NSADP Investment Plan II. Inclusive Comprehensive Agriculture Development Programme (ICADeP) 2018-2022

GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SIERRA LEONE NSADP INVESTMENT PLAN II Inclusive Comprehensive Agriculture Development Programme (ICADeP) 2018-2022 December, 2017 ii Contents Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................................. iv Forward .............................................................................................................................................. v Preface .............................................................................................................................................. vi Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................... vii Acronyms and Abbreviations ........................................................................................................... viii List of Tables ................................................................................................................................... xii List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. xiii List of Boxes ....................................................................................................................................xiv 1.0. Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1 2.0. ICADeP Formulation Context ...................................................................................................... 2 2.1. ICADeP Global, Continental and Sub-regional Strategic Context .......................................... 2 2.1.1. Global Context........................................................................................................... 2 2.1.2. Continental and Sub-Regional Contexts...................................................................... 2 2.1.3. Country Context ........................................................................................................ 4 2.1.3.1. General Country Political Context ........................................................................... 4 2.1.3.1.1. Governance and Political Context ......................................................................... 4 2.1.3.1.1.2. Policies and Government/Development Partners Engagement in Agriculture ...... 5 2.1.3.1.1.2.1. National Sustainable Agriculture Development Plan (NSDP) (2010-2030)....... 5 2.1.3.1.1.2.2 Smallholder Commercialization Programme (SCP) (2010-2014) ...................... 6 2.1.3.1.1.2.3 . Growth Poles Programme (2014) ................................................................... 6 2.1.3.1.1.2.4. A Comprehensive Programme to Enhance Food and Nutrition Security through Agriculture, Fisheries and Agro-Industry (AFAIP) .............................................................. 7 2.1.3.1.1.2.5. Institutional Support for Fisheries Management Project (2007-2010); .............. 7 2.1.3.1.1.2.6. West African Fisheries Programme in Sierra Leone (2010 – underway) ........... 7 2.1.3.1.1.2.7. Technical Capacity Building in Fishing and Seafood Processing Technology in Sierra Leone (2010-2014) .................................................................................................... 7 2.1.3.1.1.2.8. West African Pilot Project-Sierra Leone (2012-2014) ...................................... 8 2.1.3.1.1.2.9. Sustainable Aquaculture for Food Security, Livelihoods and Nutrition Project (2015-2016) ........................................................................................................................ 8 2.1.3.2. General Country Economic Context ........................................................................ 8 2.1.3.2.1. Country Economy and Participation of Agriculture Sector to Economic Growth .... 8 2.1.3.2.2. Domestic Investment and Farm Commercialisation ............................................... 9 2.1.3.2.3. Foreign Investment............................................................................................. 10 2.1.3.2.4. Poverty, Unemployment and Youth Employment................................................ 14 2.1.3.2.5. Food Security and Nutritional Status................................................................... 15 2.1.3.2.6. Physical Health Constraints ................................................................................ 18 2.1.3.2.7. Food Self-Sufficiency and Food Security ............................................................ 18 2.1.3.2.8. Support for Agri-business - Farmer Linkages along Selected Agricultural VCAs . 19 2.1.3.2.9. Formalization and Improvement of Productivity and Labor Conditions in the Informal Economy............................................................................................................. 19 3.0. The Agriculture Sector ............................................................................................................... 20 3.1. Agriculture Development Trends ........................................................................................ 20 3.1.1. Agricultural Production and Productivity Trends ...................................................... 20 3.1.2. Fisheries Sector Production and Productivity Trends ................................................ 26 4.0. Programme Context, Challenges and Rationale ........................................................................... 30 4.1. The Context ....................................................................................................................... 30 4.1.1. Agriculture Sector Framework ................................................................................. 30 4.1.2. Challenges ............................................................................................................... 30 4.1.2.1. Non-Agriculture Related Challenges ..................................................................... 30 4.1.2.2. Agriculture Related Challenges ............................................................................. 32 4.1.2.3. Macroeconomic Challenges................................................................................... 32 4.1.2.4. Programme Rationale ............................................................................................ 33 5.0. Description of the Investment Programme .................................................................................. 36 5.1. Scope ................................................................................................................................. 36 5.1. Programme Benefits and Beneficiaries ................................................................................ 37 iii 5.2. Programme Components..................................................................................................... 38 5.3. Programme Key Principles ................................................................................................. 42 5.3.1. Inclusiveness ................................................................................................................... 42 5.3.2. Comprehensiveness ......................................................................................................... 43 5.3.3. Competitiveness and Commercialization .......................................................................... 43 5.4. Food Categories for the Promotion of Food Security and Nutrition ...................................... 43 5.4.1. Staple Crops VCAs .................................................................................................. 44 5.4.2. Cash Crops VCAs .................................................................................................... 44 5.4.3. Livestock VCAs ...................................................................................................... 44 5.4.4. Forestry VCAs ......................................................................................................... 45 5.5. Specific Strategies for VCs ................................................................................................. 45 5.5.1. Export Strategy ........................................................................................................ 45 5.5.2. Increasing Input Access and Production to Satisfy Sufficiency .................................. 45 5.5.3. Agribusiness ............................................................................................................ 45 5.6. Indicative Cost ............................................................................................................ 46 6.0. Results Framework for ICADeP ................................................................................................. 55 6.1. Background ........................................................................................................................ 55 7.0. Monitoring and Evaluation ......................................................................................................... 93 7.1. Communication and Visibility ............................................................................................ 95 8. 0. Risk Assessment and Mitigation Measures ................................................................................ 96 Appendix 1. Main sectoral constraints as identified in the Agriculture Sector Review (2014) ............. 99 Appendix 2. Indicative ICADEP Budget by Activities ..................................................................... 101 Appendix 3. Decent Work Agenda .................................................................................................. 102 Appendix 4. Gross Domestic Product at Current Price (Million Leones) by Sector ........................... 103 Appendix 5. Recent Production and Productivity of Key Agricultural Products ................................ 105 Appendix 6. Distribution of Livestock Production (Number of heads) by Districts (2015) ................ 106 Appendix 7. Production (Number of heads) of Key Livestock ......................................................... 106 Appendix 8. Trend in Rice Production and Productivity, 2001-2017 ................................................ 107 Appendix 9. Trend in Cassava Production and Productivity, 2001-2017 .......................................... 107 Appendix 10. Trend in Cacao Production and Productivity, 2001-2017............................................ 108 Appendix 11. Production of Marine Capture Fisheries Catch (MT) - 1971-2013 .............................. 109 iv Acknowledgments v Forward (By His Excellency the President of the Republic of Sierra Leone, Doctor Ernest Bai Koroma) with his photo vi Preface (By the Hon Minister of Agriculture) with his photo vii Executive Summary viii Acronyms and Abbreviations A4P Agenda for Prosperity AAG Agricultural Advisory Group ABC Agriculture Business Centre AfDB African Development Bank AESD Agricultural Extension Services Division AESD Agricultural Engineering Services Division AFAIP Agriculture, Fisheries and Agro-Industry Programme ASREP Agricultural Rehabilitation Project ASR Agriculture Sector Review ATHS Agriculture Household Tracking Survey AU African Union BMI Body Mass Index BSL Bank of Sierra Leone CAADP Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme CB Community Banks CFSVA Comprehensive Food Security and Vulnerability Analysis CILSS Comité permanent Inter-Etats de Lutte contre la Sécheresse dans le Sahel COOPI Cooperazione Internazionale CORAD Coalition for Relief and Development (CARE, Catholic Relief Services, AFRICARE and World Vision International) CORAF West and Central Africa Council for Agriculture Research and Development CPIA Country Policy and Institutional Assessment CRC Citizens Report Cards DAO District Agriculture Officer DCC District Coordinating Committee DEPAC Development Partnership Committee DFID Department for International Development DHS Demographic and Health Surveys DIT District Implementation Team DoA Department of Agriculture DoF Department of Fisheries ECOWAP ECOWAS Common Agricultural Policy ECOWAS Economic Community of West African States EU European Union EUFF European Union Food Facility EVD Ebola Virus Disease FAO Food and Agriculture Organization FARA Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa FBO Farmer Based Organization FDI Foreign Direct Investment ix FFS Farmer Field School FFA Fisherfolk Association FFW Food for Work FISIM Financial Intermediation Services Indirectly Measured FMTI Fisheries and Marine Training Institute FSA Financial Services Association FSCA Food Security through Commercialization of Agriculture GAE Government Agriculture Expenditure GAFSP Global Agriculture and food Security Programme GAM Global Acute Malnutrition GDP Gross Domestic Product GEF Global Environment Facility GIS Geographic Information System GOSL Government of Sierra Leone GTZ German Technical Cooperation HDI Human Development Index HDR Human Development Report HIPC Highly Indebted Countries HIV/AIDS Human Immunodeficiency Virus/Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome HQ Headquarters ICT Information and Communication Technologies IDB Islamic Development Bank IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development IITA International Institute for Tropical Agriculture ILO International Labor Organization IVS Inland Valley Swamp JICA Japan International Cooperation Programme JMWG Joint Ministerial Working Group KfW German Financial Cooperation LBM Labor Based Methods LPO Livestock Producer Association M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MAFFS Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food Security MDAs Government Ministries, Departments and Agencies MDG Millennium Development Goal MFI Micro Finance Institution MFMR Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources MIS Management Information System MoFED Ministry of Finance and Economic Development MSME Micro, Small and Medium Enterprise MSMEL Micro, Small, Medium and Large Enterprise MOHS Ministry of Health and Sanitation MSWGCA Ministry of Social Welfare, Gender and Children‘s Affairs x MTI Ministry of Trade and Industry NaCSA National Commission for Social Action NACU National Agricultural Coordination Committee NaFFSL National Federation of Farmers in Sierra Leone NEPAD New Partnership for Africa's Development NGO Non Government Organization NPCA NEPAD Planning and Coordinating Agency NPISH Nonprofit Institutions Servicing Households NRS National Road System NSADP National Sustainable Agriculture Development Programme P4P Purchase for Progress PAF Partnership for African Fisheries PAGE Promoting Agriculture, Governance and Environment PEMSD Planning, Evaluation, Monitoring and Statistics Division PER Public Expenditure Review PLW Pregnant and Lactating Women PO Producer Organizations PPP Public Private Partnership PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper PTFAg Presidential Task Force on Agriculture RCPRP Rehabilitation and Community Poverty Reduction Project RFCIP Rural Finance and Community Improvement Project SAM Social Accounting Matrix SCP Smallholder Commercialization Programme SME Small and Medium Enterprise SCP Smallholder Commercialization Programme SEED Seed Enterprise Enhancement and Development SLARI Sierra Leone Agricultural Research Institute SLeCAD Sierra Leone Chamber for Agri-business Development SLEIPA Sierra Leone Investment and Export Promotion Agency SLeWOFF Sierra Leone Women Farmer‘s Forum SLIHS Sierra Leone Integrated Household Surveys SLRA Sierra Leone Roads Authority SSL Statistics Sierra Leone SWAP Sector Wide Approach TAA Technical Assistance Agency TCPs Technical cooperation programs TVET Technical and Vocational Education and Training UNCDF United Nation Capacity Development Fund UNCTAD United Nations Conference on Trade and Development UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNEP United Nations Environmental Programme UNFPA United Nations Population Fund UNICEF United Nations Children‘s Fund xi UNIDO United Nations Industrial Development Organization USAID United States Agency for International Development USD United States Dollars UTB Union Trust Bank VAM Vulnerability Analysis and Mapping WAPP West African Pilot Project WARFP West African Regional Fisheries Programme WB World Bank WFP World Food Programme WHO World Health Organization xii List of Tables Table 1. Net FDI Inflow and Stock 2005-2013 (UNCTAD) ............................................................... 10 Table 2. GDP by Sector and GDP Growth: ........................................................................................ 11 Table 3. The Status and Progress of Sierra Leone‘s Agricultural Investment, Growth and Poverty……………………………..…………………………………………………………………. .12 Table 4. Annual Staple Crop Production Trends, ‗000 MT 2001-2017 ............................................... 20 Table 5. Cassava and Sweet Potato Harvested Area and Yields 2001 – 2016 ...................................... 22 Table 6. Area and Location of Lakes in Sierra Leone......................................................................... 28 Table 7. Length and Area of Principal Rivers in Sierra Leone ............................................................ 28 Table 8. Food Category and Type ..................................................................................................... 43 Table 9: Detailed Cost (US$) of Project Financing by Component, Sub-Components and Activities... 46 Table 9: ICADeP Results Framework……………………………………………………………… 57 Table 11. Risks and Mitigation Measures .......................................................................................... 96 xiii List of Figures Figure 1 . The Staple and Cash Crops Yields Necessary to Achieve the A4P........................................ 9 Figure 2. Net FDI Inflows 2001-2013 ............................................................................................... 10 Figure 2b. Foreign Direct Investment in the Agriculture Sector 2010-2017 ........................................ 11 Figure 3. GDP Development and Agric. Sector Contribution to GDP ................................................. 12 Figure 4. Average Land Size Holding by Year and Region ................................................................ 13 Figure 5. Rice Self-sufficiency .......................................................................................................... 18 Figure 6. Trends in Rice Production and Productivity (2001-2017) .................................................... 22 Figure 7 Trend in Cassava Production and Productivity, 2001-2017................................................... 24 Figure 8: Trend in Cacao Production and Productivity, 2001-2017 .................................................... 24 Figure 9. Production (Number of heads) of Key Livestock (Without Chicken) ................................... 25 Figure 10. Production (Number of heads) of Chicken ........................................................................ 26 Figure 11. Distribution of Livestock Production (Number of heads) (2015)........................................ 26 Figure 12. Production of Marine Capture Fisheries Catch (MT) - 1971-2013 ..................................... 28 xiv List of Boxes Box 1. Malabo Commitment ............................................................................................................... 3 Box 2: The Specific Objectives (SOs) of ECOWAP Strategic Orientation Framework 2016-2025 ........ 4 Box 3: Key Findings on Nutrition of Children and Adults ................................................................. 16 Box 4. Specific Objective of the ICADeP .......................................................................................... 36 Box 5: ICADeP Components ............................................................................................................ 37 1 1.0. Introduction The Inclusive Comprehensive Agriculture Development Programme (ICADeP) is developed as an Investment Programme within the framework of the National Sustainable Agriculture Development Plan (NSADP) 2010-2030 within the new Country Development Strategy 2013-2037 ―Agenda for Prosperity‖ (A4P) that aims at Sierra Leone achieving middle-income status by 2037. The NSADP is a broad sector-wide development framework which also serves as Sierra Leone‘s contribution to the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) Compact under the African Union‘s New Partnership for Africa‘s Development (AU/NEPAD) activities. The NSADP/CAADP originally identified four major investment sub-programmes: the Commodity Commercialization Sub-Programme; the Agriculture Infrastructure Development Sub-Programme; the Private Sector Promotion Sub-Programme; and the Sector Coordination and Management Sub-Programme. Following the NSADP adoption, the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food Security (MAFFS) in coordination with donors prioritised and adopted the Smallholder Commercialization Programme (SCP) 2010-2014 based on the assumption that this NSADP component ―had the potential to achieve the greatest impact in terms of improved food security and wealth generation for the most vulnerable population in the short and medium term framework‖ (SCP Investment Plan, 2010). ICADeP builds on the successes and lessons learnt from SCP formulation and implementation, and emphasize the importance of developing the domestic small and medium-level commercial farms, as well as monitoring the impacts of the large-scale investments. The ICADeP also envisages urgent measures to develop evidence-based private sector support policies and mechanisms in fulfillment of the Agenda for Prosperity. The investment plan incorporates the recent Agricultural Sector Review findings and recommendations, as well as the outcomes of extensive stakeholder consultation process in 2014, and analyses the wealth of literature available for African, West African and Sierra Leonean agriculture and rural development. ICADeP is also aligned to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the sub-regional new vision and priorities which are highlighted in the Comprehensive African Agricultural Development Program (CAADP); the ECOWAS Regional Agriculture Policy (ECOWAP) 2025; and other key documents such as the Strategic Orientation Framework 2016-2025; and the Regional Agriculture and Food and Nutrition Security Investment Programme 2016-2025. These priorities are the result of profound and inclusive analysis of 10-year implementation of ECOWAP first version. 2 2.0. ICADeP Formulation Context 2.1. ICADeP Global, Continental and Sub-regional Strategic Context 2.1.1. Global Context At the global level, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) have now replaced the Millennium Development Goals, with SDG 2 ―End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture ―focusing on the role of agriculture for human and socioeconomic development. It also emphasizes on the linkages between agriculture and food systems for improved food and nutrition security. Climate change has become a key challenge for agriculture and development in general, and countries with their partners have decided to take actions towards reducing the impacts of climate change, through the Paris Declaration adopted during the COP 21. Consequently, climate smart agricultural procedures and practices will underpin the implementation of production and productivity component of this plan. 2.1.2. Continental and Sub-Regional Contexts With Heads of States commitment made at Maputo in 2003 to transform the agricultural sector, the Sierra Leone Government‘s key response was the formulation of the National Sustainable Agriculture Development Plan (NSADP) with the aim to provide short, medium and long-term Investment programmes in the agriculture sector. The NSADP/CAADP identified the aforementioned four major investment sub-programmes: the Commodity Commercialization Sub-Programme; the Agriculture Infrastructure Development Sub-Programme; the Private Sector Promotion Sub-Programme; and the Sector Coordination and Management Sub-Programme. The Smallholder Commercialization Programme (SCP) was prioritised as the program component having the potential to achieve the greatest impact in terms of improved food security and wealth generation for the most vulnerable population in the short and medium term framework. Benefits include: i. increased agricultural, livestock and fisheries production in the targeted supply chains/areas; ii. improved national food security, food intake and raised levels of nutrition, particularly for infants and PLW due to increased food production, nutritional support and reduced post-harvest losses iii. improved access to agriculture inputs, services, research and extension support, markets and market information iv. reduced transaction costs -notably for transport due to rehabilitation of feeder roads v. enhanced access to rural financial services vi. increased returns from smallholders‘ activities and investments in agriculture - such as value added/agro-processing and agribusiness. Challenges were; weak implementation capacity; constraints in accessing appropriate equipment/materials/inputs for implementing; weak extension service performance; limitations in establishing active linkages with private sector and in identifying viable market. Post Maputo commitment is the Heads of States adoption of the Malabo Declaration in 2014 on ―Accelerated Agricultural Growth and Transformation for Shared Prosperity and Improved Livelihoods‖, aiming at eradicating hunger by 2025. The key commitments of the Declaration are summarized in the box 1 below: 3 Box 1. Malabo Commitment 1. Re-commitment to the principles and values of the CAADP process 2.Re-engagement to improve the financing of investments in agriculture: (a) Compliance with the 10% target for public expenditure (b) Operationalizing the African Investment Bank 3. The commitment to eradicate hunger by 2025 (a) At least doubling productivity (with emphasis on inputs, irrigation, mechanization) (b) Reduce PHL by at least half (c) Nutrition: reduce stunting to 10% 4. The commitment to halving poverty by 2025, through inclusive agricultural growth and transformation (a) Support the agricultural sector growth in the annual GDP to at least 6% (b) Establish and/or strengthen inclusive partnerships between the public and private sectors for value chains of at least five (5) priority agricultural commodities that have strong linkages with smallholder farms (c) Create employment opportunities for at least 30% of young people in agricultural value chains (d) Entry and preferential participation of women and young people in lucrative and attractive agri-business 5. The will to promote inter-African trade in basic agricultural commodities and related services (a) Triple inter-African trade in agricultural products (b) Accelerate the Continental Free Trade Area and the transition to a continental system of a common external tariff system 6. Commitment to strengthen resilience in livelihoods and production systems to climate variability and other related shocks (a) Ensure that by 2025 at least 30% of farmer/pastoralists households resist these shocks (b) Increase investments for initiatives that build resilience, including social security for rural workers and other vulnerable social groups, as well as sensitive ecosystems (c) Integrate risk management and resilience into investment policies, strategies and plans 7. Commitment to mutual accountability in relation to actions and results (a) Through the CAADP Results Framework - conduct a biennial evaluation of agricultural commodities Source: African Union, 22nd ordinary session, 30-31 January 2014, Addis-Ababa, Ethiopia, Concept note: "2014, Year of agriculture and food security in Africa, marking the 10th anniversary of the adoption of the agricultural, development programme (CAADP)". In order to operationalise the Declaration, an Implementation Strategy and Road Map were developed, which includes an accountability mechanism - the biennial review requirement. 4 At sub-regional level, in line with Malabo Declaration and building on the assessment of 10-year implementation of the ECOWAP, ECOWAS has defined a new cycle of its regional Policy: ECOWAP 2025. The new policy‘s vision and orientation are reflected in the Strategic Orientation Framework 2016-2025 and the Regional Agriculture and Food and Nutrition Security Investment Programme 2016-2020. Box 2: The Specific Objectives (SOs) of ECOWAP Strategic Orientation Framework 2016-2025 SO1. "Contribute to increasing agro-forestry-pastoral and fisheries productivity and production through diversified and sustainable production systems, and to reducing post-production losses"; SO2. "Promote contractual, inclusive and competitive agricultural and food value chains oriented towards regional and international demand, with a view to the regional market integration"; SO3. "Improve access to food, nutrition and resilience for the vulnerable populations"; SO4. "Improve business environment, governance and funding mechanisms of the agro-forestry-pastoral and fisheries and agri-business sector". In the ECOWAS region, for the purpose of harmonising trade policies and strengthening the common market, a Common External Tariff was adopted - effective since January 2015. This will have an impact on agricultural commodities trade within and outside the sub-region. 