Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Day 2, Session 3: Building Capacity for Agricultural Policy Implementation

608

Published on

Day 2, Session 3 of the Nigeria Strategy Support Program's 2012 Research Conference

Day 2, Session 3 of the Nigeria Strategy Support Program's 2012 Research Conference

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
608
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Capacity assessment for achievingagricultural transformation agenda in Nigeria Suresh Babu, Kwabena Gyimah-Brempong, Manson Nwafor, Hyacinth Edeh IFPRI/ IITA NSSP National Conference 2012: “Informing Nigeria’s Agricultural Transformation Agenda with Policy Analysis and Research Evidence” Abuja, Nigeria – November 13-14, 2012
  • 2. Outline of the Presentation• Introduction and background• ATA context• Capacity assessment methods• Results -policy process, organizational, and individual capacity• Federal – State – LGA Linkages• Public- Private – CSO Partnerships• Value- Chain Development• Strategy for Capacity Development• Plan for ActionINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • 3. Introduction and Background• Agriculture transformation• Human capital and institutional requirement• Capacity transformation• How to increase efficiency of the human capacity?• How to increase organizational effectiveness?• How to improve the policy process?• Not just about Skills – necessary but not sufficientINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • 4. Capacity Strengthening for Agricultural TransformationINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • 5. Capacity TransformationINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • 6. ATA Context• African Agricultural Transformation - Nigeria, Kenya, Ethiopia• Setting targets to achieve for commodities• Facilitating investments• Derived from National Transformation Agenda• Mobilizing States through policy process• Increasing the role of private sector• Value Chain approachINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • 7. Mixed Methods• 4 types of questionnaire ( experts, organizations, individual, policy process)• Individual interviews• Group interviews• Groups discussions with private sectors, CSOs, actors of policy process• 3 States and 3 LGAsINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • 8. Policy Process capacity• Parliamentary Committees• NCA – Sub committees• CSOs• Private sector• FMARD• Increase accountability, inclusiveness, participation, ownership• Meaningful and effectiveINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • 9. Stages of Policy ProcessINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • 10. Organizational Performanace• PRS, ARCN, ADP• Horizontal and vertical integration• Work flow processes• Translation of ATA into work plans, budgets, targets• Monitoring and evaluation systems• Management information systems• Policy analysis and researchINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • 11. Organizational Capacity• Technical expertise vs Administrative challenges• How to connect with States and LGAs• How to work with Value-chain teams?• How to manage and coordinate the targets?• Leadership and management skills• Bringing FPRS and SPRS together to set goals and follow up.INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • 12. Individual SkillsAnalytical skills for:Strategy developmentInvestment planningMonitoring and evaluationKnowledge managementPolicy analysisINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • 13. Federal- State- LGA Linkages• How to strengthen the working relationship?• Formalized communications mechanisms and accountability• Integrating States and LGAs them in national strategies?• Reviving the organizational effectiveness• How research and extension linkages effectively be integrated at LGAs under Value chain approach?INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • 14. How to effectively engage with 774 LGAs? Federal State level State – LGA Strategies plans integrationINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • 15. Organizational and capacity interventions• Revive State Agricultural Councils• Make it responsible for monitoring the target set by national strategies• Have technical sub-committees to responsible for oversight and reporting to NCAINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • 16. Organizational and capacity interventions • Integrate LGAs, State field functionaries, and ADP extension workers (GES) • Clear allocation of responsibilities and cross monitoring.INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • 17. Public-Private- CSOs• States service delivery – effectiveness?