CAADP M&E FRAMEWORK AND MODELING IN WEST AFRICA

CAADP M&E FRAMEWORK AND MODELING IN WEST AFRICA

By Mbaye Yade Sub Coordinator ReSAKSS WA

R4D Week 2010: Mini-Symposium on Outcomes and Impact Assessments

-----------------------------------

IBADAN, NIGERIA, 24 NOVEMBER 2010

1

OUTLINE

• SAKSS TO RESAKSS• CAADP BASIC TARGETS AND PRINCIPLES• ReSAKSS => CAADP• COUNTRY CAAPD CYCLE• MODELING AGRICULTURE• CAADP M&E FRAMEWORK• 1ST COMPREHENSIVE M&E REPORT• PROSPECTS

2

FROM SAKSS TO ReSAKSS

• SAKSS:– INITIATIVE FROM CG-SYSTEM

– FOCUS ON STRATEGIC ANALYSIS AND SOME COUNTRIES– SUPPLY DRIVEN

• FROM 2006/07 FOCUSED ON CAADP IMPLEMENTATION => ReSAKSS:– GREATER LINK TO REC’S

– 3 NODES COVERING 3 REC’S WITH CONTINENT WIDE COORDINATION

– TAKE ADVANTAGE OF EXISTING NETWORKS AND CAPACITIES

– BROADER COVERAGE

3

Some basic Targets and Principles of CAADP

• CAADP as a strategic framework by which to guide country development efforts and partnerships in the agricultural sector:

• agriculture led growth for poverty reduction;

• increased funding of agriculture (10%) and

• at least 6% agriculture growth – all targeted at achieving MGD1 and other welfare targets

4

Some basic Targets and Principles of CAADP

• Greater efficiency and consistency in the planning and execution of sector policies and programmes

• Increased effectiveness in translating government expenditures into public goods and services, and

• Expertise and mechanisms to regularly and transparently measure performance against targets and keep policies and programmes on track.

5

ReSAKSS AS SUPPORT OF CAADP IMPLEMENTATION

• 3 Regional ReSAKSS nodes to:

– Facilitate access by the RECs and their member states to policy-relevant analyses of the highest quality improve policymaking,

– Track progress, document success, and derive lessons that can feed into the review and learning processes associated with the implementation of the CAADP agenda

6


– (1) mobilize existing expertise , capacities and knowledge => design, implementation, and evaluation of CAADP programs.

– (2) provide assistance to countries in the establishment of national knowledge system nodes to support CAADP implementation

7


• Work with the national nodes to provide relevant and timely information to guide:– Mutual review at the continental level to review overall

progress in the implementation of CAADP– Peer review at the regional level to promote dialogue

and mutual learning around the review of progress and performance

– Progress review at the national level to ensure that country level policies and programs are aligned with CAADP principles and on track to meet the country-specific targets and objectives

8

THE COUNTRY CAADP CYCLE

9

CAADP MODELING

• PAST PERFORMANCE AND OUTLOOK FOR AGRICULTURAL GROWTH AND POVERTY REDUCTION

– Examine recent agricultural growth performance and future growth and poverty outcomes based on observed trends;

– Compare trends with the targets established for the sector under the ECOWP/CAADP agenda and with MDG1

– Measuring the prospects of meeting these targets and analyzing the implications for future sector growth and poverty-reduction strategies;

– Estimating the long term funding needs to accelerate agricultural growth and achieve the poverty MDG.

10

CAADP MODELING

Contribution of agricultural growth to poverty reduction

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

BENIN BURKINA FASO

CAPE VERT

GAMBIE GHANA GUINEE CONAKRY

LIBERIA MALI NIGER NIGERIA SENEGAL TOGO

Agriculture Non Agriculture sectors

CAADP MODELING

Long term contributions (=> 2015) of 1% agricultural growth to increases of agricultural GDP and poverty reduction

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Benin Burkina

Faso

Cape Verde The Gambia Ghana Guinea Liberia Mali Niger Senegal Togo

Ag

GD

P (

Millio

ns

US

$)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Po

ve

rty

re

du

cti

on

(%

)

Growth in Agricultural GDP Reduction in national poverty rate

CAADP MODELING

Strategic ag sub sectors for ag growth and poverty reduction

BENIN Food crops (Roots and Tuber)*

BURKINA FASO Cattle and Sorghum/millet

CAPE VERDE Food crops

GAMBIA Cereals (millet/Sorghum)* and livestock

GHANA Root crops and fisheries

GUINEA Rice

LIBERIA Food crops

MALI Food crops (Rice; Millet/Sorghum)*

NIGER Livestock

NIGERIA Cassava, Rice

SENEGAL Livestock and food crops (millet/sorghum; Rice)*

SIERRA LEONE Cassava

TOGO Food crops

* For countries where a disaggregated SAM did not exist, results were taken from the IFPRI multi-market model

CAADP MODELING

Expected agricultural growth rate by 2015* under different scenarios

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

Ben

in

Bur

kina

Fas

o

Cape

Verd

e

Gam

bia

Gha

na

Guinea

Libe

riaM

ali

Nig

er

Nig

eria

Sen

egal

Sierra

Leo

neTog

o

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

bau national strategies CAADP

*For Nigeria, the time horizon was extended to 2017 when the country is expected to halve the poverty rate compared to its 1996 level.

