Improving Productivity & Market Success of Ethiopian Farmers Monitoring and Evaluation Report of Year 3 (2007/2008) i Table of Contents: List of Abbreviations .................................................................................................. ii Methodology ................................................................................................... 1 1. Knowledge Management ............................................................................ 3 1.1 Increased understanding and awareness of the knowledge requirements ................. 3 1.2 Availability of Knowledge and Knowledge Sharing System ................................... 5 1.3 ICT network and infrastructure developed ............................................................. 11 1.4 Functional agricultural knowledge management system operationaized highlighting innovations and appropriate technologies ..................................................................... 11 2. Innovation Capacity Development ........................................................... 14 2.1 Increased knowledge, awareness, understanding and skills of staff in public organizations ................................................................................................................. 14 2.2 Improved understanding and skills of farmers, staff from CBOs and from private- sector organizations ...................................................................................................... 16 2.3 Establishment of collaborative institutional arrangements and linkages between farmers, pastoralists, CBOs, public and private sector organizations ........................... 18 2.4 Extent of coordination, linkage, activities and/or communications between actors 20 3. Commodity Development ......................................................................... 23 3.1 Crop Commodities .................................................................................................. 24 3.2 Livestock Commodities .......................................................................................... 38 4. Research .................................................................................................... 53 5. Summary and Conclusion ........................................................................ 56 Annex 1: Performance Measurement Framework .................................................... 69 Annex 2: List of Contacted Persons .......................................................................... 83 ii List of Abbreviations AI Artificial Insemination ARARI Amhara Agricultural Research Institute ATVET Agricultural Technical and Vocational Education Training BBM Broad Bed Maker BoARD Bureau of Agriculture and Rural Development (at regional level) BPR Business Program Reengineering CBO Community-Based Organizations CGIAR Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research DA Development Agent DVM Doctor of Veterinary medicine EAP Ethiopian Agricultural Portal EARS Ethiopian Agricultural Research Systems EIAR Ethiopian Institute for Agricultural Research FTC Farmers’ Training Center HAPCO HIV/AIDS Prevention and Control Office HIV Human Immune-Deficiency Virus ICT Information and Communication Technology ILRI International Livestock Research Institute IPMS Improving Productivity and Market Success KM Knowledge Management M & E Monitoring and Evaluation MFI Microfinance Institute MoARD Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development MUB Molasses Urea Block MUM Molasses Urea Mix NAIRC National Agricultural Information Resource Centre NALC National Advisory and Learning Committee NGO Non-governmental Organizations OARI Oromiya Agricultural Research Institute OCSSCO Oromia Credit and Saving Share Company OMFI Omo Microfinance Institute OoARD Office of Agricultural and Rural Development OoPRD Office of Pastoral and Rural Development ORARI Oromia Agricultural Research Institute PA Peasant Association/also referred to as ‘Kebele’ or ‘Tabia’ PLW Pilot Learning Woreda PMF Performance Measurement Framework RALC Regional Advisory and Learning Committees RARI Regional Agricultural Research Institute RDA Research and Development Assistant RDO Research and Development Officers SARI Southern Agricultural Research Institute SMS Subject Matter Specialist SNNPR Southern Nation Nationalities and People’s Region TARI Tigray Agricultural Research Institute WALC Woreda Advisory and Learning Committee WKC Woreda Knowledge Center 1 Methodology Year 3 M & E followed the Project Performance Measurement Framework (PMF) and focused on outcome and output level results (see Annex 1 for the PMF). The data collection was done by a monitoring team from IPMS and OoARD/ZoARD staff members. In Amhara and Tigray Regions, the M & E team took training on result based M & E whereas, in Oromia and SNNPR1 the team got orientation about IPMS M & E procedures before the start of the actual data collection. Both primary and secondary data was collected. At PA level four PAs were considered for data collection. From each PLW, two intervention PAs were chosen among those where considerable progress was made in IPMS intervention. Then two non-intervention PAs were picked out from the PLWs, with the selection criterion mainly considering similarity of farming systems with the selected intervention PAs and accessibility of the PAs. In evaluating the candidate non-intervention PAs, effort was also made to exclude those where an IPMS facilitated innovation is scaled out either by training of DAs, farmer to farmer knowledge sharing or OoARDs scaling out effort. However, in most conditions, it was difficult to get ‘pure’ non-intervention PAs as the innovations are scaled out. (See Table 1). Table 1: List of PAs and priority commodities selected for quantitative analysis. Region PLW Priority commodities Intervention PAs Non-intervention PAs Amhara Metema Cattle fattening, Sesame, Banana & Cotton Tumet Gubi Jejebit Das Gundo Agam Wuha Fogera Dairy, Apiculture, Onion and Rice Woreta Zuria, Tiwha Abuna Shena A. Kokit Bure Apiculture, Cattle fattening, Banana and Avocado Arbisi Wangedem Tiya Tiya Alefa 1 Similar training will be given for the M & E team in Oromia and SNNPR. 2 Region PLW Priority commodities Intervention PAs Non-intervention PAs Oromia Meiso Avocado, Cattle fattening, Dairy, onion Tokuma Gorbu Weltane Itisa Roro Goma Avocado, Coffee, Small ruminant fattening Beshasha Kilole Omo Funtele Dedo Ureche Ada Dairy, Fattening, Onion, Chickpea Godino Denkaka Keteba/Lugo Gobesay Tigray Astbi Apiculture, Dairy, Onion, Pulse and fattening Hayelom, Barka Adisubaha Kelesha Emni Haresaw Alamata Onion, Fattening, Mango and Dairy Gerjelle Tumuga Selen Weha Tao SNNPR Alaba Apiculture, Poultry, Teff and Haricot Bean Wanja, Gubba Feleka Shekete Dale Poultry, Avocado, Mango and Haricot Bean D. Kege Ajawa Wayico Awada Then in each PA, 8-12 farmers who represent the diversity of gender, age and educational status were selected for community group interview. The group includes farmers who own various priority commodities and farmers who did and did not participate in IPMS facilitated intervention. Where possible, farmers who participated in baseline survey were called for a group interview. Then data was collected through a semi-structured questionnaire. The community group interview mainly focused on four priority commodities which were promoted by the project in different PAs (Table 1). In addition, FTCs, farmers’ plots, private fruit nurseries, input shops, bull stations, paravets, cooperative shops, etc were visited and discussion was made with relevant persons to get an in-depth view of various interventions. DAs were also interviewed about the status of technological and institutional innovations promoted by the project. Discussions also took place with WALC members and SMS working at OoARD at Woreda level, and with RALC chairpersons and researchers from the regional research centers at regional level. (See annex 2 for the list of contacted persons). Secondary data 3 were also used from various records of DAs/SMSs/RDOs, project data bases and various reports of the Project. Qualitative and quantitative methods were used to analyze the data. Frequency means and percentages were calculated to show progress or differences. The Chi-Square test was run to detect systematic association between two variables. 1. Knowledge Management The expected outputs of the project knowledge management component are increased understanding and awareness of the knowledge requirement for managing the new commodities, increased availability of knowledge in various forms and establishment of enhanced knowledge sharing systems. These outputs together with the establishment of ICT networks and infrastructures as well as the establishment of NARIC within MoRAD will contribute to the expected outcome of knowledge management, which is to have functional agricultural knowledge management system, interconnected and utilized at all levels, employing innovations and appropriate technologies. This section gives highlights of the status of the knowledge management outputs and outcomes. Knowledge Management Outputs: 1.1 Increased understanding and awareness of the knowledge requirements The project has brought about an increase in farmers’ understanding and awareness of the knowledge requirement for managing the new priority commodities. There is a marked increase in farmers’ need for information about production technologies; input supply options, credit and marketing issues. Farmers in intervention and non-intervention PAs were asked whether they have asked for information about different options of production and marketing for the selected priority commodities. The result showed that farmers in intervention PAs sought more information than farmers in non-intervention PAs. (Table 1.1). Person Chi-square test showed the result is significant in most PLWs. Table 1.1: Demand for information (on technological, input-supply, credit and market) 4 PLW PA Type Did you look for information? (%) No Yes Sig. Metema Non-intervention PA (n=32) 46.9 53.1 .035 Intervention PA (n=32) 21.9 78.1 Fogera Non-intervention PA (n=32) 9.4 90.6 .030 Intervention PA (n=32) 31.2 68.8 Bure Non-intervention PA (n=32) 53.1 46.9 .010 Intervention PA (n=32) 21.9 78.1 Mieso Non-intervention PA (n=32) 62.5 37.5 .006 Intervention PA (n=32) 28.1 71.9 Goma Non-intervention PA (n=32) 25.0 75.0 .768 Intervention PA (n=32) 21.9 78.1 Ada Non-intervention PA (n=32) 46.9 53.1 0.007 Intervention PA (n=32) 15.6 84.4 Astbi Non-intervention PA (n=32) 9.4 906 .302 Intervention PA (n=32) 3.1 96.9 Alamata Non-intervention PA (n=32) 46.9 53.1 .035 Intervention PA (n=32) 21.9 78.1 Alaba Non-intervention PA (n=32) 46.9 53.1 .121 Intervention PA (n=32) 28.1 71.9 Dale Non-intervention PA (n=32) 43.8 56.2 .800 Intervention PA (n=32) 40.6 59.4 At the Woreda level, the understanding and awareness of the knowledge requirements among the OoARDs has also improved. The OoARD of different PLWs recognized the need to support the various knowledge management tools and approaches. For example, the OoARDs of Bure and Fogera have partially supported the construction and furnishing of new Woreda Knowledge Centers. In all PLWs except Meiso, knowledge center 5 coordinators have been assigned. In Bure, the OoARD also has made an improvement by providing additional electronic equipment such as photocopy machine. OoARDs of Astbi, Alamata, Dale, Alaba, Ada , Goma have shown increased awareness of knowledge requirement by providing conducive and spacious room and making available other reading materials in the WKCs. Zonal offices, recognizing the gap in knowledge requirement, have allocated a room for the Knowledge Centers to be established at a Zonal level. 1.2 Availability of Knowledge and Knowledge Sharing System The project has worked with farmers and other private and public stakeholders in order to establish an enhanced knowledge sharing system and increase the availability of knowledge in different forms. At the Federal level, a web based central repository of information called ‘Ethiopian Agricultural Portal (EAP)’ has been established. The EAP is accessible to the public and is populated with 400 documents relevant to market oriented agricultural development collected from various sources, mainly from MoRAD, EAIR, RARIs and other national and international R & D institutions. At regional BoARDs and RARIs as well as Zonal OoARD establishment of mirror sites to allow offline access to the contents of the portal is under way for 19 sites in the third year of the project. One of the new mechanisms used for knowledge sharing to Woreda level experts and DAs is the Woreda Knowledge Centers (WKC). A WKC has been established at Woreda level within the OoARD premises in each of the PLWs. The WKCs collect electronic knowledge assets in the form of CDs and printed materials such as books, manuals/guidelines both for animal and crop commodities as well as cross cutting issues of gender, HIV/AIDS and environment from different sources including international and national research institutes (mostly ILRI and other CGIAR centers, EIAR, RARIs), MoARD /BoARD and other international research, educational and development institutes. These materials are reserved at the WKC for on-the-spot reading and browsing information from CDs or internet. Except Dale, WKCs also allow OoARD staff to borrow materials for a short time. Each WKC has three computers, a printer, a television, 6 VCD player and chair/table and shelves that support the service given. Though a connection problem is evident, all WKC except Astbi also have internet access. The number of printed material and CD/VCD available in the WKCs is indicated in Table 1.2.1. Table 1.2.1: Number of printed and electronic knowledge assets availed at WKC PLW Printed materials Books/journals/ Newsletters/magazines/ manuals CDs/VHS Metema 56 13 Fogera 175 40 Bure 367 44 Meiso 120 30 Gomma 510 5 Ada 582 57 Astbi 689 15 Alamata 192 26 Alaba 110 102 Dale 91 44 At PA (kebele) level, model FTCs were selected and were supplemented with knowledge management tools and methodologies to enable them serve as ready access points to information source. The recent effort to broaden FTCs’ role in knowledge sharing has equipped model FTCs with audiovisual equipment, ICT tools, access to internet where possible and generators where there is no electricity. The delivery of this equipment has only been partially completed due to security issues at some FTCs. Other physical demonstration materials, some printed materials and a few CDs/VCD are also available for use during farmers’ training. In addition, plots are used as live learning sites to demonstrate various crop/forage species, improved agronomic and husbandry practices as well as innovative soil and water conservation techniques. 7 Beside the above mentioned mechanisms, other knowledge sharing mechanisms that promote knowledge sharing through connection of actors, most commonly via demonstrations, study tours, seminars, workshops, meetings, field visits and exhibitions (Table 1.2.2 & 1.2.3) were also organized. Usage of roadside broadcast of tape recorded market information on market days in Meiso, and market information collection and dissemination & posting of relevant materials from the internet on notice boards in Bure and Astbi are other examples of enhanced knowledge sharing mechanisms being used to share marketing information. Table 1.2.2 Number of Knowledge Sharing Events2 Organized and No. of Participants by location (up to March 2008) Location No of events organized No. of participants (Government) No. of participants (Farmers) No. of participants (Private Sector) M F Total M F Total M F Total IPMS HQ 12 185 16 201 4 0 4 36 4 40 SNNPR 2 23 3 26 3 0 3 23 8 31 Atsbi 16 245 18 263 486 112 598 10 0 10 Alamata 29 516 104 620 1056 332 1388 20 0 20 Metema 15 246 51 297 1117 123 1240 454 74 528 Fogera 18 521 215 736 1441 481 1922 376 263 639 Bure 11 251 36 287 692 140 832 431 105 536 Ada’a 17 332 158 490 251 25 276 20 3 23 Meiso 31 213 47 260 399 209 608 15 3 18 Gomma 10 229 25 254 45 0 45 5 1 6 Alaba 71 682 123 805 13717 6412 20129 155 5 160 Dale 13 144 10 154 188 58 246 31 3 34 Total 245 3587 806 4393 (13 %) 19399 7892 27291 (81 %) 1576 469 2045 (6 %) Source: Project Knowledge Management and Capacity Building Data Base 2 These include demonstration, study tour, seminar: workshop, meeting, field visit. The number of partcipants of exhibitions is not included in the table. 8 Table 1.2.3 Number of Knowledge Sharing Events Organized and No. of Participants by type of Event (up to March 2008) Location Knowledge Sharing Events No. of Total Participants No. % M F Total Demonstration 35 14 1109 331 1440 Field day 28 11 2852 321 3173 Meeting 27 11 945 118 1063 Promotion 22 9 14389 6694 21083 Seminar 43 18 1334 363 1697 Study tour 48 20 1003 199 1202 workshop 42 17 1350 241 1591 Total 245 100% 22, 982 (74 %) 8, 267 (26 %) 31,249 Source: Project Knowledge Management and Capacity Building Data Base To understand to what extent the different knowledge management efforts improved farmers’ access to information, farmers in both intervention and non-intervention PAs were asked whether they got the information they needed about technology, input supply, credit and marketing of the selected priority commodities. The result showed that farmers in intervention PAs got more information than those in non-intervention PAs in year 3 than in the base year. However; the improvement is insignificant in some cases (Table 1.2.4). Table 1.2.4: Access to Information PLW Year PA Type Did you get information? (%) No Yes Sig. Metema Baseline Non-intervention PA (n=30) 80.0 20.0 .498 Intervention PA (n=30) 72.7 27.3 Year 3 Non-intervention PA (n=33) 69.7 30.3 .062 Intervention PA (n=32) 46.9 53.1 Fogera Baseline Non-intervention PA (n=15) 33.3 66.7 .475 Intervention PA (n=30) 23.3 76.7 9 Year 3 Non-intervention PA (n=32) 46.9 53.1 .068 Intervention PA (n=32) 25.0 75.0 Bure Baseline Non-intervention PA (n=15) 33.3 66.7 .552 Intervention PA (n=30) 23.3 76.7 Year 3 Non-intervention PA (n=32) 65.6 34.4 .006 Intervention PA (n=32) 31.2 68.8 Meiso Baseline Non-intervention PA (n=20 90.0 10.0 .014 Intervention PA (n=28) 57.1 42.9 Year 3 Non-intervention PA (n=32) 81.2 18.8 .000 Intervention PA (n=32) 34.4 65.6 Goma Baseline Non-intervention PA (n=5) 20.0 80.0 .322 Intervention PA (n=18) 44.4 55.6 Year 3 Non-intervention PA (n=32) 53.1 46.9 .131 Intervention PA (n=32) 34.4 65.6 Ada Baseline Non-intervention PA (n=28) 64.3 35.7 0.021 Intervention PA (n=32) 34.4 65.6 Year 3 Non-intervention PA (n=29) 62.1 37.9 .000 Intervention PA (n=28) 14.3 85.7 Astbi Baseline Non-intervention PA (n=32) 0 100 .313 Intervention PA (n=32) 3.1 96.9 Year 3 Non-intervention PA (n=29) 10.3 89.7 .931 Intervention PA (n=31) 9.7 90.3 Alamata Baseline Non-intervention PA (n=32) 40.6 59.4 .800 Intervention PA (n=32) 43.8 56.2 Year 3 Non-intervention PA (n=17) 41.2 58.8 .035 Intervention PA (n=24) 12.5 87.5 Alaba Baseline Non-intervention PA (n=28) 17.9 82.1 .014 Intervention PA (n=24) 50 50 Year 3 Non-intervention PA (n=32) 68.8 31.2 .790 Non-intervention PA (n=32) 65.6 34.4 Dale Baseline Non-intervention PA (n=24) 83.3 16.7 .014 Intervention PA (n=24) 50 50 Year 3 Non-intervention PA (n=32) 71.9 28.1 .042 Intervention PA (n=32) 46.9 53.1 10 In addition to the increased availability of information, the form in which information was delivered to farmers and DAs/SMS has also changed. Farmers both in intervention and non- intervention PAs have received information mainly through oral communication from DAs, SMS, researchers or other farmers. However, transfer of information through demonstration and to a lesser extent in printed form has also increased in intervention PAs. Farmers who are literate and took part in IPMS sponsored trainings have received training manuals and benefited from few production manuals and guidelines available in FTCs. Increased availability of knowledge in various forms is another important output of the project. The above mentioned and other capacity building interventions have contributed to increased availability of knowledge in various forms. Quantitative analysis of year 3 M & E data showed that farmers’ access to information about production, input supply, credit and marketing information of priority commodities is higher in intervention PAs than in non-intervention PAs. Not only access is improved but also quality of information is higher in PAs where IPMS works. While comparing intervention PAs with Non- intervention PAs, Improvement was also observed in terms of: o Diversity of source of information - In all the PLWs the most important source of extension information is still DA/OoARD, but farmers in intervention PAs named additional sources such as NGOs/CBOs and research centers. o Diversity of Information type - farmers in non-intervention PAs mainly got information on production technology, whereas farmers in intervention PAs also got information about input supply, credit and marketing of commodities. o Diversity of form in which information is delivered/received - Even though oral/lecture remained the main form of information delivery for farmers in both intervention and non-intervention PAs, other forms of information delivery like demonstration, printed material, and audio-visual aids have become more evident in intervention PAs. 11 1.3 ICT network and infrastructure developed At the federal level, the National Agricultural Resource Center (NARIC) has been completed and handed over to the MoRAD, including an e-mail server, a web server for the Ethiopian Agricultural Portal, a system management server, an Internet Security and Acceleration server and window active directory server. At regional and zonal levels, establishment of the mirror sites of the portal within BoARDs and RARIs has started and progressing during year 3. Availability of ICT infrastructure for knowledge capturing and sharing improved at Woreda level through provision three computers and a printer to each WKC as mentioned before. Similarly at PA level, two FTCs in each PLW were equipped with a computer and a printer in an effort to strengthen FTCs’ role in knowledge management. Knowledge Management Outcome: 1.4 Functional agricultural knowledge management system operationaized highlighting innovations and appropriate technologies While the establishment of ICT supported enhanced knowledge management system, increased understanding of knowledge requirements and increased availability of knowledge are the expected outputs, ‘institutionalization of functional knowledge management system’ is the outcome of the knowledge management component. Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the M & E data showed that the desired changes to institutionalize functional knowledge management system have been realized partially in all PLWs at varying degrees. The following few paragraphs discuss outcome level result achieved through the extent of utilization of knowledge based approaches. All the established Woreda Knowledge Centers (WKCs), except the ones in Meiso and Metema, were well functioning in year 3. Users of the facilities reported that the number and relevance of knowledge available in the WKCs has improved in all PLWs. Information obtained from WKC attendants indicated that utilization of services of the facilities has shown significant increase in terms of the number of users, duration of stay and utilization of different services as compared to the previous year. Even though the major users of the WKCs are SMS and graduate students, DAs from the nearby PAs also 12 reported using the facility. Computers at the WKCs were mainly used to further develop IT skills of OoARD staff. However, computers are primarily being used to browse information from the available CDs. SMSs also have started using the computers to write regular office reports, which were handwritten previously. In PLWs like Astbi, Alamata, Gomma and Bure, computers in WKC are also used to store market information and basic data on the Woreda. On the contrary, the WKCs in Metema and Meiso were not used by their intended users mainly due to lack of appropriate room for the WKC and inability to assign a person to look after the facility. To solve this problem the OoARD/IPMS of Metema has constructed a new room in its premises. The use of FTC as a knowledge sharing center has shown mixed results. DAs use the printed materials especially training manuals and other reference materials. DAs and SMSs are also using the demonstration materials at the FTCs during farmers training, and also seeds/planting materials and other demonstration materials to show various crop/forage species, improved agronomic and husbandry practices as well as innovative soil and water conservation techniques. However, results related to the use of ICT and audio-visual equipment were hardly realized by year 3. Though it is worth mentioning that very few FTCs in Bure and Goma that have started using ICT tools, others were only using audio-video equipment. Low levels of computer literacy of DAs and shortage/lack of appropriate CD/VCDs have been reported as the major problems which hinder efficient use of the facilities. Other than using WKCs and FTCs for knowledge sharing, non-IT knowledge sharing mechanisms were also promoted and some degree of institutionalization of these approaches has been recorded. The problem of low level of ownership of knowledge management approaches reported in year 2 M & E report has shown improvement in year 3. All PLWs made significant progress in incorporating the different knowledge management approaches in their annual plan. OoARD staff started to organize within PA, or PA to PA study tours, field days, exhibitions. Some also started to record promising innovations on video and use audio-video tools to share knowledge. Few examples of such cases are: 13 o In Metema, Astbi and Ada the Woreda various innovative interventions to be used for scaling out of the innovations were captured on video. o In Metema, Astbi, Meiso, Bure, DAs/SMS reported the use of audio-video equipment to scale out fruit, fattening, apiculture innovations. o DAs and SMS in most PLWs reported that they have started to organized various knowledge sharing approaches such as field day, promotion of product/service, exhibition etc with their own initiation and resource. o Collecting and disseminating of market information is slowly being adopted. For example, the role of OoARD in provision of local level market information in Bure, Fogera, Astbi, Meiso and Alaba is reported. Another indicator which shows the outcome of the various knowledge management outputs discussed in the previous section is farmers’ perception of the usefulness of information they received. In this regard quantitative analysis of year 3 M & E data showed that farmers in intervention PAs perceived the information they received for selected priority commodities is more useful than those in non-intervention PAs (Table 1.4) Table 1.4: Usefulness of Information PLW PA Type Was information Useful? (%) No Yes Sig. Metema Non-intervention PA (n=10) 80 20 0.006Intervention PA (n=16) 25 75 Fogera Non-Intervention PA (n=16) 33.3 66.7 .103Intervention PA (n=24) 12 88 Bure Non-intervention PA (n=11) 63 36 .044Intervention PA (n=22) 27 72 Mieso Non-intervention PA (n=6) 67 33 .121Intervention PA (n=22) 32 68 Goma Non-intervention PA (n=15) 40 60 .473Intervention PA (n=21) 29 71 Ada Non-intervention PA (n=11) 18.2 81.8 .656 14 Intervention PA (n=24) 12.5 87.5 Astbi Non-intervention PA (n=26) 23 77 .634Intervention PA (n=28) 18 82 Alamata Non-intervention PA (n=10) 20 80 .686Intervention PA (n=21) 14 86 Alaba Non-intervention PA (n=10) 60 40 .130Intervention PA (n=11) 27.3 72.7 Dale Non-intervention PA (n=8) 62.5 37.5 .375 Intervention PA (n=14) 42.9 57.1 2. Innovation Capacity Development Outputs of Innovation Capacity Development 2.1 Increased knowledge, awareness, understanding and skills of staff in public organizations Increased awareness, knowledge, understanding and skills of staff in public organizations are one of the project outputs. In addition to the previously discussed knowledge sharing mechanisms, the project organized various short term trainings and supported BSc/MSc studies to build capacity of staff in public organizations. These trainings covered technical and social subjects for crop and livestock sector, marketing, environmental studies, gender, HIV/AIDS, information and communication sciences, innovative extension, and other social and technical subjects relevant to market oriented agricultural development. In this regard, the project organized about 136 short term trainings up to the end of year 2008 in collaboration with other stakeholders. These trainings benefited 1,896 staff members (16 % female) of the public sector mainly those working at different levels in the Ministry, research & educational institutions (Table 2.1). Table: 2.1 Short term trainings for government employees 15 Location No. of Trainings No. of Participants Male Female Total IPMS HQ 17 349 20 369 Atsbi 17 202 28 230 Alamata 9 75 9 84 Metema 6 67 19 86 Fogera 14 127 34 161 Bure 7 113 19 132 Ada’a 20 172 91 263 Meiso 16 169 28 197 Gomma 3 52 5 57 Alaba 21 219 44 263 Dale 6 49 5 54 Total 136 1594 302 1896 Source: Project’s I Management and Capacity Building Database Similarly, 97 students (24 % female) that were being supported for their BSc./DVM/MSc have graduated by the year 2008. Among these, the percentage of BSc., DVM and MSc. graduates is 35, 15 and 50% respectively. From all graduates, 56 % were sponsored for their MSc./DVM/BSc tuition and thesis research, while 45% were sponsored for financial and supervisory support for MSc. thesis and BSc/DVM attachment works. Though some of the graduates were transferred to other posts in or out of the PLW, most of the graduates went back to serve in their PLWs. Participants of IPMS/OoARD facilitated short term trainings disclosed during interviews that the trainings contributed to improvement of knowledge and skills in various subjects. They said the lectures and the accompanying practical exercises helped them to sharpen their theoretical knowledge and develop their skills. It also helped them to know new production technologies, input supply options, and market/financial service support strategies. Other than being practical, the trainings were also appreciated by most participants for their scope beyond production technologies and covering institutional issues for input supply, credit and market support services. Moreover, WALC/RALC chairpersons described that both the short term and long term trainings addressed critical 16 issues and are greatly curbing the human power development need of the OoARDs/BoARDs. These changes in knowledge and skill are reflected in the extent of utilization of acquired knowledge and skill in their daily work. Especially DAs/SMS reported using the acquired technical knowledge in training farmers/DAs in other PAs. Another indicator which shows the extent of utilization of knowledge and skill is the effort showed by SMS/DAs to incorporating some of the innovations in their work plan and scaling out innovations in new PAs. Examples of such cases are fruits/vegetable and apiculture development in Alamata, Apiculture and dairy development in Astbi, urea treatment and fruit development in Metema, fattening in Meiso, community based rice seed production in Fogera, etc. Besides applying the technical knowledge, public sector staff have also reported using some of the innovative extension approaches related to mainstreaming gender and HIV issues, participatory extension methods, market information collection and dissemination in Meiso, Fogera, Bure and Astbi, etc. In addition to the direct benefits of participating in trainings, DAs and SMSs also reported that they have indirectly benefited from improved knowledge and skill by taking part in IPMS/OoARD facilitated innovative knowledge management and capacity development interventions. Some of the knowledge and skills reported to be developed through such mechanisms include: how to assess the knowledge requirements by conducting community diagnosis, how to conduct end of season evaluation where experience and lessons learned are discussed and used as a basis for planning future interventions, how to follow bottom up approach to extension with emphasis on addressing the critical bottleneck across the value chain etc. 2.2 Improved understanding and skills of farmers, staff from CBOs and from private-sector organizations The capacity building efforts, mainly through practical trainings on innovative technological options and institutional arrangements, have also been of use to farmers/agro-pastoralists and private sector organizations. Up to March, 2008, a total of 17 4,557 farmers (36 % female) have directly benefited from the 107 IPMS/OoARD facilitated short term trainings (Table 2.2). Table2.2: Farmers’ short term training (up to March 2008) Location No. of events No. of Participants Male Female Total Atsbi 15 538 625 1163 Alamata 8 165 77 242 Metema 5 210 11 221 Fogera 12 318 57 375 Bure 5 130 10 140 Ada’a 20 416 410 826 Meiso 15 362 166 528 Gomma 5 391 61 452 Alaba 17 259 110 369 Dale 5 133 108 241 Total 107 2922 1635 4557 Source: Project’s Knowledge Management and Capacity Building Database Individual and group interviews of farmers revealed that the level of awareness, knowledge and skills of participating farmers has improved on various technical subjects. Moreover, improvement in knowledge and skill has also been reported by farmers who took part in farmer-to-farmer knowledge sharing or/and attended successive trainings given by DAs/SMSs. Though it is difficult to measure the level of knowledge and skill that has resulted due to all the interventions, the monitoring team noted an improvement in knowledge and skill by observing farmers’ practices in converting knowledge into action. In general farmers involved in direct or indirect capacity building interventions were seen to apply the acquired knowledge and skill to manage their farms. From the private sector, about 202 individuals (8.4 % female) benefited from a total of 36 trainings which involved individuals from the private sector. In general farmers and those from the private sector who benefited from direct or indirect capacity building interventions were observed applying the acquired knowledge and skill as they employ improved management of new or existing varieties/breeds of crop/livestock following 18 recommended husbandry practice. In this regard, improvement in knowledge and skill was observed among male and female farmers, input suppliers and cooperatives/unions that showed the change in knowledge by entering into market oriented production, input supply or marketing activities. Individual traders, private sector organizations, and other farmers’ groups as well as cooperatives/unions were seen to use the acquired knowledge and skill by engaging in innovative production, input supply and marketing activities. For example members of dairy cooperatives in Ada and reported usage of improved husbandry practice. Cooperatives are also applying the knowledge and by engaging in innovative marketing activities such as milk processing in Ada, Fogera and Bure, honey processing in Alaba and Astbi etc. Similarly individual input suppliers such as paravets, private bull station owners, fruit seedling producers, pump mechanics and other agricultural input suppliers got the needed knowledge and skill which helped them to enter into business. A change in awareness and knowledge has also been reported among marketing groups, cooperatives and unions who got advisory service, which helped them to better engage either in production, input supply or marketing of a particular commodity. 2.3 Establishment of collaborative institutional arrangements and linkages between farmers, pastoralists, CBOs, public and private sector organizations Establishment of collaborative institutional arrangements and linkages between farmers, pastoralists, CBOs, public and private sector organizations is another output of the capacity development component of the project. In this regard the project facilitated the establishment of institutional arrangements such as RALC/WALC, commodity platforms and other institutional linkages which helped in promoting collaboration , coordination and learning among actors. WALC and RALC have been established at Woreda and Region level respectively in all PLWs and the four regions. In addition to their role in promoting collaboration and coordination in planning and implementation of project interventions, these arrangements are expected to facilitate learning for scale up and out of innovative approaches and technologies (see section 2.4 for actual performance of these arrangements). Similarly 19 various platforms have been formed in the PLWs since the beginning of the project to promote multi-stakeholder action for commodity development (Table 2.3). Table 2.3.1: No. of Commodity Platforms PLW Focus area of the platform Fogera Onion-seed production , safflower, fattening and fishery marketing Bure Dairy , Cattle fattening and Apiculture Meiso Small and large ruminant fattening and marketing Gomma Coffee marketing and apiculture Metema Cotton Astbi Apiculture, Small ruminant fattening and Skins and Hides, and irrigated agriculture Alamata Fattening and onion marketing Ada Chickpea , apiculture, dairy Alaba Apiculture, Sheep fattening and poultry Dale Coffee , Veterinary health delivery for tse-tse and Tryps control Other partnership arrangements, mainly bilateral linkages between farmers and other input suppliers, traders, researchers and financing institutions, that promote collaboration and coordination among relevant actors in the value chain were also formed. These linkages are mainly initiated by IPMS/OoARD to facilitate knowledge sharing, and jointly test innovative production, input supply, credit and marketing activities. Most of these linkages were initiated at a particular time but continue to serve the actors involved afterwards. Examples of such linkages are: the linkage created between farmers engaged in dairy and fattening activities and input suppliers in Goma, Metema, Alamata and Dale; linkage created between vegetable producers of Fogera and Almata with trades and brokers found in major towns, linkage created between cotton seed producers in Metema with chemical suppliers in Addis, linkage between traders and honey producers in Astbi, Bure, Goma and Alaba, linkage between farmers engaged in small and large ruminant fattening in Meiso with traders and brokers, etc. Table 2.4 shows other linkages initiated between farmers/OoARD and research centers. 