Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa
Transcript of Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa
Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
July 2004
Institutional and Policy Support Team (IPST) African Union/Interafrican Bureau for Animal Resources PO Box 30786, 00100 Nairobi, Kenya http://www.cape-ibar.org
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
Contents Abbreviations and Acronyms i Acknowledgements i Summary ii 1.0 Introduction 1 1.1 Why focus on policies and institutions? 1 1.2 Policy and institutional change in AU/IBAR 2 1.3 The IBAR Preliminary Consultation 3 2.0 Methodology 4 2.1 Focal points and resource persons 4 2.2 Literature review 4 2.3 Interviews 5 2.4 Initial country visits 5 2.5 Country-level workshops 6 3.0 Findings 7 3.1 Livestock has a low profile 8 3.2 A top-down approach to policy making 9 3.3 Capacity of government livestock agencies 10 3.3.1 Organisation and structure of livestock
ministries and departments 10 3.3.2 Knowing how to change 12 3.3.3 Incoherent and outdated policies and
legislation 12 3.3.4 Other concerns 12 3.4 Information gaps 13 4.0 The Way Forward 14
4.1 Towards a regional programme focussing on policy and institutional change in the livestock sub-sector 14
4.2 An IBAR facility dedicated to policy and institutional change 15
References 18 Annexes Annex 1: People interviewed during the preliminary consultation 19 Annex 2: National-level workshop participants 22
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
i
Abbreviations and Acronyms
AU/IBAR African Union/ Interafrican Bureau for Animal Resources
COMESA Common Market for Eastern and Southern African States
EAC East Africa Community
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization
IGAD Inter-Governmental Authority on Development
ILRI International Livestock Research Institute
IPST Institutional and Policy Support Team (AU/IBAR)
FMoAR Federal Ministry of Animal Resources (Sudan)
KNFU Kenya National Farmers Union
MAAIF Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industries and Fisheries (Uganda)
MoARD Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (Ethiopia)
MLDF Ministry of Livestock Development and Fisheries (Kenya)
MoWLD Ministry of Water and Livestock Development (Tanzania)
MPND Ministry of Planning and National Development (Kenya)
NEPAD New Partnership for Africa’s Development
NGO Non Governmental Organisation
PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
REC Regional Economic Community
REO Regional Economic Organization
UNFF Uganda National Farmers Federation
Acknowledgements AU/IBAR acknowledges the valuable contributions of everyone who participated in
the preliminary consultation. The work was funded by the Department for
International Development (UK) through grants to IBAR and the Food and
Agriculture Organization.
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
ii
Summary
In the African Union (AU), policy and institutional change at national and
regional levels is viewed as a core strategy for poverty alleviation. Within the AU,
the Interafrican Bureau for Animal Resources (IBAR) is tasked with assisting AU
member states and Regional Economic Communities (RECs) to reform and
harmonise policies in the livestock sub-sector. Furthermore, the role of livestock
development as a pathway out of poverty is attracting increasing recognition.
Animals are a major asset for rural communities throughout Africa, and provide
highly nutritious foods, income, draught power, hides and skins, and manure. In
many communities, livestock have profound cultural significance and form the
basis for traditional social support systems.
In 2003 IBAR consulted senior policy makers in Greater Horn of Africa
region to assess policy and institutional constraints in the livestock sub-sector, and
begin the process of formulating a regional programme focussing on policy reform
and targeted at poor producers. The IBAR team spoke to Ministers, Permanent
Secretaries, Head of Livestock Departments and a range of other stakeholders in
five countries. This report summarises the preliminary consultation and suggests
how a proposal for the regional programme can be finalised with real inputs and
commitment from AU/IBAR partners. The report also outlines the roles of the new
Institutional and Policy Support Team (IPST) in AU/IBAR, and suggests how the
IPST can spearhead the emerging regional programme. Five country-level reports
are also available and these reports contain detailed information derived from
dialogue with national stakeholders.
The key findings from the preliminary consultation were as follows:
• Senior policy makers were extremely frank about the need for change.
They expressed,
concern over the dearth of policy in key areas affecting the livestock
sub-sector
their frustration with the current institutional environment
their inability to formulate policy when events are rapidly changing
the low level of awareness that appropriate policy formulation is a
complex process that must involve all stakeholders
their understanding that policy change alone will have limited impact -
there must concurrently be institutional incentives and associated
legislation to implement new policy
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
iii
• A number of specific policy and institutional issues were highlighted:
despite the considerable potential to develop livestock resources as a
poverty reduction strategy, the low policy profile of livestock
an approach to policy reform based almost solely on the opinions of
government players; broad-based stakeholder analysis was rare and
most critically, mechanisms for involving poorer livestock keepers in
policy dialogue were lacking
there is a pressing need to improve government capacity with regards
the design and implementation of effective policy making processes;
the needs relates not only to stakeholder involvement, but also to a
range of structural weaknesses and policy incoherence
Based on draft logical frameworks produced in the five countries, IBAR
has provisionally formulated a goal and outputs for a regional programme. The
programme goal is to increase the contribution of livestock to poverty reduction
and wealth creation, through the development of a conducive policy environment
and institutional framework. The three outputs of the programme are as follows:
Output 1 A pro-poor institutional framework for policy review, formulation,
harmonisation and implementation being put in place at national
level.
Output 2 Better understanding and acceptance of the contribution of
livestock to poverty reduction and national economies.
Output 3 The participation of poor livestock keepers and related
communities in policy making processes is enhanced.
To finalise the regional programme proposal, IBAR will conduct further consultations with government partners and RECs with a view to producing an approved proposal by the end of January 2005. It is envisaged that further dialogue will result in letters of support from the relevant ministries plus definition of specific country-level activities, roles and responsibilities of different players, and levels of co-funding required at national level.
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
1
1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Why focus on policies and institutions?
