i Draft Baseline Survey Report “Sustainable Livelihoods for 1500 Smallholder Farming Households (7,500 People) in the Extreme North of Bangladesh”(Equalitea III) Project Submitted by Innovision Consulting Private Limited Research | Technical Assistance | Project Management
88
Embed
Draft Baseline Survey Report - traidcraft.co.uk · i Draft Baseline Survey Report “Sustainable Livelihoods for 1500 Smallholder Farming Households (7,500 People) in the Extreme
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
i
Draft Baseline Survey Report
“Sustainable Livelihoods for 1500 Smallholder
Farming Households (7,500 People) in the Extreme
North of Bangladesh”(Equalitea III) Project
Submitted by
Innovision Consulting Private Limited
Research | Technical Assistance | Project Management
ii
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
June 06, 2016
Dhaka, Bangladesh
Kazi Shahed H Ferdous
Country Director
Traidcraft Exchange (TX)
Apartment-5/A, House-11
Road-13(New), Dhanmondi R/A,
Dhaka-1209, Bangladesh
Re: Final Report on the Baseline Study of “Sustainable livelihoods for 1,500 smallholder
farming households (7,500 people) in the extreme north of Bangladesh” (EqualiTEA III)
Project
Dear Mr. Ferdous
Innovision Consulting Private Limited is pleased to submit the draft report on the baseline
study of “Sustainable livelihoods for 1,500 smallholder farming households (7,500 people) in
the extreme north of Bangladesh” (EqualiTEA III) Project. As always, we have put in careful
efforts in ensuring the highest quality in research design, implementation, and report
presentation.
We hope that the findings will be helpful to your team in terms of future decision on the
activities of the project. We thank you for your support and cooperation.
Sincerely,
Sadruddin Imran Chairman & CEO Innovision Consulting Level 6 Suite 106 House 62 Road 3 Block B Niketon, Gulshan-1 Dhaka 1212, Bangladesh
Baseline Study of “EqualiTEA II: Pro-poor Market Access for Small Tea Growers for Sustainable livelihoods” Project iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This document was developed by Innovision Consulting Private Limited under the
“Sustainable livelihoods for 1,500 smallholder farming households (7,500 people) in the
extreme north of Bangladesh” (EqualiTEA III) Project managed by Traidcraft Exchange.
We acknowledge the support provided by Mr. Kazi Shahed H Ferdous- Country Director,
Traidcraft Bangladesh and Ms. Ismat Jahan- Project Advisor, Traidcraft Bangladesh who
provided consistent supervision and guidance on the report.
We thank the implementation team of Bikash Bangladesh for facilitating the field assessment.
We acknowledge the contribution of all the reviewers of the draft report who took the time in
providing feedback that helped in the development of this work. We also thank all the
respondents and the local communities who gave their valuable time to the research team and
helped in the obtaining of area specific information that helped shape the report.
Baseline Study of “EqualiTEA II: Pro-poor Market Access for Small Tea Growers for Sustainable livelihoods” Project iv
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
AWD Advanced Wet and Dry
BDT Bangladesh Taka
BTB Bangladesh Tea Board
BTRI Bangladesh Tea Research Institute
DAE Department of Agricultural Extension
DCM Decimal
DLO District Livestock Office
FGD Focus Group Discussion
GPF Gratuity Provident Fund
HSC Higher Secondary Certificate
ICM Integrated Crop Management
IPM Integrated Pest Management
KG Kilogram
KII Key Informant Interview
LFW Logical Framework
NGO Non-Governmental Organization
OVI Objectively Verifiable Indicator
SSC Secondary School Certificate
STG Small Tea Grower
TX Traidcraft Exchange
ULO Upazilla Livestock Office
Baseline Study of “EqualiTEA II: Pro-poor Market Access for Small Tea Growers for Sustainable livelihoods” Project v
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Project Name Sustainable livelihoods for 1,500 smallholder farming households (7,500 people) in the extreme north of Bangladesh (EqualiTEA III)
Project Location Bangladesh – Panchagarh District (Tetulia and Panchagarh Sadar sub-district) and Thakurgaon District (Baliadangi sub-district)
Project Duration 36 months (from October 2015to September 2018)
Project Budget £614,565
Donors UK AID
Implementing Agency and Partners
The project is managed by Traidcraft Exchange (TX) and co-implemented by Bikash Bangladesh1
The EQUALITEA III project plans to support small and marginal farmers in Northern
Bangladesh to grow tea to give farmers a diversified, sustainable source of income and reduce
poverty. The project will work with 1,500 small and marginal households in Panchagarh
(Tetulia and Panchagarh Sadar sub-district) and Thakurgaon District (Baliadangi sub-district)
area. The project aims to build an inclusive value chain and to encourage smallholder farmers
to work collectively and collaboratively.
Innovision Consulting were contracted to conduct a baseline study of the households targeted
by the project. The baseline study aims to provide an independently assessed information
base relevant to the project against which the project’s progress and effectiveness can be
monitored and assessed during the implementation of the project’s activities and after the
completion of the project. The study has attempted to capture the current condition of the
project beneficiaries against all the Objectively Verifiable Indicators (OVIs) up to the output
level (which are relevant to the beneficiaries) of the Logical Frame Work Analysis (LFA)
document. The study also provides useful background detail on the project recipients which
may help inform future project design and approach. A summary of the findings related to
these indicators can be found at the end of the executive summary section.
The methodology used for the study involved both primary and secondary research. Primary
research consisted of Sample survey, Key Informant Interviews (KIIs), Focus Group
Discussions (FGDs) and Case Studies.
Innovision developed a questionnaire tool on the basis of the terms of reference (ToR)
supplied by Traidcraft for the IDIs. Data from 199 respondents was analysed. Innovision also
undertook 12 FGDs and 18 KIIs evenly divided across the three sub-districts. A scoping study
was carried out to test and refine all tools which were used with sample respondents from the
project areas. Our gender consultant also provided input to ensure that the tools used were
gender-sensitive and gender-aware.
Baseline Study of “EqualiTEA II: Pro-poor Market Access for Small Tea Growers for Sustainable livelihoods” Project vi
For the secondary research, Innovision has reviewed key project documents such as project
proposal, ToR for the study, logical framework, list of target beneficiaries and project
stakeholders. Innovision Consulting also made use of its own repository of agricultural
knowledge and expertise in-house.
Findings reveal that the average age was 39 for male respondents and 34 for female
respondents. About 77% of male and 88% of female respondents have literacy below
Secondary School Certificate level and 16% of male respondents and 26.3% of female
respondents are illiterate. The average family size is 5 persons, and each family has one man
and one woman who generate income on average. Two thirds of families have school-going
children. The vast majority (92.5%) of respondents are Bengali Muslims, with the remaining
largely being Hindu, or indigenous peoples (Santal).
All respondents conduct agricultural farming. Agriculture is the primary source of income for
60% of surveyed households, with other respondents saying their primary income was from
working as a day laborer2 (25%), in their own business (8.5%), in a full-time job3 (2.5%), as an
auto-rickshaw/rickshaw puller (2.5%), as a private tutor (1%) or as a homeopathic practitioner
(0.5%).
Farmers stated that they had diverse sources of income with 77% having secondary sources
of income other than just agriculture. Day labor was the most common secondary source of
income. According to our Focus Group Discussion, women are paid less (BDT 50 to 100) for
agricultural day labor than men. The average agricultural day labor wage for men is BDT250-
300 but only BDT 200 for women. Stone extracting is a job done exclusively by men and pay
is based on the amount of stone collected. In practice the amount received will range from
BDT 500 – 700. Stone crushing is similarly based on the square feet of stone crushed- but
this activity is undertaken by both men and women. A man or woman working at stone crushing
for a day could expect to earn between BDT 300 and 500.
The mean income for all respondents was BDT 89,412 (median BDT 87,900). In Tetulia, the
mean income for respondents was highest at BDT 96,755 (median BDT 96,095). Panchagarh
had a mean income of 89,278 (median 90,275) while Baliadangi had the lowest mean income
of 83,119 (median 77,485).
