Thumbnail Image

Purchase for Progress (P4P) INVESTMENT ANALYSIS: Mali










Also available in:
No results found.

Related items

Showing items related by metadata.

  • Thumbnail Image
    Book (stand-alone)
    Purchase for Progress (P4P) Investment Analysis: Tanzania 2016
    Also available in:
    No results found.

    Tanzania was identified as a pilot country to test the study methodology developed during the consultation phase (Annex 4); assess data availability and reliability at country level; and shape the way forward for the other country case studies . The objective of this country study was to investigate the main benefits arising from the Tanzania Purchase for Progress (P4P) initiative and its impact on the beneficiaries, in particular those who were not documented by the programme’s monitoring and evaluation system (M&E). This country case study highlights a number of significant results of the P4P intervention among the targeted population: increased productivity and physical outputs; changes in agricultural practices; shifts in technologies; and reduced post-harvest losses. Through the P4P, WFP was able to purchase around 15 percent of its food needs for country assistance programmes.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Book (stand-alone)
    Purchase for Progress (P4P) INVESTMENT ANALYSIS: Malawi 2016
    Also available in:
    No results found.

    Malawi was selected during the consultation phase as one of the four countries for an investment analysis case study. The objective of this country study was to investigate the main benefits arising from the Malawi Purchase for Progress (P4P) initiative and its impact on the beneficiaries, in particular those not documented by the programme’s monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system. This country case study indicates that overall P4P brought positive benefits to the smallholder farming community and resulted in the growth of ACE, as farmers recognized the value of the exchange. It should be noted that the P4P programme only targeted approximately two percent of Malawi's agricultural producers, thus any discourse in this paper should be seen in light of the limited scope and size of the pilot. Further to this, the mission only visited seven of the 30 WFP-affiliated FOs and two traders. Thus the findings are by no means representative of the total population that benefited from the P4P pr ogramme.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Book (series)
    Purchase for Progress (P4P) INVESTMENT ANALYSIS: El Salvador 2016
    Also available in:
    No results found.

    The investment analysis presented here for El Salvador is exploratory, providing, as far as the existing data and resources for the study permit, preliminary results on the Purchase for Progress (P4P) initiative’s costs and benefits.Impact of P4P on WFP programme and P4P costs: The regular programme of WFP costs does not seem to have been sufficiently affected by P4P. The M&E data is, in this regard, generally reliable. Future M&E improvements and analysis should focus on the analysis of the cos ts and benefits of P4P investment in value chain development. P4P overhead, and in particular staff costs, might deserve a better analysis in the future to look for possible efficiency gains. Nevertheless, decisions in this respect should be taken with caution, as some initially less costly projects in other countries have had to increase their implementation team in order to give the FOs the support they needed to make the project effective.

Users also downloaded

Showing related downloaded files

No results found.