Final Formatted Report - Indonesia Cocoa Value Chain
Final Formatted Report - Indonesia Cocoa Value Chain
Final Formatted Report - Indonesia Cocoa Value Chain
microREPORT #2
Indonesia Cocoa
Henry Panlibuton
Maggie Meyer
June 2004
Abbreviations..................................................................................................................................iv
Executive Summary.........................................................................................................................v
1Background and Research Approach.............................................................................................1
1.1 Background............................................................................................................................1
1.2 Research Approach................................................................................................................2
Indonesia’s Position in the Global Value Chain..............................................................................4
2.1 Major Market Segments for Cocoa .......................................................................................4
Charateristics of the Value Chain in Indonesia................................................................................8
3.1 Overview of Indonesian Cocoa..............................................................................................8
3.2 Governance and Power........................................................................................................11
3.3 Margins and the Distribution of Returns.............................................................................12
Illustrative Program Strategies.......................................................................................................14
4.1 Identification of Major Constraints and Opportunities........................................................14
4.2 Identification and Prioritization of Possible Commercially Viable Solutions.....................17
Recommendations and Conclusion................................................................................................19
Detailed Description of Value Chain Participants.....................................................................35
Assessment of Targeted Solutions ............................................................................................47
Bi-lateral Donor Investments in Cocoa......................................................................................51
Multi-lateral Donor Investments in Cocoa................................................................................52
Government of Indonesia Investments in Cocoa.......................................................................53
Private Sector Investments in Cocoa.........................................................................................54
iii
Abbreviations
iv
Executive Summary
With over 426,000 metric tons (MT) of cocoa beans1 produced in 2003, Indonesia is the third
largest producer of cocoa in the world after Ghana and the Ivory Coast. Indonesian cocoa
exports are currently valued at approximately $600-700 million per year and provide the main
source of income and livelihood for over 400,000 smallholder farmers and their families. On the
island of Sulawesi, smallholder farmers working on plots ranging from 0.5 to 1.5 hectares
produce over 80% of the cocoa exports from Indonesia.
Indonesia’s primary competitive advantage in global cocoa trade lies in its ability to supply large
quantities of beans. Current cocoa yields in Indonesia range from 400 to 800 kg/hectare, with the
potential to increase yields as high as 1 to 1.5 MT/ha. Cocoa yields in West Africa and other
major producing countries, on the other hand, are much lower and only average 300 kg/ha or
less.
As the largest producer of unfermented bulk beans, Indonesia currently occupies a strong
position with few competitors in this segment of the global market. Thus, the major threats to
Indonesia’s continued competitiveness in this market segment are internal rather than external.
The major challenge is to improve, or at least maintain, local cocoa productivity; not increased
competition from suppliers in other countries. Since global trade in Sulwesi bean is volume
based, it is recommended that efforts to improve cocoa productivity must form the basis for any
cocoa development initiative in Indonesia.
Quality is another critical concern that must also be addressed. The current marketing structure
of the value chain (and global demand for low quality/low price beans) does not provide
adequate incentives to improve quality. Without incentives for exporters, intermediaries, or
farmers to differentiate their beans and invest in quality improvements they continue to be driven
by volume-based transactions. There are some existing schemes of vertical integration including
up-country buying stations that could be expanded, where appropriate, to introduce more
commercial quality-based incentives for cocoa supply.
There may also be opportunities for further growth and competitiveness of Indonesian cocoa by
increased investments in local value addition. This could be accomplished through the
commercialization of improved plant varieties or through more efficient process technologies.
1
Or cocoa bean equivalents
v
It is recommended that possible programmatic focus areas be prioritized as follows: increased
productivity, improved quality, and increased opportunities for local value addition. All of these
reflect the economic growth priorities of USAID Indonesia and support the policy priorities of
the Government of Indonesia. Many of the current private and public sector initiatives to support
cocoa have limited outreach and are overly dependent on external funding. But these priority
program areas should not be considered in isolation. A holistic program incorporating all three is
possible, but the sequencing of activities should reflect the broad priorities as suggested.
Possible commercially viable solutions to major constraints in the value chain and illustrative
program facilitation activities, categorized by the three proposed program areas, are presented in
Table 1 below.
vi
Program Priorities/ Illustrative Facilitation Activities
Possible Commercial Solutions
Provision of formal and informal enforcement − improve systems to ensure broad-based compliance with
mechanisms to ensure compliance with existing national quality standards for cocoa bean exports
prevailing quality standards for cocoa exports. (SNI)
− improve formal and informal dispute mechanisms (e.g.
contracts, industry-based mediation/arbitration services,
etc.) to decrease risk
Availability of financial services for exporters, − explore feasibility of commercial financing based on up-
traders, and processors based on alternative country warehousing system
sources of collateral (e.g. inventory) promote possible rural-based warehouse
(inventory-based) finance program to reach rural
clients
Increased Opportunities for Local Value Addition
− increase commercial availability and smallholder farmer
Access to affordable and improved planting access to inputs
materials for smallholder farmers − promote commercial distribution of improved planting
materials that are appropriate for local conditions
Availability of a dedicated Research & − support the development of materials to inform farmers
Development facility for cocoa on the appropriate use and application of fertilizer for
cocoa (for distribution via private sector channels)
− improve the capacity of private input supply companies to
deliver a range of embedded services
− support dedicated cocoa research & development to
identify appropriate plant varieties and other inputs
Access to lobbying service to expand the legal − conduct research on effect of pending legislation (local,
status options for farmers groups, and rural provincial, or national) on continued growth and
enterprises in general, to effectively conduct competitiveness of cocoa sector
business operations
vii
The team would like to extend its deepest appreciation for the extensive logistical support
provided by the ACDI/VOCA Success Alliance staff in South and Central Sulawesi and Jakarta.
The team is also thankful for invaluable technical support and guidance from Judith Payne
(USAID/EGAT); Hubert Schmitz (Institute for Development Studies, University of Sussex); Art
Warman, Firman Aji, and Rum Ali (USAID/Indonesia); Jeanne Downing and Mike Field
(USAID/MDO); Olaf Kula (ACDI/VOCA); and Frank Lusby (AFE).
viii
1 Background and Research Approach
1.1 Background
The assessment exercise was also an opportunity to begin testing an approach and methodology
for understanding the dynamics and constraints to growth of a given value chain - within a
limited level of effort. See Appendix 1 for the Scope of Work of this assessment.
The assessment took place over a one month period, with in-country fieldwork from March 19 to
April 5, 2004. Interviews were conducted in Jakarta (March 19 to 23) and Sulawesi (March 24
to April 2). A list of the companies and agencies interviewed is presented in Table 2 below. See
Appendix 2 for full contact details.
Two focus groups discussions with 16 key value chain participants were also conducted in Palu,
Central Sulawesi and Makassar, South Sulawesi on March 27 and April 1 respectively. Final de-
briefing meetings of USAID/Indonesia and USAID/MD were conducted on April 5, 2004 before
departure from Indonesia.
The core team consisted of Henry Panlibuton (Team Leader/AFE Consultant), Maggie Meyer
(ACDI/VOCA), and Hussein B. Sutadisastra (local consultant). Additional support and technical
input was provided by Judith Payne (USAID/EGAT), Firman Aji and Muhammed Rum Ali
(USAID/Indonesia) and Hubert Schmitz (Institute for Development Studies, University of
Sussex).
