Greetings from Sudan

You can find me in SEEP network enterprises development exchange participants’ profile.

In this on line conference, I am more interested to learn on importance of rural -urban linkages. Or how can we connect rural markets to urban markets. My basic question is “Do urban value chain can sustain with out giving proper emphasize on rural linkages?

Good to know there is so much interest!

My name is Sarah Ward, I am now a technical adviser with Mercy Corps, but many of you may know me from other places :-). I am very much looking forward to exploring VC development in urban settings, as well as looking at how they connect with and effect the rural context.

As someone who tends to work in conflict-affected environments, I am always working with people who moved/were displaced from rural to urban to rural and back again due to fighting and crisis.

How they have adapted their livelihood options and what linkages they have worked out is maybe worth exploring… as Ekanath points out above.

Looking forward to our discussions…and to sharing some documents on Market Development Terms and other bits and pieces we have been working on developing at Mercy Corps.

Sarah Ward

Hi all. I am Elly Kaganzi, as you will see in the participants profiles. I am an Enterprise Development Program Manager with CHF International and Currently supporting its HIV program in Rwanda as an economic opportunities Advisor. I have previously worked with knowledge management institutions in the area of value chain developmet, market analysis and enterprise development. I am also a keen follower of Urban and periurban value chains hence my keen interest in this. I look forward to participating in this discussion.

Hi all,

I am Perveen Shaikh from ECDI in Pakistan. Very excited to be a part of this forum. I really think the theme is great as urban slums are a huge issue now and with growing urbanization, we need to be thinking along these lines.

I think the VC approach has strong potential for urban poverty alleviation – perhaps even more so than in rural settings. So many large cities, especially in Asia, are flooded with migration from the villages. These migrants have already exhibited motivation to change their lives and display strong resilience to deal with very difficult circumstances.

Looking forward to our discussions,
Perveen

I am Archibald Shodeke working for a Microfinance Institution in Sierra Leone – Can see me in the participants profile. I am interested to know how Rural linkages can be created using the Urban value chain – even though this workshop is on urban value chain focus. Also I am intersted to know how we can create viable value chains in urban poor communities.

Iam Charlotte USANASE from RWANDA, other details are found in the SEEP participants’ profile. iam very exited to join this discussion fora with much interest to learn more of VC development and empowerment especially in the poor communities since iam working for the poorest of the poor

Hope this workshop will be inspiring and productive

Charlotte

I am Sonali Chowdhary and you can find my profile in the introduction to the disussion.
Thanks everyone for your postings on the forum. I am so excited to be able to hear about your professional experiences around value chain development – be it around core urban markets or rural urban linkages. I am also interested to hear your comments, suggestions and experiences on the issues and strategies discussed in the conference paper and especially on how value chain development process can help address some of the core development issues in urban areas.

I am Marian Boquiren from SDCAsia. We started out mainly in BDS market development projects and gradually moved on to the value chain development approach and conduct of value chain studies. To date, we are implementing two value chain development programs: the USAID-IGP Banana Agri-chain Competitiveness Enhancement Program (B-ACE) in Mindanao-Philippines and the IADB-Japan Program in Costa Rica implemented with the Consejo Nacional de Produccion, which involve the upgrading of the Ferias de los Agricultores (Farmers’ Market) with the twin objectives of improving the competitiveness of smallholders in response to the changes in retail formats particularly with the participation of supermarkets in fresh produce markets and facilitating access of consumers (particularly low to low-medium income) to safe and quality products.

We look forward to learning more about urban value chain development strategies and approaches … and would be glad to share our experiences.

Marian Boquiren

One of the strengths of the value chain approach is the emphasis it places on relationships or linkages between actors in the value chain. An urban setting, where space is compressed, would seem to have more (and more complex) sets of relationships between actors or potential actors that value chain developers could utilize. The point of “potential actors” is key here, as in some cases there may be an opportunity for intermediaries to fulfill a needed role, and it could be filled by someone with ties to, but not already participating in the chain. Whereas in rural areas, a key element of the value chain approach is to develop these linkages, in cities they may only need to be identified and understood (not necessarily a simple task either) to be incorporated into an economic development strategy. Does anyone have experiences with using existing informal relationships to facilitate economic development in cities?

I’m Jimmy M Harris Jr. from the USA (and proud to say former SEEP staff member!) This promises to be a great online conference, and I’m looking forward to the rich dialog and learning that will emerge.

