Master Thesis
Using Public-Private Partnerships to implement
the Sustainable Development Goals:
A case study of the Beira Agricultural Growth Corridor in Mozambique
Romy Rohmer Student number: 10001176
24-06-2016
MSc International Development Studies Graduate School of Social Sciences Supervisor: Courtney Vegelin Second reader: Prof. Joyeeta Gupta
1
Abstract
In the recently adopted Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) the emphasis for implementing the goals is on using Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) and other Multi-Stakeholder Partnerships (MSPs), however current literature has contesting results about the effectiveness of PPPs for development. Whether PPPs are the right way to incorporate the private sector into agricultural development and to contribute to the implementation of the SDGs is questioned in this research. This research, a qualitative case study, contributes to the debate on PPPs and how they can be used to implement the SDGs. The PPP researched is the Beira Agricultural Growth Corridor (BAGC), which is a PPP focused on the promotion of commercial agriculture in the central provinces of Mozambique. The research question addressed in this research is: To what
extent can Public-Private Partnerships in agriculture contribute to the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals?
The research design is qualitative and is based on two months of fieldwork during which 19 interviews and 2 focus groups discussions were conducted with different actors that are involved in the BAGC. The main finding of this research is that several tensions and challenges are present when using this type of PPP for agricultural development and this negatively affects the possibility to contribute to the implementation of the SDGS. The implications of this study is that there are several points to be considered when using agricultural PPPs for the implementation of the SDGs, there is a need for: a long-term commercial vision, clearly defined roles and improved measurements to account for the indirect public goods that are created.
2
Acknowledgements
First of all I would like to thank my supervisor Courtney Vegelin for her guidance and feedback during the process of conducting fieldwork and writing my thesis. Second, I would like to thank Joyeeta Gupta for agreeing to be my second reader on such short notice. I would also like to thank Renée Bijvoets for the collaboration; it was a great experience doing the fieldwork together. Similarly, I would like to thank our translator Charles for doing such a good job during the focus group discussion. I would also like to thank my parents for all the support they give me. Last but not least I would like to thank all the interviewees for taking the time to meet with us and very openly and enthusiastically answering our questions.
Table of Content
Abstract 1 Acknowledgements 2 Table of Content 3 List of Abbreviations 5 1. Introduction 61.1 Case study: BAGC 7
1.2 Objectives and relevance 8
1.3 Outline of Thesis 10
2. Theoretical framework 11
2.1 Using partnerships for the implementation of the SDGs 11
2.2 Public-Private Partnerships 14
2.3 Public-Private Partnerships and Agricultural Development 18
2.4 Agricultural Development Corridor 21
2.5 Summary 22
3. Research Context 24
3.1 Mozambique 24
3.2 The Beira Corridor 27
3.3 Structure of the BAGC 29
4. Research Design 31
4.1 Research Questions 31
4 4.3 Methodology 32 4.3.1 Unit of Analysis 32 4.3.2 Methods 33 4.3.3 Sampling 36 4.3.4 Data Analysis 37 4.4 Ethical considerations 37 4.5 Limitations 38 5. Empirical Findings 40
5.1 Vision of the BAGC 40
5.2 Motives of the different actors in the BAGC 44 5.3 Roles of the different actors in the BAGC 47 5.4 Balancing public and private benefits 51
5.5 Summary 54
6. Discussion 56
7. Conclusion and Recommendations 60
7.1 Conclusion 60
7.2 Recommendations 62
7.2.1 Recommendations for policy and practice 62
7.2.2 Recommendations for further research 62
References 64
Appendixes 67
Appendix I. Operationalization of Major Concepts 67
Appendix II. Consent form 68
List of Abbreviations
BAGC Beira Agricultural Growth Corridor CEPAGRI Centro de Promoção da Agricultura IMF International Monetary Fund MSP Multi-Stakeholder Partnership NGO Non-Governmental Organization PPP Public-Private Partnership SDGs Sustainable Development Goals
UCAMA União Provincial Dos Camponeses De Manica
UN United Nations
6
1. Introduction
The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) have recently been adopted by all 193 member states of the United Nations (UN). The SDG-agenda is designed to eradicate poverty in an environmentally sustainable way and the universal agenda consists of 17 goals and 169 targets, which ought to be reached by 2030 (United Nations, 2015). For the implementation of the SDGs there is an emphasis on Multi-Stakeholder Partnerships (MSPs) and the involvement of the private sector. This is stated in the 17th and final goal of the SDGs; “Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development” (United Nations, 2015, p. 14). Two subsections of this goal, 17.16 and 17.17, emphasize the MSPs and how this needs to be encouraged and promoted in order to support the achievement of the SDGs in developing countries. Stated in the SDGs is that the partnerships can allow actors to share their “knowledge, expertise, technology and financial resources” and by doing this the partnerships can successfully contribute to the achievement of the SDGs (United Nations, 2015, p. 27).
One type of MSP that engages the private sector comes in the form of Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs). PPPs have been much discussed in the current literature and there are contesting results about PPPs for the purpose of development, with some arguing that PPPs have failed to provide positive impacts on poverty reduction and sustainable development (Hodge & Greve, 2007; Jomo et al., 2016). Since the SDGs have only recently been adopted and countries are now starting to implement the goals into their policies there is much discussion, but still little literature available on how to implement the SDGs. The strong emphasis of the UN on incorporating the private sector in development and using PPPs for the implementation of the SDGs has led to the PPPs being a prominent topic within the discussion of the SDG-agenda (Jomo et al., 2016).
7 In the last decade the amount of money being invested in PPPs in developing countries multiplied by six, but still only 2% of the PPPs are in low-income countries (Romero, 2015). More research is needed on PPPs in low-income countries to increase the understanding of the role that PPPs can have in development and in the implementation of the SDGs, as is in line with Goal 17 of the SDGs. That is why this research carries out a case study of a PPP in a developing country. The research looks at the different actors involved in the partnership to gain more understanding on their motives and roles and to contribute to the debate on using PPPs for development.
1.1 Case study: BAGC
This section introduces the case study and explains why this case study is selected. After that the objectives and the relevance of this research are discussed in the next section. The chapter concludes with an outline of the thesis.