A summary of the research approach taken during the assessment is described below. A
description of Indonesia’s role in the global cocoa value chain is presented in Section 2, and the
general characteristics of the Indonesia cocoa value chain are presented in Section 3. Overall
findings of the value chain assessment are presented in Section 4 and proposed recommendations
are then presented in Section 5.
The assessment was conducted using a value chain approach to: identify key constraints to
growth and competitiveness of the Indonesia cocoa value chain, identify and assess possible
commercially viable solutions to these constraints, and develop initial strategies to facilitate
support of a few selected solutions. The assessment approach is shown in Figure 1 below.
Specific activities conducted during the assessment are described in Appendix 3.
In addition to understanding the broad context for the systemic constraints and opportunities for
cocoa in Indonesia, the value chain approach provided useful insights on the inter-relationships
of participants, general distribution of returns (margins), and structural dynamics of cocoa in
Indonesia.
Fortunately, the cocoa value chain in Indonesia is well documented with a wealth of available
secondary data. This enabled the team to quickly orient themselves to the value chain and focus
its in-country efforts to compile and analyze complimentary primary data. The limited level of
effort for this consultancy, however, prohibited in-depth assessments of possible commercially
Another limitation was the research nature of this exercise and the uncertainty of actual program
implementation. While the data gathering purpose of this exercise was made clear during all
interviews, many key informants were still anxious to know whether follow-on program support
would be forthcoming. Sharing information and voicing opinions was generally not a concern
for most interviewees, but for some the implicit hope was to be able to move beyond analytical
research into actual implementation.
Finally, as a globally traded commodity, farm-gate and CIF prices for Indonesian cocoa are
widely available. But given the sensitivity of margins for many private sector participants,
especially large multinational companies, this information was not easily gathered or readily
presented.
With over 426,000 metric tons (MT) of cocoa beans2 produced in 2003, Indonesia is the third
largest producer of cocoa in the world after Ghana and Cote d’Ivoire (see Figure 2). On the
island of Sulawesi, smallholder farmers working on plots ranging from 0.5 to 1.5 hectares
produce over 80% of the cocoa exports from Indonesia. The remaining Indonesian cocoa
production takes place in North Sumatra, West Java, and Papua, with some small production
areas in Bali, Flores, and other islands.
Figure 2. World Cocoa Production (Supply): 2003/2004 (in ‘000 MT)
Ecua
Camero
The U.S. is the second largest buyer of cocoa beans in the world, after the European Union,
processing over 415,000 MT of beans in the 2003/2004 season (see Figure 3). The U.S. imports
135
136,000 MT of Indonesian cocoa and is by far the most important market for both cocoa beans
and cocoa products from Indonesia. But demand and cocoa processing capacity in Asia is
growing rapidly, with a 13.2% annual increase in the 2003/2004 season alone3.
U.S. demand for Indonesian cocoa has remained relatively static over the past few years but
markets in Asia (most notably in Malaysia and Singapore) offer expanded export opportunities
for Indonesia. Two new cocoa processing plants, with an annual capacity of 50,000 MT/year
each, have recently opened in Malaysia. Interestingly, one of these Malaysian plants is owned
by the largest cocoa processing company in Indonesia – the Ceres Group – which has expanded
Brazil, 15
2
Or cocoa bean equivalents
3
E D & F MAN, Cocoa Market Report, No. 371, 30th March 2004.
Although nascent, processing capacity in China is also growing but is generally regarded as a
market for low quality cocoa where bean shells (and other waste material) are incorporated into,
not removed from, their grinding process.
Russia,
Figure 4. Indonesia Cocoa Bean Exports: 2000/2001 (in ‘000 MT)
Singapore, 65
C
Ghana, 95
Philippi
Indonesia ,
The global trade in cocoa is based primarily on the end use of the cocoa bean. Some beans are
used primarily for their flavor (to produce cocoa powder), and others are used for their fat
content (to produce cocoa butter). Beans from Latin America tend to have the richest flavor,
115
Germany, 1
Value Chain Assessment: Indonesia Cocoa 5
while cocoa beans from Asia (particularly Malaysia and Indonesia) have little flavor and are used
for their fat content (referred to sometimes as "fat beans"). Most large U.S. chocolate
manufacturers (e.g. Hersheys, Masterfoods/Mars, etc.) sell in the high volume, mass production
North American market where flavor is not as important. Other large manufacturers, in Europe
and Asia, produce for more discriminating chocolate consumer markets.
Indonesia’s primary competitive advantage in global cocoa trade lies in its ability to supply large
quantities of fat beans. Cocoa grown in Indonesia, originally bred in Malaysia, was developed
for its high yield (fat) not its flavor. Current cocoa yields in Indonesia range from 400 to 800
kg/hectare, with the potential to increase yields as high as 1 to 1.5 MT/ha. Cocoa yields in West
Africa and other major producing countries, on the other hand, are much lower and only average
300 kg/ha or less.
Sulawesi cocoa is traded on the global market as an unfermented, fat, bulk bean (see Figure 5).
Processors and manufacturers will use Sulwesi bean as filler, due to its sufficient fat content and
lower cost, and blend it with other fermented beans that add flavor. The Dominican Republic
also produces unfermented, bulk bean (know as “Sanchez”) but its export volume of 40,000 MT
is less than one-tenth the size of Indonesia.
Fermentation of cocoa beans4 can help bring out their inherent flavor, but is not generally done in
Sulawesi. Cocoa farmers on some of the other islands in Indonesia (e.g. Papua, Sumatra, etc.) do
ferment their beans, but their production is quite small and is mainly sold to local processors
rather than exported. There have been efforts to encourage smallholder farmers in Sulawesi to
expand production of fermented beans, but commercial incentives for such a widespread shift in
production practices are inadequate.
Most global manufacturers and processors have learned to effectively blend unfermented
Sulawesi beans with other beans to produce their products to specification. The global demand
for these unfermented bulk beans has become relatively inelastic and not significantly affected
by changes in price. As the largest producer of unfermented bulk beans, Indonesia currently
occupies a strong position with few competitors in this segment of the global market. Thus, the
major threats to Indonesia’s continued competitiveness in this market segment are internal rather
than external. The major challenge is to improve, or at least maintain, local cocoa productivity;
not increased competition from suppliers in other countries.
4
Fermenting is a simple "yeasting" process in which the sugars contained in the beans are converted to acid. This is
done after the pods are harvested, heaped, and covered. Fermentation lasts from three to nine days – removing the
raw bitter taste of cocoa to develop a more characteristic chocolate flavor when the beans are roasted.
Ind
FAT
Charateristics of the Value Chain in Indonesia
Cocoa production in Sulawesi began to grow during the 1980s, fuelled by high global cocoa
prices and a significant decline in output from West Africa. In addition, migrant Indonesians
working on cocoa farms in Malaysia returned home to southern Sulawesi bringing back planting
materials as well as technical skills and capital to invest in cocoa production. Extensive mono-
crop production of cocoa expanded in parts of Sulawesi where suitable land was abundant and
available. However, as available land decreases and the age of bearing trees increases, more
intensive production techniques will be required to maintain and/or expand cocoa farm
productivity.
Indonesian cocoa exports are currently valued at approximately $600-700 million per year and
provide the main source of income and livelihood for over 400,000 smallholder farmers and their
families. Details on the production, supply, and demand of Indonesian cocoa and cocoa products
can be found in Appendix 4.