It is widely accepted that livestock are a vital component of rural
livelihoods in Africa. Animals provide highly nutritious foods, are sources of
income and savings, and provide draught power, transport, manure, and hides
and skins. In many African societies, livestock are the basis for traditional social
support systems and are an integral part of the African way of life1. In an era of
globalisation, predictions of future global demand for livestock products indicate
considerable opportunities for African producers2. In particular, human population
growth and urbanisation in south-east Asia present a growing potential market for
Africa and other developing regions.
In 1998 a major international donor commissioned a review of best
practice in the livestock sector3. The review included an assessment of more than
800 livestock development projects supported by multilateral and bilateral donors,
and implemented by a range of international, government and non governmental
agencies from the 1960s. Most of these projects were categorised as ‘technical
and service projects’, which often aimed to improve disease control or livestock
production through new technology, or, improve access to markets through
government marketing schemes or better marketing infrastructure. All other
projects were categorised as ‘organisational projects’, often involving training to
government partners and strengthening of extension and veterinary services. A
key finding of the review was that overall, there was little to evidence to show that
these projects had achieved sustained benefits for poor livestock keepers.
Reasons for limited success included:
• The development and attempted transfer of inappropriate technologies;
technologies were supply driven rather than demand driven
• Inappropriate incentives within research centres for poverty-focussed research
and innovation; a focus on the relatively wealthy farmers or commercial sector
• Poor delivery pathways, characterised by a small private sector and inefficient
public sector; public policy that adversely affected poorer producers.
• Relatively powerful members dominating producer organisations, or,
professional groups (high-cost and urban) preventing the activities of para-
professionals (low-cost and rural)
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
2
• Weak organisations, particularly in the areas of economic analysis of
sustainable systems, and farmer-led research and problem analysis
Despite a substantial body of negative experience in the livestock sector, a
few relatively successful projects stood out as achieving sustainable change.
Common features of these ‘institutional’ projects were a combination of
community-based approaches, private sector involvement and the creation of
enabling policy and legislative environments. These experiences from the field
agreed with emerging economic theories, particularly New Institutional Economics,
describing the crucial role of institutions in defining how organisations behave and
perform. At this point it is important to note that ‘institutions’ are understood to be
the formal and informal rules, enforcement mechanisms and norms that control
organisations, whereas policies are goals and desired outcomes4,5.
1.2 Policy and institutional change in AU/IBAR
Within the Department of Rural Economy and Agriculture of the African
Union (AU), the Interafrican Bureau for Animal Resources (IBAR) is mandated by
AU member states to facilitate policy reform and harmonisation in the livestock
sub-sector. To date, IBAR has been actively promoting policy change in the areas
of veterinary privatization and primary animal health services, and considerable
progress has been achieved in the Greater Horn of Africa region. Meetings of
African Ministers of Animal Resources are also convened by IBAR to discuss key
policy issues. However, a wide range of other service provision, marketing,
extension, research and other policy issues affecting livestock keepers still need
to be addressed.
At the 2004 AU Summit held in Addis Ababa, the AU responsibility to
provide continental leadership in the integration, co-ordination and establishment
of close co-operative relationships with Africa’s Regional Economic Communities
and Organisations (RECs/REOs) was reinforced. This will involve the
establishment of AU delegations in each REC, and the start of a process of
reflection and dialogue with the RECs on their role, capacity and ability to deliver
on standardised regional integration programmes. Bearing in mind the importance
of the agricultural sector and poverty alleviation in Africa - a key strategy of the AU
- the strengthening, co-ordination and harmonisation of REC policies and
institutions will be crucial. As the RECs in turn work hand-in-hand with their
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
3
member states, there is a need for strong support from the AU Department for
Rural Economy and Agriculture in terms of how to develop appropriate policy and
institutions. In the livestock sub-sector, this role falls to IBAR.
1.3 The IBAR Preliminary Consultation
In 2003, AU/IBAR conducted a preliminary, broad-based study on
livestock policies in the Horn of Africa region. The preliminary consultation was
conducted between June and November 2003 in five countries viz. Ethiopia,
Kenya, Sudan, Tanzania and Uganda. A central aim of the study was to assess
attitudes, understanding and needs with regards livestock policy reform, and
outline a process for elaborating a regional-level policy and institutional support
programme with full commitment from IBAR partners. Specific study objectives
were:
• Assess stakeholder understanding and attitudes with regards needs and
opportunities for poverty-focussed policy reform in the livestock sub-sector
• Develop a comprehensive list of national and regional stakeholders, and
determine commitment to work with a regional-level institutional and policy
reform programme
• Identify knowledge gaps related to pro-poor policies and propose strategies
for addressing these gaps
• Identify and prioritise opportunities where institutional and policy change in the
livestock sub-sector would have a substantial impact on poverty
• Identify viable entry-points for the adoption and implementation of institutional
and policy change processes
• Produce draft regional and country-level logical frameworks for a regional
programme of institutional and policy support to the livestock sub-sector
This report summarises the preliminary consultation at a regional-level. It
presents the key findings and proposes further work to finalise a proposal for a
regional programme of policy and institutional support to the livestock sub-sector.
More detailed information is described in the five country reports, available from
IBAR.
In May 2004 IBAR established a new Institutional and Policy Support Team (IPST) to spearhead assistance to partners. The report also outlines the
proposed tasks of the IPST in relation to the emerging regional programme.
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
4
2. METHODOLOGY
2.1 Focal points and resource persons
The conceptual approach underpinning the preliminary consultation was
country-level dialogue with key policy makers. Therefore, all activities were
arranged through focal points and facilitated by local resource persons who were
all well known in the livestock sub-sector in the respective countries. They were
identified using IBAR’s corporate experience and contacts in the region, and
focussed on the ability of the selected agencies and individuals to penetrate the
livestock sector, government offices and private sector in the respective countries.
