Budget Efficiency : Case of National Agricultural Advisory Services in Uganda

Drake Rukundo (UGANDA)

July 2013

Key Aspects of the Presentation

1.    A Synopsis of the NAADS Program in Uganda

2.  Explanation of the Dialogue Questions

3. Content,  Structure  and  Presentation  of Evidences in the Case Study

4.  Suggestions  for  Group  Work  in  discussions around the key Case questions 

About NAADS

‘A decentralized, farmer owned and private sector serviced extension system contributing to the realization of the

agricultural sector development objectives of increasing food security and lifting incomes of Ugandan farmers through the

provision of farmer-centered advisory services’

NAADS is an alternative to the Training and Visit (T&V) system. With NAADS, Uganda became one of the first African Countries to implement this common framework for agricultural extension.

1.    Uganda  is  implementing a Decentralization  form of Governance under which  structures NAADS is implemented

2. The  idea of NAADS was part of an attempt  to expedite support service extension, however it later  became  imperative  to  supply  inputs alongside advisory services

3. The  private  sector  services  providers  and  a new  management  structure  were  established as vehicles of implementation

About NAADS

NAADS Core Objectives1. Creation of options for financing and delivery of appropriate

advisory and technical services for different farmer types;

2. Gradually reducing the share of public financing of farm advisory costs such that public financing of farm advisory does not exceed 50%;

3. After the first phase of the NAADS, to realize a shift from public to private delivery of advisory services;

4. To empower subsistence farmers with access private extension services and market information; and

5. To develop the professional capacity of the private sector to sustainably meet the demand for agricultural services at the grassroots.

The NAADS Impact Pathways 

How implementation was carried out

• An Implementation Strategy with Guidelines that involved five (5) aspects

1. NAADS Secretariat at National Level2. District NAADS Coordinators at District Level3. Sub County NAADS Coordinators at Sub-district levels4. Each  farmers  within  a  village  constituted  a  Farmer  Forum 

aided by Group Promoters trained under Farmer Institutional Development  Support  Project  (Farmer Forums supported with Technical Expertise through Demonstration sites, linked to markets and

encouraged to organize themselves into Savings and Credit entities)5. Private Sector Firms Contracted both at National and District 

Level to Support Technical on-farm extension services

Governm

ent 

spon

sored 

advisory 

service 

extension

Orientation  and Sensitization  of stakeholders  at  the National  level  on Implementation Guidelines 

Back-up  Technical  Services to  selected  participating districts  and  sub-counties. Modalities  to  implement Farmer  Institutional Development (FID) support at grassroots

Coordination  with  National Research  Organization (NARO),  Private  Service providers  and  linkages  to modern  farming technologies to communities

 

What has been achieved under Phase 1

• The Program has bridged the gap that existed between the state level service providers and farmers...’brought services close to the people’

• Farmer Institutional Development conducted for farmers organized by Farmer Group Promoters and Farmer Forums

• Increase in exposure to over 60,000 farming households on new farming technologies and other 45,000 constantly provided with market information in over 40 districts of Uganda

• Other benefits of cross-cutting nature related to improvements in social governance, business ecumenism, gender and development, HIV/AIDS and environmental and natural resource conservation

What was Achieved?NAADS Activity 2009/1

02010/1

12011/1

22012/1

3No. of functional sub county Farmer Forums set-up

1,060 1,100 1,100 1,100

No. of Agricultural processing facilities equipped

900 3,000 3,000 3,000

No. of Agri-business firms supported 21 83 100 100

No. of farmer groups linked to market information

18,010 34,100 45,000 45,000

No. farmer groups trained in quality standards of products

15 70 190 190

No, of farmers who received extension services

26,000 51,000 60,000 60,000

No. of farmers who trained in commodity value chain

18,500 50,000 60,000 60,000

No. of farmers linked to technological demonstration sites

13,134 50,000 60,000 60,000

Vote Cost of Services in US $ $58,6bn

$117.2bn

$127.1bn

$149.5bn

Source: Ministry of Finance Planning and Economic Development National Budget Framework Paper 2010/11-2014/15?

Average Annual NAADS SPENDING under Phase 1

Budget itemAllocation (UGX bn)

Utilized (UGX bn) %

Advisory and Information Service to farmers 2,498.72 2,268.60 56.7Technology Development and Linkage with Markets 209.6 179.56 4.5Quality Assurance- Technical auditing of service providers 148.92 122.49 3.1Private Sector Insitutional Development 199.11 2.43 0.1Program management and Monitoring 1,943.16 1,425.02 35.6Total 4,999.51 3,998.10 100

Source: Consultant Calculation of phase one annual spending from NAADS Annual Reports 2006-2010?

What have been the Challenges?

1. Advisory or Supply of farmer inputs or both?- the challenge of providing advisory services to farmers with limited capacity to implement/utilize the ‘advice’

2. Financial Accountability around supply and management of inputs and implements to farmer groups

3. Challenges of M&E and support supervision of both the program itself and its activities

4. The Structure of implementation that created an overlap within decentralized systems already in place

Presenting The Dialogue Questions1.  The idea of provision of extension services how best can it

be tackled in your countries ?2. How can countries assess (and with what evidence) whether

extension has been efficiently managed?

3. Looking at this case study, would you, or would you not, agree that NAADS implementation has been cost effective? For instance what is a reasonable level of overheads in such a case?

4.  How it possible to measure if an initiative like NAADS delivers the desired impact and results in sustained improvements in growth and rural livelihoods?

Success in Deliberations