The major functions and participants in the Indonesian and global cocoa value chain are shown
graphically in the two maps below (Figure 6 and Figure 7 respectively). See Appendix 5 for
detailed descriptions of all the value chain participants.
Export
(bean & product) Value Chain Assessment: Indonesia Cocoa 9
Figure 7. Value Chain Map 2 (Indonesia Cocoa)
3.2.1 Market-based Governance – Overall, the Indonesian cocoa value chain can be
characterized as having a market-based governance structure with a low degree of open
coordination. In other words, there are no players or entities exerting dominant control over the
cocoa value chain. Since product specifications are relatively simple, most transactions between
buyers and sellers take place at “arm’s length”, based on supply and demand. The costs of
switching to new partners are low for both parties.5
The world price of Sulawesi cocoa beans, determined by the NY terminal market, is a key driver
for many participants in the value chain. In late 2002 and early 2003, when cocoa prices were at
an 18-year high, many exporters and traders entered the market. But when global cocoa prices
fell from $2,375/MT to $1,347/MT in 2003/2004—a 43% drop over a ten month period—many
short-term speculators and new entrants in the cocoa trade suffered substantial losses. Over the
past year, global cocoa bean prices have remained relatively stable (trading between $1,380 and
$1,725 per MT this season) which has led to further consolidation of exporters in Indonesia.
Approximately 80 percent of total Indonesian cocoa bean exports are now handled by the five
largest exporters, all of whom are local affiliates or subsidiaries of multinational companies.
The market-based governance structure of Indonesian cocoa, however, does not reflect equal
power relationships in the value chain. While spot market price information is widely available
and efficiently transferred, the flow of other product information (i.e., quality and quantity
specifications) from global buyers to exporters, intermediaries, and producers is not as
transparent. Free Air/Fair Average Quality (FAQ) is an international trading term for standard
quality of bulk, unfermented, raw cocoa beans. Although some global buyers have expressed
frustration with the inconsistency of Sulawesi beans meeting standard FAQ, most of them
continue to buy after applying discounts for the poor quality. As a result, confusing market
signals are sent and provide differing incentives for value chain participants at different levels in
Indonesia.
Transactions between cocoa farmers and market intermediaries, and between intermediaries and
cocoa exporters or processors, are primarily conducted on a “cash and carry” basis—which
requires access to sufficient working capital to remain competitive. Smallholder farmers have
the option of selling to a large number of local collectors or buyers, but most will sell their cocoa
5
Consideration and classification of value chain governance was based on factors described in “The Governance of
Global Value Chains” by G. Gereffi, J. Humphrey, and T. Sturgeon; November 4, 2003.
Unlike many cocoa farmers in the rest of the world, Indonesian cocoa farmers receive on average
a high percentage of the international price. The farm-gate price for Sulawesi beans can range
between 75 to 85 percent of the New York Terminal exchange price. While in West Africa,
cocoa farmers as little as 50 to 63 percent of the final FOB price6 (See Figure 8).
Figure 8. Comparison of Sulawesi and New York (ICCO) Cocoa Price: 2001 – 2003
18,000
16,000 $2,000
14,000
Price ($US/Ton)
Price (Rp/kg)
12,000 $1,500
10,000
8,000 $1,000
6,000
4,000 $500
2,000
0 $0
May-01
May-03
May-02
Nov-01
Nov-02
Nov-03
Mar-01
Mar-03
Mar-02
Sep-02
Sep-03
Sep-01
Jan-01
Jan-02
Jan-03
Jul-01
Jul-02
Jul-03
The highly competitive nature of the marketing system, good transportation and infrastructure,
and the relative lack of government interference in the cocoa value chain have helped to sustain
this high percentage of the FOB price for cocoa farmers in Indonesia.
With farmers receiving up to 85 percent of the FOB price, the small remaining balance is shared
among the many other participants in the value chain. According to one source, the margin
between the FOB price and the farm gate price in Indonesia can be broken down into marketing
and logistical costs (10%), collector/trader margin (3-4%), and exporter margin (2%). Given
these slim margins, the large number of local collectors and traders in the value chain depend on
quick turnover and high volume transactions.
The prices that market intermediaries pay are based primarily on a "discounting" process. The
daily global price for Sulawesi cocoa is widely known by all participants throughout the value
6
Indonesia’s Cocoa Boom, T. Akiyama, A. Nishio, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, March 1996, p. 10
The basic quality parameters include moisture content, bean count (i.e., number of beans per 100
grams), percentage of waste, moldiness, and clumped or flat beans. At the local farmer and
collector level, moisture and general appearance are the most important factors considered in the
discounting process. This discounting process (along with a margin that reflects the cost of
intermediation) determines the prices paid by market intermediaries.
Since volume is a key driver in the cocoa value chain, as stated above, some market
intermediaries will attempt to sell cocoa beans mixed with poorer quality beans or actual waste
material (e.g. shells, foreign matter) to increase the volume. The fragmentation and fierce
competitiveness of buyers for Sulawesi beans, of almost any quality, continues to reward this
opportunistic behavior.
Ultimately, the level of interaction among value chain participants is often based on the actual
and perceived amount of trust and risk in the relationship. While most farmers have various
selling options, for example, they still value linkages with consistent, transparent, local buyers
they can trust. The issue of risk is even greater for the exporters and intermediaries who provide
pre-financing to their suppliers.
In order to develop possible strategies for continued support of the cocoa value chain, the team
first identified the major constraints and opportunities to its continued competitiveness and to
further integration of MSEs in the value chain. Based on interview guides developed by AFE, a
generic classification of constraint types were used to explore possible value chain issues in
categories including:
− Policy and Regulatory Environment − Technology and Product
Development
− Organization and Management − Input Supply
− Inter-firm Cooperation & Governance − Infrastructure
− Market Access − Finance
It should be noted that the team also tried to explore information, communication, and
technology (ICT) issues where appropriate. Specific suggestions on ways to incorporate ICT
into a value chain analysis process can be found in Appendix 6.
The major constraints identified by the team are presented, in no particular order or priority, in
Table 3 below.
CONSTRAINT DESCRIPTION
Detention of cocoa beans at U.S. ports to − Since 1992, cocoa bean exports to the U.S from Indonesia (as
meet phyto-sanitary conditions of the FDA well as Malaysia and Brazil) are automatically detained without
increases the cost to exporters which inspection at the port of entry by the FDA due to the presence
reduces the price they can pay to their of live insects.
suppliers. − Some exporters claim that the additional time required to
fumigate and pass FDA inspection at U.S. ports increases the
cost, and decreases the competitiveness, of Indonesian cocoa
bean imports.
Local processors are unable to procure − Traders/collectors are supposed to collect a Value-Added Tax
adequate quantities of cocoa beans due to (VAT) when they sell beans to processors. Many do not, and
the reluctance of some traders/collectors run the risk of being discovered by tax authorities. Therefore,
(who are supposed to collect VAT on their most intermediaries prefer to sell their beans to exporters.
sales) to sell to them. − This creates logistical problems for the processors and reduces
their efficiency and competitiveness.
Based on the key constraints, the team identified possible commercially viable solutions to
address these constraints. These potential solutions reflect areas that must be upgraded to ensure
greater competitiveness of, and/or integration of MSEs into, the value-chain. The process used
to prioritize and short-list possible solutions is described in Appendix 7. This aspect of the value
chain assessment ensures that programmatic recommendations will reflect the latest thinking in
commercial approaches to enterprise development, including principles of Business
Development Services (BDS).
