Design document

Transcription

Design document

Document of
The International Fund for Agricultural Development
REPUBLIC OF ZAMBIA
SMALLHOLDER PRODUCTIVITY PROMOTION PROGRAMME
(S3P)
PROGRAMME DESIGN REPORT
VOLUME 1 – MAIN REPORT
CONFIDENTIAL
REPORT No. XX
June 2011
East and Southern Africa Division
Programme Management Department
This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the
performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without
the authorisation of the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).
Zambia: Smallholder Productivity Promotion Programme (S3P)
Programme Design Report: Volume 1 – Main Report
REPUBLIC OF ZAMBIA
SMALLHOLDER PRODUCTIVITY PROMOTION PROGRAMME (S3P)
PROGRAMME DESIGN REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ...........................................................................II
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................... IV
SAPP AND S3P PROGRAMME OVERVIEW .................................................................. 1
S3P LOGICAL FRAMEWORK .................................................................................... 2
I.
STRATEGIC CONTEXT AND RATIONALE .......................................................... 7
A.
Country and Rural Development and Poverty Context ............................... 7
B.
Rationale............................................................................................. 9
II.
PROGRAMME DESCRIPTION ........................................................................
A.
Programme Area and Target Group ......................................................
B.
Programme Development Objective ......................................................
C.
Components and Outcomes .................................................................
12
12
15
16
III.
PROGRAMME IMPLEMENTATION ..................................................................
A.
Approach ..........................................................................................
B.
Organizational Framework ...................................................................
C.
Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation and Knowledge Management ............
D. Financial Management, Procurement and Governance .............................
E.
Supervision .......................................................................................
F.
Risk Identification and Mitigation..........................................................
21
21
22
23
26
30
30
IV.
PROGRAMME COSTS, FINANCING AND BENEFITS ..........................................
A.
Programme Costs ...............................................................................
B.
Programme Financing .........................................................................
C.
Summary Benefit Analysis ...................................................................
D. Sustainability.....................................................................................
31
31
32
32
35
ANNEXES ........................................................................................................... 37
Annex 1.
Country and Rural Context Background ...................................... 39
Annex 2.
Poverty, Targeting and Gender.................................................. 46
Annex 3.
Country Performance and Lessons Learned ................................. 57
Annex 4.
Detailed Programme Description ............................................... 65
Annex 5.
Implementation Arrangements.................................................. 78
Annex 6.
Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation and Knowledge .................... 97
Annex 7.
Financial Management and Disbursement Arrangements .............104
Annex 8.
Procurement ..........................................................................113
Annex 9.
Programme Cost and Financing ................................................119
Annex 10. Economic and Financial Analysis ...............................................133
Annex 11. Draft Programme Implementation Manual .................................140
Annex 12. Adherence to IFAD Policies ......................................................158
Annex 13. Contents of the Programme Life File .........................................167
i
CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS
Currency Unit = Zambian Kwacha
USD 1.00 = ZK 4800 (April 2011)
WEIGHTS AND MEASURES
International Metric System, unless specified in text
FISCAL YEAR
1st January to 31st December
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
ACPG
ADC
AER
AR4D
AWPB
CA (CF)
CAADP
CAC
CEO
CF (CA)
CFU
CMT
COSOP
CSC
CSO
DAC
DACO
DCU
DDCC
DFA
DoA
DP
EC
FAO
FFS
FISP
FMU
FNDP
FO
FRA
FTC
GART
GDP
GRZ
HH
ICT
IFAD
IPPM
IPSAS
KM
KMC
Agricultural Cooperating Partners Group
Area Development Committee
Agro-Ecological Region
Agricultural Research for Development
Annual Work Plan and Budget
Conservation Agriculture (Conservation Farming)
Comprehensive African Agriculture Development Programme
Camp Agricultural Committee
Camp Extension Officer
Conservation Farming (Conservation Agriculture)
Conservation Farming Unit of ZNFU
Change Management Team
Country Strategic Opportunities Paper/ Programme
Cassava Sub-sector Committee
Central Statistics Office
District Agricultural Committee
District Agricultural Coordinator
District Cooperative Union
District Development Coordination Committee
District Farmers Association
Department of Agriculture
Development Partner
European Commission
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Farmer Field School
Farm Input Supply Programme
Financial Management Unit in Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives
Fifth National Development Plan (2005-2010)
Farmer Organization
Food Reserve Agency
Farmer Training Centre
Golden Valley Agricultural Research Trust
Gross Domestic Product
Government of the Republic of Zambia
Household
Information Communication Technology
International Fund for Agricultural Development
Integrated Pest and Production Management
International Public Sector Accounting Standards
Knowledge Management
Knowledge Management and Communication
ii
KM&L
LCMS
MACO
MCDSS
MDG
M&E
MIS
MFNP
MLGH
MOU
MT
MTEF
MTR
NAP
NARS
Natsave
NGO
PACO
PAO
PCR
PDG
PEA
PEP
PIM
PLARD
PME
PMU
PPD
PRSP
PSC
PSU
RIMS
RFP
S3P
SAPP
SCCI
SHEMP
SNDP
SLIP
SLM
TA
ToT
UNZA
ZARI
ZNFU
ZPPA
Knowledge Management and Learning
Living Conditions Monitoring Survey
Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives
Ministry of Community Development and Social Services
Millennium Development Goal
Monitoring and Evaluation
Management Information System
Ministry of Finance and National Planning
Ministry of Local Government and Housing
Memorandum of Understanding
Metric ton
Medium Term Expenditure Framework
Mid Term Review
National Agricultural Policy
National Agricultural Research System
National Savings and Credit Bank
Non-Governmental Organization
Provincial Agricultural Coordinator
Principle Agricultural Officer
Programme Completion Report
Project Design Group
Participatory Extension Approaches
Performance Enhancement Programme
Programme Implementation Manual
Programme for Luapula Agricultural and Rural Development
Programme Monitoring and Evaluation
Programme Management Unit
Policy and Planning Department
Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
Programme Steering Committee
Procurement and Supplies Unit
Results and Impact Management System
Rural Finance Programme
Smallholder Productivity Promotion Programme
Smallholder Agribusiness Promotion Programme
Seed Control and Certification Institute
Smallholder Enterprise and Marketing Programme
Sixth National Development Plan(2011-2015)
Smallholder Livestock Investment Project
Sustainable Land Management
Technical Assistance
Training of Trainers
University of Zambia
Zambia Agricultural Research Institute
Zambia National Farmers Union
Zambia Public Procurement Authority
iii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.
Background: The Programme design is rooted in: (i) a participatory consultative
process that started in September 2009, and involved several missions, extended field
visits, numerous workshops and meetings at central, provincial, district and field level,
and involving many different voices, from policy and decision makers to researchers,
extension workers and male and female farmers; and (ii) lessons learned from previous
and ongoing IFAD experience in Zambia, as well as from other initiatives, projects and
programmes within the country and the Region. There was a general consensus to
propose a programme that would complement and support the recently started
Smallholder Agribusiness Promotion Programme (SAPP) in the form of a Smallholder
Productivity Promotion Programme (S3P).
2.
Rationale: The justification for the investment is based on: (i) the need to
accelerate growth in smallholder agriculture to reduce poverty in Zambia, which hinges
on both improved marketing and increased productivity; (ii) the need to contribute to
the GRZ policy framework, in particular the Sixth National Development Plan (20112015), which supports the development of a sustainable and competitive agricultural
sector in order to ensure food security and income generation at household and national
levels and to maximize the sector’s contribution to GDP; and (iii) the opportunity to
complement ongoing IFAD programmes and contribute to overall cohesiveness of the
IFAD Country Strategic Opportunities Programme 2011-2015 (COSOP); (iv) the
opportunity to focus on three essential elements that deserve more systematic attention:
smallholder productivity, diversification (away from maize), and reduction of
vulnerability to climatic variations; and (v) the opportunity to engage in and support
highly relevant policy development related to these issues.
3.
Target group: The programme’s target group consists of around 60,000
smallholder farming households (with cropped area up to 5 ha), organized in groups
and/or cooperatives, or willing to join such groups. A large majority of smallholders are
below the poverty line, but many already devote part of their farming system to marketoriented production. Others remain semi-subsistence farmers who primarily grow food
crops but occasionally sell surpluses. About 50 percent are women farmers.
4.
Approach: S3P will follow a farming systems approach (up to farm gate),
thereby complementing SAPP’s value chain approach (from farm gate to end user). S3P
investment in the “supply-push” side of production development is expected to
complement the “market-pull” investment under SAPP, and also complements other
initiatives supported by GRZ and development partners. S3P will focus on cassava-based
farming systems and the associated commodities of cassava, mixed beans, groundnuts
and rice, which (with the exception of groundnuts) have already been included in the list
of commodities SAPP works with. These commodities are central to smallholder farming
systems in high rainfall areas, significant for household food and nutrition security and
income, and they offer important marketing opportunities in more efficient value chains
in which smallholder farmers can participate. The target beneficiaries are expected to
improve their organizational structures (farmers organizations and federations will be
supported to better understand and respond to market opportunities), gain access to
and adopt improved technologies (seeds, cropping practices, labour saving technologies
and tools), benefit from improved agricultural and rural infrastructure and market
linkages, have improved access to markets (linked to SAPP) and financial institutions
(linked to IFAD’s Rural Finance Programme, RFP).
5.
Objectives: the S3P goal is that income levels, food and nutrition security are
sustainably improved for poor agricultural households in the target areas. At the goal
level, the Programme is expected to assist up to 48,000 smallholder households (80 per
cent of the core target group) to achieve at least one of the following: (i) increase in
household asset ownership; (ii) increase in household savings; reduction in prevalence of
child malnutrition; and (iv) reduction in food insecurity.
iv
6.
The purpose of S3P is: that the production, productivity and sales of smallholder
farmers in target areas are sustainably increased. The associated indicators include:
(i) average crop yields of cassava, rice, mixed beans and/or groundnuts of 30,000
smallholder households increased by at least 30 percent; (ii) quantities of cassava, rice,
mixed beans and/or groundnuts marketed by 40,000 smallholder households increased
by at least 20 percent; (iii) vulnerability of 10,000 smallholder households to climatic
variation affecting crop production and/or market access reduced.
7.
Programme description: S3P will adopt a phased programmatic approach and
will be implemented over a seven years period. It will start in eight districts in two
provinces (Luapula and Northern) and will gradually expand to cover up to 24 districts in
three provinces. S3P will have two components and six sub-components.
8.
Component 1: Sustainable smallholder productivity growth, to improve
smallholder access to knowledge, extension, adapted technologies and improved
planting material, with three sub-components: 1.1 Strengthening farmer organizations
and their federations; 1.2 Pluralistic participatory extension systems; and 1.3
Agricultural research for development.
9.
Component 2: Enabling environment for productivity growth, will address
critical constraints in the enabling environment for smallholder productivity growth,
reflected in three sub-components: 2.1 Local agricultural investments, which improve
access to markets, increase labour productivity, reduce post-harvest losses, improve
land and water management; 2.2 Support to the policy and planning framework; and
2.3 Programme management, monitoring and evaluation.
10.
Outcomes generated by S3P include: (1.1) targeted smallholder groups and
organizations functioning more effectively and empowered to respond to market and
rural development opportunities; (1.2) smallholders in target areas have improved
access to more pertinent and effective advisory services delivered by government and/or
private sector; (1.3) agricultural research and seed multiplication more responsive to
priority needs of smallholders; (2.1) improved rural infrastructure and improved access
to productivity enhancing works and equipment; (2.2) improved public policy and
planning framework to support sustainable productivity growth and expand smallholder
integration in agricultural markets; and (2.3) effective implementation capacity,
knowledge management, programme coordination, results measurement and reporting.
11.
Implementation: detailed implementation procedures including start-up
activities will be documented in a Programme Implementation manual (PIM). The S3P
will be executed within the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives (MACO), and will be
managed by a Programme Management Unit, located within MACO, with a programme
manager and a management team based in Lusaka, and a technical team based in the
target provinces. It will be guided by a Programme Steering Committee, which is shared
with SAPP. MACO field staff at provincial and district level and in the Zambia Agricultural
Research Institute will play key roles. Farmer organizations and private sector entities
will provide services, where possible through public-private partnerships (PPPs), or
through contractual arrangements.
12.
Partnerships: The S3P will be co-financed by the government of Finland. This
will provide opportunity for close collaboration and synergies in particular with the
Finnish-supported Luapula Agricultural and Rural Development programme (PLARD),
which is piloting and implementing some of the activities that S3P can scale-up. The S3P
partnerships are envisaged at different levels: (i) with government and/or donor
supported programmes and initiatives; (ii) PPPs with private/non-government initiatives
that target smallholders through similar types and methods of activities promoted by
S3P; and (iii) partnerships with national and international research organizations to work
together on the development of appropriate technologies. In addition, S3P will seek to
learn from best practice, avoid overlap and ensure complementarities, create linkages,
leverage investments already made, and help establish a joint platform involving MACO
v
and its cooperating partners for lessons learned and knowledge about smallholder
productivity growth and related issues.
13.
Economic impact. The economic rationale for S3P hinges on the increased net
margins of smallholders in the “cassava belt” that produce cassava, mixed beans,
groundnuts and rice. This increased net margin will primarily result from increased
productivity (yields per ha and per labour unit). These result in a 300 per cent increase
in net household incomes the core target group farmers and an internal economic rate of
return for the programme as a whole of 14 per cent.
14.
Programme costs and financing. Total investment and recurrent costs,
including contingencies, are estimated at US$ 39.9 million (ZMK 271 billion).
Component 1 accounts for 57 per cent of total costs, and Component 2 the remaining
43 per cent. The programme will be funded by: (i) an IFAD Loan of US$ 24.8 million
provided on highly concessional terms; (ii) a Grant from the Government of Finland
(US$ 7.1 million) (EUR 5 million), on pari passu basis with the IFAD Loan; (iii) the
Government of Zambia (US$ 6.1 million), in the form of taxes foregone; (iv) Programme
beneficiaries (US$ 1.5 million) and (v) participating districts (US$ 0.4 million).
15.
Sustainability. As a result of S3P, smallholders will be more productive and
better organized, capable and empowered to consolidate their demand for quality
support services and link-up with different service providers. Decentralized agricultural
offices and institutions will have strengthened their governance capacities by routinely
engaging in bottom-up participatory planning and implementation of sustainable local
agricultural and economic activities, operating with fairness and transparency.
Government and non-government agricultural research and extension service providers
will be working together through PPP-type arrangements. Increasing productivity of
cassava, mixed beans, groundnuts and rice is expected to continue well beyond
programme duration, once the demand-driven technology development systems are
operating as intended.
16.
Risks: The Programme is regarded as only moderately risky. The design draws
lessons from previous and ongoing IFAD projects and programmes initiatives in the
country, as well as of other initiatives within Zambia and the region. The programme will
be embedded in MACO at central, provincial and district level, and measures are included
to support capacity building at these different levels. Robust implementation
arrangements and inclusion of a management team as well as a technical team should
help ensure programme execution. Risks and appropriate mitigation measures have
been identified and incorporated in the Programme design.
vi
REPUBLIC OF ZAMBIA
SMALLHOLDER PRODUCTIVITY PROMOTION PROGRAMME (S3P)
PROGRAMME DESIGN DOCUMENT
SAPP AND S3P PROGRAMME OVERVIEW
Smallholder Agribusiness Promotion Programme (SAPP)
Smallholder Productivity Promotion Programme (S3P)
Goal: Income levels, food and nutrition security sustainably
improved for poor agricultural households in target area
Development objective: Volume and value of agribusiness
output of small-scale producers increased
Development objective: Production, productivity and sales of
smallholder farmers in target areas sustainably increased.
Approach: Value chain approach, from farm gate to end user.
Approach: farming systems approach, up to farm gate.
1
Component 1: More efficient
value chains.
Component 2: Enabling
environment for agribusiness
development.
Component 1: Sustainable
smallholder productivity growth.
Component 2: Enabling
environment for productivity
growth.
Outcome 1.1: Small-scale
producers better connected to
and better able to respond to
market demand and value
addition opportunities
Outcome 2.1: Enhanced policies
and increased capacities to
deliver public good services to
small-scale farmers and promote
viable agribusiness as poverty
reduction strategy.
Outcome 1.1: Targeted
smallholder groups and
organizations functioning more
effectively and empowered to
respond to market and rural
development opportunities
Outcome 2.1: Improved rural
infrastructure and improved
access to productivity enhancing
works and equipment.
Outcome 1.2: Enhanced
capacity of value chain operators
and improved relations and
coordination among value chain
stakeholders and support services
Outcome 2.2: Effective
implementation capacity,
knowledge management,
programme coordination, results
management and reporting.
Outcome 1.2: Smallholders in
target areas have improved
access to more pertinent and
effective advisory services
delivered by MACO and/or private
sector
Outcome 2.2: Improved public
policy and planning environment
to support sustainable
productivity growth and expand
smallholder integration in
agricultural markets.
Outcome 1.3: Agricultural
research and seed multiplication
services more responsive to
priority needs of smallholders.
Outcome 2.3: Effective
implementation capacity,
measurement and reporting.
Goal: Increase the income levels of poor rural households involved
in production, value adding and trade and trade of agricultural
commodities
S3P LOGICAL FRAMEWORK
Indicators
Means of Verification
GOAL:
Income levels and food and nutrition
security sustainably improved for poor
agricultural households in the project
area
By programme completion up to 48,000 smallholder
households (80% of direct beneficiaries) achieve min. one
of the following:
 Increase in asset ownership.
 Increase in savings.
 Reduction in prevalence of child malnutrition.
 Reduction in food insecurity.

RIMS

baseline, and completion
surveys

Zambia Central Statistical
Office
DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE:
Production, productivity and sales of
smallholder farmers in target areas
sustainably increased

Increased crop yields (min. 30%) of cassava, rice,
mixed beans and/or groundnuts of 30,000 smallholder.
Increased quantities (min. 20%) of cassava, rice,
mixed beans / groundnuts marketed by 40,000
smallholder HHs .
Reduced vulnerability of 10,000 smallholder HHs to
climatic variation affecting crop production.

MACO/CSO surveys

Baseline and end- of
programme surveys.
20,000 smallholder farmers (by gender and poverty
quintile) actively involved in farmer groups,
associations and cooperatives
100 farmer groups linked to financial service providers
30% of leadership positions in farmer groups and CACs
held by women

MACO M&E data

S3P reports, surveys and
qualitative impact assessments

ZARI reports
80% of farmers participating in PEA/FFS-type groups
satisfied with advisory services.
80% of participants in PEA/FFS-type groups adopting
improved seed, planting material and/or cultural
practices.
5 public-private partnerships for agricultural extension
and marketing established in programme area.
45,000 farmers adopting improved crop varieties
adapted to target areas
30,000 farmers adopting conservation agriculture,
agro-forestry and/or improved cropping practices
adapted to target areas
5,000 farmers and their families adopting labour saving
equipment

MACO M&E data

S3P reports, surveys and
qualitative impact assessments

ZARI reports

Baseline and end- of
programme surveys.

MACO/CSO studies

ZARI/SCCI reports


Assumptions
Stable prices; effective
targeting includes poorer
households
OUTCOMES
2
Component 1: Sustainable Smallholder Productivity Growth
Targeted smallholder farmer groups
and organizations informed,
organized and empowered to
respond to market and agricultural
development opportunities.

Smallholders in target areas have
improved access to more pertinent
and effective advisory services
delivered by MACO and/or private
sector.

Agricultural research and seed
multiplication services responds to
priority needs of smallholders, with
availability of:
 Improved crop varieties.
 Improved land and crop
management practices.
 Labour saving tools/equipment.







Agricultural technologies offer
smallholders opportunities to
increase production and
productivity in a sustainable
manner.
SAPP operating effectively
and successfully on key
selected agricultural value
chains
Research - extension link
operational
Results Hierarchy
Results Hierarchy
Indicators
Means of Verification
Assumptions
S3P annual reports
Districts, communities and
groups interested willing and
able to contribute to and cofinance agricultural and rural
investments.
Component 2: Enabling Environment for Productivity Growth.
40 operational district-level agricultural investments.
350 operational community-level agricultural
investments.
500 group-level agricultural investments.


Improved public policy and planning
environment to support sustainable
productivity growth and expand
smallholders’ integration in
agricultural markets

3 changes in policies resulting from policy reviews and
studies, related workshops and lessons learning visits.


Unqualified financial and technical audits.
Timeliness and adequacy of annual work plans, budgets
and reports (including M&E reports, expenditure and
accounting reports).
Disbursement rate <10% variance from profile
Effective implementation capacity,
measurement and reporting.


SNDP reports
Policy processes driven by
technical as well as political
considerations
Audit reports
S3P periodic reports
PMU adequately staffed and
supported
Service Provider reports
PSC minutes
Existing and solid farmers
organisations genuinely
interested in having their
capacities strengthened
Individuals trained willing to
set-up farmer group and see
the value of collective action
MACO district and provincial
reports
SNDP reports
Internal / external audit reports
PSC minutes
Establishment of extension
staff posts well covered,
reduced vacancy ratio in
districts targeted by the
project
OUTPUTS
3
Sub-component 1.1: Strengthening Farmer Organizations and their Federations.
 Capacities of existing farmer
organizations, quality of their
services and capacity support
they require assessed
 Training provided to FO and
individual farmers


12 District Farmer Associations and/or District
Cooperative Unions, and 750 Farmer groups/camp level
associations, strengthened
20,000 members trained on identified priority issues.
Sub-component 1.2: Pluralistic Participatory Extension Services
PACO and DACO capacities to
coordinate and deliver quality
services strengthened
 Procurement and financial
management capacities in target
provinces / districts improved
 Improved information and
knowledge sharing
 Improved mobility and housing of
Camp extension Officers.




Quarterly provincial level planning and review meetings
involving DACOs, ZARI and partners.
Quarterly district level planning, information sharing
and review meetings.
Staff of 3 provinces and 24 districts trained in fiduciary
issues
Improved agricultural and rural
infrastructure and improved access
to productivity enhancing works and
equipment.

 Partnerships established with
private sector agricultural
extension and marketing services
providers in target areas..




Preparation of harmonized PEA/FFS curriculum for
Master Training of Trainers.
Training of master trainers in 3 provinces.
Training of trainers in 24 districts.
1500 PEA/FFS trainings for 30,000 participating
farmers.
MACO district and provincial
reports
PSC minutes
15,000 smallholders receive extension support through
public-private partnerships with private/nongovernment organizations providing such services.
PPP agreements
Service provider contracts
PPP / Service providers reports
Farmer surveys
PSC minutes
Establishment of extension
staff posts well covered,
reduced vacancy ratio in
districts targeted by the
project
Sub-component 1.3: Agricultural Research for Development (AR4D)
Improved crop varieties adapted
to target areas delivered.
On-station breeding and selection
programmes for cassava and
mixed beans and possibly rice
and groundnuts undertaken.

Number of improved cassava, mixed beans and
possibly rice and groundnuts varieties developed
ZARI reports
S3P reports
Partner institutions reports
PSC minutes

Adaptive cropping practices
research to support shift to more
intensive production systems
undertaken

ZARI reports
S3P reports
PSC minutes

Adaptive labour productivity
research for on-farm technologies
and equipment, including
transport and post-harvest
undertaken.
Improved access to certified seed
and planting material in target
areas.
Adapted certification supported
by SCCI.

Adapted CA, agro-forestry practices and/or other
improved cropping practices made available Number of
improved resilience to climatic variability, integrated
pest management Soil fertility, organic matter and
nutrients management technologies produced.
Number of Labour saving tools/equipment adapted to
target areas produced.
Improved access to transport and
training infrastructure at district
level



4
Maintenance of breeder seed stock for cassava (4
varieties min.) and mixed beans (5 varieties min.)
 Production of foundation seed for cassava and mixed

beans on 3 ha, 2 ha respectively.
 First multiplication of seed at district/block level on 2
ha, 1 ha., and second multiplication at camp level (by
FFS groups of sub-component 1.2) on 5 ha, 2 ha.
Sub-component 2.1: Local Agricultural Investments



40 district level agricultural investments planned by
communities and implemented
Cassava Sector strategy
remains a government
priority leading to increased
funding for research for Agroecological zone III, in
particular research on
cassava farming systems,
ZARI reports
S3P reports
PSC minutes
Province and District reports
S3P reports
PSC minutes
S3P reports
District Development Plans and
Annual DDCC reports
District willing and able to
finance 10% of total costs
 Participatory extension
approaches (PEA)/Farmer field
school (FFS) methodologies in
target areas harmonized and upscaled.
 Participatory assessment of
current PEA/FFS methodologies
conducted.

Improved access to local
transport and community level
infrastructure (storage, SWC)

350 small-scale community-level agricultural
investments of a public nature planned by communities
and implemented

improved access to productivity
enhancing equipment.

500 very small-scale group-level agricultural
investments identified and financed.
MACO M&E system strengthened
Improved management of
information and communication
within MACO/PPD.



Improved information for and
opportunities for discussion with
decision makers.


Unqualified financial and
technical audits.

Timeliness and adequacy of
annual work plans, budgets and
reports (including M&E reports,
expenditure and accounting
reports).





