Sustainable agriculture and rural development is people-centred, and aims to achieve rural livelihoods that are productive, viable, and capable of satisfying the cultural, social, economic environmental needs and aspirations of rural people, without compromising the ability of future generations to do the same.

For this to be achieved, many developing country governments and donors have committed to decentralization. It has various advantages: it is attractive for local stakeholders; it can boost local initiatives and “ownership” of programmes, strengthen local participatory democracy, make local institutions more responsive, and improve support for sustainable rural development. Various problems, however, are emerging as decentralization is put into practice.

Policy issues How to ensure effective policies and regulation? Parliaments are responsible for the adequacy of the decentralization process legal framework. Once suitable legislation is in place, delays in implementing laws and decrees often occur at the central, provincial and local levels. Central bureaucracy or political rivalries sometimes hamper the enforcement of decrees or the transfer of funds or human resources to the decentralized level, and affect governance. Time is required to implement new rules and retrain staff, and to actually operate the deconcentration of power and responsibilities, and the transfer of resources and competences.

Good governance requires raising the capacity of local institutions (both government and non-government) to:

• Work together in planning and executing programmes. Ensuring active and sustained participation by stakeholders can be difficult, especially by the rural poor and marginalized groups, in the whole management process. There might exist also obstacles such as myths, uses and fears about participation that can be perceived as justifications for not supporting it. It can be difficult and costly to coordinate the initiatives of various stakeholders – local authorities, line agencies of ministries, national institutions, NGOs, farmers and producers, labourers, the private sector, marginalized groups and external donors.• Mobilize resources to address priorities. Often, local authorities have been given new responsibilities but lack the skills and finance to carry them out. Local governments in Honduras and Mali, for example, have articulated a local development vision, but they lack access to public money and donor funds. They also lack people with the administrative, managerial and coordination skills needed to execute their new mandates.• Respond effectively to local constituents (especially the poor), rather being controlled by a few elite or interest groups.• Be accountable to their stakeholders, e.g. marginalized groups, central government, farmers, private sector and external donors.

• Promoting access to markets through development of roads, transport, information, communication.• Understanding and promoting competitiveness – by using technological innovations to lower cost and increase efficient use of scarce resources – and realizing local potentials, within the framework of a proper, home-grown strategy.• Identifying opportunities to diversify agriculture, produce high-value commodities, develop new or niche markets, and promote small enterprises.• Identifying ways to support local post-harvest and processing to add value to the commodity, and to promote local quality products.• Identifying possibilities to diversify economic activities to boost the local economy, reduce poverty and protect the environment.

Decision makers and stakeholder groups at the decentralized level should thus compare the strengths and weaknesses of a range of possible economic sub-sectors, in relation to their local development potential, so as to adequately include them in their priorities and plans, such as: • Traditional agricultural exports are critical for small, medium and large farming units. Countries have to rely on them (i.e. cotton in Mali) in the short term because few other options are available, or because the switch is very costly.• Traditional food production is concentrated in subsistence farming units and is associated with poverty. In some cases (rice in the Philippines), the potential exists to enhance productivity through irrigation or improved varieties, while in other cases (cereals and tubers in Mali) such potential is limited. • Non-traditional exports or high-value products for national markets are important for small farmers, traders, exporters and others. Opportunities may include production of flowers, fruits, vegetables, livestock and “functional foods” for supermarkets, tourist establishments, and for export, niche, organic or fair trade markets, but quality and safety standards are essential for marketing these products. • Non-agricultural rural activities, such agri-tourism, can offer significant win–win benefits for all stakeholders – farmers, tour operators, NGOs, businesses, and local governments. It can generate income and foreign exchange, increase public revenues, and promote infrastructure development. It should be managed in a socio-culturally responsible, businesslike and environmentally sustainable manner. • Non-agricultural and non-rural options can bring various benefits to the rural area, such as less pressure on limited natural resources, inflows of remittances, new rural–urban linkages and opportunities, and less pressure on local social services. • Natural resource and environment-related options can be in the form of encouraging “sustainable agricultural practices” (agro-forestry, organic agriculture, wildlife protection, protected areas, etc), developing renewable energy sources and providing environmental services for cash payment, e.g. under the Kyoto Protocol.

