Benefits, justifications and risks
Project beneficiaries and project benefits
General. It is expected that
between 15 000 and 20 000 poor smallholder farmers will participate
in the project coffee diversification component, including a significant
number of women head of households. The tea programme will concern
about 9 600 HHs. In the Nshili District, the number of smallholder
beneficiary HHs would be about 4 800, at least one third of which
should be women head of household. In Mushubi similar numbers will
be targeted. In total, the project support to the traditional export
crop sub-sector would benefit some 125-150 thousand people.
Coffee. The survey of smallholder coffee farmers’
opinion conducted by the project formulation mission record and
among the poor growers’ issues: (i) the need for stable and
better prices, (ii) delays in payment by traders, (iii) lack of
resources to rehabilitate their coffee bushes, (iv) absence of equipment
to de-pulp the cherries, (vi) the painstaking dirty and time consuming
work to de-pulp manually, and (vii) the non-availability of inputs,
tools, and spraying equipment.
The benefits of the project for the farmers willing
to accept the project partnership conditions would vary over time.
Over the years during which the primary societies purchase their
ownership of the industrial facilities through the dividends paid
by the processing companies, the major benefits would be:
- free planting material and initial inputs
for rehabilitation and expansion of their coffee plots;
- a stable price higher than what they could
get otherwise;
- no delay in payments;
- the purchase of the fresh cherry they
produce, rather than the parche; and
- access to credit through advance payments
guaranteed by the delivery of coffee crops for processing.
When the cooperatives are fully in control of the processing companies,
the smallholder participants will be in a position to further raise
the fresh crop price.
The price for the farmers to obtain such benefits
is based on the rigorous application of the technical requirements
for producing the quality of fresh cherries that the processing
companies will accept to market the final products at a profit,
having paid growers the prices announced for the quality of cherries
that they must deliver.
The average growers price assumed for the financial
projections of the processing and marketing companies is USD 0.11/kg
(FRW 50 at the May 2002 rate of exchange) for the fresh cherries,
equivalent to Frw 250 per kg of café parche. This
is higher than the price actually paid currently by local traders,
which is less than Frw 200/kg of parche. A stable price
of USD 0.11/kg and a ready outlet for the fresh cherries, is a very
good incentive for the growers. The impact on the HH budget would
vary with location and size of the coffee plot relative to the rest
of the farm holdings.
By way of example, the income model of a “poor”
coffee grower HH in Kibuye (see table 4 of Chapter VI), shows a
total net HH income of USD 348, of which no more than USD 20-30
from coffee, and a gap to the threshold of poverty of USD 77. As
a result of the project, that HH can improve and marginally increase
its coffee plot from 150 to 250 plants (0.11 ha), and obtain a net
income form coffee of USD 80-90, through better prices, increased
production, and some higher yields. The increase in net cash income
of USD 50-60 per annum on account of coffee, will represent a significant
improvement, getting the HH near to, although not quite over, the
threshold of poverty. Coffee benefits would be larger when the cooperatives,
finally in control of the factories, are in a position to increase
the price of the fresh cherries. The financial projection a typical
CPMCC shows that such increase can be of the order of 30%.
These results can be obtained with a marginal increase
in the cropping intensity of seasonal crops, such as to keep the
total farm production of calories per HH member at the pre-project
level, which cover the minimum requirement for food security. The
farm model analysis also shows that the returns to the day of family
labour applied to coffee would be in the range of the other most
remunerative crop (banana), and almost three times the current daily
wage for casual work. The following table summarises the with-and-without
project situation of a HH improving the coffee plot to 250 plants
under the project. Details of the farm models are given in Working
Paper 4.
A similar model is presented in Working Paper 4 for a woman headed
HH with 0.6 ha of land and 100 plants on 0.05 ha coffee plot. This
HH could increase the number of plants on the coffee plot to 150,
without jeopardising food crop production. The net income from coffee
would be half of the previous case, and the overall nutritional
value of the farm produce per HH member, would also be about half.
The coffee income could in principle supply 20-25% of the food deficit
of the HHs. In this case also the model shows that this very poor
and incomplete HH has no shortage of labour to handle food and cash
crop production from the limited amount of land they control.