Households reported their top priority for expenditure was food which accounted for 54.7% of
their expenditure. Other elements of their expenditure included loan repayments (9.0%),
medicine/health costs (6.5%), children’s education (6.2%), clothing (5.8%) and entertainment
(5.3%).
Half of respondents had savings of some sort, with two thirds of those with savings using
‘micro-savings’ schemes. However, findings from the FGD suggest that most of those using
micro-savings schemes are forced to do so under the terms of a micro-credit loan they have
taken. It is questionable then whether these should really be considered as savings- since the
farmers can only access the money once the loan is repaid. This money does not therefore
2Day laborer responses were predominantly stone workers and agricultural workers on other people’s land. 3Such as working for a local NGO.
Baseline Study of “EqualiTEA II: Pro-poor Market Access for Small Tea Growers for Sustainable livelihoods” Project vii
fulfill the function of providing protection from income shocks- since it cannot be accessed
when it is needed.
Just under a third (29%) of respondents with savings use a fixed deposit account in banks like
RAKUB and Agrani Bank. These are conventional savings which yield a rate of interest and
money can be withdrawn when needed (although there may be a penalty of interest lost for
early withdrawal). Respondents were also asked whether they had any other kind of safety
measure apart from savings. Most (69%) said that they did- but their responses tended to
involve selling assets such as the sale of a cow (55.8%) or land (32.6%).
Access to loans was found to be almost universal (98%) although fewer (41%) actually have
an outstanding loan at the time of the project. By far the most popular source of loans was
micro-credit organizations (78%) followed by commercial banks (18%). The most popular loan
providers were ASA (31%), Grameen (21%) and BRAC (15%).
The average amount of an outstanding loan is BDT 21,162. About half of these loans are used
for agricultural investment (49%) while other popular uses are business (15%), purchase/lease
land (14%) and build/maintain housing (13%). Those with a regular income stream (such as
day laborers) appear to prefer micro-credit schemes which require weekly installments and
have a lower rate of interest than money lenders. Detailed figures were not collected- but the
FGDs suggest micro-credit interest rates of approximately 12.5-15%. The interest rates for
money lenders can be much higher- one case study respondent claimed to be paying an
interest rate of 120%. Money lenders however enable farmers to borrow and repay once they
have gathered their harvest. Early marriage is prevalent within all three regions and daughters
tend to be married off between fourteen and eighteen years of age. Dowries are common and
can cost from BDT 20,000 to BDT 100,000 – many respondents have to borrow to afford these
costs.
The role of women in income generation may differ between Baliadangi and the other two
regions, Panchagarh and Tetulia. Although the sample was small, it suggested that in
Baliadangi women tend to work in agriculture doing activities such as planting, weeding and
harvesting in their own fields. By contrast- in Tetulia and Panchagarh, women may tend to
work as laborers (stone sorting/conveying) or as tailors. This might be because of cultural
differences as Baliadangi has a higher proportion of Hindus- and may be more comfortable
with women working in the fields. In all communities, it is predominantly women who do post-
harvest related activities. Women stated that they do not have full control over the income they
earn as day labor- however they also said that earning an income makes them feel more
empowered and accepted within the family.
Rice is the most common crop grown- and the vast majority is Aman rice. Wheat is also very
common in Baliadangi and in Panchagarh to a lesser extent. The average cultivable land per
respondent was 131 decimals in Baliadangi, 110 decimals in Panchagarh and 109 decimals
in Tetulia. Farmers consistently claimed that agriculture is not profitable but that they are
forced to grow crops because purchasing food would be even more expensive. Most farmers
do not use improved cultivation techniques or integrated pest management except for a few
common techniques such as placing sticks or bushes near fields to attract birds to naturally
reduce pests. Most farmers had little knowledge of tea cultivation although some have friends,
relatives or neighbors who have grown tea.
Baseline Study of “EqualiTEA II: Pro-poor Market Access for Small Tea Growers for Sustainable livelihoods” Project viii
Farmers do not currently have any membership of collective groups. They expressed a clear
preference for groups to provide them with knowledge on collective selling (80%), tea
cultivation techniques (60%) and livestock rearing training (50%). Other popular preferences
were to provide tea saplings (39%), irrigation facilities (39%), and tea leaf marketing (24%).
Farmers are generally unaware of the services the Government of Bangladesh is supposed
to provide and do not have access to these services. They also have little faith in public sector
service providers and complained that Department of Agricultural Extension (DAE) officials
rarely visited and (Sub-Assistant Agricultural Officers) SAAOs were hard to find when solutions
are needed. Instead they tend to rely on the private sector particularly input sellers who may
give them incorrect information and sometimes have perverse incentives to do so.
Generally speaking farmers are open to crop and income diversification and were keen to
begin the project and grow tea. There was greater enthusiasm for tea growing in Panchagarh
and Tetulia than in Baliadangi however because there are small holder tea growers available
in Panchagarh and Tetulia. Nevertheless most respondents were confident that tea growing
represented a good opportunity for their livelihood, particularly since it would utilize land that
might otherwise be left fallow and because they see it as much more profitable than traditional
crops.
Baseline Study of “EqualiTEA II: Pro-poor Market Access for Small Tea Growers for Sustainable livelihoods” Project ix
Summary of Baseline Survey Results for Logical Framework Logframe Indicator Indicator Description Baseline Value
Impact Indicator 1
Percentage change in the proportion of population below national poverty line in target districts (or region depending on information available)
No data collected. (Already existing figure for baseline)
Outcome Indicator 1 Average increase in annual household income of target farmer households
Outcome Indicator 2 Number of farmers who perceive an improvement in their wellbeing
No data collected.
Output Indicator 1.1
Number of farmer groups that are negotiating with local government and local tea companies/factories for better services and support
0
Output Indicator 1.2 Proportion of target households that perceive benefits from group membership
0
Output Indicator 2.1 Average yield (in kg) of tea (before processing) per acre
0
Output Indicator 2.2 Proportion of target household income earned from tea cultivation
0
Output Indicator 3.1 Proportion of target households that are satisfied with the services/support provided by barefoot service providers
0
Output Indicator 3.2
Number of households assisted with agricultural services
14.1% (28/199) These are comprised of: Govt Institutions such as DAE and Livestock (13), MFI (8), Anondo School (2), Krishi Bank: (2), Union Parishad (1), Agroni Bank (1), Tea Factory (1).
Output Indicator 3.3
Number of acres (tea and non-tea) benefiting from agricultural improvements (fertilizers, irrigation etc.)
Respondents saying they used this: Soil Test – 0% Organic Fertilizer – 93% Planting bush/stick – 21.1% Pheromone Trap – 0% Leaf Color Chart – 0% Improved Irrigation – 0.5% Advanced Wet & Dry – 0% Follow advice of local agricultural officers on amount of fertilizer used – 5.5%
Baseline Study of “EqualiTEA II: Pro-poor Market Access for Small Tea Growers for Sustainable livelihoods” Project x
Output Indicator 4.1
Proportion of target households that have adopted a new income-generating activity (in addition to tea)
0%. But note that 77% of households already have an additional income-generating activity.
Output Indicator 4.2 Amount of savings mobilized from target households
0
Output Indicator 4.3 A group savings and investment fund is available to invest in new income-generating activities
0
Baseline Study of “EqualiTEA II: Pro-poor Market Access for Small Tea Growers for Sustainable livelihoods” Project xi
Table of Contents
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL ....................................................................................................................... ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................................................................................ iii
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ......................................................................................................... iv
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................ v
List of Tables .........................................................................................................................................xiv
List of Figures ........................................................................................................................................xiv
Entertainment 4,850 3,900 3,797 6 3,288 1,200 3,684 8
Others 100,000 100,000 . 1 3,000 3,000 . 1
Total 88,080 82,740 46,159 6 87,878 79,600 36,293 9
Total Exclude Home Grown Food
58,095 46,210 38,064 6 64,102 59,320 33,586 9
Table 10 Expenditure in Female-headed Households
Average of expenditure made by
female headed household is BDT
90,840 which is higher than the sample
average (BDT 87,959). With only five
female-headed households however
this is too small a sub-sample to draw
firm conclusions however.
