1 Findings of Capacity Needs Assessment (CNA) Studies (Rwanda, Tanzania, Mozambique and Ghana) Godfrey Bahiigwa- IFPRI/ReSAKSSSamson Jemaneh- IFPRI-ESAROPresented at Agriculture Policy Exchange and Learning EventDakar, SenegalMay 13-16, 2013
2 Objectives of the studies Research questions Methodology ContentsObjectives of the studiesResearch questionsMethodologyPolicy process and linkagesCapacity Assessment resultsOptions for Country SAKSSCapacity Issues to be addressedNext steps
3 2. Objectives of CNA Studies The main objective of the study is to identify areas for capacity building to improve the quality and utility of agricultural policy analysis, strategy formulation, investment planning, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation at country level.The findings of the study will be used in designing and establishing new country SAKSS or in strengthening existing ones.
4 3. Research QuestionsThe CNA studies attempted to answer the following questionsWho are the key players in the policy process and what are the linkages among the players?What individual and organizational capacities are needed for strategic agricultural policy analysis and investment planning, M&E and Knowledge management in the short, medium and long terms to satisfy those needs?How can these capacities be harnessed through their effective use in the organizations involved in the CAADP process particularly for strategic policy analysis, program implementation, review and dialogue?
5 Identification of major actors and their linkages, and networks 4. MethodologyIdentification of key players (Government ministries, think-tanks, civil society organizations and non-state actors) was done in an inception workshop held in the countries facilitated by ReSAKSS nodes.Formal and informal interviews were conducted at three levels (i)individual level (ii) organizational level (iii) Policy process levelDesk reviews of existing literature on food and agricultural policies and strategies in the countries.Identification of major actors and their linkages, and networks
6 6.1. Capacity Assessment Results Individual level capacitiesRwandaLack of skill diversification in different domainsSmall amount of time devoted to food and agricultural policy researchLimited use of analytical softwares even if computers are available (particularly Stata, Eviews and GIS tools)Lack of capacity to analyze data using econometric tools (in both MINAGRI and its implementing agencies (RAB and NAEB)TanzaniaLack of high level (PhD) food policy researchers in the ASLMs Policy and Planning DivisionsInsufficient female professional in the food policy researchMost PhD researchers are in the age 51-60MozambiqueOnly 2 PhD level researchers form total of 45 food policy researchers in DE and DSPA DirectoratesNearly 60% of employees are young scientists below 40 who lack experience and institutional memoryVery small share of time spend on M&E (5% in the case of Ministry of Planning and development)GhanaAround 25 persons exist at national level capable of informed agricultural policy discussionAbout 10 persons within MOFA have skills in agricultural policy analysis. In other related ministries , a maximum of 1 person exists in the same qualification.
7 6.2. Capacity Assessment Results (ctd) Organization level capacitiesRwandaLimited budget reported as cross-cutting problem affecting organ. Capacityfast internet speed reported in most of the institutionsLack of capacity for data collection and analysis reported in many of the institutionsLack of coordination capacities among the different institutions involved in different stages of policy formulationPolicy analysis affected by limited staff skill in different institutionsTanzaniaLow salary scale in Ministries and universities make staff to focus on external projects/consultancy jobs.Sectoral institutions affected by decreasing budget allocations since 2010/11 (below CAADP targets), ASLMs spend 14% share of expenditure on agricultural research.GVT provides limited support for food policy research. Most of the budget comes from bilateral and multi-lateral donors.Lack of computers, limited telephone connectivity, low internet speed (for ASLMs and Universities)Use of outdated software for data analysisMozambiqueAllocation of funds by government does not match with agricultural calendar.Lack of effective coordination among sectors on Knowledge management and sharing systemLack of inter-ministerial interaction on plans and implementation processPoor incentive packages in organizations (E.g DAF) resulting in high staff turn-overDE is well endowed with equipment and soft wares such as SPSS, STATA, Excel, ARCGIS. However the directorate of Studies and Policy Analysis in MPD declared need for more computers and analytical soft wares.GhanaMOFA has elaborate M&E system that has been incorporated to the METASIP. However , the system is ineffective due to highly limited M&E training to the wider MOFA staff.M&E information even if it iexists , it does not significantly influence strategic planning and modification of policies and programs (due to staff attrition as a result of inadequate funding for the M&E)
8 6.3 Capacity Assessment Results (ctd) Policy Level Capacities (Policy dialogue, communication etc.)RwandaRound table discussion, newsletter, presentation to officials used as major communication strategy with policy makersPolicy reports and policy briefs identified as very important outletsInstitutions get regular requests from government to provide agri. Information, institutions see themselves as valuable sources of informationLack of coordination capacities among the different institutions involved in different stages of policy formulationTanzaniaOccasional request on food and agriculture information from governmentThink-tanks were identified as better positioned in policy advocacy as compared to other organizationsPersonal contact, small round table discussions, media, sending out newsletter and policy briefs, and conduction of presentations are the tools used to communicate research results to government.MozambiqueDE engages in public consultations on food and agricultural policy issues whereas the DNEAP does not engage in these kinds of activitiesPolicy Reports and Policy Briefs were reported as the most widely used communication tools by DE and MPDGhanaIn Ghana the sector is benefiting from annual Joint Sector Review which receive reports of activities in the different components of the sector.Several commissioned studies and consultancy works also provide information for the sector.The Human resources of MOFA have been reported to be overstretched to delivery on work plans.METASIP committee have virtually no evidence base information to work with.
