Sustaining Livelihoods through Organic Agriculture in Tanzania - UMB

Sustaining Livelihoods through Organic Agriculture in
Tanzania:
A Sign-post for the Future
Petra Bakewell-Stone
May, 2006
Norwegian University of Life Sciences
Department of Plant and Environmental Sciences
Master Thesis 30 credits 2006
Main Supervisor: Dr. Geir Lieblein
1

Contents
Abbreviations 3
Acknowledgements 5
Abstract 6
1 Introduction 7
2 Literature Review 8
2.1 Definitions of organic agriculture 8
2.2 Classification systems of organic agriculture 9
2.3 Organic agriculture in Africa 10
2.4 Organic agriculture as a livelihood strategy 11
2.5 Pathways to improvements in organic systems 12
3 Methods 15
3.1 Action Research 15
3.2 Systems Thinking 17
3.3 Agroecosystem Analysis 17
3.4 Farming Systems Research 18
3.5 Case Study Research 19
3.6 Participatory Learning and Action 20
3.7 Soft Systems Methodology 20
3.8 Sustainable Livelihoods Framework 22
3.9 World Café 23
4 Research Process 24
4.1 Selecting a topic 24
4.2 Exploring the subject 25
4.3 Designing the study 25
4.4 Surveying the territory 26
4.5 Seizing learning opportunities 26
4.6 Refining the concept note 26
4.7 Beginning the fieldwork 28
4.8 Key informant interviews 29
4.9 Field visits 30
4.10 Case study research 30
4.11 Stakeholder forum 32
4.12 Digesting the findings 33
4.13 Verification by acceptance 34
5 Organic Agriculture in Tanzania 35
5.1 Country background 35
5.2 History of organic agriculture in Tanzania 35
5.3 Status of organic agriculture in Tanzania 36
5.4 Modus Operandi of organic agriculture in Tanzania 39
5.5 Political context of organic agriculture in Tanzania 40
2

6 Assessment of Organic Systems in Tanzania 41
6.1 Towards a Tanzanian vision of organic agriculture 41
6.2 Benefits of organic agriculture in Tanzania 42
7 Summary of Case Study on Organic Agriculture and Rural Livelihoods in
Mkuranga District 46
7.1 Background to the area 46
7.2 Individual case narratives 46
7.3 Analysis 46
7.4 Lessons 47
8 Challenges to the Development of Organic Agriculture in Tanzania 49
8.1 Production 49
8.2 Labour 50
8.3 Gender 50
8.4 Market-orientation 51
8.5 Policy and institutional framework 53
9 Strategies to Strengthen the Organic Sector in Tanzania 55
9.1 Production and processing 55
9.2 Market development 57
9.3 Research and education 60
9.4 Policy and legislation 62
9.5 Standards and certification 65
9.6 Institutional development 67
10 Concluding Remarks 69
References 71
Appendices
1 Interviews Summary
2 Case Study Protocol
3 Report on Case Study Research
4 Invitation to Stakeholder Forum
5 Background Information to the Stakeholder Forum
6 News Release
7 Session Planning
8 Stakeholder Forum Summary Report
9 Reflections
3

Abbreviations
AIDS Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome
ASDP Agricultural Sector Development Programme
ASDS Agricultural Sector Development Strategy
BET Board of External Trade
BOKU University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences
CSO Civil Society Organisation
CSR Case Study Research
DFID Department for International Development
EPOPA Export Promotion of Organic Products from Africa
EurepGAP European Good Agricultural Practice
FAO Food and Agricultural Organisation
FSR Farming Systems Research
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GMO Genetically Modified Organism
HACCP Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point
HIV Human Immunodeficiency Virus
ICS Internal Control System
IFOAM International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movement
IMO Institute of Market Ecology
IOAS International Organic Accreditation Scheme
IPM Integrated Pest Management
ITC International Trade Centre
KNCU Kilimanjaro Native Cooperative Union
MAFSC Ministry of Agriculture, Food Security and Cooperatives
MARI Mikocheni Agricultural Research Institute
MDG Millennium Development Goals
MKUKUTA Mkakati wa Kukuza Uchumi na Kuondoa Umaski Tanzania
MRL Minimum Residue Limits
MRP Minjingu Rock Phosphate
MVIWATA Mtandao wa Vikundi vya Wakulima wa Tanzania
NEPAD New Partnership for Africa’s Development
NGO Non-Governmental Organisation
NORAD Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation
NSGRP National Strategy on Growth and Reduction of Poverty
PCI Premier Cashew Industries
PELUM Participatory Ecological Land Use Management
PGS Participatory Guarantee Systems
PLA Participatory Learning and Action
PTD Participatory Technology Development
POP Persistent Organic Pollutants
RAAKS Rapid Appraisal of Agricultural Knowledge Systems
SADC Southern African Development Community
SIDA Swedish Development Agency
SL Sustainable Livelihoods
SSM Soft Systems Methodology
SUA Sokoine University of Agriculture
SWC Soil and Water Conservation
TanCert Tanzania Organic Certification Association
4

TBS Tanzanian Bureau of Standards
TOAM Tanzania Organic Agriculture Movement
Tshs Tanzanian Shillings
UMB Norwegian University Life Sciences
UNCTAD United Nations Conference on Trade and Development
UNEP United Nations Environment Programme
WHO World Health Organisation
N.B. Unless otherwise stated all costs are given in Tanzanian shillings. At the time of
writing 1,000 Tshs is equivalent to 0.638346 Euros, based on exchange rates given at
http://www.xe.com/ucc/ (visited 09/05/06).
5

Acknowledgements
This research would not have been possible without the generous assistance of
individuals and institutions too numerous to mention here. I would, however, like to
record my most sincere thanks to my supervisor in Norway, Dr. Geir Lieblein, for
being a bastion of support at every stage in the research, and for asking fascinating
questions which have taken me into new realms of discovery. I am also very grateful
to Dr. Charles Francis, from the University of Nebraska, for his encouraging,
thoughtful and positive inputs, to Dr. Fred Johnsen and Dr. Lars Olav Eik of Noragric
for their technical support under PANTIL and to NORAD for providing the necessary
financial support for my fieldwork. My particular appreciation is extended to Leonard
Mtama of TanCert and Jordan Gama of TOAM in Tanzania for their close
collaboration and wonderful sense of humour which made working together an
extremely refreshing and pleasurable experience. Thanks are also due to Marg
Leijdens of EPOPA for facilitating my fieldwork in many ways, to Juma Mandwanga
of Premier Cashews Industries Ltd. and his family for kindly hosting me in Kerekese
during the case study research, to my local contact, Dr. Kallunde Sibuga and others at
Sokoine University of Agriculture in Morogoro, Tanzania for contributing their
knowledge and experience and to all the people involved in organic agriculture in one
way or another who volunteered their time and energy to facilitate this study. I would
like to express my profound gratitude to the late Father Yves Marché, whose tireless
work with smallholder farmers to build sustainable communities in Tanzania has been
the greatest source of inspiration in my work and studies, and whose memory
continues to significantly influence the direction of my ideas and energies. Finally, I
am forever indebted to my dear parents, Anderson Bakewell and Dr. Francine Stone,
for their selfless attentiveness to all my needs and, in the context of this research, for
meticulously proof-reading my writings and providing valuable comments.
6

Abstract
Since certified organic agriculture first emerged in Tanzania in the early 1990s it has
been receiving increasing interest from the private sector and development partners,
particularly for the role that it may have to play in addressing issues of sustainable
food production and improved livelihoods of resource-poor people. Empirical data
that helps to elucidate the relationship between organic agriculture and livelihood
sustainability is currently limited.
By joining together with key actors in Tanzania's organic sector and analysing organic
initiatives from a sustainable livelihood perspective, this study aims to assess and
enhance organic agriculture's contribution to sustainable livelihoods and food security
amongst Complex, Diverse and Risk-prone farmers. Holistic and multi-perspective
analysis of the organic sector reveals that although organic agriculture is making
efficient use of resources in the current institutional context and building upon
existing livelihood strategies, there are attendant risks and challenges in pursuing
certified organic production for the benefit of the smallholder farmers. These need to
be taken into consideration during the formulation and implementation of farm-,
district- and national-level strategies.
Key words: organic agriculture, Tanzania, sustainable livelihoods
7

Chapter One: Introduction
In an effort to address the remaining gaps in our knowledge of the livelihood benefits
to resource-poor smallholder farmers of organic certification and trade, this study
applies action research approaches to the developing organic sector in Tanzania. The
overall aim is to assess and enhance organic agriculture’s contribution to sustainable
livelihoods and food security amongst Complex, Diverse and Risk-prone (CDR)
smallholders in Tanzania.
The central research question of this study, ‘In what ways can organic agriculture be
developed for the benefit of the smallholder in Tanzania?’ has been addressed through
two whole-project case studies and multi-stakeholder involvement, the main methods
adopted to analyse the dynamics of organic agriculture at the local and national levels
respectively. The main research question can be broken down into three instrumental
questions:
1. What is the impact of organic agriculture on smallholder livelihoods?
2. By which pathways does organic agriculture lead to livelihood benefits?
3. Which strategies can be adopted to strengthen these pathways?
A three-phase research process, which has moved from case studies, key informant
interviews and field visits at the local level, to a national-level stakeholder forum and
then to verification and presentation of findings back at the local level, considers the
structure and functioning of organic systems at both spatial scales. Fieldwork was
carried out in Tanzania over four months and was arranged under the Programme for
Agricultural and Natural Resources Transformation for Improved Livelihoods
(PANTIL) involving collaboration between the Norwegian University of Life
Sciences (UMB) and Sokoine University of Agriculture (SUA) in Tanzania.
In the tradition of action research, the researcher moves beyond reflection into action
planning in collaboration with key actors, the outcome of which is the participatory
formulation of strategies for individual and joint actions to strengthen the organic
sector.
8

Chapter Two: Literature Review
The purpose of this chapter is to compile and synthesise the burgeoning literature and
research relating to organic agriculture and its role in development in sub-Saharan
Africa.
2.1 Definitions of organic agriculture
Organic agriculture, also known as ecological or biological agriculture, is a holistic
farm management system which aims to optimise the health and productivity of
interdependent communities of soil, life, plants, animals and people (FAO/WHO,
2001). Organic systems operate by integrating biological and ecological processes
such as nutrient cycling, nitrogen fixation, soil regeneration, allelopathy, competition,
predation and parasitism into food production processes. Rather than relying on
expensive and non-renewable external inputs, organic agriculture promotes a
combination of agronomic practices such as crop rotations, intercropping and the use
of locally-available manure together with biological control methods (EPOPA, 2004).
Through the mindful management of ecological and biological processes organic
farmers can optimise the use of locally or farm-derived renewable resources. Since it
builds on and enhances the ecological management skills of farmers, and includes
social standards, organic agriculture is 'more than a systems of production that
includes or excludes certain inputs' notably agrochemicals and Genetically-Modified
Organisms (GMOs) (Edwards, 2005).
The International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), a
worldwide umbrella organisation of organic agriculture movements with at least 760
member organisations and institutions in 105 countries has defined organic agriculture
as 'a whole systems approach based upon sustainable ecosystems, safe food, good
nutrition, animal welfare and social justice' (IFOAM, 2002). IFOAM has formulated
principles for organic agriculture that were revised in 2005 to include health, ecology,
fairness and care (see box below), and also basic standards that are applied to both
certified and non-certified organic agriculture.
IFOAM Revised Principles for Organic Agriculture
HEALTH – Organic agriculture should sustain and enhance the health of soil, plant,
animal, human and the planet as one and indivisible. Health is understood as the
wholeness and integrity of living systems.
ECOLOGY – Organic agriculture should be based on living ecological systems and
cycles, work with them, emulate them and help sustain them.
FAIRNESS – Organic agriculture should build on relationships that ensure fairness
with regards to the common environment and life opportunities.
CARE – Organic agriculture should be managed in a precautionary and responsible
manner to protect the health and well-being of current and future generations and the
environment.
Source: After IFOAM, 2005a
9

2.2 Classification systems of organic agriculture
Organic agriculture can be differentiated from traditional, modern and other types of
sustainable agriculture by the standards and guidelines that define and regulate it. As a
type of alternative agriculture, organic agriculture belongs to a large family of related
approaches to farming that attempt ‘to provide sustained yields through the use of
ecologically-sound management technologies’ (Altieri, 1987: xix). Certified organic
agriculture may be further distinguished from non-certified organic or agroecological
production which meets organic production standards but is not subject to organic
inspection, certification and labelling (IFOAM, 2004).
A classification system has been proposed in order to better understand the vast range
of different types of organic agriculture (see diagram below).
Classification of Organic Agriculture
Sustainable Agriculture
Certified organic Non-certified Integrated Production
organic agroforestry, low-external input,
permaculture, conservation agriculture,
eco-farming etc.
Commodity focus Community focus
Individual Catchments Groups / co-operatives
Out-growers
(contract farming)
Source: After Hauser, 2005
Even further variation in organic systems can be recognised with reference to the
typology of organic farming shown below.
In this study organic agriculture refers to the conscious use of organic agricultural
techniques, both in certified and non-certified systems. However, there is a bias
towards projects that have achieved certification status and/or are under conversion
since these are the most explicitly “organic” initiatives and therefore provide clear
examples of how this holistic farm management system is being implemented on the
ground.
10

Typology of Organic Systems
Source: Compiled from a wide range of sources including literature and personal observations
2.3 Organic agriculture in Africa
Organic agriculture is receiving increasing attention across the African continent in
parallel with the recognition of its contribution to the Millennium Development Goals
(MDGs) of improved health and food security, environmental conservation and
economic development. This is attributed to: increasing and stabilising yields in semiarid
lands; increasing returns for labour investment; combating desertification;
improving pest control; reducing debts; coping with HIV/AIDS; strengthening social
systems; and maximising environmental services (Edwards, 2005). Recognising the
link between organic agriculture and poverty reduction is behind the push by major
donors and national governments to commercialise smallholder farmers and support
their access to organic markets.
There is a whole constellation of other reasons that African smallholders are choosing
to farm organically. In addition to the interest in sustainable natural resource
management and healthy eating, increasing numbers of resource-poor farmers cannot
afford agrochemicals. Furthermore, Green Revolution packages of high-yield varieties
of food crops supported by high inputs of agro-chemicals and water are inherently
poorly suited to many semi-arid lands and areas lacking infrastructure (which is the
case for most of rural Africa). Alternatives to industrial agriculture are also being
sought as a result of the perceived threat of agro-chemicals, and as a way to reduce
exposure to toxic pesticides such as Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) that are used
in some fruit and vegetable production as well as storage of food grains.
11

In 2003, IFOAM commissioned an overview of the organic movement in Africa,
covering both certified and non-certified organic producers in 22 of Africa’s 54
countries where organic agriculture is most advanced. The IFOAM survey identifies
five different mechanisms through which organic agriculture is currently being
developed and promoted, namely:
1. commercially-driven, certified and export-led organic agriculture that exist
without any (significant) external funding, generally practised on large-scale
farms and usually for export;
2. export-oriented organic agriculture, assisted through development funding,
generally aimed at improving the cash incomes of impoverished smallholders
by giving them access to premium export markets;
3. non-market oriented organic agriculture, assisted by donor agencies to meet a
range of development objectives such as poverty relief particularly amongst
vulnerable groups such as women and female-headed households, combating
desertification and global warming, improving soil fertility, promoting the use
of local seed varieties and maintaining biodiversity;
4. local organic agriculture projects, developed by farmer groups and indigenous
development organisations as a means of addressing pressing social, economic
and environmental problems;
5. research carried out within local, national and supra-national institutes (Parrott
& van Elzakker, 2003).
The growing interest in organic agriculture in all the above sectors by actors with
vastly differing goals, motivations and attitudes is giving rise to the adoption of a
range of different farming practices with equally heterogeneous implications for the
livelihoods of producers.
2.4 Organic agriculture as a livelihood strategy
Organic agriculture is not to be seen as an end in itself, but rather as a means to
healthier soils, plants, animals and people, or a livelihood strategy used to achieve
desired livelihood outcomes such as poverty reduction, food security and
environmental conservation. The concept of livelihood ‘comprises the capabilities,
assets (including material and social resources) and activities required for a means of
living. A livelihood is sustainable when it can cope with and recover from stresses
and shocks, and maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets both now and in the
future, while not undermining the natural resource base’ (adapted from Scoones,
1998: 4).
Donor agencies and other development partners promote organic agriculture in order
to bring opportunities and welfare benefits to the people of rural Africa. The SIDAfunded
Export Promotion of Organic Products from Africa (EPOPA) claims that the
benefits of organic agriculture include increased productivity, safe food, varied diets,
increased income and return on labour, reduced costs of production and reduced risk
of crop failures (EPOPA, 2004). Informal indications show that organic producers are
more food secure and can sell excess produce, enabling them to educate and clothe
their children better than other farmers (Taylor, 2006).
Advocates of organic agriculture are being challenged to critically appraise the
contribution that organic agriculture is having to food security, a condition under
which ‘all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe
and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and
12

healthy life’ (FAO, 1996). This is extremely relevant to countries such as Tanzania
where there is a critical balance between production and needs and over a third of
children are thought to be malnourished (PELUM, 2004). Although national food
self-sufficiency is a matter of high priority, especially in the light of recent
devastating droughts in eastern Africa, malnutrition is often more significant than
inadequate total food supplies at the national level and therefore crop diversity and
local availability of food are important issues.
A number of recent reports testify to the capacity for organic farming to feed the
world population whilst not undermining the natural resource base. General Manager
of the Ethiopian Environmental Production Authority, Tewold Berhan Gebre
Egziabher, makes a compelling case that organic farming can feed the world, but
‘only if we take it seriously and do all the necessary research and development as well
as management to bolster rather than shunt the natural cycles that improve the
functioning of the ecosystem as a whole’ (Egziabher & Edwards, 2005).
There is mounting evidence to show that organic agriculture can enhance productivity
and improve access to food and income using low-cost locally available and
appropriate technologies without causing environmental damage (Hine & Pretty,
2006; Parrott & Elzakker, 2003; Rundgren, 2002; Scialabba & Hattam, 2002). A
DFID-funded assessment of farming systems of varying levels of intensity in sub-
Saharan Africa reported ‘significant potential to raise productivity through the
optimised use of locally-available natural resources’ (Harris et al., 1998: 8). Studies
conducted worldwide illustrate that organic agriculture can double or even triple to
productivity of traditional systems, particularly when one considers total production
of useful crops per area (Scialabba & Hattam, 2002). Composted plots in the Tigray
region of Ethiopia yielded 3-5 times more than chemically-treated plots (Edwards,
2005).
A report, “The Real Green Revolution”, found that organic and agroecological
farming in less developed countries produces dramatic yield increases, as well as
greater crop diversity and greater nutritional content (Parrott & Marsden, 2002).
Similarly, a review of over 200 food production projects involving simple, organictype
techniques in different countries, found that the adoption of these practices
resulted in major yield increases ranging from 46-150% (Pretty et al., 2003). Organic
agriculture was found to improve food security by addressing many different causal
factors simultaneously and in particular by building up natural resources,
strengthening communities and improving human capacity.
In the light of these studies, organic agriculture shows great potential to improve
domestic food production with cheap, low-cost locally-available technology and
inputs. However, more research is needed in order to reveal the mechanisms through
which organic agriculture increases productivity and food availability, and the extent
to which it improves the security of livelihoods and access to food by vulnerable
groups.
2.5 Pathways to improvements in organic systems
The pathways by which organic agriculture contributes to increased productivity and
livelihood benefits may be conceptualised as a “typography of transition” (Pretty,
2002; in Parrott & Elzakker, 2003). An extensive survey of sustainable agricultural
13

projects indicated four mechanisms through which improvements are occurring,
including:
1. intensification of a single component of the farm system, e.g. home-garden
intensification with vegetables and trees;
2. addition of a new productive element e.g. fish in paddy rice
3. better use of natural capital especially water through rainwater harvesting and
irrigation scheduling and land through reclamation;
4. introduction of new regenerative elements e.g. Integrated Pest Management
(IPM) or locally adapted crop varieties and animal breeds (Pretty, 2002; in
Scialabba & Hattam, 2002).
Organic systems tend to use a combination of different improvement types, which
augments the dividend of synergistic effects (Hine & Pretty, 2006). By offering an
integrated whole system approach to farming, organic agriculture increases diversity
and resistance to stress, making it ideally suited for many poor, marginalised
smallholder farmers.
The survey also showed that ‘agricultural systems with high levels of social and
human capital are more able to innovate in the face of uncertainty’ (Pretty et al.,
2003; 13). Notably, 97% of cases in the SAFE-World Research Project have a human
capital development element, and half of both organic and near-organic systems had a
focus on social capital building through groups (Pretty & Hine, 2001).
Organic agricultural practices bring about livelihood benefits to smallholder farmers
in the Global South 1 by building natural, human, social and financial assets of
farmers. Ways in which these capital assets are accumulated over time in organic
systems are summarised below:
1 In this paper, the “Global South” is used in lieu of “the Third World”, “Developing” and “Less
developed countries” and in order to distinguish these countries from the so-called “Advanced”,
“Developed” countries of the “First world”, referred to here as “the Global North”.
14

Impact of Organic Agriculture on Capital Assets
Capital asset Component Explanation
Natural Soil fertility Organic matter management (e.g. on-farm recycling
of nutrients, use of green manure crops) ! improved
structure, aggregation, porosity, microbial activity,
pore size distribution and water retention capacity of
soils ! increased resilience to water stress and
nutrient loss
Water conservation Reduced risk of ground and surface water pollution
Improved water retention capacity ! crops more
resistant to wilting during droughts
Agrobiodiversity Increased agricultural genetic resources including
insects and micro-organisms, wild flora and fauna
! reduced risk of harvest failure
! spread labour demand through the growing season
! improved soil fertility and pest control
! more products to sell at different times of the year
! more varied diets with a wide array of vitamins
and minerals
Energy efficiency Sequesters carbon ! reduces global warming
Reliance on internal resources !
lower dependence on external energy sources e.g.
fossil fuels
Human Local knowledge Makes productive use of farmers’ knowledge and
skills ! improved local self-reliance
Also draws on the advances of modern biological and
technology in order to blend both traditional and
modern knowledge
Social Social inclusion Strengthened social cohesion and partnerships within
and equity organic communities ! improved connections with
external institutions ! better access to markets and
ability of farmers to negotiate their needs as equal
partners in the food supply chain
Incorporation of fair trade principles !
improved working conditions
Increased employment to meet food and cultural
needs ! reinvigoration of rural communities
Financial Income Price premiums of 10-50% (sometimes 300%) above
conventional prices for the same product
Decreased production costs ! higher returns
Optimised productivity, yield stabilisation and
diversification ! increased earnings
Export of organic produce ! access to foreign
exchange
15

Chapter Three: Methods
‘A truly alternative agriculture must be based on a truly alternative science
that articulates multiple ways of knowing.’
(Kloppenburg, 1991: 542)
The research strategy adopted in this study of the Tanzanian organic sector has been
informed and inspired by a wide range of different qualitative and reflective
methodological approaches. Applying multiple perspectives to food and farming
systems is characteristic of agroecology, which has been described by Callicot (1988:
6; quoted in Lockeretz & Anderson, 1983: 74) as ‘a vanguard movement in opposition
to the atomism and reductionism, and materialism of the prevailing but obsolete
paradigm ... [providing] a systemic, integrative, holistic understanding of reality at the
level of organic terrestrial nature’. Thus the methods of the research are set within
philosophical frameworks which reflect ‘notions of the way the world is, the nature of
knowledge, and the very disposition and ethical framework which the researcher
brings to bear’ (Bawden; in Zuber-Skerritt, 1991: 19).
In the tradition of agroecology, therefore, the research design has integrated elements
of action research, systems thinking, agroecosystem analysis, farming systems
research, case study research, participatory learning and action, the sustainable
livelihoods framework and other approaches to agricultural research. It is thought that
these approaches and perspectives ‘may accomplish in conversation what none of
them can alone’ (Kloppenburg, 1991: 542).The following discussion outlines the main
theoretical underpinnings of the research strategy, and explains why these particular
approaches have been chosen for this study of the Tanzanian organic sector.
3.1 Action Research
Action research may be defined as ‘an approach in which the action researcher and a
client collaborate in the diagnosis of a problem and in the development of a solution
based on the diagnosis’ (Bryman, 2004). The aim of action research is to allow
knowledge to emerge through collaborative effort by joining forces with people
facing a problem to help them study and resolve it. Put simply, the starting point of
action research is therefore a researcher joining with an individual or group of people
who are concerned about their situation.
The action research approach combines the key attributes of consultancy and research.
In this context, the role of the researcher is more of a reflective consultant or
facilitator who enables problems to be solved through co-learning than of an objective
“outsider”. Thus in action research the investigator is very much part of the field of
study, whilst also being involved in the collection of data. Action research therefore
attempts to combine the two acknowledged tasks of the academic tripod, education
and research, with the third more neglected task of community outreach.
Professional action researchers are challenged to assume some of the skills normally
related to ethnography and community development work in order to sustain projectrelated
learning and participation (Whyte, 1991). Other skills useful in participatory
action research include teaching, communication, scientific enquiry, encouraging
participants to respond critically, working with community groups and coping with
socio-cultural distances.
16

Furthermore, participatory action research ‘involves practitioners in the research
process from the initial design of the project through data gathering and analysis to
final conclusions and actions arising out of the research’ (Whyte, 1991: 7). The
method of direct inclusion instead of indirect representation has been found to be a
very strong tool for advocacy (Rasmussen, 2005).
Three key features of action research are therefore:
i. Target group have an active role in knowledge creation
ii. Researchers are involved in problem solutions
iii. Joint reflection and collaborative responsibility for running research.
Ideally, the participation of the researcher is not for a short defined period, but is
rather part of a long-term process of involvement.
As a “meta-method”, action research may be distinguished from most social research
by its emphasis on practical outcomes. When clear livelihood goals such as improved
access to food and income can be identified, and a strategy such as transition to
ecological systems is being applied, the benefit of action research is that it focuses on
achieving those goals within the given context. Having emerged as a way of studying
social movements such as Nazism and its antithesis, democracy, action research is
well suited to the study of social change for it is based on the meeting between the
researcher’s intention to do research and the user’s willingness to change (Liu, 1994)
with the aim of transforming the social environment through a process of critical
enquiry (Miles & Huberman, 1994).
Since action research incorporates elements of political activity and the researcher
allies him/herself to a specific cause, there is a risk that it may be co-opted for selfinterest.
This is moderated, however, by the researcher arriving at a research question
through dialogue with actors in the field and by making the goals and methods
explicit. Furthermore, with its origins as an antiauthoritarian science epistemology
when action research was coined by Kurt Lewin in 1946, action researchers assume
the responsibility of democratising attitudes towards studying.
Action research has been found to be particularly pertinent to the study of
development (Liu, 1994) and, by extension, agricultural development, for the
following reasons. It allows complex situations to be studied by involving all the
people who are concerned and willing, leading to the mobilisation of joint resources
that could not be attained separately either by the researcher or the isolated actors. By
exploring the entire situation encountered, action research also considers both explicit
and implicit institutional aspects that are essential for understanding how social
change happens. In addition, action research provides the opportunity for ‘a shared
experience and the construction of a common history … the best cohesive force that
can exist in a development action’ (Liu, 1994: 114).
About 25 years ago, action research moved from an experimental mode into a
learning design that focuses on learning processes and collective reflection. The
resultant “action learning” approach has a capacity-building theme which emphasises
joint-learning during the assignment and knowledge accessibility. Limited knowledge
of the primary researcher on the wider institutional, political and social context
necessitates action learning. Learning has been defined as an ‘active transformation
17

process, in which people attempt to make meaning out of their changing environment’
(Remenyi, 1987: 35). It needs to be life-centred and is more successful when viewed
as ‘a process of mutual enquiry between learners and others’ (ibid).
3.2 Systems Thinking
Understanding how a complex system functions as a whole requires that intact
systems be studied. Systems approaches to research are therefore eminently suited to
the study of organic farms, which are holistic by definition. Farming may be
conceptualised as a human activity system ‘concerned with the manipulation and
management of ecosystems to meet the often ill-defined goals of the people managing
the process’ (Remenyi, 1987: 36). When applying systems approaches to the
improvement of problem situations in agriculture, one of the first steps is to identify
the system and examine its properties, including productivity, stability, sustainability
and equitability.
Systems studies in agriculture are favoured since they are realistic, interdisciplinary,
long-term and multi-scale. Drinkwater (2002: 359) argues that continued integration
of systems and reductionist approaches will likely yield ‘a more complete
understanding of how to design and manage agroecosystems’. Similarly, Whyte
(1991) points out that ‘the nature of village-level problems in sub-Saharan Africa,
encompassing as they do a range of economy, political, socio-cultural, and ecological
factors’ necessitates a multidisciplinary systems approach.
Systemic action research emerged as a reaction to the apparent limitations of
reductionist science, and in order to deal with the complexity of context and peoplespecific
real-life situations. By acknowledging the interrelatedness of different system
components, systemic approaches to problem-solving take into account properties that
may emerge from the complex whole. Nevertheless, problems may also be viewed as
‘things that never disappear utterly and that cannot be solved once and for all’ (Lakoff
& Johnson, 1980: quoted in Remenyi, 1987: 31) and therefore it may be more
constructive to try to improve problem situations, rather than solve problems. For this,
we need to ‘view agricultural issues with a sense of their complex wholeness’ using
systems-based research approaches (Remenyi, 1987: 33).
Whilst systems approaches have been important to the evolution of agricultural
research, Dover and Talbot (1987: 57) comment that ‘they must explicitly focus on
sustainability if progress is to be made’. Overall system sustainability is best revealed
by considering farming and food systems as whole with their mineral cycles, energy
transformations, biological processes and socio-economic relationships (Altieri,
1987). When using systems approaches to research it is important to be clear on not
only what systems are to be improved, but also what constitutes an improvement.
3.3 Agroecosystem Analysis
Common characteristics of systems experiments in agriculture are that realistic, intact
agroecosystems are studied in an interdisciplinary, long-term and multi-scale way. An
agroecosystem is ‘a managed ecosystem in which crop production is the primary
function’ (Drinkwater, 2002: 355). This can be understood in terms of structure
(abiotic and biotic components) and function (net primary productivity, nutrient and
energy flows, for instance). Thus agroecosystem research encompasses environmental
18

considerations as well as economic and production criteria and address a wide variety
of economic, social and environmental outcomes.
Rather than assuming that the purpose of the research is to increase productivity (the
goal of much conventional agricultural research), agroecosystem analysis enable the
researcher to develop creative insights about the nature of the problem ‘encouraging
wide and easy participation and the flow of new ideas and insights’ (Conway, 1983:
quoted in Remenyi, 1987: 39).
Despite the drawbacks of uncontrolled variability among farm sites, on-farm systems
studies offer substantial advantages as they are realistic in terms of scale, management
practice and constraints faced by the farmer and therefore offer an opportunity to
study intact agroecosystems. Such studies also enable analysis of interactions between
socioeconomic factors and management decisions.
In agricultural systems, sustainability can be assessed on different levels (Dover &
Talbot, 1987). At the production site or farm level, for example, stable agriculture
requires soil fertility management and maintaining biodiversity. At the regional level
improving sustainability may involve optimising energy efficiency, conserving
genetic resources and/or reducing pollution. Sustainability at the national and
international levels is more a matter of ensuring adequate access of people to food and
income, strengthening trade relations and preserving unique ecosystems. All levels of
sustainability, however, are reliant upon the qualities of the soil, and agricultural
sustainability starts with ‘seeking to reduce soil erosion and to make improvements to
soil physical structure, organic matter content, water-holding capacity, and nutrient
balances’ (Pretty et al., 2003: 15).
Moreover, in agricultural systems, sustainability also incorporates concepts of
resilience, the capacity of systems to buffer shocks and stresses, and persistence, the
capacity of systems to continue over long periods. Both of these aspects hinge upon
the ability of farmers to change and innovate in the face of uncertainty, and therefore
the extent to which organic agriculture builds human and social capital. From this
perspective, a sustainable production system exists when the key actors involved fit
the most applicable system of technologies, inputs or ecological management into the
specific circumstances their particular local agricultural system (Hine & Pretty, 2006).
In principle, organic agriculture constitutes a sustainable alternative since it offers
farmers a set of management principles to choose from such as emphasising
biodiversity and using synergies among crops, animals and soil to regenerate soils and
conserve resources.
3.4 Farming Systems Research
Farming Systems Research (FSR) applies the techniques of systems science to
agriculture. It explores indigenous farmers’ choices of technologies, cropping
partners, and other factors relating to food production. As a response to the realisation
of the complexity of natural resource management in diverse and risk-prone
environments (Sillitoe, 1998), FSR is interested in reflecting farmers research needs
more effectively and therefore encompasses participatory methods and farmer
decision-making, with an emphasis on listening and learning from people. According
to Francis (in Altieri & Hecht, 1990: 141), FSR ‘involves the farmer in all steps of the
activity from identification of limiting constraints to validation and adoption of new
19

technology’. This is appropriate to the study of organic systems in which information
and farmers understanding are critical production inputs.
FSR and Extension and its many variations typically involve 'highly site-specific
evaluations of possible solutions to well-identified limitations in the local production
system' (Lockeretz & Stopes, 2005: 1). Often FSR involves 'on-farm research with a
farming systems perspective' (Remenyi, 1987: 17) leading to the generation of
qualitative data requiring interpretative analysis. The advantages of carrying out
research on working farms are that the research can be conducted under a wide range
of growing conditions, the research can benefit from farmers' expert knowledge of a
farming system and also allow farmers' management ability and preferences to be part
of what is studied, fostering farmer-to-farmer exchange of information, to allow
farmers to have a greater role in choosing research topics.
It is thought that more organic research is conducted on working farms than
conventionally oriented research (Lockeretz & Stopes, 2005). This is because organic
systems are usually considered to be more closely linked to conditions on a specific
site. Furthermore, whole-farm studies are especially applicable to research into
organic farming since an important concept in organic farming is for the entire farm to
be managed as a coherent system.
The primary objective of FSR is ‘to improve the wellbeing of individual farming
families by increasing the productivity of their farming systems, given the constraints
imposed by resources and the environment’ (Remenyi, 1987: 17), and this coincides
with one of the main goals of this research – to improve the design of organic
agricultural interventions so that they bring significant benefits to smallholder
farmers. Conceptually FSR approach recognises the vital connection between
technologies and policy support systems, and thus an important thrust of such
research is the implementation of appropriate policies and support systems to create
opportunities for improved production systems. Again this perspective is deemed
useful in helping to provide conditions conducive to the adoption of organic
technologies in Tanzania.
3.5 Case Study Research
Case studies have been defined as ‘studies of events within their real-life context’
(Yin, 2003: 72). Retaining the holistic and meaningful characteristics of real-life
events is particularly advantageous ‘when the relevant theory underlying the case
study is of a holistic nature’ (Yin, 2003: 45) as is the case in organic agriculture.
Case studies can act as "windows" on organic agriculture in a particular region or
context. Case Study Research (CSR) is preferred ‘when “how” and “why” questions
are being posed, when the investigator has little control over events, and when the
focus is on a contemporary phenomenon within some real-life context’ (Yin, 2003: 1).
In the context of this study, CSR was adopted as a way to investigate the causes and
criteria for “success” in organic agriculture at the project level. During CSR,
therefore, ‘researchers collect detailed information using a variety of data collection
procedures over a sustained period of time’ (Creswell, 2003: 15).
20

When sites are selected on the basis of typicality, as opposed to uniqueness, they can
be used to derive lessons that can be applied to other organic projects. Thus case
studies may be generalisable to theoretical propositions (analytic generalisation).
Although it can be useful to scale-up recommendations, case study research is also
inherently context specific and not necessarily seeking replication. Owing to the
complexity of Africa’s agricultural systems (FAO recognises 18 distinct farming
systems in Africa), an overview of the development potential of organic agriculture in
Africa is of limited practical value. Case studies and agroecosystem analyses throw
more light upon the way in which traditional knowledge, social mobilisation and
agro-ecological approaches are restoring degraded natural resources while producing
food. The evaluation of past and current projects helps to clarify the relationship
between organic production and the overall sustainability of agricultural systems.
3.6 Participatory Learning and Action
When innovation in agriculture is conceived as a ‘social effort requiring joint
competence of interrelated actors’ (Engel & Salomon, 1997), participation becomes
an essential component in the transition to organic and sustainable systems. Much has
been written on the importance of participatory practices in research (De Jager et al.,
2001) and many prominent figures in rural development have argued that genuine
participation is crucial to the sustainability of development projects (Chambers,
1983). Participatory strategies gained popularity in agricultural research and
development in the 1970s, spreading rapidly in the 1980s. They are based on the
premise that small farmers in developing countries have developed useful information
and ideas that must be utilised in any project and are in opposition to the “transfer of
technology” paradigm.
Sillitoe (1998: 6) has argued that ‘the joint enterprise, or stakeholder participation
approach, poses some of the most challenging and stimulating problems in
development today’. It encompasses a wide spectrum of approaches from
‘consultation (outsiders retaining control), to collaboration (co-operation as equal
partners), to collegiate (insiders making research decisions)’ (Sillitoe, 1998: 7).
On-farm research is sometimes described more specifically with reference to a twocomponent
classification scheme: 'researcher initiated, farmer managed' or 'farmer
initiated, farmer managed'.
Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) is part of an emerging family of ‘alternative
systems of inquiry’ which also includes Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) and
Participatory Technology Development (PTD) (Pretty et al., 1995). PLA tools include
mapping, time lines, daily activity diagrams, seasonal calendars, trend diagrams,
transect walks, problem trees, ranking activities and Venn diagrams. Many of these
tools are useful for investigating local knowledge in organic systems, particularly at
farm and project levels. A fundamental goal is to “hand over the pen” and invite
community members and stakeholders to draw, map, model and diagram. In this
situation the researcher acts as a facilitator who builds rapport, listens, questions and
learns.
3.7 Soft Systems Methodology
Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) is a way of applying systems theory and practice to
facilitating change. SSM aims for the improvement of human practices through debate
21

and reflection with practical solutions that fit the views and interests of those involved
as well as possible. It is particularly attractive in dealing with agriculture as a complex
and purposeful activity (Remenyi, 1987).
Whereas a system can be conceived as an ‘adaptive whole’, a ‘soft system’ concerns
social actors, their activities and relationships, constructed by connecting sets of
activities to make a purposeful whole, or ‘human activity system’ (Engel & Salomon,
1997). In other words, a soft system is a system that has been assigned a purpose. It is
important to emphasise the appreciative nature of soft systems, i.e. the possibility for
different systemic images and therefore systemic images are ‘windows’ on the world
rather than representations of the world.
SSM is often chosen as a way of understanding and intervening in complex
innovation theatres where stakeholders have radically different perceptions (such as in
an organic sector comprising farmers, traders, policy makers and development
partners) since it enables the recognition of different but equally relevant worldviews.
The methodological approach is to follow a learning system or action researching
system comprised of key actors and the researcher going through sequential learning
cycles of planning, action, observation, reflection, planning, action, etc. (see diagram
below).
REFLECT
Research as an action-learning cycle
PLAN
OBSERVE
ACT
In SSM the world is considered problematic but the process of enquiry is systematic.
When the goals of a system are obscure and/or changeable, such as in the rapidly
evolving Tanzanian organic sector, SSM can be applied for the identification of
further research needs which may require soft or hard systems thinking, technology
development or basic science. Thus SSM can be located within a spectrum of
approaches from hard (e.g. cropping systems research) to ‘soft systems in which
objectives are hard to define, decision-taking is uncertain, measures of performance
are at best qualitative and human behaviour is irrational’ (Checkland, 1981: quoted in
Remenyi, 1987: 38). This has been illustrated in the Hawkesbury hierarchy of
methodologies for researching problems of increasing complexity (see diagram
below).
22

