Previous PageTable of Contents目  录Next Page

PWB Chapter 3: Cooperation and Partnerships

Major Programme 3.1: Policy Assistance

Regular Programme   US$000  
  Programme of Work 29,653  
  Adjustments to Programme of Work arising out of Budgetary Transfers 410  
  Final Programme of Work 30,063  
  Expenditure against Final Programme of Work 30,059  
  Variance of Expenditure (Over)/Under Final Programme of Work 4  
  Budgetary Transfers as percent of Programme of Work 1.4%  
Field Programme   US$000  
  Extrabudgetary TF and UNDP delivery 17,873  
  Extrabudgetary emergency project delivery 0  
  TCP delivery 8,645  
  Total Field Programme delivery 26,517  
  Ratio of Field to Regular Programme delivery 0.9  
  Technical Support Services, professional staff cost 7,143  

280.     The major programme is carried out by the Policy Assistance Division (TCA) and the Policy Assistance Branches and Units (PABs/PAUs) in regional and subregional offices. The activities of this major programme have addressed three main functions: 1) providing policy advice to countries and REIOs as well as capacity-building in the formulation and implementation of agricultural policies, strategies and programmes; 2) improving and ensuring appropriate country focus; and 3) field programme development.

Programme 3.1.1: Coordination of Policy Assistance and Field Programme Development

281.     A major undertaking during the biennium was development of EASYPol, an online, interactive multilingual repository of downloadable resource materials for capacity development in policy-making for food, agriculture and rural development (see box below).

EASYPol: Policy-Making for Agricultural and Rural Development

The repository encompasses operational tools, overviews of key development issues and guidelines, and its main target audiences are policy advisers and practitioners, government staff, international organizations and policy trainers. EASYPol currently hosts more than 50 cross-linked modules structured in several training paths, comprising PDF documents, Powerpoint slides for self-training and presentations, and exercises on spreadsheets. New materials are continuously developed and released by TCAS and its partners.

EASYPol materials are extensively used to provide technical support and capacity-building in countries around the world, including: Nigeria, Sudan, Bhutan, Armenia, the Maghreb region, Burkina Faso and other French-speaking African countries. Site visits and downloads are constantly monitored, with an average of more than 1,000 visits and several hundred downloads per month. In addition, useful feedback is routinely received from users.

EASYPol contributes to progressively increasing the quality, profile, visibility and recognition of FAO interventions in the domain of policies, thus mobilising additional funds. Moreover, as part of the Web-based FAO knowledge network, EASYPol contributes to enhancing FAO as a knowledge organization.

282.     The National strategies for food security and agricultural development - Horizon 2015, in particular for African countries, were reviewed and updated in the light of evolving conditions and new developments, in particular the implementation process of the NEPAD Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) and the formulation of national medium-term investment programmes (NMTIPs) and bankable investment project profiles. Guidance and support was also provided to various prospective diagnostic studies on emerging issues of major regional concern carried out by PABs and PAUs. Lessons learnt indicate that as a result of increased national capacity, FAO is increasingly required to collaborate with national institutes in providing policy advice. In this regard, collaborative efforts between PABs/PAUs and national institutes were promoted and technically supported.

283.     The work of the PABs/PAUs emphasised the development of programme frameworks and field programmes at country level (including sector reviews and multidisciplinary formulation missions). Project identification and formulation processes were closely monitored for quality and timeliness. In late 2004, a core working group was established to develop the methodology and coordinate the progressive implementation of the NMTPFs in close collaboration with the FAORs concerned. By end 2005, six NMTPF exercises had been carried out in individual countries and a regional approach followed for the Caribbean countries, resulting in 15 national and one regional documents. Main lessons learned were: 1) the right balance must be maintained between the need to focus on strategic priorities and the need to keep NMTPFs flexible; 2) NMTPFs must not be just a collection of projects/ programmes implemented by FAO, but should reflect FAO’s “lead agency” role in a number of areas; and 3) the convergence into a focused programme may take some time requiring a transition period during which ongoing projects should be allowed to run their course.

284.     Under the new publication series Capacity development in food and agricultural policies, a “Southland” case study was further developed into a training exercise, in English and French. The book Agricultural development policies: concepts and experiences was published in Spanish, while translations into French and Arabic were initiated. The negotiation training package Negociatrix was finalised and used in several training activities. Several training modules on Poverty Impact Analysis of agricultural and rural development policies were developed and disseminated through the Web and CD-Rom. Methodological materials on Social Accounting Matrices for policy impact analysis were developed, as well as Policy Impact Monitoring and logframe materials and software on Commodity Chain Analysis for policy-making (which were refined and tested in field activities in several countries). Capacity-building projects were supported in ten countries and one region, and support was provided to the implementation of the FNPP in 14 countries of Africa, Asia and Latin America.

285.     A new computer based system, Briefs On Line (BOL), was developed to facilitate the collection of up-to-date economic, social, agricultural, political and project information into country briefs that cover also all major aspects of FAO's activities in individual countries. During the biennium, BOL permitted the production of 800 briefs per year, eliminating routine manual tasks and allowing for greater emphasis on the substance, quality and relevance of the information.

Programme 3.1.2: Policy Assistance to Various Regions

286.     Decentralized policy assistance branches and units produced a series of country policy profiles that reviewed the agricultural sector situation, policies and priorities and the related donor policies. These included technical assistance frameworks to be agreed upon with the governments concerned, representing the basis of a country policy information system. Several important regional diagnostic studies on emerging policy issues were carried out (see box below).

Diagnostic Studies on Policy Issues of Major Regional Importance in Africa, Asia-Pacific and Latin America and the Caribbean

In order to better understand and prepare action on major policy issues resulting from ongoing changes and processes in agriculture and rural development in specific regions or subregions, TCA and the decentralized policy units have carried out a number of regional diagnostic studies. In 2004 and 2005 these included: 1) an extensive study to build a case for more support to food security and agricultural development in sub-Saharan Africa; 2) an annually updated, detailed study on trends and challenges for agriculture, forestry and fisheries in Latin America and the Caribbean; 3) a study on the implications of economic evolution and rapid growth in China, India and other Asian economies for agriculture and food security in Asia and the Pacific; and 4) a study on policy implications of soybean expansion in South America (Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay). The different studies have been discussed in seminars with government institutions, regional bodies, donors and international agencies in the respective regions, with the aim of capitalising on experience, identifying emerging challenges and opportunities, drawing lessons and defining adequate approaches and policies to deal with them.

287.     The decentralized policy assistance units provided direct policy assistance to various countries in all regions. This policy advice covered, among others, regional and subregional integration, agricultural trade, multilateral and bilateral trade negotiations in agriculture, public expenditure in rural areas, and rural development at the local level. This assistance was complemented by the preparation of policy papers and the implementation of regional training workshops and seminars on the same policy issues.

288.     Technical support and backstopping were provided to policy projects in a number of countries as well as assistance in the implementation of country strategies for national agricultural development. Assistance also included: monitoring and assessment of the impacts of domestic and external factors on food security and poverty alleviation; WTO accession and policy reforms; water policies; preparation of regional programmes for food security in Asia, Pacific, Africa, the Near East, Latin America and the Caribbean; strengthening national capacities on agricultural trade negotiations; agricultural sector reviews and formulation of agricultural development strategies; common agricultural policies and strategies for member countries of regional economic organizations in Africa.

Programme 3.1.3: Legal Assistance to Member Nations

289.     The programme supplemented and strengthened the development of a regulatory framework for food and agriculture by focusing on methods and approaches for enhancing the harmonisation of national regulatory frameworks with international agreements, plans of action and other instruments. The main achievement in this area was the successful completion and publication of Legislative Study No. 87 Perspectives and guidelines on food legislation, with a new model food law (see box below).

