GHANA-SUMMARY OF REGIONAL CONSULTATIVE WORKSHOP ON

UNCLAS ACCRA 000149

NSC FOR CHRIS PRATT
STATE PASS USTR
STATE PASS PEACE CORPS
STATE PASS MCC
STATE PASS USADF

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ECON EAGR EAID ETRD KGHG SENV ENRG PREL GH
SUBJECT: GHANA-SUMMARY OF REGIONAL CONSULTATIVE WORKSHOP ON
GHFSI AND GCC

INTRODUCTION


1. USAID/West Africa hosted a Whole of Government workshop
in Accra, Ghana over February 8-12, 2010, on the
implementation in West Africa of the Global Hunger and Food
Security Initiative (GHFSI),as well as on the planning of
investments related to global climate change (GCC). Over 60
people active in these two areas from six U.S. Government
agencies -- State, USAID, the US Department of Agriculture
(USDA),Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR),
Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC),US Forest Service
(USFS),Peace Corps, and US African Development Foundation
(USADF) -- attended the workshop. Participants came from
Washington and from the six USAID missions active in the GHFSI
-- West Africa regional, Ghana, Liberia, Mali, Nigeria, and
Senegal -- as well as from the missions in Benin and the
Democratic Republic of Congo, and the embassies in Burkina
Faso and Mauritania. There was good representation from the
country and regional teams, including economic, commercial,
environmental, and agricultural officers from the embassies,
as well as management, program, and technical officers from
USAID.

--------------
GHFSI Outcomes
--------------


2. The three days of meetings on the Global Hunger and Food
Security Initiative produced the following outcomes:

- Mutual understanding of recent developments in the USG
strategy for the Global Hunger and Food Security
Initiative, including the five core principles guiding
the initiative: 1) comprehensive plan; 2) country-led and
owned; 3).strategic coordination; 4) multilateral
cooperation; and 5) sustained commitment. The meeting was
a valuable opportunity for the USG professionals
responsible for implementation in the field to discuss
issues with key representatives of the inter-agency team
from Washington.

- Sharing of experiences among agencies and missions on how
the Whole of Government approach can best contribute to
African country-led and regional strategies and
investment plans oriented around the Comprehensive Africa
Agricultural Development Program (CAADP),supported by
national governments and multiple donors. There were
presentations on how multilateral organizations and
funding mechanisms complement USG-supported programs.

- Sharing of experiences from country teams on their
progress putting Whole of Government principles into
operation at the field level.


- Clarification of the steps to be taken by the missions in
2010 to put in place a new architecture for the
implementation of significantly expanded activities to
meet the major objectives of the GHFSI. These are: 1)
Improved economic performance of the agricultural sector,
2) Improved nutritional status, and 3) Improved capacity
of vulnerable households to meet their food needs.

- Presentations and discussions on the planning and
implementation of programming in key component areas.
These were: 1) Vulnerability, reaching the ultra-poor and
linking development with humanitarian assistance; 2)
Nutrition; 3) Gender mainstreaming; 4) Transport
corridors and regionally integrated markets; 5) Building
capacity in public and private institutions; and 6) NRM,
climate change, and food security.

- Discussion in small groups of opportunities for joint
planning and potentially coordinated procurement in
program areas common across country teams. Points of
Contact for each group will follow up with plans for
further consultations and designs. The areas were: 1)
Capacity building; 2) Reaching the very poor; 3)

Nutrition, and 4) Seed and fertilizer supply chains.
- Second drafts of the Implementation Plans (IPs) for all
of the participating Missions for FY2010, as well as the
Diplomatic Strategies of each bilateral mission were
discussed in side meetings. The final bilateral IPs, due
March 1, will integrate the Diplomatic Strategies.

- The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) is

leading the process in West Africa, with the national and
regional compacts linked with each other and the CAADP
process running in parallel with ECOWAS's own
agricultural policy (ECOWAP). All five focus countries
represented at the meeting - Ghana, Liberia, Mali,
Nigeria, and Senegal - have already signed their
respective CAADP country compacts, as has ECOWAS at the
regional level (and seven others among ECOWAS's 15 member
states). In keeping with ECOWAS's key role in the
process, Ousseni Salifou, Commissioner for Agriculture,
Environment, and Water Resources, and Yamar Mbodj,
Advisor to the Commissioner, reported on the main
achievements, proposals to strengthen the approach, post-
compact actions, and a 2010 road map, all at both the
national and regional levels. USAID and other members of
the country teams have taken responsibility to work with
the agricultural donor groups in the five focus countries
and at the regional level, to move the process forward.
The post-compact approach focuses on the investment
plans, consultative and coordinating mechanisms,
monitoring and evaluation, and accountability. By the
end of April, the remaining four national compacts will
be signed, and during May and June, detailed investment
plans will be available for all 15 countries and at the
regional level.

