"Comprehensive Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Report for the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP)," presented by Babatunde Omilola at the 6th CAADP Partnership Platform. Birchwood Hotel, Johannesburg, South Africa. April 21-23, 2010.

1. Comprehensive Monitoring and Evaluation
(M&E) Report for the Comprehensive Africa
Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP)
Babatunde Omilola
6th CAADP Partnership Platform
April 21-23, 2010
Birchwood Hotel, Johannesburg, South Africa

2. Purpose of the report
• Primary output of the • Report will evaluate
CAADP M&E Framework trends in agricultural
(which was validated in development,
March 2010) performance and
• Published annually for spending in Africa
main audience (AUC and • Will also track key poverty
NPCA) by July and hunger indicators
• Main components (MDG1)
available for CAADP PPs • Therefore tracks country/
regional/ continental
progress toward CAADP
goals and objectives

3. Outline of each M&E report
• Introduction
• Enabling environment
• CAADP implementation process
• Tracking commitments and spending
• Agricultural growth performance
• Agricultural trade performance
• Poverty, hunger and food and nutrition security
• Investment-growth-poverty linkages
• Conclusions

4. 2010 Comprehensive M&E Report for
CAADP
• Compilation of primary and secondary data
– Primary from ReSAKSS nodes; Secondary from non-
ReSAKSS sources such as WDI, FAO, UN…
• Compilation of analysis across three regional
ReSAKSS nodes
– Focuses more on continental trends, but also
disaggregates information by region and in some
cases, countries
• Synthesis of relevant literature
– Includes current and relevant analysis undertaken by
organizations such as OECD, World Bank and IFPRI

5. Introduction: Enabling environment
• Agriculture is crucial for development in Africa
– Mostly rural, at least 70% of workforce engaged in the
sector
• Yet over last 20 years, support to the sector has
declined
– Partly the outcome of SAPs, declining share in aid and
government budgets, etc.
• Recent developments have recognized agriculture’s
role in development
– WDR 2008
– Donor pledges made at G8 summit in L’Aquila
– Maputo Declaration  CAADP

6. CAADP Implementation Process
• Formulated in 2003 under auspices of AUC and
NEPAD
• Since initiation, dozens of countries have begun
the implementation process and 18 have held
Roundtables (RT) and signed country compacts
• 2 countries – Rwanda and Togo – have held post-
compact investment and review meetings
• Primary focus is now shifting from the RTs and
compacts to the post-compact implementation
process

7. CAADP Implementation Process: Status (updated April 20, 2010)
Cameroon, Zimbabwe,
DRC, Egypt, Mauritius
Libya, Tanzania
2. REC and 3. Country Steering
1. Government 4. Cabinet Memo and
Government launch and Technical
appoints Focal Point(s) Endorsement
process Committee
8. Elaboration of 5. Stocktaking,
7. Roundtable Signing 6. Drafting of Country
detailed investment Growth, Invest.
of Compact CAADP Compact
plans Analysis
Ethiopia, Benin, Burundi, Cape Verde, Comoros, Cote
Gambia, Malawi, Mali, Niger, Burkina Faso, Guinea-Bissau, d’Ivoire, Djibouti,
Ghana, Guinea, Kenya, Zambia
Liberia, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Madagascar,
Swaziland, Uganda Seychelles, Sudan
10. Agreement on 11. Operational design
9. Post compact
financing plan, and other technical
review meeting and 12. Execution of new
financing instruments, studies and
validation of investment programs
and annual review assessment for
investment plans
mechanism program execution
Rwanda,
Togo
14. Second annual 13. First annual review
review meeting meeting

8. Public agricultural spending and commitments:
Agriculture spending as a share of total spending
At least 10 percent 5 percent to less than 10 Less than 5 percent
percent
Burkina Faso
Ethiopia1
Chad2
Gambia2
Angola2
Benin
• CAADP Target = 10% of
Ghana3
Guinea
Mauritania3
Namibia2
Botswana2
Burundi2
total expenditures
Malawi2
Mali
Sao Tome and Principe2
Sudan2
Cameroon3
Central African Republic2
allocated to agriculture
Niger Togo Comoros4 sector
Senegal2 Tunisia3 Congo, Dem. Republic2
Zimbabwe2 Congo, Republic3
Cote d'Ivoire2
• Africa as a whole has
Djibouti2
Egypt3
not met 10% target
Guinea Bissau2 – Since 1980, the annual
Kenya1
Lesotho2
average has been
Liberia1 between 4 and 6%
Madagascar2
Mauritius
Morocco3
• 8 countries have met
Mozambique2
Nigeria
the target
Rwanda3
Seychelles
• 9 are spending between
Sierra Leone3
Swaziland2
5 and 10%
Tanzania
Uganda
• While 28 are spending
Zambia2
Sources: Based on ReSAKSS data collected from various national government sources and
less than 5
IMF 2009.
Notes: 1. Estimate for 2009; 2. 2007; 3. 2006; 4. 2005; 5. 2004