Hawkesbury hierarchy of approaches to research
HOLISM
Research approach Applications
SOFT SYSTEMS
HARD SYSTEMS
APPLIED SCIENCE
BASIC SCIENCE
REDUCTIONISM
Situation-improving
Situation-optimising
Problem-solving
Puzzle-solving
Source: Adapted from Remenyi, 1987
SSM and the related Knowledge Systems perspective help to develop a diagnostic
framework for analysis and design and management of interventions (Engel &
Salomon, 1997). Rapid Appraisal of Agricultural Knowledge Systems (RAAKS) is a
soft systems action-oriented methodology that is useful in stimulating the formation
of ‘soft platforms for decision-making about ecosystems’ which leads to ‘forms of
collective agency – social actors who have the will and capacity to work together to
tackle complex societal issues (Engel & Salomon, 1997: 216). Central elements of
RAAKS are teamwork, focused collection of information, qualitative analysis and
strategic decision-making. It is no coincidence that RAAKS was developed within the
context of agricultural advisory services when industrial agriculture was reaching its
ecological, social and political limits and its first applications were in support of the
reorganisation of agricultural research and extension. In this context, SSM helps to
clarify the basis and direction of change in organic agricultural systems.
3.8 Sustainable Livelihoods Framework
The Sustainable Livelihoods (SL) framework (pictured below) is an analytical device
for understanding the complexity of livelihoods and poverty. This approach to poverty
eradication was conceived by the UK’s Department for International Development
(DFID) after wide consultations. As previously outlined, a livelihood comprises the
capabilities, assets and activities required for a means of living, and it is sustainable
when it can endure shocks and stresses, maintaining or enhancing its assets into the
future without undermining the natural resource base (Scoones, 1998).
The SL framework is based on the assumption that ‘people pursue a range of
livelihood outcomes (such as health, income and reduced vulnerability) by drawing on
a range of assets to pursue a variety of activities’ (Farrington et al., 1999: 3).
23

The SL framework is considered an appropriate method for understanding the impact
of organic agriculture on livelihoods since it has an explicit focus on people , allows
the identification of livelihood-related opportunities and constraints and links microlevel
understanding of livelihood into policy and institutional change processes
(Farrington et al., 1999).
The SL framework is essentially an assets-based model of agricultural sustainability,
which considers the role of assets as inputs in agriculture and the consequences of
agriculture upon them. The “assets pentagon” pictured in the diagram above includes
human, natural, financial, physical and social forms of capital and these distinctions
were used throughout the study in order to classify agricultural resources. When
applying the SL framework to real-life cases, it becomes necessary to identify which
strategies may be labelled as organic since farmers apply a whole range of practices in
searching for a means to a living.
3.9 World Café
The World Café is a method for ‘creating a living network of collaborative dialogue
around questions that matter’ (World Café, 2002). It consists of a set of principles and
guidelines including to:
- Clarify the purpose
- Create a hospitable space
- Explore questions that matter
- Encourage everyone’s contribution
- Connect diverse perspectives
- Listen for insights and share discoveries.
When used in combination, these can foster collaborative dialogue, active engagement
and constructive possibilities for action. The approach is eminently suited to the study
of complex value-laden issues and identifying the most important issues. It was
therefore used during the Stakeholder forum as a way to focus group discussions.
24

Chapter Four: Research Process
‘Only an education of question can trigger, motivate, and reinforce curiosity’
(Freire, 1997: 31)
Having outlined the wide array of methods adopted in this study, this chapter presents
a chronological narrative of the ways in which these methods were used in the study,
from the initial seeds of intention to the final phases of the fieldwork.
4.1 Selecting a topic
With an abiding interest in sustainable agriculture in the tropics and the intention to
return to Tanzania to continue working in this field following the completion of my
Masters degree, the decision to write my thesis on organic farming in Tanzania came
quite naturally. It also coincided with the realisation of the enormous potential for
organic agriculture to alleviate poverty and increase food security in sub-Saharan
Africa, and the desire to understand how agriculture can be strategically developed to
achieve these goals. Being European by birth also stimulated my curiosity to discover
how the largely Eurocentric concept of organic agriculture is taking root in Africa,
and whether its principles and practices are indeed applicable and useful in the
African context. This illustrates the way in which ‘inquiry is dependent first on
intention, second on the type and quality of question’ (Ellinor and Gerard, 1998) and
coincides with the notion of action researching as ‘learning with the special intentions
of achieving social action whilst concomitantly adding to public knowledge’
(Bawden; in Zuber-Skerritt, 1991: 19).
The opportunity to collaborate with researchers from the Department of Crop Science
and Production at SUA arose in November 2004, and subsequent meetings with my
supervisor at UMB confirmed that it would be possible to participate in a NORADsponsored
research project at SUA. In addition to the above reasons, my goals when I
embarked upon the study included learning more about organic techniques,
procedures including certification, successful projects and the logistics of establishing
and operating an organic farm in Africa. Another area of investigation was the
importance and role of certification since inspection, certification and labelling are
aspects that distinguish certified organic agriculture from other forms of sustainable,
traditional and modern agriculture. The research was also driven by the desire to
apply recently acquired agroecological approaches to a real-life case, the emerging
organic sector in Tanzania.
From the outset the process of enquiry was guided by the broad research question of
how to develop organic agriculture in a way that brings tangible livelihood benefits to
farmers. This incorporated both an exploratory path (understanding complex
processes) and a design path (leading to improvements in our interventions). A
number of sub-objectives were also identified at this stage, including:
• To create a shared vision of the future of organics
• To make knowledge about organic food and farming more accessible
• To strengthen communication and collaboration between stakeholders
• To produce journal and feature articles on Tanzanian organic agriculture
• To develop agroecological skills, knowledge and attitudes of both the
researcher and the key actors in the system.
25

4.2 Exploring the subject
Once the broad subject area had been identified, research entered a highly divergent
and exploratory phase, during which time an extensive review of related literature was
undertaken mainly by direct searching on the internet, library databases (using key
words such as “organic agriculture” / “farming”, “Tanzania”, “agroecology”, and
“East Africa”) but also by contacting former colleagues and friends in Africa to
enquire about recent publications, research, projects and priorities.
This information was used to gradually build a "rich picture" of the status of organic
farming in the country, region and continent. In addition to shedding light on the
history of the sector, commodities produced, area and number of farms certified,
government policy, development interventions, international and national certification
systems and regional initiatives, the information search illuminated key issues,
questions, and contradictions, major opportunities and constraints and gaps in our
knowledge on organic farming in Tanzania and interesting areas for follow-up.
There were different categories of areas of organic agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa
requiring further research. These were identified as:
a) Production – improved utilisation of organic materials such as soil amendments
b) System benefits – potential cumulative and cross benefits of organic techniques,
how organic agriculture benefits resource poor households, especially with regards to
women and children and whether commercialising smallholder farmers really leads to
a decrease in poverty, or whether the man of the household is the sole beneficiary of
the extra income, social implications of promoting commercial organic agriculture
and use of income in the household, links between organics and HIV/AIDS such as
nutrition and labour requirements
c) Comparison with conventional – comparative price and long-term value of organic
and non-organic inputs through full cost accounting
d) Consumption – consumer demands and perceptions
e) Policy – impact of current national and international policies on adoption of
organic farming (Harris et al., 1998; Taylor, 2006).
Since information was sought from a wide variety of different sources and
stakeholders, the initial questions were very diverse and reflected the multiple
(sometimes opposing) concerns of the people involved in organic agriculture in
Africa.
4.3 Designing the study
In parallel with this process of contextualising the research questions, I was exploring
a variety of methodologies in order to formulate a research strategy and select
methods most suited to the chosen subject area.
The main goals and sub-objectives of the study were formulated as questions: a
central research question (in what ways can organic agriculture be developed for the
benefit of the smallholder?) and a constellation of other subsidiary questions which
were eventually distilled into a descriptive question (what is the impact of organic
agriculture on smallholder livelihoods?), an explanatory question (by which pathways
does organic agriculture lead to livelihood benefits?) and an interpretive question
(which strategies can be adopted to strengthen these pathways?). These were intended
to be guiding questions, which could be adapted on the basis of other issues identified
26

y stakeholders during fieldwork. As in grounded theory, therefore, the questions
were under continual review and reformulation (Bryman, 2004).
For each question, a suitable method of data collection was identified, and this formed
the logic of the overall research design. At this stage it was decided that the
Sustainable Livelihoods (SL) framework would be used to assess the impact of
organic agriculture on livelihoods, and also to elaborate the mechanisms or pathways.
Soft systems methodology was considered the most appropriate way of discovering
the main opportunities and constraints to reaching livelihood goals through organic
agriculture at the local and national levels.
4.4 Surveying the territory
An initial three-week visit to Tanzania was planned into the research design, and
turned out to be indispensable to the overall study. The purpose of this trip was to
meet co-researchers, learn more about SUA activities in organic agriculture and to
start planning the fieldwork logistics (including a research permit) in more detail.
4.5 Seizing learning opportunities
The entire study was enriched by participation in a number of courses, seminars and
an International Summer School on Tropical Organic Agriculture that was organised
by BOKU University in Vienna and Makerere University in Kampala. This threeweek
project included theoretical presentations, field trips to organic projects,
practical fieldwork aimed at developing an Internal Control System (ICS) and a
stakeholder forum. The relative maturity of the Ugandan organic sector combined
with its proximity to Tanzania, made this a particularly relevant experience to the
study.
Courses taken at UMB on tropical soils, sustainable agriculture, appropriate
sanitation, tropical ecology and eco-technology have all contributed to a deeper
understanding of agriculture, ecology and the design of sustainable agroecosystems.
In addition, attending two seminars in Denmark which were directly related to the
study—one on Action Research and the other on Globalisation and Organic
Agriculture—gave ample opportunity to reflect more deeply on both the context and
methodology of the research.
4.6 Refining the concept note
The period between the two visits to Tanzania was used to elaborate the overall
research design. Activities included communication with key actors at SUA and in
civil society, building a contacts database that included organic projects and potential
research partners and conducting a stakeholder analysis. The latter involved
identifying the main stakeholder groups, prioritising them and mapping their roles and
interests, including the relationships and resource flows between them. A useful tool
for this was institutional Venn diagramming. The stakeholder analysis was
approached from the perspective of individual actor, network, function and
organisation. In this way a number of different systems concepts emerged, and it was
possible to identify hierarchies (e.g. government-research-extension-farmer), levels of
analysis (e.g. stakeholders at the national level as opposed to regional level),
relationships (e.g. resource flows between donor agencies and companies) and
communication (e.g. within networks of actors).
27

In addition to understanding current collaboration, this exercise was deemed
important for identifying potential synergies for collaboration. Key categories of
stakeholder in the Tanzanian organic sector included farmer associations,
cooperatives, government, government institutions, civil society, certification bodies,
companies, and development partners.
Communicating with stakeholders in Tanzania centred on identifying and mobilising
people who were concerned with sustainable agriculture and food security,
particularly those already involved in and responsible for organic agriculture. The
idea was to build a "taskforce" of people who would join forces to analyse the current
system and explore desirable and feasible alternatives.
In order to build the most realistic and useful “rich picture” of the organic system, it
became apparent that the research would need to address multiple scales. The main
levels of analysis chosen were the farm / local level and the national level, with the
aim to bridge the micro and the macro. At the farm or local level, the main concerns
were anticipated to be conversion constraints and certification arrangements, whilst
the national level was expected to focus more on institutional factors and the policy
framework, in addition to ranking bottlenecks in the organic commodity chain. The
research could equally have chosen to consider the dynamics of organic agriculture as
it is being developed at the district, regional or continental levels.
Although the research area was still extremely broad at this stage, gradually system
boundaries were being drawn in terms of setting, actors, events and processes. For
example, the study was confined to sedentary cropping systems (ranging from purely
arable to mixed farming) either practising certified organic production or in the
process of conversion.
A CATWOE checklist was used to define the system in terms of:
Clients – smallholder farmers
Actors – farmers, researchers, government, private sector, civil society and public
Transformation – transition to organic agriculture
World view – sustainable agriculture
Owners – farmers, researchers, government, private sector, civil society and public
Environmental constraints – low investment abilities, underdeveloped markets, poor
infrastructure, unreliable climate, antagonistic worldviews
On this basis a root definition of the relevant human activity system emerged and was
expressed as:
‘Organic food and farming systems under the control of smallholder farmers
and government agents which, in the light of financial, infrastructural, market
and environmental constraints, convert to certified organic production with the
aim of improving system sustainability, food security and self-reliance’.
In addition, expected outputs and indicators were devised. The outputs included
strengthening and facilitating the national umbrella organisation for organic
agriculture, the Tanzania Organic Agriculture Movement (TOAM), providing inputs
for an organic policy, participating in knowledge-sharing and advocacy actions.
Realising the weaknesses of the current organic sector led to the realisation that
capacity-building and awareness creation were priority areas for the research to focus
upon.
28

Feedback on the initial research proposal and the subsequent concept note helped to
focus the research design. As a result, a three-phase method was adopted:
i. Initial data collection in order to characterise the system and provide inputs for
the visioning workshop including draft strategies
ii. Visioning workshop at the macro-level to create a rich picture
iii. Verification / modification / enrichment of the vision and plans of action by
taking macro results back to the micro-level and dialoguing with key
informants.
For each stage, actions, tools, data to be collected and questions to be answered were
defined.
Stage Action Tools Data to be
collected
I Key informant Stakeholder Attitudes,
interviews, analysis, motivations,
focus groups institutional Venn goals, interests,
and field visits diagramming, relationships,
SWOT, time-lines actions of key
actors
Case study SL analysis, PLA, Components of
research interviews, direct
observation
the SL framework
II Visioning
workshop
Visionary
thinking, SSM,
World Café
III Verification Interviews, focus
groups, document
exchange,
strategy review
Visions, draft
strategies,
database of
persons /
organisations /
projects / research
Revisions to
strategies, policy
recommendations
Main questions
to be answered
What is the status
of the organic
sector in
Tanzania?
What are
effective
strategies at the
local level?
What are
effective
strategies at the
national level?
How valid are the
findings?
When framing the concept note for key actors there was an effort to fully integrate
practical knowledge and findings from previous experience and the scoping mission.
At the same time it was necessary to be explicit about the theoretical foundations of
the study, and the logical framework linking questions with research design.
4.7 Beginning the fieldwork
The first week was spent making contact with people at SUA and becoming familiar
with the department’s research activities, curriculum development, facilities, teaching
resources and local projects. The second week was devoted to getting an overview of
the entire sector by conducting key informant interviews. In addition, the groundwork
for the CSR was done by meeting with representatives of case study candidates,
leading to the selection of two sites.
29

Feedback and opinions expressed in response to the concept note helped to clarify the
“rich picture” of the national sector, including trends and patterns. Conversations with
several active individuals in the organic sector caused me to rethink the basic
assumptions of the thesis and elaborate the argumentation.
4.8 Key informant interviews
The aim of the key informant interviews was to discover: the special knowledge of the
interviewee, appreciations, visions, ideas for strategies, key actors in the sector and
how they relate, main opportunities and threats for developing the organic sector. An
interview has been defined as a ‘social event with a purpose’ (Engel & Salomon,
1997: 43).
A basic checklist was used to prepare the interviews:
! Where (home / field / office)
! When (day / time of day)
! Why (explore special knowledge of the interviewee / test hypotheses / inquire
about topics of interest)
! What (life histories / representative information / communication interactions)
! Who (selection criteria)
! How (semi-structured / structured, record-keeping)
In this study, key informants are individuals who are especially knowledgeable,
insightful and perceptive regarding the dynamics of the organic movement, their
organisation or the community, since they would enable active participation in the
research (Whyte, 1991). In order to select key informants the question was asked:
‘with which individuals will collaborative work be most effective and why?’ A
summary of the interviews conducted is given in Appendix 1.
The framework for the interview included explaining my personal background, giving
a summary of the research focus and the reasons for wanting to interview the person,
providing an overview of the topics for the interview, and mentioning practicalities
(e.g. maximum time for the interview and anonymity on request). A number of basic
details were recorded at each interview including the date, time, place, interviewee’s
name, organisational affiliation, contact details and later some notes about the setting,
and atmosphere of the interview. Interviews started with open, non-directive or ‘grand
tour questions’ (Kvale, 1996). The general pattern was to start with more objective
questions and then move into subjective areas.
A basic interview guide was referred to, including questions about:
! History – how long have you been involved in organic agriculture?
! Motivations – what motivated you?
! Activities – what have been your activities in relation to organic agriculture?
! Partners – who do you work with?
! Scope – in which areas do you work?
! Impacts – what environmental / social / economic impacts have you noticed?
! Vision – what is your vision for the future of organic agriculture? in ten years
where do you want to see the sector?
! Ideas – what would support the changes needed to realise this vision? Who
should do what?
30

This was drawn as a mind-map and used as a reference during the interviews. At the
end of the interview any topics that the respondent felt were not touched upon and
that they wanted to tell more about were explored. At this stage, the notebook was
closed, and it was often found that continuing the conversation “off the record” helped
to stimulate a more relaxed and personal discussion.
Through the interview process it was possible to enrich the stakeholder analysis by
elaborating the attitudes, motivations and goals of stakeholders, their history of
involvement and current actions, target group / region, and relationships.
4.9 Field visits
In addition to the two case study initiatives (see Case study research below), four
organic projects were visited including three certified (the Kilimanjaro Native
Cooperative Union near Moshi and Mikese and Kimango Farms near Morogoro) and
one non-certified (UMADEP project in Mkuyuni division of Morogoro). These were
selected on the basis of contact with key actors and convenience. In general the
format consisted of an interview or focus group with key actors followed by a tour of
the operations. In one instance, I accompanied the farmer and an inspector during an
organic inspection.
4.10 Case study research
The basic design of the CSR followed Yin’s (2003) method, summarised in the
flowchart below.
DEFINE & DESIGN PREPARE, COLLECT & ANALYSE
develop
theory
select
cases
design
data
collection
protocol
conduct
1 st case
study
conduct
2 nd case
study
write
individual
case report
write
individual
case report
ANALYSE &
CONCLUDE
draw crosscase
conclusions
modify
theory
develop
policy
implications
write crosscase
report
Source: Adapted from Yin, 2003
A set of operational criteria were identified for the selection of case study candidates.
Organic projects / initiatives were deemed qualified on the basis of:
- development goals;
- explicitly addressing agricultural sustainability;
- active-farmer involvement;
31

- adopting novel technologies and practices; and
- community-based with proven impacts.
Thus a purposive sampling strategy was adopted which selected projects on the basis
of 'best practice'. Purposive sampling of predominantly 'good' projects, initiatives and
farmers as research partners has important implications for the overall applicability of
the findings since the cases chosen for investigation were not representative of farms
throughout the country. The 'limited geographical applicability of results' is a
pervasive problem in all on-farm research (Krell, 1999).
The choice of criteria was been influenced by a set of assumptions about the pathways
to livelihood benefits through organic agriculture. It was assumed that organic
agriculture would bring benefits to smallholders when it was a co-operative type of
project with strong social capital, both subsistence and trade orientation, local
ownership and a processing element.
A two-tailed design was adopted in which cases from both extreme of a theoretical
condition were deliberately chosen. The main proposition was that organic projects
bring the most benefits to smallholders when they successfully combine multiple
objectives of food security and trade, and also strengthen social capital. Two types of
organic project were sought:
Type 1 – export trade focus
Type 2 – subsistence and local trade focus.
Besides this key difference in orientation, other variables identified in a typology of
organic project types (agroecological conditions, accessibility, processing and
technology) were kept as similar as possible in order to be able to collapse other
conditions. There were a number of other variables including certification
arrangement and set-up that were dependent upon the main variable being examined
(orientation) and these were also expected to differ across the two case study sites.
The Type 1 project was relatively typical of the organic sector in Tanzania
(approximately 70% of certified projects are firms producing organic commodities for
export). The Type 2 project, on the other hand, is less typical since there only 30% of
certified projects are for the local market. Although this has consequences for the
ability to generalise the findings, it was considered to be of secondary importance
since the advantage of the case study method is that one gains in terms of
phenomenology.
Case study preparation involved development of a protocol (see Appendix 2) and
screening of case study nominations. Key questions being addressed by the CSR were
the same as the initial questions of the whole study:
- the impact of organic agriculture on livelihoods
- pathways to livelihood benefits
- strategies to strengthen the sustainability of organic projects.
In summary, therefore the case study was designed to undertake participatory problem
analysis and participatory solution development. After consultation with different
stakeholders it was decided that two projects in the Mkuranga district of the Coastal
region would be investigated: one focusing on organic cashew for export and the
other, an association of local groups involved in organic vegetable production for
subsistence and local trade.
32

Specific activities that were undertaken during the fortnight spent at the case study
sites included key informant interviews, for example with field officers and project
farmers. Village characterisation was carried out during village meetings and focus
groups and using participatory tools such as seasonal calendars, ranking of economic
activities, wealth indicators and Venn diagramming. In addition, farm visits, transect
walks, and focus groups were used as part of the fieldwork. A detailed report
outlining the process and findings of the CSR was prepared for the stakeholders (see
Appendix 3).
4.11 Stakeholder Forum
The rationale for holding a stakeholder forum was that successful innovation arises
from joint learning opportunities among relevant social actors and the integration of
knowledge and information from a variety of relevant sources. The importance of
bringing stakeholders together is evident when the capacity to achieve innovation in
agricultural practices is seen as ‘a collective social competence’ (Engel & Salomon,
1997) and collective intelligence is seen as a produce of the contributions of all
(Ellinor and Gerard, 1998). At the core of the process were the appreciations,
preoccupations, perceptions, judgements and understanding of the main stakeholders.
The workshop activities were designed to make these explicit by encouraging
stakeholders to assess and re-assess the problem situation and their role in it since
ideally the process of ‘unpacking taken-for-granted views and detecting invisible but
oppressive structures’ helps to bring about ‘intellectual emancipation’ (Miles &
Huberman, 1994).
SSM was the main tool used in the planning and design of the stakeholder forum, and
this overall framework helped to define the process, inputs, outputs and procedures of
approach, leading to tangible objectives and specific choices with respect to timing
and participation. Drawing inspiration from the RAAKS approach, the forum was
planned with a step-wise design that included preparation, first phase of defining the
relevant system, second phase of analysing constraints and opportunities and third
phase of articulating strategies.
In seeking to decide who would participate (relevant diversity), it was also necessary
to question why and how they would participate (conditions and standards of
communication). Participants were selected on the basis of their long-term
involvement in organic agriculture and representation of organisation / institution /
group. The aim of participant selection was to have a broad representation of the
diverse stakeholder groups, and also to have gender and age balance. Selecting the
forum participants and designing the programme were collaborative processes, and a
couple of the key actors representing civil society and the local certification body
were closely involved.
The goals and activities of the Stakeholder forum have been outlined in the Invitation
letter, Background information, Session planning, News release and Summary Report
on the stakeholder forum (see Appendices 4-8).
In summary, the three broad objectives of the forum were:
1. To share and synthesise knowledge on organic agriculture in Tanzania;
2. To create a shared vision for the future of organic agriculture in Tanzania;
33

3. To plan actions at the individual levels and institutional levels, disseminate
findings through a press conference.
The first objective was pursued through presentations and individual and group work.
A guided visioning was undertaken in order to create a shared vision for the future of
the organic sector. At its simplest level, a shared vision is the answer to the question:
‘what do we want to create?’ (Senge, 1990). Visions may also be conceived as
‘powerful mental images of what we want to create in the future. They reflect what
we care about the most, and are harmonious with our values and sense of purpose’
(Parker, 1990). Thus visioning leads to a workable and purposeful shared alternative
to an existing system. Liu (1994: 114) states that ‘there is no better incentive or
motivation for a group than to have a general vision of its situation, to get a glimpse
of a desirable future, and to experience the start of mastering its own development’.
The final activity, development of strategies, took place through the individual and
then group formulation of action plans around specific challenges and themes. The
press conference was designed in a participatory way, and ended up being a panel of
six speakers representing different stakeholder groups followed by a question-andanswer
session. Nine journalists attended resulting in two articles, four radio bulletins
and coverage on local television.
4.12 Digesting the findings
An analytic strategy was formulated in order to prioritise what to analyse, why and
how. With regards to the case studies it was decided to analyse information relating to
organic agriculture as a livelihood strategy including the different forms of capital
assets and the sustainability of the system. The principle of “optimal ignorance” was
adopted in order to analyse only what is necessary in order to understand the role of
organic agriculture in improving livelihoods, and thus there was a focus on the facts
necessary for improving the systems, and inputs to strategies and plans of action.
The key aspect of qualitative data analysis is that the material itself should speak and
determine the structure of the data presentation. In-depth interviews were analysed
using a bottom-up procedure whereby the material and key quotes was marked and
labelled, and arranged into groups. This yielded relevant statements, viewpoints and
insights. For the large part soft quantification was used (e.g. referring to all, most of,
several, a few rather than exact figures).
Various coding procedures were used to generate descriptions and themes from the
data collected during the CSR. Codes were affixed to field notes from observation and
interviews. Information derived from the case studies was categorised and tabulated
according to the SL framework and different models of sustainability and farming
systems. Information arrays and data displays were used for organising and
summarising the evidence. This information was then used to address the initial
propositions. The emphasis of case study analysis was on explanation building and
there was constant reference to the original purpose of the enquiry and possible
alternative explanations.
On-going reflection was also part of the analysis, and reflections and other remarks
were continuously noted in the margins of fieldwork notebooks. After isolating
patterns, processes, commonalities and differences, for example when building the
34

preliminary rich picture, these were taken into the field for the next phase of data
collection. Personal reflections on the entire research process are given in Appendix 9.
4.13 Verification by acceptance
In order to verify the findings, statements were given to experienced practitioners to
find out whether they were acceptable. Participants in the CSR were asked to review
and critique an interim product, and it is also envisaged that they will critique the final
products. Such verification is deemed important for developing validity and “intersubjective
consensus” (Miles & Huberman, 2004).
Participation in a UNEP-UNCTAD Regional Workshop on Organic Agriculture in
East Africa that was held in Arusha also provided a good opportunity to compare and
discuss findings with other stakeholders involved in research and the promotion of
organic production and trade.
35

Chapter Five: Organic Agriculture in Tanzania
Different countries have vastly differing histories of organic agriculture, depending on
their agroecological conditions and socio-political and economic contexts (Rundgren,
2006; Taylor, 2006). This section provides an overview of the history, status and
modus operandi of organic agriculture in Tanzania, revealing some of the countryspecific
opportunities and pitfalls of developing the organic sector.
5.1 Country background
The United Republic of Tanzania (hereafter referred to simply as Tanzania) has a total
population of 34.6 million and covers an area of 94.3 million ha, of which 5.1 million
ha are cultivated annually (about 5% of the surface area) (TARPII, 2004). Agriculture
supplies approximately 57% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and employs 70-90%
of the workforce (United Republic of Tanzania, 2006). A household budget survey in
2002 revealed that 19% of the population are below the food poverty line, meaning
that they have insufficient resources to meet calorific requirements, and 36% are
below the basic needs poverty line, although there is a large variation between regions
(Kinabo et al., 2004).
5.2 History of organic agriculture in Tanzania
Organic agriculture in Tanzania has a relatively long history. In 1898 Peramiho
Organic Garden was established in the Ruvuma region to produce a variety of
vegetables following organic principles including the use of manure and soil
conservation (Silenge & Bertram, 1996). In 1926 Peramiho exported seeds to the
Netherlands. The garden is still in existence and serves the Benedictine missionaries
of the area.
Sustainable agriculture, Soil and Water Conservation (SWC), agroforestry, Integrated
Pest Management (IPM) and related practices grew in the 1980s. A wide range of
different groups and organisations became involved, including farmers’ associations,
government research and extension and NGOs. Many of these organisations are
members of the civil society network, Participatory Ecological Land Use
Management (PELUM) Tanzania.
Certified organic agriculture emerged in Tanzania in the early 1990s. Amongst the
pioneering projects were Luponde organic tea from Iringa, Meatu organic cotton from
Shinyanga, Kyela organic cocoa production from Mbeya, and Kimango organic spices
and teas from Morogoro. In 2003 the first local certification body, the Tanzanian
certification association (TanCert) was established with support from the EPOPA
programme and a number of Civil Society Organisations (CSOs). The first
certification of organic products for the domestic market was undertaken in 2004, and
the following year TanCert started inspection services for the export market. Prior to
this organic operators were using external certifiers.
Also in 2005 a national network called the Tanzanian Organic Agriculture Movement
(TOAM) was formed which places organic farming centre stage in the aims of the
members to counter food insecurity, poverty and environmental degradation. TOAM
emerged out of a need to improve access to relevant information, exchange
experiences and unify the organic movement by setting a priority agenda for the
organic sector particularly in the areas of research, marketing, learning and advocacy.
36

The mission of TOAM is to develop a sustainable organic sector through promotion,
coordination, research and education.
5.3 Status of organic agriculture in Tanzania
Although in its infancy, the certified organic sector is growing rapidly. It is being
propelled by smallholder farmers (mostly farming 1-5 ha) and commercial interests in
capturing the expanding organic market. The formal sector has arisen from significant
attempts to engage smallholders in export commodity production, often facilitated by
local NGOs and development agencies that see a close fit between organic farming
and development objectives (Parrott & Elzakker, 2003). There is a growing realisation
that organic agriculture can contribute to the development of export and local trade,
and give opportunities to smallholder farmers to enter commercial agricultural
production.
In addition to the prospects of improved incomes, organic producers are motivated by
health and environmental concerns. The adoption of resource-efficient farming
systems such as organic agriculture is driven in part by pressure on natural resources
including threats to biodiversity such as bushfires, dependence on agrochemicals,
deforestation, the introduction of exotic species and hybrid seeds, and lack of proper
water management resulting in droughts, floods, siltation, erosion and water
contamination. Moreover the price for artificial fertilisers has been soaring in recent
decades (Silenge, 1996).
There are now at least 23 certified organic projects in Tanzania, including 16 firms for
export and 7 projects for the local market. The focus is on traditional commodity
crops such as coffee, tea, cocoa, cashew nuts and cotton and non-traditional crops
such as vanilla, sesame, herbs and spices which are often processed. Horticulturalists
are also adopting organic practices in order to produce tropical fruit and vegetables,
both fresh and dried, for the domestic and international market. The table below
shows the range of organic commodities produced in Tanzania:
Organic Produce of Tanzania
Type Product Operator Location Notes
Coffee Robusta coffee Kagera Cooperative
Union
Ltd. (KCU)
Bukoba Also instant
Arabica coffee Kilimanjaro Moshi,
Native
Cooperative Union
(KNCU)
Kilimamjaro
Instant coffee Tanganyika Bukoba,
Instant Coffee
Company Ltd.
(TANICA)
Kagera
Arabica coffee UMA
Teas and Black tea Mufindi Tea Njombe, Iringa
beverages
Estates Ltd.
(MTC)
Chamomile Clipper Fair trade
Hibiscus Zanzibar Organic Zanzibar Export
37

Cotton
Essential
oils
Culinary
spices
Spices and Herbs
Hibiscus,
Kimango Farm
lemongrass, Enterprises Ltd.
peppermint
Hibiscus Bonde la chem
chem
Cocoa Biolands
International Ltd.
Cotton ECOL Cotton
Project
Cotton BioRe Tanzania
Ltd.
Essential oils Zanzibar State
Trading Company
(ZSTC)
Essential oils Clove Stem Oil
Distillery (CSOD)
Turmeric
cinnamon
Cardamom
Nutmeg
Clove
Ginger
Black pepper
Chillies
Lemongrass
Zanzgerm
Enterprises Ltd.
Kimango Farm
Enterprises Ltd.
Tanzania Organic
Products Ltd.
(TAZOP)
Morogoro
Siha,
Kilimanjaro
Kyela, Mbeya
Handeni,
Tanga
Meatu,
Shinyanga
Zanzibar
Pemba Lemon grass oil,
cinnamon leaf
oil, sweet basil
oil and
Zanzibar,
Tanga,
Kigoma
eucalyptus oil
Ginger,
turmeric,
pepper, chilli
and lemongrass
Morogoro Paprika, chillies,
lemongrass
Zanzibar,
Morogoro
Ginger,
turmeric,
pepper,
cinnamon,
cloves, etc.
Vanilla
MAYAWA Bukoba,
Kagera
ADP Isangati Isangati,
Mbeya
Dried turmeric
ZAFFIDE Zanzibar
Fresh Avocadoes Mikese Organic Morogoro Mangoes
tropical Mangoes
Farm
fruits Pineapples
Papaya
Dried fruits Dried fruits Matunda Mema,
Kipepeo
Karagwe
Dried pineapple, Claphjo
Kibaha, Dar es
mango, bananas
tomatoes
Enterprises Salaam
Canned Canned pineapple Dabaga Vegetable Njombe
fruits
& Fruit Canning
Company Ltd.
Honey Honey Fidahussein Co. Rufiji delta
Ginger Ginger syrup Arusha
Vegetables Amaranths, cassava, Mkuranga Women Mkuranga,
tomatoes
Vegetable
Growers
Coast
38

Mushrooms Dried mushrooms Songea and
Njombe in
Iringa region
Fish Tuna Tanga Sustainably
harvested
Seaweed Seaweed powder Pemba For use as a
binding agent in
toothpaste, also
used in ice
cream and pet
Medicinal
plants
Nuts and
oil seeds
Pyrethrum
Artemisia
Aloe Vera
Cashew nuts
Shea, Macadamia
Groundnuts
Premier Cashew
Industries Ltd.
(PCI)
Kerekese,
Mkuranga
food
Cashew-nuts
TANPRO Sumbawanga Groundnuts
Sesame Singida
Safflower Envirocare Kilimanjaro
Source: Compiled from the literature including, Mwasha & Leijdens (2004), Taylor (2006), UNEP-
UNCTAD (2006), and interviews.
Estimates of the certified land area range from 37,000 ha to over 64,000 ha. The 2001
SOEL Survey recorded an organic area of 55,867 ha, comprising 0.14% of the
agricultural area (Willer & Yussefi, 2004). It is likely that the situation has changed
since then although it is not clear whether the amount of certified land area has
increased due to increasing projects or decreased as a result of farmer drop-out. In
addition, there is thought to be more than 200,000 ha of uncertified organic
agricultural land.
In 2001 it was estimated that there were almost 27,000 certified organic farms in
Tanzania (Willer & Yussefi, 2004), which makes it likely that there are now over
30,000 farmers in Tanzania producing organically. Although Tanzania exports
sizeable quantities of organic food products, the exact amounts are unclear because
customs do not classify them separately (Tairo, 1999). At least 10,467.41 tonnes were
thought to have been exported in 2005 (Taylor, 2006). In the past few years
approximately 60% of certified organic commodities produced in Tanzania have been
exported (Chilongola, 2005).
Certified organic agriculture in Tanzania is predominantly export-oriented, supported
by development funding and aimed at improving incomes. Through EPOPA, certified
organic agriculture has been promoted in Tanzania as ‘an instrument for African
exporters to improve their business and for thousands of farmers to improve their
livelihood’ (EPOPA, 2004). Certified organic projects generally have the following
components: farmer organisations, an exporter, a facilitating agency and a certifying
agency. Smallholders are contracted by exporting companies who generally pay for
certification, sometimes in collaboration with donor programmes.
In addition to this out-grower model, there are also a few individuals farming
organically on a large-scale, and one cooperative (the Kilimanjaro Native Cooperative
Union) engaged in commercial organic agriculture. The main export destinations for
39

organic crops from Tanzania are in the European Union, although some go to the
United States and the growing Middle Eastern market.
Whilst certified organic farms produce almost exclusively for the European market,
Tanzania also has a small but growing domestic market, particularly in the light of
pesticide poisonings. There is a rising awareness of the benefits of better quality food
and also possible links between healthy organic foods and some alleviation of the
effects of HIV/AIDS.
In addition to a few dedicated outlets, several of the larger supermarket chains stock
organic products. The large majority of organic customers are foreigners including
expatriates and tourists, although there is also a market amongst the wealthy urban
Tanzanian elite and middle classes, particularly for medical reasons.
Non-certified or informal organic production, on the other hand, has been practised in
Tanzania for centuries. There is a history of low-input traditional farming in Tanzania
and the majority of production of food crops such as millet, sorghum, rice, maize,
food legumes, roots, tubers, plantain and fruits are under low-external input
agriculture (Altieri, 2002; in Scialabba & Hattam, 2002; Harris et al., 1998).
Traditional farmers have found ways of improving soil structure, water-holding
capacity and nutrient and water availability without the use of artificial inputs, such as
intercropping grains and legumes. It has been estimated that in Africa 98% of all
cowpeas are grown in polycultural systems (Dover & Talbot, 1987).
Although it may not be recognised as such, organic production is already thought to
be feeding the majority of people across East Africa, especially those living outside
large conurbations who mainly eat from their own gardens and who, being commonly
averse to applying artificial inputs to their own food crops, mainly eat naturally,
organically-produced food (Taylor, 2006). The average use of chemical fertilisers is
estimated to be less that one kg per ha per year, which implies that most of the land is
never fertilised (Scialabba & Hattam, 2002).
For these reasons, agricultural production is often called organic “by default”
although the term is slightly misleading since many of these systems are not fully
complying with formal organic standards of production. Furthermore, farmers in
traditional systems often use isolated sustainable agricultural techniques,
incorporating ‘specific organic soil fertility enhancement or pest control techniques
without the farming system as a whole being organic’ (Harris et al., 1998: 2). Thus
organic farming differs from many traditional systems by aiming ‘for the entire farm
to be managed as a coherent system’ (Lockeretz & Stopes, 2000) and therefore
offering an integrated approach to soil fertility and crop protection management.
5.4 Modus Operandi of organic agriculture in Tanzania
External certifiers that operate in the country include IMO/Naturland, EcoCert and
Krav. In the past the Soil Association has worked in Tanzania. The first national
certification body, TanCert, has formulated and now applies two standards: one for
the national market and the other for the export market.
Altogether three organic standards exist in Tanzania, including:
1. a standard for local markets
40

