This document provides a baseline report on partnerships between last mile firms and financial institutions to improve smallholder finance. It details four partnerships being studied between agribusinesses, technology providers, and financial institutions. The report finds that such partnerships have the potential to improve viability by sharing costs, reducing risk for financial institutions, and providing alternative data on farmers. However, significant challenges remain such as financial institutions' lack of understanding of agriculture and reluctance to use alternative data from last mile firms. The report outlines areas to assess in future evaluations of the partnerships.
3. 3
Executive summary (2/4)
Key question 2: What are the impediments to partnership development?
Ø Last mile firms experience significant challenge when searching for and leading partnership discussion, namely:
- FIs don’t understand agriculture and therefore remain reluctant to go into partnership. Last mile firms must spend
extensive time convincing multiple stakeholders within FIs of the value proposition
- The commercial benefit of partnerships is not readily apparent. A lack of historical precedent or evidence of partnerships in
agriculture impede development. A lack of precedent also creates difficulties when negotiating the operational model, cost
and revenue sharing arrangements
- Financial institutions don’t trust the data that last mile firms provide. FIs are risk averse and therefore reluctant to use
alternate data provided by agribusinesses or ag-focused technology providers without significant verification of its integrity
and quality
Key question 1 continued…
Ø Agribusinesses and technology providers demonstrate interest in partnering with FIs where they can lower the cost of capital
for farmers and improve the monetization of the systems that the last mile firms have developed
Ø Both last mile firms and FIs believe that the above elements improve the viability of providing financial products and
services to smallholder farmers. To date, however, the partnerships in place remain in their infancy, meaning tangible results
and evidence of improved viability for both businesses and farmers is still forthcoming
Ø No evidence or discussion of improved scalability was given during the Baseline assessment. All partnerships remain in
piloting and/or proof of concept stage. It is expected that evidence of partnership benefits for scaling will not occur until
viability of partnerships are proven
4. 4
Executive summary (3/4)
Areas that should be tested through the Mid-point check-in and Endline Evaluation
Ø This baseline report has focused on the activities that both last mile firms and FIs have been undertaking to set-up
partnerships and why both parties believe partnerships will be valuable. The mid-point check-in and endline evaluation
(proposed for August 2017 and early 2018 respectively), should focus on:
- Understanding where there has been progress on partnership negotiations and development
- Whether beliefs on the benefits of partnership still holds
- What the results have been, if any, from partnerships for businesses and smallholder farmers
Key question 3: What enables partnership development and what should last mile firms look for when seeking FI
partners?
Ø In interviewing last mile firms and FIs, common enablers were evidenced supporting partnership formation:
- FIs with stated goals or strategies in agriculture or the Base of Pyramid (BoP) are more likely to be interested in
partnerships. These FIs often have little internal capability or knowledge on how to reach stated goals
- Partnership teams within FIs improve the chances of partnership formation. Partnership teams are generally more open to
innovative approaches and have experience that can expedite partnership negotiations
- Existing relationships are important. Trust is crucial to partnership formation, existing relationships improve trust
- Short term guarantees to support piloting, testing of alternate data and trust building can help. Underwriting risk in the
short term increases willingness to adopt innovative approaches during the early stages of partnership
7. 7
Context and objectives of the study
• The scale of the smallholder farmer need for financing is huge, estimated at approximately $30bn in SSA
• The recently released report – Inflection Point - proposed progressive partnerships as a key to addressing
business model sustainability challenges in the industry. Building on this, Dalberg, with the Rural and
Agriculture Finance Learning Lab, is studying the importance of partnerships for financial provision
• This deep dive study focuses on leveraging the participation of the Fund for Rural Prosperity (FRP) grant
winners to generate insightful answers for the broader rural and agricultural finance community on innovative
approaches to overcome barriers to the provision of finance, specifically focused on the question of:
• This question will be answered through an engagement that spans across 18 months with three major points
of activity: baseline, midpoint and endpoint data collections. Data collection will focus on reviewing the
motivation, process, business dynamics and results partnership formation
• The FRP winners involved in the study include: Prepeez, Kifiya, Empresa de Comercialização Agricola (ECA) and
Biopartenaire
The objectives of this report are to:
• Detail the partnerships investigated, including the process, methods and motivations of both the last mile firms
and financial services institutions for forming partnerships
• Outline the benefits from partnerships, the enabling factors that support creation and the common challenges
• Outline the results and/or impacts seen to date from partnership formation
ContextObjectives
In what ways – if at all – do business partnerships driven by technology providers or innovative
agribusinesses (“last mile firms,” distinct from models led by financial institutions) improve the
viability and potential scalability of financial service provision to rural customers?
