Complying with the             Maputo Declaration:CAP      progress and implications for pursuit of optimal AD        allo...
Background and Motivation   In 2003, African governments adopted Comprehensive    Africa Agriculture Development Programm...
Objective and outline of presentation   Present patterns and trends in public agricultural    expenditure (PAE) in Africa...
Progress at the Africa-wide level, 1995-2010          10       1995-2003          8        2003-2009Percent          6    ...
Progress in Central Africa, 2003-10          15                           Central AfricaPercent          10          5    ...
Progress in East Africa , 2003-10          25                                                  East Africa          20Perc...
Progress in North Africa , 2003-10          15                                North AfricaPercent          10          5  ...
Progress in Southern Africa , 2003-10          30          25                                                       Southe...
Progress in West Africa , 2003-10                                                         West Africa          25         ...
Summary of progress: and key questions (I)   Since 2003 when the declaration was made    » only 11 countries have surpass...
Summary of progress: and key questions (II)     » For middle income countries with other sources of       growth and devel...
PAE trends reflect changing role of state (I)                              PAE as percent of total expenditure            ...
PAE trends reflect changing role of state (II)    % of total expenditure                             14                   ...
Accounting/Composition of PAE: Case of Ghana                               12                                             ...
How has PAE trends contributed to growth?    Use simple correlations to assess co-trends between     PAE and agricultural...
PAE and agGDP                                       20                              agGDP growth rate (%)growth: Africa-wi...
agR&D exp and agGDP                                          West: Lag 3 years                                    agGDP gr...
PAE data challenges and requirements   Answering the questions posed earlier in a    comprehensive manner is very challen...
NAIPs and implications for PAE data and analysis                                NAIP budget allocated:                   ...
% of NAIP budget by top 3 objectives/programs100                                                        Enabling75        ...
% of NAIP budget by sub-sector100                                                                         Forestry 75     ...
% of NAIP budget by major commoditiesCountry, plan duration     Commodities and budget allocation                         ...
% of NAIP budget by function100                                                               Farm Support 80             ...
% of NAIP budget by target populationCountry, plan duration     Target population and budget allocationLiberia, 2011-15   ...
% of NAIP budget by source of funding                    0%      20%        40%      60%      80%       100%  Benin, 2010-...
Conclusions and Implications (I)   The amount of PAE in Africa as a whole increased    rapidly, but at a slower pace than...
Conclusions and Implications (II)   Prioritization of investments has to be based on    analysis of the efficiency and ef...
Upcoming New ReSAKSS Website         New   landing page   Improved data   visualization tool
Thank You
1                                                            2                                                            ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Complying with the Maputo Declaration: progress and implications for pursuit of optimal allocation of public agriculture expenditure

6,568 views

Published on

"Complying with the Maputo Declaration: progress and implications for pursuit of optimal allocation of public agriculture expenditure" - presented by Sam Benin at 9th CAADP PP Meeting, 25-26 March, Addis Ababa

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
6,568
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4,498
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
23
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Complying with the Maputo Declaration: progress and implications for pursuit of optimal allocation of public agriculture expenditure

  1. 1. Complying with the Maputo Declaration:CAP progress and implications for pursuit of optimal AD allocation of public agriculture expenditure Sam Benin, IFPRI 9th CAADP Partnership Platform Addis Ababa 25-26 March 2013
