Rose Fiamohe

IEA – Could you walk us through the key moments that shaped your path – from your earliest exposure to economic thinking, to what sparked your interest in the field, and ultimately what drew you to academic research?

Rose – My path into agricultural economics and academic research appears to have been shaped by an early and sustained interest in understanding the dynamics of food markets and their impact on people’s livelihoods in Sub-Saharan Africa. My foundational exposure to economic thinking began with a Professional Master’s degree (2003) followed by a Master’s by Research (2005) in Rural Economics from the Catholic University of Louvain (UCL), Belgium. These early studies, supported by excellence-based scholarships from UCL, provided a strong academic grounding. My interest was particularly sparked by the practical challenges within food systems, leading to my PhD in the same domain from UCL in 2010, where my dissertation focused on the “Role of market institutions” in determining food product trade in Benin. This deep dive into market functioning, especially issues like high transaction costs and asymmetric price transmission in local food markets, including maize, manioc, and yam, underscored the real-world impact of economic forces. The passion for understanding and addressing critical development issues, particularly those affecting food security and rural women’s economic empowerment, ultimately drew me to academic research roles, such as my post-doctoral fellowship and later my position as an Associate Principal Staff at Africa Rice Center (AfricaRice). My subsequent extensive research and publications in areas like rice market dynamics, consumer preferences, microfinance schemes for women entrepreneurs, and the adoption of agricultural technologies demonstrate a sustained commitment to rigorous, evidence-based academic inquiry aimed at informing policy and fostering sustainable development in Sub-Sahara Africa.

IEA – Your research shows different financing approaches work better for different groups of rural women entrepreneurs in Benin – social networks for small commerce, formal credit for mature enterprises, and self-financing for young entrepreneurs. How should policymakers move beyond one-size-fits-all approaches to better target these diverse needs?

Rose – To move beyond a one-size-fits-all approach, policymakers in Benin should implement targeted interventions that account for the diverse needs of rural women entrepreneurs based on their age, education, and type of business activity. For women in small commerce, particularly adult and educated traders who benefit from social networks, policymakers should increase the flexibility of formal financing conditions to resemble informal social networks, define specific flexible programs, and consider integrating these with financial education or training. For mature microenterprises with growth potential, such as those operating for over 10 years or employing salaried workers, formal credit access should be favored and adapted to their performance, potentially by increasing loan amounts for expansion and targeting those already accustomed to borrowing and repaying. Lastly, for young entrepreneurs, for whom self-financing is more profitable, policymakers should extend support through flexible start-up financing, possibly offering small, interest-free loans, and developing early entrepreneurship programs with flexible credit conditions.

IEA – Your research reveals that urban consumer preferences for rice in West Africa are influenced by distance from ports and cultural heritage centers, with domestic rice facing greater competition from imports in port cities. How should policymakers adjust their investment strategies for rice value chain upgrading based on the specific location and cultural context of their target markets?

Rose – Given the context of the West African rice market, policymakers should adjust investment strategies for rice value chain upgrading by tailoring them to the specific location and cultural context of target markets, moving beyond a “one-size-fits-all” approach. Markets located closer to ports and further from centers of rice cultural heritage exhibit consumer preferences biased towards imported Asian rice, making it more challenging for domestic rice to compete. In these areas, the optimal investment portfolio should emphasize demand-lifting activities such as quality upgrading to match Asian standards, branding, and generic promotion. This demand-lifting is a crucial pre-condition before supply-shifting investments become effective. Conversely, markets located closer to centers of rice cultural heritage and further from ports possess a “comparative advantage in demand,” where consumers are more favorable to local rice. For these markets, less investment is needed in demand-lifting, allowing more focus on supply-shifting investments like rural infrastructure, human capital development, R&D, extension, intensification, and access to land, seed, credit, and mechanization. Over time, cultural heritage can also be leveraged as a unique selling point to differentiate domestic rice from imports.