Post on 20-Nov-2014
description
Implementation Performance and
Progress toward Core CAADP Targets
Samuel Benin, IFPRI
Background and Motivation• In 2003, Africa adopted CAADP; agriculture-led
integrated framework for development
• Set targets for spending, productivity, growth, trade, outcomes (poverty, food and nutrition security, etc.)
• Developed processes for mutual engagement and evidence-based review and learning
www.resakss.org
• ReSAKSS tracks progress of 30 indicators through an interactive website and flagship Annual Trends and Outlook Report (ATOR)
Objectives and outline of presentation• Review progress in implementing the CAADP
agenda. Particularly, achieving key CAADP goals and targets:• 10% agriculture expenditure• 6% agricultural sector growth• Halving poverty and hunger
• Correlations among observed trends to assess simple associations between spending and growth and outcomes• Lessons for future work relating to implementation
of the Malabo Declaration
Format of results and notes (I)• Aggregate statistics: Africa as a whole; 5 geographic regions
(Central, East, North, Southern, West); and 4 economic regions (income, agricultural potential, natural resources):• Middle Income (MI) = 26 countries: Algeria, Angola, Botswana,
Cameroon, Cape Verde, Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, Djibouti, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Ghana, Lesotho, Libya, Mauritius, Morocco, Namibia, Nigeria, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, South Africa, South Sudan, Sudan, Swaziland, Tunisia.
• Low Income, less favorable agriculture (LI-3) = 9 countries: Burundi, Chad, Comoros, Eritrea, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Rwanda, Somalia.
• Low income, more favorable agriculture (LI-2) = 13 countries: Benin, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mozambique, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda, Zimbabwe.
• Low Income, mineral rich (LI-1) = 6 countries: Central African Republic, D.R. Congo, Guinea, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Zambia.
Format of results and notes (II)• Other aggregates not presented: Regional Economic
Communities (RECs), top 10 largest agriculture economies (based on share in Africa’s agGDP), fastest-growing agriculture economies (i.e. greater than 6%)
• Trends for three sub-periods: 1995-2003 (baseline), 2003-08 (initial CAADP timeline), 2008-2013
• Monetary values in constant 2005 US$• Data updates: retroactive, new data for recent years, data for
more countries (e.g. 50 countries with agriculture expenditure data)
• Data sources: WDI, FAOStat, IMF, national sources (statistics bureaus, ministries of finance and agriculture), studies
Enabling environment Inflation Government debt and revenue
Inflation, GDP deflator (%)
Afric
a
Cent
ral
East
Nor
th
Sout
hern
Wes
t
MI
L3 L2 L1
Africa Region Economic
0
50
100
150
3455
13 8
67
2035
133
9 710 9 10 10 9 10 10 15 8 811 7 14 8 819 11 13 11 6
1995-2003 2003-2008 2008-2012
Inflation reduced substantially from pre-CAADP levels better control of money supply; stronger purchasing power; better long-term planning
General government gross revenue and debt (% of GDP)
1995
-03
2003
-08
2008
-12
1995
-03
2003
-08
2008
-12
1995
-03
2003
-08
2008
-12
1995
-03
2003
-08
2008
-12
MI L3 L2 L1
050
100150200
28 31 31 12 20 22 18 20 21 19 26 2578 44 36
154 13254 93 58 40 96 61 38
Revenue Debt
1995
-03
2003
-08
2008
-12
Africa
050
100150200
26 30 3081 47 37
• Revenue-ratio increased slightly; but debt-ratio reduced a lot• Due to combination of debt forgiveness, more grants, greater
own revenue sources (increased export earnings, royalties, ...)
Government agriculture expenditure
Government agriculture expenditure (GAE) growth rate (annual average %)
Afric
a
Cent
ral
East
Nor
th
Sout
hern
Wes
t
MI
L3 L2 L1
Africa Region Economic
-55
152535
6
149
6
1812
9
34
6 28 14 9
413 13
6
29
11 5-1
22
-47
1 -1 114
3-5
1995-2003 2003-2008 2008-2013
• Growth in GAE slowed down or declined in 2008-03; except in central Africa where it increased
• Reflects effect of the financial and high-prices crises in 2008-09
Government agriculture expenditure (GAE, annual average % of total expenditure)
Afric
a
Cent
ral
East
Nor
th
Sout
hern
Wes
t
MI
L3 L2 L1
Africa Region Economic
0
5
10
15
3 26 4 2
5 3 47 10
4 3
64 2
53 4
711
3 5 5 3 2 5 3 5 7 8
1995-2003 2003-2008 2008-2013 10% target
• Share of GAE stagnated or declined slightly in 2008-03; except in central Africa and L3 economic group
• Reflects slowdown in growth in total expenditure
05
10152025
14 6
17 5 4 4 4
15 6 6
3 14 5 3
15
3 4 3 1
117
28
5 63
7 6 72
12
3 4 26
18
59 9
0
21
84 6
1995-2003
05
10152025
1 1 24
2 13 4
2 3 3 24
1
5 42
5 4 3
63
64
25 6
47 6 5
47 6 6
2
9
45
2
7
18
912
14
2
10
6
18
10
2003-2008
05
10152025
1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 9 10 10 1015 16 18
2008-2013 Burkina Faso, Congo R., Ethiopia, Madagascar, Malawi, Zimbabwe
Burkina Faso, Guinea, Niger, Sao Tome and Principe, Sudan
Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Malawi, Mali, Niger, Zimbabwe
≥ 10%
≥ 10%
≥ 10%
Agricultural growth
Agriculture value added (growth rate, %)
Afric
a
Cent
ral
East
Nort
h
Sout
hern
Wes
t
MI
L3 L2 L1
Africa Region Economic
0
5
10
72
4 6 48 7
2 4 452
35 4
65
34
36 3
6 5 6 5 6 5 4 4
1995-2003 2003-2008 2008-2013 6% target
• Faster growth in 2008-13 compared to 2003-08 in many sub-regions and compared to 1995-03 in central, east, and L3;
• Slower growth in west Africa;• In Africa and other sub-regions, faster growth in 2008-13
represent catch-up with pre-CAADP levels.
