1

Sustaining Livelihoods through Organic Agriculture in

Tanzania: A Sign-post for the Future

Petra Bakewell-Stone May, 2006

Norwegian University of Life Sciences Department of Plant and Environmental Sciences

Master Thesis 30 credits 2006

Main Supervisor: Dr. Geir Lieblein

2

Contents Abbreviations 3 Acknowledgements 5 Abstract 6 1 Introduction 7 2 Literature Review 8 2.1 Definitions of organic agriculture 8 2.2 Classification systems of organic agriculture 9 2.3 Organic agriculture in Africa 10 2.4 Organic agriculture as a livelihood strategy 11 2.5 Pathways to improvements in organic systems 12 3 Methods 15 3.1 Action Research 15 3.2 Systems Thinking 17 3.3 Agroecosystem Analysis 17 3.4 Farming Systems Research 18 3.5 Case Study Research 19 3.6 Participatory Learning and Action 20 3.7 Soft Systems Methodology 20 3.8 Sustainable Livelihoods Framework 22 3.9 World Café 23 4 Research Process 24 4.1 Selecting a topic 24 4.2 Exploring the subject 25 4.3 Designing the study 25 4.4 Surveying the territory 26 4.5 Seizing learning opportunities 26 4.6 Refining the concept note 26 4.7 Beginning the fieldwork 28 4.8 Key informant interviews 29 4.9 Field visits 30 4.10 Case study research 30 4.11 Stakeholder forum 32 4.12 Digesting the findings 33 4.13 Verification by acceptance 34 5 Organic Agriculture in Tanzania 35 5.1 Country background 35 5.2 History of organic agriculture in Tanzania 35 5.3 Status of organic agriculture in Tanzania 36 5.4 Modus Operandi of organic agriculture in Tanzania 39 5.5 Political context of organic agriculture in Tanzania 40

3

6 Assessment of Organic Systems in Tanzania 41 6.1 Towards a Tanzanian vision of organic agriculture 41 6.2 Benefits of organic agriculture in Tanzania 42 7 Summary of Case Study on Organic Agriculture and Rural Livelihoods in Mkuranga District 46 7.1 Background to the area 46 7.2 Individual case narratives 46 7.3 Analysis 46 7.4 Lessons 47 8 Challenges to the Development of Organic Agriculture in Tanzania 49 8.1 Production 49 8.2 Labour 50 8.3 Gender 50 8.4 Market-orientation 51 8.5 Policy and institutional framework 53 9 Strategies to Strengthen the Organic Sector in Tanzania 55 9.1 Production and processing 55 9.2 Market development 57 9.3 Research and education 60 9.4 Policy and legislation 62 9.5 Standards and certification 65 9.6 Institutional development 67 10 Concluding Remarks 69 References 71 Appendices 1 Interviews Summary 2 Case Study Protocol 3 Report on Case Study Research 4 Invitation to Stakeholder Forum 5 Background Information to the Stakeholder Forum 6 News Release 7 Session Planning 8 Stakeholder Forum Summary Report 9 Reflections

4

Abbreviations AIDS Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome ASDP Agricultural Sector Development Programme ASDS Agricultural Sector Development Strategy BET Board of External Trade BOKU University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences CSO Civil Society Organisation CSR Case Study Research DFID Department for International Development EPOPA Export Promotion of Organic Products from Africa EurepGAP European Good Agricultural Practice FAO Food and Agricultural Organisation FSR Farming Systems Research GDP Gross Domestic Product GMO Genetically Modified Organism HACCP Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point HIV Human Immunodeficiency Virus ICS Internal Control System IFOAM International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movement IMO Institute of Market Ecology IOAS International Organic Accreditation Scheme IPM Integrated Pest Management ITC International Trade Centre KNCU Kilimanjaro Native Cooperative Union MAFSC Ministry of Agriculture, Food Security and Cooperatives MARI Mikocheni Agricultural Research Institute MDG Millennium Development Goals MKUKUTA Mkakati wa Kukuza Uchumi na Kuondoa Umaski Tanzania MRL Minimum Residue Limits MRP Minjingu Rock Phosphate MVIWATA Mtandao wa Vikundi vya Wakulima wa Tanzania NEPAD New Partnership for Africa’s Development NGO Non-Governmental Organisation NORAD Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation NSGRP National Strategy on Growth and Reduction of Poverty PCI Premier Cashew Industries PELUM Participatory Ecological Land Use Management PGS Participatory Guarantee Systems PLA Participatory Learning and Action PTD Participatory Technology Development POP Persistent Organic Pollutants RAAKS Rapid Appraisal of Agricultural Knowledge Systems SADC Southern African Development Community SIDA Swedish Development Agency SL Sustainable Livelihoods SSM Soft Systems Methodology SUA Sokoine University of Agriculture SWC Soil and Water Conservation TanCert Tanzania Organic Certification Association

5

TBS Tanzanian Bureau of Standards TOAM Tanzania Organic Agriculture Movement Tshs Tanzanian Shillings UMB Norwegian University Life Sciences UNCTAD United Nations Conference on Trade and Development UNEP United Nations Environment Programme WHO World Health Organisation N.B. Unless otherwise stated all costs are given in Tanzanian shillings. At the time of writing 1,000 Tshs is equivalent to 0.638346 Euros, based on exchange rates given at http://www.xe.com/ucc/ (visited 09/05/06).

6

Acknowledgements

This research would not have been possible without the generous assistance of individuals and institutions too numerous to mention here. I would, however, like to record my most sincere thanks to my supervisor in Norway, Dr. Geir Lieblein, for being a bastion of support at every stage in the research, and for asking fascinating

questions which have taken me into new realms of discovery. I am also very grateful to Dr. Charles Francis, from the University of Nebraska, for his encouraging,

thoughtful and positive inputs, to Dr. Fred Johnsen and Dr. Lars Olav Eik of Noragric for their technical support under PANTIL and to NORAD for providing the necessary financial support for my fieldwork. My particular appreciation is extended to Leonard

Mtama of TanCert and Jordan Gama of TOAM in Tanzania for their close collaboration and wonderful sense of humour which made working together an extremely refreshing and pleasurable experience. Thanks are also due to Marg

Leijdens of EPOPA for facilitating my fieldwork in many ways, to Juma Mandwanga of Premier Cashews Industries Ltd. and his family for kindly hosting me in Kerekese during the case study research, to my local contact, Dr. Kallunde Sibuga and others at

Sokoine University of Agriculture in Morogoro, Tanzania for contributing their knowledge and experience and to all the people involved in organic agriculture in one way or another who volunteered their time and energy to facilitate this study. I would like to express my profound gratitude to the late Father Yves Marché, whose tireless

work with smallholder farmers to build sustainable communities in Tanzania has been the greatest source of inspiration in my work and studies, and whose memory

continues to significantly influence the direction of my ideas and energies. Finally, I am forever indebted to my dear parents, Anderson Bakewell and Dr. Francine Stone, for their selfless attentiveness to all my needs and, in the context of this research, for

meticulously proof-reading my writings and providing valuable comments.

7

Abstract Since certified organic agriculture first emerged in Tanzania in the early 1990s it has been receiving increasing interest from the private sector and development partners, particularly for the role that it may have to play in addressing issues of sustainable food production and improved livelihoods of resource-poor people. Empirical data that helps to elucidate the relationship between organic agriculture and livelihood sustainability is currently limited. By joining together with key actors in Tanzania's organic sector and analysing organic initiatives from a sustainable livelihood perspective, this study aims to assess and enhance organic agriculture's contribution to sustainable livelihoods and food security amongst Complex, Diverse and Risk-prone farmers. Holistic and multi-perspective analysis of the organic sector reveals that although organic agriculture is making efficient use of resources in the current institutional context and building upon existing livelihood strategies, there are attendant risks and challenges in pursuing certified organic production for the benefit of the smallholder farmers. These need to be taken into consideration during the formulation and implementation of farm-, district- and national-level strategies. Key words: organic agriculture, Tanzania, sustainable livelihoods

8

Chapter One: Introduction

In an effort to address the remaining gaps in our knowledge of the livelihood benefits to resource-poor smallholder farmers of organic certification and trade, this study applies action research approaches to the developing organic sector in Tanzania. The overall aim is to assess and enhance organic agriculture’s contribution to sustainable livelihoods and food security amongst Complex, Diverse and Risk-prone (CDR) smallholders in Tanzania. The central research question of this study, ‘In what ways can organic agriculture be developed for the benefit of the smallholder in Tanzania?’ has been addressed through two whole-project case studies and multi-stakeholder involvement, the main methods adopted to analyse the dynamics of organic agriculture at the local and national levels respectively. The main research question can be broken down into three instrumental questions:

1. What is the impact of organic agriculture on smallholder livelihoods? 2. By which pathways does organic agriculture lead to livelihood benefits? 3. Which strategies can be adopted to strengthen these pathways?

A three-phase research process, which has moved from case studies, key informant interviews and field visits at the local level, to a national-level stakeholder forum and then to verification and presentation of findings back at the local level, considers the structure and functioning of organic systems at both spatial scales. Fieldwork was carried out in Tanzania over four months and was arranged under the Programme for Agricultural and Natural Resources Transformation for Improved Livelihoods (PANTIL) involving collaboration between the Norwegian University of Life Sciences (UMB) and Sokoine University of Agriculture (SUA) in Tanzania. In the tradition of action research, the researcher moves beyond reflection into action planning in collaboration with key actors, the outcome of which is the participatory formulation of strategies for individual and joint actions to strengthen the organic sector.

9

Chapter Two: Literature Review The purpose of this chapter is to compile and synthesise the burgeoning literature and research relating to organic agriculture and its role in development in sub-Saharan Africa. 2.1 Definitions of organic agriculture Organic agriculture, also known as ecological or biological agriculture, is a holistic farm management system which aims to optimise the health and productivity of interdependent communities of soil, life, plants, animals and people (FAO/WHO, 2001). Organic systems operate by integrating biological and ecological processes such as nutrient cycling, nitrogen fixation, soil regeneration, allelopathy, competition, predation and parasitism into food production processes. Rather than relying on expensive and non-renewable external inputs, organic agriculture promotes a combination of agronomic practices such as crop rotations, intercropping and the use of locally-available manure together with biological control methods (EPOPA, 2004). Through the mindful management of ecological and biological processes organic farmers can optimise the use of locally or farm-derived renewable resources. Since it builds on and enhances the ecological management skills of farmers, and includes social standards, organic agriculture is 'more than a systems of production that includes or excludes certain inputs' notably agrochemicals and Genetically-Modified Organisms (GMOs) (Edwards, 2005). The International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), a worldwide umbrella organisation of organic agriculture movements with at least 760 member organisations and institutions in 105 countries has defined organic agriculture as 'a whole systems approach based upon sustainable ecosystems, safe food, good nutrition, animal welfare and social justice' (IFOAM, 2002). IFOAM has formulated principles for organic agriculture that were revised in 2005 to include health, ecology, fairness and care (see box below), and also basic standards that are applied to both certified and non-certified organic agriculture.

IFOAM Revised Principles for Organic Agriculture

HEALTH – Organic agriculture should sustain and enhance the health of soil, plant, animal, human and the planet as one and indivisible. Health is understood as the wholeness and integrity of living systems. ECOLOGY – Organic agriculture should be based on living ecological systems and cycles, work with them, emulate them and help sustain them. FAIRNESS – Organic agriculture should build on relationships that ensure fairness with regards to the common environment and life opportunities. CARE – Organic agriculture should be managed in a precautionary and responsible manner to protect the health and well-being of current and future generations and the environment.

Source: After IFOAM, 2005a

10

2.2 Classification systems of organic agriculture Organic agriculture can be differentiated from traditional, modern and other types of sustainable agriculture by the standards and guidelines that define and regulate it. As a type of alternative agriculture, organic agriculture belongs to a large family of related approaches to farming that attempt ‘to provide sustained yields through the use of ecologically-sound management technologies’ (Altieri, 1987: xix). Certified organic agriculture may be further distinguished from non-certified organic or agroecological production which meets organic production standards but is not subject to organic inspection, certification and labelling (IFOAM, 2004). A classification system has been proposed in order to better understand the vast range of different types of organic agriculture (see diagram below).

Classification of Organic Agriculture

Sustainable Agriculture

Certified organic Non-certified Integrated Production organic agroforestry, low-external input,

permaculture, conservation agriculture, eco-farming etc.

Commodity focus Community focus Individual Catchments Groups / co-operatives Out-growers (contract farming)

Source: After Hauser, 2005 Even further variation in organic systems can be recognised with reference to the typology of organic farming shown below. In this study organic agriculture refers to the conscious use of organic agricultural techniques, both in certified and non-certified systems. However, there is a bias towards projects that have achieved certification status and/or are under conversion since these are the most explicitly “organic” initiatives and therefore provide clear examples of how this holistic farm management system is being implemented on the ground.

11

Typology of Organic Systems

Source: Compiled from a wide range of sources including literature and personal observations 2.3 Organic agriculture in Africa Organic agriculture is receiving increasing attention across the African continent in parallel with the recognition of its contribution to the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) of improved health and food security, environmental conservation and economic development. This is attributed to: increasing and stabilising yields in semi-arid lands; increasing returns for labour investment; combating desertification; improving pest control; reducing debts; coping with HIV/AIDS; strengthening social systems; and maximising environmental services (Edwards, 2005). Recognising the link between organic agriculture and poverty reduction is behind the push by major donors and national governments to commercialise smallholder farmers and support their access to organic markets. There is a whole constellation of other reasons that African smallholders are choosing to farm organically. In addition to the interest in sustainable natural resource management and healthy eating, increasing numbers of resource-poor farmers cannot afford agrochemicals. Furthermore, Green Revolution packages of high-yield varieties of food crops supported by high inputs of agro-chemicals and water are inherently poorly suited to many semi-arid lands and areas lacking infrastructure (which is the case for most of rural Africa). Alternatives to industrial agriculture are also being sought as a result of the perceived threat of agro-chemicals, and as a way to reduce exposure to toxic pesticides such as Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) that are used in some fruit and vegetable production as well as storage of food grains.

12

In 2003, IFOAM commissioned an overview of the organic movement in Africa, covering both certified and non-certified organic producers in 22 of Africa’s 54 countries where organic agriculture is most advanced. The IFOAM survey identifies five different mechanisms through which organic agriculture is currently being developed and promoted, namely:

1. commercially-driven, certified and export-led organic agriculture that exist without any (significant) external funding, generally practised on large-scale farms and usually for export;

2. export-oriented organic agriculture, assisted through development funding, generally aimed at improving the cash incomes of impoverished smallholders by giving them access to premium export markets;

3. non-market oriented organic agriculture, assisted by donor agencies to meet a range of development objectives such as poverty relief particularly amongst vulnerable groups such as women and female-headed households, combating desertification and global warming, improving soil fertility, promoting the use of local seed varieties and maintaining biodiversity;

4. local organic agriculture projects, developed by farmer groups and indigenous development organisations as a means of addressing pressing social, economic and environmental problems;

5. research carried out within local, national and supra-national institutes (Parrott & van Elzakker, 2003).

The growing interest in organic agriculture in all the above sectors by actors with vastly differing goals, motivations and attitudes is giving rise to the adoption of a range of different farming practices with equally heterogeneous implications for the livelihoods of producers. 2.4 Organic agriculture as a livelihood strategy Organic agriculture is not to be seen as an end in itself, but rather as a means to healthier soils, plants, animals and people, or a livelihood strategy used to achieve desired livelihood outcomes such as poverty reduction, food security and environmental conservation. The concept of livelihood ‘comprises the capabilities, assets (including material and social resources) and activities required for a means of living. A livelihood is sustainable when it can cope with and recover from stresses and shocks, and maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets both now and in the future, while not undermining the natural resource base’ (adapted from Scoones, 1998: 4). Donor agencies and other development partners promote organic agriculture in order to bring opportunities and welfare benefits to the people of rural Africa. The SIDA-funded Export Promotion of Organic Products from Africa (EPOPA) claims that the benefits of organic agriculture include increased productivity, safe food, varied diets, increased income and return on labour, reduced costs of production and reduced risk of crop failures (EPOPA, 2004). Informal indications show that organic producers are more food secure and can sell excess produce, enabling them to educate and clothe their children better than other farmers (Taylor, 2006). Advocates of organic agriculture are being challenged to critically appraise the contribution that organic agriculture is having to food security, a condition under which ‘all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and

13

healthy life’ (FAO, 1996). This is extremely relevant to countries such as Tanzania where there is a critical balance between production and needs and over a third of children are thought to be malnourished (PELUM, 2004). Although national food self-sufficiency is a matter of high priority, especially in the light of recent devastating droughts in eastern Africa, malnutrition is often more significant than inadequate total food supplies at the national level and therefore crop diversity and local availability of food are important issues. A number of recent reports testify to the capacity for organic farming to feed the world population whilst not undermining the natural resource base. General Manager of the Ethiopian Environmental Production Authority, Tewold Berhan Gebre Egziabher, makes a compelling case that organic farming can feed the world, but ‘only if we take it seriously and do all the necessary research and development as well as management to bolster rather than shunt the natural cycles that improve the functioning of the ecosystem as a whole’ (Egziabher & Edwards, 2005). There is mounting evidence to show that organic agriculture can enhance productivity and improve access to food and income using low-cost locally available and appropriate technologies without causing environmental damage (Hine & Pretty, 2006; Parrott & Elzakker, 2003; Rundgren, 2002; Scialabba & Hattam, 2002). A DFID-funded assessment of farming systems of varying levels of intensity in sub-Saharan Africa reported ‘significant potential to raise productivity through the optimised use of locally-available natural resources’ (Harris et al., 1998: 8). Studies conducted worldwide illustrate that organic agriculture can double or even triple to productivity of traditional systems, particularly when one considers total production of useful crops per area (Scialabba & Hattam, 2002). Composted plots in the Tigray region of Ethiopia yielded 3-5 times more than chemically-treated plots (Edwards, 2005). A report, “The Real Green Revolution”, found that organic and agroecological farming in less developed countries produces dramatic yield increases, as well as greater crop diversity and greater nutritional content (Parrott & Marsden, 2002). Similarly, a review of over 200 food production projects involving simple, organic-type techniques in different countries, found that the adoption of these practices resulted in major yield increases ranging from 46-150% (Pretty et al., 2003). Organic agriculture was found to improve food security by addressing many different causal factors simultaneously and in particular by building up natural resources, strengthening communities and improving human capacity. In the light of these studies, organic agriculture shows great potential to improve domestic food production with cheap, low-cost locally-available technology and inputs. However, more research is needed in order to reveal the mechanisms through which organic agriculture increases productivity and food availability, and the extent to which it improves the security of livelihoods and access to food by vulnerable groups. 2.5 Pathways to improvements in organic systems The pathways by which organic agriculture contributes to increased productivity and livelihood benefits may be conceptualised as a “typography of transition” (Pretty, 2002; in Parrott & Elzakker, 2003). An extensive survey of sustainable agricultural

14

projects indicated four mechanisms through which improvements are occurring, including:

1. intensification of a single component of the farm system, e.g. home-garden intensification with vegetables and trees;

2. addition of a new productive element e.g. fish in paddy rice 3. better use of natural capital especially water through rainwater harvesting and

irrigation scheduling and land through reclamation; 4. introduction of new regenerative elements e.g. Integrated Pest Management

(IPM) or locally adapted crop varieties and animal breeds (Pretty, 2002; in Scialabba & Hattam, 2002).

Organic systems tend to use a combination of different improvement types, which augments the dividend of synergistic effects (Hine & Pretty, 2006). By offering an integrated whole system approach to farming, organic agriculture increases diversity and resistance to stress, making it ideally suited for many poor, marginalised smallholder farmers. The survey also showed that ‘agricultural systems with high levels of social and human capital are more able to innovate in the face of uncertainty’ (Pretty et al., 2003; 13). Notably, 97% of cases in the SAFE-World Research Project have a human capital development element, and half of both organic and near-organic systems had a focus on social capital building through groups (Pretty & Hine, 2001). Organic agricultural practices bring about livelihood benefits to smallholder farmers in the Global South1 by building natural, human, social and financial assets of farmers. Ways in which these capital assets are accumulated over time in organic systems are summarised below:

1 In this paper, the “Global South” is used in lieu of “the Third World”, “Developing” and “Less developed countries” and in order to distinguish these countries from the so-called “Advanced”, “Developed” countries of the “First world”, referred to here as “the Global North”.

15

Impact of Organic Agriculture on Capital Assets Capital asset Component Explanation

Soil fertility Organic matter management (e.g. on-farm recycling of nutrients, use of green manure crops) ! improved structure, aggregation, porosity, microbial activity, pore size distribution and water retention capacity of soils ! increased resilience to water stress and nutrient loss

Water conservation Reduced risk of ground and surface water pollution Improved water retention capacity ! crops more resistant to wilting during droughts

Agrobiodiversity Increased agricultural genetic resources including insects and micro-organisms, wild flora and fauna ! reduced risk of harvest failure ! spread labour demand through the growing season ! improved soil fertility and pest control ! more products to sell at different times of the year ! more varied diets with a wide array of vitamins and minerals

Natural

Energy efficiency Sequesters carbon ! reduces global warming Reliance on internal resources ! lower dependence on external energy sources e.g. fossil fuels

Human Local knowledge Makes productive use of farmers’ knowledge and skills ! improved local self-reliance Also draws on the advances of modern biological and technology in order to blend both traditional and modern knowledge

Social Social inclusion and equity

Strengthened social cohesion and partnerships within organic communities ! improved connections with external institutions ! better access to markets and ability of farmers to negotiate their needs as equal partners in the food supply chain Incorporation of fair trade principles ! improved working conditions Increased employment to meet food and cultural needs ! reinvigoration of rural communities

Financial Income Price premiums of 10-50% (sometimes 300%) above conventional prices for the same product Decreased production costs ! higher returns Optimised productivity, yield stabilisation and diversification ! increased earnings Export of organic produce ! access to foreign exchange

16

Chapter Three: Methods

‘A truly alternative agriculture must be based on a truly alternative science that articulates multiple ways of knowing.’

(Kloppenburg, 1991: 542) The research strategy adopted in this study of the Tanzanian organic sector has been informed and inspired by a wide range of different qualitative and reflective methodological approaches. Applying multiple perspectives to food and farming systems is characteristic of agroecology, which has been described by Callicot (1988: 6; quoted in Lockeretz & Anderson, 1983: 74) as ‘a vanguard movement in opposition to the atomism and reductionism, and materialism of the prevailing but obsolete paradigm ... [providing] a systemic, integrative, holistic understanding of reality at the level of organic terrestrial nature’. Thus the methods of the research are set within philosophical frameworks which reflect ‘notions of the way the world is, the nature of knowledge, and the very disposition and ethical framework which the researcher brings to bear’ (Bawden; in Zuber-Skerritt, 1991: 19). In the tradition of agroecology, therefore, the research design has integrated elements of action research, systems thinking, agroecosystem analysis, farming systems research, case study research, participatory learning and action, the sustainable livelihoods framework and other approaches to agricultural research. It is thought that these approaches and perspectives ‘may accomplish in conversation what none of them can alone’ (Kloppenburg, 1991: 542).The following discussion outlines the main theoretical underpinnings of the research strategy, and explains why these particular approaches have been chosen for this study of the Tanzanian organic sector. 3.1 Action Research Action research may be defined as ‘an approach in which the action researcher and a client collaborate in the diagnosis of a problem and in the development of a solution based on the diagnosis’ (Bryman, 2004). The aim of action research is to allow knowledge to emerge through collaborative effort by joining forces with people facing a problem to help them study and resolve it. Put simply, the starting point of action research is therefore a researcher joining with an individual or group of people who are concerned about their situation. The action research approach combines the key attributes of consultancy and research. In this context, the role of the researcher is more of a reflective consultant or facilitator who enables problems to be solved through co-learning than of an objective “outsider”. Thus in action research the investigator is very much part of the field of study, whilst also being involved in the collection of data. Action research therefore attempts to combine the two acknowledged tasks of the academic tripod, education and research, with the third more neglected task of community outreach. Professional action researchers are challenged to assume some of the skills normally related to ethnography and community development work in order to sustain project-related learning and participation (Whyte, 1991). Other skills useful in participatory action research include teaching, communication, scientific enquiry, encouraging participants to respond critically, working with community groups and coping with socio-cultural distances.

17

Furthermore, participatory action research ‘involves practitioners in the research process from the initial design of the project through data gathering and analysis to final conclusions and actions arising out of the research’ (Whyte, 1991: 7). The method of direct inclusion instead of indirect representation has been found to be a very strong tool for advocacy (Rasmussen, 2005). Three key features of action research are therefore:

i. Target group have an active role in knowledge creation ii. Researchers are involved in problem solutions

iii. Joint reflection and collaborative responsibility for running research. Ideally, the participation of the researcher is not for a short defined period, but is rather part of a long-term process of involvement. As a “meta-method”, action research may be distinguished from most social research by its emphasis on practical outcomes. When clear livelihood goals such as improved access to food and income can be identified, and a strategy such as transition to ecological systems is being applied, the benefit of action research is that it focuses on achieving those goals within the given context. Having emerged as a way of studying social movements such as Nazism and its antithesis, democracy, action research is well suited to the study of social change for it is based on the meeting between the researcher’s intention to do research and the user’s willingness to change (Liu, 1994) with the aim of transforming the social environment through a process of critical enquiry (Miles & Huberman, 1994). Since action research incorporates elements of political activity and the researcher allies him/herself to a specific cause, there is a risk that it may be co-opted for self-interest. This is moderated, however, by the researcher arriving at a research question through dialogue with actors in the field and by making the goals and methods explicit. Furthermore, with its origins as an antiauthoritarian science epistemology when action research was coined by Kurt Lewin in 1946, action researchers assume the responsibility of democratising attitudes towards studying. Action research has been found to be particularly pertinent to the study of development (Liu, 1994) and, by extension, agricultural development, for the following reasons. It allows complex situations to be studied by involving all the people who are concerned and willing, leading to the mobilisation of joint resources that could not be attained separately either by the researcher or the isolated actors. By exploring the entire situation encountered, action research also considers both explicit and implicit institutional aspects that are essential for understanding how social change happens. In addition, action research provides the opportunity for ‘a shared experience and the construction of a common history … the best cohesive force that can exist in a development action’ (Liu, 1994: 114). About 25 years ago, action research moved from an experimental mode into a learning design that focuses on learning processes and collective reflection. The resultant “action learning” approach has a capacity-building theme which emphasises joint-learning during the assignment and knowledge accessibility. Limited knowledge of the primary researcher on the wider institutional, political and social context necessitates action learning. Learning has been defined as an ‘active transformation

18

process, in which people attempt to make meaning out of their changing environment’ (Remenyi, 1987: 35). It needs to be life-centred and is more successful when viewed as ‘a process of mutual enquiry between learners and others’ (ibid). 3.2 Systems Thinking Understanding how a complex system functions as a whole requires that intact systems be studied. Systems approaches to research are therefore eminently suited to the study of organic farms, which are holistic by definition. Farming may be conceptualised as a human activity system ‘concerned with the manipulation and management of ecosystems to meet the often ill-defined goals of the people managing the process’ (Remenyi, 1987: 36). When applying systems approaches to the improvement of problem situations in agriculture, one of the first steps is to identify the system and examine its properties, including productivity, stability, sustainability and equitability. Systems studies in agriculture are favoured since they are realistic, interdisciplinary, long-term and multi-scale. Drinkwater (2002: 359) argues that continued integration of systems and reductionist approaches will likely yield ‘a more complete understanding of how to design and manage agroecosystems’. Similarly, Whyte (1991) points out that ‘the nature of village-level problems in sub-Saharan Africa, encompassing as they do a range of economy, political, socio-cultural, and ecological factors’ necessitates a multidisciplinary systems approach. Systemic action research emerged as a reaction to the apparent limitations of reductionist science, and in order to deal with the complexity of context and people-specific real-life situations. By acknowledging the interrelatedness of different system components, systemic approaches to problem-solving take into account properties that may emerge from the complex whole. Nevertheless, problems may also be viewed as ‘things that never disappear utterly and that cannot be solved once and for all’ (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980: quoted in Remenyi, 1987: 31) and therefore it may be more constructive to try to improve problem situations, rather than solve problems. For this, we need to ‘view agricultural issues with a sense of their complex wholeness’ using systems-based research approaches (Remenyi, 1987: 33). Whilst systems approaches have been important to the evolution of agricultural research, Dover and Talbot (1987: 57) comment that ‘they must explicitly focus on sustainability if progress is to be made’. Overall system sustainability is best revealed by considering farming and food systems as whole with their mineral cycles, energy transformations, biological processes and socio-economic relationships (Altieri, 1987). When using systems approaches to research it is important to be clear on not only what systems are to be improved, but also what constitutes an improvement. 3.3 Agroecosystem Analysis Common characteristics of systems experiments in agriculture are that realistic, intact agroecosystems are studied in an interdisciplinary, long-term and multi-scale way. An agroecosystem is ‘a managed ecosystem in which crop production is the primary function’ (Drinkwater, 2002: 355). This can be understood in terms of structure (abiotic and biotic components) and function (net primary productivity, nutrient and energy flows, for instance). Thus agroecosystem research encompasses environmental

19

considerations as well as economic and production criteria and address a wide variety of economic, social and environmental outcomes. Rather than assuming that the purpose of the research is to increase productivity (the goal of much conventional agricultural research), agroecosystem analysis enable the researcher to develop creative insights about the nature of the problem ‘encouraging wide and easy participation and the flow of new ideas and insights’ (Conway, 1983: quoted in Remenyi, 1987: 39). Despite the drawbacks of uncontrolled variability among farm sites, on-farm systems studies offer substantial advantages as they are realistic in terms of scale, management practice and constraints faced by the farmer and therefore offer an opportunity to study intact agroecosystems. Such studies also enable analysis of interactions between socioeconomic factors and management decisions. In agricultural systems, sustainability can be assessed on different levels (Dover & Talbot, 1987). At the production site or farm level, for example, stable agriculture requires soil fertility management and maintaining biodiversity. At the regional level improving sustainability may involve optimising energy efficiency, conserving genetic resources and/or reducing pollution. Sustainability at the national and international levels is more a matter of ensuring adequate access of people to food and income, strengthening trade relations and preserving unique ecosystems. All levels of sustainability, however, are reliant upon the qualities of the soil, and agricultural sustainability starts with ‘seeking to reduce soil erosion and to make improvements to soil physical structure, organic matter content, water-holding capacity, and nutrient balances’ (Pretty et al., 2003: 15). Moreover, in agricultural systems, sustainability also incorporates concepts of resilience, the capacity of systems to buffer shocks and stresses, and persistence, the capacity of systems to continue over long periods. Both of these aspects hinge upon the ability of farmers to change and innovate in the face of uncertainty, and therefore the extent to which organic agriculture builds human and social capital. From this perspective, a sustainable production system exists when the key actors involved fit the most applicable system of technologies, inputs or ecological management into the specific circumstances their particular local agricultural system (Hine & Pretty, 2006). In principle, organic agriculture constitutes a sustainable alternative since it offers farmers a set of management principles to choose from such as emphasising biodiversity and using synergies among crops, animals and soil to regenerate soils and conserve resources. 3.4 Farming Systems Research Farming Systems Research (FSR) applies the techniques of systems science to agriculture. It explores indigenous farmers’ choices of technologies, cropping partners, and other factors relating to food production. As a response to the realisation of the complexity of natural resource management in diverse and risk-prone environments (Sillitoe, 1998), FSR is interested in reflecting farmers research needs more effectively and therefore encompasses participatory methods and farmer decision-making, with an emphasis on listening and learning from people. According to Francis (in Altieri & Hecht, 1990: 141), FSR ‘involves the farmer in all steps of the activity from identification of limiting constraints to validation and adoption of new

20

technology’. This is appropriate to the study of organic systems in which information and farmers understanding are critical production inputs. FSR and Extension and its many variations typically involve 'highly site-specific evaluations of possible solutions to well-identified limitations in the local production system' (Lockeretz & Stopes, 2005: 1). Often FSR involves 'on-farm research with a farming systems perspective' (Remenyi, 1987: 17) leading to the generation of qualitative data requiring interpretative analysis. The advantages of carrying out research on working farms are that the research can be conducted under a wide range of growing conditions, the research can benefit from farmers' expert knowledge of a farming system and also allow farmers' management ability and preferences to be part of what is studied, fostering farmer-to-farmer exchange of information, to allow farmers to have a greater role in choosing research topics. It is thought that more organic research is conducted on working farms than conventionally oriented research (Lockeretz & Stopes, 2005). This is because organic systems are usually considered to be more closely linked to conditions on a specific site. Furthermore, whole-farm studies are especially applicable to research into organic farming since an important concept in organic farming is for the entire farm to be managed as a coherent system. The primary objective of FSR is ‘to improve the wellbeing of individual farming families by increasing the productivity of their farming systems, given the constraints imposed by resources and the environment’ (Remenyi, 1987: 17), and this coincides with one of the main goals of this research – to improve the design of organic agricultural interventions so that they bring significant benefits to smallholder farmers. Conceptually FSR approach recognises the vital connection between technologies and policy support systems, and thus an important thrust of such research is the implementation of appropriate policies and support systems to create opportunities for improved production systems. Again this perspective is deemed useful in helping to provide conditions conducive to the adoption of organic technologies in Tanzania. 3.5 Case Study Research Case studies have been defined as ‘studies of events within their real-life context’ (Yin, 2003: 72). Retaining the holistic and meaningful characteristics of real-life events is particularly advantageous ‘when the relevant theory underlying the case study is of a holistic nature’ (Yin, 2003: 45) as is the case in organic agriculture. Case studies can act as "windows" on organic agriculture in a particular region or context. Case Study Research (CSR) is preferred ‘when “how” and “why” questions are being posed, when the investigator has little control over events, and when the focus is on a contemporary phenomenon within some real-life context’ (Yin, 2003: 1). In the context of this study, CSR was adopted as a way to investigate the causes and criteria for “success” in organic agriculture at the project level. During CSR, therefore, ‘researchers collect detailed information using a variety of data collection procedures over a sustained period of time’ (Creswell, 2003: 15).

21

When sites are selected on the basis of typicality, as opposed to uniqueness, they can be used to derive lessons that can be applied to other organic projects. Thus case studies may be generalisable to theoretical propositions (analytic generalisation). Although it can be useful to scale-up recommendations, case study research is also inherently context specific and not necessarily seeking replication. Owing to the complexity of Africa’s agricultural systems (FAO recognises 18 distinct farming systems in Africa), an overview of the development potential of organic agriculture in Africa is of limited practical value. Case studies and agroecosystem analyses throw more light upon the way in which traditional knowledge, social mobilisation and agro-ecological approaches are restoring degraded natural resources while producing food. The evaluation of past and current projects helps to clarify the relationship between organic production and the overall sustainability of agricultural systems. 3.6 Participatory Learning and Action When innovation in agriculture is conceived as a ‘social effort requiring joint competence of interrelated actors’ (Engel & Salomon, 1997), participation becomes an essential component in the transition to organic and sustainable systems. Much has been written on the importance of participatory practices in research (De Jager et al., 2001) and many prominent figures in rural development have argued that genuine participation is crucial to the sustainability of development projects (Chambers, 1983). Participatory strategies gained popularity in agricultural research and development in the 1970s, spreading rapidly in the 1980s. They are based on the premise that small farmers in developing countries have developed useful information and ideas that must be utilised in any project and are in opposition to the “transfer of technology” paradigm. Sillitoe (1998: 6) has argued that ‘the joint enterprise, or stakeholder participation approach, poses some of the most challenging and stimulating problems in development today’. It encompasses a wide spectrum of approaches from ‘consultation (outsiders retaining control), to collaboration (co-operation as equal partners), to collegiate (insiders making research decisions)’ (Sillitoe, 1998: 7). On-farm research is sometimes described more specifically with reference to a two-component classification scheme: 'researcher initiated, farmer managed' or 'farmer initiated, farmer managed'. Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) is part of an emerging family of ‘alternative systems of inquiry’ which also includes Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) and Participatory Technology Development (PTD) (Pretty et al., 1995). PLA tools include mapping, time lines, daily activity diagrams, seasonal calendars, trend diagrams, transect walks, problem trees, ranking activities and Venn diagrams. Many of these tools are useful for investigating local knowledge in organic systems, particularly at farm and project levels. A fundamental goal is to “hand over the pen” and invite community members and stakeholders to draw, map, model and diagram. In this situation the researcher acts as a facilitator who builds rapport, listens, questions and learns. 3.7 Soft Systems Methodology Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) is a way of applying systems theory and practice to facilitating change. SSM aims for the improvement of human practices through debate

22

and reflection with practical solutions that fit the views and interests of those involved as well as possible. It is particularly attractive in dealing with agriculture as a complex and purposeful activity (Remenyi, 1987). Whereas a system can be conceived as an ‘adaptive whole’, a ‘soft system’ concerns social actors, their activities and relationships, constructed by connecting sets of activities to make a purposeful whole, or ‘human activity system’ (Engel & Salomon, 1997). In other words, a soft system is a system that has been assigned a purpose. It is important to emphasise the appreciative nature of soft systems, i.e. the possibility for different systemic images and therefore systemic images are ‘windows’ on the world rather than representations of the world. SSM is often chosen as a way of understanding and intervening in complex innovation theatres where stakeholders have radically different perceptions (such as in an organic sector comprising farmers, traders, policy makers and development partners) since it enables the recognition of different but equally relevant worldviews. The methodological approach is to follow a learning system or action researching system comprised of key actors and the researcher going through sequential learning cycles of planning, action, observation, reflection, planning, action, etc. (see diagram below).