8. 8
Mid-point check-in Endline evaluation
2 3
The deep dive will be completed over 3 stages - this report details the
findings from the pre-visit and baseline evaluation
Pre-visit preparation Baseline evaluation
• Review available
documentation on
FRP winners
• Prepare interview
guides for FRP
winners and their
partners
• Conduct meetings via
phone with FRP
winners to gauge
state of partnerships
• Schedule initial field
visits with FRP
winners and their
partners
• Conduct field visits
(meetings) with FRP
winners and their
partners
• Finalize baseline
Deep Dive report
after meetings
• Share finalized
baseline Deep Dive
report with Learning
Lab team
• Modify FRP winner
interview guide
• Hold calls with FRP
winners to determine
progress / any major
changes in
partnerships
• Develop short
Midline report
outlining any major
changes seen since
Baseline study
• Hold calls with FRP
winners to prepare
for endline field visits
• Modify all interview
guides as needed
• Conduct field visits
with FRP winners and
their partners
• Develop endline
Deep Dive report
that focuses on
partnership results
with Learning Lab
team
StepsTools
• Pre-visit interview
guide
• FRP winner interview
guide
• FRP winner interview
guide
• FI interview guide
• Beneficiaries interview
guide
• FRP winner interview
guide
• FI interview guide
• Beneficiaries interview
guide
1a 1b
12. 12
Four last mile firms were the focus of the study - they operate differing
business models across multiple value chains and countries in Africa
Source: Dalberg interviews and analysis
Who Where What
Biopartenaire (subsidiary of Barry Callebaut) is a cocoa off-
taker who also provides farmers with inputs and collects
payment after harvest. Biopartenaire is looking to partner in a
pre-financing scheme for quality agricultural inputs.
Empresa de Comercialização Agricola (ECA) is an off-taker of
maize working in Mozambique. They have been attempting to
build a partnership with Vodacom to facilitate mobile money
transactions. They also provide on-lending.
Prep-eez, runs an information delivery and communication
platform. The platform: (1) Provides information and
extension support; (2) Collates data on farmers, and (3)
Provides an avenue for FIs to connect with farmers and lend
directly. Prep-eez also provides on-farm services and is an
offtaker.
Kifiya has developed a transaction platform and is partnering
with farmer cooperatives, insurance companies and micro-
finance institutions to provide mobile payment solutions to
farmers. Kifiya has also developed a micro-insurance product
for farmers that it is working with insurance companies to
deliver.
ECA
*
*Kifiya is best described as a technology provider rather than an agribusiness. For
the purpose of this study, we have focused Kifiya’s agri-focused activities
15. 15
Biopartenaire is a Côte D’Ivoire based subsidiary of Barry Callebaut, a B2B
chocolate and cocoa supplier and manufacturer
Org. Type: Agribusiness
Key contact: Project Manager: Andres Tschannen
Location: Côte d’Ivoire
Business
details:
Biopartenaire is a specialized village-to-port cocoa bean
supplier. The firm:
1) Provides farmers with quality inputs for cocoa
production and collects payment at harvest time
by taking delivery of the cocoa
2) Delivers on-the-ground extension support - such
as cocoa tree pruning, agribusiness and financial
literacy training
3) Provides pre-financing for inputs to non-coop
farmers from its balance sheet
4) Partners with Advans (MFI) to support farmer
savings ,which Biopartenaire uses as collateral
Barry Callebaut has been in partnership with Advans
for three years, and aims to convince FIs to lend
directly to farmers
Biopartenaire current partnership model
for saving product
Savings
Advans provides
farmers with a
savings product
and a mobile
channel for
deposits
Farmer groups - each
farmer group has a
village coordinator who
acts as a distribution
point for inputs
Biopartenaire
provides
Advans with a
customer base
for their savings
product
Biopartenaire
sustainability
department
Biopartenaire
provides credit,
using the savings
as collateral
Source: Biopartenaire documentation, field visit with Biopartenaire team, interviews
with current and potential Biopartenaire partners, Dalberg analysis
16. 16
Biopartenaire has successfully brokered a partnership with Advans, and is
looking convince the MFI to lend directly to farmers
Source: Biopartenaire documentation, field visit with Biopartenaire team, interviews
with current and potential Biopartenaire partners, Dalberg analysis
Motivation for partnership
Process on approaching FIs and value
proposed
Business and organization dynamics
of partnership
• Remove lending from their balance
sheet and eventually hand it over to
MFIs (promote direct lending to
farmers)
• Finance farmers outside coops who
are excluded from formal finance
• Leverage Advans’ branchless banking
system to provide farmers with
finance
• Approached FIs with a finance product
which they could implement (eased
burden of developing a farmer-tailored
product)
• Leveraged the brand (and size) of Barry
Callebaut to gain traction with potential
