Week III: "Strategies and next steps"

Hi again everyone! We are into the 3rd and final week of our discussion and thanks once again to all for your excellent contributions! The key issues from the first week and the cases from last week give us now an opportunity to work on strategies for going ahead. Last week we learned from the cases from the Philippines, Nepal, China, Bangladesh and Thailand. However, there is still a need for us to be more specific about the issues identified in the last two weeks. Let me encourage those of you who have not yet shared your thoughts to participate and have your say, for what you may think as "too obvious to mention" may prove to be real nuggets of wisdom for others. And your questions will help spark new ideas. Let's make this final week a huge success. Please reflect on the following and let us know your thoughts on all or any of the following questions: Content and operational · How can win-win situations be ensured among the stakeholders while considering PPP? · What are the challenges in making "public" information available through private channels and what are the ways to overcome those? · How can content be best developed, updated and authenticated, and delivered to the intended beneficiaries? · What are the awareness generation tools to popularize ICT in rural areas in the context of e-agriculture? · How do we measure impact of e-agriculture initiatives and what are the key indicators? Next steps · How can the e-agriculture community go about collectively advancing the concept of partnerships? · How can we disseminate the learning from this forum to the wider community of practitioners and policy makers?

How can the e-agriculture community go about collectively advancing the concept of partnerships? I understand the e-agriculture community also includes mobile services (m-services). The access to mobile or cell phone by farmers and agrcultural trade community is higher compared to the access to internet & computer. The e-agricuture community concept can be sustainable if the e-services through Community Information Centers can be suplemented by the m-services. The e-services should also address the regional dialect of the user community. These basic realities gives rise to (1) Community ownership through partnership, (2) Partnership between Technology Services provider (e.g. Computer & Accessories, Mobile/Cell phone operators, Call Center Operators etc.) and (3) Government Field level Agricutural Offices, Agricutural Colleges and Universities. On the partnership issue I prefer three tier model. The top tier being the knowledge center, the 2nd tier is the content providers and the 3rd tier is the service providers. While the accdemia, research institution etc provide knowledge to the knowledge centers in particular and the other tiers in general. This allows the 3rd tier to incorporate all service providers in the e-community service arena. The whole success of the partnership will be dependent on the value of the knowledge created in the knowledge centers and their effective dissemination by the players in other layers. The e-agriculture community should advance their partnership on the basis of suggested the model.

Dear Tarique. Many thanks for your input and I agree that e-agriculture certainly includes "m services". I find the "three tier model" interesting. May I ask you to elaborate a little more on the model particularly the notion of the knowledge center (it's make up, among others) and how it relates to the tother two tiers, content and service providers? It would be helpful if you could also explain what you mean by the content and the service providers. Thanks. Manish

Hi! Community Members, This is Janaki from India again. Follwoing are some of the thoughts on the issues raised by Manish Content and operational • How can win-win situations be ensured among the stakeholders while considering PPP? A well drawn thoroughly debated proposal/project that has verbally and legally bound MOUs with mutual trust and respect for all stakeholders' commitments, methods of functioning, including failure, credit, proprietary and benefit sharing and conviction to a common goal will ensure a win-win situation. • What are the challenges in making "public" information available through private channels and what are the ways to overcome those? Cost perspective Enduser perspective To overcome the above all the parties should have a common "development' motivated agenda. • How can content be best developed, updated and authenticated, and delivered to the intended beneficiaries? Content should be developed based on baseline survey from the intended users. One should seek from the endusers about what kind of information for which they are looking for. The sought after information has to be obtained from authenticated sources and updated on a regular basis depending on the nature of content. • What are the awareness generation tools to popularize ICT in rural areas in the context of e-agriculture? Awareness camps, brochures and pamphlets distribution in simple regional languages about the need and uses of e-agriculture. training the rural youth and women in running and maintaining the e-agri-centres once they are established. • How do we measure impact of e-agriculture initiatives and what are the key indicators? Increase in awareness levels Replicability of the exiting models Livelihoods improvement Increase in income levels Demand for content Next steps • How can the e-agriculture community go about collectively advancing the concept of partnerships? Forming of rural e-agrinetworks attached to strong grass root level organizations by conducting local need assessment surveys, identifying probable partners, identifying priority areas and projects through pre project workshops etc. The e-community members from various regions may be identified for involving in these tasks. E-agriforum may appoint under the auspices of FAO a team representing all stakeholders at various regions/ countries/states/ places for involving in the above tasks, the goal being the establishment of e-agricentres in the villages. The e-agricentres can be established in the villages through public (govt and non governmental organizations) and private organizations that are willing to take part in this endeavour. Many private organizations as part of corporate social responsibility may be engaged for this purpose. The PPPP (public, private, people participation) is necessary as the public institutions are known as knowledge generators and private institutions are known for converting knowledge into useful product. The dissemination channels of private organizations are very strong which can be utilized for this. A consortium approach may followed for drawing proposals based on the need assessment surveys. • How can we disseminate the learning from this forum to the wider community of practitioners and policy makers? As the present one is individual based, E-agri forum can go for institutional based memberships across the regions all over the world and share the information with them. Later on the forum can also share the information through e-agrinetworks established at different areas. The entire exercise cannot work continuously on virtual basis. At some stage actual actors have to be drawn and the required resources have to be mobilized. Organizations like FAO may initiate and follow up this responsibility. Regards, Janaki