2. an export standard
3. a standard drafted by the Tanzania Bureau of Standards.
There is currently an initiative to develop regional standards in order to ease the
demands of meeting international trade barriers and strengthen East Africa within a
global context.
In addition to building up the organic standards and certification procedures, TanCert
is involved in training inspectors. There are currently 34 local inspectors who are
graded and inspect for the local and international markets, whilst others are trainees
who assist in establishing ICSs, quality insurance mechanisms which allow for
smallholder group certification. TanCert aims for IFOAM accreditation in 2006 in
order to reduce costs and increase ease of access to certification services.
5.5 Political context of organic agriculture in Tanzania
The Government of the Republic of Tanzania is in support of organic agriculture and
has opened up policies which allow farmers and NGOs to practice organic agriculture
in the country. The Ministry of Agriculture, Food Security and Cooperatives
(MAFSC) took part in the formulation of national organic standards.
The government has made public its support for organic agriculture as a market
strategy (Sicilima, 2003). Tanzania’s Board of External Trade (BET) is putting
greater emphasis on the production and export of organically-grown foods.
Recognising the contribution of the organic sector to overall export competitiveness,
BET has been working jointly with Geneva-based International Trade Centre (ITC) to
promote organic foods production and marketing (Tairo, 1999).
The existing national Agricultural Policy (1997) has clauses about organic agriculture
which centre on ecological and health issues. Clause 3.1 of the policy mentions
organic agriculture in relation to the management of natural resources, the production
of commercial products, protection of soil, water and wildlife and minimising
negative social and environmental externalities. However, the country has not
integrated organic agriculture fully into the main agricultural policies, which still have
a pervasive bias towards an industrial paradigm of agricultural development.
Moreover, organic practices have not been streamlined in existing extension services.
Most of the subsidies, pricing policies, infrastructure and other supports such as farm
input support schemes provide incentives for input-intensive farming methods rather
than for more ecologically-sustainable agriculture. Since such supports are only
available to conventional farmers, they encourage farmers to abandon traditional
methods. For example, the Treasury has been subsidising fertiliser transportation
throughout the country since 2003, and has a target of increasing fertiliser use to an
average of ten kg per ha by 2007/8 (Guardian, 2005). Such schemes are ‘collectively
financed in a way in which organic farms de facto subsidise their conventional
colleagues’ (Taylor, 2006: 4).
The picture described above is of the organic sector in early 2006. However, the
sector is very fluid and the situation is changing rapidly as the demand for organic
products grows and traditional trade barriers are opened.
41

Chapter Six: Assessment of Organic Systems in Tanzania
6.1 Towards a Tanzanian Vision of Organic Agriculture
Organic agriculture is essentially viewed by stakeholders in Tanzania as a sustainable
form of agriculture that improves soil fertility, provides healthy products and reduces
costs. During the stakeholder forum convened as a part of this study, key actors in the
Tanzanian organic movement identified food, environment and income as
cornerstones of their desired future organic sector. Their declared vision was ‘to have
a vibrant organic sector supported by a wide range of stakeholders that is the driving
force behind agriculture in the country, takes advantage of local and export markets
and contributes to enhanced livelihoods through quality and safe food, environmental
conservation, economic growth and sustainable development’ by 2015.
Organic agriculture is indigenous insofar as it can be conceived as a modified form of
traditional farming. Since traditional agriculture generally has low or no artificial
inputs, and frequently incorporates mulching, intercropping and other organic
practices, conversion to organic agriculture may involve only slight modifications to
farm management, e.g. fire avoidance. There are many ways in which organic
agriculture complements and builds upon cultural beliefs, for example farmers
maintain conservation areas in the Tanzanian tradition of making offerings to
propitiate the spirits of the dead (kutambika) and protecting areas for the ancestors.
Where organic systems have been developed in a participatory manner, organic
agriculture is perceived as a low-cost, environmentally-friendly means of improving
agricultural productivity for food security and trade. On the other hand, when the
concept of organic agriculture has been introduced by external agents, it is often not
fully incorporated into the identities, belief and value systems of the rural
communities. It may even be associated with exploitative relations with companies,
and understood only as a rigid and oppressive set of (mainly prohibitive) rules.
Unlike in Europe where many farmers have adopted organic agriculture for
philosophical and ideological reasons, certified organic agriculture has emerged in
Africa in response to market demand from the Global North, with health, food safety,
environmental benefits and animal welfare being lesser concerns. Findings suggest
that there is a greater risk of organic agriculture being perceived negatively where the
sole or main incentive for farmers to convert is access markets, credit and inputs.
The meaning of organic agriculture to different stakeholders is influenced to a large
extent by the way in which it develops in different areas. Cotton farmers in Shinyanga
region have been motivated to convert to organic agriculture for a number of different
reasons, include negative experiences with pesticides and their cattle, premium prices
for organic cotton, and the availability of extension services (a German development
cooperation has been active in the area since the early 1990s). Project farmers agreed
to cultivate cotton organically by practising crop rotation and integrating trap crops 2
such as sunflower in return for inputs and guaranteed markets for their cotton.
2 A trap crop is a plant known to attract a pest that is planted near a crop susceptible to that pest to lure
the pest away from the desired crop.
42

Representatives of the national farmers’ network (MVIWATA) have highlighted a
whole host of factors that are motivating smallholders to adopt organic practices in
Tanzania, including: high costs of hybrid seeds requiring chemical inputs; ease of
access to organic inputs; similarity to traditional practices; improved taste and
nutritional content; maintenance of soil moisture; heightened resistance to drought
and diseases; improved handling qualities; links between chemicals and health
problems.
6.2 Benefits of organic agriculture in Tanzania
Ecological capital – Natural capital is built in organic systems along various
agroecological transition pathways including: a) habitat manipulation via vegetative
diversification, and b) enhancement of soil biodiversity via soil management (Altieri,
2003). There is widespread awareness amongst Tanzanian smallholders of the
importance of soil fertility management practices, evidenced in the conscious use of
nitrogen-fixing trees including Grevellia spp. to replenish essential nutrients,
intercropping and green manuring leguminous plans such as Crotalaria, Cajanus and
Mucuna. These techniques, alongside many others such as composting, applying
farmyard manure, cover cropping, crop rotation and mulching result in a higher
organic matter content in the soil and greater overall resilience to drought conditions.
One notable example of farmers employing organic practices to enhance soil fertility
is the sunhemp system that was developed at Peramiho (Reijntjes et al., 1992). The
nitrogen-fixing Crotalaria species (commonly known as sunhemp) is intercropped
with maize, incorporated into the soil as a green manure and mulched to protect fruit
trees such as banana, citrus and coconut. Other advantages include erosion prevention,
fodder value, and weed, insect and nematode control.
In the upland villages of the Uluguru mountains, in the Mkuyuni division of
Morogoro region, there has been an impressive uptake of strip contouring in noncertified
organic pineapple production, resulting in slope stabilisation and reduced soil
erosion. There are also experiments with Vertiver grass (Vertiver zizanioides) which
can act as a “hedge against erosion” (World Bank, 2000). The grass is already found
in more than ten regions and is the centrepiece of a project to protect the Msimbazi
valley. Organic farmers are also making more efficient use of water resources by
employing SWC practices such as bund and trench construction.
Organic farms in Tanzania often have a high level of biodiversity and farm enterprise
diversity both as a result of purposeful cultivation and as an unintentional
consequence of discontinuing the use of synthetic inputs. One organic mango farmer
in Morogoro identified 13 different varieties of mangoes on his farm and had also
incorporated spices, nuts, hardwoods, and bee-keeping into his production system. In
the Kilimanjaro region, organic farmers have reported the return of many unusual
insects, birds and snakes since they stopped using agro-chemicals (L. Lema 2006,
pers. comm., 30 January).
Increasing agrobiodiversity in organic systems creates eco-balance, and contributes to
agroecosystem sustainability in a number of ways. In addition to improving
productivity (for example through the suppression of pests and diseases), multiple
cropping distributes labour demand through the seasons, improves diets and nutrition,
and spreads the economic and economic risk of failure. Where subsistence is an
43

important objective, the net income advantages of polycultural systems appear to be
secondary to risk reduction (Francis: in Altieri & Hecht, 1990).
The benefits of increased biodiversity are being reaped on many organic farms in
Tanzania. Crop rotations in the Shinyanga organic cotton scheme have helped to
diversify cash and food crops to include maize, paddy rice, sesame, sunflower,
jatropha and legumes such as pigeon peas, mung beans, and groundnuts (S. Ratter
2006, pers. comm., 12 March).
The diagram below summarises a variety of different organic practices that are being
used in Tanzania. Each technique holds a range of potentials and constraints that
differ according to agroecological zone. The practices have been loosely grouped
according to whether they are used for soil fertility, water conservation or pest and
disease control, although there are many interconnections for example increasing soil
nutrient content improves plant health and makes them less susceptible to damage by
pests.
Examples of organic techniques used in Tanzania for ecological benefit
WATER
CONSERVATION
Mulch,
Compost,
Raised beds,
In-row tillage,
Leguminous
green manures,
Liquid manure,
Farmyard manure,
Double-digging
SOIL FERTILITY
MANAGEMENT
Intercropping
Agroforestry
Alley cropping
Vertiver grass
Cover crops
Buffer zones
PEST AND
DISEASE
CONTROL
Minjingu Rock
Phosphate
(MPP),
Sunflower cake
Crop
rotation,
trap crops,
companion
planting
Ashes, garlic,
neem, papaya,
milk, copper,
Lantana camara
jatropha, tobacco,
pyrethrum,
Tephrosia,
Pheromone
traps, Bt,
veronica
Human capital: The knowledge and skill set of organic farmers is increased through
training given by supporting organisations and extension provided by exporting
44

companies and ICS field staff. This is often a dramatic improvement on existing
extension services. For example, the bioRe organic cotton project in Shinyanga
employs one extensionist who visits at least once a month for every 50 families in
contrast to a ratio of one government extensionist for every 500-600 farmers. In
particular, projects that involve participatory research, on-farm experimentation and
farmer-to-farmer learning help to increase farmers’ self-reliance. As an integral part
of the ICS, record-keeping also helps farmers to monitor productivity in terms of
yields and also farm income, for example knowing the exact number of clove trees on
a their farms encourages Zanzibar farmers to replace trees that are removed.
By valuing the contribution of local knowledge to the production system and making
optimum use of locally-available resources, organic agriculture supports smallholder
farm development. For example, an organic farmer in Morogoro had adopted the local
practice of planting Euphorbia around the base of mango trees in order to limit
damage by termites. Local farmers are also using the African marigold (Tagetes
erecta) for its pest repellent properties. In the Coastal region the use of red weaver
ants to biologically control the Helpelitus beetle, the main pest of the cashew trees has
become local knowledge. Indigenous knowledge is an important source of
information about the local farming system, experiences, institutions and culture since
it helps farmers adapt new ideas to their local conditions and needs and forms the
basis for change within the farming community (Reijntjes et al., 1992).
Improving access to varied and nutritious foodstuffs is another important way in
which organic agriculture is building human capital. An organic gardening project at
the Keni Aleni Primary School in Rombo, Moshi, facilitated by the NGO Envirocare,
is improving the diets and health of the school children and teachers.
Social capital: Social capital improvements in organic systems take the form of more
and stronger social organisations at the local level, new rules and norms for managing
collective natural resources, and better connectedness to external policy institutions
(Hine & Pretty, 2006). The formation of organic producer groups and ICSs improves
farmers’ access to training, inputs and credit.
Organic conversion influences all facets of farm operation including social structure,
labour demand and decision-making processes (Scialabba & Hattam, 2004). Since the
type of practices promoted in organic agriculture tend to suit the requirements of
women farmers (e.g. low external input), organic systems can enhance gender equity.
The uptake of organic vegetable cultivation by women’s groups in Mkuranga, for
instance, has been accompanied by reduced dependency on men for cash, and since
the groups explicitly focus on improving household nutrition, the benefits from
organic agriculture accrue to the farming family as a whole.
Economic capital: Many smallholders who undergo organic conversion experience
increased financial security as a result of the reduced costs of organic production,
higher farm-gate prices and increased market security. Many organic farmers and
NGOs mention the minimisation of the costs of production by using locally-available
materials as one of the key motivations for adopting organic agriculture.
Organic certification adds value to smallholder agriculture through the premium price,
market access and opportunities for value-added processing and sale of products
45

elated to organic production (Harris et al., 1998). By producing according to
international regulations and obtaining certification by a certifying body, farmers are
reported to be obtaining a premium of 15-40% for their products (EPOPA, 2004). In
addition, higher organic prices tend to create an upward trend on the price locally paid
for conventional and non-certified products. Preliminary results from a Dutch-funded
study on Standards and Agrofoods Exports suggest that organic cashew growers
receive a higher price and revenue from cashew nut sale than conventional cashew
growers (D. Nyange 2006, pers, comm., 16 January). In the past the cashew growers
have quadrupled their income in two years by doubling harvests from 1300 to 2600 kg
per year and due to price increases from 300 to 700 Tshs per kg (Edwards, 2005).
Farmers in Mkuyuni division of the Morogoro region were able to increase their
incomes significantly through the sale of (non-certified) organically-produced
plantain and pineapples. The superior quality of fruits from this particular area is
allegedly recognised in markets across the country. One farmer reported earnings of
up to 600,000 Tshs (around $600) per month from the sale of non-certified organic
plantain, which he had used to build three improved houses, purchase a town plot and
educate his children. Another indicator of the improved quality life of the local
residents since adopting organic agriculture was the increased variety of consumer
goods available in local shops.
The premium prices offered for certified organic cotton have helped to raise the
income levels of farmer in the bioRe project in Shinyanga, although according to a
consultant on the project, the establishment of a long-term partnership with a buying
company is often of greater value to the small-scale producer that the premium price
for organic produce (S. Ratter 2006, pers. comm., 12 March).
46

Chapter Seven: Summary of Case Study on Organic Agriculture and Rural
Livelihoods in Mkuranga District
Two contrasting organic initiatives in the Mkuranga district were analysed from a
sustainable livelihoods perspective in order to clarify future directions of organic
agriculture at farm- and community-levels. Premier Cashew Industries Ltd. (PCI),
which is involved in the production and processing of certified organic cashews for
export, was chosen as an example of a project with a commodity focus. An
association of local groups, known locally as Muungano, which is producing inconversion
organic vegetables for subsistence and local trade, offered an example of a
project with a community focus.
7.1 Background to the area
The Mkuranga district is located approximately 40km south of Dar es Salaam in the
Coastal region of Tanzania. The narrow lowland coastal belt is consistently hot and
humid. It is under a bimodal rainfall regime of 750-1200 mm per year and overlies
relatively infertile sandy soils dominated by Cambic Arenosols. Traditionally farmers
have sustained their families through rainfed, low-input cultivation of rice and
cassava, deriving income mainly from the sale of coconuts and more recently
cashews.
7.2 Individual case narratives
The large Dar-based PCI has been processing organic cashews since 2002 with
facilitation from EPOPA. The company is certified by IMO/Naturland, which work
through local inspectors of the domestic certification body, TanCert. PCI currently
holds contracts with 478 farmers in three villages of the Mkuranga district.
Compliance to organic standards is ensured through an ICS which facilitates group
certification. PCI employs two field officers to supervise the ICS, conduct internal
inspections and trainings.
Since 2004 a number of local production groups have been formed in the area in order
to improve household food security and increase the incomes of farming families
through organic vegetable cultivation. These grew out of discussion between leaders
of the sub-villages and representatives of supporting institutions such as EPOPA and a
government research institute. The largest group has 27 members altogether (26
women and 1 man) who together cultivate a 0.6 ha plot rented by the government
research institute. The groups are currently seeking organic certification for the local
market.
7.3 Analysis
The ecological integrity, social equity and economic effectiveness of the organic
initiatives were found to be very different, and this has important implications for the
livelihoods of the farmers involved. Key factors determining the sustainability of the
two organic initiatives as livelihood strategies were system orientation, the level of
livelihood diversity, agricultural practices, social structures and marketing
arrangements.
Overall, increased awareness of organic approaches to agriculture has contributed to
sustainable natural resource management, household food security and improved
incomes, hence improving the livelihoods of rural farm households. However, when
47

farmers are motivated to convert by incentives of sulphur on credit (for control of
Powdery Mildew Disease in cashews) and the promise of increased incomes, there is
a risk that environmental and social sustainability concerns are sidelined.
On balance, the cashew project did not appear to significantly increase livelihood
security by mitigating risks or by improving their asset base in order to reduce the
susceptibility of smallholders to loss of welfare. In the “trade not aid” approach,
organic agriculture theoretically should build financial assets. However, in the worst
case scenario, fluctuations on the world market and an over-reliance on one product,
makes the agricultural system more vulnerable to shocks. Moreover, an overemphasis
on cash crop production compromises the potential non-economic benefits
of organic agriculture such as ecological stability. The benefits, therefore, of having
links with external institutions, trainings on cashew management and increased yields
are overshadowed by the disadvantages of relying on a single cash crop, volatile
market prices and problematic input supply arrangements.
Organic agriculture was found to bring more livelihood benefits among the local
groups, where the emphasis was first on building human and social capital at the local
level, with certification a secondary concern. These included:
- more varied and nutritious diets of family members due to increased diversity
and higher quality crops;
- increased social and economic power to women accrued through higher
income from sales of vegetables;
- livelihood security through diversification and introduction of new productive
elements into the farming system;
- increased yields due to training and provision of inputs;
- closer cooperation between farmers due to the formation of local groups.
Food security was enhanced by increasing household food availability and raising
children’s nutritional status. Since it relies more on internal natural and resource
resources, the type of organic agriculture embraced by the local groups is more
ecologically, socially and economically sustainable. However, prolonged drought
conditions are still a serious threat and usually have a greater impact on vegetable
production than production of perennial crops such as cashews.
7.4 Lessons
Opportunities for improving system sustainability in organic agriculture of Mkuranga
include improving natural resource management, farmer organisation, livelihood
diversification and participatory market research and development. Institutional
relationships were found to be a key bottleneck in developing organic agriculture
oriented to the needs of smallholders. There is a need to recognise and build upon the
synergies between different stakeholders in the organic food chain, particularly
farmers’ organisations, facilitating agencies, certifiers and exporters / companies.
A collaborative relationship between the two projects with their different orientations,
empowering farmers on the one hand and producing high quality products on the
other, might result in a more effective situation. In order to bring a significant share of
farmers out of poverty the certified market-led model needs to be more aligned to
IFOAM’s basic principles of health, ecology, fairness and care by explicitly
incorporating social and environmental concerns. An organic agriculture that
comprises both a focus on community and commodity is needed in order to secure
48

sustainable livelihoods for smallholders, as is indeed one which promotes voluntary
participation, and the sharing of both information and benefits.
49

Chapter Eight: Challenges to the Development of Organic Agriculture in
Tanzania
Notwithstanding its many benefits, organic farming carries attendant risks and
challenges which also merit consideration if the sector is to be responsibly developed.
These relate to production, labour, gender, market-orientation, and the policy and
institutional framework.
8.1 Production
Organic farmers face many of the same production constraints as conventional
farmers in relation to climate, labour requirements, pest and diseases, land tenure,
distance from markets, infrastructure, credit, education and other inputs. In particular,
the increasingly erratic nature of the rains—fieldwork followed an eight-month
drought in most parts of the country—is a source of major concern for all farmers in
the country, irrespective of their wealth and the size of their landholdings.
For the bioRe organic cotton project failure of the rains has meant that farmers have
had to use three times the normal quantity of seed. The vast majority of producers rely
on rainfed agriculture and lack the necessary knowledge and resources to develop
efficient rainwater harvesting and irrigation systems. Furthermore, burning and
deforestation are commonly used practices which threaten soil and water resources
and are contributing to flash floods.
Pest and disease outbreaks present a substantial risk to those organic farmers without
sufficient knowledge or access to biopesticides. Certain pests such as armyworms
(Spodoptera exempta), quelea quelea and vermin are particularly difficult to control
without the use of toxic chemicals.
Without security of land tenure, organic farmers are much less likely to make longterm
investments in their operations. Thus unclear borders and land conflicts, often
exacerbated by limited water resources, are a significant threat to the development of
organic agriculture. Even where farm boundaries are well-defined, fire can spread fast
across neighbouring farms and, in the case of organic cashew production, causes
severe damage to both seedlings and mature stands.
In spite of increased management intensity, organic practices may initially reduce
yields in the beginning in areas where input-intensive agriculture has been practised
(EPOPA, 2004). The uptake of organic agriculture may impact negatively on the
productivity of crops that have been cultivated using chemically-intensive methods
including coffee and some vegetables. Non-traditional crops and fruit are generally
lighter users of inputs and therefore experience less change (D. Nyange 2006, pers,
comm., 16 January). Such impacts need more careful research in order to address
fears about the ability of organic agriculture to meet the production levels needed to
feed a growing population.
There are a whole host of counterpoints to concerns over productivity declines in
organic systems. Experience has shown that ‘organic methods reduce output
proportionately less than they reduce costs’ making the farmer better off (McRobie: in
Blake, 1987). Lampkin (1990: 595) comments that ‘far from threatening the
populations of developing countries with mass starvation, ecological methods such as
50

organic farming allow farmers to take control again and escape dependence on
purchased inputs, improving output while at the same time reducing risk and
inequities which have been associated with the high technological approach to
agriculture’.
Moreover the time-scale on which productivity is measured needs to be considered
since organic agriculture seeks to optimise productivity on a long-term basis rather
than maximise it in the short-term. Whilst organic systems do not always increase
yield per unit area, agroecologists argue that this is of less importance than optimising
yield stability, environmental quality and net income to the farmer over the long-term.
There is not always a direct and positive relationship between organic agriculture and
biodiversity. The uptake of commercial and certified organic agriculture may cause a
shift to monocropping in cases where organic crops have been intercropped with
conventional crops, such as organic pineapples with conventional maize or organic
bananas with conventional coffee. Moreover, efforts to obtain the highest yield of a
single cash crop (for instance in pursuit of the organic premium) conflict with trying
to achieve maximum stability of a complex biomass structure (Dover & Talbot,
1987).
An emphasis on organic production for the market results in a disproportionate focus
on the main cash crop leading to specialisation and neglect of other aspects of the
system such as the environment, food quality and animal welfare which have
historically been essential elements of the philosophy behind organic farming (Alrøe,
2004). Specialisation of organic systems has also been reported in the Italian region of
Tyrol where farmers are focusing on organic apples (El-Nagger et al., 2006).
8.2 Labour
The ability to access sufficient labour, both skilled and unskilled, is an important
prerequisite for often labour-intensive organic systems, and organic projects usually
invest heavily in human resources such as farm workers, farm managers and field
officers. Organic farmers frequently use a large proportion of their incomes on hired
labour. Conditions of employment are often problematic, with labourers preferring ad
hoc seasonal work and employers looking for long-term loyalty. There are certain
times of the year when labour availability is critical such as during the harvesting
period. Whilst labour intensiveness may be considered a constraint to organic
conversion (particularly in the light of the HIV/AIDS pandemic and rural
depopulation), it may also be considered an opportunity to expand employment in
rural communities and attract the younger generations to agriculture. Furthermore,
tedious and time-consuming practices often have alternatives such as in-field
composting.
8.3 Gender
Organic agriculture may entail changes in gender roles and control of budgets, for
example more work for women and additional incomes to men, which need to be
carefully monitored in each project. Where cropping intensity increases or new lands
are taken into cultivation organic practices may increase household workload and the
burden often falls on women. Furthermore, ‘additional income arising from sales of
produce, particularly from coffee and cotton (but not vegetables) may go directly to
men in the households, who are less likely than women to invest in children and the
51

household as a whole’ (Hine & Pretty, 2006). Certified organic farms are usually
registered in the name of the man of the household. Since the men often take charge
of the major cash crops, income derived from the sale of organic produce does not
necessarily benefit the whole family.
However, more data is needed on the gender division of labour and the distribution of
benefits from organic agriculture, and any attempt to improve the status of women
farmers through training and other means must be implemented sensitively and aimed
at the whole community, in order to avoid unintended effects that actually worsen
women’s lives (Taylor, 2006).
8.4 Market-orientation
Satisfying market demands in terms of quantity, quality and consistency of supply is
another major challenge facing organic farmers. The pressure to meet market
demands for bulk supply can cause organic farmers to try to achieve economies of
scale by reducing the diversity of crop types and/or enterprises, undermining one of
the underlying principles of organic management. The growing “conventionalisation”
of organic agriculture (such as large monocultures using input substitution), where socalled
“market needs” have separated the organic movement from its initial platform,
is of increasing concern to many actors within the organic movement (Lernoud &
Fenesca, 2004: 23).
By targeting specialised markets in Europe, the USA and Japan, organic producers
must comply with stringent market requirements (such as HACCP and Eurep-GAP)
which entail following strict sanitation and hygiene procedures. Strict adherence to
market-based standards and large-scale production gives rise to centralised
administrative control and external monitoring, in time reducing suitability to local
conditions. In the past phytosanitary regulations have been a reason for blocking
imports of organic products from Tanzania into the UK. The proliferation of
regulatory structures has increased concerns about import discrimination when
compliance is required with standards that are not suited to Tanzania’s agroecological
conditions. There is also a risk that the ‘strict demands of the organic food industry
may eclipse the ecological principles of organic farming, particularly where the need
for “quality control” can be used as a justification for authoritarianism’ (Thiers, 2005:
12) and increase tensions between producers and buyers.
It is frequently stated that one of the major challenges facing organic farmers is the
high costs of certification. In fact, some practitioners indicate that certification
represents as little as 2% of overall costs of production. Often the choice of certifier
and the complexity of procedures including transaction certifications are greater
constraints than certification cost in terms of accessing increasingly controlled import
markets (Harris et al., 1998). Since a certain part of certification is a fixed cost,
certification costs take higher percentage of earnings of smallholder units, underlining
the importance of collective certification systems such as ICSs in order to involve
smallholder farmers. Also about 50% of the certification cost may be towards travel.
The organic market is very selective which means that not all produce that has been
grown and handled according to organic standards can be sold as organic. For
example, the market for organic cashew is restricted to White Wholes which
52

constitute only 4 out of the 27 grades used by the exporting company, which means
that a large portion of organically-grown cashews cannot be sold as organic.
Producing for the world market in organic produce puts Tanzanian producers in direct
competition with those from South America, Asia, Australia and the Mediterranean.
In the organic sector the Brazilians are also supplying the market with bananas and
pineapples, for instance, whilst China is also an exporter of essential oils and
lemongrass, and Japan exports organic ginger. In order to stay competitive on global
markets, Tanzanian smallholders are challenged to capitalise on other comparative
advantages besides relatively cheap land and labour. Cheap imports of raw and
processed goods from Asia and South Africa also threaten access by Tanzanian
producers to the domestic market and could, in the future, jeopardise the development
of the local organic market.
The price premium, despite being a major incentive for many organic producers,
introduces a range of issues that have yet to be fully understood and addressed by
organic stakeholders. Value-chain analysis is needed in order to determine the
destination of price premiums amidst fears of inequitable trading structures.
When the primary motive for converting to organic agriculture is the price premium
for organic produce, there is a risk of farmers reverting to conventional production if
the differential decreases, particularly in areas that have not directly experienced the
consequences of agro-industrialisation. Where organic farmers have been lured by
higher prices, a sudden and unexpected downturn in the market may be especially
devastating. This has been the case for organic cashew growers in Mkuranga who
were able to quadruple their earnings in a couple of years only to see a 47% fall in the
farm-gate price paid for cashews the following year.
In addition, several operators pointed out that the price premium increases the risk of
conventional farmers side-selling through their organic neighbours in order to take
advantage of higher farm-gate prices. Not only does this threaten the quality of the
product, but also the credibility of the entire certification system. Since marketing
organic products presupposes a level of trust in networks, maintaining credibility is of
great import for certified organic producers. In addition to these production and
marketing issues, a price premium may put organic products out of reach to local
consumers.
Government, donor and private sector interest in organic agriculture which is largely
driven by the market rationale needs to be supplemented with increased awareness of
the possible contradictions between ecological and market rationality inherent in
organic certification and marketing systems. Organic agriculture does not perpetuate
industrial and commercial activity, but on the contrary, ‘sows the seeds of its own
market saturation’ by seeking to create stable ecosystems which do not rely on
external inputs (Their, 2005: 5). Long-term ecological benefits are rarely enough to
attract local capital and so it important to look beyond the market incentive of adding
value to agricultural products in order to understand the ecological value of organics
and in order to adhere to the core principles of organic agriculture which are dictated
by the environment.
53

Purely commercially-dictated production may fail to give due attention to ecosystem
functions and services necessary for overall system sustainability. For this reason,
Parrott and Kalibwani (2003: 57) state that ‘organic agriculture must be viewed
beyond the trade frame – as an agricultural system that enhances and manages the
complexity of the ecosystem’. The challenge is therefore ‘to find a balance between
the market rationality that gives organic agriculture its power and the ecological
rationality which gives it meaning’ (Thiers, 2005: 12).
8.5 Policy and Institutional Framework
Many believe that most agricultural sustainability improvements occurring since the
1990s have arisen despite existing national and institutional policies, rather than
because of them (Hine & Pretty, 2006). Often the focus is on delivering increased
food production, at the expense of environmental and social benefits. In addition to
the lack of enabling policies, organic agriculture has been hindered by a lack of
knowledge and information about organic agriculture among government bureaucrats
and other influential actors in educational and research institutions, leading to a poor
appreciation of its potential in poverty eradication and food security.
In spite of the government’s assertion that the agricultural sector is the main pillar of
the Tanzanian economy, agriculture has been a relatively low budgetary priority since
the 1980s. Civil society organisations under the umbrella of PELUM Tz are now
driving an advocacy campaign to increase the proportion of the budget devoted to
agriculture to at least 10% food security by 2010 as it was agreed by SADC member
States in May 2004 (PELUM, 2006).
The political and economic context in which agriculture develops has a major
influence on the choice of farming practices. Centralised political mechanisms and
unregulated markets have been found to favour chemically-intensive control
techniques (Thiers, 2005). Specific policies such as subsidies, bans, budget allocations
for research and extension for the agricultural system frequently have a distorting
influence on the uptake of organic agriculture.
The MAFSC is currently investing heavily in industrial agriculture, for example in
relation to seed technology, agro-chemicals and biotechnology. Since organic
agriculture relies more heavily on locally-available inputs, is less commerciallyoriented
and results in a decentralisation of power to local communities and groups,
there have been concerns raised over a possible backlash amongst local authorities
and government institutions due to the reduced opportunities for rent-seeking and
corruption (Hine & Pretty, 2006).
In addition, the scale of development assistance can impede the adoption of ecological
agriculture. National projects often involve “top-down” designs of farming systems,
without an understanding of specific sites. This runs counter to one of the
fundamental principles of agroecology and organic agriculture that ‘there is no
substitute for detailed knowledge of the specific site being developed or managed’
(Dover & Talbot, 1987: 50). Theirs (2005) argues that owing to the locally
differentiated and information intensive nature of organic techniques, policies using
either centralised research and extension or unregulated markets to generate
innovation and adoption will prove inadequate.
54

Low level or “pseudo” participation of farmers in the design, implementation and
monitoring of policies and programmes has been identified as a constraint not only to
the development of the organic sector, but also to achieving national food security
(PELUM, 2004).
The collaboration between stakeholders in the organic sector is impeded when the
differing goals and expectations of donors, exporters and farmers lead to
misunderstandings and mutual suspicion. In some cases farmers are discouraged from
adopting organic practices by conflicting signals from government extensionists,
companies and NGOs who promote industrial, modern and high-input forms of
agriculture.
The nature of contractual relations between producers and buyers may be a hindrance
when there is a lack of commitment to the terms of the contract and low
enforceability, leading to a high rate of drop-out on the part of farmers. Despite being
part of IFOAM basic standards, social justice is often a neglected dimension of
organic production systems partly because of the challenge of enforceability. In
export-driven organic agriculture, there is a risk of farmers become totally dependent
on one exporting company for access to the market, and therefore relations with that
buyer become even more critical to financial security. If the market or trade relations
collapse, farmers face severe difficulties in finding alternative markets. In addition,
the structure of the ICS and the ownership of the certification by companies who
specialise in certain organic commodities may make it harder for farmers to market
other crops as organic.
External technical assistance is still required in the Tanzanian organic sector for
example to build capacity for technical, organisational and legal skills needed for
establishing reliable certification and accreditations programmes. Heavy donor
support of the organic sector raises questions of long-term financial sustainability.
There are fears that such support will further entrench a “culture of receiving”, which
is reflected in the refusal of some stakeholders to attend trainings unless they are
provided with an allowance. Civil society is looking for ways to generate more funds
internally through sales and services.
55

Chapter Nine: Strategies to Strengthen the Organic Sector in Tanzania
Understanding the enormous potential that organic agriculture holds for improving the
livelihoods of smallholders, and taking into account the numerous risks and
challenges involved, stakeholders are now reaching consensus on both individual and
joint actions in order to strengthen organic agriculture and make it a more sustainable
livelihood strategy.
During interviews, focus groups, site visits and a stakeholder forum, representatives
from producer groups, civil society, the government, certification bodies, training,
research and extension institutions, and the private sector identified a number of
opportunities which may be supplemented with lessons from the literature. These
have been reported below and categorised according to the following themes:
production and processing; market development; research and education; policy and
legislation; standards and certification and institutional development.
9.1 Production and Processing
Improving the design of agroecosystems in order to take full advantage of ecological
processes could involve optimising land use, reducing losses due to pests, minimising
weed competition and improving soil fertility although it is only possible to give
precise recommendations in relation to the site-specific agroecological conditions of
each individual project. Improvements to production systems also depend on
reinforcing farmers’ knowledge of ecological and agronomic processes (see ‘Research
and Education’ below).
There are, however, a few recurrent themes that are widely applicable to organic
initiatives in Tanzania. Facilitating small-, medium- and large-scale farmers to acquire
organic inputs (such as seeds, biopesticides and organic feed) is a major challenge for
strengthening organic production across the country. Even basic farm tools such as
the hand hoe are expensive when farmers are below the official poverty line of $1 per
day. Improved access to organic inputs would help to encourage more large-scale
commercial farmers to move into organic production. Suggested activities include
developing and disseminating appropriate inputs for organic agriculture and raising
awareness on the use and availability of organic agricultural inputs. This may be
assisted by providing the farmers with inventories of organic input source, types,
distribution and consumption.
Often the main constraints to the adoption of alternative pest and disease control
techniques are lack of information, labour/time constraints and ineffective alternatives
(Harris et al., 1998), and therefore there needs to be more research, training and
dissemination of appropriate technologies, largely to raise the awareness of producers
of the range of choice of organic practices open to them, for instance for the control of
armyworms (Spodoptera exempta) which have infested significant areas of cropping
and pasture in northern, central and southern Tanzania this year (FEWS NET, 2006).
There is currently a tendency to understand non-chemical pest and disease control
methods to be limited to natural pesticides rather than to include cultural measures
such as crop rotation, intercropping and timing of operations. Similar issues apply to
soil fertility management, and there is great potential in improving the use of
biofertilisers, composting and manure management.
56