CAADP MODELING

Expected poverty reduction by 2015 under different scenarios

-100.0

-80.0

-60.0

-40.0

-20.0

0.0

20.0

40.0

Benin

Burk

ina

Faso

Cape

Ver

de

Gam

bia

Ghan

a

Guin

ea

Liber

iaM

ali

Nig

er

Nig

eria

Sen

egal

Sie

rra

Leone

Togo

bau national strategies CAADP MDG1

CAADP MODELING

Current share of agricultural spending Required agricultural funding

in total spending (%) growth rate to achieve 6 %

agricultural growth (CAADP)

16

CAADP MODELING

Current responsiveness of agricultural growth to agricultural funding

17

CAADP M&E Framework• Request from AU/NEPAD addressed to ReSAKSS• Validation of the Framework March 2010• SMART: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic

and Timely• Main Questions addressed:

– What are the projected impacts if policies and investments proceed as currently planned?

– Have expectations in terms of achieving the growth and poverty- and hunger-reduction targets been met so far?

18

CAADP M&E Framework

• Main Questions addressed:– What factors have shaped the level of impact that has

been achieved?– Are these projected impacts compatible with the growth

and poverty- and hunger-reduction goals?– Could greater or better distributed outcomes and impacts

be obtained by reconfiguring the policies and investment portfolio?

– What are the different policies and types of investments that can lead to greater and more sustainable growth as well as greater and better distributed outcomes and impacts?

– Etc.

19

CAADP M&E Framework

• ENABLING ENVIRONMENT

• CAADP COUNTRY IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS

• COMMITMENTS AND FINANCING

• AGRICULTURAL SECTOR PERFORMANCE

• CAADP GOALS/MDG1

20

CAADP M&E Framework

• ENABLING ENVIRONMENT– POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC GOVERNANCE

– POLICIES FOR PRIVATE SECTOR DEVELOPMENT

• CAADP COUNTRY IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS– STAGE IN COUNTRY ROUNDTABLE PROCESS AND

QUALITY OF PARTICIPATION

21

CAADP M&E Framework

• COMMITMENTS AND FINANCING–DONOR COMMITMENTS AND DISBURSEMENTS

–GOVERNMENT SPENDING AND INVESTMENT IN AGRICULTURE

–PRIVATE SECTOR INVESTMENTS

22

CAADP M&E Framework• AGRICULTURAL SECTOR PERFORMANCE

– CAPACITY

– AGRICULTURAL GROWTH AND SOURCES OF GROWTH

– AGRICULTURAL TRADE

• CAADP GOALS/MDG1

– POVERTY

– HUNGER AND FOOD AND NUTRITION SECURITY

23

FIRST CAADP M&E REPORT

• NO OR LIMITED PRIMARY DATA COLLECTION

• CHALLENGES:

• ACCESS TO DATA

• DATA QUALITY

• CONTINUITY

• DATA FORMAT COMPATIBILITY

• SUSTAINABILITY

24


• TEAM: CORE COUNTRY ACTORS– Planning and statistics unit of MINAGRI (PSU) as coordinator

– National Institute of Statistics (poverty unit, national accounting unit)

– Budget unit in Ministries of Finance

– Professional think tanks

– Market information systems

– M&E units in other relevant ministries such as livestock, environment, fisheries, trade, etc

– NARS including Universities

– Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRSP) unit

25


• TEAM: REGIONAL

– ReSAKSS WA EXPERTS

– LEAD EXPERTS FOR EACH COMPONENT:

• FUNDING,

• MACRO PERFORMANCE,

• AGRICULTURAL PERFORMANCE,

• LIVELIHOODS

26


• ACTIVITIES: REGIONAL– Drafting of terms of reference: list and specification of

indicators, rationale, definitions, computation, sources and links to policy targets; profile of collaborators

– Methodology workshops , quality review, technical backstopping

– Regional synthesis of each component by ReSAKSS in collaboration with lead experts

– Regional validation and dissemination workshop– Finalization of regional trends and outlook report

27


• ACTIVITIES AT NATIONAL LEVEL– PSU as coordinator develops operational plan and monitors

execution

– Data collection and analysis by different subgroups following the components

– Subgroup reports submitted to the planning unit with data sheets as annexes

– Planning unit consolidates subgroup reports and submits to ReSAKSS with all data sheets for review

– Technical meetings and national validation workshops

– Finalization of national trends and outlook report

28


• Evolution of public agricultural expenditure (in million of $ US in 2008)