Dear Janaki. Welcome back and many thanks for the rich input! May I ask you to elaborate a little more on how one can overcome the two challenges, i.e. cost and end-user perspectives, in making public information available through private delivery channels? These clearly seem to be two of the most oft-cited challenges and any ideas you could share on this will be highly useful. For instance, what are the ways for the parties concerned to have a "common development motivated agenda" as you pointed out? Thanks, Manish

Dear Members. I would like to take this opportunity to share my ideas and views on effective PPP. In Bangladesh, despite both sectors' considerable effort in trying to build meaningful partnership, very few initiatives have thus been successful. Much of this is due to inadequate understanding of what PPP entails, lack of mutual trust and absence of proper strategy. A win-win PPP model recognizes that the public and private sectors have different strengths and allows each to do what it does best. For example, through PPP, we could potentially win the "content" battle once and for all. Currently, the content available in most telecenters in Bangladesh has either been retrieved from an obsolete source or it is merely a digitized version of printed materials available at the local agriculture office. These centers also often fail to respond to farmers' need for time sensitive information such as market price or weather update or production related information on fertilizer or pesticide, which, if incorrect, can prove to be fatal. The agencies under the Ministry of Agriculture such as the Department of Agriculture Marketing (DAM) or Agriculture Information Service (AIS), which have access to the latest information and technologies and are mandated to provide these services could partner with these telecenters and enrich their knowledgebase. Private sector, with its strength of logistic support and diverse expertise could ensure effective and efficient delivery of information by leveraging existing public infrastructure or developing new if needed. This will underpin the role of government as the regulator rather than a service provider and strengthen the credibility of service provided by the private sector. In order to ensure sustainability, there also has to be a long term commitment from the public sector to the provision of quality public services and willingness of private sector to share and manage potential risks. A key success factor in the delivery of PPP projects and in the development of a competitive PPP market also lies in a solid flow of prospective projects brought forward at an early stage by Departments and procuring authorities. One of the key activities during the initial phase of any PPP programme should be the creation and maintenance of private sector interest in that programme. This may involve marketing and communicating PPP opportunities both within the country and abroad. Consultation with potential private sector service providers can raise awareness of PPP opportunities and contribute to the learning experience within the public service sector.

Dear Rubaiya. Welcome to the forum and thanks for articulating so well the roles (core competence) of the public and the private sectors in "settling the battle for content once and for all": government focuses more on regulation while private sector on service delivery. Please add to your thoughts of how you think the private sector's interest can be considered and maintained in the early stages of a PPP program. You mentioned marketing and communicating PPP opporutnity as a means to do just that but can you please use a short example to illustrate this further? Thanks. Manish