In contrast to other countries in East Africa such as Ethiopia, few farms in Tanzania
have well-integrated crop and livestock production. Sensitisation and training on
growing feed and using animal draft technology would help to nurture a greater
culture of keeping and caring for animals. Although prohibited in the organic
standards, the use of fire to clear land, reduce weeds, and flush birds and animals
whilst hunting, to name a few reasons, is widespread in Tanzania, and presents a
significant threat to organic production systems by undermining soil fertility
management measures. Farmers, field officers and government extensionists are
responding with concerted campaigns to educate and if necessary penalise those
responsible.
Enabling more producers and processors to access credit is another strategy for
securing essential agricultural inputs. A number of programmes are underway to assist
farmers to access affordable credit through micro-finance institutions and social
organisation. Facilitating access to small-scale loans needs to focus upon building
farmers’ administrative capacity, since processing the paperwork is often one of the
greatest constraints. In addition, new sources of external finance, such as grants,
subsidies or tourism can be sought. Improvements in production also need to focus on
lowering costs and increasing profits in order to strengthen the role of organic
agriculture in increasing household food security.
The economic sustainability of a production system depends to a large extent on the
choice of crop or commodity to produce for the market. The market for organic goods
now extends beyond traditional crops, and covers a range of non-traditional and
horticultural products. Tanzanian producers could take advantage of expanding
markets in wild harvested products, agroforestry of non-timber products, mushrooms,
herbs, timber, crafts and carving. The country has a large unexploited potential for
producing climate-specific crops such as tropical organic fruits, both fresh and dried.
Most imports of organic fruits, vegetables, herbs, rice and raw materials for beverages
(fruit juices such as organic pineapple and mango, as well as tea and coffee) into the
UK originate from countries outside Europe (Harris et al., 1998). Buyers in Europe
have expressed interest in particular varieties grown in Tanzania such as the Solo
papaya. Also seasonal fruits such as mangoes are in demand in other tropical
countries including the Gulf States.
Products exhibiting the greatest market potential are often characterised by being low
volume, high value, and non-perishable, such as coffee, aromatic herbs, spices,
medicinal and beauty products. Feasibility studies are being undertaken on the
potential for cultivating Artemisia which may be used to treat malaria, and Shea butter
is attracting increasing interest as a base for a range of cosmetics. EPOPA is exploring
the possibilities of establishing organic mushroom production, sesame, seaweed and
sustainable harvested tuna. Multi-purpose crops such as cashews or spices, the latter
which can be used to distil essential oils also offer distinct advantages for increasing
returns on organic production. In addition to market demand, ease of handling is an
important consideration for choosing suitable crops. Whilst some argue that it is better
to concentrate on higher-value non-traditional and horticultural crops because the
price of traditional crops such as cotton, cashew, tobacco, tea, sugar and pyrethrum
have been spiralling downwards over the past century, a case may also be made to
produce organic coffee, tea and cotton since these currently account for the bulk of
57

export earnings (Tairo, 1999). More market research is needed to identify specific
markets and to compare the price differentials of organic and conventional crops.
To avoid the risks involved in heavily market-oriented production systems (for
instance the cultivation of cash crops at the expense of food crops), operators of
organic projects have a range of options. One strategy adopted by the bioRe project is
to have an upper limit on the proportion of farmers’ land that can be used to cultivate
the primary cash crop (30% of the farmers’ acreage for cotton, in this case). In
addition, the contract stipulates that farmers should practice a three-year crop rotation,
helping to improve soil fertility and control pests such as the American bollworm.
The most potential for improved incomes comes from the production of crops that can
be easily processed into end market products for local, regional and international
trade, such as dried fruits, essential oils and aromatic plants. With its relatively low
labour costs, Tanzania is in a good position to add value to organically-produced
food, simultaneously benefiting local economies. Enabling on-farm processing, such
as through the provision of machinery, helps to integrate production, processing and
marketing and therefore leads to better returns to the farmers. This would be aided by
post-harvest technologies to improve storage and treatment in order to reduce losses.
In addition to adding value through solar drying (fruits, mushrooms and vegetables),
canning (pineapples) and distillation (essential oils) there are many other possibilities
for raising product quality above the basic export grade by processing primary
produce before sale. Examples include cleaning, treating and packing oilseeds such as
sesame, spinning cotton domestically into yarn, processing fruits into juice or
concentrate. A promising example of the export of value-added products was the
launch of an organic ginger in syrup / candied ginger project in Arusha in early 2005.
Quality improvements in production, post-harvest and processing are an important
focus of many projects. Supply of materials for processing and packaging is currently
a logistical and technical bottleneck for organic product development in the country
(M. Leijdens 2006, pers. comm., 19 January). Commercial handling skills that need
developing include storing, processing, packaging, labelling and presentation. The use
of locally-available packaging materials may be more suited to the aims of the organic
movement, and a more successful marketing strategy since consumers of organic
products are more likely to be conscientious about the impacts of packaging choices
although this should not compromise quality or shelf-life. Assurance of quality checks
and a reputable and publicly-recognised labelling system could help increase
consumer confidence’ in organic products (Harris et al, 1998: 12). Labelling produce
for traceability and transparency (location or eco-labels) also helps to increase returns,
and these need to be in the correct language for the market.
9.2 Market Development
In order to access the local, regional and international markets for organic products
there is a need to mobilise smallholder suppliers to meet the large demand for organic
products. At the same time it is necessary to ensure that international trade rules do
not impede efforts to develop the local food sector. Exporting countries in the Global
North are under increasing pressure to eliminate support programmes and export
incentives that create surpluses and lower global commodity prices.
58

Tanzania has a distinct advantage over her inland neighbours, owing to her extensive
coastline, dramatically reducing aeroplane freight and fuel surcharges on products that
can be transported by sea. Moreover, there are significant opportunities in the market
premium associated with organic certification that may generate investment of capital,
land and labour to facilitate research and adoption of environmentally and sociallysensitive
production systems.
Although the EU and the USA have thus far been the main export targets, there is also
significant potential in developing regional trade between Africa and Asia, within
Africa and between East African countries. Trade in organic products between
countries in East Africa is already taking place such as Tanzanian organic honey to
Kenya, and spices, tea and coffee to Uganda and Zambia (L. Mtama 2006, pers.
comm., 12 January).
One way in which East African countries could cooperate would be to consolidate the
supply of organic products and bulk-up trade volumes by synchronising container
loads, particularly for sesame, vanilla and dried fruits from Uganda and Tanzania
since the low volumes of organic commodities produced are currently a constraint to
marketing.
There is potential for regional solidarity in sharing experiences, standards, logo
development and common accreditation and the existence of an East African
community creates an enabling environment. Harmonisation and cooperation in East
Africa is being spearheaded by IFOAM which is also involved in developing a
common regional standard and certification structure for Tanzania, Uganda, Kenya
and now Rwanda. The East African standard is designed to be a tool for the
development of organic production in East Africa intended for trade and to be a
platform for a common label to facilitate export. In addition to certification, the
standard is designed to be used for extension, and could be a useful guide for noncertified
organic farmers. The development of a regional database is also explored as
a way of coordinating trade across the region.
Suggested strategies for developing the local market include expanding the available
range of domestic processed and convenience food, and also the range of retail chains
distributing the food, changing the price image (Tanzanian consumers are currently
deterred by the fact that it is largely expatriates who buy organic foods) and
improving communication strategies that focus on health and quality aspects (Richter
& Kovas, 2005). A well-informed public is key to creating demand-driven growth of
the organic sector.
A great deal of anecdotal evidence has been gathered that illustrates that many
Tanzanians have a preference for organic production and consumption. The high
demand for local chickens and eggs causes local people to pay double and sometimes
triple the price of the industrially-reared alternatives. There are widespread fears
about the negative effects of hormones in the conventional products on human health.
Mothers who seek safe food for their children are often knowledgeable about sources
of food produced organically, for example traditionally-stored maize is in demand
since some farmers in Tanzania use toxic substances such as DDT and copper
sulphates to store maize. Traditional maize varieties are 15% more expensive in the
large Dar es Salaam and Dodoma markets, and are reputedly tastier than the high-
59

yielding varieties that require artificial fertilisers. There is also a significant demand
for traditional green leafy vegetables, especially for Solum nigrum and Asystasia spp.
as well as ochre and collard in Morogoro, all of which are usually produced
organically.
The establishment of domestic marketing centres could help to capture this discerning
share of the market that already thinks about what to buy and eat, and also the many
Tanzanians living in the larger conurbations who have the purchasing power to spend
slightly extra on healthier and tastier options. Some farmers are already capitalising
on the market for organic products amongst the Tanzanian elite, for example a rising
demand for Hibiscus tea for its high vitamin C content and alleged alleviation of high
blood pressure. This trend would be strengthened by a rigorous campaign to raise
awareness about nutrition, diet, health and the organic alternative.
Developing direct marketing channels would address inequitable pricing structures by
reducing the number of intermediaries in the marketing chain and by helping to
increase overall returns to farmers. This also helps to reconnect producers with
consumers, and aids the transfer of information on farming practices and product
quality. In the village of Kinole in Morogoro, for example, strong farmer associations
have organised their own distribution system connecting a central storage area to
buyers across the country significantly reducing loss of profits to middlemen. This is
easier where production is located near to consumption centres. Other innovative
marketing schemes include farm shops, box / basket schemes, supplying fairs,
festivals and other events. Local hotels would be more willing to buy from organic
farmers who are organised into producer groups.
A survey of the organic sector suggests that distribution is a key constraint to
developing the local market since farmers lack access to markets and retail outlets
often express an interest in stocking more organic fresh and processed produce
particularly fruit, vegetables, flours and breads. Making local market linkages is
therefore a priority for building a strong domestic base for the promotion of
Tanzanian organic products.
Organic farmers are in a unique position to be able to link the quality of their produce
to the social and environmental conditions under which it has been produced. One
marketing strategy that is proving successful for a number of East African organic
enterprises is emphasising the geographical origin of products. Establishing a loyal
customer base through the promotion of local and distinct products with “stories” is
one way of developing a market. This is already taking place in the Morogoro region
for pineapples from Kinole, mangoes from Mikese and oranges from Matombo.
Making links with long-term buyers and secure markets may be a more sustainable
strategy than seeking out the highest price premiums especially for risk-averse and
resource-poor farmers. Ethical trading schemes such as fair trade may also help to
ensure that value reaches rural communities.
All aspects of marketing would be improved by increasing access to accurate and
timely market information which allows farmers to target the emerging ‘demanddriven
market for special supply chains of high quality products in niche markets’ (El-
Nagger et al., 2006). This could be achieved through participation in organic trade
fairs such as the annual BioFach in Germany, training on internet market research,
60

newsletters on the organic market and by appointing an ‘organic trade point officer’ at
the national level whose sole responsibility it is to disseminate market information
and assist farmers to find markets and get contracts. Improved market information and
transparency also gives farmers more control over the market system, and improves
the traceability of products from producer to consumer which helps to build an
incorruptible system of quality control. There is a need to balance confidentiality (e.g.
information restricted owing to commercial interests) and access to information which
gives stakeholders an overview of certification activities and growth of the sector.
Participatory Market Research (PMR) is needed in order expose farmers to different
markets in a systematic way, for instance by a PMR group on behalf of the broader
community, followed by a participatory prioritisation of options and revealing the
most strategic markets for organic smallholders. Such a process may involve market
development tours for groups of exporters to make better contact with target markets.
9.3 Research and Education
The importance of raising awareness on organic agriculture amongst farmers,
consumers and policy-makers cannot be overstated, and was identified as the most
pressing issue by the majority of the key actors interviewed in this study.
There is great potential for developing infrastructures for research and training in the
country. The orientation of agricultural education is arguably the most important
single constraint to developing and applying ecologically sustainable agriculture.
Since the focus has thus far been on energy-intensive and high-input but labourefficient
and high-yielding farming methods, there is a need to build learning capacity
for knowledge-intensive production systems.
Reform to the extension services and agricultural educational institutions should
encompass not only scientific content but also methodologies. A holistic and
agroecological perspective can serve as a basis for developing more environmentallysound
agricultural production systems (Altieri, 1987). A key factor is for research to
be concerned with optimising agroecosystems as a whole rather than maximising the
yield of a particular commodity. An agroecological approach illuminates the form,
dynamics and functions of ecological relations (such as nutrient cycling, predator/prey
interactions, competition, commensalisms 3 and successional changes 4 ) in the field.
Agroecosystem structure is defined not only by endogenous biological and
environmental features of the agricultural field, but also by exogenous social and
economic features. Shifting trends away from disciplinary and commodity concerns
towards more complex, systemic interactions among people, crop, soil and livestock
are yet to be recognised by public research institutions in Tanzania. Farmer-based
research and other participatory methods needs to be complemented with attention to
effective communication of results and lessons to stakeholders. The process is more
empowering when it includes women, small farmers and indigenous people, and this
requires additional resources for example for travel and translation.
3 Commensalism describes an interaction where one species benefits and the other is unaffected.
4 Succession is the gradual and orderly process of change in an ecosystem brought about by the
progressive replacement of one community by another until a stable climax is established.
61

There are currently efforts to integrate organic agriculture into primary, secondary,
diploma and degree curricula. For example, primary school courses such as
‘Education for self-reliance’ (Elimu ya Kujitegemea) which includes gardening,
composting and the use of farmyard manure, which has been phased out since it was
introduced by the first President of Tanzania, the late Mwalimu Julius Nyerere, are
receiving renewed interest. The reintroduction of vocational training into the
education system by the new President, Jakaya Kikwete, is also considered supportive
of organic agriculture. In addition, SUA has developed a course curriculum for
organic farming, and there are efforts to exploit under-utilised resources and establish
specialised institutions to drive competence by converting some government research
institutes into dedicated centres of learning about sustainable and organic agriculture.
In order to be effective research needs to be guided by farmers’ needs. In relation to
production, more research is needed into the use of biofertilisers and biopesticides, for
instance the levels of nutrient supplied by different green manures and the use of
neem to control armyworms. The efficacy of biopesticides could be improved with
research into the active ingredients, forms, doses, storability, biocidal effects and the
impact of soil and climatic conditions.
Production practices would be improved by more information on plant spacing,
growing seasons and technologies, in addition to a greater understanding of ecological
interactions including the symbiotic relations between plants and mycorrhizal fungi,
resource-sharing among plants, predator/prey and parasite/host relationships that
contribute to biological pest control and the role of plants’ genetic diversity in the
growth and spread of plant disease (Dover & Talbot, 1987).Other areas for research
include assessing the performance of modern crop varieties under intensive rotations
with legumes in order to determine the varieties most appropriate for rotations and
intercropping (Kral, 1984) since mixed-crop systems ‘perform better when species
complement one another as to growth rhythms, rooting depths, and the use of
nutrients’ (Dover & Talbot, 1987: 33).
Another strategy is to modify the agricultural extension services so that they are
supportive of organic agriculture. The emphasis here should be on the training of
trainers (extension staff, certification officers and farmer professionals) and the
development of a user-friendly extension manual. Short-term and long-term training
on organic principles for sustainability and the local market can expand knowledge
which is a prerequisite for innovation. Beyond training in production and trading
practices, farmers would also benefit from training in agricultural economics and
record-keeping.
Farmer-to-farmer extension is another promising approach for promoting
decentralised, locally-developed agronomic knowledge about different types of hard
technologies (irrigation, rainwater harvesting) and soft technologies (cultivar types,
cropping mixes, biological control and soil management techniques). In addition to
being conceived as a set of techniques, however, organic agriculture can be viewed as
‘a process of social learning’ (Röling & Wagemakers, 1997). From this perspective,
training programmes in organic agriculture should facilitate ‘a more farmer-directed,
participatory approach to the generation of agricultural technology (Thiers, 2005: 11).
62

The specific interests of different stakeholders have an influence on the type of
training provided and need to be taken into account in order to orient training schemes
towards a holistic understanding of the farming system rather than simply improving
the quality of a single product. This also has implications for deciding which
stakeholder group should take the lead in training, and whether it should be the
government, institutions of higher education, farmers’ associations, firms, aid
agencies or civil society. For instance, in the bioRe cotton project in Shinyanga
region, German development cooperation has facilitated the construction of a training
centre that offers courses on general organic agriculture, leadership, natural medicine
and health issues. Such interventions could help to reconcile the diverging trends of
market and ecology, control and empowerment.
There is a multitude of other ways in which research and education in organic
agriculture could be strengthened, such as through churches and religious groups,
exhibitions, field days, agricultural shows, consultations, radio and television
programmes, articles-writing, posters, leaflets, books and calendars. The need for
coordinated consumer education and awareness-raising has already been mentioned in
relation to market development. Exchange visits across the region could help to
catalyse the dissemination of best practices and appropriate technologies such as the
Vutu-Sukuma (Push-pull) system for pest management that has been pioneered in
Kenya but is hardly known in Tanzania. Farmer education and capacity-building
would also be facilitated by a local-language manual on “how to go organic”.
9.4 Policy and Legislation
With regards to changing national policy in favour of organic agriculture, the main
question is how to lobby the government for an operative organic agriculture policy.
Demonstrating the contribution that organic agriculture makes to food security would
help to reconcile concerns about production levels and meeting the food needs of the
population with the adoption of organics.
Organic agriculture is clearly in line with the development strategies of the Tanzanian
government and international frameworks such as Agenda 21, the World Food
Summit declarations and the MDGs. The precautionary principle, which guides
organic farmers’ relationship to technology, is endorsed in a number of international
forums, for instance the UNEP governing council passed a decision in May 1989
which recommended that all governments adopt this principle as a basis for their
policies to prevent and eliminate pollution.
The principles of organic agriculture are incorporated in many of the country’s
general policies, including those that relate to biodiversity, food security and water
protection, although usually not explicitly. The National Strategy on Growth and the
Reduction of Poverty (NSGRP, known as MKUKUTA in Kiswahili)—the second
phase of is Poverty Reduction Strategy process—includes a target for increasing
agricultural growth by 10% by 2010 by sustainable means. Nevertheless there is an
acute need to implement policy in production, processing and trade.
The 1997 Agricultural and Livestock Policy is currently under review. Explicit
support for organic agriculture in the agricultural policy would not only guide actions
by stakeholders, but would help to raise awareness, protect organic farmers and
encourage research. Rather than going into details, which is the purpose of the organic
63

standards, the policy can open up opportunities and publicise aspects of organic
agriculture (A. Mwasha 2006, pers. comm., 23 March). Given its cross-cutting nature,
organics could also be put forward for inclusion in the Crop Sub-sector, Forestry and
Bee-keeping, Health, Environment, Education, Water and Food Security policies.
Since 2001, Tanzanian agricultural policy has been broadened to include “plant
protection substances”. However, there is still a need to review the registration of
botanical pesticides which is currently thwarted by the exceedingly high registration
costs which are not conducive to local manufacturers and users. There is particular
potential in the industrial development of botanicals that are already grown
commercially in Tanzania such as tobacco and pyrethrum (Tyler, 1970). Botanical
pesticides are currently being applied as home-made preparations by small-scale
farmers in low input agriculture and also as commercial formulations by larger-scale
farmers in commercial agriculture, although these are imported from Kenya, India and
elsewhere.
The sequence of policy changes is also important, and needs to start by removing
obstacles and disincentives such as subsidising agro-chemicals. It is important to
reformulate official policies and programmes so that they do not discriminate against
organic production. Rundgren (2006) goes so far as to propose a pesticide tax. This
would help to create a level playing ground for the organic sector to develop and force
conventional agriculture to take into account its negative externalities. The strategy
currently being adopted by civil society is not to replace conventional agriculture, but
to develop and pursue an alternative which can co-exist. Although there has been a
bias towards conventional agriculture in the national policy-framework, there are a
number of high ranking officials who inadvertently validate organic agriculture by
showing a personal preference for farming organically and by purchasing organic
products.
The Agricultural Sector Development Strategy (ASDS), also being reviewed,
discusses the promotion of commercial agriculture in non-traditional export crops, for
which organic production is playing an increasingly important role. Organic
agriculture offers a commercial option for smallholder farmers to engage in marketoriented
agriculture and government officials point to the need to advocate organic
crops that are market-oriented such as cotton, cashews and coffee (A. Mwasha 2006,
pers. comm., 23 March). The Trade Policy supports the standardisation and
certification of organic production through the Tanzanian Bureau of Standards (TBS).
In this context, Hine and Pretty (2006: 26) caution that an entirely export-led
approach to organic agriculture ‘can ignore the in-country opportunities for
agricultural development focused on local and regional markets’. Therefore policies
need to incorporate multiple strands including smallholder development linked to
local markets and agri-business development for export.
The TBS standard is an effort to formalise the activities of the certified organic sector
and a means for quality control of various inputs and products. There is a need for a
careful assessment of the need for and effect of regulation so that it creates an
enabling and not a controlling environment for organic agriculture (Rundgren, 2006).
It is recommended that a regulation is not mandatory, but involves a voluntary scheme
for certification. A few lines of legal language could be enough to prevent fraud and
ensure “truthful marketing”.
64

Rather than initiating new systems of standard-setting and certification, it may be
more effective for the government to promote one existing label. One observer
commented that there is a danger of an overkill on standards since ‘we’re dealing with
an environmentally-friendly food system, not explosives’ and that it is more effective
to have a strong movement to replace the current bureaucracy with a “biocracy” (E.
Matteson 2006, pers. comm., 24 January). Thus the role of standard setters,
accreditors and certifiers needs to be moderated. Other players in the organic
movement have also stated a preference for acting at the grassroots level under the
assumption that policy-makers will start to take note when there is enough public
support.
Direct support for organic agriculture in the form of subsidies is unlikely in the light
of public resource constraints. However, tying direct farmer support to specific
services such as producing public goods for instance water conservation would be a
rational and integrated way of addressing poverty and environmental issues. Key
actors have suggested that the focus of any direct government support should be on
subsidising certification costs for export and on training and education. Organic
techniques are already being promoted within the Agricultural Sector Development
Programme (ASDP) framework and existing extension, which is a useful tool to raise
awareness amongst farmers groups. Promoting awareness could also extend to
consumer education on ways of achieving healthy and balanced diets. Creating
public-private partnerships for capacity-building, particularly in the form of technical
personnel would be another effective means.
Public procurement of organic products, particularly foodstuffs for official functions,
events, schools and hospitals would also send positive signals by supporting the
organic sector and providing smallholders with a secure market. For instance,
Tanzania may wish to derive lessons from the British success in promoting organic
school dinners. Other interventions include infrastructural development, raising
awareness of the land use and tenure policy and providing tax incentives that
encourages investment, particularly to build processing capacity. Import barriers on
sugar have made it very difficult to supply the organic starch needed for a ginger
syrup processing plant in Arusha, for example (M. Leijdens 2006, pers. comm., 19
January).
In addition to water, important inputs needed by organic farmers are seeds, botanical
pesticides and manure. Support in the form of bicycles and animal draft technology
would also be very effective since lack of transport is one of the biggest obstacles
facing smallholders in the use of organic residues for compost and feed and also
taking harvests to the markets. Changing the orientation of the agricultural input funds
is a matter of building a well-founded case and organising stakeholders.
Creating a coherent policy framework to promote organic agriculture would be
assisted by a clear Organic Action Plan that is formulated by a lead agency and
permanent national committee including both organic stakeholders and the
government. Dedicated individuals in all ministries could form an inter-ministerial
committee on organic agriculture that meets regularly. The terms of reference may
include monitoring and collecting data and writing a policy, with defined goals,
objectives and strategies specifically on organic agriculture (Rundgren, 2006). The
65

most important Ministries for the sector include those of Natural Resources, Health,
Trade, Livestock, Forestry and Agriculture and Food Security. Since agriculture adds
value to all other sectors, there is a need to link agriculture to other services more
explicitly. Similar trans-sectoral committees could also be formed at the district level.
In addition to building horizontal linkages, there is a need to strengthen vertical
linkages between national, district and rural authorities since the chain of command is
reportedly too long and cumbersome at the moment.
Giving official policy recognition to the links between agriculture and climate change
is another way of supporting the development of organic agriculture, particularly in
light of the heavy use of oil to manufacture nitrogen fertilisers, and the impact of
organic practices on soil organic matter and carbon sequestration (Kotschi and
Müller-Sämann, 2004). Organic farmers may be able to benefit from payments for
cultivating soil organic matter. As the implications of high oil prices on transport and
fertilisers become evident, organic farming may be able to assist with energy
constraints since it promotes reliance on renewable energy sources, and furthermore
integrates energy production and use on farms and could be linked to the emerging
biofuel initiatives.
Collecting and documenting successful cases of organic production and marketing
would create the ammunition for political lobbying in favour of organic agriculture.
Advocating organic agriculture would be assisted by increasing the visibility of
projects that have resulted in significant livelihood benefits and documenting best
practices at the country level. Farmers’ competent initiatives could be disseminated
through the media and other advocacy materials including T-shirts and leaflets. Other
possible strategies include making individual contact with potential ministries and
government officials, and having a national organic agriculture day or festival such as
the recent Eco-fest in Kenya.
9.5 Standards and Certification
The certified sector is currently attracting the greatest institutional interest and
appears to be relatively successful in increasing returns to farmers. International
accreditation to IFOAM and the International Organic Accreditation Service (IOAS)
which is currently being pursued by TanCert will improve ease of entry into the
market and minimise the cost of certification to make it more affordable to smallscale
farmers. Strengthening local standards, certification and inspection capacity
should also aim to develop an African sense of ownership of organic farming and
endogenous certification and standards are more likely to be adapted to local
condition.
Collective certification is perhaps a natural step for groups of smallholders who have
a history of being organised into cooperatives under the Afro-socialist presidency of
Julius Nyerere, and cooperative effort is not a foreign concept. Furthermore
cooperative economics (Ujamaa) is recognised as one of the seven pillars of African
identity (Nguzo saba).
The current development of a regional standard is designed to facilitate regional trade
by reducing technical barriers, and sharing of inspection, training materials and
information efforts. TanCert has been approached by producers in Malawi and
66

Mozambique to provide certification services, illustrating the growing interest in the
southern African region (L. Mtama 2006, pers comm., 25 February).
The proliferation of ecological and social labels presents both challenges and
opportunities to small-scale organic producers. There is mounting pressure to meet
externally-formulated Eurep-GAP requirements that impose strict adherence to
Minimum Residue Levels (MRLs), whilst at the same time there is a rise in combined
organic and Fair Trade and UtzKapeh certification (a certification programme for
responsible coffee production and sourcing).
The ways in which certification or guarantee systems are developed, the level of
participation and stakeholder understanding of certification also affects the ownership
of the final system and has an impact on the distribution of benefits from organic
agriculture. Currently farmers are being organised for certification by exporting
companies (often owned by Tanzanians of Asian origin), who are the operators, in
collaboration with donor programmes and NGOs. Whilst there are moves to make the
primary societies in the Kilimanjaro Native Cooperative Union (KNCU) certificate
owners there are trade-offs in terms of costs and logistics, and certain advantages of
centralisation.
Participatory ICS development would be facilitated by the stakeholders for each
organic initiative collectively writing down their own organic standards based on
local conditions but incorporating national standards. Participatory Guarantee
Systems (PGS) are an option for regional and local marketing which incorporate
shared vision, participation, transparency, trust, learning and horizontality (IFOAM,
2005b). There is a need to develop local and autonomous forms of certification that
best respond to the needs and demands of farmers and consumers in specific areas,
especially if the goal is to produce organic food for local consumption and to establish
sustainable food supply systems.
Currently no good examples exist in Tanzania that show how the administrative
oversight and certification of production necessary for consumer confidence coexist
with local innovation and responsiveness to local ecosystems. Key characteristics of
such systems are that they should be community-based, user-friendly, locally-adapted,
decentralised and promoting assured high quality, trust and reliability.
In terms of delivering livelihood benefits it may be more effective to identify strong
producer groups for certification rather than capable companies, particularly in
regions where sustainable agricultural policies have already been internalised, and to
emphasise mutually-beneficial partnerships. The national farmers’ network,
MVIWATA can play an important role in identifying potential organic groups. In
Uganda organic producer groups have often formed around a certified nucleus farm
that has a committed contact person to mobilise others.
Concentrating on farmers who are already fairly resilient would build confidence in
certified organic systems and attract sectoral support, which could then be extended to
resource-poor sections of society in conversion. This may also reduce the numbers
who drop out of organic projects during the conversion period when farmers cannot
sell their produce as organic. A training component which addresses the whole
production also needs to be built into the ICS.
67

Although there are a number of distinct advantages to be gained from converting to
certified production (product differentiation, higher prices, increased trust), it is
important to assess the desirability of certification for each individual project on its
own merit. Although certification is a precondition for tapping into premium organic
markets in the North, in countries where food security and nutritional shortages are
pressing problems, resources may be better directed to raising awareness on
agroecological production rather than developing standards and inspection systems.
Ultimately certification is a marketing tool that it is important when producers are
disconnected from consumers. Third party certification may not be necessary when
organic products are produced, traded and consumed locally. Declaring products as
organic may be less important than embracing the concept, principles and practices of
organic. Furthermore, it is possible that ‘an excessive focus on the role of certified
organic production, meeting the demands of generally well to do Northern consumers,
can all too easily be misinterpreted as a new form of green colonialism’ (Parrot & van
Elzakker, 2003: 19). In spite of its secondary importance in some projects, however,
certification can have a catalytic effect and positive spill-over effects for other aspects
of the farm operation such as record-keeping increasing human capital.
9.6 Institutional Development
Uniting the organic movement and sustaining coherence amongst its diverse
stakeholders in civil society, the government and the private sector is a key concern of
the newly emerging platform of the TOAM. Members include NGOs and other
advocacy organisations who emphasise the health of soil, economy and people as one
and indivisible.
Suggestions for enhancing networking and collaboration include developing a
catalogue of stakeholders, holding regular stakeholder forums and mobilising
resources. Partnerships are needed between the government, civil society and the
private sector in order to foster successful certified and non-certified organic
agriculture. Since organic agriculture is more management and knowledge intensive,
it is necessary to build the cooperative capacity of individuals and groups and invest
in social capital development at the local level (Hine & Pretty, 2006). Furthermore,
‘long-term and intensive collaboration between research institutions on the one hand
and extension services, non-government and community based organisation on the
other are a prerequisite for a successful and sustainable implementation of a facilitated
learning approach’ (de Jager et al., 2004: 205).
Certain conditions are needed in order to ensure that organic agriculture improves
peoples’ capacity to work together on common resource management problems. A
common feature of many of the established organic farmers interviewed was a strong
support network. There is usually more than one family member involved in the
operation, and many of the well-established farmers have spouses or children who are
also actively interested and engaged in the production system. Amongst Tanzanians of
Asian origin, extended family ties provide assistance in accessing foreign markets,
rare seed types and specialist knowledge. This demonstrates the way in which
membership of a community (such as ethnic or religious) can aid successful organic
farming operations. An interesting area for further research is that pioneers and
innovators in organics are usually not local to the area where they are working.
68

Pretty et al. (2003: 13) notes that sustainable agricultural systems are ‘most likely to
emerge from new configurations of social relations, comprising relations of trust
embodied in new social organisations and new horizontal and vertical partnerships
between institutions’. This raises the question as to what extent existing social
relations can be better utilised to sustainably manage natural systems. In addition to
social capital, new types of human capacity are needed, comprising ‘leadership,
ingenuity, management skills, and the capacity to innovate’, for example in farmers’
groups and networks, are important (Pretty et al., 2003: 13).
Farmer organisation into groups is an effective way of building social capital. Groups
can get easier access to transport, training, credit and other farm inputs. Collectively
farmers have greater power to negotiate reasonable prices and contracts with buyers.
Organisation into producer groups is essential for cost-effective group certification.
Farmer associations are also important in knowledge transfer, for example through
on-farm research and experimentation, the establishment of demonstration plots and
farmer-to-farmer learning on organic practices such as about composting, nurseries
and botanicals.
Management has been called the fourth pillar of sustainability (G. Rundgren 2006,
pers. comm., 1 March) and this is confirmed by the analysis of organic systems in
Tanzania. In particular, improved cooperation between stakeholders would
significantly strengthen the organic sector. Again this coincides with findings from
other studies in East Africa which suggest that ‘institutional aspects need to be
addressed in a more structured way’ (de Jager et al., 2004: 221) including the use of
effective communication tools and participation processes. Research, extension,
farmers and commercial actors need an open and active dialogue which is supported
by commitment to finding common ground.
District and/or village-level committees for organic agriculture could promote joint
actions by the government, private sector and civil society and conduct
“agroecological audits” covering, for instance, soil conservation and regeneration,
nutrient sources and uses, preservation of genetic diversity, stability of yields, water
use and hydrology and energy efficiency. This would help stakeholders to see how to
provide food on a sustained basis relying principally on indigenous resources for
fertility and pest management. Dover & Talbot (1987) suggest measurable criteria for
judging proposed projects on the basis of agricultural sustainability.
69

Chapter Ten: Concluding Remarks
Improving our understanding of the institutional, social and technical issues involved
in the production and supply of organic produce helps to ensure that the resource-poor
benefit from their involvement in organic production and trade. Furthermore,
‘ignoring the complex social issues surrounding commercial and export-oriented
agriculture is to undermine the original agrarian vision of organic farming’ (Altieri,
2003).
Organic agriculture is clearly having a positive impact on natural systems and human
welfare in Tanzania. There is also ample evidence to suggest that given the right
circumstances it can meet local food requirements while providing protection and
sustainable use of natural resources. However, not all projects have embraced organic
agriculture as a way to manage resources, rather than just a “target crop”. The sector,
which is currently being led by export-oriented organic agriculture, does not always
promote agroecological approaches that enhance diversity of production of food
crops. It is necessary to consider how to integrate other concerns besides the profit
motive into such systems, and how to use the organic market to promote ecologicallybased
agriculture. As Thiers (2005: 12) comments, ‘if both market and ecological
criteria can be satisfied within individual projects, the demonstration effect could be
substantial’.
Organic agriculture has a greater chance of meeting livelihood goals when it
integrates the main aspects of sustainability: social, economic and environmental.
This implies combining approaches that relate to development (for self-sufficiency
and community development), income-generation (for access to markets) and nature
conservation (for natural resource management) (IFOAM, 2004). Provided a holistic
approach to developing ecological farming systems is adopted, improving food
security and delivering to the global trading regime are therefore not seen to be
mutually-exclusive objectives.
The drive to develop organic agriculture gains renewed urgency at the time of writing
since a high-level African Fertiliser Summit is being organised in Nigeria by the New
Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) with the goal of rapidly increasing
chemical and synthetic fertiliser use in Africa. Organic agriculture puts farmers, rather
than external inputs, at the centre of the agricultural strategy, restoring a decisionmaking
role to local communities, guaranteeing their right to control over productive
resources and engaging their active participation in value-added food chains.
Although there are intense pockets of activity in the private sector and civil society,
organic agriculture has not fully entered into the public realm in Tanzania and is still
considered very much an alternative system. Research and education are amongst the
most important areas for strengthening the sector, not least by enabling stakeholders
at all levels to perceive the benefits of such alternative agricultural systems so that
they are motivated to make them tomorrow’s conventions.
Information and management ability are arguably the most valuable internal and
renewable resources in organic farming systems which attach ‘special importance to
how farmers can use information and judgement to replace material inputs’
(Lockeretz & Anderson, 1993: 87). The biggest transition costs should be expected in
70

terms of learning so that farmers become familiar with a greater diversity of practices
and measures and acquire the necessary information and management skills. In
particular, further research is needed in the areas of production technology,
HIV/AIDS links (e.g. in terms of nutrition and labour requirements) and social
impacts.
The ways in which farmers learn about alternative ways of farming is as important as
the actual knowledge and skills acquired. Pretty and Hine (2000) argue that, ‘if the
process by which farmers learn about technology is participatory and enhances
farmers’ capacity to learn about their farm and its resources, then the foundation for
redesign and continuous innovation is laid’ (Pretty & Hine, 2000). Therefore a key
concern is to make the social process of innovation more sustainable and improve
farmers’ ability to adapt to complex and changing rural realities.
In order to build resilience and innovation capacity within communities there is also a
need to focus on social capital and institutional development. In the future, diverse
stakeholders in the organic movement will be challenged to work together to foster
trust through a healthy level of collaboration and communication on matters
concerning the farming environment. Nevertheless, the precise arrangement of
working relations between institutions engaged in organic agriculture is an
outstanding question of the research.
A number of new but related lines of enquiry are opened up by rephrasing the original
question of this study, and asking ‘who will develop organic agriculture in Tanzania
for the benefit of smallholders?’ This raises the important issue of which stakeholders
hold responsibility for taking action, and furthermore, whether they have the capacity
to do so. Even when the means and ends have been clearly articulated by the
stakeholders, interventions in the organic sector cannot be sustainable unless they
carefully address the precise roles of different individuals and institutions.
Although this study has specifically addressed the livelihoods of smallholders in
Tanzania, many of the findings may also be applied to other tropical countries and
even to the rural sectors of the Global North. In particular, structural changes that
enable organic systems to stay true to fundamental organic principles whist still
providing adequate income are relevant to organic food and farming systems
worldwide. Although the study has not identified individual projects that are
noteworthy for satisfying both market and ecological criteria, the findings do at least
cast rays of light on ways in which the commodification of organic agriculture that
often accompanies certification can be lessened, if not avoided entirely.
71

References
Alrøe, H. F. and Kristensen, E. S. (2004) Basic principles for organic agriculture:
Why? And what kind of principles? Ecology and Farming, June 2004 special issue on
Principles of Organic Agriculture First Version, 20. April 2004
Altieri, M. A. (1987) Agroecology; The Scientific Basis of Alternative Agriculture.
London: ITDG
Altieri, M. A. and Hecht, S. B. (eds) (1990) Agroecology and Small farm
development. Florida: CRC Press
Altieri, M. (2003) Organic Agriculture Symposium 2003 Annual Meetings ASA-
CSSA-SSSA Denver, CO Nov. 4 & 5 2003
Blake, F. (1987) The Handbook of Organic Husbandry. UK: Crowood Press
Bryman, A. (2004) Social Research Methods. Second Edition. UK: Oxford University
Press
Chambers, R. (1983) Rural development: Putting the last first. Harlow: Longman
Chilongola, G. (2005) Unakijua kilimo hai? Soma hapa. Alasiri, 17 th February 2005
http://www.ippmedia.com/ipp/alasiri/2005/02/17/32774.html visited on 12/08/05
Creswell, J. W. (2003) Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods
approaches. Second edition. USA: SAGE Publications.
De Jager, A., Onduru, D., van Wijk, M. S., Vlaming, J. and Gachini, G. N. (2001)
Assessing sustainability of low-external input farm management systems with the
nutrient monitoring approach: a case study in Kenya. Agricultural Systems 69 (2001)
99-118
De Jager, A., Onduru, D. and Walaga, C. (2004) Facilitated learning in soil fertility
management: assessing potentials of low-external input technologies in east African
farming systems. Agricultural Systems 79 (2004) 205-223
Dover, M. and Talbot, L. M. (1987) To feed the earth: Agro-ecology for sustainable
development. Washington D.C.: World Resources Institute
Drinkwater, L. E. (2002) Cropping systems research: reconsidering agricultural
experimental approaches. HorTechnology, July-September 2002 12(3)
Edwards, S. (2005) Organic Agriculture for Food Security in Africa. Germany:
IFOAM
Egziabher, T. B. G. and Edwards, S. B. (2005) Can Organic Farming Feed the
World? Lecture given at the Soil Association on 12 July 2005 in London and 14 July
2005 in Edinburgh
72

