Meeting the Need for Effective Food, Agricultural and ... · 1 The Food, Agriculture and Natural...
Transcript of Meeting the Need for Effective Food, Agricultural and ... · 1 The Food, Agriculture and Natural...
1
The Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network (FANRPAN)
TOWARD A FANRPAN STRATEGY: 2007-2016
Meeting the Need for Effective Food, Agricultural and Natural Resources Policy Analysis in Southern Africa
Farm Inn Hotel, Pretoria, South Africa September 26-27, 2006
A Report of the Proceedings
REG IONA L SECRETARIAT 141 Cresswell Road, Weavind Park 0184 Private Bag X813, Silverton 0127 Pretor ia, South Africa
Tel: +27 12 845 9100 Fax: +27 12 845 9110 Email: [email protected] www.fanrpan.org
2
Contents Page 1. Background…………………………………………………………………………………………
3
2. Stakeholder par ticipation………………………………………………………………………
3
3. The Strategic P lanning Meeting…………………………………………………………………………… a) Rev iewing the ev olution of FANRPAN………………………………………………………………….. b) Defining the scope and role of policy analysis……………………………………………………… c) Stakeholder Analysis………………………………………………………………………………………… d) A SWOT analy sis of FANRPAN and its role…………………………………………………………. e) A rev iew of FANRPAN’s v ision, mission and goals………………………………………………… f) A rev iew FANRPAN’s internal env ironment………………………………………………………….. g) An assessment of the key strategic policy issues for FANRPAN to focus on…………….. h) Linking performance to M ission and to S trategy : the balance scorecard approach.
4 4 5 9 9
10 11 12 13
4. Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………… 15
Dr Douglas Merrey, Dr Lindiwe Majele Sibanda, Professor Haidari Amani and Dr Howard Elliott at the strategic planni ng meeting
3
Background FANRPAN has, over the last 2 years (2005-06), been involved in a major process of strengthening and revamping its institutional capacity – a process that has been supported by USAID-Southern Africa. This process has been characterized by five main thrusts: (I) Strengthening FANRPAN’s governance systems; (II) Strengthening FANRPAN’s links with, and contributions to, key regional policy processes and related regional institutions investing in policy reform; (III) Rev italizing FANRPAN country node system and stakeholder contributions in four pilot countries (Malawi, Mozambique, South Africa and Zambia) through training, policy dialogues, action research and new peer rev iew partnerships; (IV) Engaging national level analysts in policy research contributing to the harmonization of regional policies relating to agricultural inputs trade; and (V) Developing and implementing a sustainable funding strategy for the regional FANRPAN network . As part of this 5-pronged capacity -strengthening process, FANRPAN commissioned a baseline institutional v iability rev iew, at both national and regional levels, to establish and analyze FANRPAN’s current strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats as a basis for designing new medium term organizational and operational strategies. This baseline rev iew was undertaken using the Partner Institution Viability Assessment (PIVA) tool and rev iewed 7 main organizational elements: Governance Systems; Operational and Management Systems; Programmes and Serv ice Delivery Systems; Human Resource Development Systems; Financial Management Systems; Resource Mobilisation strategies; External Relations and Advocacy . The peak of this 2-year capacity strengthening and organizational rev iew process was a 2-day strategic planning meeting (26-27 September 2006), organized by the FANRPAN regional secretariat in Pretoria, South Africa. The meeting brought together key stakeholders to discuss the lessons and findings over the 2-years and to convert these into a new FANRPAN 10-year strategic and operational plan (2007 –2016). The strategic planning meeting was organized around 8 main elements:
1. Rev iewing the evolution of FANRPAN 2. Defining the scope and role of policy analysis 3. Stakeholder analysis 4. A SWOT analysis of Agricultural Policy in Southern Africa and of FANRPAN and its role 5. A rev iew of FANRPAN’s v ision, mission and goals 6. A rev iew FANRPAN’s internal env ironment 7. An assessment of the key strategic policy issues for FANRPAN to focus on 8. Link ing performance to Mission and to Strategy: the balance scorecard approach.
The guiding principles and critical issues within these elements were presented in a strategic planning workbook – that guided stakeholder discussions at the meeting. Stakeholder Participation Stakeholder participation and involvement was central in both the rev iew and planning processes. National and regional level stakeholders were engaged both physically and electronically as part of the assessment process. The stakeholder institutions represented at the planning meeting in Pretoria included: SADC Secretariat, NEPAD Secretariat, COMESA Secretariat, National Universities (Lesotho, Pretoria, Zimbabwe, Angola, Mozambique, Venda), CGIAR centers (IWMI, IFPRI, ILRI), FANRPAN country nodes (Angola, Malawi, South Africa, Zambia, Mozambique, Tanzania, and Mauritius), Partner institutions (ODI, SAKSS-SA, SACAU, GWP, HSRC, SAfAIDS, GECAFS, PBS, A fricaBio); Consultants (Octoplus, Headstart, Development Data; FOODNCROPBIO, Limited Edition, Auditing & Accounting firm, IBIS-Africa), NGOs (DP Foundation, NANGO-Zimbabwe; legal adv isers; and FANRPAN board members. A ll these institutions articulated the value-addition expected from FANRPAN in the form of value propositions, which FANRPAN will translate into effective action.
4
The Strategic Planning Meeting I. Evolution of FANRPAN The purpose of this session was to set the context for the strategy planning meeting and ensure that: all participants appreciated the diversity of FANRPAN’s clients and stakeholders and why their effective participation was important for FANRPAN; that all participants shared the sense of opportunity at hand in helping design and chart the future for FANRPAN; and that all participants appreciated the history and evolution of FANRPAN’s work in the region, as well as, the organizational background. Key outcomes In this session Dr Lindiwe Majele Sibanda, the FANRPAN CEO, presented the objectives of the meeting and Prof Haidari Amani, the FANRPAN Board Chairperson, helped the participants discuss and appreciate FANRPAN’s past, present and future scenarios. The following were some of the key outcomes of the session:
1) FANRPAN is a policy body – set up for policy analysis in the FANR sector 2) Initial think ing began in 1994. The network was constituted in 1997 and officially
registered in 2002 3) The network received endorsement from the SADC Council of Ministers 4) The driving forces for the creation of the network were: link ing national and regional
policy reforms; and backstopping these reforms with a critical mass of policy analysts 5) The main purpose of setting up FANRPAN was three-fold:
Promoting the development of appropriate agricultural and natural resources policies in the region through improved policy research, analysis and information generation
Building human capacity in the region for policy analysis and development Setting up a communication system for improv ing policy decisions
6) The need for a rev ised strategy is derived from three main factors: A new institutional landscape – RECs, NEPAD, FARA all bringing new processes and
targets A broader view of policy analysis – away from the narrow scope of agricultural
economic analysis that has characterized FANRPAN research to date A SWOT analysis of FANRPAN as an institution
7) Relocation of FANRPAN’s regional secretariat from Harare to Pretoria has opened up new opportunities and linkages for resource mobilization for the network
8) The diversity of FANRPAN stakeholders places competing claims on FANRPAN – based on multiple interests and demands – and these may sometimes be inconsistent
9) The FANRPAN customers and clients are not necessarily the ones pay ing the bill 10) Sometimes FANRPAN partners are themselves competitors, e.g., IFRPI is both a partner
and competitor in policy analysis 11) There is need to articulate FANRPAN’s key achievements and milestones over this period
as a basis for designing future scenarios 12) There is need to clearly define and articulate the distinctions between four categories of
FANRPAN clients: (I) FANRPAN members, (II) FANRPAN stakeholders, (III) FANRPAN partners, and (IV) FANRPAN nodes.
