workshop proceedings (part 1)
TRANSCRIPT
MauritiusBreadfruitSectorConsortiumFirstPartnershipInception
Workshop
WorkshopReport
9th&10thFebruary2012FoodandAgriculturalResearchCouncil(FARC),
Reduit,Mauritius
SupportedbythePAEPARDProject
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
1
TableofContents
Introduction ..............................................................................................................................2
Day 1 – Introduction to PAEPARD and establishment of Knowledge Base ......................3
Welcome and Introduction of Participants ............................................................................. 3
Introduction to the PAEPARD Project................................................................................... 3
The Mauritius Breadfruit Sector Consortium ......................................................................... 6
The Value-Chain Approach ................................................................................................... 7
Participants’ Expectations from workshop ............................................................................ 7
Demonstration of the use of the wiki ..................................................................................... 9
Workshop Activities & Introduction to Group Work .......................................................... 10
Team Building Activity ........................................................................................................ 12
Group work sessions (Part 1) – Participatory development of the knowledge-base ............ 12
Day 2 – Value-chain approach, roles of the stakeholders and way forward ....................14
Recap of Day 1 and continuation of group presentations .................................................... 14
Group work (Part 2) – Consolidation of knowledge, technology and skills assets .............. 14
Group Work (Part 3) - Breadfruit Value-Chain Approach and Analysis ............................. 14
Linkages among themes along the value chain .................................................................... 14
Refining the questions we are asking ourselves ................................................................... 15
Validation of the Breadfruit Value-Chain stakeholders ....................................................... 15
Results of the group work sessions .......................................................................................16
Discussion and Way Forward ...............................................................................................37
Closing remarks .....................................................................................................................38
Annex I – List of Participants ................................................................................................ 39
Annex II – Workshop Programme ........................................................................................ 40
Annex III – List of Stakeholder Institutions of the Breadfruit Sector ................................... 41
Annex IV: Review of the literature ....................................................................................... 42
Annex V: Evaluation of the workshop .................................................................................. 43
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
2
Introduction
The Mauritius Breadfruit Sector Consortium organized a two-day Partnership Inception
Workshop on 9th and 10th February 2012 at the Food and Agricultural Research Council,
Reduit. This workshop is supported and is part of the Platform for African-European
Partnership on Agricultural Research for Development (PAEPARD) Project, which is
facilitating this collaboration among various stakeholders in the Breadfruit Sector in
Mauritius as well as European Partners (African-European Partnership).
The stakeholders present at the workshop were from research institutions, the University of
Mauritius, farmer organisations, breadfruit exporters, breadfruit growers, the Ministry of
Agro-Industry and Food Security (plant protection and propagation) and the private sector.
The workshop was facilitated by two external facilitators who have been selected and trained
by PAEPARD.
The overall objectives of the workshop were for stakeholders to:
Get to know each other
Understand the PAEPARD project
Appreciate the importance of partnership within the consortium
Understand and apply the value-chain approach
Participate actively in different group activities
Establish a framework for effective partnership
During the two days of the workshop, the participants were exposed to presentations and
group activities in line with the workshop objectives.
The presentations served to increase awareness and understanding of the PAEPARD project
support, the proposed concept note and the principles behind the implementation of the
Consortium activities. The group activities were formulated to improve mutual understanding
among stakeholders along the breadfruit value chain in Mauritius and promote a collaborative
spirit among the participants.
This report covers the proceedings of the two-day workshop held on 9th and 10th February
2012 as well as the background materials used during the workshop.
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
3
Day 1 – Introduction to PAEPARD and establishment of Knowledge Base
The first day of the workshop was focused on getting to know about the PAEPARD project,
the Breadfruit Sector Consortium and the establishment of a knowledge base on breadfruit.
PowerPoint presentations were delivered by the Facilitators, followed by group activities to
establish the knowledge base in a collaborative and participatory manner.
Welcome and Introduction of Participants
The workshop was opened by Mr. K. Bheenick, Programme Manager at the Food and
Agricultural Research Council (FARC), lead partner of the breadfruit sector consortium and
convener of the workshop. He welcomed the participants and explained the importance of
holding this workshop. He laid stress on the common visioning aspect of the consortium
partners who are from different sectors of the breadfruit value chain. He also acknowledged
the assistance of PAEPARD in the funding of the workshop and added that after this two-day
workshop another one would follow in about a month’s time. He explained that the FARC’s
vision was that the consortium activities lead to the elaboration of a National Breadfruit
Programme, which could later be extended to a regional level where breadfruit planting
programmes are being implemented. Each participant was then requested to present
himself/herself and give a brief over-view of the work being done on breadfruit by their
respective organizations (see list of participants in Annex I). After the introductions, Mr. K.
Bheenick went over the Agenda of Day 1 (Annex II) for the participants to have an idea of
how the day was going to be and wished the participants all the best for the rest for the two-
day workshop.
Introduction to the PAEPARD Project
The first presentation was on introduction to the PAEPARD Project, which was presented by
Mr. T. Gunesh, one of the workshop facilitators. The presentation was focused on the
PAEPARD Project, its context, objectives, expected results, major activities and how the
concept note from Mauritius was selected during the PAEPARD second call for concept
notes. Mr. T. Gunesh laid accent on the requirement of the PAEPARD project for the
involvement of non research stakeholders in Agricultural Research for Development. He
talked on the need for demand-driven partnerships and added that following the Partnership
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
4
Inception Workshops, PAEPARD would be organizing a write-shop for writing of proposals
for the themes identified with a view to get funding from financing institutions. It was also
mentioned that among the 69 concept notes that were received by PAEPARD, 10 consortia
were selected based on different criteria and the Mauritius consortium was among the 10
selected ones. The federating themes of the European and African partnerships, as well as the
list of concept notes selected by PAEPARD were presented (Fig 1).
Figure 1. Introduction to the PAEPARD Project and selection process of concept notes
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
5
Figure 1(contd). Introduction to the PAEPARD Project and stages in the process of selection of concept notes
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
6
The Mauritius Breadfruit Sector Consortium
The second presentation was made by Mrs. I. Boodhram, the concept note applicant. She
gave a brief overview of the concept note submitted by the Mauritian Consortium, entitled
“Micro propagation and cultivation of in vitro breadfruit plants and development of novel
products from breadfruit as an alternative source of carbohydrates in Mauritius”. Breadfruit
has been chosen as it is a crop that provides a lot of opportunities; be it in terms of fresh
produce or transformed product, that is, gluten-free flour among others. It has the potential of
being an income generating plant for small households as well as for small scale orchards.