2.1.3. Country Context 2.1.3.1. General Country Political Context 2.1.3.1.1. Governance and Political Context Sierra Leone experienced a wobbly political clime from independence in 1961 that culminated some 30 years later into a deadly civil war in 1991 - producing a failed state without much to write home about. However, peace and state-building process after the war in 2001, ushered in security, power sharing and the rule of law that transform the country from being a recipient of some 18,000 peace keepers for the maintenance of security, to one that now contributes peace keepers to conflict-affected countries. Noteworthy, is the fact that Sierra Leone continues to be classified as a ‗fragile state‘ evident from the New Deal pilot study that confirmed the country‘s fragile status though considerable progress in moving out of fragility has been made1. The unresolved challenge of ensuring that the country‘s growth benefit is inclusive and cuts across different segments of society remains an important causative factor of fragility. It is therefore not surprising that Pillar 1 of Sierra Leone‘s current development plan - A4P - considers economic diversification to promote inclusive growth as pivotal. Consequently, this agricultural investment plan is contextualised in this pillar - the agriculture sector being the bread basket of the country. 1Sierra Country Strategy Paper 2013-2017 https://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Project-and-Operations/2013-2017%20-%20Sierra%20Leone% 20Country%20Strategy%20Paper 01.pdf https://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Project-and-Operations/2013-2017%20-%20Sierra%20Leone%20Country%20Strategy%20Paper 01.pdf https://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Project-and-Operations/2013-2017%20-%20Sierra%20Leone%20Country%20Strategy%20Paper 01.pdf 5 Post war recovery includes, reconstruction and democratization, though it remains one of the poorest countries in the world. Situated on the West African coast bordering Guinea and Liberia, Sierra Leone covers 71,740 square km with a population of around 6.3 million people. Sierra Leone is among low human development countries (ranks 179 out of 188 according to 2016 UNDP Human Development Report), with still persistent gender gaps. The country is divided into three provinces with 14 districts (Kambia, Karina, Port Loko, Tonkolili, Bombali, Kailahun, Kono, Pujehun, Bo, Bonthe, Koinadugu, Falaba, Moyamba and Kenema), and the Western Area. The climate is generally equatorial with distinct dry (November – April) and wet (May – October) seasons. Sierra Leone has about 5,000,000 hectares of arable land of which about 2,000,000 hectares is under cultivation2. The arable land is divided between upland and more fertile lowland areas. With support from the international community, infrastructure is being rebuilt and peace and stability have been consolidated. In 2007, the country celebrated the first peaceful transition of power from one party to another with the election of the All Peoples‟ Congress candidate, Dr. Ernest Bai Koroma, as President who was again peacefully re-elected in 2012. The Country Policy and Institutional Assessment (CPIA) rating has improved from 2.5 in 2005 to 3.0 in 20143. CPIA which ranges between 1 to 6 assesses the business regulatory environment with respect to the extent to which the legal, regulatory, and policy environments help or hinder private businesses in investing, creating jobs, and becoming more productive. The country is therefore half way to the highest score which it should endeavor to attain for a competitive agribusiness. 2.1.3.1.1.2. Policies and Government/Development Partners Engagement in Agriculture GOSL, and the international community, has been addressing poverty and food insecurity through three post-war Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) and agricultural and fisheries programmes, including ―Operation Feed the Nation‖ (2005), ―National Sustainable Agriculture Development Plan (2009), ―Smallholder Commercialization Programme‖ (2010-2014), Institutional Support for Fisheries Management Project (2007-2010); West African Fisheries Programme in Sierra Leone (2010 – underway), West African Pilot Project-Sierra Leone (2012-2014), Technical Capacity Building in Fishing and Seafood Processing Technology in Sierra Leone (2010-2014) The new country strategy, ―The Agenda for Prosperity‖ - A4P (2013) has shifted the post-war reconstruction focus of solving immediate problems to a more forward looking perspective of developing Sierra Leone from a poor to middle-income country. The A4P aims to achieve results through ―building a stable economy, founded on private sector - led growth, and diversifying activity across several competitive sectors, increasing value- added and generating gender-equitable employment.‖ It builds on 8 interconnected pillars: (i) economic diversification; (ii) natural resources management; (iii) accelerating the MDGs for human development; (iv) international competitiveness; (v) employment and labor strategy; (vi) social protection; (vii) governance and public sector reform; and (viii) gender. A4P highlights that ―the next five years, 2013- 2018, have the potential to be the most transformative in the country‘s history, as they lay the foundation for achieving middle income status. The years will represent the stage in national development where the economic model to ensure private - sector - led growth is set and pursued vigorously.‖ 2.1.3.1.1.2.1. National Sustainable Agriculture Development Plan (NSDP) (2010-2030) The main policy paper for the agriculture sector is the National Sustainable Agriculture Development Plan (NSADP), which serves as the country CAADP document. The vision of the NSADP is to make agriculture the engine for socioeconomic growth and development through commercial agriculture. More specifically, its aim is to increase commercialization of the sector and promote ―farming as a business‖ through short, medium and long term Investment Programmes. The NSADP/CAADP 2 MAFFS 3 Source: World Bank Group, CPIA database (http://www.worldbank.org/ida). 6 originally identified four major investment sub-programmes: the Commodity Commercialization Sub-Programme; the Agriculture Infrastructure Development Sub-Programme; the Private Sector Promotion Sub-Programme; and the Sector Coordination and Management Sub-Programme. Following the NSADP adoption, MAFFS in coordination with donors prioritized and adopted the Smallholder Commercialization Programme 2010-2014 (SCP) based on the assumption that this NSADP component ―had the potential to achieve the greatest impact in terms of improved food security and wealth generation for the most vulnerable population in the short and medium term framework‖ (SCP Investment Plan, 2010). 2.1.3.1.1.2.2 Smallholder Commercialization Programme (SCP) (2010-2014) The SCP has been a flagship programme of MAFFS and has proved to be a successful attempt to consolidate and coordinate the available resources. Within three years of SCP implementation, 193 Agribusiness Centres (ABCs) were constructed and equipped, thousands of farmers trained in Field Farmer Schools, hundreds of Farmer-Based Organizations (FBOs) established, nearly 2000 km of feeder roads rehabilitated, hundreds hectares irrigated, Community Banks strengthened and dozens of Financial Services Associations created. According to MAFFS, the SCP efforts resulted in major commodities productivity and output increase and improved food security. However, the latter is difficult to attribute only to smallholder farmers support in the absence of comprehensive agricultural statistics. The lessons learnt from SCP include the need to address the lack of focus on developing marketing and management skills for ―farming as business‖; mixed success of ABCs due to unresolved community ownership and management structure; the need to develop value chains ―from field to market‖ versus only focusing on production; and the need to improve monitoring and evaluation, and information systems generally. It was also noted that programme budgeting should be based on realistically available resources, with no big ―financial gaps‖. Particularly, the management, monitoring and evaluation activities should have clear government budget allocations. If these are expected to be funded by donors, there is no government ownership of the programme. The other important lesson learnt was the insufficient consideration of cross-cutting issues such as nutrition, gender, social protection and climate change in the SCP. ICADEP builds on the strengths of SCP. However, there is recognition of the limitations of focusing only on the smallest and poorest farmers and fishers and the need to support the success and growth of local medium-sized farmers, fishers and businesses along the value chain. Also there is a need to improve monitoring and optimizing the benefits of large agricultural investments and projects. 2.1.3.1.1.2.3 . Growth Poles Programme (2014) A World Bank investment initiative known as Growth Poles Programme was introduced in Sierra Leone in Sierra Leone in 2014 when Growth Pole Diagnostic Value Chain Analysis where carried-out some sectors including Agriculture, Fisheries and Mining sectors in 2014. Growth Poles are simultaneous, coordinated investments in various sectors to support self - sustaining industrialization in a country. Typically there is a combination of public and private investments; specifically built around an already existing resource at a specific location in an economy. In particular, there should be a focus on how infrastructure can be developed within an existing private investment in a manner that will encourage spillovers into other sectors. A growth pole typically will have an existing resource that serves as an inherent revenue producer. 7 2.1.3.1.1.2.4. A Comprehensive Programme to Enhance Food and Nutrition Security through Agriculture, Fisheries and Agro-Industry (AFAIP) AFAIP is a new Initiative driven by many different elements of the 8 pillars in the A4P. It is planned to be implemented as a Presidential Initiative, focusing on the achievement of specific results through the concerted efforts of at least five line ministries – Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food Security (MAFFS), Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources (MFMR), Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MEST), Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI), Ministry of Health and Sanitation (MHS) – but with active support from Ministry of Youths (MOY),Members of Parliament (MPs,) local authorities, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and the private sector. Success will depend upon effective cross-sectoral and cross-ministerial collaboration, innovative financing by government with donor support, and flexible and responsive management informed by Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E). AFAIP builds on NSADP priorities for the sector: • Increasing agricultural productivity (intensification and diversification) • Promoting commercial agriculture • Improving agricultural research and extension delivery systems • Promoting efficient and effective sector resource management systems • Mainstream cross-cutting issues in agriculture (self-sufficiency, gender, youth employment, farmer and fisher health (including HIV/AIDS) and environmental sustainability) • Sustainably managing and exploiting Sierra Leone‘s fishery and marine resources • Sustainably managing and exploiting Sierra Leone‘s forestry resources 2.1.3.1.1.2.5. Institutional Support for Fisheries Management Project (2007-2010); The European Union (EU) supported €3million project assisted the Sierra Leone Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources to establish a realistic picture of the status of fisheries resources, thus contributing to the development of fisheries management measures in line with an approved strategic fisheries policy statement. 2.1.3.1.1.2.6. West African Fisheries Programme in Sierra Leone (2010 – underway) The World Bank supported programme sets out to strengthen the capacity of Sierra Leone to manage the nation‘s fisheries within the good governance framework, reduce illegal fishing and increase local value added to fish products. The phase 1 ended in 2014 and a Global Environment Facility (GEF) support of about US$4million is currently financing preparatory activities to receive US$60 million phase 2. The second phase should provide a fishing harbour in order to establish full ownership over fisheries resources and optimize derivable benefits. 2.1.3.1.1.2.7. Technical Capacity Building in Fishing and Seafood Processing Technology in Sierra Leone (2010-2014) The Russian Federation supported and United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO)/MFMR implemented US$1.4million project aimed at developing national human resource capacity within the fishery sector to effectively manage for optimum revenue generation and sustainability. The outcome was an established Fisheries and Marine Training Institute (FMTI) at Kissy Dockyard administered by Fourah Bay College for providing middle-level manpower needs of the fishing industry 8 2.1.3.1.1.2.8. West African Pilot Project-Sierra Leone (2012-2014) An appropriate fisheries policy and legal framework, and the design and implementation of fisheries management systems are pre-conditions for successful fisheries development. In order to provide long term policy advice for the management of Sierra Leone Fisheries in addition to making the fish receiving infrastructure operational and beneficial to both public and private sector of Sierra Leone, the Partnership for African Fisheries (PAF) of the NEPAD Planning and Coordinating Agency (NPCA) supported the Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources with US$1million under a Department for International Development (DFID) grant of the West African Pilot Project (WAPP) within the framework of the West African Regional Fisheries Programme (WARFP). Working groups of experts established and provided technical backstopping for a long term policy support. 2.1.3.1.1.2.9. Sustainable Aquaculture for Food Security, Livelihoods and Nutrition Project (2015-2016) The US$342,000 FAO supported Project, was one of FAO‘s technical cooperation programs (TCPs) aimed at establishing 30 to 50 hectares of fishponds in the non-coastal communities of Bo, Kenema, Tonkolili and Kono districts, with the view of equipping rural communities with the relevant and adequate knowledge and skills to establish and manage fishponds. The Project sought to contribute to the creation of livelihood opportunities that have the tendency to generate income and ensure temporary and permanent jobs for women and youths within the project areas. The project intended to improve aquaculture by providing assistance to smallholder farmers in communities and group fish farmers through empowerment and capacity building, strengthening of extension services for fish farming and pilot production of local fish feed. It must be noted that recent fisheries sector development intervention focused on capture fisheries development and management. Consequently, support under ICADeP will be directed towards the development of Aquaculture. 2.1.3.2. General Country Economic Context 2.1.3.2.1. Country Economy and Participation of Agriculture Sector to Economic Growth The economy has rebounded strongly since the end of the civil war. The conflict had a massive impact on the economy, as it contracted by around 6 % annually between 1995 and 1999. However, between 2004 and 2007, the economy grew by an average of 7%, driven by reconstruction and recovery in the mining and agriculture sectors. The growth slowed to 4%as Sierra Leone has felt the impacts of the global economic and financial crisis in 2008-2010, but jumped to nearly 20% in 2013 due to the start of iron ore production (growing at steady 6% in 2011-2013 excluding iron ore). Other indicators reflect increasing economic stability. Inflation has decreased from double to single digits. The Government‘s debt servicing ratio stands at 1.5 %. Sierra Leone reached the Completion Point of the Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) initiative and has gained additional support under the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative. Foreign investment has been increasing from USD 9 million in 2003 to over USD 700 million in net foreign direct investment in 2012 (over USD 2 billion in FDI stocks), due to the recent increase due to iron ore and large agricultural projects investments. Agriculture is recognized to play a key role in meeting the objectives of the Agenda for Prosperity (A4P – see section 2.4). The growth diagnostics performed for A4P sets ambitious targets of increasing the production of key crops, livestock, forestry and fisheries by 10% annually to provide the necessary contribution of 4% to the national economy growth of 7% p.a. with the purpose of reaching the middle income status. To illustrate the task on hand, the average rice yield is to increase from the current (official) 1.8 tonnes per hectare to 6.85 tonnes per hectare (as illustrated in Figure 1 9 as well as other projected crops yields). In addition to staple crops, it is also important to invest in the diversification of the production (for example fruits and vegetables, legumes, etc.). Comprising > 57% of total GDP in recent times (Table 2, Figure 3), agriculture is the largest sector in the economy, employing around 60 % of the workforce. Yet, there remains a high level of informality within the agricultural sector, estimated to be up to up to 50% of the production and trade, and the sector is still facing challenges in terms of productivity and production, value chains structuring and market access, mitigation and adaptation to climate change effects. Over the years, the economy and demographics have not remained static. Mining and services sectors are growing. The urban population is growing faster than those in rural areas, so that in 20 years more than half of the population will live in urban areas. Overall population is growing stands at around 2.1% annually, increasing food demand and pressure on the production. In addition to the challenges already highlighted, the 2014 Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) outbreak undermined significantly the recent growth that was projected to be at the level of 13%-15% before the occurrence of the disease. The GDP growth rate in 2015 was -20.6 (Table 2, Figure 3). Figure 1 . The Staple and Cash Crops Yields Necessary to Achieve the A4P Garrido, L. (2012): Sierra Leone‘s Vision of Prosperity: Overcoming Constraints to Diversification and Growth. Garrido, L. (2012): Sierra Leone: Policies for Economic Diversification and Growth 2.1.3.2.2. Domestic Investment and Farm Commercialisation Official data on domestic private investment in agriculture are not available. The estimate is around USD 30-40 million per annum. The domestic investors are represented by local middle to large size farms (from 10Ha) with some investment from diaspora. Increased share of Government Agricultural Expenditure have been observed. The growth rate of Government Agriculture Expenditure (GAE) slowed to 13.4% per year on average during the NAIP period after a faster growth of 32% per year on average before NAIP period. The share of GAE in total government expenditure increased significantly to 7% per year on average during the NAIP period from 1.2% per year on average during the reference period. A similar trend was observed in GAE relative to agriculture value added – i.e., spending intensity – as the ratio increased from 1.2% before NAIP to 1.8% during NAIP. Data on middle or large farming is unavailable. However, the existing surveys demonstrate growth of a 10 n average land plot size from 2.5 Ha in 2003 to 2.9% in 20114. Nearly 30 % of households operated 2 plots, while 12.6 % operated three to eight plots (equaling farm sizes from 6 Ha up to 100 Ha). This is only a proxy indicator or farms expansion. The data was based on Sierra Leone Integrated Household Surveys (SLIHS) that did not include bigger commercial farms. 2.1.3.2.3. Foreign Investment Total amounts of Foreign Direct Investments (FDIs) are not readily available, but estimations by the Sierra Leone Investment and Export Promotion Agency (SLIEPA) point towards Ten Billion United States Dollars over the past five years. FDI has significantly increased in the last five years with new investments in iron ore and large agricultural projects as reported by Trading Economic and United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) (Figure 2 and Table 1). Figure 2. Net FDI Inflows 2001-2013 Source: http://www.tradingeconomics.com Table 1. Net FDI Inflow and Stock 2005-2013 (UNCTAD) http://unctad.org/en/pages/DIAE/World%20Investment%20Report/Country-Fact-Sheets.aspx Statistical data gleaned from MoFED indicates dwindling annual FDI in agriculture and fisheries sector especially in recent year inching towards the general elections. (Figure 2b). It is absolutely necessary to monitor the achievements and impacts of these projects, their return on investment, yields, impacts on employment, growth and poverty reduction, as well as the effectiveness of the investment incentives. 4 WB, Sierra Leone Agriculture Profile 2013; WFP Food Security Report 2011 http://www.tradingeconomics.com/ http://unctad.org/en/pages/DIAE/World%2520Investment%2520Report/Country-Fact-Sheets.aspx 11 Figure 2b. Foreign Direct Investment in the Agriculture Sector 2010-2017 0 10,000,000 20,000,000 30,000,000 40,000,000 50,000,000 60,000,000 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 U SD Year FDI (Disbursed) Table 2. GDP by Sector and GDP Growth5: Year GDP (Current Price Le. Bn.) Agriculture, Forestry & Fishing Industry Services GDP Growth Rates (%) % Agric. Sector Contribution 2010 9,844,396 5,429,597 798,027 3,616,772 5.4 55.1 2011 12,460,722 6,986,660 1,007,125 4,466,937 4.8 56.1 2012 16,515,434 8,355,508 2,400,415 5,376,603 15.2 50.6 2013 21,317,382 10,228,785 4,525,363 6,071,094 20.7 48.0 2014 22,689,471 11,751,396 3,542,818 6,767,540 4.6 51.8 2015 21,582,558 12,681,597 955,044 7,323,042 -20.6 58.8 2016 24,287,894 14,023,240 1,641,659 7,958,130 6.3 57.7 5 World Development Indicator and Statistics Sierra Leone http://databank.worldbank.org/data/reports.aspx?Code=NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG&id=1ff4a498&report name=Popular-In dicators&populartype=series&ispopular=y http://databank.worldbank.org/data/reports.aspx?Code=NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG&id=1ff4a498&report name=Popular-Indicators&populartype=series&ispopular=y http://databank.worldbank.org/data/reports.aspx?Code=NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG&id=1ff4a498&report name=Popular-Indicators&populartype=series&ispopular=y 12 Figure 3. GDP Development and Agric. Sector Contribution to GDP 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 5,000,000 10,000,000 15,000,000 20,000,000 25,000,000 30,000,000 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 % Le . B n. Year GDP (Current Price Le. Bn.) Agriculture, Forestry & Fishing GDP Growth Rates (%) % Agric. Sector Contribution The Status and Progress of Sierra Leone‘s Agricultural Investment, Growth and Poverty which is used as the base-line for the results framework of this investment plan outlined in Table 10 for key indicator targets are given in Table 3. Table 3. The Status and Progress of Sierra Leone’s Agricultural Investment, Growth and Poverty Metrics Data Source Reference Period 2008 2009 2010 NRDS Period Change between NRDS and Reference Average 2003-2007 Average 2011-2014 Value Unit Government agriculture expenditure growth rate (%) ReSAKSS 32.0 39.1 93.8 30.6 -13.4 -45.4 pp Government agriculture expenditure (% of total government expenditure) ReSAKSS 1.2 4.0 6.0 9.0 7.0 5.8 pp Government agriculture expenditure (% of agriculture value added) ReSAKSS 1.2 3.0 5.0 6.0 3.0 1.8 pp Agriculture value added per agricultural worker (constant 2010 USD) ReSAKSS 822.2 1002 1054 1053 1318 60.3 % Agriculture value added per hectare of arable land (constant 2010 USD) ReSAKSS 264.6 343 356 347 444.3 67.9 % Yield for individual crops (Ton/Ha) Maize FAOSTAT 0.92 0.84 0.92 1.45 1.97 113.4 % Cassava FAOSTAT 6.6 6.2 7.8 8.2 11.4 71.4 % Paddy Rice FAOSTAT 1.18 1.43 1.78 1.87 1.82 53.4 % Plantains FAOSTAT 5.3 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.5 3.9 % Taro (cocoyam) FAOSTAT 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.4 2.5 -0.3 % Growth rate of output for individual commodities (%) % Maize FAOSTAT 25.4 2.99 25.9 73.4 -6.5 -1.26 % Cassava FAOSTAT 58.0 5.0 41.5 15.5 6.2 -89.3 % Paddy Rice FAOSTAT 12.53 15.7 30.6 15.7 3.3 73.9 % Plantains FAOSTAT 3.9 2.6 2.6 1.6 1.8 52.3 % Taro (cocoyam) FAOSTAT 1.6 -10.7 10 1.8 2.6 66.9 % Agriculture production index (2004-2006=100) WDI 96.5 104.3 128.7 145.4 164.6 70.6 % Agriculture value added (Billion US$) WDI 1.0 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.5 50.8 % Growth rate of agricultural value added (constant 2005 US$) WDI 8.9 6.7 4.0 3.5 3.5 -5.4 pp Growth rate of agricultural value added WDI 5.8 5.1 2.7 2.2 2.2 -6 pp 13 per capita (constant 2005 US$) Growth rate of GDP per capita (constant 2005 US$) WDI 2.7 2.8 2.2 2.9 8.8 6.1 pp GDP per capita (constant 2005 US$) WDI 353.9 384.9 393.5 405.1 498.9 40.9 % GNI per capita, PPP (constant 2011 international $) WDI 1,056.6 1,244.9 1,284.1 1,231 1,495.8 41.5 % Gini coefficient*** WDI 40.2 33.9 -15.4 % Number of jobs created per annum* WDI 64813 44395 45081 147462 48435 25.3 % Employment rate (% of population) WDI 65.6 66.3 66.4 66.5 66.6 1.0 pp Poverty headcount ratio, national (% of population)** WDI 64.4 52.9 -11.5 pp Poverty headcount ratio, national (% of rural population)** WDI 78.7 66.1 -12.6 pp Poverty headcount ratio at $1.90 a day (2011 PPP) (% of population)** WDI 58.47 52.33 -6.14 pp Legends: ReSAKSS: Regional Strategic Analysis and Knowledge Support System; WDI: World Development Indicators; FAOSTAT: FAO Statistic database; * Calculation from employment rate and population from the WDI database; ** Poverty measures for years 2003 and 2011. *** Gini values are for 2003 and 2011. The Agriculture Household Tracking Survey (ATHS, 2011) shows 7% of households used fertilizers and other inputs and 8% used credit to buy agricultural machinery and equipment. Another 8% were selling their produce not at the farm gate suggesting more advanced marketing strategies. It can be presumed that these wages may represent the evolving class of bigger commercial farmers. ATHS has so far been the only survey in Sierra Leone that gives some idea of production and marketing activities of farmers. Again, ATHS did not include commercial farms. All the agricultural research is dedicated to smallholders, poverty and food (in) security. Figure 4. Average Land Size Holding by Year and Region Objective microeconomic and market research of agricultural enterprises is virtually absent in Sierra Leone and generally in Western Africa, although it is very important for the Government to understand the drivers and patterns of local farms commercialization. Thus it is imperative to 14 carefully analyze the nature of agricultural land expansion as it relates to agricultural commercialization at the microeconomic levels. This is particularly important given the ongoing debate about whether African governments and development partners should promote large-scale versus smallholder farming and given the uncertainty about the extent to which current commercialization and growth in agriculture have been inclusive. Indeed, anecdotal evidence suggests that the processes entail a special group of smallholder farmers that have transitioned to become medium- and large-scale commercial farmers, but the nature and implications of this transitioning process are not understood. 2.1.3.2.4. Poverty, Unemployment and Youth Employment Sierra Leone recorded an increasing development progress over the last decade, according to UNDP Human Development Report 2016 (HDR, 2016). Sierra Leone registered an average annual HDI growth of 1.04%; 2.65%; 1.39%; over the periods: 1990–2000; 2000–2010; 2010–2015 respectively. Over a 25 year period, 1990–2015; an average annual HDI growth of 1.75% was scored. The country‘s Human Development Index (HDI) also shows a positive change in rank of value 3 between 2010–2015; denoting an improvement6. That Sierra Leone ranked 174/174 in 2000 just before the end of the war and now (in 2015) ranks 179/188; is indeed an improvement. However, given that the country was ranked 176/188 in 2014 but dropped to 179/188 in 2015 to (HDR, 2016); signals room for improvement. Health indicators depict a mixed bag. Some basic improvement in health indicators is observed. For example, Kamara et al., (2006)7 reported mortality rates for infants and under 5s of 115-121 and 194-224 respectively in 2004 which according to (HDR, 2016), decreased to 87/1000 and 120/1000 live births respectively in 2015. But, maternal mortality is at 1360 per 100,000 in 2015 up from 1200 per 100,000 live births in 1990s. About 38% of under 5s are moderately or severely stunted. With only 0.2 physicians/10,000 people in 2015(HDR, 2016), that is sharp fall form 7.3 physicians for every 10,000 people in 2004 even when adjusted for population increase according to United Nations Population Fund UNFPA et al, (2006)8. About 37% and 56% do not have access to safe drinking water and improved sanitation respectively in 2015 (UNICEF)9compared to 57% and 39% respectively in 2004 (UNFPA et al., 2006). Gender difference is observed in literacy level with 59% and 76% registered for females and males respectively in 2015 to (HDR, 2016). It not surprising that citizen‘s overall satisfaction with wellbeing score of 4.9/10 was registered by Sierra Leone (HDR, 2016). According to the World Bank Poverty Profile 2013, the poverty reduced from 66.4 % of the population in 2003 to 52.9 % in 2013. This poverty level rises to 66.4 % in rural areas, but is comparatively lower at 20.7 % in Freetown. Poverty is also concentrated among young people with around 70 % of youth (aged between 15 and 35) unemployed or underemployed. Women‘s labour force participation in crop farming and in trade and repairs stand at 65.8% and 21.9% respectively. The dominance of women in the self-employed/informal sector with poor working conditions, low salaries and no social protection leaves them open to exploitation and increases their vulnerability to poverty. The population in the eastern part of the country is more likely to be poor. In rural areas, 6 UNDP Human Development Report (HDR) 2016: http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/2016 human development report.pdf 7 Kamara, J.A.L., Williams, M.L.J., Turay, S and Sengeh, P. (2006). Republic of Sierra Leone - 2004 Population and Housing Census: Analytical Report on the Mortality and Disability Status of the Population. UNFPA/SSL/EU; Statistics Sierra Leone, Freetown, Sierra Leone; November 2006. 