Hi! Everyone This is Janaki I agree with Rubiya's apparent views on PPPs. The PPPs have gained significance in the context of globalization where everything is market driven. As rightly mentioned, unless the private partners' interests are taken care the PPPs are generally not successful. That's the reason; I mentioned the challenges in PPPs as "cost' and "enduser' factors, for which Manish sought for little clarity. We all agree that public institutions work for public good since they invest with tax payers (public money); henceforth their enduser is mostly the "common man'. However, for private organizations since the organizations are built mostly with their money, naturally they look for quick returns and their enduser is obviously a rich consumer who has the purchasing ability. Once we consider partnerships between these two for a common goal like serving the farmer in a village (landless resource poor) by providing enough information through e-agriculture the enduser has to be same and the cost factor has to be looked into by either public partner or both so that the service/product is affordable. On the other hand, if the private partners also work for public good as part of "corporate social responsibility' in some areas where there is a need for critical support from all stakeholders with "development motto' (eg. rural development/agricultural development)' there exists a common agenda and common goal and a "win-win' situation can be attained in PPPs in e-agriculture. There are some examples of PPPs in infrastructure (construction of Airports, Highways etc.) where the services are charged heavily due to the intervention of private partners which becomes outside the reach of common man. This should not be the case if the motto (agenda) of PPPs in e-agriculture is to reach a common farmer in a remote village. Regards, Janaki

Dear Janaki, Reaching resource poor men and women is an issue raised by Janaki that has slipped under the radar in most of the discussion to date. And yet these are the prime implementors of information that we are hoping to provide through e-agricutlure. I am wondering how e-krishok is addressing the social factor in its e-agriculture initiative. Noel

Dear All greetings I join here again to give my inputs to the questions raised by manish How can content be best developed, updated and authenticated, and delivered to the intended beneficiaries? First of all, We should actually see what content is actually needed by the beneficiaries. the assessment of needs should follow a region-specific approach.the authenticity of the content also matters. for this data should be collected from public as well as private partners. the choice of partners should also be based on authenticity and relevancy of information. Content development is a constantly evolving process.as the needs of the target groups may keep on changing from time to time . the user groups also may change ,so assessment should be done regularly. the updation of data is also very important. as was seen with my experience of AGMARKNET scheme, where farmers have to be given the price information related to different commodities. the daily updation is required. In case it is not done on a regular basis, the information is of no use to farmers. As we all know information should be SMART S specific M measurable A Accurate R Relevant T Timely The content though available on electronic media is always not completely accessible by the farmers or other target groups. in the AGMARKNET, the content is being made available through pamphelets, tickers in agricultural mandis.notice bords. ITC e chaupal is also taking help of these instruments for content dissemination. thanks and waiting to hear from you all Sapna

Hi Its Remi again from Win Incorporate, Bangladesh. Responsing to Manish's query, I am attaching here my views: [color=red]• What are the challenges in making "public" information available through private channels and what are the ways to overcome those? I observed these challenges: 1. Lack of Awareness on information dissemination process: From our field experience, we found that farmers in some locality are not aware well enough about the ICT services at the centers. Sometimes they also don't have the clear idea on how to bring their problems and take the solutions from centers. This should be resolved; otherwise PPP in e-agriculture perspective may not result as expected. 2. Lack of knowledge of the center entrepreneur about the contents in hand: Sometimes the center owner (or the operator) does not have the clear idea about the information they have in their hand. This may because of the lack of interest in this activity due to lower profit (sometime none). They needed to be encouraged in financial and social perspective to brain-storm the content they have and to disseminate those to the beneficiaries (farmer). 3. Information accessibility: In content development process sometimes the access to specific types of public info, such as the video clips content, up-to-date text content is restricted or it become hard-nut-to-crack situation. It results in the absence of HIGHLY DYNAMIC quality in the content. It should be resolved. [color=red]• How can content be best developed, updated and authenticated, and delivered to the intended beneficiaries? I think content development, updating and authentication process is described well enough by Kashfia Ahmed. But I have to add something in the delivery mechanism. This can be done in four ways: A. Through PC-internet-website at centers: Here "Content" is hosted in the "Internet", and it can be obtained through "PC" (here at GPCIC) with the help of "website" (here ruralinfobd.com). So this "3-tie" should be maintained smoothly with redundant backup internet connectivity facility. b. Through Audio-visual KIOSK (touch screen driven multimedia software) at centers: Beside the conventional "3-tie" system, KIOSK can be introduced to disseminate the info more user-friendly. With this farmers can get their info from touch-screen KIOSK without the help of the operator and it will make more impact on them. Multimedia software can be developed with the existing content to meet this necessity. As we know pictorial information has more impact than textual, so it can make this project much better than the usual. c. Through CallCenters (cell phone/land phone): Since cell phone has become the more popular device which even an illiterate individual can operate, it can be bind up with Call-Center to deliver the information services instantly. This can make a win-win situation for both the center owner and the user. d. Through hard copy: Beside these methods, hard copy of the needed information with colorful illustration can be produced and delivered at minimum cost to the farmers (like insecticide booklet, pesticide booklet, crop-chart etc.) which will help them instantly solve any related problem mentioned here. Individual farmer may be uneducated but any one of the family members can help them to find out their answers from these publications. [color=red]• What are the awareness generation tools to popularize ICT in rural areas in the context of e-agriculture? 1. Awareness through local community gathering (by Court-yard meeting, Workshop, locally initiated Theatre on common rural problems and solving etc.): There is no other alternate way to aware the local community without these public gathering. I have a friend of mine worked in this process in which they have introduced a new idea called Theatre for Development (TfD) process. According him, they have primarily gathered some local problems (regarding agriculture and other) from the community, made a script on that and then they trained some local hand-picked actor-actress to perform the situation in public place through open-air theatre. At some point of the play when they have reached to the "problem", they invited individuals from the audience to solve the problem. The play is designed in such a way that if some problem/solution session arises, that automatically results to the center specific ICT solution. And thus the present audience and hence the locality become informed about the center, its activity and the usage of ICT for their own purpose. As per my friend, this process made a huge impact among the locality. So, I think, this could be a tremendous tool to popularize ICT in rural areas in the context of e-agriculture. 2. Hands-on demonstration (once/twice a month) about the process of the query and delivery of the content from rural centers may have a good impact in this context. This type of campaign has already started by Win Inc. few months back and its result is very positive. A huge number of the locality became aware about the centers (CICs/RICs). regd Remi IT Director Win Inc.