20 Table 2.3.2: linkages facilitated between OoARD/farmers & research centers PLW Linkage with Research Center for Knowledge Sharing/ Capacity Building or Technology Transfer Astbi Mekele University , Mekele Research Center, Holeta Research Center Alamata Werer, Mekele, Sirinka and Alamata research centers Metema Gonder and Andasa Research Centers Bure Adet , Andasa and Bahirdar Farm Mechanization Research Center Fogera Adet, Andasa, Bahirdar Fish Research centers Ada D. Zeit Research Center Meiso Werer, Melkasa and Adamitulu Research Centers Goma Jima University, Jima Research Centers Alaba Awasa Research Center, Holeta Research Center, Areka Research Center, Sodo & Alagae ATVET Dale Awasa, Awada & Melkasa Research Centers Outcome of Innovation Capacity Development 2.4 Extent of coordination, linkage, activities and/or communications between actors Outcome level result of the capacity building component of the project is ‘strengthened innovation capacity of farmers, pastoralists, community-based and private sector organizations, and public organizations to support the development of small-holder, market-oriented agricultural production systems’. Achievement of the result is reflected by the extent of coordination, linkages, activities and/or communications between actors, level of responsiveness of the extension system to the needs of women and men farmers and by the level of satisfaction of farmers with the technical & institutional support they receive. The previously observed problem of a low level of awareness of WALC members about the project’s objective and approach in the past year has shown significant progress. Members reported greater involvement of WALC in project planning and implementing, and also mentioned WALC’s greater planning flexibility following the decision made towards the end of year 3, which gave WALCs the opportunity to manage their own budget. The learning function of WALC has also progressed significantly from the previous year as they now meet regularly and conduct periodic field visits. On the contrary, RALCs in all four regions were weak and their role was limited to approving the annual plans of PLWs. This came about due to RALC members’ inability to conduct 21 the regular meeting and review project progress collectively as a result of their engagement in the extended BPR process during the year. However, chairpersons of RALC stated that they were following project progress individually with RDOs at informal settings. The different linkage arrangements and commodity platforms that were established across the PLWs showed mixed results in playing their role in promoting coordination and learning. Some of these arrangements facilitated the joint action of stakeholders to solve specific problems along the value chain. However, most of the initial commodity platforms were weak or have ceased to exist as permanent institutional arrangements. But many agree that the experience gained from platform approach has made working with ad-hoc committees commonplace in most PLWs. These ad-hoc committees don’t have permanent structures and draw as members stakeholders from different disciplines and are mostly established to solve marketing or input supply problems for a particular season. In terms of improving the communication and linkages, the different commodity platforms mentioned earlier have also played their own role in promoting coordination and learning. For example, the Apiculture platform formed in Gomma, which incorporates different stakeholders from public and private sectors, discussed constraints and opportunities of the sector and set objectives of the platform. In Fogera the onion- seed production platforms have worked to discuss problems in areas of onion seed production and taken appropriate steps to help seed producers. Similarly, the discussion made in fish platform led to linking the fishermen with a fish marketing corporation which agreed to collect fish from them. In Bure, dairy, cattle fattening and apiculture platforms identified major bottlenecks in market oriented development of the commodities and prepared action plans. In Meiso cattle fattening platform organized a livestock fair, which facilitated market linkage. In Gomma, a coffee platform highlighted challenges and opportunities along the value chain and stakeholders agreed to work jointly. Apiculture platform in Alaba has undergone formal procedures and upgraded to a primary apiculture cooperative in the Woreda. Coffee platform in Dale brought various 22 actors together and discussed major problems in coffee production in the Woreda. Onion platform in Alamata and Apiculture platform in Astbi have also brought various stakeholders together to improve marketing of onion and honey respectively. In Astbi the apiculture platform brought changes in improving market linkage and synchronizing pesticide use not to be in conflict with apiculture development. However, some of the platforms were informal, weak or ceased to function. For example cotton platform in Metema, fattening platform in Fogera etc are no more conducting their regular meetings. One of the intermediate objectives of capacity building and knowledge management interventions is to improve provision of demand driven extension service to farmers and private sector organizations by strengthening the capacity of extension service providers. The improvement in this regard is measured by the satisfaction of farmers by the extension service they get for selected priority commodities. Farmers were asked whether they are satisfied with the extension service they got with regard to the selected priority commodities. Quantitative analysis of year 3 M & E data showed that farmers’ satisfaction with the extension service they get for selected priority commodities is higher in intervention PAs than non-intervention PAs. Table 2.4 : Farmers’ satisfaction with the extension service they receive PLW PA Type Satisfied with the extension service? (%) Sig No Yes Metema Non-intervention (n=22) 95.5 4.5 .000Intervention (n=26) 42.3 57.7 Fogera Non-intervention (n=20) 95.0 5.0 .578Intervention (n=21) 90.5 9.5 Bure Non-intervention (n=21) 85.7 14.3 .000Intervention (n=24) 5.0 75.0 Meiso Non-intervention (n=32) 91 9 0.055Intervention (n=32) 72 28 Goma Non-intervention (n=32) 62 38 0.611 23 Intervention (n=32) 56 44 Ada Non-intervention (29) 89.7 10.3 .302Intervention (30) 80 20 Astbi Non-intervention (n=30) 63.3 36.7 .074Intervention (n=32) 40.6 59.4 Alamata Non-intervention (n=26) 46.2 53.8 .213Intervention (n=30) 30.0 70.0 Alaba Non-intervention (n=32) 71.9 28.1 .023Intervention (n=32) 43.8 56.2 Dale Non-intervention (n=32) 87.5 12.5 .070Intervention (n=32) 68.8 31.2 3. Commodity Development The outcome of the commodity development component of the project is the adoption of appropriate technologies, innovative input supply-output marketing and financial services in order to improve agricultural productivity and market success in the PLWs. Establishment of ten PLWs that are strategically linked to the priorities of the Woreda & Regional Development Plans; and promotion of appropriate technologies processes and institutional innovations are the two major outputs that contribute to the above mentioned outcome. In addition to the previously established 8 PLWs, the two PLWs of Goma and Bure were established in Oromia and Amhara Regional States. Annual work plans in all PLWs developed in close collaboration with OoARD staff and approved by their respective WALC. According to WALC and RALC officials, the annual plans which were developed by IPMS/OoARD are in line with the overall government objective of market oriented agricultural development, but differ in approach followed to meet the objective. The project together with its partners identified and introduced technological, organizational and institutional innovations for production, input supply, and marketing 24 of crop and livestock commodities. Almost all of the innovations were initially introduced in selected farmers in one or few PAs mainly in demonstration form. The level of adoption in year 3 varies across various innovations and PLWs/PAs depending on several factors. Some of the innovations were newly introduced and were still at demonstration stage during year 3. On the other hand, some of the innovations went beyond the initial stage of demonstration and adopted by a number of farmers in other PAs or other Woredas. On the contrary others were adopted only by the initial farmers or adopted by a small number of farmers or not adopted at all. The following sections present in tabular form the different technological and institutional innovations introduced across the ten PLWs. The successive tables present the type of production and input supply interventions (with or without credit), brief description of the intervention, number of producers/input suppliers involved area/no. covered by the intervention, and number of PAs covered by the interventions. Marketing interventions are presented in bullet form below each table. The tables start with intervention in crop production and marketing followed by intervention in livestock production and marketing. 3.1 Crop Commodities The major production interventions for crop commodities include introduction of farmers based seed/seedling production system, introduction of crop varieties, introduction of on farm processing/storage technologies and introduction of management practices (e.g. improved land preparation methods, improved planting method, improved weed control method, improved soil and water conservation technology, improved pest and disease control and management methods etc). Input supply interventions for crop were mainly establishment of farmer based seed/seedling supply system, facilitation of private and/or cooperative input shops. Marketing interventions were mainly related to provision of market information and facilitation of market linkage. Some of these interventions in production, input supply and marketing were with provision of credit while others were without credit. 25 Table 3.1: Rain-fed Annual Crops (Cereals, Pulses, Oil Crops, Cotton & Hot pepper) 3.1.1a Production Interventions : Type of Intervention PLW Description of intervention, and whether or not credit was provided Area or numb er No of producers No of PA s M F Tot al Farmer/communit y based seed production (with introduction of new varieties or for existing varieties) + improved management practice Fogera Farmers based upland Rice (Nerica) seed production system established (new variety) 15ha 73 4 77 9 Fogera Seed production and farmer to farmer seed exchange system established for chick pea (new variety) 0.28 ha 7 - 7 3 Bure Marko fana, improved hot pepper variety introduced through demonstration (0.5 ha) and then farmers started seed multiplication. 2ha 4 0 4 1 Alaba Farmer based teff seed multiplication system which was introduced in the past continued to multiply seed for the newly introduced teff varieties (DZ cross 37 & CR-37) 122 ha 178 - 178 3 Metema Seed grower farmers started on farm rice seed production for three new varieties of upland rice 5.75 35 2 37 4 Ada Seed multiplication of teff, wheat and chickpea demonstrated on farmers field 29 41 2 43 4 Dale Farmers based haricot bean seed system established to bulk up seed source for the newly introduced varieties3. 22.5ha 127 1 0 137 10 Variety – introduction (together with improved management practice) Bure Seven improved bread wheat varieties4 introduced through on farm demonstration and three varieties were selected for multiplication 2100m 2 3 0 3 1 Three improved Faba bean varieties introduced though demonstration ( Adet Hana, CS-20DK and Degaga) together with improved management practice 600m2 2 0 2 1 Two varieties of hot pepper introduced. 4 - 4 1 Metema Deltapine, improved cotton variety dressed with a chemical (Cruiser) introduced to fight pest damage. Productivity which was lowered to 8-12 qt/ha has increased to 25- 33 qt/ha with the use of chemically treated improved variety. 1235 ha 5 0 5 10 Ada Three varieties of teff, five varieties of wheat and four varieties of chickpea demonstrated on FTCs 720 m2 6 FT Cs 6 3 Nassir,Cranscope,DRK,Ibado,Omo95,Dimtu, Awash1, Awash Melka,Awassa Dume 4 HAR604 (Galema), HAR1868 (Shena), HAR1685 (Kubsa), HAR2536 (Simba), HAR3646 (Senkegna), HAR3730 (Gasaye) and HAR2562 (Densa) 26 Alamata Three improved sesame varieties (Adi, Serkamo & Tate) introduced through demonstration at FTCs and farmers field 3 ha 5 - 5 Alamata Marekofana, new hot pepper variety demonstrated at FTC and farmers field. 25 kg seed 4 4 FT C 4 Alaba New haricot bean varieties (Awash I, Dimtu, Awash Melka and Nasir) introduced through demonstration on farmers field with ORGA fertilizer. 52 9 Alaba Soya bean varieties (Awassa 95, Williams, V.coker 240) were introduced 22 2 2 44 8 Management Practices Bure Use of recommended fertilizer rate for hot pepper demonstrated 2 ha 4 0 4 1 Improved land preparation methods (if not mentioned above) Bure Wheat production using minimum tillage, appropriate chemicals, composting and fertilizer use demonstrated.. 2.5 ha 9 1 10 2 Metema Use of BBM for excess water drainage demonstrated 27.38 88 - 88 5 Ada Apron Star (seed dressing chemical) and inoculum for chickpea demonstrated on farmers field 4 ha 16 0 16 4 Ada Inoculums for faba-bean demonstrated on farmers’ field. 7.5ha 30 0 30 6 Alaba ORGA an organic fertilizer demonstrated and promoted. 1 ha 2 - 2 2 Astbi Pulse production under irrigation during the dry season promoted. The number of farmers who produce pulse under irrigation increased to 1840 (423 female) and the area increased to 234 ha Improved weed control technologies (if not mentioned above) Metema Use of Round UP chemical for minimum tillage introduced and promoted for cotton , rice and sesame. 1368 lt was reported to be used in 2006 & 07 by farmers in 23 PAs. Dale The use of bio fertilizer demonstrated. 1ha 4 4 8 1 Improved pest and disease control and management Alaba Improved weed control and pest management promoted using bio-pesticides and chemicals through training of farmers to provide private crop protection service (see input supply below) Introduction on farm processing/storage technologies Bure Mechanical wheat thresher introduced and demonstrated for wheat In 2 PAs Alaba Mechanical Teff thresher introduced and demonstrated. Latter IPMS provided credit for a private entrepreneur (see input supply and marketing interventions below) 27 3.1.1b Input supply /Credit Interventions Type of Intervention PLW Description of intervention and credit provision No input and service providers Quantity inputs services sold Unit price PAs Covered Farmer based seed supply systems Fogera Farmer-to-farmers seed supply system for upland rice established 75 125 quintal 5 birr 4 Fogera Farmers based seed supply system established for chick pea 7 28kg 3 Bure Private seed and seedling producers established for improved variety of hot pepper 15 (6 female) Not yet sold 120 birr/kg for seed 150 birr per nursery bed (which covers half ha) 3 Dale Farmers’ based seed production system established for improved varieties of haricot bean 137 57 qt 6 birr 10 Metema Farmers’ based rice seed production 37 202 qt 6 birr/kg 4 Alaba Farmer based teff seed multiplication introduced in the past continued seed multiplication. Agreement was signed between farmers and ESE and Menchenon Cooperative Union. A total of 353 qt was produced from 37 ha Input Shops – private and/or cooperative Metema Private input shops which provide chemicals and seeds opened One licensed and 5 not licensed shops 1200 lt of round up chemical 16 kg of vegetable seed 123 birr /lt round up 33 birr/50 gm (tomato) 5 Metema Cooperative started supplying cruiser treated deltapine variety and round up chemical 1 173 qt 10 birr/kg 3 PAs Alaba Input supply shop established by Menchonneon Farmers’ cooperative union (with IPMS credit)5 . 1093 kg fertilizer and 755 lt agro chemicals sold to farmers in 22 PAs Ada Yerer Union continued supplying chick pea seeds 5 However, the shop was hardly functional during the monitoring visit. Internal management problem was reported as a cause. 28 Alaba Private crop protection service introduced. Farmers who trained to provide crop spraying services for crop continued to give service. They also got IPMS credit for the purchase of spraying and other necessary equipment. 11 10 birr/ha (traditional crop sprayers charge3-4 birr/ha) 22 Alaba Private entrepreneur supported with credit and started to give threshing service in the Woreda. 1 35 birr/hr 62 4 Dale Weynenata farmers Cooperative obtained credit fund to engage in collecting and marketing of haricot bean seed produced by seed procuring farmers (see farmers based seed production and supply above) OoARD new input supply function Fogera OoARD started to act as intermediary to promote farmers to farmer seed exchange system by buying upland rice seed from farmers and selling to other PAs 3.1.1c Marketing Interventions: Bure: • IPMS/OoARD provided weekly market price information for agricultural commodities. IPMS collects the data and distributed to all PAs through SMSs & DAs. OoARD staff has gradually started to involve in organizing market information. • Price trend of bread wheat identified by analyzing five year market price data at Bure. • A Cooperative Union at Bure linked with traders in Metema and sold teff and faba bean at a better price. • Mechanical wheat thresher introduced and demonstrated in two PAs. Metema: • Training on store management and fumigation technique was provided for a private exporter of Sesame. Application of some of the knowledge is reported by the trainee. • Linkage was facilitated for sesame producers and traders, but no result is yet reported due to this linkage. • Linkage is created with cotton farmers and a ginnery in Gonder. The ginnery agreed to pay a premium to cotton farmers. Farmers also linked with Bahirdar textile, but no result is yet reported due to this linkage. • Rice polisher is demonstrated and the polisher is given to farmers as a demonstration material. 29 Fogera: • Linkage created with a German company and a domestic oil crop export agency for marketing of safflower petal. As a result of the linkage local people from 16 PAs have started collecting and selling the petal to a middle man working on behalf of the company. During year three a total of 887 kg safflower was sold at a price ranging from 15-18 birr/kilo. • The concept of standardized grading is introduced by demonstrating the use of sieve of three sizes with one private polisher. Varieties of rice dish and graded rice promoted during exhibition and great demand is expressed by restaurant owners. However, adoption of the sieve beyond the demonstration was not reported. Alaba: • Weekly market information collection and dissemination for major commodities has been introduced in three main market sites (Kulito, Besheno and Guba) using billboards. Except the initial establishment of the billboards by IPMS and LIVIA, all routine activities of data collection and posting are done by OoARD staff. Speakers were also used to disseminate market information in main market sites. • Mechanical teff thresher was demonstrated at market place. A private entrepreneur who purchased the machine using IPMS credit fund started giving threshing service to farmers at a price of 35 birr/hr. The machine improves grain quality of teff and reduces cost of post harvest processing. Dale: • Weynenata cooperative in Dale linked with exporters for future haricot bean marketing. The Cooperative also took credit fund to facilitate bulk production and distribution of haricot bean seed by farmers. Ada: Market Bill boards have been introduced in FTCs to provide weekly market information of agricultural products. However utilization of the billboards has been poor, except Dire PA. 30 3.1.2 Fruits and Vegetables 3.1.2a: Production Interventions Type of Intervention PLW Description of interventions and whether or not credit was provided Are a or nu mb er No of producers No of PA s M F Tot al Farmer/comm unity based seed/seedling production system (with introduction of new varieties or for existing varieties) + improved management practice. Mete ma Farmer to farmer sucker supply system established for the newly introduced two banana varieties. - 1 2 0 12 4 Bure Two grafted Avocado varieties and solo papaya variety introduced and farmers based seedling multiplication and distribution system established for the newly introduced avocado and solo papaya varieties. 131 1 1 1 12 3 Four banana varieties introduced and farmer to farmer sucker supply system introduced for the newly introduced four banana varieties6. 59 see dlin gs 3 3 6 3 Foger a Tomato seed production is demonstrated at farmers’ field using new tomato variety (cylderical type tomato) and stagger production technique. 1.5 85 1 6 - 16 5 Onion seed production at farmers’ field and farmer to farmer seed exchange and quality control system established. 4.7 ha 2 6 - 26 5 Dale Improved varieties of avocado and mango7 introduced and farmer based improved fruit seedling production system established 6 - 6 2 Ada Farmers based fruit nursery established for production of the newly introduced improved fruit varieties (mango and avocado). 