II. Defining the Scope of Policy Analysis This session discussed the demand for policy analysis and the factors that enhance its impacts. The underly ing theoretical frameworks for developing an effective strategic plan, as well as, the scope and scale of policy analysis and policy advice were presented by Dr Howard Elliot (Figures 1 and 2) as a basis for refining FANRPAN work . The frameworks were used throughout the
5
planning meeting as a basis for understanding the strategic planning process and the implications of the scope and scale of policy analysis to FANRPAN’s effectiveness. Key outcomes 1. The strategic planning process was informed by 5 main elements (figure 1): an initial
agreement by both external and internal stakeholders that FANRPAN needs a new and more focused direction; a rev iew of FANRPAN’s mandate; a review of FANRPAN mission and values; an assessment of FANRPAN’s external and internal env ironments; and a critical analysis of the strategic issues that FANRPAN needs to address over the next 10 years.
2. FANRPAN needs to engage in a complete policy analysis cycle (figure 2) which consists of 6 major activ ities: Research and analyze; design and recommend; adv ise strategically ; mediate; democratize; and clarify values and arguments.
3. Implementing each of these policy analysis activ ities requires a specific operational sty le, a specific thrust and specific human resources that FANRPAN must have:
In researching and analyzing policies – FANRPAN assumes a “rational sty le” – and the driving force in this sty le must be: “what is good knowledge that the stakeholders need to know?” In order to research and analyze effectively , FANRPAN needs independent and objective researchers. The value-added in this mode is scientific quality , reliabil ity and validity of the findings.
In designing and recommending new policies – FANRPAN assumes a “client adv ice sty le” – and the driving force in this sty le must be, “what is good for the client?” In this mode FANRPAN needs impartial advisors and independent experts. The value-added in this mode will be policy relevance, usability and action-orientation.
In advising strategically – FANRPAN must focus on the “process.” The driv ing force here must be: “What is good for the process?” In order to advise strategically , FANRPAN needs good client counselors. In this operational mode the value-added will be political effectiveness, workability of options proposed, pro-activeness and personal goal achievement.
In the mediation role – FANRPAN needs to assume an “interactive sty le” and the driv ing force must be, “What is good for mutual understanding?” In this mode FANRPAN needs good facilitators, mediators and process managers and the key value-added will be acceptance and learning, sharing of different perspectives, and commitment to policy change.
In the democratizing mode – FANRPAN must assume a “participatory sty le” in which the driv ing force must be: “What is good for democratic society?” In this mode FANRPAN needs “democratic advocates” and the value-added is democratic legitimacy, openness, transparency and effective representation.
In clarifying values and arguments – FANRPAN assumes an “argument sty le’ and the driv ing force in this case would be, “what is good for debate?” In this mode FANRPAN would need good narrators, logicians and a code of ethics. The value-added would be improved quality of debate and arguments; consistency , richness and openness.
4. The demand for policy analysis is derived from a real demand for policy change on the part of some important client.
5. There are important differences between economic analysis (what is causing disequilibria), policy analysis (options), and policy adv ice (relevance). In this context its critical to isolate when each of these is likely to be effective.
6. The demand for the prov ision of policy analysis is not restricted to the public sector. 7. The greater the policy disequilibria – the greater the expected gain from policy change 8. Policy research may take the form of: data and information; ideas; and advocacy . It is
possible to combine research and advocacy . It is important to assess whether the type of
6
policy engagement being undertaken is appropriate to the situation and the stakeholders involved.
9. Analysis of the demands of advocacy groups will give an indication of the ev idence base required.
Participants in a working group session: Dr Charles Mataya (Malawi node); Mr. Richard Humphries Sout h Africa node); Dr Tobias Takavarasha (Zimbabwe node) and Mr. Innocent Modisaotsile (SADC Secretariat)
7
(1
) In
itia
l ag
reem
ent
(Pla
n f
or
pla
nn
ing )
Sta
keho
lder
s • I
nte
rnal
•E
xter
nal
(2)
Man
date
s
(3
) M
issi
on/V
alue
s •B
y st
akeh
olde
rs
(5)
ST
RA
TEG
IC I
SSU
ES
• D
irect
App
roac
h •
Goa
ls A
ppro
ach
• V
ision
of S
ucce
ss
appr
oach
•
Indi
rect
App
roac
h
(6)
ST
RATE
GY
FORM
ULA
TIO
N
(4A
) Ex
tern
al
Env
iron
me
nt A
sse
ssm
ent
Forc
es/T
rend
s Po
litica
l; Ec
onom
ic; S
ocia
l; te
chno
logi
cal;
educ
atio
nal;
phys
ical
Key
Res
ourc
e C
ontr
olle
rs
Clie
nts;
Cus
tom
ers;
Pay
ers;
m
embe
rs; r
egul
ator
s
Com
petit
ors
& C
olla
bora
tors
Co
mpe
titiv
e an
d co
llabo
rativ
e fo
rces
(4B
) In
tern
al E
nvi
ron
me
nt
Ass
ess
men
t
Re
sour
ces
Peop
le;
Econ
om
ic; I
nfor
mat
ion;
C
ompe
tenc
es;
Cul
ture
Pre
sent
Str
ateg
y
Ove
rall;
Dep
artm
enta
l; Bu
sine
ss
proc
ess;
fun
ctio
nal
Per
form
ance
In
dica
tors
; R
esul
ts;
Hist
ory
Str
ateg
ic P
lann
ing
Str
ateg
ic p
lann
ing
Opp
ortu
nitie
s an
d th
reat
s
Stre
ngth
s an
d W
eak
ness
es
Exte
rnal
En
viro
nm
ent
Inte
rna
l En
vir
onm
en
t
Figu
re 1
: T
he S
trat
egic
Pla
nnin
g C
ycle
: A
dapt
ed f
rom
: B
ryso
n, J
ohn
M.
Stra
tegi
c Pl
anni
ng f
or P
ublic
and
No
npro
fit
Org
aniz
atio
ns,
A G
uide
to
Stre
ngth
eni
ng a
nd S
usta
inin
g O
rgan
izat
iona
l A
chie
vem
ent.
Jos
sey-
Bas
s Pu
blis
hers
, C
A. 1
995;
8
Figu
re 2
Res
earc
h &
A
naly
ze
Des
ign
&
Rec
omm
end
Adv
ise
Stra
tegi
cally
Med
iate
D
emoc
rati
ze
C
lari
fy
Val
ues
&
Arg
umen
ts
Rati
onal
sty
le
Wha
t is
good
kno
wle
dge?
Inte
ract
ive
Styl
e W
hat i
s go
od fo
r m
utua
l un
ders
tand
ing?
1. O
verv
iew
of a
ctiv
ities
that
m
ake
up p
olic
y an
alys
is
2. P
olic
y an
alys
is s
tyle
s lin
ked
to
acti
vitie
s 3.