The case study in this research is the Beira Agricultural Growth Corridor (BAGC) partnership in Mozambique. This Public-Private Partnership was initiated in 2010 and is focused on creating more agribusiness in the central provinces of Mozambique. It is a large-scale project that involves many different partners and has great potential to reach both agricultural growth and contribute to the reduction of poverty in this area of Mozambique. The PPP is aiming to create the necessary infrastructure to connect smallholder farmers to commercial value chains. The model that the BAGC uses for this is an out-grower scheme in which commercial farms work with out-growers around their farm and provide these smallholder farmers with extension work. This will be further explained in section 3.3. In addition to this out-grower model, the BAGC wants to improve the business climate so that it will allow for more private sector development in the central provinces (BAGC, 2010).
The BAGC makes for an interesting case study because it is a relatively new PPP that is focused on agricultural development in a low-income country. It is important to gain more
8 understanding about using PPPs for agricultural development because many rural areas are still extremely poor and the farmers have no other option to generate income. Since it is an agricultural PPP not all SDGs are related, yet in the SDGs sustainable agriculture is strongly promoted and the inclusion of the marginalized in rural areas is also seen as important to address (United Nations, 2015).
Another reason that this makes for an interesting case study is the focus that the BAGC has on private sector-led development, something that has not been done much in the agricultural sector in Africa (BAGC, 2010; Ferroni & Castle, 2011; Smart and Hanlon, 2014) but is increasingly important in bilateral funding policies. In the SDGs the need to incorporate the private sector in development comes forward (United Nations, 2015). Also the Dutch Embassy in Mozambique, which is the main donor of the BAGC, states that they want to involve the private sector to help Mozambique achieve the SDGs (Dutch Embassy, 2014).
Another aspect is that the BAGC initiative involves the commitment of many different types of partners: government, the private sector, farmers unions and the international community, including donors and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) (BAGC, 2010). Understanding the different motivations for actors to enter a PPP is important because it is very prominent in the debate whether PPPs are suited to use for development (Romero, 2015). There are many perspectives to research from all these different actors involved in the BAGC and therefore the PPP is suitable to use as a case study to add to the discussion whether PPPs can support the implementation of the SDGs.
1.2 Objectives and relevance
The objective of this research is to gain more understanding on how MSPs, particularly PPPs, can be a tool towards implementing the SDGs as is in line with goal 17. Finding the right forms to incorporate the private sector remains a pressing issue, and there is still much academic discussion on using PPPs for development. Whether PPPs are the right way to incorporate the
9 private sector into agricultural development and to contribute to the implementation of the SDGs is questioned in this research. This study looks at the motives and roles of the different actors to identify the possible challenges that actors face in PPPs for development in the agricultural sector.
The research question that is addressed in this thesis is: To what extent can
Public-Private Partnerships in agriculture contribute to the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals?
The following sub-questions are used to answer the research question:
- What are the motives of different actors to be involved in the BAGC partnership? - What are the roles of the different actors involved in the BAGC partnership? - How are public and private benefits balanced within the BAGC partnership?
The contributions of this research are both theoretical and practical. First of all the research aims to contribute to the discussion on using PPPs for development by giving insight into the motives and roles of the different actors within a PPPs and how the private benefits and public benefits are being balanced. Second, this research contributes to general theoretical knowledge on PPPs and in particular on PPPs that are focused on agricultural private sector-led development in growth corridors, which is a relatively new model for development and therefore not much theory is available on these types of PPPs yet. Third, the research also gives contributions to the understanding of how PPPs can be used for the implementation of the SDGs. The practical contributions of this research will be for policy makers and for other actors engaging in PPPs or working on the implementation of the SDGs. It can give more practical insights in how to incorporate development goals and about the relations between the different actors engaging in a PPP.
10 1.3 Outline of Thesis
This thesis consists of seven chapters. The first chapter is the introduction to the thesis and shows the objectives and relevance of this research, it also introduces the case study. The second chapter is the theoretical framework and contains current literature on the implementation of the SDGs and on Public-Private Partnerships in general. It also contains current literature on agricultural private sector-led development and in particular Growth Corridors.
In the third chapter the research context is further explained. It starts with contextual information on the political and economic situation of Mozambique in general. The area of the Beira Corridor is described and the chapter will conclude with a description of the structure and the different actors involved in the BAGC.
In the fourth chapter the research design is addressed. It starts with the research questions and the conceptual framework. This is followed by the explanation of the methodology used during the fieldwork and how the data was analyzed upon return from the field. The chapter concludes with the ethical considerations and the limitations of the research.
The fifth chapter contains the empirical findings of the fieldwork. This is divided into five sections based on the sub questions and themes that have come up during the research. It starts with an explanation of the roles of the different actors in the BAGC, followed by a section about the motives of the different actors in the BAGC. The next section is about the partnership dynamics, in which the interactions between the actors in the BAGC will be discussed. After that the balancing of public benefits and private benefits within the BAGC partnership is discussed, the final section is about the vision of the BAGC.
The sixth chapter is the discussion chapter in which the findings are discussed in relation to the theoretical framework. The final chapter begins with the conclusion that will answer the research question and concludes with recommendations for further research and recommendations for policy and practice.
2. Theoretical framework
Since the SDGs have only recently been adopted, theory that explains using partnerships for the implementation of the SDGs is lacking. However, there is some literature available and this is discussed in the first section of this theoretical framework. After that the general literature on PPPs is discussed briefly to gain more understanding of the rationale, the intended outcomes and the challenges of using PPPs for development. Since the BAGC is a partnership focused on agricultural development this is followed by an overview of the literature on PPPs and agricultural development, in particular private sector-led development in Africa. Consequently agricultural development corridors are discussed and this chapter concludes with a summary of the theory discussed in the theoretical framework.
2.1 Using partnerships for the implementation of the SDGs
After years of preparation, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were adopted in September 2015 by all 193 member states of the United Nations. As was mentioned before, the SDG-agenda consists of 17 universal goals and 169 targets which ought to be reached by 2030. All goals are interlinked and can reinforce each other: the improvements in one area can reinforce the improvements in another area of the SDGs (United Nations, 2015). The SDGs follow up on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which ended in 2015. With the establishment of the new goals there is more attention for inclusive development and environmental sustainability issues (Sachs, 2012). Due to the increased climate issues the triple bottom line approach that aims to simultaneously incorporate the economic, social and environmental dimension in development is now seen as important all over the world. The triple bottom line stands for economic development, social inclusion and environmental sustainability. This approach is very much embedded in the SDGs and forms a solid base for the path of development in the next 15 years that all UN countries agreed upon (Sachs, 2012).
