Final_RFI_Aquaculture_01242018.pdf

Issuance Date: January 24, 2018

Response Due Date and Time: February 15, 2018 at 8:00 a.m. Burma Local Time.

Subject: Request for Information Feedback on USAID/Burma’s Aquaculture Activity

The U.S. Agency for International Development's Mission to Burma (USAID/Burma) is in the process of finalizing the design of a new activity to facilitate smallholder engagement in the aquaculture sector. Subject to availability of funds, it is anticipated that this activity will be implemented over a period of five years.

To that end, USAID requests comments and information about interests, capabilities, and market information related to the attached document contained in this file and the set of specific questions included therein, to inform the design of a future mechanism.

This Request for Information (RFI) is issued solely for planning purposes and is published in accordance with FAR Part 10 and FAR 15.201(e). This RFI is open for comments from any interested US and Non-US Organizations.

This is not a solicitation or a call for proposals. Any proposals submitted in response to this request will not be considered.

Please do not submit applications, proposals, resumes or promotional materials, as they will be discarded. The submission shall be written in English with each page numbered consecutively.

Responses to this RFI should be submitted to USAID via email to BurmaOAA@usaid.gov with subject line “RFI

- USAID/Burma’s Aquaculture Activity”, no later than the date and time stated above. Only electronic submissions will be accepted.

All information provided will become the property of USAID and will not be returned. USAID reserves the right to use information provided by respondents for its purposes. Proprietary information must not be sent. The issuance of this request will not restrict the Government's ultimate approach, if any. Respondents are advised that USAID is under no obligation to acknowledge receipt of the information, answer questions or provide feedback to respondents with respect to any information submitted. Any information submitted in response to this notice is voluntary. Not responding to this request does not preclude participation in any future solicitation, if any is issued.

Thank you for your assistance and interest in USAID/Burma programming.

Sincerely, /s/ R. Brian Aaron Contracting Officer USAID/Burma

(RFI_Aquaculture_Activity)

USAID/Burma’s Aquaculture Activity Background Information and Questions

Background:

Undergoing profound and rapid change, Burma is now in the early stages of a historic transition: Military rule has given way to a more open society and a democratic leaning government; the previously closed economic system is being replaced with an open market economy; and, the once isolated country is now actively engaged in regional and global affairs. Burma’s challenge is to stimulate broad-based, sustained economic growth throughout the country focusing on policy reforms and investments in sectors that will have the greatest positive impact as quickly as possible. This growth will build momentum towards broad political support for further democratic reforms, ideally releasing a virtuous cycle critical for sustaining the peace process.

The dynamics of a modernizing food market in Burma present opportunities for near-term, potentially quick impact agricultural sector growth and development. As incomes and urbanization increase, so will domestic consumer demand for diversified diets. Experience in neighboring countries shows that producers and processors will, if the investment environment allows, respond to changing consumer demands and new market opportunities.

The aquaculture sector in Burma presents an opportunity for inclusive economic growth; one where both domestic and export demands are growing. Recent surveys12 of smallholder farmers engaged in aquaculture identified both tremendous growth potential, as well as several constraints. Strengthening Burma’s aquaculture system through facilitative development assistance3 has the potential to significantly contribute to the objectives of the U.S.

Government's Global Food Security Strategy: 1) Inclusive and sustainable agriculture-led economic growth; 2) Strengthened resilience among people and systems; and, 3) a well-nourished population, especially among women and children. Aquaculture opportunities vary by region due to Burma’s varied agro-ecological environments, ambiguous national and regional laws and regulations, and socio-political realities. USAID/Burma is particularly interested in the unique opportunities for aquaculture development in the Ayeyarwady and Yangon Regions, and Rakhine State.

Illustrative Objective of an Aquaculture Activity

USAID/Burma acknowledges there are many other development activities working throughout the aquaculture sector; hence, responses to the questions below should consider how a new activity can best coordinate with other donors in the sector.

USAID/Burma is requesting information on a potential new activity that will be implemented over a period of five years with the following Objective and Sub-Objectives. Respondents are asked to provide input on some or all of the questions under the following sub-objectives.