Mrs Boodhram explained to the participants that the concept note had been submitted
following consultations with a few of the stakeholders and partners and that this workshop,
with its extended consultation with stakeholders, provided an excellent opportunity to review
the proposed activities of the consortium. She also presented the partners currently involved
in the project.
Figure 2. Proposed outcomes and partnership arrangements of the Consortium
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
7
The Value-Chain Approach
The value-chain approach was presented by Ms. Nawsheen Hosenally, one of the workshop
facilitators. She built on Mrs. Boodhram’s presentation to demonstrate that there are many
partners involved in the consortium and there are multiple linkages among them. However, in
order to work in a partnership, it is important to have a proper understanding of the existing
relationships and an agreed mechanism for interactions. She explained about the value-chain
approach and proposed that, through the workshop activities, the importance of linkages
among different actors involved at various points in a value chain would be highlighted. She
also explained the role and responsibilities of the facilitators, which was mainly to act as a
neutral partner, to bring the partners together in their discussions and to promote mutual
understanding among them. Since a facilitator is not a leader, the role of a leader v/s
facilitator was also explained (Fig 3). Stakeholders were reassured that the partners of the
consortium had already been meeting and coordinating some of the activities, especially in
the preparations and organisation of the series of workshops to be supported by the
PAEPARD project.
Participants’ Expectations from workshop
After the participants had an overview on the PAEPARD project, the Mauritius breadfruit
sector consortium, the value-chain approach and the role of leader v/s facilitator, the floor
was opened for clarifications and discussions. Participants were then asked to describe their
expectations from the workshop (Box 1). In general, stakeholders had a wide range of
expectations, each specific to the current issues they were dealing with. This was to be
expected, and hopefully most of their expectations would have been addressed by the end of
the workshop activities.
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
8
Figure 3. Introduction to the Value Chain Approach as it would be applied to the breadfruit sector in Mauritius
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
9
Box 1. Participants’ Expectations from Workshop
Discuss problems being encountered for producing grafts and find solutions
See if partners within the consortium may help in production of the planting materials for farmer organization presently awaiting planting materials to set up a breadfruit village,
See whether it will be possible to introduce planting materials from abroad
Find how the consortium can work together to conserve germplasm in Mauritius and support each other in propagation as well
Get maximum knowledge and information on the whole value-chain
Need a real sharing of information and all partners must collaborate in doing so (value-chain approach and inclusive demand-driven partnerships)
Get new ideas on value-addition, product development and new ventures in the breadfruit sector
Know how we are going to collaborate based on the work that has already started and what we want to do in the future
We have worked as individuals up to now, but time has come to sit together and become a team
Discuss the opportunities that are available and try to make the most of these by working as a team
All collaborators become one (Not just talking, but make it happen)
It is a first-time multi-stakeholder partnership and it is hoped that it will work well such that the workshop acts as a trigger for more interaction
Hope that this workshop does not “die” like those in the past
Get the support of policy makers
Come up with a group project to benefit the country
Make workshop successful, have write-shop and get funding
Hope to get funding through this partnership
Demonstration of the use of the wiki
Since the first meeting of the consortium, a wiki was created to facilitate collaboration within
the multi-stakeholder partnership. The wiki consisted of several pages, each having specific
objectives. A demonstration was made on the use of the wiki and how different partners may
collaborate by sharing their work, participate in discussion forums, upload files and comment
on the different pages. The wiki is accessible at http://paepardmauritius.pbworks.com
Furthermore, there was another page on the wiki which consisted of an editable map of
breadfruit trees in Mauritius using Google Maps. The objectives of this map are (a) to test if
‘crowd-sourcing’ is a viable method of gathering information in a spatial and descriptive
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
10
manner in Mauritius and (b) to provide the members of the breadfruit sector consortium with
a map of distribution and quantity of breadfruit trees to work with, to complement statistics
that may be available. A step-by-step demonstration was also done to show the participants
how they can add breadfruit trees to the map.
Participants then discussed the wiki and ways in which it could be useful, not only to the
partners in the consortium, but to all stakeholders. There was an immediate need expressed
for a tutorial to be made available about the use of the wiki and also on the procedure to edit
the map of breadfruit trees in Mauritius. Participants likened the wiki to a one-stop shop of
information, where at institutional level each member of the consortium or each stakeholder
would have a clear idea of the work being done by each partner. Furthermore, the wiki would
be a place to gather other information related to the consortium. Participants also expressed
their appreciation of the breadfruit mapping is being done, which will benefit many of the
stakeholders in the breadfruit in Mauritius. In addition, importers and exporters who are not
in the consortium will still get valuable information through the map. Finally, it was also
hoped that the map would provide a proper framework of the breadfruit sector and
characterize the agglomerations of breadfruit trees into backyard production or mini-
orchards. Thus, a lot of hope was placed on the development of the map, but its success
would depend on the contribution of the stakeholders and the public at large.
Workshop Activities & Introduction to Group Work
The workshop objectives and activities were explained to the participants through a
PowerPoint Presentation (Figure 4).
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
11
Figure 4. Presentation of the group work activities during Day 1 of the workshop
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
12
Team Building Activity
Prior to the group activity, following the lunch break, the participants were exposed to a team
building activity called “The Human Knot”. The participants were divided into 2 groups and
each group had to form a circle. In each group, the participants were required to hold the
hands of each other (except the person next to oneself). Without releasing their hands, they
had to untangle themselves to form a perfect circle.