Und
erly
ing
valu
es a
nd c
rite
ria
of
polic
y an
alys
is
Scie
ntifi
c qu
ality
V
alid
ity
Relia
bilit
y
Polic
y re
levan
ce
Usa
bility
A
ctio
n or
ient
atio
n Politi
cal e
ffect
ivene
ss
Wor
kabi
lity
Pro-
activ
enes
s Pe
rson
al g
oal a
chie
vem
ent
Acce
ptan
ce &
lear
ning
Co
mm
itmen
t Sh
arin
g of
pers
pect
ives
Le
arnin
g
Dem
ocra
tic l
egiti
mac
y O
penn
ess
Tran
spar
ency
R
epre
sent
atio
n
Qua
lity
of d
ebat
e an
d
Arg
umen
ts
Con
sist
ency
R
ichn
ess,
ope
nnes
s
Idea
listic
an
d ge
neri
c va
lues
&
crit
eria
Pra
gmat
ic &
pa
rtic
ular
val
ues
and
crit
eria
Facil
itato
r; M
edia
tor;
pr
oces
s m
anag
er
Dem
ocra
tic
Advo
cate
Narr
ator
, Lo
gicia
n, e
thic
s Inde
pend
ent S
cien
tist
Obj
ectiv
e re
sear
cher
In
depe
nde
nt e
xper
t Im
part
ial a
dviso
r
Clie
nt C
ouns
elor
4. C
once
ptua
l mod
el o
f Po
licy
Ana
lysi
s
Adv
ice
styl
e W
hat i
s go
od fo
r th
e cl
ient
?
Arg
um
en
t st
yle
W
hat
is g
ood
for
deba
te?
Par
tici
pato
ry s
tyle
W
hat i
s go
od fo
r de
moc
ratic
soc
iety
?
Pro
cess
sty
le
Wha
t is
good
for t
he p
roce
ss?
Ob
ject
o
rien
ted
valu
es &
cr
iter
ia
Sub
ject
o
rien
ted
valu
es &
cr
iter
ia Figu
re 2
: A
con
cept
ual
mod
el f
or P
olic
y A
naly
sis:
Ado
pted
fro
m M
ayer
, Ig
or S
, C
,. El
s va
n D
aale
n, a
nd P
iete
r W
.G. B
ots.
20
04.
Per
spec
tive
s on
pol
icy
anal
ysis
: a
fram
ewor
k fo
r un
ders
tand
ing
and
desi
gn,
Int
ern
atio
nal J
our
nal
of T
echn
olog
y,
Polic
y an
d M
ana
gem
ent.
“Promote, influence and facilitate quality agricultural and natural resources policy research, analysis and dialogue at the national, regional and global levels”.
9
III. Stakeholder Analysis: FANRPAN’s Clients and Stakeholders The purpose of this session was to describe the diversity of FANRPAN stakeholders and analyze their claims on FANRPAN products and serv ices. Key outcomes 1. The diversity of FANRPAN stakeholders often places competing and sometimes conflicting claims
on FANRPAN. 2. FANRPAN needs to isolate a special category of “critical stakeholders” – those that directly impact
on FANRPAN’s existence. 3. The “critical stakeholders” prov ide core support to FANRPAN and influence FANRPAN’s strategic
plan. 4. FANRPAN needs a business plan with specific core functions and activ ities funded by the “critical
stakeholders.” 5. In terms of effectiveness, FANRPAN stakeholders can be characterized as either “primary or
secondary.” Some stakeholders can swing between primary and secondary depending on the situation and level (national or regional).
6. Primary stakeholders are the ones that use FANRPAN products – while the secondary stakeholders are the ones that have to be conv inced about FANRPAN.
7. A wider group of public institutions and stakeholders, beyond the Ministries of Agriculture, is critical, e.g., parliaments and parliamentary committees.
8. Stronger operational partnerships with universities in developing countries are critical. 9. Partnerships with NGOs/CSOs should cover a wider scope, including trade unions, consumer
organizations. 10. ‘Agribusiness’ is too general – this needs to be split into several strata to include SMEs. 11. FANRPAN needs to articulate the different instruments it requires to reach different stakeholders. 12. National governments and bilateral donors should be included in the list of donors. 13. FANRPAN needs to identify and use “key change agents” that can influence policy change and
support FANRPAN lobby ing and advocacy activ ities. 14. FANRPAN needs to respond directly to the RECs agenda (SADC and COMESA). 15. FANRPAN needs to adopt informed policy positions based on technical research. 16. FANRPAN’s key functions must be providing research and articulating policy . 17. Donors are mainly concerned with FANRPAN hav ing and exhibiting a clear development purpose
for the region. 18. Who are the FANRPAN members and what’s their stake? What is the stake of governments – is it
in setting of priorities? How does FANRPAN balance between collaboration with government v is-à-v is independence?
19. Stakeholders include even those that might influence FANRPAN negatively. 20. What is the stake of SADC in FANRPAN? 21. Geographical coverage – is it SADC or Southern Africa? What is the implication of this on certain
stakeholders? To whom is FANRPAN responsible? 22. Who is a member of the network and who is a stakeholder? 23. FANRPAN membership consists of stakeholders across 4 sectors: government, Farmer
organizations, policy research institutions, and private sector. IV. SWOT Analysis This session discussed the current FANRPAN strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats in the context of the current regional agricultural policy needs, stakeholder demands and the theory of effective policy analysis. This discussion was informed by three sets of analysis: the report on the InterAcademy Council (IAC) workshop on agricultural issues in the region; the FANRPAN electronic survey analysis; and an internal SWOT analysis undertaken by FANRPAN’s strategic planning core team. Some of the key outcomes included:
“Promote, influence and facilitate quality agricultural and natural resources policy research, analysis and dialogue at the national, regional and global levels”.
10
1. New branding – the relocation of FANRPAN to South Africa has given FANRPAN a new image – a new quality brand and an opportunity for attracting new resources. This new branding needs to trick le down to the nodes.
2. Commitment by the regional secretariat and regional board – the core team at the regional secretariat has demonstrated unique levels of tenacity , resilience and commitment over the last 3 years in working with very limited resources.
3. Finance Manager – FANRPAN urgently needs a fulltime finance manager based at the regional secretariat. This has not been possible to date due to lack of core funds.
4. Research Director – FANRPAN needs a resident research director to ensure quality control in FANRPAN research. Again this had not been possible due to limited funds.
5. Communication/ICT Manager – FANRPAN needs a resident communication manager to handle the information and knowledge management component of FANRPAN’s work .
6. There is a weak link between the secretariat and some country nodes. The two-year capacity grant from USAID focused on five of the twelve nodes. The different country nodes have different compositions.
7. FANRPAN carries out excellent policy research – but the reports need further distilling for different audiences.
8. FANRPAN prov ides an excellent forum for regional information sharing, and prov ides national level organizations an opportunity to access regional organizations and processes.
9. FANRPAN is well-recognized in the region and has high credibility . 10. FANRPAN has been undertak ing short-term projects that do not allow sufficient time and
funding to assess impact. 11. FANRPAN needs to establish a core regional peer rev iew team to rev iew its research
outputs. 12. FANRPAN prov ides a dialogue forum for various stakeholders. 13. FANRPAN has a regional character – a regional institutional framework for implementing
multi-country activ ities. FANRPAN is an organization that has been regionally grown. 14. FANRPAN has some very strong and credible node hosting institutions. 15. The FANRPAN network harnesses a diversity of skills in the region. 16. FANRPAN operates through loose linkages – which can sometimes affect longer-term
impact. 17. FANRPAN largely depends on external funding. FANRPAN needs to find ways of charging
for its serv ices. 18. FANRPAN needs to develop more synergies with the National Agricultural Research
Institutions (NARIs). 19. Because of the varied national interests, FANRPAN needs to focus on balancing regional
policy interests, and harmonizing the differences. 20. FANRPAN’s impact, to date, is not easily quantifiable. FANRPAN needs a strong M & E
component. 21. The changing nature of international and regional agricultural trade is an opportunity for
FANRPAN to intensify its trade related policy analysis in the region, as well as respond to national level trade challenges.
