Strengthening Capacities For Evidence Based Policy Planning And Implementation In Africa Ifpri S Support To Caadp In 2017 2018

This report highlights achievements made in 2013 by IFPRI and its partners in support of the CAADP implementation agenda through ReSAKSS, the AGRODEP Modeling Consortium, and analytical work on agricultural growth and investment options.

Introduction: Since 2006, the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) has provided policy research and capacity-strengthening support to guide the planning and implementation of the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP). Endorsed in 2003 by African heads of state and government, CAADP is a continentwide framework for accelerating growth and progress toward poverty reduction and food and nutrition security through an agriculture-led growth strategy. As part of IFPRI’s support to CAADP, the Regional Strategic Analysis and Knowledge Support System (ReSAKSS) was established in 2006 to provide policy-relevant analysis, data, and tools necessary to support the formulation and implementation of evidence-based agricultural-sector policies and strategies, as well as to facilitate CAADP policy dialogue, peer review, benchmarking, and mutual learning processes. ReSAKSS is facilitated by IFPRI in partnership with Africa-based CGIAR centers, the African Union Commission (AUC), the NEPAD Planning and Coordinating Agency (NPCA), and leading regional economic communities (RECs)

IFPRI commissioned this study to assess how the country programs (CPs) are performing—which approaches and methods are producing the best outcomes across countries and over time—to identify factors that promote or impede their progress and lessons for making them more impactful in the future. The study has two major components. The first is a survey and analysis of the factors that CP leaders perceived to have most helped them influence host-country policies. We interviewed all current and most past CP leaders, which enabled us to compile evidence from recent CP experiences as well as from the 1980s and 1990s. We focused on the lessons they drew from their past successes that shed light on how to make their other activities successful. We did not undertake similar interviews on failed efforts because it is much harder to elicit such information from CP leaders. Additional insights about unsuccessful activities are, however, captured in the second component of the study, a commissioned external evaluation of the performance of a sample of ongoing country programs. Ideally, the external evaluation would have included CPs in both Africa and Asia, but this was not possible with the available budget. We therefore settled for an evaluation of CPs in Africa south of the Sahara. Doing so had two advantages: (1) the African CPs are more homogenous in terms of their objectives, structure, and internal IFPRI management, making comparisons among them more insightful; and (2) the budget was sufficient to both include all the African CPs in some of the analyses and allow the external evaluator to visit three of them.

Over the past decade, interest in gender equality and women’s empowerment has grown rapidly, creating a unique opportunity to institutionalize gender research within agricultural research for development. This book, edited by researchers from the CGIAR Gender Platform, reviews and reflects on the growing body of evidence from gender research. It marks a shift a way from a traditional focus on how gender analysis can contribute to improved productivity, flipping the question to ask, How does agricultural and environmental research and development contribute to gender equality and women’s empowerment? Chapters synthesize the wide range of CGIAR and other research in this area, covering breeding research and seed systems, value chain participation, nutrition-sensitive agriculture, natural resources, climate adaptation and mitigation, the “feminization” of agriculture, women’s role in agricultural research, and emerging gender transformative approaches.

Agricultural transformation and development are critical to the livelihoods of more than a billion small-scale farmers and other rural people in developing countries. Extension and advisory services play an important role in such transformation and can assist farmers with advice and information, brokering and facilitating innovations and relationships, and dealing with risks and disasters. Agricultural Extension: Global Status and Performance in Selected Countries provides a global overview of agricultural extension and advisory services, assesses and compares extension systems at the national and regional levels, examines the performance of extension approaches in a selected set of country cases, and shares lessons and policy insights. Drawing on both primary and secondary data, the book contributes to the literature on extension by applying a common and comprehensive framework — the “best-fit” approach — to assessments of extension systems, which allows for comparison across cases and geographies. Insights from the research support reforms — in governance, capacity, management, and advisory methods — to improve outcomes, enhance financial sustainability, and achieve greater scale. Agricultural Extension should be a valuable resource for policymakers, extension practitioners, and others concerned with agricultural development.

This book is open access under a CC BY 4.0 license. The book examines the methodological challenges in analyzing the effectiveness of development policies. It presents a selection of tools and methodologies that can help tackle the complexities of which policies work best and why, and how they can be implemented effectively given the political and economic framework conditions of a country. The contributions in this book offer a continuation of the ongoing evidence-based debate on the role of agriculture and participatory policy processes in reducing poverty. They develop and apply quantitative political economy approaches by integrating quantitative models of political decision-making into existing economic modeling tools, allowing a more comprehensive growth-poverty analysis. The book addresses not only scholars who use quantitative policy modeling and evaluation techniques in their empirical or theoretical research, but also technical experts, including policy makers and analysts from stakeholder organizations, involved in formulating and implementing policies to reduce poverty and to increase economic and social well-being in African countries.

The Innovation for Agribusiness (InovAgro) project, which launched with its first three year phase in 2010, uses a market system development (MSD) approach towards the goal of increasing incomes of men and women small-scale farmers in northern Mozambique. InovAgro interventions promote improved agricultural productivity, participation in selected high-potential value chains and the development of inclusive and sustainable market systems, such that impacts are expected to last long beyond the termination of the project. This paper presents results from a midline quantitative impact evaluation of the second phase of the InovAgro project interventions (2014-2017). In it, we use a carefully designed and executed quasi-experimental study design to credibly attribute changes in market engagement and welfare of participating farmers to exposure to the InovAgro II project, identifying and testing in what respects the intervention was most successful, and what regard it had less impact. Although InovAgro II projects operate in 11 districts of Zambézia and Cabo Delgado provinces, this impact evaluation focuses on two districts in Zambézia province (Alto Molócue and Molumbo), and in terms of value chains, focuses on the soybean and pigeon pea high-potential value chains, while the InovAgro II project interventions focus on these in addition to maize, sesame and groundnut. A baseline survey was undertaken in 2015 covering the 2014/2015 agricultural season and a midline follow-up survey was conducted in 2017, covering the 2016/2017 agricultural season and reaching 1,749 households of the original 1,886 households interviewed in the baseline survey. Using difference-in-difference estimation and propensity score matching, we find that exposure to the InovAgro II project is associated with an increase in the proportion of households selling soybean and pigeon pea by approximately 5% and 16%, respectively (significant at the .01 level). Exposure to the InovAgro II project also results in significantly higher shares of smallholder farmers using improved seed for soybean and pigeon pea (an increase of 6% for soybean and 2% for pigeon pea). We find that the InovAgro II project is also associated with significant increases in access to agricultural output market information from formal sources (5%) and hired labor for farming activities (8%). Despite the significant impacts on short term outcome variables, exposure to the InovAgro II project had limited impact on long term outcome variables, such as on rural-urban migration as well as engagement in the non-farm sector (two proxies for assessing potential welfare implications of the project) however this finding is not surprising given the impact evaluation covers only two years-a short period of time to bring about the long-term impacts expected to eventually emanate from an MSD project.