partners
• Focused on approaching MFIs rather
than banks; MFIs are more flexible on
the types of collateral they use, while
banks are reluctant to work with farmers
• Partnerships with FIs are handled
within Biopartenaire’s sustainability
department
• Developed an an open-ended MoU
with Advans, which allows for
flexibility in implementation in order
to draw learnings from the pilot phase
• Biopartenaire communicates directly
with the Director of Advans in addition
to a Project Manager in the Cocoa
Department at Advans
Details of Biopartenaire partnership activities and negotiations:
• The cocoa value chain in Ivory Coast is well structured and involves a large number of the country’s rural
population. This has drawn the interest of MFIs, and creates the opportunity to promote partnerships
• While the government has worked to promote finance for farmers, much of the task has fallen on off-takers. Moreover, few
farmers have title deeds and can therefore not use their land as collateral, creating a need to promote partnerships
How country context is impacting partnership development
Potential impact on farmers
• Most farmers have no access to formal financial services, and use expensive loan sharks. Biopartenaire’s model
ensures that the finance goes towards input provision, therefore increasing yield and income. It is also more
affordable that informal finance, reducing exploitation of farmers
19. 19
Empresa de Comercializacao Agricola (ECA) is an agro-processing company
that works closely with Mozambican maize farmers
*CDM is a subsidiary of SABMiller
Source: ECA documentation, interviews with current ECA partners, Dalberg analysis
Org. Type: Agribusiness
Key contacts: Managing Director: Grant Taylor
Administration and Finance Manager: Alison Taylor
Location: Mozambique
Business
details:
ECA is an agribusiness that:
1) Buys maize from farmers, and processes and
sells it to both local and international off-
takers like Cargill and CDM*
2) Provides input financing to farmers; ECA
distribute and collect the money, which they
deduct from the harvest to pay the input
finance loan
ECA receives a financing facility (loan) from Banco
Terra Moçambique (BTM) that they use to finance
input supply for its farmers. In 2016 ECA entered
into an agreement with CDM to pre-finance the
crops
ECA looking to partner with Vodafone to
implement mobile payment solution for its farmers
to improve operational efficiency and reduce costs;
also looking at Banco Oportunidade
Initially envisioned ECA partnership model
Loan facility Mobile
money
Farmers
ECA deducts input loan
payments after harvest,
and pays farmers
(currently pay cash but
working towards mobile
payments)
Annual loan
to ECA
ECA
ECA
ECA buys and
distributes inputs
to farmers
Off-taker
purchases
(under negotiation)
Mobile payments
solution for ECA
farmers
Purchase
maize from
ECA
20. 20
ECA has faced challenges in securing partnerships, largely due to the
operating environment in Mozambique
Source: ECA documentation, interviews with current ECA partners, Dalberg analysis
Motivation for partnership
Process on approaching FIs and value
proposed
Business and organization dynamics
of partnership
• To support improved working capital
management by having banks or off-
takers pre-finance inputs for farmers
• To provide an efficient mobile
payments solution for farmers that
lowers transaction costs and improves
security
• Promote business to a broad range of
banks and off-takers through in-person
meetings and existing relationships
• Utilize support from external platforms
and donors - e.g. AgDevCo, Grow Africa -
to develop connections and support
partnership formation
• Agreement with BTM is a standard
contract with the agribusiness unit. It’s
supported by a guarantee provided
from Rabo Foundation
• Pre-financing agreement with CDM was
signed in 2016 and this covers the
annual contract of product required by
CDM
Details of ECA partnership negotiations:
• Mozambique is experiencing political turmoil; conflict in the region ECA operates has displaced 1000 farmers
who were working with ECA and led to Cargill pulling out of an agreement to pre-finance inputs
• The poor communication infrastructure and weak mobile money ecosystem has made Vodafone reluctant to enter into
partnership with ECA, as they would have to take up the cost of setting up the infrastructure themselves
• There has been major exchange rate depreciation and the central bank has extremely limited liquidity. This has driven up
interest rates, increased commercial bank capital requirements and reduced the amount available for lending
• All land belongs to the government; farmers do not own land and therefore have no collateral. This makes it difficult to
structure a partnership where FIs will lend directly to farmers
How country context is impacting partnership development
Potential impact on farmers
• Continued support from BTM and CDM would allow ECA to continue pre-financing agricultural inputs, thereby
increasing farmer yield and income
• Successful partnership with Vodafone would reduce the risk of farmers carrying cash around during the harvest
