Upload
lillian-wilkins
View
221
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
GAFSP/NAFSP &Nepal: An Interventionist FOs/CSOs Concerns
A Presentation at GAFSP-KM Workshop By NAFSP/ FOs Co-Ordinator
Prof Keshab Khadka, Ph DCCM & Head, Research Department,
All Nepal Peasants’ FederationOrganised by AFA/Agricord/AsiaDHRRA/CSA, Phnom
Penh, Cambodia, 8-11 Nov 2012
GAFSP Includes Nepal
• Govt of Nepal(GoN) eligibility to GAFSP informed: Jun 2010
• CIP and national priority pre-conditionalities• Central authorities consortium: Aug 2010• GoN Proposal to GAFSP Secretariat Sept 2010• Original Scheme of US $65.5 Million on Food
and Nutrition package program• GoN informed of proposal selected at reduced
scale of $46.5 M grant and $11.5M in-fund
FOs/CSOs and GAFSP
• Till Revised version, no leakage to FOs/CSOs• Thanks to AFA that FOs/CSOs got GAFSP
informed and ANPfa/ WOCAN jointly hold civil society interaction program on 10 July 2011
• AFA, specially Esther, second visit on Aug 2011 and discussions at various level
• National Peasant's Coalition meet and Esther's presentation on GAFSP at ANPFa Secretariat
• Interactions with GoN, FAO TA & World Bank• Intervention begins: GoN & WB team, sour face
FOs/CSOs Position
• Many a good projects failed as grass-root people ignored as farmers traditionally a silent majority
• Farmers, the ultimate project implementer, be at centre of this GAFSP, renamed NAFSP
• Diverse Ecology needs Bio-diversity based agri- production enhancement project: humid to arid crops pattern, added community culture
• Small and marginal peasants, IPs, Women, Dalits, Landless farmer & farm labour focus
• Poor infrastructure/ poor access to market/Dalit-based agri-labour feminization of agriculture
• Farmer first with right based CSO scrutiny
FO/CSO face GoN: Dhulikhel fight
• GoN/MoAC presented Four Components– Technology Development and Adaption – Technology Dissemination and Adoption – Livelihood Enhancement – Nutritional Status Enhancement FOs/CSOs accepted caption but thorough revision of
content subject to stakeholders' concernsProject site 19 Districts of Mid/Far west Mountain &
Hills welcomed but focus on 7 Dist be to 8 DistTalk with Secretary/ MoAC for mutual move agreed
Consulting stakeholder – the Challenge
• Approaches to fund raising for Surkhet stakeholders' consultative conference
• WB 17 Feb follow up visit & sharp criticism • Thanks to Soc & his follow up visit that
finalised small fund: AFA/AsiaDHRRA co-op• Big Bang Surkhet event Jun 15-17 Consultative
Conference, a farmers' strength show off
Surkhet War – Victory of FOs/CSOs
Hundred s attend; Thousands speak– All key FOs and NGOs working on food security,
peasants right and natural resource management– FOs who are part of the Peasants' Coalition (Part of
IFAD MTCP) including Water & Forest Users– Public officials of concerned Ministry and Offices– Farmers and Peasants of the project area of
GAFSP /NAFSP focusing on hard-hit 8 districts– Other stakeholders: Feminization & Gender Justice,
Dalits and IPs, Lagged behind social groups HR activists & Media people, Lawyers & ProfsWFP
The output – Revised Components
• 3FOs+2CSOs out of 17 member NSC• NPC at Regional, District and VDC body• Program Designing, M&E, local leadership• Still Challenging FO Front but warm relations• Food Sovereignty,-the guiding principle REVISIONS:– Emphasis on local seed & breed– Sustainable Natural Farming + Zero budget crops– Bio-diversity based local technology promotion– Socio- cultural, gender & IPs, Local people centre
The Progress So Far
• July Review of WB & FAO: mutually respectful• Final Appraisal Mission Sept 7-17 and FOs:
Emphasis on result-oriented implementation• Esther reporting: WB tabled final proposal at
GAFSP Secretariat and remarks on 23rd Oct• GoN ready to implement by Jan' 2013• Phone talk on 5th Nov 2012 with Secretary,
MoAC/N and others: a happy going
Lesson Learned
• Historical Peoples' Movement II of 2004 & common agenda: Food Sovereignty
• FOs common platform in MTCP/IFAD: NPC and GAFSP and ADS interventions
• It's FOs encounter with GAFSP, rather than involvement, FOs/CSOs fought own
• Different Farmers' and Peasants Organisations at National Table and alliance building
• Common understanding among FOs vital for strong position assertion
The Analysis
• No opposition after involvement but neither submission: constructive criticism, grass-root based fact forces bureaucracy to go along
• Accountability, transparency and mutual confidence building bring farmers together
• Less politicisation but much policy intervention earns mass support
• Thanks to GAFSP: Farmers learn Governance