This team building activity had 2 objectives; (a) to make the participants realize the essence
of collaboration in a team, and (b) to act as an energizer. The team building activity may be
viewed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqTuIlNHtmc&feature=youtu.be
Group work sessions (Part 1) – Participatory development of the knowledge-base
The second part of Day 1 of the workshop consisted of a group activity with the objective to
create a knowledge base on breadfruit. To facilitate the process, a review of literature on
Breadfruit, based on 7 key documents identified, had been carried out by Research Assistants
at the Food and Agricultural Research Council (FARC) prior to the workshop. In this
Literature Review, 11 themes were identified along the value chain, and the contents
organised by theme (Table 1)
Table 1. Themes identified for Group Activity
1. Origin and distribution of breadfruit
2. Germplasm
3. Environmental requirements
4. Propagation methods and planting materials
5. Agronomy and cultural practices
6. Fruiting
7. Harvest and post -harvest
8. Product development and marketing
9. Market/Exports
10. Uses of plant parts other than the fruit
11. Consumer preferences, education and products
The participants were divided into 4 groups according to their interests to the themes. Each
group was comprised of 3-4 members and was allocated 1 to 3 themes to work upon
(depending on the number of pages and the content). Each participant was handed a copy of
the Literature Review on Breadfruit, which included the theme which they had to work on.
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
13
After going through the reading material on their respective themes, members of each group
were required to discuss among themselves and address the following questions for each
theme;
(a) What do we know? – Green
(establishing the knowledge assets)
(b) Where are we now? – Yellow
(establishing the current status)
(c) Where should we be? – Blue
(establishing objectives for the theme)
(d) What is missing to get there? – Pink
(establishing what is required to achieve the objective)
(e) What questions are we are asking ourselves? – White
(establishing the information needs)
The answers to the above questions were written on cards of corresponding colours for each
question and these were stuck on the wall according to the theme. Each group was given at
least 1hr30mins to cover the review of the literature, to discuss the issues and to address the
issues adequately.
After the group activity, the group leaders presented their outputs during the plenary session
(Figs. 6-8). During the different presentations, other participants also had the opportunity to
post any new ideas/ questions on the given themes, thus enriching the existing knowledge
already gathered by the group members or identifying areas that required more clarification
or detailed information. Since there was not enough time to complete all the presentations,
the last group would present their work the following day. The work carried out by the
groups would serve for the following group activity sessions the next morning.
Figure 6. Group Presentations at the end of Day 1
Figure 5: Questions to be answered for each theme
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
14
Day 2 – Value-chain approach, roles of the stakeholders and way forward
Recap of Day 1 and continuation of group presentations
Day 2 started off with the welcoming of the participants by the facilitators of the workshop.
Members of the last group, who worked on the last 3 themes, presented their work following
which ideas/ questions from the floor were added to the flip-chart (like the previous day).
The facilitators then did a quick recap of the activities of Day 1 (about PAEPARD, the
consortium, value-chain approach, role of facilitators, workshop objectives, group activity)
before explaining what was expected from the participants on Day 2 (Annex II).
Group work (Part 2) – Consolidation of knowledge, technology and skills assets
The next group activity built on what had been done the previous day. Participants were
required to validate the knowledge, technology and skills assets by reassessing the statements
and qualifying them as based on (a) literature available (b) documented research or
information from other organisations and (c) indigenous knowledge. This process would
ensure that knowledge assets that the groups had identified were already documented or the
sources of information were known. This would facilitate compilation of information and the
generation of knowledge products, at a later stage, to guide the research and development
process.
Group Work (Part 3) - Breadfruit Value-Chain Approach and Analysis
Linkages among themes along the value chain
The second group work was based on the value-chain approach, whereby the participants
were asked to have a look at the themes of different groups and to find linkages and discuss
how components from other themes are inter-connected. If there are links, they had to locate
where these links are, and how do they see them connected.
The objective of the activity was to enable the consortium stakeholders to see the connection
of roles/ components in the different themes that were selected.
After each group had a look at the other themes and found connections, two groups were
chosen at random to present the linkages they found both upstream and downstream along the
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
15
value chain. After the presentations, it was agreed by the stakeholders that they could
collectively identity several linkages among the themes all along the value-chain. The
facilitators explained that further Value Chain Analysis, for which methods have been
developed, would be carried out at the next workshop, when more information about the
themes and their linkages had been gathered.
Refining the questions we are asking ourselves
Following the activity of Day 1 listing the “questions we are asking ourselves” and the
presentations thereon, there were many questions which had been generated by participants.
However, some of the questions were duplicated while others were not well formulated or
unclear. Therefore, the group work consisted of clustering of questions while also re-visiting
the list of questions after the value chain linkages had been established during the previous
session. The objective was to come up with a clear set of questions that would have to be
answered and the information further analyzed at a later stage.
The facilitators explained that the next step would consist of synthesizing a draft of the output
of the group activities, which would be further discussed on the consortium wiki and during
the next Partnership Inception Workshop.
Validation of the Breadfruit Value-Chain stakeholders
The last group activity for the workshop consisted of identifying the stakeholders involved in
addressing each theme along the breadfruit value-chain. Participants were provided with a list
of partners/ stakeholders involved in the Mauritius Breadfruit Consortium (Annex III).
Considering the 11 themes identified in the breadfruit value-chain, they were required to:
Locate who are the different stakeholders involved (Who?)
Why they are involved in that specific theme (Why?)
How are they involved – their roles (How?)
Flip-charts and markers were provided to the participants and they divided the questions in 3
columns (who, why, how) and they located which stakeholder is involved where for each
theme. While the participants were provided with a list of stakeholders, they were allowed to
add stakeholders who they thought might have an important role in the value chain (Fig.7).
One group was chosen at random to present its work to validate that all other groups had also
completed the exercise in a similar manner (Fig. 8)
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
16
Figure 7. Group Discussion on stakeholders present in value-chain
Figure 8. Group presentation on stakeholders and their roles
ResultsofthegroupworksessionsResults of the group work sessions are shown below: the cumulative results of the group
work carried out during the workshop for each of the 11 themes. The literature review,
presented in Annex V, is referred to in each of the thematic sections.
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
17
1. Origin and Distribution of Breadfruit
Review of the literature:
Annex IV, pages 1-3
What do we know?
Origin (from literature)
Tropical Distribution worldwide (from literature)
Where are we now?
Do not know the number of varieties locally
Do not know about the distribution of varieties locally
Where should we be?
Number of varieties introduced
Number of trees
More exhaustive review of literature
Other sources of information?
What is missing to get there?
Eco-geographical survey on breadfruit trees
What questions are we asking ourselves?
What is the Geographical distribution of breadfruit trees in Mauritius?
Should we do a Tree census in Mauritius?
Can we use a GIS system?
Breadnut - number of trees and distribution?
Is a census of breadnut trees required?
Can there be other sources of information?