season, particularly in the wake of political turmoil
21. 21
Due to the operational risks and investment required, ECA’s partners require
assurances of a return on investment in order to consider partnership
Source: Biopartenaire documentation, field visit with Biopartenaire team, interviews
with current and potential Biopartenaire partners, Dalberg analysis
ECA’s current and potential partners and the details of their interest:
• [Motivation] BTM does not have interest in increasing activities with ECA at this moment, they do, however, highlight that
the strength and unique value of ECA comes through the strong relationship and trust they have built with farmers
• [Process – maintain relationship] BTM has a long relationship with ECA but will not deal directly with farmers as it is too
risky. They advise that it’s difficult to generate profit in agriculture, which heightens reluctance to work directly with farmers
• [Business dynamics] The bank provides ECA with an overdraft facility; ECA buys inputs, distribute them and collect the
money, which they deduct from the harvest to pay the input finance loan. Rabo Foundation gives a 90% guarantee on the
exposure on the loan. BTM finances ECA and other agribusinesses because there are guarantees in place to protect the bank
• [Motivation] Vodacom is interested in supporting farmers and increasing transaction volumes of mobile money in
Mozambique. They will be more willing to partner once sufficient opportunity to add value by going cashless is apparent
• [Business dynamics – risks to partnership] Liquidity management for mobile money agents is a problem – a limited mobile
money ecosystem results in farmers withdrawing all their cash at once, creating large peaks and dips in supply. This is in
addition to the security concerns of handling large amounts of cash, and the logistical barriers to acquiring the cash
necessary for daily operation since there is only one bank in ECAs area of operation
Overview: Banco Terra Moçambique was started as an agriculture and food bank, but has since diversified its portfolio,
with agriculture accounting for 40% of its portfolio. They have interest in working with all large agribusinesses like ECA
Details
Current partner
Potential partner
Overview: Vodacom is a mobile money provider in Mozambique. ECA has sought a partnership with Vodacom to
support the use mobile money services to pay farmers. Negotiation has stalled with Vodacom citing connectivity
challenges and insufficient development of the mobile money ecosystem as major impediments to investment
Details
23. 23
Prepeez is a Ghanaian based agribusiness/tech firm focused on developing a
platform to connect financial services to smallholder farmers
Source: Dalberg analysis and interviews
Org. Type: Technology platform provider
Key contact: CEO: Kow A. Sam (called Sam)
Location: Ghana
Business
details:
Prep-eez runs an information delivery and
communication platform. The platform:
1) Provides information and extension support
using integrated voice recognition (IVR)
2) Collates data on farmers, such as farm size,
crops grown, crop status and demographics
3) Provides an avenue for FIs to connect with and
lend directly to farmers (still under
development and negotiation)
Prepeez also have field agents who deliver on-the-
ground extension support - such as cocoa tree
pruning - and use smartphones to collect data on
farmers. Prepeez also act as an input provider and
off-taker for the farmers it works with
Prepeez is currently negotiating partnerships with
the Ghana Agriculture Insurance Programme
(GAIP), Fidelity Bank and EcoBank
Pre-peez envisioned partnership model
Other
Prepeez BUs
Prepeez
platform
Insurance
(under negotiation)
Credit and saving
(under negotiation)
Farmers
Farm and
farmer data
Extension
support
Provide
inputs
Purchase
produce
Access
farmer
profiles
Access
farmer
profiles
24. 24
Prepeez is seeking partnerships with multiple financial institutions in Ghana;
negotiations remain ongoing
Source: Dalberg analysis and interviews
Motivation for partnership
Process on approaching FIs and value
proposed
Business and organization dynamics
of partnership
• Capitalize on ‘Know Your
Customer’(KYC) information being
collected on farmers
• Allow farmers to better afford inputs
and extension support such as
pruning services
• To use platform to facilitate
Warehouse Receipt financing (not
currently available) that capitalizes on
price changes in cocoa (govt sets
annual price in October)
• Has prepared a pitch and approached
most FIs in Ghana. Specific focus given
to FIs who are known to target
smallholder farmers and be open to
innovation
• Leverage existing contacts to gain
introductions to the correct people
within FIs
• Promote the market size and
opportunity to capture that market as
major selling point to FIs
• Negotiation focused on the creation of
MoUs. On-going negotiation on what
form the product takes, the business
model and who signs-off with FIs
resulting in delays achieving final
agreement
• No formal structure for regular
communication or liaison is in place.
