SHARE THIS ARTICLE !
What is this ?

Afrique Australe >> Actualité >> Adding Value to Sustainable Agriculture Produce Network programme – Evaluation of year 1

08/04/2009

Adding Value to Sustainable Agriculture Produce Network programme – Evaluation of year 1

The ZAVSAP (Zimbabwe - Adding Value to Sustainable Agriculture Produce) Network programme was initiated by VOLENS and its partners in April 2008. The programme aims at creating and supporting a network of 9 Zimbabwean NGOs working with small-scale farmers, and seeks to build capacity among NGO staff and their beneficiaries (small-scale farmers) in food processing, value addition and marketing so as to enhance household food and income security and alleviate poverty.

Between 21 and 28 January 2009, the Green Living Movement (a Zambian NGO with extensive knowledge in agriculture) undertook an evaluation to assess the progress made in the implementation of the programme, to learn about the challenges encountered and to propose future action.

Soon after this external evaluation, VOLENS’ Regional Coordinator Kristien Van Camp visited the members of the ZAVSAP Network. Her evaluation of the programme presents some similarities with the external one, but also some discrepancies.

In the end, the whole network sat together to compare and discuss all the actors’ opinions and views on the network and its activities. The whole exercise contributed to a better understanding of each other and to more fine-tuned expectations. The second year of the programme was thus started on a solid and transparent basis.

Key observations

Relevance of the programme
The assessment established that NGO staff and farmers generally see potential benefits in the programme. In the face of persistent food shortages in the country and the economic downturn, the programme comes in handy as it addresses core issues which are key to sustainable community livelihoods. The high cost in production of maize and the unpredictable weather patterns have also raised the need for farmers to embrace crop diversification and identify alternative sources of food and income. But members pointed out that the trainings provided through the network lacked follow-up regarding the transmission of knowledge to the larger communities.

This point was agreed on by all actors. Although the potential benefits of the programme are present, the member organisations underlined the fact that they have very little funds available for trickling down the information to a larger group of beneficiaries. To address the trickle down issue, the network decided to organise the coming trainings as much as possible in the rural area while focusing on the crops that are readily available in those places.

Too ambitious expectations
The assessment observed that in many instances, members joined the VOLENS network with too ambitious expectations which the network could not meet. It was evident that some partners did not fully appreciate the contractual provisions with regard to the form of assistance that VOLENS is able to provide. Some members expected VOLENS to provide them with funds to meet administrative and personnel costs. Another expectation was that VOLENS would provide members with funds to conduct trainings and food processing demonstrations in communities and for the acquisition of food processing equipment (such as fruit processors, oil pressing machines, and solar driers).

The members agreed that it is not VOLENS’ mandate to provide funds for the acquisition of technologies. As a way forward, the members agreed on focusing on simple and easy-to-reproduce technologies during the trainings, to write some joint proposals to fundraise for equipment for demonstration purposes and to link farmers to micro-finance institutions so they can buy their own utensils.

Time was taken to go over the terms of agreement until all members felt the limitations and obligations were clear. In general, the members were positive now they know what to expect from VOLENS.

Marketing
The evaluation further established that the farmers and project facilitators had acquired substantial amounts of knowledge and skills on food processing, but little effort in many cases had been made to put acquired skills into practice. Marketing was an area that appeared to be a major challenge. In many cases the members and farmers expected VOLENS to find markets for them.

Whereas the first year has been focusing on food processing, the network actors agreed on giving marketing a larger place in the coming years.

Ownership of the network
There were strong feelings among most of the members on clarity about the ownership and structure of the network. The structure was said to be undefined while some members felt that VOLENS owned the network and they were mere ‘rubber stamps’ as key decisions were made at the VOLENS office.

This finding was not agreed on during discussions with all the actors. On the contrary, members felt they owned the network as they are actively involved, decide on the activities, identify their own needs, have the space to express their opinions, etc.

Relevance of activities
Most of the activities undertaken in the last 8 months were said to have been beneficial and relevant to the needs of the organisations, except for a few that were said to have been either irrelevant or poorly organised. The “Small grains processing training” at ISTT, in Lusaka, Zambia was largely irrelevant, the TRADIFFA Fair in Morogoro, Tanzania was said to have been poorly organised while the “Introduction to Marketing” in Harare was said to have been a mere academic exercise which lacked practical application.

Network Committee Meetings
Network Committee Meetings provide a platform for activity review and reflection. This was appreciated by all the members, though 6 months period between these meetings is too long. It was proposed and agreed that the meetings be held 3 times a year. Moreover, the members agreed to hold the Committee Meetings in the offices of the network members on a rotational basis.


Conclusion
The evaluation of the network activities of the first year proved to be a very useful tool. On top of giving a general feel of how the network is perceived, the assessment gave the opportunity for in-depth discussions based on the input from a neutral third party.

As a result, the second year of activities started with a renewed confidence in the programme.

This very short summary of the evaluation exercise has been compiled from different documents: the Green Living Movement evaluation report, the minutes of the 3rd Network Committee Meeting, and the Regional Coordinator’s report on her visit of the members. These documents are available from the bottom of this page.

Documents