Mean Med STD N
Food 53200 48000 10545 5
Exclude Consumption 40052 45840 11219 5
Medicine 3220 2800 3037 5
Clothing 3700 4000 975 5
Travel 4500 4500 2121 2
Religious event 2700 2000 1483 5
Education of Children 21275 5000 34247 4
Repair of house 1500 1500 707 2
Dowry . . . 0
Loan payment 1200 1200 . 1
Entertainment 7650 6000 8047 4
Others 2800 2700 1575 4
Total 90840 84400 34667 5
Total Exclude Consumption 77692 60400 33865 5
32
3.2.4 Savings
The small and marginal farmers surveyed responded that half of them have some form of savings.
When asked what savings scheme they use, we found that the majority of people (67%) use
micro-savings schemes by Micro-Finance Institutes (MFI) followed by 29% in fixed deposits in
banks (RAKUB, Agrani Bank etc.).
Table 11 Amount of savings
Amount of Savings Mean Median Standard Deviation
Savings account 4,378 1,700 5,785
Fixed deposit 7,923 3,500 10,090
Micro-savings scheme 5,600 3,000 6,312
Others7 10,174 6,000 9,078
The average of amount of savings those who save in different savings scheme are shown by the
table above. Findings from the FGDs suggest that most of the savings in ‘micro-savings the
scheme’ are mandatory savings8 saved along with repayment of micro-credit loan. These savings
are required by MFIs to secure any future loan.
It should be noted however that there is controversy about whether the micro-savings scheme
should be considered as savings. This money can only be accessed once the loan is repaid. In
effect- this plays the role of giving a deposit for the loan, rather than acting as savings. Farmers
are only able to access their money once the loan is repaid- and therefore it cannot protect them
from income shocks.
We were not able to assess the extent to which these micro-savings scheme (or indeed other
savings schemes) allow for flexible access to money to prevent income shocks. In some cases-
7Others consists of Local Life Insurance Policy (Loko Bima), Local Community Co-operatives, Cash and Ekti Bari Ekti Khamar, a government project for rural development. 8 An obligatory amount is saved with the repayment of loan instalments by loan taker.
47%53%
Do you have savings
Yes
No
15%0%
29%
67%
15%
11%
Savings SchemesSavings account
Sanchay Patra
Fixed deposit
MicrosavingsSchemeCash in Hand
Other
Figure 7Savings tendency by the respondents Figure 8Scheme preferences by respondents
33
the farmers themselves may not be aware of the exact terms. A conservative estimate of the
amount of savings available that could be used for this purpose would be to discount all money
placed in micro-savings schemes. If this were done- then only 11% of respondents have savings
that fulfill these criteria (22/199).
Among MFIs present in the target area ASA, Grameen Bank, BRAC and national NGOs working
with micro-credit schemes RDRS, TMSS, and ESDO etc. are popular by the respondents. RAKUB
and Agrani bank are also found to be preferred by people for saving in the area. Among others
form of savings, there are cash in hand, savings in local community co-operatives,
3.2.5 Credit/Loan
From the sample survey conducted we found almost all of the respondents (98%) have access to
loan. By access, we mean respondents can get loan from an institute if they intend to. 41% of the
respondents have outstanding loan currently. The average of outstanding loan amount
respondents have currently is BDT 21,162.
Table 12 Amount and Purpose of Loan
About half (49%) of the respondents who have outstanding loan took the loan to invest in
agriculture. Substantial numbers of people also take loan for purchasing or leasing lands, for
starting or expanding business, for building or maintaining houses or for buying cattle. Other
reasons for taking loan includes wedding cost or dowry for daughter’s wedding, legal costs in
case of disputes among the communities, medical expenditures etc.
Findings from the FGDs suggest that, people who have regular in-flow of income i.e. day laborers
prefer micro-credit schemes which require weekly installments by MFIs; on the other hand people
who cannot afford weekly installments go for bank loans or loan from money lender and repay
98%
41%
2%59%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Have Access to Loan Have outstanding loan
No
Yes
Outstanding Loan Amount (BDT) Mean St. Dev.
Loan Amount 21,162 15,019
Purpose of Taking Loan Responses
Agricultural investment 49%
Purchase/lease land 14%
Business 15%
Build/maintain housing 13%
Buy cattle 8%
Other 22%
34
after harvesting their crop. Among different sources of loan people avail, ASA is the most popular
source of loans, followed by Grameen Bank and BRAC.As asked about the reason behind this
preference, respondents stated that, flexibility of loan repayment is partly a reason. People do not
prefer MFIs which are not flexible in collection of repayment installment and do not give any space.
However, respondents hardly mentioned if there is any difference in interest rate; it seems
complex for them to calculate.
Source of Loan
Micro-finance Institutes Response
ASA 31%
Grameen Bank 21%
BRAC 15%
RDRS 3%
TMSS 2%
ESDO 2%
Grameen Shokti 1%
Polli Daridro Bimochon Prokolpo 3%
Bank
Krishi Bank 12%
Agroni Bank/Janata Bank 6%
Others
Ekti Bari Ekti Khamar 6%
Grocery store 4%
Neighbor 3%
Mohajon (Money Lender) 2%
3.3. Gender Involvement
Post-harvest related activities in the agriculture are pre-dominantly done by women in these three
targeted sub-districts. This was confirmed both by the survey and by the FGDs. Women are also
responsible for raising and looking after livestock and poultry. In some cases, women also work
as day laborers. Respondents of Tetulia stated that in about 30% of household contain female
day laborer working as non-agricultural laborer for instance in stone crushing. This figure is higher
than the survey data would suggest. Female agricultural day laborers receive lower wages than
men by between BDT 50 and BDT 100 per day.
Table 13 Secondary Sources of Income for Women
Secondary Sources of Income
For Female Panchagarh Tetulia Baliadangi
Tailors work 2 2 0
Job 0 0 2
Stone laborer 2 1 1
Tea garden laborer 0 0 0
Number of respondents 4 3 3
35
Women in Baliadangi are seen working in agriculture for instance planting, weeding, harvesting
etc. on their own fields. This might be because of cultural differences. In Baliadangi, Hindu people
are common for which it is more acceptable for them to work in the field. From the FGDs we
conducted it was found however that, there is no women day laborer there in Baliadangi. However,
women do not have full control over the income they earn as day labor although female
respondents said that generating income makes them more empowered and accepted in their
family.
From the sample survey it was found that, majority (88%) of the respondents said that decisions
are made jointly about major family affairs. There was a small difference in responses between
men and women. No men stated that the women make the decisions in their household, although
some women stated that they make the decisions (note that this is not necessarily a contradiction
since it will in part be due to the existence of female-headed households where no man is
present).
Broadly speaking- the results are similar whether men or women answer. However clearly this
question may not fully capture the complex dynamics around actual decision-making- particularly
given the fact that many women were less informed about the finances of their farming practices
and did not know the price received for their crops. It may be that respondents answered that they
make decisions jointly because there is a negative perception around saying that the man makes
all the decisions, or that they assumed this is what the researchers wanted to hear. Given
background knowledge of the rural context- it seems unlikely that the women are as empowered
as the headline 88% figure would suggest.
Table 14 Who makes the decisions in your households?
Decision made by Male Respondents Female Respondents
Husband 10% 8%
Wife 0% 6%
Husband and wife together 90% 86%
Payment of dowries is still common in the targeted region and the rate is excessively high. For
example families have to pay a dowry of BDT 20,000 to 100,000 or more for each wedding
depending on the qualification of the groom9. Survey respondents were asked whether they had
paid a dowry in the past year- and so many of them had not since they may not have had a
daughter married in that time period.
