Research on actors providing funding to FPOs for collective assets

Table of Content:

Who is funding FPOs for purchase of collective assets?

Non-banking financial institutions

Non-banking multi-service institutions that provide financial services

Government lenders & Agribanks

Social Investing, crowdfunding & crowd-lending

Development agencies, foundations, & donors


Case Study: USAID Naatal Mbay project in Senegal


Collective assets definitions

FAO case study on SEWA notes that they are support women organizations access productive assets and self-manage their organizations (committees, groups, cooperatives). SEWA facilitates capital formation through asset ownership and access to financial services (savings, insurance, credit). Social and productive assets (seeds, fertilizer, land, finance, equipment) reduce vulnerability to shocks (resilience). (Refer to notes from call with SEWA SEWA (CIFAR project) )

Tamil Nadu case study organic farming by the Centre for Indian Knowledge Systems defines assets are:

Social assets = relationships with community, gov’t, etc.

Financial assets = savings, banking, loans, etc.

Physical assets = Equipment

Human assets = KSAs on health, ag info, leadership, etc.

Natural assets = water, land, biodiversity, etc.

IFPRO study on Gender, Assets, and Agricultural Development Programs defines assets are listed below and also benefits of productive assets for women:

Access to, control over, and ownership of assets are critical components of wellbeing (Sherraden 1991; Carter and Barrett 2006). Productive assets can generate products or services that can be consumed or sold to generate income. Assets are also stores of wealth that can increase (or decrease) in value. Assets can act as collateral and facilitate access to credit and financial services as well as increase social status. Flexibility of assets to serve multiple functions provides both security through emergencies and opportunities in periods of growth (Deere and Doss 2006). In their study of “voices of the poor,” Narayan et al. (2000: 5) found that “the poor rarely speak of income, but focus instead on managing assets—physical, human, social and environmental—as a way to cope with their vulnerability.” Access to, control over, and ownership of assets including land and livestock, homes and equipment, and other resources enable people to create stable and productive lives. Increasing the nexus of control over assets also potentially enables more permanent pathways out of poverty compared to measures that aim to increase incomes or consumption alone.

These different forms of asset holdings have been categorized as (for our purposes, those in red):

Collective approaches not a panacea; need to pay attention to factors affecting collective action when group-based approaches are used.


Key learnings from research on climate and FPO financing

(Conducted by Strategy Officer candidate)

a.     Access to market and finance is key to mobilize sustainable and climate resilient agriculture. Currently, smallholder farmers in India lack the incentives to adopt sustainable practices given the risks involved. Access to finance and markets through farmer groups, collectives and coops can offset some of this economic uncertainty and may motivate farmers to adopt more sustainable practices.

b.     Banks are risk averse post pandemic which may lead to them diverting their investments to less risky assets away from farm/agri investments. Institutions funding sustainable farming projects can now access capital markets through ESG dedicated funds in the form of investments, bonds or through secondary markets to enhance liquidity. This trend has been increasing as seen in examples like Grameen Impact Fund.

c.     In addition to access to finance, aggregator models involving farmer coops or FPOs can provide small holder farmers the access to alternative modes of marketing. Small holder farmers are often restricted in their capacity to reach a larger market and have limited access to customized solutions. Therefore, directing funds towards collectives could be more beneficial.

d.      However, it is also important to emphasize on two things while funding farmer coops or FPOs in India-i) which stage they are in (early stage, emerging/growing stage or matured/expansion stage), and ii) how the money would be used. This is crucial because FPOs in different stages of their existence have different funding requirements that need to be catered to. For instance, an early stage FPOs may require funds to set up, training and system development, while growing stage FPOs need it for working capital and matured FPOs need funding to sustain and grow. Different needs would mean different modes of funding and hence needs should be appropriately identified.

e.     It is also important to highlight that FPOs often function like small businesses and hence require continued flow of finance for different needs through the course of their functioning. It has been seen that often funds help FPOs in increasing membership but given their limited ability to expand, most FPOs fail to grow sustainably. 

f.      Some challenges FPOs and farmer collectives face include (but not limited to):

 g.     It is also seen that farmer groups/coops have helped female small holder farmers who face multiple challenges including farm size, low literacy, lack of bargaining power, and illegality of land tenancy in some cases. Funding from FPOs have proven to help women farmers and therefore directing funds towards collectives can aid in bridging the gender gap in agriculture while also mobilizing climate resilient agricultural practices.

h.     Policy level: Detailed taxonomy of guidelines is crucial to ensure that the green financing/investments meets its intended goals towards the sustainable production and climate resilience. SEBI guidelines do not provide detailed principles to decide whether investments are leading to the intended impact. The Government of India’s Sustainable Finance Task Force is working towards laying these detailed principles down for future investments.

Finally on best practices, Acumen India with Rabo Foundation have recommended the following:

  1.  Developing context and feasible climate impact frameworks by defining the key measures of impact and charting impact measurement frameworks for different business models to support FPOs in different stages.

  2. Directing patient capital towards early-stage enterprises to ensure increased membership in FPOs along with longevity. Investing in farm-centric models and innovative financing can improve farmer resilience and contribute to better outcomes.

  3. Supporting capacity building through incubator and accelerator programs is crucial to facilitate knowledge creation, mentorship, value creation, and equitable collaboration leading to systemic change and ecosystem strengthening.


Scope of landscaping reseach

  1. Do collective assets work or not? Is it true that capital towards collective assets is actually effective? (without the issue of commons) 

  2. What should be collective assets? (income generating be collective assets?) 

  3. If collective assets, then what kind of collective assets actually work? (e.g., ALC said retail outlets) - can we develop a list of types of collective assets  

  4. How are these investments packaged? 

  5. Who are the players that actually provide these finds of funding? (e.g., give directly? KIVA? TechnoServe? USAID? Apparently IRRI, CIMMYT has done stuff like this, happy seeder work?) 

  6. What have we learned from their experience?