8 UNFPA, SSL and EU (2006). 2004 Population and Housing Census. Statistics Sierra Leone (SSL), A.J. Momoh Street, Freetown, Sierra Leone. 9UNICEF Sierra Leone Data https://data.unicef.org/country/sle/ http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/2016 human development report.pdf https://data.unicef.org/country/sle/ 15 households in which the head‘s primary occupation is agriculture were more likely to be poor, as well as those with smaller landholdings. Those growing rice were neither more nor less likely to be poor. In addition, households in which the head has at least some secondary or post-secondary education were less likely to be poor. Women and youth are particularly vulnerable and trapped in perpetual poverty due to persistent norms of social exclusion, particularly common in rural areas. This undermines their participation in local decision-making, access to productive resources, fair targeting of public projects and services and opportunities to integrate into market systems. However, women-led households demonstrate better resilience to poverty than male-led households (WB Poverty Profile 2013). The conflict in Sierra Leone affected access to educational opportunities for a large number of youth and this is reflected in the extremely low levels of literacy in the country. Low levels of education and vocational skills are an obstacle to decent employment and increased business opportunities. Lack of basic financial, marketing, management and other transferrable skills constrain business growth and trans-sectoral labor force movements, as well as posing a serious challenge for the investors. While the primary and secondary education situation is improving, the adult education needs to be addressed with involvement of the private sector. In general, in the country, a lack of alignment between labor market needs and curricula (both in formal and informal education) remains. The mismatch between education and training and the labor market needs, can be addressed through the development of labor market ready skills and entrepreneurship minded youth, with the capacity to successfully scale up business opportunities, both in the informal sector and the formal sector; ensuring education and training matches the requirements of both formal and informal employment, including self-employment. Holistic approaches will need to be adopted which will include not only market-demanded skills but also an array of life skills (from agro business to health related ones and diseases prevention and mitigation further to the current ongoing EVD crises). 2.1.3.2.5. Food Security and Nutritional Status On average, households spend approximately 60 % of their incomes on food. About 49.8 % of households are food insecure, according to the 2015 Comprehensive Food Security and Vulnerability Analysis (CFSVA)10, meaning they face difficulties to access and consume the required quantity and quality of food necessary to maintain a healthy and active life. Compared to 2010 CFVSA, there is an increase of about 5% of the food insecure. Out of these households in 2015, 8.6% are severely food insecure (an increase of 6.5% compared to 2010). Food insecurity is higher in rural areas (59.7%). The highest numbers of food insecure people were engaged in farming, including: production of vegetables and fruit (63.1 percent), food crops (62.3 percent) and cash crops (63.1 percent). Fact about food security status in Sierra Leone11 depicts that ½ of the population 3.5million people are food insecure. The diet of Sierra Leoneans is still less diversified. As example, in 2014, cereals (mainly rice) represented 49.8% share of the dietary energy supply, followed by starchy roots (12.6%). Some products such as fruits and vegetables, meat, fish, milk and eggs were less consumed (respectively 3.4%, 1.2%, 2.5%, 0.5% and 0.1%)12. This could be attributed to several factors, such as insufficient availability, high food costs coupled with poverty and cultural and social 10 Sierra Leone - Comprehensive Food Security and Vulnerability Analysis, December 2015. https://www.wfp.org/content/sierra-leone-comprehensive-food-security-and-vulnerability-analysis-december-2015 11 Launch of the 2015 Comprehensive Food Security and Vulnerability Analysis (CFSVA) 27 October 2016 .Freetown https://eeas.europa.eu/sites/eeas/files/cfsva launch.pdf 12 FAO. Food and Nutrition in numbers, 2014. https://www.wfp.org/content/sierra-leone-comprehensive-food-security-and-vulnerability-analysis-december-2015 https://eeas.europa.eu/sites/eeas/files/cfsva launch.pdf 16 influences. It is therefore not surprising that the Sierra Leone Global Hunger Index is said to in the critical region13 It takes 7.7 miles to access a functioning market; the price of local and imported rice has risen by 38% since 2010; households spend 2/3 of their income on food and transport; 608,500 people about 10% of the population are severely food insecure; ½ of the total number of farmer‘s productivity is constrained due to lack of improved seeds; and local rice production has declined by 15% since 2010. Also very revealing is the condition that only 4% of famers can produce enough rice to meet their family‘s needs for 1 year; over ½ of households consume 4 food groups or less per week and 2/3 of all households do not get enough iron from their diet. National fish consumption is 17 kg per capita per year and close to the global average of 19.7 kg14 and fish is the most accessible animal protein. Food fish security would be further guaranteed by boosting aquaculture. Sierra Leone Demographic Health Survey gives the following key findings with respect to nutrition of children and adults15 Box 3. Key Findings on Nutrition of Children and Adults • Thirty-eight percent of children under age 5 are stunted, 9 percent are wasted, and 16 percent are underweight. Children‘s nutritional status has a positive relationship with the mother‘s health, the mother‘s education, and household wealth. • The proportion of children underweight has decreased from 21 percent in 2008 to 16 percent in 2013. • Almost all children (97 percent) are breastfed at some point. Exclusive breastfeeding is uncommon, however; only 32 percent of children under age 6 months are exclusively breastfed. The median duration for exclusive breastfeeding among Sierra Leone children is 0.6 months, unchanged since 2008. • Sixty-two percent of children age 6-9 months are consuming the recommended breast milk and complementary foods, and 68 percent of children age 12-23 months are consuming both. • Only 7 percent of children age 6-23 months are fed appropriately, based on recommended infant and young child feeding practices. • Eighty percent of children age 6-59 months are anaemic. • Nine percent of women are undernourished (BMI < 18.5), while 18 percent are overweight or obese (BMI > 25.0). The survey reports that nutritional status of children under age 5 as measured by wasting or low weight-for-height indicates that overall, 9 percent of children are wasted, and 4 percent are severely 13 The GHI is an association of 4 indicators: x under-five year stunting prevalence x under-five year underweight prevalence x prevalence of undernourishment x under-five year mortality prevalence 14 FACTSHEET. Feed the Future Sierra Leone Scaling up Aquaculture Production (SAP); http://pubs.iclarm.net/resource centre/2017-27.pdf 15 Sierra Leone Demographic Health Survey, 2013. https://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/FR297/FR297.pdf http://pubs.iclarm.net/resource centre/2017-27.pdf https://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/FR297/FR297.pdf 17 wasted. Wasting increases initially with the child‘s age from 10 percent at under age 6 months (10 percent) to a peak of 18 percent at age 9-11 months, before declining steadily to 7 percent at age 48-59 months. A slightly higher proportion of male children than female children are wasted (11 percent versus 8 percent). Children reported to be very small at birth (14 percent) and children born to thin mothers (BMI < 18.5) (12 percent) are more likely to be wasted than other children (10 percent or less). Northern region has the highest prevalence of wasting (11 percent) and severe wasting (5 percent) compared with the other regions. It should be noted that 8 percent of children under age 5 in Sierra Leone are overweight. At the national level the survey report indicates that, 16 percent of children under age 5 are underweight; with 6 percent severely underweight. There are no clear weight-for-age trends across age groups. Children age 6-8 months and those age 9-11 months are most likely to be underweight (both 20 percent or greater). As with the other two nutritional indicators, male children are more likely to be underweight (18 percent) than female children (15 percent), and smaller size at birth is associated with lower weight-for-age. Children born to thin or underweight mothers are more likely to be underweight (21 percent) than children born to mothers with normal BMI (16 percent), or mothers that are overweight (13 percent). The proportion of underweight children is higher in rural areas (18 percent) than in urban areas (12 percent). Children in the Western region are least likely (10 percent) to be underweight compared with the other regions (16 percent or higher). Though under-nutrition rates in Sierra Leone remain high, an emerging food policy issue may be prevention of obesity. There are indications for increased risk for future obesity, if improved access to quantity, but not quality, of food is addressed. The youth population, aged 15-35, comprises one third of the population of Sierra Leone and youth unemployment has been regarded as a major root cause of the outbreak of civil conflict in Sierra Leone. Youth unemployment remains a challenging social and economic problem in Sierra Leone. The country‘s youth unemployment rate of around 70 % is amongst the highest in the West African sub-region and an estimated 800,000 youth today are actively searching for employment (UNDP). Furthermore, illiteracy remains a persistent challenge and youth that lack that skills and education find it extremely difficult to compete for the limited jobs available. In the context of the Agenda for Change for 2008-2012, the government has implemented new legislation for youth-friendly initiatives that aim to provide an environment conducive to youth development, employment and empowerment. Youth employment remains a top priority in the Agenda for Prosperity. However, despite the implementation of various initiatives, aimed at creating jobs for youth, unemployment in Sierra Leone remains intractably high. With an economic growth spurred on to a large extend by the mining sector; the country is facing difficulties to absorb growing numbers of unemployed youth. Decent employment also remains a challenge in the country. Basic labor standards do exist in Sierra Leone, but are not well implemented. Although in certain cases some improvements have been reported, a lot needs to be further reinforced. The country is a signatory to a number of international conventions on labor including freedom of association, elimination of compulsory labor, elimination of the worst forms of child labor and elimination of discrimination. In addition, a number of 18 labor-market regulations that seek to balance job creation with social protection exist but are not enforced well due to the lack of capacity. Such regulations include those governing the minimum wage, holidays and paid leave. Several social safety-net programmes in Sierra Leone now mostly rely on community-driven development initiatives, such as the Social Action and Poverty Alleviation Programme and the National Commission for Social Action (NACSA) project funded by the World Bank and the African Development Bank (AfDB). 2.1.3.2.6. Physical Health Constraints The current EVD crisis highlighted one of the key binding constraints for agriculture and the whole country – poor health due to very weak infrastructure. Even without the Ebola epidemic, there are up to 2 million annual cases of malaria, high cholera and other diseases incidence coupled with half of the population experiencing various levels of food insecurity and malnutrition. High incidence of water and food borne diseases (cholera, dysentery etc.) induces inadequate absorption of food nutrients due to frequent stools and result into malnutrition. Another trend is the ―feminisation‖ of agriculture due to male and youth migration to urban centres, which sets physical limits to the extensive agriculture. The estimated effect is that at least half of the work force potential is lost due to illness or malnutrition. This is a very serious constraint, particularly for the smallholder family farms, which will only be alleviated with gradual health system improvement. 2.1.3.2.7. Food Self-Sufficiency and Food Security The rate of food self-sufficiency declined from a high of about 95% at Independence in 1961 to a low of 50% during the civil war years in the 1990s (Figure 5). Although there has been some recovery during the last decade self-sufficiency has not yet recovered to the levels in the early 1960s as shown in Figure reflecting self-sufficiency levels for rice. Figure 5. Rice Self-sufficiency Source: WFP, 2011 There is high dependency on rice, the country‘s main staple, with 104kg consumed per capita per annum. It is not surprising that data with respect to self-sufficiency is only available on rice. However, there has been a rice deficit for the last two decades, a trend that dramatically worsened during the civil war. Although domestic production recovered quickly after 2001, the country produces only three-quarters of its rice requirement, with remaining demand being met by imports. During the food price crisis of 2008, the cost of rice rose by over 50 % between January and July 2008. The current EVD crisis could potentially have a similar or even more severe impact on the food process in 2014-2015. Food security will very much depend on the 19 sub-sector productivity increase through private sector development and the government policies towards balance nutrition and food diversification as discussed in the ASR main report. Depending on the success of the structural transformation and wealth growth, the Government will decide whether self-sufficiency in rice will still be a priority or the economy will have sufficient external shock absorption capacity and will follow other economic priorities. 2.1.3.2.8. Support for Agri-business - Farmer Linkages along Selected Agricultural VCAs There is evidence from the 2014 ASR, that numerous commodities provide excellent opportunities for agriculturalists and fisher folks throughout Sierra Leone. Agricultural and fishery researchers, extension staff, governmental officials and donor personnel can and should provide guidance and recommendations to the agricultural community as to which commodities are suitable to conditions which exist with the country; as well as bring attention to market opportunities. However, to achieve economic improvement for the entire agricultural sector; of primary importance is for government is to resist regulatory restrictions which overly burdensome, a tax code which does not put agriculture in an uncompetitive position on the global stage and to continue the battle against corruption. In addition, government should insure there are no restrictions which inhibit trade and open markets. A key to economic success for agriculture is to maintain an environment in which the private sector can make practical business decisions relative to what to produce and market. 2.1.3.2.9. Formalization and Improvement of Productivity and Labor Conditions in the Informal Economy A key problem facing those involved in agriculture is mostly the informal nature of the sector. This deprives them of better investment financing, insurance and other social benefits. ICADEP will encourage the transformation of the agribusinesses into formal and legal entities. This will not only promote a legal and formal agribusiness but will enhance much improved sector statistics, increased government revenue and strengthening the agriculture and fisheries value chain stakeholders in the market as an organized advocacy group(s). At the same time, in order to boost its poverty reduction objectives, the ICADEP will work on improving the productivity and decent labor conditions in the informal economy whilst promoting skills development, value chain partnerships with informal organizations of rural workers and inclusive responsible contract farming and out grower schemes. 20 3.0. The Agriculture Sector 3.1. Agriculture Development Trends The agriculture sector remains the biggest sector of the economy contributing between >57% to GDP and is dominated by the crops sub-sector (Appendix 4). The contributions of the sub-sectors to the GDP are also shown in (Appendix 4). Crops represent 70% of the agricultural output while fisheries contribute 14%, forestry 11% and livestock only 4%. It should be noted that fisheries contribution must have been under-reported as small-scale fisheries data was not collected between 2010-2017 the sub-sector that contributed about 92.5% of the national catch in 2009. The investment plan will therefore include support to data collection for capture fisheries in addition to aquaculture development which is emphasized in this plan. Traditionally, rice dominates the crops contribution to GDP with an average of over 15% in the last five years followed by cassava at 9.3%. The drivers of the value-added growth within the crops sector were rice, groundnut, maize and other crops (including cash crops). 3.1.1. Agricultural Production and Productivity Trends There remains a high level of informality within the agricultural sector; perhaps up to 50% of the production and trade. Many of these informal producers are within the smallholder category which as a demographic group produced 47% of all agricultural raw products at the start of the implementation of the SCP. As mentioned earlier, fisheries figures are even higher with small-scale operator contributing about 92.5% of the national catch in 200916 (Appendix 11). That data was not collected between 2010-2017 on the subsector which makes such a significant contribution to food fish security is dumbfounding. Aquaculture and inland fisheries are yet to be fully developed. The capacity development of MFMR to keep up with the data collection requirement for management information is crucial for the development of aquaculture and inland fisheries resources. Due to the GOSL post-conflict reconstruction effort, the agricultural production in all sub-sectors in Sierra Leone shows an increasing trend since the cessation of hostilities in 2001 as shown in Table 4, 5; Appendices 5, 8, 9 and 10; Figures 6, 7 8) . Table 4. Annual Staple Crop Production Trends, ‘000 MT 2001-2017 Year Paddy Rice Maize Cassava Sweet Potato Pulses/ Groundnut 2001 310.620 10.00 741.216 38.200 15.00 2002 422.065 10.03 895.817 45.450 28.00 2003 445.633 11.90 1,091.168 84.446 33.00 2004 542.000 12.49 1,758.004 153.196 40.00 2005 552.000 13.11 2,287.000 160.121 43.00 2006 562.000 16.24 2,973.100 168.129 48.00 2007 588.004 20.30 3,865.030 176.537 52.00 16 MFMR Statistics Unit (note that small-scale fisheries data was last recorded in 2009) 21 2008 680.097 22.85 4,058.288 180.068 58.00 2009 888.417 23.53 4,261.205 183.670 59.00 2010 1,026.671 44.46 4,697.992 187.344 70.00 2011 1,129.338 52.416 3,460.357 210.313 83.068 2012 1,141.417 39.237 3,585.172 220.829 84.748 2013 1,255.559 40.022 3,810.418 225.246 86.443 2014 816.503 20.812 2,316.811 138.207 22.882 2015 995.360 22.619 2,556.554 153.298 25.169 2016 1,160.646 12.554 3,073.121 169.375 66.308 Source: PEMSD/MAFFS Analysis in various reports of yields and the areas harvested demonstrates that the production growth has been mainly achieved through the expansion of crop areas (Figure 6, 7, 8). Time series for Cassava and sweet potatoes (Table 5) also indicates inelastic productivity with increase in production area. The same could be said about a range of crops (Appendix 5). Possible reasons for the productivity stagnation would include, low quality seed, little use of agricultural inputs and technologies, high post-harvest losses and farm fragmentation (lack of economies of scale). Consequently, measure for increasing productivity should be an important undertaking during ICADeP implementation. Table shows a somewhat marginal increase in livestock over the period 2014-2015 except for chicken production that witnessed a significant increase. Distribution of livestock by district depicted areas with comparative advantage for the production of the various livestock (Appendix 6). For example, Koinadugu district is clearly the biggest cattle producer, contributing about 25% of production - closely followed by Kono district providing 21%. The proximity of these districts to neighbouring Guinea – a significant cattle producing country, might be influential. Port Loko and Kambia districts lead sheep production whereas; Kailahun, Kambia, Kono, Port Loko and Tonkolili are the major producers of goats. Western Area dominates swine and chicken production contributing 31% and 35% respectively. 22 Figure 6. Trends in Rice Production and Productivity (2001-2017) Source: MAFFS It should be also noted that all surveys focus on smallholder households and do not capture the commercial farms; it is difficult to track the real production and productivity patterns of the different types and size of farming enterprise. The same relates to all sub-sectors productivity surveys to identify best production practices and yields. Table 5. Cassava and Sweet Potato Harvested Area and Yields 2001 – 2016 Year Cassava Sweet Potato Area Cultivated (Ha) Yield (Mt/Ha) Production (Mt) Area Cultivated (Ha) Yield (Mt/Ha) Production (Mt) 2001 61,768 12.00 741,216 7,640 5.00 38,200 2002 68,909 13.00 895,817 9,090 5.00 45,450 2003 83,936 13.00 1,091,168 16,379 5.40 84,446 2004 134,404 13.00 1,758,004 28,240 5.40 153,196 2005 175,923 13.00 2,287,000 29,652 5.40 160,121 2006 228,700 13.00 2,973,100 31,115 5.40 168,129 2007 297,310 13.00 3,865,030 32,692 5.40 176,537 2008 312,176 13.00 4,058,288 33,346 5.40 180,068 2009 327,785 13.00 4,261,205 34,013 5.40 183,670 2010 344,175 13.00 4,697,992 34,693 5.40 187,344 2011 420,457 8.23 3,460,357 41,729 5.04 210,313 2012 225,766 15.88 3,585,172 21,419 10.31 220,829 2013 352,816 10.80 3,810,418 64,354 3.50 225,246 2014 180,493 12.84 2,316,811 19,565 7.06 138,207 2015 201,621 12.68 2,556,554 21,040 7.28 153,298 2016 195,824 15.69 3,073,121 18,659 9.08 169,375 Source: PEMSD/MAFFS 23 Analysis of the food production and the food demand in Sierra Leone, illustrated that rice production and imports have increased simultaneously17. Sierra Leone requires about 530,000 mt of milled rice to meet the consumption needs of the population annually. National Paddy Rice Production was projected at 524,000 mt in 2006 and 638,000 mt in 2007. The level of rice self-sufficiency rose from 57.45 percent in 2002, to 69 percent in 2005 and then to 71 percent in 2007. The remainder must be imported at increasingly expensive prices in the current situation of high prices for food including rice. International nominal prices of all major food commodities reached, in the first three months of 2008, their highest level in nearly 50 years, while prices in real terms in nearly 30 years. The prices of rice, the main staple food in Sierra Leone has seen a steady increase by more than 50% on average in the entire country. Rice Yields Rice production has increased steadily and continuously after the civil war touching an all-time record of 1,279,612 tons in 2017 (Appendix 8). This increase in production is attributed to increase in area cultivated which has increased form 258,850 hectares in 2001 to 1,030,450hectares in 2017. There is also some movement in productivity, yields increased from 1.20t/ha in 2001 to 1.87 t/ha in 2013 but dropped to 1.30t/ha in 2017. This increase in yield appears to be a result of increase in area under rice cultivation. Despite this increase, yields are still very low in Sierra Leone compared to the average of Sub Saharan Africa and remain far below the potential. Cassava Yields Like rice, cassava production has been increasing since the end of the conflict. Production has increased from 741,216 tons in 2001 to 4,932,892 tons in 2012, an increase of about 85 percent. It is clear (from Appendix 9; Figure 7) that increase in production is entirely a result of increase in area under cultivation. However, in recent year 2016-2017 productivity is increasing due to improved variety and input supplies. The area under cultivation increased from 61,768 ha in 2001 to 379,453 ha in 2012, while productivity stagnated at 13.00t/ha from 2013 to 2012. Cassava yields are relatively low given the yield potential of 20-40t/ha of available improved cassava varieties (SLICASS). The low yield on farmer‘s field could largely be attributed to poor management practices, and the predominant use of traditional varieties which are susceptible to the yield reducing cassava mosaic disease. Cocoa Yields In recent years, there has been a big push in Sierra Leone to increase cocoa production, following on from the demise of the industry during the civil war. Efforts to improve the sector include the establishment of Kenema Forestry and Tree Crop Research Centre (KFTCRC) mandated to conduct research on tree crops. While agriculture plays an important role in Sierra Leone's economy, given that it employs around two-thirds of the country's labour force, however, cocoa production still constitutes a tiny fraction of the country's overall agricultural production. This is not surprising, as for instance, in 2011, only 123,576 ha of land were committed to cocoa production compared to 603,924 ha for rice and 361,384 ha for cassava (Tables 4,5; Appendix 5, 8 9 and 10). Nonetheless, both area under cultivation of cocoa and the crop yields have been gradually increasing. Area under cultivation increased from 30,333 ha to 139,980 ha, while productivity increased from 0.36 t/ha to 0.47 t/ha in 2001 and 2017, respectively after attaining 0.96t/ha in 20012 (Appendix 10; Figure 8). 17 A. M. H. Conteh et al. (2012). The influence of price on rice production in Sierra Leone. Agricultural Sciences 3 (2012) 462-46 24 Figure 7 Trend in Cassava Production and Productivity, 2001-2017 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 0 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 3,000,000 3,500,000 4,000,000 4,500,000 5,000,000 5,500,000 6,000,000 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 P ro du ct iv it y (M t/ H a) A re a an d P ro du ct io n (H a an d M t) Year Production (Mt) Area (Ha) Productivity (Mt/Ha) Figure 8: Trend in Cacao Production and Productivity, 2001-2017 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000 20 01 20 02 20 03 20 04 20 05 20 06 20 07 20 08 20 09 20 10 20 11 20 12 20 13 20 14 20 15 20 16 20 17 P ro du ct iv it y (M t/ H a) Ar ea a nd P ro du ct io n (H a & M t) Year Area (Ha) Production (Mt) Productivity (Mt/Ha) Forestry Sierra Leone is part of the Upper Guinea Rainforest, accommodating a diversity of plants and animals. Thus, forest products (both timber and non-timber) have customarily being major sources of ways and means of eking-out a living especially for the rural poor. Wood products such as timber are significant income earners whereas; well-being supporters such as bush meat, medicinal plants, fuel wood (charcoal), wild fruits, nuts and tubers can also bring in income. Other non-use values and services such as serving as a carbon sink in climate mitigation; a source of water supply and recreational facilities or as fish breeding sites in the case of mangrove forest are also very important. It is therefore not surprising that the A4P recognised reconciling economic development and environmental sustainability as crucial for continued provision of those use and non-use services by forest18. Therefore, that, Sierra Leone developed a national biodiversity strategic action plan in 2003; 18 Agenda for Prosperity: Sierra Leone‗s Third Generation Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (2013 – 2018). 