Navigating Impact

Smallholder Agriculture in Emerging Markets

Strategy: Improved Market Linkages

STRATEGY OV
Navigating Impact is an effort to identify evidence-backed strategies to deliver against investors outcomes
and impacts, to highlight metrics that indicate performance toward those strategies, and to signpost to
measurement frameworks and tools that help investors measure and manage impact.

How to use this Document:

There are four components to this tool -
1) The Strategy Overview section - an overview of the strategy,
including who it helps, what it delivers, how much it delivers, and
EVIDENCE M
the market gaps it addresses. This section is helpful for investors looking for guidance
on strategy setting.
2) An Evidence Map to ground the strategy in existing research. This section is a
complement to the Strategy Overview Section.
3) A set of Common Core Metrics, which indicate performance toward
success within this strategy. This section is helpful for investors looking for credible,
common core metrics for investments that align with this strategy. COMMON-COR
4) A set of 3rd-Party Tools, Measurement Frameworks, and Methodologies
that will help you to implement those metrics and measure/manage impact. This
section is helpful for investors who need guidance on setting up an impact
measurement framework beyond metric selection

MEASUREME
MAP

For additional background on this project, please visit: navigatingimpact.thegiin.org

For additional information on the GIIN's work on Impact Meaurement, please visit: thegiin.org
STRATEGY OVERVIEW

EVIDENCE MAP

COMMON-CORE METRICS

MEASUREMENT
MAP

navigatingimpact.thegiin.org/about/
Navigating Impact
Smallholder Agriculture in Emerging Markets
Strategy: Improved Market Linkages
Feedback: To provide feedback, supporting or contradictory evidence, or for questions, please click here.

SDGs
This strategy likely contributes to these Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs):
1 - No Poverty
10 - Reduced Inequality
12 - Responsible Consumption and Production

WHAT
Investors interested in deploying this strategy should consider the scale of the addressable problem, the nature of possible positive outcomes, and the importance of the
potential change to the people (or planet) experiencing it.
What problem does the investment aim to address? How important is it for the people experiencing the problem that the issue is addressed?
Smallholder farmers often face many challenges accessing buyers, including high transportation costs, lack of negotiating power, and drops in pricing at common times of
harvest. Investments aiming to improve market linkages can improve outcomes in the following ways:

- Through collective action groups, smallholders can attract larger buyers, access larger markets, negotiate stronger prices, and reduce transaction costs to enhance economies
of scale (4, 5).
- Contract farming can shift sale of yields from highly volatile, informal markets to a more consistent market (2, 6).
- Certifying smallholders (or facilitating third-party certification) can allow them to access stable, premium prices in commercial markets, regardless of local market
fluctuations (7).
- Strengthening the reliability and quality of smallholder yields by integrating the value chain and designing inclusive business models, alongside increasing market
accessibility, can create further stability, encourage good agricultural practice, and help farmers avoid the risk of price volatility (2).
- A combination of these factors can contribute to higher, steadier incomes for smallholder farmers and more economically stable communities.
What is the scale of the problem?
Studies of several emerging-market countries in Africa and Asia have found that 50–70% of smallholder farmers are not transitioning from subsistence to commercial farming
(2). Upwards of 80% to 90% of agricultural goods in most developing countries trade on informal markets, the prices of which are based on arbitrary assessments of supply,
demand, and local customer loyalty to certain sellers. An estimated 2% of farmers of 30 or fewer hectares have steady market access (2).

WHO
Investors interested in deploying this strategy should consider the scale of the addressable problem, the nature of possible positive outcomes, and the importance of the
potential change to the people (or planet) experiencing it.
Who/What is helped through this strategy?
Low-Income, Farm-Dependent Households: Over two billion of the world's poorest individuals live in households that depend on agriculture for income and nutrition (1).
Low-income smallholders—farmers cultivating fewer than two hectares—often choose to sell their yields at sub-optimal prices due to limited market access and time-
constrained cash flow needs. Improved access to markets and information about pricing can earn farmers more for their yields.