Stakeholders involved in issues related to Origin and Distribution of breadfruit
Who? Why? How? 1. CSO Involved in census Include breadfruit on
household survey 2. All stakeholders in the
breadfruit sector To map distribution of breadfruit trees across the island
On consortium wiki
3. Documentation centres (MAIFS/ AREU/ MSIRI/ FARC)
Involved in documentation More exhaustive review of literature
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
18
2. Germplasm
Review of the literature:
Annex IV, pages 4-8
What do we know?
Twenty varieties identified as core varieties (literature)
Can be conserved by tissue culture(literature)
Seem to have two varieties or phenotype locally (round & oblong)(observation)
Breadnut can be used as root-stock for grafting (local validated practice)
Breadnut has an edible seed (high protein)(literature)
Where are we now?
Propagating only two seedless varieties locally
In vivo production of plants using root only (Literature Revue agricole)
Where should we be?
Characterisation of our varieties (morphological & molecular)
Any development project for which we need new germplasm
Introduction of new varieties if there is a need
In-vitro propagation
What is missing to get there?
Breadfruit to shift from an under-utilized crop to a commercial crop
Collaboration with international and local institution dealing with Breadfruit
What questions are we asking ourselves?
Which varieties exist in Mauritius?
Is there a possibility of extension of production season particularly with increasing urbanization
Has there been genetic erosion or drift in our local varieties?
Should we increase our genetic pool?
Can we look for germplasm of dwarf varieties to facilitate harvest?
Is there a need to promote conservation of existing germplasm?
Do Reunion, Comores and Seychelles, for example, have the same varieties?
Are we having any pest/disease problems?
Are bats a problem with breadfruit?
Breadnut - is there a demand for it? What do we know about it?
Why breadnut as a root stock?
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
19
Is breadfruit a suitable alternative to breadfruit in Mauritius? Why bother about breadnut?
How to differentiate between young plants of breadnuts and breadfruit?
Which institutions will be involved in this? Or has capacity? Private labs or propagators?
Stakeholders involved in issues related to germplasm
Who? Why? How? 1. UoM Studies on general
erosion or drift in local varieties
Research existent and facilities available
Student projects
2. AREU Varieties existing in Mauritius
Introduction of new varieties
On-going research on breadfruit
Research on usefulness of breadnut regarding nutritional properties and on a rootstock
Survey by extension services
Evaluation trials Collaborative programs
(UoM?)
3. MAIFS (NPPO & Entomology)
Facilitate introduction of new germplasm
PRA & Disease/ pest surveillance
4. MAIFS (Horticulture division)
Already involved in conservation
In-vitro and In-vivo collections
5. FARC Already involved in conservation of germplasm
In-vitro collections
6. Research organizations in different countries
Already involved in Research and development
Collaborative programs
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
20
3. Environmental Requirements
Review of the literature:
Annex IV, pages 9-11
What do we know?
Wide range of adaptation (literature)
Agro-climatic requirements (literature)
Where are we now?
Distribution is nearly all over the island
Not clear if there are concentration zones of trees
Where should we be?
Mapping of trees distribution
Identifying agro-climatic zones suitable for optimal production
What is missing to get there?
Agronomic studies that report on adaptation in Mauritius
Experimental trials
What questions are we asking ourselves?
Are there specific micro-climates that are ideal for breadfruit?
Tolerance to drought with relation to climate change?
Tolerance to cyclones?
What is the yielding period in different zones and where to obtain the general yield data?
Check germplasm with different production & harvesting time to extend period of supply?
Is it possible to extend the production season?
Can breadfruit be grown in super-humid regions of Mauritius?
Is soil pH and high rainfall limiting factors to breadfruit tree growth in Mauritius?
Is breadfruit an invasive species?
Stakeholders involved in issues related to environmental requirements
Who Why How 1. AREU On-going research Trials in different
locations 2. Meteorological
Services Meteorological data
available Provision of
meteorological data
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
21
4. Propagation methods and planting materials
Review of the literature:
Annex IV, pages 12-14
What do we know?
Can be propagated by root cuttings , air layering, stem cutting, grafting, T.C methods, seeds
Where are we now?
Studies already started
Selected clones being propagated
Root cuttings main method, higher success rate
In-vitro propagation (under experiment)
Air-layering(under experiment)
Grafting
Where should we be?
Should have already mastered vegetative propagation methods
Should have already large number of breadfruit plants for sale
Planting material at affordable price (current price at Barkley Rs 185/unit)
What is missing to get there?
Research facilities and funds
Skilled labour
Need more starting materials
What questions are we asking ourselves?
Tapping funds (from where)?
Training for propagation required?
Pros and cons of propagation method
Is any method of propagation highly recommended
What are the success rates of the different propagation methods?
Do we have facilities for mass propagation (large scale)?
What are the problems encountered for different propagation methods
Is it easy to propagate by in-vivo methods
What if someone use root cuttings from grafted plants?
Is there any subsidized price for large scale?
What are the current prices?
Cost effective method of propagation
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
22
Where to get readily available planting materials?
Do we have enough planting materials and root stock?
Which rooting system/ propagation method is suitable against cyclone?
Who is and how to coordinate gathering of information on amount of planting materials available, rate of production?
Which institutions have capacity to do this? Private sector?
Can people /farmers/ students be trained on grafting techniques?
Who can/will train producers on propagating methods?
Stakeholders involved in issues related to propagation methods and planting materials
Who? Why? How? 1. MAIFS (Barkly ES) Propagation
Sale of planting material Propagation and sale by
conventional means Adapt protocol for Tissue
culture method for sale 2. AREU Research and Development
Information Dissemination Training
Research and Development on different methods of propagation of breadfruit
Sale of breadfruit planting material
Training of Extension Officers and growers
3. FARC (Tissue Culture Lab)
Research and Development on protocol development
Production and sale of planting materials
Research on in-vitro propagation of breadfruit
Sale of tissue-culture plants
Research on Tissue culture in collaboration with UoM
4. UoM Research Research on Tissue culture in collaboration with FARC
5. Labourdonnais and other private sectors
Propagation and sale of planting materials
Production and sale of agricultural produce
Propagation by conventional means and sale
Collaborate in on-farm trials (OFT’s)
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
23
5. Agronomy and cultural practices
Review of the literature:
Annex IV, pages 15-20
What do we know?