• Do we have alternative paths?• Role of Private sector?• Role of CSOs?• GES is an example – First year of implementation but good learning for involvement of private sector and strengthening them.INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • 18. Consultations with the CSO LeadersINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • 19. PPC partnerships• Development of private sector through rural entrepreneurs.• Small scale agro- dealers and private traders• Agro-processors• Vocational training in agribusiness• Vocational training in Farm mechanization• Emphasis on rural youth for Agribusiness – ICT- practical training- business orientationINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • 20. Capacity for Value Chain Development Input , credit market Final Farm level market / production retailing Processing Output and value markets additionINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • 21. Broad set of capacity needs• Value chain teams need orientation• Integrate them horizontally with Agencies and departments• With state and LGA levels – organizational capacity• Mainstreaming and capacity translation• Analytical capacity for value chain analysisINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • 22. Elements of a Capacity Strengthening Strategy• ATA should include a capacity development strategy• Any structural transformation requires corresponding organizational and capacity transformation• Responding to Food Crisis is an example• Comprehensive capacity development programINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • 23. Mapping organizational linkages in FMARDINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • 24. Mapping of Organizations and Stakeholders in Implementation of ATAINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • 25. Conclusions• Capacity for designing and implementation of strategies is grossly lacking.• Some technical skills and capacity exists at all levels.• Capacity needs in policy process, organizational effectiveness, and human skills• Investment is needed to strengthen and integrate capacities• Plan of action for implementation in the next 3 years• Discussions welcomeINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
  • 26. Mission Progress & Forward-Looking Strategy Eric Eboh, President, APRNet@ IFPRI Research Conference, 13-14 November 2012
  • 27. Outline of Presentation on APRNet• How and why we came into being?• What we seek to achieve?• Where we are now?• What we aim to become?• Our Challenges and Opportunities• An Appeal for Collaboration, Cooperation and Support
  • 28. Important Take-off Dates• 22nd April 2009 • 24th November 2009 – APRNet was – Adoption of conceived Constitution and Election of Pioneer Exco
  • 29. Major Problematic Retrospect 22nd April 2009• Dissatisfaction with the very low interaction, collaboration and teamwork among policy researchers• Concerns that: – research is not making sufficient impact on policymaking and private enterprise – interaction, cooperation and collaboration between researchers and policymakers have been merely ad hoc, episodic and mostly unorganised
  • 30. APRNet was therefore intended to:• Change the status quo characterized by isolation, poor interaction and lack of organized communication across the stakeholder aisles in agricultural and rural development policy landscape• Foster interaction, connections, cooperation, collaboration, complementation, communication and information sharing among the Stakeholder Quartet in agricultural, food security and rural development policy – Researchers – Government MDAs in Agric., Rural Devt. Water Res. & Evnt – Agric. Sector CSOs & NGOs – Agric. Entrepreneurs & Managers
  • 31. Quartet of APRNet StakeholdersEnterprise Policymakers &Community – GovernmentFarmers, Managers, Technocrats inInvestors, Entrprnrs. MDAs APRNetPractitioner ResearchCommunity – Community -CSOs, NGOs (NARIs, Univs. T-Tanks)
  • 32. APRNet Exco. reflects Stakeholder Quartet• Research Community• Policymakers – FMARD, NPC, FMWR• Enterprise Community – Representatives of Farmer Groups/Organisations, e.g. ALFAN,• Development Practice Community – NGOs, CSOs, PSOs, e.g. NESG
  • 33. 14th JUNE 2011 - INCORPORATION
  • 34. Take-off Secretariat Support• Computer• Printer• UPS• Modem
  • 35. VISION• The VISION of APRNet is to become an authoritative and independent forum for promoting research for evidence- based agricultural and rural development policies in Nigeria.
  • 36. MISSION• The MISSION of APRNet is to facilitate the conduct of research as well as the communication and utilization of research results in the agriculture and rural development policy process in Nigeria.
