MEETING PRIVATE GRADES AND STANDARDS IN TRANSITION AGRICULTURE: EXPERIENCES FROM THE ARMENIAN DAIRY INDUSTRY

One of the main trends emerging from the agroindustrialization process is the rise of 'grades and standards' (G&S) in food products. G&S were initially developed by the public sector to reduce transaction costs and ensure product quality and safety but have become a strategic instrument of competition in differentiated product markets (Reardon et al, 2001). Firms are using grades and standards to protect and develop brands in the international marketplace and in some cases to fill in for missing public standards. While producers in developed countries have the resources to meet these requirements, in developing countries these changes have tended to exclude small firms and farmers from participating in market growth, because of the implied investment requirements (Reardon et al, 2001). This is leading to already disadvantaged farmers in these countries being forced to produce basic subsistence food crops and become further excluded from the opportunity to join the global food industry. While past research has evaluated the effects and trends of G&S (Reardon, et al, 2001; Farina & Reardon, 2000; Reardon & Farina, 2002) the organizational structure to enable small farmers to meet these requirements has largely been overlooked. In this paper we use a theoretical contract enforcement framework to argue that private enforcement capital developed through the facilitation of an external aid agency can be an effective means for creating credible and sustainable relationships capable of meeting G&S. We draw upon theory from Cocks and Gow (2002), Oliver and Gow (2002) and Gow et al. (2000) to argue that in situations characterized by high discount rates and low reputation or trust levels (such as transition agriculture) that the use of a third party external enforcement agent can be used to provide the necessary linkage between the parties to facilitate transactions. Through the facilitation role of the external agency, private enforcement capital is developed between the firm and the farmers, opening the path for a sustainable mutually beneficial relationship. Empirical evidence is provided by the case of the United States Department of Agriculture Marketing Assistance Project (USDA MAP) in Armenia and its role in establishing farmer owned milk marketing cooperatives. By acting as an external facilitator in the initial establishment and ongoing development of milk supply cooperatives the USDA MAP has provided a solution to the dual market failure problems of reliable supply of the consistent quality of milk required by processors while enabling farmers access to markets and ensuring timely payment and therefore enabling farmers and firms to credibly contract for the collective marketing of their milk. Through the establishment of a unique and flexibly designed combination of leadership development, training in governance, financial management, dairy management, and quality improvement programs, the USDA MAP has assisted the groups in expanding the self enforcing range in such a manner that the cooperative should be capable of sustaining long term credible exchange relationships once the external agency withdraws. This is important as aid programs have often failed at ensuring sustainability once external management and financial support is removed. Data for this paper was collected through a series of semi-structured interview with USDA MAP staff, dairy processing firm managers, cooperative managers, and cooperative presidents during the fall of 2002, and over a two week period in March, 2003.Livestock Production/Industries,

MEETING PRIVATE GRADES AND STANDARDS IN TRANSITION AGRICULTURE: EXPERIENCES FROM THE ARMENIAN DAIRY INDUSTRY

Livestock Production/Industries,

Public Facilitation of Small Farmer Access to International Food Marketing Channels: An Empirical Analysis of the USDA Market Assistance Program in Armenia

