How has Covid-19 affected data quality in the agriculture sector? Highlights on a recent e-Panel

By Ethel Sibanda, Principal Consultant at Itad, September 2020

An e-Panel, co-hosted by AVANTI and EvalForward, set out to explore this question. Our panellists, Armand Zoa, Joas Tugizimana and Tim Njagi, shared their experiences from Cameroon, Rwanda and Kenya respectively.

All three underscored the importance of data quality in the sector, from calculating food security deficits, food production, and consumption, to more commercial uses and decisions such as trade, pricing and marketing. As the discussion progressed, what became clear is that countries with stronger management information systems (MIS) for agricultural data are coping better with the adverse impacts of COVID-19 on data quality than those with less established systems. Evidence for this can be drawn in two main areas: harmonisation of national data systems and presence of long- term systematic data.

Harmonised, national data systems strengthen quality

Rwanda has a state-owned MIS, centrally managed and cascading to the district level. The country has a robust results-based management system in which performance contracts are signed between the Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINAGRI) and various institutions and their staff as a commitment to implement and report on time-bound targets. The MINAGRI MIS generates survey reports alongside a functional M&E platform. Data quality is verified through field visits conducted across the country on a quarterly basis, and digital platforms like crop monitoring system are in place. Budget cuts to redirect funds to the COVID-19 response have resulted in limited monitoring and verification visits, potentially compromising data quality, albeit to a limited extent. Because of its relatively robust processes and systems, the country seems to grapple less with the financial cuts and travel restrictions posed by COVID-19.

Kenya is beginning to see traction in harmonised national data systems and corresponding improvements in data quality, predominantly through interventions spearheaded by overseas development assistance (ODA). These include the Global Open Data for Agriculture and Nutrition (GODAN), the CGIAR Big Data platform and Africa Development Bank investments supporting member states to harmonise methodologies and data collection tools. Although not centrally managed, such initiatives have made strides in enhancing data quality and availability, more so in the context of COVID-19 related travel restrictions. As a back-stop measure, during lockdown there has been elevated use of remote data collection methods, for example through satellites, phone or SMS surveys.

Cameroon’s Ministère de l’Agriculture et du Développement Rural (MINADER) data management system is less harmonised and typically based on estimates that are neither verified nor substantiated. It is quite typical for different government ministries to make decisions on a common agricultural intervention based on different estimate figures. The COVID crises has enhanced the interest of policy makers in agriculture and food security data, in the effort to prevent the health crises deteriorating into a food crisis. This renewed interest could support efforts to improve harmonisation of agricultural data systems.

Long-term, systematic data collection enhances quality

Kenya has an established database with panel data over long periods and a large sample of respondents that are familiar with the system. In addition to familiarity, respondents have some level of trust in both the system and data collectors which arguably enhances data quality and responsiveness. The country already has comprehensive data sets on household demographics, periodic data on food availability, pricing and fluctuations during different seasons, making it less cumbersome for researchers to build on that data in the face of COVID-related restrictions. For example, researchers are currently soliciting only critical information to build on existing panels through relatively shorter surveys, thereby reducing respondent fatigue, increasing response rates and data quality.

Similarly, Rwanda with its well-established MIS and data management processes, can model forecasts based on existing data in the face of travel restrictions.

Meanwhile, in Cameroon, the MINADER are taking steps to improve results-based management and data quality in agriculture through the AVANTI initiative, but face considerable challenges due to the lack of long-term data- the last agricultural census was conducted as far back as 1984.  Timely collection of data is further compounded by political unrest in some parts of the country and COVID-19 related travel restrictions.

Overall, resilience to the effects of COVID-19 on data quality is stronger for countries with established state-funded/ run, harmonised MIS than otherwise. While ODA funding goes a long way in introducing technologies and methodologies that enhance data quality, most initiatives are programme based, time-bound and not harmonized, thereby limited in enhancing data quality at the national level, particularly in the long term. This points to the imperative for both national governments and development partners to invest in strengthening government data management systems, so as to enhance evidence-based policy and decision making, particularly in times of crises such as this one.