  • 37. OBJECTIVES - I• Promote the exchange of existing research information (methods, data, publications)• Mobilize a pool of financial resources for independent policy research• Encourage mentoring of upcoming policy researchers
  • 38. OBJECTIVES - II• Provide peer review for researchers• Create channels for linking research with policy process• Encourage the use of research results in the policy process
  • 39. METHODOLOGY• Research and information sharing;• Training/capacity building;• Policy linkages and feedback; and• Dissemination and public enlightenment
  • 40. KEY FUNCTIONS - I• Facilitator of policy research and policy analysis – provide conducive working platforms and arrangements for the conduct of good-quality research• Policy advocate – promoting and projecting research-based evidence and policy recommendations through sensitisation, enlightenment and public appearances
  • 41. KEY FUNCTIONS - I• Network loop – connecting and linking researchers, policymakers and practitioners to increase collaboration and shared understanding, build mutual confidence and promote better interface of research, policy and practice• Agent of information and learning – transmitting and diffusing research and evidence-based information for broader public consumption
  • 42. KEY FUNCTIONS - II• Services provider – providing client-oriented expert and technical services for capacity enhancement of policy formulation, implementation, monitoring and evaluation in support of Nigeria’s agricultural development policies, institutions and programmes
  • 43. PROGRESS DASHBOARD• Membership growth – from 28 at registration to more than 80 presently 90 80 70 60 50 40 Membership 30 20 10 0 2009 2012
  • 44. PROGRESS DASHBOARD• Training and capacity building – Mendeley Web-based research writing resources 10th February 2010, Sheraton Hotel, Abuja
  • 45. PROGRESS DASHBOARD• Training and capacity building – Research Writing and Policy Communications workshop 31 August – 1 September 2010, Enugu
  • 46. PROGRESS DASHBOARD• Training and capacity building – Training workshop on methodologies and tools for agricultural policy analysis from 20-23 March 2012 at Enugu
  • 47. Policy Dialogue and Stakeholder Engagement• National Policy Symposium on “Making Research Work for End-Users”, held on 24th May 2011 at Abuja – in collaboration with NARIs and ARCN
  • 48. APRNet Launched its Secretariat• Office Accommodation and Resumption of Program Officer- 1st June 2012
  • 49. APRNet website launched www.arprnetworkng.org• On 6th May 2012
  • 50. Publications• ANNUAL REPORTS – 2010 & 2011 uploaded in the website• APRNet Information Brochure• APRNet: Mission Progress and Forward- Looking Strategy – an upcoming Flyer
  • 51. FINANCES• Membership Subscription• IFPRI grants for Secretariat support• Donations from members and stakeholders (time, intellect and materials)• Exploring new Funding and Resources – Development Partners, Research Networks, Government Partners, project-based sources• In line with good corporate governance, AUDIT REPORTS accomplished for 2010 and 2011.
  • 52. Communication and Advocacy• Newsletters
  • 53. Communication and Advocacy• Media Interviews and Press Releases (6 July 2012)
  • 54. FORWARD-LOOKING STRATEGY 2012-2016
  • 55. Concept Paper presented by the President at the 2011 Congress Meeting 23rd November 2011, Enugu
  • 56. Strategy Development ProcessStrategy Workshop – EXCO Ratification of15th March 2012 Strategy – 6th July 2012
  • 57. President SECRETARIAT [Program Coordinator, Research Coordinator, Advocacy CoordinatorProgram/Admin Officer, Mobilisation Officer, Zonal Liaison Officers (6nos.), Website Manager] Vice Presidents (2nos.) Treasurer Secretary Organogram of APRNet
  • 58. Policy Research & Policy Analysis• In support of evidence-based policymaking and programme/project planning – Budget Analysis and Reviews – State of Nigeria Agriculture Series (SONAS)
  • 59. Research Communications & Policy Dialogue/Advocacy• National Policy Dialogue Series on “Making Research Work for End-Users” – Examine, disseminate and promote best practices and innovative models for research delivery by the National Agricultural Research Institutes and by individual policy researchers• Research Monographs, Research Summaries/Abstracts, Policy Briefs, Policy Primers, Policy Papers & Policy Memos to Government MDAs and Legislative Committees.• Evidence-based Annual Reviews/Dialogue on “State of Nigeria Agriculture” – Quarterly Series - Reviews/Publications/Releases – Annual Series - Reviews/Publications/Releases
  • 60. CAPACITY BUILDING for LINKING RESEARCH, POLICYMAKING & ENTERPRISE• Training and Technical Assistance on Policy Analysis (working with ARCN)• Training Policymakers and Technocrats on finding/accessing and using Research Findings in Policymaking• Training of Researchers on Research Dissemination, Communications and Methods/Practices for Linking/Engaging in the Policy process
  • 61. Methodology/Approach• Program-based Resource mobilisation (human, material, logistics, financial)