However from the FGD findings, we found that early marriage is prevalent in the targeted region
and that dowries are required always. People marry their daughter off at the age between 14
years to 18 years. As we asked about the reason for doing that responses from one of the FGD
in Baliadangi were like below,
9Note that this upper end was reported in FGD discussions- not through the survey.
36
“As any girl grows up, the amount of the dowry increases. We cannot marry any of our daughters
off without dowry.”
Table 15 Expense in Dowry
3.4. Agricultural Practices and Status of
Production
Agricultural Practices
In the targeted three upazillas where the survey was conducted, agriculture is the main source of
income for majority (60% of the surveyed respondents) of the respondents. Highland and middle-
high lands hold the majority of total cultivable land of the upazillas. Rice is the prominent food
crop followed by wheat and maize is the cash crop. A snapshot of the targeted three upazillas is
shown by the below table-
Table 16 Agriculture at a glance
Sadar Upazilla,
Panchagarh (In
hectare)
Tetulia Upazilla,
Panchagarh (In hectare)
Baliadangi Upazilla, Thakurgaon (In hectare)
Total cultivable land 25,800 18,919 28,425
High land 20,640 8,513 15,000
Middle-high land 3,870 9,459 10,080
Middle-low land 1,290 947 3,345
Acreage (hectare) in different crop
Crops Panchagarh Sadar Tetulia Baliadangi
Rice (Aman season) 23,220 12,755 25,000
Boro (Boro season) 2,400 2,580 5,960
Wheat 7,000 1,485 15,000
Chili 2,000 - 2,000
Potato 2,000 786 2,500
Maize 6,000 53 -
Sesame/Mustard 2,000 91 1,200
Jute 3,000 195 1,500
Vegetable 3,500 262 1,000
Source: Key informant interview Note: Data not found for blank fields.
Respondents’ families expense in Dowry (for the last year)
Panchagarh Tetulia Baliadangi
Response Mean Std.
Dev.
Response Mean Std.
Dev.
Response Mean Std.
Dev.
Dowry 0 2
30,00
0 28,284 1 20,000 0
Number
of
Respon
dents
86 53 60
Note: Figures are in BDT
37
From the sample survey it was found that the average of total cultivable land possessed by the
respondents is higher in Baliadangi (131 decimal) than in Panchagarh (110 decimal) and Tetulia
(109 decimal). The survey also determines how much land farmers keep fallow. Findings from
FGDs suggest that, farmers define fallow land both as land kept fallow around the year, but also
in some cases include lands which cultivate vegetables, Robi season crops as subsistence crops
only once in a year and kept fallow for rest of the year, lands with bamboo bush etc.
Tetulia Panchagarh Baliadangi
Average Decimal
Base Average Decimal
Base Average Decimal
Base
Own land 111 32 105 64 114 39
Family Land 123 53 117 86 141 60
Leased in land 58 10 71 20 40 15
Leased out land 33 2 67 2 0 0
Mortgaged land 44 8 55 3 42 7
Total Land 109 53 110 86 131 60
Cultivable Land 39 53 35 84 33 60
Fallow Land 126 24 129 42 147 23
Tea Cultivable (Previously fallow)
39 25 33 36 33 20
Tea Cultivable (Previously other
crop)
44 39 44 62 35 46
Total Tea Cultivable Land
51 53 45 86 39 60
The average of total tea cultivable lands is higher for respondents in Tetulia but lower in
Baliadangi. This may be the effect from the confidence farmers got from seeing other small holder
tea growers whereas, in Baliadangi it is not common.
Almost all (96%) of the respondents replied that, they mainly invest from agriculture from their
own findings. About 9% of the respondents take loan from MFIs. Note that farmers may invest in
their agriculture from more than one source.
38
Table 17 Funding for Agriculture
Status of Production:
There is a common saying we heard repeatedly as we interviewed any farmer during the survey,
“Agriculture does not provide with any profitability rather we incur losses for every other year;
however, we continue cultivating crops as purchasing food instead would cost higher. Moreover,
our investment in agriculture is in fractions of time and money rather than in bulk amount; so as
we harvest and get the return in bulk, it is something useful.”
Detailed examination of their costs and revenues through our survey- suggests that actually
farmers are profitable. Farmers’ appear to perceive their agricultural activities to be less profitable
than they actually are.
To know the extent of losses (if any) incurred by farmers, the cost benefit analysis of top five crops
is given below. Please note that net profit was calculated by combining revenue from the crop in
question with revenue from by-products and then subtracting the total cost.
Table 18 Cost Benefit Analysis of top five crops
Rice Tetulia Panchagarh Baliadangi
Land size (dec) 84 103 101
Total cost (BDT) 10792 15469 11776
Total production (Kg) 1371 1846 1572
Sale Volume (Kg) 462 735 383
Average sales price (BDT) 14 14 14
Total Rice Revenue (BDT) 19122 25581 21568
Revenue from By-products 2473 1435 1991
Net profit (BDT) 10803 11547 11782
Profit/decimal 129 113 117
Wheat Tetulia Panchagarh Baliadangi
Land size (dec) 59 41 71
Total cost (BDT) 8126 6729 10890
Total production (Kg) 934 564 980
Sale Volume (Kg) 840 504 840
96%
2.30% 0.50% 3.20% 9% 6.30% 0.50% 0.90%0%
20%40%60%80%
100%120%
39
Average sales price (BDT) 16 16 16
Total Wheat Revenue (BDT) 15031 8761 15488
Revenue from By-products 418 192 646
Net profit (BDT) 7324 1936 5244
Profit/decimal 125 55 74
Maize Tetulia Panchagarh Baliadangi
Land size (dec) 28 63 44
Total cost (BDT) 7874 14274 8656
Total production (Kg) 1060 2268 1459
Sale Volume (Kg) 1060 2268 1459
Average sales price (BDT) 11 11 10
Total Maize Revenue (BDT) 11660 26141 14173
Revenue from By-products 0 522 590
Net profit (BDT) 3786 12389 6106
Profit/decimal 138 196 138
Chili Tetulia Panchagarh Baliadangi
Land size (dec) 36 36 45
Total cost (BDT) 9844 9097 8612
Total production (Kg) 280 450 233
Sale Volume (Kg) 242 420 198
Average sales price (BDT) 82 76 86
Total Chili Revenue (BDT) 16720 27662 19864
Revenue from By-products 187 89 423
Net profit (BDT) 7063 18654 11676
Profit/decimal 195 521 262
Jute Tetulia Panchagarh Baliadangi
Land size (dec) 37 28 26
Total cost (BDT) 5589 4307 5105
Total production (Kg) 557 279 234
Sale Volume (Kg) 557 279 233
Average sales price (BDT) 35 35 36
Total Jute Revenue (BDT) 13794 9356 9171
Revenue from By-products 1066 203 217
Net profit (BDT) 9271 5244 4288
Profit/decimal 253 185 167
Whilst there are regional differences between the three areas, a general pattern emerges from
the survey findings that while all crops are profitable, the most profitable are cash crops like chili
and jute. Wheat is the crop which gives the most disappointing return in all three regions.
The data from the survey can be compared with the data taken from the FGD discussions. In
some cases, the FGDs presented a range rather than a definite figure. As can be seen- the data
are consistent from FGD to survey. There appears to be a small tendency for the survey to
suggest higher profitability/at the upper end of profitability compared to the FGD.
Comparison of FGD and Survey Data on Profitability
40
Crop Low-FGD (BDT/decimal)
High-FGD (BDT/decimal)
Survey (BDT/decimal)
Aman Rice 61 91 119
Wheat 76 76 85
Maize 121 121 157
Chili 242 333 326
Jute 181 181 201
As we surveyed the behavioral practices for improved cultivation techniques and access to those,
we found that the vast majority of respondents apply organic fertilizers. By organic fertilizers,
people meant cow-dung and poultry litter. Farmers of the region also sometimes plant some
bushes or sticks near the farm land to attract birds and to reduce pest attacks naturally- which is
one Integrated Pest Management method. However no farmers were found to use soil testing,
pheromone trap or other improved techniques to farming.
