National Agriculture Policy

1.1  Policy and Legal framework

The agricultural sector is guided by the National Agricultural Policy which undergoes periodic reviews to ensure its relevance to prevailing climatic, social and economic conditions of the country. In addition, the sector has a number of pieces of legislation some of which are outdated. A process has been initiated in the recent past to repeal, review, amend and enact new legislation aimed at providing a legal framework that will maximize sector development and growth.

The following policy statements were arrived at by consensus of all the key stakeholder categories in the sector and are contained in both the SNDP as well as the Zambia CAADP Compact of January 2011. Consequently, these policies will be the basis for the implementation of NAIP.

Table 25 Key NAIP Policies

It has been realized by Government, the private sector as well as the Cooperating Partners that the existing policies and pieces of legislation are not adequate to create the enabling environment necessary for the private sector to drive the growth envisaged in the sector. Therefore, they will need to review existing policies and legislation, so as to align them to the current social and economic environment, and where possible develop new ones to ensure that the policy and legal framework is conducive for the attainment of the desired growth and reduction in poverty levels.

The National Agricultural Policy is already under review. The other ones which are critical which will need immediate attention are the following: the development of an Agricultural Marketing Act that will regulate market players in agricultural marketing; the review of the Agricultural Credit Act to provide for use of warehousing receipt system as collateral in obtaining loans; legislations regarding animal health, livestock development, dairy development, animal identification and traceability and veterinary and para-veterinary professional which are necessary to guide the sector on the control and prevention of livestock diseases as well as regulate dairy and livestock production; and the Fisheries Policy and Fisheries Act.

The overall implementation responsibility of the NAIP will fall under the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock whose major focus will be the creation of an enabling environment for a private-sector led the agricultural development and economic growth.

MAL will ensure linkages and synergies with other relevant government ministries and institutions (covering all the relevant sectors) for effective implementation of its mandate. MAL will use the Agricultural Sector Advisory Group (Ag SAG) to engage other stakeholders on key issues affecting the sector as well as report progress on the implementation of its mandate. At sub-national level, existing structures, namely; the Provincial Agriculture and Environment Subcommittee (PAES) of the Provincial Development and Coordination Committee (PDCC); the District Agriculture and Environment Subcommittee (DAES) of the District Development and Coordination Committee (DDCC) and the Community Agriculture Committee (CAC), will be strengthened under the policy dialogue sub-component of the Key Support Systems (Institutional Strengthening). This will be aimed at promoting stakeholder participation, coordination and decentralization at these levels, which in turn is expected to enhance effective implementation performance of the NAIP. The membership of  Ag SAG, PAES, DAES and CAC will be reviewed to ensure strong representation from appropriate private sector institutions. These structures will be supported through regular meetings and heightened dialogue on programme design and implementation to ensure improved performance.
In line with the liberalization policy, the private sector will drive the development and growth of the agricultural sector along with the civil society and farmer organizations (including small scale, medium and large-scale farmers). Other partnerships that are critical to the implementation of this NAIP will include Cooperating Partners (CPs), financial institutions, input suppliers, agro-industry, traders and regional economic communities such as the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) and the Southern African Development Community (SADC).

The Private Sector will take a dominating role in driving the development agenda of the Agricultural Sector. In this regard, government and the other stakeholders see a major role for the private sector in all the Investment Programmes.  However, it needs to be recognized that the country is coming from a background where the government dominated the running of the economy. This implicitly left a weakened private sector that needs a considerable capacity building for it to effectively undertake its rightful role as an engine to propel the sector’s growth.

The Central Government’s facilitatory functions through MAL will include: strategic planning; oversight; policy formulation; capacity building of private sector and civil society organizations; enforcement of legislation; regulation and inspection; provision of basic agricultural and rural infrastructure; financing of the control of pests and diseases of national economic importance; sector coordination and overall monitoring and evaluation.

The Local Governments (at provincial and district levels) will offer investors in all the Investment Programmes incentives for identified ventures that are socially and environmentally sustainable. They will offer the necessary incentives for a heightened private sector is driven agricultural development agenda within their respective boundaries within the jurisdiction that presents a “win” for communities, LGs and the investor. Local governments will negotiate terms and conditions for concessions or contracts for management of infrastructures including Built, Own Operate and Transfer (BOOT) investments. They will ensure the availability of the socially and environmentally feasible sites for resource development and use within their districts or provinces.

The Central Government (CG) will provide advice to districts and communities on PPP arrangements/modalities. The government will identify and support aspects of proposed local infrastructure development plans that may encourage private investment. CG will establish systems for the routine dissemination of advice to local institutions from inter-district to the community level and to individual and community enterprises on sources of public investment funding; it will promote investments in commercial intensive ventures that also benefit communities.

