Boosting growth, ending hunger, and social protection Samuel Benin Deputy Director, Africa Regional Office International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) (Coauthors: Tsitsi Makombe and Wondwosen Tefera) (Data collection: ReSAKSS-regional and county-SAKSS teams and networks)

1. Tracking CAADP Implementation
and Key Outcome Indicators
Boosting growth, ending hunger, and social protection
Samuel Benin
Deputy Director, Africa Regional Office
International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)
(Coauthors: Tsitsi Makombe and Wondwosen Tefera)
(Data collection: ReSAKSS-regional and county-SAKSS teams and networks)

2. Tracking what?
• CAADP I, 2003-2008: Declaration 7(II).2, AU 2003, Maputo,
Mozambique
• “… implement … CAADP … and commit … at least 10% of national
budgetary resources to agriculture … within five years.”
• CAADP II, 2009-2015: Declaration 2(XIII).5, AU 2009, Sirte, Libya
• “… continue … CAADP implementation … to achieve the … 6 percent growth
and … 10 percent budget share to agriculture … by 2015”
• Malabo Declaration, 2015-2025: Declaration 1(XXIII), AU 2014,
Malabo, Equatorial Guinea
• 7 areas: CAADP principles, enhancing investment finance, ending hunger by
2025, halving poverty by 2025, boosting intra-African agricultural trade,
enhancing resilience, and mutual accountability for results and actions

3. How tracked? (1)
• M&E Framework (Benin et al. 2011);
reported in ReSAKSS ATOR/website
• Results Framework (AU 2015); new
indicators reported by ReSAKSS
• Biennial Review (AU 2017); first report
& AATS at AU Summit in January 2018
CAADP Results Framework: 2015-25
CAADP M&E Framework, 2003-15 CAADP Biennial Review, 2015-25
42 indicators
43 indicators
38 indicators

4. How tracked? (2)
CAADP Results Framework: 2015-25
CAADP M&E Framework, 2003-15 CAADP Biennial Review, 2015-25
42 indicators
43 indicators
38 indicators
Area Indicators
A: Enabling environment 9
B: Implementation process 11
C: Spending 4
D: Productivity and growth 7
E: Trade 5
F: Outcomes 6
Level Indicators
1: Agriculture’s contribution to
growth and development
14
2: Agricultural transformation and
inclusive growth
12
3: Systemic capacity to deliver
results
12
Area Indicators
1: CAADP principles and process 3
2: Enhancing investment finance 6
3: Ending hunger 17
4: Halving poverty 8
5: Boosting intra-African ag. trade 3
6: Enhancing resilience 3
7: Mutual accountability 3
• ReSAKSS revised database to include
new indicators from RF and BR
• No data yet for several new ones
• ReSAKSS 2018 data: 58 indicators
 42 quantitative and 16 qualitative

5. Bar charts
for
selected
regions,
countries,
and year
for all
indicators
Maps for
selected
regions,
countries,
indicator,
and year
Trends for selected regions,
countries, and indicator
resakss.org
Where are the ReSAKSS data
and progress reports?
ATOR: trends for Africa, regions, &
various groups (incl. CAADP
implementation level reached)
• Baseline: 1995-2003
• Subperiod I: 2003-2008
• Subperiod II: 2008-2017

6. Results for selected indicators
• CAADP processes ad mechanisms
• Preparation of NAIPs and mutual accountability mechanisms
• Boosting agricultural output and productivity
• Agricultural GDP and labor productivity
• Ending hunger
• Children under-five years’ nutrition (stunting and wasting)
• Enhancing resilience and strengthening social protection
• Systems, ODA food aid, and government budgets and expenditures
Data: compiled by ReSAKSS from multiple sources (see ATOR for details)
Presentation: CAADP processes by region; outcomes at baseline (1995-
2003) and change afterwards by level of CAADP implementation reached

7. 1st-generation NAIPs and mutual
accountability processes, by August 2018
% of total
countries
Africa
(55)
Region
CA
(9)
EA
(14)
NA
(7)
SA
(10)
WA
(15)
Compact 76 100 71 14 70 100
NAIP 1.0 62 67 64 14 30 100
Business
meeting
53 44 50 14 30 93
GAFSP 31 11 36 0 20 60
JSR assessed 55 33 57 0 70 80
GAFSP = Global Agricultural and Food Security Program
JSR = joint sector review
• Moderate to high
rates of achievement
on various milestones:
 Most advanced:
Western, Central, and
Eastern Africa
 Least advanced:
Northern Africa
• Least progress in
external funding via
GAFSP

