Limitation of using pull-only or push-only approaches 

Pull only interventions are not ideal in displacement contexts as they risk excluding less market-ready groups, such as refugee and host communities. The cost of push-only strategies require significant investments in training, asset transfers, and coaching, due to limited scale and low value for money.

More push than pull intervention

Due to operational & technical challenges, many of the value chains interventions implemented by PROSPECTS countries  have focused more on the supply side of the labour market with “push” interventions (capacity building and technical training, distribution of seeds and grants, construction of infrastructure, etc.) often delivered through direct support, in collaboration with implementing partners, rather than influencing how markets can work to deliver such support. Four factors linked to this: 

Need for heavier support and subitising activities in capacity building.

• Push intervention are more familiar to project staff because it's similar to traditional practices.
• Push intervention show quick results so easier to measure.
• Push interventions are easier to plan and manage, especially for resource stretched teams.

Time difference of push-pull impact

The push and pull approaches do not meet in the middle of the market system at the same time.  A few years may be needed to iron out sequencing problems such as unmet off-taker expectations, oversupply, profit not as anticipated, which is further complicated by the trust that had not yet been established in refugee hosting areas & off-takers.

Additional barriers to consider for refugee inclusion

When developing agricultural value chains, one of the barriers is inclusiveness of refugees in land rights and ownership. As shown in examples from Sudan and Uganda, refugees did not have access to land ownership, so establishing a value chain required negotiation on land use with members of the host communities. Long-term and sustainable solutions require policy change over land rights, but in the short-term, programme teams helped facilitate access for a small cohort, on a case-by-case basis. Outside land ownership, refugees are often limited by what sectors they are legally allowed to obtain work permits, and practical access to land that’s close enough to their settlements where they can travel to obtain work, especially for those in rural areas.

Market distortions

In times of crisis, other NGOs started to introduce free of cost goods and services, and employed cash grants. While in times of crisis, this might be necessary, it does distort the market over a longer period after the crisis, making it more difficult to develop a market for a good or service that was at one point subsidised.

Need for great agility 

Some common contextual challenges among the cases presented include lack of access to productive inputs, limited capacity to produce at scale, distance to markets and lack of financial capital. Each context shaped how these challenges affected the target group, and how push and pull approaches were developed to respond to them. Because the situations in PROSPECTS countries are relatively volatile, changes were more frequent and unexpected.