25 which described the status of biodiversity, and action plans for its sustainable management worth‘s the while. Sierra Leone has 48 forest reserves under the custody of government occupying approximately 285,000 hectares of total land cover. In addition, there are 300,000 hectares of mangrove forests and 30,000 hectares of constituted community forests. Fifteen protected areas are proposed, eight in the terrestrial ecosystem and seven in the wetlands (Op.Cit). FAO (2010) Forest Resource Assessment Country report for Sierra Leone 19 indicate that 38% of Sierra Leone‘s land area, or over 2.5 million hectares, comprises wooded landscapes. Although effective management of Sierra Leone‘s natural resources and the environment was identified as key to Peace and Development in the Agenda for Change, A4P observed that unregulated exploitation of these resources has resulted in deforestation, resource depletion, environmental degradation and biodiversity loss. ICADeP activities would include Advocacy/research for the development of selected value chains such as neem tree, moringa, honey bee, garlic, and mint tree. Livestock The 2015 CFSVA also estimated levels of livestock products, especially milk, produced during 2014-1520. The average production per farming household was 73.8 pints nationwide. It was observed that the production of milk is sizeable only in a few districts in Sierra Leone. The districts with the highest quantity of milk production per household per year are Koinadugu (198.0 pints), Tonkolili (40.1 pints) and Port Loko (28.0 pints). The rest of the districts recorded low or insignificant levels of milk production. Figure 9. Production (Number of heads) of Key Livestock (Without Chicken) The production of eggs was recorded at 25.4 per household per year compared to 30.7 in 2013-14, before the EVD outbreak. This may represent a knock on effect of the breakdown in the provision of livestock extension services, such as vaccination of chickens, as a result of movement restrictions during EVD. The highest egg production was in Kambia (35.6 per household per year), followed by Bonthe and Port Loko. Reduced availability of eggs, an important protein source, also bears implications for nutritional security. 19 FAO. (2010). Global Forest Resource Assessment. Country Report Sierra Leone. FRA 2010/189. FAO, Rome. 20 State of Food Security in Sierra Leone 2015 Comprehensive Food Security and Vulnerability Analysis Data collected September - October 2015. http://documents.wfp.org/stellent/groups/public/documents/ena/wfp288316.pdf http://documents.wfp.org/stellent/groups/public/documents/ena/wfp288316.pdf 26 Figure 10. Production (Number of heads) of Chicken Overall, the production of livestock products declined during 2014-15 compared to 2013-14, demonstrating the impact of the EVD outbreak (Appendices 6,7; Figures 9, 19, 11). Milk production declined by 40.5 percent in the country, with the highest decline at the district level observed in Kambia (89.8 percent), Kailahun (79.6 percent), Tonkolili (79.5 percent) and Bombali (73.9 percent). Similarly, egg production declined by 17.2 percent between 2013-14 and 2014-15. At the district level, whilst egg production increased in some districts, this was offset by larger decreases in other districts. Figure 11. Distribution of Livestock Production (Number of heads) (2015) 3.1.2. Fisheries Sector Production and Productivity Trends Marine Capture Fisheries Recent studies21 noted that the fisheries sector of Sierra Leone has a diverse and valuable array of fish stocks in marine and inland environments, which are exploited mainly through fishing and a limited number of aquaculture systems. According to the Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources 21 Neiland, A.E., Cunningham, S., Arbuckle, M., Baio, A., Bostock, T., Coulibaly, D., Gitonga, N.K., Long, R. and Sei, S. (2016) Assessing the Potential Contribution of Fisheries to Economic Development—The Case of Post-Ebola Sierra Leone. Natural Resources, 7, 356-376. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/nr.2016.76031 27 (MFMR) Statistics Unit, the current total annual fisheries production is about 260,000 tonnes in 2009 (Figure 12; Appendix 11). The marine artisanal fishing sub-sector, characterized by small-scale, inshore, low technology operations, accounts for the bulk of this catch (240,000 t, valued [first sale only] at USD 100 million per year). The marine industrial fishing sub-sector catches an estimated 20,000 t (valued at USD 25 million per year). Both inland fisheries and aquaculture production are relatively small in comparison. It should be noted that the official statistics (above) use a set of financial indicator values (e.g. gross catch value based on first sale market prices and landings, costs are not included). While this approach provides a good starting point for understanding the value of the sector (assuming that the basic catch and market statistics are accurate), the next level of analysis (using formal economic approaches to assess expenditures, profitability and net returns) is needed to better understand the performance of the sector, and its contribution to the economy overall. The fisheries sector is estimated to provide employment and a source of livelihoods for over 500,000 people, mainly in coastal communities. Fish is the most important source of animal protein for the majority of the population. Annual fish exports are valued at USD 2.5 million and fishing license fees amount to USD 2.5 million per year. In terms of domestic revenue collection by the Government of Sierra Leone, the fisheries sector contributed USD 34 million (1 per cent of total revenue) in 2014. This represents a doubling of the revenue collected in 2013. The contribution of the fisheries sector to GDP in Sierra Leone was estimated to be 10.2 per cent in 2014. The largest contribution came from agriculture, hunting and forestry (42.5 per cent) and then mining (11.6 per cent). GDP figures underestimate the economic importance of the fish resources, because fisheries sector GDP is restricted to fish catching activities alone. The GDP generated by downstream secondary economic activities such as fish processing and trading which depend on healthy fish stocks are attributed to other sectors of the economy. Inland Fisheries Fish production from inland fisheries has the potential to contribute greatly to national fish production, alleviate poverty and food insecurity. Indicative estimates put the annual production at 40,000mt comprising of about 150 species from 34 families (of which 40 species have been identified in the Pujehun district)22. Sierra Leone is considered as one of the West African countries with a major inland fisheries potential – one which can bring in US$ 30 million annually – providing a per caput consumption of 12.3kg, and with the capability to contribute up to 1% to GDP23. Inland artisanal fisheries are undertaken from lakes (Table 6), rivers (Table 7) and coastal and riverine wetlands. Much attention has not been given to fisheries development from these ecosystems. Apart from Lake Sonfon (permanent throughout the year), the other lakes are considered as Lagoons. 22 FAO Fishery Country Profile (Sierra Leone). http://www.fao.org/fishery/countrysector/naso sierraleone/en 23 World Fish Centre (2008). Tropical River Fisheries Valuation: Establishing Economic Value to Guide Policy. Issues Brief/1890.Online:http://www.worldfishcenter.org/v2/files/WF 1106 Establishing%20economic%20value%20to%20gui de%20policy.pdf http://www.fao.org/fishery/countrysector/naso sierraleone/en 28 Figure 12. Production of Marine Capture Fisheries Catch (MT) - 1971-2013 Table 6. Area and Location of Lakes in Sierra Leone Lake Mape Mabesi Baiama Popei Sonfon Masatoi Kamason Tibi Kenema Kwako Gambia District Pujehun Pujehun Bonthe Bonthe Koinadugu Pujehun Bonthe Bonthe Bonthe Bonthe Bonthe Area (KM2) 27.7 20.7 6.5 5.4 2.6 2.6 1.8 1.8 1.3 1.0 0.9 Source: Surveys and Lands Division, Ministry of Lands, Housing and the Environment, Freetown, Sierra Leone. Table 7. Length and Area of Principal Rivers in Sierra Leone River 1. Rokel (Sierra Leone River) 2. Moa 3. Sewa 4. Wannjei 5. Mabole 6. Little Scarcies 7. Pampana 8. Bagbe 9. Great Scarcies 10. Mongo 11. Mano 12. Jong 13. Bagru 14. Teye 15. Tabe 16. Meli 17. Ribbi 18. Bafin 19. Kukuli Length (KM) 290 266 209 177 161 161 153 137 129 105 105 97 89 89 80 80 56 56 43 Area (KM2) 396 256 303 67 114 202 91 15 91 67 16 119 78 36 39 10 39 16 31 Source: Surveys and Lands Division, Ministry of Lands, Housing and the Environment, Freetown, Sierra Leone 29 Extensive river networks drain the country before emptying into the sea and these rivers form basins which are the primary areas for agricultural and fisheries production. Aquaculture Aquaculture survey in 200524 estimated a total of 1,190 fishponds nationwide of which 708 (59.5%) were active and 482 (40.5%) were inactive; 95.9% of them cultured tilapia. Bo district had 29 ponds which constituted 60% of the total number of ponds in the country. About 22 percent of the ponds belong to village communities or fishing associations; approximately 80 percent of the same total number of ponds are private ponds, with about 87 percent of the same total are owned by males. There are a total of about 1,800 ponds in operation nationwide, with a total annual production of about 90 t/year. Another base line study conducted in 200925 indicated the existence of 2,494 ponds nationwide, of which 1,801 were in operation and the rest (31 %) were abandoned. The estimated operational pond area was 61.8 ha and the maximum production was 92 t/year. The baseline study ACP Fish II study in 201126 concluded that the districts of Bo, Kenema, Pujehun and Kailahun are suitable areas for the development of low input low output fish farming in dam ponds. The study strongly recommended the practice of low input low output dam ponds and further concluded that if the utilization of only 2 % of the existing Inland Valley Swamps (IVS) in the three districts are developed with low input fish farming, it would result in the development of about 6900 ponds, covering 4,100 hectares, with a total potential production of 2,071 t/year to improve the food security of about 207,000 persons. When aquaculture started in Makali in the 1970s farmers owned 1-4 fishponds, with a total surface area ranging from 100 to 500 m2 per pond. The yield from these ponds was 1.5 to 2.5 tons/ha/year. This base line study provides the base line for ICADeP intervention in Aquaculture. From detailed analysis of previous surveys and evaluation of recent developments, recent baseline study on aquaculture conducted in 201527 offered a number of problems facing the industry based on the responses of fish farmers. These include: the Difficulty in obtaining fish feed and seeds; Lack of technical skills and knowledge in pond management; Lack of adequate support from government and NGOs; Difficult access to suitable land; Difficulties and lengthy processes in obtaining the loans; High interest on loans; Risks and hazards in travelling to get supplies or to dispose of the harvest by marketing. 24 Deen, S.I.S. (2005) Report on National aquaculture baseline survey. Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources. 25 MFMR 2009. Baseline studies on the aquaculture of Sierra Leone. Report by K.Dabo et al 26 Anon. (2013) ACPFishII. A comprehensive aquaculture baseline study. Final technical report, Project Ref. No. WA-1.2-B1, region: Sierra Leone. European Union – COFREPECHE: Strengthening Fisheries Management in ACP countries. 27 Baseline Survey on the Aquaculture Sector in Sierra Leone. FAO Technical Cooperation Programme TCP/SIL/3502, 2015. Report by PAT. Showers 30 4.0. Programme Context, Challenges and Rationale 4.1. The Context 4.1.1. Agriculture Sector Framework At the national level, the Agenda for Prosperity (A4P) (2013-2018) is the principal policy framework within which the GoSL channels national developmental efforts. Specifically, ICADeP will be anchored in Pillar 1 of the A4P ―Economic Diversification to Promote Inclusive Growth‖ focusing on increasing agricultural productivity and value-addition. As sub-sectors within the agricultural sector such as fisheries and forestry are natural resources; Pillar 2 of A4P ―Managing Natural Resources‖ will also guide the programme. This is so because, well managed natural resources, provides productive services such as energy, shelter, food, employment, and exports, as well as regulating services, such as watershed and flood management. Because we live in an environment where we engage in activities to make a living, we must reconcile economic development with environmental sustainability under Pillar 2. A competitive economy is necessary for improving a country‘s standard of living, creating jobs and sustainably reducing levels of poverty. Accelerated agricultural production and productivity would require production of competitive products in forms, shapes and sizes that are acceptable in the local and international markets. Consequently, Pillar 4 dealing with ―International Competitiveness‖ would be instructive. The National Sustainable Agriculture Development Plan (NSADP) (2010-2030) is the broad framework for putting the objectives of the Government‘s A4P into action in the agricultural sector. The flagship program under NSADP was the Smallholder Commercialisation Program (SCP) (2010-2014) which focused on commercialising agriculture through linking large and small farmers to markets. This ICADeP investment plan (2018-2022) serves as a follow-up to SCP. It is vital to note that NSADP and SCP were developed in fulfillment of the compact under the umbrella regional Comprehensive African Agriculture Development Program (CAADP). At sub-regional level, in line with Malabo Declaration and building on the assessment of 10-year implementation of the ECOWAP, ECOWAS has defined a new cycle of its regional Policy: ECOWAP 2025. The new policy‘s vision and orientation are reflected in the Strategic Orientation Framework 2016-2025 and the Regional Agriculture and Food and Nutrition Security Investment Programme 2016-2020. This ICADeP investment plan follows up on the SCP with the goal of 4.1.2. Challenges The agriculture sector as the largest contributor to GDP has the potential to significantly contribute to societal well-being in Sierra Leone. However, there is a general acceptance that the sector lags behind from achieving its full potential due to a number of challenges. In addition to the main sectoral constraints identified by the Agriculture Sector Review (2014), provided in Annex 1, the following challenges should be addressed by the investment plan in other to achieve expressed goal and objectives 4.1.2.1. Non-Agriculture Related Challenges Social and Age Discriminations and Cultural Barriers in the Agriculture Sector There are social and cultural barriers affect the agribusiness in Sierra Leone, as traditional ―glass ceilings‖ prevent even the most successful entrepreneurs from growing and deny their access to resources: those who are not well connected with the political or social elite, women entrepreneurs (notably market women), rural women who have no property rights, or bound with other traditional 31 limits e.g. women cannot become part of fishing crew.28 This can only be overcome with consistent and persistent equal rights promotion campaign, community empowerment and sensitization, as well as establishing level play field in agriculture. Age-based discriminations are also persistent in the country. Young people have major issues concerning access to land, assets, finance and markets29. Considering the average aging farming population and the need to increased agricultural production to meet the food and nutritional needs of a growing population, barriers and impediments for young women and men entering the sector should be timely addressed through incentives, adequate capacity development, facilitated access and private – public partnerships (PPPs). Physical Health Constraints As already mentioned in sub-section 2.1.3.2.6, the infrastructure and medical supplies in the health sector is grossly inadequate as testified by the recent EVD crisis. Poor health is the key binding constraints for agriculture and the whole country. “Feminisation” of Agriculture and Rural-Urban Migration Another trend is the ―feminisation‖ of agriculture due to male and youth migration to urban centres, which sets physical limits to the extensive agriculture. Again the general movement of abled men and women from rural areas to urban centers/mining areas in search of greener pastures/fortune deprive the agricultural sector of much needed labour force. Weak Sectoral Policy, Regulatory and Institutional Framework Sectoral policy, regulatory and institutional environment are incoherence and inadequate to accommodate the required reforms that would supports agricultural investment and transformation. Moreover, all sector stakeholder coordination mechanisms are not strengthened and functional. The same could be said about M&E and accountability systems which are not fully functional to inform policy-making. Public institutions and sector actors‘ organizations not have adequate (institutional, technical, organizational, financial and management) capacities to carry out their professional activities. Weak Sectoral Coordination Low Levels of Vocational Skills and Basic Education The agriculture sector of Sierra Leone is dominated by illiterate smallholder/artisan practitioners lacking basic skills and education. The technological infusion necessary for the attainment of the expressed objectives of ICADeP would require extensive and intensive extension services including training of practitioners in basic skills. The conflict in Sierra Leone affected access to educational opportunities for a large number of youth and this is reflected in the extremely low levels of literacy in the country. Low levels of education and vocational skills are an obstacle to decent employment 28 Andy Thorpe, Nicky Pouw, Andrew Baio, Ranita Sandi, Ernest Ndomahina, and Thomas Lebbie (2013): ―Fishing Na Everybody Business‖: Women Work and Gender Relations in Sierra Leone‘s Fisheries, Feminist Economics, 20 , Iss. 3, 2014 29 Richards, P. 2006. "Young men and gender in war and post-war reconstruction: some comparative findings from Liberia and Sierra Leone". In I. Bannon and Maria Correia, eds, The Other Half of Gender: men’s issues in development, Washington: World Bank, pp. 195-218. 32 and increased business opportunities. Lack of basic financial, marketing, management and other transferrable skills constrain business growth and trans-sectoral labor force movements, as well as posing a serious challenge for the investors. While the primary and secondary education situation is improving, the adult education needs to be addressed with involvement of the private sector. In general, in the country, a lack of alignment between labor market needs and curricula (both in formal and informal education) remains. The mismatch between education and training and the labor market needs, can be addressed through the development of labor market ready skills and entrepreneurship minded youth, with the capacity to successfully scale up business opportunities, both in the informal sector and the formal sector; ensuring education and training matches the requirements of both formal and informal employment, including self-employment. Holistic approaches will need to be adopted which will include not only market-demanded skills but also an array of life skills (from agro business to health related ones and diseases prevention and mitigation further to the current ongoing EVD crises). 4.1.2.2. Agriculture Related Challenges A number of agricultural related challenges which the invest plan should address have been identified; viz: x Inadequate availability and accessibility to quality production factors such as land, capital, viable inputs and knowledge. x Obsolete crops, livestock, fishery and forestry production practices and techniques that are not climate smart x Copious pre and direct post-harvest losses due to weak production infrastructures. x Inferior food safety and quality standards along the production line x Inadequate and dysfunctional domestic markets with weak regional and global markets linkages x Unstructured value chains that are not inclusive and sustainable x Vulnerable groups do not have sustainable and equitable access to market infrastructure and productive resources x Limited access to sustainable healthy and nutritious diets and lack of food choices especially among the most vulnerable x Weak warning and preparedness mechanisms against shocks undermining implementation of mitigation methods x Lack of capacity by the vulnerable populations to access diversified income generation opportunities 4.1.2.3. Macroeconomic Challenges As rightly and clearly noted in the A4P30, notwithstanding strides made in stabilising the economic environment in recent years, the investment programme should be mindful of the following challenges which may undermine macroeconomic stability in the medium-term. Less Diversified Economy Lack of diversification in the structure of the economy with high unemployment hinders sustainable inclusive growth is the relatively. Few sectors dominate the economy and there is need to diversify 30 Agenda for Prosperity: Road to Middle-Income Status. Sierra Leone 3rd Generation Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper. http://www.sierra-leone.org/Agenda%204%20Prosperity.pdf pp-21-22 http://www.sierra-leone.org/Agenda%204%20Prosperity.pdf 33 into other growth-promoting and employment-creating sectors, such as fisheries, tourism and manufacturing. Insufficient GDP growth But for downturn induced by the EVD outbreak, the economy has experienced strong growth in recent years, averaging 5.2% excluding iron ore output. This rate of economic growth, even though high by regional and international standards, is not enough to have a significant impact on poverty. External Shocks. High international prices of food and fuel impact domestic prices adversely and contribute to high inflation. Government mitigation interventions on behalf of the poor and vulnerable through the reduction in duties and taxes on basic food items and petroleum products undermines domestic revenue mobilisation. In turn, Government attempts to deliver the planned level of services in the face of higher prices of goods and services, increases public expenditure above budgeted amounts to culminate in widening budget deficits. Deficits are in most cases financed by borrowing from the domestic bank and non-bank sectors, and so have adverse consequences for macroeconomic stability, leading to higher inflation and interest rates, and depreciating exchange rates. Climatic variability and natural disasters also impact agricultural production and productivity. Fluctuations in Commodity Prices The commodity boom in Iron ore was expected to generate substantial revenues to support public expenditure. However, projected mineral revenues depend largely on movements in the international prices of these commodities. As it turned out that the projected prices of these mineral exports, was not as high as projected due to price fluctuations. Thus the projected revenues did not happen, which complicated budgetary management; expenditures were adjusted accordingly, thereby disrupting the implementation of public programmes and projects. Government also borrowed to fill the shortfall, with consequences for macroeconomic stability. Dutch Disease A major challenge posed by the expected inflow of foreign currency from mineral/oil exports is the appreciation of the Leone. This has the tendency to make other sectors of the economy like agriculture less competitive and hence reduce growth prospects. High Debt Burden One of the challenges to macroeconomic stability and economic growth is the potential high debt burden. While Sierra Leone‘s external debt remains sustainable, with moderate risk of debt distress, a significant increase in non-concessional borrowing could increase debt overhang. Low Domestic Revenue Mobilisation Low domestic revenue to GDP ratio has resulted in huge budget deficits, financed partly by borrowing from the domestic banking sector. This thwarts private investment activities and undermining macroeconomic stability. Improved management of rent from natural resources should help increase domestic revenues. 4.1.2.4. Programme Rationale The Agricultural Sector Review 2014 conducted after the SCP showed a significant change in the landscape of the agriculture sector. Sierra Leone is no longer a post-conflict country surviving on subsistence agriculture. There is a whole spectrum of micro, small, medium and large enterprises operating in the sector, including individual commercial farms, farmer-based organizations, 34 fisherfolk cooperatives, traders, processors, input dealers, medium-size producers and processors, and large-scale commercial enterprises. The rationale and indeed the justification for the ICADeP investment plan is the need to resolve the lessons learnt from the implementation of the SCP alluded to in sub-section 2.1.2; address sectoral challenges identified by the ASR specified in Annex I; and to resolve the challenges noted by appraisal teams of this investment plan summarised in sub-section 4.1.2. Logically, these challenges now form the basis of the intervention logics of the ICADeP investment plan. Addressing these challenges could accelerate agribusiness development and unleash the promising domestic investors and business potential by providing stimuli for business formalisation. This would present opportunities for establishing special Economic Zones for agro-processing and Clusters and Growth poles development. Such development should target regional and international trade thereby sustaining persistent infrastructure development and maintenance. Investment and diversification along the value chain would also benefit from increased financial literacy and developing entrepreneurial culture among youth. Agriculture sector as the largest contributor to GDP and the biggest employer of Sierra Leoneans is the main conduit of poverty reduction in the short and medium term. The sector has the potential to absorb unskilled youth on a large scale, provide decent employment opportunities in rural areas and enhance food security and poverty reduction. This is so because; rural poverty is often a problem of poor employment quality. Most of the working poor (earning less than 1.25 USD a day) are typically subsistence farmers, own-account or contributing family workers. Furthermore, high child labor and youth unemployment and underemployment rates represent missed opportunities to harness the investment in the human capital of future generations. A transformed and competitive agriculture sector advocated by ICADeP would create decent employment opportunities in the country especially for young women and men - as a key priority of the programme. The Implementation of ICADeP‘s involves review of laws, regulations and policies pertaining to land, taxation and import and export regulations. Although Sierra Leone has made some important strides towards improving the business climate; certain policy domains of particular importance to food security, agriculture and rural development require further efforts to crowd in investment and ensure the achievement of development goals. Improving food and nutrition security and reducing households‘ vulnerability to shocks and stresses should remain the top priority of the country‘s developmental efforts but, food insecurity and malnutrition remains a pressing problem among rural populations. Coping mechanisms including seeking off-farm labor, reducing the number and diversity of meals - negatively affects productive capacity, or obtaining loans from others in the family or community - often push people further into the debt trap. By recognising financing of social protection as an investment in economic growth, ICADeP will promote equity and contribute to social stability. Poor rural households that mostly rely on agriculture for their livelihoods are often affected by limited access to resources, low agricultural productivity, poorly functioning markets and repeated exposure to risks which the investment plan will assess and alleviate. Climatic variability poses a serious risk that could result into production failures. Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA) measures adopted by the ICADeP will ensure that households are resilient to 35 climate and weather-related shocks; agriculture is under sustainable land management practices; share of population exposed to climate risk are reduced; share of land under small-scale irrigation in is increased; soil fertility management practices are adopted; awareness of climate change risk and impact among farming population is improved and seeds adapted to heat and drought in major crops are used. The paradigm shift from supply chain to value chain agribusiness adopted by ICADeP encourages a market oriented mentality wherein products that are valued and can be sold are produced. This enhances collaborative management and holistic participation across the value chain from up to downstream. Consequently, strong relationships are forged facilitating information flow wherein stakeholders know what the market wants. The ICADeP is characterised by inclusiveness of stakeholders which engenders shared vision, objectives, and strategies; agreed performance; evidence-based analysis; transparent dialogue and commitment to implement recommendation from the ASR. These characteristics will enable adherence to mutual accountability. 