MCDA Final Report Malawi - Standards and Trade Development ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table A3.6.Pesticide controls for Tobacco Decision Criterion Value Details Confidence Cost Up-front investment US$800,000 Procurement and installation of kite for pesticide residue testing and non-tobacco-related materials (NTRM) sorting and removal. Medium On-going cost 0.1% Costs of testing, on-going training, etc. Medium Ease of implementation 5 Change in absolute value of exports US$60 million Trade diversification 0 Agricultural/fisheries productivity +1 Installation of kits for testing and removal of NTRM is difficult since there is a large number of producers and numerous buyers. The most appropriate place to install the kits is not always clear unless there is funding for each grower to be provided with one, which is unlikely. Trade impacts There will be a general improvement in quality of the exported tobacco and a decline in export market rejections. At the same time, production levels are restricted. It is estimated that exports could increase by 10% by 2017. Little or no impact. Malawian tobacco is blended because of quality issues. Domestic agri-food impacts Increased exports and lower levels of rejections should enhance farm prices and/or sales Medium Medium Medium Medium Domestic public health 0 No impact High Environmental protection 0 Little or no impact Medium Social impacts Poverty impact +1 Increased income of small-scale tobacco producers Medium Impact on vulnerable groups +1 Tobacco producers are often small, but less poor than smallholders as a whole. Production mainly by men. Medium Page | 63
Table A3.7.Pesticide controls for pulses Decision Criterion Value Details Confidence Cost Up-front investment US$1.5 million This will involve the widespread training of farmers in GAP and good handling practices by those engaged in storage, as well as the development and use of a network of commercial grain storage facilities. Figures are based on a similar project in Rwanda. High On-going cost 0.1% Limited cost of maintaining awareness. Medium Ease of implementation 4 Change in absolute value of exports US$2.7 million Trade diversification +1 Dispersed and loosely organised grower base which will be difficult to coordinate and train, and with uncertain outcomes. Trade impacts The value of exports would be increased as a result of better quality and lower rejections. It is assumed that this will result in value addition of 10%.better export quality will be achieved and hence facilitate trade There will be more a degree of trade diversification, mainly away from tobacco. Domestic agri-food impacts Medium High Medium Agricultural/fisheries productivity +1 Agricultural productivity will increase High Domestic public health 0 Little or no impact unless controls are also applied to production for domestic consumption. Medium Environmental protection 0 No anticipated environmental impact Medium Poverty impact +1 Impact on vulnerable groups +1 Social impacts Some positive effect on farmer income due to less wastage and better prices. Some impact on smallholders engaged in production of pulses. Little or no impact on other groups unless same practices are applied to production for domestic consumption. High Medium Page | 64
Page 1 and 2:
MINISTRY OF INDUSTRY AND TRADE Usin
Page 3 and 4:
4.11. Compliance with hygiene requi
Page 5 and 6:
RASFF SADC SME SPS STDF TAML TBT UP
Page 7 and 8:
Using Multi Criteria Decision Analy
Page 9 and 10:
Table 1. Existing reviews of SPS co
Page 11 and 12:
Table 3. Malawian agri-food exports
Page 13 and 14: were presented with a series of car
Page 15 and 16: Genetically-modified organism (GMO)
Page 17 and 18: Option Number Name Details 4 Mycoto
Page 19 and 20: Option Number Name Details 15 Seed
Page 21 and 22: Table 6. Decision criteria measurem
Page 23 and 24: 4. Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS)
Page 25 and 26: participation/oversight of the Comp
Page 27 and 28: 4.9. Pesticide residue testing capa
Page 29 and 30: Development (OECD) 51 ; and 3) Inte
Page 31 and 32: Figure 4. Decision criteria measure
Page 33 and 34: Figure 7. Decision criteria measure
Page 35 and 36: Finally, Figures 11 and 12 report t
Page 37 and 38: Figure 12. Decision criteria measur
Page 39 and 40: Figure 14. Decision criteria scores
Page 47 and 48: To explore the impact of changing t
Page 49 and 50: Figure 32. Net flows for baseline m
Page 51 and 52: Given the robustness of the results
Page 53 and 54: Faulkner, L., Harrington, J., Levy,
Page 55 and 56: Appendix 2. Participants at Stakeho
Page 57 and 58: Appendix 4. Capacity-Building Optio
Page 59 and 60: Poverty impact +2 Impact on vulnera
Page 61 and 62: Table A3.4. Mycotoxin testing capac
Page 63: Poverty impact +1 Impact on vulnera
Page 67 and 68: Table A3.9.Pesticide controls for t
Page 69 and 70: Table A3.11. Animal health controls
Page 71 and 72: Social impacts Poverty impact +1 Sm
Page 73 and 74: Social impacts Poverty impact +2 Li
Page 75 and 76: Table A3.15. Seed inspection and ce
Page 77 and 78: Table A3.16. Animal health controls
Page 79 and 80: 21 Anonymous (2002). Volume 2, Chap
Page 81: The eggs from which the day old chi
show all

MCDA Final Report Malawi - Standards and Trade Development ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?