strategic policy analysis 24 06
Post on 19-Oct-2014
598 views
DESCRIPTION
ReSAKSS-AfricaLead Workshop on Strengthening Capacity for Strategic Agricultural Policy and Investment Planning and Implementation in Africa Safari Park Hotel, Nairobi, June 25th‐ 26th 2012TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
STRATEGIC ANALYSIS UNDER CAADP PROCESS
Paul Guthiga, ReSAKSS‐ECA
Workshop on Strengthening Capacity for Strategic Agricultural Policy and Investment Planning and Implementation in Africa
Safari Park Hotel, Nairobi on 25th‐ 26th April 2012
![Page 2: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Key Issues in Agricultural Development
2
![Page 3: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Importance of Agriculture in African Economies
• Agriculture remains a key sector in most countries in Africa;
– Part of strategy for achieving economic growth, poverty reduction & foodsecurity
3Source: compiled by ReSAKSS based on the mostly recently available country sources
![Page 4: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Low budgetary allocation…
4
![Page 5: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Sector Growth‐1
• After several decades of stagnation;– The continent posted positive overall GDP growth rates & agricultural
growth during the last decade
• Impressive progress in agricultural GDP growth;
– Average rate of 4 percent between 2007 and 2009
• With differences in performance among countries…
5
![Page 6: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Sector Growth ‐2
6
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
Bur
undi
DR
C
Com
oros
Djib
outi
Egy
pt
Erit
rea
Eth
iopi
a
Ken
ya
Liby
a
Mad
agas
car
Mau
ritiu
s
Mal
awi
Rw
anda
Sud
an
Sw
azila
nd
Sey
chel
les
Tanz
ania
Uga
nda
Zam
bia
Zim
babw
e
AgG
DP
grow
th (A
nnua
l % c
hang
e)
Average 1999-2001 Average2002-4 Average 2005-2007
Source: Authors’ computations based on data on ReSAKSS Website
![Page 7: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Sector Growth…3 • The countries that met the CAADP target included;
– Rwanda (8.4%), Ethiopia (7.7%), Tanzania (7.3%) and Malawi (6.5%).
• However, high growth rates in agricultural GDP have not
invariably translated to reduction in poverty and hunger.
– In some countries there is marginal or no reduction in poverty despite
high growth in agricultural GDP.
– Need for targeting investments subsectors or in geographical regions with
potential for high impact on poverty
7
![Page 8: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Sector Growth…4
8
![Page 9: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Agricultural productivity…1
• Ag. productivity growth in Africa, especially in SSA, has been impressive since the mid‐1980s
• Labor productivity risen faster than land productivity in the continent as a whole…
• But in SSA and in some countries land productivity has risen faster than labor productivity..
9
![Page 10: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Land and Labour productivity in SSA and Sub‐regions (1961‐2009)
Source: ReSAKSS ATOR, 2011 10
![Page 11: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Labour and Land Productivity in Selected Countries (1961‐2009)
Source: ReSAKSS ATOR, 2011 11
![Page 12: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Total Factor Productivity in SSA (1961=1)
• Slight improvement in 1960s followed by rapid deterioration till mid 1980s
• Very little technical change over the whole period
12
![Page 13: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Maize productivity…1
• Maize is the key staple in most countries in the region.
• Maize yields in the majority of countries in the COMESA
region are very low;
– Mostly less than 2 tones/ha compared to a world average of 5
tones/ha
• Yield decline has occurred in several countries in the region
over the past decade
13
![Page 14: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Maize Productivity…2
14
![Page 15: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
2006 ‐ 2010 production growth rates 2006 ‐ 2010 Yield growth rates
Beans Maize Beans MaizeCOMESA 2.4 5.0 1.7 1.3East Africa 2.4 3 0.9 ‐1.4Burundi ‐0.8 2.0 5.0 ‐1.0Comoros 5.1 0.5DRC 0.9 0.0 0.0 ‐0.01Djibouti 0.8 ‐2.6 3.7 ‐12.4Egypt 0.3 4.2 ‐2.3 ‐3.1Eritrea ‐4.5 1.3Ethiopia 16.5 3.4 5.7 ‐0.1Kenya ‐5.2 ‐2 0.7 ‐4.7Libya 2.2 ‐1.5 0.1 ‐1.7Madagascar 1.0 0.5 ‐0.8 ‐4.0Malawi 8.0 8.9 9.8 7.3Mauritius 17.2 3.8Rwanda 2.9 51.1 5.5 36.9Sudan ‐2.8 ‐21 ‐0.4 4.1Swaziland ‐1.1 6.1 0.3 4.6Uganda 2.0 1.9 ‐0.4 ‐0.3Tanzania 3.1 5.6 ‐0.8 ‐0.6Zambia 18.2 5.1Zimbabwe ‐5.7 ‐7.2 ‐3.9 ‐3.3
Production versus Productivity Growth
Production is growing faster than productivity
15
![Page 16: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Poverty trends
• Africa as a whole has experienced a moderate decline in the rate of poverty since 1990
• From 47.0 percent in 1990–95 to 46.5 percent in 1995–2003 and 44.3 percent in 2003–09.