2 2 Onion seed production technique demonstrated on farmers field and farmers group organized along a river and credit fund was used to purchase motor pump. Gom ma Private fruit nursery for fruit established. The system is being tested with one farmer who prepared 1000 avocado, 35 Apple Meiso Mango(Tommy), Avocado, Papaya (Solo), Banana (short & Giant Cavendish, Poyo Four male farmers in 3 PAs prepared about 65158 grafted and non-grafted 6 Butazo, Poyo, William-2 and cooking type 7 Etinger, Hass, Baccon, Fruite and Apple mango varieties introduced 8 Papaya=800, Avocado grafted 860, Avocado non-grafted=561, Mango grafted =864, Mango non-grafted 22, Banana, 315 31 and Williams) fruit varieties introduced and private fruit nursery established for improved varieties of Mango, Avocado, Papaya , Banana and Guava seedlings of Avocado and distributed to 369 farmers found in 15 PAs. Adama Red and Bombe Red varieties of onion introduced and farmers based seed production system initiated for onion seed production About 40 farmers in 11 PAs started using these varieties. Alam ata Onion seed production system introduced in demonstration form 2.5 ha 4 - 4 2 Astbi Onion seed production demonstrated Variety – introduction (with improved management practice) Bure Two grafted Avocado varieties introduced 131 1 1 1 12 3 Mete ma Two varieties of banana short and Jaint Cavendish introduced with management practices such as planting method, water casement structure and improve ripening method with management practice 100 ha 2 1 9 9 2 313 16 Two improved varieties of mango (Kent and apple mango) and solo papaya introduced with management practice. 1 4 0 14 3 Two varieties of tomato and one variety of onion is introduced through demonstration 2 ha 16 6 Ada Adama Red variety of onion introduced with improved management practice of double row planting and furrow irrigation among Women vegetable growers saving and credit group 2.5 ha - 1 0 10 1 Grafted fruits (three varieties of Avocado, 3 varieties of orange, two varieties of Lemon, one variety of Banana and papaya was introduced. 802 see dlin gs 2 1 2 23 1 Alam ata Two banana varieties (William I and Poyo) and papaya varieties introduced 340 suc ker s 16 Goma Improved varieties avocado and its propagation technique introduced 300 see dlin gs 3 3 6 5 Improved planting methods Bure Demonstrating grafted planting material and spacing for avocado 7 1 8 3 Foger a Staggered planting for tomato production introduced 1.5 85 1 9 - 19 5 Improved planting , weed control and soil and water Alam ata Improved management practice promoted for onion through training and advisory service. About 660 ha land is covered with onion production under improved management practice in six PAs 32 conservation method Alam ata Improved planting methods, weed control and soil and water conservation etc were introduced for Avocado, Mango, Papaya and Banana For 3422 Mango, 2767 Avocado, 147 Guava, 11154 Papaya ,964 Orange and 920 bananas in 7 PAs and their FTCs Alam ata Improved management practice promoted through demonstration, training and follow up advisory service for tomato and pepper About 11ha & 51 ha covered under improved management practice of tomato and pepper respectively in 3 PAs Astbi Improved management practice demonstrated for garlic and other vegetables using irrigation. OoARD reported expansion of agricultural lands under irrigation Type of Intervention PLW Description of interventions and whether or not credit was provided Area or numb er No of producer s No. of PAs M F T Improved soil and water conservation technologies + tree management Bure Mulching and irrigation structure demonstrated for avocado and pruning practice demonstrated for Avocado 7 1 8 3 Alam ata Improved agronomic practices and use of optimum deep well irrigation promoted for vegetable production 5 Improved pest and disease control and management Introduction on farm processing/st orage technologies 3.1.2b: Input supply /Credit interventions Type of Intervention PLW Description of intervention and credit provision No of input and service providers Quantity inputs service sold Unit price PAs Covered Farmer based seed/seedling supply systems Bure Private grafted avocado seedlings 12 Have not started selling. 10 birr 3 33 distribution system established Farmer to farmer sucker supply system established for the newly introduced banana and solo type papaya varieties. 6 10 3 Metema Farmer to farmers’ sucker supply system established for newly introduced banana and solo papaya varieties. More than 12 farmers in 4 PAs are actively sell banana suckers to other farmers. Up to year 3 about 4000 sucker were sold at an average price of 10 birr/sucker. 50 % is sold to farmers in 16 PAs and the rest to other 4 neighboring Woredas9 and the Sudan. These farmers also used suckers to expand their own farms. There is also one farmer who sell seedlings of solo papaya. In year three he sold 738 solo papaya seedlings at a price of 3 birr/kg. Fogera 26 farmers in 5 PAs produced and sold6.3 qt of certified onion seeds. In addition to fulfilling onion seed requirement of the Woreda, they have sold to other regions. Goma Private fruit nursery established 1 Sold 16 000 gravelia seedlings, fruit seedlings were not yet ready at the time of the visit. 50 cents/seedling 1 Meiso Private fruit nursery established for Avocado, Papaya , Banana and Guava seedlings 4 6515 seedlings produced and distributed to 369 farmers 10-14 birr/seedling 15 Farmers to farmers onion seed 6 22.5 kg 150 birr/kg 2 PAs 9 Thach Armacho, Quara, East and West Belesa and Adi Arkay. 34 supply system established Ada Private fruit nursery established and continued to supply grafted seedlings. 2 494 15-20 birr/seedling Dale Farmers based fruit nursery established 6 1147 seedlings 13 birr Input Shops – private and/or cooperative Metema Private input shop which provide seeds of papaya and other vegetables established 1- 160 birr/kg In woreda town Ada 3 3 Astbi Local pump maintaining system established by training individuals 6 Though the intervention helped to some extent, farmers reported the problem in this regard has not yet fully solved. The problems are often beyond the capacity of these people. Alamata Cooperative Union strengthened and linkages facilitated to supply inputs to farmers Provided 11 qt onion seed to farmers. OoARD new input supply function Bure OoARD nursery site started providing grafted avocado and three varieties of banana seedlings, and solo papaya Alamata OoARD with IPMS support reclaimed previously swampy area r vegetable and cereal production. About 165 ha (Gerjelle 70 ha and Tumuga 95 ha) of land reclaimed for crop production and grazing land in two PAs. 3.1.2c: Marketing Interventions Metema: • Two marketing cooperatives have been established in two PAs to facilitate input and output marketing for fruits and leafy vegetables. Linkage with fruit wholesalers in Gondar has been made for the sale of bananas. • Ripening method for banana is introduced. Establishment of ripening house in Gonder facilitated and individuals in some PAs started using the ripening method. 35 Fogera: • Stagger production of onion and tomato to avoid lower price due to market saturation was demonstrated. Participant farmers were able to harvest 1.5 month earlier than the normal harvest and sold tomato at a price of 3-4 birr which is 0.5 to 2 birr during normal period. • Weekly and monthly market price information is collected by telephone and shared with producers and brokers for onion during peak harvesting season. Market linkage was facilitated with traders and brokers in major market towns for onion bulb. In order to enhance market linkage for onion bulb, traders’ names and their respective addresses have already been collected and documented. Market linkage was also created with union in Almata for onion seed and farmers sold 11 qt of onion seed worth 14,000 birr. Alamata: • Fruit and vegetable producing farmers are linked with individual traders in Mekele and with Union at Humera. Onion marketing platform have been formed at Woreda and PA level to follow the market situation , provide price information and facilitate linkage. The platform coordinated marketing of onion bulb with the cooperative union, hoping farmers would get better price if they sell to the union than individual traders. However , the arrangement didn’t benefit farmers as the union couldn’t buy the product on time and traders/brokers were excluded from the market. Astbi: • Linkage was formed between vegetable farmers and traders . Traders tel. address given to farmers and DAs. Bure: • Sugar cane juice maker introduced and adopted by a hotel in Bure town. 36 3.1.3 Coffee 3.1.3a Production Interventions Production interventions/ Credit : PLW Description of variety or management interventions and nature of intervention and whether or not credit was provided* Area or number No of producers No of PAs M F Total Farmer/community based seed production Dale Farmers based seed and seedling production system 2000 coffee seedling /for seed orchard and 95Kg seed of local coffee cultivar/ Angefa was distributed 31 households heads with their wives involved in 9 PAs Goma Farmer based seedling production using vegetative hybrid coffee multiplication technique introduced for Aba Buna 100 seedlings 1 - 1 1 Variety – introduction +Management Practices Dale 1377(Angefa) variety introduced. Farmers trained in Improved nursery and seed as well as orchards management. Improved land preparation, planting methods also demonstrated with variety introduction. 31 31 9 Introduction on farm processing/storage technologies Gomma The use of improved sun drying post harvest technology and community based quality control system was promoted facilitated by credit to improve the quality of coffee. Even though the effort was expected to increase farmers’ income by 30 %, the result was not achieved due to lower price. 4095m poly sheet , 4095m shade net , 4095 m chicken wire , 4095m Hessian clothe and 4095m jute sacks were supplied though OoARD. 300 farmers (9 female) participated from 11 PAs. 3.1.3 b: Input Supply Interventions 37 Type of Intervention PLW Description intervention and credit provision Farmer based seed supply systems Dale Farmer based seedling supply system is established for best performing local varieties with 31 farmers. Goma Farmer based seedling supply system is established using vegetative hybrid coffee multiplication technique. The private person prepared 100 seedlings. Input Shops – private and/or cooperative Goma Farm implements supply was facilitated for coffee production and rural farm tools shops are opened by farmer traders with credit. The five shops have sold 3300machetes, 379 forks Zapas and 150 sickles were sold to farmers 3.1.3c Marketing Intervention: Gomma • Improved coffee sun drying was introduced to improve the quality of coffee and thus increase income. About 300 farmers participated and produced 94 qt of quality coffee. Linkage has also been made with market parties interested to offer a premium price for quality coffee. Auction organized, premium price (20% higher than the normal coffee) offered, but farmers finally reject the offer seeking better price. • Community quality control committee established to control the process of preparation of quality coffee using mesh wire. . 38 3.2 Livestock Commodities Similar to the crop, various technological, organizational and institutional interventions in production, input supply and marketing were promoted for livestock commodities. Among production interventions, genetic improvement, livestock feed and improved animal management practices were the major ones for small and large ruminants’ meat and dairy development. For apiculture, introduction of modern/transitional hive, introduction of improved beekeeping methods, introduction of colony production methods, introduction of bee forage/supplementary feed were the major production interventions. While introduction of improved fishing equipments together with improved fishing practice is the major production intervention for Fishery, production of chicks from hatcheries, production of pullets, introduction of improved housing, feeding and disease control systems are the major production interventions for poultry. In input supply, introduction of improved forage seed production system, introduction of chopping services, introduction of privatized bull service for local and exotic breeds, introduction of improved AI service, introduction of paravet for improved animal health service, community based animal health control system were the major interventions for small and large ruminants’ meat and dairy development. Similarly input supply interventions for apiculture introduced farmer-to-farmer bee forage seed sale system, wax sale system and sale of colonies. For Poultry the major input supply interventions are distribution and sale of chicks and pullets, introduction of paravet service and private feed/drug suppliers were the major input supply interventions. In marketing provision of market price information, facilitation of linkages for output marketing, introduction of processing techniques, and organizing marketing groups were the major marketing interventions for livestock commodities. 39 3.2.1 Large and small ruminants’ meat and dairy development 3.2.1a: Production Interventions: Type of Intervention PLW Description of interventions and credit provision No. of livestock or areas No of farmers No of PAs M F Total Genetic improvement Introduction of improved (exotic and local) breeds (sheep, cattle) Fogera Pure Fogera breed (re) introduced through private bull service for large ruminant dairy development 4 bulls 4 - 4 2 Holstein/Friesian breed introduced through private bull service 2 2 2 2 A domestic sheep breed called Washera breed introduced through community ram service Initially 3 rams were introduced , now hybrid of this breed reached over 90 3 - 3 2 Metema Borena bulls introduced through private bull service and AI for large ruminant meat production 4 bulls and 45 cows served with AI 4 - 4 2 Alaba Facilitated the introduction of Holstein Frisian breed for dairy through credit 10 cows 9 1 10 1 Alamata Begait breed introduced for large ruminant dairy development . 40 (now 57) 33 7 40 8 Jersey and Holstein breed introduced using AI service and with estrus synchronization prior to AI service. 29 Livestock Feed Forage seed production system Alaba Forage seed multiplication was demonstrated for rural dairy group 54 cows (of which 24 are exotic) 28 2 30 1 Meiso Elephant grass, pigeon pea, cow pea, buck wheat, lucenea, moringa planted on farmers field to establish farmer to farmer forage seed/planting material exchange -FTCs were planted with different forage species (Sesbania, TL, Lucinia) to serve as demonstration site and serve as a source of planting materials - 50 9 Fodder species introduction Fogera Napier grass for backyard forage development introduced 0.5 ha 7 1 8 4 Bure Seeds of Vetch, Cow pea, Oat, Napier grass and Rhodes 0.5 ha 8 0 8 4 40 distributed to farmers for backyard forage development for dairy and fattening Metema Elephant grass cutting and bana grass supplied for backyard forage development 500 cuttings 3 1 3 1 Alaba Desho grass, lablab, oats and Rhodes grass introduced for urban dairy group, private nursery and FTC 2.5 ha 10 1 11 3 Ada Elephant grass supplied to farmers and FTCs 300m2 2 - 2 2 Dale Falaris and Desho grass introduced at FTC and farmers field - 85 14 99 3 Alamata Cowpea, lablab, Alfalfa, pigeon pea and Rhodes grass and sun hemp introduced first in FTCs then seeds/cuttings distributed to farmers 100kg of cow pea, 20 kg of pigeon pea, .25 kg of Buffle grass and 600 cuttings of elephant grass. Farmers intercropped cow pea in 35 ha land 18 7 Astbi Demonstration of three accessions of improved Napier grass , Desmanthus vigratus, Medicago sativa, Chloris gayana, Sesbania sesban, Casia struttii, Sesbania, Sesbania sesban, Eragrosis curvula introduced in farmers field, FTCs and nursery cites. Phalaris, Rhodes,Tagasaste and sesbania have been also planted to rehabilitate sloping lands and as a source of cut and carry feed for livestock 6991 cuttings 4.5 kg, 50 poly bags, and 8 bunches The cuttings are planted in 7 FTCs and 826 farmers have planted about 28,000 cuttings. Now the 7 FTCs have started providing planting materials to farmers. Meiso Tree legumes ( Sesbania, Leucena, Morenga) and Herbaceous legumes ( Cow pea, buck wheat, Siratro, Axillaries, Pigeon pea, stylosanthes seca, S. hamata and S. gramme, Silver leaf and Green leaf desmodiums) introduced at farmers field and FTCs in 15 PAs. Grazing area improvement Fogera Promoted eradication of Amecela weed which infested grazing lands, oversaw grazing lands with grass and legumes forage species and introduce community management of grazing land for cut and carry system. 17 ha 1138 159 1297 5 Alaba Grazing land improvement by planting Elephant grass strip demonstrated for women fattening group 269 sheep & goat - 21 21 1 Astbi Introduce area closure with cut and carry feeding system and enrich/develop grazing area at bottomlands .the response of grazing lands to fertilizer application was also demonstrated in 4 PAs. 682 ha and 2348 TLU 4553 households 13 Astbi Enrich/develop degraded sloppy lands with improved grasses (Phalaris and Rhodes) and forage legumes (Tree Lucrne and Sesbania) 448 ha & 2176.8 TLU 1251 households 8 Astbi Establishment of Napier grass along the irrigated canals, river banks and gullies. 28,881 Napir grass cuttings 826 households 13 Alamata Previously swampy area reclaimed and adaptability of forage species is tested on part of the reclaimed land in two PAs 41 2 Hay making Bure Baler is introduced for hay making as a demonstration material in two PAs Metema Felch for grass cutting is introduced as a demonstration material and demonstration was conducted. 120 3 123 9 Astbi Baler and donkey pulled cart were introduced for hay making as a demonstration material in four PAs Alaba Demonstration of hay making and urea treatment 450 goats 50 - 50 2 Chopping cereal Stover Metema Stover chopper is introduced as a demonstration material Meiso Stover chopper introduced as a demonstration material. 52 5 Urea treatment of straw/Stover Bure Urea treatment of crop residues demonstrated in 7 PAs to encourage year round fattening Bure Urea treatment is demonstrated to 16 members (2 female) of Bure –Damot dairy cooperatives in one PA Fogera Urea treatment demonstrated for dairy farmers in 7 PAs. Milk increment of 1 lit/day reported by participant farmers Metema Urea treatment of straw demonstrated to 82 farmers(13 female) in 9 PAs Ada Urea treatment of straw demonstrated. Meiso Urea treatment is demonstrated for 36 farmers (all male) in 7 PAs. Introduction of supplements Metema Rice bran as animal feed promoted 2 Alaba UMB production demonstrated 354 kg produced 2 - 2 1 Meiso MUB, ULB and MUM is introduced for dairy and fattening About 100 farmers in 10 PAs are believed to use MUB to support fattening. Gomma Cotton seed meal from oil factory, which used to be transported to other areas previously, is introduced for small ruminant fattening group as a supplementary feed. 600 kg 34 86 120 1 Improved animal management practices Stall feeding practice Metema Large ruminant fattening using cut and carry system with improved housing, health and feeding system promoted through training, facilitating linkage and follow up advisory service. A group of 40 people with HIV in Woreda town also enrolled in fattening business. 404 148 3 151 + 40 13 +1 Bure Sheep fattening using improved feeding and handling practice with credit promoted 22 21 - 21 1 Large ruminant fattening using improved feeding, health and management practice promoted using credit fund 5 100 105 7 Fogera Stall feeding, improved housing and disease control promoted for large ruminant fattening with the support of IPMS credit. 46 7 - 7 3 Alamata Better feed management and utilization practice promoted in 5 PAs. Farmers trained in improved fattening package and encouraged to practice fattening by providing credit. 120 farmers 2 Gomma Small ruminant fattening using improved feeding, housing and health promoted, using community based insurance system with 600 sheep 34 86 120 1 42 credit Meiso The use of shade and stall feeding for large ruminant fattening promoted 1500 30 Ada Fattening using improved feeding, housing and health control promoted with credit. 6 Alaba Peri-urban dairy group organized to promote improved dairy management practice 30 30 1 Improved housing Metema Model site for improved housing established at farmers site. 11 1 1 Ada Improved housing promoted among women dairy farmers. 