The background to Mary’s Bangladesh ship disassembly story was featured on CBS’s “60 Minutes” awhile back. There’s a good report at:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/11/03/60minutes/main2149023.shtml

For another example, our organization, the Citizens Development Corps recently signed a new contract with the oil company BP in Angola that will extend and expand our Supplier Training Initiative which is steered by an Industry Group that also includes Sonangol, Exxon, Chevron and Total. Through CDC’s Luanda business center, the Centro Apoio Empresarial (CAE), CDC provides business training and other services to Angolan small and medium size enterprises to enable them to compete for contracts with the multi-national oil and gas companies operating in the country. Under the new agreement CDC will continue to operate CAE for an additional three years and will expand operations from Luanda into other urban centers, including Soyo, Cabinda and Benguela. The heart of the program is to train transport, catering, construction and other local businesses in procurement policy and processes. We’ve been on the ground in Angola for two years and have helped guide 41 new lucrative contracts for Angolan SMEs and are in the process of replicating the model elsewhere. No governmental or donor funding is involved.

Our experiences indicate that informal relationships parallel to the promotion of common business objectives among the different players are effective platforms in facilitating upgrading.and market access. This seems to be especially effective in sectors that are growing rapidly or facing considerable uncertainties (or increased risk). Likewise, in many cases, especially where potential catalysts are also small enterprises (e.g., local traders/intermediaries), it was necessary for our program to provide upgrading assistance to put them in a better position to link poor/marginal communities with bigger markets and/or enhance their effectiveness as “extension officers”, information providers, etc. In other words, our program has to explore ways on how to improve capability and capacity of potential catalysts so that their influence and control can be used to yield positive benefits for micro enterprises and the improvement of the chain in general without eroding their profit margins. Likewise, gestation of horizontal and vertical collaborations particularly when it involve MSEs/poor communities seems to be faster when mechanisms are not that formal and required less coordination or mechanisms that evolved more spontaneously and naturally. A pre-requisite to this though is to ensure that standards are recognized and understood by all including sanctions and benefits.

Hi Marian,

I think you hit the nail on the head when you say “ Likewise, gestation of horizontal and vertical collaborations particularly when it involve MSEs/poor communities seems to be faster when mechanisms are not that formal and required less coordination or mechanisms that evolved more spontaneously and naturally.”

It is so important that the messages and methods are clear concise and not wrapped up in too much technical language. I’m not a technical person and do not have a degree to sell a fish, but I am heavily involved in ‘persons empowerment.’ I recognise the greatest value is in fact knowing the situation on the ground like the back of my hand, understanding why things are the way they are before any ‘improvements’ or ‘assistance’ are given.
I get mind boggled with the language used at the upper technical level. I call it the language of ‘Workshops and Seminars’. We need simple solutions, in simple language and perhaps we need to decipher some of the technical language in seminars like these so that it can filter down to those that can use it themselves without having to wait for assistance from development experts. We need to form an information bridging system.

As a person on the ground, in my trainings I have found that practical hands on works best. Teaching/learning by experiencing. I really value the case studies especially those with pictures.
I also believe that creating small easily replicated impacts have a higher chance of sustainability for our poor.

Hi All,

Good to be a part of this discussion! Nice to connect with familiar faces and be introduced to new ones. (I am one of the technical resources for the discussion and the facilitator for the upcoming scale-up PLP). Sorry, need to get a picture uploaded too…..

I agree that supporting the development of a market system that is rich in informal, spontaneous and natural connections/mechanisms promotes a potentially durable network for MSEs. My good friend, Perveen Shaikh, and I have witnessed how a program can effectively promote the development of a dense web of flexible relationships in Pakistan – both in terms of rural/urban connections and in urban/urban relationships. This ‘dense web’ offers a range of choices – unlike a chain that is only as strong as its weakest link.

I do think, however, that other models and combinations of models can be highly effective, and may be preferrable. I am in Kenya at the moment, and I am observing how very poor communities in coastal regions are challenged, and may not be supported by the same type of informal and spontaneous network. This is in part because of the type of products they produce (agriculture – rural/urban) and the markets that are most likely to be profitable (export, semi-processed). In this case, consistent large quantities of outputs per month are required to meet the needs of buyers. And, lead firms / pocessors may be their best option. I am not a big fan of the ‘lead firm’ model per se – it creates a risky situation for producers if not well managed…..but in some cases, it may be the best or only option. In order to mitigate risk, seeking out mulitple lead firms / processors is one option.

Looking forward to the debate and comments!
Linda

Hi All,
I am Wajahat Nassar from Pakistan. I am looking forward to a great conference, aiming at solving urban problems.

