Implementation Performance and

Progress toward Core CAADP Targets

Samuel Benin, IFPRI

Background and Motivation• In 2003, Africa adopted CAADP; agriculture-led

integrated framework for development

• Set targets for spending, productivity, growth, trade, outcomes (poverty, food and nutrition security, etc.)

• Developed processes for mutual engagement and evidence-based review and learning

www.resakss.org

• ReSAKSS tracks progress of 30 indicators through an interactive website and flagship Annual Trends and Outlook Report (ATOR)

Objectives and outline of presentation• Review progress in implementing the CAADP

agenda. Particularly, achieving key CAADP goals and targets:• 10% agriculture expenditure• 6% agricultural sector growth• Halving poverty and hunger

• Correlations among observed trends to assess simple associations between spending and growth and outcomes• Lessons for future work relating to implementation

of the Malabo Declaration

Format of results and notes (I)• Aggregate statistics: Africa as a whole; 5 geographic regions

(Central, East, North, Southern, West); and 4 economic regions (income, agricultural potential, natural resources):• Middle Income (MI) = 26 countries: Algeria, Angola, Botswana,

Cameroon, Cape Verde, Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, Djibouti, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Ghana, Lesotho, Libya, Mauritius, Morocco, Namibia, Nigeria, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, South Africa, South Sudan, Sudan, Swaziland, Tunisia.

• Low Income, less favorable agriculture (LI-3) = 9 countries: Burundi, Chad, Comoros, Eritrea, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Rwanda, Somalia.

• Low income, more favorable agriculture (LI-2) = 13 countries: Benin, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mozambique, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda, Zimbabwe.

• Low Income, mineral rich (LI-1) = 6 countries: Central African Republic, D.R. Congo, Guinea, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Zambia.

Format of results and notes (II)• Other aggregates not presented: Regional Economic

Communities (RECs), top 10 largest agriculture economies (based on share in Africa’s agGDP), fastest-growing agriculture economies (i.e. greater than 6%)

• Trends for three sub-periods: 1995-2003 (baseline), 2003-08 (initial CAADP timeline), 2008-2013

• Monetary values in constant 2005 US$• Data updates: retroactive, new data for recent years, data for

more countries (e.g. 50 countries with agriculture expenditure data)

• Data sources: WDI, FAOStat, IMF, national sources (statistics bureaus, ministries of finance and agriculture), studies

Enabling environment Inflation Government debt and revenue

Inflation, GDP deflator (%)

Afric

a

Cent

ral

East

Nor

th

Sout

hern

Wes

t

MI

L3 L2 L1

Africa Region Economic

0

50

100

150

3455

13 8

67

2035

133

9 710 9 10 10 9 10 10 15 8 811 7 14 8 819 11 13 11 6

1995-2003 2003-2008 2008-2012

Inflation reduced substantially from pre-CAADP levels better control of money supply; stronger purchasing power; better long-term planning

General government gross revenue and debt (% of GDP)

1995

-03

2003

-08

2008

-12

1995

-03

2003

-08

2008

-12

1995

-03

2003

-08

2008

-12

1995

-03

2003

-08

2008

-12

MI L3 L2 L1

050

100150200

28 31 31 12 20 22 18 20 21 19 26 2578 44 36

154 13254 93 58 40 96 61 38

Revenue Debt

1995

-03

2003

-08

2008

-12

Africa

050

100150200

26 30 3081 47 37

• Revenue-ratio increased slightly; but debt-ratio reduced a lot• Due to combination of debt forgiveness, more grants, greater

own revenue sources (increased export earnings, royalties, ...)

Government agriculture expenditure

Government agriculture expenditure (GAE) growth rate (annual average %)

Afric

a

Cent

ral

East

Nor

th

Sout

hern

Wes

t

MI

L3 L2 L1

Africa Region Economic

-55

152535

6

149

6

1812

9

34

6 28 14 9

413 13

6

29

11 5-1

22

-47

1 -1 114

3-5

1995-2003 2003-2008 2008-2013

• Growth in GAE slowed down or declined in 2008-03; except in central Africa where it increased

• Reflects effect of the financial and high-prices crises in 2008-09

Government agriculture expenditure (GAE, annual average % of total expenditure)

Afric

a

Cent

ral

East

Nor

th

Sout

hern

Wes

t

MI

L3 L2 L1

Africa Region Economic

0

5

10

15

3 26 4 2

5 3 47 10

4 3

64 2

53 4

711

3 5 5 3 2 5 3 5 7 8

1995-2003 2003-2008 2008-2013 10% target

• Share of GAE stagnated or declined slightly in 2008-03; except in central Africa and L3 economic group