Fast growing/long life
Hardy
Productive
Well adapted to local conditions
Old trees can be rejuvenated
Where are we now?
Evaluation plots set up at AREU
Rejuvenation under observation
Where should we be?
Germplasm (local) characterization completed (molecular/phenotypic)
Establish local clones conservatory
Map of growing areas should have been available
What is missing to get there?
Funds
Insufficient planting materials
Absence of guidelines
No training to growers
Using elevators for plucking
Mechanized techniques
What questions are we asking ourselves?
What are the factors responsible for fruit drops?
What are the production constraints?
Can we go for high density planting materials
Can reports on the evaluations be made available( preliminary)
How does pruning affect yield?
Recommendations on pruning
Are the training materials/leaflets suitable? Is there need to revise/updates
Do we have agro-climatic maps?
What are the known production seasons in Mauritius?
Are there any appropriate tools for harvesting
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
24
Can tall trees be pruned?
What are irrigation requirements?
Should we have specific varieties for fresh and processing?
Bearing time for different planting materials(stem cuttings, root cuttings, grafting)
Can we do intercropping?
Can fruiting be enhanced like litchis?
What is the recommended pathway ‘to move from under-utilized crop to commercial crop’
Stakeholders involved in issues related to Agronomy, Cultural practices & Fruiting
Who? Why? How? 1. AREU Research and
Development Information
dissemination Training
Agronomic evaluation Production of
recommendation sheets Workshops/ Field days/
visits 2. SFWF Provide support to
farmers (insurance, schemes etc.)
Identify constraints faced by growers in collaboration with AREU
3. Private firms Importer of machinery/ tools
Make available appropriate harvest tools for breadfruit
4. Growers/ MAMCF/ Ministry of cooperatives
Producers of breadfruit Collaborate with AREU for on-farm trials
5. MAIFS Schemes for pest control Control of pests
Support/ incentives for control of bats
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
25
6. Fruiting
Review of the literature:
Annex IV, pages 21-25
What do we know?
Seasonal
Large trees can be regenerated
Maturity indices easy
Fruit production capacity
Where are we now?
Production season known
Fruit drop high
Tall trees difficult to harvest
Production capacity of local accessions(yield) known
Where should we be?
Less fruit drop
What is missing to get there?
Local agronomic studies
What questions are we asking ourselves?
In case of attacks by fruit bats, bird-netting needed?
What are the post harvest losses?
Have the fruits got good preservation qualities?
What are the approved pesticides on breadfruit?
What are the pest and diseases affecting breadfruit?
When do we know that the fruits are ready for harvest?
Can it be grown in super humid zones?
How to produce off season fruits?
Introduction and evaluation of new clones?
Support from NPPO for introduction?
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
26
Stakeholders involved in issues related to Agronomy, Cultural practices & Fruiting
Who? Why? How? 1. AREU Research and
Development Information
dissemination Training
Agronomic evaluation Production of
recommendation sheets Workshops/ Field days/
visits 2. SFWF Provide support to
farmers (insurance, schemes etc.)
Identify constraints faced by growers in collaboration with AREU
3. Private firms Importer of machinery/ tools
Make available appropriate harvest tools for breadfruit
4. Growers/ MAMCF/ Ministry of cooperatives
Producers of breadfruit Collaborate with AREU for on-farm trials
5. MAIFS Schemes for pest control Control of pests
Support/ incentives for control of bats
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
27
7. Harvest and Post Harvest
Review of the literature:
Annex IV, pages 26-32
What do we know?
Grading/sorting
Waxing
Water Treatment
Traditional minimal processing (e.g water treatment)
Rod Plucking
Climbing using ladder
Picking up falling fruits
Quality index at harvest
Packing (Leno bags, gunny bags, bamboo baskets)
Where are we now?
No information on existing varieties
Using traditional harvest technique
International post-harvest practices exist
Where should we be?
Develop quality parameters (Norms/Standards)
Pruning activities
Early and late varieties
Develop dwarf and early maturity plants disease
Packing to reduce post-harvest losses (e.g agricultural crates)
What is missing to get there?
Schemes/loans for post-harvest/harvest facilities
Effective collaboration between partners
No existing protocols for harvesting/post-harvest
Sharing of information
More research and development funding
International collaboration
What questions are we asking ourselves?
At which stage to harvest? (Maturity index – optimum and actual)
Is the practice of placing fruit in water documented and justified?
Do we have appropriate tools for harvest in Mauritius? E.g. Aluminum poles
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
28
After harvest (green) No. of days kept (Stored) for local marketing?
What can be done (Backyard/for local market) to increase shelf-life of breadfruit?
What are the recommended packaging/storage materials for Mauritius?
Appropriate methods to increase shelf-life?
Effect of pruning on yield/quality?
Develop protocol – Responsibility?
Can we put breadfruit in under cool conditions to increase shelf-life?
Which type of wax can be used? Available?
Stakeholders involved in issues related to harvest and post-harvest
Who? Why? How? 1. Cooperatives To achieve economies of
scale Regrouping of farmers
2. Associations and companies (SMEDA)
Better management Training Incentive schemes Appropriate funding
mechanisms 3. AREU Harvest and post-harvest
protocol Norms and standards Shelf-life improvement Improvement in
harvesting techniques Pest and disease
management Improved cultural
practices
Research and trials Literature and research Literature and research Training/ information
kits/ grants/ schemes for equipments
Awareness campaigns/ information materials/ identification of pests and diseases
4. UoM/AREU Harvest and post-harvest protocols
Research
5. MSB/ UoM/ AREU Norms and standards Literature and research 6. Private companies/ AREU
Improvement in harvesting techniques
Training/ information kits/ grants/ schemes for equipments
7. SFWF/ Meteo/ Private companies
Risk management Support/ assistance/ insurance schemes
8. AREU/MAIFS Pest and disease management
Awareness campaigns/ information materials/ identification of pests and diseases
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
29
8. Product development and marketing
Review of the literature:
Annex IV, pages 33-43
What do we know?
Marketing channel – local/export
Animal feed (Pigs)
Processing awareness exist (chips, canned, flour, boiled)
Human consumption (boiled, chips, curry, snacks)
High potential for export
High risk crop (cyclone prone)
High land requirement
Where are we now?
Export of product (approx. 100mT)
Development and research on flour production
Long-term storage (freezing) shelf-life studies
Development of frozen French fries, wedges
Where should we be?