Perspectives and Guidelines on Food Legislation, with a New Model Food Law

This important tool for governments seeking to update their national legal frameworks for food was published in 2005. The text draws on FAO’s experience in providing technical assistance to governments, and examines the many elements of the national system which should be taken into account in the revision of national food laws. After exploring the national legal framework, the international context and the policy environment, the text offers concrete recommendations for the preparation of a basic national food law, including three variants of a new model food law.

290.     The regional technical assistance project "Strengthening Coastal Fisheries Legislation in the Pacific Island States of Micronesia" (where assistance in fisheries legislation was provided to facilitate community-based fisheries and aquaculture management) was directly instrumental in achieving a region-specific impact for the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (CCRF). The harmonised legislation developed with the support of the project reflected the standards and guidelines enshrined in that instrument, and sought to implement them in the regional context.

291.     FAOLEX, the world's largest database on food and agriculture legislation, added approximately 15,000 new records during the biennium with links to full legislative texts, all of which users can access via Internet using a sophisticated search interface. Seven books on comparative law topics were produced and published targeted to new and emerging areas of law, such as intellectual property rights in plant varieties, urban and peri-urban forestry and greening, animal genetic resources, and to recent developments in the areas of forestry, groundwater in international law, fisheries and food. One lesson learned through auto-evaluation is that information which needs frequent revision should be online and not published on paper.

292.     Technical assistance on improving legal frameworks for food and agriculture was provided to several countries in all regions of the world. Assistance was extensively provided on the full range of subject matters covered by FAO, including legal aspects of food safety, plant genetic resources, plant protection, seeds, pesticides, animal health and veterinary services, marketing and rural institutions, community-based natural resource management, forestry, land tenure and land use, fisheries, water, trade, protected areas and wildlife. Technical assistance projects were funded by the TCP and other extrabudgetary resources.

293.     Several regional projects focusing on legislation or with legal components were implemented or initiated during the biennium. The use of regional modalities, where appropriate, has allowed efficient sharing of lessons and legal techniques between countries seeking to manage shared resources or similar legal and developmental circumstances, notably: 1) wildlife in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan; 2) animal, plant and food law in West Africa and Latin America; 3) food safety legislation in Central Europe; 4) organic agriculture legislation in Latin America; 5) food security legislation in the South Pacific; 6) regulation of coastal fisheries in the Micronesian sub-region of the Pacific; and 7) community-based fisheries management regulation for members of the Asia Pacific Fisheries Commission. The bulk of programme delivery has been achieved thanks to leveraging of extra-budgetary resources, notably TCP, UTFs and GCPs.

Major Programme 3.2: Support to Investment

Regular Programme   US$000  
  Programme of Work 55,128  
  Adjustments to Programme of Work arising out of Budgetary Transfers (3,075)  
  Final Programme of Work 52,053  
  Expenditure against Final Programme of Work 52,045  
  Variance of Expenditure (Over)/Under Final Programme of Work 8  
  Budgetary Transfers as percent of Programme of Work (5.6%)  
Field Programme   US$000  
  Extrabudgetary TF and UNDP delivery 251  
  Extrabudgetary emergency project delivery 0  
  TCP delivery 10,384  
  Total Field Programme delivery 10,635  
  Ratio of Field to Regular Programme delivery 0.2  
  Technical Support Services, professional staff cost 198  

294.     The major programme works to increase the commitment of external and domestic resources to the agriculture and rural sector in developing countries and countries in transition. It does this by facilitating the interaction of governments with major international financing institutions (IFIs), UN agencies and bilateral donors. It also links IFIs to FAO’s technical and field expertise. Through its long-term collaboration programmes, new partnerships and pre-investment operations funded by the Technical Cooperation Programme (TCP), the Investment Centre Division (TCI) is active in some 100 countries, helping to put agriculture and rural investment on the development agendas of governments and IFIs.

295.     In 2004-05, there was a notable revival in investment in the sector, with a large increase in lending to some regions, in particular Asia. Through the Centre, FAO has been a key player in this revival in collaboration with its financiers. The major programme carried out a wide range of activities aimed to attract the support of financing donors and to mobilise loans, grants and credits for investment programmes and projects for agriculture, rural development, the environment and post-emergency rehabilitation. This assistance by the Centre resulted in a large number of investment programmes and projects approved under FAO’s funding cooperation agreements which include: African Development Bank (AfDB); Asian Development Bank (AsDB); European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD); Inter-American Development Bank (IDB); International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD); Islamic Development Bank (IsDB); Global Environment Facility (GEF); subregional development banks and Arab Funds; and the World Bank Group.

296.     The Centre also continued efforts to attract additional funding for investment programmes and projects from new partners and other sources. Examples of significant contributors in 2004-05 included the OPEC Fund for International Development (OFID), the EC and several bilateral donors. The Centre continued to assist in the formulation, appraisal and evaluation of WFP country strategies, programmes and projects, and to provide pre-investment formulation support to national and regional programmes for food security funded by FAO and others.

297.     The Centre responded to a growing number of “upstream” requests to conduct thematic studies, policy dialogues and sector reviews to identify best practices and opportunities for future investments. In Africa and the Caribbean, the Centre helped governments to develop NMTIPs and bankable investment project profiles in priority areas. In Africa, this work was carried out in support of NEPAD-CAADP. The Centre also continued to help countries address the challenges of working with new budget support mechanisms and to become more self-reliant in mobilising investment funds. In 2004-05, results of this assistance were reflected in increasing domestic counterpart funds for agriculture and rural sector projects.

298.     The Centre further increased its involvement in investment advocacy work through the Global Donor Platform for Rural Development, which is aimed at improving the harmonisation and alignment of donor programmes in pursuit of the Paris Declaration goals on enhancing aid effectiveness, and focusing action on achieving the MDGs. The Centre co-chairs the Global Platform and some FAO/World Bank Cooperative Programme resources, as well as funds from the EC-FAO Food Security Programme, which are targeted for this task.

299.     The Centre tackled operational challenges during the biennium by implementing measures to align its internal processes with FAO financial and administrative procedures. The accounting and budgetary planning structure was revised. Through the use of arrears funding, the Centre’s management information system (TCIMIS) was upgraded to better link with FAO's corporate systems (Oracle, FPMIS37). The Centre strengthened its technical and advisory skills in investment operations by organising a larger than ever number of seminars, training workshops and thematic papers that also benefited FAO counterparts.

300.     A combination of careful cost control and greater diversity in the types of work of the Centre, including high levels of reimbursable activities from other divisions, led to a significantly more cost-effective use of TCI staff. This allowed the Centre to meet the demands of its partner financial institutions at a lower level of the programme of work than originally envisaged.

Table 3.2.1: Investment Centre Assisted Programmes and Projects Approved for Financing

  World Bank IFAD Regional development banks* EBRD Other Total  
Number of projects
2000-01 36 13 17 3 21 90  
2002-03 42 11 6 3 95 157  
2004-05 60 13 8 5 45 131  
External finance, US$ '000 **
2000-01 1,666,380 317,250 342,440 100,320 98,500 2,524,890  
2002-03 2,830,700 255,730 120,770 92,950 402,520 3,702,670  
2004-05 3,686,710 291,620 241,910 71,810 225,400 4,517,450  
Domestic counterpart funds, US$ '000 ***
2000-01 626,560 180,270 115,780 193,000 82,870 1,198,480  
2002-03 1,149,050 74,700 33,240 17,530 102,150 1,376,670  
2004-05 1,265,490 207,870 56,240 52,590 101,880 1,684,070  
Total investment, US$ '000
2000-01 2,292,940 497,520 458,220 293,320 181,370 3,723,370  
2002-03 3,979,750 330,430 154,010 110,480 504,670 5,079,340  
2004-05 4,952,200 499,490 298,150 124,400 327,280 6,201,520  
* refers to the African, Asian and Inter-American Development Banks
** includes co-financing, if any, from other financing sources
*** refers to government and beneficiary contributions, except for EBRD counterpart funds which originate from private companies and banks

301.     Table 3.2.1 shows the results of assistance provided by the major programme to countries over the last three biennia in collaboration with major financing partners and other funding sources. The majority of these investment programmes and projects involved Centre support in formulation over several years prior to their approval. A total of 131 projects were approved for 2004-05. Of these, 113 were externally-funded, which represents a significant increase over 85 externally-funded projects approved during 2002-03 and 69 externally-financed projects approved in 2000-01. In particular, there was a substantial rise in World Bank projects, with 60 approved in 2004-05. The category “Other” shows projects approved through smaller financing partners and the Centre’s support to pre-investment activities using TCP funds. Recently, the number of Centre TCPs under “Other” has fluctuated widely, from 18 approved in 2004-05 to 72 (44 for NEPAD-CAADP) in 2002-03 and 21 in 2000-01.

