2008年-世界发展银行全球_Nigeria_-_Agriculture_Public_Expenditure_Review_157页_1mb

Nigeria Agriculture Public Expenditure Review Summary

Core Content

The Nigeria Agriculture Public Expenditure Review (NAGPER), conducted by the World Bank and IFPRI in 2008, provides an analysis of public spending on agriculture in Nigeria. The report aims to understand the current level and composition of agricultural expenditures, the budget processes that influence these allocations, and to offer preliminary policy recommendations. The study highlights the low level of public investment in agriculture compared to international standards and the need for a more efficient and impactful approach to resource allocation.

Main Objectives of the Study

• Establish a robust database on public expenditure in the agricultural sector.
• Diagnose the level and composition of agricultural spending in the recent past.
• Understand the budget processes that determine resource allocation in the sector.
• Draw preliminary policy recommendations for agriculture.

Key Findings

Public Spending on Agriculture is Low by International Standards

• Agricultural spending averaged 1.7% of total federal spending from 2001 to 2005, significantly lower than other key sectors like education and health.
• Compared to other African countries, Nigeria's agricultural spending was among the lowest, especially in 2000.
• Expressed as a percentage of agricultural GDP, spending has varied between 1% and 10%, with sharp spikes in the mid-1980s and 2001.
• Public spending on agriculture is exceptionally low in Nigeria, even when compared to poorly performing sub-Saharan African countries.

Publicly Funded Agricultural Interventions Have Had Variable but Generally Positive Impacts

• Agricultural Development Projects (ADPs) have been the primary vehicle for public investment in agriculture in Nigeria.
• The fadama development projects, which focus on irrigation, have been the most successful components of ADPs.
• Infrastructure projects under ADPs have often met initial targets, but serious maintenance issues have emerged.
• Federal government-managed agricultural programs have generally been ineffective, often short-lived and failing to meet their objectives.
• A top-down approach to program design has affected the success of both ADPs and federal agricultural programs.
• Large-scale irrigation projects have not performed as well as small-scale schemes, due to a lack of attention to local contexts.
• Adoption of improved crop varieties has been high, but other inputs have been modestly adopted.
• Farmers tend to take an incremental approach, selecting only a few elements of a complete technology package.

Agricultural Spending is Broadly Aligned with Policies, but There Are Important Discrepancies

• Agricultural spending generally follows government policy priorities, especially during periods of clear policy implementation.
• Spending is heavily concentrated in three areas: fertilizer procurement and distribution (43%), the food security component of the NSPFS (22%), and buyer-of-last-resort grain purchases (16%).
• These three items account for over 81% of total agricultural capital spending.
• Government purchasing of agricultural inputs and outputs makes up nearly 60% of total capital spending.

Challenges in Data Collection

• Inconsistent data from different sources.
• Uncertainty in official budget definitions for certain years.
• Misclassification of recurrent costs as capital spending.
• Inadequate documentation of off-budget expenditures and donor funds.
• Weak tracking and reporting systems in Nigeria, even by developing country standards.
• Limited funding for in-depth analysis, allowing only a small and possibly non-representative sample of states and LGAs to be studied.

Policy Recommendations

• The NAP and NEEDS I emphasize the importance of strengthening input supply systems and stabilizing output prices.
• There is a need for more targeted and efficient investments to boost productivity and competitiveness.
• Strengthening monitoring and evaluation mechanisms is crucial to ensure the effectiveness of agricultural programs.
• Improving institutional capacity and decentralization processes can help in better resource allocation and utilization.
• Research and extension programs should be prioritized to support improved agricultural practices and technologies.

Conclusion

The NAGPER concludes that while public spending on agriculture in Nigeria is aligned with policy priorities, it is generally low and not optimally targeted. The report underscores the importance of increasing investment in agriculture, particularly in areas that contribute to productivity and rural welfare. It also highlights the need for better data collection and management, as well as more effective policy implementation and monitoring.