Constraints to smallholders participation in Cassava value ... - aaacp

Table 3 Overall benefits and risks from growing cassava0=not at all important, 3=very important Mean SDIncreased food security 2.60 0.778Increased income 1.23 1.216More stable income 1.01 1.125Increased exposure to weather and production risks 0.62 1.005Increased exposure to crop damage 0.59 0.856Increased exposure to market risks 0.40 0.7013.6 Interventions and supportThe level of outside support in Chongwe District reported by growers was limited. MACO wasconsidered to be the principal player (but account must be taken of the fact that enumerators wereMACO staff), followed by NGOs PAM and FoDiS (JICA), and a handful of other NGOs. Means ofsupport were:• farm visits, group training, nucleus farmers, wider media, technical demonstrations andvisits, distribution of planting materials (20-38%)• commercial outgrower schemes (9%)For all respondents, the percentage who had received training in cassava production and relatedactivities was low, particularly in respect of processing and quality control (Table 4):Table 4 TrainingRespondents who received training in: %producing cassava 30.2processing cassava 19.8marketing and business 31.0group organisation 31.0quality control 12.1Various interventions were cited by farmers (Table 5). Visits by private sector agents were almostnegligible with only 1 mention of the processor Authentic Foods. A total of 26% of growers said thatthey were aware of cassava initiatives in which they had not participated. Only 4 respondentscommented that non-participation was due to lack of interest, and only one to lack of time. Whereinterventions were targeted at women, some men commented that they had been excluded.14