Increase usage as staple food side dishes
Unacceptable fruits, waste from processing as animal feed
Resource material for composting
Substitute for current bad eating habits (e.g. oily foods, saturated foods)
Tap on outer island resources (Rodrigues)
What is missing to get there?
More research and development and funding
Lack of information on product
Critical mass to invest in commercial production
Loans/incentive schemes
Setting up of food parks
What questions are we asking ourselves?
How do we think we are going to increase usage as staple?
Regarding increasing consumer awareness, what is being done?
What is the demand for breadfruit on the local market?
Can it be used for baby foods?
For flour making, are there any specific requirements (varietal, stage of maturity)?
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
30
Fresh products or processed?
Market consumption?
Is there scope for development of SME (Processing)?
Is there any kind of risk management strategy in place?
Land availability for setting up orchards?
When is the next fruit tree census?
Stakeholders involved in issues to product development and marketing
Who? Why? How? 1. FARC/SFWF Demand for fresh and
processed breadfruit Survey Breadfruit festival
2. AREU/ UoM Consumer preferences/ New products
Survey/ sensory evaluation
3. Enterprise Mauritius New markets International exhibitions/ partnerships
4. AREU/ UoM/ NPPO Type of varieties Literature Trials Research
5. Land use division/ AS/ MAIFS
Land availability Land bank
6. APAU/ MAIFS Census on breadfruit trees in the Republic of Mauritius
Survey Complete enumeration Editable/clickable map
7. Food security fund/ DBM/ Private banks
Access to capital Schemes Grants Loan facilities
8. MAIFS/ MAMCF/ Private stakeholders/ SFWF
Continuous/ Reliable supply of breadfruit
Partnerships/ Bi-lateral agreements
9. AMB/ Freeport Storage facilities Provide storage facilities
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
31
9. Markets/Export
Review of the literature:
Annex IV, pages 44-46
What do we know?
Where are we now?
Where should we be? What is missing to get there?
Different types of products
Fresh breadfruits for export
Breadfruit flour Other usages at
level of household e.g. chips, cakes
Wider range of products and breadfruit varieties
Develop commercial production
Identify local germaplasm/ Access other germplasm
R&D on processed products
Identify interested entrepreneurs
Different markets
E.U Regional and international markets
Data on volume and value of exports and country of destination
Identify new export markets
Identify competitors in export markets
Market demand
E.U and local markets
Australia, USA, Canada and New Zealand
Tourist industry Domestic markets
e.g. frozen chips, canned, flour
Gluten free products
Determine current annual production in Mauritius
Work with hotel chef Local market
intelligence Market intelligence for
Gluten free products
Market Access
Fulfilling SPS requirements for E.U
Infrastructure for commercially processing
Food safety requirements
SPS requirements for other international markets (Market barriers)
Logistics for packaging and export (Perishable)
Certification (evidence for Gluten free products)
Financial Resources for investment
Identify SPS requirements for potential export markets (e.g. fruit flies)
Develop packaging Develop certification
system for food safety and allergens free
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
32
What questions are we asking ourselves?
Types of products
What is current production volume?
What is current export volume?
To which markets are breadfruit exported?
What are other potential markets?
Different Markets
In these export markets, what are customs duties applied?
In these export markets what are SPS requirements?
Can Mauritius abide by these SPS requirements?
Market intelligence in current and potential export markets: Who are the buyers? Price? Need specific varieties? Potential for market development? How consumed?
Market demand
Who are our competitors?
Their Prices?
Cost analysis including freight cost?
Seasonality of supply from Mauritius v/s others?
Development of other products; Processed; Pulp/ canned/ frozen / possible? Cost?
Market access
Export markets potential for these processed products?
What inputs are needed: Infrastructure, technology, packaging, storage conditions, transport conditions, cold-chain? (processed)
Forecast of production volume in next 5-10 years?
What are requirements to import/ propagate varieties?
What is shelf life of varieties?
What are current standards for export? Size/ type of packaging?
Determine regularity of supply for export markets?
Are breadfruit destined for export coming from orchards or backyards?
Any orchard project?
Can orchard be certified global gap?
If marketed as Gluten free, who will certify?
What are health and nutritional advantages and How can these be used for marketing?
Sensitization of farmers on gap to produce good quality breadfruit, Who/How?
What is potential for absorption on local market?
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
33
Market intelligence: Who are buyers? Preferred way of consuming? Price? Potential for processed products and prioritize? Hotels: Potential?
Should new recipes be developed?
Marketing of breadfruit on local market: How? Who? For both processed and fresh?
What time of the year are competitors exporting?
What are the conditions for import of new breadfruit accession?
Any strategy to market breadfruit as potential candidates for food security?
What are the priorities for Mauritius?
Should we have a brand name- branding breadfruit of Mauritius?
What are storage conditions of breadfruit before export?
What are the requirements for export? (size, weight, type and so on)
What is the current practice for sale of breadfruit (whole/ whether semi processed?)
Are there any post harvest treatments for breadfruit before export?
Which sources of information exist on international trade of breadfruit?
Stakeholders involved in issues related to markets and export
Who? Why? How? 1. APEXHOM Involved in export policies
and information Facilitation
Information on export standards, market access
2. Exporters Know export markets Information on export data and constraints
3. Producers/ Processors Need markets to sell Production information 4. AREU Post-harvest for exports Research and Development on
shelf-life, post-harvest, storage, packaging, Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs) etc.
5. Enterprise Mauritius Know export markets Participation in trade fairs to present breadfruits
6. NPPO SPS for imports and exports
Allow import of germplasm and information on SPS of export matkets
7. Laboratories (Food Tech Lab)
Testing of pesticides Testing of pesticide residues
8. Women entrepreneurs Capacity to produce/ process
Start processing
9. Chefs/ hotels Use in restaurants Use breadfruits – new recipes 10. Media Communicate Inform public about breadfruit 11. Consumer organizations
Inform consumers Inform consumers about benefits
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
34
10. Uses of Plant parts other than the fruit
Review of the literature:
Annex IV, pages 47-49
What do we know? Where are we now?