Following a brief assessment of short-listed solutions (see Appendix 8), illustrative facilitation
activities to support the value chain were identified. See Table 4 below. A commercial
solutions-based approach was used to identify possible program strategies and to address the
prevailing outreach and sustainability limitations of many existing cocoa support initiatives (see
Appendix 9).
Had more time been available, the Team would have carried out a more thorough assessment of
each of the proposed solutions - looking specifically at who the providers of the solution might
be, what constraints they face in providing the solution, and commercial feasibility. The
commercial feasibility of all the solutions would also need to be verified and assessed in greater
depth. This would have led to the identification of upgrading/facilitation activities that respond
directly to the constraints holding back the development of commercially viable solutions in the
value chain.
Because the Team lacked the time to do this for all potential solutions, many of the proposed
program strategies are more general in nature, and could be further developed and defined.
However, illustrative facilitation activities were proposed and generated during the focus group
discussions and/or interviews with key participants.
Indonesian cocoa is a $600-700 million industry and a major source of private sector trade and
investment for enterprises of all scale. But given the many constraints to the value chain
identified above, the dominant role of cocoa in sustainably driving economic growth, especially
in Sulawesi is by no means assured.
Should USAID be interested in expanding its current level of support to cocoa in Indonesia, it is
recommended that programmatic focus areas be prioritized as follows: increased productivity,
improved quality, and increased opportunities to add and capture value locally (see Figure 10).
All of these reflect the economic growth priorities of USAID Indonesia (i.e., increased trade,
investment, and employment) and support the policy priorities of the GoI as stated in its
Economic Policy Package: Pre and Post-IMF (also known as the “White Paper”).
Based on the various interviews and discussions with key participants, as well as the secondary
data collected and compiled, the over-riding concern was the decreasing productivity of
Indonesian cocoa. Global trade in Sulwesi bean is volume based. This means that it depends on
large volume production of relatively inexpensive, unfermented bulk beans (used primarily for
(imp
their fat rather than flavor content). Therefore, it is recommended that efforts to improve cocoa
productivity must form the basis for any cocoa development initiative in Indonesia. Increased
production via extensive rather than intensive farming practices is no longer viable. Without
improved productivity, it will be impossible to sustain (much less increase) the level of global
trade in Indonesian cocoa and cocoa products.
PRODUC
Value Chain Assessment: Indonesia Cocoa 19
(sustaine
From international buyers to smallholder farmers, quality is another critical concern that must
also be addressed. The current marketing structure of the value chain (and global demand for
low quality/low price beans) does not provide adequate incentives to improve quality. There are
a few existing schemes of vertical integration that could be expanded, where appropriate, to
introduce commercial quality-based incentives for cocoa supply. It is clear, however, that
initiatives to improve quality must be demand-led and emanate from final international buyers.
With improved productivity and bean quality, there may be opportunities to not only maintain
but to increase global trade and investment of Indonesian cocoa.
There may also be opportunities for further growth and competitiveness of Indonesian cocoa by
increased investments in local value addition. This could be accomplished through the
commercialization of improved plant varieties or through more efficient process technologies.
In either case, the policy and regulatory environment must be improved to facilitate and promote
increased investments in value-addition.
It should be noted that there is international and local debate about the feasibility of local
processing, since quantity and quality of raw material alone may not be sufficient for Indonesian
processors to be viable. A major global buyer stated that unless a processing facility has a
minimum capacity of 50,000 MT/per year it cannot effectively compete with the expanded
grinding facilities in the Southeast Asia region. With the exception of the Ceres Group, the
capacity of the other processors in Indonesia is far below that level—ranging from
approximately 12,000 to 20,000 MT per year.
It is not recommended that USAID consider these priority program areas in isolation. A holistic
program incorporating all three is possible, but the sequencing of activities should reflect the
broad priorities as suggested.
Possible commercially viable solutions to major constraints in the value chain and illustrative
program facilitation activities, categorized by the three proposed program areas, are presented in
Table 5 below.
The team would like to extend its deepest appreciation for the extensive logistical support
provided by the ACDI/VOCA Success Alliance staff in South and Central Sulawesi. The team is
also thankful for the technical support and guidance from Judith Payne (USAID/EGAT); Art
Warman, Firman Aji, and Rum Ali (USAID/Indonesia); Jeanne Downing and Mike Field
(USAID/MDO); Olaf Kula (ACDI/VOCA); and Frank Lusby (AFE).
Scope of Work
A. AMAP BDS Component: B, Market Assessments, AMAP BDS Knowledge and Practice
Final Products:
1. Desktop Review
2. Findings Report
3. Recommendations on value chain programming
G. For Deliverables:
Cocoa production expanded largely in the 1990s and was driven by smallholder
farmers. As production and demand increased over recent years, farming
practices did not keep pace. With more cocoa being cultivated, the infestation
of the Cocoa Pod Borer (CPB) increased, retarding production and quality and
posing a substantial threat to the viability of Sulawesi cocoa production. The
Sustainable Cocoa Extension Services for Smallholders (SUCCESS) Alliance
project, implemented by ACDI/VOCA, was designed in coordination with
The SUCCESS Alliance project has recognized the need to improve follow-up
and extension to effect a lasting change in cultural practices at the farm level
and is attempting to involve more local government extension support to further
follow up and support the use of recommended practices. . SUCCESS Alliance
has recently begun to focus more on long-term sustainability by adding a farmer
organization component to their activities. The SUCCESS Alliance has also
started to establish a local NGO to possibly carry on sustained cocoa activities
in the future.
Constraints
Input and Farm Level -- While there is a strong interest within the industry to
address the CPB threat and other quality and production concerns, there are a
number of constraints that have limited real progress. In particular, farmers are
not well organized and have limited direct, on-going commercial relationships
that inform and encourage them to change crop management practices. Even
though many farmers trained by SUCCESS Alliance are practicing better crop
husbandry in their gardens through improved farm level management of cocoa,
finance and replacing aging cocoa trees is critical to the long-term sustainability
of the commodity. Smallholder farmers need to gain greater leverage and to be
able to accept and utilize news skills, know-how, and information as it is
transferred through fee-for-service training or embedded in commercial
There is also still a lack of commercial relationships between farmers and actual
and potential service providers. Outreach of commercial input providers varies,
but when extensive outreach exists, farmers do not often have proper cash flow
and/or credit to purchase inputs when they are readily available. The three
programs that are active do not yet engage with commercial input providers
helping them understand how better to sell and target smallholder cocoa
farmers. The commercial delivery of inputs not only provides a more
sustainable mechanism for accessing inputs, but also an important commercial
relationship that can provide information and know-how.
Traders – One of the main complaints from farmers trained by the SUCCESS
Alliance program is that although they are producing a greater quantity of cocoa
and consequently earning more income for it, they are not getting any price
differential from traders for the additional increase in quality. Some exporters or
traders do offer a price differential on quality but this is not captured by the
farmer unless s/he sells directly to the exporter. At the farm gate, farmers
generally deal with village collectors or local traders who tend to negotiate with
each farmer on the quality and quantity they sell. Farmers have limited
leverage in transactions with traders when negotiating on their own.
(Nonetheless, cocoa marketing is highly competitive in Indonesia, with fairly thin
profit margins, and farmers do receive a high percentage of the world price.)
Traders tend to adopt short term rent seeking behaviors and do not see the
farmers as being key to their longer term success. There is a very short-term
perspective among traders, who do not grade cocoa for quality standards, trying
to maximize profits for each transaction. Short-term profit maximization has
also encouraged traders to begin adding waste to the cocoa to add weight.
