Improving Institutional Capacity:
Strengthening Farmer Organizations in the OIC Member Countries
83
conducted, with the goals of: identifying the needs of FOs in specific regions,
understanding what challenges banks face in lending to FOs at present (for example, a
perception that risk is too high), and exploring potential financial product solutions for
farmer organizations. As access to credit allows FOs to purchase productivity-enhancing
inputs for their members and also exercise greater market power by aggregating their
members’ produce, this could have beneficial effects on the strength and effectiveness of
farmer organizations in the OIC.
5.2. Possibilities for co-operation between OIC Member Countries and
among Member Countries and multilateral organizations
Given the overall OIC mandate “to promote cooperation among Member States to achieve
sustained socioeconomic development for effective integration in the global economy, in
conformity with the principles of partnership and equality”124, identifying opportunities for
OIC Member Countries to support cooperation among themselves and between the OIC and
global partners was an important goal. To this end, three such opportunities are described
below.
The first opportunity is for OIC Member Countries to collaborate with the ILO on adapting
and implementing Recommendation 193 in the OIC context. As discussed in Section 4.3.2,
Recommendation 193 provides a framework for farmer organization promotion, covering
areas such as autonomy and freedom from government interference, ease of registration,
equality under the law for co-operatives and other forms of corporate organization, gender
equity, and dedication of government resources to capacity-building and service provision.
Recommendation 193 has already been adapted by several OIC member countries, including
Malaysia, Uganda, Benin, Egypt, Indonesia, and Guinea-Bissau; continuing this work is a way to
advance the relationship between FOs and the state. Here, workshops could be convened
involving Members‘ Ministries of Agriculture and the ILO, with the ILO providing advice
on the creation of such policies and Member Countries advising on OIC-specific
considerations.
OIC Member countries could also encourage better data on farmer organizations and
strengthening efforts. This study found significant gaps in the availability of data on the size
and strength of farmer organizations as well as on government allocations for FO-
strengthening efforts (note that these gaps are not unique to the OIC but are a common
problem in many parts of the world). These data gaps can impair the effectiveness of FO-
related policymaking, as, for example, it becomes difficult to calculate the scale of resources
required to assist FOs when the total size of the FO landscape in a country is not known. As
discussed in Sectio reliable data on FO penetration in some form was found in only 29
of 52 countries researched. There could be an opportunity for the Member Countries to
collaborate with another OIC body, the Statistical, Economic and Social Research and Training
Centre for Islamic Countries (SESRIC), in this area. Going further, Member Countries could
coordinate with the FAO (an important source of worldwide agricultural statistics) on
appropriate definitions and methodologies for OIC farmer organization statistics. There
are three specific, important statistical areas to focus on for the OIC Member Countries:
124 OIC Charter