9. Public agricultural spending and commitments:
Agriculture spending as a share of agriculture GDP
5 percent to less • An alternative measure
At least 10 percent
Botswana1
than 10 percent
Burkina Faso
Less than 5 percent
Benin2
that weighs the size of the
Zambia Cameroon
sector in the overall
Egypt
Zimbabwe Ethiopia Cote d’Ivoire1 economy when comparing
Mali Ghana across countries
Niger Kenya
• Compared to Asia, Africa
Malawi
agricultural spending
Nigeria1
Rwanda
under this measure is low
Togo1 – Asia spends 8-10% on
Uganda
average compared to 5-7%
in Africa
Sources: Based on ReSAKSS data collected from various national government
sources and IMF 2009.
Notes: 1. 2007; 2. 2008.
• Only 3 countries exceed
the 10% mark

10. …But the share of countries meeting the
10% target recently been increasing
70 • In 2003, only 5.9% of
Share of reporting countries (%)
60
50 African countries
40
30
were spending at
20 least 10% of their
10
0 total budget
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
allocations on
More than 10% 5%-10% Less than 5%
agriculture
Sources: Based on ReSAKSS data collected from various national government
sources and IMF 2009.
• This figure increased
to 15.2% in 2007 and
to 35.7% in 2008

11. Disaggregation of agriculture
expenditures: West Africa (WA)
• What is the source of Breakdown of agricultural expenditure by source of funding in selected
West African countries (average 2003-2007)
most agricultural 100
Share of agircultural expenditures (%)
90
funding? 80
70
– In WA, the Sahelian 60
countries (which largely 50
40
spend on investments 30
rather than recurrent), 20
10
funding primarily comes 0
from ODA/external sources
– Whereas the coastal
countries’ agricultural From internal sources From external sources
spending mostly comes
from internal sources Source : ReSAKSS 2010 data collection from various national government
sources.

12. Disaggregation of agriculture
expenditures: West Africa (WA)
• How are the agricultural 100
expenditures spent? 90 Research and
Development
– Subsectors: most countries
Share of total agriculture expenditure (%)
80
Other
in WA spend on the crop 70
production subsector 60 Non
rather than livestock or 50
Disaggregated
fisheries and forestry 40
Irrigation
– Function: varies by country 30 Inputs and
(see chart) 20
Equipment
• Only in Burkina Faso and 10
Extension
Mali is irrigation heavily 0 Admistration
favored Ghana Benin Togo Burkina Mali
• R&D spending is limited in Faso
all countries Source: ReSAKSS data collection from various national
government sources.

13. Resource efficiency
• Resource efficiency can be
140
measured by the investment gap
Ratio of actual to budgeted agriculture expenditures
ratio = ratio of actual spending to 120
budgeted spending 100
• Best practice is a maximum of 3%
discrepancy between budgeted 80
and actual (=97% investment gap
(%)
60
ratio)
40
• From 2000 to 2004/5, Nigeria and
Malawi (figure) had poor budget 20
execution, within a range of 48 to 0
85%. 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
– This means that up to 52% of
budgeted resources for agriculture Nigeria Malawi PEFA target
were not being spent.
– In contrast, in recent years, both
countries have overspent the Sources: Mogues et al. 2008; Njiwa et al. 2008; Govereh et al.
2009.
budgeted amount. Note: The PEFA target is considered the threshold below which
the investment gap ratio indicates underutilization of funds. It is
set at 97 percent.

