Programme Evaluation of FAO Activities In

Auto-Evaluation of FAO Activities in Technical Support Services to Member Nations and the Field Programme (Programme Entity 222S1) and FAO/World Bank/USDA Initiative for Agricultural Statistics in Africa (Programme Entity 222A2) FINAL REPORT

29.06.2006

Summary report Description of the Programme Entities The main activity to be implemented under the two programme entities is the formulation, implementation and technical supervision of field projects in support of national agriculture statistics systems, on request of countries, mainly through external and FAO TCP funding. Another important activity covered by the PE 222S1 is the organisation of the biennial sessions of FAO Regional Commissions on Agricultural Statistics (FAO Statutory Bodes in Statistics) Under the two PEs, direct assistance, technical workshops and seminars were also to be provided to countries to strengthen their capacity in the compilation of socio-economic indicators and supply- utilisation accounts/food balance sheets. Main Findings Overall, the auto-evaluation noted a general improvement in the results of assistance in statistics at country level. Under the two PEs, ESS was very effective in adjusting to changes in donor priorities and mobilising resources with projects funds reaching 7 to 9 millions US dollars per biennium. Notable results have been also achieved in capacity building and there are now much more qualified agriculture statisticians in countries, particularly in developing countries. Also, achievements can be noted in basic data production with a large number of countries conducting censuses of agriculture and agriculture surveys with assistance of FAO.

However the participants to the auto-evaluation found that sustainability of project results remains an important issue in many countries. Also a general declining trend (in real terms) in FAO resources allocated to statistics in a context of increasing demand for assistance and decreasing donor support to agriculture statistics has been noted with concerns.

The participants noted that major changes are taking place in the agricultural sector and the rural world with issues of poverty, food security, sustainable development, environment and gender getting high priority on the policy agenda both at international and national levels. They noted that FAO past assistance to national statistical systems remained mainly concentrated on traditional areas of agriculture statistics and that a more comprehensive coverage and an integrated approach are needed to deal with these emerging data needs. It was also considered that past assistance did not do enough to take into account possible synergies and potential economies of scale associated with providing assistance and addressing needs at regional or sub-regional levels.

The participants to the auto-evaluation noted that, statistical capacity building activities require longer gestation period and more resources which cannot be adequately supported by short-term projects such as TCP interventions. It was suggested that FAO should seek funding for specific capacity building projects. Another important issue was the absence of effective follow-up mechanism to the implementation of the recommendations from Commission meetings as well as training sessions. The auto-evaluation also found that ESS should do more t0o improve its communication with national statistical offices.

Major Recommendations 1. FAO assistance programme should continue to concentrate where it has comparative advantage while taking into account new data needs associated with emerging priority policy issues: poverty, food security, gender, environment. It should give priority to assisting countries in developing longer term perspective and plans for food and agriculture statistics development within the overall national system of statistics and driven by priority policy data needs. 2. Project formulation should put an emphasis on national ownership and commitment. A critical assessment and analysis of the pertinence of country requests and commitment for follow-up, including allocation of required resources should be systematically done when formulating an assistance project. Given possible synergies and potential economies of scale associated with providing assistance and addressing needs at regional or sub-regional levels it was recommended that FAO, together with Regional Economic Communities and Groupings and donors, should whenever possible explore the possibility of regional/sub-regional assistance projects. 3. In order to address the funding issue of assistance to national agriculture statistics systems, the auto-evaluation recommended that ESS should make efforts to build strategic alliances with national, regional and international institutions (Universities and Academics, Economic Research Institutions, Technical Cooperation Agencies, etc..) which could provide complementary services or funding or add value to the interventions of FAO projects. In this sense, it is recommended that terms of References of ESS staff and Consultants should systematically include the assessment of potential partners. It is also recommended that ESS should work more closely with Regional Offices and FAO Technical Cooperation Department to analyse donor assistance frameworks to countries in order to identify opportunities for assistance in agriculture statistics. This should facilitate the identification of potential emerging donors such as South Korea, Thailand, Malaysia etc.. 4. Regarding the content and coverage of the projects, the approaches taken in the new world programme for census of agriculture and CountrySTAT (integrated and modular approach) is supported. More emphasis should be also put on capacity building/transfer of skills and knowledge with special attention to data analysis. Specific capacity building projects at regional/sub-regional level are recommended. 5. Given the important changes and innovations in normative development made recently by ESS, and the importance of the quality of consultants and experts used in field projects, it is recommended that technical briefing and training/up-dating of these experts and consultants on new approaches and tools be included in the programme of ESS. The new developments need also to be more disseminated to all stakeholders, including Donor community. Short pamphlets on modules or supplementary surveys in the new World Programme for Census of Agriculture may be prepared and disseminated. The same applies for CountrySTAT. 6. Regarding Regional Commission meetings and other Workshops and Seminars, it was recommended that more effective mechanisms for follow-up of the implementation of recommendations should be put in place. 7. In order to address the concerns related to communication between ESS and national statistics offices, it is recommended that ESS explores all possible avenues to improve the linkages and communication with these offices in order to better understand their problems and find adequate solutions: Commission meetings, field visits as well as internet and other ways may be used.

2 A. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROGRAMME ENTITIES

Direct assistance to Member Nations and assistance through the field programme are important components of the Statistics Division’s mission. Technical Support Services to Member Nations and the Field Programme (222S1) and FAO/World Bank/USDA Initiative for Agricultural Statistics in Africa (222A2) are primarily designed to contribute to strengthening national systems of agricultural statistics to enable them to provide an increasing quantity and better quality data in support of national policies and as an input to FAO global database. Work under these programme entities contribute to FAO's Corporate Strategy E, Strategic Objectives E.1 – an integrated information resource base, with current, relevant and reliable statistics, information and knowledge made accessible to all FAO clients and E.3 – a central place for food security on the international agenda.

The FAO Strategic Framework 2000-2015 under “Corporate Strategy E-Improving decision- making through provision of information and assessments and fostering of knowledge management for food and agriculture” recognises that “the demand for information, both existing time series and new data elements, is forecast to continue to grow and to change, with an increasing requirement for information in support of policy advice, and to ensure that crucial emerging issues are authoritatively and forcefully placed upon the international agenda. It is further noted that there appears to be a decline in the quality of country level data collection systems which are the main sources of FAO’s data”.

This auto-evaluation examines work undertaken during the past 3 biennia (2000-2005) both under the Regular Programme and Field Programme, including activities funded under TCP and extra-budgetary funds. It examines the activities related to each of the Major Outputs of the two Programme Entities (222S1 and 222A2) with particular emphasis on (i) the direct advice and assistance to countries and field projects and (ii) the Statutory Body meetings. It will therefore cover the following major outputs (including their predecessors).

