Presentation on theme: "CIDA Agriculture Programming in Africa Food Security Policy Group (FSPG) Kioko Munyao Food Security and Policy Development (World Vision Canada)"— Presentation transcript:
CIDA Agriculture Programming in Africa Food Security Policy Group (FSPG) Kioko Munyao Food Security and Policy Development (World Vision Canada)
Food Security Policy Group The FSPG is a working group of the Canadian Council for International Cooperation (CCIC) focusing on two main areas in relation to food security: –Development Aid policy –Trade policy
Objective To provide civil society feedback on the relevance to poverty reduction of CIDA’s programming in agriculture in selected CIDA ‘countries of concentration’ with particular emphasis on the interests of the rural poor, including small and medium scale agriculturalists. (Ethiopia, Ghana and Mozambique)
Purpose Identify lessons from the three country experiences in order to inform dialogue in Canada on increasing effectiveness of CIDA interventions in Agriculture for poverty reduction Provide a better understanding of the relevance of CIDA supported programs for the agricultural development priorities of small producers to improve their livelihoods In SWAp type programs, identify ways in which CIDA can strategically influence program design and impact Strengthen the support for agriculture in CIDA’s priorities Advocate for CIDA to meet its commitments in funding for agricultural development according to CIDA’s 2003 strategy paper.
Context of CIDA Agricultural Focus Prior to 1990 there was recognition of the role of Agriculture in poverty reduction and as an engine for development in developing countries (20% of ODA) But this changed in the 1990s with overall donor investment in Agriculture for Africa dropping by 43% CIDA’s 2003 policy statement set out to reverse this by bringing back agriculture as a focus in Canada’s ODA CIDA set a target for increasing agriculture expenditure to $ 500 million/yr by 2007 ( ~ 10% of ODA) from a low of 84 million in 2001
FSPG and CIDA The FSPG contribution to CIDA’s 2003 strategy focused on: –Poverty reduction through improved rural livelihoods –Importance of rural infrastructure and services prioritizing domestic food security needs –Sustainable local production for domestic markets –Gender aspects of agriculture and food security –Involvement of CIDA in diverse partnerships to improve capacities of the poor to organize themselves –Focus of CIDA’s support to governments should Promote appropriate agricultural trade and investment Support policies consistent with the principles of the right to food, local food security and sustainable agriculture
Current Scenario In 2003/2004 and 2004/2005, CIDA met its commitment in Agricultural investment as per its 2003 policy paper But in 2005/2006 this fell short of the target of $ 300 million by 22% and future projections point to a leveling off at this current rate which is far below the $ 500 million target by 2007 set in the 2003 policy Concurrently, CIDA Agricultural programming in Africa increased notably in Ethiopia, Ghana and Mozambique as a result of the 2003 strategy
Research Process View of various stakeholders including farmers association and civil society organizations on their governments agricultural programming and priorities Agriculture’s position and role in countries PRSP Assessment of CIDA supported agricultural programs and how they fit in with the recipient governments agricultural priorities Civil societies recommendations on how CIDA’s agricultural programming can be made more effective Lesson sharing from the research with CIDA
Country Context Ethiopia together with Ghana and Mozambique are the main recipients of Canadian agricultural development assistance in Africa. They accounted for a large % of the agricultural development assistance to Africa between 2002 and 2005 All the three countries have enjoyed relatively stable economic growth post 2002 averaging at about 6% annually They all have in place a PRSP in which agricultural development is seen as a major contributor to rural development
Focus of CIDA’s Country Strategy This varies and is guided by CIDA country development programming frameworks (CDPF) for the three countries: – in Ghana, where the previous CIDA programming framework ( /5) focusing on two program areas: Basic Human needs Governance is currently being updated, a discussion document which provides the rationale and strategy for CIDA contributions to food security in the northern regions of Ghana acts as the framework.
CIDA’s Country Strategy Continued…. In Ethiopia the CIDA country framework in operation focuses on: –Agriculture/Food security –Governance and capacity building and aims at supporting the Ethiopian governments development commitment as elaborated in the second generation PRSP focusing on: –Food security and agriculture development led industrialization –Regional decentralization –Public and private sector capacity building –Justice system and civil service reforms
Continued In Mozambique the current CDPF focuses on –Education –Agriculture and Rural Development –HIV/AIDS –Governance It is designed to complement the country's PRSP with its theme of reducing absolute poverty.
PRSP’s and Coherence to Poverty Reduction Mozambique's PRSP is the most comprehensive in linking the aspirations of rural poor to the national level economic development strategy and also has wide support from both donors and local civil society. Ghana; the PRSP has not taken into consideration the effects of the SAPs that the country underwent in the 1980’s that reduced investment in public service spending and negatively affected provision of basic services to the poor. Ethiopia; a well designed second generation PRSP and other national food security and agricultural development initiatives have recently been jeopardized by the unfolding political situation in the country and the subsequent response of the donor community
National Agricultural Policy Initiatives Ethiopia has a number of these including: –Agriculture Development led industrialization strategy ( ADLI) –National Agricultural Input and Output Marketing strategy –Sustainable Development and poverty reduction Program (SDPRP) –Plan for sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication (PASDEP) –New Coalition for Food security
Why the Multiplicity of Agricultural Initiatives? Some of the national agricultural development initiatives are as a result of a genuine government commitment to addressing the recurrent problem of food insecurity and rural poverty and are well thought out and were very consultative in their formulation Others are a response to donor initiated processes to mitigate the effects of drought especially the 2001/2002 Horn of Africa drought that affected Ethiopia and the 2000/2 floods in Mozambique Likewise some were more geared towards positioning for donor investment and were in some cases a response to government expectations of the changing trend in donor funding
Civil Society views and preliminary findings from the research - Development of small scale irrigation -Access to credit -Improvement in agricultural marketing and value adding processes -Development of strong community based partnership for agricultural development -Improvement in agricultural extension and research functions The five most important areas identified as priorities by various stakeholders in agriculture were:
Coherence Between Stakeholder Priorities, Government Focus and CIDA’s Framework Of the three countries, Mozambique again has a higher level of coherence between the above three factors compared to Ghana and Ethiopia, though it is not possible to conclusively determine whether this has ultimately led to better results. Ethiopia with its multiplicity of national agricultural initiatives has had mixed success in this areas due to both the complexity that this creates as well as the tension between civil society and government. It is not possible to conclusively determine whether this has been as a result of poor design, or as a result of the perceived high handedness of the government to civil society.
Preliminary Lessons from the Research Supporting an agricultural led economic growth oriented system does not automatically address food security needs of the hungry poor. Though improvement in macro economic performance has a positive effect in poverty reduction, it does not automatically address the needs of the poorest and may even create great wealth disparities. There’s a need to factor in provision of social services to the poorest. The effects of previous donor led initiatives especially SAP’s need to be addressed concurrently with new initiatives e.g. the liberalization of strategic national food reserves and downsizing of agricultural extension services There is need for coherence between the IPS, CDPF and the PRSP’s if the aim is to be responsive and align to recipient country needs