36 5.0. Description of the Investment Programme 5.1. Scope The Inclusive Comprehensive Agriculture Development Programme (ICADEP) follows-up from SCP with the overall goal or the desired state of affairs of ―Increased agriculture sector contribution to a broad-based socioeconomic development and food & nutrition security of rural Sierra Leone in a sustainable and inclusive manner‖. The extent of increase will be the difference in end time target outputs and that of the base line as stipulated in the results framework in Section 6. The ICADEP will be implemented over a four year period from 2018 to 2022. All components of the ICADEP will incorporate social, gender and youth development indicators which will be gender and age disaggregated for providing opportunities to men, women and youth. The Gender Desks in MDAs involved will facilitate and monitor women and youth participation. ICADEP will build on the successes and lessons learnt of previous agriculture and fisheries development programmes, the recent Smallholder Commercialization Programme and the findings of the Agriculture Sector Review 2014 (ASR). It is designed such that it incorporates the initiatives of the AFAIP. The Programme combines the existing initiatives, e.g. SCP components and programmatic gaps to be addressed. In order to achieve the goal, a number of specific objectives or concrete steps are will be taken as specified in Box 4: Box 4. Specific Objective of the ICADeP Specific Objective 1: Strengthen governance structures and mechanisms for improved evidence-based policy and programming, coordination, implementation and monitoring and evaluation to enhance mutual accountability Specific Objective 2: Increase sustainable, inclusive and intensified production and productivity of diverse quality commodities for improved food and nutrition security Specific Objective 3: Improve efficiency, sustainability and competitiveness of agriculture value chains and market linkages Specific Objective 4: Increase and improve resilience of livelihoods against shocks and promote full access to nutritious foods for the most vulnerable The aforementioned specific objectives will be pursued via four (4) components as listed in Box 5: 37 Box 5: ICADeP Components COMPONENT 1: Sector governance and ICADeP management and implementation COMPONENT 2: Sustainable and inclusive agricultural productivity and production systems COMPONENT 3: Agribusiness, infrastructure and value chain development COMPONENT 4: Livelihoods, resilience, nutrition of vulnerable groups 5.1. Programme Benefits and Beneficiaries The ICADEP will generate a number of interrelated economic and social benefits, including: (i) increased production and productivity and selected commodities targeted by the programme; (ii) improved food security and nutritional status, particularly of infants, children, women and other vulnerable populations because of increased dispensable incomes and food availability; (iii) improved access to agricultural and financial services for farmers and their organizations, agribusinesses and other actors along the value chain; (iv) formalization of agribusinesses and MSME development, leading to increased and diversified income opportunities and a vibrant rural economy; (v) improved market access and trade promotion through infrastructure improvements, market development, information provision and the enforcement of quality standards and food safety; (vi) decent work creation in both in formal and informal segments of agriculture, either in salaried employment or self-employment; (vii) a more effective and capacitated public sector, able to respond to sector stakeholders evolving support requirements; (viii) foreign exchange savings though increased production leading to a more positive trade balance and food price reductions. The programme benefits will all contribute to achieving a pro-poor and equitable growth path in Sierra Leone through sustainable agricultural development. The programme will impact several groups of direct beneficiaries: smallholder commercializing farmers and their organizations, medium and small scale agri-business and agricultural entrepreneurs, and vulnerable and at-risk populations, including unemployed, underemployed and working in poverty youth. Consumers will also benefit from the improvement of the sector. Commercializing farmers will be supported to realize sustainable production and productivity increases leading to increased rural incomes through strengthening farmer organizations, improving the availability and access to rural services (inputs, technology transfers and finance, productive asset building, and improving market opportunities. Existing and emerging agri-businesses and rural entrepreneurs will be supported by addressing administrative and physical constraints to doing business and providing targeted incentives to the development of this sub-sector. Furthermore, ICADEP will improve market access and development, through feeder road development and providing accurate and up-date market information and promoting the introduction of food safety and quality standards. Vulnerable and at risk populations will be supported by participating in either 38 productive safety nets or cash transfer schemes. Additional support will be provided to these group in the form of additional (child) feeding and nutrition training and skill development. Throughout he programme special emphasis is placed on women and youth, identifying particular interventions that would raise their incomes, enhance their food security, by improving production and promoting non and off-farm income generating activities. The interventions of the programme will also bring indirect benefits to the wider rural population through expected multiplier effects achieved through increased dispensable incomes and a more diverse and vibrant rural economy. 5.2. Programme Components 5.2.1. Component 1. Sector governance and ICADeP Management and Implementation (US$) ICADeP will contribute to the strengthening of governance structures and mechanisms for improved policy and programming, coordination, implementation and monitoring and evaluation. In particular it will focus on: 1. Policy, legal and regulatory environment that adequately supports agricultural investment and transformation developed in an inclusive manner x Organize inclusive cross-sectoral and multi-stakeholder dialogues to formulate sector policies, strategies, regulatory measures and investments x Conduct a mapping of current agricultural, fishery, livestock, land and forestry policy gaps x Conduct an analysis of the legal, fiscal and regulation environment for agricultural investment and value chain promotion x Develop, review and domesticate current policies, strategies and fiscal measures x Implement policies and evaluated performance 2. National and decentralized sector stakeholder coordination mechanisms strengthened in order to make them effectively functional x Strengthen multi-sectoral coordination dialogues through the multi-stakeholder coordination platform x Establish intra-institutional working groups to address sector coordination gaps x Conduct an analysis on multi-sectoral synergies and win-wins with the agriculture sector, including with nutrition, education, social protection and gender x Develop dialogue platforms at decentralized levels by using decentralized advisory platforms 3. National and decentralized information, M&E and accountability systems made fully functional for effective reporting and informed policy-making x Consolidate sectoral budget, financing and financial tracking systems x Conduct a sectoral review and analysis to determine sector performance x Develop and implement a communication strategy to guide the generation and dissemination of sector information x Develop and ensure effective management of a multi-sectoral web-based information sharing platform x Review and strengthen existing agriculture-based information systems and data management 39 4. Institutional, technical, organizational, financial and management capacities of public institutions and sector actors built in order to carry out their professional activities effectively x Conduct an assessment to identify capacity gaps among National and decentralized sector institutions, actors and implementers x Develop an inclusive capacity building programme for sector actors and implementers x Implement the capacity building programme for sector actors and implementers, including extension agents x Develop District Agricultural Investment Plans 5.2.2. Component 2. Sustainable and Inclusive Agricultural Productivity and Production Systems (US$) ICADeP will support increased sustainable and inclusive production and productivity of diverse quality commodities for improved food and nutrition security. The programme will focus on: 1. Availability and accessibility to quality production factors enhanced and supported in an sustainable and inclusive manner x Conduct normative and operational research for improved quality inputs; x Create formal and informal system for the provision and timely distribution of quality and improved inputs for agriculture; x Create formal and informal system for the provision and timely distribution of quality and improved inputs for livestock; x Create formal and informal system for the provision and timely distribution of quality and improved inputs for aquaculture and fisheries; x Create formal and informal system for the provision and timely distribution of quality and improved inputs for forestry; x Provide and maintain small, medium and large scale irrigation infrastructure and equipment; x Facilitate acquisition and maintenance of mechanization equipment by farmers x Facilitate soft loans and financial services‘ access for farmers such as access to e.g. micro-finance; financial literacy village savings and loans schemes x Undertake a mapping of arable, cultivated, non-cultivated areas and wetlands to identify and address land utilization issues. x Undertake a soil fertility test/mapping to provide soil fertility profile across the country. x Identify and disseminate innovative technology and productive practices through extension advisory services 2. Crops, livestock, fishery and forestry production practices and techniques are improved and made climate smart x Train extension agents, smallholders and enterprises (in a gender sensitive manner) on climate-smart and enhanced agricultural practices, knowledge and techniques; x Conduct normative and operational research for natural resource management; x Set up an Information, Education and Communication (IEC) innovative platforms for technology transfer. 40 x Conduct normative and operational research for developing adequate, innovative, climate-smart and affordable technologies including pest bio-control measures for smallholders and enterprises; x Undertake pest management campaigns to develop capacity of farmers to prevent and identify pest and diseases related to crops, livestock, fisheries and forestry; x Improve pest management and control (including provision of sample control test kits to smallholders) from extension agents to farmers; x Strengthen/establish production demonstration sites for improved practices among farmers; 3. Production infrastructures strengthened so as to avoid pre -harvest losses and ensure food safety standards along the production line. x Provide, rehabilitate and maintain storage facilities for seeds and crops to smallholders and enterprises; x Provide, rehabilitate and maintain ranches, slaughterhouses, dairy and meat production centers and feed stores; x Provide and rehabilitate and maintain fish ponds, hatcheries, cold chains and feed mills; x Establish, rehabilitate and maintain IVS; x Provide harvesting infrastructure, equipment and materials x Provide on-farm transportation means for crops, aquaculture and livestock x Establish and equip food safety laboratories; x Train lab technicians and extension agents about food safety standards; x Ensure food safety for local market 5.2.3. Component 3. Agribusiness, Infrastructure and Value Chain Development (US$) ICADeP will support efforts to improve efficiency, sustainability and competitiveness of agriculture value chains and market linkages focusing on: 1. Post-harvest losses reduced and food safety and quality improved x Train farmers on post-harvest management practices (including storage and processing to maintain the quality and nutritional benefits of the crops) x Build or rehabilitate individual/collective improved post-harvest storage and conservation facilities x Facilitate acquisition of processing materials, technologies and inputs to communities and Small-Medium and Large Enterprises x Provide incentive schemes to establish competitive agro-processing Small-Medium and Large Scale Enterprises x Update/develop food safety standards and regulations for international and local markets x Strengthen food safety control and certification systems (training of officers and provision of facilities) x Promote a visual identity (branding logo) for Sierra Leone quality agricultural products 2. Functional domestic markets established and their links with regional and global markets strengthened x Build and rehabilitate feeder roads 41 x Strengthen domestic market information systems x Establish and capacitate a market information platform targeting external opportunities x Strengthen linkages between local farmers, agro-processing actors and institutional markets (schools, army, hospitals, prisons, etc.) to enhance home-grown institutional feeding program for improved diet quality of occupants of those institutions x Organize and support trade fares and periodic markets x Developing commodity market structures in selected areas (abattoirs, markets, vegetable markets, fish markets etc.) x Align national food safety policies and standards to regional and global ones 3. Value chains are well structured, inclusive and sustainable x Conduct an assessment to identify and select agribusiness value chains based on financial, socio-economic, food and nutrition security impact; and disseminate the findings to attract investment x Conduct an assessment to identify the typology of actors and activities involved in the selected agribusiness value chains x Support the establishment of agribusiness actor groups into selected agricultural value chains x Develop technical, managerial and organizational capacities of the organized agribusiness value chain groups x Conduct needs assessment and reinvest in established Agribusiness Centre for effective governance and profitable business 5.2.4. Component 4. Livelihoods, Resilience, Nutrition of Vulnerable Groups (US$) ICADeP will support efforts to increase and improve resilience of livelihoods against shocks and promote full access to nutritious foods for the most vulnerable. The focus will be on; 1. Most vulnerable have sustainable and equitable access to market, infrastructure, productive and financial resources x Conduct a situation assessment and analysis of the most vulnerable groups in agriculture and rural areas. x Developing a targeting system and an interactive database of most vulnerable groups. x Develop/strengthen preventive and productive social safety nets including cash and asset transfer programmes to improve and diversify livelihoods of the most vulnerable. x Build and strengthen organizational capacity and financial literacy of community -based saving groups. x Capitalise and review the modus operandi of community banks and financial services associations to enhance their capacity to reach the most vulnerable. x Develop and implement a strategy for women and youth inclusion in agriculture 2. Access to sustainable healthy and nutritious diets is improved and food choices among the most vulnerable are improved x Conduct mass media and community on campaigns on food and nutrition education and BCC (Behavior Change Communication), capitalizing on the existing Food Based Dietary Guidelines - emphasising diversifying food production systems for nutrition security) 42 x Strengthen capacities of local communities on food preparation, preservation and processing techniques and enterprises for nutrient-sensitive food processing, packaging and conservation x Support backyard gardening for diversification and enhancement of increased nutritious food consumption x Encourage the consumption of locally grown food stuffs 3. Early warning and preparedness mechanisms against shocks improved and mitigation measure implemented in consonance with National Adaptation Programme of Actions (NAPA) priorities x Carry out an assessment to identify gaps, constraints and needs in current early warning systems; x Strengthen the capacity of institutions responsible for early warning systems and inter-agency collaboration; x Develop a communication strategy and platform to disseminate information on/of early warning systems; x Provide adapted information and tools/plans to strengthen capacity of communities and households to take early action before shocks; x Improve risk management tools (as household insurance) and support mitigation and adaptation actions at central and decentralized levels x Implement social safety nets in emergencies for affected agricultural communities (including conditional and non-conditional cash transfers during seasonal vulnerability) 4. Capacities of the vulnerable populations built in order to have access to diversified income generation opportunities x Provide business development services, vocational training (+basic literacy and numeracy) to affected communities x Provide value-chain oriented start up kits to affected communities x Promote integrated farming systems 5.3. Programme Key Principles 5.3.1. Inclusiveness ICADEP will focus on identifying and intensifying growth poles: micro, small, medium and large domestic businesses, as well as the potential of large farming with foreign investment. This growth shall be inclusive and pro-poor, not in the sense that 100% of rural citizens are expected to become successful entrepreneurs but in the sense of creating improved decent rural labour conditions and opportunities, incomes, skills and food security and nutrition. ICADEP will also make sure that medium-size enterprises and middlemen playing a vital role in the value chains and markets development are not excluded from the support programmes while checking the tendency of exorbitant profiteering. A major role in this inclusive process will be played by regional, national and local member organizations including National Federation of Farmers of Sierra Leone ((NaFFSL), the Sierra Leone Chamber for Agribusiness Development (SLeCAD), Fisherfolk Association, Livestock Producers‘ Organization, Sierra Leone Women‘s Forum (SLWF), Cocoa and Coffee Commodity Association (SLCCCA), Business Forum (SLBF), other produce organizations (PO), farmer-based organizations (FBOs) and cooperatives. The active involvement of women and youth 43 groups and associations, as well as informal workers organizations will facilitate their inclusion across programme activities. 5.3.2. Comprehensiveness The ICADEP is a comprehensive programme as it identifies and promotes the key and viable commodities covering the four subsectors of Agriculture: Crops, Fisheries, Livestock and Forestry and envisages measures strengthening the Value Chain approach for each of the prioritized commodities. It is also comprehensive in the sense that it aims to bring sustainable benefits to the diverse array of livelihood groups of rural Sierra Leone. 5.3.3. Competitiveness and Commercialization ICADEP will provide support to improve the competitiveness of local grown products and their commercialization, development and growth of domestic small and medium agribusinesses and agricultural entrepreneurs, as well as stimulating investments by large scale business and attracting FDIs. Development of the agricultural value chains will be supported through a package of investment incentives for the private sector. It will promote linkages among smallholders, medium and large-scale enterprises as vertical and horizontal integration strategies for promoting commercialization and modernization of production as well as processing and value addition in Sierra Leone. Issues of meeting international food safety standards will be addressed. ICADEP will address the key binding constraints and seize growth opportunities for the agricultural sector contribution to A4P. 5.4. Food Categories for the Promotion of Food Security and Nutrition Stakeholders categorised the various food stuffs produce in Sierra Leone for the purpose of promoting food security and nutrition during a well-attended retreat over 5 days (Table 8). These priority value chains will be the focus of ICADeP. Table 8: Food Category and Type Food Category Food type Staples Rice; Cassava; Sorghum; Millet; Maize; Yam; Sweet Potato; Plantain Pulses/Legumes Soya Beans; Black Eyed Beans; Broad Beans; Groundnut, Sesame Fruits Citrus; Pine Apple; Avocado; Banana; Mango; Pawpaw; Guava; Water Melon; Plum Vegetables Tomato; Onion; Pumpkin; Okra; Carrot; Cabbage; Runner-Beans; Peppers; Cucumber; Garden-Eggs; Green Leafy Vegetables Meat and Dairy Dairy Value Chain: Milk/Cheese from cattle and small ruminant Meat Value Chain: Meat from cattle, small ruminant, rabbit, pig Poultry Value Chain: Eggs, Meat Fish/Aquatic Resource Value Chains Tilapias, Cat fish, Cutlass fish, Carps (introduction), Crabs, Shrimps, Oysters Non-Wood Forest Neem Tree, Moringa, Honey Bee, Garlic (advocacy/research), Mint tree 44 Products Value Chains Cash Crops Palm Oil; Ginger; Coffee; Cacao, Cashew nuts; Sunflower 5.4.1. Staple Crops VCAs The GoSL has with good rationale, encouraged the production of Rice in the interest of the nation becoming self‐sufficient for this crop. While this goal has yet to be met, good progress has been achieved. At the same time, as noted further, a more balanced diet involving fruits and vegetables has been recommended by nutritionists and leaders within the GoSL. For business people who engage in agriculture; two general crops emerge within the ASR as having great potential for continued expansion within the unique conditions which exist within Sierra Leone. Sorghum and Cassava each present largely untapped potential as commodities with stable processing possibilities. The success of developing increased Sorghum production to serve beer distilleries in Sierra Leone is a classic example of how to engage and improve a value chain in a developing country. And Cassava which is now referred to as the ―multipurpose crop for the 21st century‖ presents a host of multiple opportunities as a commodity destined for processing. In addition to these staples, the country could engage in production of nutrient-dense crops such as legumes/pulses. 5.4.2. Cash Crops VCAs When export crops are considered, the ASR reports on how devastating the loss of exports becomes for a fragile economy as was evidenced during and after the long period of turmoil and war in Sierra Leone. Cocoa and Coffee were the traditional export commodities produced in Sierra Leone prior to the period of war. After the war, a decade of effort and investment was required to once again gain a foothold for these two commodities in the global marketplace. Although exports of Cocoa or Coffee has yet to put Sierra Leone on the map as a major player on the world stage as a supplier of these commodities; during recent years producers and exporters have developed an solid reputation as dependable suppliers. This has been especially true as related to organic Cocoa. With a foundation for growth in the export marketplace established in the past few years; increased production along with globally acceptable standards should set the stage for continued export expansion; especially for Cocoa that will continue to be in short supply globally for years to come. In addition, as Sierra Leone continues to gain a reputation as a dependable source for Cocoa and Coffee; opportunities for other crops such a Cashew Nuts, Mangoes, Oranges, Avocado, Hot Chili Pepper, Pineapple, Palm Oil, as well as processed products, e.g. Fruit Juices should evolve substantially. In addition to increased production of exportable commodities, acceptable standards of quality and identity, sound promotion and marketing will be promoted by GOSL in order to achieve sustainable success. The GoSL will also continue to improve logistical infrastructure as related to roads, air transport and seaports. Without these improvements, exports will not flourish. 5.4.3. Livestock VCAs As compared to crops, the ASR makes note of little investment being made by either the GoSL or donors to stimulate the development of the livestock and poultry sub‐sectors in agriculture. ICADEP will promote opportunities for Poultry, Small and Large Ruminants; as well as specifically in the Dairy business. Although there are constraints, primarily of a social nature there remain vast areas where livestock grazing is practical. In addition, adding livestock as a component of general farming, a practice which largely evaporated during the long war, presents a viable income addition for small and medium holders. Additional research, education and extension focus on livestock all represents very good investments in the interest of a stronger agricultural sector. The GOSL will be investing in extension and veterinary services to provide sustainable livestock and poultry Value Chains. 45 5.4.4. Forestry VCAs Value‐added Forestry Products present a valuable opportunity in Sierra Leone. Value added wood working ventures will be encouraged within the country as opposed to loosening restrictions on export of logs. Forested areas are facing serious challenges due to traditional farming practices which involve clearing land via fire, deforestation from logging activities, and the development of large commercial farms. The GoSL will develop stronger regulations and enforcement as related to the ‗slash and burn‘ practices; especially for smallholder farmers. Non-timber forest products will also be promoted, as means of income diversification and considering their contribution to food and nutrition security 5.4.5. Fisheries/Aquaculture VCAs One of the greatest resources within Sierra Leone is the marine ecosystem which includes not only ocean waters; but inland water bodies such as rivers, estuaries, lakes and flood plains richly endowed with abundant and diverse species of finfish, shellfish and wetland resources. As reported within the ASR, the contribution of fisheries to the GDP has been increasing substantially between 2004 and 2013; however the national demand is yet to be met. Illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing is a serious global problem, and one of the main constraints to the achievement of sustainable fisheries. Investment within the Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources (MFMR) to reduce IUU will benefit private business interests engaged in the fisheries sector. As an important nutritional source for domestic consumption and a potentially significant export revenue stream; fisheries should be given a high priority from an investment perspective. Aquaculture will be particularly promoted under ICADeP investment. 5.5. Specific Strategies for VCs A number of specific strategies could be followed in the development of the value chains specified in the food categories in Table above. These strategies include; 5.5.1. Export Strategy Under this strategy, an export market oriented mentality is encouraged for the traditional cash crops such as palm oil, ginger, coffee, cacao, cashew nuts, sunflower etc. 5.5.2. Increasing Input Access and Production to Satisfy Sufficiency Here, the focus is on increasing production from access to inputs supplies and other factors of production to satisfy the demand for staples such as rice, cassava, sorghum, millet, maize, yam, potato (orange flesh sweet) and plantain. 5.5.3. Agribusiness Livestock integrated with cereals and vegetable production is a viable agribusiness. Cereals and vegetables could be used in ration formulation whereas; animal waste is used as organic manure in vegetable production. Net feeding cost reduction gained would translate into good profit margins as animal feeds account for a significant proportion of production cost in livestock production. 