Rural Communities: Market access is highly correlated with road access and distance to market (2). With limited access to major markets, high transport costs, and limited
information about pricing between markets, rural farmers cannot sell for premium prices. Improved access to major markets and comparative pricing information can help
rural farmers make more informed decisions about where and when to sell.

Young Farmers: The next generation of smallholders is maturing with knowledge of—and often access to—mobile phones and computers. These young farmers may gain
more from this strategy, since they may be more amenable to testing innovative approaches and non-traditional market linkages (2).

What are the geographic attributes of the impact target?

Most of the world's 450 million smallholder farmers live in Asia, with smaller numbers in Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East and North Africa; most are in rural
locations, though some are also peri-urban or urban (1). Roughly half of farmers holding 30 or fewer acres of farmland qualify as “vulnerable, market-challenged” or ultra-
poor farmers, both characterized by infrequent access to commercial markets (3).

CONTRIBUTION
Investors considering investing in a company or portfolio aligned with this strategy should consider how their desired effect compares to what will likely happen anyway. Is
the investment's contribution 'likely better' or 'likely worse' than what is likely to occur anyway—in terms of What, How Much, and Who?
Will the investment likely result in a better outcome than what would occur without the investment, and if so, how?
The extent to which this strategy can improve market linkages depends on the investee business and the product they are bringing to market. For this strategy, strengthening
links between elements of the value chain to increase market efficiency and smallholder crop value would make an investment's contribution likely better than what would
occur without it.

HOW MUCH
Investors deploying capital into investments aligned with this strategy should think about the possible significance of the investment's effect in terms of breadth, depth, and
duration.
How many can receive the outcome through this strategy?
The potential breadth of impact depends on the fraction of the 450 million smallholder farmers worldwide who lack steady access to formal and commercial markets. While
there are no robust estimates for the number of farmers who could receive market linkage-focused improvements, 98% of farmers with holdings of 30 or fewer hectares
currently lack steady market access and could likely benefit significantly from improved market linkages (2).
How much change can beneficiaries experience through this strategy?
The amount of change that beneficiaries derive from this strategy depends on the specific market linkages created and the extent to which these effectively increase and
stabilize prices farmers earn. Evaluations of related investments include the following:

- In Costa Rica, one evaluation found that farmers participating in the specialty coffee segment receive an extra USD 0.09 per pound produced, a 13% increase compared to
those participating in conventional channels, while marketing through cooperatives yielded an extra USD 0.05 per pound, a 7% increase (8).
- In a Madagascar-based study, participating in contract farming reduced the duration of the average household’s hungry season by about 10 days and increased the likelihood
in any given month that the average household's hungry season would end by almost 20% (9).