Programme Entity 222S1: Technical Support Services to Member Nations and Field Programme

This PE includes four Major Outputs: (i) Advice/assistance to countries and capacity building in socio-economic indicators (MO 523); (ii) Advice/assistance to countries and capacity building in Supply Utilisation Accounts and Food balance Sheets (MO 534); (iii) Advice/assistance to countries on development of integrated systems of food and agricultural statistics and agricultural censuses (MO 547); (iv) Meetings of Statistical Commissions and Statutory Bodies (MO 563).

It should be noted that up to the PWB 2000/01, the MO 563 was part of the PE 222P3: Agricultural Statistics Development. Before PWB 2000/01 PE 222S1 mainly covered Technical and Advisory services and support to the field programme (MO 547). The changes in the structure and composition of the PE took place with the PWB 2002/03.

3 Programme Entity: 222A2: FAO/World Bank/USDA Initiative for Agricultural Statistics in Africa

This Programme Entity includes three Major Outputs: (i) Conceptual frameworks and programmes (MO 541); (ii) Data quality assessment, data harmonisation, storage and dissemination (MO 542); (iii) Technical supervision and evaluation (MO 543)

The main activity to be implemented under the two programme entities is the formulation, implementation and technical supervision of field projects in support of national agriculture statistics systems, on request of countries, mainly through external and FAO TCP funding. Another important activity covered by the PE 222S1 is the organisation of the biennial sessions of FAO Regional Commissions on Agricultural Statistics (FAO Statutory Bodes in Statistics):  African Commission on Agricultural Statistics (AFCAS)  Asia and Pacific Commission on Agricultural Statistics (APCAS)  Working Group on Agricultural Statistics in Latin America and Caribbean region (FAO- OAS/CIE-IICA)  FAO/ECE/CES Study Group on Food and Agricultural Statistics in Europe  Statistics Advisory Committee of Experts (SAC)

Under the two PEs, direct assistance, technical workshops and seminars were also to be provided to countries to strengthen their capacity in the compilation of socio-economic indicators and supply-utilisation accounts/food balance sheets. It should be noted that these training activities are only part of the overall capacity building effort provided by the Division. In particular, PE 222P3 includes also an important component of capacity building related to Censuses and Survey methodologies and other technical subjects related to national systems of food and agriculture.

B. AUTO-EVALUATION PROCESS

The auto-evaluation process began with deskwork for information-gathering and portfolio analysis. The purpose was to analyse the changes in the scope, funding sources, geographical distribution, structure of the portfolio of statistics projects formulated and implemented under the two PEs as well as the modalities of implementation over the years (from 90’s to 2005). Information and data from the internal ESSS database on projects, project evaluation reports as well as information from FPMIS have been gathered and analysed to derive trends and directions of the assistance. The output of this work is attached in annex 1. with statistical data tables and graphs on the evolution of the portfolio of statistics projects over the past years.

Reports from the meetings of the Regional Commissions were also consulted as well as reports on other workshops and seminars conducted under the two PEs. The report of the External Evaluation of Activities related to Agricultural Statistics in FAO conducted in 2002/2003 provided important information and context for the auto-evaluation.

A process of consultation with selected recipient Member Nation representatives, Senior International Consultants and FAO staff in Headquarters and in regional offices was done.

4 Regarding the external experts, a limited but highly qualified and experienced representatives and consultants were carefully selected for this consultation. A brief background on the experts consulted is provided in annex.1. The consultation was conducted in two steps:

1) A survey using detailed questionnaire was designed and conducted. The questionnaire was sent to a representative sample of Heads of National Agriculture Statistics Offices of selected recipient countries, senior international consultants with field experience covering a wide range of countries in all major regions. The questionnaire included the main issues to be covered by the auto-evaluation. The design allowed for close responses as well as open comments and suggestions. Eleven responses were received, processed and analysed (both close responses and open comments were analysed). The geographical distribution of the respondents is as follow: Africa (4); Asia (2); Latin America and Caribbean (1); Eastern Europe (1); Near East (1); FAO Regional Office for Latin America and Caribbean (1); FAO former Operations Chief (1). The results from the close questions are summarised in annex 5. Given the high level of the participants, their broad experience and knowledge of the situation in countries of the regions that they represented as well as the FAO field projects in Statistics, Regional Commission meetings and technical training, this survey provided very relevant information for the assessment of the two PEs and suggestions for the future.

2) A two-day roundtable meeting of a selected panel of experts (including some of the respondents to the questionnaire survey) was organised at FAO Headquarters. All major FAO Regions were represented: Africa (2); Asia (2) Latin America and Caribbean (1); Near East (1); Eastern Europe (1). Four ESS staff concerned with the PEs participated in the meeting of the panel. The panel made an overview of FAO field programme, technical support services to Member Nations and regional commission meetings during the period 2000-2005. It discussed the Relevance, Design Implementation, Processes, Efficiency and management as well as Results and Effectiveness of corresponding Programme Entities. The panel also discussed (with the participation of the Statistics Division Director), current and future direction as well as focus and main innovations being introduced by ESS in its activities to make its support to countries more effective. During the panel meeting, a session was dedicated to discussions with the Heads of TCAP and TCP on the assessment of past ESS field projects and overall changes taking place in donor funding availability, priorities and requirements for future field projects in the new environment of FAO. The panel made several important recommendations which are taken into account in this report.

The auto-evaluation also benefited from conclusions of a one-day meeting with a Senior Consultant in the form of a Peer Review with focus on the effectiveness of FAO assistance in Agricultural Statistics in Africa Region. All Senior Staff of ESS attended this meeting which addressed several issues very relevant to the auto-evaluation.

5 C. MAIN FINDINGS

Contribution of the PEs to FAO Strategic Framework and the mandate

A primary function of the Organisation embodied in its constitution is to collect, analyse, interpret and disseminate information relating to nutrition, food and agriculture. The Strategic Framework stipulates that the two PEs should contribute to FAO's Strategic Objectives E.1 – an integrated information resource base, with current, relevant and reliable statistics, information and knowledge made accessible to all FAO clients and E.3 – a central place for food security on the international agenda

The large majority of participants to the auto-evaluation found that the PEs corresponded very well to the thrust of the mandate of FAO. They found that ESS has used efficiently the vehicle of field projects in the delivery of Technical Assistance to needy member nations in order to enable them to provide to FAO, current, relevant and reliable statistics. The auto-evaluation also found that the strengthening of national capacity which is part of many statistics projects, has also resulted in the existence of a large number of nationals with adequate technical capacity in agriculture statistics.