MACO M&E system revised and operational
Programme planning and monitoring specialist based in
MACO/PPD
5
Number and type of policy reviews and studies relevant
to sustainable productivity growth and smallholder
integration in markets, and related workshops and
discussion forums and dialogue events
 Increased exposure to other
 Number and type of exposure visits of policy and
experiences by policy and
decision makers, within Zambia to programme or other
decision makers.
relevant sites and/or events or international relevant
sites or events.
Sub-component 2.3: Programme Management, Monitoring and Evaluation.
PSC established and meeting regularly for S3P/SAPP
AWPBs, Progress and annual reports prepared.
MTR and Completion review conducted
Communities willing and able
to contribute at least 25% of
total costs
Groups willing and able to
contribute at least 50% of
total costs.
MACO Annual report and
provincial reports
MIS database
Advisor reports
PSC minutes
Policy reports
Workshop reports
New policies and legislation
PSC minutes
Study tour reports
New policies and legislation
PSC minutes
Performance Enhancement
Programme remains a priority
for MACO
CAADP process on-track
Minutes of PSC meetings
AWPB and Annual report
Minutes of Joint Decision Meeings
with PSC and IFAD
Mid-Term Review Aide memoire
and report
Completion report
Baseline survey and completion
survey reports
PSC minutes
PMU established and staffed
Policy and decision makers
willing to participate and
make evidence-based policy
decisions
Policy and decision makers
willing to participate and
make evidence-based policy
decisions
Sub-component 2.2: Support to the Policy and Planning Framework
SNDP reports
PSC minutes
S3P reports
Service provider reports
SNDP reports
PSC minutes
S3P reports
Service provider reports
PSC minutes
I.
A.
STRATEGIC CONTEXT AND RATIONALE
Country and Rural Development and Poverty Context
1.
Zambia is a large landlocked country (753,000 km2 - the 39th largest country in
the world). Its population, which grew at 2.8 per cent during the 2000s, totalled only
13 million in 2010, giving it a population density of only 17 persons/km2. Its GDP per
capita currently stands at US$ 1760 (PPP); its Gini index, at over 0.50 in 2006, indicates
that income distribution remains extremely unequal; and its Human Development Index
of 0.395 gives it a ranking of 150th out of 169 countries, low but about average for subSaharan Africa.
2.
At independence in 1964, Zambia inherited an economy which was heavily
dependent on the copper mining sector (accounting more than 90% of export earnings),
and a population that was close to 50 per cent urban, one of the highest rates in subSaharan Africa. After 30 years of relatively poor economic performance, Zambia’s
macroeconomic situation has improved in the last 10 years: driven by the macroeconomic and public sector reforms initiated in the 1990s and propelled by rising copper
prices, annual economic growth averaged 4.8 percent over the period 2002-2005 and
increased to 6.1 percent over 2006-2009. Average annual inflation over 2006-2009 fell
to 11 percent as compared to 20 percent during 2002-20051. Good progress has been
made in seven out of the eleven MDG indicators, in particular for child malnutrition,
primary education, infant mortality and the incidence of malaria. Targets on hunger,
education, gender equality and HIV&AIDS are likely to be achieved by 2015.
3.
National poverty levels have come down somewhat since 1998, but remain high
with 64 percent of the population ranked as poor and 51 percent as extremely poor in
20062. Poverty in rural areas is significantly higher than in urban areas, and has
declined less during the period since 1998 (Table 1). Female headed households are
more likely to be poor than those headed by men.
Table 1: Poverty levels in Zambia 1998-2006 (compiled from CSO data Annex 1).
Zambia
Rural
Urban
1998
Poverty
Extreme
Incidence
Poverty
73
58
83
71
56
36
2006
Poverty
Extreme
Incidence
Poverty
64
51
80
67
34
20
4.
Agriculture is the main source of income and employment for more than 60 per
cent of the population, and especially for women, who constitute 65 percent of the rural
population. Accelerated growth in the agriculture sector is thus key to reducing both
poverty and the dependency on the mining sector. However, the sector has grown only
weakly since 2000 – on average 2 per cent per year, though there were strong
performances in 2003/2004, 2009/2010 and 2010/11, mainly linked to record-breaking
maize harvests the last two seasons. Moreover, while between 1987 and 2010 food
production increased at an average 4.3-4.4 percent per year, it was increases in the area
cropped that accounted for fully 4 percent of that, while the annual productivity (yields
per ha) increased at only 0.3-0.4 percent per annum (see Annex 1).
5.
The smallholder farming sector numbers approximately 1.1 million households,
over 20 per cent of which are headed by women. These households cultivate on average
1.5 ha of land, generally using low-input, hand hoe technology and relying primarily
upon family labour. They produce principally for household consumption, although about
one-third sell some of their production, while at the other extreme, about one quarter
suffer chronic food insecurity and require long-term social protection. These are often
1
2
Sixth National Development Plan 2011-2015.
Central Statistical Office: Poverty Trends Report, 1996 – 2006.
7
female-, elderly- or child-headed households, the chronically sick and/or disabled 1. In
addition, there are some 50,000 emergent farmers, who cultivate between 5 and 20 ha,
typically with draught power, greater use of purchased inputs, and hired labour; and
their production is predominantly for sale. The vast majority of such farmers operate
along the line-of-rail that traverses the country from south-west to north-east. There are
some 1500 large-scale commercial farmers, included a sizeable number of Zimbabweans
who have relocated to Zambia, who generally cultivate upwards of 50 ha, have extensive
mechanization and use both permanent and casual staff. There is also a limited number
of large corporate operations, farming thousand of hectares of crops and/or with a
thousand or more head of livestock, that are managed by hired professionals and
vertical integrated to agro-processing.
6.
Smallholder farming systems vary according to the agro-ecological conditions
across the country. In the northern half of the country, cassava is the main staple and
the basis for the production system. In the southern half of the country, maize is the
main food crop; while in the centre, there are mixed maize/cassava systems. Overall,
agricultural production is dominated by maize, which is grown by 80 per cent of farming
households and in 2010 covered over half the area planted. Maize production is strongly
promoted by the Government of Zambia (GRZ) through: (a) a targeted subsidized Farm
Input Supply Programme (FISP); and (b) a guaranteed maize purchase programme by
the Food Reserve Agency (FRA), which in recent years has offered above market farmgate prices. Other important smallholder crops include beans, groundnuts, rice, cotton,
tobacco, sugar cane and vegetables. Some 20 per cent of smallholders own cattle,
mainly in the drier southern part of the country, where draft power is a key element of
the cropping systems and permit larger areas to be cultivated than in the north, where
lack of labour is the principal constraint to increased production. Poultry are much more
widespread, owned by over 90 per cent of households.
7.
Conservation farming practices have been widely promoted in Zambia, and
around 180,000 small-scale farmers have adopted some elements of conservation
farming. However, the techniques used are those that have been developed specifically
for the maize-based farming systems in the dryer parts of the country, while the main
cassava based farming systems are mostly located in more humid regions with acidic
soils, for which appropriate CF techniques still need to be developed.
8.
An estimated 300,000, or one quarter of all, smallholders are currently linked to
agribusiness through more or less vertically integrated value chains, for crops such as
cotton, tobacco, sugarcane and horticultural crops. Outside these value chains, low
population densities mean that for many farmers agricultural markets are distant,
uncompetitive and unremunerative, all of which creates little incentive for increased
production. This is one of the factors behind the low productivity of the smallholder
sector. Another is the plentiful availability of arable land, which means that expanding
the area under cultivation, rather than intensifying the production system, remains a
possibility for a majority of smallholder farmers. Lack of education – over 70 per cent of
smallholder farmers have only primary education – and entrepreneurial skills; high
dependency rates and seasonal labour constraints, combined with high levels of disease
and hunger during the growing season; plus the devastating effects of HIV/AIDS, also all
undermine farmers’ productive capacity. So too do farmers’ lack of financial assets.
Growing climatic variability and extremes, and declining soil fertility and soil acidity also
adversely affect agricultural production. In addition, animal diseases and deaths in the
1990s, especially in southern Zambia, have undermined productive capacity.
9.
Land-rights of smallholders are in general considered relatively secure. However,
land is starting to become a constraint in some more densely populated areas; in some
parts of the country the land rights of women – particularly widows – are not secure;
1
World Bank Report No. 36573-ZM, January 9, 2007: Zambia Smallholder Agriculture Commercialization
Strategy.
8
and there are some concerns regarding the conversion of customary land to leasehold
land, in particular for larger (sometimes foreign) investors. A draft Land Policy aims
(among other things) to strengthen decentralised land administration systems and the
registration of customary lands, but the finalisation of this policy has been protracted.
10.
Agricultural extension services are provided through MACO, donor-funded
projects/ programmes, NGOs, churches, the Zambia National Farmers Union (ZNFU) and
the private sector, all to a large extent using MACO staff. MACO’s institutional structure
comprises the Departments of Policy and Planning; Agriculture; Cooperatives, Agribusiness and Marketing; Administration and Finance; and Human Resources, as well as
Institutes for Research and for Seed Certification. The structure is replicated at provincial
and district levels; and each district is split up into blocks, and further into camps, each
one (in theory) with a front-line Camp Extension Officer (CEO). MACO promotes
participatory extension approaches, but is challenged by its limited institutional capacity
at different levels. Field staff play key roles, but positions are sometimes vacant and
staff are often poorly trained and/or ill equipped.
11.
In 2009, MACO identified its major capacity development needs as being in five
key areas: (a) informing and strengthening its policy analysis and decision-making
processes; (b) reviewing its functions, role and capacities for services provision and for
co-ordination; (c) building modern budget, planning and financial systems from national
to district levels; (d) modernising its human resources management and development;
and (e) modernising its knowledge management and technology (ICT). Particular
concerns have been MACO’s monitoring and evaluation systems and the lack of priority
given to financial management and control. All of these issues are to be tackled under a
forthcoming EU-financed Performance Enhancement Programme (PEP). Two other areas
in which MACO has lagged are in relation to public-private partnerships and to
decentralisation. In both these areas however, some progress is now being made.
12.
Other key institutions in the agricultural sector are the research organizations:
the Zambia Agricultural Research Institute (ZARI), the non-profit agency Golden Valley
Agricultural Research Trust (GART), and a variety of other public and private agencies
conducting research on crops, livestock and fisheries. The Zambia National Farmers
Union (ZNFU) and its affiliate Conservation Farming Unit (CFU) is a national
membership-based organization for all types of farmers in Zambia; and at local level
farmer organizations include primary and district cooperatives, promoted by MACO over
many years, and the District Farmers Associations (DFA) that are affiliated to the ZNFU.
13.
An apparent high priority given by GRZ to the agriculture sector has not generally
been reflected in its budget allocation: as a share of total expenditure, agriculture
effectively received an average of 3 per cent between 1994 and 2002. It rose gradually
to over 12 per cent in 2007, before falling to 8 per cent in 2008 and 2009 and less than
7 per cent in 2010. However, of this up to 45 per cent is used on FISP and the FRA’s
purchases of maize; and this has squeezed the budgets for other MACO activities. Public
investments in key activities such as livestock extension, support to crops other than
maize, and agricultural research remain at a low level; and activities at field level are
particularly affected. In addition, donor support to the sector has declined considerably
in recent years, from over K400 billion in 2007 to less than K190 billion in 2011.
B.
Rationale
14.
The sector policy framework for S3P is set by variety of agricultural development
policies and strategies: the National Agricultural Policy 2004-2015 (NAP); the National
Development Plans; and the Comprehensive African Agriculture Development Plan
(CAADP) principles embraced by Government. All of these support the national Vision
2030, which aims for Zambia to become “a prosperous middle-income country by 2030”.
15.
The NAP presents a vision for the agricultural sector as being “to promote
development of an efficient, competitive and sustainable agricultural sector, which
9
assures food security and increased income”; and its main thrusts are increased
production, sector liberalization, commercialization, promotion of public and private
sector partnerships, and provision of effective services to ensure sustainable agricultural
growth. The Sixth National Development Plan 2011-2015 (SNDP), launched in February
2011, highlights the urgency of economic diversification. Its vision for the agricultural
sector – one of five key growth sectors identified – reconfirms that of the NAP, while its
goal is “to increase and diversify agriculture production and productivity so as to raise
the share of its contribution to 20 percent of GDP by end-2015”. The Plan identifies a
number of strategic priorities for the crop production, livestock and fisheries sub-sectors;
and it also gives emphasis to promoting post-harvest technologies, agro-processing and
access to domestic, regional and international markets for agro-products. In support of
SNDP, Zambia signed its CAADP Compact in January 2011. The Compact comprises five
programmes, for sustainable land management; agricultural productivity improvement;
agricultural marketing development and investment promotion; food and nutrition
security; and research, seeds and extension enhancement. It also commits GRZ to
agriculture marketing and credit acts; fertilizer distribution reforms – and particularly the
use of e-vouchers; and reconfirms an expanded role for the private sector.
16.
Accelerated growth in smallholder agriculture hinges on both marketing and
productivity, and key elements of GRZ policy have been the embracing of the
commercialization of small-scale agriculture as the main driver of poverty reduction by
generating sustainable incomes from “farming as a business”. Agribusiness is
encouraged to strengthen market linkages between smallholder farmers and consumers
through increased private sector participation in service delivery, such as in input supply,
output marketing and agro-processing.
17.
The IFAD Country Strategic Opportunities Programme for Zambia (COSOP) for
2011-2015 is aligned with the National Agricultural Policy and SNDP’s goal for the
agricultural sector. Its goal is to increase the incomes, improve the food security
and reduce the vulnerability of rural people living in poverty. It includes three
Strategic Objectives (SOs).
18.
Strategic Objective 1: Access to, and participation in, expanded and more
competitive markets by poor rural men and women are increased, within more
efficient value chains. The objective will be achieved through an array of interventions
along value chains for specific commodities (crop, livestock, fisheries and forest-derived)
of particular importance to smallholder producers. Improved market access would
provide incentives for smallholder farmers to increase the productivity and sustainability
of their farm systems, which will be facilitated through complementary support provided
under the programme. The recently started Smallholder Agribusiness Promotion
Programme (SAPP) will be the main delivery vehicle for this objective; opportunities for a
NTFP commercialisation project could also be explored during the period 2013-2015.
19.
Strategic Objective 2: Access to and use of technologies and services for
enhanced productivity, sustainability and resilience of smallholder production
systems are increased. Achieving this objective will involve the strengthening and
diversification of service provision (the supply), as well as the strengthening of farmer
capacity to productively draw on and use these services (the demand). It will require a
focus on improving the access to, and use, of improved technologies for crop and
livestock production, as well as more sustainable land management by smallholder
households. The proposed Smallholder Productivity Promotion Programme (S3P) will
contribute to the achievement of this objective.
20.
Strategic Objective 3: Access to and use of sustainable financial services
by poor rural men and women are increased. The objective will be achieved through
a systematic approach to rural financial services development, encompassing
community-based financial institutions, MFIs and commercial banks, as well as the policy
framework for rural financial services. It will support the other strategic objectives of the
country programme related to agricultural production and marketing, as well as
10
supporting non-farm rural enterprises. The delivery vehicles will be the ongoing Rural
Finance Programme (RFP), which will continue until 2013, and a possible follow-up
intervention.
21.
IFAD’s experience with agricultural and rural development projects in Zambia has
been varied, though it has gradually improved over time, in large part as a result of the
growing impact of having an IFAD country office and stronger, IFAD-conducted
implementation support. A first set of lessons learnt (see Annex 3) points to the
importance of simple project designs, strong yet accountable project management units,
and enhanced country ownership. Second, the project completion report for the
Smallholder Enterprise and Marketing Programme (SHEMP) highlighted two key issues:
the importance of rural roads as a precondition for agricultural and rural development;
and the importance of production support to enable farmers to increase their
productivity and respond to the demands of the market in response to the new
opportunities created through the value chain projects, SHEMP and the follow-up SAPP.
Third, one of the key lessons relating to the country programme is the fact that there
has been insufficient collaboration and learning between projects; this is something that
needs to change.
22.
The design for S3P seeks to build on these lessons, as well as those of other
donor-supported projects in Zambia. It also takes up the theme, highlighted in the
COSOP, of working with GRZ to promote ‘smart’ government, involving new ways of
working with the private sector. Government is still at an early stage of implementing
these principles, and IFAD can provide it support in developing appropriate models and
piloting partnerships, and in promoting “farming as a business”. In addition, S3P is
explicitly designed to complement and reinforce SAPP, with SAPP focussing on marketing
and value chains of selected commodities, while S3P promotes productivity increases in
the farming systems that have these commodities as basis. Effectively, SAPP focuses on
the demand-pull side of the value chains of these commodities, while S3P will work on
the supply-push side. Both are considered innovative programmes within Zambia and
will serve as vehicles for further learning and policy dialogue, and will contribute to
MACO’s transformation in support of “farming as a business”.
23.
Finally, S3P will actively seek opportunities for collaboration with others of GRZ’s
development partners. The programme will be co-financed by the government of
Finland, which will provide opportunity for close collaboration and synergies in particular
with the Finnish-supported Luapula Agricultural and Rural Development programme
(PLARD), which is piloting and implementing some of the activities that S3P can learn
from, and where appropriate scale-up. The programme will also be closely coordinated
with the capacity development efforts of the EU-financed PEP. Concrete opportunities for
collaboration exist also with other development partners, including JICA, USAID and the
other Rome-based agencies; and these will be exploited by the programme.
24.
The starting point for S3P is the value chains associated with a limited number of
selected commodities on which SAPP focuses its efforts. The commodities promoted
under SAPP have been selected according to: the extent to which they are grown by, and
offer market opportunities to, large numbers of smallholder farmers – and particularly
for women and young farmers; their importance or significance for both household food
security and sales income; the extent to which the value chain can be up-scaled; and the
opportunities offered for value addition at farm level. Using these screening criteria,
cassava and mixed beans (Phaseolus sp.), rice, goats/village chickens and fish1 have
all been selected by stakeholders (government and non-government) for programme
engagement. Detailed analysis of these value chains started in the second quarter 2011.
1
Village chickens, goats and fish will not be retained by S3P, mainly because of the recent creation of a
separate Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development (MLFD), which would make implementation
arrangements more complex.
11
25.
Cassava holds a primary role in Zambia’s food security, as a buffer against grain
shortages. It represents 17 per cent of the area cropped with staples, accounts for 26
per cent of the total production of staple crops and for an estimated 20 per cent of
national calories consumed. Though the potential for cassava production and value
chains is significant, with potential demand estimated at 4 million Mt1, at present low
productivity and lack of market linkages mean that the cassava sector is not as viable
from a business point of view as some other crops. It is grown by about 400,000
smallholders, about two-thirds of whom are found in Luapula and Northern Provinces. In
these provinces more than 80 percent of the rural population depend on cassava for food
security, with both men and women involved in farming, primary processing and trading.
Productivity is generally low, with yields averaging 7 tons per hectare, and there is
substantial scope for increasing both yields and sales of cassava in the two provinces
(see Annex 1, Table 3). Apart from cassava, the cash crops grown in these farming
systems include maize, mixed beans, rice, groundnuts and millets.
II.
A.
PROGRAMME DESCRIPTION
Programme Area and Target Group
26.
S3P will adopt a phased approach to implementation. It will start in Project Year
(PY) 1 in eight districts in Luapula and Northern Provinces, expanding to 16 districts in
PY2, and further expanding to a third province and a total of 24 districts in PY3. The
initial programme area (PY1 and PY2) is determined by the main area of cassava-based
farming systems: within the two targeted provinces high potential districts will be
prioritized, with as main criterion that they should be important cassava and/or mixed
beans production areas, with the highest potential to increase marketable surpluses (see
Map and Table 3 in Annex 1). Expansion of the area in PY3 will allow the Programme to
respond to the new market opportunities identified under SAPP, including for other
commodities: areas with high smallholder market potential for, for example, rice and
groundnuts (though possibly a number of other crops) could be brought into the
programme. Within the total 24 districts, clusters of agricultural camps will be prioritized
for intensive support, using the same criteria, up to a maximum of 150 camps in total.
27.
Unlike in many countries, there are not major regional differences in poverty
rates across the country. Excluding Lusaka and Copper Belt Provinces, which have a high
proportion of their populations living in the urban areas, all the other 7 provinces in the
country have rates of poverty between 72 and 79 per cent, with the rates in the rural
areas generally over 80 per cent. Northern Province ranks the second highest in poverty
incidence and extreme poverty in 2006 (78 and 64 per cent respectively), and Luapula
the third highest (73 per cent and 61 per cent respectively). Food insecurity and
malnutrition are prevalent in these provinces, as stunting among preschool- and schoolage children is highest in Luapula (about 50 per cent and 51 per cent), followed by
Northern Province (also around 50 per cent, compared to a national average of 42 per
cent and 31 per cent respectively)2. Further, Luapula and Northern Provinces reportedly
have some of the highest prevalence of chronic energy deficiency among women (13-14
per cent compared to national average of 10 per cent). Similarly, Luapula and Northern
Provinces’ average share of household expenditure on food, typically expressing the
extent of poverty and food security, were reported among the highest range in the
country (between 60-67 per cent)(see also Annex 2).
28.
Agro-ecological characteristics. Luapula and Northern Provinces are located in
the so-called Agro-Ecological Region (AER) III, at altitudes that range from 1,100-1,700
metres above sea level, except for the Luapula Valley (along the border with the
Democratic Republic of Congo), with land below 1,000 metres asl. The mean annual
rainfall in this region exceeds 1,000 mm and the length of the growing season varies
1
2
Zambia Cassava Sector Development Strategy 2010-2015. MACO, ACP, ITC, FAO, IITA, ACF.
Central Statistic Office (CSO) 2009.
12
from 120 to 150 days. The soils are highly weathered, leached and acidic, with pH of
less than 4.5, very low soil organic matter content and very low reserves of primary
minerals. They are usually deficient in phosphorous, nitrogen and many other major
plant nutrients and some micro-nutrients. Though these soils have serious chemical
limitations to plant growth, their physical properties are mostly favourable.
29.
Traditional slash and burn agriculture (Chitemene) is still widely practiced,
although in some areas close to the main road axes, farmers are already moving
towards more settled systems. However, doing so, and gradually shifting towards more
intensive farming systems, requires drastic changes in soil management, so as to
increase soil organic matter content and pH, enhance the sustainability of the farming
systems and promote greater resilience to climatic variability (flooding and drought).
Within this perspective, conservation farming and agro-forestry technologies appear to
be the most promising options. However, the CF and agro-forestry technologies
promoted in Zambia have mainly been developed for the dryer, maize-based production
systems of AERs I and II, and they still need to be fully adapted to AER III.
30.
The target group would consist of productive small-scale/ smallholder rural
farmers (with cropped area up to 5 ha) organized in groups and/or cooperatives, or
willing to join such groups. As much as 80 per cent of smallholders are below the
poverty line. Many already devote part of their farming system to market-oriented
production and have joined an enterprise group or common interest group, but their
commercial activities are constrained by poor market access and weak bargaining power.
Others remain semi-subsistence farmers who primarily grow food crops but occasionally
sell surpluses.
31.
Woman farmers and female headed households are common in both groups, as
are households affected by HIV/AIDS, but women are reported as more disadvantaged,
with less assets and opportunities to engage in commercial agriculture. Division of labour
is differentiated, with fields and farming activities partially separate along gender lines.
Women are overburdened with subsistence farming and other household chores. When
subsistence-oriented, household-based enterprises dominated by women become more
commercial, husbands are likely to become more involved. Men control most income
from the sale of (cash) crops.
32.
The target group is characterized by low asset-based, precarious livelihoods with
comparatively low resilience to shocks. Under stress low-asset households are likely to
fall back into conditions of vulnerability and extreme poverty. In these situations, they
are forced to rely on traditional coping strategies such as skipping meals, reducing
dietary diversity, engaging in causal labour on farms or other occupations at low rates,
depending on familial social networks, bartering, selling assets, pulling children out of
school etc.1 Vulnerability is due to a complexity of factors: weakened social capital, the
high prevalence of HIV/AIDS, climatic shocks such as droughts and flooding, lack of
capital to expand agricultural activities, low levels of education and, notably, isolation
and distance from economic and social services, including markets, schools and health
facilities. An important factor keeping households strapped in this cycle is low production
and productivity, resulting in low incomes. The project aims to support these households
by improving their access to improved, services and infrastructure that respond to
farmers’ particular conditions and asset base.
33.
For many smallholders lack of labour is a more critical constraint to increased
production than lack of land. This situation is particularly acute for households with
conditions that worsen labour availability, notably female-headed and those affected by
HIV/AIDS. Reportedly, about 60 percent of rural families have lost family members due
to HIV/AIDs. This is putting stress on the extended family system as already vulnerable
families take in more dependent members, raising the burden of acquiring enough food.
The phenomenon of child-headed households has also been rising, particularly limiting
1
IFAD (2006) Study on Poverty and Targeting in Eastern and Southern Africa: Zambia Country Report, and
(2008) Zambia: Vulnerability Assessment Committee (ZVAC)
13
opportunities for the girl child, often withdrawn from school to help with home care of
sick members1. On this specific issue, S3P foresees activities related to adaptive
research on tools and equipment (including for transport), in view of increasing labour
productivity; as well as promoting investments in agro-processing technologies which
will result in freeing significant time for women in particular.
34.
Direct beneficiaries. Agricultural camps in the target areas consist of 1,0001,500 rural smallholder households (Luapula and Northern Provinces respectively). The
S3P aims at working in a total of about 150 camps distributed over these, plus a third
province, reaching an average of 200 smallholder households per camp. These will
participate directly in the main S3P activities, notably Farmer Field School-type groups
(about 10 groups per camp), to improve access to technologies and markets. The core
target group will therefore consist of 30,000 participating smallholder households,
equivalent to around 150,000 people2, or about 20 per cent of the rural population in
targeted camps (Table 2 below). At least half these participants are expected to be
women farmers - an expectation based on the experience under SHEMP, where 62 per
cent of the members of the groups supported were women. The programme will work
with groups of farmers, where group members are involved in small-scale cassava
and/or mixed bean production systems (which includes groundnuts in rotation with other
crops) and/or rice, or are interested in growing rice. Groups will range in extent of
formality (from cooperatives to “clubs”) and diversity of membership will be encouraged,
e.g. women, youth, members from disadvantaged households.
35.
The core target group also includes those farmers who: (i) gain access to
improved planting material (sub-component 1.3), as well as other technological
improvements through farmer organizations (sub-component 1.1) and/or partners (subcomponent 1.2); and (ii) households who benefit from improved community investments
and infrastructure (sub-component 2.1), but which are not counted above. This second
direct group is estimated to consist of a further 30,000 smallholder households,
equivalent to some 150,000 people or 20 per cent of the population in targeted camps.
36.
The total number of participants and direct beneficiaries of the programme will
therefore amount to 60,000 households, equivalent to 300,000 people, or 40 per cent of
the population of targeted camps (Table 2 below).
Table 2. Summary of Participants and Beneficiaries
Description
Provinces targeted
Districts targeted
Coverage
Luapula, Northern and third
Province
24 districts in 3 Provinces
Agricultural Camps targeted for
intensive support
150
Farmer groups and households
targeted
1,500 groups with
30,000 smallholder HHs
(150,000 people)
Other farmers/HHs in target area
benefitting from improved planting
material, seeds, advisory services
and/or community infrastructure
Total direct beneficiaries
1
2
Assumptions
About 30% of total camps
in 3 provinces.
Average 1,000 HHs per
camp
10 groups per camp
20 HHs pr group
5 persons/HH
(150,000 people)
20% of camp HHs
(300,000 persons)
About 40% of total
population of targeted
camps
Chiwele D. et all (2004) for FAO. Agricultural Development and Food Security in Sub-Saharan Africa: A
Case Study of Zambia; and NAP draft (2011).
Average size of 5 persons/household; Zambia Census 2000.
14
37.
Indirect beneficiaries would include smallholder producers of cassava, mixed
beans/groundnuts who do not live in the targeted camps, but who would nevertheless
(in due course) be able to gain access to improved technologies (in particular improved
crop varieties and CF technologies) generated by S3P.
38.
Self-targeting. Once the programme areas are defined through a process of
geographic targeting, a self-targeting approach will be activated in complement with
SAPP. Self-targeting in S3P, in complement to SAPP, will be guided by the core criteria of
smallholder farmers who are already organised in farmer groups (producer groups,
cooperatives, informal associations etc.) or are willing and have potential to join such
groups, and potential to be linked to markets (see SAPP WP1). The targeting strategy
will be inclusive, determined by farmer interest and willingness to comply with
programme procedures. Farmers in all ranges of small-scale cassava and/or mixed bean
production systems as well as rice growers in areas of concentration, will be eligible as
direct beneficiaries of programme support.
39.
To ensure adequate gender mainstreaming in S3P, a pro-active gender targeting
would be incorporated through a gender mainstreaming strategy that will be crosscutting throughout all programme interventions and aligns with both IFAD and GRZ
policies. In addition to ensuring equal opportunities, special attention is required to
promote participation of women in the range of programme activities and access to
benefits. This will require monitoring not only of quantitative achievements but also of
qualitative changes (e.g. leading roles played by women, gradual changes of women’s
roles and voice in the household and in groups); the results will guide programme
implementation. A minimum target of 30 percent female beneficiaries will be used
regarding participation in capacity building activities and for the disbursement of
matching grants to groups. Should women not be gaining access to programme benefits
as intended, direct targeting measures would be considered.
B.
Programme Development Objective
40.
The Smallholder Productivity Promotion Programme (S3P) has as its overall goal
that Income levels, food and nutrition security are sustainably improved for poor
agricultural households in target areas. The indicators at the goal level include: up to
48,000 smallholder households (80 per cent of direct beneficiaries) achieve at least one
of the following by programme completion: (i) an increase in household asset ownership;
(ii) an increase in household savings; (iii) reduction in prevalence of child malnutrition;
and (iv) a reduction in food insecurity (see Logical Framework).
41.
The S3P purpose or development objective is that production, productivity and
sales of smallholder farmers in target areas are sustainably increased. The associated
indicators include: (i) average crop yields of cassava, rice, mixed beans and/or
groundnuts of 30,000 smallholder households are increased by at least 30 percent;
(ii) the quantities of cassava, rice, mixed beans and/or groundnuts marketed by 40,000
smallholder households are increased by at least 20 percent; (iii) the vulnerability of
10,000 smallholder households to climatic variation affecting crop production and/or
market access is reduced.
42.
S3P is closely linked to SAPP and the commodities selected under SAPP, in
particular cassava, rice and mixed beans. Initially, S3P will operate exclusively in the
cassava-based farming systems common to the Northern and Luapula Provinces. The
productivity of these farming systems will be enhanced, as will that of the main crops
cultivated under these systems: cassava, rice, mixed beans and groundnuts1.
1
SAPP does not yet focus on opportunities in the groundnut value chain, however it will be requested to
analyse the market opportunities offered by groundnuts, with a view to possibly including it.
15
C.
Components and Outcomes
43.
S3P will adopt a phased programmatic approach and will have a duration of seven
years. The programme will have two components, each of which are divided into three
subcomponents: (i) Sustainable smallholder productivity growth; and (ii) Enabling
environment for productivity growth. See Annex 4 for a detailed description of
components and outcomes.
44.
Component 1: Sustainable Smallholder Productivity Growth (US$ 24.2
million) with as its objective to: improve smallholders access to, and ability to use,
knowledge, extension1, adapted technologies and improved planting material.
Component key outcomes include: (a) targeted farmer groups and organizations function
more effectively and are empowered to respond to market and rural development
opportunities; (b) smallholder farmers in target areas have improved access to more
relevant and effective advisory services delivered by MACO as well as farmer
organizations and/or private sector; and (c) agricultural research and seed multiplication
services respond better to priority needs of smallholders. This component includes three
sub-components: 1.1 strengthening farmer organizations and their federations;
1.2 pluralistic participatory extension services; and 1.3 agricultural research for
development.
45.
Sub-component 1.1: Strengthening farmer organizations and their
federations, with as its objective to strengthen membership-based farmers associations
and cooperatives and their federations at camp and district level to improve and diversify
the offer of services to farmers. Farmer groups, associations and/or cooperatives and
their federations provide services which go beyond, but include, both technical advisory
services as well as marketing services (for instance bulking). These organizations
already exist at camp, block and district level, but their effectiveness is variable
depending on why and how they were formed, their cohesiveness and management
capacity and the support they have received. The nature of the support provided by the
programme would be determined by the development stage groups have reached.
46.
S3P will strengthen existing farmer organizations, assist interested farmers who
are not yet organized to become organized, and support federations of farmer
associations and cooperatives to increase their membership base. It targets 10 district
level farmers associations and/or cooperative unions (i.e 50 per cent of overall targeted
districts) and 750 farmer groups with 20,000 members. Implementation will be
outsourced and activities will include: (i) a detailed assessment of the existing farmers
organizations and their federations in the target areas, their level of development and
capacity, the quality of the services they offer to their members, and their main capacity
development requirements; (ii) provision of the training and capacity building as per
identified needs, for instance on group formation and group dynamics, leadership skills,
governance, entrepreneurship skills and business planning (farming as a business),
financial management, accounting and legal aspects; and (iii) follow-up and on-the-job
mentoring of federative structures at district level in terms of developing capacities of
coordination and service provision. Once a group has sufficiently matured (see Annex 4
for a description of development stages), S3P would assist it to link up to financial
institutions that promote saving and credit activities, such as for instance those
supported through the IFAD-financed Rural Finance Programme (RFP). It would also seek
to explore the issue of identifying a sustainable institutional development path for them.
47.
Sub-component 1.2: Pluralistic participatory extension services, with as
objective to improve the access, quality and sustainability of advisory services available
to smallholders in the target areas. Extension services are “pluralistic” when there is a
diversity of providers, for instance by government, by farmer organizations, and by the
private/non-government sector. S3P will support different sources of advisory services
to farmers: MACO, membership-based farmer organizations, private or commercial
1
In this document, extension and advisory services are used synonymous.
16
enterprises and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). These provide complementary
services, while each contributes to long-term sustainability of advisory service delivery to
farmers. “Participatory” extension approaches provide the opportunity for on-farm
testing and development of technical options which effectively respond to farmers’
needs. This is done through farmer-led trials and demonstrations, promotion of farmerto-farmer learning, farmer organization knowledge exchange networks, and access to
information platforms using modern information and communications technologies (ICT).
48.
S3P will promote an extension process in which: (a) farmers are organized and
empowered to demand quality support services; (b) service providers work with
organized market-oriented farmer groups; (c) collaboration between MACO and nongovernment service providers is promoted; (d) ICT for information access and feedback
are increasingly used; and (e) cross-cutting issues, such as gender and HIV/AIDS are
mainstreamed. Since the strengthening of farmer organizations is already covered under
sub-component 1.1, the activities under sub-component 1.2 are limited to: (i)
strengthening of MACO field capacities; (ii) harmonization of participatory extension
services; and (iii) partnerships with other providers of extension.
49.
Strengthening MACO field capacities, at Provincial and District levels, including
support for: (i) a facilitator, based in the office of the Provincial Agricultural Coordinator
(PACO), to assist in planning, coordination, information and knowledge management and
M&E; (ii) quarterly provincial level agricultural planning and review meetings with the
participation of the District Agricultural Coordinators (DACOs), provincial agricultural
research stations, donor-supported project representatives, and other relevant partners;
(iii) quarterly district level agricultural planning and review meetings for district staff,
district planning officers and representatives of the provincial agricultural research
stations, donor-supported MACO projects and other partners; (iv) provincial and district
procurement and financial management training and technical support; (v) information
and knowledge sharing: exchange visits, participation in knowledge events, production
and distribution of communication/information material; and (vi) providing mobility,
housing and solar panels for CEOs where needed and appropriate.
50.
Harmonization and upscaling of participatory extension approaches (PEA) within
MACO and the different donor supported MACO projects, including support to: (i) assess
the various diverse extension methodologies that have been, or are currently being,
used in Zambia and elsewhere (including those that use ICT); (ii) prepare a harmonized
curriculum for training of trainers (ToT) in PEA/FFS approach including a module on basic
business planning; (iii) conduct ToT at provincial level and form master trainers to
(iv) conduct ToT at district level, targeting CEOs and lead farmers as facilitators, who (v)
are expected to facilitate between one and three FFS each cropping season; and (vi)
regular refresher training sessions for MACO field staff. The ToTs will also be open to
representatives of farmer organizations and the private/non-government sector.
51.
Partnerships with organizations providing advisory services. At present, some
private/non-government initiatives target smallholders through similar types and
methods of activities promoted by S3P (and SAPP) 1. They are successfully engaging
smallholders in organized bulking, marketing, and processing of mainly mixed beans,
groundnuts and rice; they provide relevant advisory services to smallholders to ensure
regular supply and desired quality of farm products. The services provided are at present
partially financed by the profit margin of the processing and marketing business, and
could in future be totally financed by the latter. Some of these private/non-government
service providers have gained considerable outreach and experience in the S3P target
areas and constitute an important asset that could be further strengthened to serve a
larger number of farmers within a framework for pluralistic extension services.
1
Two relevant initiatives are: (i) the COMACO enterprise supported by the Wildlife Conservation Society
serving 45,000 farmers, providing business training, investing in local bulking, transport and processing
units for rice, beans, groundnuts and soya beans and creating market outlets both at national and
international level; and (ii) SNV specialising on rice value chain and providing assistance throughout the
chain including support to the newly founded Zambia Rice federation.
17
52.
At the same time, MACO has established a committee specifically to identify
opportunities for promoting non-government provision of extension services
(complementary to those already provided by MACO). Working closely with SAPP, S3P
can support this initiative, working in two main areas. First, it would finance studies and
reviews to help the committee both to identify opportunities where pluralistic service
provision in the agricultural sector can add value, and to define the key roles for MACO
in promoting, managing and monitoring service providers. These could also identify how
ICT can be used to contribute to improved extension services; and address and
mainstream cross-cutting issues, such as gender and HIV/AIDS. Second, it would finance
pilot projects for the non-government provision of extension-related services. These
would be realised through: (i) public-private partnerships (PPPs) where the private or
non-government partner shares similar objectives, but needs additional support or
resources to up-scale activities in the target areas; and (ii) more straightforward
contracting in cases where PPPs might not be possible or would be less desirable.
53.
Sub-component 1.3: Agricultural Research for Development (AR4D), with
as its objective to complement on-going GRZ and other partners’ initiatives to
strengthen strategic on-station and on-farm research capacities to broaden the
technology options for increased smallholder productivity. Potential technology options to
increase smallholder productivity range from: (a) improved certified seed and planting
material; (b) integrated soil fertility and crop management techniques that allow for and
facilitate the shift from traditional extensive slash-and-burn (chitemene) to more
intensive and more permanent farming systems, for which conservation agriculture and
agro-forestry appear to be promising options; and (c) improved tools, equipment and
techniques that reduce labour requirements or peaks of intensive labour requirements.
54.
S3P support of adaptive research will involve: (i) strategic agricultural research
for development (AR4D) in support to on-going ZARI research programmes, integrating
technical support from regional/ international research institutions and programmes; (ii)
competitive AR4D, driven by partnerships involving different agricultural research
institutions such as ZARI, GART, the University of Zambia (UNZA), and the private/nongovernment sector; (iii) promoting farmer participation in identifying research priorities
and in implementing and evaluating AR4D; (iv) instituting provincial- and district-level
AR4D platforms as part of the quarterly agricultural review and planning meetings
included under sub-component 1.2; and (v) building an integrated research-extension
information management platform. Specific activities include: (a) adaptive research for
improved varieties and cropping practices; (b) participatory research on integrated soil
fertility management practices, conservation Agriculture (CA) and agro-forestry
practices; (c) research on adapted tools/equipment; and (d) access to improved Seeds
and Planting Material.
55.
Adaptive research for improved varieties and cropping practices, to support:
(i) on-going on-station breeding and selection programmes for cassava (ZARI’s Mansa
station in Luapula Province), beans (ZARI’s Misamfu Research Station in Northern
Province) and possibly rice and groundnuts; (ii) participatory researcher and farmer-led
on-farm trials for most advanced lines, as well as improved cropping practices, especially
Integrated Pest and Production Management (IPPM) practices; (iii) specialised technical
assistance and support from international institutions (IITA for cassava, CIRAD for
conservation agriculture, CIAT for beans, for example). The programme will finance
some up-grading of research infrastructure of research stations and some equipment.
56.
Adaptation of conservation agriculture, agro-forestry and other improved
cropping practices. One of the main factors limiting agricultural productivity in the
programme areas is the low soil fertility (low organic matter content and soil acidity). It
is therefore imperative to continue working on identifying integrated soil fertility
management practices, including those that go under the label of conservation and
agro-forestry technologies adapted to the local agro-ecological and socio-economic
conditions. This research would be undertaken by ZARI in a partnership with GART and
18
farmers’ organizations and would complement existing efforts being undertaken with the
support of the CFU, GART and FAO.
57.
Research on adapted tools/equipment, including for transport, and on-farm postharvest technologies. S3P will support research related to improving labour productivity
and, therefore, competitiveness of commodities produced in the project area. Labour
availability is an important factor limiting agricultural growth and solutions to this issue
are fundamental to significantly improve production. Labour saving equipment and
agro-processing technologies adapted to local climate for cassava and other crops need
to be developed. The research will be conducted by the post-harvest unit in ZARI, in
collaboration with IITA in the case of cassava technology, private industries and other
partners as required.
58.
Access to improved seeds and planting material. Cassava, mixed beans and other
neglected crops are not of commercial interest to the private seed sector. Therefore,
farmer-based multiplication of high quality seed/planting material will be promoted and
strengthened for sustainability, with support to: (i) the maintenance of breeder and
foundation seed stock by specialised commodity research programmes in ZARI; (ii) first
multiplication at district level); (iii) second multiplication at camp level whereby by
farmer groups and/or specialized seed producer groups/individuals; (iv) adapted
certification (Quality Declared Seeds) support to be provided by the Seed Control &
Certification Institute (SCCI); and (v) strengthened local agro-dealer networks. In
addition to the support for cassava and mixed beans, the project would support the work
undertaken by ZARI in Kasama with the support from JICA and SNV related to the
purification of local varieties of rice used in the project area.
59.
Component 2: Enabling Environment for Productivity Growth (US$ 17.7
million) will address critical constraints in the enabling environment for smallholder
productivity growth, including: (i) improved rural infrastructure and improved access to
productivity enhancing equipment and assets; (ii) the policy and institutional framework
to provide the necessary support services; and (iii) programme coordination,
management and monitoring and evaluation.
60.
Sub-component 2.1: Local Agricultural Investments will help finance
investments that improve access to markets, increase labour productivity, reduce postharvest losses, improve land and water management, or facilitate access to knowledge.
This sub-component, which will start in PY2, will provide conditional partial grants for
eligible agricultural investments, as well as technical and facilitation assistance to
prepare the investment requests and help ensure correct implementation, operation and
maintenance. Access to resources will be according to defined criteria that outline
beneficiary eligibility and eligible type of investments. Three categories of investment will
be established, each with specific procedures and internal control mechanisms. Financial
allocations between the three categories will be flexible, according to demand.
61.
District-level agricultural investments of a strategic nature, such as:
(i) improvement of feeder roads connecting productive smallholder areas to main roads;
and (ii) rehabilitation of district Farmer Training Centres or Farm Institutes. All such
investments would be conditional on there being a sound and credible business plan for
the sustainable operation and management of the infrastructure financed. S3P
contribution to such investments will be up to 90 percent of total costs, with a ceiling
equivalent to US$ 250,000 per sub-project. Investments that would normally be
undertaken by the private sector are not eligible for support. Sub-projects will be
identified by the communities and, after approval at district level, included in the District
Development Plan. The proposals will then be reviewed by the PACO, and (depending on
the amount) submitted through the Programme Management Unit (PMU) for final review
and approval by the Programme Steering Committee (PSC). If the cost per sub-project
averages US$ 100,000, a total of 40 sub-projects could be financed from the allocation.
62.
Community-level agricultural investments of a public nature, including for
instance: (i) spot improvement of agricultural roads, such as culverts, fords or small
19
bridges; (ii) small-scale storage sheds and drying floors; and (iii) small-scale water
management or soil erosion control structures. Proposals will originate at the farmer
group, cooperative or community level, and will be submitted though the local structures
for the review of the DACO, and final approval by the PACO where the total investment is
within his/her approval ceiling (currently ZK20 million / US$ 4,400), and – through the
PMU - by the PSC where it is beyond this. S3P will provide facilitation services for
participatory identification, planning, feasibility screening and construction. Requesting
groups or communities will need to meet eligibility criteria, while the proposals will need
to include realistic operation and management plans. S3P contribution will be up to 75
percent of construction costs, with a ceiling of US$ 25,000 per sub-project. The total S3P
co-financing amount is set at US$3.5 million (though this could be increased or
decreased depending on actual achievements and availability of funds). With an average
cost per sub-project amounts of US$ 10,000, a total of around 350 sub-projects (15 per
district) could be financed from the provisional allocation.
63.
Group-based agricultural investments with a high social value includes limited and
conditional support to enable groups of poor and disadvantaged rural people, in
particular women and girls, to purchase labour-saving equipment. The processing of the
crops being targeted by S3P is usually done by women, using methods which are
extremely labour-intensive and time consuming, and labour-saving technologies can
have a very significant positive impact on their livelihoods. Investment support will be
restricted to interest groups that: (i) have reached a sufficiently mature developmental
stage; (ii) whose members are already members of savings groups; but (iii) are not able
to raise sufficient funds to obtain the required equipment on credit; while (iv) the laboursaving equipment would, at a modest fee, also be available to other (non-group)
community members. Requests for these investments will originate at the group level
and S3P will provide facilitation services for participatory identification, planning,
feasibility screening and preparation of business plans. S3P contribution will be up to 50
percent of equipment costs, with a ceiling of US$ 2,500 per sub-project and a maximum
of one sub-project per group. Sub-projects will be approved by the DACO, up to his/her
approval ceiling (currently ZK10 million or US$2,200); beyond this sub-projects will be
referred for the PACO’s approval. The total available S3P co-financing amount is set at
US$0.5 million. Since sub-project co-financing costs are expected to be very modest, on
average US$1,000 per sub-project, a total of close to 500 sub-projects (or only 20 per
district) could be financed from the provisional allocation.
64.
Technical and facilitation assistance will be provided for: (i) training of DACO and
DDCC staff, CACs and other community committees and eligible farmer groups, as
required; (ii) facilitation of the participatory planning and implementation processes for
community-level and group-based sub-projects and verification of eligibility of
communities, groups and their proposed investments; (iii) technical assistance for the
screening, assessment and design of proposed investments, such as technical, financial,
economical, social and environmental feasibility, as well as (iv) preparation of business,
operation and maintenance plans. A Local Agricultural Investments Manager, working
closely with the programme manager as a part of the PMU, will provide overall
leadership to the sub-component: he/she will establish the procedural and operational
modalities for the funding facilities; ensure that these function, with active community
involvement; and monitor the sub-projects once financed and implemented.
65.
Sub-component 2.2 Support to the Policy and Planning Framework would
support MACO’s Policy and Planning Department (PPD) to manage flows of information
and communication, undertake policy reviews, and provide opportunities to learn from
relevant experience.
66.
Management of information and communication within MACO and PPD has
become increasingly challenging in recent years. This reflects staff shortages,
compounded by the recent creation of the Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries
Development (MLFD), as well as the proliferation of different development partnersupported projects and programmes, which MACO is increasingly concerned to
20
coordinate effectively. To assist MACO strengthen its knowledge management systems,
S3P will finance the recruitment of a Programme planning and monitoring specialist.
He/she will be based in PPD and will report to the Director PPD, and will: (i) assist with
the review of the current M&E system and facilitate internal discussion on this issue; (ii)
advise on information technology requirements for a Management Information System;
(iii) assist in the coordination and harmonization of the different initiatives, projects and
programmes in relation to the SNDP, the National Agricultural Policy and the Zambia
CAADP; (iv) assist in the management of information and communication flows related
to these; and (v) support MACO in mainstreaming gender through implementation of the
recent strategy and implementation plan for engendering the public service. The
programme would finance this post for a period of 3 years, with any future need
reviewed in the context of the institutional strengthening activities under PEP.
67.
Policy reviews and studies will be undertaken that aim to improve the enabling
environment relevant to sustainable productivity growth and expanded smallholders’
integration into agricultural markets. Support would be provided to undertake specific
studies, draft policies and regulations; as well as for multi-stakeholder review, discussion
(workshop, forums) and dialogue related to their preparation. Some of the topics already
identified include, for example, those policies specific to cassava-based farming systems,
such as the importance of cassava in national food security, issues related to FISP and
the FRA, the lack of appropriate CA techniques for agro-ecological region III, and issues
of extension methodology. Other policy issues will be identified through the course of
programme implementation. Visits by senior policy and decision makers, within Zambia
and elsewhere within the region, has proven a valuable contribution to the policy agenda
under other projects in Zambia, and it would be supported under S3P.
68.
Sub-component
2.3.
Programme
Management,
Monitoring
and
Evaluation. The S3P will be managed on behalf of Government by a Programme
Management Unit (PMU) located within the Policy and Planning Department (PPD) of
MACO. The PMU will consist of management and technical teams, overseen by a
Programme Manager responsible for overall programme delivery, based in Lusaka, who
will report to the Director PPD. The management team will also be based in Lusaka and it
will include a Financial Management Specialist; a Procurement and Contracts Specialist;
a Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation/Knowledge Management/ Communication
Specialist; and a Local Agricultural Investments Manager (budgeted for under
Component 2.1).
69.
The technical team will be based at provincial level (in a ZARI Research Station
either in Northern or Luapula Province) and will include a Research for Development
Specialist, and an Extension Methodology Specialist. It will also include one Facilitator
per target province, who will be based in the office of the PACO (and budgeted under
Component One). All these posts will report to the Programme Manager. The PMU will
also manage a budget for hiring short term technical expertise required by the
programme.
III.
PROGRAMME IMPLEMENTATION
A.
Approach
70.
The S3P will be implemented over a period of seven years. Implementation will
start in two provinces (Luapula and Northern Province): in PY1 eight districts will receive
intensive support, and PY2 another eight district within these same provinces will be
added. As of PY3, a third province and a further eight district will be added.
71.
The S3P is expected to complement the already-ongoing SAPP, and by formally
linking the two programmes to each other, the one is expected to strengthen the other’s
effectiveness and enhance its ability to achieve its overall objective, and vice versa. The
two programmes will be managed separately, but a number of mechanisms, including a
single Programme Steering Committee for both, linked annual work planning and
21
budgeting processes and outcomes, and regular meetings of project managers, will
ensure that they remain coordinated and mutually supportive.
B.
Organizational Framework
72.
S3P will be overseen by a Programme Steering Committee (PSC), managed by a
Programme Management Unit (PMU) located within the Policy and Planning Department
(PPD) of MACO, and implemented by MACO and a variety of non-government partners
and service providers. The same Programme Steering Committee (PSC) that has already
been established for SAPP will provide overall policy and technical direction and guidance
to the programme. Chaired by the Permanent Secretary MACO, it includes
representatives of the relevant MACO departments; Ministry of Finance and National
Planning (MFNP); Ministry of Commerce, Trade and Industry (MCTI); Ministry of Local
Government and Housing (MLGH); Farmers Organizations (such as the Zambia National
Farmers Union, ZNFU) and Industry Organizations (such as the Cassava Sub-sector
Committee), relevant to the selected commodities or sectors. The PSC should meet at
least quarterly, to review and approve the annual work plan and budget, progress
reports, the annual financial statements and the external auditor’s report; to provide
strategic guidance to the PMU and implementing agencies (within and outside
government); to monitor implementation progress and impact; and to make specific
recommendations for follow-up, which the PMU should be accountable for delivering.
73.
MACO, and specifically PPD, is the lead programme implementing agency. This is
a role that involves: (a) taking overall implementation responsibility; (b) convening the
PSC; (c) managing changes in Programme direction; (d) chairing the Country
Programme Management Team (established as the Programme Development Group
during the design phase), to offering a platform for technical advice, guidance and
knowledge management, and provide an opportunity for the PMU to engage with key
ministries, representatives of farmers’ organizations and the private sector.; (e)
recruiting the staff of the PMU; and (f) ensuring coordination with other on-going
GRZ/Development Partner support in the sector.
74.
A dedicated Programme Management Unit will be created to support MACO to
manage S3P implementation. The PMU, located – like SAPP – within PPD, will be led by a
Programme Manager who will report to the Director PPD. He/she will be responsible for
overall programme delivery, and will lead the PMU (an organogram of the PMU as well as
terms of reference for each position are provided in Annex 5). The management team
will include the following posts: a Financial Management Specialist, a Procurement and
Contracts Specialist, and a Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation/Knowledge Management/
Communication Specialist. The team will be based in Lusaka, so as to facilitate close
working relations with MACO, SAPP and other national stakeholders, though it will be
expected to travel frequently to the programme provinces and it will have a budget to
allow them to do so.
75.
The Technical team will include a Research for Development Specialist and an
Extension Methodology Specialist, both of whom will be based in a Research Station
either in Northern or Luapula Province; as well as one Facilitator in each of the three
provinces targeted by the Programme, based in the office of the PACO; and a Local
Agricultural Investments Manager, who will be based in one of the provinces. All these
positions will report to the Programme Manager. The PMU will also manage a budget for
hiring short term technical expertise as required. Additional support to provincial and
district financial management may be an area where such expertise will be required.
76.
The PMU will draw on management procedures that will be documented in a
Programme Implementation Manual (PIM). The PIM outline is presented in Annex 11: a
complete draft of the PIM will be prepared by a consultant prior to programme start-up,
and it will be finalised by the PMU during the first quarter of programme year one.
Among other things, the PIM will define the criteria for selecting the districts and camps
to be covered under the programme (which are then reflected in the AWPBs); it will
22
include detailed operational guidelines and procedures for the Local Agricultural
Investments; and it will also include a gender strategy, which defines the operational
measures to be taken to promote gender mainstreaming and women’s empowerment
under the programme.
77.
The S3P PMU will also draw on and learn from the managers of other IFADfinanced projects in Zambia. Under the COSOP 2011-2015 it is intended that the
managers and teams all of the IFAD-financed projects in Zambia meet regularly to share
experience and lessons learnt, and build linkages and synergies between their projects.
Project Managers’ Team (PMT) meetings will be convened monthly, with the participation
of the IFAD Country Officer. The PIM will define the range of specific mechanisms that
will be used to develop operational synergies between S3P and SAPP.
78.
MACO provincial and district staff will play key roles in the implementation,
monitoring and supervision of S3P activities. The service-providers engaged to undertake
tasks will work in partnership with provincial and district staff, particularly the Principal
(at Province level) and Senior (at district level) Agricultural Officer and relevant Subject
Matter Specialists, but also relevant ZARI staff from the Research Stations in Mansa and
Kasama (Luapula and Northern). District staff, in particular the 24 District Agricultural
Coordinators and their technical teams, the Block Extension Supervisors (BESs) and the
Camp Extension officers (CEO) in the 150 target camps, will all benefit from the
programme’s capacity development activities, and play valuable roles in knowledge
sharing and supporting research and extension linkages. Members of the Camp
Agricultural Committees (CACs) in the targeted camps, and of the 24 District Agricultural
Committees (DACs) will also benefit from capacity building.
79.
Local-level Farmer Organizations and Cooperatives play a key role in representing
the interests of smallholder farmers. Under sub-component 1.1, S3P will provide support
to strengthen the capacity of local-level farmer groups, already-existing and new.
District level farmer associations and cooperative unions will also be supported,
depending on the role they can play in improving farmer-productivity within specific
value chains. Participatory planning will be used to identify the specific needs of these
organizations and these will be incorporated into the work plans. S3P will also seek to
support in identifying a sustainable institutional development path for the farmer
organizations and cooperatives.
80.
Local (district and sub-district) coordination committees such as the DACs and
CACs, as well as the multisectoral District Development Coordination Committees
(DDCCs) and Area Development Committees (ADCs) will all play key roles in overseeing
and prioritizing agricultural development activities at camp level. CACs will be
encouraged to coordinate agricultural development activities with the endorsement of
ADCs that are responsible for coordinating all development efforts at ward level. DACs
oversee and prioritize agricultural development activities at district level (see Annex 5,
Appendix 2).
C.
Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation and Knowledge Management
81.
Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation (PM&E) systems will be established to meet
the needs of Programme management, GRZ, IFAD and other stakeholders (see Annex
6). The S3P PME system will be guided by the following principles: (i) the establishment
of a sound planning and monitoring framework (logical framework) with a limited
number of indicators; (ii) the use of the annual work plan and budget (AWPB) as the key
instrument for defining and guiding programme activities and expenditures; (iii) the use
of simple M&E processes, structures and instruments, including M&E software which can
be adjusted to make M&E information accessible to key stakeholders in a timely manner;
(iv) alignment with existing M&E frameworks at national and district level, to strengthen
the M&E system of MACO and reduce the workload of the district and camp staff, and in
particular use of MACO participatory planning process at camp, district, provincial and
national level; (v) timely collection of baseline data for key indicators in the logframe as
23
specified in the M&E Plan; (vi) integration of communication and Knowledge
Management (KM) in all aspects of programme planning and M&E to encourage feedback
and reflection on results for effective adaptive management; and (vii) provision of
adequate resources for capacity building of stakeholders involved in PME activities at all
levels, with a focus on participatory PME approaches.
82.
A point of departure for the PM&E system will be the programme start-up
workshop, which the PMU will organize. The workshop will involve all relevant
stakeholders, government and non-government, at national, provincial and district
levels, and its purpose will be to reach a clear and common understanding of S3P
objectives; the main results that need to be achieved and indicators for measuring their
achievement; the roles and responsibilities of each stakeholder; and the implementation
arrangements for the various sub-components. This workshop will also be the
opportunity for team building and establishing working relationship between the PMU,
the PPD, other national stakeholders and IFAD.
83.
Annual work plan and budget (AWPB). The AWPB will be the key instrument
for implementation and operational control, in that its approval by the PSC and IFAD will
be the authority for the PMU to conduct activities and incur expenditure. It also
facilitates operational flexibility, as it allows for regular adjustments to be made to the
programme approach, activities and expenditures to reflect the implementation
experience gained and changing circumstances. Particular attention will therefore be
given to the process for its preparation, which should be inclusive, participatory and
demand driven; involve all relevant stakeholders from within and beyond government;
and after the first year, build on the annual implementation review (see para.89). Timely
preparation and submission of AWPB will require adherence to a schedule of preparation,
which also needs to be linked to the GRZ budgetary approval process.
84.
In a programme such as S3P, in which the geographical area of intervention is
defined in only broad terms, the AWPB for PY1, PY2 and PY3 will assume particular
importance, in that they will define the specific districts (and within them camps) in
which the programme will be implemented. These AWBPs will therefore indicate the
districts and camps to be covered during the year to come, selected on the basis of clear
and transparent criteria (already defined in the PIM – para.76).
85.
The Programme Manager will oversee the whole AWPB process and ensure that
the Director of PPD and his team are fully involved. The M&E specialist within the PMU
will be responsible for coordinating the preparation of AWPB, its consolidation,
presentation to PSC, finalization and submission to IFAD. He/she will be supported by:
(i) the Financial Management Specialist to ensure proper costing, incorporation of the
financing plan and disbursement arrangement; (ii) the Procurement and Contracts
Specialist who will prepare the procurement plan; and (iii) the Technical Team will
provide technical support in preparing the work plans. Given the importance of the
process, the PMU will receive training in the preparation of AWPBs.
86.
Monitoring and evaluation. S3P results are expected at three different levels
(objectives, outcomes, outputs), reflected in the Logical Framework. At each level a set
of indicators has been developed, taking into account on one hand IFAD’s Results and
Impact Management System (RIMS) framework, and on the other GRZ strategy and
programming documents such as the Sixth National Development Plan (SNDP). These
indicators, which will be gender disaggregated wherever possible, will be reviewed and
finalised during programme start-up in consultation with the main stakeholders. The
logframe (and particularly the outcomes and outputs, and their indicators) may then be
revised at a later stage if required.
87.
Planning, M&E under the programme will be coordinated by the M&E specialist
whose role will be to develop appropriate tools and procedures; strengthen the capacity
of implementing partners to carry out their monitoring tasks; recruit specialists as
necessary for PME system design, impact assessment and other specialized studies; and
consolidate and analyze the data. Supported by short-term technical assistance as
24
necessary, the M&E Specialist will be responsible for setting up an effective PME plan and
system during the first six months of S3P implementation. In doing so, he/she will work
closely with PPD and other technical departments of MACO. The M&E system will
comprise the following elements.
88.
The programme will establish a management information system (MIS), using a
dedicated software that will be used to collect data from various levels. The MIS
database will be aligned with the MACO M&E system being developed under the “Support
to the Agricultural Sector Performance Enhancement Programme (PEP)”. Reporting will
be aligned or will be based on the Camp, Block, District and Provincial format of MACO.
Service providers will also be required to use this software when reporting on their
achievements. Results will be presented in summary form in quarterly and annual
progress reports. The MIS will also provide the basis for the half-yearly and annual
progress reports that will be submitted to IFAD.
89.
A baseline survey will be undertaken during the first semester, to establish
benchmarks against which the outcomes and impact on the beneficiaries would be
assessed. Annual implementation reviews will be conducted, involving implementers at
all levels and key stakeholders, to analyse and review lessons and challenges. The
reviews will be linked with the AWPB planning processes to ensure that lessons lead to
improved implementation. Qualitative analysis will be conducted from the end of the
second year to assess whether activities are likely to lead to the desired higher-level
results. Process monitoring will also be carried out during these reviews, by assessing
the degree of beneficiaries’ participation in project activities, quantifying the numbers of
households reached through the different components, and confirming the level of
participation by women and youth. Specialised studies to evaluate the extent to which
the S3P purpose and overall goal are being achieved will be contracted out. An
assessment of quantitative targets included at all levels in the logical framework will be
carried out before the Mid-Term Review.
90.
A Mid Term Review (MTR) will be undertaken, during the first semester of the
fourth year to assess programme’s achievements and interim impact, the efficiency and
effectiveness of S3P management, and the validity of S3P design. On the basis of its
findings, the MTR mission may make recommendations for revisions to the programme
activities and approach for the remainder of the implementation period, as well as
modifications to the PIM, if required.
91.
At the end of the implementation period, an End of Programme survey will be
carried out to measure changes at beneficiary level, comparing with the baseline
situation. Baseline and terminal surveys will be contracted out to service providers under
the supervision of the PMU. The PMU will also prepare an internal Programme
Completion Report (PCR), which will include an assessment of the achieved versus the
planned impact, to be submitted to GRZ and IFAD within three months of programme
completion.
92.
Knowledge management and learning. In S3P, knowledge management and
learning (KM&L) will be a means to make the programme more effective and efficient,
enable it to simplify processes, adapt much faster to the emerging realities and lessons,
and achieve greater impact. The main purpose of KM processes within S3P is to ensure
that knowledge generated is systematically identified, analysed, documented, used to
improve S3P performance and shared. KM&L will be fully linked to the S3P PME system,
to enable a continuous improvement process, based on feedback loops from data
collection to analysis and interpretation. This will enable S3P to be flexible and
responsive to changing circumstances. Emerging lessons and experience will also be
used to support capacity building and institution strengthening activities of a range of
stakeholders, especially MACO at provincial, district and camp level, as well as other GRZ
departments, service providers, farmer organizations and others. Systematic KM&L will
also support evidence-based decision-making and policy development. Developing the
KM system, which will be the responsibility of the M&E specialist, will involve the
25
following steps: (a) design of an appropriate monitoring and documentation system;
(b) development of appropriate institutional arrangements; (c) monitoring, evaluation
and documentation; (d) information management; (e) communication; and
(f) knowledge based project support, decision making and policy dialogue.
D.
Financial Management, Procurement and Governance
93.
The programme will be co-financed by IFAD (loan of US$ 24.8 million), the
Government of Finland (grant of US$ 7.1 million1), GRZ (estimated US$ 6.1 million), the
districts (US$ 0.4 million) and by the beneficiaries (US$ 1.5 million).
94.
In 2010, the Governments of Finland and Sweden conducted an external
assessment of MACO’s financial management capacity2. They conclude that while MACO
staff are well trained and able to apply sound financial management, internal audit and
procurement systems, the areas of bank reconciliation, accounting and reporting, and
audit committee function are considered as weak. At provincial level in particular, a
number of constraints are highlighted. The level of fiduciary risk in MACO as a whole is
therefore considered to be substantial, though it is expected that the roll-out of the
Integrated Financial Management Information System (IFMIS), foreseen in 2012, will
help address many of the constraints identified. The proposed financial management and
procurement arrangements proposed for S3P recognise these strengths and weaknesses,
they also build on IFAD experiences in Zambia, and they are intended to ensure the
secure and effective financial management of the programme
Financial Management
95.
Finland’s contribution will be channelled via IFAD and blended with the IFAD loan
in a fixed ratio (pari passu) of 22 per cent (Finland): 78 per cent (IFAD). This
arrangement will be formalised in the financing agreement between GRZ and IFAD, in
which Finland’s contribution will appear, as well as agreements between IFAD and
Finland, and between the Governments of Finland and Zambia. GRZ contribution will
come from foregone taxes and duties, while beneficiaries’ contribution will be limited to
sub-component 2.1 (Local Agricultural Investments), and will be made both in-cash and
in-kind (labour and local materials).
96.
Disbursement Procedures and Withdrawal of Funds. The arrangements for Loan
Administration will be contained in a Letter to the Borrower sent from IFAD to the
Ministry of Finance and National Planning. Programme expenditures will be broken down
by expenditure category, as well as by financier. The Letter to the Borrower will provide
for four possible disbursement procedures: (i) via Designated Account; (ii) Direct
Payment; (iii) Special Commitment; and (iv) Reimbursement of expenditures incurred. It
is foreseen that the bulk of programme funds will be disbursed through the first
procedure, via the designated account. Direct Payment procedure will be used only for
payments on goods and services procured internationally.
97.
Funds flow arrangements have been kept simple (see Annex 7, Appendix 1).
IFAD/Finland funds will pass into a Designated Account (DA) denominated in US Dollars
and held at the Zambia Reserve Bank (ZRB). This account will be managed by
MACO/PPD and will require one signature each from both Category 1 (Director PPD, Chief
Accountant or Principal Accountant) and Category 2 (PMU Programme Manager or
Financial Management Specialist). The designated account will be used to feed the
Kwacha-denominated Operations Account (OA), which will be held in a commercial bank
in Lusaka and will be managed exclusively by the PMU. It will be replenished from the
DA, based on progress reports and in compliance with IFAD disbursement procedures.
Any involvement of public/ private institutions in the delivery of programme activities will
1
2
The grant from the Government of Finland is denominated in Euros, and thus the US Dollar value may vary
according to future exchange rate movements.
Assessment of the Financial Management Capacity of the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperative and the
Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries, (2010) Finnish Consulting Group; Pre-Award Assessment Ministry of
Agriculture and Cooperatives (2009), Moore Stephens LLP (Upon request of the Embassy of Sweden)
26
be treated as service provision, and will be translated into output-based contracts/MOUs
with payments treated as reimbursable to the service provider.
98.
The operation of the Designated Account and Operational Programme Account will
be in accordance with IFAD procedures. The DA will be replenished on the basis of
regular withdrawal applications with the appropriate supporting documentation, known
as Statement of Expenditures (SoE). Disbursement of funds from the DA will be made
for all eligible expenditures – excluding taxes and duties – against submission of full
standard supporting documentation. The Designated Account will have a ceiling
equivalent to approximately six months of programme expenditure.
99.
For activities implemented by MACO at decentralised level, funds will be passed to
a provincial programme account, held in ZK in a commercial bank branch in each of the
Provincial capitals where the programme is working. These will operate on an imprest
basis: the PCU will provide an advance that will need to be justified before subsequent
releases. This account will finance activities implemented by MACO, and will consist of
paying DSA, fuel, training facility, equipment, etc. The Provincial MACO accountant will
be responsible for managing the account and providing financial reports for the PMU
financial management specialist to review. Provincial and district accountants where the
programme will be operating will benefit from training on IFAD and GRZ financial
management and procurement procedures.
100. Financial management at the provincial level can be problematic; there are
frequently pressures on the provincial accountant to use project resources for nonproject purposes. To strengthen the S3P financial management arrangements at this
level and prevent any possibility of leakage of funds, a series of measures are proposed:

The amount of the advance will initially be kept low (one month operations) and
gradually increased as capacities are improved and the provincial accountant is
able to provide complete and accurate financial reports.

The Financial Management Specialist in the PMU will be expected to travel to the
provinces monthly to review and verify the provincial programme accounts.
He/she will be provided with an adequate travel budget to make this possible.

All transfers of funds from the operations account in Lusaka to the provincial
programme account will be accompanied by a note to the Provincial PS, indicating
the expected use of the funds.

Using an internet banking facility, the FMS will be able to review the provincial
operations accounts in real time. He/she will also be authorised to block the
account in the event of unjustified expenditures.

All proposed expenditures from the account will be: (a) subject to ex-ante audit;
(b) cleared (by email) by the FMS; and (c) approved by the PS of the Province

In addition, orientation and related training on financial management and
procurement procedures (both GRZ and IFAD) will be provided for all relevant
staff at provincial level: the provincial accountant, PACO, internal auditor, PS.
These should also be involved in the preparation of the AWPB, to increase their
awareness of the proposed project activities. Support for the Provincial
Accountants’ mobility, to enable them to visit the districts, will also be provided.
101. Programme Financial Statements and Financial Reporting. According to GRZ
procedures, S3P Financial Statements will be prepared in compliance with International
Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) Cash basis. Guidance on compliance will be
offered by the MACO Chief Accountant (who is an officer of the Accountant General’s
Office in MFNP); and he/she will be closely involved in the preparation of Final Accounts.
IFAD-financed transactions will initially be accounted for and reported on using the
SAPPO accounting package. Provincial accountants will prepare financial statements
based on models developed by the PMU’s Financial Management Specialist, a qualified
accountant. Performance-based invoices, linked to achievement of defined milestones,
27
will be the basis for payments to contractors, and it will be the responsibility of the
service providers to collate documentation to justify their claims for reimbursable costs.
102. Monthly management accounts will be prepared, based on the accounting system,
to aid management decision and control. Half yearly progress reports, which include
analysis of the programme’s finances, should be submitted to IFAD no later than three
months after the end of each six month period. Annual reports, including financial
reports, will also need to be prepared and submitted not later than three months
following the end of the year. The annual reports will be more detailed than the half-year
reports. In addition to a simple review of implementation progress, they will require
analysis by the PMU, and a presentation of a full picture of programme resources,
achievements of the past year and since the beginning of the programme, as well as
annual and cumulative expenditure. Analysis is required of successful approaches and
outputs, failures and constraints, performance of implementing partners, and whether
progress is being made towards achieving objectives. Such analysis should lead to
conclusions about the effectiveness of programme strategies, the need for modification
of the logical framework, and planning for the following year.
103. Audit. MACO internal auditors will include S3P in their annual internal audit plans
– and will thus cover it during the audits in accordance with GRZ procedures. MACO
internal auditors will have a right to report directly to the PSC should there be a need.
There should be at least one internal audit report covering SAPP in each quarter. Each
year the GRZ Auditor General, or a firm acceptable to him/her, will conduct an external
audit of the Programme’s Financial Statements. Normal GRZ procedures will be followed
in selecting and appointing the auditors: after consulting with the Auditor General, the
PMU will prepare a list of firms to be invited to tender. IFAD will need to provide its no
objection to this list, to the terms of reference and later to the tender evaluation report,
prior to it being sent to the Auditor General for issuing the contract to the external audit
firm. The audit will be carried out in accordance with International Standards on Auditing
(ISA), and a certified copy of the Audit Report must be submitted to IFAD no later than 6
months after the end of the Fiscal Year. Failure to do so will result in disbursement being
suspended.
Procurement
104. IFAD’s revised Project Procurement Guidelines (September 2010), and associated
Procurement Handbook, provide for all procurement to be carried out in accordance with
national procurement regulations, to the extent that they are consistent with IFAD
Procurement Guidelines. In cases where IFAD deems that the borrower’s system for
procurement is either in whole or in part not in line with the revised guidelines, then an
alternative provision will apply (IFAD rules), in whole or in part.
105. The latest international assessment of GRZ procurement procedures was
conducted by OECD/DAC in 2007, and was based on the 1994 Zambia National Tenders
Board Act. Its main conclusions were that while the system is well documented with
clear responsibilities and procedures, some major weaknesses remained. The GRZ then
passed a Public Procurement Act in 2008, which transformed the Zambia National Tender
Board into the Zambia Public Procurement Agency (ZPPA), and gave it a specific
oversight and regulatory role; while ministries and public spending agencies are being
empowered to be fully responsible for the complete procurement cycle1. A transition
period during which ZPPA retained its review and approval role was supposed to have
ended in December 2010, following the finalization of the procurement regulations,
including revised standard bidding documents. However, it appears that the ZPPA has
yet to be transformed into a full oversight and regulatory body. The procurement
regulation and standard bidding documents based on the 2008 Act have not yet been
released, and meantime, MFNP has recently issued a circular requiring that procurement
1
Another provision of the 2008 Act is that all contracts need to be subject to a legal review by the Office of
the Attorney General. The practicality of this measure, and the capacity of the Attorney General office to
follow-up on this provision has yet to be ascertained.
28
requests above ZK 50 million (approximately equivalent to US$ 10,000) are sent to ZPPA
for prior review. Of particular relevance for S3P, the MACO Procurement and Supplies
unit has been rated by ZPPA as falling into Category C of procurement units (the highest
rating).
106. Zambia’s procurement system is classified as being generally in accordance with
the requirements laid out in IFAD’s revised Public Procurement Guidelines, and suitable
for use for project procurement, subject to some modifications that will be specified in
the Financing Agreement and the Letter to the Borrower. While S3P procurement will
comply with Zambian procedures as per the Public Procurement Act 2008, several
procurement risks have been identified, and the programme will implement a variety of
risk mitigation and management measures (see Annex 8).
107. Different procurement methods (ranging from International Competitive Bidding
to Direct Contracting) will be used for the different categories of procurement depending
on nature, amount and other criteria, the guiding principal being economy and efficiency.
These methods will be specified in the procurement plans that will be part of each year’s
AWPB. An initial 18-months plan is provided in Appendix 1 to Annex 8. In terms of
responsibilities, the PMU will conduct local or international shopping for contracts not
exceeding USD 10,000, while the MACO Procurement and Supplies Unit (PSU) will
procure for contracts above US$ 10,000, as per GRZ procedures. These include prior
review by ZPPA and IFAD, and going through the MACO tender committee, whose
decisions will be subject to ZPPA and IFAD final clearance. IFAD will confirm its prior
review thresholds, above which clearance will be needed at critical stages of the
procurement process (currently US$ 50,000 for Goods/Civil works and US$ 25,000 for
Consulting Services) in the Letter to the Borrower. If the procurement process is within
the relevant threshold, the programme can carry out the process and report, and IFAD
will conduct ex-post verification based on a sample. The clearance of terms-of-reference
for all Consulting Services will require a “No Objection” from IFAD, irrespective of the
threshold.
108. S3P procurement activities will be coordinated by a Procurement and Contracts
specialist who will be responsible for undertaking procurement activities within the S3P
threshold and preparing documents for procurement processes. This specialist will have
the necessary experience and sound understanding of GRZ procurement guidelines and
the procedures applying to internationally financed projects, including those of IFAD.
MACO Procurement and Supplies Unit through the Ministerial Tender Committee will
undertake procurement activities above the limit of the S3P.
Governance
109. The context is set by Transparency International’s 2010 Corruption Perceptions
Index, which ranks Zambia 101st out of 178 countries, or in the top one-third of
countries of sub-Saharan Africa; and by the fact that to date, no cases of corruption in
the IFAD country programme in Zambia have come to light. Full fiduciary compliance
under S3P will be facilitated by the PMU’s inclusion of both a procurement and contracts
specialist, who will work closely with MACO’s PSU to track procurement activities on a
continuous basis, and a financial management specialist with specific responsibility for
the programme’s financial management. The holding of separate programme accounts,
the specific safeguard measures established for expenditures at the provincial level
(para.100) and the internal and independent external auditing of these accounts, will
also all contribute to preventing misuse of programme funds. At programme start-up, a
loan administration workshop will be conducted and, with inputs from Zambia’s AntiCorruption Commission and the local chapter of Transparency International, an S3P
governance and anti-corruption strategy will be defined. In addition, the operational
procedures for the Local Agricultural Investments sub-component will include
mechanisms that enable rural communities and groups to prevent and/or whistle blow
on any corruption they encounter. Finally, the programme will conduct publicity and
awareness campaigns to ensure transparency, and wide participation in programme
29
planning, implementation and monitoring will allow potential beneficiaries (and NGOs
and civil society) to become aware of what they are entitled to expect, thereby
stimulating demand for accountability from programme partners.
110. IFAD will also play its part in ensuring the good governance of programme funds
through prior review of all major procurements and ex-post review conducted on a
sample basis. IFAD’s direct supervision process includes modules on fiduciary compliance
and the responsibility and accountability framework, and all supervision missions will
include a team member with specific responsibility for financial management and
procurement issues.
E.
Supervision
111. Supervision of S3P will be carried out directly by IFAD as an ongoing process of
implementation support; a process made easier by the presence of the IFAD Country
Officer, who will provide hands-on, day-to-day support. Experience in Zambia shows the
importance of strong implementation support, particularly in the early stages of
implementation. Thus the annual implementation support/ supervision missions would be
consistently followed by shorter follow-up missions six months later, in order to maintain
the hands-on support. Supervision will serve on one hand to ensure fiduciary
compliance, and on the other, as an opportunity to assess achievements and lessons
jointly, and to reflect on adjustments that may be needed to the programme approach or
activities to improve implementation performance. Missions would therefore be an
integral part of the KM cycle, with mission members playing a supportive and coaching
role. To ensure continuity in this process, missions would be carried out by a core team
of resource persons returning regularly, joined by specialists to address the specific
needs of a given year. An in-depth joint mid-term review would be organised by
government and IFAD in the first semester of the fourth year of implementation. It
would be carried out by consultants not involved in supervision missions so as to bring a
fresh look at three years of project achievements and learning.
F.
Risk Identification and Mitigation
112. The Programme is regarded as only moderately risky. The design draws lessons
from previous and ongoing IFAD-supported projects and programmes initiatives in the
country, as well as of other initiatives within Zambia and the region. The programme will
be embedded in MACO at central, provincial and district level, and measures are included
to support capacity building at these different levels. Robust implementation
arrangements and inclusion of a management team as well as a technical team should
help ensure programme execution. Risks and appropriate mitigation measures have
been identified and incorporated in the Programme design. The principal risks, their
possible consequences and proposed mitigation measures are detailed in Table 3.
Table 3: Programme risks, possible consequences and mitigation measures.
Risks
Possible Consequences
Mitigation Measures
 Marketing
problems for
crops in S3P
supported
farming
systems
(cassava, mixed
beans, rice and
groundnuts)
 Diversification of
agricultural sector gets
delayed.
 Over dependence on
maize increases.
 National food security
becomes less stable
 Coordinate with ongoing SAPP programme, which includes
focus on cassava, mixed beans and rice value chains.
 Joint SAPP/S3P Steering Committee.
 Support the public policy and planning framework of the
agricultural sector.
 Reluctance of
smallholder
farmers to fully
engage with the
Programme
 Farmers knowledge of
and access to improved
technologies will not
improve.
 Farmers will not gain
access to productivity
enhancing works,
 Strengthening smallholder farmer organizations
 Linking with marketing service providers and value
chains, in particular by working with SAPP in the same
areas and on the same commodities.
 Using participatory extension approaches.
 Using participatory, bottom-up planning methods for
productivity enhancing works and the like.
30
Risks
Possible Consequences
infrastructure and
equipment
 Delayed and/or
ineffective provision of
extension and advisory
services.
 Delayed release of
improved planting
material, technologies
and equipment.
 Limited
implementation
capacity in
MACO (Dept. of
Agriculture and
ZARI) at
central,
provincial and
district levels
 Financing
constraints limit
smallholder
production and
productivity
increase
 Delay in
Programme
start-up
 Farmers are unable to
obtain funding needed
for short- and mediumterm investments
 The impacts of
HIV/AIDS and
increasing the
exposure to risk
of HIV infection
 Attention diverted from
productive activities to
coping strategies
 Higher risk of infection
due to greater mobility
and increased incomes
 Accelerated soil erosion
and/or fertility depletion
 Pursuit of shortterm
productivity
objectives will
cause
environmental
damage
 Possibly lengthy PMU
recruitment and
implementation and
disbursement delays
 Financial
management
delays and
irregularities
 Slow disbursement
 Cash flow problems
 Need to reimburse
ineligible expenditures
 Procurement
risk
 Delays in procurement
 Funds used differently
than foreseen.
 Bank reconciliation
issues.
IV.
Mitigation Measures
 Continuous sensitisation of smallholder farmers about
goal and objectives of S3P
 Robust programme management arrangements, with
teams at central and provincial levels.
 Tech. assistance to MACO at central and provincial levels
 Strengthening MACO field capacities in particular at
district and camp levels.
 Strengthening ZARI capacities at provincial research
stations.
 Use diversified range of service providers, including
farmer organizations, PPP-type arrangements with private
sector and contracted service providers and research
institutions.
 Provide assistance in linking farmers to existing and new
sources of finance including RFP
 Provide conditional limited financial support to obtain
labour saving equipment where this has high social
impact and where vulnerable groups are not able to raise
all required funds
 Impose minimal conditions of disbursement
 PIM will already have been drafted.
 Recruit PMU on time
 Assistance from IFAD Country Officer and ongoing SLIP,
RFP and SAPP in implementing start-up activities
 Integrate HIV/AIDS messages throughout capacity
building and training events.
 Involve HIV/AIDS Focal Point Person from MACO in
capacity building and training events
 Agricultural research includes integrated pest and
production management (IPPM), and conservation
farming.
 These topics are then integrated in extension methods
and messages.
 Environmental safeguards will be incorporated in design
and approval criteria for local agricultural investments.
 Build accountancy capacity in S3P PMU, plus Provincial
and District Account Units
 Introduce safeguards in the disbursement and use of
funds at province
 Training provincial and district FM staff.
 IFAD supervision and implementation support missions
 Annual audits
 Procurement specialist in PMU.
 Training of district procurement and accounting staff.
 Only limited amounts of funds sent to provincial
programme accounts, according to actual needs.
 Incorporate asset management registry in financial
management software.
PROGRAMME COSTS, FINANCING AND BENEFITS
A.
Programme Costs
113. Main assumptions. The total programme costs have been estimated by applying
price contingencies to the base costs. The price contingencies are based on inflation
factors: for the entire duration of the programme, the local inflation has been assumed
at 8 per cent per annum. International inflation has been assumed at 0 per cent until
programme start and for the two initial project years, then 0.5 per cent per annum for
the five following years. The initial exchange rate for the analysis has been set at
Zambian Kwacha (ZK) 4,800 to US$ 1.00, the rate prevailing in April 2011. The
conversions from current US dollar values into ZK are calculated using the constant
purchasing power (CPP) exchange rate (ZK/US$) as calculated by the Costab program.
Both foreign and local inflation rates are compounded at mid-year (see Annex 9).
31
114. Physical contingencies - accounting for changes in quantities and in unit prices
that are not related to monetary fluctuation - have been set at zero percent, considering
that the quantities and unit costs in the budget are meant to calculate envelopes by
activity, that will be clarified and detailed during project implementation, rather than
targets to be achieved. The way the budget was established contains in itself sufficient
flexibility to avoid using additional physical contingencies. Price contingencies, as
calculated by Costab, are 1 per cent of base costs in US$ and to 43 per cent of base
costs in ZK, based on the constant purchasing power assumption.
115. Taxes and duties have been estimated using the Zambia Revenue Authority data.
All items imported for Programme purposes attract import duties, while domestically
purchased items are subject to national and local taxes of different types. Value-add tax
(VAT) has been applied on all expenditure accounts. All taxes and duties would be paid
for by GRZ, with the exception of taxes on salaries and allowances paid from the loan
and grant, which are deducted at source.
116. Summary of Costs: The total investment and incremental recurrent Programme
costs, including price contingencies, are estimated at US$ 39.9 million (ZK 271 billion)1.
The foreign exchange component is estimated at US$ 6.9 million. Duties and taxes make
up approximately US$ 6.3 million. Programme costs are summarised in Table 4 (see also
Annex 9). Component 1 comprises 57 per cent of total costs, and Component 2 the other
43 per cent. In terms of expenditure by sub-component, the major investments are for
1.2 – Extension services, with 30 per cent of total funds; 1.3 – Agricultural Research,
with 21 per cent; and 2.1 – Local Agricultural Investment, with 33 per cent of total
costs; taken together, they represent 84 per cent of the total budget. The Programme
Management and M&E costs are estimated at 9 per cent of total costs.
Table 4: Total project cost by component in US$ ‘000
Total
Amoun
t
For.
Local
(Excl.
Duties
&
%
Exch.
Taxes)
Taxes
A. Sustainable Smallholder Productivity Growth
Strengthening member-based farmers organisations and their federations
Pluralistic participatory extension services
Agricultural Research for Development (AR4D)
Subtotal Sustainable Smallholder Productivity Growth
2 517
11 809
8 540
22 866
6
30
21
57
126
1 214
2 282
3 622
2 265
8 953
4 686
15 904
126
1 642
1 572
3 340
B. Enabling Environment for Productivity Growth
Local Agricultural Investments
Support to the Policy and Legal Framework
Programme Management, Monitoring and Evaluation
Subtotal Enabling Environment for Productivity Growth
13 082
521
3 388
16 990
33
1
9
43
2 779
112
311
3 202
7 912
330
2 561
10 803
2 391
79
269
2 739
39 856
100
6 824
26 706
6 079
B.
Programme Financing
117. The proposed IFAD loan amounts to US$ 24.8 million. This represents 62 per cent
of the total estimated Programme costs. Finland will contribute through a grant of
US$ 7.1 million (EUR 5 million), representing 18 per cent of the total budget. The IFAD
and Finnish funds will be disbursed together, in a pari passu ratio of 78:22, and they are
therefore presented in the tables under one and the same column.
118. The beneficiaries will contribute an estimated US$ 1.5 million, 4 per cent of the
total programme budget. Their participation is expected as counterpart contribution
1
The total programme budget may vary according to the value of the Finnish grant in support of the
programme, which is denominated in Euros.
32
under the Local Agricultural Investments sub-component; it will be made both in-cash
and in-kind; and it will range, depending on the type of investment, from 25 to 50 per
cent of its total cost.
119. The districts will contribute under the Local Agricultural Investment subcomponent, by participating in the financing of the District-level agricultural investments.
The participation of the districts in the cost of these will be at least 10 per cent of total
cost of these investments, which corresponds to about US$ 0.4 million or about 1 per
cent of the budget. It will be provided principally in-kind, in the form of the staff time
spent in preparing the proposals and supervising construction.
120. The Government will finance all duties and taxes. Its share of the budget
amounts to an equivalent of US$ 6.1 million, representing 15 per cent of the total
programme budget.
Table 5: Project Financing Plan by Disbursement Account
(USD '000)
1. Equipment and materials
2. Civil works
3. Services: TA and studies
4. Trainings and Workshops
Total PROJECT COSTS
GRZ
Amount %
1,287
1,449
2,961
381
6,078
17
15
20
5
15
Districts
Amount %
415
415
IFAD / Finland
Amount
%
4
1
5,963
6,831
11,865
7,244
31,902
77
71
80
95
80
Beneficiaries
Amount %
497
964
1,460
6
10
4
Total
Amount %
7,747 19
9,658 24
14,826 37
7,625 19
39,856 100
Table 6: Project Financing Plan by Component and Sub-component
(USD '000)
GRZ
Amount %
126 5
1,642 14
1,572 18
3,340 15
Programme M anagement, M onitoring and Evaluation
2,391 18
79 15
269 8
2,738 16
Total PROJECT COSTS
6,078 15
C.
Districts
Amount %
-
-
IFAD / Finland
Amount %
Beneficiaries
Amount %
2,391
10,167
6,968
19,525
95
86
82
85
-
415
3
- - 415
2
8,816
442
3,119
12,376
67
85
92
73
415
31,902
80
1
-
Total
Amount
%
2,517
11,809
8,540
22,866
6
30
21
57
1,460 11
- - 1,460
9
13,082
521
3,388
16,990
33
1
9
43
1,460
39,856
100
4
Summary Benefit Analysis
Financial Analysis
121. Without-Project Situation The average cultivated area of cassava per
household is estimated 1.55 ha, of which half is harvested in a year. For mixed beans/
groundnuts, the cultivated area per household is estimated at 0.30 ha per household,
and for rice at 0.25 ha per household. It is assumed that 100 per cent of the farmers
cultivate cassava without mechanisation, fertiliser, herbicides nor improved varieties. 50
per cent are assumed to sell their produce fresh while the other 50 per cent transform
them into chips. For mixed beans, 65 per cent of the farmers are assumed to monocropping with local varieties, no mechanisation nor commercial inputs; 5 per cent do the
same but add some fertiliser; 25 per cent of the farmers intercrop maize and mixed
beans with local varieties, no mechanisation nor commercial inputs. Finally, 5 per cent
operate mixed beans-maize intercropping, use improved mixed beans varieties, hybrid
maize and some fertiliser. Rice growers are assumed to cultivate local varieties without
using external inputs. The average net margins appear much higher for the mixed
beans/groundnut cropping patterns than for cassava one, and even higher for rice.
Cassava however provides more stable yields under a variety of growing conditions and
33
therefore plays a crucial role in terms of food security. Overall, the average net margin
per household in the without-programme situation is estimated at ZK 145,000 per year.
122. With-project Situation. It is expected that the programme will result in an
increase in areas, ranging from 25 per cent for cassava to 35 per cent for mixed
beans/groundnuts as well as for rice. Cropping patterns would change, with higher
inputs and outputs, and post-harvest transformation and value addition. There would be
30,000 farmers members of the FFS-type groups organized with programme support and
another 15,000 farmers assisted by partners/service providers. A further 15,000
households would benefit indirectly from community-level infrastructure investments and
indirect extension that may, more gradually, promote an uptake of the improved
cropping patterns. The achievement of the with-programme cropping patterns is
expected to be reached by Year 10 for cassava and Year 9 for mixed beans, groundnut
and rice. Overall, for an identical area of cassava, with mixed beans/groundnuts and
maize combined, the net income of the households would increase from ZK 145,000 to
ZK 608,000, or 300 per cent. Under these assumptions, the net margin would increase
from an estimated US$ 1.16 million to an estimated US$ 5.7 million.
Economic Analysis
123. Economic conversion factors: The economic crop models have been calculated
by using individual economic conversion factors for all the inputs1. For the outputs
(maize, mixed beans, rice), the economic prices have been estimated by calculating the
import parity, either from Johannesburg (based on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange
when available). For cassava, no regional representative prices could be found. The
conversion factor (economic / local price) that was applied by default is 1.2. For rice, the
conversion factors that has been applied is 0.9 considering that Zambia still has a
competitiveness problem. For maize, considering the important stock surpluses of the
year 2010 and the fact that Zambia will not be able to absorb all its production, the
export parity price was used. The conversion factor applied to the overall programme
costs was 1 (after retrieval of taxes and duties).
124. The calculation of programme benefits has been limited to economic valuation of
increased production (mainly through increased yields and production areas), and it has
not taken into consideration the potential higher prices that may be gained though
improved post-harvest practices (in terms of processing and marketing). Equally, the
calculation of programme costs include only a part of the costs of some subcomponents: 90 per cent of the support to agricultural research; 30 per cent of the costs
of the Local Agricultural Investment sub-component, as a major part will be
infrastructure and post-harvest equipment; and 20 per cent of the “Support to the Policy
and Legal Framework” subcomponent (SC.2.2.) as this support will target MACO at
central level and have a much wider impact that cannot be directly linked to the results
expected from the present programme.
125. The discount rate used in calculating the Net Present Value (NPV) is 10 per cent
per year, and while the cost of capital opportunity in Zambia is higher, in agriculture this
is already considered reasonable and even quite high when targeting the poor farmers.
The period of time taken into account for the discounted fund flows is 25 years.
126. Gross economic margin on area as presently cultivated: Based on these
assumptions, the present economic gross margin on the total area cultivated by the
direct and indirect beneficiaries is estimated around US$ 6.3 million per year. It would
be at US$ 10 million per year with the programme in year 8 and slowly increase to
US$ 11.3 million in year 25.
1
Most of the Conversion Factors applicable to farm production inputs were taken from the very detailed
calculations operated by J. Keyser (Case study for Zambia as background document) for the Study
“Awakening Africa’s Sleeping Giant”, World Bank - FAO, 2009.
34
127. Baseline results: Based on the assumptions as presented above, the Economic
Internal Rate of Return (EIRR) of the programme is estimated at 14 per cent,
while the NPV is US$ 5 million.
128. Sensitivity analysis: The EIRR has a rather low sensitivity (Table 7) to
variations in costs and to reductions or delays in income. The highest risk incurred is a
reduction in income due to lower output prices and / or to an increase in the costs of
commercial inputs. With a 10 per cent reduction in the gross farmer income, the EIRR
falls to 12 per cent, and with a 20 per cent reduction it goes down to 7 per cent.
Table 7: Sensitivity analysis
Standard sensitivity tests
Ref. case
NPV 10%
(million
USD)
14%
5
EIRR
Costs
+
10%
12%
Costs
+
20%
10%
0
Costs
+
30%
9%
-2
Income
+
10%
17%
8
Income
+
20%
19%
10
Income
+
30%
21%
13
Income
-
-10%
12%
2
Income
-
-20%
7%
-2
Income -30%
Income delayed by 1 year
Income delayed by 2 years
2%
-7
10%
6%
0
-4
D.
3
Sustainability
129. S3P complements the ongoing SAPP, which is starting its value chain work by
linking poor but organized rural smallholder producers of cassava and mixed beans to
private sector agribusiness operators. In so doing it is creating new incentives for
smallholder farmers to increase their production -and increasingly their productivity – of
these crops. The S3P will strengthen this process by giving farmers in the cassava-based
based farming systems of Luapula, Northern and a third province the access to improved
technologies and techniques for increased agricultural productivity, as well as the
capacity to use them effectively, and in so doing substantially increasing their
marketable surpluses.
130. Smallholder producers will be more productive and better organized, capable and
empowered to consolidate their demand for quality support services and link-up with
DACO technical teams and/or other service providers (Farmers organizations, NGOs,
private sector). This will create opportunities for (partial) payment of demanded
agricultural services by smallholders, and would facilitate an eventual re-alignment of
agricultural extension camps to better coincide with sub-district political boundaries with
the (reduced) extension staff relocating to sub-district multi-sectoral service centres.
S3P’s significant investment in social capital building of the membership-based farmers
organizations as well as their federations at District level, should increase the probability
that development options at this level are more inclusive of vulnerable populations.
131. Decentralized agricultural offices and institutions, in particular DACOs, DACs and
CACs, will have strengthened their governance capacities by routinely engaging in
bottom-up participatory planning and implementation of sustainable local agricultural
and economic growth initiatives, operating with fairness and transparency. Information
and knowledge management will be greatly improved and actual results obtained at the
camp level will be central to the up-dated monitoring and evaluation system. This will
35
also support MACO in improving the quality of the devolution and decentralisation
exercise that it is expected to engage in.
132. Government and non-government agricultural research and extension service
providers would be working together through PPP-type arrangements which are not only
supported by policy, but for the viability of which there is increasing evidence in Zambia.
133. Sustainable increase of the productivity of the cassava based farming system will
be enhanced by the development of a set of soil fertility management practices
(including but not limited to conservation farming and agro-forestry) adapted to local
needs and capacities. This will be central to accelerating the transition from the
unsustainable chitemene (‘slash and burn’) production system to sustainable permanent
cultivation systems; indeed it is a necessity for such a transformation to take place, as
gradually it must. It will also help increase resilience of these farming systems in the
face of increasing climatic variations. Increasing production and productivity of cassava,
mixed beans/groundnuts and rice is expected to continue well beyond programme
duration, once the demand-driven technology development systems are operating as
intended, improved plant varieties for instance will continue to be released.
134. Finally, S3P implementation in close collaboration with other programmes, such
as the SAPP, FRP and the EU-financed PEP, will strengthen MACO’s capacities to execute
is functions in the sector.
36
ANNEXES
1.
Country and Rural Context Background
2.
Poverty, Targeting and Gender
3.
Country Performance and Lessons Learned
4.
Detailed Programme Description
5.
Implementation Arrangements
6.
Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation and Knowledge
7.
Financial Management and Disbursement Arrangements
8.
Procurement
9.
Programme Cost and Financing
10.
Economic and Financial Analysis
11.
Draft Programme Implementation Manual
12.
Adherence to IFAD Policies
13.
Contents of the Programme Life File
37
Annex 1.
Country and Rural Context Background
Key File 1: Rural Poverty and Agriculture Sector Issues
Priority areas/
affected groups
Rural Poverty
Major Issues