With the continued globalization, rapid channel consolidation, increasing technology, capital, food safety and private grades and standards requirements, many small scale agricultural and horticultural producers from transitional and developing countries are rapidly becoming excluded from international agri-food marketing system. Consequently, governments and international agencies alike are reevaluating the structure, form, and delivery of their assistance programs as they search to identify new delivery mechanisms that can overcome the weaknesses that their traditional programs face within this new business environment. Their challenge is to design programs that facilitate the establishment of economically viable and sustainable market relationships and business models between small-scale producers and the international food marketing system that provide these financially distress producers access to the technological know-how, market knowledge and access, and financial and productive resources required to successively compete. Recent Central and Eastern European (CEE) experiences indicate that foreign direct investment and the entry of multinational firms have successfully facilitated small farmers access to international marketing channels. By entering markets with sufficient capital to ensure contract enforcement and support investment, multinational firms can overcome the pervasive hold-up and underinvestment problems plaguing the sector thereby stimulating investment and growth in agricultural production (Gow & Swinnen, 1998; 2001; Walkenhorst, 2000; Dries & Swinnen, 2004). For numerous reasons access to sufficient foreign direct investment or multinational firms may not be an option for many countries. The obvious question therefore becomes, can an alternative third-party facilitation mechanism for stimulating agriculture be identified apart from the private solutions found in Central and East Europe? Glover and Kusterer (1990), Porter and Philips-Howard (1997), Coulter et al (1999), Eaton and Shepherd (2001), and Simmons (2001) allude to the benefits of public agencies in facilitating firm farmer relationships. However as of now the literature has not identified nor extracted the critical processes and factors required in the design, development and establishment of long-run economically viable and sustainable business models that facilitate small producers' access to international food markets. In this research we develop a theoretical model explaining the critical processes and factors involved in the public facilitation of the establishment of economically sustainable marketing relationships between small producers and agroprocessors in the presence of financial distress and absence of effective enforcement mechanisms. The USDA Market Assistance Program (MAP) in Armenia is used to empirically test the theoretical model as it provides a natural experiment. Aremina's recovery is similar to those observed in other CEE countries; however Armenia's agricultural sector has not experienced the recovery found elsewhere. A key constraining factor has been the lack of foreign direct investment initiated solutions so successfully employed elsewhere (World Bank, 1999; 2002). Without the presence of private solutions that can create self-enforcing relationships and encourage relationship specific investment, the Armenian agricultural sector has remained in a sub optimal equilibrium characterized by deep financial distress and a general lack of investment. The only sub-sectors that have seen growth any growth have had MAP facilitation support. Thus what is unique is that the MAP project appears to provide a public solution rather than a private solution to the problem, as in all the previous research (Gow & Swinnen, 1998; 2001; Foster, 1999; Gow et al, 2000; Walkenhorst, 2000; Dries & Swinnen, 2004; Cocks & Gow, 2003). In order to examine the phenomena of establishment and development of sustainable inter-organizational marketing relationships within the context of Armenian agriculture, the USDA MAP project, and the goat industry, we have used mixed methodological approach combining qualitative and quantitative data collection. Approximately 100 semi-structured interviews were conducted with farmers, industry representatives, local experts, and USDA MAP personnel. In additional, an extensive enumerated survey was implemented questioning 2000 farmers in five sectors over 2003 and 2004. Based upon the extensive interviews 12 different business models and facilitation processes used by the USDA MAP were identified and a suitable stratified survey frame was designed to test the differences between these models. The theoretical model and empirical results indicate that the third party public facilitator, USDA MAP, is critical in facilitating the initial development of the channel and identifying a value proposition in a downstream market. However, economic sustainability requires that the public agency remain an arms-length third party facilitator, rather than being the leader in the development of the channel and thus an integral cog in the channel. The actual development of the marketing channel should be led by an entrepreneur who possesses both the ability to develop the marketing channel and who is trusted by the local community. By leading the development of the channel the private enforcement capital that is created through the development of the channel is created between the entrepreneur and the farmers. Over time this widens the self enforcing range of the relationship, therefore allowing greater shifts in market conditions and decreasing the risk of opportunistic behavior (Gow et al, 2000). By holding the trust and respect of the community the entrepreneur inherently holds private enforcement capital with the rest of the community equivalent to the present value of their reputation or trust individually and collectively with the community (Oliver & Gow, 2002). Additionally, the expectation of a value proposition of a downstream market creates the expectation of private enforcement capital between farmers the entrepreneur through the present value of future returns that the entrepreneur could earn from the value proposition (Gow et al, 2000). Thus the combination of the present value of the entrepreneur's reputation with the farmers in the short term combined with the longer term expectation of future returns through the value proposition and creates sufficient private enforcement capital for the immediate development of a self-enforcing relationship with the farmers.International Relations/Trade,

Sheep Updates 2006 -Part 1

This session covers seven papers from different authors: PLENARY 1. Making Dollars from Merinos, David Sackett, Holmes Sackett & Associates Pty Limited, Wagga Wagga, NSW 2. A new variety of sulla (Hedysarun coronarium)for forage production in southern Australia, Kevin Foster, Ron Yates, Phil Nichols, Department of Agriculture and Food, WA and Centre for Legumes in Mediterranean Agriculture, UWA 3. Mating - Short and fast is better, Graeme Martin, John Milton, Faculty of Natural & Agricultural Sciences, The University of Western Australia 4. Breech strike protection in sheep post 2010, Scott Williams, Program Manager Animal Health and Welfare, Australian Wool Innovation Limited 5. How the West can win!, Garry McAlister, Meat & Livestock Australia Limited, New South Wales. 6. The Merino Company (TMC) - Active Marketing and supply chain management, Mark Suttie, General Manager Marketing – The Merino Company (TMC) 7. Driving on-farm productivity: the next 20 years, Peter Fennessy, Jack Cocks, AbacusBio Limited, Dunedin, New Zealan

Vaccine programme stakeholder perspectives on a hypothetical single-dose human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine schedule in low and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends a 2-dose HPV vaccine schedule for girls aged 9-14 years. As randomised controlled trials assessing the immunogenicity and efficacy of a 1-dose schedule are ongoing, we interviewed immunisation programme managers and advisors in low and middle-income countries (LMIC) about a hypothetical, future reduction in the HPV vaccine schedule. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with LMIC immunisation programme managers and national immunisation technical advisory group members (key informants; KIs) in 2017, recruited for their knowledge/experience in national HPV vaccine policy and provision. Data were analysed thematically. RESULTS: We conducted 30 interviews with KIs from 18 countries. Perceived advantages of a 1-dose schedule included reduced logistical and financial resources needed for vaccine delivery, fewer cold chain requirements and easier integration into routine immunisation services. Perceived challenges included health worker hesitancy, resources needed to re-mobilise communities and re-train health workers, potential misrepresentation of schedule changes by anti-vaccine groups or the media. Half of interviewees suggested a WHO recommendation would be necessary prior to policy change. CONCLUSIONS: We found wide-ranging support among LMIC immunisation managers and advisors for a 1-dose vaccine schedule if research demonstrated immunological and clinical evidence of efficacy, and WHO provided a formal recommendation