46 5.6. Indicative Cost Table 9: Detailed Cost (US$) of Project Financing by Component, Sub-Components and Activities Component Description Cost (US$) 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Component 1. Sector governance and ICADeP Management and Implementation (US$) Sub-Component 1 Policy, legal and regulatory environment that adequately supports agricultural investment and transformation developed in an inclusive manner Activity 1.1.0 Organize inclusive cross-sectoral and multi-stakeholder dialogues to formulate sector policies, strategies, regulatory measures and investments Activity 1.1.1 Conduct a mapping of current agricultural, fishery, livestock, land and forestry policy gaps Activity 1.1.2 Conduct an analysis of the legal, fiscal and regulation environment for agricultural investment and value chain promotion Activity 1.1,3 Develop, review and domesticate current policies, strategies and fiscal measures Implement policies and evaluated performance Sub-Component 2 National and decentralized sector stakeholder coordination mechanisms strengthened in order to make them effectively functional Activity 1.2.0 Strengthen multi-sectoral coordination dialogues through the multi-stakeholder coordination platform Activity 1.2.1 Establish intra-institutional working groups to address sector coordination gaps Activity 1.2.2 Conduct an analysis on multi-sectoral synergies and win-wins with the agriculture 47 sector, including with nutrition, education, social protection and gender Activity 1.2.3 Develop dialogue platforms at decentralized levels by using decentralized advisory platforms Sub-Component 3 National and decentralized information, M&E and accountability systems made fully functional for effective reporting and informed policy-making Activity 1.3.0 Consolidate sectoral budget, financing and financial tracking systems Activity 1.3.1 Conduct a sectoral review and analysis to determine sector performance Activity 1.3.2 Develop and implement a communication strategy to guide the generation and dissemination of sector information Activity 1.3.3 Develop and ensure effective management of a multi-sectoral web-based information sharing platform Activity 1.3.4 Review and strengthen existing agriculture-based information systems and data management Sub-Component 4 Institutional, technical, organizational, financial and management capacities of public institutions and sector actors built in order to carry out their professional activities effectively Activity 1.4.0 Conduct an assessment to identify capacity gaps among National and decentralized sector institutions, actors and implementers Activity 1.4.1 Develop an inclusive capacity building programme for sector actors and implementers Activity 1.4.2 Implement the capacity building programme for sector actors and implementers, including extension agents Activity 1.4.3 Develop district agricultural investment plans 48 Subtotal Component 2. Sustainable and Inclusive Agricultural Productivity and Production Systems (US$) Sub-Component 1 Availability and accessibility to quality production factors enhanced and supported in an sustainable and inclusive manner Activity 2.1.0 Conduct normative and operational research for improved quality inputs; Activity 2.1.1 Create formal and informal system for the provision and timely distribution of quality and improved inputs for agriculture; Activity 2.1.2 Create formal and informal system for the provision and timely distribution of quality and improved inputs for livestock; Activity 2.1.3 Create formal and informal system for the provision and timely distribution of quality and improved inputs for aquaculture and fisheries; Activity 2.1.4 Create formal and informal system for the provision and timely distribution of quality and improved inputs for forestry; Activity 2.1.5 Provide and maintain small, medium and large scale irrigation infrastructure and equipment; Activity 2.1.6 Facilitate acquisition and maintenance of mechanization equipment by farmers Activity 2.1.7 Facilitate soft loans and financial services‘ access for farmers such as access to e.g. micro-finance; financial literacy village savings and loans schemes Activity 2.1.8 Undertake a mapping of arable, cultivated, non-cultivated areas and wetlands to identify and address land utilization issues. Activity 2.1.9 Undertake a soil fertility test/mapping to provide soil fertility profile across the country. Activity 2.1.10 Identify and disseminate innovative 49 technology and productive practices through extension advisory services Sub-Component 2 Crops, livestock, fishery and forestry production practices and techniques are improved and made climate smart Activity 2.2.0 Train extension agents, smallholders and enterprises (in a gender sensitive manner) on climate-smart and enhanced agricultural practices, knowledge and techniques; Activity 2.2.1 Conduct normative and operational research for natural resource management; Activity 2.2.2 Set up an Information, Education and Communication (IEC) innovative platforms for technology transfer. Activity 2.2.3 Conduct normative and operational research for developing adequate, innovative, climate-smart and affordable technologies including pest bio-control measures for smallholders and enterprises; Activity 2.2.4 Undertake pest management campaigns to develop capacity of farmers to prevent and identify pest and diseases related to crops, livestock, fisheries and forestry; Activity 2.2.5 Improve pest management and control (including provision of sample control test kits to smallholders) from extension agents to farmers; Activity 2.2.6 Strengthen/establish production demonstration sites for improved practices among farmers; Sub-Component 3 Production infrastructures strengthened so as to avoid pre -harvest losses and ensure food safety standards along the production line. Activity 2.3.0 Provide, rehabilitate and maintain storage facilities for seeds and crops to smallholders and enterprises; 50 Activity 2.3.1 Provide, rehabilitate and maintain ranches, slaughterhouses, dairy and meat production centers and feed stores; Activity 2.3.2 Provide and rehabilitate and maintain fish ponds, hatcheries, cold chains and feed mills; Activity 2.3.3 Establish, rehabilitate and maintain IVS; Activity 2.3.4 Provide harvesting infrastructure, equipment and materials Activity 2.3.5 Provide on-farm transportation means for crops, aquaculture and livestock Activity 2.3.6 Establish and equip food safety laboratories; Activity 2.3.7 Train lab technicians and extension agents about food safety standards; Activity 2.3.8 Ensure food safety for local market Subtotal Component 3. Agribusiness, Infrastructure and Value Chain Development (US$) Sub-Component 1 Post-harvest losses reduced and food safety and quality improved Activity 3.1.0 Train farmers on post-harvest management practices (including storage and processing to maintain the quality and nutritional benefits of the crops) Activity 3.1.1 Build or rehabilitate individual/collective improved post-harvest storage and conservation facilities Activity 3.1.2 Facilitate acquisition of processing materials, technologies and inputs to communities and Small-Medium and Large Enterprises Activity 3.1.3 Provide incentive schemes to establish competitive agro-processing Small-Medium and Large Scale Enterprises Activity 3.1.4 Update/develop food safety standards and regulations for international and local markets 51 Activity 3.1.5 Strengthen food safety control and certification systems (training of officers and provision of facilities) Activity 3.1.6 Promote a visual identity (branding logo) for Sierra Leone quality agricultural products Sub-Component 2 Functional domestic markets established and their links with regional and global markets strengthened Activity 3.2.0 Build and rehabilitate feeder roads Activity 3.2.1 Strengthen domestic market information systems Activity 3.2.2 Establish and capacitate a market information platform targeting external opportunities Activity 3.2.3 Strengthen linkages between local farmers, agro-processing actors and institutional markets (schools, army, hospitals, prisons, etc.) to enhance home-grown institutional feeding program for improved diet quality of occupants of those institutions Activity 3.2.4 Organize and support trade fares and periodic markets Activity 3.2.5 Developing commodity market structures in selected areas (abattoirs, markets, vegetable markets, fish markets etc.) Activity 3.2.6 Align national food safety policies and standards to regional and global ones Sub-Component 3 Value chains are well structured, inclusive and sustainable Activity 3.3.0 Conduct an assessment to identify and select agribusiness value chains based on financial, socio-economic, food and nutrition security impact; and disseminate the findings to attract investment Activity 3.3.1 Conduct an assessment to identify the typology of actors and activities involved in 52 the selected agribusiness value chains Activity 3.3.2 Support the establishment of agribusiness actor groups into selected agricultural value chains Activity 3.3.3 Develop technical, managerial and organizational capacities of the organized agribusiness value chain groups Activity 3.3.4 Conduct needs assessment and reinvest in established Agribusiness Centre for effective governance and profitable business Subtotal Component 4. Livelihoods, Resilience, Nutrition of Vulnerable Groups (US$) Sub-Component 1 Most vulnerable have sustainable and equitable access to market, infrastructure, productive and financial resources Activity 4.1.0 Conduct a situation assessment and analysis of the most vulnerable groups in agriculture and rural areas. Activity 4.1.1 Developing a targeting system and an interactive database of most vulnerable groups. Activity 4.1.2 Develop/strengthen preventive and productive social safety nets including cash and asset transfer programmes to improve and diversify livelihoods of the most vulnerable. Activity 4.1.3 Build and strengthen organizational capacity and financial literacy of community -based saving groups. Activity 4.1.4 Capitalise and review the modus operandi of community banks and financial services associations to enhance their capacity to reach the most vulnerable. Activity 4.1.5 Develop and implement a strategy for women and youth inclusion in agriculture 53 Sub-Component 2 Access to sustainable healthy and nutritious diets is improved and food choices among the most vulnerable are improved Activity 4.2.0 Conduct mass media and community on campaigns on food and nutrition education and BCC (Behavior Change Communication), capitalizing on the existing Food Based Dietary Guidelines - emphasising diversifying food production systems for nutrition security) Activity 4.2.1 Strengthen capacities of local communities on food preparation, preservation and processing techniques and enterprises for nutrient-sensitive food processing, packaging and conservation Activity 4.2.2 Support backyard gardening for diversification and enhancement of increased nutritious food consumption Activity 4.2.3 Encourage the consumption of locally grown food stuffs Sub-Component 3 Early warning and preparedness mechanisms against shocks improved and mitigation measure implemented in consonance with National Adaptation Programme of Actions (NAPA) priorities Activity 4.3.0 Carry out an assessment to identify gaps, constraints and needs in current early warning systems; Activity 4.3.1 Strengthen the capacity of institutions responsible for early warning systems and inter-agency collaboration; Activity 4.3.2 Develop a communication strategy and platform to disseminate information on/of early warning systems; Activity 4.3.3 Provide adapted information and tools/plans to strengthen capacity of communities and 54 households to take early action before shocks; Activity 4.3.4 Improve risk management tools (as household insurance) and support mitigation and adaptation actions at central and decentralized levels Activity 4.3.5 Implement social safety nets in emergencies for affected agricultural communities (including conditional and non-conditional cash transfers during seasonal vulnerability) Sub-Component 4 Capacities of the vulnerable populations built in order to have access to diversified income generation opportunities Activity 4.4.0 Provide business development services, vocational training (+basic literacy and numeracy) to affected communities Activity 4.4.1 Provide value-chain oriented start up kits to affected communities Activity 4.4.2 Promote integrated farming systems Subtotal Total 55 6.0. Results Framework for ICADeP 6.1. Background Sierra Leone‘s National Sustainable Agriculture Development Plan (NSADP) 2010-2030 as the Agricultural Sector‘s Development Framework, is also the country‘s contribution to the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) at the continental level under the auspices of the African Union‘s New Partnership for Africa‘s Development (AU/NEPAD) initiatives. The commodity commercialization aspect of NSADP - as an important sub-programme identified under the NSADP/CAADP, attracted national and donor‘s priority which resulted into the implementation of the Smallholder Commercialization Programme (SCP) 2010-2014 as the component with the greatest potential impact with respect to improved food security and wealth generation. This Inclusive Comprehensive Agricultural Development Programme (ICADeP) is a follow-up programme building on the lessons learnt from the implementation of the SCP. The programme developmental genealogy outlined above is germane to the approach used in preparing this results framework for ICADeP (Table 10) as an M&E tool for results-based programming and performance monitoring. The M&E method is based on Monitoring and Evaluation indicators set forth in this results framework including; i) result based mechanisms of the CAADP Result Framework; ii) programme development objectives/outcomes result indicators, iii) component activity indicators subjected to logframe analysis; vi) participatory methods to include the views of direct beneficiaries from surveys e.g. Citizens Report Cards (CRC). In their Declaration in Malabo; during the ASSEMBLY OF THE UNION Twenty-Third Ordinary Session 26-27 June 2014 (see Part VII - Commitment to Mutual Accountability to Actions and Results), the African Heads of State were mindful of the need for monitoring, tracking and reporting on the implementation of the Declaration using the CAADP Results Framework for bench-marking programme progress. This is to say that, the CAADP Results Framework is an integral part of CAADP implementation. Consequently, as ICADeP is a progeny from the CAADP process, this ICADeP result framework has been contextualised in the CAADP Results Framework ensuring; strengthening systematic capacity to deliver results as the basis of agricultural transformation and sustained inclusive agricultural growth in order to enhance agriculture‘s contribution to economic growth and inclusive development. Within that global structure, a results matrix has been developed for monitoring programme development objectives indicators. The logical framework matrix will be used to track progress on implementing component activities on short term basis to feed into the results framework The ICADeP Results Framework should strengthen and align existing systems and tools, including enhancing multi-sectoral linkages and promoting multi-stakeholder implementation, partnership, monitoring & evaluation and improving accountability. The framework is meant to standardise and harmonise strategies and programmes by stakeholders, including farmers‘ and fishers‘ organisations, the private sector, civil society, research institutions and multilateral and donor partners. Importantly, systematic tracking and monitoring of core indicators will generate progress reports from robust monitoring plans for data generation and from stakeholder consultations to corroborate the reports. Such reports will be useful for planning, implementation and decision-making. The proposed project will be implemented over a 4 year period and assumes the SMART-W guiding principles requiring 56 that actions should be Specific, Measurable, Assignable, Result Based, Time bound and Written down (SMART-W)31. 31Scarborough, N.M. (2010). Essentials of Entrepreneurship and Small Business Management, 6th Edition (Pearson Custom Business Resources), Pp. 85. 57 Table 10. ICADeP Results Framework INTERVENTION LOGIC General objective ACTIVITY Activity to be carried out and in what sequence EXPECTED RESULTS Output envisaged MILESTONE INDICATORS Key indicators related to general objectives TARGETS Output quantification with timeline Baseline Mid-term End Indicator/Unit of Measurement Goal (Impact) Increased agriculture sector contribution to a broad-based socioeconomic development and food & nutrition security of rural Sierra Leone in a sustainable and inclusive manner Rural income growth Rural poverty reduced Extreme hunger reduced Food insecurity reduced Nutrition insecurity reduced % Increase % Reduction % Reduction Reduced % Reduction 2.2% 66% 49.4% 3.5% 50%% 25% 37%% 7% per annum 40% by 2022 50% by 2022 25% by 2022 Development Objective Conducive environment and incentives in place for sustainable agricultural production and agribusiness and value chain development. Agriculture growth Growth rate of agriculture value added, in constant US dollars, per agricultural worker (ţAgW) Growth rate of agriculture value added, in constant US dollar, per hectare of agricultural arable land (ţAgL) Growth rate of yields for selected VCs, (t/ha) Maize; Cassava; Rice 2.2 3.5 6.5; 6.2; 3.3 2.7 4.0 3.5; 6.5; 3.8 3.0 4.5 0; 7.0; 4.0 58 Budgetary allocation to agriculture Incidence of rural working poor No of agricultural jobs created along the value chain Public agriculture expenditure as share of total public expenditure (ţPAE) Volume of foreign direct investment in agric (disbursed). VC Reduction rate of poverty headcount ratio, at national poverty line (% of population), dpovN Reduction rate of the gap between the wholesale price and farmgate price (ţfgws) Number of part-time jobs created per annum by age group and gender (doubled 100%) Number of full-time jobs created per annum by age group and gender (doubled 100%) 2.5% 41.5M (2010-2017 average) 66% 50% 20,000 10,000 7% 60M 50% 30% 30,000 15,000 10% 100M 40% 20% 40,000 20,000 59 COMPONENT 1: Sector Governance and ICADeP Management and Implementation Specific Objective 1: Strengthen governance structures and mechanisms for improved policy and programming, coordination, implementation and monitoring and evaluation to enhance mutual accountability. 1.1. Policy, legal and regulatory environment that adequately supports agricultural investment and transformation developed in an inclusive manner 1.1.1 Organize inclusive cross-sectoral and multi-stakeholder dialogues to formulate sector policies, strategies, regulatory measures and investments 1.1.2. Conduct a mapping of current agricultural, fishery, livestock, land and forestry policy gaps 1.1.3 Conduct an analysis of the legal, fiscal and regulation environment for agricultural investment and value chain promotion 1.1.4 Develop, review and domesticate current policies, strategies and fiscal measures and ensure implementation and performance evaluation Inclusive multi-sectoral/multi-stakeholder dialogues for policy/strategy formulation organised Policy review undertaken and gaps identified & rectified Comprehensive legal, fiscal and regulatory needs assessment for agricultural investment and value chain promotion carried-out Existing agricultural policies and institutional settings strengthened to successfully implement ICADeP to achieve goals and targets. Number of inclusive multi-sectoral/multi-stakeholder dialogues for policy/strategy formulation organised Number of reviewed & updated agricultural, fisheries, livestock and forestry policies available Report on assessment analysis available and used in implementation. Number of evidence-based policies, supportive institutions and corresponding human resources developed Evidence of policy implementation and publication of performance 15 Agriculture: 0 Fisheries: 1 Livestock: 0 Forestry: 0 Land: 1 0 0 0 45 Agriculture: 1 Fisheries: 1 Livestock: 1 Forestry: 1 Land: 1 1 10 1 performance evaluation report/sector 75 Agriculture: 1 Fisheries: 1 Livestock: 1 Forestry: 1 Land: 1 1 Updated 20 1 performance evaluation report/sector 60 1.2 National and decentralized sector stakeholder coordination mechanisms strengthened in order to make them effectively functional 1.2.1 Strengthen multi-sectoral coordination dialogues through multi-stakeholder coordination platform 1.2.2 Establish intra-institutional working groups to address sector coordination gaps Multi-sector coordination among stakeholders strengthened by establishing and operationalizing Multi-sectoral Platform Intra-institutional working group established through Joint Ministerial Working Group (JMWG) Degree of adherence to mutual accountability principles such as: Level of participation and inclusiveness % No of joint decisions taken and implemented through joint coordination body Proportion of farmers having access to Agricultural Advisory Services (FAgAS). Recruit trained and qualified extension staff Degree of adherence to mutual accountability principles. Level of participation and inclusiveness No of joint decisions taken and implemented through joint coordination body Published report shared and implemented Number of platforms established and made effectively functional 25% 5 0.05% 124 25% 6 0 2 75% 15 10% 524 75% 12 2 3 (to be strengthened) 100% 25 20% 620 100% 18 4 3 (strengthened) 61 1.2.3 Conduct an analysis on multi-sectoral synergies and win-wins with the agriculture sector, including with nutrition, education, social protection and gender 1.2.4 Develop dialogue platforms at decentralized levels by using decentralized advisory platforms Study conducted on multi-sectoral synergies to discern win-win possibilities within the agriculture sector Multi-sectoral/stakeholder platform established at district and local council levels Degree of adherence to mutual accountability principles. Level of participation and inclusiveness No of joint decisions taken and implemented through joint coordination body Number of study conducted Number of platform established at decentralised levels 60% 12 per district 0 13 75% 24 1 15 100% 48 2 15 Maintained 62 1.3 National and decentralized information, M&E and accountability systems made fully functional for effective reporting and informed policy-making 1.3.1 Consolidate sectoral budget, financing and financial tracking systems 1.3.2 Conduct a sectoral review and analysis to determine sector performance 1.3.3 Develop and implement a communication strategy to guide the generation and dissemination of sector information 1.3.4 Develop and ensure effective management of a multi-sectoral web-based information sharing platform 1.3.5 Review and strengthen existing agriculture-based information systems and data management Accountability system for tracking sectoral budgets established Joint sectoral review conducted Communication strategy developed and implemented Web-sites developed and managed where multiple sectors have access and share information Agricultural statistics and Market information management improved and available to all stakeholders No. of Accountability system in place effectively tracking sectoral budget Number of sector reviews completed and lessons learnt used to inform policy review or implementation strategy Number of useful information generated and disseminated across sub-sectors Number of website established and functional Number of end-users tracked with feed-back No. of SME and survey data publicized annually No Agric-market bulletin published and distributed Number of slots in community radio discussions on Agricultural Market information 5 0 4/year 0 0 0 4 0 5 (to be strengthened) 2 20 1 5,000 2 24 48 48 5 (strengthened) 4 20 Maintained 1 10,000 4 48 96 63 Number of Agric-Market Data Collection conducted No. of information campaigns carried out across sub-sectors No of SME Info Points operational Large business monitoring report publicized annually Index of capacity to generate and use agriculture statistical data and information (ASCI) 12 10/year 0 0 0 60/year 66 2 25 96 90/year 66 4 ASCI of 55 achieved by 2022 1.4 Institutional, technical, organizational, financial and management capacities of public institutions and sector actors built in order to carry out their professional activities effectively 1.4.1 Conduct an assessment to identify capacity gaps among National and decentralized sector institutions, actors and implementers 1.4.2 Develop an inclusive capacity building programme for sector actors and implementers 1.4.3 Implement the capacity building programme for sector actors and implementers, including extension agents 1.4.4. Develop District Agricultural Investment Plans Study conducted and capacity gaps identified Capacity building programme developed based of existing gaps Capacity programmes implemented District Investment Plans Developed Number of capacity assessment report implemented to inform development of capacity building programme Number of available capacity building programme developed Number of capacity programmes implemented Number of District Investment Plans Developed and made available to potential investors 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 8 4 4 4 15 64 COMPONENT 2: Sustainable and inclusive agricultural productivity and production systems Specific Objective 2: Increase sustainable and inclusive production and productivity of climate smart and diverse quality commodities for improved food and nutrition security 2.1 Availability and accessibility to quality production factors enhanced and supported in a sustainable and inclusive manner 2.1.1. Conduct normative and operational research for improved quality inputs; 2.1.2. Create formal and informal systems for the provision and timely distribution of quality and improved inputs for agriculture; Improved and quality agriculture sector inputs provided and distributed List of improved and quality inputs across the agriculture sector Increase use of fertilizer for agriculture development Increase public expenditures to agriculture as part of national expenditures, to at least 10% from the year 2018 to 2022. Proportion of men and women engaged in agriculture have access to financial services to be able to transact agriculture business. Access to finance as % of total commercial banks loans advances to agriculture Increase the size of 1 3kg/ha 2.1% 5% 1% 7,176 hectares 1 25kilograms per hectare of arable land 10% 10% 5% 14,000 2 40kilograms per hectare of arable land 10% 25% 10% 28,000 65 irrigated areas (as per its value observed in the year 2018) Increase the current levels of quality agricultural inputs for increased crop production Production Increase in rice production: Increase in other arable crops production: Increase in tree crops production: Number of farmers trained in improve farming techniques and value addition: Inputs Quantity of improved seeds/planting material distributed to farmers Improved seed rice (mt): Other improved arable crop planting materials (units): Improved tree crop (mt): 1,160,646mt 830,280 1,678,984 37,500 58,548 2,991,000 13,380,000 1,400,000 1,004,640 2,031,000 225,000 70,565 3,619,000 14,280,500 1,700,000 1,215,000 2,460,000 375,000 85,900 4,376,800 19,603,000 66 % farmers have access to quality agricultural advisory services that provide locally relevant knowledge, information and other services. Increase the level of Investments in Agricultural Research and Development to at least 1% of the Agricultural GDP, from 2018 to 2022. Ensure that 100% of small-scale farmers (< 5hectres) and agribusiness interested in agriculture have rights to access the required land. Ensure that 60% of large-scale farmers and agribusiness interested in agriculture have rights to access the required land. Increase agricultural yield levels of priority commodities, by the year 2022 from the year 2018 Rice: 0.05% 0.04% 70% 30% 10% 1% 80% 50% 20% 2% GDP 100% 60% 67 2.1.3. Create formal and informal systems for the provide and timely distribution of quality and improved inputs for livestock Quality livestock breeds produced and distributed Cassava: G/nuts: Sweet Potatoes Maize: . Increase number of quality agricultural inputs for livestock (breed), Number of nucleus Artificial Insemination (AI) Stations established and functional set up and implemented for animal improvement (1 per Region) Number of Paddocks established Number of Pasture and Range Management Programmes implemented % of farmers practicing zero grazing Number of cattle settlement exercises supported in cattle/small ruminant production areas Number of milk processing 1.24mt 15.69 0.77 9.08 2.23 0 0 0 5% 0 3.0 20.0 1.5 15.0 3.0 3 3 7 15% 50 4.0 25.0 2.0 20.0 5.0 5 5 14 30% 100 68 plants established (Peri-Urban) Number of Vaccination and deworming/treatment exercises conducted against Anthrax, Black Quarters, worms, tick, mange for farm animals etc Number of animal fattening programmes/demonstrations conducted and functional Production of dairy products(cheese production etc) businesses establish Number of pig breed improvement stations for the production and distribution of piglet production established and operational 0 0 0 0 0 3 30 30 3 90 5 50 50 5 190 69 2.1.4. Create formal and informal systems for the provision and timely distribution of quality and improved inputs for aquaculture and fisheries. Increased pond development and provision of inputs/tools equipment/infrastructure Number of farm buildings Constructed for extension (1 per block Number of poultry feed mill established Number of Vaccine cold chains provided % Slaughter houses refurbished and upgraded Number of Vets trained Number of middle level manpower trained Number of animal production cadre trained Number of Lab technicians trained Number of mobile clinics Increase levels of fish pond (400m2)from current levels (maintain existing ponds and develop new ones Existing New Ponds - 100/district Tools/Pond/Country 0 1 0 0% 0 0 0 0 0 1170 0 33 4 90 20% 10 10 20 20 3 Maintain 1170 700 66 6 190 60% 20 20 40 40 5 Maintain 1170 1,400 70 Shovels (6/pond) Machetes (6/pond) Hoes (3/pond) Pipes - 6‖ (2/pond) Elbows (2/pond) Mattocks (2/pond) Tape rule (100 Pieces for country) Lines (1,700 pieces for country) Head pan (5/pond) Hacksaw frame (50 for country) Hacksaw Blades (1,000 pieces for country) Wheelbarrow (20/district) Drag nets (4/District) Fertilizer (5/pond) Lime (5/pond) Vehicles (10 for country) Bikes (40 for country) Computer and accessories Lab equipment (02 and PH meter; test tubes, sachi disc, cupboards) Labour requirement/pond and capacity development Labour/pond National sensitisation campaigns 2person/pond 10/pond Maintain 10/pond 71 Training Programmes Exchange Programmes National International Infrastructure Rehabilitation of Stations Farm House 3 Bedroom accommodation for Aquaculture Officers – 1/District Fingerlings/pond. Tilapia Catfish Number of data collected on artisanal fisheries 0 2/year 0 0 2 buildings /stations 0 800 800 0 2 10 2 1 Rehabilitate 2 7 1,500 1,000 2 4 20 4 2 Rehabilitate 2 14 Maintain 1,500 Maintain 1,000 4 72 2.1.5. Provide and timely distribute quality and improved inputs for forestry; 2.1.6. Provide and maintain small, medium and large scale irrigation infrastructure and equipment; 2.1.7: Facilitate acquisition and maintenance of mechanization equipment by farmers Quality forest trees seedling produced and distributed Irrigation infrastructure and equipment provided and maintained Farmers acquire and maintain mechanised equipment Increase current levels of quality agricultural inputs for forestry (seedlings) by the year 2022 from the year 2018. Increase the current levels of large scale irrigation infrastructure and equipment Dams (80x50x5m) Giant Sprinklers Pumps (50,000 hp) Increase the current levels of small scale irrigation infrastructure and equipment Dams (10x20x3m) Number of mechanised equipment available in 66 Agriculture blocks Threshers Power Tillers Tractors Combined Harvesters Transplanters Weeders 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 60 6 20 198 198 132 66 132 66 10 5 80 10 50 330 330 198 132 264 132 198 73 2.1.8. Facilitate soft loans and financial services‘ access for farmers such as access to e.g. micro-finance; financial literacy village savings and loans schemes 2.1.9. Undertake a mapping of arable, cultivated, non-cultivated areas and wetlands to identify and address land utilization issues. Farmers have accesses to financial services and literacy Map of arable, cultivated and non-cultivated land produced Rice haulers Destoners Planters Graters Peelers Pressers Hammer mills Hatcheries Feeders Incubators Chippers Feed Blenders Generators (250KVA) Increase the current levels of access to financial services such as loans, financial literacy by farmers % of farmer with access to loans % of farmers having financial literacy services Number of Mapping undertaken reviewed updated annually Proportion of country for 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5% 1% 0 132 132 132 66 66 66 14 66 33 198 66 66 66 10% 10% 2 198 198 132 132 132 28 132 66 330 198 198 132 25% 20% 4 100% 74 2.1.10. Undertake a soil fertility test/mapping to provide soil fertility profile across the country. 