Sam (Prepeez CEO) is driving all liaison
and negotiation
Details of Prepeez partnership negotiations:
• Ghana is private sector friendly with a competitive banking industry. This results in the need to promote the
economic and business case for partnership formation
• Ghana currently has high interest rates (circa 35%) which locks most farmers out of the market. Partnerships must be
developed in order to create sufficient value so farmers still demand the financial services on offer
• The government has monopoly buying power and sets and annual price for cocoa. This can impact partnership opportunities
How country context is impacting partnership development
Potential impact on farmers
• Financial services currently unavailable. Will improve ability to purchase yield improving inputs and extension
• WRS will allow delay of selling cocoa to capitalize on higher price whilst still getting access to some cashflow
• Packaged insurance offering will allow farmers to delay sale of produce with greater piece of mind
25. 25
FIs are interested in partnering because Prepeez provides a gateway to a
large customer base and access to useful farmer data
Source: Dalberg analysis and interviews
Potential partners Prepeez is in negotiation with and the details of their interest:
• [Motivation] Prepeez provides acquisition channel through KYC, on-the-ground team and expertise on agriculture needs
• [Process – approvals] Fidelity is currently seeking internal approvals in order to take the partnership forward
• [Organization dynamics] Partnership is being negotiated by Fidelity’s ‘inclusive business unit.’ This unit focuses on the BOP
• [Motivation and process] The market size of agriculture creates a compelling value proposition. Ecobank is currently
assessing the business case and associated risk. Assessment by the Credit Department and Digital Transactions team
• [Organization dynamics] The Digital Transaction team leads negotiation. They’re an entry point for other financial products
• [Motivation] Prepeez brings large amounts of data which is valuable for GAIP in developing insurance products. Prepeez
also an attractive partner for GAIP because they lower transaction costs by not only providing a channel to distribute
insurance but also have an on-the-ground team who can educate and conduct due diligence on farmers
• [Process] GAIP is currently negotiating product and revenue sharing details with Prepeez and also seeking internal approvals
Potential partner
Potential partner
Potential partner
Overview: Fidelity Bank strategy is focused on building the customer base and increasing level of deposits. They are
seeking partnerships such as Prep-eez that support customer acquisition efficiently and with limited cost
DetailsDetails
Overview: EcoBank has a strategy directive to do more work in agriculture but don't have the systems, connections
or structures in place to be able to do this. Prep-eez can provide data and connection to farmers
Details
Overview: GAIP was specifically set-up to increase insurance in the agriculture sector with all insurance companies
mandated to contribute to GAIP’s pool of risk capital. They are actively looking for partners to help deliver insurance
27. 27
Kifiya has developed a transaction platform, agent network and micro-
insurance product that they are scaling up across Ethiopia
Source: Dalberg analysis and interviews
Org. Type: Payment Service Provider and Enabler of Digital
Financial Services*
Key contact: Director: Myriam Said
Location: Ethiopia
Business
details:
Kifiya develops digital financial services
infrastructure (transaction platforms and
distribution channels) that:
1) Provide payment services (such as for utility
bills and transit tickets) through agents and a
merchant network
2) Partner with and enable MFIs to provide
branch-less banking services through
cooperatives
3) Develop and deliver micro insurance products
to smallholder farmers
The main area of interest for this study is the
partnerships Kifiya is currently developing with
Ethiopia’s largest insurance companies - Ethiopian
Insurance Agency and Oromia Insurance Agency -
to scale and deliver their micro-insurance product
Kifiya partnership model
Farmers
Kifiya
platform
Multi-purpose cooperatives
(contains Kifiya agent)
Provide extension
support, inputs,
finance products etc.
