|
|||||||||
| |
|||||||||
In addition to my comments on the Rockefeller hypothesis the note by Christe Peacock inspires a couple other comments. To be effective we really need to take due consideration of the limitation of developing country governance and the overall administrative environment in developing countries. In doing so we need to back away from some of our developed country idealism and look at the track record of what we have been attempting and the post funding sustainability of the effort. Some time I think we are more concerned with the mechanism then the objective. Fully agree that we need to make certain that smallholders get the best support they can in terms of input cost and market prices. How this is done is really not important. We seem to think that the only way to do this is by organizing framer and getting them involved all they way to the consumer. I would contend that within the administrative environment of developing countries we are imposing on the farmers the most expensive, least convenient, and most corruption potential support system. The farmers are really not interested in this which leads to most efforts collapsing immediately one donor funding is ended. It should be noted that in the US the cooperative system has only 30% and declining market share. Only the dairy cooperative has a majority share at 80%, while the fresh vegetable and animal sections have only 10%. It should also be noted Farmland the largest US cooperative entity sought Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in May 2002. Is it our objective to bankrupt the smallholders. How does this compare with cooperative market share in the UK and EURO? It would be nice to hear from some people who are only indirectly involved with cooperatives in developing country, do see if they find them effective or not. I actually favor private village enterprises. They have always been the prime support providers of smallholders. I would expect that a close evaluation would indicate they are the most cost effective, and convenient. There real problem is the high degree of fragmentation with a large number of competing family enterprises. This fragmentation fosters competition but also limits market volume. With only limited market volume the minimum mark-ups have to be reasonable high so they can have a modest income. However, I would content that is the best offer available. I'll stop here for response although I could go on for hours on this issue which I think is the most critical in the poverty alleviation program. Respectfully submitted. Dick Tinsley ============================================================= To send a reply to this message that goes to all list members, make sure that you send your reply to <address removed> To unsubscribe from this list, send an email to "<address removed>", with the message body: unsubscribe economic-opportunity <your-email-address>
Please visit dfid-agriculture-consultation.nri.org.