- The USAID bilateral missions and the West Africa regional
mission gave presentations on the status of the
respective CAADP country or regional compacts and
implementation of the FY2009 supplemental funding. In
its presentation, USAID/Mali outlined how it is
facilitating the CAADP process in the country, which
signed its compact in October 2009. The mission is
providing support to the office within the Ministry of
Planning and Statistics responsible for CAADP and to the
Food Security Commission. The presentation stressed the
Whole of Government approach (involving State, USDA, MCC,
Commerce, Defense, USFS, the Peace Corps, and Food for
Peace) that was being pursued, as well as the involvement
of other donors in the effort. It also stressed the
importance of building the capacity of Malian Government
for leadership and analysis; in FY2010, USAID/Mali is
supporting capacity-building for a major university, key
ministries, and research institutions. USAID/Mali
concluded by appealing for a political push to motivate
the headquarters of other donors more enthusiastically to
support the CAADP process.


- USAID/Senegal in its presentation noted that the
following day (February 9) the country would be holding
its national CAADP round table, with about 400 people in
attendance. The round table had been postponed since
November 2009 to ensure the availability of the President
and to allow the donors to work out who should sign the
compact on their behalf. The national agricultural
investment plan could stand improvement, especially by
including more measurable impacts. There is a need for
the Presidential agricultural initiative GOANA (Grande
offensive pour la nourriture et l'abondance) to be
incorporated into the investment plan. USAID/Senegal
chairs two donor groups ones on environment and the
private sector and is active in the agricultural one.
The mission is supporting a great deal of capacity-
building this year, conducting an institutional analysis
with the Ministry of Agriculture, supporting the planning
unit at that ministry, and building the capacity of four
universities. The mission has been participating in a
Whole of Government approach for many years, with an
QWhole of Government approach for many years, with an
agreement with USDA on sanitary and phyto-sanitary work,
a major agreement with the Peace Corps, another with the
US Geological Survey, and FFP and OFDA active in the
country.

- USAID/Nigeria in its presentation noted that the national
CAADP compact had been signed in October 2009, with the
USAID Mission Director signing on behalf of the donor
community; the compact does not deal with nutrition,
trade, or policy issues. Mission projects, including
MARKETS (Maximizing Agricultural Resources and Key
Enterprises in Targeted Sites),have been adopted by the
Government of Nigeria as models for government
strategies, demonstrating the high degree of alignment
between the mission's programs and such strategies. A
national CAADP Secretariat is now being established to
coordinate and organize government activities in this
domain. Four donors in Nigeria (the African Development

Bank, World Bank, the UK's Department for International
Development, and USAID) have developed a country
partnership strategy, which is the core of the mission?s
strategic plan, while the UN's Food and Agriculture
Organization is coordinating the Food Security Technical
Group. As to the Whole of Government approach,
USAID/Nigeria has expanded work with USDA on the
productivity side, while work on improving the policy
environment is being undertaken by the International Food
Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) and West Africa node in
Ibadan of the Regional Strategic Analysis and Knowledge
Support System (ReSAKSS).

- USAID/Ghana noted that that country's national CAADP
compact had been signed in October 2009, with the World
Bank signing on behalf of all donors. The agricultural
sector working group, co-chaired by the Canadian
International Development Agency and the Ghanaian
Government, has been very active, with USAID playing a
major role. The next major step is that the Ministry of
Food and Agriculture will be holding an internal retreat
in March to increase its understanding of its capacity
gaps. The national agricultural investment plan carries
a price tag of 2.9 billion Ghana cedis (about $2 billion)
and is running hundreds of millions of Ghana cedis short.
There will be a joint sector review in June to review
progress toward meeting the CAADP goals. Some $12
million of the supplemental funds have been used to begin
the new ADVANCE (Agricultural Development and Value Chain
Enhancement) cooperative agreement, with the priority
commodities being maize, rice, sorghum, and soybeans.
IFPRI is leading the process of increasing capacity at
the Ministry of Agriculture, to the tune of $3.5 million
over four years. In terms of the Whole of Government
approach, USAID/Ghana has been taking the lead among
donors; the Ambassador or Deputy Chief of Mission chair
quarterly food security meetings. USAID/Ghana is looking
to scale up its agreements with USDA, while the Peace
Corps has submitted a proposal to place volunteers in
remote, rural areas in support of the GHFSI. Although
the mission has one staff member under the Development
Leadership Initiative, it still has a need for senior
technical advisors.