  2. 2. Background and Motivation In 2003, African governments adopted Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) » Achieve 6% ag GDP growth rate per year » Spend 10% of national expenditure on ag – Maputo Declaration Public spending (fiscal policy in general) in agriculture is a key instrument for most developing country governments to achieve national development objectives: » Most of poor work in the agriculture sector and in rural area » Sector employs 65% of the labor force and accounts for 32% of GDP » Evidence that public agriculture investment (particularly in R&D) has large poverty-reducing effects » Experience of Green Revolution (especially India and China)
  3. 3. Objective and outline of presentation Present patterns and trends in public agricultural expenditure (PAE) in Africa Assess progress in achieving the Maputo Declaration target of spending 10% of national expenditures in the agriculture sector Implications of the Declaration on spending behavior and optimal PAE allocation PAE data requirements in the joint agriculture -sector reviews (JSRs)
  4. 4. Progress at the Africa-wide level, 1995-2010 10 1995-2003 8 2003-2009Percent 6 4 2 0 CA EA NA SA WA Share of public agriculture expenditure (PAE) in total expenditures for Africa as a whole declined in 2003- 09 (post CAADP) compared to 1995-2003 (pre-CAADP) Differences across different regions and countries
  5. 5. Progress in Central Africa, 2003-10 15 Central AfricaPercent 10 5 0 African… Equatorial Burundi Central Chad & Principe Congo, De Congo, Rep Cameroon Sao Tome m. Rep. Guinea . Shares increased in Burundi, Rep of Congo, and São Tomé and Principe Shares declined or stagnated in other countries, which also spend less than 5%
  6. 6. Progress in East Africa , 2003-10 25 East Africa 20Percent 15 10 5 0 South… Rwanda Kenya Djibouti Ethiopia Mauritius Tanzania Uganda Madagascar Seychelles Sudan Many countries in East Africa spend 5-10% percent of total expenditure on agriculture Shares have increased over time in several countries (especially Ethiopia, Rwanda, Sudan)
  7. 7. Progress in North Africa , 2003-10 15 North AfricaPercent 10 5 0 Morocco Algeria Egypt Mauritania Tunisia Shares have stagnated in Mauritania and diverged downwards from the 10% target in the other countries
  8. 8. Progress in Southern Africa , 2003-10 30 25 Southern AfricaPercent 20 15 10 5 0 Botswana Angola Lesotho Zambia Africa Swaziland Mozambiqu Namibia Malawi Zimbabwe South Malawi is outstanding performer, with nearly three e time the target in recent times Apart from Zambia, shares have stagnated or declined in the other countries
  9. 9. Progress in West Africa , 2003-10 West Africa 25 20Percent 15 10 5 0 Sierra… Burkina… Cote… Guinea-… Ghana Liberia Guinea Nigeria Senegal Mali Togo Cape Verde Gambia Niger Region where many countries have achieved target Shares have increased in many countries Burkina Faso and Mali (and Niger in recent times) have consistently cut back on the shares to the target level
  10. 10. Summary of progress: and key questions (I) Since 2003 when the declaration was made » only 11 countries have surpassed the target in any year—Burkina Faso, Chad, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guinea, Malawi, Mali, Nig er, Senegal, Zambia, and Zimbabwe » only 7 have surpassed it in many years Where the shares have been increasing or are high: » Especially among countries in east and west Africa, is it because they have observed positive returns or because they think the 10% is optimal? Where the shares have been declining: » Especially in Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger where the shares were higher than 10%, is it because they are not getting the expected returns?
  11. 11. Summary of progress: and key questions (II) » For middle income countries with other sources of growth and development (esp. in north and southern Africa), is it because returns to additional spending in agriculture is lower than in the other sectors?  Where the shares have stagnated: » Is it because they have reached equilibrium, where returns to additional spending in agriculture and non- agriculture are equal?  These questions reflect the issue of the composition of public agriculture expenditure (PAE): » Role of government: large variation over time reflects changing involvement of government in the sector » Accounting issue: PAE depends of how PAE is accounted for and reported in different countries
  12. 12. PAE trends reflect changing role of state (I) PAE as percent of total expenditure 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000Botswana 9.7 9.8 6.5 6.0 4.2Egypt 4.4 4.2 5.4 5.0 6.8Ethiopia 6.9 9.9 6.9 9.1 10.4Ghana 12.2 6.2 6.1 5.1 3.2Kenya 8.4 10.4 6.0 5.5 6.8Malawi 10.2 8.4 11.1 11.1 8.8Morocco 6.5 5.0 5.0 4.2 3.5Tunisia 14.5 8.3 8.5 8.3 9.3Uganda 32.5 3.9 2.2 2.9 2.6Zambia 13.4 10.7 5.6 2.5 2.1 Compared to pre-structural adjustment periods, share of PAE has declined substantially. Governments were directly involved in agriculture production, cooperatives, marketing boards, etc.