-10
0
10
20
3 27 4
6
1 1 3 4 7 5 3-1
2-2 1 3 1
71
5 4 36
0
117 4
-4
94
12
2 4 6 4 16
2 16 6
103
1995-2003
-15
-5
5
15
52 3 3 3 1 2 1 1 2
4 25
3 30
3 47 7
3 3 5 58
-3 -27 5
05 4 5
2
12
-4
84
25
3
-13
13
14
5
2003-2008
-10
0
10
20
-7 -60 0 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 6 6 7 7 7 7 8 9 10 11 12 12
17
2008-2013
High variability over time ● Many different countries surpassed 6% target in different sub-periods ● 16 countries in 2008-13 ●
Angola, Ethiopia and Mozambique in 2003-08 and 2008-13
(Agriculture value added growth, %)
Outcomes Poverty Food and nutrition security Hunger
Pove
rty
(% o
f po
pula
tion)
Mal
nutr
ition
(%
of ch
ildre
n un-
der 5
)
Glob
al H
unge
r In
dex
Central
0
35
70
43 28 2643 26 2431 24 23
1995-2003 2003-2008 2008-2012Pove
rty
(% o
f po
pula
tion)
Mal
nutr
ition
(%
of ch
ildre
n un-
der 5
)
Glob
al H
unge
r In
dex
Africa
0
35
70
44 23 2142 21 1940 20 17
1995-2003 2003-2008 2008-2012 • Poverty, malnutrition and hunger has declined at aggregate levels everywhere;
• Declined by 2% points per year on average in post-CAADP sub-periods compared to pre-CAADP
Pove
rty
(% o
f po
pula
tion)
Mal
nutr
ition
(%
of ch
ildre
n un-
der 5
)
Glob
al H
unge
r In
dex
North
0
35
70
5 8 63 74
3 54
1995-2003 2003-2008 2008-2012Pove
rty
(% o
f po
pula
tion)
Mal
nutr
ition
(%
of ch
ildre
n un-
der 5
)
Glob
al H
unge
r In
dex
Southern
0
35
70
4817 19
4314 17
3913 15
1995-2003 2003-2008 2008-2012 • Differences across sub-regions:
• Lowest levels in all three indicators in north Africa;
• Moderate levels of poverty in central and southern Africa;
• Moderate levels of malnutrition and hunger in southern Africa
Pove
rty
(% o
f po
pula
tion)
Mal
nutr
ition
(%
of ch
ildre
n un-
der 5
)
Glob
al H
unge
r In
dex
West
0
35
70
5828 21
5526 18
5424 16
1995-2003 2003-2008 2008-2012
Pove
rty
(% o
f po
pula
tion)
Mal
nutr
ition
(%
of ch
ildre
n un-
der 5
)
Glob
al H
unge
r In
dex
East
0
35
70
5730 28
5228 2548 27 24
1995-2003 2003-2008 2008-2012 • Highest levels of poverty in east and west Africa;
• Highest levels of malnutrition in central, east, and west Africa;
• Highest levels of hunger in central and east Africa
CorrelationsThough do not imply cause-effect relationships (which require more detail data and advanced quantitative methods), strong correlation coefficient hints plausible association
Government agriculture expenditure (GAE) and agricultural GDP growth (I)
-20 0 20 40 60 800
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
f(x) = 0.033648029 x + 3.063376581R² = 0.0484961721908553
1995-2012
GAE growth rate (%)
AgGD
P gr
owth
rate
(%) Weak positive
correlation between GAE growth and AgGDP growth
Different results for different sub-regions, sub-periods, and types of GAE (other studies)
Government agriculture expenditure (GAE) and agricultural GDP growth (II)
1995-2003
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100-5
0
5
10
15
f(x) = 0.029283481 x + 3.003323783R² = 0.0393256918940874
GAE growth rate (%)
AgGD
P gr
owth
rate
(%
)
-20 0 20 40 60 80-5
0
5
10
15
f(x) = 0.050694443 x + 2.934659557R² = 0.0725422038827026
GAE growth rate (%)Ag
GDP
grow
th ra
te
(%)
2003-2012
Larger (but still weak) positive correlation between GAE growth and AgGDP growth in post-CAADP sub-period compared to pre-CAADP
Agricultural GDP growth and malnutrition (I)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
-15-13-11
-9-7-5-3-1135
f(x) = − 0.49417662 x − 0.023625682R² = 0.148303819281579
1995-2012AgGDP growth rate (%)
Child
mal
nutr
ition
(% ch
ange
)
Weak positive correlation between AgGDP growth and malnutrition reduction
