

Mary-Ellen McGroarty, Snr Programme Adviser for Ethiopia,

Kenya, Laos, Malawi, Mozambique, Rwanda, Tanzania, Uganda &

Zambia: Mary-Ellen.McGroarty@wfp.org

Jorge Fanlo, Snr Programme Adviser for Afghanistan, Burkina

Faso, DRC, Ghana, Liberia, Mali, Sierra Leone & Sudan:

Jorge.Fanlo@wfp.org

Clare Mbizule: Snr Programme Adviser, M&E:

Clare.Mbizule@wfp.org

Alessia De Caterina, Reports Officer:

Alessia.Decaterina@wfp.org

Blake Audsley, Market Analyst: Blake.Audsley@wfp.org

Tobias Bauer, Communications Officer:

Tobias.Bauer@wfp.org

Helen Kamau-Waweru, Finance Officer:

Helen.Kamau-Waweru@wfp.org

Ester Rapuano, Snr Finance Assistant.:

Ester.Rapuano@wfp.org

Amanda Crossland, Snr Staff Assistant to P4P Coordinator:

Amanda.Crossland@wfp.org

Kathryn Bell-Greco, Admin. Assistant:

Kathryn.BellGreco@wfp.org

Alessia Rossi, Staff Assistant: Alessia.Rossi@wfp.org

PROCUREMENT DIVISION

Bertrand Salvignol: Food Technologist:

Bertrand.Salvignol@wfp.org

Van Hoan Nguyen: Food Technologist:

VanHoan.Nguyen@wfp.org

Jeffrey Marzilli: P4P liaison: Jeffrey.Marzilli@wfp.org

Laila Ahadi: Procurement Officer: Laila.Ahadi@wfp.org

The update is published by the P4P Coordination Unit in Rome, Italy. Contact us at wfp.p4p@wfp.org

External: www.wfp.org/p4p Internal: http://go.wfp.org/web/purchaseforprogress

CALENDAR

7 March- 9 May: ODI Mid-Term Evaluation Missions: Uganda (7-22 March); El Salvador (30 March-12 April); Liberia (4-15

April); Zambia (4-18 April); Kenya (11-21 April); Mali (11-21 April); Guatemala (27 April- 09 May).

20 March- 27 May: IDS Gender missions: Ethiopia (20-31 March); Burkina Faso (4-15 April) and Guatemala (16-27 May).

28 March- 8 April: Rwanda Study Tour to Uganda and Ethiopia to learn from the Warehouse Receipt System in Uganda

and from the Commodity Exchange in Ethiopia.

4-8 April: Africa Agricultural Markets Programme (AAMP) seminar and training workshop on smallholder

commercialization, Kigali, Rwanda.

19-20 April: P4P Seminar: Peer review of the technical aspects of the P4P M&E system, Washington, DC USA.

3-7 May: Global Child Nutrition Forum: “Scaling Up Sustainability: Linking School Feeding with Agriculture Development to

Maximize Food Security”, Nairobi, Kenya.

11 May: Seminar organized by the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) on “Employment and Income in

Fragile Contexts: Private sector’s crucial role for effective development—exploring new perspectives”, Bern, Switzerland.