Document of
The International Fund for Agricultural Development
REPUBLIC OF MALAWI
SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION PROGRAMME (SAPP)
PROGRAMME DESIGN REPORT
MAIN REPORT AND ANNEXES
East and Southern Africa Division
Project Management Department, IFAD
DRAFT
Report No ………….
November 2011
This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of
their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without the authorisation of the
International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
MALAWI: SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION PROGRAMME
PROGRAMME DESIGN REPORT
MAIN REPORT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
I.
II.
III.
IV.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
STRATEGIC CONTEXT AND RATIONALE ..........................................................1
A. Background.....................................................................................................................1
B. Country and Rural Development and Poverty Context ..................................................1
C. Rationale .........................................................................................................................6
PROGRAMME DESCRIPTION ..........................................................................8
A.
B.
C.
D.
Programme Area and Target Group................................................................................8
Programme Development Objectives ...........................................................................10
Components/Outcomes.................................................................................................10
Lessons Learned and reflected in Project Design .........................................................17
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
Approach.......................................................................................................................17
Organisational Framework ...........................................................................................17
Planning, M&E and Knowledge Management .............................................................18
Financial Management, Procurement, Audit and Governance .....................................19
Supervision ...................................................................................................................21
Risk Identification and Mitigation ................................................................................21
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
Programme Costs..........................................................................................................22
Programme Financing...................................................................................................23
Summary Benefit Analysis ...........................................................................................24
Sustainability ................................................................................................................24
Loan Conditions and Covenants ...................................................................................25
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION .......................................................................17
PROGRAMME COSTS, FINANCING AND BENEFITS............................................22
Annexes:
1. Poverty and Rural Context Background
2. Poverty, Targeting and Gender
3. Country Performance and Lessons Learned
4. Detailed Project Description
5. Implementation Arrangements
6. Planning, M&E and Knowledge Management
7. Financial Management and Disbursements
8. Procurement
9. Project Cost and Financing
10. Economic and Financial Analysis
11. Draft Programme Implementation Manual
12. Adherence to IFAD Policies
13. Contents of the Programme Life File
Working Papers:
1. The Agricultural Sector
2. Policy and Institutional Framework
3. Poverty, Gender and Targeting
4. Agricultural Extension
5. Intensified Sustainable Crop Production
6. M&E, Knowledge Management and Communications
7. Programme Implementation
8. Procurement and Financial Management
9. Programme Costs
10. Financial and Economic Analysis
11. Draft Programme Implementation Manual
i
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS
Currency Unit = Malawi Kwacha
USD 1.00 = MWK 150 (July 2011)
WEIGHTS AND MEASURES
International Metric System, unless specified in text
FISCAL YEAR
1st July to 30th June
ii
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
ADC
ADD
ADMARC
AEDC
AEDO
ASWAp
ASWAp-SP
AWPB
CA
CAADP
CGIAR
COSOP
DAEECC
DAES
DC
DCAFS
DFID
DOF
EMC
EPA
FAO
FISP
FUM
GAPs
GOM
ICB
IRLADP
JICA
KM
M&E
MDGs
MDPC
MGDS
MIWD
MLGRD
MoAIWD
MOFDP
MOIT
MPRS
NASFAM
NRC
ODPP
OPV
PIM
PIU
PM&E
PPP
RIMS
RLEEP
RLSP
SAPP
SHFS
USAID
VDC
WB
Area Development Committee
Agricultural Development Division
Agricultural Development and Marketing Corporation
Agricultural Extension Development Coordinator
Agricultural Extension Development Officer
Agricultural Sector Wide Approach (formerly ADP)
ASWAp Support Project (formerly ADP-SP)
Annual Workplan and Budget
Conservation Agriculture
Comprehensive African Agriculture Development Programme
Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research
Country Strategic Opportunities Programme
District Agricultural Extension Coordinating Committee
Department of Agricultural Extension Services
District Council (formerly District Assembly)
Donor Committee on Agriculture and Food Security
Department for International Development (UK)
Director of Finance (MOAIWD)
Executive Management Committee (of ASWAp)
Extension Planning Area
Food and Agricultural Organisation
Farm Input Subsidy Programme
Farmers Union of Malawi
Good Agricultural Practices
Government of Malawi
International Competitive Bidding
Irrigation, Rural Livelihoods and Agricultural Development Project
Japan International Cooperation Agency
Knowledge Management
Monitoring and Evaluation
Millennium Development Goals
Ministry of Development Planning and Cooperation
Malawi Growth and Development Strategy
Ministry of Irrigation and Water Development
Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development
Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Water Development
Ministry of Finance and Development Planning
Ministry of Industry and Trade
Malawi Poverty Reduction Strategy
National Smallholder Farmer Association of Malawi
Natural Resources College
Office of the Director of Public Procurement
Open Pollinated Variety
Project/Programme Implementation Manual
Project Implementation Unit
Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation
Public-Private Partnership
Results Impact Management System
Rural Livelihoods and Economic Enhancement Programme
Rural Livelihoods Support Programme
Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme
Smallholder Food Security
United States Agency for International Cooperation
Village Development Committee
World Bank
iii
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
iv
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.
Country Strategy. The goal of the GOM-IFAD country strategy is to: “reduce poverty and
expand economic opportunities among the rural population”. The objectives include: (i) increased
sustainable productivity through improved natural resource management; and (ii) the creation of
sustainable agricultural input and produce markets. The Sustainable Agricultural Production
Programme (SAPP) will spearhead GOM-IFAD efforts towards these objectives.
2.
Rural Poverty. About 52 per cent of the population live below the national poverty line of
Malawian kwacha 16,165/year and about 22 per cent live in extreme poverty. According to the
Human Development Index Report for 2009 compiled by the United Nations Development
Programme, 73.9 per cent of the population live below the income poverty line of US$1.25/day and
90.4 per cent below the US$2.0/day threshold. The Malawi Growth and Development Strategy
(MGDS), which is the successor to the Malawi Poverty Reduction Strategy (MPRS) sets the overall
agenda for social and economic development of the country with a clear focus on agricultural and
rural development and rural poverty reduction.
3.
Agricultural Sector Policies are built around two key instruments: the Agricultural SectorWide Approach (ASWAp) including the Farm Input Subsidy Programme (FISP). SAPP is designed to
be implemented within the ASWAp framework in parallel with related donor-supported initiatives;
and to complement and amplify the impact of the FISP, which absorbs the great majority of
Government funding for the sector. The ASWAp envisages a single comprehensive programme and
budget framework, and a formalised process for better coordination between Government and donors.
The ASWAp targets three focus areas, two key support services and two cross-cutting issues. The
target areas are: food security and risk management; commercial agriculture, agro-processing and
market development; and sustainable agricultural land and water management. The two key support
services are technology generation and dissemination; and institutional strengthening and capacity
building. The cross-cutting issues are HIV prevention and AIDS impact mitigation; and gender equity
and empowerment. The ASWAp is being implemented by the Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and
Water Development (MoAIWD) through the ASWAp Secretariat. GOM expects that all agricultural
sector programmes and projects will eventually be managed within the ASWAp framework with a
gradual progression from discrete project funding to pooled financing.
4.
Key Challenges to agricultural development and rural poverty reduction include; (i) very
small landholdings which are scarcely able to provide subsistence food needs; (ii) low crop yields due
to land degradation, declining soil fertility and lack of irrigation; (iii) lack of diversification in
farming systems (80-90% is maize); (iv) poorly developed markets for agricultural inputs and
produce; and (v) weak service provision, particularly rural financial services and agricultural research
and extension. The ASWAp and the FISP represent the two main pillars of the Government’s efforts
to address these challenges.
5.
Programme Rationale. Rural poverty is closely linked to the capacity of the environment to
support the very high population density. Smallholder agriculture is characterised by low input maize
production to meet subsistence food needs. Fortunately there are a number of options available to
increase production more sustainably, ranging from simple and affordable modifications to the way
crops are grown; to full-scale re-design of farming systems including incorporation of new crops,
varieties, equipment, agro-chemicals and other technologies. Most of these good agricultural practices
(GAPs) are based on the principles of conservation agriculture including: (i) minimal disturbance of
the soil and early planting; (ii) retention of crop residues and weeds on the soil surface; (iii) timely
and efficient weed control; (iv) crop rotation or intercropping (with emphasis on leguminous species);
and (v) correct use of organic and inorganic fertilisers.
6.
On-farm trials have been undertaken to validate these techniques, with generally favourable
results. However, adoption has been limited due to weak knowledge management and
communications, inadequate capacity in the extension system and institutional pre-occupation with
the funding and management of the FISP. In addition, further on-farm trials and demonstrations are
needed to refine the techniques for different agro-ecological and socio-economic contexts. The
i
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
objective is to improve the livelihoods of large numbers of rural households through the adoption of
affordable packages of improved agricultural practices using a low-cost farmer-to-farmer extension
approach, supported by further adaptive research and knowledge management.
7.
Programme Area. The Programme will be area-focussed and will concentrate on
enhancement of agricultural productivity based on simple/affordable technologies which are suitable
for smallholder adoption, and will help bridge the large gap between actual and potential yields.
MOAIWD has selected six districts for inclusion in the Programme.
8.
The Target Group is defined as “smallholder food security” (SHFS) households comprising
productive men and women who have the potential to achieve household food security, but due to
limited resources find it difficult to produce a surplus for market. They aim at food security and need
technical and financial support in terms of basic inputs such as seed and fertiliser to increase food
crop yields. This group constitutes 80% of smallholder farmers, and is the focus of the public
extension service. The majority of this group are responsive to interventions aimed at alleviating
hunger, but often depend on external support for technologies which involve purchased inputs. The
SHFS group also includes the ultra-poor who have few assets, are often chronically ill or disabled,
and live in elderly or child-headed households. This extremely vulnerable group relies mainly on lowpaid seasonal labour.
9.
Targeting Mechanisms. The Programme will have mechanisms to ensure that the targeted
poor men and women actually participate in the planned interventions. These include: (i) geographic
targeting measures; (ii) enabling measures; (iii) empowerment and capacity building measures; (iv)
self-targeting measures based on options which are attractive to the poor, but less so to the better off;
(v) direct targeting measures; and (vi) procedural measures.
10.
Programme Objectives. The Programme will be implemented over a nine year period as an
“earmarked” project within the ASWAp. The goal is to contribute to reduction of poverty and
improved food security among the rural population. The specific development objective is to achieve
a viable and sustainable smallholder agricultural sector employing good agricultural practices
(GAPs). Figure 1 provides an overview of the Programme illustrating how the various components
and sub-components will contribute to the achievement of the objectives.
11.
The main thrust of the Programme is enhancement of agricultural productivity based on
simple/affordable GAPs which will help to bridge the large gap between actual and potential crop
yields. It will greatly improve the effectiveness and impact of the FISP, which provides access to
improved seeds and fertilisers, but does little to promote their efficient and effective use. An adaptive
research programme will be supported to fine-tune GAP packages to Malawian socio-economic and
agro-ecological conditions; in conjunction with knowledge management and communication
initiatives. A range of extension tools will be deployed to train farmers to adopt GAPs that will
sustainably increase staple crop yields (e.g. maize, pigeon peas, groundnuts and cassava), improve
soil health, and enable greater crop diversification and commercialisation. The Programme will also
facilitate farmers in obtaining access to the inputs needed to utilise GAPs including tools, equipment,
seeds of alternative (mainly legume) crops, fertilisers, financial services, post-harvest facilities, and
improved market infrastructure.
ii
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
Figure 1: Programme Overview
Goal: Contribute to reduction of poverty and improved food security among the rural population.
Development Objective: A viable and sustainable smallholder agricultural sector employing
good agricultural practices (GAPs).
Outcome 1: Appropriate agricultural
technologies/GAPs developed and
understood by potential beneficiaries.
Outcome 2: Widespread farmer
adotion of GAPs leading to improved
productivity and crop yields
Comp. 1: Adpative Research and Knowledge Mangt
Comp. 2: Farmer Adoption of GAPs
Output 1.1:
Action research programmes
which develop/refine GAP
packages adapted to various
agro-ecological and socioeconomic contexts
Output 1.2:
Knowledge about GAPs
effectively gathered,
managed and
communicated to
stakeholders
Output 2.1:
Improved agricultural
extension services accessible
to target group raising
awareness and sensitising
about GAPs
Sub-Component 1.1: Adaptive Research
a) Research planning and management
b) Capacity building
c) On-farm trials
d) Soil fertility enhancement
e) Research on adoption behaviour
Output 2.2:
Target group has access
to necessary inputs for
sustained adoption of
GAPs
Sub-Component 2.1: Improved Agricultural Extension
a) Farmer to farmer extension network
b) Extension coordination
c) DAES suport: headquarters level
d) DAES support: district level
e) DAES support: EPA level
f) Training for DAES staff
g) Farmer group development
h) Extension materials and mass media
i) Extension programme management
Sub-Component 2.2: Access to Key Agricultural Inputs
a) Seed multipication and distribution
b) Post harvest management
c) Engageement with agro-dealers
d) Access to financial services
Sub-Component 1.2: Knowledge Mangement and Communication
a) Knowledege management and communication strategy
b) Knowledge harvesting, storgage and processing
c) Knowledge sharing and learning parterships
Component 3: Programme Management and Coordination
12.
Programme Phasing. The Programme will be implemented over nine years using a
graduated approach to establish operational modalities, train staff, screen/evaluate GAPs to be
promoted, engage with lead farmers, and develop partnerships and coordination arrangements; before
up-scaling to engage with the target groups over the full Programme area. Around 200,000 farming
households are expected to participate.
13.
Programme Management. The Programme will be fully integrated within the ASWAp
framework. All activities will be undertaken through the mainstream systems of Government.
Procedures for Programme oversight and management will be in line with those established by the
ASWAp Secretariat and documented in its operational manuals, apart from those relating to financial
management and audit as detailed in Annex 7.
14.
Total Programme Cost is estimated to be USD 51.1 million of which about 89% will be
financed by IFAD comprising half highly concessional loan and half grant. Part of the grant
component will be used to finance a Programme Preparatory Facility (PPF) to facilitate quick
Programme start-up. As the Programme develops and production increases it is foreseen that the
OPEC Fund for International Development (OFID) may provide co-financing to fund the
development of market infrastructure.
iii
Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme: Logical Framework Matrix
Results Hierarchy
Goal: Contribute to reduction of poverty and
improved food security among the rural population.

Prevalence rates for food insecurity in project
districts decline by 30%

RIMS level 3 indicators: prevalence of child
malnutrition and inventory of household assets.
Level of national food production increases by
10%
Average maize yields in target group households
increase from 1.3t/ha to 3.0 t/ha.


Means of Verification
Household income and expenditure surveys.

RIMS impact survey questionnaire (baseline
and final)

Agricultural production and trade statistics.

Baseline and follow-up crop production and
yield surveys in Programme areas.

Records of FISP and independent monitoring
reports on Programme.
Assumptions
iv

GOM will be prepared to phase out subsidies
once farmers are able to finance procurement
of inputs themselves.

GAP packages suitable for adoption by
target groups will be identified and accepted
by potential beneficiaries.

Suitable partners to undertake action
research programmes will be engaged.

% of land planted to high value (non-maize) crops
increased from 10% to 20%.

At least 33% of target group farmers accessing
crop inputs through commercial channels.
Outcome 1: Appropriate agricultural
technologies/GAPs developed and understood by
potential beneficiaries.

Number of improved agronomic packages tested
and demonstrated.

Documents describing key elements of
agronomic packages tested and demonstrated.

Awareness of improved agronomic packages
amongst stakeholder groups.

Awareness surveys (baseline and follow-up).
Output 1.1: Action research programmes which
develop/refine GAP packages adapted to various
agro-ecological and socio-economic contexts, and
improved methods of disseminating such packages
to rural communities.

Results of action research programmes which
demonstrate superior GAP packages suitable for
smallholders.

Reports on trials and demonstrations.


Farmer and researcher evaluation of GAP
packages.
Measurements of crop productivity and
profitability.
Output 1.2: Knowledge about GAPs effectively
gathered, managed and communicated to
smallholders.

Regional knowledge centres on GAPs effectively
networked.

Reports of regional knowledge networking
activities.

Regional agricultural knowledge sharing
networks will be effectively engaged.

Knowledge generated by programme widely
disseminated and understood by stakeholders.

Information dissemination materials produced
and distributed.


Reports on other knowledge management
activities (e.g. workshops).
Other partners will cooperate in the
development of effective knowledge
management systems.

Surveys on awareness and acceptance of
GAPs amongst farmers, extension workers
and researchers.

Baseline and follow-up surveys on
agricultural practices in Programme areas.

Farmers will be willing and able to procure
the necessary inputs to sustain use of GAPs
after support ends.
Outcome 2: Widespread farmer adoption of GAPs
leading to improved productivity and crop yields.

At least 80,000 smallholders adopting GAPs in the
Programme area.

40% of farmers continue to apply GAPs after
Programme support ended.
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme: Programme Design Report
Programme Design Report – Main Report


Development Objective: A viable and sustainable
smallholder agricultural sector employing good
agricultural practices (GAPs).
Indicators a/
Prevalence rates for rural poverty in project
districts decline by 20%

At least 50% of target group households receiving
extension services on GAPs.

Records of extension service providers (Govt,
NGO, private).

An adequate number of suitably qualified
extension service providers will be available.

135,000 households adopting GAPs by Year 9

At least two thirds of farmers satisfied with
extension services.
Baseline and follow-up studies on adoption
behavour


Adequate research-extension linkages will be
established and maintained.

Baseline and follow-up surveys on households
receiving services and level of satisfaction.

Extensions materials and training curricula.

Records maintained by partners engaged to
undertake seed multiplication and distribution.


Baseline and follow-up surveys of agrodealers.
It will be possible to engage suitable partners
for seed multiplication and distribution,
agro-dealer support and rural financial
services.

Records maintained by partners engaged to
provide financial services to target group
farmers.

Quarterly and annual ASWAp progress
reports.

Programme will be implemented within the
emerging ASWAp framework.

IFAD supervision reports.

MoAIWD will provide adequate resources
for efficient and effective management.

ASWAp consolidated AWPBs.


ASWAp M&E reports.

Mid-Term Review and programme
completion report.
Adequate resources allocated to Programme
management, monitoring and evaluation in a
timely fashion.

Output 2.2: Target group has access to necessary
inputs for sustained adoption of GAPs.
v
Outcome 3: Programme efficiently and effectively
integrated within the ASWAp framework.
Output 3.1: Programme management systems fully
integrated within the ASWAp management system.

160 tonnes per annum of improved (non-maize)
seed produced and distributed to target group
households.

At least 75% of agro-dealers in Programme area
stocking key agricultural inputs (type, quantity)
needed for GAPs.

9,700 grain silos distributed.

Level of storage losses decreased from 20% to 5%

At least half of target group households accessing
formal credit for purchase of crop inputs.

ASWAp performance indicators (see ASWAp
PIM)

Assessments of the ASWAp Secretariat’s
effectiveness in facilitating Programme
implementation.
a/ All indicators to be gender disaggregated and aligned with ASWAp key performance indicators.
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme: Programme Design Report
Programme Design Report – Main Report
Output 2.1: Improved agricultural extension
services accessible to target group households
raising awareness and sensitising farmers about
GAPs.
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
REPUBLIC OF MALAWI
SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION PROGRAMME (SAPP)
PROGRAMME DESIGN REPORT
MAIN REPORT
I.
STRATEGIC CONTEXT AND RATIONALE
A. Background
1.
During 2009, a joint IFAD/Government of Malawi (GOM) team developed a Country
Strategic Opportunities Programme (COSOP) to serve as the framework for IFAD/GOM partnership
in rural poverty reduction over the period 2010-2015. This follows a long period of engagement
between IFAD and GOM in which IFAD has supported ten investment projects and three grants with
a total value of USD 118 million. The COSOP is anchored on: (i) the Malawi Growth and
Development Strategy (MGDS) 2006-11; (ii) the Agriculture Sector Wide Approach (ASWAp) which defines the agricultural development agenda for the period 2011-15; (iii) the Compact between
GOM and other stakeholders for the Comprehensive African Agricultural Development Programme
(CAADP); and (iv) the Malawi Development Assistance Strategy 2006-2011 which is Malawi’s
blueprint for making development assistance more effective.
2.
In accordance with the consensus reached during the COSOP process, the goal of the GOMIFAD country strategy is to: “reduce poverty and expand economic opportunities among the rural
population”. In pursuing this goal IFAD will support GOM in its efforts to achieve sustainable
reductions in the high levels of rural poverty seen throughout most of the country. The COSOP
objectives include: (i) increased sustainable productivity through improved natural resource
management; and (ii) the creation of sustainable agricultural input and produce markets. The COSOP
identifies four possible initiatives for incorporation in the project pipeline, of which the highest
priority is the Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP).
B.
Country and Rural Development and Poverty Context
Country Economic Background
3.
Malawi is a densely populated landlocked country of about 14 million people in an area of
118,484 km2, of which 24,000 km2 is fresh water. Population growth is 2.8 % per annum and the
country has one of the lowest levels of per capita GDP in the world (USD 290 in 2008). With a human
development index of 0.493 Malawi is ranked 160th out of 182 countries, while its gender
development index is 0.432, giving it a ranking of 143rd out of 182 countries.
4.
In 2002, the Government launched the Malawi Poverty Reduction Strategy (MPRS) with the
goal of achieving “sustainable poverty reduction through empowerment of the poor” over a three-year
period. The MPRS achieved a modest decline in poverty levels while real GDP growth averaged only
1.5% per annum. The MPRS was reformulated during 2005 as the MGDS, which remains the
overarching policy framework for social and economic development. Under the MGDS, real GDP
growth for 2006-2009 averaged 8.4% and is expected to continue to be strong, helped by increased
revenue from mining, and improved agricultural sector performance. The fiscal deficit has been
brought down to less than 2% of GDP, and HIPC relief has greatly reduced the burden of debt service.
5.
Malawi has a predominantly agricultural economy, with most of the population depending on
subsistence farming and exports heavily reliant on the key cash crops, tobacco, tea, sugar and cotton.
Real GDP growth rates averaged less than 4% during the 1990s, and have ranged from 2% to nearly
9% since 2002. The current account deficit of around 5% of GDP is financed by donor grants and
development credits. The country has very limited access to alternative modes of external financing
and has attracted limited foreign direct investment.
1
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
6.
Agriculture provides about 80% of exports and contributes some 34% to GDP; services make
up 46% of GDP and industry 20%. The performance of agriculture is therefore critical for the
economy. Average growth in the sector is highly dependent on climatic factors. Following a long
period of modest growth between 1980 and 2000, agricultural output grew at just 2% per annum
between 2000 and 2005, with a drop to -9% during the 2005 drought, and smallholder output actually
declined. However there has been strong growth of around 9% per annum from 2006 to 2009 due to
the introduction of the Farm Input Subsidy Programme (FISP) and favourable weather patterns in the
period.
7.
Notwithstanding good recent performance, the socio-economic challenges remain formidable
and the ability to maintain a level of economic growth to ensure poverty reduction remains limited by:
(i) the narrow economic base; (ii) the small domestic market; (iii) poor infrastructure/high transport
costs; (iv) erratic power supply and heavy reliance on energy imports; (v) Government intervention in
key market sectors; and (vii) weak institutional management capacity in the public and private sectors.
Education levels and productivity are low and the country is extremely vulnerable to shocks,
particularly drought, as a result of its heavy dependence on rainfed agriculture. Sporadic food
insecurity and malnutrition, combined with HIV/AIDS prevalence of 12%, add to the challenges.
Rural Poverty Analysis (Annex 2 and Working Paper 3)
8.
About 52 per cent of the population live below the national poverty line of Malawian kwacha
16,165/year and about 22 per cent live in extreme poverty. According to the Human Development
Index Report for 2009 compiled by the United Nations Development Programme, 73.9 per cent of the
population live below the income poverty line of US$1.25/day and 90.4 per cent below the
US$2.0/day threshold. The proportion of poor and ultra-poor is highest in rural areas of the southern
and northern parts of the country, while the centre is less poor. Over 90 per cent of the poor live in
rural areas
9.
Poverty continues to be lower in urban areas (14%) than in rural areas (43%) and there is a
widening income gap between urban and rural areas. Rural areas have a higher proportion of both
stunted and underweight children, 36% and 18% respectively compared to urban areas with 31% and
12% respectively. Over 90% of the poor live in rural areas. However the extent of inequality is
substantially higher in urban areas. The richest 10% of the population has a per capita income eight
times higher than the poorest 10%. Progress towards the MDGs remains mixed and access to assets,
services and opportunities is profoundly unequal across the population.
10.
Rural poverty is characterised by a number of factors, including gender of household,
household size, education of household head, access to markets and financial services, presence of a
cash crop and recurrence of shocks:





Gender of Household Head. Women head about 25% of the households in Malawi and
they are disproportionately poor. Fifty-one percent of male-headed households are poor
while 59% of female-headed households are poor.
Household Composition. Poor households are significantly larger than non-poor
households. Average household size is 5.4 for the poor and 3.8 for the non-poor.
Education. Poverty is more severe among people who live in households whose heads
have no formal education; and those with more than a junior certificate of education are
significantly less likely to live in poverty. The adult literacy rate is 70% up from 65% in
2005. Female literacy rate is 60%, compared to male literacy of 79%.
Land Holding Size. Average land holding size per household is 1.0ha. Seventy-five
percent of the farmers cultivate less than 1.0ha, with 33% of male household heads
cultivating less than 0.5ha as compared to almost half of female household heads.
Access to Markets and Services. The poor tend to live in remote areas with few roads
and means of transport, which limits their economic opportunities. Access to financial
services is also severely limited.
2
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report

Illness and Disability have a major effect on household poverty levels, especially in
families affected by chronic debilitating diseases such as HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis,
both of which are accentuated by poor nutrition.
National Poverty Reduction Strategy
11.
The MGDS has a clear focus on rural poverty reduction, recognising that the great majority of
poor people live in rural areas. The philosophy of MGDS is poverty reduction through sustainable
economic growth and infrastructure development. The nine key priority areas of MGDS are: (i)
agriculture and food security; (ii) green belt irrigation and water development; (iii) education, science
and technology; (iv) transport infrastructure development and Nsanje inland port; (v) climate change,
natural resources and environmental management; (vi) integrated rural development; (vii) public
health, sanitation and HIV/AIDS management; (viii) youth development and empowerment; and (ix)
energy, mining and industrial development. MGDS is built around five broad thematic areas: (i)
sustainable economic growth through increasing investment in productive sectors, promoting exports
and addressing supply-side constraints; (ii) social protection for the most vulnerable and disaster risk
management; (iii) social development with emphasis on health, population, education and gender
mainstreaming; (iv) infrastructure development; and (v) improving governance, fiscal management,
control of corruption, decentralisation, law and justice, security and human rights.
Governance Framework
12.
Malawi has been a multiparty democracy since 1994. Economic policy is driven by the
Ministry of Development Planning and Cooperation (MDPC) and the Ministry of Finance and
Development Planning (MOFDP). IFAD’s principal partner ministries are MOFDP, the Ministry of
Agriculture, Irrigation and Water Development (MOAIWD), and the Ministry of Local Government
and Rural Development (MLGRD). These and other ministries generally have limited capacity in
policy, planning, implementation, and M&E due to budget constraints and shortages of qualified staff.
Other key partners include NGOs and farmer organisations such as the National Smallholder Farmers’
Association of Malawi (NASFAM), the Farmers Union of Malawi (FUM), international (CGIAR)
research institutions and their national counterpart organisations, and academic institutions.
13.
Malawi’s Decentralisation Policy was enacted in 1998, providing for the devolution of certain
central government functions to 28 elected District Councils (DCs). Below the district level there is a
dualistic system of governance incorporating traditional authorities and elected village councils,
which are members of Village Development Committees (VDCs) and Area Development Committees
(ADCs). IFAD programmes are implemented at the DC level and below, and have consistently
encountered capacity limitations owing to the multitude of demands on the decentralised staff of
sectoral ministries and the low technical and financial management capacity. The agricultural
extension system operates through Agricultural Development Divisions (ADDs) comprising at least
two Districts; the DCs; Extension Planning Areas (EPAs) – 5 to15 per District; and Sections – about
10 per EPA.
14.
Government policies favour mainstreaming donor-supported programmes within Government
systems, phasing out parallel project implementation structures and adopting sector-wide approaches.
To this end, GOM has recently indicated its intention to abolish project implementation units (PIUs)
by mid-2012, and to fully mainstream their functions in the respective ministries. However, the
human resource capacity constraints in the civil service remain a challenge. Although the ASWAp
Support Project (ASWAp-SP) is supporting capacity building activities at district levels, most
districts still lack fiduciary and technical management capacity and there is often a need for project
appointed staff to undertake grass-roots activities at the district level and below. Similarly, project
facilitation/support units embedded in the host ministries as well as occasionally opted-in technical
assistance has provided important project implementation and management support.
Agricultural and Rural Development Policies (Working Paper 1)
15.
Overview. The ASWAp was formulated as a means of achieving the goals of the MGDS. The
ASWAp offers a strategy for increasing agricultural productivity, food security and the contribution to
economic growth which is aligned with the CAADP. The Malawi CAADP Compact was signed by
3
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
the Government, development partners and other stakeholders on 19th April 2010, and commits all
partners to support for the ASWAp, within the CAADP framework. The CAADP/ASWAp envisages
a single comprehensive programme and budget framework, and a formalised process for better
coordination between the Government and donors.
16.
ASWAp Focus Areas. Food security will be addressed by increasing maize productivity,
reducing post-harvest losses, diversifying food production and managing risk by maintaining food
reserves. Malnutrition will be reduced through agricultural diversification that includes legumes,
vegetables, fruits, small livestock and fish. The development of commercial agriculture, agroprocessing and markets will entail diversification, agro-processing for import substitution and value
addition, domestic and export market expansion, and the building of public-private partnerships
(PPPs). Sustainable management of natural resources will focus on sustainable land and water
utilisation with emphasis on conservation agriculture, afforestation, protection of fragile catchment
areas, rehabilitation of degraded land, water use efficiency and expanding irrigation through the
greenbelt initiative.
17.
Key Support Services. Support services will focus on market-oriented research
complemented by extension and training. Capacity-building will concentrate on strengthening
institutions, building management systems and improving resource allocation.
18.
Cross-Cutting Issues. HIV/AIDS issues will be mainstreamed to minimise impact, enhance
resilience and household coping mechanisms, and reduce infection risks. Gender issues are also
mainstreamed in order to reduce disparities and enhance the capacity of the youth, women and men to
contribute to agricultural productivity.
19.
The ASWAp is being implemented by MOAIWD through the ASWAp secretariat.
Implementation is governed by a MOU signed by stakeholders. Annual workplans are prepared by
MOAIWD and the implementing agencies down to the DC level. M&E will be based on annual
reviews using agreed indicators of performance. The total budget over four years is estimated at
US$1.7 billion with funds to be sourced from both Government and donors. Three funding
mechanisms are envisaged: pooled funding, earmarked funding and discrete funding. GOM has
indicated its preference for pooled funding. All the major donors have committed to working within
the ASWAp framework. An ASWAp Support Programme (ASWAp-SP) funded by the World Bank
and Norway was launched in 2008 and may be expanded through the creation of a wider multi-donor
support group.
20.
The Farm Input Subsidy Programme was launched in 2005-06 to increase agricultural
production and assure food security. The advent of FISP has seen agriculture’s share of the
Government budget increase from 6-8% of the total between 1995 and 2005, to around 16% in 200609. The FISP coupled with good weather conditions has resulted in a significant increase in maize
production. The availability of hybrid seed and fertiliser, combined with improved farming practices
has led to improved crop productivity. The subsidy programme is now a firmly established pillar of
agricultural policy. However, it presents a number of policy issues: (i) the cost of the programme is
very high (more than 70% of MOAIWD budget) and limits the GOM’s capacity to invest in extension
and research services needed to ensure optimal use of the inputs; and (ii) the programme has the
potential to displace commercial input purchases by farmers.
21.
Key challenges for the subsidy programme include: (i) the escalation of costs due to increases
in fertiliser prices and the scope of the programme, which in 2008-09 was extended to cover other
(non-maize) commodities and inputs; (ii) the logistic challenges associated with the scale and
geographic coverage of the programme and the need for timely provision of inputs; (iii) the need for
stronger PPPs in the operation of the programme; (iv) the challenge of coordinating complementary
research and extension activities in order to improve the yield responses; (v) shortages of some inputs,
particularly legume seeds; and (iv) the need for a strategy for graduating recipients from subsidised to
commercial input supplies.
4
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
Constraints and Opportunities for Agricultural and Rural Development
22.
Overview. Agriculture is the most important sector of the economy, employing about 80% of
the workforce. The sector is dualistic, comprising smallholder and estate subsectors. More than 90%
of the rural population (2.5-3.0 million households) are smallholder farmers with customary land
tenure. They cultivate small and fragmented landholdings over approximately 2.4 million hectares,
with low yields, and are mainly subsistence-oriented. Average landholding size has fallen from 1.5
hectares in 1968 to around 0.8 hectares today. Over 80% of this land is planted to maize. The estate
land is mainly under freehold or leasehold tenure and the main crops are tobacco, tea, sugar and
coffee. Tobacco is Malawi’s largest export cash crop, accounting for over 60% of export earnings,
followed by tea and sugar.
23.
Farming Systems. There are two main farming systems: maize mixed (covering 85% of
cropland) and cereal-root crop mixed in the south (15% of cropland). The original niche of
smallholders was in the provision of maize to feed estate and urban workers. Today, maize remains
the dominant crop. About one third of smallholders also cultivate tobacco, groundnuts, rice and
cotton. In good rainfall years with favourable prices and access to inputs, Malawi is able to produce
around 3.0 million tonnes of maize, which is above the self-sufficiency level of 2.3 million tonnes.
However, in poor seasons food shortages are experienced, particularly in the food deficit southern
parts of the country. Many households with large families and small plots endure chronic food
insecurity and malnutrition.
24.
Productivity. Despite the availability of better technologies, the productivity of most crops
has only shown modest improvement, largely as a result of declining soil fertility. Since 1970 average
maize yields increased from about 1.0 t/ha to 1.5t/ha, a rate of only 1.1% per annum. Also
contributing to the low yield are factors such as poor access to financial services and markets,
unfavourable weather, small landholdings and nutrient-depleted soils, coupled with limited use of
fertilisers prior to introduction of the FISP. The use of improved varieties, together with fertilisers,
better crop husbandry and irrigation, has the potential to greatly improve yields. Since 2005 maize
yields have been significantly higher due to better availability seed and fertiliser under the FISP,
combined with good seasonal conditions. However Post-harvest losses are estimated to be around
30% of production for maize and higher for perishable commodities.
25.
Water. Malawi has long experience in water management, especially with irrigation schemes
on both a small and a large scale. However, over 98% of cultivated land is used for subsistence
rainfed farming with less than 1% under irrigation, mainly on customary land. Major problems
revolve around management of land and water, canal repairs, mobilisation of labour for maintenance
and rules for resolving disputes. The Government’s greenbelt initiative envisages massive investment
in irrigation along the length of Lake Malawi and the Shire Valley.
26.
Land Tenure. Malawi developed a National Land Policy in 2002 that allows customary land
to be registered and protected against arbitrary conversion to public land, and formalises the role of
customary leaders to improve transparency in land transactions. Landholders are encouraged to
register their land as private customary estates with security of tenure. This will enable the creation of
private leasehold estates out of registered customary estates without relinquishing customary
ownership. This provision will allow traditional leaders, family heads and individual holders of
registered customary land to grant leases.
27.
Fisheries and Livestock. Fishing is an important source of employment for around 250,000
people and accounts for 60-70% of the animal protein intake. More than 90% of the catch is landed by
artisanal fishers. Livestock ownership is very low by regional standards with an average of 0.53
tropical livestock units per household. Performance of the livestock sector is affected by low
productivity of the cropping sector as cropping extends into grazing areas. Per capita meat
consumption and animal protein intake is low, contributing to poor nutrition among children.
28.
Marketing. Markets for agricultural inputs and produce are weak, partly due to the former
dominance of the Agricultural Development and Marketing Corporation (ADMARC) and the failure
of the private sector to fill the void left by its withdrawal. Participation of agro-dealers in the supply
5
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
of seed through FISP has helped to improve the reach of dealer networks. The dealers have also
participated in FISP fertiliser distribution although ADMARC also retains a role in this activity.
However, the private sector remains under-developed in rural areas and smallholders are poorly
integrated in the marketing system. The situation is compounded by limited market infrastructure,
poor quality feeder roads, inadequate market information, and a lack of skills and facilities in postharvest storage and agro-processing.
C. Rationale
Programme Rationale and Objectives
29.
Malawi has one of the highest population densities in Africa, placing heavy pressure on the
environment. Rural poverty is closely linked to the capacity of the environment to support such
pressure, and smallholder agriculture is characterised by large numbers of very poor farmers
dependent on low input maize production with low and declining soil fertility. Productivity of most
crops is constrained by declining soil fertility and land degradation. However, the long term decline in
crop yields since the 1970s has recently shown signs of recovery associated with the FISP, now in its
sixth season. Correct use of fertilisers is by far the most important technology for increasing
agricultural productivity in Malawi. This requires supply of fertilisers which are formulated according
to the characteristics of Malawi’s soils, rather than the standard product available today which poses a
threat to medium and long term productivity through nutrient imbalances. Farmers also need to be
trained in fertiliser application methods, and a range of complementary nutrient management
measures including organic fertilisers/manure application, crop residue retention, crop rotations etc.
30.
In addition to fertility management sustainable productivity increases of the maize-based
farming system requires: (i) land management practices that increase organic matter, improve water
infiltration and root penetration, and improve crop responses to fertiliser; (ii) affordable and timely
availability of fertilisers; (iii) improved varieties of maize and legumes; and (iv) improved crop
management practices (sowing, weeding, pest and disease control, harvesting and post-harvest). There
is clearly a need to break the cycle of poverty and hunger by promoting alternative ways of growing
crops which are more productive but affordable to the poor, and offer potential to reverse the decline
in soil fertility.
31.
Fortunately there are a number of options for addressing these issues. These range from
simple and affordable modifications to the way crops are grown; to full-scale re-design of farming
systems including incorporation of new crops, varieties, equipment, agro-chemicals and other
technologies. Most of these good agricultural practices (GAPs) are based on the principles of
conservation agriculture including: (i) minimal disturbance of the soil (no ploughing or ridging1) and
early planting; (ii) retention of crop residues and weeds on the soil surface; (iii) timely and efficient
weed control; (iv) crop rotation or intercropping (with emphasis on leguminous species); and (v)
correct use of organic and inorganic fertilisers. Agro-forestry and soil/water conservation measures
may be included in the package, and use of herbicides to reduce labour inputs is also an option.
32.
On-farm trials have been undertaken to validate and demonstrate these techniques, with
generally favourable results. The benefits include significantly reduced labour requirements, due to
avoiding the need for ploughing and ridging; and improved yields, particularly in dry years. Planting
can be undertaken earlier, weed control is improved through crop rotation and residue retention, water
runoff is reduced and infiltration is improved, and soil organic matter increases and the need for use
of chemical fertilisers is reduced. These benefits have been observed in many countries, and
experience suggests that crop yields and soil health continue to improve for a decade or more.
However, adoption of these technologies has been limited until now due to weak knowledge
management and communications, lack of capacity in the extension system and institutional preoccupation with the funding and management of the FISP. In addition, further on-farm trials and
1
Ridging may be required on slopes above 5% where there is significant erosion risk, provided the ridges are correctly
aligned.
6
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
demonstrations are needed to refine the techniques for different agro-ecological conditions, farming
systems and socio-economic contexts.
33.
Other countries in the region are more advanced in the dissemination and adoption of GAPs
and conservation agriculture systems and have developed low cost farmer-to-farmer extension models
which operate successfully in the context of under-funded extension systems. Widespread adoption of
GAPs as outlined here has the potential to greatly improve the effectiveness of the FISP and reduce
the continuing high levels of rural poverty. The recommended approach is to improve the livelihoods
of large numbers of rural households through the adoption of affordable packages of improved
agricultural practices using low-cost farmer-to-farmer extension, supported by further adaptive
research and knowledge management. Almost all of Malawi’s rural households have the potential to
benefit from these initiatives. However a graduated approach will be preferred, beginning with very
basic changes promoted in a concentrated programme area to refine techniques and build confidence;
before up-scaling and out-scaling to more sophisticated approaches over a wider area.
Alignment with Country Policies and IFAD Strategies
34.
SAPP is fully aligned with Malawi’s development policies and strategies specifically the
Malawi CAADP Compact, the ASWAp, the MGDS and the Malawi Development Assistance
Strategy. The programme will be implemented through Government systems and aligned with
national policies and complementary donor initiatives. The agricultural sector is widely supported by
donors such as: the European Union, the World Bank, the African Development Bank, the Norwegian
Agency for Development Cooperation, the UK Department for International Development (DFID),
the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), the United States Agency for International
Development (USAID) and a number of NGOs. Maintaining strategic partnerships has been a
challenge for donors accentuated by the complex array of donor and Government initiatives.
Nevertheless, donor coordination has significantly improved under the Donor Committee on
Agriculture and Food Security (DCAFS), of which IFAD is a member.
35.
The Programme is also aligned with the five objectives of IFAD’s strategic framework 201115 which include:





a natural resource and economic asset base for poor rural women and men that is more
resilient to climate change, environmental degradation and market transformation;
access for poor rural women and men to services to reduce poverty, improve nutrition,
raise incomes and build resilience in a changing environment;
poor rural women and men and their organisations able to manage profitable, sustainable
and resilient farm and non-farm enterprises or take advantage of decent work
opportunities;
poor rural women and men and their organisations able to influence policies and
institutions that affect their livelihoods; and
enabling institutional and policy environments to support agricultural production and the
full range of related non-farm activities.
Key Design Issues
36.
Programme Scope. The scope of the Programme is tailored to match the capacity of the
implementing agencies. In view of the challenges currently facing MOAIWD including continuing
staff shortages and project implementation capacity, the programme will be simple in its scope and
targets. This suggests a programme operating in no more than six districts. Should implementation
proceed rapidly and successfully, additional resources could be committed by IFAD to expand the
number of districts.
37.
Extension Methodologies (See Working Paper 4). Roll-out of improved agricultural
practices to large numbers of smallholders will require a major extension effort over an extended
period. Two factors influence the choice of extension methodologies: first, the limited number of
frontline extension workers (many positions are vacant), and the lack of operating resources,
especially transport and communications; and second, the need to adopt low-cost extension
approaches in order to engage with a large number of smallholder households. These considerations
7
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
support GOM policy on pluralistic approaches to extension through a range of partnerships, including
the private sector; and suggest that farmer-to-farmer extension methods should play a prominent role,
and that NGOs could be engaged to work in partnership with Government extension workers in order
to supplement the limited human resources currently available. In this regard, helping to make the
existing extension workforce more effective through provision of mobility, operating expenses and
training should have high priority. Production and distribution of high quality extension literature, and
mass media communications, particularly radio, will also be emphasised.
38.
Technology Adoption. There is a broad range of options for GAPs suited to rainfed crop
production in the various agro-ecological zones and farming systems of Malawi. Many of these have
been tested and found to produce significant increases in yields and favourable financial and
economic impacts. However none have so far “taken off” into widespread spontaneous adoption. The
reasons for this appear to include various combinations of: (i) the under-resourced extension system;
(ii) fragmented and sporadic technology promotion efforts by NGOs; (iii) poor availability of the
necessary farm inputs, especially tools, legume seeds and herbicides; (iv) farmers’ inability to afford
such inputs and the limited availability of seasonal credit; (v) lack of a strategic approach to amplify
agricultural productivity through GAPs under FISP support; and (vi) the expectation among many
farmers that free or subsidised inputs will always be available. SAPP will complement the FISP; but
go much further in ensuring that farmers received the necessary training, inputs and financial services
in order to adopt complete packages of GAPs on a sustainable basis.
39.
Seed Availability. Although hybrid maize seeds are readily available through commercial
channels, and farmers are prepared to spend money on such seed, the availability of seed of legume
species limits the ability of many farmers to adopt GAPs, most of which include increased use of
legumes in the farming system. Many improved varieties of legume crops and trees have been
developed, but the seed industry has not shown much interest in multiplying and distributing them.
However, where improved legume seeds have been distributed to farmers, they have been well
accepted. The Programme will therefore include specific initiatives to multiply and distribute legume
seeds; through seed multiplication and distribution schemes managed by private seed companies.
MOAIWD will be responsible for the technical monitoring and regulatory aspects of seed
multiplication initiatives.
II.
A.
PROGRAMME DESCRIPTION
Programme Area and Target Group
The Programme Area
40.
The Programme will be area-focussed and will concentrate on enhancement of agricultural
productivity based on simple/affordable technologies which are suitable for smallholder adoption, and
will help bridge the large gap between actual and potential yields. MOAIWD has selected six districts
for inclusion in the Programme: Blantyre, Chiradzulu, Balaka, Nkhotakota, Lilongwe and Chitipa (see
map). The selection of districts was on the basis of: (i) potential for improved agricultural methods to
have an impact on productivity, food security and incomes; (ii) the prevalence of poverty and food
insecurity; (iii) the presence/absence of other programmes of projects working in similar areas; and
(iv) the level of interest by the District Council.
The Target Group (Annex 2 and Working Paper 3)
41.
Poverty rates in the candidate districts range from 37% to 67%, of whom 11% to 33% are
described as ultra-poor. Most of the remainder are near-poor, and at risk of slipping backwards into
the ranks of the poor due to frequent shocks such as drought. MOAIWD categorises smallholder
farmers into three groups: Commercial Farmers are generally male, economically active, hire labour
and are market-oriented, with enterprises such as tobacco, maize, tea, coffee and dairy, on a relatively
large scale. They are few in number and tend to be the first to adopt new technologies. They are
usually members of associations and cooperatives and are important in demonstrating farming as a
business as well as improved technologies.
8
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
42.
Small-Scale Commercial Farmers (SSCFs) usually attain food security, are skilled, and
market oriented, but have limited assets. They are easily mobilised into farmers’ clubs/groups and are
able to demand services with the aim of farming as a business. They tend to be the most active and
influential in farmer groups, usually volunteer to host demonstrations and trials, become the first
adopters, and volunteer as Lead Farmers. When supported technically and financially with loans and
access to markets, this group is responsive and facilitates wider spread of GAPs and will therefore be
targeted by the programme to facilitate early adoption of GAPs. Young male farmers dominate this
group, which is larger than the commercial farmers.
43.
Smallholder Food Security (SHFS) Farmers are productive men and women who have the
potential to achieve household food security, but due to limited land and resources find it difficult to
produce a surplus for the market. They aim at food security and need technical and financial support
in terms of basic inputs such as seed and fertiliser to increase food crop yields. This group constitutes
80% of smallholder farmers, and is the focus of the public extension service.
44.
SHFS households are of two kinds: one group, which is in the majority, tends to be
responsive to interventions aimed at alleviating hunger, which is their priority. However, when
technologies involve purchased inputs, they often depend on support from extension organisations and
NGOs. Once food security is achieved, they become empowered to join other extension activities,
become Lead Farmers, and engage in off-farm activities. Due to the potential increase in yields
associated with GAPs, the goal of household food security can be realised and some men and women
could move towards commercialisation. This will therefore be the main target group in SAPP for
both improved extension service and adaptive research.
45.
The other group under the SHFS category is the ultra-poor with extremely limited resources
and usually food insecure. The group is further divided into: (i) those who are able bodied; and (ii) the
elderly, child headed households, those with disabilities, and chronic illnesses including HIV/AIDS.
The able bodied, which include some of the female headed households, tend to have less land, no
access to inputs, and few other assets. During the hunger season, which is also the peak agricultural
period, they survive on piece work in other farmers’ fields. Households with chronic illnesses and
disabilities tend to work with very limited resources. While there are other active members in the
family, they tend to be busy with caring for the sick or the physically challenged. Both groups are
extremely vulnerable to shocks and disasters; tend to sell subsidised inputs for immediate food needs
and usually suffer from malnutrition. Those with chronic illnesses and disabilities would benefit from
labour-saving technologies such as zero tillage and herbicide use.
Targeting Mechanisms (Annex 2)
46.
The Programme will have mechanisms to ensure that the targeted poor men and women
actually participate in the planned interventions. These include: (i) geographic targeting measures; (ii)
enabling measures; (iii) empowerment and capacity building measures; (iv) self-targeting measures;
(v) direct targeting measures; and (vi) procedural measures.
47.
Geographic targeting measures focus on large concentrations of rural poor. The Programme
will target six districts identified by GOM. Of the six districts, Lilongwe district has the lowest
percentage of poor and ultra-poor but the highest number. The Programme will initially begin in
Lilongwe because of its large number (around 130,000) of poor rural families, and its impact on food
security as it is one of the major grain baskets and therefore has good potential for commercialisation.
The Programme will target a total of about 200,000 households in six districts.
48.
Enabling measures embrace number of policies that aim at addressing the high levels of
poverty, gender disparities and HIV/AIDS. The main policies which will guide the implementation of
the programme are the MGDS, the ASWAp, and national policies on gender and HIV&AIDS. These
and other policies show the commitment of the Government to reduce poverty levels, address gender
inequalities and reduce the spread and mitigate the impact of HIV/AIDS.
49.
Empowerment and capacity building mechanisms to enable farmers who are interested and
committed to participate, but lack certain resources or skills, will include: (i) training farmers in
GAPs; (ii) supporting on-farm demonstrations; (iii) creation of a farmer-to-farmer extension network
9
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
to encourage adoption of best practices; (iv) ensuring that at least 30% of the membership of decisionmaking structures are women; and (v) and ensuring that at least 50% of media interviews include
women.
50.
Self-targeting measures that are attractive to the poor, but less so to the better off will
include (i) low-cost agronomic methods; (ii) conservation agriculture packages suitable for adoption
by poor smallholders; (iii) post-harvest equipment and farm tools which address the needs of
smallholder farmers; and (iv) seed multiplication and distribution of crops and varieties (especially
OPVs) of special interest to smallholders. Farmer group development will vary by category of
farmers. SHFSs and SSCFs will be attracted to farmer groups or clubs, as well as women’s groups and
HIV/AIDS support groups. Associations will be supported for business-oriented farmers to facilitate
access to extension services, input and output marketing as well as seed multiplication activities. The
Programme will conduct participatory on-farm trials to refine GAP technologies in conjunction with
national, regional and CGIAR centres. Both men and women from the SHFS and SSCF will be
selected to host the trials.
51.
Direct targeting measures will be applied for interventions that meet specific criteria
because of their cost and other conditions. Communities will develop criteria for selecting
participants. Researchers will develop criteria in conjunction with extension staff for selecting farmers
to host participatory farm trials and participate in seed multiplication. Selection of women to fulfil
quotas will also be subject to criteria set by the community in conjunction with extension staff.
52.
A number of procedural measures will be followed to ensure the poor are targeted and that
gender empowerment is achieved. These include: (i) a baseline survey for needs assessment; (ii)
community sensitisation and mobilisation; (iii) farmer and staff training on GAPs appropriate to target
group smallholders; (iv) farmer group development and training; (v) planning and coordination of
extension services; and (vi) focussing extension works on target group needs and capabilities.
B.
Programme Development Objectives
53.
The Programme will be implemented over a nine year period as an “earmarked” project
within the ASWAp. The goal is to contribute to reduction of poverty and improved food security
among the rural population. The specific development objective is to achieve a viable and
sustainable smallholder agricultural sector employing good agricultural practices (GAPs). Figure 1
in the Executive Summary provides an overview of the Programme illustrating how the various
components and sub-components will contribute to the achievement of the goal and objectives.
54.
The main thrust of the Programme is enhancement of agricultural productivity based on
simple/affordable GAPs which are suitable for smallholder adoption, and will help to bridge the large
gap between actual and potential crop yields. Promotion of better agricultural practices will greatly
improve the effectiveness and impact of the FISP, which provides selected farmers with access to
improved seeds and fertilisers, but does little to promote their efficient and effective use. An adaptive
research programme will be supported to fine-tune GAP packages to Malawian socio-economic and
agro-ecological conditions; in conjunction with knowledge management and communication
initiatives to ensure that knowledge generated within the Programme is communicated to
stakeholders, and that relevant knowledge from outside is made available to all. A range of extension
tools will be deployed to train farmers to adopt improved agricultural technologies that will
sustainably increase staple crop yields, improve soil health, and make way for greater crop
diversification and commercialisation. The Programme will also facilitate farmers in obtaining access
to the inputs needed to utilise GAPs including tools, equipment, seeds of alternative (mainly legume)
crops, fertilisers, financial services, and post-harvest storage facilities.
C.
Components/Outcomes
Component 1: Adaptive Research and Knowledge Management
Sub-Component 1.1: Adaptive Research
Sub-Component 1.2: Knowledge Management and Communication
10
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
Component 2: Farmer Adoption of GAPs
Sub-Component 2.1: Awareness Raising and Sensitisation
Sub-Component 2.2: Access to Key Agricultural Inputs
Component 3: Programme Management and Coordination
55.
Programme Phasing. The Programme will implemented over nine years using a graduated
approach to establish operational modalities, train staff, screen/evaluate GAPs to be promoted, engage
with lead farmers, and develop partnerships and coordination arrangements; before up-scaling to
engage with the target groups over the full Programme area. The Programme will have the option of
an accelerated roll out to all to all Programme districts, should implementation capacity continue to be
available. An interim review will be conducted after three years of operations to inform decisions on
up-scaling, and a mid-term review will be undertake in Year 5.
56.
Component 1: Adaptive Research and Knowledge Management (USD 5.4 million) will
further refine improved agricultural techniques to the conditions of Malawi. This will be undertaken
in partnership with national, regional and international agricultural research and knowledge
institutions. The outcome of Component 1 is expected to be appropriate agricultural
technologies/GAPs developed and understood by potential beneficiaries.
57.
Sub-Component 1.1: Adaptive Research (USD 4.3 million). A well-focussed programme of
adaptive research (on-farm and on-station) will validate and adjust proven agricultural technologies in
terms of their applicability to Malawian agro-ecological and socio-economic conditions. The
approach will be differentiated according to the maturity of the various technologies and the level of
experience with their utilisation. Some basic techniques can be recommended for immediate adoption
by farmers. Others require validation through trials on farmers’ fields in different agro-ecological
zones before packages of recommended practices can be formulated and demonstrated.
58.
The Adaptive Research Sub-Component will be managed by the MOAIWD Research
Department and implemented in conjunction with a number of partners including Bunda College,
NRC, and CGIAR institutions. Sub-Component 1.1 will primarily address issues which are of most
relevance to the six Programme districts, many of which will also have broader national relevance. It
will be planned and implemented in close coordination with the IFAD-supported regional programme
“Facilitating the Adoption of Conservation Agriculture by Resource Poor Smallholder Farmers in
Southern Africa” which is managed by CIMMYT and implemented in partnership with national
institutions2.
59.
The adaptive research programme will be managed on a rolling three-year basis with annual
reviews. In the first year a full nine-year programme will be drawn up, with detailed plans and
budgets for the first three year cycle. The output of Sub-Component 1.1 will be action research
programmes which develop/refine GAP packages, adapted to various agro-ecological and socioeconomic contexts, and improved methods of disseminating such packages to rural communities. The
principal activities to be undertaken will include:
(a) Research planning and management will include preparation of a nine-year indicative
plan, and rolling annual three-year research plans; preparation and periodic review of
trial protocols; annual review and priority-setting workshops; and publication of an
annual research report. This work, and the capacity building described in (b) below, will
be undertaken in partnership with a regional CGIAR institution under a formal twinning
arrangement.
(b) Capacity building for adaptive research. Researchers, extension workers and other
relevant staff will need orientation on the GAPs being researched especially for CA
initiatives. Staff will be given in-service training on CA principles and practices by
recognised expert organisations in the field. Bunda College will be supported to develop
CA teaching modules and imported CA equipment (planters, sprayers, subsoilers etc.)
2
This Project was completed in 2010 and a second phase is currently being planned.
11
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
will be provided for CA training purposes. The MOAIWD Research Department will be
supported with vehicles, equipment and MSc scholarships. Study tours will be
undertaken to learn about CA initiatives in other countries in the region.
(c) On–farm and on-station trial programme. The final selection of GAPs to be
researched and disseminated will depend on farmer-participatory selection, but are
expected to include some or all of the following:
 CA practices including direct and basin planting; residue retention and management;
leguminous intercrops, cover crops and rotations, agroforestry and contour
hedgerows.
 Crop storage losses using metal silos, airtight bags and “cocoons” compared with
traditional methods with respect to protection from fungal infections and pests,
especially insects and rodents.
Trial performance will be monitored and the impacts on productivity, profitability,
erosion control and soil fertility enhancement will be measured. CA equipment will also
be demonstrated and, where available, equipment hire service providers will be
identified, equipped and trained in CA techniques, machinery operation and business
skills. All trial plots will be on-farm, managed by researchers and extension workers in
close collaboration with the farming community. The communities will participate fully
in selection of treatments and evaluation of results.
(d) Soil fertility enhancement. The Programme will support research to address critical soil
fertility issues and improve the effectiveness of fertiliser distributed under the FISP.
Whilst the impact of the FISP is positive, the response to fertilisers is less than potential
and there are concerns about nutrient imbalances arising from the absence of potassium
in the standard fertiliser. Trials will be established to evaluate the performance of fertility
management practices using inorganic and organic sources of plant nutrients. The
inorganic sources will include the standard FISP fertiliser with the addition of potassium
and micro-nutrients. Organic sources will include animal manures, composts, residue
mulch, agro-forestry, and leguminous cover crops. The Programme will also support soil
and plant tissue testing to develop a better characterisation of Malawi’s soil fertility
problems. The Programme will also collaborate with implementers of similar efforts by
AGRA and African Soil Information Service (AfSIS) projects (see www.africasoils.net).
(e) Research on adoption behaviour. The Programme will undertake studies on the
effectiveness of various extension approaches/methods and male and female adoption of
various agricultural practices. This reflects the need to develop a better understanding of
the interactions between bio-physical, financial and social determinants of adoption
behaviour. Research will include baseline studies and monitoring of the physical,
biological, social and financial impacts of the improved agricultural practices offered, as
well as the extension methodologies employed.
60.
Sub-Component 1.2: Knowledge Management and Communication (USD 1.0 million).
The Programme’s emphasis on the development, refinement and dissemination of GAPs calls for
knowledge and learning intensive approach to be mainstreamed in all sub-components. The
Programme will therefore support capacity building for systematic knowledge management and
communication in MOAIWD in general, and within the participating ADDs and Districts, and in
relevant stakeholder institutions. The output of Sub-Component 1.2 will be knowledge about GAPs
effectively gathered, managed and communicated to stakeholders. The principal activities to be
undertaken will include:
(a) Knowledge management and communication strategy. A comprehensive KM and
communication strategy anchored on the existing M&E system, and consistent with the
knowledge diffusion strategy that is being formulated under the ASWAp-SP, will be
prepared during the first year of Programme implementation, with funding from a
Programme Preparatory Facility (PPF) grant. The Programme will make budgetary
12
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
provision to execute this function effectively, including national and international
technical assistance.
(b) Knowledge harvesting, storage and processing resources will be made available to
harvest, store, process and disseminate information to the people and organisations that
need it, and to ensure best use of knowledge generated by other initiatives in Malawi and
the region. Electronic databases accessible through the Programme website, will
constitute the primary tool. Such databases are already available under the MOAIWD
Technical Secretariat, with an experienced management team. SAPP will finance
additional hardware and software, so as to better maintain and disseminate data, and
library services for document acquisition and storage at various work stations.
(c) Knowledge sharing and learning partnerships The Programme will employ a “value
chain” approach to knowledge management, incorporating action learning approaches,
training at various levels, establishment of communities of practice, and systematic
documentation and knowledge dissemination processes. Some of these elements are
present in MOAIWD, but require better coordination, particularly the flow of
information and knowledge sharing in the extension system. After information is
captured, there will be value addition through interpretation and analysis, drawing on
information from other sources, and adapting it for use by a range of partners.
Instruments to be deployed will be specified in the knowledge management and
communication strategy.
(d) Formal Training in GAPs. The Programme will support the development of appropriate
curricula at Bunda College and NRC as well as the purchase of conservation agriculture
equipment for demonstration to students.
61.
The Programme M&E Officer will be responsible for collating and analysing all relevant
information for the benefit of all stakeholders, and ensuring that SAPP is an active partner in the
implementation of the ASWAp. Financial resources will be dedicated to this function, as well as a
Knowledge Management and Communication Officer, who will work closely with the M&E Officer.
These two officers will be supported by technical assistance to design and operationalise the M&E
system and develop a comprehensive knowledge management and communication strategy.
62.
Component 2: Farmer Adoption of GAPs (USD 40.5 million) will facilitate the
dissemination and adoption of GAPs which aim to increase crop yields, diversify production, reduce
yield variability, reduce labour inputs and improve soil health through integrated packages of
improved soil and water management. This will draw on the lessons learned from similar initiatives in
the region, with refinements to suit Malawian agro-ecological and socio-economic conditions
informed by the adaptive research and knowledge management initiatives of Component 1. The two
main requirements for farmer adoption of GAPs include: (i) increased awareness of the technologies
available and their benefits and costs; and (ii) access to the key inputs needed. The outcome of
Component 2 is expected to be widespread farmer adoption of GAPs leading to sustainably improved
productivity and crop yields.
63.
Sub-Component 2.1: Improved Agricultural Extension (USD 33.2 million): this will be
based on a low-cost farmer-to-farmer extension network modelled on several successful partnerships
between the MOAF Department of Agricultural Extension Services (DAES) and NGOs. The network
will engage around 200,000 farm households (of which at least 50% will be female or child-headed)
and will be structured as follows:
No of Districts
No of District Stakeholder Panels
No of District Agricultural Extension Coordinating Committees (DAECCs)
No of Extension Planning Areas (EPAs)
No of Area Stakeholder Panels
13
6
6
6
45
45
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
No of Agricultural Extension Development Coordinators (AEDCs): 1 per EPA
No of Field Officers: 1 per EPA
No of Agricultural Extension Development Officers (AEDOs): 14 per EPA
No of Lead Farmers: 5 per AEDO
No of Farmer Groups: 3 per Lead Farmer
No of Farmers: 20 per Farmer Group
45
45
650
3,250
9,750
200,000
64.
The output of Sub-Component 2.1 will be improved agricultural extension services
accessible to target group households, raising awareness and sensitising farmers about GAPs. The
principal activities to be undertaken will include:
(a) Farmer-to-Farmer Extension Network. Creation of a low-cost farmer-to-farmer
extension network to promote the adoption of GAPs is the core activity to be undertaken
by SAPP. The AEDC and AEDOs in each EPA will coordinate the engagement of Lead
Farmers who will be responsible for overseeing demonstration plots on farmers’ fields
and the organisation of field days, farmer field schools, gender and HIV/AIDS
mainstreaming, and farmer business schools to raise awareness and understanding of
GAPs. On average, EPAs have about 14 sections, each with an AEDO. Each AEDO will
engage and support five Lead Farmers. For the NGO partners, this will involve the
placement of one Field Officer in each of the 45 EPAs to be supported with salaries,
allowances, motorcycles, telephones and extension equipment. Each Lead Farmer will
support one or more farmer groups of about 15-20 members each. The Programme will
finance bicycles, protective clothing and other incentives to motivate Lead farmers, but
not salaries; demonstration plots (0.1ha each) of GAPs on farmers’ fields; and field days
and farmer field schools under MAFS and its NGO service-providers. The extension
network will be developed in a phased manner beginning in about a half of the EPAs
initially and subsequently expanding to cover all EPAs in the six districts.
(b) Extension Coordination. The Programme will support the coordination of agricultural
extension activities in the six target Districts to ensure that SAPP activities are
harmonised with related and complementary activities and the extension system
generally. This will be undertaken through regular meetings and information exchanges
which are currently constrained by lack of funding and poor communication facilities.
The Programme will fund four meetings per year of the District Agricultural Extension
Coordinating Committees (DAECCs) and the District Stakeholder Panels, as well as four
meetings per year of the Area Stakeholder Panels in each of the participating EPAs.
(c) DAES Support Headquarters Level. The Programme will provide support for
supervision visits for DAES at Headquarters level to enable it to better fulfil its mandate.
This will include three vehicles, graphic design and video equipment, computer
equipment and consultancy support for mass media communications.
(d) DAES Support: District Level. This will include provision of vehicles (four for
Lilongwe district and two each for the other districts), computer equipment office
furniture and extension equipment.
(e) DAES Support at EPA Level. Mobility and communications are key constraints within
the extension system at EPA level. Each of the participating EPAs will be provided with
motorcycles (one per AEDO) in order to provide the mobility needed to undertake
effective extension activities through the farmer-to-farmer extension network. The DAES
EPA offices and resource centres will also be provided with computer equipment,
internet facilities, office furniture and extension equipment such as notice boards and
public address systems. For the EPAs without electricity, the programme will finance
installation of solar power.
(f) Training for Technical Staff. The Programme will provide training to DAES and other
relevant technical staff at various levels focusing on improving their knowledge of basic
agronomy, and increasing their awareness of the range of GAPs and conservation
farming methods currently available, and enhancing their extension and communication
14
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
skills. The technical training will include four workshops per annum for District
Extension Coordinators, Subject Matter Specialists and AEDCs; and three workshops per
annum for frontline extension staff (AEDOs). There will also be in-service degree level
training at Bunda College for 25 AEDCs who do not currently hold degrees; and diploma
training at NRC for around 130 AEDOs.
(g) Farmer Group Development. The approximately 9,700 farmer groups to be engaged by
the Programme will be supported through group dynamics and leadership training for
group leaders and facilitation support to encourage and enable the groups to affiliate with
higher level farmer organisations such as the Farmers Union of Malawi (FUM),
NASFAM, and/or thematic networks involved in sustainable land and water
management.
(h) Extension Materials and Mass Media. The Programme will finance the development
and continuous refinement of high quality extension materials including brochures,
posters and leaflets; as well as their production in large numbers and distribution to
extension staff and farmers. This material will also be made available to other
programmes and projects involved in the promotion of GAPs in Malawi. The Programme
will also support the development and broadcasting extension messages by TV and radio,
including through community radio stations in the Programme areas.
(i) Extension Programme Management. In accordance with MOAIWD policy on the
pluralistic approach to delivery of extension services, the Programme will contract NGOs
to coordinate and support the farmer-to-farmer extension network described in a) above.
The NGOs will recruit and supervise the 45 Field Officers (one per EPA) and 3,250 Lead
Farmers in the conduct of demonstrations, field days and Farmer Field Schools. This
approach is based on a number of successful models which have been demonstrated in
Malawi and is consistent with MOAIWD policy on the use of contacted service providers
for extension activities. The NGOs will have the status of contract service-providers and
will be recruited and supervised by DAES. The contractors will be responsible for
managing SAPP extension activities including training and supporting frontline
extension staff and the extension system generally in the demonstration and
dissemination of GAPs.
65.
Sub-Component 2.2 Access to Key Agricultural Inputs (USD 7.3 million). Farmers are
often unable to adopt GAPs because of the non-availability or un-affordability of key inputs. This
applies particularly to legume seeds (beans, soya beans, cowpea, pigeon pea, groundnuts and
leguminous trees) which are an important element of the GAPs to be offered by the Programme. To
address this constraint the Programme will engage with private seed companies to support the
multiplication and distribution of selected seeds through the network of farmer groups created under
Sub-Component 2.1. The Programme will also engage with input suppliers/agro-dealers to encourage
the commercialisation of inputs needed for GAPs (fertilisers, seeds, agro-chemicals, tools, implements
etc.); and will establish partnerships with micro-finance institution(s) to facilitate the adoption of
agricultural practices which require access to financial services, especially seasonal crop loans,
leasing, insurance services etc.
66.
The output of Sub-Component 2.2 will be target groups with access to necessary inputs for
sustained adoption of GAPs. The principal activities to be undertaken will include:
a) Seed multiplication and Distribution. The Programme will engage private seed
companies to establish a contract seed multiplication and distribution system which aims
to supply legume crop seeds (e.g. groundnuts, pigeon peas, beans) to about 20,000
farmers per annum sufficient to plant (or interplant) about 0.1 ha each. Around 500-600
contract seed growers will be engaged to produce a certified seed crop. A suitably
qualified seed company will be engaged to manage the contract seed growing system,
and the MOAIWD Seed Services Unit will be responsible for technical supervision and
seed certification. The activity will be undertaken in close cooperation with the FISP and
the ongoing Malawi Seed Industry Development Project, which is supported by Irish Aid
15
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
and ICRISAT; and the SAPP will also be linked to the IFAD financed RLEEP which is
supporting the value chains of groundnuts and pigeon peas with the participation of
ICRISAT as a partner for production and supply of certified seed. Other key partner
organisations will include the Malawi Seed Alliance (MASA) and the Seed Traders
Association of Malawi (STAM).
b) Engagement with Agro-Dealers. The Programme will identify 40-50 agro-dealers with
a presence or interest in the six Programme districts; and will engage with these through
the AGRA-supported Malawi Agribusiness Strengthening Programme (MASP) which
has established linkages with the agro-dealers. The aim is to increase the capacity of
agro-dealers to supply agricultural inputs through commercial channels and train dealers
in their correct use. This will include a pilot programme of village-based agro-dealer
agents to connect with clusters of farmer groups to bulk-up orders for agricultural inputs
and arrange for their procurement and delivery to the village. The agents will be
remunerated by the Programme for two years, after which they are expected to receive
income from agro-dealer commissions.
c) Post Harvest Management. Increasing crop yields have highlighted the need for better
post-harvest management to reduce storage losses and improve the capacity of
subsistence farmers to make the transition to small-scale commercial farming. Small and
medium scale metal silos are a proven technology for greatly reducing post harvest losses
and enabling farmers to hold grain until prices rise. The Programme will therefore
provide small (0.5 tonne) and medium (1.8 tonne) silos to subsistence and emerging
commercial farmers on a cost-sharing basis, together with training in post-harvest
management and silo fabrication. A priority under this activity will be to find ways of
reducing the cost of manufacturing silos. The Programme will also test the use of small
(30-40kg) airtight plastic bags and airtight “cocoons” for reducing storage losses.
d) Access to Financial Services. The Programme will partner with selected microfinance
institutions with a presence or interest in providing financial services to target group
smallholders in the six Programme districts. The MFI partners will be selected on the
basis of competitive bidding. Grants will be provided for the purpose of extending the
reach of financial services to households growing cash crops and conducting farming as a
business, with an emphasis on services which are intended to facilitate the adoption of
GAPs. The grants will be for about USD 50,000 per district per year for three years and
may be provided to one, two or three different institutions.
67.
Component 3: Programme Management and Coordination (USD 5.2 million). SAPP will
be implemented within the GOM policy and institutional framework. This follows the creation of the
ASWAp and the decision to discontinue the use of PIUs in accordance with the Paris Declaration and
GOM’s Development Assistance Strategy. SAPP will be implemented within the context of the
ASWAp by the ASWAp Secretariat under the overall leadership of the ASWAp Coordinator and the
Secretary for Agriculture and Food Security. The relevant technical departments will be actively
involved both at central and decentralised levels with administrative departments such as Planning,
Human Resources, Finance and Administration providing support services. Start-up and
implementation arrangements are provided in Annex 5.
68.
IFAD will provide a grant of USD 0.6 million in the form of a Programme Preparatory
Facility (PPF) to facilitate a quick start-up of Programme activities. The PPF will be launched
immediately upon signature of the Programme Financing Agreement, and will not be subject to
conditions of effectiveness or disbursement. The PPF will finance international and national technical
assistance, temporary logistic support, MOAIWD staff orientation, detailed design of the M&E and
knowledge management systems, finalisation of the Programme Implementation Manual (PIM),
preparation of the first Annual Workplan and Budget (AWPB) and procurement plan, procurement of
accounting software, and a start-up workshop and Programme launch. Details on the activities to be
funded by the PPF are given in Annex 5, Appendix 3.
16
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
D.
Lessons Learned and reflected in Project Design
69.
Overall, the performance of the country programme has been satisfactory, but plagued by
slow implementation related to capacity shortfalls in Government institutions. As the size of the IFAD
programme grows, these limitations will become increasingly important and necessitate a high level
of implementation support. The multitude of programmes and projects supported by other donors adds
to the pressure on capacity, especially within MOAIWD. The Government’s decision to discontinue
the use of PIUs and contracted project staff can be expected to place further strains on implementation
capacity in the next few years as mainstream institutions take full responsibility for project
management.
70.
A number of lessons have been learned from IFAD’s experience in Malawi. These are
detailed Annex 3, together with a description of the way in which the design of SAPP has responded
to the lessons learned. Lessons learned from the expanding country programme will make a valuable
contribution to evidence-based policy formulation within a comprehensive knowledge management
framework. This will depend on partnerships being formed with key institutions and development
agencies to enable them to make informed policy choices reflecting the priorities of the rural poor and
contribute to policy dialogue. The de facto country presence now in place will facilitate engagement
of IFAD in policy and programmatic processes. Moreover, it is intended to establish a full-time
staffed country office in Malawi during 2012.
III.
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
A.
Approach
71.
Overall coordination of Programme activities will be done by the ASWAp Secretariat.
While adhering to the general guidelines for implementing projects within the ASWAp framework,
and in line with GOM’s decentralisation policy, SAPP will delegate responsibility for Component 2
activities (comprising almost 80% of costs) to ADD and DC levels to bring implementation
responsibilities closer to the beneficiary communities. Recognising staffing limitations within the
Ministry, SAPP will also employ partnership arrangements with NGOs and other service-providers
subject to output-based contracts. This will involve the use of reputable and competent organisations
that are actively working with Government extension services, and will maximise the use of capacity
within the relevant MOAIWD departments.
72.
The Programme will be fully integrated within the ASWAp framework under the earmarked
funding mechanism. All activities will be undertaken through the mainstream systems of Government.
Procedures for Programme oversight and management will be in line with those established by the
ASWAp Secretariat and documented in the ASWAp-SP Project Implementation Manual (PIM), apart
from those relating to financial management and audit as detailed in Annex 7.
73.
It is foreseen that implementation start-up will be relatively fast, given that the coordination
team i.e. the ASWAp Secretariat is already in place and functioning, and will be supported by the PPF
grant to be provided by IFAD. Start-up and implementation arrangements are detailed in Annex 5,
while the summary and draft PIM is provided in Annex 11 and Working Paper 11.
B.
Organisational Framework
74.
The Programme Steering Committee will be the ASWAp Executive Management Committee
(EMC). The ASWAp Coordinator will oversee Programme implementation along with the other
programmes and projects under the ASWAp umbrella. Direct Programme management responsibility
will be assigned to the ASWAp Deputy Coordinator (Management) and Deputy Coordinator
(Technical). The Deputy Coordinator (Management) will be responsible for management-related
activities especially under Component 3 of the Programme. The Deputy Coordinator (Technical) will
be responsible for managing the implementation of core activities under Components 1 and 2.
Responsibility for field operations under Component 2 will be assigned to the ADDs and DCs under
the control of the ADD Programme Managers and DADOs respectively. Activities undertaken by
17
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
organisations outside the Ministry (parastatals, NGOs, financial institutions, private sector etc) will be
governed by contracts or MOUs.
75.
MOAIWD will be required to assign a number of staff full-time to Programme
implementation. Whether existing or new appointees, these will be engaged under normal civil service
conditions. They will include an M&E Officer and a Knowledge Management and Communication
Officer (Planning Department); a Procurement Officer (Procurement Unit), and two accountants
(Finance Department). These may be existing staff members or new recruits filling vacancies. They
will be supported during the initial years by a Programme Management Advisor, Financial
Management Advisor, Procurement Advisor and an M&E/Knowledge Management Advisor. These
Advisors will support the entire ASWAp programme, not just the SAPP component.
76.
At ADD and District levels staff will mostly be assigned to Programme activities on a parttime basis, and will be provided with the resources (training, transport, operating costs, extension
materials etc.) needed to undertake activities specified in the AWPBs. NGOs will be engaged to
support District and EPA level extension efforts in partnership with Government officers.
C.
Planning, M&E and Knowledge Management
Planning (Annex 6)
77.
SAPP’s annual planning and implementation cycle will form part of the ASWAp
implementation framework. ASWAp’s planning, budgeting and monitoring is aligned with GOM’s
main planning cycle. The fiscal year goes from July to June while budget preparation extends from
January to May. Budget ceilings are issued between February and May before the budget goes to
Parliament for approval in late June. Plan preparation starts at district level in January. Districts have
until March to finalise their activities and budget based on disaggregated annual targets of selected
output indicators from the ASWAp-SP results framework. The ADD provides backstopping support
to districts in the initial stages. The districts receive individual budget ceilings previously agreed by
the ASWAp EMC, on proposals from the MOFDP. The AWPB is revised and sent to the District
Commissioner and ADD by early April. The ADD consolidates the AWPBs from the districts under
its control and sends the consolidated version to the Planning Department of MOAIWD between
March and April for consolidation into the Ministry AWPB. The ASWAp Secretariat inserts the
budget elements from the other implementing ministries (MOIT, MOLGRD, MOIWD, Department of
Climate Change and Meteorological Services and other key implementers) and finalises the overall
AWPB for the ASWAp. This is endorsed by the EMC before being sent to the MOFDP for inclusion
in the budget in June.
78.
An annual implementation report is prepared within 60 days of the end of the fiscal year. This
report is based on the planning for the previous year and explains which targets have been met, which
ones have not and why. This report forms the basis for an Annual ASWAp Review in September that
makes a performance assessment of the Ministries and the ASWAp during the previous year. The
report also contains financial and budget execution information. The Agriculture sector review then
feeds into the MGDS review mechanism.
Monitoring and Evaluation (Annex 6)
79.
Malawi has a National M&E Master Plan which outlines the main framework for monitoring
development policies and programmes in the country. It presents an action plan that can be used to
monitor and evaluate inputs, outputs, outcomes and impacts. The M&E Division of Ministry of
Development Planning and Cooperation (MDPC) acts as the Secretariat for the national system. The
Secretariat coordinates outcome and impact monitoring activities across all sectors. MOAIWD has an
M&E system managed by the M&E Unit of the Agriculture Planning Services Department. The Unit
is tasked to monitor and evaluate all projects in MOAIWD including those under the ASWAp. The
Unit has positions for M&E officers at national level as well as at ADD and District levels. However,
there is a high vacancy rate especially at field level and the M&E system is not functioning
efficiently. Furthermore, the results generated are not regularly reported as required. Annex 6 and
Working Paper 6 provide guidance on what is required to ensure that the existing M&E system in
18
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
MOAIWD is comprehensive enough to provide the necessary information to monitor and evaluate
management of SAPP.
80.
M&E will be undertaken at different levels to support effective implementation, maintain the
Programme’s focus and direction, and provide information for addressing constraints and ensuring
delivery of outputs. IFAD will undertake supervision/ implementation support at least twice per year
to assess the status of Programme implementation and evaluate direction. It will also provide technical
assistance to support implementation and undertake a mid-term review during Year 5. MOAIWD will
assign an M&E Specialist on a full-time basis who will have direct responsibility for monitoring and
evaluating the administrative, financial, technical, socioeconomic and environmental elements of the
Programme. As a starting point, a baseline survey will be undertaken to benchmark the existing
situation in the Programme Districts.
81.
Specialised studies to evaluate the extent to which the Programme goal and purpose are being
achieved will be contracted out. Indicators selected from the RIMS, as well as general and sectorspecific (ASWAp) indicators have been integrated in the logframe. Quantitative impact assessment
will be carried out before the Mid-Term Review and as part of the Programme completion process.
Quantitative targets have been included at all levels in the logical framework. Qualitative analysis will
also be conducted from the end of the second year to assess whether activities are likely to lead to the
desired higher-level results. This will include analysis of the extent to which smaller and poorer
farmers have been able to improve their productivity levels, and will consider the benefits that have
been delivered to women and youth from a quantitative point of view, by using gender-disaggregated
indicators; and from a qualitative perspective, by case studies on women and youth beneficiaries.
Knowledge Management and Communication (Annex 6)
82.
Knowledge management is an important element of SAPP in that the Programme will
develop, refine and disseminate GAPs, which are better suited to the conditions of Malawi, and are
markedly different from current practices. The Programme will support a major learning process to
change practices and raise awareness of more efficient and sustainable approaches to farming. The
design of SAPP recognises the knowledge-intensive nature of the technology development and
adoption process and has a number of activities to facilitate the process including: (i) testing,
evaluating and demonstrating improved farming approaches; (ii) on-farm adaptive trials and
demonstrations; (iii) technical training and study tours; (v) support for farmer-to-farmer learning; and
(vi) closer two-way communication between research and extension.
83.
Knowledge management processes within SAPP are designed to ensure that knowledge
generated within the Programme is systematically identified, analysed, documented and shared. This
systematic approach will enable the Programme to be flexible and responsive to changing
circumstances. This knowledge will contribute to the evolution of key incentives, instruments,
services and institutions that comprise the agricultural and rural policy framework. It will also be used
to support capacity building and institutional strengthening activities of a range of stakeholders
including service providers, farmer organisations and government departments.
84.
A comprehensive KM and communication strategy will be developed under the PPF. It will
be anchored on the MOAIWD M&E system and will be consistent with the information and
knowledge diffusion strategy that is being formulated under the ASWAp. The Programme will
support capacity building for systematic knowledge management and communication in MOAIWD in
general, and within the participating ADDs and Districts, and in relevant stakeholder institutions.
D.
Financial Management, Procurement, Audit and Governance
Financial Management (Annex 7 and Working Paper 8)
19
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
85.
Although SAPP will be managed within the ASWAp framework under the earmarked funding
option, the accounting and disbursement system must enable traceability of IFAD funds. To this end,
the SAPP accounting cycle will involve:





86.
Preparing a SAPP-specific AWPB consistent with, and consolidated into the ASWAp
AWPB, with the requisite budgetary and expenditure controls.
Committing funds using a SAPP-specific procurement plan as part of the ASWAp
procurement plan.
Disbursing funds through SAPP-specific Designated and Operational bank accounts.
Submitting withdrawal applications to replenish the Designated Account and/or to pay
suppliers directly.
Preparing and auditing SAPP - specific financial statements. This will involve accounting
for receipts and analysing expenditure trends according to the SAPP expenditure
categories and components - in compliance with internationally accepted accounting
practices.
The key elements of the SAPP accounting and procurement cycle are proposed as follows:



For the consolidation of the SAPP AWPB for Component 2, the ADD seems to be more
suited, while the ASWAp secretariat will provide policy guidance to ensure coordination
with related projects and programmes.
Disbursing funds and replenishing the Designated Account will be under the oversight of
the MOAIWD Director of Finance (DOF). The DOF will be supported by two
Justification Accountants, one of whom would work within the ADDs; while the other
would work directly with Accountant in charge of Development Accounts in the DOF’s
office. All payment requisitions, including those from the DCs and NGOs, will be
forwarded directly to MOAIWD headquarters and copied to the ADD.
The DOF will be responsible for preparing a complete set of SAPP financial statements.
Because of the limitation to the extent the Government Chart of Accounts, the Integrated
Financial Management System (IFMIS) cannot be expected to generate SAPP
expenditure reports analysed by component and category, and to facilitate the preparation
of Withdrawal Applications. Therefore, the Justification Accountants supporting the DOF
will be equipped with a simple off-the-shelf accounting package with the necessary
training.
Procurement (Annex 8 and Working Paper 8)
87.
The National Procurement Law and Regulations will govern all Programme procurements
except for ICB which will follow the prevailing World Bank guidelines.. The Procurement Unit of the
MOAIWD will be in charge of SAPP Procurement which will be based on the 18-month procurement
plan forming part of each AWPB. For SAPP, the procurement thresholds and associated methods will
be aligned to those set by the World Bank for the ASWAp-SP except where these differ from IFAD
recommended thresholds. The MOAIWD Procurement Unit is staffed with a Chief Procurement
Officer, a supplies officer, and two Procurement assistants; and also has three procurement advisers
(consultants) who have elevated the capacity of MOAIWD. If required, it will be possible with SAPP
financing to hire a full-time SAPP contracts officer to follow-up the day-to-day SAPP procurement
process and contracts management.
88.
The legal and regulatory framework for procurement is satisfactory, and it is expected that the
MOAIWD Procurement Unit will be able to steer the SAPP procurements, as long as the two
consultants, or the equivalent, are retained. GOM procurement systems are in accordance with IFAD
requirements, and a Procurement Advisor will be engaged by the SAPP to train and guide MOAIWD
procurement staff. Since key procurements will be done through the MOAIWD Procurement Unit the
numerous weaknesses identified in other procurement entities especially the DCs will not adversely
affect SAPP.
89.
Based on the assessments carried out by the World Bank and confirmed by the SAPP design
mission (Annex 8 and Working Paper 8), provided the two ASWAp-SP existing procurement
20
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
consultants are retained or their positions are substantively filled with officials of similar calibre, the
MOAIWD Procurement Unit has the capacity to manage procurement using the Ministry’s Internal
Procurement Committee (IPC). Government procedures will be used; except for ICB procurement
where the World Bank procedures will be used.
Governance
90.
Since the Programme will be embedded in the ASWAp, its governance arrangements will be
those of the ASWAp itself. These arrangements will apply to oversight by the ASWAp EMC, lines of
responsibility under the ASWAp Coordinator and devolution of responsibilities to ADD and District
levels.
91.
The Government shall have the financial statements relating to SAPP audited each Fiscal
Year by the Auditor General or a private firm appointed by the Auditor General and acceptable to
IFAD. The external audits will carried out in accordance with the International Standards on Auditing
and the Fund’s “Guidelines on Programme Audits (for Borrowers’ Use)”, as may be amended from
time to time. In addition to the audit report on the financial statements, the auditors shall provide: (i)
an opinion on the certified statements of expenditure and the operation of the Designated Account;
and (ii) a separate management letter, addressing the adequacy of the accounting and internal control
systems. The Government shall deliver the above-mentioned items to the Fund within six months of
the end of each such Fiscal Year. The Government shall submit to IFAD the reply to the management
letter of the auditors within one month of receipt thereof.
92.
The Government shall ensure that in addition to the audit reports on the financial statements,
the auditors shall provide: (i) an opinion on the certified statements of expenditure and the operation
of the Designated Account; and (ii) a separate management letter addressing the adequacy of
accounting and internal control systems.
E.
Supervision
93.
Supervision of SAPP will be carried out directly by IFAD as an ongoing process of
implementation support. There will be one supervision mission during the PPF period and during the
subsequent 12-18 months it is envisaged that supervision missions will be required every six months.
Implementation support will focus on planning, procurement, financial management, M&E, and
integration of Programme activities within the ASWAp framework. The Country Programme
Manager will maintain oversight of the supervision process with the assistance of selected specialist
consultants. The Country Officer (expected to be appointed in 2012) will be available for day-to-day
supervision and implementation support.
F.
Risk Identification and Mitigation
94.
The Programme will be subject to a number of generic risks affecting the entire country
programme which include: (i) limited capacity in relevant institutions; (ii) scarcity and lack of
capacity among service providers; (iii) delays in programme implementation; (iv) changing
agricultural and rural policy framework; and (v) deterioration in the fiscal position and/or loss of
budget support from donors. The COSOP includes risk mitigation measures for these and other risk
elements.
95.
Risks which relate specifically to SAPP include: (i) lack of institutional capacity of
MOAIWD particularly at District level and below, and on research stations; (ii) the potential for
research and extension effort to be dissipated among a number of un-coordinated initiatives; and (iii)
other initiatives offering free or subsidised inputs which reduce the incentives for farmers to change
the way they grow their crops. The principal risks, their possible consequences and proposed
mitigation measures are detailed in the following table:
21
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
Risks
Possible Consequences
Mitigation Measures
Generic Risks Spanning the Entire Country Programme
 Limited implementation  Delayed
and
ineffective  Provide for Technical Advisors to
capacity
in
relevant
implementation.
support implementation
institutions.
 Disbursement delays
 Invest in capacity building.
 Make maximum use of private service
providers and NGOs
 Provide financial management training to
improve accounting, reporting and
consequently the accountability;
 Enhance capacity of the national audit
office by the use of private sector audit
firms..
 Lack of capacity among  Expensive and poor quality service  Training and capacity building for service
service providers.
delivery.
providers in relevant fields.
 Delay in achieving loan  Possibly lengthy implementation  Secure
minimal
conditions
of
effectiveness
and
and disbursement delays.
effectiveness.
Programme launch.
 Provide IFAD finance for Programme
preparatory facilities.
 Weak and/or unstable  Long delays in Programme  Align
Programme
design
and
coalition governments.
implementation.
implementation with the electoral cycle.
 The
impacts
of  Attention diverted from productive  Mainstream HIV/AIDS in all programmes
HIV/AIDS.
activities.
and projects.
 Some investments in capacity
building wasted.
 Inconsistent agricultural  Failure
to
align budgetary  Encourage Government to allocate
and
rural
policy
allocations with policies.
budgetary resources to the ASWAp
framework.
accordingly.
 Deterioration in GOM’s  Declining budgetary resources for  Maximise opportunities for private sector
fiscal position and/or loss
agriculture and rural development.
engagement which do not rely on
donor support.
government resources.
 Difficulty in establishing  Weak sense of ownership of IFAD  Provide incentives to attract well qualified
an effective CPMT.
supported programmes.
CPMT members.
Programme-Specific Risks
 Farmers are unwilling to  Increased maize yields will  Support commercialisation efforts to
diversify
maize-based
improve food security but not
develop profitable cash crops.
farming systems.
reduce poverty levels.
 Link farmers to markets.
 GAP methods will not  Low adoption rates.
 Conduct
on-farm
trials
and
prove popular among
demonstrations and farmer-to-farmer
farmers.
extension.
 Reluctance of the private  Farmers will remain isolated from  Full private sector participation in
sector to fully engage in
markets.
Programme design.
the Programme.
 Over-reliance
on
parastatal  Private sector representation on Steering
marketing organisations.
Committees.
 Financing constraints limit  Farmers and SMEs are unable to  Provide assistance in linking farmers and
smallholder and SME
obtain
funding
needed
SME businesses to sources of finance.
participation.
commercialisation.
IV.
PROGRAMME COSTS, FINANCING AND BENEFITS
A.
Programme Costs
96.
Total investment and recurrent costs, including contingencies, over the nine-year Programme
life are estimated at around USD 51 million (around MWK 10 billion). Component 1: Adaptive
Research and Knowledge Management, comprises 10.5 % of costs; Component 2: Farmer Adoption
of GAPs, comprises 79.2 %; and Component 3: Programme Management and Coordination comprises
10.3 % (see Annex 9 and Working Paper 9 for details).
22
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
Table 1: Total Programme Costs by Component
(MK Million)
Component and Sub-Component
A. Adaptive Research and Knowledge Management
Adaptive Research
Knowledge Management and Communication
Subtotal
B. Farmer Adoption of GAPs
Improved Agricultural Extension
Access to Key Agricultural Inputs
Subtotal
C. Programme Management and Coordination
Total BASELINE COSTS
Physical Contingencies
Price Contingencies
Total Programme Costs
B.
%
% Total
Foreign Base
Local Foreign Total Local Foreign Total Exch.
Costs
469
139
608
3,508
714
4,222
476
5,306
12
2,249
7,568
133
4
137
(US$ Million)
602
143
745
3.1
0.9
4.1
0.9
0.0
0.9
4.0
1.0
5.0
22
3
18
9
2
11
1,070 4,579
304 1,018
1,374 5,596
258
734
1,769 7,075
7
20
669 2,919
2,446 10,014
23.4
4.8
28.1
3.2
35.4
0.1
3.0
38.4
7.1
2.0
9.2
1.7
11.8
0.0
0.9
12.7
30.5
6.8
37.3
4.9
47.2
0.1
3.8
51.1
23
30
25
35
25
38
23
25
65
14
79
10
100
8
108
Programme Financing
97.
IFAD will finance around 89.3 % of the total Programme cost through a financing package
comprising a loan of USD 22.85 million under highly-concessional terms and a grant of an equal
amount. Part of the grant component will be used to finance the PPF. This financing arrangement
reflects Malawi’s status as a “yellow” country under the Debt Sustainability Framework. The
Government will finance around 8.3% of the total programme cost through taxes and staff salaries
(including existing positions and recruitments to fill vacancies), and beneficiaries will contribute with
some inputs for around 2.4% of total programme costs.
Table 2: Summary of Programme Financing Plan
Component/Sub-Component
A. Adaptive Research and Knowledge Management
Adaptive Research
Knowledge Management and Communication
Subtotal
B. Farmer Adoption of GAPs
Improved Agricultural Extension
Access to Key Agricultural Inputs
Subtotal
C. Programme Management and Coordination
Total Programme Costs
IFAD
IFAD
Loan/Grant
PPF
USD m % USD m %
3.7 84.4
1.0 98.6
4.7 87.1
31.7
5.9
37.7
2.7
45.1
95.7
81.1
93.0
52.3
88.2
-
Government Benficiaries
Total
USD m % USD m % USD m %
-
0.7 15.6
0.0 1.4
0.7 12.9
0.6 10.8
0.6 1.1
1.4 4.3
0.2 2.2
1.6 3.9
1.9 36.9
4.2 8.3
-
-
1.2 16.7
1.2 3.0
1.2 2.4
4.3 8.5
1.0 2.0
5.4 10.5
33.2
7.3
40.5
5.2
51.1
64.9
14.3
79.2
10.3
100.0
Potential for Harmonised Financing and Implementation Within ASWAp
98.
The launch of the ASWAp and the CAADP Compact and Investment Framework; as well as
GOMs decision to discontinue all PIUs from the end of 2011; have taken place during the course of
Programme design. The Programme is designed to be implemented through the ASWAp Secretariat
using mainstream MOAIWD operational and financial procedures under the earmarked funding
option. This means that SAPP will have its own AWPB and produce auditable financial reports in the
form required by IFAD, which would then be aggregated into the overall ASWAp AWPB and
financial reports.
99.
Currently there is only one project which is fully integrated into the ASWAp – the ASWApSP which is jointly financed by WB/GEF and Norway and is supporting the development of the
ASWAp itself as well as other activities similar to those proposed for SAPP. A new AfDB rural
infrastructure and irrigation project is also planned to be brought into the ASWAp. It is not clear
23
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
whether, to what extent, or how quickly the large number of other projects and programmes will be
brought under the ASWAp umbrella. However it is certain that all new projects will have to be
designed into the ASWAp.
100.
It has been suggested that SAPP could be “rolled together” with ASWAp-SP or “harmonised”
with several related initiatives likely to be supported by other donors. This would involve much closer
integration than simply supporting discrete programmes under the ASWAP umbrella. One possibility
is to have a number (say five) of sub-sectoral initiatives each funded by a syndicate of donors who
would commit to harmonise support under a uniform set of procedures, but each with separate
financing agreements and financial reporting (i.e. parallel financing).
C.
Summary Benefit Analysis
101.
The economic rationale (Annex 10) for SAPP hinges on: (i) the use of a low-cost but effective
farmer-to-farmer extension system to support the adoption of simple and affordable agricultural
technologies which will increase maize and legume yields, enable diversification into higher value
crops, and improve soil health; (ii) reduced post-harvest losses; (iii) reduced labour inputs and
improved labour productivity through improved crop management practices and particularly weed
control practices; (iv) more efficient use of crop inputs, especially fertilisers (partly provided under
the FISP, but considered as a cost for farmers in the financial analysis); and (v) improved access to
inputs and markets as well as reduced transport costs.
102.
Crop budgets (Working Paper 10) show that the improved agricultural packages proposed
have the potential to generate attractive financial benefit-cost ratios with or without the FISP. When
the financial benefits at farm level are aggregated up into national economic benefits (Working Paper
10), based on conservative assumptions concerning adoption rates for GAPs, the overall economic
rate of return of the programme is around 25%. This could easily be higher if farmers take advantage
of the attractive financial benefit/cost ratios obtainable from moving up the steps of the technology
ladder.
103.
Annex 12 presents Environmental Screening and Scoping Note (ESSN) and an environmental
monitoring checklist in accordance with IFAD procedures. The Programme’s focus on rural poverty
reduction, and the special targeting mechanisms proposed, is expected to produce a number of
positive social impacts. Promotion and adoption of GAPs has the potential to improve soil organic
matter levels, increase carbon sequestration, reduce fossil fuel use, reduce soil erosion, and improve
household food security. However use of herbicides and inorganic fertilisers will need to be carefully
monitored to ensure compliance with prudent use of these materials. Provided this is done, no adverse
environmental consequences are expected. Overall the programme presents few environmental risks,
and the potential to generate a number of significant environmental and social benefits provided
certain safeguards are adopted, and is therefore considered Category B.
D.
Sustainability
104.
At current average levels of productivity and population growth Malawi will be unable to
make significant inroads into rural poverty and food insecurity. However, current agricultural support
measures in Malawi are un-sustainable in the long-run, given the very high cost of the FISP, and the
likelihood of ongoing fiscal stringency. This makes it vital to increase agricultural productivity to
improve the effectiveness of FISP investments and enable rainfed crops to be produced sustainably
without high levels of subsidisation. Three of the four main thrusts of SAPP will directly address the
twin issues of productivity and government support levels which underpin the move towards a more
sustainable future for the sector: (i) a shift in emphasis from subsidised input supply to improved
productivity; (ii) more effective and sustainable service delivery through community-based farmer-tofarmer extension services; and (iii) institutional and management innovations improve the access to
key agricultural inputs through commercial channels.
105.
Alongside these three main thrusts a number of complementary measures are incorporated to
enhance the prospects for a sustainable smallholder sector. These include fostering and supporting
24
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Main Report
greater participation of the private sector in the supply of inputs and services, particularly seed,
fertilisers and financial services; support for the development of farmer groups; and intensive training
for farmers, research and extension staff in modern, more productive and environmentally friendly
rainfed cropping technologies. Where production will increase substantially, especially for groundnuts
and pigeon peas, farmers will be linked to the IFAD financed RLEEP which is supporting the
production and marketing of these commodities in partnership with private sector and non
government organizations.
E. Loan Conditions and Covenants
106.
During the Financing Agreement negotiations for the SAPP, IFAD will be seeking a number
of assurances from the Government in the following areas:

Commitment that the AWSAp Secretariat will continue to be adequately staffed and will be
charged with responsibility for the coordination and management of SAPP activities.

Commitment that MOAIWD will assign required personnel for SAPP implementation on a
full time or part time basis according to need, and key staff consisting of M&E Officer,
Knowledge Management and Communications Officer, Procurement Officer(s) and two
Accountants would be assigned to the Programme immediately upon signing of the Financing.

Commitment to engaging with regional and international organizations, private sector and
non-governmental organizations as implementing partners and service providers, with the
active participation of the Programme’s target group, in order to ensure that the SAPP
objectives are met.
107.
Conditions of effectiveness and disbursement to be incorporated in the loan/grant agreement
are expected to be minimal in order to facilitate speedy launch of the Programme. Conditions of
effectiveness will include: (i) Parliamentary authorisation and ratification of the Financing Agreement
and approval to proceed with implementation. Conditions of disbursement will include: (i) measures
to allow taxes and duties to be waived; and (ii) opening of the designated account.
108.
IFAD will release a portion of the grant funds to finance a PPF following signing of the
loan/grant agreement in order to facilitate compliance with the above conditions including
recruitment of key technical advisors, procurement and installation of accounting software,
orientation of MOAIWD staff, preparation of the first annual work plan and budget, and review and
finalization of the draft PIM and procurement plan.
25
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 1
Annex 1: Country and Rural Context Background
I.
Social And Economic Development Policies
Malawi’s overarching policy document for social and economic development is the
Malawi Growth and Development Strategy. The MGDS is linked to the Millennium Development
Goals (MDGs) in enhancing economic growth and poverty reduction. Likewise, the country’s
agriculture sector development strategy as defined in the Agricultural Sector-Wide Approach
(ASWAp) is aligned to the CAADP framework at regional level to foster agricultural-led economic
growth. At international level, the ASWAp implements resolutions made at different international
groupings such as the World Summit on Food Security by FAO, the Paris Declaration on Aid
Effectiveness and Agricultural Trade Policy by WTO.
1.
The main thrust of the MGDS is to create wealth through sustainable economic growth
and infrastructure development as a means of achieving poverty reduction. Its main focus is to
increase the level of economic growth to at least six percent per annum on a sustainable basis. This
is expected to transform the country from being a predominantly importing and consuming to a
predominantly manufacturing and exporting economy.
2.
The MGDS represents a policy shift from social consumption to sustainable economic
growth and places emphasis on nine key priority areas of (i) agriculture and food security; (ii)
greenbelt irrigation and water development; iii) transport infrastructure development and Nsanje
inland port; (iv) Education Science and Technology; (v) Public health sanitation and HIV and AIDS
management; (vi) Youth development and empowerment; (vii) Integrated Rural Development; (viii)
Energy Mining and Industrial Development; and (ix) Climate Change and Natural Resources and
Environmental Management.
3.
The emphasis in agriculture is to increase the contribution of the agricultural sector to
economic growth through production of food crops and value addition for domestic and export
markets. The MGDS aims at increasing agricultural productivity and food diversity by: (i) increasing
value addition to agricultural products by smallholder farmers and orienting smallholder farmers to
greater commercialisation; (ii) strengthening the linkages of farmers to markets through infrastructure
development; and (iii) enhancing irrigation and water development. Such agricultural strategies need
to ensure that sustainability mechanisms are embedded at programming stage.
4.
The Malawi Development Assistance Strategy (DAS) sets out the policy for increasing
efficiency and effectiveness in the utilisation of aid. The DAS seeks to achieve these outcomes
through the operationalisation of the norms of the Paris Declaration. The five norms are: (i) national
ownership of the development agenda; (ii) alignment of development partners to the national
development strategy and government systems; (iii) harmonisation of development partner’s systems
and activities; (iv) managing resources and decision-making for results; and (v) mutual accountability
5.
SAPP is fully aligned with Malawi’s development policies and strategies, specifically the
Malawi CAADP Compact, the ASWAp, the MGDS and the DAS. The programme will be
implemented through Government systems and aligned with national policies and complementary
donor initiatives.
6.
II.
Overview of the Agricultural Sector
Smallholder production on landholdings of less than one hectare dominates the
agricultural sector. The smallholder and estate sub-sectors have historically been delineated by
different legal and institutional rules regarding crop production, marketing arrangements, pricing, and
land tenure. More than 90% of the rural population encompasses smallholders with customary land
tenure. Over 80% of this land is planted to maize while smaller average allocations are made to a wide
diversity of additional food and cash crops including tobacco and groundnuts. The estate sub-sector
accounts for about 10% of the land area, which is mainly under freehold or leasehold tenure. The
main cash crops grown by the estate sector are tobacco, tea and sugarcane. Tobacco is Malawi’s
largest export cash crop, accounting for about 60% of export earnings, followed by tea and sugar.
7.
1
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 1
Production and consumption of animal products is very low. As cropping extends into grazing areas,
the numbers of ruminant livestock, especially cattle, have declined.
The long term performance of the agricultural sector has been weak but has rebounded
during the last five years due to a combination of above average rainfall and the large-scale
subsidised supply of fertilisers and seed. These have contributed to bumper harvests and strong
growth in the sector. Over the past 20-25 years, Malawi shifted from being a self-sufficient producer
of maize to a regular net importer, dependent on foreign assistance, to achieve a national food
balance. The Government embarked on various initiatives to boost agricultural production and
alleviate poverty. These include market liberalisation (1994) and agricultural production support
programs such as the Universal Starter Pack (1998), and the Targeted Input Program (2002), which
was replaced by Farm Input Subsidy Programme (FISP) in 2005-06. This, in combination with
favourable rains, has brought production surpluses. Over 50% of the entire budget of the MAFS is
now allocated to the FISP.
8.
Low agricultural productivity continues to pose a threat to national and household food
security. Malawi’s agriculture has until very recently, been unable to overcome chronic food
insecurity. However the introduction of the FISP has coincided with a marked upswing in crop
productivity. Maize yields in three of the last four years have been well above average against the
background of a weak long-term up-trend in crop yields. The maize yield trendline has moved from
about 1.0t/ha in 1982-83 to around 1.5t/ha today, representing an annual growth rate of 1.7% which is
well below population growth rate. Moreover, average yields are a fraction of potential yields
(6-7t/ha), as achieved by leading farmers. The reasons for low crop yields are many and include: low
and declining soil fertility; dependence on rainfed production; limited use of improved seeds and
fertilisers; and an inadequately resourced extension system. This is exacerbated by weak links to
markets, high transport costs, weak farmer organisations, poor quality control and inadequate
information on markets and prices.
9.
III.
The Agricultural Sector-Wide Approach
The ASWAp3 offers a strategy for achieving the growth and poverty alleviation
objectives of the MGDS. It comprises a harmonised investment program in three major areas: food
security, commercialisation, and sustainable resource management. The ASWAp’s priorities are
aligned with CAADP pillars. The objective is to achieve an annual growth rate in the agricultural
sector of 6% within a harmonised government and donor investment framework in the pursuit of a
prioritised and results-oriented development agenda with a gradual transition to pooled funding. The
ASWAp strengthens donor alignment with government priorities, and reduces donor commitments to
large numbers of distinct projects with parallel implementation mechanisms. Ultimately, the
government seeks to have all donors funding passing through existing administrative structures under
a common set of programme management, implementation and monitoring systems. The ASWAp
also encourages greater coordination of the agricultural development investments of a wider range of
stakeholders including other line Ministries, the private sector, NGOs and farmer organisations.
10.
The move towards a fully-fledged sector-wide approach based on pooled funding is
expected to be gradual beginning with implementing the priority investment programme using a
Programme Based Approach. The main features of this approach are: (i) leadership by the host
country or organisation; (ii) a single comprehensive programme and budget framework; (iii) a
formalised process for donor coordination and harmonisation of donor procedures for programme
design, implementation, financial management, planning and monitoring.
11.
The ASWAp targets three focus areas, two key support services and two cross-cutting
issues as summarised below.
12.
3
Originally known as the Agricultural Development Programme (ADP).
2
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 1
Focus Area
Food Security and Risk
Management
Commercial Agriculture, Agroprocessing and Market
Development
Sustainable Agricultural Land and
Water Management
Components
1. Maize self-sufficiency through increased maize productivity and
reduced post harvest losses.
2. Diversification of food production and dietary diversification for
improved nutrition at household level with focus on crops,
livestock, and fisheries.
3. Risk management for food stability at national level.
1. Agricultural exports of different high value commodities for
increased revenue and income.
2. Agro-processing mainly for value addition and import substitution.
3. Market development for inputs and outputs through Public/private
sector partnerships.
1. Sustainable agricultural land management.
2. Sustainable agricultural water management and irrigation
development through the greenbelt initiative.
Key Support Services
Technology Generation and
Dissemination
Components
1. Results and market oriented research on priority technology needs
and provision of technical and regulatory services.
2. Efficient farmer-led extension and training services.
Institutional Strengthening and
Capacity Building
1. Strengthening public management systems.
2. Capacity building of the public and private sectors.
13.
Cross Cutting Issues include:


HIV/AIDS pandemic. HIV/AIDS issues will be mainstreamed in the ASWAp with the
aim to minimise morbidity and mortality, enhance resilience and household coping
mechanisms and also reduce HIV infection risks and vulnerability.
Gender Disparities. Gender issues are mainstreamed in the ASWAp in order to reduce
gender disparities and enhance capacity of the youth, women and men to contribute to
agricultural productivity.
IV.
Donor Support for Agriculture and Rural Development
The agricultural sector is widely supported by donors such as: IFAD, the European Union,
the World Bank, the African Development Bank, the Norwegian Agency for Development
Cooperation, the UK Department for International Development (DFID), the Japan International
Cooperation Agency (JICA), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and a
number of NGOs. Maintaining strategic partnerships has been a challenge for donors accentuated by
the very complex array of donor and Government initiatives. Nevertheless, donor coordination has
significantly improved under the Donor Committee on Agriculture and Food Security (DCAFS), of
which IFAD is a member.
14.
Government favours mainstreaming donor-supported programmes within Government
systems, and phasing out parallel project implementation structures. At the same time there is
recognition by the sectoral ministries of the challenges that this represents given capacity constraints
in the civil service. Most districts lack financial management capacity and there is often a need for
project staff to undertake grass-roots activities at the district level and below.
15.
The key donors are moving towards harmonised financing arrangements within the
ASWAp framework in an effort to consolidate the plethora of programmes and projects under a
more manageable number of sub-sectoral or thematic groupings which are consistent with the main
pillars of the ASWAp and the CAADP Compact. A recent discussion paper4 by DCAFS provides an
16.
4
“The time is now: Proposals to pursue greater harmonization of investments in the agricultural sector in support of the
ASWAP” By Anne Conroy, DCAFS Facilitator, 16th November 2010
3
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 1
indication of how such arrangements may evolve in the near future, and the possible implications for
financing and implementation of SAPP.
MOAIWD directly or indirectly supervises more than 50 distinct donor projects. Only
14 of these were considered on-budget in 2010-11 and only a minority of these was explicitly
identified in the Ministry’s budget. Donor commitments to agriculture are significant – the ASWAp
identifies potential donor funding of up to USD400 million over the next four years. The level of
donor funding should increase once increased returns to investment are realised as a result of
removing duplication, enhancing efficiency and lowering transaction costs for all concerned.
17.
Greater harmonisation of funding and programming can be measured in terms of three
objectives: (i) a growing share of funding will be explicitly aligned with the ASWAp Results
Framework; (ii) GOM expectations for a declining proportion of donor funding to be allocated to
discrete projects, and a growing proportion to be allocated to ASWAp programmes in the form of
pooled funding; and (iii) a growing share of donor resources are expected to be declared on-budget,
and administered using the government’s own financial management, procurement and human
resources management systems.
18.
This suggests moving to common work plans and budgets for core initiatives. However,
this does not require a pooled funding. A common work plan can be supported by some donors with
pooled funding if their rules permit, and by different donors with parallel funding. It does imply a
commitment to a common work plan, common procedures, common budgets with uniform unit costs,
and a common approach to targeting resources to the district level, common methods for contracting
implementing partners, and a uniform approach to the issue of overheads and joint arrangements for
supervision and M&E.
19.
4
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 1
Appendix 1: Country Data Sheet
2000
2005
2008
2009
W orld vie w
Population, total (m illions)
Population growth (annual % )
Surface area (sq. km ) (thousands)
Poverty headcount ratio at national poverty line (% of population)
GNI, Atlas m ethod (current US$) (billions)
11.83
13.65
14.85
15.26
3.2
2.8
2.8
2.8
118.5
118.5
118.5
..
..
52.4
..
..
1.75
2.86
3.89
4.20
GNI per capita, Atlas m ethod (current US$)
150
210
260
280
GNI, PPP (current international $) (billions)
7.11
8.44
11.35
11.63
600
620
760
760
GNI per capita, PPP (current international $)
Pe ople
Incom e share held by lowest 20%
..
..
..
..
Life expectancy at birth, total (years)
51
51
53
..
Fertility rate, total (births per wom an)
6.2
5.8
5.5
..
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 wom en ages 15-19)
161
147
133
..
Contraceptive prevalence (% of wom en ages 15-49)
31
..
..
..
Births attended by skilled health staff (% of total)
56
..
..
..
164
134
115
110
M alnutrition prevalence, weight for age (% of children under 5)
22
18
..
..
Im m unization, m easles (% of children ages 12-23 m onths)
73
82
88
92
Prim ary com pletion rate, total (% of relevant age group)
65
55
..
..
Ratio of girls to boys in prim ary and secondary education (% )
93
99
99
..
13.5
12.3
..
..
Forest area (sq. km ) (thousands)
35.7
34.0
..
..
Agricultural land (% of land area)
50.2
52.8
..
..
..
..
..
..
Im proved water source (% of population with access)
63
74
80
..
Im proved sanitation facilities (% of population with access)
50
54
56
..
..
..
..
..
0.1
0.1
..
..
..
..
..
..
1.74
2.86
4.27
4.97
1.6
2.6
9.7
7.7
30.5
15.3
9.0
8.6
Agriculture, value added (% of GDP)
40
33
34
36
Industry, value added (% of GDP)
18
21
21
21
Services, etc., value added (% of GDP)
43
47
45
44
Exports of goods and services (% of GDP)
26
20
23
20
Im ports of goods and services (% of GDP)
35
44
26
23
Gross capital form ation (% of GDP)
14
23
27
22
Revenue, excluding grants (% of GDP)
..
..
..
..
Cash surplus/deficit (% of GDP)
..
..
..
..
M ortality rate, under-5 (per 1,000)
Prevalence of HIV, total (% of population ages 15-49)
Environm e nt
Annual freshwater withdrawals, total (% of internal resources)
Energy use (kg of oil equivalent per capita)
CO2 em issions (m etric tons per capita)
Electric power consum ption (kW h per capita)
Econom y
GDP (current US$) (billions)
GDP growth (annual % )
Inflation, GDP deflator (annual % )
Sta te s a nd m a rke ts
Tim e required to start a business (days)
..
39
39
39
M arket capitalization of listed com panies (% of GDP)
..
8.1
41.4
..
0.7
1.3
..
..
0
3
12
..
0.1
0.4
2.1
..
Roads, paved (% of total roads)
..
..
..
..
High-technology exports (% of m anufactured exports)
2
7
2
..
52.3
58.6
58.0
52.7
100
82
76
94
2,705
3,183
959
1,093
13.4
..
..
..
-85
-30
..
..
1
1
1
26
52
170
60
Net official developm ent assistance and official aid received (current US$) (m illions)4 46
573
913
..
M ilitary expenditure (% of GDP)
M obile cellular subscriptions (per 100 people)
Internet users (per 100 people)
Globa l links
M erchandise trade (% of GDP)
Net barter term s of trade index (2000 = 100)
External debt stocks, total (DOD, current US$) (m illions)
Total debt service (% of exports of goods, services and incom e)
Net m igration (thousands)
W orkers' rem ittances and com pensation of em ployees, received (current US$) (m illions)
1
Foreign direct investm ent, net inflows (BoP, current US$) (m illions)
Source : W orld De ve lopm e nt Indica tors da ta ba se , De ce m be r 2010
5
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 2
Annex 2: Poverty, Targeting and Gender
I.
Rural Poverty Analysis
About 52 per cent of the population live below the national poverty line of Malawian kwacha
16,165/year and about 22 per cent live in extreme poverty. According to the Human Development
Index Report for 2009 compiled by the United Nations Development Programme, 73.9 per cent of the
population live below the income poverty line of US$1.25/day and 90.4 per cent below the
US$2.0/day threshold. The proportion of poor and ultra-poor is highest in rural areas of the southern
and northern parts of the country, while the centre is less poor. Over 90 per cent of the poor live in
rural areas.
1.
Poverty continues to be lower in urban areas (14%) than in rural areas (43%) and there is a
widening income gap between urban and rural areas. Rural areas have a higher proportion of both
stunted and underweight children, 36% and 18% respectively; compared to urban areas with 31% and
12% respectively. Over 90% of the poor live in rural areas.
2.
The extent of inequality is substantially higher in urban areas. The richest 10% of the
population has a per capita income eight times higher than the poorest 10%. Progress towards the
MDGs remains mixed and access to assets, services and opportunities is profoundly unequal across
the population. Between 1980 and 2010 Malawi's Human Development Index (HDI) rose by 1.3%
annually from 0.258 to 0.385 in 2010, which gives the country a rank of 153 out of 169 countries with
comparable data and just below the average of Sub-Saharan Africa.
3.
Rural poverty is characterised by a number of factors, including gender of household,
household size, education of household head, access to markets and financial services, presence of a
cash crop and recurrence of shocks:
4.
 Gender of Household Head. Women head about 25% of the households in Malawi and
they are disproportionately poor. Fifty-one percent of male-headed households are poor
while 59% of female-headed households are poor.
 Household Composition. Poor households are significantly larger than non-poor
households. Average household size is 5.4 for the poor and 3.8 for the non-poor. As the
household gets larger, household members share the same resources, thereby reducing
their per capita incomes. Poor households tend to have a dependency ratio of 1.4 compared
to non-poor households with 0.8.
 Education of the Head. Poverty is more severe among people in households whose heads
have no formal education; and those with more than a junior certificate of education are
significantly less likely to live in poverty. The adult literacy rate is 70% up from 65% in
2005. Female literacy rate is 60%, compared to male literacy of 79%. Almost a third of
rural household heads have never attended school, in comparison with less than 10% of
urban household heads.
 Land Holding Size. Average land holding size per household in Malawi is 1.0ha.
Seventy-five percent of the farmers cultivate less than 1.0ha, with 33% of male household
heads cultivating less than 0.5ha as compared to almost half of female household heads.
The poor hold only 0.23 hectares per capita compared to the non-poor that hold 0.42
hectares per capita.
 Access to Markets and Services. The poor tend to live in remote areas with few roads and
means of transport, which limits their economic opportunities. Access to financial services
is also severely limited. Only 12% of households have access to credit and access is
especially difficult for smallholder farmers.
 Illness and Disability have a major effect on household poverty levels, especially in
families affected by chronic debilitating diseases such as HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis, both
of which are accentuated by poor nutrition.
1
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 2
II.
Gender Issues
Gender mainstreaming is central to most agricultural programmes but gender
disparities persist. This is largely because implementation does not adequately address the major
constraints to enhancing the role of women in agriculture. The Programme will target both men and
women and use mechanisms to ensure participation of both genders with attention to empower
women in all its interventions.
5.
About 88% of rural women are employed in the agricultural sector as smallholder
farmers, compared with 73% of rural men. More women than men are full-time farmers and this is
reflected in village meetings, where more women than men attend. Women participate fully in
production of both cash and food crops, and their contribution to food security is considerable. They
are the major growers of staples such as maize and cassava and other food crops including legumes
and vegetables. Women care for all important small livestock - poultry, goats, and pigs.
6.
In addition to the work on the farm, women are responsible for most domestic work.
Some 75% of females are engaged in collecting firewood as compared to 33% of males; 88% of
females are engaged in fetching water as compared to 45% of males, and about 53% of females care
for the sick while for males it is 40%. Most women are therefore overburdened by a heavy workload,
which makes labour saving technologies such as zero till agriculture attractive.
7.
Women’s’ contribution is often underestimated, or not recognised in development
strategies. Farmers are often perceived as men and household heads perceived as male. Women
therefore have limited access to resources such as land, credit and agricultural inputs, technology,
extension and training services. Grabbing of property such as land, oxen, ploughs and inputs after the
death of a male spouse by relatives of the bereaved, also contributes to female poverty. Illiteracy
levels are higher for women than for men, which limit their participation in decision-making, and their
special needs and interests in agriculture are often unmet.
8.
About a quarter of households are headed by women who are divorced, unmarried,
widowed, in a polygamous marriage or de facto heads while their husbands work away from home.
Women heads of household tend to be younger and less educated than their male counterparts. Their
households have fewer assets, limited access to inputs, more dependants, and longer periods of food
insecurity.
9.
Ownership of and access to land is via ether matrilineal or patrilineal succession. In the
matrilineal system (common in the central and southern regions), the inheritance rights are through
the female line. Women in these societies have influence on major decisions such as the selection of
chiefs and use of land, although the man still remains the head of household. The husband obtains the
right to cultivate the land through his wife, or if un-married, his sisters. In the case of divorce the
children remain with the wife and the husband returns to his home village. Basically, the opposite is
true in the patrilineal system. The man inherits land from his father or grandfather. In the case of
divorce, the wife loses custody of the children and her right to cultivate the husband’s land and returns
to her own village.
10.
Both systems recognise the man as the head of household and the main decision maker.
The culture expects the men to make all the major decisions with or without consultation with their
wives. Furthermore, the brothers and uncles in the matrilineal system assume a greater responsibility
over the women in their family regardless of their marital status. This implies that control over land
and inheritance in both systems is usually in the hands of the men. The important factor is the
woman’s marital status. Female household heads make almost all decisions in their household. Also,
there is more security for the female partner in the matrilineal system because the woman is
cultivating her land, in her own village, and amongst her own people. The challenge is to ensure
equitable distribution of land for both men and women in both systems of marriages as the land policy
stipulates.
11.
Choice of technologies promoted affects the level of participation between men and
women. More women than men participate in programmes that deal with food crops such as maize,
12.
2
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 2
groundnuts, beans, sweet potatoes and soybeans. Women also dominate in savings and loans schemes.
The Programme’s focus will largely be on the maize-based farming system and therefore likely to
attract women who are particularly concerned about household food and nutrition security.
Although it is difficult for most smallholders to access credit, it is harder for women
than men. The most important extension messages concern the use of improved varieties of maize
and the use of fertiliser. Most farmers are aware of their importance but fail to take full advantage due
to inadequate knowledge and access to finance to purchase the inputs. Most of the credit is offered to
facilitate the production of cash crops such as tobacco and cotton, which is typically the domain of
men.
13.
III.
HIV/AIDS Issues
Malawi continues to suffer from the related problems of poverty, food insecurity and
HIV/AIDS. AIDS is the leading cause of death amongst adults, is a major factor in the low life
expectancy of 55 years, and contributes to the large number of orphans. Intensive efforts have been
made in recent years to increase awareness about HIV and these efforts appear to have had positive
impact. HIV prevalence has declined from 14% in 2005 to about 12% in 2007. There is a higher rate
of HIV amongst women than amongst men, and around 60% of adults living with HIV are female.
14.
The epidemic has heavily affected children. At the end of 2007, an estimated 91,000
children in Malawi were living with HIV, and over half a million had been orphaned by AIDS. This
contributes to the high dependency ratio in poor households. HIV prevalence is almost twice as high
in urban areas as it is in rural areas. However, prevalence is declining in many urban areas and rising
in many rural ones.
15.
Government has focused much attention to treatment, care and support. It has developed
guidelines and scale-up plans for us of anti-retroviral (ARV) drugs, treatment of AIDS-related
infections, and related services. Since the government announced that ARV drugs would be provided,
pressure is mounting for the government to deliver. However there are still many people living with
advanced HIV who are not receiving ARV treatment. The health system is faced with constraints that
have to be overcome for effective implementation of treatment, care and support programmes.
16.
Women are more at risk of infection, and are disproportionately affected by HIV/AIDS.
The task of caring for people with AIDS and AIDS orphans falls more on women than on men. Upon
death of a husband, many women often return to their maternal homes, particularly when very ill.
Property grabbing after the death of a husband is also common. This leaves the women and children
with nothing, thereby increasing their vulnerability to the disease through high risk coping strategies
and exploitation. Girls tend to be the first to be withdrawn from school as AIDS exacerbates poverty.
Poverty also limits people’s access to reproductive health services, prevention and treatment, and puts
increased pressure on women and girls to take on the role of social safety net through caring for sick
relatives as others become sick and die. To care for the sick some women take loans or sell assets.
There is also reduced labour available for farming activities, resulting in late preparation of land,
weeding and harvesting. This contributes to reduced yields and food insecurity.
17.
IV.
Targeting Strategy and Mechanisms
GOM has identified six districts as potential participants in the Programme. Poverty rates
in these districts range from 38% to 67%, of whom 11% to 33% are ultra-poor. Most of the remainder
are near-poor, and at risk of slipping backwards into the ranks of the poor due to frequent shocks such
as drought. The Programme will target communities with high levels of poverty and treat all
households as part of the target group. This approach is valid for natural resource management
initiatives where all households contribute to the management of the resource base.
18.
IFAD characterises Malawi’s rural poor in three categories: (i) the economically active
(or capable poor) who are able-bodied, of working age and in good health, but lack productive assets;
(ii) the transient poor, who are at risk of becoming poor due to periodic or transitory shocks, but also
19.
3
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 2
have the ability to move out of poverty; and (iii) the ultra-poor, who have no capacity to generate
income and are in a cycle of continuous poverty, in particular, the elderly, sick, disabled and orphans.
MOAIWD categorises smallholder farmers into three groups: Commercial Farmers (CFs)
are generally male, economically active, hire labour and are market-oriented, with enterprises such as
tobacco, maize, tea, coffee and dairy, on a relatively large scale. They are few in number and tend to
be the first to adopt new technologies. They are usually members of associations and cooperatives and
are important in demonstrating farming as a business as well as improved technologies.
20.
Small-Scale Commercial Farmers (SSCFs) usually attain food security, are skilled, and
market oriented, but have limited assets. They are easily mobilised into farmers’ clubs/group and are
able to demand services with the aim of farming as a business. They tend to be the most active and
influential in farmer groups, usually volunteer to host demonstrations and trials, become the first
adopters, and volunteer as Lead Farmers. When supported technically and financially with loans and
access to markets, this group is responsive and facilitates wider spread of good agricultural practices
(GAPs). Young male farmers dominate this group, which is larger than the CFs.
21.
Smallholder Food Security (SHFS) Farmers are productive men and women who have the
potential to achieve household food security, but due to limited land and resources are unlikely to
produce a surplus for the market. They aim at food security and need technical and financial support
in terms of basic inputs such as seed and fertiliser to increase food crop yields. This group constitutes
80% of smallholder farmers, and is the focus of the public extension service.
22.
SHFS households are of two kinds. The majority group tends to be responsive to
interventions aimed at alleviating poverty, but when technologies involve purchased inputs, they often
depend on support from extension organisations and NGOs. Once food security is achieved, they
become empowered to join other extension activities, become Lead Farmers, and engage in off-farm
activities. Due to the potential increase in yields associated with GAPs, the goal of household food
security can be realised and some men and women could move towards commercialisation. This will
therefore be the main target group in SAPP for both extension services and adaptive research. Most
women in male headed households are in this group.
23.
The other group under the SHFS category is composed of the ultra-poor with extremely
limited resources and usually food insecure. The group is further divided into: (i) those who are
able bodied; and (ii) the elderly, child headed households, those with disabilities, and chronic illnesses
including HIV/AIDS. The able bodied, which include some of the female headed households, tend to
have less land, no access to inputs, and few other assets. During the hunger season, which is also the
peak agricultural period, they survive on piece work in other farmers’ fields. Households with chronic
illnesses and disabilities tend to work with very limited resources. While there may be other active
members in the family, they tend to be busy with caring for the sick or the physically challenged.
Both groups are extremely vulnerable to shocks and disasters; tend to sell subsidised inputs for
immediate food needs and usually suffer from malnutrition. Those with chronic illnesses and
disabilities would benefit from labour-saving technologies such as zero tillage and herbicide use.
24.
The Programme will have mechanisms to ensure that the targeted poor men and women
actually participate in and benefit from the planned interventions. These include: (i) geographic
targeting measures; (ii) enabling measures; (iii) empowerment and capacity building measures; (iv)
self-targeting measures; (v) direct targeting measures; and (vi) procedural measures.
25.
Geographic targeting measures will focus on large concentrations of rural poor in the six
districts identified by MOAIWD. The final choice of districts will be based on (i) potential for
sustainable agricultural practices to make an impact on productivity, food security and incomes; (ii)
the level of poverty and food insecurity; (iii) the presence/absence of other projects working in similar
areas; and (iv) the level of interest by the District Assembly. Of the six potential districts listed in
Table 1, Lilongwe district has the lowest percentage of poor and ultra-poor but the highest number.
The Programme will initially begin in Lilongwe because of its large number of poor rural families,
and its impact on food security as it is one of the major grain baskets and therefore has good potential
26.
4
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 2
for commercialisation. The Programme will target a total of about 200,000 households in the target
districts. In each district, all EPAs and the sections under them will be part of the programme.
District
Table 1: Number of Rural Households by Potential District
No of
% of Households No of Households
No of
No of
farm
UltraUltraEPAs
Sections families
-poor
Poor
-poor
Poor
Lilongwe rural
Blantyre rural
Balaka
Chiradzulu
Nkhotakota
Chitipa
Total
19
4
6
3
7
6
45
317
83
60
62
77
51
650
343,981
140,733
95,898
90,009
71,946
45,511
788,078
11.7
16.0
33.5
27.5
11.4
30.4
37.5
46.5
66.8
63.5
48.0
67.2
40,246 128,993
22,517 65,441
32,126 64,060
24,752 57,156
8,202 34,534
13,835 30,583
141,679 380,767
Enabling measures embrace number of policies that aim at addressing the high levels of
poverty, gender disparities and HIV/AIDS. The main policies which will guide the implementation of
the programme are the MGDS; ASWAp; and national policies on gender and HIV/AIDS. These and
other policies show the commitment of the Government to reduce poverty levels, address gender
inequalities and reduce the spread and mitigate the impact of HIV/AIDS. IFAD will raise awareness
among MOAIWD officials and its partners during all supervision and evaluation missions about the
emphasis on poverty targeting and gender empowerment and the mechanisms to be followed.
27.
Empowerment and capacity building mechanisms to enable farmers who are interested and
committed to participate, but lack certain resources or skills, will include: (i) training farmers in
GAPs; (ii) supporting on-farm demonstrations; (iii) creation of a farmer-to-farmer extension network
to encourage adoption of best practices; (iv) ensuring that at least 30% of the membership of decisionmaking structures are women; and (v) and ensuring that at least 50% of media interviews include
women.
28.
Self-targeting measures will include activities which are attractive to the poor but less so to
the better off, such as: (i) low-cost soil conservation methods; (ii) conservation agriculture packages
suitable for adoption by poor smallholders; (iii) post-harvest equipment and farm tools which address
the needs of smallholder farmers; and (iv) seed multiplication and distribution of crops (especially
legumes) and varieties (especially open pollinated) of special interest to smallholders. Farmer group
development will vary by category of farmers. SHFSs and SSCFs will be attracted to farmer groups or
clubs, as well as women’s groups and HIV/AIDS support groups. Associations will be supported for
business-oriented farmers to facilitate access to extension services, input and output marketing as well
as seed multiplication activities. The Programme will conduct participatory on-farm trials to refine
GAP technologies in conjunction with national, regional and international research organisations.
Both men and women from the SHFS and SSCF will be selected to host the trials.
29.
Direct targeting measures will be applied for interventions that meet specific criteria
because of their cost and other conditions. Communities will develop criteria for selecting
participants. Researchers will develop criteria in conjunction with extension staff for selecting farmers
to host participatory farm trials and participate in seed multiplication. Selection of women to fulfil
quotas will also be subject to criteria set by the community in conjunction with extension staff.
30.
A number of procedural measures will be followed to ensure the poor are targeted and that
gender empowerment is achieved. These include: (i) a baseline survey for needs assessment; (ii)
community sensitisation and mobilisation; (iii) farmer and staff training on GAPs appropriate to target
group smallholders; (iv) farmer group development and training; (v) planning and coordination of
extension services; and (vi) focussing extension works on target group needs and capabilities.
31.
5
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 2
V.
Institutional Capacity
MOAF has developed gender and HIV/AIDS responsive community appraisal tools based on
the “four Is” (Identification, Internalisation, Integration and Institutionalisation) and “four Ps”
(Policies, Programmes, Projects and Partnerships), which together form a gender and HIV/AIDS
mainstreaming process. This is a participatory process which involves a gendered PRA at
identification that is also responsive to HIV/AIDS issues. However, not all extension officers have the
expertise to competently use these tools. There is also limited capacity to develop pro-poor and
gender responsive work plans and budgets. In addition, the M&E system is not gender responsive.
MOAIWD therefore proposes that the Programme includes capacity building in pro-poor and gender
budgeting, gender responsive M&E, and the interpretation and use of gender disaggregated data.
32.
Potential NGO partners routinely conduct PRA for planning community activities. NASFAM
has facilitated PRA training to the association structures and equipped them with a PRA manual. TLC
routinely uses a participatory approach to identify target categories (rural poor and women), identify
needs and implement interventions. TLC has standard guidelines for each intervention. FRM’s
participatory radio campaigns are by nature inclusive and contribute to equal opportunities for both
men and women
33.
From the foregoing, it is proposed to strengthen the pro-poor approach by improving on the
PRA tools used in MOAIWD, institutionalise gender budgeting and gender responsive M&E system
at all levels as well as conduct refresher training for staff and lead farmers and association structures
on the improved and developed tools.
34.
6
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 3
Annex 3: Country Performance and Lessons Learned
A.
Country Programme Performance
Overall, the performance of the country programme has been satisfactory, but plagued by
slow implementation related to capacity shortfalls in Government institutions. As the size of the IFAD
programme grows, these limitations will become increasingly important and necessitate a high level
of implementation support. The multitude of programmes and projects supported by other donors adds
to the pressure on capacity, especially within MOAIWD. The Government’s decision to discontinue
the use of Project Implementation Units (PIUs) and contracted project staff can be expected to place
further strains on implementation capacity in the next few years as mainstream institutions take full
responsibility for project management.
1.
B.
Lessons Learned
A number of lessons have been learned from IFAD’s experience in implementation of the
Rural Livelihoods Support Programme (RLSP), the Irrigation Rural Livelihoods and Agricultural
Development Programme (IRLADP), and the Rural Livelihoods and Economic Enhancement
Programme (RLEEP). These are detailed below together with a description of the way in which the
design of SAPP has responded to the lessons learned.
2.
Lesson Learned
 Local
government
implementation
capability: Programme implementation
through the decentralised District planning
and administrative framework is feasible,
but the limited number, current level of
experience, calibre and capability of District
and downstream staff necessitate further
orientation and exposure to management
demands - and a guiding and mentoring
input in the early years of an intervention.
SAPP Response
 District Councils (DCs) will be called upon to
implement a number of activities, either alone, or in
conjunction with private sector actors. The ASWAp
Secretariat will coordinate the provision of
resources for specific implementation activities in
the participating districts and EPAs. In addition,
private sector and NGO service providers will
contribute at district and EPA levels to counter the
shortcomings of local government capability. In
addition, there will also be provision for DC
capacity building in specific areas. There will also
be close partnership with RLSP, RLEEP and
IRLADP with a view to learning from their
experiences and improving performance as a joint
effort.
 Central
Government
bureaucratic
constraints: The protracted time span often
required for project approval and
effectiveness, the stop-go implementation of
macroeconomic policies and the lack of
coordination among different Government
and
donor-financed
initiatives
have
significantly affected project start-up and
field-level implementation in the past.
 GOM is currently working in close collaboration
with development partners in implementing the
ASWAp which is a programme-based approach to
sectoral development designed to streamline and
coordinate the implementation of all development
activities within the sector. SAPP is consistent with
the main thrust of the ASWAp in both its
development strategy and operational modalities.
 High project management costs: The lack
of implementation capacity in Central and
Local government institutions (exacerbated
by HIV/AIDS) has usually been addressed
by
the
establishment
of
project
 IFAD supports GOM policy to phase out these units
in order that implementation is mainstreamed
within permanent institutions. However the rate at
which this can be done depends on the development
of capacity within those institutions, which are
 A Programme Preparatory Facility (PPF) is
included in the financing plan so that funds for
start-up activities are available upon signing of the
financing agreement. This is expected to facilitate
start-up activities and reduce the risk of delays in
launching the Programme.
1
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 3
Lesson Learned
implementation, coordination and support
units staffed by contracted personnel. The
market rates for engagement of such persons
are well above civil service salaries leading
to project management costs of up to 25% of
project costs. Consequently GOM has
announced that all PIUs must be phased out
by the end of 2011, and remuneration of
project staff will revert to standard civil
service conditions.
SAPP Response
themselves reliant on recurrent budget resources.
 SAPP will be implemented within the mainstream
functions of Government as a programme under the
ASWAp umbrella, with support provided for
capacity building and short-term technical
assistance where needed. The ASWAp secretariat
will focus on coordinating and supporting activities
implemented by other institutions and the private
sector, rather than direct implementation.
 Outreach
and
targeting:
despite
impressive effort and some past success,
targeting of the poorest and most
disadvantaged echelons of rural society and
achieving sustainable impact remains a
challenge.
 SAPP does not specifically target the poorest of the
poor. The economically active and motivated poor
are the main practicable target group for a
Programme of this nature. The systems and
instruments
for
interaction
between
the
economically active poor and their actual or
prospective NGO and private sector partners are
designed not to exclude either the core poor or the
better off, but also not to lose impact by being
diverted into social or welfare activities.
 Beneficiary training and sustainability:
Most beneficiaries in GAP schemes need to
receive some form of training before
implementing projects. However this should
not be seen as a one-off exercise.
 SAPP will provide follow-up and refresher training
in most cases – a need which is recognised by the
beneficiaries
themselves,
especially
those
conducting small-scale commercial agriculture.
This will be crucial in achieving sustainable
outcomes.
 Need for patience, persistence and a
longer-term perspective: Considerable
time, resources, flexibility and patience are
required to overcome the entrenched
dependency and aversion to change, risk,
entrepreneurial activity and even project
ownership among the rural poor. This
implies only slow progress, high costs of
interaction and probably limited success
rates for some initiatives.
 The Programme will be implemented over nine
years, with conservatively phased activities, and
assumes modest rates of uptake and performance and is seen as only the first of a series of similar
initiatives, should it prove successful. IFAD and
Government recognise that sustained engagement
with large numbers of rural households is needed to
make progress.
 Financial stringency:
Realism and
pragmatism are required in costing,
especially as it relates to contributions by
Government and beneficiaries, in view of
the continued, severe budgetary constraints
on counterpart funding, at National and
District levels; and the very high poverty
levels of target group households. Even
when projects are supported by external
funding, disbursements are often slow due
to late or incomplete acquittal of advances.
 The Programme is 100% IFAD financed through
the proposed loan and grant, except for recurrent
costs and taxes and duties that GOM will forego.
The Programme financing plan assumes minimal
reliance on Government co-financing and on
beneficiary contribution - and the assurance of
adequate operational cost funding for District and
downstream support. The Programme design
includes detailed recommendations for financial
control procedures which are intended to overcome
the bottlenecks in release of funds.
 Complementarity and collaboration:
Given the intensity of donor involvement
and the diversity of multilateral and bilateral
projects already underway, IFAD should
continue and intensify its practice of
collaborating with and involving other
agencies.
 The Donor Coordination Group on Agriculture and
Food Security (DCAFS) has been kept fully
informed during the inception, formulation and
appraisal phases and the Programme has been
designed to be consistent with the ASWAp.
 The launch of the ASWAp and the CAADP
Compact provides a new and stronger collaborative
framework for GOM and donor supported
2
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 3
Lesson Learned
 Monitoring and evaluation: M&E is an
important
element
of
Programme
management and a catalyst for motivation of
participants and associated agencies.
However, many programmes have devoted
insufficient resources to M&E and/or
designed systems that are too complex and
contain too many performance indicators.
initiatives.
SAPP Response
 SAPP will adopt a streamlined M&E approach
which includes a large measure of self-monitoring
by Programme participants and partners. This will
be facilitated by assignment of a full-time M&E
officer in the MOAIWD Planning Department.
Since 2005 the FISP has had a major impact on productivity and production in the agricultural
sector. However, several evaluations of the programme have suggested that its effectiveness could be
further improved through additional investments in research and extension, capacity building for
farmer organisations, targeting beneficiaries who could not otherwise afford to purchase seed and
fertiliser, as well as measures to improve logistics and timeliness of input distribution. Government is
committed to continuation of the FISP and the design of SAPP recognises that substantial human and
financial resources will continue to be allocated to the programme, and that SAPP will need to focus
on improving the targeting and effectiveness of the subsidies by giving due attention to the
dissemination of more productive agronomic methods.
3.
Lessons learned from the expanding country programme will make a valuable contribution to
evidence-based policy formulation within a comprehensive knowledge management framework. To
some extent, this will depend on partnerships being formed with key institutions and development
agencies to enable them to make informed policy choices reflecting the priorities of the rural poor and
contribute to policy dialogue. The de facto country presence now in place will facilitate engagement
of IFAD in policy and programmatic processes. Moreover, it is intended to establish a full-time
staffed country office in Malawi during 2012.
4.
3
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 4
Annex 4: Detailed Programme Description
Programme Goal and Objectives
The Programme will be implemented over a nine-year period as an “earmarked” project
within the ASWAp. The goal is to contribute to reduction of poverty and improved food security
among the rural population. The specific development objective is to achieve a viable and
sustainable smallholder agricultural sector employing good agricultural practices (GAPs). Figure 1
(Executive Summary) provides an overview of the Programme illustrating how the various
components and sub-components will contribute to the achievement of the goal and objectives.
1.
The main thrust of the Programme is enhancement of agricultural productivity based on
simple/affordable GAPs which are suitable for smallholder adoption, and will help to bridge the large
gap between actual and potential crop yields. Promotion of better agricultural practices will greatly
improve the effectiveness and impact of the FISP, which provides selected farmers with access to
improved seeds and fertilisers, but does little to promote their efficient and effective use. An adaptive
research programme will be supported to fine-tune GAP packages to Malawian socio-economic and
agro-ecological conditions; in conjunction with knowledge management and communication
initiatives to ensure that knowledge generated within the Programme is communicated to
stakeholders, and that relevant knowledge from outside is made available to all. A range of extension
tools will be deployed to train farmers to adopt improved agricultural technologies that will
sustainably increase staple crop yields, improve soil health, and make way for greater crop
diversification and commercialisation. The Programme will also facilitate farmers in obtaining access
to the inputs needed to utilise GAPs including tools, equipment, seeds of alternative (mainly legume)
crops, fertilisers, financial services, and post-harvest storage facilities.
2.
Components and Phasing
Component 1: Adaptive Research and Knowledge Management
Sub-Component 1.1: Adaptive Research
Sub-Component 1.2: Knowledge Management and Communication
Component 2: Farmer Adoption of GAPs
Sub-Component 2.1: Improved Agricultural Extension
Sub-Component 2.2: Access to Key Agricultural Inputs
Component 3: Programme Management and Coordination
Programme Phasing. The Programme will be implemented over nine years using a
graduated approach to establish operational modalities, train staff, screen/evaluate GAPs to be
promoted, engage with lead farmers, and develop partnerships and coordination arrangements; before
up-scaling to engage with the target groups over the full Programme area. An interim review will be
conducted after several years of operations to inform decisions on up-scaling and expansion to
additional districts, and a mid-term review will be undertake in year 5.
3.
Component 1
Component 1: Adaptive Research and Knowledge Management (USD 5.4 million) will
further refine improved agricultural techniques to the conditions of Malawi. This will be undertaken
in partnership with national, regional and international agricultural research and knowledge
institutions. The outcome of Component 1 is expected to be appropriate agricultural
technologies/GAPs developed and understood by potential beneficiaries.
4.
Sub-Component 1.1: Adaptive Research (USD 4.3 million). A well-focussed programme
of adaptive research will validate and adjust proven agricultural technologies in terms of their
applicability to Malawian agro-ecological and socio-economic conditions. The approach will be
differentiated according to the maturity of the various technologies and the level of experience with
their utilisation. Some basic techniques such as timely weed control and appropriate use of fertilisers
5.
1
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 4
can be recommended for immediate adoption by farmers. Others require validation through trials on
farmers’ fields in different agro-ecological zones before packages of recommended practices can be
formulated and demonstrated.
The Adaptive Research Programme will be managed by the MOAIWD Research Department
and implemented in conjunction with a number of partners including Bunda College (University of
Malawi), NRC, and CGIAR institutions (ICRISAT, CIAT, IITA, ICRAF, CIMMYT etc). SubComponent 1.1 will primarily address issues which are of most relevance to the six Programme
districts, many of which will also have broader national relevance. It will be planned and implemented
in close coordination with the IFAD-supported regional programme “Facilitating the Adoption of
Conservation Agriculture by Resource Poor Smallholder Farmers in Southern Africa” which is
managed by CIMMYT and implemented in partnership with national institutions in Malawi,
Mozambique, Zambia and Zimbabwe5.
6.
The adaptive research programme will be managed on a rolling three-year basis with annual
reviews. The Programme Implementation Manual (PIM, Working Paper 11 details the activities to be
undertaken during the first 18 months, during which a full nine-year programme will be drawn up,
with detailed plans and budgets for the first three year cycle. The output of Sub-Component 1.1 will
be action research programmes which develop/refine GAP packages adapted to various agroecological and socio-economic contexts, and improved methods of disseminating such packages to
rural communities. The principal activities to be undertaken will include:
7.
a)
Research Planning and Management will include preparation of a nine-year
indicative plan, and rolling annual three-year research plans; preparation and periodic
review of trial protocols; annual review and priority-setting workshops; and publication
of an annual research report. This work, and the capacity building described in b)
below, will be undertaken in partnership with a regional CGIAR institution under a
formal twinning arrangement.
b)
Capacity Building for Adaptive Research. Researchers and extension workers will
need orientation on the GAPs being researched especially for the CA components. Staff
will be given in-service training on CA principles and practices by recognised expert
organisations in the field. Bunda College will be supported to develop CA teaching
modules and imported CA equipment (planters, sprayers, subsoilers etc) will be
provided for CA training purposes. The Research Department will be supported with
vehicles, equipment and MSc scholarships. Study tours will be undertaken to learn
about CA initiatives in other countries in the region.
c)
On-Farm Trial Programme to refine the technologies already in existence for
different agro-ecological conditions, farming systems, and socio-economic contexts.
The trials will be researcher managed and implemented by district-level MOAIWD
Subject Matter Specialists, who will also be responsible for monitoring results
including farmer’s opinions on the merits of various technologies. The final selection of
GAPs to be researched and disseminated will depend on farmer-participatory selection,
but are expected to include some or all of the following:


Conservation agriculture practices including direct and basin planting; residue
retention and management; leguminous intercrops, cover crops and rotations,
agroforestry and contour hedgerows.
Crop storage losses using metal silos, airtight bags and “cocoons” compared with
traditional methods with respect to protection from fungal infections and pests,
especially insects and rodents.
Trial performance will be monitored and the impacts on productivity, profitability,
erosion control and soil fertility enhancement will be measured. CA equipment will
also be demonstrated and, where available, equipment hire service providers will be
5
This project has been completed, but a proposal for a second phase is currently being considered by IFAD.
2
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 4
identified, equipped and trained in CA techniques, machinery operation and business
skills. All trial plots will be on-farm, managed by researchers and extension workers in
close collaboration with the farming community. The communities will participate fully
in selection of treatments and evaluation of results.
d)
Soil fertility enhancement. Low and declining soil fertility is the dominant factor
underlying Malawi’s poor crop yields and associated food insecurity. The Programme
will support research to address critical soil fertility issues and improve the
effectiveness of fertiliser distributed to farmers under the FISP. Whilst the impact of the
FISP is positive, the yield response to fertilisers is less than potential and there are
concerns about nutrient imbalances arising from the absence of potassium in the
standard compound fertiliser used.
e)
The Programme will therefore implement a programme of applied plant nutrition
research to characterise the soil fertility problem and prepare recommendations for
improved soil fertility management which can be incorporated in crop production
packages, and can be used to augment the impact of the FISP. Trials will be established
to evaluate the performance of fertility management practices using inorganic and
organic sources of plant nutrients. The inorganic sources will include the standard FISP
fertiliser with the addition of potassium and micro-nutrients. Organic sources will
include animal manures, composts, residue mulch, agro-forestry, and leguminous cover
crops. The Programme will also support soil and plant tissue testing to develop a better
characterisation of Malawi’s soil fertility problems. The Programme will also
collaborate with implementers of similar efforts by AGRA and AFSIS projects.
f)
The Programme will include: (i) soil and plant tissue testing to characterise the nature
and extent of nutrient and micronutrient deficiencies and imbalances; (ii) fertiliser trials
to measure the response to different types and rates of fertiliser application including
combined organic and inorganic fertiliser regimes across a range of soil types and
cropping systems; (iii) medium and long-term monitoring of soil fertility and crop
yields; (iv) financial and economic analysis of different approaches to soil fertility
management; and (v) recommendations for modifying the formulation of fertilisers
used in the FISP and improving their utilisation efficiency. The plant nutrition studies
will be facilitated by the acquisition of modern soil and plant tissue analysis equipment
to be operated by the MOAIWD Research Department together with funding for
installation, training and operation of the equipment.
g)
Research on Adoption Behaviour. The Programme will undertake studies on the
effectiveness of various extension approaches/methods and farmer adoption of various
agricultural practices. This reflects the relatively low adoption rates of improved
agricultural technologies in Malawi, and the need to develop a better understanding of
the interactions between bio-physical, financial and social determinants of adoption
behaviour. Some of the issues to be considered include: (i) labour requirements of
different cultivation practices (particularly important in households affected by chronic
illness); (ii) the availability and cost of inputs such as improved seeds and fertilisers;
(iii) the accessibility of financial services needed to support some GAPs; and (iv) the
awareness of GAPs in rural communities. Research on adoption behaviour will also
include baseline studies and monitoring of the physical, biological, social and financial
impacts of the various improved agricultural practices promoted by the programme.
Sub-Component 1.2: Knowledge Management and Communication (USD 1.0 million).
The Programme’s emphasis on the development, refinement and dissemination of GAPs calls for a
knowledge and learning intensive approach to be mainstreamed across all Components and SubComponents. The Programme will therefore support capacity building for systematic knowledge
management and communication in MOAIWD in general, and within the participating ADDs,
Districts and in relevant stakeholder institutions. A knowledge management and communication SubComponent will be included to ensure that adequate resources are made available to harvest, store,
8.
3
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 4
process and disseminate information to the people and organisations who need it, and to ensure best
use of knowledge generated by other initiatives in Malawi and the region. This is consistent with the
main themes of IFAD’s knowledge management strategy6 and the integrated approach to agricultural
development incorporated in CAADP and the ASWAp. The output of Sub-Component 1.2 will be
knowledge about GAPs effectively gathered, managed and communicated to stakeholders. The
principal activities to be undertaken will include:
Knowledge Management and Communication Strategy. The basis for the Programme’s
knowledge management and communications strategy is outlined in Annex 6 and Working Paper 6. A
comprehensive KM and communication strategy anchored on the MOAIWD M&E system, and
consistent with the knowledge diffusion strategy that is being formulated under the ASWAp-SP, will
be prepared during the first year of Programme implementation, and will be funded from a
Programme Preparatory Facility (PPF) grant (Component 3). The Programme will make budgetary
provision to execute this function effectively including national and international TA. The strategy
will be reviewed and revised annually by conducting a knowledge audit to identify key needs and
opportunities, and the specification of activities to be included in the annual workplan and budget. It
is very likely that the strategy will evolve over the life of the Programme as the volume and scope of
information grows and as information and communication technologies develop rapidly and extend
their reach in rural areas. The design and annual revision of the strategy will be the responsibility of a
Knowledge Management and Communication Officer who will be part of the MOAIWD Programme
team with the support of a short-term international knowledge management and communication
consultant.
9.
a)
Knowledge Harvesting, Storage and Processing. Resources will be made available to
harvest, store, process and disseminate information to the people and organisations that
need it, and to ensure best use of knowledge generated by other initiatives in Malawi and
the region. Electronic databases, which are accessible through the Programme website,
will constitute the primary tool. Such databases are already available under the
MOAIWD Technical Secretariat, with an experienced management team. SAPP will
finance additional hardware and software, so as to better maintain and disseminate data,
and library services for document acquisition and storage at various work stations.
b)
Knowledge Sharing and Learning Partnerships. The Programme will employ a “value
chain” approach to knowledge management, incorporating action learning approaches,
training at various levels, establishment of communities of practice, and systematic
documentation and knowledge dissemination processes. Some of these elements are
present in MOAIWD, but require better coordination, particularly the flow of
information and knowledge sharing in the extension system. After information is
captured, there will be value addition through interpretation and analysis, drawing on
information from other sources, and adapting it for use by a range of partners.
c)
The knowledge sharing and learning instruments to be deployed will be specified in the
knowledge management and communication strategy and may include some or all of the
following: (i) studies and publications on lessons learned; (ii) case studies documenting
successes and failures; (iii) publicity material including newsletters, radio and television
programmes; (iv) formation of national and regional learning networks; (v) periodic
meetings and workshops to share knowledge and lessons learned; (vi) research-extension
liaison/feedback meetings; (v) national and regional study tours; (vi) preparation and
distribution of technical literature on improved agricultural practices, including crop and
farm budgets; and (vii) the routine supervision missions, mid-term review and project
completion report. Special efforts will be made to incorporate stakeholders at district,
EPA and community level in the learning partnerships to ensure that they contribute to
and benefit from the sharing of knowledge.
6
IFAD (September 2007) “Knowledge Management Strategy” and IFAD (November 2008) “Knowledge Management and
Learning Methods Tools and Techniques”.
4
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 4
d)
Formal Training in GAPs. The Programme will support the development of appropriate
curricula at Bunda College and NRC as well as the purchase of conservation agriculture
equipment for demonstration to students.
Specific initiatives in knowledge management and communication are expected to cover
some or all of the following:
10.
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
i)
j)
identification of existing resources and opportunities for collaboration on knowledge
management activities;
review of other relevant initiatives in Malawi and neighbouring countries and further
analysis to identify and better understand success factors;
stakeholder analysis to ascertain existing levels of knowledge of the different
stakeholders, and identify and analyse their information and knowledge needs;
awareness raising and sensitisation of Programme participants, including building
understanding of the objectives and potential benefits;
processes to be embedded in Programme activities to ensure that lessons learned and
good practice are captured systematically, shared, and used to improve project
implementation;
capacity building for the extension services with knowledge and technical support
materials, including targeted messages and extension methodologies needed to
communicate effectively with farmers;
support for advocacy efforts through providing evidence of impact gathered through the
M&E system, closely linked to knowledge management activities;
coordination and information sharing among the various implementation partners,
especially contracted service providers and the various levels of Government;
an annual review of experience and performance, in dialogue between service-providers
and stakeholders to decide how to respond to new constraints and opportunities identified
during implementation; and
meetings, workshops and exchange visits to support knowledge sharing and learning by
partners and stakeholders.
The Programme M&E Officer will be responsible for collating and analysing all relevant
information for the benefit of all stakeholders, and ensuring that SAPP is an active partner in the
implementation of the ASWAp. Financial resources will be dedicated to this function, as well as a
Knowledge Management and Communication Officer, who will work closely with the M&E Officer.
These two officers will be supported by technical assistance to design and operationalise the M&E
system and develop a comprehensive knowledge management and communication strategy.
11.
Component 2
Component 2: Farmer Adoption of GAPs (USD 40.5 million) will facilitate the
dissemination and adoption of GAPs which aim to increase crop yields (e.g. maize, groundnuts,
pigeon peas and cassava), diversify production, reduce yield variability, reduce labour inputs and
improve soil health through integrated packages of improved soil and water management. This will
draw on the lessons learned from similar initiatives in the region, with refinements to suit Malawian
agro-ecological and socio-economic conditions informed by the adaptive research and knowledge
management initiatives of Component 1. The two main requirements for farmer adoption of GAPs
include: (i) increased awareness of the technologies available and their benefits and costs; and (ii)
access to the key inputs needed. The outcome of Component 2 is expected to be widespread farmer
adoption of GAPs leading to sustainably improved productivity and crop yields.
12.
Sub-Component 2.1: Improved Agricultural Extension (USD 33.2 million). This will be
based on a low-cost farmer-to-farmer extension network modelled on several successful partnerships
between MOAIWD/DAES and NGOs (see Working Paper 4). The network will engage almost
200,000 farm households (of which at least 50% will be female or child-headed) and will be
structured as follows:
13.
5
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 4
No of Districts
No of District Stakeholder Panels
No of District Agricultural Extension Coordinating Committees (DAECCs)
No of Extension Planning Areas (EPAs)
No of Area Stakeholder Panels
No of Agricultural Extension Development Coordinators (AEDCs): 1 per EPA
No of Field Officers: 1 per EPA
No of Agricultural Extension Development Officers (AEDOs): 14 per EPA
No of Lead Farmers: 5 per AEDO
No of Farmer Groups: 3 per Lead Farmer
No of Farmers: 20 per Farmer Group
6
6
6
45
45
45
45
650
3,250
9,750
200,000
The output of Sub-Component 2.1 will be improved agricultural extension services
accessible to target group households, raising awareness and sensitising farmers about GAPs. The
principal activities to be undertaken will include:
14.
a)
Farmer-to-Farmer Extension Network. Creation of a low-cost farmer-to-farmer
extension network to promote the adoption of GAPs is the core activity to be undertaken
by SAPP. The AEDC and AEDOs in each EPA will coordinate the engagement of Lead
Farmers who will be responsible for overseeing demonstration plots on farmers’ fields
and the organisation of field days, farmer field schools, gender and HIV/AIDS
mainstreaming, and farmer business schools to raise awareness and understanding of
GAPs. On average, EPAs have about 14 sections, each with an AEDO. Each AEDO will
engage and support five Lead Farmers. For the NGO partners, this will involve the
placement of one Field Officer in each of the 45 EPAs to be supported with salaries,
allowances, motorcycles, telephones and extension equipment. Each Lead Farmer will
support three farmer groups of about 20 members each. The Programme will finance
bicycles, protective clothing and other incentives to motivate Lead farmers, but not
salaries; demonstration plots (0.1ha each) of GAPs on farmers’ fields; and field days and
farmer field schools under the DAES and its NGO service-providers. The extension
network will be developed in a phased manner beginning in about half of the EPAs
initially and subsequently expanding to cover all EPAs in the six districts.
b)
Extension Coordination. The Programme will support the coordination of agricultural
extension activities under the District Agricultural Extension Service System in the six
target Districts to ensure that SAPP activities are harmonised with related and
complementary activities under other programmes and projects and the extension system
generally. This will be undertaken through regular meetings and information exchanges
which are currently constrained by lack of funding and poor communication facilities.
The Programme will fund four meetings per year of the District Agricultural Extension
Coordinating Committees (DAECCs) and the District Stakeholder Panels, as well as four
meetings per year of the Area Stakeholder Panels in each of the participating EPAs.
c)
DAES Support Headquarters Level. The Programme will provide support for
supervision visits for DAES at Headquarters level to enable it to better fulfil its mandate.
This will include three vehicles, graphic design and video equipment, computer
equipment and consultancy support for mass media communications.
d)
DAES Support: District Level. This will include provision of vehicles (four for
Lilongwe district and two each for the other districts), computer equipment office
furniture and extension equipment.
e)
DAES Support: EPA Level: Mobility and communications are key constraints within
the extension system at EPA level. Each of the participating EPAs will be provided with
motorcycles (one per AEDO) in order to provide the mobility needed to undertake
effective extension activities through the farmer-to-farmer extension network. The DAES
EPA offices and resource centres will also be provided with computer equipment,
internet facilities, office furniture and extension equipment such as notice boards and
6
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 4
public address systems. For the EPAs without electricity the Programme will finance
installation of solar power.
f)
Training for DAES Staff. The Programme will provide training to DAES staff at
various levels focusing on improving their knowledge of basic agronomy and increasing
their awareness of the range of GAPs and conservation farming methods currently
available, and enhancing their extension and communication skills. The technical
training will include four two-day workshops per annum for District Extension
Coordinators, Subject Matter Specialists and AEDCs; and three three-day workshops per
annum for frontline extension staff (AEDOs). There will also be in-service degree level
training at Bunda College for 25 AEDCs who do not currently hold degrees; and diploma
training at NRC for around 130 AEDOs.
g)
Farmer Group Development. The approximately 9,700 farmer groups to be engaged by
the Programme will be supported through group dynamics and leadership training for
group leaders and facilitation to encourage and enable the groups to affiliate with higher
level farmer organisations such as the Farmers Union of Malawi (FUM), NASFAAM,
and/or thematic networks involved in sustainable land and water management.
h)
Extension Materials and Mass Media. The Programme will finance the development
and continuous refinement of high quality extension materials including manuals
brochures, posters and leaflets; as well as their production in large numbers and
distribution to extension staff and farmers. This material will also be made available to
other programmes and projects involved in the promotion of GAPs and conservation
agriculture in Malawi. The Programme will also support the development and
broadcasting extension messages by radio, including through community radio stations in
the Programme areas.
i)
Extension Programme Management. In accordance with MOAIWD policy on the
pluralistic approach to delivery of extension services, the Programme will contract NGOs
to coordinate and support the farmer-to-farmer extension network described in a) above.
The NGOs will recruit and supervise the 45 Field Officers (one per EPA) and 3,250 Lead
Farmers in the conduct of demonstrations, field days and Farmer Field Schools. This
approach is based on a number of successful models which have been demonstrated in
Malawi and is consistent with MOAIWD policy on the use of contacted service providers
for extension activities. The NGOs will have the status of contract service-providers and
will be recruited and supervised by DAES. Selection and recruitment will be by national
competitive bidding with one contract per two districts. Each contract will involve the
services of a Programme Manager, two District Supervisors and about 15 Field Officers.
The contractors will be responsible for managing SAPP extension activities in all EPAs
of the two districts including training and supporting frontline extension staff and the
extension system generally in the demonstration and dissemination of GAPs. The
contracted NGOs will be reimbursed the actual cost of delivering the specified services
and will receive an annual management fee.
Sub-Component 2.2 Access to Key Agricultural Inputs (USD 7.3 million). Experience in
Malawi has often shown that farmers are aware of improved technologies and prepared to adopt them,
but are unable to do so because of the non-availability or un-affordability of key inputs. Whilst hybrid
seed is readily available from commercial sources and through the FISP, seed of open pollinated
varieties is difficult to buy because the seed companies and agro-dealers are reluctant to supply these
seeds. This applies particularly to legume seeds (beans, soyabeans, cowpea, pigeon pea, groundnuts
and leguminous trees) which are an important element of the improved agronomic packages to be
promoted by the Programme.
15.
To address this constraint the Programme will engage with private seed companies to support
the multiplication and distribution of selected seeds through the network of farmer groups and Farmer
Trainers created under Sub-Component 2.1. The Programme will also engage with input
suppliers/agro-dealers to encourage the commercialisation of inputs needed for the improved
16.
7
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 4
agricultural practices (fertilisers, seeds, agro-chemicals, tools, implements etc.); and will establish
partnerships with micro-finance institution(s) to facilitate the adoption of improved agricultural
practices which require farmer access to financial services, especially seasonal crop loans, insurance
services etc.
The output of Sub-Component 2.2 will be target groups with access to necessary inputs for
sustained adoption of GAPs. The principal activities to be undertaken will include:
17.
a)
Seed multiplication and Distribution. The Programme will engage private seed
companies to establish a contract seed multiplication and distribution system which aims
to supply legume crop seeds to about 20,000 farmers per annum sufficient to plant (or
interplant) about 0.1 ha each. This will require the production of about 160 tonnes of
certified seed per annum (assuming a seeding rate of 8kg/0.1 ha plot). Around 500-600
contract seed growers will be engaged to each plant about 0.2 ha of a certified seed crop.
The Programme will purchase breeder seed (about 500kg per annum) and multiply this to
produce about 9,000 kg of basic seed which will be supplied to the contract growers. A
suitably qualified seed company will be engaged to manage the contract seed growing
system, and the MOAIWD Seed Services Unit will be responsible for technical
supervision and seed certification. The Programme will provide salary and allowances
for a Seed Coordinator and about 12 Seed Field Officers, each of whom will supervise a
group of 40-50 small-scale contract seed growers. Other investments will include a
vehicle for the Seed Coordinator and motorcycles and equipment for the Seed Field
Officers; a central seed store and office and six smaller district seed stores; seed cleaning
equipment; training for the Seed Field Officers and contract seed growers; and support
for the MOAIWD Seed Services Unit in the form of a vehicle, motorcycles, seed
production manuals, provision of seed inspection services and seed testing equipment.
The seed multiplication and distribution programme will be undertaken in close
cooperation with the FISP and the ongoing Malawi Seed Industry Development Project,
which is supported by Irish Aid and ICRISAT. Other key partner organisations will
include the Malawi Seed Alliance (MASA) and the Seed Traders Association of Malawi
(STAM).
b)
Engagement with Agro-Dealers. The Programme will identify 40-50 agro-dealers
(from approximately 250 in Malawi) with a presence or interest in the six Programme
districts; and will engage with these through the AGRA-supported Malawi Agribusiness
Strengthening Programme (MASP) which has established linkages with the agro-dealers
and is in the process of forming an agro-dealers association. The aim is to increase the
capacity of agro-dealers to supply agricultural inputs (seeds, fertilisers, herbicides,
pesticides) through commercial channels and train dealers in their correct use. This will
include a pilot programme of village-based agro-dealer agents to connect with clusters of
farmer groups engaged under Sub-Component 2.1 to bulk-up orders for agricultural
inputs and arrange for their procurement and delivery to the village. These are activities
which many farmers find difficult and expensive to organise individually, especially in
the more remote areas. The agents will be remunerated by the Programme for two years,
after which they are expected to receive income from agro-dealer commissions. The
Programme will also provide training for the selected agro-dealers and their staff in the
technical aspects of storage and utilisation of agricultural inputs to ensure safe and
correct use of these items, and training courses for the village-based agro-dealer agents.
c)
Post Harvest Management. Increasing crop yields have highlighted the need for better
post-harvest management to reduce storage losses and improve the capacity of
subsistence farmers to make the transition to small-scale commercial farming. Small and
medium scale metal silos are a proven technology for greatly reducing post harvest losses
and enabling farmers to hold grain until prices rise. The Programme will therefore
provide small (0.5 tonne) and medium (1.8 tonne) silos to subsistence and emerging
commercial farmers on a cost-sharing basis, together with training in post-harvest
management and silo fabrication. A priority under this activity will be to find ways of
8
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 4
reducing the cost of manufacturing silos. The Programme will also test the use of small
(30-40kg) airtight plastic bags and airtight “cocoons” for reducing storage losses.
d)
Access to Financial Services. The Programme will partner with selected microfinance
institutions with a presence or interest in providing financial services to target group
smallholders in the six Programme districts. The MFI partners will be selected on the
basis of competitive bidding. The grants will be for the purpose of extending the reach of
financial services to households growing cash crops and conducting farming as a
business, with an emphasis on services which are intended to facilitate the adoption of
GAPs. Such services may include: (i) seasonal crop loans; (ii) crop insurance; (iii) crop
input savings schemes7; (iv) warehouse receipts, and other financial products which may
be proposed by the institutions. The grants will be for about $50,000 per district per year
for three years and may be provided to one, two or three different institutions. All
activities under this initiative will be closely coordinated with the FIMA (Financial
Inclusion in Malawi) Project.
Component 3
Component 3: Programme Management and Coordination (USD 5.2 million). SAPP will
be implemented within the GOM policy and institutional framework. This follows the creation of the
ASWAp and the decision to discontinue the use of PIUs in accordance with the Paris Declaration and
GOM’s Development Assistance Strategy. SAPP will be implemented within the context of the
ASWAp under the overall leadership of the Secretary for Agriculture and Food Security. This implies
that the relevant technical departments will be actively involved both at central and de-central level
with administrative departments such as Planning, Human Resources, Finance and Administration
providing support services.
18.
Overall coordination of Programme activities will be done by the ASWAp Secretariat. While
adhering to the general guidelines for implementing projects within the ASWAp framework, and in
line with GOM’s decentralisation policy, SAPP will delegate responsibility for Component 2
activities (comprising over 8 % of costs) to ADD and DC levels to bring implementation
responsibilities closer to the beneficiary communities. Recognising staffing limitations within the
Ministry, SAPP will also employ partnership arrangements with NGOs and other service providers
subject to output-based MOUs. This will involve the use of reputable and competent organisations
that are actively working with Government extension services, and will maximise the use of capacity
within the relevant departments.
19.
It is foreseen that implementation start-up will be relatively fast, given that the coordination
team, i.e. the ASWAp Secretariat, is already in place and functioning. To support the Secretariat
accelerate start-up, IFAD will provide a grant of USD 0.6 million in the form of a Programme
Preparatory Facility (PPF) to facilitate a quick start-up of Programme activities. The PPF will be
launched immediately upon signature of the Programme Financing Agreement, and will not be subject
to conditions of effectiveness or disbursement. The PPF will finance international and national
technical assistance, temporary logistic support, MOAIWD staff orientation, detailed design of the
M&E and knowledge management systems, finalisation of the Programme Implementation Manual
(PIM), preparation of the first Annual Workplan and Budget (AWPB) and procurement plan,
procurement of accounting software, and a start-up workshop and Programme launch. Start-up and
implementation arrangements are detailed in Annex 5, while the summary and draft PIM is provided
in Annex 11 and Working Paper 11 respectively.
20.
7
Money deposited at harvest time that cannot be withdrawn until the following planting season.
9
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 5
Annex 5: Implementation Arrangements
I.
Institutional Framework for Programme Implementation
1.
Implementation of SAPP will take place within the ASWAp management framework, using
ASWAp procedures, and will involve various actors at central, district and community level with
clearly defined roles and responsibilities. At central level the actors will include: government
institutions, NGOs, research organisations and micro-finance institutions as elaborated below.
2.
Government Institutions. The key Ministries that will participate in implementing SAPP are
MOAIWD, the Ministries of Finance (MOF), Development Planning, and Cooperation (MDPC),
Local Government and Rural Development (MLGRD) and Industry, Trade and Private Sector
Development (MITPSD). Each ministry will be responsible for the implementation of SAPP activities
directly related to their mandates.
3.
The main forum for performing these roles and responsibilities will be through the Executive
Management Committee (EMC) of the ASWAp where some of the Ministries are already members.
For those that are not members they will fulfil their roles and responsibilities through regular
consultation processes or would be co-opted on the meetings of the EMC as deemed necessary. In
general, the Ministries are expected to perform roles and responsibilities as outlined below.

MOAIWD will provide leadership for implementation of SAPP activities within the
ASWAp framework. Specific roles will include the following:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)




Formulation and review of SAPP annual work plans and budgets (AWPBs).
Assignment of staff to be responsible for the implementation of SAPP activities at
MOAIWD headquarters, ADD, district and EPA level.
Implementation of all SAPP activities through respective departments, district and
EPA structures of MOAIWD.
Monitoring and evaluation of the performance SAPP activities being implemented
in all the Programme districts.
Preparation and submission of monthly, quarterly and annual reports.
Development and application of systems and guidelines.
Identification and engagement of NGOs and private sector institutions to deliver
output based services.
Compliance with agreed standards for all actors involved in implementing the
SAPP activities.
MOF will be responsible for the timely disbursement of funds received from IFAD and
ensuring government contributions to the Programme are made available to MOAIWD.
MDPC will be responsible for ensuring SAPP financial requirements under part 2 of
government funding are included in the annual Public Sector Investment Programme
(PSIP); and for central monitoring and evaluation of the SAPP based on the M&E Master
Plan.
MLGRD will be responsible for providing policy and technical guidance on SAPP’s
how can interface with local structures.
MITPSD will be responsible for providing policy and technical guidance on how best
the Programme can help farmers build business skills that will make them grow and
succeed.
4.
Non-Government Organisations. NGOs will be identified and engaged on performancebased contracts through competitive bidding. The selection criteria will take into account the
competence and capacity of the NGOs to deliver expected results. The contracted NGOs will
ultimately be responsible for implementing and reporting all activities agreed with MOAIWD and
reflected in the contracts. They will submit quarterly and annual reports. They will also be required to
develop the capacities of lead farmers, farmer groups and government extension workers to facilitate
the adoption of new technologies.
1
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 5
5.
Research Organisations: Apart from the Department of Research in MOAIWD, the Ministry
will partner with reputable international and national research institutions including Bunda College
and CGIAR institutions. The partner research organisations will be responsible for the preparation and
submission of quarterly and annual, work plans and budgets as well as ensuring submission of
implementation reports.
6.
Micro-Finance Institutions: MFIs will provide financial services to individuals or farmer
groups to enable them adopt and sustain good agricultural practices (GAPs). The services will include
the provision of loans, insurance business skills training etc. The services will include the provision of
seasonal loans, crop saving schemes, crop insurance etc. The Programme will select MFI partners to
provide services in the selected districts and EPAs on a competitive bidding basis.
II.
Programme Management
Overview
7.
Programme Management arrangements are described in detail in Working Paper 7. SAPP will
be fully integrated within the ASWAp framework under the earmarked funding mechanism. All
activities will be undertaken through the mainstream institutional arrangements, systems and policy
guidelines of the GOM. Procedures for Programme oversight and management will be in line with
those established by the ASWAp Secretariat and documented in the ASWAp-SP Project
Implementation Manual (PIM)8. A draft SAPP PIM has been prepared - see Working Paper 11.
8.
The Programme Steering Committee will be the ASWAp EMC. The Committee will be
responsible for:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
9.
providing strategic direction for the SAPP and other Programmes;
ensuring effective inter-Ministerial coordination for SAPP implementation;
overseeing the development and implementation of policy decisions under SAPP;
approving SAPP annual work plans and budgets (AWPBs);
monitoring and reviewing progress in implementing Programme activities; and
reviewing lessons learned from implementing Programme activities.
The Programme management team and their advisors are summarised in the following table.
Position
Programme Management Positions
ASWAp Coordinator
Responsibilities
General oversight of Programme
implementation
Component 1 and 2 Management
Component 3 Management
Programme Operations Management
ASWAp Deputy Coordinator (Technical)
ASWAp Deputy Coordinator (Management)
ASWAp Coordinator of Sustainable Productivity and
Growth Technical Committee
Advisory Positions
Programme Management Advisor (44 person-months)
Procurement Advisor (10 person-months)
Financial Management Advisor (6 person-months)
M&E Advisor (9 person-months)
Knowledge Management and Communication Advisor (4 person-months)
10.
The ASWAp Coordinator will oversee Programme implementation along with the other
programmes and projects under the ASWAp umbrella. The key functions of the Coordinator will
include:
a)
8
Providing leadership in implementing Programme activities.
A revised version of the ASWAp-SP PIM will be developed in 2011.
2
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 5
b)
c)
d)
Ensuring integration of SAPP within the ASWAp framework and its harmonisation
with other ASWAp programmes and projects
Consolidating SAPP workplans and budgets within the overall ASWAp annual
workplan and budget.
Organising meetings of the EMC.
11.
Direct Programme management responsibility will be assigned to the ASWAp Deputy
Coordinator (Management) and Deputy Coordinator (Technical). The Deputy Coordinator
(Management) will be responsible for managing Component 3 of the Programme. The Deputy
Coordinator (Technical) will be responsible for managing the implementation of activities under
Components 1 and 2. The responsibilities of the two Deputy Coordinators will include:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
Timely provision of resources for implementation of activities by the different actors at
central, ADD, district and EPA levels.
Receiving, reviewing, consolidating and submitting, quarterly, and annual Programme
implementation reports.
Reviewing and making recommendations on the performance of institutions contracted
to provide services on behalf of the Programme.
Implementing a capacity building plan for the departments of Agriculture Research,
Agriculture Extension Services, Crop Development and Land Resources as well as
supporting service departments such as Planning, and Finance and Administration
including at district and EPA level.
Documenting and sharing lessons from implementing activities especially under
Components 1 and 2.
12.
The two ASWAp Deputy Coordinators will be responsible for receiving, reviewing, and
consolidating AWPBs from implementers of activities before submission to the ASWAp Secretariat.
The Deputy Coordinators will be supported by a Programme Task Force (PTF) consisting of key
personnel including a Programme Operations Manager (Coordinator of Sustainable Productivity and
Growth Technical Committee) besides other professional staff. The Programme Operations
Manager will be responsible for ensuring that designated members of staff within the relevant
MOAIWD Departments and partnering institutions are provided with the resources needed to
implement Programme activities in accordance with the AWPBs.
13.
The PTF will be supported by a nationally recruited Programme Management Advisor who
will work closely with the ASWAp Coordinator and the two Deputies. Among other responsibilities
as determined in the scope of work, he or she will:
a)
b)
c)
Advise the ASWAp Coordinator and Deputy Coordinators on management and
technical aspects of SAPP and highlight areas requiring attention.
Provide capacity building support to the ASWAp Secretariat through coaching and
mentoring.
Review the performance of SAPP components and make relevant recommendations.
The PTF will also be supported by part time advisors in Procurement, Financial Management, M&E
and Knowledge Management and Communications. All of the advisors will be funded from the grant
portion of the IFAD financing and will be additional to the existing ASWAp-SP advisory positions.
Roles of the MOAIWD Departments
14.
Responsibility for implementing Components 1 and 2 will remain with the technical
departments, namely; Agricultural Research, Agricultural Extension, Land Resources Conservation
and Crop Development. They will provide professional and technical leadership in implementing the
different activities. The departments of Planning and Administration and Finance will provide general
management and support services for the effective implementation of SAPP consistent with their
mandates.
3
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 5
District Level Implementation
15.
District level implementation of Programme activities will be backstopped and supervised
by the ADDs due to their close proximity and competence of personnel at that level. The ADDs
within the geographical area of SAPP implementation will, therefore, exercise oversight in the
implementation of at least 80% of activities under Component 2. The Deputy Programme Manager
will be responsible for reviewing and consolidating the district plans and budgets; monitoring
implementation of activities by the district staff and those by partners (NGOs, CSOs and or private
sector organisations) implementing outsourced activities. He or she will also be responsible for
reviewing, consolidating and submitting district reports to the ASWAp Secretariat with copies to the
technical departments.
Summary of Roles and Responsibilities
16.
The following table summarises implementation roles and responsibilities of the main actors
mentioned above. Detailed roles and responsibilities for each component are presented in Appendix 1
and overall management structure is presented in Appendix 2.
Designated Office or Functional
Structure
ASWAp Executive Management
Committee
Summary of Key Roles and Responsibilities
ASWAp Coordinator
ASWAp Deputy Coordinators



Programme Advisors

Coordinator of Sustainable
Productivity and Growth
Technical Committee
Department of Agriculture
Research
Department of Agriculture
Extension Services

Department of Land Resources
Conservation






Provide strategic direction for the SAPP and other Programmes.
Oversee the development and implementation of policy decisions under
SAPP.
Responsible for general oversight and leadership for SAPP implementation.
Prepare reports and organise meetings of the EMC.
Providing management and technical services for the effective
implementation of the Programme.
Provide professional advice to the ASWAp Secretariat and the PTF on the
performance of SAPP components.
Programme Operations Manager, responsible for provision of resources for
implementation of SAPP activities.
Provide professional and technical leadership in implementing the Adaptive
Research and Knowledge Management Component.
Provide professional and technical leadership in implementing farmer
adoption of GAPs.
Recruit and supervise NGOs as extension service-providers.
Provide leadership and professional guidance in implementing land
resources management activities.
Department of Crop Development

Provide leadership and professional guidance on crop production and
management activities.
Department of Agriculture
Planning Services

Provision of planning, knowledge management, monitoring and evaluation
services.
Department of Administration and
Finance
Agriculture Development Division

Provide HR, finance and procurement services.

Provide operational management oversight for implementing activities
especially under Component 2
Provide support to district level implementation.
Supervise and monitor implementation of Component 2 activities within the
respective EPAs.
Participation, supervision and monitoring of activities within EPAs and
helping to mobilise farmers for adoption of GAPs.
Implementation of output-based activities under performance-based
contracts.
District Agriculture Office


Extension Planning Area (EPA)

Collaborating NGO/Private
Organisations

Lead farmers and farmer groups

Direct participation in implementing activities and promoting the adoption
of new technologies and GAPs.
4
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 5
III.
Programme Staffing Arrangements
17.
MOAIWD Headquarters will assign required personnel for SAPP implementation on a fulltime or part-time basis according to need. Those assigned at Headquarters will provide the necessary
policy and professional guidance. Given high staff turnover and work overloads, it is advisable to
assign alternates with whom they will work very closely as team members for knowledge sharing and
accountability. It should be clear however who among the alternates has the primary responsibility for
ensuring that the work is done. This is intended to avoid the risk that each will pass-off responsibility
to the other.
18.
Key staff requirements will initially include: M&E Officer, Knowledge Management and
Communication Officer (Planning Department); Procurement Officer (Procurement Unit), and two
Accountants (Finance Department). These may be existing staff members or new recruits filling
current vacancies. They will constitute part of the Programme Task Force to support the Programme
Manager and the ASWAp Secretariat with the day to day operations of the Programme. However,
these initial staffing requirements are subject to review as SAPP implementation evolves and matures.
19.
At ADD and District level most assigned staff will perform their duties on part-time basis
while at district and community level contracted NGO personnel are expected to work closely with
the district and extension staff.
20.
Terms of Engagement. All staff assigned to SAPP will be on normal civil service conditions
in accordance with government directives on project implementation. Where appropriate, during the
first two to three years the officers will be supported by specially recruited advisors in the areas of
Programme Management, Financial Management, Procurement, M&E and Knowledge Management.
The role of the advisors will primarily be to provide expert advice through coaching and mentoring
services to personnel assigned to the Programme, and the ASWAp in general.
IV.
Capacity Building Issues
21.
Institutional Capacity: SAPP will support capacity building activities to facilitate its
implementation and contribute towards MOAIWD’s organisational effectiveness. Meanwhile, as part
of preparatory process for ASWAp implementation, capacity building activities in MOAIWD are
being supported under ASWAp-SP. Without required capacities the likelihood of realising ASWAp
goals and objectives will be remote. Hence, the ASWAp-SP covers several aspects of capacity
building. They include human resources focusing on staffing levels, competence building, systems
review and development in relevant functional areas such as financial management, M&E and
operational infrastructure covering computers and vehicles.
22.
Staffing limitations have been persistent over the years especially at frontline level. Most
districts and EPAs are operating with less numbers of required personnel especially as regards
extension services. High vacancy rates are mainly attributed to high staff turnover due to multiple
factors including deaths, retirements and resignations. The vacancy rate ranges from 35% to over
50%. In order to address the situation, MOAIWD has intensified efforts to fill vacancies and between
1,000 and 1,500 positions have been filled, though some could have already fallen vacant again due to
the factors outlined above.
23.
To effectively implement SAPP and similar Programmes MOAIWD will have to review the
vacancy situation at headquarters, ADD and selected districts. The aim should be to develop a
recruitment and deployment plan to ensure that vacancies that might negatively impact on ASWAp
implementation are filled through staff redeployment or recruitment. Members of staff can either be
on a permanent or non-established basis in line with government policy on project management. This
will entail ensuring that budgetary commitments are agreed with the Treasury as well as securing
authority from the Department of Public Service Management for Programme positions as may be
deemed appropriate during the life of SAPP.
5
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 5
V.
Conclusions
24.
Successful implementation of SAPP will depend on the ownership and commitment of senior
management within MOAIWD and implementing partners as well as beneficiary communities. This
entails significant behavioural change and positive mindsets in order to move beyond the basic
operational premise of “business as usual”. Initial workshops on the orientation of key staff at each
level of implementation will be a critical entry point in promoting the desired change. In addition,
strong leadership capabilities especially at ADD, District and EPA level are a precondition for
effective implementation. It will be necessary to provide leadership and management training in the
early stages of the Programme to the ADD Programme Managers and the DADOs, since the focal
point of operations is at these two levels.
25.
It is also important that partners with responsibility for implementation are committed to
timely execution of their responsibilities in accordance with annual workplans and reporting
schedules. Hence, the assignment of personnel to the Programme activities cannot be overemphasised.
Similarly, the importance of preparing the beneficiary communities and assessing their capacities to
participate in Programme activities at that level is crucial. In summary, capacity considerations should
be an ongoing feature of the Programme to ensure availability of capabilities at each level and within
implementing structures.
6
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 5
Appendix 1: Implementation Arrangements by Component, Sub-Component and Activity
Component 1: Adaptive Research and Knowledge Management
Activity
A. Research
Planning and
Management








B. Capacity
Building





C. On-Farm Trials
Implementation Arrangements
Sub-Component 1.1: Adaptive Research
The Department of Research will be responsible and accountable for the
planning and management of all research activities.
The Director of Research will be responsible for the preparation and
submission of annual and quarterly work plans and budgets to the ASWAp
Secretariat. He or she will work closely with heads of departments and
organisations (or their appointed representatives) implementing the different subcomponent activities to ensure concerted efforts and timely deliverables.
The Director of Research will ensure that implementing organisations from
outside MOAIWD sign MOUs which specify the roles and responsibilities as well
as performance standards for the execution of sub-component activities.
The Director of Research will be responsible for the consolidation and
submission of quarterly and annual reports on the implementation of the subcomponent activities to the ASWAp Coordinator who will serve as SAPP
Programme Manager.
The Heads of implementing organisations will prepare annual, quarterly work
plans, budgets and reports based on agreed activities and submit them to the
Director of Research for review and consolidation. They will also ensure to send
copies to the ASWAp Secretariat.
The Director of Research and Heads of participating organisations will
appoint desk officers as coordinators and to provide technical backstopping services
for effective implementation of sub-component activities.
The desk officers will perform their roles and responsibilities as integral part
of their day to day work.
The Director and Heads of institutions will ensure that the officers so
appointed are oriented on their roles and responsibilities and provided the necessary
resources and management support.
Heads of departments within MOAIWD and implementing NGOs, research
institutions and/or private organisations will be responsible and accountable for
implementing identified capacity building activities (systems, processes,
competence building etc. central to the implementation of sub-component activities
under their charge.
They will ensure that capacity building plans, budgets and reports are
prepared and submitted to the Director of Research for review and consolidation.
Each head of participating department or organisation will appoint an officer
(existing or new) to be responsible for review, preparation, monitoring and
reporting capacity building activities and budgets.
The Director of Research will review and consolidate capacity building plans,
budgets and reports received for submission to the ASWAp Secretariat.
The ASWAp Coordinator as SAPP Programme Manager will review and
consolidate capacity building plans, budgets and reports for submission to the
ASWAp EMC.
The Director of Research will provide overall leadership in carrying out onfarm trials in close liaison with the Directors of the Departments of Land Resources
and Crop Development, DAES and heads of other participating research
institutions. He or she will be responsible for the preparation, implementation and
review of joint work plans and budgets.

DLRC will be responsible the planning and implementing conservation
agriculture on-farm trials. This will include the demonstration of CA equipment,
identifying equipment hire service providers, equipping and training them in CA
techniques, machinery operation and business skills.

The Department of Crop Development will be responsible for planning and
implementing on-farm trial crop/seed production activities.

7
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 5
Activity
Implementation Arrangements
DAES through extension personnel at EPA and community level will identify
and work with farmers to participate on-farm trials and prepare weekly, monthly,
quarterly and annual reports as well as disseminate results and lessons.

DAES through the DADOs and extension personnel at EPA and community
level will monitor, trial performance, the impacts on productivity, erosion control
and measure soil fertility enhancement. The DADO and extension personnel will
submit monthly and quarterly reports to relevant departments for their appropriate
actions.

Researchers from the DAR, Bunda College or any outsourced research
institute or organisation will be responsible for the management of all trial plots onfarm.

Extension staff at EPA and community level will be supervise and implement
day to day activities of trial plots on the farm and will work closely with the
researchers responsible for the management of research of plots and on-farm trials.

Farmer groups or community based agriculture groups/organisations will fully
participate in implementing on-farm trial activities. They will be involved in the
selection of treatments and evaluation of results and consequently disseminate the
same to their respective communities.

Farmers will be responsible for managing pilot and demonstration plots after
they have received orientation.
D. Soil Fertility

The Department of Research will be responsible for planning, implementing
Enhancement
and reporting plant nutrition studies intended to enhance soil fertility. The
department will work in partnership with other technical departments in MOAIWD
and where possible will outsource plant nutrition research services to competent
NGOs and research institutions.

The Department of Crop Development will be responsible for planning and
implementing sub-component activities intended to improve the effectiveness of
fertiliser distributed under the FISP among the SAPP participating communities.

DLRC will work closely with the Departments of Research and Crops to
establish and evaluate the performance of fertility management practices using
inorganic and organic sources of plant nutrients. The department will also undertake
soil and plant tissue testing to develop better characteristics of Malawi’s soil
testing.

DAES through extension personnel at EPA and community level disseminate
messages promoting GAPs on land use and soil fertility.

Implementing NGOs and/or private sector organisations will promote GAPs
on land use and enhancement of soil fertility taking into account research results on
plant nutritional studies.

Community farmer organisations or associations will be responsible for
promoting awareness messages on GAPs within their geographical areas of
operation.
E. Research on

The Department of Research will contract sub-component activities to
Adoption
competent research organisations based on output based procedures.
Behaviour

The contracted organisations will be responsible for carrying out research
activities including studies on the effectiveness of various extension approaches or
methods and farmer production of various agricultural practices, baseline studies
and monitoring of the physical, biological, social and financial impacts of the
improved agricultural practices offered and extension methodologies employed.

DAES personnel at EPA and community level will be responsible for
promoting behaviour that will support the application or the adoption of agricultural
practices supported by the research outcomes.
Sub-Component 1.2: Knowledge Management and Communication
A. Knowledge

The Department of Agriculture Planning Services will by virtue of its strategic
Management &
and policy analysis role under ASWAp framework provide leadership for the
Communication
development and implementation of Knowledge Management and Communication
Strategy
Strategy including the establishment of library services and electronic database.

The Principal Economist for M&E will be designated as the Knowledge
Management and Communications Officer responsible for facilitating the

8
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 5
Activity



B. Knowledge
Harvesting,
Storage and
Processing



C. Knowledge
Sharing and
Learning
Partnerships


Implementation Arrangements
development and implementation of the Knowledge Management and
Communication Strategy.
Directors of all technical departments will be responsible for the development
and implementation of aspects of Knowledge Management and Communications
Strategy under their direct control. They will ensure they work closely with the
Director of Planning and report implementation of activities to the ASWAp
Secretariat.
Respective Directors will ensure there is a dedicated staff member as a focal
point within their departments responsible for knowledge management and
communications strategy development.
DAES through extension personnel at EPA and community level and
contracted NGOs will be responsible for the transmission of technologies and
practices emerging from adaptive research activities.
The Department of Crop Development will take the lead in implementing and
monitoring knowledge harvesting, storage and processing activities as well as
making resources available to organisations and farmers that need them.
DAES through extension staff at EPA and community level will be
responsible for the development of messages and dissemination of information on
knowledge harvesting, storage and processing practices under SAPP and other
initiatives.
NGOs or private sector organisations contracted to participate in developing
messages and dissemination of information on best practices among the farming
communities, farmer groups and individual farmers will work closely with
government extension personnel to ensure common approach and teamwork as well
as facilitate capacity building.
The Director of Planning, working closely with the technical departments, and
contracted NGOs will be responsible for ensuring that knowledge sharing and
learning partnership practices are the core components of the Knowledge
Management and Communications Strategy where roles and responsibilities of
different parties at national, district and community level will be outlined for
effective implementation and coordinated efforts.
Researchers, extension personnel, farmer representative groups and CBOs
will be responsible for preparing and sharing reports that reflect activities on action
learning approaches, training at various levels, establishment of communities of
practice, and systematic documentation and knowledge dissemination processes.
Component 2: Farmer Adoption of Good Agricultural Practices
9
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 5
Activity
A. Farmer-tofarmer
Extension
Network
B. Extension
Coordination
Implementation Arrangements
Sub-Component 2.1: Improved Agriculture Extension

DAES will be responsible for defining the plan and the establishment of low
cost farmer-to-farmer extension networks that will promote the adoption of GAPs
as a core activity within the respective EPAs and farming communities.

At EPA and community level the following will be the implementation
arrangements:
a) Agriculture Extension Development Coordinators (AEDCs) in each EPA will
be responsible for the engagement of Lead Farmers who will oversee
demonstration plots on farmers’ fields and the organisation of field days,
farmer field schools and farmer business schools to raise awareness and
understanding of GAPs.
b) Each AEDC will engage and support eight Lead Farmers who will be
equipped with necessary operating resources such as bicycles, protective
clothing, allowances etc.
c) Each Lead Farmer will support three farmer groups of about twenty members
each

NGO partners contracted will provide output-based services and will place
two field officers in each EPA covered by the SAPP.