14. Donor spending on African agriculture
• In Africa as a whole, donor 3,000
Emergency food aid
spending for agriculture as a Development food aid/food security 2,040
share of total donor spending 2,500
Agriculture and rural development 2,592
saw a consistent decline, from
Constant 2007 US$ (millions)
1,704 2,2861,596
an average of 15% between 2,000 2,103
2,034
1,439
1980 and 1995 to 12% between 1,906
1,9991,433
1,837
2000 and 2002. 1,500 1,688 764
• In 2006, the ratio had declined
to about 4%. 1,000
378
• Total ODA for agriculture in Sub- 242 894
750
Saharan Africa has hovered at 500 618
692 625
549
668 688
US$1 billion a year since the
1990s. 0
• In comparison, the share of ODA 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
spent on aid for emergencies
has doubled and, in actual 60,000 12
dollars, has more than Share of ODA allocated to agriculture (%)
50,000 10
quadrupled during the same
Share of ODA to agriculture (%)
period.
Constant 2007 US$ (millions)
40,000 8
• Although investment in 30,000 6
agriculture has increased in Total ODA
20,000 4
recent years, a large and commitments
increasing share is still devoted 10,000 ODA commitments to agriculture 2
to short-term food aid 0 0
interventions
Chart Source: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) 2009.

15. Agricultural performance
• Although agricultural performance varies within and across African countries, recent trends
indicate an increase in agricultural GDP growth at the continental and regional levels
• SSA’s agriculture GDP growth rate increased from an annual average of 3.0% in the 1990s and
2000s to 5.3% in 2008
• A similar trend can be observed at the regional level
– All regions saw an increase in average agricultural growth rates from approximately 3.0% in the 1990s to 2008,
although Southern Africa has seen the most dramatic increase with a current agriculture GDP growth rate of 7.1%
– West Africa and East and Central Africa’s recent agriculture growth is also positive at 4.3 and 4.8%, respectively.
10
Average annual growth rates (%)
8
6
4
2
0
-2
-4
1999
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
GDP Agriculture GDP CAADP target for agriculture GDP
Source: World Bank 2009.
Note: 2009 GDP estimates are from International Monetary Fund (IMF) 2009.

16. Agriculture GDP growth and CAADP
30
Agriculture GDP annual growth rate (%)
25
20
15
10
5
0
-5
-10
-15
-20
2008 CAADP Target
Source: ReSAKSS calculations based on World Bank 2009.
• The CAADP agriculture GDP growth rate target is 6%
• In 2008, ten countries met the CAADP’s 6% target:
– Angola, Ethiopia, Mali, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Rwanda, Senegal, Tanzania, and Uganda.
• Nineteen other countries attained moderate agricultural GDP growth rates of
between 3 and 6 percent.
• In the same year, eight countries experienced negative growth in their agriculture
sectors.

17. Agricultural trade performance
35
30
• Sub-Saharan Africa has
25
been a net food
20 importer since the
US$ billion
15 1980s.
10
• In 2007, the value of
5
the region’s trade
0
deficit started to
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
Imports Exports
increase as a result of
Source: FAOSTAT 2010.
higher food prices.

18. Agricultural trade performance by regions:
A snapshot of COMESA and ECOWAS
COMESA Region ECOWAS Region
• Both the imports and exports of agricultural raw
materials have increased over time in nominal • Agricultural exports account for a large
value for the COMESA region share of total exports in WA countries with
low or no mineral resources (e.g., ~80-90%
• But, the region has been exporting and importing
in Benin, Burkina Faso, Gambia…)
relatively less agricultural products compared to
non-agricultural products • Only 1/3 of countries are able to cover
their agriculture imports by their
• Exports of cash crops (tobacco, tea, coffee,
agriculture exports
vegetables) have increased in value since 2000
• This ratio has been declining due to higher
• Imports of wheat, maize and palm oil also
prices of food imports
increased since 2000
• The coverage rate (ag imports to ag exports) 400
Ratio of agricultural imports to
350
varies for the region from year to year
agricultural exports (%)
300
Share of ag. Share of ag. 250
Agricultural Agricultural Net exports Exports in Imports in 200
Year
exports (US$) imports (US$) (US$) total exports total 150
(%) imports (%) 100
2000 945,426,069 1,007,971,576 -62,545,507 6.77 3.37 50
2001 892,311,614 912,441,887 -20,130,273 6.88 3.18 0
Gambia
Mali
Ecowas
Nigeria
Côte d'Ivoire
Togo
Benin
Ghana
Niger
Cape Verde
Guinea
Burkina Faso
Senegal
2002 1,085,743,413 897,860,082 187,883,331 3.13 1.97
2003 1,424,042,407 951,961,782 472,080,625 3.08 2.17
2004 1,745,443,839 1,067,728,616 677,715,222 3.06 2.15
2005 1,521,101,002 1,401,474,548 119,626,453 2.02 2.06
2006 1,528,029,010 1,675,221,277 -147,192,267 1.54 2.16
2007 2,056,217,333 1,933,331,954 122,885,379 1.96 2.01 2003-2007 2008 Target
2008 2,451,807,257 2,804,033,755 -352,226,499 1.58 1.85 Source: ReSAKSS data collected from various national government sources.
Source: COMESA 2010.

