The U.S. Agency for International Development's Production, Finance, and Technology (PROFIT) program in Lusaka, Zambia, is different from other development projects, according to Rob Munro, the program's senior market development advisor. This is because PROFIT has "real clients" in the private sector who maintain relationships with smallholder farmers.
By working with these partners, PROFIT isn't distorting the market "by throwing money at it" or giving farmers subsidies for inputs, such as fertilizer. Instead, it is working with farmers, the private sector, and donors to improve the competitiveness of rural businesses by linking large agribusiness firms to farmers. It's helping to improve linkages within industries that large numbers of small and medium-sized enterprises participate in, such as cotton, livestock, and non-timber forest products like honey.
Specifically, PROFIT helps communities select and train agricultural agents who work with agribusiness to provide inputs to farmers in rural areas-places where agribusiness firms had been reluctant to go because they didn't think there was a big enough market. The agents are essentially entrepreneurs who provide goods and services that the communities didn't have access to. In addition to selling things like hybrid maize or fertilizer, the agents can also provide ripping services to farmers practicing conservation farming methods, as well as herbicide spraying and veterinary services.
The "key" to the program's success, says Munro, is that the agent is a "community man" selected by the communities themselves, not by agribusiness firms. The farmers trust the agent not to run off with their money and to deliver the goods and services they've purchased.
Unlike traditional development projects that "inundate" communities with trainers, PROFIT minimizes the number of USAID staff involved locally, helping to ensure that the project isn't viewed as traditional "aid," which can create dependency. Unlike the AGRA-supported CNFA, which relies extensively on its own staff to train agro-dealers, 80 percent of the trainings for agents are not provided by PROFIT, but by firms that are training agents how to use their products.
PROFIT's model means that the program doesn't work "with the poorest of the poor," but with farmers who have the ability to scale up, says PROFIT chief of party Mark Wood. If you start with the very poorest, Wood says, "it's like trying to start a car without an engine." But by working with the 200,000 farmers in Zambia who have the means to collaborate with businesses, PROFIT is helping to create opportunities for thousands of poorer farmers in the future.
Stay tuned this week for more about PROFIT and Mobile Technology's work to help small and medium-sized enterprises and farmers use mobile phone technology for e-banking services and to access market information.
Thank you for reading! If you enjoy our diary every day we invite you to get involved:
1. Comment on our daily posts -- we check for comments everyday and want to have a regular ongoing discussion with you.
2. Receive regular updates--Join the weekly BorderJumpers newsletter by clicking here.
3. Help keep our research going--If you know of any great projects or contacts in West Africa please connect us connect us by emailing, commenting or sending us a message on facebook.
I know a lot of my posts tend to be on the long side, so I promise to keep this short, but I have a few random thoughts based on the responses I've been getting (personally and on OpenLeft.com) to my first post on this topic:
1. I really do feel like I sounded too dismissive in my first post of NPC, and that wasn't my intent. I think what they are trying to do with the PROI idea is intriguing and has potential for changing the culture of giving patterns, and I failed to convey that. The challenge for them is that, in the spirit of their founders and their home in Silicon Valley, they have a true venture capitalist model, and the results of their efforts will take a while to prove themselves, so it is too early to judge what they will accomplish. They are trying to do something that is difficult- make the culture of giving in progressive politics more sane- and they deserve credit for that effort.
2. It's been pointed out to me that we should give credit where credit is due, and thank the donors who already have supported the blogosphere in different ways. I don't know them all, but here's some to note:
-Rob McKay mentioned in his post that he has done so.
-I've been reminded by multiple people, including some of the recipients of their generosity, that Andy and Deborah Rappaport, in addition to founding NPC, have given substantial grants to great netroots-y groups such as ActBlue and NOI.
-Rob Johnson and Gail Furman have both been stalwart friends of the blogosphere.
-The Arca Foundation (which I'm on the board of) has given two sizable grants to groups helping bloggers.
There are others as well, including a fair number I don't know about, who have helped out in different ways. Thanks to all who have done their part.