Majority of slum dweller in south East Asia do not have legal papers of their occupied land. Some times slums are evicted by land owner or government line department. Slum dweller usually lived in a small house or occupied very small piece of land. Technology should be developed to cultivate agriculture in a small piece of land before developing urban value chain for agricultural product.

Mozharul Islam
Senior Monitoring Officer
Practical Action (Intermede Technology Development Group) Bangladesh
Dhaka, Bangladesh

I hope it may not be the appropriate topics to discuss on this session although I would like to bring this issues on this discussion.

We have to encourage promoting of SMEs that mutually beneficial to both rural and urban, since SME activity is the main source of employment in both areas. Both market share inputs- outputs equally.

Both urban and rural areas are inter-connected on economic activities. Both rural-urban markets are equally important. Generally development of efficient, competitive markets, including domestic markets for exchanges of agricultural products and urban products consumed by rural consumers, benefits both rural and urban populations.

In my opinion, in this one line discussion, let’s look this issues critically how urban value chain can complement /contribute rural employment and how rural production system can contribute on urban markets.

Urban poor are more vulnerable then rural poor. The urban poor have less copping strategy then rural poor.I am fully agree with Mozharul Islam,s concern slum dweller,s situation. Similarly in post conflict situation most of the returnees and conflict affected population, IDPs are settled on urban areas and facing the similar problem of unemployment, no appropriate technology and other services.

In scope of urban value chain, why not to look alternative economic opportunity/services in nearby rural areas so that we can encourage those population (urban poor) to start some income activities in rural market centers?.

Hi, there. I am Cathy Ratcliff, working for Mercy Corps in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Our economic development work in Addis Ababa revolves around microfinance, and our main local partner is interested in exploring value chains.

I found Linda’s comment about value networks interesting, especially with regard to the chain being only as strong as its weakest link. It made me wonder if there is any talk of Value Chain Development becoming Value Network Development?

Well Mary and other participnats, have been failing to log on , now i have accessed the conference and iam still getting familiar with all the discussion and will be giving in my comments.

thanks

Did you know that 31 villagers will continue to show up in an Indian city every minute over the next 43 years — 700 million people in all. The Pushpak Express in India brings these villagers to Mumbai. Check out the story (Rumbling Across India to a New Life in the City) in the New York Times (from 25-Nov-2007) here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/25/world/asia/25migrants.html?emc=eta1

There is also a short, 2 minute 44 second video that accompanies the article.

The article brings up rural-urban linkages issues and highlights the “swallows” who go to Mumbai for a few years, go back to their villages for a few years, go back to Mumbai, etc.

Hi! I am Rubayat, A development practitioner having specialization in Human Rights Based Approach to development programming.
May 11, 08, Dhaka.
———————————————————————-

I am little scared with development concepts and jargons. I can share some findings from my research work “Conceptualizing Two Development Approaches and Applicability in the Context of Reality”.

“Rights Based Approach (RBA) and Sustainable Livelihood Approach (ALA) both have target for well-being and adequate standard of living for the poor and vulnerable. From RBA perspective food, house, health, education, and work are fundamental rights to capable a person. SLA transfer asset to achieve these as outcome for their beneficiaries. RBA could not address market issues; SLA recognizes the dominance of market and accepts it but has not given explicit direction how to cope. RBA recognizes confrontation with duty bearers for claiming and bargaining rights. SLA’s PIP is abstract and confrontation is not found. It could be assumed that there is no conflict of interest between groups. Landless, small, and marginal farmers are often found complaining being cheated either by middlemen and local elites or by WTO. Thus, confrontation is obvious.”

“Uncertainties out of changing global context and upcoming challenges should be given serious consideration by development practitioners. Thus, it is impossible to prescribe any absolute model for SLA or RBA, which could be a “magic bullet” for solving livelihood crisis of marginal people in Bangladesh. Mainstreaming RBA for program designing could bring long term changes at community level. This does not mean to replace SLA by RBA but find some complementary space for each other. For example, non exploitative micro finance model of ActionAid Bangladesh is a good asset intervention method for poverty alleviation. RBA scrutinizes rights awareness and claiming capacity of those community people beside asset empowerment. However, such mutual intervention should consider the local need very carefully.”

In my opinion, mutual intervention space between SLA and RBA is needed. Asset transfer and rights awareness can go hand in hand.