ILLUSTRATIVE INVESTMENT
MFarm is an agriculture services and technology company–financed in part by Novastar Ventures–that provides an SMS- and web-based commodity exchange for the five
million smallholder farmers in Kenya (10). MFarm agents recruit and support smallholder farmers, in part by aggregating and coordinating collection of produce.
Transparency, quality control, and disintermediation help smallholder farmers improve their agricultural practices, achieve higher prices for their produce, and pay lower
prices for agricultural inputs through MFarm’s “Groupon” buying model, thereby increasing their incomes.
FOOTNOTES
1 Tom Carroll, Andrew Stern, Dan Zook, Rocio Funes, Angela Rastegar, and Yuting Lien. Catalyzing Smallholder Agricultural Finance. Dalberg Global Development Advisors, 2012. http://www.inclusivebusinesshub.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Catalyzing_Smallholder_Ag_Finance.pdf.
2 Shaun Ferris, Peter Robbins, Rupert Best, Don Seville, Abbi Buxton, Jefferson Shriver, and Emily Wei. “Linking Smallholder Farmers to Markets and the Implications for Extension and Advisory Services.” Modernizing Extension and Advisory Services (MEAS) Discussion Paper 4, May 2014. https://agrilinks.org/library/linking-smallholder-farmers-markets-and-implications-extension-and-advisory-services.
3 Nicholas J. Sitko and Thomas S. Jayne. “The Rising Class of Emergent Farmers: An Effective Model for Achieving Agricultural Growth and Poverty Reduction in Africa?” Indaba Agricultural Policy Research Institute, Working Paper 69, October 2013. http://fsg.afre.msu.edu/zambia/wp69.pdf.
4 Steve Wiggins and Sharada Keats. Smallholder Agriculture’s Contribution to Better Nutrition. London: Overseas Development Institute, April 2013.
5 Peter Lanjouw and Rinku Murgai. “Poverty Decline, Agricultural Wages, and Nonfarm Employment in Rural India: 1983–2004.” Agricultural Economics 40, no. 2 (March 2009): 243–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.2009.00373.x.
6 Elly Kaganzi, Shaun Ferris, James Barham, Annet Abenakyo, Pascal Sanginga, and Jemimah Njuki. “Sustaining Linkages to High Value Markets through Collective Action in Uganda.” Food Policy 34, no. 1 (February 2009): 23–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2008.10.004.
7 Vijay Paul Sharma, Bill Vorley, Jikun Huang, Abid Qaiyum Suleri, Larry Digal, and Thomas A. Reardon, eds. Linking Smallholder Producers to Modern Agri-Food Chains: Case Studies from South Asia, Southeast Asia and China. New Delhi: Allied Publishers, 2013.
8 Meike Wollni and Manfred Zeller. “Do Farmers Benefit from Participating in Specialty Markets and Cooperatives? The Case of Coffee Marketing in Costa Rica.” Paper presented at the International Association of Agricultural Economists Conference, Gold Coast, Australia, August 2016.
9 Marc F. Bellemare and Lindsey Novak. “Smallholder Participation in Contract Farming and Food Security.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Agricultural and Applied Economic Association, Minneapolis, MN, July 2014. http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/169817.
10 MFarm (blog). http://www.mfarm.co.ke/blog.

