ator 2012 11.06.2012
Post on 15-Nov-2014
898 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
1
Trends in Key Agricultural and Rural Development Indicators in COMESA Region
Paul Guthiga & Stella MassaweReSAKSS ECA
2
Outline
• About the report
• CAADP: Principles, Implementation status and M&E
• Economic performance
• Agricultural financing and expenditures
• Performance of agriculture sector
• Agricultural productivity trends
• Poverty and hunger
• Concluding remarks
3
About the report
• Annual Trends and Outlook Report (ATOR) for agriculture
and rural development indicators is a flagship M&E
report prepared by ReSAKSS.
• For what purpose?
– Document & monitor progress towards achievement of the
CAADP targets and other developmental goals.
– Facilitate peer learning, review and mutual accountability among
countries.
• For the year 2011; ATOR focused on “Trends in
Agricultural Productivity”
4
CAADP: Principles, Implementation Status & M&E
5
CAADP Principles
• Agriculture-led growth to achieve MDG1.
• Pursuit of 6% average annual sector growth
• Allocation of 10%of national budgets to agriculture sector
• Exploitation of regional complementarities and cooperation
to boost growth
• Policy efficiency, dialogue, review and accountability
(evidence-based policymaking)
• Partnerships and alliances to include all stakeholders
6
Stages of CAADP Implementation at Country Level
Source: ReSAKSS, 2010
7
CAADP Implementation• At the country level, the implementation process aims at:-
– Aligning national agricultural sector policies, strategies and investment
programs with CAADP principles, pillars and targets.
• At the regional level, RECs plays a coordination role
• Progress of implementation is varied among countries;– Some have made good progress while others lag behind
– Countries in the COMESA region that had developed detailed investment
plans include Rwanda, Uganda, Ethiopia, Malawi, Kenya, and Burundi
8
Status of Implementation at Country Level
Country Name
Dates when compact signed
Investment Plan (IP) ready
IP review date Business meeting held
Rwanda 30-31 Mar, 2007 Yes 4-8 Dec, 2009 8-9 Dec, 2009
Ethiopia 27-28 Sept, 2009 Yes 10-16 Sept, 2010 6-7 Dec, 2010
Burundi 24-25 Aug, 2009 Yes 22-31 Aug, 2011 14-15 Mar, 2012
Uganda 30-31 Mar, 2010 Yes 2-10 Sept, 2010 16-17 Sept, 2010
Malawi 19 Apr, 2010 Yes 10-16 Sept, 2010 28-29 Sept, 2010
Tanzania 6-8 Jul, 2010 Yes 20-31 May, 2011 9-10 Nov, 2011
Kenya 23-24 Jul, 2010 Yes 6-14 Sept, 2010 27 Sept, 2010
Swaziland 3-4 Mar, 2010 In process Not yet Not yet
Zambia 18 Jan, 2011 In process Not yet Not yet
DRC 18 Mar, 2011 In process Not yet Not yet
Djibouti 19 Apr, 2012 Not yet Not yet Not yet
Source: CAADP Website (http://www.nepad-caadp.net)
9
Implementing M&E• Establishment and operation of M&E systems is critical in the
implementation of CAADP compacts and Investment plans.• Why M&E?
– To quantify progress in performance of the agricultural sector. – To monitor delivery on commitments.– Assess effectiveness of the various types of interventions.– Assess consistency with initial targets.
