ICT for livelihoods

Reflection and some links to ICCO’s views and other experiences.

By Rob Witte

The last few days I attended an international knowledge exchange workshop organised by GINKS and IICD. IICD calls these events “Cross Country Learning Events”, CCLE. The theme of the workshop was “ICT for livelihoods”, especially of agricultural producers. Participants came from Africa and Latin America (see IICD’s blog for the reflections of the facilitator and some participants’ impressions). In the workshop I presented some of the lessons learned of ICCO’s Fair Economic Development programme and a short overview of ICCO’s role in the Connect for Change Alliance. You can find this presentation here.

In the margins of the workshop I discussed several issues with participants and organisers, and I will use this blog to share a few with the general public.

- Gender concerns

- Rural entrepreneurship

- Multi-stakeholder cooperation

Gender: Similar to what ICCO has experienced in its Fair Economic Development programme in the last few years, my observation was that gender balance is still an unresolved issue in the ICT for Livelihoods programme. A few questions and remarks in the workshop and its fringes show that there are several barriers for an equal participation of women:

- More than a few times they cannot attend capacity building workshops that require overnight stay.

- Some women avoid the use of novel technologies, assuming that they cannot comprehend them

- Unwillingly some choices of activities creates a male bias, such as market-information that focuses on typical “male crops”

- In mixed groups women’s issues or even women’s competencies or leadership skills may go unnoticed because of “dominant” male behaviour.

In the weeks preceeding this workshop I have studied a few documents on ICT and gender, and the one I especially like is Researching ICT-Based Enterprise for Women in Developing Countries: A Gender Perspective, as it puts the IT and gender issues in the context of “ overall” gender equality barriers. I really recommend reading this document while we continue preparing for the Connect for Change programme.

Rural Entrepreneurship: One of the participants asked me to explain what ICCO had in mind when referring to “rural entrepreneurship” and whether we had any documents to clarify this concept. I answered that it is related to the role of rural producers in our value chain approach. On this approach we are discussing emerging issues in a special ValueChainDevelopment wiki (please send me an e-mail if you experience problems in accessing this wiki…). Rural entrepreneurs can be individual producers, producer organisations or cooperatives with an entrepreneurial and market oriented outlook, but also traders, transporters and other service providers (including ICT services…). The kind of issues involved in capacities of producer organisations are very well summarized in a new approach to the appraisal of POs, as highlighted in this web-link of newforesight

Multi Stakeholder Cooperation: As I already stated in my presentation of ICCO on day one of the workshop, we are convinced that poverty reduction is a complex issue that often needs cooperation between various (types of) stakeholders, such as grassroots organisations, NGOs, (responsible elements within) the business sector and government instiututions at various levels. This approach compares well with IICDs “national roundtable” approach, and I would be interested to share experiences on the issues that partners encounter in such national cooperation processes. For an overview of what ICCO sees as Issues in Multi-Stakeholder Cooperation arrangements, please have a look at the latest briefing paper of February 2009:

Investing in Africa.

Short report on KIT seminar on participations on 10 November 2010.
By André Vording
The seminar was held as part of the 100th anniversary of the Royal Tropical Institute in Amsterdam. There were three key not speakers, Prof Dr Ewald Engelen from Univ of Amsterdam, Drs Nanno Kleiterp from FMO and Mr Ezra Musoke from InReturn in Tanzania.
Prof Engelen argued that the way institutional investors are now doing business they will never shift to investing in to Africa. This is not because of lack of growth perspective in Africa, in the coming decades expected growth will range between 5 and 20% per annum as compared to anticipated growth in Europe and the US of less than 3% per annum. No, it because investors look for four key issues: transparency (can you easily see with one press on the button how your investment is performing), liquidity of investment (can you sell it easily), risk versus return (rendement) ( compared to what is acceptable).
The transparency is a constraint for investments in Africa, liquidity as well unless more investors get interested. Risk and return are perceived to be higher in Africa, though in reality investments over the past few years performed better than the stock in Europe and US. However, because of endless financial product development one can sell/buy investments in Europe and US which have a high leverage on the real returns (remember the ICT bubble and others).
Current investments worldwide are 50,000 billion USD, only some 20 billion is invested in Africa.
According to Mr Kleiterp FMO invests some 5 billion, of which 1,5 billion in Africa. According to the Director a mindshift is needed in development cooperation, as markets should be more in the lead rather than political objectives.
Mr Musoke from InReturn based in Tanzania discussed the challenges of SMEs in Africa, of which access to funding is one of the main ones: 150-200% collateral is needed in (unmovable) assets such as land or buildings.
Debaters were Nanno Kleiterp (FMO), Bert Koenders (PvdA), Eric Smaling (senator SP), J Seohan Pieter van Tuyll van Serooskerken (E+Co), Marise Blom (Mango Capital), Sietze Montijn (Heineken), Fred Zaal (KIT), Anna Pot (AGP), Ewald Engelen (UvA), Martin De La Beij (BuZa DDE), Jeroen Blum (Shell Foundation). Each statement was defended by one and attacked by another, public was after a discussion of 7 minutes given the opportunity to vote. Several different statements were discussed ranging from the lack of impact of social investements on economic growth (yes/no) to the Chinese approach as model for development (most did not agree).
Other issues which came up during the discussions: the pension funds manage 600 billion euro, so far little is invested in Africa. They would like to increase but they need large scale investment opportunities.
Examples of investment funds were given Mango Capital , E+co, others.
It was agreed that Africa is implicitly perceived as one entity, while in practice differences between countries and regions are huge. Also Africa suffers from a negative image partly caused by charity fund raising.
Though some stressed the need for economic development as base for development, other such as the Director of DDE Martin de la Beij as well as former minister of Development Cooperation Bert Koenders stressed a wider approach which also pays attention to education, health and human rights.
All in all an interesting content , well organized, lively debates which were well facilitated, also nice network event.