Title
Food price volatility: How to help https://www.ifad.or Blein, R., and R. Longo. "Food price volatility-
smallholder farmers manage risk
and uncertainty
Smallholder Participation in
Contract Farming and Food
Security
Catalyzing Smallholder
Agricultural Finance
Comparison of three modes of
increasing benefits to farmers
within agroforestry tree products
market chains in Cameroon
PROFIT Zambia Impact
Assessment
Samarth - Nepal Market
Development Programme
(NMDP) Annual Results Report
Year 4
Working with Smallholders: A
Handbook for Firms Building
Sustainable Supply Chains
EVIDENCE
Link Citation
how to help smallholder farmers manage risk
and uncertainty." Round Table organized during
the Thirty-second session of IFAD's Governing
Council(2009).
http://ageconsearch Bellemare, Marc, and Lindsey Novak.
"Smallholder Participation in Contract Farming
and Food Security." In 2014 Annual Meeting,
July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota, no.
169817. Agricultural and Applied Economics
Association, 2014.
https://static.glob Carroll, T., A. Stern, D. Zook, R. Funes, A.
Rastegar, and Y. Lien. "Catalyzing Smallholder
Agricultural Finance (Sept. 2012). Dalberg
Global Development Advisors." (2012).
http://www.worldagro
Charly, Facheux, Amos Gyau, Diane Russell,
Divine Foundjem-Tita, Charlie Mbosso, Steven
Franzel, and Zac Tchoundjeu. "Comparison of
three modes of improving benefits to farmers
within agroforestry product market chains in
Cameroon." African Journal of Agricultural
Research 7, no. 15 (2012): 2336-2343.
https://beamexchangeDAI. "PROFIT Zambia Impact Assessment."
2010.
http://samarth-nepal Nepal Market Development Programme
(NMDP). ""Samarth - Nepal Market
Development Programme (NMDP) annual
results report year 2."" 2014.
http://www.ifc.org International Finance Corporation. (2013).
Working with Smallholders: A Handbook for
Firms Building Sustainable Supply Chains
A Review of Existing
Organisational Forms of
Smallholder Farmers ’
Associations and their
Contractual Relationships with
other Market Participants in the
East and Southern African ACP
Region
Tuning in the market signal: the
impact of market price
information on agricultural
outcomes
Do farmers benefit from
participating in specialty markets
and cooperatives? The case of
coffee marketing in Costa Rica1
Building Bridges: Value Initiative http://www.seepnetwo
Program in Jamaica
Engaging smallholders in value
chains: Creating new
opportunities for beekeepers in
Ethiopia
Linking Small-Scale Vegetable http://pdf.usaid.gov Dunn, E., H. Schiff, and L. Greevey. Linking
Farmers To Supermarkets:
Effectiveness Assessment Of The
GMED India Project
Crop price indemnified loans for http://onlinelibrary Karlan, D., Kutsoati, E., McMillan, M., &
farmers: A pilot experiment in
rural Ghana
Diversification and Its Impact on
Smallholders: Evidence from a
Study on Vegetable Production
http://www.fao.org Poole, N., & de Frece, A. (2010). A Review of
Existing Organisational Forms of Smallholder
Farmers ’ Associations and their Contractual
Relationships with other Market Participants in
the East and Southern African ACP Region. All
ACP Agricultural Commodities Programme
Paper Series - No.11 (Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations), (11).
http://citeseerx.is Svensson, Jakob, and David Yanagizawa Drott.
"Tuning in the market signal: the impact of
market price information on agricultural
outcomes." Document de Travail (2010).
https://core.ac.uk/d Wollni, Meike, and Manfred Zeller. "Do
farmers benefit from participating in specialty
markets and cooperatives? The case of coffee
marketing in Costa Rica1."Agricultural
Economics37, no. 2‐3 (2007): 243-248.
Morgan, Beverly and Nicardo Neil. "Building
Bridges: Value Initiative Program in Jamaica."
SEEP Network, 2012.
http://policy-practi Anand, Shekhar, and Gizachew Sisay.
"Engaging Smallholders in Value Chains:
Creating new opportunities for beekeepers in
Ethiopia." Oxfam Policy and Practice:
Agriculture, Food and Land11, no. 4 (2011):
74-88.
small-scale vegetable farmers to supermarkets:
effectiveness assessment of the GMED India
project. No. 166. Micro Report, 2011.
Udry, C. (2010). Crop price indemnified loans
for farmers: A pilot experiment in rural Ghana.
Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 78(1), 37-55.
Joshi, P. K., Laxmi Joshi, and Pratap S. Birthal.
"Diversification and its impact on smallholders:
Evidence from a study on vegetable
production." Agricultural Economics Research
Review 19, no. 2 (2006): 219-236.
http://ageconsearch.
Value chains, agricultural markets
and food security
Selling low and buying high: An
arbitrage puzzle in Kenyan
villages
Commercialising cassava: new
opportunities for Universal
Industries and Malawian
smallholders
Smallholder Participation in
Contract Farming: Comparative www.sciencedirect. F. Bellemare, Hope C. Michelson, Sudha
Evidence from Five Countries
Developing markets for dairy
production through service
development and public-private
partnerships in rural Armenia
Linking Smallholder Producers to
Modern Agri-Food Chains: Case
Studies from South Asia,
Southeast Asia and China
What Works for Market
Development: A Review of the
Evidence
Feed the Future learning agenda
literature review: expanded
markets, value chains, and
increased investment
Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations (FAO). "Value chains,
agricultural markets and food security."The
State of the Agricultural Commodity Markets In
Depth, 2015-2016.
http://www.fao.org/3
Burke, Marshall. "Selling low and buying high:
An arbitrage puzzle in Kenyan villages." In
Working Paper. 2014.
https://www.atai-re
Scarampi, Adriano. "Commercialising cassava:
New opportunities for Universal Industries and
Malawian smallholders." Business Innovation
Facility, 2013.
https://beamexchang
http:// Barrett, Christopher B., Maren E. Bachke, Marc
com/science/ Narayanan, and Thomas F. Walker.
article/pii/ "Smallholder participation in contract farming:
S0305750X110022 comparative evidence from five countries."
82 World Development40, no. 4 (2012): 715-730.
https:// Suisse. Division de la coopération avec l'Europe
beamexchange.org/ de l'Est et la CEI (SDC) and Springfield Centre
resources/487/ for Business in Development. "Developing
markets for dairy production through service
development and public-private partnerships in
rural Armenia." Bern : SDC, 2008.
https:// Sharma, Vijay Paul, Bill Vorley, Jikun Huang,
books.google.com/ Abid Qaiyum Suleri, Larry Digal, and Thomas
books?id=Rg- A. Reardon, eds.Linking Smallholder Producers
OAwAAQBAJ&pri to Modern Agri-Food Chains: Case Studies
ntsec=frontcover#v from South Asia, Southeast Asia and China.Vol.
=onepage&q&f=fal 1. Allied Publishers, 2013.
se
Sunil Sinha, Sunil, Johan Holmberg, Mark
Thomas. "What Works for Market
Development: A Review of the Evidence." UTV
Working Paper. (2013).
https://beamexchange
https:// Campbell, R. "Feed the future learning agenda
agrilinks.org/sites/ literature review: expanded markets, value
default/files/ chains and increased investment." prepared for
resource/files/ the US Agency for International Development.
FTF_FEEDBACK_
Value_Chains_The
me_Lit
%20Review.pdf
Outreach, outcomes and
sustainability in value chain
projects
Linking Farmers to Markets for
High-Value Agricultural
Commodities
https:// Creevey, Lucy, Elizabeth Dunn and Elisabeth
www.microlinks.or Farmer. "Outreach, outcomes, and
g/sites/microlinks/ sustainability." ACDI/VOCA. USAID
files/resource/ Microreports 171. 2011.
files/
Outreach_outcomes
_sustainability_VC
_projects.pdf
https:// Birthal, Pratap S., Awadhesh K. Jha, and
ageconsearch.umn. Harvinder Singh. "Linking farmers to markets
edu/bitstream/ for high-value agricultural commodities."
47437/2/2-PS- Agricultural Economics Research Review 20,
Birthal.pdf no. 2007 (2007).
 OUTCOMES
Increased Increased Increased Increased Growth of Increased Reduced
productivity high-risk, farmer input agribusiness rural food waste
high-yield income or investment employment
NESTA
crop assets
selections