C. DAES Support
at Headquarters,
ADD and
District Level




DAES will be responsible for implementing and monitoring of agricultural
extension activities under the District Agricultural Extension Service System in the
targeted districts to ensure SAPP activities are harmonised with other related and
complementary Programmes and projects.
The DADO and extension personnel at EPA and community level will be
responsible for implementing, monitoring and reporting activities of the District
Agricultural Extension Coordinating Committees (DAECCs), District Stakeholder
Panels (DSPs) and Area Stakeholders Panels (ASPs). This will include meetings of
the committees and other extension service activities.
Stakeholders on the DAEDCC, DSP and ASP will be responsible for
reporting SAPP activities implemented and documenting lessons and challenges as
well as reporting back to their members or constituencies.
DAES will be responsible for providing policy and technical guidelines in line
with the objectives of SAPP to NGO institutions contracted to provide extension
services at national and district level. The department will also be responsible for
monitoring the performance of the NGOs.
The ADD assigned to manage SAPP activities for the selected districts will
provide backstopping services to the DADOs in implementing district level
activities including monitoring the activities implemented by NGOs within the
districts in question.
The DADOs will monitor and report on implementation of SAPP extension
activities within their districts and prepare quarterly and annual reports for
submission to DAES and backstopping ADD. The DADOs will also share his
reports with the DAEC as well as the District Executive Committee of the District
Council.
The ASWAp Coordinator as the Programme Manager of SAPP will provide
to operational resources to the DAES and DADO which will include:
a)
One vehicle will be provided to headquarters and ADD while the district will
receive two vehicles.
b) Computers, office furniture, extension equipment.
c) Radio and TV equipment for the extension branch.
D. DAES Support
at EPA Level
 The DADOs will be responsible for the provision of leadership for the planning,
implementation, monitoring and reporting of activities at District level. They will
ensure that:
a)
Each EPA receives one motorcycle and each AEDO is supplied with a
bicycle. This is for the purpose of mobility for undertaking extension services
through farmer-to-farmer extension network.
b) The DAES EPA offices and resource centres are supplied with computer
10
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 5
Activity
E. Training for
DAES Staff
Implementation Arrangements
equipment, internet facility, office furniture and extension equipment such as
notice boards and public address systems and where there is no electricity
solar power will be installed.

DAES will ensure that all targeted and relevant training for the DAES staff at
the headquarters, ADD, District, and EPAs is included in the annual work plans
and budgets. The training will be targeted at improving knowledge in basic
agronomy, and increasing their awareness of the range of the GAPs currently
available. Training activities will include the following:
a)
four 2-day workshops per year for District Extension Coordinators, subject
matter specialists, and AEDCs;
b) Three 3-day workshops per annum for frontline extension staff (AEDOs);
c) in-service degree training at Bunda College for 25 AEDCs for those without
degrees; and
d) diploma training for 130 AEDOs at Natural Resources College.
The CHRMD at MOAIWD Headquarters will be responsible for managing
the actual implementation and monitoring of the planned training activities.

The CHRMD will also be responsible for contractual arrangements with the
training providers and communicating with the candidates based on training
guidelines.

F. Farmer Group
Development
DAES will be responsible for the planning and implementation of farmer
group development training activities.

The officer responsible for training within DAES will be responsible for
planning the implementation of such activities working closely with the ADD
Programme Manager or his/her designated desk officer and the DADOs as well as
DAECs and contracted NGOs.

Training activities will be delivered by contracted competent NGOs and
private sector service providers and monitored by the District Agriculture
Extension personnel. Areas of training will include:

a) Group dynamics and leadership training for farmer group leaders.
b) Provision of facilitation support to encourage and enable groups to affiliate
with higher level farmer organisations such as the Farmers Union of Malawi
(FUM), NASFAM and/or thematic networks involved in sustainable land and
water management.
G. Extension
Materials and
Mass Media
 The Communications Division within DAES will be responsible for the production
and continuous refinement of extension material and mass media Programmes. In
cases where the work is contracted out it will provide operational guidelines for
output-based services and quality assurance. The specific activities will include:
a)
Financing of the development and continuous refinement of high quality
extension materials (brochures, posters, and leaflets).
b) Production of the material in large numbers and distribution to extension staff,
farmers and other Programmes and projects involved in the promotion of
GAPs.
c) The development and broadcasting of extension messages by TV and radio,
including through community radio stations in the Programme area.
Sub-Component 2.2: Access to Agricultural Inputs
A. Seed

The Department of Crop Development will be responsible for defining and
Multiplication
implementing seed multiplication and distribution activities.
and Distribution

Competent private seed companies will be contracted to undertake
multiplication and distribution of selected seeds through the network of farmer
groups created under Sub-Component 2.1.

The Department will ensure that the distribution of seeds to farmers within the
selected farmer’s networks takes into account the guidelines for the distribution of
fertiliser and farm inputs under the FISP.
11
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 5
Activity
B. Engagement
With AgroDealers
Implementation Arrangements
The Department of Crop Development will be responsible for the engagement
of agro-dealers.

The Department will engage the services of agro-dealers using guidelines
applicable under ASWAp partnership or contractual agreements. This will include
input suppliers/agro-dealers to encourage the commercialisation of inputs needed
for GAPs (fertilisers, seeds, herbicides, tools, implements etc.).

C. Post-Harvest
Management

D. Access to
Financial
Services

The Department of Crop Development will be responsible for the
management of post-harvest activities including the provision of small (0.5 tonne)
and medium (1.8) silos to subsistence and emerging commercial farmers on costsharing basis and training in post-harvest management and silo fabrication.

The Department will contract the services of competent and reputable NGOs
to carry out post-harvest management activities based on MOUs with specific
requirements for capacity building to ministry staff at EPA and community level.
The ASWAp Coordinator, as the Programme Manager will be responsible for
establishing partnerships with reputable micro-finance institutions to operate in
areas covered by SAPP in order to facilitate the adoption of agricultural practices
which require access to financial services especially seasonal crop loans, leasing,
insurance services etc.

The MOAIWD Director of Finance will be responsible for the implementation
and monitoring of partnership agreements with the successful micro-finance
institutions.

The ASWAp-SAPP Financial Advisor will be responsible for providing
expert advice regarding operational modalities on which institutions to partner with
based on credible criteria including the capacity to invest in the rural areas where
SAPP will be operating.

The Partner micro-finance institutions will, among other things, be
responsible for ensuring that the farmers are properly oriented on business
management skills to ensure effective use of financial services.
Component 3: Programme Management
Activity
A. Policy
Framework
B. Institutional
Framework






C. Programme
Management


Implementation Arrangements
The SAPP will be organised and managed in accordance with GOM policies,
strategies, systems, guidelines and organisational arrangements and structures. Some
of the key policies and strategies include: the MGDS, DAS, Decentralisation Policy
and the policy on abolition of PIUs. Also to be taken into account is the Paris
Declaration and the MDGs.
Implementation of SAPP will involve multiple stakeholders at central, district,
and community level. These are government ministries, Partnering NGOs and
research organisations, micro-finance institutions and farmer organisations and
associations.
MOAIWD will be responsible for the implementation of the SAPP. It will plan,
implement, monitor, review and report component activities of SAPP.
MOAIWD will implement SAPP on the basis of the ASWAp framework which
is the agriculture sector’s arrangement for implementing Programmes and delivering
services.
Participating institutions in implementing the SAPP will be responsible for
providing required policy and technical inputs consistent with their respective
mandates. The main institutions include: MOF, MDPC, MITPSD, MLGRD,
outsourced NGOs and research organisations.
Micro-finance institutions will provide financial services to facilitate access to
financial services for the acquisitions of new technologies and GAPs.
The ASWAp Secretariat will be responsible for the implementation of SAPP
activities.
The EMC of ASWAp will be the Programme Steering Committee responsible
for providing strategic direction and guidance.
12
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 5
Activity










D. Staffing
Requirements


E. Capacity
Building



Implementation Arrangements
The ASWAp Coordinator and his deputies and other key staff such as
Programme Advisor will be responsible for reviewing, planning, budgeting and
reporting SAPP activities and perform all other management roles and
responsibilities.
Directors of respective Technical Departments (Crop Development, Agriculture
Extension Services, Land Resources and Research) will be responsible for the
implementation of SAPP component activities for which they will report to the
Secretary for Agriculture and Food Security.
In particular, the Department of Research and DAES will be the lead
departments in implementation Components 1 and 2 respectively based on approved
work plans and budgets.
The technical departments will be supported and complemented by the other
departments such as Agriculture Planning Services, Administration and Finance in
areas of their mandate and expertise.
The Planning Department will be responsible for developing the knowledge
management and communications strategy; and monitoring and evaluating the
performance of SAPP implementation.
The Department of Administration and Finance will be responsible for human
resources, finance and procurement activities of SAPP component activities.
At least 80% of Component 2 activities will be managed at ADD level which
will also be responsible for backstopping the selected districts.
District and EPA as well as community agriculture personnel will be
responsible for planning, budgeting, reporting and activities being implemented and
disseminating information on GAPs.
Lead farmers and farmer groups will be responsible for sharing experiences and
promoting use of new technologies as well as initiating learning events.
The Programme will outsource implementation and management of some of the
component activities especially under Component 2 to NGOs and/or reputable
private firms. The arrangement will be guided by service contracts and/or MOUs.
Respective departments will assign Ministry personnel to carry out Programme
activities. This will be either existing or temporary staff on normal terms and
conditions of service applicable to civil servants.
Some of the positions are Monitoring and Evaluation Officer, Knowledge
Management and Communications Officer; Accountants etc. These will be
complemented by short and long term consultancies.
The Programme will provide targeted training activities to enhance the
competences of staff assigned and/or participating in implementing Programme
activities; and to farmers and other stakeholders vital to the implementation of the
Programme.
Training interventions will focus on the acquisition of diploma and degree
certificates; orientation on SAPP implementation roles and responsibilities, demand
driven competence workshops; for example, in the area of general management such
as team building, change management, effective communication etc.
The provision of resources for the acquisition and maintenance of operational
equipment, office furniture, vehicles, computers etc. as specified under respective
components of SAPP.
13
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 5
Appendix 2: Organisation Chart
ASWAp Executive
Management Committee
ASWAp Secretariat
(ASWAp Coordinator)
Programme Task Force
Manager, Components 1 & 2 a/
Manager, Component 3 b/
Operations Manager c/
MOAFS
Technical Depts
Ag
Research
Ag
Extension
Land
Resources
Technical Assistance Team
Advisor to Programme Manager
Financial Management Advisor
Procurement Advisor
M&E Advisor
Knowledge Management Advisor
Other MOAFS
Departments
Crop Development
Planning
Dept
Admin &
Finance
ADDs &
Districts
Contracted
Service Providers
(Private Sector, NGOs)
a/ ASWAp Deputy Coordinator (Technical)
b/ ASWAp Deputy Coordinator (Management)
c/ Coordinator of Sustainable Productivity and Growth Technical Committee
14
EPAs
Farmer
Groups
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 5
Appendix 3: Programme Preparatory Facility (PPF)
1.
The problem of prolonged lead-times between programme approval and effectiveness/start-up
has often arisen in Malawi. This can be addressed by the use of grant funds to accelerate start-up
activities with a view to enabling Government to achieve accelerated programme effectiveness. It is
therefore proposed that IFAD will provide and advance of USD 0.6 million from the grant portion of
the IFAD financing envelope in the form of a Programme Preparatory Facility (PPF) to facilitate a
quick start-up of Programme activities. PPF funding will be used to facilitate the transition from
Programme approval to effectiveness and implementation, avoiding the long delays that normally
occur. Basic systems can have a major impact on how long the Programme takes to get started and
how much can be achieved in the first few years. A programme can be declared effective, but fail to
take off because of lack of adequate guidance. The PPF will support some of the key start-up
activities even in the pre-effectiveness period to ensure basic systems and capacity will be in place by
the time programme is declared effective.
2.
The PPF will be launched immediately upon signature of the Programme Financing
Agreement, and will not be subject to conditions of effectiveness or disbursement. The PPF will
finance international and national technical assistance, temporary logistic support, MOAIWD staff
orientation, detailed design of the M&E and knowledge management systems, finalisation of the draft
Programme Implementation Manual (PIM), preparation of the first Annual Workplan and Budget
(AWPB) and procurement plan, procurement of accounting software, and a start-up workshop and
Programme launch. The PPF will finance the following activities:











Provision of six person-months of international technical assistance and 12 personmonths of national technical assistance to support key start-up activities. Consultants will
be selected by IFAD.
Provision of temporary logistic support for the Programme Facilitation Team including
hire of vehicles, equipment and office facilities for six to twelve months.
Orientation of MOAIWD staff through workshops at headquarters and district levels.
Technical assistance for detailed design of the M&E system.
Technical assistance for preparation of the knowledge management and communication
strategy.
Finalisation of the PIM, based on the draft PIM already prepared.
Preparation of the first Annual Workplan and Budget and finalisation of the 18-month
procurement plan, based on the draft procurement plan already prepared.
Procurement and installation of accounting software.
Procurement of office supplies and equipment.
Miscellaneous supplies and services needed during the first six months.
Conduct of a start-up workshop and Programme launch.
3.
The SAPP start-up will be managed and coordinated by the ASWAp Secretariat with the
support of IFAD. Milestones for the key start-up activities are shown in the following table.
15
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 5
Key Start-up Activities
PPF effectiveness: Signing
Financing Agreement
Responsible Entity
MOF with follow-up from IFAD
December 2011 - January 2012
Preparation of PPF AWPB for
initial disbursement
MOF and MOAIWD with support
from IFAD
January-February 2012
Identification
of
Technical
Assistance (consultants) for startup activities
IFAD;
Secretariat
January – March 2012
Preparation of the first Annual
Work plan and Budget (AWPB)
and finalization of procurement
plan
MOAIWD/ASWAP
TA
Secretariat,
February – April 2012
Finalisation
Programme
Manual
MOAIWD/ASWAP
Institutional TA
Secretariat;
March – April 2012
MOAIWD/ASWAp
Financial TA
Secretariat;
April – May 2012
of
of
Timeframe
the
draft
Implementation
Procurement and installation of
accounting software
MOAIWD/ASWAp
Detailed design of ME and KM
system;
training and technical
follow-up
MOAIWD/ASWAP Secretariat,
M&E and KM TAs
April 2012 – April 2013 (includes
training support for MOAIWD
staff)
MOAIWD
orientation
MOAIWD/ASWAP
IFAD; and TA
February –
continuous
and
district
staff
Start-up workshop and Programme
launch
Secretariat;
MOAIWD/MOF; IFAD
Note: All above activities to be closely supported by IFAD.
16
July
2012
and
June - July 2012 (note that this is
also contingent upon parliamentary
ratification of the financing)
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 5
Appendix 4: Terms of Reference for Key Staff Positions
1.
The Programme will engage a team of advisors to support the Programme Management
Team, including the following:
Person-Months
Position
PPF
Yr 1
Yr 2
Yr 3
Yr 4
Yr 5
Programme Management Advisor a/
6
12
12
8
4
Procurement Advisor a/
4
3
2
1
Financial Management Advisor a/
3
2
1
Monitoring and Evaluation Advisor b/
2
3
3
2
1
KM and Communication Advisor b/
2
2
1
1
Total Person-Months
4
18
21
18
10
4
a/ National Consultant
b/ International Consultant
Yr 6
2
2
Total
44
10
6
11
6
77
2.
The actual time inputs by each advisor and their terms of reference (TORs) will be reviewed
annually and specified in the annual workplan and budget (AWPB). Initial draft TORs for each
advisor are given below.
Programme Management Advisor (PMA)
1.
The PMA will be engaged for a total period of 44 working months over years 1-6 of the
programme including six months in year 1, 12 months in years 2 and 3 and 14 months intermittent
input during years 4, 5 and 6. The function of the PMA will be to support the Programme
management team in establishing and operationalising Programme management systems, as indicated
in the draft Programme Implementation Manual (PIM) provided in Working Paper 11.
2.
The PMA will advise the Programme management team on all aspects of Programme
Management including planning, budgeting, administration, reporting, resource mobilisation, M&E,
training, capacity-building, knowledge management, financial management, auditing, cash flow
management and other areas considered critical to the overall success of the Programme. Specific
duties will include:











Support the ASWAp Coordinator, the two Deputy Coordinators and the Programme
Operations Manager in all aspects relating to management of the Programme.
Facilitate liaison at national and district level with ministries, parastatals, DCs and
NGOs; and with national and regional level bodies representing farmers, service
providers, value chain actors and related interests.
Provide training to Central, ADD, and District level staff; as well as contracted serviceproviders on Programme management issues, based on the PIM.
Assist in the preparation of periodic and annual reports and the presentation of these to
the Programme Steering Committee (ASWAp EMC).
Provide capacity building support to the ASWAp Secretariat through coaching and
mentoring.
Support the Programme to ensure that it is implemented according to the financing
agreement and within Government policies and regulations under the overall ASWAp
framework.
Review Programme performance from time to time and make recommendations as to
how Programme management can be improved.
Assist with integration of SAPP within the ASWAp framework and in liaison with the
donor community and the development of partnerships with related programmes, projects
and institutions.
Coordinate and backstop implementing agencies and service providers.
Oversee the work of the other Programme advisors.
Undertake other duties as requested by the ASWAp Coordinator and/or Deputy
Coordinators.
17
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 5
Qualifications and Experience








Advanced degree in agriculture, agricultural economics, business management or a
related field.
At least ten years professional experience as a Project Manager or Project Management
Advisor.
Experience with donor financed development projects
Detailed knowledge of Malawian institutional and policy frameworks.
Good knowledge of the Programme management cycle with emphasis on annual work
planning, budgeting and reporting.
High level of computer literacy.
Good oral and written communication skills and fluency in written and spoken English.
Ability to exercise leadership and to work as a team member.
Procurement Advisor (PA)
1.
The PA will be engaged for a total period of ten working months including 4, 3, 2 and 1
month respectively in years 1-4 of the Programme. The function of the PA will be to support the
Programme management team in establishing and operationalising procurement systems, as indicated
in Working Paper 8 (Procurement and Financial Management) and the draft Programme
Implementation Manual (PIM) provided in Working Paper 11.
2.
The PA will advise the Programme management team on all aspects of Programme relating to
procurement and contracting. A large portion of the activities of the Programme will be contracted out
to service-providers, and the PA will provide the necessary support to ensure that all goods and
services procured by the Programme will be done in accordance with the approved procedures as set
out in the PIM and the Letter to the Borrower. Specific duties will include:













Assist preparation of a rolling 18-month procurement plan in the form specified in the
financing agreement and suitable for incorporation in the AWPB.
Monitor the progress of procurement and contracting activities against the targets
specified in the AWPB.
Assist with the preparation of tender and other procurement documents in accordance
with applicable guidelines and generally facilitate the procurement process.
Train staff of MOAIWD and other implementing institutions in the applicable
procurement procedures.
Assist preparation of TORs for services and technical specifications for hardware
procurement, in conjunction with the relevant technical personnel in MOAIWD.
Advise on local shopping for goods and services where this falls within the procurement
guidelines.
Review draft tender documents and invitations to bid from qualified suppliers.
Train bid evaluation committees to undertake technical evaluation of bids or proposals
for supply of goods and services.
Review procedures for progressive payments to contractors against the agreed milestones
or outputs.
Assist the development and maintenance of a contracts/grants/commitments register and
undertake reviews to ensure that all contracts are being implemented as stipulated
therein.
Guide the conduct of field compliance verifications to check on the extent of
achievement or otherwise of contract milestones.
Advise on the preparation quarterly and annual reports on procurement and contractual
activities undertaken by the Programme.
Undertake other duties as requested by the ASWAp Coordinator and/or Deputy
Coordinators.
18
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 5
Qualifications and Experience







Degree in economics, finance or law; or equivalent management qualification with
significant training and practical in procurement within Government programmes
supported by international financial institutions.
At least six years professional experience as a Project Procurement Officer or Advisor.
Detailed knowledge of procurement guidelines and the protocols and procedures
applying to internationally financed projects in Malawi.
Good knowledge of the Programme management cycle with emphasis on procurement
planning, budgeting and reporting.
High level of computer literacy.
Good oral and written communication skills and fluency in written and spoken English.
Ability to work as a team member.
Financial Management Advisor (FMA)
1.
The FMA will be engaged for a total period of six working months including 3, 2 and 1
months respectively in years 1-3 of the Programme. The function of the FMA will be to support the
Programme management team in establishing and operationalising financial management systems, as
indicated in Working Paper 8 (Procurement and Financial Management) and the draft Programme
Implementation Manual (PIM) provided in Working Paper 11.
2.
The FMA will act as advisor to the MOAIWD Director of Finance (DOF) on all aspects
related to financial management of the Programme with particular emphasis on the smooth flow and
proper accounting use of funds, personnel, equipment, supplies and external services. Specific duties
will include:












Ensure that administrative and financing directives and guidelines of the ASWAp EMC
are reflected in all Programme activities.
Assist with establishment of the financial and administrative policies, systems, formats
and procedures, including those for service contracting, budgeting and accounts and
audit.
Assist in developing the liaison function at the national, operational, District and
downstream local government and community levels, vis a vis financial management and
control.
Advise on oversight and regulatory/financial supervision of a representative sample of
Programme contracts including contracts with private service providers, NGOs and
farmer groups.
Advise on procedures for conducting and monitoring all audits and reviews, and
preparing the necessary reports.
Conduct training and orientation sessions for implementing agencies, organisations,
officials, farmer organisation etc., - particularly with respect to budgeting, financial
management and operating and maintenance issues.
Advise on establishing the financial and administrative policies, systems, formats and
procedures, including those for service contracting, budgeting and accounts and audit.
Establish protocols for use of the designated and operational accounts in accordance with
IFAD procedures.
Provide training in preparation of routine and ad-hoc financial reviews and reports as
needed, including six-monthly reports to the ASWAp Secretariat.
Ensure the availability and smooth flow of Programme funds, resources and supplies.
Contribute to the preparation and periodic up-dating of the PIM and financial
management manuals.
Ensure that the Programme’s financial procedures as detailed in the PIM and financial
management manuals are strictly adhered to by all Programme staff and implementing
agencies.
19
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 5








Assist the DOF and ADD/District level accounting staff in facilitating the timely
disbursement of project funds to the various accounting units.
Assist and train MOAIWD staff in compiling SOEs for districts, headquarters and other
implementing agencies for submission to the Ministry of Finance and IFAD.
Liaising with the District Accountants from the Programme districts and MOAIWD in
preparation and consolidation of AWPBs.
Provide training for MOAIWD accounting staff in the preparation of financial reports as
specified in the Financing Agreement.
Advise the DOF, the Programme management team, and the Programme Steering
Committee (ASWAp EMC) on the Programme’s financial status and trends.
Ensure adherence to Government of Malawi’s financial practices and circulars as issued
from time to time.
Facilitate and ensure that external auditors are availed all necessary documents during the
audit as detailed in the Financing Agreement.
Undertake other duties as requested by the ASWAp Coordinator and/or Deputy
Coordinators.
Qualifications and Experience







Degree in commerce or accounting from a recognised university and CPA Examination
Part II.
At least eight years professional experience in managing or advising on the financial
aspects of donor-funded projects.
Strong working knowledge of GOM accounting and financial management procedures.
Good knowledge of the Programme management cycle with emphasis on budgeting and
financial reporting.
High level of computer literacy including the use of standard accounting software
packages.
Good oral and written communication skills and fluency in written and spoken English.
Ability to work as a team member.
Monitoring and Evaluation Advisor (M&EA)
1.
The M&EA will be engaged for a total period of 11 working months including 2, 3, 3, 2 and 1
month respectively in years 1-5 of the Programme. The M&EA will be engaged through the
Programme Preparatory Facility (PPF) in the first year, and under standard consultancy arrangements
thereafter. The function of the M&EA will be to support the Programme management team in
establishing and operationalising the M&E system, as indicated in Working Paper 6 (Planning, M&E
and Knowledge Management) and the draft Programme Implementation Manual (PIM) provided in
Working Paper 11.
2.
The M&EA will act as advisor to the Programme M&E Officer on all aspects related to the
establishment and operation of a sound M&E system in line with the Programme’s objectives and
approach. Specific duties will include:






Advise on the detailed design of the Programme M&E system and its incorporation in
the PIM. Initial inputs in the first six months will be under the PPF grant.
In collaboration with all contractors/implementers, assist in elaborating a detailed
implementation logframe for the Programme as the basis for the participatory monitoring
systems.
Establish the timing and agendas for participatory monitoring workshops, including
arrangements for ensuring representation of all participants, the target group and women.
Assist service providers in setting up and using the M&E system.
Prepare the framework for benefit monitoring and impact evaluation, based largely on
the participatory monitoring process.
Design the necessary surveys, studies and enquiries to be undertaken; and advise on the
contracting and supervision of technical assistance and consulting inputs required.
20
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 5






Assist preparation of regular monitoring reports to the ASWAp Secretariat and IFAD
highlighting areas of concern and prepare the documentation for review at management
meetings.
Advise on and provide training to support the compiling and distributing the
Programme’s periodic progress reports.
Assist in organising and facilitating the Annual Review Workshops, AWPB Workshops,
supervision missions and other technical backstopping missions.
Undertake an assessment of M&E staff training requirements and conduct short training
courses.
Liaise with the ASWAp Secretariat and executing agencies and providing technical
backstopping in the multidisciplinary M&E process.
Ensure proper M&E on gender and poverty including:
–
–
–
–
–
–

integrate a range of gender-disaggregated and poverty performance indicators into
the logframe and the participatory monitoring system;
ensure that the design of the benefit M&E system (including the baseline survey)
includes poverty and gender perspectives;
ensure a fair representation of women and the poorer participants at participatory
monitoring workshops;
ensure that specifications for internal monitoring with service providers includes the
collection of selected poverty and gender indicators;
analyse the poverty and gender data, particularly with regard to assessing targeting
effectiveness and initiate mechanisms for improving beneficiary outreach if
necessary; and
ensure monitoring reports reflect gender-disaggregated data where appropriate.
Undertake other duties as requested by the ASWAp Coordinator and/or Deputy
Coordinators.
Qualifications and Experience








Degree in relevant Social Science or Economics from a recognised university. A postgraduate qualification in M&E would be an advantage.
At least eight years professional experience in the design and operation of M&E systems
for donor-funded projects in agriculture and rural development.
Significant training and experience in data analysis and operating relevant statistical
computer programmes.
Working knowledge of GOM and ASWAp M&E policies and procedures.
Good knowledge of the Programme management cycle with emphasis on performance
indicators, M&E and reporting.
High level of computer literacy including the use of M&E software packages.
Good oral and written communication skills and fluency in written and spoken English.
Ability to work as a team member.
Knowledge Management and Communication Advisor (KM&CA)
1.
The KM&CA will be engaged for a total period of six working months including 2, 2, 1 and 1
months respectively in years 1-4 of the Programme. The KM&CA will be engaged through the PPF in
the first year, and under standard consultancy arrangements thereafter. The function of the KM&CA
will be to support the Programme management team in establishing and operationalising the
Knowledge Management and Communication system, as indicated in Working Paper 6 (Planning,
M&E and Knowledge Management) and the draft Programme Implementation Manual (PIM)
provided in Working Paper 11.
2.
The KM&CA will act as advisor to the Programme Knowledge Management and
Communication Officer on all aspects related to the establishment and operation of a sound
knowledge management system in line with the Programme’s objectives and approach. The Advisor
21
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 5
will support the integration of knowledge management in Programme management, strengthen the
linkages between KM and the M&E system, and support the design and implementation of KM and
communication strategies at programme level. Specific duties will include:












Support the development of a KM and communication strategy during the PPF phase
according to Programme needs and priorities and integrate the strategy with the overall
ASWAp KM and communications agenda.
Advise on the development, implementation, evaluation and continual improvement of
KM and communication in the Programme and the ASWAp in general.
Develop an annual knowledge management and communications implementation plan
and budget.
Work with the IFADAfrica coordinator, as well as with the RLEEP KM initiative to
design and implement a training programme for Programme staff and partners, as
required, on KM and communication approaches, methods and tools.
Ensure liaison with the management of different executing agencies for effective
linkages and information exchange.
Ensure that systematic learning and knowledge sharing are fully embedded in the
Programme to ensure upscaling of successfully tested innovations.
Support the production of reports and thematic case studies, and elaborate lessons
learned and stories about successes emerging from the Programme.
Provide advice and support on how to build knowledge management and communication
into the design of new projects and programmes under the ASWAp umbrella.
Develop and conduct training for Programme staff and partners, as required, on KM and
communication approaches, methods and tools.
Assist in developing campaigns and information materials to support awareness raising
and sensitisation of key stakeholders.
Draft a media strategy to raise awareness good agricultural practices in Malawi.
Undertake other duties as requested by the ASWAp Coordinator and/or Deputy
Coordinators.
Qualifications and Experience








Degree in communications, journalism or a related discipline from a recognised
university. A post-graduate qualification in agriculture or rural development would be an
advantage.
At least five years professional experience in the design and operation of KM and
communication systems for projects in agriculture and rural development.
Experience in designing and implementing successful communication and knowledge
management strategies for sustainable development.
Experience in, or solid understanding of, use of modern information and communication
technology (ICT) in development.
Experience in rural development project management and implementation, in particular a
good basic knowledge of project M&E systems.
High level of computer literacy including the use of M&E software packages.
Good oral and written communication skills and fluency in written and spoken English.
Ability to work as a team member.
22
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 6
Annex 6: Planning, M&E and Knowledge Management
A.
Planning
1.
SAPP’s annual planning and implementation cycle will form part of the ASWAp
implementation framework (see Attachment 2, Working Paper 7). ASWAp’s planning, budgeting
and monitoring is aligned with GOM’s main cycle. The fiscal year goes from July to June while
budget preparation extends from January to May. Budget ceilings are issued anytime between
February and May before the budget goes to Parliament for approval in late June. The budget
implementation report is sent at the same time as the next budget.
2.
Planning preparation starts at district level in January of the year preceding
implementation. Districts have until March to finalise their activities and budget based on annual
targets of selected output indicators from the ASWAp-SP results framework. The ADD provides
backstopping support to districts at least in the initial stages. The districts receive individual budget
ceilings previously agreed by the ASWAp EMC, on proposals from the MOF. The Annual Work plan
and Budget (AWPB) is revised and sent to the District Commissioner and ADD by early April. The
ADD consolidates the AWPBs from the districts under its control and sends the consolidated version
to the Planning Department of MOAIWD between March and April.
3.
By Mid-May, the Planning Department consolidates the AWPB for the Ministry. The
ASWAp secretariat inserts the budget elements from the other implementing ministries (MOIT,
MLGRD, MOIWD, Department of Climate Change and Meteorological Services and other key
implementers) and finalise the overall AWPB for the ASWAp. This is endorsed by the EMC before
being sent to the MOF for inclusion in the National budget in June.
4.
All cost centres receive funds according to the treasury plan and start implementing
activities and spending their budget. All districts report at least on a quarterly basis both on the use of
funds and implementation of activities to the District Council (DC) and the ADD. These compile a
report and submit it to Planning and the Finance departments at MOAIWD Headquarters.
5.
An annual implementation report is prepared within 60 days of the end of the fiscal year.
This report is based on the planning for the previous year and explains which targets have been met,
which ones have not and why. This report forms the basis for an Annual ASWAp Review (coinciding
with the Partnership Forum) in September that makes a performance assessment of the Ministries and
the ASWAp during the previous year. The report also contains financial and budget execution
information. The Agriculture sector review then feeds into the MGDS review mechanism.
6.
An external audit is launched shortly after accounts are closed in July. It is expected that this
external audit will be ready by November. Based on the outcome of the Annual review and on the
Audit report, donors will make their commitments for the following year. This, along with GOM
commitments and the amounts foreseen in the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework, forms the
basis for calculating budget ceilings for the following fiscal year.
B.
Monitoring and Evaluation
7.
Malawi has a National M&E Master Plan which outlines the main framework for
monitoring economic and social development policies and programmes in the country. It presents a
detailed and sequenced action plan that can be used to monitor and evaluate inputs, outputs, outcomes
and impacts. The M&E Division of MDPC acts as the Secretariat for the national development
monitoring system. The Secretariat coordinates all outcome and impact monitoring activities across
all sectors.
8.
MOAIWD has an M&E system managed by the M&E Unit of the Agriculture Planning
Services Department. The Unit is tasked to monitor and evaluate all projects in MOAIWD and is
therefore also responsible for monitoring and evaluating all projects and programmes under the
ASWAp framework. The Unit has positions for M&E officers at national level as well as at ADD and
District levels. However, there is a high vacancy rate in the Unit especially at field level and the M&E
1
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 6
system is not functioning efficiently. The system is not tracking the details of the ASWAp-SP
performance consistently. The Ministry’s database is incomplete. It appears that the process of
collating data and assuring records is not efficient. Furthermore, the results generated from the
monitoring process are not regularly reported to the Programme Management Working Group.
9.
M&E will be undertaken at different levels to support effective implementation,
maintain the Programme’s focus and direction, and provide information for addressing constraints and
ensuring delivery of outputs. IFAD will undertake periodic monitoring, evaluation and
supervision/implementation support at least twice per year to assess the status of Programme
implementation and evaluate Programme direction. It will also provide technical assistance to support
implementation and undertake a Mid-Term Review during Year 5. The strategy will be to establish an
iterative process for identifying issues and problems to ensure that the Programme focus is maintained
and expected outputs are achieved. MOAIWD will assign an M&E Specialist from the Planning
Department on a full-time basis who will have direct responsibility for monitoring and evaluating the
administrative, financial, technical, socioeconomic and environmental elements of the Programme.
IFAD’s RIMS system will be integrated into the M&E system, which will itself be embedded in the
ASWAp M&E systems. Participatory evaluations will be conducted annually at the village level.
Likewise, specific M&E indicators will be identified in a participatory manner at the national, district,
sub-district and village levels. As a starting point, a baseline survey will be undertaken to benchmark
the existing situation.
10.
M&E systems will be established to meet the information needs of Programme
management, Government, IFAD and other stakeholders. Programme-specific monitoring will be
built around the logical framework at activity level and will assess the delivery of the Programme
outputs. Output indicators have been defined in the logical framework and will be reviewed and
finalised during Programme start-up.
11.
Specialised studies will be commissioned to evaluate the extent to which the Programme
purpose and overall goal are being achieved. Indicators selected from the RIMS, as well as general
and sector-specific indicators have been integrated in the logical framework. Quantitative impact
assessment should be carried out before the Mid-Term Review and as part of the Programme
completion process. Quantitative targets have been included at all levels in the logical framework.
Qualitative analysis will also be conducted from the end of the second year to assess whether
activities are likely to lead to the desired higher-level results. This will include analysis of the extent
to which smaller and poorer farmers have been able to improve their productivity levels and will
consider the benefits that have been delivered to women and youth from a quantitative point of view,
by using gender-disaggregated indicators; and from a qualitative perspective, by case studies on
women and youth beneficiaries.
12.
M&E will be coordinated by the MOAIWD Department of Agricultural Planning
Services (DAPS). DAPS will facilitate the M&E function of SAPP as part of its responsibilities for
M&E of the ASWAp by developing appropriate tools and procedures; by strengthening the M&E
capacity of implementing partners; by recruiting specialists for impact assessment and other
specialised studies; and by consolidating and analysing the data. The M&E findings will be
summarised in quarterly and annual progress reports. The accuracy of monitoring data in particular
will be verified through regular field visits. SAPP will also contribute to strengthening MOAIWD’s
M&E capacity.
13.
The summary indicative M&E/KM framework presented in Attachment 3 of Working
Paper 6 provides guidance on what is required to ensure that the existing M&E system in MOAIWD
is comprehensive enough to provide the necessary information to monitor and evaluate management
of the SAPP Programme. In addition, the system should be consistent with the National M&E Master
Plan.
C.
Knowledge Management
2
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 6
14.
Knowledge management is an important element of SAPP in that the Programme will
develop, refine and disseminate GAPs, which are suited to the conditions of Malawi, and are
markedly different from current practices. The Programme will support a major learning process to
change practices and raise awareness of more efficient and sustainable approaches to farming. The
design of SAPP recognises the knowledge-intensive nature of the technology development and
adoption process and has a number of activities to facilitate the process including: (i) testing,
evaluating and demonstrating improved farming approaches; (ii) on-farm adaptive trials and
demonstrations; (iii) technical training and study tours; (v) support for farmer-to-farmer learning; and
(vi) closer two-way communication between research and extension.
15.
The main purpose of knowledge management processes within SAPP is to ensure that
knowledge generated within the Programme is systematically identified, analysed, documented and
shared. This systematic approach will enable the Programme to be flexible and responsive to changing
circumstances. This knowledge will contribute to the evolution of key incentives, instruments,
services and institutions that comprise the agricultural and rural policy framework. It will also be used
to support capacity building and institutional strengthening activities of a range of stakeholders
including service providers, farmer organisations and government departments. In addition, KM
processes in SAPP will ensure that appropriate lessons learned and good practices from other parts of
the region and the world are gathered and disseminated within Malawi.
16.
The Programme’s emphasis on the development, refinement and dissemination of GAPs calls
for knowledge and learning intensive approach to be mainstreamed in all components and subcomponents. The Programme will therefore support capacity building for systematic KM and
communication in MOAIWD in general, within the participating ADDs and Districts, and in relevant
stakeholder institutions.
17.
A comprehensive KM and communication strategy will be anchored on the MOAIWD
M&E system and will be consistent with the information and knowledge diffusion strategy that is
embedded in the ASWAp. A Programme KM Officer (currently the position of Principal Economist
in the M&E Section, Planning Department of MOAIWD) will work closely with the MOAIWD
participating departments to ensure linkages and coordination with the sector’s broader
communication and KM support activities at all levels: headquarters, ADDs, and Districts.
18.
The Programme will therefore support capacity building for systematic knowledge
management and communication in MOAIWD in general, and within the participating ADDs and
Districts, and in relevant stakeholder institutions. The principal activities to be undertaken will
include: (i) preparation of a knowledge management and communication strategy anchored on the
existing MOAIWD M&E system; (ii) provision of resources to harvest, store, process and disseminate
information to the people and organisations that need it; and (iii) development of knowledge sharing
and learning partnerships incorporating action learning approaches, training at various levels,
establishment of communities of practice, and systematic documentation and knowledge
dissemination processes.
3
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 7
Annex 7: Financial Management And Disbursements
A.
Overview of the SAPP Accounting Cycle
1.
The Programme will be managed within the ASWAp framework with overall responsibility
assigned to MOAIWD. The IFAD support will be “earmarked” but will not be pooled funding. Under
this arrangement, the SAPP accounting cycle will be straightforward including five inter-dependent
steps as shown in the chart below and elaborated in Working Paper 8:
1. AWPB preparation
2. Committing Funds
DCs prepare AWPBs. Approved
by ADDs and ASWAp Secretariat.
Procurement Unit of MOAFS to
take charge of procurement.
AWPB and 18 month
procurement plan subject to "no
objection" by IFAD
SAPP to assign Contracts Officer
located in Procurement Unit
5. SAPP Financial and
Audit Reports
3. Disbursements
4. Designated Account
SAPP Designated Bank and Operational
Accounts to be managed by DOF,
MOAFS. DCs to channel payment
requisitions to DOF to make
disbursements. Justification
Accountants to be assigned to DOF
IFAD will advance an initial deposit.
Designated Account to be replenished
through submission of withdrawal
applications to IFAD. Processing of WAs
will be managed by Justification
Accountants in DOF Office
B.
Annual Workplan And Budget
2.
In the ASWAp framework, there will be an ASWAp-wide budget. The ASWAp budget will
evolve from an aggregation of all activities under different funding sources. Therefore it will be
possible to prepare SAPP specific AWPB. The SAPP AWPB will be put together in a format
described in the IFAD guidelines for AWPBs by the District Councils (DCs) and their respective
ADDs working closely with implementing partners - NGOs and Government Institutions.
3.
The ASWAp secretariat will clear the SAPP draft AWPB for each Programme Year. Each
AWPB shall include, among other things, a detailed description of planned Programme activities by
sub-component during the coming year, a procurement plan for eighteen months and the sources and
uses of funds, based on the respective work plans and budgets prepared by each of the Programme
Parties. After ASWAp secretariat approval of the AWPB, the draft AWPB will be submitted to IFAD
for its comments and acceptance, no later than 60 days before the beginning of the Programme Year.
If IFAD does not comment on the draft AWPB within 30 days of receipt, the AWPB shall be deemed
accepted. If required, the ASWAp secretariat may request adjustments in the AWPB during the
Programme Year, which shall become effective upon acceptance by IFAD.
4.
No withdrawal shall be made from the Loan and Grant Accounts until the AWPB has
been approved. In order to be able to submit the AWPB to IFAD within 60 days before the beginning
of the Programme-year, the AWPB planning calendar shown in Working Paper 8 should be followed.
It should be reviewed and modified as may be necessary in consultation with the MOAIWD, ADDs,
participating DCs, and other key stakeholders.
1
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 7
C.
Disbursements and Replenishments
5.
As SAPP will be financed through the ASWAp “earmarked” funding mechanism its funds
cannot be comingled with other funds. While endeavouring to minimise the number of bank
accounts to be opened in line with Government policy, the following bank accounts will be required:



Specific Designated Account in USD at the Reserve Bank of Malawi.
Operational Account to be managed by Director of Finance (DOF), MOAIWD with
support of SAPP justification accountants.
Parastatals and NGOs as service providers/partners will be required to open specific
SAPP operational bank accounts; and to demonstrate and document in the MOUs
measures put in place to ring-fence SAPP funds for only SAPP activities.
6.
The DCs will work through their respective ADDs and therefore they do not have to openbank accounts as under the existing ASWAp arrangements. ADDs will also not open any SAPP bank
accounts. A centralised payments system from the operational account to be managed by the DOF
will be followed. Activity-specific advances may be made to the DAs; to be liquidated immediately
after the activity is implemented. Such transfers may therefore be deposited in the District
Development Fund (DDF) bank accounts; however for all SAPP accounting such transfers will be
accounted for as advances and not as bank balances.
7.
In addition to using the designated account, other disbursement methods such as the use of
direct payments from IFAD, reimbursement procedure, and special commitment will be available.
These will be explained in the Letter to the Borrower/Recipient and the disbursements handbook. The
funds flow will therefore be straight forward as shown in Appendix 1.
8.
Accounting for Advances to the Districts and others: Advances tagged to fully costed
activities may be given to the DCs or staff or partners on condition that such advances must be
liquidated within a week after completion of the activity for which the advance was given. Such
advances will not be expensed and will not be replenished for at the point of transfer; until acceptable
accountability has been submitted. At the point of making the advance: Debit: Ledger Account of
advance taker; Credit Bank. After the advance taker has been able to justify the expenditure: DebitExpense account; Credit the advance taker ledger account.
9.
Direct payments from IFAD or GOM or beneficiaries have to be posted in the accounting
system because they are just like any other payment. Within the accounting package, no bank account
would be affected and so the information should be posted in the accounting package using a journal
voucher. There is a risk that some direct payments may not be recorded because the non-recording
would not be detectable through bank reconciliations as no bank accounts would be affected. To
counter this risk, it is important that the data in the accounting package be reconciled at least on a
quarterly basis to the disbursements statements issued by IFAD.
D.
Expenditure Categories
10. Working through a number of NGOs/implementing partners/DCs could make it
cumbersome having to sort their expenditure returns by category and by component in a situation
where there is no PIU. In an environment where earmarked funding has to be disbursed through
ASWAp, it is important to have inbuilt flexibility in the set-up of expenditure categories. Such
flexibility can be achieved through having fewer but”implementation-smart” expenditure categories.
The ideal is to be able to link each key implementing partner to only one expenditure category. The
SAPP Justification Accountants would find it easier to prepare withdrawal applications and financial
statements once s/he has established the understanding such as: partner X corresponds to category A.
With such a matching, the absence of a PMU will not be felt much in terms of preparation of
statements of expenditure (SOEs) and Financial Statements.
11.
Under SAPP the structure of expenditure categories should mirror the kinds of implementation
partners; such that it is possible to associate an implementation partner with a single expenditure
2
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 7
category. Against the foregoing, the SAPP expenditure categories will appear in Schedule 2 to the
financing agreement as follows:
Category
1
2
Investment Costs
Vehicles, Motorcycles and Equipment
Technical Assistance, Trainings, workshops and Studies
3A
Support for Adaptive Research
3B
Support for Knowledge Management and Communication
3C
Support for Improved Agricultural Extension
3D
Support for Access to Key Agricultural Inputs
4
Recurrent Costs
Salaries and Allowances
5
Incremental Operating Costs
E.
Financial Reporting and Auditing
12. Being earmarked funding further implies that a complete set of Financial Statements specific
to SAPP will have to be prepared. Such financial statements will be shared with IFAD on a sixmonthly basis. The financial statements based on International Public Sector Accounting Standards
(IPSAS) cash basis will disclose analysis of receipts and payments by SAPP components, by SAPP
expenditure categories, and by financiers among other dimensions. The Government financial
management system (IFMIS) cannot be used to generate such detailed financial statements. This is
because the Government chart cannot be over-stretched to sort information by category, by
component, by financier etc.
13. For in-country disbursement management SAPP could be rolled into IFMIS; but this would
imply that the operations accounts be managed by the Accountant General. However, IFMIS cannot
be expected to generate a complete set of SAPP financial statements. In order to generate SAPP
financial statements acceptable to IFAD, off-IFMS analysis will be necessary. This makes it necessary
to make budgetary provision for simple off-the-shelf accounting package; and for two Justification
Accountants to support the DAs, ADDs and the DOF in this task. The SAPP Justification Accountants
will use such a package to prepare (off- IFMIS) a complete set of financial statements and withdrawal
applications. However, it should be noted that the financial statements under IPSAS cash basis as
adopted in Malawi and acceptable to IFAD are rather straight forward requiring an account of funds
received, and how these were spent by category and by component. The format that can be used in
preparing both progress and annual audited financial statements is presented in Attachment 2,
Working Paper 8.
14. The Government shall have the financial statements relating to SAPP audited each Fiscal
Year by such auditors in accordance with the International Standards on Auditing and the Fund’s
“Guidelines on Programme Audits (for Borrowers’ Use)”, as may be amended from time to time. In
addition to the audit report on the financial statements, the auditors shall provide: (i) an opinion on the
certified statements of expenditure and the operation of the Designated Account; and (ii) a separate
management letter, addressing the adequacy of the accounting and internal control systems. The
Government shall deliver the above-mentioned items to the Fund within six months of the end of each
such Fiscal Year. The Government shall submit to IFAD the reply to the management letter of the
auditors within one month of receipt thereof.
15. The Government shall ensure that in addition to the audit reports on the financial statements,
the auditors shall provide: (i) an opinion on the certified statements of expenditure and the
operation of the Designated Account; and (ii)a separate management letter addressing the adequacy of
accounting and internal control systems.
3
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 7
Appendix 1: SAPP Funds Flow Chart
Counterpart FundsAccountant General
IFAD
2
1
USD Designated
A/C, Reserve Bank
4
3
6
Through holding A/C
MOAFS Managed
Operational Bank
5
Districts, Beneficiaries, Contractors/ Service Providers, Suppliers, Consultants
3.
16. Transfers to the districts will be activity tagged; to be justified on activity basis after the activity
has been completed. Districts will be able to have transfers for more than one activity at a time. An
explanation of each of the lines of the above Flow of Funds Chart, together with the double-entry
accounts posting that should be passed at each stage is presented in the table below:
4.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Flow Description
Direct payments from IFAD to service
providers, contractors, etc.
Initial deposit into the Designated
Account and subsequent
replenishments.
Payments in foreign currency for goods
supplied, works executed and services
rendered.
Transfer from Designated Account into
Operations Account through a holding
account.
Payments of IFAD portion of local
costs.
GOM Counterpart Funds.
Bookkeeping Strategy
Debit: Expense account per chart of accounts depending
on the category and component of the expense.
Credit: IFAD direct payments.
Debit: Bank.
Credit: Initial Deposit.
Debit: Expense account per chart of accounts depending
on the category and component of the expense.
Credit: Bank.
Inter-bank contra entries.
Debit: Expense account per chart of accounts depending
on the category and component of the expense.
Credit: Bank.
Debit: Expense account per chart of accounts depending
on the category and component of the expense.
Credit: GOM counterpart Contribution.
5.
17. Financial Management capacity of MOAIWD was reviewed by the World Bank as part of its
October 2010 ADP-SP supervision mission. The SAPP design mission has confirmed the following
areas for improvement:
a) IFMIS is unable to facilitate the generation of project financial statements by component and
by category, thus under SAPP a simple off the shelf accounting package will be installed.
4
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 7
b) Filing system is weak. Thus under SAPP the MOAIWD will be supported with an accounts
assistant to ensure a good filing system.
c) Payment periods continue to take longer than the normally expected 48 hours. The
Ministry pledged to continue to make follow ups with the relevant authorities at
Ministry of Finance in order to address this challenge.
d) At the DC levels, the financial management capacity is weak. Under SAPP, only activity
tagged advances will be sent to the districts to be liquidated on activity by activity basis once
the activity has been implemented.
5
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 7
Appendix 2: Draft TOR for Auditors
The accounting period to be covered by the audit is 1 July 20xx to 30 June 20xx.
Objective and scope of the audit
1.
To enable the auditors to express their professional opinion(s) on the financial position of the
SAPP at the end of the period covered by the audit, on the funds received and on the expenditures
incurred.
2.
The audit will be carried out in accordance with International Standards on Auditing (ISA).
The auditors are to comment on the accounting principles used for the preparation of the financial
statements and to confirm if they were consistently applied. Special attention will be placed on
whether:






IFAD and counterpart funds, have been used in accordance with the financing
agreement(s) with due attention to economy, efficiency, and only for the purposes for
which financing was provided.
Goods and services have been procured in accordance with the Financing Agreement(s).
All supporting documentation, records and accounts have been maintained in respect of
all programme activities, (including the expenditures by SOEs).
The Designated Account has been used and maintained in conformity with the Financing
Agreement (s).
Assets procured from programme funds exist, are properly safeguarded and there is a
verifiable ownership by the implementing agency or beneficiaries in line with the
Financing Agreement(s).
National laws have been complied with and that the financial and accounting procedures
approved for the programme (i.e. PIM) were followed and used.
3.
In complying with the International Standards on Auditing, the auditors are expected to pay
attention to: Fraud and Corruption (ISA 240), Laws and Regulations (ISA 250), Governance (ISA
260) and Risks (ISA 330).
Programme Financial Statements (PFSs)
4.
The auditors should verify that the programme financial statements (PFSs) have been
prepared in accordance with the International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) - Cash
Basis and give a true and fair view of the financial position of the programme and of the resources and
expenditures for the audited period.
The PFS should include:
a) A statement of funds received and of expenditures incurred disclosing separately IFAD’s
funds, counterpart funds (government), and beneficiaries’ contributions.
b) Expenditure analysis and trends by component as well as by category each analysed by
financier with a budget vs actual variance analysis.
c) A summary of the activities of the Designated Account.
d) A Balance Sheet showing accumulated funds of the programme, bank balances, as
limited under IPSAS cash basis, reconciling these with the surplus presented in the
receipt and expenditure of funds under b) above.
e) A schedule listing individual Withdrawal Applications submitted during the year under
audit with a reconciliation with IFAD records.
f) A statement of the accounting policies and other explanatory notes to the financial
statement and accounts.
g) A statement of Designated Account reconciliation consistent with the IFAD Letter to the
Borrower.
h) A statement of Loan and Grant disbursements reconciled with IFAD records.
i) A list of assets acquired or procured to date with programme funds.
5.
The Auditors’ opinion should confirm that the financial statements are in agreement with the
books of accounts maintained through the accounting software.
6
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 7
6.
As an annex to the PFSs, the auditors should prepare a reconciliation of the amounts shown as
received by the programme and those shown as disbursed by IFAD.
Statement of Expenditures (SOEs)
7.
In addition to the audit of the PFSs, the auditors will include a review of SOEs used as a basis
for submission of withdrawal applications to IFAD. The auditors will carry such tests and reviews as
considered necessary under the circumstances in order to verify that SOEs issued during the period
were prepared in conformity with the Financing Agreement(s), were eligible for financing and were in
agreement with the accounting books. Annexed to the PFS, should be a schedule listing individual
WAs providing details relative to amounts submitted for reimbursement and amounts reimbursed by
disbursement method (SOEs, direct payment, special commitment, reimbursement to the Designated
Account, reimbursement of pre-financed expenditures). Where ineligible expenditures are identified,
as having been included in withdrawal applications, these should be separately noted in the audit
report. Additionally the auditors should verify reimbursement of ineligible expenditures (if any) to the
Designated Account.
8.
The total withdrawals under SOE procedure should be part of the overall reconciliation with
IFAD records.
9.
The auditors will issue a separate audit opinion on the SOEs indicating the extent to which the
SOE procedure can be relied upon as basis for loan disbursements under the programme.
Designated Account (DA)
10.
The auditors are also required to audit the activities of the DAs associated with the
programme, including the Authorized Allocation or Initial Deposit, replenishments, interest that has
been earned, withdrawals related to project expenditures, transfers to the Operating account(s), and
the year-end balance.
11.
The auditors will reconcile the balance with the fund balance and with the Bank statement.
Receipts will be reconciled with IFAD disbursements.
12.
The auditors will issue a separate audit opinion on the DA indicating if the operations of the
DA were in accordance with the Financing Agreement(s).
Additional Opinions Required
13.
Additional to the opinion on the PFS, the SOEs and the DA, the following opinions will be
required: (a) Compliance with Procurement Procedures; and (b) Provision and usage of Counterpart
Funds.
Management Letter
14.
The auditors will provide a management letter in which they will:
a) Give comments and observations on the accounting records, systems and controls that
were examined during the course of the audit.
b) Identify specific deficiencies or areas of weakness in systems and controls, and make
recommendations for their improvement.
c) The auditors should check that transactions are well authorised; first through their
inclusion in AWPB that reflects IFAD’s prior authorisation and second through
approvals by the ASWAp Coordinator.
d) Report on the degree of compliance of each of the financial covenants in the Financing
Agreement(s) and give comments, if any, on internal and external matters affecting such
compliance.
e) Communicate matters that have come to their attention during the audit which might
have a significant impact on the implementation of the programme.
f) Give comments on previous audits recommendations that have not been satisfactorily
implemented.
g) Economy, efficiency and effectiveness in the use of resources.
h) Achievement of the planned results of the programme
7
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 7
i) Bring to the recipient attention any other matter that the auditors consider pertinent,
including ineligible expenditures
15.
The management letter should also include responses from the District Assemblies and
ASWAp Secretariat /Coordinator to the issues highlighted by the auditors.
Available Information
16.
The auditors will have access to all legal documents, correspondences, and any other
information associated with the programme and deemed necessary by the auditors. The auditors will
also obtain confirmation of amounts disbursed and outstanding at IFAD (to be facilitated by IFAD if
necessary). Available information will include copies of the relevant programme design reports,
Financing Agreement(s), supervision mission reports and progress reports. It is highly desirable that
the auditors become familiar with “IFAD Operational Procedures for Project Audits”, with “IFAD
Guidelines for Project Audits”, and with the “IFAD Loan and Grant Administration Manual” as may
be amended from time to time.
17.
.
8
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 8
Annex 8: Procurement
A. The 18 Month Procurement Plan
A Procurement Plan covering 18-months must be prepared each time a new AWPB is
prepared. The reason why the Procurement Plan is to be prepared for 18 months whereas the AWPB
spans 12 months is to be able to initiate the procurement process for the activities needed in the first
months after the expiry of the 12-months AWPB. The procurement thresholds to guide the appropriate
procurement methods for World Bank limits under the ASWAp-SP – are given in the below table:
1.
Goods
Service
s
Threshold
MWK
USD’000
million
Up to 7.5
Up to 50
7.5-37.5
50-250
>37.5
>250
Up to 7.5
Up to 50
>7.5
Up to 7.5
7.5-75
>75
Works
>50
Up to 50
50-500
>500
Procurement Method
Request for Quotation (RFQ) using Govt approved list
National Competitive Bidding (NCB)
International Competitive Bidding (ICB)
Least Cost Selection (LCS) - Other methods such as Fixed
Budget (FBS) and Quality Based Selection (QBS) may be used
depending on the assignment.
QCBS
RFQ
NCB
ICB
The Draft IFAD Procurement handbook has recommended the following thresholds and these
are what will be used under SAPP as maybe amended from time to time by IFAD:
a) The threshold for ICB which the IFAD draft procurement Handbook recommends is as
follows:
2.
Category Contract Value
Goods- above USD 200,000
Civil works- above USD 1,000,000
Services- above USD 100,000
b) IFAD’s Prior Review thresholds: The Fund’s No Objection will be required at critical stages
of the Procurement processes above the following thresholds:
Category Estimated Contract Value
Goods and Works- above USD 200,000
Services- above USD 100,000
The SAPP Contract Officer, who will report to the Procurement Unit of MOAIWD, will
work through the AWPB to determine the best contract packaging possible, including consideration of
what lots can be put together in a package for which it is possible to find a supplier or bulking
opportunities. The Procurement Unit of MOAIWD will refine the Procurement Plan and submit it to
ODPP for information. It is important to note that if Procurement Officers do not carefully work
through the procurement planning optimal contract packaging or bulking opportunities may be
missed; this will affect disbursement as there may be many small packages and payments that make
impossible to deploy optimally the available disbursement methods.
3.
The format of a proposed Procurement Plan that will be used under SAPP is given in
Appendix 1. The Procurement Plan under various columns must indicate at minimum the following:
4.


What goods, services and civil works are to be procured - arranged in optimal contract
packages in different lots.
What procurement method is to be followed?
1
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 8


Whether IFAD’s Prior review is required or not (IFAD’s prior review threshold for
Malawi is currently USD 20,000 for both goods and services, to be reviewed during the
course of programme implementation).
Timelines showing milestones when the key stages of the procurement cycle will be
achieved.
B.
Assessment of National Procurement Systems
IFAD’s revised General Conditions for Agricultural Development Financing (April 2009)
adopt a new approach to procurement that is financed by IFAD loans and grants, stating that:
“Procurement of goods, works and services financed by IFAD shall be carried out in accordance with
the provisions of the Borrower/Recipient’s procurement regulations, to the extent such are consistent
with the IFAD Procurement Guidelines. Each Procurement Plan shall identify procedures which must
be implemented by the Borrower/Recipient in order to ensure consistency with the IFAD Procurement
Guidelines.” In adopting this approach, IFAD is following the principles set out in the Paris
Declaration on Aid Effectiveness and the Accra Agenda for Action in respect of the use of existing
national procurement systems. However, the use of a borrower’s/recipient’s regulations for
procurement will always be subject to verification by IFAD. The SAPP design mission has complied
with the IFAD draft procurement handbook which has set a two tiered approach to the review, by
IFAD, of a Borrower/Recipient’s procurement systems as follows:
5.

Stage 1: Overarching country assessment: This is to provide a high level assessment of the
status of the overall legislative and regulatory framework, and national structure for public
procurement.

Stage 2: Project specific assessment: During project design stage, IFAD will undertake a
more comprehensive assessment of the degree of practical implementation of the regulatory
framework; and the procurement capacity of agency designated to undertake the project
procurement.
The SAPP design mission has obtained publicly available review of Malawi National
Procurement systems by OECD; this is included in the project life file. The key points in the OECD
assessment are that the Malawi legislative and regulatory framework is robust enough. The
applicable law and regulations are contained in: (i) the Public Procurement Act of 2003; (ii) the
Procurement Regulations of 2005; and (iii) Desk Instructions for Public Procurement.
6.
The Public Procurement Act of 2003 introduced a new legal framework governing public
procurement in Malawi. The framework provided for the establishment of the ODPP, which, since
becoming operational in 2004, has taken the lead on public procurement reform. Among the changes
to the procurement system introduced by ODPP was the complete decentralisation of the procurement
process to the level of each public entity. There was also a concerted effort to raise awareness of the
newly established framework among public sector officials, the private sector, civil society and the
general population.
7.
The legal and regulatory framework provides a sound legal framework for efficient public
procurement. The Public Procurement Act and Regulations adequately establish the institutional
framework required to support public procurement, the stages of the procurement process, the main
methods of procurement and their conditions for use, and the conditions for review and auditing.
Moreover, the Desk Instructions serve as a manual for procuring entities providing easy and
simplified explanations and guidance. Finally, a comprehensive set of Standard Bidding Documents
(SBDs) for a wide range of goods, works, and services has been issued to assist the procuring entities
in the procurement process. The legal and regulatory framework in place thus represents a key asset in
the development of sound and efficient procurement.
8.
Despite these overall encouraging trends, a recent country procurement assessment by ODPP
with UNDP support has found a number of issues that still need to be addressed to ensure that
9.
2
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 8
procurement processes are in practice fully compliant with the legislative and regulatory framework.
These include:






few procuring entities use the SBDs;
many procuring entities do not have a copy of the Regulations and Desk Instructions;
the quality of technical specifications is often poor;
evaluation criteria are often poorly specified;
awareness of procedures for review is very limited; and
Some procuring entities have experienced political interference in the procurement
process.
C. Institutional Framework and Management Capacity
The legal framework in place provides a sound basis for the ODPP to exercise its duties.
The Public Procurement Act establishes the ODPP as the regulatory body responsible for the
administration of the Act, placed directly under the general supervision of the President. The Public
Procurement Act further sets out the functions of the ODPP, which include dissemination of the Act
and regulations, development of standardised documents for procurement, promotion of a professional
procurement workforce, data collection and monitoring at procuring entity level, administrative
review of bid protests, establishment of a data and information base, etc. Based on the framework in
place, the ODPP has embarked on carrying out substantially all the functions and responsibilities
defined by the legal framework, also serving as a key driver towards the development of an efficient
procurement system.
10.
A sustainable strategy and capacity exists to provide training, advice, and assistance to
develop the procurement capacity of government. Another major step forward has been taken in the
field of professional development where a comprehensive national training policy for the procurement
area has been developed, covering training and capacity development strategies. UNDP has provided
financial support for this capacity building over the last three years.
11.
New electronic procedures are in place to support timely procurement, contract execution,
and payment at central government level. Malawi has implemented the Integrated Financial
Management Information System (IFMIS) which provides for an electronic interface between the
financial management and procurement systems in all central ministries. Although the procurement
module of the IFMIS has not been implemented, the system in place still supports the procurement
process, e.g. by reserving funds for procurement once a Local Purchase Order is registered in the
system and authorising payments within 24 hours following request from the procuring entities. In
effect, the problem of late payments is generally reported to have lessened since the implementation
of the IFMIS system.
12.
D. Procurement Operations
The integrity and transparency of a public procurement system relies on a number of
control mechanisms, including an effective control and audit system, an efficient complaint
mechanism, a comprehensive information sharing system enabling civil society and interested
stakeholders to conduct social audit, and effective ethics and anti-corruption measures. Without such
control mechanisms, flaws in the procurement system may not be detected and addressed. The fourth
pillar of the assessment therefore considers the existence of adequate control systems and the
practices related to these. Based on the ODPP assessment findings, the following strengths of the
Malawian control system may be highlighted.
13.
A three-tier complaint review system has been established and is now fully operational. The
Public Procurement Act establishes clear and detailed provisions for a three-tier complaint review
system, the first level being the procuring entity, the second level being the Review Committee of the
ODPP, and finally the third level being the High Court (only judicial review) and the Supreme Court
of Appeal. The approval of the Review Committee by the President represents a major step forward in
14.
3
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 8
developing an efficient complaint review system and improving the transparency and integrity of the
public procurement system.
A comprehensive mechanism for dissemination of procurement information is in place.
The creation of a Public Relations Office within the ODPP has significantly strengthened the
mechanism for dissemination of procurement information. In addition, in August 2010, the ODPP has
directed that any contract award over MWK 45 million (USD 300,000) must be published in the
press.
15.
A sound legal framework for addressing corruption, fraud, conflict of interest, and
unethical behaviour exists. The Public Procurement Act precisely defines the terms “corrupt practice”
and “fraudulent practice” and sets out the actions that can be taken if such practices are detected.
Furthermore, the responsibilities, accountabilities, and penalties for individuals and firms found to
have engaged in fraudulent or corrupt practices are detailed. As such, the legal framework in place
constitutes an excellent framework for addressing ethics and anti-corruption issues in the field of
public procurement.
16.
The assessment by ODPP encountered a number of weaknesses related to the compliance and
performance of the established control mechanisms. The following key issues were noted: (i) auditors
lack procurement proficiency; (ii) weak enforcement of audit recommendations; (iii) internal audit
committees are not yet established; and (iv) complaint decisions are currently not being published.
17.
On project specific procurement assessments, the SAPP mission based itself on working
interactions with the procurement unit of MOAIWD and on the basis of a sample of procurements
under ADP-SP (Now ASWAP-SP) as well as the work done by the World Bank as documented in
their supervision mission reports and procurement reviews done during the appraisal of ADP-SP.
18.
The Procurement Unit of the MOAIWD will be in charge of SAPP Procurements. ODPP
has been carrying out performance of various Procurement Entities (PEs). Depending on the
assessment the ODPP has in August 2010 reclassified the PEs based on their respective performances.
MOAIWD was classified as having adequate capacity. As a result MOAIWD is authorised by ODPP
to undertake procurements of up to MWK 30 million (USD 200,000) for goods, MWK 40 million
(USD 267,000) for works and MWK 10 million (USD 67,000) for services without obtaining ODPP’s
No Objection.
19.
20.
According to the October 2010 ADP-SP World Bank supervision mission report:
a) The Ministry has attached higher importance to its procurement function by inviting the Chief
Procurement Officer to join its Management Committee. Correspondingly, for the first time
in many years, the Ministry now has an aggregate procurement plan encompassing all its
annual procurement requirements. This is an excellent step forward.
b) The speed and timeliness of procurement under this project has improved. The Ministry
completed a new procurement manual, and submitted acceptable versions of a revised
masterplan for the full 2008 to 2013 project period. This includes a detailed outline of the
procurement tasks to be completed each fiscal year.
c) The project’s procurement plan is being consistently followed. All of the 12 procurement
tasks for goods in 2009/10 were initiated by the end of the fiscal year. The majority of these
are well advanced with deliveries either completed, or near completion.
d) The mission also notes that the procurement of consultant services remains substantially
behind schedule. It has taken more than a year to complete the hiring of a number of these
positions.
e) Procurement Capacity: Progress has been made in filling key positions in the Ministry’s
procurement section. There are two externally funded Technical Assistants (TA) in the
section, one provided by ADP-SP, and the other by the United Nations Development
Programme. As a result of staffing shortages, the Technical Consultants are implementing
basic procurement services while providing in-service training.
f) There are improvements in preparing procurement documents with the support provided by
the two consultants. The Ministry acknowledges that additional training in government and
4
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 8
donor procurement guidelines and procedures will be required to further upgrade the skills of
national staff. There is low capacity in the districts which needs to be enhanced through
workshops, short courses and on the job coaching. This will be undertaken by the TAs, Office
of Director Public Procurement and selected institutions within the country. The procurement
unit has prepared a national strategic training plan for procurement to be implemented during
the current fiscal year.
g) Publication of Award of Contracts: The Ministry has published results of some awarded
contracts for prior review contracts in both the local media and dg Market. However, there is
limited evidence to indicate that the results of post review contracts are published on a
quarterly basis as required. This needs to be resolved.
In addition the SAPP design mission selected a sample of procurements packages under the
ADP-SP and assessed the following aspects
21.
PROCUREMENT PLANNING
At least for the ADP-SP, procurement plans are prepared ahead of time as a norm and seem realistic,
although the procurement of consultants’ services was taking longer than envisaged in the procurement
plan.
Contract packages (thresholds) are not in accordance with the national framework, but are aligned with the
World Bank requirements.
BIDDING DOCUMENTS
From a sample of bidding documents seen and World Bank supervision mission’s reports, MOAIWD has
capable staff for preparation of bidding documents.
With the two senior consultants doing procurement work as well, the general quality of documentation
produced by the MOAIWD is good.
Technical specifications and Terms of Reference coming from user departments are not very clear, and
usually require a lot of improvement from the procurement unit before being finalized.
There exists standard national bidding documents for goods, works and consultants and ODPP has ensured
to disseminate them. The mission found the MOAIWD had used these standard bidding documents together
with the desk instructions.
From a sample reviewed by the mission, the bidding documents contained all information necessary to
prepare responsive bids and clearly communicate the evaluation criteria.
The mission was satisfied that contractual conditions contained in the bidding documents included the
minimum requirements to ensure adequate protection for the GOM/ MOAIWD.
Standard purchase orders are used for shopping and commitments are captured in the IFMIS to encumber
funds.
PRE-QUALIFICATION
The design mission noted that pre-qualification is carried out when appropriate and pre-qualification
documents clearly and completely describe all requisites for submitting responsive applications and the
qualification requirements.
For NCB contracts, bidders are required to submit audited financial statements as basis for financial
information required, and this is analysed to assess financial capabilities to perform contracts.
ADVERTISEMENT
Contracts to be awarded by competitive bidding are publicly advertised in a national wide newspapers and
for ICB the dg market is used.
The required minimum time allowed to obtain documents and prepare bids is observed.
COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN BIDDERS AND THE PROCURING AGENCY
From procurement files, the mission was satisfied that requests for clarifications are answered and the
procurement team together with the two consultants understand well that such clarifications should be
communicated to all prospective bidders.
RECEIPT OF BIDS AND OPENING
5
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 8
The mission also noted that bids are received prior to the deadline and are securely stored in a lockable
secure tender box, public bid openings are conducted usually on the very deadline for bid submission. The
two consultants are supporting in documenting minutes at various stages.
BID EXAMINATION AND EVALUATION
The evaluations are conducted by suitably qualified permanent evaluation committees and the Malawi
Procurement regulations require seeking external evaluators for technical reviews. The consultants are
supporting the MOAIWD to ensure that responsiveness is determined on the basis of the documentary
requirements described in the documents. Bid evaluations are carried out thoroughly and on the basis of the
criteria specified in the documents. There were no indications that evaluations are not completed within the
original bid validity period. In addition, from a sample seen, bid evaluation reports are prepared containing
all essential information.
CONTRACT AWARD AND EFFECTIVENESS
Contract award decisions are in compliance with the evaluation criteria in the bidding documents.
Unsuccessful bidders are informed in writing that they have not won the contract, with some reasons for
future improvement. Conditions precedent to contract effectiveness clearly is defined in the contracts (i.e.
performance security, advance payment etc.)
CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
There is a manual contract monitoring system and IFMIS is also used to encumber funds once a contract
has been entered into and is used to monitor delivery of goods.
ORGANISATION AND FUNCTIONS
MOAIWD procurement staff had copies of the national procurement regulatory framework including the
law, regulations and desk instructions. Procurement and financial management functions separated are
separated although the DOF sometimes sit on evaluation committees.
SUPPORT AND CONTROL SYSTEMS
Independent auditing arrangements are in place and audits are undertaken although the auditors may need
procurement training.
RECORD KEEPING
The consultants are supporting to ensure that there is adequate contract administration records maintained.
STAFFING
Progress has been made in filling key positions in the MOAIWD procurement section. The only vacant
position is that of Director (The deputy director was acting Director at the time of the design mission), but
was expected to be filled soon. There are two externally funded Technical Assistants (TA) in the section,
one provided by ADP-SP, and the other by the United Nations Development Programme. As a result of
staffing shortages, the Consultants are implementing basic procurement services while providing in-service
training. These consultants have helped a lot in elevating the procurement capacity status of the MOAIWD.
During financing negotiations, IFAD will enquire on the GoM’s plans to sustain the capacity should the
contracts of these consultants not be extended.
E.
Conclusion and Way Forward
The legal and regulatory framework for procurement is satisfactory, and the MOAIWD
Procurement Unit is well staffed and is able to undertake the SAPP procurements. . The GoM during
financing negotiations should give assurances regarding its plans at the end of the contracts of the two
consultants who have elevated the procurement capacity of MOAIWD. SAPP has plans to finance a
high calibre procurement professional to further support MOAIWD. GOM procurement systems are
in accordance with IFAD requirements. Since key procurements will be done through the MOAIWD
Procurement Unit the weaknesses identified in other procurement entities especially the DCs will not
adversely affect SAPP.
22.
The National Procurement Law and Regulations will therefore govern all Programme
procurements. The only exception will be in the case of international competitive bidding, where,
regardless of the results of any assessment of national procurement regulations or procedures, the
procedures of the World Bank as set forth in its procurement guidelines will always apply as a matter
of new IFAD policy.
23.
6
Appendix 1: Draft Eighteen Month Procurement Plan
A: SERVICES (USD '000)
Preparation of Tender
Documents
Cost Table
Reference
DT. 1.1
DT. 1.1 C
DT. 1.1D
7
DT. 1.1E
DT 1.2
DT 1.2B
DT. 1.2C
DT. 1.2 D
DT 2.1
Estimated Contract
Plan Vs Actual
Sum
Procurement Method Prior Review(Y/N) Bid Doc
NO IFAD
Indicative timing of each step of the process --> 15 days
5 days
Indicative timing per main process -->
Total 15 days
Total indicative timing -->
Adaptive Research
Contracting of a CGIAR institution to underake Research Plan
Planning and Management and capacity building for
Revised
adaptive Research
Actual
Plan
Contracting of a Research Institution/ organisation to
Revised
manage on-farmTrials
Actual
Plan
Contracting of a NGOs for plant nutrition studies
intended to enhance soil fertility and promotion of GAPs Revised
on land use and enhancement of soil fertility.
Actual
Contracting of Organisation for carrying out research
activities including studies on the effectiveness of various Plan
extension approaches or methods and farmer production
of various agricultural practices, baseline studies and
Revised
monitoring of physical, biological, social and financial
impacts of the improved agricultural practices supported
by the research outcomes.
Actual
Knowledge Mangement and Communication
Contracting of NGO or private Organisation to participate Plan
in developing messages and dissemination of information
on best practices among the farming communities,
Revised
farmer groups and individual farmers
Actual
Contracting of NGO for ensuring that knowledge sharing Plan
and learning partnership practices are the core
components of the knowledge management and
Revised
communication strategy
Actual
Plan
Contracting of an organisation to develop curricula at
Revised
Bunda College and NRC.
Actual
Improved Agricultural Extension
DT. 2.1 A
Contracting of NGO partners to provide output-based
services and will place two field officers in each EPA
covered by the SAPP
DT. 2.1 C
Contracting of NGO Institutions to provide extension
services at national and district level.
Plan
Revised
Actual
Plan
Revised
Actual
Publication
5 days
Tendering Process
Closing
Response Time Date
Opening Date
12-21 days
1 day
1 day
Total 19-28 days
Grand Total 39-48 days
Technical
Evaluation
10 days
Evaluation Process
Financial
Evaluation
Evaluation
Report
5 days
5 days
Total 5 days
Final NO
IFAD
5 days
Contract Details
Notification of
award
Contract
Signature
88 QCBS
YES
m1wk1
m1wk2
m1wk3
m2wk4
m2wk4
m2wk4
m3wk3
m3wk4
m4wk1
m4wk1
m4wk2
m4wk3
138 QCBS
YES
m1wk1
m1wk2
m1wk3
m2wk4
m2wk4
m2wk4
m3wk3
m3wk4
m4wk1
m4wk1
m4wk2
m4wk3
171 QCBS
YES
m1wk2
m1wk3
m1wk4
m2wk3
m2wk4
m2wk4
m3wk2
m3wk3
m3wk4
m4wk1
m4wk1
m4wk2
62 QCBS
YES
m2wk2
m2wk3
m2wk4
m3wk3
m3wk4
m3wk4
m4wk2
m4wk3
m4wk4
m4wk4
m4wk4
m5wk1
89 QCBS
YES
m2wk2
m2wk3
m2wk4
m3wk3
m4wk1
m4wk1
m4wk2
m4wk3
m4wk4
m5wk1
m5wk1
m5wk2
89 QCBS
YES
m2wk2
m2wk3
m2wk4
m3wk3
m4wk1
m4wk1
m4wk2
m4wk3
m4wk4
m5wk1
m5wk1
m5wk2
18 Least Cost Selection
NO
m2wk3
m2wk4
m3wk1
m3wk4
m3wk 4
m3wk4
m4wk2
m4wk3
m4wk4
m5wk1
m5wk1
m5wk2
48 Least Cost Selection
YES
m2wk3
m2wk4
m3wk1
m3wk4
m3wk 4
m3wk4
m4wk2
m4wk3
m4wk4
m5wk1
m5wk1
m5wk2
48 Least Cost Selection
YES
m2wk4
m3wk1
m3wk2
m4wk1
m4wk1
m4wk1
m4wk3
m4wk4
m5wk1
m5wk2
m5wk2
m5wk2
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 8
DT. 1.1 A & B
Contract Packages
Preparation of Tender
Documents
Cost Table
Reference
Contract Packages
Estimated Contract
Plan Vs Actual
Sum
Procurement Method Prior Review(Y/N) Bid Doc
NO IFAD
Indicative timing of each step of the process --> 15 days
5 days
Indicative timing per main process -->
Total 15 days
Total indicative timing -->
DT. 2.1 G
Contracting of NGOs and private sector service providers
Plan
to provide training in areas of group dynamics and
leadership training for farmer group leaders as well
provision of faciliatation support to encourage and
Revised
enable groups to affiliate with higher level farmer
organisations and/or thematic network involved in
sustainable land and water management.
Actual
DT. 2.1 H
Contracting service provider for design and provision of
extension materials and mass media
DT. 2.1. I
Contracting of NGO for extension programme
management
DT 2.2
DT. 2.2 B
Access to key Agricultural Inputs
Study on and trainings for Agro-Dealers
DT. 2.2 C
DT 2.2 D
DT 3
DT 3 A
Final NO
IFAD
5 days
Contract Details
Notification of
award
Contract
Signature
YES
m3wk1
m3wk2
m3wk3
m4wk2
m4wk2
m4wk2
m5wk4
m5wk1
m5wk2
m5wk2
m5wk2
m5wk2
32 Least Cost Selection
YES
m3wk1
m3wk2
m3wk3
m4wk2
m4wk2
m4wk2
m5wk4
m5wk1
m5wk2
m5wk2
m5wk2
m5wk2
Plan
Revised
Actual
113 QCBS
YES
m3wk4
m3wk5
m4wk1
m4wk4
m4wk4
m4wk4
m5wk2
m5wk3
m5wk4
m6wk1
m6wk1
m6wk1
Plan
Revised
Actual
150 QCBS
YES
m3wk4
m3wk5
m4wk1
m4wk4
m4wk4
m4wk4
m5wk2
m5wk3
m5wk4
m6wk1
m6wk1
m6wk1
Plan
Revised
Actual
28 QCBS
YES
m3wk3
m3wk4
m4wk1
m4wk4
m4wk 4
m4wk4
m5wk2
m5wk3
m5wk4
m6wk1
m6wk1
m6wk1
60 QCBS
YES
m3wk3
m3wk4
m4wk1
m4wk4
m5wk 4
m4wk4
m5wk2
m5wk3
m5wk4
m6wk1
m6wk1
m6wk1
28 QCBS
YES
m4wk1
m4wk2
m4wk3
m5wk2
m5wk 2
m5wk2
m5wk3
m5wk4
m6wk1
m6wk2
m6wk2
m6wk2
YES
m4wk1
m4wk2
m4wk3
m5wk2
m5wk 2
m5wk2
m5wk3
m5wk4
m6wk1
m6wk2
m6wk2
m6wk2
YES
m4wk2
m4wk3
m4wk4
m5wk3
m5wk4
m5wk4
m6wk2
m5wk3
m5wk4
m6wk1
m6wk1
m6wk1
YES
m4wk2
m4wk3
m4wk4
m5wk3
m5wk4
m5wk4
m6wk2
m5wk3
m5wk4
m6wk1
m6wk1
m6wk1
Contracting of NGO to carry out post-harvest
Plan
management activities based on MOUs with specific
requirements for capacity building up to ministry staff at Revised
EPA and community level.
Actual
Plan
Competitive Grants to MFIs: MFIs must compete for
Revised
these grants (2 No)
Actual
Programme Management and Coordination
Contracting of International and National consultants in
consultation with IFAD to assist effectiveness and startup- Plan
to be funded under PPF
Revised
Actual
Contracting consultants for Financial Management and
Procurement advisory
Evaluation Process
Financial
Evaluation
Evaluation
Report
5 days
5 days
Total 5 days
85 QCBS
Consultation between
504 IFAD and GOM
Plan
42 QBS
Revised
Actual
DT 3 G
Contracting consultants for Surveys and Studies
Plan
88 QCBS
Revised
Actual
M= Month, wk= week. Therefore, m2wk3 means month 2 week three starting the count fromwhen PPF funds will start flowing
DT 3 C
Technical
Evaluation
10 days
QBS- Quality Based Selection
QCBS- Quality Cost Based Selection
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 8
Contracting of training providers for improving
Plan
knowledge in basic agronomy, and increasing awareness Revised
of the range of the GAPs available.
Actual
8
DT. 2.1 F
Publication
5 days
Tendering Process
Closing
Response Time Date
Opening Date
12-21 days
1 day
1 day
Total 19-28 days
Grand Total 39-48 days
B: GOODS(USD'000)
Technical
Evaluation
10days
EvaluationProcess
Financial
Evaluation
Evaluation
Report
5days
5days
Total 5days
Final NO
IFAD
5days
ContractDetails
Notificationof
award
Contract
Signature
9
m2wk3
m2wk4
m3wk1
N/A
m3wk2
m3wk3
m3wk3
m3wk4
m4wk1
N/A
m4wk2
m4wk3
m3wk2
m3wk3
m3wk4
m4wk1
m4wk2
m4wk3
m3wk2
m3wk3
m3wk4
m4wk1
m4wk2
m4wk3
m3wk2
m3wk3
m3wk4
N/A
m4wk1
m4wk2
m3wk2
m3wk3
m3wk4
N/A
m3wk2
m3wk3
m3wk4
N/A
DT=DetailedTableintheCostTables
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 8
Preparationof Tender
TenderingProcess
Estimated
Closing
ContractPackages
ContractSum ProcurementMethod PriorReview(Y/N) PlanVsActual BidDoc
Publication Response Time Date OpeningDate
NOIFAD
Indicativetimingof eachstepof theprocess--> 15days
5days
5days
12-21days
1day
1day
Indicativetimingpermainprocess-->
Total 15days
Total 19-28days
Total indicativetiming-->
GrandTotal 39-48days
12 DirectContracting
NO
Plan
m1wk1 N/A
m1wk2
m2wk1
m2wk1 m2wk1
DT2.2A(line10- Engagementof aResearchInstitutionforTrials, breeder
Revised
11)
seedandFoundationSeedProduction(2,100Kgs)
Actual
42
YES
Plan
m1wk1 m1wk2
m1wk3
m2wk4
m3wk1 m3wk1
NCB
Engagementof PrivateCompanies&ContractFarmers
DT2.2A(line12)
Revised
forCertifiedSeedProduction(40tonnes)
Actual
VehiclesandMotorcycles
DT1.1B, C,D; DT
2.1C, D, I; DT2.2A; Lot1: Vehicles(28No)
ICB
YES
DT3A, 3C, 3D, 3E
2,048
Plan
m1wk2 m1wk3
m1wk4
m2wk3
m2wk4 m2wk4
DT1.1C, DT2.1E,
Lot2: Motorcycles(309No)
DT2.2A
1,082
Revised
Actual
DT1.1D, DT1.2C,
Plan
m1wk2 m1wk3
m1wk4
m2wk3
m2wk4 m2wk4
DT2.1C, DT2.1D, Computers(43No)
126
NCB
YES
Revised
DT2.1E, DT3A, DT
Actual
AssortedSeedRelatedEquipment
Plan
m2wk1 m2wk2
m2wk3
m2wk3
m2wk4 m2wk4
Lot1: DistrictSeedstoreswithbasicseedequipment(2
DT2.2A
Stores)
20
Revised
NCB
YES
DT2.2A
Lot2: SeedProductionManuals
10
Actual
DT2.2A
Lot3: SeedTestingEquipment
52
PostHarvestEquipment
DT2.2B
156
Plan
m2wk2 m2wk3
m1wk4
m2wk3
m2wk4 m2wk4
Lot 1. Largemetal silos (1.8tonnes)- 1,500No
ICB
DT2.2
86
YES
Revised
Lot 2. Small metal silos (0.5tonnes)- 1500No
Actual
OfficeEquipments
DT2.1D,EDT2.2A,
Lot1: OfficeEquipmentsets(62sets)
105
DT3A,C,D,E
Plan
m2wk3 m2wk3
m1wk4
m2wk3
m2wk4 m2wk4
DT2.1D, E
Lot2: ExtensionEquipment(22sets)
22
NCB
YES
Revised
DT1.1C
Lot3: ConservationAgricultureEquip(50No)
6
Actual
DT1.1D
Lot4: GPSEquipment(12set)
1
M=Month, wk=week. Therefore, m2wk3meansmonth2weekthreestartingthecountfromwhenPPFfundswill startflowing
NCB- National CompetitiveBidding
ICB=International CompetitiveBidding
CostTable
Reference
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 9
Annex 9: Project Cost And Financing
The tables below provide a summary of project financing by component, and expenditure
accounts by financiers. All the detailed financing tables are in Working Paper 9. The financing
arrangements are based on the following:
1.