While processors have worked to limit the amount of waste, this practice has
added additional costs in testing and oversight. The combination of short-term
thinking, lack of transparency, and poor business practices has created a bad
reputation for traders with processors, and has made the value chain more
inefficient and less capable of handling shocks such as with the infestation of
CPB.
Processors – The processors are primarily large international firms that have
limited understanding, ability or time to work with individual farmers. While they
are interested in direct sourcing cocoa from farmers because they know the
quality will be higher than buying from traders who mix waste with the farmers’
beans, they simply do not have the outreach nor is it economically efficient.
They also realize that they are not the best suited to facilitate farmer
organization or collaboration to organize the sale of cocoa by such groups. At
the same time, they are very concerned with the situation of cocoa quality and
quantity and have become increasingly concerned over having access to cocoa
beans meeting industry standards. The concern spills over to traders who as
part of the value chain, affect the supply of quality cocoa.
Wider Industry – When looked from an overall industry perspective there is both
a lot of opportunity and a number of substantial threats. One threat is the lack
of integration along the value chain. Sulawesi farmers have several advantages
over African farmers, such as a highly competitive and efficient marketing
system (no marketing boards), many exporters, low cost of transportation, good
infrastructure, low cost of inputs and stable macroeconomic policies, which
allow them to greater opportunities if efficiencies along the value chain are
The research approach used will be refined and developed into a tool for
Component B under AMAP BDS K&P. Lessons learned about the dynamics of
interfirm relationships and constraints to growth within the sector will inform the
K&P research agenda.
Country Indonesia, Sulawesi.
Selection &
Rationale:
Proposed LOE: Team Leader : Henry Panlibuton, AFE, Strategic Planning Specialist, Level
One ---2 days preparation, 3 days field training of consultants; 10 days field data
collection; 5 days for mission report and Case write-up. Total: 20 days.
Hubert Schmitz: Strategic Planning Specialist, Level One (non US), 1 day for
input into field training of enumerators; 2 days for review and commentary on
final report. Total: 3 days.
2-3- bilingual TCN Local Consultant Enumerators, Level One or Level Two, tbd
2@ 13 days each= 26 days.
25-Mar-04 Cocoa Village Collector Linda – (Balinese Trader) Cocoa Village Collector, Tolai, Central Sulawesi
26-Mar-04 Farmer Group, Sindue Subdistrict Farmer Group (25 members) Sindue, Subdistrict, Central Sulawesi
ACDI VOCA Alumni
26-Mar-04 Cocoa Farm Demplot Farmer Demplot Sindue, Subdistrict, Central Sulawesi
26-Mar-04 PT. Mitra Celebes Sejati (Palu) Jeffri PT. Mitra Celebes Sejati
Jl. Trans Sulawesi Palu-Pantoloan,
Km. 16 Taipa Palu, Central Sulawesi
Tl.(62-451) 491-726, Fx. 491-800
27-Mar-04 Focus Group Discussion Farmers, Exporters/Traders, Palu, Central Sulawesi.
ASKINDO, Gov. officials
27-Mar-04 Citra Tani Radio Rudi – Director Palu, Central Sulawesi
SOUTH SULAWESI
25-Mar-04 Farmer Group ACDIVOCA Farmer Alumni Cempa Toa, Subdistrict Suppa, South Sulawesi
25-Mar-04 Farmer Group ACDIVOCA Farmer Alumni Amassangan, Subdistrict Suppa, South Sulawesi
29-Mar-04 Bank Perkreditan Rakyat (BPR) H. Bakhtiar A. Bong SE PD BPR City Council Makassar,
City Council of Makassar Jl. Gunung Bawakaraeng No. 154, Makassar 90145
Tl.: (62-411) 424-283; Fx.: 424-284
Cel.: 081342731221
29-Mar-04 Bank Indonesia Ika Wijaya Jl. Jend. Sudirman, Makassar
Tl. (62-411) 315-188; Cel.: 0811463519
29-Mar-04 Bank Rakyat Indonesia (BRI) Denny Rohman Jl. Jend. A. Yani, Makassar, Tl.: (62-411) 313-174
31-Mar-04 PT. Bakti Persada Perkasa Rudy Saldy SE, Jl. Tol Ir. Sutami,
Director Tl.: (62-411)437059; Fx.:516188
31-Mar-04 PT.Cargill Ruud Engbers Kima 9 Kav.L7B Daya, Makassar, South Sulawesi
Tl.: (62-411)514361
31-Mar-04 CV. Tri Karya Muhammad Akbar Jl. Pengayoman Ruko Mirah C 26, Makassar, South Sulawesi
Tl.: (62-411)422287
1-Apr-04 Group Discussion ASKINDO, Exporters, Suppliers,
ACDIVOCA, Cocoa Village
Model
1-Apr-04 International Finance Corporation Bruce Wise – Program Manager Graha Pettarani Building 5th Flr.,
A Member of The World Bank Group Jl. A.P. Pettarani No. 47, Makassar, South Sulawesi
Tl.:(62-411) 425280/84; Fx.:425269; Cel.:08123852006
2-Apr-04 PT. Maju Bersama Cocoa Indonesia Wilson Balleta & Jl. Kima 8, Kav. Ss-21, Kawasan Industri Makassar,
Chin Makassar 9011, South Sulawesi, Indonesia
Tl.: (62-411)554267; Fx.: 554245
United States
Details on the production, supply, and demand of Indonesian cocoa and cocoa products are
shown below.
Below is a brief description of the major functions and participants in the Indonesia cocoa value
chain, which are shown graphically in two value chain maps (Figure 6 and Figure 7
respectively).
Research/Extension:
There is one major agricultural research station in Indonesia, funded by the Government of
Indonesia and located in Jember, Java. This station provides limited research and training for
the cocoa sector, and does not have outreach or activities in Sulawesi, or links to extension
activities. There is little research funded by other donors or the private sector. ACIAR has
conducted small-scale research on improved varieties for pest and disease resistance, and is now
testing these varieties with the SUCCESS Alliance. PT Effem, a local cocoa processing
subsidiary of Masterfoods/Mars Inc., also has a small seed garden where limited research is
conducted.
Cocoa extension falls under the direction of Dinas Perkebunan (Disbun), the Department of
Estate Crops. Due to decentralization, each district office of Disbun in Sulawesi now controls its
budget and activities independently, including extension work. Most Disbun extension agents
are not specialists in cocoa, and due to budget constraints and lack of education and training, the
services that district Disbun agents provide to cocoa farmers are limited. Under the SUCCESS
Alliance (implemented by ACDI/VOCA), some Disbun extension agents and a small cadre of
farmer/trainers have been trained to lead best practice trainings using the farmer field school
methodology for cocoa farmers in their area.
Other public-funded extension programs include the Cocoa Village Model (implemented and
funded by the Indonesia Cocoa Association – ASKINDO), and the PRIMA project
(implemented by PT Effem, with Dutch funding).
Input Supply:
The major inputs for smallholder cocoa production are seedlings and planting material, tools,
fertilizers, and pesticides. Most farmers obtain seedlings and planting material from their own or
neighboring farms. There are few community or commercial nurseries for cocoa. There are two
large fertilizer/input supply companies in Indonesia, including PUSRI, who distribute their
products via a network of wholesalers/distributors and local kiosks and retailers. Per
government decree, each of these companies is now only able to operate in designated
geographic areas of the country. Cocoa farmers typically buy their tools, fertilizers and
pesticides from these small retail operations in nearby towns. However, there is limited access to
inputs for farmers who do not live near towns.