The communities, community groups or community-based institutions will participate in negotiating terms, conditions and concessions for investments to ensure community concerns are addressed including, participating in recurrent monitoring and oversight of investments to ensure it is in consonance with community interests. The Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation (PME), which has been tested and proven during the implementation of the Zambia Social Investment Fund (ZAMSIF), will be used by communities for tracking implementation progress and impact of various interventions within community boundaries. Communities will provide services and labour forces required by local investments and generally take advantage to acquire new skills introduced by investors.

1.3  Financing Modalities

The financing of NAIP will follow a mixture of modalities that allows participating Cooperating Partners (CPs) and other actors to meet their reporting obligations to their respective governments and taxpayers. Nonetheless, the prefered modality of financing is the Direct Budget Support (DBS). Notwithstanding a particular mode of financing, all financing activities will come under the Integrated Financial Management Information System (IFMIS) whose roll out at national level began in 2012.

The financing of NAIP will follow a mixture of modalities that allows participating Cooperating Partners (CPs) and other actors to meet their reporting obligations to their respective governments and taxpayers. Nonetheless, the prefered modality of financing is the Direct Budget Support (DBS). Notwithstanding a particular mode of financing, all financing activities will come under the Integrated Financial Management Information System (IFMIS) whose roll out at national level began in 2012.

The NAIP will have a results-based M&E system. While not ignoring the lower level indicators (input and output) as these are critical to monitoring the implementation performance which ultimately leads to the achievement of the overall objectives (through the objective hierarchy), NAIP’s M&E system will have a deliberate focus on higher level indicators (outcomes and impacts). These are critical to tracking the intended change and benefits accruing to the primary and other beneficiaries targeted by NAIP interventions.

For optimum performance of the NAIP taking into account its relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability, there is a need for an M&E system that is robust and cost-effective. In this regard, the NAIP M&E system will incorporate the following 7 major components if it is to realize its mandate: (i) Clearly defined objectives; (ii) Clearly defined Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that meet SMART criteria; (iii) Clearly defined data collection methods for the indicators (including frequency for data collection); (iv) Institutional framework for data collection (including a definition of roles for all those involved); (v) Frequency of data collection and responsibility; (vi) Data analysis frequency and responsibility; and, (vii) Information dissemination plan, including the audience.

An M&E system as described above needs a minimum number of dedicated staff at all levels for it to be effective. It is, therefore, proposed that there be dedicated staff to deal with M&E at national, provincial and district level through established M&E units. The proposed minimum number of such staff at the various levels are as follows: National level, at least 5; provincial level, not less than 2 and district level, at least 3. It is thus envisaged that an M&E directorate will be established to ensure the monitoring and evaluation of the NAIP implementation performance are given the attention it deserves. A number of variables will be assessed to establish their impact including the impact of government policies on various farmer categories; the impact of climate change on production and productivity, and; the impact of technologies and farming practices. All data will be desegregated by gender to ensure detailed in-depth analysis of these variables on male and female farmers. This will facilitate gender-sensitive programming and technological development. The analysis will also be undertaken by agro-ecological zones, rural versus urban as well as farmer categories.

Three evaluations will be undertaken aimed at tracking the performance of the KPIs in the next 5 years namely; baseline, mid-line and end-line. Among others, the baseline evaluation will serve the purpose of confirming and updating the baseline values as well as fill the gaps where such values do not exist as is currently the case for many KPIs. There will need to incorporate new questions in the Post Harvest Survey to facilitate the collection of data for any important additional Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) in the NAIP, including per capita consumption of highly nutritive foods produced in the country. The mid-line is critical to review the extent to which NAIP will be on course in pursuing its overall goals and objectives halfway through its life. Consequently, a window of opportunity will be provided to make any necessary adjustments, if need be including adjustments of KPI values either upwards or downwards. The end-line will provide lessons during the overall implementation period of the Plan as well as provide a basis for informed decisions with regards to a possible phase II of NAIP and what the key focus areas of such a phase would be.

It is highly recommended that Annual Sector Performance Analysis (ASPA) be undertaken that would culminate in Annual Review meetings involving all key stakeholders. This will provide a forum for sector review as well as prioritize investment areas in the coming year. Consequently, the Annual Work Plan and Budget (AWPB) for the coming year will be informed by findings from the ASPA. IAPRI and the Department of Policy and Planning (PPD) of MAL are well placed to undertake these analyses.

Table 26 below identifies key risks that may be faced in the achievement of NAIP overall goal and objectives and provides a basis for determining how implementers of NAIP should address these risks.

Table 26:   Summary of Risk Analysis and Mitigation

Based on the above risk assessment, the overall risk of NAIP implementation is low. GRZ is currently implementing other supportive measures that will positively impact NAIP implementation performance such as the Integrated Financial Management Information System (IFMIS). The design of MAL’s integrated Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) system has reached an advanced stage. Once operational, the M&E system is expected to add value to the realization of NAIP objectives.