• M&E systems established at various levels : – National level; embedded in national M&E systems;– Regional and continental levels; CAADP M&E Framework– Mutual Accountability Framework (MAF) at the national and
international
10
ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE
11Source: ahttp://data.worldbank.org/indicator bIMF, 2008; IMF, 2009a; IMF,2009b, IMF,2010
2003-2007 2008 2009 2010Burundi 3.6 4.5 3.5 3.9Comoros 2.1 1.0 1.8 2.1DRC 6.4 6.2 2.8 7.2Eritrea 1.8 –9.8 3.9 2.2Ethiopia 11.9 11.2 10.0 8.0Kenya 5.3 1.6 2.6 5.0Madagascar 6.2 7.1 –3.7 –2.0Malawi 5.4 8.6 7.6 6.6Mauritius 4.3 5.5 3.0 4.0Rwanda 6.7 11.2 4.1 6.5Sudan 8.0 6.8 6.0 5.1Seychelles 7.6 –1.3 0.7 6.2Swaziland 2.9 3.1 1.2 2.0Tanzania 7.2 7.3 6.7 6.5Uganda 7.8 8.7 7.2 5.2Zambia 5.6 5.7 6.4 7.6Zimbabwe –17.7 6.0 9.0SSA 6.4 5.6 2.8 5.0
In general economic growth is impressive;
Differences between countries;
High food and fuel prices and inflation still pose threat to future growth
Real GDP Growth in the COMESA Countries
12
Contribution of Agriculture to Total GDP in COMESA countries
Less than 20%
20-29% 30% and above
Libya, Seychelles, Mauritius, Djibouti, Eritrea, Zimbabwe, Swaziland and Egypt
Zambia, Madagascar, Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania
Sudan, Comoros, Burundi, Malawi, Ethiopia, DRC, and Rwanda
Source: compiled by ReSAKSS based on the mostly recently available country sources
13
Agricultural Financing and Expenditures
14
Budgetary allocation
5%
10%
Ethiopia
& Malawi
Burundi, DRC, Egypt, Kenya, Mauritius &Rwanda
Madagascar, Swaziland, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia & Zimbabwe
Maputo Declaration target of 10% budgetary allocation by government is yet to
be met by most countries
15
Proposed Budget Allocation in NAIPs, 2010-15
Source: National Agricultural Investment Plans
Kenya: heavy on irrigation and commercialization
Malawi: heavy on farm support and irrigation
Rwanda: more balanced, favoring NRM
Uganda: balanced, favoring extension and farm support
16
Performance of the Agriculture Sector
17
Agriculture Sector Growth-1
• Impressive progress in agricultural GDP growth; average rate
of 4 percent between 2007 and 2009
• But there were differences in performance among countries
in the COMESA region
18
Agriculture Sector Growth-2
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
Bur
undi
DR
C
Com
oros
Djib
outi
Egy
pt
Erit
rea
Eth
iopi
a
Ken
ya
Liby
a
Mad
agas
car
Mau
ritiu
s
Mal
awi
Rw
anda
Sud
an
Sw
azila
nd
Sey
chel
les
Tanz
ania
Uga
nda
Zam
bia
Zim
babw
e
AgG
DP
gro
wth
(Ann
ual %
cha
nge)
Average 1999-2001 Average2002-4 Average 2005-2007
Source: Authors’ computations based on data on ReSAKSS Website
19
Agriculture Sector Performance (1)
• The countries that met the CAADP target included;
– Rwanda (8.4%), Ethiopia (7.7%), Tanzania (7.3%) and Malawi
(6.5%).
• However, high growth rates in agricultural GDP have not
invariably translated to reduction in poverty and hunger.
– In some countries there is marginal or no reduction in poverty
despite high growth in agricultural GDP.
– Need for targeting investments subsectors or in geographical regions
with potential for high impact on poverty
20
Agriculture Sector Performance (2)
21
Agriculture, value added as share of GDP (Current USD)Country/ Region Annual Average Level
(1990 - 2010)Annual Average Change(1990 - 2010)
COMESA 21.2 -2.8East Africa 33.2 1.3Burundi 46.45 0.77Comoros 44.28 -1.41DRC 47.27 -1.84Djibouti 3.49 -1.80Egypt 16.08 -1.87Ethiopia 52.13 -0.18Kenya 28.32 -1.35Libya 2.97 -5.45Madagascar 28.40 -0.31
Malawi 35.64 -4.26Mauritius 7.85 -2.35Rwanda 38.51 -2.53Seychelles 3.25 -3.03Sudan 37.66 -5.04Swaziland 10.42 -0.79Tanzania 37.55 1.72Uganda 36.17 -1.55Zambia 20.98 -3.12Zimbabwe 17.91 -2.67
Source: Authors calculation based on WDI (2010)Notes: Blank cells indicate missing values. Regional aggregate values are calculated as weighted summations. The weights are computed using country’s GDP as a share of regional GDP.
Contribution of agricultural sector to GDP has slightly decreased in nearly all countries
22
Agricultural Productivity Trends
23
Productivity:- definitions
• Agricultural productivity measures can be ; partial or total.
• Total factor productivity (TFP); compares an index of agricultural
inputs to an index of outputs.
• Partial productivity; amount of output per unit of a particular
input (e.g. land, labour etc)
• TFP more appropriate but less often used due to paucity of data
on prices key inputs
24
Crop productivity
• Maize is the key staple in most countries in the region.