Growing:
There are approximately 400,000 smallholder farmers in Sulawesi, who farm an average of less
than 1.5 hectares each, and produce bulk, unfermented cocoa. Most labor on cocoa farms is
provided by family members with little outside hired labor. Average yield on these farms varies
Collecting/Bulking:
Local Collectors are primarily farmers or rural entrepreneurs who travel to farms with a
motorbike (or sometimes a truck) and purchase cocoa beans from farmers once or twice per
week during the two harvest periods. The scale of these purchases is small and turnover is rapid.
If they purchase wet beans, collectors will often full-dry them, but their storage capacity is still
limited. Before harvest, some collectors provide cash advances (or pre-financing) to farmers,
while some provide housing or transportation in exchange for beans. Collectors usually sell to
larger traders either in towns or markets. Some collectors truck their beans directly to Makassar,
and small number sell directly to exporters or processors.
PT Effem has also established an upcountry buying station in Parigi, Central Sulawesi to pilot
test a direct supply chain with farmers. By offering slightly higher base prices and a relatively
more transparent procurement process, PT Effem hopes to provide incentives to consistently
supply cocoa of higher quality. Based on their experience, other local processors and large-scale
exporters are exploring the possibility of vertically-integrating as well.
Trading
Traders purchase cocoa beans from collectors or, to a lesser extent, directly from farmers. They
make most purchases at collection points (towns and markets) up-country and arrange for
transport of the beans to the main cities of Makassar or Palu. Specific data was not available, but
there are an estimated 9,000 traders in Sulawesi with most buying between 1,000 to 5,000 MT of
cocoa per year, depending on cash flow and availability of working capital.
Traders primarily sell their cocoa beans to exporters in Makassar or Palu, although a smaller
amount flows to local processors. There are a smaller number of traders who sell only “export-
ready” beans and are expected to adhere to a higher quality standard. Traders receive daily price
information from New York and Makassar via fax or phone. Although ASKINDO is a national
association for the entire cocoa industry, the leadership and most members are traders which
constitute its primarily constituency.
Processing (local):
Cocoa processing, or grinding, entails the transformation of dried beans into a variety of
processed cocoa products, including: cocoa paste or liquor, cake, powder, and butter.
Approximately 10% of Sulawesi cocoa production is processed locally. Most local processors
primarily process Sulawesi beans, although some also purchase smaller amounts of fermented
beans from Sumatra, Java, Papua or Papua New Guinea. Processors buy beans primarily from
traders and collectors and most have about 20 consistent suppliers. Processors have strict quality
standards and will discount their suppliers accordingly (see Section 2.3 for details on the
discounting process).
In Sulawesi, the largest processors are PT Effem and Unicom (a subsidiary of a Dutch-owned
cocoa trading company) with an average capacity of 10,000–15,000 MT per year. Unicom
exports semi-finished cocoa products to its parent factories in Europe for further processing and
packaging. PT Effem primarily sells products to Masterfoods manufacturing plants in the U.S,
Brazil, and other parts of Southeast Asia—as well as to Ceres Group, the major local
manufacturer. Both PT Effem and Unicom are hoping to expand their processing capacity. In
addition, there are plans by separate local entrepreneurs to start-up a new cocoa processing
facility in Palu and in Makassar later this year.
Local processors are charged with a 10% VAT tax on the sale of their cocoa products and an
income tax, which has recently been reduced from 2.5% to 0.5%. A new association called
APIKCI was recently established to primarily represent cocoa processors and manufactures but
its membership is still limited.
Manufacturing (local):
Manufacturing is the process of producing final finished chocolate products. There are a number
of local small-scale manufacturers producing for the domestic market and sold to middle-upper
class consumers in Indonesia. Overall domestic consumption is low (i.e., approximately 35,000
MT annually). The Ceres Group is the only fully integrated cocoa manufacturer and product
exporter in Indonesia. The Ceres manufacturing plant is located in Java but recently expanded
their processing operations internationally, with a new 50,000 MT capacity facility in Malaysia.
Ceres produces a variety of higher quality chocolate products for export to other regional Asian
markets as well.
Exporting:
Exporters must fumigate cocoa beans before shipping and typically sell to importers on an
“FOB” (“free on board”) port of embarkation basis for future shipment. There is currently no
export tax on cocoa beans although the GoI is considering it. Exporters also have quality
standards and discount for poor quality, although standards vary depending on the specific
requirements of their international buyers.
There are 10-20 local small-scale cocoa bean exporters that are largely based in Makassar, with
a few exporting from Palu. These exporters buy beans from collectors and traders who deliver
their warehouses, and then sell primarily to regional buyers for processing. The medium- to
large-scale exporters also sell to regional buyers with a few selling to U.S-based buyers as well.
Both the small- and medium/large-scale exporters have found it increasingly difficult to compete
with the multinational affiliate exporters. As a result, many have begun selling directly to the
larger multinational exporters rather than continue to export directly themselves.
Multinational exporters will typically have a core group of 20-30 traders but will buy from any
supplier who meets their requirements. Some multinational exporters have started to explore
upcountry buying activities to obtain better quality directly from farmers, but most prefer to have
traders bring the beans to their warehouses in Makassar or Palu.
There is an Indonesian national quality standard for exports of cocoa beans, developed by the
National Standards Board of Indonesia (SNI), but it is currently only voluntary. If exporters or
buyers require certification of their beans then the inspection is performed by one of two
companies (Sucofindo or PanAsia) who will test a sample of the beans against the quality
standards for bean count, waste level, mold, and moisture content. The inspection companies
then issue a certificate to the exporter ensuring that the beans meet the Indonesian quality
standard. However, the legitimacy of these inspection certificates is still questioned by some
international buyers.
BPSMP, a division of the Ministry of Trade and Industry, has recently been charged with
oversight and regulation of the inspection agencies to help ensure that the Indonesian SNI
standard is being upheld. This is a new process which is not yet obligatory and will be
implemented gradually. To date, government enforcement of the standard has been extremely
limited.
Importing/Trading:
Several large multinational processors and manufactures use international agents, based
primarily in New York or London, to source beans or cocoa products. The biggest cocoa bean
exporter in Indonesia is the local affiliate of ED&F Man—one of the largest cocoa and
commodity traders in the world.
Most cocoa is globally traded on the New York and London commodity exchanges. Since the
U.S. is the biggest buyer of Sulawesi beans, most of the Indonesian cocoa trade passes through
the New York exchange which serves as the basis for Sulawesi bean prices. Physical trade does
not pass through the exchange. It is the mechanism used by international importers and traders
to establish current commodity prices.
Processing (regional/international):
Many of the multinational affiliate exporters in Indonesia are subsidiaries of, and directly supply
beans and products to, their multinational processors including Cargill and ADM. The
processed cocoa products are sold to manufacturers in the U.S., Asia, Latin America, and
Europe. Blommer Chocolate Company is the largest cocoa processor in North America and is a
major importer of Sulawesi bean.
Manufacturing (international):
U.S. manufacturers are the largest international buyers of processed cocoa butter from Sulawesi,
purchasing about 40% of total exports, followed by European and Southeast Asian buyers. The
market for Sulawesi cocoa powder is split fairly evenly between buyers in the U.S, Southeast
Asia, and Europe.