Relevance of PEs activities to Member Nations

The two Programme Entities, Technical Support Services to Member Nations and the Field Programme (222S1) and FAO/World Bank/USDA Initiative for Agricultural Statistics in Africa (222A2) were found highly relevant by Representatives from Member Nations, as well as members of the panel of experts. The large majority of the respondents to the questionnaire found that the activities and outputs related to field programme, direct assistance and meetings were very relevant to the needs of the intended target audiences (government statisticians, analysts and planners in governments, World Bank, other development partners, private sector). The same percentage of respondents found also that the capacity building activities were very relevant.

Field Programme The portfolio analysis showed that on average 20 to 30 projects were formulated and implemented during each biennium with an average budget of US$ 350,000 to US$ 450,000 per project as compared to an average of more than US$ 1,000,000 in the 80’s. The average duration of projects is about 18 months actually. The analysis showed that there is a larger number of smaller and shorter projects now that in the 80’s. Therefore the technical assistance is mainly provided through short missions of ESS staff and consultants as opposed to longer term experts as was the case in the 80’s. In line with the principles of decentralisation, regional and sub- regional statisticians are on the front line for providing technical assistance and responding to country requests. Four regional/sub-regional statistician posts are located respectively in the Regional Office for Africa (RAF), Accra, Ghana; the Sub-regional Office for Eastern and Southern Africa (SAFR), Harare, Zimbabwe; the Regional Office for Asia and Pacific (RAP), Bangkok, Thailand and the Regional Office for Latin America and Caribbean (RLC), Santiago, Chili.

6 The main subject covered by the field programme during the period under review remained the assistance to the Census of Agriculture with more than 50% of the projects supporting this activity. Development or rehabilitation of permanent systems of agriculture statistics systems were also important subjects with 25-30% of projects.

In general, field projects are the response to specific requests from countries and therefore, they address the requirement of member nations for data and statistics. However the participants to the auto-evaluation found that sustainability of project results is an issue in many countries. It was suggested that a preliminary and detailed assessment of country commitment to the project objectives and its follow up including proper allocation of funds for follow up should be more systematically done during the formulation phase. The findings and conclusions of this assessment should be an important input to FAO process of approval of the assistance.

Another issue raised was the fact that FAO was not a funding agency and has only limited resources under the two PEs. In fact these resources in real terms have followed a declining trend other time:

1996/97 1998/99 2000/01 2002/03 2004/05 222A2 478 409 421 222P3* 2047 2136 1693 222S1 1025 1552 1736 Total 4602 3350 3550 4097 3850 222A2+222S1 1503 1961** 2157** * the budget for Statutory Body Meetings was included in this PE until 2000/01 ** These budgets include funds allocated to statutory body meetings

Given the small number of staff associated with this limited resources, there is a significant increase of the workload for those Division staff dealing with projects.

Therefore it was suggested that activities under these PEs should aim at developing strategic partnerships with national, regional and international institutions and agencies which may be concerned with the project activities. In this sense, it is advised to include in the TOR's of consultants and FAO staff dealing with project formulation and implementation, the identification of potential partners among other agencies and institutions, working in this area.

The participants noted that major changes are taking place in the agriculture sector and the rural world with issues of poverty, food security, sustainable development, environment and gender getting high priority on the policy agenda both at international and national levels. They therefore recommended that FAO assistance to national statistical systems should pay more attention to new data needs for these emerging policy issues. The activities should emphasize the analysis and use of data and address issues related to improving data quality at country level. A more comprehensive coverage and an integrated approach are suggested to make linkages with other disciplines within the Organization. This should be done in the broader framework of MDGs that are of most relevance to FAO’s mandate and within the overall statistical framework of countries. The assistance should aim at offering to countries modern technological packages that they can readily integrate in their planning frameworks. Under FAO assistance projects,

7 support should also given to the analysis of country assistance strategy documents prepared by many donors in order to identify potential entry points for support to agriculture statistics development.

It was considered that past assistance did not do enough to take into account possible synergies and potential economies of scale associated with providing assistance and addressing needs at regional or sub-regional levels. Scattered country-level projects by FAO were found insufficient in many regions. It was recommended that FAO, together with other donors, should whenever possible consider the possibility of regional/sub-regional assistance projects.

Regional Commissions and Statistical Advisory Committee meetings, Technical Workshops It was found that the Regional Statistical Commission meetings provide good venues for exchange of information and experiences among member countries. Moreover, they provide a forum for sharing and finding solutions to statistics-related problems common to member countries. During the period under review, three biennial Regional meetings were organised as follow:  AFRICA: 17th , 18th 19th AFCAS respectively in 2001, 2003 and 2005  ASIA and PACIFIC: 18th , 19th 20th APCAS respectively in 2000, 2002 and 2004  EUROPE: 25th , 26th 27th FAO/ECE/CES Study Group respectively in 2001, 2003 and 2005  LATIN AMERICA: 20th , 21th 22th FAO/OAS/CIE /IICA Working Group respectively in 2001, 2003 and 2005.  SAC: 13th and 14th Session in 2004 and 2005

It was noted that major innovations were introduced by ESS (in collaboration with Regional Statisticians) in these meetings to make them more effective in using time and addressing substantive issues which resulted in their revitalisation and a significant improvement in the level and number of participants, particularly in Africa Region.

A Technical Workshop open to major stakeholder of food and agriculture statistics development was organised in partnership with other Agencies (World Bank, PARIS21, French Cooperation) back-to-back and prior to regular Commission Sessions. This was done for Africa in 2001, 2003 and 2005. This change proved to be very successful as it allowed more open discussion on substantive technical subjects with high level and diversified participants.

A second innovation was the replacement of country statements by a more structured presentation on the state of food and agriculture systems in countries of the regions and major issues of interest. A standard questionnaire was prepared in advance and completed by countries to serve as background information for the report. This was first done for the 18th AFCAS in 2003 and repeated in other regions and other sessions. This change was also found very positive.

Two meetings of the Statistics Advisory Committee of Experts were organised in 2004 and 2005. This important statutory body which was discontinued was re-established following recommendations from the External Evaluation of Agriculture Statistics in FAO. The meetings reviewed ESS activities, particularly FAOSTAT/CountrySTAT project and the new World

8 Programme for census of Agriculture 2010. The Committee provided important technical advice and recommendations.

Regional Training Sessions (National Demonstration Centres) were organised in all regions on FAO methodologies for deriving Food Security Indicators from Household Income Expenditure Surveys results. Training and workshops on Supply Utilisation Accounts and Food balance Sheets were also organised in all regions. Round table meetings on the census programme, technical workshops on statistics systems for food security and workshops on livestock statistics were organised in most regions. It should be noted also that many project activities address capacity building concerns of requesting countries. The seminars, workshop and Training in general were found relevant to the needs of countries.