Research as an action-learning cycle

In SSM the world is considered problematic but the process of enquiry is systematic. When the goals of a system are obscure and/or changeable, such as in the rapidly evolving Tanzanian organic sector, SSM can be applied for the identification of further research needs which may require soft or hard systems thinking, technology development or basic science. Thus SSM can be located within a spectrum of approaches from hard (e.g. cropping systems research) to ‘soft systems in which objectives are hard to define, decision-taking is uncertain, measures of performance are at best qualitative and human behaviour is irrational’ (Checkland, 1981: quoted in Remenyi, 1987: 38). This has been illustrated in the Hawkesbury hierarchy of methodologies for researching problems of increasing complexity (see diagram below).

PLAN

ACT

OBSERVE

REFLECT

23

Hawkesbury hierarchy of approaches to research Research approach Applications

Source: Adapted from Remenyi, 1987

SSM and the related Knowledge Systems perspective help to develop a diagnostic framework for analysis and design and management of interventions (Engel & Salomon, 1997). Rapid Appraisal of Agricultural Knowledge Systems (RAAKS) is a soft systems action-oriented methodology that is useful in stimulating the formation of ‘soft platforms for decision-making about ecosystems’ which leads to ‘forms of collective agency – social actors who have the will and capacity to work together to tackle complex societal issues (Engel & Salomon, 1997: 216). Central elements of RAAKS are teamwork, focused collection of information, qualitative analysis and strategic decision-making. It is no coincidence that RAAKS was developed within the context of agricultural advisory services when industrial agriculture was reaching its ecological, social and political limits and its first applications were in support of the reorganisation of agricultural research and extension. In this context, SSM helps to clarify the basis and direction of change in organic agricultural systems. 3.8 Sustainable Livelihoods Framework The Sustainable Livelihoods (SL) framework (pictured below) is an analytical device for understanding the complexity of livelihoods and poverty. This approach to poverty eradication was conceived by the UK’s Department for International Development (DFID) after wide consultations. As previously outlined, a livelihood comprises the capabilities, assets and activities required for a means of living, and it is sustainable when it can endure shocks and stresses, maintaining or enhancing its assets into the future without undermining the natural resource base (Scoones, 1998). The SL framework is based on the assumption that ‘people pursue a range of livelihood outcomes (such as health, income and reduced vulnerability) by drawing on a range of assets to pursue a variety of activities’ (Farrington et al., 1999: 3).

SOFT SYSTEMS

HARD SYSTEMS

APPLIED SCIENCE

BASIC SCIENCE

Situation-improving

Situation-optimising

Problem-solving

Puzzle-solving

HOLISM

REDUCTIONISM

24

The SL framework is considered an appropriate method for understanding the impact of organic agriculture on livelihoods since it has an explicit focus on people , allows the identification of livelihood-related opportunities and constraints and links micro-level understanding of livelihood into policy and institutional change processes (Farrington et al., 1999). The SL framework is essentially an assets-based model of agricultural sustainability, which considers the role of assets as inputs in agriculture and the consequences of agriculture upon them. The “assets pentagon” pictured in the diagram above includes human, natural, financial, physical and social forms of capital and these distinctions were used throughout the study in order to classify agricultural resources. When applying the SL framework to real-life cases, it becomes necessary to identify which strategies may be labelled as organic since farmers apply a whole range of practices in searching for a means to a living. 3.9 World Café The World Café is a method for ‘creating a living network of collaborative dialogue around questions that matter’ (World Café, 2002). It consists of a set of principles and guidelines including to:

- Clarify the purpose - Create a hospitable space - Explore questions that matter - Encourage everyone’s contribution - Connect diverse perspectives - Listen for insights and share discoveries.

When used in combination, these can foster collaborative dialogue, active engagement and constructive possibilities for action. The approach is eminently suited to the study of complex value-laden issues and identifying the most important issues. It was therefore used during the Stakeholder forum as a way to focus group discussions.

25

Chapter Four: Research Process

‘Only an education of question can trigger, motivate, and reinforce curiosity’ (Freire, 1997: 31)

Having outlined the wide array of methods adopted in this study, this chapter presents a chronological narrative of the ways in which these methods were used in the study, from the initial seeds of intention to the final phases of the fieldwork. 4.1 Selecting a topic With an abiding interest in sustainable agriculture in the tropics and the intention to return to Tanzania to continue working in this field following the completion of my Masters degree, the decision to write my thesis on organic farming in Tanzania came quite naturally. It also coincided with the realisation of the enormous potential for organic agriculture to alleviate poverty and increase food security in sub-Saharan Africa, and the desire to understand how agriculture can be strategically developed to achieve these goals. Being European by birth also stimulated my curiosity to discover how the largely Eurocentric concept of organic agriculture is taking root in Africa, and whether its principles and practices are indeed applicable and useful in the African context. This illustrates the way in which ‘inquiry is dependent first on intention, second on the type and quality of question’ (Ellinor and Gerard, 1998) and coincides with the notion of action researching as ‘learning with the special intentions of achieving social action whilst concomitantly adding to public knowledge’ (Bawden; in Zuber-Skerritt, 1991: 19). The opportunity to collaborate with researchers from the Department of Crop Science and Production at SUA arose in November 2004, and subsequent meetings with my supervisor at UMB confirmed that it would be possible to participate in a NORAD-sponsored research project at SUA. In addition to the above reasons, my goals when I embarked upon the study included learning more about organic techniques, procedures including certification, successful projects and the logistics of establishing and operating an organic farm in Africa. Another area of investigation was the importance and role of certification since inspection, certification and labelling are aspects that distinguish certified organic agriculture from other forms of sustainable, traditional and modern agriculture. The research was also driven by the desire to apply recently acquired agroecological approaches to a real-life case, the emerging organic sector in Tanzania. From the outset the process of enquiry was guided by the broad research question of how to develop organic agriculture in a way that brings tangible livelihood benefits to farmers. This incorporated both an exploratory path (understanding complex processes) and a design path (leading to improvements in our interventions). A number of sub-objectives were also identified at this stage, including:

• To create a shared vision of the future of organics • To make knowledge about organic food and farming more accessible • To strengthen communication and collaboration between stakeholders • To produce journal and feature articles on Tanzanian organic agriculture • To develop agroecological skills, knowledge and attitudes of both the

researcher and the key actors in the system.

26

4.2 Exploring the subject Once the broad subject area had been identified, research entered a highly divergent and exploratory phase, during which time an extensive review of related literature was undertaken mainly by direct searching on the internet, library databases (using key words such as “organic agriculture” / “farming”, “Tanzania”, “agroecology”, and “East Africa”) but also by contacting former colleagues and friends in Africa to enquire about recent publications, research, projects and priorities. This information was used to gradually build a "rich picture" of the status of organic farming in the country, region and continent. In addition to shedding light on the history of the sector, commodities produced, area and number of farms certified, government policy, development interventions, international and national certification systems and regional initiatives, the information search illuminated key issues, questions, and contradictions, major opportunities and constraints and gaps in our knowledge on organic farming in Tanzania and interesting areas for follow-up. There were different categories of areas of organic agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa requiring further research. These were identified as: a) Production – improved utilisation of organic materials such as soil amendments b) System benefits – potential cumulative and cross benefits of organic techniques, how organic agriculture benefits resource poor households, especially with regards to women and children and whether commercialising smallholder farmers really leads to a decrease in poverty, or whether the man of the household is the sole beneficiary of the extra income, social implications of promoting commercial organic agriculture and use of income in the household, links between organics and HIV/AIDS such as nutrition and labour requirements c) Comparison with conventional – comparative price and long-term value of organic and non-organic inputs through full cost accounting d) Consumption – consumer demands and perceptions e) Policy – impact of current national and international policies on adoption of organic farming (Harris et al., 1998; Taylor, 2006). Since information was sought from a wide variety of different sources and stakeholders, the initial questions were very diverse and reflected the multiple (sometimes opposing) concerns of the people involved in organic agriculture in Africa. 4.3 Designing the study In parallel with this process of contextualising the research questions, I was exploring a variety of methodologies in order to formulate a research strategy and select methods most suited to the chosen subject area. The main goals and sub-objectives of the study were formulated as questions: a central research question (in what ways can organic agriculture be developed for the benefit of the smallholder?) and a constellation of other subsidiary questions which were eventually distilled into a descriptive question (what is the impact of organic agriculture on smallholder livelihoods?), an explanatory question (by which pathways does organic agriculture lead to livelihood benefits?) and an interpretive question (which strategies can be adopted to strengthen these pathways?). These were intended to be guiding questions, which could be adapted on the basis of other issues identified

27

by stakeholders during fieldwork. As in grounded theory, therefore, the questions were under continual review and reformulation (Bryman, 2004). For each question, a suitable method of data collection was identified, and this formed the logic of the overall research design. At this stage it was decided that the Sustainable Livelihoods (SL) framework would be used to assess the impact of organic agriculture on livelihoods, and also to elaborate the mechanisms or pathways. Soft systems methodology was considered the most appropriate way of discovering the main opportunities and constraints to reaching livelihood goals through organic agriculture at the local and national levels. 4.4 Surveying the territory An initial three-week visit to Tanzania was planned into the research design, and turned out to be indispensable to the overall study. The purpose of this trip was to meet co-researchers, learn more about SUA activities in organic agriculture and to start planning the fieldwork logistics (including a research permit) in more detail. 4.5 Seizing learning opportunities The entire study was enriched by participation in a number of courses, seminars and an International Summer School on Tropical Organic Agriculture that was organised by BOKU University in Vienna and Makerere University in Kampala. This three-week project included theoretical presentations, field trips to organic projects, practical fieldwork aimed at developing an Internal Control System (ICS) and a stakeholder forum. The relative maturity of the Ugandan organic sector combined with its proximity to Tanzania, made this a particularly relevant experience to the study. Courses taken at UMB on tropical soils, sustainable agriculture, appropriate sanitation, tropical ecology and eco-technology have all contributed to a deeper understanding of agriculture, ecology and the design of sustainable agroecosystems. In addition, attending two seminars in Denmark which were directly related to the study—one on Action Research and the other on Globalisation and Organic Agriculture—gave ample opportunity to reflect more deeply on both the context and methodology of the research. 4.6 Refining the concept note The period between the two visits to Tanzania was used to elaborate the overall research design. Activities included communication with key actors at SUA and in civil society, building a contacts database that included organic projects and potential research partners and conducting a stakeholder analysis. The latter involved identifying the main stakeholder groups, prioritising them and mapping their roles and interests, including the relationships and resource flows between them. A useful tool for this was institutional Venn diagramming. The stakeholder analysis was approached from the perspective of individual actor, network, function and organisation. In this way a number of different systems concepts emerged, and it was possible to identify hierarchies (e.g. government-research-extension-farmer), levels of analysis (e.g. stakeholders at the national level as opposed to regional level), relationships (e.g. resource flows between donor agencies and companies) and communication (e.g. within networks of actors).

28

In addition to understanding current collaboration, this exercise was deemed important for identifying potential synergies for collaboration. Key categories of stakeholder in the Tanzanian organic sector included farmer associations, cooperatives, government, government institutions, civil society, certification bodies, companies, and development partners. Communicating with stakeholders in Tanzania centred on identifying and mobilising people who were concerned with sustainable agriculture and food security, particularly those already involved in and responsible for organic agriculture. The idea was to build a "taskforce" of people who would join forces to analyse the current system and explore desirable and feasible alternatives. In order to build the most realistic and useful “rich picture” of the organic system, it became apparent that the research would need to address multiple scales. The main levels of analysis chosen were the farm / local level and the national level, with the aim to bridge the micro and the macro. At the farm or local level, the main concerns were anticipated to be conversion constraints and certification arrangements, whilst the national level was expected to focus more on institutional factors and the policy framework, in addition to ranking bottlenecks in the organic commodity chain. The research could equally have chosen to consider the dynamics of organic agriculture as it is being developed at the district, regional or continental levels. Although the research area was still extremely broad at this stage, gradually system boundaries were being drawn in terms of setting, actors, events and processes. For example, the study was confined to sedentary cropping systems (ranging from purely arable to mixed farming) either practising certified organic production or in the process of conversion. A CATWOE checklist was used to define the system in terms of: Clients – smallholder farmers Actors – farmers, researchers, government, private sector, civil society and public Transformation – transition to organic agriculture World view – sustainable agriculture Owners – farmers, researchers, government, private sector, civil society and public Environmental constraints – low investment abilities, underdeveloped markets, poor infrastructure, unreliable climate, antagonistic worldviews On this basis a root definition of the relevant human activity system emerged and was expressed as: ‘Organic food and farming systems under the control of smallholder farmers and government agents which, in the light of financial, infrastructural, market and environmental constraints, convert to certified organic production with the aim of improving system sustainability, food security and self-reliance’. In addition, expected outputs and indicators were devised. The outputs included strengthening and facilitating the national umbrella organisation for organic agriculture, the Tanzania Organic Agriculture Movement (TOAM), providing inputs for an organic policy, participating in knowledge-sharing and advocacy actions. Realising the weaknesses of the current organic sector led to the realisation that capacity-building and awareness creation were priority areas for the research to focus upon.

29

Feedback on the initial research proposal and the subsequent concept note helped to focus the research design. As a result, a three-phase method was adopted:

i. Initial data collection in order to characterise the system and provide inputs for the visioning workshop including draft strategies

ii. Visioning workshop at the macro-level to create a rich picture iii. Verification / modification / enrichment of the vision and plans of action by

taking macro results back to the micro-level and dialoguing with key informants.

For each stage, actions, tools, data to be collected and questions to be answered were defined. Stage Action Tools Data to be

collected Main questions to be answered

Key informant interviews, focus groups and field visits

Stakeholder analysis, institutional Venn diagramming, SWOT, time-lines

Attitudes, motivations, goals, interests, relationships, actions of key actors

What is the status of the organic sector in Tanzania?

I

Case study research

SL analysis, PLA, interviews, direct observation

Components of the SL framework

What are effective strategies at the local level?

II Visioning workshop

Visionary thinking, SSM, World Café

Visions, draft strategies, database of persons / organisations / projects / research

What are effective strategies at the national level?

III Verification Interviews, focus groups, document exchange, strategy review

Revisions to strategies, policy recommendations

How valid are the findings?

When framing the concept note for key actors there was an effort to fully integrate practical knowledge and findings from previous experience and the scoping mission. At the same time it was necessary to be explicit about the theoretical foundations of the study, and the logical framework linking questions with research design. 4.7 Beginning the fieldwork The first week was spent making contact with people at SUA and becoming familiar with the department’s research activities, curriculum development, facilities, teaching resources and local projects. The second week was devoted to getting an overview of the entire sector by conducting key informant interviews. In addition, the groundwork for the CSR was done by meeting with representatives of case study candidates, leading to the selection of two sites.

30

Feedback and opinions expressed in response to the concept note helped to clarify the “rich picture” of the national sector, including trends and patterns. Conversations with several active individuals in the organic sector caused me to rethink the basic assumptions of the thesis and elaborate the argumentation. 4.8 Key informant interviews The aim of the key informant interviews was to discover: the special knowledge of the interviewee, appreciations, visions, ideas for strategies, key actors in the sector and how they relate, main opportunities and threats for developing the organic sector. An interview has been defined as a ‘social event with a purpose’ (Engel & Salomon, 1997: 43). A basic checklist was used to prepare the interviews:

! Where (home / field / office) ! When (day / time of day) ! Why (explore special knowledge of the interviewee / test hypotheses / inquire

about topics of interest) ! What (life histories / representative information / communication interactions) ! Who (selection criteria) ! How (semi-structured / structured, record-keeping)

In this study, key informants are individuals who are especially knowledgeable, insightful and perceptive regarding the dynamics of the organic movement, their organisation or the community, since they would enable active participation in the research (Whyte, 1991). In order to select key informants the question was asked: ‘with which individuals will collaborative work be most effective and why?’ A summary of the interviews conducted is given in Appendix 1. The framework for the interview included explaining my personal background, giving a summary of the research focus and the reasons for wanting to interview the person, providing an overview of the topics for the interview, and mentioning practicalities (e.g. maximum time for the interview and anonymity on request). A number of basic details were recorded at each interview including the date, time, place, interviewee’s name, organisational affiliation, contact details and later some notes about the setting, and atmosphere of the interview. Interviews started with open, non-directive or ‘grand tour questions’ (Kvale, 1996). The general pattern was to start with more objective questions and then move into subjective areas. A basic interview guide was referred to, including questions about:

! History – how long have you been involved in organic agriculture? ! Motivations – what motivated you? ! Activities – what have been your activities in relation to organic agriculture? ! Partners – who do you work with? ! Scope – in which areas do you work? ! Impacts – what environmental / social / economic impacts have you noticed? ! Vision – what is your vision for the future of organic agriculture? in ten years

where do you want to see the sector? ! Ideas – what would support the changes needed to realise this vision? Who

should do what?

31

This was drawn as a mind-map and used as a reference during the interviews. At the end of the interview any topics that the respondent felt were not touched upon and that they wanted to tell more about were explored. At this stage, the notebook was closed, and it was often found that continuing the conversation “off the record” helped to stimulate a more relaxed and personal discussion. Through the interview process it was possible to enrich the stakeholder analysis by elaborating the attitudes, motivations and goals of stakeholders, their history of involvement and current actions, target group / region, and relationships. 4.9 Field visits In addition to the two case study initiatives (see Case study research below), four organic projects were visited including three certified (the Kilimanjaro Native Cooperative Union near Moshi and Mikese and Kimango Farms near Morogoro) and one non-certified (UMADEP project in Mkuyuni division of Morogoro). These were selected on the basis of contact with key actors and convenience. In general the format consisted of an interview or focus group with key actors followed by a tour of the operations. In one instance, I accompanied the farmer and an inspector during an organic inspection. 4.10 Case study research The basic design of the CSR followed Yin’s (2003) method, summarised in the flowchart below.

Source: Adapted from Yin, 2003

A set of operational criteria were identified for the selection of case study candidates. Organic projects / initiatives were deemed qualified on the basis of:

- development goals; - explicitly addressing agricultural sustainability; - active-farmer involvement;

develop theory

select cases

design data

collection protocol

conduct 1st case study

conduct 2nd case study

write individual case report

write individual case report

draw cross-case

conclusions

modify theory

develop policy

implications

write cross-case report

DEFINE & DESIGN PREPARE, COLLECT & ANALYSEANALYSE & CONCLUDE

32

- adopting novel technologies and practices; and - community-based with proven impacts.

Thus a purposive sampling strategy was adopted which selected projects on the basis of 'best practice'. Purposive sampling of predominantly 'good' projects, initiatives and farmers as research partners has important implications for the overall applicability of the findings since the cases chosen for investigation were not representative of farms throughout the country. The 'limited geographical applicability of results' is a pervasive problem in all on-farm research (Krell, 1999). The choice of criteria was been influenced by a set of assumptions about the pathways to livelihood benefits through organic agriculture. It was assumed that organic agriculture would bring benefits to smallholders when it was a co-operative type of project with strong social capital, both subsistence and trade orientation, local ownership and a processing element. A two-tailed design was adopted in which cases from both extreme of a theoretical condition were deliberately chosen. The main proposition was that organic projects bring the most benefits to smallholders when they successfully combine multiple objectives of food security and trade, and also strengthen social capital. Two types of organic project were sought: Type 1 – export trade focus Type 2 – subsistence and local trade focus. Besides this key difference in orientation, other variables identified in a typology of organic project types (agroecological conditions, accessibility, processing and technology) were kept as similar as possible in order to be able to collapse other conditions. There were a number of other variables including certification arrangement and set-up that were dependent upon the main variable being examined (orientation) and these were also expected to differ across the two case study sites. The Type 1 project was relatively typical of the organic sector in Tanzania (approximately 70% of certified projects are firms producing organic commodities for export). The Type 2 project, on the other hand, is less typical since there only 30% of certified projects are for the local market. Although this has consequences for the ability to generalise the findings, it was considered to be of secondary importance since the advantage of the case study method is that one gains in terms of phenomenology. Case study preparation involved development of a protocol (see Appendix 2) and screening of case study nominations. Key questions being addressed by the CSR were the same as the initial questions of the whole study:

- the impact of organic agriculture on livelihoods - pathways to livelihood benefits - strategies to strengthen the sustainability of organic projects.

In summary, therefore the case study was designed to undertake participatory problem analysis and participatory solution development. After consultation with different stakeholders it was decided that two projects in the Mkuranga district of the Coastal region would be investigated: one focusing on organic cashew for export and the other, an association of local groups involved in organic vegetable production for subsistence and local trade.

33

Specific activities that were undertaken during the fortnight spent at the case study sites included key informant interviews, for example with field officers and project farmers. Village characterisation was carried out during village meetings and focus groups and using participatory tools such as seasonal calendars, ranking of economic activities, wealth indicators and Venn diagramming. In addition, farm visits, transect walks, and focus groups were used as part of the fieldwork. A detailed report outlining the process and findings of the CSR was prepared for the stakeholders (see Appendix 3). 4.11 Stakeholder Forum The rationale for holding a stakeholder forum was that successful innovation arises from joint learning opportunities among relevant social actors and the integration of knowledge and information from a variety of relevant sources. The importance of bringing stakeholders together is evident when the capacity to achieve innovation in agricultural practices is seen as ‘a collective social competence’ (Engel & Salomon, 1997) and collective intelligence is seen as a produce of the contributions of all (Ellinor and Gerard, 1998). At the core of the process were the appreciations, preoccupations, perceptions, judgements and understanding of the main stakeholders. The workshop activities were designed to make these explicit by encouraging stakeholders to assess and re-assess the problem situation and their role in it since ideally the process of ‘unpacking taken-for-granted views and detecting invisible but oppressive structures’ helps to bring about ‘intellectual emancipation’ (Miles & Huberman, 1994). SSM was the main tool used in the planning and design of the stakeholder forum, and this overall framework helped to define the process, inputs, outputs and procedures of approach, leading to tangible objectives and specific choices with respect to timing and participation. Drawing inspiration from the RAAKS approach, the forum was planned with a step-wise design that included preparation, first phase of defining the relevant system, second phase of analysing constraints and opportunities and third phase of articulating strategies. In seeking to decide who would participate (relevant diversity), it was also necessary to question why and how they would participate (conditions and standards of communication). Participants were selected on the basis of their long-term involvement in organic agriculture and representation of organisation / institution / group. The aim of participant selection was to have a broad representation of the diverse stakeholder groups, and also to have gender and age balance. Selecting the forum participants and designing the programme were collaborative processes, and a couple of the key actors representing civil society and the local certification body were closely involved. The goals and activities of the Stakeholder forum have been outlined in the Invitation letter, Background information, Session planning, News release and Summary Report on the stakeholder forum (see Appendices 4-8). In summary, the three broad objectives of the forum were:

1. To share and synthesise knowledge on organic agriculture in Tanzania; 2. To create a shared vision for the future of organic agriculture in Tanzania;

34

3. To plan actions at the individual levels and institutional levels, disseminate findings through a press conference.

The first objective was pursued through presentations and individual and group work. A guided visioning was undertaken in order to create a shared vision for the future of the organic sector. At its simplest level, a shared vision is the answer to the question: ‘what do we want to create?’ (Senge, 1990). Visions may also be conceived as ‘powerful mental images of what we want to create in the future. They reflect what we care about the most, and are harmonious with our values and sense of purpose’ (Parker, 1990). Thus visioning leads to a workable and purposeful shared alternative to an existing system. Liu (1994: 114) states that ‘there is no better incentive or motivation for a group than to have a general vision of its situation, to get a glimpse of a desirable future, and to experience the start of mastering its own development’. The final activity, development of strategies, took place through the individual and then group formulation of action plans around specific challenges and themes. The press conference was designed in a participatory way, and ended up being a panel of six speakers representing different stakeholder groups followed by a question-and-answer session. Nine journalists attended resulting in two articles, four radio bulletins and coverage on local television. 4.12 Digesting the findings An analytic strategy was formulated in order to prioritise what to analyse, why and how. With regards to the case studies it was decided to analyse information relating to organic agriculture as a livelihood strategy including the different forms of capital assets and the sustainability of the system. The principle of “optimal ignorance” was adopted in order to analyse only what is necessary in order to understand the role of organic agriculture in improving livelihoods, and thus there was a focus on the facts necessary for improving the systems, and inputs to strategies and plans of action. The key aspect of qualitative data analysis is that the material itself should speak and determine the structure of the data presentation. In-depth interviews were analysed using a bottom-up procedure whereby the material and key quotes was marked and labelled, and arranged into groups. This yielded relevant statements, viewpoints and insights. For the large part soft quantification was used (e.g. referring to all, most of, several, a few rather than exact figures). Various coding procedures were used to generate descriptions and themes from the data collected during the CSR. Codes were affixed to field notes from observation and interviews. Information derived from the case studies was categorised and tabulated according to the SL framework and different models of sustainability and farming systems. Information arrays and data displays were used for organising and summarising the evidence. This information was then used to address the initial propositions. The emphasis of case study analysis was on explanation building and there was constant reference to the original purpose of the enquiry and possible alternative explanations. On-going reflection was also part of the analysis, and reflections and other remarks were continuously noted in the margins of fieldwork notebooks. After isolating patterns, processes, commonalities and differences, for example when building the

35

preliminary rich picture, these were taken into the field for the next phase of data collection. Personal reflections on the entire research process are given in Appendix 9. 4.13 Verification by acceptance In order to verify the findings, statements were given to experienced practitioners to find out whether they were acceptable. Participants in the CSR were asked to review and critique an interim product, and it is also envisaged that they will critique the final products. Such verification is deemed important for developing validity and “inter-subjective consensus” (Miles & Huberman, 2004). Participation in a UNEP-UNCTAD Regional Workshop on Organic Agriculture in East Africa that was held in Arusha also provided a good opportunity to compare and discuss findings with other stakeholders involved in research and the promotion of organic production and trade.

36

Chapter Five: Organic Agriculture in Tanzania Different countries have vastly differing histories of organic agriculture, depending on their agroecological conditions and socio-political and economic contexts (Rundgren, 2006; Taylor, 2006). This section provides an overview of the history, status and modus operandi of organic agriculture in Tanzania, revealing some of the country-specific opportunities and pitfalls of developing the organic sector. 5.1 Country background The United Republic of Tanzania (hereafter referred to simply as Tanzania) has a total population of 34.6 million and covers an area of 94.3 million ha, of which 5.1 million ha are cultivated annually (about 5% of the surface area) (TARPII, 2004). Agriculture supplies approximately 57% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and employs 70-90% of the workforce (United Republic of Tanzania, 2006). A household budget survey in 2002 revealed that 19% of the population are below the food poverty line, meaning that they have insufficient resources to meet calorific requirements, and 36% are below the basic needs poverty line, although there is a large variation between regions (Kinabo et al., 2004). 5.2 History of organic agriculture in Tanzania Organic agriculture in Tanzania has a relatively long history. In 1898 Peramiho Organic Garden was established in the Ruvuma region to produce a variety of vegetables following organic principles including the use of manure and soil conservation (Silenge & Bertram, 1996). In 1926 Peramiho exported seeds to the Netherlands. The garden is still in existence and serves the Benedictine missionaries of the area. Sustainable agriculture, Soil and Water Conservation (SWC), agroforestry, Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and related practices grew in the 1980s. A wide range of different groups and organisations became involved, including farmers’ associations, government research and extension and NGOs. Many of these organisations are members of the civil society network, Participatory Ecological Land Use Management (PELUM) Tanzania. Certified organic agriculture emerged in Tanzania in the early 1990s. Amongst the pioneering projects were Luponde organic tea from Iringa, Meatu organic cotton from Shinyanga, Kyela organic cocoa production from Mbeya, and Kimango organic spices and teas from Morogoro. In 2003 the first local certification body, the Tanzanian certification association (TanCert) was established with support from the EPOPA programme and a number of Civil Society Organisations (CSOs). The first certification of organic products for the domestic market was undertaken in 2004, and the following year TanCert started inspection services for the export market. Prior to this organic operators were using external certifiers. Also in 2005 a national network called the Tanzanian Organic Agriculture Movement (TOAM) was formed which places organic farming centre stage in the aims of the members to counter food insecurity, poverty and environmental degradation. TOAM emerged out of a need to improve access to relevant information, exchange experiences and unify the organic movement by setting a priority agenda for the organic sector particularly in the areas of research, marketing, learning and advocacy.

37

The mission of TOAM is to develop a sustainable organic sector through promotion, coordination, research and education. 5.3 Status of organic agriculture in Tanzania Although in its infancy, the certified organic sector is growing rapidly. It is being propelled by smallholder farmers (mostly farming 1-5 ha) and commercial interests in capturing the expanding organic market. The formal sector has arisen from significant attempts to engage smallholders in export commodity production, often facilitated by local NGOs and development agencies that see a close fit between organic farming and development objectives (Parrott & Elzakker, 2003). There is a growing realisation that organic agriculture can contribute to the development of export and local trade, and give opportunities to smallholder farmers to enter commercial agricultural production. In addition to the prospects of improved incomes, organic producers are motivated by health and environmental concerns. The adoption of resource-efficient farming systems such as organic agriculture is driven in part by pressure on natural resources including threats to biodiversity such as bushfires, dependence on agrochemicals, deforestation, the introduction of exotic species and hybrid seeds, and lack of proper water management resulting in droughts, floods, siltation, erosion and water contamination. Moreover the price for artificial fertilisers has been soaring in recent decades (Silenge, 1996). There are now at least 23 certified organic projects in Tanzania, including 16 firms for export and 7 projects for the local market. The focus is on traditional commodity crops such as coffee, tea, cocoa, cashew nuts and cotton and non-traditional crops such as vanilla, sesame, herbs and spices which are often processed. Horticulturalists are also adopting organic practices in order to produce tropical fruit and vegetables, both fresh and dried, for the domestic and international market. The table below shows the range of organic commodities produced in Tanzania:

Organic Produce of Tanzania Type Product Operator Location Notes

Robusta coffee Kagera Co-operative Union Ltd. (KCU)

Bukoba Also instant

Arabica coffee Kilimanjaro Native Cooperative Union (KNCU)

Moshi, Kilimamjaro

Instant coffee Tanganyika Instant Coffee Company Ltd. (TANICA)

Bukoba, Kagera

Coffee

Arabica coffee UMA Black tea Mufindi Tea

Estates Ltd. (MTC)

Njombe, Iringa

Chamomile Clipper Fair trade

Teas and beverages

Hibiscus Zanzibar Organic Zanzibar Export

38

Spices and Herbs Hibiscus, lemongrass, peppermint

Kimango Farm Enterprises Ltd.

Morogoro

Hibiscus Bonde la chem chem

Siha, Kilimanjaro

Cocoa Biolands International Ltd.

Kyela, Mbeya

Cotton ECOL Cotton Project

Handeni, Tanga

Cotton

Cotton BioRe Tanzania Ltd.

Meatu, Shinyanga

Essential oils Zanzibar State Trading Company (ZSTC)

Zanzibar Essential oils

Essential oils Clove Stem Oil Distillery (CSOD)

Pemba Lemon grass oil, cinnamon leaf oil, sweet basil oil and eucalyptus oil

Zanzgerm Enterprises Ltd.

Zanzibar, Tanga, Kigoma

Ginger, turmeric, pepper, chilli and lemongrass

Kimango Farm Enterprises Ltd.

Morogoro Paprika, chillies, lemongrass

Tanzania Organic Products Ltd. (TAZOP)

Zanzibar, Morogoro

Ginger, turmeric, pepper, cinnamon, cloves, etc.

MAYAWA Bukoba, Kagera

Vanilla

ADP Isangati Isangati, Mbeya

Dried turmeric

Culinary spices

Turmeric cinnamon Cardamom Nutmeg Clove Ginger Black pepper Chillies Lemongrass

ZAFFIDE Zanzibar Fresh tropical fruits

Avocadoes Mangoes Pineapples Papaya

Mikese Organic Farm

Morogoro Mangoes

Dried fruits Matunda Mema, Kipepeo

Karagwe Dried fruits

Dried pineapple, mango, bananas tomatoes

Claphjo Enterprises

Kibaha, Dar es Salaam

Canned fruits

Canned pineapple Dabaga Vegetable & Fruit Canning Company Ltd.

Njombe

Honey Honey Fidahussein Co. Rufiji delta Ginger Ginger syrup Arusha Vegetables Amaranths, cassava,

tomatoes Mkuranga Women Vegetable Growers

Mkuranga, Coast

39

Mushrooms Dried mushrooms Songea and Njombe in Iringa region

Fish Tuna Tanga Sustainably harvested

Seaweed Seaweed powder Pemba For use as a binding agent in toothpaste, also used in ice cream and pet food

Medicinal plants

Pyrethrum Artemisia Aloe Vera

Premier Cashew Industries Ltd. (PCI)

Kerekese, Mkuranga

Cashew-nuts Cashew nuts Shea, Macadamia Groundnuts

TANPRO Sumbawanga Groundnuts Sesame Singida

Nuts and oil seeds

Safflower Envirocare Kilimanjaro Source: Compiled from the literature including, Mwasha & Leijdens (2004), Taylor (2006), UNEP-

UNCTAD (2006), and interviews. Estimates of the certified land area range from 37,000 ha to over 64,000 ha. The 2001 SOEL Survey recorded an organic area of 55,867 ha, comprising 0.14% of the agricultural area (Willer & Yussefi, 2004). It is likely that the situation has changed since then although it is not clear whether the amount of certified land area has increased due to increasing projects or decreased as a result of farmer drop-out. In addition, there is thought to be more than 200,000 ha of uncertified organic agricultural land. In 2001 it was estimated that there were almost 27,000 certified organic farms in Tanzania (Willer & Yussefi, 2004), which makes it likely that there are now over 30,000 farmers in Tanzania producing organically. Although Tanzania exports sizeable quantities of organic food products, the exact amounts are unclear because customs do not classify them separately (Tairo, 1999). At least 10,467.41 tonnes were thought to have been exported in 2005 (Taylor, 2006). In the past few years approximately 60% of certified organic commodities produced in Tanzania have been exported (Chilongola, 2005). Certified organic agriculture in Tanzania is predominantly export-oriented, supported by development funding and aimed at improving incomes. Through EPOPA, certified organic agriculture has been promoted in Tanzania as ‘an instrument for African exporters to improve their business and for thousands of farmers to improve their livelihood’ (EPOPA, 2004). Certified organic projects generally have the following components: farmer organisations, an exporter, a facilitating agency and a certifying agency. Smallholders are contracted by exporting companies who generally pay for certification, sometimes in collaboration with donor programmes. In addition to this out-grower model, there are also a few individuals farming organically on a large-scale, and one cooperative (the Kilimanjaro Native Cooperative Union) engaged in commercial organic agriculture. The main export destinations for

40

organic crops from Tanzania are in the European Union, although some go to the United States and the growing Middle Eastern market. Whilst certified organic farms produce almost exclusively for the European market, Tanzania also has a small but growing domestic market, particularly in the light of pesticide poisonings. There is a rising awareness of the benefits of better quality food and also possible links between healthy organic foods and some alleviation of the effects of HIV/AIDS. In addition to a few dedicated outlets, several of the larger supermarket chains stock organic products. The large majority of organic customers are foreigners including expatriates and tourists, although there is also a market amongst the wealthy urban Tanzanian elite and middle classes, particularly for medical reasons. Non-certified or informal organic production, on the other hand, has been practised in Tanzania for centuries. There is a history of low-input traditional farming in Tanzania and the majority of production of food crops such as millet, sorghum, rice, maize, food legumes, roots, tubers, plantain and fruits are under low-external input agriculture (Altieri, 2002; in Scialabba & Hattam, 2002; Harris et al., 1998). Traditional farmers have found ways of improving soil structure, water-holding capacity and nutrient and water availability without the use of artificial inputs, such as intercropping grains and legumes. It has been estimated that in Africa 98% of all cowpeas are grown in polycultural systems (Dover & Talbot, 1987). Although it may not be recognised as such, organic production is already thought to be feeding the majority of people across East Africa, especially those living outside large conurbations who mainly eat from their own gardens and who, being commonly averse to applying artificial inputs to their own food crops, mainly eat naturally, organically-produced food (Taylor, 2006). The average use of chemical fertilisers is estimated to be less that one kg per ha per year, which implies that most of the land is never fertilised (Scialabba & Hattam, 2002). For these reasons, agricultural production is often called organic “by default” although the term is slightly misleading since many of these systems are not fully complying with formal organic standards of production. Furthermore, farmers in traditional systems often use isolated sustainable agricultural techniques, incorporating ‘specific organic soil fertility enhancement or pest control techniques without the farming system as a whole being organic’ (Harris et al., 1998: 2). Thus organic farming differs from many traditional systems by aiming ‘for the entire farm to be managed as a coherent system’ (Lockeretz & Stopes, 2000) and therefore offering an integrated approach to soil fertility and crop protection management. 5.4 Modus Operandi of organic agriculture in Tanzania External certifiers that operate in the country include IMO/Naturland, EcoCert and Krav. In the past the Soil Association has worked in Tanzania. The first national certification body, TanCert, has formulated and now applies two standards: one for the national market and the other for the export market. Altogether three organic standards exist in Tanzania, including:

1. a standard for local markets

41

2. an export standard 3. a standard drafted by the Tanzania Bureau of Standards.