12 Since the SDGs are universal goals formed at the international level, it can be a difficult task for governments to implement the SDGs at the national and regional level (Bhattacharya & Ali, 2014). Embedding the goals into national and regional policies can be a complex process and that is why the United Nations states that in order to put the SDG-agenda into effect it requires Multi-Stakeholder Partnerships (MSPs): this includes the participation of governments, the private sector, civil society, international institutions and other actors like research institutes and NGOs (Sachs, 2012; United Nations, 2015). It is recognized that each country has their own priorities in achieving sustainable development and that especially vulnerable countries, like African countries, need more help and financial assistance in achieving this (United Nations, 2015). Hence there is not only a need for partnerships between different stakeholders but also between developed and underdeveloped countries (Bhattacharya & Ali, 2014; United Nations, 2015). MSPs consist of a wide variety of partnerships where state and non-state actors collaborate at different levels: transnational, national, regional and local (Pattberg & Widerberg, 2014). Successful partnerships engage all stakeholders and combine their competencies and experience; these collaborations and synergies can play an important role in the process of implementing the SDGs (Bhattacharya & Ali, 2014; Dodds, 2015).
Especially emphasized in the SDG policy document is the role of the private sector (United Nations, 2015). There is general consensus on the need to incorporate the private sector in development since the end of the 1990s. The shift to private sector development is essentially based on the logic that unregulated economic growth is achieved by the private sector, which forms the engine of development as in line with the neoliberal view of development. It is the view that development should be market-led and that the role of the government is to provide the necessary conditions for the private sector and to ensure that the economic growth is environmentally sustainable and contributes to poverty reduction (Schulpen & Gibbon, 2002). This simplistic and limited explanation forms the reasoning behind
13 private sector development and the shift from many countries to increasingly incorporate the private sector in bilateral funding in the form of partnerships between public and private sector.
By incorporating the private sector in development, the division of tasks between public and private sector actors is blurred. The private actors take on some of the responsibility for providing public goods and as a consequence of this, the field of development has become more dynamic and heterogeneous. Reaching sustainable development is not just a task of the state anymore but is also based on the practices of the private sector (Glasbergen, 2011; Schulpen & Gibbon, 2002). The private sector can greatly enhance the capacity of the public sector by complementing public investments with private capital, which can severely increase the impact of the investments. Not only can they enhance the capacity with financial resources but also with non-financial resources such as technological advances and the sharing of knowledge (Bhattacharya & Ali, 2014). How to manage the evolving relationship and the shared responsibility for development between public and private sector is a difficult task that is much discussed in current development debate (Brinkerhoff & Brinkerhoff, 2011). The UN seems to be convinced that partnerships are the way to incorporate private sector and to manage the relationship between public and private, therefore using PPPs for development is emphasized in the SDGs (United Nations, 2015).
In academic literature there is also much critique on the use of partnerships for development. Biermann, Man-san Chan and Pattberg (2007) state that the role of partnerships in the implementation of global development goals is overstated. According to them there are several factors that constrain the contribution of partnerships to implementation of international programs. First of all, it can be an issue whether partnerships have the necessary financial and human resources to do so. Also it can be questioned whether a partnership actually has the potential to make significant impact and if there is, whether this is direct impact or more an indirect contribution to the implementation of development goals (Biermann, Man-san Chan & Pattberg, 2007). The final constraint can be the opposing interests of partners and
14 opposing perspectives on how to implement the universal goals (Bilal et al., 2014). Others say that PPPs do not work in general because of the inherently different perspectives of the private and public sector. Not only do PPPs tend to be very expensive they also do not always provide efficiency gains and do not improve the quality of delivering public goods. Essentially, PPPs have failed to provide impacts on poverty and sustainable development (Jomo et al., 2016).
Thus while the UN emphasizes the use of partnerships to implement the SDGs not all academic literature supports this. The next section discusses PPPs in more detail to gain understanding on what PPPs are and why they are established. It also further elaborates on the academic discussion on using PPPs for development.
2.2 Public-Private Partnerships
In today’s globalized world the societal challenges that arise are increasingly in need of combined efforts from a wide range of actors from both public and private sector across national borders. How to best combine the efforts from the different actors remains a pressing issue (Brinkerhoff & Brinkerhoff, 2011; Glasbergen, 2011). One widely used term for the combination of efforts from different actors is the term Public-Private Partnership (PPP) (Hodge & Greve, 2007). Much has been written about PPPs in the literature, however it still remains a vague concept with different definitions and ideologies (Brinkerhoff & Brinkerhoff, 2011; Romero, 2015). There is no single definition of PPP because PPPs come in many different types and forms (Hodge & Greve, 2007). However, there are some common features and criteria: collaboration between a public and private actor, collectively set goals, collaborative decision-making, horizontal structures, public and private funding, distribution of risks and shared accountability (Brinkerhoff & Brinkerhoff, 2011; Bouman et al., 2013).
Not only are there different definitions of PPPs, there are also different reasons for a PPP to be established. However, the main reason behind the establishment of a PPP is that the partnership forms a way to manage the relationship between public and private sector in a way
15 that it can benefit both. It is a so called win-win principle in which the resources of the public and private sector are complementary and therefore the results will be better for all involved; more or improved public services are delivered and the private benefits are increased at the same time (Hodge & Greve, 2007). Another reasoning is that societal problems are in need of a multi-actor solution and therefore it is determined that a partnership has to be established to incorporate all these actors (Brinkerhoff & Brinkerhoff, 2011). There can also be more specific reasons that can be both instrumental and normative; it can be a need for financial means but it can also be that the government believes that the private sector will be better at providing a certain service than the public sector (Brinkerhoff & Brinkerhoff, 2011).
The initial motivation to enter a PPP can be different for the actors involved. For the public sector the motivation is usually to increase their capacity to deliver public services with the resources of the private sector. For the private sector, the profitability of the project is an important incentive for entering the PPP (Romero, 2015). Bouman et al. (2013, p. 5) categorize the rationale for establishing the PPP and for the actors to enter the PPP into five categories, or a combination of these categories: “financial, developmental, efficiency, ideological and political reason”. It can be established to improve effectiveness and efficiency so that that it has lower costs or that the quality of services is improved. It can also be established for political reason and used as a policy tool or it can be used for ideological reasons as a symbolic effort. The motivation to establish a partnership between the private and public sector can be very strong when there are market failures and/or institutional failures that prohibit the private or public sector from delivering certain goods and services on their own and thus they need each other. When both sectors truly need each other the chances are more likely that the PPP will succeed (Bouman et al., 2013). Understanding the reasons for a PPP to be established and the motivations for the different actors to enter a PPP is important in order to find out if they are suitable for development (Romero, 2015). This is the first key point coming forward from the debate in current literature on using PPPs for development.