8. 2nd-generation NAIPs (by August 2018) and
CAADP biennial review (BR) overall results
Number of
countries
Africa
(55)
Region
CA
(9)
EA
(14)
NA
(7)
SA
(10)
WA
(15)
NAIP2.0
Launched 16 1 5 0 1 9
SAP 21 0 5 0 1 15
MGM 15 0 1 0 0 14
NAIP 2.0 19 1 4 0 1 13
BR
Report (%) 85 100 71 57 100 93
On track (%) 42 11 60 50 60 36
On track (wt%) 36 11 43 29 60 33
SAP = status and assessment profile report
MGM = Malabo goals and milestones report
• NAIP 2.0 process gaining
momentum:
 Western Africa in lead,
followed by Eastern Africa
• High BR reporting (> # of
countries with compact)—
100% for Eastern and
Southern Africa
 Most on track: Southern
and Eastern Africa
 Least on track: Central
and Western Africa

9. Strengthening systemic capacity,
by August 2018, existence and quality of: (1)
% of total
countries
Africa
(55)
Region
CA
(9)
EA
(14)
NA
(7)
SA
(10)
WA
(15)
Inclusive peer review
and MA mechanisms
47 22 36 0 90 67
Evidence-based
policies and human
resources
60 22 79 29 90 60
Multisectoral
coordination body
53 11 64 14 60 80
Country SAKSS 25 11 29 0 20 47
• Moderate to
high rates of
achievement:
 Most advanced:
are Southern and
Western Africa
 Least advanced:
Northern Africa
• Least progress in
country SAKSS
across regions

10. Strengthening systemic capacity,
by August 2018, existence and quality of: (2)
• Rationale: safeguard
success of CAADP
implementation
• Most-advanced
CAADP countries
have largest
systemic capacities
• Hypothesis: expect
largest improvement
in outcomes in most-
advanced CAADP
countries!
23 33 22 89 75
0
20
40
60
80
100
CL0 CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4
Inclusive peer review & MA
mechanisms
46 67
33
78 75
0
20
40
60
80
100
CL0 CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4
Evidence-based policies and
human resources
31 42 0
89 100
0
20
40
60
80
100
CL0 CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4
Multisectoral coordination
body
0 8 11 33
75
0
20
40
60
80
100
CL0 CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4
Country SAKSS
Percentofcountriesingroup
CL0 = pre-compact; CL1 = compact; CL2 = CL1 + NAIP;
CL3 = CL2 + 1 external funding; CL4 = CL2 + >1 external funding;

11. Boosting agricultural output and productivity
7.2 6.7 6.8 2.4 1.8
12.2
0
5
10
15
All CL0 CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4
CAADP Level
agGDP (constant 2010 US$,
billion)
1995-2003
4.2
1.1 1.1 1.0
5.3 6.5
4.3
3.4 2.8 4.7
4.7 4.6
-1
3
7
11
All CL0 CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4
CAADP Level
agGDP growth rate (%)
2003-2008 2008-2017
1.0
3.4
1.1 0.6 0.5 0.8
0
1
2
3
4
All CL0 CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4
CAADP Level
agGDP/worker (Constant
2010 US$, 1000)
1995-2003
1.6 1.0
-0.8 -0.8
2.1 3.4
2.5 3.9 4.4
2.6
1.6
2.5
-1
3
7
11
All CL0 CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4
CAADP Level
agGDP/worker growth rate
(%)
2003-2008 2008-2017
• Largest growth in
output and labor
productivity in the
most-advanced
CAADP countries:
 CL4 beat 6%
agGDP growth
target in 2003-08
 Growth slower in
2008-2017
• Growth in others
(CL0-2) catching up
or higher in 2008-
2017

12. Ending hunger (children under-5’s nutrition)
• At baseline (1995-
2003): stunting >
wasting; but same
across groups
• Largest declining
rates in 2008-17
than in 2003-08
• Mixed progress
across groups 
multisectoral
nature (CL1 alarm)
 Large progress in
CL4 (2008-17) 
role for CAADP
42
28
43 44 45 46
0
10
20
30
40
50
All CL0 CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4
CAADP level
Stunting incidence (%)
1995-2003
-1.0
0.3
-1.8
-0.6 -1.0 -1.4
-1.6
-2.2
-1.1
-0.8
-1.1
-1.9
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
Stunting growth rate (%)
2003-2008 2008-2017
10 8 11 13 9 11
0
10
20
30
40
50
All CL0 CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4
CAADP level
Wasting incidence (%)
1995-2003
0.2
-0.1 0.4 -1.5
-0.8
0.9
-1.7
0.0
0.3
-2.1
-1.0
-3.1
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
Wasting growth rate (%)
2003-2008 2008-2017

