Review of CAADP Progress_2009

Review of CAADP Progress

Partnership to Cut Hunger and Poverty in Africa

SPECIAL DISCUSSION: Next Steps for the US Food Security Initiative

Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities

December 3, 2009

Babatunde OmilolaCoordinator, Regional Strategic Analysis and Knowledge Support System (ReSAKSS)

IFPRI

Outline

• What is CAADP? – Principles

– Processes and implementation

• Where is CAADP now?– Agricultural growth

– Agricultural Investments (Allocations to agriculture)

• Impacts– Poverty and hunger (MDG1)

• Challenges

What is CAADP?

• The Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) is the African Union (AU)/New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) vision and strategy for the development of African agriculture.

• CAADP puts agriculture at top of priorities of African countries

• CAADP is African-owned and African-led

CAADP Principles

• Employ agriculture-led growth to achieve MDG1 of halving poverty and hunger by 2015

• Pursuit of 6% average annual sector growth at national level

• Allocation of 10% of national budgets to agriculture sector

• Exploitation of regional complementarities and cooperation to boost growth

• Policy efficiency, dialogue, review and accountability (evidence-based policymaking)

• Partnerships and alliances to include farmers, agribusiness, civil society

CAADP Process

• The principles are achieved through:– the strategic functions of CAADP, – the guidance and involvement of the Regional Economic Communities

(RECs), and– the national roundtable process

• These activities surround four key pillars, led by Africa-based technical institutions: – Pillar 1: extending the area under sustainable land management

(University of Zambia)– Pillar 2: Improving rural infrastructure and trade-related capacities for

market access (Conference of Ministers of Agriculture of West and Central Africa (CMA/AOC))

– Pillar 3: Increasing food supply and reducing hunger (University of KwaZulu-Natal)

– Pillar 4: Agricultural research, technology dissemination and adoption (Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA))

Who Implements the CAADP process?

• African Union Commission (AUC) and New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD)

• Key Regional Economic Communities (RECs) establish their own priorities based on the continent-wide Pillars– Economic Community of West African States

(ECOWAS)– Southern African Development Community (SADC)– Common Market of Eastern and Southern Africa

(COMESA)

• Countries in Africa

1. Government appoints Focal

Point(s)

2. REC and Government launch

process

3. Country Steering and Technical

Committee

4. Cabinet Memo and Endorsement

5. Stocktaking –Growth and

Investment Analysis

6. Drafting of Country CAADP

Compact

7. Roundtable Signing of Compact

8. Donor and Government

Implementation

9. Regular Refinement and

Adjustment

The National CAADP Roundtable Process & Country Status

Libya, Eritrea

Comoros, Madagascar, Sudan

Cape Verde, C. d’Ivoire, Djibouti,

Seychelles, Swaziland

Burkina Faso, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Kenya,

Malawi, Uganda, Zambia

Benin, Burundi, Ethiopia, Gambia, Ghana, Liberia,

Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra

Leone, Togo

Zimbabwe, Egypt, Mauritius, DRC

13 countries

1

6

5

4

3

2

CAADP Framework created by AU, targets (6% & 10%) agreed upon by all African leaders.

In order to implement goals of CAADP framework, decisionmakers need evidence-based knowledge on investments, options, etc.

ReSAKSS, though its network of partners across the continent, takes stock and starts analysis of growth options.

The establishment of Country SAKSS facilitates this by providing country-specific information and analysis. These also serve as in-country policy and knowledge hubs.

ReSAKSS manages this knowledge so that decisionmakers and stakeholders can access and utilize it. Debate and dialogue take place in countries as they consider options for implementing CAADP framework. (lead-up to Roundtables)

Country CAADP compacts are signed binding stakeholders to goals set forth at Roundtables.

What is the role of ReSAKSS in CAADP implementation?

Tracking Progress of CAADP: ReSAKSS Websitewww.resakss.org

Users can customizethe map and charts

based on the specific information they are looking for, whether

that be regional information or

country-specific information

The ReSAKSS website allows users to easily track progress

against the CAADP and MDG targets

while also accessing a wealth of knowledge and data on

agricultural development in Africa

Where are we now?

• 6 years after CAADP, has there been any progress toward the goals?

• The Process: – 13 countries and 1 region have signed CAADP compacts

• Agricultural Spending/Investment: – The number of countries spending at least 10% of budgets

on agriculture has increased since 2002

• Agricultural Growth:– At the continent level agricultural growth has increased

since 2002– The number of countries with annual agricultural growth

rates of 6% or more has increased since 2002

Government spending on agriculture: Progress towards the Maputo Declaration target

• The African continent as a whole has not met the 10% target (current spending at 6-8 percent)

• But, this varies by country

0

5

10

15

20

25

Gu

ine

a B

issa

u*

**

Gab

on

**

*

DR

C**

Co

te d

'Ivo

ire

Mo

rocc

o*

*

Cen

tral

Afr

ican

…

Mau

riti

us*

*

Leso

tho

**

Rw

and

a

Egyp

t**

Cam

ero

on

**

Bo

tsw

ana

Bu

run

di*

**

Ken

ya*

***

Swaz

ilan

d**

Uga

nd

a***

*Su

dan

***

Nam

ibia

**

Tan

zan

ia**

Mau

rita

nia

***

Be

nin

***

*

Tun

isia

**

Nig

eria

Zim

bab

we*

*

Zam

bia

*

Togo

Mad

agas

car*

*

Gam

bia

***

Mo

zam

biq

ue*

*C

had

***

Gh

ana*

**

*

Mal

i

Mal

awi

Eth

iop

ia*

*

Sen

egal

Gu

inea

***

Nig

er*

Bu

rkin

a Fa

so*

%

Agricultural Expenditures as a share of total (%), 2007

CURRENT, 2007 (Unless otherwise noted)

*=2006; **=2005; ***=2004; ****=2008 estimates

Source: Omilola and Lambert, 2009.