1 x

1 x

2 x

2 x x

2 x x x

1 x
1 x

3 x

2 x

2 x x

2 x x x

3 x x

3 x x

3 x x
1 x

3 x

1 x

1 x

2 x x

2 x x

1 x x x
2 x x

1 x
 IMPACTS
Improved Increased Improved Increased Stronger Feedback:
product food security household comm. local
quality resilience resilience economy

x
 x

x x
x

x x

x
To provide feedback, supporting or contradictory evidence, or for questions, please click here.
 CALCULATIO
METRIC METRIC DEFINITION IRIS ID
N
CORE METRICS
Client OrganizationsNumber of enterprises that were clientsPI9652 N/A
Client Individuals: Number of unique smallholder farmer PI6372
i N/A
Units/Volume Sold: Amount of the product/service sold byPI1263 N/A
Crop Type Type of crop(s) produced by the organization.
PD1620 Select from
N/Athe
options in the Excel Reference List tab.
Producer Price PremPrice premium percentage that the produ PI1568 Price obtained by
Farmer Sales Reven Value of the revenue from sales of thePI1775 N/A
Number of client indNumber of unique client individuals wh PI2822 N/A
ADDITIONAL METRICS FOR MORE TARGETED IMM
Average Client AgriculAverage agricultural yield per hectare, of PI9421 YieldClient 1+Yie
Client Individuals: Fe Number of unique women who were clients PI8330
o N/A
Individuals Trained: ToNumber of individuals who received trainin PI2998 N/A
After-Sale Client SuppIndicates whether the organization provides PI4180 N/A
Supplier Individuals: TNumber of individuals who sold goods or PI5350
se N/A
Supplier Individuals: Number of female individuals who sold good PI1728 N/A
Cost Transparency Indicates whether the organization fully disPI6941 N/A
Water Savings from PrVolume of water savings during the reportiPD5786 Units/Volume Sold
Waste Reductions fromAmount of reduction in waste over the oper PI5926
Energy Savings from SAmount of energy savings due to the organi PD4927 Client Individuals:
Permanent Employees:Number of people employed by the organizat OI8869 N/A
Pesticide Use Amount of pesticides used during the reporOI9891 N/A
Client Savings Premiu Ratio of the price savings obtained by the PI1748 Cost of product or
Land Indirectly ControArea of land indirectly controlled by the oPI6796 N/A
FOOTNOTE COLLECTION CONSIDERATIONS

