Ministry of Food Production, Land and Marine Affairs (MFPLMA) Strategic Plan 2011-2015

Ministry of Food Production, Land and Marine Affairs (MFPLMA) Strategic Plan 2011-2015 March 2011 1 Ministry of Food Production, Land and Marine Affairs (MFPLMA) Strategic Plan 2011-2015 March 2011 2 Table of Contents Contents 1.0 Foreword ........................................................................................................................................... 4 2.0 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................... 5 Chapter 1: The Organisation ................................................................................................................. 10 Chapter 2: The Strategic Planning Exercise .......................................................................................... 17 Chapter 3: The Strategic Framework .................................................................................................... 20 Chapter 4: Strategic Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 22 Chapter 5: Goals and Objectives ........................................................................................................... 33 Chapter 6: Organisational Strategy and Action Plan ............................................................................ 36 Chapter 7: Conclusion – Way Forward ................................................................................................. 43 List of Appendices ....................................................................................................................................... 44 Appendix 1 Action Plan 2011-2015 ......................................................................................................... 45 Appendix II: - Legal and Regulatory Framework: MFPLMA ................................................................. 46 Appendix III: - Policy Framework ...................................................................................................... 47 Appendix IV: - Other Relevant Information ...................................................................................... 54 Appendix V : Sample Unit/Division/Entity Strategic Plan Format aligned to the MFPLMA Overall Framework .............................................................................................................................................. 68 3 Acronyms ADB- Agricultural Development Bank ASTT- Agricultural Society of Trinidad and Tobago CCGA- Cooperative Citrus Growers Association CCIB- Cocoa and Coffee Industry Board CFA- Cattle Farmers Association CFTDI- Caribbean Fisheries Training and Development Institute CGA- Citrus Growers Association CRFM- CARICOM Regional Fisheries Mechanism ECIAF- Eastern Caribbean Institute for Agriculture and Forestry EMA - Environmental Management Agency EMBDC- Estate Management and Business Development Corporation IDB- Inter-American Development Bank IMA- Institute of Marine Affairs LLPB- Livestock and Livestock Products Board NAMDEVCO- National Agricultural Marketing and Development Corporation NFFA- National Food-Crops Farmers Association NIHERST- National Institute for Higher Education in Research, Science & Technology SFDC- Seafood Industry Development Committee, TTABA- Trinidad and Tobago AgriBusiness Association UTT- University of Trinidad and Tobago 4 1.0 Foreword The Ministry of Food Production, Land and Marine Affairs acknowledges with deep appreciation the financial and technical assistance provided by the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO) in the preparation of its Strategic Plan 2011- 2015. The Ministry is also heartened to note the close collaboration of IICA in this exercise. The completion of the Plan is an initial and essential step in the mission to transform the Ministry into the effective vehicle worthy of leading the challenge of revitalizing agriculture, fisheries and food systems in Trinidad and Tobago. Clearly, much would depend on the direction and guidance provided in diligently pursuing the initiatives outlined in the document; how quickly and effectively we communicate with our internal (staff) and external (farmers, fishers et al) clients on the details of the Plan; and how aggressively we develop and nurture our strategic partnerships. As Minister, I take personal responsibility for ensuring that this Strategic Plan is seen as an accountability tool for the Ministry and that it remains a living document guiding the preparation of our annual programme of work and budget, periodically reviewed and updated through consultations with our stakeholders. 5 2.0 Executive Summary This Strategic Plan serves as the framework for the MFPLMA to think and work strategically in order to fulfill its mandate and become an adaptive institution that continuously improves its performance and service delivery. It was developed on the basis of consultations with both internal and external stakeholders of the Ministry. Chapter 1 indicates the current portfolio responsibility of the Ministry, defines its organizational structure and identifies the affiliate state entities responsible to the Minister. The Ministry comprises twelve technical divisions the major roles and functions of which include:  development of sectoral policies, plans and programmes and monitoring and evaluating implementation;  production and distribution of high quality planting material and conservation of germplasm;  promotion of animal health and disease control, distribution of genetically improved livestock and provision of specialized veterinary services;  capacity building of farmers through agricultural extension services;  fisheries extension advice, conservation and management of living marine resources and enforcement of fisheries regulations;  management of the Botanic Gardens, Queen’s Park Savannah and promotion of ornamental and environmental horticulture;  provision of technical advisory services and conduct of physical infrastructural works related to o-farm irrigation and drainage, access road development;  state land management including land acquisition and distribution;  provision of wide=ranging technical agricultural advisory services and training to farmers and households;  undertake relevant agricultural research and development of technological packages for increasing agricultural production and productivity;  provision of up-to-date and authoritative maps, charts and land and sea information;  review and update of legislation. Chapter 2 confirms that the rationale for the strategic planning exercise is rooted in the mandate to all Ministries “ to develop … Strategic Plans to achieve Government’s overall goal of ‘Prosperity for All’.” However, it emphasizes that the Ministry fully appreciates the value of adopting and applying strategic thinking and planning concepts as it strives for institutional effectiveness and relevance in the dynamic environment in which agriculture and the food system operate. The Chapter identifies the main elements of the strategic planning process as:  the preparation of a Sector Policy and Strategy Framework to guide the strategic planning exercise;  internal discussions with MFPLMA and its affiliate agencies to solicit buy-in and validate sectoral goals; 6  internal and external Stakeholder Consultations, a critical aspect of the participatory approach, involving key stakeholders;  the mechanics of plan preparation;  validation with senior management Chapter 3 outlines the strategic framework. The following Vision Statement is developed: To be a client oriented, performance driven, environmentally responsible organization delivering integrated services aligned to a changing food and agriculture system The Ministry’s mandate is defined as: MFPLMA will foster the sustainable use and conservation of agriculture and fisheries resources through appropriate science and technologies, knowledge management and economic integration that enables producers to realize profits and consumers to secure food and nutrition requirements. The Organizational Values which govern the behaviour of staff and the Ministry itself are identified as: 1 Leadership and stewardship: articulating and implementing government policy and regional and international obligations; and motivating and empowering employees clients and stakeholders; 2 Equitable and fair decision making: respecting the needs and situations of employees, clients and stakeholders and providing opportunities for professional advancement; 3 Integrity and professionalism: respecting institutional procedures and processes, and avoiding conflicts of interest at all costs; and building a culture of productivity and commitment to work; 4 Objective and evidence-based: planning and executing public policies, strategies and resources based solely in terms of the public interest;; 5 Accountable and transparent: sharing information that can impact stakeholders and employees decision-making and actions and open to change; 6 Effective and entrepreneurial: ensuring that services to clients and stakeholders are designed and delivered in the most innovative, equitable and effective manner; 7 Inclusive and participatory: engaging employees, clients and stakeholders to ensure full representation, consultations and communication. The Strategic Analysis in Chapter 4 presents the results of the MFPLMA SWOT Analysis, stakeholder consultations and institutional analysis. The following main conclusions are drawn:  the stakeholders generally agree that the MFPLMA: has an important role to play in facilitating the development of agriculture and food production for the nation, however organisational deficiencies limit the effectiveness with which clients and other stakeholders are supported and serviced; must be more proactive in its engagements with its clients and other stakeholders to ensure that the Ministry’s interventions are relevant and efficiently delivered; 7 needs to substantially strengthen and expand its ICT platform to enhance effectiveness of internal communication and coordination and as well, enable greater access to participation of stakeholders in consultations and decision-making processes; needs to develop more formalized arrangements (MOUs etc) to contract services and support of implementing partners  the MFPLMA employees, themselves: recognise the need for institutional alignment and operational strengthening in a number of areas, if the Organisation is to be a respected and effective facilitator of agriculture and food production activities in the country; recognise the importance of building inter-Ministry/Agency coordination and commitment for more effective collaboration in areas that impact the performance of the Ministry; the need to urgently upgrade its ICT platform as an essential prerequisite for effective stakeholder engagement, service delivery excellence, timely decision-making and for building a platform for change management.  the MFPLMA entities recognise some critical areas to be addressed, chief among these are the urgent need to: provide a policy and strategic framework within which the agencies missions and activities can be based, aligned for greater relevance and effectiveness with enhanced opportunities for inter-agency collaboration; clarify the governance and coordination structures between the MFPLMA, its entities and with the THA in order to build a cohesive development framework, enhance client relations and deliver efficient support and services. This will require a review of institutional mandates and performance with a view to simplifying and increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of the institutional landscape and minimising overlaps and duplication. Chapter 5 speaks to the goals and objectives underlying the Strategic Plan. Goa 1: Respect for agriculture and the environment, empowerment of stakeholders and building of social capital for sustainable agriculture and rural development. Objectives:  To strengthen stakeholders’ capacity for organisational development, representation and engagement in public-private sector consultations and partnerships so that government policies and interventions are stakeholder driven, relevant and sustainable and encouraging of woman and youth involvement;  To strengthen and promote nature conservation and in particular, conservation of biodiversity and ecosystems Goal 2 : Expanded opportunities for productive employment and improved social conditions for small-scale producers, including women and youth. 8 Objectives:  To foster respect for agriculture and the land and facilitate the development of sustainable livelihoods and market opportunities for subsistence and small-scale commercial producers;  To explicitly develop livelihoods initiatives to accommodate women and youth Goal 3: Efficient, profitable and competitive agri-business enterprises and industries Objectives:  To create a results-oriented research, innovation and technology development institutional framework that enables the science and technology potential and drives productivity, profitability and sustainability of small-scale and commercial stakeholders;  To secure the policy and space for traditional crops with important socio-economic roles in rural and industry development;  To foster innovation in process, product and industry development for the creation and expansion of a wider range of competitive products and services utilising both local farm produce and outputs from agriculture joint ventures with other CARICOM countries;  To strengthen technical capacity and institutional processes to design, develop and effectively deliver an integrated package of critical support and services to facilitate implementation of the crop, fisheries and livestock development programmes that add value to stakeholders’ efforts to improve their operations Goal 4: Transparent, coordinated and results-driven agricultural institutional framework Objective: To transform the MFPLMA into a modern, client responsive and effective institution by streamlining its institutional structure and strengthening operating norms and procedures and coordination mechanisms with Entities to enhance its impact on the agriculture, fisheries and food production system Goal 5: Securing the interest of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food Production Objective: To strike an appropriate balance between national and regional/international development priorities and initiatives in order to add value to agricultural development and food security in Trinidad and Tobago while strengthening regional integration. All Ministries are required to include the following three mandatory goals: a. Effective and Efficient Institutions b. Service Delivery Excellence c. Management Performance These are fully incorporated in Goal 4 above (under development Pillar 6 – Good Governance) and highlighted in the Summary Action Plan, Table 4. The specific measures and interventions required are detailed in Appendix I, the Action Plan. 9 Chapter 6 defines the two-pronged approach the Ministry will pursue to give effect to the Strategic Plan: i. The Sectoral Strategy focussing on agriculture and the food production sector, placing high priority on: a) the Social and Human Dimension, treated through an integrated Programme for Food and Nutrition Security, encapsulating development Pillars 1 and 2; and b) the Competitiveness and Economic Growth Dimension, reflecting the objectives of development Pillar 5.; ii. The Institutional Strategy, focussing on MFPLMA, which speaks to institutional strengthening as key for managing and implementing the Sectoral Strategy. This aspect emphasizes two development imperatives: a) Good Governance and Institutional Transformation, in keeping with development Pillar 6, and b) Foreign Policy, as reflected in development Pillar 7. This Chapter also underscores the need for developing a Sector Policy and Strategy to guide development over the medium term and for strengthening the Ministry as the main instrument to oversee the revitalization of the sector. Change Management will be an essential part of the process for implementing the Strategic Plan of. An important aspect of developing the Strategic Plan was the process itself, built on consultations with stakeholders and MFPLMA employees and entities. Target-specific and deeper consultations will continue to play a critical role in the process of promoting understanding and acceptance of the Strategic Plan and strengthening processes for internalisation and change management. Change management will be especially important to the process of streamlining the functional Divisions and Units of the MFPLMA and as well in aligning the mandates and activities of the affiliate Entities into one National Agriculture and Food Security Action Framework. The detailed Action Plan, is elaborated in Appendix I. The strategic goals and programmatic interventions are identified and organized within the framework of the following Development Pillars: 1 - People-centred Development 2 - Poverty Reduction and Social Justice 5 - A More Diversified Knowledge-Intensive Economy 6 - Good Governance 7 - Foreign Policy This Strategic Plan provides the medium-term framework for developing the annual programme of work and budget of the Ministry and its affiliate entities. It will also be the basis for establishing robust performance appraisal and monitoring and evaluation systems. As an important first step, the divisions of the Ministry will be mandated to develop three (3) to five (5) year operational plans providing technical details and targets in accordance with the template provided in Appendix V. For the affiliate entities, a review and update of existing strategic plans will be required. This package of mutually reinforcing initiatives will contribute to a much more coherent and coordinated institutional support arrangement for the agriculture and food sector. Further critical and urgent actions emerging from the analysis include the imperative to: 10 a. Commission the Sectoral Policy and Strategy; b. Undertake an in-depth analysis and review of the existing sectoral governance structure – MFPLMA and its entities – with a view to effect better alignment of institutional arrangements and relationships; c. Examine and address critical human resource and ICT issues which currently constrain institutional performance; and d. Establish a Change Management Team to roll out the Strategic Plan throughout the Ministry to effectively bring on board ALL staff, forging a cohesive team to meet the challenges of revitalizing the sector. Chapter 1: The Organisation This chapter defines the management structure –( administrative and technical) of the Ministry of Food Production, Land and Marine Affairs (MFPLMA and its affiliate entities based on its current portfolio. 