302.     External financing commitments (table above) rose to over US$ 4.5 billion in 2004-05. The World Bank Group continued to account for the largest share with 82% in 2004-05, 77% in 2002-03 and 66% in 2000-01. Domestic counterpart funding also rose. These increases reflect collective efforts by financing agencies and governments to reverse the decline in previous years in official development assistance in the agriculture and rural sector.

303.     Figure 3.2-1 provides a breakdown of total investments committed by financing partners during the last three biennia, which rose in 2004-05 to over US$ 6.2 billion, compared to US$ 5 billion in 2002-03, and US$ 3.7 billion in 2000-01 (see also above table). The World Bank Group total investments increased to nearly US$ 5 billion provided in 2004-05. IFAD’s total investments also increased substantially to almost US$ 500 million and regional development bank total investments doubled to almost US$ 300 million in 2004-05 compared to US$ 154 million in 2002-03. EBRD total lending also increased from the previous biennium to over US$ 124 million in 2004-05. “Other” total funding resources committed in 2004-05 amounted to some US$ 327 million, with the largest contributors being GEF, OFID, WFP, IsDB, West African Development Bank (BOAD), EC and bilateral donors. 

304.     By sector (Figure 3.2-2), 65 out of the 113 externally-financed projects approved in 2004-05, totalling some US$ 3.5 billion, target hunger and poverty eradication, environmental sustainability, improved information technology and communication and combating HIV-AIDS. Forestry work received increased support from the World Bank following revision of its Forest Strategy in 2002. A significant share (5%) was mobilised for emergency assistance to agricultural and rural area rehabilitation following the Tsunami, avian influenza, hurricanes and earthquakes that struck a number of poor countries during 2004-05.

Table 3.2.2: Investment Centre Missions

  Subsector analysis Project identification Project preparation Assessment of project results Appraisal and supervision Total  
Number of missions
2000-01 78 129 367 63 595 1,232  
2002-03 137 137 420 58 583 1,335  
2004-05 135 125 549 45 552 1,406  
Number of person days
2000-01 2,893 4,756 16,993 2,405 14,952 41,999  
2002-03 4,112 5,108 17,508 3,567 15,742 46,037  
2004-05 4,491 4,467 29,457 1,526 14,131 54,090  

305.     The total number of Investment Centre missions in 2004-05 (see Table 3.2.2) continued to increase as the Centre focused more on despatching smaller teams for shorter periods. Requests for sector and subsector analysis missions (135) continued to be high, to help governments review their agricultural activities and rural institutions, and prepare plans for decentralizing public services to the private sector. Of the 674 missions undertaken for project identification (125) and project preparation (549), 376 were for the World Bank (56%), 29 for IFAD (4%), 24 for regional development banks (4%), 10 for EBRD (1%), and 235 for “Other” financiers (35%) which included TCP-funded missions. There were 45 missions carried out to assess project results and prepare implementation completion reports, and a strong demand continued for investment project appraisal and supervision missions (552). In terms of person days, in 2004 there was an exceptional number of days allocated to work for TCP formulation work (9,749) (much for NEPAD-CAADP), more than double the number in 2005. In 2003, only 2,982 person days were charged to TCP activities.

Table 3.2.3: Number of Project Formulations Completed

  World Bank IFAD Regional development banks EBRD Other Total  
2000-01 31 11 14 0 14 70  
2002-03 21 10 13 2 27 73  
2004-05 22 5 14 3 61 105  

306.     The number of project formulations completed during 2004-05 (Table 3.2.3) for proposed financing, credits or grants rose to 105. Work under “Other” included formulation of the large number of TCPs approved in 2002-03 in support of NEPAD-CAADP. However, through TCP resources, the Centre is also increasing its pre-investment collaboration with external financing partners. In 2005, several projects approved for funding by IDB, BOAD, OFID and the IsDB, were formulated with support from TCPs.

Table 3.2.4: Investment Centre Assisted Programmes and Projects Approved for Financing by Region

  Sub-Saharan Africa Asia and the Pacific Near East and North Africa Latin America and Caribbean Europe Total  
Number of projects
2000-01 35 17 6 21 11 90  
2002-03 81 23 23 20 10 157  
2004-05 39 33 23 17 19 131  
External finance, US$ '000
2000-01 972,380 670,640 186,320 384,870 310,680 2,524,890  
2002-03 919,110 1,239,360 398,860 908,140 237,200 3,702,670  
2004-05 877,890 2,135,150 697,020 299,970 507,420 4,517,450  
Domestic counterpart Funds, US$ '000
2000-01 306,440 213,160 99,590 161,350 417,940 1,198,480  
2002-03 184,680 471,300 127,700 536,350 56,640 1,376,670  
2004-05 302,490 569,270 431,920 146,400 233,990 1,684,070  
Total Investment, US$ '000
2000-01 1,278,820 883,800 285,910 546,220 728,620 3,723,370  
2002-03 1,103,790 1,710,660 526,560 1,444,490 293,840 5,079,340  
2004-05 1,180,380 2,704,420 1,128,940 446,370 741,410 6,201,520  

307.     Regarding the regional distribution of programmes and projects approved (Table 3.2.4), sub-Saharan Africa continued to receive the greatest number of externally-financed projects with 33 in 2004-05, 31 projects in 2002-03 and 28 in 2000-01. In 2005, collaboration increased in particular with AfDB which approved five projects that had been on hold for several years. Apart from the unusually heavy TCP support provided in 2002-03 for NEPAD-CAADP (150 projects), 8 TCPs were implemented in sub-Saharan Africa.

308.     In terms of external financing by region for projects approved during 2004-05 (Table 3.2.4 and Figure 3.2-3), there were dramatic increases in lending to Asia and the Pacific, the Near East and North Africa, and Europe. External financing for Asia and the Pacific rose to over US$ 2.1 billion, up from US$ 1.24 billion in 2002-03 and US$ 671 million in 2000-01. External financing for the Near East and North Africa, which included increased assistance to Central Asia (see box below highlighting economic growth in Central Asia), nearly doubled from some US$ 399 million in 2002-03 to over US$ 697 million in 2004-05, while lending to Europe more than doubled in 2004-05 to over US$ 507 million, compared to US$ 237 million in 2002-03. Some very large World Bank projects approved for Latin America and the Caribbean during 2002-03 exceptionally boosted lending, which returned to more usual levels in 2004-05 of around US$ 300 million.

Facilitating Economic Growth in Central Asia

During 2004-05 and the previous reporting period, three Central Asian countries received external financing for the first time: Kazakhstan (2003), Tajikistan (2004) and Uzbekistan (2005). Four externally-funded projects were approved for Azerbaijan from 2003 to 2005 and one for Kyrgyzstan in 2004. In Tajikistan, another project was approved in 2005 and a credit line proposal was finalised for approval. The major financing partners were the World Bank, GEF, IFAD and EBRD. TCP investment support was also provided to Turkmenistan in 2003 for the first time.