Expected benefitsAppropriate decentralization should lead to the following:• Better systems of planning and implementing rural development, and greater accountability in terms of policy delivery and impact on the ground.• Allowing governments to focus on what they must do – provide overall policy and legal frameworks, regulation of food safety and quality, and monitoring their implementation • More focus on agriculture and rural development at the national level, and better achievement of international agendas such as the Millennium Development Goals, international environmental agreements and sustainable development.• Better capacity for mobilizing resources and for regional and community self reliance. • More efficient use and greater impact of local, national and external resources. • Better ability to mobilize resources and expertise, and to channel them to the local area – for example through enhanced management of national public resources and coordination of foreign assistance.• Tapping the potential offered by “twinning” arrangements. These are partnerships between local authorities in different countries – for example, between a municipality in the Philippines and a local council in Europe. The partnerships can manage resources from “decentralized cooperation mechanisms”, e.g. through the European Union’s LEADER programme, local communities from EU member countries are establishing co-funding of activities with municipalities in North-African countries.

The SARD-Farming Systems Evolution project of FAO (GCP/INT/819/MUL)aims to strengthen the ability of government and non-government stakeholders to improve policies and institutions to achieve sustainable agriculture and rural development (SARD).

The project studied how selected farming systems in Honduras, Mali and the Philippines had evolved over the long term. It identified their driving forces, current strengths and weaknesses, and outlined future policy priorities and actions for sustainable agriculture and rural development.

The project used participatory, bottom-up approaches to ensure that the views of stakeholders at all levels, including local people, were taken into account, and integrates the cultural, social, economic and environmental dimensions in the analysis of sustainability.

The SARD-FSE project, supported by the governments of France and Japan, was implemented with the Programme for Sustainable Agriculture on Sloping Lands of Central America (PASOLAC) in Honduras, the Institute of Rural Economics (IER) in Mali and the Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ANGOC) in the Philippines.

SARD-Farming Systems Evolution projectFood and Agriculture Organization of the United NationsViale delle Terme di Caracalla, Rome, Italywww.fao.org/sard

4. Decentralization and sustainable agriculture and rural development

SARD – Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development – is a people-centred approach that focuses on improving livelihoods and satisfying the needs of current and future generations. It strives to orient policy, institutional and technological change for the sustainable management of agriculture, forestry, fisheries, natural resources, and other rural activities. It rests on four pillars: environment, economic, social and cultural.

Briefs in this series:

1. Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development: the Policy Challenge2. Engaging stakeholders in policy development for agriculture and rural development3. Strengthening sustainable agricultural and rural enterprises4. Decentralization and sustainable agriculture and rural development5. Some policy priorities for sustainable agriculture and rural development 6. Participatory monitoring

and evaluation for sustainable agriculture and rural development

7. Information note on SARD Farming System Evolution Guidelines

The SARD-Farming Systems Evolution project is supported by the governments of France andJapan

SARD BRIEF

4. Decentralization and sustainable agriculture and rural development

SARD BRIEF

This SARD brief is based on the SARD-Farming Systems Evolution project of the Rural Development Division of FAO, which studied major farming systems in Honduras, Mali and the Philippines to find ways to improve policies and institutions to achieve sustainable agriculture and rural development (SARD).

4. Decentralization and sustainable agriculture and rural development

4. Decentralization and sustainable agriculture and rural development

SARD BRIEF SARD BRIEF

MORE INFORMATION• Rural Development Division, FAO, www.fao.org/sd/ index_en.htm• Decentralized Governance Programme, www.undp.org/governance/ decentralization.htm• European Centre for Development Policy Management, www.uneca.org/itca/ governance/ Decentralization.htm• Overseas Development Institute, UK, www.odi.org.uk • World Bank, www1.worldbank.org/ publicsector/ decentralization/index.asp

How to ensure resource mobilization and management?A large number of programmes and projects are relevant to the local economy. They may be managed and funded by government ministries, national-level institutions (such as research institutes), donors or international NGOs. The resources involved may be substantial. However, they often do not fit into any unified plan, and local authorities and local people – supposedly their clients and beneficiaries – know little about them and havelittle or no say in them. These activities soak up attention from central government, and may overwhelm the ability of local stakeholders to deal with them. Duplication of effort, fragmentation, wasted resources and inefficiency are the results. Coordination is necessary at all levels to use effectively the scarce human and financial resources in a decentralized administrative environment.

How to support the local economy and environment?Decentralization places local authorities in a new situation. They are responsible for supporting local economic viability, for example by managing investment, promoting farm and non-farm employment, and increasing incomes for the rural poor. They also have new responsibilities for environmental sustainability, in terms of natural resource management and environmental conservation. But their options for increasing production and productivity and for creating wealth are limited.

