Samuel Benin International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) FARA-7th Africa Agriculture Science Week 14th June 2016, Kigali, Rwanda

1. Data Initiatives to Track
Public Spending and Outcomes
in African Agriculture
FARA-7th Africa Agriculture Science Week
14th June 2016, Kigali, Rwanda
Samuel Benin
International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)
DATA, INFORMATION AND KNOWLEDGE SYSTEMS Session
Organised by CTA, in partnership with FARA, IFPRI, GODAN

2. WhymonitoragriculturalR&Dresources?
 Public expenditure is a powerful instrument for achieving sustainable
development objectives—via reducing economic inefficiencies and
addressing inequality
 Thus, CAADP 10% agriculture expenditure target is not surprising
 Why 10%? How should it be allocated across different:
 subsectors (crops, livestock, etc.), commodities (food vs export crops, etc.),
economic uses (salaries, capital, etc.), functions (R&D, irrigation, etc.), space
(regions, districts), target groups (gender, farm size), etc.?
 Tough but very relevant questions, as different types of spending have
different effect on different outcomes in different places:
 Effects materialize via different pathways  indirect effects
 Effects materialize at different times  sequencing
 Effects conditioned by different factors  substitution/complementarity
 Need to know quantity and quality of spending to analyze linkages with
development for better scarce resource allocation decisions
Why Track Public Agricultural Spending?

3. WhymonitoragriculturalR&Dresources?
 3 data initiatives led by IFPRI
 SPEED (Statistics on Public Expenditures for Economic
Development)
 ReSAKSS (Regional Strategic Analysis and Knowledge
Support System)
 ASTI (Agricultural Science and Technology Indicators)
 Other data initiatives
 FAO (MAFAP, GEA), World Bank (AgPERs, BOOST)
 Gaps and Implications
Outline of presentation

4. Coverage and indicators—2015 release
• 1980-2012, 147 countries, 8 regions
• 9 sectors
▶ Agriculture, defense, education, fuel &
energy, health, mining, social protect,
transport & comm.
• Several indicators
▶ Amount in constant 2005 PPP$ & US$
▶ % of sector expenditure in total
▶ Agriculture, % of expenditure in agGDP
▶ % of total expenditure in total GDP
Data sources, coverage, and indicators
Main data sources (compiled on UN COFOG)
• IMF, World Bank, Eurostat, national sources
• Source of each data point is documented

5. Online tools (google “IFPRI speed”)
Global comparative overview of sectoral
expenditures for selected year & indicator
Sector trends for
selected country
& indicator
Sectoral
expenditures for
selected country,
year, & indicator
Global comparative overview for
selected year & indicator
Selected country’s
trend compared to
regional and global
trends
Selected country’s
expenditure
compared to
regional and global
averages for
selected year
Download Data
and Charts

6. New directions under consideration
• All sectors: disaggregation by economic use
▶ Compensation of employees, use of goods and services,
consumption of fixed capital, interest, subsidies, grants,
social benefit, other
• Agriculture sector: disaggregation by sub-function
▶ Research, extension, irrigation, marketing infrastructure,
farm support, etc.
• Other sectors: identify key sub-functions for poverty
and nutrition (other?), e.g.:
▶ Expenditure in rural areas for all sectors
▶ Expenditure on primary education and health care
▶ Expenditure on school feeding in education sector

7. evidence- and outcome-based planning and
implementation of agricultural-sector
policies and strategies in Africa
Strategic Analysis and Monitoring of CAADP
and Agricultural Performance in Africa
Knowledge Management, Capacity
Strengthening, and Policy Communications
support
review and
dialogue
Objectives, outputs, and partners

8. Data and tools (www.resakss.org)
Coverage and indicators—annual
update
• 1980-recent year; 54 countries
▶ Regions: 5 geographic, 4
economic, 8 RECs, 4 CAADP
groups, other
• Topic area (number of indicators)
▶ Enabling environment (9)
▶ CAADP implementation process
(11)
▶ Agricultural spending (4)
▶ Agricultural productivity and
growth (7)
▶ Agricultural trade (5)
▶ Poverty, hunger, nutrition (6)
• Data sources
▶ FAO, World Bank, SPEED, national
Analysis
• Trends—compare
for selected
countries or
regions
• Bar graphs—
compare all
indicators for
selected country
and year
• Download charts
and data

9. Data and tools (www.resakss.org)
Coverage and indicators—annual
update
• 1980-recent year; 54 countries
▶ Regions: 5 geographic, 4
economic, 8 RECs, 4 CAADP
groups, other
• Topic area (number of indicators)
▶ Enabling environment (9)
▶ CAADP implementation process
(11)
▶ Agricultural spending (4)
▶ Agricultural productivity and
growth (7)
▶ Agricultural trade (5)
▶ Poverty, hunger, nutrition (6)
• Data sources
▶ FAO, World Bank, SPEED, national
Analysis
• Trends—compare
for selected
countries or
regions
• Bar graphs—
compare all
indicators for
selected country
and year
• Download charts
and data
Progress: CAADP 10% Agriculture Expenditure Target

10. • Additional indicators implied by Malabo
Declaration
• More deeper analyses to support CAADP review
 Efficiency and effectiveness of different types of
policies and public spending
 Contribution of agriculture to overall outcomes
(growth, poverty, hunger, nutrition)
• More user-friendly updated website
New directions: data, analysis, tools