• The COMESA region experienced similar declining trend, with different levels of intensities across countries.
16
![Page 17: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Poverty declining.. but still high (1)
Country Name Most recent year Most recent poverty rates 2011 EstimatedRates
Burundi 2006 81.3 78.3Comoros 2004 46.1DRC 2006 59.2Egypt 2005 1.9 2.2Ethiopia 2005 39.0 25.6Kenya 2005 19.7 19.8Madagascar 2005 67.8 55.2Malawi 2004 73.9 64.4
Rwanda 2005 76.8 77.1Swaziland 2001 62.9 45.7Tanzania 2007 67.9 58.3Uganda 2009 28.7 21.4Zambia 2004 64.9 62.2
International Poverty Line: Poverty rates $1.25 a day (PPP) (% of population)
Source: http://data.worldbank.org ; 2011 Estimates are authors calculations based on “business as usual scenarios” 17
![Page 18: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Food Insecurity and Malnutrition
18
05101520253035404550
Burundi
Comoros
DRC
Djibouti
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Kenya
Madagascar
Malaw
i
Mauritius
Rwanda
Sudan
Swaziland
Tanzania
Uganda
Zambia
Zimbabw
e
1990 2003 2010
Global Hunger Index (GHI)
Key: • 0 (No hunger)• 20.0‐29.9 (Alarming hunger)• 30 and above (Extremely Alarming)
![Page 19: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Trends in GHI…hunger has reduced, but increased in some countries
Country% Change in GHI values
1990‐2010% Change in GHI values
2003‐2010Burundi 17.5 ‐10.3Comoros 5.7 ‐9.4DRC 60.8 9.0Djibouti ‐23.5 12.4Ethiopia ‐32.3 ‐18.8Kenya ‐15.7 ‐8.9
Madagascar ‐5.5 ‐8.1Malawi ‐43.5 ‐28.3Mauritius ‐8.2 76.3Rwanda ‐18.4 ‐15.1Sudan ‐18.4 ‐18.6Swaziland ‐19.4 ‐27.4Tanzania ‐20.7 ‐30.9Uganda ‐24.6 ‐19.5Zambia ‐14.4 ‐21.6Zimbabwe 3.5 ‐9.9
Source: Authors’ computation 19
![Page 20: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Rising food prices worsen hunger situation…
20
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
Jan‐07 Apr‐07 Jul‐07 Oct‐07 Jan‐08 Apr‐08 Jul‐08 Oct‐08 Jan‐09 Apr‐09 Jul‐09 Oct‐09 Jan‐10 Apr‐10 Jul‐10 Oct‐10 Jan‐11 Apr‐11 Jul‐11 Oct‐11 Jan‐12 Apr‐12
Ethiopia‐ Food Total FAO GLOBAL‐ Food Kenya‐ Food & Non‐Alcoholic Drink
Malawi‐ Food MauritiusFood And Non Alcoholic Beverages Rwanda‐ Food And Non‐Alcoholic Beverages
Tanzania‐ Food and Non alcoholic beverages Uganda‐ Food Zambia‐ Food
Djibouti ‐ Food
![Page 21: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Market Access and Trade• Agricultural trade accounts for about a third of the total intra‐
COMESA trade • Regional trade in food staples has implications on regional
food security • But.. Intra‐regional trade especially agriculture remain low• Constrained by
– Trade barriers; Tariff & non‐tariff barriers– Poor infrastructure
21
![Page 22: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Trend in the Structure of Intra‐COMESA Trade
22
Source: COmStat
![Page 23: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Environmental degradation & climate change
• Environmental degradation is a prevalent problem;
• Broad consensus that climate change poses a serious risk toagricultural production and food security in Africa
• Impacts of climate change manifested through extreme andincreasingly variable weather conditions.