The participants to the auto-evaluation however noted that, statistical capacity building activities require longer gestation period and more resources which cannot be adequately supported by short-term projects such as TCP interventions. In addition to the usual assistance projects, it was suggested that FAO should seek funding for specific projects focusing on capacity building (Trust Funds). Regional and sub-regional perspective should be considered in these projects.

The participants stressed the need to strengthen or put in place more effective follow-up mechanisms for the implementation of the recommendations from Commission meeting and training Sessions. Also regional perspective on training sessions was recommended as much as possible.

Responding to needs and efficiency

The participants found that ESS has been in general quite responsive when dealing with country needs for support in agricultural statistics and has delivered satisfactorily. The analysis of the portfolio of field projects indicates an increasing diversification regarding geographical distribution of projects and sources of funding. All FAO regions are now covered with projects as compared to the past were projects tended to be concentrated in Africa, Asia and to some extent Latin America. In addition to TCP funding, six trust fund sources are now supporting the field projects (EC, World Bank, French Cooperation, Japan, Italian Cooperation, UTF/country funds, ) as compared to the situation in the 80s where more than 90% of funds were coming from UNDP alone. During the period under review, under the PEs some major census projects have been formulated and or implemented successfully. Some examples are given below:  The first Census of Agriculture of China funded by Italian Cooperation for a budget of US$ 16,000,000  The Census of Agriculture and Livestock in Niger funded by European Union for the equivalent of US$ 8,000,000.  The Census of Agriculture in Cote d’Ivoire funded by European Union for a total amount equivalent to US$ 5,000,000  The Census of Agriculture of Lebanon funded by the Government through the World Bank for a budget of more than US$ 3, 000,000.

9 The Census projects of Lebanon, Côte d’Ivoire and Niger followed a preparatory assistance from FAO/TCP which facilitated the mobilization of the bigger project funding. This catalytic use of TCP resources in statistics projects was recognized and appreciated by TCOT.

Under PE 222A2, two capacity building and regional projects were formulated and implemented mainly in Africa region: Project GCP/INT/874/WBK: Strengthening Agriculture Statistics for Poverty Reduction and Food Security in Rural Africa, funded by the World Bank for US$ 400,000 and Project GCP/INT/903/FRA: Appui au Renforcement des Systèmes d’Information et de Statistiques Rurales en Afrique, funded by French Cooperation for the equivalent of US$ 490,000. The idea of these two projects emanated from AFCAS meetings and partnership with the World Bank, PARIS21, French Cooperation and other Agencies. Also, regional project GCP/RAS/184/JPN Strengthening Regional Data Exchange on Food and Agriculture Statistics in Asia and Pacific Countries, funded by Japan for US$ 1,260,000 emanated from APCAS meetings and covers 16 countries in Asia.

Despite its limited resources, the Statistics Division made effective effort under the two PEs to adapt to changing environment and maintain an adequate level of mobilization of external funds to support national agricultural statistics systems.

The technical content of the projects drew to a large extent on normative work developed by ESS under the other PEs, particularly:  the world programmme for census of agriculture (PE 222P3)  the Supply/Utilization accounts and Food Balance Sheets (222P1)  Indicators of food insecurity (222P2)

The majority of the respondents to the survey found that ESS has been very effective in maintaining synergy and balance between normative and operational work.

In recent years, with the modernization of FAOSTAT, a new framework based on FAOSTAT framework, CountrySTAT was developed by the Division. It is aimed at assisting countries in developing an integrated system of food and agriculture statistics in a consistent way, to facilitate harmonization, exchange and dissemination of information using modern IT tools. CountrySTAT framework is seen by ESS as an integrating framework and vehicle for future assistance in food and agriculture statistics to Member Nations.

The participants to the auto-evaluation appreciated the efforts being made by ESS to adapt its assistance programme to new environment and emerging needs. They recommended that ESS should continue in this direction and stressed the need for better integration of statistics activities with the other FAO area of technical competence and thus more effectively exploit the Organizations multi-disciplinary strengths. FAO assistance should remain focused and building on the Organization’s comparative advantage of neutrality and honest broker through continuous improvement, identification and adoption of best “statistical” practice.

At national level, the participants recommended that a high priority should be given to supporting strategic planning of national systems of statistics and mainstreaming food and agriculture statistics in this process. This should be done in close collaboration with national

10 authorities and other partners, in particular PARIS21 with whom the Division has already established working relations.

Communication between ESS and national offices of agriculture statistics seems to be below expectations according to some respondents: only a limited number of them found that ESS was very effective while number of respondents from countries found that ESS was not effective. The participants therefore recommended that ESS should make efforts to improve communication and linkages with other international organisations and countries in order to be more informed of their problems and develop more suitable solutions. In this sense, it was suggested that a specific area on ESS web page could be open to receiving feedbacks and linkages with NSOs and national agricultural statistics offices.

Some participants found that sometimes the process of project approval takes too much time and that efforts should be made to reduce the time needed for the approval of projects. However, it was recognised that this was an issue which does not depend only on ESS since many units in FAO and at Donor Agencies may be involved in the process.

Quality and effectiveness of outputs under the PEs

The participants found that direct advice and assistance through field projects was generally of high quality. This good quality is affirmed by the large number of countries and institutions that are ready to draw planning inferences from the data obtained in close collaboration with the ESS Division and the extent to which they wish to see the Division associated in the implementation of their technical assistance programmes in the area of statistics.

However, a significant number of respondents to the survey found that the coverage of gender, environmental, food security and poverty issues was limited. The participants recommended that ESS should strengthen its efforts in developing a more coherent framework that would integrate these important topics in its statistical assistance programme. In this sense, they recommended that specific methodological guidelines should be developed on these topics by the division. Also training for the analysis and efficient use of statistical information should be part of the assistance programme.

The participants also noted that past censuses were often designed and implemented as stand alone operations not linked to current data production systems despite FAO recommendations in past programmes which implied that the Census of Agriculture should be part of an integrated programme. In some cases, data generated by the census was not compatible with current statistics and was not fully used. The new approach developed by ESS in the World Programme for Census of Agriculture 2010 was found to address this issue to a large extent. It reiterates more strongly the need to design the Census of Agriculture as a component of an integrated census and survey programme and introduces a modular approach with core module and thematic modules. The participants recommended that assistance to censuses of agriculture systematically include follow-up current agriculture surveys and permanent systems in the form of an integrated survey and census programme with attention paid to reconciling census data with current time series before and after the census in order to minimise conflicting data.

11 Some participants also commented on the quality of consultants by FAO used in field projects (particularly the use of TCDC experts in some circonstances) which has a significant impact on the quality of services provided. They recommended that FAO should be very selective in the recruitment of consultants and experts in its field programme. They further recommended that periodic evaluation to assess the quality of advice and assistance should be conducted involving the beneficiaries.