This blog is also posted on the EvalForward website.

Look out for more knowledge platforms and opportunities to learn on AVANTI and EvalForward. 

The AVANTI Ghana AG-Scan: lessons in capacity, legitimacy and facilitation

By Abdulkareem Lawal, Principal Consultant and Emmeline Henderson, Knowledge and Communications for Ghana Ag-Scan, July 2020

The AVANTI Initiative has conducted AG-Scans in ten countries around the world. Whilst they all had the same overall aim – to enable participants to self-assess their capacity for results-based management (RBM) in their agricultural sector and put together a plan to close the gaps – each AG-Scan was tailored to the national context, and lessons were learnt from all of them.

Due to COVID-19, the AG-Scans planned for 2020 have been postponed, so we have taken the opportunity to reflect on our last AG-Scan of 2019, which took place in Ghana in November. Through this workshop, we were able to draw out three key lessons, that while particular to that context, are important for planning the workshops more broadly. 

1. Harnessing the latent capacity in RBM.

The Modernizing Agriculture in Ghana (MAG) programme, funded by the Canadian International Development Agency, to contribute to the reversal of declining growth in the Ghanaian agriculture sector, has helped build RBM capacity within the Ministry of Food and Agriculture (MoFA), and elevate its importance and use. At the beginning of the workshop, some of the participants were, therefore, a bit sceptical about the value added by the AVANTI self-assessments. To counter this scepticism, the AVANTI team worked with a core group of participants prior to the workshop to adapt the process to their particular issues around RBM and SDG reporting, including how AVANTI complements existing initiatives like the MAG and the Partnership for Inclusive Agricultural Transformation in Africa (PIATA). The core team were able to bring these issues to group sessions to build on the application of the RBM knowledge and skills that already existed in MoFA, and the facilitators were able to focus discussions on the need to harness the existing skills into practice.

2. Facilitation is key to enabling contributions

Engaging with stakeholders in a self-assessment process, as well as influencing government behaviour, can be a challenging and politically sensitive process. The perception of being evaluated or assessed can lead to a more guarded response from participants. Managing expectations and unease requires facilitation that strikes the right balance between deep, up-to-date, local knowledge, credibility and the ability to work iteratively and get messaging right. The Ghana team, like all AG-Scans teams, was made up of national and international facilitators with mixed and complementary skills – bringing international experience and the in-depth local contextual knowledge and experience the process requires to be successful.

3. IFAD’s participation provided contextual knowledge and added legitimacy to the process.

The Country Programme Officer and resident consultant with the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) attended all sessions, from the adaptation meetings with the core group to the AG-Scan workshop itself, and the action planning session afterwards. The presence of these IFAD staff not only helped in providing additional contextual clarifications to many issues, it also helped to add legitimacy to the process.

The AG-Scan workshop provided the Ghanaian participants the opportunity to take stock and reflect on their critical RBM and SDG reporting gaps, and plan for the future. There are success factors in place in Ghana, for RBM and AG-Scan follow up process, especially given the existence of the Ministry of Monitoring and Evaluation, and the collaborative relationship that already exists between MoFA, and other government ministries and organisations.

Lessons for the future

The lessons from this AG-Scan, as well as the learning from all of our AVANTI workshops, are crucial for us to gather, understand and use for future work so that the initiative can continue to support national governments understand and build their capacity for RBM and SDG reporting in the agricultural sector.

Importance of leadership in RBM – Highlights on a recent e-Panel

By Ethel Sibanda, Principal Consultant at Itad, May 2020

In a recent e-Panel, co-hosted by AVANTI and EvalForward, we explored the role of leadership in instilling a culture of Results Based Management (RBM) in African agriculture based on evidenced experience. Three panellists, Angela Dannson, Elias Segla and Ian Goldman, shared real-life examples based on their leadership experience in African agriculture. Three points stood out for me: the importance of champions at senior levels such as the presidency, leadership at the institutional level and leveraging networks within and outside government.