Note: Data of 2014-15; data not found for blank fields. Source: Key Informant Interview with Upazilla Livestock Office.
The upazilla livestock office is authorized to work for the development of the livestock in the
upazilla under which there are numerous programs which are mentioned by the upazilla livestock
office. Among them Artificial Insemination (AI) is the program which requires very minimal amount
of stated rate set by the government. The office also works for motivating farmers in livestock
farming, farm registration program, vaccination program for livestock etc. The office also stated
that there are micro-credit facilities extended by the livestock department on livestock farming.
Any farmer can get up to BDT 20,000 for poultry farming, BDT 15,000 for goat farming and BDT
15,000 for dairy farming. This scheme currently only runs in one livestock office- but is being
extended to all in the project areas. There is no interest charged on the money borrowed, but
there is a 3% service charge. The money has to be repaid in three, equal installments, at a yearly
interval.
The most common diseases for livestock in the area are foot and mouth disease for cattle, PPR
for goat, Plague disease for poultry etc. The office stated that farmers are entitled for getting free
services for livestock disease if the service takes place in the livestock office; however, the service
does not remain free if any farmer calls livestock officials to his place. We discussed the farmers’
allegations that they do not receive services and entitlements and thus have to depend more on
private service providers. The livestock officer agreed that there is a shortage of sufficient human
resource which means it is not possible to ensure services and entitlements to door to door. In
addition, the distances between the livestock office and rural areas where farmers reside also
contributes to the dependence on private service providers.
Page | 68
ANNEX 3: CASE STUDIES
Information removed for the purposes of data protection. Please contact Traidcraft
Exchange head office in the UK for further information on this.
ANNEX 4: TERMS OF REFERENCE
Baseline Study of “Sustainable livelihoods for 1,500 smallholder farming households (7,500 people) in the extreme north of Bangladesh” Project
1. Introduction to Traidcraft
For more than 30 years, Traidcraft has been fighting poverty through trade, believing in the
positive and transformational potential of trade to bring hope to millions trapped in poverty. We
believe that trade affects the life of every person and can provide the most sustainable way of
overcoming poverty. Yet markets do not always work in favour of the poor, and often work against
them. This is a major factor contributing to their poverty.
In all our areas of work, Traidcraft plays a key role as catalyst and convenor, encouraging different actors to work together to develop approaches that lead to inclusive economic growth. We have a particularly strong track record of constructive engagement with the private sector as both trading and development partners.
Working with local partners and communities, and engaging with the private sector, other non-
governmental and governmental bodies, our interventions revolve around three inter-related
areas:
• Trade: facilitating access to local, regional and international markets for small enterprises. • Support: building the capacity of poor producers to trade effectively, helping them form
enterprises and collaborative groups and equipping them with business skills. • Influence: challenging injustice and encouraging changes in government policies, corporate
practices and public attitudes to trade, development and poverty.
We assist those who are economically marginalised and the communities in which they operate.
We pay particular attention to women, rural communities, and small enterprises (including
smallholder farmers).
2. Project Background and Context
Project Name Sustainable livelihoods for 1,500 smallholder farming households (7,500 people) in the extreme north of Bangladesh (EqualiTEA III)
Project Location Bangladesh – Panchagarh District (Tetulia and Panchagarh Sadar sub-district) and Thakurgaon District (Baliadangi sub-district)
Project duration 36 months (from October 2015to September 2018)
Project budget £614,565
Donors UK AID
Page | 69
Implementing agency and partners
The project is managed by Traidcraft Exchange (TX) and co-implemented by Bikash Bangladesh
Despite making good progress, Bangladesh is still one of the world’s least developed countries, ranking 146 out of 187 countries on the 2013 Human Development Index. According to the 2013 Human Development Report, 58% of the population lives in multi-dimensional poverty. Research also shows that economic conditions have not improved for much of the population (World Bank).
Our target communities are isolated with few livelihood options. Farming households are classed as ‘extreme’ poor as average per capita income per day is about 50 BDT (£0.42) based on average annual household income of 90,416 BDT (£753) and a family size of 5. This is well below international and national poverty lines. People also fare poorly with regard to other socio-economic indicators; 71% live in multi-dimensional poverty, over 60% are illiterate, 63% are in debt and there are high levels of malnutrition (about 43%). Families spend about 50% of their income on food.
Communities in the extreme north of Bangladesh are isolated with few livelihood options. Research has shown that tea is one of the few crops suitable for cultivation in the target areas. The sandy acidic soil is problematic for many crops but perfect for tea cultivation. Domestic demand for tea is also growing. Smallholder tea growing therefore provides an opportunity to reduce poverty in these very remote areas. Through provision of tea saplings and technical training, encouraging farmers to work together and ensuring a critical support network, the project will directly benefit 7,500 people.
Tea cultivation can also help improve the ecology by reducing landslides, soil erosion and ground water depletion and increasing soil fertility. However, smallholder tea growing is fairly new in Bangladesh, and there is no comprehensive programme to promote smallholder tea growing in the region. This project will therefore promote tea cultivation as a sustainable livelihood option in a region which has limited agricultural production, and high levels of unemployment and migration, alongside encouraging crop diversification, improving general agricultural practices and encouraging the adoption of additional livelihood generating activities. Thus the project can help to increase resilience through reducing dependence on any one source of income.
Since 2006-07 Bangladesh started importing tea, in 2010-11 traders imported 5.79 million Kg tea. Low priced imported tea caused price of tea in auction to drop and large quantity of tea remained unsold due to withheld of auctions in 2014 in Bangladesh. In recent years the STG sector has grown in numbers, acreage, and production in Bangladesh. As per BTB, around 40,000 acres of sandy and acidic land in three northern districts can be cultivated for growing small-scale tea. This is where the EqualiTEA III project could make an impact by increasing number of STGs and thereby increasing tea production.
This project will create sustainable income source for 1500 small tea growers through tea cultivation in small gardens in Northern Bangladesh and also from other income generating activities. It is a proven option for poor and marginalised communities to get permanently out of poverty and the project also try to develop an inclusive value-chain for small tea growers.
Problem faced by the small farmers in this region:
• Smallholder farmers lack know-how about good agricultural practices that could help them get the most out of their sandy, acidic soil. They also lack access to services or support.
• Smallholder farmers have very few resources to invest in their agriculture. A lack of access to proper sources of credit prevents farmers from improving their agricultural practices, purchasing quality inputs such as fertilisers and irrigation, and entering/expanding into tea
Page | 70
cultivation.
• Because of their remote location and poor soil composition, smallholder farmers depend on a limited number of crops. Failure to get a decent yield or a fair price therefore has a significant and negative impact on their ability to afford basics such as food and healthcare.
The target communities are remote and lack any sort of collective identity. Without this small-
holder farmers are even more vulnerable, and unable to benefit from shared learning, economies
of scale (through group purchasing/selling), collective negotiation and lobbying/advocacy etc. In
order to address these problems several approaches will be taken simultaneously:
1. Encouraging smallholder farmers to work collectively and collaboratively. This will involve: 1.1) Organising smallholder farmers into local groups and a regional farmer association; 1.2) Building the capacity of the groups and regional association; and 1.3) Conducting tea sector research (with a focus on smallholder tea growers) and developing a policy position paper and action plan.
2. Developing strong agricultural enterprises through better farming and business practices and diversification into tea. This will involve: 2.1) Raising awareness with prospective smallholder tea growers; 2.2) Training smallholder farmers on tea and agricultural cultivation; 2.3) Providing loans for saplings and facilitating buy-back agreements with tea factories; and 2.4) Facilitating access to other inputs. Once the loans for saplings are repaid they will be used to establish a revolving fund that will be used to facilitate new entrants into tea cultivation and scale up impact (see 4.8).
3. Ensuring smallholder farmers have access to appropriate ongoing agricultural services. This will include: 3.1) Training 120 barefoot service providers; and 3.2) Building linkages between farmers and private/public service providers.