• Reflects slowdown in growth in total expenditure

05

10152025

14 6

17 5 4 4 4

15 6 6

3 14 5 3

15

3 4 3 1

117

28

5 63

7 6 72

12

3 4 26

18

59 9

0

21

84 6

1995-2003

05

10152025

1 1 24

2 13 4

2 3 3 24

1

5 42

5 4 3

63

64

25 6

47 6 5

47 6 6

2

9

45

2

7

18

912

14

2

10

6

18

10

2003-2008

05

10152025

1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 9 10 10 1015 16 18

2008-2013 Burkina Faso, Congo R., Ethiopia, Madagascar, Malawi, Zimbabwe

Burkina Faso, Guinea, Niger, Sao Tome and Principe, Sudan

Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Malawi, Mali, Niger, Zimbabwe

≥ 10%

≥ 10%

≥ 10%

Agricultural growth

Agriculture value added (growth rate, %)

Afric

a

Cent

ral

East

Nort

h

Sout

hern

Wes

t

MI

L3 L2 L1

Africa Region Economic

0

5

10

72

4 6 48 7

2 4 452

35 4

65

34

36 3

6 5 6 5 6 5 4 4

1995-2003 2003-2008 2008-2013 6% target

• Faster growth in 2008-13 compared to 2003-08 in many sub-regions and compared to 1995-03 in central, east, and L3;

• Slower growth in west Africa;• In Africa and other sub-regions, faster growth in 2008-13

represent catch-up with pre-CAADP levels.

-10

0

10

20

3 27 4

6

1 1 3 4 7 5 3-1

2-2 1 3 1

71

5 4 36

0

117 4

-4

94

12

2 4 6 4 16

2 16 6

103

1995-2003

-15

-5

5

15

52 3 3 3 1 2 1 1 2

4 25

3 30

3 47 7

3 3 5 58

-3 -27 5

05 4 5

2

12

-4

84

25

3

-13

13

14

5

2003-2008

-10

0

10

20

-7 -60 0 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 6 6 7 7 7 7 8 9 10 11 12 12

17

2008-2013

High variability over time ● Many different countries surpassed 6% target in different sub-periods ● 16 countries in 2008-13 ●

Angola, Ethiopia and Mozambique in 2003-08 and 2008-13

(Agriculture value added growth, %)

Outcomes Poverty Food and nutrition security Hunger

Pove

rty

(% o

f po

pula

tion)

Mal

nutr

ition

(%

of ch

ildre

n un-

der 5

)

Glob

al H

unge

r In

dex

Central

0

35

70

43 28 2643 26 2431 24 23

1995-2003 2003-2008 2008-2012Pove

rty

(% o

f po

pula

tion)

Mal

nutr

ition

(%

of ch

ildre

n un-

der 5

)

Glob

al H

unge

r In

dex

Africa

0

35

70

44 23 2142 21 1940 20 17

1995-2003 2003-2008 2008-2012 • Poverty, malnutrition and hunger has declined at aggregate levels everywhere;

• Declined by 2% points per year on average in post-CAADP sub-periods compared to pre-CAADP

Pove

rty

(% o

f po

pula

tion)

Mal

nutr

ition

(%

of ch

ildre

n un-

der 5

)

Glob

al H

unge

r In

dex

North

0

35

70

5 8 63 74

3 54

1995-2003 2003-2008 2008-2012Pove

rty

(% o

f po

pula

tion)

Mal

nutr

ition

(%

of ch

ildre

n un-

der 5

)

Glob

al H

unge

r In

dex

Southern

0

35

70

4817 19

4314 17

3913 15

1995-2003 2003-2008 2008-2012 • Differences across sub-regions:

• Lowest levels in all three indicators in north Africa;

• Moderate levels of poverty in central and southern Africa;

• Moderate levels of malnutrition and hunger in southern Africa

Pove

rty

(% o

f po

pula

tion)

Mal

nutr

ition

(%

of ch

ildre

n un-

der 5

)

Glob

al H

unge

r In

dex

West

0

35

70

5828 21

5526 18

5424 16

1995-2003 2003-2008 2008-2012

Pove

rty

(% o

f po

pula

tion)

Mal

nutr

ition

(%

of ch

ildre

n un-

der 5

)

Glob

al H

unge

r In

dex

East

0

35

70

5730 28

5228 2548 27 24

1995-2003 2003-2008 2008-2012 • Highest levels of poverty in east and west Africa;

• Highest levels of malnutrition in central, east, and west Africa;

• Highest levels of hunger in central and east Africa

CorrelationsThough do not imply cause-effect relationships (which require more detail data and advanced quantitative methods), strong correlation coefficient hints plausible association

Government agriculture expenditure (GAE) and agricultural GDP growth (I)

-20 0 20 40 60 800

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

f(x) = 0.033648029 x + 3.063376581R² = 0.0484961721908553

1995-2012

GAE growth rate (%)

AgGD

P gr

owth

rate

(%) Weak positive

correlation between GAE growth and AgGDP growth

Different results for different sub-regions, sub-periods, and types of GAE (other studies)