2.1.11. Identify and disseminate innovative technology and productive practices through extension advisory services Soil fertility map/profile across the country produced Farmers benefit from innovative technology and productive practice soil fertility profile is conducted Increase current levels of the farmer/extension work ratio delivering effective innovative advisory services 0 0.05 50% 10% 20% 2.2 Crops, livestock, fishery and forestry production practices and techniques are improved and made climate smart 2.2.1. Train extension agents, smallholders and enterprises (in a gender sensitive manner) on climate-smart and enhanced agricultural practices, knowledge and techniques. 2.2.2. Conduct normative and operational research for natural resource management. Extension workers trained in climate smart practices that are passed on to farmers. Promote initiatives of building resilience of production systems to reduce vulnerabilities of the livelihoods of farming communities to climate variability and other related risks. Research for developing appropriate natural resource management measures conducted and results Increase % of farm, pastoral, and fisher households are resilient to climate and weather related risks, by the year 2022. Increase % of agricultural land placed under sustainable land management practice. Number of agronomic natural resource management measures developed and introduced Number of vegetative natural resource management measures developed and introduced Number of structural natural resource management measures developed and introduced Number of management 0 0.13% 0 0 0 10% 1% 2 2 3 20% 5% 4 2 5 75 2.2.3. Set up an Information, Education and Communication (IEC) innovative platforms for technology transfer ; 2.2.4. Conduct normative and operational research for developing adequate, innovative, climate-smart and affordable technologies including pest bio-control measures for smallholders and enterprises; 2.2.5. Undertake pest management campaigns to develop capacity of farmers to prevent and identify pest and diseases related to crops, livestock, fisheries and forestry; 2.2.6. Improve pest management and control (including provision of sample control test kits to smallholders) implemented IEC innovative platforms set up and effectively functional Innovative, climate smart and affordable technologies developed from results of research and implemented Pest management campaigns undertaken and impact assessed Pest management and control measures improved measures developed and introduced % reduction of deforestation Number of IEC platforms set up and functional (1 per district) % reduction of farm families exposed to climate risk Increase proportion of land under small-scale irrigation Rate of adoption of soil fertility management practices Degree of awareness of climate change risk and impact among farming population practices Share of seeds adapted to heat and drought in major crops practices No. of natural resource management campaigns undertaken 0 0 1 0 1% 5% 5% 5% 12 2 10% 8 15% 3% 10% 25% 10% 48 4 20% 16 30% 6%% 20% 50% 20% 96 76 from extension agents to farmers; 2.2.7 Strengthen/establish production demonstration sites for improved practices among farmers; Demonstration sites strengthened or established Number of farmer who can identify diseases due to campaign Number of farmer who can prevent diseases due to campaign Number of farmers who can effectively use improved measures including sample kits Number of site established Number of technologies developed and implemented Number of pest management campaigns developed and implemented Number of improved Pest management control measures developed and implemented Recommended and approved Pesticides, herbicides, etc made available in all Agric blocks Number of Pest Management 5% 5% (of 750,000) 5% 1 0 84 84 0 25% 25% (of 750,000) 25% 8 5 150 150 33 50% 50% (of 750,000) 50% 16 10 150 150 66 77 Demonstration sites strengthened or established 13 existing to be strengthened 66 to be established and maintained 66 to be established and maintained 2.3 Production infrastructures strengthened so as to avoid pre harvest losses and ensure food safety standards along the production line. 2.3.1. Provide, rehabilitate and maintain storage facilities for seeds and crops to smallholders and enterprises; 2.3.2. Provide and maintain ranches, slaughterhouses, dairy and meat production centers and feed stores; 2.3.3. Provide and rehabilitate and maintain fish ponds, hatcheries, cold chains and feed mills; Storage facilities provided, rehabilitated and maintained Number of facilities provided Number of facilities Rehabilitated (All) Number of facilities maintained (All) Number of facilities provided Ranches: Slaughterhouses Dairy and Meat Production Centre Feed Stores Rehabilitated and maintained Hatcheries: Feed mill: Provided Hatcheries: Feed mill: Cold Chains 403 403 403 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 Maintain 403 and get them operational Maintain 403 and get them operational Maintain 403 and get them operational 15 15 15 4 2 1 4 5 8 Maintain 403 and get them operational Maintain 403 and get them operational Maintain 403 and get them operational 15 15 15 4 2 1 6 9 16 78 2.3.4. Develop, rehabilitate and maintained IVSs 2.3.5. Provide harvesting infrastructure, equipment and materials 2.3.6. Provide on-farm transportation means for crops, aquaculture and livestock 2.3.6. Establish and equip food safety laboratories; IVSs developed/ rehabilitated and maintained Harvesting infrastructure, equipment, and materials provided, rehabilitated and maintained On-farm transportation means provided Safety labs established and equipped Hectares of IVS developed/rehabilitated Hectares of IVS maintained Number of facilities provided Threshers Combined Harvesters Rice haulers Destoners Graters Peelers Number of transportation Provided No of transportation for crops (one/chiefdom) No of transportation for aquaculture (one/chiefdom) No of transportation for livestock (one/chiefdom) Number of labs established, equipped and functioning effectively % of products certified by 9304 9304 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% 14,000 14,000 403 403 403 403 403 403 190 190 190 1 5 50% 28,000 28,000 403 403 403 403 403 403 190 190 190 2 10 100% 79 2.3.7. Train lab technicians and extension agents about food safety standards; 2.3.8. Ensure food safety for local market Lab Tech and extension agents trained to man labs and demonstration sites Local food stuffs monitored for safety labs are accepted in the international market Number of lab technicians trained and employed at labs Proportion of markets monitored for safety of local food stuffs 0 0% 5 50% 10 100% 80 COMPONENT 3: Agribusiness, infrastructure and value chain development Specific Objective 3: Improve efficiency, sustainability and competitiveness of agriculture value chains and market linkages 3.1 Post-harvest losses reduced and food safety and quality improved 3.1.1 Train farmers on post-harvest management practices (including storage and processing to maintain the quality and nutritional benefits of the crops) 3.1.2 Build or rehabilitate individual/collective improved post-harvest storage and conservation facilities 3.1.4 Facilitate acquisition of processing materials, technologies and inputs to communities and Small-Medium and Large Enterprises 3.1.5 Provide incentive schemes to establish competitive agro-processing Small-Medium and Large Scale Enterprises 3.1.6 Update/develop food safety standards and regulations for international and local market Farmer trained in post- harvest management measures Improved post-harvest storage and conservation facilities built or rehabilitated Acquisition of processing material , technologies, and inputs facilitated Competitive agro-processing enterprises established Safety standards and regulations updated Number of farmers trained Post-Harvest Losses (PHL) level for the 5 national priority commodities Number of post-harvest storage and conservation facilities built or rehabilitated Number of small-medium and large enterprises acquiring processing materials, technologies and inputs doubled from current levels Percentage of businesses applying NFIQ standard certificates % of farm families 0 40% 403 12 5% 187,500 30% 403 maintained and operational 90 25% 375,000 20% 403 maintained and operational 190 50% 81 3.1.7 Strengthen food safety control and certification systems (training of officers and provision of facilities) 3.1.8 Promote a visual identity (branding logo) for Sierra Leone quality agricultural products Food safety control and certification systems strengthened Quality agricultural products visually identified with logo complying with food safety standards and regulations Number of food safety officers trained and employed (1 per block) % of products with quality logo 0 0 5% 15% (of 750,000) 33 25% 30% (of 750,000) 66 50% 3.2 Functional domestic markets established and their links with regional and global markets strengthened 3.2.1 Build and rehabilitate feeder roads 3.2.2 Strengthen domestic market information systems 3.2.3 Establish and capacitate a market information platform targeting external opportunities 3.2.4 Strengthen linkages between local farmers, agro-processing actors and institutional markets (schools, army, hospitals, prisons, etc.) to enhance home-grown institutional feeding program for improved diet quality of occupants of those institutions Feeders roads built and rehabilitated Market information readily available to farmers Market information platform for external opportunities established Local farmers and institutional markets strengthened Km of feeder roads rehabilitated % of farmers accessing domestic market information Number of hits at the market information portal Increase in Income generated from provision of market information Number of market information system such as radio discussions etc held to disseminate information in good time Number of agro-processor cooperatives forged 3789 10% 0 0 5 0 5789 25% 5,000 10% 25 10 7789 50% 10,000 20% 50 20 82 3.2.5 Organize and support trade/market fares and periodic markets 3.2.6. Developing commodity market structures in selected areas (abattoirs, markets, vegetable markets, fish markets etc.) Trade fares and periodic markets organised and supported Commodity market structures developed and Food safety and quality standards are developed, disseminated and enforced Food needs assessment study of key institutions (Police, Hospitals, Correction Centres etc) At least 50% of food needs of institutions met by local agro-processors Number of campaigns conducted to promote consumption of local foods Number of trade/market fares organised and supported Number of period markets across the country supported with WASH, Storage, medical facilities and Accommodation Map/profile of all market structures Database developed for agro-industries in country with developed capacity to manage database Number of public commodity markets structures refurbished and provided with WASH, electricity, medical facilities, Day-Care, cold chains and storage 0 10% 8 0 0 0 0 0 2 25% 25 8 15 1 1 15 4 50% 50 16 30 1 updated 1 updated 30 83 3.2.7 Align national food safety policies and standards to regional and global ones Foods safety policies aligned with global ones Support Sierra Leone Standards Bureau with requisite training and equipment to gain accreditation Popularise the ECOWAS Trade Liberalisation Scheme (ETLS) for citizens to take advantage of the trade opportunity Establish agro growth center in Freetown with input supplies e.g. seeds, fertilizer, pesticides, transportation Number of food safety policy alignment to global ones Number of staff trained for accreditation relation duties Proportion of food stuffs gaining international certification Number of local food safety monitors trained to cover country Number of monitoring exercise/month Number of training workshops on ETLS Number of radio discussions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 2 15% 25 10 10 20 1 Maintained 5 4 25% 50% 15 20 40 84 3.3 Value chains are well structured, inclusive and sustainable 3.3.1 Conduct an assessment to identify and select agribusiness value chains based on financial, socio-economic, food and nutrition security impact; and disseminate the findings to attract investment 3.3.2 Conduct an assessment to identify the typology of actors and activities involved in the selected agribusiness value chains 3.3.3 Support the establishment of agribusiness actor groups into selected agricultural value chains Assessment study conducted and results implemented to inform investors Assessment study conducted and actor‘s profiles in selected value chain determined Actor groups in selected VCs organised and supported for increased production and productivity, poverty reduction. Number of PPP established for priority agricultural commodity value chains Actor‘s profile available Number of actor groups registered with line ministries and MSWGC Proportion of actor groups linked with viable PPP Increased income generation by member of actor groups lined to PPP Reduction of poverty within actor groups Increase production and productivity within actor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 Database for Actors in the 4 MDAs established 2 group established for each VC 50% 25% 25% 10% 40 4 database updated 2 groups maintained and operational 100% 50% 50% 20% 85 3.3.4 Develop technical, managerial and organizational capacities of the organized agribusiness value chain groups 3.3.5. Conduct needs assessment and reinvest in established Agribusiness Centres for effective governance and profitable business Technical, managerial and organizational skills agribusiness VCs developed Needs assessment completed and reinvestment procedures established Organizational capacity and financial literacy of community based saving groups groups % of groups demonstrating improved management skills No of business plans developed and financed No of ABC‘s supported Number of ABCs operational on a sustainable basis Number of financial literacy studies successfully completed 0 52 52 0 10% 150 150 5 25% 403 403 10 86 COMPONENT 4: Livelihoods, resilience, nutrition of vulnerable groups Specific Objective 4: Increase and improve resilience of livelihoods against shocks and promote full access to nutritious foods for the most vulnerable 4.1 Most vulnerable have sustainable and equitable access to market, infrastructure and productive resources 4.1.1: Conduct a situation assessment and analysis of the most vulnerable groups in agriculture and rural areas. 4.1.2: Developing a targeting system and an interactive database of most vulnerable groups. 4.1.3: Develop /strengthen preventive and productive social safety nets including cash and asset transfer programmes to improve and diversify livelihoods of the most vulnerable 4.1.4: Build and strengthen organizational capacity and financial literacy of community based saving groups. Situation analysis of the most vulnerable groups in agriculture and rural areas completed Database on most vulnerable groups developed with baseline of their poverty, nutrition status, accessibility to productive resources, health status etc. Preventive and productive social safety nets developed and strengthened Organizational capacity and financial literacy of community based saving groups strengthened Availability of report Number of data base established (1 per District) No. of farmer groups receiving reliable and timely cash transfer through national institutions Proportion of farmer groups covered by social protection: Number of financial literacy studies successfully completed Number of loan beneficiaries (farm families) 0 0 78 5% (of 750,000) 0 15,000 Available by year 1 7 228 15% 5 187,500 Report reviewed and updated 14 378 25% 10 375,000 87 4.1.5. Capitalise and review the modus operandi of community banks and financial services associations to enhance their capacity to reach the most vulnerable. 4.1.6. Develop and implement a strategy for women and youth inclusion in agriculture Community banks capitalise and reviewed to reach most vulnerable At least 50% of farmers having access to finance Volume of agriculture credit provided in support to capitalise community based savings At least 15$ of volume of agriculture credit provided directly to youth and women Number of youths that is engaged in new job opportunities in agriculture value chains, (ţYth) Proportion of rural women that are empowered in agriculture, (ţWE) Number of jobs created per annum Strategy developed, implemented and monitored Apex Banks Apex Banks Apex Banks 10,000 5% 10,000 0 25% 10% 50,000 15% 50,000 1 50% 15% 100,000 25% 100,000 1 Updated 88 4.2 Access to sustainable healthy and nutritious diets and improved and food choices among the most vulnerable improved 4.2.1. Conduct mass media and community on campaigns on food and nutrition education and Behavior Change Communication (BCC), capitalizing on the existing Food Based Dietary Guidelines emphasising diversifying food production systems for nutrition security) 4.2.2. Strengthen capacities of local communities on food preparation, preservation and processing techniques and enterprises for nutrient-sensitive food processing, packaging and conservation Mass media and community campaigns and BCC conducted for diversifying food production for nutrition security Number of trainings, sensitization and advocacy conducted % of population aware of the food based dietary guidelines emphasising food diversification for nutrition security Prevalence of stunting (% of children under 5 years old) (St) reduced by 1.5% per year from current levels Prevalence of underweight (% of children under 5 years old) (Uw) – reduced by 1.5% per year from current levels 5 0 28.5 12.9 15 50% 25.5% 9.9% 25 65% 22.6% 6.9% 89 4.2.3. Support backyard gardening for diversification and enhancement of increased nutritious food consumption 4.2.4. Encourage the consumption of locally grown food stuffs Backyard garden promotion scheme designed and implemented Campaigns and demonstrations to promote consumption of locally grown foods stuffs undertaken Prevalence of wasting (% of children under 5 old) (W) reduced to ≤ 5% from current levels Increase in proportion of Minimum Dietary Diversity-Women (ţMDDW) – increased by 20% from current levels Proportion of 6-23 months old children who meet the Minimum Acceptable Diet (MAD) increased by 50% from current levels Number farm families with backyard gardens growing diversified and nutritious food stuffs Number of campaigns Number of demonstrations 4.7% 0% 7% 45% (of 750,000) 10 10 4.5% 10% 23% 65% (of 750,000) 30 30 4% 20% 50% 85% (of 750,000) 50 50 90 4.3 Early warning and preparedness mechanisms against shocks improved and mitigation measures implemented in consonance with the National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPA) Priorities 4.3.1: Carry out an assessment to identify gaps, constraints and needs in current early warning systems; 4.3.2: Strengthen the capacity of institutions responsible for early warning systems and inter-agency collaboration; 4.3.3: Develop a communication strategy and platform to disseminate information on early warning systems; Early warning systems assess and improved for effective preparedness Preparation for the Use of Meteorological Satellite in Africa (PUMA) station at the Lungi airport capacitated to provide Early Warning of Imminent Hazardous Weather or Climate as it relates to agriculture/fisheries. Permanent investment budget-lines created to respond to spending needs on resilience building initiatives, especially for disaster preparedness plans, functioning early warning and response systems. Communication and strategy and platform developed Early warning systems needs assessed and report available Frequency of weather alerts received Number of mitigation measures instituted against hazardous weather or climate from early warning alerts Number of preparedness measures in place Proportion of farmers reached with early warning information from platform 0 0 5 5 10% (of 750,000) By year 1 Every other day 10 10 30% Needs reviewed, updated and implemented Daily 10 10 50% 91 4.3.4: Provide adapted information and tools/plans to strengthen capacity of personnel to take early action before shocks 4.3.5: Improve risk management tools (as household insurance), mitigation and adaptation actions at central and decentralized levels 4.3.6: Implement social safety nets in emergencies for vulnerable agricultural communities (including conditional and non-conditional cash transfers during seasonal vulnerability) Early warning systems apps install in personnel phone and trained in used Risk management tools improved. Social safety nets in emergencies provided Number of personnel receiving early warning information via phone Number of mitigation measures instituted against hazardous weather or climate from early warning alerts Proportion of farmer groups covered by social protection Number of farming households provided with Input: Cash transfer 52 5 5% 78 78 60 Maintained and equipped 10 15% 228 228 60 Maintained and equipped 10 25% 378 378 4.4. Capacities of the vulnerable populations built in order to have access 4.4.1: Provide business development services, vocational Capacity of affected communities developed via % of affected communities trained Percentage engaged in 0% (of 750,000) 15% 25% 92 to diversified income generation opportunities training (+basic literacy and numeracy) to affected communities 4.4.2 Provide value-chain oriented start up kits to affected communities 4.4.3. Promote integrated farming systems vocational training Affected communities provided with start-up Integrated farming systems to guard against risk total agri enterprise/income failure new job opportunities in agriculture value chains % of farmers provided with start-up and operational Number of farm families undertaking integrated farming system involving crop/forestry and farm animal/aquaculture production 10,000 0% (of 750,000) 25% (of 750,000) 50,000 15% 50% (of 750,000) 100,000 25% 75% (of 750,000) and improve on scope 93 7.0. Monitoring and Evaluation The ICADeP management will be via a multiple tiers Vertical Hierarchical Management System (VHMS). Multiple-stakeholders such as traders, women, producer and investor/business associations and NGOs will be major actors in programme implementation accommodated by a multi-sectoral advisory platform. Figure 13. Organogram for ICADeP Implementation and Monitoring An important element of the ICADEP is to significantly improve agriculture sector governance through regulatory assessment reform, statistics and information management, and improved M&E systems and capacities. One core activity related to M&E is the development of a results framework at the medium and long time level outlined in Section 6. The M&E Manual developed under the supervision of National Program Coordination Secretariat will constitute a framework which focuses on tracking the impacts of the ICADEP on a short term basis which will be the basis of informing the results framework. To this effect, a programme logframe will be developed to monitor the impacts of the ICADEP activities at field level for the components and sub-components. The constituent sections of the logframe will include; an intervention logic – which specifies the general objective; activity section - which gives the activities to be carried out and in what sequence; a section on expected results - outlining output envisaged; verifiable Indicators (target) section – providing key indicators related to general objectives; assumptions/risks section – which provides the necessary conditions to achieve objectives; a section on responsibility –specifying institution responsible for implementation and finally, the timeframe section – which indicates period during which activities takes place or are projected to occur. MAFFS in collaboration with partner MDAs will establish baselines that will serve the basis for the programme progress measuring. Sources for verification will include the official and harmonized statistical data of GOSL‘s MDAs and non-governmental organisations, WB, FAO, AfDB, UNCTAD, UNDP, Enterprise Surveys, government, donor and private sector reports. The multiple tiers Vertical Hierarchical Management System comprises of: Multi-Sectoral Stakeholder Advisory Platform National Steering Committee SPU Joint Ministerial Working Group Presidency National Program Coordination Secretariat 94 1. The Presidency - comprising the President and his/her advisers will be the highest governing body of the programme. The Presidency is responsible for resource mobilization, oversight, coordination of various MDAs, monitoring and evaluation of higher level objectives (Goal/Impact). 2. The Strategic Policy Advisory Unit in the State House will liaise between the Presidency and the Ministerial Group ensuring that the recommendations/concerns of the Presidency and its own reviews are considered by the Ministerial group. Summary reports will be presented to the Presidency every three months for the adjustment of policies and plans accordingly. 3. The Steering Committee report to the Joint Ministerial Working Group comprising of Ministers and their Permanent Secretaries who report to the Strategic Policy Advisory Unit at State House for the attention of the Presidency. At the Ministerial Level, the program will be anchored under Pillar One of the Agenda for Prosperity (i.e., economic diversification to promote inclusive growth) chaired by MAFFS, to be co-chaired by MFMR, MHS and MTI. The programme will therefore be implemented within that existing structure and new joint performance management systems. It will, among others, be responsible for ensuring the accomplishment of targets under their direct purview, supervising implementation, establishing and developing a base for record-keeping and reporting (area specific Management Information System). For that purpose, Component Teams will be established accordingly. It will report to the SPU on overall programme progress, issues or challenges and recommendations. Some modifications can be made as necessary. 4. The National Steering Committee of the program with the responsibility of reviewing more technical issues, approaches and monitoring the outcomes level of objectives. The National Steering Committee constituting Directors of the participating Ministries and the ICADeP Focal Points in those Ministries will reports to the Ministerial group and engages the multi-sectoral platform 5. Multiple-stakeholders such as traders, women, producer and investor/business associations and NGOs will be major actors in programme implementation accommodated by a multi-sectoral stakeholder advisory platform where their concerns, inputs will be discussed while appraising them about project progress and challenges. 