A major activity of the preparatory period for the third phase of the “Small Scale Fish Farming in the Lake Basin” - project is the conduct of socio-economic investigations in order to redefine the project strategy to better target the ultimate beneficiaries, small scale fish farmers.
The present report is to provide guidance in the assembly of adequate socio-economic information on the target group and to ensure small scale fish farmers' participation in the planning of project activities. It also identifies possibleparametersforroutine monitoring during the consolidation phase.
After ten years of assistance by the project, implemented by FAO and LBDA with funding by BSF and UNDP, fish farming is being established in the project area, and playing an increasingly important role in the supply of animal protein in people's diets.
The project document for a consolidation phase, prepared on the basis of findings of the Technical Review Mission, has been rejected for BADC funding by a Belgian Government project appraisal group because of the lack of sufficient feasibility studies and indicators. A continued support by BSF has been proposed.
To comply with BSF criteria, the project document needs to be revised. It was recommended to allow for a 6 to 12 months preparatory phase, during which adequate information on the target group and farming systems can be gathered to reorient the project in the consolidation phase towards sustainability of the interventions.
The BSF policies are directed to assure the survival of people menaced by hunger, malnutrition and under-development in regions of the Third World where the highest mortality rates due to these causes are registered.
The BSF approach is based on a two-pronged strategy: a short term crash programme, and long term development efforts to increase productivity and improve social services.
In Western Kenya, BSF intervened through the Farmer's Groups and Community Support Project. Key focus has been beneficiary participation in the planning and implementation process. It is also a key element in IFAD's Special Programme for Africa, to which approach BSF is supportive.
Chronicmalnutrition and poverty, high child mortality, and high population density with a subsequent scarcity of land, form the main justifications for a continued participation of BSF in the development of small scale fish farming in the region.
Fish and fish farming have a role to play in alleviating malnutrition. Fish contributes to food security by improving people's diets and by generating income for the rural poor. There is an evident fish eating tradition in the project area and fish farming has an impact on the availability of disposable incomes which is yet to be assessed. The project has aimed to increase production in food and income, and to diversify between crops.
The approach of the project so far has been technology driven, but it has been demonstrated that those projects that are based on delivery of technical inputs have poor sustainability. The intervention strategy of the project needs to be reviewed towards the socio-economic setting of small scale fish farming. Action oriented investigations to be conducted in the preparatory phase are to generate adequate knowledge on specific variables to formulate action programmes for the consolidation phase.
Factors of importance are: socio-economic characteristics of farmers; the importance of fish in people's diets and for the household's income; social levelling mechanisms and intra-household allocation of resources; and fish farmers' motivations and priorities.
Participation of fish farmers in the planning and development of adequate action programmes is essential if sustainability of the intervention is to be attained. A dynamic interaction between target group and project is needed. Resource-poor community members as well as key-farmers have an important role in this process.
The study programme proposed contains three elements: a formal questionnaire survey, participatory rural appraisal, and specific topic investigations.
It is recommended that impact assessment and baseline study are combined in the conduct of a single cross-sectional household survey that will compare the living standards and income generation and expenditures of project beneficiaries with those of a control group of non-fish farming households that live under similar socio-economic and environmental conditions. Variables to be assessed are presented in the programme element. To assess the sustainability of the project's impact, it is recommended to repeat the study at the end of the consolidation phase and possibly again three years after completion of the project.
PRA has been proposed to obtain a thorough understanding of the fish farmer's household objectives and needs, and the opportunities and constraints. It is also proposed to initiate a process of a two-way flow of information between project and target group and to ensure fish farmers participation in the planning of action programmes. PRA techniques as well as issues to be addressed are presented in the programme element.
Three specific topic investigations have been recommended. First, an assessment of privatization or commercialization of fry production centres and feed production, and the consequences thereof for extension services. Secondly, a micro-level financial cost-benefit analysis as an indicator for farm performance. Thirdly, a study on marketing conditions and structure.
For monitoring the progress of the project, meaningful qualitative indicators have been recommended. These include: pond maintenance; information exchange and fingerling supply between farmers; market dynamics; and key fish farmers records.
Implementation frameworks for each of the programme elements have been recommended. The frameworks suggest subsequent logical steps for the conduct of the programme elements, as well as a tentative time frame. Considerations on modalities of implementation, composition of study teams, and training and instruction requirements are also presented. For the implementation of continuous progress monitoring, it has been recommended to make use of monthly debriefing sessions with technical officers. It is anticipated that the implementation of the impact study and PRA programmes will take forty weeks, and that specifics topics investigations may be conducted in parallel.