Only 8 countries have met the 10%

target

Have countries increased their spending in response to the 2003 Maputo Declaration?

• At the continental level, agricultural spending nearly doubled between 2000 and 2005

• In 2003, only 3.2% of countries allocated 10% or more of their budgets to agriculture– This increased to 33.3%

in 2006 before slightly falling to 25% in 2007

• 9 countries increased their allocations from less than 5% spending to 5-10% spending

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

% o

f re

po

rtin

g co

un

trie

s

Level of agricultural spending as a share of total spending, 2002-2007

Less than 5% 5%-10% More than 10%

Source: Omilola and Lambert, 2009.

Agricultural expenditure as a share of agricultural GDP

• Measures government spending on agriculture relative to the size of that country's agriculture sector

• Under this measure, more countries fall into the category of low budget support to agriculture

0

20

40

60

80

%

Agricultural expenditures as a share of agricultural GDP, 2007

CURRENT, 2007 (Unless otherwise noted)

*=2006; **=2005; ***=2008 estimates

The range is considerable

(1 to 60%)

On aggregate , Africa spends between 5-7% of agricultural GDP on agriculture,

compared to 15% in Asia during its Green Revolution

Source: Omilola and Lambert, 2009.

Agricultural GDP growth

Page 15

-36

-30

-24

-18

-12

-6

0

6

12

18

24

Erit

rea

Gam

bia

, Th

e

Zim

bab

we

Sen

ega

l

Tun

isia

Mau

rita

nia

Mal

awi

Leso

tho

Cap

e V

erd

e

Gab

on

Mal

i

Ke

nya

Co

te d

'Ivo

ire

Eth

iop

ia

Zam

bia

Mad

agas

car

Alg

eri

a

CA

R

Ch

ad

Gu

ine

a-B

issa

u

Bo

tsw

ana

DR

C

Seyc

he

lles

Swaz

ilan

d

Nig

er

Bu

rkin

a Fa

so

Djib

ou

ti

Sud

an

Egyp

t

Cam

ero

on

Uga

nd

a

Gh

ana

Bu

run

di

Nig

eri

a

Co

mo

ros

Mau

riti

us

Mo

rocc

o

Tan

zan

ia

Gu

ine

a

Sou

th A

fric

a

Togo

Be

nin

Nam

ibia

Mo

zam

biq

ue

Sao

To

me

& …

An

gola

Rw

and

a

Equ

ato

rial

Gu

ine

a

2002: Only 9 countries achieved 6% or more annual growth

2008: At least 20 countries achieved 6% or more annual growth

6% CAADP target

6% CAADP target

Source: WDI

Burkina Faso CameroonCongo, D.R.

C. African Rep. Ethiopia Guinea Kenya Mali

Morocco Senegal

Swaziland Togo

TunisiaUganda

AngolaBotswana

EgyptGhana

MauritaniaNamibia

Countries on track towards halving poverty by 2015

Countries on track towards halving hunger by 2015Only 6 Countries on track

towards achieving both goals of MDG1

Algeria Malawi

Sao Tome and PrincipeTanzania

What about poverty and hunger?

Source: Omilola and Lambert, 2009

Changes in poverty% population in households below $1.25/day

0

30

60

90

19

86

19

94

19

94

19

98

20

03

19

92

19

98

20

06

19

96

20

01

19

85

19

86

19

87

19

88

19

93

19

95

19

98

20

02

19

96

20

02

19

82

19

95

20

00

20

05

BOT BFS BRD CAM CID DJI ETH

0

30

60

90

1988 1992 2006 1993 1991 2003 1994 2005 1993 2003 1993 1999 2005 2004

GHA GUB GUI KEN LES MAD MWI

0

30

60

90

19

91

19

95

20

01

20

05

19

90

20

03

19

93

19

95

20

00

19

95

20

01

19

92

20

00

19

89

19

92

19

96

19

99

20

02

20

05

19

91

19

93

19

96

19

98

20

03

20

04

SEN SIL SA SWZ TNZ UGA ZAM

0

30

60

90

19

89

19

94

20

01

20

06

19

87

19

93

19

96

20

00

19

85

19

91

19

99

20

01

20

07

19

97

20

03

19

92

19

94

20

05

19

86

19

93

19

96

20

04

19

85

20

00

MAL MAU MOR MOZ NIG NGR RWD

Challenges for CAADP• Although agriculture seems to be firmly back on the

development agenda, pledges have not translated into increased spending in many countries.

• The CAADP process has stalled in some countries.• The post-compact process has only recently received

attention (Rwanda post-compact meeting on Dec. 8-9) • The contributions of the CAADP process to the

achievements in agricultural growth and poverty reduction are not yet known fully.

• How are agricultural budgets being spent? Are they being spent judiciously?

• What critical M&E information is needed to enhance effective dialogue and policy processes at all levels?Page 18

Thank you.