One-stop-shop for
MPC to facilitate
transactions
Insurance Lending
(7 MFIs)
Transit
companies
Utility
companies
*As noted earlier, Kifiya is foremost a technology platform provider. They
are currently developing agriculture focused products and partnerships in
order to increase the volume of transactions through their platform
28. 28
Kifiya is currently increasing the depth of partnerships with insurance
companies who can scale the micro-insurance product they’ve developed
Source: Dalberg analysis and interviews
Motivation for partnership
Process on approaching FIs and value
proposed
Business and organization dynamics
of partnership
• Kifiya wants partners to create an
ecosystem that can enable the
delivery of financial services at scale
by leveraging its DFS infrastructure
• Kifiya is also looking for insurance
companies who can underwrite the
risk and scale up the micro-
insurance product they have
developed for farmers
• Kifiya targets the biggest MFIs and
insurance companies (by market share)
as potential partners
• Kifiya capitalizes on existing connections
to gain an audience with potential
partners and present a pitch deck to
those interested
• Kifiya has built a consortium that
includes government agencies that have
a stake in micro insurance development
• A steering committee and working
group have been formed which
include: Kifiya, insurance companies
and government reps. The committee
determines roles and responsibilities
in addition to areas of operation
• Kifiya use MoUs with partners which
stipulate revenue sharing
arrangements
Details of Kifiya partnership negotiations:
• The private sector in Ethiopia is small. Most organizations have significant government ownership and
involvement. The government stipulates where organizations can operate and what they can offer
• All farmers in Ethiopia are members of cooperatives. Working with farmers requires working through cooperatives
• The government has prioritized micro-insurance for farmers as an area for development. The government has a target of 5.6
million farmers receiving micro-insurance by 2021
• Recently reported unrest in parts of Ethiopia may impact where Kifiya is able to operate and with whom
How country context is impacting partnership development
Potential impact on farmers
• Farmers will be able to access more products with greater ease due to multiple partners using Kifiya platform
• Very few farmers have insurance (currently less than 10,000 farmers have agri micro insurance and these are pilot
projects), a high quality and affordable micro-insurance product will mitigate the impact of unforeseen events
29. 29
Insurance companies are mandated by the government to insure over five
million farmers, they believe Kifiya can help them achieve this
Source: Dalberg analysis and interviews
• [Motivation] EIC have limited internal capacity for innovation / product development (e.g. they employ no actuaries) and
ability to rapidly grow customers numbers. They state “We see Kifiya as the brains of our organization“
• [Process for selection – suits needs] EIC is mandated by the government to increase the number of farmers accessing
insurance. EIC have selected Kifiya as partner because: (1) Kifiya’s platform and agency network will allow insurance to be
delivered more cheaply (EIC estimate 60% cheaper), (2) Kifiya has developed an insurance product that is superior to
anything else on the market and (3) Kifiya have a proven capacity to successfully role out new and innovative products
• [Organizational dynamics] The partnership is being led by EICs Director for Micro-insurance
Kifiya’s major partners in the insurance sector and the details of their interest:*
*Note that whilst Kifiya has a multitude of partners, during the field visit and for the purpose of this study we have focused on partnerships
with FIs working in the insurance sector. These partnership negotiations are viewed as the most relevant for the deep dive question
• [Motivation] Increasing sales of micro-insurance to farmers is a priority area for OIA. Their interest in Kifiya stems from the
belief that the Kifiya platform and agency network will significantly lower the cost of delivering insurance products. In
addition, the Kifiya micro-insurance product is deemed superior to the micro-insurance products OIA currently has on offer
(Kifiya’s product uses satellite data working on a 1x1km pattern whilst OIA’s product works on a 10x10km pattern)
• [Process] OIA is not concerned about the business case for partnership, customer acquisition is most important factor
• [Organizational dynamics] OIA have a micro-insurance team who is in charge of leading and managing the partnership
DetailsDetails
Overview: The Ethiopian Insurance Corporation (EIC) is state owned and accounts for 40% of the insurance
market. They seek partners such as Kifiya to help them provide insurance to the majority of Ethiopians
Current partner
Current partner
Overview: Operating in the Oromia region, the Oromia Insurance Agency (OIA) is the second biggest
insurance company in Ethiopia. They seek partners who can help them increase their customer base
35. 35
Observed examples of how last mile firms are sharing (reducing) costs and
risk with FIs
Source: Interviews with FRP winners and their partners, Dalberg analysis
Customer acquisition
Product
distribution / collection
Product
development
Credit risk management
• Biopartenaire reduces
customer acquisition
costs for Advans by
allowing them to access
a large number of
farmers at once. Advans
would otherwise have to
invest in marketing costs
and work to build trust
with these farmers
• In Ghana, Prepeez intend
to allow multiple FIs to
view the records of
farmers they work with;
this reduces FIs’ costs of
seeking out farmers
whom they can offer
financial services
• Kifiya’s platform serves
as a central channel that
insurance companies can
use to sell their products,
reducing the costs of
establishing distribution
channels to reach
farmers.
