ISET

The Forum took place on 29 November 2016 in the framework of the EU-funded European Neighbourhood Programme for Agriculture and Rural Development (ENPARD) in order to discuss some the key challenges Georgia’s agricultural cooperatives face with regard to access to finance. Please see the conference programme and presentations (listed below).

This was the fourth in a series of policy dialogues about agriculture and rural development organized by the CARE consortium, which includes the ISET Policy Institute, the Regional Development Association (RDA), and the Georgian Farmers Association (GFA). Other ENPARD-implementer consortia, led by Mercy Corps, Oxfam and People in Need, also contributed to the Forum. Many other organizations presented and actively participated in the discussion: the Georgian Ministry of Agriculture, the EU Delegation to Georgia, the French Development Agency, the Agricultural Cooperatives Development Agency (ACDA), the Georgian Farmers Association (GFA), agricultural cooperatives, TBC Bank and other financial institutions, leasing companies, business and finance consulting groups, and research centers, among others.

For detailed information, please see the notes from the forum.

Summarizing the Forum, ISET’s President Eric Livny reflected on the commonly expressed view that there is a lack of funding available for Georgian farmers or farmer cooperatives. He suggested that, in fact, there may be too much funding, given that new donors, such as the French Development Agency, now enter the fray and join the EU, USAID, SDC, EBRD and others in subsidizing commercial lending and otherwise supporting Georgian farmers.

Metaphorically speaking, there is a lot of government and development assistance money sitting on top of a mountain, waiting to be distributed to farmers. And, there are a lot of farmers jumping up and down at the bottom of the mountain, trying to reach some of the money that is potentially up for grabs. Unfortunately for both parties, according to Mr. Livny, potential funders and farmers have a hard time meeting each other because of the farmers’ limited ability to actually climb the mountain. Put simply, there are simply not enough commercially viable projects in Georgia’s fragmented and inefficient agriculture that could be undertaken at the going interest rates and/or could meet the due diligence requirements posed by the Georgian banks.

Forum related documents:

Forum Agenda

• Forum Agenda (in Georgian)

• Communique – Access to Finance for Agricultural Cooperatives (in English)

Communique – Access to Finance for Agricultural Cooperatives (in Georgian)

Summary – Access to Finance for Agricultural Cooperatives (in Engish)

• Summary – Access to Finance for Agricultural Cooperatives (in Georgian)

Presentations:

• Crédit Agricole and other similar European experiences. Lessons learned on access to finance for agriculture. An overview of cooperatives’ financing in France – Bernard Fouquet

Financial instruments for cooperatives – Juan Echanove

Results from the Annual Cooperative Survey: access to finance – Irakli Kochlamazashvili

ACDA Programs to support cooperatives: past and future plans – Giorgi Misheladze (in Georgian)

Revolving fund in ENPARD-coops – Silvia Sanjan Munoz

AFD support to smallholders and cooperatives’ access to financing: lessons learned and prospects in Georgia – Virginie Dago

Value chain financing model, “Darchelis Tkhili” case – Tyler Green

Policy Briefs

  • ENPARD Annual Cooperative Survey Results

    On 14 July 2017, ENPARD implementing organisation CARE and its partner ISET Policy Institute (ISET-PI), in cooperation with other ENPARD implementing partners (Oxfam, Mercy Corps, People in Need and UNDP Adjara) presented the results of ENPARD Cooperatives Survey, which assesses the performance of EU-supported cooperatives for the period 2014-2016. The results are based on the data collected by four ENPARD implementer consortia (led by CARE, Oxfam, Mercy Corps and People in Read More
  • Unlocking the Export Potential of Georgian Agriculture

    Georgia’s agri-food export is concentrated in few products and few undemanding markets, making it highly vulnerable to shocks on a small number of commodity and geographical markets. At the same time, the diversity of climatic conditions and ample water resources create significant growth and diversification potential for Georgian agriculture. Georgian conditions appear especially suitable for the production and export of high-value niche products as the land mass is small and fragmented, Read More
  • Towards Strong and Balanced Growth: Georgia’s Economic Policy Priorities in 2017-2020

    This research paper intended to supplement and complement the following economic policy strategies and plans of the Georgian government in the areas of sustainable and balanced growth: • “Georgia 2020”, a broad agenda directed at long-run growth of most economic sectors with validity beyond the 2020 date • A “4 point plan” and a broader “14 point plan” of economic reform proposals of the government announced right before and right after Read More
  • Fiscal Policy After the Parliamentary Elections

    Economic reforms announced in the run-up to the parliamentary elections in October 2016 raised concerns about whether Georgia was departing from its path of prudent fiscal policy. A reform of the corporate profit tax and increased infrastructure investment were driving expectations of a 6% of GDP budget deficit in 2017, endangering Georgia’s macroeconomic stability and its reputation with investors. After winning the elections, the “Georgian Dream” coalition has undertaken significant efforts towards keeping the budget deficit at bay. The deficit Read More
  • Access to Finance for Agricultural Cooperatives

    The Forum took place on 29 November 2016 in the framework of the EU-funded European Neighbourhood Programme for Agriculture and Rural Development (ENPARD) in order to discuss some the key challenges Georgia’s agricultural cooperatives face with regard to access to finance. Please see the conference programme and presentations (listed below). This was the fourth in a series of policy dialogues about agriculture and rural development organized by the CARE consortium, which Read More
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7

Our Partners