• Maize yields in the majority of countries in the COMESA
region are very low;
– Mostly less than 2 tones/ha compared to a world average of 5
tones/ha
• Yield decline has occurred in several countries in the region
over the past decade
25
Maize Productivity Figure: Yields of Maize (tonnes/ha), averages for 2000-02 and 2006-08
26
2006 - 2010 production growth rates 2006 - 2010 Yield growth ratesBeans Maize Beans Maize
COMESA 2.4 5.0 1.7 1.3East Africa 2.4 3 0.9 -1.4ASARECA 2.2 3.4 1.4 -0.7Burundi -0.8 2.0 5.0 -1.0Comoros 5.1 0.5DRC 0.9 0.0 0.0 -0.01Djibouti 0.8 -2.6 3.7 -12.4Egypt 0.3 4.2 -2.3 -3.1Eritrea -4.5 1.3Ethiopia 16.5 3.4 5.7 -0.1Kenya -5.2 -2 0.7 -4.7Libya 2.2 -1.5 0.1 -1.7Madagascar 1.0 0.5 -0.8 -4.0Malawi 8.0 8.9 9.8 7.3Mauritius 17.2 3.8Rwanda 2.9 51.1 5.5 36.9Sudan -2.8 -21 -0.4 4.1Swaziland -1.1 6.1 0.3 4.6Uganda 2.0 1.9 -0.4 -0.3Tanzania 3.1 5.6 -0.8 -0.6Zambia 18.2 5.1Zimbabwe -5.7 -7.2 -3.9 -3.3
Production versus Productivity Growth
Production is growing faster than productivity
27
Coefficient of Yield Variation (2000-2010)Countries Beans Maize Rice Wheat Cassava Sweet
Potato
COMESA 5.7 8.0 6.1 4.9 3.9 26.7East Africa 4.9 18.8 10.6 18.1 7.4 32.5ASARECA 5.6 10.4 12.0 14.2 3.7 27.2Burundi 8.2 5.0 5.8 7.0 22.6 33.1Comoros 12.7 8.3 4.5 42.5DRC 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.7 0.5 28.7Djibouti 6.3 16.6Egypt 4.0 5.0 3.1 4.3 35.5Eritrea 135.9 59.1 57.0Ethiopia 26.0 18.1 1.9 17.7 167.5Kenya 15.8 11.6 27.4 22.2 27.6 31.9Libya 13.9 19.2 8.1Madagascar 7.2 24.3 18.8 10.1 18.4 27.8Malawi 20.6 37.9 25.4 44.8 14.8Mauritius 13.9 13.3 37.6Rwanda 18.8 51.9 31.5 37.6 27.9 29.1Seychelles 9.3Sudan 7.4 40.8 37.6 25.9 4.3 32.7Swaziland 2.5 23.8 12.5 17.0 540.8Uganda 15.0 9.9 5.9 2.6 4.4 48.1Tanzania 15.1 44.5 14.7 36.3 15.7 170.2Zambia 19.1 19.3 18.2 5.1 33.7Zimbabwe 29.2 46.1 23.0 26.6 6.9 68.3
Source: Authors Calculation based on FAO data
28
Fertilizer Use• Average fertilizer use COMESA region is only about 30 Kg/ha.• Lower than 50kg/ha target set during the African Fertilizer
Summit. • Low use underlay the low productivity.• Low levels of fertilizer use are attributed to; high costs, poor
transport infrastructure, unavailability in some remote areas among others
29
Fertilizer consumption Kg/ ha arable land
30
Productivity in Livestock Sector
• Livestock production is a key activity in the region particularly in the arid and semi arid zones.