22. FANRPAN needs to increase demand for its products – by advertising its serv ices even beyond the region.
23. The increasing demand for capacity building in policy development in the region is an excellent opportunity for FANRPAN to take the lead.
24. Track ing the regional policy commitments and pronouncements, e.g., monitoring the quality and quantity of the Maputo declaration on 10% national spending on agriculture, and implementation of CAADP and MDGs is an open opportunity for FANRPAN.
V. A Review of Mission, Mission and Goals
“Promote, influence and facilitate quality agricultural and natural resources policy research, analysis and dialogue at the national, regional and global levels”.
11
The purpose of this session was to rev iew FANRPAN’s Vision, Mission and Goal statements and assess if they adequately reflect the positioning that the organization was designed to be, as well as, project what it env isages to be in the next 10 years. It was observed that FANRPAN’s v ision must be distinct from those of other players (but be a broadly shared one) and the mission must reflect how FANRPAN will implement what it is striv ing to achieve in its v ision. Key outcomes The participants proposed 5 v ision statements and mandated the “core strategy team” – to further work these into a final FANRPAN vision: 1. “Creating a Conducive Policy Env ironment for a Food Secure SADC” 2. “Creating a Conducive Policy Env ironment of Sustainable food Security in Southern Africa”
(This was followed by a protracted debate on whether FANRPAN’s geographical coverage should be specified as SADC or Southern Africa. Each seemed to have its own merits and demerits)
3. “A food secure Southern Africa managing natural resources sustainably and equitably” 4. “A southern Africa that has achieved sustainable livelihoods” 5. “Productive agriculture as a basis for widely shared food security and prosperity
using natural resources sustainably in Southern Africa”. (There was some general consensus around this statement)
The following mission statements were proposed and the “core team” mandated to further work these into a f inal statement: 1. “Coordinate, promote, influence, and facilitate policy research, analysis and dialogue at
national, regional and global levels – in order to reduce poverty , achieve food security and equity – and contribute to agricultural growth and sustainable natural resource management – in Southern Africa”
2. “Ev idence-based policy analysis, dialogue and advocacy” 3. “Promote, influence and facilitate quality natural resources, agricultural and food
policy research, analysis and dialogue at the national, regional and global levels”. (There was some general consensus on this statement)
The meeting resolved that, FANRAN would achieve this mission through three main channels:
Generating evidence-based policy options (policy research) Building human and institutional capacity for policy development in the
region (capacity building) Providing appropriate policy information and advice (consultation).
6. The Internal Environment The purpose of this session was to rev iew the existing ev idence on the internal env ironment of FANRPAN at 4 levels:
a) As a network of engaged policy analysts and users b) As a secretariat serv ing a diverse group of clients and stakeholders c) As a network of networks – a regional network of national networks (national nodes)
with different national level needs d) As a regional institution - its governing mechanisms and operational strategies.
Key Outcomes Building on the discussion of FANRPAN’s v ision, mission and goals – the following were some of the outcomes essential for optimal performance:
“Promote, influence and facilitate quality agricultural and natural resources policy research, analysis and dialogue at the national, regional and global levels”.
12
1. The SADC position on the Regional Board – has not been adequately filled since the relocation of the SADC-FANR directorate from Harare, Zimbabwe to Gaborone, Botswana. Filling this, as soon as possible, might ensure the required SADC endorsement of FANRPAN work .
2. Composition of Regional Board – needs to be rev isited by defining the specific “purpose” of the board. Is it for “raising FANRPAN’s profile? Is it for “fund raising”? Is it primarily for proper governance? What are the advantages versus costs of a larger board? What is the “value-added”?
3. Node/Country-based Board versus Eminent persons/trustees type board – FANRPAN needs to decide which type of board will give it leverage? Is it representation based or value-based or both?
4. Agenda setting – research issues and priorities should come from the national node through a representative regional board. The role of the Secretariat is mainly implementation (coordinating, fundraising, establishing linkages and regional representation).
5. Communication – a system of continuous communication between the Secretariat and the nodes, on the one hand, and among nodes, on the other, must be developed. This communication must go beyond just joint studies – it must be on-going even when there is no specific joint activity between a given node and the secretariat.
6. Country node; Node hosting Institution and Node Coordinator/facilitator – Although the FANRPAN constitution attempts to define these - there is need for more definite and clearer criteria to help stakeholders distinguish between these three elements – as they tend to be used synonymously – and in so doing - creating undue uncertainty. Country nodes are the national policy research, analysis and dialogue coordination units established in each of the member states. The node members comprise of FANRPAN’s four key stakeholder groups (government ministries responsible for FANR, policy research units, private sector national umbrella organizations that deal with FANR, national farmer organizations. The country node members designate one national organisation to be the node hosting institution, which prov ides secretariat serv ices through a node coordinator. A facilitator who, in most cases, is a full time employee of the node hosting institution assists the Coordinator.
7. Criteria for an ideal node-hosting institution – while the national contexts for policy engagement differ across the different national landscapes – it was proposed that a good node-hosting institution must have the following minimum attributes:
Convening capacity – capacity to convene high-level policy dialogue meetings for a cross-section of stakeholders in the FANR sector
Respect/Recognition by Government – must have a well defined policy agenda respected and recognized by government and other key stakeholders
Strong leadership/Governance – must be an organization with its own strategic direction and purpose – exemplified in strong leadership and governance systems
Legal Institution – must be a legal entity able undertake legally bidding agreements and MOUs with FANRPAN and other stakeholders
Capacity to raise own funding – the node hosting institution must have independent funding. FANRPAN cannot establish and fund a separate national level institution. This type of structure would be too heavy for FANRPAN
Communication System – must have a good communication system Independent – must be apolitical – able to play the role of an independent broker Interface between Regional and National issues – must have a policy agenda
to which FANRPAN can prov ide a regional link – and vice versa Networking – must be an organization with an emphasis on networking and
building partnerships so that the link to FANRPAN is part of its network ing agenda. 8. ACF model – the Agricultural Consultative Forum (ACF) of Zambia – that currently hosts the
FANRPAN-Zambia node – is an excellent nodal-model. Achiev ing this requires heavy investment in building capacity and stakeholder confidence. The Zambia model is very close to the CISANET-model in Malawi and the upcoming National Agricultural Forum in Mozambique is being modeled in a similar form.
7. Strategic Issues
“Promote, influence and facilitate quality agricultural and natural resources policy research, analysis and dialogue at the national, regional and global levels”.
13
This session was aimed at ref ining the areas of focus that FANRPAN is and should be involved in. The assessment was based on four key questions:
1. Why is it an issue and how is it related to FANRPAN’s v ision, mission, mandate, internal strengths, and external opportunities?
2. What would be the consequences of FANRPAN not addressing this issue? 3. How and to what extent is FANRPAN addressing this issue currently? 4. What priority rank ing should be given to this issue?