6. For the day-to-day coordination of the program, it will be the responsibility of the unified National Program Coordination Secretariat housed at the MAFFS while the various MDAs and other stakeholders will be responsible for implementing specific aspects of the program under Performance based MOUs at national and decentralized levels to collect and analyse date on programme indicators and report results to the other 3 levels above. Tracking of the indicators 95 and activities will be conducted daily by the MDAs‘ national and district departments in charge of M&E who will constitute the National Programme Coordination Secretariat who will report to the Multi-Sectoral Stakeholder Advisory Platform. Other functions include: i. Develop and establish M&E coordination procedures between implementing partners ii. Develop M&E Manual under supervision of National Program Coordination Secretariat iii. Prepare and submit M&E reports to Presidency/SPU, Ministerial JWG, National Steering Committee, Stakeholders and Donors for review. The principles of mutual accountability should be adhered to wherein; vision, objectives and strategies are shared with all stakeholders who will then agree on performance indicators. It is important that programme analysis is evidence-based and inclusive of all stakeholders in order to facilitate transparent dialogue and enhance commitment to implementation of recommendations emanating from the review process. 7.1. Communication and Visibility The people of Sierra Leone are the ultimate programme beneficiaries or losers depending on programme outcome. They are the beneficiaries in case of favourable outcomes and indeed they will be the loser where there are adverse outcomes or failures. This is so because, grant or loan for the programme implementation will be on their behalf. In the case of loans, the people will have to repay and even government contribution to the programme will likely come from taxpayer‘s money or national resources. But again, the successful attainment of all programme objectives should translate into improved society wellbeing. Therefore, it is the right of the population to be abreast with both the achievements and challenges during project implementation. Accordingly, at the level of the day to day monitoring of programme implementation, communication departments of all participating MDAs will be involved in M&E with the aim of reporting implementation progress or otherwise via print, television or social media. Citizens report cards will be periodically obtain to gauge public opinion about programme implementation. 96 8. 0. Risk Assessment and Mitigation Measures The following risks and mitigation measures have been identified for ICADEP. Table 11. Risks and Mitigation Measures Risk Probability/ Impact Implications and Risk Mitigation Measures Ebola health re-occurs High/High Part of the funding will be diverted from all components to provision of free and/or subsidised food, seeds and inputs. However, this distribution will still require good information systems and private sector development that are central to this ICADEP Programme. As soon as borders are reopened and quarantines lifted GOSL will run a hotline for business to remove all administrative barriers to reinvigorate trade Iron ore prices will continue fall with the implication to lower than expected GOSL revenue High/Medium In combination with continuing health crisis, the impact can be high. However, if the Ebola epidemics are curbed GOSL should still aim at 10% budget spent on agriculture and provide necessary resources for ICADEP. Active involvement of the private sector in all components will also mitigate this risk. Simplification and streamlining tax, inspection, licensing and trade will encourage SMEs to ―formalize‖ and increase the tax revenue. Foreign investors will withdraw due to the health crisis or political unrest Medium/Medium The FDI impacts have not been assessed yet. Most were expected to start full commercial operations in 2014-2018. Part of the investors is expected to continue because of the well-established operations and multi-million investments. In any event, the short-term negative impacts are possible. However, the central concept of ICADEP and the follow-up programmes is to prepare and develop a highly profitable and socially responsible class of domestic medium and large-scale farmers, fishers and entrepreneurs that would fully mitigate the risk of the foreign investment exit. As elections draws nigh, the tendency is that donors may hold on to funds until after elections 97 Global rice price will be increasing Low/High The medium-term projections indicate stable global rice prices, production and consumption. This programme aims at development of a number of high-growth and high productivity enterprises who will have the potential to ensure rice self-sufficiency in SL in medium-term. In case of short-term fluctuations temporary price subsidising will be possible Fluctuation of cocoa prices Low/Low The long-term forecast for global cocoa price is positive. Temporary fluctuations are not expected to significantly reduce the profitability of Sierra Leonean exporters. Lack of MDAs and donor coordination High/High This risk will be mitigated through incorporation of common performance targets in MAFFS, MTI and MFMR Performance Plans and the leading role of the State House and PTFAG. GOSL will continue improving its transparency and accountability indicators to convince donors establish a unified PIU Lack of MDA capacity to implement the Programme High/Medium GOSL has reasonably educated human resources. One of ICADEP objectives is for MDAs to readjust the existing structures and HR to new functions. The donors will help with the necessary training and improve their coordination to make the MDAs project management task easier. Poor credit culture and low quality of bank portfolios High/Medium The risk is from medium to low because of low number of agricultural loans. The SL commercial banks have increasing number of NPLs. In this context, in the short term it is much more important to improve the banks‘ portfolio quality than extend more loans. BOSL shall strictly implement prudential controls over banks and MFIs and banks shall take legal action against NPL. On the other hand, MAFFS, MTI and MFMR will support developing good quality bankable projects. ICADEP will concentrate only on the poor farmers/fishers and/or large foreign investors High/High While it is important to support the poor (and this is what most donor focus on), the GOSL will also make sure that medium farmers/fishers will receive the government support understanding that agricultural growth for prosperity needs economy of scale and significant increase productivity and profitability. GOSL will be improving business climate for all business sizes and monitor large farms for the balance of economic and social successes and lessons learnt, as well as incentives efficiency. 98 Information and statistical systems become unsustainable High/Medium It is important that information and statistical systems developed within this Programme are properly institutionalized in the form of laws, regulation and operating instructions and become part of the GOSL routine operations. To this effect, Component IV will be predominantly funded from the GOSL budget and use donor money mainly for specialist expert support. Social or political unrest Medium/High The devastating Ebola impact may cause social or political unrest in the pre-election years. To mitigate this risk, GOSL will ensure maximum transparency in providing support to farmers, fishers and rural population and run an intensive information campaign on types of government support, achievements, problems and solution sensitization. Youth employment initiatives will have a particular emphasis in all Component activities and in the information campaigns. Insufficient funding of infrastructure projects Medium/High GOSL Government will seek public - private partnership with private investors. Targeting and elite capture risks Medium/Medium Information and sensitization of communities (during the trainings, through radio programmes) and implementing partners. Complaint mechanisms in place Audit, monitoring and evaluation, regular assessments of the targeting strategy Clear criteria of the beneficiaries selection Involvement of traditional and district authorities as well as the communities in the selection process of the beneficiaries Clear national criteria for medium and large enterprise support and M&E 99 Appendix 1. Main sectoral constraints as identified in the Agriculture Sector Review (2014) Summary of problem description as stated in the ASR (for a more detailed insight consult the ASR document): a) Governance x Land market remains non-transparent and complicated causing problems both to smallholders and big investors x Legal documents documenting title and certifying ownership to land is non existent x Decent labor standards remain unimplemented; x Lack of standards or quality certifications for agricultural crops x Coordination of various MDAs‘ efforts in such a multi-faceted sector as agriculture remains a challenge leading to duplication, lost opportunities and wasted resources x The Government and donors are overly focused on development of small subsistence farms representing 54% of rural households, and on issues related to big foreign investment, ignoring the ―middle of pyramid‖, i.e. SMEs involved in production, trading, financing and processing and linking the markets; x Problems related to illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing due to weak governance and the failure of the country‘s fisheries sector to meet its international responsibilities. x Inadequate forestry and wildlife sector policy to address governance and management issues in the sub sectors; b) Finance and administration x Weak banking infrastructure in the districts; high percentage of non-performing loans in commercial banks; low credit culture; lack of bankable projects x Administrative barriers for business and trade remain high with estimated loss of 1.5-2% of GDP and presenting a risk of crowding out investors x Farmers are generally resource poor and lack financial capacity to acquire basic inputs (fertilizers, seeds, pesticides etc) or pay for services (tractor, machinery hire) x Lack of farmer collateral to obtain credit c) Information management x No statistical data exist on SMEs in agriculture nor on the real levels of foreign and domestic investment preventing the Government from effective policy design and implementation for private sector development x Lack of comprehensive M&E related to government and donor funded projects x Extension services and R&D are weak and underfunded limiting the potential of VC actors to achieve the productivity potential and presenting high risks, particularly for livestock subsector d) Infrastructure x Very low utilization of water resources for Inland Valley irrigation x Lack and unreliability of electricity is a huge obstacle to agri-processing x Roads between urban and rural areas, particularly the agricultural productive regions, remain largely unpaved and of poor quality x Air and sea transportation are constrained by inadequate infrastructure at Lungi Airport and at the Queen Elizabeth Port 100 x Connections to neighboring countries are also limited x Limited storage and processing capacity and practices cause high post-harvest losses e) Vulnerability x Half of all farmers are smallholders. 98% of those annually experience extended hunger periods x Low or even no skilled workforce in all subsectors; x Youth have low levels of education and lack professional adequate skills x Young people do not have facilitated access in the sector and / or incentives x Women dominate the informal economy with x No social protection and increased vulnerability to poverty for women and youth; x Limited access of women to a whole range of critical productive assets and services; x Alarming rate of loss of biodiversity f) Food security and nutrition x Widespread malnutrition of children (18.7% underweight, 34.1% stunted and 6.9% wasted or severely wasted); x 45% of households are classified as food insecure facing seasonal food access issues; x Regularly occurring localized disasters such as drought, floods, insect attacks, landslides, bush fires and livestock diseases leading to food insecurity and malnutrition. g) Production and productivity x The average sector productivity is about 20%-25% of the maximum attainable yields (particularly for staple crops including rice) x Traditional farming systems are not competitive with modern large scale production and traditional livestock systems compete with traditional farming systems over resources (land and water) causing increasing tensions between crop and livestock farmers x Up to 50% of economic informality in the sector results in lost growth potential and persistent poverty x The low level of education and health prevent agriculture intensification and innovation x Women have not yet been able to achieve equitable political representation at different levels of government x On the other hand, the ―feminization‖ of agriculture and youth migration to urban areas set physical limits on extensive agriculture x Women market potential is huge which is demonstrated by market women. However, it is restrained by social and tradition norms 101 Appendix 2. Indicative ICADEP Budget by Activities Notes and Comments to the Indicative ICADEP Budget 1. The ICADEP Programme was designed for three fiscal years of 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022. However, the health crisis situation as of October 2014, the related reorientation of the government and donor resources to combat EVD and its consequences in 2014-2015, as well as the election year 2018 will potentially delay the launch and implementation of some activities (e.g. institutional reforms) to mid-2018. Quarterly Budget reviews and updates will be necessary alongside with standard M&E activities. 2. The Government investment in agriculture is based on the demonstrated capability of the GOSL to fulfill the Maputo Declaration commitment to spend 10% of the overall government spending on agriculture. In fact, the spending on the sector went down from 9% in 2009 to 6.6% in 2012. However, if the Government is to implement the Agenda for Prosperity, it is to come back to the Maputo Declaration commitment. In absolute figures, the spending should be at least an equivalent of USD 27-30 million yearly, with recurrent, donor and infrastructure spending excluded. However, it would be fair to include the tax and other duties exempted to donors and investors. 3. With reference to the SME legislation, statistical data development, RIA and coordination measures the existing recurrent budgets of all key government agencies involved are proposed to cover the major part of the expense (with few exceptions where donors can help with funding of highly specialized international experts, e.g. Regulatory Impact Assessment). 4. The Local Content Policy should be applied to all donor and NGO projects. The employment of foreign workers and specialists must be justified. If not stipulated by intergovernmental aid agreements, the foreign personnel of aid projects should be subject to the Sierra Leone tax regulations. There must be a requirement that at least 60% of any donor project budget shall be spent in Sierra Leone and for Sierra Leoneans. 5. The donor contributions were estimated based on the aggregated data of the AgPER presentation on 30 June 2014. Upon finalization of a separate ongoing Agriculture Public Expenditure Review, it will be necessary to verify/adjust both the government budget and the donor funding levels. The donor commitment to the Plan will be secured by MAFFS through consultations with key donors. 6. The Budget includes some elements of humanitarian aid in the form of direct and free food supplies to support vulnerable groups or subsidized agricultural inputs for revitalization of the agricultural activities any other expected humanitarian and emergency aid. 7. The private sector contribution is mainly the investment in the sector: production, processing, out-grower schemes, trade, etc. 8. The mechanisms for the ICADEP funding can include government budget expenditure, direct budget support, sector-wide support, programme/project support, direct private investment and credit. GOSL is considering options to optimize the programme coordination, management and funding management efforts through establishing a unified Project Implementation Unit and account. 102 Appendix 3. Decent Work Agenda The International Labor Organization (ILO) formulated the concept of decent work and developed a decent work agenda. The decent work agenda rests on four pillars, namely employment creation and enterprise development (Pillar I); social protection (Pillar II); standards and rights at work (Pillar III); and governance and social dialogue (Pillar IV). Decent work has been defined by the ILO and endorsed by the international community as being productive work for women and men in conditions of freedom, equity, security and human dignity. Decent work involves opportunities for work that is productive and delivers a fair income; provides security in the workplace and social protection for workers and their families; offers better prospects for personal development and encourages social integration; gives people the freedom to express their concerns, to organize and to participate in decisions that affect their lives; and guarantees equal opportunities and equal treatment for all. Given the nature of decent work as universal aspiration of people everywhere, the conceptual definition applies to all human beings, all countries and all socio-economic contexts. To facilitate the operationalization of the decent work concept to rural areas, and the agricultural sector in particular, the FAO developed an applied definition of Decent Rural Employment (DRE) with 6 main priority dimensions (see box below). Priority Dimensions to Achieve Decent Work in Rural Areas 1) Respect the four core labour standards Effective abolition of child labour Elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labour Freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining Elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation 2) Provide an adequate living income 3) Entail an adequate degree of employment security and stability 4) Adopt minimum occupational safety and health (OSH) measures, which are adapted to address sector-specific risks and hazards; 5) Avoid excessive working hours and allows sufficient time for rest 6) Promote access to adapted technical and vocational training Full info on the applied definition of decent rural employment: http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user upload/fao ilo/pdf/DRE Applied Definition.pdf http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user upload/fao ilo/pdf/DRE Applied Definition.pdf 103 Appendix 4. Gross Domestic Product at Current Price (Million Leones) by Sector 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 1. Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries 3,361,971 4,007,950 4,591,100 5,429,597 6,986,660 10,215,234 11,724,453 1.1 Crops 2,218,474 2,669,483 3,133,423 3,508,077 4,349,157 5,020,506 6,292,560 7,165,022 1.11. Rice 854,546 1,166,414 1,451,411 1,607,426 2,028,262 2,164,606 2,639,445 3,088,453 1.12. Fruits and Vegetables 274,649 323,085 361,644 436,477 529,950 617,938 695,991 777,288 1.13. Cassava 402,572 382,575 466,829 542,114 665,472 806,662 1,319,634 1,522,369 1.14. Groundnut 435,821 495,757 496,507 506,282 617,072 750,199 803,593 848,965 1.15. Maize 94,197 106,003 124,345 151,863 196,204 270,768 304,914 347,954 1.16. Sweet Potato 38,896 35,424 39,816 40,261 57,019 118,113 203,017 231,049 1.17. Other crops 117,794 160,225 192,870 223,654 255,178 292,219 325,965 348,943 1.2. Livestock 163,768 185,182 204,849 294,397 373,838 463,642 509,855 539,209 1.3. Forestry 425,464 522,114 611,512 705,201 975,152 1,253,047 1,460,614 1,560,445 1.4. Fisheries 554,264 631,171 641,315 921,922 1,288,514 1,618,313 1,952,204 2,459,777 2. Industry 622,787 585,221 543,946 798,027 1,007,125 2,400,415 4,728,821 6,147,497 2.1. Mining and Quarrying 326,583 265,961 240,340, 410,642 528,777 1,831,856 4,130,680 5,490,088 2.11. Diamond 232,788 183,339 165,275 281,067 336,055 437,296 500,794 541,612 2.12. Iron Ore 29,933 1,129,025 3,366,239 4,733,198 2.13. Other minerals (rutile, bauxite, gold, etc) 58,878 55,121 50,274 87,415 112,381 199,941 188,528 133,317 2.14. Quarrying 34,918 27,501 24,791 42,160 50,408 65,594 75,119 81,242 2.2. Manufacturing and Handcraft 159,175 182,041 176,800 223,299 288,488 333,221 347,271 375,414 2.3. Electricity and Water Supply 22,237 16,912 17,512 24,443 30,237 37,805 43,890 60,457 2.31. Electricity 12,350 8,558 9,272 12,484 16,196 16,910 18,632 29,511 2.32. Water 9,887 8,354 8,240 11,960 14,040 20,895 25,259 30,946 2.4. Construction 114,791 120,307 109,294 139,643 159,623 197,533 206,980 221,537 3. Services 2,237,853 2,622,216 2,874,672 3,616,772 4,466,937 5,313,745 5,919,626 6,409,560 3.1. Trade and Tourism 562,171 655,359 738,286 941,678 1,206,762 1,454,240 1,684,715 1,872,958 3.11. Wholesale and Retail 534,948 626,234 709,290 905,194 1,157,426 1,386,646 1,610,887 1,792,717 104 Source: Statistics Sierra Leone. https://www.statistics.sl/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/annual statistical digest 2007 2013.pdf 3.12. Hotels and Restaurant 27,223 29,125 28,996 36,485 49,335 67,594 73,828 80,241 3.2. Transport, Storage and Communication 390,587 473,909 528,442 586,426 688,455 733,836 802,747 881,132 3.21. Transport 222,123 268,643 298,256 329,473 389,236 418,871 458,229 504,043 3.22. Communication 168,464 205,266 230,186 256,953 299,218 314,964 344,518 377,089 3.3. Finance, Insurance and Real Estate 327,860 359,467 384,955 479,134 583,534 684,079 751,284 820,567 3.31. Banking 100,971 113,506 137,786 171,506 207,396 246,566 274,141 300,114 3.32. Insurance 44,368 50,794 30,783 45,393 56,503 63,278 69,283 76,992 3.33. Real Estate 151,986 178,790 200,128 241,540 293,266 341,957 371,352 402,116 3.34. Other Financial Institutions 30,535 16,377 16,258 20,696 26,368 32,277 36,507 41,344 3.4. Administration and Public Services 258,301 259,292 292,214 421,261 582,853 768,132 871,506 1,002,069 3.5. Other Services 257,999 303,499 339,721 410,018 497,825 580,479 602,197 642,862 3.6. Education 137,794 214,918 203,609 237,666 290,722 350,979 379,766 411,435 3.7. Health 231,904 257,441 273,170 437,171 479,580 538,252 564,594 586,240 3.8. NPISH 71,237 98,331 114,276 103,417 137,208 203,748 262,817 192,296 4. FISIM 73,826 80,766 88,190 93,939 96,803 102,351 108,431 115,087 5. Total Value Added at Basic Prices (1+2+3) 5,730,367 6,038,914 6,231,915 6,565,135 6,957,146 8,051,014 9,727,633 10,879,748 6. Taxes less Subsidies on Products 303,418 319,755 329,974 347,618 367,675 387,306 408,611 431,231 7. Gross Domestic Product and Market Prices (5+6) 6,033,785 6,358,669 6,561,889 6,912,753 7,324,821 8,438,320 10,136,243 11,310,979 https://www.statistics.sl/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/annual statistical digest 2007 2013.pdf 105 Appendix 5. Recent Production and Productivity of Key Agricultural Products Crop Rice Sweet Potato Cassava Maize Sorghum Sesame Cacao Coffee Oil Palm Cashew Pepper Groundnut Year Area (ha) 2014 712,498 19,565 180,493 9,904 63,714 17,501 110,138 51,238 86,265 3,822 23,374 37,759 2015 864,574 21,040 201,621 10,766 70,115 18,837 117,550 55,985 119,614 4,174 25,739 50,889 2016 936,774 16,559 195,824 5,625 75,547 20,275 133,314 64,854 648,570 4,682 12,133 85,908 2017 983,613 20,525 215,407 6,188 83,102 22,303 139,980 68,097 680,999 4,916 13,346 94,499 Year Productivity (mt/ha) 2014 1.15 7.10 12.84 2.10 0.65 0.30 0.40 1.70 7.50 0.36 0.26 0.61 2015 1.15 7.30 12.67 2.10 0.65 0.30 0.27 1.71 7.50 0.08 0.26 0.50 2016 1.24 9.08 15.70 2.23 0.65 0.31 0.43 1.71 7.50 0.34 0.96 0.77 2017 1.30 9.53 16.47 2.24 0.68 0.32 0.45 1.80 7.88 0.36 1.01 0.81 Year Production (mt) 2014 816,503 138,27 2,316,811 20,812 41,414 5,250 44,055 87,105 646,988 1,376 6,077 22,882 2015 995,360 153,298 2,557,588 22,619 45,554 5,775 48,461 95,816 897,103 1,514 6,686 25,169 2016 1,160,646 150,312 3,073,121 12,554 49,106 6,215 56,836 115,482 4,864,275 1,605 12,841 66,083 2017 1,279,612 195,600 3,547,746 14,479 56,509 6,852 57, 672 122,328 5,362,863 1,769 13,480 76,544 Source: PEMSD/MAFFS Annual Yield Studies for Food Crops 106 Appendix 6. Distribution of Livestock Production (Number of heads) by Districts (2015) Source: PEMSD/MAFFS Appendix 7. Production (Number of heads) of Key Livestock Livestock Cattle Sheep Goat Pigs Chicken Ducks Year 2011 568,700 750,200 883,300 52,100 10,406,000 882,768 2012 625,570 825,220 971,630 57,310 11,446,800 971,044 2013 688,127 907,742 1,068,793 63,041 12,591,260 1.068,147 2014 241,153 945,047 1,538,557 122,925 12,781,575 1,122,301 2015 245,736 963,001 1,567,789 125,064 14,721,718 1,143,625 Source: PEMSD/MAFFS No District Cattle % Sheep % Goats % Pigs % Chicken % Ducks % 1 Bo 15,376 6.3 35,872 3.7 100,781 6.4 10,208 8.2 932,509 6.3 81,650 7.1 2 Bombali 26,681 10.9 51,444 5.3 117,366 7.5 2,705 2.2 919,064 6.2 79,168 6.9 3 Bonthe 3,166 1.3 14,350 1.5 33,728 2.2 5,462 4.4 585,364 4.0 20,745 1.8 4 Kailahun 12,936 5.3 106,075 11.0 173,860 11.1 10,350 8.3 903,470 6.1 154,714 13.5 5 Kambia 27,377 11.1 172,691 17.9 192,172 12.3 2,931 2.3 703,470 4.8 94,243 8.2 6 Kenema 3,081 1.3 46,218 4.8 55,458 3.5 4,033 3.2 789,313 5.4 129,402 11.3 7 Koinadugu 61,561 25.1 101,806 10.6 142,940 9.1 5,612 4.5 862,146 5.9 72,371 6.3 8 Kono 51,785 21.1 83,195 8.6 170,211 10.9 4,471 3.6 813,872 5.5 81,498 7.1 9 Moyamba 8,999 3.7 37,120 3.9 104,800 6.7 13,190 10.5 763,032 5.2 83,990 7.3 10 Port Loko 17,021 6.9 163,578 17.0 205,356 13.1 9,758 7.8 960,297 6.5 88,200 7.7 11 Pujehun 3,631 1.5 22,824 2.4 22,046 1.4 5,236 4.2 392,415 2.7 52,132 4.6 12 Tonkolili 13,467 5.5 117,352 12.2 205,856 13.1 11,837 9.5 886,996 6.0 105,333 9.2 13 W/Area 655 0.3 10,476 1.1 43,215 2.8 39,271 31.4 5,209,770 35.4 100,179 8.8 National 245,736 100 963,001 100 1,567,789 100 125,064 100 14,721,718 100 1,143,625 100 107 Appendix 8. Trend in Rice Production and Productivity, 2001-2017 Year Area (Ha) Productivity (Mt/Ha) Production (Mt) 2001 258,850 1.20 310,620 2002 343,142 1.23 422,065 2003 356,506 1.25 445,633 2004 426,772 1.27 542,000 2005 427,907 1.29 552,000 2006 422,556 1.33 562,000 2007 432,356 1.36 588,004 2008 475,592 1.43 680,097 2009 499,111 1.78 888,417 2010 549,022 1.87 1,026,671 2011 603,924 1.87 1,129,338 2012 717,872 1.59 1,141,417 2013 671,422 1.87 1,255,559 2014 712,498 1.15 816,503 2015 864,574 1.15 995,360 2016 936,774 1.24 1,160,646 2017 983,613 1.30 1,279,612 Source: PEMSD. Appendix 9. Trend in Cassava Production and Productivity, 2001-2017 Year Area (Ha) Productivity (Mt/Ha) Production (Mt) 2001 61,768 12.00 741,216 2002 68,909 13.00 895,817 2003 83,936 13.00 1,091,168 2004 134,404 13.00 1,758,004 2005 175,923 13.00 2,287,000 2006 228,700 13.00 2,973,100 2007 297,310 13.00 3,865,030 2008 312,176 13.00 4,048,288 2009 327,785 13.00 4,261,205 2010 344,175 13.00 4,697,992 2011 361,384 13.00 4,474,275 2012 379,453 13.00 4,932,892 2013 398,426 13.65 5,438,515 2014 180,493 12.84 2,316,811 2015 201,621 12.67 2,557,588 2016 195,824 15.70 3,073,121 2017 215,407 16.47 3,547,746 Source: PEMSD. 108 Appendix 10. Trend in Cacao Production and Productivity, 2001-2017 Year Area (Ha) Productivity (Mt/Ha) Production (Mt) 2001 30,333 0.36 10,920 2002 35,135 0.37 13,000 2003 42,105 0.38 16,000 2004 49,762 0.42 20,900 2005 57,226 0.42 24,035 2006 73,576 0.42 30,902 2007 84,578 0.42 35,523 2008 97,265 0.42 40,851 2009 106,992 0.87 93,083 2010 117,691 0.91 107,099 2011 123,576 0.91 112,450 2012 129,755 0.96 123,981 2013 136,243 1.01 137,333 2014 110,138 0.40 44,055 2015 117,550 0.27 48,461 2016 133,314 0.43 57,672 2017 139,980 0.45 63,583 Source: PEMSD. 109 Appendix 11. Production of Marine Capture Fisheries Catch (MT) - 1971-2013 Source: MFMR Statistics Unit. Year Industrial Fisheries Artisanal Fisheries National Total % Industrial Contribution % Artisanal Contribution 1971 7836 22764 30600 25.6 74.4 1972 7881 43129 51010 15.4 84.6 1973 14031 52669 66700 21.0 79.0 1974 8274 59465 67739 12.2 87.8 1975 6652 61945 68597 9.7 90.3 1976 19022 50275 69297 27.4 72.6 1977 33361 46772 80133 41.6 58.4 1978 75865 41881 117746 64.4 35.6 1979 112168 45166 157334 71.3 28.7 1980 122862 31544 154406 79.6 20.4 1981 122862 31600 154462 79.5 20.5 1982 100820 34616 135436 74.4 25.6 1983 78851 47247 126098 62.5 37.5 1984 135044 43272 178316 75.7 24.3 1985 156065 43704 199769 78.1 21.9 1986 156702 44142 200844 78.0 22.0 1987 182100 44500 226600 80.4 19.6 1988 176000 46350 222350 79.2 20.8 1989 184520 48200 232720 79.3 20.7 1990 180000 50000 230000 78.3 21.7 1991 75237 48071 123308 61.0 39.0 1992 31424 47477 78901 39.8 60.2 1993 21828 46928 68756 31.7 68.3 1994 18341 46779 65120 28.2 71.8 1995 16100 46708 62808 25.6 74.4 1996 16597 46673 63270 26.2 73.8 1997 11137 46656 57793 19.3 80.7 1998 14190 46648 60838 23.3 76.7 1999 15569 46420 61989 25.1 74.9 2000 14345 45910 60255 23.8 76.2 2001 22598 39950 62548 36.1 63.9 2002 13595 55659 69254 19.6 80.4 2003 17165 65458 82623 20.8 79.2 2004 14237 106216 120453 11.8 88.2 2005 15797 116614 132411 11.9 88.1 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 13645 15863 19061 19658 20421 23594 6816 21661 120490 126597 171126 243633 0 0 0 0 134135 142378 190187 263291 20421 23594 6816 21661 10.2 11.1 10.0 7.5 100 100 100 100 89.8 88.9 90.0 92.5 0 0 0 0