CAADP Implementation and Achievement of Outcomes

1. CAADP Implementation and
Achievement of Outcomes
Sam Benin, IFPRI

2. Introduction and Objectives
• Last 2 days: learned about significant growth and
poverty reduction in Africa in recent decades
• Question: how has CAADP contributed to these
achievements?
• Objective of presentation: use analysis of means of
change in key indicators to assess CAADP effects:
• Indicators: government agriculture expenditure, agricultural
value added, GDP per capita, and poverty gap
• Assumption: CAADP involves intensive processes and
actions that take time to implement  the longer a
country engages, the greater the likelihood of success

3. Methods and Data (1)
• CAADP? if and when a country signed a compact
Description Countries
Signed compact by
end of 2009 (C-09)
Benin, Burundi, Cape Verde, Ethiopia, Gambia, Ghana,
Liberia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Togo (13)
Signed compact
after 2009 or by
end of 2011 (C-11)
Burkina Faso, Central African Republic, Congo, Dem. Rep.,
Côte d'Ivoire, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Malawi,
Mauritania, Mozambique, Senegal, Seychelles, Swaziland,
Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia (16)
Signed compact
after 2011 or by
end of 2014 (C-14)
Angola, Cameroon, Chad, Congo, Rep., Djibouti, Equatorial
Guinea, Gabon, Lesotho, Madagascar, Sao Tome and
Principe, Sudan, Zimbabwe (12)
Signed compact
after 2014 or never
(no-C)
Algeria, Botswana, Comoros, Egypt, Eritrea, Libya, Mauritius,
Morocco, Namibia, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan,
Tunisia (13)

4. Methods and Data (2)
• Aggregate statistics in the indicators across the
four CAADP groups over three sub-periods:
• 1995-2003 as baseline
• Change in 2003-2008, initial CAADP timeline
• Change in 2008-2014, renewal of CAADP until Malabo
• Hypothesis: e.g. agricultural value added growth
rate from baseline in C-09 > C-11 > C-14 > no-C
• Data from various international and national
sources (see ReSAKSS website for details)

5. Agriculture Exp (% of total
exp), annual average
3.4 3.7 5.3 4.0 3.0
0
3
6
All C-09 C-11 C-14 no-C
Compact
Level (%)
1995-2003
-1.5
2.8
1.1
-1.7
-3.4
-10
-5
0
5
10
Growth Rate (%)
2003-2008 2008-2014
• Before CAADP,
share was 3.4%
in Africa; went
down over time
• Since CAADP,
share increased
most in C-09,
then C-11
• Declined in
others, especially
those without
compacts

6. 2.50 2.86 1.62 1.76
4.12
0
5
All C-09 C-11 C-14 no-C
Compact
Constant 2005 US$, mil
1995-2003
3.4 3.0
4.2
2.7 2.4
0
5
10
Growth Rate (%)
2003-2008 2008-2014
Agriculture Value Added,
annual average • Overall high
growth across
board
• Consistent with
change in exp
share, agGDP
increased most in
C-09 and C-11;
but higher
growth in C-11
• High growth in
others, especially
in 2008-2014

7. 979
392 456 701
2415
0
1000
2000
3000
All C-09 C-11 C-14 no-C
Compact
Constant 2005 US$
1995-2003
2.2
4.7
2.6 1.8 2.2
-3
0
3
6
9
12
Growth Rate (%)
2003-2008 2008-2014
GDP per Capita, annual
average • GDP per capita
highest in
countries with no
compact (e.g. N.
Africa, Botswana,
S. Africa)
• As with earlier
results, fastest
growth in C-09
and C-11
• Moderate growth
in others, mostly
in 2003-2008

8. 15.5 17.6 18.5 25.0 4.1
0
10
20
30
All C-09 C-11 C-14 no-C
Compact
Level (%)
1995-2003
-2.0 -2.5 -2.7 -1.4
-0.8
-6
-3
0
3
Growth Rate (%)
2003-2008 2008-2014
Poverty Gap (% in total
population), annual average
• The poverty gap
also shrunk
fastest in C-09
and C-11
• Moderate rate of
reduction in the
others
• In countries with
no compacts, the
gap first widened
and then shrunk

9. 2nd-Level Analysis
• Summary: countries that have engaged in the
CAADP process longer (i.e. those that signed their
compacts by the end of 2011):
• have progressed fastest toward the Maputo 10% target;
• are realizing faster agGDP and overall income growth;
• are deepening their poverty reduction the most.
• Question: what if such countries were predisposed
prior to CAADP, e.g. Rwanda, Malawi, Ghana who
may have already been in a CAADP-like process?
 redo analysis after dropping vey low and very high
achievers at baseline from the data (i.e. use countries with
initial similar performance—30 countries)

10. -1.3
3.3
0.6
-1.7
-10
-5
0
5
10 Ag Exp. Share of Total
-2.7 -2.5
-3.8
-1.3
-10
-5
0
Poverty Gap
2.4
4.8
3.0 1.7
0
5
10
15
All C-09 C-11 C-14
Compact
GDP per Capita
3.3 2.9
4.9
2.7
0
5
10
15
All C-09 C-11 C-14
Compact
Ag Value Added
Annual average growth rate in
expenditure and outcomes (%)
2008-2014 2003-2008
Summary:
• Most of the countries with no
compacts (no-C) dropped out and so
group is left out of analysis
• Overall results do not change. C-09 and
C-11 experienced:
• Faster growth in ag exp share;
• Faster agGDP and GDP per capita growth;
• Faster reduction in poverty gap.

11. Conclusions and Implications
• Results 1: significant progress toward achieving core
CAADP targets (10% ag exp and 6% agGDP growth) in
countries that have engaged in process longest
• Results 2: these have likely contributed to the more
rapid growth in incomes (GDP per capita) and
deepening of poverty reduction in those countries
• Sustaining Results: High inter-temporal variability in
achievements reflects challenges in sustaining
commitments  Malabo Declaration is timely
• Malabo: elaborates desired contribution of agriculture
to overall results  more disaggregated indicators and
deeper analyses are needed (e.g. effectiveness and
efficiency of different types of policies and spending)