Inputs required for the implementation of the proposed programme are presented in a tentative budget. It is considered that, in view of the heavy socio-economic component during this phase of the project and the technical backgrounds of LBDA project staff and of the national project coordinator, it may be preferable to have a CTA socio-economist, in which case international consultancy services may not be required. Both options are estimated to have equal budgetary consequences. It is suggested that assistance of national graduate trainees/associate professional officers may be requested, although the implementation may not be dependent on their availability. Upgrading of computer facilities in the project is recommended.
Since 1985, the Government of Kenya, through the Lake Basin Development Authority (LBDA), has been assisted by activities of FAO projects in introducing fish farming in Western Kenya. Reduction of supply from capture fisheries, due to changes in the fisheries of Lake Victoria and environmental changes, caused the population in the region to face protein insufficiency, which was aggravated by a high and increasing population density. This was even more true for markets in the interior of this region, distant from Lake Victoria, due to a poor physical infrastructure and lack of appropriate transportation means. The projects have been financially supported by UNDP and the Belgian Survival Fund (BSF) and again more recently, by FAO's TCP resources.
It has been mentioned on various occasions that, after ten years of assistance, fish farming is being established in the project region, and is playing an increasingly important role in the supply of animal protein in people's diets. In view of the quantitative achievements of the project, BSF emphasized that the extension of the second phase, by 15 months until end 1994, would be the last intervention on her part. However, the Third Kenya/Belgium Joint Commission of 20–21 June 1994, proposed to continue the project in order to ensure the viability and the sustainability of the action. In this third phase of the project, emphasis should be laid on the development of fish culture as an economic activity, with the principal aim of creating profitable enterprises. A joint GOK/FAO/UNDP/BADC Technical Review Mission was fielded in February 1995 to evaluate past activities and formulate a new project document for the third phase. The document submitted for BADC funding was largely based on the recommendations of this mission.
A Belgian Government project appraisal group, representing relevant services in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, met on 11 January 1996 to review the project document. The group observed that formulation of a project phase to develop small enterprises had been hampered by the lack of factors and studies, that would prove the feasibility of such a project. In particular, the group mentioned:
- there are few farms with fish culture as the main activity;
- there is a lack of quantitative and reliable data on production, production costs, and profitability of the operations;
- the rate of repayment to the revolving fund is low;
- there is little capacity for private enterprises to produce fingerlings and to specialize in fingerling production;
- a network of fingerling producers and distributors is not yet established.
Although the group recognized the fact that the project has developed effectively a basis for rural aquaculture and the activities accelerated during the last three years of implementation, it concluded that funding through BADC would not be justified. However, the group recommended co-funding by BSF for a third and last consolidation phase, with the following objectives:
- to establish a capacity based on a core group of around one hundred small associations of fish farmers, that would allow for maintaining and developing aquaculture in an autonomous manner. This capacity would include production knowledge and sufficient fingerling production at the farmer level, production and distribution of fish feeds at acceptable prices, and farmer to farmer extension services through the core group;
- to develop extensive fish farming into a more profitable activity so that it would be less marginal in the farming system as a whole;
- to continue to promote rural aquaculture as a tool to improve food security for an increasing number of small scale farmers.
In its consideration of justification of further intervention, the group recommended participation by BSF because:
- the region is densely populated with consequent high pressure on land. Poverty and malnutrition are high. Against this background and given the fact that the project aims at product diversification, with incomes from aquaculture to assure improvement of the nutritional status, the action would be justified. Beneficiaries should be the small scale farmers.
- the cost-benefit ratio between project inputs and production increase is weak but improvement is anticipated in view of the fact that aquaculture is now established and introduction of new technologies in rural areas generally take time. A consolidation phase is therefore justified. New strategies are required to improve the cost-efficiency ratio.
- women's participation in aquaculture is high and they could be key partners in intensifying efforts for higher incomes and improved diets for children.
However, the group also reviewed the project document on its compliance with BSF criteria and found it incompatible with the principles of BSF. The focus of BSF is on contribution to efficient and sustainable improvement of the well-being of food-insecure peoples. It was felt that the project document in its present format puts too much emphasis on institutional development and it was recommended that the project strategy should be redefined and reformulated to target the ultimate beneficiaries, small scale fish farmers.