16 Besides the rationale for establishing and entering a PPP another factor that is prominent in the debate on PPPs is balancing the outcomes of a PPP. Often the intended public benefits are not achieved; this can be due to the implementation of the partnership or due to too much focus on the private benefits. Attaining financial benefits is very important because it is what motivates the private actors to engage in the partnership, however these do not always align with the intended public benefits (Brinkerhoff & Brinkerhoff, 2011). It can be hard to find the right balance when there is a divergence of interest and incentives for the different actors involved. Sometimes trade-offs have to be made, these trade-offs are often made at the expense of the public benefits (Brinkerhoff & Brinkerhoff, 2011). Another issue with PPPs is that when transnational actors are involved it is often the case that the PPP is required to contribute in the implementation of global norms and values (Brinkerhoff & Brinkerhoff, 2011). International institutions but also donor countries can use their authority to push forward these global norms and values in the PPP, even if this might not be the intention of other public and private actors involved. These other actors might have less commitment with the global norms and values and this also outbalances the intended outcomes of the different actors (Brinkerhoff & Brinkerhoff, 2011). This difficulty of balancing the outcomes in a PPP also contributes to the debate on using PPPs for development and is the second key point coming forward from current literature.
According to Romero (2015) the impact of PPPs on development outcomes varies and the author mentions several constraints in using PPPs for development purposes. First, the project has to be profitable or else the private sector will not engage. Thus, they might not operate in all areas or in all sectors because some of them are just not profitable enough. Second, the impact of PPPs on job availability can be more long-term oriented and indirect; it can even have negative impacts on the short-term direct job creations. Third, it usually requires long-term contractual commitment from government, this means that if public spending has to be reduced the government will be constrained to do this in the PPP and will have to cut on other spending. Also the efficiency gains of PPPs are not always shared with everyone,
17 especially the poor do not always gain from this. The final constraint is that environmental concerns are not present in most PPPs, there is a strong need to incorporate sustainability practices into PPPs (Romero, 2015). Other authors also stress the challenges and limitations of using PPPs for development purposes and state that the evidence of the impact of PPPs on development outcomes is rather weak (Roehrich, Lewis & George, 2014; Jomo et al., 2016).
Despite the debate on the developmental impact of PPPs and the challenges that are faced, PPPs are still used for development purposes. A crucial requirement is that all stakeholders have to be engaged in the partnership (Romero, 2015). The involvement of all stakeholders is essential because only then the intended benefits and efforts can be aligned. This process requires transparency and accountability and it is very important that development outcomes are put at the forefront. Usually the economic dimension is at the forefront in a PPP but it is important to also include the social and environmental dimensions, as in line with the SDGs (Roehrich et al., 2014; Romero, 2015). Assessing whether PPPs endorse sustainable development and contribute to reducing poverty and inequality is difficult because it is hard to measure the outcomes. Governments have difficulty in assessing whether the outcomes are pro-poor and much of the outcomes are very term and there is a lack of long-term evaluation. It is important that governments have the institutional capacity to evaluate and manage PPPs, this means that some developing countries will need help with technical assistance and capacity building from the international community (Jomo et al., 2016). Besides the institutional capacity of a country another important aspect to keep in mind is that research indicates that the impact of PPPs on development outcomes varies greatly across sectors. PPPs are generally more suitable in sectors where the demand is relatively stable and the quality easy to measure, and less suitable in sectors where access and equity are hard to ensure (Jomo et al., 2016; Romero, 2016).
Thus, there many different definitions and types of PPPs and it usually involves many different stakeholders. The differences in motives from the actors involved can make it hard to
18 balance the public and private benefits between all stakeholders. PPPs can face many constraints when used for development purposes, the main arguments in the debate on using PPPs for development that come forward in section 2.1 and 2.2 are summarized in table 1. The suitability of PPPs varies across countries and across sectors, the next section will discuss PPPs and development in the agricultural sector in Africa.
Table 1 . Argument in the debate on using PPPs for development
For Against
-Incorporate the Private Sector in development -No significant impact on development and the reduction of poverty
-Enhance capacity of the Public Sector -Opposing interests
-Share responsibility -Inherently different perspectives -Combine resources
(knowledge, expertise, technology, financial)
-Too expensive
-Does not incorporate environmental concerns
2.3 Public-Private Partnerships and Agricultural Development
The liberalization of the agricultural sector in Africa in the last couple of decades has been an unequal process with little success (Paulton & Macartney, 2012). In many countries in Africa agriculture is stuck between market failure and state failure. The state has been lacking in providing the enabling environment that encourages a stronger agricultural market and has also been lacking to provide agricultural extension services (Paulton & Macartney, 2012). This has stimulated looking for ways to bring in the private sector to provide these services through market mechanisms instead of having these provided by the state. The participation of the private sector has been very limited and the low number of private investments is due to various reasons: the lack of a supporting institutional and economic environment, lack of infrastructure, lack of access to capital, lack of technology and high risks in African markets (Paulton & Macartney, 2012). All these factors contribute to the continuing market failures in the agricultural market in Africa (Poulton, Kydd, & Dorward, 2006). In the last years, a few PPPs
19 have been established across Africa and other parts of the world in order to try to strengthen the agricultural market and enhance the functioning of agricultural value chains. The sharing of transaction costs and risk by public and private sector can compensate for the lack of a supporting institutional and economic environment. However, the effect of such PPPs on the agricultural market and on the smallholder farmers is still limited (Paulton & Macartney, 2012). Development of the agricultural sector in Africa and improving the lives of the smallholder farmers remains an important issue because many rural areas are still extremely poor and the farmers have no other option to generate income. The livelihoods of about one third of the world’s population depends on small-scale farming and are therefore a major focus in development practices (Ferroni & Castle, 2011). Several of the goals of the SDGs are also directly related to agriculture (United Nations, 2015). In many countries in Africa agriculture is not sustainable and the smallholder farmers have very low yields due to three main causes; lack of access to technology, lack of adequate extension services and poor access to markets (Ferroni & Castle, 2011). As has been mentioned, the government tries to incorporate the private sector in providing agricultural extension services but this has been difficult due to the instable institutional and economic environment (Paulton & Macartney, 2012). PPPs form a way to encourage the private sector to go to areas where the commercial incentives are low. In that way the farmers that are too remote to participate in the economy can also be incorporated into agricultural value chains. Boosting the rural economies can create market opportunities for companies and simultaneously fight poverty (Ferroni & Castle, 2011; Hall, 2006). However, not many PPPs for agricultural development have yet been established in Africa and as has been shown in the previous section, challenges still remain in using PPPs for development purposes.