1.1 Current Portfolio of the Ministry 1.1.1 Assignment of Responsibility to the Minister of Food Production, Land and Marine Affairs The Organisation was renamed the Ministry of Food Production, Land and Marine Affairs (MFPLMA) in June 2010. It is the official public sector agency responsible for leading and managing implementation of government policy for agricultural development in Trinidad and Tobago. The Ministry has been assigned specific portfolio responsibilities as follows1:  Agricultural Extension Services  Agricultural Finance and Credit (Policy)  Agricultural Infrastructure  Agricultural Land Development, Distribution and Land Regularization  Agricultural Marketing  Agricultural Policy and Planning  Agricultural Research  Animal Health and Protection  Apiculture  Botanic Gardens  Crop Production (Food and Fibre)  Horticulture  Hydrographic Surveys  Lands and Surveys  Livestock Production  Marine Fisheries and Aquaculture  Plant Health and Protection 1 Trinidad and Tobago Gazette (Extraordinary) Vol. 49, No. 99, 9th August 2010 – Assignment of Responsibility to Ministers 11  Rural Development (Agriculture) The organization structure for providing the technical services required under the portfolio constitutes the following division/units. (See Figure 1 - Organizational Chart) 1. Office of the Chief Technical Officer (Agriculture) responsible for overseeing and ensuring that the agricultural technical support services and functions of the Ministry are integrated and coordinated for effective delivery. 2. Agricultural Planning Division: contributes to the development of overall national and sectoral policies and plans; coordinates and oversees the determination of a consistent set of goals and objectives for agricultural development and the formulation, evaluation and implementation of concomitant sectoral policies, plans, programmes and projects; 3. Agricultural Services Division: produces and distributes high quality planting material for the farming community and public and is responsible for conservation of strategic germ plasm; 4. Animal Production and Health Division: responsible for development, promotion of animal health and disease control, multiplication and distribution of genetically improved livestock, provision of specialized and clinical veterinary services to livestock farmers; 5. Extension, Training and Information Services Division: promotes capacity building and empowerment of crop and livestock farmers and households by developing and providing high quality training material and courses through an extension service which is client-oriented and responsive to changing needs and circumstances; 6. Fisheries Division: advises on fisheries development policy; provides fisheries extension services and training to fishermen, marketers and aquaculturists on fishing gear, equipment and method and fish handling and processing; conservation; assists in the management of the living marine resources of the EEZ and administers and contributes to the enforcement of fisheries regulations in accordance with the governing legislation; 7. Horticultural Services Division: manages the Botanic Gardens, Queen’s Park Savannah, develops and promotes ornamental and environmental horticulture and provides outdoor landscape advisory services; 8. Land and Water Development Division: acquires, develops and provides relevant engineering inputs and agricultural engineering advisory services and undertakes, on an appropriate scale, physical infrastructural works for the Ministry and the farming, forestry and fishing communities in drainage and irrigation, land development and access roads; agricultural mechanization structures; 9. Land Management Division: manages state lands, including reserved and designated lands; assists with land location and mapping; undertakes land allocation and distribution and land acquisition for government purposes; 10. Regional Administrations: North and South (two divisions) service the needs of the farming communities in their respective regions by delivering a coordinated package of technical advisory services, utilizing a team approach; wide-ranging training for capacity development; and by actively soliciting concerns, ideas, responses and suggestions of the client communities to influence development of policies and programmes; 12 11. Research Division: contributes to increasing agricultural production and productivity through conduct and wider application of relevant applied and adaptive research in livestock, crop production and crop protection, development of technological packages, technical support and guidance on adoption of new technologies and the formulation of appropriate production policies to facilitate increased competitiveness and trade in crop and livestock products consistent with WTO Agreement; 12. Survey and Mapping Division: adopts and applies new technologies for providing up-to date and authoritative maps, charts and land and sea information, in conventional and progressively in digital form to underpin national economic growth and development, satisfying the needs of Government, the general public and the private sector. The administrative management structure of the Ministry covers the following functional areas: 1. Central Administration Services, provides support services to all divisions in the areas of finance and accounting, property management and security services thereby facilitating the smooth operational functioning of the Ministry in the pursuit of its goals; 2. Human Resources Division, oversees the human resources development and management function of the entire Ministry, ensuring an organization appropriately staffed to discharge its mandate; 3. Legal Unit, reviews and updates existing and develops new legislation to meet the changing requirements for promoting sustainable agricultural development and food production; provides legal advice to the Ministry as required; 4. Information Technology Unit, develops, manages and services the Ministry’s information communication technology platform ensuring information lubricates the Ministry’s communication and decision-making processes; 5. Corporate Communications Unit, develops, coordinates and executes the Ministry’s public education and information programme, all Ministerial events (including tours, meetings and courtesy calls on the Minister); 6. Internal Audit, appraises the Permanent Secretary of the performance of the Ministry’s financial management and procurement processes and activities, advising on compliance with government procedures and legislation. There is no exact mapping between the portfolio areas allocated to the Ministry and the functional units defined in its organizational structure. Parastatal agencies have been established to fill the functional gaps. While these entities do not fall directly within the organisational structure of the Ministry, they form part of the wider institutional framework developed to service the sector, operating under the purview of the Minister.. In addition, the Minister has certain responsibilities entrusted to him through law including plant and animal health protection, conservation of forests including wildlife, protection of marine resources, promotion and regulation of agricultural marketing and credit, prevention of praedial larceny and improved security of land tenure. A list of major relevant legislation is provided in Appendix II. 13 13 [[CChhaapptteerr 11 –– TThhee OOrrggaanniissaattiioonn] 14 FIGURE 1: ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE OF THE MINISTRY OF FOOD PRODUCTION, LAND AND MARINE AFFAIRS (MFPLMA) COMMUNICATIONS UNIT INTERNAL AUDIT LEGAL UNIT Horticultural Services & Botanic Gardens Agricultural Planning Division (Programmes & Projects IDF) Fisheries Division DEPUTY PERMANENT SECRETARY DEPUTY PERMANENT SECRETARY Central Administrative Services (Security, Administration, Property Management, Finance and Accounting Information Technology Unit Survey Mapping Division Land Management Division Human Resource Division HONOURABLE MINISTER (HM) PERMANENT SECRETARY (PS) CHIEF TECHNICAL OFFICER Research Division Land & Water Development Division Animal Production & Health Agricultural Services Extension Training & Information Division Regional Administration North Regional Administration South [[CChhaapptteerr 11 –– TThhee OOrrggaanniissaattiioonn] 15 1.1.3 The Wider Institutional Framework Supporting the Minister of Food Production, Land and Marine Affairs The institutional structure of the MFPLMA is strengthened by the provision of a number of other bodies through which agricultural policy can be realised. (See Figure 2). These relate mainly to portfolio areas of Agricultural Finance and Credit (Policy), Agricultural Marketing, Agricultural Infrastructure and Rural Development (Agriculture). The various agencies and their unique institutional arrangements vis a vis the Ministry are:2 1. Statutory Boards and other Bodies  Agricultural Society of Trinidad and Tobago (ASTT)  Caribbean Agricultural Research and Development Institute (CARDI)  Cocoa and Coffee Industry Board (CCIB)  Livestock and Livestock Products Board (LLPB) 2. Wholly Owned Enterprises  Caroni (1975) Limited  Estate Management and Business Development Company Limited (EMBDC)  National Agricultural Marketing and Development Corporation (NAMDEVCO) 3. Majority Owned Enterprises  Agricultural Development Bank (ADB) 4. Minority Owned Enterprises  Caribbean Food Corporation (CFC) Amendment is required with respect to two named institutions that do not constitute part of the Ministry’s Institutional framework, specifically the:  Caribbean Agricultural Research and Development Institute (CARDI), which is duly constituted as an official Organ of the CARICOM Community and cannot be considered under any of the above categories specified by Cabinet,  Caribbean Food Corporation (CFC), regional organisation that is no longer operational. Amendment to the above list also requires the addition of the following agricultural agencies under the Ministry’s portfolio. • Lands and Surveys Board (LSB), • Sugarcane Feeds Centre (SFC), • Trinidad and Tobago AgriBusiness Association (TTABA) • Tucker Valley Agricultural Enterprises Limited (TVAEL) • Caribbean Fisheries Development and Training Institute (CFTDI) The status of these agencies with respect to the degree of operational autonomy and integration within the Ministry’s institutional structure needs to be unambiguously determined. 2 Gazette Notice 15th June 2010 – Responsibilities of Ministers [[CChhaapptteerr 11 –– TThhee OOrrggaanniissaattiioonn] 16 FIGURE 2: STATE ENTITIES UNDER THE MINISTRY OF FOOD PRODUCTION, LAND AND MARINE AFFAIRS (MFPLMA) [[CChhaapptteerr 22 –– TThhee SSttrraatteeggiicc PPllaannnniinngg EExxeerrcciissee] 17 Chapter 2: The Strategic Planning Exercise 2.1 The Rationale The MFPLMA Strategic Plan responds to the mandate to all Ministries “to develop both 3-year and 5-year Strategic Plans to achieve Government’s overall goal of ‘Prosperity for All’.” However, the Ministry also realizes that strategic thinking and planning are intrinsic to its success as an institution, given the dynamic nature of both the internal and external environment conditioning its operations. Population growth, global environmental change, globalization of markets and resources, evolving consumers’ preferences, a more demanding food industry, government interaction and regulation and the pivotal role of technology are among the main drivers of change affecting agriculture and food systems development globally, regionally and nationally. MFPLMA must understand, anticipate and position itself to adequately assist in addressing and mitigating the resulting impacts. Additionally, the secular decline in the performance of both food and non-food agriculture in Trinidad and Tobago over the past decade, with concomitant erosion of rural livelihoods together with volatile and rising food prices and the consequent impacts on the cost of living require immediate and decisive responses from the agriculture and food production sector. The role of MFPLMA in developing, directing, supporting and coordinating the response agenda constitutes its core business and defines its contribution to ensuring ‘Prosperity for All’. This strategic planning exercise facilitates the required review of the way the Ministry is structured, its functions and responsibilities, and the status of delivery arrangements, systems and procedures. The analysis determines the organizational changes and improvements necessary to deliver on the identified and approved actions. In this regard, the Strategic Plan aims at ensuring that the Ministry acts in accordance with current government policy and its portfolio responsibilities and satisfies the needs of its clients and stakeholders. A key aspect is an analysis of the Ministry’s relationship with its clients, partners and stakeholders. 2.2 Methodology Since July 2010, MFPLMA has been interacting extensively with its clientele, the key actors along the value chain from ‘Farm to Fork’. They include farmers, fishers, input suppliers, marketers, processors/manufacturers, entrepreneurs and related supporting service and stakeholder communities. These discussions culminated in three structured national consultations which identified and validated the following critical areas for intervention: infrastructure; incentives; value chain management and marketing; praedial larceny; commodity development – crops, horticulture, livestock; fisheries management and development; technical support; finance and investment capital; land management (including large farms); and labour. Information generated from the consultations was analysed and incorporated in formulating the Ministry’s One Year Action Plan. This process is intrinsically linked to the preparation of the Strategic Plan. [[CChhaapptteerr 22 –– TThhee SSttrraatteeggiicc PPllaannnniinngg EExxeerrcciissee] 18 Indeed, the in-depth nature of the interactions with the stakeholder communities lent credibility to the further structured conversations relating to the strategic planning exercise since the latter were seen as part of a continuing dialogue. The main elements of the strategic planning process included: 1. Preparation of a Sector Policy and Strategy Framework Document The absence of a clearly articulated Sector Strategic Framework – Policy and Plan – as a context for locating the Ministry Strategic Plan was a challenge. The Manifesto and in particular the seven development pillars and the agriculture and food production chapter provided a generalized framework. These were necessary but not sufficient for facilitating the strategic planning exercise. Indeed, many stakeholders explicitly and robustly opined on the need for a sector policy and strategy. The first step in the strategic planning process entailed developing a more focussed sectoral framework for defining a suite of sectoral policy goals to guide the MFPLMA institutional improvement. Accordingly, a ‘Policy Framework and Strategic Agenda for the Agricultural Sector’ was prepared. (See Appendix III for a concise version and the full document submitted as a background paper attached to this document). 2. Internal discussions with MFPLMA and affiliate agencies to: Seek buy-in for the Strategic Plan and Planning Exercise; Validate sectoral policy goals (generated from the Policy and Strategy Document, prepared from analysing the Manifesto, the Budget Speech, Ministerial Statements, the Regional Food and Nutrition Security Policy, One Year Action Plan, interactions with clients and scanning the global and regional arenas); Solicit understanding of the existing institutional arrangements for delivery; Obtain views on improvements required; Establish goals for improving the Ministry; Facilitate stakeholder analysis; Undertake SWOT analysis; Contribute to a plan of action (inclusive of objectives and strategies) for achieving the agreed goals. 