“Agriculture: Turning promisesinto realities on the ground”Coordination amongst development partnersNiger, Burkina Faso and Ghana

April 2011

Sébastien FourmyOxfam France

CC NN PP FF PP // NN

Field Mission

• 3 West African countries: Niger, Burkina Faso, Ghana

• Interviews:– Bilateral international development agencies (heads

of the rural sector, agriculture, food security departments , etc.)

– Multilaterals (FAO, WFP, UNDP, World Bank, EU, etc.) – Ministries of Agriculture, Economics and Finance; Food

Crisis Management bodies

• Partner Organisations: – Farmers’ platform of Niger (PFPN); – Farmers’ confederation of Burkina Faso (CPF); – Farmers’ Organisation Network of Ghana (FONG)

Context Agriculture: neglected by ODA (1/3)

Context Neglected by national investments (2/3)

74%

20%

6%

PTF Gouvernement PPTE

Ghana: 2008 MoFA budget Niger: 2008 budget secteur rural

63%

36%

1%

Development partners Government IGF

Context Domination of the project approach (3/3)

Burkina Faso Nb DPs Nb of Projects

2007 27 131

Niger Nb DPs Nb of Projects

2007 24 692008 28 67

Ghana Nb DPs Nb of Projects

2009 13 63

Ghana: Aid flows (2001-2007) Million $

Adverse effect of project aid

• Project approach: 100% of funds implemented through projects in Agriculture sector (Burkina, 2007)

• Project management units (PMUs):– 40% of projects put PMUs in place (Burkina, 2007)– PMUs accounts for 15 to 60% of project fundings (Niger,

2007)

• Missions: – 330 missions from donors in 2007 (Burkina, 2007)– Ghana imposed a 2 months ‘mission free period’

• Specialization: 12 different donors units within gahna’s Ministry of Finance

Lack of coordination and of country ownership Value chains in Burkina Faso

“In the field, the donors have such different intervention methods that they are becoming incomprehensible to the actors they are supposed to be helping.”

Official of Ministry of Finance, Burkina Faso

• Government strategy: Around 20 ‘value chains action plans’

• 6 DP programmes with no links between them:– Poor distribution across the supported value chains:

– Poor geographical distribution of value chains

– Different intervention strategies in the field

– Poor alignment on existing strategies, coordination bodies, etc.

Lack of coordination and of country ownership Coordination bodies: ex of Niger

dgq<

23 + 1 + 1 + 2 = 27

Challenge: strengthening national policies Investing concretely in programmes

• Necessitates a change in approach by the TFPs:– Specific skills: prior capacity building – Specific human and financial investment– Flexibility and an individual pace necessary for any

learning process– Repositioning by the TFPs – effective participation by civil society

• From words to actions:– A waiting strategy adopted by the TFPs in country– Few TFPs are actually adopting a support approach

Main recommendations TFPs should:

• Move away from implementing projects towards concrete support for developing and implementing sector-wide programmes;

• Move towards a phase of dialogue and real coordination for their interventions ;

• Translate the funding promises made at international level into additional, long term, predictable funding, so as to strengthen the current national and regional process.

Main recommendations States should:

• Ensure active supervision in the development and implementation of sector-wide agricultural programmes, to be consistent with the regional trade policy creating a favourable environment

• Demonstrate real leadership in coordination for TFP interventions

• Make agriculture and food security real budgetary priorities

Thank you for your attention

The full study is available in English and French