Many of the large manufactures will source cocoa from international traders, but some deal
directly with exporters themselves or have representatives in cocoa producing countries.
Hershey Foods, one of the biggest buyers of Sulawesi cocoa, is the largest chocolate
manufacturer in the world. Other major manufacturers who source Indonesian cocoa include
Lindt, Cadburys, etc.
There are also integrated multinational processors and manufacturers who produce their
own cocoa products for use in the manufacturing of chocolate. Two of the largest ones, ADM
and Masterfoods/Mars, have significant presence and representation in Indonesia.
7
These recommendations have been prepared by Judy Payne (USAID/EGAT/EIT/IT) who participated on the value
chain assessment team and provided technical support on ICT-related issues.
Objectives: The analyst needs to pursue three types of questions in order to identify where ICT
tools and services might address constraints.
1. What types of ICT each significant player in the value chain uses today or could use
(that is, it is accessible to the player and the player is willing to use) at a reasonable price.
2. Ways ICT is already being used to address constraints in the value chain and with what
effect (success?); and ways that might be extended.
What internal software applications players at the global level use. Many, of not most, firms in
developed countries rely heavily on software applications for internal management and
operations and, increasingly, to conduct
business with their suppliers and customers. Example 1: In the apparel industry, many large
apparel businesses design on-line and transmit their
It is important to know how these designs electronically to those that cut and assemble
applications affect their relations to the apparel. They also track progress on assembly
customers and suppliers. If players in and shipment electronically via electronic
developing countries are more difficult to transactions. If a group of apparel assemblers in
deal with because they do not provide XYZ country can’t receive and handle designs
electronically nor report their progress, they are at
information in the same format or via the
a competitive disadvantage.
same media, they are less competitive. That
means the global player has to handle them
with exceptional and probably more costly processes.
Perhaps a bit more probing may be needed with interviewees regarding innovative ways ICT
might help improve relationships along the value chain. Many people do not think in these terms
so may find it more difficult
to think of possibilities.
Example 2: Most large global distributors use networked business
That is why it is so
applications to conduct business with their key large suppliers and
customers. This is fundamental to how they operate and not only important that the
increases their process efficiencies but saves them significantly in interviewees are made
inventory and transportation costs. They simply do not inventory aware of some of the
inputs any more or very little. Firms with heavy or large products possibilities during the team
sometimes use “rolling” inventory. For example, timber companies orientation.
load their stock on trucks and route them on the fly to customers as
they travel across the country as orders come in electronically from
construction firms. Manufacturers do this as well. If suppliers in a Whom to Interview
developing country do not use these core applications, it becomes Most ICT related questions
much more costly for a global buyer to turn to them at all. Suppliers can be posed to the usual
in developing countries must become part of this virtual value chain.
Tip: You may also want to track down ICT experts – perhaps consultants – in the global sector
you are assessing. These experts may not focus at all on any players in developing countries.
But they can give you important insights into the types of software applications and
communication that are becoming fundamental for the global players in the sector. Some global
customers may compensate for the lack of ICT capabilities of suppliers in developing countries,
putting these suppliers at a disadvantage unbeknownst to them. See the boxes on the prior page
for examples of how this might affect those in developing countries. Being left out of the virtual
value chain will increasingly mean being left out of the value chain completely.
This means that the firm selected for the SOW must be able and willing to do this. This will not
and should not require a separate “ICT” member of the assessment team. That would only mean
that ICT is meant as an add-on, not integrated into the work as needed. All team members can
quickly be oriented from an ICT perspective.
A summary of the major value chain constraints and potential commercially viable solutions
(critical success factors) needed to address them is shown below.
The team then conducted an exercise to prioritize the possible commercial solutions to the key
constraints using a “Short-Listing Matrix” which shows the relative rating (i.e., high, medium,
low) of each proposed solution against two critical selection criteria. Any solution falling within
a pre-determined “not attractive” range could be considered as low priority, while solutions rated
with high potential in both criteria are considered more “attractive” and of higher priority
consideration.
The following criteria were used to determine the relative priority of the possible commercial
solutions:
− Potential for Growth and Expansion of the Value Chain: the possibility of the
proposed solution resulting in increased growth and expanded trade, investment, and/or
competitiveness of the cocoa value chain.
− Potential Number of Smallholder Farmers that would benefit or increase
participation in the value chain: the increased number of smallholder farmers benefiting
or participating in the value chain as a result of the proposed solution. This could also be
a measure of outreach as well as potential employment opportunities.
11 8, 10
High 7
3, 6, 12, 13 5, 14
1, 2
Medium
Low 4, 9
Low Medium High
Potential No. of Smallholders that would Benefit or Increase Participation in the Value Chain
Determining the feasibility of the highest priority solutions was the next phase of the assessment.
In addition to the information collection from interviews and secondary research, two focus
group discussions (FGDs) were held with selected value chain participants in Palu and Makassar.
The objective of the FGDs was to validate the identified constraints and possible commercial
solutions and, more importantly, to begin a dialogue with relevant stakeholders on how specific
solutions could best be supported and commercially sustained.
For some of the participants, the FGDs offered them a rare opportunity to share their views and
opinions on how to address prevailing problems with other value chain participants. The goal
was to move beyond the usual discussion of constraints to a constructive public-private sector
conversation on how the constraints can be sustainable mitigated and addressed within a
commercial private sector context.
When conducting value chain analysis, it is also important to complete an assessment of possible
commercially viable solutions to the major value chain and subsector constraints. Due to the
limited level of effort available for this assessment, full assessments of the various solutions
were not completed but, based on data available and compiled in Indonesia, illustrative examples
are presented below.
Illustrative Example 1
Commercially Viable Solution: Training and technical assistance for smallholder farmers in “best practice”
methods to improve crop production.
These best practice techniques include improved pruning, frequent harvesting, improved farm sanitation,
fertilizing/nutrient management, tree rehabilitation (e.g. grafting of improved tree stock), shade management,
biological controls, and appropriate use of pesticides.
Subsector Constraint (addressed by solution):
The quantity of Sulawesi cocoa production has started to decrease over the past few years. While there are many
reasons for this decrease, it is recognized that increased infestation of the cocoa pod borer (CPB) is a major factor.
Other factors which limit the production of smallholder farmers include: age of trees, drought, farmer behavior and
lack of cocoa extension, black pod (fungal), vascular stem die-back, and other pests and diseases.
As a result of pest infestation and poor crop management techniques, smallholder farmers have experienced lower
yields and decreased quality (e.g. increased waste, clumping, mold, bean count, smaller/flatter beans, and higher
moisture) which has decreased their income potential.
Existing Providers of the Solution
There are a number of mechanisms currently being used to delivery training and technical assistance in cocoa best
practice to smallholder farmers, including:
(i) SUCCESS Alliance
(ii) PRIMA
(iii) ASKINDO Cocoa Village Model
(iv) Disbun Extension Agents
It should be noted that the sustainability and outreach of all the existing service providers are severely limited. The
cost recovery of all of the providers currently depends on external (public/donor) funding. The commercial
provision of best practice training and technical assistance is not done and the capacity to scale-up existing
provision will also be a challenge.