3. Internal and External Stakeholder Consultations to: Seek buy-in for the Strategic Plan and the strategic planning exercise; Explain the link between the earlier consultations re One Year Action Plan and the strategic planning exercise; Share the draft sector operational goals and MFPLMA organization goals; Obtain stakeholder ideas and suggestions on MFPLMA actions and institutional improvements to achieve goals. 4. Preparation of Action Plan Interpretation of the Action Plan Template presented challenges which required clarification with the National Transformation Unit of the Ministry of Planning, Economic and Social Restructuring and Gender Affairs which is coordinating the strategic [[CChhaapptteerr 22 –– TThhee SSttrraatteeggiicc PPllaannnniinngg EExxeerrcciissee] 19 planning exercise across the public service. It emerged from the discussions that the Action Plan Template was a work-in-progress, being tweaked, ever so slightly, in response to feedback from Ministries. Indeed, training sessions for Ministries had only recently been initiated. MFPLMA was already somewhat advanced in the plan preparation when this meeting took place and had already made some adjustments for ease of understanding and to facilitate follow up action at Division/Unit and agency levels. The modified Action Plan is being used in this exercise. 5. Validation of the Final Draft The final draft Strategic Plan document was discussed and validated by the Ministry’s senior management team prior to submission to the Minister and Cabinet. [[CChhaapptteerr 33 –– TThhee SSttrraatteeggiicc FFrraammeewwoorrkk] 20 Chapter 3: The Strategic Framework 3.1 Vision To be a client oriented, performance driven, environmentally responsible organization delivering integrated services aligned to a changing food and agriculture system 3.2 Mandate The mandate for the MFPLMA’s is to make Trinidad and Tobago a ‘food secure nation’. This mandate derives from: i. Parliament: comprising both the House of Representatives and the Senate, which determines the Ministry's annual budgetary allocation, enacts the enabling legislation which govern certain prescribed areas of activities, poses questions to be answered relating to performance under areas of the Ministry's portfolio assignment and through the Public Accounts Committee ancl Public Accounts Enterprise Committee ensures accountability for expenditure of funds allocated through the budgetary process, and ii. Cabinet: which decides on policies, programmes and projects and the priorities related thereto for implementation by the Ministry, and which, in turn, is advised by the Ministry on matters related to its portfolio. In implementing its mandate, the MFPLMA will focus on the six development pillars for agriculture in Trinidad and Tobago, specifically:  respect for agriculture, the farmers and the land;  affordable food on a sustained basis  sustainable livelihood for farmers  a mixture of traditional and technology-driven platforms  regional and extra-regional joint ventures to achieve economies of scale and export competitiveness  functional linkages between research and development and the sector to strengthen knowledge applications Converted into a statement, the Mandate defined in the 6 development pillars can be expressed as follows:  the MFPLMA will foster the sustainable use and conservation of agriculture and fisheries resources through appropriate science and technologies, knowledge management and economic integration that enables producers to realize profits and consumers to secure food and nutrition requirements. Key Economic Areas covered under the mandate are Crops (food and non-food), Livestock, Marine fisheries and Aquaculture. [[CChhaapptteerr 33 –– TThhee SSttrraatteeggiicc FFrraammeewwoorrkk] 21 MFPLMA Mission: To work as an innovative team championing the conservation of biodiversity and sustainable development of food and non food systems, supported by sound public policy. 3.3 Organisational Values The MFPLMA will operate in accordance with the following Organsational Values that will be a requirement of all employees and expectation of clients and stakeholders: 8 Leadership and stewardship: articulating and implementing government policy and regional and international obligations; (linked to #8 in Manifesto, pg 70) and motivating and empowering employees clients and stakeholders; 9 Equitable and fair in decision making: respecting the needs and situations of employees, clients and stakeholders (linked to #1&7 in Manifesto, pg 70) and providing opportunities for professional advancement; 10 Integrity and professionalism: respecting institutional procedures and processes, and avoiding conflicts of interest at all costs; (linked to #2&6 in Manifesto, pg 70) and building a culture of productivity and commitment to work; 11 Objective and evidence-based: planning and executing public policies, strategies and resources based solely in terms of the public interest; (linked to #3 in Manifesto, pg 70); 12 Accountable and transparent: sharing information that can impact stakeholders and employees decision-making and actions (linked to #4&5 in Manifesto, pg 70) and open to change; 13 Effective and entrepreneurial: ensuring that services to clients and stakeholders are designed and delivered in the most innovative, equitable and effective manner; 14 Inclusive and participatory: engaging employees, clients and stakeholders to ensure full representation, consultations and communication; [[CChhaapptteerr 44 ––SSttrraatteeggiicc AAnnaallyyssiiss] 22 Chapter 4: Strategic Analysis As the competent national authority with the mandate for the production and marketing of agriculture, fisheries and food production, the Ministry of Food Production, Land and Marine Affairs (MFPLMA) operates within an internal and external environment that exerts substantial impacts on its organisational success. The main areas which affect and will continue to impact the MFPLMA’s capacity to successfully fulfil its mandate can be grouped as follows: Internal:  Institutional structure and operational norms and procedures, related to whether the Ministry, as an institution comprising internal units and state entities, is organised for effective operations;  Human resource capacity and management, related to the quality of skills, competencies and effective management of same;  Budget and investment, related to adequacy and continuous provision of financing and capital funds to implement development interventions3; External  Macro-economic situation and the relative position of agriculture in the development agenda;  The number of other organisations and agencies involved in supporting the development of agriculture and food production and the nature of the relationship with the MFPLMA;  The dynamic global situation with respect to uncertainty in agriculture and food production, demand and market response, trade negotiations, concerns over environmental and climate change impacts and the resulting impacts of rising food prices on poverty levels and food security in net food importing countries, such as Trinidad and Tobago. Given these internal realities and external factors, the MFPLMA is expected to contribute to national development in the seven inter-connected development Pillars. These Pillars provide the general policy framework and operating context for the MFPLMA’s interventions in the development of agriculture and food systems.4 Through interventions aimed at creating a food secure nation and as well, creating the conditions and national environment for the emergence of productive and profitable livelihoods, enterprises, agri-business associations and industries, it is also expected that the 3 See Appendix V for an Analysis of Government Allocation to the Ministry of Agriculture over the 2006-2011 period, prepared (February 2011) as part of the background documentation. 4 See Appendix IV for more details on the Agriculture Policy Context. [[CChhaapptteerr 44 ––SSttrraatteeggiicc AAnnaallyyssiiss] 23 MFPLMA will impact positively on employment creation, poverty reduction, health and wellness and environmental sustainability. The following analysis emphasises important strengths of the MFLMA and areas where opportunities exist for further strengthening. 4.1 MFPLMA SWOT Table 1: SWOT Analysis STRENGTHS: OPPORTUNITIES: 1. Leadership/Institutional Positioning Strong, committed and respected Minister, skilled in marketing, employee and client relations, diplomacy and negotiation; Improved platform for engagement with and confidence of stakeholders; Direct access to resident headquarters of regional and international development organisations Strong regional and international representation and respect; to set the policy direction and create the right environment for agriculture’s development; to be more client oriented in outlook, approach, programmes, organization and structure; to expand access to resources through more strategic national, regional and international partnerships; make a bigger impact on poverty reduction 2. Human Resources/Capacity Qualified, competent and experienced senior managers; Open-mindedness and willingness to learn among junior staff; Dedicated, committed, enthusiastic staff; Good working relations between senior staff and senior professionals in regional and international organisations; to strengthen/upgrade staff skills and expertise in a more cost-effective manner; to fill critical vacancies and enhance efficiency to build a staff skills database and conduct a manpower audit to optimise use of existing human resources; to formalise and institutionalize relations to complement existing competencies; 3. Operations/Service Delivery Highly decentralised Ministry; Accessible to clients; Good capital assets and infrastructure Network of offices, facilities and services; Unique & Specialised functions (Sole regulatory agency, only service provider in some key technical areas and services, research and diagnostic capacity) Well established internal institutional procedures and processes for planning; Well managed rules & regulations to prevent/minimise/manage agricultural health and safety emergencies; well funded relative to other organisations to decentralise decision-making for greater effectiveness; to be more effective in planning and service delivery through modern ICT; to strengthen governance/coordination structures– THA/MFPLMA; MFPLMA/other Ministries and sector institutions/agencies; to become more ‘cutting edge and innovative’ in specialty functions; to expand clientele in new and emerging fields and provide differentiated package of services (e.g, urban agriculture) to strengthen/develop internal operational procedures and protocols; [[CChhaapptteerr 44 ––SSttrraatteeggiicc AAnnaallyyssiiss] 24 and past experiences - to optimise use of resources through more effective planning, programming &M&E; The effective channelling of these strengths and opportunities will become critical in addressing the weaknesses in and threats to the MFPLMA. The main areas of weaknesses and threats are also presented according to the same broad categories. WEAKNESSES THREATS 1. Leadership/Institutional Positioning Absence of sector policy and strategy to clarify and coalesce actions of the Ministry and affiliates towards a common purpose Absence of internal systems to quickly respond and adapt to stakeholder and changing sector needs Poor public understanding of the role of the Ministry and awareness of its responsibilities Weak/ad-hoc inter-ministerial linkages and coordination to minimise opportunities for policy conflicts Weak inter-sectoral linkages for business development in agriculture Political volatility and social unrest Outdated legislation and the associated limitations/constraints Negative impacts of macroeconomic policies on agriculture Competition in allocation of resources among state agencies and divisions of the Ministry Reduction in budget compromising the ability to deliver on planned activities; 2. Human Resources/Capacities Weak HR function resulting in a host of HR deficiencies associated with (a) staff shortages, (b) low staff morale (c) no succession planning (d) inadequate attention given to filling vacancies (human resource management and development strategies are poor); Loss of institutional memory and environment for continuous learning (due to loss of senior technical staff) Loss of qualified staff to competitive agencies and high staff turnover; Dwindling pool for accessing qualified staff due to shifting focus of the UWI agriculture programme 3. Operations/ Service Delivery Outdated organisational structure and determination of functional areas Weak alignment of units with core mandates and activities; Poor adherence to and weakened culture for planning and programme coordination; Weak intra-institutional and Ministry-state agencies communication, information sharing and coordination; No functioning IT systems for internal communication, knowledge management and sectoral database development and maintenance; Ad hoc systems leading to creating parallel institutions. (Duplication of work between state agencies and the Ministry) Competition from input suppliers who are more accessible and readily available for technology/knowledge transfer (not necessarily good advice); Clients claiming lack of access to extension officers [[CChhaapptteerr 44 ––SSttrraatteeggiicc AAnnaallyyssiiss] 25 WEAKNESSES THREATS Inadequate resources for effective delivery of expanded mandate, security services (including praedial larceny) Ineffective administrative processes for timely approval of projects and access to budget allocations to implement work programmes weak M&E systems: no formal systems exist; particularly with the PSIP projects(role for finance and planning); financial auditing systems/unit (quality management) Institutional uncertainty of strategic organizations (e.g. TTABA) There is a general consensus that institutional weaknesses have been a major factor in contributing to the low status of agriculture in the country, and the lack of performance in the sector itself. Inadequate funding has also been determined as a critical factor in the loss of capacity of the Ministry of Agriculture. While the annual budgetary allocation is a good index of government’s intent to influence the course of national development, actual expenditure is a reflection of the real fiscal space available to impact such a process.5 A recent assessment of the Government allocation to the Ministry over the 2006-2009 period revealed that on average, actual national expenditure was 9.44 percent above budgetary allocation. However, despite this result at the national level, for the Ministry of Agriculture, the actual average annual expenditure was 10.5 percent below that which was budgeted. The situation may, to a large extent, have been the result of the following factors:  The lack of priority and importance which the government attaches to the sector and its contribution to the national economy;  Lack of consistency in the level of commitment of government to the stated goals of the sector, or alternatively, the role ascribed to the sector in the development process; and  The low bargaining power of the Ministry and related agencies in a period of enhanced competition for and access to government outlays. These results reflect the internal and external realities and factors which determine the conditioning environment within which the MFPLMA operates. They also provide sufficient evidence of, and justification for ensuring both the adequacy and continuity of government budgets, as well for the MFPLA itself, to build in-house capacity for project preparation as a means of mobilising external resources to support programme implementation on behalf and for the benefits of the organisation’s stakeholders. 5 Analysis of Government Allocation to the Ministry of Agriculture over the 2006-2011 period, prepared by IICA (February 2011) as part of the background analysis for the preparation of the MFPLMA’s Strategic Plan 2011-2015. [[CChhaapptteerr 44 ––SSttrraatteeggiicc AAnnaallyyssiiss] 26 4.2 MFPLMA Stakeholder Analysis A stakeholder is defined as any group or individual who can affect or is affected by the achievement of the organization’s objectives. Their relationship is defined as an “interest” relationship on the basis that unilateral, multilateral or reciprocal benefits accrue from the relationship. The stakeholder analysis clarifies who are the direct clients of the Ministry and indentifies other strategic stakeholders according to some proposed criteria as provided below. The analysis identifies (a) the influence and impact on MFPLMA activity and (b) the effect and result of Ministry actions on the operations of each category and stakeholder identified. 