MilkIT Advisory Council Meeting Dehradun 23/07/14

1. MilkITAdvisory Council MeetingDehradun 23/07/14 Activity update Nils Teufel, ThanammalRavichandran, & team

2. Objective/Elements

3. Meeting objectives • Progress snapshot-activities last 6 months • Group discussion • Which project results will you incorporate in your department / institution? • What mechanisms needed for fodder development? How to establish fodder seed bank? • What sort of material is needed for dissemination of IP approach and its outputs?Who is the main audience?

4. Update so far…… Village census Site selection- 2 clusters/district Household census Constraint analysis Feed Assessment Tool (FEAST) IP (Innovation platform) platform meetings(documentation) Marketing and feed interventions Linking with other institutions

5. Innovation platform Incentive? Pushing technology Power dynamics Participation Rigid rules? Weak voice

6. IP meetings • 1 dairy value chain IP and 2 feed IP in each selected district (main meetings every 3 months) • Implementation of interventions developed and agreed at IP meetings (action plan); regular progress review & feedback • New members from nearby clusters also joined in IP meetings • District level meetings with Aanchal and other institutions (e.g. IDBI bank, NABARD) • ILSP team will lead the IP meetings in Sult • Limitations • Election moral code of conduct • Participation from government departments is limited • Follow-up not always consistent with agreed plans

7. Marketing interventions - Sult • Progress • Linkage with Aanchal • 4 collection points in Baseri, Besarbagarh, Gahnaneet and Saknara, covering 8 villages • Demand from outside selected clusters for support to open further collection centres to link with Aanchal • Employment: 8 (collection, head-load to road) • Request from Aanchal for short study on closure of previous collection centres in Sult and Bikyasain • Limitations/constraints • Limited breed improvement activities (distance to institutions) • Lack of support from Aanchal for input supply (credit and feed; no credit even after one year) - initiated district level discussions - lack of monitoring supervisor • Late milk payments, lack of transparency (supervisor/secretary)

8. Aanchal study:Reasons for dairy closure • Study design • PRA in 10 villages (Sult and Bikyasain) • Discussion with secretaries and farmers • Results • In 5 villages (near road): decreased dairy animal population due to migration & climate change -> no interest in re-opening dairy collection centre • In 5 villages (far from road): less migration, more dairy animals ->renewed interest in dairy collection • In all villages: No input services (feed & credit) from Aanchal (even though they gave milk for 5-8 years), farmers not aware of services • Lack of awareness on price system, lack of transparency, price difference to local market • Capacity building/ training limited to secretaries • Lack of support in times of feed scarcity

9. Marketing interventions - Bageshwar • Progress • SHG based co-operative covering 11 villages, >INR 70,000 profit in last 14 months • Private trader emerged to collect excess milk • Plan for expansion of IP to nearby cluster • Purchase of vehicle by one farmer with support of bank • Agreement with private feed company for direct supply of concentrate / support from ILSP • Demand for credit support from 40 farmers (mini-dairy) –applied to IDBI bank & NABARD • Limitations/constraints • More demand for good fodder crops - unable to get seeds (stylosanthus, desmodium, setaria etc.) • More involvement of CHIRAG and ILSP – limited government support

11. Feed innovations • Fodder crops: • Dual purpose: maize, finger millet, sorghum. • Legume: berseem (clover) • Feed troughs /feed drums • Fast response/adoption • Chaff cutter • Failure of manual chaff cutter – labour need • Traditional small knife is accepted • Chaff cutter from Gujarat - more demand • Local manufacturer for chaff cutter identified • Concentrate feed • More demand in Bageshwar due to high yielding cows • Linked with private feed company for direct producer dealership (↓ transaction cost)

12. Participatory feeding trials • Planned in feed IP • 118 farmers participated from 7 villages • Test feed troughs & chaffing • Fast adoption of feed troughs and chaff cutter • Perception of farmers • Less fodder wastage • Clean fodder for animals • Considerable labor savings

13. Knowledge sharing • Training • Pant Nagar University:Business Enterprise development • More on production enhancement • Farmers gave good feedback on learning about new fodder crops & grasses • But limited training in business development • Regular staff meetings – exchange between partners • IP workshop in Tanzania for partners

14. Forward plans (6 months) IP workshops for various stakeholders Up-scaling the IP approach with other institutions: NABARD, ILSP, Himmothan, Bank Fodder development - seed/fodder bank (ILSP/VPKAS) Value chain assessment (post) - ongoing Livelihood Impact study FEAST (second round and control) Outputs/ documentation/dissemination

15. Presentation feedback 1 How to make project sustainable?This has been important issue in project development- mainly in regard to IP approach. Progress: Getting partner institutions (e.g. NABARD) interested to taking up IP approach, also ILSP is planning to integrate IP approach into all ILSP value chains and projects. But also on technical issues (e.g. fodder) further activities are being initiated.