Rural
Livelihoods:
General



39



Agriculture
Production and
Productivity




Deep human crisis in the 21st Century seen from poor MDG indicators –
poverty & hunger, poor education attainment, gender inequality, child
health, reproductive health, HIV&AIDS incidence and low access to safe
water and adequate sanitation
Zambia’s Human Poverty Index one of the highest in the world
Things improving in some indicators (e.g. child mortality and malaria) and
rural areas posting better trends in others but challenge still huge
Rural area missing out on economic growth as extreme poverty rose
between 2004 and 2006 while it fell in urban areas
Poverty highest in HHs headed by old people, female, people without
education (87% of whom were poor), small farmers (68% of whom
extremely poor in 2006 compared to 23% in urban low cost areas)
Households have few financial resources as a substantial part of people’s
incomes spent on food alone (48% overall but 65% in rural areas in 2006)
Poor human capital characteristics
Vulnerability to long term trends – 25 years of poor economic performance
leaving serious deficits in key investments (rural economic and social
infrastructure); HIV&AIDS’ general debilitating impact on livelihoods (e.g. by
seriously eroding the asset pentagon) with negative impacts higher among
women; Natural resource depletion partly due to more intensive utilisation
and use of wrong production methods
Vulnerability to shocks – climate change and variability with rising frequency
of droughts alternating with floods in some areas, animal diseases and
deaths, death and sickness in the family, macroeconomic shocks (e.g.
Kwacha appreciation, fuel price hikes, global economy business cycles)
Vulnerability to seasonal factors – food availability lowest during the rain
season when labour demand peaks and incidence of diseases (malaria and
diarrhea) also peak, little cash income generation during slack period
Area based vulnerabilities – Some areas much more prone to droughts and
floods, poor soils such as due to acidity, declining soil fertility, etc.

Low education levels of small farmers, especially among women,
constraining ability to effectively use extension and market information
Inadequate commercial orientation to farming taken as a way of life and not
as a business
Collapse of key marketing and rural finance institutions during 1990s
agriculture liberalization
High transaction costs due to sparsely populated settlements, poor rural

















Support MFNP to make rural development central to Zambia’s
quest to achieve the MDGs by 2015
Promote revitalization of agriculture development in general to
help achieve broad based growth and cut poverty and hunger
(MDG 1)
Promote commodities of significant importance to smallholders
in general and women farmers in particular
Promote small livestock to deal with labour-scarcity and the
building of the rural population’s financial base
Promote labour-based projects and help generate cash income
during slack period
Helping farmers take a more business approach to farming will
enhance financial base
Promote and strengthen where they exist savings and credit
schemes. Help revitalize agricultural credit through innovative
products
Promote participatory NRM and the mainstreaming of climate
change mitigation and adaptation
Promote creation of livestock disease free zones for a vibrant
livestock sector
Promote labour-saving technologies and production techniques
Promote better preparedness for Natural Disasters
Help develop ability to forecast policy impacts and
macroeconomic shocks on different social groups and the
design of adequate mitigation measures
Effective mainstreaming techniques for HIV&AIDS, gender and
poverty in proposed interventions
Support achievement of MDGs beyond MDG 1
Commercialisation of smallholder agriculture through
appropriate interventions along value chains
Household and group based approach to extension helping
smallholders to:
Plan, cost and record all their activities
Use economic information to take key decisions and produce


Required Actions
Priority areas/
affected groups
Major Issues



Agriculture
Sector Funding




40












for specific markets
Make on-farm investments to enhance productivity and value
addition
Support provision rural financial services through innovative
products appropriate for the rural poor
Promote conservation farming to include aspects with more
long term impacts such as agroforestry technologies
Value chains
Ensuring better access to fertilizer and hybrid seeds through
access to financial services and cash income (off season agric
production, off-farm enterprises, small livestock, etc)
Mainstreaming of HIV&AIDS and gender
Support to MACO (Agribusiness & Marketing Department) for
cohesion and increased efficiency in the management of the
rural economic development process.
Diversify farm base through market-led opportunities. Those
productive farmers with potential to respond to market signals
will be able to make rational production decisions.
For those smallholders with some production potential, use
demand-pull/market-led approaches to build self-reliance
based on commercial approach and relationships, and higher
incomes.




infrastructure (roads, electricity, telecommunication, storage facilities, etc),
poorly organized farmer groups, etc
Low on-farm investments due to low financial assets, unsupportive land
tenure system, etc
Poor delivery of agriculture services – extension, research, irrigation, etc –
and inadequate access by farmers
Negative effects of climate change and variability
Dominance of maize even in areas where it is not economical to produce
Decline in soil fertility in the more productive areas of Zambia
Labour constraints at the height of farming season due to lack of farm power
mechanization, prevalence of diseases and low food stocks, AIDS, gender
discrimination
Inadequate access to modern farm inputs due to few financial assets by
small farmers
Size of agricultural sector budget constrained by the FISP allocations.
Size of budget growing but achieving growth targets requires quality
allocations.
Planned improvement in field service delivery shown but need to be
sustained.
Subsidised inputs crowd out the private sector deliveries and discourage
investments in new private fertiliser sales networks.
Misallocation and inefficiencies in usage does not encourage sustainable
fertiliser use.
Diversion raises incomes of some but does little to raise crop productivity.
Late delivery of inputs does not improve productivity.
Required Actions
Priority areas/
affected groups
Commercialisati
on of
smallholder
production and
promotion of
value addition




















Required Actions
Lack of entrepreneur culture, business and financial management skills.
Absence of contract loyalty/credit repayment culture among small farmers.
Limited supply contract-based market linkages.
Low purchasing power of local consumers, local market volumes.
Limited value addition and high dependence on buying and selling of
unprocessed agricultural products, dominated by food items.
Limited availability of skilled service providers.
Lack of adequate and timely market information.
Inadequate market infrastructure: storage, collection centres, feeder roads.
Limited availability/access to financial services.
Limited capacity of farmer based organizations to bargain and negotiate.
Lack of skills in post harvest, value-adding and agro-processing activities.
Limited capability to identify/exploit value chain opportunities.
High levels of illiteracy, innumeracy.

Policy uncertainty affects the efficient operation of the private sector e.g.

Export bans, import quotas.

Uncertainty over changes in import tariff rates.

When and where will FRA enter the market - prices at which FRA buys
and sells unpredictable uneconomical for private sector to compete.

Farmer and trader inventory carrying risks high.

All of these sources of unpredictability impede private traders servicing
small farmer needs

Impedes investment and competition in output and inputs markets.
FRA and FISP accounting for two-thirds agriculture budget with emoluments
claiming significant share of the rest leaving little for other operations
ABM which should support private sector has no policy framework and
strategy and service delivery systems yet to be fully developed.
ABM does not yet have sufficient numbers of professional and technical staff
(some assigned to the FISP on a full-time basis) with competencies to
support development of a competitive agribusiness sector.
ABM Posts at District level only filled in 2008, by direct entry staff who need
to be equipped with the necessary skills to support agribusiness.
A weak extension service – poorly staffed on the ground due to high
turnover, poor camp infrastructure, little operational funding (e.g. for fuel),
lack of in-service training to update officers with current messages, many
not fully equipped in PEA facilitation
Centralized decision making to support Community-Driven Development
















Facilitate resilient market linkages based on sustainable
business relationships.
Promote market-led agro-processing ventures.
Facilitate generation of market information and timely
dissemination.
Facilitate development of storage and market infrastructure by
private sector/joint venture.
Collaborate with relevant stakeholders to promote financial
services to support business ventures.
Develop marketing skills among service providers.
Identify market opportunities and convey to farming
community.
Avail both agribusiness technical advisory services and
matching grants to boost agricultural commercialisation
through:

Mentoring.

Product Development.

Market Development.

Supply Chain Development.

Market Information Dissemination.
Support MACO to build policy and planning machinery to
ensure coordinated rural commercialisation process.
Support MACO to work out detailed investment plan and
strategy to guide SNDP implementation
Support policy dialogue on how to ensure sector funding is
according to sector priorities
Support reinvigoration of the extension service
Strengthen MACO ABM to be able efficiently to play its public
sector role in the private sector-led agribusiness agenda.
Promote private sector/NGO provision of services, in tandem
with public services.
Promote service provision that responds to market-oriented
knowledge needs of the poor.
Strengthen capacity of ABM staff in the Districts and
Provinces.
Promote public/private/NGO partnerships for synergy,
sustainability.
41
Public sector
capacity to
support rural
development.
Major Issues
Source: Central Statistical Office www.cso.zm, downloaded 24/10/10
Figure 2: Long-term average annual production and productivity increase of the
main Zambian food crops (expressed in tons cereal equivalent).
42
Table 1: Millennium Development Goals Indicators, 1990 - 2006
MDG INDICATOR
Proportion of people living in extreme poverty (%)
Underweight children (%)
Stunted children (%)
Wasted children (%)
Net enrolment ratio (%)
Proportion starting grade 1 reaching grade 7 (%)
Literacy rate of 15-24 year olds (%)
Ratio of literate females to males
Share of women in wage formal employment (%)
Infant mortality rate
Maternal mortality rate
ESS trends of HIV infection among ANC (%)
ZDHS HIV prevalence
New cases of malaria per 1,000
Malaria fatality rate per 1,000
Proportion without sustainable access to improved
water source
Proportion without access to improved sanitation
Source: UNDP/GRZ, various MDG Reports
1990
Value
58.2
25.0
40.0
5.0
80.0
64.0
79.0
0.97
39.0
107.0
649.0
20.0
121
11
26.0
43
Actual
Year
1990
1992
1992
1992
1990
1991
1990
1990
1990
1992
1992
1994
1990
1990
1991
2002
Value
58.0
28.0
47.0
5.0
68.0
73.0
75.0
0.98
35.0
95.0
729.0
19.1
16.0
377
48
43
Actual
year
2002
2002
2002
2002
2002
2003
2003
2000
2000
2000
2002
2002
2002
2002
2002
1998
2004
2006
43.1
40
2015
Target
29.1
12.5
20.0
2.5
100
100
100
36
162
20.0
121
11
24.5
34.0
1998
29.9
36.1
13.0
53.0
20.0
50.0
6.0
85.0
82.0
70.0
0.8
51.0
19.7
54.2
5.9
97.0
83.0
-
-
70.0
449
14.3
Table 2: Proportion Below Poverty Line, 1991 - 2006
1991
1993
1996
1998
2004
2006
Extreme
Poverty
58
Poverty
Incidence
74
Extreme
Poverty
61
Poverty
Incidence
69
Extreme
Poverty
53
Poverty
Incidence
73
Extreme
Poverty
58
Poverty
Incidence
68
Extreme
Poverty
53
Poverty
Incidence
64
Extreme
Poverty
51
Rural
Urban
88
49
81
32
92
45
84
24
82
46
68
27
83
56
71
36
78
53
53
34
80
34
67
20
Central
Copperbelt
Eastern
70
61
85
56
44
76
81
49
91
71
28
81
74
56
82
59
33
70
77
65
79
63
47
66
76
56
70
63
38
57
72
42
79
59
27
65
Luapula
Lusaka
84
31
73
19
88
39
79
24
78
38
64
22
82
53
69
35
79
48
64
29
73
29
61
16
Northern
N/ Western
84
75
76
65
86
88
72
76
84
80
69
65
81
77
66
64
74
76
60
61
78
72
64
57
Southern
79
69
87
76
76
59
75
59
69
54
73
58
Western
84
76
91
84
84
74
89
78
83
73
84
73
Zambia
Source: Central Statistical Office, Living Conditions Monitoring Survey 2006
44
Poverty
Incidence
70
Table 3 : Estimation of marketing potential for cassava and mixed beans in
districts of Luapula and Northern Province12.
Cropholder
(Nber of
HH) /a
Cassava (average/ HH)
Cassava
Area
Fresh
Dry
Market
Pot.
(ha/HH
Prod.
Prod.
Prod.
Market
) /b (kg/year) (kg/year) (kg/year) (t/year)
MIXED BEANS (average
/ HH)
ProdMarket
Area
Prod.
(ha/HH) uction
/b (kg/year) (kg/year)
Mixed
beans
Pot.
Market
(t/year)
LUAPULA
Chienge
14 824
1.26
6702
1676
776
11 497
0.04
17
-33
18 502
0.98
4634
1159
259
4 784
0.04
21
-29
Mansa
16 773
1.95
7661
1915
1015
17 028
0.17
62
12
Milenge
3 419
1.44
7703
1926
1026
3 507
0.08
36
-14
Kawambwa
Mwense
204
10 476
1.61
5606
1401
501
5 252
0.01
3
-47
11 165
1.44
6682
1670
770
8 603
0.05
11
-39
4 964
3.72
17305
4326
3426
17 009
0.02
5
-45
80 124
1.57
6979
1745
845
67 680
7 500
1.42
7098
1775
1175
8 809
0.01
2
-48
Chinsali
12 500
0.90
4522
1130
530
6 630
0.30
231
181
2 258
Isoka
17 500
0.33
1674
419
-181
0.19
86
36
636
8 500
0.18
882
221
-379
0.00
1
-49
Kasama
15 500
1.04
5190
1298
698
10 811
0.32
248
198
3 075
Luwingu
10 000
1.49
7465
1866
1266
12 663
0.80
450
400
3 996
Mbala
20 000
0.79
3937
984
384
7 683
0.64
418
368
7 356
Mpika
17 000
0.62
3102
775
175
2 983
0.21
181
131
2 221
11 000
1.10
5507
1377
777
8 545
0.74
449
399
4 385
Nchelenge
Samfya
Total
204
NORTHERN
Chilubi
Kaputa
Mporokoso
Mpulungu
8 500
1.21
6045
1511
911
7 746
0.29
226
176
1 493
Mungwi
14 237
1.26
6316
1579
979
13 936
0.22
170
120
1 707
Nakonde
13 772
0.71
3545
886
286
3 943
0.23
177
127
1 744
156 009
0.88
4383
1096
496
83 748
31 991
0.01
64
16
-134
0.05
33
-17
2 941
0.00
0
0
-150
0.03
16
-34
Kapiri Mposhi
27 653
0.02
76
19
-131
0.04
32
-18
Mkushi
13 075
0.09
475
119
-31
0.04
36
-14
Mumbwa
19 229
0.09
29
-21
Serenje
21 583
0.16
65
15
Total
28 871
CENTRAL
Chibombo
Kabwe
Total
116 472
/a: Source: Adapted from District Agricultural Office Kasama (2007) and HH Survey 2008/09 (CSO)-Luapula.
/b: Source: Crop Focus Survey Data 2009-10, Central Statistical Office (CSO). (Unpublished)
1
2
Marketing potential calculated on basis of combined data from Crop Focus Survey 2009/10, HH Survey
2008/09 by CSO, and pers. Comm. to the mission. Average annual cropped areas and production for
cassava and beans for 2009/10 cross checked with CSO time series for 2000/09 and adjusted as
appropriate. For cassava, annually harvested area considered at 50% of cropped area, dry yields at 25% of
fresh root yields.
Average consumption/person of cassava estimated on basis of proportion of 60-70% (150 kg/year), 4050% (100 kg/year) and 10-15% (25 kg/year) of average caloric intake Luapula, Northern and Central
Provinces. Considering 6 persons per HH, the total cassava consumption at district level and the potential
for annual marketable dry cassava have been derived. Due to high market value, mixed beans are
generally considered as a ‘cash’ crop and farm HH consumption is not known. Average annual household
retention estimated at 50 kg, the rest as marketable.
45
320
320
Annex 2
Poverty, Targeting and Gender
Poverty Context
1.
General situation: Rural smallholders make up about 60 percent of the national
population and about 79 percent of smallholders nationwide are reported below the
poverty line with 66 percent reported as extremely poor 1. Although rural poverty has
declined from 88 percent in 1991 to 78 percent in 20062, it remains widespread among
smallholders, effecting women more than men, by a 7 percent difference in poverty
incidence (see figure below). Zambia has a young and dependent population, with 46
percent under the age of 15, which poses a great socio-economic burden on the family
and the entire nation. Job creation has not been commensurate with gains from
economic growth, which has been hampered by low education levels and HIV/AIDs.
2.
The majority of households nationwide are relatively asset-poor, with trends
showing that farmers with better access to markets have increased farm size, asset
values, gross revenue and household incomes 3. S3P-targeted Luapula and Northern
Provinces have poverty incidences of 73 percent and 78 percent of the population
respectively, and extreme poverty incidences of 61 percent and 64 percent.
3.
In general, smallholders in Zambia are subsistence-based small-scale farmers,
poor yet productive men and women farmers who have potential to take advantage of
development opportunities and improved assets. The 23 percent of smallholder
households who are women-headed show higher levels of poverty (see Table 1 below),
largely due to unequal opportunities, access to services, status and representation.
Table 1: Incidence of Household Poverty by Gender, 1998 and 2006
(Source: CSO, LCMS 1998 and 2006)
Poverty Status
Overall Poverty
Extreme Poverty
Moderate Poverty
Gender of House
Head
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
Female
per cent Households
1998
2006
72
63
77
70
56
49
65
57
16
14
12
13
4.
Women are not formally excluded from smallholder farming opportunities, but are
greatly disadvantaged due to cultural norms, which prevent women from fully benefitting
from equal opportunities and undermine their ability in accessing land, services, training,
credit, and voice and representation in decision-making policy and planning4. Because
women are more directly faced with meeting household basic requirements, have fewer
economic resources and are disadvantaged in accessing financial assets, it is reported
that women have increased their participation in the labour markets, including the urban
informal sector5. Women contribute to at least 60 percent of farm labour, collect water
and firewood, and assume the major role and responsibility for childcare and numerous
household tasks6.
5.
Multidimensionality of Poverty: variation of poverty levels and livelihood
conditions among households within provinces and districts depend on a range of factors
- notably the natural resource base (soils, water, climate conditions), remoteness and
1
2
3
4
5
6
National Agricultural Policy (NAP) 2011-2030 draft version 2011; and SAPP:WP1(2010).
Central Statistic Office in NAP, draft (2011); Living Condition Monitoring Survey (LCMS) 2006.
Food Security in Zambia, FAO, draft, 2011.
Discussed in NAP draft 2011; and The Household Approach as an Effective Tool for Gender Empowerment:
A Review of the Policy, Process and Impact of Gender Mainstreaming in the Agricultural Support Programme
(ASP) in Zambia. March 2008.
From Chiwele, D. for UNICEF (2008) Situation Analysis Women and Children: Household Income and
Poverty.
SAPP (2009) WP1; and NAP draft 2011.
46
access to key infrastructures and services (roads, agricultural extension services,
markets, storage, social services, information etc), level of education of household
members, household asset-base and accumulation, labour availability (including
conditions of health) and gender. Seventy percent of female-headed households fall
below the aggregate poverty line, compared to 63 percent of male-headed households.
Further, extreme poverty is found to be more prevalent among female-headed
households (57 percent) than poor male headed households (49 percent)1.As indicated
in the table above, the incidence of overall poverty is falling slightly faster among maleheaded households than among female-headed households2.
6.
Pockets of rural households exist that have comparatively less resilience to
shocks than other households, and under stress are likely to fall back into conditions of
vulnerability and extreme poverty. In these situations, they are forced to rely on
traditional coping strategies such as skipping meals, reducing dietary diversity, engaging
in causal labour on farms or other occupations at low rates, depending on familial social
networks, bartering, selling assets, pulling children out of school etc) 3. Vulnerability to
falling into poverty is caused by factors such as collapsing social capital, high prevalence
of HIV/AIDS, effects of maize monoculture bias, lack of capital to expand agricultural
activities4. An important factor keeping households strapped in the cycle of poverty is
low production and productivity - resulting in low incomes which create limitations in
purchases of inputs and labour. Self-assessments from the LCMS (2006), show that
many farmers mention low agricultural production and productivity as a main cause of
poverty, commonly citing : inability to afford agricultural inputs, lack of capital to start or
expand agricultural outputs and lack of labour. Labour is a critical constraint for
smallholders, particularly because most poor smallholder producers depend only on hand
hoes for cultivation. As most households are labour constrained, this situation is
particularly acute for those households with particularly limited labour availability notably female-headed and those affected by HIV/AIDS. 5
7.
Food insecurity: appears widespread and severe in the Luapula and Northern
provinces. Stunting, a good indicator of long-term exposure to food insecurity among
preschool-age children is highest in Luapula, reported at 50 percent compared to a
national prevalence of 42 percent; among school-age children, Luapula records the
highest prevalence rate 51 percent, followed by the Northern province at 50 percent,
compared to a national average of 31 percent6. Further, Luapula and Northern were
among provinces with the highest prevalence of chronic energy deficiency among women
(13-14 percent compared to national average of 10 percent), while the average share of
household expenditure on food, typically expressing the extent of poverty and food
security, were also among the highest in the country (between 60-67 percent), see
Table 2 below.
8.
Self-sufficiency and adequate daily intake is insufficient for a balanced nutritional
diet. Reports7 indicate that at national and household levels there is inadequate
emphasis on production of vegetables, fruits and legumes (protein-rich food crops
providing adequate vitamins and minerals) and preparation of nutritious meals. In
addition, food production is not evenly distributed among households. Chilewe (2008)
found the biggest differences among undernourished children below age 5 years was
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Chiwele (2008).
LCMS 2004.
IFAD (2006) Study on Poverty and Targeting in Eastern and Southern Africa: Zambia Country Report, and
(2008) Zambia: Vulnerability Assessment Committee (ZVAC)
Thurlow J. and P. Wobst (2004) The Road to Pro-Poor Growth in Zambia: Past Lessons and Future
Challenges. IFPRI; and SAPP WP1.
Labour is limited in efficiency and intensity, reinforced or caused by a complexity of factors: low population
densities (15 persons/km2), illness and disease e.g. HIV/AIDS, limited use of labour-saving technologies,
costs of hiring labour with low returns to investment, peak labour-demand periods falling during the hungry
season when hunger and disease is highest, etc.
Central Statistic Office (CSO) 2009.
NAP draft (2011).
47
between male and female headed households1. Stunting in non-poor female headed
households was as high as in extremely poor male-headed households leading to a
conclusion that a child growing up in a female-headed household was more likely to be
undernourished even if that household was not poor. Probable causes for this include
that female household heads take up more responsibilities than their counterparts in
male headed households, resulting in less time to safeguard the nutritional health of
their children. Important as well, women have lower economic assets and access to
financial resources compared to their male counterparts resulting in daily struggles to
obtain enough for their families.
Table 2: Proportion of household income spent on food and non-food items,
1998 and 2006 (Source: CSO, LCMS 1998 and 2006).
Zambia
Rural
Urban
Female
Rural Areas
Small-scale
Medium-scale
Large-scale
Non-agriculture
Urban Areas
Low-cost
Medium-cost
High-cost
Food
59
72
51
62
58
1998
Non-Food
41
28
49
38
42
Food
48
65
38
2006
Non-Food
52
35
62
74
63
41
62
26
37
59
38
67
60
46
49
33
40
54
51
52
49
39
48
51
61
42
32
29
58
68
71
Determinants of Rural Poverty
9.
Isolation and poor infrastructure conditions are particularly prominent in S3P
target provinces, undermining the commercialisation and expansion of the rural
economy. The Zambia Livelihood Map Rezoning and Baseline Profiling (2004) 2 describes
the targeted S3P zones as subsistence-based agricultural zones with limited trading in
agricultural products, generally poor infrastructure, with livelihood activities of fishing in
Luapula and livestock in Northern province. Zambian farmers have lower access to roads
and markets than farmers from neighbouring countries (to some extent due to low
population densities3). Studies and data suggest that proximity to urban centres are
critical factors effecting smallholder potential for poverty reducing commercialization 4
(see Figure 1 below).
10.
Neglect of road maintenance and little extension of roads into more remote rural
areas (i.e. feeder roads) have contributed to rural household dependency on subsistence
farming and limited access to markets. In addition, storage facilities have been reported
to be inappropriately located and in need of rehabilitation and post harvest losses are
reported between 15 and 30 percent. Even those farmers who are able to increase
productivity and produce some surplus for sale face constraints that limit the profitability
of the commodities they produce.
1
2
3
4
Chilewe (2008).
Final Report by the Zambia Vulnerability Assessment Committee (ZVAC) (2004)
FAO draft (2011).
IFAD 2006; Thurlow and Wobst (2004); and Siegel Paul B. (2008) Profile of Zambia’s Smallholders: Where
and Who are the Potential Beneficiaries of Agricultural Commercialization? Africa Region Working Paper
Series No. 118. World Bank.
48
Figure 1: Average household distance to markets and poverty headcount by
Province
(Adapted from: Thurlow & Wobst, 2004. Calculations from CSO/LCMS 1998).
11.
A second and extremely vital constraint to agricultural growth and
commercialization as mentioned is labour availability. In Zambia, land is not the issue,
but rather the ability to cultivate the land1. Household wellbeing and viability of
commercial agriculture is based on productivity, closely correlated with availability of
labour.
12.
Zambia’s high HIV/AIDs prevalence, estimated at 15 percent of the adult
population, has weakened household resilience, decreased labour availability and created
barriers to economic development. HIV/AIDS pandemic has effected disproportionately
more women compared to men2 and is creating new food insecure categories. This is
putting stress on the extended family system as already vulnerable families take in more
dependent members, raising the burden of acquiring enough food for all. The
phenomenon of child-headed households has also been rising, particularly limiting
opportunities for the girl child – often withdrawn from school to help with home care of
sick members.3 About 60 percent of farm households have suffered losses due to
HIV/AIDs. Households caring for sick members, having lost productive household
members, or those caring for orphans and additional dependents are confronted with
heavy economic burdens. Moreover, the impact of HIV/AIDs has resulted in severe
absences and vacancies among MACO extension staff and also decreased numbers of
progressive farmers.
Programme Targeting Strategy
13.
Overview: the targeting strategy of the S3P will be inclusive, aim to reduce
barriers to participation, and be guided by farmer interest and willingness to participate.
Smallholders in targeted camps will access programme support as direct beneficiaries as
members of existing PEA/FFS-type groups or if they are interested to form such groups.
Farmers who are not members of groups and other rural household members located in
target areas will have opportunities to indirectly benefit from a range of programme
support. The S3P targeting strategy is designed based on a two-step approach, including
1
2
3
IFAD (2006).
Chiwele (2008) reports that women accounted for more than half of the adults estimated to be living with
HIV and that young women are especially hit by the pandemic with those aged 15 to 19 years five times
more likely to be infected compared to their male peers.
Chiwele D. et all (2004) for FAO. Agricultural Development and Food Security in Sub-Saharan Africa: A
Case Study of Zambia; and NAP draft (2011).
49
geographic targeting followed by self-targeting (see Table 4). Direct targeting may be an
option considered for implementation based on mid-term findings from monitoring the
targeting strategy, - particularly to enhance mechanisms across programme activities for
strengthening gender inclusion, HIV/AIDs-affected households and youth.
14.
Geographic targeting will be based on the location of cassava-based farming
systems. Selection of target areas based on viability of market-oriented production
rather than exclusively on poverty profile criteria has been recommended as the most
logical targeting mechanism for Zambia to promote commercialisation 1. SAPP has
applied the geographic targeting approach using the main criteria of high-production
areas of cassava and mixed beans with high potential for engagement with existing or
prospective producer groups. S3P coverage areas will be aligned as much as possible
with SAPP coverage areas although it will include specific areas of interest for rice and
groundnut production in addition to cassava and mixed beans. A total of four
commodities (cassava, mixed beans, groundnuts and rice), therefore, have been
selected as entry points based on the following criteria:












potential to generate income by smallholders, particularly smallholders who have
high poverty prevalence;
potential to show quick and tangible results;
potential to integrate women into value chain activities, i.e at least 50 per cent;
potential for efficiency gains and value addition in the value chain;
potential contribution to food security;
resilience to potential shocks (disease, drought);
complementarity with other agribusiness support initiatives;
sustainability in terms of natural resource management;
up-scalable;
balancing agro ecological zones;
existence of strong commodity/sectoral organizations;
existence of market opportunities
15.
S3P will initially focus on Luapula and Northern Provinces which together account
for some 70-90 percent of national cassava and mixed bean production, as well as 50
per cent of national rice production. Improving productivity and marketing opportunities
of these commodities, correspond to interests and needs of smallholder farmers and
particularly the poor in these regions. While poverty has not been the principle criteria
for targeting, it is noteworthy that Northern province ranked the second highest of
provinces in poverty incidence and extreme poverty in 2006, while Luapula ranked third
highest.
16.
While SAPP aims to target 20-30 districts nationwide over the project lifetime,
S3P will prioritize a total of 24 districts from three provinces, including Luapula and
Northern. The main selection criterion is the potential to increase marketable surpluses
(see Table 3 of Annex 1). Within each district, and average of about six to seven camps
will be selected, using the same criteria as district selection, with consideration of
additional criteria as appropriate such as existing projects/interventions/NGOs to
optimize synergies, demonstrated or particular commitment/interest/capacity of local
authorities, leaders, CACs (for example through past efforts), presence or proximity to
particularly favorable resources/infrastructures, etc. S3P will be implemented through a
phased approach, scaling up gradually.
17.
Self targeting: once programme areas are defined through geographic
targeting, a self-targeting approach will be activated in complement with SAPP. Selftargeting in S3P will be guided by the core criteria of smallholder farmers who are
already organised in farmer groups (producer groups, cooperatives, informal
associations etc.) or are willing and have potential to join such groups, having limited
external support, and potential to be linked to markets (see SAPP: WP1). To effectively
1
IFAD (2006).
50
implement self-targeting mechanisms, expansive awareness raising and sensitization will
be undertaken, through information and communication campaigns targeted to all
categories of smallholders. This will be essential to promoting inclusiveness and broadbased participation among the diversity of smallholders. Measures such as multistakeholder participatory decision-making (e.g. CACs, DACs) and mechanisms for
exchange and dialogue will be strengthened to reinforce equity and fair access to
programme support, reducing disproportional benefits that often favor the more elite,
powerful and less poor.
18.
Target group. Agricultural camps in the target area consist on average of 1,000
(Luapula) to 1,500 (Northern) rural smallholder households. S3P aims at working in
about 150 camps distributed over three provinces, reaching an average of 200
smallholders per camp that would participate directly in the main activities of S3P,
notably the FFS-type groups (about 10 groups/camp) to improve access to improved
technology and markets The core target group beneficiaries would therefore consist, of
30,000 smallholders households, equivalent to around 150,000 people (average size of 5
persons/household)1 in the associated households or about 20 per cent of the rural
population in targeted camps. An expected 50 per cent of these core participants would
be women farmers2. Selection of these groups would be based on self-targeting
mechanisms according to core criteria of the programme (see Table 4). Eligibility will
require that group members are involved in small-scale cassava and/or mixed bean
production systems (which includes groundnuts in the rotation amongst other crops)
and/or grow rice or are interested in growing rice. Groups will range in extent of
formality (from cooperatives to “clubs”) and diversity of membership will be encouraged,
e.g. women, youth, members from disadvantaged households.
19.
The core target group also includes those (i) farmers who gain access to
improved planting material (output of component 1.3), as well as other technological
improvements through farmers organizations supported by Component 1.1 and/or
partners (sub-component 1.2) and (ii) households who benefit from improved
community investments and infrastructure (Component 2.1) but which are not counted
in above. This second direct beneficiary group is estimated to consist of a further 30,000
smallholder households, equivalent to some 150,000 people or 20 per cent of the
population in targeted camps. The total number of direct beneficiaries, would therefore
amount to 60,000 households, equivalent to 300,000 people, or 40 per cent of the
population of targeted camps.
Table 2. Summary of Project Beneficiaries (conservative estimates)
Description
Provinces targeted
Districts targeted
Coverage
Luapula, Northern and third
Province
24 districts in 3 Provinces
Agricultural Camps targeted for
intensive support
Farmer groups and households targeted
Other farmers/HHs in target area
benefitting from improved planting
material, seeds, advisory services
and/or community infrastructure
Total direct beneficiaries
1
2
Assumptions
150
1,500 groups with
(150,000 people)
About 30% of total
camps in 3 provinces.
Average 1,000 HHs
per camp
10 groups per camp
20 HHs pr group
5 persons/HH
(150,000 people)
20% of camp HHs
(300,000 persons)
About 40% of total
population of
targeted camps
Zambia census 2000
The standard minimum percentage of female project beneficiaries/participants in Zambia.
51
20.
Indirect beneficiaries would include cassava, mixed beans/groundnut and/or
rice producing smallholders that do not live in the targeted camps, but who would
nevertheless (in due course) be able to gain access to improved technologies (in
particular varieties and CF technologies) generated by S3P. It is assumed that those
living within Luapula, Northern and third province to be determined and included in the
programme would be the first to gain access to improved planting material. Those living
outside Luapula and Northern provinces, but within Agro-Ecological Region III would be
the second indirect beneficiaries.
21.
Finally, an important category of stakeholders who will benefit from S3P support
include both men and women MACO staff, particularly Camp Extension Officers (CEOs)
working in the 150 target camps, their Block Extension Supervisors (BESs), the 24
District Agricultural Coordinators and their technical teams, will be included in
programme capacity building (including the MACO district gender focal points). Staff
from ZARI research stations in Mansa and Kasama will greatly benefit from the capacity
development activities foreseen by the project. Technical staff from partner
organizations working with the project including service providers will also be able to
benefit from S3P’s capacity building programme. In complement, members of the Camp
Agricultural Committees (CACs) in the targeted camps, and members of the 24 District
Agricultural Committees (DACs) will benefit from capacity building.
Table 4: Summary of S3P targeting and gender mainstreaming mechanisms
Geographic targeting –
focus on poor rural areas
with potential for growth



Self-targeting
measures- create an
inclusive environment
that reduces barriers and
attracts participation
among the productive
poor ensuring benefits
respond to their priority
needs & livelihoods
Direct targeting –
programme benefits
channelled to specific
individual or households





Empowerment
measures –give target
groups at least equal
chances to access project
activities






Based on criteria prioritizing entry points as high-production areas of cassava,
mixed beans/groundnuts and/or rice - with potential for participation of existing
or prospective producer groups; these are subsistence-based, food-security crops
with market potential , greatly cultivated by women (see above for commodity
selection criteria);
Alignment with SAPP
MACO will advise on district and sub-district target Camps for intervention based
on agreed criteria
Guided by core criteria: smallholder farmers are already organised in farmer
groups (producer groups, cooperatives, informal associations etc.) or willing and
have potential to join such groups, having limited external support, and potential
to be linked to markets.
Inclusive, adaptive approaches and graduated packages and capacity building
programmes responding to needs, livelihood conditions and endowments of
potential target groups
Participatory Capacity building programmes (FFS-type) responding to smallholder
priority needs
If M&E results at mid-term show evidence of poor gender mainstreaming, quotas
would be established and earmarked to ensure 30 % of project activities benefit
women (trainings; membership in producer groups; support to women’s producer
groups; leadership roles; matching grants earmarked for women groups)
Appropriate agricultural technologies, cooperative and group activities and
enterprises that take labour and other constraints of HIV/AIDS-affected
households into account will be promoted.
Specific attention focussed in supporting institutional strengthening of existing
farmers associations and their federations at district level;
Ensure that capable women groups and women members in mixed groups are
included among groups/committees supported. Also promote involvement of
members of HIV/AIDs- affected households and youth
Gender issues will be included modules of capacity development programmes in
order to promote gender mainstreaming –Attention given to women’s
needs/priorities for adaptive research, technology adaption etc. (i.e. time/
workloads, labour-saving)
Promote women as officers in providing agricultural services (i.e.. MACO, others)
and encourage service provision to target needs and priorities of women and
other marginalized groups. In parallel, strengthen role and effectiveness of MACO
Gender Focal Points at District level.
Promote women’s participation in all capacity development activities of S3P
(agricultural training, farmer field schools, lead farmers commodity groups,
organisational and business training, committee support)
Promote activities that benefit women in local planning processes
52
Enabling measures –
create an sustain a policy
& institutional
environment favourable
to gender equality and
women’s empowerment




Procedural measures –
ensure gender-equitable
participation in , and
benefit from planned
activities



Monitoring targeting –
monitor outputs,
outcomes, & emerging
impacts as they relate to
target groups




Policy and legislative reviews, studies and workshops related to Component 2.2
will give attention to gender equality and empowerment (e.g. MACO devolution
strategy, demand-driven research-extension services, cassava-based farming
systems)
Women will be encouraged to participate in advocacy, policy dialogue events
Relevant messages about gender mainstreaming and HIV/AIDS will be integrated
in programme activities, e.g. in the terms of reference of service providers, and
linked to trainings
District-level Gender Focal Points supported toward sustaining gendermainstreaming in MACO policies, programmes and activities
During staff recruitment processes/selection should give consideration to
capacity, qualifications and performance in gender mainstreaming (TORs) and
women should be encouraged to apply
Service providers should evidence competence/experience with gender
mainstreaming and be encouraged to have women staff, and partners should be
encouraged to participate in gender capacity building
Key project events: launching, workshops, and communications and circular
should include aspects of gender and also HIV/AIDS
Project should allocate sufficient resources to gender mainstreaming
Use of participatory M&E methodologies to analyse and learn lessons at regular
intervals the extent to which programme interventions have reached expected
target groups: smaller and poorer producers including women (and youth) and
how project has adequately addressed their priorities. Remedial actions, notably
at mid-term review, to adjust programme approaches as required in response to
M&E results to ensure compliance with targeting and gender mainstreaming
strategies
Use of gender-disaggregated indicators for logframe and M&E systems to analyse
project benefits (agricultural knowledge & practices, economic, organisational,
social and representative) accessed by women, and if possible, other
marginalized groups (youth)
Gender-sensitive beneficiary and impact assessments to determine project
outcomes and impacts on women (might include case studies on increased
empowerment of women and female-headed households as a result of
programme activities)
Gender Targeting
22.
Institutional environment: MACO has committed to mainstreaming gender in
its current policies, programmes, organisational structure and procedures and activities
in line with Zambia’s National Gender Policy (2002) and the subsequent Strategic Plan of
Action for the National Gender Policy (2004-2007), as well as the Fifth National
Development Plan (2006-2010).1 MACO, like other line ministries and government
institutions have been supported in this effort by the Gender in Development Division
(GIDD) of the Cabinet Office, who is the responsible coordinating body for supporting
implementation of, and to facilitate research and resource mobilisation in gender
mainstreaming in development programmes.
23.
To champion this task, each ministry has designated Gender Focal Persons
(GFPs), in the case of MACO, a Senior Rural Sociologist of the Policy and Planning
Department (PPD), complemented by designated GFPs in each department at national
level and in each District. The GFPs has received gender training and orientation, but
have realised little in practical results. A number of institutional constraints prevent
promotion of gender mainstreaming within MACO e.g. inadequate resources and
prioritisation; legal frameworks regarding MACO and its activities are largely silent on
gender; accountability for gender mainstreaming and buy in – notably at leadership
levels from the top– is unclear and in need of strengthening; limited reporting exists and
no formats are designed for tracking gender inclusion in MACO activities or capturing
progress made; MACO staff lack gender awareness and training in gender mainstreaming
in order to effectively incorporate gender issues in their work; little orientation of new
staff; no gender mainstreaming in curricula of agricultural colleges; and little attention
1
With clauses including e.g. 30 % of land allocated reserved or women; ensuring women’s access to
agricultural extension and credit; collection of gender disaggregated data.
53
given to best practices with few examples despite the significant role of women in the
agricultural sector.
24.
Within MACO, there are no gender equity measures for recruitment, promotion,
training or careers paths. The GIDD Audit (2010)1 reports four women are Directors but
most women are positioned at middle to lower ranks. Overall, MACO seeks to ensure
that the standard 30 percent of its workforce are female (of a total staff roster currently
in the range of 650) and this goal appears to be achieved, notably in the extension
services2. Two of nine PACOs are currently women, but only three of 72 DACOS are
women3. The posting of female staff as Camp Officers to remote rural areas remains a
challenge as women prefer to work closer to urban areas where better social services are
accessible4. However women farmers indicated that they found it easier to work with
female extension workers5. Further, it has been reported that women who attend group
meetings found it difficult to persuade the whole family to adopt extension messages and
that the group approach alone does not empower women sufficiently because the whole
household must be involved.
25.
MACO GFPs in Districts6 face similar constraints as at national level, and have
expressed feeling a lack of support that they require to assume their roles. Exchanges
with GFPs indicate frustration - they are insufficiently briefed and equipped to perform
their tasks. At district levels, it is repeatedly said that there is insufficient priority on
gender mainstreaming, notably in MACO and also among many other line ministries.
Despite that GFPs exist at Province level (MFNP) to support district-level GFPs from all
ministries (through capacity building, information sharing, etc.), there is inadequate
attention. According to GFPs, sensitization and awareness raising within ministries is vital
to improving gender mainstreaming – this includes from camp level up. Capacity
building, with analytical tools and support for planning and M&E with disaggregated data
collection is also lacking. Perhaps most important, one GFP mentions, ministries need to
get serious about gender: internalisation is lacking. The enabling environment for gender
mainstreaming within MACO merits strengthening and commitment. The GIDD Audit has
provided a range of recommendations but progress has been slow in their uptake.
26.
Overview of gender roles in rural context: women play a central role in the
agricultural sector as described above (80 percent of food producers), but are
traditionally marginalized from decision-making and control of assets and incomes 7.
Division of labour is differentiated, with fields and farming activities separate along
gender lines. Women are overburdened with subsistence farming and other household
chores –contributing to at least 60 percent of farm labour, collection of water and
firewood, and assuming responsibility for childcare and numerous household tasks 8.
When subsistence-oriented, household-based enterprises dominated by women become
more commercial however, husbands are more likely to become involved. Men control
most income from the sale of crops (cash crops). Women have little access to laboursaving technologies, hired labour, extension services, and are in weak decision-making
positions in traditional rural households9. Women and youth have been reported as
unable to access land, customary inheritance practices continue to discriminate against
women, and land-grabbing from widows and orphans has also been reported 10.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
GIDD (2010).
Farnworth C.R. and M. Munachonga (2010) Gender Approaches in Agricultural Programmes – Zambia
Country Report. A Special Report of Agricultral Support Programme (ASP), Sida
Mr. Kunda, MACO Gender Focal Point and Rural Sociologist, personal communication.
For example 23 Camp Extension Officers (CEOs), or 16 percent of all CEOs in Luapula are reported to be
women. Personal communication. John Myunga.
Farnworth C.R. and M. Munachonga (2010).
District Gender Committees also exist as a sub-committee of DDCCs
Bishop-Sambrook, C and C. Wonani (2008) The Household Approach as an Effective Tool for Gender
Empowerment: A Review of the Policy, Process and Impact of Gender Mainstreaming in the Agricultural
Support Programme (ASP) in Zambia.
SAPP WP1; NAP draft (2011).
Bishop-Sambrook, C and C. Wonani (2008).
Zambia Land Alliance. Luapula Province.
54
27.
However gradual changes are possible, and some projects working with MACO,
such as the recently completed Agricultural Support Programme (ASP) show promising
results concerning gender empowerment and also HIV/AIDS mainstreaming through that
MACO could build from1. Lessons and recommendations particularly relevant to S3P
include:







Strengthen MACO commitment to gender at the highest levels, stress
accountability and ensure gender-disaggregated data in M&E to evidence the
difference gender mainstreaming makes in people’s lives;
promote a gender-sensitive environment for community mobilisation and service
delivery;
ensure all staff - notably service delivery - are involved in gender mainstreaming
and sufficiently build their capacity to do so (with accompanying materials and
manuals);
continue to apply the 30 percent women’s participation minimum target that is
commonly used in all gender mainstreaming approaches nationally;
ensure communication strategies incorporate gender mainstreaming;
make use of local contact /lead farmers to enable them to train others and
deliberately target local women to improve gender equality and ensure that
women farmers have a cadre of extension workers that specifically address their
practical and strategic gender needs;
strengthen women’s empowerment capacities in organisation, leadership and
business planning.
28.
Gender mainstreaming approach: to ensure adequate gender mainstreaming
in the project, a pro-active gender targeting will be incorporated into the programme
through the design of a gender mainstreaming strategy that will be cross-cutting
throughout all interventions. This strategy will be detailed during the S3P design of the
programme implementation manual (PIM). The strategy will align with both IFAD and
Zambia national policies, which advocate that in addition to ensuring equal opportunities,
special attention or affirmative action (such as sensitization, training, pro-active
measures, targeted adapted technologies) may likely be required to promote women’s
participation in and access to programme activities and benefits. These mechanisms will
require monitoring continuously over time to ensure not only quantitative achievements
(numbers of women trained, lead farmers etc.) but also qualitative changes (e.g. leading
roles played by women, gradual changes of women’s roles and voice in the household, in
groups, in communities).
29.
Across programme activities, notably those concerning improved agricultural
services, adapted technologies, strengthening research-extension linkages of Component
One, attention will be given to addressing priorities of households that may be
marginalized or disadvantaged and less endowed but capable to participate (femaleheaded, HIV/AIDs-affected and youth-headed households etc.). For example laboursaving technologies such as conservation farming, and adapted farming systems that
include mixed farming practices contributing to labour efficiency and dietary and
nutritional benefits will be promoted. Likewise, activities supporting smallholder land use
planning, community-level land use management rules and land tenure security will be
gender sensitive and include for example boundary demarcation of female-headed
households and women’s fields according to households as appropriate. These activities
would include collecting disaggregated gender and wealth ranking data on the range and
average size of land parcels being accessed by various users for cultivation purposes,
eventually resulting in clarification of landholdings and greater security among women
farmers. This information would strengthen measuring S3P impact disaggregated by
gender, and also facilitate women’s increased investments in production and access to
financial resources.
1
see the household approach model of ASP applied in Northern, Central and Southern Provinces in BishopSambrook and Wonani (2008); and Farnworth and Munachonga (2010).
55
30.
As outlined in the summary targeting and gender mainstreaming table above, a
number of measures will be undertaken in S3P to promote gender-sensitivity:

programme management and implementation procedures;

access to programme services and benefits that are adapted to priorities and
needs of women (e.g. adapted technologies);

promotion of women’s empowerment;

strengthening a gender-equitable enabling environment in the agricultural sector;

monitoring programme interventions to ensure adequate strengthening of
women’s equity and empowerment.
56
Annex 3.
Country Performance and Lessons Learned
Key File 2: Organizational Capability Matrix
Weaknesses
Opportunities/threats
Remarks
Ministry of
Agriculture
and Cooperatives
 National influence and
expertise in all facets of
agricultural production.
 Existence of necessary
extension network
(camps, blocks and
district structures) and
working as main
interface with farmers
 Has attempted to rollout
Participatory Extension
Approach for a number of
years
 Extension workers, block
supervisors and subject
matter specialists
qualified enough to adapt
to introduction of new
methodologies
 Existence of farmer
institutes training centres
in each district for
demonstration of
appropriate technologies
and training of farmer
management skills
 Existence of Farm
Institutes for In-service
Training and higher level
farmer training
 Many messages on farm
production and
productivity still relevant
 Need for strong
leadership to
modernize and fully
decentralize functions
 Existence of necessary
network for veterinary
services and livestock
extension
 Both DoLVS and DoF
OPPORTUNITIES:
 MACO has noted legal constraints. Planning
to review and rationalize relevant statutes
 MOL has adopted policy of allocating at least
30% of land titles to women in the state
land to improve their access to land;
 CAADP under the AU/NEPAD supporting
Zambia and other African countries to
develop Compact as a rallying initiative for
coordinated support to agriculture –
targeting 6% agric growth, 10%
expenditure allocation to the sector
 A re-emergence of global interest in funding
agriculture
 Many organisations willing to partner with
MACO’s extension and research services
 Accepted by farmers as the lead institution
to provide agric services
 Existence of PPP models in extension and
research that could be extended to other
areas
THREATS
 Most of the traditional systems that regulate
land tenure treat women as minors who
cannot directly own land
 Centralization of political power
unsupportive to Community-Driven
Development
 Agriculture governed by many pieces of
legislation managed by different
organisations. Contradictory statutes in
some cases
 Absence of key legislation like the Agric
Credit Act constraining private sector role in
agriculture
Ministry of
Livestock and
Fisheries
Development
 FRA and FISP accounting for two-thirds of
budget leaving little for operations
 Reduced number and quality of MACO
publications (e.g. annual statistics and
monthly bulletins) indicative of weak M&E
systems.
 MACO’s inability to deliver quality
services due to:
 A lack of organisational flexibility
 Inadequate operational resources in
general
 Inability by officers at district, block and
camp level to visit farmers or support
farmers’ initiatives due to lack of
resources
 High number of unfilled positions at
district, block and camp levels
 Inadequate training and exposure to
modern methodologies by extension staff
 Assumption during the 1990s
liberalization that extension would be
largely privatized leaving a big gap
 Lack of coordinating mechanisms with
other ministries and organisations (MOL,
MCDSS, MCTI, ZDA, etc)
 Weak sector policy leadership
 Weak financial management systems
 Weak capacity to modernize and
discharge key functions for a Ministry of
Agriculture in a modern pluralistic
paradigm for service provision
 Weak partnerships with DPs mostly due
to lack of agreement on budget allocation
 Weak capacity to enforce existing
legislation
 New ministry in existence for only two
years. Still developing systems and
strengthening sub-national structures
 Yet to demonstrate strong sector policy
leadership
OPPORTUNITIES
 Increasing appreciation of the importance of
livestock including small livestock and
fisheries in rural livelihoods
 New chance to think through legislation,
Strengths
57
Organization
Organization
Strengths
adopted participatory
approach. Strongly
backed for DoF by the
amended Fisheries Act of
2007
Ministry of
Community
Development
and Social
Services
(MCDSS)
 Existence of an elaborate
institutional framework
for social protection (SP)
in general and the Public
Welfare Assistance
Scheme (PWAS) in
particular rising from
community to national
level
 The PWAS has a well
elaborated reporting
system targeted at
 Huge capacity deficit due to historical
neglect in public funding to livestock and
fisheries to prevent and control diseases
of nat’l economic importance leading to a
broad decline in livestock service delivery
over the years
 High number of unfilled positions at
district and sub-district levels with the
DoF especially only having token
presence in most fisheries, except during
the annual closed season (1st December
to 28th February) when it makes a
concerted effort to enforce the ban on
fishing activities.
 Weak capacity to enforce existing
legislation by both livestock and fisheries
departments
 Inadequate clarity regarding authority to
allocate land between the state
(president), traditional leadership and
local authorities
 Centralized issuance of certificate of title
makes it very costly for potential title
holders ;
 Lack of coordination of land use functions
spread among different institutions;
 Lack of systematic planning in the land
delivery process; and,
 Lack of a systematic mechanism to deal
with abuse of office by the agent of the
Commissioner of Lands.
 MCDSS occupies weak space in the wider
GRZ institutional framework to be an
effective champion of SP agenda and
policy due to:
 SP roles spread across a range of
ministries besides the MCDSS (e.g.
Labour, Agriculture, Health and
Education), grant funded organisations
like NAC and NGOs.
 Weak liaison between the SP-SAGs, the
MFNP and sector ministries
 MCDSS has challenges to secure wider
Remarks
policies and strategies in the new ministry
THREATS
 Livestock farmers low willingness to pay
hindering development of a private sector
driven veterinary services
 Important legislation like the Water, Wildlife
and Land Acts paying scanty attention to
fisheries
 Some chiefs owning personal lagoons not
subject to seasonal closure interfering with
management of legislation
THREATS
 Inadequate sensitisation on conversion of
customary tenure to lease hold tenure;
 Differences in the nature and form of
customary land tenure across the country.
 Lack of guidelines on the role and functions
of traditional authorities and local
authorities in land dministration;
 Unclear assignment of land rights and
responsibilities;
 Lack of popular participation by the local
people in land alienation decision;