Key outcomes The following were some of the outcomes of this session: 1. Scope and Scale – participants proposed the following rank ing for FANRPAN:
a) Analysis of policy options based on available knowledge b) Management of policy processes (policy debate) c) Prov iding policy adv ice d) Economic and social science research
2. Gaps in Skills and Knowledge – participants proposed that FANRPAN needs additional sk ills in: a) Social analysis b) Enhancing information sharing
3. Region relevance – participants felt that the region really needs a network like FANRPAN linking the different actors and think tanks – and prov iding a platform for interface. They felt that the region is best served by an autonomous network that can mobilize resources in a “planned” fashion – to prov ide policy services on a continuous basis and not short-term consultancy mode
4. Thematic priorities – in terms of thematic priorities – participants observed that the lists identified in the workbook could be collapsed into fewer broad areas – from which FANRPAN could draw thematic issues to address:
Markets and Trade – including regional trade policy harmonization, input and output markets development, cross-border trade, smallholder supply chains (contract farming)
Natural Resources Management – including transboundary resources such as transboundary river basins, agricultural water productiv ity; environmental change; and biofuels (Land reform was emphasized by some, but there was no agreement)
Technology Development and adoption – Biotechnology; improved seed varieties; irrigation
Investment and Infrastructure – trans boundary infrastructural development; regional integration
Capacity building for policy analysis – human and institutional capacity development Agricultural Information Systems – knowledge management (trends analysis);
market information Food Security – the link between agriculture and other sectors – e.g. Health and
Agriculture (HIV and AIDS, Malaria, TB) Monitoring and Evaluation – of regional policy commitments – MDGs, CAADP, SADC
Heads of State Declarations 5. Links with other Policy Processes – two processes were identified for immediate FANRPAN
link up: NEPAD’s RE-SAKSS CAADP-COMESA country round-tables.
8. The Balanced Score Card: Linking performance to Mission and Strategy This session introduced the concept of balanced score card as a method for systematically identify ing the most important points/issues of leverage for FANRPAN, as well as, the trade-offs accompany ing these issues. The balanced scorecard has four distinctive characteristics:
1. It is a top-down reflection of the organization’s mission and strategy: It ensures that local activ ities and processes undertaken in the name of FANRPAN will be relevant to the overall strategy.
“Promote, influence and facilitate quality agricultural and natural resources policy research, analysis and dialogue at the national, regional and global levels”.
14
2. It is forward-looking: It addresses current and future success: how the Secretariat and the other FANRPAN structures can improve performance in the next period.
3. It integrates ex ternal and internal measures: It helps managers see where they have made trade-offs between performance measures in the past and helps ensure that future success on one measure does not come at the expense of another.
4. It helps an organization to focus: a balanced scorecard requires managers to reach agreement on only those measures most critical to the success of a company ’s strategy.
The balanced score card is, thus, a tool that will help FANRAPN respond effectively to three key questions:
a) If we succeed with our vision and strategy, how will FANRPAN look different to its shareholders and customers; in terms of its internal processes; in terms of its abil ity to innovate and grow?
b) What are the critical success factors in each of the four scorecard perspectives? c) What are the key measurements that will tell us whether FANRPAN is addressing those
success factors as planned? Figure 3: The balance Score Card (A rv eson. P, 1998)
“Promote, influence and facilitate quality agricultural and natural resources policy research, analysis and dialogue at the national, regional and global levels”.
15
Conclusion New Branding - The strategic planning meeting was a key milestone in the evolution of a new “branding” for FANRPAN – a high performance organization bringing a new value proposition to all its clients, customers and stakeholders. The need for a rev ised FANRPAN strategy derives from three main factors: a new institutional landscape including new demands and opportunities; a broader v iew of policy analysis; and a SWOT analysis of FANRPAN as an institution. Conceptual framework - The strategic planning process was anchored on two conceptual underpinnings: a 5-stage strategic planning cycle (figure 1) and a 6-step policy analysis cycle (figure 2). FANRPAN needs to engage in a complete policy analysis cycle: researching and analyzing; designing and recommending; advising strategically; mediating; democratizing; and clarify ing values and arguments. Critical stakeholders - The diversity of FANRPAN stakeholders and clientele often places competing and sometimes conflicting claims on FANRPAN. FANRPAN needs to isolate a special category of “critical stakeholders” – those that directly impact on FANRPAN’s existence. The “critical stakeholders” will prov ide core support to FANRPAN and significantly influence FANRPAN’s strategic plan. FANRPAN needs to develop a “business plan” with a specific “core” that will be funded by the “critical stakeholders.” New Opportunities - The relocation of the secretariat to South Africa has given FANRPAN a new quality brand and an opportunity for attracting new resources. This new branding needs to trick le down to the nodes. The changing nature of international and regional agricultural trade is an opportunity for FANRPAN to intensify its trade-related policy analysis in the region, as well as, respond to national level trade challenges. FANRPAN needs to increase demand for its products – for example by advertising its serv ices even beyond the region. The increasing demand for capacity building in policy development in the region is an excellent opportunity for FANRPAN to take the lead. Tracking the regional policy commitments and pronouncements – e.g., monitoring the quality and quantity of the Maputo declaration on 10% national spending on agriculture; implementation of CAADP and MDGs – is an opportunity for FANRPAN to become more relevant to the RECs and other regional processes. FANRPAN’s Mission – there was unanimous agreement that the FANRPAN mission must be to: “Promote, influence and facilitate quality agricultural and natural resources policy research, analysis and dialogue at the national, regional and global levels.” FANRPAN would achieve this mission through three main channels: generating ev idence-based policy options (policy research); building human and institutional capacity for policy development in the region (capacity building); and prov iding appropriate policy information and adv ice (consultation). Country node model – there was agreement that the Agricultural Consultative Forum (ACF) of Zambia – that currently hosts the FANRPAN-Zambia node – is an excellent nodal-model. This model is very close to the CISANET-model in Malawi and the upcoming National Agricultural Forum in Mozambique – and should be documented and promoted. Thematic priorities – participants observed that the thematic issues identified in the workbook could be collapsed into fewer broad areas – from which FANRPAN could draw thematic issues to address:
Markets and Trade; Natural Resource Management; Technology Development and Adoption; Investment and Infrastructure; Capacity Building for Policy Development; Agricultural Information Systems; Food Security; Monitoring and Evaluation of Regional Policy Implementation
“Pro
mot
e, in
fluen
ce a
nd fa
cilita
te q
ualit
y ag
ricu
ltura
l and
nat
ural
reso
urce
s po
licy
rese
arch
, ana
lysi
s and
dia
logu
e at
the
natio
nal,
regi
onal
and
glo
bal l
evel
s”.