Here are my some collected inputs: Establishment of wider network; communication networks needs to be supported amongst actors in the market chain (farmers, transporters, buyers, traders, etc), in order to ensure more equitable, timely, and collaborative access to markets for smallholders Farming/Production: • More investment is needed to develop technical infrastructure and skilled human resources for farmers and make it available in local content /language . • Technical information systems in agriculture need to incorporate local knowledge through the local capacity building, the system need to be integrated into regional and international systems and maintain links to policy-makers for effective policy feed back. Research & Innovation"; in PPP model a group of Researchers and extensionists are required to improve the system and continued to interact and share knowledge more effectively using the new digital technologies. Financial sustainability must be built into PPP model

Dear All greetings I join here again to give my inputs to the questions raised by manish How can content be best developed, updated and authenticated, and delivered to the intended beneficiaries? First of all, We should actually see what content is actually needed by the beneficiaries. the assessment of needs should follow a region-specific approach.the authenticity of the content also matters. for this data should be collected from public as well as private partners. the choice of partners should also be based on authenticity and relevancy of information. Content development is a constantly evolving process.as the needs of the target groups may keep on changing from time to time . the user groups also may change ,so assessment should be done regularly. the updation of data is also very important. as was seen with my experience of AGMARKNET scheme, where farmers have to be given the price information related to different commodities. the daily updation is required. In case it is not done on a regular basis, the information is of no use to farmers. As we all know information should be SMART S specific M measurable A Accurate R Relevant T Timely The content though available on electronic media is always not completely accessible by the farmers or other target groups. in the AGMARKNET, the content is being made available through pamphelets, tickers in agricultural mandis.notice boards. ITC e chaupal is also taking help of these instruments for content dissemination. thanks and waiting to hear from you all Sapna

