Liberias National Policy for Agricultural Extension and Advisory

Liberia’s National Policy for Agricultural Extension and Advisory Services Dr. Vickie A. Sigman MEAS Project University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign

Purpose of today’s presentation and discussion: � Provide information and engage in discussion on the process in which Liberia was involved in developing its AEAS policy � So that others can build on and potentially learn from the Liberian experience. 2

Points to cover: 1. Context 2. Policy development and validation process 3. Post policy follow-on 4. Status of policy and follow-on 3

Point 1. Context (My Involvement & Background Information) � My Involvement ◦ 2009 -2011 Ag & Enterprise Dev Advisor at USAID Mission Liberia ◦ 2012 invited back, through USAID-funded Modernizing Extension and Advisory Services (MEAS), to facilitate MOA to develop its AEAS policy 4

Context (Background: Country & Ag sector) � Post-conflict ◦ ◦ country Decades of mismanagement 14 years of brutal civil war Fragile state President Eleanor Johnson Sirleaf (since 2006) moving forward � Agriculture agriculture sector: Smallholder subsistence ◦ 2/3 rds of 4 mil population engaged ◦ Reliance on food imports ◦ Yields; post-harvest losses; value chains 5

Context (Background: Ag Extension) � History ◦ Ag Ext Service established 1960, top-down, tech transfer; T&V ineffective relative to cost; complete collapse due to Civil War; afterwards international community provided most ag extension services � Current status ◦ Rebuilding public system – challenged by lack of �Accessible improved technologies and practices �Client-based program planning, implementation, M&E �Adequate human, infrastructural, institutional capacities �Sufficient funding ◦ Many NGOs, limited private sector ◦ Legacy of preoccupation with distribution of inputs ◦ Uncoordinated, fragmented, duplicative services of varying quality 6

Context (Background: rationale for extension policy development) � Extension landscape is changing � No existing ag extension policy (incomplete 2009 draft) � � National and sector policies call for a new direction to improve ag production and gain food security (PRS 2008; FAPS 2008; LASIP 2010) MOA response to President’s request for specific agricultural policies (ag ext, gender, seed sector, etc. ) � Donor investments encouraged by having a formal policy � Underpinned by Nairobi Declaration 7

2. Policy development and validation process � Key actions taken � Key decisions made � Key lessons learned 8

A. Key actions taken � Appoint Task Force (MOA/USAID/FED; revise 2009 policy) � Engage Facilitator � � Prepare Task Force (schedule; policy definition/purpose; global trends in extension reform; other country policies) Obtain Additional Stakeholder Input (Deputy Minister written request; individual/group meetings; e-mail survey; field visits) � Discuss and Debate � Draft and Revise Policy (iterative process) � � Hold Stakeholder Validation Workshop (day-long; participants and participant preparation; process; results) Finalize Policy Document (incorporate stakeholder input) 9

B. Key decisions made � Policy name: AE, EAS, RAS, AEAS � Document detail and length � To include/not include the “how” of the policy and why/why not � The extent to which stakeholder input is to be incorporated in the policy 10

B. Key decisions made (continued) � � Areas of policy intervention to include, which areas to emphasize or de-emphasize, and why Emphasized ◦ System characteristics ◦ Client stakeholders and geographic coverage ◦ Content, approach, and methods ◦ Actor roles and responsibilities ◦ Coordination and consultation of all stakeholders � Best Practices Group (alternative to r-e-f linkages) ◦ Coordination mechanisms – to be detailed – existing mechanism ACC, 3 platforms � Less emphasis on ◦ Funding ◦ Staffing ◦ Capacity Development 11

C. Key lessons learned � � � Importance of a committed Task Force Usefulness of Task Force learning, particularly via review of other country policies Necessity of allocating sufficient time and resources to obtain stakeholder input Facilitating policy development requires more time than writing policy Value of framing process within overall phases: ◦ policy development and validation (agenda setting and formulation) policy adoption policy implementation policy evaluation 12

3. Post policy follow-on (recommendations and program design) � Recommendations for next steps: ◦ Initiate process of formal adoption by the Government of Liberia ◦ Develop and implement an Outreach Campaign to create awareness and understanding of the policy at county and district levels ◦ Develop the Implementation Strategy for the policy as a matter of priority ◦ Prepare plans for and initiate implementation of selected components of the Policy 13

Post policy follow-on (continued) � Design program to strengthen AEAS ◦ Respond to Next Steps Recommendation to plan/implement components of the policy � Design a program which would support the actualization of parts of the policy � To be funded by a donor, or different donors � To consider ongoing efforts to strengthen AEAS , (USAID via FED and other projects coordinated by MOA Project Management Unit – Af. DB, IFAD) ◦ Designed by Task Force with virtual support by facilitator ◦ Resulted in a program description (proposal) to be submitted by MOA to donors ◦ Includes Outreach Campaign and development of Implementation Strategy (horse/carriage or chicken/egg) 14

4. Status of policy and follow-ons � Minister of Agriculture submitting the policy to the Government of Liberia for review and ultimately adoption � Program to strengthen AEAS receives full support from Deputy Minister of Rural Development, Extension, and Research who advocates with the Minister of Agriculture for its submission to donors for funding 15

Thank you. Questions/comments welcome! 16

Terms of Use © Vickie Sigman, Univ. of Illinois, MEAS project. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3. 0 Unported License. Users are free: • to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work • to Remix — to adapt the work Under the following conditions: • Attribution — Users must attribute the work to the author(s)/institution (but not in any way that suggests that the authors/ institution endorse the user or the user’s use of the work).

Disclaimer This presentation was made possible by the generous support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development, USAID. The contents are the responsibility of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government.