Different results for different sub-regions, sub-periods, and drivers of AgGDP growth (other studies)
Agricultural GDP growth and malnutrition (II)
1995-2003
-5 0 5 10 15
-9-7-5-3-1135
f(x) = − 0.238916943 x − 0.324251935R² = 0.0785135692873132
AgGDP growth rate (%)
Child
mal
nutr
ition
(%
chan
ge)
-5 0 5 10 15
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
f(x) = − 0.469673929 x − 0.648426034R² = 0.108226720599792
AgGDP growth rate (%)
Child
mal
nutr
ition
(%
chan
ge)
2003-2012
Larger (but still weak) positive correlation between AgGDP growth and malnutrition reduction in post-CAADP sub-period compared to pre-CAADP
Conclusions and implications Key findings Future work vis-à-vis Malabo Declaration
Conclusions and implications (I)• Significant progress in several indicators associated
with CAADP• High inter-temporal variability in key indicators (e.g.
government agriculture expenditure) reflects challenges in sustaining commitment Malabo Declaration is timely• Malabo Declaration:• Has many result areas with specific and more ambitious
targets more indicators needs to be tracked• Elaborates desired contribution of agriculture to overall
results more disaggregated indicators are needed
Conclusions and implications (II)• Malabo Declaration:• Asks for implementation strategy and roadmap
more deeper analyses are required (e.g. efficiency and effectiveness of different types of policies and public spending)• Commitment to systematic regular review
process effective (institutionalized) M&E systems and mutual accountability platforms
IDEAL DISAGGREGATED EXPENDITURE DATA
Functions (COFOG)
701. Gen. Pub. Services
702. Defense
703. Pub. Order & Safety
704. Economic Affairs
705. Environ Protection706. Housing & Community Amenities707. Health
708. Rec., Culture, & Rel.
709. Education
710. Social Protection
Economic classification21. Compensation of employees22. Use of goods and services23. Consumption of fixed capital24. Interest25. Subsidies
26. Grants
27. Social benefits
28. Other
Agricultural sub-sector
Crops
Livestock
Forestry
Fishery
Agricultural sub-functions
Extension
Research
Irrigation
Land management
Market infrastructureFarm support
Policy, planning, M&E
Regulation, licensing
Statistics
…
Level
Central
State/Region
Local/District
…
Policy objective
Food security
Productivity/Growth
…
Target
Demography
Geography
…
Planning/Execution
Budget
Expenditure
Source of financing
Domestic (loan, tax)
External (loan, grant)
Thanks
CAADP Implementation process Compacts Country and other supporting initiatives
CAADP processes and supporting initiatives
0183654
1 13 22 29 30 37 40
Number of countries with CAADP Compacts
• Other country: NAIPs (xx by end of 2013); Country SAKSS (12 by end of 2014); CANs (14); JSRs (7)
• Supporting initiatives: GAFSP (15 approved $563 million); Grow Africa (7); New Alliance (10)
Afric
a
Cent
ral
East
Nor
th
Sout
hern
Wes
t
MI
L3 L2 L1
Africa
Region Economic
0
10
20
62 3
11 11
36
2 4 76 2 610
18
37 3 6 96 4 5 9
21
2 6 5 6 6
1995-2003 2003-2008 2008-2012
Government agriculture expenditure (annual average % of agriculture value added)
Land and labor productivity
1995-03 2003-08 2008-12Africa
0500
1,0001,5002,000
618 742 832574 712 824
Labor (2005 US$/worker) Land (2005 US$/ha)
1995-03
2003-08
2008-12
1995-03
2003-08
2008-12
1995-03
2003-08
2008-12
1995-03
2003-08
2008-12
MI L3 L2 L1
-1,0001,0003,0005,000
1995
-03
2003
-08
2008
-12
1995
-03
2003
-08
2008
-12
1995
-03
2003
-08
2008
-12
1995
-03
2003
-08
2008
-12
1995
-03
2003
-08
2008
-12
Central East North Southern West
02,0004,0006,000
Labor (2005 US$/worker) Land (2005 US$/ha)