  • 62. Methodology /Approach• Collaboration, Cooperation and Joint Programming
  • 63. Critical Challenges and Opportunities – Creating Value for Policymakers• Providing real-time research, analysis and evidence feedback and knowledge needs for topical ATA Initiatives such as – Fertilizer Vouchers & Input Subsidies – Commodity Value Chains – Agricultural Credit Schemes – Staple Crop Processing Zones – Growth Enhancement Scheme• Engaging with State Governments on topical policy questions such as – agric. budgets, fertilizer markets, agric. extension and capacity building of agric. ministry and officials
  • 64. Critical Challenges and Opportunities – Creating Value for Members - I• Creating benefits and value to members to elicit greater individual interest, teamwork and participation• Creating novel researcher-esteeming channels for beneficial interaction with policymakers, development partners, research-funding institutions
  • 65. Critical Challenges and Opportunities – Creating Value for Members- II• Providing greater access to training, professional growth, career building and research funding opportunities – e.g. building a critical mass of well-tooled policy researchers within APRNet, need help from IFPRI• Giving corporate “impersonal” voice to policy advocacy and research dissemination that will otherwise be risky with individual researcher approaches – providing researchers a “special window” to the outside world
  • 66. Looking Forward -OUR VISION IS CLEAR To Become the Foremost Research-based Change Agent in Nigeria’s Drive for Agricultural Transformation
  • 67. ChallengesBut, as a budding organisation, ourare Daunting, with Implicit Opportunitieswaiting to be tapped for us to Grow……… So, we need your Experiences, Advice and Suggestions! THANK YOU!
  • 68. Capacity building for Community driven development. Evidence from Mid Term ImpactEvaluation of the National Fadama development (Fadama3) Project Kato,E. (IFPRI), and E. Nkonya. (IFPRI) D, Phillip, B. Ahmed, A. G. Daramola, A. Gana Shetima, S., Ingawa, I. Luby, E.A. Lufadeju, M. Madukwe, and Peter Ajibaiye Abuja, Nigeria, November 13-14, 2012
  • 69. Nigeria’s economic growth – an express train whichby-passes the poor• Nigeria’s GDP grew by 6.4% in 2001- 10, a growth which was among the highest in SSA• However, 64% of the population lives below the international poverty line• Majority of the poor (70%) are in rural areas• People living below US$1/day increased from 52% in 2004 to 61% in 2010 (NBS 2010)• Does this mean that Nigeria’s fast economic growth is by-passing poor farmers?• What can be done to put the rural poor onboard Nigeria’s express train economic growth? Is Fadama III the
  • 70. Fadama3 implementation design: Coverage: 36 states Time span: 2009-2013. Possible extension. Project Budget: 250 million dollars from WB and 200 m from Nigeria Govt. Organisation of Beneficiaries: individuals had to form Fadama User groups(FUGs) based on EIG. 20 members per FUG. several FUGs encouraged to form an FCA (Fadama Community Association).
  • 71. Fadama3 implementation design Types of beneficiary groups: crop farmers, livestock producers, fisher folks, agro processors, vulnerable persons etc. Project support: capacity building, community owned infrastructure, productive asset acquisition, advisory services, input support .
  • 72. Capacity building in FADAMA3 Project Component 1. Capacity Building, Local Government, and Communications and Information Support--US$87.5m. This component included : (a)Capacity building support for community organizations; (b) Capacity building support to local governments; and (c) Communications and information support.
  • 73. FADAMA – Capacity Value Chain FED. FCAs EIGs FADAMA State FCA CDDs FADAMA Facilitators LGA Federation Welfare of FADAMA of FCAs beneficiaries
  • 74. What Capacities were Needed? Forming EIGs (FUGs) Mobilizing FCAs Federating FCAs Designing Business Plans and budgets Implementation capacity Monitoring and Evaluation Impact Assessment Redesigning of business plans and CDDs
  • 75. Focus on M&E capacity M&E is critical for program redesign. Is needed for monitoring expenditures Is useful for re-allocation of resources within activities Useful for creating database for eventual impact evaluation. However capacity of M and E is usually weak M and E is crucial for achieving project goals and objectives. Because of this situation, IFPRI focused on strengthening M and E capacity within fadama3 project.
  • 76. Capacity Building activities for LocalCollaborators. -IFPRI worked with 36 State consultants, 4 Zonal consultants, 1 National Consultant drawn mainly for Local State Universities. -IFPRI also worked with National Fadama office strengthening Monitoring and Evaluation staff skills. Trained all state consultants, State Level M and E staff, and National Fadama M and E staff (about 120 persons). Skills Imparted: -Design of Baseline studies with a counterfactual approach (selection of Controls).
