Africa r&d for accra july 2013
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Like this? Share it with your network

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads


Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds



Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

    No notes for slide


  • 1. Agricultural Research, Extension and Education in Africa Stocktaking and Future Challenges Accra (July, 2013)
  • 2. 2003 2  NARIs – working largely independently, funding eroding  T&V prevalent – 100K extensionists around Africa  Ag universities struggling  SROs – ASARECA and CORAF small but growing, SACCAR gone  SPAAR becoming FARA – FARA not yet Pillar lead agency  CGIAR strong but very independent actor  Fragmented external support - projects  Idea of CAADP emerging – but not yet clear what to do
  • 3. 2008 3  NARIs stagnation continues  T&V in decline – nothing to replace it at scale, many interesting boutique approaches  Ag universities struggling - Tsunami of students, continued decline  Fragmented support from partners - projects  CGIAR strong but very independent actor  CAADP process starting in earnest  FAAP developed  country level processes launched  FARA and SROs emerging as strong players
  • 4. FAAP advocates:  Use of agreed design principles for research, extension, and education – reform where needed  Scale up of investment in research, extension and education – particularly at regional/continental level  Alignment with CGIAR and take better advantage of its resources  Harmonization of external support  Human Capital approach – this leads to profitability, capital accumulation at farm level, and transfer and adoption (so not T&V)  integration of University and Research Effort  African institutions to lead this
  • 5. FAAP’s recommendations  Extension - human capital approach – build capacities of farmers to be good critical thinkers, profitable, able to access information and funding and build capital stock, better able to use purchased inputs  Decentralization  Farmer control  Pluralism  Research – alignment with priorities, closer alignment with universities, strategic use of regional resources, coordination of effort  Education – scale-up, reform, responsiveness to sectoral priorities, regional approaches, stronger links to research programs - less fragmentation of support  Build on CAADP IPs
  • 6. Selected Accomplishments of FARA and SRO MDTFs Scale-up of Programs Coherence - Comprehensive Strategic Plans and MTOPs Core Budget – roughly one third to one half of total Administrative Capacity – established Leadership role – established (but only partially realized)
  • 7. 2013 – Foundations for Transformation in Place  Conceptual directions widely agreed  Principles and Paradigms agreed (FAAP – and Pillar 4 Strategy, Science Agenda)  Roles at each level agreed  Research priority studies for all sub-regions  Supra-national Institutions in place to lead, support reform, coordinate investment  On Research – SROs and FARA scaled up and administratively capable  On Extension – AFAAS solidly launched  On Education – TEAM Africa solidly launched  Relationship w/ CGIAR strengthening (Dublin Process)  CAADP processes and IPs at Country and Regional Levels  Harmonization of support at Continental and Regional levels
  • 8. Scale of programs at supra- national levels  Regional Ag Research Institutions  ASARECA (US$93 Million)  CORAF (US$120 Million)  CCARDESA (US$50 Million)  FARA (US$108 Million)  Regional Centers of Excellence in Ag Research  West Africa (US$500 Million)  East Africa (US$120 Million)  Southern Africa (US$90 Million)  AFAAS (US$17 Million)  Tertiary Agricultural Education  TEAM Africa (US$8 Million)  Regional Projects (US$150 Million)  MDTF Investment Fund (? Million)
  • 9. External support at supra- national levels: DPs launched – WB followed 2006 – from a group of DPs - $ 25 M / year from WB - $ 0 M / year 2013 – from a group of DPs - $ 70 M / year from WB - $ 180 M / year
  • 10. While Foundations for Progress are in place ….. ….. Transformative progress not yet achieved
  • 11. Africa - Labor & Land Productivity Low 10 100 1,000 10,000 100 1,000 10,000 100,000 Agricultural output per worker (log scale) Agriculturaloutputperhectareofland(logscale) Australia & New Zealand N America W Europe Japan & S Korea Former USSR W Asia & N Africa Latin America Sub-Saharan Africa ChinaS Asia South Africa E Europe SE Asia 1000 ha/worker 100 ha/worker 10 ha/worker 1 ha/worker0.1 ha/worker Source: Fuglie, 2011
  • 12. African Agriculture – Sources of Growth 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Growthindex(base:1971-73=1) Output Inputs TFP
  • 13. Growth has been driven by more land, labor, (and small farms) ….. .…. not by productivity Little change (or decline) in Human Capital Purchased variable inputs Non-land Physical capital
  • 14. Human capital on farms very low 14 Source: World Bank SHIP files, 2012
  • 15. Capital per farm - low and falling
  • 16. FAAP approaches can help  Reformed extension – raise human capital at farm level (which will lead to capital accumulation as well) – also (but not only) technology transfer – greater farmer control, pluralism in delivery ….. And scale up  Reformed research – regional systems (not isolated national systems) – specialization – stronger links to university systems – demand driven elements at national level and below – pluralism in delivery – strategic investment - more effective partnerships w/ CGIAR ….. And scale up  Reformed ag education and training – raise human capital at professional levels - stronger links to research system – regional approaches – responsiveness of curriculum for relevance …… And scale up
  • 17. Important elements of the FAAP agenda not yet done  Scale up, capacity building, and reform at national level  Regional approaches  Greater focus of FARA and SROs on core roles (including supporting evolution at national level)  Further reduction in fragmentation of effort
  • 18. Challenges at national level  Despite wide-spread commitment to FAAP principles and CAADP processes – reform limited so far and programs less effective than they could be  Extension and Education not sufficiently present in IPs  Growth in budgets inadequate - resource constraints matter  Making this happen is difficult
  • 19. Challenges for Continental and Regional Structures  Rapid growth of SROs and FARA  Continued proliferation of projects (diverting attention from core functions)  Developing capacity to bring FAAP to bear at national level  Dependence on (weak) national capacity to carry out regional priorities  Developing sustained and focused investments on strategic priorities (Centers of excellence) – not just spreading it around  Demonstrating and recording and communicating impact  But Africa now in a good position to go forward
  • 20. Implementing FAAP Leadership and technical work from FARA, SROs, AFAAS, TEAM Africa Development of materials to lay out implications of FAAP for program, institutional design FARA / SROs / AFAAS / TEAM Africa to support application of FAAP principles at country level Scale-up of strategic programs at regional and continental level
  • 21. Work streams to support Transformation Agenda  Ensure funding of FARA, SROs, AFAAS, and TEAM Africa where they focus on agreed roles and the Transformation Agenda  Support strategic regional investments in research and education  Scale-up and harmonization of support for REE at county level (on FAAP-consistent programs that are part of CAADP IPs) w/ integration of research and university programs  Support CAADP – CGIAR alignment and collaboration on technology platform  Focus on impact – but do not neglect long-term capacity building  Embed REE in CAADP