19. Poverty, Hunger and Food and
Nutrition Security: MDG1
• The continent as a whole is not on track to achieving
the first MDG of halving hunger and poverty by 2015
• ReSAKSS estimates use a simple “business as usual”
linear projections based on previous growth rates to
estimate current hunger and poverty rates
• These are compared to yearly benchmark rates that are
required to meet MDG1 (halving the 1990 rates by
2015) to determine if a region/country is “on track” or
not
• According to these estimations, current child
underweight prevalence stands at 29.3% for SSA and
current poverty is at 38.6%, both of which are higher
than their benchmark rates

20. Which countries are “on track”?
•There are 2 components to MDG1: hunger and poverty
•Great progress has been made in many countries that are meeting one or the other,
but only one – Ghana – is currently meeting both
Burkina Faso
Cameroon Algeria
C. African Rep. Angola
Egypt Benin
Ethiopia Botswana
Guinea Burundi
Ghana Gambia
Kenya
Lesotho Guinea Bissau
Mali Mauritania
Senegal Namibia
Swaziland Sao Tome &
Tanzania Principe
Countries on track towards Countries on track Countries on track towards
halving poverty by 2015 towards achieving halving hunger by 2015
MDG1

21. Poverty, Hunger and Food and Nutrition Security:
The Global Hunger Index (GHI)
• The index is an average of
– The percentage of the population that is
undernourished
– The percentage of children that are underweight
– The under-5 mortality rate
• Captures intra-household food security
• Countries with GHIs higher than 20 are
considered to have “alarming” rates of hunger

22. Poverty, Hunger and Food and Nutrition Security:
The Global Hunger Index (GHI)
50
Global Hunger Index
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
South Africa
Comoros
Ethiopia
Gambia
Sudan
Cameroon
Togo
Morocco
Lesotho
Botswana
Mauritania
Swaziland
Senegal
Kenya
Zambia
Algeria
Mauritius
Angola
Rwanda
Niger
Nigeria
Zimbabwe
Tanzania
Egypt
Ghana
Uganda
Mali
Djibouti
Liberia
Mozambique
Madagascar
Gabon
Namibia
Eritrea
Cote d'Ivoire
Benin
Malawi
Central Af. Rep.
Sierra Leone
Tunisia
Chad
Congo, Dem. Rep.
Congo, Rep.
Guinea
Guinea Bissau
Burundi
Burkina Faso
1990 2009 Alarming
Source: IFPRI 2010.
• The majority of countries in Africa have seen a decline in their GHIs from
1990 to 2009 (improvement in hunger)
– In the COMESA region, 2/3 of countries saw a decline
– In SADC, nearly every country except for DRC and Zimbabwe saw a decline or
leveling off of GHIs
– In ECOWAS, 10 out of 14 countries saw a decline
• Despite these reductions, all regions have multiple countries which remain
above the alarming level

23. Investment-Growth-Poverty Linkages
• Does growth, spurred by investment, lead to
poverty reduction?
– This is the theory behind much of the CAADP
agenda (that higher agriculture expenditures will
lead to agriculture growth and poverty reduction)
– In practice, higher overall economic growth has
not always translated into poverty/hunger
reduction