• Most countries recorded productivity gain between 2000 and 2009 but some recorded decline
• At the regional level, some productivity gains have been recorded in beef productivity
31
Beef productivityCountry Beef yields in carcass weight (kg) Change in beef yields (%)
2000 2005 2009 2000-09 2005-09Burundi 126.4 126.5 126.5 -0.88 -0.01Comoros 110.0 110.0 110.0 0.02 0.00DRC 155.9 155.6 159.2 2.11 2.28Djibouti 110.0 110.0 109.7 -0.28 -0.28Egypt 172.8 191.7 203.4 16.85 6.10Eritrea 108.9 108.9 91.7 -15.84 -15.85Ethiopia 108.3 108.4 108.4 0.79 0.02Kenya 136.7 149.1 150.0 21.54 0.59Libya 178.7 197.7 160.4 -8.37 -18.85Madagascar 127.5 127.5 127.5 0.00 0.00Malawi 205.0 205.0 205.0 0.47 -0.02Mauritius 206.7 231.8 235.0 9.27 1.34Seychelles 239.2 224.8 225.8 -7.52 0.46Sudan 114.4 122.2 125.1 12.28 2.38Swaziland 225.4 217.6 261.7 8.73 20.23Uganda 150.0 156.4 175.7 17.12 12.32Tanzania 108.0 108.1 108.6 0.24 0.46Zambia 158.3 160.0 162.0 4.52 1.26Zimbabwe 223.3 225.0 225.0 4.65 0.00Rwanda 104.0 104.0 104.0 0.00 0.00COMESA 129.3 135.1 137.7 8.40 1.94
Source: Authors’ computations based on data from FAOSTAT
32
Agricultural trade performance• Agricultural trade accounts for about a third of the
total intra-COMESA trade • Regional trade in food staples has implications on
regional food security • Agricultural trade is constrained by
– Tariff & non-tariff barriers
• Accurate data is key for monitoring progress especially on informal trade
33
Value of agricultural trade in the COMESA region
Year Total COMESA exports (country imports) (USD)
Total food imports (USD)
Total agricultural raw materials imports (USD)
Food imports as % of total COMESA exports (A)
Agricultural raw materials as % of total COMESA exports (B)
Agricultural trade (A+B)
2003 1,820,290,339 559,295,121 104,437,668 30.7 5.7 36.4
2004 2,003,943,144 731,650,899 58,674,879 36.5 2.9 39.4
2005 2,752,761 ,589 909,746,039 112,531,448 33.1 4.1 37.2
2006 3,029,887,300 995,730,257 91,060,719 32.9 3 35.9
2007 4,223,471,205 1,487,046,578 115,318,365 35.2 2.7 37.9
2008 6,383,617,580 1,920,458,845 81,821,128 30.1 1.3 31.4
2009 6,063,933,735 1,858,050,282 101,832,352 30.6 1.7 32.3
Source: COMSTAT online
34
Poverty and Hunger
35
Poverty trends
• Africa as a whole has experienced a moderate decline in the rate of poverty since 1990
• From 47.0 percent in 1990–95 to 46.5 percent in 1995–2003 and 44.3 percent in 2003–09.
• The COMESA region experienced similar declining trend, with different levels of intensities across countries.
36
Poverty declining.. but still high (1)
Country Name Most recent year Most recent poverty rates 2011 Estimated Rates
Burundi 2006 81.3 78.3Comoros 2004 46.1DRC 2006 59.2Egypt 2005 1.9 2.2Ethiopia 2005 39.0 25.6Kenya 2005 19.7 19.8Madagascar 2005 67.8 55.2Malawi 2004 73.9 64.4
Rwanda 2005 76.8 77.1Swaziland 2001 62.9 45.7Tanzania 2007 67.9 58.3Uganda 2009 28.7 21.4Zambia 2004 64.9 62.2
International Poverty Line: Poverty rates $1.25 a day (PPP) (% of population)
Source: http://data.worldbank.org ; 2011 Estimates are authors calculations based on “business as usual scenarios”
37
Poverty declining…but still high (2)
Country Years Poverty incidence (%)
Burundi 1990 34.9
2002 68.0
DRC 2004/05 71.34
Ethiopia 1994/95 49.5
2009/10 29.0
Kenya 1992 44.8
2005/06 45.9
Malawi 1997-98 66.5
2007 40
Madagascar 1993 70
2001 70.1
Trends in poverty reduction (with reference to national poverty line) in the selected countries in the COMECA region
38
Poverty declining…but still high (3)
Country Years Poverty incidence (%)Rwanda 2000-2001 58.9 2010/11 44.9Tanzania 1991/92 38.6 2007 33.6Uganda 1992 56.4 2009 24.5Zambia 1991 70 2006 64
Source: Based on the available from National surveys
39
Population Undernourished (in Millions)Country Name 1990-1992 1995-1997 2000-2002 2006-2008
Burundi 2.5 3.5 3.9 4.9 Comoros 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 DRC 1.0 1.2 0.6 0.5 Djibouti 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 Eritrea 2.1 2.1 2.7 3.1 Ethiopia 34.7 36.2 32.6 32.6 Kenya 8.1 9.0 10.6 12.4
Madagascar 2.4 3.5 4.4 4.7 Malawi 4.2 3.8 3.6 3.9 Mauritius 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Rwanda 3.0 3.0 3.1 3.0 Sudan 10.8 9.3 9.8 8.8 Tanzania 7.7 12.8 14.0 13.9 Uganda 3.5 4.9 4.8 6.7 Zambia 2.9 3.6 4.7 5.4 Zimbabwe 4.3 5.3 5.1 3.7 COMESA 87.8 98.9 100.7 104.3 EAC 24.8 33.2 36.4 40.9
Source: http://www.fao.org/economic/ess/ess-fs/fs-data/ess-fadata/en/
40
Child malnutrition rates (Weight for Age)Country Name Most Recent Year Most recent malnutrition rates 2011 Estimated
rateBurundi 2005 39.2 39.6Comoros 2004 24.9 24.6DRC 2007 28.2 25.1
Djibouti 2006 29.6 35.8Egypt 2008 6.8 8.6
Eritrea 2002 34.5 29.5Ethiopia 2005 34.6 27.4Kenya 2009 16.4 16.4Libya 2007 5.6 6.2Madagascar 2004 36.8 38.2
Malawi 2006 15.5 6.6
Mauritius 1995 13 6Rwanda 2005 18 15.6Seychelles 1988 5Sudan 2006 31.7 27.0Swaziland 2007 6.1 4.9Tanzania 2005 16.7 11.0Uganda 2006 16.4 14.2Zambia 2007 14.9 10.4Zimbabwe 2006 14 16.1
1Source: http://data.worldbank.org ; 2011 Estimates are authors calculations based on “business as usual scenarios”
41
Global Hunger Index
Source: IFPRI, Concern Worldwide and Welthungerhilfe, 2010
The index ranks countries on a 100-point scale, with 0 being the best score (no hunger) and 100 being the worst
20.0 and 29.9 indicates alarming hunger, 30.0 or higher-extremely alarming.