17
Mat
rix
of F
AN
RPA
N’s
Pro
gram
mat
ic li
nkag
es t
o R
egio
nal P
olic
y Fr
amew
ork
s P
ropo
sed
them
atic
A
rea
FAN
RP
AN
Pro
gram
me
/int
erve
ntio
ns
Alig
nmen
t to
NEP
AD’s
CA
ADP
A
lignm
ent
to S
AD
C’s
RIS
DP
Al
ignm
ent
to C
OM
ESA
’s
Agri
cult
ural
str
ate
gy
Alig
nmen
t to
the
UN
-
MD
Gs
Mar
kets
and
Tra
de –
in
cludi
ng re
gion
al tr
ade
polic
y ha
rmon
izatio
n, in
put
and
outp
ut m
arke
ts de
velo
pmen
t, cr
oss-b
orde
r tr
ade,
smal
lhol
der
supp
ly
chai
ns (c
ontra
ct fa
rmin
g)
• M
aize
Mar
ketin
g an
d Tr
ade
Polic
ies i
n th
e SA
DC
Regi
on, i
n Co
llabo
ratio
n w
ith M
ichi
gan
Stat
e Un
iver
sity
; fun
ded
by th
e Ro
ckef
eller
Fou
ndati
on;
• Co
ntac
t Far
min
g as
a
Mec
hanis
m fo
r th
e Co
mm
ercia
lizat
ion
of
Smal
lhol
der
Agri
cultu
re in
the
SAD
C Re
gion
, Fun
ded
by th
e Fr
ench
Gov
ernm
ent;
•
The
Impo
rtan
ce o
f Rel
ief S
eed,
an
d O
ppor
tuni
ties
for
Impr
ovin
g th
e Co
ntrib
utio
n of
Re
lief S
eed
Prog
ram
mes
to
Com
mer
cial S
eed
Mark
et
Dev
elop
men
t – fu
nded
by
USA
ID
• A
seed
vou
cher
stud
y to
de
scrib
e th
e di
ffere
nt w
ays i
n w
hich
relie
f see
d an
d se
ed
vouc
hers
are
bein
g pr
ogra
mm
ed a
nd d
eter
min
e w
ays
in w
hich
seed
vou
cher
s ca
n po
tent
ially
bes
t ben
efit
both
farm
ers a
nd co
mm
ercia
l se
ed m
arke
ts, f
unde
d by
U
SAID
. •
A U
SAID
fund
ed fe
rtiliz
er tr
ade
stud
y on
Sco
ping
the
Dev
elop
men
t of F
ertili
zer
Stra
tegie
s fo
r Ma
lawi
, M
ozam
biqu
e an
d Za
mbi
a •
Stat
us of
Pla
nt V
ariet
y Pr
otec
tion
(PVP
) in
the
SAD
C Re
gion
, fun
ded
by U
SAID
Con
trib
utes
to
CAAD
P’s
Pill
ar 2:
•
Impr
ove
rura
l inf
rast
ruct
ure
trad
e re
late
d m
arke
t acc
ess:
mar
kets
; pac
kagi
ng; h
andl
ing
syste
ms;
inpu
t sup
ply
netw
orks
•
Infor
mat
ion
and
know
ledg
e sy
stem
s
Dire
ctora
te o
f Tra
de, I
ndus
try,
Fina
nce
and
Inve
stm
ent
Dire
ctora
te o
f Foo
d Ag
ricu
lture
and
N
atura
l Res
ourc
es
• Pr
omot
ing
Trad
e an
d H
arm
onis
ation
of F
ood
Safe
ty
Stan
dard
s •
SAD
C Se
ed S
ecur
ity
Prog
ram
me
COM
ESA
’s a
gric
ultu
re m
arke
ting
an
d re
gion
al in
tegr
atio
n ac
tivi
ties
: •
Agric
ultur
al M
arke
t Pro
mot
ion
and
Regi
onal
Inte
gratio
n Pr
ojec
t (su
ppor
ted
by th
e Af
DB)
•
The
Regi
onal
Agr
icultu
ral
Trad
e Ex
pans
ion
Supp
ort
(RAT
ES)
proj
ect s
uppo
rted
by
USA
ID
• Th
e AG
OA
Linka
ges (
ALIN
K) in
CO
MES
A su
ppor
ted
by U
SAID
. •
The
Com
mod
ity E
xcha
nge
Initi
ative
•
The
WTO
and
EU/
EPA
mar
ket
acce
ss in
itiat
ives
aime
d at
en
surin
g th
at th
e ES
A re
gion
ge
ts a
fair
deal
in gl
obal
ag
ricu
ltura
l tra
de
arra
ngem
ents
•
Fish
eries
Sec
tor
Deve
lopm
ent
in p
artn
ersh
ip w
ith th
e Co
mm
on F
und
for
Com
mod
ities
•
Impl
emen
tatio
n of
NEP
AD's
Com
preh
ensiv
e Af
rican
Ag
ricult
ural
Dev
elop
men
t Pr
ogra
mm
e (C
AADP
) in
the
East
ern a
nd C
entra
l Afri
can
(ECA
) re
gion
Goa
l 8:
Deve
lop
a gl
obal
pa
rtne
rshi
p fo
r de
velo
pmen
t D
evel
op fu
rthe
r an
open
tr
adin
g an
d fin
ancia
l sy
stem
that
is ru
le-b
ased
, pr
edic
table
and
non
-di
scrim
inato
ry, i
nclu
des
a co
mm
itmen
t to
good
go
vern
ance
, dev
elop
ment
an
d po
verty
redu
ctio
n—
natio
nally
and
in
tern
atio
nally
Ad
dres
s the
leas
t de
velo
ped
coun
tries
' sp
ecia
l nee
ds. T
his
inclu
des
tarif
f- a
nd q
uota
-fre
e ac
cess
for t
heir
exp
orts;
en
hanc
ed d
ebt r
elie
f for
he
avily
inde
bted
poo
r co
untri
es; c
ance
llatio
n of
of
ficia
l bila
teral
deb
t; an
d m
ore
gene
rous
offi
cial
deve
lopm
ent a
ssis
tanc
e fo
r co
untri
es co
mm
itted
to
pove
rty
redu
ction
D
eal c
ompr
ehen
sivel
y with
de
velo
ping
cou
ntrie
s' de
bt
prob
lems t
hrou
gh n
ation
al
and
inte
rnat
iona
l mea
sure
s to
mak
e de
bt s
usta
inab
le in
th
e lo
ng te
rm
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es
Man
agem
ent –
inclu
ding
tr
ansb
ound
ary
reso
urce
s su
ch a
s tra
nsbo
unda
ry ri
ver
basin
s, ag
ricu
ltura
l wat
er
prod
uctiv
ity; e
nviro
nmen
tal
chan
ge; a
nd b
iofu
els (
Land
re
form
was
em
phas
ized
by
som
e, b
ut th
ere
was
no
agre
emen
t)
• Li
mpo
po B
asin
Wat
er P
over
ty
anal
ysis,
wat
er a
vaila
bilit
y an
d ac
cess
, agr
icul
tura
l wat
er
prod
uctiv
ity, i
nstit
utio
n an
d in
terv
entio
n an
alys
is an
d kn
owled
ge b
ase
deve
lopm
ent –
fu
nded
by
the
CGIA
R –
Chal
leng
e Pr
ogra
mme
for
Wat
er an
d Fo
od (C
PWF)
•
Glo
bal E
nviro
nmen
tal C
hang
e –
a GE
CAFS
pro
gram
me to
be
host
ed b
y FA
NRP
AN
• Re
gion
al h
ost f
or th
e CO
MPET
E
Con
trib
utes
to
CAAD
P’s
Pill
ar 1:
Ex
tend
area
und
er su
stai
nabl
e la
nd
man
agem
ent a
nd re
liabl
e wa
ter
cont
rol s
yste
ms
Info
rmat
ion
and
know
ledg
e sy
stem
s
Dire
ctora
te o
f Foo
d Ag
ricu
lture
and
N
atura
l Res
ourc
es
• Th
e Ag
ricult
ural
Wat
er
Man
agem
ent f
or F
ood
Secu
rity
Pr
ogra
mm
e •
The
Regi
onal
Lan
d Re
form
Fa
cility
•
The
SAD
C Bi
ofue
ls P
roje
ct
• SA
DC
FAN
R M
ulti-
Coun
try
Prod
uctiv
ity P
rogr
amm
e (M
APP)
• Ir
rigat
ion D
evel
opme
nt in
the
COM
ESA
Regi
on (
with
the
assi
stanc
e of
the
Indi
an
Gov
ernm
ent)
•
The
Actio
n Pl
an fo
r the
En
viron
men
t am
ong m
embe
r st
ates
•
Impl
emen
tatio
n of
NEP
AD's
Com
preh
ensiv
e Af
rican
Ag
ricult
ural
Dev
elop
men
t Pr
ogra
mm
e (C
AADP
) in
the
East
ern a
nd C
entra
l Afri
can
(ECA
) re
gion
Goa
l 7:
Ensu
re
envi
ronm
enta
l su
stai
nabi
lity
Inte
grat
e th
e pr
incip
les o
f su
stai
nable
dev
elop
men
t in
to co
untry
poli
cies
and
prog
ram
mes;
reve
rse
loss
of e
nviro
nmen
tal r
esou
rces
Re
duce
by h
alf t
he
prop
ortio
n of p
eople
w
ithou
t sus
tain
able
acce
ss
to s
afe
drin
king
wat
er
“Pro
mot
e, in
fluen
ce a
nd fa
cilita
te q
ualit
y ag
ricu
ltura
l and
nat
ural
reso
urce
s po
licy
rese
arch
, ana
lysi
s and
dia
logu
e at
the
natio
nal,
regi
onal
and
glo
bal l
evel
s”.