There is currently an initiative to develop regional standards in order to ease the demands of meeting international trade barriers and strengthen East Africa within a global context. In addition to building up the organic standards and certification procedures, TanCert is involved in training inspectors. There are currently 34 local inspectors who are graded and inspect for the local and international markets, whilst others are trainees who assist in establishing ICSs, quality insurance mechanisms which allow for smallholder group certification. TanCert aims for IFOAM accreditation in 2006 in order to reduce costs and increase ease of access to certification services. 5.5 Political context of organic agriculture in Tanzania The Government of the Republic of Tanzania is in support of organic agriculture and has opened up policies which allow farmers and NGOs to practice organic agriculture in the country. The Ministry of Agriculture, Food Security and Cooperatives (MAFSC) took part in the formulation of national organic standards. The government has made public its support for organic agriculture as a market strategy (Sicilima, 2003). Tanzania’s Board of External Trade (BET) is putting greater emphasis on the production and export of organically-grown foods. Recognising the contribution of the organic sector to overall export competitiveness, BET has been working jointly with Geneva-based International Trade Centre (ITC) to promote organic foods production and marketing (Tairo, 1999). The existing national Agricultural Policy (1997) has clauses about organic agriculture which centre on ecological and health issues. Clause 3.1 of the policy mentions organic agriculture in relation to the management of natural resources, the production of commercial products, protection of soil, water and wildlife and minimising negative social and environmental externalities. However, the country has not integrated organic agriculture fully into the main agricultural policies, which still have a pervasive bias towards an industrial paradigm of agricultural development. Moreover, organic practices have not been streamlined in existing extension services. Most of the subsidies, pricing policies, infrastructure and other supports such as farm input support schemes provide incentives for input-intensive farming methods rather than for more ecologically-sustainable agriculture. Since such supports are only available to conventional farmers, they encourage farmers to abandon traditional methods. For example, the Treasury has been subsidising fertiliser transportation throughout the country since 2003, and has a target of increasing fertiliser use to an average of ten kg per ha by 2007/8 (Guardian, 2005). Such schemes are ‘collectively financed in a way in which organic farms de facto subsidise their conventional colleagues’ (Taylor, 2006: 4). The picture described above is of the organic sector in early 2006. However, the sector is very fluid and the situation is changing rapidly as the demand for organic products grows and traditional trade barriers are opened.

42

Chapter Six: Assessment of Organic Systems in Tanzania 6.1 Towards a Tanzanian Vision of Organic Agriculture Organic agriculture is essentially viewed by stakeholders in Tanzania as a sustainable form of agriculture that improves soil fertility, provides healthy products and reduces costs. During the stakeholder forum convened as a part of this study, key actors in the Tanzanian organic movement identified food, environment and income as cornerstones of their desired future organic sector. Their declared vision was ‘to have a vibrant organic sector supported by a wide range of stakeholders that is the driving force behind agriculture in the country, takes advantage of local and export markets and contributes to enhanced livelihoods through quality and safe food, environmental conservation, economic growth and sustainable development’ by 2015. Organic agriculture is indigenous insofar as it can be conceived as a modified form of traditional farming. Since traditional agriculture generally has low or no artificial inputs, and frequently incorporates mulching, intercropping and other organic practices, conversion to organic agriculture may involve only slight modifications to farm management, e.g. fire avoidance. There are many ways in which organic agriculture complements and builds upon cultural beliefs, for example farmers maintain conservation areas in the Tanzanian tradition of making offerings to propitiate the spirits of the dead (kutambika) and protecting areas for the ancestors. Where organic systems have been developed in a participatory manner, organic agriculture is perceived as a low-cost, environmentally-friendly means of improving agricultural productivity for food security and trade. On the other hand, when the concept of organic agriculture has been introduced by external agents, it is often not fully incorporated into the identities, belief and value systems of the rural communities. It may even be associated with exploitative relations with companies, and understood only as a rigid and oppressive set of (mainly prohibitive) rules. Unlike in Europe where many farmers have adopted organic agriculture for philosophical and ideological reasons, certified organic agriculture has emerged in Africa in response to market demand from the Global North, with health, food safety, environmental benefits and animal welfare being lesser concerns. Findings suggest that there is a greater risk of organic agriculture being perceived negatively where the sole or main incentive for farmers to convert is access markets, credit and inputs. The meaning of organic agriculture to different stakeholders is influenced to a large extent by the way in which it develops in different areas. Cotton farmers in Shinyanga region have been motivated to convert to organic agriculture for a number of different reasons, include negative experiences with pesticides and their cattle, premium prices for organic cotton, and the availability of extension services (a German development cooperation has been active in the area since the early 1990s). Project farmers agreed to cultivate cotton organically by practising crop rotation and integrating trap crops2 such as sunflower in return for inputs and guaranteed markets for their cotton.

2 A trap crop is a plant known to attract a pest that is planted near a crop susceptible to that pest to lure the pest away from the desired crop.

43

Representatives of the national farmers’ network (MVIWATA) have highlighted a whole host of factors that are motivating smallholders to adopt organic practices in Tanzania, including: high costs of hybrid seeds requiring chemical inputs; ease of access to organic inputs; similarity to traditional practices; improved taste and nutritional content; maintenance of soil moisture; heightened resistance to drought and diseases; improved handling qualities; links between chemicals and health problems. 6.2 Benefits of organic agriculture in Tanzania Ecological capital – Natural capital is built in organic systems along various agroecological transition pathways including: a) habitat manipulation via vegetative diversification, and b) enhancement of soil biodiversity via soil management (Altieri, 2003). There is widespread awareness amongst Tanzanian smallholders of the importance of soil fertility management practices, evidenced in the conscious use of nitrogen-fixing trees including Grevellia spp. to replenish essential nutrients, intercropping and green manuring leguminous plans such as Crotalaria, Cajanus and Mucuna. These techniques, alongside many others such as composting, applying farmyard manure, cover cropping, crop rotation and mulching result in a higher organic matter content in the soil and greater overall resilience to drought conditions. One notable example of farmers employing organic practices to enhance soil fertility is the sunhemp system that was developed at Peramiho (Reijntjes et al., 1992). The nitrogen-fixing Crotalaria species (commonly known as sunhemp) is intercropped with maize, incorporated into the soil as a green manure and mulched to protect fruit trees such as banana, citrus and coconut. Other advantages include erosion prevention, fodder value, and weed, insect and nematode control. In the upland villages of the Uluguru mountains, in the Mkuyuni division of Morogoro region, there has been an impressive uptake of strip contouring in non-certified organic pineapple production, resulting in slope stabilisation and reduced soil erosion. There are also experiments with Vertiver grass (Vertiver zizanioides) which can act as a “hedge against erosion” (World Bank, 2000). The grass is already found in more than ten regions and is the centrepiece of a project to protect the Msimbazi valley. Organic farmers are also making more efficient use of water resources by employing SWC practices such as bund and trench construction. Organic farms in Tanzania often have a high level of biodiversity and farm enterprise diversity both as a result of purposeful cultivation and as an unintentional consequence of discontinuing the use of synthetic inputs. One organic mango farmer in Morogoro identified 13 different varieties of mangoes on his farm and had also incorporated spices, nuts, hardwoods, and bee-keeping into his production system. In the Kilimanjaro region, organic farmers have reported the return of many unusual insects, birds and snakes since they stopped using agro-chemicals (L. Lema 2006, pers. comm., 30 January). Increasing agrobiodiversity in organic systems creates eco-balance, and contributes to agroecosystem sustainability in a number of ways. In addition to improving productivity (for example through the suppression of pests and diseases), multiple cropping distributes labour demand through the seasons, improves diets and nutrition, and spreads the economic and economic risk of failure. Where subsistence is an

44

important objective, the net income advantages of polycultural systems appear to be secondary to risk reduction (Francis: in Altieri & Hecht, 1990). The benefits of increased biodiversity are being reaped on many organic farms in Tanzania. Crop rotations in the Shinyanga organic cotton scheme have helped to diversify cash and food crops to include maize, paddy rice, sesame, sunflower, jatropha and legumes such as pigeon peas, mung beans, and groundnuts (S. Ratter 2006, pers. comm., 12 March). The diagram below summarises a variety of different organic practices that are being used in Tanzania. Each technique holds a range of potentials and constraints that differ according to agroecological zone. The practices have been loosely grouped according to whether they are used for soil fertility, water conservation or pest and disease control, although there are many interconnections for example increasing soil nutrient content improves plant health and makes them less susceptible to damage by pests.

Examples of organic techniques used in Tanzania for ecological benefit

Human capital: The knowledge and skill set of organic farmers is increased through training given by supporting organisations and extension provided by exporting

Minjingu Rock

Phosphate (MPP),

Sunflower cake

Ashes, garlic, neem, papaya, milk, copper, Lantana camara jatropha, tobacco, pyrethrum, Tephrosia, Pheromone traps, Bt, veronica

PEST AND DISEASE

CONTROL

Crop

rotation, trap crops, companion

planting

Mulch, Compost, Raised beds, In-row tillage, Leguminous green manures, Liquid manure, Farmyard manure, Double-digging

WATER CONSERVATION

Intercropping Agroforestry

Alley cropping Vertiver grass Cover crops Buffer zones

SOIL FERTILITY MANAGEMENT

45

companies and ICS field staff. This is often a dramatic improvement on existing extension services. For example, the bioRe organic cotton project in Shinyanga employs one extensionist who visits at least once a month for every 50 families in contrast to a ratio of one government extensionist for every 500-600 farmers. In particular, projects that involve participatory research, on-farm experimentation and farmer-to-farmer learning help to increase farmers’ self-reliance. As an integral part of the ICS, record-keeping also helps farmers to monitor productivity in terms of yields and also farm income, for example knowing the exact number of clove trees on a their farms encourages Zanzibar farmers to replace trees that are removed. By valuing the contribution of local knowledge to the production system and making optimum use of locally-available resources, organic agriculture supports smallholder farm development. For example, an organic farmer in Morogoro had adopted the local practice of planting Euphorbia around the base of mango trees in order to limit damage by termites. Local farmers are also using the African marigold (Tagetes erecta) for its pest repellent properties. In the Coastal region the use of red weaver ants to biologically control the Helpelitus beetle, the main pest of the cashew trees has become local knowledge. Indigenous knowledge is an important source of information about the local farming system, experiences, institutions and culture since it helps farmers adapt new ideas to their local conditions and needs and forms the basis for change within the farming community (Reijntjes et al., 1992). Improving access to varied and nutritious foodstuffs is another important way in which organic agriculture is building human capital. An organic gardening project at the Keni Aleni Primary School in Rombo, Moshi, facilitated by the NGO Envirocare, is improving the diets and health of the school children and teachers. Social capital: Social capital improvements in organic systems take the form of more and stronger social organisations at the local level, new rules and norms for managing collective natural resources, and better connectedness to external policy institutions (Hine & Pretty, 2006). The formation of organic producer groups and ICSs improves farmers’ access to training, inputs and credit. Organic conversion influences all facets of farm operation including social structure, labour demand and decision-making processes (Scialabba & Hattam, 2004). Since the type of practices promoted in organic agriculture tend to suit the requirements of women farmers (e.g. low external input), organic systems can enhance gender equity. The uptake of organic vegetable cultivation by women’s groups in Mkuranga, for instance, has been accompanied by reduced dependency on men for cash, and since the groups explicitly focus on improving household nutrition, the benefits from organic agriculture accrue to the farming family as a whole. Economic capital: Many smallholders who undergo organic conversion experience increased financial security as a result of the reduced costs of organic production, higher farm-gate prices and increased market security. Many organic farmers and NGOs mention the minimisation of the costs of production by using locally-available materials as one of the key motivations for adopting organic agriculture. Organic certification adds value to smallholder agriculture through the premium price, market access and opportunities for value-added processing and sale of products

46

related to organic production (Harris et al., 1998). By producing according to international regulations and obtaining certification by a certifying body, farmers are reported to be obtaining a premium of 15-40% for their products (EPOPA, 2004). In addition, higher organic prices tend to create an upward trend on the price locally paid for conventional and non-certified products. Preliminary results from a Dutch-funded study on Standards and Agrofoods Exports suggest that organic cashew growers receive a higher price and revenue from cashew nut sale than conventional cashew growers (D. Nyange 2006, pers, comm., 16 January). In the past the cashew growers have quadrupled their income in two years by doubling harvests from 1300 to 2600 kg per year and due to price increases from 300 to 700 Tshs per kg (Edwards, 2005). Farmers in Mkuyuni division of the Morogoro region were able to increase their incomes significantly through the sale of (non-certified) organically-produced plantain and pineapples. The superior quality of fruits from this particular area is allegedly recognised in markets across the country. One farmer reported earnings of up to 600,000 Tshs (around $600) per month from the sale of non-certified organic plantain, which he had used to build three improved houses, purchase a town plot and educate his children. Another indicator of the improved quality life of the local residents since adopting organic agriculture was the increased variety of consumer goods available in local shops. The premium prices offered for certified organic cotton have helped to raise the income levels of farmer in the bioRe project in Shinyanga, although according to a consultant on the project, the establishment of a long-term partnership with a buying company is often of greater value to the small-scale producer that the premium price for organic produce (S. Ratter 2006, pers. comm., 12 March).

47

Chapter Seven: Summary of Case Study on Organic Agriculture and Rural Livelihoods in Mkuranga District

Two contrasting organic initiatives in the Mkuranga district were analysed from a sustainable livelihoods perspective in order to clarify future directions of organic agriculture at farm- and community-levels. Premier Cashew Industries Ltd. (PCI), which is involved in the production and processing of certified organic cashews for export, was chosen as an example of a project with a commodity focus. An association of local groups, known locally as Muungano, which is producing in-conversion organic vegetables for subsistence and local trade, offered an example of a project with a community focus. 7.1 Background to the area The Mkuranga district is located approximately 40km south of Dar es Salaam in the Coastal region of Tanzania. The narrow lowland coastal belt is consistently hot and humid. It is under a bimodal rainfall regime of 750-1200 mm per year and overlies relatively infertile sandy soils dominated by Cambic Arenosols. Traditionally farmers have sustained their families through rainfed, low-input cultivation of rice and cassava, deriving income mainly from the sale of coconuts and more recently cashews. 7.2 Individual case narratives The large Dar-based PCI has been processing organic cashews since 2002 with facilitation from EPOPA. The company is certified by IMO/Naturland, which work through local inspectors of the domestic certification body, TanCert. PCI currently holds contracts with 478 farmers in three villages of the Mkuranga district. Compliance to organic standards is ensured through an ICS which facilitates group certification. PCI employs two field officers to supervise the ICS, conduct internal inspections and trainings. Since 2004 a number of local production groups have been formed in the area in order to improve household food security and increase the incomes of farming families through organic vegetable cultivation. These grew out of discussion between leaders of the sub-villages and representatives of supporting institutions such as EPOPA and a government research institute. The largest group has 27 members altogether (26 women and 1 man) who together cultivate a 0.6 ha plot rented by the government research institute. The groups are currently seeking organic certification for the local market. 7.3 Analysis The ecological integrity, social equity and economic effectiveness of the organic initiatives were found to be very different, and this has important implications for the livelihoods of the farmers involved. Key factors determining the sustainability of the two organic initiatives as livelihood strategies were system orientation, the level of livelihood diversity, agricultural practices, social structures and marketing arrangements. Overall, increased awareness of organic approaches to agriculture has contributed to sustainable natural resource management, household food security and improved incomes, hence improving the livelihoods of rural farm households. However, when

48

farmers are motivated to convert by incentives of sulphur on credit (for control of Powdery Mildew Disease in cashews) and the promise of increased incomes, there is a risk that environmental and social sustainability concerns are sidelined. On balance, the cashew project did not appear to significantly increase livelihood security by mitigating risks or by improving their asset base in order to reduce the susceptibility of smallholders to loss of welfare. In the “trade not aid” approach, organic agriculture theoretically should build financial assets. However, in the worst case scenario, fluctuations on the world market and an over-reliance on one product, makes the agricultural system more vulnerable to shocks. Moreover, an over-emphasis on cash crop production compromises the potential non-economic benefits of organic agriculture such as ecological stability. The benefits, therefore, of having links with external institutions, trainings on cashew management and increased yields are overshadowed by the disadvantages of relying on a single cash crop, volatile market prices and problematic input supply arrangements. Organic agriculture was found to bring more livelihood benefits among the local groups, where the emphasis was first on building human and social capital at the local level, with certification a secondary concern. These included:

- more varied and nutritious diets of family members due to increased diversity and higher quality crops;

- increased social and economic power to women accrued through higher income from sales of vegetables;

- livelihood security through diversification and introduction of new productive elements into the farming system;

- increased yields due to training and provision of inputs; - closer cooperation between farmers due to the formation of local groups.

Food security was enhanced by increasing household food availability and raising children’s nutritional status. Since it relies more on internal natural and resource resources, the type of organic agriculture embraced by the local groups is more ecologically, socially and economically sustainable. However, prolonged drought conditions are still a serious threat and usually have a greater impact on vegetable production than production of perennial crops such as cashews. 7.4 Lessons Opportunities for improving system sustainability in organic agriculture of Mkuranga include improving natural resource management, farmer organisation, livelihood diversification and participatory market research and development. Institutional relationships were found to be a key bottleneck in developing organic agriculture oriented to the needs of smallholders. There is a need to recognise and build upon the synergies between different stakeholders in the organic food chain, particularly farmers’ organisations, facilitating agencies, certifiers and exporters / companies. A collaborative relationship between the two projects with their different orientations, empowering farmers on the one hand and producing high quality products on the other, might result in a more effective situation. In order to bring a significant share of farmers out of poverty the certified market-led model needs to be more aligned to IFOAM’s basic principles of health, ecology, fairness and care by explicitly incorporating social and environmental concerns. An organic agriculture that comprises both a focus on community and commodity is needed in order to secure

49

sustainable livelihoods for smallholders, as is indeed one which promotes voluntary participation, and the sharing of both information and benefits.

50

Chapter Eight: Challenges to the Development of Organic Agriculture in Tanzania

Notwithstanding its many benefits, organic farming carries attendant risks and challenges which also merit consideration if the sector is to be responsibly developed. These relate to production, labour, gender, market-orientation, and the policy and institutional framework. 8.1 Production Organic farmers face many of the same production constraints as conventional farmers in relation to climate, labour requirements, pest and diseases, land tenure, distance from markets, infrastructure, credit, education and other inputs. In particular, the increasingly erratic nature of the rains—fieldwork followed an eight-month drought in most parts of the country—is a source of major concern for all farmers in the country, irrespective of their wealth and the size of their landholdings. For the bioRe organic cotton project failure of the rains has meant that farmers have had to use three times the normal quantity of seed. The vast majority of producers rely on rainfed agriculture and lack the necessary knowledge and resources to develop efficient rainwater harvesting and irrigation systems. Furthermore, burning and deforestation are commonly used practices which threaten soil and water resources and are contributing to flash floods. Pest and disease outbreaks present a substantial risk to those organic farmers without sufficient knowledge or access to biopesticides. Certain pests such as armyworms (Spodoptera exempta), quelea quelea and vermin are particularly difficult to control without the use of toxic chemicals. Without security of land tenure, organic farmers are much less likely to make long-term investments in their operations. Thus unclear borders and land conflicts, often exacerbated by limited water resources, are a significant threat to the development of organic agriculture. Even where farm boundaries are well-defined, fire can spread fast across neighbouring farms and, in the case of organic cashew production, causes severe damage to both seedlings and mature stands. In spite of increased management intensity, organic practices may initially reduce yields in the beginning in areas where input-intensive agriculture has been practised (EPOPA, 2004). The uptake of organic agriculture may impact negatively on the productivity of crops that have been cultivated using chemically-intensive methods including coffee and some vegetables. Non-traditional crops and fruit are generally lighter users of inputs and therefore experience less change (D. Nyange 2006, pers, comm., 16 January). Such impacts need more careful research in order to address fears about the ability of organic agriculture to meet the production levels needed to feed a growing population. There are a whole host of counterpoints to concerns over productivity declines in organic systems. Experience has shown that ‘organic methods reduce output proportionately less than they reduce costs’ making the farmer better off (McRobie: in Blake, 1987). Lampkin (1990: 595) comments that ‘far from threatening the populations of developing countries with mass starvation, ecological methods such as

51

organic farming allow farmers to take control again and escape dependence on purchased inputs, improving output while at the same time reducing risk and inequities which have been associated with the high technological approach to agriculture’. Moreover the time-scale on which productivity is measured needs to be considered since organic agriculture seeks to optimise productivity on a long-term basis rather than maximise it in the short-term. Whilst organic systems do not always increase yield per unit area, agroecologists argue that this is of less importance than optimising yield stability, environmental quality and net income to the farmer over the long-term. There is not always a direct and positive relationship between organic agriculture and biodiversity. The uptake of commercial and certified organic agriculture may cause a shift to monocropping in cases where organic crops have been intercropped with conventional crops, such as organic pineapples with conventional maize or organic bananas with conventional coffee. Moreover, efforts to obtain the highest yield of a single cash crop (for instance in pursuit of the organic premium) conflict with trying to achieve maximum stability of a complex biomass structure (Dover & Talbot, 1987). An emphasis on organic production for the market results in a disproportionate focus on the main cash crop leading to specialisation and neglect of other aspects of the system such as the environment, food quality and animal welfare which have historically been essential elements of the philosophy behind organic farming (Alrøe, 2004). Specialisation of organic systems has also been reported in the Italian region of Tyrol where farmers are focusing on organic apples (El-Nagger et al., 2006). 8.2 Labour The ability to access sufficient labour, both skilled and unskilled, is an important prerequisite for often labour-intensive organic systems, and organic projects usually invest heavily in human resources such as farm workers, farm managers and field officers. Organic farmers frequently use a large proportion of their incomes on hired labour. Conditions of employment are often problematic, with labourers preferring ad hoc seasonal work and employers looking for long-term loyalty. There are certain times of the year when labour availability is critical such as during the harvesting period. Whilst labour intensiveness may be considered a constraint to organic conversion (particularly in the light of the HIV/AIDS pandemic and rural depopulation), it may also be considered an opportunity to expand employment in rural communities and attract the younger generations to agriculture. Furthermore, tedious and time-consuming practices often have alternatives such as in-field composting. 8.3 Gender Organic agriculture may entail changes in gender roles and control of budgets, for example more work for women and additional incomes to men, which need to be carefully monitored in each project. Where cropping intensity increases or new lands are taken into cultivation organic practices may increase household workload and the burden often falls on women. Furthermore, ‘additional income arising from sales of produce, particularly from coffee and cotton (but not vegetables) may go directly to men in the households, who are less likely than women to invest in children and the

52

household as a whole’ (Hine & Pretty, 2006). Certified organic farms are usually registered in the name of the man of the household. Since the men often take charge of the major cash crops, income derived from the sale of organic produce does not necessarily benefit the whole family. However, more data is needed on the gender division of labour and the distribution of benefits from organic agriculture, and any attempt to improve the status of women farmers through training and other means must be implemented sensitively and aimed at the whole community, in order to avoid unintended effects that actually worsen women’s lives (Taylor, 2006). 8.4 Market-orientation Satisfying market demands in terms of quantity, quality and consistency of supply is another major challenge facing organic farmers. The pressure to meet market demands for bulk supply can cause organic farmers to try to achieve economies of scale by reducing the diversity of crop types and/or enterprises, undermining one of the underlying principles of organic management. The growing “conventionalisation” of organic agriculture (such as large monocultures using input substitution), where so-called “market needs” have separated the organic movement from its initial platform, is of increasing concern to many actors within the organic movement (Lernoud & Fenesca, 2004: 23). By targeting specialised markets in Europe, the USA and Japan, organic producers must comply with stringent market requirements (such as HACCP and Eurep-GAP) which entail following strict sanitation and hygiene procedures. Strict adherence to market-based standards and large-scale production gives rise to centralised administrative control and external monitoring, in time reducing suitability to local conditions. In the past phytosanitary regulations have been a reason for blocking imports of organic products from Tanzania into the UK. The proliferation of regulatory structures has increased concerns about import discrimination when compliance is required with standards that are not suited to Tanzania’s agroecological conditions. There is also a risk that the ‘strict demands of the organic food industry may eclipse the ecological principles of organic farming, particularly where the need for “quality control” can be used as a justification for authoritarianism’ (Thiers, 2005: 12) and increase tensions between producers and buyers. It is frequently stated that one of the major challenges facing organic farmers is the high costs of certification. In fact, some practitioners indicate that certification represents as little as 2% of overall costs of production. Often the choice of certifier and the complexity of procedures including transaction certifications are greater constraints than certification cost in terms of accessing increasingly controlled import markets (Harris et al., 1998). Since a certain part of certification is a fixed cost, certification costs take higher percentage of earnings of smallholder units, underlining the importance of collective certification systems such as ICSs in order to involve smallholder farmers. Also about 50% of the certification cost may be towards travel. The organic market is very selective which means that not all produce that has been grown and handled according to organic standards can be sold as organic. For example, the market for organic cashew is restricted to White Wholes which

53

constitute only 4 out of the 27 grades used by the exporting company, which means that a large portion of organically-grown cashews cannot be sold as organic. Producing for the world market in organic produce puts Tanzanian producers in direct competition with those from South America, Asia, Australia and the Mediterranean. In the organic sector the Brazilians are also supplying the market with bananas and pineapples, for instance, whilst China is also an exporter of essential oils and lemongrass, and Japan exports organic ginger. In order to stay competitive on global markets, Tanzanian smallholders are challenged to capitalise on other comparative advantages besides relatively cheap land and labour. Cheap imports of raw and processed goods from Asia and South Africa also threaten access by Tanzanian producers to the domestic market and could, in the future, jeopardise the development of the local organic market. The price premium, despite being a major incentive for many organic producers, introduces a range of issues that have yet to be fully understood and addressed by organic stakeholders. Value-chain analysis is needed in order to determine the destination of price premiums amidst fears of inequitable trading structures. When the primary motive for converting to organic agriculture is the price premium for organic produce, there is a risk of farmers reverting to conventional production if the differential decreases, particularly in areas that have not directly experienced the consequences of agro-industrialisation. Where organic farmers have been lured by higher prices, a sudden and unexpected downturn in the market may be especially devastating. This has been the case for organic cashew growers in Mkuranga who were able to quadruple their earnings in a couple of years only to see a 47% fall in the farm-gate price paid for cashews the following year. In addition, several operators pointed out that the price premium increases the risk of conventional farmers side-selling through their organic neighbours in order to take advantage of higher farm-gate prices. Not only does this threaten the quality of the product, but also the credibility of the entire certification system. Since marketing organic products presupposes a level of trust in networks, maintaining credibility is of great import for certified organic producers. In addition to these production and marketing issues, a price premium may put organic products out of reach to local consumers. Government, donor and private sector interest in organic agriculture which is largely driven by the market rationale needs to be supplemented with increased awareness of the possible contradictions between ecological and market rationality inherent in organic certification and marketing systems. Organic agriculture does not perpetuate industrial and commercial activity, but on the contrary, ‘sows the seeds of its own market saturation’ by seeking to create stable ecosystems which do not rely on external inputs (Their, 2005: 5). Long-term ecological benefits are rarely enough to attract local capital and so it important to look beyond the market incentive of adding value to agricultural products in order to understand the ecological value of organics and in order to adhere to the core principles of organic agriculture which are dictated by the environment.

54

Purely commercially-dictated production may fail to give due attention to ecosystem functions and services necessary for overall system sustainability. For this reason, Parrott and Kalibwani (2003: 57) state that ‘organic agriculture must be viewed beyond the trade frame – as an agricultural system that enhances and manages the complexity of the ecosystem’. The challenge is therefore ‘to find a balance between the market rationality that gives organic agriculture its power and the ecological rationality which gives it meaning’ (Thiers, 2005: 12). 8.5 Policy and Institutional Framework Many believe that most agricultural sustainability improvements occurring since the 1990s have arisen despite existing national and institutional policies, rather than because of them (Hine & Pretty, 2006). Often the focus is on delivering increased food production, at the expense of environmental and social benefits. In addition to the lack of enabling policies, organic agriculture has been hindered by a lack of knowledge and information about organic agriculture among government bureaucrats and other influential actors in educational and research institutions, leading to a poor appreciation of its potential in poverty eradication and food security. In spite of the government’s assertion that the agricultural sector is the main pillar of the Tanzanian economy, agriculture has been a relatively low budgetary priority since the 1980s. Civil society organisations under the umbrella of PELUM Tz are now driving an advocacy campaign to increase the proportion of the budget devoted to agriculture to at least 10% food security by 2010 as it was agreed by SADC member States in May 2004 (PELUM, 2006). The political and economic context in which agriculture develops has a major influence on the choice of farming practices. Centralised political mechanisms and unregulated markets have been found to favour chemically-intensive control techniques (Thiers, 2005). Specific policies such as subsidies, bans, budget allocations for research and extension for the agricultural system frequently have a distorting influence on the uptake of organic agriculture. The MAFSC is currently investing heavily in industrial agriculture, for example in relation to seed technology, agro-chemicals and biotechnology. Since organic agriculture relies more heavily on locally-available inputs, is less commercially-oriented and results in a decentralisation of power to local communities and groups, there have been concerns raised over a possible backlash amongst local authorities and government institutions due to the reduced opportunities for rent-seeking and corruption (Hine & Pretty, 2006). In addition, the scale of development assistance can impede the adoption of ecological agriculture. National projects often involve “top-down” designs of farming systems, without an understanding of specific sites. This runs counter to one of the fundamental principles of agroecology and organic agriculture that ‘there is no substitute for detailed knowledge of the specific site being developed or managed’ (Dover & Talbot, 1987: 50). Theirs (2005) argues that owing to the locally differentiated and information intensive nature of organic techniques, policies using either centralised research and extension or unregulated markets to generate innovation and adoption will prove inadequate.

55

Low level or “pseudo” participation of farmers in the design, implementation and monitoring of policies and programmes has been identified as a constraint not only to the development of the organic sector, but also to achieving national food security (PELUM, 2004). The collaboration between stakeholders in the organic sector is impeded when the differing goals and expectations of donors, exporters and farmers lead to misunderstandings and mutual suspicion. In some cases farmers are discouraged from adopting organic practices by conflicting signals from government extensionists, companies and NGOs who promote industrial, modern and high-input forms of agriculture. The nature of contractual relations between producers and buyers may be a hindrance when there is a lack of commitment to the terms of the contract and low enforceability, leading to a high rate of drop-out on the part of farmers. Despite being part of IFOAM basic standards, social justice is often a neglected dimension of organic production systems partly because of the challenge of enforceability. In export-driven organic agriculture, there is a risk of farmers become totally dependent on one exporting company for access to the market, and therefore relations with that buyer become even more critical to financial security. If the market or trade relations collapse, farmers face severe difficulties in finding alternative markets. In addition, the structure of the ICS and the ownership of the certification by companies who specialise in certain organic commodities may make it harder for farmers to market other crops as organic. External technical assistance is still required in the Tanzanian organic sector for example to build capacity for technical, organisational and legal skills needed for establishing reliable certification and accreditations programmes. Heavy donor support of the organic sector raises questions of long-term financial sustainability. There are fears that such support will further entrench a “culture of receiving”, which is reflected in the refusal of some stakeholders to attend trainings unless they are provided with an allowance. Civil society is looking for ways to generate more funds internally through sales and services.

56

Chapter Nine: Strategies to Strengthen the Organic Sector in Tanzania Understanding the enormous potential that organic agriculture holds for improving the livelihoods of smallholders, and taking into account the numerous risks and challenges involved, stakeholders are now reaching consensus on both individual and joint actions in order to strengthen organic agriculture and make it a more sustainable livelihood strategy. During interviews, focus groups, site visits and a stakeholder forum, representatives from producer groups, civil society, the government, certification bodies, training, research and extension institutions, and the private sector identified a number of opportunities which may be supplemented with lessons from the literature. These have been reported below and categorised according to the following themes: production and processing; market development; research and education; policy and legislation; standards and certification and institutional development. 9.1 Production and Processing Improving the design of agroecosystems in order to take full advantage of ecological processes could involve optimising land use, reducing losses due to pests, minimising weed competition and improving soil fertility although it is only possible to give precise recommendations in relation to the site-specific agroecological conditions of each individual project. Improvements to production systems also depend on reinforcing farmers’ knowledge of ecological and agronomic processes (see ‘Research and Education’ below). There are, however, a few recurrent themes that are widely applicable to organic initiatives in Tanzania. Facilitating small-, medium- and large-scale farmers to acquire organic inputs (such as seeds, biopesticides and organic feed) is a major challenge for strengthening organic production across the country. Even basic farm tools such as the hand hoe are expensive when farmers are below the official poverty line of $1 per day. Improved access to organic inputs would help to encourage more large-scale commercial farmers to move into organic production. Suggested activities include developing and disseminating appropriate inputs for organic agriculture and raising awareness on the use and availability of organic agricultural inputs. This may be assisted by providing the farmers with inventories of organic input source, types, distribution and consumption. Often the main constraints to the adoption of alternative pest and disease control techniques are lack of information, labour/time constraints and ineffective alternatives (Harris et al., 1998), and therefore there needs to be more research, training and dissemination of appropriate technologies, largely to raise the awareness of producers of the range of choice of organic practices open to them, for instance for the control of armyworms (Spodoptera exempta) which have infested significant areas of cropping and pasture in northern, central and southern Tanzania this year (FEWS NET, 2006). There is currently a tendency to understand non-chemical pest and disease control methods to be limited to natural pesticides rather than to include cultural measures such as crop rotation, intercropping and timing of operations. Similar issues apply to soil fertility management, and there is great potential in improving the use of biofertilisers, composting and manure management.

