CAADP Implementation and Achievement of Outcomes Sam Benin, IFPRI
Introduction and Objectives Last 2 days: learned about significant growth and poverty reduc7on in Africa in recent decades Ques6on: how has CAADP contributed to these achievements? Objec6ve of presenta6on: use analysis of means of change in key indicators to assess CAADP effects: Indicators: government agriculture expenditure, agricultural value added, GDP per capita, and poverty gap Assump6on: CAADP involves intensive processes and ac7ons that take 7me to implement è the longer a country engages, the greater the likelihood of success
Methods and Data (1) CAADP? if and when a country signed a compact Descrip6on Signed compact by end of 29 (C- 9) Signed compact aser 29 or by end of 211 (C- 11) Signed compact aser 211 or by end of 214 (C- 14) Signed compact aser 214 or never (no- C) Countries Benin, Burundi, Cape Verde, Ethiopia, Gambia, Ghana, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Togo (13) Burkina Faso, Central African Republic, Congo, Dem. Rep., Côte d'ivoire, Guinea, Guinea- Bissau, Kenya, Malawi, Mauritania, Mozambique, Senegal, Seychelles, Swaziland, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia (16) Angola, Cameroon, Chad, Congo, Rep., Djibou7, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Lesotho, Madagascar, Sao Tome and Principe, Sudan, Zimbabwe (12) Algeria, Botswana, Comoros, Egypt, Eritrea, Libya, Mauri7us, Morocco, Namibia, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan, Tunisia (13)
Methods and Data (2) Aggregate sta6s6cs in the indicators across the four CAADP groups over three sub- periods: 199-23 as baseline Change in 23-28, ini7al CAADP 7meline Change in 28-214, renewal of CAADP un7l Malabo Hypothesis: e.g. agricultural value added growth rate from baseline in C- 9 > C- 11 > C- 14 > no- C Data from various interna7onal and na7onal sources (see ReSAKSS website for details)
Agriculture Exp (% of total exp), annual average 1 - - 1 6 3-1, Growth Rate (%) 2,8 Level (%) 3,4 3,7,3 4, 3, All C- 9 C- 11 C- 14 no- C 199-23 1,1-1,7-3,4 All C- 9 C- 11 C- 14 no- C 23-28 28-214 Before CAADP, share was 3.4% in Africa; went down over 7me Since CAADP, share increased most in C- 9, then C- 11 Declined in others, especially those without compacts
Agriculture Value Added, annual average 1 Growth Rate (%) 4,2 3,4 3, 2,7 2,4 All C- 9 C- 11 C- 14 no- C 23-28 Constant 2 US$, mil 2, 2,86 1,62 1,76 4,12 All C- 9 C- 11 C- 14 no- C 199-23 28-214 Overall high growth across board Consistent with change in exp share, aggdp increased most in C- 9 and C- 11; but higher growth in C- 11 High growth in others, especially in 28-214
GDP per Capita, annual average 12 9 6 3-3 3 2 1 2,2 23-28 28-214 Constant 2 US$ 241 979 392 46 71 All Growth Rate (%) 4,7 2,6 1,8 2,2 All C- 9 C- 11 C- 14 no- C 199-23 C- 9 C- 11 C- 14 no- C GDP per capita highest in countries with no compact (e.g. N. Africa, Botswana, S. Africa) As with earlier results, fastest growth in C- 9 and C- 11 Moderate growth in others, mostly in 23-28
Poverty Gap (% in total population), annual average 3-3 - 6 3 2 1 Growth Rate (%) - 2, - 2, - 2,7-1,4 Level (%) 1, 17,6 18, 2, 4,1 All C- 9 C- 11 C- 14 no- C 199-23 -,8 All C- 9 C- 11 C- 14 no- C 23-28 28-214 The poverty gap also shrunk fastest in C- 9 and C- 11 Moderate rate of reduc7on in the others In countries with no compacts, the gap first widened and then shrunk
2 nd -Level Analysis Summary: countries that have engaged in the CAADP process longer (i.e. those that signed their compacts by the end of 211): have progressed fastest toward the Maputo 1% target; are realizing faster aggdp and overall income growth; are deepening their poverty reduc7on the most. Ques6on: what if such countries were predisposed prior to CAADP, e.g. Rwanda, Malawi, Ghana who may have already been in a CAADP- like process? è redo analysis aser dropping vey low and very high achievers at baseline from the data (i.e. use countries with ini7al similar performance 3 countries)
Annual average growth rate in expenditure and outcomes (%) 1 - - 1 1 1 Summary: Ag Exp. Share of Total Most 3,3 of the - 1,7-1,3,6 countries with no compacts (no- C) dropped out and so - All C- 9 C- 11 C- 14 group is les out of analysis Ag Value Added 4,9 3,3 2,9 2,7 All C- 9 C- 11 C- 14-1 1 1 All C- 9 C- 11 C- 14-2,7-2, 2,4 1 28-214 23-28 Poverty Gap - 3,8 Overall results do not change. C- 9 and C- 11 experienced: - 1,3 GDP per Capita 4,8 3, 1,7 Faster growth in ag exp share; Faster aggdp and GDP per capita growth; Faster reduc7on in poverty gap. All C- 9 C- 11 C- 14
Conclusions and Implications Results 1: significant progress toward achieving core CAADP targets (1% ag exp and 6% aggdp growth) in countries that have engaged in process longest Results 2: these have likely contributed to the more rapid growth in incomes (GDP per capita) and deepening of poverty reduc7on in those countries Sustaining Results: High inter- temporal variability in achievements reflects challenges in sustaining commitments è Malabo Declara7on is 7mely Malabo: elaborates desired contribu7on of agriculture to overall results è more disaggregated indicators and deeper analyses are needed (e.g. effec7veness and efficiency of different types of policies and spending)