Organizations should footnote all assumptionsThisused

metric
as well
is a as
simple
the types
countofofenterprises
number ofthat
enterprises
were clients
th using Client Type (PD7
Organizations should footnote all assumptionsThis metric captures the number of unique smallholder fa
Organizations selling multiple distinct produOrganizations should collect these data directly from thei
N/A Organizations can report this metric at an organizationa
Organizations should footnote all assumption The price premium is the percentage by which a product'
Organizations should footnote all assumptionsIf available,
used, as well
organizations
as Client Type
should(PD7993).
collect this
Sales
datarevenue
directlyshould
from agribusinesses.
be revenue resultin
Unl
Organizations should footnote any assumption Unless all clients are surveyed about their use of the se

Organizations should footnote all assumptions u This metric captures the average output per hectare per smallh
Organizations should footnote all assumptions u This metric captures the number of unique female clients who
Organizations should footnote the type and extentThe metric captures the number of individuals who received tr
Organizations should footnote the type of supportAfter-sale support can include a range of services to help clie
Organizations should footnote all assumptions u This metric is meant for organizations who seek to support li
Organizations should footnote all assumptions u This metric is meant for organizations who seek to support fe
Organizations should footnote details on the typePricing and cost information to footnote might include instal
Organizations should footnote all assumptions u This metric captures the water savings to consumers for organ
Organizations should footnote all assumptions usWaste reduction captured through this metric may include effor
Organizations should footnote all assumptions u This metric captures the total consumer energy savings of orga
Organizations should footnote any assumptions madThis metric is intended to capture the number of unique indiv
Organizations should footnote the classification Pesticide use refers to insecticides, fungicides, herbicides,
Organizations should footnote all assumptions useThis metric measures the price discount/savings as a percentag
Organizations should footnote details about the nUnless all clients are surveyed regarding their land holdings a
 Feedback:
RATIONALE FOR INCLUSION

Understanding the number of client organizations reached allows for calculation of impact both on aggregate and on a per-orga
Understanding the number of clients reached allows calculation of impact related to risk mitigation on a per-farmer basis. Orga
While understanding the number of clients is also ultimately important to understanding the benefits that product have for the li
Investments targeted toward risk mitigation often aim to create an enabling environment for farmers to adopt high-risk, high-yi
Investors aiming to increase farmers' profits for their products may consider including this metric, which provides a measure of
Perhaps the clearest indicator of impact on agribusiness is increased revenue. By tracking sales revenue (ideally before and afte
This metric captures the number of unique individuals who did not previously have access to the service or product who now do

Investors aiming to increase yields of high-profit crops or livestock might consider including this metric, which can provide a valuable meas
While Client Individuals: Smallholder (PI6372) captures the broader number of individuals reached, organizations interested in benefiting sp
Investors in organizations that include knowledge transfer, training, or follow-up support in addition to their products and services may cons
Investors in organizations that include knowledge transfer, training, or follow-up support in addition to their products and services may cons
Investors in organizations that include the purchase of crops or livestock, rather than exclusively providing inputs or insurance policies, may
Investors in organizations that include the purchase of crops or livestock, rather than exclusively providing inputs or insurance policies, may
This metric may be relevant for investors interested in financial transparency and empowered smallholder decision-making.
Investors particularly targeting environmental sustainability, water conservation, waste reduction, or energy consumption may consider inclu
Investors particularly targeting environmental sustainability, water conservation, waste reduction, or energy consumption may consider inclu
Investors particularly targeting environmental sustainability, water conservation, waste reduction, or energy consumption may consider inclu
Investments targeted toward gainful employment may consider including this metric, with the possible addition of Temporary Employees (O
Organizations targeting investments toward improved agronomic practices or environmental sustainability may consider including this metr
Investments aiming to improve access to credit and savings products may consider using this metric to understand their products in relation t
This metric captures the land area that is under the organization's indirect control or land that the organization supports or influences but doe
 To provide feedback, supporting or contradictory evidence, or for questions, please click here.