Regarding effectiveness, it was recognised that this does not depend solely on FAO's work as commitment of countries with the follow up actions is crucial. Recommendations made in previous paragraphs apply also here: systematic assessment of country commitment, better communication with national offices, strategic planning to better set priorities. The participants also recommended that FAO should promote more dialogue and advocacy within countries with decision makers, Planers, Cooperation Agencies, Academics and other Partners.

D. ISSUES, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS

The majority of participants to the auto-evaluation found that the PEs corresponded very well to the thrust of the mandate of FAO. They found that ESS has used efficiently the vehicle of field projects in the delivery of Technical Assistance to needy member nations in order to enable them to provide to FAO, current, relevant and reliable statistics.

The two Programme Entities were found also as highly relevant to the needs of the intended target audiences (government statisticians, analysts and planners in governments, World Bank, other development partners, private sector). In general, field projects are the response to specific requests from countries and therefore, they address the requirement of member nations for data and statistics.

The main subject covered by the field programme was the assistance to the Census of Agriculture with more than 50% of the projects supporting this activity. Development or rehabilitation of permanent systems of agriculture statistics systems were also important subjects with 25-30% of projects.

It was found that the Regional Statistical Commission meetings provide good venues for exchange of information and experiences among member countries and provide a forum for sharing and finding solutions to statistics-related problems common to member countries. They provide also a forum for potential donors and countries to meet and closely interact on potential project ideas. Three regional/inter-regional project ideas emerged from the Commission meeting during the reporting period.

Three biennial Regional meetings were organised in each one of the four regions: Africa, Asia and Pacific, Europe, Latin America and Caribbean. It was noted that major and positive innovations were successfully introduced by ESS in these meetings to make them more effective in using time and addressing substantive issues. These innovations included, organisation of technical workshop back-to-back with the Commission meeting and the replacement of country

12 statements by a report on the state of food and agriculture systems in regions prepared on the basis of a standard questionnaire completed and analysed in advance of the meeting. These innovations resulted in revitalisation of the Commissions with an increasing interest and participation of senior staff from countries and other agencies which enhanced the relevance and effectiveness of the Commissions.

The participants found that ESS has been quite responsive when dealing with country needs for support in agricultural statistics and has delivered satisfactorily. The analysis of the portfolio of field projects indicates an increasing diversification regarding geographical distribution of projects and sources of funding. All FAO regions are now covered with projects and six funding sources are now available as compared to the situation in the 80s where more than 90% of funds were coming from UNDP alone. During the period under review, under the PEs several major census projects have been formulated and/or implemented successfully. Examples include the first census of agriculture of China (Italian Cooperation), the census of agriculture in Côte d’Ivoire (European Union), the census of agriculture and livestock in Niger (European Union).

The auto-evaluation noted that despite limited resources allocated to ESS for assistance to countries from FAO Regular Programme Budget, an effective effort was made by the Division under the two PEs to adapt to changing environment and maintain considerable level of mobilization of external funds to support national agricultural statistics systems. The technical content of the projects drew to a large extent on normative work developed by ESS under the other PEs, with particular emphasis on the world programme for census of agriculture (PE 222P3). Other normative activities highly used under the two PEs were: Supply/Utilization accounts and Food Balance Sheets (222P1) and Indicators of food insecurity (222P2). Sixty percent of the respondents to the survey found that ESS has been very effective in maintaining synergy and balance between normative and operational work.

In recent years, with the modernization of FAOSTAT, a new framework based on FAOSTAT framework, CountrySTAT was developed by the Division. CountrySTAT framework is seen by ESS as the integrating framework and vehicle for future assistance in food and agriculture statistics to Member Countries. The participants to the auto-evaluation appreciated the efforts being made by ESS to adapt its assistance programme to new environment and emerging needs.

The participants found that direct advice and assistance through field projects was generally of high quality and comprehensive.

Overall, the auto-evaluation noted a general improvement in the results of assistance in statistics at country level. Under the two PEs, ESS was very effective in adjusting to changes in donor priorities and mobilising resources with projects funds reaching 7 to 9 millions US dollars per biennium. Notable results have been also achieved in capacity building and there are now much more qualified agriculture statisticians in countries, particularly in developing countries. Also, achievements can be noted in basic data production with a large number of countries conducting censuses of agriculture and agriculture surveys with assistance of FAO.

However the participants to the auto-evaluation found that sustainability of project results remains an important issue in many countries. Also a general declining trend (in real terms) in

13 FAO resources allocated to statistics in a context of increasing demand for assistance and decreasing donor support to agriculture statistics has been noted with concerns.

The participants noted that major changes are taking place in the agricultural sector and the rural world with issues of poverty, food security, sustainable development, environment and gender getting high priority on the policy agenda both at international and national levels. They noted that FAO past assistance to national statistical systems remained mainly concentrated on traditional areas of agriculture statistics and that a more comprehensive coverage and an integrated approach are needed to deal with these emerging data needs.

It was considered that past assistance did not do enough to take into account possible synergies and potential economies of scale associated with providing assistance and addressing needs at regional or sub-regional levels.

The participants to the auto-evaluation noted that, statistical capacity building activities require longer gestation period and more resources which cannot be adequately supported by short-term projects such as TCP interventions. It was suggested that FAO should seek funding for specific capacity building projects. Another important issue was the absence of effective follow-up mechanism to the implementation of the recommendations from Commission meetings as well as training sessions.

At national level, the participants indicated that more advocacy, visibility and relevance of agriculture statistics systems is needed and that FAO assistance should give high priority to supporting strategic planning of national systems of statistics and mainstreaming food and agriculture statistics in this process.

Communication seems to be also an important issue for a number of respondents to the survey who found that ESS was able to communicate and coordinate very effectively with International Organisations. A number of other respondents found that communication with national offices was very effective while 30% found that it was not effective. Some participants found that sometimes the process of project approval takes too much time and that efforts should be made to reduce the time needed for the approval of projects and that project support cost seems high.

Many of these issues are being addressed by ESS as indicated above. In order to continue the improvement of the relevance, quality and effectiveness the assistance and capacity building activities implemented under the two PEs, the participants made several relevant recommendations. The major recommendations are summarised below.

Major Recommendations

1. FAO assistance programme should continue to concentrate where it has comparative advantage while taking into account new data needs associated with emerging priority policy issues: poverty, food security, gender, environment. It should give priority to assisting countries in developing longer term perspective and plans for food and agriculture statistics development within the overall national system of statistics and driven by priority policy data needs.

