This is based on the presentation given at the advisory council
meeting, but block selection data and conclusions have been
updated based on new milk procurement data.
Notes on plenary and group discussions have also been added.
MilkIT
Background
Current Status
Outlook
1st Advisory Council Meeting
Dehradun 01/06/2012
Nils Teufel
Topics
• Background
– ILRI’s activities in South Asia
– History of the MilkIT proposal
– Major structure
• Current status
–
–
–
–
Collaboration with Ajeeveeka/IFAD
Selection of sites & partners
Detailed work-plans
Preparations for implementation
• Outlook
– Next activities in 2012
– Plans for 2013
01/06/2012
2/35
Background – ILRI in South Asia
• Feed improvements (fodder, food-feed crops,
processing)
• Market development
• Work on innovation
01/06/2012
3/35
Background – History of MilkIT
• Fodder Innovation Project/
Fodder Adoption Project
• OPEC dairy feeding & marketing project
• EU/IFAD call
01/06/2012
4/35
Background – major structure
• Institutional strengthening
– Value chain assessments
– Stakeholder involvement
– Innovation platforms for improved dairy marketing
• Productivity improvements
– Feed assessments
– Technology matching
– Innovation platforms for productivity improvements
focussing on feeding
• Knowledge sharing
– Communication outputs
– Meetings between partners, stakeholders, countries
01/06/2012
5/35
Status – Collaboration Ajeeveeka
• IFAD aim of linking loan programmes to grants
• Building on base laid by ULIPH
• Alignment with development of ILSP
– Site selection
– M&E framework (base-line survey)
– Support for value chain activities
• Comparison with Tanzania
01/06/2012
6/35
Status – Site selection, districts
Districts
IFAD
HARKIDUN
PUROLA
0
CHHOLMI
GANGOTRI
UTTARKASHI
JADAR
IFAD_ILSP
BHATWARI
PUROLA
TIUNA
HATAR
RAJGARHI
BHATWARI
RAJGARHI
CHAKRATA
BADRINATH
"
DUNDA
CHAURANGI KHAL
CHAKRATA
DUNDA
JOSHIMATH
BHARKOT
OKHIMATH
PRATAPNAGAR
JOSHIMATH
RUDRAPRAYAGOKHIMATH
TEHRI
PRATAPNAGAR
GHANSYALI
BHATWARI
CHAMOLI
TEHRI GARHWAL
TILWARA
"
DEHRA DUN
POKHRI
"
DEVAPRAYAG
CHAMOLI
MUNSYARI
KARNAPRAYAG
"
DEHRA DUN
CHAMOLI
"
VIKASNAGAR
SRINAGAR
PHURKIYA
NARENDRANAGARDEVAPRAYAG
"
RISHIKESH
PAURI
KARNAPRAYAG THARALI
PITHORAGARH
THALISAIN
BAGESHWAR
"
BAIJRO
LAKSAR
KAPKOT
BAGESHWAR
LANSDOWNE
KOTDWARA
RANIKHET
DHUMAKOT
BHIKIYASAIN
ALMORA
DHARCHULA
"
ROORKEEROORKEEHARIDWAR GARHWAL
HARIDWAR
LANSDOWNE
DHARCHULA
MUNSYARI
DIDIHAT
DIDIHAT
GANGOLIHAT
RANIKHET
PITHORAGARH
"
"
ALMORA
NAINI TAL
NAINI TAL
CHAMPAWAT
"
"
RAMNAGAR
KASHIPUR
CHAMPAWAT
HALDWANI
KASHIPUR
HALDWANI
• Ajeeveeka
activity
• Either
Kumaon or
Garhwal
• Mid-hills
• Dairy
dynamics
UDHAM SINGH NAGAR
"
KICHHA
SITARGANJ KHATIMA
SITARGANJ
KHATIMA
01/06/2012
7/35
Status – Partners 1
• Which type of partners (December workshop)?
HIMMOTHAN
IFAD
INHERE
LCM (Loke chetna manch)
CHIRAG
CHEA
01/06/2012
8/20
Status – Partners 2
• Medium NGO with
– local experience and
– capacity for research
– INHERE in Almora
• Would new federations be a more sustainable
structure?
– Bageshwar – Chamoli?