Ellinor, L. and Gerard, G. (1998) Dialogue: Rediscover the transforming power of
conversation. New York: John Wiley and Sons
El-Nagger, A., Ounmaa, A., Muukka, E., Zaleckas, E., Abraityté, G., Jansons, I.,
Rasmussen, J., Ahnström, J., Pirhoger-Walzl, K., O’Doherty Jensen, K., Jørgensen,
K.F., Sarunaite, L., Bleidere, M., Trydeman Knudsen, M., Pugliese, M., Nielsen, M.,
Mugurerza, B., Bakewell-Stone, P., Hansen, P. K., Al-Kufaishi, S., Kobayashi, S.,
Rydberg, T., Klubova, V., Liorancas, V., and Høgh-Jensen, H. (2006) Globalisation
as a Challenge or Opportunity for Organic Farming. DACROFenews. Newsletter of
the Danish Research Centre for Organic Food and Farming. March 2006. No. 1
Engel, P. G. H. and Salomon, M. L. (1997) Facilitating innovation for development:
A RAAKS resource box. The Netherlands: Royal Tropical Institute
Envirocare (2005) Madawa ya Asili kwa Mifugo na Mimea. Supported by HIVOS
EPOPA (2004) Development through organic trade
www.grolink.se/epopa/Publications/EPOPA-Article-may-04-web.pdf visited on
06/03/05
FAO (1996) World Food Summit of the United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organisation. Rome: FAO.
FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission (2001) Guidelines for the production,
processing, labeling and marketing of organically produced foods. CAC/GL 32-1999-
Rev.1-2001. Rome
Farrington, J., Carney, D., Ashley, C. and Turton, C. (1999) Sustainable livelihoods in
practice: Early Applications of Concepts in Rural Areas. Natural Resource
Perspectives, Number 42, June 1999. ODI
http://www.odi.org.uk/nrp/42.html visited on 29/06/04
FEWS NET (2006) Tanzania Food Security Update March/April 2006. Funded by the
US Agency of International Development
Freire, P. (1997) Pedagogy of the Heart. New York: Continuum
Guardian (2005) Fertiliser use ‘far below recommended average’. The Guardian,
Friday, June 24, 2005
Harris, P. J. C., Lloyd, H. D., Hofney-Collins, A. H., Barrett, A. R. and Browne, A.
W. (1998) Organic agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa: Farmer demand and potential
for development. UK: HDRA Publications
Hauser, M. (2005) Organic land use and livelihood systems in tropical and subtropical
regions. Lecture Notes for course on Organic land use and livelihood systems
in tropical and sub-tropical regions, summer term 2005, University of Natural
Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Austria
73

Hine, R. and Pretty, J. (2006) Organic Agriculture and Food Security in East Africa.
Presentation at the CBTF Organic Agriculture Regional Workshop: Promoting
Production and Trading Opportunities for Organic Agricultural Products in East
Africa. Arusha, Tanzania 6-10 March 2006
IFOAM (2002) International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements basic
standards for organic production and processing. Germany: Tholey-Theley
IFOAM (2004) Organic agriculture and food security. Germany: IFOAM
IFOAM (2005a) Principles of Organic Agriculture
http://www.ifoam.org/organic_facts/principles/pdfs/Principles_Organic_Agriculture.p
df visited on 24/11/05
IFOAM (2005b) Participatory Guarantee Systems – Shared Vision, Shared Ideals
Concept Working Paper
http://www.ifoam.org/about_ifoam/standards/pgs/pdts/PGSConceptDocument.pdf
visited on 12/03/06
Kinabo, L., Batamuzi, E., Tarimo, A., Macha, J., Malimbwi, R., Makungu, P., Nyaki,
A., Madata, C., Johnsen, F. and Moinuddin, H. (2004) Performance Report
2000/2004 TARP II – SUA Project Food Security and Household Income for
Smallholder Farmers; Applied Research with Emphasis on Women
Kloppenburg, J. (1991) Social Theory and the De/Reconstruction of Agricultural
Science: Local Knowledge for an Alternative Agriculture. Rural Sociology 56 (4)
519-548
Knudsen, M T, Halberg, N., Olesen, J.E. Byrne, J., Iyer, V. and Toly, N. (2005):
Global trends in agriculture and food systems. In: Halberg, N., Alrøe, H.F., Knudsen
M.T. and Kristensen, E.S. (eds.) Global Development of Organic Agriculture:
Challenges and Promises. Chapter 1. Wallingford: CABI
Kotschi, J. and Müller-Sämann, K. (2004) The Role of Organic Agriculture in
Mitigating Climate Change. Bonn: IFOAM
Krell, R. (1999) Summary and Conclusions. Proceedings from the Second workshop
of the Sustainable Rural Environment and Energy Network (SREN) Working Group
on Research Methodologies in Organic Farming: On-Farm Participatory Research
http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/006/AD237E/ad237e01.htm visited on 02/20/05
Kral, D. M. (1984) Organic farming: Current technology and its role in Sustainable
Agriculture ASA Special Pub. No. 46, U. S.
Kvale, S. (1996) Interviews: an introduction to qualitative research interviewing.
California: Sage
Lampkin, N. (1990) Organic Farming. UK: Farming Press
74

Lerdahl, E. (2001) Staging for creative collaboration in design teams; Models, tools
and methods. Doctoral thesis for the Norwegian University of Science and
Technology, Trondheim
Lernoud, A. P. and Fonesca, A.F. (eds) (2004) Workshop on Alternatives on
Certification for Organic Production. Proceedings. April 13-17 2004, Torres-RS-
Brazil
Lockeretz, W. and Anderson, M. D. (1993) Agricultural Research Alternatives.
University of Nebraska Press
Lockeretz, W. and Stopes, C. (2000) Issues in on-farm research. Proceedings from the
Second workshop of the Sustainable Rural Environment and Energy Network (SREN)
Working Group on Research Methodologies in Organic Farming: On-Farm
Participatory Research
http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/006/AD237E/ad237e02.htm visited on 20/02/05
Liu, M. (1994) Action Research and Development Dynamics. In Sebillote, M.
Systems-oriented research in agriculture and rural development : international
symposium, Montpellier, France - 21 to 25 November 1994. Montpellier: CIRAD-
SAR
Miles, M. B. and Huberman, A. M. (1994) Qualitative Date Analysis: an expanded
sourcebook. Second edition. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage
Mwasha, A. M. and Leijdens, M. (2004) Basic data on certified organic production
and export in Tanzania 2003. EPOPA October 2004
Parker, M. (1990) Creating Shared Vision. Oslo: Norwegian Center for Leadership
Development
Parrott, N. and Marsden, T. (2002) The Real Green Revolution – Organic and agroecological
farming in the South. London: Greenpeace
Parrott, N. and van Elzakker, B. (2003) Organic and like-minded movements in
Africa; Development and Status. Germany: IFOAM.
Parrott, N. and Kalibwani, F. (2003) Organic Agriculture in the Continents. In Parrott,
N. and van Elzakker, B. (2003) Organic and like-minded movements in Africa;
Development and Status. Germany: IFOAM
PELUM Tanzania (2004) Food First; Voicing Farmers’ Rights. Research report on
food security issues in Tanzania as a basis for advocacy work with and for small-scale
farmers.
PELUM Tanzania (2006) PELUM Tanzania. Paper for the UNEP-UNCTAD Capacity
Building Task Force of Trade, Environment and Development Regional Workshop on
Organic Agriculture in East Africa, March 6-10, Arusha, Tanzania
75

Pretty, J. N., Guijt, I., Thompson, J. and Scoones, I. (1995) A Trainer’s guide for
Participatory Learning and Action. Participatory Methodology Series 1. London:
IIED
Pretty, J. N. and Hine, R. E. (2001) Reducing food poverty with sustainable
agriculture: A summary of New Evidence. University of Essex
Pretty, J. N., Morison, J. L. L. and Hine, R. E. (2003) Reducing food poverty by
increasing agricultural sustainability in developing countries. Agriculture, Ecosystems
and Environment 95 (2003) 217-234
Rasmussen, S. S. (2005) Action Research in Less Developed Countries. Paper
presented at Seminar on ‘Action Research as University Practice for KVL Students
and Faculty’, April 6, 2005, KVL, Denmark
Reijntjes, C., Haverkort, B., Waters-Bayer, A., (1992) Farming for the Future. An
Introduction to Low-external-input and Sustainable Agriculture. The Netherlands:
ILEIA
Remenyi, J. V. (eds) (1987) Agricultural systems research for developing countries.
Proceedings of an international workshop held at Hawkesbury Agricultural College,
Richmond, N.S.W. Australia 12-15 May 1985
Richter, T. and Kovacs, A. (2005) Strategies to support domestic organic markets in
countries with emerging organic sectors. Paper presented at Researching Sustainable
Systems – International Scientific Conference on Organic Agriculture, Adelaide,
Australia, September 21-23, 2005
Röling, N. G. and Wagemakers, M.A. E. (eds) (1997) Facilitating Sustainable
Agriculture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Rundgren, G. (2002) Organic Agriculture and Food Security. IFOAM Dossier #1.
Tholey Theley, Germany
Rundgren, G. (2006) Best Practices for Organic Policy: What Developing Country
Governments Can Do to Promote the Organic Sector. Paper presented at the UNEP-
UNCTAD Capacity Building Task Force of Trade, Environment and Development
Regional Workshop on Organic Agriculture in East Africa, March 6-10, Arusha,
Tanzania
Scialabba, N. H. and Hattam, C. (eds) (2002) Organic agriculture, environment and
food security. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations Rome, 2002
Environment and Natural Resources Series No. 4 from
http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/Y4137E00.htm visited on 20/02/05
Scoones, I. (1998) Sustainable Rural Livelihoods; A framework for analysis. IDS
Working Paper 72. Brighton: IDS
76

Senge, P. M. (1990) The Fifth Discipline: the art and practice of the learning
organization. New York: Doubleday
Sicilima, N. P. (2003) A speech delivered by the director of crop development,
Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security, Dr. N. P. Sicilima; at the second national
stakeholders meeting for organic agriculture in Tanzania held at UNICEF conference
hall in Dar-es-Salaam 17 th January 2003
Silenge, F. H. (1996) Tanzania: Small-scale organic farming. From ifoam’96 Book of
Abstracts 11 th IFOAM Scientific Conference 11-15 August 1996, Copenhagen,
Denmark from http://ecoweb.dk/english/ifoam/conf96/abs237.htm visited on 21/02/05
Silenge, F. H. and Bertram, T. M. (1996) Kilimo Hai Msingi na Utekelezaji.
Peramiho: Benedictine Publications Ndanda.
Sillitoe, P. (1998) Local knowledge in tropical agricultural research and
development. Tropical Agricultural Association Seminar at Durham University,
September 1998
Tairo, A. (1999) Tanzania backs organic exports. The East African, Business section
March 4-11 1999
TARPII (2004) The Impact Assessment and Perspectives - The Case of the project
Food Security and Household Income for Smallholder Farmers in Tanzania: Applied
Research with an Emphasis on Women. Tanzania Agricultural Research Project Phase
Two, Tanzania
Taylor, A. (eds) (2006) Overview of the Current State of Organic Agriculture in
Kenya, Uganda, and the Republic of Tanzania and the Opportunities for Regional
Harmonisation. Paper presented at the UNEP-UNCTAD Capacity Building Task
Force of Trade, Environment and Development Regional Workshop on Organic
Agriculture in East Africa, March 6-10, Arusha, Tanzania
Thiers, P. (2005) Using global organic markets to pay for ecologically based
agricultural development in China. Agriculture and Human Values (2005) 22: 3-15
Tyler, H. A. (1970) Organic Gardening without poisons. New York: Van Nostrand
Reinhold Company Ltd.
UNEP-UNCTAD (2006) The Status of Organic Agriculture Production and Trading
Opportunities in Tanzania. Final Report presented at the UNEP-UNCTAD Capacity
Building Task Force of Trade, Environment and Development Regional Workshop on
Organic Agriculture in East Africa, March 6-10, Arusha, Tanzania
United Republic of Tanzania (2006) Official Online Gateway of the United Republic
of Tanzania
http://www.tanzania.go.tz/ visited on 24/04/06
Whyte, W. F. (eds) (1991) Participatory Action Research. USA: SAGE Publications
77

Willer, H. and Yussefi, M. (2004) The World of Organic Agriculture; Statistics and
Emerging Trends. Germany: IFOAM
Wilson, K. K. and Morren, G.E.B. (1990) The Learning Dimensions of Professional
Enquiry. In: Wilson, K. and Morren, G.E.B. Systems Approaches for Improvement in
Agriculture and Resource Management. New York: McMillan, 27-35
World Bank (2000) Vertiver Grass: The Hedge Against Erosion. Washington D.C.:
World Bank
World Café (2002) Café to Go: A quick reference guide for putting conversations to
work. Whole Systems Associates
http://www.theworldcafe.com visited 09/12/05
Yin, R. K. (2003) Case Study Research; Design and Methods. Third edition. Applied
Social Research Methods Series, volume 5. USA: SAGE Publications
Zuber-Skerritt, O. (eds) (1991) Action Research for Change and Development.
Aldershot: Avebury
78

APPENDIX 1
Interviews Summary
Date Time Organisation Interviewee(s)
16/06/05 1400 TanCert / TOAM Jordan Gama
20/06/05 1200 Dept. Crop Science & Prod., SUA A. Maerere,
K. Sibuga,
Rwehubiza
22/06/05 1130 KIHATA Abasi Rehani
22/06/05 1400 Dept. Crop Science & Prod, SUA K. Sibuga
22/06/05 1530 IRTECHO Mwadhini Myanza
23/06/05 0845 Horticultural Unit, SUA Mbilinyi
23/06/05 1630 Dept. of Soil Science, SUA M. Kilasara
23/06/05 1830 Kimango Farm Enterprises Kim Axmann
25/06/05 1000 SUA Centre for Sustainable Rural Dev. Amon Mattee
27/06/05 1000 PELUM Tanzania Yakobo Tibamanya
29/06/05 TanCert Leonard Mtama
Jordan Gama
30/06/05 1230 Salvation Army / Envirocare Salome Kisenge
30/06/05 1400 Ministry of Agric. & Food Security Adah Mwasha
01/07/05 1030 EPOPA Rainard Mjunguli
01/07/05 1100 Tanzania Tea Packers Group Edward Mhagama
01/07/05 1130 Dai Pesa William Creighton
12/01/06 0900 TanCert Leonard Mtama
13/01/06 1530 KIHATA Abbasi Rehani
14/01/06 1400 MVIWATA Jeremiah Maina
Andrew Hepelwa
Justice Shekilango
16/01/06 0930 SUA, Dept. of Agric. Economics and
Agribusiness
David Nyange
16/01/06 1130 SUA, Dept. of Soil Science Method Kilasara
17/01/06 1130 WSCT Shakim Mhagama
17/01/06 1320 SNV Lameck Kikoka
19/01/06 1130 EPOPA Marg Leijdens
19/01/06 1430 IFAD / IFOAM / IMO Mwatima Juma
20/01/06 0900 TOAM Jordan Gama
20/01/06 1130 Mikocheni Agricultural Research Ruth Madulu
Institute (MARI)
Betty Chanalila
23/01/06 0900 Premier Cashews Industries Ltd. Ramaiah
23/01/06 1130 Premier factory Radha Krisna
23/01/06 1300 Premier Cashew collection point Jaffer Pardham
Mohammed
24/01/06 1100 Tanzania Organic Foundation Fred Machange
24/01/06 1230 Grolink
Eva Mattsson
TanCert
Leonard Mtama
24/01/06 1530 MARI Ruth Minja
27/01/06 0800 Mikese Mango Farm Abdeali Karimjee
30/01/06 0930 Envirocare Loyce Lema
15/03/06 1100 Dept. of Food Science, SUA Joyce Kinabo
79

16/03/06 1200 UMADEP Muvellah & Innocent
22/03/06 1100 Kimango Farm Simone Axmann
23/03/06 1100 MVIWATA Steven Ruvuga
27/02/06 0800 Television Tanzania (TVT) Godfrey Nago
12/03/06 1800 BioRe Saro Ratter
20/03/06 0900 Dept. Crop Science & Prod, SUA A. Maerere & K.
Sibuga
20/03/06 1000 Horticultural Unit, SUA Mr. Mbilinyi
22/03/06 1630 TOAM Jordan Gama
23/03/06 1400 Ministry of Agric. & Food Security Adah Mwasha
23/03/06 1700 Tanzania Organic Foundation Fred Machange
24/03/06 0800 Ministry of Agric. & Food Security Geoffrey Kirenga
24/01/06 1630 PCI Jaffer Pardhan
27/03/06 1300 EPOPA Marg Leijdens
80

APPENDIX 2
Case Study Protocol
Overview of Case study project
- Objectives
The main goal of the case study is to assess and enhance organic agriculture’s
contribution to sustainable livelihoods and food security amongst smallholders in
Tanzania.
Sub-objectives of the case study are:
1. To describe and analyse an organic agricultural system;
2. To bridge the gap between disciplinary knowledge and action using systems
approaches;
3. To devise draft strategies for improving the system in collaboration with key
actors.
The case study method, which investigates events within their real-life context, has
been chosen in order to shed light on the complex organic movement in Tanzania.
Case study research has been designed as part of a larger multi-method study which
applies action research approaches to the developing organic sector in Tanzania.
- Auspices
In 2004 Sokoine University of Agriculture (SUA) in Morogoro, with support from the
Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD) and the Norwegian
University of Life Sciences (UMB) initiated the Programme for Agricultural and
Natural Resources Transformation for Improved Livelihoods (PANTIL).
In order to promote research and farmers empowerment, PANTIL provides six
openings for post-graduates from Norway to do research in Tanzania. Under this
Young Professionals Scheme, the decision was taken to support this study of the
developing organic sector in Tanzania, which is linked to other research efforts at
SUA particularly into social capital. The research began unofficially in November
2004 and is expected to last until June 2006, including three months fieldwork in
Tanzania.
- Credentials
The primary researcher is currently enrolled in a Masters programme in Agroecology
at UMB. She also has two and a half years experience working with PELUM
Association, an umbrella organisation that promotes learning, networking and
advocacy in sustainable agriculture and food security in Eastern and Southern Africa.
- Background and Relevance
Although certified organic agriculture in Tanzania was just emerging in the early
1990s (Parrot and Elzakker, 2003), it has already gained substantial support
amongst farmers and institutions. This runs parallel to the realisation that pursued as
a way of improving sustainability; organic agriculture can contribute to ecological
health, agro-biodiversity, local food security and self-reliance. This is particularly
pertinent in a country where soils are being rapidly degraded, almost one third of
children under five years are malnourished, and where over 90% of the population is
rural and depends on land resources for livelihoods.
In the Tanzanian policy context, organic agriculture offers a very real and integrated
way to achieve the goals laid down in the national Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
(PRSP) and the Development Vision 2025, not least those of food self-sufficiency
and food security.
81

The majority of certified organic land in Tanzania is under the production of export
crops including coffee, spices, cashew nuts and cotton. Expanding Northern markets
such as the European Union provide good prospects for increasing returns on
climate-specific crops such as nuts, spices and essential oils. Organic producers in
Tanzania are being challenged to respond to the current trend of globalisation and to
strategically position themselves with regards to its threats and opportunities. Some
promising steps include developing processing capacity in order to add value to
organic products and social labelling such as Fair Trade.
The extent to which certification of organic production, which is driven largely by the
need to guarantee the quality of exported produce for wealthy consumers in the
North, improves livelihoods is open to debate. The process is often costly and
onerous for smallholders, and when certification is beyond the means of
smallholders, large corporate producers (in collaboration with consultants) contract
producers through Internal Control Systems (ICS), hold the certificate and to some
extent dictate the buying price. Thus a focus on certified organic products for export
could widen socio-economic disparities and political asymmetries.
Recent studies on organic agriculture in Africa highlight the fact that substantial
organic export industries, often based on large, foreign-owned or managed holdings,
currently co-exist alongside significant levels of poverty and malnutrition (Parrott and
Elzakker, 2003). There are concerns amongst some commentators that
“conventionalisation of organic farming” is taking place with ‘specialisation and
enlargement of farms, increasing capital intensification and marketing becoming
export-oriented’, exacerbating landlessness, urbanisation and environmental
deterioration (Knudsen et al., 2005). This is not to mention the “delocalisation” of
relationships between organic producers and consumers which constitutes a
departure from core organic principles including that of nearness.
On the other hand, converting to certified organic production primarily for export
crops could have positive spill-over effects on domestic food/cash crops, for example
through the inclusion of food crops in rotation such as legumes in organic cotton.
Increased agro-biodiversity contributes directly to improved diets and nutrition of local
populations, not to mention many other positive impacts of organic management on
the natural environment (Scialaba and Hattam, 2002). It is becoming apparent,
therefore, that export schemes should be complemented by measures to explicitly
target local food security, and there is a growing consensus that Tanzania needs to
expand the domestic market of organic produce both for regional economies and the
health of local consumers.
An initial trip to Tanzania in June 2005 revealed marked differences in the entry
points, players and organisational structures of various organic initiatives in
Tanzania. This heterogeneity is evident in the vicinity of Morogoro where organic
producers range from small-scale fruit and spice producers that are organising into
groups in order obtain loans and certification, to large-scale commercial enterprises
in organic cashew, spices and tea production. How are these projects affecting the
livelihoods of those involved, and which strategies are most effective in bringing
about beneficial changes? Remaining gaps in knowledge could be filled by research
on the livelihood benefits to resource-poor smallholder farmers of organic certification
and trade (Harris et al., 2001).
Case Study Questions
There is a need to identify the types of organic agricultural systems that meet both
the immediate and long-term needs of rural small-scale producers. With an explicit
82

emphasis on “success stories”, or initiatives that appear to making headway towards
development goals, the case study will explore the pathways to livelihood benefits
through organic farming (after Pretty et al., 2003).
The central research questions that the case study will address are:
a) How does organic agriculture affect the livelihoods of smallholders? and;
b) How can organic agriculture be developed for the benefit smallholder?
The case study research will follow the broad strategy of expressing the present
situation and determining key issues (what is), determining the future-wanted
situation (what could be) and proposing recommendations that would facilitate the
movement from the present to the future (how to get there).
Specific areas of investigation will include the history of involvement in organics,
reasons for conversion, environmental / agronomic / social and economic impacts
and sustainability, opportunities and constraints to achieving livelihood goals, and
ideas for actions that would bring about the future-wanted situation.
Field Procedures
- Selection of case study sites
The criteria which guide the selection of case study sites include a set of
assumptions about the conditions under which organic agriculture constitutes a
sustainable livelihood strategy. A livelihood is sustainable when it can cope with and
recover from stress and shocks, maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets, both
now and in the future, without undermining the natural resource base.
On the basis of previous research into food security in Tanzania (PELUM, 2004), a
literature review and key informant interviews it is assumed that organic agriculture
provides a sustainable solution when it emphasises the localisation of the food
system, whilst not precluding the possibility of marketing organic produce
internationally once subsistence needs have been met.
It is hypothesised that locally-owned organic projects that involve broad-based
participation of smallholders who are organised for group certification and producing
for domestic consumption as well as international markets bring livelihood benefits to
the most number of smallholder farmers in proportion to the total number involved.
This proposition will be put to test by analysing two organic initiatives—one which
incorporates multiple objectives including subsistence and trade, and the other which
focuses primarily on the production of cash crops for export. These contrasting entry
points will most likely be accompanied by differences in ownership, certification
arrangements and target markets.
In order that the main assumption can be more accurately tested, a number of other
variables which are likely to affect the viability of organic agriculture as a sustainable
livelihood strategy will be kept similar in both sites. These include favourable
agroecological conditions, main crops, local processing activities, appropriate
technology and relatively good infrastructure / market access.
- Access to case study sites
The unit of analysis will be an organic farming initiative involved in sedentary
cropping activities in rural Tanzania which is either certified or under conversion. The
case study site will therefore be an organic project under one operator / licensee
(either a single farm or a group of farms).
83

It is essential to the study that the key actors involved in the selected case study are
responsive and demonstrate a willingness to take part in the research. The duration
of fieldwork on the case study site is expected to be 5-10 days, depending on the
size of project and the availability of key actors.
- Sources of information
The case study research will rely on multiple sources of evidence. Data may be
collected through direct observation, field tours, semi-structured interviews, focus
groups, documentary analysis, participatory exercises (such as participatory
mapping, transect walks, matrix scoring and seasonal calendars) and participant
observation. The information will be recorded with the aid of note-taking,
photography, digital recording and Global Positioning System (GPS) mapping.
Follow-up and documentation
Whilst the case study will take into account the influence of the specific local context,
the case study site will be chosen for its typicality rather than uniqueness. This will
increase the applicability of draft strategies to other areas. Findings from the case
studies will therefore help to inform the formulation of individual / institutional plans of
action at a national seminar on organic agriculture to be held in the first week of
March.
A summary report of each case study will be produced and circulated amongst key
actors for review and verification. The findings will be the basis of a journal article
and possibly popular articles for local and international publications. All persons have
the right to remain anonymous and permission will be sought before using the
original names of people and places in articles.
References
Harris, P.J.C. Browne, A.W., Barrett, H.R. and Cadoret, K. (2001) Facilitating the
Inclusion of the Resource-Poor in Organic Production and Trade: Opportunities and
Constraints Posed by Certification. For Rural Livelihoods Department DfID, U.K.
Knudsen, M T, Halberg, N., Olesen, J.E. Byrne, J., Iyer, V. and Toly, N. (2005):
Global trends in agriculture and food systems. In: Halberg, N., Alrøe, H.F., Knudsen
M.T. and Kristensen, E.S. (eds.) Global Development of Organic Agriculture:
Challenges and Promises. Chapter 1. CABI
Parrott, N. and van Elzakker, B. (2003) Organic and like-minded movements in
Africa; Development and Status. IFOAM
PELUM (2004) Food First: Voicing Farmers’ Rights. Research report on food security
issues in Tanzania as a basis for advocacy work with and for small-scale farmers
Pretty, J. N., Morison, J. L. L. and Hine, R. E. (2003) Reducing food poverty by
increasing agricultural sustainability in developing countries. Agriculture, Ecosystems
and Environment 95 (2003) 217-234
Scialabba, N. H. and Hattam, C. (eds) (2002) Organic agriculture, environment and
food security. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations Rome, 2002
Environment and Natural Resources Series No. 4 from
http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/Y4137E00.htm visited on 20/02/05
Yin, R. K. (2003) Case study research: Design and Methods. Third edition. Applied
Social Research Methods Series, Volume 5. SAGE Publications, USA
84

APPENDIX 3
Report on Case Study Research
Analysis of Organic Agricultural Systems in Mkuranga District
from a Sustainable Livelihoods Perspective
Contents
Petra Bakewell-Stone, March 2006
Introduction
Methodology
Overview of the Case Study Area
Individual Case Narratives
Premier Cashew Industries Ltd.
Muungano – An association of local groups
Organic Agriculture: What does it mean to the farmer?
Cross-case Livelihood Analysis
Stakeholder Analysis
Opportunities for Improving System Sustainability
Conclusion
Appendices
Acronyms
BFF Beyond Farmer First
CBT Cashew Board of Tanzania
CDC Centre for Development of Cashews
CDR Complex-Diverse-Risk-prone
DALDO District Agricultural and Livestock Development Officer
EPOPA Export Promotion of Organic Products from Africa
FO Field Officer
HACCP Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point
ICS Internal Control System
IFOAM International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements
IMO Institute of Market Ecology
ITK Indigenous Technical Knowledge
KIWAMASO Kikundi cha Maendeleo Sotele
MARI Mikocheni Agricultural Research Institute
MSK Rural Peoples’ Knowledge
MVIWATA Mtandao wa Vikundi vya Wakulima Tanzania
NSGRP National Strategy on Growth and Reduction of Poverty
NOP National Organic Program
OA Organic Agriculture
PCI Premier Cashew Industries
PGS Participatory Guarantee Systems
RPK Rural Peoples’ Knowledge
SIDO Small Industries Development Organisation
TanCert Tanzanian Organic Certification Association
TAWLAE Tanzanian Association of Women Leaders in Livestock and the Environment
TOAM Tanzanian Organic Agricultural Movement
UMB Norwegian University of Life Sciences
85

Introduction
The purpose of this preliminary report is to share and verify findings from case study
research on organic agricultural systems in Mkuranga district, Coastal Region. This
was undertaken in partial fulfilment of an MSc in Agroecology with the Norwegian
University of Life Sciences (UMB).
The overall goal of the case study research is to assess and enhance organic
agriculture’s contribution to sustainable livelihoods and food security amongst
Complex-Diverse-Risk-prone (CDR) farmers. By joining hands with the stakeholders
the researcher aims to clarify the future directions of the organic systems from a
sustainable livelihoods perspective 5 . The case studies form part of a larger multimethod
study which applies action research approaches to the developing organic
sector in Tanzania.
Specific objectives of the case study include:
1. Describe and analyse organic agriculture (OA) from a sustainable livelihoods
approach including an assessment of the vulnerability context, livelihood
assets, transforming structures and processes, livelihood strategies and
livelihood outcomes for the smallholder farmer;
2. Facilitate a participatory process which involves all different parties, makes
choices explicit and allow various outcome possibilities to be negotiated; and
3. Identify focal points for intervention, or areas where action may proceed and
common goals can be achieved.
The case study analyses two organic initiatives—one which focuses primarily on the
production of cash crops for export [type 1], and the other which incorporates
multiple objectives including subsistence and trade [type 2], in order to test the
proposition that ‘organic agriculture provides a sustainable solution when it
emphasises the localisation of the food system, whilst not precluding the possibility of
marketing organic produce internationally once subsistence needs have been met’.
The organic agricultural systems in the area may be categorised as:
1) Type 1 – Premier Cashew Industries Limited (PCI)
2) Type 2 – an association of local groups producing organic vegetables (Muungano).
Whilst the original proposal was to consider the contrasting types of initiatives
separately, over the course of the fieldwork it became increasingly clear that, although
institutional relationships are strained and there is distinct gender division of labour
between food and cash crops, there is significant overlap between the two initiatives.
The vegetable plots are located on land within or bordering that certified under the
cashew nut project. The women producing the vegetables are the wives of the men
registered in the cashew nut project and therefore they assist each other in farming
activities. A boundary between the two initiatives is therefore artificial, and obscures
the actual structure and functioning of the human activity system.
5 A livelihood comprises the capabilities, assets and activities required for a means of living. A
livelihood is sustainable when it can cope with and recover from stress and shocks, maintain or
enhance its capabilities and assets, both now and in the future, while not undermining the natural
resource base.
86

Thus the sustainable livelihood’s framework has been applied to the organic
agricultural system as a whole. This reflects both the fundamental interdependencies
of the two initiatives and the belief that overall system sustainability of both would be
enhanced by strengthening coordination and cooperation between the two.
Methodology
The broad strategy adopted was:
a) To express the present situation and determine key issues (what is);
b) To determine the future-wanted situation (what could be); and,
c) To propose recommendations to facilitate the transition from present to future (how
to get there).
An exploratory phase involving key informant interviews in Dar es Salaam, was
followed by 10 days in Mkuranga district. Data was collected through semi-structured
interviewing, direct observation (e.g. transect walk), focus group discussions, oral
histories, mini-farm case studies and portraits of individual farmers.
During focus group discussions a number of participatory tools were employed
including ranking economic activities, seasonal calendars, social profiling, wealth
indicators and Venn diagrams (diagrams used to explore the roles and relationships of
groups and individuals).
The first round of information gathering in the field was followed by onsite analysis.
A second round of information gathering included informal discussions with farmers,
farm tours and a second focus group discussion for each project. Joint validation of
the results allowed for verification and enrichment of data and prioritisation of key
issues.
Contact with key stakeholders is continuing in a final stage of information gathering.
This report analyses the organic system from the perspective of the sustainable
livelihoods approach, and presents findings for eliciting and incorporating feedback
with the aim of improving the accuracy and usefulness of the final document.
Overview of the Case Study Area
The unit of analysis in the case study research comprises two villages (Kerekese and
Sotele) in Kisiju Division of Mkuranga District, Coastal Region. Each village consists
of three sub-villages: Mwagatani, Kerekese and Kibewa in Kerekese village; and
Sotele A, Sotele B and Sotele C in Sotele village. Some basic facts about the villages
are given below:
Sotele Kerekese
Number of inhabitants 1917 2112
Number of households 428 301
Number of farmers
registered in PCI organic
cashew nut project
85 251
Source: Ward records and village executives
87

Although the sub-villages have distinct boundaries which have been comprehensively
mapped by PCI Field Officers (FO), in reality these boundaries are permeable. For
example, a significant proportion of plots in Kerekese, for example, belong to
residents of Sotele.
Premier Cashew Industries
Individual Case Narratives
Premier Cashews Industries Ltd. (PCI) is a sister company of the Dar-based large
food supplier, Fida Hussein. PCI was established in 1999 as the first private company
to process raw cashew nuts in Tanzania. The company has around 1700 workers, the
majority of whom are women working at the Vingunguti factory. Expatriates of
mainly Indian origin and Tanzanians make up the management.
In 2000 the company contracted 202 farmers in Kerekese village to produce 68 tonnes
of organic cashews. After the first year, production by those same farmers increased
to 200 tonnes due to provision of inputs, improved farm management and the
premium price incentive. Since 2001, PCI has been working with Export Promotion
of Organic Products from Africa (EPOPA) in order to attain organic certification and
expand its organic line.
From 2002, the company started processing organic cashew nuts. It was first certified
by Swedish certification body KRAV and then, from the start of the 20003/4 season,
by Swiss IMO in collaboration with German Naturland. Production and processing
standards also meet European organic regulations (N� 2092/91) and the American
National Organic Program (NOP). The costs of certification were initially covered
fully by EPOPA, although each year subsequent PCI paid a greater proportion of
certification, and this year they are expected to cover the full amount.
The stated aims of the organic certification project include:
- improved livelihoods for smallholders and their communities as a result of
premium prices;
- improved quality and yield of cashew nuts through exposure to innovative and
environmentally-sound farming techniques;
- long-term and mutually-advantageous relationships between farmers and
buyers;
- value-addition to an important Tanzanian export crop;
- improved food safety and factory working conditions;
- diversified export products for PCI (summarised from PCI Promotional
Booklet).
PCI currently holds contracts with 478 farmers of Kerekese (257), Sotele (85) and
Kalole (136) villages in Mkuranga District. There is an estimated potential of
increasing the number of farmers in the project to 1000 by 2008, who would produce
approximately 4000 tonnes of cashews annually.
Compliance to organic standards is ensured through an Internal Control System (ICS)
which facilitates group certification. PCI employs two field officers, one based in
Kerekese and the other in Sotele. These field officers inspect all the farms at least
88

once per year, provide training, mobilise farmers to carry out practices such as
pruning and pest/disease scouting and respond to individual requests for assistance.
Living in the villages, these field officers are accountable to both the company and the
village communities. External inspections are carried out on a random sample of
farms by IMO/Naturland annually.
Farms in PCI organic cashew project area range between 1 and 135 acres (although
the vast majority are less than 30 acres), have between 20 and 8800 cashew trees and
consist of 1-5 plots (figures are derived from internal inspection reports).
Premier adds values to organic cashews through the following process:
Day Processing Activity
Purchasing raw cashews in the villages
1 Transport by trucks from farms to factory in sisal/gunny bags
2-3 Sun-drying raw cashews and packaging in sisal/gunny bags
4 Steaming for 30 minutes using special boilers and cookers to facilitate
extraction of the kernel
5 Cooling in a shaded area
6 Cutting with hand-operated cutting machines to separate the kernel from the
shell
7-8 Drying at 80�C for 3 hours in coconut-fuelled Borma drying machines and
then cooling to facilitate the removal of the protective testa layer and reduce
the moisture content of the kernel protecting it from pest and fungal attack as
well as natural deterioration
9 Hand-peeling
10 Manual and machine grading according to size, colour, count and shape into
27 grades
11 Packing using a moulded vacuum packaging system in multi-layered barrier
bags, vacuuming and flushing with carbon dioxide and nitrogen gases,
impulse double sealing
Export
Source: Based on PCI promotional literature
Processing is carried out manually largely by women. The factory has a capacity of
processing 50 tonnes per day. The factory alternates between processing conventional,
and then processing organic cashew nuts from April/May.
The focus of organic processing is on creating a hygienic environment. There are
separate bowls, crates and other equipment for the organic line. Workers wear a
different uniform and meet hygienic requirements by covering their hair, not wearing
nail polish, jewellery etc. Storage areas, gunny bags, stainless steel tools are specially
marked and labelled as “organic”. EPOPA and Agroeco have also done consultancies
to assist PCI to conform with the Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP)
standards.
In the year ending August 2005, PCI exported 3,701,314 kg of cashews to 15
countries, earning $12,792,629.64 (with each kilo selling at an average price of
$3.46). These countries included South Africa, USA, Canada, the Netherlands, Japan,
89