24. Investment-Growth-Poverty Linkages
• Of the 13 countries on track for the poverty MDG1 target, 6 are
also meeting the 10% spending target, and 4 are meeting the 6%
agricultural GDP growth target
•3 of which are meeting both CAADP targets – Ethiopia, Mali and Senegal
•Of the 10 countries on track for the hunger MDG1 target, 2 are
meeting the 6% agriculture GDP growth target
Countries meeting 6%
Countries meeting agriculture growth Countries meeting Countries meeting
10% spending target target poverty MDG1 target hunger MDG1 target
Burkina Faso Angola Burkina Faso Algeria
Ethiopia Ethiopia Cameroon Angola
Ghana Mali C. African Rep. Benin
Guinea Mozambique Egypt Botswana
Malawi Namibia Ethiopia Burundi
Mali Niger Ghana Gambia
Niger Rwanda Guinea Guinea Bissau
Senegal Senegal Kenya Mauritania
Tanzania Lesotho Namibia
Uganda Mali Sao Tome and Principe
Senegal
Swaziland
Tanzania

25. Investment-Growth-Poverty Linkages
• Badiane and Ulimwengu propose 2 measures for
tracking this: poverty overhang and growth
deficit
– They compare the rate of poverty reduction to that of
growth
– When a country’s growth rate is less than that
required for maintaining the pace of poverty
reduction the country is said to be experiencing a
growth deficit.
– Where the rate of poverty reduction is slower than
that of GDP growth the country is said to be
experiencing a poverty overhang.

26. Investment-Growth-Poverty Linkages in West Africa
This column indicates the increase, in This column indicates the extent, in
percentage points, which has to occur percentage, by which the poverty rate
in GDP growth if the country’s pace of should have been lowered given the
poverty reduction in the 1990-2005 country’s growth rate in the 1990-
period is to be maintained 2005 period
Growth (%) required for achieving MDG1 or
6% Agriculture Growth
GDP Agric GDP Agric Funding
Growth Deficit Poverty Overhang Growth Growth Growth Most Propoor sub-sectors
Benin Less than 2.5 5.1 13.1 7.9 Food crops
3.2 7.1 9.1 Livestock
Burkina Faso Greater than 20 – 30
Cape Verde 2.5 – 5 5.4 2.6 11.2 Food crops
Cote d'Ivoire Less than 2.5
Gambia Less than 2.5 20.3 14.4 27 Cereals
5 4.2 19.1 Staple, fishery and
Ghana Less than 2.5 forestry
Guinea Less than 2.5
Guinea Bissau Less than 2.5
40.5 26 27 Food crops (rice, cassava
Liberia Greater than 30 – 40 and others)
7.2 12.5 8.2 Food crops and livestock
Mali Greater than 10 – 20
Niger Greater than 50 4 11.5 11.1 livestock
11 12 24 Cereals
Nigeria Greater than 40 – 50
5.7 6.8 7.6 Food crops
Senegal Greater than 10 – 20
7.2 5.5 10 Cassava, rice
Sierra Leone Greater than 30 – 40
4.3 9.6 35.4 Food crops
Togo Greater than 20 – 30
Sources: Badiane and Ulimwengu, forthcoming and IFPRI CAADP analyses (see ReSAKSS WP series).

27. Investment-Growth-Poverty Linkages
in West Africa
• Among the West African countries experiencing a poverty
overhang, the worst case is found in Niger where the poverty
rate should have been lower than half of its current rate given
the country’s growth rate between 1990 and 2005.
• The countries with the lowest overhang are Senegal and Mali
where it has a value of greater than 10 to 20.
• The success of CAADP implementation is particularly critical
for countries experiencing poverty overhang in the sense that
it can bring about the necessary increase in agriculture
funding and agriculture GDP needed to appreciably improve
the pace of poverty reduction.
• Analysis carried out by IFPRI, ReSAKSS WA and their
collaborators indicates that agriculture growth rates ranging
from 2.6% (in Cape Verde) to 26% (in Liberia) would be
needed to achieve MDG1 by 2015 in 12 countries.

28. Conclusions
• Increased attention to agriculture’s role is evident
in donor and government pledges
• Yet this has been slow to translate into increased
spending (8 countries meeting 10% target)
• Agricultural policies and programs must now take
into consideration the complex combinations of
factors such as more volatile food markets and
prices, market distortions, and climate change
• The next phase of CAADP (post-compact) will
emphasize these factors as investment plans are
laid out in more detail

29. More information…
• Is available in the detailed draft of the
Comprehensive M&E Report for CAADP
• A shorter, summarized version is available in the
ReSAKSS 2009 Annual Trends and Outlook Report
– online at
http://www.resakss.org/index.php?pdf=42774
• All published CAADP analyses, briefs, brochures
and signed compacts are available at
www.resakss.org

30. Thank you!