As has been mentioned, one of the challenges with PPPs is that the private actors have their own motivations and they will only participate in the PPP if their objectives will be met. It is important to make sure that these objectives of the private sector are in line with the public objectives as well (Paulton & Macartney, 2012). In the agricultural sector, it happens often that
20 the benefits are unequally divided between the public and private objectives (Palmer, 2010). This is mainly due to the fact that private actors will only participate in the partnership if there are enough financial benefits for them and/or not too much risk. The major reason that there are so little agricultural private investments in Africa is that there are high risks with low expected returns (Palmer, 2010). It is hard to attract the private sector and the focus has to be on the possible benefits that they can attain with developing the agricultural market and boosting the rural economy. Also the private sector has to be supported in sharing transaction costs and risk by the public sector, which does not always happen. Thus in order for the private sector to enter a PPP focused on agricultural development a focus on market development is required as well as the potential for higher revenues and growth potential with reduced levels of risk, which is a challenging task (Warner, Kahan & Lebel, 2008). The focus on the market and private benefits can lead to the private benefits outweighing the public benefits, this is an important challenge in agricultural PPPs.
What also contributes to challenge of balancing the private and public benefits is that PPPs that are intended for agricultural development will never deliver a completely “public” service. Since agricultural PPPs only focus on a certain part of the population -the farmers- it thereby excludes the rest of the population (Warner, Kahan & Lebel, 2008. There is also the difficulty of ensuring equitable distribution and access to public services in rural areas (Romero, 2016). Moreover due to the great focus on market development that is required for private actors to enter, as is explained in the previous section, there will be even less focus on serving the broad public interest (Warner, Kahan & Lebel, 2008). It can therefore be hard to find the balance between public benefits and private benefits in agricultural PPPs. This can create a conflict between the public interest and the commercial interest and requires good negotiation and agreements between the partners. Some partnerships fail to deliver the intended development outcomes by the public sector or fail to reach the intended commercial outcomes by the private sector, or both (Warner, Kahan & Lebel, 2008).
21 Thus, due to the weak institutional and economic environment the agricultural private sector development in Africa has been low. By focusing om the market and sharing the transaction costs and risks PPPs are a way to support the private sector in providing agricultural extension services but this also comes with the challenge in balancing private and public benefits. The next section will focus on one type of agricultural PPP; the Agricultural Development corridor.
2.4 Agricultural Development Corridor
One type of PPP for agricultural development is the ‘Agricultural Development Corridor’ that has been first presented on the World Economic Forum in 2009 (Kaarhus, 2011). A corridor means a certain spatial area which, in this case, is seen as a spatial area that is economically important for agricultural growth. It can be defined as the territory that consists of all the economic activities and inhabitants that form the backbone of the agricultural infrastructure in a certain area (Gálvez Nogales, 2014).
The key focus of Agricultural Development Corridors is on providing infrastructure that will improve the competitiveness of the agricultural sector and other economic activities in the corridor. The simple logic is that improved infrastructure creates the conditions for more commercial agriculture because it will improve the access to market and agricultural inputs (Weng et al., 2013). Besides improving the physical infrastructure, the aim is to complement this by also improving the business environment. In this way, the corridor area will become more economically attractive to both local business and multinational business, this will eventually lead to more investments and economic growth (Gálvez Nogales, 2014).
The concept of agricultural corridors is founded on the green growth believe that environmental sustainability should be integrated within economic growth. The focus therefore is not only on economic growth that will contribute to the reduction of poverty but also on economic growth that has as little negative environmental impacts as possible (Gálvez Nogales,
22 2014). This fits well in the triple bottom line approach that has been discussed before in regards to the SDGs and counters the critique that environmental concerns are not present in most PPPs as has been stated in section 2.2 (Romero, 2015).
Thus, agricultural growth corridors are a relatively new type of PPP that focuses on boosting the local economy in a certain spatial area through environmentally sustainable agricultural development. Not much research has been done in the challenges of using this specific type of PPPs for development.
2.5 Summary
It is emphasized by the UN that in order to implement the SDGs, MSPs are needed. This includes partnerships both between developed and underdeveloped countries and between the public and private sector. The little literature that is available on using partnerships for the implementation of SDGs has contesting results. It is argued by some that governments need help from private sector to enhance their capabilities, both with financial and nonfinancial resources. For this reason, PPPs can play an important role in the implementation of the SDGs, however others say that this role is overstated because there are several factors that constrain PPPs to contribute to the reduction of poverty and to reach sustainable development.
PPP remains a vague concept with different definitions and forms, however there are some common features and criteria for PPPs. There can be different reasons to establish a PPP and there can also be different motives for actors to enter a PPP. What comes forward from the literature is that the different rationale behind and the different motives to enter a PPP are prominent aspects in the debate whether PPPs are suited to use for development. Also important in regard to the SDGs is the challenge to balance the proportion of the public and the private benefits, as well as the difficulty to obtain commitment from all actors to implement global norms and values.
23 In recent years, PPPs for agricultural development have been established in Africa in an attempt to compensate for the weak government and bad business environment. However the effects of such PPPs on the agricultural market and on the smallholder farmers is still limited. The importance for more private sector agricultural development in rural areas is clear but there are still some challenges when using agricultural PPPs for development; the issue of equity and access to the provided public goods and the focus on market development, this gives the risk that private benefits will be at the expense of public benefits.
What comes forward in the theoretical framework is the importance to look at the different motives of the actors involved and the roles that they have when looking at the use of PPPs for development. These partnership dynamics can determine whether a PPP will or will not contribute to the implementation of the SDGs. The theoretical framework also shows the importance of agricultural private sector-led development and the challenge of balancing public and private benefits when using PPPs as a tool to provide agricultural development .