• High dependence on rain‐fed agriculture, coupled with weakcapacity to adapt pose huge threat for agriculture andlivelihoods
• But… little weight in policy
23
![Page 24: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
POLICY ANALYSIS
24
![Page 25: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Agricultural Policy Making…1
• Agriculture has regained policy prominence; hence policyinitiatives like CAADP.
• New approach; evidence‐based and inclusivepolicymaking processes
• Increasing economic integration hence more policymaking processes at the RECs level;– trade policies,
– macro‐economic policies,
– agricultural policy etc
25
![Page 26: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Agricultural Policy Making…2
• But, …little understanding of policy‐making processesand political economy motivations.
• Entry of many new actors in the policy arena.
• Consensus that persistent problems of poverty and food insecurity can be addressed; correct identification of policies and their implementation.
• But the problem of poor policy formulation and implementation still persist.
26
![Page 27: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Agricultural Policy Making…3 • Policies are often;
– Formulated without evidence,
– Likely impacts are poorly analysed and understood
– Good policies are hindered by poor implementation.
• The changing policy environment require;– Increased understanding of policy making processes and
– Skills and tools to effectively participate in policy processes
27
![Page 28: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Characteristics of public policies..1
• Problem‐centred: attempt to address specificproblems affecting specified groups in the society
• Based on scientific methods to be able toconvince stakeholders on reliability and somedegree of objectivity;
• Normative – Not completely objective as valuejudgement cannot be entirely eliminated;
28
![Page 29: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Characteristics of public policies..2
• Involves some art, craft and persuasion to marshal various interest groups especially the losers in a policy decision
• Multi‐disciplinary: Good public policies incorporate ideas from different fields such as economics, sociology, biology, political science, etc
29
![Page 30: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
30
Steps in Policy Analysis…1
• Define and analyze the problem– Questions ;Who is affected and how seriously?– may include looking for causes
• Construct policy alternatives – might be the most important step– want to encourage creativity
![Page 31: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
31
Steps in Policy Analysis…2
• Develop evaluative criteria– effectiveness, efficiency, equity, political feasibility– assess potential of different criteria– will vary depending on the problem
• Assess policy alternatives– ask which is likely to produce desired outcomes
• Draw conclusions– some may advocate a single policy action, but others may not
– be sure of the information gathered
![Page 32: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Strategic Analysis Under CAAD Process
32
![Page 33: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Strategic Issues…1
• What has been the past performance and outlook foragricultural growth and poverty reduction?
• What are the Strategic options and sources for growth andpoverty reduction?
• What growth rates are needed to achieve set developmenttargets?
• What investment options can generate the needed growth?
33
![Page 34: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Strategic Issues…2
• Which sub‐sectors within agriculture have the highestpotential to deliver on development goals e.g. povertyreduction?
• What levels of funding is needed to achieve the set goals?
• What kind of strategic analysis and knowledge supportsystems is needed to guide implementation of identifiedstrategies at country level?
34
![Page 35: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Major outputs from strategic analysis…1
• Country background papers and brochures and briefs utilized
in CAADP roundtables that examined
• The brochures and briefs have been utilized in countries such
as:
Benin, Burundi, Cape Verde, Ethiopia, Ghana, Niger, Nigeria, Mali,
Senegal, the Gambia, Liberia, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Uganda, Tanzania,
Togo among others.
• Agricultural growth and investment options for poverty
reduction for countries such as:
Rwanda, Uganda, Mozambique, Zambia, Malawi, Ghana
35
![Page 36: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Major outputs from strategic analysis..2
• CAADP Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) framework
• Development of high quality databases, advanced policymodelling tools, and detailed baselines.
36
![Page 37: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
THANK YOU
37
![Page 38: Strategic policy analysis 24 06](https://reader034.vdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051322/5443d0e8b1af9f740a8b4696/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Fertilizer consumption Kg/ ha arable land
38
LOW fertilizer use ; average 30kg/ha