UK, India, Pakistan, Sweden, South Korea, UAE, Yemen and also, neighbouring
countries of Kenya and Uganda. 4-6% of production is distributed locally.
Only 5% of the raw cashew nuts bought by PCI are from certified organic land.
Nevertheless much of the organic production is sold as conventional, particularly
since grades other than White Wholes are difficult to market organically. Only 3 or 4
of the 27 grades can be sold organically.
Muungano – An Association of Local Groups
Since 2004 a number of local production groups have been formed in the villages of
Kitomondo, Kerekese and Sotele in order to improve food security and increase the
incomes of farming families.
The following groups have been identified:
- Mshikamano, Sotele A
- Umoja ni Nguvu, Sotele B
- Woman’s Group, Sotele C
- Jipe Moyo, Kibewa, Kerekese
- Kiwamaso cassava group, Sotele B
- TAWLAE cassava group, Sotele
These are grouped together under the umbrella ‘Muungano’. These organisations
grew out of discussions between leaders of the sub-villages and representatives of
supporting institutions such as EPOPA and MARI already working in the area.
The largest of the groups is Umoja ni Nguvu which has 27 members altogether (26
women and 1 man). The members of the vegetable growing groups are mainly
women, whilst the cassava production and processing groups are largely men’s
groups. Production activities are organised slightly differently in each group.
Members of Jipe Moyo share a one acre plot that belongs to one of the members. On
the 1.5 acre plot of Umoja ni Nguvu each member has their own small plot, and there
is also a collective classroom plot.
Although the groups lie within or border the area certified organically in the cashew
nut project, none of the local organic vegetable production groups are certified in their
own right. This means that whilst members are using organic practices, the products
are not marketed as organic.
The Manager of the Tanzanian Organic Certification Association (TanCert) has
visited the groups and has started the process of conversion in collaboration with
MARI which will supervise the Internal Control System and be the owner of the
project’s certificate. The area is due to be fully converted within the next few months.
A field officer based in Kitomondo will be responsible for carrying out inspections
and additional trainings.
90

Summary of Two Organic Initiatives
PCI Muungano
Agroecological Infertile sands on gently rolling uplands; alluvial soils in
conditions
Rufiji Sand and infertile soils; fertile soils on uplands and
- soils & topography river flood plains
- rainfall
Bimodal rainfall 750-1200 mm / yr
- altitude
Under 300 m
Size
Individual plots average Group plots of between 1
- acreage
between 0 and 30 acres and 7 acres
- number of farmers Altogether 487 farmers More than 6 groups of
registered
between 8 and 35 members
(i.e. around 120 farmers
actively involved)
Orientation Mainly international trade, Mainly food security, also
also improved livelihoods local trade
Certification Certified by
Under conversion with
IMO/Naturland
TanCert
Ownership Company in collaboration Farmers in collaboration
with donors (EPOPA) with government research
institute and NGOs
Product Processed cashew nuts Fresh fruits (bananas and
pawpaw) and vegetables
including amaranth, ochre,
sweet potatoes, cassava and
collard
Distance to market Farmers transport nuts with Produce taken to daily
bicycles to central village village markets and also sold
godowns (less than 10km) to local schools. Dar es
from where the company Salaam markets (40km from
collects them and
Mkuranga) are not yet being
transports them to Dar for
processing and export
exploited
Technology Modern inputs such as Traditional and novel
sulphur spraying
practices such as mulching
and use of botanical
pesticides
91

Organic Agriculture: What does it mean to the farmer?
As a result of the way in which OA developed in the area, the understanding of OA
has been perverted. The words of one Sotele farmer epitomise the perception of
organics: mkulima ni jembe la kilimo hai (‘the farmer is the hoe of organic farming’).
When asked to expand upon this comment, the farmer described a situation where
farmers are used like implements to assist companies; they are not listened to or cared
for, and thrown aside when the work is done.
Since OA, as a concept, has been recently introduced from the outside (brought by
agents of Premier, EPOPA, NGOs and research institutions), and has not emerged
“organically”, it has not been fully incorporated into the identity, existing belief and
value systems of the villagers. In the words of one old farmer: ‘organic agriculture has
come because of the cashew trees’.
The principles of OA are understood in so far as practices do not transgress IFOAM
basic standards (e.g. no chemicals) and also in a way that maximises the yield of a
cashew trees (e.g. pruning). OA is understood as a system that promotes the use of
natural fertilisers, pest management, weeding and cleaning cashew farms and
prohibits the use of fire and careless disposal of batteries and plastic. It was
discovered that some farmers had not collected and burnt plastic waste because they
were under the impression that all fire is prohibited in organic farming. Understanding
of OA was found to be greater amongst members of the local groups who also
mentioned the use of botanical pesticides.
PCI has successfully been able to change capabilities and behaviour of the farmers
with incentives of an organic premium (20-25%), secure market, inputs on credit and
loans. Villagers were motivated to join the cashew project and undergo conversion to
organic agricultural by the incentives of sulphur on credit and increased incomes. In
the context of cashew nut production, OA is perceived a set of regulations and
recommendations on proper farm management.
Women in local groups on the other hand, are motivated to convert more by the desire
to improve agricultural productivity for food security and trade. Muungano has also
addressed deeper relationships such as that of gender. Since production is relatively
low, and produce is marketed locally, formal certification is not considered a priority
and awareness on certification procedures was low.
Whereas PCI pays $5000 annually for the organic certificate, this is well beyond the
means of individual and even a group of farmers. It is therefore more realistic for
local groups to concentrate on getting certified for the local market (funded by
TanCert), particularly since there are currently very few premiums paid for organic
produce domestically. Careful and participatory development of an ICS that is locallyowned
may be a more successful strategy in the long-term.
Attention to the needs and perceptions of the farmers will assist external institutions
to facilitate OA in a way that allows for adaptation (rather than wholesale adoption) of
organic principles and practices.
92

Cross-Case Livelihood Analysis
The following discussion uses DFID’s Sustainable Livelihoods (SL) framework
(pictured below) to analyse the defined organic agricultural system.
Vulnerability context
Adverse shocks, trends and seasonality which threaten CDR smallholders include low
and fluctuating prices for the main cash crop cashew nuts, unreliable climatic regimes
including recurrent droughts, crop pests and disease outbreaks, an annual hunger
period and the risk of anthropogenic fire. These factors pose a major threat to farmers
in their search for a means of living and also present significant risks to the
functioning of a sustainable organic agricultural system.
Price of cashew nuts
The low price of cashew nuts and dependence on one crop was indisputably the key
issue that farmers believed was affecting their livelihoods. From an all-time high of
600-750/= Tshs in the 2004/5 season, the price dropped dramatically in the 2005/6
season. The high price of the last season meant that farmers had high expectations and
may even have planned on receiving the same or a higher price for their cashew nuts.
In the buying season just ended (2005/6) there was a “tug of war” between buyers
over the price of cashew nuts multiple buyers and the farmers. Approximate changes
in the price (Tanzanian shillings per kilo) for raw organic cashew nuts from Kerekese
village over the 2005/6 harvesting period is illustrated in the graph below. The mean
average was 450/= Tshs per kilo.
93

Estimated prices paid in Kerekese for organic cashews 2005/6
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
October November December January
In addition, farmers reported dramatic price changes over short periods of time, e.g.
from 480/= Tshs to 300/= Tshs in two days. Several of the farmers interviewed sold
all/most of their cashews to PCI for 370/= Tshs per kilo (almost half the price of the
previous season). It is rumoured that farmers in other areas were receiving higher
prices, such as in Mkuranga (400/= Tshs) and Mtwara (510-600/= Tshs). Whereas
farmers in Mtwara are organised, those in Mkuranga do not assert collective
bargaining power. It therefore appears that Mkuranga farmers are receiving a lower
price for a higher quality (organic) product.
It is widely stated that the price for organic products in the whole chain is better than
for conventional. PCI claims that organic cashews fetch a premium of 20-25% which
goes to the farmer. However, it is far from clear whether this premium ever reaches
the cashew farmer of Mkuranga and many farmers blamed corrupt and dishonest
buying officials. On the other hand, few farmers keep harvest records and few if any
conduct economic analyses of their production, and therefore it is possible that the
price has not been as important as the increasing costs and debts being incurred.
The drop in prices occurred at the international level. Several explanations have been
given for the poor prices given to Tanzanian cashew nut farmers. A large shipment
that had been stored West Africa and which was sold last year may have flooded the
market with cashew nuts. Also Indian traders were more cautious as a result of the
Presidential elections in Tanzania in October/November. Whatever the reason, the
resulting price barely covered the farmers’ costs of production and this has severely
compromised the livelihood of the farmer. The lack of alternatives to cashew nuts also
increases farmers’ vulnerability to fluctuations on the world market.
At the time of writing, PCI is considering providing a second payment, depending on
the world market prices for cashews at the time of processing (J. Pardhan 2006, pers.
comm., 24 March). Furthermore, the low prices paid to some farmers is often a
reaction to the discovery that they have exceeded their initial yield estimates and sideselling
conventional cashews.
94

Drought
Dependence on rainfed agriculture and the irregularity of rains in recent years was
cited as the second most important issue by farmers. According to elders, persistent
drought has only affected the region since around the year 2000. The lack of rainfall
affects annual crops particularly maize, legumes and vegetables and sugar cane most
severely, significantly undermining access to a varied nutritious diet and household
food security.
Crop pests and disease outbreaks
The major disease affecting cashew trees is fungal powdery mildew, which usually
affects the tree most between June and September after the appearance of young
leaves and flowers. The fungus thrives in the shade and in average heat and moisture
conditions. It is usually combated with sulphur dust since this is the cheapest
fungicide. This is applied by many farmers four times between July and September, at
a rate of 1 kg per tree (0.25 kg per round).
On the basis of the focus group discussions, it appears that Kerekese farmers have
much greater problems with pests than those in Sotele. Certain farmers and also
experts at the CDC cited the helpelitis as a greater threat to cashew production than
fungal powdering mildew. According to advocates of OA, pests are a sign that the soil
in which a plant grows is depleted and unhealthy. The insect pests and fungal disease
affecting crops in the area may therefore be symptomatic of more systemic
imbalances in the soil and agroecosystem.
A summary of other pests that were encountered during the fieldwork period, along
with the crops that they affect and the methods employed for managing them is given
in the table below:
Pest / Disease Crop / livestock Management
Birds Rice, tomatoes and Set-up a temporary
amaranth
camp near the crops
Vervet monkeys
Most food crops and fruits during critical growing
Monkeys (kima)
stages
Baboons
Use also traps, nets and
guns (but bullets are
expensive @ 1,000/=
Tshs)
Lions Cows and goats Use fire and shout to
chase them away
Mice Maize, cassava
Wild boars Cassava Trap, chase away by
shouting or with dogs
Christians hunt and eat
them
Grasshoppers (senene & Vegetables
Botanicals such as
panzi)
papaya and Neem
Catepillars Amaranth and other leaves, and Tagete
vegetables
(mabangi ya mbwa)
Termites Coconut Exacerbated by
95

mulching, although not
a major problem
Chonga beetles Coconut Cut and burn affected
trees
Helpelitis Cashew Biological control using
red weaver ants
(majimoto)
White tapeworm (Bo?) Cashew Cut affected branches /
Fungal powdery mildew
disease
trees
Cashew Sulphur
Hunger
According to one farmer the stomach is like a leaky bucket that continuously needs
refilling. This illustrates the daily struggle of farmers and their families to access
sufficient quantities of safe and nutritious food. Farmers in Kerekese identified the
months of food shortages as being between February and September, whilst farmers
in Sotele said that food shortages mainly occurred in July-June and October-January.
At the time of visiting most farmers were eating 1-2 meals per day. The staple food
crops are rice and cassava. Many people also buy maize flour to make stiff porridge.
The consequence of food shortages is that people start to loan and/or sell their assets
including livestock and sulphur, which is supplied in June when farmers have limited
cash. It also means that farmers are in a poor position to negotiate better prices and
sell their cashew nuts even when prices are low in order to meet short-term food
needs.
Anthropogenic fire risk
One of the main production risks in the area is fire. Not only was this mentioned on
the internal inspection reports for 2005 (significantly reducing the yield of four
farms), but there was also widespread evidence of burning throughout the project
area. Fire is a particular threat to young cashew trees, although it can also have a
devastating impact on more mature stands and other crops. It is detrimental to soil
micro-organisms, increases the acidity of soils and reduces soil organic matter.
The precise reason for people starting fires is not clear, although they are said to be
caused by youths with malevolent intentions. Fire is also widely used to prepare field
for paddy rice cultivation and to clean farms, reduce weeds and promote high yields
in the short-term. Last year a fire started in Kisiju was reported to have spread widely
in the area, exacerbated by the extended dry season.
Livelihood Assets
Each farmer has a certain combination of human, natural, social, physical and
financial capital that is available to him/her for OA. Investigations also revealed that
there are number of assets which are still needed in order to make OA a viable
livelihood strategy.
96

Human Capital
Human capital comprises the physical capability, good health, ability to labour, skills
and knowledge important for the successful pursuit of OA. The workforce available
for agriculture consists of the men and women of the farming households.
There is a distinct division of labour along gender lines according to the type of crop
cultivated. Cashew nuts are the main cash crop of the area and therefore it is the men
of the area who are the most visibly involved in their production, although women
participate in all the farming activities. The men are also the ones registered in the list
of growers of the ICS. Food crops such as vegetables are more the domain of the
women, and this is reflected in the membership of the local groups producing organic
vegetables.
Although polygamy is widespread and consequently families are large (one farmer
interviewed had 21 children), the majority of the children are either of school-going
age or have migrated to the towns and city in search of paid employment. A large
proportion of the population of both villages are therefore dependents.
Many farmers employ farm labourers to assist with weeding and clearing the land
prior to the cashew nut harvesting season, and also with the actual gathering of the
nuts. Large groups of between 20 and 60 young men, often of Wagogo and
Wanyamwezi origin are hired during the harvesting/buying season (October –
January). Farmers claim that a large proportion of their income (around one third) is
used to pay hired labourers. It is not uncommon for farmers to use 600,000/= Tshs to
pay labourers. It has been estimated by EPOPA that $30,000 was taken out of the
region by hired labourers (M. Leijdens 2006, pers. comm., 19 January). Time and
labour was cited as a constraint to the production of organic vegetables by the women
in local groups who described their other responsibilities including feeding and caring
for the children.
As is customary in Muslim societies, many inhabitants go to pray in the Mosque five
times daily. In addition to worship, much time is also spent carrying out familial and
societal duties such as attending weddings and funerals. On the basis of direct
observation and daily activity diagrams, a significant portion of men’s days are also
spent sitting in the market place and making social commentary.
In order to carry out agricultural activities, farmers depend on both local and
introduced knowledge and skills. Their expertise in cashew nut production is
demonstrated by the way that they select quality seedlings on the basis of weight,
yield and resistance. In addition to an intimate knowledge of the area, its ecological
conditions and potential, they have been brought new technologies such as vegetable
processing (drying amaranth for storage), and improved Soil and Water Conservation
techniques (sunken beds).
However, most of the farmers have a very low level of education (many have not
completed primary school) and have only attended Madras. This contributes to a lack
of awareness about environmental issues (evidenced by the plastic bags and batteries
littering the farms). The attitude of leaving cashew trees to grow everywhere and only
attending to them when absolutely necessary is also widespread, as is the mentality
that reducing the number of trees will reduce the overall yield.
97

Natural Capital
The average size of the farms ranges between 1 and 40 acres. Land is either inherited
along a patrilineal system or bought. Currently land costs between 50,000/= Tshs and
100,000/= Tshs per acre. Land disputes, usually over inheritance issues, are common.
The cashew tree is considered the greatest natural source of wealth. The large number
of cashew trees in the area provides an assured production. The optimum yield of a
cashew tree is around 40 kg. The tree grows well with adequate space (either 12m X
12m or 15m x 15m on less fertile soils) and light. The cashew tree usually starts
yielding after 4 years. It grows better on loose soils (tifutifu) than clayey soils
(finyanzi).
Of the many crops cultivated in the area besides cashew, the most common are:
! Fruits – pineapple, jack fruit, orange, lime, passion, banana, baobab fruits,
mango 6 , sugar cane and a wide variety of other fruits known locally as furu,
tonga etc.
! Other food crops – cassava, green gram, pigeon pea, paddy rice, maize,
cowpea, sweet potato, coconut, plantain 7 , pumpkin, tomato, arrowroot, collard,
yams
! Other cash crops – oil palm
Artificial fertilisers and pesticides have not been used in the memory of those
interviewed. A number of farmers complained that soil fertility has been declining,
and that it is now necessary to apply farmyard manure on land that before never
needed it.
Whilst not very common, some farmers keep livestock including chickens, ducks,
doves, cows and goats.
Despite being absolutely essential to OA, water is the lacking in the area. The failure
of the short rains has been a source of great problems for the farmers.
Only one local group (Umoja ni nguvu) has access to water for irrigation and is
therefore the only group that has been able to continue vegetable cultivation. This
group relies on five hand-dug wells in local depressions. Some fortunate farmers
access water from natural basins, although those that have not dried up are few and far
between. Many farmers have dug local wells although many of these have also dried
up. PCI has provided a number of hand-operated wells locally although some of these
have broken and engineers have not yet come to fix them.
Water from local and improved wells is not enough for domestic consumption.
Families are also buying water at 300/= Tshs per 20-litre container from the local
school. It is therefore not realistic to expect them to be irrigating crops at this time.
6 Mango types include Dodo, Hagatani, Pafu and Mali.
7 Types of cooking bananas grown locally include Bukoba, Boko boko, Mzuzu, Kunana and Jamaica.
98

Social Capital
The dominant tribes in the area are Zaramo, Dengereko, Gindo, Digo and Matumbi.
Recently there has been an influx of Maasai in the area who are migrating with their
herds towards the Rufiji in search of feed for their livestock. Around 80% of the
population are Muslim and most of the remaining population are Christian. On the
whole, however, religious preference does not have a big impact on farming activities
(beyond the Islamic prohibition on pig-rearing). Members of both religions cooperate
freely together in productive activities.
Understood as a propensity for mutually beneficial collective action, social capital in
the local groups was great. The groups organised their own meetings, field visits, etc.
and one person from Kitomondo village has been elected to liaise between all the
groups. Nevertheless, cooperation was waning as a result of the severe production
constraints, particularly such as lack of water.
In contrast, there was little evidence of coordinated actions by farmers in relation to
the organic cashew project. That is not to say that social resources (networks, social
claims, social relations, affiliations and associations) upon which farmers could draw
do not exist, but rather that they were not being used. Occasionally farmers help one
another with farm work and alternate between farms but these arrangements have
been short-lived.
One notable exception is a Youth Group from Kerekese which has established a demo
plot (

Typology of Participation
1. Passive Participation – People participate by being told what is going to
happen or has already happened. It is a unilateral announcement by an
administration or project management without listening to peoples’ responses.
The information being shared belongs only the external professionals.
2. Participation in information giving – People participate by answering
questions posed by extractive researchers using questionnaire surveys or
similar approaches. People do not have the opportunity to influence
proceedings, as the findings of the research are neither shared nor checked for
accuracy.
3. Participation by consultation – People participate by being consulted, and
external people listen to views. These external professionals define both
problems and solutions, and may modify these in the light of peoples’
responses. Such a consultative process does not concede any share in decisionmaking,
and professionals are under no obligation to take on board peoples’
views.
4. Participation for material incentives – People participate by providing
resources, for example labour, in return for food, cash or other material
incentives. People have no stake in prolonging activities when the incentives
end.
5. Functional participation – People participate by forming groups to meet
predetermined objectives related to the project, which can involve the
development or promotion of externally initiated social organisation. These
institutions tend to be dependent on external initiators and facilitators, but may
become self-dependent.
6. Interactive participation – People participate in joint analysis, which leads to
action plans and the formation of new local institutions or the strengthening of
existing ones. It tends to involve interdisciplinary methodologies that seek
multiple perspectives and make use of systematic and structured learning
processes. These groups take control over local decisions, and so people have
a stake in maintaining structures or practices.
7. Self-mobilisation – People participate by taking initiatives independent of
external institutions to change systems. They develop contacts with external
institutions for resources and technical advice they need by retaining control
over how resources are used. Such self-initiated mobilization and collective
action may or may not challenge existing inequitable distributions of wealth
and power.
Source: After Pretty et al., 1995
Physical Capital
Farm implements commonly used include the hoe, axe, machete and rake. Some
improved cashew seedlings are obtained from local research station CDC, whilst the
majority of farmers use their own seedlings to propagate cashew trees. Crops are
transported to the market either on the head or by bicycle depending on the means of
the farmers.
PCI supplies the farmers with sulphur and sprayers on credit. One bag of sulphur (25
kg) is sold for 10,200/= Tshs. Whilst this assists farmers to combat fungal powdery
mildew, it also results in the farmers accumulating debts and over the long term will
100

esult in soil acidificiation. Only about 2% of farmers own blowers; the rest need to
hire them. Often farmers sell bags of sulphur for around 5000/= Tshs to other farmers
in the area and in neighbouring villages who are not in the project. They may sell up
to 50% of their bags.
Local groups in Sotele have been provided with a number of inputs including a
cassava mill and chipping machine from TAWLAE / VECO, and seeds, seedlings,
manure and botanical pesticides (e.g. neem powder) from MARI. Nevertheless, lack
of inputs such as hoes, manure, watering cans and different and early-maturing seed
varieties was cited as a major production constraint by members of the local groups.
Financial Capital
Farmers have access to credit through PCI. Depending on their production, some
farmers are also eligible to loans of around 500,000/= Tshs. Members of registered
local groups theoretically also have access to loans from grant-giving bodies.
Each season 20% of the farmers’ earnings are directed to a central input fund at the
District council. The input fund provides around 1 bag of sulphur for every 2-4 people
every season (sufficient for spraying 25 trees).
After labour and input expenses have been paid, there is usually very little money
remaining. One farmer described how in 2005/6 1.5m shillings was used to pay
workers and debts for inputs, leaving only 200,000/= Tshs of which 150,000/= Tshs
was used for paying school fees. This explains why the money is finished soon (some
say 10 days) after the farmers have been paid. In some cases half of the payments
from the cashews are used to pay labourers.
Cultural Capital
Cashew farmers of Mkuranga may also be said to have cultural capital in that the
cashew trees represent wealth, both symbolically and historically in the community.
According to the Village Leader of Kerekese, they are a way for them to be
remembered.
In the 15 th Century Portuguese Missionaries brought the tree to East Africa and India
from Brazil and are believed to have planted them along the coast as a windbreaker
and to reduce soil erosion. Thus the cashew tree was originally planted in Mkuranga
for environmental management.
People were moved into the area after Independence in 1961 and the implementation
of the Afro-socialist Ujamaa programme initiated by the first President Julius
Nyerere. Originally, local people relied on cassava. Before cashew trees, coconuts
were the main cash crop until they were recently devastated by the Coconut Lethal
Disease which has simultaneously caused the tree canopies and incomes derived from
it to topple.
Political Capital
Politically the area is dominated by supporters of the opposition party CUF, although
it is not clear to what extent this influences their access to public resources and
political capital.
101

The research has found limited evidence for participation in policy dialogue and
price-setting. Both are currently top-down. Farmers were not aware of different
agricultural policies and laws, and could not give examples of how these touched their
lives.
Policies, Institutions and Processes
Policies, institutions and processes have a mediating influence on the livelihood assets
and strategies of smallholders in Mkuranga. In particular, marketing arrangements
embody the social processes, institutional forms and power dynamics at play.
Until 1999 cashews were sold through co-operatives. With the collapse of the
cooperatives due to mismanagement of government funds, farmers transported the
cashews themselves to Dar es Salaam and sold them on the free market. Recently
buyers such as PCI have shown an interest in collecting the crop from the villages.
In total eight companies bought cashew nuts from Mkuranga farmers in the 2005/6
season including PCI, Mohammed Enterprises, Olam and H.S. Impex. They bought
cashews for between 350/= Tshs and 580/= Tshs per kilo from the villages.
A meeting of the Cashew Board of Tanzania (CBT) and buying companies in late
2005 set the price for cashews at 600/= Tshs per kilo. This price was widely
publicised through the media. Nevertheless, no evidence has been found that any
companies paid this price, leading farmers to conclude that buyers have formed a
cartel which is collaborating to keep prices low.
Other crops are marketed at the local village markets in Sotele and Kerekese, at
smaller-scale markets in the sub-villages, at Mkuranga market and some fruits are
transported to Dar.
Livelihood Strategies
Organic cashew production
The organic production of cashew nuts is the primary livelihood strategy of farmers in
the study area. In practice there is almost no difference between production of
cashews on registered organic farms and production on so-called conventional farms.
Organic farmers differ only in so far as they have had the opportunity to become part
of the project (after application and inspections). According to one key actor
“organic” cashews have exactly the same taste and quality as “conventional” cashews
and the farming systems themselves are no different.
With regards to the management of cashew trees and soil fertility, experts recommend
pruning, stumping, sanitation, propping and mulching. The latter is widely practised
by leaving cut grasses to rot in situ.
Ash and charcoal is often applied as a fertiliser. Sunhemp (Crotalaria spp.) has also
been cultivated by at least one of the women’s groups although its value as a green
manure was not fully realised, as it had not been ploughed back in. The few farmers
that keep livestock including cows, goats and chickens apply manure onto their fields,
although there appears to be limited knowledge on proper manure handling for
retention of nutrients. Thus there is a low level of integration between crop and
102

livestock components. The influx of Maasai pastoralists into the area has the potential
to alter this state of affairs, through negotiation and suitable agreements between the
pastoralists and the arable farmers.
In its current form, cashew nut production in the area is largely a mono-crop,
particularly in Kerekese. On the cashew farms in Kerekese especially there is a lack
of ground cover, partly because the leaves rot slowly, but also because the high
density of trees and interlocking canopies prevent the penetration of sunlight and
rainfall to nourish understorey crops. Intercropping in plots of cashew trees has also
been limited due to the lack of rain, and roaming livestock have also been mentioned
as a reason why understorey legumes are not more widely grown. However, the
benefits of intercropping appear to be widely understood.
Members of Kiwamaso local group were intercropping maize and cowpeas. In Sotele,
some farmers were intercropping fruit trees with their cashew trees, and Kerekese
farmers emphasised the importance of interplanting cassava as a food crop. One
farmer visited in Kerekese had a productive and diverse home garden encircling his
house, whilst the cashew trees were planted in an outer circle. There have also been
efforts by EPOPA to include leguminous cowpeas (Vigna unguiculata) and pigeon
peas (Cajanus cajan) to provide additional soil cover and food.
Since returns on farmers’ investment in cashew trees have been declining, a number
of farmers have also started to break their contracts with PCI, selling their cashew
nuts to other buyers on the free market.
Other economic activities
Besides cashew nuts, some farmers make their living from a range of small-scale
economic activities, listed below in the order of priority defined by members of the
two villages:
Kerekese Sotele
1 Charcoal Charcoal
2 Fishing Oil palm
3 Vegetables Weaving grass mats, basketry
4 Coconuts Local chickens
5 Small shops Vegetables
6 Carpentry
7 Sewing
8 Pottery
9 Clothes washing & ironing
Other income-earning activities observed were salt-making on the coastal plains and
brick-making. Some farmers set up small industries to shell and roast off-season
cashew nuts. However, one farmer commented that ‘eating your own cashews is like
burning money’.
Members of the local groups are particularly enterprising, diversifying their incomeearning
activities to include weaving grass mats, local chicken rearing and milling
cassava to make flour for baking. Vegetables are cultivated on sunken beds which are
103

carefully mulched and sprinkled with water. Chicken droppings are mixed with the
soil and applied on the soil, with a covering of sand.
In periods of food shortage, many people (especially truant children) resort to hunting
and gathering wild foods such as local fruits, crabs and shells from the seashore.
Livelihood Outcomes
Wealth indicators identified by the farmers indirectly reflect the desired livelihood
outcomes of the community, i.e. the goals of pursuing organic agriculture. According
to farmers of Kerekese and Sotele villages, wealthy farmers have large farms, many
cashew trees, high yields and good farm management. Male cashew farmers also said
that they wished to be remembered, for example through their cultivation of cashew
trees.
When asked about a vision for the future, Kerekese farmers said that they wished to
have iron-sheeting on their houses and ideally three wives. The village leader
responded to the question by asking: ‘Is it pleasing that our children are produced in
mud huts?’
The main development outcome sought by both cashew farmers and members of local
groups is increased incomes. One cashew farmer in Sotele said that he wished to
receive 1000/= Tshs per kg for their cashews by 2015.
Similarly, members of the local groups were aiming to open bank accounts and make
savings. Women in the local groups described their reason for being involved in
organic vegetable production as wishing to help themselves and their children. For
them the issue of parenthood was most important. Helping one another financially
during difficult periods (e.g. with schooling and medical expenses) was an important
motivation.
However, there are important differences between the two organic projects, on the
basis of orientation. Women in the local groups involved in organic vegetable
production were more geared towards (and arguably more successful in) community
development. The names of the groups are revealing as to the spirit of their existence:
- Muungano meaning Joining Together / Union
- Mshikamano meaning Solidarity
- Umoja ni Nguvu meaning Unity is Strength
- Jipe Moyo meaning Take heart / Have faith or courage
- Kikundi cha Maendeleo Sotele meaning Sotele Development Group.
The level of inclusiveness, social cohesion and sustainability is less central to
businesses. The name Premier presumably refers to the superior quality of the
processed cashew nut. This highlights the fundamentally different entry points of OA
in the two projects.
The main uses of household income in the village after repayment for inputs and
labour, are educating children and buying clothes, kitchenware, soap, cooking oil,
kerosene etc.
104

Stakeholder Analysis
A stakeholder analysis reveals the different interests, roles and activities of the main
institutions supporting OA in the area.
Generalised map of stakeholders, their interests, role and food flows in
Mkuranga organic agricultural system
CONSUMERS
IN THE GLOBAL
SOUTH –
(awareness of) health
and nutrition effects of
PRIVATE food
SECTOR –
including suppliers,
processors and
distributors/retailers,
impact on profit margins
and ability to influence
overall system
sustainability
CONSUMERS
IN THE
GLOBAL
NORTH – food
safety issues,
ethical
choices
It is anticipated that the most vulnerable groups in the community are those that are
excluded from the organic projects. Ideally they should be incorporated directly into
the research.
Type Institution Roles
Producers Farmers
registered
in project /
organised
into group
GOVERNMENT –
local government,
district officials,
extensionists and policymakers,
with mandate
and responsibility to
alleviate poverty
SMALLHOLDER
FARMERS –
have the most to
gain/lose from changes
in the food system,
dependent on agriculture
for food security
CERTIFIERS
– define the organic
standards and therefore
determine the
orientation of the sector,
guardians of the organic
principles
Summary of Key Stakeholders and their Roles
RESEARCHERS
– generate,
synthesise and
transfer knowledge
MULTI-
LATERAL &
BILATERAL
PROGRAMMES –
Provide a mediating
institutional context
NGOs –
Strengthen civil
society through
capacitybuilding
and
advocacy
actions
Provide the knowledge, skills and labour necessary to
transform natural capital into agricultural produce
Farming households are also the central decision-making
units
Marked social heterogeneity and varying livelihood
105

Government MARI /
interests, in particular along gender lines
Motivate women to cultivate vegetables organically,
- research FARM- monthly seminars, provide seedlings for papaya, bananas
institutions, Africa and Tagete (marigold) and some farm tools, training on
district
packaging
authorities CDC and Provide improved seeds and seedlings of 20 different
and local Naliendele types at subsidised rate of 250/= Tshs which are disease
government in Mtwara resistant, early-maturing, high yielding, training for
farmers, extensionists and groups
Village Supervises the cleaning of farms, organises meetings to
government mobilise farmers in weeding and sanitation practices
DALDO Organise meetings, provide extension
Bilateral aid EPOPA Promotes export of organic products for empowerment
programme
of farmers, supports national sector development and
provides trainings, builds linkages between projects, and
provides contact with external individuals and
organisations
Target products with an assured market, and where the
price difference with conventional products is significant
NGOs TAWLAE / Advice and inputs such as farm tools, seeds, local
VECO chickens, fertilisers, wells and cassava mill
SIDO Training in local processing and monitoring
Rescue Provided dispensary and well
Certifiers ICS Field
Officers
Internal inspections, trainings and mobilisation
TanCert Visit, train and mobilise producers to form ICS in order
to guarantee compliance to organic standards
IMO External inspections
Private Premier Buy cashew nuts, provide inputs and loans, training on
Sector Cashew organic cashew production including recognising and
Industries / scouting for disease and sulphur spraying, dug wells for
Fida villagers both to reward good farmers and also for the
general community, concrete and iron sheeting for local
schools, build cashew nut store
Consumers Provide a market for goods, make choices when buying
and are the ultimate consumers of the foodstuffs
N.B. Acronyms are elaborated on the title page.
Despite the individual importance of all these institutions, relationships between them
have been strained. To take the widely lamented example of the buyer and the farmer,
PCI pays for transport and inputs for the organic farmer. The provision of sulphur is a
way to maintain farmer loyalty. Nevertheless, the price of the cashews barely covers
the costs of production (including inputs and labour) and therefore it appears to some
like a barter trade of cashews for sulphur, with profit being extracted largely by the
buying companies. On the other hand, PCI is having a problem of not being able to
recover loans, reportedly losing 12 million Tshs last year due to non-repayment.
Currently there is little loyalty of the producers to the buyers. Access to sulphur on
credit and loans are only barely adequate as an incentive for farmers to improve the
quality of their production and storage practices. There is limited contact between
106

farmers and the PCI management, and as a result there are significant
misunderstandings and distrust particularly on the part of farmers.
This is just a snapshot of the highly complex institutional linkages that characterise
the system. If stakeholders are serious about respecting the ecological imperative and
meeting the needs of the farmer, they should work together to foster trust through a
healthy level of collaboration and communication on matters concerning the farming
environment. This would reverse the negative images and mental models that are
currently held, and help partners serve the farmers more effectively.
Opportunities for Improving System Sustainability
This section highlights key entry points (geographical, institutional, thematic) for
improving the projects. Although a range of strategies are presented (could be read as
a menu), success of all of them hinges on first building human and social capital for
sustainability. The introduction of technologies, development of new cash crops, etc.
will be of little help without corresponding expansion of awareness and new ways of
working with others.
Organic cashew production
Cashew exports are a very valuable source of foreign exchange income in Tanzania.
By embracing high quality organic production, producers can exploit the demand for
these nuts. There is potential to dramatically increase the amount of income from
cashew nuts by increasing the proportion of processed cashew kernels exported
(currently 90% of cashews are being exported raw from Tanzania). PCI’s operations
would be improved by finding ways to market lower grades of organic cashews and
also by converting the entire processing line to organic. This would reduce the time,
energy and expense needed to modify the procedures from conventional operations to
comply with organic standards every year. It would also reduce the risks of
contamination of the organic product.
Mkuranga district has substantial potential as a major organic cashew nut supplier,
although the prices need to reflect the superior quality of the product, i.e. the same or
higher than prices for conventional cashew nuts. In the light of experience,
particularly the dramatic variation in prices, it may be better to focus first on farmers
who have enough assets to withstand shocks in the system.
The most common form of pest management is sulphur spraying. However, since the
input is easily available on credit, there is superficially a low incentive to reduce its
use. However, there are many ways that the farmers can reduce their use of sulphur,
and thereby their accumulation of debts (which are deducted from the price given for
the cashews after harvest), dependence on external inputs and possibly long-term soil
acidification.
More technical knowledge and sensitisation is needed on practices such as pruning,
stumping and in situ grafting. EPOPA and CDC recommend hygienic practices such
as cleaning and trashing to allow enough aeration and reduce the places harbouring
pests and disease. Thinning also has the effect of increasing yields since fruits grow
on the outside of the canopy. Cashew nut trees should be spaced at 12x18 metres
when intercropped with citrus or mango trees, annuals and legumes such as cowpeas.
107

Whilst changing the environment of the tree and farm to allow more sun and wind by
lopping branches and strategically removing trees with lower production levels has
proven effective in reducing the risk of fungal powdery mildew disease many farmers
have not adopted these practices. There needs to be an assessment of the local context
and appreciation of the factors that cause farmers to reject certain techniques and
adopt others. Since many of the farmers are elderly, labour is short and implements
such as chainsaws are not available, implementation of these techniques is considered
too labourious for some.
Sulphur use could also be reduced through scouting techniques to monitor levels of
disease and spraying only if above a threshold of more than 10 branches in 100.
According to an Envirocare booklet on natural plant protection, Neem, urine, milk
and ashes can also be used to control powdery mildew disease (Envirocare, 2005). A
number of farmers have been successfully using maji moto ants to biologically control
helpelitis. The CDC also recommends urine and soap or Neem to control the main
cashew pest, helpelitis. More farmers need training and sensitisation on these
possibilities.
Another improvement on the use of sulphur would be a Thiovet Jet, a sulphur
fungicide manufactured by Sygenta in Switzerland. According to product literature,
this type does not causes acidification, although it is water-based and would therefore
require a reliable water source (currently not available).
Other uses of the cashew
The cashew tree is multi-purpose, and there is significant potential to raise awareness
and develop strategies to exploit other uses of the tree.
Cashew nuts grow at the end of plants called cashew apples. These are mostly left to
rot or thrown out at the time of harvesting because they spoil within 24 hours.
However, local people make a sweet unfermented brew from the apple locally called
Togwa. Currently this is only produced in small quantities for domestic consumption,
although it is greatly enjoyed. An alcoholic brew called Ulaka is also made, although
residents are Muslim and therefore less likely to pursue this option. Besides juice, the
cashew apple may be used to make jams and jellies. Enterprising farmers who are
able to process cashew apples at the right time may find a niche market for such
products in either supermarkets or specialist health store, particularly if they are
marketed as organic. An obvious constraint is labour since these activities would need
to be done during the peak cashew nut harvesting season. In addition, such activities
depend on access to processing technology, some of which is not available in
Tanzania.
Increased awareness and training on the medicinal uses of cashew trees (oil to treat
scurvy, warts and ringworm; leaves for vitamin C deficiency and intestinal colic;
cashew apple for vitamin C deficiency; resin as an expectorant and cough remedy;
root as a purgative) would also have positive impacts on the livelihoods of the
producers through self-treatment, and possibly product development and sale.
On farms where the felling of some cashew trees is recommended, optimum use
should be made of the wood, for example as a building material (houses, boats),
firewood or charcoal. At a time when felling trees for making charcoal is illegal
108