13. Enhancing resilience
• Food reserves,
EWS, etc.: highest
performance in the
most-advanced
CAADP countries
• Budget: same
across groups
• Household/farm
level: data from
CAADP BR has
several gaps:
 E.g., CL0 has
Egypt (got 100%)
and 1 or 2 others
75 69 67
44
100 92
0
20
40
60
80
100
All CL0 CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4
Existence of food reserves,
EWS, etc. (% of countries)
44
82
21 29 19 33
0
20
40
60
80
100
All CL0 CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4
% of farm households
resistant to climate &
weather shocks, etc.
24
56
4
19 12 11
0
20
40
60
80
100
All CL0 CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4
% of land under sustainable
management practices
Source: ReSAKSS 2018
Source: CAADP BR (AUC 2018)
Source: CAADP BR (AUC 2018)
Source: CAADP BR (AUC 2018)
63 63 67 69 67 61
0
20
40
60
80
100
All CL0 CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4
Existence of budget for
resilience building (% of
countries)

14. Strengthening social protection (1)
Source: CAADP BR (AUC 2018)
58
82
38 22
77
51
0
20
40
60
80
100
All CL0 CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4
Budget to cover vulnerable
social groups (% of total
resources required)
Main indicator in CAADP
BR has several data gaps:
 Only 26 countries reported
 Most reliable average
estimate is for all at 58%
• At baseline (2003),
emergency food aid
at 4% of ODA
 Very high (15%)
in CL1 Angola,
Chad, Sudan, and
Zimbabwe
• Declining (esp. in
CL0 and CL4)
 Reflects progress
in ag. growth and
hunger
• Increasing in CL2
 further research
4 5 15
1 3 4
0
5
10
15
20
All CL0 CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4
CAADP level
Emergency food aid (% of total
ODA)
2003
-1.5 -46.1
5.1 20.8
-9.5 -10.1
-5.5
-9.6
-10.3
4.0
10.2
-3.4-50
-25
0
25
Emergency food aid growth
rate (%)
2003-2008 2008-2016
Source: ReSAKSS based on OECD-CRS (2018)

15. Strengthening social protection (2)
Government expenditure by sector in SSA, % of total
• Expenditure on
social sectors
increased rapidly:
 Especially on
social protection,
which averaged
12.5% from 2008
• Relative to share
on agriculture
 Low (3%) and
declining (-1%) in
2008-2017
Source: SPEED database (IFPRI 2015)
0.0
0.4
0.8
1.2
1995 2000 2005 2010
Agriculture
Education
Health
Transport and Communication
Socilal Protection

16. Strengthening social protection (3)
Government expenditure (share and per capita)
• Is overall growing
trend substitute
for declining
external food aid?
• Most striking is
declining trend in
CL4
 Is this due to
huge progress in
ag. growth and
hunger?
Further research
needed
5 4 8 1 2 8
0
2
4
6
8
10
All CL0 CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4
CAADP level
Gov't exp on social protection
(% of total exp)1995-
2003
1.7
9.6
3.3
35.5
-13.1
17.7
18.9
20.0
12.1
-6.9-20
0
20
40
Exp. share growth rate (%)
2003-2008 2008-2012
13 24 12 1 1 5
0
10
20
30
All CL0 CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4
CAADP level
Gov't exp on social protection
per capita (const. 2005 US$)
1995-2003
11.8 16.6
36.4 32.1
-9.7
16.7 12.4
35.0 19.0
-1.4-20
0
20
40
Exp./capita growth rate (%)
2003-2008 2008-2012
Source: SPEED database (IFPRI 2015)

17. Strengthening social protection (4)
Government expenditure by type for selected countries
• Such analysis can help understand policies on the topic and their targeting
• Categories least reported on: housing, R&D, social exclusion, and survivors
• Old age important everywhere, except Burundi where unemployment dominates
Source: IMF 2018
16 19
3035
81
29
18
27
51
13
41
74 50
52 49
18 24
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Angola,
2014-17
(16%)
Burundi,
2013
(1%)
Kenya,
2013
(3%)
Namibia,
2011-15
(7%)
Seychelles,
2014-16
(15%)
S. Africa,
2012-16
(10%)
Uganda,
2014-16
(4%)
Fam. & child.
Housing
Old age
R&D
Sick. & disable.
Soc. exclusion
Survivors
Unemploy
Other

18. Conclusions and implications
• Trends in key CADP outcome indicators, presented here or in the
2017-18 ATOR, show Africa has made good progress since 2003.
• These achievements are laudable, due largely to investment in
systemic capacities, despite spending on government agriculture
core functions being squeezed by those on social sectors, including
rapidly-rising social protection spending in the last decade.
• Solid progress in outcomes, plus declining food aid and government
social protection spending, in the most-advanced CAADP countries
(CL4) suggest that implementing CAADP continues to pay off.
• Addressing data gaps and quality issues in the CAADP BR process
should be a priority and lead to conduct of analysis that strengthens
evidence-based planning and implementation of the Malabo agenda.

19. Thank you
Check out
Chapter 12 of
the 2017-2018
ATOR for
more.