1.
Promoting CAADP Mutual Accountability Through the
Biennial Reviews Process
Greenwell Matchaya, PhD
Senior Economics Researcher & ReSAKSS-SA Coordinator
International Water Management Institute
Pretoria
g.Matchaya@cigar.org

2.
INTRODUCTION
The Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP)
 Key Africa’s policy framework for agriculture development and
transformation since 2003.
 Focuses on reducing poverty and increasing food security and nutrition.
 The 2014 Malabo Declaration on Agricultural Transformation added focus
areas to the CAADP.
oThe Malabo Declaration is an agricultural transformation agenda
owith commitments and targets in 7 thematic areas:

3.
Adapted from AUC 2020, https://au.int/en/caadp/toolkit

4.
Under the Commitment to Mutual Accountability to Actions and Results (7)
 African Leaders committed to a systematic regular review process of the
progress made
 in implementing the provisions of the Declaration using the CAADP Results
Framework
 (a) to conduct a biennial Agricultural Review Process that involves tracking,
monitoring and reporting on progress
 AU developed AATS based on 43 indicators for the 1st BR and 47 indicators for
the 2nd BR.
 Results presentation is not a focus of this session but some highlights on country
performance in the BR1 and BR2 are as below:
INTRODUCTION II

5.
CONTINENTAL PERFORMANCE IN 2017 AND 2019
Adapted from AUC 2020, https://au.int/en/caadp/toolkit

6.
MUTUAL ACCOUNTABILITY FOR ACTIONS AND RESULTS

Adapted from AUC 2020, https://au.int/en/caadp/toolkit

7.
 Technical leadership- with AUC/NEPAD and partners: Leads the development of
methods for the reviews etc
 eBR development and deployment with AUC/NEPAD and partners
 Support to countries to resolve emerging technical issues
 Work with RECs, AUC/NEPAD and partners to review submitted reports
 Technical leadership in trainings of country experts
 Leading the development of briefs and materials for dissemination
 Contributes to concepts development in this area
ROLE OF RESAKSS I

8.
BR PROCESS CHALLENGES NOTED I
 Data Issues in all Countries: The data availability and quality challenges
continue to affect the BR process even in the second round of reporting.
 Some of the BR Indicators are Not routinely collected by National
systems. There is a need to mainstream the BR indicators in routine data
collection at national level
 Assessment of the Inaugural BR: a majority of the countries did not conduct
an assessment of the 1st BR to identify areas that need improvement in the 2nd
BR.
 This may have contributed to hence the low performance of in some cases

9.
BR PROCESS CHALLENGES NOTED II
 Weak Data Standards and Protocols: Some countries continue to have weak data
standards and protocols. As such, quality, accuracy, traceability and verification of
data are compromised.
 BR Processes at country levels not fully inclusive: In some cases, countries still
do not have an elaborate BR process. It should be popularized more –expand BR
teams
 Reports Validation challenges: With both the 1st and 2nd BR Processes, some
countries have not held a robust validation workshop/meeting.
 Need further studies in areas of post harvest losses and women empowerment to
generate initial data at country level

10.
LESSONS LEARNT I
 Countries with relatively stronger data systems in some cases reported better
 Formation of Cluster Groups: Member States at national level which created Cluster Groups
to align to the seven (7) Malabo Declaration Commitments improved reporting rates
 The REC Secretariats and ReSAKSS technical team BR Meeting: This meeting is vital in
improving the quality of Member States BR reports and also enhancing the reporting rates.
 eBR helped with reporting and analysis and minimized errors in indicator computations. Shows
usefulness of ICT in this process
 Development of BR Work Plans/Roadmaps: The roadmaps/plans developed during country
trainings assisted Member states to preparations.
 Assessment of previous BR as part of preparation for future BR was useful

11.
SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT I
 Complete the CAADP processes
 Domestication of the Malabo Declaration and targets into NAIPs.
 Integrate the Malabo Commitments into National Agriculture Investment Plans
(NAIPS) and ensure effective implementation
 Build capacity for evidence-based agricultural policy-making and
programing by making the Biennial Review process a part of regional and
national decision systems.
 Convene national dialogues to reflect on and discuss the results of this
Biennial Review report

12.
SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT II
 Integrate the BR data collection process into existing national and regional
systems to ease data collection.
 CAADP in general and the BR process in particular, requires stronger
political leadership and commitment
 Link the BR to policies and programs, and use it to trigger changes at country
level
 Strengthening country level data systems in general
 Broadly communicate BR findings, and enhance the visibility of the BR

13.
 Countries need to report their performance again in 2021
 This report will cover the period 2020 -2021
 The final roadmap will be shared by AUC at CAADP PP –Nov 2020
 Critical Analysis of BR II process by Theme- November 2020
 Malabo Policy Learning event- 23-24 November 2020
 CAADP PP meeting – November 25-27 2020
 Permanent Secretaries Retreat- Date :TBC
 Revision of Technical documents for BR III- Dec 2020-Jan 2021
 Training of Trainers (Virtual)- January 2021
DRAFT BIENNIAL REVIEW III ROADMAP I

14.
 Training of country experts – February 2021
 Country data Collection and validation – March/June 2021
 Data valuation at REC level- July 2021
 Final submission using eBR July 2021
 Data Cleaning and feedback to countries- July/August 2021
 Write-shop –August 2021
 Presentation to Heads of State- Jan 2022
DRAFT BIENNIAL REVIEW III ROADMAP II