OPPORTUNITIES
 Existence of coordination forums at
provincial, district and sub-district levels
provides many opportunities for the MCDSS
to sell and allow other agencies to buy into
its agenda
 Donor keenness and willingness to support
social protection

THREATS
 Little public pressure on government to
provide social protection to the poor
 Recent improvements in
data capturing and
management in land
allocation and ownership
58
Ministry of
Lands
Weaknesses
Organization
Strengths
Weaknesses





59
Research
Institutions Zambia
Agriculture
Research
Institute
(ZARI),
Golden Valley
Agricultural
Research
Trust (GART),
University of
Zambia
(UNZA)
Local
Government
Structures
 ZARI’s research agenda
setting participatory in a
bottom-up fashion
 ZARI stations located
strategically in the three
agro-ecological zones
 GART’s diverse nature of
funding sources allows it
to undertake research of
interest to both small
scale and commercial
farmers
 UNZA research playing
special role as main
objective is to contribute
to qualifications of UNZA
staff and add to their
publications lists
 Current staffing of ZARI
at 73% of the
establishment in 2009 as
well the qualification and
quality of researchers
(MSc and PhD holders)
judged as satisfactory
 Deconcentration of MACO
to provinces, districts
and camps better





political buy-in in the SP agenda
Limited capacity for policy analysis and
training and professional development
undermining needed confidence to
assume strong leadership role
Weak ownership and commitment within
the MCDSS to some aspects of SP such as
cash transfers which are more
championed by donors
The functionality of PWAS undermined by
the low and erratic funding
Weak sustainability of the PWAS system
due to dependency on volunteers
MCDSS state of physical assets and
infrastructure in districts including office
accommodation very poor
Of late and due to funding challenges,
ZARI participatory approach to research
agenda setting not working as well as it
once did with frequency of meetings and
the participation of a wide range of
partners declining.
Low budget execution rates for ZARI,
especially for regional stations as well as
the erratic and unpredictable monthly
releases affecting negatively the
continuity of the work.
All donor contributions to GART (more
than 50% of research funding) earmarked
grants for specific activities which
restricts its research agenda setting
based on perceived needs
Links between UNZA research, ZARI and
extension service virtually non-existent
Socio-economic researchers underrepresented in the research system,
undermining understanding on low
productivity despite existence of
necessary technologies
 Very limited management capacities.
 Few resources reaching sub-national
levels. Staff demotivated
Remarks
 Not seen by more “powerful” ministries as a
particularly convincing policy champion in
the field of poverty reduction
OPPORTUNITY
 Increasing regional cooperation in
agriculture research
 Reemerging international interest in
supporting agriculture research

THREATS
 Most senior researchers at ZARI nearing
retirement age.
OPPORTUNITIES
 Existence of a Decentralisation Policy
 Inclusion of decentralisation in the draft
 Development of local
Government structures
is ongoing but
financial allocations,
resource provision and
beneficiary targeting and
receipts. Data
aggregation and
provincial performance
reports are produced at
provincial level before
submission to the HQ
Organization
Weaknesses
advanced under MACO
compared to other
ministries. MACO at all
these levels
 Some political
accountability for local
services.
 Inadequate staffing levels
 Too much staff hours spent on FISP
management at critical time in farming
season
constitution
 District and sub-district structures (DDCC,
ADC, ZDC, VDC) allowing interorganisational cooperation
 MACO well recognised at district and subdistrict levels
Traditional
Authority
 Very good understanding
of and strong influence
on communal life.
 Limited technical capacity.
 Inexperience in market-based
development.
Apex Farmer
Organisations
(AFOs) –
Zambia
National
Farmers
Union,
Peasant
Farmers
Association of
Zambia,
Women in
Agriculture
 Membership driven and
thus credible with
farmers
 Committed leadership
 Written constitutions to
guide operations
 Available support
(technical and financial)
from donors
 For ZNFU, a functional
secretariat with capable
management and
technical staff
 Extensive networking and
linkages among farmer
organizations
 Represented on key
dialogue platforms. Have
opportunity to influence
policy/ operating
environment
 Credibility with
governments and other
stakeholders.
Cooperatives
and other
farmer groups
 Voluntary grassroots
organization
 High level farmer interest
THREATS
 Inadequate political will to carryout
decentralisation in eight years since Policy
adopted
Remarks
incomplete.
OPPORTUNITIES
 Partner in participatory development.
 Not necessarily
representative of
participating
smallholders
 Limited financial resources and funding
sources although things better for ZNFU
 Donor dependency especially ZNFU
 Poor and limited communication systems
 Apart from ZNFU, other AFOs have
inadequate office accommodation
 Non-ZNFU AFOs lack own assets
 Inadequate human capacity at leadership
and secretariat levels in non-ZNFU AFOs
 Inadequate skills in leadership, advocacy
and lobbying
 Non-ZNFU AFOs lacking adequate
accounting systems
 Inadequate promotional activities,
marketing
OPPORTUNITIES
 A vast untapped membership
 Increasing donor support to social economic
development
 Political stability and improving policy
environment

 Weak management and poorly organized
 Dominance of only a few individuals
 Cooperatives that only become active
OPPORTUNITIES
 Good entry point for farmer mobilization
and service provision
THREATS
 Government policy inconsistency
 Majority of potential members engaged in
low profit agriculture activities
 Poor rural infrastructure hampering effective
communication with members as well
members access to markets leading to low
earnings
 The devastating impacts of HIV&AIDS
 Non payment of registration and annual
subscription
 Inadequate support from donors (for nonZNFU AFOs) and government

60
Strengths
Organization
61
Bank and
Micro-Finance
Institutions
Weaknesses
 Good interface with other
structures at community
level
 Strong and vibrant in
areas where projects
worked with farmer
groups/ cooperatives
during fertilizer distribution
 Cooperatives not fully compliant with the
Cooperatives Act
 Few financial resources
THREATS
 Political interests able to hijack agenda of
farmer organisations
 Driven by profit motive.
 Efficiency.
 Growing interest in
providing services to
smallholders.
 Flexibility in matching
supply and demand.
 Outgrower funding for
some crops – cotton,
tobacco, flowers.
 Rising domestic savings
as a share of GDP from
about 6% in the 1990s to
around 16.5% in the
2000s – surpassed SSA
corresponding average in
2006
 Number of commercial
bank branches has grown
rapidly in the period
2006-2009; reaching 264
across 17 banks as of
September 2009
 Number of ATMs
increased from 54 to 295
over the period 20042008
 Innovative money
transfer schemes
emerging such as mobile
transfer systems
 Small stock market intermediaries
colluding.
 Limited access to credit.
 Limited outreach of support services.
OPPORTUNITIES
 Extension and marketing services.
BANKING SECTOR
 Low financial intermediation due to small
size and coverage of banking sector;
 Dependency of bank earnings on lending
to blue chip corporate companies, foreign
exchange trading and trading in
Government securities;
 Labour market rigidities – restrictive
labour legislation, immigration procedures
and limited training programmes for
banking professionals
 Complex liquidation process for banks in
liquidation;
 Poor credit culture;
 Weak legal infrastructure;
 The high cost of banking services;
 High cost of credit despite declining
inflation rates due to high operational
costs and risk
OPPORTUNITIES
 Improving policy and regulatory
environment
 An increasingly stable macroeconomic
environment
 Small farmers willingness to participate in
savings and credit schemes
MICRO-FINANCE INSTITUTIONS
 Micro, small and medium enterprise
finance continues to lag behind peer
countries, in part driven by the
predominantly informal status of micro
and small enterprises
THREATS
 Policy inconsistencies
 Unsupportive regulatory environment
THREATS
 Poor credit culture due to lack of a credit
reference bureau,
 Inadequate legal infrastructure,
 significant share of business owners is
unaware of micro-credit opportunities
 Low demand for financial services due to
high poverty levels
Remarks
 Poorly developed
wholesale supply chain
and transport
infrastructure.
Private sector
Strengths
Organization
Strengths
International
NGOs
 Have secure sources of
funding.
 Ability to employ capable
motivated staff.
 Limited knowledge of local environment.
 Limited local capacity building.
 Local ownership of development
interventions sometimes weak.
OPPORTUNITIES
 Able to build own capacity through work
with international NGOs.
 Possible partners for community capacity
building interventions.
THREATS
 Steady increase in number and quality of
Local NGOs focused on rural and agricultural
development.
OPPORTUNITIES
 Economic group mobilisation and training.
 Rural finance initiatives.
Remarks
 Mixed experience of
contribution of I-NGOs
to IFAD-funded
projects in Zambia.
 Confusion between
roles of service
provider and donor.
 Good understanding of
local environment
 Dearth of skilled human resource
occasioned by:
 Different accounting and auditing
standards,
 Lack of financial safety nets,
 Inefficient payments system
 Inadequate rural branch network
 Limited liquidity due to the crowding-out
effects of Government’s borrowing from
the banking system and tight monetary
policy (i.e. high statutory reserves)
 Cumbersome procedures and
requirements for opening a savings
account
 Commercial banks consider lending to
smallholder farmers to be very risky
 Lack of understanding of business and
markets.
 Operating on very small scale.
62
Local NGOs
Weaknesses
Lessons learned
1.
A general lesson from all interventions supported by Zambia’s development
partners is that GRZ agencies working in agriculture and rural development face
challenges taking on new functions or assuming new ways of delivering services. This
points to the need for simplicity in project design; for the establishment of coordination
units that can support the line functions; for implementation support to assist project
coordinators manage for development results; and for building national ownership over
the projects. The establishment of informal stakeholder reference groups to guide
project design and implementation processes – something that has been done during
recent design processes – has proved a useful mechanism for doing so. In addition,
financial management and accountability is not consistently strong within GRZ, and this
mean that it is not appropriate to fully rely on national systems for disbursement and
management of loan funds; there is instead need for separate accounts, careful cashflow
management and active support to financial management systems, as well as specific
safeguard measures to avoid the possibility of funds being used for non-project
purposes.
2.
Projects have typically been managed by national coordinators recruited
specifically for the posts, and some have involved recruitment of service providers to
conduct key project activities. Experience has shown both that the recruitment process
itself can be slow – and in this support to GRZ may be necessary; and that contracted
staff and service providers have not always performed to the standards required. Here, it
is critical that contracts allow for regular review of performance and opportunities for
renewal or termination, according to that performance. There has also been insufficient
collaboration and learning between projects; insufficiently strong governance
arrangements; and, till recently, inadequate follow-up and support from IFAD. A related
key lesson has been that projects have benefited enormously where they have been able
to mobilise a pool of short-term business consultants to address specific constraints and
to make use of specific opportunities for rapid response to problems and opportunities.
3.
GRZ decision making is consensual, though this can be slow and it can result in
delays in project implementation. Nevertheless, it is important to respect these
processes and time spans if ownership for the projects is to be maintained. An example
is new ways of working with the private sector. GRZ in general, and MACO in particular,
is committed to giving a greater role to other stakeholders in the agricultural sector. Yet
in practice, it is still at an early stage of implementing these principles, and it needs
assistance to develop appropriate models and pilot partnerships.
4.
Historically, Zambia has had a strong welfare culture, reflected both in
government policies and donor-supported projects that offered investments and grants
without commitment from the rural population. This led to a culture of dependency and
stifled initiative, as well as wasted public resources. Government is now trying to
promote a “mindset change”, promoting farming as a business and encouraging a
savings culture. These efforts need to be actively supported, and located within a larger
vision of private sector-led agricultural development; and at the same time care needs to
be taken to avoid approaches that could undercut the efforts being made to bring about
this important change in mindset.
5.
A set of lessons highlighted in the recent PCR validation exercise for SHEMP
conducted by IOE, of particular importance for S3P, is that the support provided for
farmers’ participation in commodity value chains is appropriate and that there are
agribusiness value chains that have the potential to improve small-farmer incomes in a
relatively short period of time. The rapid development of communications technology
offers many agribusiness development opportunities which could not have been
imagined a few years ago. However, it is not appropriate to look at the post-production
links in the value chain without also looking at on-farm production, which is of course a
key link in the value chain. This was not addressed under SHEMP; and indeed, a market
for cassava was found but then lost again as farmers proved unable to expand their
63
production to supply in the quantities required. The follow-up to SHEMP – SAPP – was
developed too soon to take on board this lesson, and it too provides no direct support for
farm production. It is now clear that if farmers are to participate more effectively in
commodity value chains, then they need support to increase their productivity and
respond to the demands of the market – all within a context where farming is seen as a
business which is part of complex commercial networks. These are the issues that S3P
will respond to.
6.
The PCRs for both SHEMP and FRMP pointed to the enormous importance of rural
infrastructure – particularly access roads, to link remote rural communities to markets
for agricultural inputs and produce, and consumer goods, and to health and education
services. Although labour-based techniques for road works have had a mixed success,
they bring important benefits beyond the road itself; lessons have been learnt under
SHEMP, and they should be supported. However, prioritisation and selection of roads is a
key issue; as is road maintenance, and arrangements for the subsequent maintenance of
any road constructed or rehabilitated need to be in place prior to making investments.
7.
Finally, there have been a number of lessons learnt regarding project
sustainability: (a) implementation of interventions that have been anchored in farmer or
trader representative organizations greatly improves the prospects of sustainability; (b)
capacity building within the public sector is needed to provide “public good” services and
improve the enabling environment for private sector development; (c) utilising existing
farmer groups, rather than creating new ones, avoids duplication and improves
sustainability; (d) linkages to, and cooperation with, other agribusiness development
programmes offers scope for further development of interventions; (e) encouraging
relevant private sector companies to participate in and co-finance aspects of the
intervention plans ensured a sense of ownership and commitment; and (f) some
interventions may need to be extended in time to become fully sustainable – this calls
for periodic review and refinement of intervention plans.
64
Annex 4.
Detailed Programme Description
1.
The Smallholder Productivity Promotion Programme (S3P) has as overall goal:
Income levels, food and nutrition security sustainably improved for poor agricultural
households in target areas. The indicators at the goal level include: up to 48,000
smallholder households (80% of direct beneficiaries) achieve at least one of the following
by programme completion: (i) increase in HH asset ownership; (ii) increase in HH
savings; (iii) reduction in prevalence of child malnutrition; (iv) reduction in food
insecurity (see Logical Framework).
2.
The S3P purpose or development objective is: Production, productivity and
sales of smallholder farmers in target area sustainably increased. The associated
indicators include: (i) average crop yields of cassava, rice, mixed beans and/or
groundnuts of 30,000 smallholder HHs increased by at least 30 percent; (ii) quantities of
cassava, rice, mixed beans and/or groundnuts marketed by 40,000 smallholder HHs
increased by at least 20 percent; (iii) vulnerability of 10,000 smallholder HHs to climatic
variation affecting crop production and/or market access reduced.
3.
The main farming system in the programme area is the traditional chitimene
slash and burn system in which maintenance of soil fertility is ensured by cutting shrubs
and branches of bigger trees, concentrating these on the area to be planted and burning
them. The plot is then planted with finger millet, usually mixed with other crops
(pumpkin, cassava, sorghum for example) in the first year, followed by a mixture of
cassava, mixed beans, and groundnuts in the following three or four seasons. The plot is
then left fallow for 20 to 25 years to restore forest cover and soil fertility. Farmers with
access to suitable lowlands in areas with sufficient rainfall cultivate small plots of rice,
especially in Northern Province. The main food crops are cassava and mixed beans, while
rice, groundnuts and finger millet (for the production of local beer) are partially
consumed and represent the main cash crops.
4.
Although population density is still low, it has become too high to sustain the
chitimene system, especially in areas with better road access. Farmers are therefore
gradually adopting technologies for more permanent cultivation of their fields. This
includes preparing semi-permanent or permanent ridges where soil fertility is managed
by incorporation of green manure, more careful crop rotation with leguminous crops and
localised use of manure and fertilizer.
5.
Cassava, mixed beans and groundnuts will serve as main entry points to
improve stability, productivity and profitability of smallholder production systems in the
target areas. In addition, S3P will support diversification of farming system in response
to market opportunities, including rice. Smallholders and their organizations will be
supported to better understand and respond to market opportunities. Cassava, mixed
beans and rice are also targeted by SAPP for improvement of the overall value chain.
S3P investment in the “supply-push” side of production development is expected to
complement the “market-pull” investment under SAPP, and also complements other
initiatives supported by GRZ and development partners1. These commodities are central
in high rainfall smallholder farming systems, significant for household food and nutrition
security and income, and central for women farmers, with high potential for value chain
up-scaling. Increased smallholder production and productivity is expected to generate
substantial additional rural economic activity and contribute directly to improved
household and national food security, as well as improved livelihoods.
6.
The programme area is largely determined by the production area of the crops
targeted. Initially, intensive support from both SAPP and S3P will focus on Luapula and
Northern Provinces, which together account for some 70-80 per cent of national cassava
1
For example, the Finnish cooperation in Luapula are strongly supporting the development of cassava, beans
and rice; JICA is particularly active in promoting beans and rice both in Luapula and Northern province;
whereas SNV is the main supporter of the rice value chain development in Northern Province.
65
and mixed bean production and are also areas of significant potential for groundnut and
rice production. Some activities target the entire Province (strengthening of MACO
including research) while other activities target key production areas for the different
crops (clusters)1 with highest potential for increased marketable surpluses. S3P will also
have a broader impact from the wider adaptation of technologies developed,
infrastructure constructed, and improved policy and legal framework.
7.
The target group consists of productive smallholder/small-scale farmers2 who
derive a majority of their livelihood resources from agricultural production with a
potential for increasing significantly their share of marketed production of cassava,
mixed beans, rice and/or groundnuts. Direct beneficiaries will be organized farmers
groups and/or cooperatives, or producers willing to join such groups. Further to the
direct beneficiaries, technologies and approaches developed under S3P will induce spillover and feed scaling-up processes within the cassava based production systems of
AEZ III.
8.
S3P will adopt a phased programmatic approach, and will have a duration of
seven years. It will start in eight districts in Luapula and Northern Provinces and will
gradually expand to cover up to 24 districts in these plus a third provinces. S3P will have
two components, each divided into three sub-components: (i) Sustainable smallholder
productivity growth; and (ii) Enabling environment for productivity growth.
Component 1: Sustainable Smallholder Productivity Growth (US$ 24.2 million)
9.
The objective of this component is to improve smallholders access to knowledge,
extension3, adapted technologies and improved planting material. These improved
services will support sustainable productivity growth and diversification of smallholders
involved in cassava-based production systems in target areas. The programme will
contribute to gradually increase farmer group capacities to identify and analyse
opportunities for local agricultural and economic growth, to advocate for changes in
agricultural policies and demand quality services from the responsible authorities. The
project will strengthen the capacity of MACO to coordinate and deliver quality advisory
services in the target areas including the generation of technology adapted to local
needs. S3P will also facilitate the establishment of partnerships with other players in the
target areas (private sector, NGOs etc) to scale-up positive experiences.
10.
The expected outcomes are: (a) smallholder groups and organizations in target
areas functioning more effectively and empowered to respond to market and rural
development opportunities; (b) smallholder farmers in target areas have improved
access to more pertinent and effective extension services delivered by MACO as well as
farmer organizations and/or private sector; (c) agricultural research and seed
multiplication services more responsive to priority needs of smallholder farmers.
11.
Component one is organized in three sub-components: (i) strengthening farmer
organizations and their federations; (ii) pluralistic participatory extension services; and
(iii) agricultural research for development.
Sub-component 1.1: Strengthening farmer organizations and their federations
(US$ 2.5 million)
12.
This sub-component will strengthen membership-based farmer associations and
cooperatives in the target areas at camp and district level to improve and diversify the
offer of services to farmers. Farmer groups, associations and/or cooperatives and their
federations provide services which go beyond, but include, both technical advisory
services as well marketing services (for instance bulking). These organizations already
exist at camp, block and district level, but their effectiveness is variable depending
mainly on their cohesiveness and management capacity.
1
2
3
Clusters will comprise a number of camps/extension blocks where targeted commodities form a key
element of production systems and high potentials for value chain development.
About 75% of rural population in targeted areas in Northern, Luapula Provinces.
In this document, extension and advisory services are used as synonymous
66
13.
The target is to strengthen 12 DFAs and/or DCUs (50 per cent of the Districts in
the project area) and 750 camp level associations in terms of knowledge of their
members’ rights and duties, transparent procedures and accounting, consensual decision
making, quality of services provided and business planning. Lead farmers and technical
staff of District Farmer Association (DFAs) and/or District Cooperative Unions (DCUs) will
benefit from technical training provided in Sub-component 1.2, which focuses on
technical extension services. They will also be empowered to participate in the planning
and review meetings at PACO and DACO level. Although the focus is on strengthening
existing farmer organizations, S3P will also assist farmers who are not yet organized but
who are interested and willing to start their own association. Once a group has evolved
through a series of development stages (see Table 1 below), S3P will assist them to link
up to financial institutions that promote saving and credit activities, such as for instance
those supported through IFAD-financed Rural Finance Programme (RFP). It will also seek
to explore the issue of identifying a sustainable institutional development path for them.
14.
The implementation will be outsourced to service providers1 working in this field
in Zambia. The contract will foresee the following activities:
(a)
A detailed assessment of the existing farmer organizations as well as their
federations in the target areas, their level of development and capacity and
the quality of the services they offer to their members; as well as the main
capacity development requirements.
(b)
Provision of training on priority issues identified in (a). These could include
group formation and group dynamics, leadership skills, governance,
entrepreneurship skills and business planning (farming as a business),
financial management, accounting and legal aspects.
(c)
Follow-up and on-the-job mentoring of district level federative structures in
terms of developing capacities for coordination and service provision.
15.
The objective is to improve the access, quality and sustainability of advisory
services available to smallholders in target areas. Evolution towards pluralistic
smallholder knowledge support and advisory services involves: (i) increased efficiency
and result-oriented services provided by MACO through harmonised participatory
extension approach; (ii) increased ownership and involvement of local farmer
organizations in support service provision to their members (see sub-component 1.1);
and (iii) increased provision of services from private enterprises involved in processing
and marketing of different commodities.
16.
S3P will, therefore, support different sources of advisory services to farmers:
MACO, farmer organizations, private or commercial enterprises and NGOs. Subcomponent 1.1 deals with strengthening of farmer organizations. Sub-component 1.2 will
strengthen MACO field capacities and establish partnerships with private enterprises and
NGOs, to promote an extension process in which: (i) farmers are empowered to demand
quality support services (linkage with sub-component 1.1); (ii) service providers work
with organized market-oriented farmer groups; (iii) collaboration between MACO and
non-government service providers is encouraged; (iv) modern information and telecommunications (ITC) technologies for information access and feedback are increasingly
used; and (v) cross-cutting issues, such as gender and HIV/AIDS are mainstreamed.
Sub-component 1.2 includes three sets of activities: (a) strengthening of MACO
capacities; (b) harmonization of participatory extension services; and (c) partnerships
with other providers of extension.
1
There are various international and national organizations working in capacity building of farmer
organizations including ActionAid, Zambian National Farmers Union (ZNFU), Zambia Agribusiness Technical
Assistance Centre (ZATAC), Community Markets for Conservation (COMACO), CLUSA, MS-Zambia, etc.
67
Table 1: Group development stages, characteristics and examples of training
modules (Source: adapted from SHEMP - Africare 2002-2007 Closeout Report)
Development
Stage
Stage 1:
Inception
Characteristics
Training modules
Indicators
-Farmers come together
for a purpose
-Un developed
organizational structure
-Loosely structured
activities
-Direction is lacking
-Functions and roles are
unclear
Awareness
-Contact meetings
-Benefits of enterprise groups
-Examples of success stories and
exchange visits
-Consolidation/formation of
smallholder enterprise group
Leadership Training
-Roles of members in a group: rights
and duties of members
-Leadership styles
-Qualities of a good leader
-Consolidation of group structure
Name of group and
membership
Stage 2:
Emergent
-Basic organizational
structure in place
-Purpose and
organizational objective
clarified
-Activities more clearly
defined
Group registration & functioning
-By-laws/constitution formulation
-Need for registration and membership
fee
-Importance of accountability &
transparency
Leadership Training
-Training of Executives
-Animator training
-Consultative decision making
-Development of smallholder
enterprise group
Entrepreneurship Training
-Developing business ideas
-Group executives
elected
-By-law/Constitution
-Group registered
-Regular group
meetings
-Bank Account opened
-Membership fees
Stage 3:
Maturing
-A group consolidates
into an Apex
organization
-Plan of activities on a
wider coverage
-Employs some
permanent staff to run
depot
-Focus on the benefits of
the members
-Vivid linkages with
business intermediaries
Leadership Training
-Planning, organizing and monitoring
-Financial management
-Property and material management
-Group dynamics
Entrepreneurship Training
-Developing business ideas
-Choosing an enterprise
-Budgeting
-Cash flow plan
-Record keeping
-Sourcing and handling capital
Enterprise Training
-Group belongs to an
Association
-Group linked to
savings & credit
-Group buying inputs
or selling produce
together
-Group has
documented Business
Plans
Stage 4: Mature
-Apex organization able
to run own affairs
Communication Training
-Action planning and resource
mobilization
-Writing a project proposal
Marketing Training
-Linkages with service
organizations
Stage 5: Selfsustaining
Group successfully runs
profitable enterprises
with minimal need for
external assistance
Recapitulation of modules on the basis
of gaps identified
-Volume of business
and Turnover
-Use of own resources
-Level of profits
realized and
management
Source: Africare Smallholder Enterprise and Marketing Program (SHEMP):2002-2007 Closeout Report
68
Sub-component 1.2: Pluralistic participatory extension services (US$ 11.9
million)
17.
Strengthening MACO field capacities at Provincial (PACO) and District (DACO)
levels, to improve performance and efficiency in order to be able to deliver good quality
services to farmers1, including:
(i)
Provide provincial facilitators based in the PACO’s office to assist the PACO
and his/her team and the districts and build their capacities to: (a) coordinate
different activities and projects present in the province and its districts, favouring
synergies and complementarities; (b) assist in information and knowledge
management; (c) prepare their annual work-plans; (d) assist in processing of the
investment requests under sub-component 2.1; (d) monitor results and resolve
problems.
(ii)
Quarterly Provincial level planning and review meetings with participation
of DACOs and technical staff of the district offices as well as other partners to
improve synergies. These quarterly meetings will last one or two days and will
provide the opportunity for the DACOs to report to PACO on the progress in the
implementation of their work-plan and share useful information with other
DACOs. They will also host the AR4D stakeholder platform including research,
extension, farmer organizations and other stakeholders involved in the
agriculture/agribusiness sector and facilitate the coordination of implementation
of AR4D activities.
(iii)
Quarterly District level planning, information sharing and review meetings
for CEOs, BESs and SAOs as well as partners, similar to the meetings at PACO
level but with a more operational focus. These meetings will last one or two days
and will facilitate planning and priority setting of agricultural support activities, as
well as analysis and review of achievements, AR4D activities, and provision of
specific training.
(iv)
Capacity building in procurement and financial management at provincial
and district level: training and technical support. This is also linked to the
implementation of sub-component 2.1 (District Agricultural Investment Fund).
(v)
Information and knowledge sharing to contribute to strengthening the
culture of knowledge sharing and innovation within MACO field structures. This is
one of the important functions of the quarterly meetings. In addition, S3P will
provide resources for exchange-visits and participation to knowledge events,
regular production and distribution of communication/information material as
needed.
(vi)
Providing mobility and housing to CEOs where needed and appropriate. A
total of 85 CEO houses will be constructed and/or rehabilitated in three Provinces
in seven years, 30 motorcycles provided and 150 solar panels installed.
18.
Harmonization and up-scaling of participatory extension approaches
(PEA). MACO has mainstreamed PEA in its extension system but the capacity to
implement PEA varies considerably between districts. In addition, different donor
supported initiatives have introduced different versions of PEA with different names and
slight methodological variations. All of these are inspired by the Farmer Field School
(FFS) approach which provides the opportunity for on-farm learning, testing and
development of technical options which effectively respond to farmers’ needs. Most
methodologies have successfully introduced basic business planning skills, important for
farmers to make the most profitable choice for them. S3P will support:
1
There is an on-going project financed by a group of donors including the European Union called
Performance Enhancement Project (PEP) which will work on this capacity development at national level.
This activity will be implemented in coordination with PEP’s activities (see Annex 6).
69
(i)
Participatory assessment of current PEA methodologies in the target areas,
determining their strengths and weaknesses, involving farmers and extension
staff.
(ii)
Preparation of a harmonized curriculum for Masters training and training of
trainers (ToT) in PEA/FFS-type approach, including a module on financial analysis
and business planning.
(iii)
Training of provincial Master Trainers, targeting DAOs, SAOs, staff from
partner organizations (and possibly some BESs or CEOs), to form about 10-15
Master Trainers in each targeted province.
(iv)
ToT at District level. Master trainers will organize ToT at District level
targeting CEOs and lead farmers as well as field staff from DFAs/DCUs and other
partner organizations. In some cases, the ToTs will provide training to CEOs and
lead farmers from more than one District. A total of 3 District level ToTs are
planned for Luapula Province, 6 for Northern province and 5 for the third
province. About 280 staff/lead farmers will benefit from these trainings.
(v)
FFS at camp level. CEOs and lead farmers trained as facilitators are
expected to facilitate at least one and no more than three FFS-type groups each
cropping season; A total of 1500 FFS would be supported in 7 years in three
provinces for a total estimate of 30,000 participating farmers. Focus would be on
the sustainability of the activities of the group and on business training for the
more market oriented groups. The ToTs will benefit not only MACO staff, but also
lead farmers working with farmers organizations, the private sector and NGOs. In
this way the project would contribute to building the capacities of different
sources of advisory services in the project area.
(vi)
Regular training sessions for MACO field staff at all levels, and CEOs in
particular. Training priorities will be identified during the quarterly planning and
review meetings at PACO and DACO levels and possibly implemented at the same
occasions to limit the costs. Priority will be given to mobilizing local human
resources, such as ZARI researchers, technical assistance personnel, farmer
organizations, commercial enterprises and NGOs.
19.
Partnerships with organizations providing advisory services. There are
interesting success stories of organizations and/or enterprises 1 involved in organizing
producers for bulking of production to be marketed, medium-scale processing and
marketing of mainly cassava, mixed beans, groundnuts and rice. In addition to providing
a regular, ensured and growing market for these products, they provide advisory
services to producers to ensure regular supply of the product at the requested quality.
These organizations have gained considerable experience in the project area, work with
the same farmers which will be targeted by S3P and constitute an important asset which
could be further strengthened to serve a larger number of farmers. The methodologies
used to work with farmers are in line with the participatory methodologies advocated by
S3P. The services provided, at present, are partially financed by the profit margin of the
processing and marketing business and, in future, could be totally financed by the latter.
20.
At the same time, MACO has established a committee specifically to identify
opportunities for promoting non-government provision of extension services. The S3P
can support this initiative, by helping the committee both to identify opportunities where
pluralistic service provision in the agricultural sector can add value and to define the key
roles for MACO in promoting, managing and monitoring service providers, as well as by
financing pilot projects. These would provide services that complement those already
1
Two particularly interesting initiatives are (i) the COMACO enterprise supported by the Wildlife Conservation
Society serving 45,000 farmers, providing business training, investing in local bulking, transport and
processing units for rice, beans, groundnuts and soybeans and creating market outlets both at national and
international level; and (ii) SNV specialising on rice value chain and providing assistance throughout the
chain including support to the newly founded Zambia Rice federation.
70
provided by MACO and provide an opportunity to increase the market outlet possibilities
for smallholders, thus creating a virtuous circle of increased demand pulling increased
productivity and production which, in turn, opens up new market potentials. Since these
organizations are working both on support to production (extension, technology
adaptation and facilitating access to inputs), processing and access to markets, close
coordination with SAPP will be necessary. Support could be envisaged through PublicPrivate Partnerships (PPPs) where the private or non-government partner shares similar
objectives, but needs some support or resources to up-scale activities in the target
areas. In other cases, PPPs might not be possible or would be less desirable, and more
straightforward contracting of service providers would be more appropriate. It will be
important to be both flexible and very clear as to why a particular option is preferred.
The expected outcome is an up-scaling of a certain ongoing successful undertakings in
the target areas, increasing their outreach by an additional 15,000 smallholders.
Sub-component 1.3: Agricultural Research for Development (US$ 9.7 million)
21.
The specific objective of this sub-component is to broaden the technology options
for increased productivity of smallholder farmers. The programme will complement ongoing GRZ and other partners support to strengthen strategic on-station and on-farm
research capacities to adapt potential productivity enhancing technologies to local
farming systems. Identification of new varieties of the different crops and availability of
certified seed for existing improved varieties is essential to improve productivity. A
gradual shift from traditional chitemene land use system to more intensive semipermanent production systems also requires the adoption of integrated soil fertility and
crop management techniques aiming at increasing soil organic matter content and pH
levels. Conservation farming and agro-forestry appear to be promising options. Given
the labour shortage at farm level, significant increases in productivity will only be
possible through the introduction of adapted tools and equipment.
22.
Implementation of adaptive research activities will involve strategic agricultural
research for development (AR4D) in support to on-going ZARI research programmes,
integrating technical support from regional/international research institutions and
programmes; as well as competitive AR4D driven by partnerships for innovation
development and adaptation and involving ZARI, GART, UNZA, NGOs, private sector.
Both approaches will involve on-station and on-farm activities and feed into
strengthened research-extension collaboration at local level, including stakeholder
planning and evaluation. In addition, S3P will support the strengthening of institutional
AR4D collaboration and partnerships for enhanced research-extension-training linkages,
by: (a) farmer empowerment, priority need identification, involvement in AR4D
implementation and evaluation cycles; (b) instituting district AR4D platforms (research,
extension services, FO, private) and research-extension linkage officers; (c) broadening
partnerships for AR4D involving public and private agricultural
research
institutions/organizations operating at national (NARS), regional and international levels;
and (d) building an integrated research-extension information management platform.
23.
There is a strong linkage between sub-component 1.2 and sub-component 1.3, in
that the harmonised extension methodology supported by S3P will include the
identification of research priorities as well as adaptive trials at farmer level through the
FFS. In addition, the quarterly provincial and district level meetings will include the
research staff and could therefore include the institutionalization of AR4D thematic
district platforms (research, extension, FO and private sector) without additional cost.
24.
Activities will include: (a) adaptive research for improved varieties and cropping
practices; (b) adaptation of Conservation Agriculture (CA) and agro-forestry practices;
(c) Identification of tools/equipment and post-harvest technologies adapted to local
situation; (d) support to decentralised seed and planting material production.
25.
Adaptive research for improved varieties includes support for: (i) on-going
on-station breeding and selection programmes for cassava (ZARI’s Mansa station in
Luapula Province), mixed beans (Misamfu station in Northern Province) and possibly rice
71
and groundnuts; (ii) participatory researcher and farmer-led on-farm trials for most
advanced lines (Advanced and Uniform Yield Trials); and (iii) specialised technical
assistance and support from international institutions (IITA– cassava, CIRAD– Agroecology, CIAT– beans for example) S3P will finance some up-grading of research
infrastructure of research stations and some equipment. On the basis of local
productivity and acceptability criteria, key outputs will significantly widen farmers’
options for improved productivity.
26.
Adaptation of Conservation Agriculture, agro-forestry practices and other
improved cropping practices. In the medium term, a gradual shift from traditional
land use (chitemene slash and burn) towards more intensive production systems
requires a drastic change of soil management towards increased soil organic matter
content and pH, to promote more sustainable semi-permanent production systems,
resilient to climatic variability (flooding, drought). Within this perspective, CA and agroforestry appear among the most promising options, but need to be adapted to high
rainfall cassava-based farming systems predominant in the target areas. Integrated Pest
Management (IPM) is another area with great potential benefits in terms of productivity
enhancement and improved quality and value of production. These options will not only
allow intensifying local farming systems, increasing their productivity, reducing farmers
risk and labouring input, but also allow for carbon sequestration in soils by raising
significantly their organic matter level. Such a shift would adapt local farming systems to
changing environment and contribute to climate mitigation.
27.
Key outputs of on-farm research/testing programmes will generate a range of
technology options adapted to local bio-physical and farming system conditions,
targeting: (a) sustainable soil, water and crop management systems aiming at reduced
soil tillage; (b) permanent soil coverage and enhanced soil organic matter management,
by crop rotations and associations, improved fallows and agro-forestry; (c) adapted soil
acidity management/liming and integrated soil nutrient management; and (d) reduced
labour input (gender, child labour, HIV), especially for land preparation and weed
management. Farmers’ access to specialised tools, equipment’s, planting material (cover
and fallow crops) and inputs (lime, base fertilizer) are considered as critical enhancing
factors. Research will be undertaken by ZARI in a partnership with GART 1 and FOs and
will complement existing efforts being undertaken with CFU, GART and FAO support.
28.
Research on adapted tools/equipment, including for transport, and on-farm
post-harvest technologies. S3P will support research on improved labour productivity
(including transport) for enhanced competitiveness of commodities produced in the
target areas. Labour availability is an important factor limiting agricultural growth given
the low population densities and the impact of HIV/AIDS. Solutions to this issue are,
therefore, fundamental to significantly improve production and marketing.
29.
Labour saving equipment and adapted post-harvest-processing technologies need
to be developed for cassava and other crops, in close collaboration with various partners
which have been working on these issues. Research should determine the priorities in
terms of labour saving technology for S3P target groups, including tools and equipment
for both cropping and domestic tasks. The latter has particular implications for women
and children in terms of availability of labour for agriculture. Research should cover the
technological as well as the socio-economic issues related to specific devices. End-users
(both male and female) should be involved in the setting of the priorities and the handon testing of alternative technologies. Research will be implemented by the post-harvest
unit in ZARI in collaboration with IITA in the case of cassava technology, private
industries and other partners as required.
30.
Access to improved Seeds and Planting Material. Cassava, mixed beans,
groundnuts and rice are not considered as commercial interest crops by the private seed
1
GART: Golden Valley Agricultural Research Trust, an autonomous and self-sustaining Public Private
Partnership organization created by GRZ and the Zambia National Farmers Union.
72
sector. Therefore, farmer-based high quality seed/planting material multiplication will be
promoted and strengthened as follows:
(i)
Maintenance of breeder seed stock by specialised commodity research
programmes in ZARI stations of Mansa (4-5 cassava varieties) and Kasama (4-5
mixed beans varieties).
(ii)
Production of foundation seed in both stations: cassava (about 3 ha for
each variety) and mixed beans (about 2 ha for each variety over two seasons.
(iii)
First multiplication at district level whereby each district will organize 2-3
ha of cassava and 1 ha of mixed beans multiplication in each targeted block.
(iv)
Second multiplication at camp level whereby each camp will organize
farmer groups and/or specialized seed producer groups/individuals for an
equivalent of 5 ha of cassava and 2 ha of mixed beans. As far as possible,
existing FFS-type groups will be used (linkage with sub-component 1.2).
(v)
Adapted certification (Quality Declared Seeds) support to be provided by
the Seed Control & Certification Institute (SCCI).
31.
In addition to the support for cassava and mixed beans, the project will
complement the work undertaken by ZARI in Kasama with the support from JICA and
SNV related to the purification of local varieties of rice used in the project area.
Component 2: Enabling Environment for Productivity Growth (US$ 17.7 million)
32.
This component will address critical constraints in the enabling environment for
smallholder productivity growth, including: (i) improved rural infrastructure and
improved access to productivity enhancing equipment and assets; (ii) the policy and
institutional framework to provide the necessary support services; and (iii) programme
coordination, management and monitoring and evaluation.
Sub-component 2.1: Local Agricultural Investments (US$ 13.1 million)1
33.
This sub-component will help finance investments that improve access to
markets, increase labour productivity, reduce post-harvest losses, improve land and
water management, or facilitate access to knowledge. Conditional partial grants will be
provided for eligible agricultural investments and technical and facilitation assistance will
be provided to prepare investment requests and help ensure correct implementation,
operation and maintenance. Access to resources will be according to defined criteria that
outline beneficiary eligibility and eligible type of investments. Three windows will be
established, each with specific procedures and internal control mechanisms.
34.
The final decision to finance a particular sub-project will depend on the costs of
the sub-project and the authorized approval limits at different levels. The approval limit
for the DACO is currently ZK10 million or approximately US$2,200. Where the approval
ceiling goes beyond that of DACO, the DDCC reviewed and recommended sub-project
proposal will be referred to the PACO, whose approval ceiling is ZK20 million or
approximately US$4,400. Where it goes beyond the approval ceiling of the PACO, it will
be referred through the PMU to the S3P Steering Committee for approval. In all cases,
funds will be released on a case-by-case basis for payment of specific sub-projects or
tranches of sub-projects. Funds will be transferred from central level to dedicated
accounts at the provincial level, for specific payments. Capacity building and training for
provincial and district level staff in procurement and financial management are included
in sub-component 1.2.
35.
District-level agricultural investments of a strategic nature, such as: (i)
improvement of feeder roads (agricultural roads) connecting productive smallholder
1
For detailed operating procedures for the Local Agricultural Investment sub-component, see Annex 11,
Attachment 2
73
areas to main roads1; and (ii) rehabilitation of district Farmer Training Centres or Farm
Institutes; all investments being conditional on there being a sound business plan for
sustainable operation and management. Potential sub-projects will be identified at the
district level and should be of a strategic nature, for example constructing or
rehabilitating a feeder road to a key productive camp or area already selected for
intensive extension support under Component 1. Investments that would normally be
undertaken by the private sector are not eligible for support. Requests for support will be
identified by communities and prepared by the DACO, for review and approval by the
(economic sub-committee of) the District Development Coordination Committee (DDCC).
The proposal will then be included in the District Development Plan. It will then be
submitted for final approval to the DACO (if less than his/her limit of approval authority,
currently ZK10 million / US$2,200); to the PACO, (if less than his/her authority limit,
currently ZK20 million / US$ 4,400), or, through the Programme Management Unit
(PMU), to the Programme Steering Committee (PSC).
36.
Average sub-project co-financing costs are expected to be equivalent to around
US$100,000, which is the approximate cost of 10 km of feeder road. The total available
S3P co-financing amount is set at US$4 million, which means that a total of around 40
sub-projects could be financed from the provisional allocation; though this amount could
be increased or decreased depending on actual achievements and availability of funds.
37.
S3P contribution to such investments will be up to 90 percent of total costs, with
a co-financing ceiling equivalent to US$ 250,000 per sub-project. The district
contribution, at least 10 percent of total costs, will include costs of identification, design,
preparation of bills of quantities, social and environmental impact assessment,
preparation of business and/or management and operation plans, construction
supervision and the like, including non-MACO district staff as appropriate (district
director of works for instance). S3P will provide engineering and supervision support,
both at preparation and implementation stage, mainly to make sure the proposals meet
the required quality standards and that construction is correct.
38.
Community-level agricultural investments of a public nature, including for
instance: (i) spot improvement of agricultural roads, such as culverts, fords or small
bridges; (ii) small-scale storage sheds and drying floors; and (iii) small-scale water
management or soil erosion control structures.
39.
Potential sub-projects will be identified in those camps and key production areas
with high potential for increased marketable surpluses selected under Component one
for intensive support. This will be done through a pro-active process facilitated by a
contracted service provider, who will ensure that: (i) CACs are trained to handle the
planning, submission, supervision and M&E of local sub-projects, and to coordinate these
with Area Development Committees as appropriate; (ii) proposed sub-projects are
technically, socially, economically and environmentally feasible and meet eligibility
criteria2; (iii) requesting groups are genuine (i.e. not just formed to receive inputs) and
meet eligibility requirements in terms of management capacity; (iv) community/group
contributions are spelled out clearly and the beneficiaries are aware and ready to provide
their share; (v) sound business and/or operation and maintenance plans are included in
the proposals; (vi) requesting groups are –where necessary– provided with essential
training to allow them to operate and manage the requested investments; (vii) relevant
district and sub-district staff are kept informed and correct procedures are followed; and
(viii) final agreements are concluded in the form of a contract between the DACO and
1
2
Although labour-based techniques for road works have had a mixed success, they bring benefits beyond the
road itself; important lessons have been learnt under SHEMP. However, prioritisation and selection of roads
is a key issue; as is road maintenance, and arrangements need to be in place prior to making investments
in road construction or rehabilitation. Here, useful lessons have been learnt under the World Bank-financed
Agricultural Development Support Project with output and performance based road contracting (OPRC).
Ineligible expenditures for co-financing would include land, family labour, working capital, recurrent
expenses, normal business costs, tobacco and alcohol and related products/services, technologies that
infringe on existing laws and regulations on patents and copyrights, etc.
74
the local community and/or farmer group. Community-level investment proposals
prepared by eligible groups and/or communities that have been assisted by other
programmes, projects or initiatives (for example PLARD) will also be considered for cofinancing support.
40.
Proposals will be submitted by farmer group, cooperative or community for the
review of the CACs, after which the CEOs submits the request for review by the DACO,
and final approval by the PACO where the total investment is within his/her approval
ceiling (currently ZK20 million / US$ 4,400), and – through the PMU - by the PSC where
it is beyond this amount. S3P will provide facilitation services for participatory
identification, planning, feasibility screening and construction. Requesting groups or
communities will need to meet eligibility criteria, while the proposals will need to include
realistic operation and management plans. S3P contribution will be up to 75 percent of
construction costs, with a co-financing ceiling of US$ 25,000 per sub-project. Community
and/or group contributions would be largely or entirely in kind, including labour and local
material.
41.
The total available S3P co-financing amount is set at US$3.5 million (though this
could be increased or decreased depending on actual achievements and availability of
funds). Assuming average sub-project co-financing costs to be equivalent to around
US$10,000 per sub-project, this means that a total of 350 sub-projects (15 per district)
could be financed from the provisional allocation.
42.
The preparation and implementation process will also require relevant district
staff to visit concerned camps, communities, groups and sites on several occasions, and
a sum equivalent to 5 percent of total construction costs (US$0.23 million) will be made
available for this purpose. Cost of facilitation and training (etc) by the service provider is
estimated at 20 percent of total construction costs, or approximately US$0.93 million.
S3P management will also provide separate engineering and supervision support to
make sure the proposals meet the required quality standards and that construction is
carried out correctly.
43.
Group-based agricultural investments with a high social value includes
limited and conditional support to enable groups of poor and disadvantaged rural people,
in particular women and girls, to purchase labour-saving equipment. The processing of
the crops being targeted by S3P is usually done by women using methods which are
extremely labour-intensive and time consuming. In such situations labour saving
technologies can have a very significant positive impact on livelihoods of the poor and
disadvantaged, in particular women and girls. In this respect it is also important to note
that women are more vulnerable to HIV/AIDS and also nurse HIV/AIDS patients in the
communities.
44.
Investment support will be restricted to groups that: (i) have reached a
sufficiently mature developmental stage; but (ii) because of prevailing poverty are not
able to raise sufficient funds to obtain the required equipment on credit; while (iii) the
labour saving equipment would, at a modest fee, also be available to other community
members (non-group members). Requests for these investments will originate at the
group level and S3P will provide facilitation services for participatory identification,
planning, feasibility screening and preparation of business plans. There will be stringent
eligibility criteria that requesting groups need to meet. S3P contribution will be up to
50 per cent of equipment costs, with a co-financing ceiling of US$ 2,500 per sub-project
and a maximum of one sub-project per group.
45.
What needs to be ensured is that: (i) groups are not formed just to be able to
receive financial support to acquire equipment, this is done by imposing stringent criteria
on group functioning and how long it has been operating (at least 6 months, preferably
one year before potentially qualifying, to be verified by service provider and CEO); (ii)
the emerging micro-finance sector is not undermined, which is done by verifying that
groups are not able to raise more than 50 percent of the costs of the desired equipment,
and by limiting support to only one piece of equipment per eligible group; (iii) that the
75
subsidy is not used for private goods or commercial purposes, but instead has a major
social impact in the group and surrounding community, mainly through the reduction of
time-consuming drudgery labour; and (iv) that control over the equipment, its use and
potential benefits remains with the eligible group, who should have a sound operation
and management plan, and who may need additional training to make this happen.
46.
Identification of potential sub-projects is mainly linked to the eligibility of the
groups. Therefore, facilitation of the identification, planning and implementation process
will be carried out by the same service provider that is contracted to implement subcomponent 1.1 (strengthening farmer organizations). Sub-projects will be submitted
through the CAC, reviewed DAC, and approved by the DACO, up to his/her authorised
approval ceiling (currently ZK10 million or US$2,200); beyond this sub-projects will be
referred for the PACO’s approval. The total available S3P co-financing amount is set at
US$ 0.5 million. Since sub-project co-financing costs are expected to be very modest, on
average most likely below US$1,000 per sub-project, a total of close to 500 sub-projects
(or 20 per district) could be financed from the provisional allocation.
47.
Costs of facilitation and training of groups is estimated to be equivalent to the cofinancing costs.
48.
Technical and facilitation assistance will be provided for: (i) training of DACO
and DDCC staff, CACs and other community committees and eligible farmer groups, as
required; (ii) facilitation of the participatory planning and implementation processes for
community-level and group-based sub-projects and verification of eligibility of
communities, groups and their proposed investments; (iii) technical assistance for the
screening, assessment and design of proposed investments, such as technical, financial,
economical, social and environmental feasibility, as well as (iv) preparation of business,
operation and maintenance plans. A Local Agricultural Investments Manager, working
closely with the programme manager as a part of the PMU, though based in one of the
two provinces, will provide overall leadership to the sub-component: he/she will
establish the procedural and operational modalities for the funding facilities; ensure that
these function, with active community involvement; and monitor the sub-projects once
financed and implemented.
Sub-component 2.2 Support to the Policy and Planning Framework
(US$ 0.5million)
49.
S3P would support MACO’s Policy and Planning Department (PPD) to manage
flows of information and communication, undertake policy reviews, and provide
opportunities to learn from relevant experience.
50.
Management of information and communication within MACO and PPD has
for several reasons become more constrained. This is partly related to staff shortages
compounded by the recent creation of the Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries
Development (MLFD), and partly to the proliferation of different development partner
supported projects and programmes, which MACO is increasingly concerned to
coordinate. To assist MACO strengthen its knowledge management systems, S3P will
finance the recruitment of a Programme planning and monitoring specialist. He/she will
be based in PPD and will report to the Director PPD, and will: (i) assist with the review of
the current M&E system in MACO, including reviewing current M&E indicators, reporting
formats, frequency and information flow; (ii) facilitate internal discussion within the PPD
M&E Unit, the M&E Working Group and progressively to larger audiences regarding the
selection of key indicators, reporting formats, frequency and information flow; (iii)
facilitate discussion during workshops at central and provincial level; and (iv) advise PPD
regarding IT requirements for a Management Information System. This person will also
build capacity and assist in: (a) coordinating and harmonizing the different initiatives,
projects and programmes in relation to the SNDP, the National Agricultural Policy and
the Zambia CAADP; and (b) managing information and communication flows related to
these. The programme would finance this post for a period of 3 years, with any future
need reviewed in the context of the institutional strengthening activities under PEP.
76
51.
Policy reviews and studies will be undertaken that aim to improve the enabling
environment relevant to sustainable productivity growth and expanded smallholders’
integration into agricultural markets. Support would be provided to undertake specific
studies, draft policies and regulations; as well as for multi-stakeholder review, discussion
(workshop, forums) and dialogue related to their preparation. Some of the topics already
identified include, for example, those policies specific to cassava-based farming systems
and the role of cassava in national food security, issues related to FISP and the FRA, the
lack of appropriate CA techniques for agro-ecological region III. Other policy issues will
be identified through the course of programme implementation.
52.
Opportunities to learn from experience, in particular field and other exposure
visit of policy and decision makers, both within Zambia and to relevant international sites
or events.
Sub-component 2.3. Programme Management, Monitoring and Evaluation
(US$ 3.4 million)
53.
The S3P will be managed on behalf of Government by a Programme Management
Unit (PMU) located within the Policy and Planning Department (PPD) of MACO. The PMU
will consist of management and technical teams, overseen by a Programme Manager
responsible for overall programme delivery, based in Lusaka, who will report to the
Director PPD. The management team will also be based in Lusaka and it will include a
Financial Management Specialist; a Procurement and Contracts Specialist; a Planning,
Monitoring and Evaluation/Knowledge Management/ Communication Specialist; and a
Local Agricultural Investments Manager (budgeted for under Component 2.1).
54.
The technical team will be based at provincial level (in a ZARI Research Station
either in Northern or Luapula Province) and will include a Research for Development
Specialist, and an Extension Methodology Specialist. It will also include one Facilitator
per target province, who will be based in the office of the PACO (and budgeted under
Component 1). All these posts will report to the Programme Manager. The PMU will also
manage a budget for hiring short term technical expertise required by the programme.
77
Annex 5.
Implementation Arrangements
Approach
1.
The S3P will be implemented over a period of seven years. Implementation will
start in two provinces (Luapula and Northern Province): in PY1 eight districts will receive
intensive support, and PY2 another eight district within these same provinces will be
added. As of PY3, a third province and a further eight district will be added. Criteria for
the selection of districts will be included in the PIM; and the annual work plans and
budgets for PY1, PY2 and PY3 will indicate the proposed districts and camps to be
covered in that year’s implementation programme. The AWPBs will then be subject to
approval by IFAD. Any decision to expand target areas needs to be justified by
reasonably satisfactory progress in the initial target areas, as evidenced by annual
implementation reviews.
2.
The S3P is expected to complement the already-ongoing SAPP, and by formally
linking the two programmes to each other, the one is expected to strengthen the other’s
effectiveness and enhance its ability to achieve its overall objective, and vice versa. The
two programmes will be managed separately, but a number of mechanisms, including a
single Programme Steering Committee for both, linked annual work planning and
budgeting processes and outcomes, and regular meetings of project managers, will
ensure that they remain coordinated and mutually supportive. Both S3P and SAPP will
also be linked to the Rural Finance Programme, but this link will not be formal.
Institutional set-up
3.
S3P will be overseen by a Programme Steering Committee (PSC), managed by a
Programme Management Unit (PMU) located within the Policy and Planning Department
(PPD) of MACO, and implemented by MACO and a variety of non-government partners
and service providers.
4.
The S3P Programme Steering Committee (PSC) will be the same as the one
set-up for SAPP. It will provide overall policy and technical direction and guidance to
both programmes. It will be chaired by the Permanent Secretary of MACO, and will
include representatives of the relevant MACO departments (Policy and Planning,
Agribusiness and Marketing, Agriculture, Cooperatives, ZARI, SCCI); Ministry of Finance
and National Planning (MFNP); Ministry of Commerce, Trade and Industry (MCTI);
Ministry of Local Government and Housing (MLGH); Farmers Organizations (such as the
Zambia National Farmers Union, ZNFU) and Industry Organizations (such as the Cassava
Sub-sector Committee (CSC), relevant to the selected commodities or sectors. The PSC
should meet at least quarterly; with its key responsibilities to:

ensure that Programme activities are in line with national policies, procedures and
legislation;

provide strategic guidance to the PMU and implementing agencies (within and
outside government);

ensure that interventions are coordinated
development programmes and projects;

review and approve SAPP and S3P’s Annual Work Plans and Budgets (AWPBs)

review financial progress, approve the annual financial statements and review the
external auditor’s report;

monitor implementation progress and impact;

approve grants above a certain
Investments sub-component
threshold
where
under
appropriate
the
Local
with
other
Agricultural
5.
It will be expected to make specific recommendations for follow-up, which the
PMU should be accountable for delivering.
78
6.
A dedicated Programme Management Unit will be created to support MACO to
manage S3P implementation. It will have the following main functions:

Implementation of S3P sub-components;

outsourcing and contract management of service providers;

Ensuring effective financial management including setting-up and operating an
accounting system consistent with GRZ and IFAD financial procedures; and
ensuring timely flow of funds to MACO implementing national, and provincial
offices as well as contracted Service Providers in accordance to agreed plan of
work and budget.