1. Importance of champions at senior levels such as the presidency

The highest office in Benin has not left RBM to chance but is driving and embedding a culture of results in the agriculture sector. The presidency introduced a national level initiative to drive results and accountability which saw the appointment of a minister in charge of planning and development with a mandate to oversee the delivery of results. To institutionalise the results agenda an accompanying national evaluation policy was enacted and is currently under implementation. Not only is the government implementing the policy but evaluating and reviewing to improve weaknesses identified to date. In order to ensure such a culture for results thrives, there needs to be stability and consistency of leadership over time. In the case of Benin – and in spite of changes in national leadership – the country has had the same minister presiding over planning and development, leading to sustained improvements, consistency and embedding of culture for results. This is impressive and not commonly observed when there is a change in political power.

2. Importance of leadership at the institutional level

Not only is leadership at the presidency level critical, but also within institutions such as government ministries. In Ghana, a ministry with a specific focus on monitoring & evaluation (M&E) was established to oversee and implement the results agenda under the leadership of a cabinet-level minister. The minister’s technical background in agriculture is said to have contributed to instilling a culture of RBM.  To operationalise the ministry’s mandate the government has set aside an annual budget to ensure data is collected, analysed and reported. Through its National Development Framework, Ghana accounts for results under various agreements they have signed such as the Malabo Declaration and Agenda 2030. The country established flagship agricultural programmes with accompanying monitoring and accountability structures to track results and communicate progress to the citizenry.  From my experience evaluating work in Ghana, I know that their flagship programme ‘Planting for Food and Jobs’ has definitely made strides in the right direction, notwithstanding some improvements that can still be made.

Learning from work and studies in Benin, South Africa and Uganda also attest to the importance of the role of middle managers in embedding RBM. Questions from e-Panel participants revealed how there remains scope to venture more towards understanding the effectiveness of interventions as opposed to the current focus on output level monitoring for accountability and compliance. All panellists admitted to the existence of gaps in leadership and capacity at the grassroots/sub-national level which inadvertently affect the quality of data at the aggregate regional and national levels. As a data quality geek, this painful reality breaks my heart as any national-level data can only be as good as the sub-national data feeding into it.

3. Leveraging networks within and outside government

Last but not least is the importance of leaders leveraging networks and alliances to enhance a culture of results. Experience from Benin, South Africa and Uganda points to the role of leadership outside government structures and systems. Evidence suggests that this role goes beyond the individual to a collective effort by other non-state players in the sector. It requires building trust and partnerships between state and non- state players. In Benin, South Africa and Uganda the governments leveraged the resources of Twende Mbele (a partnership of African governments promoting M&E). Discussions pointed to the importance of dialogue processes with actors outside government, including civil society. I think there is much to learn from this example, given the politicisation of data and the sensitive nature of dealing with national-level statistics. Some good examples of leveraging networks within the broader sector were cited in Ghana. The government receives budgetary support for M&E from the Canadian government. Further, the country has established a vibrant Agriculture Sector Working Group (ASWG) in which M&E is a sub-group. I have had a glimpse of the ASWG and can commend it as an example for other countries to follow. The networks within government go beyond the Ministry of Food and Agriculture to other sector agencies such as the Ministry of Finance, the Ghana Statistical Service and the National Development Planning Commission. In addition to leveraging networks, both state and non-state leaders need to be politically savvy in identifying, negotiating and optimizing opportunities to influence evidence-based decision making.

The legitimacy of African leaders speaking about their experience of the role of leadership in RBM in African governments was in itself intriguing. As an African and an evaluator, this e-Panel left me feeling quite reassured by the pockets of success and levels of progress towards instilling a culture of results in national government institutions. It leaves me wondering whether enough is being done by the development sector to strengthen the critical role of leadership in RBM. As AVANTI and EvalForward, we endeavour to leverage our experience and networks to share knowledge on what works and what doesn’t in RBM in agriculture and food security.

Look out for more knowledge platforms and opportunities to learn on our respective websites: AVANTI and EvalForward.

This blog is also posted on the EvalForward website.

Lee el blog en español.

Lire le blog en français.