1. Direct clientele: Clients (individuals, organisations or groups of individuals) who receive direct support (technical, etc.) from the Ministry and make the most direct demand of its services. Consequently, they suffer/are affected most significantly by changes in Ministry policies and operations. The Ministry is accountable to them. 1.1 Governing bodies a) Parliament b) Cabinet 1.2 Productive Sector a) Primary producers, irrespective of size, commercial orientation and focus of operations, comprising farmers and farmer associations and fisher-folk (including aquaculturalists) and their associations, engaged in the cultivation, production, harvesting and sale of the products. They look to the Ministry for direction, facilitation and promotion by way of policies, programmes, projects, technical assistance and institutional and infrastructural support. Their concerns are often articulated through organizations and groups both formal and informal. The Ministry interacts with these - its major clients - in order to assess needs and better shape, develop and implement intervention strategies. b) Food and non-food processors; c) Landscapers d) Conservation groups e) Homeowners – less recognised, but involved in household gardening, floriculture, fruit production, processing; 2. Related Public Sector Affiliates This category comprises Government established bodies and entities that are wholly/partially owned by the Ministry. Stakeholders in this group have a recognized connection with and complement the mandate of the MFPLMA. The nature of their relationship includes some form of reporting/auditing/accountability and responsibility to the MFPLMA. They comprise both: a) Agencies established by and for the Ministry, and financially dependent on Ministry budget allocations in the form of subventions (e.g., MFPLMA’s entities) [[CChhaapptteerr 44 ––SSttrraatteeggiicc AAnnaallyyssiiss] 27 b) Other Ministries/agencies that either make decisions that affect the MFPLMA’s execution of its mandate (e.g, Ministries of Trade and Industry, Health) and/or are responsible for the assets and resources required by the MFPLMA to effectively implement its mandate (e.g., Ministries of Works and Transport and Public Utilities and WASA). They can be effective collaborators; 3. Strategic Partners/Collaborators that support the MFPLMA’s technical mandate This group comprises: a) national organisations involved in agriculture and food industry development b) regional and international organisations with complementary mandates for agricultural and rural development, and with an explicit identification of the MFPLMA as a primary client. These organisations may or may not receive quota funding from the Government of Trinidad and Tobago 4. Others Financial institutions, who will have the evidence-base to design and offer innovative credit and financial packages for the farming and agri-business community; Service Providers, including those offering services similar to the MFPLMA who represent a potential source of competition or possible strategic partner; General public including consumers, who will benefit from stable, affordable, wholesome and variety food choices; With respect to the latter group in the final category, the Ministry is fully cognisant that consumers are the ultimate group that stands to gain or lose from the quality of interventions taken in agriculture and food production systems. While the general consumer is not a direct client of the Ministry, the design and implementation of interventions to improve and expand farm outputs and promote and foster food processing are undertaken on the basis of nutrition for healthy diets, health and safety guidelines and as well, on satisfying demands for convenience and variety. The degree of impact of MFPLMA’s interventions on the categories of stakeholders defined above will vary depending on the nature and strength of the relations and may be either of the following. 1. Strong impact – the issue/influence is very significant at both a strategic and operational level to the area of influence/interest as it relates to the Ministry. 2. Moderate impact – the issue/influence is important at a strategic and operational level to the area of influence/interest as it relates to the Ministry. 3. Little impact – the issue/influence is more important at an operational than a strategic level to the area of influence/interest as it relates to the Ministry. 4. No impact - the issue/influence has no bearing at either strategic or operational levels to the area of influence/interest as it relates to the Ministry. Table 2 provides summary details of these stakeholder issues by category of stakeholders, as defined above. [[CChhaapptteerr 44 ––SSttrraatteeggiicc AAnnaallyyssiiss] 28 Table 2: Stakeholder Analysis Stakeholder By Category Stakeholder Issue Impact of Stakeholder Issue on the Ministry Stakeholder Assumptions about the Organisation Main Intervention/ Services required by Stakeholder 1. CLIENTS 1.1 -Governing Bodies and Policy-making i. Cabinet and Parliament - Inadequate information and analysis to justify annual budgetary submission and establish policy priorities Leads to budget cuts and which limits capacity of MFPLMA to effectively implement programme Evidence-based policy guidelines and situation analyses Timely performance reports and Results-based planning 1.2 Productive Sector ii. Primary producers (farmers, fisher-folk, etc) Untimely response to needs, inability to solve problems, and unreliable and inadequate service delivery MFPLMA becomes agency of last resort reduced participation of stakeholders competition from private service providers Services offered will be relevant and their delivery timely and effective timely and reliable response, advice and problem solving and effective service delivery; well functioning infrastructure (ICT, roads, markets etc); greater involvement in planning and decision-making iii. Value adding (Food processors and Non food manufacturing) environment not enabling and supportive of local agriculture value adding Ministry’s objectives under-mined by policy conflicts Integrated package of support, incentives and services; iv. Conservation Groups - Not included in policy dialogue and decisions regarding environmental issues for agriculture Agricultural activities continue to have negative impacts on the environment Ministry is environmentally conscious Incorporate environmental issues in planning and decision making for agriculture v. Home-owners Landscapers, backyard gardeners Lack of consistent and coordinated support for backyard farming and landscape service providers Ministry is disconnected from areas that could yield high impact (e.g. urban and peri-urban agriculture) Ministry is aware and supportive of modern agribusiness Support to non-commercial and/or semi-commercial home-based and urban and peri-urban farming systems [[CChhaapptteerr 44 ––SSttrraatteeggiicc AAnnaallyyssiiss] 29 Stakeholder By Category Stakeholder Issue Impact of Stakeholder Issue on the Ministry Stakeholder Assumptions about the Organisation Main Intervention/ Services required by Stakeholder 2. Related Public Sector Affiliates 2.1 MFPLMA Entities – Complement the Ministry’s Functions State Agencies ADB ASTT CCIB CFTDI EMBDC LLPB NAMDEVCO TTABA Agencies are incapacitated and performance compromised due to inadequate budgets, exorbitant bureaucracy in decision-making and poor coordination Ministry often blamed for failures in the sector and creating duplication of limited resources; Limits MFPLMA’s effective use of entities as instruments for supporting development Actions of entities are not aligned to MFPLMAs creating difficulties for accountability and transparency Effective advocacy and leadership Timely problem solving and disbursement of budgets and Clear policy framework as the basis for defining objectives and actions; Improvement of internal mechanisms and processes for decision-making, communication and coordination Commitment to approved budgets Formalized arrangements (MOUs etc) for giving practical effect to strategic alliances 2.2 Other Line Ministries and State Agencies – Collaborators Ministry of Finance Ministry of Planning, Economic and Social Restructuring and Gender Affairs insufficient justification for the quantum of funds requested and inadequate information to guide process of budget adjustments incomplete project proposals and related documents The MFLMA budgets are often the first to be cut resulting in scale-back of essential services and programmes, compromising performance and stakeholder confidence MFPLMA unable to make convincing case for funding Timely status reports and requests for budgets Well prepared project analyses and documents Well developed and evidence based budget proposals More efforts at external resource mobilisation to complement government budgets [[CChhaapptteerr 44 ––SSttrraatteeggiicc AAnnaallyyssiiss] 30 Stakeholder By Category Stakeholder Issue Impact of Stakeholder Issue on the Ministry Stakeholder Assumptions about the Organisation Main Intervention/ Services required by Stakeholder Ministries of: Works and Transport, Housing & the Environment; Local Govt. Regional Corporations; National Security Health Education Mechanisms for institutionalising areas for functional cooperation and for defining agricultural impacts of policy weak and untimely; Ministry often blamed for problems in the sector including high food prices, acquisition of agriculture land Poor performance and lack of delivery and results of the Ministry’s work programme Planning and coordination systems and capacities are participatory and the Ministry is empowered to take action Policy briefs to inform decision making & priority setting Clear and timely plan indicating the type and time schedule of services required; Communication, follow-up and monitoring capacity to ensure functional cooperation is effective Formalized arrangements (MOUs etc) for contracting services and support Ministries of: Legal Affairs Public Services Commission Lack of timely information and response to queries Limits the MFPLMA’s ability to timely and effectively respond to operational issues (e.g. HR, etc) Management capacity and operational efficiencies exist Timely and adequate information and improved processes for decision-making 3. Other Players in National Agriculture Development (they are independent bodies that either benefit from or collaborate with MFPLMA) 3.1 National CCGA CFA ECIAF EMA IMA NFFA NIHERST SIDC SFDC UTT CARIRI etc list not exhaustive  receive little or no financial support from government;  government trade policies may conflict with operations;  absence of specialised support services  no clear guidance on policy and programme priorities;  no clear protocols or mechanisms for inter agency collaboration  Reduces MFPLMAs impact on developments in the sector;  MFPLMA is not taking advantage of the broader institutional framework for agriculture  cost effective use of resources;  MFPLMA is ready and able to engage in collaboration  Increased resource allocations  More consultation with the MFLMA in the programming and planning of research activities  Increase in MFPLMA service range to include specialised clientele needs  3.2 Regional & International Agriculture and Food Development related organisation: (collaborators and/or suppliers of funds & technical services)  CARDI  CRFM  Weak inter-institutional linkages and  The activities and results of research, technical  Clear articulation of policy and strategy  MoUs with MFPLMA establishing a firm, committed and [[CChhaapptteerr 44 ––SSttrraatteeggiicc AAnnaallyyssiiss] 31 Stakeholder By Category Stakeholder Issue Impact of Stakeholder Issue on the Ministry Stakeholder Assumptions about the Organisation Main Intervention/ Services required by Stakeholder  UWI  IICA  FAO  IDB coordination mechanisms for effective collaboration and training services offered not as impactful on MFPLMA interventions as they could be framework within which support can be aligned and complemented and ownership of the process transparent basis for institutional engagement [[CChhaapptteerr 44 ––SSttrraatteeggiicc AAnnaallyyssiiss] 32 In summary, the nature and extent of the impact and influence of the MFPLMA on stakeholders fall largely within organizational/operational efficiency. Some of the major areas of concern revolve around weaknesses in intra- and inter-ministerial collaboration which limit the effectiveness of policy-making and planning processes and with consequent and adverse implication for the budgetary process. The results of the MFPLMA SWOT Analysis, stakeholder consultations and institutional analysis suggested the following main conclusions:  the stakeholders generally agree that the MFPLMA: has an important role to play in facilitating the development of agriculture and food production for the nation, however organisational deficiencies limit the effectiveness with which clients and other stakeholders are supported and serviced; must be more proactive in its engagements with its clients and other stakeholders to ensure that the Ministry’s interventions are relevant and efficiently delivered; needs to substantially strengthen and expand its ICT platform to enhance effectiveness of internal communication and coordination and as well, enable greater access to participation of stakeholders in consultations and decision-making processes; needs to develop more formalized arrangements (MOUs etc) to contract services and support of implementing partners  the MFPLMA employees, themselves: recognise the need for institutional alignment and operational strengthening in a number of areas, of the Organisation is to be a respected and effective facilitator of agriculture and food production activities in the country; recognise the importance of building inter-Ministry/Agency coordination and commitment for more effective collaboration in areas that impact the performance of the Ministry; the need to urgently upgrade its ICT platform as an essential prerequisite for effective stakeholder engagement, service delivery excellence, timely decision-making and for building a platform for change management.  the MFPLMA entities recognise some critical areas to be addressed, chief among these are the urgent need to: provide a policy and strategic framework within which the agencies missions and activities can be based, aligned for greater relevance and effectiveness with enhanced opportunities for inter-agency collaboration; clarify the governance and coordination structures between the MFPLMA, its entities and with the THA in order to build a cohesive development framework, enhance client relations and deliver efficient support and services. This will require a review of institutional mandates and performance with a view to simplifying and increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of the institutional landscape and minimising overlaps and duplication. [[CChhaapptteerr 55 –– GGooaallss aanndd OObbjjeeccttiivveess] 33 Chapter 5: Goals and Objectives By 2015, it is expected that the agriculture and food production system of Trinidad and Tobago will exhibit characteristics consistent with . . . . . . a diversified, profitable and sustainable agriculture and agri-business system that contributes to food and nutrition security, generates viable livelihoods and preserves the nation’s biodiversity and environmental resources. The above vision of agriculture is built on three inter-locking elements of development, i.e., the need for agriculture and food systems to: 1. contribute to secure, reliable and resilient food and nutrition security6; 2. generate economic activity and incomes that contribute to growth and poverty reduction; 3. preserve the natural resource base and enhance environmental and biodiversity conservation and protection and build resilience to climate change impacts; These critical elements of agriculture are also essential building blocks of sustainable development. The agriculture and food production system community in Trinidad and Tobago is dominated by small and medium-sized operators. This reality demands that focus is maintained on providing an environment of continuous learning and innovation among this group of stakeholders in order to foster and sustain improvements in productivity and business success. Such gains and successes will be a necessary but not sufficient requirement for increasing the share of local farm, fish and processed food and non-food products in the local food service, food retailing and food processing industries. This will, in turn, lead to a reduction in the dependence on imported food supplies and a reduced vulnerability to external food system shocks, such as the impacts of trade disruptions and price hikes. Positioning agriculture to contribute to the achievement of these development objectives will require well targeted and sustained interventions in some key strategic areas, including improving rural and productive infrastructure throughout the value chain, strengthening the science and technology base, promoting and fostering an entrepreneurial culture, improved market access and critically incorporating environmentally friendly principles in all aspects of farming, fisheries and agribusiness. Success in these and other areas will lead to a noticeable increase in the output of the sector and hence an increase in the relative share of primary agriculture to GDP and expanded economic linkages to other sectors, notably, manufacturing and services. A dynamic and competitive agriculture and food production system will also have positive and sustained impacts on rural development. In keeping with the above general development issues, the Goals and Objectives which the MFPLMA shall pursue over the 2011-2015 planning cycle are identified in Table 3 below. It should be noted that the three mandatory goals: 6 The Goals and Objectives of food security are consistent with that defined under the Regional Policy for Food and Nutrition Security (RPFNS) [[CChhaapptteerr 55 –– GGooaallss aanndd OObbjjeeccttiivveess] 34  