• Vodacom has leveraged
ECA’s on-ground
presence and connection
with growers to try and
develop a distribution
channel for mobile
money and to grow the
mobile money ecosystem
• Biopartenaire serves as a
distribution channel for
Advans’ savings product
• Kifiya has designed an
agri-insurance product
for farmers, which has
reduced the cost for
insurance companies to
conduct their own
research and
development for farmer-
tailored insurance
products.
• Biopartenaire uses its’
knowledge of cocoa
agronomic cycles and
farmer incomes to
design financial packages
and advise Advans on
how products should be
rolled out
• Prepeez is educating
farmers on WRS
• Biopartenaire provides
farmers with technical
assistance (agronomic,
agribusiness and
financial literacy
training), which increases
productivity and finance
management, thereby
reducing credit risk
• Prepeez is providing
easy-to-access farmer
and agriculture data
• ECA provides on-lending
services to farmers. As
the lender and collector
of credit, ECA conducts
due diligence on farmers
and absorbs a portion of
the loss should a farmer
default
36. 36
Strong interest exists in using last mile firm data to better serve smallholders;
FIs remain unsure of how to best use data and whether it can be trusted
Source: Interviews with FRP winners and their partners, Dalberg analysis
Ø Last mile firms can provide an array of data that can be used to better assess farmers for credit and
insurance products, such as data on farm size, crops grown, market prices etc.
Ø FIs are interested in agriculture specific data because they often know little about these areas and
have few other data sources by which to adequately assess of smallholder farmers
“We don’t know much about farmers and
have little data about them - any data that
can be provided by a partner is useful”
Ecobank, Ghana
Financial institutions believe that the data last mile
firms provide can improve the viability of assessing
smallholders for financial products. Most FIs are
currently unsure of how to best use alternative data and
whether it can be trusted
Types of data
Examples
Ø Prepeez is collecting significant amounts farmer data, including plot size and growing activities. FIs in
Ghana have expressed significant interest in utilizing this data for farmer assessment
Ø Outside of this deep dive, projects are being led by Mercy Corps’ Agrifin Accelerate and AGRA on the use of
alternative data for credit scoring. Multiple financial institutions have expressed strong interest in utilizing
alternative data for improving their ability to lend to smallholder farmers
Use of
alternative
data (per FI)
Pre-
conditions
Ø Financial institutions express interest in utilizing alternate data in order to better manage risk in lending
to farmers and expand customer base
Ø Financial institutions also demonstrate interest in using alternate data for product development: “The data
collected shapes your thinking” – GAIP, Ghana
Ø FIs have a lack of trust in alternate data provided by last mile firms. Before buying in, FIs require better
understanding of how to best use alternate data and verification on the data's quality and accuracy
38. 38
Despite the potential benefits for improving viability of financial service
provision, common challenges are experienced for partnership development
SOURCE: Discussions with FRP winners and their partners, Dalberg analysis
FI challenges
• Trusting data integrity: FIs do not trust the data being provided by last mile firms. Internal risk
management teams are reluctant to use this data without significant level of testing and analysis. A
lack of unique identifiers within data also inhibits the ability to use it “We need to undertake due
diligence with extension providers to ensure data integrity” – Opportunity International
• Institutional and systems rigidity: FIs are generally highly risk averse resulting in multiple levels of
hierarchy across multiple Departments that must approve any new products or partnerships. Even
if buy-in exists, FIs find it difficult to adjust systems to integrate with last mile firms.
Last mile firm
challenges
• Finding the right department within FIs: many FIs see work with smallholder farmers as sitting
within CSR or ‘inclusive business’ units. These units may not offer the commercial products or
terms that are best suited to meeting the long term needs of last mile firm or farmers
• Proving commercial viability: FIs are often larger, more established companies than the last mile
firms pushing for partnership. Consequently, it may take a lot of time for last mile partner to build
credibility and grow into a size that is attractive for FIs. For example, Vodafone (a potential ECA
partner) highlighted than when considering partnerships, “We look for the size of the company:
the more payments they do the better”
General
challenges
• Agreeing to the operational model – Partners may struggle to align on roles and responsibilities,
which can be time-consuming and/or lead to dissatisfaction. For example, Advans has been working
with Biopartenaire for three years but don’t feel they have the operational model right, “We did not
do a good job of clarifying who does what in the beginning, we feel it would actually be more
efficient to have our own foot soldiers on the ground because our solution is quite complicated”
• Agreeing to cost and revenue sharing - Costs to educate and train farmers on the value of financial
products can be significant. Last mile firms may look for support from FIs to help meet these costs
which they may be reluctant to do without donor support
43. 43
Annex 1: Few results are yet to be seen, the Midline and Endline studies
should seek to highlight the impact from partnerships
SOURCE: Discussions with FRP winners and their partners, Dalberg analysis
Summary of results from partnerships so far:
Given limited results to date, the Midline and Endline studies should give significant time to measuring results,
namely:
• How many farmers received financial products as a result of the partnership?