11. ASTI indicators (are/will be online)
• Institutional arrangements
• R&D spending by cost category
• Funding sources
• R&D staff by degree, gender, and age
• R&D focus by commodity
• Output indicators
• Student population
Data collection methods
• Focus on low- and middle-income countries
• Institutional survey rounds (primary data)
• Large network of national, regional, and
international partners
ASTIindicators,datacollectionmethods,andoutputs

12.  Interactive country pages allow users to access detailed
investment and human resource trends in agricultural
research, and download factsheets and other information.
 Country benchmarking tool enables cross-country
comparisons and rankings of key ASTI indicators.
 Data download and graphing tool allows users to explore
in-depth datasets—filter data by country and indicator.
 Interactive directory listing of all agricultural R&D agencies
and their institutional and demographic details.
 Tools and data can be embedded (tailor-made) on websites
of national and regional partners.
ASTI’sonlinetools(www.asti.cgiar.org)

13.  Update and expand current datasets on agricultural R&D
investments and capacities through two consecutive survey
rounds in 2015 and 2017
 Include collection of output indicators and more granular
data on R&D capacity and investments
 Conduct additional policy analysis of structure, composition
and R&D focus of research systems, investments, and
capacities
 Further enhance dissemination and advocacy activities to
ensure uptake of key ASTI messages at all levels to
maximize impact and sustainability
ASTIactivitiesinAfrica,2015–2018

14. Other Agriculture Spending Data Initiatives
Mogues et al.
2016
Compares 13
cross-country
data initiatives
that include
PAE
Compares
methods,
scope, etc. and
provides
statistics on
PAE

15. Gaps and Implications
 We now know much more about total government
expenditure on agriculture relative to other sectors; despite
some discrepancies
 Recall: how should the total be allocated across different:
 subsectors (crops, livestock, etc.), commodities (food vs export crops,
etc.), economic uses (salaries, capital, etc.), functions (R&D, irrigation,
etc.), space (regions, districts), target groups (gender, farm size), etc.?
 Still substantial knowledge gaps in such quality of spending
 Except: couple of sub-sectors, total (government plus other) R&D,
some subsidies, in few countries, over short series, etc.
 Need to step up effort to measure more quality, else difficult
to make comprehensive recommendations about how to
prioritize spending

16. Function (COFOG)
701. Gen. Pub. Services
702. Defense
703. Pub. Order & Safety
704. Economic Affairs
705. Environ Protection
706. Housing &
Community Amenities
707. Health
708. Rec., Culture, & Rel.
709. Education
710. Social Protection
Economic Use
21. Compensation of
employees
22. Use of goods and
services
23. Consumption of
fixed capital
24. Interest
25. Subsidies
26. Grants
27. Social benefits
28. Other
Agricultural
sub-Sector
Crops
Livestock
Forestry
Fishery
Agricultural
sub-Function
Extension
Research
Irrigation
Land management
Market infrastructure
Farm support
Policy, planning, M&E
Regulation, licensing
Statistics
…
Level
Central
State/Region
Local/District
…
Policy Objective
Food security
Productivity/Growth
…
Target
Demography
Geography
…
Planning/Execution
Budget
Expenditure
Source of Financing
Domestic (loan, tax)
External (loan, grant)
Different levels of disaggregationIdeal Disaggregated Time-Series Data

17. E.g.: Returns to Spending in India (1)
Return in agricultural GDP (RPS per RPS spending)
1960s–1970s 1980s 1990s
Return R1 R2 Return R1 R2 Return R1 R2
Agricultural sector
Research & dev’t 8.65 2 5 7.93 1 2 9.50 1 1
Irrigation investment 8.00 3 6 4.71 2 4 4.37 2 4
Irrigation subsidies 5.22 4 7 2.25 4 6 2.47 4 6
Fertilizer subsidies 1.79 5 8 1.94 5 8 0.85 5 8
Credit subsidies 18.77 1 2 3.00 3 5 4.26 3 5
Rural sector
Roads 19.99 1 1 8.89 1 1 7.66 1 2
Education 14.66 2 3 7.58 2 3 5.46 2 3
Power subsidies 12.06 3 4 2.25 3 6 1.19 3 7
Source: Based on Fan, Gulati, and Thorat (2008).
RPS = Retention Pricing Scheme. R1 = rank of return within sector, where 1 is the
highest rank. R2 = rank of return across sectors, where 1 is the highest rank.

18. E.g.: Returns to Spending in India (2)
Source: Based on Fan, Gulati, and Thorat (2008).
RPS = Retention Pricing Scheme. R1 = rank of return within sector, where 1 is the
highest rank. R2 = rank of return across sectors, where 1 is the highest rank.
Number of poor reduced per million RPS spending
1960s–1970s 1980s 1990s
Return R1 R2 Return R1 R2 Return R1 R2
Agricultural sector
Research & dev’t 642.69 2 5 409.00 1 3 436.12 1 2
Irrigation investment 630.37 3 6 267.01 2 4 193.21 3 5
Irrigation subsidies 393.70 4 7 116.05 4 7 113.47 4 6
Fertilizer subsidies 90.07 5 8 109.99 5 8 37.41 5 8
Credit subsidies 1448.51 1 3 154.59 3 5 195.66 2 4
Rural sector
Roads 4124.15 1 1 1311.64 1 1 881.49 1 1
Education 1955.56 2 2 651.40 2 2 335.86 2 3
Power subsidies 998.42 3 4 125.50 3 6 59.15 3 7