Effective and Efficient Institutions;  Service Delivery Excellence; and  Management Performance are addressed under Pillar 6, Good Governance in Table 3. The measures (actions) to achieve these are highlighted in Table 4 – Summary Action Plan, and elaborated in detail in Appendix I – The Action Plan. [[CChhaapptteerr 55 –– GGooaallss aanndd OObbjjeeccttiivveess] 35 Table 3: Goals and Objectives Development Pillar Strategic Goals Objectives 1- People centred development Respect for agriculture and the environment, empowerment of stakeholders and building of social capital for sustainable agriculture and rural development i. To strengthen stakeholders’ capacity for organisational development, representation and engagement in public-private sector consultations and partnerships so that government policies and interventions are stakeholder driven, relevant and sustainable and encouraging of woman and youth involvement; ii. To strengthen and promote nature conservation and in particular, conservation of biodiversity and ecosystems 2- Poverty Reduction and Social Justice Expanded opportunities for productive employment and improved social conditions for small-scale producers, including women and youth iii. To foster respect for agriculture and the land and facilitate the development of sustainable livelihoods and market opportunities for subsistence and small-scale commercial producers; iv. To explicitly develop livelihoods initiatives to accommodate women and youth 5- A More Diversified, Knowledge Intensive Economy Efficient, profitable and competitive agri-business enterprises and industries v. To create a results-oriented research, innovation and technology development institutional framework that enables the science and technology potential and drives productivity, profitability and sustainability of small-scale and commercial stakeholders; vi. To secure the policy and space for traditional crops with important socio-economic roles in rural and industry development; vii. To foster innovation in process, product and industry development for the creation and expansion of a wider range of competitive products and services utilising both local farm produce and outputs from agriculture joint ventures with other CARICOM countries; viii. To strengthen technical capacity and institutional processes to design, develop and effectively deliver an integrated package of critical support and services to facilitate implementation of the crop, fisheries and livestock-based development programmes that add value to stakeholders’ efforts to improve their operations 6- Good Governance Transparent, coordinated and results-driven agricultural institutional framework ix. To transform the MFPLMA into a modern, client responsive and effective institution by streamlining its institutional structure and strengthening operating norms and procedures and coordination mechanisms with Entities to enhance its impact on the agriculture, fisheries and food production system 7- Foreign Policy Securing the interest of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food Production x. To strike an appropriate balance between national and regional/international development priorities and initiatives in order to add value to agricultural development and food security in Trinidad and Tobago while strengthening regional integration. [[CChhaapptteerr 66 –– OOrrggaanniissaattiioonnaall SSttrraatteeggyy aanndd AAccttiioonn PPllaann] 36 Chapter 6: Organisational Strategy and Action Plan 6.1 Organisational Strategy and Action Plan The MFPLMA will pursue a two-pronged approach to give effect to the Strategic Plan. This is based on a clear recognition that there are two distinct yet inter-related aspects of the Strategic Plan: 1. the Sectoral Strategy - which focuses on the agriculture and food production sector, placing priority on the following development dimensions: 1.1 Social and Human Development dimension, treated through an Integrated Programme for Food and Nutrition Security which encapsulates national development Pillars 1 & 2; 1.2: Competitiveness and Economic Growth dimension, which reflects the objectives of the national development Pillar 5. 2. the Institutional Strategy - which focuses on the MFPLMA and speaks to institutional strengthening of the Ministry and its key affiliate agencies as the main instrument for managing and implementing the Sectoral Strategy. This aspect of the strategy emphasises two development imperatives: 2.1: Good Governance and Institutional Transformation, which is in keeping with national development Pillar 6; and 2.2: Foreign Policy, an essential complement to good governance and reflected in national development Pillar 7. Programmes Programmes Strategic Plan Sectoral Goals Institutional Goals #1 #2 #3 #4 #... #12 #13 #14 #15 #16 [[CChhaapptteerr 66 –– OOrrggaanniissaattiioonnaall SSttrraatteeggyy aanndd AAccttiioonn PPllaann] 37 As recognised earlier, an agriculture development strategy for the 2011-2015 planning period has not been articulated. Notwithstanding, there are clear and well accepted development imperatives that agriculture must respond to if it is to contribute meaningfully to sustainable development. These provide the base for developing the Sectoral Goals, as specified in Table 4 Goals and Objectives. The need to strengthen the MFPLMA as the main instrument through which interventions are designed, resourced, implemented and monitored, is an essential part of the Strategic Plan. The Institutional Goals for the MFPLMA are also specified in Table 4. An essential part of the process for implementing the Strategic Plan is that of Change Management. An important aspect of developing the Strategic Plan was the process itself, built on consultations with stakeholders and MFPLMA employees and entities. Target-specific and deeper consultations will continue to play a critical role in the process of promoting understanding and acceptance of the Strategic Plan and strengthening processes for internalisation and change management. The capacities and integration mechanisms of the Human Resource Division, Agricultural Planning Division and the Corporate Communications Unit through training in change management techniques and facilitation, will be strengthened for effective support to the process. Change management will be especially important to the process of streamlining the functional Divisions and Units of the MFPLMA and as well in aligning the mandates and activities of the affiliate Entities into one National Agriculture and Food Security Action Framework. 6.2 Critical Success Factors Leadership:  Political will and support  Clear Organisational Chart and Intra-Agency Functional Cooperation Protocols  Well-developed and understood decision-making channels and processes  Well-defined and communicated administrative protocols and procedures  Clearly articulated and communicated Public Relations ‘Messaging’, Strategy and processes  Robust Internal and Stakeholder Accountability Procedures Strategic Planning Orientation and Results-Based Programming Capacity:  Operational Plan approved and institutionalised  M&E Systems and Procedures established and institutionalised  Effective Use of analytical Tools, e.g., Integrated Assessment, Stakeholder Assessment, Participatory Methods, Cost of Production etc. [[CChhaapptteerr 66 –– OOrrggaanniissaattiioonnaall SSttrraatteeggyy aanndd AAccttiioonn PPllaann] 38 Adequate human resources:  No prolonged Vacancies (in excess of 3 months) in key positions  A Performance Evaluation system linked to the Ministry’s Strategic Goals and Programmes  Clearly defined and communicated employee benefits and opportunities  Formal structured Professional Development-Succession Planning Strategy  Well defined system for skills enhancement, development for Daily Rated Workers Adequate and sustainable financial resources:  Well defined and communicated Resource mobilisation strategy  Project Preparation Orientation and Management Capacity Well equipped and managed work environment:  Comfortable office space and lunch-room facilities  Updated and user friendly procedural manuals  Effective ICT platforms and employee literacy  Gender mainstreaming in all actions and activities 6.3 The Action Plan (Details in Appendix 1) The Action Plan will be defined at two levels of operations: Level 1 – which will provide the Goals and overarching Programmatic Areas of the National Agriculture and Food Security Action Framework (NAFSAF) and Level 2 – which will provide the technical details and targets of the individual functional units and Division of the MFPLMA as well as its Entities aligned to the NAFSAF. (See template attached at Appendix V) The principal strategies that will be employed to give effect to the Strategic Plan may be categorised as follows, but not limited to: a) Stakeholder Participatory Methods b) Organisational development; c) Human Capacity & Skills Development; d) ICT Upgrades and Literacy e) Information and Knowledge Management f) Project preparation & Pilot Projects g) Resource mobilisation & Financing h) Gender & Youth Focus i) Environmental agenda j) Infrastructural Works k) Strategic Partnerships [[CChhaapptteerr 66 –– OOrrggaanniissaattiioonnaall SSttrraatteeggyy aanndd AAccttiioonn PPllaann] 39 l) Legislation, Regulation & Enforcement m) Farm to Market Linkages (Value Chain Development); n) Hazard & Risk management and mitigation, o) Strategic and Evidence-Based Planning [[CChhaapptteerr 66 –– OOrrggaanniissaattiioonnaall SSttrraatteeggyy aanndd AAccttiioonn PPllaann] 40 Table 4: Summary Action Plan Goal, Programmes, Measures and Expected Impact in 2015 Strategic Goal Programme Areas Measures (Actions) Expected Impact (2015)  Respect for agriculture and the environment, empowerment of stakeholders and building of social capital for sustainable agriculture and rural development 1.1 Institutional Strengthening and Integration of Producer and Community Stakeholder Groups and Associations 1) Strengthen stakeholder groups and organisations to enhance opportunities for representation and participation in policy and programme planning; 2) Develop and manage public awareness and education to promote the importance of agriculture to national security and sustainable development  Farmers, fisher-folk and other key clients are organised, respected and well represented as equal partners in decision-making 1.2 Conservation and enhancement of horticultural resources and public spaces 3) Provide high quality and safe ornamental, horticultural and agricultural planting material to facilitate the expansion of food and non-food agribusiness, home gardening and maintenance of botanic landscapes  Enhanced respect for the environment in public spaces, workplace, homes and communities.  Expanded opportunities for productive employment and improved social conditions for small-scale producers, including women and youth 2.1 Sustainable Livelihoods and Food Security Development 4) Strengthen regulatory & administrative processes for land management and development to improve security of tenure and capacity to obtain productive resources 5) Improve, upgrade and maintain critical agriculture and fisheries infrastructure and facilities to enhance access and operational efficiency 6) Strengthen skills and business management capacity of small producers, including women and youth to encourage and facilitate agriculture related sustainable livelihoods and market linkages 7) Develop and establish risk management and mitigation plans for small farmers and fisherfolk 8) Promote and facilitate expansion of home gardening with a focus on food production in ‘at risk’ communities  Improved social situations and economic well-being of subsistence and small scale commercial producers. [[CChhaapptteerr 66 –– OOrrggaanniissaattiioonnaall SSttrraatteeggyy aanndd AAccttiioonn PPllaann] 41 Table 4: Summary Action Plan Goal, Programmes, Measures and Expected Impact in 2015 Strategic Goal Programme Areas Measures (Actions) Expected Impact (2015)  Efficient, profitable and competitive agri business enterprises and industries 5.1 Results-oriented agriculture research, innovation and technology institutions and systems 9) Strengthen capacity for impact-oriented research, innovation and technology development and transfer to improve the science base for agriculture and support continuous productivity improvement.  Stronger culture of, and capacity for continuous innovation and productivity enhancements in agriculture 5.2 Revitalisation and Development of Traditional Tree Crop Industries 10) Tree Crop Estate rehabilitation and modernisation to secure productive capacity, expand business and market linkages and contribute to economic, environmental and food and nutrition security objectives  Productive agricultural estates contributing to rural development and growth in agri-business 5.3 Entrepreneurship and Industry Development for Diversified and Competitive Agri Business 11) Product Development, Business Linkages and Market Expansion using the Value chain approach to create enterprises and firms that can take advantage of the growing demand;  Improved investor confidence and enhanced growth opportunities in improved and innovative value added products and services 5.4 Agricultural Development Support and Services (ADSS) 12) Create an integrated agricultural support and services delivery (ADSS) to improve the effectiveness of, and enhance stakeholder access to agriculture development programmes and resources  Enhanced capacity of Stakeholders to improve the productivity and profitability of their enterprises/business ventures [[CChhaapptteerr 66 –– OOrrggaanniissaattiioonnaall SSttrraatteeggyy aanndd AAccttiioonn PPllaann] 42 Table 4: Summary Action Plan Goal, Programmes, Measures and Expected Impact in 2015 Strategic Goal Programme Areas Measures (Actions) Expected Impact (2015)  Transparent, coordinated and results-driven agricultural institutional framework 6.1 Institutional Strengthening of MFPLMA and its entities 13) Strengthen the legislative and regulatory base of the MFPLMA to create an effective and efficient enabling institutional framework for government interventions, Entities operations and private sector actions 14) Integrate and coordinate MFPLMA planning and operations to enhance management performance and establish the effective leadership required to modernize agriculture and food production 15) Develop and institutionalise a culture of service delivery excellence to enhance understanding of MFPLMA’s roles and functions and strengthen the effectiveness and benefits of its interventions for its stakeholders  The MFPLMA is a client driven, effective and well respected leader and service provider  Securing the interest of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food Production 7.1 Integrating agriculture into regional and international economies 16) Strengthen representation in international and regional fora on matters that impact national agricultural development in order to influence decision-making, build partnerships and mobilise external resources.  Strengthened integration and influence on regional and international agricultural policy, programmes and development assistance Appendices 43 Chapter 7: Conclusion – Way Forward The Ministry recognizes and will fully explore the potential value of this strategic planning exercise in contributing to the development and promotion of a culture of strategic thinking – critically examining what and how things are done – within the organization, as part of the process of continuous learning and improving. The Strategic Plan provides the medium-term framework for developing the annual programme of work and budget of the Ministry and its affiliate entities. It will be the basis for establishing robust performance appraisal and monitoring and evaluation systems. To be relevant, the Plan will be periodically reviewed and updated to reflect the dynamism in both the internal and external environment. As an important first step, the divisions of the Ministry will be mandated to develop three (3) to five (5) year operational plans providing technical details and targets in accordance with the template provided in Appendix V. For the affiliate entities, a review and update of existing strategic and operational plans will be required. This package of mutually reinforcing initiatives will contribute to a much more coherent and coordinated institutional support arrangement for the agriculture and food sector. Further critical and urgent actions emerging from the analysis include the imperative to: a-.Commission the Sectoral Policy and Strategy; b.-Undertake an in-depth analysis and review of the existing sectoral governance structure – MFPLMA and its entities – with a view to effecting better alignment of institutional arrangements and relationships; c.-Examine and address critical human resource and ICT issues which currently constrain institutional performance; and d.