TABLE 1: Focal points and resource persons Country
Focal point
Resource persons
Ethiopia Kenya Sudan Tanzania Uganda
Dr. Berhanu Admassu IBAR Dr. Abdullahi O. Ismail Deputy Director, Ministry of Livestock Development and Fisheries Dr. Ahmed M. Hassan Undersecretary, Federal Ministry of Animal Resources and Fisheries Dr. Mohamed M. Bahari National Co-ordinator, Pan African Programme for the Control of Epizootics Dr. Flora Kasirye Dairy Development Manager, Dairy Development Authority
Dr. Solomon Nega Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development Dr. Mtula Otieno and Dr. Kimenye Consultants, IBAR Dr. A. Shommu Adviser, Federal Ministry of Animal Resources and Fisheries Mr. S. Mwinjaka Senior Livestock Economist, Ministry of Water and Livestock Development Dr. J. Saamanya Commissioner, Animal Production and Marketing, Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industries and Fisheries
2.2 Literature Review
A review of published and grey literature was conducted. The review
included publications on the current academic debate on policy and policy-making
processes, and the relationship between policy and poverty reduction.
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
5
For grey literature, the services of local resource persons (Table 1) proved
to be invaluable. In the case of Sudan (Arabic), Tanzania (Kiswahili) and Ethiopia
(Amharic) local resource persons were not only able to access government
documents but also managed to translate key documents into English. The
translated documents are available at IBAR and include government decrees,
statutes and periodic policy papers. The results of country level literature review
and listing of detailed literature reviewed in each country are contained in the five
ratified country reports, which are available at IBAR.
2.3 Interviews
Interviews were conducted using a Personal Interview Framework. The
number of people of people interviewed by country was nine in Ethiopia, 22 in
Kenya, 10 in Sudan, 31 in Tanzania and 16 in Uganda (a total of 88 interviews). A
full list of interviewees is provided in Annex 1. The framework was divided into two
sections:
Section 1 - targeting representatives of government, local NGO’s, policy research
institutions, private sector representatives and members of parliament. This
section was further divided into four main areas covering country specific
information and poverty mapping in the livestock sector; existing policy
arrangements; existing institutional arrangements; linkages between policy and
institutional arrangements.
Section 2 - targeted donor and international organizations representatives and
sought to establish the awareness, influence and role of these organizations in the
policy making processes as well as their opinions on existing institutional
arrangements supporting policy formulation and implementation.
The Personal Interview framework was pre-tested in Kenya and
despatched to the focal points (Table 1) for in-country use.
2.4 Initial Country Visits
Initial visits were made to each of the five countries, during which local
resource persons (Table 1) were interviewed, endorsed and subsequently
contracted and trained on the Personal Interview Framework.
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
6
A critical aspect of the initial country visits was also preliminary discussion
with senior government officials, and private sector and NGO stakeholders on the
concept of pro-poor policy and institutional change in the livestock sub-sector.
2.5 Country-level workshops
Using the focal points and resource persons, two-day workshops were
conducted in each of the five countries. The main aim of the workshops was to
begin the process of logframe formulation for country-level programmes. The
criteria for selecting the workshop participants were knowledge of the livestock
sector and the need for broad stakeholder representation (private sector,
government, NGOs). In addition, the workshops were primarily working sessions
demanding certain commitments including confirmatory positions. Therefore
participants from government required a certain level of authority. As far as
possible, gender balance was taken into account. The number of participants was
intentionally kept at around 10 people in order to maintain an overview of
participation and results. An experienced local logframe facilitator was used in
each workshop.
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
7
3. FINDINGS
The consultation proved to be a useful way to introduce the concept of
pro-poor institutional and policy change to senior government and other
stakeholders - a total of 171 people were involved in the consultation,
The IBAR consultation on livestock policies and poverty, 2003:
Who did we talk to? • Two Ministers Responsible for
Animal Resources • Four Permanent Secretaries • 17 Directors of Livestock
Departments • 77 senior government officials • 24 NGO representatives • Seven university dons
• Two Directors of national policy
research institutes • Seven representatives of farmers
unions • Four representatives of livestock traders
associations • Two international agencies – IGAD and
FAO
The overall findings of the initial consultation were not a radical departure
from what might have been predicted by experts working in this area.
However, the major achievement of the consultative process was that
IBAR tapped into a rich core of concern among African legislators and
senior policy makers for the need to bring about change. Furthermore, this
change must primarily be in policy process. Senior officials were frank
about:
the dearth of policy in key areas affecting the livestock sub-sector
their frustration with the current institutional environment
their inability to formulate policy when events are rapidly changing
the low level of awareness that appropriate policy formulation is a
complex process that must involve all stakeholders
their understanding that policy change alone will have limited impact -
there must concurrently be institutional incentives and associated
legislation to implement new policy
Detailed findings are available in the country reports. On a regional level,
the main findings from the consultation are described below.
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
8
3.1 Livestock has a low profile
Livestock is a neglected sub-sector of agriculture. Governments have
tended to emphasise crops as opposed to livestock, and there was poor
information on the role that livestock could play in securing livelihoods, and its
contribution to the overall economy.
Although documents such as national Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers
(PRSPs) define development priorities, in some countries the nature of the PRSP
was not clear. This prevented livestock agencies being fully engaged with PRSPs
and consequently, livestock issues were not adequately captured. The inclusion of
the livestock sub-sector was more an afterthought which featured in PRSPs only
after agitation by pressure groups (as was the case of Kenya and Ethiopia).
