Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

Notes from Jan 25 meeting

DG: Akash Asthana (Unlicensed) Namita Singh (Unlicensed) Ashu Sikri (Unlicensed)

SEWA: Nithya and Salonie

A couple highlights relating this to recent DFN convos: 

  • Cultivating strong local leadership is critical ingredient for success of the collective

  • Marketing support also critical and something that is a real challenge bc there is a lot of diversity in what is grown and challenges in moving beyond extremely local markets 

  • Access to finance is important but didn't come across the biggest blocker; the type of capital that is required are funds for fund capex (eg, purchasing processing and other value addition equipment) not WC to smooth out the cash cycle

  • They seem keen to work together and have strong values alignment so would be great to have as a partner in co-creating DFN

Salonie and Nitya from Sewa Bharat which is the national level federation for SEWA and it aims to create a support system for cooperatives, bring in innovation, help women collectives setup producer companies. 

For reference, Sewa has 150 member orgs and 1.9mn women members. Its a trade union for informal workers that has been around for 50 years. Many of the SEWA collectives are focused on agricultural production. 

  • SEWA's vision of scale is a network of autonomous, smaller, locally sustainable enterprises not SEWA as some huge entity which I highlighted resonates strongly with our own orientation

Focus for the CIFAR project is how to support women's cooperatives; where are gaps and entryways where digital tech can play a supportive role in self-governance. Working closely with with two women's agricultural cooperatives 

  1. South gujarat, 1000 farmers (viable)

  2. Ahmedabad, reviving a 200 farmer cooperative that is currently defunct

Work on establishing women's cooperatives in other geographies as well: 

  • Partnership w Uttrakhand govt; supporting 40 cooperatives in one district, hundreds across the state. Trying to increase sense of ownership and enhance governance capacity, esp given challenges rooted in geography

  • In Bihar, work with 60k women across 5 districts. Primary trade is agriculture. Case study of Karnbhumi

 

Karnbhumi

  • Started as a project w Oxfam in 2014 to increase productivity in rice 

  • In 2017, incorporated FPO w 750 shareholders in 2 districts 

  • Initial focus on aggregating input purchases; this proved tricky bc there was a huge diversity in input requirements (given the geographical area was pretty large) so limited ability to aggregate demand. 

  • Have been working with DeHaat which has helped w accessing seeds; plan to work with them on marketing as well

  • Marketing / Offtake is a challenge, wide variety of output across farmer members makes it tough to aggregate and deciding which markets to go and actually reaching them is a challenge

  • Women members need to make a big conceptual leap to go from manager own land to thinking at the level of an FPO. 

  • Business knowledge is limited and women don't have context beyond their local markets

  • While the FPO shareholders are a mix of land owners and sharecroppers, board members all own some land and so not able to reach the the most disenfranchised  

 

We covered a couple key questions: 

  1. What makes a women's agriculture focused collective successful? 

  • Capacity building of local leadership is critical; usual focus is on increasing productivity but leadership / soft skills are really important 

  • Geographic concentration helps; when localized, can focus on a single crop and have local participation in governance 

  • Each leader is responsible for their local group and there is constant engagement between these members and local leaders

  • Establishing identity is really important and can be a step change from current state; do women see themselves as farmers and then entrepreneurs / collective members? 

2. Where does it make sense to federate / centralize vs. decentralize?

One thing I was trying to get at with this question is where does it make sense for data to stay at the Producer group / local level and where does it make sense to aggregate and pool together? 

Centralize: 

  • Capacity building and training

  • Research

  • Compliance 

  • Working capital / access to finance: bring in new assets or technologies (capital equipment like processing unit), cooperatives took a loan from federation and provided money to farmers who then purchased seeds

  • Some aspects of marketing, especially establishing linkages beyond local markets

  • HR and recruitment

  • Common tools (incl software) and templates: finance/compliance, order and purchase books

  • Some institutional level partnerships (eg, DeHaat)

Decentralize

  • Day to day management and governance 

  • Input and output marketing

  • Demand aggregation and generation

Next Steps

  • DG to send a note proposing followup sessions so we can collectively figure out who to include from each side and perhaps even bring in leaders from the farmer groups (which I think will be great).

    • Ashu to draft email and get feedback from DG internal team before sending  

  • Some threads that seemed intriguing: 

    • How can we increase decision making capacity by collecting and presenting relevant and timely information? Can use this as a chance to showcase KDE (which seemed of interest) and farmer scorecard / benchmarking and better understand the workflows and painpoints within SEWA's agricultural producer groups  

    • Video is powerful, how can it be used for capacity building of collective leaders and members? Again, DG can share some of its work in this space and I imagine there is a lot we can learn from SEWA. 

    • Sounds like SEWA is putting together a peer network / learning group and we should participate in that

...

Andrew Hicks (Unlicensed) scheduling an intro call with the team for Jan 17

...