- USAID/Liberia observed that that country had signed its
compact in October 2009, with the USAID Mission Director
signing on behalf of the donor community. The process in
Liberia was slowed by the absence of a Minister of
Agriculture from February to September 2009. Even before
the compact was signed, USAID/Liberia was providing
capacity-building support to the Ministry of Agriculture,
and supporting rice seed certification through an
arrangement with the Africa Rice Center (WARDA) and
multiplying seeds working with the private and public
sectors. Additional ongoing projects deal with
infrastructure (feeder roads and bridges),potable water,
and cash crops (cocoa and rubber). The national
agricultural investment plan that accompanied the compact
has been costed out, but there has been no donor
coordination meeting to discuss it. As to the Whole of
Government approach, other agencies active in Liberia
include the Peace Corps, the Office of Defense
Cooperation, and USDA (especially, Food for Progress).
The mission is understaffed to manage its $35 million
annual Economic Growth portfolio, which includes
agriculture, natural resource management, infrastructure,
and enterprise development. The key constraint on
coordination with the Government of Liberia is capacity
Qcoordination with the Government of Liberia is capacity
within the Ministry of Agriculture, where expertise is
thin below the top level.

- USAID/West Africa noted in its presentation that the
ECOWAP/CAADP Compact has been validated and approved by
the ECOWAS Council of Ministers on October 22, 2009, in
Yamoussoukro. An international conference in Abuja on
financing ECOWAP/CAADP reviewed and approved the compact
on November 11-12, 2009. The ECOWAP/CAADP regional
compact has three components (known as Mobilizing
Programs),as follows: Promotion of strategic products
for food sovereignty ($450 million); Promotion of a
global environment conducive to regional agricultural
development ($270.5 million); and Reduction in food
insecurity and promotion of sustainable and stable access
($225 million). ECOWAS expects to contribute 15 percent
of the $900 million. Some donors have already indicated
their levels of contribution (for example, Spain has
pledged $300 million). USAID/West Africa has been

supporting the CAADP process in a number of ways, as
follows: supporting a long-term advisor (Mbodj) at the
ECOWAS Commission who works directly on the process;
monitoring country-level compact development; supporting
the preparation of Pillar 1 and 3 documents at the
continental level through the Permanent Interstate
Committee for Drought Control in the Sahel (CILSS);
supporting the preparation of Pillars 1 and 2 of the
Regional Agricultural Investment Plans and other
documents presented at the ECOWAS International
Conference on Financing; and very recently providing an
advisor on agricultural trade policy to ECOWAS through
the Agribusiness and Trade Promotion project. ECOWAS
continues to have capacity-building needs, particularly
with respect to its role in coordinating the
implementation of the national compacts in its 15 member
states. Although the Whole of Government approach is
complicated in the regional context by a host of factors,
USAID/West Africa has long cooperated with, and will ramp
up its cooperation with the USDA/Foreign Agriculture
Service's regional attaches in Dakar and Lagos, and with
USTR on trade policy issues, including trade/transport
corridors.

- A draft Results Framework for the Initiative was
presented and draft indicators against which expanding
activities will be monitored shared. Participants were
encouraged to provide comments and feedback by March 15.

- Proposed methods for impact assessment were discussed, as
well as the Mutual Accountability Framework being
developed for all of the partners linked to CAADP.

- Identification and discussion of key management issues of
staffing, procurement, technical support, and so on, that
will need to be resolved in each mission in 2010 as the
GHFSI and programs in climate change are scaled up.
Acquisition and Assistance officers from Washington and
the regional West Africa mission participated actively in
the discussions to find solutions.

--------------
GCC Outcomes
--------------


3. The two-day meeting on Global Climate Change produced the
following outcomes:

- Mutual understanding of how the U.S. Government is moving
forward in the context of the Copenhagen Accord with
programs in support of low-carbon economic growth and
adaptation to the probable effects of climate change.

- Preliminary discussions of how programs in the field
should be planned and implemented.

- Agreement on a recommendation that Whole of Government
country teams in Africa be fully involved in shaping the
development of the climate change program.
- Discussion of the need to balance the integration of
climate change programs into the GHFSI and other
portfolios of the missions in Africa on the one hand, and
the needs of Washington-based offices to track progress
of narrowly targeted policy priorities on the other.