Ensuring timely procurement of all works, goods and services contracts by
preparing tender documents, call for proposals, terms of reference and working in
close consultation with MACO PSU, and ensure adequate contract management

Organizing and ensuring timely preparation, coordination and reporting of the
Annual Work Plan and Budget (AWPB);

Setting up and implementing a participatory planning, and monitoring/evaluation
system;

Operating an efficient Management Information System (MIS); including financial/
management accounting software and undertake Programme M&E, with a
contracts/ grants tracking module

Ensuring the timely execution of key studies, Mid-Term Review and Programme
Completion Report, and submit timely progress, M&E and audit reports

Putting in place knowledge management and dissemination to strengthen policy
making process, and replicating successful experience on productivity increases.
7.
The PMU, located – like that of SAPP – within PPD, will be led by a Programme
Manager who will report to the Director PPD. He/she will be responsible for overall
programme delivery, and will lead the PMU (a detailed organogram of the PMU as well as
terms of reference for each position are provided in Annex 5). A detailed organigramme
of the PMU as well as terms of reference for each position are provided as Appendices to
this Annex. All programme-financed positions will be recruited openly and competitively
by MACO. Full time positions will be hired for an initial three year contract, with a 12
month probation period. Subject to satisfactory performance the contact will be
extended on a two year rolling basis.
8.
The management team will include the following posts: a Financial Management
Specialist, a Procurement and Contracts Specialist, a Planning, Monitoring and
Evaluation/Knowledge Management/ Communication Specialist; and a Local Agricultural
Investments Manager, whose role will be to manage this sub-component. The team will
be based in Lusaka, so as to facilitate close working relations with MACO, SAPP and
other national stakeholders, though it will be expected to travel frequently to the
programme provinces and it will have a budget to allow them to do so. It is expected
that the Programme Manager, the M&E officer and the Financial Management Specialist
will go once a month, and the procurement and contracts specialist will travel once a
quarter.
9.
The Technical team will include a Research for Development Specialist and an
Extension Methodology Specialist, both of whom will be based in a Research Station
either in Northern or Luapula Province; as well as one Facilitator in each of the three
provinces targeted by the Programme, based in the office of the PACO. All these
positions will report to the Programme Manager. The PMU will also manage a budget for
hiring short term technical expertise which will be hired as required. Additional support
to provincial and district level financial management may be one of the areas where such
expertise will be required. The Research for Development Specialist and the Extension
Methodology specialist will advise/support Research and Development (R&D) activities,
79
including preparing the Annual Work Plan and Budget (AWPB); providing methodological
support for innovative and sustainable extension; supporting enhanced research
extension linkages and coordination; supporting extension capacity strengthening/
building activities; and promoting gender, HIV/ AIDS and environment mainstreaming.
They will provide backstopping to the Provincial Facilitators.
10.
The Provincial facilitators will work closely and advise the PACO and his/her staff
to ensure that Programme activities are included in the normal planning process at
district and provincial level, will promote close coordination between activities various
projects active in the province, will encourage a stronger link between research and
extension. They will assist the PME and KM specialist to compile the Programme AWPB,
and to report on implementation of activities and on outputs achieved, they will also
provide a knowledge management function by keeping a record of Programme activities
and achievements, sharing lessons learnt and best practice. They will also ensure that
Programme funds are spent in line with what they were intended for, and will work
closely with provincial accountants (PACO) and the Programme financial management
specialist to ensure that Programme expenditures are tracked, particularly in the case of
component 2.1 (Local Agricultural Investments).
11.
The S3PU will also manage a budget for hiring short term technical expertise,
which will be used as required. The financial management systems at provincial and
district level is expected to be one specific area requiring support.
12.
The PMU will draw on management procedures that will be documented in a
Programme Implementation Manual (PIM). The PIM outline is presented in
Annex 11; a complete draft PIM will be prepared prior to programme start-up; and the
PIM will be finalised by the PMU during the first quarter of programme year one. Among
other things, the PIM will include detailed operational guidelines and procedures for the
Local Agricultural Investments; it will define the criteria for selecting the districts and
camps to be covered under the programme (which are then reflected in the AWPBs); and
it will also include a gender strategy, which defines the operational measures to be taken
to promote gender mainstreaming and women’s empowerment under the programme.
For example, programme staff composition and TORs, composition of the PSC,
engagement of service providers, launching workshops, other forums and all capacity
building programs will ensure gender-sensitive criteria and gender-equitable
participation whenever possible.
13.
The Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives (MACO) and in particular the
Policy and Planning Department (PPD) is the lead Programme implementation agency.
This is a role that involves:

Recruiting the staff of the PMU

Taking overall implementation responsibility

Convening the Programme Steering Committee

Managing changes in Programme direction

Continuing to chair the Country Programme Management Team (established as
the Programme Development Group during the design phase), to offer a platform
for technical advice, guidance and knowledge management, and provide an
opportunity for the PMU to engage with key ministries, representatives of
farmers’ organizations and the private sector

Ensuring coordination with other on-going GRZ/Development Partner support in
the sector.
14.
MACO Purchasing and Supplies Unit (PSU) will support the procurement of goods
and services needed for the implementation of S3P, as well as providing guidelines for
asset registry. MACO Financial Management Unit (FMU) will take responsibility for the
management of the Designated Account, ensuring timely replenishment of the
Operations Account once PMU has satisfied the requirements and after a withdrawal
80
application has been made and checked. This is further elaborated upon in Annex 7 on
Financial Management issues. The FMU is staffed with Accounting personnel from the
Ministry of Finance and National Planning. It will Reviews reports submitted by SAPPO
and if satisfied reimburses the SAPPO operations account on a quarterly basis. The
Operations account is managed exclusively by SAPPO. The Chief Accountant will be
closely involved in the preparation of S3P financial statements and support in the
preparation of financial progress reports for in-country reporting and monitoring.
15.
MACO Department of Agriculture will provide designated contact persons for S3P
in the selected provinces and districts (the PAO and SAO), and will facilitate the
participatory planning process at national, provincial, district and sub-district levels.
MACO National, Provincial and District Staff will play a key role in implementation,
monitoring and supervision of Programme activities.
16.
The Programme Development Group (PDG, also known as Technical Review
Panel once the programme is operational) is an advisory panel, which is not part of the
managerial chain of responsibility. The role of the PDG will be to provide advice and
support to S3P implementation. Knowledge management is an important function of the
PDG in pursuing the synthesis and dissemination of lessons learned during the course of
implementation. The PDG will meet on an ad hoc basis as needed, and its composition
may be varied according to the matters under review. The PDG will be chaired by the
Policy and Planning Department.
17.
Farmer Organizations and Cooperatives play a key role in representing the
interests of small-scale producers. Participatory planning will be used to identify the
specific needs of these organizations and these will be incorporated into the MACO work
plans. The Programme will seek to strengthen the capacity of existing and new farmer
groups which may have received support in the past, or may be currently supported by
other initiatives. Coordination with other agencies and programs that deal with
agricultural production aspects will be pursued in this regard. Farmer organisations and
agribusinesses at higher levels (larger cooperative societies, cooperative unions,
commodity associations, input/ output dealers, small manufacturers) will be supported
depending on the role they can play in improving farmer-productivity within specific
value chains.
Coordination and partnerships
18.
Local (district and sub-district) coordination committees such as the District and
Camp Agricultural Committees (DACs, CACs) as well as the more general District
Development Coordination Committee (DDCC) and Area Development Committee (ADC)
at Ward level will play a key role of overseeing and prioritizing agricultural development
activities at camp level. CACs will be encouraged to coordinate agricultural development
activities with the endorsement of ADCs that are responsible for coordinating all
development efforts at ward level. DACs oversee and prioritize agricultural development
activities at district level. They will particularly play a key role in approving investment
projects under the Local Agricultural Investments sub-component. DACs will be
encouraged to coordinate more effectively with the DDCC that are responsible for
coordinating all development efforts at district level, in particular regarding the intracommunity agricultural investments that will be financed under the sub-component,
consisting of public infrastructure investments at district level. A figure is provided in
Appendix 2 of this Annex.
19.
S3P is designed to develop a wide range of partnerships to enhance productivity
through collaboration with key players and service providers by actively forging linkages
with other relevant projects and initiatives. In doing so, S3P will seek to learn from best
practice, avoid overlap and ensure complementarities; create synergies; leverage
investments already made; strengthen linkages between those initiatives and MACO;
and establish a joint platform involving MACO and its cooperating partners for sharing
lessons learnt and knowledge about productivity enhancement.
81
20.
Provincial and District Offices of MACO will play an important role in participatory
planning. The service-providers engaged to undertake tasks will work in partnership
with Provincial and District staff, particularly the Principal (at Province level) and Senior
(at district level) Agricultural Officer and relevant Subject Matter Specialists, but also
relevant ZARI staff from Research Stations present in Programme intervention areas.
District staff, in particular exstension staff, Block Extension Officer (BEO), and Camp
Extension officers (CEO) will play valuable role in knowledge sharing through platforms
that will be established to support research and extension linkages.
Linkages with SAPP and IFAD portfolio
21.
The S3P PMU will also draw on and learn from the managers of other IFADfinanced projects in Zambia. In particular, it is expected that S3P will coordinate closely
with SAPP. This will be achieved by taking the following actions:

There will be a Joint Programme Steering Committee for SAPP and S3P. The
membership of the existing SAPP PSC will be slightly revised and is provided in
detail below. All meetings of the PSC will therefore revise both programmes
simultaneously.

The two programmes will conduct joint planning and budgeting of their activities,
through joint preparation of Annual Work Plan and Budgets, to ensure
complementarity, coordination and sequencing of activities.

Joint Decision Meetings, coinciding with annual IFAD supervision missions,
meeting with the PSC, will take place at least once a year. These meetings will
take decisions about the evolving programmatic nature of the S3P and SAPP, and
will ensure that both Programmes evolve in parallel.

Both programmes will be directly supervised by IFAD.

Monthly meetings between Programme Managers and relevant members of their
team will take place, and a constant flow of information between the two
programmes will be maintained through regular contacts between M&E officers.
These meetings will involve the participation of the IFAD Country Officer.

Annual Information sharing and review workshop will be held with programme
teams and various service providers and partners of SAPP and S3P, and will
include the participation of the IFAD-financed Rural Finance Programme, as well
as IFAD Country Officer.

Both programmes will be housed under the Policy and Planning Department (PPD)
and both managers will report to the Policy and Planning Director.
22.
While SAPP activities are mostly contracted out to service providers, it is expected
that a sizable part of S3P activities will be implemented through MACO structures at
national, provincial, district and sub-district levels. While central-level staff will provide
the overall policy guidance, provincial staff will monitor implementation of activities at
district level and also coordinate annual platforms for review of the performance of S3P.
District and sub-district staff will be actively involved in implementation of activities.
MACO will designate the Principle Agricultural Officer (PAO) and the Senior Agricultural
Officer (SAO), at provincial and district levels respectively as the official contact persons
for S3P. Other activities will be contracted out to service providers. All service
provider(s) will be responsible to MACO and their activities will be embedded within the
Ministry, adopting a partnership and mentoring approach with Ministry staff at
headquarters, Provincial, District and Sub-District levels.
23.
Both S3P and SAPP should also coordinate closely with the Rural Finance Project
(RFP), which aims to improve access to rural financial services. This includes innovative
instruments to improve groups and individuals access to finance which is pursued
through a collaboration with the National Savings and Credit Bank (Natsave) which offers
normal banking and financial services and has a product which offers credit facilities for
different agricultural equipment. Another component of RFP promotes community-based
82
institutions which work with groups to introduce them to group savings and credit
schemes. Group members access loans from these schemes to enable them engage in
activities which improve their livelihoods, and to purchase productive equipment and
inputs. S3P will provide information to RFP so as to allow expansion of these services
and components to targeted areas.
Programme start-up
24.
Key Start-Up Activities will include the following:

Recruitment of a consultant/technical advisor to work with MACO to facilitate
activities required for Programme start-up.

Opening of the Designated Account and PMU operational bank account.

Advertisement for and recruitment of key staff of PMU.

Preparation of tender documents for critical start-up procurements.

Facilitation of arrangements for MACO to temporarily provide logistic support (e.g.
vehicles, office space etc) until the Programme acquires its own.

Identification and renting of suitable PMU premises.

Procurement of basic furniture and computer equipment with accessories for use
by the PMU staff;

Finalisation of Draft PIM based on the Programme Design Report, and initial draft
completed by a local consultant prior to negotiations; design of the Financial
Management Manual;

Selection of the first 8 districts to be covered under the programme;

Preparation of the Year 1 Annual Work Plan and Budget and Procurement Plan
based on Programme design;

Establish the Programme Steering Committee and ensure it has its first meeting
within twelve months of programme effectiveness

Conduct of start-up workshop with programme team and IFAD staff, as well as
initial capacity assessment needs.

Conduct Programme launch workshop.
25.
These activities will be financed through an advance provided to the PMU by
IFAD, which will be transferred following opening of dedicated and operational accounts.
26.
A start-up workshop will be organized with project staff to reach a clear and
common understanding of the Programme objectives, the main results that need to be
achieved, the roles and responsibilities of each stakeholder, the implementation
arrangements for the various subcomponents. This workshop will also be the opportunity
for some team building and establishing working relationship between IFAD, the PMU,
the PPD and other stakeholders.
27.
The overall objective of the workshop is to ensure that programme team and
partners have a common and shared vision regarding the strategy. Therefore the start
up operations support will facilitate the involvement of teams and partners in conceptual
discussions at a very early stage, co-creation of operational modes and ways and the
rigorous nurturing of learning and knowledge management within the programme.
28.
This will be initiated through a 3 day central-level workshop to be attended by all
central level MACO staff involved in implementation, the PMU and the technical aand
management teams. This will be followed by cascading provincial and district level startup workshops. The provincial and district level workshop will coincide with the first
quarterly planning and review meetings.
29.
The outputs of the start-up operations support are expected to be:
83

Programme language and operational implications simplified for everyone`s
understanding

A common understanding right from the beginning created

Changes and processes leading to results envisioned and described

Team development strengthened to operationalise the programme and work on
the challenges and solutions, favouring an working atmosphere in the team with
low hierarchy and minimal communication blockages between level (e.g. field
level versus PMU)

The PMU team exposed to KM concept, approaches, impacts, methods and tools

Procedures and organisational processes to foster learning and KM developed

The programme implementation team operates as a team with
30.
The workshop will focus specifically on:

Creating clarity from all actors and detailed understanding of how to
operationalise the programme– with a presentation and unpacking the
programme document

Discussion on the programme strategy and how to put it into practice, the lessons
from the past and innovation required

Working together: institutional arrangements, roles and mechanisms to make this
work within the team and with partners, job descriptions and performance
criteria, core values and principles how to operate

Visualising the desired changes / results (hard and soft) and developing
behavioural indicators through outcome visioning exercise (close the eyes and see
people DOING things leading to results, outcome mapping exercise..)

Knowledge Management and Learning (concepts and principles, KM framework,
the pillars, tools.....)

Organisational development learning process (team building) with the whole
team from PMU to field officers

Internal and external communication and feedback mechanisms

Facilitation skills for meetings and stakeholder interaction

Action planning for 2-3 months
84
Annex 5 – Appendix 1: Programme Organizational Chart
Programme Steering Committee
(PSC)
S3P
Programme Manager
Management
Based in Lusaka
SAPP
Programme Manager (p.m.)
Technical
Based in the field
85
Financial Management Specialist
Research for Development Specialist
Procurement and Contracts Specialist
Extension Methodology Specialist
Monitoring/Evaluation and Knowledge
Management and Communications
Specialist
Local Agricultural Investments Manager
Provincial Facilitators (one per province)
Policy and Planning Department
MACO
Annex 5 – Appendix 2: Diagram of Decentralized Structures
MACO/Ag sector devolution
Administration
Facilitation/support
National
Participative Agricultural planning
Local Agricultural sector financing
Participative local planning
Local develop. financing
Gender
Focal points
PACO
Gender
Commit.
District
District Devlop.
Commitee ( DDC)
District Agric.
Committee
(DAC)
DACO
86
4 Subcommitees
Block
Camp
Zone
Village
BES
Ward level
Camp Agric.
Commitee
CEO
Zonal Ag.
Com
Zonal Ag.
Com
CAC
Zonal Ag.
Com
District
Council
Other sectors
Area Develop.
Commitee (ADC)
Other sectors
Provincial
MACO
Decentralization
Annex 5 – Appendix 3: Draft Terms of Reference for Programme Management
Unit staff
1.
Programme Manager
The Programme Manager will be responsible for all aspects of the management. All
programme funded positions will report to the Programme Manager. The Programme
Manager will be directly answerable to the Permanent Secretary of MACO, through eh
Policy and Planning Director, as well as to the Programme Steering Committee (PSC).
Specific duties:

Acting as Secretary to the PSC and ensuring that its directives and guidelines are
incorporated into all Programme activities.

First class contractual management, with the support of the Procurement and
Contracts Officer; ensuring contractors are meeting their obligations and are paid
only for agreed deliverables.

Liaison function for all aspects related to the Programme, especially the
development and maintenance of partnerships with related programmes and
projects and institutions engaged in smallholder agribusiness development and
rural financial services.

Direct responsibility - with such external professional assistance as required - for
the initial arrangements for the operation of the Programme; and for the design,
testing and introduction of the essential Programme management systems and
procedures.

Coordination and supervision of preparation of annual workplans and budgets by all
implementing units and contractors; and amalgamation of these into the overall
AWPB.

Final accountability for operation of Programme bank accounts.

Oversight of the work of the Programme team.

Facilitation and/or supervision of the tender procedures for service contracting and
coordination of work of contractors.

Preparation of six-monthly and annual reports to the MACO, PSC, MFNP and IFAD.

Providing leadership, guidance, enthusiasm and catalytic input to all levels of
Programme participants and activities, whenever appropriate.

Ensuring that the PMU, and all consultants and contractors engaged by it, comply
with the Programme’s gender and targeting strategies.
Qualifications and experience:

A university degree in economics, social sciences or a natural resources discipline
would be a marked advantage.

At least 15 years experience in the planning, management, administration and
implementation of agricultural or rural development Programmes in the public,
private or NGO sectors and specific exposure to commercial/private sector practice
in service contracting, performance monitoring and financing.
Competencies:

effective judgment and determination;

a consistent track record of increasing responsibility and achievement; and

a high level of inter-personal skills;

Strong written and oral communication skills in English;


Strong analytical skills Self motivated and creative thinker;
Proven ability to work in teams, strong social skills and open-minded and
87

2.
Ability to work independently and with limited supervision.
The Financial Controller will be the principal actor in routine financial management of
Programme activities, responsible for the smooth flow and proper accounting of use of
funds - and with the help of his/her Secretary/Accounts Assistant - personnel,
equipment, supplies and external services. He/she will report directly to the Programme
Manager and be a key member of the PMU, particularly in relation to liaison with the
MACO, MFNP, IFAD, Bankers, private sector.
Specific responsibilities:

Ensuring that administrative and financing directives and guidelines of the Steering
Committee are reflected in all Programme activity.

Establishing the financial and administrative policies, systems, formats and
procedures, including those for service contracting, budgeting and accounts and
audit.

The liaison function for all programme related activities, vis a vis financial
management and control.

Taking primary responsibility for the financial aspects of preparation of the
Programme AWPBs.

Operating the designated and operational accounts in accordance with IFAD
procedures.

Ensuring compliance by contractors of all financial management related aspects.

Supervising the financial management of programme resources at provincial level,
including through regular visits to the PACOs’ offices

Preparation and submission of routine and ad-hoc financial reviews and reports as
needed, including six-monthly reports to the Programme Manager.

Ensuring the availability and smooth flow of Programme funds, resources and
supplies.

Assisting in facilitation and supervision of the tender, award and performance
assessment procedures for service contracting.

Preparation and application of procurement procedures in accordance with
Government requirements.

Arranging, participating in and monitoring the conduct of all audits and reviews,
and preparing the necessary reports.
Qualification and Experience

University degree with full membership of the Zambian Institute of Chartered
Accountants.

At least 10 years experience in the financial and administrative management of
Programmes or businesses with similar funding budgets and contractual
complements similar to those under this Programme.
Competencies

Strong written and oral communication skills in English

Strong analytical skills

Self motivated and creative thinker

Proven ability to work in teams, strong social skills and open-minded

Ability to work independently and with limited supervision
88
3.
Procurement and Contracts Specialist
Since a large portion of the activities of the Programme will be contracted out to serviceproviders, the PMU will engage a Procurement and Contracts Specialist who will be
responsible for ensuring that all goods and services procured by the Programme will be
done in accordance with the approved procedures as set out in the PIM and the Letter to
the Borrower.

preparation of a rolling 18 month procurement plan in the form specified in the
financing agreement and suitable for incorporation in the AWPB;

monitoring the progress of procurement and contracting activities against the
targets specified in the AWPB;

ensuring that the Programme’s gender and targeting strategies are operationalised
through its procurement procedures;

With assistance from other S3P staff, preparing terms of reference for consultancy
services and technical specifications for hardware procurement, in conjunction with
the relevant technical personnel in MACO;

undertaking local shopping for goods and services where this falls within the
procurement guidelines;

preparing tender documents in the required format and advertising or inviting bids
from qualified (or pre-qualified) suppliers;

convening and supporting bid evaluation committees to undertake technical
evaluation of bids or proposals for supply of goods and services;

awarding contracts for supply of goods and services, negotiating contractual
conditions and monitoring performance against contracts awarded;

approving progressive payments to contractors against the agreed milestones or
outputs;

maintaining a register of approved suppliers for smaller items procured locally, and
a register of contracts and payments against milestones or outputs;

submitting quarterly and annual reports on all procurement and contractual
activities undertaken by the Programme.
Qualification and Experience

Degree in economics, finance or law; or equivalent management qualification with

Significant training and practical experience in procurement within Government
programmes supported by international financial institutions.

Sound understanding of GRZ procurement guidelines and the protocols and
procedures applying to internationally financed projects in Zambia.

At least seven years experience in procurement and contracting preferably
including the operation of decentralised co-financing schemes.
Competencies





89
4.
Planning Monitoring & Evaluation/KM Specialist
The Planning, Monitoring & Evaluation/Knowledge Management & Communication
Specialist will have overall responsibility for coordinating and facilitating the planning,
M&E and KMC activities related to S3P implementation. The Specialist will ensure that
robust systems for PME and KM are not only established, but also fully linked, to enable
the Programme to be flexible and responsive to changing circumstances. The Specialist
will also assess needs and capacity for PME and KM at provincial, district and lower levels
and accordingly design and implement capacity building programmes. The Specialist will
engage and closely supervise service providers who will work on M&E and KM with
relevant Government staff at Provincial and District levels.
Specific PME duties
The PME/KM Specialist will provide overall leadership, coordination and facilitation to:

Establish a Monitoring and Evaluation System taking into account the Government
monitoring frameworks, IFAD RIMs and project objectives

Develop a Management Information System (MIS) for managing data and
information for overall monitoring.

Fine-tune the programme’s dynamic Logframe in keeping with IFAD-RIMS;

Define and establish the programme’s monitoring formats, and impact indicators;

Organize and supervise a focused baseline survey at the beginning of the
programme to be undertaken by a contracted institution;

Establish implementation targets, monitor implementation
performance, and assess outputs and outcomes;

Facilitate programme’s annual review workshops, impact assessment studies, Mid
Term Review and completion review;

Collect essential data to be included in quarterly, semi-annual and annual reports;

Monitor financial and physical progress as well as reporting back to stakeholders to
create a better learning environment;

Organize training for the MACO and other partners implementing in MIS, PIMA
system and basic reporting requirements;

Improve programme performance by providing relevant and well researched
information to the PMU on a timely basis;

Ensure capture of intended impact as well as successes and failures;
processes
and
Specific duties

Develop a Knowledge Management & Communication Strategy
systematic, continuous learning, improvement and knowledge sharing;

Develop annual workplans and budgets to operationalize the KMC strategy and
make sure it is internalized by key programme implementers;

Develop and implement processes to ensure that lessons learned and good practice
are captured systematically, shared, and used to improve programme
implementation;

Support advocacy efforts through providing evidence of impact gathered through
the M&E system, closely linked to knowledge management activities;

Coordinate the development and implementation of training programmes to build
capacity and develop knowledge management skills and competencies of MACO
staff at all levels, as well as private and public service providers

Provide technical backstopping and guidance to MACO staff at Provincial and
District level responsible for PME and KMC .
90
to
ensure

Develop or adapt relevant tools and processes for implementing staff to collect,
process/analyse, store and share information and knowledge, and ensure relevant
staff have the capacity to use them;

Ensure that innovative experiences, learning and good practices are captured,
synthesized, documented and shared continuously within the Programme, within
the MACO, with the IFAD Country Programme Team (CPT) and with in-country
partners, IFAD and other regional and international partners;

Ensure that lessons and good practice emerging from the Programme support
knowledge based decision making and policy dialogue;

Provide communication support to awareness raising and sensitisation of
Programme participants, including building understanding of the Programme’s
objectives, benefits;

Assess and establish appropriate communication channels to be used for different
stakeholders.

Foster partnerships for broader knowledge-sharing and learning;

Ensure monitoring and evaluation of performance of the programme’s KMC
strategy.

Commission short-term technical assistance and undertake any other duties that
may be assigned to him/her by the PM;
Qualifications

Higher-level degree in agricultural economics, rural development or other relevant
field

University-level studies in a field related to communication,
management or a related field would be an advantage

Proficient in the use of databases and spreadsheets; demonstrated skills in
quantitative and qualitative analysis and data management; proficient with
statistical and other software packages for both quantitative and qualitative
analysis

Experience in analyzing complex programmes or policies.
knowledge
Experience:

Minimum of 10 years relevant experience. Significant experience working in in M&E
and/or programme management, plus KM and/or communication for development
projects.

Experience in facilitation, in particular of learning processes.

Proven experience in designing and implementing successful communication and
knowledge management strategies for sustainable development, or in planning and
implementing strategies at management level.

Past experience of working on a donor-funded project would be an advantage.
Experience in process documentation an advantage.

Good understanding of use of modern information and communication technology
(ICT) in development.
Competencies





91
5.
Local Agricultural Investments Manager
The Manager will ensure not only that procedures for the Local Agricultural Investments
sub-component are established, but also that they function with active involvement of
the community through dialogue, community participation and decision making in the
planning, implementation and monitoring of the programme. The Manager will work to
perform as an adjunct to the Programme Coordinator to ensure all modalities for the
implementation of sub-component are put in place and for supervising (intra) community
agricultural investments activities.
Key Duties
The Manager will provide overall leadership, coordination and facilitation to:

Establish the modalities of operationalizing a co-financing facility taking into
account the Government procurement procedures issued in accordance with the
Public Procurement Act 2008, the IFAD 2010 Procurement guidelines,
environmental, and gender issues.

Provide support to communities and local MACO structures to ensure the proposals
are identified, prepared, reviewed and approved, and financed;

Monitor the use and impact of the sub-projects financed, and ensure that the M&E
activities of the Local Agricultural Investment sub-component are incorporated in
the Knowledge Management & Communication Strategy, to ensure systematic and
continuous learning, improvement and knowledge sharing;

Modify the operational procedures as necessary, in the light of implementation
experience

Commission short-term technical assistance and undertake any other duties that
may be assigned to him/her by the PM;
Specific duties
The Manager will, in collaboration with the relevant MACO technical staff and District
Council staff:

Design various documents which will be necessary for the smooth and effective
implementation of the infrastructure activities under the community-based
agricultural investment. These may include but not limited to an infrastructure
application form, a technical field appraisal (TFA) form, a social-cost Benefit
Analysis sheet, Monthly brief form, Community partnership agreement form,
partnership/contractor agreement form, invitation to tender document, guidelines
for participation in the bidding process which should conform to IFAD procurement
guidelines and the Zambia tendering procedures, tender evaluation form, tender
evaluation summary sheet, agenda for tender evaluation and awarding session,
activity and payment schedule, programme monitoring form, programme
completion report format, maintenance guidelines, and programme committee
training checklist.

Participate in building the capacity of provincial and district staff to enable them to
effectively undertake technical field and appraisal visits to undertake the social,
economic, environmental and technical feasibility assessment.

Participate in the design of the Programme’s Environmental Policy and
Environmental Guidelines which will be applied to all projects funded by the
Programme.

Participate in supervising and monitoring of Contractor’s implementation or
construction works after every major activity in the Activity Schedule together with
Clerk of Works (District Council, MACO technical staff and FTL. The EC will submit
monthly project monitoring reports to the FTL and S3P M&E specialist.

Monitor the status of sub-projects financed through the three windows, and where
possible assess their impact.
92

Prepare and submit a programme completion report to the S3P TL at the end of
each assignment.
Qualifications and experience

Civil engineering or Rural engineering Degree

10 years experience in similar rural engineering consultancy works

Experience of working with community-based construction projects

Knowledge of financial management will be an added advantage

Able to develop Bill of Quantities

Able to provide training to contractors and other stakeholders
6.
Research for Development Specialist
The Research for Development Specialist together with the Extension specialist will work
in close collaboration to advise/support MACO in the implementation of Components 1.2
and 1.3. The Research and Development (R&D) specialist will work specifically with ZARI
staff located in Kasama (Northern Province) and Mansa (Luapula Province) research
stations. His/her approach will be that of contribute to build ZARI’s capacity to manage
research activities more efficiently and effectively and establish sustainable linkages
between research and extension in order to be better able to respond to priority needs of
smallholder farmers. The R&D specialist will assist ZARI in the planning and
implementation of the activities foreseen in the AR4D sub-component of the project. The
R&D specialist will be based in Kasama or in Mansa.
Specific duties:
The specific responsibilities of the Research and development specialist will include the
following:

Assist in the preparation of the Annual Work Plan and Budget (AWPB);

Provide methodological support for planning research trials and programmes;

Assist in the preliminary participatory diagnostic study of the cassava-mixed beans
based farming system to identify the major potential and constraints faced by
smallholder farmers;

Compile, in collaboration with ZARI staff, a baseline report on the research
activities undertaken by Mansa and Kasama research stations in the last five years
highlighting constraints and options for the future;

Assist in the identification of partners for research and technical assistance from
international research centers, establish contacts and estimate potential for
collaboration;

Support ZARI staff in activities related to enhancing research extension linkages
and coordination;

Participate in the coordination workshops and meetings both at PACO and DACO
levels;

Assist ZARI staff in improving their capacity of information and knowledge sharing
and documentation;

Organize and deliver training to ZARI staff as well as extension staff;

Deliver on-the-job training to counterpart ZARI staff as required;

Establish and maintain linkage with other partners (NGOs, private sector,
universities etc) undertaking research on the commodities targeted by the project
and ensure regular exchange of information;

Promote gender, HIV/ AIDS and environment mainstreaming in research options;
93

Monitor implementation of project activities related to AR4D

Prepare contribution to progress reports

PhD in agriculture, soil science or other relevant field

At least 8 years experience in adaptive research on soil fertility management in
agro-ecological zone similar to the project are and/or varietal screening of one or
more of the commodities targeted by the project (cassava, mixed beans, rice,
groundnuts);

Some experience in capacity development and training; Experience in facilitation,
in particular of learning processes.

Previous experience as technical assistant in development projects will be
considered favourably;

Good knowledge of the African research institutions as well as the International
research institutions;

Competencies





7.
Participatory Extension (PE) Specialist
The Participatory extension specialist will work in close collaboration with the Research
for Development specialist to advise/support MACO in the implementation of
Components 1.2 and 1.3. The PE specialist will work with the decentralized structures of
MACO (PACO and DACOs) in Luapula and Northern provinces to start with, and later in a
third province still to be selected. His/her approach will be that of contributing to build
MACO’s capacity to deliver better quality advisory services to farmers and do so more
efficiently and effectively. The PE specialist will assist MACO in the planning and
implementation of the activities foreseen in the sub-component 1.2 of the project.
He/she will be based in Kasama or in Mansa.
Specific duties:

Assist in the preparation of the Annual Work Plan and Budget (AWPB);

Provide methodological support for the harmonization of the various existing
participatory extension approaches being used in the project area;

Support the implementation of a preliminary participatory study of the different
methodologies to identify the major potential and constraints of each and analyze
issues of sustainability;

Facilitate the establishment of contacts with partners implementing different
extension methodologies and identify ways of information sharing and concrete
collaboration;

Support MACO staff in activities related to enhancing research extension linkages
and coordination;

Participate in the coordination workshops and meetings both at PACO and DACO
levels;
94

Assist MACO staff in improving their capacity of information and knowledge sharing
and documentation;

Organize and deliver training to PACO, DACO staff including CEO’s;

Promote gender, HIV/ AIDS and
approaches;

Monitor implementation of project activities related to extension;

Assist PACO in the organization of the Master training courses at Provincial level, in
particular in the identification of the trainers from neighbouring countries;

Support master trainers at provincial level in the organization of the Training of
trainers (ToT) at the District level;

Provide guidance and technical assistance in the development of a good
documentation, information and knowledge sharing strategy, with clear outputs
and products;

Deliver on-the-job training to counterpart MACO staff as required;

Prepare contribution to progress reports
environment mainstreaming in extension

Higher-level degree in agriculture, agricultural economics or closely related fields;

At least 8 years experience in adaptive participatory extension approaches,

Exposure and/or experience with the Farmer Field Schools methodology;

Some direct experience in capacity development and training;


Previous experience as technical assistant in development projects will be
considered favourably.
Competencies





8.
Provincial Facilitator
The Provincial Facilitator will be posted within the PACO office in provinces where S3P is
being implemented and will assist the PACO with the planning, coordination,
management of the various project-financed activities, but also provide support to
general planning, coordination and management function of the PACO.

Advise the PACO and his/her staff to ensure that programme activities are included
in the normal planning process at district and provincial level,
95

Promote close coordination between activities various programmes and
stakeholders active in the province, through the organization of regular meetings
to plan, share lessons learnt and ensure harmonization of approaches to extension

Promote a stronger link between research and extension by supporting Agricultural
Research for Development Platform, encouraging an integrated research and
extension information platform

Promote linkages between various sub-components of the programme

Assist the PME specialist to compile the programme AWPB, and to report on
implementation of activities and on outputs achieved, \

Provide a Knowledge Management Function by keeping a record of programme
activities and achievements, sharing lessons learnt and best practice.

Assist the Financial Management Specialist in ensuring that programme funds are
spent in line with what they were intended for, and will work closely with provincial
accountants (PACO) to ensure that programme expenditures are tracked.

Advanced degree in agriculture/agronomy or related discipline;

At least 10 years experience in public and private sector.

Some direct experience in capacity development and training;

Competencies





96
Annex 6.
Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation and Knowledge
Introduction
1.
Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation (PM&E) systems will be established to meet
the needs of Programme management, GRZ, IFAD and other stakeholders. The S3P PME
system will be guided by the following principles: (i) the establishment of a sound
planning and monitoring framework (logical framework) with a limited number of
indicators; (ii) the use of the annual work plan and budget (AWPB) as the key
instrument for defining and guiding programme activities and expenditures; (iii) the use
of simple M&E processes, structures and instruments, including M&E software which can
be adjusted to make M&E information accessible to key stakeholders in a timely manner;
(iv) alignment with existing M&E frameworks at national and district level, to strengthen
the M&E system of MACO and reduce the workload of the district and camp staff, and in
particular use of MACO participatory planning process at camp, district, provincial and
national level; (v) timely collection of baseline data for key indicators in the logframe as
specified in the M&E Plan; (vi) integration of communication and Knowledge
Management (KM) in all aspects of programme planning and M&E to encourage feedback
and reflection on results for effective adaptive management; and (vii) provision of
adequate resources for capacity building of stakeholders involved in PME activities at all
levels, with a focus on participatory PME approaches.
Annual Work Plan and Budget (AWPB)
2.
The AWPB will be the key instrument for implementation and operational control,
in that its approval by the PSC and IFAD will be the authority for the PMU to conduct
activities and incur expenditure. It also facilitates operational flexibility, as it allows for
regular adjustments to be made to the programme approach, activities and expenditures
to reflect the implementation experience gained and changing circumstances. Particular
attention will therefore be given to the process for its preparation, which should be
inclusive, participatory and demand driven; involve all relevant stakeholders from within
and beyond government; and after the first year, build on the annual implementation
review. Timely preparation and submission of AWPB will require adherence to a schedule
of preparation, which also needs to be linked to the GRZ budgetary approval process.
3.
The following AWPB preparation schedule is provided for guidance. It should be
reviewed and modified as may be necessary as part of the SAPP start-up activities.
AWPB preparation schedule
Activity
Briefing on preparation of AWPB provision
of guidelines and format to key
implementing agencies.
Call letter from PMU for the preparation of
AWPB to PPD, other MACO staff, Service
Providers, etc
Preparation of AWPB by participating
institutions/ service providers.
Submission of AWPB proposals to SAPPO.
Preparation of consolidated AWPB
Review/agreement on draft AWPB by
participating institutions and service
providers
Preparation of 2nd Draft AWPB
incorporating comments of participating
institutions/service providers and clearance
by Programme Manager
Review by PSC
Schedule
End April
Early May.
May/June.
Mid July
Mid July –
end July
Responsibility
M&E Specialist supported by
Letter drafted by M&E Officer and
sent under the signature of
Programme Manager
Each service provider to have a
focal person.
SAPPO: M&E specialist, Financial
management specialist
Early August
Meeting called by Programme
Manager
Mid August
M&E Specialist
Last week
August.
PSC
97
Finalisation by PMU
Submission to MACO for incorporation into
MACO budget
Submission of draft AWPB to IFAD
Comments from IFAD
Finalisation of AWPB/distribution to
implementing institutions/service Providers
First week
September
Mid
September
Mid October
Mid November
End December
PMU
Programme Manager
Permanent Secretary - MACO
IFAD CPM
S3P Programme Manager
4.
In a programme such as S3P, in which the geographical area of intervention is
defined in only broad terms, the AWPB for PY1, PY2 and PY3 will assume particular
importance, in that they will define the specific districts (and within them camps) in
which the programme will be implemented. These AWBPs will therefore indicate the
districts and camps to be covered during the year to come, selected on the basis of clear
and transparent criteria (already defined in the PIM).
5.
The S3P M&E specialist will be responsible for coordinating the preparation of
AWPB, its consolidation, presentation to PSC, finalisation and submission to IFAD.
He/she will receive support from: (i) the Financial Management Specialist to ensure
proper costing, incorporation of the financing plan and disbursement arrangement; (ii)
the Procurement and Contracts Specialist who will prepare the procurement plan; and
(iii) the Technical Team will provide technical support in preparing the work plans. The
Programme Manager will oversee the whole process and ensure that the Director of PPD
and his team are fully involved in the process.
6.
In General the AWPB should cover the following areas:
a) Summary of progress and performance since effectiveness including:
 Physical progress made in the previous year, including quantitative data.
 Financial progress in the previous year including cost overruns and savings
and analysis of flow of funds from financiers.
 Procurement performance.
 Constraints and problems from previous year, and recommendations to
resolve them.
 Lessons learned and rationale for activities proposed.
b) Description of work plan of current year including:
 Objectives (why?)
 Activities (how?)
 Programme area (where?)
 Deliverables and outputs (what?)
 Required inputs
 Implementation arrangements (when?)
 Institutional responsibilities (who?)
 Key M&E indicators, etc
c) M&E activities; impact oriented data, expected outputs etc.
d) Quantitative data of planned inputs in table format showing detailed physical and
financial targets, sources of funding and budget summary tables.
e) Monthly activity schedules and timelines (implementation schedule).
f)
18-month procurement Plan.
Monitoring and evaluation approach
7.
Programme results are expected at three different levels (development objective,
outcomes, outputs), reflected in the Logical Framework. At development objective level,
results are aggregated long-term impact on the beneficiaries. The outcomes are the
98
short- and medium-term effects of the programme resulting from beneficiaries access to,
use of and satisfaction with outputs of the programme, while the outputs result from the
implementation of programme activities and are products and services directly delivered
by the programme. At each level a set of indicators has been developed taking into
account IFAD’s Results and Impact Management System (RIMS) framework, but also
Government strategy and programming documents such as the Sixth National
Development Programme (SNDP). These indicators will be reviewed and finalised during
programme start-up. Gender-sensitive indicators will be included whenever possible.
Since some of the actual implementation will be contracted out to service providers,
monitoring requirements will be included as part of their contractual obligations.
8.
Programme Management, supported by technical assistance, will be responsible
for setting up an effective PME system during the first six months of programme
implementation which includes fine-tuning the M&E Plan in consultation with the main
programme stakeholders and reviewed during project launch workshop. The logframe
and M&E Plan may also be revised at a later stage if required.
9.
Programme planning M&E will be coordinated by the M&E specialist whose role
will be to facilitate the PM&E function by developing appropriate tools and procedures;
by strengthening the capacity of implementing partners to carry out their monitoring
tasks; by recruiting specialists for impact assessment and other specialized studies; and
by consolidating and analyzing the data. The findings of monitoring and evaluation will
be summarized in quarterly and annual progress reports. The S3P M&E specialist will
work closely with the Policy and Planning Department in MACO and with other technical
departments. The programme will purchase a Management Information Software that
will be used to collect data from various levels. Service providers will be required to use
this software when reporting on their achievements.
10.
The MIS database will be aligned with the MACO M&E system being developed
under the “Support to the Agricultural Sector Performance Enhancement Programme
(PEP)”. Data collection by Camp officers will be integrated into the Agriculture Diary for
Extension Officers. Reporting will be aligned or will be based on the Camp, Block, District
and Provincial format of MACO.
Data collection methods
11.
A baseline survey will be undertaken during the first semester, to establish
benchmarks against which the outcomes and impact on the beneficiaries would be
assessed. In each programme district, a survey will be carried out during the first
quarter of programme implementation in order to obtain an overview of the current
production practices and production levels of the cassava based farming systems,
identify constraints and potentials, as well as needs for capacity building for different
stakeholders.
12.
Annual implementation reviews will be done, involving implementers at all
levels and key stakeholders to analyse and review lessons and challenges. The reviews
will be linked with the AWPB planning processes to ensure that lessons lead to improved
implementation. Qualitative analysis will be conducted from the end of the second year
to assess whether activities are likely to lead to the desired higher-level results. This will
include analysis of the extent to which smaller and poorer producers have increased
productivity, and will consider the benefits that have been delivered to women and the
youth from a quantitative point of view, by using gender-disaggregated indicators; and
from a qualitative view, by case studies on how women producers are better off as a
result of Programme interventions. Process monitoring will also be carried out during
these reviews, by assessing the degree of beneficiaries’ participation in project activities,
quantifying the numbers of households reached through the different components, and
confirming the level of participation by women and youth.
13.
Specialised studies to evaluate the extent to which the Programme purpose
and overall goal are being achieved will be contracted out. Indicators selected from
99
IFAD’s Results and Impact Monitoring System (RIMS) as well as general and sectorspecific indicators from SNDP have been integrated in the logical framework. The
Programme will mainly rely on secondary sources for baseline data, including the Living
Conditions Monitoring Survey (Central Statistical Office, CSO), the Crop Forecast and
Post-Harvest Surveys conducted by MACO and CSO, progress reports on the Millennium
Development Goals and selected country reports. An assessment of quantitative targets
included at all levels in the logical framework will be carried out before the Mid-Term
Review.
14.
A midterm review will be undertaken, during the first semester of the fourth
year to assess programme achievements, interim programme impact, efficiency and
effectiveness of programme management, and validity of programme design. On the
basis of its findings, the MTR mission will revise the programme document for the
remaining programme life and suggest any changes to the PIM, if required.
15.
At the end of the programme, an End of Project survey will be carried out to
measure changes at beneficiary level, comparing with the baseline situation. Baseline
and terminal surveys will be contracted out to service providers under the supervision of
the PMU. The PMU will also prepare an internal Programme Completion Report (PCR),
which will include an assessment of the achieved versus the planned impact, to be
submitted to GRZ and IFAD within three months after programme completion.
M&E Linkages to the Performance Enhancement Programme (PEP)
16.
MACO’s M&E system is currently characterized by: (a) Activity-Based Budgeting
and reporting; (b) parallel reporting processes (where departments at central level are
mirrored at provincial and district level and report to their department as well as to the
DACO and/or PACO), leading to a variety of formats and type of information being
requested; (c) limited possibilities of aggregation of results (since there are no standard
indicators and formats used by all departments; (d) a reporting system focusing on
activities and production figures of the sector, and little or no information on products
and services delivered by MACO (output level), nor on beneficiaries (smallholders)
access to, use of, or satisfaction with these services (outcome level).
17.
In 2009 the Cabinet took the decision to split agriculture and livestock, and
create a Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development (MLFD) out of MACO. The
Policy and Planning Department (PPD) is being split between the two Ministries at
National and Provincial levels, putting an additional strain in terms of staff dedicated to
M&E in both Ministries, since there are few dedicated M&E staff at provincial level, and
none at district level. To compound this many M&E posts are vacant.
18.
PACO and DACO have a coordination role at local level, but this role is not
presently exercised fully. Many projects (usually implemented by NGOs, financed with
their own funding or with donor funding) start activities without proper consultation with
local authorities, and in absence of a coordinated approach. In practice DACOs are aware
of projects when these approach them for collaboration, but PACOs are often informed of
on-going projects when there is a problem that requires their attention. Poor planning
and monitoring of these various initiatives can lead to conflicting implementation
methodologies and overlaps, or gaps that could be better addressed if there was a more
proactive coordination role by PACOs and DACOs. Limited information sharing means
that DACO and PACO usually list the projects operating in their area (the ones they are
aware of), but fail to indicate basic information (how many smallholders are targeted,
where) and main results achieved by these projects.
19.
The objective of the PEP is that the capacities of MACO and MLF are
strengthened in an effective and sustainable way. PEP will provide them with resources,
staff to take up their new roles, favouring partnerships with private sector. A Change
Management Team (CMT) will guide and facilitate implementation and give support to
institutional strengthening and capacity building in MACO and MLF for them to fulfil their
mandates. It is proposed that the CMT will include 11 members, of which 2 from MACO
100
and 2 from MLF, and one representative each from MFNP, Cabinet, Ministry of
Commerce, donors, NGO, private sector, training institutions.
20.
Results to be achieved are grouped around four broad areas which are:
(a) change management and improved services (including setting up CMT); (b) sector
policy planning and financial management (including link to MTEF and IFMIS); (c) human
resources management training and ICT (including payroll and personnel databases, job
description, human resources strategies, training strategies both internal and external);
(d) monitoring and evaluation. Total budget is 7.5 million EUR over three and half years.
21.
Support to the M&E system has been identified as a priority area of intervention,
especially focusing on the review and design of and M&E system with MTEF indicators.
The EC has limited its support to an envelope of EUR 340,000, aimed at providing two
TA (to develop methodologies for social accountability (3 months), and a assist with
identification of indicators and strengthening of the current reporting system, (12
months), and to finance a user survey, implemented by a national institution. It is
foreseen that this support would target the first 24 months of the PEP. However there
are substantial additional resources to strengthen the Management Information System
(MIS) and the IT requirements to set-up and roll-out such a system.
22.
IFAD and Finland are also co-financing the PEP with approximately 1.9 million
USD of grant resources aimed at strengthening and supporting M&E and Early Warning
system in MACO, in particular providing training to MACO staff at all levels. The
objectives of this grant is for MACO to better be able to perform its sector coordination
function at local level, to provide timely and quality food security information, and to
monitor its performance and that of the sector (other stakeholders) more effectively,
through the production of data that contributes to evidence based decision making,
either through administrative reporting systems or through surveys. A MACO M&E
working group is being set-up, chaired by PPD, and with M&E staff from the various
departments, and various donor financed and MACO implemented projects.
23.
In this regard, MACO has requested that S3P provides technical assistance to PPD
in the form of a Programme planning and monitoring specialist who will be based in PPD
and who will report to the Director PPD, for a period of 3 years, and who will: (i) assist
with the review of the current M&E system in MACO, including reviewing current M&E
indicators, reporting formats, frequency and information flow; (ii) facilitate internal
discussion within the PPD M&E Unit, the M&E Working Group and progressively to larger
audiences regarding the selection of key indicators, reporting formats, frequency and
information flow; (iii) facilitate discussion during workshops at central and provincial
level; and (iv) advise PPD regarding IT requirements for a Management Information
System. This person will also build capacity and assist in: (a) the coordination and
harmonization of the different initiatives, projects and programmes in relation to the
SNDP, the National Agricultural Policy and the Zambia CAADP; and (b) the management
of information and communication flows related to these.
Knowledge management and learning processes
24.
In S3P, knowledge management and learning (KM&L) will be a means to make
the programme more effective and efficient, enable it to simplify processes, adapt much
faster to the emerging realities and lessons, and achieve greater impact. The main
purpose of KM processes within S3P is to ensure that knowledge generated is
systematically identified, analysed, documented, used to improve programme
performance and shared. KM&L will be fully linked to the S3P PME system, to enable a
continuous improvement process, based on feedback loops from data collection to
analysis and interpretation. This will enable S3P to be flexible and responsive to
changing circumstances. Emerging lessons and experience will also be used to support
capacity building and institution strengthening activities of a range of stakeholders,
especially MACO at provincial, district and camp level, as well as other GRZ departments,
service providers, farmer organizations and others. Systematic KM&L will also support
evidence-based decision-making and policy development.
101
25.
The S3P KM&L system will be developed in consultation with the “Smallholder
Agribusiness Promotion Programme” (SAPP) and the “Support to the Agricultural sector
Performance Enhancement Programme (PEP) which has just started programme
activities. This is expected to facilitate “scaling up” of innovations and lessons into MACO
and its institutions.
26.
The objective of the KM&L system of S3P is to integrate Knowledge Management
and Communication (KMC) in all aspects of project management (including design,
implementation, M&E, financial management, supervision and reporting) to improve
project management processes and delivery of the programme objectives. The KMC
system will be guided by the following key concepts and principles: institutionalization;
knowledge value chain approach; action learning; communities of practice; and
networking and partnerships.
27.
In developing the S3P KM system, the following steps will be considered: (a)
design of an appropriate monitoring and documentation system; (b) development of
appropriate institutional arrangements; (c) monitoring, evaluation and documentation;
(d) information management; (e) communication; and (f) knowledge based project
support, decision making and policy dialogue.
28.
The objectives, activities, responsibilities and methods for each of these steps will
be elaborated with stakeholders as part of start-up support process. A PME/KMC
specialist will be included in the PMU. The KM capacity at provincial and district level will
be strengthened so that each province and district can analyze its implementation
experience and incorporate this for enhanced programme results and sharing. The
annual S3P supervision and implementation support mission will not only be for
assessing fiduciary issues, but also to assess knowledge and capacity gaps and how
these are managed. The programme’s PME/KM system will also provide key learning
opportunities for understanding and assessing progress towards meeting GRZ
development targets. Awareness will be created within the private sector and among
other stakeholders as to opportunities for participation in service provision in the rural
areas, and opportunities will be created for new actors to enter the market for services.
29.
Although some costs of implementing the KM system are integrated within project
implementation, other costs related to building and managing the KM system, and
upgrading KM competencies were identified, including: national PME/KM specialists; field
back stopping support by PME/KMC; KM capacity building, coaching and mentoring;
information communication technology (ICT) comprising equipment, maintenance and
training; documentation equipment; production of documented outputs; review and
planning workshops; participation in networking and knowledge sharing workshops.
30.
KM&L in S3P will support the policy and institutional framework in two major
ways: (a) support the integration of KM&L in MACO; and (b) develop mechanisms for
continuous policy dialogue and improvement based on lessons from practice and
evidence gathered. This will include the following strategies:

Utilisation of the knowledge and lessons and evidence in project implementation
for a strategic policy dialogue e.g. extension assessment to inform the need of an
extension policy

Involvement of policy and decision makers in lesson learning and KM activities

Studies to assess the level of learning at policy level

Establishment of institutionalised mechanisms for feedback from practice into
policy arena
31.

Specific KM&L activities will include:
Awareness sessions/meetings with policy makers on lessons learnt and policy
implications – towards improvement
102

Bring policy makers to specific learning events in projects to become part of the
lessons learning

Produce adequate policy influence materials targeting specific policy arenas

Informal communication and engagement with policy and decision makers by
project coordinator and staff

Make lessons and implication learning a part of an agenda where policy makers
meet and discuss (annual review meetings of ministries etc , Country assistance
strategy papers, etc )
103
Annex 7.
Financial Management and Disbursement Arrangements
Introduction
1.
Both GRZ and IFAD require that the Programme be well managed and supervised
to ensure that loan proceeds are used only for intended purposes with due regard to
efficiency, effectiveness and sustainable achievement of the Programme’s development
objectives. In order for the implementing agencies and all those involved in the
Programme’s financial management (e.g. external auditors) to have a common
understanding of and approach to the various aspects of financial management and
disbursement arrangements, these are described in the next paragraphs.
2.
Both Finland and Sweden have recently made their own assessment of MACO’s
financial management systems and capacity1. Some of the main findings are that while
MACO staff are well trained and able to apply sound financial management, internal audit
and procurement systems, the areas of bank reconciliation, accounting and reporting (no
double entry accounting system), and audit committee function are all considered as
weak. At provincial level the main constraints include: a) shortage of district accountants
and absence of internal audit post at provincial level, b) weak bank reconciliation
procedures c) budget reallocation according to needs (fungibility risk), d) poor
procurement control and limited procurement skills, and e) the absence of a systemic
asset management system.
3.
At present the level of fiduciary risk in the Ministry as a whole is therefore
considered to be substantial, though it is expected that the roll-out of the Integrated
Financial Management Information System (IFMIS), foreseen in 2012, will help address
many of the constraints that were identified. However, the proposed arrangements for
financial management under S3P recognise and respond to the current weaknesses,
building in a number of safeguards and risk mitigation measures.
Financing
4.
The programme will be co-financed by IFAD (loan of USD 24.8 million), the
Government of Finland (grant of USD 7.1 million), the Government of the Republic of
Zambia (estimated USD 6.1 million), districts (US$ 0.4 million); and by programme
beneficiaries (USD 1.5 million).
5.
Finland’s contribution will be channelled via IFAD and blended with the IFAD loan
in a fixed ratio (pari passu) of approximately 22 per cent (Finland): 78 per cent (IFAD).
This arrangement will be formalised in the financing agreement between GRZ and IFAD,
in which Finland’s contribution will appear, as well as agreements between IFAD and
Finland, and between the Governments of Finland and Zambia. The GRZ contribution will
come from foregone taxes and duties; while the contribution of both the districts, which
will be mainly in-kind (staff time), and the beneficiaries’, with will be both cash and inkind (labour and local materials), will be limited to sub-component 2.1 (Local Agricultural
Investments).
Disbursement Procedures and Withdrawal of Funds
6.
Negotiations for the loan will include agreeing on Loan Administration
arrangements, which will be contained in a Letter to the Borrower sent from IFAD to
MFNP. Programme expenditures will be broken down by expenditure category, as well as
by financier.
7.
The Letter to the Borrower will provide for four alternative disbursement
procedures, as follows: (i) via Designated Account; (ii) Direct Payment; (iii) Special
Commitment; and (iv) Reimbursement of expenditures incurred. It is foreseen that the
1
Assessment of the Financial Management Capacity of the Ministry of Agricultuere and Cooperative and the
Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries, (2010) Finnish Consulting Group; Pre-Award Assessment Ministry of
Agriculture and Cooperatives (2009), Moore Stephens LLP (Upon request of the Embassy of Sweden)
104
bulk of programme funds will be disbursed through the first procedure via the designated
account. Direct Payment procedure will be used only for payments on goods and services
procured internationally.
8.
To initiate the process of accessing IFAD funding, MACO/PPD with assistance of
MFNP will submit the request for an initial advance which will be processed by IFAD if the
following requirements are fulfilled:
a) Disbursement conditions as defined in the loan agreement will have been met
b) Letter on authorised signatories will have been submitted to IFAD.
c) A procurement plan has been prepared.
d) The Withdrawal Application will have been found in order following the guidelines
to be contained in the Letter to the Borrower.
9.
This advance will cover a list of expenditure for programme start-up (detailed in
Annex 5: Implementation arrangements), which are necessary before the first Annual
Work Plan and Budget can be prepared and approved by the Project Steering
Committee.
10.
Subsequent withdrawal applications will be submitted based on forms to be
prescribed in the Letter to the Borrower and must be signed by the authorised persons
designated by GRZ who will be the Programme Manager, Financial Management
Specialist, MACO‘s Chief Accountant (representing MFNP) and the Director of PPD at
MACO. A withdrawal application is a legal instrument for withdrawal of loan proceeds.
Flow of Funds and Financial Management
11.
Funds flow arrangements have been kept simple (see chart in Appendix 1).
IFAD/Finland funds will pass into a Designated Account (DA) denominated in US Dollars
and held at the Zambia Reserve Bank (ZRB). This account will be managed by
MACO/PPD and will require one signature each from both Category 1 (Director PPD, Chief
Accountant or Principal Accountant) and Category 2 (PMU Programme Manager or
Financial Management Specialist). The designated account will be used to feed the
Kwacha-denominated Operations Account (OA), which will be held in a commercial bank
in Lusaka and will be managed exclusively by the PMU. It will be replenished from the
DA, based on progress reports and in compliance with IFAD disbursement procedures.
Any involvement of public/ private institutions in the delivery of programme activities will
be treated as service provision, and will be translated into output-based contracts/MOUs
with payments treated as reimbursable to the service provider.
12.
For activities implemented by MACO at decentralised level, funds will be made
available to an Operations sub-account, or provincial project account, held in ZK in a
commercial bank branch in each of the Provincial capitals where the project is working.
It will operate on the basis of an imprest account: the PMU will provide an advance that
will need to be justified before subsequent releases. This account will finance activities
implemented by MACO, and will consist of paying DSA, fuel, training facility, equipment,
etc…
13.
Financial management at the provincial level can be problematic; there are
frequently pressures on the provincial accountant to use project resources for nonproject purposes. To strengthen the S3P financial management arrangements at this
level and prevent any possibility of leakage of funds, a series of measures are proposed:

The amount of the advance will initially be kept low (one month operations) and
gradually increased as capacities are improved and the provincial accountant is
able to provide complete and accurate financial reports.