  13. 13. PAE trends reflect changing role of state (II) % of total expenditure 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2005 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2010 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Ghana Zambia New form of direct governmental involvement in the sector in recent times in form of heavy farm support subsidies Issue is extent to which these programs have been refurbished to take account of their negative experiences in the past
  14. 14. Accounting/Composition of PAE: Case of Ghana 12 Feeder roadsPercent of total expenditure 10 Debt service PSI 8 Cocoa 6 Research 4 Fisheries 2 Forestry 0 Crops & 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 livestock Accounting changed over time. Is it merely to show compliance with CAADP target? Or is effectiveness of portfolio considered? Also reflects changing role of MDAs in the sector
  15. 15. How has PAE trends contributed to growth?  Use simple correlations to assess co-trends between PAE and agricultural GDP rate  No cause-effect relationships, which require detail PAE and other data and advanced quantitative methods
  16. 16. PAE and agGDP 20 agGDP growth rate (%)growth: Africa-wide 15 10 Positive correlation; 5 larger when PAE 0 growth rate is used -5 0 5 10 15 20 y = 0.1521x + 1.65 Different results for -10 R² = 0.0179 different regions, with -15 PAE (% of total expenditures) largest correlations in east Africa, which is a 20 top performer in both agGDP growth rate 15 indicators (%) 10 5 Low significance using 0 aggregate PAE points -20 -10 -5 0 10 20 30 40 to the importance of -10 y = 0.0952x + 1.7053 R² = 0.0644 composition of PAE -15 PAE growth rate (%)
  17. 17. agR&D exp and agGDP West: Lag 3 years agGDP growth rate (%) 10 growth: west Africa 5 Correlation is weak when 0 the data for all countries -20 -15 y = 0.047x + 2.673 -10 -5 -5 0 5 10 15 20 are pooled in a single R² = 0.015 agR&Dexp growth rate (%) estimation for Africa agGDP growth West: Lag 6 years rate (%) 10 Results uphold common 8 6 knowledge that agR&D 4 2 investments take time to -30 -20 -10 0 -2 0 10 20 30 manifest y = 0.082x + 2.766 -4 R² = 0.129 agR&Dexp growth rate (%) Results (magnitude of agGDP growth West: Lag 9 years correlation, lags, and rate (%) 8 6 statistical significance) are 4 2 different for different -40 -30 -20 -10 0 -2 0 10 20 30 regions y = 0.148x + 0.707 -4 -6 R² = 0.445 agR&Dexp growth rate (%)
  18. 18. PAE data challenges and requirements Answering the questions posed earlier in a comprehensive manner is very challenging; virtually impossible with existing data for many countries Some analysis on the efficiency and effectiveness of PAE exists in a handful of countries only We are faced with PAE measurement problems » Most of data are at higher aggregate level » Data systems reflect outlays associated with organizational structures of governments rather than objectives sought and functions performed » Several PAE undertaken outside traditional ag MDAs We need to do better for successful JSRs
  19. 19. NAIPs and implications for PAE data and analysis  NAIP budget allocated: » Objectives and programs » Sub-sector » Commodity and commodity groups » Economic use and functions » Target population » Sources of financing  Need PAE data accordingly: for review, learning, and further planning
  20. 20. % of NAIP budget by top 3 objectives/programs100 Enabling75 Environment Science&Tech5025 NRM 0 Burkina… Cote… Tanzania, 2012-… Sierra… Niger, 2010-2012 Benin, 2010-2015 Burundi, 2012-2017 Ghana, 2011-2015 Malawi, 2011-2014 Rwanda, 2009-2012 Togo, 2010-2015 Ethiopia, 2010-2020 Gambia, 2011-2015 Kenya, 2010-2015 Nigeria, 2011-2014 Senegal, 2011-2015 Uganda, 2011-2015 Liberia, 2011-2015 Markets Productivity Food Security Food and nutrition security and increasing productivity dominate planned expenditures in many countries Improving markets and sustainable NRM also take a large share
  21. 21. % of NAIP budget by sub-sector100 Forestry 75 Fishery 50 25 Livestock 0 Crops Benin,Burkina Faso, 2011-15Liberia, 2011-15 2011-15 2010-152010-15 2010-15 Cote d’Ivoire, 2010-15 Mali, Senegal, Togo, Very few NAIPs had a breakdown by subsector, which is surprising given that PAE is typically reported by subsector In general, crops subsector dominates; share of other subsectors depends on country context