Table 19: Expected benefits to smallholder
coffee planter HH
| HH of 5 people, 2.5 labor units, 1.1 ha farm |
Without project |
With project |
Difference |
| |
|
|
|
| Coffee
plot, surface (ha) |
0.08 |
0.12 |
+0.04 |
| Number
of plants |
150 |
250 |
+100 |
| Cropping
intensity, seasonal crops |
113 |
122 |
+8% |
| Net
coffee income |
27 |
80-90 |
50-60 |
| Total
HH income, USD |
345 |
410 |
65 |
| Kcal/person
produced at the farm |
2,045 |
2,045-2,315 |
0-260 |
| Remuneration
of family labour day (Frw): |
|
|
|
| -
Coffee growing |
200 |
795-880 |
595-680 |
| -
Best other crop (banana) |
866 |
866 |
- |
| Wage
of casual labor (Frw/day) |
250 |
250 |
- |
| Gap
to threshold of poverty (USD 425) |
-80 |
-10 |
|
A coffee grower participating in the project would
also benefit from the guaranteed credit scheme. In the case of the
HH shown in the table above, the HH would be in a position to borrow
each year up to USD 30 against its coffee delivery, which would
permit them to buy some fertilisers on credit not only for coffee,
but also for food crops, and so increase the ceiling intake produced
of the farm, or to provide for other urgent necessities, or to purchase
a goat, for example, at a price of USD 20.
Tea. The current situation of
a poor HH selling labour to the OCIR plantation at Nshili is compared
in the following table to the “with project” situation
estimated in Table 5 of Chapter VI. The green leaf price assumed
is Frw 45/kg, which is slightly higher than currently paid (Frw
43/kg). As a result of the project, the income of the beneficiaries
of the plantation distribution is expected to increase from well
below to just above the threshold of poverty. However, when the
primary societies are in a position to acquire the full control
of the factory, the price of the green leave can double, increasing
the net income of the HHs by about USD 130, bringing the total income
well above the threshold of poverty. At Frw 45/kg of green leaves,
the remuneration of a day of work by the HH members in tea growing
(Frw 900) will be well above the current daily wage for casual labour,
and lower only to that of growing peas. However, when the price
of the green leave doubles, tea growing will be by far the most
remunerative crop for the farmers.
Table 20: Expected benefits of Nshili project
on a poor HH beneficiary of the distribution of the OCIR-Thé
plantation
| Type
of HH: complete family with 5 members,
2.5
labour units |
HHs selling labour to the Nshili plantation
(before project) |
After plantation distribution
(with project) |
Differentials |
| |
|
|
|
| Modal
land holdings |
0.9 ha |
1.15 |
0.25 ha |
| Sources
of income (USD equivalent) |
|
|
|
| Net
farm income |
233 |
381 |
233 |
| of which, tea |
0 |
134 |
148 |
| Other
income |
120 |
50 |
-70 |
| of which, cash income |
90 |
20 |
-70 |
| |
|
|
|
| Total
income |
353 |
431 |
78 |
| Total
cash income |
90 |
154 |
64 |
| |
|
|
|
| Nutritional
value of the food-crops produced on the farm (Kcal/person/day) |
1,711 |
3,296 |
1,585 |
| Remuneration
of family labour day (Frw): |
|
|
|
| -
Tea growing |
- |
900 |
n.s. |
| -
Best other crop (peas) |
|
1,069 |
- |
| Gap
to threshold of poverty (USD 425) |
-72 |
6 |
66 |
The figure presented in Table 20 assume that, after
organising their tea plot the beneficiaries of the distribution
use their cash income to purchase fertilisers also for their food
production, which exploring the very large increase in the motion
value of their farm production.
Availability of family labour for tea
and coffee growing. The mission has investigated the question
of whether poor smallholders in the project area have sufficient
labour to handle a new approach to coffee and tea growing. The farm
models presented in Working Paper 4 are based on a poor HH farming
1.1 ha with 0.1 ha coffee plot. This HH would have a labour force
equivalent to 2.5 adult persons per day available during peak demand
for agricultural work on the family farm, that is, net of the labour
required to perform mandatory HH maintenance tasks that cannot be
postponed during such periods of the year. Such labour force is
well in excess of what is required to handle all the cropping tasks
during the two growing seasons, which is estimated at a total of
no more than 250 work days per annum, with a peak of 64 work days
per month during the month of May. A coffee grower with 250 bushes
does not need to apply more than 50 workdays to this crop, out of
the total of 250 days. The most labour intensive activities (mulching
and harvesting) are actually spread over a harvest season of 2-4
months. Coffee cherries do not all mature at the same time, so that
only a small input of family labour is required on a weekly basis
to harvest 250 plants over several weeks. Similar considerations
apply to a very poor HHs with only 1.5 labour units in the family
that would handle half the farm holding size, and a coffee plot
with between 50 and 150 plants. A tea planter with 1.1 ha of land,
and 0.25 ha of tea, has a heavier workload a little more than 300
days, but more evenly spread throughout the year. Picking is done
twice a month, but is not done at the same time across a plot of
0.25 ha. Normally, the plot is split into three or four sections,
so that harvesting takes one person 3 to 4 working days twice a
month. Some time is required for pruning, however, there is no need
for mulching, and little weeding is required once a good tea bush
canopy is established to protect the soil.
|