1. Page 1 NGUETSE TEGOUM Pierre NAKELSE Tebila OUEDRAOGO Issaka Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Assessing the Impact of Agro-pastoral Projects on the Productivity of Farmers Organisations: The Case of Cameroon

2. Page 2 Introduction Introduction Methodology Methodology Results Results Conclusion ConclusionOutline

3. Page 3 Millennium Development Goals : fight against extreme poverty and hunger; Implementation of the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) adopted in 2003; Implementation of the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) adopted in 2003; Low economic growth and increase poverty incidence in rural areas (+2.9%) result of "non success" of the implementation of the PRSP; Low economic growth and increase poverty incidence in rural areas (+2.9%) result of "non success" of the implementation of the PRSP; New development vision expressed through the Growth and Employment Strategy Paper New development vision expressed through the Growth and Employment Strategy Paper Deployment of many projects and programs in rural areas between 2002 and 2008. Deployment of many projects and programs in rural areas between 2002 and 2008. Introduction (1/2)

4. Page 4 The support in terms of projects and programs (PP) for farmers' organizations (POs) do not seem to have a real impact on people in rural areas; The support in terms of projects and programs (PP) for farmers' organizations (POs) do not seem to have a real impact on people in rural areas; Yet the development of agro-products is a major objective of the State in the GESP; Yet the development of agro-products is a major objective of the State in the GESP; Thus it is important to assess the impact of projects and programs undertaken by the Government Thus it is important to assess the impact of projects and programs undertaken by the Government Did the projects and programs significantly improved productivity and living conditions of farmers' organizations? Did the projects and programs significantly improved productivity and living conditions of farmers' organizations? Introduction (2/2)

5. Page 5  Methodology for the analysis of satisfaction (D. Szabo et al (1968)) Its implementation was performed by calculating the scores using a Likert scale (1932). Its implementation was performed by calculating the scores using a Likert scale (1932). Disadvantage: Subjective: do not allow an objective assessment of the impact of PP due subjective response. Advantage: For taking into account the views of beneficiaries and an explanation of the results of projects and programs. Methodology (1/5) A mixed methodology (qualitative and quantitative) is implemented.

6. Page 6  Evaluation by ordinary least squares (OLS) Advantage: Easy to implement Disadvantage : Endogeneity of the variable profit which leads to underestimation and non-convergence of the estimators. Causal model of Rubin (1977) Two techniques used are used: - One to one matching with replacement (easier but asymptotic properties of the causal effect in the treated group is unknown) - Epanechnikov Kernel matching (asymptotic properties established by Heckman et al. (1998)) Causal model of Rubin (1977) Two techniques used are used: - One to one matching with replacement (easier but asymptotic properties of the causal effect in the treated group is unknown) - Epanechnikov Kernel matching (asymptotic properties established by Heckman et al. (1998)) Methodology (2/5)  Quantitative methods of impact assessment (1/2)

7. Page 7AdvantageDesadvantage Lower costs,Lower costs, More results,More results, Generalizable results Control selection problems related to observable characteristics; Intuition is very similar to that of the controlled experiment which is ideal for measuring impact;Generalizable results Control selection problems related to observable characteristics; Intuition is very similar to that of the controlled experiment which is ideal for measuring impact; Complexity of results Selection bias due to unobservable characteristics Substitution Bias Complexity of results Selection bias due to unobservable characteristics Substitution Bias  Quantitative methods of impact assessment (2/2) Methodology (3/5)

8. Page 8 Methodology(4/5) The data used are those of the EIPA survey (2009) conducted by Cameroonian Ministry of Economy and Planning in 2009 - It's a quota survey that covered the entire country and involved 1350 FOs. - Two units of observation were used: the members and the FOs for which the information was collected from the leaders. Data (1/2) Data (1/2)

9. Page 9 The questionnaire leader: - A section on general information about the FOs (age, rate of women,...) - A section for the spending of the FOs - A section on perceptions of the FOs in relation to the impact of state grant Data processing: Variables having non-response rate higher than 30%were dropped. Hotdeck Random method was used to treat missing values Hotdeck Random method was used to treat missing values Methodology (5/5) Data (2/2) Data (2/2)

10. Page 10 Results (1/2) Beneficiary satisfaction Satisfaction of the leaders by region and poverty incidence

11. Page 11 Results (2/2) Results of the matching and OLS Returns to government grants/subsidies (in %) BreedingAgricultureTogether Difference of productivity before matching25.91.410.6 Ordinary Least Squares (OLS)16.1**-1.94.0 One to one matching Effect on the treated (ATT)20.9**0.4**3.4 Effect on the non-treated (ATNT) 7.4***11.1**6.6 Kernel Epanechnikov Effect on the treated (ATT)18.9***-4.4*-0.2 Effect on the non-treated (ATNT) 21.9***2.1**12.1 Poverty gap in 2007 is estimated at 70 000 FCFA at the national level (ECAM 3 Report)

12. Page 12 Qualitative method: Satisfaction Analysis: Leaders and members of farmers’ organizations consider themselves satisfied with the support of the State and its partners. Quantitative methods: OLS: Overall OLS show a positive impact of projects and programs. However for the case of agriculture the impact is negative. Matching: Overall matching highlights the positive impact of support on the productivity of FOs. Specifically the impact of support was more important and statistically significant in the livestock sector than in agriculture. Conclusion (1/3)

13. Page 13 Policy recommendations: 1 – Updating the existing file of FOs with contact information, this would combat the existence of fictitious FOs (indeed, it was realized that some beneficiary FOs have ever existed on field). 2. Encouraging rural people to form themselves into organizations to be more efficient and easier to solicit assistance; Conclusion (2/3)

14. Page 14 Policy recommendations: 3 - making the process for awarding grants more transparent, as people pointed out that the grants are often awarded based on criteria such as the segregationist, political affiliation, ethnicity or "networks"; 4- Increasing the budget devoted to the development of rural areas; 5- Establishing a permanent monitoring and impact evaluation of agro-pastoral projects. Conclusion (3/3)

15. Page 15 Thank You!