82 44 3 47 6 Disease control Alaba Community animal health service provision introduced with provision of credit. The six paravets are giving service in 22 PAs Meiso Para vets were trained, certified by OoPRD / Regional Vet. Laboratory and started operating after purchasing the necessary vet. kit But not all are effective (see input supply below) 18 - 18 9 PAs 3.2.1b: Input supply supply/credit interventions Input supply supply/credit interventions PLW Description intervention and credit provision No. of service/ input providers Quantity of inputs/services sold* Unit price** PAs covered No of buyers of inputs and services M F Other T Forage seed distribution/sale system Alaba Private forage seed distribution system through forage seed shopkeeper introduced & supported with credit 1 138 kg of seed sold (April- June) - - - - - Meiso Farmers to farmers forage seed and 20 260 kg10 3-8 birr11 10 PAs 50 10 OoPRD 61 10 100 kg of cow pea, 10 kg of Pigeon pea, 30 kg of Sesbania and Lucenea, 10 kg of Moringa, 10 kg of Rhodes grass, 100 bundles of sweet potato and 100 kg of Buck Wheat 11 Cow pea= 4birr/kg, Pigeon Pea=3 birr/kg, Lucenea and Sesbania = 4 birr/kg, Moringa =8birr/kg, sweet potato= 5 birr/bundle 43 planting material supply system facilitated for seeds of sesbania, lucena, moringa, cowpea, buck wheat and rhodes grass Forage seed distribution/sale system at FTC FTCs in Astbi, Alamata, Fogera, Bure, Ada, Meiso , Alaba and Dale provide planting materials of fodder species. (See fodder species introduction above) MUB/UMB sale system Alaba Private UMB sale system introduced 2 478 kg UMB sold 5.5 birr/kg 18 PAs - 359- 359 Meiso Private input supply system of MUB established12 3 200kg 4 birr/kg 10 PAs 10 5 - 15 Privatized bull services (exotic and local) Fogera Private bull station established both for local and exotic breed 4 16 5 5 - - - - Fogera Community ram service without charge , farmers reported higher birth weight of lambs (5-7 kg) than the local sheep breeds (3-4kg) About 90 hybrids were born Metema Private bull station established 4 Haven’t yet started giving service Alamata Private bull service 1 From Mar. 2007 – Sept. 2007 177 cows got bull service l 50 birr 4 Ada Private bull station established 2 2 12 At the time of the monitoring vist two of the shops were closed. 44 Ada Training and introducing private AI system 2 2 But they are not functioning as they find it difficult to get AI. Paravet animal health service system Alaba Paravet system introduced 4897 animals treated 24 252 various types of drugs supplied to users by paravets 6 6 paravets located in 6 PAs but give service to 22 other PAs - - - - Meiso Paravets have started giving services to surrounding farmers. Out of the trained 18, 10 have started giving service but only two are effectively operating in 4 PAs 9 PAs - - - - Community based drug supply system Fogera Community based integrated Trypanosomaiasis control system established in 6 PAs. The system involves farmers network for the use of trap net, pour-on chemical and other anti-parasitic and profilactic drugs.240 trap nets used in different villages and farmers reported decreased population of biting flies. Animal input supply shops (drugs, concentrates) Bure Three farmer- trader provide industrial byproduct (wheat bran and Nough cake) to fattening groups 1 10 qt 250 2 45 3.2.1c: Marketing Interventions Bure: • IPMS/OoARD provided weekly market price information for small and large ruminant, milk and milk product and other commodities. The information is collected by IPMS and distributed to all PAs through SMSs. OoARD staff has gradually started to involve in organizing market information data. • A fattening cooperative (Andinet animal production, fattening and marketing cooperative) was formed. The Cooperative has a total member of 105 farmers found in 7 PAs. The cooperative got credit (465,000 birr) and members participated in year round fattening. Marketing linkage was created with a military camp and a cooperative in Gonder and preliminary agreement was reached to use trade license of the Gonder cooperative to export animals to the Sudan. • Market linkage is also formed with Birsheleko military camp and farmers have started selling their animals to the camp. • A small ruminant fattening group of 16 female farmers were facilitated in Fetam Sentom PA. 11 got credit from office of Women’s affair of the Woreda. • 41 people ( 3 female) were organized and formed Bure- Damot milk development and marketing cooperative ; the coop got o credit for purchase of cart, horse and refrigerator to improve marketing of products Fogera: • Marketing of fattened animals is facilitated through one of the farmers who had contact with traders linked with Sudan’s Market. • In previous year IPMS/OoARD facilitated the establishment of two dairy cooperatives at Amedber and Woreta town. IPMS/OoARD provided training, and conducted market promotion. These cooperatives have continued collection and processing and marketing of milk and milk products. The cooperative at Woreta Town is well functioning; it constructed its own shop and increased supply of milk to 100 lt/day (from 60 lt/day previously). The cooperatives at Amedber weakened due to marketing and internal management problems. Metema: 46 A fattening cooperative is under establishment in one PA (kokit). Meiso: • Market committee established at OoPRD used to provide market information by phone on demand. However this activity is stopped currently as it is taken up by Public Relation and Information Desk of the Woreda, which started broadcasting market information using radio broadcast. • Animal fare is organized to promote fattening activities within the Woreda and encourage livestock traders to come to the Woreda. After this activity, farmers and DAs reported that the number of traders coming to the market has increased and it has also motivated farmers to engage in cattle fattening. • Animal weighting service demonstrated at market place for small ruminant producers. So that they are informed about the weight of their animals and negotiate effectively with buyers. • Market linkage is created with ELFORA and small ruminant fattening groups • The establishment of fattening cooperatives facilitated to increase negotiation power large and small ruminant fattening farmers o In Tokuma PA, 14 farmers (all male) formed market group for large ruminant fattening, another market group also formed in Gode Chele and in Chacole PA two market groups with 30 members formed and strengthened. • Market linkage is created with Modjo Abators for small ruminant fattening group in Agamsa chali PA with 22 farmers. Even though they haven’t started selling animals to the abattoir , they manage to sell animals so far through local assemblers. • Milk collection group established at Gorbu which sell 50-100 litter a day established Ada: • The previously formed linkage between farmers in Denkaka PA and Ada Dairy Cooperative is functioning well. Milk collection farmers’ continued to supply milk on daily basis. Alamata: A dairy cooperative (Desta milk marketing cooperative) established by OoARD/IPMS in 2005 with initial membership of 20 individuals have continued its activity. In 2007 membership increased to 135 individuals with an average daily milk collection of 120 liters. 47 3.2.2 Apiculture: 3.2.2a Production interventions Type of intervention PLW Description of the intervention and provision of credit no, areas No of farmers No of PAs M F T Introduction of modern hive/ beekeeping methods Alaba Use of modern beehive and nuclei box promoted using credit fund for 15 individuals (7 female) in 2 PAs for the purchase of 45 beehives and nuclei boxes. However due to the wider effort to promote modern apiculture in the Woreda the number of modern beehives in the Woreda has increased. Astbi Modern apiculture promoted among 38 landless youth (4 female) for the purchase of 114 colonies. Promotion of modern beehive, bee forage development, and other modern apiculture methods was conducted together with training and follow-up services. The effort believed to improve productivity by 100% and increase the number of modern beehives significantly. Introduction of transitional hive/beekeeping methods Bure Transitional beehive is demonstrated 3 2 - 2 2 Ada Transitional beehive is supplied to farmers with credit 21 9 2 11 3 Introduction of bee feed (fodder, sugar, other) Alaba Lenorous , year round flowering bee forage and Trelucerne, Pahacelia and local bee forages introduced at farmers field and also planted in two FTCs. A number of farmers in 5 PAs reported that they planted this forage on their backyard. Astbi Bee forage enrichment at 1129 ha of grazing area and 3.4 ha of homestead land promoted. Farmers reported allocating plot for bee forage is new practice in the PLW Production of colonies Fogera Farmers trained the technique of colony splitting and trained farmers started colony production using the technique of queen splitting 18 3 21 4 Bure farmers trained and started colony production using the technique of queen splitting 6 colonies 3 - 3 2 Astbi Techniques of colony splitting demonstrated and farmers started practicing it. Splits 126 colony to 126 66 6 Alaba Technique of colony production introduced using nuclei box, which is purchased by credit and trained farmers started practicing. 8 7 15 3.2.2b: Input Supply Interventions Type of intervention PLW Description of the intervention and provision of credit Private input supply system. Goma One private apiculture input supplier was strengthened in Agro town by providing credit. Wax sale system Alaba Farmer to farmer wax sales system started and about 500 sheets of wax reported to be sold through such 48 mechanism. Farmer to farmer bee forage seed sale system Alaba Farmer to farmer bee forage sale system promoted and farmers started selling bee forage seed to other farmers and OoARD at a price of 50 birr/kilo Astbi Bee forage species planted at FTCs are being distributed to farmers in 15 PAs New input supply service function of OoARD for production and processing Alaba 3 Wax printer machine and 3 honey extractor introduced as a demonstration material. Fogera Honey extractor provided as a demonstration material 3.2.2c: Marketing Interventions: Bure: • IPMS/OoARD provided weekly market price information for honey. The information is collected by IPMS and distributed to all PAs through SMSs. OoARD staff has gradually started to involve in organizing market information data. • Previously dysfunctional beekeepers cooperative (Kokeb bee product marketing cooperative), with 48 members (all men), became operational after advisory and training services were given for its members and officials. The cooperative collected 400 kg of honey (@ 20 birr/kg) and sold (@ 23 birr/kg) from members. o As a result of the market linkages created with Bersheleko Military Camp and Bure ATVET College, the cooperative sold about 253 kg honey in one season. o It is linked with Zembaba Union which is found in Bahirdar. The union is agreed to buy honey form the cooperative at higher price. Negotiation is also underway to consider the cooperative as member of the Union. o The cooperative is also linked with a private honey exporter; sample of honey is given to assess the quality. If quality is assured, the honey will be exported to Saudi Arabia. Astbi: o Market linkage was created with farmers in Astbi and honey traders and processors in major towns. Telephone number of traders collected and shared with producers. Experts and farmers reported this intervention contributed to increased price of honey. o Linkage was created with Dima, a private company with mobile honey processing centrifuge Alaba: o Price information on honey is collected and disseminated in three main market sites (Kulito, Besheno and Guba) using billboards. o 3 wax printer and honey extractors operated by OoARD o Linkage was created with honey processors, but since the price is lower than the local market farmers are selling locally. 49 50 3.2.3 Fish ? Improved fishing practice promoted through training and organizing farmers in to fishing groups for fishermen in two PAs. 49 fishermen grouped in to seven groups and provided with modern boat and fishing equipment for each group with credit. Two of the groups also got additional credit for the purchase of outboard engine. In terms of marketing intervention, market linkage was made with Bahirdar fishery production and Marketing Corporation. The cooperation signed agreement with farmers on transportation and payment issues and farmers have started supplying fish to the cooperation. Market linkage was also made with private traders in Gonder, who latter opened branch collection center in Woreta Town. 51 3.2.4 Poultry 3.2.4 a: Production Interventions Production/credit interventions PLW Description of the interventions and provision of credit No. of birds No of farmers No of PAs M F T Production of chicks from hatcheries Bure Demonstration of local incubator 3 0 3 1 Alaba Water and charcoal hatcheries demonstrated 100 18 1 19 2 Production of pullets Dale Farmers based pullet production system demonstrated among a women group of 79 (and one male)in 5 PAs with credit. The group trained about modern apiculture development including feeding, health and housing issues. Hay box brooder and runner introduced. Women got 4000 day old chicken and sold the pullets at 3-5 months of age. The group also linked with poultry feed suppliers Improved housing system Alaba Demonstration of improved housing using a model house constructed 100 pullets and cockerels 9 1 10 1 Improved feeding system for egg and meat production Alaba Improved poultry feed production method introduced 247 pullets and cockerels and 135 chicken 23 1 24 3 Improved disease control Alaba The paravets also give service for poultry 3.2.4 b: Input supply Interventions Input supply supply/credit interventions Description intervention and credit provision No. of service/ input providers Quantity of inputs/services sold Unit price PAs covered Distribution and sales of chicks and pullets Dale Farmers’ based pullet production and distribution system established with credit 80 Raised 3584 pullets and sold to egg producers in urban & peri- urban areas. 50 17 PAs and Yirgalem and Awasa towns. 496 individuals (105 female) and one Ngo purchased the pullets. Para vet service provision Bure Three youth organized for modern poultry production, 1 52 facilitated supply of improved breeds and are in preparation stage to provide day old chickens for the community in Bure Feed/drug input suppliers Improved feed/supplement introduced through two private shop owners. 2 23.5 kg 4 birr/kg 29 farmers in 6 PAs purchased the feed. 3.2.4c: Marketing interventions • 16 women in one PA organized for local chicken rearing and marketing in Bure • 80 individuals (79 women) organized as pullet producers. Pullet marketing was advertised through FM and Sidama radio. Linkage with potential buyers /governmental and nongovernmental organizations /was facilitated through direct contact. 53 4. Research The expected outcome of the research component are strategies, policy and technology options and institutional innovations developed both from research and lessons learned, documented and promoted in order to enhance market-oriented agricultural development. Approaches, methods, tools and processes developed, documented and promoted for knowledge management, capacity building, commodity development, gender, HIV/AIDS and environment are the expected outputs of the research component. The project conducted/sponsored studies on various subjects since its inception. These studies were conducted by the project staff, consultants and researchers from EARS on topics related to priority commodities and cross cutting issues. In addition, graduate and attachment students have also contributed by conducting studies across the ten PLWs. To improve the involvement of RARIs, a MoU was signed with regional research institutes that provided collaborating research institutions a framework for conducting participatory community based action research. all in all, 156 studies have been finalized by the project staff, consultants, researchers and students by the end of 2008. (Table 4:1) Table 4:1 Number of Completed Studies (up to end of 2008) PLW No. of Completed studies Ada 18 Alaba 19 Alamata 15 Astbi 17 Bure 5 Dale 20 Fogera 19 Goma 3 Meiso 13 Metema 20 54 Other 7 Total 156 The completed studies covered various topics in areas of production, marketing, extension, innovation, gender, HIV/AIDS, environment and knowledge management. 65% of these studies cover production and marketing of priority commodities, while gender and HIV/AIDS related studies make up 16 %. In an effort made to disseminate research findings, the project published and distributed 13 of the completed studies as working paper of the project to libraries and WKCs of RARIs, BoARDs and OoARDS. Similarly reports on 23 completed studies have been presented on national and international conferences and submitted to be published as part of conference proceedings. Graduate students who have been sponsored by the project have presented major findings of their research to PLW staff. Copies of research reports of consultants, attachment and graduate students were also made available at WKCs. However, interviewed BoARD/OoARD stated that, even though they believe in the relevance of topics of IPMS facilitated studies to solve local problems feedback they get on research results concerning their PLWs/region was minimal. Apart from students’ presentations of their findings to a small number of audience at PLW level and occasional project staff/consultant presentations of research reports during workshops, local staff do not have other opportunities to get summaries of main findings. There is also no other mechanism to provide an abridged version of major research results tailored to PLW staff. In general unlike the previous year involvement of regional research institutes has improved after the MoU was signed. The MoU have influenced research teams to modify their approaches to include other partners (mainly OoARD staff) for participatory community based action researches. However failure to implement research proposals according to agreed time table and procedure were reported for some studies. 55 Researchers’ engagement in the BPR process and logistic bottlenecks were mentioned as the main problems by researchers. However, limited experience of researchers in conducting community based action research could also have contributed for the reported delay. 