1

2

4

8

16

32

64

128

256

512

1024

2048

4096

19

90

19

91

19

92

19

93

19

94

19

95

19

96

19

97

19

98

19

99

20

00

20

01

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

20

07

20

08

Bénin

Burkina Faso

Cote d'Ivoire

Gambia

Ghana

Liberia

Mali

Niger

Nigeria

Sénégal

Sierra Leone

Togo

29


• Evolution of the agriculture share in the total public expenditure

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

0.45

0.5

19

90

19

91

19

92

19

93

19

94

19

95

19

96

19

97

19

98

19

99

20

00

20

01

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

20

07

20

08

Burkina Faso

Cote d'Ivoire

Gambie

Ghana

Liberia

Mali

Niger

Nigeria

Sénégal

Sierra Leone

Togo

Cible

30


MAPUTO DECLARATION MONITORING

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

Burkin

a Faso

Niger

Senega

lM

ali

Ghana

Gambia

Benin

Liberia To

go

Niger

ia

Sierr

a Leone

Côte d'

Ivoire

Mean 2000-2004 Mean 2005-2008 Target


• Breakdown of agricultural expenditure by economic use (average 2003-2007)

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Burkina

Faso

Niger Mali Sénégal Nigeria Bénin Ghana Côte

d'Ivoire

Togo

Investment Recurrent

32


• Breakdown of agricultural expenditure by source of funding (average 2003-2007

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Niger Burkina

Faso

Mali Togo Bénin Sénégal Côte

d'Ivoire

Ghana

Share of interna l resources Share of externa l Resources

33


• Distribution of agricultural expenditure by type (average 2004-2008)

24.8

61.7

2.1

12.7

0.0

33.9

53.0

21.9

13.5

6.5

1.6

0.9

12.0

22.7

14.1

7.8

17.5 0.0

8.7

17.7

56.164.6

46.2

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Ghana Benin Togo Burkina Faso Mali

Non desagregé

Autres

Intrants et equipements

Vulgarisation

Recherche et developpement

Irrigation

Admistration

34


• Agricultural growth in 2008 and 2003-2007

-10.0%

-5.0%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

Liberia

Senega

lM

ali

Niger

Burkin

a Faso

Gambia

Niger

ia

Sierr

a Leone

Ghana

Guinea

Cape V

erde

Benin

Guinea

Biss

au Togo

Côte d'

Ivoire

2008 2003-2007 Target

35


• Contribution of different sub sectors in ag growth in 2008

-40%

-20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Benin Burkina Faso Côte d'Ivoire Niger Nigeria Senegal Togo

Peche, foresterie

Elevage

Production végétale

36


• Distribution of agricultural exports by country 2000-2007

53.2%

20.0%

7.4%

5.0%

4.2%

3.3%

2.9% 1.7%

1.5% 0.6%0.1% 0.1%

Côte d'Ivoire

Ghana

Senegal

Mali

Nigeria

Benin

Burkina Faso

Niger

Togo

Guinea

Gambia

Cape Verde

37


• Distribution of agricultural exports by product in the region (2000-2005)

42.5%

15.0%

11.3%

5.6%

2.7%1.8%

1.8%1.7%1.3%1.1% Cocoa

Cotton

Wood and Timber

Fish and other aquaticProductsCoffe

Cashew Nut

Live Animals

Banana

Tobacco and Derivates

Palm Oil

38


• Structure of food imports (2003-2007)

22%

17%

13%

11%

7%

6%

5%3%

Rice

Wheat

Fish

Milk Products

Edible Oils

Sugar and sweets

Derivatives from Cereals and Milk

Meat

39


• Evolution of the agricultural trade balance

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

300%

350%

400%

Côte d'

Ivoire

Ghana

Burkin

a Faso M

aliTo

go

Benin

Senega

l

Niger

Guinea

Niger

ia

Gambia

Cape V

erde

Ecowas

2003-2007 2008 Target

40


• Trend in food trade balance

0.0%

20.0%

40.0%

60.0%

80.0%

100.0%

120.0%

Côte d'

Ivoire To

go

Senega

l

Ghana

Niger

Burkin

a Faso M

ali

Benin

Guinea

Gambia

Cape V

erde

Niger

ia

2003-2007 2008 Target

41


• Changes in Welfare Indicators In West Africa (1990s – 2000s)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Poverty

Incidence

Per capita GDP Poverty gap

ratio

Share of

poorest quintile

Underweight

children

Stunted

Children

Undernourished

population

GHI

% Increase % Decrease

42

PROSPECTS

• Second phase of “consolidation and repositioning of ReSAKSS as the leading knowledge platform for agricultural policy planning and implementation in Africa, ... full operationalization at country level of CAADP M&E for African agricultural development by setting up operational country networks..”

• Hand over to REC’s

43

MERCI DE VOTRE

AIMABLE ATTENTION

44

Business

CAADP M&E FRAMEWORK AND MODELING IN WEST AFRICA