المنتدى العالمي المعني بالأمن الغذائي والتغذية

Dear PPP moderator,

I find the proposal interesting. The approaches listed exists in many parts of SSA where i gathered localised perspectives while conducting field based people centred community research on Forests and Community Foods.

Community-based-institutions at the community and village levels are still in existence in many parts of Africa. Those community institutional laws provide governing principles on all aspects of natural resources and population settlement and movement management in the lands they occupy (Kenyan constitution 2010/2012].

The draft FSN Forum presentation is interesting in view of its leaning upon public institutions of agricultural development of commodity crops like tea, coffee and sugar. Agriculture for growth as a topic is challenged by decreased useful edible diversity. When more than 80% of a regional population focuses on consuming a few crops,commodity prices fall whilst food prices rise.

Perhaps there maybe a need to find methods "other new commodities"and approaches for broader essential commodities so as to increase effective Public-Privte-Patnership in the agricultural sector for all concerned and affected.

Monica Opole

Senior consultant

Forests, trees, diverse edible diversity and people.

@ Getaneh Gobezie

Dear Getaneh, thank you for the valid points you have raised. The issue of affordable finance for the agricultural sector is a long-standing one. We need financiers who understand the agricultural sector and can analyze agricultural business plans. The issue of incentives vis-à-vis measures is well noted – it is fine line to draw. This will be raised at the roundtable dialogue.

Dear colleagues

Thank you for this very important Agri-PPP Guide. I strongly believe this will help plan effective collaboration.

I think there are two key issues for further discussion or elaboarion.

1) Since the participants can involve those from private sector (profit motivated) and those in Government, NGOs (often socially motivated), we need to decide the level of ''profit'' (and risk taking) that can be attained by those especially in the private sector, and to reach a concensus or mutual understanding on that level.... One challenge that we face in ruralfinance is the level of microcredit interest to be charged by banks and microfinance institutions (MFIs). As far as I know, so far, there is no consensus on a ''reasonable'' interest rate that need to be charged (though the components that should go into the computation are quite clear). Indeed, there are also those who strongly argue against ''any interest'' on credit delivered to businesses owned by poor people..... The confusion often gives rise to difficulties on collaborative efforts!!

2) How can we balance between ''INCENTIVE'' and ''MEASURES'' on those who fail to deliver as per commitments (see Box on page 11 on the Guide), especially for the private sector. May be the only MEASURE we can do on the private sector who fail to deliver is to remove the so-called incentive? What are the strategies to avoid potential crowding out of private sector actiors while doing so?

I think these are some of the key issues that need further discussion on the guide.

Getaneh ([email protected])

@ Olga Gwanda

Dear Olga, thank you for your valuable comments. Indeed, an exit strategy is critical for sustainability but it is not always well thought through in the design of the PPP. More thought needs to be put into how the public sector can exit after a set period.

From my own point of view, all the principles given in the guidelines are important and are relevant to the Zambian context and to me the most appealing principle is Principle 11- Exit strategy. The main challenge we face in Africa is that of unsustainable development programs. If the benefits from agri-PPPs should continue past the period of public-private involvement, then sustainable development would have been initiated. When it comes to sustainability of development initiatives, we can think in terms of the relationship between a Venture Capitalist and an entrepreneur. Venture Capitalists are not permanent equity holders; they usually exit the venture at the end of the initial high growth phase, without jeopardizing the entrepreneur’s interests. In the same way, the public and private institutions should not be permanent equity holders in development initiatives that are meant to benefit smallholder farmers. As was in the case of the Zambian Kaleya Smallholders Company Ltd, after being integrated in the development initiatives, smallholder farmers should also be given the chance to be equity stakeholders, so that when the time comes for the government and the private companies to exit, the initiative will continue (as a private company) under the governance of the smallholder farmers.