The Financial Management Specialist in the PMU will be expected to travel to the
provinces monthly to review and verify the provincial programme accounts.
He/she will be provided with an adequate travel budget to make this possible.
105

All transfers of funds from the operations account in Lusaka to the provincial
programme account will be accompanied by a note to the Provincial PS, indicating
the expected use of the funds.

Using an internet banking facility, the FMS will be able to review the provincial
operations accounts in real time. He/she will also be authorised to block the
account in the event of unjustified expenditures.

All proposed expenditures from the account will be: (a) subject to ex-ante audit;
(b) cleared (by email) by the FMS; and (c) approved by the PS of the Province

In addition, orientation and related training on financial management and
procurement procedures (both GRZ and IFAD) will be provided for all relevant
staff at provincial level: the provincial accountant, PACO, internal auditor, PS.
These should also be involved in the preparation of the AWPB, to increase their
awareness of the proposed project activities. Support for the Provincial
Accountants’ mobility, to enable them to visit the districts, will also be provided.
The Summary of Funds flow arrangements by sub-component is shown below:
Sub-component
1.1 Strengthening Farmers
Organizations and their
federation

Possible Payment Arrangements
Essentially a Service Provider requiring a contract, and payments
linked to agreed outputs

These payments will be made directly by the PMU

Funds will be channelled to provincial accounts, managed by MACO
under supervision of Financial Management Specialist, and after
adequate training. Payment will cover DSA, fuel, training facility,
equipment

Partnerships with other organizations will be formalized under a MoU
which will specify payment conditions. These payments will be made
directly by the PMU, as for any service providers

Funds will be channelled to provincial accounts, managed by MACO
under supervision of Financial Management Specialist, and after
adequate training.

Partnerships with other organizations will be formalized under a MoU
which will specify payment conditions. These payments will be made
directly by the PMU, as for any service providers

Funds will be disbursed to the Project Provincial Account to be
managed by the Provincial Accountant, with the support of the
Provincial Facilitator from the PMU.

Contractors and agro-dealers will be paid directly from this subaccount, following detailed disbursement modalities. Groups will be
required to open their own bank account to mobilize their contribution,
but no project monies will be transferred there.

Disbursements will be eligible for IFAD replenishment at the point of
making the disbursements, as opposed to waiting for the grantee to
spend the last Kwacha of the Grant; but through accounting/ grants
management software the follow-up of the grant utilisation will be
assured.
2.2 Support to Policy and
Institutional Framework

The payments will al be done from the Operations Account, managed
by PMU. Payments for the Internationally recruited TA will be done by
IFAD through Direct Payment procedure.
2.3 Programme Management,

All activities to be managed by PMU. The payments will al be done from
the Operations Account, managed by PMU.
1.2 Pluralistic participatory
extension services
1.3 Agricultural Research for
Development
2.1 Local Agricultural
Investments
14.
The operation of the Designated Account and Operational Programme Account will
be in accordance with IFAD procedures. The DA will be replenished on the basis of
regular withdrawal applications with the appropriate supporting documentation, known
as Statement of Expenditures (SoE). Disbursement of funds from the DA will be made
for all eligible expenditures – excluding taxes and duties – against submission of full
standard supporting documentation. SoEs will not be required for contracts and/or
payments valued at less than US$ 30,000, or its equivalent in local currency, for all
106
goods, works or services. In such cases all underlying documentation related to such
cases will be retained at the PMU, and made available for sample post-review by IFAD
Supervision Missions and examined by auditors as required.
15.
The Designated Account will have a ceiling equivalent to approximately six
months of programme expenditure (between 12-15 per cent of total loan amount).
Fiduciary Risk and Mitigation Measures
Several fiduciary risks have been identified and will be mitigated by the project:
Fungibility risk
Delays in production of
supporting documentation
Limited financial management
skills
Delays in counterpart funds
Only limited funds will be sent to the provincial project imprest account,
according to needs, and corresponding to no more than 3 months of the
AWPB. Initially amounts will cover one month of expenditure
Close supervision from Fin. Management Specialist in PMU
All proposed expenditures to be cleared and approved
Annual audits
IFAD supervision missions
Reporting will be done by the Provincial accountant under supervision
from S3P financial management specialist, who will visit once a month to
reconcile bank account and financial reports
The project will finance financial management and procurement training
to provincial and district financial management and procurement staff in
all provinces where the project will be operating
National technical assistance support will be provided during the first 12
months to assist them with financial reporting, and book keeping
Taxes and duties are now considered eligible expenditures (section
11.01(c) of the new IFAD general conditions of financing
Accounting System
16.
According to GRZ procedures, S3P Financial Statements will be prepared in
compliance with International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) Cash basis.
Guidance on compliance will be offered by the MACO Chief Accountant who is an officer
of the MFNP - Accountant General’s Office. IFAD financed S3P transactions will initially be
accounted for and reported on using the SAPPO accounting package. Approximately 60
percent of IFAD projects in the region use TomPro accounting software with good
results. This software can also be programmed to generate automatically withdrawal
statements. S3P will adopt the last version of TOMPRO with the multi-sites option to
allow recording of data at the provincial level and consolidation of accounting data at the
central level
17.
The accounting system will be configured to be able to generate financial
information in the following dimensions:

expenditure trends by components by financier;

expenditure trends by categories by financier;

contractors statements of account with sufficient audit trail;

investment fund Module able to handle such anticipated magnitude of grants;

outstanding advances to contractors and others, aged to facilitate follow-up;

commitments;

receivables in the form of replenishment applications in transit and any refunds
that may be due from Government.
18.
Performance-based invoices will be the basis for payments to contractors. For a
contractor to be paid, an invoice will be submitted with evidence that a related milestone
to justify a payment has been achieved. However reimbursable costs will have to be
fully justified. It will be the responsibility of the service providers to collate
documentation to support their reimbursement cost claims.
107
19.
Provinces will have formal accounting obligation and provincial accountants will
be provided with training on financial management and procurement procedures (both
GRZ and IFAD procedures). A national Technical Assistance will be provided to them at
the beginning of the project to assist them with preparation of financial statements,
reports and book-keeping. The accounting software will need to have a grants (or subprojects) module to keep track of commitments and disbursements.
Financial Reporting and Programme Financial Statements
20.
According to GRZ procedures, S3P Financial Statements will be prepared in
compliance with International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) Cash basis
and give a true and fair view of the financial position of the Programme and of the
resources and expenditures for the audited period. The PFS should include:

A statement of funds received and of expenditures incurred disclosing separately
IFAD’s funds, counterpart funds (government), and beneficiaries’ funds.

Expenditure trends component-wise; category-wise each analysed by financier
with a budget versus actual variance analysis.

A summary of the activities of the Designated Account.

A Balance Sheet showing accumulated funds of the Programme, bank balances,
as limited under IPSAS cash basis.

A schedule listing individual Withdrawal Applications.

A summary of the accounting policies and other explanatory notes.

A list of assets acquired or procured to date with Programme funds.
21.
Guidance on compliance will be offered by the MACO Chief Accountant who is an
officer of the MFNP - Accountant General’s Office.
22.
Provincial accountants will prepare financial statements based on models
developed by the PMU’s Financial management specialist.
23.
The MACO Chief Accountant will be closely involved in the preparation of Final
Accounts.
Progress reports are a formal requirement. Sufficient information must be made
available about what money is spent on, how much is spent on what, and what the
results are. The main functions of progress reports include:
24.

review current progress
compared to budget;

provide overall status information on the Programme since it started, in terms of
physical progress and total expenditure;

identify problems during the reporting period and steps to solve these problems;

analyse strengths and weaknesses, opportunities and threats;

discuss quantitative
objectives; and

provide strategic direction for the next planning cycle.
and
compared
qualitative
to
planned
progress
activities
made
in
and
expenditure
achieving
overall
25.
Monthly management accounts will be prepared based on the accounting system
to aid management decision and control. The monthly management accounts will include
the following.

Budget Execution Report. A budget/actual comparison of the expenditures
incurred component-wise and category-wise. It includes a list of commitments
entered into and still to be paid (including awarded grants not yet settled);
analysed component-wise and category-wise. A commitment is a signed contract
or issued a Purchase Order, or grant agreement.
108

Statement of financial position (financial assets and liabilities).

Statement of commitments (off-balance sheet) - the contracts and grants
register.

Bank reconciliation statement.
26.
Half yearly reports should be submitted to IFAD no later than three months after
the end of each six month period. Annual financial reports will also need to be prepared
and submitted not later than three months following the end of the year.
27.
The nature of annual reports is different from that of half-year reports. In
addition to a simple review of implementation progress, this requires analysis by
Programme management. A full picture of Programme resources, achievements of the
past year and since the beginning of the Programme, as well as annual and cumulative
expenditure needs to be presented. Analysis is required of successful approaches and
outputs, failures and constraints, performance of implementing partners, and whether
progress is being made towards achieving objectives. Such analysis should lead to
conclusions about the effectiveness of Programme strategies, the need for modification
of the logical framework, and planning for the following year.
Audit
28.
MACO internal auditors will include S3P in their annual internal audit plans – and
will thus cover it during the audits in accordance with GRZ procedures. MACO internal
auditors will have a right to report directly to the PSC should there be a need. There
should be at least one internal audit report covering SAPP in each quarter.
29.
Each year GRZ’s Auditor General or a firm acceptable to him/her will do an
external audit of the Programme’s Financial Statements. The audit will be carried out in
accordance with International Standards on Auditing. Normal GRZ procedures will be
followed in selection and appointment of auditors, which need to be hired by the Auditor
general. The PMU will prepare a list of firms to be invited to tender, after consulting with
the Auditor General. IFAD will need to provide its no objection to this list before the
tender is issued. The tender evaluation report will also need to be cleared by IFAD before
it can be sent to the Auditor general for issuing the contract to the external audit firm.
30.
The audit report will be circulated to the PSC, IFAD, MACO and other interested
stakeholders. A certified copy of the Audit Report must be submitted to IFAD no later
than 6 months after the end of the Fiscal Year. Failure to do so will result in an
automatic and mandatory suspension of disbursements. Appendix 2 provides sample
terms of reference for the external auditors.
31.
The auditors should verify that the Programme PFSs have been prepared in
accordance with the International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) - Cash
Basis and give a true and fair view of the financial position of the Programme and of the
resources and expenditures for the audited period. The Auditors’ opinion should confirm
that the financial statements comply with the official books of accounts, based on the
accounting software in operation. As an annex to the PFSs, the auditors should prepare a
reconciliation of the amounts shown as received by S3P and those shown as disbursed
by IFAD. The auditors are to comment on the accounting principles used for the
preparation of the financial statements and on if they were consistently applied. Special
attention will be given to determine whether:

IFAD and counterpart funds, have been used in accordance with the financing
agreement, with due attention to economy, efficiency, and only for the purposes
for which financing was provided.

Goods and services have been procured in accordance with the financing
agreement.

All supporting documentation, records and accounts have been maintained in
respect of all Programme activities, (including the expenditures by SOEs).
109

The Designated Account has been used and maintained in conformity with the
financing agreement.

Assets procured from Programme funds exist, are properly safeguarded and there
is a verifiable ownership by the implementing agency or beneficiaries in line with
the financing agreement.

National laws have been complied with and that the financial and accounting
procedures approved for the Programme (i.e. PIM) were followed and used.
32.
In addition to the audit of the PFSs, the auditors will include a review of SOEs
used as a basis for submission of withdrawal applications to IFAD. The auditors will carry
such tests and reviews as considered necessary under the circumstances in order to
verify that SOEs issued during the period were prepared in conformity with the financing
agreement, were eligible for financing and were in agreement with the accounting books.
Annexed to the PFS, should be a schedule listing individual withdrawal applications
providing details relative to amounts submitted for reimbursement and amount
reimbursed and by disbursement method (SOEs, direct payment, special commitment,
reimbursement to the Designated Account, reimbursement of pre-financed
expenditures). Where ineligible expenditures are identified, as having been included in
withdrawal applications, these should be separately noted in the audit report.
Additionally the auditors should verify reimbursement of ineligible expenditures (if any)
to the Designated Account.
33.
The total withdrawals under the SOE procedure should be part of the overall
reconciliation with IFAD records indicated. The auditors will issue a separate audit
opinion on the SOEs indicating the extent to which the SOE procedure can be relied upon
as basis for loan disbursements under the Programme.
34.
35.
Finally the auditors will provide a management letter in which they will:

Give comments and observations on the accounting records, systems and
controls that were examined during the course of the audit.

Identify specific deficiencies or areas of weakness in systems and controls, and
make recommendations for their improvement.

Check that transactions are well authorised; first through their inclusion in the
AWPB that reflects IFAD’s prior authorisation, and second through approvals as
required.

Report on the degree of compliance of each of the financial covenants in the
financing agreement and give comments, if any, on internal and external matters
affecting such compliance.

Communicate matters that have come to their attention during the audit which
might have a significant impact on the implementation of the Programme.

Give comments on previous audit recommendations that have not been
satisfactorily implemented.

Comment on the economy, efficiency and effectiveness in the use of resources.

Bring attention to any other matter that the auditors consider pertinent, including
ineligible expenditures.
The management letter should also include responses from S3P and MACO’s PPD.
110
Annex 7 – Appendix 1: Funds Flow Chart
IFAD
2
Designated a/c (US$) @ RBZ
1
3
Operations a/c @ commercial bank (ZK)
4
5
Provincial programme a/c @
commercial bank (ZK)
6
Contractors, service providers, suppliers, PPP, consultants, agri-dealers
Line 1: Direct payments from IFAD to suppliers, etc for disbursements related to goods
and services that have been procured internationally
Line 2: Initial allocation into the Designated Account (advance) and subsequent
replenishments. The Designated account will be initiated with an advance based on
projected cumulative average expenditure for six months of the Programme. This
advance will be replenished until towards programme closure when recovery of the
advance starts to take place.
Line 3: Transfer of IFAD funds from the designated account to SAPP Operational
Accounts for covering eligible local costs in Kwacha.
Line 4: Payments of IFAD and GRZ portion of local costs in Kwacha directly to service
providers
Line 5: Payments of IFAD and GRZ portion of local costs in Kwacha to the operationssub-account, managed by MACO province accountant for expenditure that will be
executed by MACO.
Line 6: Payments from the operations-sub-account, managed by MACO province
accountant to local contractors and agro-dealers, for the District Agricultural Investment
Fund.
111
Annex 7 – Appendix 2: Sample Terms of Reference for Auditors
Introduction
An audit is an ex-post review of the books of accounts, records of transactions and
financial and other systems maintained by an entity, and of its financial statements.
An external audit is carried out by independent professional auditors completely
independent of the entity whose accounts are being audited, and aims to:

Provide assurance of accountability.

Give credibility to the financial statements and other management reports.

Identify weaknesses in internal controls and financial systems and make
recommendation thereon.
This is considered an essential tool when reporting financial data; many users require
financial information to be certified by a certified public accountant and/ or the State
auditor, and this has become best market practice. The external auditor is guided by
auditing standards, such as the International Standards of Auditing (ISA).
An audit report on the financial statements, with a separate opinion on the use of the
Designated Account and Statement of Expenditures, is required each year from the
External Auditor, normally within 6 months of the year end. Non receipt within 180 days
from the original due date may trigger suspension of further disbursements.
Expected outputs
Annual audits will be performed in accordance with International Standards of Auditing
and will include a separate audit opinion on:



the financial statements
the certified statements of expenditure
the operation of the Designated Account
The Audit Report should include confirmation that goods, works and services have been
procured in accordance with underlying loan covenants and GoM financial regulations
and verification of whether the expenditures have been incurred in accordance with the
loan covenants, approved AWPBs, and with due care to economy, efficiency and value
for money.
The auditors should also prepare a management letter, addressing the adequacy of the
accounting and internal control systems, including management reply and action plan.
Auditors will also make observations on other matters that may have a negative impact
on project implementation. Comments should be accompanied with practical
recommendations for dealing with the issues raised.
Timeframe
The Audit report will be submitted in original hard copy to the IFAD CPM within six
months of the close of the financial year, corresponding to the audited period. IFAD will
respond within one month of receipt of the audit report.
Management response to the audit report and in particular to the observations raised in
the management letter is required within 30 days and must be copied to the IFAD CPM.
It is vital that follow up is made on audit recommendations especially in cases where the
audit opinion is qualified. If the audit requirements are not complied with or are not
satisfactory to IFAD, sanctions may be applied, including suspension of further
disbursements.
112
Annex 8.
Procurement
Introduction
1.
IFAD has recently approved a revised Project Procurement Guidelines (September
2010), and associated Procurement Handbook, which adopt a new approach to
procurement that is financed by IFAD loans and grant. These guidelines state that all
procurement shall be carried out in accordance with national procurement regulations, to
the extent that they are consistent with IFAD Procurement Guidelines. In cases where
IFAD deems that the borrower’s system for procurement is either in whole or in part not
in line with the revised guidelines, then an alternative provision will apply (IFAD rules),
in whole or in part.
2.
The Government of Zambia passed a Public Procurement Act in 2008, which
transforms the Zambia National Tender Board into the Zambia Public Procurement
Agency (ZPPA), with oversight and regulatory role, while Ministries and Public Spending
Agencies (MPSA) are being empowered to be fully responsible for the complete
procurement cycle. (A specific provision of the 2008 Act is that all contracts need to be
subject to a legal review by the Office of the Attorney General; the practicality of this
measure, and the capacity of the Attorney General office to follow-up on this provision
has yet to be ascertained.)
3.
A transition period during which ZPPA retained its review and approval role was
supposed to have phased out in December 2010. During this phase the procurement
regulations should have been finalized, including revised standard bidding documents. In
fact, it appears that the ZPPA has yet to be transformed into a full oversight and
regulatory body. The procurement regulation and standard bidding documents based on
the 2008 Act have not yet been released. Moreover MFNP has recently sent a circular
requesting all MPSAs (including local governments, parastatals, etc) to send
procurement requests above ZK 50 million (approximately equivalent to US$ 10,000), to
ZPPA for prior review.
Assessment of existing procurement procedures
At country level
4.
The latest international assessment of GRZ procurement procedures was
conducted by OECD/DAC in 2007, and was based on the 1994 Zambia National Tenders
Board Act. It followed the methodology developed for the Assessment of National
procurement Systems (version4). Its main conclusions were that while the system is well
documented with clear responsibilities and procedures, some major weaknesses
remained, particularly regarding the fact that: a) open competitive bidding is not stated
as the default procurement method, many tenders are in fact restricted or not
adequately advertised; b) the complaints system works poorly and the appeals
mechanism is inadequate; c) there are no standard bidding documents for the
procurement of goods, services and works; d) there is a conflict of interest for ZPPA to
be a regulator, and participate at the same time in the procurement decision process; e)
records management is very poor; and finally f) risk assessment and management is not
undertaken.
5.
IFAD’s recent project experience suggests there have been improvements in a
number of these areas. For example, standard bidding documents are now used; and the
complaints/appeals system appears to be functioning. Under SAPP, a complaint
submitted by a bidding consultancy company resulted in ZPPA requiring MACO to
conduct a re-evaluation of the financial proposals submitted by the short-listed firms. A
new OECD/DAC assessment would therefore seem to be needed to review the changes
that have occurred since the new law was enacted and following the 24+ months
transition period.
113
6.
The World Bank has found that some provisions of the new Procurement Act are
not admissible for its projects. These relate to the eligibility of foreign bidders in national
bidding or consultant selection processes, as well as the obligation for foreign bidders or
consultants to partner with local bidders or consultants to participate in international
competitive bidding or international selection of consultants. The Bank has requested
that these provision not apply to WB-financed contracts, and that this be reflected in the
legal agreement, stating that foreign bidders shall be allowed to participate in national
bidding processes and, for ICB, that foreign bidders shall not be obliged to partner with
nationals.
7.
Zambia procurement system is classified as being generally in accordance with
the requirements laid out in IFAD’s revised Public Procurement Guidelines, and suitable
for use for project procurement, subject to some modifications (in line with those of the
World Bank). These will be specified in the Financing Agreement and the Letter to the
Borrower. The Procurement and Supplies unit of MACO has been rated by ZPPA as falling
in category C of procurement units (the highest rating possible).
At institutional level
8.
While S3P procurement will comply with the Zambia procedures issued in
accordance with the Public Procurement Act, 2008, several procurement risks have been
identified, and the programme will implement risk mitigation and management
measures.
Procurement risks and mitigation measures
Risk
Fungibility risk
Bank reconciliation risk
Limited procurement skills
Procurement control
Asset Management
Office Attorney general review
of all contracts resulting in
delayed contract signature
Management/Mitigation measure
Only limited amounts of funds will be sent to the provincial project
imprest account, according to needs, and corresponding to no more than
3 months AWPB
Done by the Provincial accountant under supervision from S3P
procurement and contracts specialist, who will visit once a month to
reconcile bank account and financial reports
The project will finance training to provincial and district financial
management and procurement staff in all provinces where the project will
be operating
Prior review by ZPPA and IFAD. IFAD shall conduct post review of
procurement documentation. All documentation relating to bid
submissions will be subject to independent audit
The S3P procurement specialist will ensure that an asset management
registry is incorporated to the financial management software (such as
Tompro) to keep track of goods procured
There is not much project can do about this except bring up in regular
dialogue with Ministry of Finance on a case by case basis
Procurement Thresholds
9.
Different procurement methods (ranging from International Competitive Bidding
to Direct Contracting) will be used for the different categories of procurement depending
on nature, amount and other criteria the guiding principal being economy and efficiency.
These methods will be specified in the procurement plans that will be part of each year’s
AWPB. An initial 18-months plan is provided in Appendix 1 to this Annex.
The following threshold set up by ZPPA apply in Zambia
Threshold
Up to ZK 5 million (USD 1000)
Above ZK 5 million to ZK 10 million (USD 2000)
Above ZK 10 million up to ZK 50 million (USD
10,000)
Above ZMK 50 million (USD 10,000)
1
Authorising Office
Senior Officer (PACO, DACO, Deputy Director)
Head of Department, PACO
Controlling Officer (Permanent Secretary or S3P
Programme Manager)
MACO or Provincial Tender Committee1, following
review by ZPPA of tender documents, and followed
by ZPPA approval of tender evaluation report and
award proposal
MACO has a tender committee that is chaired by the PS and composed of various MACO department representatives. The
Procurement and Supplies unit of MACO provides secretariat. This committee meets once a week.
114
10.
The Zambia Procurement guidelines include the following thresholds.
a) Simplified Bidding procedure, which means local shopping is allowed only up to
ZMK 500 million (US$ 100,000). This means simplified solicitation document.
However there is a need to send both the solicitation documents and quotations
to ZPPA for clearance.
b) Above ZMK 500 million (US$ 100,000) open bidding has to be followed. This
means preparing a request for Proposal or Expression of interest if a
prequalification procedure is being followed. Here again ZPPA has to give its
approval to tender documents and shortlist before the tender is launched, and
also approve the tender evaluation committee report.
c) There are no thresholds to define when the open bidding should be National
Competitive Bidding (NCB) or International Competitive Bidding (ICB). Following
IFAD regulations, it is suggested that any procurement over US$ 150,000 should
follow the ICB procedure, with Expression of Interest, short list of qualified
providers, and request for tenders.
11.
IFAD will define its prior review threshold, above which IFAD clearance will be
needed at critical stages of the procurement process. Normally these thresholds are as
follow: a) US$ 50,000 for Goods/Civil works and b) US$ 25,000 for Consulting Services.
12.
The Procurement Procedures that will be followed by S3P under the various subcomponents are as follows:

The PMU will do local or international shopping for contracts not exceeding
US$ 10,000.