  • 77. More skills Imparted -Design of follow-up surveys ( Midline survey). Data management, data quality and data integrity processes. Rigorous Analytical approaches for Impact evaluation. -Counterfactual analysis: Matching methods with single difference , double difference and Triple difference -Non Counterfactual analysis. -FIML, LIML, etc.
  • 78. Did the CDDapproach used by Fadama3Improve Rural HouseholdWelfare in Nigeria?
  • 79. Analytical Approach ( IdentificationStrategy) Counterfactual Analysis: -Quasi-Experimental Estimates: Matching combined with difference-in- difference estimator. -Matching Methods: Kernel matching and Nearest Neighbor (Propensity Score matching), -Robustness Checks: Covariate Matching and Coersened Exact Matching. -Matching quality checks: balancing tests, Common support , Trimming and CIA assumption checks
  • 80. National Impacts of Fadama3Livestock Crop Non Farm Agricultural HouseholdIncome income Income Income income44%** 32% 415%** 23%** 19%**
  • 81. Impacts by Gender Crop Livestock Non- Household Income Income Farm Income IncomeMale 19%** 49%** 152%*** 16%**Female 157%*** No impact 4284%*** 48%**
  • 82. Impacts by Wealth Status Asset Terciles Agricultural Non Farm Household Income Income Income Tercile1(Poor) 30%** 1830%*** 36%*** Tercile2 (medium) 18%* No Impact No Impact Tercile3 (Rich) 12% No Impact No Impact
  • 83. Impacts by AgeAge Crop Livestock Non FarmTerciles Income Income IncomeYouth No No Impact 245%***beneficiaries ImpactMedium age No No Impact No Impacttercile ImpactOlder 52%*** 159%*** No Impactbeneficiaries
  • 84. Impact on household income (ΔATT)Fadama III had greatest impact on hhd incomeof women and the poorest  effective targeting
  • 85. Impacts on Job creation(Proxy: Agricultural Labour Demand) Fadama increased demand for hired labor in agricultural production by 5 persons/ hhd. With With With State Village Geopolitic Fixed Fixed al Fixed effects effects effectsFadama3 5.311*** 5.421*** 3.345***Other Controls Yes Yes Yes
  • 86. Impacts on Poverty Reduction. About 8% of Fadama III beneficiaries escaped from poverty. Poverty line Poverty line Poverty line =$1.25 per day =$2 per day =$1 per dayFadama 3 8.4% *** 8.8% *** 8.3% ***
  • 87. Impacts on Income Inequality Fadama III reduced income inequality by 16% while income inequality in the communities without Fadama III project decreased by only 3%.
  • 88. Additional Impacts Elite Capture: Statistically Tested and found no Evidence of Elite capture. Political capture: We did not test for this.
  • 89. Implications of Fadama III Both Fadama II and Fadama III CDD approach has shown effective targeting of the poor Fadama III reached only 3.5% of the households in Nigeria.
  • 90. How could the remaining 96%households benefit from the favorableimpacts of Fadama III? • Commercialization of rural services offered by Fadama III ( inputs support) • Mainstream FCAs (e.g. Federation of FCAs) • Mainstream other services & approaches in rural poverty reduction programs (e.g. ATA, ADP, rural infrastructure, etc) • Greater harmonization and coordination of rural poverty programs. One of the key reasons for Fadama III success is provision of several synergistic rural services Yes, Fadama III CDD approach could put Nigeria’s poor farmers onboard the express train economic growth
  • 91. Implications For ATA ? ATA implementation is based on Value Chain Approach ATA Value chains could be considered as CDDs of FADAMA Development of Value chains will need capacity along the value chains Identifying these capacities and strengthening them will enhance the implementation of ATA A careful development of a capacity strategy and implementing them will make ATA successful
  • 92. Implications for ATA contd Attention to M &E Quality data collection on all ATA outcomes for Rigorous Assessment of ATA impacts for both short term and long term impacts M&E data collection be disaggregated by social-economic and socio-demographic characteristics e.g gender, wealth status.

×