9 7.1 Options for Country SAKSS RwandaThe Node is a single person (coordinator) without any significant research and program assistanceThe process of establishing the SAKSS network of partners and launching specific activities, particularly strategic and monitoring analysis has been slow.The architecture of the SAKSS, particularly the role of different actors within MINAGRI has not been clear.How to go about setting up a governance structure that enables key stakeholders to inform the direction of the work program on strategic analysis , M&E and knowledge system, remains key question to be answered.Even if the Country SAKSS is well integrated in the organization chart of the Ministry, since the Country SAKSS does not utilize the financial resources of MINAGRI, it is somewhat seen as other internal project funded by Development Partners.
10 7.2. Options for Country SAKSS 2. TanzaniaIn Tanzania, M&E in agriculture sector is done by the ASDP M&E Thematic Working Group (M&E TWG) since 2006 for the ASDP.Most of its members are from ASLMs officials and some from NBS and Development partners (DPs). However, the study noted that outcome of its activities and functions have some challenges:The composition of the existing group is very limited in terms of representatives. The report indicates that this has negative impact on its performance(on time data availability, effectiveness of ASDP and its outcome on stakeholders all can be attributed to limited network of the group)The CNA study recommends that since the functions of the existing group address the agriculture sector and all ASLMs are well involved, it is plausible to use the structure of the existing group with minor modifications to have SAKSS node with extensive network and more potential members.
11 7.3 Options identified for country SAKSS 3. MozambiqueFor Mozambique, the CNA study recommends that MozSAKSS be established within DE and have close collaboration with other relevant MINAG institutions such as DNSA, IIAM and DNTF.The study also recommends that a steering committee should be created comprised of the various institutions to implement the agreed annual work plan or any eventual immediate demands approved by MINAG for DE to make sure all planned activities are prioritized by respective departments.The steering committee would also provide for wide representation in the agricultural sector in determining the capacity needs and the agricultural policy research agenda that MozSAKSS should address.Given the lack of skills in certain areas, the team should receive technical backstopping from ReSAKSS-SA and other partners.The organizational set up should include building of capacity at provincial level with counterpart institutions as most activities are implemented at provincial level.
12 7.4. Options for Country SAKSS 4. GhanaThe study recommends that the node be located in a research and an academic environment that has reasonably good human and material resources to provide leadership and direction and to coordinate SAKSS activities.At the moment, SAKSS is located in MOFAThe proposal is that the SAKSS node be located at the Institute of Statistical, Social and Economic Research (ISSER) of the University of Ghana instead of within MOFA but with a deputy coordinator from the PPMED of MOFA. This is not to imply that SAKSS will be “owned” by the University. It will be a MOFA (agriculture sector) project but located in an institution that can easily harness expertise within the University, other universities and research institutions within and outside the country as well as the Ministries, NGOs etc. to undertake the required activitiesThe location of SAKSS outside MOFA will strengthen the collective “ownership” of METASIP by all agriculture sector partners. In addition it can relate more effectively with the SAKSS of other African countries and the ReSAKSS nodes which are located in research institutions across the continent.The study validation workshop in the last 2 weeks did not uphold this recommendation and as such the Ghana SAKSS will be in MOFA
13 8. Capacity Issues to be addressed The case studies identified areas for improving the quality and utility of agricultural policy analysis and investment planning, M&E, and knowledge managementThe studies suggest a lot of improvement is still needed for different institutions and stakeholders to fully and actively contribute in the agricultural policy formulation process.The areas for improvement include;Strengthening evidence based analysis to improve priority settingIncentive packages for technical staff to improve performanceAgricultural M&E systems to track sector performanceStaff training related to data processing, analysis, reportingPhysical facilities (computers, car, office space, softwares)Adequate financing particularly for policy research and advocacy.IT and data analysis skillsKnowledge management and information sharing mechanismsBuilding capacity of regional and district personnel in agricultural policy discussions and dialogue.Building capacity of farmer based organizations and associations in good governance.
14 9. Next Steps Complete the studies in the 15 countries Validation of studies by stakeholdersDevelop SAKSS work planSet up SAKSS management teamSign MOU between ReSAKSS and GovernmentHire SAKSS country manager and teamLaunch SAKSS nodeTrain SAKSS/CAADP teamSet up/strengthen M&E System