57

In contrast to other countries in East Africa such as Ethiopia, few farms in Tanzania have well-integrated crop and livestock production. Sensitisation and training on growing feed and using animal draft technology would help to nurture a greater culture of keeping and caring for animals. Although prohibited in the organic standards, the use of fire to clear land, reduce weeds, and flush birds and animals whilst hunting, to name a few reasons, is widespread in Tanzania, and presents a significant threat to organic production systems by undermining soil fertility management measures. Farmers, field officers and government extensionists are responding with concerted campaigns to educate and if necessary penalise those responsible. Enabling more producers and processors to access credit is another strategy for securing essential agricultural inputs. A number of programmes are underway to assist farmers to access affordable credit through micro-finance institutions and social organisation. Facilitating access to small-scale loans needs to focus upon building farmers’ administrative capacity, since processing the paperwork is often one of the greatest constraints. In addition, new sources of external finance, such as grants, subsidies or tourism can be sought. Improvements in production also need to focus on lowering costs and increasing profits in order to strengthen the role of organic agriculture in increasing household food security. The economic sustainability of a production system depends to a large extent on the choice of crop or commodity to produce for the market. The market for organic goods now extends beyond traditional crops, and covers a range of non-traditional and horticultural products. Tanzanian producers could take advantage of expanding markets in wild harvested products, agroforestry of non-timber products, mushrooms, herbs, timber, crafts and carving. The country has a large unexploited potential for producing climate-specific crops such as tropical organic fruits, both fresh and dried. Most imports of organic fruits, vegetables, herbs, rice and raw materials for beverages (fruit juices such as organic pineapple and mango, as well as tea and coffee) into the UK originate from countries outside Europe (Harris et al., 1998). Buyers in Europe have expressed interest in particular varieties grown in Tanzania such as the Solo papaya. Also seasonal fruits such as mangoes are in demand in other tropical countries including the Gulf States. Products exhibiting the greatest market potential are often characterised by being low volume, high value, and non-perishable, such as coffee, aromatic herbs, spices, medicinal and beauty products. Feasibility studies are being undertaken on the potential for cultivating Artemisia which may be used to treat malaria, and Shea butter is attracting increasing interest as a base for a range of cosmetics. EPOPA is exploring the possibilities of establishing organic mushroom production, sesame, seaweed and sustainable harvested tuna. Multi-purpose crops such as cashews or spices, the latter which can be used to distil essential oils also offer distinct advantages for increasing returns on organic production. In addition to market demand, ease of handling is an important consideration for choosing suitable crops. Whilst some argue that it is better to concentrate on higher-value non-traditional and horticultural crops because the price of traditional crops such as cotton, cashew, tobacco, tea, sugar and pyrethrum have been spiralling downwards over the past century, a case may also be made to produce organic coffee, tea and cotton since these currently account for the bulk of

58

export earnings (Tairo, 1999). More market research is needed to identify specific markets and to compare the price differentials of organic and conventional crops. To avoid the risks involved in heavily market-oriented production systems (for instance the cultivation of cash crops at the expense of food crops), operators of organic projects have a range of options. One strategy adopted by the bioRe project is to have an upper limit on the proportion of farmers’ land that can be used to cultivate the primary cash crop (30% of the farmers’ acreage for cotton, in this case). In addition, the contract stipulates that farmers should practice a three-year crop rotation, helping to improve soil fertility and control pests such as the American bollworm. The most potential for improved incomes comes from the production of crops that can be easily processed into end market products for local, regional and international trade, such as dried fruits, essential oils and aromatic plants. With its relatively low labour costs, Tanzania is in a good position to add value to organically-produced food, simultaneously benefiting local economies. Enabling on-farm processing, such as through the provision of machinery, helps to integrate production, processing and marketing and therefore leads to better returns to the farmers. This would be aided by post-harvest technologies to improve storage and treatment in order to reduce losses. In addition to adding value through solar drying (fruits, mushrooms and vegetables), canning (pineapples) and distillation (essential oils) there are many other possibilities for raising product quality above the basic export grade by processing primary produce before sale. Examples include cleaning, treating and packing oilseeds such as sesame, spinning cotton domestically into yarn, processing fruits into juice or concentrate. A promising example of the export of value-added products was the launch of an organic ginger in syrup / candied ginger project in Arusha in early 2005. Quality improvements in production, post-harvest and processing are an important focus of many projects. Supply of materials for processing and packaging is currently a logistical and technical bottleneck for organic product development in the country (M. Leijdens 2006, pers. comm., 19 January). Commercial handling skills that need developing include storing, processing, packaging, labelling and presentation. The use of locally-available packaging materials may be more suited to the aims of the organic movement, and a more successful marketing strategy since consumers of organic products are more likely to be conscientious about the impacts of packaging choices although this should not compromise quality or shelf-life. Assurance of quality checks and a reputable and publicly-recognised labelling system could help increase consumer confidence’ in organic products (Harris et al, 1998: 12). Labelling produce for traceability and transparency (location or eco-labels) also helps to increase returns, and these need to be in the correct language for the market. 9.2 Market Development In order to access the local, regional and international markets for organic products there is a need to mobilise smallholder suppliers to meet the large demand for organic products. At the same time it is necessary to ensure that international trade rules do not impede efforts to develop the local food sector. Exporting countries in the Global North are under increasing pressure to eliminate support programmes and export incentives that create surpluses and lower global commodity prices.

59

Tanzania has a distinct advantage over her inland neighbours, owing to her extensive coastline, dramatically reducing aeroplane freight and fuel surcharges on products that can be transported by sea. Moreover, there are significant opportunities in the market premium associated with organic certification that may generate investment of capital, land and labour to facilitate research and adoption of environmentally and socially-sensitive production systems. Although the EU and the USA have thus far been the main export targets, there is also significant potential in developing regional trade between Africa and Asia, within Africa and between East African countries. Trade in organic products between countries in East Africa is already taking place such as Tanzanian organic honey to Kenya, and spices, tea and coffee to Uganda and Zambia (L. Mtama 2006, pers. comm., 12 January). One way in which East African countries could cooperate would be to consolidate the supply of organic products and bulk-up trade volumes by synchronising container loads, particularly for sesame, vanilla and dried fruits from Uganda and Tanzania since the low volumes of organic commodities produced are currently a constraint to marketing. There is potential for regional solidarity in sharing experiences, standards, logo development and common accreditation and the existence of an East African community creates an enabling environment. Harmonisation and cooperation in East Africa is being spearheaded by IFOAM which is also involved in developing a common regional standard and certification structure for Tanzania, Uganda, Kenya and now Rwanda. The East African standard is designed to be a tool for the development of organic production in East Africa intended for trade and to be a platform for a common label to facilitate export. In addition to certification, the standard is designed to be used for extension, and could be a useful guide for non-certified organic farmers. The development of a regional database is also explored as a way of coordinating trade across the region. Suggested strategies for developing the local market include expanding the available range of domestic processed and convenience food, and also the range of retail chains distributing the food, changing the price image (Tanzanian consumers are currently deterred by the fact that it is largely expatriates who buy organic foods) and improving communication strategies that focus on health and quality aspects (Richter & Kovas, 2005). A well-informed public is key to creating demand-driven growth of the organic sector. A great deal of anecdotal evidence has been gathered that illustrates that many Tanzanians have a preference for organic production and consumption. The high demand for local chickens and eggs causes local people to pay double and sometimes triple the price of the industrially-reared alternatives. There are widespread fears about the negative effects of hormones in the conventional products on human health. Mothers who seek safe food for their children are often knowledgeable about sources of food produced organically, for example traditionally-stored maize is in demand since some farmers in Tanzania use toxic substances such as DDT and copper sulphates to store maize. Traditional maize varieties are 15% more expensive in the large Dar es Salaam and Dodoma markets, and are reputedly tastier than the high-

60

yielding varieties that require artificial fertilisers. There is also a significant demand for traditional green leafy vegetables, especially for Solum nigrum and Asystasia spp. as well as ochre and collard in Morogoro, all of which are usually produced organically. The establishment of domestic marketing centres could help to capture this discerning share of the market that already thinks about what to buy and eat, and also the many Tanzanians living in the larger conurbations who have the purchasing power to spend slightly extra on healthier and tastier options. Some farmers are already capitalising on the market for organic products amongst the Tanzanian elite, for example a rising demand for Hibiscus tea for its high vitamin C content and alleged alleviation of high blood pressure. This trend would be strengthened by a rigorous campaign to raise awareness about nutrition, diet, health and the organic alternative. Developing direct marketing channels would address inequitable pricing structures by reducing the number of intermediaries in the marketing chain and by helping to increase overall returns to farmers. This also helps to reconnect producers with consumers, and aids the transfer of information on farming practices and product quality. In the village of Kinole in Morogoro, for example, strong farmer associations have organised their own distribution system connecting a central storage area to buyers across the country significantly reducing loss of profits to middlemen. This is easier where production is located near to consumption centres. Other innovative marketing schemes include farm shops, box / basket schemes, supplying fairs, festivals and other events. Local hotels would be more willing to buy from organic farmers who are organised into producer groups. A survey of the organic sector suggests that distribution is a key constraint to developing the local market since farmers lack access to markets and retail outlets often express an interest in stocking more organic fresh and processed produce particularly fruit, vegetables, flours and breads. Making local market linkages is therefore a priority for building a strong domestic base for the promotion of Tanzanian organic products. Organic farmers are in a unique position to be able to link the quality of their produce to the social and environmental conditions under which it has been produced. One marketing strategy that is proving successful for a number of East African organic enterprises is emphasising the geographical origin of products. Establishing a loyal customer base through the promotion of local and distinct products with “stories” is one way of developing a market. This is already taking place in the Morogoro region for pineapples from Kinole, mangoes from Mikese and oranges from Matombo. Making links with long-term buyers and secure markets may be a more sustainable strategy than seeking out the highest price premiums especially for risk-averse and resource-poor farmers. Ethical trading schemes such as fair trade may also help to ensure that value reaches rural communities. All aspects of marketing would be improved by increasing access to accurate and timely market information which allows farmers to target the emerging ‘demand-driven market for special supply chains of high quality products in niche markets’ (El-Nagger et al., 2006). This could be achieved through participation in organic trade fairs such as the annual BioFach in Germany, training on internet market research,

61

newsletters on the organic market and by appointing an ‘organic trade point officer’ at the national level whose sole responsibility it is to disseminate market information and assist farmers to find markets and get contracts. Improved market information and transparency also gives farmers more control over the market system, and improves the traceability of products from producer to consumer which helps to build an incorruptible system of quality control. There is a need to balance confidentiality (e.g. information restricted owing to commercial interests) and access to information which gives stakeholders an overview of certification activities and growth of the sector. Participatory Market Research (PMR) is needed in order expose farmers to different markets in a systematic way, for instance by a PMR group on behalf of the broader community, followed by a participatory prioritisation of options and revealing the most strategic markets for organic smallholders. Such a process may involve market development tours for groups of exporters to make better contact with target markets. 9.3 Research and Education The importance of raising awareness on organic agriculture amongst farmers, consumers and policy-makers cannot be overstated, and was identified as the most pressing issue by the majority of the key actors interviewed in this study. There is great potential for developing infrastructures for research and training in the country. The orientation of agricultural education is arguably the most important single constraint to developing and applying ecologically sustainable agriculture. Since the focus has thus far been on energy-intensive and high-input but labour-efficient and high-yielding farming methods, there is a need to build learning capacity for knowledge-intensive production systems. Reform to the extension services and agricultural educational institutions should encompass not only scientific content but also methodologies. A holistic and agroecological perspective can serve as a basis for developing more environmentally-sound agricultural production systems (Altieri, 1987). A key factor is for research to be concerned with optimising agroecosystems as a whole rather than maximising the yield of a particular commodity. An agroecological approach illuminates the form, dynamics and functions of ecological relations (such as nutrient cycling, predator/prey interactions, competition, commensalisms3 and successional changes4) in the field. Agroecosystem structure is defined not only by endogenous biological and environmental features of the agricultural field, but also by exogenous social and economic features. Shifting trends away from disciplinary and commodity concerns towards more complex, systemic interactions among people, crop, soil and livestock are yet to be recognised by public research institutions in Tanzania. Farmer-based research and other participatory methods needs to be complemented with attention to effective communication of results and lessons to stakeholders. The process is more empowering when it includes women, small farmers and indigenous people, and this requires additional resources for example for travel and translation.

3 Commensalism describes an interaction where one species benefits and the other is unaffected. 4 Succession is the gradual and orderly process of change in an ecosystem brought about by the progressive replacement of one community by another until a stable climax is established.

62

There are currently efforts to integrate organic agriculture into primary, secondary, diploma and degree curricula. For example, primary school courses such as ‘Education for self-reliance’ (Elimu ya Kujitegemea) which includes gardening, composting and the use of farmyard manure, which has been phased out since it was introduced by the first President of Tanzania, the late Mwalimu Julius Nyerere, are receiving renewed interest. The reintroduction of vocational training into the education system by the new President, Jakaya Kikwete, is also considered supportive of organic agriculture. In addition, SUA has developed a course curriculum for organic farming, and there are efforts to exploit under-utilised resources and establish specialised institutions to drive competence by converting some government research institutes into dedicated centres of learning about sustainable and organic agriculture. In order to be effective research needs to be guided by farmers’ needs. In relation to production, more research is needed into the use of biofertilisers and biopesticides, for instance the levels of nutrient supplied by different green manures and the use of neem to control armyworms. The efficacy of biopesticides could be improved with research into the active ingredients, forms, doses, storability, biocidal effects and the impact of soil and climatic conditions. Production practices would be improved by more information on plant spacing, growing seasons and technologies, in addition to a greater understanding of ecological interactions including the symbiotic relations between plants and mycorrhizal fungi, resource-sharing among plants, predator/prey and parasite/host relationships that contribute to biological pest control and the role of plants’ genetic diversity in the growth and spread of plant disease (Dover & Talbot, 1987).Other areas for research include assessing the performance of modern crop varieties under intensive rotations with legumes in order to determine the varieties most appropriate for rotations and intercropping (Kral, 1984) since mixed-crop systems ‘perform better when species complement one another as to growth rhythms, rooting depths, and the use of nutrients’ (Dover & Talbot, 1987: 33). Another strategy is to modify the agricultural extension services so that they are supportive of organic agriculture. The emphasis here should be on the training of trainers (extension staff, certification officers and farmer professionals) and the development of a user-friendly extension manual. Short-term and long-term training on organic principles for sustainability and the local market can expand knowledge which is a prerequisite for innovation. Beyond training in production and trading practices, farmers would also benefit from training in agricultural economics and record-keeping. Farmer-to-farmer extension is another promising approach for promoting decentralised, locally-developed agronomic knowledge about different types of hard technologies (irrigation, rainwater harvesting) and soft technologies (cultivar types, cropping mixes, biological control and soil management techniques). In addition to being conceived as a set of techniques, however, organic agriculture can be viewed as ‘a process of social learning’ (Röling & Wagemakers, 1997). From this perspective, training programmes in organic agriculture should facilitate ‘a more farmer-directed, participatory approach to the generation of agricultural technology (Thiers, 2005: 11).

63

The specific interests of different stakeholders have an influence on the type of training provided and need to be taken into account in order to orient training schemes towards a holistic understanding of the farming system rather than simply improving the quality of a single product. This also has implications for deciding which stakeholder group should take the lead in training, and whether it should be the government, institutions of higher education, farmers’ associations, firms, aid agencies or civil society. For instance, in the bioRe cotton project in Shinyanga region, German development cooperation has facilitated the construction of a training centre that offers courses on general organic agriculture, leadership, natural medicine and health issues. Such interventions could help to reconcile the diverging trends of market and ecology, control and empowerment. There is a multitude of other ways in which research and education in organic agriculture could be strengthened, such as through churches and religious groups, exhibitions, field days, agricultural shows, consultations, radio and television programmes, articles-writing, posters, leaflets, books and calendars. The need for coordinated consumer education and awareness-raising has already been mentioned in relation to market development. Exchange visits across the region could help to catalyse the dissemination of best practices and appropriate technologies such as the Vutu-Sukuma (Push-pull) system for pest management that has been pioneered in Kenya but is hardly known in Tanzania. Farmer education and capacity-building would also be facilitated by a local-language manual on “how to go organic”. 9.4 Policy and Legislation With regards to changing national policy in favour of organic agriculture, the main question is how to lobby the government for an operative organic agriculture policy. Demonstrating the contribution that organic agriculture makes to food security would help to reconcile concerns about production levels and meeting the food needs of the population with the adoption of organics. Organic agriculture is clearly in line with the development strategies of the Tanzanian government and international frameworks such as Agenda 21, the World Food Summit declarations and the MDGs. The precautionary principle, which guides organic farmers’ relationship to technology, is endorsed in a number of international forums, for instance the UNEP governing council passed a decision in May 1989 which recommended that all governments adopt this principle as a basis for their policies to prevent and eliminate pollution. The principles of organic agriculture are incorporated in many of the country’s general policies, including those that relate to biodiversity, food security and water protection, although usually not explicitly. The National Strategy on Growth and the Reduction of Poverty (NSGRP, known as MKUKUTA in Kiswahili)—the second phase of is Poverty Reduction Strategy process—includes a target for increasing agricultural growth by 10% by 2010 by sustainable means. Nevertheless there is an acute need to implement policy in production, processing and trade. The 1997 Agricultural and Livestock Policy is currently under review. Explicit support for organic agriculture in the agricultural policy would not only guide actions by stakeholders, but would help to raise awareness, protect organic farmers and encourage research. Rather than going into details, which is the purpose of the organic

64

standards, the policy can open up opportunities and publicise aspects of organic agriculture (A. Mwasha 2006, pers. comm., 23 March). Given its cross-cutting nature, organics could also be put forward for inclusion in the Crop Sub-sector, Forestry and Bee-keeping, Health, Environment, Education, Water and Food Security policies. Since 2001, Tanzanian agricultural policy has been broadened to include “plant protection substances”. However, there is still a need to review the registration of botanical pesticides which is currently thwarted by the exceedingly high registration costs which are not conducive to local manufacturers and users. There is particular potential in the industrial development of botanicals that are already grown commercially in Tanzania such as tobacco and pyrethrum (Tyler, 1970). Botanical pesticides are currently being applied as home-made preparations by small-scale farmers in low input agriculture and also as commercial formulations by larger-scale farmers in commercial agriculture, although these are imported from Kenya, India and elsewhere. The sequence of policy changes is also important, and needs to start by removing obstacles and disincentives such as subsidising agro-chemicals. It is important to reformulate official policies and programmes so that they do not discriminate against organic production. Rundgren (2006) goes so far as to propose a pesticide tax. This would help to create a level playing ground for the organic sector to develop and force conventional agriculture to take into account its negative externalities. The strategy currently being adopted by civil society is not to replace conventional agriculture, but to develop and pursue an alternative which can co-exist. Although there has been a bias towards conventional agriculture in the national policy-framework, there are a number of high ranking officials who inadvertently validate organic agriculture by showing a personal preference for farming organically and by purchasing organic products. The Agricultural Sector Development Strategy (ASDS), also being reviewed, discusses the promotion of commercial agriculture in non-traditional export crops, for which organic production is playing an increasingly important role. Organic agriculture offers a commercial option for smallholder farmers to engage in market-oriented agriculture and government officials point to the need to advocate organic crops that are market-oriented such as cotton, cashews and coffee (A. Mwasha 2006, pers. comm., 23 March). The Trade Policy supports the standardisation and certification of organic production through the Tanzanian Bureau of Standards (TBS). In this context, Hine and Pretty (2006: 26) caution that an entirely export-led approach to organic agriculture ‘can ignore the in-country opportunities for agricultural development focused on local and regional markets’. Therefore policies need to incorporate multiple strands including smallholder development linked to local markets and agri-business development for export. The TBS standard is an effort to formalise the activities of the certified organic sector and a means for quality control of various inputs and products. There is a need for a careful assessment of the need for and effect of regulation so that it creates an enabling and not a controlling environment for organic agriculture (Rundgren, 2006). It is recommended that a regulation is not mandatory, but involves a voluntary scheme for certification. A few lines of legal language could be enough to prevent fraud and ensure “truthful marketing”.

65

Rather than initiating new systems of standard-setting and certification, it may be more effective for the government to promote one existing label. One observer commented that there is a danger of an overkill on standards since ‘we’re dealing with an environmentally-friendly food system, not explosives’ and that it is more effective to have a strong movement to replace the current bureaucracy with a “biocracy” (E. Matteson 2006, pers. comm., 24 January). Thus the role of standard setters, accreditors and certifiers needs to be moderated. Other players in the organic movement have also stated a preference for acting at the grassroots level under the assumption that policy-makers will start to take note when there is enough public support. Direct support for organic agriculture in the form of subsidies is unlikely in the light of public resource constraints. However, tying direct farmer support to specific services such as producing public goods for instance water conservation would be a rational and integrated way of addressing poverty and environmental issues. Key actors have suggested that the focus of any direct government support should be on subsidising certification costs for export and on training and education. Organic techniques are already being promoted within the Agricultural Sector Development Programme (ASDP) framework and existing extension, which is a useful tool to raise awareness amongst farmers groups. Promoting awareness could also extend to consumer education on ways of achieving healthy and balanced diets. Creating public-private partnerships for capacity-building, particularly in the form of technical personnel would be another effective means. Public procurement of organic products, particularly foodstuffs for official functions, events, schools and hospitals would also send positive signals by supporting the organic sector and providing smallholders with a secure market. For instance, Tanzania may wish to derive lessons from the British success in promoting organic school dinners. Other interventions include infrastructural development, raising awareness of the land use and tenure policy and providing tax incentives that encourages investment, particularly to build processing capacity. Import barriers on sugar have made it very difficult to supply the organic starch needed for a ginger syrup processing plant in Arusha, for example (M. Leijdens 2006, pers. comm., 19 January). In addition to water, important inputs needed by organic farmers are seeds, botanical pesticides and manure. Support in the form of bicycles and animal draft technology would also be very effective since lack of transport is one of the biggest obstacles facing smallholders in the use of organic residues for compost and feed and also taking harvests to the markets. Changing the orientation of the agricultural input funds is a matter of building a well-founded case and organising stakeholders. Creating a coherent policy framework to promote organic agriculture would be assisted by a clear Organic Action Plan that is formulated by a lead agency and permanent national committee including both organic stakeholders and the government. Dedicated individuals in all ministries could form an inter-ministerial committee on organic agriculture that meets regularly. The terms of reference may include monitoring and collecting data and writing a policy, with defined goals, objectives and strategies specifically on organic agriculture (Rundgren, 2006). The

66

most important Ministries for the sector include those of Natural Resources, Health, Trade, Livestock, Forestry and Agriculture and Food Security. Since agriculture adds value to all other sectors, there is a need to link agriculture to other services more explicitly. Similar trans-sectoral committees could also be formed at the district level. In addition to building horizontal linkages, there is a need to strengthen vertical linkages between national, district and rural authorities since the chain of command is reportedly too long and cumbersome at the moment. Giving official policy recognition to the links between agriculture and climate change is another way of supporting the development of organic agriculture, particularly in light of the heavy use of oil to manufacture nitrogen fertilisers, and the impact of organic practices on soil organic matter and carbon sequestration (Kotschi and Müller-Sämann, 2004). Organic farmers may be able to benefit from payments for cultivating soil organic matter. As the implications of high oil prices on transport and fertilisers become evident, organic farming may be able to assist with energy constraints since it promotes reliance on renewable energy sources, and furthermore integrates energy production and use on farms and could be linked to the emerging biofuel initiatives. Collecting and documenting successful cases of organic production and marketing would create the ammunition for political lobbying in favour of organic agriculture. Advocating organic agriculture would be assisted by increasing the visibility of projects that have resulted in significant livelihood benefits and documenting best practices at the country level. Farmers’ competent initiatives could be disseminated through the media and other advocacy materials including T-shirts and leaflets. Other possible strategies include making individual contact with potential ministries and government officials, and having a national organic agriculture day or festival such as the recent Eco-fest in Kenya. 9.5 Standards and Certification The certified sector is currently attracting the greatest institutional interest and appears to be relatively successful in increasing returns to farmers. International accreditation to IFOAM and the International Organic Accreditation Service (IOAS) which is currently being pursued by TanCert will improve ease of entry into the market and minimise the cost of certification to make it more affordable to small-scale farmers. Strengthening local standards, certification and inspection capacity should also aim to develop an African sense of ownership of organic farming and endogenous certification and standards are more likely to be adapted to local condition. Collective certification is perhaps a natural step for groups of smallholders who have a history of being organised into cooperatives under the Afro-socialist presidency of Julius Nyerere, and cooperative effort is not a foreign concept. Furthermore cooperative economics (Ujamaa) is recognised as one of the seven pillars of African identity (Nguzo saba). The current development of a regional standard is designed to facilitate regional trade by reducing technical barriers, and sharing of inspection, training materials and information efforts. TanCert has been approached by producers in Malawi and

67

Mozambique to provide certification services, illustrating the growing interest in the southern African region (L. Mtama 2006, pers comm., 25 February). The proliferation of ecological and social labels presents both challenges and opportunities to small-scale organic producers. There is mounting pressure to meet externally-formulated Eurep-GAP requirements that impose strict adherence to Minimum Residue Levels (MRLs), whilst at the same time there is a rise in combined organic and Fair Trade and UtzKapeh certification (a certification programme for responsible coffee production and sourcing). The ways in which certification or guarantee systems are developed, the level of participation and stakeholder understanding of certification also affects the ownership of the final system and has an impact on the distribution of benefits from organic agriculture. Currently farmers are being organised for certification by exporting companies (often owned by Tanzanians of Asian origin), who are the operators, in collaboration with donor programmes and NGOs. Whilst there are moves to make the primary societies in the Kilimanjaro Native Cooperative Union (KNCU) certificate owners there are trade-offs in terms of costs and logistics, and certain advantages of centralisation. Participatory ICS development would be facilitated by the stakeholders for each organic initiative collectively writing down their own organic standards based on local conditions but incorporating national standards. Participatory Guarantee Systems (PGS) are an option for regional and local marketing which incorporate shared vision, participation, transparency, trust, learning and horizontality (IFOAM, 2005b). There is a need to develop local and autonomous forms of certification that best respond to the needs and demands of farmers and consumers in specific areas, especially if the goal is to produce organic food for local consumption and to establish sustainable food supply systems. Currently no good examples exist in Tanzania that show how the administrative oversight and certification of production necessary for consumer confidence coexist with local innovation and responsiveness to local ecosystems. Key characteristics of such systems are that they should be community-based, user-friendly, locally-adapted, decentralised and promoting assured high quality, trust and reliability. In terms of delivering livelihood benefits it may be more effective to identify strong producer groups for certification rather than capable companies, particularly in regions where sustainable agricultural policies have already been internalised, and to emphasise mutually-beneficial partnerships. The national farmers’ network, MVIWATA can play an important role in identifying potential organic groups. In Uganda organic producer groups have often formed around a certified nucleus farm that has a committed contact person to mobilise others. Concentrating on farmers who are already fairly resilient would build confidence in certified organic systems and attract sectoral support, which could then be extended to resource-poor sections of society in conversion. This may also reduce the numbers who drop out of organic projects during the conversion period when farmers cannot sell their produce as organic. A training component which addresses the whole production also needs to be built into the ICS.

68

Although there are a number of distinct advantages to be gained from converting to certified production (product differentiation, higher prices, increased trust), it is important to assess the desirability of certification for each individual project on its own merit. Although certification is a precondition for tapping into premium organic markets in the North, in countries where food security and nutritional shortages are pressing problems, resources may be better directed to raising awareness on agroecological production rather than developing standards and inspection systems. Ultimately certification is a marketing tool that it is important when producers are disconnected from consumers. Third party certification may not be necessary when organic products are produced, traded and consumed locally. Declaring products as organic may be less important than embracing the concept, principles and practices of organic. Furthermore, it is possible that ‘an excessive focus on the role of certified organic production, meeting the demands of generally well to do Northern consumers, can all too easily be misinterpreted as a new form of green colonialism’ (Parrot & van Elzakker, 2003: 19). In spite of its secondary importance in some projects, however, certification can have a catalytic effect and positive spill-over effects for other aspects of the farm operation such as record-keeping increasing human capital. 9.6 Institutional Development Uniting the organic movement and sustaining coherence amongst its diverse stakeholders in civil society, the government and the private sector is a key concern of the newly emerging platform of the TOAM. Members include NGOs and other advocacy organisations who emphasise the health of soil, economy and people as one and indivisible. Suggestions for enhancing networking and collaboration include developing a catalogue of stakeholders, holding regular stakeholder forums and mobilising resources. Partnerships are needed between the government, civil society and the private sector in order to foster successful certified and non-certified organic agriculture. Since organic agriculture is more management and knowledge intensive, it is necessary to build the cooperative capacity of individuals and groups and invest in social capital development at the local level (Hine & Pretty, 2006). Furthermore, ‘long-term and intensive collaboration between research institutions on the one hand and extension services, non-government and community based organisation on the other are a prerequisite for a successful and sustainable implementation of a facilitated learning approach’ (de Jager et al., 2004: 205). Certain conditions are needed in order to ensure that organic agriculture improves peoples’ capacity to work together on common resource management problems. A common feature of many of the established organic farmers interviewed was a strong support network. There is usually more than one family member involved in the operation, and many of the well-established farmers have spouses or children who are also actively interested and engaged in the production system. Amongst Tanzanians of Asian origin, extended family ties provide assistance in accessing foreign markets, rare seed types and specialist knowledge. This demonstrates the way in which membership of a community (such as ethnic or religious) can aid successful organic farming operations. An interesting area for further research is that pioneers and innovators in organics are usually not local to the area where they are working.

69

Pretty et al. (2003: 13) notes that sustainable agricultural systems are ‘most likely to emerge from new configurations of social relations, comprising relations of trust embodied in new social organisations and new horizontal and vertical partnerships between institutions’. This raises the question as to what extent existing social relations can be better utilised to sustainably manage natural systems. In addition to social capital, new types of human capacity are needed, comprising ‘leadership, ingenuity, management skills, and the capacity to innovate’, for example in farmers’ groups and networks, are important (Pretty et al., 2003: 13). Farmer organisation into groups is an effective way of building social capital. Groups can get easier access to transport, training, credit and other farm inputs. Collectively farmers have greater power to negotiate reasonable prices and contracts with buyers. Organisation into producer groups is essential for cost-effective group certification. Farmer associations are also important in knowledge transfer, for example through on-farm research and experimentation, the establishment of demonstration plots and farmer-to-farmer learning on organic practices such as about composting, nurseries and botanicals. Management has been called the fourth pillar of sustainability (G. Rundgren 2006, pers. comm., 1 March) and this is confirmed by the analysis of organic systems in Tanzania. In particular, improved cooperation between stakeholders would significantly strengthen the organic sector. Again this coincides with findings from other studies in East Africa which suggest that ‘institutional aspects need to be addressed in a more structured way’ (de Jager et al., 2004: 221) including the use of effective communication tools and participation processes. Research, extension, farmers and commercial actors need an open and active dialogue which is supported by commitment to finding common ground. District and/or village-level committees for organic agriculture could promote joint actions by the government, private sector and civil society and conduct “agroecological audits” covering, for instance, soil conservation and regeneration, nutrient sources and uses, preservation of genetic diversity, stability of yields, water use and hydrology and energy efficiency. This would help stakeholders to see how to provide food on a sustained basis relying principally on indigenous resources for fertility and pest management. Dover & Talbot (1987) suggest measurable criteria for judging proposed projects on the basis of agricultural sustainability.

70

Chapter Ten: Concluding Remarks Improving our understanding of the institutional, social and technical issues involved in the production and supply of organic produce helps to ensure that the resource-poor benefit from their involvement in organic production and trade. Furthermore, ‘ignoring the complex social issues surrounding commercial and export-oriented agriculture is to undermine the original agrarian vision of organic farming’ (Altieri, 2003). Organic agriculture is clearly having a positive impact on natural systems and human welfare in Tanzania. There is also ample evidence to suggest that given the right circumstances it can meet local food requirements while providing protection and sustainable use of natural resources. However, not all projects have embraced organic agriculture as a way to manage resources, rather than just a “target crop”. The sector, which is currently being led by export-oriented organic agriculture, does not always promote agroecological approaches that enhance diversity of production of food crops. It is necessary to consider how to integrate other concerns besides the profit motive into such systems, and how to use the organic market to promote ecologically-based agriculture. As Thiers (2005: 12) comments, ‘if both market and ecological criteria can be satisfied within individual projects, the demonstration effect could be substantial’. Organic agriculture has a greater chance of meeting livelihood goals when it integrates the main aspects of sustainability: social, economic and environmental. This implies combining approaches that relate to development (for self-sufficiency and community development), income-generation (for access to markets) and nature conservation (for natural resource management) (IFOAM, 2004). Provided a holistic approach to developing ecological farming systems is adopted, improving food security and delivering to the global trading regime are therefore not seen to be mutually-exclusive objectives. The drive to develop organic agriculture gains renewed urgency at the time of writing since a high-level African Fertiliser Summit is being organised in Nigeria by the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) with the goal of rapidly increasing chemical and synthetic fertiliser use in Africa. Organic agriculture puts farmers, rather than external inputs, at the centre of the agricultural strategy, restoring a decision-making role to local communities, guaranteeing their right to control over productive resources and engaging their active participation in value-added food chains. Although there are intense pockets of activity in the private sector and civil society, organic agriculture has not fully entered into the public realm in Tanzania and is still considered very much an alternative system. Research and education are amongst the most important areas for strengthening the sector, not least by enabling stakeholders at all levels to perceive the benefits of such alternative agricultural systems so that they are motivated to make them tomorrow’s conventions. Information and management ability are arguably the most valuable internal and renewable resources in organic farming systems which attach ‘special importance to how farmers can use information and judgement to replace material inputs’ (Lockeretz & Anderson, 1993: 87). The biggest transition costs should be expected in

71

terms of learning so that farmers become familiar with a greater diversity of practices and measures and acquire the necessary information and management skills. In particular, further research is needed in the areas of production technology, HIV/AIDS links (e.g. in terms of nutrition and labour requirements) and social impacts. The ways in which farmers learn about alternative ways of farming is as important as the actual knowledge and skills acquired. Pretty and Hine (2000) argue that, ‘if the process by which farmers learn about technology is participatory and enhances farmers’ capacity to learn about their farm and its resources, then the foundation for redesign and continuous innovation is laid’ (Pretty & Hine, 2000). Therefore a key concern is to make the social process of innovation more sustainable and improve farmers’ ability to adapt to complex and changing rural realities. In order to build resilience and innovation capacity within communities there is also a need to focus on social capital and institutional development. In the future, diverse stakeholders in the organic movement will be challenged to work together to foster trust through a healthy level of collaboration and communication on matters concerning the farming environment. Nevertheless, the precise arrangement of working relations between institutions engaged in organic agriculture is an outstanding question of the research. A number of new but related lines of enquiry are opened up by rephrasing the original question of this study, and asking ‘who will develop organic agriculture in Tanzania for the benefit of smallholders?’ This raises the important issue of which stakeholders hold responsibility for taking action, and furthermore, whether they have the capacity to do so. Even when the means and ends have been clearly articulated by the stakeholders, interventions in the organic sector cannot be sustainable unless they carefully address the precise roles of different individuals and institutions. Although this study has specifically addressed the livelihoods of smallholders in Tanzania, many of the findings may also be applied to other tropical countries and even to the rural sectors of the Global North. In particular, structural changes that enable organic systems to stay true to fundamental organic principles whist still providing adequate income are relevant to organic food and farming systems worldwide. Although the study has not identified individual projects that are noteworthy for satisfying both market and ecological criteria, the findings do at least cast rays of light on ways in which the commodification of organic agriculture that often accompanies certification can be lessened, if not avoided entirely.