(government directive in response to the drought conditions), such material is
particularly important as an energy source in an area remote from the benefits of
electricity.
Livelihood diversification
In order to endure various shocks, trends and seasonality, farmers need to diversify
their livelihood portfolios and invest more in other income-earning activities besides
cashew nut production. Other crops that could contribute to a multiple and dynamic
livelihood include fruit such as mangos, jack fruits and pineapples, hardwoods such as
East African teak, Moringa tree (for medicines, cosmetics etc.), arrowroot (especially
for producing sweet snacks such as Halwa), mlala grass (Hyphae coricacea) for
weaving mats, hats etc. Whilst the market is not developed palm oil is another source
of income (red palm oil sells for about 600/= Tshs per litre locally) that has potential
for development particularly when as a feedstock for newly-emerging biofuels.
Farmers in Mkuranga district (particularly in Sotele) are at a distinct advantage in so
far as they are relatively near the Dar es Salaam market (40km).
During the second focus group in Kerekese, participants developed a strategy for
producing arrowroot (ulanga in Kiswahili, food is locally called wanga). This local
tuber is widely available, although not currently cultivated but harvested from the
wild. It also commonly invades cashew farms, and appears to be shade-loving. The
strategy produced is replicated below:
Action How Who When Needs
Produce
arrowroot
for food
and sale
! Collect seeds from the
bush
! Plant in farm – FO has
volunteered ½ acre
! After 1 year harvest
white part of root and
leave the black part in
the ground
! Grind with traditional
sticks / stones
! Filter with a white cloth
! Cool with water 3 times,
also to reduce bitterness
! Spread out in sun for one
day
! Use for foods such as
ugali, bagia, haalwa
mixed with coconut etc. –
home consumption / sale
Groups of
men and
women
July /
August
Milling /
grinding
machines,
market
research,
enough water
The production of arrowroot appears to be a viable strategy, and would strengthen the
organic agricultural system. The knowledge, labour and motivation exists. If the FO
undertakes to mobilise people around this venture, it may stimulate the formation of
other local production groups. Arrowroot is currently sold for 200-300/= Tshs per kg
and there are also export possibilities. One other advantage of the plant is that it is not
109

stolen by baboons and monkeys, although porcupines do have a habit of digging them
up.
Since cashew nut production is a seasonal activity, such alternative crops would make
better use of time over the agricultural year. Farmers could make use of off-season
periods for productive activities such as farm management, small-scale enterprises,
group mobilization, on-farm research and visits.
Whilst the felling of trees specifically for the manufacture of charcoal (the main
alternative economic activity to cashew nut production) is not particularly
environmentally-friendly, there may be significant opportunities in using excess
cashew trees and coconut stumps for charcoal-making. There are also efforts to
introduce a more efficient charcoal-making technology into the area, in order to make
the activity more commercially viable.
Other plans, for example to establish small-scale fishing businesses and fish ponds,
could also be explored and developed. (See above list of economic activities)
Environmental awareness
Sensitisation on a range of environmental practices would allow farmers to make
informed decisions in the management of their natural resources. Key areas are soil
fertility management, responsible rubbish disposal, and the use of fire.
It would be good to apply scientific techniques to soil analysis, and also to conduct a
study on the causes and effects of fire. Several farmers claimed that soil fertility in the
area has been declining and it would be useful to isolate the main reason. Modern
Scientific Knowledge (MSK) in combination with Rural Peoples’ Knowledge (RPK)
(i.e. Indigenous Technical Knowledge – ITK) can play a role in improving the
sustainability of livelihoods.
Whilst members of the local groups were trained on compost-making, they had yet to
practice it. This is partly because of the shortage of water which is needed for
composting. Male cashew farmers appeared to be largely unaware of compost-making
techniques, instead mixing kitchen wastes with non-decomposable material and
burning it.
Soil and Water Conservation in some higher relief areas could be strengthened by
considered planting of contour hedges such as the multi-purpose grass Vertiver. This
is also a good source of composting material and, if planted continuously, a barrier to
vermin.
Whilst it is a permitted organic input, sulphur use can lead to soil deterioration, and
farmers who apply the element mentioned the side-effects on health, for example
experiencing burning in the throat and eyes when spraying. Locally-available
botanical pesticides such as Neem and papaya leaves have significant potential as an
alternative plant protection, although more research and on-farm experimentation is
needed in order to determine doses etc. Pyrethrum and/or Tephrosia may also be used
in the control of caterpillars and grasshoppers, although these are less commonly
found.
110

Whilst not exclusively promoting OA, the Original Cashew nut Improvement
Network for East and South Africa funded by the Holland-based Common Fund for
Commodities, which is supervised by Naliendele, has the potential to disseminate
knowledge and technologies for sustainable cashew nut production.
Input provision
In order to implement improved agricultural practices, farmers need access to a range
of inputs most importantly water, but also chainsaws to fell surplus trees and cut large
branches, sharp penknives for grafting, bicycles, concrete for livestock urinecollection
systems and Neem or other crop processing equipment. Provision of such
inputs could bring greater net benefits than sulphur for cashew farmers currently
supplied by the company on credit and the government through the input supply trust
fund.
Farmer Organisation
Strong farmers groups would be in a better position to negotiate prices. The efficient,
modernised and locally-owned market in Kinole village, Mkuyuni division in
Morogoro could give inspiration to farmers from Mkuranga. It is recommended that
farmers be supported to visit well-established farmers groups in order to learn more
about management. This would also help to cultivate an open attitude to change,
experimentation and culture of visiting and learning from each other. The national
farmers network, MVIWATA, can play a key role in strengthening the organisation of
farmers groups in the area.
Farmers in Sotele have already had the idea to form a cooperative for all local groups
involved in a wide range of economic activities from tomato production to forestry.
This would be coordinated by the district leaders, and would enable the groups to
access loans under the NSGRP (or MKUKUTA) strategy. According to the farmers,
strong organisation would help the farmers to have a voice. A committee is already in
place. Registering the local groups is a first step that allows the members to open bank
accounts and access loans.
Institutional Relationships
Improving relationships between stakeholders is possible if all act out of good faith,
with patience and mutual respect. At a fundamental level, the activities of
government, civil society and private sector complement one another. The District
Councillor’s suggestion to ‘open a new chapter’ should therefore be embraced
wholeheartedly, and improved working relationships between different institutions
should be a priority. Likewise, EPOPA’s invitation to organise a one-day visit to the
PCI factory in Dar es Salaam and Kerekese farmers is a positive development, and
would help to strengthen relationships between Fida, EPOPA, the District authorities
and farmers. Making the different interests, perceptions and values of the various
actors explicit would help to build mutual understanding and develop a culture of
trust.
In particular, the study has found synergies and potential areas for enhanced
collaboration between the PCI cashew project and the organic activities of the local
groups. It is not clear why the ICS already in place in the cashew project cannot be
modified to cover inspection of other crops and thereby allow local groups to sell their
products as certified organic. This would require joint decisions on the part of some of
111

the main stakeholders including TanCert, PCI Field Staff, MARI and EPOPA.
Ultimately such an arrangement would be more “organic” since the production system
would be considered as a whole.
Also, adherence to the terms of the legally-binding contract by both farmers and
buyers would also improve the relationships. This would involve farmers selling
exclusively to PCI and PCI buying all cashews at a better price than other buyers.
Farmers should be aware of their rights and be able to take appropriate steps should
conditions of the contract be broken.
Market research and development
Participatory Market Research (PMR), which exposes farmers to different markets in
a systematic way by a PMR group on behalf of the broader community would help to
make organic agriculture more economically viable. This could be followed by
participatory prioritization of options (e.g. through pair-wise ranking, cost-benefit
analyses, etc.)
Members of Umoja ni Nguvu mentioned a desire to open a small shop locally in
Sotele. Such a shop would enable the group to expand cassava processing activities,
and market freshly baked cassava products including chips, cakes, doughnuts, etc.
In order to improve the viability of organic production, there needs to be simultaneous
awareness-raising of the local population on the health and environmental advantages
of organic food and farming.
112

Conclusion
In conclusion we may ask does OA help the farmer, and if so how? In so far as the
CDR farmer seeks food, nutrition, increased incomes and ‘development’ for example
in the form of improved housing, OA can assist him/her to achieve livelihood
outcomes. However, on the basis of research findings, the organic cashew project
does not significantly reduce the susceptibility of smallholders to loss of welfare by
mitigating risks or by improving their asset base. The benefits of linkages with
external institutions, improved knowledge through trainings and increased yields are
cancelled out by the disadvantages of over-reliance on a single cash crop, volatile
market prices and problematic input supply arrangement with buying company.
Although Muungano are not yet certified organic, their adoption of OA appears to be
much more sustainable, ecologically, socially and economically. To a greater extent
they rely on internal natural and social resources. Pursued in this way (with a greater
emphasis on environmental and social sustainability than on economic
competitiveness) OA appears to be better served for improving the sustainability of
livelihoods by enabling smallholders to cope with and recover from shocks and
stresses.
The following summary seeks to answer the question:
In what ways does the practice of organic agriculture in the two initiatives influence
the ecological integrity, social equity and economic effectiveness of farmer
livelihoods?
Aspect of
Organic initiative
sustainability
Type 1
Type 2
Organic cashew project
Muungano local groups
+ - + -
Ecological Agricultural Liberal use of Training and
training " sulphur " soil provision of inputs
mulching acidification " intensification
of components of
Improved Emphasis on the farm system
pest/disease cashews " (e.g. amaranth
control and neglect of other cultivation) "
cashew tree crops " reduced increased yields
management agrobiodiversity
(cleaning,
Increased soil
pruning etc.) "
cover and
increased cashew
improved Soil and
productivity,
Water
reduced sulphur
Conservation
use
techniques "
increased soil
PCI contract and
promises of
premium prices
" increased
cashew nut
moisture
yields
Social Record keeping
in the ICS "
improved
knowledge of
Registration of
selected farmers in
the project area "
increased
Formation of local
groups "
increased culture of
visiting and
Entry of a wide
range of institutions
whose goals and
activities are not
113

farms e.g.
number of trees
Links with
external
institutions such
as Naliendele "
improved
knowledge and
social capital
Mobilisation
around
recommended
practices "
formation of a
youth group
Economic Contract with
PCI " assured
market
Increased yields
" theoretically
increased
earnings
Cash crop
alternative to
coconuts,
pineapples,
cassava etc. "
raised incomes
marginalisation of
other farmers
Strong incentive to
increase the yields
and quality of
cashew nuts "
reduced livelihood
portfolio
Contract with PCI
" obliged to sell
cashews even
though price may
be unfavourable
Enticement of
inputs on credit and
cash loans " debts
learning from one
another’s’ farms,
improved
cooperation
between farmers
Improved
vegetable
production "
diverse high
quality crops "
more varied and
nutritious diet for
all family members
Introduction of
new productive
elements in the
farming systems
including
vegetables "
livelihood
diversification and
increased incomes
Income from sale
of vegetables "
greater
independence and
empowerment of
women
Provision of inputs
by supporting
organisations "
improved farm
operations
always transparent
" reduced
ownership of the
development process
by local farmers
It is worth reporting that one of the key actors in PCI who has supervised the whole
organic cashew nut project found that there had been no changes to the livelihoods of
the smallholders, and that they were the same as when they started. Similarly, central
figures in the local organic vegetable-producing groups commented that it was still
too early to assess the impact that OA has had on livelihoods.
It should be noted that the findings in this report are derived from a ten-day stay in
Mkuranga district, and are probably greatly influenced by the seasonality of
agricultural activities. The visit took place in the first fortnight of February, near the
end of the main harvesting season. The main agricultural activities being undertaken
by farmers were pruning of cashew trees and preparing the land for cassava and rice
in anticipation of the long rains. Following the failure of the 2005 short rains, all
farmers in the area were facing severe water shortages which stymied most planting
operations.
114

In some respects this is the ideal time to assess whether OA has made livelihoods
more sustainable, since they were being put to the test as a result of the drought and
exceptionally low prices for cashew nuts on the world market. On the basis of the
research findings, however, the forms of OA currently being practised in Mkuranga
are not sufficient to meeting the livelihood goals of the rural population. However,
there are many opportunities for strengthening the existing systems to make them
more environmentally sound, socially just and economically viable.
How can organic agriculture be developed for the benefit of farmer?
Findings support the original hypothesis that OA which comprises both a community
and commodity focus is needed in order to secure sustainable livelihoods for
smallholders. This would make the most efficient use of available resources in the
current institutional context and build upon existing livelihood strategies.
In Mkuranga district, the ideal situation would be for the two projects with their
differing orientations to collaborate and combine the two strands of empowering
farmers and producing high quality products. However, the issue needs to approached
sensitively, and will not be truly sustainable without an internal drive (selfmobilisation
as opposed to passive participation – see Appendix). Integration of
commodity and community focuses of OA would be facilitated by having an in-built
mechanism to ensure that organic initiatives address all aspects of sustainability
including agro-biodiversity, water security and livelihood security.
One idea for embracing holism in this way would be to have an Organic Taskforce or
committee for each geographical region engaged in OA, including representatives
from all the various stakeholder groups, who together would develop an integrated
organic action plan to establish an ICS with multiple objectives. They would also be
a focal point for information dissemination and grassroots mobilisation.
One way to encourage this would be for organisations explicitly supporting OA in the
country such as the Tanzanian Organic Agricultural Movement (TOAM) or TanCert
to critically examine the way in which ICS systems are designed, and to prepare a
Kiswahili manual on establishing an ICS which addresses areas currently being
overlooked particularly ownership and participation. Multiple objectives to build into
a holistic organic farm management system include building human resources,
fostering trust, sustainable natural resource management, improving access to
productive resources, remunerative employment, strengthening markets, infrastructure
and institutions, applying research and technology, good governance and trade
policies.
The efforts of women to improve the organic farm system would be supported
through positive discrimination and explicit gender policies such as registering them
on growers’ lists, in recognition of their vital contribution to food crop production.
Lessons may be drawn from recent efforts by IFOAM to promote Participatory
Guarantee Systems (PGS) 8 .
8 See the Participatory Guarantee Systems / Concept Working Paper at
http://www.ifoam.org/about_ifoam/standards/pgs.html
115

There are many reasons why (collective) action of this sort has not yet taken place.
Not least are the attitudes, motives and awareness of individuals. Even where the will
exists there are often limited resources such as time and personnel. Also, such
initiatives are unlikely to be taken unless there is a facilitating agency that initiates the
whole process.
Farmers in these villages are in a unique position to recognise and strengthen organic
agricultural practices both as a means to improve nutrition and household food
security, and to provide a secure income. If the stakeholders are serious about
improving the sustainability of the overall system, there are many potential avenues to
explore – environmental, social and economic. Underpinning these is the imperative
to build human and social capital particularly of the farmers, but also of their
supporting institutions.
116

APPENDIX 4
January 26, 2006
R.e. Interactive Conference on the Future of the Organic Sector in Tanzania
Dear Sir / Madam,
You are hereby invited to attend a two-day interactive conference to create a shared
vision for the future of the organic sector in Tanzania, to be held at the Institute of
Continuing Education (ICE) at Sokoine University of Agriculture (SUA) in Morogoro
on March 1 st and 2 nd 2006.
The purpose of the conference is to draw together 15-30 key actors in the organic
sector in order to think strategically about future directions of organic agricultural
systems in Tanzania. How can organic agriculture be oriented towards mitigating
risks and improving livelihood security for smallholders? The process will build upon
the newly developed Strategic Plan of the Tanzanian Organic Agricultural Movement
(TOAM). The goal is for every participant to take away an individual plan of action
that they can carry out in collaboration with others.
The conference will take the form of guided conversations around main themes, group
activities interspersed with short presentations. Expected outputs include statements,
visions and strategies on the development of the organic sector in Tanzania. These
will be shared amongst the wider organic community and the public, particularly
through a press conference involving local media. A tentative outline for the
conference (which may be subject to change) is included below.
Proceedings will be in English, although if any of the participants require translation
the organisers will do their best to arrange this on request.
Lunch and refreshments will be provided for all participants on both days. There will
be possibility for accommodating participants travelling from outside of Morogoro at
the ICE hostel at SUA on Wednesday night. Kindly confirm in advance if you will
need accommodation.
The conference room will have an Information desk with reference books, papers and
publications on organic agriculture. You are invited to bring any other information
materials that you would like to share and also organic products from your project /
region for display.
I very much hope that you will be able to join us in Morogoro. Your inputs will be
highly valued for you are the future organic agriculture in Tanzania! Looking
forward to the pleasure of your company.
Yours truly,
Petra Bakewell-Stone.
117

Tentative Timetable
Wednesday March 1 st 2006
Time Action Activity Responsible
1030 Arrival and Opening Petra / Sibuga
1035 Introductions All
1045 Organic Agriculture at SUA Dr. Maerere /
Dr. Nyange
1100 Share and synthesise History & Status of Leonard Mtama,
knowledge on organic Organics in Tanzania TanCert
1130 food and farming Organic principles and
practices
Petra, All
1200
Key issues in Tanzanian
organics
All
1300 Lunch All
1400 Vision 2015 – The Guided Visioning Dr. Geir Lieblein,
Future of Organics
UMB
1500
Enrichment of Visions All
1715 Video: Food for Life All
1730 End of day
Thursday March 2 nd 2006
Time Action Activity Responsible
0830 Summary of previous day Petra
0845 Action planning Group discussions - Dev.
of strategies
All
1200 Feedback and reflection All
1230 Lunch All
1330 Press Conference Poster presentations of
visions, declarations and
action plans
All participants,
journalists
1530 Closure and departures Dr. Geir Lieblein /
Jordan Gama,
TOAM
N.B. If, for any reason, you are unable to attend, kindly consider sending a
representative from your organisation / project who has in-depth knowledge of
organic agriculture and who will be able to contribute fully to the discussion and give
feedback to other members.
For further information contact:
Petra Bakewell-Stone
Department of Crop Science & Production (DCSP)
P.O. Box 3005
Sokoine University of Agriculture (SUA)
Morogoro, TANZANIA
Mobile: 0748 551424 / 0744 857029
E-mail: dadapatra@hotmail.com
Institutional affiliation:
Masters student of Agroecology
Dept. of Plant & Environmental Sciences
Norwegian University of Life Sciences
(UMB), P.O. Box 5003, N-1432 Ås
NORWAY
Mobile: +47 48036170
E-mail: petrab@student.umb.no
118

APPENDIX 5
Background Information to Stakeholder Forum
In 2004 Sokoine University of Agriculture (SUA) in Morogoro, with support from the
Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Norad) and the Norwegian
University of Life Sciences (UMB) initiated the Programme for Agricultural and
Natural Resources Transformation for Improved Livelihoods (PANTIL).
In order to promote research and farmers empowerment, PANTIL provides six
openings for post-graduates from Norway to do research in Tanzania. Under this
Young Professionals Scheme, the decision was taken to support a study of the
developing organic sector in Tanzania, which is linked to other research efforts at
SUA.
The overall aim is to assess and enhance organic agriculture’s (OA) contribution to
sustainable livelihoods and food security amongst smallholders in Tanzania. The
study is in partial fulfilment of a Masters in Agroecology at UMB. Work on this MSc
thesis started in November 2004 and is expected to last until June 2006, including
three months fieldwork in Tanzania (January – March 2006).
The central research question is: ‘How can OA be developed for the benefit of the
smallholder in Tanzania?’ This will be addressed through two whole-project case
studies and multi-stakeholder involvement, the main methods adopted to analyse the
dynamics of OA at the local and national level respectively. A three-phase research
process which moves from case studies and key informant interviews at the local level
to a national-level seminar and then verification and presentation of findings back at
the local level will attempt to capture the dynamics of OA at both spatial scales and
the interactions between them.
This interactive conference will provide a forum for both the researcher and other
participants to present their activities and findings since last meeting. In the tradition
of action research, however, the stakeholder forum will move beyond reflection and
also aim to refine some of the key sections of the TOAM Strategic Plan, clarify the
future-wanted situation (Vision 2015) and converge around ideas for individual and
joint actions.
119

APPENDIX 6
NEWS RELEASE: Growth of the Organic Movement in Tanzania
The national umbrella organisation for organic agriculture, Tanzania Organic
Agricultural Movement (TOAM), is launching its 2006-2008 Strategic Action Plan in
order to boost awareness of organic agriculture in the country, develop local and
international markets and strengthen standards and certification.
Around 30 key actors in the organic sector will be meeting at the Institute of
Continuing Education (ICE), at Sokoine University of Agriculture (SUA) in
Morogoro on March 1-2 2006 in order to plan actions to achieve a shared Vision 2015
for the future of organic food and farming in Tanzania. Stakeholders present will
include producers, processors, exporters, operators, certifiers, inspectors, researchers,
educators, and representatives from both the government and Non-Governmental
Organisations (NGOs).
The organic agricultural sector is currently the fastest growing food sector.
Worldwide growth rates in organic food sales have been in the range of 20-25%
annually for over a decade.
Certified organic agriculture emerged in Tanzania in the early 1990s. Amongst the
pioneering projects are Luponde organic tea from Iringa, Meatu organic cotton from
Shinyanga and Kimango Farm producing organic spices and teas in Morogoro.
Organic agriculture has already gained substantial support amongst farmers and their
supporting institutions. There are currently 23 certified projects in Tanzania (16 for
export and 7 for the local market). This runs parallel to the realisation that pursued as
a way of improving the sustainability of agricultural systems, organic agriculture can
contribute to ecological health, agro-biodiversity, local food security and self-reliance.
The majority of certified organic land in Tanzania (estimated at 15,000 ha) is under
the production of both traditional export crops including coffee, tea and cotton, and
non-traditional export crops such as spices. Horticulturalists are also adopting the
holistic farm management system in order to produce fruits and vegetables, both fresh
and processed, for the domestic and international market.
Expanding Northern markets, such as the European Union, provide good prospects for
increasing returns on climate-specific crops such as nuts, spices and essential oils. The
market growth for organic foods in the UK, for example, is 12% per year and a large
proportion of that is imported—currently about 70% of the UK fruit market is
imported, particularly citrus and tropical fruits.
There are also promising opportunities for marketing organic food locally with
several specialist and general stores in the largest towns (Dar es Salaam, Morogoro,
Arusha) supplying the needs of organic consumers. Whilst the market has thus far
been dominated by relatively affluent expatriates and educated middle-classes,
increasingly ordinary Tanzanians are turning to organic food particularly when
recommended by doctors, and due to the nutritional advantages for HIV/AIDS
sufferers.
120

Organic agriculture offers a very real and integrated way to achieve the development
goals laid down in national policies such as the National Strategy for Growth and
Reduction of Poverty (NSGRP / Mkakati wa Kukuza Uchumi na Kupunguza
Umaskini Tanzania, or MKUKUTA in Kiswahili) and the Development Vision 2025,
not least those of food self-sufficiency and food security.
The issue of food security is closely linked to that of energy security. At a time when
oil sells for over $100 per barrel and is only set to rise, energy considerations are
another powerful impetus propelling us towards the uptake of organic agriculture.
High oil prices give rise to higher costs of fuel and industrial inputs. It takes five
tonnes of oil to produce just one tonne of fertiliser. Thus farmers are well advised to
reduce dependence on external inputs, and maximise the use of internal and
renewable resources.
Organic agriculture may be broadly defined as an environmentally and socially
sensitive food system. According to the Basic Standards of the International
Federation of Organic Agricultural Movements (IFOAM), ‘organic agriculture is a
whole system approach based upon a set of processes resulting in a sustainable
ecosystem, safe food, good nutrition, animal welfare and social justice. Organic
production therefore is more than a system of production that includes or excludes
certain inputs’.
Furthermore, the “organic” label denotes compliance with specific production and
processing methods. The first national certification body, TanCert, has developed
standards for both local and international markets, and provides inspections and
certification services for organic entrepreneurs. Once certified, producers and
processors can display the exclusive Tanzanian organic logo which assures customers
that food production meets organic standards, and helps producers get a premium
price for their high quality produce. TanCert is currently preparing its application for
IFOAM Accreditation which will dramatically improve Tanzania’s access to organic
markets worldwide.
For further information contact:
Petra Bakewell-Stone, SUA dadapatra@hotmail.com Mob. 0748 551424
Leonard Mtama, TanCert nadimtama@hotmail.com Tel. 022 2124441
www.tancert.org
Jordan Gama, TOAM gamajam2002@yahoo.com Tel. 022 2124441
121

Session Planning
APPENDIX 7
Organic principles and practice in Tanzania – Group Work (1hr 10mins)
Purpose:
Process:
Clarify the context
Create common understanding of organic agriculture
Unearth key issues / themes
Raise questions that matter
Introduce the Café process (guidelines, etiquette, logistics etc.)
Ask participants to reflect individually on the questions below and
write down their answers on a post-it:
1. WHAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ASPECT OF ORGANIC AGRICULTURE
TO YOU?
2. WHAT CHALLENGE, IF RESOLVED, WOULD RADICALLY IMPROVE THE
STATE OF ORGANIC AGRICULTURE IN YOUR AREA / THE COUNTRY?
Sharing in six groups of five people each, which then come up with
one-line definitions of what organic means to them.
Answers to Q.2 to be stuck on flip-chart paper on table, and
discussions noted down around them, including new questions, issues
etc. that arise in the conversation
Groups circulate around the tables leaving the host remaining.
Cross-pollination of ideas
Return to “home tables” and share
Each group to select one question that if resolved would most radically
improve the state of organic agriculture
This question is written in big block letters on A3 paper phrased:
How to ………? or
In what ways might we …………..?
Table hosts present questions to whole group and sticks the question
on one of the flipcharts stuck on the walls. The title of each flipchart is
one of TOAM’s 5 Pillars of Action and 2/3 flipcharts are left blank.
These can be re-grouped if necessary.
1. Market development
2. Standards and certification
3. Research and education
4. Policy and legislation
5. Institutional development
122

Outcome:
Participants share immediate reactions and comments on the
presentations
Mutual understanding of what organic agriculture means to different
stakeholders
Focus areas identified for development of strategies
Creating a shared vision (2hrs 25mins)
Purpose:
Process:
Motivate participants through a strong image of a future
attractor
Build-consensus on the future directions of the sector
Focus strategic agenda for day 2
Ask participants to sit comfortably, preferably with eyes closed, legs
uncrossed etc. and then read through the following with adequate
pauses:
It is the year 2015. An exciting organic initiative that you have been involved with for
many years has been more successful than you ever anticipated. It has gained
widespread support from the local community. Generous partners have contributed a
wealth of expertise and support. The initiative has become a model for the
development of organic agriculture in Tanzania, and there has also been rising
interest from the government, researchers, journalists, the agricultural community
and general public. What has taken place? ………….How has the system changed?
………………
You have been invited to present the initiative at a conference at SUA. The audience is
large and mixed. It includes your close collaborators, politicians and all are curious
to know the secrets of your success.
It is the month of March, and it has just rained making the air fresh. The sun shines
brightly on the green campus. People look smart and colourful. Now you are at the
front of the hall and someone is introducing you.
You start to describe what has taken place and how the food and farming system of
your area has been transformed and people are reaping the benefits.
After thinking this through, participants can jot down key aspects on a
pad, and are also invited to doodle, draw and be creative in visualizing
the transformation.
Sharing in groups, listening carefully to visions of others
Patterns and trends noted on flip-chart paper
123

Outcome:
Aspects of visions that resonate with everyone are incorporated into a
shared vision 2015
Groups mingle and people enrich their thoughts
Participants return to “home” tables and make vision statements which
are written in big block letters on A3 paper
Table hosts present shared visions
Visions are attached to flip-chart and facilitator underlines key points
On the basis of this the whole group negotiates an overall shared vision
which could be phrased:
To have an organic sector that …………………….
Shared vision 2015 statement
Drawings / mind maps of group visions
Joint ownership
Clearer understanding of the fate towards which we move
Development of strategies – Group work (3hrs 15mins with breaks)
Purpose:
Process:
Converge on key questions (challenges and opportunities)
Generate ideas for actions
Relate this to individual working context
Strategise steps needed
Identify partners, form alliances
Give clear instructions (on hand-outs?)
Participants choose a question that concerns them and stand by the
flip-chart on which it is written. Possibility to formulate new
question, and add it to existing flip-charts
Take note of others in same group (should be between 3 & 5 people).
Participants scatter for 15 minutes an formulate individual plans of
action around question, keeping in mind their vision 2015
Fill out table that’s been provided
Action Activity (how?) Who? When?
Identify the hindering and supporting forces
Participants reassemble and find partner who listens to the person
explain their Action Plan and asks is it New? Appealing? Possible?
Action Plans may be modified as a result.
124

People go into groups defined by which flip-chart they stood next to
Share ideas for action
Try to make joint plan of action which can be expressed in the
statement which may be phrased:
In order to ….(goals), …..(key actors) resolve to
……….(action) through ………..(activities) by ……..(when).
This is written in big block letters on a flip chart.
Venn diagram is drawn on flip chart to show the key actors, their roles,
importance (shown by size) and relationships (shown by position).
Arrows may be drawn on to illustrate flows of information,
knowledge, resources etc.
Outcome:
Each group to present a strategy, along with the Venn diagram of key
actors for one question to the plenary and this is followed by questions
and discussion
Individual / joint Plans of Action
Partnerships identified / formed
Feedback and reflection (15mins)
Purpose:
Process:
#
$
%
Evaluate the conference
Reflect
Derive lessons for future
Individual reflection on highlights, main lessons, feelings
These are noted on post-its and attached along a Mood Monitor to
show how participants feel and why
Participants invited to consider the question:
WHAT WILL I REMEMBER MOST ABOUT THIS MEETING?
Outcome:
Conference evaluated
Lessons carried forward
125

Press conference
Purpose:
Process:
Outcome:
Make events within the organic movement public
Stimulate public awareness and debate
(Precise format of Press Conference to be planned in collaboration
with participants at the beginning of Day2)
Radio / TV / Newspaper journalists invited into conference
Press pack provided
Introduction to Press conference
3/4 willing participants sit at front of room and present key themes that
have emerged over the conference, based on the key challenges, Vision
statement and Declarations on strategies
All participants have opportunity to relay messages, publicise
their projects, causes, display products, literature, answer questions etc.
Radio / TV and article coverage
126

APPENDIX 8
Organic Stakeholders’ Forum
Summary Report
On March 1-2 2006, a researcher from the Norwegian University
of Life Sciences (UMB) organised a two-day interactive conference
on the future of the organic sector in Tanzania at the Institute of
Continuing Education (ICE) of Sokoine University of Agriculture
(SUA) in Morogoro, Tanzania.
In addition to sharing and synthesising knowledge on the rapidly
growing sector, participants engaged in activities to refine the
Strategic Plan 2006-8 of the Tanzanian Organic Agriculture
Movement (TOAM) and created a shared Vision 2015 and joint
strategies for addressing the major challenges.
Petra Bakewell-Stone
March 15, 2006
Contents
List of Participants 2
Introduction 3
Organic Agriculture at Sokoine University of Agriculture 3
Genesis and Development of Organic Agriculture in Tanzania
Interim Report on Research into Organic Agriculture
4
5
The World of Organic Agriculture 5
Organic Vision 2015 6
Key Challenges 6
Joint Strategies 7
Press Conference 10
Conclusion 10
Appendices
1 Background to the Forum 11
2 Programme
3 Acronyms
127

List of participants
Organisation Name Phone E-mail
SUA, Crop Science Kallunde P. Sibuga 0744
974528
sibuga88@yahoo.co.uk
SUA, ICE Innocent H. Babili 0748
378224
babhili@yahoo.com
SUA, Soil Science Method Kilasara 0744
493668
mmkilasara@yahoo.com
SUA, Crop Science Cornel L.
0744 rweyemamu@suanet.ac.tz
Rweyemamu
362194
SUA, Agricultural David Nyange 0744 davidnyange@hotmail.com
Economics
272573
EPOPA / Grolink Gunnar Rundgren +46
56372345
gunnar@grolink.se
TanCert Leonard Mtama 0748
490275
lm@tancert.org
TOAM Jordan Gama 0744
618484
kilimohai@excite.com
UMB Petra Bakewell-Stone 0748
551424
dadapatra@hotmail.com
Ministry of
Eutropia S. Mwasha 0744 tropiatz@yahoo.com
Livestock Dev.
449534
IFOAM / TOAM Mwatima Juma 0744
536630
mwatimajuma@yahoo.com
EPOPA Ade Towry-Coker 0745
267005
adetowrycoker@agroeco.net
KIHATA aubeda Kondo 0745
559929
kihatahq@yahoo.com
KIHATA Mary Kibiriti 0744
240403
kihatahq@yahoo.com
PELUM Tanzania Donati Senzia 0744 686
677
senzia75@yahoo.com
Envirocare Lars Grimsby 0787
071925
envirocare@Got.co.tz
TAaOP Ltd. Khamis I.
0741 khim64@hotmail.com
Mohammed
232602
Agroeco Marleen de Blécourt
Marleen.deblecourt@wur.nl
Mikese Farm Murtaza A.i Karimjee 0748
495985
UMADEP Richard A. Muvellah 0748
840886
IRTECO Mwadhini Myanza 0744
583242
MVIWATA Renath M. Kauki 023
2614184
UHAI-aanzibar Abdalla M. Mmanga 0744
340658
UHAI-aanzibar Mwawaidi A. Khatib
BCS-HAI Miriam M. Ngdmaryo 0748
397704
aAFFIDE /
Issa Mahmoud 0744
aanzibar MVIWATA
910816
mikesefarm@yahoo.com
umadep@mail.suanet.ac.tz
mwadhini@yahoo.co.uk
kaukirms@yahoo.com
uhaiznz@hotmail.com
mwanachwaya@yahoo.com
mngmaryo@yahoo.com
issaimahmoud@yahoo.com
128

Introduction
After welcoming the participants, Petra Bakewell-Stone outlined the
objectives of the forum including:
- to review the organic agenda;
- to bring stakeholders together for strengthening communication
and collaboration;
- to contribute to TOAMds Strategic Plan which highlighted lack of
coordination between stakeholders as a major weakness in
Tanzaniads organic sector;
- to bring unity and direction to the Tanzanian organic
movement; and
- to engage in participatory planning in order to build a strong
and vibrant sector.
The expected outputs included:
1. A shared Vision 2015 for the future of the organic sector, and
2. Each participant to take away with them a Plan of Action (PoA)
to carry out individually and in collaboration with others.
There followed a round of introductions. Participants (26 in total)
included producers, processors, exporters, certifiers, inspectors,
researchers, educators and representatives from both the government
and Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs).
Organic Agriculture at SUA
Dr Nyange of the Department of Agricultural Economics presented
preliminary study results from organic farming sub-project. Nyangeds
presentation focused on a comparative analysis of productivity,
profitability and economic efficiency between organic farmers and
conventional growers of cashew, pineapple and banana. Other
members of the research team are Dr Gasper Ashimogo and Dr
Emmanuel Mbiha.
Nyange informed the meeting that a total of 120 cashew growers were
surveyed in Mkuranga district in Coast Region of which 60 were
organic growers. Similar samples of banana and pineapple farmers
were surveyed in Arumeru (Arusha) and Njombe (Iringa) districts,
respectively. The study identified important participants in the supply
chains of organic products as producer groups, promoting (facilitating)
agent, certifying agent and exporting (processing) company.
Preliminary results presented were mainly descriptive statistics on
demographical profiles of organic and conventional crop growers, farm
size, input usage, crop sales, revenue, and agronomic practices by
farmers. Results suggest organic cashew growers had less unattended
cashew trees (i.e. less trees in the bush), use more sulphur, had
higher yields, received higher price and revenue from cashew nut sale.
Results from pineapple growers were less consistent but indicated
organic growers received higher price and had higher yields. These
129

observations are opposite to organic crops in formally input intensive
farming systems such as coffee where conversion to organic leads to
decreased productivity despite the increase in management intensity.
Dr. Sibuga of the Department of Crop Science and Production (DCSP)
gave an overview of the Universityds involvement in organic
agriculture. The DCSP has developed a course curriculum for organic
farming. The course contents have been discussed by relevant
committees at the Faculty level and received the approval of the SUA
senate. However, the course is yet to be offered pending a general
review of the curricula scheduled for this calendar year.
The main objective of the course is that students should acquire a
basic understanding of organic farming from agronomic,
environmental and societal perspectives, and that they should be able
to link theory to concrete farming situations.
Course contents include: definition, history, philosophy and goals of
organic farming; present status worldwide and in Tanzania; organic
farming for the market, and beyond the market logic; organic farming
and agroecological knowledge; potentials and limitations of organic
farming in crop and livestock systems (social issues, economic issues,
crop production, soil management, pest management and animal
husbandry); environmental and socio-economic implications of
organic farming; food quality and consumerd awareness of organic
produce; systems thinking and multi-perspective analysis.
Other efforts include the development of a research proposal which
will be submitted to solicit funding from local and international
sources. The proposal will seek to address aspects related to research
and training of SUA students, farmers and extension workers.
Genesis and Development of Organic Agriculture in Tanzania
Leonard Mtama of TanCert gave an overview of the history and status
of the organic agriculture sector in Tanzania.
Historical background
1898 Peramiho Organic Garden established – the garden
produced a variety of vegetables following organic
principles including use of manure and soil conservation.
It was self-claimed organic and served the Benedictine
missionaries of the area. The garden is still in
existence (see jMiaka 100 Bustani ya Peramiho by Bro.
Thomas Morrus)
1992 First certified organic production in Tanzania (now there
are more than 17 projects certified for organic production)
" ..... more!
130