Government agriculture expenditure (GAE) and agricultural GDP growth (II)

1995-2003

-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100-5

0

5

10

15

f(x) = 0.029283481 x + 3.003323783R² = 0.0393256918940874

GAE growth rate (%)

AgGD

P gr

owth

rate

(%

)

-20 0 20 40 60 80-5

0

5

10

15

f(x) = 0.050694443 x + 2.934659557R² = 0.0725422038827026

GAE growth rate (%)Ag

GDP

grow

th ra

te

(%)

2003-2012

Larger (but still weak) positive correlation between GAE growth and AgGDP growth in post-CAADP sub-period compared to pre-CAADP

Agricultural GDP growth and malnutrition (I)

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

-15-13-11

-9-7-5-3-1135

f(x) = − 0.49417662 x − 0.023625682R² = 0.148303819281579

1995-2012AgGDP growth rate (%)

Child

mal

nutr

ition

(% ch

ange

)

Weak positive correlation between AgGDP growth and malnutrition reduction

Different results for different sub-regions, sub-periods, and drivers of AgGDP growth (other studies)

Agricultural GDP growth and malnutrition (II)

1995-2003

-5 0 5 10 15

-9-7-5-3-1135

f(x) = − 0.238916943 x − 0.324251935R² = 0.0785135692873132

AgGDP growth rate (%)

Child

mal

nutr

ition

(%

chan

ge)

-5 0 5 10 15

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

f(x) = − 0.469673929 x − 0.648426034R² = 0.108226720599792

AgGDP growth rate (%)

Child

mal

nutr

ition

(%

chan

ge)

2003-2012

Larger (but still weak) positive correlation between AgGDP growth and malnutrition reduction in post-CAADP sub-period compared to pre-CAADP

Conclusions and implications Key findings Future work vis-à-vis Malabo Declaration

Conclusions and implications (I)• Significant progress in several indicators associated

with CAADP• High inter-temporal variability in key indicators (e.g.

government agriculture expenditure) reflects challenges in sustaining commitment Malabo Declaration is timely• Malabo Declaration:• Has many result areas with specific and more ambitious

targets more indicators needs to be tracked• Elaborates desired contribution of agriculture to overall

results more disaggregated indicators are needed

Conclusions and implications (II)• Malabo Declaration:• Asks for implementation strategy and roadmap

more deeper analyses are required (e.g. efficiency and effectiveness of different types of policies and public spending)• Commitment to systematic regular review

process effective (institutionalized) M&E systems and mutual accountability platforms

IDEAL DISAGGREGATED EXPENDITURE DATA

Functions (COFOG)

701. Gen. Pub. Services

702. Defense

703. Pub. Order & Safety

704. Economic Affairs

705. Environ Protection706. Housing & Community Amenities707. Health

708. Rec., Culture, & Rel.

709. Education

710. Social Protection

Economic classification21. Compensation of employees22. Use of goods and services23. Consumption of fixed capital24. Interest25. Subsidies

26. Grants

27. Social benefits

28. Other

Agricultural sub-sector

Crops

Livestock

Forestry

Fishery

Agricultural sub-functions

Extension

Research

Irrigation

Land management

Market infrastructureFarm 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)

Thanks

CAADP Implementation process Compacts Country and other supporting initiatives

CAADP processes and supporting initiatives

0183654

1 13 22 29 30 37 40

Number of countries with CAADP Compacts

• Other country: NAIPs (xx by end of 2013); Country SAKSS (12 by end of 2014); CANs (14); JSRs (7)

• Supporting initiatives: GAFSP (15 approved $563 million); Grow Africa (7); New Alliance (10)

Afric

a

Cent

ral

East

Nor

th

Sout

hern

Wes

t

MI

L3 L2 L1

Africa

Region Economic

0

10

20

62 3

11 11

36

2 4 76 2 610

18

37 3 6 96 4 5 9

21

2 6 5 6 6

1995-2003 2003-2008 2008-2012

Government agriculture expenditure (annual average % of agriculture value added)

Land and labor productivity

1995-03 2003-08 2008-12Africa

0500

1,0001,5002,000

618 742 832574 712 824

Labor (2005 US$/worker) Land (2005 US$/ha)

1995-03

2003-08

2008-12

1995-03

2003-08

2008-12

1995-03

2003-08

2008-12

1995-03

2003-08

2008-12

MI L3 L2 L1

-1,0001,0003,0005,000

1995

-03

2003

-08

2008

-12

1995

-03

2003

-08

2008

-12

1995

-03

2003

-08

2008

-12

1995

-03

2003

-08

2008

-12

1995

-03

2003

-08

2008

-12

Central East North Southern West

02,0004,0006,000

Labor (2005 US$/worker) Land (2005 US$/ha)