For this purpose, FAO has been requested to reformulate the document following the indications provided by the group. The third phase would be divided into two periods, with a total duration of 3 years. A first period of 6 to 12 months is for redefining project strategy, following a participatory approach in planning the project activities, with small scale farmers and associations. The strategy should comply with the three objectives formulated by the group. The socio-economic studies, as proposed in the project document, should be implemented. Arrangements should be made with LBDA in order to allow for privatization of the system and its instruments for aquaculture promotion, but with reasonable control from LBDA. This period should conclude in a proposal for the consolidation phase. The proposal for this second period of 2 to 2.5 years should be evaluated by a tripartite mission. The three objectives mentioned should be the guiding principles of this phase. Objectives should be quantified and a permanent monitoring system should be in place. At the end of the project, rural aquaculture should rely fully on the capacities of the core group of fish farmers associations, so that activities can proceed in an autonomous manner. In reformulating the document, the active participation of women should be considered.
Upon acceptance of these recommendations, FAO is requested to submit a brief proposal for the first period of 6 to 12 months. A major activity of the first period is the conduct of socio-economic investigations in order to redefine the project strategy to target the ultimate beneficiaries. The present report is to provide guidance in the assembly of adequate socio-economic information on the target group, during the implementation of the first period, and to ensure small scale fish farmers' participation in the planning of project activities, in accordance with BSF principles. The report also intends to identify parameters for routine monitoring during the consolidation phase.
For this purpose, the report will go briefly into BSF's approach and its strategy in Western Kenya, followed by a review of the project strategy in its addressing of socio-economic aspects of fish farming. It will then make an attempt to identify the socio-economic information needed for the implementation of the consolidation phase and to address the needs of the target group, and parameters for project progress monitoring. The section following this will go into a programme for the assembly of the information and to obtain participation of fish farmers in the planning of project activities. The report will conclude with recommendations for the implementation of the programme.
The absence of a team leader has seriously hampered the compliance with the terms of reference for this mission (see Attachment II), as the consultant was expected to collaborate and discuss socio-economic matters with the team leader. Furthermore, the National Project Co-ordinator (NPC), who had been with the project in the implementation of the second phase, had been replaced shortly before arrival of the mission. However, an excellent working relationship was established with the NPC ad interim and other project staff, and full support for the consultancy was provided by LBDA project staff and the FAO Representation in Nairobi. The cooperation of other relevant organizations, the LBDA field staff and the fish farmers is very much appreciated.
The terms of reference for this consultancy mention the design of a programme for the assembly by national experts of existing socio-economic data and information within 2 months. However, from review of the project document and the comments by the project appraisal group, as well as discussions with relevant parties at the beginning of the consultancy, it became apparent both at FAO headquarters and in Nairobi that it was the intention to have a proposed programme for socio-economic investigations during the project's preparatory period of 6 to 12 months. The programme proposed in this report is based on that assumption.
The Belgian Survival Fund was established in 1983 in response to an 80 Nobel Prize winners' appeal in their Manifest Against Death through Hunger and Under-development, The Fund has as its objective “to assure the survival of peoples menaced by hunger, malnutrition and under-development in regions of the Third World where the highest mortality rates due to these causes are registered” (BADC/IFAD 1993). The Belgian Government approached four UN agencies - IFAD, WHO, UNICEF, and UNDP - to combine efforts in achieving BSF's objectives. IFAD was given the co-ordinator's role because its mandate was the most in line with BSF requirements. Presently, roughly more than one third of BSF funds are channelled through IFAD, one third through Belgian NGO's, and one third goes to the Special Programme for Africa.
BSF funded activities target the poorest parts of Africa: the Horn, including Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, Uganda and Tanzania. Within these countries, efforts were concentrated in some of the poorest sub-regions, that required special attention because of civil war or an influx of refugees from a nearby civil war, because of drought or the lack of agricultural inputs, because of a high rate of population growth and consequent mounting pressure on the land, or because of pockets of chronically high levels of malnutrition.
The BSF approach is based on a two-pronged strategy: the first part is a short term crash programme for inputs distribution to permit the destitute and drought-afflicted peoples, refugees, returnees and displaced people, to regain their production capacity; the second part of the strategy consists of long term development efforts to increase productivity and improve social services. Areas with the highest rate of mortality and incidence of absolute poverty were the prime target. Among the types of activities under this second strategy were: improved distribution of agricultural inputs and credit; promotion of alternative livelihoods by creating off-farm income-generating activities for small farmers, pastoralists, women and the landless; and assistance to governments to increase their institutional capacity to reach the poor. The assistance to the development of small scale fish farming in Western Kenya must be seen in the light of these types of activities.
A population growth rate as high as 3.9 percent, 77 percent of the land area being arid to semi-arid, and only 18 percent with a medium to high agricultural potential, were factors decisive for BSF intervention in Kenya. Especially the situation in Nyanza province was assessed to be quite precarious, with a high child mortality rate of 21.6 percent. The incidence of women-headed households were also the country's highest. It was observed that many children died of intestinal disorders and childhood diseases.