• What was the financial impact on both the FI and the last mile firm from the partnership?
• What was the impact on the farmers / beneficiaries from the partnership?
• Were there new partnerships formed or partnerships that were absolved over time? What was the driver of
change?
• What are the other major issues that have been experienced through the life of the partnership?
• Have the partnerships impacted the rural and agricultural finance ecosystem within the target market?
Biopartenaire ECA Kifiya Prepeez
• 1000 farmers are using
Advans’ saving product as
collateral for credit
• Advans sees the
partnership as being in an
experimental phase, and
is hoping to scale up
services after drawing
learnings from the pilot
• More than 4,000 farmers
receiving on-lending from
facility provided by Banco
Terra
• Banco Terra is likely to
keep working with ECA
because their loan is
guaranteed
• Vodafone is willing to work
with ECA if mobile money
and communication
infrastructure improves
• ~2,000 farmers
participated in micro-
insurance trial with 75%
receiving some form of
payout
• Program to be scaled up in
early 2017; insurance
companies see strong
value in access to farmers,
a strong product and the
distribution channel Kifiya
provides
• Partnerships are not yet in
place, MoUs are currently
under negotiation
• Fidelity and GAIP both see
a strong value proposition
in Prepeez (customer
acquisition and farmer
data, respectively)
44. 44
Annex 2: This study aligns with other partnership focused activities being
undertaken by Mercy Corps and AGRA on improving smallholder finance
* Patient Procurement Platform in Tanzania and DigiFarm in Kenya
• AGRA is currently conducting a study looking at data
being collected by agribusinesses and what FI
require to be use and trust this data for credit
assessments
• Mercy Corps’ AgriFin Accelerate (AFA) program is
supporting the development of two partnership
based platforms* to bring multiple players (FIs, input
suppliers, extension services and market buyers)
together
• Financial institutions seek partnerships for a range of
reasons, including access to alternative data,
customer acquisition and lowering transaction costs.
What they value depends on the institutions strategy
• Technical support can play a valuable role in
supporting partnerships, particularly by underwriting
risk whilst the value of the partnership and the data it
brings is being verified. Technical support helps
increase the confidence of FIs who lack knowledge on
farmers and farmer-specific data
• Partnership formation can be a lengthy process
which requires multiple iterations and rounds of
negotiation due to the amount of time it takes to
build trust and align on the business model
• FIs state a need for the data to be in a form that can
be easily processed, and the difficulty of working
with data provided when data needs and
specifications of FIs have not been considered from
the beginning
A&B
• FIs express strong interest in using alternative data
but don’t trust the integrity of the data being
collected. FIs are also unsure which data points
provide the best decision making information
• No clear systems or standards for data security and
integration of data collection / sharing systems
• Limited knowledge of agriculture within FIs
• Building trust between partners in addition to
determining roles and responsibilities takes time and
delays partnership formation
• Determining revenue share arrangements is difficult
where no historical precedent exists
• Partner reticence on sharing data due to concerns
about losing IP and data not being ‘clean’ for use
Recent
Activities
Challenges
identified
for
partnership
formation
Where
findings
align with
this
Baseline
Report
45. 45
Annex 2: Additional further, or upcoming reading
• Learning Lab and ISF (2016) Inflection Point
• Learning Brief 01: The business case for digitally-enabled smallholder
finance
• Initiative for Smallholder Finance Briefing Notes
• Lending a Hand: How direct-to-farmer finance providers reach smallholders
• Value Chain Financing: How agro-enterprises serve as alternate aggregation
points for delivering financial services to smallholder farmers
• The Rise of the Data Scientist: How big data and data science are changing
smallholder finance
• IDH Sustainable Trade: Service Delivery Model research
• Forthcoming: Opportunity International Value Chain Partnerships in
Practice