2003 The Tanzanian organic certification association (TanCert),
the first local certification body was established by
organic stakeholders in Tanzania.
Organic stakeholders established the organic standards
for Tanzania
2004 Certification of organic products for the domestic market
by TanCert done
2005 TanCert started inspection services for the export mark
The Tanzania Organic Agriculture Movement (TOAM)
established
Challenges:
- low capacity to access certification costs
- limited extension services
- underdeveloped domestic market infrastructures for organic
produce
Achievements:
- local certification body established - TanCert
- organic standards for Tanzania put in place by TanCert
- trade mark for organic products
- certification for export as ljoint venture” is in place
- number of organic projects have increased from 1 in 1992 to 17
in 2005
- TOAM established
Expectations of stakeholders and the community:
- join hands (TanCert and TOAM)
- domestic market development
- research
- increase the export market
Interim Report on Research into Organic Agriculture
Petra Bakewell-Stone of UMB summarised preliminary findings from
her research into the livelihood implications of different types of
organic agriculture, including case study research on two organic
initiatives in the Coastal region. She concluded by highlighting some
key issues and focal points for intervention.
The World of Organics
Chief Executive of Grolink and former President of the Board of
IFOAM, Gunnar Rundgren shared knowledge and experience on the
development of organic agriculture worldwide. The presentation
covered emerging issues in organic agriculture relating to markets,
certification, food security and policy recommendations.
131

Organic Vision 2015
The outcome of a guided visioning was as follows:
“To have a vibrant organic sector supported by a wide range of
stakeholders that is the driving force behind agriculture in the country,
takes advantage of local and export markets and contributes to
enhanced livelihoods through quality and safe food, environmental
conservation, economic growth and sustainable development”
This was also translated into Kiswahili:
“Kuwa na sekta endelevu ya kilimo hai inayojumuisha wadau wote ili
kutoa msukumo wa kuendeleza kilimo nchini kwa kutumia fursa za
masoko ya ndani na nje ili kuboresha hali ya maisha, mazingira,
kukuza uchumi na maendeleo endelevu”
Key Challenges
Participants were asked to identify the questions that, if resolved,
would radically improve the state of organic agriculture in their area /
country. Priority questions were grouped according to TOAMds main
Pillars of Action.
Theme Questions / challenges
MARKET
DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS
AND
CERTIFICATION
RESEARCH
AND
EDUCATION
- How to access both local and international
markets for organic productsn
- How to assist farmers to cover the costs of
certificationn
- How to create awareness among small-scale
farmers on the concept of organic agriculture
and access to the marketn
- In what ways might we develop research and
training infrastructuresn
- How to raise public awareness on organic
agriculturen
- How to ensure that information and
knowledge on organic agriculture is available
to the publicn
- How to address lack of awareness on the
values and benefits of organic agriculture
amongst policy-makers, producers and
consumersn
- How to change agricultural extension services
so that they are supportive of organic
agriculturen
- How to practically change the consumption
attitudes of people on organic product usen
132

PRODUCTION
POLICY AND
LEGISLATION
INSTITUTIONAL
DEVELOPMENT
- How to acquire organic inputs for small-scale,
medium-scale and large-scale organic
farmingn
- How to encourage big farmers to engage in
organic agriculturen
- In what ways should we lobby the government
for operative organic agriculture policyn
- How to change government policy in favour of
organic agriculturen
- How to reconcile government policy on food
security with the concept of organic
agriculturen
- In what ways might we sustain coherence
among stakeholders in the organic sectorn
- How to develop the organic sector from the
bottom-upn
Joint Strategies
In addition to individual plans of action, participants formulated joint
strategies and identified the key actors that need to form working
partnerships in order to achieve stated goals and realise the shared
vision.
Theme Goal Actors* Actions Activities Timeframe
Market 1. Increase trade a) TOAM, Access markets a) conduct training a) twice a
development and sustain the BET for organic on internet market year
production of b) TOAM, products research
b) yearly
organic EPOPA,
b) participation in c) by 2008
agriculture companies
organic trade fairs d) by 2008
c) TOAM
e.g. BioFach e)
d) TOAM,
c) formulate local quarterly /
traders,
market centres weekly
TCCIA, ACT
d) create market
e) TOAM,
linkages between
BET, TanCert,
buyers / traders
TCCIA, local
and producers
newspapers,
e) develop
forum
newsletters on the
creation
organic market
(through post/email)
Standards and Minimise the a) TOAM, Reduce a) accreditation of a) by the
certification cost of
TanCert, certification TanCert to end of
certification to EPOPA, SIDA, costs
international bodies 2007
make it DANIDA
b) formulation of b) by 2007
affordable to b) TOAM,
group certification c) on-going
small-scale TanCert,
especially for small-
farmers TCCIA
scale farmers
c) producers
c) encourage largescale
producers to
get involved in
organics
Research and 1. Create TOAM, Lobbying and Consultations On-going
133

education
awareness
2. Generate and
disseminate
technologies
Production Increase organic
agricultural
production in
Tanzania
Policy and
legislation
Incorporate
organic
agriculture into
existing polity
Ministries
(AFSC, LD,
VPO), higher
learning
institutions
Ministries
(AFSC, LD,
VPO), TBS,
Tancert,
TFDA, SUA,
TOAM
Producers,
traders,
Ministries
(AFSC, LD,
LGA, IT&M,
NR, VPO),
SUA, NGOs,
KIHATA,
TOAM,
PELUM,
TanCert,
Envirocare,
EPOPA
TOAM,
government,
NGOs /
CSOs,
consumers,
producers,
traders, SUA
advocacy
Establishment
of resource
centres
Publications
Research and
training
Publications
1. Increase
availability and
use of organic
agricultural
inputs
2. Improve
training and
extension
services
Lobby the
government for
operative
national organic
agriculture
policy
Exhibitions
Exchange visits
Field days
Agricultural shows
Production of
extension manuals
Training (short- and
long-term)
Radio and TV
programmes
Exchange visits
a) inventories
organic input
sources, types,
distribution and
consumption
b) raise awareness
on the use and
availability of
organic agricultural
inputs
c) develop &
disseminate
appropriate inputs
for organic
agriculture
a) training of
trainers (extension
staff and farmer
professionals)
b) information-
sharing & exchange
a) collect &
document farmersd
competent organic
initiatives
b) disseminate
farmersd competent
initiatives through
media & other
advocacy materials
e.g. T-shirts and
leaflets
c) make individual
contact with
potential ministries
and govt. officials /
decision-makers
d) initiate an
operative integrated
& national organic
agriculture day
e) organic
interactive
conferences on
selected themes of
organic agriculture
twice yearly
2006-
2009
a) June –
December
2006
b) June
2006
c) June
2006
a) April
2006
onwards
b) August
2006
2006-
2010
134

Institutional
development
Enhance
networking and
collaboration
among
stakeholders
Researchers
(SUA, USDM,
TIPRI, NEMC,
LD, AFSC),
KIHATA,
TOAM,
PELUM,
Envirocare,
EPOPA,
companies,
consumers
* Acronyms are elaborated in below
Sustain
coherence
among organic
stakeholders
f) develop a
mechanism for 8/8
and 7/7 shows
g) establish national
and district organic
agriculture
committees
a) develop a
catalogue of
stakeholders
b) hold stakeholder
fora
c) resource
mobilisation
a) June –
Nov.
b) ongoing
c) yearly
135

Press Conference
Representatives of the private sector (Khamis Mohammed, TAaOP),
academia (Cornel Rweymamu, SUA), international agencies (Mwatima
Juma, IFOAM), producer associations (Miriam Ngdmaryo, Bonde la
Chem Chem) and civil society (Jordan Gama, TOAM) made statements
on their activities in organic agriculture, and their outlooks on the
future.
The speakers challenged the sector to address key issues including:
- mobilising smallholder suppliers to meet the large demand for
organic products, both in Africa and abroad;
- uniting the organic movement with its diverse stakeholders in
civil society, the government and the private sector;
- joining together with the IFOAM African Organic Agricultural
Centre based in Senegal to advocate on issues that are special
and specific for smallholders in Africa;
- raising awareness amongst consumers on the environmental
implications of organic production;
- making knowledge and inputs for organic agriculture more
widely available.
Conclusion
The forum was brought to a close by Jordan Gama of TOAM who
thanked everyone for their good participation. Important outcomes
included information-exchange and networking amongst stakeholders
and greater clarity on the steps needed to strengthen the countryds
organic movement.
136

Acronyms
ACT Agricultural Council of Tanzania
AFSC Ministry of Agriculture, Food Security and Cooperatives
BET Board of External Trade
CSO Civil Society Organisation
DANIDA Danish International Development Agency
DCSP Department of Crop Science and Production
EPOPA Export Promotion of Organic Products from Africa
ICE Institute of Continuing Education
IFOAM International Federation of Organic Agriculture
Movements
IT& M Ministry of Industry, Trade and Marketing
KIHATA Kilimo Hai Tanzania
LD Ministry of Livestock Development
LGA Ministry of Local Government Authority
MVIWATA Mtandao wa Vikundi vya Wakulima Tanzania
NEMC National Environment Management Council
NGO Non-Governmental Organisation
NR Ministry of Natural Resources
PELUM Participatory Ecological Land Use Management
SIDA Swedish International Development Agency
SUA Sokoine University of Agriculture
TanCert Tanzania Organic Certification Association
TBS Tanzania Bureau of Standards
TCCIA Tanzania Chamber of Commerce Industry and Agriculture
TFDA Tanzania Food and Drugs Authority
TIPRI Tanzania Pesticides Research Institute
TOAM Tanzania Organic Agriculture Movement
UMB Norwegian University of Life Sciences
USDSM University of Dar es Salaam
VPO Vice Presidentds Office
aAFFIDE aanzibar Association for Farmers and Fishermen
Development
137

APPENDIX 9
Reflections
‘The important thing is to educate the curiosity through which knowledge is
constituted as it grows and refines itself through the very exercise of knowing’
(Freire, 1997)
Research is a process of enquiry which involves asking questions out of curiosity in
order to generate new insights. By maintaining this attitude of curiosity the researcher
can reflect on what has been learnt and how it has been learnt, allowing yet new
insights and perceptions to emerge. According to Ellinor and Gerard (1998),
reflection is about ‘taking time to observe more than one event and wonder about the
connections between them, to formulate the questions that will take you to the next
level’.
Although it may seem contradictory to pause and think awhile in action research,
critical reflection is integral to action-oriented research, which seeks to use lessons
derived from action to inform and improve future action. Thus for experiential
learning to occur, “doing” needs to be complemented by “reflecting”, which entails
processing new information, relating it to what is already known, and making sense of
it by connecting it to our knowledge system. Silence is considered a prerequisite for
reflection and the development of collective intelligence since ‘it allows more subtle
levels of meaning and relationship to come forward’ (Ellinor and Gerard, 1998).
Action informs reflection, and reflection refines action, and therefore we need to give
equal weight to theory and practice in order to ‘intervene in systems in ways which
are ethically sound and environmentally and socially responsible’ (Bawden: in Zuber-
Skerritt, 1991: 19).
Action research is designed to solve particular local problems through a cycle of
reconnaissance, planning, action and re-reconnaissance (Miles & Huberman, 1994).
It is hard to pinpoint the starting point for the cyclical process of learning in this
study. On the one hand, working with an umbrella organisation of NGOs in Tanzania
to promote learning, networking and advocacy in sustainable agriculture and food
security provided a basis for exploring of the organic sector. On the other hand,
exposure to a range of agroecological methods, concepts and theories during courses,
seminars and reading provided frames through which to view the structure and
functioning of organic systems. Key events of the research can be superimposed on
Kolb’s model of the experiential learning cycle (below).
138

Accommodative
knowledge
Convergent
knowledge
Active
experimentation
Kolb’s model of the learning cycle
Concrete
experience
(scoping mission)
(partner communication, (building a preliminary
fieldwork) rich picture)
Abstract
conceptualisation
(theory-building, refining
research strategy)
Reflective
observation
Divergent
knowledge
Assimilative
knowledge
Source: Adapted from Wilson & Morren, 1990
Nevertheless the stages were not clear-cut and did not always progress in a linear
fashion. Often activities took place simultaneously, such as continuous literature
review and synthesis of both content (e.g. meeting minutes, workshop reports) and
process (e.g. examples from other action research studies, case studies, qualitative
research). For this reason, it may be more productive to refer to a “spiralling”, rather
than a “circling” (Ellinor and Gerard, 1998). Furthermore, many of activities that
were undertaken, particularly those relating to social learning and visioning, are not
comfortably encompassed in Kolb’s model of learning, except perhaps in the broad
sense that they involve active experimentation.
Subjectivity
Dover and Talbot (1987: 53) state that ‘few if any scientists are free of biases inherent
in their training, experience, and peer relationships’. Being clear about the subjective
element and motivations of the researcher is integral to action research. Moreover,
‘one can only become whole by the responsible acceptance of one’s partiality’ (Berry,
1977: 123; quoted in Kloppenburg, 1991: 539). The research started from the valueladen
premise that organic farming is a desirable and feasible alternative for
smallholder farmers in Tanzania. This apparent subjectivity is based upon objective
assessments of the benefits of organic agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa.
Rather than being a source of bias, however, these underlying assumptions give the
research an advantage over conventional experimental and investigative research
since it moves beyond analysis into action planning. Sacrificing the objective
perspective for greater richness of information has been recognised as a trade-off in
139

action research that makes it differ from traditional methods (Øritsland, 1999: in
Lerdahl, 2001). Instead of seeking to discover whether organic farming holds benefits
for Tanzanian smallholders, the research is an effort to work with partners to validate
the proposed change and facilitate the transition to organic farming and is therefore an
applied form of research and development.
In addition, the theory underlying the selection of case study sites was informed by a
set of assumptions based on previous research into food security in Tanzania
(PELUM, 2004), a literature review and key informant interviews (see Chapter 4 on
the Research Process above). Ultimately it proved difficult to test the main
proposition that ‘organic agriculture provides a sustainable solution when it
emphasises the localisation of the food system, whilst not precluding the possibility of
marketing organic produce internationally once subsistence needs have been met’,
since no examples could be found of organic initiatives producing organic goods for
both the local and the international market. Thus although two organic initiatives were
studied, one focusing on the production of cash crops for export and the other
incorporating multiple objectives including subsistence and trade, it was not possible
to directly compare on them on criteria such as income from agriculture.
Over the course of the CSR it became increasingly clear that there was significant
social and geographic overlap between the two initiatives, and therefore it was more
relevant to apply the SL framework to the organic agricultural system as a whole. In
this way, the CSR challenged my mental models and becomes a continually changing
iterative process.
In other cases, I only became aware of my assumptions when they were challenged.
For example, the notion that organic agriculture reduces dependence on external
inputs was called into question by the organic cashew nut project which led to an
increased reliance on sulphur as a means to control disease on cashew trees. This
finding illuminated the contradiction between organic principles and practices. In this
way, I have been led to reflect not only on the subjective element that guided the
research, but also how my subjectivity has been affected by the research.
Participation
It soon came to light that two opposing goals were being pursued in the design of the
research: to pinpoint a specific research question or set of questions that could define
the research strategy, guide fieldwork and documentation; and to facilitate a
participatory process for identifying research questions. By remaining open to a wide
variety of different standpoints and creating space for adaptation to the context and
for new perceptions, positions and relevant relationships, multi-stakeholder
involvement inevitably lengthens and complicates the research process, as it puts a
greater emphasis on finding the right question as opposed to answering a predetermined
question. Crucially it asks 'whose question is being addressed?' Although
this approach allows less time and resources to be dedicated to seeking answers to the
questions, importantly it means that the questions are more likely to relate to the real
needs of the stakeholders and provide information that is applicable to local contexts.
Since the aim is to benefit the farmer, topic selection was open to discussion and
efforts were made to integrate farmer knowledge and participation.
140

Similarly in the CSR, there were originally two broad objectives: information
extraction and facilitating an action-learning process. Ultimately, however, the
balance was tipped towards the former, more conventional objective of research.
Facilitating an action-learning process was found to be extremely complex in the
institutional context since the stakeholder groups were relatively hostile towards one
another and unwilling to work together and time was restrictive. For collaborative
social research to take place researchers need to join closely with participants from
the outset, and this cooperation of participants is, in turn, dependent on time and
resources. Time and resource constraints have placed pressure on the research process
at every stage. Thus when measured against criteria such as the level of participation
in the process and the level consensus reached, the CSR was less successful, than
when measured by the data output.
Ideally participatory action research is initiated by the groups for whom the research
is meant to benefit, although this is rarely the case in sub-Saharan Africa where a
great majority of the rural populace are illiterate and have limited access to formal
education. Miles and Huberman (1994) suggest that researchers make a social
contract with participants and jointly agree on such issues as the time and effort
involved, type of data collected, voluntary participation, confidentiality of material,
anonymity of participants and the benefits to informants and researchers.
Limitations on time and differences in area of expertise meant that farmers were not
fully involved in defining the process, and often decisions had to be taken on behalf of
the stakeholders e.g. with regards to the type of participatory tools used. For this
reason, the process was not fully participatory. In addition, there was no internal drive
for the research to take place, and actually the main reason for participation in the
CSR was that the farmers were ‘summoned’ by village leaders after I arrived and after
they had been informed of my presence and purpose. Ultimately these conditions are
likely to reduce the receptivity of the farmers to the research findings.
The conditions for participation in the CSR also raise the issue of the cultural
ambiguity of participation. The western perspective of participation which involves
‘the open exchange of arguments and ideas … the right to question, and … the
prerogative to be different, to conduct experiments, and to make mistakes’ differs
from the actual experience of many regions of rural sub-Saharan Africa where ‘direct
questioning and open dialogue among different subgroups are shunned, and in
subsistence economies, experimentation and mistakes are often regarded as conveying
unacceptable risks’ (Whyte, 1991). The hesitancy of many women farmers to express
theirs in the presence of (mainly male) village leaders during focus groups in the CSR
is symptomatic of these cultural differences.
This highlights the importance of rooting participation in existing cultural norms, and
of investigating what participation means and actually involves in the local and
national context of the study. In order to make the researcher/participant contract
more explicit it may have been more relevant to search for ‘forms of relationships
[that] can simultaneously accommodate prevailing socio-cultural norms and the
objective of participatory involvement in applied research’ (Whyte, 1991: 203). Even
the process of reflection itself is culturally situated since ‘statistically speaking, our
western culture is primarily extroverted’ (Ellinor and Gerard, 1998).
141

The need to be sensitive to the history and experiences of participation in rural areas
was also underscored by the suspicion and deep caution that my presence initially
generated amongst the farmers. Such a reaction in not uncommon during research in
rural areas, and has been explained by the fact that village people have often been
manipulated by powerful social forces (Chambers, 1983) and indeed I learnt that the
area has a long, and not wholly positive, history of interventions by government
research institutes, the private sector and development organisations.
Initial suspicions were greatly alleviated once I had described in detail my
organisational affiliations and villagers understood the neutrality of my position since
I was not employed by a company or development agency. In addition, having official
documentation from SUA and letters of introduction for the district officials and
village authorities proved to be very important for gaining the trust of local people. In
this way, rapport, which exists on three levels (with oneself, with team / research
partners and with clients), changed over the course of the research enabling me to
gather a great deal more data.
Direct and participant observation, including taking every opportunity to meet with
and socialise with stakeholders, ended up being extremely important methods, not
only for gathering data, but also for gaining the trust of the key actors. Participant
observation involved participating in the daily lives of stakeholders, observing and
asking questions in order to understand the experiences, underlying values and
assumptions of the stakeholders. Submergence in action, allowed phenomena and
causal relationships to be observed through firsthand experience and this led to a
greater understanding of tacit knowledge and unspoken rules. For example, drawing
water with local women and buying fruits and vegetables from the local markets
enabled me to observe more closely the gender division of labour and the daily
activities of villagers during the CSR. It is possible, however, that had I remained in
the village longer unbiased observation would have become more difficult due to
increased emotional engagement with the material.
Holism
Developing the organic sector in a holistic way requires consideration of values,
socio-political organisation, technology, knowledge and environment. For this reason,
it was important to include many different types of information, particularly during
the initial stages of the research. Due to the large amount of data generated, the field
of study appeared to be exceedingly broad and amorphous. Thus there were necessary
trade-offs between the level of detail and the usefulness of the information. Whilst it
would have been interesting to conduct an ecological audit of the case study site in
terms of biodiversity and soil fertility, the range of other socio-cultural and economic
indicators being considered precluded the possibility of undertaking a more
comprehensive environmental assessment.
In addition, approaching the field of study from a variety of different perspectives
yielded a great deal of apparent inconsistencies because the differing concerns of the
stakeholders give rise to varying capabilities, behaviour and attitudes. For example,
during the CSR it came to light that the buying company and the farmers had
completely different opinions on the destination of premium prices. This made
triangulation of sources all the more relevant. The existence of persistent and glaring
contradictions was also instructive because it highlighted problematic and unresolved
142

issues in the organic sector. Lack of clarity and doubt is characteristic of actionlearning
and can even be viewed as a necessary precursor to a deeper understanding.
The eminent pedagogue, Paulo Freire acknowledged that ‘doubts take me to
uncertainties, the only place where it is possible to work toward the necessary
provisional certainties’ (Freire, 1997: 30).
Collecting data from a wide variety of different sources and using different methods
(i.e. following the holistic approach) resulted in the identification of a multitude of
strategies relating to many different areas of organic agriculture including production,
trade, policy, regulation and institutions. However, as pointed out by Ellinor and
Gerard (1998), ‘diversity is necessary for creativity’ and for this reason the breadth of
the original research question is considered a source of inspiration and not confusion,
since it has brought to the fore many practical ways of moving forward including
innovative approaches to working with important issues such as certification and
institutional development.
Language
During the whole-project case studies some of the most revealing insights into the
goals of the systems, production methods and the values and attitudes of farmers
emerged from the use of language including metaphor. By recording how the topics
were discussed in interviews and focus groups it was possible to illuminate the
processes of collectively defining meanings and the nuances of language. For
example, the statement by one cashew grower that ‘the farmer is the hoe of organic
farming’ is a clear indication of the perceived exploitative nature of relationships in
the organic food chain. Another assertion, made by an organic vegetable grower, that
‘our children were born in amaranths’ makes clear the importance of cultivating
vegetables for family nutrition. Thus direct quotes were found to be extremely useful
in conveying the perspectives of the stakeholders.
In addition the names of the organic initiatives are also very indicative of their
orientation. Translations of the names of the local vegetable growers’ groups, which
include “Joining Together”, “Solidarity”, “Unity is Strength” and “Take Heart”,
demonstrate the spirit of their existence. The name of the organic cashew project,
“Premier”, presumable refers to the superior quality of their processed cashew nut.
This shows that the level of inclusiveness and social cohesion is less central to the
business, and highlights the fundamentally different entry points of the organic
agriculture in the two projects.
At a more profound level, the use of language in communication not only reflects but
also shapes the realities of those who use it. This leads Freire (1997: 33) to note that
‘if communication and intercommunication represent processes that speak to life
about the support system, in the existential experience they acquire a special
connotation. In this instance, both communication and intercommunication involve
the comprehension of the world’. This realisation arouses my desire to explore in
more depth the role of language and communication in developing ecologically
sustainable agriculture, both in terms of our relationships with nature, with ourselves
and with one another. As Engel and Salomon (1997) comment: ‘effective and
sustained communication is fundamental to developing and maintaining standards of
competent performance in and between human practices’. For example, an improved
understanding of the social integument of the generation and transmission of local
143

knowledge would help to foster the self-development and self-empowerment rural
peoples (Kloppenburg, 1991).
In some cases, language was also a limitation to understanding. For example, in the
early stages of the research I was asking farmers whether they composted using the
formal Kiswahili translation of composting (mbolea vunde), and I was surprised by
how few farmers were aware of the technique. Eventually, it came to light that many
farmers are not familiar with this terminology and many practice forms of composting
but refer to it using different words and phrases such as ‘kuoza udongo’ which
literally means ‘rotting the soil’.
Role of the researcher
A preliminary assessment of Tanzania's organic sector revealed the need for
knowledge synthesis, and a researcher to engage in cataloguing the organic
knowledge base, drawing together research capacity and experimentation, networking
and information dissemination. These activities were therefore built into the overall
research design and, as a result, my role as a researcher in this study has been
multifaceted and has incorporated facilitation, mobilisation and communication, in
addition to the more traditional roles of data collection, analysis and documentation.
Capitalising on the extensive experience of those already working directly in organic
agriculture also appeared to make best use of my relatively limited knowledge and
time. Research was aimed at promoting partnerships between farmers, researchers,
extensionists and policy-makers, and providing useful information in an accessible
format in order to build capacity in organic farming.
The skills needed for participative research were found to be significantly different
from those needed for orthodox research. They included self-awareness, selfreflexiveness,
facilitative skills in interpersonal and group settings, political skills and
data management skills. Facilitation involves accepting that full control of all the
relevant processes is impossible, and allows for partiality, emphasising the process
rather than the product. Researching complex, real-life cases also involves accepting
the arbitrariness of the facilitator’s role, since those concerned continue to make their
own judgements in terms of means and ends, and randomness as a result of
unintended consequences.
Unwittingly, my role was also as a catalyst. For instance, as a result of accompanying
me to the case study site, a representative of the donor agency made long overdue
contact with district officials. During this interaction, they made plans to meet again
and the district official was invited to go to the factory where cashews are processed.
This was an important development since up until this point lack of interaction had
been the source of prolific misunderstandings between the stakeholders. In addition,
my staying in the annex to the cashew store led to the nearby well being repaired.
This serves villagers living up to a several kilometres away and is an important source
of water for domestic use particularly during the dry season.
Collaborative research
Working with other people was undoubtedly one of the most rewarding and
challenging aspects of action research. Being amongst like-minded and dedicated
individuals brought life to the whole research process and renewed collective
144

commitment to the task of developing the organic sector. Whilst interacting with key
actors in the organic movement I learnt to engage the whole person, to balance
sociability with professionalism, to be sympathetic and aware of alternative visions
and goals and to place the most emphasis on the positive aspects of the organic sector
including achievements and opportunities in order to discover which actions are
effective and how can they be strengthened.
The few instances where key actors were not cooperative were also important learning
experiences. In one case, a central figure in an organic project tried hard to dissuade
me from visiting the site, and refused to make information available for reasons that
were not clear. Although this significantly impaired my ability to learn more about the
context of the project, it was fortunate that other actors, including the farmers
themselves did not share the same attitude and were much more forthcoming. My
reaction was to continue to try to involve the person in my research activities, inviting
her to the stakeholder forum and sending her interim reports on the research, although
unfortunately this did not change her stance. This experience demonstrates the
importance of patience and persistence in collaborative research, as well as the ability
to be flexible and try other approaches or avenues of enquiry when one proves to be
unfeasible.
Findings from both the CSR and stakeholder forum underscored the necessity of
forming alliances to promote organic agriculture. In order to successfully regulate
collective actions and decision-making such alliance requires certain leadership
patterns and coordinating mechanisms. Ideally emergent structural arrangements
should be renegotiable and in flux. The critical role of the TOAM network, an alliance
established for the explicit purpose of improving the social organisation of innovation
in organic agriculture, became increasingly clear, as did its potential in creating
opportunities for learning through joint reflection, providing mutual support and joint
advocacy.
Access to information
Information about the degree to which organic agriculture is being developed in
Tanzania is widely scattered and not easy to collate. For instance, it is difficult to get
precise figures for production, acreage and sales which would help to measure organic
agriculture’s contribution to GDP. Often companies themselves are unsure about such
figures and data retrieval may take considerable time.
The accessibility of information regarding the status, achievements, potential and
bottlenecks facing organic farming was found to differ depending on the type of
farming. While there is considerable data on certified organic farming, information
regarding informal organic production is much more elusive. This is partly the result
of particular social interests that ‘gain differential influence over the institutional
structure of knowledge production’ (Kloppenburg, 1991: 521). The informal organic
sector may also be less visible than that of certified organic production because it is
less easy to distinguish non-certified organic agriculture owing to the numerous
organisations that share similar approaches such as permaculture, eco-farming, biointensive
and agroecology, although they are not formally aligned to the organic
movement. Since the philosophy and agronomic practices that they employ is largely
comparable with the organic worldview, however, they play an important role in
developing the organic sector.
145

This constrains our ability to assess the opportunities and challenges facing the
majority of farmers who are engaged in non-certified organic farming. This bias in
available information towards externally-funded development projects also leads to an
underestimation of locally-led indigenous experimentation and innovation, leading to
the perception that organic agriculture is a Northern-led phenomenon and reducing
the African sense of ownership over the project.
Field visits
Although relatively brief (lasting a half / whole day), field visits were found to be
extremely instructive not least because they involved farm tours and direct
observation and experience of the farming environment. The state of the vegetation
was a good indicator of the productivity of the agroecosystem. Visiting the Mkuyuni
division of the Morogoro region, I was immediately struck by the lush hillsides,
abundance of species and apparent fertility of the land. Observing the activities of
local people also yielded many insights into the farming systems. Waiting for the
members of the focus group, I watched young men climbing large mango trees and
lowering great crates of fresh fruits. The care that they took not to damage the
mangoes demonstrated the high value of the fruits on the market. Taking a short walk
I also noticed a young mother intercropping plantains with cocoyams and ochre.
During a focus group on the same visit different participatory methods were used
including a time-line, participatory mapping and SWOT analysis. These tools greatly
aided interest and focus on the topic at hand, demonstrating the importance of
visualisation and “handing over the pen”. The extended focus group gave a good rich
picture of the area, and information was also exchanged in the form of printed
materials. The key actors were very keen for more information about TanCert and
also the fruit drying operations in Uganda. In addition, I was given a tour of the area
and had the chance to visit the main market, a banana-ripening system and an
impressive demonstration plot on a one hectare slope of primary school land.
Interviews
Critical reflection on the interviewing process yields a number of insights into how
interviews can be more effectively approached in the future. It became apparent that
in order to guide the conversation the interviewer needs to direct and maintain the
flow of the interview, always keeping the next topic in mind. Time-keeping was also
found to be important, and it was necessary to remain sensitive to the interviewee’s
plans and not to exceed one and half hours. In spite of the interview guide, the
interviews were generally unstructured and directed by the emerging conversation.
There was often a focus on the areas of interest and expertise of the interviewee. The
underlying thread combining all the interviews, however, was attention to organic
agriculture and smallholder livelihoods.
Interviews were especially useful in triangulating facts, and getting second opinions
on projects. Often a great deal of information was retrieved by focusing on the
subjects that excited and inspired the interviewee. Whilst it was often instructive to
delve into the frustrations faced by the interviewees in their working lives and this
proved to be particularly revealing about stakeholder relationships, it was equally
146

important not to dwell on negative aspects too much since this can lower morale and
act as a disincentive to constructive action. I therefore made a conscious effort to
discuss achievements and potentials in the organic sector with interviewees.
Making the information-exchange two-way was also important. However, this also
raises the question of whether it is problematic to state one’s own observations and
opinions since there is a possibility that this will influence the answers of the
interviewee and as scientists we are generally taught to stay neutral. On the other
hand, in order to be truly empathetic listeners, responses are required. Not only does
this type of active listening encourage more discussion around the issues and build
rapport, but it also results in a more natural conversation than remaining completely
neutral, simply nodding and noting down what is being said. It also seems only fair to
share one’s own observations and opinions with the informant, since that is what they
are being asked to provide.
During the interviews I explored the effectiveness of not concealing any information,
whilst also trying not to breach the confidentiality of other interviews. When
divulging information about other partners including their status and activities, there
was an effort to be sensitive and diplomatic, whilst at the same time acknowledging
that I had information to share and had formed opinions based on experience. This
approach proved quite successful since interviewees opened up considerably and
showed an extraordinary level of frankness. This underscores the importance of
engaging the whole self in the process of data collection, and in encouraging genuine
participation.
Case study research
Living in a village in rural Africa is a sure way to alter the perspective of a Westerner,
and although I have already spent time in such places, the CSR made a lasting
impression on me. Even after a short period of just two weeks, I started to appreciate
the magnitude of the challenges faced by the farmers. I was struck by the fact that
despite being just 40 km from the largest city in Tanzania, the farmers in Mkuranga
district have virtually no public services such as electricity and running water.
When I enquired into the villagers’ understanding of organic agriculture during the
first village meeting in Kerekese I was greeted first with total silence and then by one
young man saying that it was not understood at all. It later emerged that the villagers
were extremely disgruntled by the prices given for the organic cashews given in the
previous season, and that they believed that I was an agent from the buying company.
I derived many lessons from that meeting, which I applied in the next village meeting
in Sotele, for example explaining in detail that I was not connected with any cashew
buying company or development agency. In addition I made sure that there was a
circular seating arrangement and that we had an extended round of introductions, and
this made the atmosphere much more conducive to discussion. The level of
participation was so great in fact that for a while I was concerned that the meeting
would descend into complete chaos and I therefore resorted to using an empty water
bottle as a “talking stick” so that people would take turns to talk and listen to one
another, rather than talking over one another.
147

After realising that many farmers had already become disillusioned with organic
agriculture, my objectives for the CSR expanded beyond the initial question of how
organic agriculture could benefit smallholders, to getting a deeper understanding of
life in the coastal region, becoming more informed about the realities of organic
agriculture and joining hands with the local people to find sustainable livelihood
strategies.
In addition, living amongst rural peoples gave me a greater awareness of the nature of
non-certified organic production as I came to realise that the villagers were living in
an organic system of their own fashioning, informed by a deep knowledge of the land,
the history, the seasons and daily struggles. Nevertheless, a lack of exposure through
travelling or the media meant that there were many aspects of organic agriculture that
were not known locally. Changes in agricultural systems are occurring rapidly as a
result of the promotion of organic agriculture by external agents and the introduction
of formal organic standards. However, the trainings and inputs provided by these
agents do not appear to be stimulating self-reliance and may even be further
entrenching the culture of receiving.
Stakeholder forum
The experience of organising the forum was both exhilarating and exhausting. The
main constraint was being just one person to facilitate the process. At times it was
frustrating to have to plan and think ahead to the next session, and not be able to fully
concentrate on the content of the presentations, or group work at hand. Designating a
time-keeper was very useful for keeping the programme on track and the whole
process running smoothly. The decision to serve participants with organic
refreshments and lunch increased the organisational pressures, particularly since it
was complicated and time-consuming to procure the ingredients, but nevertheless it
was greatly appreciated and was deemed important for demonstrating that it is
possible to obtain locally-produced organic food.
With hindsight there are several aspects of the forum that could have been improved.
For example, it would have been better to allocate more time for the group work and
also several of the presentations. With regards to logistics, misunderstandings would
have been avoided by explicitly informing which costs would not be covered (e.g.
transport fares, and breakfast) in addition to those which were included (e.g. lunch,
refreshments and stationeries). It is quite common in Tanzania for the organiser of
workshops to be approached with requests for refunds and allowances and it soon
became apparent that in order to be fair and consistent, conditions need to be clearly
defined beforehand, and the organiser should not be swayed by last-minute requests.
Also I realised the importance of systematically introducing and thanking speakers.
The “mood monitor” which was used to evaluate the forum showed that all the
participants were satisfied, happy or very happy with the whole process. Words
commonly used to describe the forum were “interactive”, “informative” and
“participatory”. Several people mentioned that they were happy to build a relationship
with SUA with regards to organic agriculture, and enjoyed sharing ideas and
experiences and were impressed by the outputs including the vision and action plans.
Strengthening the collaboration between farmers, researchers, the private sector and
the government was arguably the most important outcome of the forum. Two
criticisms were raised during the forum evaluation: one relating to covering the cost
148

of transport, breakfast and dinners and the other regarding the lack of time to develop
the strategies.
Action enquiry demands the exercise of freedom so that participants can relate
personally, can creatively interpret exercises and can find their own way of
understanding and using models and methods. However, owing to the tight schedule
and the time needed for participants to establish their own relation to exercises,
methods and tools, more emphasis was placed on employing the methods, rather than
introducing and explaining them. If time had allowed, it would have been beneficial
to explore the use of SSM, Visionary thinking and the World Café since this would
have enabled the participants to help to develop their own agroecological and
facilitation skills. Furthermore, sharing systemic methods and methodologies with
co-enquirers is part of being as action-researching practitioner in order to help ‘the
system to organise itself in ways which encourage the whole complex to “learn” or
“research itself through” the issues which it faces’ (Bawden; in Zuber-Skerritt, 1991:
26).
Validity / verification
The third stage of the fieldwork process, verification of findings, proved to be very
useful for going deeper into the key issues, unearthing other important factors and
gaining alternative perspectives and viewpoints. Although none of the key informants
from the CSR responded to the Preliminary Report on the CSR, follow-up interviews
helped to improve the accuracy of the final report. In particular, discussing the
findings with a key person in the cashew processing company balanced the
accusations by the farmers of foul-play. It is likely that the report would have been
enriched even more by presenting the findings to a focus group consisting of
representatives from different stakeholder groups, although this would need very
sensitive facilitation given the highly conflicting viewpoints.
Sustainability
Given the original aims of the research, the long-term outcomes of the research are of
great import. Nevertheless the sustainability of the interventions is dependent on
factors beyond my immediate control, such as the existence of facilitating agencies
and the commitment of donors, heads of organisations and others to strengthening the
organic sector through the allocation of appropriate resources.
The issue of livelihood benefits has a temporal dimension, and deciding on the time
frame adopted in the study is in some ways problematic. On the one hand, resourcepoor
farmers generally have an immediate needs perspective, whilst on the other hand
the vision of organic agriculture is long-term sustainability.
It is difficult to evaluate the extent to which the research has enabled problems to be
solved through co-learning. According to Miles and Huberman (1994) the analytic
tasks involved in action research include action-related constructs seen in a melioristic
frame, such as performance indicators. However, not all the expected results have
indicators that are measurable in the time span of the study. For example, the indicator
for having a shared vision for organic agriculture in the country is that stakeholders
demonstrate an active commitment to their roles in the organic sector and this could
be realised months, or even years after the actual fieldwork period.
149