1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Approach

Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)

Irrigation Projects in the Niger Inland Delta (IPRO-DI)

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH (GIZ) - Germany

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

01/07/2012

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Yes

2.1 Short description of the Approach

Setting up local rice storage facilities and a fund for temporarily buying in rice after the harvest.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

The objectives are to combat speculation and the impoverishment of beneficiaries.
The practice involves setting up local rice storage facilities and a fund for temporarily buying in rice after the harvest in order to (i) give growers access to ready cash, (ii) enable growers to benefit from price rises and (iii) prevent falls in the market price of rice. Growers buy back their rice stocks for the same price they sold it for and then resell it (during the period in which prices are high). Storage fees of 1,000 CFA francs per sack are charged in order to maintain and grow the fund (taking into account inflation).
A fund is made available to satellite initiatives of the project or development planners to cover the reverse repurchase of sacks of rice during harvest time at the market price. The sacks are marked by the owners and stored in PMN/IPRODI’s storage facilities. In the lean season (June to August) when rice prices are highest, growers can rebuy their sacks for the same price they were paid at harvest time plus 1,000 CFA francs per sack.
For example: In 2009, in the Attara area, sacks of rice that were reverse repurchased at 8,000 CFA francs per sack were sold in July at 15,000 CFA francs. The grower earned an extra 6,000 CFA francs, with 1,000 CFA francs being provided to the fund.
PMN/IPRODI makes funds available to the head of satellite initiatives/planners and carries out monitoring and follow-up. Planners/heads of satellite initiatives implement and monitor the practice. Growers are the clients in this process, providing rice and subsequently repurchasing it.
Implemented in Attara (Niafunké Circle), along the Bara Issa River and in the Kessou floodplain area (circles of Timbuktu and Goudam). Approximately 1,000 tonnes of rice are stored per year. The fund only works with targeted growers who have an obvious need for such assistance. There are four storage centres holding a total of eight storage facilities. The practice has been in place since 2000. Annual audits show that the funds are growing. The client base is regular and unchanging.

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Approach has been applied

2.6 Dates of initiation and termination of the Approach

2.7 Type of Approach

• project/ programme based

2.8 Main aims/ objectives of the Approach

Setting up local rice storage facilities and a fund for temporarily buying in rice after the harvest; combat speculation and the impoverishment of beneficiaries
The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: lack of local rice storage facilities; speculation; impoverishment

2.9 Conditions enabling or hindering implementation of the Technology/ Technologies applied under the Approach

3.1 Stakeholders involved in the Approach and their roles

3.2 Involvement of local land users/ local communities in the different phases of the Approach

	Involvement of local land users/ local communities	Specify who was involved and describe activities
initiation/ motivation	passive
planning	passive
implementation	interactive
monitoring/ evaluation	passive
Research	passive

3.4 Decision-making on the selection of SLM Technology/ Technologies

Specify who decided on the selection of the Technology/ Technologies to be implemented:

• mainly SLM specialists, following consultation with land users

Explain:

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by SLM specialists with consultation of land users

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

Specify who was trained:

• land users

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Yes

Specify whether advisory service is provided:

• at permanent centres

Describe/ comments:

Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?

• yes, moderately

Specify the level(s) at which institutions have been strengthened or established:

• local

Specify type of support:

• financial
• capacity building/ training
• equipment

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Yes

Comments:

economic / production aspects were regular monitored by project staff through measurements
There were no changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation
There were no changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Yes

Specify topics:

• economics / marketing
• technology

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

Comments (e.g. main sources of funding/ major donors):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: international: 100.0%

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

Did land users receive financial/ material support for implementing the Technology/ Technologies?

Yes

If yes, specify type(s) of support, conditions, and provider(s):

A fund is made available to satellite initiatives of the project or development planners to cover the reverse repurchase of sacks of rice during harvest time at the market price.

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

• infrastructure

6.1 Impacts of the Approach

6.2 Main motivation of land users to implement SLM

6.3 Sustainability of Approach activities

Can the land users sustain what has been implemented through the Approach (without external support)?

• yes

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
combat speculation and the impoverishment of beneficiaries: setting up local rice storage facilities and a fund for temporarily buying in rice after the harvest in order to (i) give growers access to ready cash, (ii) enable growers to benefit from price rises and (iii) prevent falls in the market price of rice
provides protection for growers with low incomes (1,000 to 1,500 people)
prevents growers from falling into debt
enables a fund to be built up over time (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Success factors and constraints: Availability of the rice fund; simple procedures; sufficient storage capacity available; credible management that growers can trust)

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Manual of Good Practices in Small Scale Irrigation in the Sahel. Experiences from Mali. Published by GIZ in 2014.

Available from where? Costs?

http://star-www.giz.de/starweb/giz/pub/servlet.starweb

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Description of the trust fund approach