Psychosis risk candidate ZNF804A localizes to synapses and regulates neurite formation and dendritic spine structure

BackgroundVariation in the gene encoding zinc finger binding protein 804A (ZNF804A) is associated with schizophrenia (SCZ) and bipolar disorder (BP). Evidence suggests that ZNF804A is a regulator of gene transcription and is present in nuclear and extranuclear compartments. However, a detailed examination of ZNF804A distribution and its neuronal functions has yet to be performed.MethodsThe localization of ZNF804A protein was examined in neurons derived from human neural progenitor cells (hNPCs), human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) or in primary rat cortical neurons. Additionally, siRNA-mediated knockdown of ZNF804A was conducted to determine its role in neurite formation, maintenance of dendritic spine morphology and responses to activity-dependent stimulations.ResultsEndogenous ZNF804A protein localized to somato-dendritic compartments and co-localized with the putative synaptic markers in young neurons derived from hNPCs and hiPSCs. In mature rat neurons, Zfp804A, the homolog of ZNF804A, was present in a subset of dendritic spines and co-localized with synaptic proteins in specific nanodomains, as determined by superresolution microscopy. Interestingly, knockdown of ZNF804A attenuated neurite outgrowth in young neurons, an effect potentially mediated by reduced neuroligin-4 (NLGN4) expression. Furthermore, knockdown of ZNF804A in mature neurons resulted in the loss of dendritic spine density, and impaired responses to activity-dependent stimulation.ConclusionsThese data reveal a novel subcellular distribution for ZNF804A within somato-dendritic compartments and a nanoscopic organisation at excitatory synapses. Moreover, our results suggest that ZNF804A plays an active role in neurite formation, maintenance of dendritic spines and activity-dependent structural plasticity

Anastrozole versus tamoxifen for the prevention of locoregional and contralateral breast cancer in postmenopausal women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ (IBIS-II DCIS): a double-blind, randomised controlled trial

Background Third-generation aromatase inhibitors are more effective than tamoxifen for preventing recurrence in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive invasive breast cancer. However, it is not known whether anastrozole is more effective than tamoxifen for women with hormone-receptor-positive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Here, we compare the efficacy of anastrozole with that of tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. Methods In a double-blind, multicentre, randomised placebo-controlled trial, we recruited women who had been diagnosed with locally excised, hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. Eligible women were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio by central computer allocation to receive 1 mg oral anastrozole or 20 mg oral tamoxifen every day for 5 years. Randomisation was stratified by major centre or hub and was done in blocks (six, eight, or ten). All trial personnel, participants, and clinicians were masked to treatment allocation and only the trial statistician had access to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was all recurrence, including recurrent DCIS and new contralateral tumours. All analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat basis (in all women who were randomised and did not revoke consent for their data to be included) and proportional hazard models were used to compute hazard ratios and corresponding confidence intervals. This trial is registered at the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN37546358. Results Between March 3, 2003, and Feb 8, 2012, we enrolled 2980 postmenopausal women from 236 centres in 14 countries and randomly assigned them to receive anastrozole (1449 analysed) or tamoxifen (1489 analysed). Median follow-up was 7·2 years (IQR 5·6–8·9), and 144 breast cancer recurrences were recorded. We noted no statistically significant difference in overall recurrence (67 recurrences for anastrozole vs 77 for tamoxifen; HR 0·89 [95% CI 0·64–1·23]). The non-inferiority of anastrozole was established (upper 95% CI <1·25), but its superiority to tamoxifen was not (p=0·49). A total of 69 deaths were recorded (33 for anastrozole vs 36 for tamoxifen; HR 0·93 [95% CI 0·58–1·50], p=0·78), and no specific cause was more common in one group than the other. The number of women reporting any adverse event was similar between anastrozole (1323 women, 91%) and tamoxifen (1379 women, 93%); the side-effect profiles of the two drugs differed, with more fractures, musculoskeletal events, hypercholesterolaemia, and strokes with anastrozole and more muscle spasm, gynaecological cancers and symptoms, vasomotor symptoms, and deep vein thromboses with tamoxifen. Conclusions No clear efficacy differences were seen between the two treatments. Anastrozole offers another treatment option for postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS, which may be be more appropriate for some women with contraindications for tamoxifen. Longer follow-up will be necessary to fully evaluate treatment differences