Where should we be? What is missing to get
there? Different parts of breadfruit tree, multipurpose tree
use of the other plant parts at household level
use of the other parts of breadfruit other than at household level, e.g. handicraft for tourism industry/export
R&D on the medicinal value
Can use timber, fruits, seeds, peel bark, latex, buds, leaves, flower, spike, trees
Using only fruits
Food Developing flour
Used for animal Feed Used for medicinal purposes
Used for clothing Agro-forestry shade Caulking for canoes Adhesives Used for construction of buildings, handicrafts, surfboards
What questions are we asking ourselves?
What are the possible uses of by-products from breadfruit processing?
Is there any economic importance of plant parts other that fruit for Mauritius?
Stakeholders involved in issues related to uses of plant parts other than the fruit
Who? Why? How?
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
35
11. Consumer preferences, Education and Products
Review of the literature:
Annex IV, pages 50-53
What do we know?
Where are we now?
Where should we be?
what is missing to get there?
Preferred by Asian niche markets
Most people are discovering how to use breadfruit in their menu
People should find it normal that breadfruit forms part of their diet
Peoples’ awareness of nutritional value
Preference for fresh fruits
Develop breadfruit as a disaster relief food (food security)
Wide range of products (international markets) e.g. canned
Awareness on gluten free products
Support from the government
What questions are we asking ourselves?
Is breadfruit also consumed by Europeans in replacement of potato?
In what forms consumers would like to eat breadfruit? Fresh or frozen?
Are products demand driven?
How has the perception/status of breadfruit changed over the years?
Nutritional analysis of derived products (w.r.t. snacking at school)?
Need for educating consumers?
Survey on consumer preferences?
What need to be done to increase consumer?
Awareness on importance of breadfruit?
Concept of breadfruit festival?
Which countries are producing breadfruit flour?
Quantity of flour exported and where?
How many breadfruit need to replace 1kg of wheat?
Cost of production of flour?
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
36
Stakeholders involved in issues related to Consumer preferences, Education and Products
Who? Why? How? 1. Exporter (Sarjua?) Already have access to
export market Provide information on
consumers from international markets and their requirements
2. Producers and Processors Customer Satisfaction Development of new products
3. MoA/ Producers Create awareness Breadfruit festivals Breadfruit consumption
campaigns World Food Day
4. Consumer Protection Association
Platform for local consumers
Consumer acceptance/ consumer awareness
5. CSO, AREU Data on breadfruit consumption locally
Surveys Data on per capita
consumption of breadfruit 6. Media Consumer education Radio talks, TV programs
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
37
DiscussionandWayForwardThe last part of the workshop was a plenary session whereby the consortium partners
reflected on that had been achieved during those two days and discussed proposals for the
way forward. The aspects that guided the discussions included the role of each partner in the
partnership, expectations from each other and from the facilitators; the means of
communication considered appropriate for the consortium members, and planning for future
activities, including the next workshop.
The main conclusions of the discussion sessions are as follows:-
A summary of the workshop will be written up and shared with the participants and stakeholders (through the wiki)
All partners in the consortium and those who are present in the workshop will be required to share the work that they are presently doing (a summary) with respect to breadfruit on the wiki
Various partners are already working in collaboration, but this should be strengthened further by communicating more with each other
Communication will be done through emails and on the wiki, but regular physical meetings will also be arranged at FARC, whereby all important discussions and activities will take place
Frequency of the meetings will depend on the speed at which we are working and how much of the work has been done in a given time-frame
Next workshop is expected to be around mid-March (depending on how fast we are working on the output from workshop 1)
Before next workshop, we are expected to have a meeting on 2nd March 2012, during which a representative from Cole-ACP will be in Mauritius and will join us
Between the 1st and 2nd workshop, we will try to find answers to the questions that were generated during 1st workshop on the wiki and during physical meetings
During the 2nd workshop, a value-chain mapping and analysis will be done For the questions that remain unanswered, they will be used to generate research
questions in the different aspects of the value-chain that had been identified (Also done during second workshop)
In the medium-term, we will try to establish a National Breadfruit Program, under which there will be several project proposals on breadfruit
After the 2nd workshop, a write-shop will be organized by PAEPARD in Nairobi, Kenya
When the project proposals are ready, we will apply for funding at local, regional and international level
Since the idea of using breadfruit as a staple crop is already on the agenda on the government, we will request funding on breadfruit from the government (given that the consortium has already been formed and partners involved are already working on the subject)
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
38
The Consortium will participate in events like the Breadfruit Day (organized by the Agricultural Research and Extension Unit), Breadfruit festival and Breadfruit village (Organized by Farmer Organization – MAMCF)
Research will continue for years, but the partners are expected to be in touch throughout the process and contribute to the value chain
This whole process may take years, but without collaboration, it will not be possible
ClosingremarksPrior to closing the workshop, participants were asked to fill in the evaluation forms for the
First Partnership Inception Workshop. Mr K Bheenick, Programme Manager at the FARC
thanked the participants for their presence and their active participation. He reminded them
that the workshop had been a very productive and exhaustive one as the participants had to
think and probe a lot to compile as much information as possible. This has contributed to the
consortium members having a clearer idea of the current status of the breadfruit sector in
Mauritius, a joint vision of where we should be, and areas where gaps exist, which may be
filled up through Research and Development. He also thanked the facilitators for their efforts
and their success in maintaining the level of interaction during the workshop. Finally he
requested participants to remain in touch through email and through the wiki, and to
contribute with additional information to answer the questions being asked, as this
information will be used in the planning process for the next workshop and the generation of
the research project proposals.