Box 1 Importance of livestock sector in Uganda7 Livestock production constitutes an important sub-sector of Uganda’s agriculture,
contributing about 9% of National Gross Domestic Product and 17% of Agricultural
Gross Domestic Product. It is an integral part of the agricultural system in many parts of
the country. Livestock contributes significantly to the welfare of the population at both
household and national levels by:
• being the source of human food such as meat, milk and eggs, which are all high
value sources of essential nutrients
• providing income to farmers through sale of animals and their products
• serving as mobile banks from which the funds can be liquidated for other uses
• using the dung as organic fertilisers for sustainable agriculture
• providing draught power for ploughing and transport
• contributing to socio-cultural values of society in the form of dowry, gifts and pride
Box 2 Contribution of the Livestock Sector in Kenya8 This contribution can be significant. In the case of Kenya studies show that 70% of
Kenya’s land lies in marginal areas which contains more than 50% of all the country’s
livestock; livestock farming contributing around 10% to GDP. In 2002, this amounted to
Kenya Shilling 54 billion (~US$ 71,000,000) - about the same figure as that allocated
to the education ministry - and translates to 30% of all agricultural production.
Livestock-related work employs a little less then half of the entire agricultural labour
force (We neglect the farmer at our own peril, Daily Nation 23rd March 2004). Similar or
even more significant figures apply for the other countries in the region.
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
9
This state of affairs reflected the lack of recognition given to the livestock
sub-sector in general and in particular, the needs of poor livestock keepers. This
was compounded by the weak capacity of livestock technicians to interpret the
needs of Planning and Finance Ministries, and ‘sell’ the idea of investing in the
livestock sub-sector.
3.2 A top-down approach to policy making
Nearly all countries had a common history of policy formulation that put
government at the centre of policy formulation and implementation. Although the
literature review revealed that descriptions of policy-making processes were few, a
general finding was that policy making was a top-down process.
Box 3 Policy Making Process in Kenya8
The executive dominates the livestock policy-making process in Kenya. After becoming
aware of a problem that can be solved through policy change, the executive appoints a task
force from among its experienced officers. The task force then collects information from the
field through consultations, and writes a paper. The paper is discussed at the relevant
departmental level and a policy is formulated. It is then presented to stakeholders in a
workshop where comments are made and incorporated into the document. After this the
draft policy document is taken to the Permanent Secretary who after consultations prepares
a cabinet paper. If cabinet passes it, the document is taken to the Attorney General’s Office
where the document is revised using the necessary legal language. From there, the
document is taken to Parliament where it is debated and if passed, becomes law. The
current system is weak on the point of stakeholder participation at all stages (problem
identification, formulation and even implementation). Most poor people do not attend
meetings and even if they do, they do not contribute ideas, as they are generally afraid of
government officers. Participation is never easy to implement and ways of empowering
communities or community-based organizations have to be found. In the thorny area of
pastoralism, there are many NGOs speaking for the poor. There is also a Pastoralists
Parliamentary Group that is currently lobbying for the pastoralist agenda. The work of
improving participation has started on the right foot, but more needs to be done.
Due to the high cost of adequate grassroots consultations, and the lack of
tools, experience and knowledge to facilitate participation, policy formulation was
very weak on the point of stakeholder participation at all stages. National capacity
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
10
to utilise a livelihoods approach to identify key policy and institutional constraints
affecting the use of livestock in poverty reduction was weak and under-developed.
The policy formulation process in all countries had a strong linear
orientation (top down with heavy government influence) although efforts were
being made to integrate a more bottom up approach as well as a broader
spectrum of stakeholders in the PRSP process and other policy formulation
processes. It should also be realised that weaknesses in policy-making process
are not necessarily livestock-sector specific, but can relate to many government
ministries (Box 4).
Box 4 National Strategies and Poverty Alleviation in the Sudan9
It is observed for Sudan that national developmental strategies are of a general and
sweeping nature; they do not specifically target the poor. It is hoped that the success in the
implementation of these strategies would result in poverty alleviation through sustainable
economic development. However, this is yet to happen. Serious efforts have been made in
Sudan to implement these strategies but poor performance and lack of adequate funds are
the main constraints towards effective implementation, thus resulting in starvation and
poverty in many parts of the country which is often complicated by civil strife and war in
southern and western Sudan, and other areas of the country. 3.3 Capacity of government livestock agencies
Stakeholders, including the private sector, accepted the relevant livestock
ministry as being the country-level entry point for policy and institutional change
activities. However, livestock ministries and departments were characterised by
various weaknesses.
3.3.1 Organisation and structure of livestock ministries and departments
In Ethiopia, Sudan and Tanzania11, federal governance arrangements
were in place although even in these three countries, there was much variation.
The system of government in Sudan is based on the constitution of 1998 and the
country is divided into 26 states. Each state has considerable autonomy and
power to legislate and raise taxes. The federal public sector is now limited to
planning, research, training, control of major epidemics and international
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
11
relationships which includes export of livestock and imports of inputs for
production. In Uganda and Kenya more centralized government was evident.
A common observation for all countries following federalisation was that
central government tended to be isolated from the affairs of the regions/states.
Consequently, policy making at central government level was not in tune with the
policies being enacted and followed in the regions. In these countries it was
evident that there was a need to define responsibilities of central government and
states/regions. In the case of Uganda and Kenya, central government appeared to
dominate.
The consultation put the underlying causes here squarely on political
creation and structuring of government ministries without due consideration of
core functions, previous lack of pro-poor focus, inadequate private sector linkages
and financial mismanagement. Weaknesses in the organisation and structure of
livestock agencies resulted in inadequate arrangements for pro-poor policy
formulation and implementation in all countries (Box 5).
Box 5 Livestock agencies and policies in Ethiopia10
For Ethiopia, the agencies responsible for the development of the sector, be it production,
marketing, veterinary services or research are not organised in such a way that they work
closely under one umbrella†. For example, the Animal and Fishery Resources, and Animal
Health Regulatory Department are under the Ministry of Agriculture but the Livestock
Marketing Authority is under the Ministry of Trade and Industry. Animal production and
animal health research are under the Ethiopian Agricultural Research Institute. Given the
huge livestock resource the country owns; Ethiopia has failed to establish a strong
institutional framework for livestock development.
