Findings of Capacity Needs Assessment (CNA) Studies ( Rwanda, Tanzania, Mozambique and Ghana )

1. Findings of Capacity Needs Assessment (CNA) Studies (Rwanda, Tanzania, Mozambique and Ghana) Godfrey Bahiigwa- IFPRI/ReSAKSS Samson Jemaneh- IFPRI-ESARO Presented at Agriculture Policy Exchange and Learning Event Dakar, Senegal May 13-16, 2013

2. Contents • Objectives of the studies • Research questions • Methodology • Policy process and linkages • Capacity Assessment results • Options for Country SAKSS • Capacity Issues to be addressed • Next steps

3. 2. Objectives of CNA Studies • The main objective of the study is to identify areas for capacity building to improve the quality and utility of agricultural policy analysis, strategy formulation, investment planning, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation at country level. • The findings of the study will be used in designing and establishing new country SAKSS or in strengthening existing ones.

4. 3. Research Questions The CNA studies attempted to answer the following questions • Who are the key players in the policy process and what are the linkages among the players? • What individual and organizational capacities are needed for strategic agricultural policy analysis and investment planning, M&E and Knowledge management in the short, medium and long terms to satisfy those needs? • How can these capacities be harnessed through their effective use in the organizations involved in the CAADP process particularly for strategic policy analysis, program implementation, review and dialogue?

5. 4. Methodology • Identification of key players (Government ministries, think-tanks, civil society organizations and non-state actors) was done in an inception workshop held in the countries facilitated by ReSAKSS nodes. • Formal and informal interviews were conducted at three levels (i)individual level (ii) organizational level (iii) Policy process level • Desk reviews of existing literature on food and agricultural policies and strategies in the countries. • Identification of major actors and their linkages, and networks

6. 6.1. Capacity Assessment Results

7. 6.2. Capacity Assessment Results (ctd)

8. 6.3 Capacity Assessment Results (ctd)

9. 7.1 Options for Country SAKSS • Rwanda • The Node is a single person (coordinator) without any significant research and program assistance • The process of establishing the SAKSS network of partners and launching specific activities, particularly strategic and monitoring analysis has been slow. • The architecture of the SAKSS, particularly the role of different actors within MINAGRI has not been clear. • How to go about setting up a governance structure that enables key stakeholders to inform the direction of the work program on strategic analysis , M&E and knowledge system, remains key question to be answered. • Even if the Country SAKSS is well integrated in the organization chart of the Ministry, since the Country SAKSS does not utilize the financial resources of MINAGRI, it is somewhat seen as other internal project funded by Development Partners.

10. 7.2. Options for Country SAKSS 2. Tanzania • In Tanzania, M&E in agriculture sector is done by the ASDP M&E Thematic Working Group (M&E TWG) since 2006 for the ASDP. • Most of its members are from ASLMs officials and some from NBS and Development partners (DPs). However, the study noted that outcome of its activities and functions have some challenges: • The composition of the existing group is very limited in terms of representatives. The report indicates that this has negative impact on its performance(on time data availability, effectiveness of ASDP and its outcome on stakeholders all can be attributed to limited network of the group) • The CNA study recommends that since the functions of the existing group address the agriculture sector and all ASLMs are well involved, it is plausible to use the structure of the existing group with minor modifications to have SAKSS node with extensive network and more potential members.

11. 7.3 Options identified for country SAKSS 3. Mozambique • For Mozambique, the CNA study recommends that MozSAKSS be established within DE and have close collaboration with other relevant MINAG institutions such as DNSA, IIAM and DNTF. • The study also recommends that a steering committee should be created comprised of the various institutions to implement the agreed annual work plan or any eventual immediate demands approved by MINAG for DE to make sure all planned activities are prioritized by respective departments. • The steering committee would also provide for wide representation in the agricultural sector in determining the capacity needs and the agricultural policy research agenda that MozSAKSS should address. • Given the lack of skills in certain areas, the team should receive technical backstopping from ReSAKSS-SA and other partners. • The organizational set up should include building of capacity at provincial level with counterpart institutions as most activities are implemented at provincial level.

12. 7.4. Options for Country SAKSS 4. Ghana • The study recommends that the node be located in a research and an academic environment that has reasonably good human and material resources to provide leadership and direction and to coordinate SAKSS activities. • At the moment, SAKSS is located in MOFA • The proposal is that the SAKSS node be located at the Institute of Statistical, Social and Economic Research (ISSER) of the University of Ghana instead of within MOFA but with a deputy coordinator from the PPMED of MOFA. This is not to imply that SAKSS will be “owned” by the University. It will be a MOFA (agriculture sector) project but located in an institution that can easily harness expertise within the University, other universities and research institutions within and outside the country as well as the Ministries, NGOs etc. to undertake the required activities • The location of SAKSS outside MOFA will strengthen the collective “ownership” of METASIP by all agriculture sector partners. In addition it can relate more effectively with the SAKSS of other African countries and the ReSAKSS nodes which are located in research institutions across the continent. • The study validation workshop in the last 2 weeks did not uphold this recommendation and as such the Ghana SAKSS will be in MOFA

13. 8. Capacity Issues to be addressed • The case studies identified areas for improving the quality and utility of agricultural policy analysis and investment planning, M&E, and knowledge management • The studies suggest a lot of improvement is still needed for different institutions and stakeholders to fully and actively contribute in the agricultural policy formulation process. • The areas for improvement include; • Strengthening evidence based analysis to improve priority setting • Incentive packages for technical staff to improve performance • Agricultural M&E systems to track sector performance • Staff training related to data processing, analysis, reporting • Physical facilities (computers, car, office space, softwares) • Adequate financing particularly for policy research and advocacy. • IT and data analysis skills • Knowledge management and information sharing mechanisms • Building capacity of regional and district personnel in agricultural policy discussions and dialogue. • Building capacity of farmer based organizations and associations in good governance.

14. 9. Next Steps • Complete the studies in the 15 countries • Validation of studies by stakeholders • Develop SAKSS work plan • Set up SAKSS management team • Sign MOU between ReSAKSSand Government • Hire SAKSS country manager and team • Launch SAKSS node • Train SAKSS/CAADP team • Set up/strengthen M&E System

15. Thank You!