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
39
AnnexI–ListofParticipantsName Institution Job Title Tel Fax Email
Mr. Yann Goblet
Labourdonnais Assistant Diversification Manager
266 9533 266 6415 pepiniere.ciaglabo@ intnet.mu
Mr. Yacoob Mungroo
Horticulture Division (MAIFS)
Scientific Officer
464 5517 [email protected]
Mrs. Saraspadee Subramaniam
AREU Research Scientist
670 8249 [email protected]
Dr. Arvind Ruggoo
University of Mauritius
Associate Professor
403 7695 465 5743 [email protected]
Mrs. Sachita Jawaheer – Unathras
National Plant Protection Office (MAIFS)
Scientific Officer
464 4872 465 9591 moa-pathology@ mail.gov.mu
Mr. Krit Beeharry
MAMCF/ SFWF Chairman [email protected]
Mr. Prithiviraj Dookithram
Small Farmers Welfare Fund
Technical Officer
433 3249 [email protected]
Mr. Devanand Bhurtun
AREU Extension Officer
261 9216 2619216 [email protected]
Mrs. Babita Dussoruth
AREU Research Scientist
466 1090 [email protected]
Mr. Dharam Bachraz
Independent (Farmer Organization)
Agronomist [email protected]
Mrs. Indira Boodhram
FARC Laboratory & Nursery Manager
465 1011 465 3344 [email protected]
Mr. Krishan Bheenick
FARC Programme Manager
465 1011 465 3344 [email protected]
Ms. Varsha Jadoo
FARC Assistant Research Scientist
465 1011 465 3344 [email protected]
Ms. Anishka Ramkhalawan
FARC Trainee 465 1011 465 3344 [email protected]
Ms. Pratima Greedharry
FARC Assistant Research Scientist
465 1011 465 3344 [email protected]
Mr. Kaylasson Maistry
FARC Assistant Research Scientist
465 1011 465 3344 [email protected]
Mrs. Raifa Bundhun
APEXHOM Secretary General
433 4906 4334862 [email protected]
Ms. Nawsheen Hosenally
Independent PAEPARD Facilitator
910 1841 nawsheen.hosenally@ gmail.com
Mr. Toolsee Gunesh
Farmers Service Centre
PAEPARD Facilitator
726 3393 [email protected]
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
40
AnnexII–WorkshopProgramme
Partnership Inception Workshop Programme
DAY 1 Thursday 09 February 2012
09.00 – 09.30 Welcoming Address; Introduction to participants
09.30 – 10.00 Introduction to PAEPARD
10.00 – 10.30 Concept Note/Presentation of partnerships
10.30 – 11.00 TEA BREAK
11.00 – 12.00 Workshop Activities; Role of leader/facilitators; Introduction to group work
12.00 -13.00 LUNCH
13.00 – 14.00 Group Work
14.00 – 14.30 TEA BREAK
14.30 – 15.30 Group Work / Presentations
15.30 – 16.00 Debriefing Session
DAY 2 Friday 10 February 2012
09.00 – 09.15 Recap of Day 1
09.15 – 10.15 Group Work/Presentations
10.15 – 10.30 TEA BREAK
10.30 – 11.30 The Breadfruit Value Chain Analysis Group Work
11.30 – 12.00 Presentations
12.00 -13.00 LUNCH
13.00 – 14.30 Discussion and way forward
14.30 – 15.30 Debriefing Session
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
41
AnnexIII–ListofStakeholderInstitutionsoftheBreadfruitSector
List of Stakeholder institutions as identified by Consortium partners:
Food and Agricultural Research Council (FARC)
Agricultural Research and Extension Unit (AREU)
University of Mauritius (UoM)
Conserverie Sarjua Ltee
Mauritius Agricultural Marketing Cooperative Federation (MAMCF)
Partner from European Union
Ministry of Agro-Industry and Food Security (MAIFS)
Association des producteurs et exportateurs horticoles de Maurice (APEXHOM)
Other Exporters
Les Moulins de la Concorde (LMLC)
Producers (Large Scale and Small Scale)
Mouvement Autosuffisance Alimentaire (MAA)
National Plant Protection Office (NPPO)
National Women Entrepreneur Council (NWEC)
Agricultural Policy Analysis Unit (APAU)
Agricultural Marketing Board (AMB)
Ministry of Finance (MOF)
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
42
AnnexIV:Reviewoftheliterature
Breadfruit Sector Consortium
(Mauritius, 2012)
Review of Literature (8 Feb 2012)
Key:
1. Source 1; Breadfruit: Promoting the conservation and use of underutilized and neglected crops (Diane Ragone, 1997)
2. Source 2; Artocarpus atilis (Diane Ragone, April 2006) 3. Source 3; Breadfruit. Morton, J.1987 4. Source 4; Regeneration guidelines for breadfruit (Ragone D. 2008) 5. Source 5; Postharvest handling Technical Bulletin (New Guyana
Marketing Corporation, 2004) 6. Source 6;Farm and Forestry Production and Marketing Profile for
Breadfruit(Diane Ragone, 2011) 7. Source 7; Report of First International Symposium on Breadfruit
Reasearch and Development (Taylor.M & Ragone. D, 2007, Nadi, Fiji)
(This Annex is presented as a separate document)
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
43
AnnexV:Evaluationoftheworkshop
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
44
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
45
What I liked the most about the workshop
The purpose of the workshop was well explained.
The willingness of all stakeholders to provide maximum information to
consortium. The spirit within workshop.
Les interactions entre les différents intervenants qui ont été très intéressantes.
Chacun a apporté et partagé les connaissances de la culture du fruit à pain.
The participants were all contributing for the success of the workshop, willing to
share all information about their activities; mutual trust; co-operation / team
spirit
Discussion / Interaction; New knowledge on breadfruit ; Positive approach of each
participant
New methods of brainstorming and analysis
It was very interactive.
Very interactive, lots of new ideas and new information
Work groups, Interactive sessions
The groupwork session and the issues to work upon
Interactive workshop; Group work was interesting
Information exchange.
New ideas about use of breadfruits
(3 blank returns)
What I did not like the most about the workshop
Un aspect que l’on ne connait toujours pas, c’est ‘quantifier la demande’
The venue
There was some discussion that was not relevant to the theme
Some information was not relevant
The food
The meal was not balanced, not tasty
(10 blank returns)
FirstPartnershipInceptionWorkshopReport February2012
46
What is the most important lesson I take with me at the end of the workshop
Existence of the project and its coherence on Breadfruit
Spirit of collaboration
Work as a team
Working in groups, with different opinions can help to find better solutions
Working in such a group with people from different sectors / organization where
we feel there is a sharing of information increase in knowledge.
Many institutions are working at their level on breadfruit. Collaborative work,
sharing of information essential
We should not be working on our own: this leads to duplication of work. We
should work in collaboration for a fruitful objective.
Different organisations have different types of information that can be used
(information which were not known before)
The importance of value chain approach
Importance of sharing ideas with other institutions
To understand what is the position of our institution in the value chain
La viabilité de la filière dépendera grandement de la volonté du consomateur ;
chaque maillon (stakeholder) de la filière est interdépendent. Un travail collectif
est un “must”.
(4 blank returns)