--------------
Workshop sessions on GHFSI
--------------


4. Representatives of offices in Washington provided an
overview of recent developments. The GHFSI is a global, multi-
agency USG effort, led by an inter-agency team chaired by the
Counselor and Chief of Staff to the Secretary of State. USAID
is taking a lead role in implementation, working closely with
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB),the Treasury, USDA,
MCC, USTR, and others in a coordinated, Whole of Government
approach. Africa is in the spotlight because the chronically
poor and hungry constitute a larger proportion of the
population than in any other region of the world, and because
Qpopulation than in any other region of the world, and because
in spite of national economic growth, the proportion of the
population classified as poor has been increasing in many
countries in recent years. The GHFSI, which may be rebranded
as "Feed the Future," incorporates the objectives and
principles laid out at the G8 summit at L'Aquila, Italy, and
the Food Security Summit in Rome in 2009. An updated version
of the strategy document was distributed. A draft results

framework was presented and draft indicators were distributed
for discussion and feedback.


5. Presentations on the UN High Level Task Force on Food
Security and on multi-donor trust funds managed by the World
Bank provided the context within which the USG initiative is
working as part of broader multi-lateral efforts. The
Consultative Group on International Agriculture Research
(CGIAR) system of international agricultural research centers
has mobilized multilateral support for many years. The centers
have long-term presence in many countries, and have built the
capacity of national systems to generate applied research,
policy options, and technology dissemination through
partnerships.


6. African governments, in partnership with the private
sector, civil society, and the international donor community,
have taken a leadership role through CAADP. CAADP Country
Compacts are endorsements by governments and development
partners of evidence-based sector-wide strategies. After these
are signed, the next step is to work towards comprehensive
plans for investment and policy reform that will be externally
reviewed by a team of experts mobilized by ECOWAS. CAADP is a
country-led, not an exclusively government-led process. The
process must include effective consultations with private
sector and civil society organizations, as well as with the
agricultural donor working groups. A policy reform agenda is a
key element in every strategy. USAID and other members of the
country teams have taken responsibility to work with the
agricultural donor groups to advance the CAADP process as the
keystone partnership for the GHFSI in Africa.


7. In Washington, the Whole of Government approach has
brought together State, Treasury, USDA, USTR, MCC, and other
agencies with USAID to develop the GHFSI. The draft
Implementation Plans developed by each of the USAID missions
in the target countries have been reviewed by the interagency
teams. In addition, the country teams led by State have
submitted Diplomatic Strategies tied to the Initiative. These
lay the foundation for the Whole of Government process in the
field, identify key areas for policy reform, and name country
and regional forums for disseminating information.
Presentations by representatives the MCC, USTR, and USDA, as
well as one sent from Treasury, provided information on how
country teams can best link with their programs and resources.
Representatives from each country team summarized their
progress. The Peace Corps and the USADF also participated in
the meeting. The final IPs, due March 1, will incorporate the
technical programs, updated Whole of Government linkages, and
the diplomatic strategies.


8. A key objective of the GHFSI in 2010 is to lay evidence-
based foundations for further scaling up in 2011 and beyond.
The core objectives of the initiative are 1) Improved economic
performance of the agricultural sector, 2) Improved
nutritional status, and 3) Improved capacity of vulnerable
households to meet their food needs. Linked to these are a
number of other key topic areas. Presentations and working
groups discussed how country teams can best address these
issues, and how they can work together to assemble relevant
analysis, plan and perhaps also to jointly implement certain
activities. Among the issues discussed were the following:

- Reaching the poor and vulnerable: linking humanitarian
assistance with agriculture-based growth;

- Regional integration and transport corridors, to increase
regional trade and the availability of staple foods

through improved access to markets for producers and
reduced transactions costs;

- Building integrated, cross-sectoral programs on
nutrition, to set standards of accountability for
measurable decreases in the prevalence of underweight
children and to support country-led processes to reduce
under-nutrition;

- Incorporating women and youth into development processes;

- Integrating natural resource management and adaptation to
the effects of climate change into programs linked to the
GHFSI; and

- Coordinated capacity-building, to provide short-term
training to African partners in public and private
institutions to strengthen their capabilities to
contribute to programs and objectives of CAADP.