Burundi
Comoros
DRC
Djibouti
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Kenya
Madagascar
Malaw
i
Mauritius
Rwanda
Sudan
Swaziland
Tanzania
Uganda
Zambia
Zimbabw
e
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
1990 2003 2010
42
Trends in GHI…hunger has reduced, but increased in some countries
Country% Change in GHI values
1990-2010% Change in GHI values
2003-2010Burundi 17.5 -10.3Comoros 5.7 -9.4DRC 60.8 9.0Djibouti -23.5 12.4Ethiopia -32.3 -18.8Kenya -15.7 -8.9
Madagascar -5.5 -8.1Malawi -43.5 -28.3Mauritius -8.2 76.3Rwanda -18.4 -15.1Sudan -18.4 -18.6Swaziland -19.4 -27.4Tanzania -20.7 -30.9Uganda -24.6 -19.5Zambia -14.4 -21.6Zimbabwe 3.5 -9.9
Source: Authors’ computation
43
Rising food prices worsen hunger situation…
Jan-07 Apr-07 Jul-07 Oct-07 Jan-08 Apr-08 Jul-08 Oct-08 Jan-09 Apr-09 Jul-09 Oct-09 Jan-10 Apr-10 Jul-10 Oct-10 Jan-11 Apr-11 Jul-11 Oct-11 Jan-12 Apr-120
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
Ethiopia- Food Total FAO GLOBAL- Food Kenya- Food & Non-Alcoholic Drink Malawi- Food
MauritiusFood And Non Alcoholic Beverages Rwanda- Food And Non-Alcoholic Beverages Tanzania- Food and Non alcoholic beverages Uganda- Food
Zambia- Food Djibouti - Food
44
Food Aid (Tones)… has increased in some countries
Source: Computed from data from Food Aid Information System of the WFP
Recipient 2002-2004 (A) 2008-2010 (B) % change A-BBurundi 60,815.8 44440.2 -26.9DRC 80,850.2 158029.0 95.5Djibouti 11318.6 14128.0 24.8Egypt 11,990.1 3367.5 -71.9Eritrea 258,050.3 5746.7 -97.8Ethiopia 1013711.1 1185371.2 16.9Kenya 133360.5 252133.6 89.1Madagascar 47072.5 27052.7 -42.5Malawi 127525.6 67657.3 -46.9Rwanda 52114.3 20414.9 -60.8Seychelles 0.0 1166.7 ..Sudan, the 259203.1 553256.4 113.4Swaziland 16673.1 12541.8 -24.8Tanzania 109169.0 50318.1 -53.9Uganda 167933.3 135034.5 -19.6Zambia 101206.6 18095.2 -82.1Zimbabwe 274819.0 218169.8 -20.6COMESA* 2,725,813.2 2,769,423.4 1.6
45
Concluding remarks (1)• Process of CAADP implementation is ongoing well in most
countries but some challenges still remain…– Slow implementation in many countries– M&E systems need more capacity, better coordination & harmonization– Huge budget deficits in most investment plans
• Economic growth trends in the region in general appear positive for most countries but…
• Countries remain vulnerable to external shocks like the global food price and financial crises, climate extremes, etc
• Food and nutritional security remain a major problem in most countries.
• Need to eliminate existing barriers to trade…
46
Concluding remarks (2)• Agricultural productivity growth in the region has been
impressive but still below potential• Hence need for significant investments in agricultural R&D an
other investments
top related