18
proj
ect (
Com
pete
nce
Platfo
rm
for
Ener
gy, C
rop
and
Agro
-fo
rest
ry S
yste
ms –
Afri
ca)
– a
biof
uels
proj
ect f
unde
d by
EU
Ac
hiev
e sig
nific
ant
impr
ovem
ent i
n liv
es o
f at
leas
t 100
mill
ion
slum
dw
elle
rs, b
y 20
20
Te
chno
logy
D
evel
opm
ent
and
adop
tion
– Bi
otec
hnol
ogy;
im
prov
ed se
ed v
ariet
ies;
irr
igat
ion
• Ad
dres
sing
Agri
cultu
ral
Biot
echn
olog
y an
d Bi
o-sa
fety
Po
licy
issue
s to
Impr
ove
Food
Se
curit
y in
the
SADC
, fun
ded
by th
e US
Gra
ins
Coun
cil a
nd
the
IFPR
I- P
BS;
• Pr
opos
ed e
stabl
ishm
ent o
f the
So
uthe
rn A
frica
Res
earc
h an
d Te
chno
logy
Net
work
(SAA
RTN)
in
col
labor
atio
n wi
th th
e Ag
ricult
ural
Res
earc
h co
uncil
•
Biot
echn
olog
y M
ulti-
stak
ehold
er d
ialo
gues
in
Sout
hern
Afri
ca in
colla
bora
tion
with
IFPR
I
Con
trib
utes
to
CAAD
P’s
Pill
ar 4:
Im
prov
e agr
icultu
ral r
esea
rch,
te
chno
logy
dis
sem
inati
on a
nd
adop
tion
to p
rovid
e the
und
erpi
nnin
g ne
cess
ary
for
long
-term
pro
duct
ivity
an
d co
mpe
titiv
enes
s
Dire
ctora
te o
f Foo
d Ag
ricu
lture
and
N
atura
l Res
ourc
es
• Th
e SA
DC
Com
mitt
ee fo
r Bi
otec
hnol
ogy
and
Bios
afet
y •
SAD
C FA
NR
Mul
ti-Co
untry
Pr
oduc
tivity
Pro
gram
me (
MAP
P)
• Co
ordi
nate
d Ag
ricu
ltura
l Re
sear
ch a
nd T
echn
olog
y In
terv
entio
ns (s
uppo
rted
by
USA
ID)
• A
Regi
onal
App
roac
h To
ward
s Bi
otec
hnol
ogy
(sup
port
ed b
y U
SAID
) •
Impl
emen
tatio
n of
NEP
AD's
Com
preh
ensiv
e Af
rican
Ag
ricult
ural
Dev
elop
men
t Pr
ogra
mm
e (C
AADP
) in
the
East
ern a
nd C
entra
l Afri
can
(ECA
) re
gion
Goa
l 8:
Deve
lop
a gl
obal
pa
rtne
rshi
p fo
r de
velo
pmen
t In
coo
pera
tion
with
the
priv
ate
sect
or, m
ake
avai
labl
e the
ben
efits
of
new
tech
nolo
gies
—
espe
cially
info
rmat
ion
and
com
mun
icatio
ns
tech
nolo
gies
Inve
stm
ent
and
Infr
astr
uctu
re –
tran
s bo
unda
ry in
frastr
uctu
ral
deve
lopm
ent;
regi
onal
in
tegr
atio
n
N
ew A
rea
Con
trib
utes
to
CAAD
P’s
Pill
ar 2:
Im
prov
e rur
al in
frast
ruct
ure
Info
rmat
ion
and
know
ledg
e sy
stem
s
Dire
ctora
te o
f Inf
rast
ruct
ure
and
Serv
ices
Impl
emen
tatio
n of
NEP
AD's
Com
preh
ensiv
e Af
rica
n Ag
ricul
tura
l De
velo
pmen
t Pro
gram
me (
CAAD
P) in
th
e Ea
ster
n an
d Ce
ntra
l Afri
can
(ECA
) re
gion
Goa
l 8:
Deve
lop
a gl
obal
pa
rtne
rshi
p fo
r de
velo
pmen
t Ad
dres
s the
spec
ial n
eeds
of
land
locke
d an
d sm
all
isla
nd d
evel
opin
g St
ates
C
apac
ity b
uild
ing
for
polic
y de
velo
pmen
t –
hum
an a
nd in
stitu
tiona
l ca
paci
ty de
velo
pmen
t
• St
reng
then
ing
Polic
y An
alys
is
and
Repr
esen
tatio
n Ca
paci
ty o
f Fa
rmer
-Bas
ed O
rgan
isatio
ns in
th
e SA
DC R
egio
n, Fu
nded
by
the
CTA;
•
USA
ID p
roje
ct o
n Im
prov
ing
the
Polic
y En
viron
ment
of
Smal
lhol
der
Farm
ers
thro
ugh
Tran
sform
atio
n of
FAN
RPAN
in
to a
Rep
utab
le R
egio
nal
Net
work
with
Enh
ance
d H
uman
an
d In
stitu
tiona
l Cap
acity
for
Supp
ortin
g Po
licy
Form
ulat
ion
and
Impl
emen
tatio
n in
the
SAD
C Re
gion
; •
New
are
a –
build
ing
capa
city
for
full
cycl
e po
licy
anal
ysis
: res
earc
hing
and
anal
yzing
; des
igni
ng a
nd
reco
mm
endi
ng; a
dvisi
ng
stra
tegi
cally
; med
iatin
g;
dem
ocra
tizin
g; a
nd cl
arify
ing
valu
es an
d ar
gum
ents
Con
trib
utes
to
CAAD
P’s
Pill
ar 4:
Cr
eatin
g an
enab
ling
envir
onm
ent
Info
rmat
ion
and
know
ledg
e sy
stem
s
Dire
ctora
te o
f Soc
ial a
nd H
uman
D
evel
opm
ent
Dire
ctora
te o
f Foo
d Ag
ricu
lture
and
N
atura
l Res
ourc
es
Th
e SA
DC F
ood
Secu
rity
Capa
city
Bui
ldin
g Pr
ogra
mm
e
Impl
emen
tatio
n of
NEP
AD's
Com
preh
ensiv
e Af
rica
n Ag
ricul
tura
l De
velo
pmen
t Pro
gram
me (
CAAD
P) in
th
e Ea
ster
n an
d Ce
ntra
l Afri
can
(ECA
) re
gion
Goa
l 8:
Deve
lop
a gl
obal
pa
rtne
rshi
p fo
r de
velo
pmen
t In
coo
pera
tion
with
the
deve
lopi
ng c
ount
ries,
de
velo
p de
cent
and
pr
oduc
tive
work
for
yout
h
Agr
icul
tura
l Inf
orm
atio
n Sy
stem
s –
know
ledge
m
anag
emen
t (tre
nds
• In
vent
ory
of A
gricu
ltura
l re
sear
ch in
stitu
tions
in
Sout
hern
Afri
ca –
in
Con
trib
utes
to
CAAD
P’s
Pill
ar 4:
In
form
atio
n sh
arin
g an
d its
role
in
mar
ket d
evel
opm
ent
Dire
ctora
te o
f Foo
d Ag
ricu
lture
and
N
atura
l Res
ourc
es
• Th
e SA
DC
Agric
ultu
ral
• CO
MES
A’s F
ood
and
Agric
ultur
al M
arke
ting
Info
rmat
ion
Syst
em (F
AMIS
),
Goa
l 8:
Deve
lop
a gl
obal
pa
rtne
rshi
p fo
r de
velo
pmen
t
“Pro
mot
e, in
fluen
ce a
nd fa
cilita
te q
ualit
y ag
ricu
ltura
l and
nat
ural
reso
urce
s po
licy
rese
arch
, ana
lysi
s and
dia
logu
e at
the
natio
nal,
regi
onal
and
glo
bal l
evel
s”.