Regarding policy, in 1992 a livestock development policy was drafted for Ethiopia as part
and parcel of an overall agricultural policy of the country. The principal objectives of the
draft policy document include achievement of food self-sufficiency in livestock products,
improvement of nutritional status of the population, increasing employment opportunities
through the promotion of agri-business, expanding livestock and livestock product exports,
as well as boosting rural incomes. However, although the draft policy is still an integral part
of the agricultural policy, there is a need to formulate more specific livestock development
policies as related to the major constraints. These constraints include feeds and nutrition,
animal health, livestock breed improvement and marketing.
† In July 2004 IBAR assisted the authorities in Ethiopia to restructure veterinary services. The new structure included re-centralisation of tasks such as national disease surveillance and epizootic disease control.
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
12
3.3.2 Knowing how to change
An equally critical result of the consultation was the inadequate capacities
of the respective governments, including ministries responsible for livestock
development, to effect necessary and urgent institutional change required in all
the countries in the region. The consultation indicated that underlying causes here
included simply inadequate skills, but exacerbated by lack of political good will for
reforms.
3.3.3 Incoherent and outdated policies and legislation
The preliminary consultation unearthed a plethora of numerous, outdated
and therefore irrelevant and contradictory legislation in the various livestock
ministries in the five countries. Most of these policies and laws could not therefore
be implemented, and required urgent and comprehensive review. Inadequate
policies for animal production, health and marketing were evident in all countries.
Box 6 Policies, Laws, Regulations and Standards in Uganda7
For Uganda, weak enforcement of policies, laws, regulations and standards has led to the
spread of diseases and production of sub-standard products, and has limited access to the
highly competitive international markets for beef, milk and hides and skins. Some products
are expensive compared to those from other countries where they are subsidised to
promote exports. Some of the laws are out-dated and need to be reviewed. 3.3.4 Other concerns
Policy monitoring and evaluation mechanisms were grossly inadequate. A
notable exception was the efforts being made to monitor the progress of PRSP
implementation in all the concerned countries.
The consultation also indicated that policy makers were not able to
respond to changing situations which required updating or making of new policies.
In addition, joint analysis with stakeholders of policy-making processes brings the
realization that the policy making process is indeed a complex process as
opposed to a conventional linear process, the latter being the usual understanding
of policy making on the part of government.
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
13
3.4 Information gaps
The consultation confirmed the need for relevant poverty and livestock
data in all countries. The apparent lack of up-to-date and appropriate data is a
perennial problem whose underlying causes include lack of funds and lack of
focus on poverty (with the latter becoming increasingly important). This problem
partly contributes to the lack of recognition of the contribution of the livestock
sector to the overall economy (Box 7).
Box 7 Status of Livestock Data in Uganda and Ethiopia7,10
For the last five years a comprehensive livestock census has not been carried out in
Uganda. The data used is based on estimates and projections. Similarly, field studies to
generate data on production parameters for the different types of animals and breeds are
few. This affects the planning of the intervention programmes. Similarly it is noted for
Ethiopia that data available regarding livestock are too old, based on assumptions and
unreliable. Irrespective of the agro ecological zones or ones ethnic group people are not
willing to volunteer information on the number of animals they own. Therefore; there is a
pressing need to come up with a solution for tackling this strong shortcoming for proper
planning.
Of particular importance in addressing poverty alleviation in the livestock
sub-sector is the need to identify poor livestock keepers6. In Ethiopia, interviews
revealed that substantial numbers of poor people were found in the Ethiopian
highlands, where mixed farming is practised. This was explained by increasing
population pressure on landholdings combined with rudimentary agricultural and
animal production techniques. In Kenya, many poor people were found in mixed
rain-fed farming systems. In these areas, human population growth and animal
diseases were important factors.
In Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania and Sudan pastoralists were
among the poorest livestock keepers. Poverty in pastoralist areas was associated
with loss of herds due to drought, conflict or disease. In Tanzania, loss of grazing
land was noted (especially in areas also inhabited by wildlife).
Conflict was noted as a particular constraint in north and northwest
Uganda, and in Sudan. Poor people are also to be found in the irrigated
agriculture and livestock areas, as confirmed by interviews carried out by the
consultants in Gezira state in Sudan.
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
14
4. THE WAY FORWARD
4.1 Towards a regional programme focussing on policy and institutional change in the livestock sub-sector
The preliminary consultation and literature review revealed that livestock
projects (including integrated rural development projects) had attempted to
address well-known production, marketing, service provision, research and
technology transfer constraints for many years. However, the policy and
institutional considerations underlying these constraints had not been specifically
recognized, targeted and addressed, especially as they relate to the poor.
Consequently, an emerging and significant need for the Horn of Africa is to
develop a pro-poor institutional framework that will enable policy review,
formulation, harmonization and implementation. To enable this, the capacities of
partners to utilize a livelihoods approach should be built up and then the
livelihoods approach used to identify key policy and institutional constraints
affecting the use of livestock in poverty reduction.
In future, institutional analysis should be facilitated for key partners and
institutional and policy changes will need to be supported. This initiative will
enable a better understanding of the contribution of livestock to poverty reduction
and national economies.
A key role for IBAR is to work with regional and national partners to build
the findings of the consultative process into a real programme of policy and
institutional change. The consultation showed that country logframes were similar
at goal and purpose levels. Therefore, at present the regional programme has a
goal of “increasing the contribution of livestock to poverty reduction and wealth
creation”, through the development of a conducive policy environment and
institutional framework. Three major outputs have also been identified:
Output 1 A pro-poor institutional framework for policy review, formulation,
harmonisation and implementation being put in place at national
level.
Output 2 Better understanding and acceptance of the contribution of
livestock to poverty reduction and national economies.
