176
Keywords Rice straw · Value chain · Intersectoral upgrading · Straw mushroom ·
Vietnam
11.1 Introduction
Value chains are by definition demand-driven (FAO 2014; Kaplinsky and Morris
2000). However, rice straw value chains—straw being a byproduct of rice value
chains—are supply-driven rather than demand-driven. Rice straw is produced to
satisfy the demand, not for rice straw but for rice, which drives rice value chain
operations, from which rice straw is generated. This generation of the straw, in turn,
triggers the need for proper use and management of the byproduct and, thus, the
evolvement of straw supply chains. The demand for rice straw products in diverse
markets will not necessarily trigger the production of the straw—as in a classic
value chain—but will rather encourage the diversion of straw utilization from one
activity (e.g., burning, incorporation) to another (e.g., baling, selling). The notion of
an “end-market” is central to food value chain research (FAO 2014). In the case of
rice straw value chains, the end-product is not food for human, but animal feed or
an input into other food or nonfood value chains (e.g., dairy, meat, mushroom,
energy, fiber, etc.). As a result, the “end-markets” for rice straw value chains are
generally input markets for other food or nonfood value chains.
Value chain development typically follows an upgrading trajectory, which begins
with process upgrading, moves on to product upgrading, and then on to functional,
channel and intersectoral upgrading (Gereffi 1999; Kaplinsky and Morris 2000).
Value chain upgrading—from process up to intersectoral upgrading—is triggered
by demand factors (e.g., increasing demand for organic products) and then operationalized and reinforced by supply factors in response to the changes in the demand
side (e.g., farmers’ adoption of organic farming and traders’ assurance of product
quality and traceability throughout subsequent value chain stages). Urbanization,
rising income levels, and diet change drive up the demand for high-value food products (Wang et al. 2014) and trigger a shift in food expenditure components, with a
decreasing share of rice and rising shares of meat/fish, vegetables, and edible oils
(Reardon 2015). As a result, actors on the supply side of rice value chains increasingly explore ways to offer customers more attractive rice products with superior
quality attributes in terms of fragrance, purity, homogeneity, packaging, food safety,
traceability, nutrition, health, and convenience. Rice businesses increasingly compete not just on price but on quality and product differentiation (Reardon et al.
2014). This triggers investment in process upgrading (e.g., adoption of postharvest
and processing technology, good agricultural practices), product upgrading (e.g.,
improvement of intrinsic quality and extrinsic quality cues such as packaging,
branding, and advertising), and functional upgrading (e.g., millers taking on the role
of prefinancing quality inputs for farmers through contract farming to ensure reliM. Demont et al.
Keywords Rice straw · Value chain · Intersectoral upgrading · Straw mushroom ·
Vietnam
11.1 Introduction
Value chains are by definition demand-driven (FAO 2014; Kaplinsky and Morris
2000). However, rice straw value chains—straw being a byproduct of rice value
chains—are supply-driven rather than demand-driven. Rice straw is produced to
satisfy the demand, not for rice straw but for rice, which drives rice value chain
operations, from which rice straw is generated. This generation of the straw, in turn,
triggers the need for proper use and management of the byproduct and, thus, the
evolvement of straw supply chains. The demand for rice straw products in diverse
markets will not necessarily trigger the production of the straw—as in a classic
value chain—but will rather encourage the diversion of straw utilization from one
activity (e.g., burning, incorporation) to another (e.g., baling, selling). The notion of
an “end-market” is central to food value chain research (FAO 2014). In the case of
rice straw value chains, the end-product is not food for human, but animal feed or
an input into other food or nonfood value chains (e.g., dairy, meat, mushroom,
energy, fiber, etc.). As a result, the “end-markets” for rice straw value chains are
generally input markets for other food or nonfood value chains.
Value chain development typically follows an upgrading trajectory, which begins
with process upgrading, moves on to product upgrading, and then on to functional,
channel and intersectoral upgrading (Gereffi 1999; Kaplinsky and Morris 2000).
Value chain upgrading—from process up to intersectoral upgrading—is triggered
by demand factors (e.g., increasing demand for organic products) and then operationalized and reinforced by supply factors in response to the changes in the demand
side (e.g., farmers’ adoption of organic farming and traders’ assurance of product
quality and traceability throughout subsequent value chain stages). Urbanization,
rising income levels, and diet change drive up the demand for high-value food products (Wang et al. 2014) and trigger a shift in food expenditure components, with a
decreasing share of rice and rising shares of meat/fish, vegetables, and edible oils
(Reardon 2015). As a result, actors on the supply side of rice value chains increasingly explore ways to offer customers more attractive rice products with superior
quality attributes in terms of fragrance, purity, homogeneity, packaging, food safety,
traceability, nutrition, health, and convenience. Rice businesses increasingly compete not just on price but on quality and product differentiation (Reardon et al.
2014). This triggers investment in process upgrading (e.g., adoption of postharvest
and processing technology, good agricultural practices), product upgrading (e.g.,
improvement of intrinsic quality and extrinsic quality cues such as packaging,
branding, and advertising), and functional upgrading (e.g., millers taking on the role
of prefinancing quality inputs for farmers through contract farming to ensure reliM. Demont et al.