56 5. Summary and Conclusion The project has achieved various levels of results in four of its components: knowledge management, capacity building, commodity development and research. In knowledge management, the project undertook activities to identify knowledge gaps, capture knowledge, develop and enhanced knowledge sharing mechanism and establish ICT network and infrastructures. The expected outputs of the project knowledge management component are increased understanding and awareness of the knowledge requirement for managing the new commodities, establishment of enhanced (IT based or non-IT based) knowledge sharing system and increased availability of knowledge in various forms These outputs have and will contribute to the expected outcome of knowledge management, which is to have functional agricultural knowledge management system, interconnected and utilized at all levels, employing innovations and appropriate technologies. These outputs are discussed in detail below. As a primary output of the knowledge management project, enhanced IT based and non- IT based knowledge sharing systems were established at different levels. At the Federal level, a web based central repository of information called ‘Ethiopian Agricultural Portal (EAP)’ has been established. The EAP is accessible to the public and is populated with relevant documents collected from various sources. At regional BoARDs and RARIs as well as Zonal OoARD establishment of mirror sites to allow offline access to the contents of the portal is under way in the third year of the project. The Woreda Knowledge centers that were established previously are functioning in all PLWs, except Meiso and Metema where lack of conducive room and personnel to look after WKCs were identified to be deterrents. At PA level, model FTCs were selected and were supplemented with knowledge management tools and methodologies to convert them into knowledge centers. The effort to broaden FTCs’ role in knowledge sharing has equipped model FTCs with audiovisual 57 equipment, ICT tools, access to internet where possible and generators where there is no electricity. The delivery of these equipment has only been partially completed due to security issues at some FTCs. Other physical demonstration materials, printed materials and a few CDs/VCD are also available. In addition, plots are used as live learning sites to demonstrate various crop/forage species, improved agronomic and husbandry practices as well as innovative soil and water conservation techniques. Up to September 2008, 625 non-IT innovative knowledge sharing approaches which promote linkage among partners through connection of actors were conducted across the PLWs in the form of demonstration, study tours, seminars, workshops, platform meetings, field visits and exhibitions. These events have brought together a total of 31,249 male and female farmers and staff from the private and public sectors. Even though IPMS took the lead in most of these events, OoARDs initiation and participation was reported in most of the PLWs. Some have even started to take the initiative to organize such events with their own resources. It should be noted that these mechanisms are not totally new to PLWs, but the approaches they were conducted in terms of frequency, focus, source of knowledge, etc made them different from the previous times. Increased availability of knowledge in various forms is another important output of the project. The above mentioned and other capacity building interventions have contributed to increased availability of knowledge in various forms. Quantitative analysis of year 3 M & E data showed that farmers’ access to information about production, input supply, credit and marketing information of priority commodities is higher in intervention PAs than in non-intervention PAs. Not only access is improved but also quality of information was found to be higher in PAs where IPMS works. While comparing intervention PAs with Non-intervention PAs, Improvement was also observed in terms of: o Diversity of source of information - In all the PLWs the most important source of extension information is still DA/OoARD, but farmers in intervention PAs named additional sources such as NGOs/CBOs and research centers. o Diversity of Information type - farmers in non-intervention PAs mainly got information on production technology, whereas farmers in intervention 58 PAs also got more information about input supply, credit and marketing of commodities. o Diversity of form in which information is delivered/received - Even though oral/lecture remained the main form of information delivery for farmers in both intervention and non-intervention PAs, other forms of information delivery like demonstration, printed material, and audio-visual aids have become more evident in intervention PAs. The third important output of the project is increased understanding and awareness of the knowledge requirement for managing the new commodities. Farmers now have increased awareness regarding the need of information about production technologies, input supply options, credit and marketing issues. Results of the M & E data showed that farmers in intervention PAs asked for more information than those farmers in non-intervention PAs. Officials of OoARD in different PLWs have also recognized the need to support the various knowledge management tools and approaches and have supported the project’s knowledge management efforts. The expected outcome of the outputs of knowledge management mentioned above is the institutionalization of functional knowledge management system established at PLW level. Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the M & E data showed that the desired changes to institutionalize functional knowledge management system have been realized in part in all PLW in various degrees. The M & E findings indicated that the utilization of the various enhanced knowledge management systems at different levels. The EAP and the MoARAD e-mail system have become operational at the federal level, with EAP now accessible to any one with internet connection. Staff of the federal MoARD has also started using the e-mail system for communication. Similarly, improved use of the services of the WKCs is recorded at Woreda level. OoARD staff use WKCs as a center for self development by reading/borrowing materials, browsing internet/CDs, and organizing other knowledge sharing events such as seminars and workshops. To a lesser extent, computers are also 59 used to write office reports and to store some basic data relating to the Woreda, indicating the beginning of a shift from reporting and keeping data on paper to a computerized database. However, the use of FTCs as a center of knowledge sharing within PA by using ICT and audio-video tools has hardly began during year three at PA level. The main reasons for this are identified as delay in delivery of the facilities to PAs, lack electric power at the FTCs, and low level of DAs’ IT literacy. However, FTCs have started using other demonstration materials provided by the project during farmers’ training. They also use their plots to demonstrate various crop/forage species, improved agronomic and husbandry practices as well as innovative soil and water conservation structures as mentioned previously. Usefulness of the other non-IT knowledge sharing approahes is also reported by participating farmers, DAs and experts. As indicated in the main report the various knowledge sharing events influenced participating farmers, DAs and experts to test production, input supply and marketing innovations to their own settings. Aside from appreciating the benefits of such knowledge sharing mechanisms, some level of institutionalization is observed in terms of the OoARDs supporting knowledge sharing mechanisms and also organizing knowledge sharing events with their own resources. All in all, the knowledge management component of the project has registered the outputs and outcomes stated above. However, one should note that these achievements are not at the same level in all PLWs or even in all PAs of the same PLW. Moreover, the problems mentioned are not equally important in all PLWs. However, the following are common problems that need attention of the concerned. Despite improved utilization of WKC facilities, shortage of relevant printed and electronic materials (especially in national or local languages), frequent failure of computers in the WKC and lack of local capacity to maintain them and weak linkage with domestic and foreign knowledge generating institutions are some of the problems observed. Both IPMS and OoARD need to strengthen the effort to solve these problems. Linking WKC with research centers, universities and subscribing to free newsletters and 60 magazines related to market oriented agricultural development should be considered. Most of the Woredas have assigned individuals to look after the WKC, but they lack the training required. The use of FTCs as a hub for knowledge sharing is at an early stage and the recorded achievements are not consistent across all PAs. Although availability of printed materials is on the rise, it still falls far short of the needed amount in language and relevance at DA levels. Delivery of ICT and audio-video equipment is delayed in most PAs and utilization of the facilities hardly began in those who have received the equipments. Low level of computer literacy of DAs and shortage/lack of appropriate CD/VCDs are the major problems which hinder efficient use of the facilities. Priority should be given to training DAs on how to use ICT, promote the use of TV/DVDs by providing CD/VCDs appropriate for farmers, including finding a means for providing maintenance for computers and other ICT equipment. As pointed above OoARD staff participation in using and organizing knowledge sharing events is encouraging, but their involvement in knowledge gap assessment and capturing is low. Skill development in areas of data collection and analysis and preparation of data entry forms are two areas that deserve attention. The major outputs of the capacity building component of the project are development of collaborative network arrangements among actors and increased awareness, knowledge and skill of farmers, individuals from the private sector, and public sector staff. In this regard the project organized various short term trainings in specific technical and social subjects which benefited 4557 farmers, 202 individuals from community based or private organizations, and 1896 public sector staff. Similarly 97 public sector staff members that have been sponsored for their MSc./DVM/BSc. have graduated by 2008. As a result of these capacity building efforts and other knowledge management efforts, increased knowledge and skill was recorded among farmers, private sector and public sector staff. Farmers who directly participated in IPMS facilitated intervention and those who took part in farmer-to-farmer knowledge sharing or attended successive trainings 61 given by DAs/SMSs showed significant improvement in knowledge and skill in production, input supply and marketing of crop or livestock enterprise. Though it is difficult to measure the level of knowledge and skill that has resulted due to all the interventions, the monitoring team noted an improvement in knowledge and skill by observing farmers’ practices in translating knowledge into action. Farmers involved in direct or indirect capacity building interventions were seen applying the acquired knowledge and skill to managing their farms. Improvement in the private sector was evident in input suppliers and cooperatives/unions that have used the incremental knowledge by entering into market-oriented production, input supply and marketing activities. Likewise, public sector staff members have reported that the various knowledge management and capacity building activities have helped them to improve their knowledge and skills, which they are using in two ways. DAs/SMS reported that they have started using the acquired technical knowledge to train farmers/DAs in non- intervention PAs, and are now incorporating the various innovations promoted by IPMS in their annual plans and have started to scale out innovations in new PAs. The report also discussed linkages and collaborative institutional arrangement that were formed to promote collaboration and coordination among actors. In this regard WALC and RALC were established at Woreda and Region levels respectively, and partner linkages and commodity platforms that prompted multi-stakeholders action formed for various commodities across the PLWs. Other partnership arrangements, mainly bilateral linkages between farmers and other input suppliers, traders, researchers and financing institutions, that promote collaboration and coordination among relevant actors in the value chain were also formed. These linkages are mainly initiated by IPMS/OoARD to facilitate knowledge sharing, and jointly test innovative production, input supply, credit and marketing activities. 62 While the establishment of these institutional arrangements is reported as an output level result, the extent of linkage and coordination among actors and farmers’ satisfaction of the extension service were seen as indicators of outcome of capacity development, which is strengthened innovative capacity of farmers, private and public sector organizations. The established WALCs and RALCs are functioning well in all PLWs and Regions except Meiso, where problems of working together were reported by members of WALC. The previously observed problem of a low level of awareness of WALC members about the project’s objective and approach in the past year has shown significant progress. Members reported greater involvement of WALC in project planning and implementing. They also reported about the greater planning flexibility WALC got following the decision made towards the end of year 3, which gave WALCs the opportunity to manage their own budget. The learning function of WALC has also progressed significantly from the previous year as they now meet regularly and conduct periodic field visits. In the contrary, RALCs in all four regions were weak and their role is limited to approving the annual plans of PLWs. This came about due to RALC members’ inability to conduct the regular meeting and review project progress collectively because of their engagement in the extended BPR process during the year. However, chairpersons of RALC stated that they were following project progress individually with RDOs through informal settings. The different linkage arrangements and commodity platforms that were established across the PLWs showed mixed results in playing their role in promoting coordination and learning. Some of these arrangements facilitated the joint action of stakeholders to solve specific problems along the value chain. However, most of the initial commodity platforms were weak or have ceased to exist as permanent institutional arrangements. But many agree that the experience gained from platform approach has made working with ad-hoc committee commonplace in most PLWs. These ad-hoc committees don’t have permanent structures and draw as stakeholders from different disciplines and are mostly established to solve marketing or input supply problems for a particular season. 63 Finally, quantitative analysis of year 3 M & E data showed that farmers’ satisfaction with the extension service they got for the selected priority commodities was higher in intervention PAs than non-intervention PAs. The following are some observations regarding capacity development interventions: ? Except in Tigray region, DAs were frequently transferred to other PAs, a fact which has both a positive and negative impact on the project’s objective. DAs who have limited exposure to a particular innovation from non-intervention PAs are transferred to intervention PAs or vice versa. Even though such cases positively contributed to the scaling out of innovation into non-intervention PAs, it also hampered continuity and expansion of some innovations in the interventions PAs. In this regard, interventions whose capacity building efforts included other DAs from potential PAs beyond the immediate intervention PAs were not so much affected since the newly assigned DAs would have the necessary exposure. Similarly, even though the horizontal and vertical transfer of SMSs who benefited from short term and long term capacity building efforts may hamper the realization of their contribution in their PLW, they will contribute to the scaling out and up process of project approaches. ? Platforms are mostly initiated by IPMS staff and the involvement of actors other than IPMS and OoARD is low. Nurturing the participation of other stakeholders especially from the private sector and building their capacities to effectively participate in these arrangements should be considered. ? Capacity building efforts, which increased knowledge and skill of participants, were now better linked with commodity development efforts, which facilitated conducive conditions to transform knowledge in to action, which is an improvement as compared to the findings in the previous year’s M & E report. According to SMSs, proper targeting of training participants and preparation of action plans at the end of trainings were reasons to this improvement. 64 ? Capacity development interventions provided to cooperatives/unions is shallow and mostly limited to technical matters, giving advisory service and promoting linkage with relevant actors. However, OoARD and CBO officials pointed out the need of capacitating CBOs’ officials in issues of leadership, organizational and business management. Similar problems, though to a lesser extent, are also seen in the capacity building efforts towards private input suppliers. The outcome of the commodity development component of the project is the adoption of appropriate technologies, innovative input supply, output marketing and financial services in order to improve agricultural productivity and market success in the PLWs. Establishment of ten PLWs that are strategically linked to the priorities of the Woreda & Regional Development Plans; and promotion of appropriate technologies, processes and institutional innovations are the two major outputs that contribute to the above mentioned outcome. In addition to the previously established 8 PLWs, Goma and Bure PLWs were established in Oromia and Amhara Regional States. Annual work plans of the PLWs were developed in close collaboration with OoARD staff and approved by the respective WALC & RALC. According to WALC and RALC officials, the annual plans are in line with the overall government objective of market oriented agricultural development. However, IPMS/OoARD plan differs from the regular OoARD plan in the approach they employ to meet objectives. According OoARD/BoARD officials IPMS/OoARD plans employ participatory, value chain approach to develop few marketable commodities. Moreover, the plan emphasizes to knowledge management and capacity building interventions to support development of selected commodities. It was also reported that, in addition to using the inputs of various stakeholders, the IPMS/OoARD approach gave a room for various production, input supply and marketing innovations. The project together with its partners identified and introduced technological, organizational and institutional innovations for production, input supply, and marketing 65 of crop and livestock commodities. Some of these interventions in production, input supply and marketing were with provision of credit while others were without credit. The major production interventions for crop commodities include introduction of farmers’ based seed/seedling production system, introduction of crop varieties, introduction of on farm processing/storage technologies and introduction of improved management practices. 13 Input supply interventions for crop commodities were mainly focused on establishment of farmer based seed/seedling supply system, facilitation of private and/or cooperative input shops. Marketing interventions were mainly related to provision of market information and facilitation of market linkage. Similarly, innovative interventions were promoted for livestock commodities. Among production interventions, genetic improvement, livestock feed improvement and improved animal management practices were the major production interventions reported for small and large ruminants’ meat and dairy development. Production interventions for apiculture include introduction of modern/transitional hive, introduction of improved beekeeping methods, introduction of colony production technique, introduction of bee forage and supplementary bee feed. While introduction of improved fishing equipments together with improved fishing practice was the major production intervention for Fishery development, production of chicks from hatcheries, production of pullets, introduction of improved housing, feeding and disease control systems were the major production interventions for poultry development. In input supply, introduction of improved forage seed production system, introduction of chopping services, introduction of privatized bull service for local and exotic breeds, introduction of improved AI service, introduction of paravet system for improved animal health service and community based animal health control system were the major interventions for small and large ruminants’ meat and dairy development. Similarly input supply interventions for apiculture development focused on the establishment of farmer- 13 e.g improved land preparation methods, improved planting method, improved weed control method, improved soil and water conservation technology, improved pest and disease control and management methods etc 66 to-farmer bee forage seed sale system, wax and bee colony sale system. For Poultry the major input supply interventions were distribution and sale of chicks and pullets, introduction of paravet service and private feed/drug suppliers were the major input supply interventions. Marketing interventions for livestock focused on provision of market price information, facilitation of linkages for output marketing, introduction of processing techniques, and organizing marketing groups. Almost all of the innovations were initially introduced in selected farmers in one or few PAs mainly in demonstration form. The level of adoption in year 3 varies across various innovations and PLWs/PAs depending on several factors. Some of the innovations were newly introduced and were still at demonstration stage during year 3. Some of the innovations went beyond the initial stage of demonstration and adopted by a number of farmers in other PAs or other Woredas. On the contrary others were adopted only by the initial farmers or adopted by a small number of farmers or not adopted at all. The project has conducted studies on various topics by the project staff, consultants, researchers, attachment and graduate students. A total of 156 studies have been finalized by 2008. 