72

References Alrøe, H. F. and Kristensen, E. S. (2004) Basic principles for organic agriculture: Why? And what kind of principles? Ecology and Farming, June 2004 special issue on Principles of Organic Agriculture First Version, 20. April 2004 Altieri, M. A. (1987) Agroecology; The Scientific Basis of Alternative Agriculture. London: ITDG Altieri, M. A. and Hecht, S. B. (eds) (1990) Agroecology and Small farm development. Florida: CRC Press Altieri, M. (2003) Organic Agriculture Symposium 2003 Annual Meetings ASA-CSSA-SSSA Denver, CO Nov. 4 & 5 2003 Blake, F. (1987) The Handbook of Organic Husbandry. UK: Crowood Press Bryman, A. (2004) Social Research Methods. Second Edition. UK: Oxford University Press Chambers, R. (1983) Rural development: Putting the last first. Harlow: Longman Chilongola, G. (2005) Unakijua kilimo hai? Soma hapa. Alasiri, 17th February 2005 http://www.ippmedia.com/ipp/alasiri/2005/02/17/32774.html visited on 12/08/05 Creswell, J. W. (2003) Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. Second edition. USA: SAGE Publications. De Jager, A., Onduru, D., van Wijk, M. S., Vlaming, J. and Gachini, G. N. (2001) Assessing sustainability of low-external input farm management systems with the nutrient monitoring approach: a case study in Kenya. Agricultural Systems 69 (2001) 99-118 De Jager, A., Onduru, D. and Walaga, C. (2004) Facilitated learning in soil fertility management: assessing potentials of low-external input technologies in east African farming systems. Agricultural Systems 79 (2004) 205-223 Dover, M. and Talbot, L. M. (1987) To feed the earth: Agro-ecology for sustainable development. Washington D.C.: World Resources Institute Drinkwater, L. E. (2002) Cropping systems research: reconsidering agricultural experimental approaches. HorTechnology, July-September 2002 12(3) Edwards, S. (2005) Organic Agriculture for Food Security in Africa. Germany: IFOAM Egziabher, T. B. G. and Edwards, S. B. (2005) Can Organic Farming Feed the World? Lecture given at the Soil Association on 12 July 2005 in London and 14 July 2005 in Edinburgh

73

Ellinor, L. and Gerard, G. (1998) Dialogue: Rediscover the transforming power of conversation. New York: John Wiley and Sons El-Nagger, A., Ounmaa, A., Muukka, E., Zaleckas, E., Abraityté, G., Jansons, I., Rasmussen, J., Ahnström, J., Pirhoger-Walzl, K., O’Doherty Jensen, K., Jørgensen, K.F., Sarunaite, L., Bleidere, M., Trydeman Knudsen, M., Pugliese, M., Nielsen, M., Mugurerza, B., Bakewell-Stone, P., Hansen, P. K., Al-Kufaishi, S., Kobayashi, S., Rydberg, T., Klubova, V., Liorancas, V., and Høgh-Jensen, H. (2006) Globalisation as a Challenge or Opportunity for Organic Farming. DACROFenews. Newsletter of the Danish Research Centre for Organic Food and Farming. March 2006. No. 1 Engel, P. G. H. and Salomon, M. L. (1997) Facilitating innovation for development: A RAAKS resource box. The Netherlands: Royal Tropical Institute Envirocare (2005) Madawa ya Asili kwa Mifugo na Mimea. Supported by HIVOS EPOPA (2004) Development through organic trade www.grolink.se/epopa/Publications/EPOPA-Article-may-04-web.pdf visited on 06/03/05 FAO (1996) World Food Summit of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation. Rome: FAO. FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission (2001) Guidelines for the production, processing, labeling and marketing of organically produced foods. CAC/GL 32-1999-Rev.1-2001. Rome Farrington, J., Carney, D., Ashley, C. and Turton, C. (1999) Sustainable livelihoods in practice: Early Applications of Concepts in Rural Areas. Natural Resource Perspectives, Number 42, June 1999. ODI http://www.odi.org.uk/nrp/42.html visited on 29/06/04 FEWS NET (2006) Tanzania Food Security Update March/April 2006. Funded by the US Agency of International Development Freire, P. (1997) Pedagogy of the Heart. New York: Continuum Guardian (2005) Fertiliser use ‘far below recommended average’. The Guardian, Friday, June 24, 2005 Harris, P. J. C., Lloyd, H. D., Hofney-Collins, A. H., Barrett, A. R. and Browne, A. W. (1998) Organic agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa: Farmer demand and potential for development. UK: HDRA Publications Hauser, M. (2005) Organic land use and livelihood systems in tropical and sub-tropical regions. Lecture Notes for course on Organic land use and livelihood systems in tropical and sub-tropical regions, summer term 2005, University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Austria

74

Hine, R. and Pretty, J. (2006) Organic Agriculture and Food Security in East Africa. Presentation at the CBTF Organic Agriculture Regional Workshop: Promoting Production and Trading Opportunities for Organic Agricultural Products in East Africa. Arusha, Tanzania 6-10 March 2006 IFOAM (2002) International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements basic standards for organic production and processing. Germany: Tholey-Theley IFOAM (2004) Organic agriculture and food security. Germany: IFOAM IFOAM (2005a) Principles of Organic Agriculture http://www.ifoam.org/organic_facts/principles/pdfs/Principles_Organic_Agriculture.pdf visited on 24/11/05 IFOAM (2005b) Participatory Guarantee Systems – Shared Vision, Shared Ideals Concept Working Paper http://www.ifoam.org/about_ifoam/standards/pgs/pdts/PGSConceptDocument.pdf visited on 12/03/06 Kinabo, L., Batamuzi, E., Tarimo, A., Macha, J., Malimbwi, R., Makungu, P., Nyaki, A., Madata, C., Johnsen, F. and Moinuddin, H. (2004) Performance Report 2000/2004 TARP II – SUA Project Food Security and Household Income for Smallholder Farmers; Applied Research with Emphasis on Women Kloppenburg, J. (1991) Social Theory and the De/Reconstruction of Agricultural Science: Local Knowledge for an Alternative Agriculture. Rural Sociology 56 (4) 519-548 Knudsen, M T, Halberg, N., Olesen, J.E. Byrne, J., Iyer, V. and Toly, N. (2005): Global trends in agriculture and food systems. In: Halberg, N., Alrøe, H.F., Knudsen M.T. and Kristensen, E.S. (eds.) Global Development of Organic Agriculture: Challenges and Promises. Chapter 1. Wallingford: CABI Kotschi, J. and Müller-Sämann, K. (2004) The Role of Organic Agriculture in Mitigating Climate Change. Bonn: IFOAM Krell, R. (1999) Summary and Conclusions. Proceedings from the Second workshop of the Sustainable Rural Environment and Energy Network (SREN) Working Group on Research Methodologies in Organic Farming: On-Farm Participatory Research http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/006/AD237E/ad237e01.htm visited on 02/20/05 Kral, D. M. (1984) Organic farming: Current technology and its role in Sustainable Agriculture ASA Special Pub. No. 46, U. S. Kvale, S. (1996) Interviews: an introduction to qualitative research interviewing. California: Sage Lampkin, N. (1990) Organic Farming. UK: Farming Press

75

Lerdahl, E. (2001) Staging for creative collaboration in design teams; Models, tools and methods. Doctoral thesis for the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim Lernoud, A. P. and Fonesca, A.F. (eds) (2004) Workshop on Alternatives on Certification for Organic Production. Proceedings. April 13-17 2004, Torres-RS-Brazil Lockeretz, W. and Anderson, M. D. (1993) Agricultural Research Alternatives. University of Nebraska Press Lockeretz, W. and Stopes, C. (2000) Issues in on-farm research. Proceedings from the Second workshop of the Sustainable Rural Environment and Energy Network (SREN) Working Group on Research Methodologies in Organic Farming: On-Farm Participatory Research http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/006/AD237E/ad237e02.htm visited on 20/02/05 Liu, M. (1994) Action Research and Development Dynamics. In Sebillote, M. Systems-oriented research in agriculture and rural development : international symposium, Montpellier, France - 21 to 25 November 1994. Montpellier: CIRAD-SAR Miles, M. B. and Huberman, A. M. (1994) Qualitative Date Analysis: an expanded sourcebook. Second edition. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Mwasha, A. M. and Leijdens, M. (2004) Basic data on certified organic production and export in Tanzania 2003. EPOPA October 2004 Parker, M. (1990) Creating Shared Vision. Oslo: Norwegian Center for Leadership Development Parrott, N. and Marsden, T. (2002) The Real Green Revolution – Organic and agro-ecological farming in the South. London: Greenpeace Parrott, N. and van Elzakker, B. (2003) Organic and like-minded movements in Africa; Development and Status. Germany: IFOAM. Parrott, N. and Kalibwani, F. (2003) Organic Agriculture in the Continents. In Parrott, N. and van Elzakker, B. (2003) Organic and like-minded movements in Africa; Development and Status. Germany: IFOAM PELUM Tanzania (2004) Food First; Voicing Farmers’ Rights. Research report on food security issues in Tanzania as a basis for advocacy work with and for small-scale farmers. PELUM Tanzania (2006) PELUM Tanzania. Paper for the UNEP-UNCTAD Capacity Building Task Force of Trade, Environment and Development Regional Workshop on Organic Agriculture in East Africa, March 6-10, Arusha, Tanzania

76

Pretty, J. N., Guijt, I., Thompson, J. and Scoones, I. (1995) A Trainer’s guide for Participatory Learning and Action. Participatory Methodology Series 1. London: IIED Pretty, J. N. and Hine, R. E. (2001) Reducing food poverty with sustainable agriculture: A summary of New Evidence. University of Essex Pretty, J. N., Morison, J. L. L. and Hine, R. E. (2003) Reducing food poverty by increasing agricultural sustainability in developing countries. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 95 (2003) 217-234 Rasmussen, S. S. (2005) Action Research in Less Developed Countries. Paper presented at Seminar on ‘Action Research as University Practice for KVL Students and Faculty’, April 6, 2005, KVL, Denmark Reijntjes, C., Haverkort, B., Waters-Bayer, A., (1992) Farming for the Future. An Introduction to Low-external-input and Sustainable Agriculture. The Netherlands: ILEIA Remenyi, J. V. (eds) (1987) Agricultural systems research for developing countries. Proceedings of an international workshop held at Hawkesbury Agricultural College, Richmond, N.S.W. Australia 12-15 May 1985 Richter, T. and Kovacs, A. (2005) Strategies to support domestic organic markets in countries with emerging organic sectors. Paper presented at Researching Sustainable Systems – International Scientific Conference on Organic Agriculture, Adelaide, Australia, September 21-23, 2005 Röling, N. G. and Wagemakers, M.A. E. (eds) (1997) Facilitating Sustainable Agriculture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Rundgren, G. (2002) Organic Agriculture and Food Security. IFOAM Dossier #1. Tholey Theley, Germany Rundgren, G. (2006) Best Practices for Organic Policy: What Developing Country Governments Can Do to Promote the Organic Sector. Paper presented at the UNEP-UNCTAD Capacity Building Task Force of Trade, Environment and Development Regional Workshop on Organic Agriculture in East Africa, March 6-10, Arusha, Tanzania Scialabba, N. H. and Hattam, C. (eds) (2002) Organic agriculture, environment and food security. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations Rome, 2002 Environment and Natural Resources Series No. 4 from http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/Y4137E00.htm visited on 20/02/05 Scoones, I. (1998) Sustainable Rural Livelihoods; A framework for analysis. IDS Working Paper 72. Brighton: IDS

77

Senge, P. M. (1990) The Fifth Discipline: the art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday Sicilima, N. P. (2003) A speech delivered by the director of crop development, Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security, Dr. N. P. Sicilima; at the second national stakeholders meeting for organic agriculture in Tanzania held at UNICEF conference hall in Dar-es-Salaam 17th January 2003 Silenge, F. H. (1996) Tanzania: Small-scale organic farming. From ifoam’96 Book of Abstracts 11th IFOAM Scientific Conference 11-15 August 1996, Copenhagen, Denmark from http://ecoweb.dk/english/ifoam/conf96/abs237.htm visited on 21/02/05 Silenge, F. H. and Bertram, T. M. (1996) Kilimo Hai Msingi na Utekelezaji. Peramiho: Benedictine Publications Ndanda. Sillitoe, P. (1998) Local knowledge in tropical agricultural research and development. Tropical Agricultural Association Seminar at Durham University, September 1998 Tairo, A. (1999) Tanzania backs organic exports. The East African, Business section March 4-11 1999 TARPII (2004) The Impact Assessment and Perspectives - The Case of the project Food Security and Household Income for Smallholder Farmers in Tanzania: Applied Research with an Emphasis on Women. Tanzania Agricultural Research Project Phase Two, Tanzania Taylor, A. (eds) (2006) Overview of the Current State of Organic Agriculture in Kenya, Uganda, and the Republic of Tanzania and the Opportunities for Regional Harmonisation. Paper presented at the UNEP-UNCTAD Capacity Building Task Force of Trade, Environment and Development Regional Workshop on Organic Agriculture in East Africa, March 6-10, Arusha, Tanzania Thiers, P. (2005) Using global organic markets to pay for ecologically based agricultural development in China. Agriculture and Human Values (2005) 22: 3-15 Tyler, H. A. (1970) Organic Gardening without poisons. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company Ltd. UNEP-UNCTAD (2006) The Status of Organic Agriculture Production and Trading Opportunities in Tanzania. Final Report presented at the UNEP-UNCTAD Capacity Building Task Force of Trade, Environment and Development Regional Workshop on Organic Agriculture in East Africa, March 6-10, Arusha, Tanzania United Republic of Tanzania (2006) Official Online Gateway of the United Republic of Tanzania http://www.tanzania.go.tz/ visited on 24/04/06 Whyte, W. F. (eds) (1991) Participatory Action Research. USA: SAGE Publications

78

Willer, H. and Yussefi, M. (2004) The World of Organic Agriculture; Statistics and Emerging Trends. Germany: IFOAM Wilson, K. K. and Morren, G.E.B. (1990) The Learning Dimensions of Professional Enquiry. In: Wilson, K. and Morren, G.E.B. Systems Approaches for Improvement in Agriculture and Resource Management. New York: McMillan, 27-35 World Bank (2000) Vertiver Grass: The Hedge Against Erosion. Washington D.C.: World Bank World Café (2002) Café to Go: A quick reference guide for putting conversations to work. Whole Systems Associates http://www.theworldcafe.com visited 09/12/05 Yin, R. K. (2003) Case Study Research; Design and Methods. Third edition. Applied Social Research Methods Series, volume 5. USA: SAGE Publications Zuber-Skerritt, O. (eds) (1991) Action Research for Change and Development. Aldershot: Avebury

79

APPENDIX 1 Interviews Summary

Date Time Organisation Interviewee(s) 16/06/05 1400 TanCert / TOAM Jordan Gama 20/06/05 1200 Dept. Crop Science & Prod., SUA A. Maerere,

K. Sibuga, Rwehubiza

22/06/05 1130 KIHATA Abasi Rehani 22/06/05 1400 Dept. Crop Science & Prod, SUA K. Sibuga 22/06/05 1530 IRTECHO Mwadhini Myanza 23/06/05 0845 Horticultural Unit, SUA Mbilinyi 23/06/05 1630 Dept. of Soil Science, SUA M. Kilasara 23/06/05 1830 Kimango Farm Enterprises Kim Axmann 25/06/05 1000 SUA Centre for Sustainable Rural Dev. Amon Mattee 27/06/05 1000 PELUM Tanzania Yakobo Tibamanya 29/06/05 TanCert Leonard Mtama

Jordan Gama 30/06/05 1230 Salvation Army / Envirocare Salome Kisenge 30/06/05 1400 Ministry of Agric. & Food Security Adah Mwasha 01/07/05 1030 EPOPA Rainard Mjunguli 01/07/05 1100 Tanzania Tea Packers Group Edward Mhagama 01/07/05 1130 Dai Pesa William Creighton 12/01/06 0900 TanCert Leonard Mtama 13/01/06 1530 KIHATA Abbasi Rehani 14/01/06 1400 MVIWATA Jeremiah Maina

Andrew Hepelwa Justice Shekilango

16/01/06 0930 SUA, Dept. of Agric. Economics and Agribusiness

David Nyange

16/01/06 1130 SUA, Dept. of Soil Science Method Kilasara 17/01/06 1130 WSCT Shakim Mhagama 17/01/06 1320 SNV Lameck Kikoka 19/01/06 1130 EPOPA Marg Leijdens 19/01/06 1430 IFAD / IFOAM / IMO Mwatima Juma 20/01/06 0900 TOAM Jordan Gama 20/01/06 1130 Mikocheni Agricultural Research

Institute (MARI) Ruth Madulu Betty Chanalila

23/01/06 0900 Premier Cashews Industries Ltd. Ramaiah 23/01/06 1130 Premier factory Radha Krisna 23/01/06 1300 Premier Cashew collection point Jaffer Pardham

Mohammed 24/01/06 1100 Tanzania Organic Foundation Fred Machange 24/01/06 1230 Grolink

TanCert Eva Mattsson Leonard Mtama

24/01/06 1530 MARI Ruth Minja 27/01/06 0800 Mikese Mango Farm Abdeali Karimjee 30/01/06 0930 Envirocare Loyce Lema 15/03/06 1100 Dept. of Food Science, SUA Joyce Kinabo

80

16/03/06 1200 UMADEP Muvellah & Innocent 22/03/06 1100 Kimango Farm Simone Axmann 23/03/06 1100 MVIWATA Steven Ruvuga 27/02/06 0800 Television Tanzania (TVT) Godfrey Nago 12/03/06 1800 BioRe Saro Ratter 20/03/06 0900 Dept. Crop Science & Prod, SUA A. Maerere & K.

Sibuga 20/03/06 1000 Horticultural Unit, SUA Mr. Mbilinyi 22/03/06 1630 TOAM Jordan Gama 23/03/06 1400 Ministry of Agric. & Food Security Adah Mwasha 23/03/06 1700 Tanzania Organic Foundation Fred Machange 24/03/06 0800 Ministry of Agric. & Food Security Geoffrey Kirenga 24/01/06 1630 PCI Jaffer Pardhan 27/03/06 1300 EPOPA Marg Leijdens

81

APPENDIX 2 Case Study Protocol

Overview of Case study project

- Objectives The main goal of the case study is to assess and enhance organic agriculture’s contribution to sustainable livelihoods and food security amongst smallholders in Tanzania. Sub-objectives of the case study are:

1. To describe and analyse an organic agricultural system; 2. To bridge the gap between disciplinary knowledge and action using systems

approaches; 3. To devise draft strategies for improving the system in collaboration with key

actors. The case study method, which investigates events within their real-life context, has been chosen in order to shed light on the complex organic movement in Tanzania. Case study research has been designed as part of a larger multi-method study which applies action research approaches to the developing organic sector in Tanzania.

- Auspices In 2004 Sokoine University of Agriculture (SUA) in Morogoro, with support from the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD) and the Norwegian University of Life Sciences (UMB) initiated the Programme for Agricultural and Natural Resources Transformation for Improved Livelihoods (PANTIL). In order to promote research and farmers empowerment, PANTIL provides six openings for post-graduates from Norway to do research in Tanzania. Under this Young Professionals Scheme, the decision was taken to support this study of the developing organic sector in Tanzania, which is linked to other research efforts at SUA particularly into social capital. The research began unofficially in November 2004 and is expected to last until June 2006, including three months fieldwork in Tanzania.

- Credentials The primary researcher is currently enrolled in a Masters programme in Agroecology at UMB. She also has two and a half years experience working with PELUM Association, an umbrella organisation that promotes learning, networking and advocacy in sustainable agriculture and food security in Eastern and Southern Africa.

- Background and Relevance Although certified organic agriculture in Tanzania was just emerging in the early 1990s (Parrot and Elzakker, 2003), it has already gained substantial support amongst farmers and institutions. This runs parallel to the realisation that pursued as a way of improving sustainability; organic agriculture can contribute to ecological health, agro-biodiversity, local food security and self-reliance. This is particularly pertinent in a country where soils are being rapidly degraded, almost one third of children under five years are malnourished, and where over 90% of the population is rural and depends on land resources for livelihoods. In the Tanzanian policy context, organic agriculture offers a very real and integrated way to achieve the goals laid down in the national Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) and the Development Vision 2025, not least those of food self-sufficiency and food security.

82

The majority of certified organic land in Tanzania is under the production of export crops including coffee, spices, cashew nuts and cotton. Expanding Northern markets such as the European Union provide good prospects for increasing returns on climate-specific crops such as nuts, spices and essential oils. Organic producers in Tanzania are being challenged to respond to the current trend of globalisation and to strategically position themselves with regards to its threats and opportunities. Some promising steps include developing processing capacity in order to add value to organic products and social labelling such as Fair Trade. The extent to which certification of organic production, which is driven largely by the need to guarantee the quality of exported produce for wealthy consumers in the North, improves livelihoods is open to debate. The process is often costly and onerous for smallholders, and when certification is beyond the means of smallholders, large corporate producers (in collaboration with consultants) contract producers through Internal Control Systems (ICS), hold the certificate and to some extent dictate the buying price. Thus a focus on certified organic products for export could widen socio-economic disparities and political asymmetries. Recent studies on organic agriculture in Africa highlight the fact that substantial organic export industries, often based on large, foreign-owned or managed holdings, currently co-exist alongside significant levels of poverty and malnutrition (Parrott and Elzakker, 2003). There are concerns amongst some commentators that “conventionalisation of organic farming” is taking place with ‘specialisation and enlargement of farms, increasing capital intensification and marketing becoming export-oriented’, exacerbating landlessness, urbanisation and environmental deterioration (Knudsen et al., 2005). This is not to mention the “delocalisation” of relationships between organic producers and consumers which constitutes a departure from core organic principles including that of nearness. On the other hand, converting to certified organic production primarily for export crops could have positive spill-over effects on domestic food/cash crops, for example through the inclusion of food crops in rotation such as legumes in organic cotton. Increased agro-biodiversity contributes directly to improved diets and nutrition of local populations, not to mention many other positive impacts of organic management on the natural environment (Scialaba and Hattam, 2002). It is becoming apparent, therefore, that export schemes should be complemented by measures to explicitly target local food security, and there is a growing consensus that Tanzania needs to expand the domestic market of organic produce both for regional economies and the health of local consumers. An initial trip to Tanzania in June 2005 revealed marked differences in the entry points, players and organisational structures of various organic initiatives in Tanzania. This heterogeneity is evident in the vicinity of Morogoro where organic producers range from small-scale fruit and spice producers that are organising into groups in order obtain loans and certification, to large-scale commercial enterprises in organic cashew, spices and tea production. How are these projects affecting the livelihoods of those involved, and which strategies are most effective in bringing about beneficial changes? Remaining gaps in knowledge could be filled by research on the livelihood benefits to resource-poor smallholder farmers of organic certification and trade (Harris et al., 2001). Case Study Questions There is a need to identify the types of organic agricultural systems that meet both the immediate and long-term needs of rural small-scale producers. With an explicit

83

emphasis on “success stories”, or initiatives that appear to making headway towards development goals, the case study will explore the pathways to livelihood benefits through organic farming (after Pretty et al., 2003). The central research questions that the case study will address are: a) How does organic agriculture affect the livelihoods of smallholders? and; b) How can organic agriculture be developed for the benefit smallholder? The case study research will follow the broad strategy of expressing the present situation and determining key issues (what is), determining the future-wanted situation (what could be) and proposing recommendations that would facilitate the movement from the present to the future (how to get there). Specific areas of investigation will include the history of involvement in organics, reasons for conversion, environmental / agronomic / social and economic impacts and sustainability, opportunities and constraints to achieving livelihood goals, and ideas for actions that would bring about the future-wanted situation. Field Procedures

- Selection of case study sites The criteria which guide the selection of case study sites include a set of assumptions about the conditions under which organic agriculture constitutes a sustainable livelihood strategy. A livelihood is sustainable when it can cope with and recover from stress and shocks, maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets, both now and in the future, without undermining the natural resource base. On the basis of previous research into food security in Tanzania (PELUM, 2004), a literature review and key informant interviews it is assumed that organic agriculture provides a sustainable solution when it emphasises the localisation of the food system, whilst not precluding the possibility of marketing organic produce internationally once subsistence needs have been met. It is hypothesised that locally-owned organic projects that involve broad-based participation of smallholders who are organised for group certification and producing for domestic consumption as well as international markets bring livelihood benefits to the most number of smallholder farmers in proportion to the total number involved. This proposition will be put to test by analysing two organic initiatives—one which incorporates multiple objectives including subsistence and trade, and the other which focuses primarily on the production of cash crops for export. These contrasting entry points will most likely be accompanied by differences in ownership, certification arrangements and target markets. In order that the main assumption can be more accurately tested, a number of other variables which are likely to affect the viability of organic agriculture as a sustainable livelihood strategy will be kept similar in both sites. These include favourable agroecological conditions, main crops, local processing activities, appropriate technology and relatively good infrastructure / market access.

- Access to case study sites The unit of analysis will be an organic farming initiative involved in sedentary cropping activities in rural Tanzania which is either certified or under conversion. The case study site will therefore be an organic project under one operator / licensee (either a single farm or a group of farms).

84

It is essential to the study that the key actors involved in the selected case study are responsive and demonstrate a willingness to take part in the research. The duration of fieldwork on the case study site is expected to be 5-10 days, depending on the size of project and the availability of key actors.

- Sources of information The case study research will rely on multiple sources of evidence. Data may be collected through direct observation, field tours, semi-structured interviews, focus groups, documentary analysis, participatory exercises (such as participatory mapping, transect walks, matrix scoring and seasonal calendars) and participant observation. The information will be recorded with the aid of note-taking, photography, digital recording and Global Positioning System (GPS) mapping. Follow-up and documentation Whilst the case study will take into account the influence of the specific local context, the case study site will be chosen for its typicality rather than uniqueness. This will increase the applicability of draft strategies to other areas. Findings from the case studies will therefore help to inform the formulation of individual / institutional plans of action at a national seminar on organic agriculture to be held in the first week of March. A summary report of each case study will be produced and circulated amongst key actors for review and verification. The findings will be the basis of a journal article and possibly popular articles for local and international publications. All persons have the right to remain anonymous and permission will be sought before using the original names of people and places in articles. References Harris, P.J.C. Browne, A.W., Barrett, H.R. and Cadoret, K. (2001) Facilitating the Inclusion of the Resource-Poor in Organic Production and Trade: Opportunities and Constraints Posed by Certification. For Rural Livelihoods Department DfID, U.K. Knudsen, M T, Halberg, N., Olesen, J.E. Byrne, J., Iyer, V. and Toly, N. (2005): Global trends in agriculture and food systems. In: Halberg, N., Alrøe, H.F., Knudsen M.T. and Kristensen, E.S. (eds.) Global Development of Organic Agriculture: Challenges and Promises. Chapter 1. CABI Parrott, N. and van Elzakker, B. (2003) Organic and like-minded movements in Africa; Development and Status. IFOAM PELUM (2004) Food First: Voicing Farmers’ Rights. Research report on food security issues in Tanzania as a basis for advocacy work with and for small-scale farmers Pretty, J. N., Morison, J. L. L. and Hine, R. E. (2003) Reducing food poverty by increasing agricultural sustainability in developing countries. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 95 (2003) 217-234 Scialabba, N. H. and Hattam, C. (eds) (2002) Organic agriculture, environment and food security. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations Rome, 2002 Environment and Natural Resources Series No. 4 from http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/Y4137E00.htm visited on 20/02/05 Yin, R. K. (2003) Case study research: Design and Methods. Third edition. Applied Social Research Methods Series, Volume 5. SAGE Publications, USA

85

APPENDIX 3 Report on Case Study Research

Analysis of Organic Agricultural Systems in Mkuranga District

from a Sustainable Livelihoods Perspective

Petra Bakewell-Stone, March 2006

Contents

Introduction Methodology Overview of the Case Study Area Individual Case Narratives

Premier Cashew Industries Ltd. Muungano – An association of local groups

Organic Agriculture: What does it mean to the farmer? Cross-case Livelihood Analysis Stakeholder Analysis Opportunities for Improving System Sustainability Conclusion Appendices Acronyms BFF Beyond Farmer First CBT Cashew Board of Tanzania CDC Centre for Development of Cashews CDR Complex-Diverse-Risk-prone DALDO District Agricultural and Livestock Development Officer EPOPA Export Promotion of Organic Products from Africa FO Field Officer HACCP Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point ICS Internal Control System IFOAM International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements IMO Institute of Market Ecology ITK Indigenous Technical Knowledge KIWAMASO Kikundi cha Maendeleo Sotele MARI Mikocheni Agricultural Research Institute MSK Rural Peoples’ Knowledge MVIWATA Mtandao wa Vikundi vya Wakulima Tanzania NSGRP National Strategy on Growth and Reduction of Poverty NOP National Organic Program OA Organic Agriculture PCI Premier Cashew Industries PGS Participatory Guarantee Systems RPK Rural Peoples’ Knowledge SIDO Small Industries Development Organisation TanCert Tanzanian Organic Certification Association TAWLAE Tanzanian Association of Women Leaders in Livestock and the Environment TOAM Tanzanian Organic Agricultural Movement UMB Norwegian University of Life Sciences

86

Introduction The purpose of this preliminary report is to share and verify findings from case study research on organic agricultural systems in Mkuranga district, Coastal Region. This was undertaken in partial fulfilment of an MSc in Agroecology with the Norwegian University of Life Sciences (UMB). The overall goal of the case study research is to assess and enhance organic agriculture’s contribution to sustainable livelihoods and food security amongst Complex-Diverse-Risk-prone (CDR) farmers. By joining hands with the stakeholders the researcher aims to clarify the future directions of the organic systems from a sustainable livelihoods perspective5. The case studies form part of a larger multi-method study which applies action research approaches to the developing organic sector in Tanzania. Specific objectives of the case study include:

1. Describe and analyse organic agriculture (OA) from a sustainable livelihoods approach including an assessment of the vulnerability context, livelihood assets, transforming structures and processes, livelihood strategies and livelihood outcomes for the smallholder farmer;

2. Facilitate a participatory process which involves all different parties, makes choices explicit and allow various outcome possibilities to be negotiated; and

3. Identify focal points for intervention, or areas where action may proceed and common goals can be achieved.

The case study analyses two organic initiatives—one which focuses primarily on the production of cash crops for export [type 1], and the other which incorporates multiple objectives including subsistence and trade [type 2], in order to test the proposition that ‘organic agriculture provides a sustainable solution when it emphasises the localisation of the food system, whilst not precluding the possibility of marketing organic produce internationally once subsistence needs have been met’. The organic agricultural systems in the area may be categorised as: 1) Type 1 – Premier Cashew Industries Limited (PCI) 2) Type 2 – an association of local groups producing organic vegetables (Muungano). Whilst the original proposal was to consider the contrasting types of initiatives separately, over the course of the fieldwork it became increasingly clear that, although institutional relationships are strained and there is distinct gender division of labour between food and cash crops, there is significant overlap between the two initiatives. The vegetable plots are located on land within or bordering that certified under the cashew nut project. The women producing the vegetables are the wives of the men registered in the cashew nut project and therefore they assist each other in farming activities. A boundary between the two initiatives is therefore artificial, and obscures the actual structure and functioning of the human activity system. 5 A livelihood comprises the capabilities, assets and activities required for a means of living. A livelihood is sustainable when it can cope with and recover from stress and shocks, maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets, both now and in the future, while not undermining the natural resource base.

87

Thus the sustainable livelihood’s framework has been applied to the organic agricultural system as a whole. This reflects both the fundamental interdependencies of the two initiatives and the belief that overall system sustainability of both would be enhanced by strengthening coordination and cooperation between the two.

Methodology The broad strategy adopted was: a) To express the present situation and determine key issues (what is); b) To determine the future-wanted situation (what could be); and, c) To propose recommendations to facilitate the transition from present to future (how to get there). An exploratory phase involving key informant interviews in Dar es Salaam, was followed by 10 days in Mkuranga district. Data was collected through semi-structured interviewing, direct observation (e.g. transect walk), focus group discussions, oral histories, mini-farm case studies and portraits of individual farmers. During focus group discussions a number of participatory tools were employed including ranking economic activities, seasonal calendars, social profiling, wealth indicators and Venn diagrams (diagrams used to explore the roles and relationships of groups and individuals). The first round of information gathering in the field was followed by onsite analysis. A second round of information gathering included informal discussions with farmers, farm tours and a second focus group discussion for each project. Joint validation of the results allowed for verification and enrichment of data and prioritisation of key issues. Contact with key stakeholders is continuing in a final stage of information gathering. This report analyses the organic system from the perspective of the sustainable livelihoods approach, and presents findings for eliciting and incorporating feedback with the aim of improving the accuracy and usefulness of the final document. Overview of the Case Study Area The unit of analysis in the case study research comprises two villages (Kerekese and Sotele) in Kisiju Division of Mkuranga District, Coastal Region. Each village consists of three sub-villages: Mwagatani, Kerekese and Kibewa in Kerekese village; and Sotele A, Sotele B and Sotele C in Sotele village. Some basic facts about the villages are given below: Sotele Kerekese Number of inhabitants 1917 2112 Number of households 428 301 Number of farmers registered in PCI organic cashew nut project

85 251

Source: Ward records and village executives

88

Although the sub-villages have distinct boundaries which have been comprehensively mapped by PCI Field Officers (FO), in reality these boundaries are permeable. For example, a significant proportion of plots in Kerekese, for example, belong to residents of Sotele.

Individual Case Narratives

Premier Cashew Industries Premier Cashews Industries Ltd. (PCI) is a sister company of the Dar-based large food supplier, Fida Hussein. PCI was established in 1999 as the first private company to process raw cashew nuts in Tanzania. The company has around 1700 workers, the majority of whom are women working at the Vingunguti factory. Expatriates of mainly Indian origin and Tanzanians make up the management. In 2000 the company contracted 202 farmers in Kerekese village to produce 68 tonnes of organic cashews. After the first year, production by those same farmers increased to 200 tonnes due to provision of inputs, improved farm management and the premium price incentive. Since 2001, PCI has been working with Export Promotion of Organic Products from Africa (EPOPA) in order to attain organic certification and expand its organic line. From 2002, the company started processing organic cashew nuts. It was first certified by Swedish certification body KRAV and then, from the start of the 20003/4 season, by Swiss IMO in collaboration with German Naturland. Production and processing standards also meet European organic regulations (N 2092/91) and the American National Organic Program (NOP). The costs of certification were initially covered fully by EPOPA, although each year subsequent PCI paid a greater proportion of certification, and this year they are expected to cover the full amount. The stated aims of the organic certification project include:

- improved livelihoods for smallholders and their communities as a result of premium prices;

- improved quality and yield of cashew nuts through exposure to innovative and environmentally-sound farming techniques;

- long-term and mutually-advantageous relationships between farmers and buyers;

- value-addition to an important Tanzanian export crop; - improved food safety and factory working conditions; - diversified export products for PCI (summarised from PCI Promotional

Booklet).

PCI currently holds contracts with 478 farmers of Kerekese (257), Sotele (85) and Kalole (136) villages in Mkuranga District. There is an estimated potential of increasing the number of farmers in the project to 1000 by 2008, who would produce approximately 4000 tonnes of cashews annually. Compliance to organic standards is ensured through an Internal Control System (ICS) which facilitates group certification. PCI employs two field officers, one based in Kerekese and the other in Sotele. These field officers inspect all the farms at least

89

once per year, provide training, mobilise farmers to carry out practices such as pruning and pest/disease scouting and respond to individual requests for assistance. Living in the villages, these field officers are accountable to both the company and the village communities. External inspections are carried out on a random sample of farms by IMO/Naturland annually. Farms in PCI organic cashew project area range between 1 and 135 acres (although the vast majority are less than 30 acres), have between 20 and 8800 cashew trees and consist of 1-5 plots (figures are derived from internal inspection reports). Premier adds values to organic cashews through the following process: Day Processing Activity Purchasing raw cashews in the villages 1 Transport by trucks from farms to factory in sisal/gunny bags 2-3 Sun-drying raw cashews and packaging in sisal/gunny bags 4 Steaming for 30 minutes using special boilers and cookers to facilitate

extraction of the kernel 5 Cooling in a shaded area 6 Cutting with hand-operated cutting machines to separate the kernel from the

shell 7-8 Drying at 80C for 3 hours in coconut-fuelled Borma drying machines and

then cooling to facilitate the removal of the protective testa layer and reduce the moisture content of the kernel protecting it from pest and fungal attack as well as natural deterioration

9 Hand-peeling 10 Manual and machine grading according to size, colour, count and shape into

27 grades 11 Packing using a moulded vacuum packaging system in multi-layered barrier

bags, vacuuming and flushing with carbon dioxide and nitrogen gases, impulse double sealing

Export Source: Based on PCI promotional literature

Processing is carried out manually largely by women. The factory has a capacity of processing 50 tonnes per day. The factory alternates between processing conventional, and then processing organic cashew nuts from April/May. The focus of organic processing is on creating a hygienic environment. There are separate bowls, crates and other equipment for the organic line. Workers wear a different uniform and meet hygienic requirements by covering their hair, not wearing nail polish, jewellery etc. Storage areas, gunny bags, stainless steel tools are specially marked and labelled as “organic”. EPOPA and Agroeco have also done consultancies to assist PCI to conform with the Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) standards. In the year ending August 2005, PCI exported 3,701,314 kg of cashews to 15 countries, earning $12,792,629.64 (with each kilo selling at an average price of $3.46). These countries included South Africa, USA, Canada, the Netherlands, Japan,

90

UK, India, Pakistan, Sweden, South Korea, UAE, Yemen and also, neighbouring countries of Kenya and Uganda. 4-6% of production is distributed locally. Only 5% of the raw cashew nuts bought by PCI are from certified organic land. Nevertheless much of the organic production is sold as conventional, particularly since grades other than White Wholes are difficult to market organically. Only 3 or 4 of the 27 grades can be sold organically. Muungano – An Association of Local Groups Since 2004 a number of local production groups have been formed in the villages of Kitomondo, Kerekese and Sotele in order to improve food security and increase the incomes of farming families. The following groups have been identified:

- Mshikamano, Sotele A - Umoja ni Nguvu, Sotele B - Woman’s Group, Sotele C - Jipe Moyo, Kibewa, Kerekese - Kiwamaso cassava group, Sotele B - TAWLAE cassava group, Sotele

These are grouped together under the umbrella ‘Muungano’. These organisations grew out of discussions between leaders of the sub-villages and representatives of supporting institutions such as EPOPA and MARI already working in the area. The largest of the groups is Umoja ni Nguvu which has 27 members altogether (26 women and 1 man). The members of the vegetable growing groups are mainly women, whilst the cassava production and processing groups are largely men’s groups. Production activities are organised slightly differently in each group. Members of Jipe Moyo share a one acre plot that belongs to one of the members. On the 1.5 acre plot of Umoja ni Nguvu each member has their own small plot, and there is also a collective classroom plot. Although the groups lie within or border the area certified organically in the cashew nut project, none of the local organic vegetable production groups are certified in their own right. This means that whilst members are using organic practices, the products are not marketed as organic. The Manager of the Tanzanian Organic Certification Association (TanCert) has visited the groups and has started the process of conversion in collaboration with MARI which will supervise the Internal Control System and be the owner of the project’s certificate. The area is due to be fully converted within the next few months. A field officer based in Kitomondo will be responsible for carrying out inspections and additional trainings.