Objective: Inclusive aquaculture system strengthened

Sub-Objective 1: Smallholder farmers engaged in resilient production practices

Belton, B., Hein, A., Htoo, K., Kham, L.S., Nischan, U., Reardon, T., Boughton, D. 2015. Aquaculture in Transition: Value Chain Transformation, Fish and

Food Security in Myanmar. International Development Working Paper 139. Michigan State University.

Ben Belton, Ben, Mateusz Filipski and Chaoran Hu. 2017. Aquaculture In Myanmar: Fish Farm Technology, Production Economics And Management. Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security Policy Research Paper 52. Michigan State University.

Facilitative Development Assistance works to make changes in incentives and behaviors within value chains and market systems leading to strengthened relationships between market actors, ultimately leading to improved market efficiencies.

(RFI_Aquaculture_Activity)

Sub-Objective 2: Enhanced linkages between market actors in the aquaculture sector Sub-Objective 3: Increased capacity of public and private stakeholders to advocate for improved policy and regulation

Sub-Objective 1: Smallholder farmers engaged in resilient production practices

Illustrative Results:

● Smallholder farmers have access to and utilize productive inputs and information necessary to engage in commercial aquaculture production.

● Smallholders adopt natural resource management practices to ensure sustainable production.

● Smallholders adapt production practices in response to changing environmental conditions.

Questions

1. What approaches should USAID consider to achieve this sub-objective?

2. What are the key leverage points in the aquaculture value chain where USAID can intervene to support smallholder aquaculture production?

3. What nutrition sensitive interventions have worked to improve WASH practices and increase the consumption of fish/seafood products by both producers and consumers?

4. What food safety issues need to be addressed during production within smallholder-based aquaculture supply chains?

5. What opportunities are there to make smallholder aquaculture production more resilient?

Sub-Objective 2: Enhanced linkages between market actors in the aquaculture sector

Illustrative Results:

● Processors source their raw materials from smallholder supply bases through durable and transparent interactions

● Fish/seafood producer and industry associations implement growth oriented visions

● Support services are available to producers that facilitate upgrading

● Market actors have access to appropriate financing

● Input providers deliver quality goods and services

● Increased consumption of smallholder produced fish/seafood

● Increased economic opportunities for women throughout the aquaculture sector

● Research and extension services support aquaculture sector development

● MOALI departments coordinate with the private sector and support industry upgrading (research, nurseries, feed industry, etc.)

● Appropriate regional/state government departments engage and support aquaculture extension and research

Questions

1. What approaches should USAID consider to achieve this sub-objective?

2. What are the most binding constraints to growth and communication between buyers, seller; markets; and intermediate actors (transportation, regulations, packaging, other inputs)?

3. What approaches have been successful in facilitating a linkage between processing firms/buyers and smallholders?

4. How should USAID consider facilitating durable and transparent interactions between market actors?

5. What is the most appropriate method for supplying extension services? DOF, private, other?

6. How can USAID facilitate the sustainable flow of information between DOF research institutions and private sector actors?

Sub-Objective 3: Increased capacity of public and private stakeholders to advocate for improved policy and regulation.

Illustrative Results:

● MOALI supports and advocates for policies that support smallholder based aquaculture.

● Appropriate regional/state government departments engage and support in aquaculture sector development

● Industry associations and producer groups formulate and advocate for growth enabling policies and regulations

Questions

1. What approaches should USAID consider to achieve this sub-objective?

2. What approach should be used to build government support for aquaculture at both the Union and the

Regional levels?

3. What policy/law/regulation constraints exist that limit aquaculture sector development?

4. What are the institutional capacities of industry associations and producer groups to engage in policy dialogue?

Specific considerations for working in Rakhine State that apply to all sub-objectives:

1. What are the unique opportunities and constraints to aquaculture sector growth in Rakhine State?

2. What approach to developing the aquaculture sector in Rakhine will result in the broadest economic engagement among rural stakeholders?

3. What are the risks associated with engaging smallholder farmers in Rakhine State in terms of local conflict dynamics?

- End of Request for Information -