  22. 22. % of NAIP budget by major commoditiesCountry, plan duration Commodities and budget allocation Rice=24.9%, Corn=18.7%, Pineapple=4.2%,Benin, 2010-15 Vegetables=4.1%Gambia, 2011-15 Rice=20.1%Malawi, 2011-14 Maize=37.2% Rice=30.1%, Corn=12.7%, Millet/Sorghum=Mali, 2011-15 7.2%Nigeria, 2011-14 Cash crops=13%, Rice=2.8% Groundnut=8.9%, Maize=8.6%,Senegal, 2010-15 Sorghum=4.5%, Cowpea=3.8%, Rice=1.4% All the NAIPs identified specific commodities to lead overall agricultural growth and development. Only few had specific budget allocations. Maize and rice received the largest shares
  23. 23. % of NAIP budget by function100 Farm Support 80 and Subsidies 60 NRM 40 20 0 Irrigation Burkina… Cote… Ethiopia, 2010-… Malawi, 2011-… Tanzania, 2012-… Uganda, 2011-… Gambia, 2011-… Rwanda, 2009-… Senegal, 2011-… Sierra… Burundi, 2012-… Niger, 2010-2012 Nigeria, 2011-2014 Togo, 2010-2015 Benin, 2010-2015 Kenya, 2010-2015 Liberia, 2011-2015 Mali, 2011-2015 Ghana, 2011-2015 Extension Research NRM and farm support and subsidies dominate planned expenditures, followed by irrigation Research and extension are stated priorities with specific budget allocations in a few countries only
  24. 24. % of NAIP budget by target populationCountry, plan duration Target population and budget allocationLiberia, 2011-15 Women and youth=4.8% Smallholder farmers=35.5%, CommercialNigeria, 2011-14 farmers=9.6% Youth=48.8%, Men andSenegal, 2010-15 women=40.3%, Women=0.6%, Men=0.2%Tanzania, 2012-16 Mainland=92.6%, Zanzibar=7.4%Uganda, 2011-15 Northern region=2.4% Very few NAIPs had a breakdown of the budget by target population, even though targeting and different target groups were discussed in all of them
  25. 25. % of NAIP budget by source of funding 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Benin, 2010-15Ethiopia, 2010-20Gambia, 2011-15 Ghana, 2011-15 Kenya, 2010-15 Liberia, 2011-15 Malawi, 2011-14 Niger, 2010-12Rwanda, 2009-12Senegal, 2011-15 Togo, 2010-15 Government Development partners Others Funding gap Dependence on external sources for financing the NAIPs Only in a couple of countries is government financing at least 50% More than 50% financing gaps in Benin, Gambia, Ghana, Senegal, Togo
  26. 26. Conclusions and Implications (I) The amount of PAE in Africa as a whole increased rapidly, but at a slower pace than the growth in total expenditures resulting in a decline in the share of PAE in total expenditures for Africa as a whole Some governments’ reports on compliance with the Maputo Declaration has generated controversy on what to count as PAE » resulting in a debate that may be polarizing behavior around the fundamental issue of the investments needed to achieve development results » i.e. what types of investment, how much of each type of investment, where should they be invested, and when should they be invested
  27. 27. Conclusions and Implications (II) Prioritization of investments has to be based on analysis of the efficiency and effectiveness of different types of public spending. Therefore, disaggregation of public expenditure data by type, across space, and over time is critical. » Need public expenditure accounting and reporting systems with unique codes or identifiers that also reflect the objectives and functions that the outlays are undertaken for (Kenya’s Open data on public expenditure is a very good example). » This is important for review of the NAIPs (as in JSRs) » Will enhance the political accountability of government to its citizens
  28. 28. Upcoming New ReSAKSS Website  New landing page  Improved data visualization tool
  29. 29. Thank You
  30. 30. 1 2 4 5 0 3 Gabon Congo, Rep. Region Central Burundi Sudan Madagascar Tanzania Ethiopia Rwanda1996-2003 Eritrea Eastern Region Uganda Kenya Mauritius Tunisia Region Morocco Mauritania Zambia Mozambique2003-2008 Malawi Namibia South Africa Northern Southern Region Botswana Niger Guinea Sierra Leone Nigeria Togo Burkina Faso Benin Gambia Western Region Côte dIvoireNEPAD 1% target Annual average (% of total agriculture value added) Ghana Mali Senegal All All Spending on Ag Research and Development

×