Output 3 The participation of poor livestock keepers and related
communities in policy making processes is enhanced
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
15
Discussions to date indicate that such a programme will address the
institutional and policy environment affecting the following key areas:
• Service provision
• Country and regional institutional and policy barriers affecting marketing of
livestock products and trade
• Access to research and technology by the poor in the livestock sector
In order to ensure full commitment to an emerging regional programme, IBAR
believes that further dialogue with regional and national partners is required.
Ultimately, the aim is to reach agreement on the way forward and elaborate
regional and country-level programmes. This process will include discussion with
those countries and RECs not visited during the initial consultation, and will lead to
funding proposals.
IBAR is now planning a series of country and regional-level events to ensure
that funding proposals are finalised with the full commitment of our partners.
These events include additional country-level visits plus a regional expert
consultation of selected individuals from PRSP Committees. It is envisaged that
further dialogue will result in:
letters of support and/or memoranda of understanding with the relevant
ministries
definition of specific country-level activities, roles and responsibilities of
different players, and levels of co-funding required at national level
an improved profile for livestock at national level plus the option for
countries to consider applying for direct budgetary support from relevant
donors
further lobbying for further consideration and inclusion of livestock issues,
identified during national level consultations, in PRSP and economic
recovery strategies of relevant countries
a finalised proposal for IBAR to submit to relevant donors
This second round of dialogue will take place during the next six months, being
August 2004 to January 2005.
4.2 An IBAR facility dedicated to policy and institutional change
In May 2004 IBAR established an ‘Institutional and Policy Support Team’
(IPST). This team developed from the CAPE Unit of IBAR, which has worked
intensively on policy and institutional change processes since 1999. The CAPE
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
16
Unit plans to both maintain the momentum and enthusiasm generated during the
consultation, and to support the formation of the IPST at regional level.
Regional co-ordination
The consultative process outlined in this concept note confirmed the need and a
significant demand for the IPST. During five national workshops, IBAR was
accepted as the regional focal point for the coordination of policy and institutional
change activities in the Horn of Africa. The institutional knowledge and capacity of
IBAR in the livestock sub-sector and its experience of working with governments
in Africa and their RECs/REOs, will enable IBAR to more proactively support
policy and institutional change at national level and to effectively partner with
IGAD, COMESA and the EAC.
Tracking and responding to global issues
The IPST will become a regional coordination focal point to link local concerns to
global action on the one hand, whilst improving the understanding of the impact of
global action on local conditions. In creating an animal resource regional focal
point there is also recognition of the following considerations: the cost
effectiveness of setting up an expert pool at regional level to facilitate the solving
of identified national problems and concerns; the presence of cross border issues
such as disease control, conflict management and livestock trade that are better
handled at a regional level; the need for pro-poor livestock related policy
harmonization within the region that must also be coordinated at the regional level.
Institutional analysis using the livelihoods approach
The IPST will put in place a pro-poor institutional framework that will enable policy
review, formulation, harmonization and implementation. To enable this, capacities
of partners to utilize a livelihoods approach will be built up and subsequently the
livelihoods approach will be used to identify key policy and institutional constraints
affecting the use of livestock in poverty reduction. Furthermore institutional
analysis will be facilitated for key partners and institutional and policy changes
required will be supported.
Engaging the PRSP process
The initiative will enable a better understanding of the contribution of livestock to
poverty reduction and national economies. The IPST will create linkages with
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
17
national poverty reduction strategies especially PRSP processes that either have
been completed or are ongoing in the countries of the region and build upon them.
Studies on the contribution of livestock to national economies and human
development will be undertaken and forums will be organized to advocate,
network and share information on the importance of livestock to national
economies and human development.
Stakeholder involvement
A major concern of the initiative will be the enhancement of the participation of
poor livestock keepers and their communities in policy-making processes. To
achieve this, in country awareness on the need for pro-poor policies and the need
for the involvement of the poor in policy making processes will be strengthened
and increased. Indirect support will be given to build the capacity of grassroots
organizations to advocate for poor livestock keepers and support also will be given
in the dissemination of relevant information.
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
18
References 1. AU/IBAR (2002). Africa Needs Animals. Policy Briefing Paper No. 1, AU/IBAR,
Nairobi. 2. DELGADO, C., ROSEGRANT, M., STEINFELD, H., EHUI, S. & COURBOIS, C.
(1999). Livestock to 2020: The Next Food Revolution. 2020 Vision for Food Agriculture and the Environment Discussion Paper 28. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington D.C.
3. ASHLEY, S., HOLDEN, S. & BAZELEY, P. (1998). Strategies for Improving
DFID’s Impact on Poverty Reduction: A Review of Best Practice in the Livestock Sector. Department for International Development, London.
4. THE WORLD BANK (2002). Building Institutions for Markets. World Development
Report 2002. World Bank, Washington DC. 5. NORTH, D.C. (1991). “Institutions”. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5 (1): 97-
112. 6. THORNTON, P. K., KRUSKA, R. L., HENNINGER, N., KRISTJANSON, P. M.,
REID, R. S., ATIENO, F., ODERO, A. N. & NDEGWA, T. (2002). Mapping Poverty and Livestock in the Developing World. International Livestock Research Institute, Nairobi.
7. AU/IBAR (2003). Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in
Africa: Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa - Ratified Uganda Country Report. AU/IBAR, Nairobi.
8. AU/IBAR (2003). Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in
Africa: Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa - Ratified Kenya Country Report. AU/IBAR, Nairobi.
9. AU/IBAR (2003). Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa - Ratified Sudan Country Report. AU/IBAR, Nairobi.
10. AU/IBAR (2003). Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in
Africa: Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa - Ratified Ethiopia Country Report. AU/IBAR, Nairobi.
11. AU/IBAR (2003). Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in
Africa: Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa - Ratified Tanzania Country Report. AU/IBAR, Nairobi.
