Process and Partnership for
Pro-Poor Policy Change
SDP STAKEHOLDERS,
HISTORICAL TIME LINES &
THE CHANGES
Tuesday, 22nd February 2005
The SDP Case Study
1
INTRODUCTION
• SDP is an integrated R&D
development project - Started in
1997 (Oct ’96)
• Designed to have 2 phases (2 &
4 years respectively - to end in
July 2003 but has been
extended to March 2005
• DFID & GoK-funded
The SDP Case Study
2
• Collaboratively implemented by
MoLFD (lead), KARI & ILRI
• Works closely with dairy industry
stakeholders, key players &
partners
• Consumption to production – all
aspects of dairy systems
The SDP Case Study
3
Stakeholders grouping
• Dairy industry wide players –
smallholder dairy farmers and the
small traders
• Steering committee
• Collaborating institutions
• Chore staff and management
• Key players
• Partners
The SDP Case Study
4
PRE-PROJECT ACTIVITIES
• KARI & ILCA (ILRI) established a
programme based at KARI’s
Mtwapa RRC, from 1988 to 1994
• This was in response to the
government’s (MoLD) need to
improve smallholder dairy in the
coastal region (to meet milk
demand & improve incomes of
rural community at coast)
The SDP Case Study
5
• Program was to identify and
resolve biological, social and
economic constraints to the
development, adoption and
increase in productivity of the
smallholder dairying in the
coastal lowlands
• designed along a production-toconsumption system approach
The SDP Case Study
6
• Planned to be implemented in an
integrated research and development
approach - in close collaboration with
MoLD through NDDP (Dutch) and
with the participation of other
institutions (KETRI, etc.)
• This ensured research-extensionfarmer linkages - resulting in farmer
managed technology trials
The SDP Case Study
7
• On station proven technologies also
tested systematically with farmers
through:
– Farmer/extension staff visits to the
long-term on-station experiments;
– Research-extension managed
demonstration plots on selected
farms;
– Field days held on these farms and
those of early adopters; and
– Farmer-managed trials on some 300
farms in 4 districts of the coastal
lowlands.
The SDP Case Study
8
• Planning and review processes
established between researchers,
extension staff and farmers were
institutionalized into “cluster”
consultative meetings
• As a result the “cluster”
mechanism for strengthening
research-extension-farmer
linkages was naturally replicated
through KARI centres
The SDP Case Study
9
FROM COAST TO HIGHLANDS
• From lessons of integrated &
collaborative approaches to resolving
smallholder dairy farmers’ problems at
the coast, it was decided the experiences
could benefit other parts of the country
• This led to discussions (1993 - between
MoLD, KARI, ILCA and ODA ) to seek
further support and resources to extend
coastal experience and model of
research-extension-farmer collaboration
to the highlands
The SDP Case Study
10
• The discussions resulted in ODA
sponsoring a workshop (March 1995)
for stakeholders & key players in the
industry to plan and develop a
collaborative dairy project for
implementation by MoLD, KARI and
ILRI
• W/shop produced a draft logframe
showing where more support for the
smallholder dairy development was
required
The SDP Case Study
11
• Participants, identified the need for a
dairy system Research and
Development project to support
smallholders supplying, or with
potential to supply, the Nairobi milk
market
• A committee (MoLD, KARI and ILRI)
was formed to prepare a proposal for
DFID consideration.
• DFID had given approval for the
project (SDP) by December 1995 to
start in 1996 – started in August 1997
The SDP Case Study
12
• SDP designed on the lessons
from coast programme – mainly
that, for SDP to succeed there is
need for:– Active participation of all major
dairy industry stakeholders and key
players in the identification and
resolution of technical, socioeconomic and policy constraints
along the dairy production-toconsumption chain;
The SDP Case Study
13
–Effective linkages with MoLFD
and related ministries at policy
as well as operational level;
–Effective linkages with the
private sector for provision of
output and input services; and
–Effective means to implement
proposals by feeding directly
into design of pilot initiatives.