Kazakhstan is a good example of the strong commitment to investment in agriculture and rural development in the subregion. During 2004-05, three large projects for a total investment of US$ 243 million were approved for funding by the World Bank and GEF, in which 45 to 70% represent domestic contributions mobilised by the Government of Kazakhstan and beneficiaries. These counterpart funds are providing support to forestry protection and reforestation (US$ 28.8 million), agricultural post-privatisation (US$ 61.1 million) and agricultural competitiveness (US$ 59.1 million). External loans for these projects total US$ 94 million.

In 2004-05, upstream work was undertaken in Azerbaijan (agricultural markets study) and Tajikistan (agricultural sector strategy). In Kyrgyzstan, two studies were carried out for the World Bank on agricultural policy and the livestock sector, and the Centre helped EBRD identify agribusiness investment opportunities and conduct a feasibility study for rural and agricultural financing of small and medium enterprises. TCP support was provided to the Economic Cooperation Organization in the formulation of a regional programme for food security to benefit 10 countries in the region. The Centre is also becoming increasingly involved in TCP support to NSPFS in Central Asia.

309.     External commitments to least developed countries (LDCs) (Figure 3.2-4) remained steady in 2004-05. However, the percentage of lending noticeably declined in relation to the total amount of external financing approved during the biennium. The stagnation in external lending to LDCs is partly because LDCs tend to secure small projects with financing mobilised from smaller partners and bilateral donors. Other influencing factors may be the increase in debt relief under the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative, and the increasing difficulty of the poorest countries to obtain lending for agricultural and rural investment activities.

Major Programme 3.3: Field Operations

Regular Programme   US$000  
  Programme of Work 12,313  
  Adjustments to Programme of Work arising out of Budgetary Transfers (310)  
  Final Programme of Work 12,003  
  Expenditure against Final Programme of Work 12,002  
  Variance of Expenditure (Over)/Under Final Programme of Work 1  
  Budgetary Transfers as percent of Programme of Work (2.5%)  
Field Programme   US$000  
  Extrabudgetary TF and UNDP delivery 322  
  Extrabudgetary emergency project delivery 0  
  TCP delivery 0  
  Total Field Programme delivery 322  
  Ratio of Field to Regular Programme delivery 0.0  
  Technical Support Services, professional staff cost 862  

Achievements - Management and support to the field programme
310.     This major programme oversees all phases of the FAO field programme cycle, including project execution and implementation for all project types and funding sources. It provides quality control of field projects through the design and management of project review processes, including direct project reviews, and ensures feedback on managerial, operational and implementation issues regarding the field programme to the technical and administrative departments and to management. The programme consolidates information flows on the decentralized field programme implementation structure, resulting from the decentralization of field operations, and supports emergency operations with monitoring and reporting tools.

311.     Non-emergency projects are operated by FAO Representatives, country project operations officers and technical officers in the five regional offices and by technical officers at headquarters, while emergency activities are operated by TCE at headquarters, both directly and through FAORs. The field programme support structure provides an effective, coherent, responsive and transparent information and operations system that delivers project services promptly and cost-effectively to countries as prescribed in project agreements. The Field Operations Division (TCO), which implements the major programme, closely interacts with other divisions, and oversees the work of the regional operations branches in field programme monitoring, coordination and reporting.

312.     The programme contributed to the continued consolidation of field programme operations through a series of activities and initiatives, including:

  • Updating the normative framework for project operations through Field Programme Circulars, “Frequently Asked Questions”, the Web-based Field Programme Manual (operations component) and publication of documents and CD-ROMs providing guidance to staff throughout the Organization on approved operations standards and principles. In 2005, a simplified system for claiming TSS in TCP projects was introduced.
  • Further enhancement of the Web-based FPMIS including: dedicated emergency appeals monitoring and reporting; tools for supporting large-scale emergencies (e.g. locust campaign, Tsunami response, avian flu, etc.); enhanced analytical management reporting tools with drill down capabilities; indexing of documents stored in FPMIS (~30,000) and free text search of stored documents; improvement of linkage with the corporate Oracle Data Warehouse; roll-out of selected sections of FPMIS to FAO Permanent Representatives and government agencies; roll-out of field project data from the FPMIS to the general public through the corporate Web site; and overall improvement of the performance, with accessibility worldwide through the Internet.
  • Management studies and reviews of complex problems requiring an adjustment of the corporate strategy or approach towards the field programme, including the review of large UTF programmes/projects utilising a mixed national execution (NEX) modality and development of procedures through inter-departmental working groups (e.g. Brazil: report issued in January 2004; Afghanistan: 2003-2005, with a follow-up mission in 2006; Nigeria: 2004-2005).
  • Coordination of the transfer of budget holder and operational responsibilities to the FAORs in Afghanistan, Iran and Sierra Leone and provision of on-site training in field programme operations to staff in the respective Representations.
  • Regular strategic reporting on field programme performance to senior management through monthly and annual reports that provide information on past and current delivery performance, as well as an outlook on future delivery through a system of regularly updated delivery estimates and continuous review and scrutiny of the project pipeline.
  • Oversight and coordination of the corporate and departmental project review processes prior to project approval within the TC Department: the Project Design Advisory Group (PDAG) provides a systematic verification that all actions required to ensure the technical soundness and operational feasibility of projects have been taken; and the Programme and Project Review Committee (PPRC) provides a corporate review of the consistency of project design with substantive corporate policies and priorities, including the MDGs.
  • Review and updating of the material for the Project Cycle Overview Course (PCOC) organised by the Human Resources Management Division in 2004 and 2005 as well as provision of support to its presentation.

313.     Figure 3.3.1 illustrates the evolution during the past two biennia of the process of decentralization initiated in 2000, through which the responsibility for operating projects was transferred to FAORs. In 2004-05, 46% of FAO’s technical cooperation activities were operated by FAORs compared with 44% in 2002-03. This was matched by a decrease in the portion operated by the regional operations branches, 16% in 2004-05 as compared to 18% in the previous biennium. There was also a change in the share operated by headquarters technical divisions, down by 5% to 24% in 2004-05 and by the regional technical officers, down to 1.5% from 5%; and an increase in the share operated by TC Department, up from 4% in 2002-03 to 12% in 2004-05.

Achievements - Field programme delivery
314.     FAO’s total field programme delivery (see Table 3.3.1) reached US$ 723 million in 2004-05 compared with US$ 712 million in 2002-03 and US$ 687 million in 2000-01. This was achieved through improved delivery performance across all funding sources. GCP- and UTF-funded cooperation for non-emergency activities increased by 37% over the past biennium. The improved delivery performance is also reflected in the significantly improved implementation of the RP-funded field programme (i.e. TCP and SPFS) which reached a historic peak with US$ 121 million compared with US$ 111 million in 2002-03. UNDP remained a marginal funding source for FAO’s technical cooperation, declining from US$ 26 million in 2002-03 to US$ 15 million in 2004-05.

