This document discusses two questions: how governments have used recent Agriculture Public Expenditure Reviews (Ag PERs), and how to make Ag PERs more useful. It finds that Ag PERs have been used to improve strategic planning, expenditure levels and composition, budget processes, communications and accountability, and mobilize external finance. However, some problem areas identified in Ag PERs have not been acted upon, such as whether recurrent budgets are sufficient to sustain investment scale-up or provide essential public services. It also notes challenges in coordinating central and devolved expenditure authorities and linking expenditure to sector outcomes. Solutions proposed include routine "Ag PER Lite" analyses, strengthening analytical capacity, and improving data and monitoring and evaluation systems.

1. Agric Public Expenditure Reviews:
How Being Used?
How MakeThem More Useful?
Stephen D. Mink
IFPRI Consultant
Side-Event: Towards Strengthening Agriculture Public Expenditure
Analysis for Improved Decisions and Learning
September 1st
, 2015

2. Two Questions
• How have Government authorities and sector stakeholders used their
recent Ag PERs?
• Indications from responses to questions put to agriculture ministry contacts,
Ag PER national consultants and World Bank country staff.
• How make Ag PERs more useful?
• Preliminary observations drawn from a synthesis being prepared of a sample
of 19 Ag PERs
2

3. Uses of Ag PER
1. Improve Strategy Planning and Monitoring
• Foundation for strategic planning and strategy monitoring
• Identify policy-expenditure nexus where reform needed.
• Use in development of national agricultural investment plan
2. Improve Expenditure Levels and Composition
• Identification of underfunded sub-sectors.
• Substantiate claims for more public finance for the sector.
3

4. Uses of Ag PER
3. Strengthen Budget Processes for Better Expenditure Management
• Strengthening of budget management capacity.
• Baseline for annual updating as input to improved expenditure management.
• Baseline for transition to program budgeting.
• Identify need for follow-up specialized studies.
• Input to sector authorities’ own action plan.
4

5. Uses of Ag PER
4. Strengthen Communications and Accountability
• Input to communication with domestic stakeholders (farmers, private sector,
parliamentarians, JSR).
5. Mobilize External Finance
• Orientation of World Bank Assistance.
• Identify other lessons for follow-up.
5

6. AgPE Issues Not (Yet) Getting Follow-up
AgPE problem areas identified which do NOT seem to be getting acted
upon – 4 examples:
• Recurrent budgeting – sufficient to sustain investment scale-up?
• Recurrent budgeting – sufficient to provide essential public services?
• Coordinating central and devolved expenditure authority – are
systems in place for this?
• Linking expenditure to sector outcomes – what is needed for simple
analysis?
6

7. Hi
Recurrent Budgeting – Sufficient To Sustain Investment Scale-up?
7
Ratio of Non-Wage Recurrent to
Investment Expenditure
Investment Change
OverPeriod, %,
current value
Start of Period End of Period
Chad (2004-11) 0.03 0.02 0.94
Cote d’Ivoire(2000-10) 0.52 4.51 0.46
Ghana (2004-11) 0.85 0.43 1.61
Guinea (2004-12)* 0.04 0.05 1.61
Sierra Leone (2004-12) 16.13 5.13 7.33
Togo (2002-10) 0.19 0.12 5.09
Madagascar (2007-12)* 0.14 0.35 0.19
Mozambique (2002-07)* 0.04 0.03 2.95
Red – potential problem of inadequate recurrent budget as investment expands?

8. Recurrent Budgeting – Sufficient To Provide Essential Public
Services?
• Important public goods and services require recurrent budgets
• Extension and advisory services, research
• Crop and livestock phyto-sanitary services
• Input quality regulatory systems
• Ag PERs reveal that recurrent budget planning is underemphasized,
incremental more often than strategic
• Nigeria example of critical recurrent budgets lacking to accompany
fertilizer and seed sector reform
8

9. Coordinating central and devolved expenditure authority – are
systems in place for this?
Devolution of Agricultural Spending, Sub-National Share, %
Deconcentration
Decentralization
9
Burkina
Faso
Chad Ghana Liberia Togo Mozam
bique
Zambia
Regional &
Local
Authorities
82.5 4 27 0 2 19 14
Nigeria Cameroun Rwanda Sierra
Leone
South
Africa
Regional&Local
Authorities ~50 15 5 19 57

10. Linking expenditure to sector outcomes – what is needed for simple
analysis?
Ag PERs struggle to in clarify the correlation between sector public
expenditure and outcomes
Types of public expenditure outcomes:
• Overall sector growth
• Sub-sector growth
• Physical productivity improvement
• broader development impacts - rural poverty, national food security,
agricultural trade balance
M&E statistical systems capacity needs building
10

11. Next?
Challenges are:
• data available but analysis not done in Ag PER
• data lacking for analysis
• intractable problem even if data available and analysis done
Solutions being pursued:
• Make improved AgPER routine -> Ag PER Lite
• Strengthen analytical capacity -> network of practitioners
• Build into national dialogue -> JSR
• Strengthen data and monitoring and evaluation -> Country SAKSS
11