1 International Fund for Agricultural DevelopmentPaolo Silveri Country Programme Manager, Programme Management Dept. Università degli Studi Roma Tre, 10 November 2016
2 IFAD Who we are Who we work with What we do How we work Where we workOutreach and results of IFAD’s investments IFAD and food security Theories of Change Concrete cases
3 Who we are IFAD is a specialized United Nations agency and an International Financial Institution, established in 1977 Together with FAO and WFP, IFAD based its headquarters in Rome as a UN agency committed to ensure rural poverty reduction and food security IFAD was created to form global alliances across geographic and ideological boundaries that bring people together for the shared goal of eradicating poverty and hunger The Fund is a unique partnership of members of OPEC, other developing countries and members of the OECD
4 Who we work with Around three billion people live in rural areas of developing countries, accounting for about 40 per cent of world’s population. Among the 795 million of the world's poorest and undernourished people, three quarters live in rural areas. The world’s 500 million small farms are the main source of income and sustenance for most rural people. They are also responsible for up to 80 per cent of food production in developing countries.
5 What we do Since its creation, IFAD has focused exclusively on rural poverty reduction, working with poor rural populations in developing countries to eliminate poverty, hunger and malnutrition; raise their productivity and incomes; and improve the quality of their lives. The Fund provides loans on highly-concessional, intermediate and ordinary terms to developing countries to finance innovative agriculture and rural development projects and programmes. Lending conditions vary according to the borrower’s GNI per capita. IFAD provides also grants to institutions and organizations in support of activities to strengthen the technical and institutional capacities linked to agricultural and rural development.
6 How we work Partnerships are central to IFAD’s work. IFAD’s partners include Member States; civil society organizations, particularly those of smallholders farmers and rural people; UN agencies; bilateral and multilateral development agencies; agricultural research centers; NGOs and foundations; policy research institutes and universities; regional organizations; and the private sector. IFAD also brokers partnerships among the diverse parties working in development and for South-South and Triangular Co-operation (SSTC).
7 Where we work NEN APR LAC WCA ESAIFAD is currently working on 231 projects in 98 countries around the world NEN APR LAC WCA ESA 40 Country Offices are supporting operations in the field and 10 more will be soon opened
8 Outreach and results Since 1978, IFAD has mobilized about US$ 43 billion of investments and co-financing in agricultural and rural development Over 1,000 programmes and projects across 123 countries Approximately 462 million people empowered to grow more food, better manage their land and other natural resources, learn new skills, start small businesses, build strong organizations and gain a voice in the decisions that affects their lives
9 IFAD and Food Security Agreement establishing IFAD (1977) called for improving the nutritional status of the poorest IFAD’s lending policy underscores improved nutrition as a key principle of poverty reduction Nutrition for Growth Meeting (London, 2013) UN Scaling-up Nutrition Movement (SUN) Addis Ababa Conference (2015) Mainstreaming Nutrition-Sensitive Agriculture at IFAD: Action Plan (2015) IFAD Strategic Framework (2015) Post-2015 development agenda: SDGs 2030 (2015)
10 Implicit vs Explicit Theories of ChangeImplicit goal of improving food security and nutrition (FSN) through rural development projects was based on an underlying assumption: increased incomes automatically lead to improvements in FSN. Impact Evaluation: is this really happening? Corrective measures: Prioritize FSN in development agenda; Make FSN-related policy/project objectives explicit; Embed FSN into projects’ ToC
11 Explicitly addressing Food Sec. and NutritionA few concrete initiatives in: Guatemala SCAMPIS (small grant) Guyana Hinterland Project (investment project), ToC Sudan Gash Sustainable Livelihoods Project Laos (inter-agency policy cooperation)
12 Case of Guatemala: SCAMPISScaling up Micro-Irrigation Systems (SCAMPIS) Grant-financed programme ( , € 3 M ) Intervention areas in Guatemala, India, Madagascar 13,000 families benefiting from low-cost irrigation 5,000 water purifiers helped reduce diarrhoeal disease, a major contributor to infant malnutrition Vegetable gardens combined with nutrition education (both at hh level and schools) encouraged households to start consuming new local varieties of vegetables, channelling increased incomes towards improved diets
13 Major contextual challenges for hh.s in the project area Main Risks Outcomes Development Objective Results Indicators Economic constraints limiting business development: Weak integration in markets and the national economy Remoteness Lack of infrastructure Limited access to information, energy and technology Economic risks: Productive specialization (vs traditional diversification strategy): vulnerability to market shocks; increased seasonality effects on income and labor cycles Competition for labor from other sectors (e.g., mining) Climate change risks: Productive transformation without access to adequate technology and information for water and soil management Shift to less diversified farming systems Social risks: Weakening of social capital and organization capacity Exclusion of vulnerable groups including women and youth Risks for nutrition and food security: Increased complexity of nutritional problems (e.g., transition to unhealthy diets) Decrease of food security Loss of traditional knowledge, food culture and agro-biodiversity Institutional risks: Weak inter-institutional coordination for actions at the regional level Weak managerial and organizational capacity to implement investment at the local level (communities and producers’ organizations) Outcome 1: Communities and producer groups have identified investment opportunities manage economic and climate change risk. Increased access to assets Outcome 2.1: Increased investments in business plans improved agriculture and related income-generating opportunities and improved market access Improved livelihood resilience through income generation, access to assets, improved nutrition and adaptation to climate variability. Increased vulnerability of the target group and lack of incentives for investment able to reduce economic and environmental risks Outcome 2.2: Increased access to assets that build community and household resilience and create an enabling productive environment (water, energy, ITC) Increased income-generating opportunities Outcome 2.3: Improved diet of adequate quality and appropriate quantity, referring to context- appropriate food-based dietary guidelines and drawing insofar as possible on own-production and local markets in a context of effective behavior change and nutrition education activities. Natural resources constraints for the development of the agricultural and rural sector: Low soil fertility in the savannah in region 9 Climate change affecting the continuation of established practices and the transition to new production patterns: Increased variability in rainfall patterns (R1 and R9) More server floods and prolonged dry periods (R9) Salt water intrusion (R1) Improved quality of nutrition Outcome 3: Efficient and adequate management and implementation of planned activities of the project and effective coordination and planning between institutions at the national and local level.
14 Sudan: Gash Sustainable Livelihoods ProjectIrrigation, infrastructure rehabilitation and governance of land and water resources Including women in social and economic life through training on vocational skills, including on nutrition, food processing and the benefit of non-customary foods (e.g. eggs, vegetables, milk) Learning to diversify diets with higher and more complete nutritional contents led to positive results on family nutrition and food variety As a side effect, women acquired more freedom to meet and socialize among themselves more frequently
15 Inter-agency cooperation in LaosIn Laos, IFAD is working with the national government, UNICEF and WFP to develop the country’s first coordinated multi-sectoral response to undernutrition. The plan embraces a set of priority interventions from several Ministries (Agriculture, Health, Education). Initial pilot phase in 3 provinces Expected results: reducing undernutrition by 4% per year, thus quadrupling the figure obtained by the gov. over the last decade.
16 Thank You