ct both on aggregate and on a per-organization basis.

mitigation on a per-farmer basis. Organizations may also report Client Individuals: Female (PI8330) to understand their impact related to g
the benefits that product have for the lives of target beneficiaries, the number of products sold is essential to calculating the total environme
for farmers to adopt high-risk, high-yield crop varietals or livestock. Tracking farmer crop selections—or Livestock/Fish Type (PD4686), i
is metric, which provides a measure of farmers' above-benchmark income from sales of their products.
g sales revenue (ideally before and after investment, though that data may not be available), impact in this sense is easily calculated. As this
ss to the service or product who now do as a function of this investment. Essentially, it measures the filled market gap, demonstrating the ex

metric, which can provide a valuable measure of how much improvement farmers gain from the offered products or services. Investors targeting post-harv
ed, organizations interested in benefiting specific demographics may also choose to report Client Individuals: Female (PI8330), Client Individuals: Minori
on to their products and services may consider including this metric in their data collection. Trainings and follow-up support can increase an investment's
on to their products and services may consider including this metric in their data collection.Ffollow-up support can increase an investment's positive impa
providing inputs or insurance policies, may consider measuring their reach through suppliers instead of or in addition to clients. If measuring total supplier
providing inputs or insurance policies, may consider measuring their reach through suppliers instead of or in addition to clients. If measuring total supplier
llholder decision-making.
or energy consumption may consider including these metrics in their impact frameworks.
or energy consumption may consider including these metrics in their impact frameworks.
or energy consumption may consider including these metrics in their impact frameworks.
sible addition of Temporary Employees (OI9028).
ainability may consider including this metric as a means of understanding how their products interact with other related inputs.
ric to understand their products in relation to others on the market.
organization supports or influences but does not directly cultivate or manage. Examples in which an organization indirectly controls land might include pu
tand their impact related to gender empowerment.
alculating the total environmental and social impact of an investment, both in aggregate and per-product.
estock/Fish Type (PD4686), if relevant—allows calculation of impact on the aggregate level.

se is easily calculated. As this data may be difficult to obtain, the organization can estimate average revenue based on a representative samp
ket gap, demonstrating the extent to which this investment has provided new compared to additional access to risk mitigation. Investors ma

es. Investors targeting post-harvest storage or sale of crops may find this metric less useful.
330), Client Individuals: Minorities/Previously Excluded (PI4237), Client Individuals: Disabilities (PI6266), or Client Individuals: Low Income (PI7098)
ort can increase an investment's positive impact. These data are useful both for reporting impact and for improving products and services.
se an investment's positive impact. These data are useful both for reporting impact and for improving products and services.
ents. If measuring total suppliers, measuring Supplier Individuals: Female (PI1728) is recommended based on CSAF norms and as a proxy measure for g
ents. If measuring total suppliers, measuring Supplier Individuals: Female (PI1728) is recommended based on CSAF norms and as a proxy measure for g

y controls land might include purchase contracts or sourcing from farmer cooperatives. Organizations that exert control of land practices on indirectly con
ed on a representative sample.
isk mitigation. Investors may seek to focus on filling market gaps through direct access or by providing a comparable product at a lower pr

viduals: Low Income (PI7098), or several of these.

s and services.

s and as a proxy measure for gender empowerment outcomes.

s and as a proxy measure for gender empowerment outcomes.

and practices on indirectly controlled land should footnote these details of control (e.g., when an organization specifies that farmers adhere to specific env
arable product at a lower price or via an innovative financing mechanism.

farmers adhere to specific environmental practices).