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
19
ANNEXES ANNEX 1: PEOPLE INTERVIEWED DURING THE PRELIMINARY CONSULTATION
COUNTRY AND NAME
POSITION ORGANIZATION
Ethiopia Dr. Sileshi Zewde Dr. Solomon Nega Mr. Habtamu Teka Ms. Darlene Cutshall Dr. Alemayu Reda Hon. Kibre Jimara Dr. Kassaye Hadgu Mr. Belashaw Hurisa Mr. Tesfaye Kenya Mr. David Nalo Dr. Julius Kiptarus Mr. A. O Esmail Mr. Yacob Aklilu Dr. Julius K. Kilungo Dr. C.M. Wanjigi Dr. Langat J.K. Ms. Nyawira Hiuhu Mr. F. Kamau Mr. F. M. Marete Mr. John Ongori Mr. J. Tendwa Dr. Amos Omore Dr. Nick Hooton Dr. Michael Waithaka Dr. Joyce Njoro Dr. Leina Mpoke Mrs. Mercy Karanja Mr. John Mutunga Dr. James Njau Mr. Philip Kiriro
Director, Veterinary Services Team Local Resource Person Commissioner, Oromiya Pastoralists Development Commission (OPDC) Adviser Expert, Livestock sector Member of Parliament – Deputy Chairman, Parliamentary Pastoral Standing Committee Programme Officer, FAO Livestock Working Group Head, Livestock and Fisheries Marketing Department Artificial Insemination Centre Permanent Secretary Director of Livestock Production Deputy Director, Livestock Production/ Focal Point Advisor, Livestock Marketing Programme Program Specialist/Economist Senior Veterinary Officer Veterinary Officer Programme Officer Deputy Director, Livestock Production Deputy Director, Livestock Production Senior Animal Production Officer Deputy Director, Livestock Production Veterinary Epidemiologist Researcher Veterinary Epidemiologist CEO Programme Officer CEO Programme Coordinator Chairman, Kiambu National Chairman
MoARD MoARD Oromiya Pastoralists Development Commission USAID USAID Parliamentary Standing Committee on Pastoralism FAO MoARD MoARD MPND MoLDF MoLDF AU/IBAR USAID ALRMP ALRMP Pastoralist Thematic Group MoLDF MoLDF MoLDF ILRI ILRI ILRI CLIP/ITDG CLIP/ITDG Kenya National Farmers Union (KNFU) KNFU KNFU KNFU
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
20
MoAR MoAR MoAR MoAR
State Minister Undersecretary Resource Person/Adviser Director of Extension and Technology Transfer
Sudan Dr. Adam Ballooh Mohamed Dr. Ahmed Mustafa Hasan Dr. Shommu Dr. Ali Adam El Tahid Dr. Bakri Ahmed Abdelrahim Dr. Hasan Mohammed Nour Dr. Omer Hassan Eldirani Dr. Mohammed Razig Dr. Mahgoub Members Staff members
Director of Milk Production Director, Planning and Development Head of Marketing Section – Planning Administration National Coordinator, PACE Communication and Data Management, PACE Livestock Traders Association Meat Processing Training Institute
MoAR MoAR MoAR MoAR MoAR MoAR
Tanzania Mr. Bakari Mahiza
Principal Secretary
MoWLD
Mr. A. G. I Nyenza Director, Policy and Planning MoWLD Dr. J. N. Malewas Principal Veterinary Officer MoWLD Mr. G. Saelie Senior Economist MoWLD Mr. S. R. Mwinjaka Senior Livestock Economist MoWLD Mr. Felix Ngamlagogi Economist MoWLD Mr. David Maneno Planning Officer MoWLD Mr. I. N. L Kaduma Agricultural Economist MoWLD Mr. D. A. Rwazamle Agricultural Economist MoWLD Dr. J. O. Mollel Assistant Director, Veterinary
Public Health MoWLD
Dr. G. Mwanganga Head, Zoo Sanitary Inspection Services
MoWLD
Mr. E. Mwambembe Principal Tsetse Officer MoWLD Mr. Adela Mroso Head, Transboundary Animal
Diseases MoWLD
Dr. T. Ponela Mlelwa Assistant Director, Tanzania Veterinary Board
MoWLD
Dr. J. G. M. Mindogo Head, Veterinary Public Health MoWLD Dr. B. Kimaryo Director of Veterinary Services MoWLD Mrs A. P. Njombe Director of Animal Production MoWLD Mr.I. Isaac Assistant Director of Range
Management MoWLD
Mr. S. M. Leshongo Livestock Water Resource Development Officer
MoWLD
Dr. G. S. Madata Director of Livestock Research and Training
MoWLD
Mr. L. Ngigwana Regional Advisor on Livestock Development, Arusha
MoWLD
Dr. Mohammed M. Bahari
National Project Coordinator, PACE MoWLD
Dr. Pascal Mujuni Economist MoWLD Dr. Francis Sudi MoWLD Dr. A. E. Kimambo Senior Lecturer Sokoine University Dr. G. C. Kifaro Head of Dept. Sokoine University Prof. L. R. Kurujila Lecturer Sokoine University Dr. Robert Allport Country Program Coordinator VetAid
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
21
Dr. Beppe Di Giulio
Private veterinarian
Dr. Lieve Lynen Technical Adviser, ECF Immunisation programme
Veterinary Investigation Centre, Arusha
Mr. Edward Porokwa Programme Director Pastoralists Indigenous Non Governmental Organization’s Forum
Uganda Dr. Eli Katunguka-Rwakishaya
Dean, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine
Makerere University
Dr. John Okidi Executive Director Economic Policy Research Centre, Makerere University
Dr. Richard Isabirye Operations Manager Uganda Veterinary Association
Mr. Okoth James Robert
Programme Assistant FAO
Dr. Flora Kasirye Manager/Focal Point Dairy Development Authority Mr. Robert P. Walimbwa
