1 / 16

Ann Waters-Bayer, ETC AgriCulture, Netherlands

Tracking ARD investment and civil society organisation (CSO) involvement. Ann Waters-Bayer, ETC AgriCulture, Netherlands. INSARD. 3-year project developed by six African and EU partners: ESAFF (Tanzania) ETC AgriCulture (Netherlands) GRET (France) REPAOC (Senegal) PELUM (Zambia)

ismael
Download Presentation

Ann Waters-Bayer, ETC AgriCulture, Netherlands

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Tracking ARD investment and civil society organisation (CSO) involvement Ann Waters-Bayer, ETC AgriCulture, Netherlands

  2. INSARD 3-year project developed by six African and EU partners: • ESAFF (Tanzania) • ETC AgriCulture (Netherlands) • GRET (France) • REPAOC (Senegal) • PELUM (Zambia) • Practical Action (UK) that promote ARD partnerships working toward innovation systems that are more farmer-led.

  3. Aim of INSARD “To ensure an informed participation of a broad range of European and African civil society organisations in the formulation and implementation of ARD policies.” Some of the participants in the INSARD consultation workshop, Nairobi, Nov 2011

  4. Main tasks of INSARD • Design mechanisms that allow CSOs to participate effectively in ARD decision-making in SSA and Europe • Link African and European CSOs that seek to influence ARD policy and practice for/in SSA • Help CSOs define research priorities and best ways to communicate these to researchers and policymakers • Work with other stakeholders to strengthen demand-led and ecologically oriented ARD • Stimulate greater resource flows to such research with and for smallholders

  5. Start-up study: “mapping” of African & European CSOs in ARD in SSA • Carried out by Mutizwa Mukute & Tafadzwa Marange, Zimbabwe, in consultation with INSARD team • To identify formal and informal linkages among CSOs and other stakeholders involved in ARD • To identify potentials and blockages in ARD to realising greater participation of CSOs in deciding on resource allocation, priorities and implementation • To discover how, where and by whom decisions for resource allocation for ARD in SSA are made

  6. ARD agenda-setting mechanisms in which CSOs (could) engage – 1 – International • GFAR: Global Forum for Agricultural Research • GCARD: Global Conference on Agricultural Research for Development • CGIAR: Consultative Group of International Agricultural Research • FAO: Food and Agriculture Organisation & its Committee on World Food Security (CFS) • BetterAid Forum / People’s Coalition on Food Sovereignty / High-Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness

  7. ARD agenda-setting mechanisms in which CSOs (could) engage – 2 – SSA / Europe • FARA: Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa • ASARECA: Association for Strengthening of Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa • CCARDESA: Centre for the Coordination of Agricultural Research and Development for Southern Africa • CORAF / WECARD:West and Central African Council for Agricultural Research and Development • PAEPARD:Platform for African–European Partnership in Agricultural Research for Development • EFARD:European Forum for Agricultural Research and Development

  8. International mechanisms for resource allocation in ARD in SSA • GDPRD: Global Donor Platform for Rural Developmentlimited attention to ARD but recently set up working group to map ARD resources and track ARD investments • EIARD: European Initiative on Agricultural Research for Development • CGIAR Fund Council:65% of EU and member country ARD funding goes to CGIAR • About 40 multilateral and bilateral donors identified: most donors have no CSO space in decision-making structures

  9. ARD resource allocation in SSA countries • Science & Technology/Agricultural Research Funds • African governments giving more importance to agriculture as basis for economic development, e.g. CAADP, Maputo Declaration • Increasing role of some SSA governments in funding ARD: up to 50% • Many SSA governments have budget-making processes that invite CSO input, but stay at sector level (not ARD) • Examples of innovative programmes to increase smallholders’ access to ARD resources and capacity to decide on what research to conduct and with whom:Local Innovation Support Funds (LISFs)

  10. Trends in ARD expenditure in SSA since 1998 (IFPRI 2011) • 10 countries increasing: Benin, Burundi, DR Congo, Ghana, Mauritania, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda • 10 countries decreasing: Eritrea, Gabon, Guinea, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mozambique, Niger, Senegal, Zambia, Zimbabwe • 5 steady: Ivory Coast, Ethiopia, Namibia, Rwanda, South Africa • 5 fluctuating: Burkina Faso, Botswana, Gambia, Kenya, Mali Key determinants of ARD funding levels and trends: • economic performance • social and political stability • relative priority given to ARD • donor support

  11. Challenges faced by CSOs in influencing ARD investment policy • CSOs do not have enough knowledge about resource-allocation mechanisms • Competing interests among CSOs • Little capacity to jointly influence resource-allocation systems and processes • Lack of mandate to speak on behalf of others • Insufficient space for CSOs to engage with donors • Perceived or actual lack of capacity to generate evidence to back up CSO positions

  12. Opportunities for CSO involvement in deciding on ARD investment • Shifting global thinking about role of CSOs in ARD (e.g. IAASTD) • Provision for CSO involvement in some ARD structures at different levels (e.g. GFAR, FARA, SRFs, NARS) • Growing realisation of need for different kind of agricultural research (to enhance innovation systems)

  13. Study recommendations – 1 CSOs should increase their involvement in ARD governance & resource-allocation structures by: • Ensuring effective occupation of spaces set aside for CSOs in such structures • Lobbying for new spaces for CSO inclusion in such structures • Forming grounded national and regional CSO-ARD platforms • Developing CSO capacities to mobilise resources for this • Lobbying donors to include and monitor smallholder-farmer & agro-ecological impact indicators in ARD

  14. Study recommendations – 2 In resource-allocation structures, CSOs should push for investing ARD resources in line with IAASTD recommendations: • Smallholders should be involved in agenda setting and implementation through participatory research because they are critical to food security and poverty alleviation • ARD should support effective ways of working with different knowledge systems and practices that enhance agro-ecological practices

  15. CSO info needs for tracking ARD investment • How are ARD investment priorities determined? • Who decides on fund allocation on basis of what criteria / indicators (e.g. focus on / involvement of smallholders)? • To what extent is partnership involving CSOs required in the ARD, and what are roles of CSOs in this partnership? • On what types of agricultural systems are ARD funds being spent?

  16. Conclusion ARD partnerships that genuinely involve CSOs so that research becomes more smallholder-focused and ecologically oriented can be developed only if adequate human and financial resources are generated for them and enough time is provided for their evolution. Thank you For more information, please contact: agriculture@etcnl.nl

More Related