Proposed Potential Provider(s) of Commercially Viable Solutions:
Individual Private Sector Companies
input supply companies (e.g. Pusri)
collectors/traders
processors (e.g. PT Effem, Unicom)
exporters (e.g. Continaf, Olam)
Farmer trainers
Sulawesi Cocoa Research Center/Institute
(does not currently exist, but could be developed)
Constraints to Provision and Use of the Solution (for targeted providers and users):
It will be important for all providers to coordinate their activities at some level in order to avoid sending mixed or
conflicting best practice messages to smallholder farmers.
Exporters
− production training and technical assistance is not their core business
Input Supply companies
− production training and technical assistance is not their core business
− the training and technical assistance provided by private sector may be too narrowly focused (i.e.,
appropriate use of fertilizer) and not significantly result in sustainable cocoa production for smallholder
farmers
Processors
− production training and technical assistance is not their core business
Farmer trainers
− lack of technical and management capacity to properly train and provide technical support to smallholders
− perception by other farmers that they know better than the farmer-trainers
− production and dissemination of appropriate farmer-to-farmer training materials (from Success) is limited
− there is a need to determine how farmer trainers could recover the cost of providing this training and
conduct this as either a full-time or part time activity
Collectors/Traders
− the association is not structured to conduct extensive training programs for smallholders
− perception of lack of trust by many in the industry; seen as only interested in their core trader constituency
− technical capacity to provide best practice training is limited
− few technical staff to expand the outreach of training and technical assistance
Sulawesi Cocoa Research Institute/Center
− does not currently exist
− would need to operate commercially to recovery costs for certain activities
Illustrative Example 2
Commercially Viable Solution: Access to and availability of appropriate cocoa production inputs for smallholder
farmers.
This service would entail both the availability cocoa production inputs including the optimal mix of fertilizer for
cocoa, improved tree species and plant varieties, harvesting tools, etc. Training of smallholder farmers in the
appropriate use of these inputs would be critical. A variety of financing options for farmers to access these inputs
must also be considered.
Subsector Constraint (addressed by solution):
There is little or no availability of a variety of inputs necessary to fully utilize best practice techniques and improve
cocoa production for smallholder farmers. In addition, they have not been able to access these inputs if available
because of the cost and seasonality of cocoa farmer income.
Proposed Provider(s) of Solution:
− input supply companies (e.g. Pusri)
− financial institutions (e.g. Bank Indonesia, BPRs, etc.)
− farmers groups (FFS alumni)
There are a variety of on-going and pending investments to support Indonesian cocoa—seven of
them are public sector projects and three are private sector initiatives.
Whether private or public-sector supported, most of these investments lack outreach to most of
the 400,000 smallholder cocoa farmers and/or are heavily dependent on external funds to
continue.
Using the methodology of farmer field schools, the Success Project is facilitating intensive four-
month training programs for smallholder farmers throughout Sulawesi. It is recognized,
however, that the outreach and sustainability of the training and technical assistance is currently
limited.
There may be opportunities to explore additional methods to expand the dissemination of the
PsPSP messages via media including radio and television, if appropriate. During the assessment,
the team held discussions with a local radio station in Central Sulawesi (Radio Citra Pertanian)
which is one of the few private stations dedicated to agricultural-based programming. They
broadcast in AM, FM, and short-wave and expressed openness to new programs. Print media
could also be better exploited to disseminate the PsPSP methodology. The general distribution
Local private sector sponsorship of expanded media dissemination should also be pursued where
appropriate. During interviews and the FGDs, initial discussions with some input supply
companies and exporters regarding possible commercial sponsorship of quality cocoa messages
were generally positive.
By the end of the program in 2005, the SUCCESS Alliance plans to reach over 80,000 farmers in
Sulawesi, Papua, North Sumatra, and Bali—providing training to improve crop husbandry and
integrated pest management to control CPB. The specific training curriculum in the various
provinces is also being expanded to include use of bio-controls, farmer-led research, genetic
selection and side-grafting, and community nurseries.
The Success Alliance already has strong relationships with its existing private sector partners
(including Masterfoods/Mars, Hersheys, and the World Cocoa Foundation) who provide
technical assistance and additional funding for small research and training activities, including
research and testing for bio-controls and clonal varieties.
Australian Government: ACIAR, with funding from the Australian government and
Masterfoods, has begun conducting small-scale research to identify appropriate genetic varieties
for Sulawesi cocoa farmers. This research has focused primarily on yield and pest and disease
resistance.
The agribusiness linkages component of PENSA is based in Makassar and will focus its
activities in the South Sulawesi province only. Cocoa is one of three subsectors they have
targeted under this component—emphasizing technical assistance to the cocoa sector and
enabling environment for agribusiness. A summary of PENSA’s planned cocoa support
activities are presented below.
Component Sub-Component/Activities
Technical Assistance to support and monitoring of current initiatives
the Cocoa Sector o improved productivity and quality in supply chain
feasibility study for up-country procurement, warehousing, financing system
attraction of finance for Industry Development
liaise with other donors on cocoa investment projects
promote commercial cocoa investment opportunities
assess level of support for Cocoa Dev. Fund
It should be noted that the PENSA program is very new and while they plan to work in the areas
listed above, they are still only in the planning stage. PENSA has expressed interest in working
with USAID and/or other donors to implement programs in the cocoa sector so there are definite
opportunities for possible programmatic synergy and leverage.
Asian Development Bank (ADB): Sustainable Tree Crop Productivity Project: The
ADB is preparing a project to increase the incomes of smallholder tree-crop farmers and to
remove constraints on tree-crop subsector productivity. The project will improve support and
regulatory services, targeting the poor, through district-level interventions. Specific
objectives include:
(i) restructuring of support services for the smallholder subsector;
(ii) promotion of diversified and sustainable farming systems among small tree-crop
farmers; and
(iii) provision of infrastructure to encourage the development of integrated tree-crop
production, marketing, processing, and manufacturing, through private sector
investment, state-owned enterprises, and cooperatives.
It is not clear how much project support will ultimately be targeted at cocoa, but the PENSA
program is maintaining involvement during these preparatory phases to ensure that cocoa is
explicitly incorporated.
Since activities and budgets are now controlled at the district level, however, plans of the
provincial Disbun to implement this program are dependent on districts providing funding and
staffing.
Kimbun Program: Since 2002, Dispun has also been establishing local district-level
“Tree-Crop Industry Stakeholder Development Program (KIMBUN)” areas to improve cocoa
production and provide access to finance for farmers. The lending component of KIMBUN is
based on a solidarity group model, with no interest terms. To date, the outreach of this program
has been very small. Given its concessionary lending terms, the sustainability of the program’s
activities are dubious.
Masterfoods PRIMA: Masterfoods/PT Effem, with funding from the Dutch government,
is currently implementing a small two-year cocoa research program called PRIMA. Under the
PRIMA project, Masterfoods is providing intensive technical training in IPM and best practices
to 1,000 farmers and laborers in the village of Noling (South Sulawesi). Collectors and traders
working in the Noling area. have also been trained under the PRIMA project. Masterfoods is
now monitoring and evaluating the effect of this intensive training on the quality of cocoa being
produced throughout Noling.
Bank Niaga: For the past two years, this bank has been conducting a pilot warehouse
receipt program (where farmers/traders warehouse beans and then receive a bank loan that uses
the warehoused beans as collateral), to offer fixed asset-based lending products to its higher-end
clients. To date the program has only had 5-6 clients participate (with 2 in Sulawesi), mostly
higher-end exporters with substantial clout and influence, but the concept of inventory-based
credit is one that could benefit the wider cocoa industry if it could be made more accessible to
other participants in the value chain.