1. AfDB-IFAD Joint Evaluation of Agriculture and Rural Development in Africa Towards purposeful partnerships in African agriculture 19 October 2010, Gaborone, Botswana

2. 2  Assess the relevance, performance and impact of IFAD and AfDB policies and operations for agriculture in Africa  Evaluate the IFAD/AfDB partnership and their partnerships with other sector stakeholders  Propose forward looking recommendations to respond to Africa’s emerging opportunities and challenges in agriculture Evaluation objectives

3. 3 AfDB and IFAD  IFAD and AfDB are major players in ARD in Africa  Combined cumulative total US$ 10 billion in loans and grants increasing to about US$17 billion with co-financing and borrower contributions  By 2007 the two accounted for 50% of all multilateral aid to ARD in Africa  Current lending(2008): AfDB US$ 360 million, IFAD US$ 235 million  AfDB is multi-sectored working exclusively in Africa while IFAD works exclusively in ARD throughout the world  Both have been over the past 3-4 years undergoing a reform process which continue today. Reforms have mainly focused on lender performance

4. 4 ARD Context: Opportunities and Challenges  Economic and agricultural growth accelerating and potential for further growth  Demand and trade for agriculture products, new commodities (bio- fuels) and bio-technology  Yet, volatile prices for commodities and underdeveloped input/output markets; unfavourable external trade regime  Agriculture growth remains key to reducing rural poverty  Focus on widely shared growth through the four “I”s - investment climate, infrastructure, innovation, institutions  Smallholder farmers and women play a central role in promoting agricultural growth  Transformation and commercialization of smallholder agriculture  Fragile states: require different institutions and implementation modalities  Political will: Rising government commitment to agriculture and rural development and emergence of CAADP  More space for private sector and more regional integration

5. 5 ARD Context: Opportunities and Challenges (Cont.)  There is a Policy Gap in ARD: includes the knowledge gap as well as limited capacity to formulate and implement sound policies  Weak government capacity; poor quality sector institutions; limited decentralization  Stronger civil society and improved democratic process; reduced number of armed conflicts  New aid architecture (Paris Declaration, Accra Agenda for Action) and emerging donors playing increasing role  Adapting to and mitigating climate change

6. 6 Past Performance: AfDB & IFAD Projects

7. 7 Project Performance

8. 8 Past performance: some key issues  “Micro-macro paradox” in project and country programme performance  Weak analytical work and knowledge management  Need to focus more clearly on specific sub-sectors such as water and irrigation, livestock, micro-finance and community driven development  Concerns about efficiency and sustainability of projects and other interventions  Not enough attention paid to gender  Weak performance of both lending agencies (AfDB/IFAD) and borrowers (governments)  Benchmarking: performance roughly on par with other organizations working on ARD in Africa

9. 9 Partnerships  Past partnership between IFAD and AfDB was weak, among other issues, with limited co-financing of projects  In a context of “partnership proliferation”, IFAD and AfDB require clearer partnership policies and objectives  Past partner priorities were not always set well, and there was too little focus on specific partnership results and value-added  IFAD and AfDB need to clearly articulate their comparative advantages and complementarities for future partnership, at global and country levels  Further internal reforms in both agencies are needed to develop workable partnership models and supportive business processes  Strong partnerships are dynamic in nature, they require flexibility  Adequate resourcing, including staff resources, and organizational incentives are crucial to make partnerships work

10. 10 Complementarities for partnerships  IFAD and AfDB have different mandates that guide their ARD relevance and possible complementarities  AfDB: infrastructure, regional development, governance, skills, private sector, poverty reduction through growth  IFAD: empowers farmers and the rural poor, targets smallholders and poverty directly, innovates  The AfDB/IFAD partnership must be seen within the broader framework of strategic sector partnerships  with African organizations (NEPAD/CAADP) and initiatives (FARA, AGRA, AFFM)  with World Bank, EC, bi-lateral lead donors, knowledge institutions (IFPRI) etc.  Country level partnerships are key

11. 11 The story emerging from the evaluation  Africa is a continent on the move  Medium and long term prospects are good, as there is renewed interest in ARD and macro-economic policies have improved  Challenges remain, new and old, such as low levels of human development, climate change and distorted trade regime  Agriculture remains very important for economic development and poverty reduction, especially the role of smallholder farmers and women. There is untapped potential  Good policies matter, but there is a policy, institutional and leadership gap. Many governments lack the capacity for planning and implementing pro-poor growth policies and programmes

12. 12 The story emerging from the evaluation (cont.)  The political will to invest in agriculture is critical, need for improvements in some countries through greater allocation of resources to ARD in line with Maputo declaration  There now is more space for the private sector in Africa with many opportunities to further expand collaboration  Strong partnership are required between development partners, including public and private sectors and civil society  Partnership between IFAD and AfDB in the past was opportunistic, rather than strategic. Limited co-financing over the past 30 years

13. 13 The story emerging from the evaluation (cont.)  Complementarity between the two organizations should be the basis for future partnerships, based on comparative advantage and proven specialisation  Non-lending activities are currently weak in both agencies  IFAD-AfDB need to deepen and complete the process of internal change and move beyond their current role as project investment agencies. Need to become more knowledge and policy oriented, focused and specialised  Sustainability of benefits, efficiency and gender equality remains a major concern

14. 14 Recommendations Focus around the three “Ps” of policy, performance, and partnership Filling the sector policy gap  At regional and sub-regional level support and maintain alignment with CAADP  At country level  support borrowers to further develop sound national ARD policies and strategic priorities  support sector coordination and align AfDB and IFAD strategies and programmes fully with national policy frameworks  At global level develop knowledge and capacity to engage in international advocacy on trade issues affecting African producers

15. 15 Recommendations (cont.) Improving Lender Performance  Increase skills, knowledge and capacity in the areas of policy, analytical work, knowledge management, and managing partnerships  Strengthen country presence  Finance simpler, more tightly focused projects and programmes, undertaken within the framework of coordinated sector plans  Increase support in fragile states for ARD, giving careful attention to choice and sequencing

16. 16 Recommendations (cont.) Improving Borrower Performance Support governments to undertake capacity needs assessments of borrowers in ARD, and provide substantial support for institutional development, including for  political decentralization  gender mainstreaming  research and development

17. 17 Recommendations (cont.) Building purposeful partnerships  AfDB-IFAD to deepen their current bilateral partnership based on their respective comparative advantage, specialization and complementarity  Bank support for large scale operations (e.g., infrastructure) to be complemented by IFAD’s attention to small scale activities (e.g., small producers and their organizations)  IFAD’s role in pro-poor innovations and Bank’s capacity to upscale offer opportunities for wider impact  At (sub-)regional level, take forward their partnership within the framework of CAADP

18. 18 Thank you!