-Establish a Change Management Team to roll out the Strategic Plan throughout the Ministry to effectively bring on board ALL staff, forging a cohesive team to meet the challenges of revitalizing the sector. A critical aspect of the implementation strategy entails forging and nurturing strategic alliances both within and outside the public sector. In this regard, the Strategic Plan will be used as an instrument to engage in conversations of influence with key stakeholders with a view to recruiting their active participation in the implementation. Every effort will be made to develop protocols and related mechanisms to formalize such arrangements. List of Appendices Appendix I: Action Plan Appendix II: Legal and Regulatory Framework: MFPLMA Appendix III: Policy Framework Appendix IV: Other Relevant Information Appendix V: Sample Division/Unit/Entity Strategic Plan Format Appendices 45 Appendix 1 Action Plan 2011-2015 Provided as a separate document: “Ministry of Food Production, land and Marine Affairs, Action Plan 2011-2015 Appendices 46 Appendix II: - Legal and Regulatory Framework: MFPLMA 1. Agricultural Contracts Act, Chapter 63:50 2. Agricultural Development Bank Act Chapter 79:07 3. Agricultural Fires Act, Chapter 63:02 4. Agricultural Small Holdings Tenure Act Chapter 59:53 as amended by Act No. 16 of 1987 5. Agricultural Society Act, Chapter 63:01 6. Animal (Diseases & Importation) Act No. 19 of 1954, Chapter 67:02; Regulations under the Act. 7. Archipelagic Waters and Exclusive Economic Zone Act, 1986 8. Beekeeping and Bee Products Act Chapter 67:53 9. Botanic Gardens Act Chapter 41:03 10. Caribbean Agricultural Research and Development Institute Act ,1981 Chapter 63:04 11. Caribbean Fisheries Training and Development Institute Act, 1975 Chapter 39:53 12. Caribbean Industrial Research Institute Act, 1971 Chapter 85:52 13. Cocoa and Coffee Industry Act Chapter 64:20 as amended by Act No. 5 of 1988 14. Continental Shelf Act, 1969 Chapter 1:52 15. Control of Importation of Live Fish Act Chapter 67:52 16. Fisheries Act Chapter 67:51, The Fisheries Regulations 17. Fishing Industry (Assistance) Act 1955 Chapter 85:03 18. Land Acquisition Act, 1994 19. Land Surveyors Act 1996 20. Land Surveyors Ordinance 1952 21. Livestock and Livestock Products Board Act, 1997 22. Marine Areas (Preservation and Enhancement) Act, Chapter 37:02 23. The National Agricultural Marketing Development Company - Act No. 16 of 1991 24. The Plant Protection Act, 1975 amended by Act No. 2 of 2001 The Plant Protection Regulations, 1953 25. Pounds Act, Chapter 67:03, Amended by No. 23 of 1997 26. Praedial Larceny Prevention Act 1963 Chapter 10:03- Amended by Act No. 56 of 2000 27. Production of Cane Act Chapter 64: 01 28. Queen’s Park Savannah Act Chapter 42:06 29. Regularisation of Tenure (State Lands Act) No. 20 of 1986 30. State Lands Act Chapter 57:01 31. The Sugar Industry Control Board Act Chapter 64:03 32. The Sugar Industry Special Funds Act Chapter 64:04 33. The Sugar Quotas Act Chapter 64:92 34. Territorial Sea Act, Chapter 1:51 as amended by No.22 of 1986 35. Trinidad Islandwide Cane Farmers Association (TICFA) No. 17 of 1961 Appendices 47 Appendix III: - Policy Framework Policy Context A 2010 publication of the World Economic Forum (WEF), titled ‘Realizing a New Vision for Agriculture: A roadmap for stakeholders’ explicitly recognises the major challenges to food and agricultural sustainability and projects a vision of agriculture as a positive contributor to food security, environmental sustainability and economic opportunity. The vision is rolled out in a roadmap and framework for action built on business-led and market-based solutions that are explicitly linked to national development priorities. The Government of Trinidad and Tobago, in its national development goal, specifies the need to create ‘a thriving economy and sustainable future’. In achieving this goal, Government has specified seven core and inter-connected pillars for sustainable development as: 1- People-Centred Development – We Need Everyone and All Can Contribute 2- Poverty Eradication and Social Justice – Preference for Poor and Disadvantaged 3- National and Personal Security – Human Security for Peace and Prosperity 4- Information and Communication Technologies – Connecting T&T and Building the New Economy 5- A More Diversified, Knowledge Intensive Economy- Building on the Native Genius of Our People 6- Good Governance– People Participation 7- Foreign Policy – Securing Our Place in the World There is a clear linkage between these seven pillars and the internationally-accepted dimensions of sustainable development, these being the economic, environmental, socio cultural and political-institutional dimension and their inter-relationships. These obvious linkages and their inter-connected nature can be seen as follows Sustainable Development Pillars & Objectives Government 7 Inter-connected development Pillars Economic (Competitiveness) 1- People-Centred Development 3- National and Personal Security 4- Information and Communication Technologies 5- A More Diversified, Knowledge Intensive Economy 6- Good Governance 7- Foreign Policy Environmental (Sustainability/ Climate change adaptation ) Socio-cultural (Equity) 1- People-Centred Development 2- Poverty Eradication and Social Justice 3-National and Personal Security Political-Institutional (Governance) 1- People-Centred Development 2- Poverty Eradication and Social Justice 3- National and Personal Security 4- Information and Communication Technologies 6- Good Governance 7- Foreign Policy Appendices 48 While it is clear that environmental issues must be given prominence in all policies, strategies and actions taken in furtherance of these development pillars, the links to the environmental dimension of sustainable development is not as obviously defined in the themes of the Government’s 7 inter-connected pillars. Notwithstanding, it is imperative that the agriculture and food systems place environmental and climate change impacts at the top of the development goals and agenda. This is an imperative goal, one which has no substitute. Agriculture is identified among the sectoral drivers to achieving a thriving economy and sustainable future’. In contributing to the attainment of this goal, there are a number of factors in the external and internal contexts that could either facilitate or constrain its capacity to perform and contribute to sustainable development. These are highlighted and discussed below.  volatile and rising international prices of basic food commodities. This issue is of central importance to the goal of creating a food secure nation and in embodied in all 6 development pillars for agriculture. “The FAO Food Price Index, which measures monthly price changes for a food basket composed of cereals, oilseeds, dairy, meat and sugar, hit an all-time high of 214.7 points in December (2010), above a previous record set in June 2008 during the food crisis. High food prices have come back into the spotlight after they fuelled protests in Tunisia that led to the fall of the president there earlier this month and have spilt over to Egypt. World leaders at the World Economic Forum in Davos last week warned rising food prices risked stoking more unrest and even war. French President Nicolas Sarkozy reiterated calls for regulation to rein in speculation and volatility”. (Reuters, Svetlana Kovalyova, MILAN, January 31, 2011). Trinidad and Tobago is a net food importing country with a significant worsening of this position between 2002 and 2008. The tariff lines with the highest import values (in decreasing order of value) are: dairy products; cereals; misc edible preparations; beverage, spirits; preparations of fruits and vegetables. In 2008 and 2009 food inflation in Trinidad and Tobago was 25.9% and 12.7% while overall inflation was 12.0% and 7.0%. An analysis of the food sub-index revealed that fruits and vegetables were the two sub-groups driving the increase in prices in the one-year period ending June 2010. Importantly, the majority of the items in these two sub-groups are produced domestically. Food price increases have a disproportionate impact on lower-income groups since they spend a larger share of income on food. Priorities of traditional and technology-driven platforms, regional and extra-regional joint ventures and functional linkages to research and development will be essential to expanding local food production and marketing and mitigating inflationary tendencies. The Regional Food and Nutrition Security Policy, which was adopted by the Member States of CARICOM in late 2010, identifies the key issues and provides a holistic framework for addressing food security concerns from a regional perspective. This framework addresses the issue along the lines of the four inter-connected components of food security – availability, accessibility, nutrition and stability. Appendices 49 Agricultural policy for Trinidad and Tobago must respond to the challenge of feeding the population in the context of instability in world food markets, from which a disproportionate share of its food supplies obtained, and serious deficiencies in its domestic farm-to-market agriculture and food systems. Hence the need to create a food secure nation is an essential and strategic goal.  Environmental degradation and climate change impacts The WEF reiterated what several countries are already well aware of, that ‘the world must produce more with less; the sector is entering a new era, marked by scarcer resources’. The issue of scarcer resources is of particular significance for farming which is heavily dependent on adequate land, soil fertility and water resources. The issue of land management and agriculture’s inability to retain arable land amidst the growing pressures and competition for land use has resulted in a significant reduction in land suitable for agriculture production. The land area in agriculture has been declining and most of the remaining agricultural holdings (87.1% in 2004) were less than 5 ha with 22.0% less than 0.5ha. In Tobago 45.8% of holdings were under 0.5ha. There have been significant declines in the number of farmers in agriculture during the 19827- 20048 period. Further, decades of agrochemical use has compromised the fertility profile of soils, with consequent adverse implications for the efficient expansion of food and other crops. Encroachment in forested areas and deforestation, particularly in watersheds are also creating problems of water management for agriculture. This situation is exacerbated by the impacts of climate change, which are already evident in the rainfall variability which has increased production risk. Analyses of rainfall patterns over the years indicate that Trinidad and Tobago faces a higher probability of drought conditions in a given year. Pollution through carbon emissions, another dimension of climate change, is a major policy issue for Trinidad and Tobago with implications for agriculture. Trinidad and Tobago, as a result of its petroleum based industries, has a high per capita carbon footprint. Trinidad and Tobago will have to respond to global pressures towards the ‘greening of agriculture’ in the context of developing a Green economy, a strategy that is gaining currency and offers emerging and niche market opportunities in agriculture and its linked industries. 9 This aspect is inextricably linked to all the agricultural development pillars, with particular importance for ‘respect for agriculture, the farmers and the land’ and ‘sustainable livelihood for farmers’. Agricultural policy for Trinidad and Tobago must respond to the challenge to ‘produce more with less’, ensuring that its land and marine biodiversity resources are conserved, protected and managed in a sustainable manner.  issues and impacts arising from globalisation The basket of foods produced from crops and animals must be widened to meet growing consumer demands. In addition to producing more with less, Trinidad and Tobago must content with the impacts of globalisation on changes in culture, food distribution systems and food 7 Central Statistical Office; 1982 Agricultural Census Report; 1986 8 Central Statistical Office; 2004 Agricultural Census Preliminary Report; 2005 9 ECLAC; A Green Economy: Introduction to the Debate and Implications for Latin America and the Caribbean; 2010 Appendices 50 consumption and production patterns. Globalisation and the host of international and bi-lateral trade agreements intended to facilitate freer trade10 have facilitated the growing shift towards dining out’, fast foods, and easy to prepare meals. This has also influenced heavily the product preferences of the domestic food and beverage manufacturing industries. This shift supported by issues of value for money has prompted a movement away from many locally produced items, such as root crops and bananas, in daily meals. Agricultural policy for Trinidad and Tobago must respond to changing consumer preferences as well as the growing concerns over chronic non-communicable diseases, several of which are associated with diet choices, ensuring that the outputs of the sector must be diverse and competitive.  issues and impacts arising from regional integration There is high interdependence of food markets between Trinidad and Tobago and especially the countries of the southern CARICOM. Trade data confirm that the CARICOM market is important to the food and agriculture sector in Trinidad and Tobago. This country directed more than 46% of its agriculture exports to the Southern CARICOM countries, mainly of processed products - beverages, preparations of cereals, tobacco, preparations of vegetables fruits and nuts, with all tariff lines except one having percentage shares in excess of 25%. Trinidad and Tobago is an important market for food exports from countries of the southern Caribbean in particular St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Guyana, St. Lucia and Suriname. Trinidad and Tobago is also an important transhipment and shipment point for many of the food products sold and agricultural technology used in the southern Caribbean. The efficient operation of ports and transhipment operations will benefit neighbouring countries. Given the urgent and more concerted efforts at functional cooperation and policy harmonisation in CARICOM, as part of the Single Market and Economy, the national agriculture policy framework for Trinidad and Tobago will increasingly need to be aligned with and incorporate elements of regional agriculture policy. In this context, national agriculture pillars relating to regional joint ventures and functional linkages to achieve economies of scale and export competitiveness will become important. Agricultural policy for Trinidad and Tobago is expected to contribute to the goal of regional integration and respond to the imperatives of harmonisation and functional cooperation in the development and implementation of regional agricultural policy and strategies and the fostering of cross-border investments and intra-regional trade in agricultural and food products.  issues relating to agriculture’s small share in the national economy Compared to the energy sector (35.8 and 35.7% of GDP in 2009 and 2010), agriculture is a small part of the economy (0.6% of GDP in both 2009 and 2010). In terms of employment, agriculture engaged 3.78% of persons employed in 2009 Qtr 4, compared with 3.54% for the petroleum sector. The small relative share of agriculture in the economy has consequences – agriculture becomes a price-taker in the market for labour. Farming is beset by chronic labour shortages, 10 For Trinidad and Tobago, the main trade agreements are the World Trade Organisation (WTO), the African Caribbean and Pacific (ACP)-European Union (EU) Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) and bi laterals such as with the Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, etc. Appendices 51 which is a major cost item, while at the same time policy concerns are increasingly biased towards ‘reasonable’ consumer prices. The upside, however, is that the smaller the relative size the more feasible it becomes to finance incentives for the sector. Another consequence is that stimulating increased production and productivity will depend to a greater extent on innovation and innovativeness than on infrastructure. The smaller the share of agriculture in the economy the more it is that the acceptable income for a farmer is influenced by non-agriculture developments in the economy. The agriculture sector is recognised as a source of benefits beyond the production of food and fibre. The multifunctional role of agriculture highlights that it provides significant positive impacts, which includes contribution to sustainable development, protection of the environment, sustained vitality of rural areas, poverty alleviation and provider of public goods such as aesthetics. Recognition of agriculture's multifunctional nature and the provision of adequate budgetary allocations for its development are important if it is to be accorded the due attention in the inter-sectoral struggles that pervades the national development process. The role of the State, through the MFPLMA, will be a critical determinant in how the agriculture system is positioned to respond to these policy challenges and contribute to the national goals of prosperity for all through by building a thriving economy and sustainable future. The Portfolio and Manifesto define the Sectoral scope for the MFPLMA as:  Crop Production (Food and Fibre)  Horticulture  Animal Production  Apiculture  Marine Fisheries and Aquaculture  Rural Development (Agriculture) In this context, the agriculture system is defined as encompassing commodity value chains – i.e., activities and support systems for farming (crop, livestock and horticulture production), fishing