The MACO Procurement and Supplies Unit will procure for contracts above
US$ 10,000, following GRZ procedure, including prior review by ZPPA and prior
review by IFAD in cases where it applies, and going through the MACO tender
evaluation committee, whose decisions will be subject to ZPPA and IFAD final
clearance, as foreseen in GRZ and IFAD procedures.
13.
These thresholds will be confirmed in the Letter to the Borrower. The clearance of
ToRs for all Consulting Services will require a “No Objection” from IFAD irrespective of
this threshold. This is provided by the Procurement advisor based in Nairobi, as well as
the CPM at HQ. If the procurement process is within this threshold, the project can carry
out the process and report, IFAD will conduct ex-post verification based on a sample.
Procurement Implementation Arrangements
14.
S3P procurement activities will be coordinated by a procurement and contracts
specialist who will be responsible for undertaking procurement activities within the S3P
threshold and prepare procurement documents for processes. This specialist will have
the necessary experience and sound understanding of GRZ procurement guidelines and
the procedures applying to internationally financed projects. MACO Procurement and
Supplies Unit through the Ministerial Tender Committee will undertake procurement
activities above the limit of the S3P.
15.
The S3P procurement specialist will facilitate procurement for S3P following
guidelines to be specified in the S3P Project Implementation Manual (PIM), including
procurement procedures for goods, works and services; community based procurement
procedures, internal control, reconciliation and dispute resolution, risk management;
post procurement, audit and monitoring; etc.
115
Annex 8 – Appendix 1: 24 Month Procurement Plan
S.C.
Activity
1. WORKS
1.2. A. Strengthening MACOcapacities in the field
2.1. B. District Agricultural Investment Fund (DAIF)
2.1. B. District Agricultural Investment Fund (DAIF)
Expenditure category
Expense
5. Upgrading of relevant camp facilities
Housing rehabilitation
1. District-level agricultural investments
2. Community-level agricultural investments
Unit
unit
lumpsum
lumpsum
Quantities subject to the tender
Base Unit Cost
Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Y6 Y7 Total (ZMK'000)
(USD)
12
12
24
48.000
10.000,00
Y1
Available financial envelop (including contingencies) (USD'000)
Y2
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Y7
Total
120.0
521.0
625.0
120.3
116
* Note on process:
Single (S):
one single tender for all quantities indicated
Multiple (M):
separate tenders and contracts for each year
Single extendable upon performance(E):
one single tender for all quantities indicated leading to a contractual framework agreement. Firmorder (and implementation) for 2 years and extension of service upon quality and performance reviews.
** In the case of multiple tender, only indicated for the first round
240.3
521.0
625.0
Launch of
tender
process**
Proc. Method
Process*
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
S
M
M
Start of
implementation /
Delivery**
Quarter after project start-up
4.5
4.5
4.5
6
6
6
Procurement Plan - 24 Months
24 Month Procurement Plan
S.C.
1.2.
1.2.
1.2.
117
1.2.
1.3.
1.3.
1.3.
1.3.
1.3.
1.3.
1.3.
1.3.
1.3.
1.3.
1.3.
1.3.
Activity
2. EQUIPMENT
A. Strengthening MACO capacities in the field
B. Harmonization and up-scaled application of
participatory extension approaches (PEA)
A. Research specialist
B. Agricultural research for development
1.3. B. Agricultural research for development
1.3.
2.1.
2.1.
2.1.
2.1.
2.2.
2.2.
2.2.
2.3.
2.3.
2.3.
2.3.
2.3.
2.3.
2.3.
2.3.
Local Agricultural Investment
A. Programme planning and monitoring specialist in
PPD
PPD
PPD
A. PMU operations
A. PMU operations
A. PMU operations
A. PMU operations
A. PMU operations
A. PMU operations
A. PMU operations
A. PMU operations
Expense
1. Facilitators at PACO
4WD vehicles
Computer
Sets/a
(Laptops) Office
Electronic
Equipments
/b
Personal
offices'
furniture of solar
Installation
panels
Motorbikes
Vehicle
Set
lumpsum
set
unit
unit
2
2
2
2
30
1. Extension specialist
4WD vehicles Pick-up
Computer Sets
(Laptops)
Electronic Office
Equipments /i
Personal offices'
furniture
Vehicle
1
Unit
30
24
30
24
30
24
Total
Base Unit Cost
(ZMK '000)
(USD)
Available financial envelop (including contingencies) (USD '000)
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Y7
Total
2
2
2
2
120
72
200.000
13.000
700
8.000
3.600
21.600
41.666,67
2.708,33
145,83
1.666,67
750,00
4.500,00
83.3
5.4
0.3
3.3
22.5
-
1
200.000
41.666,67
41.7
22.5
108.0
22.6
108.3
22.7
108.8
Launch of
tender
process**
Start of
implementation /
Delivery**
Proc. Method
Process*
83.3
5.4
0.3
3.3
90.2
325.1
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
S
S
S
S
S
S
-1
-1
-1
-1
2.5
2.5
3
3
3
3
4
4
41.7
Cost based NCB
S
1
3
S
Set
1
1
13.000
2.708,33
2.7
2.7
Cost based NCB
-1
1
lumpsum
1
1
700
145,83
0.1
0.1
Cost based NCB
S
-1
1
set
Vehicle
Set
lumpsum
set
unit
unit
unit
unit
unit
unit
unit
unit
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
1
1
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
1
1
3
3
1
8.000
200.000
13.000
700
8.000
197.000
21.600
7.200
3.840
197.000
21.600
7.200
3.840
1.666,67
41.666,67
2.708,33
145,83
1.666,67
41.041,67
4.500,00
1.500,00
800,00
41.041,67
4.500,00
1.500,00
800,00
1.7
41.7
2.7
0.1
1.7
41.0
13.5
4.5
0.8
41.0
13.5
4.5
0.8
1.7
41.7
2.7
0.1
1.7
41.0
13.5
4.5
0.8
41.0
13.5
4.5
0.8
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
2.5
-1
-1
-1
2.5
-1
-1
1
1
1
1
1
3
4
3
3
3
4
3
3
ls
1
1
2
240.000
50.000,00
50.0
50.0
Cost based NCB
M
2.5
4
ls
1
1
2
48.000
10.000,00
10.0
10.0
Cost based NCB
M
2.5
4
ls
Set
lumpsum
set
lumpsum
5
1
1
1
5
20
1
1
1
36.000
13.000
700
8.000
7.500,00
2.708,33
145,83
1.666,67
37.5
2.7
0.1
1.7
112.5
2.7
0.1
1.7
229.0
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
M
S
S
S
S
2.5
-1
-1
-1
5.5
4
1
1
1
7
set
1
1
7.000
1.458,33
1.5
1.5
Cost based NCB
S
-1
1
Electronic Office Equipments /a
lumpsum
1
1
700
145,83
0.1
0.1
Cost based NCB
S
-1
1
Personal offices' furniture
1. Vehicles and office equipment
set
Vehicle
Vehicle
Set
Set
lumpsum
lumpsum
set
set
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
5
1
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
5
1
8.000
200.000.000
155.000.000
13.000.000
7.000.000
50.000.000
144.000.000
16.800.000
33.600.000
1.666,67
41.667
32.292
2.708
1.458
10.417
30.000
3.500
7.000
1.7
41.7
32.3
10.8
1.5
10.4
30.0
17.5
7.0
1.7
41.7
32.3
10.8
1.5
10.4
30.0
17.5
7.0
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
Cost based NCB
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
Computer Sets (Laptops)
1. Adaptive research
3. Identification and scaling-up of adapted postharvest technologies
Investment manager
Investment manager
Investment manager
3. Group-based agricultural investments /f
Mansa - Equipment:
4X4 CAR
Mansa
- Equipment:
Motorbike
Mansa
- Equipment:
laptops- Equipment:
Mansa
laser printer
Kasama
- Equipment:
4X4 CAR
Kasama
- Equipment:
Motorbike
Kasama
- Equipment:
laptops - Equipment:
Kasama
laser printer
Tools / post-harvest
equipment Mansa
Tools / post-harvest
equipment Kasama
Post-harvest
equipment
for Farm training
institute/FTC/DACO
Computer
Sets
(Laptops) Office
Electronic
Equipments
/i
Personal
offices'
furniture
Computer Sets (Desktop)
City car Sets
Computer
(Laptops) Sets
Computer
(Desktops) and other
Accounting
MIS software
Electronic
Office
Equipments
/a
Personal
offices'
furniture room's
and airfurniture
Meeting
and air condition
10
75.0
229.0
* Note on process:
Single (S):
Multiple (M):
one single tender for all quantities indicated leading to a contractual framework agreement. Firm order (and implementation) for 2 years and extension of service upon quality and performance reviews.
1.2.
1.2.
1.2.
1.2.
1.2.
1.2.
Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Y6 Y7
Activity
S.C.
Expense
Unit
Y1
Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Y6 Y7
Total
Base Unit Cost
(ZMK '000)
(USD)
Y1
Available financial envelop (including contingencies) (USD '000)
Y2
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Y7
Total
Proc. Method
Process*
Launch of
tender
process**
Start of
implementation /
Delivery**
3. SERVICES
1.1. A. Service provider
lumpsum
Provincial facilitator
1.2. A. Strengthening MACO capacities in the field
3. Capacity building in proc. & fin. mgt.
3. Capacity building in procurement and
financial management /e
1.2. participatory extension approaches (PEA)
C. Establish partnerships and strengthen existing
1.2. organizations providing advisory services
C. Establish partnerships and strengthen existing
1.2. organizations providing advisory services
1.3. A. Research specialist
pers.-month
12
24
30
36
Technical support
pers.day
50
50
25
25
Technical support /g
pers.-day
50
50
25
Extension specialist
pers.-month
12
12
12
1. Piloting of partnerships for advisory services
lumpsum
2. Studies and reviews
lumpsum
Research specialist
12
36
36
36
25
208.3
416.7
626.6
524.7
421.9
212.0
106.5
2 516.7
109.4
109.9
110.5
636.7
210
14.400
3.000,00
36.0
72.0
90.2
108.8
150
3000
625
31.0
31.0
16.0
16.0
150
3.000
625,00
31.3
31.3
15.7
48
17.520
3.650,00
43.8
43.9
44.1
400.0
401.0
403.0
43.8
-
pm
1
1
1
pm
1
1
1
ls
0.5
1
1
1
1
pm
2
2
2
2
pm
2
2
2
pm
7
7
7
43.8
407.0
409.0
2 425.0
101.0
2.1. A. Preparation, facilitation, training, M&E
2. Preparation and M&E by District staff
lumpsum
31.3
61.6
61.9
62.2
31.8
248.8
2. Engineering for preparation and supervision
lumpsum
104.0
209.0
210.0
211.0
106.0
840.0
lumpsum
245.8
246.4
247.7
253.1
127.2
1 120.3
43.9
118
3. Training and facilitation
PPMS in PPD
2.2. PPD
pers.-month
12
12
2.2. B. Policy framework support
1. International technical assistance
person-day
20
2.2. B. Policy framework support
2. Studies
study
2.3. A. PMU operations
2. Personnel /b
2. Personnel /b
2. Personnel /b
Programme manager
Finances and
administration manager
Procurement and
contracts specialist /c
2. Personnel /b
2. Personnel /b
2. Personnel /b
1. Project Preparation, Reporting, Monitoring
and Evaluation
and Evaluation
and Evaluation
and Evaluation
and Evaluation
and Evaluation
2.3. B. Surveys, Studies and Reports
12
12
405.0
1. District Ag. Investment Manager
12
175.6
12
94.1
12
100.0
15.8
Mansa - Training and
technical support:
Cassava -: Training
TS
Kasama
and
technical support: Beans
: TS international
Partnership
CA
2. Development of CA practices adapted to high Research contracts
rainfall based farming systems
managed
by nat. or
TA
- International
2. Development of CA practices adapted to high technical assistance in
CA - Support from
TA
2. Development of CA practices adapted to high agroforestry institute
ICRAF
pers.-month
100.0
94.0
48
17.520
3.650,00
43.8
0.5
4
125.000
26.041,67
26.0
26.1
26.4
13.3
91.8
0.5
4
125.000
26.041,67
26.0
26.1
26.4
13.3
91.8
1
1
7
208 333
104.0
208.0
209.0
210.0
211.0
212.0
213.0
1 367.0
2
2
1
13
120.000
25.000,00
50.0
50.0
50.1
50.4
50.6
50.9
25.6
327.6
2
2
2
1
13
120.000
25.000,00
50.0
50.0
50.1
50.4
50.6
50.9
25.6
327.6
7
7
7
7
49
17.520.000
3 650
43.8
43.8
43.9
44.1
44.3
44.6
44.8
309.4
-
-
-
-
1 000 000
43.9
44.1
175.6
36
17.520
3.650,00
43.8
43.8
131.5
15
35
4.800
1.000,00
20.0
15.0
35.0
2
2
4
100.000
20.833,33
41.7
41.7
83.3
Pers.months
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
84
26.160.000
5.450
65.4
65.4
65.6
65.9
66.2
66.6
66.9
461.9
Pers.months
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
84
20.160.000
4.200
50.4
50.4
50.5
50.8
51.0
51.3
51.5
356.0
Pers.months
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
84
17.520.000
3.650
43.8
43.8
43.9
44.1
44.3
44.6
44.8
309.4
M&E specialist
Pers.months
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
84
17.520.000
3.650
43.8
43.8
43.9
44.1
44.3
44.6
44.8
309.4
Secretary
Driver / messenger /
office assistant
Preparation of gender
strategy
Preparation of
communication strategy
International TA for
PM&E development
Baseline and Impact
Evaluation /e
Pers.months
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
84
7.200.000
1.500
18.0
18.0
18.0
18.1
18.2
18.3
18.4
127.1
Pers.months
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
84
4.800.000
1.000
12.0
12.0
12.0
12.1
12.2
12.2
12.3
84.8
Ls
-
52.1
52.1
Ls
-
52.1
52.1
Days
30
-
30
4.800.000
1.000
30.0
30.0
Study
1
-
1
720.000.000
150.000
150.0
150.0
Thematic Studies
lumpsum
-
1
1
96.000.000
20.000
20.0
External Audits /f
audit
-
1
7
72.000.000
15.000
15.0
1
1
1
1
2
* Note on process:
Single (S):
Multiple (M):
one single tender for all quantities indicated leading to a contractual framework agreement. Firm order (and implementation) for 2 years and extension of service upon quality and performance reviews.
20.0
15.0
15.1
15.2
15.3
30.7
106.3
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
Quality and Costs
Based Tender
E
2.5
4
E
1
3
E
2
3
E
4
6
E
-1
1
E
3.5
5
M
3
4
E
-0.5
1
E
2.5
4
E
2.5
4
E
2.5
4
E
2.5
4
E
2.5
4
E
-1
1
E
3.5
5
E
4.5
6
E
3.5
5
E
-1
1
S
2.5
4
M
2.5
4
E
-1
1
E
-1
1
E
-1
1
E
-1
1
E
-1
1
E
-1
1
S
1.5
3
S
1.5
3
S
1.5
3
S
1.5
3
S
4.5
6
E
3.5
5
-
Annex 9.
Programme Cost and Financing
MAIN ASSUMPTIONS
1.
Inflation. For the entire duration of the programme, the local inflation has been
assumed at 8 per cent per annum. International inflation has been assumed at 0 per
cent until programme start and for the two initial project years, then 0.5 per cent per
annum for the five following years.
2.
Exchange rate. The competitiveness of Zambian agriculture for import
substitution or export is quite dependent on the value of the Kwacha. The currency issue
has strongly impacted on the profitability of cash crops production and determined their
level of production. The value of the Kwacha evolves very much in parallel with the
prices of copper on the international market. Over the last years, the evolution of the
Kwacha has been rather erratic (Figure 1).
3.
The initial exchange rate for the analysis has been set at Zambian Kwacha (K)
4,800 to US$ 1.00, the rate prevailing in April 2011. The conversions from current dollar
values into K are calculated using the constant purchasing power (CPP) exchange rate
(K/US$) as calculated by the Costab program. Both foreign and local inflation rates are
compounded at mid-year.
Figure 1: Exchange rate USD/K (estimate for 2010)
Exchange rate USD/K
0.00045
0.0004
0.00035
0.0003
K
/ 0.00025
D
S 0.0002
U
0.00015
0.0001
0.00005
0
9
9
9
1
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
2
2
0
0
2
3
0
0
2
4
0
0
2
5
0
0
2
6
0
0
2
7
0
0
2
8
0
0
2
9
0
0
2
0
1
0
2
Table 1: Assumptions regarding inflation and exchange rate
Period
Project preparation
(April 2011)
Foreign exchange Inflation (%)
Local Currency Inflation (%)
Exchange rate ZK/US$ b/
4,800
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Y7
-
-
-
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
8.2
8.0
8.0
8.0
8.0
8.0
8.0
5,401
5,833
6,284
6,753
7,257
7,799
8,381
a/ between project costs estimates during pre-appraisal (January 2011) and likely project start date (January 2012).
b/ using Constant purchasing parity rate option.
4.
Taxes and duties have been estimated using the Zambia Revenue Authority data.
All items imported for Programme purposes attract import duties, while domestically
purchased items are subject to national and local taxes of different types. VAT has been
applied on all expenditure accounts. Local staff are held responsible for the payment of
their national tax liabilities on salaries and allowances paid from the loan.
5.
Contingencies. Physical contingencies - accounting for changes in quantities and
in unit prices that are not related to monetary fluctuation - have been set at zero percent
considering that the quantities and unit costs in the budget are meant to calculate
envelopes by activity, that will be clarified and detailed during project implementation,
rather than targets to be achieved. The way the budget was established contains in itself
sufficient flexibility to avoid using additional physical contingencies. Price contingencies,
as calculated by Costab, are 1 per cent of base costs in US$ and to 43 per cent of base
costs in ZK thanks to the CPP assumption (see para. 4).
119
Table 2: Assumptions for the disbursement and expenditure accounts
Disbursement category Expenditure category
Civil works
Equipment
% of % foreign
taxes exchange
Investment costs
Civil works
10%
18%
Vehicles
Vehicle 4x4 SW
Vehicle 4x4 pick up
Sedan cars
Motorbikes
41%
29%
37%
23%
49%
59%
52%
64%
Equipment
Agricultural inputs
Agricultural and processing machinery and tools
Construction material
Computer equipment
Communication equipment
Photocopier, printer
Other imported office equipment
Office furniture
14%
14%
23%
17%
23%
14%
16%
12%
72%
72%
64%
69%
64%
72%
64%
32%
5%
5%
Consulting services
National consultancies
International consultancies
15%
0%
10%
90%
Operating costs
PMU/PCU salaries
Allowances for field visits
Vehicles O&M
Office equipment O&M
15%
0%
16%
16%
0%
0%
38%
32%
Capacity building and TA Training and workshops
Project operating costs
PROGRAMME COSTS
6.
Total Programme Costs: The total investment and incremental recurrent
Programme costs, including price contingencies, are estimated at US$ 39.9 million
(ZK 271 billion). The foreign exchange component is estimated at US$ 6.9 million. Duties
and taxes make up approximately US$ 6.3 million. Programme costs are summarised in
Tables 3 and 4 (detailed costs are included in the Working Paper).
7.
Costs by Component: In terms of expenditure by sub-component (SC), the major
investment are for 1.2 - Extension, with 30 per cent of total funds, 1.3 – Research, with
21 per cent, and 2.1 - District Agricultural Investment funds, with 33 per cent of total
costs: taken together, they represent 84 per cent of the total budget. The Programme
management and M&E costs are estimated at 9 per cent of total costs.
8.
Costs by disbursement account: In terms of cost by disbursement account (see
Table 5), Services by service providers (technical assistance, MACO staff, etc.) represent
37 per cent of the budget. Civil works amounts to an estimated 25 per cent, Equipment
and material to some 19 per cent, and training and studies to some 19 per cent of the
total budget. Most of the civil works will be provided through the Local Agricultural
Investments mechanisms (SC.2.1.).
120
Table 3: Total project cost by component in US$
('000 USD)
Local
(Excl.
Taxes)
Total
Amount
For.
Exch.
%
Duties &
Taxes
A. S ustainable S mallholder Productivity Growth
2,517
11,809
8,540
22,866
6
30
21
57
126
1,214
2,282
3,622
2,265
8,953
4,686
15,904
126
1,642
1,572
3,340
13,082
521
3,388
16,990
33
1
9
43
2,779
112
311
3,202
7,912
330
2,561
10,803
2,391
79
516
2,985
Total PROJECT COS TS
39,856 100
6,824
26,706
6,326
Table 4: Project costs by component in ZK and US$
(ZMK Million)
% % Total
For.
Base
Local Foreign Total Exch. Costs
(US D '000)
Local Foreign Total
A. S ustainable S mallholder Productivity Growth
11,400
50,375
29,762
91,537
600 12,000
5,783 56,158
10,870 40,632
17,253 108,790
5
10
27
16
6
30
21
57
2,375
10,495
6,200
19,070
125 2,500
1,205 11,700
2,265 8,465
3,594 22,665
5
10
27
16
6
30
21
57
49,067
1,956
14,641
65,664
13,236
532
1,484
15,253
62,303
2,488
16,125
80,917
21
21
9
19
33
1
8
43
10,222
408
3,050
13,680
2,758 12,980
111
518
309 3,359
3,178 16,858
21
21
9
19
33
1
8
43
% % Total
For.
Base
Exch. Costs
Total BAS ELINE COS TS
Physical Contingencies
Price Contingencies
157,201
68,152
32,506 189,707
13,244 81,396
17
16
100
43
32,750
281
6,772 39,522
52
333
17
16
100
1
Total PROJECT COS TS
225,353
45,750 271,103
17
143
33,032
6,824 39,856
17
101
Table 5: Project costs by disbursement category
(USD '000)
2. Civil works
Total
Total
Amount %
7,747
9,658
14,826
7,625
39,856
19
24
37
19
100
For.
Exch.
2,826
1,738
1,879
381
6,824
121
Local
(Excl.
Taxes)
3,634
6,471
9,739
6,862
26,706
Duties &
Taxes
1,287
1,449
3,208
381
6,326
9.
Disbursement by year: The annual disbursement by component and by year is
presented in Table 6. The disbursements are quite equally split between the seven years
of implementation, with slightly higher disbursement rates over years 2 to 6.
Table 6: Disbursement by component and by year
(USD '000)
Y2
208
757
1,045
2,011
417
1,782
1,099
3,298
627
1,933
1,323
3,883
525
2,126
1,339
3,990
422
1,856
1,453
3,731
212
1,813
1,414
3,440
107 2,517
1,540 11,809
866 8,540
2,513 22,866
68
132
765
965
1,824
124
379
2,328
3,091
124
431
3,646
3,107
36
448
3,591
3,174
36
445
3,655
1,742
58
441
2,240
75 13,082
11
521
480 3,388
566 16,990
2,976
7%
7%
5,625
14%
22%
7,529
19%
40%
7,581
19%
59%
7,386
19%
78%
5,679
14%
92%
3,078 39,856
8% 100%
100%
Total PROJECT COSTS
%
% cumulated
Totals Including Contingencies
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Y1
Y7
Total
FINANCING
10. Tables 7 and 8 provide a summary of the proposed financing arrangement (see
Working Paper for detailed financing arrangement for each budget items).
11. IFAD contribution: The proposed IFAD loan amounts to US$ 24.8 million,
representing 63 per cent of the total estimated Programme costs. Finland will contribute
through a grant of US$ 7.1 million, representing nearly 17 per cent of the total budget.
These funds will be disbursed on a “pari passu” principle in a fixed ratio of approximately
78:22, and they are, therefore, presented in the tables under one and the same column.
12. The Programme beneficiaries will contribute an estimated US$ 1.5 million, 4 per
cent of the total programme budget. Their participation is expected as counterpart
contribution under the Local Agricultural Investments sub-component; it will be made
both in-cash and in-kind; and it will range, depending on the type of investment, from
25 to 50 per cent of its total cost.
13. The districts will contribute under the Local Agricultural Investment component,
by participating in the financing of the District-level agricultural investments. The
participation of the districts in the cost of these will be at least 10 per cent of total cost
of these investments, which corresponds to about US$ 0.4 million or about 1 per cent of
the budget. It will be provided principally in-kind, in the form of the staff time spent in
preparing the proposals and supervising construction.
14. The Government will finance all duties and taxes (except for those on salaries).
Its share of the budget amounts to an equivalent of US$ 6.1 million, representing 15 per
cent of the total programme budget.
Table 7: Project Financing Plan by Disbursement Account
(USD '000)
2. Civil works
Total PROJECT COSTS
GRZ
Amount %
1,287
1,449
2,961
381
6,078
17
15
20
5
15
Districts
Amount %
415
415
4
-
122
1
IFAD / Finland
Amount
%
5,963
6,831
11,865
7,244
31,902
77
71
80
95
80
Beneficiaries
Amount %
497
964
1,460
6
10
4
Total
Amount %
7,747 19
9,658 24
14,826 37
7,625 19
39,856 100
Table 8: Project Financing Plan by component and sub-component
(USD '000)
GRZ
Amount %
126 5
1,642 14
1,572 18
3,340 15
2,391 18
79 15
269 8
2,738 16
Total PROJECT COSTS
6,078 15
Districts
Amount %
-
-
IFAD / Finland
Amount %
Beneficiaries
Amount %
2,391
10,167
6,968
19,525
95
86
82
85
-
415
3
- - 415
2
8,816
442
3,119
12,376
67
85
92
73
415
31,902
80
1
-
2,517
11,809
8,540
22,866
6
30
21
57
1,460 11
- - 1,460
9
13,082
521
3,388
16,990
33
1
9
43
1,460
39,856
100
4
PROCUREMENT
15.
Table 9 presents the global procurement plan by expenditure account.
Table 9: Procurement plan by expenditure account
(USD '000)
A. Civil works
B. Vehicles
C. Computer
D. Imported furniture and equipment
E. Local equipment and small expenses
F. International Consultants
G. PM U Team
H. National Consultants
I. Training Related Procurements
J. Procurements Using M atching Grants
K. Operating Costs Related procurements
Total
National
Consulting
Competitive Services:
Bidding
QCBS
9,658
886
83
1,593
12,219
123
980
3,077
7,715
2,517
14,289
Direct Purchase/
Negotiations/
Shopping Single Tender
1,895
2,162
2,554
1,812
8,423
1,765
177
429
2,554
4,925
Total
Amount
%
Total
9,658
886
83
1,593
3,661
1,156
3,077
10,306
7,625
1,812
39,856
Detailed Cost Tables
Table 1.1. Strengthening member-based farmers organisations and their federations
Detailed Costs
I. Investment Costs
A. Service provider
Total
lumpsum
Y1
Totals Including Contingencies (USD '000)
Y2
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Y7
Total
Disb. Acct.
208
208
417
417
2 517
2 517
TRAININGSDA
627
627
525
525
422
422
212
212
107
107
124
Unit
Table 1.2. Pluralistic participatory extension services
Detailed Costs
Quantities
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Y7
Total
Unit Cost
(ZMK '000)
(USD)
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Y7
109
-
109
-
110
85
6
110
-
-
Total
Disb. Acct.
Provincial facilitator
4WD vehicles /a
Electronic Office Equipments /b
125
Vehicle Operation and Maintenance
Miscellaneous office expenditure
DSA
Domestic air tickets
Subtotal Facilitators at PACO
2. Regular planning, review and coordination meetings
Quarterly provincial meetings /c
Quarterly District meetings /d
Subtotal Regular planning, review and coordination meetings
3. Capacity building in procurement and financial management /e
Trainings /f
Technical support /g
Travel costs for Provincial accountants /h
Subtotal Capacity building in procurement and financial management
4. Information / knowledge sharing /i
Housing rehabilitation
Installation of solar panels
Motorbikes
Subtotal Upgrading of relevant camp facilities
Subtotal Strengthening MACO capacities in the field
pers.-month
Vehicle
Set
12
2
2
24
-
30
1
1
36
-
36
-
36
2
2
36
-
lumpsum
2
set
2
ls/car/year
ls/office/year
DSA
travel
210
5
5
14.400 3.000,00
200.000 41.666,67
13.000 2.708,33
36
83
5
-
72
90
42
3
-
1
-
2
-
-
5
700
-
1.
-
-
-
-
3.
8.000
145,83
0
-
0
-
1.666,67
3
-
2
-
1
2
2.5
3
3
3
3
17.5
50.000 10.416,67
10
21
26
31
32
32
1
60
4
2
120
8
3
150
10
3
180
12
3
180
12
3
180
12
3
90
12
18
960
70
18.000
500
2.400
3.750,00
104,17
500,00
4
6
2
151
8
13
4
117
9
16
5
193
11
19
6
177
11
19
6
178
11
19
6
269
0
-
637
210
14
SERVICES
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
-
1
EQUIPMENT
-
5
EQUIPMENT
32
184
EQUIPMENT
12
10
6
170
66
101
35
1 253
EQUIPMENT
SERVICES
SERVICES
Meeting
4
8
10
12
12
12
12
70
12.000
2.500,00
10
20
25
30
30
31
31
177
TRAININGSDA
Meeting
16
48
80
96
96
96
96
528
12.000
2.500,00
40
50
120
140
201
226
242
272
243
273
244
275
245
276
1 335
1 512
TRAININGSDA
session
pers.-day
1
50
1
50
1
25
-
3
150
50.000 10.416,67
3.000
625,00
10
31
10
31
10
16
-
-
-
-
31
94
TRAININGSDA
SERVICES
-
2
2
15
56
15
41
22
38
22
22
22
22
118
243
EQUIPMENT
42
30
40
40
60
61
61
-
292
TRAININGSDA
120
120
121
122
-
-
483
CIVIL_WORKS_DA
23
108
251
604
23
108
251
750
23
109
252
799
122
656
627
468
ls/yr
25
3
0
0
3
0
3
3
16
35.000
7.291,67
-
lumpsum
unit
unit
unit
-
12
12
12
12
30
24
30
24
30
24
0
-
30
0
-
-
48
-
120
72
0
-
48.000 10.000,00
-
3.600
21.600
-
750,00
4.500,00
23
23
295
16
22
22
90
325
898
4 198
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
Unit
Unit Cost
Quantities
Unit
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Y7
Total
Unit Cost
Unit Cost
(ZMK '000)
(USD)
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Y7
Total
Disb. Acct.
B. Harmonization and up-scaled application of participatory extension
approaches (PEA)
Extension specialist
Electronic Office Equipments /j
12
1
1
12
-
12
-
12
-
-
-
-
48
1
1
lumpsum
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
700
set
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
8.000
lumpsum
50.000 10.416,67
1
1
1
1
-
-
-
4
Rent
DSA
Subtotal Extension specialist
year
month
DSA
travel
1
12
80
4
1
12
80
4
1
12
80
4
1
12
80
4
-
-
-
2. Master Training in the provinces /k
training
1
1
1
3. Training of trainers at District level /l
training
126
4. FFS-type activities at camp level
5. Refresher training sessions of field staff /m
6. Operating costs for CEOs and DACOs /n
CEOs
DACOs
Subtotal Operating costs for CEOs and DACOs
FFS
0
0
3. Stakeholder workshops
Subtotal Establish partnerships and strengthen existing organizations
providing advisory services
-
-
-
-
-
-
3
0
0
0
3
3
3
3
2
0
14
90
130
225
295
370
390
1500
44
42
3
-
-
-
-
-
-
176
42
3
SERVICES
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
145,83
0
-
-
-
-
-
-
0
EQUIPMENT
1.666,67
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
EQUIPMENT
lumpsum
lumpsum
44
lumpsum
lumpsum
lumpsum
Total
_________________________________
\a replacement of car upon justification
\b printer, phone
\c 20 pers., 2 days.
\d 10 pers., 2 days
\e Trainings and TA. Focused on accountants based in PACOs and DACOs.
\f max. 4 days, 14 persons.
\g by accounting company. framework contract.
\h covers DSAs, petrol etc. for
\i participation in knowledge events and exchange visits
\j printer, phone
\k each training concerns 20 trainees
\l for 15 CEOs/ lead farmers
\m technical & methodological. subjects acc. to priorities identified in the PACO and DACO quarterly meetings.
\n includes fuel, repairs for vehicles/motorbikes, partial or full DSAs, other miscellaneous (phone costs)
44
10
10
10
10
-
-
-
42
EQUIPMENT
4
5
8
2
119
4
5
8
2
73
4
5
8
2
73
4
5
8
2
74
-
-
-
15
20
33
8
340
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
SERVICES
SERVICES
384.000 80.000,00
80
80
80
-
-
-
-
240
TRAININGSDA
-
195
195
196
197
132
-
917
TRAININGSDA
-
54
78
136
179
226
239
913
TRAININGSDA
TRAININGSDA
312.000 65.000,00
2.880
600,00
65 120 150 180 180 180 180 1 055
8
16
24
24
24
24
24
144
44
3.750,00
416,67
104,17
500,00
18.000
2.000
500
2.400
lumpsum
Subtotal Harmonization and up-scaled application of participatory
extension approaches (PEA)
C. Establish partnerships and strengthen existing organizations
1. Piloting of partnerships for advisory services
2. Studies and reviews
-
4
48
320
16
17.520 3.650,00
200.000 41.666,67
13.000 2.708,33
4.800
28.800
1.000,00
6.000,00
60
60
91
91
92
92
486
65
48
113
120
96
216
150
144
295
181
145
326
182
146
328
183
147
330
184
147
331
1 066
873
1 939
312
678
782
823
796
779
663
4 835
100
400
100
401
-
403
101
405
-
407
-
409
-
2 425
301
-
-
-
-
-
-
150
50
500
401
504
405
407
409
2 776
50
757
1 782
1 933
2 126
1 856
1 813
1 540
11 809
SERVICES
SERVICES
SERVICES
SERVICES
TRAININGSDA
pers.-month
Vehicle
Set
Table 1.3. Agricultural Research for Development (AR4D)
Detailed Costs
Unit
Y2
Quantities
Y4
Y5
Y3
pers.-month
Vehicle
Set
lumpsum
set
lumpsum
year
month
DSA
travel
12
1
1
1
1
1
1
12
80
4
12
1
1
12
80
4
12
1
1
12
80
4
12
1
1
12
80
4
unit
ls
unit
ls
unit
unit
1
1
3
3
3
1
1
3
-
1
3
-
1
3
-
Y6
Y7
0
0
Unit Cost
(ZMK '000)
Total
Unit Cost
(USD)
Y1
-
48
1
1
1
1
4
4
48
320
16
17.520 3.650,00
200.000 41.666,67
13.000 2.708,33
700
145,83
8.000 1.666,67
50.000 10.416,67
18.000 3.750,00
2.000
416,67
500
104,17
2.400
500,00
44
42
3
0
2
10
4
5
8
2
119
1
3
-
1
7
3
21
6
2
197.000 41.041,67
70.000 14.583,33
21.600 4.500,00
6.500 1.354,17
7.200 1.500,00
3.840
800,00
41
15
14
4
5
1
0
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Y2
44
-
44
-
10
4
5
8
2
73
44
-
10
4
5
8
2
73
10
4
5
8
2
74
-
-
Y7
Total
-
Disb. Acct.
176
42
3
0
2
42
15
20
33
8
340
SERVICES
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
SERVICES
SERVICES
41
103
14
29
9
2
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
127
Mansa - Equipment: 4X4 CAR
Mansa - Operational costs for car
Mansa - Equipment: Motorbike
Mansa - Operational costs for motorbikes
Mansa - Equipment: laptops
Mansa - Equipment: laser printer
1
3
1
1
3
3
-
-
15
-
15
4
-
15
4
-
15
4
-
15
4
4
5
1
15
-
-
4
-
Mansa - Research costs: Field experimental support the ZARI BEANS programme
ls
10
10
15
20
26
27
27
135
EQUIPMENT
Mansa - Research costs: Field experimental support the ZARI CASSAVA programme
ls
15
20
25
40
53
53
53
259
EQUIPMENT
Mansa - Research costs: Field experimental support RICE AND GN
Mansa - Research costs: On farm testing (varieties and cropping practices for beans
and cassava) /b
ls
12
20
30
42
42
42
43
231
EQUIPMENT
on-farm trial
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Mansa - Training and technical support: Cassava : participation at intl. WS, prog. visits /c
visit
1
1
1
1
1
1
-
6
Mansa - Training and technical support: Cassava : TS international institutes (IITA etc) /d
Mansa - Operational costs for Cassava progr. communication / office
Kasama - Equipment: 4X4 CAR
Kasama - Operational costs for car
Kasama - Equipment: Motorbike
Kasama - Operational costs for motorbikes
Kasama - Equipment: laptops
Kasama - Equipment: laser printer
pm
ls
unit
ls
unit
ls
unit
unit
1
-
1
-
1
-
0.5
1
1
3
3
3
1
1
3
-
1
3
-
1
3
-
1
3
1
1
3
3
-
1
3
-
25.000
-
5.208,33
5
3.5
125.000 26.041,67
1
7
3
21
6
2
197.000 41.041,67
70.000 14.583,33
21.600 4.500,00
6.500 1.354,17
7.200 1.500,00
3.840
800,00
26
6
41
15
14
4
5
1
5
-
26
6
6
-
5
15
-
15
4
-
26
6
6
15
5
-
4
5
-
15
4
15
-
4
5
1
13
6
6
15
-
-
-
4
5
-
4
-
EQUIPMENT
31
TRAININGSDA
92
44
41
103
14
29
9
2
SERVICES
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
Kasama - Research costs: Field experimental support the ZARI BEANS programme
ls
10
10
15
20
26
27
27
135
EQUIPMENT
Kasama - Research costs: Field experimental support the ZARI CASSAVA programme
ls
15
20
25
40
53
53
53
259
EQUIPMENT
Kasama - Research costs: Field experimental support RICE AND GN
Kasama - Research costs: On farm testing (varieties and cropping practices for beans
and cassava) /e
ls
12
20
30
42
42
42
43
231
EQUIPMENT
-
EQUIPMENT
Kasama - Training and technical support: Beans : participation at intl. WS, prog. visits /f
Kasama - Training and technical support: Beans : TS international institutes (CIAT etc)
/g
Kasama - Operational costs for Beans progr. - comm. and office
Subtotal Adaptive research
on-farm trial
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
visit
1
1
1
1
1
1
-
6
pm
ls
1
-
1
-
1
-
0.5
3.5
25.000
-
5.208,33
5
125.000 26.041,67
26
4
303
-
-
5
5
4
158
26
4
250
-
-
-
5
5
4
263
26
4
355
-
5
4
312
13
4
320
31
92
26
1 962
TRAININGSDA
SERVICES
EQUIPMENT
Research specialist
Rent
DSA
Subtotal Research specialist
Y1
2. Development of CA practices adapted to high rainfall based farming systems
Partnership CA Research contracts m anaged by nat. or regio. research partners /h
Managem ent fees /i
TA - International technical assistance in CA
TA - Support from agroforestry institute ICRAF
Y1
ls
ls
pm
pm
0.5
1
1
1
1
1
1
6.5
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
13
13
-
-
-
trial
Y2
Quantities
Y4
Y5
Unit
Y3
Y6
Y7
Total
Unit Cost
(ZMK '000)
Unit Cost
(USD)
1.000.000
208.333,33
120.000 25.000,00
120.000 25.000,00
Y1
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Y2
Y7
Total
104
17
50
50
208
22
50
50
209
27
50
50
210
31
50
50
211
32
51
51
212
32
51
51
213
21
26
26
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Disb. Acct.
1 367
182
328
328
SERVICES
SERVICES
SERVICES
SERVICES
On farm trial (collaboration GARI and other research centre) /j
On-farm research activities (collaborat. ZARI - other research centre) - Vouchers for CA
scaling up
-
-
-
-
-
-
EQUIPMENT
beneficiary
200
500
750 1 000 1 000 1 000
500
4 950
250
52,08
10
26
39
52
53
53
27
260
EQUIPMENT
On-farm research activities (collaborat ZARI - other research centre) - Laboratory costs
beneficiary
200
500
750 1 000 1 000 1 000
500
4 950
250
52,08
10
26
39
52
53
53
27
260
EQUIPMENT
week
4
4
4
4
4
4
-
24
25.000
5.208,33
21
21
21
21
21
21
126
TRAININGSDA
Biannual CA concertation m eeting /l
session
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
14
37.500
7.812,50
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
110
TRAININGSDA
unit
lum psum
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
28
24.000
5.000,00
20
4
379
20
4
519
20
4
551
20
4
585
20
4
588
20
4
591
20
4
457
141
26
3 670
TRAININGSDA
EQUIPMENT
ls
ls
ls
ls
pm
ls
ls
1
1
1
1
1
5
0
1
0
1
1
10
0
1
1
1
1
1
5
0
1
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
7
2
7
2
7
20
0
144.000
240.000
12.500
48.000
120.000
36.000
30.000,00
50.000,00
2.604,17
10.000,00
25.000,00
7.500,00
30
50
3
10
25
38
30
31
25
75
30
50
3
10
25
38
155
133
155
SERVICES
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
SERVICES
EQUIPMENT
SERVICES
10
1
8
3
3
5
29
866
10
1
8
3
3
5
29
839
26
Scientific exchange visits and participation at regional CA conferences
Office and com m unication /m
Subtotal Developm ent of CA practices adapted to high rainfall based farm ing system s
128
3. Identification and scaling-up of adapted post-harvest technologies
Post-harvest research program m e Mansa
Tools / post-harvest equipm ent Mansa
Office and com m unication (post harvest unit Mansa)
Tools / post-harvest equipm ent Kasam a
TA IITA
Post-harvest equipm ent for Farm training institute/FTC/DACO (20)
Technical support to on-farm trials (equipm ent provided under m atching grant) /n
Subtotal Identification and scaling-up of adapted post-harvest technologies
4. Basic/foundation seed production
Cassava base m aterial m ultiplication
Beans breeder seed m ultiplication
Beans basic seed m ultiplication
Seed quality control SCCI
Office and com m unication SCCI
ZARI farm m anagem ent
Subtotal Basic/foundation seed production
Subtotal Agricultural research for developm ent
ha
ha
ha
ha
ls
ls
10
0
5
10
1.
1
Cassava - Bloc (with specialised FG) /o
ha
50
Cassava - Cam p (with FG) /p
ha
-
Beans (and others) - Bloc (with specialised FG) /q
ha
20
Beans (and others) - Cam p (with FG) /r
ha
-
10
0
5
10
1.
1
10
0
5
10
1.
1
10
0
5
10
1.
1
10
0
5
10
1.
1
10
0
5
10
1.
1
10
0
5
10
1.
1
70
2
35
70
7.
7
5.000
10.000
7.500
1.250
12.500
25.000
1.041,67
2.083,33
1.562,50
260,42
2.604,17
5.208,33
70
85
100
100
100
150
200
300
500
500
-
505
2.500
520,83
-
1 650
1.500
312,50
30
40
40
40
40
-
210
3.750
781,25
50
100
150
25
50
50
95 540 890
50
890
200
200
-
700
2.500
520,83
50
890
50
890
-
275
4 195
2.500
250
520,83
52,08
58
58
59
59
212
100
18
20
177
150
677
10
1
8
3
3
5
29
987
10
1
8
3
3
5
29
935
11
1
8
3
3
5
30
1 031
11
1
8
3
3
5
30
991
11
1
8
3
3
5
30
866
74
4
55
18
18
37
206
6 515
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
36
44
52
53
53
-
265
EQUIPMENT
47
63
94
158
159
-
521
EQUIPMENT
23
31
31
32
32
-
165
EQUIPMENT
3
-
30
-
30
-
3
-
25
-
31
-
3
3
25
-
3
-
25
-
26
-
C. Organisation of decentralized farmer/farmer group seed multiplication and quality control
Orphan crops - Cam p /s
Quality control / SCCI
Subtotal Organisation of decentralized farm er/farm er group seed m ultiplication and quality control
ha
ha
Total
_________________________________
\a printer, phone
\b in conjunction with the FFS
\c 1 week visit in region
\d 1 m onth consultancy
\e part of the FFS
\f 1 week visit in region
\g 1 m onth consultancy
\h GART, ITTA, CIRAD, ...
\i 5% of "partnership research contract" and of "on-farm trials"
\j linked to the FFS
\k 1 week in the region
\l 100 pers. for 2 days
\m GART and CA associations
\n linked with com ponent 2.1. - DAIF
\o 2.5 ha per bloc
\p 5 ha per cam p
\q 1 ha per bloc
\r 2 ha per cam p
\s 0.5 ha per cam p
0
16
-
26
52
79
105
106
-
368
EQUIPMENT
13
5
60
26
28
187
26
46
263
26
47
330
26
47
421
27
47
423
-
144
220
1 685
EQUIPMENT
SERVICES
1 045
1 099
1 323
1 339
1 453
1 414
866
8 540
Scientific training: WS, visits, etc. /k
Table 2.1. Local Agricultural Investments (LAI)
Detailed Cos ts
Quantities
(ZMK '000)
(USD)
Y1
-
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Y7
pers .-m onth
Vehicle
Set
12
1
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
1
-
12
1
12
-
84
1
2
17.520
200.000
13.000
3.650,00
41.666,67
2.708,33
Electronic Office Equipm ents /c
lum ps um
1
-
-
-
1
-
-
2
700
Pers onal offices ' furniture
s et
lum ps um
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
12 12 12 12 12 12 12
40 80 80 80 80 80 80
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
7
84
520
28
129
Mis cellaneous office expenditure
Rent
DSA
Dom es tic air tickets
Subtotal Dis trict Agricultural Inves tm ent Manager
2. Preparation and M&E by District staff
3. Engineering for preparation and supervision
4. Training and facilitation
Subtotal Preparation, facilitation, training, M&E
year
m onth
DSA
travel
lum ps um
lum ps um
lum ps um
Y2
44
Y3
44
Y4
44
44
3
-
-
-
145,83
0
-
-
-
8.000
50.000
1.666,67
10.416,67
2
5
-
18.000
2.000
500
2.400
3.750,00
416,67
104,17
500,00
4
5
4
2
68
4
5
8
2
68
31
104
246
449
5
68
Y5
4
5
8
2
68
62
209
246
585
44
42
45
3
0
5
4
5
8
2
69
62
210
248
588
Y7
-
-
5
Y6
-
-
Total
45
-
309
42
5
SERVICES
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
-
0
EQUIPMENT
2
53
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
-
11
11
4
5
8
2
117
62
211
253
643
4
5
8
2
77
32
106
127
342
Disb. Acct.
11
4
5
9
2
75
75
26
35
55
14
542
249
840
1 120
2 751
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
SERVICES
SERVICES
SERVICES
SERVICES
SERVICES
B. Local Agricultural Investments (LAI)
1. District-level agricultural investments /d
lum ps um
2. Community-level agricultural investments /e
lum ps um
3. Group-based agricultural investments /f
Subtotal Local Agricultural Inves tm ents (LAI)
lum ps um
Total
_________________________________
\a Civil engineer with good fin. m gt. and procurem ent knowledge
\b will s hare the car with the facilitators and the extens ion s pecialis t
\c printer, phone
\d 90% IFAD, 10% Dis trict
\e 75% IFAD, 25% beneficiaries
\f 50% IFAD, 50% beneficiaries
-
521
1 190
1 196
1 202
530
0
625
1086
1091
1097
636
-
229
1 375
230
2 506
231
2 519
232
2 531
233
1 399
68
1 824
3 091
3 107
3 174
1 742
-
-
4 640 CIVIL_WORKS_DA
0
-
4535 CIVIL_WORKS_DA
-
1 155
10 331
75
13 082
EQUIPMENT
Unit Cost
Unit
A. Preparation, facilitation, training, M&E
1. Local Agricultural Investments Manager /a
Local Agricultural Inves tm ents Manager
4WD vehicles Pick-up /b
Com puter Sets (Laptops )
Total
Unit Cost
Table 2.2. Support to the Policy and Legal Framework
Detailed Costs
Unit
Subtotal Programme planning and monitoring specialist in PPD
B. Policy framework support
1. International technical assistance
2. Studies
130
3. Workshops
Subtotal Policy framework support
Total
_________________________________
\a printer, phone
Y2
Y3
Quantities
Y4
Y5
Y6
Y7
Total
Unit Cost
(ZMK '000)
Unit Cost
(USD)
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Y7 Total
Disb. Acct.
pers.-month
set
lumpsum
set
12
1
1
1
12
-
12
-
-
-
-
-
36
1
1
1
17.520
7.000
700
8.000
3.650,00
1.458,33
145,83
1.666,67
44
1
0
2
44
-
44
-
-
-
-
-
132
1
0
2
SERVICES
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
year
1
1
1
-
-
-
-
3
12.000
2.500,00
3
50
3
46
3
46
-
-
-
-
8
142
EQUIPMENT
person-day
study
20
2
15
2
15
2
15
-
15
-
15
1
-
95
7
4.800
100.000
1.000,00
20.833,33
20
42
15
42
15
42
15
-
15
-
15
21
-
96
146
SERVICES
SERVICES
ws
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
13
50.000
10.416,67
21
83
21
78
21
78
21
36
21
36
21
58
11
11
136
378
TRAININGSDA
132
124
124
36
36
58
11
521
A. Programme planning and monitoring specialist in PPD
PPMS in PPD
Computer Sets (Desktop)
Y1
Table 2.3. Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation
Detailed Costs
Quantities
Unit
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Y7
Total
Unit Cost
Unit Cost
(ZMK)
(USD)
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Y7
Total
Disb. Acct.
A. PMU operations
1
-
-
-
1
-
-
2
200.000.000
41.667
42
-
-
-
42
-
-
84
EQUIPMENT
Vehicle
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
155.000.000
32.292
32
-
-
-
-
-
-
32
EQUIPMENT
Set
4
-
-
-
4
-
-
8
13.000.000
2.708
11
-
-
-
11
-
-
22
EQUIPMENT
Computer Sets (Desktops)
Accounting and other MIS software
Set
lumpsum
1
1
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
2
1
7.000.000
50.000.000
1.458
10.417
1
10
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
3
10
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
lumpsum
1
-
-
-
0.2
-
-
1.2
144.000.000
30.000
30
-
-
-
6
-
-
36
EQUIPMENT
Personal offices' furniture and air condition
set
5
-
-
-
-
1
-
6
16.800.000
3.500
18
-
-
-
-
4
-
21
EQUIPMENT
Meeting room's furniture and air condition
set
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
33.600.000
7.000
7
-
-
-
-
-
-
7
EQUIPMENT
151
-
-
-
61
4
-
215
Subtotal Vehicles and office equipment
131
2. Personnel /b
Programme manager
Finances and administration manager
Procurement and contracts specialist
M&E specialist
Secretary
Driver / messenger / office assistant
Subtotal Personnel
3. Operation and maintenance
Office Rent Lusaka
DSA
Pers.months
Pers.months
Pers.months
Pers.months
Pers.months
Pers.months
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
84
84
84
84
84
84
26.160.000
20.160.000
17.520.000
17.520.000
7.200.000
4.800.000
5.450
4.200
3.650
3.650
1.500
1.000
65
50
44
44
18
12
233
65
50
44
44
18
12
233
66
51
44
44
18
12
234
66
51
44
44
18
12
235
66
51
44
44
18
12
236
67
51
45
45
18
12
238
67
52
45
45
18
12
239
462
356
309
309
127
85
1 648
lumpsum
Month
Month
DSA
travel
2
12
12
100
20
2
12
12
150
40
2
12
12
150
40
2
12
12
150
40
2
12
12
150
40
2
12
12
150
40
2
12
12
100
20
14
84
84
950
240
40.000.000
12.000.000
5.500.000
500.000
2.400.000
8.333
2.500
1.146
104
500
17
30
14
10
10
17
30
14
16
20
17
30
14
16
20
17
30
14
16
20
17
30
14
16
20
17
31
14
16
20
17
31
14
11
10
118
212
97
100
121
81
96
96
97
97
98
83
648
15
15
15
15
15
15
-
91
480
344
345
347
409
354
321
2 602
Subtotal Operation and maintenance
4. Training for PMU staff /c
Subtotal PMU operations
lumpsum
SERVICES
SERVICES
SERVICES
SERVICES
SERVICES
SERVICES
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT
SERVICES
SERVICES
TRAININGSDA
Vehicle
City car
Table 2.3. Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation
Detailed Costs
Quantities
Unit
Ls
Ls
Days
Study
Study
review
lumpsum
mission
audit
Total
132
_________________________________
\a integrated copier-printer-scanner, projector, server, phone system
\b Includes all benefits
\c targets principally the WS organised by IFAD
\d Final impact evaluation completes the Completion mission
\e last year two audits: one at start for previous year and one in the end for year 7
30
1
-
Y2
Y3
1
1
Y4
1
1
1
15
1
1
1
Y5
Y6
1
1
Y7
1
1
1
0.5
1
2
Total
45
1.5
2
1
5
1
7
Unit Cost
Unit Cost
(ZMK)
(USD)
4.800.000
720.000.000
240.000.000
240.000.000
96.000.000
240.000.000
72.000.000
1.000
150.000
50.000
50.000
20.000
50.000
15.000
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Y7
Total
52
52
30
150
284
20
15
35
50
20
15
85
15
50
20
15
101
20
15
35
51
20
15
86
77
51
31
159
52
52
45
227
101
50
101
51
106
786
765
379
431
448
445
441
480
3 388
Disb. Acct.
SERVICES
SERVICES
SERVICES
SERVICES
SERVICES
SERVICES
SERVICES
SERVICES
SERVICES
B. Surveys, Studies and Reports
1. Project Preparation, Reporting, Monitoring and Evaluation
Preparation of gender strategy
Preparation of communication strategy
International TA for PM&E development
Baseline and Impact Evaluation /d
Qualitative impact assessments
Mid-Term Review
Thematic Studies
Completion mission
External Audits /e
Subtotal Project Preparation, Reporting, Monitoring and Evaluation
Y1
Annex 10.
Economic and Financial Analysis
OVERALL ASSUMPTION FOR THE ANALYSIS
Without-Programme Situation
1.
Cultivated area: The programme will focus its interventions on three cropping
systems: (i) the cassava-based system, (ii) the mixed beans and groundnut cultivation
and (iii) lowland rice production.
2.
In the without programme situation, the average cassava area cultivated per
household is estimated 1.55 ha, of which half is harvested in a year. For mixed beans/
groundnuts, the cultivated area per household is estimated at 0.30 ha per household,
and for rice at 0.25 ha per household (Table 1).
3.
Considering the above figures and the assumption that the programme would
directly support 45,000 farmers/ households for cassava production. Out of these
45,000, 37,000 would also further develop their mixed beans and/or groundnut
production while some additional 8,000 farmers would develop their rice production. The
total area targeted before increase would be 70,500 ha of which 42,000 ha are
harvested on a yearly basis (due to the bi-annual harvest for cassava). Out of that
latter, 69 per cent is cassava, 27 per cent mixed beans and/or groundnut and 5 per cent
rice.
Table 1: Areas cultivated and harvested per household (ha) (direct
beneficiaries).
Area per household (ha) (without programme) Total area Total area
3rd
Weighted cultivated harvested
Luapula Northern
(ha)
(ha)
province average
Cultivated area - cassava (only half of which is harvested every year)
Cultivated area - beans & groundnut
Cultivated area - rice
Overall
2.00
0.10
0.20
1.10
0.50
0.30
1.55
0.30
0.25
1.55
0.30
0.25
57,350
11,100
2,000
70,450
28,675
11,100
2,000
41,775
4.
Cropping patterns: In terms of cropping habits, it is assumed that: 100 per
cent of the farmers cultivate cassava without mechanisation, fertiliser, herbicides nor
improved varieties. 50 per cent are assumed to sell their produce in fresh while the other
50 per cent operate a transformation into chips. For mixed beans, 65 per cent of the
farmers are assumed to mono-cropping with local varieties, no mechanisation nor
commercial inputs; 5 per cent do the same but add some fertiliser; 25 per cent of the
farmers do associated maize and mixed beans intercropping with local varieties, no
mechanisation nor commercial inputs. Finally, 5 per cent operate mixed beans-maize
intercropping, use improved mixed beans varieties, hybrid maize and some fertiliser. The
results of the cropping budgets for mixed beans and groundnut was considered
sufficiently similar so that the budget for mixed beans was used as an acceptable proxy
for groundnut. Rice growers are assumed to cultivate local varieties without using
external inputs.
With-Programme Situation
5.
Beneficiaries. The number of total direct beneficiaries of the programme
amounts to 60,000 households. 45,000 households/ farmers will benefit from direct
support through extension. It is assumed that these 45,000 farmers grow and will be
supported in growing cassava. 37,000 of them will receive a further support to grow
mixed beans or groundnuts, while 8,000 of them will rather go for rice. The 15,000
remaining direct beneficiaries of the programme will benefit from improved infrastructure
(feeder roads, culverts, farmer training centres, water control systems, drying floors,
storage rooms, etc.), from access to improved varieties and techniques developed by the
133
research with the help of the programme, from improved organisational capacities
through the farmers’ organisations and from extension services that will have been
trained by the programme. They do however not directly benefit from the extension
support paid by the programme1. Cultivated area: It is expected that the programme will
promote an increase in areas cultivated. The increase would range from 25 per cent for
cassava to 35 per cent for mixed beans/groundnuts as well as for rice. In the withprogramme situation, the average cassava area cultivated per household is estimated
1.86 ha, of which half is harvested in a year. For mixed beans/groundnuts, the cultivated
area per household is estimated at 0.41 ha per household, and for rice at 0.34 ha per
household (Table 2). The total area directly developed through the programme would be
86,500 ha of which 52,000 ha are harvested on a yearly basis (due to the bi-annual
harvest for cassava).
Table 2: Areas cultivated and harvested per household (ha) (direct
beneficiaries).
Area per household (ha) (with programme)
Cultivated area - cassava (only half of which is harvested every year)
Cultivated area - beans & groundnut
Cultivated area - rice
Overall
Luapula
Northern
2.40
0.14
0.27
1.32
0.68
0.41
Total area Total area Increase
with
3rd
Weighted cultivated harvested
(ha)
(ha)
programme
province average
1.86
1.86
68,820
34,410
20%
0.41
0.41
14,985
14,985
35%
0.34
0.34
2,700
2,700
35%
86,505
52,095
23%
6.
Cropping patterns. The Programme’s seven years’ interventions would result in
changed cropping patterns, with higher inputs and outputs, and post-harvest
transformation and value addition. There would be 30,000 farmers members of the FFStype groups organized with programme support and another 15,000 farmers assisted by
partners / service providers (PPP) or other partners with programme support that would
be adopting improved technologies. The economic and financial analysis is mainly based
on these 45,000 direct beneficiary households. A further 15,000 households would only
benefit indirectly from community-level infrastructure investments and indirect extension
that may, more gradually, promote an uptake of the improved cropping patterns.
7.
Adoption rates. The achievement of these cropping patterns is expected to
gradually build up with the support of the programme and be reached by year 10 for
cassava and 9 for mixed beans, groundnut and rice. For the 15,000 direct beneficiaries
of the programme but that are indirect beneficiaries of the extension services provided
through the programme, the adoption rate is assumed to be much slower and late. In
that situation, full adoption is assumed in year 25 for cassava and 23 for mixed beans,
groundnuts and rice.
8.
Yields. Cassava yield are expected to increase gradually from the present
average of 7 t/ha (fresh) to 13.7 t/ha mainly through the adoption of improved varieties
and soil fertility improvement with minimal external inputs (Table 3). Bean yields are
expected to increase from the present average of 355 kg/ha in mono-cropping to 856
kg/ha. Rice yields would increase from the present average of 750 kg/ha to an average
of 1,775 kg/ha using improved seed, inputs and practices.
Table 3: Average yields without and with programme (from yr 10 onwards)
(kg/ha)
(kg/ha)
Cassava
Beans
Rice
1
Without
7,000
355
750
With
13,713
856
1,775
% Increase
96%
141%
137%
In order to better distinguish the agricultural production impact of the programme on this second group,
they are treated separately and therefore called “indirect beneficiaries” in the calculation tables.
134
9.
Tables 4 to 6 present the without and with-programme cropping patterns for the
three crops, as well as the associated yields.
Table 4: Cassava - Cropping patterns and associated yields in the without and
with programme situation
Cropping intensity
Cassava
Variety
Cassava
Beans
Mechanisation
Fertilizer
Transformation
Herbicides
Without project situation
With project situation - expected
Associated yields (kg/ha) (fresh)
a.
Local
50%
25%
7,000
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
Local
Improved Improved Improved Improved Improved
Improved
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
50%
5%
2.5%
30%
15%
12.5%
10%
7,000
14,000
14,000
15,000
18,500
25,000
Table 5: Mixed beans - Cropping patterns and associated yields in the without
and with programme situation
Cropping intensity
Beans
Variety
BEANS MONOCROPPING
Beans
Maize
Mechanisation
Fertilizer
Pesticides
Herbicides
Associated yields (kg/ha)
a.
Local
65%
20%
350
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
Local
Improved Improved Improved Improved
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
5%
2.5%
10%
25%
10%
2.5%
550
750
1,250
1,400
1,500
MAIZE+ BEANS
g.
h.
i.
Local
Improved Improved
Local
Hybrid
Hybrid
yes
yes
yes
yes
25%
5%
5%
20%
5%
250
750
900
Table 6: Rice - Cropping patterns and associated yields in the without and with
programme situation
Rice
Variety
Mechanisation
Fertilizer
Pesticides
Herbicides
Associated yields (kg/ha)
Cropping intensity
a.
b.
c.
d.
Local
Improved Improved Improved
yes
yes
yes
100%
10%
40%
30%
20%
750
1,500
2,000
2,500
10.
Production increase. Table 7 presents the estimated impact of the project in
year 10 after project start. For cassava, the increase of 270,000 MT represents the
equivalent of about 81,000 MT of dried products (chips). For mixed beans, the increase
is substantial in relative terms (over 200 per cent increase) but quite limited in absolute
terms (9,000 MT). This is also the case for rice. These levels of increase are reasonable
but efforts should be made in close collaboration with SAPP and within the S3P approach
to secure markets.
135
Table 7: Impact of programme on the crop production
tons
Cassava (fresh)
Beans
Rice
Without
With
200,725
3,941
1,500
471,847
12,831
5,063
Increase
271,122
8,890
3,563
% Increase
135%
226%
238%
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
Without-Programme situation
11.
Table 8 presents a summary of the detailed calculations operated under the
different assumptions. The detailed cropping budgets are presented in the Working
Paper. The average net margins appear much higher for the mixed beans / groundnut
cropping patterns than for cassava one, and even higher for rice. The return to labour
(per person-day) is also rather well differentiated between the three. Cassava however
provides more stable yields due to a lower sensitivity to climatic chocks and therefore
plays a crucial role in terms of food security. Overall and on average amongst the
beneficiary population, the net margin per household in the without programme situation
is estimated at 145,000 ZK per year.
Table 8: Summary of financial returns on production
('000 KW)
Income per ha and per year
Return to labour
Area per hh (ha)*
Income per hh
Cassava Beans / Gdnut
22,781
358,158
3,217
5,625
1.55
0.30
35,311
107,448
Rice
612,450
12,878
0.25
153,113
* cassava: only half of which is harvested every year
With-Programme Situation
12.
Table 9 to 12 present the financial results of the various and combined cropping
patterns in the with-programme situation. For cassava, the net margin per household,
for an identical cultivated area as in the without-programme situation, would increase
from 35,000 ZK without programme to 250,000 ZK with programme. For mixed beans,
under the same conditions, the increase passes from 107,500 ZK to 355,000 ZK per
household and year, while for rice, it goes from 153,000 up to 375.500 ZK. Overall, for
an identical area, with mixed beans and maize combined, the net income of the
households would evolve from 145,000 ZK to 608,000 ZK, which represents an increase
of 300 per cent. Under these assumptions, the net margin would increase from an
estimated USD 1.16 million to an estimated USD 5.7 million.
Table 9: Summary of financial returns on production
('000 KW)
Income per ha
Return to labour (Kw/person-day)
Area per household (ha)*
Income per household (Kw)
Cassava
Beans / Gdnut
134,549
875,444
3,829
7,961
1.86
0.41
250,261
354,555
* cassava: only half of which is harvested every year
136
Rice
1,112,535
9,679
0.34
375,481
Table 10: Cassava. Presentation of net margins and return to labour with
programme
Cassava
%
25.0%
5.0%
2.5%
30.0%
15.0%
12.5%
10.0%
Cassava - Not processed
Cassava - Processed
Cassava improved - not processed
Cassava improved - processed
Cassava improved - processed and herbicides
Cassava improved - processed and fertiliser
Cassava with beans - improved - processed and fertiliser
Cassava - Weighted average net income per ha and per year
Weighted average net income per household (ZK) per year
Net income for the targeted households (ZK million) per year
Net income for the targeted households (US$)
Financial
Net margin
Return to
per ha and
labour
year (ZK)
(ZK/pd)
3,463
3,034
42,100
3,400
93,925
3,666
184,075
4,264
185,107
4,309
150,157
3,863
274,721
4,007
100.0%
134,549
250,261
11,262
2,346,199
3,829
Table 11: Mixed beans. Presentation of net margins and return to labour with
programme
Beans (and maize) (proxy for groundnuts)
Beans mono - Basic variety
Beans mono - Basic variety with limited fertiliser
Beans mono - Improved variety, no fertiliser
Beans mono - Improved variety, with fertiliser
Beans mono - Improved variety, with fertiliser and pesticides
Beans mono - Improved variety, with fertiliser, pesticides and herbicides
Maize and beans - Basic variety
Maize and beans - Basic variety with limited fertiliser
Maize and beans - Basic variety with limited fertiliser, pesticides and herbicides
Beans (and maize) weighted average net income per ha (ZK)
Weighted average net income per household (ZK)
Net income for the targeted households (ZK million)
%
20.0%
2.5%
10.0%
25.0%
10.0%
2.5%
5.0%
20.0%
5.0%
Financial
Net margin
Return to
per ha and
labour
year (ZK)
(ZK/pd)
235,699
5,014
255,792
4,848
1,017,384
10,274
1,337,591
10,412
1,270,723
9,722
1,470,719
11,465
619,315
7,244
746,709
6,248
832,501
6,722
100.0%
875,444
354,555
13,119
2,733,026
7,961
Table 12: Rice. Presentation of net margins and return to labour with
programme
Financial
Rice
%
10.0%
30.0%
30.0%
30.0%
Cropping intensity and practices as without project
Improved cropping practices - low intensity
Improved cropping practices - medium intensity
Improved cropping practices - high intensity
Rice weighted average net income per ha (ZK)
Weighted average net income per household (ZK)
Net income for the targeted households (ZK million)
Net margin
per ha and
year (ZK)
100.0%
Return to
labour
(ZK/pd)
612,450
940,900
1,077,850
1,485,550
12,878
16,837
16,145
20,274
1,112,535
375,481
3,004
625,801
9,679
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
13.
Economic conversion factors: The economic crop models have been calculated
by using individual economic conversion factors for all the inputs1. For the outputs
(maize, mixed beans, rice), the economic prices have been estimated by calculating the
import parity, either from Johannesburg (based on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange
1
Most of the Conversion Factors applicable to farm production inputs were taken from the very detailed
calculations operated by J. Keyser (Case study for Zambia as background document) for the Study
“Awakening Africa’s Sleeping Giant”, World Bank - FAO, 2009.
137
when available). For cassava, no regional representative prices could be found. The
conversion factor (economic / local price) that was applied by default is 1.2. For rice, the
conversion factors that has been applied is 0.9 considering that Zambia still has a
competitiveness problem. For maize, considering the important stock surpluses of the
year 2010 and the fact that Zambia will not be able to absorb all its production, the
export parity was taken into account rather the import one. The conversion factor
applied to the overall programme costs was 1 (after retrieval of taxes and duties).
14.
Gross economic margin on area as presently cultivated: Based on these
assumptions, the present economic gross margin on the total area cultivated by the
direct and indirect beneficiaries is estimated around US$ 6.3 million per year. It would
be at US$ 10 million per year with the programme in year 8 and slowly increase to US$
11.3 million in year 25.
15.
Baseline results: The discount rate adopted is 10 per cent per year. The cost of
capital opportunity in Zambia is higher but in agriculture this is already considered
reasonable, and even quite high when targeting the poor farmers. The period of time
taken into account for the discounted fund flows is 25 years. Based on the assumptions
as presented above, the Economic Internal Rate of Return (EIRR) of the programme is
estimated at 14 per cent (see Working Paper). The associated Net Present Value at a 10
per cent discount rate is USD 5 million. Considering the all the benefits have not been
captured in the simulation, the model for the calculation of the economic returns do only
take partially into consideration some of the costs: 90 per cent of the support to
agricultural research (SC.1.3.), 30 per cent of the costs of the District Agricultural
Investment Fund (SC.2.1.) as am major part will be infrastructure and post-harvest
equipment and 20 per cent of the “Support to the Policy and Legal Framework”
subcomponent (SC.2.2.) as this support will target MACO at central level and have a
much wider impact that cannot be directly linked to the results expected from the
present programme. The simulation has been limited to the analysis of the consequences
of improved production (mainly through increased yields and production areas) but has
not taken into consideration the potential higher prices that may be gained though
improved post-harvest practices (in terms of processing and marketing). The effective
economic return is therefore expected to be notably greater than the 14 per cent.
16.
Sensitivity analysis: The EIRR has a rather low sensitivity to variations in costs
and to reductions or delays in income (Table 14). The highest risk incurred is a reduction
in income due to lower output prices and / or to an increase in the costs of commercial
inputs. With a 10 per cent reduction in the gross farmer income, the EIRR falls to 12 per
cent. With a 20 per cent reduction in gross farmer income it goes down to 7 per cent.
Table 13: Economic conversion factors for inputs
Ca s u a l la b o r
P e rma n e n t la b o r
P e tro l
Fu el
Seed s
F e rtilis e r (LCF , ECF )
F e rtilis e r (F A M )
Ch e mic a ls (e x in s e c tic id e s )
In s e c tic id e s
T ra c to r
Ve h ic le s
F a rm Imp le me n ts
O ffic e e q u ip me n t
In s u ra n c e
138
75%
75%
55%
66%
99%
98%
98%
97%
87%
85%
76%
85%
82%
75%
Table 14: Sensitivity analysis
Standard sensitivity tests
Ref. case
NPV 10%
EIRR (million
USD)
14%
4
Costs
+
10%
11%
2
Costs
+
20%
10%
-1
Costs
+
30%
8%
-3
Income
+
10%
16%
7
Income
+
20%
18%
10
Income
+
30%
20%
12
Income
-
-10%
11%
1
Income
-
-20%
6%
-3
Income -30%
Income delayed by 1 year
Income delayed by 2 years
1%
-8
9%
5%
-1
-5
139
Annex 11.
Draft Programme Implementation Manual
The purpose of the Programme Implementation Manual (PIM) is to facilitate programme
management and implementation by defining the processes, procedures, responsibilities
and schedules associated with, on one hand, all of the main programme activities, and
on the other, the various management and fiduciary systems.
The first complete version of the PIM will be drafted by a 2-person team of consultants,
hired directly by IFAD, prior to programme start-up. This will provide guidance to the
members of the PMU, as and when it is established, and the PMU members themselves
will be responsible for reviewing the draft PIM and finalising it during the first 6 months
of programme implementation. However, the PIM will need to be a living document,
which will keep evolving during programme implementation, and the PMU team will need
to update it regularly, as and when necessary.
The draft annotated outline of the PIM, shown in Appendix 1, envisages 11 chapters,
made up of: (i) an introduction; (ii) the institutional arrangements for programme
management and implementation; (iii) the programme area; (iv) the programme
activities, by sub-component; (v) the programme financial resources; (vi) the financial
management and accounting arrangements; (vii) procurement; (viii) planning and
budgeting; (ix) monitoring and evaluation; (x) general administrative matters; as well as
(xi) the operational linkages / synergies with SAPP. Draft operating procedures for the
Local Agricultural Investments sub-component, defined during the final design mission,
are shown in Appendix 2; these are expected to be provide the basis for the procedures
defined in more detail in the PIM.
140
Annex 11 - Appendix 1: Proposed Outline Of Programme Implementation
Manual
1.
Introduction
Purpose of Programme Implementation Manual: Explanation of how the PIM is
intended to be used, by whom, and for what purpose.
S3P in Summary: Provide a summary description of the Programme including
implementation arrangements indicating who is responsible for what.
Programme Start-Up Activities:
2.

Define the list of start-up activities,

Draw up a draft approach to the start-up workshop

Prepare a bar-chart showing the start-up work plan

Define the process, responsibilities and timetable for the recruitment of the PMU
staff
Implementation and Institutional Arrangements
Roles and responsibilities of the Programme Steering Committee, PMU and implementing
and technical partners
Programme Governance: Review the Programme Steering Committee’s composition
and recommend members to be included – in the light of the current PSC for SAPP being
expanded to take responsibility for S3P; review its terms of reference, particularly in the
light of the agreed need for the PSC to play a more proactive role than hitherto, and
recommend the additional tasks it should perform.
Programme Organisation and Management: Define the programme organogram,
showing clearly the lines of responsibility, reporting and coordination, within the PMU,
and between the PMU and MACO.
Programme Planning and Budgeting: Detail the procedures, responsibilities and
deadlines for preparation and approval of annual workplans and budgets by
implementing partners and the PMU.
Implementation approach. Outline the key elements of the implementation approach,
e.g. specifically targeted to respond to the constraints and opportunities of poor
smallholder farmers – men and women – in northern Zambia; demand-driven and
participatory; government-owned; supportive of ‘farming as a business’ and publicprivate partnerships to promote smallholder agricultural development; and closely linked
to SAPP (and RFP).
3.
Programme Area
Criteria for selection: Define the criteria for selection of districts and camps in PY1 and
PY2, and of third province districts and camps in PY1 and PY2. To include: actual and
potential production of cassava and beans; market opportunities; linkages to SAPP and
complementarities with other projects, in particular the Luapula Rural and Agricultural
Development Project; target population
Definition of process for selection: Define responsibilities for drawing up and
approving proposed programme area. Indicate the roles, stakeholders and linkages to
141
SAPP. Prepare a template for matrix to prioritize and select (province), districts and
camps.
4.
Procedures for Programme Activities
For all proposed programme activities:



Clearly describe how all activities will be implemented
Summarize institutional roles and responsibilities
Review terms of reference (TOR) of S3P staff and update accordingly
Sub-component 1.1: Strengthening farmer organizations and their federations
The sub-component will strengthen existing farmer organizations, and assist farmers
interested and willing to start their own organizations. Implementation will be
outsourced to service providers working in this field in Zambia (one/province targeted by
the programme). The contracts will include the following tasks: (a) detailed assessment
of the existing farmer organizations, their level of development and capacity (as per the
5-stages of maturity defined in the PDR), the quality of the services they offer to their
members, and their main capacity development requirements; (b) development of
training material and provision of training on priority issues identified (could include
group formation and group dynamics, leadership skills, governance and decision making
processes, entrepreneurship skills and business planning, financial management,
accounting and legal aspects); and (c) follow-up and on-the-job mentoring in terms of
developing capacities for coordination and service provision, including linking up to rural
finance services.
Draw up (draft) tender documents for these services, including the preparation of TOR
and a more detailed indication of the services required.
Sub-component 1.2: Pluralistic participatory extension services
The sub-component will broaden technology options for smallholders to increase
productivity, by supporting different sources of advisory services to farmers: MACO,
farmer organizations, private or commercial enterprises and NGOs.
Strengthening MACO field capacities: at Provincial and District levels, to improve
performance and efficiency in order to be able to deliver good quality services





Review the TOR of the Provincial Facilitators and further define how they will
operate at PACO’s office.
Prepare draft TOR for Quarterly Provincial and District planning and review
meetings (1-2 days), specifying outputs, participation, etc...
Prepare draft TOR for recruitment of service provider to conduct provincial and
district level capacity building in procurement and financial management.
Prepare TOR for a study to explore the possible roles that ICT could play in
extension delivery
Prepare tender documents for procurement of goods and launching of works
contract relative to providing mobility and housing to CEOs. Works will be
conducted through local contractors whenever possible
Harmonization and up-scaling of participatory extension approaches (PEA). Based on the
Farmer Field School approach, and following a participatory assessment of current PEA
methodologies (done by the PMU).

Prepare TOR for a short-term consultant/trainer, who will be hired to work with
the PMU both to develop a harmonized curriculum for Master training and training
of trainers (ToT), and to train provincial Master Trainers, targeting DAOs, SAOs,
staff from partner organizations
142
Partnerships with organizations providing advisory services: Public-Private Partnerships
(PPPs) may be envisaged where government and the private or non-government partner
share similar objectives, but the latter needs some support or resources to up-scale
activities in the target areas.

Working with MACO’s committee looking at PPPs for extension, prepare TOR for
any studies for which a need has already been defined; and draft a possible
methodology for PPP, identifying which type of costs S3P will cover, and which are
expected to be covered by the partner; and in other cases where contracting of
service providers is envisaged, prepare TOR and request for proposals.
Sub-component 1.3: Agricultural Research for Development (AR4D)
The focus will be on strengthening of institutional AR4D collaboration and partnerships
for enhanced agricultural research-extension-training linkages.
Adaptive research for improved varieties. S3P will finance up-grading of research
infrastructure of research stations and some equipment. Procurement of works will be
done through local contractors to the extent possible.
Adaptation of Conservation Agriculture, and other improved cropping practices. Key
outputs of on-farm research/testing programmes will generate a range of technology
options adapted to local farming system conditions.

Prepare draft Memoranda of Understanding between ZARI, ICRAF and S3P;
between ZARI, GART and S3P; and any others identifiable at this stage.
Research on adapted tools/equipment, including for transport, and on-farm post-harvest
technologies. S3P will support research on improved labour productivity for enhanced
competitiveness of commodities produced in the target areas. S3P will finance research
equipment for ZARI, and post-harvest equipment for Farmer training Institutes for
demonstration purposes.


Prepare equipment specification for tender process.
Prepare draft Memorandum of Understanding between ZARI, IITA (e.g.), private
sector and S3P (for cassava technology).
Access to improved Seeds and Planting Material. Farmer-based high quality
seed/planting material multiplication will be promoted and strengthened as follows: (a)
maintenance of breeder seed stock by specialised commodity research programmes in
ZARI stations of Mansa and Kasama; (b) production of foundation seed in both stations
by ZARI for cassava and mixed beans over two seasons; and (c) first multiplication at
district level and second multiplication at camp level through farmer groups and/or
specialized seed producer groups/ individuals.
Prepare (a) draft contract between ZARI and Farmer Groups or individual
farmers, and (b) methodology (draft criteria) for selecting groups/ farmers.
Adapted certification (Quality Declared Seeds) support to be provided by the Seed
Control & Certification Institute (SCCI).

Sub-component 2.1: Local Agricultural Investments
The sub-component will help finance investments that improve access to markets,
increase labour productivity, reduce post-harvest losses, improve land and water
management, or facilitate access to knowledge. Conditional partial grants will be
provided for eligible agricultural investments, and technical and facilitation assistance
will be provided to prepare investment requests and help ensure correct implementation,
operation and maintenance. Access to resources will be according to defined criteria that
outline beneficiary eligibility and eligible type of investments. Three funding windows
categories will be established, each with specific procedures and internal control
mechanisms. The sub-component will be managed by a Local Agricultural Investments
manager.
143

Review and strengthen the TOR for the Local Agricultural Investments manager
District-level agricultural investments of a strategic nature, such as improvement of
feeder roads and rehabilitation of district Farmer Training Centres and Farm Institutes conditional on a sound business plan for sustainable operation and management being
provided. S3P contribution to such investments will be up to 90 percent of total costs,
with a ceiling equivalent to US$ 250,000 per sub-project. S3P will provide engineering
and supervision support, both at preparation and implementation stage.

Prepare a manual detailing how these investments will be identified and
prioritised (criteria, business plan, etc); responsibilities for detailed design,
preparation of bill of quantities, environmental and social impact assessment; the
procurement process to local contractors and how to mobilize district contribution.
Community-level agricultural investments of a public nature, including for instance: spot
improvement of agricultural roads; small-scale storage sheds and drying floors; and
small-scale water management or soil erosion control structures. S3P will provide
facilitation services for participatory identification, planning, feasibility screening and
construction.

Prepare TOR for this facilitation, and tender documents for works contracts

Prepare a Manual detailing how these investments will be identified and prioritised
(eligibility criteria of requesting groups or communities), how realistic operation
and management plans will be prepared, how the procurement process of local
contractors will work, and how to mobilize community contribution.
Group-based agricultural investments with a high social value includes limited and
conditional support to purchase labour saving equipment that might in more advanced
situations be entirely financed through private means. S3P contribution will be up to 50
percent of equipment costs, with a ceiling of US$ 2,500 per sub-project and a maximum
of one sub-project per group. S3P will provide facilitation services for participatory
identification, planning, feasibility screening and preparation of business plans.

Prepare TOR for this facilitation, and tender documents for works contracts

A Manual needs to be prepared detailing how these groups will be identified and
prioritised (eligibility criteria of requesting groups), how realistic operation and
management plans will be prepared, how the procurement process of local
contractors will work and how to mobilize community contribution.
For all three of the funding windows, there will be need to ensure:

that the operational procedures include as a precondition for investment a
credible and sound business plan for the sustainable operation and maintenance
of the infrastructure or equipment financed.

that the procedures include mechanisms that enable rural communities and
groups are able to identify, prevent and/or whistle-blow on any cases of
corruption encountered.
Technical and facilitation assistance will be provided for: (i) training of DACO and DDCC
staff, CACs and eligible farmer groups, as required; (ii) facilitation of participatory
planning and implementation processes at community-level; (iii) technical assistance for
the screening, assessment and design of proposed investments, (iv) preparation of
business, operation and maintenance plans; and (v) engineering support for the design
of infrastructure proposals and supervision of its construction.

Prepare a manual detailing how the training and facilitation support for groups
and local institutions will be accessed, how technical assistance will be mobilized.
144
Sub-component 2.2 Support to the Policy and Planning Framework
Focus: Support MACO’s Policy and Planning Department (PPD) to manage flows of
information and communication, undertake policy reviews, and provide opportunities to
learn from relevant experience.
Management of information and communication: S3P will provide a Programme planning
and monitoring specialist who will be based in PPD and who will report to the Director
PPD, for a period of 3 years.

Prepare draft TOR.
Policy reviews and studies: S3P will provide support to undertake specific studies, draft
policies and regulations, as well as the review, discussion (workshop, forums) and
dialogue related to their preparation.

5.
Define the processes for identifying the need for policy reviews and studies. To
the extent that any relevant policy review and studies have already been
identified by MACO, prepare draft TOR.
Gender strategy
Aim: to ensure that women make up at least 50% of the participants in programme
activities, and 50% of the beneficiaries of the programme’s impacts.
Define both the vehicles and the mechanisms that will be used to ensure that at least 50
per cent of the programme participants and beneficiaries are women. These may
include:

The use of quantitative gender targets to ensure women’s full participation in
different programme activities

The use of qualitative gender targets relative to women’s roles in community
groups / organizations

The inclusion of gender targets in TOR and contracts with service providers

The use of gender-disaggregated
programme impact
6.
data
for
monitoring
participation
and
Financial Management and Accounting
Programme Financial Resources
Summarise the programme cost estimates, by financiers, component and expenditure
categories; and disbursement schedules
Grant and Loan Administration Arrangements:

Describe the process of accessing IFAD loan and Finland grant funds

Review disbursement policies and procedures including withdrawal procedures
and ensure that they are in conformity with IFAD and GRZ requirements
Flow of Funds:
Chart and narrative describing the various channels for disbursement of funds
through the designated account, operating account, direct payment etc
Financial Management and Accounting System:


Draw up the general specifications, including control mechanisms, for the
financial management and accounting systems and procedures to be used by the
PMU and the implementing partners
145

Review accounting procedures for receipts and payments and ensure that they
conform to GRZ and IFAD requirements

Review and recommend budget and budget control policies and procedures
Financial Reporting and Auditing:

List the reports required and their contents and frequencies, plus procedures for
auditing, including internal control, and dispute reconciliation.

Review and attach sample financial reporting formats as per GRZ and IFAD
requirements

Review internal control and dispute resolution mechanisms

Review and attach internal and external sample audit principles, and prepare
draft TOR for external audit
Procurement
7.

Review and recommend procurement procedures for goods and works

Review and recommend procurement procedures for consultancies, including
steps in consultancy selection

Review and recommend appropriate procurement procedures for the Local
Agricultural Investment funding windows, including procurement to be
undertaken at sub-project level

Review thresholds and ensure that they are in conformity with GRZ and IFAD
requirements

For all procedures, indicate circumstances under which a waiver can be granted.

Ensure that issues of post procurement, audit and monitoring are included in all
procedures

Define responsibilities for the various procedures, and at the various stages,
involving the PMU, MACO and ZPPA; and indicate requirements for prior review

Draw up a draft 18-month procurement plan, linked to a tentative implementation
schedule (see 8. below)
8.
Planning and budgeting

Define a participatory process for preparation and approval of annual work plan
and budget, which makes clear how the programme beneficiaries will be involved
and how the linkages to SAPP will be made; identify responsibilities and
stakeholders; and draw up a proposed cycle for the exercise.

Draw up a draft template for AWPB format.

Develop a tentative implementation schedule showing what will be the main focus
of the first, second and third years – subject to update/review once the PMU is on
board.
9.