14 2. Project formulation should put an emphasis on national ownership and commitment. A critical assessment and analysis of the pertinence of country requests and commitment for follow-up, including allocation of required resources should be systematically done when formulating an assistance project. Given possible synergies and potential economies of scale associated with providing assistance and addressing needs at regional or sub- regional levels it was recommended that FAO, together with Regional Economic Communities and Groupings and donors, should whenever possible explore the possibility of regional/sub-regional assistance projects. 3. In order to address the funding issue of assistance to national agriculture statistics systems, the auto-evaluation recommended that ESS should make efforts to build strategic alliances with national, regional and international institutions (Universities and Academics, Economic Research Institutions, Technical Cooperation Agencies, etc..) which could provide complementary services or funding or add value to the interventions of FAO projects. In this sense, it is recommended that terms of References of ESS staff and Consultants should systematically include the assessment of potential partners. It is also recommended that ESS should work more closely with Regional Offices and FAO Technical Cooperation Department to analyse donor assistance frameworks to countries in order to identify opportunities for assistance in agriculture statistics. This should facilitate the identification of potential emerging donors such as South Korea, Thailand, Malaysia etc.. 4. Regarding the content and coverage of the projects, the approaches taken in the new world programme for census of agriculture and CountrySTAT (integrated and modular approach) is supported. More emphasis should be also put on capacity building/transfer of skills and knowledge with special attention to data analysis. Specific capacity building projects at regional/sub-regional level are recommended. 5. Given the important changes and innovations in normative development made recently by ESS, and the importance of the quality of consultants and experts used in field projects, it is recommended that technical briefing and training/up-dating of these experts and consultants on new approaches and tools be included in the programme of ESS. The new developments need also to be more disseminated to all stakeholders, including Donor community. Short pamphlets on modules or supplementary surveys in the new World Programme for Census of Agriculture may be prepared and disseminated. The same applies for CountrySTAT. 6. Regarding Regional Commission meetings and other Workshops and Seminars, it was recommended that more effective mechanisms for follow-up of the implementation of recommendations should be put in place. 7. In order to address the concerns related to communication between ESS and national statistics offices, it is recommended that ESS explores all possible avenues to improve the linkages and communication with these offices in order to better understand their problems and find adequate solutions: Commission meetings, field visits as well as internet and other ways may be used.

15 ANNEXES

16 ANNEX 1: Respondents to the questionnaire survey

Latin America and Caribbean

1. Mr Miguel GALMES (URUGUAY)

Mr Galmes has been working as FAO senior consultant for several years in many Latin America and Caribbean countries. He is very familiar with situation and needs of these countries and FAO Technical Assistance content and modalities. He also attended several FAO statutory body meetings and workshops.

Asia and Pacific

2. Mr Genero de GUZMAN (PHILIPPINES)

Mr de Guzman has been working as FAO senior consultant for several years in many Asia and Pacific countries. He also worked for several months at the FAO Regional Office for Asia and Pacific and in that position, supervised several assistance projects and organised APCAS Sessions. He is very familiar with situation and needs of countries in Asia and Pacific and FAO Technical Assistance content and modalities.

3. Mr Yoichiro KAWASAKI: (JAPAN)

Mr Kawasaki is... at Japan Agricultural Exchange Council (JAEC) and brings a Donor Country perspective to this auto-evaluation. He has been working as a consultant on evaluation missions of activities of the Japan funded and FAO executed Regional Data exchange project. He is familiar with Donor and recipient country requirements as well as FAO Technical Assistance.

Africa

4. Mrs Samia ZEKARIA GUTU, General Manager, Central Statistics Authority. Ethiopia

Ms Zekaria is familiar with FAO activities and well aware of assistance requirements in Eastern and Southern Africa region. The CSA in Ethiopia has the overall coordination function for the statistics system, including Agriculture Statistics. Ms Zekaria has been attending the last three AFCAS meetings as well as FAO technical experts meeting on the World Census of Agriculture.

5. Mr Domingos DIOGO, Advisor to Director, Economic Planning Directorate of the Ministry of Agriculture, MOZAMBIQUE.

Mr Diogo has been for several years, head of the Agriculture Statistics Division of the Ministry of Agriculture. He was the National Project Directeor for the last Census of Agriculture supported by FAO. He was the focal point for the organisation of the 19th Session of AFCAS. Mr Diogo is very familiar with FAO assistance and the requirements of Lusophone countries.

17 6. Mr Mamadou WANE, Chef de la Division des Statistiques Agricoles, Ministère de l’Agriculture, SENEGAL.

Mr Wane is the Chief of the Agriculture Statistics Division of the Ministry of Agriculture of Senegal. He has attended several FAO meetings and participated in the last census of agriculture supported by FAO in the mid 90’s. He also regularly attends AFCAS meetings.

7. Mr Idir BAIS, Directeur des Statistiques Agricoles et des Systèmes d'Information, Ministère de L'Agriculture et du Développement rural, Algérie

Mr Bais is the Director of the Agriculture Statistics and Information Systems of the Algerian Ministry of Agriculture. He was the Vice-Chair of the 19th Session of AFCAS and brings the perspective of North African Countries.

CIS Countries

8. Mr Georges KVINIKADZE (GEORGIA)

Mr Kvinikadze is the Head of Agriculture statistics of Georgia. He has been involved in several Workshops and Seminars organised by FAO for CIS countries. He was also the counterpart for FAO TCP project for preparatory assistance to the Census of Agriculture and EC funded project on Food Security. He brings CIS countries perspective to the auto-evaluation.

Near East

9. Mr Talal HATOUM (LEBANON)

Mr Hatoum has been for several years the National Director of the Agriculture Census project executed by FAO. He brings the experience from this project as well as a wider perspective Near East countries. Mr Hatoum is fully aware of the Techinical Assistance of FAO.

10 Mr Patrick TESHA, retired FAO Chief, Operations Branch

Mr Tesha is a retired FAO Staff. He served as Chief of the Operations Branch at Headquarters, in the Regional Office for Asia and Pacific and in the Regional Office for Africa. He has a long and very wide experience in FAO field projects in different regions of the world. He also acted as FAO Representative in several countries. Mr Tesha is fully aware of the projects implemented by ESS.

11 Mr Gilberto MONCADA, Regional Statistician, Regional Office for latin America and Caribbean

Mr Moncada is a newly appointed Statistician in RLC and brings a fresh view to FAO technical assistance from the perspective of his national and international background (MR Moncada worked also with the World Bank).