and sustainable management of the country’s land, and renewable natural marine resources. These activities and support systems generally fall under the purview of the Ministry of Food Production, Land and Marine Affairs and its affiliate institutions. The notable exceptions are that the processing component of the food value chain falls under the Ministry of Trade and Industry, consumer matters fall under the Ministry of Legal Affairs, and a major segment of the sustainable management of land (and flora and fauna) resources fall under Forestry Division of the Ministry of Housing and the Environment. This sub-sectoral focus is in keeping with the sectoral goal of food production and food security, and as well, provides scope for building competitive food and non-food good and services to facilitate both enterprise development and export expansion. It is well recognized that while the Ministry itself is not directly involved or responsible for the actual performance and contribution of these sub-sectors, the quality of the services provided to producers and other actors in these sub-sectors and rural areas will play a determining role. Appendices 52 The Manifesto identified a set of priority initiatives aimed at producing results in these areas in fulfillment of the sector’s mandate. For convenience, these initiatives can be strategically clustered into the following themes: 1. Institutional Coordination and Strengthening 2. Enabling Environment 3. Infrastructure Development and Maintenance 4. Natural Resource and Environmental Management: 1. Institutional Coordination and Strengthening Agricultural Research, Technology and Innovation Platform: Identify an umbrella institution to synergise all existing institutions and information on research and development for agriculture. This will include issues of tissue culture, product identification and development, pest control, quality improvements and appropriate science and technology. Extension Services: Strategically link extension services to farmers as part of a sustainable system Marketing: Strengthen institutional marketing to support farmers for domestic and international penetration 2. Enabling Environment Policy and Strategy development Incentives to (a) foster a multi-sectoral approach to agricultural development such as agriculture/tourism, agriculture/culture. Tobago is already leading the way; (b) facilitate value-added beyond primary production and (c) encourage the banking sector to provide a window for agricultural investment. Risk Management: Introduction of a crop insurance system Agricultural Labour and Human Resources by: (a) Introducing a wage support mechanism for farmers hiring labour in specific food production activities to encourage and attract youth to agriculture depending on their interest and inclination; (b) Linking state temporary work programmes with rural development need, through the possible expansion of CEPEP and URP to provide labour and infrastructure support to the farming community, (c) Working with tertiary education sector to strengthen curriculum to provide trained human resources in areas such as technology, harvesting techniques, farm management, agro processing, agro-entrepreneurship and (d) Training of farmers in HACCP (Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points) and other sanitary and phyto-sanitary requirements; Strategic Partnerships: exploring and securing partnerships with the private sector in strategic areas where necessary to propel the sector as was done in the energy sector; 3. Infrastructure Development and Maintenance Comprehensively address support infrastructure challenges to food security in the first year of Government. Once support infrastructure challenges are addressed, we will manage, monitor, maintain and sustain support system for food production 4. Natural Resource and Environmental Management: Water Management through Integrated Policy: Initiate integrated action on water resources management, drainage, irrigation, flooding water capture, conservation, sustainable food production and food security; Appendices 53 Land Management, with a focus on: (a) a national “agricultural land” information inventory system which documents all allocations by the state and soil profiles to enable government to optimize state land usage; (b) a National Land Use Policy that specifies and protects land to be used exclusively for agriculture; and (c) Regularising “squatter farm lands” on the basis of Fast-track the transfer of deeds and titles to farmers frustrated over the years by impediments to legitimate ownership and inability to use land as collateral in financial transactions Marine Resources: by strengthening management of marine resources and the coastal communities that depend on them; Waste Management: by implementing a zero waste policy where the by-products from agro-processing can be used as a feed stock for farmers. The only stated initiative not represented in the above clustering is that which speaks to ‘Increase agriculture’s contribution to GDP from less than 0.6% to 3% in 5 years (PP pg 59)’. This is, in fact, more of a goal for the sector than an initiative. The considerations emerging from this analysis in terms of defining both a Strategic Plan for the sector and the Ministry include: 1. Whether the four broad areas adequately cover the current mandate of the Ministry as defined under the specific Portfolio areas and are sufficient to meet the policy objectives defined under the 6 Agricultural Development Pillars and contribute meaningfully to the attainment of the 7 national development pillars? 2. Whether the sectoral scope accurately reflects the current scope for the Ministry’s actions, that is, food and non-food production from crops (food and non-food) and animal (including fish and bees). Or whether a key sub-sector has been inadvertently omitted? 3. Do these specified areas of work clearly reflect the incorporation of critical emerging issues as part of the portfolio, such as issues related to Food Safety, Germplasm and biodiversity preservation, or are these areas more effectively addressed elsewhere? And if so, are they reflected in other portfolios? 4. Whether the original intent of placing the functions of Horticulture (excluding propagation centres) and the Botanic Gardens still remains valid in the context of: (a) the Ministry’s mandate revolves around food production, from farm to table, (b) the tendency over time, to shift responsibility for forestry and environment out of the Ministry, (c) use of these resources more for recreation and associated arts and culture activities. 5. Whether the Ministry’s scope of work as defined is in keeping with the perceptions and expectations of its stakeholders? 6. Since the late 1980s Trinidad and Tobago has held a policy position of drawing a distinction between public goods and private goods and in consequence the role of the State. This policy position will remain in effect as the MFPLMA seeks to undertake broad-based efforts to reduce production and marketing risks to its sector’s stakeholders. Appendices 54 Appendix IV: - Other Relevant Information 1 Brief Historical Overview of the Ministry of Food Production, Land and Marine Affairs (MFPLMA) 1987-2010 In April 1987, the Organisation was designated the Ministry of Food Production, Marine Exploitation, Forestry and the Environment. Over the period 1987 to June 1998, while the name was changed to Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Marine Resources, the portfolio remained unchanged, with the Ministry responsible for:  Agricultural Land Development and Distribution  Agricultural Marketing  Agriculture  Food Production  Forestry, Parks, Open Spaces  Horticulture  Fisheries and Marine Exploitation Responsibility for Hydrographic Surveys and Lands and Surveys was added included in December 1995 and remained until these two areas were merged into Land Reform. During this 11 year period, the Ministry’s mandate included responsibility for the major primary sub-sectors – crop and animal, represented by the label Food Production, forestry and fisheries and some key associated services, such as land management, marketing and propagation services. 1987 to 1998 marked a relatively stable period for the Organisation, in terms of consistency of mandate and scope of services provided to the agricultural community. Major institutional changes, defined by adjustments to the Portfolio, began in 2001, with the addition of three distinct areas of responsibility, namely, Agricultural Extension Services, Agricultural Planning and Crop Research. Further adjustments to the Portfolio in 2002 provided some indication of the widening of the scope of the Ministry, with new assigned areas of:  Agricultural Finance & Credit (Policy)  Agricultural Infrastructure  Animal Health and Protection  Plant Health and Protection  Rural Development Other notable changes, with implications for organisational development included:  expansion of the scope of Fisheries to include Aquaculture,  the separation of food production into two distinct areas of responsibility, namely Crop Production and Livestock production and their complementary services as noted above in the new introductions;  and the reintroduction of Hydrographic Surveys and Lands and Surveys as part of the Portfolio. 2002 was therefore a watershed year when the Organisation redefined its role in the development of the agriculture and food sector, retaining and expanding responsibilities that Appendices 55 directly complemented its role, such as research, and relinquishing others, notably those relating to forestry and environmental services, which included Horticulture and the Botanic Gardens. That structure remained in place until the addition of Apiculture in 2006, and the Botanic Gardens in 2007. Thereafter, the area of responsibility which appeared to be in question with respect to its fit in the Ministry’s Portfolio was that of ‘Forestry, National Parks, Wildlife’, and ‘Horticulture’. This situation could be linked to the perception of the forests as a public good, one with a heavy bias on environmental preservation and provision of environmental services linked to tourism. It could also be explained by the operational focus of the forestry Division on biodiversity conservation and protection of state reserves as opposed to promoting use of forests resources for production food and non-food products. In an era where adaptation strategies to climate change impacts are receiving prominence in international, regional and national policy dialogue, a strategic decision needs to be taken with respect to the role of forests in national development, the policy guidelines which will govern the sustainable management of forestry resources and the direct and indirect impact on forestry management of the various Ministries, including and especially the MFPLMA, Tourism Development, among others. The changes to the name and portfolio over the last twenty (20) years could have resulted from the need to more clearly define the scope, mandate and operational focus of the Ministry and or, the need to achieve institutional realignment in response to external dynamics and domestic policy shifts, among others. 2 Details of Name and Portfolio changes over time DATE Ministry Name Ministry Portfolio 1987 (April) Ministry of Food Production, Marine Exploitation, Forestry and the Environment  Agriculture  Marine Exploitation (fish and other living Resources)  Food Production  Food Marketing  Forestry  Agricultural Land Development and Distribution  Environmental/Ecological Resource Management  State Enterprises to be specified b y the Prime Minister Statutory Boards and Similar Bodies  Agricultural Development Bank  Central Marketing Agency  Cocoa and Coffee Industry Board  Agricultural Society of Trinidad and Tobago  Zoological Society of Trinidad and Tobago  Institute of Marine Affairs 1992 (April) Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Marine Resources  Agriculture  Agricultural Marketing  Agricultural Land Development and Distribution  Forestry, Parks and Open Spaces  Horticulture  Food Production  Fisheries and Marine Exploitation (fish and other living Resources) Appendices 56 2 Details of Name and Portfolio changes over time DATE Ministry Name Ministry Portfolio Statutory Boards and Similar Bodies  Agricultural Society of Trinidad and Tobago  Zoological Society of Trinidad and Tobago  Cocoa and Coffee Industry Board Designated Majority Owned Enterprises  National Agricultural Marketing Development Company Limited  Caroni (1975) Limited  Orange Grove National Company Limited  TANTEAK (Trinidad and Tobago Forest Products Company Limited)  Agricultural Development Bank of Trinidad and Tobago  National Fruit Processors Limited  Non Pareil Estates Limited  National Fisheries Company Limited  National Poultry Company Limited 1995 (Dec) Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Marine Resources Same as 1992 with the inclusion of:  Lands and Surveys  Hydrographic Surveys Designated Minority Owned Enterprises  Caribbean Food Corporation Omission of:  Orange Grove National Company Limited Company Limited  National Fruit Processors Limited  National Fisheries Company Limited  National Poultry Company Limited 1998 (June) 1999 (Oct) Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Marine Resources Same as 1995 with the exception of: Land Reform replacing (Lands and Surveys and Hydrographic Surveys) 2001 (Jan) Ministry of Food Production and Marine Resources  Agricultural Extension Services  Agricultural Land Development and Distribution  Agricultural Marketing  Agricultural Planning  Crop Research  Fisheries and Marine Exploitation (fish and other living Resources)  Food Production (Crop and Animal) Statutory Boards and Similar Bodies  Agricultural Society of Trinidad and Tobago  Caribbean Research and Development Institute (CARDI)  Cocoa and Coffee Industry Board Wholly Owned Enterprises  National Agricultural Marketing Development Indirectly Owned Enterprises  Palo Seco Agricultural Enterprises Limited Forestry, Parks and Open Spaces not under the purview of the Ministry Horticulture not under the purview of the ministry Caroni 1975 not under the purview of the ministry Omission of Zoological Society of Trinidad and Tobago 2001 Ministry of Food  Agricultural Extension Services Appendices 57 2 Details of Name and Portfolio changes over time DATE Ministry Name Ministry Portfolio (Oct) Production and Marine Resources  Agricultural Land Development and Distribution  Agricultural Marketing  Agricultural Planning  Crop Research  Fisheries and Marine Exploitation  Food Production (Crop and Animal) Statutory Boards and Similar Bodies  Agricultural Society of Trinidad and Tobago  Caribbean Research and Development Institute (CARDI)  Cocoa and Coffee Industry Board Wholly Owned Enterprises  National Agricultural Marketing Development Indirectly Owned Enterprises  Palo Seco Agricultural Enterprises Limited Forestry, Parks and Open Spaces not under the purview of the ministry Horticulture not under the purview of the ministry Caroni 1975 not under the purview of the ministry 2002 (Feb) Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Marine Resources  Agricultural Extension Services  Agricultural Finance and Credit (Policy)  Animal Health and Protection  Agricultural Infrastructure  Agricultural Land Development and Distribution and Regularization  Agriculture  Agricultural Marketing  Agricultural Policy and Planning  Agricultural Research  Marine Fisheries and Aquaculture  Plant Health and Protection  Rural Development  Crop Production (Food and Fibre  Livestock Production  Hydrographic Surveys  Lands and Surveys Statutory Boards and Similar Bodies  Agricultural Society of Trinidad and Tobago  Caribbean Agricultural Research and Development Institute (CARDI)  Cocoa and Coffee Industry Board  Livestock and Livestock Products Board Wholly Owned Enterprises  Caroni (1975) Limited  National Agricultural Marketing Development Majority Owned Enterprises  Agricultural Development Bank Minority Owned Enterprises  Caribbean Food Corporation Indirectly Owned Enterprises  Palo Seco Agricultural Enterprises Limited Forestry, Parks and Open Spaces not under the purview of the ministry Horticulture not under the purview of the ministry Appendices 58 2 Details of Name and Portfolio changes over time DATE Ministry Name Ministry Portfolio Inclusion of Caroni 1975 Limited 2006 (Aug) Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Marine Resources Same as February 2002 with the following exceptions:  Inclusion of Apiculture  Omission of Palo Seco Agricultural Enterprises Limited 2007 (Dec) Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Marine Resources Same as August 2006 with the following exceptions:  Inclusion of Forestry, National Parks, Wildlife  Inclusion of Horticulture  Inclusion of Botanic Gardens (Separation of Horticulture and Botanic Gardens) 2010 (June) Ministry of Food Production, Land and Marine Affairs Same as August 2006 with the following exceptions:  Forestry, National Parks and Wildlife not under the purview of the ministry Highlighted areas indicate additions to the portfolio and the use of red indicate explanatory notes. Source: Trinidad and Tobago Gazette Appendices 59 3 INDICATIVE Areas of Activity of MFPLMA Entities (February 2011) ENTITY TECHNICAL AREAi ADB EM BDC CCIB CF