3. Research Context
This chapter presents the context in which the research is conducted. First some information on the history, the economy and the political situation of Mozambique is discussed. After that the region of the Beira Corridor and the intended goals of the BAGC are discussed. This chapter concludes with an explanation of the structure of the BAGC and the actors involved.
3.1 Mozambique
Mozambique is a country in the south of Africa, on the east coast. It is considered as one of the poorest countries in the world (UNDP, 2015). After Mozambique became independent from Portugal in 1975 there was an almost continuous civil war for 16 years. Since the ending of the civil war in 1992 there has been great focus by the government on economic development (UNDP, 2015). After two decades of consistent and strong economic growth, between 7% and 8%, Mozambique has become more economically stable (UNDP, 2015). In the last two decades Mozambique has also been receiving a lot of official development assistance from donors and the amount of aid coming in is relatively high compared to low-income other countries (Hanlon, 2010). The liberalization process in the last two decades was strongly driven by the donor countries, this created a dependency on development aid. The pursuit of structural adjustment programs from the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and good governance practices by the Mozambican government maintained the stream of foreign development aid coming in (Niño & Billon, 2014). The main drivers of economic growth in recent years have been Foreign Direct Investments, especially from the extractive industries since major gas fields were found in Mozambique (Niño & Billon, 2014). Since less development aid is coming in it is important for Mozambique to remain attractive the coming years for further FDI (ADB, 2015).
25 Despite the economic growth, there is no significant poverty reduction in recent years and therefore it is important for Mozambique to focus more actively on equally distributing the benefits coming from economic growth. Of the 25.2 million people living in Mozambique, 54.7% are still living in poverty and there is severe inequality between the rich and the poor and also between the rural and urban areas (Dutch Embassy, 2013; World Bank, 2015). The majority of the poor population lives in the rural areas: they remain very vulnerable and are not included in the economic and social benefits that come from economic growth (UNDP, 2015). This is partly due to a lack of money invested in the rural areas by the government. But also because the development policies of the donors and the Mozambican government focuses on creating human capital (through better education and improved health) and economic infrastructure (Hanlon, 2010). The reasoning is that this infrastructure will allow for the private sector to invest in the rural areas of Mozambique and that will eventually lift people out of poverty. This is in line with the neo-liberal policies of the World Bank and the IMF; the government provides the conditions but the rest is left to the market (Hanlon, 2010). Large FDIs are seen as the easiest and fastest way for agricultural development because these private sector investors are expected to bring all that is needed with them (Smart and Hanlon, 2014, p. 43). However, these large FDI are not creating new jobs and does not lead to a reduction in poverty. The people benefitting from it is mostly a powerful small elite (Niño & Billon, 2014).
The political situation in Mozambique has also not been without troubles in the last decades after Mozambique moved from a socialist phase to a capitalist system in the late 1990s. Since the end of the civil war, the Frelimo party has been the governing party in Mozambique, having won all six elections since the peace accord has been signed. During this time the opposition party Renamo has failed to gain more control (Hanlon, 2010). Frelimo remains popular mostly in the south, where the capital Maputo is located, and in the far north of Mozambique, while the center area of Mozambique, where the BAGC is located, is where supporters of Renamo are based (Hanlon, 2010). In 2013 attacks started again from Renamo,
26 after 20 years of peace (Hanlon, 2015, p. 129). Rebels from Renamo have been attacking the road, mostly the main road N1 that goes all the way from the south to the north of Mozambique. Many corruption allegations have been made against the current government but the main reasoning for Renamo to rise up against Frelimo is the increasing inequality in Mozambique (Hanlon, 2015, p. 130). The ability to participate in the economy is unequal; the poor, and especially the poor in the rural areas, have no opportunities and support to improve their livelihoods. The distribution of wealth is also extremely unequal and the benefits from economic growth are not trickling down to the poor. Due to the large gas fields found in Mozambique in 2012, there is an elite of Frelimo that are now relatively wealthy and this also adds to the corruption allegations against the current government (Hanlon, 2015, p. 130).
As has been mentioned, the rural areas in Mozambique remain the poorest and the poverty is not decreasing. This rural poverty is largely associated with the limited development in the agricultural sector, the lack of access to markets and low productivity (Smart and Hanlon, 2014, p.2). The typical rural family farms have one hectare of land and use low quality seeds, no fertilizers and no irrigation system. It will require increased modernization to lift the lives of the farmers and their families in the rural areas in Mozambique out of poverty (Smart and Hanlon, 2014, p.2). The donor’s and government’s agricultural development policies in the last decade has been through a dual strategy. They try to create the right condition for very big companies on the one side and also focus on the smallholder farmers on the other, however this strategy has been failing (Smart and Hanlon, 2014, p. 4). There is need for more small and medium sized commercial farms that can really boost the local economy and provide more employment. The failing dual strategies in the last decades has shown that keeping the smallholders on their one hectare of land is not going to reduce poverty and neither are the large plantations from Mozambique’s socialist phase (Smart and Hanlon, 2014, p. 4).
The capital of Mozambique is Maputo. Maputo lays in the most southern part of the country, close to the border with South Africa. Maputo has 1.2 million inhabitants, which is by
27 far the biggest city in Mozambique, and has been expanding rapidly in the last decade showing signs of growth like new buildings being constructed and traffic jams of expensive cars (Hanlon, 2015). As the capital and the largest city, the center for business in Mozambique is mainly in Maputo and also the government is located here. Most of the country’s wealth can be found in Maputo and the rapidly expanding vibrant city contrasts sharply with the extremely poor rural areas of Mozambique.
3.2 The Beira Corridor
The BAGC initiative is focused on the regional area that is called the Beira Corridor, which stretches out across three provinces in central Mozambique: Manica, Sofala and Tete (see Figure 1). It covers a large area of land that has a lot of agricultural potential. The area is 227.000 square kilometers and has 4.8 million inhabitants. A lot of the inhabitants live in poverty and outside the provincial capital cities of Beira, Tete and Chimoio almost all of the inhabitant’s livelihoods depend on agriculture. At the start of this initiative, there was hardly any commercial agriculture in this corridor but it did have a lot of potential. The BAGC initiative was created to realize this potential (BAGC, 2010). There is 10 million hectares of land in the area that is suited for agriculture; only 15% of this is now in use and mostly by smallholder farmers. The reason that the agricultural potential in the Beira corridor has not been realized is due to a number of factors: a lack of access to finance, a lack of infrastructure, and a lack of access to agricultural support services (BAGC, 2010). Besides the agricultural potential the Beira Corridor can also become the gateway for the important port of Beira to the inland of Malawi, Zambia and Zimbabwe, but improved infrastructure is needed for this (BAGC, 2010).