19
anal
ysis)
; mar
ket
info
rmat
ion
colla
bora
tion
with
SAKS
S-SA
•
Agric
ultur
al g
row
th a
nd p
over
ty
tren
ds in
Sou
ther
n Af
rica
– in
co
llabo
ratio
n w
ith SA
KSS-
SA
• Re
gion
al P
olic
y Dia
logue
s and
Pu
blica
tions
, fun
ded
by C
TA;
• FA
NRP
AN s
take
holde
r dire
ctory
Info
rmat
ion
and
know
ledg
e sy
stem
s RE
-SAK
SS
CAAD
P ea
rly a
ctio
ns
Info
rmat
ion S
yste
ms
(AIM
S)
• St
atis
tical
Cro
p Fo
reca
sting
M
etho
dolo
gy P
rogr
amm
e •
SAD
C Re
giona
l Rem
ote S
ensin
g U
nit
a co
mpo
nent
of t
he A
MPR
IP
prog
ram
sup
porte
d by
AfD
B •
The
Pan
Afric
an T
setse
and
Tr
ypan
osom
iasi
s Era
dica
tion
Cam
paig
n (P
ATTE
C) in
co
llabo
ratio
n w
ith th
e AU
•
Impl
emen
tatio
n of
NEP
AD's
Com
preh
ensiv
e Af
rican
Ag
ricult
ural
Dev
elop
men
t Pr
ogra
mm
e (C
AADP
) in
the
East
ern a
nd C
entra
l Afri
can
(ECA
) re
gion
•
Crop
Cris
is Co
ntro
l (C3
) Pr
ojec
t with
the
supp
ort o
f U
SAID
In c
oope
ratio
n wi
th th
e pr
ivat
e se
ctor
, mak
e av
aila
ble
the b
enef
its of
ne
w te
chno
logi
es—
es
pecia
lly in
form
atio
n an
d co
mm
unica
tions
te
chno
logie
s
Food
Sec
urit
y an
d po
vert
y re
duct
ion
– th
e lin
k bet
ween
agr
icult
ure
and
othe
r se
ctor
s – e
.g.
Hea
lth a
nd A
gricu
lture
(HIV
an
d AI
DS, M
alar
ia)
• Th
e im
pact
of H
IV a
nd A
IDS
on
Agric
ultur
e an
d Fo
od S
ecur
ity
in
the
SAD
C,
fund
ed
by
the
Euro
pean
Uni
on a
nd t
he S
ADC
Secr
etar
iat
• Ru
ral L
ivel
ihoo
ds P
roje
ct in
the
Sout
hern
Af
rica
-
Polic
y M
odul
e, fu
nded
by
U
SAID
/RCS
A th
roug
h II
TA;
Con
trib
utes
to
CAAD
P’s
Pill
ar 3
In
crea
se fo
od s
uppl
y, re
duce
hun
ger
and
impr
ove
resp
onse
s to
food
em
erge
ncy
cris
es
Info
rmat
ion
and
know
ledg
e sy
stem
s
Dire
ctora
te o
f Soc
ial a
nd H
uman
D
evel
opm
ent
Dire
ctora
te o
f Foo
d Ag
ricu
lture
and
N
atura
l Res
ourc
es
• Th
e Re
gion
al F
ood
Rese
rve
Facil
ity
• SA
DC
FAN
R M
ulti-
Coun
try
Prod
uctiv
ity P
rogr
amm
e (M
APP)
•
Earl
y W
arni
ng S
yste
ms
• Vu
lner
abilit
y M
onito
ring
Syst
ems
Regi
onal
Foo
d Se
curit
y/Fo
od R
eser
ve
Initi
ativ
e am
ong
mem
ber s
tate
s •
The
Food
Sec
urity
Pol
icy
and
Vuln
erab
ility
Red
uctio
n Pr
ogra
m (
to b
e su
ppor
ted
by
the
9th ED
F)
• Li
vest
ock
Sect
or D
evel
opm
ent
in c
ollab
orat
ion
with
the
AU
and
USA
ID
• In
terv
entio
ns to
mitig
ate
impa
cts o
f HIV
/AID
S am
ong
smal
lhold
er fa
rmer
s in
the
ESA
regi
on
Goa
l 1:
Erad
icat
e ex
trem
e po
vert
y an
d hu
nger
•
Redu
ce b
y ha
lf the
pr
opor
tion
of p
eople
liv
ing o
n le
ss th
an a
do
llar a
day
•
Redu
ce b
y ha
lf the
pr
opor
tion
of p
eople
w
ho s
uffer
from
hu
nger
G
oal 6
: Com
bat
HIV
and
A
IDS,
Mal
aria
and
othe
r m
ajor
dise
ases
•
Hal
t and
beg
in to
re
vers
e th
e sp
read
of
HIV
/AID
S •
Hal
t and
beg
in to
re
vers
e th
e in
cide
nce
of m
alaria
and
oth
er
majo
r dise
ases
Mon
itor
ing
and
Eval
uati
on –
of r
egio
nal
polic
y com
mitm
ents
–
MD
Gs,
CAAD
P, S
ADC
Hea
ds o
f Sta
te
Dec
lara
tions
• N
ew A
rea
C
ontr
ibut
es t
o ov
eral
l CA
AD
P M
onito
ring
natio
nal l
evel
ado
ptio
n an
d in
vest
men
t In
form
atio
n an
d kn
owle
dge
syst
ems
Dir
ecto
rate
of F
ood
Agri
cultu
re a
nd
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es
• SA
DC
Plan
t Pro
tect
ion
Actio
n Pl
an
Dir
ecto
rate
of S
ocia
l and
Hum
an
Dev
elop
men
t
Impl
emen
tatio
n of
NEP
AD's
Com
preh
ensiv
e Af
rica
n Ag
ricu
ltura
l Dev
elop
men
t Pr
ogra
mm
e (C
AAD
P) in
the
East
ern
and
Cent
ral A
frica
n (E
CA)
regi
on