91

Summary of Two Organic Initiatives PCI Muungano Agroecological conditions - soils & topography - rainfall - altitude

Infertile sands on gently rolling uplands; alluvial soils in Rufiji Sand and infertile soils; fertile soils on uplands and river flood plains Bimodal rainfall 750-1200 mm / yr Under 300 m

Size - acreage - number of farmers

Individual plots average between 0 and 30 acres Altogether 487 farmers registered

Group plots of between 1 and 7 acres More than 6 groups of between 8 and 35 members (i.e. around 120 farmers actively involved)

Orientation Mainly international trade, also improved livelihoods

Mainly food security, also local trade

Certification Certified by IMO/Naturland

Under conversion with TanCert

Ownership Company in collaboration with donors (EPOPA)

Farmers in collaboration with government research institute and NGOs

Product Processed cashew nuts Fresh fruits (bananas and pawpaw) and vegetables including amaranth, ochre, sweet potatoes, cassava and collard

Distance to market Farmers transport nuts with bicycles to central village godowns (less than 10km) from where the company collects them and transports them to Dar for processing and export

Produce taken to daily village markets and also sold to local schools. Dar es Salaam markets (40km from Mkuranga) are not yet being exploited

Technology Modern inputs such as sulphur spraying

Traditional and novel practices such as mulching and use of botanical pesticides

92

Organic Agriculture: What does it mean to the farmer? As a result of the way in which OA developed in the area, the understanding of OA has been perverted. The words of one Sotele farmer epitomise the perception of organics: mkulima ni jembe la kilimo hai (‘the farmer is the hoe of organic farming’). When asked to expand upon this comment, the farmer described a situation where farmers are used like implements to assist companies; they are not listened to or cared for, and thrown aside when the work is done. Since OA, as a concept, has been recently introduced from the outside (brought by agents of Premier, EPOPA, NGOs and research institutions), and has not emerged “organically”, it has not been fully incorporated into the identity, existing belief and value systems of the villagers. In the words of one old farmer: ‘organic agriculture has come because of the cashew trees’. The principles of OA are understood in so far as practices do not transgress IFOAM basic standards (e.g. no chemicals) and also in a way that maximises the yield of a cashew trees (e.g. pruning). OA is understood as a system that promotes the use of natural fertilisers, pest management, weeding and cleaning cashew farms and prohibits the use of fire and careless disposal of batteries and plastic. It was discovered that some farmers had not collected and burnt plastic waste because they were under the impression that all fire is prohibited in organic farming. Understanding of OA was found to be greater amongst members of the local groups who also mentioned the use of botanical pesticides. PCI has successfully been able to change capabilities and behaviour of the farmers with incentives of an organic premium (20-25%), secure market, inputs on credit and loans. Villagers were motivated to join the cashew project and undergo conversion to organic agricultural by the incentives of sulphur on credit and increased incomes. In the context of cashew nut production, OA is perceived a set of regulations and recommendations on proper farm management. Women in local groups on the other hand, are motivated to convert more by the desire to improve agricultural productivity for food security and trade. Muungano has also addressed deeper relationships such as that of gender. Since production is relatively low, and produce is marketed locally, formal certification is not considered a priority and awareness on certification procedures was low. Whereas PCI pays $5000 annually for the organic certificate, this is well beyond the means of individual and even a group of farmers. It is therefore more realistic for local groups to concentrate on getting certified for the local market (funded by TanCert), particularly since there are currently very few premiums paid for organic produce domestically. Careful and participatory development of an ICS that is locally-owned may be a more successful strategy in the long-term. Attention to the needs and perceptions of the farmers will assist external institutions to facilitate OA in a way that allows for adaptation (rather than wholesale adoption) of organic principles and practices.

93

Cross-Case Livelihood Analysis The following discussion uses DFID’s Sustainable Livelihoods (SL) framework (pictured below) to analyse the defined organic agricultural system.

Vulnerability context Adverse shocks, trends and seasonality which threaten CDR smallholders include low and fluctuating prices for the main cash crop cashew nuts, unreliable climatic regimes including recurrent droughts, crop pests and disease outbreaks, an annual hunger period and the risk of anthropogenic fire. These factors pose a major threat to farmers in their search for a means of living and also present significant risks to the functioning of a sustainable organic agricultural system. Price of cashew nuts The low price of cashew nuts and dependence on one crop was indisputably the key issue that farmers believed was affecting their livelihoods. From an all-time high of 600-750/= Tshs in the 2004/5 season, the price dropped dramatically in the 2005/6 season. The high price of the last season meant that farmers had high expectations and may even have planned on receiving the same or a higher price for their cashew nuts. In the buying season just ended (2005/6) there was a “tug of war” between buyers over the price of cashew nuts multiple buyers and the farmers. Approximate changes in the price (Tanzanian shillings per kilo) for raw organic cashew nuts from Kerekese village over the 2005/6 harvesting period is illustrated in the graph below. The mean average was 450/= Tshs per kilo.

94

Estimated prices paid in Kerekese for organic cashews 2005/6

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

October November December January

In addition, farmers reported dramatic price changes over short periods of time, e.g. from 480/= Tshs to 300/= Tshs in two days. Several of the farmers interviewed sold all/most of their cashews to PCI for 370/= Tshs per kilo (almost half the price of the previous season). It is rumoured that farmers in other areas were receiving higher prices, such as in Mkuranga (400/= Tshs) and Mtwara (510-600/= Tshs). Whereas farmers in Mtwara are organised, those in Mkuranga do not assert collective bargaining power. It therefore appears that Mkuranga farmers are receiving a lower price for a higher quality (organic) product. It is widely stated that the price for organic products in the whole chain is better than for conventional. PCI claims that organic cashews fetch a premium of 20-25% which goes to the farmer. However, it is far from clear whether this premium ever reaches the cashew farmer of Mkuranga and many farmers blamed corrupt and dishonest buying officials. On the other hand, few farmers keep harvest records and few if any conduct economic analyses of their production, and therefore it is possible that the price has not been as important as the increasing costs and debts being incurred. The drop in prices occurred at the international level. Several explanations have been given for the poor prices given to Tanzanian cashew nut farmers. A large shipment that had been stored West Africa and which was sold last year may have flooded the market with cashew nuts. Also Indian traders were more cautious as a result of the Presidential elections in Tanzania in October/November. Whatever the reason, the resulting price barely covered the farmers’ costs of production and this has severely compromised the livelihood of the farmer. The lack of alternatives to cashew nuts also increases farmers’ vulnerability to fluctuations on the world market. At the time of writing, PCI is considering providing a second payment, depending on the world market prices for cashews at the time of processing (J. Pardhan 2006, pers. comm., 24 March). Furthermore, the low prices paid to some farmers is often a reaction to the discovery that they have exceeded their initial yield estimates and side-selling conventional cashews.

95

Drought Dependence on rainfed agriculture and the irregularity of rains in recent years was cited as the second most important issue by farmers. According to elders, persistent drought has only affected the region since around the year 2000. The lack of rainfall affects annual crops particularly maize, legumes and vegetables and sugar cane most severely, significantly undermining access to a varied nutritious diet and household food security. Crop pests and disease outbreaks The major disease affecting cashew trees is fungal powdery mildew, which usually affects the tree most between June and September after the appearance of young leaves and flowers. The fungus thrives in the shade and in average heat and moisture conditions. It is usually combated with sulphur dust since this is the cheapest fungicide. This is applied by many farmers four times between July and September, at a rate of 1 kg per tree (0.25 kg per round). On the basis of the focus group discussions, it appears that Kerekese farmers have much greater problems with pests than those in Sotele. Certain farmers and also experts at the CDC cited the helpelitis as a greater threat to cashew production than fungal powdering mildew. According to advocates of OA, pests are a sign that the soil in which a plant grows is depleted and unhealthy. The insect pests and fungal disease affecting crops in the area may therefore be symptomatic of more systemic imbalances in the soil and agroecosystem. A summary of other pests that were encountered during the fieldwork period, along with the crops that they affect and the methods employed for managing them is given in the table below: Pest / Disease Crop / livestock Management Birds Rice, tomatoes and

amaranth Vervet monkeys Monkeys (kima) Baboons

Most food crops and fruits

Set-up a temporary camp near the crops during critical growing stages Use also traps, nets and guns (but bullets are expensive @ 1,000/= Tshs)

Lions Cows and goats Use fire and shout to chase them away

Mice Maize, cassava Wild boars Cassava Trap, chase away by

shouting or with dogs Christians hunt and eat them

Grasshoppers (senene & panzi)

Vegetables

Catepillars Amaranth and other vegetables

Botanicals such as papaya and Neem leaves, and Tagete (mabangi ya mbwa)

Termites Coconut Exacerbated by

96

mulching, although not a major problem

Chonga beetles Coconut Cut and burn affected trees

Helpelitis Cashew Biological control using red weaver ants (majimoto)

White tapeworm (Bo?) Cashew Cut affected branches / trees

Fungal powdery mildew disease

Cashew Sulphur

Hunger According to one farmer the stomach is like a leaky bucket that continuously needs refilling. This illustrates the daily struggle of farmers and their families to access sufficient quantities of safe and nutritious food. Farmers in Kerekese identified the months of food shortages as being between February and September, whilst farmers in Sotele said that food shortages mainly occurred in July-June and October-January. At the time of visiting most farmers were eating 1-2 meals per day. The staple food crops are rice and cassava. Many people also buy maize flour to make stiff porridge. The consequence of food shortages is that people start to loan and/or sell their assets including livestock and sulphur, which is supplied in June when farmers have limited cash. It also means that farmers are in a poor position to negotiate better prices and sell their cashew nuts even when prices are low in order to meet short-term food needs. Anthropogenic fire risk One of the main production risks in the area is fire. Not only was this mentioned on the internal inspection reports for 2005 (significantly reducing the yield of four farms), but there was also widespread evidence of burning throughout the project area. Fire is a particular threat to young cashew trees, although it can also have a devastating impact on more mature stands and other crops. It is detrimental to soil micro-organisms, increases the acidity of soils and reduces soil organic matter. The precise reason for people starting fires is not clear, although they are said to be caused by youths with malevolent intentions. Fire is also widely used to prepare field for paddy rice cultivation and to clean farms, reduce weeds and promote high yields in the short-term. Last year a fire started in Kisiju was reported to have spread widely in the area, exacerbated by the extended dry season. Livelihood Assets Each farmer has a certain combination of human, natural, social, physical and financial capital that is available to him/her for OA. Investigations also revealed that there are number of assets which are still needed in order to make OA a viable livelihood strategy.

97

Human Capital Human capital comprises the physical capability, good health, ability to labour, skills and knowledge important for the successful pursuit of OA. The workforce available for agriculture consists of the men and women of the farming households. There is a distinct division of labour along gender lines according to the type of crop cultivated. Cashew nuts are the main cash crop of the area and therefore it is the men of the area who are the most visibly involved in their production, although women participate in all the farming activities. The men are also the ones registered in the list of growers of the ICS. Food crops such as vegetables are more the domain of the women, and this is reflected in the membership of the local groups producing organic vegetables. Although polygamy is widespread and consequently families are large (one farmer interviewed had 21 children), the majority of the children are either of school-going age or have migrated to the towns and city in search of paid employment. A large proportion of the population of both villages are therefore dependents. Many farmers employ farm labourers to assist with weeding and clearing the land prior to the cashew nut harvesting season, and also with the actual gathering of the nuts. Large groups of between 20 and 60 young men, often of Wagogo and Wanyamwezi origin are hired during the harvesting/buying season (October – January). Farmers claim that a large proportion of their income (around one third) is used to pay hired labourers. It is not uncommon for farmers to use 600,000/= Tshs to pay labourers. It has been estimated by EPOPA that $30,000 was taken out of the region by hired labourers (M. Leijdens 2006, pers. comm., 19 January). Time and labour was cited as a constraint to the production of organic vegetables by the women in local groups who described their other responsibilities including feeding and caring for the children. As is customary in Muslim societies, many inhabitants go to pray in the Mosque five times daily. In addition to worship, much time is also spent carrying out familial and societal duties such as attending weddings and funerals. On the basis of direct observation and daily activity diagrams, a significant portion of men’s days are also spent sitting in the market place and making social commentary. In order to carry out agricultural activities, farmers depend on both local and introduced knowledge and skills. Their expertise in cashew nut production is demonstrated by the way that they select quality seedlings on the basis of weight, yield and resistance. In addition to an intimate knowledge of the area, its ecological conditions and potential, they have been brought new technologies such as vegetable processing (drying amaranth for storage), and improved Soil and Water Conservation techniques (sunken beds). However, most of the farmers have a very low level of education (many have not completed primary school) and have only attended Madras. This contributes to a lack of awareness about environmental issues (evidenced by the plastic bags and batteries littering the farms). The attitude of leaving cashew trees to grow everywhere and only attending to them when absolutely necessary is also widespread, as is the mentality that reducing the number of trees will reduce the overall yield.

98

Natural Capital The average size of the farms ranges between 1 and 40 acres. Land is either inherited along a patrilineal system or bought. Currently land costs between 50,000/= Tshs and 100,000/= Tshs per acre. Land disputes, usually over inheritance issues, are common. The cashew tree is considered the greatest natural source of wealth. The large number of cashew trees in the area provides an assured production. The optimum yield of a cashew tree is around 40 kg. The tree grows well with adequate space (either 12m X 12m or 15m x 15m on less fertile soils) and light. The cashew tree usually starts yielding after 4 years. It grows better on loose soils (tifutifu) than clayey soils (finyanzi). Of the many crops cultivated in the area besides cashew, the most common are:

! Fruits – pineapple, jack fruit, orange, lime, passion, banana, baobab fruits, mango6, sugar cane and a wide variety of other fruits known locally as furu, tonga etc.

! Other food crops – cassava, green gram, pigeon pea, paddy rice, maize, cowpea, sweet potato, coconut, plantain7, pumpkin, tomato, arrowroot, collard, yams

! Other cash crops – oil palm Artificial fertilisers and pesticides have not been used in the memory of those interviewed. A number of farmers complained that soil fertility has been declining, and that it is now necessary to apply farmyard manure on land that before never needed it. Whilst not very common, some farmers keep livestock including chickens, ducks, doves, cows and goats. Despite being absolutely essential to OA, water is the lacking in the area. The failure of the short rains has been a source of great problems for the farmers. Only one local group (Umoja ni nguvu) has access to water for irrigation and is therefore the only group that has been able to continue vegetable cultivation. This group relies on five hand-dug wells in local depressions. Some fortunate farmers access water from natural basins, although those that have not dried up are few and far between. Many farmers have dug local wells although many of these have also dried up. PCI has provided a number of hand-operated wells locally although some of these have broken and engineers have not yet come to fix them. Water from local and improved wells is not enough for domestic consumption. Families are also buying water at 300/= Tshs per 20-litre container from the local school. It is therefore not realistic to expect them to be irrigating crops at this time.

6 Mango types include Dodo, Hagatani, Pafu and Mali. 7 Types of cooking bananas grown locally include Bukoba, Boko boko, Mzuzu, Kunana and Jamaica.

99

Social Capital The dominant tribes in the area are Zaramo, Dengereko, Gindo, Digo and Matumbi. Recently there has been an influx of Maasai in the area who are migrating with their herds towards the Rufiji in search of feed for their livestock. Around 80% of the population are Muslim and most of the remaining population are Christian. On the whole, however, religious preference does not have a big impact on farming activities (beyond the Islamic prohibition on pig-rearing). Members of both religions cooperate freely together in productive activities. Understood as a propensity for mutually beneficial collective action, social capital in the local groups was great. The groups organised their own meetings, field visits, etc. and one person from Kitomondo village has been elected to liaise between all the groups. Nevertheless, cooperation was waning as a result of the severe production constraints, particularly such as lack of water. In contrast, there was little evidence of coordinated actions by farmers in relation to the organic cashew project. That is not to say that social resources (networks, social claims, social relations, affiliations and associations) upon which farmers could draw do not exist, but rather that they were not being used. Occasionally farmers help one another with farm work and alternate between farms but these arrangements have been short-lived. One notable exception is a Youth Group from Kerekese which has established a demo plot (<1 acre) in Mwahagatani sub-village where 11 members (five women and six men) are testing the impact of pruning and stumping practices on yields. There is no culture of visiting fellow farmers in order to learn from one another. There is a general perception that levels of cooperation have declined in recent years. One old farmer commented that ‘pity ran out long ago’ and now ‘everyone is for themselves’. In both projects there are power relations at play which severely hamper the ability of farmers to access agricultural knowledge and inputs. In the cashew project, participation is either in information-giving, by consultation or for material incentives (see the seven-fold typology of participation below). In addition to being for material incentives, participation by the women in Muungano is functional. The challenge for external facilitators is to enable farmers to interactively participate and self-mobilise. Both projects have strong ties with external organisations. For example, cashew farmers hold contracts with the PCI, and have links to development programs such as EPOPA and Naliendele government research institute.

100

Typology of Participation

1. Passive Participation – People participate by being told what is going to happen or has already happened. It is a unilateral announcement by an administration or project management without listening to peoples’ responses. The information being shared belongs only the external professionals.

2. Participation in information giving – People participate by answering questions posed by extractive researchers using questionnaire surveys or similar approaches. People do not have the opportunity to influence proceedings, as the findings of the research are neither shared nor checked for accuracy.

3. Participation by consultation – People participate by being consulted, and external people listen to views. These external professionals define both problems and solutions, and may modify these in the light of peoples’ responses. Such a consultative process does not concede any share in decision-making, and professionals are under no obligation to take on board peoples’ views.

4. Participation for material incentives – People participate by providing resources, for example labour, in return for food, cash or other material incentives. People have no stake in prolonging activities when the incentives end.

5. Functional participation – People participate by forming groups to meet predetermined objectives related to the project, which can involve the development or promotion of externally initiated social organisation. These institutions tend to be dependent on external initiators and facilitators, but may become self-dependent.

6. Interactive participation – People participate in joint analysis, which leads to action plans and the formation of new local institutions or the strengthening of existing ones. It tends to involve interdisciplinary methodologies that seek multiple perspectives and make use of systematic and structured learning processes. These groups take control over local decisions, and so people have a stake in maintaining structures or practices.

7. Self-mobilisation – People participate by taking initiatives independent of external institutions to change systems. They develop contacts with external institutions for resources and technical advice they need by retaining control over how resources are used. Such self-initiated mobilization and collective action may or may not challenge existing inequitable distributions of wealth and power.

Source: After Pretty et al., 1995

Physical Capital Farm implements commonly used include the hoe, axe, machete and rake. Some improved cashew seedlings are obtained from local research station CDC, whilst the majority of farmers use their own seedlings to propagate cashew trees. Crops are transported to the market either on the head or by bicycle depending on the means of the farmers. PCI supplies the farmers with sulphur and sprayers on credit. One bag of sulphur (25 kg) is sold for 10,200/= Tshs. Whilst this assists farmers to combat fungal powdery mildew, it also results in the farmers accumulating debts and over the long term will

101

result in soil acidificiation. Only about 2% of farmers own blowers; the rest need to hire them. Often farmers sell bags of sulphur for around 5000/= Tshs to other farmers in the area and in neighbouring villages who are not in the project. They may sell up to 50% of their bags. Local groups in Sotele have been provided with a number of inputs including a cassava mill and chipping machine from TAWLAE / VECO, and seeds, seedlings, manure and botanical pesticides (e.g. neem powder) from MARI. Nevertheless, lack of inputs such as hoes, manure, watering cans and different and early-maturing seed varieties was cited as a major production constraint by members of the local groups. Financial Capital Farmers have access to credit through PCI. Depending on their production, some farmers are also eligible to loans of around 500,000/= Tshs. Members of registered local groups theoretically also have access to loans from grant-giving bodies. Each season 20% of the farmers’ earnings are directed to a central input fund at the District council. The input fund provides around 1 bag of sulphur for every 2-4 people every season (sufficient for spraying 25 trees). After labour and input expenses have been paid, there is usually very little money remaining. One farmer described how in 2005/6 1.5m shillings was used to pay workers and debts for inputs, leaving only 200,000/= Tshs of which 150,000/= Tshs was used for paying school fees. This explains why the money is finished soon (some say 10 days) after the farmers have been paid. In some cases half of the payments from the cashews are used to pay labourers. Cultural Capital Cashew farmers of Mkuranga may also be said to have cultural capital in that the cashew trees represent wealth, both symbolically and historically in the community. According to the Village Leader of Kerekese, they are a way for them to be remembered. In the 15th Century Portuguese Missionaries brought the tree to East Africa and India from Brazil and are believed to have planted them along the coast as a windbreaker and to reduce soil erosion. Thus the cashew tree was originally planted in Mkuranga for environmental management. People were moved into the area after Independence in 1961 and the implementation of the Afro-socialist Ujamaa programme initiated by the first President Julius Nyerere. Originally, local people relied on cassava. Before cashew trees, coconuts were the main cash crop until they were recently devastated by the Coconut Lethal Disease which has simultaneously caused the tree canopies and incomes derived from it to topple. Political Capital Politically the area is dominated by supporters of the opposition party CUF, although it is not clear to what extent this influences their access to public resources and political capital.

102

The research has found limited evidence for participation in policy dialogue and price-setting. Both are currently top-down. Farmers were not aware of different agricultural policies and laws, and could not give examples of how these touched their lives. Policies, Institutions and Processes Policies, institutions and processes have a mediating influence on the livelihood assets and strategies of smallholders in Mkuranga. In particular, marketing arrangements embody the social processes, institutional forms and power dynamics at play. Until 1999 cashews were sold through co-operatives. With the collapse of the cooperatives due to mismanagement of government funds, farmers transported the cashews themselves to Dar es Salaam and sold them on the free market. Recently buyers such as PCI have shown an interest in collecting the crop from the villages. In total eight companies bought cashew nuts from Mkuranga farmers in the 2005/6 season including PCI, Mohammed Enterprises, Olam and H.S. Impex. They bought cashews for between 350/= Tshs and 580/= Tshs per kilo from the villages. A meeting of the Cashew Board of Tanzania (CBT) and buying companies in late 2005 set the price for cashews at 600/= Tshs per kilo. This price was widely publicised through the media. Nevertheless, no evidence has been found that any companies paid this price, leading farmers to conclude that buyers have formed a cartel which is collaborating to keep prices low. Other crops are marketed at the local village markets in Sotele and Kerekese, at smaller-scale markets in the sub-villages, at Mkuranga market and some fruits are transported to Dar. Livelihood Strategies Organic cashew production The organic production of cashew nuts is the primary livelihood strategy of farmers in the study area. In practice there is almost no difference between production of cashews on registered organic farms and production on so-called conventional farms. Organic farmers differ only in so far as they have had the opportunity to become part of the project (after application and inspections). According to one key actor “organic” cashews have exactly the same taste and quality as “conventional” cashews and the farming systems themselves are no different. With regards to the management of cashew trees and soil fertility, experts recommend pruning, stumping, sanitation, propping and mulching. The latter is widely practised by leaving cut grasses to rot in situ. Ash and charcoal is often applied as a fertiliser. Sunhemp (Crotalaria spp.) has also been cultivated by at least one of the women’s groups although its value as a green manure was not fully realised, as it had not been ploughed back in. The few farmers that keep livestock including cows, goats and chickens apply manure onto their fields, although there appears to be limited knowledge on proper manure handling for retention of nutrients. Thus there is a low level of integration between crop and

103

livestock components. The influx of Maasai pastoralists into the area has the potential to alter this state of affairs, through negotiation and suitable agreements between the pastoralists and the arable farmers. In its current form, cashew nut production in the area is largely a mono-crop, particularly in Kerekese. On the cashew farms in Kerekese especially there is a lack of ground cover, partly because the leaves rot slowly, but also because the high density of trees and interlocking canopies prevent the penetration of sunlight and rainfall to nourish understorey crops. Intercropping in plots of cashew trees has also been limited due to the lack of rain, and roaming livestock have also been mentioned as a reason why understorey legumes are not more widely grown. However, the benefits of intercropping appear to be widely understood. Members of Kiwamaso local group were intercropping maize and cowpeas. In Sotele, some farmers were intercropping fruit trees with their cashew trees, and Kerekese farmers emphasised the importance of interplanting cassava as a food crop. One farmer visited in Kerekese had a productive and diverse home garden encircling his house, whilst the cashew trees were planted in an outer circle. There have also been efforts by EPOPA to include leguminous cowpeas (Vigna unguiculata) and pigeon peas (Cajanus cajan) to provide additional soil cover and food. Since returns on farmers’ investment in cashew trees have been declining, a number of farmers have also started to break their contracts with PCI, selling their cashew nuts to other buyers on the free market. Other economic activities Besides cashew nuts, some farmers make their living from a range of small-scale economic activities, listed below in the order of priority defined by members of the two villages: Kerekese Sotele 1 Charcoal Charcoal 2 Fishing Oil palm 3 Vegetables Weaving grass mats, basketry 4 Coconuts Local chickens 5 Small shops Vegetables 6 Carpentry 7 Sewing 8 Pottery 9 Clothes washing & ironing Other income-earning activities observed were salt-making on the coastal plains and brick-making. Some farmers set up small industries to shell and roast off-season cashew nuts. However, one farmer commented that ‘eating your own cashews is like burning money’. Members of the local groups are particularly enterprising, diversifying their income-earning activities to include weaving grass mats, local chicken rearing and milling cassava to make flour for baking. Vegetables are cultivated on sunken beds which are

104

carefully mulched and sprinkled with water. Chicken droppings are mixed with the soil and applied on the soil, with a covering of sand. In periods of food shortage, many people (especially truant children) resort to hunting and gathering wild foods such as local fruits, crabs and shells from the seashore. Livelihood Outcomes Wealth indicators identified by the farmers indirectly reflect the desired livelihood outcomes of the community, i.e. the goals of pursuing organic agriculture. According to farmers of Kerekese and Sotele villages, wealthy farmers have large farms, many cashew trees, high yields and good farm management. Male cashew farmers also said that they wished to be remembered, for example through their cultivation of cashew trees. When asked about a vision for the future, Kerekese farmers said that they wished to have iron-sheeting on their houses and ideally three wives. The village leader responded to the question by asking: ‘Is it pleasing that our children are produced in mud huts?’ The main development outcome sought by both cashew farmers and members of local groups is increased incomes. One cashew farmer in Sotele said that he wished to receive 1000/= Tshs per kg for their cashews by 2015. Similarly, members of the local groups were aiming to open bank accounts and make savings. Women in the local groups described their reason for being involved in organic vegetable production as wishing to help themselves and their children. For them the issue of parenthood was most important. Helping one another financially during difficult periods (e.g. with schooling and medical expenses) was an important motivation. However, there are important differences between the two organic projects, on the basis of orientation. Women in the local groups involved in organic vegetable production were more geared towards (and arguably more successful in) community development. The names of the groups are revealing as to the spirit of their existence:

- Muungano meaning Joining Together / Union - Mshikamano meaning Solidarity - Umoja ni Nguvu meaning Unity is Strength - Jipe Moyo meaning Take heart / Have faith or courage - Kikundi cha Maendeleo Sotele meaning Sotele Development Group.

The level of inclusiveness, social cohesion and sustainability is less central to businesses. The name Premier presumably refers to the superior quality of the processed cashew nut. This highlights the fundamentally different entry points of OA in the two projects. The main uses of household income in the village after repayment for inputs and labour, are educating children and buying clothes, kitchenware, soap, cooking oil, kerosene etc.

105

Stakeholder Analysis

A stakeholder analysis reveals the different interests, roles and activities of the main institutions supporting OA in the area.

Generalised map of stakeholders, their interests, role and food flows in Mkuranga organic agricultural system

It is anticipated that the most vulnerable groups in the community are those that are excluded from the organic projects. Ideally they should be incorporated directly into the research.

Summary of Key Stakeholders and their Roles

Type Institution Roles Producers Farmers

registered in project / organised into group

Provide the knowledge, skills and labour necessary to transform natural capital into agricultural produce Farming households are also the central decision-making units Marked social heterogeneity and varying livelihood

SMALLHOLDER

FARMERS – have the most to

gain/lose from changes in the food system,

dependent on agriculture for food security

GOVERNMENT – local government, district officials,

extensionists and policy-makers, with mandate and responsibility to

alleviate poverty

RESEARCHERS

– generate, synthesise and

transfer knowledge MULTI-

LATERAL & BILATERAL

PROGRAMMES – Provide a mediating institutional context

NGOs –

Strengthen civil society through

capacity- building and

advocacy actions

CONSUMERS IN THE GLOBAL

SOUTH – (awareness of) health

and nutrition effects of food

CONSUMERS IN THE GLOBAL NORTH – food safety issues, ethical choices

PRIVATE SECTOR –

including suppliers, processors and

distributors/retailers, impact on profit margins and ability to influence

overall system sustainability

CERTIFIERS

– define the organic standards and therefore

determine the orientation of the sector, guardians of the organic

principles

106

interests, in particular along gender lines MARI / FARM-Africa

Motivate women to cultivate vegetables organically, monthly seminars, provide seedlings for papaya, bananas and Tagete (marigold) and some farm tools, training on packaging

CDC and Naliendele in Mtwara

Provide improved seeds and seedlings of 20 different types at subsidised rate of 250/= Tshs which are disease resistant, early-maturing, high yielding, training for farmers, extensionists and groups

Village government

Supervises the cleaning of farms, organises meetings to mobilise farmers in weeding and sanitation practices

Government - research institutions, district authorities and local government

DALDO Organise meetings, provide extension Bilateral aid programme

EPOPA Promotes export of organic products for empowerment of farmers, supports national sector development and provides trainings, builds linkages between projects, and provides contact with external individuals and organisations Target products with an assured market, and where the price difference with conventional products is significant

TAWLAE / VECO

Advice and inputs such as farm tools, seeds, local chickens, fertilisers, wells and cassava mill

SIDO Training in local processing and monitoring

NGOs

Rescue Provided dispensary and well ICS Field Officers

Internal inspections, trainings and mobilisation

TanCert Visit, train and mobilise producers to form ICS in order to guarantee compliance to organic standards

Certifiers

IMO External inspections Private Sector

Premier Cashew Industries / Fida

Buy cashew nuts, provide inputs and loans, training on organic cashew production including recognising and scouting for disease and sulphur spraying, dug wells for villagers both to reward good farmers and also for the general community, concrete and iron sheeting for local schools, build cashew nut store

Consumers Provide a market for goods, make choices when buying and are the ultimate consumers of the foodstuffs

N.B. Acronyms are elaborated on the title page. Despite the individual importance of all these institutions, relationships between them have been strained. To take the widely lamented example of the buyer and the farmer, PCI pays for transport and inputs for the organic farmer. The provision of sulphur is a way to maintain farmer loyalty. Nevertheless, the price of the cashews barely covers the costs of production (including inputs and labour) and therefore it appears to some like a barter trade of cashews for sulphur, with profit being extracted largely by the buying companies. On the other hand, PCI is having a problem of not being able to recover loans, reportedly losing 12 million Tshs last year due to non-repayment. Currently there is little loyalty of the producers to the buyers. Access to sulphur on credit and loans are only barely adequate as an incentive for farmers to improve the quality of their production and storage practices. There is limited contact between

107

farmers and the PCI management, and as a result there are significant misunderstandings and distrust particularly on the part of farmers. This is just a snapshot of the highly complex institutional linkages that characterise the system. If stakeholders are serious about respecting the ecological imperative and meeting the needs of the farmer, they should work together to foster trust through a healthy level of collaboration and communication on matters concerning the farming environment. This would reverse the negative images and mental models that are currently held, and help partners serve the farmers more effectively.

Opportunities for Improving System Sustainability

This section highlights key entry points (geographical, institutional, thematic) for improving the projects. Although a range of strategies are presented (could be read as a menu), success of all of them hinges on first building human and social capital for sustainability. The introduction of technologies, development of new cash crops, etc. will be of little help without corresponding expansion of awareness and new ways of working with others. Organic cashew production Cashew exports are a very valuable source of foreign exchange income in Tanzania. By embracing high quality organic production, producers can exploit the demand for these nuts. There is potential to dramatically increase the amount of income from cashew nuts by increasing the proportion of processed cashew kernels exported (currently 90% of cashews are being exported raw from Tanzania). PCI’s operations would be improved by finding ways to market lower grades of organic cashews and also by converting the entire processing line to organic. This would reduce the time, energy and expense needed to modify the procedures from conventional operations to comply with organic standards every year. It would also reduce the risks of contamination of the organic product. Mkuranga district has substantial potential as a major organic cashew nut supplier, although the prices need to reflect the superior quality of the product, i.e. the same or higher than prices for conventional cashew nuts. In the light of experience, particularly the dramatic variation in prices, it may be better to focus first on farmers who have enough assets to withstand shocks in the system. The most common form of pest management is sulphur spraying. However, since the input is easily available on credit, there is superficially a low incentive to reduce its use. However, there are many ways that the farmers can reduce their use of sulphur, and thereby their accumulation of debts (which are deducted from the price given for the cashews after harvest), dependence on external inputs and possibly long-term soil acidification. More technical knowledge and sensitisation is needed on practices such as pruning, stumping and in situ grafting. EPOPA and CDC recommend hygienic practices such as cleaning and trashing to allow enough aeration and reduce the places harbouring pests and disease. Thinning also has the effect of increasing yields since fruits grow on the outside of the canopy. Cashew nut trees should be spaced at 12x18 metres when intercropped with citrus or mango trees, annuals and legumes such as cowpeas.