Table 3.3.1: FAO Field Programme Delivery (US$ million)

Description 2000-01 2002-03 2004-05  
FAO Execution 19.7 14.6 5.5  
FAO Implementation 7.8 7.9 9.8  
SPPD/STS 6.3 3.4 0.1  
Total UNDP 33.8 26.0 15.3  
Trust Funds - Non-emergency
FAO/Government Cooperative Programme (GCP) 157.9 155.0 206.8  
Associate Professional Officer (APO) Programme 19.4 15.9 17.2  
Unilateral Trust Funds (UTF) 48.1 53.3 78.7  
FAO-Donors Partnership Programmes - 15.3 9.6  
UN Population Fund (UNFPA) 5.0 2.6 1.3  
UN Environment Programme (UNEP) 0.8 2.0 4.0  
Other UN Organizations 8.7 9.2 9.7  
TeleFood 3.4 3.0 4.2  
Miscellaneous Trust Funds 7.5 9.6 15.9  
Total - Non-emergency 250.8 266.0 347.5  
Trust Funds - emergency assistance
Oil for Food 249.0 197.9 38.3  
Other Special Relief Operations 76.3 111.8 201.2  
Total - emergency assistance 325.3 309.7 239.5  
Total Trust Funds 576.1 575.7 587.0  
Total External Funding 609.9 601.6 602.3  
Regular Programme
Technical Cooperation Programme (TCP) 68.5 101.9 115.3  
Special Programme for Food Security (SPFS) 8.8 8.8 5.4  
Total Regular Programme 77.3 110.7 120.7  
TOTAL FIELD PROGRAMMES 687.2 712.3 723.1  

315.     The delivery of emergency assistance continued at a very high level, despite the conclusion of the Oil-for-Food Programme in Iraq, as other large-scale emergencies requiring FAO’s involvement nearly doubled from US$ 112 million in 2002-03 to US$ 201 million in 2004-05. Emergency activities to combat the effects of major natural disasters such as locusts, Tsunami and the onset of avian influenza, contributed to this increase (see box below).

316.     The total number of technical cooperation and emergency projects (including TeleFood) approved in 2004-05 (which subsequently became operational during the biennium) increased by 24% (from 1,406 projects in 2002-03 to 1,750 in 2004-05). Of those, 64% had budgets of less than US$ 250,000 and over 40% had budgets of less than US$ 100,000 (mainly TeleFood and small TCPs). The number of large projects with budgets above US$ 1 million, as well as their share in the total number, increased to 171 projects (from 105 in 2002-03), representing 10% (7% in 2002-03); more than half were related to emergency activities. In 2004-05, TCP and SPFS accounted for 35% of the new projects approved.

317.     Table 3.3.2 provides an analysis of field programme delivery by major donor. In addition to individual donors, the total amount of multi-donor contributions to specific programmes/projects (e.g. Indian Ocean Tuna Commission, Desert Locust control programmes and commissions, support for emergency response to the expansion of avian influenza from East and Southeast Asia to other regions, etc.) reached almost US$ 17 million in 2004-05 from US$ 12 million in 2002-03.

318.     The funding of FAO’s field programme in 2004-05 was supported by 16 major donors (i.e. those contributing over US$ 10 million each), covering about 75% of the overall delivery. The major support provided by the UN Department of Humanitarian Affairs in 2000-01 and 2002-03 with exclusive focus on the Iraq Oil-for-Food programme ended in 2003; this programme contributed US$ 182.8 million to the delivery in 2002-03, but only US$ 2.7 million in 2004-05 (see table below). However, the Oil-for-Food programme has been followed by a programme of support for rehabilitation operations in Iraq, with funding provided by the UN Development Group through the Iraq Trust Fund which had a delivery of US$ 35.5 million in 2004-05.

319.     During the 2004-05 biennium the number of non-traditional donors increased, including several first time donors to FAO’s programme (e.g. Ethiopia, Libya and South Africa), while other countries significantly increased their ongoing unilateral cooperation with FAO (Afghanistan, Cambodia and the Republic of Korea).

Table 3.3.2: Sources of External Funding for the Field Programme (US$ 000)

Donor Name 2002-03 2004-05  
European Community 36,061 69,389  
Italy 42,105 52,771  
United Kingdom 20,373 39,617  
Netherlands 62,371 38,988  
United Nations Development Group Office (DGO) Service & Support UNDG/EXECCOM Secretariat 0 35,539  
Japan 19,348 27,417  
Belgium 15,591 25,399  
Norway 19,374 24,576  
United States of America 19,145 22,889  
Sweden 11,802 21,734  
Germany 6,654 19,182  
Multi-donor contributions 12,317 16,923  
Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of 9,674 15,693  
UNDP 25,974 15,376  
Spain, Kingdom of 7,709 12,631  
Canada 2,925 11,555  
Brazil 11,877 9,891  
UN Department of Humanitarian Affairs - CEN 182,806 2,743  
Sub-total 506,106 462,313  
Other Donors 95,519 140,023  
Total 601,625 602,336  

320.     Over the past two biennia, FAO’s assistance to the majority of countries (excluding regional, inter-regional or global projects) was in the range of US$ 1 million to US$ 4.9 million. In 2004-05, 18 countries had field programmes activities in the range of US$ 5 million to US$ 19.9 million, compared with 14 countries in 2002-03. While in 2002-03 only Afghanistan and Iraq benefited from assistance above US$ 20 million, in 2004-05 there were three countries in this range (Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan).

321.     The completion of the Oil-for-Food programme in Iraq also had an impact on the distribution of the field programme delivery by technical programme. Major Programme 2.1: Agricultural Production and Support Systems (following table) accounted for 55% of the total field programme delivery and 83% of Emergency Programme delivery in 2004-05, compared to 63% and 92% in 2002-03. Two major programmes had a significant increase in field programme delivery during 2004-05: Major Programme 2.5: Contributions to Sustainable Development and Special Programme Thrusts (which includes the SPFS), with over 15% of the total delivery in 2004-05 compared to 10% in 2002-03 and Major Programme 2.3: Fisheries, with 8.5% in 2004-05 compared to 4.6% in 2002-03.

Table 3.3.3: Field Programme Delivery by Technical Programmes in 2004-05 (percentage)

  Programme TF/UNDP Emergency TCP/SPFS Total  
2.1.0 Intra-departmental Programme Entities for Agricultural Production and Support Systems 1.0 0.0 1.1 0.7  
2.1.1 Natural Resources 10.3 15.9 4.8 11.2  
2.1.2 Crops 16.0 48.3 27.8 28.7  
2.1.3 Livestock 7.1 10.9 11.9 9.1  
2.1.4 Agricultural Support Systems 2.8 8.3 4.3 4.9  
2.1.5 Agricultural Applications of Isotopes and Biotechnology 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.1  
2.1 Agricultural Production and Support Systems 37.4 83.4 49.8 54.7  
2.2.0 Intra-departmental Programme Entities for Food and Agriculture Policy and Development 0.9 1.1 0.1 0.8  
2.2.1 Nutrition, Food Quality and Safety 3.9 0.9 4.9 3.1  
2.2.2 Food and Agricultural Information 3.3 0.0 2.8 2.2  
2.2.3 Food and Agricultural Monitoring, Assessments and Outlooks 0.8 0.2 0.1 0.5  
2.2.4 Agriculture, Food Security and Trade Policy 3.4 1.6 1.3 2.5  
2.2 Food and Agriculture Policy and Development 12.4 3.8 9.2 9.0  
2.3.1 Fisheries Information 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.2  
2.3.2 Fisheries Resources and Aquaculture 3.2 0.0 2.2 2.0  
2.3.3 Fisheries Exploitation and Utilisation 0.6 6.9 2.1 3.0  
2.3.4 Fisheries Policy 5.9 0.1 1.8 3.3  
2.3 Fisheries 10.2 7.0 6.2 8.5  
2.4.1 Forest Resources 5.7 0.2 3.4 3.5  
2.4.2 Forest Products and Economics 0.5 0.0 0.9 0.4  
2.4.3 Forestry Policy and Institutions 2.9 0.0 2.9 1.9  
2.4.4 Forestry Information and Liaison 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.6  
2.4 Forestry 10.2 0.2 7.3 6.4  
2.5.1 Research, Natural Resources Management and Technology Transfer 4.4 0.3 3.6 2.9  
2.5.2 Gender and Population 1.4 3.1 1.2 1.9  
2.5.3 Rural Development 4.5 1.3 3.2 3.2  
2.5.6 Food Production in Support of Food Security in LIFDCs 12.8 0.7 3.8 7.3  
2.5 Contributions to Sustainable Development and Special Programme Thrusts 23.1 5.5 11.8 15.4  
3.1.1 Coordination of Policy Assistance and Field Programme Development 1.3 0.0 1.3 0.9  
3.1.2 Policy Assistance to Various Regions 3.1 0.0 4.3 2.3  
3.1.3 Legal Assistance to Member Nations 0.6 0.0 1.5 0.5  
3.1 Policy Assistance 4.9 0.0 7.2 3.7  
  Non Technical Programmes 1.8 0.0 8.6 2.3  
  TOTAL 100 100 100 100  