TDI LLPD ASTT NAM DEVCO SFC TT ABA Enabling Environment Policy formulation Policy advocacy/influence    Producer Representation     Programme development /implementation   Legislation (amendments/ reform)  Agriculture/Industry promotion      Incentive programmes  Land tenure   Financing  Revenue generation/ resource mobilisation    Producer Training       Good Production techniques    Food safety   Farm management/ record keeping    Pest & disease control Water management  Fertilizers & Pesticides  Greenhouse technology  Integrated farm systems  Packaging  Post harvest  Slaughter practices  Grades & standards  Marketing  Input Supply Seeds, seedlings, plants Breeding stock  Artificial Insemination Animal Stock replacement  Farm tools & machinery   Fertilisers/pesticides Veterinary medicines Extension & Services    Production advice Field monitoring Information on market situation Technology transfer   Pest & disease control advice Physical Infrastructure Access roads    Irrigation systems & dams   Appendices 60 ENTITY TECHNICAL AREAi ADB EM BDC CCIB CF TDI LLPD ASTT NAM DEVCO SFC TT ABA Drains  Ponds  Landing sites  Building Rehabilitation (Farm & Residential)  Marketing Facilities Packinghouses Processing facilities Abattoir Livestock Infrastructure  Information development/ Database development Farmer/fisher registration Producer/processor database   Production surveys   Market users registration Market Information /Intelligence    Site/Facility Management Wholesale market  Packing houses  Processing plant  Cold storage facility  Auction yards  Abattoirs  Research, Product Development, Analytical Tools Demonstration plots  Varietal selection & testing  Livestock breeding  Improved Animal management systems  Animal feeding technology/nutrition    Composting & vermiculture  New crop varieties   New value-added Products  Cost of Production models Feasibility Studies  Waste management & biosecurity   Marketing & Trade Research/intelligence   Standards (drafting)  Quality control systems & monitoring    Farm certification   Market Promotions   Local food promotions   Branding  Trade facilitation/fairs   Import standards  Target Markets for Linkages Appendices 61 ENTITY TECHNICAL AREAi ADB EM BDC CCIB CF TDI LLPD ASTT NAM DEVCO SFC TT ABA School dietary programme  Chefs (Restaurants/Hotels)  Bakeries Organisational Development Develop Commodity associations/coops    Support Community organisations Promote Business development    Provide dialogue forum   Support Project preparation  Appendices 62 4 Analysis of Government Allocation to the Ministry of Agriculture, 2006-2011 This report presents an analysis of the Government of Trinidad and Tobago budgetary allocation to the agricultural sector (agriculture, lands, forestry and fisheries) over the period 2005 through 2011. The analysis of the situation, to a large extent, is expected to:  Determine the priority and importance which the government attaches to the sector and its contribution to the national economy;  Test the consistency of the level of commitment of government to the stated goals of the sector, or alternatively, the role ascribed to the sector in the development process; and  Reflect the bargaining power of Agriculture and related departments in a period of enhanced competition for and access to government outlays. The analysis has focused on three main issues, namely: (1) The relative size of Budgetary Allocation to the Agricultural Sector; (2) The actual budgetary expenditure by the sector; and (3) Intra –sectoral allocations. Trends in Budgetary Allocations Table 1 presents the estimates of budgetary allocation for the period 2005 through to 2011. The Table clearly shows an upward trend in the annual budgetary allocation by the Government of Trinidad and Tobago for the period. On the average, for the period under review, the Capital Budget represented 7.2 percent of Total Budgetary Allocation, with the Recurrent Budget accounting for 92.8 percent. The total annual allocations to the Ministry of Agriculture, Lands and Marine Resources (MALMR), fluctuated somewhat during the period, albeit with an upward tendency. The average Capital Budget of the MALMR, for the period, was approximately 16.3 percent of Total MALMR budgetary Allocation, with the Recurrent Budget accounting for 83.7 percent. The relative capital budgetary allocation of the MALMR over the period is, therefore, at a higher percentage than the overall national budget. TABLE 1: TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO ESTIMATES OF BUDGETARY ALLOCATION (2005 – 2011) ITEM ESTIMATES – YEARS (TT $000) 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 TOTAL BUDGET 1 Total Govt. Budget - 35,916,856 37,334,644 41,805,949 50,957,116 45,964,603 52,146,888 2 Total MALMR - 582,995 651,188 674,083 888,546 719,440 720,344 3 2/1 % - 1.62 1.74 1.61 1.74 1.57 1.38 CAPITAL BUDGET 4 Capital Govt - 1,500,000 3,400,000 3,900,000 4,080,000 3,009,500 3,050,000 5 Capital MALMR - 46,850 133,750 148,250 158,150 84,000 118,210 6 5/4 % - 3.12 3.93 3.80 3.88 2.79 3.88 RECURRENT BUDGET 7 Recurrent Govt - 34,416,856 33,934,644 37,905,949 46,877,116 42,955,103 49,096,888 8 Recurrent MALMR - 536,145 517,438 525,833 730,396 635,440 602,134 9 8/7 % - 1.56 1.52 1.39 1.56 1.48 1.23 The budgetary allocation of the MALMR as a percentage of total budgetary allocation (Figure 1) fluctuated over the period under review, with a downward tendency. Appendices 63 Tables 2 through 4 present the total, capital and recurrent actual expenditures, revised estimates and estimates for the MALMR for the period 2005 through 2011. Table 2: TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO TOTAL MALMR BUDGETARY ALLOCATION (2005 -2011) ITEM – YEARS (TT $000) 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 1. ACTUAL 447,038 491,476 605,787 716,565 689,791 - 2. REVISED ESTIMATE - 498,326 632,334 759,610 688,210 707,965 3. ESTIMATE - 582,995 665,688 674,083 888,546 719,440 720,344 Table 3: TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CAPITAL MALMR BUDGETARY ALLOCATION (2005 -2011) ITEM – YEARS (TT $000) 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 1. ACTUAL 84,106 55,326 140,608 142,642 100,374 - 2. REVISED ESTIMATE - 39,885 129,565 144,594 102,114 84,000 3. ESTIMATE - 46,850 133,750 148,250 158,150 84,000 118,210 Table 4: TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO RECURRENT MALMR BUDGETARY ALLOCATION (2005 -2011) ITEM – YEARS (TT $000) 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 1. ACTUAL 362,932 436,150 465,179 573,923 589,417 - 2. REVISED ESTIMATE 458,441 502,769 615,016 586,096 623,965 3. ESTIMATE 536,145 517,438 525,833 730,396 635,440 602,134 In real terms the annual budgetary allocation to the MALMR also fluctuated between 2006 and 2010, however, with an upward tendency. As demonstrated in Figure 2, real budgetary allocation declined between 2006 and 2008, recovered significantly in 2009, but again declined in 2010. 1.3 1.35 1.4 1.45 1.5 1.55 1.6 1.65 1.7 1.75 1.8 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 % Year Figure 1: MALMR Allocations as % of Total Budget Budgetary Allocation Appendices 64 Actual Budgetary Expenditure While the estimate of budgetary allocation represents the intent of Government to influence the national development process, the actual expenditure is a reflection of the real fiscal space available to impact such a process. Time series data available for the period 2006 through 2009 (Table 5) indicates that actual national expenditure was, on the average, 9.44 percent above budgetary allocation. Despite the higher out-turn of national actual expenditure over budgetary allocation, the actual average annual expenditure for the MALMR was 10.5 percent below that which was budgeted. This situation is presented graphically in Figure 3. The situation reflected in Figure 3 may be, to a large extent, the result of the following factors:  The lack of priority and importance which the government attaches to the sector and its contribution to the national economy;  Lack of consistency in the level of commitment of government to the stated goals of the sector, or alternatively, the role ascribed to the sector in the development process; and  The low bargaining power of Agriculture and related departments in a period of enhanced competition for and access to government outlays. 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 TT $ 0 0 0 Year Figure 2: Nominal vs Real Budgetary Allocation of the MALMR Total Nomimal MALMR Total Real MALMR Appendices 65 TABLE 5: TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO ACTUAL BUDGETARY EXPENDETURE (2005 -2011). ITEM ACTUAL – YEARS (TT $000) 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 1. TOTAL GOVT BUDGET 30,631,532 39.288,660 41,608,215 55,465,567 45,330,381 - 2. TOTAL MALMR 447,038 491,476 605,787 716,566 689,791 - 2/1 % 1.46 1.25 1.46 1.29 1.52 - 3. CAPITAL GOVT 3,031,867 1,844,434 4,117,879 4,302,765 3,549.157 - 4. CAPITAL MALMR 84,106 55,326 140,608 142,643 100,374 - 5. 4/3 % 2.77 3.00 3.41 3.32 2.83 - 6. RECURRENT GOVT 27,599,665 37,444,226 37,490,336 51,162,802 41,781,224 - 7. RECURRENT MALMR 362,932 436,150 465,179 573,923 589,417 - 8. 7/6 % 1.31 1.16 1.24 1.12 1.41 Intra-Sectoral Allocation Tables 6 and 7 present the intra-sectoral actual capital and recurrent expenditures, respectively, for the period 2006 through. The following conclusions from the analysis of both the capital and recurrent expenditures are relevant;  On the average, the actual capital expenditure over the period represents 21.5 percent of total expenditure by the MALMR.  The priority attached to research and development seems low in light of the average low expenditure in that critical area (2 percent of total expenditure).  The average actual expenditure for goods and services represents only 20.7 percent of total recurrent expenditure compared to 46.4 percent for personnel expenditure.  Current transfers on the average represent 31.3 percent of total recurrent expenditure. The value, including the efficiencies and effectiveness, of these transfers should be evaluated. 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 2006 2007 2008 2009 % Year Figure 3: MALMR Actual Expenditure vs Estimates (% of Total) Estimates of Budgetary Allocation Actual Budgetary Expenditure Appendices 66 TABLE 6: ACTUAL CAPITAL AGRICULTURAL BUDGETARY EXPENDITURE (2005 -2011) ITEM YEARS (TT $000) 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 1 PRODUCTIVE SECTORS 1.1 Production and marketing 1,644 1,644 2,319 2,319 3,944 3,944 5,499 5,499 2,625 2,625 2 ECONOMIC INFRASTRUCTURE 2.1 Fishing 2.2 Forestry 2.3 Land management services 2.4 Research and development 2.5 Production & marketing 2.6 Agricultural access roads 2.7 other services 2.8 Drainage and irrigation 2.9 Other economic services 62,769 1,550 5,850 7,631 22,904 2,124 12,530 10,180 42,920 2,026 6,001 10,297 1,191 7,847 15,557 124,713 5,051 9,766 10,018 34,912 4,136 16,510 44,322 125,922 2,475 11,976 9,006 13,348 360 38,680 3,071 8,207 38,799 84,099 1,950 15,841 8,932 7,445 1,496 14,496 4,355 7,975 21,608 3 SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE 3.1 Recreation and culture 1,344 1,344 2,106 2,106 4 MULTI-SECTORAL/ OTHER SERVICES 4.1 Agriculture, forestry & fisheries 4.2 General services 19,693 3,019 16,674 10,088 2,990 7,097 11,951 2,929 9,022 9,878 2,985 6,892 11,544 3,750 7,794 TOTAL CAPITAL 84,106 55,326 140,512 142,643 100,374 Appendices 67 TABLE 7: ACTUAL RECURRENT AGRICULTURAL BUDGETARY EXPENDITURE (2005 -2011) ITEM YEARS (TT $000) 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 1 PERSONNEL EXPENDITURE 1.1 General administration 1.2 Agriculture 1.3 Fisheries 1.4 Animal production & health 1.5 Lands and surveys 1.6 Land management 1.7 Horticulture 1.8 Forestry 161,302 38,594 85,054 3,836 18,024 15,794 163,047 38,685 86,147 4,336 18,077 15,802 218,627 53,473 114,791 5,439 23,388 21,536 287,014 60,500 113,944 5,561 23,730 21,346 10,420 51,513 296,452 55,961 111,011 5,726 23,616 23,245 13,420 63,473 2 GOODS AND SERVICES 2.1 General administration 2.2 Agriculture 2.3 Fisheries 2.4 Animal production& health 2.5 Lands and surveys 2.6 Land management 2.7 Horticulture 2.6 Forestry 46,698 12,263 19,870 2,545 3,852 8,167 96,178 56,445 21,439 4,142 4,366 9,786 100,581 59,725 21,422 4,650 4,554 10,230 135,344 54,190 37,359 5,503 6,621 11,780 1,225 5,759 12,907 123,922 61,288 24,485 4,387 4,934 10,295 1,002 4,901 12,631 3 MINOR EQUIPMENT PURCHASES 3.1 General administration 3.2 Agriculture 3.3 Fisheries 3.4 Animal production & health 3.5 Lands and surveys 3.6 Land management 3.7 Horticulture 3.8 Forestry ,141 1,470 2,095 668 782 1,126 8,313 1,162 4,721 254 677 1,499 10,756 1,828 5,060 440 1,045 2383 7,569 1,144 3,466 373 605 879 686 417 5,196 600 2,423 143 482 565 352 430 201 4 CURRENT TRANSFERS & SUBSIDIES 4.1 Current transfers 4.2 Subsidies 131,685 72,585 59,100 145,518 73,715 71,803 107,022 67,229 39,793 115,219 84,194 31,025 125,336 85,340 39.996 5 CURRENT TRANSFER TO STAT. BOARDS AND SIMILAR BODIES 17,106 23,095 28,194 28,777 38,511 TOTAL RECURRENT 362,932 436,150 465,179 573,923 589,417 Appendices 68 Appendix V : Sample Unit/Division/Entity Strategic Plan Format aligned to the MFPLMA Overall Framework AAPPPPEENNDDIIXX VV [[SSaammppllee UUnniitt//DDiivviissiioonn//EEnnttiittyy SSttrraatteeggiicc PPllaann FFoorrmmaatt aalliiggnneedd ttoo tthhee MMFFPPLLMMAA OOvveerraallll FFrraammeewwoorrkk]] MINISTRY: Ministry of Food Production, Land and Marine Affairs Development Pillar 1- People Centred Development MFPLMA Programme 1.1 Institutional Strengthening and Integration of Producer and Community Stakeholder Groups and Associations Unit/Division/Entity Eg. Agricultural Planning Unit/Division/Entity Specific Objective related to programme Eg. to provide the analytical information to guide the development of stakeholder engagement strategies and support systems? MEASURES: (Actions will remain consistent in terminology and numbering with the Overall Strategic Plan) Unit’s Main Activities/ Strategies Strategic Partners Baseline Data 2010 Performance Indicator Target 2011 Is this year still necessary or redundant? 2012 2013 2014 2015 1) Strengthen stakeholder groups and organisation to.....  What exactly will the unit do in these programmes  within MFPLMA, Entities  Other Ministries Is there need to realign the 1-Yr Operational Plan? 2) Develop and manage public awareness and education to .... AAPPPPEENNDDIIXX VV [[SSaammppllee UUnniitt//DDiivviissiioonn//EEnnttiittyy SSttrraatteeggiicc PPllaann FFoorrmmaatt aalliiggnneedd ttoo tthhee MMFFPPLLMMAA OOvveerraallll FFrraammeewwoorrkk]] MINISTRY: Ministry of Food Production, Land and Marine Affairs Development Pillar 1- People Centred Development MFPLMA Programme 1.2 Conservation and enhancement of horticultural resources and public spaces Unit/Division/Entity ?? Unit/Division/Entity Specific Objective related to programme ?? MEASURES: (Actions will remain consistent in terminology and numbering with the Overall Strategic Plan) Unit’s Main Activities/ Strategies Strategic Partners Baseline Data 2010 Performance Indicator Target 2011 Is this year still necessary or redundant? 2012 2013 2014 2015 3) Provide high quality and safe ornamental, horticultural and agricultural planting material to... Is there need to realign the 1-Yr Operational Plan? AAPPPPEENNDDIIXX VV:: SSaammppllee UUnniitt//DDiivviissiioonn//EEnnttiittyy SSttrraatteeggiicc PPllaann FFoorrmmaatt aalliiggnneedd ttoo tthhee MMFFPPLLMMAA OOvveerraallll FFrraammeewwoorrkk]] MINISTRY: Ministry of Food Production, Land and Marine Affairs Development Pillar 2- Poverty Reduction and Social Justice MFPLMA Programme 2.1 Sustainable Livelihoods and Food Security Development Unit/Division/Entity ?? Unit/Division/Entity Specific Objective related to programme ?? MEASURES: (Actions will remain consistent in terminology and numbering with the Overall Strategic Plan) Unit’s Main Activities/ Strategies Strategic Partners Baseline Data 2010 Performance Indicator Target 2011 Is this year still necessary or redundant? 2012 2013 2014 2015 4) Strengthen regulatory & administrative processes for land management and development to... Is there need to realign the 1-Yr Operational Plan? 5) Improve, upgrade and maintain critical agriculture and fisheries infrastructure and facilities to... 6) Strengthen skills and business management capacity of small producers, including women and youth to... AAPPPPEENNDDIIXX VV:: SSaammppllee UUnniitt//DDiivviissiioonn//EEnnttiittyy SSttrraatteeggiicc PPllaann FFoorrmmaatt aalliiggnneedd ttoo tthhee MMFFPPLLMMAA OOvveerraallll FFrraammeewwoorrkk]] MINISTRY: Ministry of Food Production, Land and Marine Affairs Development Pillar 2- Poverty Reduction and Social Justice MFPLMA Programme 2.1 Sustainable Livelihoods and Food Security Development Unit/Division/Entity ?? Unit/Division/Entity Specific Objective related to programme ?? MEASURES: (Actions will remain consistent in terminology and numbering with the Overall Strategic Plan) Unit’s Main Activities/ Strategies Strategic Partners Baseline Data 2010 Performance Indicator Target 2011 Is this year still necessary or redundant? 2012 2013 2014 2015 7) Develop and establish risk management and mitigation plans for small farmers and fisherfolk 8) Promote and facilitate expansion of home gardening with a focus on food production in ‘at risk’ communities.