The goal of the BAGC partnership is to support the sustainable development of the agricultural sector in the Beira corridor. Through investments, the infrastructure and support services will be enhanced. These investments will be private sector-led with a supportive role for the government (BAGC, 2010). The idea was that commercial investment
28 from the private sector would be complemented with public financial sources in order to compensate for the high risks and transaction costs in the Beira corridor (Kaarhus, 2011). This is called patient capital and seen as “the most effective means of kick-starting sustainable commercial agriculture in Africa and delivering major benefits for smallholder farmers” (Palmer, 2010: 17). This way private capital will be invested into commercial farming and agricultural service infrastructure in the Beira corridor. This will help smallholder farmers to move to commercial farming and this will increase the productivity and income of smallholder farmer. Not only the smallholder farmers will benefit but also the rural communities in the Beira corridor will eventually benefit because the increased income will lead to better access to electricity and clean water, increased food security and increased health status (BAGC, 2010; Palmer, 2010).
Several investments in commercial farms have already been made, especially in the Manica province, and a growth in the number of small and medium commercial farmers can already be seen in this Province. However, this is not due to support from the government, but due to Zimbabwean farmers with experience coming in and getting support from the donor countries and international institutions. However many of the problems in this area still remain; lack of access to finance, lack of access to markets, and the commercial farmers carrying all the risks (Smart and Hanlon, 2014, p. 43).
29
Figure 1. The BAGC area in Mozambique
Source: Beira Corridor, 2010 (p. 9)
3.3 Structure of the BAGC
The BAGC initiative is set up as two separate institutions: the BAGC partnership and the Catalytic Fund (see figure 2), both of the institutions funded by the donors. The reason to set it up as separate institutions was that the Catalytic Fund should function as an investment company that is managed by an outside party: AgDevCo. The role of the Catalytic Fund is to invest in commercial farmers that will incorporate smallholder farmers in their business through an out-grower model. The commercial farmers can provide the smallholder farmers with inputs and extension services so that the harvest and income of the smallholder farmers will significantly improve, this will indirectly provide positive benefits to the local communities (BAGC, 2010).
The institution of the BAGC partnership is managed by the full-time secretariat of the BAGC and the BAGC board. On the board are the executive director, a representative of the
30 national farmers union UNAC, two representatives of the private sector and a representative from the government. The government institution that is involved in the BAGC initiative is CEPAGRI, which is the Centre for the Promotion of Agribusiness and falls under the Ministry of Agriculture. The role of the board is to discuss the policies and plans, which the BAGC secretariat will then execute and implement. BAGC secretariat has a coordinating function that brings together the different stakeholders but also implements certain projects focused on smallholder farmers (Beira Corridor, 2016).
Figure 2. The structure of the BAGC
To sum up, the context of the research has many interesting aspects. Mozambique is one of the poorest countries in the world and is economically and politically not very stable. Especially the rural areas, where the BAGC is located, are extremely poor. The goal of the BAGC is to support the sustainable development of the agricultural sector in the Beira corridor, so that it can boost the local economy and lift people out of poverty. The structure of the BAGC is set up as two separate entities that are both funded by the donors. The Catalytic fund works as a financial institution and the BAGC partnership forms the coordinating entity that brings all the stakeholders together.
4. Research Design
In this chapter the research design is addressed. It starts with the research questions and the conceptual scheme, after which the operationalization of major concepts is described. This is followed by an explanation of the methods used during the fieldwork and how the data are analyzed. The chapter concludes with the ethical considerations and the limitations of the research.
4.1 Research Questions
Following the theoretical framework it can be said that there is still much uncertainty regarding the implementation of the SDGs and how PPPs can contribute to this as is in line with Goal 17 of the SDGs. As has been mentioned in the introduction, the objective of this research is to gain more understanding on how PPPs can be used for the implementation of the SDGs. In particular a PPPs focused on private sector-led agricultural development. Therefore the research question that is addressed in this thesis is: To what extent can Public-Private Partnerships in agriculture
contribute to the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals?
In the theoretical framework the motivations and the roles of the actors engaging in the PPP have come forward as being important when considering the use of PPPs for development. These partnership dynamics can determine whether a PPP will or will not contribute to the implementation of the SDGs. In order to provide an answer to the research question, some major concepts have been operationalized (see Appendix I) and the following sub-questions have been formulated based on the theoretical framework:
- What are the motives of different actors that are involved in the BAGC? - What are the roles of the different actors involved in the BAGC? - How is the balance between public and private benefits?
32 4.2 Conceptual Scheme
The conceptual scheme is based on the structure of the BAGC together with important concepts that came up in the theoretical framework, which have been operationalized (see Appendix I). In this case study the motives and the roles of the actors involved in the BAGC are investigated. Furthermore, the balance between public benefits and private benefits is an important aspect. Since the commercial and smallholders farmers are the recipients of the BAGC they are also important actors and thus included in the conceptual scheme.
Figure 3. Conceptual Scheme
4.3 Methodology
4.3.1 Unit of Analysis
The aim of this case study is to gain more understanding on how PPPs can be used for the implementation of the SDGs. This will be done by researching the practices of the different actors involved in the BAGC and the relation to each other. The unit of analysis in this research
33 therefore are the actors involved in the BAGC. This consists of six units of observation, which are the different groups that are involved in the BAGC. The first group is government officials; interviews were conducted with representatives from the Mozambican government, Dutch Embassy, Norwegian Embassy and from the United Kingdom’s Department for International Development (DFID). Interviews were also conducted with the second group, which consists out of NGOs (SNV and AGRA) and with the third group, which consists of the private sector (Vale, Banco Terra, Tongaat Hullet and ACIS). The fourth group are farmers unions (UNAC and UCAMA) and the fifth group are commercial farmers that have been invested in by the Catalyic Fund (ECA, Phoenix Seeds and FrutiManica). The last group are smallholder farmers; two focus group discussions were held with two different groups of smallholder farmers. In addition, a representative of the BAGC administration and representatives of AgDevCo, who are managing the Catlytic Fund, were interviewed as well.