108

Whilst changing the environment of the tree and farm to allow more sun and wind by lopping branches and strategically removing trees with lower production levels has proven effective in reducing the risk of fungal powdery mildew disease many farmers have not adopted these practices. There needs to be an assessment of the local context and appreciation of the factors that cause farmers to reject certain techniques and adopt others. Since many of the farmers are elderly, labour is short and implements such as chainsaws are not available, implementation of these techniques is considered too labourious for some. Sulphur use could also be reduced through scouting techniques to monitor levels of disease and spraying only if above a threshold of more than 10 branches in 100. According to an Envirocare booklet on natural plant protection, Neem, urine, milk and ashes can also be used to control powdery mildew disease (Envirocare, 2005). A number of farmers have been successfully using maji moto ants to biologically control helpelitis. The CDC also recommends urine and soap or Neem to control the main cashew pest, helpelitis. More farmers need training and sensitisation on these possibilities. Another improvement on the use of sulphur would be a Thiovet Jet, a sulphur fungicide manufactured by Sygenta in Switzerland. According to product literature, this type does not causes acidification, although it is water-based and would therefore require a reliable water source (currently not available). Other uses of the cashew The cashew tree is multi-purpose, and there is significant potential to raise awareness and develop strategies to exploit other uses of the tree. Cashew nuts grow at the end of plants called cashew apples. These are mostly left to rot or thrown out at the time of harvesting because they spoil within 24 hours. However, local people make a sweet unfermented brew from the apple locally called Togwa. Currently this is only produced in small quantities for domestic consumption, although it is greatly enjoyed. An alcoholic brew called Ulaka is also made, although residents are Muslim and therefore less likely to pursue this option. Besides juice, the cashew apple may be used to make jams and jellies. Enterprising farmers who are able to process cashew apples at the right time may find a niche market for such products in either supermarkets or specialist health store, particularly if they are marketed as organic. An obvious constraint is labour since these activities would need to be done during the peak cashew nut harvesting season. In addition, such activities depend on access to processing technology, some of which is not available in Tanzania. Increased awareness and training on the medicinal uses of cashew trees (oil to treat scurvy, warts and ringworm; leaves for vitamin C deficiency and intestinal colic; cashew apple for vitamin C deficiency; resin as an expectorant and cough remedy; root as a purgative) would also have positive impacts on the livelihoods of the producers through self-treatment, and possibly product development and sale. On farms where the felling of some cashew trees is recommended, optimum use should be made of the wood, for example as a building material (houses, boats), firewood or charcoal. At a time when felling trees for making charcoal is illegal

109

(government directive in response to the drought conditions), such material is particularly important as an energy source in an area remote from the benefits of electricity. Livelihood diversification In order to endure various shocks, trends and seasonality, farmers need to diversify their livelihood portfolios and invest more in other income-earning activities besides cashew nut production. Other crops that could contribute to a multiple and dynamic livelihood include fruit such as mangos, jack fruits and pineapples, hardwoods such as East African teak, Moringa tree (for medicines, cosmetics etc.), arrowroot (especially for producing sweet snacks such as Halwa), mlala grass (Hyphae coricacea) for weaving mats, hats etc. Whilst the market is not developed palm oil is another source of income (red palm oil sells for about 600/= Tshs per litre locally) that has potential for development particularly when as a feedstock for newly-emerging biofuels. Farmers in Mkuranga district (particularly in Sotele) are at a distinct advantage in so far as they are relatively near the Dar es Salaam market (40km). During the second focus group in Kerekese, participants developed a strategy for producing arrowroot (ulanga in Kiswahili, food is locally called wanga). This local tuber is widely available, although not currently cultivated but harvested from the wild. It also commonly invades cashew farms, and appears to be shade-loving. The strategy produced is replicated below: Action How Who When Needs Produce arrowroot for food and sale

! Collect seeds from the bush

! Plant in farm – FO has volunteered ½ acre

! After 1 year harvest white part of root and leave the black part in the ground

! Grind with traditional sticks / stones

! Filter with a white cloth ! Cool with water 3 times,

also to reduce bitterness ! Spread out in sun for one

day ! Use for foods such as

ugali, bagia, haalwa mixed with coconut etc. – home consumption / sale

Groups of men and women

July / August

Milling / grinding machines, market research, enough water

The production of arrowroot appears to be a viable strategy, and would strengthen the organic agricultural system. The knowledge, labour and motivation exists. If the FO undertakes to mobilise people around this venture, it may stimulate the formation of other local production groups. Arrowroot is currently sold for 200-300/= Tshs per kg and there are also export possibilities. One other advantage of the plant is that it is not

110

stolen by baboons and monkeys, although porcupines do have a habit of digging them up. Since cashew nut production is a seasonal activity, such alternative crops would make better use of time over the agricultural year. Farmers could make use of off-season periods for productive activities such as farm management, small-scale enterprises, group mobilization, on-farm research and visits. Whilst the felling of trees specifically for the manufacture of charcoal (the main alternative economic activity to cashew nut production) is not particularly environmentally-friendly, there may be significant opportunities in using excess cashew trees and coconut stumps for charcoal-making. There are also efforts to introduce a more efficient charcoal-making technology into the area, in order to make the activity more commercially viable. Other plans, for example to establish small-scale fishing businesses and fish ponds, could also be explored and developed. (See above list of economic activities) Environmental awareness Sensitisation on a range of environmental practices would allow farmers to make informed decisions in the management of their natural resources. Key areas are soil fertility management, responsible rubbish disposal, and the use of fire. It would be good to apply scientific techniques to soil analysis, and also to conduct a study on the causes and effects of fire. Several farmers claimed that soil fertility in the area has been declining and it would be useful to isolate the main reason. Modern Scientific Knowledge (MSK) in combination with Rural Peoples’ Knowledge (RPK) (i.e. Indigenous Technical Knowledge – ITK) can play a role in improving the sustainability of livelihoods. Whilst members of the local groups were trained on compost-making, they had yet to practice it. This is partly because of the shortage of water which is needed for composting. Male cashew farmers appeared to be largely unaware of compost-making techniques, instead mixing kitchen wastes with non-decomposable material and burning it. Soil and Water Conservation in some higher relief areas could be strengthened by considered planting of contour hedges such as the multi-purpose grass Vertiver. This is also a good source of composting material and, if planted continuously, a barrier to vermin. Whilst it is a permitted organic input, sulphur use can lead to soil deterioration, and farmers who apply the element mentioned the side-effects on health, for example experiencing burning in the throat and eyes when spraying. Locally-available botanical pesticides such as Neem and papaya leaves have significant potential as an alternative plant protection, although more research and on-farm experimentation is needed in order to determine doses etc. Pyrethrum and/or Tephrosia may also be used in the control of caterpillars and grasshoppers, although these are less commonly found.

111

Whilst not exclusively promoting OA, the Original Cashew nut Improvement Network for East and South Africa funded by the Holland-based Common Fund for Commodities, which is supervised by Naliendele, has the potential to disseminate knowledge and technologies for sustainable cashew nut production. Input provision In order to implement improved agricultural practices, farmers need access to a range of inputs most importantly water, but also chainsaws to fell surplus trees and cut large branches, sharp penknives for grafting, bicycles, concrete for livestock urine-collection systems and Neem or other crop processing equipment. Provision of such inputs could bring greater net benefits than sulphur for cashew farmers currently supplied by the company on credit and the government through the input supply trust fund. Farmer Organisation Strong farmers groups would be in a better position to negotiate prices. The efficient, modernised and locally-owned market in Kinole village, Mkuyuni division in Morogoro could give inspiration to farmers from Mkuranga. It is recommended that farmers be supported to visit well-established farmers groups in order to learn more about management. This would also help to cultivate an open attitude to change, experimentation and culture of visiting and learning from each other. The national farmers network, MVIWATA, can play a key role in strengthening the organisation of farmers groups in the area. Farmers in Sotele have already had the idea to form a cooperative for all local groups involved in a wide range of economic activities from tomato production to forestry. This would be coordinated by the district leaders, and would enable the groups to access loans under the NSGRP (or MKUKUTA) strategy. According to the farmers, strong organisation would help the farmers to have a voice. A committee is already in place. Registering the local groups is a first step that allows the members to open bank accounts and access loans. Institutional Relationships Improving relationships between stakeholders is possible if all act out of good faith, with patience and mutual respect. At a fundamental level, the activities of government, civil society and private sector complement one another. The District Councillor’s suggestion to ‘open a new chapter’ should therefore be embraced wholeheartedly, and improved working relationships between different institutions should be a priority. Likewise, EPOPA’s invitation to organise a one-day visit to the PCI factory in Dar es Salaam and Kerekese farmers is a positive development, and would help to strengthen relationships between Fida, EPOPA, the District authorities and farmers. Making the different interests, perceptions and values of the various actors explicit would help to build mutual understanding and develop a culture of trust. In particular, the study has found synergies and potential areas for enhanced collaboration between the PCI cashew project and the organic activities of the local groups. It is not clear why the ICS already in place in the cashew project cannot be modified to cover inspection of other crops and thereby allow local groups to sell their products as certified organic. This would require joint decisions on the part of some of

112

the main stakeholders including TanCert, PCI Field Staff, MARI and EPOPA. Ultimately such an arrangement would be more “organic” since the production system would be considered as a whole. Also, adherence to the terms of the legally-binding contract by both farmers and buyers would also improve the relationships. This would involve farmers selling exclusively to PCI and PCI buying all cashews at a better price than other buyers. Farmers should be aware of their rights and be able to take appropriate steps should conditions of the contract be broken. Market research and development Participatory Market Research (PMR), which exposes farmers to different markets in a systematic way by a PMR group on behalf of the broader community would help to make organic agriculture more economically viable. This could be followed by participatory prioritization of options (e.g. through pair-wise ranking, cost-benefit analyses, etc.) Members of Umoja ni Nguvu mentioned a desire to open a small shop locally in Sotele. Such a shop would enable the group to expand cassava processing activities, and market freshly baked cassava products including chips, cakes, doughnuts, etc. In order to improve the viability of organic production, there needs to be simultaneous awareness-raising of the local population on the health and environmental advantages of organic food and farming.

113

Conclusion In conclusion we may ask does OA help the farmer, and if so how? In so far as the CDR farmer seeks food, nutrition, increased incomes and ‘development’ for example in the form of improved housing, OA can assist him/her to achieve livelihood outcomes. However, on the basis of research findings, the organic cashew project does not significantly reduce the susceptibility of smallholders to loss of welfare by mitigating risks or by improving their asset base. The benefits of linkages with external institutions, improved knowledge through trainings and increased yields are cancelled out by the disadvantages of over-reliance on a single cash crop, volatile market prices and problematic input supply arrangement with buying company. Although Muungano are not yet certified organic, their adoption of OA appears to be much more sustainable, ecologically, socially and economically. To a greater extent they rely on internal natural and social resources. Pursued in this way (with a greater emphasis on environmental and social sustainability than on economic competitiveness) OA appears to be better served for improving the sustainability of livelihoods by enabling smallholders to cope with and recover from shocks and stresses. The following summary seeks to answer the question: In what ways does the practice of organic agriculture in the two initiatives influence the ecological integrity, social equity and economic effectiveness of farmer livelihoods?

Organic initiative Type 1

Organic cashew project Type 2

Muungano local groups

Aspect of sustainability

+ - + - Ecological Agricultural

training " mulching Improved pest/disease control and cashew tree management (cleaning, pruning etc.) " increased cashew productivity, reduced sulphur use PCI contract and promises of premium prices " increased cashew nut yields

Liberal use of sulphur " soil acidification Emphasis on cashews " neglect of other crops " reduced agrobiodiversity

Training and provision of inputs " intensification of components of the farm system (e.g. amaranth cultivation) " increased yields Increased soil cover and improved Soil and Water Conservation techniques " increased soil moisture

Social Record keeping in the ICS " improved knowledge of

Registration of selected farmers in the project area " increased

Formation of local groups " increased culture of visiting and

Entry of a wide range of institutions whose goals and activities are not

114

farms e.g. number of trees Links with external institutions such as Naliendele " improved knowledge and social capital Mobilisation around recommended practices " formation of a youth group

marginalisation of other farmers

learning from one another’s’ farms, improved cooperation between farmers Improved vegetable production " diverse high quality crops " more varied and nutritious diet for all family members

always transparent " reduced ownership of the development process by local farmers

Economic Contract with PCI " assured market Increased yields " theoretically increased earnings Cash crop alternative to coconuts, pineapples, cassava etc. " raised incomes

Strong incentive to increase the yields and quality of cashew nuts " reduced livelihood portfolio Contract with PCI " obliged to sell cashews even though price may be unfavourable Enticement of inputs on credit and cash loans " debts

Introduction of new productive elements in the farming systems including vegetables " livelihood diversification and increased incomes Income from sale of vegetables " greater independence and empowerment of women Provision of inputs by supporting organisations " improved farm operations

It is worth reporting that one of the key actors in PCI who has supervised the whole organic cashew nut project found that there had been no changes to the livelihoods of the smallholders, and that they were the same as when they started. Similarly, central figures in the local organic vegetable-producing groups commented that it was still too early to assess the impact that OA has had on livelihoods. It should be noted that the findings in this report are derived from a ten-day stay in Mkuranga district, and are probably greatly influenced by the seasonality of agricultural activities. The visit took place in the first fortnight of February, near the end of the main harvesting season. The main agricultural activities being undertaken by farmers were pruning of cashew trees and preparing the land for cassava and rice in anticipation of the long rains. Following the failure of the 2005 short rains, all farmers in the area were facing severe water shortages which stymied most planting operations.

115

In some respects this is the ideal time to assess whether OA has made livelihoods more sustainable, since they were being put to the test as a result of the drought and exceptionally low prices for cashew nuts on the world market. On the basis of the research findings, however, the forms of OA currently being practised in Mkuranga are not sufficient to meeting the livelihood goals of the rural population. However, there are many opportunities for strengthening the existing systems to make them more environmentally sound, socially just and economically viable. How can organic agriculture be developed for the benefit of farmer? Findings support the original hypothesis that OA which comprises both a community and commodity focus is needed in order to secure sustainable livelihoods for smallholders. This would make the most efficient use of available resources in the current institutional context and build upon existing livelihood strategies. In Mkuranga district, the ideal situation would be for the two projects with their differing orientations to collaborate and combine the two strands of empowering farmers and producing high quality products. However, the issue needs to approached sensitively, and will not be truly sustainable without an internal drive (self-mobilisation as opposed to passive participation – see Appendix). Integration of commodity and community focuses of OA would be facilitated by having an in-built mechanism to ensure that organic initiatives address all aspects of sustainability including agro-biodiversity, water security and livelihood security. One idea for embracing holism in this way would be to have an Organic Taskforce or committee for each geographical region engaged in OA, including representatives from all the various stakeholder groups, who together would develop an integrated organic action plan to establish an ICS with multiple objectives. They would also be a focal point for information dissemination and grassroots mobilisation. One way to encourage this would be for organisations explicitly supporting OA in the country such as the Tanzanian Organic Agricultural Movement (TOAM) or TanCert to critically examine the way in which ICS systems are designed, and to prepare a Kiswahili manual on establishing an ICS which addresses areas currently being overlooked particularly ownership and participation. Multiple objectives to build into a holistic organic farm management system include building human resources, fostering trust, sustainable natural resource management, improving access to productive resources, remunerative employment, strengthening markets, infrastructure and institutions, applying research and technology, good governance and trade policies. The efforts of women to improve the organic farm system would be supported through positive discrimination and explicit gender policies such as registering them on growers’ lists, in recognition of their vital contribution to food crop production. Lessons may be drawn from recent efforts by IFOAM to promote Participatory Guarantee Systems (PGS)8.

8 See the Participatory Guarantee Systems / Concept Working Paper at http://www.ifoam.org/about_ifoam/standards/pgs.html

116

There are many reasons why (collective) action of this sort has not yet taken place. Not least are the attitudes, motives and awareness of individuals. Even where the will exists there are often limited resources such as time and personnel. Also, such initiatives are unlikely to be taken unless there is a facilitating agency that initiates the whole process. Farmers in these villages are in a unique position to recognise and strengthen organic agricultural practices both as a means to improve nutrition and household food security, and to provide a secure income. If the stakeholders are serious about improving the sustainability of the overall system, there are many potential avenues to explore – environmental, social and economic. Underpinning these is the imperative to build human and social capital particularly of the farmers, but also of their supporting institutions.

117

APPENDIX 4 January 26, 2006

R.e. Interactive Conference on the Future of the Organic Sector in Tanzania Dear Sir / Madam, You are hereby invited to attend a two-day interactive conference to create a shared vision for the future of the organic sector in Tanzania, to be held at the Institute of Continuing Education (ICE) at Sokoine University of Agriculture (SUA) in Morogoro on March 1st and 2nd 2006. The purpose of the conference is to draw together 15-30 key actors in the organic sector in order to think strategically about future directions of organic agricultural systems in Tanzania. How can organic agriculture be oriented towards mitigating risks and improving livelihood security for smallholders? The process will build upon the newly developed Strategic Plan of the Tanzanian Organic Agricultural Movement (TOAM). The goal is for every participant to take away an individual plan of action that they can carry out in collaboration with others. The conference will take the form of guided conversations around main themes, group activities interspersed with short presentations. Expected outputs include statements, visions and strategies on the development of the organic sector in Tanzania. These will be shared amongst the wider organic community and the public, particularly through a press conference involving local media. A tentative outline for the conference (which may be subject to change) is included below. Proceedings will be in English, although if any of the participants require translation the organisers will do their best to arrange this on request. Lunch and refreshments will be provided for all participants on both days. There will be possibility for accommodating participants travelling from outside of Morogoro at the ICE hostel at SUA on Wednesday night. Kindly confirm in advance if you will need accommodation. The conference room will have an Information desk with reference books, papers and publications on organic agriculture. You are invited to bring any other information materials that you would like to share and also organic products from your project / region for display. I very much hope that you will be able to join us in Morogoro. Your inputs will be highly valued for you are the future organic agriculture in Tanzania! Looking forward to the pleasure of your company. Yours truly, Petra Bakewell-Stone.

118

Tentative Timetable Wednesday March 1st 2006 Time Action Activity Responsible 1030 Arrival and Opening Petra / Sibuga 1035 Introductions All 1045 Organic Agriculture at SUA Dr. Maerere /

Dr. Nyange 1100 History & Status of

Organics in Tanzania Leonard Mtama, TanCert

1130 Organic principles and practices

Petra, All

1200

Share and synthesise knowledge on organic food and farming

Key issues in Tanzanian organics

All

1300 Lunch All 1400 Guided Visioning Dr. Geir Lieblein,

UMB 1500

Vision 2015 – The Future of Organics

Enrichment of Visions All 1715 Video: Food for Life All 1730 End of day Thursday March 2nd 2006 Time Action Activity Responsible 0830 Summary of previous day Petra 0845 Action planning Group discussions - Dev.

of strategies All

1200 Feedback and reflection All 1230 Lunch All 1330 Press Conference Poster presentations of

visions, declarations and action plans

All participants, journalists

1530 Closure and departures Dr. Geir Lieblein / Jordan Gama, TOAM

N.B. If, for any reason, you are unable to attend, kindly consider sending a representative from your organisation / project who has in-depth knowledge of organic agriculture and who will be able to contribute fully to the discussion and give feedback to other members. For further information contact: Petra Bakewell-Stone Department of Crop Science & Production (DCSP) P.O. Box 3005 Sokoine University of Agriculture (SUA) Morogoro, TANZANIA Mobile: 0748 551424 / 0744 857029 E-mail: dadapatra@hotmail.com

Institutional affiliation: Masters student of Agroecology Dept. of Plant & Environmental Sciences Norwegian University of Life Sciences (UMB), P.O. Box 5003, N-1432 Ås NORWAY Mobile: +47 48036170 E-mail: petrab@student.umb.no

119

APPENDIX 5 Background Information to Stakeholder Forum

In 2004 Sokoine University of Agriculture (SUA) in Morogoro, with support from the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Norad) and the Norwegian University of Life Sciences (UMB) initiated the Programme for Agricultural and Natural Resources Transformation for Improved Livelihoods (PANTIL). In order to promote research and farmers empowerment, PANTIL provides six openings for post-graduates from Norway to do research in Tanzania. Under this Young Professionals Scheme, the decision was taken to support a study of the developing organic sector in Tanzania, which is linked to other research efforts at SUA. The overall aim is to assess and enhance organic agriculture’s (OA) contribution to sustainable livelihoods and food security amongst smallholders in Tanzania. The study is in partial fulfilment of a Masters in Agroecology at UMB. Work on this MSc thesis started in November 2004 and is expected to last until June 2006, including three months fieldwork in Tanzania (January – March 2006). The central research question is: ‘How can OA be developed for the benefit of the smallholder in Tanzania?’ This will be addressed through two whole-project case studies and multi-stakeholder involvement, the main methods adopted to analyse the dynamics of OA at the local and national level respectively. A three-phase research process which moves from case studies and key informant interviews at the local level to a national-level seminar and then verification and presentation of findings back at the local level will attempt to capture the dynamics of OA at both spatial scales and the interactions between them. This interactive conference will provide a forum for both the researcher and other participants to present their activities and findings since last meeting. In the tradition of action research, however, the stakeholder forum will move beyond reflection and also aim to refine some of the key sections of the TOAM Strategic Plan, clarify the future-wanted situation (Vision 2015) and converge around ideas for individual and joint actions.

120

APPENDIX 6 NEWS RELEASE: Growth of the Organic Movement in Tanzania

The national umbrella organisation for organic agriculture, Tanzania Organic Agricultural Movement (TOAM), is launching its 2006-2008 Strategic Action Plan in order to boost awareness of organic agriculture in the country, develop local and international markets and strengthen standards and certification. Around 30 key actors in the organic sector will be meeting at the Institute of Continuing Education (ICE), at Sokoine University of Agriculture (SUA) in Morogoro on March 1-2 2006 in order to plan actions to achieve a shared Vision 2015 for the future of organic food and farming in Tanzania. Stakeholders present will include producers, processors, exporters, operators, certifiers, inspectors, researchers, educators, and representatives from both the government and Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs). The organic agricultural sector is currently the fastest growing food sector. Worldwide growth rates in organic food sales have been in the range of 20-25% annually for over a decade. Certified organic agriculture emerged in Tanzania in the early 1990s. Amongst the pioneering projects are Luponde organic tea from Iringa, Meatu organic cotton from Shinyanga and Kimango Farm producing organic spices and teas in Morogoro. Organic agriculture has already gained substantial support amongst farmers and their supporting institutions. There are currently 23 certified projects in Tanzania (16 for export and 7 for the local market). This runs parallel to the realisation that pursued as a way of improving the sustainability of agricultural systems, organic agriculture can contribute to ecological health, agro-biodiversity, local food security and self-reliance. The majority of certified organic land in Tanzania (estimated at 15,000 ha) is under the production of both traditional export crops including coffee, tea and cotton, and non-traditional export crops such as spices. Horticulturalists are also adopting the holistic farm management system in order to produce fruits and vegetables, both fresh and processed, for the domestic and international market. Expanding Northern markets, such as the European Union, provide good prospects for increasing returns on climate-specific crops such as nuts, spices and essential oils. The market growth for organic foods in the UK, for example, is 12% per year and a large proportion of that is imported—currently about 70% of the UK fruit market is imported, particularly citrus and tropical fruits. There are also promising opportunities for marketing organic food locally with several specialist and general stores in the largest towns (Dar es Salaam, Morogoro, Arusha) supplying the needs of organic consumers. Whilst the market has thus far been dominated by relatively affluent expatriates and educated middle-classes, increasingly ordinary Tanzanians are turning to organic food particularly when recommended by doctors, and due to the nutritional advantages for HIV/AIDS sufferers.

121

Organic agriculture offers a very real and integrated way to achieve the development goals laid down in national policies such as the National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty (NSGRP / Mkakati wa Kukuza Uchumi na Kupunguza Umaskini Tanzania, or MKUKUTA in Kiswahili) and the Development Vision 2025, not least those of food self-sufficiency and food security. The issue of food security is closely linked to that of energy security. At a time when oil sells for over $100 per barrel and is only set to rise, energy considerations are another powerful impetus propelling us towards the uptake of organic agriculture. High oil prices give rise to higher costs of fuel and industrial inputs. It takes five tonnes of oil to produce just one tonne of fertiliser. Thus farmers are well advised to reduce dependence on external inputs, and maximise the use of internal and renewable resources. Organic agriculture may be broadly defined as an environmentally and socially sensitive food system. According to the Basic Standards of the International Federation of Organic Agricultural Movements (IFOAM), ‘organic agriculture is a whole system approach based upon a set of processes resulting in a sustainable ecosystem, safe food, good nutrition, animal welfare and social justice. Organic production therefore is more than a system of production that includes or excludes certain inputs’.

Furthermore, the “organic” label denotes compliance with specific production and processing methods. The first national certification body, TanCert, has developed standards for both local and international markets, and provides inspections and certification services for organic entrepreneurs. Once certified, producers and processors can display the exclusive Tanzanian organic logo which assures customers that food production meets organic standards, and helps producers get a premium price for their high quality produce. TanCert is currently preparing its application for IFOAM Accreditation which will dramatically improve Tanzania’s access to organic markets worldwide. For further information contact: Petra Bakewell-Stone, SUA dadapatra@hotmail.com Mob. 0748 551424 Leonard Mtama, TanCert nadimtama@hotmail.com Tel. 022 2124441 www.tancert.org Jordan Gama, TOAM gamajam2002@yahoo.com Tel. 022 2124441

122

APPENDIX 7 Session Planning Organic principles and practice in Tanzania – Group Work (1hr 10mins) Purpose: Clarify the context Create common understanding of organic agriculture Unearth key issues / themes Raise questions that matter Process: Introduce the Café process (guidelines, etiquette, logistics etc.) Ask participants to reflect individually on the questions below and write down their answers on a post-it: 1. WHAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ASPECT OF ORGANIC AGRICULTURE TO YOU? 2. WHAT CHALLENGE, IF RESOLVED, WOULD RADICALLY IMPROVE THE STATE OF ORGANIC AGRICULTURE IN YOUR AREA / THE COUNTRY? Sharing in six groups of five people each, which then come up with one-line definitions of what organic means to them. Answers to Q.2 to be stuck on flip-chart paper on table, and discussions noted down around them, including new questions, issues etc. that arise in the conversation Groups circulate around the tables leaving the host remaining. Cross-pollination of ideas Return to “home tables” and share Each group to select one question that if resolved would most radically improve the state of organic agriculture This question is written in big block letters on A3 paper phrased: How to ………? or In what ways might we …………..? Table hosts present questions to whole group and sticks the question on one of the flipcharts stuck on the walls. The title of each flipchart is one of TOAM’s 5 Pillars of Action and 2/3 flipcharts are left blank. These can be re-grouped if necessary. 1. Market development 2. Standards and certification 3. Research and education 4. Policy and legislation 5. Institutional development

123

Participants share immediate reactions and comments on the presentations Outcome: Mutual understanding of what organic agriculture means to different stakeholders Focus areas identified for development of strategies Creating a shared vision (2hrs 25mins) Purpose: Motivate participants through a strong image of a future attractor Build-consensus on the future directions of the sector Focus strategic agenda for day 2 Process: Ask participants to sit comfortably, preferably with eyes closed, legs uncrossed etc. and then read through the following with adequate pauses: It is the year 2015. An exciting organic initiative that you have been involved with for many years has been more successful than you ever anticipated. It has gained widespread support from the local community. Generous partners have contributed a wealth of expertise and support. The initiative has become a model for the development of organic agriculture in Tanzania, and there has also been rising interest from the government, researchers, journalists, the agricultural community and general public. What has taken place? ………….How has the system changed? ……………… You have been invited to present the initiative at a conference at SUA. The audience is large and mixed. It includes your close collaborators, politicians and all are curious to know the secrets of your success. It is the month of March, and it has just rained making the air fresh. The sun shines brightly on the green campus. People look smart and colourful. Now you are at the front of the hall and someone is introducing you. You start to describe what has taken place and how the food and farming system of your area has been transformed and people are reaping the benefits. After thinking this through, participants can jot down key aspects on a pad, and are also invited to doodle, draw and be creative in visualizing the transformation. Sharing in groups, listening carefully to visions of others Patterns and trends noted on flip-chart paper

124

Aspects of visions that resonate with everyone are incorporated into a shared vision 2015 Groups mingle and people enrich their thoughts Participants return to “home” tables and make vision statements which are written in big block letters on A3 paper Table hosts present shared visions Visions are attached to flip-chart and facilitator underlines key points On the basis of this the whole group negotiates an overall shared vision which could be phrased: To have an organic sector that ……………………. Outcome: Shared vision 2015 statement Drawings / mind maps of group visions Joint ownership Clearer understanding of the fate towards which we move Development of strategies – Group work (3hrs 15mins with breaks) Purpose: Converge on key questions (challenges and opportunities) Generate ideas for actions Relate this to individual working context Strategise steps needed Identify partners, form alliances Process: Give clear instructions (on hand-outs?) Participants choose a question that concerns them and stand by the flip-chart on which it is written. Possibility to formulate new question, and add it to existing flip-charts Take note of others in same group (should be between 3 & 5 people). Participants scatter for 15 minutes an formulate individual plans of action around question, keeping in mind their vision 2015 Fill out table that’s been provided Action Activity (how?) Who? When? Identify the hindering and supporting forces Participants reassemble and find partner who listens to the person explain their Action Plan and asks is it New? Appealing? Possible? Action Plans may be modified as a result.

125

People go into groups defined by which flip-chart they stood next to Share ideas for action Try to make joint plan of action which can be expressed in the statement which may be phrased: In order to ….(goals), …..(key actors) resolve to ……….(action) through ………..(activities) by ……..(when). This is written in big block letters on a flip chart. Venn diagram is drawn on flip chart to show the key actors, their roles, importance (shown by size) and relationships (shown by position). Arrows may be drawn on to illustrate flows of information, knowledge, resources etc. Each group to present a strategy, along with the Venn diagram of key actors for one question to the plenary and this is followed by questions and discussion Outcome: Individual / joint Plans of Action Partnerships identified / formed Feedback and reflection (15mins) Purpose: Evaluate the conference Reflect Derive lessons for future Process: Individual reflection on highlights, main lessons, feelings These are noted on post-its and attached along a Mood Monitor to show how participants feel and why # $ % Participants invited to consider the question: WHAT WILL I REMEMBER MOST ABOUT THIS MEETING? Outcome: Conference evaluated Lessons carried forward

126

Press conference Purpose: Make events within the organic movement public Stimulate public awareness and debate Process: (Precise format of Press Conference to be planned in collaboration with participants at the beginning of Day2) Radio / TV / Newspaper journalists invited into conference Press pack provided Introduction to Press conference 3/4 willing participants sit at front of room and present key themes that have emerged over the conference, based on the key challenges, Vision statement and Declarations on strategies All participants have opportunity to relay messages, publicise their projects, causes, display products, literature, answer questions etc. Outcome: Radio / TV and article coverage

127

APPENDIX 8 Organic Stakeholders’ Forum

Summary Report

On March 1-2 2006, a researcher from the Norwegian University of Life Sciences (UMB) organised a two-day interactive conference on the future of the organic sector in Tanzania at the Institute of Continuing Education (ICE) of Sokoine University of Agriculture (SUA) in Morogoro, Tanzania. In addition to sharing and synthesising knowledge on the rapidly growing sector, participants engaged in activities to refine the Strategic Plan 2006-8 of the Tanzanian Organic Agriculture Movement (TOAM) and created a shared Vision 2015 and joint strategies for addressing the major challenges.

Petra Bakewell-Stone March 15, 2006 Contents List of Participants 2 Introduction 3 Organic Agriculture at Sokoine University of Agriculture 3 Genesis and Development of Organic Agriculture in Tanzania 4 Interim Report on Research into Organic Agriculture 5 The World of Organic Agriculture 5 Organic Vision 2015 6 Key Challenges 6 Joint Strategies 7 Press Conference 10 Conclusion 10 Appendices 1 Background to the Forum 11 2 Programme 3 Acronyms

128

List of participants

Organisation Name Phone E-mail SUA, Crop Science Kallunde P. Sibuga 0744

974528 sibuga88@yahoo.co.uk

SUA, ICE Innocent H. Babili 0748 378224

babhili@yahoo.com

SUA, Soil Science Method Kilasara 0744 493668

mmkilasara@yahoo.com

SUA, Crop Science Cornel L. Rweyemamu

0744 362194

rweyemamu@suanet.ac.tz

SUA, Agricultural Economics

David Nyange 0744 272573

davidnyange@hotmail.com

EPOPA / Grolink Gunnar Rundgren +46 56372345

gunnar@grolink.se

TanCert Leonard Mtama 0748 490275

lm@tancert.org

TOAM Jordan Gama 0744 618484

kilimohai@excite.com

UMB Petra Bakewell-Stone 0748 551424

dadapatra@hotmail.com

Ministry of Livestock Dev.

Eutropia S. Mwasha 0744 449534

tropiatz@yahoo.com

IFOAM / TOAM Mwatima Juma 0744 536630

mwatimajuma@yahoo.com

EPOPA Ade Towry-Coker 0745 267005

adetowrycoker@agroeco.net

KIHATA aubeda Kondo 0745 559929

kihatahq@yahoo.com

KIHATA Mary Kibiriti 0744 240403

kihatahq@yahoo.com

PELUM Tanzania Donati Senzia 0744 686 677

senzia75@yahoo.com

Envirocare Lars Grimsby 0787 071925

envirocare@Got.co.tz

TAaOP Ltd. Khamis I. Mohammed

0741 232602

khim64@hotmail.com

Agroeco Marleen de Blécourt

Marleen.deblecourt@wur.nl

Mikese Farm Murtaza A.i Karimjee 0748 495985

mikesefarm@yahoo.com

UMADEP Richard A. Muvellah 0748 840886

umadep@mail.suanet.ac.tz

IRTECO Mwadhini Myanza 0744 583242

mwadhini@yahoo.co.uk

MVIWATA Renath M. Kauki 023 2614184

kaukirms@yahoo.com

UHAI-aanzibar Abdalla M. Mmanga 0744 340658

uhaiznz@hotmail.com

UHAI-aanzibar Mwawaidi A. Khatib

mwanachwaya@yahoo.com

BCS-HAI Miriam M. Ngdmaryo 0748 397704

mngmaryo@yahoo.com

aAFFIDE / aanzibar MVIWATA

Issa Mahmoud 0744 910816

issaimahmoud@yahoo.com

129

Introduction After welcoming the participants, Petra Bakewell-Stone outlined the objectives of the forum including:

- to review the organic agenda; - to bring stakeholders together for strengthening communication

and collaboration; - to contribute to TOAMds Strategic Plan which highlighted lack of

coordination between stakeholders as a major weakness in Tanzaniads organic sector;

- to bring unity and direction to the Tanzanian organic movement; and

- to engage in participatory planning in order to build a strong and vibrant sector.

The expected outputs included:

1. A shared Vision 2015 for the future of the organic sector, and 2. Each participant to take away with them a Plan of Action (PoA)

to carry out individually and in collaboration with others. There followed a round of introductions. Participants (26 in total) included producers, processors, exporters, certifiers, inspectors, researchers, educators and representatives from both the government and Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs). Organic Agriculture at SUA Dr Nyange of the Department of Agricultural Economics presented preliminary study results from organic farming sub-project. Nyangeds presentation focused on a comparative analysis of productivity, profitability and economic efficiency between organic farmers and conventional growers of cashew, pineapple and banana. Other members of the research team are Dr Gasper Ashimogo and Dr Emmanuel Mbiha. Nyange informed the meeting that a total of 120 cashew growers were surveyed in Mkuranga district in Coast Region of which 60 were organic growers. Similar samples of banana and pineapple farmers were surveyed in Arumeru (Arusha) and Njombe (Iringa) districts, respectively. The study identified important participants in the supply chains of organic products as producer groups, promoting (facilitating) agent, certifying agent and exporting (processing) company. Preliminary results presented were mainly descriptive statistics on demographical profiles of organic and conventional crop growers, farm size, input usage, crop sales, revenue, and agronomic practices by farmers. Results suggest organic cashew growers had less unattended cashew trees (i.e. less trees in the bush), use more sulphur, had higher yields, received higher price and revenue from cashew nut sale. Results from pineapple growers were less consistent but indicated organic growers received higher price and had higher yields. These

130

observations are opposite to organic crops in formally input intensive farming systems such as coffee where conversion to organic leads to decreased productivity despite the increase in management intensity. Dr. Sibuga of the Department of Crop Science and Production (DCSP) gave an overview of the Universityds involvement in organic agriculture. The DCSP has developed a course curriculum for organic farming. The course contents have been discussed by relevant committees at the Faculty level and received the approval of the SUA senate. However, the course is yet to be offered pending a general review of the curricula scheduled for this calendar year. The main objective of the course is that students should acquire a basic understanding of organic farming from agronomic, environmental and societal perspectives, and that they should be able to link theory to concrete farming situations. Course contents include: definition, history, philosophy and goals of organic farming; present status worldwide and in Tanzania; organic farming for the market, and beyond the market logic; organic farming and agroecological knowledge; potentials and limitations of organic farming in crop and livestock systems (social issues, economic issues, crop production, soil management, pest management and animal husbandry); environmental and socio-economic implications of organic farming; food quality and consumerd awareness of organic produce; systems thinking and multi-perspective analysis. Other efforts include the development of a research proposal which will be submitted to solicit funding from local and international sources. The proposal will seek to address aspects related to research and training of SUA students, farmers and extension workers. Genesis and Development of Organic Agriculture in Tanzania Leonard Mtama of TanCert gave an overview of the history and status of the organic agriculture sector in Tanzania. Historical background 1898 Peramiho Organic Garden established – the garden produced a variety of vegetables following organic principles including use of manure and soil conservation. It was self-claimed organic and served the Benedictine missionaries of the area. The garden is still in existence (see jMiaka 100 Bustani ya Peramiho by Bro. Thomas Morrus) 1992 First certified organic production in Tanzania (now there are more than 17 projects certified for organic production) " ..... more!