65% of these relate to production and marketing of priority commodities, while gender and HIV/AIDS make up 16 % of the completed studies. To disseminate result of the studies, 13 of these completed studies have been published as working paper of the project and 23 submitted to conference proceedings. Graduate students presented major findings of their research to PLW staff and copies of research reports of consultants, attachment and graduate students were also made available at WKC. The report noted increased involvement of RARIs in conducting action research as compared to the past year. The MoU which was signed between IPMS and RARIs influenced researchers to include other partners in the research process for participatory community based action research. However, delay in implementation and finalization of research reports according to standard were reported due to the extended BPR process which kept researchers busy, logistic problems (especially vehicle) and possibly limited experience of researchers on community based action research. 67 Even though BoARD/OoARD staff believes that studies conducted/sponsored by IPMS have dealt on topics that are relevant to local situations, they reported limited awareness about findings of the completed studies and therefore; their relevance to solve local problems. Absence of other mechanisms (other than students’ presentations to PLW staff and project staff/consultants’ presentations during occasional workshops) that provide summaries of main findings and implications for local development is missing. Therefore designing of mechanisms that would help to provide an abridged version of major research results tailored to PLW staff needs to be considered. IPMS being a learning project, from the research component perspective information should be generated and synthesized about the innovations tested in the PLWs and shared across sites and with others through different means to allow learning from experience. Even though there were some instances of recording innovation history in some PLWs, studies on efficiency and effectiveness of innovations are limited. Tracking and documenting processes of innovation, synthesizing lessons learned and sharing within and outside PLWs should be key focus areas in the future. 68 69 Annex 1: Performance Measurement Framework Result Expectations Performance Indicators Data Sources Methods & Techniques of Data Collection Frequency of Data Collection Roles and Responsibility Impact: Improved agricultural productivity and production within functional market-oriented agricultural production systems in and beyond the PLWs. On the Right are Possible Performance Indicators for Post-Project Impact Assessment by External Evaluators: [Baseline; End-of-Project (EoP) targets; Fiscal Year (FY) targets; Six-month targets] (individuals or organizations from which the data is obtained) (what methods & techniques will be used to collect data) (how often does data have to be collected for management & reporting purposes) C – who collects data A – who analyzes data R – who reports on analyses D – who makes decisions if decisions are required 1. % of cultivated area under cash crops. 2. % increase in volume of each priority commodity, crop and/or livestock, which is sold. 3. % increase in volume of produce moving outside of the 10 PLWs and/or Woredas. 4. % increase of women’s share of commercial sales within households and/or communities. 5. Presence of soil and water conservation measures adopted by households. 6. % of crops grown with commercial varieties. 7. Presence of a reduction in risky behavior with respect to HIV/AIDS. 8. % increase in yield per hectare or milk per unit produced. 9. % increase of women in valued- added activities involving priority commodities. 10. Extent to which gender, HIV/AIDS and environment are integrated into the DAs’ activities and/or Annual Work Plans. Outcome # 1: Functional agricultural knowledge management system operationalized at Woreda & Federal levels, 1. Extent of utilization of knowledge-based approaches to developing marketable commodities. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - Communities (of farmers and/or pastoralists in PLWs. The same structure as used in the baseline survey will be used to establish group interviews) - Group Interviews - Project Year (PY) 3 - PY 5 (before Project completion) - Under the management of the IPMS Performance Measurement Officer (PMO), PM Assistants (PMAs) prepare data collection instruments in collaboration with RDOs, RDAs, and FAs. PMAs, under the PMO, will be responsible for the collection, analyzes and reports on data collected. - IPMS management and/or Steering Committee (SC) make decisions as required. 70 highlighting innovations and appropriate technologies. 2. Frequency of information exchange among Stakeholder institutions and organizations (including the private sector) at Woreda, Regional & Federal levels. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - Woreda level: OoARD, WALC, & NGOs - Regional level: BoARD & RALC Chairperson - Federal level: NALC - Private sector - Interviews - PY 3 - PY 5 - PMAs (PMAs will supervise and participate in data collection, analyzes and reports on data collected) 3. Usefulness of information received by farmers, institutions and organizations. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - Communities - Woreda level: OoARD & NGOs - Regional level: BoARD & RALC Chairperson - Federal level: NALC & MoARD - Group Interviews - Interviews (Interview questions need to define “usefulness”) - PY 3 - PY 5 - PMAs Outputs that contribute primarily to Outcome #1. Output # 1.1: Increased understanding and awareness of the knowledge requirements for managing the new commodities of farming systems in the PLWs. 1. Number of new types of inquiries by women and men farmers about different options for production and marketing of the new commodities. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - Communities - DAs - Group interviews - Interviews (and possible review of records or activity logs) - Annually, beginning in PY 2. - PMAs 2. Frequency of interface between Woreda OARD, Regional BoARD, MoARD, Regional & National Agriculture Research Institutions (RARIs and NARIs) & private sector. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - Office of Agriculture and Rural Development (OoARD) at Woreda level - Regional BoARD - Federal MoARD -Regional & National Agriculture Research Institutions (RARIs and NARIs) -Private sector - Interviews and/or document review for all data sources - Annually, beginning in PY 2. - PMAs 71 Output # 1.2: Increased availability of knowledge in various forms. 1. Number of knowledge assets (e.g., best practices, improved varieties and institutional innovations) made available to women and men farmers and to Woreda level organizations. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - Communities - DAs - Woreda OoARD - Group Interviews - Interviews and review of documents - Interviews - Annually, beginning in PY 2. - PMAs 2. Presence of ready access points (persons or tools) to information sources. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - FTCs - OoARD - BoARD or Planning Officer - MoARD - IPMS Office - Interviews - Interviews - Interviews - Interviews - Review Project records - Annually, beginning in PY 2. - PMAs Output # 1.3: Enhanced knowledge sharing systems established. 1. Extent of dissemination of available knowledge. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - Communities - Woreda OoARD - Woreda Knowledge Centre (WKC) - DAs - Group Interviews - Interviews - Interviews - Interviews and review of documents - Annually, beginning in PY 2. - PMAs 2. Frequency of knowledge sharing [e.g., at meetings, farmers’ days, FTCs, Communities of Practices, exhibitions, conferences as well as amongst various Stakeholder organizations (e.g., NALCs, RALCs, WALCs and private sector organizations]. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - FTCs - OoARD and/or WALC - BoARD and/or RALC - MoARD and/or NALC - Ethiopian Agricultural Research System (EARS) - Interview DAs - Interviews - Interviews and/or review records of WALC & RALC meetings - Interviews - Interviews and/or surveys - Annually, beginning in PY 2. - PMAs 72 Output # 1.4: National Agricultural Information Resource Centre (NAIRC) established & operationalized within MoARD. 1. Presence of a central repository of information on priority commodities that is easily accessible by Stakeholders. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - MoARD - BoARD - OoARD - Interviews and/or physical inspection - Interviews and/or physical inspection - Interviews and/or physical inspection PY 3 PY 5 - PMAs 2. Extent to which information available on priority commodities addresses issues of technology, extension services, credit information & services, marketing, & input supply. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - MoARD - BoARD - OoARD - Interviews - Interviews - Interviews PY 3 PY 5 - PMAs Output # 1.5: ICT networks and infrastructure established & operationalized. 1. Presence of ICT network & infrastructure established and operationalized at different levels. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - MoARD - BoARD - OoARD - IPMS Office - Interviews for all levels - Document reviews for all levels - Physical inspection for all levels - Document reviews - PY 3 - PY 5 - PMAs 2. Extent to which Woreda office personnel, women and men, are able to search for desired information at the NAIRC and from other relevant sources. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - MoARD - BoARD - OoARD - WKC - Interviews for all levels - Document reviews for all levels - Physical inspection for all levels - PY 3 - PY 5 - PMAs 73 Outcome # 2: Strengthened innovation capacity of farmers, pastoralists, community- based and private sector organizations, and agriculture and natural resource management public organizations to support the development of small-holder, market- oriented agricultural production systems. 1. Extent of coordination, linkages, activities and/or communications between actors. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - OoARD - IPMS Office - CBOs - Private sector organizations - EARS - NGOs - Interviews and/or review reports - Review 6 month activity reports - Interviews - Interviews - Review reports - Interviews - PY 3 - PY 5 - PMAs 2. Level of responsiveness of the extension system, including FTCs, to the needs of women and men farmers. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - Communities - DAs - OoARD - Group Interviews - Interviews & review Annual Work Plans - Interviews & review planning documents and reports - PY 3 - PY 5 - PMAs 3. Level of satisfaction of women and men farmers with the technical & institutional support they receive. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - Communities - Group Interviews - PY 3 - PY 5 - PMAs Outputs that contribute primarily to Outcome #2. Output # 2.1: Increased knowledge, awareness, understanding and skills of staff in public organizations, in the Ministry, and in Research & Educational institutions (including possible post- 1. Extent to which training courses incorporate participatory technology development skills, dissemination methods and cross-cutting themes of gender equality, environment and HIV/AIDS. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - TVETs instructors who were trained by the IPMS Project and who are now teaching. - DAs - Group and/or individual interviews - Interviews - Annually, beginning in PY 3. - PMAs 74 graduate candidates) to enhance their capacity to better respond to the needs of farmers (training in specific technical and social subjects such as: environmental studies, gender equality, HIV / AIDS, information and communication sciences, innovative extension, agronomy, marketing, and crops and animal production). 2. Extent to which staff in public organizations incorporate innovative methods in the provision of services to women and men farmers. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs Staff, men and women, in public organizations, such as: - OoARD - BoARD - MoARD - NARI (EARS) - DAs (TVET) - IPMS Office - Interviews and/or review of Work Plans and reports of public organizations. - Annually, beginning in PY 3. - PMAs 3. Level of satisfaction of women and men farmers & pastoralists with the services delivered to them by CBOs, public & private sector organizations. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - Communities - Group Interviews - Annually, beginning in PY 3. - PMAs 75 Output #2.2: Increased knowledge, awareness, understanding and skills of women and men farmers, pastoralists, and staff from Community- Based Organizations (CBOs) and from private- sector organizations serving the PLWs. 1. Level of awareness, knowledge and skills of farmers and pastoralists on specific technical and social subjects. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - Communities - CBOs - Private sector organizations - Group Interviews - Interviews - Interviews - Annually, beginning in PY 3. - PMAs Output # 2.3: Collaborative network arrangements between farmers, pastoralists, CBOs, public and private sector organizations developed to better respond to market demands on the use of demand-driven agricultural technologies and services. 1. Presence of functional institutional arrangements that promote collaboration and coordination amongst various actors. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs Heads of Bureaus and Sector Experts at: - OoARD - BoARD - MoARD - IPMS Office - Interviews at the Woreda, Regional and Federal levels. - Review of planning documents - Review reports - Annually, beginning in PY2. - PMAs 2. Extent to which these functional institutional arrangements promote collaboration and coordination amongst various actors in order to respond to and learn from market-oriented agricultural development. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - OoARD - BoARD - MoARD - Private sector organizations - RARIs - Document reviews focusing on, e.g., shared plans and activities - Interviews - Interviews & review documents - Annually, beginning in PY2. - PMAs 76 Outcome # 3: Appropriate technologies, innovative input supply – output marketing, and financial services adopted in order to improve agricultural productivity and market success in the PLWs. 1. Level of farmers’ adoption of technologies (products, methods and processes). Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - Communities - OoARD - PA Administration including DAs - Group Interviews - Interviews & review reports - Interviews - PY 3 - PY 5 - PMAs 2. Number of institutions providing innovative new agricultural support systems (e.g., extension, input supply, credit and marketing) Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - Communities - OoARD - PA Administration including DAs - Group Interviews - Interviews & review reports - Interviews - PY 3 - PY 5 - PMAs 3. Extent to which technologies are sensitive to gender, HIV/AIDS, environment and sustainability issues. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - Communities - OoARD - PA Administration including DAs - Group Interviews - Interviews & review reports - Interviews - PY 3 - PY 5 - PMAs Outputs that contribute primarily to Outcome #3. Output # 3.1: Ten PLWs established in four (4) regions that are strategically linked to the priorities of the Woreda & Regional Development Plans. 1. Ten PLWs with analyses or diagnoses and Annual Work Plans completed. Baseline: O PLWs Targets: EoP-10 & FYs - IPMS Office - Review completed Annual Work Plans Annually, beginning in PY 2. - PMAs 2. Extent to which PLWs’ Annual Work Plans are integrated with the priorities of the Woreda and Regional Development Plans. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - WALC Chairperson - RALC Chairperson - NALC Chairperson - IPMS office - Interviews and review Annual Work Plans of WALC, RALC & NALC - Review completed Annual Work Plans Annually, beginning in PY 2. - PMAs 77 Output # 3.2: Appropriate technologies, processes and institutional innovations identified & promoted. 1. Number of appropriate tech-nologies and processes identified & promoted. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - IPMS office - Document review - Annually, beginning in PY3. - PMAs 2. Number of institu-tional innovations identified & promoted (e.g., extension, input supply, credit, marketing) Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - IPMS office - Document review - Annually, beginning in PY3. - PMAs Outcome # 4: Strategies, policy & technology options, and institutional innovations developed (from both research and lessons learned), documented and promoted in order to enhance market-oriented agricultural development. 1. Number of priority commodities for which technology options are developed, documented and promoted. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - IPMS Office - Woreda OoARD - BoARD - Review Project documents and reports to capture scaling-up and out. - Interviews - Interviews - PY 3 - PY 5 - PMAs 2. Number of strategies, policy options and institutional innovations for knowledge management, capacity building, input/output marketing or services, developed, documented and promoted for market- oriented agricultural development. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - IPMS Office - Woreda OoARD - BoARD - MoARD - EARS - Review Project documents and reports to capture scaling-up and out. - Interviews - Interviews - Interviews - Interviews - PY 3 - PY 5 - PMAs 78 3. Number of all kinds of publications, media coverage or other outlets that promote IPMS strategies, policies & technology options, and institutional innovations. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - IPMS Office - Review Project documents, studies and reports - PY 3 - PY 5 - PMAs 4. Extent to which IPMS publications are found relevant to Stakeholders. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - IPMS Office - Woreda OoARD - BoARD - MoARD - EARS - Review Project documents and reports - Interviews - Interviews - Interviews -Interviews - PY 3 - PY 5 - PMAs Outputs that contribute primarily to Outcome #4. Output # 4.1: Approaches, methods, tools and processes for knowledge management developed, documented and promoted. 1. Number of completed studies on approaches, methods, tools and processes for knowledge management. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - IPMS office - Review Project documents, studies and reports -Annually, beginning in PY 2. - PMAs 2. Number of promotional events on knowledge management. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - IPMS office - Review Project documents, studies and reports - Annually, beginning in PY 2. - PMAs 79 3. Extent to which approaches, methods, tools and processes for knowledge management are relevant to Stakeholders. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - Communities - OoARD - RARIs - MoARD - EIAR - Private sector - IPMS office - Group Interviews - Interviews & review documents - Interviews & review documents - Interviews & review documents - Interviews & review documents - Interviews - Review Project documents, studies and reports - Annually, beginning in PY 2. - PMAs Output # 4.2: Approaches, methods, tools and processes for capacity building developed, documented and promoted. 1. Number of completed studies on approaches, methods, tools and processes for capacity building. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - IPMS office - Review Project documents, studies and reports - Annually, beginning in PY 2. - PMAs 2. Number of promotional events on capacity building. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - IPMS office - Review Project documents, studies and reports - Annually, beginning in PY 2. - PMAs 3. Extent to which approaches, methods, tools and processes for capacity building are relevant to Stakeholders. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - Communities - PA including DAs - OoARD - Private sector - BoARD - MoARD - IPMS office - Group Interviews - Interviews & review documents - Interviews - Interviews - Interviews - Interviews - Review Project documents, studies and reports - Annually, beginning in PY 2. - PMAs 80 Output #4.3: Approaches, methods and processes for market- oriented priority commodities including technologies and institutional arrangements developed, documented and promoted. 1. Number of completed studies on selected priority commodities. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs 1. IPMS office - Review Project documents, studies and reports -Annually, beginning in PY 2. - PMAs 2. Number of promotional events on priority commodities. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - IPMS office - Review Project documents, studies and reports - Annually, beginning in PY 2. - PMAs 3. Extent to which completed studies on priority commodities are characterized for application outside of the PLWs. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - IPMS office - OoARD - BoARD - Review Project documents, studies and reports - Interviews and review reports - Interviews and review reports - Annually, beginning in PY 2. - PMAs Output # 4.4: The inter-relationships between the environment and agricultural productivity and 1. Number of completed studies on the inter- relationships between the environment and agricultural productivity and production. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - IPMS Project - Review Project documents, studies and reports - Annually, beginning in PY 2. - PMAs 2. Number of promotional events on the environment. . Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - IPMS office - Review Project documents, studies and reports - Annually, beginning in PY 2. - PMAs 81 production understood, documented and promoted. 3. Extent to which documented agri- ecological relationships are relevant to PLWs, TVETs and to FTCs Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - PA including DAs - OoARD - FTCs - TVETs - Interviews - Interviews - Interviews with Development Agents at FTCs and review curriculum - Interview TVET Department of Natural Resources Instructors - Annually, beginning in PY 2. - PMAs Output # 4.5: The inter-relationships between gender equality and/or HIV/AIDS and agricultural productivity and production understood, documented and promoted. 1. Number of completed studies on the inter- relationships between gender equality and/or HIV/AIDS and agricultural productivity and production. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - IPMS office - Review Project documents, studies and reports - Annually, beginning in PY 2. - PMAs 2. Number of promotional events on gender equality and/or HIV/AIDS. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - IPMS office - Review Project documents, studies and reports - Annually, beginning in PY 2. - PMAs 3. Extent to which documented gender equality and/or HIV/AIDS and Woreda or local level agricultural productivity and production relationships are relevant to PLWs and incorporated into the curriculum at TVETs and at FTCs. Baseline: Targets: EoP & FYs - PA including DAs - OoARD - FTCs - TVETs - Interviews - Interviews - Interviews with Development Agents at FTCs and review curriculum - Interview TVET Department of Natural Resources Instructors - Annually, beginning in PY 2. - PMAs 82 83 Annex 2: List of Contacted Persons Name Sex PA Bure: Farmers KtemaYitaye F Alefa Genet Endlaew F Alefa Woyinitu Yayentesfa M Alefa Alehenge Wondim M Alefa Tadele Kasi M Alefa Wondei Ayanew M Alefa Engida Balew M Alefa Getnet Molla M Alefa Alemtsehay Mulu F Arbisi Shite Migbaru M Arbisi Getaneh Hunege M Arbisi Berhanu Mengiste M Arbisi Meberate Asmare (kes) M Arbisi Simachew Yalew M Arbisi Melesew Demel M Arbisi Asmamaw Bitew M Arbisi Fente Berihun M Arbisi Yeshialem Wude F Wangedem Feleke Musie F Wangedem Kasaye Afework F Wangedem Getenet Engida M Wangedem Shitu Tsema M Wangedem Sinke Kibebew M Wangedem Getachew Ayalew M Wangedem Tilahun Tafere M Wangedem Degu Meshesa M Wangedem Simachew Alamrew M Wangedem Tisfahun Grem M Wangedem Yibel Dange M Wangedem Minlargeh Ante M Wangedem Ashibir Alemu (fruit nursery) M Wangedem Mosit Bekele F Tiya Tiya Asrat Admas M Tiya Tiya Belachew Asfaw M Tiya Tiya Mantegbosh Worku F Tiya Tiya Zewde Alamerew M Tiya Tiya Fogera: Farmers Eritban Atloge M Shina Belete Addis M Shina Amlaku Wondoch M Shina Getaneh Berhane M Shina Dejen Zeleke M Shina Misganaw Derso M Shina Abera Tesema M Shina 84 Babu Tegege M Abua Kokit Tadese Mitku M Abua Kokit Zenebe Mare M Abua Kokit Nigat Teshome M Abua Kokit Abebe Teshager M Abua Kokit Melaku Addis M Abua Kokit Bosena Adis F Abua Kokit Derso Teshale M Abua Kokit Bizaw Mekonnen M Abua Kokit Desi Ejigu M Abua Kokit Endeshaw Yitay M Abua Kokit Andualem Melak M Tiwha Gebre Mersha M Tiwha Eshete Assefa M Tiwha Asrat Takele M Tiwha Debre Dejen F Tiwha Asfaw Alemneh M Tiwha Asebew Kase M Tiwha Amon Alemayhu F Tiwha Melkeneh Anteneh M Tiwha Tsegaw Get M Tiwha Teje Yalew F Tiwha Ajebush Mersha F Tiwha Binaym Ayele M Woreta Town, Fish trader Melkam Marie M Amed Ber , Washera Ram owner Ayele Tarko M Woreta Zuria Desta Mengistu M Woreta Zuria Awoke Taye M Woreta Zuria Muche Birhan M Woreta Zuria Musie Dagnew M Woreta Zuria Mesele Asmare M Woreta Zuria Anberber Miheret M Woreta Zuria Kelemu Tarekege M Woreta Zuria Destaw Asmare M Woreta Zuria Aragaw Adugna M Woreta Zuria Tensae Gashaw M Woreta Zuria Geta Mesele Woreta Zuria Guadehe Dubale M Woreta Zuria Tazeb Balew F Woreta Zuria Abrara Jegene Woreta Zuria Zewdu Wendemalem M Alember, Chairperson Abebal Dairy cooperative Metema: Farmers Shibmera Worku F Agam Woha Kasaye Zewdu F Agam Woha Mola Mekonnen M Agam Woha Ali Yesuf M Agam Woha Seble Tadese F Agam Woha Aregash Bogale F Agam Woha Ashagre Ayechew M Agam Woha Adem Yibre M Agam Woha 85 Asamere Belay M Agam Woha Shikur Gedeb M Agam Woha Adem Yasin M Agam Woha Zemet Werku F Gubai Enana Desalege M Gubai Fentahun Adane M Gubai Melese Berhanu M Gubai Takele Mola M Gubai Guade Belete M Gubai Azanu Dereje F Gubai Wube Atale M Gubai Tsegaye Zemene M Tumet Zenebe Melese M Tumet Anteneh Alemu M Tumet Aschalew G/anania M Tumet Mamo Aboneh M Tumet Amsalu Baye M Tumet Tebeje Adane M Tumet Desalege Tegege M Tumet Enana Terefe F Tumet Asefa Negatu M Tumet Awoke Abera M Tumet Dagnet Chekol M Tumet Nega Getahun M Tumet Ada: Farmers Tilahun Chirenet M Gobesay Teshome Ayano M Gobesay Tadelu Feleke F Gobesay Beredu Feleke F Gobesay Woyineshet Abebe F Gobesay Tsehay Kibebew F Gobesay Bekele Eshetu M Gobesay Yirdaw Balcha M Gobesay Mesfin Bekele M Gobesay Adnew Negash M Keteba/Lugo Wosenu Kebede M Keteba/Lugo Bekele Wodajo M Keteba/Lugo Zenebech Workeneh F Keteba/Lugo Alemayhu Arega M Keteba/Lugo Feleke Kebede M Keteba/Lugo Legese Akalu M Keteba/Lugo Game Tulu M Keteba/Lugo Abate Zegeye M Keteba/Lugo Mose Terefe M Keteba/Lugo Getachew H/Wold M Godino Getachew Alemu M Godino Medenek Chefe F Godino Nigatu merega M Godino 86 Tigist Fikru F Godino Solomon Mulugeta M Godino Begashaw Worku M Godino Sinafekesh Yigeletu F Godino Teshome Mulugeta M Godino Shumi Deyas M Denkaka Gadisa Feyesa M Denkaka Embet Tesema F Denkaka Atenafu Kidane M Denkaka Lema Alemu M Denkaka Berhane Alemayhu F Denkaka Alemu Tesema M Denkaka Amare Asrat M Fruit farmer and private bull owner, Godino Sisay Megersa M Water pump owner , Kaliti Degefa Kasa M Water pump owner, Kaliti Alaba: Farmers Haji Awol Mencha M Feleka Bergena Mohammed M Feleka Kurkur Beres M Feleka Kesema Edoa M Feleka Mohammed Adem M Feleka Kemeru Ahemed M Feleka Aberash Munate F Feleka Analech Tena F Feleka Mohamed Nur Adem M Feleka Mugero Gontro M Feleka Abderheman Ibrahim M Feleka Muhamed Sule M Guba Bedru Hamid M Guba Beras Meshehe M Guba Ryeto Shonash M Guba Abdela Adem M Guba Dilbago Alebe M Guba Jemal Muktar M Guba Kedir Alish M Guba Abredo Sekano M Guba Adem Mohamed M Guba Morkato Esale M Guba Bamuna Abdo M Shekete Daru Asemo M Shekete Mohamed Nur M Shekete Jemal Ahemed M Shekete Keyru Hadsu M Shekete Eshetu Eman Mohamed M Shekete Begegena Aman M Shekete Tenebo Aman M Shekete Mama Jido M Shekete Shemsu Munduno M Shekete 87 Hady Negash F Shekete Workite beshat F Shekete Mebaza Berasa F Shekete Nunu Adem F Shekete Mohamed Gobena M Wanja Dameto Kemal M Wanja Hasen Gatea M Wanja Awel Hamet M Wanja Husien Gboena M Wanja Abiyu Hasen M Wanja Somona Missa F Wanja Keyriga Mohamed F Wanja Rodino Ahemed F Wanja Rukia Abdo F Wanja Abyo Hassen M Wanja Zemezema Edris F Wanja Bergena Basero M Alaba Town Haile Shumeye M Alaba Town (dairy group, member) Abdela Abdere M Paravet Dale: Farmers Tshay Tena F Ajwa Abebech Argeta F Ajwa Alemetu Harqua F Ajwa Tadelech Burqa F Ajwa Senbete Uagamo F Ajwa Tirunesh Kambe F Ajwa Kuni Geremew F Ajwa Askale Arusi F Ajwa Yohannes Borsemo M Ajwa Woldemedhin Inibora M Ajwa Wude Guye M Ajwa Sana Kabiso M Ajwa Huriso Humiso M Wayicho Sermiso Kebede M Degefe Bushade M Getachew Gebaba M Wayicho Tirunesh Yumura F Wayicho Yimegushal Demesie F Wayicho Hayato Horiso F Wayicho Aster chasa F Wayicho Zinash Kebede F Debub Kege Tsehaynesh Mekuria F Debub Kege Anchacha Halamo M Debub Kege Habte Markos M Debub Kege Abate Amelo M Debub Kege 88 Kebede Kelifo M Debub Kege Paulos Aemecha M Debub Kege Abera Ueke M Debub Kege Bizunesh Hayato F Debub Kege Geremew Getesi M Debub Kege Adisu Sorisa M Debub Kege Eyob Ashengo M Debub Kege Almaz Uriso M Megera Kebede Godon M Megera Asefaw urgesso M Megera Zewditu Berasa M Megera Almaz Abiyu F Megera Fanaye Mufte F Megera Danse Dalecha M Megera Tirfesh Kebede F Megera Abaynesh Amelo F Megera Addisu Wuoe M Gane Zeleke Deremo M Gane Danchelo Kabeto F Gane Dorgemo Tura M Gane Lamiso Kabeto M Gane Farmers : Alamata Name Sex PAs Kubi Jemene M Selenwuha Asefu Sefa F Selenwuha Amare Debech M Selenwuha Abate Kumsa M Selenwuha Kubi Tewodaje M Selenwuha Ergo Ejigu M Selenwuha Tedros Getahun M Selenwuha Shambel Getaye M Selenwuha Derebew W/gebriel M Selenwuha Tesfa Bimerew M Selenwuha Baye Haftu M Tao Terefe Gebre M Tao Ale Mekonnen M Tao Kubi Mohammed M Tao W/Senbet Hagos M Tao Chekol Adane M Tao Asgedom Berhane M Gerjele Ahemed Siraj M Gerjele Tafte Abraha M Gerjele Barmntoy Tuemaye M Gerjele Darge Shumey M Gerjele Halefom Gidey M Gerjele Huluf Terefe M Gerjele Fenta Huluf M Tumuga 89 Alemu Abate M Tumuga Yimam Ahemed M Tumuga Tadese Mola M Tumuga Arage Meherete M Tumuga Ahemed Rebso M Tumuga Abraha Mebrehatu M Tumuga Gilay Hayelom M Alamata Town Kidanu Hagos M Haresaw Kahsa Hadush F Haresaw Hiwot Gidey F Haresaw Maekelech Asefa F Haresaw Abrehet Hagos F Haresaw Mulu Kahsay M Haresaw Desaleg Gebru M Haresaw Deshi Abraham M Haresaw Desta Gebremariam M Haresaw Desta Gebreselase M Haresaw Mitslal Mehari F Barkaadisebha Desta Aregaw M Barkaadisebha Yehane Mehari M Barkaadisebha Haleka Berhane Asefa M Barkaadisebha Reda Berhane M Barkaadisebha Hansa Gebre F Barkaadisebha Gergin Berhe F Barkaadisebha Hidag Brhan F Barkaadisebha Lemlem Redaee F Barkaadisebha Tesfay Gebre M Barkaadisebha Burak Damoz M Barkaadisebha Kiros Kahsay M Barkaadisebha Medhin Teare F Hayelom Birhan Worede F Hayelom Demekech Berhe F Hayelom Abraha Hagos M Hayelom Mahamud Tahir M Hayelom Selemon G/yesus M Hayelom Yilma G/selasie M Hayelom G/medihin Teare M Hayelom Mehari Aleayo M Hayelom Keshi Tsiuy Alemayo M Hayelom Hishe Bitu F Keleshaemni Tsegay Abraha M Keleshaemni G/mariam Abraha M Keleshaemni Sndayo G/hiowt F Keleshaemni Zeru Nigus M Keleshaemni Desta G/hiwot F Keleshaemni Kahsu Kindeya M Keleshaemni Keshi G/zher G/hiwot M Keleshaemni Kasa Gebre M Keleshaemni 90 Gidey Yohannes F Golgelaele Kiros Kidane M Barkahadishaba Kes W/Giorgis F Barkahadishaba Meiso: Farmers Jemal Juya M Husie Adami Ahemed Jemal M Husie Adami Oumer Ali M Gorbu Fatuma Mwato F Gorbu Adem Usu M Gorbu Mhamed Amin M Gorbu Damtew Awulachew M Gorbu Hasen Usu M Gorbu Abedela Siraj M Gorbu Abdela Umer M Gorbu Ali Amin M Gorbu Meka Mohamed F Gorbu Temshi Baja F Gorbu Juhar Oumer M Gorbu Mohammed Oumer M Gorbu Ousman Adem M Gorbu Kemer Abdo M Itisaroro Abdulrahman Eibro M Itisaroro Abdi Mekonnen M Itisaroro Seido Ali M Itisaroro Asha Ahemed F Itisaroro Ersiya Ousman F Itisaroro Momina Eibrona F Itisaroro Wube Yimer F Itisaroro Dale: DAs Tadese Latemo M Ajewa Tesema Geteamo M Ajewa Tigist Asefa F Ajewa Gizachew Tadesse M Gane Adungna Ademe M Debub Kege Wodimagne Yohannes M Debub Kege Tesfaye Lensamo M Megera Wubante Tesfaye M Megera Manhos Geda M Megera Zelalem Hayeso M Megera (PA Manager) Melese Mathios M Debub Kege Gizachew M Gane Dale: SMS Belete Dejene M Planning, monitoring evaluation and feedback coordinator, OoARD 91 Mekdes Ferew F Planning, monitoring evaluation and feedback expert, OoARD Tilahun Negash M Extension communication expert, OoARD Semere Tamirat M Cooperatives expert, OoARD Asefa Adela M Animal Husbandry expert, OoaRD Lema G/meskel Seyola M Seed multiplication and distribution and quality control expert, OoARD Tegege Maruru M Food security expert, OoARD Daniel Dawit M Natural Resource expert, OoARD Dale (Region, Zone and Reseach) Ato Desta Gebre M Extension, Regional OoARD, RALC member Sani M Head, SNNPR OoARD, RALC Chairperson Mulugeta Fetene M Cooperative Division, Regional OoARD & Former RALC Chairperson Berhanu Solomon M Former Sidama Zone OoARD Head Daniel Dawro (Dr.) M Director, SARI Gebeyehu Ganga ( Dr.) M Livestock Research Director, SARI Agedew Bekele M Director, Awasa Research Center Experts/monitors Alaba Legese Hailu M Crop production and protection expert, OoARD Jemal Mohamed M Forage and Animal Husbandary expert, OoARD Hailu Alemu M Planning Officer, OoARD Mesay Tegne M Planning Officer, OoARD Abebaw Mekonen M Extension Communication expert, OoARD Muleye Tafese M DA( Guba) DAs: Ada Zemenay Asesefa F Denkaka Almaz Wdede F Denkaka Berhanu Demesie M Denkaka Elsabet Gemeda Female Ude Hailu Demesi Male Gobesay Meaza Abay Male Gobesay Guta Asefa Male Keteba/Lugo 92 Meseret Edosa Male Keteba/Lugo Belaynehs Hordofa Female Godino Addis Menday Female Godino Admasu Abera Male Godino Hailu Merga M Head OoARD, WALC Chairperson, OoARD, ADa Seble Negash F SMS, Horticulutre, OoARD Sori Chalisa M Planning and Monitoring Expert, Woreda Admin Addisu Menkir M SMS, Natural Resource, OoARD Sisay Woyecha M Planning and Monitoring Expert, OoARD Kebede Tulu M SMS, Agronomy, OoARD Motuma Tolosa M Planning and Monitring Expert, ZoARD, Adama Meheretab M Knowldge Center Attendant Ayele Bedane M Representative, Head ZoARD, Adam Bure: SMS/WALC members Yigzaw Zelalame M Deputy Head, OoARd Worku Demelew M Women’s Affair, Woreda Admin. Ayaleneh Dange M Extension team leader, OoARD Enanu Tesfaw F Cooperative team leader, OoARD Yonas Wondem M HAPCO, Woreda Admin. Hiruy Geremw M AISCO-Marketing Division Hailu Asefa M Marketing and input supply team leader, OoARD Shiferaw Tefere M ACSI, Woreda level manager Adis Enemayehu F Head, Women’s affair, Woreda Admin Fogera: SMS and WALC members Worku Mulat M WALC, Chairperson, OoARD head, Woreta Andargachew Gashaw M Animal Production, OoARD Habte W/Selasie M Animal Production, OoARD Tesema Hailu M Agroforestery, OoARD Anteneh Belay M Extension, Team Leader, OoARd Lakew Mitiku M Head, ACSI Branch Office, Fogera Fogera DAs Alelege Kefe M DA, Amed Ber Mekonent Guesh M DA, Ambed Ber Tilahun Yirdaw M DA, W.zuria Bure: DAs Mululaem Delele Male Arbisi Atnafu Shiferaw Male Wangedem Enchalew Zeleke Male Wangedem Yenehun Ayechew Male Wangedem 93 Tigist Melesew Female Alefa Tadese Mola Male Alefa Mulusew Tsegaye Male Alefa Getenet Mule Male Zewyeshun Amanu Bitew Male Zewyeshun Abera Ayenew Male Zewyeshun Ambaye Desalege Male Zalema Debebe Muleye Male Zalema Almaz Yingal Female Zalema Goma: DA Mohammed Nure M Bulbulo Amelework Weljira F Bulbulo Delil Abafita M PA offiial Tofik Raya M Beshasa Hayat Aba biya M Beshasha Temam Edri M Beshasha Goma: Input supplier Awol A/fita M Input shop owner, Yachi Ureche DAs: Alamata Gidey Hibu M Selenwuha Degefaw Kasahun M Selenwuha Tadese Bezabeh M Selenwuha Tikuye Niguse M Tumuga Yilma Sisay M Tumuga Desu Wedaje M Gerjele Almaz Afework F Gerjele Gufi Alem F Gerjele Darge Berhe M Gerjele (PA manager) Efrem Asfaw M WKC attendant Azeb Admasu F Tao DAs Astbi Germay Niguse M Hayelom Haftu G/hiwot M Hayelom Yemane G/egziabher M Hayelom Kiflom Kasa M Kelesha Mezgebe Girmay M Kelesha Asmerom Kebede M Kelesha Kahsay Entehabo M Barkaadisebha Desta Fikre M Barkaadisebha Tsgabu Atsbeha M Barkaadisebha Habtamu Getachew M Harsaw T/mariam Kahsay M Harsaw Hailu Tsegay M Harsaw Tesfalem G/kidan M Golgelnaele Abraha Kefay M Golgelnaele 94 Gidey Yohannes M Golgelnaele Betel Lukas F Regional Knowldge Center attendant, BoARD, Mekele G/Egziabher G/yohannes Director, Livestock Research, TARI Alamata: WALC & SMS Mebrahtom Gebrselassie M Deputy OoARD Head Yirgalem Zemenfeskiduse M Abergele, WALC Member Redde Berhane M Cooperative, WALC Member G/Eyesus Meles M OoARD, WALC Member G/Selama G/Slassie M Women’s Affair, WALC Member Lemlem Eyasu M Union, WALC Member Tesfaye Berh M Woreda Chairman, WALC Member Afeworki G/mariam M Irrigation developmet team Tesfa G/egziabher M Fruti developmet team Berhen Tafere M Amimal production and feed experr Guesh Tekele M Vegetable prodution and feed expert Hayle Kasa M Agriculutre Advisor of Zonal Administeration, South Tigray Zone, Maychew Astbi: WALC and SMS Mulugeta G/Mariam M Livestock, Team Leader, OoARD Goytoem G/Egziabeher M Natural Resource Sector, OoARD Tesfay Hailemelelot M Forestery Developmet, Team Leader, OoARD G/reab G/michael M Agriculural Sector Coordinator, OoARD Yonas Gebru M Extension Service, Head, OoARD Kestla Fissha M Deputy Head, OoARD Hiwot G/Tsion F Input Supply Team Leader, OoARD Almaz Hiluf F Cooperative Expert, OoARD Issa Mohammed M Coopereative Expert, OoARD Gebru Kirus M Cooperative Sector coordinator, OoARD Teklay Gebru M OoARD Head Goitom Gebryesus M Crop development expert Atsede Hregawi F Personnel, OoARD Birhan Teshome M Irrigation Team Leader, OoARD Amahara Region (Zone, Region BoARD and Research) Wondimagene Mengesah M AI, Andasa Woudi Tsega F Nutrition, Andasa Mulugeta Alemahyhu M Forage, Andasa Adisu Bitew M Animal Production, Andasa Habtam Asefa M Socio-economics, Andasa 95 Tekeba M Cener Manager, Andasa Sewagne M Rice research, Adet Research Center Eshete Dejen M Director, Livestock Research, ARARI, Bahirdar Aynalem M RALC Chairperson, Amhara BoARD, Bahirdar Getenet Mukria M Andasa research center Metema (OoARD) Getasew Agneche M OoARD head- Meteama Beewuket Amare M SMS, Livestock production Gizat M SMS, Cooperative Solomon Abegaz M Center Manager, Gonder Research Center, Gonder Yeshambel Tefera M Livestock Research, Gonder Research Center, Gonder Ali Abdulahi M Pulse Research, Gonder Research Center, Gonder Habtamu Yesegat M Socio-economics Research, Gonder Research Center, Gonder Meiso (OoPRD) Kebede Gebena M Planning Officer, Zonal OoARD, Meiso Shibru Fekadu M Planning Officer, Zonal OoPRD, Meiso Shiferaw Workeneh M Expert, Input Supply Desk, OoPRD, Meiso Moges Gahsaw M Expert, Coperative Desk, OoPRD, Meiso Yohannes Legesse M Expert, Animal Production, OoPRD, Meiso Mekbeb Zigeju M Expert, Marketing Desk, OoPRD, Meiso Kedir Yasin M Expert, Animal Health, OoPRD, Meiso Serkalem… F Representative, Women's Affair, Woreda Administeration, Meiso Eyob Alemayhu M Expert, livestock, OoPRD Wondwosen Woldeyes M Representative of,Zone OoARD Head, Astbe Teferi Meiso DAs Zerihun Naheya M Tokuma Derje Regasa M Tokuma Abenet Ketema M Gorbu Yodit Abebe F Gorbu Goma: SMS Sileshi Delelege M Plan and program, Zone OoARD, Jima Tefera Beyene M Plan and program, Zone OoARD, Jima Mergia Feyeisa M SMS, Marketing, OoARD Ferdisa Olfira M Cooperative Office, Agaro Bogale Guta M SMS, Horticultrue, OoARD 96 Serawit H/Mariam M SMS, Coffee Agronomy, OoARD Melaku Ayalew M SMS, Landuse, OoARD Haile Abe M Horticulure, Researcher, Jima Reseach Center