Under the BSF-IFAD arrangement, the fund intervened in Siaya District through the Farmer's Groups and Community Support Project. The project approach was based on full participation of the community on changing the attitude of local authorities, encouraging them to support those activities which were perceived by the people and the community as priorities. Through training and credit programmes, extension services and distribution of inputs, the project achieved its major objectives. The project has had substantial impacts on inputs supply, incomes, food availability, people's health and water supply. In the second phase of the project, the experience in Siaya District was transferred to seven other districts.
Key focus in the above project has been beneficiary participation in planning, implementation and evaluation. In the BSF concept, beneficiary participation in the planning and implementation process is fostered through the system of development committees at the village up to the district level. Beneficiaries were trained and oriented to assume full responsibility for their own development. Beneficiary participation is also a key element in IFAD's Special Programme for Sub-Saharan African Countries Affected by Drought and desertification (SPA). BSF is supportive to SPA projects because of their approach. SPA projects focus on environmental rehabilitation, enhancement of community and household food security, assistance to rural women to raise productivity and increase their incomes, a participatory approach to ensure sustainability in the post-project period, assisting in reintegration of special vulnerable groups, and economic recovery programmes for the rural poor.
Chronic malnutrition and poverty, high child mortality, and high population density with a subsequent scarcity of land in Western Kenya, form the main justifications for a continued participation of BSF in the development of small scale fish farming in the region. Undoubtedly, fish and fish farming activities can play an important role in alleviating malnutrition. The contribution of fish and fish products to food security is two-fold: improvement of people's diets and income-generating for the rural poor.
Fish as food
Fish is not an important source of calories, except for the oil of fatty fish, and in that respect, does not compete with other staple foods, such as rice, maize, cassava, beans, etc. However, fish and fish products are very rich in animal proteins. In developing countries, fish contributes 19 percent to animal protein intake and just over 4 percent to total protein intake (FAO 1995). High quality protein is essential for growth and health, and thus forms a valuable ingredient in a balanced diet. Fish is a source of essential fatty acids which are required by children in particular. It is also a relatively inexpensive source of essential micronutrients, such as calcium, iodine and vitamins, which are vital for nutrition and generally not found in staple foods.
In the project area, there is an evident fish eating tradition, due to the vicinity of Lake Victoria. Furthermore, the recent “Eat more fish” publicity campaign has had significant impact on consumption habits of those people until recently excluded from access to fish. Although the issue has not been properly assessed, interior markets seem to be open for an increased supply of fish and fish products. Fish can therefore be considered to be an increasingly important component in the daily diet of the rural population. However, the importance that fish makes in people's diets in relation to other food items, is yet to be assessed.
Fish as income
Fish, as a commodity, can make an important contribution to the economic well-being of fish farmers. It provides access to disposable incomes that can be utilized to obtain a balanced diet. Through economic interactions, it also provides incomes to those engaged in fish processing and trade.
There may be various reasons to grow fish as a cash crop: profitability of the activity; lack of realistic alternatives; diversification of production; etc. It has been observed in the project area that farmers tend to diversify between cash and subsistence crops in order to avoid dependency for income and food supply on one crop only.
The characteristics of the farms visited in the region range from subsistence to semi-commercial, both in scale and in their approach to fish culture. Often, in income generating terms, the activity may be considered secondary after more traditional cash crops, such as maize and cotton. On other occasions, fish may be grown for supplementary feeding, but harvest surpluses always seem to be cashed, either directly on-farm or in the local market. It is important to assess the impact of fish farming on the availability of disposable incomes and how these are utilized, in order to appraise the contribution of the activity to people's economic well-being.
In line with the principles of BSF, the project has aimed to increase production in food and income, and to diversify between crops to reduce dependency on a few crops thereby spreading farmers' risks, BSF has therefore co-funded the project with UNDP for the past ten years, with the exception of two intervals when the project was supported entirely through the FAO Technical Cooperation Programme (TCP). From being secondary donor, in the course of time, BSF became FAO/LBDA's major partner in the implementation of the project. With it came a stronger involvement in evaluation and formulation activities, and the last evaluation mission, on whose recommendations the project document of GCP/KEN/060/BEL was based, was under leadership of the Belgian representative.
BADC funding was proposed in order to steer the project towards commercialization of fish farming. Although the project had achieved its objectives, in BSF's view a follow-up phase was deemed to be necessary to sustain the activities implemented by the project. However, with the recommendations of the project appraisal group for renewed BSF funding, the project's approach needs to be reoriented to better reach the ultimate beneficiaries, small scale fish farmers.