Fair Phone: Work in progress

18-10-2010 Author: Marianne Wilson Source: OneWorld

Original blog in Dutch: http://www.oneworld.nl/Nieuws/Actueel/article/27197/Eerlijke_telefoon_Werk_in_uitvoering
(Google Translator)
Blackberrys, iPhones and Androids: The consumer has plenty of choices in mobile phones. But who is an 'honest' variety hoping to find it, a long search. Fair wants to change phone. That job is not from one day to another cleared.

"Phone manufacturers say it is so difficult to make promises about a fair chain because they can not guarantee the provenance of raw materials," says Nathalie Ankersmit, spokesman Niza, one of the initiators of fair phone. "We want this campaign to make clear that it is indeed inevitable."


Raw materials such as cobalt and copper miners in countries like Congo - often children, and for a pittance in appalling conditions in the foreground. Then they end up using middlemen for large mining dealers who pocket large sums of money. Trade in raw materials for mobile phones is also often associated with rebel groups who finance their weapons. Hence, mobile phones are also called blood.


Idealistic techies
Through cooperatives of small miners in Congo copper and cobalt fair fair phone shop, two items used in the production of mobile phones. The campaign also asks people to think about the design and the campaign of a fair phone. Waag Society, a media lab that develops creative technology and one of the initiators of fair phone, go in search of idealistic techies who FabLabs tinker with a new device.

In addition, through the site and people with a creative gift for festivals and an adventurous spirit who wanted to think about the campaign. Adventurers can win a trip to Congo. That's not a relaxing vacation. Ankersmit: "The winner will visit my other initiatives that claim to responsible production. That he or she should help evaluate."

Work in progress
Ankersmit must acknowledge that a fair phone phone for fair work in progress. Copper and cobalt are indeed beneficial, but two of the 24 commodities that are processed in mobile phones and then there are the working conditions in Asian factories which do an upgrade phone use. "In any case, a beginning, which we want to stimulate phone manufacturers."

If ultimately a fair phone prototype of a phone is fair, so they want the farmer to phone manufacturers. "Only Samsung has so far said they do about whether to remain in dialogue with us."

IDE-I on BBC

IDE-I an ICCO partner using an inclusive business approach to promoting drip irrigation systems, was broadcast on BBC this week:

A few minutes ago we said "till soon" to Bart de Steenhuijsen Piters of the Royal Tropical Institute (KIT) from Amsterdam. Bart presented a short book on farmers as shareholders, presenting recent experiences of organic and fair trade producers that became shareholders in companies involved in the sale of their produce. Not as a cooperative, which Bart defined as a "Civil Society Organisation", but in a new or existing corporation / business. In the end, he concluded that two models of funding such ownership were the most appropriate:
1) A trust fund, where an external donor puts up the capital for the farmers' shares
2) A premium based model, where a little share of the value of the consumer-end-product is returned via a separate mechanism to the group/organisation holding the shares.

The main issues to be resolved through share-holder farmers are influence over and transparency of the chain, as a shareholder gets information. For this purpose a relatively small share will do, and will be relatively cheap.
However, often a much bigger share is bought by donor agencies, where they also want to be represemted on the board of the company. Exerting influence on this level requires good knowledge and business insights, which donors or farmer umbrella organisations often don't have.

ICCO staff contributed to the discussion with examples from Peru, Paraguay and Mali.

The presentation can be downloaded here (soon!)

The book is still available at the Royal Tropical Institute, in print, or electronically. Please click!

KIT is presently working on a comparable publication on Producer Organisations.

Organic Business Guide launched!

Over the past 9 months we worked on the ambitious project of elaborating an Organic Business Guide. It is a joint project of Helvetas, Agro Eco Louis Bolk Institute, ICCO and IFOAM, with support from ICCO, SECO, UNEP and SIDA. Numerous people from other organisations also contributed in some way or the other to the book.

We are now happy to present you the result of this work. Print copies will be launched during Biofach at the following occasions, to which you are most welcome:
Tue 16.2.: IFOAM Trade Symposium
Thu 18.2.: Organic Night, receptions at the IFOAM stall (18.00h) and African Pavillion (20.00h)
Fri 19.2.: Organic Africa Symposium (11.00h)

Thereafter, print copies can be ordered from http://shop.ifoam.org/bookstore. The pdf version will also be available for free download from there. We will send you the agreed free copies after Biofach. In case you are at Biofach, please let me know, so that we can hand over the copies there. If we miss each other at Biofach, please pick up your copies from the IFOAM booth.

Maybe when reading the document you find that some aspects could be elaborated further, or additional examples or tools come to your mind that you think should be included? No problem! We also set up an interactive wikibook-version at http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Organic_Business_Guide. You can edit the book there and thus further develop it.

The French edition is in preparation and should be ready by mid March.

Now we need your support in making the book widely known among the target groups. You could for example:
Mention the book at your website, with a link to the IFOAM bookstore and to the wikibook
Inform your network about the book by e-mail or include it in your newsletters
Mention the book in presentations (e.g. using the attached slide)
Distribute copies of the book among the target groups (let us know in case you require additional copies, against shipping costs)

We want to use this occasion to wholeheartedly thank all of you who contributed to this project. A special thanks to ICCO, SECO, UNEP and SIDA for their generous support.
And of course we are looking forward to receiving your feedback!

Best regards,

Frank Eyhorn
Helvetas Organic & Fairtrade Competence Centre

and

Bo van Elzakker
Agro Eco Louis Bolk Institute

Eline received the report of the conference last October 29, see blogpost of Decmeber 18.
Here you find the report