Regulatory Service Manager Dairy Development Authority
Mr. Micheal Oyat Programme Coordinator Oxfam Dr. Jimmy Patrick Saamanya
Commissioner for Animal Production and Marketing/ Resource Person
MAAIF
Mrs. Tumusiime Rhoda Peace
Commissioner Planning & Development
MAAIF
Mr. Chebet Maikut President UNFF Mr. Nuha Mwesigwe Senior Policy Advisor - Institutional
Building UNFF
Mr. Augustine Mwendya
Chief Executive Secretary UNFF
Dr. Ssemambo Wagrie
Chief Executive National Animal Genetic Resource and Insemination Centre
Mr. Richard Ssewakiryanga
Team Leader Uganda Participatory Poverty Assessment Programme
Dr. C. S. Rutebarika Coordinator MAAIF Dr. William Olaho-Mukani
Director for Animal Resources MAAIF
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
22
ANNEX 2: NATIONAL-LEVEL WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS COUNTRY AND NAME POSITION ORGANIZATION Ethiopia Dr. Yoseph Shiferaw
Division Head
Animal Health Holetta Research Centre
Dr. Amsalu Demissie Senior Veterinarian Veterinary Department, MoARD
Dr. Taffese Mesfin Livestock Sector Advisor Farm Africa - Ethiopia Dr. Kassaye Hadgu Programme Officer, Livestock
Working Group FAO
Dr. Abay Bekele Project Manager CARE Borana Project Mr. Ato Hizikas Ketema Senior Livestock Expert Animal Production and
Fisheries Development Department (MoARD)
Dr. Ashenafu Worku Senior Livestock Expert Animal Production and Fisheries Development Department (MoARD)
Dr. Kelay Belihu Lecturer AAU, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine,
Dr. Berhanu Admassu Veterinary Field Officer AU/IBAR Dr. Genene Regassa Animal Health Services Team
Leader Oromiya Pastoral Commission
Dr. Metalgin Ayehu Dr. Zinash Silesh Logframe Expert Ethiopian Agricultural
Research Organization Dr. Awoke K. Mariam Senior Researcher National Animal Health
Research Centre Dr. Solomon Nega Resource Person MoARD Uganda Dr. Maria G. Nassuna Musoke
Lecturer, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine
Makerere University
Dr. Kitaka Gerald District Veterinary Officer, Nakasongola District
MAAIF
Dr. J.P. Saamanya Commissioner, Animal Production and Marketing
MAAIF
Mr. Maholo Dennis MAAIF Mr. Saabiti Robert MAAIF Mr. Francis Buwembo Monitoring and Evaluation
Specialist Land “O” Lakes
Dr. Richard Isabirye Private Veterinarian Uganda Veterinary Association
Dr. J.B. Kasirye Provincial Veterinary Officer MAAIF Mr. Apili E.C. Evelyn Senior Economist MAAIF Dr. Moses Kulabako Veterinarian Diary Board Dr. S. Kajura Provincial Veterinary Officer MAAIF Dr. F. Kasirye Manager/Local Resource Person Dairy Development Authority Dr. Rose Azuba Lecturer, Faculty of Veterinary
Medicine Makerere University
Dr. M. Kamukama Uganda Breeders Association Mr. Edward Sebina MAAIF Tanzania Dr. M. M. Bahari
Coordinator/Focal Point, PACE
MoWLD
Dr. D. S. C Sendalo Deputy Director of Research MoWLD
Institutional and Policy Support to the Livestock Sub-sector in Africa: Regional Overview of a Preliminary Consultation in the Greater Horn of Africa
_________________________________________________________________
23
Dr. A. Mrosso In charge of Transboundary
Disease Control MoWLD
Dr. J. U. K Soi Provincial Veterinary Officer MoWLD Mr. I. N. L Kaduma Agricultural Economist/ Planner MoWLD Mr. D. N Shirima Research Officer MoWLD Dr. R. C. A Kweka Assistant Director MoWLD Mr. P. S Mwasha Veterinary Officer MoWLD Mr. N. R. Mbwambo Director, Extension MoWLD Dr. J. Melewasi Principal Veterinary Officer MoWLD Dr. P. Z Njau Assistant Director MoWLD Mr. Odilo Majengo Facilitator Ministry of Cooperatives Mr. S. R Mwinjaka Resource Person/Livestock
Economist MoWLD
Sudan
Dr. Adam Ballooh Mohammed
State Minister
FMoAR
Dr. Ahmed Mustafa Hassen Undersecretary FMoAR
Prof. Musa Tibin Musa Director General Ministry of Science and Technology
Prof. Mahmood Musa University of Khartoum
Mr. Sayed Saced Abdalla Saced
Undersecretary Ministry of Social Affairs
Mr. Sayed Mustafa Hawlly
Facilitator Ministry of Finance & Economic Planning.
Dr. Adam Adem Slih Programme Officer FAO
Dr. Omer Egemi Programme Officer UNDP
Dr. Hassan Khatah Advisor FMoAR
Mr. Sayed Salih Abdel Mageed
Programme Officer OXFAM
Mr. Ali Adam Eltahir
Director of Extension and Technology transfer.
Ministry of Research and Technology
Mr. Omer Hassan Eldirani Head, Marketing Section FMoAR
Kenya Mr. A. O Esmail
Deputy Director
MLDF
Dr. Ngeywa Assistant Director, Department of Veterinary Services
MLDF
Mr. F. Ngewa Senior Livestock Production Officer MLDF Ms. Mitoko Gender Specialist MLDF Dr. J. Njoro CEO CLIP Mr. C. Opiyo Statistician MNPD Mr. Arap Sang Provincial Livestock Development
Officer MLDF
Mr. Anyona Senior Economist Poverty Eradication Commission
Mr. Mbombuna Head of Planning MLDF Dr. A. Catley Policy Advisor AU/IBAR