16. Presentation feedback 2 Is any 3rd party impact assessment planned ?IFAD project evaluation in December evaluated some parts of the project.Student study planned based on study already implemented.ILSP is thinking of impact assessmentsFEAST will be performed a second time

17. Presentation feedback 3 What is the expected support from the National Bank for Agricultural and Rural Development (NABARD)?(What is current extent of covered farmers? 1382 farmers)NABARD can take up the approach beyond project area, also through local NGOs (mentioned in out-scaling workshop, previous day). If NABARD is aware of the success of innovation platforms, NGOs will find it easier to link farmers to credit institutions. NABARD will work with local institutions (e.g. IDBI); but producer collectives, supported by NABARD, could also be a potential target for innovation platforms to improve market links and production. Training and support mechanisms (farmer clubs) can be promoted and accessed through innovation platforms.

18. Presentation feedback 4 How to get a higher price for milk which is appropriate for the high quality of the milk? Only with good prices will farmers be interested in expanding dairy production?But we also have to consider the difficulties of transporting milk to urban centres. Aanchal is trying to help farmers in remote areas by subsidising collection (head-loads).

19. Presentation feedback 5 What are we trying to replicate from the project?The innovation platform approach is the core of the project and is therefore the main tool to be replicated. All market interventions and technical innovations implemented by the project have only been identified, disseminated and adopted through the IPs. We document the changes in production and marketing to show evidence of IP success, but are aware that this might distract from core project issue.

20. Presentation feedback 6 Dairy animal growth/fertility/reproduction are poor because of poor nutrition. What can the project provide to alleviate this?This has been a constraint to dairy production in the hill areas for some time. This is why the project has focussed on feed innovation platforms. However, changing extensive feeding systems is a long-term investment.Opportunities for collaboration with ULDB, mainly in training

21. Presentation feedback 7 How can be the IP approach be more structure-orientated? For instance, can women’s co-operatives for dairy development be established to increase sustainability?The project has initiated the formation of a co-operative in Bageshwar, based on the discussions at IP meetings. Also, Aanchal is promoting formal village-level dairy co-operatives.However, the same type of organisation does not work in all situations and conditions. The IPs should help with finding the most appropriate organisational form for each situation.On the other hand, discussions are still on-going how far IPs themselves should be formalised (compare with experience in Tanzania).

22. Breakout feedbackGroup 1 Question: Which project results will be incorporated in own institution? AHD: Chaff cutter (Gujrat model) looks promising, especially with local manufacturing; banks are willing to support dissemination ILSP: IP approach will help with overcoming limitations of market access and input services (e.g. credit)Pilot sites (from 41 activity blocks) will be identified to implement IP with new clusters in other value chains. ILSP already has federations at cluster-level as basis for IP. AHD: Make input supply (e.g. AI) sustainable (through IPs?) Banks: Use the potential of new and active farmer groups organised in IPs and linked to other stakeholders to make development activities more efficient (e.g. link credit for mini-dairy to milk collection for repayment; easier where institutions and producers are linked through IP

23. Breakout feedbackGroup 2 - 1 Question: How to establish fodder seed bank and other fodder development activities • Identify fodder requirements: • Fodder for lean periods: Dec-Feb & May-Jul • Currently only 50% of required fodder produced • Fodder from irrigated areas especially important: dual-purpose crops • Fodder by season: • Rabi fodder: • Crop-land: Berseem, oats, inter-crops (rye-berseem; Persian clover), dual-purpose wheat & barley (pre-cut for fodder) • Trees: Bhimal (Grewiaoptiva), Kachnar (Phaneravariegate), Dhudila (Ficusnemoralis, wall), banjoak (Quercusleucotrichophora); encourage SHGs to establish nurseries to produce saplings; forest department provides seeds and licences • Grass-land: Nursery development (sown in winter, planted out in rainy season), state department also provides seeds, form seed bank through SHGs which set up nurseries to grow from seeds and distribute planting material

24. Breakout feedbackGroup 2 - 2 • Kharif fodder: • Lots of fodder available • Conservation of grass from grass-land through hay for lean periods (silage on appropriate) • Improved species: hybrid napier (x with bajra), grows even under pine, higher protein and digestibility • Utilise field risers (terraces): hybrid napier, setaria …… • Which institutions can be combined to enable collection, cleaning, distribution of fodder seeds? • Farmers can be identified & trained • Forest department provides licencesResearch institutes can provide initial seed for multiplication (through NGOs) • Training can be provided. ULDB is also interested.

25. Breakout feedbackGroup 2 - 3 AHD: State government has decided to set up an new fodder development department.It will concentrate on improving fodder production and (alpine) grazing areas (Bugials).AHD has already established some fodder banks in various blocks. Control of wild animals is required to limit damage to fodder crops. In HP some research on fertility control of wild animals is being pursued.

26. Breakout feedbackGroup 3 - 1 Question: What material is needed to disseminate project outputs? What is the main audience? • What do we want to disseminate? Do we need impact study first? Can we produce some preliminary calculations? • Audiences and products: • Government institutions: (short) policy papers, one-on-one discussions • Universities/research institutions: technical papers (e.g. on participatory approaches, IP results) • Students: compile key learnings into e-learning / video modules • NGO, development organisations: trainings, work-shops, seminars on IP approaches; use project experiences • Farmers: Success stories to create awareness: posters, leaflets, folders, technical manuals (also relevant for universities); focus on economic impact

27. Participation - 1

28. Participation - 2