The SDP Case Study
14
As a result,
• SDP was designed to be managed
through SC - comprising of major
dairy industry stakeholders and key
players & chaired by MoLFD (DLP)
- at the apex, meets quarterly
• SC membership: KENFAP,
KNFC,KDPA, DRSK, KEBS, UoN,
MoH, MoCD&M, DVS and DPIS
section of MoLFD
The SDP Case Study
15
SDP Management structure
STEERING COMMITTEE
MoLFD – DLP/DVS/DPD,
KARI, ILRI, KEBS, DFID, MoH/PH
DRSK, KDPA, KENFAP, KNFC, UoN
SDP MANAGEMENT
MoLFD/KARI/ILRI
Manager
Ass. Manager
Advisor/FM
Dairy Systems
Appraisal
Policy and
Institutional Reforms
Validation and
Dissemination
The SDP Case Study
16
SDP RESPONDING TO
CHANGING P&I ENVIRONMENT
• SDP designed for 2 phases –
initially 4 & 6 yrs respectively but
finally 2 & 4 yrs
• Integrated R&D, Consumption to
production – all aspects of dairy
systems
• Original emphasis was on farm
technology and for the SH dairy
sector supplying Nairobi
The SDP Case Study
17
• SDP changes over time are
reflected in logframes’ goals
and purposes as summarized
in the following: -
The SDP Case Study
18
Goals for the 3 project phases
1. Improved access by dairy
farmers to efficient, demand
driven services, technologies,
advice and information
2. Contribution to sustainable
improvements in the livelihoods
of poor people in Kenya
The SDP Case Study
19
3. Improved access by poor dairy
farmers to goods, services and
output markets, and by other
farmers to agricultural
knowledge services
– * Super goal for phase 3 Contribution to sustainable
improvements in the
livelihoods of poor people in
Kenya
The SDP Case Study
20
Purpose - 3 project phases
1. Required actions for creation
of a supportive operational
environment for smallholders
supplying the Nairobi milk
market agreed
2. Improved access by
smallholder dairy farmers to
technologies, advice and
information
The SDP Case Study
21
3. Policies and institutions
support: a) dairying by the
poor and b) effective
agricultural knowledge
systems in support of the
poor
The SDP Case Study
22
• 1st change in 1999 - necessary
in order to closely reflect ideas
introduced during the project’s
• But major change was in
2000 on realisation that it
was difficulty to have an
impact in the prevailing P&I
environment
The SDP Case Study
23
CHANGES OF SC MEMBERSHIP
OVER IMPLEMENTATION PERIOD
• SC initial membership was – MoLFD,
KARI, ILRI and DFID & other dairy
industry stakeholders & key players
as ex-officio (when and as necessary
except in case of DFID)
• This arrangement was changed after
the 1st SC meeting to include more
SH
The SDP Case Study
24
• Expanded to include: DVS,
Commissioner of Co-op and
MD (KDB) as full members
and Chief, Public Health
(MoH), MD (KEBS),
Chairman, AP (UoN), DRSK,
KENFAP, KNFC & KDPA as
ex-officio
The SDP Case Study
25
• Also incorporated in the SC
were Chief of APD & HDBB
and the Heads of Extension
and the Planning Divisions
• Since then, there is no
difference of SC membership
The SDP Case Study
26
• Notable changes of SC have been
brought about by changes in the
participating institutions – MoLFD
(5 DLPs), KDPA (3 Chairmen),
KDB (3 MDs), KARI (2 reps.)
• There were also changes from the
other institutions but not as
impacting
The SDP Case Study
27
OTHER CHANGES
• MoLFD Ministers & PSs
• Change in Ministry structure –
DLP to SDDLP due to combining
2 depts.
• Change of other key actor such
as Technical Manager at KDB
• Change at top at KARI and ILRI
• Change at DFID – 3 Senior
advisors
The SDP Case Study
28
Gradual Change of Mind Set by
Key Players in the Dairy Industry
• Major challenge to the project
has been on how to deliver at the
purpose level – Policies and
institutions support: a) dairying by
the poor and b) effective
agricultural knowledge systems
in support of the poor
The SDP Case Study
29
• Two issues have attracted a lot of
attention:
– Recognition of the importance of the
informal (traditional) milk markets in
the dairy industry (employment,
moderation of prices, nutrition of the
poor); and
– The need for use of alternative
(lactoperoxidase – LP) system of
milk preservation where the cold
chain system is not feasible.
The SDP Case Study
30
• Initially, the two areas were almost
considered taboo by regulators
• SDP was seen to promote illegal
activities in its attempt to highlight
these issues
• Change has been observed in the
way the issues are now being
addressed – no longer outright
rejection or seen as taboo
The SDP Case Study
31
CHANGE IN SDP MANAGEMENT
• 3 Task Teams were formed to
assist management of technical
activities
• The 3 initial managers are all
gone (2001, 2002 & 2004
The SDP Case Study
32
MAJOR EVENTS AND ACTIVITIES
DURING THE PROJECT LIFE
• RA – impact on understanding of
the dairy industry
• Assessment of Public Health
Hazards of informal Milk Marketing
in Kenya
– Active debate on PH risks
– PH Committee set up at KDB (2001)
The SDP Case Study
33
• Focus on P&IR after
“Snapshot” O-P review
• Coming up with a new
strategy after recognition that
SDP could not deliver alone
(advocacy)
• Partnership with like minds
The SDP Case Study
34
• The new strategy was based
on:
– Multi-pronged approaches;
– Use of different media and
approaches;
– Strong and diverse partnerships;
and
– Flexibility to respond to
opportunities and developments.
The SDP Case Study
35
• Partnership and strategy
culminated in the very
successful Policy Forum of
May 2004 and an
accelerated change of
mind sets by some
The SDP Case Study
36
Acknowledgement:
The Success of SDP is due to financial support by the
Kenya Government, through MoLFD and KARI, and
the British Government, through DFID and the effort of
many MoLFD, KARI, ILRI staff and those of other
collaborating Institutions who have put up with the
demands of the project’s activities
The SDP Case Study
37