Explain the role of the logical framework for planning and monitoring and
evaluation

Explain how the monitoring system will be set-up and implemented
146

10.
Prepare draft TOR for the baseline study
General Administrative Matters
Define procedures and responsibilities for:

General office administration

Motor vehicle and asset maintenance

Human resource administration

Contracts administration
11.
Operational linkages / synergies with SAPP
Define the range of specific mechanisms that will be used to develop operational
synergies between S3P and SAPP. They will include, though not necessarily be limited to:

The selection of provinces, districts and camps to be covered under S3P

The role of Programme Managers’ Team

Linkages through the Annual Work Planning and Budgeting process

Jointly-conducted annual review of implementation performance

Role of the Programme Steering Committee
147
Annex 11 - Appendix 2: Draft operating procedures for the Local Agricultural
Investments sub-component
1.
The Local Agricultural Investments sub-component will help finance investments
that improve access to markets, increase labour productivity, reduce post-harvest
losses, improve land and water management, or facilitate access to knowledge.
Assistance to be provided under this sub-component will be flexible and multifarious. It
will take the form of management assistance, technical training, social and economic
appraisals, facilitation of community participation and/or financial assistance on a cofinancing basis according to the capacity of the community. S3P will provide conditional
partial grants primarily for equipment or small-scale infrastructure with high public and
social value, which are categorized as follows:
(a) District-level agricultural investments of a strategic nature
(b) Community-level agricultural investments of a public nature
(c) Group-based agricultural investments with a high social value
2.
The proposals have been developed taking into consideration lessons learnt from
other programmes. These include the IFAD-funded Smallholder Enterprise and Marketing
Programme (SHEMP); the SIDA-funded Agricultural Support Programme (ASP) which in
turn built on the experiences of a number of other SIDA funded projects in the
agricultural sector; the Rural Investment Fund Programme (RIF); the ZAMSIF
Programme; the World Bank funded Agricultural Development Support Project for
Smallholder Commercialisation (ADSP-SC), and the African Development Bank-funded
Agricultural Sector Investment Support to Eastern Province.
(a): District-level agricultural investments of a strategic nature
3.
Investments could include, for example, improvement of feeder roads connecting
productive smallholder areas to main roads, or rehabilitation of district level Farmer
Training Centres or Farm Institutes (on condition that a sound business plan for
sustainable operation and management is provided). Investments that would normally
be undertaken by the private sector would not be eligible for support. These investments
would be of a strategic nature and requests for support would be prepared by the DACO
in close coordination with the District Development Coordination Committee (DDCC), and
would also be included in the District Development Plan.
4.
Intra-community agricultural
investments’ facilitation process for the
identification of the need for infrastructure will be done in harmony with the
generic facilitation which will be employed by the Programme in Sub-component 1.1. A
preliminary assessment of existing and condition of infrastructure in the area will be
undertaken, with a view to identifying intra-community infrastructure priorities. S3P
would provide facilitation services through the service provider for participatory
identification, planning, feasibility screening, construction, maintenance, and monitoring
of projects. Requests will emanate from participatory this process. The request for the
project by the community will first be submitted to the Area Development Committee
(ADC)1 for review and recommendation before being submitted to the DACO.
5.
First community meeting – Once the DACO is satisfied with the request from
the ADC, the ADC and DACO will hold a focused community meeting which will be aimed
at informing the Community about the ADC and DACO decision concerning the request
for the project. The DACO will prepare a project proposal in collaboration with the
community and the ADC for submission to the DDCC for approval. At the same meeting,
the community will be informed of the next steps in the approval process, including the
responsibility of the community to select a project committee.
1
An ADC is the next lower level in the structure after the District Development Coordinating Committee
(DDCC) which is responsible for coordinating development work in a particular area. The CAC is
represented on the ADC.
148
6.
Selection of the Infrastructure project committee – During the first
meeting, the ADC (including the CAC) and the DACO (in collaboration with the
CEOs/BEOs in affected communities) will facilitate the community in the selection of the
project committee which will be responsible for mobilizing the resources, providing
oversight in the implementation of the project and constitute Panel B of the Project
Account to which funds will be disbursed for project implementation. The project
committee will need to be trained in its roles and responsibilities through the facilitation
process in Sub-component 1.1 in collaboration with the Local Agricultural Investment
manager.
7.
The Proposal will need to include realistic operation and management plans. For
simplicity, the Local Agricultural Investment manager will design an infrastructure
project application form to be used by communities and groups. The application form
should contain at the minimum the following information: date of application, contact
person, name of applicant, legal status (options should include organized interest/farmer
group), name of project, location, village(s), distance from district centre (km),
economic activity in the community, description of the project, constraints created by
current condition or lack of infrastructure, proposed works to be carried out, technology
required (labour and machinery), environmental considerations (climate of area,
topography of the project area, vegetation type, protected areas and how they will be
protected, possibilities of project distancing some people, impact of materials to be used
on the environment, etc.), number of beneficiaries and benefits, estimated total project
cost, estimated project duration, proposed maintenance arrangement, management
skills required and available to implement the project, community participation (when,
how by whom the project was identified and whether project has been discussed by the
community). The proposal should be signed by the DACO and at least two community
representatives.
8.
Technical Field and Appraisal visit –The DACO will submit the project proposal
to the DDCC. A Technical Field and Appraisal visit will be undertaken by relevant
representatives of the DDCC (DACO, SAO, Cooperative Development and Marketing
Officer), Technical Service Branch (TSB) of MACO, ADC representative, Director of
Works, related specialist Infrastructure from the District Council, Facilitation Team
Leader (FTL) and the CEO. The purpose of the visit will be to assess the expressed
interest and the intra-community’s need for the project in terms of how the project idea
evolved; how much participation of the requesting community has been generated; the
social, economic, environmental and engineering feasibility. Cost-benefit analysis
criteria1 will be the basis for recommending a particular project. The physical nature of
the project will provide the basis for the preparation of Bills of quantities (BOQs).
9.
Approval of the infrastructure project proposal – The Technical Field and
Appraisal visit report will be presented to the infrastructure and agriculture Subcommittees of the DDCC2 for approval. The DACO will only sign for the approval of the
project once it has been reviewed and approved by those subcommittees of the DDCC.
10.
Approval limits: The approval limit for the DACO is K10,000,000 or
approximately US$2,200. Where the approval ceiling goes beyond that of the DACO, the
DDCC reviewed and recommended project proposal will be referred to the PACO whose
approval ceiling is K20,000,000 (approximately US$4,400). Where it still goes beyond
1
2
The IFAD funded Smallholder Enterprise and Marketing Programme (SHEMP) developed the cost-benefit
analysis criteria to use under its Market Access Improvement sub-component which was providing road
rehabilitation works. The Agricultural Support Programme (ASP) also had cost-benefit analysis criteria it
was using. These can be adopted with minor adjustments where necessary so that there is no re-inventing
of the will and to avoid unnecessary costs of developing new criteria.
DDCC was established by Government through Circulars as a forum for coordinating the planning and
implementation of development activities at the District level. It comprises various sector sub-committees
whose representation is drawn from Ministerial departments performing specified Government functions
and responsible for implementing programmes and report to their respective heads of department, NGOs,
and the private sector.
149
the approval ceiling of the PACO, it will be referred through the PMU to the S3P Steering
Committee for approval.
11.
Second community meeting – Once a request has been approved/ rejected,
the CEOs in collaboration with the ADC will arrange for a focused facilitation meeting
with the communities involved at which the results of the request will be communicated.
The meeting will be attended by the all Community members, project committee
members, the DACO, the DC, the local Facilitator, the FTL, the Local Agricultural
Investment manager, the Director of Works from the District council, and
representatives from the ADC. The DACO or District Commissioner will announce the
results and give reasons for rejected requests. For the approved projects, the DACO or
the DC will hand over a letter of approval of the project by the Programme to the
community. The meeting will also discuss the S3P intra-community-based agricultural
investment sub-component and illustrate the importance of mainstreaming environment
and gender aspects. Environmental activities at the different project cycle will be
explained. Additionally the roles of all stakeholders in the project i.e. the local
CEO/Facilitator, FTL, the Engineering Consultant, Director of Works, DC, DACO, the Local
Agricultural Investment manager and other stakeholders will explained. The scope of
work to be done and the contents of the BOQ, drawings and tendering process will be
explained to the community. The Director of Works will also facilitate the design of a
local detailed Work Plan indicating major project stages and Time Schedule for the local
material and labour contribution by the community at each project stage. The meeting
will further discuss the future need for maintenance and Community contribution
towards maintenance, and the need for a project bank account. Maintenance will include
mitigating activities to sustain the environment which will also be included in the workplan.
12.
Invitations to tender - Invitations to tender for construction of approved
projects will be advertised in the three prominent daily newsprints, namely Times of
Zambia, Daily Mail and The Post. The advertisements shall run for three consecutive
days at least 4 weeks before the date for opening and evaluation. Tender documents will
be sold at respective Facilitation team (FT) offices in the district and at the S3P PMU in
Lusaka. Tender guidelines will be developed by the Engineering Consultant in
collaboration with MACO ensuring that they satisfy the Government Procurement
procedures and the IFAD procurement guidelines.
13.
Receiving of tender documents - Receiving of tender documents will be done
at respective FT offices where arrangements to visit the project sites will be made by the
respective FTs. The FTL will accompany the potential contractors to the project sites for
them to assess the project requirements to enable them submit the tender documents.
14.
Composition of the committee to select a contractor - All districts whose
projects will be approved will constitute panels to select contractors to construct the
projects. The panels will comprise benefiting community representatives, ADC
representatives, DDCC representatives, DAC representatives, District council
representatives, MACO technical branch and other organizations depending on the needs
of the district. All tendering sessions will be chaired by the DC or will be delegated to the
DACO in MACO.
15.
Opening and evaluation of applications and awarding of contracts - This
process will include opening of tenders, meeting the contractors, announcing the values
of tenders, apportioning time a for interviews and checking the correctness of the
submitted tender documents, and interviewing the contractors. Preceding the interviews,
accepted and rejected documents will be announced and reasons for rejection given.
Arithmetical corrections and new tender values to the tender documents will also be
announced. All queries will be discussed at this stage. Awarding and signing of contracts
with successful contractors will be a preserve of the DACO in collaboration with the S3P
Facilitation Team Leader done upon agreeing on the terms. However, priority will be
given to constructors in the district in which the approved project is, provided they meet
150
the requirements. The next to be considered are those in the province before
consideration will be given to those at national level.
16.
Announcement of tender results – A third focused facilitation meeting will be
held with the community. It will comprise participants from the Project committee, the
DACO, the FTL, the local CEO/Facilitator, the Contractor, and Director of Works, DDCC
representatives, and ADC/CAC representatives. During this meeting, the activity and
work schedule will be developed and agreed upon by all stakeholders: MACO, the
Contractor and the community. Terms of payment will also be agreed based on the
agreed activity and work schedule which will be phased according to major
milestones/phases of the project. Mobilization of the Contractor to project site will be
within 2 weeks of signing of the contract.
17.
Community ownership – Project ownership will be promoted by two processes.
The first one is through dialogue, community participation and decision making in
planning, implementation and maintenance of the project which is aimed to provide the
local community with an improved understanding of social and economic significance,
technical quality, contractual obligations, good governance and ownership of the project.
The second process will be through community contribution. S3P contribution to Intracommunity agricultural investments would be up to 90 percent of total costs, with a
ceiling equivalent to US$ 250,000 per sub-project. Community contributions will be in
form of local materials (such as sand and stones), labour, food, and tools for
construction and maintenance of the project.
18.
Capacity building: Capacity will be build for various stakeholders as follows:
a) The community in their project identification, planning, project proposal writing,
implementation and maintenance roles and responsibilities;
b) Those to undertake the technical field and appraisal visit in their roles and
responsibilities and criteria for recommending a project for partial funding; and
c) The technical sub-committee of the DDCC, which will be approving project
proposals, supervising and monitoring the project, in their roles and
responsibilities and utilization of various forms which will be developed for project
implementation.
(b): Community-based agricultural investments of a public nature
19.
Investments here will include: (i) spot improvement of local feeder roads
including culverts and bridges; (ii) small-scale storage sheds and drying floors; and
(iii) small-scale water control or soil erosion control structures such as weir dams and
furrows/canals. Requests for would originate at the farmer group, cooperative or
community level and would reach the DACO through the Camp Agricultural Committees
and the CEOs.
20.
Eligibility of groups: For requesting groups to be eligible, they will be required
to have reached Development Stage 4 (Maturity stage – see Table 1, Annex 4) where
they are able to run their own affairs. Community-based agricultural investments’
facilitation process for the identification of the need for infrastructure will be done in
harmony with the generic facilitation which will be employed by the Programme in Subcomponent 1.1. A preliminary assessment of existing and condition of infrastructure in
the area will be undertaken. The results of the preliminary assessment will be used to
identify community-based infrastructure priorities and assess farmer groups and interest
groups showing high possibility to suffer infrastructural-related constraints. S3P would
provide facilitation services for participatory identification, planning, feasibility screening
and construction. Requests will emanate from participatory this process.
151
21.
Contents of the project proposal – proposals will need to include realistic
operation and management plans. For simplicity, the Engineering Consultant, in
collaboration with the Local Agricultural Investment manager will design a infrastructure
project application form to be used by communities and groups. The application form
should contain at the minimum the following information: date of application, contact
person, name of applicant, legal status (options should include organized interest/farmer
group), name of project, location, village(s), distance from district centre (km),
economic activity in the community, description of the project, constraints created by
current condition or lack of infrastructure, proposed works to be carried out, technology
required (labour and machinery), environmental considerations (climate of area,
topography of the project area, vegetation type, protected areas and how they will be
protected, possibilities of project distancing some people, impact of materials to be used
on the environment, etc.), number of beneficiaries and benefits, estimated total project
cost, estimated project duration, proposed maintenance arrangement, management
skills required and available to implement the project, community participation (when,
how by whom the project was identified and whether project has been discussed by the
community). The proposal should be signed by the CEO and at least two community
representatives.
22.
Selection of the Infrastructure project committee – The project proposal will
first be submitted to the CAC/CEO for review and recommendation before being
submitted to the DACO. If the CAC is satisfied with the proposal, the CAC and the CEO
will hold a focused community meeting which will be aimed at informing the Community
about the CAC decision concerning the project. At the same meeting, the CAC and the
CEO will facilitate the community in the selection of the Infrastructure project committee
which will be responsible for mobilizing the resources, providing oversight in the
implementation of the project and constitute Panel B of the Project Account to which
funds will be disbursed for project implementation. The project account will be opened
at District level. The project committee will need to be trained in its roles and
responsibilities.
23.
Technical Field and Appraisal visit – Once an application has been submitted
to the DACO by the community, a Technical Field and Appraisal visit will be undertaken
by relevant representatives of the DAC (DACO, SAO, Cooperative Development and
Marketing Officer), Technical Service Branch (TSB) of MACO, CAC representative,
Director of Works, related subject manager specialist Infrastructure from the District
Council, Facilitation Team Leader (FTL) and the CEO. The purpose of the visit will be to
assess the expressed interest and the community’s need for the project in terms of how
the project idea evolved; how much participation of the requesting community has been
generated; the social, economic, environmental and engineering feasibility of the
project; and the physical nature of the project which will provide the basis for the
preparation of Bills of quantities (BOQs).
24.
Approval of the infrastructure project proposal – The Technical Field and
Appraisal team’s report with its recommendations will be presented to the full DAC 1 for
Community-based agricultural investments of a public nature for approval. Where the
approval ceiling goes beyond that of the DACO (currently K10,000,000 /approximately
US$2,200), the project proposal will be referred to the PACO for approval. Where it still
goes beyond the approval ceiling of the PACO (currently K20,000,000 /approximately
US$4,400) it will be referred to the S3P Steering Committee.
25.
Focused
facilitation
meeting
–
Once
a
request
has
been
approved/disapproved, the CEO will arrange for a focused facilitation meeting with the
group or community at which the results of the request will be communicated. The DACO
or District Commissioner will announce the results and give reasons for disapproved
1
DAC comprises the DACO, SAO, Cooperative Development and Marketing Officer, a representative from input
agro dealers, a representative from a marketing agency (usually the Food Reserve Agency), a
representative from NGOs, and a Planner from the Council.
152
requests. The meeting will be attended by the all Community and group members,
Infrastructure committee members, the DACO, the DC, the local Facilitator, the FTL, the
subject matter specialist responsible for Infrastructure, the Director of Works from the
District council, and representatives from the CAC. For the approved projects, the DACO
or the DC will hand over a letter of approval of the project by the Programme to the
group. The meeting will discuss the S3P community-based agricultural investment subcomponent and illustrate the importance of mainstreaming environment and gender
aspects. Environmental activities at the different project cycle will be explained.
Additionally the roles of all stakeholders in the project including the local CEO/Facilitator,
FTL, Director of Works, DC, DACO, subject matter specialist Infrastructure and other
stakeholders will be explained. The scope of work to be done and the contents of the
BOQ, drawings and tendering process will be explained to the community. The Director
of Works will also facilitate the design of a local detailed Work Plan indicating major
project stages and Time Schedule for the local material and labour contribution by the
community at each project stage. The meeting will further discuss the future need for
maintenance and Community contribution towards maintenance, and the need for a
project bank account. Maintenance will include mitigating activities to sustain the
environment which will also be included in the work-plan.
26.
Invitations to tender - Invitations to bid for construction of approved projects
will be advertised within the three prominent daily newsprints, namely Times of Zambia,
Daily Mail and The Post. The advertisements shall run for three consecutive days at least
4 weeks before the date for opening and evaluation. Tender documents will be sold at
respective Facilitation team (FT) offices in the district and at the S3P PMU in Lusaka.
Tender guidelines will be developed by the Engineering Consultant ensuring that they
satisfy the Government Procurement procedures and the IFAD procurement guidelines.
27.
Receiving of tender documents - Receiving of tender documents will be done
at respective FT offices where arrangements to visit the project sites will be made by the
respective FTs. The FTL will accompany the potential contractors to the project sites for
them to assess the project requirements to enable them submit the tender documents.
All would-be contractors should be able to visit the project sights before submitting their
bids and their bids should indicate source of their material and water to avoid delays in
programme implementation.
28.
Composition of the committee to select a contractor - All districts whose
projects will be approved will constitute panels to select contractors to construct the
projects. The panels will comprise benefiting community representatives, CAC
representatives, DAC representatives, District council representatives, MACO technical
branch and other organizations depending on the needs of the district. All tendering
sessions will be chaired by the District Agricultural Coordinator in MACO.
29.
Opening and evaluation of applications and awarding of contracts - This
process will include opening of tenders, meeting the contractors, announcing the values
of tenders, apportioning time a for interviews and checking the correctness of the
submitted tender documents, and interviewing the contractors. Preceding the interviews,
accepted and rejected documents will be announced and reasons for rejection given.
Arithmetical corrections and new tender values to the tender documents will also be
announced. All queries will be discussed at this stage. Awarding and signing of contracts
with successful contractors will be a preserve of the DACO in collaboration with the S3P
Facilitation Team Leader which will be done upon agreeing on the terms. However,
priority will be given to constructors in the district in which the approved project is,
provided they meet the requirements. The next to be considered are those in the
province before consideration will be given to those at national level.
30.
Announcement of tender results and contractor mobilisation – A Focused
Facilitation meeting including participants from the Infrastructure Fund committee, the
District coordinator, the FTL, the local CEO/Facilitator, the Contractor, and Director of
Works and CAC representative will be held for the benefiting community at which the
153
tender results will be announced and terms of payment agreed. Terms of payment will
be agreed based on the Activity and work schedule to be developed and agreed upon by
MACO and the Contractor. Mobilization of the Contractor to project site will be within 2
weeks of signing of the contract.
31.
Community ownership – Project ownership will be promoted by two processes.
The first one is through dialogue, community participation and decision making in
planning, implementation and maintenance of the project which is aimed to provide the
local community with an improved understanding of social and economic significance,
technical quality, contractual obligations, good governance and ownership of the project.
The second process will be through community contribution. S3P will contribute up to
75% of construction costs, with a ceiling of US$ 25,000 per sub-project. Community
contributions will be in form of local materials (such as sand and stones), labour, food,
and tools.
32.
Capacity building: To ensure sustainable utilisation of the projects, a strong
sense of ownership by the requesting community coupled with appropriate management
skills will be an essential prerequisite. Capacity will be built for the community (including
the project committee), those participating in the technical field and appraisal visit, the
DAC which will be approving project proposals, and the MACO Technical Branch Team
plus the District Council who will be involved in the supervision and monitoring of the
project. These will be trained in their respective roles and responsibilities for them to
execute their duties diligently. Groups will also be facilitated in preparation of
proposals/requests.
33.
Management of infrastructure development - An Engineering Consultant
(EC) will be contracted to give managerial advice on matters of construction and
management of the DAIF to the Programme, target-communities, private contractors
and public institutions in the target districts. The EC will not on full time basis, but will be
called upon to provide services as and when need arises.
34.
Funds flow for both categories of infrastructure (district and community) - the
participating community or group will open an S3P account to which funds will be sent
directly from the PMU. Every cheque issued on those accounts will require two
signatures, one from Panel A and another from Panel B. Panel A will comprise the MACO
District signatories (the DACO and the Assistant Accountant) while Panel B will comprise
the executive members of the infrastructure project committee (chairperson, secretary
and treasurer) who are community or group representatives . The community or group
will be required to select representatives who are credible, have integrity and are
transparent. For them to do that, the group facilitation in sub-component 1.1 will
emphasis this aspect as well the roles and responsibilities of the project committee.
35.
Project
monitoring
and
inspection
Monitoring
of
Contractor’s
implementation or construction works will take place after every major activity in the
Activity Schedule by Director of Works and FTL (DC). The CEO will submit monthly
project monitoring reports to the FTL and S3P TL. To ensure quality, each project will be
inspected at least 6 times during the construction phase.
36.
Pre-commissioning workshops - The Pre-Commissioning Workshops will be
organised by Infrastructure Fund committees after physical construction of project is
completed. The workshops will discuss Maintenance Plans that will be costed in terms of
labour, tools and material requirements which will be based on the maintenance
guidelines and frequency which will be developed by the EC for each type on
infrastructure. The plans will also include the necessary training in maintenance. The
workshops will also discuss possible business developments resulting from the new
infrastructure (e.g. out-grower schemes, input supply) and its capacity to support
economic exploitation without compromising the environment; and future use of the
tools provided by the Contractor. The tools could be used for other Community income
generating projects as well as for individual productive purposes like opportunities for
154
hiring. The pre-commissioning workshop will decide the date for Commissioning and
Hand-Over.
37.
Commissioning and Handover - The Commissioning and Handover workshops
will be ceremonies to publicise the completion and takeover of the infrastructure by the
community. These ceremonies will be graced by high ranking government officials.
38.
Project final completion workshop - Final project completion workshops will
be held for each project after a one-year retention phase. The retention phase will be
devised to expose the infrastructure to all the seasonal variations and identify any
defects resulting from poor workmanship for the contractor to repair. The workshops will
be epitomised by termination of contracts between S3P and the partner communities and
the Partnership with the respective contractors.
(c): Group-based agricultural investments with a high social value:
39.
Investments here would include limited and conditional support to purchase
labour saving equipment that might in more advanced situations be entirely financed
through private means. The processing of the crops being targeted by S3P is usually
done by women using methods which are extremely labour-intensive and time
consuming. In addition, it is also important to note that women are more vulnerable to
HIV/AIDS and also nurse HIV/AIDS patients in the communities such that they have to
share their time between meeting those social needs and agricultural production. In such
situations, labour-saving technologies can have a very significant positive impact on
livelihoods of the poor and disadvantaged, in particular women, girls and the youth as a
way of mitigating effects of cross cutting issues (gender and HIV/AIDS).
40.
Assessment of groups: There are existing smallholder farmer groups with a
common interest, willingness and capacity to develop into entrepreneurs but due to
poverty levels and other factors which disadvantage them, they are unable to access
credit for improved agricultural productivity. These groups include women groups, girls,
youth groups, HIV/AIDS support groups, etc. These groups are at different levels of
development in terms of group dynamics, cohesiveness, and self-sustainability. Each
group will be assessed to ascertain the development stage (see Annex 4, Table 4). The
results of this assessment will be used to determine the level, focus and emphasis of
capacity building to be provided to each group to enable them reach a maturity stage
(Stage 4) when they can be able to access the co-financing facility.
41.
Groups will be capacity built with organizational/legal skills. Interest group
members and their leaders will be trained in group dynamics, leadership skills, qualities
and values of a leader, management skills, facilitation of assembly meetings, monitoring
production, farmer groups’ rights and responsibilities, and legal aspects like development
of group constitutions (bye laws). All members of interest groups will also be strongly
encouraged to be members of savings and credit groups, though there should be no
relationship between the interest group and the savings and credit group (except that of
client and bank). These topics will be included in the facilitation which will be done for
farmer groups in Sub-component 1.1.
42.
Agricultural equipment: The groups will be supported with co-financing for the
acquisition of the following agricultural equipment:
(i) on-farm irrigation equipment such as treadle pumps, Ntambo pumps, water
pumps (various capacities), windmills, irrigation pipes, water tank stands from
2,500 – 10,000 litres capacity tanks, poly tanks from 2,500 – 10,000 litres, etc.
on-farm production equipment and assets such as ox carts, ploughs, diesel
engine walking tractor with accessories, oxen or tractor driven harrow, etc.
(ii) on-farm agricultural post-harvest treatment and value adding equipment and
assets such as motor or diesel engine dehullers, motor or diesel engine gravity
hammer-mills, motor or diesel engine cyclone hammer-mills, manual or diesel
155
maize shellers, motor or diesel engine cassava processors, hand operated oil
presses (yenga), single phase electric motor or hand operated peanut butter mills
(25 – 80 kgs per hour), manually operated or with electric motor groundnut
shellers with winnower 50 – 150 kgs per hour), and motor or diesel engine
dehuller/hammermill Combos (600 kgs per hour).
(iii)Other on-farm equipment such as single choppers (manual, diesel or motor
driven) for cutting fodder for livestock feed, motor or diesel engine feed mixer,
feeding/milking cage with capacity of 1 – 6 animals, 15 – 20 litres milking
buckets, generator sets, 20 – 40 kgs per hour fired/firewood roasting drum for all
roasting requirements, etc.
43.
Project Proposals: Requests for these investments would originate at the group
level and S3P would provide facilitation services for participatory identification, planning,
feasibility screening and preparation of business plans. The group will submit a formal
request to MACO through the Camp Extension Officer (CEO) with quotations from three
agro dealers contracted by MACO to supply agricultural equipment. The request should
contain the following information at the least: date of application, contact person, the
name of the group, camp, district, when the group was formed, why it was formed, legal
status, the training the group has received, proof of having reached the maturity stage,
the activities the group is involved in, the name of the agricultural equipment the group
is applying for (with attached minutes of the resolution of the group to apply for that
equipment), justification for the request (social and economic benefits), how much the
group is proposing to contribute, how much the group has set aside as operating capital,
financial position of the group, maintenance proposal, etc.
44.
Eligibility criteria: There will be stringent eligibility criteria that requesting
groups need to meet. Investment support would be restricted to groups that: (i) have
reached a sufficiently mature developmental stage (Stage 4); but (ii) because of
prevailing poverty are not able to raise sufficient funds to obtain the required equipment
on credit; while (iii) the labour saving equipment would, at a modest fee, also be
available to other community members (non-group members). Special consideration will
be given to women, youth, and other vulnerable groups.
45.
Project co-financing: S3P will remain flexible in terms of how much a group
should contribute to the cost of the agricultural equipment it selects - since groups have
different financial capacities and the types and prices of equipment also vary - up to a
maximum of 50 percent of equipment costs, with a ceilings of US$ 2,500 per sub-project
and one sub-project per group. The Camp Extension Officer (CEO), as a group facilitator,
in collaboration with the service provider where possible, will make an assessment and
recommendations for the financial capacity of a particular group. In making this
assessment, consideration should be made that the group will also need to have
operating capital.
46.
It is critical that the equipment acquired by the groups is seen as belonging to the
members and not the programme. To address the ownership issue the group’s
contribution will be raised either through cash or individual loans obtained from the
savings and credit groups. This way the members will take care of the equipment
because it will be used to generate income for the group and themselves and it is this
income that will be used to pay back the loan. The savings and credit group loans will
also be a source of funds to maintain the equipment.
47.
Feasibility assessment by a technical committee: The Camp Agricultural
Committee (CAC) chaired by the CEO, the Block Extension Officer (Block) and the
respective MACO specialist at district level will undertake a feasibility assessment of the
request and make recommendations to the District Agricultural Committee (DAC) which
is headed by the District Agricultural Coordination Officer (DACO) for approval.
48.
Approval Limits: The DAC will review the appraisal and approve or reject the
request. Where the project requested for is worth more than the approval limit of the
DACO (ZK 10,000/US$2,200), the proposal will be referred for the PACO’s approval.
156
49.
Focused facilitation meeting: Once a request has been approved/rejected, the
CEO will arrange for a focused facilitation meeting with the group at which the results of
the request will be communicated. The meeting will be attended by the DAC, BEO, CEO,
CAC and all group members. The DACO will announce the results and give reasons for
disapproved requests. For groups whose requests have been approved, the DACO will
hand over a letter of approval of the equipment by the Programme to the group. The
meeting will also discuss the contributions of the group to the acquisition of the
agricultural equipment and agree when that payment can be made. The meeting will also
discuss the future need for maintenance and group contribution towards maintenance
and the economic opportunities which could be taken up using the income earned from
the utilization of the equipment. Maintenance should include ways to sustain the
environment.
50.
Development of a procurement plan: MACO, in collaboration with the
recipient group will come up with a procurement plan which will be enshrined in the
contract to be signed between those two parties. MACO should consider identifying local
agro dealers with whom it will sign contracts for the supply of various types of
agricultural equipment. The group will pay its contribution directly to the approved agro
dealer and submit proof of payment to DACO as the basis on which the Programme will
release its contribution of funds. The Programme will make a cheque payment directly to
the agro dealer1.
Other issues
51.
Monitoring of funded projects: The CEO and the infrastructure project
committees should undertake regular monitoring of the groups which benefit from
funding and produce monthly and quarterly reports as per the MACO reporting system.
52.
Funding ceiling: Due to the demand-driven nature of the sub-component, all
the three categories of support under it shall have no ceiling per district. However, to
create a level playing field for all districts in each province participating in the
Progamme, all information on the sub-component and its operations should be rolled out
to all the districts at the same time. However, at Programme level, the sub-component
will have a ceiling of US$16 million which will be buffer Fund.
1
Consideration was made for the use of a voucher system but it was dropped because it usually works well
where the support is in standardized/pack form. However, if it is still of interest, after the first year, PLARD
II can explore possibilities of using a voucher system instead of a cheque. This will entail assessing the
most demanded agricultural equipment to come up with vouchers for those. Once a group brings proof of
payment for its contribution to the DACO it will be provided with a voucher to take to the agro dealer. Then
the agro dealer will redeem the voucher. The voucher system will quicken the process of equipment
acquisition as the group will be able to get the equipment even before the agro dealer redeems the
voucher. When a cheque is used the group has to wait for the cheque to be prepared by DACO, collected
and deposited by the agro dealer, and cleared by the bank.
157
Annex 12.
Adherence to IFAD Policies
ENVIRONMENTAL SCREENING AND SCOPING NOTE
1.
This Environmental Screening and Scoping Note (ESSN) has been prepared in line
with IFAD’s Administrative Procedures for Environmental Assessment in the Project Cycle
(President’s Bulletin 94/03) using information gathered during the visit of IFAD
inception, formulation and appraisal missions to Zambia between October 2010 and April
2011. It has benefited extensively from the Environmental and Social Review Note
(ESRN) prepared for the Smallholder Agribusiness Promotion Programme (SAPP) 1. The
proposed environmental classification for the project is “B”. No further information is
deemed necessary to complete the ESSN and no formal Environmental Assessment is
considered necessary.
I.
PROGRAMME DESCRIPTION
2.
S3P has a two components and six sub-components. For a detailed programme
description, please refer to the description in the Main Text of the Project Design Report
and to Annex 2 (Poverty, Targeting and Gender) and Annex 4 (Detailed Programme
Description).
S3P Goal: Income levels, food and nutrition security sustainably improved for poor agricultural
households in target area
S3P Development objective: Production, productivity and sales of smallholder farmers in
target areas sustainably increased.
Component 1: Sustainable smallholder
Component 2: Enabling environment for
productivity growth.
productivity growth.
Sub-component 1.1:
Strengthening farmer organizations and their
federations
Sub-component 2.1:
District Agricultural Investment Fund
Sub-component 1.2:
Sub-component 2.2:
Support to the policy and planning
framework
Sub-component 2.3:
Programme management, monitoring and
evaluation
Sub-component 1.3:
Agricultural research for development
II.
MAJOR SITE CHARACTERISTICS
3.
The proposed programme area will cover 24 districts, most of which are located
in of the cassava-based farming system areas in Luapula and the Northern provinces of
Zambia, which the Government has identified as the priority area for S3P. Some districts
will be located in a third province, which will be identified and decided during the course
of the programme.
4.
These cassa-based farming system areas areas are characterised by a high
incidence of poverty (>70 per cent), low human development indicators and overall
deprivation. These areas are, generally, both food and nutrition insecure and outside of
the agricultural sector, the access to other sources of employment and income is limited.
Many areas within these districts are remote and isolated (mainly family settlements),
which results in poor access to markets, sporadic government services and limited
economic opportunities. (see also details in Annex 1).
5.
Physical and Biological Characteristics. Zambia is endowed with a wealth of
natural resources within 16 ecosystems with landscapes that include extensive forests,
grassy plains, hills and steep escarpments; huge lakes and rivers, deep valleys and
ecologically rich wetlands together with areas of anthropic origin such as cropland,
plantation forests and urban settlements. The country straddles large parts of the
1
See SAPP-WP 6. Social screening is provided in Annex 1 .
158
Zambezi and Congo drainage systems, and it is thus probably the best watered country
in Africa, in terms of both surface and ground water resources. The country has six
major perennial rivers - the Zambezi, Luangwa, Kafue, Kabompo, Luapula and
Chambeshi; and four major lakes: Bangweulu, Kariba, Tanganyika and Mweru. The
water bodies also include substantial wetland areas around the rivers and lakes.
Including these wetlands, surface water covers 20 per cent of Zambia’s land area. The
agricultural potential of the country is defined in terms of three Agro-Ecological Regions
(Figure 1) and their main characteristics are described in Table 1.
Table 1: Classification of Agro-Ecological Regions (AER) in Zambia.
Element
Rainfall
LGP (70% probability)
Nber of decades < 30 mm
Altitude
Temperature Growing season
Cold season
Sunshine
Soils
Vegetation
Main crops
AER 1
<800 mm
80-120 days
Up to 5
Valleys: 300-900 m asl.
South: 900-1200 m asl.
20-25 °C
Mild/severe frost
AER 2 /a
800-1000
mm
100-140 days
1-3
900-1300 m asl.
Loamy clay soils
Red coarse sandy soils
Poor drained sandy soils
IIa: Moderately leached
clay soils
Mopane woodland
Acacia woodlands
Deciduous thickets
Drought resistant crops
such as cotton, sorghum
and millet (rice in
shores of Zambezi
plains).
Livestock limited
(Tsetse)
23-25 °C
Some severe frost
IIb: Coarse sandy loams
and Sandy soils
IIa: Miombo woodland
Munga woodland
IIb: Kalahari woodland
IIa: Maïze, cotton,
tobacco, helianthus,
soybean, and irrigated
wheat and vegetables
IIb: maize, rice, cashew
nut, cassava, millet,
vegetables.
AER 3
>1000 mm
120-150 days
1100-1700 m asl.
Luapula valley:1000m
26°C
Limited
Highly weathered soils
pH<4.5 (Al/Mn tox)
Miombo woodland
Cassava, maïze, mixed
beans, millet/sorghum
and groundnuts, sugar
cane and fruits
Livestock: mainly small
ruminants, poultry
Livestock: beef cattle
production, dairy, and
poultry.
Provinces
Southern and parts of
IIa: Lusaka, Central +
Eastern and Western
Southern and Eastern
IIb:Western
/a: AER 2 is commonly sub-divided into sub-region IIa comprising the sandveld plateau of Central, Eastern?
Lusaka and Southern Provinces and a sub-region IIb comprising the Kalahari sand plateau and the Zambezi
flood plains in the western Province.
Figure 1: Zambia agro-ecological regions I, IIa, IIb and III.
159
6.
Overview of Agro-ecological conditions in the target area. The Luapula and
the Northern Province of Zambia are located in the agro-ecological zone III (1000-1500
mm annual rainfall). This zone forms a plateau located at 1000-1500 m asl and benefits
from a rather high rainfall in a mono-modal pattern. Average annual rainfall varies from
1100 mm in the South (Mpika) to 1400 in the northern part of the plateau. The length of
growing period (LGP) extends from November to March-April with an average LGP of 128
to 172 days when moving from the south to the north (Nchelenge). The Luapula valley
(east of the plateau along the RDC border) has a rather drier micro-climate with a larger
degree of unpredictability (especially in Kawambwa). The soils are highly weathered,
leached and acidic, with pH of less than 4.5 and very low reserves of primary minerals
and very low organic matter levels do provide low water storage and buffer capacity,
leading rapidly to dry soil conditions when rain intervals increase especially at the end of
the rainy season. They are usually deficient in phosphorous, nitrogen and many other
major plant nutrients and some micro-nutrients. Though these soils have serious
chemical limitations to plant growth, the physical properties are mostly favourable. Soil
organic matter content is very low and holds the key to productivity improvements.
7.
Temperature and elevation. The elevation of the great central African plateau
on which Zambia is located, typically between 1000 and 1300 m asl modifies
temperatures, which are lower than for coastal areas at the same latitude, and pleasant
for much of the year. On the plateau (covering about 80 per cent of the country) mean
minimums for June in the cool dry season are in the range 6–12°C, mean maximums for
October, the hot dry season are 28–35°C. Frost only occurs on a few days in winter on
the highest exposed hills, or more widely in the lower humidity areas of the southern
half of the country. Plants susceptible to frost do not grow in the southern half of the
country. Otherwise temperature by itself is not a great determinant of plant and animal
distribution. Temperatures are higher at lower elevations, such as the Luapula-Mweru
and Mweru-Wantipa/Tanganyika valleys in the north, and highest in the lower Luangwa
and Zambezi valleys in the south, typically experiencing 40°C in October. One way in
which temperature affects the distribution of large mammals is through the distribution
of the tsetse fly, which, within its range is found in hotter valleys rather than the higher,
cooler plateau. Species susceptible to trypanosomiasis are not found in such valleys.
8.
Soils and Land Classification Suitability. Soils1 of AER III consist of highly
weathered and leached soils that are characterized by low pH < 4.5, low CEC and very
low reserves of primary minerals. Soils are usually deficient in phosphorus, nitrogen and
many other major plant nutrients and some micro-nutrients. Though the soils have
serious chemical limitations for plant growth, their physical properties are generally
favourable: these include micro-structural stability, deep and well drained soils (in
absence of ‘clay pan’, and relatively high biological activity.
9.
Soil acidity in the northern area has been studied over the past half-century. Main
agronomic related elements are: (i) low pH (< 4.5 PH water): (ii) Ca and Mg
deficiencies; (iii) Al and Mn toxicities and critical Al saturation of CEC; (iv) phosphate
‘fixation’ (formation of Al phosphates which precipitates and thus unavailable to plants).
Lime rates needed to to neutralize the exchangeable Al would raise pH and supply
adequate levels of Ca and Mg (dolomitic lime). However some soils (e.g. in Luapula)
1
Most common soils are: (i) strongly leached reddish to brownish clayey to loamy soils derived from acid
rocks (Miombo) - Orthic/Xhantic Ferral soils – Ferric Acrisols; (ii) shallow and gravel soils occurring in
rolling to hilly areas, shallow to deep moderately- strongly leached reddish and brownish clay-loamy soils
(Lithosoils, Orthic Feralsoil and Lithosol, Ferric Acrisol, ferric Luvisol; (iii) Moderately leached red-brown
clay-loam soils derived from acid rocks-Miombo (Ferric Acrisol/Luvisol); (iv) Associations of strongly
leached brown-yellow mainly loamy well drained and poorly drained floodplain soils (Xanthic Ferral sol +
Ferralitic Cambisol, Humic Ferral sol and Dystic Gleysol); and (v) Swamps and swampy soils (Grassland)
(Distric Gleysoils /Humic G. and Distric Fluvisoils); (vi) Soils of the rift valley with variable textures, highly
acid sandy soils up to dark alkaline cracking clays (Chromic/pellic vertisol, Orthic Luvisols); and (vi) alluvial
soils along Luangwa river (Eutric Fluvisols + Eutric Cambisol).
160
show a combined Al and Mn toxicity and thus would require higher levels of lime1 to
neutralize exchangeable Mn.
III.
KEY ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ISSUES
A. Environmental Degradation and Poverty
10.
There is a high correlation between poverty and environmental degradation as a
result of poor people’s dependence on exploitation of the environment for survival. The
poverty situation in the country, and in particular in the rural areas, results in
unsustainable natural resource exploitation, and is associated with resource depletion
and environmental degradation. These problems are compounded by high levels of rural
population growth which contribute further to a vicious cycle of increasing poverty and
increasing depletion of resources. This central issue is compounded by limited
understanding of environmental problems, a weak administrative and legal framework,
and breakdown of traditional values and practices which previously ensured a high
degree of social responsibility and equitable sharing of resources within a natural
equilibrium.
B. Deforestation and Land Degradation
11.
The greatest environmental challenge facing the country is deforestation.
Although some 60 per cent of the total land area is covered by forest, much of it is
degraded through encroachment and bush fires; the two principal causes being
uncontrolled agricultural expansion and charcoal burning. Between 1990 and 2000,
Zambia lost an average of close to 450,000 hectares of forest per year, equivalent to an
average deforestation rate of 0.9 per cent; while between 2000 and 2005, the rate of
forest change further increased to 1.0 per cent per annum. In total, between 1990 and
2005, Zambia lost almost 14 per cent of its forest cover, or around 6.7 million hectares.
12.
Deforestation has in turn affected the hydrological cycle and modified weather
conditions. For example, in Kaoma district of Western Province - one of Zambia's largest
charcoal-producing regions, several perennial streams have become seasonal and some
have even dried up, while the water level in the Luena River, which flows through the
town of Kaoma, has dropped. In Zambia's Southern Province, which suffered one of the
highest and fastest deforestation rates in the 1990s, floods and droughts have become
more frequent events. Other, linked environmental issues include soil erosion and land
degradation - verging on desertification in some areas - most of which results from
deforestation, land clearance and agricultural techniques that are ill-adapted to Zambian
conditions. Wildlife depletion is also an issue, especially in the protected areas; as are
inadequate sanitation and air and water pollution.
13.
In the programme target area, where soils are frequently heavily leached and
acid, the ‘large circle Chitemene’ shifting ax and hoe hand cultivation is the most
common farming/cropping system practiced by the local Bemba populations. The
cultivation starts with the selection of a field site on the basis of the quantity of available
wood material and its botanical composition – fertility indicator. Clearing of the selected
area2 starts in May-June (after rains): men cut shrubs/small trees and chop off the
branches of bigger trees leaving trunks standing, while others cut trees at shoulder
height (labour saving and less dangerous). Once cut women collect and pile up branches
to prepare field for burning in late October after first rains, leaving a deep layer of ash.
Finger millet is always grown in the first year, usually mixed with other crops such as
pumpkins and cassava (some maize, sorghum and bulrush millet may also be planted).
In the 2nd season, millet stalks are burnt and groundnuts and/or finger millet is planted.
In the 3th year, mixed beans are most commonly grown, or groundnuts if finger millet
1
2
Several local sources for agricultural lime where identified among others in Ndola, Mkushi, Matanda and
Nkombwa hills. See also: Economic aspects of Agricultural liming in Zambia. SPRP Studies n°9 (NORAGRIC,
1987).
When fields are far away from the village a small temporary hut will be built where the family will live
during clearing, land preparation and harvesting periods.
161
was grown in the 2nd year. Mixed beans (February-June) are planted on ridges, made
early in the rainy season and contain incorporated grass. Harvest of cassava, planted in
the first year, starts in December before the planting of the mixed beans. The fourth
year could also be used for mixed beans and then the field is left to fallow.
14.
The size of the cultivated field depends upon the (natural) wood quantity and
density: a variation between 3-12 times (on average 6.5-10 times) 1 the actual
cultivated area is being cleared and the wood accumulated on the area to be cultivated.
On the basis of 0.6-1 ha per HH cleared annually (the average for Luapula/Northern
Provinces smallholders), the total land (landholding) requirement per HH has been
calculated at about 25-40 ha2, given a fallow requirement of 15years and the fact that
about 60 per cent of the total area is suitable for cropping.
15.
Conservation Farming. Traditional agricultural techniques that leave the topsoil
bare during key periods of the year make a significant contribution to soil erosion and
environmental degradation. The Conservation Farming Unit (CFU), an initiative of the
Zambia National Farmers Union (ZNFU), has been trying to change this. Since 1996, and
backed by a consortium of international donor agencies, it has been promoting the use
of conservation farming (CF) techniques for smallholders in Zambia as a means to
increase productivity, while using the land and water resources in a more efficient and
sustainable manner.
The CF system they advocate involves: dry-season land
preparation using minimum tillage methods; no burning but rather retention of crop
residue from the prior harvest; planting and input application in fixed planting stations;
and nitrogen-fixing crop rotations. The CF system: (i) enables farmers to plant with the
first rains; (ii) improves water infiltration, water retention and plant root development;
(iii) prevents soil erosion; and (iv) enables farmers to locate fertiliser and organic
material in close proximity to the plants, where they will provide greatest benefits.
16.
Immediate gains result from increased yields, lower draft power and labour
requirements, and from a reduced risk of crop failure in years of low rainfall: thus
making it an invaluable approach for enhancing farmers’ ability to adapt to the effects of
climate change. Many of the benefits are longer term however: they include improved
soil organic matter levels, gains from nitrogen-fixing crop rotations, and reduced labour
requirements for field preparation that enable many adopters to expand the area of land
under cultivation. By ensuring permanent ground cover, CF also provides a carbon sink
and so contributes to climate change mitigation. To date, approximately 140,000160,000 smallholder farmers in Zambia (about one in seven) have adopted CF
techniques to some degree.
17.
Traditional slash and burn agriculture (Chitemene) is still widely practiced.
Shifting towards more intensive farming systems requires a drastic change in soil
management towards increased soil organic matter content and pH, to promote more
sustainable semi-permanent farming systems, resilient to climatic variability (flooding
and drought). Within this perspective, conservation farming and agro-forestry
technologies appear to be the most promising options. However, the CF and agroforestry technologies promoted in Zambia have mainly been developed for the dryer,
maize-based farming systems of agro-ecological regions I and II, they have not been
adapted to AER III.
C. Climate Change
18.
Despite low greenhouse gas emissions, the threat of climate change looms in
Zambia. There remains uncertainty about how its impact will play out, with different
forecasting models providing a range of different scenarios. According to the model used
in the National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA)3, mean temperatures are
1
2
3
Trapnel 1953. The current level appears to be much higher
Or an average carrying capacity of about 2-3 HH per km².
“The National Adaptation Programme of Action” Ministry of Tourism, Environment and Natural Resources,
2007
162
expected to increase (average 2°C between 2010 and 2070), while rainfall will increase
in AER III and decrease in AER I – particularly the valley areas and the southern parts of
Western and Southern provinces. In all areas however, climatic conditions will become
ever more uncertain, and floods and droughts are expected to become ever-more
frequent. The implications for smallholder farmers are important: one key conclusion is
that, under a variety of climate change scenarios, most varieties of maize, the staple
crop (grown by 80 per cent of smallholder farmers nationwide) would not mature due to
shortening of the growing season, especially in Zones I and II.
19.
According to the NAPA, the country is already suffering from growing climatic
variability. Both droughts and floods are increasing in frequency and intensity: between
2000 and 2007 there were two drought years, two flood years and only two normal
condition years. The impacts of these floods and droughts have included widespread
crop failure/loss, outbreaks of human and animal diseases, dislocation of human
populations and destruction of property and infrastructure. In Zambia's Southern
Province, which suffered one of the highest and fastest deforestation rates in the 1990s,
floods and droughts have become perennial, causing failed harvests and chronic hunger,
while other parts of the country have been experiencing shorter rainy seasons with
colder winters and warmer summers.
20.
In 2007 IUCN and partners conducted a participatory climate change vulnerability
assessment (using the CRiSTAL decision support tool) with selected in communities in all
three agro-ecological Zones1. Their findings were largely consistent with those of the
NAPA. The communities cited drought, floods, extreme heat and shorter rainy season as
the four main climate hazards faced, and were of the view that these changes started 3
to 9 years ago. The communities also identified the impacts that they associated with
the hazards, as indicated in Table 2 below:
Table 2: Impact associated with climatic hazards as identified by communities.
Drought
 Crop-damage/loss, leading
to food scarcity and hunger
 Water shortages
 Reduced fish stocks
 Income loss
 Reduced charcoal business
 Increase in diseases
(human and animals)
 Decreased water quality
 Increased soil erosion
 Decreased soil fertility
 Increased honey
production (if drought not
too severe)
Floods
 Crop damage/loss,
leading to food
scarcity and
hunger
 Loss of crop land
and grazing
grounds
 Decline in fish
catches
 Increase in
diseases (malaria,
dysentery, cholera)
 Destruction of
infrastructures
(roads, houses)
 Loss of life
(human, livestock)
Extreme heat
 Increase in
diseases affecting
animals, crops,
humans (especially
malaria)
 Decreased human
capacity to work
 Loss of life
(human, livestock)
 Crop damage/loss
 Reduced fish
stocks
 Decreased
livestock feed
 Reduced water
quality
Shorter rainy season
 Decreased crop yields
 Crop damage/loss
 Decreased income from
sale of crops
 Crop seeds which do
not reach maturity
(with negative effects
on next generation of
crops)
 Reduced charcoal
production and
business
21.
Climatic data over the past decades indicate an increasing level of total annual
rainfall variability (linked to ‘La Nina’) and farmers claim that rainfall intensity is
increasing in ‘wetter’ years, while rainfall intervals increase in ‘drier’ years. Furthermore,
the increasing variability of LGP, induces reduced growing periods in relatively less rainy
years and increased unpredictability of rain onset (planting time). Except for specific
areas in the Luapula valley, the overall rainfall pattern does not yet appear problematic
for local cassava-based cropping systems. However, soil erosion and temporary field
flooding increase in wetter years, while higher risks for seeding failure for grain crops
and cassava yield decreases occur in drier years. Cassava being planted after grain
crops, the initial growth of cassava plants is not strong enough to pass the dry season
1
Climate Change and Development Project, Pilot Phase: “Climate change vulnerability assessment in
Zambia”, IUCN 2007
163
(from 160 days in the North to 210 days in South on average) without too much
damage.
22.
A number of cropping practices, including adapted varieties, could be integrated
within local cropping systems to reduce farmers risk levels linked to increasing rainfall
variability. However, in the medium term, a gradual shift from traditional land use
(chitemene slash and burn) toward more intensive farming system requires a drastic
change of soil management towards increased soil organic matter and pH. Within this
perspective, conservation farming and agro-forestry appear among the most promising
options. These options would not only allow intensifying local farming systems,
increasing their productivity, reducing farmers risk and labouring input, but also allow for
carbon sequestration in soils by raising significantly their organic matter level. This shift
would adapt local farming systems to changing environment and contribute to climate
mitigation.
IV.
POLICY, LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK
23.
Zambia’s body of laws relating to the management of the environment and
natural resources sector is spread over more than 20 international treaties and over 30
Acts of Parliament; and responsibility dispersed amongst at least ten ministries. Natural
resource and environmental priorities have been spelled out in the National
Environmental Action Plan, the Forest Policy, the Zambia National Biodiversity and Action
Plan (NBSAP), the Zambia Forestry Action Plan (ZFAP), the National Action Plan (NAP)
for the implementation of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification
(UNCCD), and the Zambia Wetland Strategy and Action Plan. They have also been
reflected in the FNDP (2006-2010), where environment is treated as a cross-cutting
issue with its own specific objectives and strategies.
24.
More recently, the National Policy on the Environment (NPE, 2007 1) serves to
rationalise the various priorities and define a comprehensive policy for managing
environmental and natural resources in harmony with the national development policy.
The NPE is envisaged as an all-encompassing approach to environmental management.
Its overall vision is to provide a framework for the sustainable management of Zambia’s
environment and natural resources, and to this end it incorporates a set of objectives,
guiding principles and strategies aimed at ensuring that all organisations and individuals
exercise due care to avoid depletion of natural assets and environmental degradation. Its
goals are expected to be achieved through the FNDP programmes on natural resources
management and the environment.
Specific to the agriculture sector, the NPE’s
objective is to promote environmentally-sound agricultural development by ensuring
sustainable crop and livestock production through ecologically appropriate production
and management techniques, and appropriate legal and institutional framework for
sustainable environmental management.
25.
The key institutions are, above all, the Ministry of Tourism, Environment and
Natural Resources (MTENR) - the lead institution for environmental and natural resource
management in Zambia, and the Environmental Council of Zambia (ECZ), which is
mandated to protect the environment and control pollution and is empowered to identify
projects, plans and policies for which Environmental Impact Assessments are necessary.
V.
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS
A. Overview
26.
The attainment of the Programme’s overall goal – Income levels, food and
nutrition security sustainably improved for poor agricultural households in the project
area - is expected to have a positive socio-economic impact on the target population as
1
The process of developing the NPE was initiated by the Ministry of Tourism, Environment and Natural
Resources in 2004. It was finalized in 2005, approved by cabinet in December 2007, and it is expected to
be formally launched by mid-2009.
164
well as strengthening the capacity of the target population to adapt to the effects of
climate change.
27.
In its support for agricultural productivity increase of cassava and mixed beans
based farming systems, S3P will promote crop diversification (particularly away from
maize), so reducing the vulnerability of participant smallholder farmers to climate related
shocks and risks of crop failure. Selected value chains are key to the livelihood of poor
smallholder producers in the target area and offer also a good opportunity for increased
commercialization and income, ensuring food security as well as for market
opportunities. All of these aspects are expected to have important and positive social
impacts.
28.
S3P will promote the adoption of improved cassava and mixed beans cultivars
that are better adapted to local farming systems and the emerging climatic conditions
than are those currently used. It will promote their adoption and enhance their
productivity, within the context of a conservation farming approach developed for the
local agro-ecological conditions. These measures will not only reduce the vulnerability of
the rural population to climatic shocks; they will also have a positive impact on the
environment, through improved soil and water conservation, and increased carbon
sequestration.
B. Benefits and Risks
29.
Overall the environmental impact of the proposed programme is expected to be
positive. Production increase will be generated by productivity enhancement and
improved return to cultivated land and labour. Although benefits from conservation
farming practices are mainly expected in the medium to longer term, S3P will provide
the building blocks for improved sustainability of local farming systems within a
perspective of optimizing the use of available natural resources but also for climate
change adaptation and mitigation.
30.
A priori, one can point to the possibility of environmental and social risks
associated with: (i) increased use of fertilizer and other agro-chemicals (particularly
herbicide, which is promoted as part of the conservation farming package) by
participating smallholder farmers; (ii) increased forest land clearing for new cultivation of
selected commodities; (iii) increased gender inequality either through focus on crops
controlled by men, or through men appropriating the benefits of “women’s”
commodities; (iv) increased HIV transmission along crop marketing corridors; (v)
Pollution, treatment of waste and/or waste water in agro-processing (e.g. cassava
transformation); and (vi) erosion risks associated to infrastructure development (rural
roads).
C. Mitigation measures for environmental issues
31.
To ensure that all intervention plans adequately take into account all potential
environmental costs and benefits, agreement has been reached within SAPP that experts
from the Environmental Council of Zambia (ECZ) will participate in the value chain
analysis and the design of IPs. Within this framework, general guidelines for
environmental risk management will be developed and check lists used when reviewing
the annual work programme.
32.
Although expected to be overall positive, potential environmental risks could be
associated with community-based agricultural investment supports targeting productive
rural infrastructure (market infrastructure, feeder roads, etc.) but also projects that have
a positive impact on the environment and sustainability of intensified farming systems
(soil erosion control, reforestation, etc.). Environmental issues will be identified by rapid
environmental assessments and involved communities sensitized. Mitigation measures
will be proposed and integrated into the respective investment action plan, as
appropriate.
165
33.
Furthermore, the preparation of farmer group investments in window 1 ‘Farming
as a Business’, will explicitly include a simplified participative review of potential
environmental issues at planning stage and, wherever appropriate, will make
recommendations for mitigating any environmental risk and/or expanding the
environmental benefits. It is not possible at this stage to predict the range of issues to
be considered, given the diversity of demand-driven activities to be proposed.
Nevertheless, particular areas of focus are likely to include among others:
a) Ensuring that farmers are trained in safe storage and handling of fertiliser and
other agro-chemicals (particularly herbicides and insecticides);
b) Ensuring that the promotion of any commodity-specific market opportunities does
not result: (i) in increased clearing of forest land for new cultivation; or (ii) in the
over-exploitation of cultivated soils, woodlands or grazing land;
c) Promoting conservation farming practices (in partnership with GART/ZARI and
other Conservation Farming partners) as a basis for on-farm productivity
increases;
d) Ensuring that the benefits accrue primarily to the programme target group and
improve their food and nutrition security;
e) Ensuring not only that within the target group women benefit proportionately, but
also that men do not appropriate the benefits of “women’s” commodities;
f) Avoiding the risk of increased HIV transmission by providing HIV training at all
stages of the value chain;
g) Training small and medium scale value chain operators in the safe treatment of
waste and/or waste water in agro-processing (e.g. cassava)
D. Monitoring
34.
While it will be the responsibility of the value chain players supported by the
Programme to promote positive environmental impacts and mitigate negative impacts,
the monitoring both of those measures and of the environmental social impacts, both
positive and negative, of the intervention plans will be the responsibility of the service
providers who are engaged to support implementation of the intervention plans.
Participative monitoring will be undertaken in relation to environmental and social
indicators at Programme level, but also embodied in each of the investment plans.
Programme monitoring will include appropriate environmental indicators at output level.
E. Environmental Category
35.
The Programme is proposed for classification as Category B – with minor
environmental and social impacts, that can be managed and remedied.
36.
Further information required to complete screening and scoping: No further
studies required at this stage.
166
Annex 13.
Contents of the Programme Life File
PROCESS DOCUMENTS:

Identification Mission Aide Mémoire, September 2010

S3P Concept Note November, 2010

OSC Minutes 11 November 2010

Detailed Design Mission Aide Memoire, 17 January – 4 February 2011

QE Panel Report, 21 March 2011

PLARD/S3P proposed synergies 8 April 2011

Final Design Mission Aide Memoire, 28 March – 15 April 2011
WORKING PAPERS RELATED TO JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2011 MISSION:

Food Security (V. Glaesener)

Agriculture (H. Pfeiffer)

Land Tenure Security and Land Use Planning (H. Liversage)
WORKING PAPERS AND NOTES RELATED TO APRIL 2011 MISSION

Analysis of Market Outlook (V. Glaesener)

S3P Costs and Financing (V. Glaesener)

S3P Financial and Economic Analysis (V. Glaesener)

Support to Agricultural Production and Diversification (A. Mascaretti / E. Chuma).
167

Design document

Transcription

Similar documents

Biographies of winners of the Yara Prize

Read the full MACO article here

Chapter 15 Section 5: The Revolution in Agriculture

OSSBERGER Small decentralized hydropower stations

chsas ffa - Next Generation STEM Learning for All

ZANACO-Summary of 2015 Year-end Results

MACO® Compact Retrofits Van Dorn/Demag

Read the full MACO article here

Latest on Mining

ALLIANCE ONE ZAMBIA