Presentation on theme: "Budget Efficiency : Case of National Agricultural Advisory Services in Uganda Drake Rukundo (UGANDA) July 2013."— Presentation transcript:
Budget Efficiency : Case of National Agricultural Advisory Services in Uganda Drake Rukundo (UGANDA) July 2013
Key Aspects of the Presentation 1. A Synopsis of the NAADS Program in Uganda 2. Explanation of the Dialogue Questions 3. Content, Structure and Presentation of Evidences in the Case Study 4. Suggestions for Group Work in discussions around the key Case questions
About NAADS A decentralized, farmer owned and private sector serviced extension system contributing to the realization of the agricultural sector development objectives of increasing food security and lifting incomes of Ugandan farmers through the provision of farmer-centered advisory services NAADS is an alternative to the Training and Visit (T&V) system. With NAADS, Uganda became one of the first African Countries to implement this common framework for agricultural extension.
1. Uganda is implementing a Decentralization form of Governance under which structures NAADS is implemented 2.The idea of NAADS was part of an attempt to expedite support service extension, however it later became imperative to supply inputs alongside advisory services 3.The private sector services providers and a new management structure were established as vehicles of implementation About NAADS
NAADS Core Objectives 1.Creation of options for financing and delivery of appropriate advisory and technical services for different farmer types; 2.Gradually reducing the share of public financing of farm advisory costs such that public financing of farm advisory does not exceed 50%; 3.After the first phase of the NAADS, to realize a shift from public to private delivery of advisory services; 4.To empower subsistence farmers with access private extension services and market information; and 5.To develop the professional capacity of the private sector to sustainably meet the demand for agricultural services at the grassroots.
How implementation was carried out An Implementation Strategy with Guidelines that involved five (5) aspects 1.NAADS Secretariat at National Level 2.District NAADS Coordinators at District Level 3.Sub County NAADS Coordinators at Sub-district levels 4.Each farmers within a village constituted a Farmer Forum aided by Group Promoters trained under Farmer Institutional Development Support Project ( Farmer Forums supported with Technical Expertise through Demonstration sites, linked to markets and encouraged to organize themselves into Savings and Credit entities ) 5.Private Sector Firms Contracted both at National and District Level to Support Technical on-farm extension services
Government sponsored advisory service extension Orientation and Sensitization of stakeholders at the National level on Implementation Guidelines Back-up Technical Services to selected participating districts and sub-counties. Modalities to implement Farmer Institutional Development (FID) support at grassroots Coordination with National Research Organization (NARO), Private Service providers and linkages to modern farming technologies to communities
What has been achieved under Phase 1 The Program has bridged the gap that existed between the state level service providers and farmers...brought services close to the people Farmer Institutional Development conducted for farmers organized by Farmer Group Promoters and Farmer Forums Increase in exposure to over 60,000 farming households on new farming technologies and other 45,000 constantly provided with market information in over 40 districts of Uganda Other benefits of cross-cutting nature related to improvements in social governance, business ecumenism, gender and development, HIV/AIDS and environmental and natural resource conservation
What was Achieved? NAADS Activity2009/102010/112011/122012/13 No. of functional sub county Farmer Forums set-up1,0601,100 No. of Agricultural processing facilities equipped9003,000 No. of Agri-business firms supported2183100 No. of farmer groups linked to market information18,01034,10045,000 No. farmer groups trained in quality standards of products 1570190 No, of farmers who received extension services26,00051,00060,000 No. of farmers who trained in commodity value chain 18,50050,00060,000 No. of farmers linked to technological demonstration sites 13,13450,00060,000 Vote Cost of Services in US $ $58,6bn$117.2bn$127.1bn$149.5bn Source: Ministry of Finance Planning and Economic Development National Budget Framework Paper 2010/11-2014/15?
Average Annual NAADS SPENDING under Phase 1 Budget item Allocation (UGX bn) Utilized (UGX bn)% Advisory and Information Service to farmers2,498.722,268.6056.7 Technology Development and Linkage with Markets209.6179.564.5 Quality Assurance- Technical auditing of service providers148.92122.493.1 Private Sector Insitutional Development199.112.430.1 Program management and Monitoring1,943.161,425.0235.6 Total4,999.513,998.10100 Source: Consultant Calculation of phase one annual spending from NAADS Annual Reports 2006-2010?
What have been the Challenges? 1.Advisory or Supply of farmer inputs or both?- the challenge of providing advisory services to farmers with limited capacity to implement/utilize the advice 2.Financial Accountability around supply and management of inputs and implements to farmer groups 3.Challenges of M&E and support supervision of both the program itself and its activities 4.The Structure of implementation that created an overlap within decentralized systems already in place
Presenting The Dialogue Questions 1. The idea of provision of extension services how best can it be tackled in your countries ? 2. How can countries assess (and with what evidence) whether extension has been efficiently managed? 3. Looking at this case study, would you, or would you not, agree that NAADS implementation has been cost effective? For instance what is a reasonable level of overheads in such a case? 4. How it possible to measure if an initiative like NAADS delivers the desired impact and results in sustained improvements in growth and rural livelihoods?