322.     The regional distribution of 2004-05 field programme delivery underwent significant changes compared to 2002-03 (Figure 3.3-2 below), due to a sharp decline in delivery to the Near East from 35% in 2002-03 to 17% in 2004-05, as a result of the reduction of the Oil-for-Food programme in Iraq. The share of Africa went from 25% to 35%, of Asia and the Pacific from 14% to 18%, and of Latin America and the Caribbean from 9% to 11%. There were minor shifts in the share of Europe (which decreased from 3% to 2%) while the share of inter-regional/global projects increased from 15% in 2002-03 to 17% in 2004-05.

323.     FAO’s emphasis on supporting least developed countries (LDCs) is demonstrated through the increasing share of these countries in total field activities (Table 3.3.4). In 2004-05 LDCs accounted for almost 34% of field programme delivery compared with 27% in 2002-03. In terms of total delivery, assistance for LDCs increased by 28% to US$ 244 million in 2004-05 from US$ 190 million in 2002-03.

Table 3.3.4: Project Delivery in LDCs (percentage)

Funding Source 2000-01 2002-03 2004-05  
Trust Fund (GCP and UTF) 13.3 21.3 31.5  
UNDP 73.4 80.5 83.7  
TCP/SPFS 41.8 41.6 38.1  
Total 19.5 26.6 33.7  

Achievements - Emergency operations and rehabilitation
324.     The 2004-05 biennium saw the further consolidation of the TCE Division established in 2002 to handle FAO’s ever-changing programme in emergencies and rehabilitation. Guidance on strategic planning, technical, coordination and capacity-building issues together with information exchange was an ongoing challenge due to the multi-dimensional nature of many interventions, their complexity and the large number of key partners involved. Together with these partners, FAO attempted to ensure a smooth transition from the emergency phase to the recovery and longer-term development work, bridging the gaps and advocating for the sustainable management of natural resources, thus helping people to rebuild and improve their livelihoods.

325.     FAO’s emergency and rehabilitation programme delivery was US$ 240 million in 2004-05, compared with US$ 310 million in 2002-03. While the 2002-03 biennium was characterised by the Oil-for-Food programme, which accounted for 64% of the emergency delivery, the 2004-05 delivery was characterised by the combination of several thematic (avian influenza, locust, Tsunami), regional (Great Lakes Region, southern Africa) and country (Iraq, Somalia, Sudan) programmes.

326.     In terms of resource mobilisation, US$ 415 million were received over the 2004-05 biennium in support of FAO’s emergency and rehabilitation programme compared with US$ 155 million over 2002-03, excluding the contributions received under the Oil-for-Food Programme. This 267% increase in voluntary contributions is explained mainly by the steadily growing support of donors to FAO’s emergency and rehabilitation operations in Africa, the mobilisation of resources through the UNDG Iraq Trust Fund for rehabilitation operations in Iraq, and the unprecedented donor response to the locust and Tsunami crises. More than two-thirds of the funds were received in response to UN appeals (Consolidated Appeal Process, Flash Appeal, etc.). There has been a steady increase in the number of donors supporting FAO’s emergency and rehabilitation assistance, from 15 in 2003 to more than 30 in 2004-05.

327.     This programme also coordinates FAO interactions with the Executive Committee on Humanitarian Affairs (ECHA), the humanitarian segment of the ECOSOC, the Inter-agency Standing Committee (IASC), and the UNDG/ECHA working group on transition issues. Specific attention is given to quarterly meetings of the IASC working group, the main policy-making forum for humanitarian action. Concerning operational aspects, collaboration was further developed with WFP, UNHCR38, ILO and UNDP (Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Response) in particular on undertaking joint needs assessments and preparation and implementation of joint flagship programmes, and in better cooperation on common services (i.e. logistics, office space, vehicles, etc.).

328.     The portfolio managed by TCE has become an increasingly complex and diversified one, as shown in the box below.


During the 2004-2005 biennium, US$ 133 million were mobilised for emergency activities in Africa, an increase of almost 50% compared with 2002-03. Thirty-seven countries in Africa benefited from this assistance, with large programmes implemented in Sudan, Democratic Republic of Congo, Burundi, Zimbabwe and Angola. Twenty Emergency and Rehabilitation Coordination Units were operational. The programmes in Africa increasingly focus on agriculture and food security coordination. Activities are driven by the needs of the affected households and include the provision of agricultural inputs, good quality seed production, multiplication of cassava cutting varieties resistant to Mosaic Virus, surveillance and control of animal diseases, local production of hand tools, issuance of seed vouchers and fairs, training and support of community-based animal health workers, etc. In southern Africa an US$ 8 million programme funded by the Government of South Africa assisted more than 100,000 hungry, poor and vulnerable households affected by HIV/AIDS, drought and food insecurity in seven countries (Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, Swaziland, Zambia and Zimbabwe). In Sudan, FAO implemented a diversified and complex portfolio of direct relief operations, such as the distribution of inputs to vulnerable groups, including returnees, as well as more long-term and sustainable interventions covering training, setting-up much needed agricultural services, capacity-building, rehabilitation of small-scale infrastructure, land rights and natural resource management.


ECLO, re-established in August 2004, constituted a new platform for joint fund-raising and implementation of an US$ 80 million emergency programme, funded by 27 donors, through 67 projects. Most funds was received in the second part of 2004, with many of the control inputs delivered in 2004 and in 2005; at the end of 2005, there was a remarkable decline in Desert Locust populations leading to preparations for the phasing out of ECLO operations in 2006. The emphasis then shifted towards locust monitoring and testing of alternative control methods, and environmentally related activities, as well as to resumption of the ongoing EMPRES programme for West Africa.


The earthquake on 26 December 2004 off the west coast of northern Sumatra led to the most destructive series of Tsunamis in recorded history, killing more than 220,000 people and affecting the livelihoods of more than 1.4 million people in 14 countries around the Indian Ocean. The Tsunami had the greatest impact on rural coastal communities, many of which were already poor and vulnerable with a high dependency on severely depleted and over-fished natural resources and degraded ecosystems. Thanks to the generous, rapid and programmatic support of donors in the context of the UN Indian Ocean Earthquake and Tsunami Flash Appeal, FAO implemented a strong response aiming to protect, restore and enhance the livelihoods of the affected populations. Upon specific requests from the concerned countries, FAO structured its emergency and rehabilitation response towards three outcomes: 1) the recovery of fisheries; 2) agriculture- and forestry-based livelihoods; and 3) overall coordination support among the different actors in those areas of intervention. Within this framework, the Tsunami Response Team (at headquarters, in the region and in the field) coordinated the deployment of technical and operational support in Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Myanmar, Maldives, Seychelles and Somalia. With an overall budget of US$ 59 million in 2005 (about 60 projects), the programme primarily focused on the replacement of lost assets: boat building and repairs, supply of fishing gear and fish processing equipment, land reclamation and salinity monitoring, provision of seeds, fertilizers, small farm machinery, livestock and veterinary services and tree seedlings.

Avian Influenza

FAO has been active in providing support to disease control efforts in infected countries and in assisting non-infected countries to prepare for a rapid and effective response in case of infection, as reported under Programme 2.1.3: Livestock and Major Programme 4.1: TCP.