131

2003 The Tanzanian organic certification association (TanCert), the first local certification body was established by organic stakeholders in Tanzania. Organic stakeholders established the organic standards for Tanzania 2004 Certification of organic products for the domestic market by TanCert done 2005 TanCert started inspection services for the export mark The Tanzania Organic Agriculture Movement (TOAM) established Challenges:

- low capacity to access certification costs - limited extension services - underdeveloped domestic market infrastructures for organic

produce Achievements:

- local certification body established - TanCert - organic standards for Tanzania put in place by TanCert - trade mark for organic products - certification for export as ljoint venture” is in place - number of organic projects have increased from 1 in 1992 to 17

in 2005 - TOAM established

Expectations of stakeholders and the community:

- join hands (TanCert and TOAM) - domestic market development - research - increase the export market

Interim Report on Research into Organic Agriculture Petra Bakewell-Stone of UMB summarised preliminary findings from her research into the livelihood implications of different types of organic agriculture, including case study research on two organic initiatives in the Coastal region. She concluded by highlighting some key issues and focal points for intervention. The World of Organics Chief Executive of Grolink and former President of the Board of IFOAM, Gunnar Rundgren shared knowledge and experience on the development of organic agriculture worldwide. The presentation covered emerging issues in organic agriculture relating to markets, certification, food security and policy recommendations.

132

Organic Vision 2015 The outcome of a guided visioning was as follows:

“To have a vibrant organic sector supported by a wide range of stakeholders that is the driving force behind agriculture in the country,

takes advantage of local and export markets and contributes to enhanced livelihoods through quality and safe food, environmental

conservation, economic growth and sustainable development” This was also translated into Kiswahili: “Kuwa na sekta endelevu ya kilimo hai inayojumuisha wadau wote ili kutoa msukumo wa kuendeleza kilimo nchini kwa kutumia fursa za

masoko ya ndani na nje ili kuboresha hali ya maisha, mazingira, kukuza uchumi na maendeleo endelevu”

Key Challenges Participants were asked to identify the questions that, if resolved, would radically improve the state of organic agriculture in their area / country. Priority questions were grouped according to TOAMds main Pillars of Action. Theme Questions / challenges MARKET DEVELOPMENT

- How to access both local and international markets for organic productsn

STANDARDS AND CERTIFICATION

- How to assist farmers to cover the costs of certificationn

RESEARCH AND EDUCATION

- How to create awareness among small-scale farmers on the concept of organic agriculture and access to the marketn

- In what ways might we develop research and training infrastructuresn

- How to raise public awareness on organic agriculturen

- How to ensure that information and knowledge on organic agriculture is available to the publicn

- How to address lack of awareness on the values and benefits of organic agriculture amongst policy-makers, producers and consumersn

- How to change agricultural extension services so that they are supportive of organic agriculturen

- How to practically change the consumption attitudes of people on organic product usen

133

PRODUCTION

- How to acquire organic inputs for small-scale, medium-scale and large-scale organic farmingn

- How to encourage big farmers to engage in organic agriculturen

POLICY AND LEGISLATION

- In what ways should we lobby the government for operative organic agriculture policyn

- How to change government policy in favour of organic agriculturen

- How to reconcile government policy on food security with the concept of organic agriculturen

INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT

- In what ways might we sustain coherence among stakeholders in the organic sectorn

- How to develop the organic sector from the bottom-upn

Joint Strategies In addition to individual plans of action, participants formulated joint strategies and identified the key actors that need to form working partnerships in order to achieve stated goals and realise the shared vision.

Theme Goal Actors* Actions Activities Time-frame

Market development

1. Increase trade and sustain the production of organic agriculture

a) TOAM, BET b) TOAM, EPOPA, companies c) TOAM d) TOAM, traders, TCCIA, ACT e) TOAM, BET, TanCert, TCCIA, local newspapers, forum creation

Access markets for organic products

a) conduct training on internet market research b) participation in organic trade fairs e.g. BioFach c) formulate local market centres d) create market linkages between buyers / traders and producers e) develop newsletters on the organic market (through post/e-mail)

a) twice a year b) yearly c) by 2008 d) by 2008 e) quarterly / weekly

Standards and certification

Minimise the cost of certification to make it affordable to small-scale farmers

a) TOAM, TanCert, EPOPA, SIDA, DANIDA b) TOAM, TanCert, TCCIA c) producers

Reduce certification costs

a) accreditation of TanCert to international bodies b) formulation of group certification especially for small-scale farmers c) encourage large-scale producers to get involved in organics

a) by the end of 2007 b) by 2007 c) on-going

Research and 1. Create TOAM, Lobbying and Consultations On-going

134

awareness

Ministries (AFSC, LD, VPO), higher learning institutions

advocacy Establishment of resource centres Publications

Exhibitions Exchange visits Field days Agricultural shows

education

2. Generate and disseminate technologies

Ministries (AFSC, LD, VPO), TBS, Tancert, TFDA, SUA, TOAM

Research and training Publications

Production of extension manuals Training (short- and long-term) Radio and TV programmes Exchange visits

2006-2009

1. Increase availability and use of organic agricultural inputs

a) inventories organic input sources, types, distribution and consumption b) raise awareness on the use and availability of organic agricultural inputs c) develop & disseminate appropriate inputs for organic agriculture

a) June – December 2006 b) June 2006 c) June 2006

Production Increase organic agricultural production in Tanzania

Producers, traders, Ministries (AFSC, LD, LGA, IT&M, NR, VPO), SUA, NGOs, KIHATA, TOAM, PELUM, TanCert, Envirocare, EPOPA

2. Improve training and extension services

a) training of trainers (extension staff and farmer professionals) b) information-sharing & exchange

a) April 2006 onwards b) August 2006

Policy and legislation

Incorporate organic agriculture into existing polity

TOAM, government, NGOs / CSOs, consumers, producers, traders, SUA

Lobby the government for operative national organic agriculture policy

a) collect & document farmersd competent organic initiatives b) disseminate farmersd competent initiatives through media & other advocacy materials e.g. T-shirts and leaflets c) make individual contact with potential ministries and govt. officials / decision-makers d) initiate an operative integrated & national organic agriculture day e) organic interactive conferences on selected themes of organic agriculture twice yearly

2006-2010

135

f) develop a mechanism for 8/8 and 7/7 shows g) establish national and district organic agriculture committees

Institutional development

Enhance networking and collaboration among stakeholders

Researchers (SUA, USDM, TIPRI, NEMC, LD, AFSC), KIHATA, TOAM, PELUM, Envirocare, EPOPA, companies, consumers

Sustain coherence among organic stakeholders

a) develop a catalogue of stakeholders b) hold stakeholder fora c) resource mobilisation

a) June – Nov. b) on-going c) yearly

* Acronyms are elaborated in below

136

Press Conference Representatives of the private sector (Khamis Mohammed, TAaOP), academia (Cornel Rweymamu, SUA), international agencies (Mwatima Juma, IFOAM), producer associations (Miriam Ngdmaryo, Bonde la Chem Chem) and civil society (Jordan Gama, TOAM) made statements on their activities in organic agriculture, and their outlooks on the future. The speakers challenged the sector to address key issues including:

- mobilising smallholder suppliers to meet the large demand for organic products, both in Africa and abroad;

- uniting the organic movement with its diverse stakeholders in civil society, the government and the private sector;

- joining together with the IFOAM African Organic Agricultural Centre based in Senegal to advocate on issues that are special and specific for smallholders in Africa;

- raising awareness amongst consumers on the environmental implications of organic production;

- making knowledge and inputs for organic agriculture more widely available.

Conclusion The forum was brought to a close by Jordan Gama of TOAM who thanked everyone for their good participation. Important outcomes included information-exchange and networking amongst stakeholders and greater clarity on the steps needed to strengthen the countryds organic movement.

137

Acronyms

ACT Agricultural Council of Tanzania AFSC Ministry of Agriculture, Food Security and Cooperatives BET Board of External Trade CSO Civil Society Organisation DANIDA Danish International Development Agency DCSP Department of Crop Science and Production EPOPA Export Promotion of Organic Products from Africa ICE Institute of Continuing Education IFOAM International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements IT& M Ministry of Industry, Trade and Marketing KIHATA Kilimo Hai Tanzania LD Ministry of Livestock Development LGA Ministry of Local Government Authority MVIWATA Mtandao wa Vikundi vya Wakulima Tanzania NEMC National Environment Management Council NGO Non-Governmental Organisation NR Ministry of Natural Resources PELUM Participatory Ecological Land Use Management SIDA Swedish International Development Agency SUA Sokoine University of Agriculture TanCert Tanzania Organic Certification Association TBS Tanzania Bureau of Standards TCCIA Tanzania Chamber of Commerce Industry and Agriculture TFDA Tanzania Food and Drugs Authority TIPRI Tanzania Pesticides Research Institute TOAM Tanzania Organic Agriculture Movement UMB Norwegian University of Life Sciences USDSM University of Dar es Salaam VPO Vice Presidentds Office aAFFIDE aanzibar Association for Farmers and Fishermen Development

138

APPENDIX 9 Reflections

‘The important thing is to educate the curiosity through which knowledge is

constituted as it grows and refines itself through the very exercise of knowing’ (Freire, 1997)

Research is a process of enquiry which involves asking questions out of curiosity in order to generate new insights. By maintaining this attitude of curiosity the researcher can reflect on what has been learnt and how it has been learnt, allowing yet new insights and perceptions to emerge. According to Ellinor and Gerard (1998), reflection is about ‘taking time to observe more than one event and wonder about the connections between them, to formulate the questions that will take you to the next level’. Although it may seem contradictory to pause and think awhile in action research, critical reflection is integral to action-oriented research, which seeks to use lessons derived from action to inform and improve future action. Thus for experiential learning to occur, “doing” needs to be complemented by “reflecting”, which entails processing new information, relating it to what is already known, and making sense of it by connecting it to our knowledge system. Silence is considered a prerequisite for reflection and the development of collective intelligence since ‘it allows more subtle levels of meaning and relationship to come forward’ (Ellinor and Gerard, 1998). Action informs reflection, and reflection refines action, and therefore we need to give equal weight to theory and practice in order to ‘intervene in systems in ways which are ethically sound and environmentally and socially responsible’ (Bawden: in Zuber-Skerritt, 1991: 19). Action research is designed to solve particular local problems through a cycle of reconnaissance, planning, action and re-reconnaissance (Miles & Huberman, 1994). It is hard to pinpoint the starting point for the cyclical process of learning in this study. On the one hand, working with an umbrella organisation of NGOs in Tanzania to promote learning, networking and advocacy in sustainable agriculture and food security provided a basis for exploring of the organic sector. On the other hand, exposure to a range of agroecological methods, concepts and theories during courses, seminars and reading provided frames through which to view the structure and functioning of organic systems. Key events of the research can be superimposed on Kolb’s model of the experiential learning cycle (below).

139

Kolb’s model of the learning cycle (scoping mission) (partner communication, (building a preliminary fieldwork) rich picture)

(theory-building, refining research strategy)

Source: Adapted from Wilson & Morren, 1990

Nevertheless the stages were not clear-cut and did not always progress in a linear fashion. Often activities took place simultaneously, such as continuous literature review and synthesis of both content (e.g. meeting minutes, workshop reports) and process (e.g. examples from other action research studies, case studies, qualitative research). For this reason, it may be more productive to refer to a “spiralling”, rather than a “circling” (Ellinor and Gerard, 1998). Furthermore, many of activities that were undertaken, particularly those relating to social learning and visioning, are not comfortably encompassed in Kolb’s model of learning, except perhaps in the broad sense that they involve active experimentation. Subjectivity Dover and Talbot (1987: 53) state that ‘few if any scientists are free of biases inherent in their training, experience, and peer relationships’. Being clear about the subjective element and motivations of the researcher is integral to action research. Moreover, ‘one can only become whole by the responsible acceptance of one’s partiality’ (Berry, 1977: 123; quoted in Kloppenburg, 1991: 539). The research started from the value-laden premise that organic farming is a desirable and feasible alternative for smallholder farmers in Tanzania. This apparent subjectivity is based upon objective assessments of the benefits of organic agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa. Rather than being a source of bias, however, these underlying assumptions give the research an advantage over conventional experimental and investigative research since it moves beyond analysis into action planning. Sacrificing the objective perspective for greater richness of information has been recognised as a trade-off in

Concrete experience

Abstract conceptualisation

Active experimentation

Reflective observation

Divergent knowledge

Assimilative knowledge

Accommodative knowledge

Convergent knowledge

140

action research that makes it differ from traditional methods (Øritsland, 1999: in Lerdahl, 2001). Instead of seeking to discover whether organic farming holds benefits for Tanzanian smallholders, the research is an effort to work with partners to validate the proposed change and facilitate the transition to organic farming and is therefore an applied form of research and development. In addition, the theory underlying the selection of case study sites was informed by a set of assumptions based on previous research into food security in Tanzania (PELUM, 2004), a literature review and key informant interviews (see Chapter 4 on the Research Process above). Ultimately it proved difficult to test the main proposition that ‘organic agriculture provides a sustainable solution when it emphasises the localisation of the food system, whilst not precluding the possibility of marketing organic produce internationally once subsistence needs have been met’, since no examples could be found of organic initiatives producing organic goods for both the local and the international market. Thus although two organic initiatives were studied, one focusing on the production of cash crops for export and the other incorporating multiple objectives including subsistence and trade, it was not possible to directly compare on them on criteria such as income from agriculture. Over the course of the CSR it became increasingly clear that there was significant social and geographic overlap between the two initiatives, and therefore it was more relevant to apply the SL framework to the organic agricultural system as a whole. In this way, the CSR challenged my mental models and becomes a continually changing iterative process. In other cases, I only became aware of my assumptions when they were challenged. For example, the notion that organic agriculture reduces dependence on external inputs was called into question by the organic cashew nut project which led to an increased reliance on sulphur as a means to control disease on cashew trees. This finding illuminated the contradiction between organic principles and practices. In this way, I have been led to reflect not only on the subjective element that guided the research, but also how my subjectivity has been affected by the research. Participation It soon came to light that two opposing goals were being pursued in the design of the research: to pinpoint a specific research question or set of questions that could define the research strategy, guide fieldwork and documentation; and to facilitate a participatory process for identifying research questions. By remaining open to a wide variety of different standpoints and creating space for adaptation to the context and for new perceptions, positions and relevant relationships, multi-stakeholder involvement inevitably lengthens and complicates the research process, as it puts a greater emphasis on finding the right question as opposed to answering a pre-determined question. Crucially it asks 'whose question is being addressed?' Although this approach allows less time and resources to be dedicated to seeking answers to the questions, importantly it means that the questions are more likely to relate to the real needs of the stakeholders and provide information that is applicable to local contexts. Since the aim is to benefit the farmer, topic selection was open to discussion and efforts were made to integrate farmer knowledge and participation.

141

Similarly in the CSR, there were originally two broad objectives: information extraction and facilitating an action-learning process. Ultimately, however, the balance was tipped towards the former, more conventional objective of research. Facilitating an action-learning process was found to be extremely complex in the institutional context since the stakeholder groups were relatively hostile towards one another and unwilling to work together and time was restrictive. For collaborative social research to take place researchers need to join closely with participants from the outset, and this cooperation of participants is, in turn, dependent on time and resources. Time and resource constraints have placed pressure on the research process at every stage. Thus when measured against criteria such as the level of participation in the process and the level consensus reached, the CSR was less successful, than when measured by the data output. Ideally participatory action research is initiated by the groups for whom the research is meant to benefit, although this is rarely the case in sub-Saharan Africa where a great majority of the rural populace are illiterate and have limited access to formal education. Miles and Huberman (1994) suggest that researchers make a social contract with participants and jointly agree on such issues as the time and effort involved, type of data collected, voluntary participation, confidentiality of material, anonymity of participants and the benefits to informants and researchers. Limitations on time and differences in area of expertise meant that farmers were not fully involved in defining the process, and often decisions had to be taken on behalf of the stakeholders e.g. with regards to the type of participatory tools used. For this reason, the process was not fully participatory. In addition, there was no internal drive for the research to take place, and actually the main reason for participation in the CSR was that the farmers were ‘summoned’ by village leaders after I arrived and after they had been informed of my presence and purpose. Ultimately these conditions are likely to reduce the receptivity of the farmers to the research findings. The conditions for participation in the CSR also raise the issue of the cultural ambiguity of participation. The western perspective of participation which involves ‘the open exchange of arguments and ideas … the right to question, and … the prerogative to be different, to conduct experiments, and to make mistakes’ differs from the actual experience of many regions of rural sub-Saharan Africa where ‘direct questioning and open dialogue among different subgroups are shunned, and in subsistence economies, experimentation and mistakes are often regarded as conveying unacceptable risks’ (Whyte, 1991). The hesitancy of many women farmers to express theirs in the presence of (mainly male) village leaders during focus groups in the CSR is symptomatic of these cultural differences. This highlights the importance of rooting participation in existing cultural norms, and of investigating what participation means and actually involves in the local and national context of the study. In order to make the researcher/participant contract more explicit it may have been more relevant to search for ‘forms of relationships [that] can simultaneously accommodate prevailing socio-cultural norms and the objective of participatory involvement in applied research’ (Whyte, 1991: 203). Even the process of reflection itself is culturally situated since ‘statistically speaking, our western culture is primarily extroverted’ (Ellinor and Gerard, 1998).

142

The need to be sensitive to the history and experiences of participation in rural areas was also underscored by the suspicion and deep caution that my presence initially generated amongst the farmers. Such a reaction in not uncommon during research in rural areas, and has been explained by the fact that village people have often been manipulated by powerful social forces (Chambers, 1983) and indeed I learnt that the area has a long, and not wholly positive, history of interventions by government research institutes, the private sector and development organisations. Initial suspicions were greatly alleviated once I had described in detail my organisational affiliations and villagers understood the neutrality of my position since I was not employed by a company or development agency. In addition, having official documentation from SUA and letters of introduction for the district officials and village authorities proved to be very important for gaining the trust of local people. In this way, rapport, which exists on three levels (with oneself, with team / research partners and with clients), changed over the course of the research enabling me to gather a great deal more data. Direct and participant observation, including taking every opportunity to meet with and socialise with stakeholders, ended up being extremely important methods, not only for gathering data, but also for gaining the trust of the key actors. Participant observation involved participating in the daily lives of stakeholders, observing and asking questions in order to understand the experiences, underlying values and assumptions of the stakeholders. Submergence in action, allowed phenomena and causal relationships to be observed through firsthand experience and this led to a greater understanding of tacit knowledge and unspoken rules. For example, drawing water with local women and buying fruits and vegetables from the local markets enabled me to observe more closely the gender division of labour and the daily activities of villagers during the CSR. It is possible, however, that had I remained in the village longer unbiased observation would have become more difficult due to increased emotional engagement with the material. Holism Developing the organic sector in a holistic way requires consideration of values, socio-political organisation, technology, knowledge and environment. For this reason, it was important to include many different types of information, particularly during the initial stages of the research. Due to the large amount of data generated, the field of study appeared to be exceedingly broad and amorphous. Thus there were necessary trade-offs between the level of detail and the usefulness of the information. Whilst it would have been interesting to conduct an ecological audit of the case study site in terms of biodiversity and soil fertility, the range of other socio-cultural and economic indicators being considered precluded the possibility of undertaking a more comprehensive environmental assessment. In addition, approaching the field of study from a variety of different perspectives yielded a great deal of apparent inconsistencies because the differing concerns of the stakeholders give rise to varying capabilities, behaviour and attitudes. For example, during the CSR it came to light that the buying company and the farmers had completely different opinions on the destination of premium prices. This made triangulation of sources all the more relevant. The existence of persistent and glaring contradictions was also instructive because it highlighted problematic and unresolved

143

issues in the organic sector. Lack of clarity and doubt is characteristic of action-learning and can even be viewed as a necessary precursor to a deeper understanding. The eminent pedagogue, Paulo Freire acknowledged that ‘doubts take me to uncertainties, the only place where it is possible to work toward the necessary provisional certainties’ (Freire, 1997: 30). Collecting data from a wide variety of different sources and using different methods (i.e. following the holistic approach) resulted in the identification of a multitude of strategies relating to many different areas of organic agriculture including production, trade, policy, regulation and institutions. However, as pointed out by Ellinor and Gerard (1998), ‘diversity is necessary for creativity’ and for this reason the breadth of the original research question is considered a source of inspiration and not confusion, since it has brought to the fore many practical ways of moving forward including innovative approaches to working with important issues such as certification and institutional development. Language During the whole-project case studies some of the most revealing insights into the goals of the systems, production methods and the values and attitudes of farmers emerged from the use of language including metaphor. By recording how the topics were discussed in interviews and focus groups it was possible to illuminate the processes of collectively defining meanings and the nuances of language. For example, the statement by one cashew grower that ‘the farmer is the hoe of organic farming’ is a clear indication of the perceived exploitative nature of relationships in the organic food chain. Another assertion, made by an organic vegetable grower, that ‘our children were born in amaranths’ makes clear the importance of cultivating vegetables for family nutrition. Thus direct quotes were found to be extremely useful in conveying the perspectives of the stakeholders. In addition the names of the organic initiatives are also very indicative of their orientation. Translations of the names of the local vegetable growers’ groups, which include “Joining Together”, “Solidarity”, “Unity is Strength” and “Take Heart”, demonstrate the spirit of their existence. The name of the organic cashew project, “Premier”, presumable refers to the superior quality of their processed cashew nut. This shows that the level of inclusiveness and social cohesion is less central to the business, and highlights the fundamentally different entry points of the organic agriculture in the two projects. At a more profound level, the use of language in communication not only reflects but also shapes the realities of those who use it. This leads Freire (1997: 33) to note that ‘if communication and intercommunication represent processes that speak to life about the support system, in the existential experience they acquire a special connotation. In this instance, both communication and intercommunication involve the comprehension of the world’. This realisation arouses my desire to explore in more depth the role of language and communication in developing ecologically sustainable agriculture, both in terms of our relationships with nature, with ourselves and with one another. As Engel and Salomon (1997) comment: ‘effective and sustained communication is fundamental to developing and maintaining standards of competent performance in and between human practices’. For example, an improved understanding of the social integument of the generation and transmission of local

144

knowledge would help to foster the self-development and self-empowerment rural peoples (Kloppenburg, 1991). In some cases, language was also a limitation to understanding. For example, in the early stages of the research I was asking farmers whether they composted using the formal Kiswahili translation of composting (mbolea vunde), and I was surprised by how few farmers were aware of the technique. Eventually, it came to light that many farmers are not familiar with this terminology and many practice forms of composting but refer to it using different words and phrases such as ‘kuoza udongo’ which literally means ‘rotting the soil’. Role of the researcher A preliminary assessment of Tanzania's organic sector revealed the need for knowledge synthesis, and a researcher to engage in cataloguing the organic knowledge base, drawing together research capacity and experimentation, networking and information dissemination. These activities were therefore built into the overall research design and, as a result, my role as a researcher in this study has been multifaceted and has incorporated facilitation, mobilisation and communication, in addition to the more traditional roles of data collection, analysis and documentation. Capitalising on the extensive experience of those already working directly in organic agriculture also appeared to make best use of my relatively limited knowledge and time. Research was aimed at promoting partnerships between farmers, researchers, extensionists and policy-makers, and providing useful information in an accessible format in order to build capacity in organic farming. The skills needed for participative research were found to be significantly different from those needed for orthodox research. They included self-awareness, self-reflexiveness, facilitative skills in interpersonal and group settings, political skills and data management skills. Facilitation involves accepting that full control of all the relevant processes is impossible, and allows for partiality, emphasising the process rather than the product. Researching complex, real-life cases also involves accepting the arbitrariness of the facilitator’s role, since those concerned continue to make their own judgements in terms of means and ends, and randomness as a result of unintended consequences. Unwittingly, my role was also as a catalyst. For instance, as a result of accompanying me to the case study site, a representative of the donor agency made long overdue contact with district officials. During this interaction, they made plans to meet again and the district official was invited to go to the factory where cashews are processed. This was an important development since up until this point lack of interaction had been the source of prolific misunderstandings between the stakeholders. In addition, my staying in the annex to the cashew store led to the nearby well being repaired. This serves villagers living up to a several kilometres away and is an important source of water for domestic use particularly during the dry season. Collaborative research Working with other people was undoubtedly one of the most rewarding and challenging aspects of action research. Being amongst like-minded and dedicated individuals brought life to the whole research process and renewed collective

145

commitment to the task of developing the organic sector. Whilst interacting with key actors in the organic movement I learnt to engage the whole person, to balance sociability with professionalism, to be sympathetic and aware of alternative visions and goals and to place the most emphasis on the positive aspects of the organic sector including achievements and opportunities in order to discover which actions are effective and how can they be strengthened. The few instances where key actors were not cooperative were also important learning experiences. In one case, a central figure in an organic project tried hard to dissuade me from visiting the site, and refused to make information available for reasons that were not clear. Although this significantly impaired my ability to learn more about the context of the project, it was fortunate that other actors, including the farmers themselves did not share the same attitude and were much more forthcoming. My reaction was to continue to try to involve the person in my research activities, inviting her to the stakeholder forum and sending her interim reports on the research, although unfortunately this did not change her stance. This experience demonstrates the importance of patience and persistence in collaborative research, as well as the ability to be flexible and try other approaches or avenues of enquiry when one proves to be unfeasible. Findings from both the CSR and stakeholder forum underscored the necessity of forming alliances to promote organic agriculture. In order to successfully regulate collective actions and decision-making such alliance requires certain leadership patterns and coordinating mechanisms. Ideally emergent structural arrangements should be renegotiable and in flux. The critical role of the TOAM network, an alliance established for the explicit purpose of improving the social organisation of innovation in organic agriculture, became increasingly clear, as did its potential in creating opportunities for learning through joint reflection, providing mutual support and joint advocacy. Access to information Information about the degree to which organic agriculture is being developed in Tanzania is widely scattered and not easy to collate. For instance, it is difficult to get precise figures for production, acreage and sales which would help to measure organic agriculture’s contribution to GDP. Often companies themselves are unsure about such figures and data retrieval may take considerable time. The accessibility of information regarding the status, achievements, potential and bottlenecks facing organic farming was found to differ depending on the type of farming. While there is considerable data on certified organic farming, information regarding informal organic production is much more elusive. This is partly the result of particular social interests that ‘gain differential influence over the institutional structure of knowledge production’ (Kloppenburg, 1991: 521). The informal organic sector may also be less visible than that of certified organic production because it is less easy to distinguish non-certified organic agriculture owing to the numerous organisations that share similar approaches such as permaculture, eco-farming, bio-intensive and agroecology, although they are not formally aligned to the organic movement. Since the philosophy and agronomic practices that they employ is largely comparable with the organic worldview, however, they play an important role in developing the organic sector.

146

This constrains our ability to assess the opportunities and challenges facing the majority of farmers who are engaged in non-certified organic farming. This bias in available information towards externally-funded development projects also leads to an underestimation of locally-led indigenous experimentation and innovation, leading to the perception that organic agriculture is a Northern-led phenomenon and reducing the African sense of ownership over the project. Field visits Although relatively brief (lasting a half / whole day), field visits were found to be extremely instructive not least because they involved farm tours and direct observation and experience of the farming environment. The state of the vegetation was a good indicator of the productivity of the agroecosystem. Visiting the Mkuyuni division of the Morogoro region, I was immediately struck by the lush hillsides, abundance of species and apparent fertility of the land. Observing the activities of local people also yielded many insights into the farming systems. Waiting for the members of the focus group, I watched young men climbing large mango trees and lowering great crates of fresh fruits. The care that they took not to damage the mangoes demonstrated the high value of the fruits on the market. Taking a short walk I also noticed a young mother intercropping plantains with cocoyams and ochre. During a focus group on the same visit different participatory methods were used including a time-line, participatory mapping and SWOT analysis. These tools greatly aided interest and focus on the topic at hand, demonstrating the importance of visualisation and “handing over the pen”. The extended focus group gave a good rich picture of the area, and information was also exchanged in the form of printed materials. The key actors were very keen for more information about TanCert and also the fruit drying operations in Uganda. In addition, I was given a tour of the area and had the chance to visit the main market, a banana-ripening system and an impressive demonstration plot on a one hectare slope of primary school land. Interviews Critical reflection on the interviewing process yields a number of insights into how interviews can be more effectively approached in the future. It became apparent that in order to guide the conversation the interviewer needs to direct and maintain the flow of the interview, always keeping the next topic in mind. Time-keeping was also found to be important, and it was necessary to remain sensitive to the interviewee’s plans and not to exceed one and half hours. In spite of the interview guide, the interviews were generally unstructured and directed by the emerging conversation. There was often a focus on the areas of interest and expertise of the interviewee. The underlying thread combining all the interviews, however, was attention to organic agriculture and smallholder livelihoods. Interviews were especially useful in triangulating facts, and getting second opinions on projects. Often a great deal of information was retrieved by focusing on the subjects that excited and inspired the interviewee. Whilst it was often instructive to delve into the frustrations faced by the interviewees in their working lives and this proved to be particularly revealing about stakeholder relationships, it was equally

147

important not to dwell on negative aspects too much since this can lower morale and act as a disincentive to constructive action. I therefore made a conscious effort to discuss achievements and potentials in the organic sector with interviewees. Making the information-exchange two-way was also important. However, this also raises the question of whether it is problematic to state one’s own observations and opinions since there is a possibility that this will influence the answers of the interviewee and as scientists we are generally taught to stay neutral. On the other hand, in order to be truly empathetic listeners, responses are required. Not only does this type of active listening encourage more discussion around the issues and build rapport, but it also results in a more natural conversation than remaining completely neutral, simply nodding and noting down what is being said. It also seems only fair to share one’s own observations and opinions with the informant, since that is what they are being asked to provide. During the interviews I explored the effectiveness of not concealing any information, whilst also trying not to breach the confidentiality of other interviews. When divulging information about other partners including their status and activities, there was an effort to be sensitive and diplomatic, whilst at the same time acknowledging that I had information to share and had formed opinions based on experience. This approach proved quite successful since interviewees opened up considerably and showed an extraordinary level of frankness. This underscores the importance of engaging the whole self in the process of data collection, and in encouraging genuine participation. Case study research Living in a village in rural Africa is a sure way to alter the perspective of a Westerner, and although I have already spent time in such places, the CSR made a lasting impression on me. Even after a short period of just two weeks, I started to appreciate the magnitude of the challenges faced by the farmers. I was struck by the fact that despite being just 40 km from the largest city in Tanzania, the farmers in Mkuranga district have virtually no public services such as electricity and running water. When I enquired into the villagers’ understanding of organic agriculture during the first village meeting in Kerekese I was greeted first with total silence and then by one young man saying that it was not understood at all. It later emerged that the villagers were extremely disgruntled by the prices given for the organic cashews given in the previous season, and that they believed that I was an agent from the buying company. I derived many lessons from that meeting, which I applied in the next village meeting in Sotele, for example explaining in detail that I was not connected with any cashew buying company or development agency. In addition I made sure that there was a circular seating arrangement and that we had an extended round of introductions, and this made the atmosphere much more conducive to discussion. The level of participation was so great in fact that for a while I was concerned that the meeting would descend into complete chaos and I therefore resorted to using an empty water bottle as a “talking stick” so that people would take turns to talk and listen to one another, rather than talking over one another.

148

After realising that many farmers had already become disillusioned with organic agriculture, my objectives for the CSR expanded beyond the initial question of how organic agriculture could benefit smallholders, to getting a deeper understanding of life in the coastal region, becoming more informed about the realities of organic agriculture and joining hands with the local people to find sustainable livelihood strategies. In addition, living amongst rural peoples gave me a greater awareness of the nature of non-certified organic production as I came to realise that the villagers were living in an organic system of their own fashioning, informed by a deep knowledge of the land, the history, the seasons and daily struggles. Nevertheless, a lack of exposure through travelling or the media meant that there were many aspects of organic agriculture that were not known locally. Changes in agricultural systems are occurring rapidly as a result of the promotion of organic agriculture by external agents and the introduction of formal organic standards. However, the trainings and inputs provided by these agents do not appear to be stimulating self-reliance and may even be further entrenching the culture of receiving. Stakeholder forum The experience of organising the forum was both exhilarating and exhausting. The main constraint was being just one person to facilitate the process. At times it was frustrating to have to plan and think ahead to the next session, and not be able to fully concentrate on the content of the presentations, or group work at hand. Designating a time-keeper was very useful for keeping the programme on track and the whole process running smoothly. The decision to serve participants with organic refreshments and lunch increased the organisational pressures, particularly since it was complicated and time-consuming to procure the ingredients, but nevertheless it was greatly appreciated and was deemed important for demonstrating that it is possible to obtain locally-produced organic food. With hindsight there are several aspects of the forum that could have been improved. For example, it would have been better to allocate more time for the group work and also several of the presentations. With regards to logistics, misunderstandings would have been avoided by explicitly informing which costs would not be covered (e.g. transport fares, and breakfast) in addition to those which were included (e.g. lunch, refreshments and stationeries). It is quite common in Tanzania for the organiser of workshops to be approached with requests for refunds and allowances and it soon became apparent that in order to be fair and consistent, conditions need to be clearly defined beforehand, and the organiser should not be swayed by last-minute requests. Also I realised the importance of systematically introducing and thanking speakers. The “mood monitor” which was used to evaluate the forum showed that all the participants were satisfied, happy or very happy with the whole process. Words commonly used to describe the forum were “interactive”, “informative” and “participatory”. Several people mentioned that they were happy to build a relationship with SUA with regards to organic agriculture, and enjoyed sharing ideas and experiences and were impressed by the outputs including the vision and action plans. Strengthening the collaboration between farmers, researchers, the private sector and the government was arguably the most important outcome of the forum. Two criticisms were raised during the forum evaluation: one relating to covering the cost

149

of transport, breakfast and dinners and the other regarding the lack of time to develop the strategies. Action enquiry demands the exercise of freedom so that participants can relate personally, can creatively interpret exercises and can find their own way of understanding and using models and methods. However, owing to the tight schedule and the time needed for participants to establish their own relation to exercises, methods and tools, more emphasis was placed on employing the methods, rather than introducing and explaining them. If time had allowed, it would have been beneficial to explore the use of SSM, Visionary thinking and the World Café since this would have enabled the participants to help to develop their own agroecological and facilitation skills. Furthermore, sharing systemic methods and methodologies with co-enquirers is part of being as action-researching practitioner in order to help ‘the system to organise itself in ways which encourage the whole complex to “learn” or “research itself through” the issues which it faces’ (Bawden; in Zuber-Skerritt, 1991: 26). Validity / verification The third stage of the fieldwork process, verification of findings, proved to be very useful for going deeper into the key issues, unearthing other important factors and gaining alternative perspectives and viewpoints. Although none of the key informants from the CSR responded to the Preliminary Report on the CSR, follow-up interviews helped to improve the accuracy of the final report. In particular, discussing the findings with a key person in the cashew processing company balanced the accusations by the farmers of foul-play. It is likely that the report would have been enriched even more by presenting the findings to a focus group consisting of representatives from different stakeholder groups, although this would need very sensitive facilitation given the highly conflicting viewpoints. Sustainability Given the original aims of the research, the long-term outcomes of the research are of great import. Nevertheless the sustainability of the interventions is dependent on factors beyond my immediate control, such as the existence of facilitating agencies and the commitment of donors, heads of organisations and others to strengthening the organic sector through the allocation of appropriate resources. The issue of livelihood benefits has a temporal dimension, and deciding on the time frame adopted in the study is in some ways problematic. On the one hand, resource-poor farmers generally have an immediate needs perspective, whilst on the other hand the vision of organic agriculture is long-term sustainability. It is difficult to evaluate the extent to which the research has enabled problems to be solved through co-learning. According to Miles and Huberman (1994) the analytic tasks involved in action research include action-related constructs seen in a melioristic frame, such as performance indicators. However, not all the expected results have indicators that are measurable in the time span of the study. For example, the indicator for having a shared vision for organic agriculture in the country is that stakeholders demonstrate an active commitment to their roles in the organic sector and this could be realised months, or even years after the actual fieldwork period.