WIN-WIN-WIN: in-kind assistance, livestock insurance and credit in Rwanda by Bavagnoli, M. and Van 't Wout, T.
Please find below the
The proposal directly meets the objective of the contest in terms of linking social protection with climate risk insurance. It proposes a robust climate risk management framework focusing on social assistance through productive assets, strengthening capacity for risk reduction, improving access to affordable finance, and improving access to insurance. The geographical focus for the proposed feasibility study makes it realistic in terms of achieving its intended outcome.
Novel focus on animal health as the foundation of a climate-resilient rural economy in the specific target region. Triple win is making farmers, insurers and the social protection system all resilient to climate shocks. Strong focus in prioritization of insuring credit and thus reducing poor farmer risks & other barriers to access is not unheard of but rarely addressed Many insurance and social protection schemes are narrowly focused on set of conditions related to managing the financial risks of the program. Integration of the field school is novel in this respect. The institutional structures necessary and the research required to make this work seem to be solidly in place. So feasibility and likelihood of positive results are quite strong.
Identifying existing constraints and challenges as well as potential opportunities to link social protection schemes with insurance and credit may be good but the value added is not argued well. Once the report is done, the question of "then what?" need to be discussed a bit further. The animal health connection is not well argued.
Thank you very much for your proposal to our contest. Our judges have selected your proposal to advance to the Semi-Finalists round. For the revision phase, we would like to provide you with some feedback from the judges that should help you improve your proposal and address open questions for the finalist round:
This proposal would make a valuable contribution to the development of appropriate affordable livestock index insurance for small farmers in the target region. This feasibility study is certainly important to better understand the links between the government's social protection scheme and opportunities with respect to livestock insurance and credit for vulnerable herders.
However, there is a range of challenges that our judges identified to be considered and addressed before any positive impact is achieved. The linkages to a more effective and climate-resilient social protection system for Rwanda need further thought. In light of climate change impacts that can be anticipated with some confidence in the coming decade, areas this proposals should look further into include the relative productive potential of small ruminants vs. cattle, establishment of guidelines for stocking rates that do not exacerbate land degradation, further diversification of livestock.
Given current knowledge cited on the negative socio-economic effects stemming from rainfall deficit, it would be imprudent not to specifically look at linking social protection systems (food for work, cash for work) to protection of water resource systems, intensification of gardening with manure inputs, etc. in addition to the more traditional conditions linked to health and education of children. This should be taken into account for the review phase.
In addition, the proposal would benefit from addressing what role the national government has in the process and how to ensure sustainability and ownership.
Please note also that, as semi-finalists to the contest, you are requested to provide a detailed budget for the spending of the seed funding (40,000 euros) that the team winning the Judge’s choice award will be granted for the implementation of their proposal.
Good luck and all the best,
The contest fellows
No comments have been posted.