Hello Everyone! On the discussion points raised by Manish and the suggestions made by Janaki and others, I would like to share the following thoughts: As per FAO document - Bridging the Rural Divide From and comments made on this forum, the need for a common and comprehensive Portal/Gateway for the agricultural community is emerging very strongly. The efforts needed to develop such a portal and ensure its sustainability, a PPP model is perhaps the best option. Discussed below is a broad outline of such a portal. ï‚° Scope and Objectives The key objectives of this portal should be: * Emerge as a "One Stop" portal to meet most of the knowledge sharing and information needs of the agricultural community. * It should be self sustainable. This can happen only if the coverage is wide and allows service providers the option for revenue generation * To provide multilingual capability and options for customization to suit regional/country specific needs * To offer features that goes beyond static content to assist farmers in decision making and e-commerce so that the portal is useful, popular and actively used. * Option for multichannel dissemination of information through mobile phones, TV and radio, so that people with no access to computers can benefit too. ï‚° Suggested Features * General Content Relevant content such as: - farming best practices, - macro level information on soil, regional climate and weather conditions, - information on local government policies, programs and schemes - directories of - agriculture expert communities, research institutions, manufacturers & distributors of agro inputs, agro marketing & trading agencies This content is generally static in nature, but needs to be kept current * Community Networking - A platform for information exchange between community members, government officials and stake holders. (Similar to the features of the FAO "e agriculture site" This portal will complement the FAO platform and is not expected to duplicate it). - Training and capacity building - Social Networking - blogs, wikis * Advisory Services - This feature would allow farmers to seek advice from a panel of experts on farming and cultivation based on local conditions, choice of crops, agro input management on standing crops, prophylactic control and GIS based advisory services * Decision Support - Farmers need information to make choices and decisions depending on weather and market conditions. This information is dynamic in nature and can be made available by linking information from multiple sources. - Crop production and cultivation planning (based on demand supply situations) - Irrigation scheduling and application of agro inputs based on weather forecasts - Market price information to decide on timing and location of sale * E-Commerce - The ability to perform commercial transactions will enhance the popularity of the portal considerably such as sale of agricultural produce and demand aggregation - Purchase of agro inputs - (option for reverse auctions ) - Financial, banking, insurance and taxation transactions ï‚° Next Steps Some of the points mentioned have already been discussed, but they have been mentioned again to maintain the sequence. * Set up a Forum or Working Group to manage this initiative. (Many initiatives in industry such as setting technology standards, liaison with regulatory bodies are managed this way). * Conduct a study with stakeholders and community members to validate the desired features of the portal. * Get stakeholders (government, research institutions, industry) to work on a collaborative framework, since some of the features of this portal would depend on data feeds form multiple sources to derive richer information and content. * Develop a "Proof of Concept' for the main features of the portal. * Obtain feedback and suggestions from the community on the PoC. * Review the feedback for further action. Cheers, Amit Dasgupta.

Dear Dr Dasgupta Your valuable input and the kind of action plan suggested is quite encouraging and seems to be practical, ofcourse with lot of persuation and commitment from all the stakeholders. Where there is a beginning there is a way. The feedback is very essetnial for refining the models for further replication. Regards, janaki

Thank you for your Question Manish. Government and private sector sometimes have opposing interests, but often too they have a common interest. Marketing and communicating PPP opportunity entails finding that common interest and building a partneship upon it. For example, the mobile phone companies in Bangladesh are very keen to set up an agriculture call center. MOA also realizes the need. Both parties could market and communicate their strengths to each other and find an even balance of tasks and risks. The decision to carry out a project in partnership with the private sector is mostly for the government to take. Naturally it is also possible for private sector parties to take the initiative and approach the government with proposals. Either party's proposal should list what it can offer to the other. The dialogue should start from the initiation phase. I hope that brings a little more clarity. Best Rubaiya

Dear Rubaiya, I agree with you that there is tremendous opoprtunity for private - public in e-agriculture. You have rightly identified content as an important issue. I do think a model is in place that IRRI has been nurturing with BRRI (Bangladesh Rice Research Institute). On the Bangladesh Rice Knowledge Bank there is up to date information on rice production technology. It is in simple fact sheets. There are also changes being done in the coming three to four weeks. There is no reason why telecentres cant link to thatand even develop customized material from it. With CIMMYT we are now extending the approach to BARI. The short cut many private sector groups choose is to bipass the current government scientists and hire short term consultants (retired ag professionals) and pay large sums to have material written that may or may not be up to date. In the very process the government institution is marginalised. The cost of working with institute scientists is not large. For BRRI there were a series of workshops with 25 to 30 scientists producing the material. In the process the Bangladesh Rice Knowledge Bank has become institutionalised and so is now part of the annual program review. It is also linked to the Training Centre of BRRI and so is now being used for government officer training. That material will be authoriative for any e-agriculture model that evolves. Question: farmer asks in telecentre for information on BRRI dhan 47. There is a fact sheet on the Knowledge Bank that can be accessed. I feel there is a model in embryo that can be built on by any PPP emerging network. e-krishok could form such linkages. Noel

