Deep Roots

[

] 208

Lessons learned

1. Social protection programmes targeting poor and vulnerable

community members can work if targeting is rigorous and

involves the direct participation of community members.

2. To succeed with inputs subsidy programmes, the beneficiaries

should be willing to learn and comply with the recommended

agronomic practices including the correct use of inputs in raising

productivity per unit of land.

3. There is value in applying technical knowledge gained through

trainings and graduating the beneficiary to become a local trainer

for the community members.

4. Most small-scale farmers are trapped in a poverty cycle because

there are no sufficient social protection programmes. Several

smallholder, poor farmers in Molo are yet to get NAAIAP assistance

because of inadequate funds available for project expansion.

the primary objective of NAAIAP is to improve input access

and affordability of the key agricultural inputs needed by

millions of resource-poor, smallholder farmers. In so doing,

the project aims at helping poor households to kick-start their

asset-deprived farming systems and break their poverty cycles

through the adoption of intensive, business-oriented farming

systems. Overall, NAAIAP is implemented within underdevel-

oped rural settings that are dominated by poor and vulnerable

communities. According to the programme national coordi-

nator Rose Mwangi, what makes the NAAIAP concept very

special is its fabled beneficiary-selection activities. The start-

ing point is the criteria for selecting the implementation

site. The stringent measures include a requirement that the

place must be inhabited by a poor farming community with a

poverty index above 30 per cent; no history of government-

support programmes over the last decade; inaccessibility of

basic production assets and other essential rural infrastruc-

ture; and very low agricultural productivity of less than a

quarter of the national average.

As a pro-poor targeted programme, the criterion for

selecting the beneficiaries is equally rigorous. First, the target

beneficiary must be a subsistence farmer who is unable to

procure required farm inputs on their own. Secondly, the

farmer must have at least half an acre of land available for

maize production, which is the commodity used as a cruci-

ble for changing the farmers’ livelihoods. During selection,

preference is given to households headed by women or chil-

dren households. The other factors for a household’s selection

include demonstrated evidence of vulnerability, the house-

hold head being a person with a disability or infected by the

HIV/AIDs virus, and the household’s willingness to change

through the adoption of intensive farming based on a sustain-

able business model. To ensure the utmost transparency, the

ultimate beneficiary must be brazenly vetted and approved

by the community leaders in an open forum (known locally

as a Baraza) with members of the community as witnesses.

To NAAIAP beneficiaries, the word ‘vulnerable’ has a second

meaning: undo vulnerability.

Mrs Kosgei became a NAAIAP beneficiary through a quirk

of fate. Initially, she had applied to be a NAAIAP beneficiary

but fell short of the project’s meticulous criteria. But her

house happened to be the home of Johnston Yegon, who had

become disabled through a grisly road accident and therefore

could not provide for his young family of a wife and two chil-

dren. Mr Yegon, a distant relative of Mrs Kosgei, is the one

who was initially selected by the community leaders to be

the NAAIAP beneficiary. And so when Mr Yegon was called

upon to receive his farm inputs voucher by the NAAIAP team

during the project launch, it was Mrs Kosgei who turned up

to receive the voucher on his behalf. The knowledge that Mrs

Kosgei’s household accommodated Mr Yegon facilitated the

crafting of a secondary condition: Mrs Kosgei’s household

would use the subsidized inputs in line with the NAAIAP

approach and pass over part of the gains to the Yegons. The

only danger this arrangement carried was that of a mixed reac-

tion among local leaders who defined the last vetting lines. But

after the leaders gave a no-objection nod to the arrangement,

Mrs Kosgei never looked back.

When Mrs Kosgei received the farm inputs package, she

vowed not to join the bandwagon of those willing to cross

the river without getting wet. Recalling her household’s situ-

ation before she became a NAAIAP beneficiary, the harvest

of a meagre seven bags of maize which, as the best she ever

received from planting 1.5 acres of land, was far below the

area’s potential yield of 25 bags per acre. “Due to lack of

resources and knowledge, I used to plant maize seeds recycled

from the store and did not use any fertilizer,” said the farmer

on being questioned about low yields.

In the 2012 long rains planting season, Mrs Kosgei

received her Kilimo Plus (Inputs Grant) starter kit compris-

ing a 50 kilogram bag of Basal fertilizer (DAP), 50 kilograms

of topdressing fertilizer (CAN) and a 10 kilogram bag of

certified maize seed (H614) worth a total of KSh8,000

(about US$9). From her Merry-go-round social group, she

borrowed a further Ksh5,000 to plough and plant her 1 acre

farm using the NAAIAP inputs. After planting, Mrs Kosgei

joined other NAAIAP beneficiaries to undertake training on

Beneficiaries of the programme are able to apply the knowledge they gain

and become local trainers for their community

Image: NAAIAP

eep

oots