Some criticize that micro finance along with high interest is exploitative. In addition, this type credit serve well-off poor and do not work for very poor. Some alternative organizations, nowadays, are talking about interest free small credit and they call it non-exploitative credit. However, this is an area of development debate. Dierct assest transfer is also kind of superficial solution to drag poor out of poverty.

Now here we are talking about “VC approach”.

I can share a little part written on market from my research work “Incorporation of Rights Based Approach in development programming: an examination of problems and prospects of ict4d projects”;

Markets do not care for disadvantaged. Those, who have skill, capital, resource, and capacity, will survive in the market. And those, who have disability, incapability, lack of capital and resources, they will suffer and live below poverty line. RBA stresses on duty bearers’ responsibility to create social and political atmosphere where unequal distribution of opportunities will not exist. Therefore, RBA does not emphasize to push poor and vulnerable to fight in the market for their survival. RBA may not give any immediate solution to fight against poverty rather it focuses on voice, participation, and empowerment for alleviating poverty in the long run. RBA is a new theory and it may require years after years to mobilize different actors to raise their consciousness and responsibility for entire society and poverty alleviation. GB’s VPP has given some instant solution to fight against poverty by accepting the presence and dominating character of market and its influence on social, political and economic order in the local, national and international perspective.

The dominance and existence of market mechanism is unavoidable. Sen (1999: 112) said, “we have good reasons to buy and sell, to exchange, and to seek lives that can flourish on the basis of transactions.” Transaction is the blood flowing through the veins of market mechanism. Transaction has to be there to keep market alive. Now, RBA stresses on equity and avoid inequality. It is not easy to eradicate inequality, which results due to market. According to Sen (1999: 119), a market situation can be efficient when no one’s utility and substantive freedom can be enhanced without cutting into the utility and freedom of someone else, still there could be inequalities in the distribution of utilities and freedoms. Therefore, RBA’s ideal situation of inequality requires rethinking about market mechanism rather than accusing it. Sen has found two aspects of the problem associated with inequality, one is income inequality and another is inequality in substantive freedoms and capabilities. RBA wants governments to take necessary policies and steps to avoid inequality in the market, so that, disadvantaged people can benefit from it. Sen (1999: 120) connected equity problem with serious deprivation and poverty. Now, government has to provide the social security e.g. employment, health, education, house, etc. Thus, Sen has found the notion of social security system that welfare states try. He has even found conflict between social commitment of Europe that emphasizes on social security rather than employment and that of United States, which stresses on high level of employment. Therefore, he recommends on “simultaneity” of both issues.

I agree with Sen, that importance of efficiency and equity is equally important. Though both have conflict and because of that inequality in terms of market opportunities exist in different societies in the world, the success of RBA lies with the effective combination of equity with efficiency. Economically, politically, and socially advantaged group of people make material benefit from the market, on the other hand disadvantaged and incapable people live under poverty line with sufferings and miseries, which is unjust and violation of human rights. If RBA goes in line with welfare state’s concept of minimum reasonable income, and other social benefits, it may reduce the efficiency and economic growth of a society and give rise to a parasite group of people who enjoy benefit and lose capabilities by doing nothing. Hence, RBA at market situation seeks further critical scrutiny and reformation. Sen (126: 126) has given an insight on many sided approach to balance role of government, and other social and political institutions about the functioning of markets.

Thus, market is Frankenstein that may or may not obey his master.

Changing global context and challenges may worsen situation that ever imagined. The challenges are climate change, hunger & famine, diseases, and conflicts. We are not the programmer or designer of the world and subsequently we can not come up with any “magic bullet” for poverty alleviation along with a time frame. Perhaps we will be watching one such effort MDG’s fatal end at the end of 2015. According to AAI at the current rate of progress, it will take 120 years to reach the Millennium Development Goal and WFS commitments to halve hunger by 2015. Therefore, it is time to have alternative thoughts and solutions rather prescriptions. As long as we do not have unusual magic bullet, we keep trying with whatever we have such as MDGs, PRSPs, SLA, RBA, Human Security, VC approach and so on. But we do not have time much for experimentation.

How long should we be continuing this effort to end poverty? It may appear pessimistic prediction that hunger, poverty, and food insecurity may continue till dooms day. Academics and activists of transnational civil society agree that there is enough food in this world to feed the population in hunger. Where does the surplus food of the world go?
Is not it the politics to trash food rather feed hungry? And this power politics of wealthy groups is no more a secret. The amount of food they waste and the amount of money they spend in weapon production and in war could be surplus for solving hunger and poverty issue in the globe. This is not supposed to happen. Politics, conspiracy, and exploitation are dominating over good will for serving humanity.