Orora_Wihaze_RFI_June_27_2018.pdf
PDF 301 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Orora Wihaze
- Solicitation number
- RFI-696-18-01
About this file
Orora Uhaze RFI
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| RFI_Orora_Wihaze_Cover_Letter.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
FEED THE FUTURE RWANDA ORORA WIHAZE ACTIVITY
1. Background
Rural poverty and malnutrition in Rwanda
While Rwanda’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth over the last five years has averaged 7% per year, a high rate of household poverty is a common feature of the country’s rural economic landscape. The results of surveys conducted by the World Food Programme in Rwanda indicate that while poverty rates dropped 5.8 percentage points between 2010-2011 and 2013-2014, the overall poverty rate (daily per capita expenditures of less than $1.09) remains at 39%.1 Most households in Rwanda are net buyers of food and nutrient-rich foods which tend to be expensive relative to foods lower in nutrient content such as staple food grains. As a result, poverty translates directly to reduced consumption of nutritious food. These effects can be particularly harmful, as it affects the nutritional status for the most vulnerable family members, especially women and children.
Women in reproductive age especially people living with disabilities (PLW) and children under two (CU2) are the most vulnerable to the effects of poor nutrition. Results from the 2014-2015 DHS indicate that 38% of children under five are stunted and only 18% of children 6-23 months met the minimum acceptable diet (MAD)2. Consumption of animal source foods (ASF) for children aged between 6 to 23 months is also extremely low [17% consume fleshy foods (meat, fish, poultry), 4.4% consume eggs, and 1.6 % consume milk or milk products].
ASF production and demand in Rwanda
The agricultural sector in Rwanda is the main source of livelihood for an estimated 73% of households. Increased productivity in the agricultural sector was the main driver of Rwanda’s impressive economic growth rate of 6.9% recorded in 2015. While the agricultural sector overall grew at a rate of 5% in 2015, growth in the livestock sector was estimated at 9%.3 Data from the National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda (NISR) indicate that over the five-year period of 2008- 2013, overall meat production expanded by 5.5% with beef representing 37% of the total meat produced.4
Despite increased production of ASFs, the expanding middle class, the growing tourism industry
1 World Food Programme (WFP). 2015. Comprehensive Food Security and Vulnerability Analysis (CFSVA) 2015.
WFP, Vulnerability and Mapping (VAM) Food Security unit in collaboration with the Rwanda Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINAGRI) and the National Institute of Statistics Rwanda (NISR), Kigali.
2 The “minimum acceptable diet” measures both the minimum feeding frequency and minimum dietary diversity, as appropriate for children of 6‐23 months� 3 World Bank. 2014. Promoting Agricultural Growth in Rwanda: Recent Performance, Challenges and Opportunities. Republic of Rwanda, Rwanda Agriculture Policy Note. Report No: ACS9719. Washington, DC.
4 National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda (NISR), National Statistics Yearbook, 2014 and high demand for ASF in export markets [mainly in Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)] have led to increased demand for ASF produced in Rwanda, creating shortages of ASF in the local market and triggering high prices. Prices also remain high because Rwanda’s production and marketing systems are very inefficient and supply is constrained as a result.
In the absence of significantly expanded productivity and availability, it’s doubtful that prices for ASF will come down to levels affordable by rural poor households. Unaffordability of ASF partly contributes to low consumption levels whereby meat consumption is at 40kg/person/year and milk consumption is at 8kg/person/year instead of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) - recommended level of 170kg/person/year and 30kg/person/year, respectively.
Challenges to increased consumption of ASF in Rwanda
Low prevalence of ASF in diets for the majority of the rural poor households is a result of different issues that cut across ASF value chains. The issues include:
1) High cost of ASFs and uninformed dietary norms
2) Scarcity of inputs, especially feeds
3) Low availability and technical capacity of public animal health, extension, and training services
4) Lack of producer’s organizations and low volumes of ASFs produced
5) Competition from lower-cost producers in neighboring countries
6) Lack of financing for smallholder farmers
7) Climate risk mitigation
Based on these challenges new approaches are needed to sustainably increase the availability of, access to, and consumption of ASF through Development of a profitable market.
2. Results Framework
Below is an illustrative results framework of what USAID/Rwanda proposes for the activity design that will sustainably increase the availability of, access to, and consumption of ASF through development of a profitable market.
Figure 1: Results Framework
3. Development Model
In order to increase availability of and access to ASFs, USAID/Rwanda envisions a transformative process whereby households in target geographic zones will be assisted to transition from no or limited livestock/ASF production to intensive market engagement (see figure 2). At all levels of this transition, households will be engaged in nutrition behavior change strategies to increase ASF demand.
Smallholder‐Led ASF Market Development Model
Orora Wihaze Strengthens Market Systems and Facilitate Private Sector Investment Orora Wihaze Innovation Fund assists research institutions to build credibility by testing new technology and innovative, appropriately scaled ASF production systems
Enabling policies for ASF market integrators – feed mills, processing plants, etc. – to contract smallholder suppliers and share market risk
Local governments perceive value of supporting ASF market‐strengthening public infrastructure – roads, water\sewer, electricity grids
LCSOs, RAB, Agro‐Vets with new knowledge and skills better able to provide client smallholders training, technical assistance, access to technology
CHWs, LCSOs, private firms with information and enhanced SBCC skills to build local demand by promoting ASF consumption
ROW cost shares on social marketing of new ASF products in rural markets, some generated by CHAIN partners
With Orora Wihaze support cooperatives and private businesses aggregate demand for inputs and services and live animal, milk, etc.
supplies for buyers
Orora Wihaze assists leaders in SACCOs and other MFIs providing credit (including for women) to understand ASF market opportunities
Contract growing with lead firms setting quality standards, providing some inputs and technical assistance and taking responsibility for transport, processing, distribution and retailing. Pre‐negotiated prices based on defined performance standards (e.g. kg feed\kg live bird)
Market‐linked,small‐scale ASF production systems
Organization of producers into cooperatives.
Use of more productive inputs including feeds and improved genetics.
Investments in upgraded facilities, water systems. Negotiation with traders and
Income generation and nutrition improvement focus in low input\low output systems Confidence‐building and asset accumulation through group savings and loan cooperatives. Development of ASF‐ based livelihoods through access to in‐ kind credit for breeding stock and feeds, training and TA. Production of ASFs for household use and local sale in village
In cr ea se d a va ila b ili ty o f A
SF
s at lo w er p ri ce s in lo ca l m ar ke ts
Fa m ili es in p ro m is in g m ar ke t ar e as , w ill in g to p ar tn er w it h
A
SF
m ar ke t e n tr e p re n e u rs
4. Results and Goals
Orora Wihaze will achieve the following results:
o Increase income for 125,000 households o Increase private sector investment in the ASF value chain o Increase the dietary diversity of 30,000 children of 6-23 months of age o Increase the dietary diversity of 41,000 pregnant and lactating women.
o Increase prevalence of children of 6-23 months of age who consume ASF by 40% from the current baseline o Increase prevalence of women of reproductive age who consume ASF by 40% from the current baseline
File details come from the government source that posted it.