Monitoring African Food and Agricultural Policies (MAFAP) - Jean Balié, FAO ReSAKSS Conference, Dakar, 12 and 13 November 2013
Post on 25-May-2015
311 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Transcript
With the financial support of
Public expenditure in selected West and East African countries: The Maputo
Target and what’s behind it?
Monitoring African Food and Agricultural Policies (MAFAP)
Jean Balié, FAOReSAKSS Conference, Dakar, 12 and 13 November 2013
MAFAP System1. Working with national partners to build evidence
a) Price incentives for key agricultural value chainsb) Public expenditure and aidc) Policy coherence
2. Facilitating policy dialogue, uptake and advocacy– Regional (CAADP) and national (investment plans, policy
reforms)
3. Developing institutional capacities4. Establishing a community of practice
Agriculture-specific expenditure (food and agriculture development support)
Agriculture-supportive expenditure (rural development
support)
Individual support to food and agriculture
General support to food and agriculture
Payments to consumers
Payments to producers
Payments to other agents
Inputs subsidiesIncome support
CashFood aid
Research
Feeder roads
Technical assistance/extension services
Training
Rural education
Idem Rural health
Rural infrastructure
Overarching categories Categories Sub-categories Components
Irrigation
Storage
Inspection
Marketing
School feeding
Level of public expenditure for agriculture and rural development:
Overall decline of public expenditure for ag. and rural development between 2006 and 2010
AbsoluteRelative
10%
Governments agreed to increase PE in support to Ag. and rural development (CAADP) ≠ Decline of PE
Behind the Maputo target…
From 2006 to 2010 : National spending : +14% Donor spending : -8.3%`
Behind the Maputo target… (2006-07 vs 2008-10) Share of aid in public
expenditure for food and agriculture
Burkina Faso -10
Kenya +2
Mali -2
Tanzania -19
Uganda -19
Behind the Maputo target…
Share of total budget going to ag (05-10)
Ag PE per agricultural worker - USD (05-10)
Ag PE per agricultural land – USD/ha (05-10)
Burkina Faso
15.5 % 46 22
Kenya 6.3% 62 18
Mali 11 % 74 4
Tanzania 12.1% 34 14
Uganda 11.1% 51 31
Composition – general categories
Decline of rural expenditureSpecialization towards agricultural specific expenditure (direct and indirect)
Share of donor spending in rural development
Burkina Faso Kenya Mali Tanzania Uganda
82% 0 83% 64% 31
Policy objectives focus on boosting production and productivity rather than fostering rural development.East Africa : specialization of expenditure towards private goods rather than public.
Composition – Ag-specific support
Low support to consumers though public spending.PE target mainly producers.
Pillar 3 of CAADP- Promotion of food security by fostering productivity and production and improving food availability
Composition – payments to producer
Western African countries: capital (on farm irrigation)Eastern African countries: variable inputs
Burkina Faso
Composition of capital subsidies
Coherent with national policy strategies for Western African countries : boosting rice production and yields.East African : technology based improvmt of productivity
Composition – indirect ag-specificResearch and dissemination of knowledge
Higher spending in Eastern African Countries in support to research but overall relative decline.
Pillar 4- Investments in agricultural researchOverall relative decline
Pillar 2- Improved market accessLimited support to marketing activities- Supported trough infrastructure spending
Composition – groups of commodities
Crops mostly targeted
East Africa : more diversified support than West Africa
Share of PE targeting individual commodities
Conclusions after food crisis, mixed signals sent to producers: - price
& trade policies versus subsidies
reduction in donor funds affects rural development spending
regional differences: importance of capital, variable inputs, research and extension
period analyzed was exceptional: regular tracking required
Thank you!
For more information: www.fao.org/mafap
top related