An objective process of prioritisation was undertaken in order to select the final commodities for detailed value chain analysis.

The information collected in the commodity literature reviews and briefs, consultation feedback and the Socio-economic review was used to inform the commodity prioritisation process. 

In order for the commodities to be prioritised, selection criteria were established and then weighted according to their level of importance to the achievement of AIP-PRISMA (PDF 344 KB) goals.

The selection criteria used to prioritise the commodities incorporated issues such as integration of the poor into markets, product potential for growth, opportunity for scaling up, risk, number of households impacted, poverty incidence and extent. Consideration was also given to factors such as environmental impact, long-term sustainability and gender.

Poverty alleviation and sustainability of the economic activity: 60%

# Criteria Weighting Rationale
1. Is there potential to reach large numbers of poor households in production and post-production? 30% AIP-Rural goal to reach one million poor male and female producers in EJ, NTT and NTB over 10 years
2. What is the potential to sustainably increase income for producers? 30% AIP-Rural goal is to increase incomes of poor male and female producers by 30% over 10 years
3. Does the chain/commodity fit with the focus of Government programs and priorities? 10% AIP-Rural goal is to collaborate closely with Government of Indonesia's priorities and programs
4. How project-crowded is the sector?  To what extent are sector needs addressed by current donors? 5% Aims not to compete or duplicate, but to complement existing initiatives
5. What is the agro-ecological feasibility? 10% The commodity should be well suited to the biophysical constraints of East Java, NTT and NTB
6. Is it environmentally sustainable? 10% To assure project sustainability
7. External risks 5% To assure  project sustainability

Structure of the value chain: 40%

# Criteria Weighting Rationale
1. Is there potential for post harvest productivity/ value-added? 30% AIP-Rural supports better access to input and output markets
2. What is the potential for improving market access? 30% AIP-Rural supports better access to input and output markets
3. What is the scalability and transferability potential? 25% To ensure lessons learned from the study be up-scaled to the national level and the lessons learned transferable to other sectors
4. Is there sufficient infrastructure availability? 15% To assure project feasibility

 

The final commodity ranking (commodity score multiplied by weighted criteria) is presented below. The commodities (circled in blue) that provide the greatest likelihood of achieving the goals of AIP-PRISMA (PDF 344 KB) were beef cattle, mango, maize, vegetables, peanut, soybean/mungbean. The Reference Group decided to group together peanut, soybean and mungbean (circled red) and reclassify under the one commodity group of legumes.

The project team developed individual scores between 1-5 against the selection criteria for each of the 16 commodities. In the tables below, each score has been hyperlinked to the relevant section in the commodity briefs to conveniently view the rationale behind each of the scores.

Poverty alleviation and sustainability of the economic activity

# Criteria Banana Beef Cattle Cashew Cassava Cocoa Coffee Dairy Fishery Maize Mango NTFP Peanut Seaweed Soybean/Mungbean Sweet potato Vegetables
1. Is there potential to reach large numbers of poor households in production and post-production? 4 5 3 3 3 3 2 3 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4
2. What is the potential to sustainably increase income for producers? 2 5 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 4 2 4 2 3 2 4
3. Does the chain/commodity fit with the focus of Government programs and priorities? 3 5 2 4 3 3 3 5 5 4 1 2 5 4 2 4
4. How project-crowded is the sector? To what extent are sector needs addressed by current donors? 4 4 2 5 2 1 2 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 3
5. What is the agro-ecological feasibility? 5 4 5 4 3 3 2 5 4 4 4 3 5 3 5 3
6. Is it environmentally sustainable? 2 3 5 2 4 2 4 2 3 5 3 4 5 4 4 3
7. External risks 2 4 3 3 2 2 2 2 4 3 2 3 2 3 2 3

Structure of the value chain

# Criteria Banana Beef Cattle Cashew Cassava Cocoa Coffee Dairy Fishery Maize Mango NTFP Peanut Seaweed Soybean/Mungbean Sweet potato Vegetables
1. Is there potential for post harvest productivity/ value-added? 2 4 2 3 2 3 3 4 3 4 4 4 2 3 2 4
2. What is the potential for improving market access? 3 3 4 2 3 4 3 2 4 4 2 4 4 3 1 4
3. What is the scalability and transferability potential? 3 4 1 4 3 4 2 3 4 4 3 4 4 4 2 4
4. Is there sufficient infrastructure availability? 2 3 4 3 3 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 2 2 3 2