In 2004, the worst hurricane season in the last ten years severely affected at least ten Caribbean countries, damaging agriculture and fisheries infrastructure and assets. To assist countries affected by Hurricane Ivan, FAO mobilised over US$ 7 million. In 2005, FAO provided support to Grenada, Haiti, Jamaica, Guatemala and El Salvador to recover from the damages caused by Hurricanes Emily, Dennis and Stan through distribution of agricultural inputs to the most affected families.


After the significant donor response to the UN Appeal for Afghanistan in 2002-03, several donors continued to support FAO's emergency and rehabilitation activities in the country. In 2004-05, FAO received from donors more than US$ 15 million to support internally displaced persons (IDPs), widows, returnees, ex-combatants, local artisans and rural communities through vaccination of livestock against animal diseases outbreaks, locust and Sunn pest control campaigns, provision of vegetable seeds, tools, fertilizers and wheat seed, local manufacturing and distribution of tools and grain metallic silos, construction of grain storage warehouses, training and capacity-building of local institutions, poultry husbandry, house gardening and horticultural activities, and rehabilitation of irrigation canals.


As an immediate response to the October 2005 South Asia earthquake, FAO participated in the UN Flash Appeal with a post earthquake early recovery and short-term rehabilitation programme of US$ 25 million. FAO allocated from its own TCP resources immediate emergency assistance to support poor rural household livelihoods in earthquake-affected areas. As part of the international assessment exercise, FAO fielded a rapid assessment mission to assist in the preparation of a coherent Early Recovery and Post Earthquake Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Plan for the agriculture and livestock sector of the affected areas. While the humanitarian action initially focused on immediate life-saving needs, food security concerns were flagged from the earliest moment to contain dependency on relief aid and related budget requirements over time. FAO took the lead of the "livelihood" cluster and provided coordination support to the Earthquake Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Authority set up by the Government.

Major Programme 3.4: FAO Representatives

Regular Programme   US$000  
  Programme of Work 81,747  
  Adjustments to Programme of Work arising out of Budgetary Transfers 4,375  
  Final Programme of Work 86,122  
  Expenditure against Final Programme of Work 86,119  
  Variance of Expenditure (Over)/Under Final Programme of Work 3  
  Budgetary Transfers as percent of Programme of Work 5.4%  
Field Programme   US$000  
  Extrabudgetary TF and UNDP delivery 0  
  Extrabudgetary emergency project delivery 0  
  TCP delivery 0  
  Total Field Programme delivery 0  
  Ratio of Field to Regular Programme delivery 0.0  
  Technical Support Services, professional staff cost 6,889  

329.     The reduction of budgetary resources for the FAOR network in the Adjusted Programme of Work 2004-05 (US$ 5.7 million or 9%) was partially absorbed through cost containment measures (vacancy management, the postponement of equipment replacement) and increased income earned.

330.     The findings of the Independent Evaluation of FAO’s Decentralization and Management’s preliminary response were examined by the 92nd Session of the Programme Committee and the 108th Session of the Finance Committee in September 2004. In the subsequent sessions of the Committees, the Secretariat submitted a detailed follow-up response that included a number of elements that were then incorporated into the PWB 2006-07 and the Reform proposals of the Director-General.

331.     FAORs continued their regular liaison work with the governments to which they are accredited, including the promotion of coordinated WFS follow-up and of the IAAH. World Food Day and TeleFood activities were undertaken in close collaboration with either a national WFD committee or a WFD focal point.

332.     FAORs liaised on a regular basis with regional organizations based in their countries of accreditation. They continued to monitor the agricultural sector and food supplies in their countries, keeping headquarters informed of important events and impending problems. In countries hit by natural or human-induced disasters, FAORs provided vital liaison functions with the governments concerned and contributed to the needs assessment for emergency intervention in the agricultural sector.

333.     Assistance by FAORs to technical programmes included logistical and administrative support for missions undertaken by staff from headquarters, regional and subregional offices; organisation of meetings and training activities; and disbursement of funds at the request of technical units. Other areas of assistance were the identification of consultants; handling of data collection and questionnaires on behalf of technical units; advocacy on technical issues; assistance in disseminating publications through the FAO Representation libraries; and provision of status reports on technical activities of the government.

334.     FAORs collaborated with the Investment Centre, technical units, regional PABs and subregional PAUs in formulating national agricultural policies and programmes and development of the field programme at country level, including the identification, formulation and appraisal of projects. They performed key resource mobilisation functions by liaising with local donor representatives and the funding liaison units at headquarters. Contact with local donors gained importance as their capitals increasingly delegated project approval authority to the country level.

335.     As members of the United Nations Country Team (UNCT), FAORs participated in a variety of UN system initiatives, such as the preparation of common country assessments (CCAs), United Nations Development Assistance Frameworks (UNDAFs), national MDG reports, the UN System Network on Rural Development and Food Security, and joint programmes with a view to ensuring that food security, agriculture and rural development issues were adequately addressed in these inter-agency processes.

336.     Emergency situations required significant additional response in a number of FAO Representations. The countries where the FAOR was assisted by a dedicated emergency coordination unit increased from 23 in 2002-03 to 37 in 2004-05.

337.     FAORs continued to assume operational responsibility and budget holder responsibilities for FAO’s national non-emergency projects (see Major Programme 3.3). The number of projects under their responsibility increased from 564 in 2003 to 903 in 2004, slightly diminished to 808 in 2005, while delivery increased by 36.6% from 2003 to 2005.

Evolution of the FAOR network
338.     During the 2004-05 biennium, the number of Member Nations increased to 188 from 187 in 2002-03 (see Table 3.4.1). The Organization maintained 74 fully fledged FAO Representations, excluding those combined with regional or subregional offices. The number of countries covered by multiple accreditations increased to 36, and the number of national correspondents in these countries went up to 33.

Table 3.4.1: Coverage of FAO Member Nations by the Network of FAO Offices

Description 2002-03 2004-05  
Countries hosting headquarters, Regional, Subregional or Liaison Offices 14 14  
Countries with fully fledged FAO Representations 74 74  
Countries with out-posted technical officers as FAORs 8 11  
Countries covered by multiple accreditation 32 36  
Countries without an accredited representative 59 53  
- of which developing countries 39 21  
Total 187 188  

339.     The Council, at its 119th Session in November 2000, approved the establishment of additional FAO Representations through the assignment of Outposted Technical Officers (OTO/FAORs). Under this scheme, the bulk of the cost of the establishment and functioning of the FAO Representations is covered by the host country. Negotiations were initiated with 18 countries, and by the end of 2005, twelve agreements had been signed and eleven outposted technical officers had taken up their assignments as OTO/FAOR.

340.     The FAOR staffing structure during 2004-05 was characterised by a 15% increase in National Professional Officers, a 10% decrease in general service staff, and a stable growth (0.5%) in the number of staff provided by the host governments (see Table 3.4.2). In particular, in order to professionalise the administrative and finance functions in all FAO country offices, the most senior GS administrative posts in the FAO Representations are being gradually replaced by posts of National Professional Officers with the title of Assistant FAOR (Administration). There was an overall decrease in the staff of FAO Representations of 4% during 2004-05.

Table 3.4.2: Staff of FAO Representations

Description 2000-01 2002-03 2004-05  
International professional officers 92 92 92  
National professional officers 65 92 106  
General Service staff 606 577 521  
Total FAO staff 763 761 719  
Government-provided staff 148 185 186  
Total staff in FAORs 911 946 905  

341.     The professional capacity of the FAO Representations was strengthened by the assignment of extrabudgetary human resources through the following arrangements: three Basque Volunteers were assigned for one year (renewable) to Representations in Ecuador, Guatemala and Dominican Republic; four Italian-funded UN Fellows were assigned to Representations in Mozambique, Zambia, the Philippines and India; and six volunteers from Italian universities were assigned for 3-6 months in different FAO Representations. These were pilot experiences which, if successful, will be replicated in the upcoming biennium.