3. I've been told that my post was fine regarding the big picture, but lacked a real world "next steps" section, especially for frontline bloggers writing away on issues with no access to sources of money. Good point, and I think all of us need to spend some time working through the realities of all this.
New Progressive Coalition and Democracy Alliance have both sent very thoughtful and interesting responses to my recent post on bloggers and donors, and I encourage folks to read them and respond. I like both of the posts a lot, and I think their ideas about how to move forward are useful. I have also gotten a lot of other constructive feedback from individuals in the donor, and plan to do another post soon on this topic. -Mike
First of all, I would like to thank OpenLeft for the opportunity to respond to your post about connecting donors to the blogosphere, and offer some insight from one donor's perspective as well as some insight into the Democracy Alliance organization.
As a longtime donor to progressive causes and campaigns, I have witnessed the evolution of the progressive movement. As a Board member for a number of progressive organizations, including Mother Jones and the Ms. Foundation for Women, I've had valuable insight into the challenges facing organizations as they seek out individual donors for the multi-year funding that is crucial for building capacity. Over the years that I have been involved in the progressive movement as a donor and activist, the environment has changed significantly. I believe there are powerful forces and constituencies that are replacing the old guard and bringing new voices and new ideas into the process. I have grown frustrated with the approach of "targeting" voters through expensive television ads that often miss the intended audience by a mile. I believe that blogs, and other new media tools, are a more efficient way to reach voters and we must find ways to support this work. As an individual donor I have supported and will continue to support bloggers, and the use of new technology and the online space to reach critical audiences who are often missed by more traditional media.
Political events in 2000, 2002, and 2004 galvanized the progressive movement at all levels. Progressives came together across the country, in a variety of ways, to unite around shared beliefs and a shared desire for change. As a Democracy Alliance Partner since its founding in 2005, and Board chair for the past year, I've seen firsthand exactly how much we've accomplished in the two years since our inception and I'm heartened to see the movement expanding on all fronts.
The netroots community and blogosphere have grown in the last several years into a powerful force that was almost unimaginable just a few years ago. In the last two years the Democracy Alliance has begun to form a first of its kind community of donors committed to strengthening democracy by partnering with, making human and financial investments in, and fostering collaboration among leaders and institutions committed to building a sustainable progressive infrastructure.
In his post Mike correctly enumerated some crucial barriers to funding the blogosphere, and the near impossibility of realizing a significant impact by giving to individuals. However, those barriers are neither permanent nor insurmountable. As an individual progressive funder I, and others like me, will continue to fund bloggers and those who are making progressive change happen. As a Partner in the Democracy Alliance the goal is to fund collaboratively, and as the Chairman of the Democracy Alliance, we look forward to finding opportunities to support the entire netroots community through organizations and institutions that are enabling the long-term health and sustainability of the community.
I hope this marks the beginning of an honest and productive conversation between donors and the netroots, about how to leverage the power of both groups to move forward in a strategic and effective partnership.
On behalf of the Board of Directors, and the Democracy Alliance staff, I want to thank you again for the opportunity to share my thoughts.
There is a great deal of conversation in the blogosphere about why Democratic and progressive donors don't do more to support this movement. Bloggers are justifiably proud of the incredible added value they've brought to Democratic/progressive politics in the form of breaking important news stories that the media has ignored, shaping the debate on major issues that nobody else has done, identifying candidates early on that the Democratic establishment was ignoring and helping them go on to victory, recruiting tens of thousands of new volunteers for Democratic candidates and raising millions of dollars for the Democratic Party and progressive candidates. Bloggers have revitalized the Democratic Party and progressive politics, and yet for the most part, they are ignored by its major donors.
I wanted to share my perspective on this, as someone who knows and has worked for many years with people in the donor community. I believe that bringing these donors into a mutually beneficial relationship with the progressive blogosphere will happen, but that it will take a different kind of strategy and some patience before things change. I am optimistic over the long term, because for all their differences, the big donor community and the blogger community have one big thing in common: candidates and groups all too often look at them as ATM machines, rather than valuing their ideas and strategic thinking.
STATE BLOGS
The U.S. Agency for International Development's 