4. Developing systems to support smallholder farming households to diversify their income. This will include: 4.1) Capacity building of groups on group savings and investment schemes; 4.2) Building links with financial institutions; and 4.3) Capacity building for additional income-generating activities. This activity will have a particular focus on empowering women as experience has shown that as women start to contribute more to household income they will become more confident and gain more respect within their family and community (see 4.10)
The project will work to provide sustained support to the disadvantaged small farmers for
enhancing skills and capacity for growing tea, increasing income, increased access to
entitlements and services. The interventions will facilitate inclusive economic growth of small and
marginal tea growers by promoting potential economic activities to strengthen resilient livelihoods.
The project will build a partnership between small growers and tea companies in delivering
positive and long term benefits for both sides. The project is designed for a specific region where
tea growing for small farmers provides a sustainable solution for poverty alleviation.
This project attempts to take advantage of market opportunities to find solutions to extreme
poverty in Northern Bangladesh. Very small and marginal farmers have the opportunity to enter
a new supply chain and engage effectively with other market players to deliver win-win outcomes
for everyone involved. The project is working to ensure income to the extreme poor, profits to
business partners, availability of tea to meet strong market demand, and deliver a model of
poverty alleviation that can be scaled up for other poor communities.
Page | 71
The target group for this project are the most marginal and small men and women farmers who
own a small piece of land which is ideal for tea cultivation but cannot start tea garden due to lack
of capital and technical skills.
The project will also raise awareness about the government services/support available to small-
scale tea farmers whilst also supporting groups/associations to lobby for the proper
implementation of existing policies.
The project will work to achieve the following Outcomes:
• Output 1: 1,500 smallholder farming households are working collectively and collaboratively to increase their resilience.
• Output 2:1,500 smallholder farming households improve their agricultural practices and start cultivating tea in order to increase their income and reduce their vulnerability.
• Output 3: 1,500 smallholder farming households have appropriate ongoing services/support for agricultural cultivation.
• Output 4: Systems in place to support smallholder farming households to diversify their income and increase their resilience
The project log frame is attached as Annex 2 and will be considered as an integral part of the TOR.
3. Purpose and Objectives of the Baseline Study
The purpose of this baseline study is to provide an independently assessed information base against which to monitor and assess the project’s progress and effectiveness during implementation and after project completion.
Being effectively the first step in the project monitoring and evaluation system, the baseline study is an early element of the project monitoring framework. The framework is based on the project log frame (attached as annex2), which includes the expected project outputs, the indicators of achievement and the potential sources of information. The baseline study gathers the information to be used in subsequent assessments of how efficiently the activity is being implemented and the eventual results of the project. The mid-term review and final project evaluation will judge progress largely by comparing recent data with the information of the baseline study.
Key project indicators and data to be gathered:
Please see the Annex 1
4. Audience for the baseline study
This independent baseline study is commissioned by Traidcraft and will be shared with project staff and participants, management and staff of Traidcraft and its partners, project associates, project donors, other relevant actors.
5. Geographical Coverage
The project is being implemented in two north most districts of Bangladesh i.e. Panchagarh (specifically Tetulia and Panchagarh Sadar sub-districts) and Thakurgaon (Baliadangi sub-district).
Page | 72
6. The Baseline Study Process and Methodology
The baseline study should be conducted in a participatory manner to bring the multiple perspectives from key stakeholders in assessing the current situation of the target beneficiaries and the context within which the project is located.
A Project Monitoring & Evaluation Group will be established to both inform and support the project monitoring and evaluation processes. This will comprise key project staff from Traidcraft and its partners in country, as well as key staff from Traidcraft’s UK office.
It is envisaged that the baseline study methodology will include:
• A desk review/research of project information including the key documents listed in these terms of reference.
• A planning meeting with the project management team to gain a deeper understanding of the project and to review the project log frame to ensure clarity and shared understanding of what needs to be measured and the most appropriate and effective means of gathering the data (including identification of any known key informants).
• An initial 2-3 day scoping visit to the project location to :
i. gain an understanding of the conditions in which the baseline study will be undertaken – for example, the season of the year, the prevailing political conditions, the state of the economy, any cultural divisions, and recent or expected extraordinary events such as natural disasters, political upheavals or economic shocks.
ii. conduct a mapping exercise to inform the selection of interviewees for the farmer survey, focus group discussions, in-depth case studies, and key informant interviews
iii. identify what information already exists that can feed into the baseline study.
• Following this initial scoping visit, a further meeting with the project management team to present and discuss the detailed plan and methodology for gathering and analyzing the baseline data required, including the process for selecting interviewees.
• Design and preparation of the farmer survey including: preparation of a clear, logical and simple questionnaire, which will include all required information and can be encoded without difficulty; pre-testing in the project location and finalization of the questionnaire; organizing logistics in the field.
• Design and preparation of farmer focus group discussions and key informant interviews as agreed with the Project management Team.
• Conduct questionnaire-based farmer survey (through individual interviews with 225 EqualiTEA III farmers; 12 focus group discussions and 18 key informant interviews (6 from each sub-district).
• Develop in-depth case studies - the field work should include in-depth interviews with 10-12(number to be agreed with project management team) participating farmers to provide the basis for individual case studies that can be tracked throughout the life of the project so that we can better understand how their situations change as a result of the project. The case studies should include photographs of the farmers and their households.
• Data analysis (including data masking and database development). The consultant would normally present a preliminary overview of their findings to the project management team in-country and receive comments from them before preparing the draft evaluation report. Subsequently, the consultant submits the draft report to the project management team for
Page | 73
written comment before finalizing the report, to minimize the chance of inaccuracies and to maximize ownership of the findings.
The methodology should ensure that:
• both quantitative and qualitative methods should be incorporated into the baseline study and that more visual forms of information are included, for example, photographs, maps, diagrams
• the extent to which the daily life of the farmers being studied is disrupted is minimised – from the perspective of both men and women
• questions included in the survey provides information that will enable more effective analysis (for example, gender of farmer, age, ethnicity, level of education, size and gender make-up of household, size of land holding, types of crops grown, assets owned) – the specific information required should be agreed with the project management team during the planning meetings.
7. Documents that we will provide
▪ The approved project proposal document ▪ The approved project Logical Framework ▪ List of target beneficiaries ▪ List of other project stakeholders
8. Expected Deliverables
The main deliverables will be a final report of the baseline. The content of the report will be in the following:
▪ Contents page
▪ Abbreviations and acronyms page
▪ Executive Summary
▪ A short introduction to the project
▪ Methodology (including a clear explanation of the data collection methods used so that these can be effectively replicated during subsequent monitoring and evaluation processes)
▪ Baseline findings
▪ Small case studies/anecdotes and quotes from project beneficiaries and other stakeholders on relevant topics under baseline report
▪ Conclusions
▪ Annexes including: TOR, list of interviewees, survey questionnaire, focus group and key informant interview guides, raw data sheet, the final version of the Logical Framework with the baseline figures inserted, in-depth case studies on 10-12 participating farmers.
A concise power point presentation of the final baseline report should also be prepared (to be submitted in a CD/ DVD form). All documents, papers and data produced during the assessment are to be treated as the property of Traidcraft and Bikash Bangladesh and restricted for public use. The contracted agency/consultant will submit all original documents, materials and data to the contracting organization.