342.     The updating of financial accounting records through the Field Accounting System (FAS) was further enhanced by the introduction of a quick-track daily data transmission process (compared to the previous by-monthly frequency of transmission). Newly recruited administrative staff in FAOR offices were trained together with a number of back-up users. Office management procedures relating to budget monitoring and control, procurement, asset control, personnel and internal control have been developed and made available to decentralized offices through the FAOR Handbook available in the Country Office Information Network (COIN) system.

343.     Building on the promulgation of a new FAO field security policy issued in July 2003 and the establishment of a unit dedicated to safeguarding the security of FAO field personnel and infrastructure, security at field locations has been enhanced through four sets of action:

  • FAO’s participation in the newly established UN-DSS, which includes benefiting from the UN unified security management system in non-headquarters duty stations worldwide and a field-based team of international Field Security Coordination Officers.
  • Provision of Minimum Operating Security Standards (MOSS) equipment and facilities in accordance with policy established by UN-DSS for FAO duty stations in each of the five security phases and for duty stations subject to terrorist threat – depending on the phase and terrorist threat level.
  • provision of Minimum Operating Residential Security Standards (MORS) equipment and measures to strengthen security at the residences of FAO personnel and their families.
  • Training of staff in security awareness, preparedness and use of security-related equipment.

344.     Expenditures of US$ 5.8 million on field security under Major Programme 3.4 exceeded the amount budgeted by US$ 3.1 million, what was covered in part from savings on UN-DSS and Malicious Acts Insurance Policy (MAIP), cost shares reported under Major Programme 1.3.

Major Programme 3.5: Cooperation with External Partners

Regular Programme   US$000  
  Programme of Work 11,790  
  Adjustments to Programme of Work arising out of Budgetary Transfers 480  
  Final Programme of Work 12,270  
  Expenditure against Final Programme of Work 12,271  
  Variance of Expenditure (Over)/Under Final Programme of Work (1)  
  Budgetary Transfers as percent of Programme of Work 4.1%  
Field Programme   US$000  
  Extrabudgetary TF and UNDP delivery 5,679  
  Extrabudgetary emergency project delivery 0  
  TCP delivery 0  
  Total Field Programme delivery 5,679  
  Ratio of Field to Regular Programme delivery 0.5  
  Technical Support Services, professional staff cost 1,229  

Programme 3.5.1: Multilateral and Bilateral Agencies

345.     This programme continued to focus on the mobilisation of a substantial flow of extrabudgetary resources in support of the field programme, as well as FAO’s normative activities. The approach to resource mobilisation continued to rely upon matching FAO's understanding of a recipient's requirements (taking into account in-country capacity), the interest of donors in terms of stated geographic and thematic programme priorities and the comparative advantage of FAO.

346.     At country level, the Organization increasingly worked within country-led development frameworks and especially within Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs), CCAs and UNDAFs. A central role within these frameworks has been increasingly given to the development of FAO-led national medium-term priority frameworks (NMTPFs). This ensured that FAO projects were solidly anchored in national development strategies and plans, and in consonance with the support to national priorities espoused under the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness.

347.     The concept of the Strategic Partnership Agreement was further developed with several bilateral partners, including the Netherlands, Norway, Belgium and the United Kingdom as a flexible funding mechanism for inter-disciplinary action in the context of broader development initiatives at country level. A major cooperation agreement had been signed in the previous biennium with the European Union which opened the way for a significant expansion and diversification of the EU-funded programme.

348.     Important developments took place in FAO’s collaboration with several bilateral partners (e.g. Sweden, Germany, Italy, Japan, Spain and Switzerland) and with institutions (e.g. the OPEC Fund, the World Bank, the French Development Agency, IFAD, regional economic organizations and GEF) resulting in a notable increase in trust fund approvals. Negotiations leading up to the signature in Washington on 10 March 2006 of the new UN - World Bank Financial Management Framework Agreement laid the foundation for further negotiations with the World Bank on future grants to FAO directly or for FAO's involvement through technical assistance in World Bank grants awarded to developing countries. The shift continued in the UTF programme from bank-funded to country-funded projects (e.g. Brazil, Mexico, Venezuela, Nigeria, Gabon, South Africa, etc.) financing FAO's technical assistance from their own public resources. The Global Trust Fund for Food Security and Food Safety received contributions from Italy, Libya, OPEC, Oman and Saudi Arabia.

349.     The participation of the 15 donors actively supporting the Associate Professional Officer (APO) programme remained stable while some potential donor sources have expressed interests in joining the programme. Through a programme of on-the-job training, young APOs provided active support to normative activities in particular at FAO headquarters. A number of donors have also demonstrated increasing interest in financing APO positions in the decentralized offices and projects in support to the field programme.

Programme 3.5.2: Civil Society Awareness and Partnerships

350.     This programme has contributed to the strengthening and building of partnerships with CSOs, NGOs, the private sector, UNDG and decentralized entities.

351.     Civil society participation has become more visible within FAO for example in the work related to the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture and the Voluntary Guidelines to support the progressive realisation of the right to adequate food in the context of national food security. Another important aspect has been the follow-up to the World Food Summit Plan of Action and to the Civil Society Forum for Food Sovereignty through a consultative mechanism established by FAO with the International NGO/CSO Planning Committee for Food Sovereignty. Civil society panel discussions continue to be organised on the occasion of the World Food Day observance at headquarters, as well as NGO/CSO participation in technical committee meetings and regional conferences.

352.     FAO’s dialogue with the private sector focused on promoting the SPFS, TeleFood and the IAAH. The Private Sector Partnerships Advisory Committee reviewed some 89 requests which resulted in several agreements being signed with partners, such as Fondation Internationale Carrefour, Tetra Pak, Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundations and several private companies for support to projects, publications, workshops and conferences and World Food Day/TeleFood.

353.     FAO’s Decentralized Cooperation Programme signed six Memoranda of Understanding with local authorities in Italy and five in France. Some US$ 5 million has been raised for projects in Africa and Latin America from Italy, France and Spain with a further US$ 4.5 million in the pipeline for projects on water management, food production, agricultural productivity and post-production.

Programme 3.5.3: Cooperation Agreements with Member Nations and Support to ECDC and TCDC

354.     The main objective of the cooperation agreements is to mobilise expertise and enhance the spirit of partnership among Member Nations. The Young Professionals Programme increases opportunities for young professionals from developing countries to gain experience and knowledge in working with international organizations.

355.     During the 2004-05 biennium, 1,675 assignments were arranged with external partners. Of these assignments, 947 were carried out by retired experts, 647 by TCDC/TCCT39 experts and 65 by visiting experts from academic and research institutions (see table below). The Young Professionals Programme provided 16 on-the-job-training assignments to young professionals from developing countries.

Table 3.5.1: Use of partnership programmes

Description 2002-03 2004-05  
TCDC/TCCT experts 296 647  
Countries which have endorsed the programme   132  
Visiting experts from academic and research institutions 93 65  
Countries which have endorsed the programme   68  
Regional and international institutions which have endorsed the programme   7  
Retired experts 1,134 947  
Countries which have endorsed the programme   92  
Young professionals 40 16  

1 The Institute for Research and Education on Negotiation in Europe (ESSEC-IRÉNÉ); Internationale Weiterbildung und Entwicklung gGmbH (InWEnt)

1 West African Economic and Monetary Union (UEMOA)

1 African, Caribbean and Pacific Group

38 Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)

37 Field Programme Management Information System

39 Technical Cooperation among Developing Countries (TCDC); Technical Cooperation among Countries in Transition (TCCT)

Previous PageTable of Contents目  录Next Page