4.3.2 Methods
The data used for this case study is collected with a mixed-methods qualitative research design consisting of semi-structured interviews, focus group discussion and policy document analysis. All data used in this research is qualitative data and is approached from a post-positivist epistemology; the background and knowledge of the researcher impacts what is observed so there is always some bias (Guba & Lincoln, 1994, p.110). With the use of multiple qualitative methods the knowledge, perspectives and experiences from the researched are collected, thus gaining multiple insights into the reality of this particular case. It is kept in mind that this research is based on information that comes from the personal experience of the interviewees and the biased interpretation of their experiences by the researcher. Since this is a case study of a very specific public-private partnership at a certain time in a certain region in Mozambique not all findings are transferable; they can be very context specific. Perhaps findings can be
34 partly generalized to agricultural public-private partnerships in general but it will still be based on data that is in this particular case study thus it will never be sure whether the findings will apply to other public-private partnerships or in other contexts or in other times.
The qualitative data were collected from both primary and secondary sources. The semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions were conducted from a primary source, by myself together with Renée Bijvoets, another student. All the primary data collected, were gathered together as we were both studying the same case study from different angles. It is time consuming to collect most of the data from a primary source, however the advantage is that in this way the researcher can have control over the collected data and knows where the data came from (Lewis, Thornhill & Saunders, 2007, p. 268). In addition secondary data were used for this research in the form of official BAGC documents obtained from the Internet.
The collection of the primary data was done in a two-month fieldwork that was divided in two phases. During the first phase, interviews were conducted with all the actors located in Maputo: the embassies of the donor countries, government, NGOs and companies. The second phase was in the Beira Corridor area; we started in Beira for a couple of days, the capital of Sofala province and the second biggest city in Mozambique, to do interviews with two companies and then we continued to Chimoio. Chimoio is the capital of the province of Manica and in this province most of the investments of the Catalytic Fund were made. We stayed here for almost two weeks to interview the local farmers union and several commercial farmers and to do the focus group discussion. Sadly we had to cancel some of our plans in this area due to political unrest; there were attacks from Renamo on the road close to two commercial farms that we were planning to visit. We decided to cancel those plans last minute in order to ensure our personal safety, more on this in section 4.4.
As mentioned the following research methods were used in this research; (i) semi-structured Interviews, (ii) focus group discussion and (iii) policy document analysis and will now be further elaborated upon.
35
(i) Semi-structured Interview
All the key actors in the BAGC partnership that were willing to participate have been researched through semi-structured interviews. For this research this was the most appropriate method because it gives participant the opportunity to give his or her own input, in this way the perspective of the participant becomes more clear (Bryman, 2012, p. 470). During the 10 weeks in Mozambique we conducted 19 interviews with an average duration of an hour. The questions in the interviews were based on a list of open questions divided in several themes; the BAGC in general, their organization’s reason to join the BAGC and their role in the partnership, the relationship between smallholders and commercial farmers, the SDGs and PPPs in general. The themes were handled in more or less the same order every interview, however the order of questions and which questions depended on the flow of the interview. Some questions were more focused on my research and some questions were more focused on Renée’s research, however we soon found out that the answer’s to her questions could also be of use for me and vice versa. Doing these interviews together and both asking questions went really well because it allows to complement each other, take time to reflect and think during the interview and this makes it easier to get a good structure in the interviews and make sure you ask everything you want. All the interviews were conducted in English thus there was no need to use an interpreter.
(ii) Focus Group Discussion
In order to gain more understanding about the perspective of the smallholder farmers two focus groups discussions were conducted. This method was chosen because for this research the perspective of the farmers as a group is more important than the individual perspectives of the smallholder farmers. In order to gain an understanding on how a group of people perceive something focus group discussion are the most appropriate method for this (Bryman, 2012, p. 501).
36 The focus group discussion were semi-structured and held in the local language, therefore a translator was used to ask the questions. He translated the answers back immediately after the reply of the respondents so that there was the possibility to decide which question to ask next. All the questions were open-ended and it was encouraged that not just one person answered but multiple and that they reacted on each other. The first focus group discussion was with four farmers of the extension program from the commercial farm FrutiManica and everyone actively participated. In the second focus group discussion we started with seven and ended with twelve farmers, all from the associations of UCAMA, and due to the big group not everyone participated actively but it was a few farmers that talked most.
(iii) Policy Document Analysis
Documents from the official BAGC reports and from the governments of Mozambique and the Netherlands were analyzed before going into the field. The data obtained from the policy documents were used to gain more understanding of the BAGC partnership before going into the field. Some of the questions in the interviews were based on the data from the documents in order to get more clarity on the information and triangulate the information.
4.3.3 Sampling
The sampling was done through purposive sampling; the participants were selected based on their involvement and expertise on the BAGC partnership (Bryman, 2008: 458). Emails were send in the weeks before starting the field work in Mozambique to all partners of the BAGC. Depending on the response and availability interviews were conducted and more contacts were established through the participants. We tried to do interviews with as many actors as possible and preferably with different types of actors: government, donors, private sector, commercial farmers and smallholder farmers. The smallholder farmers were approached through the farmer union UCAMA in Chimoio and through one of the commercial farmers.
37
4.3.4 Data Analysis
The qualitative data obtained from the interviews and focus groups discussions were transcribed into texts while still in the field. After returning from the field all the transcribed data were analyzed by open coding. The software of Atlast.ti was used for this as a tool to help organize and digitalize all the qualitative data that were generated by the interviews and focus group discussion. In this way it became easier to see the relations between the data and to get a better grip on what has been said in the different interviews and how this interrelates with each other. It also gave more of an overview of the data and made it easier to compare the data to the operationalized concepts coming from the theoretical framework in order to see how the data relates to current literature.
4.4 Ethical considerations
Before conducting the interviews and focus group discussion all the participants were informed about the goal of the research and asked to sign the form with permission to use the data collected from the interview (see appendix II). The consent formed states that the results will be handled with confidentiality and anonymously and that the data would only be used for this master thesis. The response of the participant are used anonymously because they might not be comfortable to have their name listed and might hold back to say things that are not in the interest of the organization that they work for. Also in the form was stated that participation in the research is on a voluntary basis and they can refuse to answer any questions that they feel uncomfortable with.
Besides these ethical considerations for the respondents it was also important to keep focus on our own personal safety. As already mentioned in the previous chapter we had to cancel a couple of visits we had planned near to Chimoio due to attacks by Renamo on the road close to the farms that we were supposed to visit. During the time that we were in the Sofala and Manica provinces there was a travel advice from the Dutch Embassy to only go into that