– Perhaps not yet
– CHIRAG in Bageshwar
01/06/2012
9/20
Status, block selection - ILSP
Partner
activities
01/06/2012
10/35
Status, block selection,
market access
Milk procurement Aanchal
2011/12 [kg/bov fem]
Village road access %
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
01/06/2012
11/35
Status, block selection,
land use
ShareForestOfUtilized
ShareIrrArea %NetSown
60%
30%
50%
25%
40%
20%
30%
15%
20%
10%
10%
5%
0%
0%
01/06/2012
12/35
Status, block selection,
bovine density
BovFem/km2
250
200
150
100
50
0
01/06/2012
BovFem/cap
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
13/35
Status, block selection,
intensified livestock
BuffFem/BovFem %
45
CbFem/BovFem %
3.0
40
35
2.5
30
2.0
25
20
1.5
15
1.0
10
5
0.5
0
0.0
01/06/2012
14/35
Status, block selection,
conclusion
• Bageshwar
– Chirag only active in Bageshwar block
– Dairy development indicators (milk procurement,
forest share) also support Bageshwar block
• Almora
– Chaukutia excluded: high forest & irrigation
– Syaldeh excluded: low milk procurement
– Bhikyasen and Sult both possible – more data
required
01/06/2012
15/35
Status, site selection, clusters
• Bageshwar block –
Chirag is active in two clusters
– Kathpuryachina
– Dewaldar
• Bhikyasen & Sult –
Inhere has links to both blocks
– Cluster overviews for Bhikyasen & Sult
01/06/2012
16/35
Status, site selection, sub-clusters
• Village census at cluster level
• Classification of sub-clusters by milk marketing
(formal/informal)
• Defined by field facilitator reach (4-6 villages)
• Base for feed innovation platform?
• Dairy innovation platform at cluster level?
• Control sites within cluster?
01/06/2012
17/35
Preparations for implementation
•
•
•
•
•
•
Office
Secondary data collection
Local contacts
Detailed work-plans
Partner agreements
Value chain assessment tools
01/06/2012
18/35
Outlook – activities 2012
(work plan)
Steps
Topics
Tools
Time
Site selection
Block data for cluster
Secondary data
June
Cluster data for sub-cluster
Village census
June
Village survey
July
Value chains
VCA
September
Development
Actor mapping
August
Feeding & feed gaps
FEAST
October
Characterisation Villages
Innovation
01/06/2012
Dairy market platform formed
October
Feeding platform formed
November
Market interventions identified
December
Feed interventions identified
January ‘13
19/35
Outlook – activities 2013
Steps
Topics
Innovation
Intervention trials round 1
Jan-Apr
Intervention trials round 2
May-Aug
Scaling-up of interventions
Jul-Oct
Platform sustainability
Sep-Nov
Moving on
Time
Documentation
Reports
Sep-Nov
Publicity
Workshops
Demonstrations
Media
Sep-Nov
Impact assessment
01/06/2012
Tools
Oct-Nov
20/35
Thank You!
01/06/2012
21/35
Discussion on presentation - 1
• What is the meaning of “innovation platform”?
–
–
–
–
It’s about to bringing together experiences of a variety of stakeholders on
dairy marketing, feed support , knowledge sharing and innovation/change
regarding how to test & adapt these innovations.
Innovation platforms are not only a discussion forum and not just an
extension activity.
• What will be the project output in Dec 2013 and who will receive it?
– As a research project, papers and reports will be major outputs, with IFAD
being the first recipient.
– Research outputs will be aligned with the demands of donors and partners.
– Documentation of processes and results will enable global and local use.
– Documentation of establishment and success/failure of innovation
platforms will be a major output. Induced changes will be a main indicator.
• What will be language of dissemination?
– Main audience will be institutions. Therefore, first language will be English.
– However, for local institutions documents in Hindi will also be prepared.
01/06/2012
22/35
Discussion on presentation - 2
• What will be done to reduce livestock impact on forests?
– Feed requirements, current sources & opportunities will be assessed
with FEAST
– General land-use change will not be a focus of MilkIT because of its
short duration
– More efficient use of existing resources will probably emphasise farm
products and labour efficiency (reducing forest use)
– Himmothan has already experience with introducing winter fodder.
Forest use has already decreased.
• How can MilkIT improve green fodder supply when the project is
only 20 months and most green fodder comes from trees which
yield only after 3-5years?
– MilkIT will prioritise technologies (with the help of Techfit) which yield
fast effects (no planting campaigns, no focus on breed improvement).
– More efficient use of existing feeds will be focus (supplementation,
chopping) and wider use of under-utilised resources (grass-lands).
01/06/2012
23/35
Discussion on presentation - 3
• How will feed-related problems be identified? How will local capacity &
willingness for adoption be considered?
– Innovation platforms will improve communication.
– Specific tools (e.g. Techfit) will enable efficient discussion.
• What will be main project indicators, milk yield?
– Milk yield will be important, but profitability and labour returns will also be
main indicators.
– Improved productivity will decrease pressure on forests.
• How will other aspects of productivity be considered (breed, health) and
who will be doing this?
– Within the project period no major breed improvement effects can be
expected.
– But we know that local cows are being replaced with buffaloes.
– Feed improvements offer greater effect in improved animals with less labour.
– Where health issues are important we include local institutions in platform.
01/06/2012
24/35
Discussion on presentation - 4
• How will the variation between households and animals be
considered?