Page | 74
9. Budget
Total Fees and expenses: up to £ 5,000 (including Vat and Tax)
10. Timetable for Baseline Study
The baseline study should be completed by March 2016.There is a tight timeframe for the
research of this project and the consultant would need to work around the following dates:
Activity Deadlines
Sending TOR to Consultants/ Agencies no
later than
27th January 2016
Receipt of Proposals (EOI) 9thFebruary 2016
Selection of Consultant & Communication of
Results
14th February 2016
Completion of contracting formalities 15th February 2016
Work commences 16th February 2016
Submission of Questionnaire and FGD Tool 23rd February 2016
Submission of draft Report 20thMarch 2016
Comments on the draft report ( From TXHQ
and TXBD) and sending to consultant
24thMarch 2016
Submission of final report 28thMarch 2016
11. Application Process
Interested organizations, individuals are requested to submit their Expression of Interest (EoI)
either in hard copy or electronically to the following address on or before 9th February 2016:
Md. Haroon-Or-Rashid Sarker
Project Coordinator
Sustainable livelihoods for 1,500 smallholder farming households (7,500 people) in the extreme north of Bangladesh (EqualiTEA III) Traidcraft Exchange, Bangladesh Country Office
Flat 1B, House 11, Road 13 (new)
Dhanmondi, Dhaka-1209, Bangladesh
Tel: +88 02- 9119555
M+: 8801743969760
Page | 75
The EoI should include
▪ Contact details ▪ Up to date and detailed CV of the consultant(s)with brief descriptions of similar assignments ▪ A clear overview of how this piece of work will be approached, the methodology proposed and
the outputs generated, with a clear timeline for each of the specified activity and a budget apportioned for the assignment
▪ Two references
The EOI, excluding the consultant CVs, should not be more than 10 pages long, should have
single spacing, and use Arial typeface with a minimum font size of 10.
For any queries on the TOR please contact Md. Haroon-Or-Rashid Sarker,
(Project Coordinator), Traidcraft Exchange, Bangladesh Country Office)
12. Selection Criteria
On receipt of the EOI designated project management team will study the proposals including an interview, and take a decision about the consultant/s/ agency for the study. Selection of the consultant/s/ agency will be based on:
Selection Criteria Scores
Quality of the proposed plan – well thought out, logical, strong methodology and approach, well-timed, level of details, would meet objectives
10
Experience of conducting baseline studies of livelihoods projects 10
Knowledge / Experience on agriculture sector especially small-scale agriculture, farmer group and association management, public and private service provisions, vulnerability to natural disaster and climate change, etc.
10
Availability during the period of the project 10
Costs – value for money 10
TOTAL 50
At the beginning of the evaluation process, project staff will meet and hold a briefing session with the consultant/consulting firm to agree on the overall study methodology and highlight any key issues to be addressed.
13. Mode of Payment
Total fees for the evaluation will be paid in three installments:
1. 30 percent of the total fee will be paid on signing the contract
2. 40 percent of the total fee will be paid after submission of the draft report
Page | 76
3. The remaining amount (30 percent) will be paid upon acceptance of the final report.
For each installment, the payments would be made in crossed cheque by the name of the organization / individual.
General terms and conditions
▪ Traidcraft and Bikash Bangladesh reserve the right to accept or reject any proposal without giving any verbal and/or written rationale;
▪ All reports and documents prepared during the assignment will be treated as property of Traidcraft and Bikash Bangladesh
▪ The reports/documents or any part, therefore, cannot be sold, used and reproduced in any manner without prior written approval of Traidcraft and Bikash Bangladesh;
▪ Traidcraft and Bikash Bangladesh reserve the right to monitor the quality and progress of the work during the assignment.
Page | 77
Key project indicators and data to be gathered
Project indicators (from the project log frame)
Information that needs to be collected at the baseline
Methods of collection to be considered
Goal
The proportion of people whose income is less than national poverty level in the target districts
• Annual household income Survey of farmers
Purpose
1500 smallholder farming households in the extreme north of Bangladesh have reduced poverty and more sustainable livelihoods through tea cultivation
• Annual household income
• Sources of income – where does it come from?
Survey of farmers (Might be useful to use a seasonal calendar approach to assessing sources of income at different times of the year.)
Number of farmers who perceive an improvement in their wellbeing
• A wellbeing survey will be carried out as an integral part of the baseline. Traidcraft will train selected firms’ survey team on wellbeing concept, methodology and data collection tools.
Output 1
1,500 smallholder farming households are working collectively and collaboratively to increase their resilience.
• Are there any existing farmers groups? How many? What types / functions.
• How many of the farmers (part of the baseline) are members of groups
• If so, how many of these groups are currently taking collective actions? What issues, what results/
• Survey of farmers (question on whether or not they are currently a member of a group and what type)
• Key informant interviews& focus group discussions with farmers on issues/ results
Number of farmer groups that are negotiating with local government and local tea companies/factories for better services and support
• Are any existing farmers groups currently negotiating with local stakeholders? If so, how many? What types of services / resources, to what result?
• Key informant interviews
• Focus group discussions with farmers
Proportion of target households that perceive benefits from group membership
• If there are any existing farmers groups, do they perceive any benefits from belonging to a group? What benefits?
• Focus group discussions with farmers
• Survey of farmers (if a member of a group, ask if they perceive any benefits)
Output 2
1,500 smallholder farming households improve their agricultural practices and start cultivating tea in order to increase their income and reduce their vulnerability.
• Current level of production costs (baseline team may need to develop a matrix that asks for costs for each input and the quantity they use per bigha) across crops
• Survey of farmers
• Farmer focus group discussions with farmers
Average yield (in kg) of tea (before processing) per acre
• Current levels of productivity [define unit to be used–by year, by bigha?]
• Survey of farmers
• Farmer focus group discussions with farmers
Page | 78
(disaggregated by male/female headed households)
• How much fallow land and how much land used for other crops are farmers using for tea cultivation?
• Key informant interviews
Proportion of target household income earned from tea cultivation (disaggregated by male/female headed households)
• Current levels of yield per acre for existing crops per season [define period to be used.]
• Background information on potential for increase in productivity for different crops to assess where farmers are currently in relation to this.
• Survey of farmers
• Farmer focus group discussions with farmers
(Might be useful to use a seasonal calendar approach to help farmers relate more details.)
Output 3:
1,500 smallholder farming households have appropriate ongoing services/support for agricultural cultivation.
• Existing policies, practices or resources in place that support farmers.
• Issues around policies (gaps, information, implementation, attitude of officials)
• Mapping exercise of support services and policies exist
• Key informant interviews
• Focus group discussions with farmers (e.g. how much do they know about the policies being developed and the gaps.)
Proportion of target households that are satisfied with the services/support provided by barefoot service providers
• What services do farmers need, where do they get them from, what services are missing, quality of services, what does it cost (affordability).
• Level and nature of existing provision of public and private services to target farmers
• Mapping exercise of support services and policies exist
• Interviews with key informants
• Focus groups discussions with farmers
(Need to differentiate between services provided by the private sector and the government and discuss separately.)
Number of households assisted with agricultural services
• How many farmers received services from public and/or private service providers?
• Expectations from these service providers? What types of services they need?
• If any farmers are currently receiving services, how satisfied are they with these services? What needs to change?
• Mapping exercise
• Interviews with key informants
• Focus groups discussions with farmers
Number of acres (tea and non-tea) benefiting from agricultural improvements (fertilisers, irrigation etc.) (disaggregated by male/female headed households)
• How much land farmers at present cultivating with improved agricultural practices? (conducting soil test, using required amount of fertilizers and pesticides, etc.)
• Survey of farmers
• Farmer focus group discussions with farmers
• Where possible observation
Page | 79
Output 4
Systems in place to support smallholder farming households to diversify their income.
• Number and type of crops currently grown by farmers / which ones are better (in terms of return)/ analysis of cash vs. food crops.
• Number and type of environmentally friendly alternative income generating activities farmers are presently using. [For the survey we might need to provide a checklist of the main practices involved.]
Mapping (so that researchers are familiar with the range of agricultural practices in the area.) Survey of farmers
Proportion of target households that have adopted a new income-generating activity (in addition to tea)
• Currently how many households have adopted an alternative income-generating activity?
• Survey of farmers
• Farmer focus group discussions with farmers
• Interviews with key informants
Amount of savings mobilised from target households (disaggregated by male/female headed households)
• How much savings the farmers have currently?
• How many and what type of Investment Schemes (Sanchay Patra, Fixed Deposit, etc.) the farmers using now?