18 ANNEX 2: Participants to the meeting of the Panel of experts 12-13 December 2005, Rome

External experts

Latin America and Caribbean 1) Mr Miguel GALMES (URUGUAY): [email protected]

Asia and Pacific 2) Mr Genero de GUZMAN (PHILIPPINES): [email protected] 3) Mr Yoichiro KAWASAKI: (JAPAN): [email protected] [email protected]

Africa 4) Mr Domingos DIOGO (MOZAMBIQUE): [email protected] 5) Mr Mamadou WANE (SENEGAL): [email protected]

CIS 6) Mr Georges KVINIKADZE (GEORGIA): [email protected]

Near East 7) Mr Talal HATOUM (LEBANON): : [email protected]

FAO Staff

Statistics Division (ESS) 8) Mr. Haluk KASNAKOGLU Director 9) Mr. Hiek Som Chief, Surveys and Statistical Development Servic; 10) Mr. Naman KEITA (FAO), Senior Statistician 11) Mr Mukesh SRIVASTAVA (FAO), Statistician 12) Mr François FONTENEAU (FAO), Statistician

Technical Cooperation Department 13) Mr Roberto Samanez, Chief, Field Programme Development Service (TAP) 14) Mr Mory Keita, O-i_C, Technical Cooperation Service (TCOT)

PBE 15) Consultant, Evaluation Service (PBEE),

19 ANNEX 3: Meeting with a Senior Consultant as peer Review on FAO assistance to Africa Region 16 February 2006 Rome

Senior Consultant: Michael Lipton

Participants from FAO Statistics Division: H. Kasnakoglu, Director, ESS H. Som, Chief, ESSS E. Gillin, O-i-C, ESSB R. Sibrian, O-i-C, ESSA D. Marshall, Senior Statisticia, ESSS N. Keita, Senior Statistician, ESSS R. Mayo, Senior Statistician, ESSB F. Schmitt, Statistician, ESSB P. Ngoma, Statistician, ESSS V. Ngendakumana, Statistician, ESSB M. Campeanu, Statistician, ESSB D. Ballayan, Statistician, ESSA C. Fabi, Statistician, ESSA M. Barre, Statistician, ESSA F. Fonteneau

20 ANNEX 4: Field Programme and Technical Support Services to Member Nations in Food and Agricultural Statistics, including Regional Commission Meetings

QUESTIONNAIRE

The evaluation will particularly assess the areas indicated in this questionnaire, at country level, regional and/or global level as appropriate.

You are requested to use this questionnaire as a guide to provide your assessment of past activities and recommendations for more effective assistance in the future. You may comment on other relevant issues as appropriate.

Issues to be covered

1. During the past 6 years, have you been involved or associated with one of the following FAO Statistics Division field project or direct assistance activities?

Yes No 1. Field Programme (Project) 2. Regional commission meeting 3. Technical workshop/seminar 4. Other assistance

If 1, 2, 3 and 4 are all checked with NO, you may go to point 8.

If 1, 2, 3 and/or 4 are checked with YES,

Please specify projects, meetings or other type of assistance in which you were involved/associated with:

......

21 2. In your opinion, to what extent the activities have corresponded with the thrusts of the mandate of FAO?

. ... Corresponded very well . ... Corresponded well . ... Did not correspond . ... Did not correspond at all

Please comment and provide your recommendations for improvement as appropriate ......

3. What is your assessment of the relevance of the project activities/meetings in your country or region/other direct assistance, according to your experience:

a) degree to which field programme, its specific outputs and direct assistance was focused on topics and problems assigned priority by countries and/or regions

. Very focused on country/region priority topics and problems . Focused on country/region priority topics and problems . Not focused on country/region priority topics and problems . Not focused at all on country/region priority topics and problems

b) extent to which the work represents the most appropriate response from ESS and takes advantage of FAO's comparative advantages, strategic priorities, and complementarity between ESS's support and that provided by other sources;

. Very appropriate response . Appropriate response . Not appropriate . Not appropriate at all

c) relevance of the activities and outputs to the intended target audiences (government statisticians, analysts and planners in governments, World Bank, other development partners, private sector);

. Very relevant . Relevant . Not relevant . Not relevant at all

d) Relevance of capacity building activities (e.g. regional/country workshops, formal/informal training)

. Very relevant . Somehow relevant

22 . Not relevant . Not relevant at all

23 Please comment on the relevance and provide your recommendations for improvement as appropriate......

4. What is your assessment of the responsiveness and efficiency of the FAO Statistics Division’s (ESS) institutional capacity to deliver direct advice and assistance as well as field projects in statistics to countries, including:

e) the extent to which ESS has been able to draw on FAO’s areas of technical competence and multi-disciplinary strengths, the degree of synergy and balance between normative and operational work, and the integration of field programme in statistics with the work of other FAO units:

. Very effective use of FAO’s technical competence and multi- disciplinary strengths . Effective use . Not effective use . Not effective use at all

f) the ability of ESS to review demands and find effective ways of answering them:

. Very effective . Effective . Not effective . Not effective at all

g) the ability of ESS to communicate and coordinate with statistical bureaux in countries, and to work and coordinate with other international and national organizations:

International org. National org. . Very effective . Effective . Not effective . Not effective at all

h) cost-efficiency and timeliness in production of outputs;

. Very cost-efficient and timely . Cost-efficient and timely . Not cost-efficient and timely . Not cost-efficient and timely at all

24 25 Please comment on responsiveness and efficiency and provide your recommendations for improvement as appropriate ......

5. What is your assessment of the quality of direct advice and assistance as well as field projects work, of the FAO Statistics Division’s (ESS), including the:

i) outputs in terms of such factors as technical appropriateness, relevance and implementability:

. High standard of quality . Good quality . Bad quality . Very bad quality

j) comprehensiveness, in particular, the extent to which key concerns including gender, environmental, food security and poverty issues have been adequately included:

. Very comprehensive . Comprehensive . Limited coverage . Very narrow coverage

Please comment on the quality and provide your recommendations for improvement as appropriate ......

26 6. What is your assessment of the e ffectiveness and extent to which the main programme outputs are being used and applied towards achieving the planned results, including the:

k) extent to which direct advice and assistance as well as field projects has led to improved institutional capacity in countries:

. Highly effective . Effective . Not effective . Not effective at all

l) extent to which the recommendations of the statistical commissions and statutory bodies have been implemented; degree to which statutory bodies and expert panels are performing a useful information-sharing and oversight role, and how they could be improved:

. Very useful . Useful . Not useful . Not useful at all

m) resources mobilized in favour of support to national statistical systems thanks to the programme entities:

n) degree to which the decline in the quality of data is being controlled or reversed in some countries of intervention:

o) degree to which governments, other FAO units, the WB and other potential users are using the generated data in their planning and analysis (e.g. in PRSPs, in monitoring MDGs, in planning field programmes, etc.):

. Data generated is being widely used . Some use is made of the data . Limited use is made of the data

27 . No use is made of the data

28 Please comment on the effectiveness and provide your recommendations for improvement as appropriate ......

7. What do you consider the best examples, of ESS assistance over the last few years in agricultural statistics? What factors, in your opinion, made possible better results/impacts in those cases than elsewhere ?:

......