I'm posting the following from our Subject Matter Expert, Dr. Asaduzzaman. Thanks to Dr. Asaduzzaman for his thoughts. Hi everybody, Let me try to give some answer to each of the questions. More thought of course needs to go into these issues. Content - Q1 on Win Win situation A win-win situation obtains only when the stakeholders all have a common interest though may be for different reasons . Private sector will be interested if there is a scope for profit. If costs of providing service is high, they would be interested if it is possible to some how subsidise efforts at their level. On the public (Government) side, it should be, theoretically at least, provision of public service. Unfortunately, the ground reality in countries of the South is that public officials may not like to expend efforts for new ventures which may necessitate going beyond their normal duties and responsibilities which also in many cases remain unattended. On the other hand, this is true at least in Bangladesh that a kind of working relationship has emerged between the Government and the NGOs. If NGOs act as honest brokers at the field level it may be possible to bring in the private sector through them. In fact, the NGOs may actually help in mobilising people to use the opportunities available while the actual operation of facilitation may be done by the private sector. Content - Q2 on Public information through private channels The problem lies in collating "publicly held information" . Much of the information even if available remain scattered and in either hard copy or "in file" form. Also, many are at the field level, spatially scattered all over the place. Recently there was a debate regarding how firm are the Department of Extension's figures on ag output. To my querry, the DAE people said that they do it through crop-cutting surveys which I doubted and asked if the data base is available. The DAE people said that it exists. I wanted to have access to it. This was before the Ag Advisor. But I came to know that even if it at all exists, it is held at the block level in some file somewhere (who knows where?). So, the first challenge is to physically locate the information. File information, particularly, has to be carefully copied, all collated in one place and then digitalise it for ease of future reference. Sometime there may be a concern among the public officials if the information so provided would be breach of confidentiality. Hence there is a need for understanding between the policy makers and the information providers (whoever that is incl private, NGOs or whatever) regarding the limits of the nature of information that may be so collected and collated before putting in public space. Of course, this concern should not arise in case of information already in the public domain in some form. The next challenge is to make some order and sense out of the information that are collected. This may be a specialist's job . More importantly, any information that are put on the public space, has to be vetted for authenticity and accuracy by a team composed of experts as well as other concerned persons. This is essential if the information is of technical nature, be it fertiliser application or land laws. The private sector on the ground has to have ready an operational channel which has to be well-known to the people. Here I have already referred to social mobilisation through NGOs. I would also like to point out that if ICT is to be employed for dissemination, this must not be mono-information medium. Variety of information may be made available to people in which case it would appeal better to them. Content - Q3 on content development Here we need to have first a Needs Assessment of the types, forms, periodicity and language of the content. It may also have graphics, animation, audio and video clips to make it more easily comprehensible to the people. This should be done by people who can do it best. Updating would require regular liaison between the developers and the public information supplier. technical side of it is not so difficult. Mainataining liaison is more important. Also the frequency of updating has to be based on demand from the clientale. As information build up a FAQ may be copiled for simpler and common questions so that it takes very little time to reply to people's questions. Authentication, I have already discussed earlier. However, there should be a referral system too experts for more complicated and new matters that come up Content - Q4 on awareness generation Mobilisation may be through NGOs, workshops with stakeholders at various levels, most importantly demonstration at the ground level. Some training may be needed, I suggest get hold of the newly passed out diploma holders from agriculture schools in the districts (in case of Bangladesh). They may act as kind of grass roots level subject matters persons. Content - Q5 on measuring impact Several ways may be. Indicators may be a. How frequently people request for information b. How many do so c. If it is increasing over time d. If they have used the relevant information for solving their problems e. If the information has been found to be effective if they have tried it out? f. If not, have they referred back to the persons concerned and what had been the response in terms of investigation on the authenticity of the information provided and i this has been changed subsequently. g. How frequent is the failure sysndrom? Instruments may be FGD, semi-structured questionnaire. But intensive FGDs with groups of people may be the most effective one. Next steps Advancing concept of e-agriculture as well as dissemination of present sum total of ideas. Prepare a concept document based on the discussion so far. have face to face discussion based on the concept note. But most importantly go out to the field and try it out among the actual recipients by talking to them. Revise the concept and circulate among all stakeholders. Have pilot based on these ideas and if successful, replicate. If revisions, course corrections are needed do so by talking to people on the ground. but share the information among all for a proper assessment. Asaduzzaman