• Number and type of safety (other sources of income or savings) measures currently used by farmers.
Develop questions to cover main measures involved, e.g.:
• Do farmer households have savings, insurance, etc.
• What do they do in event of drought, flash floods?
• Have they experienced any of these in the last 5 years? With what impact?
• What suggestions do they have in terms of dealing with climate change?
• Are they open to crop changes? Are they aware of farmers who have changed crops, done any other thing to reduce negative impact of climate change?
• Survey of farmers
A group savings and investment fund is available to invest in new income-generating activities
• How many farmers have access to finance?
• How many farmers have own fund?
•
Page | 80
• How many farmers have existing loans and what is the amount of loan?
Page | 81
Page | 82
ANNEX 5 LOGICAL FRAMEWORK MATRIX
Sustainable livelihoods for 1,500 smallholder farming households (7500 people) in the extreme north of Bangladesh
10% 40% 70% Economic conditions are stable and conducive to small-scale agriculture and tea cultivation Bangladesh Government continues to promote small scale tea growing, agricultural growth and food security Natural disasters do not undermine project impact
Achieved
Source
Baseline and project progress report, focus group discussions, smallholder tea growers record, annual and final project evaluations
Outcome Indicator 2 Baseline Milestone 1 (2016)
Milestone 2 (2017) Target (date) (2018)
Number of farmers who perceive an improvement in their wellbeing
Planned To be assessed 10% (300 of 3000) (150 men and 150 women)
40% (1200 of 3000) (600 men and 600 women)
80% (2400 of 3000) (1200 men and 1200 women)
Achieved
Source
Page | 83
Baseline and project progress report, annual and final project evaluations
DFID (£) Appeal income (£) Other (£) Total (£) DFID SHARE (%)
614565 0 0 614565 100%
Output Indicator 1.1 Baseline Milestone 1 (2016)
Milestone 2 (2017) Target (date) (2018)
Assumption
Number of farmer groups that are negotiating with local government and local tea companies/factories for better services and support
Planned 0 (2015) 15 60 60 Smallholder farmers, groups and associations are willing to work together Strong leaders are available for the groups and associations Local authorities and other stakeholders engage with the project Government bodies and officials recognise the associations as farmer representative bodies
Achieved
Source
Baseline and project progress report, focus group discussions, smallholder tea growers group register, annual and final project evaluations
Output Indicator 1.2 Baseline Milestone 1 (2016)
Milestone 2 (2017) Target (date) (2018)
Proportion of target households that perceive benefits from group membership
Planned 0 (2015) 40% (600 households of a total of 1500) (480 male headed HHs and 120 female headed HHs)
75% (1125 households of a total of 1500) (900 male headed HHs and 225 female headed HHs)
90% (1350 households of a total of 1500) (1080 male headed HHs and 270 female headed HHs)
Achieved
Source
Baseline and project progress report, focus group discussions, smallholder tea growers group register, annual and final project evaluations
DFID (£) Appeal income (£) Other (£) Total (£) DFID SHARE (%)
102103 0 0 102103 100%
DFID (FTEs)
2.25
Output Indicator 2.1 Baseline Milestone 1 (2016)
Milestone 2 (2017) Target (date) (2018)
Assumptions
Page | 84
Average yield (in kg) of tea (before processing) per acre (disaggregated by male/female headed households)
Planned 0 (2015) 951 2167 3,901 (6,174 by 2020, i.e. after 5 years)
Smallholder farmers see the benefits of tea cultivation Smallholder farmers do not want to convert all their land to tea Smallholder farmers are willing to adapt practices and use new knowledge and skills
Achieved
Source
Baseline and project progress report, focus group discussions, smallholder tea growers production record, annual and final project evaluations
Output Indicator 2.2 Baseline Milestone 1 (2016)
Milestone 2 (2017) Target (date) (2018)
Proportion of target household income earned from tea cultivation (disaggregated by male/female headed households)
Planned 0 (2015) 10% 23% 42%
Achieved
Source
Baseline and project progress report, focus group discussions, smallholder tea growers production record, annual and final project evaluations
DFID (£) Appeal income (£) Other (£) Total (£) DFID SHARE (%)
325300 0 0 325300 100%
DFID (FTEs)
2.7
Output Indicator 3.1 Baseline Milestone 1 (2016)
Milestone 2 (2017) Target (date) (2018)
Assumptions
Proportion of target households that are satisfied with the services/support provided by barefoot service providers
Planned 0 (2015) 40% (600 households of a total of 1500) (480 male headed HHs and 120
75% (1125 households of a total of 1500) (900 male headed HHs and 225 female headed HHs)
90% (1350 households of a total of 1500) (1080 male headed HHs and 270 female headed HHs)
Smallholder farmers see the value of technical and business services Tea companies see a business case for
Page | 85
female headed HHs)
working with smallholder tea growers Service providers have adequate technical expertise and knowledge Achieved
Source
Baseline and project progress report, focus group discussions, smallholder tea growers group register, annual and final project evaluations
Output Indicator 3.2 Baseline Milestone 1 (2016)
Milestone 2 (2017) Target (date) (2018)
Number of households assisted with agricultural services
Planned
14.1% (28/199)
750 (600 male headed HHs and 150 female headed HHs)
1200 (960 male headed HHs and 240 female headed HHs)
1500 (1200 male headed HHs and 300 female headed HHs)
Achieved
Source
Baseline and project progress report, focus group discussions, smallholder tea growers group register, annual and final project evaluations
Output Indicator 3.3 Baseline Milestone 1 (2016)
Milestone 2 (2017) Target (date) (2018)
Number of acres (tea and non-tea) benefiting from agricultural improvements (fertilisers, irrigation etc.) (disaggregated by male/female headed households)
Planned Respondents saying they used this: Soil Test – 0% Organic Fertilizer – 93% Planting bush/stick – 21.1% Pheromone Trap – 0% Leaf Colour Chart – 0% Improved Irrigation – 0.5% Advanced Wet & Dry – 0% Follow advice of local agricultural officers on amount of fertilizer used – 5.5%
1200 2400 3,000
Achieved
Source RISK RATING
Page | 86
Baseline and project progress report, focus group discussions, smallholder tea growers Production record, smallholder tea growers group register, annual and final project evaluations
Low
DFID (£) Appeal income (£) Other (£) Total (£) DFID SHARE (%)
73285 0 0 73285 100%
DFID (FTEs)
1.8
Output Indicator 4.1 Baseline Milestone 1 (2016)
Milestone 2 (2017) Target (date) (2018)
Assumptions
Proportion of target households that have adopted a new income-generating activity (in addition to tea)
Planned 0 %(2015) [Note: 77% of surveyed respondents have secondary source of income other than agriculture]
10% (150 households of a total of 1500) (120 male headed HHs and 30 female headed HHs)
40%(600 households of a total of 1500) (480 male headed HHs and 120 female headed HHs)
80% (1200 households of a total of 1500) (960 male headed HHs and 240 female headed HHs)
Farmers see the benefits of group savings Farmers willing to adapt and invest alternative income-generating options
Achieved
Source
Baseline and project progress report, focus group discussions, smallholder tea growers group register, annual and final project evaluations
Output Indicator 4.2 Baseline Milestone 1 (2016)
Milestone 2 (2017) Target (date) (2018)
Amount of savings mobilised from target households (disaggregated by male/female headed households)
Planned 0 (2015) £7,512 £22,539 £37,566
Achieved
Source
Baseline and project progress report, smallholder tea growers savings record, bank statements, annual and final project evaluations
Output Indicator 4.3 Baseline Milestone 1 (2016)
Milestone 2 (2017) Target (date) (2018)
A group savings and investment fund is available to invest in new income-generating activities
Planned £0 (2015) £0 £18,000 £18,000
Achieved
Source RISK RATING
Baseline and project progress report, smallholder tea growers savings record, bank statements, annual and final project evaluations
Low
DFID (£) Appeal income (£) Other (£) Total (£) DFID SHARE (%)