8. General comments on past assistance in statistics and recommendations for improvements of future assistance, including areas of concern at country/regional level and emerging issues and opportunities.

......

29 ANNEX: 5 Field Programme and Technical Support Services to Member Nations in Food and Agricultural Statistics, including Regional Commission Meetings

QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS

Issues to be covered

1. During the past 6 years, have you been involved or associated with one of the following FAO Statistics Division field project or direct assistance activities?

(nb of responses) Yes No 1. Field Programme (Project) 9 0 2. Regional commission meeting 5 3 3. Technical workshop/seminar 8 1 4. Other assistance 3 3

2. In your opinion, to what extent the activities have corresponded with the thrusts of the mandate of FAO?

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Corresponded very w ell Corresponded w ell Did not correspond Did not correspond at all

9. What is your assessment of the relevance of the project activities/meetings in your country or region/other direct assistance, according to your experience:

p) degree to which field programme, its specific outputs and direct assistance was focused on topics and problems assigned priority by countries and/or regions

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Very focused Focused Not focused Not focused at all

q) extent to which the work represents the most appropriate response from ESS and takes advantage of FAO's comparative advantages, strategic priorities, and complementarity between ESS's support and that provided by other sources;

30 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Very appropriate response Appropriate response Not appropriate Not appropriate at all

r) relevance of the activities and outputs to the intended target audiences (government statisticians, analysts and planners in governments, World Bank, other development partners, private sector);

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Very relevant Relevant Not relevant Not relevant at all

s) Relevance of capacity building activities (e.g. regional/country workshops, formal/informal training)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Very relevant Relevant Not relevant Not relevant at all

10. What is your assessment of the responsiveness and efficiency of the FAO Statistics Division’s (ESS) institutional capacity to deliver direct advice and assistance as well as field projects in statistics to countries, including:

t) the extent to which ESS has been able to draw on FAO’s areas of technical competence and multi-disciplinary strengths, the degree of synergy and balance between normative and operational work, and the integration of field programme in statistics with the work of other FAO units:

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Very effective Effective Not effective Not effective at all

u) the ability of ESS to review demands and find effective ways of answering them:

31 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

v) the ability of ESS to communicate and coordinate with statistical bureaux in countries, and to work and coordinate with other international and national organizations:

International organizations:

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

National organizations:

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

w) cost-efficiency and timeliness in production of outputs;

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Very cost-efficient and timely Cost-efficient and timely Not cost-efficient and timely Not cost-efficient and timely at all

32 11. What is your assessment of the quality of direct advice and assistance as well as field projects work, of the FAO Statistics Division’s (ESS), including the:

x) outputs in terms of such factors as technical appropriateness, relevance and implementability:

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

High standard of quality Good quality Bad quality Very bad quality

y) comprehensiveness, in particular, the extent to which key concerns including gender, environmental, food security and poverty issues have been adequately included:

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Very comprehensive Comprehensive Limited coverage Very narrow coverage

12. What is your assessment of the e ffectiveness and extent to which the main programme outputs are being used and applied towards achieving the planned results, including the:

z) extent to which direct advice and assistance as well as field projects has led to improved institutional capacity in countries:

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Highly effective Effective Not effective Not effective at all

aa) extent to which the recommendations of the statistical commissions and statutory bodies have been implemented; degree to which statutory bodies and expert panels are performing a useful information-sharing and oversight role, and how they could be improved:

33 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Very useful Useful Not useful Not useful at all bb) resources mobilized in favour of support to national statistical systems thanks to the programme entities:

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Very effective Effective Not effective Not effective at all cc) degree to which the decline in the quality of data is being controlled or reversed in some countries of intervention:

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Very effective Effective Not effective Not effective at all dd) degree to which governments, other FAO units, the WB and other potential users are using the generated data in their planning and analysis (e.g. in PRSPs, in monitoring MDGs, in planning field programmes, etc.):

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Data generated is being w idely used Some use is made of the data Limited use is made of the data No use is made of the data

34 

35 ANNEX: 6 PORTFOLIO ANALYSIS OF AGRICULTURE STATISTICS PROJECTS

TABLE 1: CHANGE IN AVERAGE PROJECT SIZE

BIENNIUM Average budget 000$ 80' 1.640 1990/91 521 1994/95 335 2000/01 325 2004/05 358

TABLE 2: CHANGE IN SOURCE OF FUNDING OF PROJECT

BIENNIUM TCP GCP UNDP UTF TOTAL 80' 0,0 6,3 93,8 0,0 100,0 1990/91 45,5 0,0 45,5 9,1 100,0 1994/95 78,9 5,3 10,5 5,3 100,0 2000/01 76,5 11,8 5,9 5,9 100,0 2004/05 54,8 22,6 0,0 22,6 100,0

36 TABLE 3: CHANGE IN DONOR FUNDING OF PROJECTS (% number of projects)

SOURCES 80' B 90/91 B 94/95 B 00/01 B 04/05 FAO/TCP 0 45 79 76 53 EC 0 0 5 0 13 ITA 6 0 0 6 3 FRA 0 0 0 0 3 JPN 0 0 0 6 3 UNDP 94 45 11 6 0 WB 0 0 0 0 3 UTF (WB, Countries,) 0 9 5 6 22 TOTAL 100 100 100 100 100

TABLE 4: CHANGE IN GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF PROJECTS

REGION BIENNIUM

37 1994/9 2004/0 1980's 1990/91 5 2000/01 5 AFRICA 50 55 37 53 39 ASIA_PACIFIC 50 ... 21 29 13 LATIN AMERICA AND CARIBBEAN 36 26 6 26 NEAR EAST 9 16 12 13 EUROPE 0 0 0 3 INTER_REGIONAL 0 0 6 TOTAL 100 100 100 100 100

TABLE 5: MAIN PROJECT ACTIVITY

SUBJECT COVERAGE (project title) B B 80' B 90/91 94/95 B 00/01 04/05

AGRIULTURE_CENSUS 53 45 63 65 48 DATA PROCESSING/DATABASE 6 0 0 12 0 DEVELOPMENT/ REHABILITATION OF PERMANENT.SYSTEMS 35 45 26 12 39 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE INFORMATION SYSTEMS 6 0 0 0 6 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE TRADE STATISTICS 0 0 0 0 3 COST OF PRODUCTION 0 0 0 0 3 STRATEGIC_PLANNING/CAPACITY BUILDING 0 0 0 0 6 DATA EXCHANGE 0 0 0 6 3 AGRBUSINESS 0 0 5 0 0 CAPACITY BUILDING 0 0 5 0 0 LIVESTOCK STATISTICS 0 9 0 6 0 TOTAL 100 100 100 100 100