– MilkIT will only target groups (e.g. SHGs), not individual
households/animals
– At the platform level discussions will have to consider for which type
of households/animals technologies are suitable.
– When documenting effects we will have to collect household/animal
data.
• How is MilkIT going to compete with strong local dairy
organisations?
– We will map which institutions are working on which issues.
– The innovation platforms will bring all relevant and willing actors
together as a complementary activity.
– We are aware that compared to local institutions MilkIT will only show
a brief appearance and cannot compete.
01/06/2012
25/35
Group discussions
1. Innovation platforms:
–
–
“How can innovation platforms support development and
dissemination of new technologies for dairy development?”
Himmothan, GBPIHED, Elks, AHD
2. Marketing constraints:
– “What are you most interested in for overcoming institutional
and marketing constraints in the dairy sector?”
– Aanchal, Ajeeveeka, ULDB, Chirag
3. Feeding constraints:
– “What should MilkIT produce to help with improving
productivity of dairy animals among small holders through
better feeding, breeding & health?”
– GBPUAT, FD, VPKAS
01/06/2012
26/35
Grp 1: Innovation platforms
M. Chauhan
R.S. Negi
01/06/2012
R.S. Rawat
S. Jarial
R.C. Rajaguru
27/35
Grp1 Innovation platforms
• Value of innovation platforms
Most important
– Contribute by bringing in technologies, pilot them, scale it up
– By creating platform at different levels, knowledge sharing at right levels
– By creating awareness, demonstration wider audience, feedback, knowledge
documentation
– Difficulties & risk:
– Sustainability, ownership, scope
– Compendium of successful experiences
– Malavika: Ownership for sustainability (who owns)
– Negi: What about the costs for maintaining platform
– Malavika: which scale?
block level officers/ paravets/ ext. workers don’t talk to each other, maybe that
would be useful
– NGOs do talk to each other
– Padma: what is the actual income contribution of milk, what can actually be
improved through more milk
01/06/2012
28/35
Additional input
on innovation platforms (later)
• Padma: expand the innovation platforms to include
other actors who work in different fields (e.g.
breeding, health, small ruminants etc.). Offer the
platform as a useful and efficient approach to get
collaboration & knowledge exchange going.
• Malavika: Support communication between local
government officials and practitioners. They have
only few opportunities for exchange.
01/06/2012
29/35
Grp 2: Inst. & mrktng constraints
Atul Shah
Pankaj Kumar
Pawan Kumar
A.K. Negi
01/06/2012
30/35
Grp 2: Institutional constraints
• Baseline survey
– Market research (Milk production groups)
Most important
• demand/supply gap
• production, status/potential
Tiwari: consider own consumption requirements (nutritional security)
Others: but we are just talking about selling surplus
• Awareness of group formation
– Benefits
– Approach (evaluation of form of organisational structure)
– Business plan (economics of group activities for sustainability)
Malavika: Use federations to market more products.
Pawan: Develop a variety of successful business models; MilkIT can bring
together knowledge of successful innovations, compendium (specific examples)
– Marketing
– Incentives
• Capacity building
– NGOS can be roped in
01/06/2012
31/35
Grp2: Marketing constraints
• Infrastructure
Most important
– cold-storage/chain
– collection points (suggestions for linking remote villages)
• Value addition (Amul example)
(Lepcha: think of cheese as in Sikkim)
(Malavika: Minimum amount is so low that any processing is
difficult, starting dairies with 50l/d) as soon as area is increased,
transport becomes too expensive)
• Pricing (amount, quality)
• Identification of markets
• Collection process
• Standardisation
• Up-scaling
01/06/2012
32/35
Grp 3: Feed constraints
V. Padmakumar
T. Ravichandran
01/06/2012
J.K. Bisht
S.T.S. Lepcha
T.P. Tiwari
33/35
Grp 3: Feed constraints
•
Feeding
– Choice of fodder
•
•
•
Most important
For lean period (Apr-Jun, Dec-Feb)
Fodder trees (Bhimal, oak)
Perennial grasses (broom, napier, congo)
– Dual purpose crops: wheat, barley, paddy (suitability), depends on area
– Use of weeds (Natal grass?)
– Improvement of existing feeds
•
Urea treatment, UMB, suppl green fodder, concentrates, suppl with area specific minerals
– Reduce wastage/feeding
– Fodder banks (Negi: GoU is putting fodder banks in each block)
•
Breeding
– cross-breeding
– red. calving interval
– red. AFC
•
Health
– Deworming, ext. parasites
– Promotion of EVM (ethnoveterinary system)
– Vaccination (FMD, HS) (Negi: cold chain); Negi: improve evidence-based veterinary services,
not effectively targeted, also information links (helpline).
01/06/2012
34/35
Chairman’s conclusions
• In livestock development
consider 3 types
– Milk animals (5l milk/d)
– Tea animals (1l milk/d)
– Dung animals (no milk/d)
01/06/2012
35/35