A field visit was undertaken by experts Dr. Takuji Wen Tsusaka and Dr. Siriluck Sirisup, along with three support staff, to Bua Yai Subdistrict, Nan Province, to explore and identify input suppliers and output buyers that would benefit from this TA’s Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) practices and product quality intervention, respectively.
The objectives of the field mission were as follows:
- To update the list of relevant input suppliers and output buyers such as input dealers, farmer enterprises, and processors.
- To obtain information on the latest requirements for the GAP and PGS.
- To investigate the potential for some of the input suppliers to benefit from the TA interventions (i.e., CSA, high-value crops, product quality improvement).
- To investigate the potential for some of the community enterprises and processors to benefit from the TA interventions.
- To examine how farmers and community enterprises assess the quality and safety of their products as well as their current knowledge of good practices.
The qualitative data collection methods were adopted in light of the limited number of respondents and the necessity for the exploratory inquiry. In-depth interviews (IDI) were used as the main methods for eliciting the information. The interview checklists were prepared for each type of respondents. The selection of input suppliers was based on their relevance to the three CSA practices and/or the connection with TA farmers, while the selection of output processors was based on their relevance to the six strategic crops of the TA. On one occasion, a focus group discussion was held with 5 herb farmers. In addition, 20 farmers in the TA were interviewed using a structured instrument to assess their capacity for food safety management.
Key takeaways from the field visit
- Eight input suppliers and five output processors (including double counting) that are relevant to the TA interventions have been engaged as candidates for collaboration in TA activities and outputs. The companies and their value chain functions are presented in the table below.
| Company/Enterprise | Value Chain Function | TA Crop | ||
| Input Supply | Processing | Retail | ||
| Community Enterprise Group of Forest Planting 3 types 4 benefits | ✅ | Cacao | ||
| Community Enterprise of Ban Mai Mongkol Medical Herbs Group for Essential Oil Extraction | ✅ | Lemongrass | ||
| Bua Yai Sub-district Organic Agriculture Community Enterprise (Nan Organic Agriculture Community Enterprise Network) | ✅ | ✅ | Pumpkin | |
| Cocoa Valley Resort Company | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | Cacao |
| Singuang Nan & Peanut House | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | Peanut |
| Chok Por. Panit Shop | ✅ | |||
| Keeratayamitkaset Shop | ✅ | |||
| Sa Than Organic Farming Community Enterprise | ✅ | Pumpkin | ||
| Technology Lanna | ✅ | |||
| Weerachon Solar Cell | ✅ | |||
- The latest requirements for the GAP were obtained. The DOA in each province is responsible for certifying GAP and Thai Organic. The MoU has been signed between the DOA and DOAE to facilitate the certification process for either individual farmers or farmer groups. After submission of the application with required evidence, the district agricultural extension officers check the documents and farm plots for the readiness of certification. Then, the district agricultural extension officers cooperate with the DOA to certify the farm. The period of each certification is two years. Before the renewal application, the district agricultural extension officers cooperate with the DOA to prepare for the renewal process. This MOU has made the entire process for GAP certification faster than direct application to the DOA. The PGS Organic is not certified by the MOAC. On the other hand, PGS organic practices are not certified by the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives (MOAC) but by the Thai Organic Agriculture Foundation (TOAF). The certification process and relevant procedures are available on the TOAF website.
- Potential for seven input suppliers to benefit from the TA interventions was identified. Input suppliers that are not part of the organic value chain at the moment exhibit some reservation toward making new products available, indicating their preference to have farmers grow maize so that they can sell synthetic inputs. Nonetheless, some input suppliers express their willingness to procure and supply organic inputs as long as there is demand. In terms of inputs for CSA, a supplier of solar irrigation systems in Chiang Rai and a supplier of biochar machines in Chiang Mai manifest their interest and readiness to supply their products to Nan.
- Potential for five processors to benefit from the TA interventions was identified. All the interviewed processors currently deal with one of the six alternative TA crops and express keen interest in purchasing the respective crop from farmers in Bua Yai. They request that the farmers contact them when they become ready to supply the produce of the alternative crops.
- Current knowledge of and capacity for food safety and product quality control among farmers and communities were assessed. Most farmers are aware of GAP and improved practices but are not interested in implementation because they mostly produce non-food crops (rubber, maize for feed). For food production for home consumption purposes, they apply reduced synthetic inputs. Farmers perceive it is impossible to avoid chemical contamination of soil and water because of intensive use of synthetic inputs for rubber and maize production. Even though some farmers were trained in GAP, the required practices are cumbersome, especially recording and traceability. Recording everything is not practical because their food crops are in small-scale production. A few farmers applied for GAP certification previously but failed to receive it. Most farmers use the same vehicle for input and output transportation, which does not comply with the GAP standards. Separating vehicles only for small-scale production is not practical. Many farmers use water for post-harvest washing, but the water is not of the same quality as potable water.
- Recommendations for further capacity building in TA: In brief, farmers are aware of improved practices, but are not applying it because of small-scale production of food crops. This implies that they will be able to apply it only when food production is adequately upscaled. Future capacity building should focus on expansion of scale of food crop production based on market demand, rather than teaching them what GAP and organic practices are.