--------------
Management Issues
--------------



9. Within USAID in particular, key management issues of
staffing, procurement, technical support, and so on, will need
to be resolved in each mission in 2010 as the GHFSI and
programs on climate change are scaled up. All of the missions
urgently need more people, including qualified and experienced
professional staff. In addition, "surge teams" of experts
available from Washington and the regional missions must be
expanded to assist in program designs, reviews, and
evaluations. Ways must be found to deal effectively with very
real constraints including National Security Decision
Directive 38 (NSDD-38) ceilings on staff, office space,
housing, support budgets, International Cooperative
Administrative Support Services (ICASS) charges, and lengthy
administrative approval processes. It was recommended that the
GHFSI indicators and reporting requirements, as well as the
definitions of funding categories, be integrated with existing
mechanisms as much as possible. Participants called for more
certain budget levels in out-years to facilitate multi-year
programming. Participants appreciated the difficulty of
devising a process that was both country-led and governed by a
common, Africa-side approach under a single Results Framework.
Senior staff participated actively in these discussions, and
expressed agreement on the need to work together to find
solutions.


10. Led by members of USAID's Office of Acquisition and
Assistance (A&A) from Washington and the region, the group
discussed flexible ways of setting up grants and contracts to
scale up activities. The field is receiving mixed signals. On
the one hand, the OMB recently issued a paper calling for
reductions in costs and risks to the government, reducing
reliance on Indefinite Quantity Contracts, and encouraging
smaller implementing agreements with increased participation
by small businesses and African partners. On the other, the
missions and country teams are being encouraged to find
mechanisms to reduce the number and complexity of procurement
mechanisms and management units. New requirements for
Congressional notification for proposed procurements above
specified thresholds are in the FY2010 Appropriations Bill.
A&A offices both in Washington and in the field are over-
stretched already. A&A specialists should be brought into the
early stages of planning, so that programs can be scaled up
quickly and effectively, using appropriate mechanisms within
the framework of agency and administration policies.


11. The U.S. Government interagency team met with
representatives of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs),
commercial banks, consulting companies, and philanthropic
foundations. The consultation provided an opportunity to
update the group on the consultation process, to document and
review the principles underlying the initiative, and to
describe the planning for implementation that is taking place.
Meeting participants were appreciative of the consultations
that the U.S. Government has supported. They raised questions
regarding the role of private commercial banks in the process,
where CAADP fits within the GHFSI, and the importance of
capacity-building for African institutions (as opposed to the
conventional approach of funding projects implemented by
companies and NGOs from the developed world).


--------------
Workshop sessions on Climate Change
--------------



12. USAID/West Africa hosted U.S. Government staff from

missions across West and Central Africa and offices in
Washington to plan for scaling up USAID's climate change
investments. The two days included discussions on how USAID
is organizing itself to address climate change, an update on
outcomes from the UN negotiations in Copenhagen in December
that will impact USG policy and programs, and emerging
analysis on opportunities for USAID climate change investments
in Africa. Several USAID missions shared their experience in
addressing climate change issues through existing investments
in biodiversity, clean energy, and adaptation.


13. In Copenhagen, the U.S. committed itself to spending $1
billion on REDD-related (UN Collaborative Programmed on

Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation
in Developing Countries) activities over the next three years.
In addition, the U.S. will contribute its share of an
international commitment to spending $10 billion per year on
climate change over the next three years, rising to $100
billion per year by 2020. Lastly, pending legislation in
Congress is likely to shape the direction of the USG's climate
change investments. USAID is still determining Copenhagen?s
impact on priorities, programs, and reporting on investments.


14. In meetings with representatives of USAID/Washington's
Office of the Sustainable Development under the Africa Bureau
and Bureau of Economic Growth, Agriculture, and Trade, each
mission provided updates on national policy development on
climate change and discussed potential USAID investment areas
and technical assistance needs. Missions also provided input
to emerging priorities. Although there were some areas where
the data did not reflect the current situation, many missions
felt that the analysis did provide a sound basis on which to
lay out budget priorities.


15. Missions noted that they would like the field to be more
involved in shaping the development of the climate change
program. Participants felt that there was a disconnect
between Washington's expectation that climate change funds
meet narrowly targeted policy priorities and field missions'
emphasis on integrated programming that meets key development
priorities, including climate change. In particular, there
was concern that the narrow definitions of mitigation may mean
the discontinuation of funding for long-standing, successful
programs, such as support for the West African Power Pool, and
the inability to support fossil-fuel based initiatives that
clearly reduce carbon emissions, such as efforts to reduce gas
flaring in Nigeria. Another key question was the nexus
between programming in the areas of biodiversity and climate
change, with the view widely expressed that areas containing
important biodiversity should not be totally ignored in favor
of ones with the greatest potential for carbon mitigation.


16. Questions and issues from all participants were collected
throughout both sessions of the workshop. Many of these were
discussed in the meetings, and other will be addressed on the
interactive website Food Security, Sustainable Trade, and
Environmental Resilience (FOSTER)
(http://communities.usaidallnet.gov/foster).

TEITELBAUM