GOM will finance all recurrent personnel costs including salaries and allowances for
Government staff assigned full-time to the Programme (or proportionately for part time
assignees); as well as taxes levied on procurement of goods and services.
Beneficiaries will finance a 50% share of the cost of metal silos under the post-harvest
management sub-component, as well as toolkits provided to tinsmiths.
IFAD will finance 100% of the operation and maintenance costs of vehicles and
motorcycles procured by the Programme and used for Programme purposes.
IFAD will fund all other costs through a loan or grant. Part of the grant potion will be used
to finance the PPF.
Table 1: Summary Project Costs by Components
(MK Million)
Component and Sub-Component
A. Adaptive Research and Knowledge Management
Adaptive Research
Knowledge Management and Communication
Subtotal
B. Farmer Adoption of GAPs
Improved Agricultural Extension
Access to Key Agricultural Inputs
Subtotal
C. Programme Management and Coordination
Total BASELINE COSTS
Physical Contingencies
Price Contingencies
Total Programme Costs
Local
469
139
608
3,508
714
4,222
476
5,306
12
2,249
7,568
(US$ Million)
%
% Total
Foreign Base
Local Foreign Total Exch.
Costs
Foreign Total
133
4
137
602
143
745
3.1
0.9
4.1
0.9
0.0
0.9
4.0
1.0
5.0
22
3
18
9
2
11
1,070 4,579
304 1,018
1,374 5,596
258
734
1,769 7,075
7
20
669 2,919
2,446 10,014
23.4
4.8
28.1
3.2
35.4
0.1
3.0
38.4
7.1
2.0
9.2
1.7
11.8
0.0
0.9
12.7
30.5
6.8
37.3
4.9
47.2
0.1
3.8
51.1
23
30
25
35
25
38
23
25
65
14
79
10
100
8
108
Table 2: Summary Project Costs by Expenditure Account
(M K M i l l i o n )
E x p e n d i tu r e A c c o u n ts
I . I n v e stm e n t C o sts
A . V e h ic le s , M o t o rc y c le s a n d E q u ip m e n t
B . Te c h n ic a l A s s is t a n c e , Tra in in g s , W o rk s h o p s a n d S t u d ie s
C . S u p p o r t fo r A d a p ti v e R e se a r c h a n d K n o w l e d g e M a n a g e m e n t
1 . S u p p o rt fo r A d a p t ive R e s e a rc h
2 . S u p p o rt fo r K n o w le d g e M a n a g e m e n t a n d C o m m u n ic a t io n
S u b to ta l
D . S u p p o r t fo r F a r m e r A d o p ti o n o f G A P s
1 . S u p p o rt fo r Im p ro ve d A g ric u lt u ra l E x t e n s io n
2 . S u p p o rt fo r A c c e s s t o K e y A g ric u lt u ra l In p u t s
S u b to ta l
T o ta l I n v e stm e n t C o sts
I I . R e c u r r e n t C o sts
A . S a la rie s a n d A llo w a n c e s
B . In c re m e n t a l O p e ra t in g C o s t s
T o ta l R e c u r r e n t C o sts
T o ta l B a se l i n e C o sts
P h y s ic a l C o n t in g e n c ie s
P ric e C o n t in g e n c ie s
T o ta l P r o g r a m m e C o sts
1
L o c a l F o re ig n
(U S $ M i l l i o n )
T o ta l
L o ca l
F o re ig n
T o ta l
% T o ta l
B a se
C o sts
155
123
211
131
366
254
1.0
0.8
1.4
0.9
2.4
1.7
5
4
418
139
557
84
4
88
502
143
645
2.8
0.9
3.7
0.6
0.0
0.6
3.3
1.0
4.3
7
2
9
3,333
676
4,009
4,843
919
271
1,190
1,621
4,252
947
5,199
6,464
22.2
4.5
26.7
32.3
6.1
1.8
7.9
10.8
28.3
6.3
34.7
43.1
60
13
73
91
215
247
463
5,306
12
2,249
7,568
148
148
1,769
7
669
2,446
215
396
611
7,075
20
2,919
10,014
1.4
1.6
3.1
35.4
0.1
3.0
38.4
1.0
1.0
11.8
0.0
0.9
12.7
1.4
2.6
4.1
47.2
0.1
3.8
51.1
3
6
9
100
8
108
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 9
Table 3: Summary of Project Financing Plan
Component/Sub-Component
A. Adaptive Research and Knowledge Management
Adaptive Research
Knowledge Management and Communication
Subtotal
B. Farmer Adoption of GAPs
Improved Agricultural Extension
Access to Key Agricultural Inputs
Subtotal
C. Programme Management and Coordination
Total Programme Costs
IFAD
IFAD
Loan/Grant
PPF
USD m % USD m %
3.7 84.4
1.0 98.6
4.7 87.1
31.7
5.9
37.7
2.7
45.1
2
95.7
81.1
93.0
52.3
88.2
-
Government Benficiaries
Total
USD m % USD m % USD m %
-
0.7 15.6
0.0 1.4
0.7 12.9
0.6 10.8
0.6 1.1
1.4 4.3
0.2 2.2
1.6 3.9
1.9 36.9
4.2 8.3
-
-
4.3 8.5
1.0 2.0
5.4 10.5
1.2 16.7
1.2 3.0
1.2 2.4
33.2 64.9
7.3 14.3
40.5 79.2
5.2 10.3
51.1 100.0
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 10
Annex 10: Economic and Financial Analysis
A.
Introduction
This Annex provides an analysis of the financial and economic impacts of SAPP. Further
details are given in Working Paper 10. The financial analysis is aimed at determining the financial
viability and incentives for the target population to engage in the productive activities to be supported
under SAPP. The economic analysis is aimed at confirming the overall economic viability of the
Project and its contribution to redution of poverty and improved food security among the rural
population.
1.
2.
The economic rationale for SAPP hinges on:



the use of a low-cost but effective farmer-to-farmer extension system to support the
adoption of simple and affordable agricultural technologies which will increase maize
and legume yields, enable diversification into higher value crops, and improve soil
health;
reduced labour inputs and improved labour productivity through improved crop
management practices and particularly weed control practices; and
More efficient use of crop inputs, especially fertilisers (partly provided under the FISP,
but considered as a cost for farmers in the financial analysis). Crop budgets show that the
improved agricultural packages proposed have the potential to generate attractive
financial benefit-cost ratios with or without the farm input subsidy programme (FISP).
B.
Benefit-Cost Analysis
Three crop production technology models have been developed for the predominant maizebased farming system. The models are computed for both their respective financial and economic
values. Traditional Practice uses no fertiliser and produces a yield of around 1.3 tonnes of maize per
hectare. All labour is provided by the family, and total family labour input required is 152 days/ha.
3.
Improved Practice includes maize/pigeon pea intercropped and grown with improved
practice. It involves the application of 100 kg of basal NPK fertiliser and 100 kg of urea for top
dressing per hectare. That will require an addition of around 10 days of family labour, requiring a total
of 162 days/ha. The resultant yields from such practices average about 2.5 tonnes per hectare of maize
and 300 kg of pigeon pea.
4.
Zero Tillage with Herbicides (Conservation Agriculture) is represented by maize/pigeon
pea under a conservation agriculture system involving use of herbicides plus the same fertiliser
applications as the improved practice model. This produces a further increase in yield to around 3.5
tonnes of maize and 500 kg of pigeon pea per hectare, and a reduction in family labour inputs due to
reduced effort spent on cultivation and weed control. Higher quantities of herbicides are
recommended for the first few years, but experience shows that the need for herbicides will decrease
after few years of application.
5.
Crop budgets show that the improved agricultural packages proposed have the potential to
generate attractive financial benefit-cost ratios. The financial benefit cost ratio (Incremental
Benefits/Incremental Cost) associated with a move from traditional to improved technology is 2.5:1;
and the move from improved technology to zero till agriculture with herbicides is estimated to be
4.2:1. Moreover the cash gross margin per labour-day increases from USD 1.98 under traditional
technology to USD 7.20 under the zero till model. This large increase is partly due to reduced labour
utilisation for land preparation and weed control, and partly due to the higher yields achieved.
6.
The economic benefit/cost analyses places a value on the labour used or saved in the
different models. In economic terms there is also a favourable benefit cost ratio along the technology
adoption pathway from traditional to higher levels of technology. The economic benefit/cost ratio is
2.4:1 passing from the traditional to the improved model, and around 6.3:1 adopting the conservation
agriculture model. The economic benefit/cost analyses places a value on the labour used or saved in
7.
1
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 10
the different models. In economic terms there is also a favourable benefit cost ratio along the
technology adoption pathway from traditional to higher levels of technology. The economic
benefit/cost ratio is 2.4:1 passing from the traditional to the improved model, and around 5.6:1
adopting the conservation model.
To conclude the analysis of the three different levels of technology demonstrates that it
should be possible to greatly improve the profitability of crop production in Malawi using good
agricultural practices.
8.
C.
Economic Analysis
The costs and revenues estimated in the financial analysis provide the basis for an evaluation
to determine the likely economic benefits and costs to the economy as a whole. The main benefits of
the Programme would accrue to the Malawi economy in terms of the improved farming systems that
will sustainably increase food crop yields diversify crop production by inclusion of legumes in the
cropping system, and improve soil health. Furthermore, reduced post harvest losses will come from
promoting the use of metal silos for grain storage. These will reduce losses and damage due to insect
infestation, and allow farmers to store grain safely to avoid having to sell surplus grain in the
immediate post harvest period when prices are at their lowest.
9.
Total hectares of crop in programme area have been calculated having assumed that the
average landholding size is around 0.8 hectares. Furthermore, it has been assumed that 80% of the
farmers are practicing the traditional mode of farming, 20% are practicing the improved mode, and no
farmers are practicing the conservation agriculture/zero tillage in the base year 1. The analysis is
based on linear trends between the Year 1 and Year 9 combinations of the various models as shown in
Table 1.
10.
Table 1 also shows the number of target group households practicing the different levels of
technology. By the end of the programme implementation period some 98,000 households are
expected to be using improved agricultural practices and around 39,000 will be using zero tillage/CA
techniques. By year 20 these numbers are expected to increase to 117,000 and 58,000 respectively. It
is also likely that there will be some spontaneous adoption of these improved technologies by nontarget group households in the six programme districts, although this has not been quantified in the
economic analysis.
11.
Table 1: Cropping Technologies used in Programme Area
% of crops in programme area
Model A: Traditional practice
Model B: Improved practice
Model C: Zero till/CA
Number of Farm Households (‘000)
Total target group
No of HH using traditional practice
No of HH using imporved practice
No of HH using zero till/CA
Yr 1
80
20
0
Without Project
Yr 9
Yr 20
50
40
40
45
10
15
37
30
7
0
195
97
78
20
195
78
88
29
Yr 1
80
20
0
37
30
7
0
With Project
Yr 9
Yr 20
30
10
50
60
20
30
195
58
98
39
195
19
117
58
The analysis has also considered the benefit of reduced storage losses consequent to the
adoption of metal silos on the basis of 20% losses of production without the project and 5% of losses
with project.
12.
The analysis presented in Working Paper 10 shows that the total economic gross margin
generated with the programme is much higer than the the total economic gross margin generated
without the programme. The overall economic rate of return of the programme is around 26%.
This could easily be higher if farmers take advantage of the attractive financial benefit/cost ratios
obtainable from moving up the steps of the technology ladder.
13.
2
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 10
The economic rate of return is relatively robust to cost increases, reduced benefits or
implementation delays as shown by the following sensitivity analysis:
14.
Costs increased by 10%
Benefits reduced by 10%
Benefits deferred by two years
All of the above
Economic IRR
23%
23%
17%
14%
In addition to the quantifiable benefits there are also serveral significant non-quantified
benefits. The Programme is expected to generate signficant environmental benefits (see ESSN in
Annex 12) in terms of agro-biodiversity, reduced soil erosion, better managment of soil nutritiens, and
improved hydrology arising from higher water infiltration and retention rates. Social benefits that
have not been valued in the economic analysis include: empowerment of rural communities,
especially women; reduced drudgery from manual labour (and improved returns to labour); improved
food security; and improved nutrition due to incorporation of legume crops in crop rotations. In
addition there will be significant capacity building that will help to create institutions and train people
to better support rural poverty reduction efforts in the country.
15.
To conclude, the Programme has the potential to generate a robust economic rate of return,
even with modest adoption rates, because of the low cost approach to extension services and the
substantial yield responses to simple technical interventions.
16.
3
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 11
Annex 11: Draft Programme Implementation Manual
The PIM will be finalised during the proposed Programme Preparatory Facility (PPF) phase. The PIM
will bring together relevant information detailed in the Annexes and Working Papers and will be
integrated with the existing ASWAp-SP PIM (currently under review) which details operational
procedures for the ASWAp and the projects and programmes which fall within it. A draft PIM
(Working Paper 11) has been prepared with the following contents:
I.
INTRODUCTION
A.
Purpose of Programme Implementation Manual
B.
SAPP in Summary
C.
Programme Start-Up Activities
II.
IMPLEMENTATION AND INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
A.
Programme Governance
B.
Programme Planning and Budgeting
III.
DETAILED ANALYSIS AND INTERVENTION PLANNING
A.
Integration with District and ADD Planning Processes
B.
Implementation of Annual Workplans at Local Level
IV.
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTING
A.
General Institutional Set-Up and Governing Regulations
B.
Programme Financial Resources
C.
Grant and Loan Administration Arrangements
D.
Flow of Funds
E.
Expenditure Categories
F.
Accounting System
G.
Auditing
IV
PROCUREMENT
A.
MOAIWD Procurement Ceilings and Legal and Regulatory Framework
B.
The Nature and Type of SAPP Procurements
C.
SAPP Procurement Roles and Responsibilities
D.
Procurement Processes and Methods
V.
MONITORING AND EVALUATION
A.
Background
B.
Situation Analysis
C.
SAPP M&E System Framework
D.
Role of the SAPP M&E Officer
E.
Improvements Required
Attachment 1: Format of Financial Reports under IPSAS Cash Basis
Attachment 2: Format of Procurement Plan
Attachment 3: Logical Framework
1
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 12
Annex 12: Adherence to IFAD Policies
A.
Overview
This Annex is based on IFAD’s Strategic Framework for 2007-10 and a range of policy and
strategy documents covering targeting, gender, rural finance, private sector, rural enterprise,
environment and climate change, knowledge management and SWAPs. The contents of the Annex
reflect IFAD’s: (i) assessment of the fundamental causes of rural poverty; (ii) development and
strategic objectives and operational outcomes, outputs and inputs; and (iii) principles of engagement
(targeting, empowering poor rural people, innovation, learning and scaling-up, effective partnerships,
sustainability, and economic efficiency). This discussion of SAPP’s adherence to IFAD’s policies is
presented in tabular format and uses the above-listed points against which comments are provided on
the relevant design features of the Programme. The Annex also includes the Environmental Screening
and Scoping Note.
1.
B.
IFAD Strategic Framework
The Strategic Framework aims to ensure that poor rural people have better access to, and the
skills and organisation they need to take advantage of:
2.






Natural resources, especially secure access to land and water, and improved natural
resource management and conservation practices.
Improved agricultural technologies and effective production services.
A broad range of financial services.
Transparent and competitive markets for agricultural inputs and produce.
Opportunities for rural off-farm employment and enterprise development.
Local and national policy and programming processes.
Strategic Element

Access
to
natural
resources
and
improved
natural resource management
and conservation practices.
Programme Response

Improved natural resource management is a key element of
SAPP through promotion of technologies which are both more
productive and more sustainable in terms of protection against soil
degradation and erosion.

Improved
agricultural
technologies and effective
production services.

The Programme has a strong technology emphasis through
promotion of good agricultural practices (GAPs) which have been
demonstrated to be effective and relevant to the needs of the target
group. The Programme will also invest in improving the effectiveness
of extension services and facilitating access to agricultural inputs.

A broad range
financial services.
of

SAPP will develop partnerships with existing financial service
providers on a district-by-district basis in order to improve access to
financial services needed to move towards commercialisation of
smallholder agriculture.

Transparent
competitive
markets
agricultural
inputs
produce.
and
for
and

The Programme will support closer engagement with agrodealers to improve smallholders’ access to inputs and markets through
commercial channels.

Opportunities for rural
off-farm employment and
enterprise development.


Local
and
national
policy and programming
processes.

Not applicable.
By participating in the ASWAp IFAD will engage fully with the
Government and other development partners in local and national
policy dialogue.
1
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 12
C.

Policy
Targeting policy

Gender policy
Other Elements of IFAD’s Policy Framework

Programme Response
The Programme design (see Annex 2 and Working Paper 3) provides a
detailed analysis of poverty, gender and targeting. The targeting strategy
defines mechanisms to ensure that the targeted poor men and women
actually participate in and benefit from the planned interventions. These
include: (i) geographic targeting measures; (ii) enabling measures; (iii)
empowerment and capacity building measures; (iv) self-targeting measures;
(v) direct targeting measures; and (vi) procedural measures.

Rural
policy
finance

SAPP will enter into formal arrangements with one or several
microfinance institutions whereby IFAD will contribute to the cost of
extending their services into the project areas where access to financial
services is extremely limited. This is expected to result in sustainable access
to financial services by target group households.

Private sector and
rural enterprise policy

The Programme will engage directly with the private sector, especially
in the area of improving access to key agricultural inputs needed to adopt
GAPs.

Environment and
climate change

SAPP is expected to result in positive environmental outcomes (see
ESSN below) associated with the adoption of GAPs, including conservation
agriculture.

The Programme will also contribute to climate change adaptation by
promoting GAPs which are more resilient to climatic extremes, especially
droughts; and to climate change mitigation through carbon sequestration in
soil organic matter.

Sub-component 1.2, Knowledge Management and Communication
recognises the knowledge-intensive nature of the proposed interventions and
the need to systematically harvest, process, store and disseminate knowledge
about GAPs and the factors which influence their adoption (see Annex 6 and
Working Paper 6)

SAPP is consistent with IFAD’s policy of engaging with SWAps where
Governments are developing such sector-wide programmes. IFAD aims to
add value to SWAps to make them more effective in rural policy reduction;
and to participate in pooled funding arrangement where fiduciary and M&E
systems are sufficiently well developed. If this is not the case IFAD will
provide support to the SWAps via project funding using its own systems and
procedures, while at the same time supporting the development of
Government fiduciary arrangements.


Knowledge
management
SWAp policy
D.
6.
Environmental Screening and Scoping Note
National Environmental Policy
1.
The Government of Malawi is increasingly concerned about the deterioration of the country's
natural resources and the environment. The biggest environmental and developmental challenge is
how to limit or reverse the degradation of natural resources and the environment whilst pursuing
increased agricultural productivity, food security and economic growth. The Government adopted a
National Environmental Policy (NEP) in 1996 to provide guidance and set standards for development
of sector policies in environment and natural resources. It provided an overall framework against
which relevant sectoral environmental policies were revised and adopted to ensure that these are
consistent with the principles of sustainable development.
2.
New national economic instruments and strategies have been developed and implemented
since then which have significant impacts on environment and natural resources management. These
2
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 12
developments and experiences have prompted Government to revise the NEP in 2004 to ensure that it
remains current, responds to new challenges and incorporates lessons learned. The Revised NEP
recognises the importance of creating an enabling policy and legal framework for cross sector
coordination, participation of non state sectors, strengthening the enforcement machinery and
decentralising natural resources and environmental management and governance. It therefore calls for
development of mechanisms for cross sector management; facilitating active participation of local
communities and other stakeholders in enforcement of legislation; and integration of environmental
planning, management and institutional frameworks into the decentralised governance structure.
3.
In addition to these environment and natural resources related policies and governance
frameworks, Malawi has developed strategic frameworks to improve economic performance and
management and focus on future programs and prospects. These include the Vision 2020 and the
MGDS. Each Government Department is under obligation to ensure that these instruments are
reflected in its policies, programmes and projects. Finally, the World Summit on Sustainable
Development, Johannesburg, 2002 provided new insights and priorities in its WEHAB principles that
have significant bearing on environment and natural resources management policies.
4.
The NEP is an overarching framework instrument. It does not override powers and
responsibilities of sectoral ministries, but instead reinforces them and highlights areas of high priority
for the nation. The institution responsible for environmental affairs will play a facilitating,
coordinating and advisory role in ensuring its implementation, setting and enforcement of relevant
and acceptable standards. The NEP objectives should be seen as addressing the broad range of
environmental problems facing Malawi at the present time. These problems and their relative
importance may change over time. For this reason, the Policy will be reviewed and updated every five
years.
E.
Ratified Conventions
5.
Malawi is a party and adheres to internationally accepted principles of the 1972 Stockholm
Declaration, the 1992 Rio Declaration and the WEHAB (Water, Energy, Health, Agriculture and
Biodiversity) principles of 2002 as adopted by the United Nations Conferences. Malawi is also a
signatory to a number of international environmental conventions and protocols such as the
Convention on International Plant Protection; Convention on Wetlands of International Significant;
Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage; Convention on the
Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals; Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES); African Convention on Conservation of
Nature and Natural Resources; FAO International Undertaking on Plant and Genetic Resources;
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea; the Vienna Convention and Montreal Protocol for
Protection of the Ozone Layer; Convention on Biological Diversity; Convention on Climate Change;
and the Convention on combating Desertification. Malawi is also a party to a number of regional
protocols relating to environment and natural resources management. These include the SADC
Protocols on shared watercourses, wildlife management and law enforcement, energy, mining,
forestry and fisheries. The nation will continue to accede to and abide by internationally acceptable
conventions and protocols.
F.
Potential Environmental and Social Impacts/Concerns
Malawi’s natural resource base provides a number of opportunities to reduce rural poverty. It
is increasingly recognised that sustainable use of the natural resource base is fundamental for any
successful rural development initiative. Efforts are, therefore, always made to maintain the natural
resource base upon which economic growth depends. However, its fragile environment presents
significant challenges in environmental management and the related rural livelihoods. The majority of
the poor rural households, to be targeted by the proposed Programme, are directly dependent on
natural resources for their livelihoods. The close interdependence between environmental health,
sustainable production and rural livelihoods provides an opportunity to apply improved natural
6.
3
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 12
resource management initiatives to prevent damage to the environment and, at the same time, address
the social and economic issues which underlie rural poverty.
7. Traditional Practices. The area planted to rainfed crops has been increasing steadily in line with
population growth, but not sufficiently to avoid a reduction in farm sizes. Most of the land is cropped
every year, often without use of fertilisers or crop rotations, with the result that soils are severely
depleted of fertility and degraded by erosion. Crop residues are normally burned or grazed by cattle or
goats. Severely degraded and eroded fields cannot be abandoned or fallowed due to the shortage of
land. These factors contribute to the low yields normally achieved by smallholder farmers. The
practice of hoe cultivation and ridging contributes to the formation of a hard layer in the soil (known
as a “hoe pan”) which limits water and root penetration, further reducing crop yields.
Sustainable Agricultural Intensification. SAPP will test, demonstrate and promote a set of good
agricultural practices (GAPs) including conservation agriculture packages which are much more
sustainable and environmentally responsible than current methods, and are expected to generate a
number of long-term environmental and social benefits. The key elements of the agronomic packages
to be promoted are described in Working Paper 5 and include:
8.






minimal soil disturbance through the use of zero tillage and direct seeding methods;
deep ripping along the planting line, in fields where a hardpan has formed;
early planting and timely weed control using mechanical methods and/or herbicides;
retention of crop residues on the soil surface to conserve moisture and control weeds;
correct use of organic and inorganic fertilisers to reverse the long term decline in soil
fertility improve fertilise use efficiency; and
crop rotation and/or intercropping including non-cereal crops, especially grain legumes.
Environmental Impacts: The agronomic options listed above are expected to be adopted in
various combinations with some farmers opting for the complete package, and others for selected
elements. Whether adopted partially or in full, the GAPs are expected to generate predominantly
positive environmental impacts including some of all of the following:
9.





increased soil organic matter and improved soil structure;
reduced rates of soil erosion due to improved water infiltration and retention of crop
residues to protect the soil surface;
restoration of soil fertility levels by shifting the nutrient balance from negative to
positive;
increased crop yields and reduction in the land area needed to achieve household food
security; and
reduced carbon footprint resulting from increasing soil organic matter and reduced use of
fossil fuels for ploughing.
10. SAPP represents a new approach to rainfed agricultural development which is intended to
improve the effectiveness and impact of the FISP. FISP has been successful in increasing crop yields,
but has not yet been accompanied by improved agronomic interventions which have the potential to
amplify the benefits of fertiliser use and develop more profitable and sustainable farming systems.
SAPP will address these shortcomings of the FISP and make a significant contribution to improving
the overall environmental impact of agriculture in Malawi.
11. The only significant environmental concern involves the use of inorganic fertilisers, pesticides
and herbicides. Many farmers do not have a good understanding of the correct and prudent use of
these items, and the agro-dealers that sell them do not have the expertise needed to provide sound
advice to their customers. Agricultural extension staff also have limited experience in the use of
agricultural chemicals. This can result in over-use or under-use of agricultural chemicals, use of
inappropriate or prohibited substances, failure to observe withholding periods, etc. Apart from the
financial cost, such practices can cause contamination of domestic water supplies, build-up of pest
and weed resistance, and unfavourable market reaction.
12. SAPP will address concerns about possible environmental and health impacts of agricultural
chemicals through the proposed training programmes for farmers, extension workers, subject matter
4
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 12
specialists and agro-dealers. Training will cover the full range of substances likely to be used
including fertilisers, insecticides, fungicides and herbicides and include basic product information,
toxicology, recommended use protocols, application methods and rates, use of protective equipment,
withholding periods, safe disposal of containers etc.
13. Social Impacts: The social impacts of SAPP are expected to be predominantly positive, reflecting
the Project’s poverty reduction and food security agenda and the promotion of agricultural systems
which will allow rural households to become self-reliant. The risks of the Programme contributing to
the widening of social inequities are minimised by careful attention to targeting mechanisms to ensure
that the specified target groups do in fact benefit from the programme. The principal targeting
mechanisms are elaborated in Annex 2 and Working Paper 3. Gender and HIV/AIDS mainstreaming
considerations are embedded within the targeting strategy and have been reflected in the definition of
the target groups and targeting mechanisms.
G.
Environmental and Social Classification
14. The Programme has the potential to generate a number of significant environmental and social
benefits. However, use of agrochemicals including herbicides and chemical fertilisers will need to be
carefully monitored to ensure that there is no build-up of residues in the soil or contamination of
surface or groundwater resources. Based on the IFAD Environmental Assessment Guidelines the
Programme is therefore considered Category B. However these risks need to be considered relative to
the risks of continuing environmentally damaging and un-sustainable cultivation methods.
H.
Environmental Safeguards
15. Whilst any negative environmental impacts are expected to be relatively benign, and there is
potential to generate significant environmental benefits, it is considered prudent to incorporate
environmental screening and monitoring procedures within the design of the Programme. Each district
and EPA will complete an environmental assessment as it enters the Programme and prepare an
environmental management plan to mitigate possible negative impacts and enhance environmentally
positive outcomes. Implementation of the environmental management plan will be monitored as part
of overall Programme M&E, and periodically reviewed by IFAD supervision/implementation support
missions. The mid-term review will also make an assessment of environmental impacts and
recommend necessary changes to monitoring procedures and/or mitigation measures.
16. A national consultant will be engaged to undertake the initial environmental assessment and
prepare the environmental management plan in each district and EPA. This will be based on the draft
environmental checklist presented in Appendix 1. The consultant will also train district and EPA level
staff in the use of the environmental checklist and how to make visual assessments of environmental
impacts in order to give early warning of any problems which may arise.
5
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 12
Appendix 1: Draft Environmental Assessment Checklist
A














Describe the current state of the environment in the district/EPA (soil, water, air, biodiversity
etc.).
Do current agricultural practices have positive/negative environmental impacts?
Describe any harmful environmental practices currently employed by farmers (e.g. burning
crop residues, ridge mis-alignment, monocultures).
How can these harmful practices be avoided or mitigated?
Describe any beneficial environmental practices currently employed by farmers (e.g.
mulching, organic farming, grass strips, contour banks, use of manure).
How can these beneficial practices be encouraged or expanded?
Describe the proposed Programme interventions in the district/EPA and identify the likely
scope and nature of environmental interactions.
What actions should be undertaken to minimise harmful impacts of Programme interventions?
What actions should be undertaken to reinforce or enhance positive impacts?
What resources are needed to manage the positive and negative environmental impacts of the
Programme effectively?
What is the level of environmental awareness amongst farmers, government staff and NGOs?
Is there a need for further environmental training in the district/EPA?
Is the regulatory framework adequate to prevent negative environmental impacts?
How should environmental impacts be monitored and assessed?
H.
















9
Baseline Assessment
Agrochemicals9
What agrochemicals (insecticides, fungicides, herbicides, fertilisers etc.) are currently used in
the district/EPA?
Will the Programme be supporting use of new agrochemicals and are these approved for use
in Malawi?
Are there any significant environmental hazards associated with the use of these
agrochemicals?
Do any of these agrochemicals pose threats to human health?
Are agro-dealers and farmers aware of these threats?
Are agro-dealers and farmers trained in correct use of agrochemicals?
What arrangements are in place for safe storage and transport of agrochemicals?
What arrangements are in place for safe disposal of agrochemical containers?
Are instructions for safe use available and written in local language(s)?
Are withholding periods specified, and if so, are farmers aware of them?
Is suitable protective equipment available, and is it being used correctly?
Are there arrangements in place for monitoring pesticide residues in soil and/or agricultural
produce?
Are there risks that surface or groundwater could be contaminated by agrochemicals?
What are the health implications of drinking contaminated water and what safeguards are
required to avoid any risks?
Are there any possible implications for fish and wildlife populations, and how can these be
mitigated?
Are farmers and extension staff aware of integrated pest management (IPM) options for
minimising use of pesticides?
Includes fertilisers, insecticides, fungicides, herbicides, rodenticides etc
6
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 12


Are farmers and extension staff aware of options for reducing chemical fertiliser applications
by use of organic fertilisers?
What further training is needed to minimise the environmental impacts of agrochemical use?
7
Malawi: Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP)
Programme Design Report – Annex 13
Annex 13: Contents of the Programme Life File
PRIOR DOCUMENTS
COSOP
OSC minutes
Programme Design Report – First Draft
Programme Design Report – Second Draft
Programme Design Report – Third Draft
CPMT Minutes
WORKING PAPERS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
The Agricultural Sector
Policy and Institutional Framework
Poverty, Gender and Targeting
Agricultural Extension
Intensified Sustainable Crop Production
M&E, Knowledge Management and Communications
Programme Implementation
Procurement and Financial Management
Programme Costs
Financial and Economic Analysis
Draft Programme Implementation Manual
REFERENCE DOCUMENTS
ASWAp
CAADP Compact
1
OECD Procurement Assessment - Malawi
MISSION DOCUMENTS
Terms of Reference for Scoping Mission
Terms of Reference for Design Mission
Aide Memoire of Scoping Mission
Aide Memoire of Design Mission
IFAD REVIEW DOCUMENTS
Maturity Assessment Template for Quality Enhancement
Reviewers’ Recommendations Note
QE Panel Report
Minutes of QE Meeting
1