The national government has often withdrawn from providing services such as extension, training and credit. Other stakeholders, especially NGOs and businesses, now have important roles to play in providing such services, but they need an enabling environment, regulatory frameworks, incentives and monitoring that must be provided for by governments. New economic opportunities are emerging for rural areas, such as the payment for environmental services, eco-tourism, and non-agricultural industries and services. It takes time to set up and manage these new modalities, and also to create a stimulating and enabling environment for local enterprises. Boosting the local economy can often be a very difficult challenge. It also takes resources and skills that are often unavailable, especially at the local level.

Policy and institutional options and prioritiesEnsuring effective policies and regulation New models for public action are often needed or require further enhancement at the national and local levels. In some cases, basic features as follows can be relevant, and be part of the legal set up of decentralization:• An inter-ministerial mechanism or council in charge of sustainable agriculture and rural development can be set up in the central government. • Line ministry agencies at the local level function under the direction of the provincial government (e.g. state, regional, district), while implementing guidelines issued by the central government, without relating laterally to the guidelines of other ministerial agencies.• Deconcentration of power is organized, entailing that responsibilities, competences and resources are actually transferred to the local units (e.g. municipalities).• Local and sub-regional administrative units are upgraded through enhanced capabilities.

At the national level, vertically oriented ministries fail to deliver desirable policy impacts because they cannot deal with critical cross-cutting priorities. Coordination at the Cabinet level or ad hoc between ministries is inadequate. In some cases, an inter-ministerial mechanism or council for rural development at the Cabinet level can be highly effective for developing a long-term vision and coherent strategy for rural development and ensure effective planning. It could then coordinate efforts across ministries of agriculture and rural development, natural resources and the environment, planning, finance and investment, education, health and infrastructure development.

Different ministries represented in the national inter-ministerial council should work together so their mandates and priorities are flexible and can be adapted or tailored forspecific conditions, needs and opportunities at the regional levels. National priority setting and programming should benefit from feedback from regional and local institutions, NGOs and the private sector. Quite often, the setting up of such a mechanism is complex and overlaps with other inter-ministerial structures (e.g. concerning food security, or poverty reduction strategies, or environmental protection). Adjustments and ways must be found for it to be a light but effective coordinating facility. In any case, it is indispensable that, under the auspices of this type of council, or any equivalent transversal structure, a national SARD long term vision and strategy are conceived, adopted, implemented and monitored.

At the territorial or regional level, stronger leadership and management is often needed for developing strategy, formulating programmes and allocating resources, andmonitoring local development. This leadership, when needed and established, should be accountable to stakeholders at national and local levels. Examples of key areas in which this capacity should be developed are local economic development, natural resources management and the environment, human capital, physical infrastructure, research and development, safety net programmes and social transfers. At the local level, authorities must be responsible for developing a long-term vision, development strategy and plan of action. Such a plan should guide the involvement of outside donors and projects, secure the participation of all local stakeholders, and coordinate public support.

Decentralization is only possible if sub-regional administrative units are upgraded so they can plan development activities, manage finances and projects, and conduct social and environmental assessments. The Philippines offers an example of how this might work. In the 1990s, local government units were devolved power and responsibilities to plan development, deliver basic services and generate revenues. The local government works with NGOs and community organizations as key partners in development. Since rural development is a priority in the national government’s poverty alleviation strategy, the local government promotes sustainable agriculture as an integral component of this strategy. The World Bank and other donors have supported local governments to implement many activities to develop infrastructure, and build institutional capacity in education, energy, environment, health and nutrition, transportation, water supply, sanitation, and agrarian and judicial reform. Universities support the local government units by training professionals, providing extension, and adapting farming technologies to suit local conditions. Of course, the real issue is indeed whether the local government units, or any model, have managed to reduce poverty after years of operation.

Resource mobilization and managementSub-regional authorities and local units such as municipalities must mobilize resources from two major sources: first, effective transfer of financial resources and capabilities from the central government; and second, they should be legally empowered to raise their own revenues or mobilize investments. Funds available at the decentralized level generally can be a combination of the following: • Local taxes: land, “sin” taxes (tobacco, alcohol, etc.), environmental taxes (“polluter pays” principle), other taxes levied on local economic activities (taxes on businesses, hospitality services, professional services, etc.).• Transfers from the national government.• National and local safety net programmes that target vulnerable groups or affected persons, i.e. refugees, famine victims, disabled or other human-made or natural disasters.• Support from external donors. • Mechanisms to channel a share of remittances from migrants towards local socio-economic projects, based on voluntary contributions.• Community financial and in-kind contributions.• Payment for environmental services, for example through participation in the Kyoto Protocol, mechanisms ensuring payments for water quality or watershed management services. In Honduras, upstream dwellers can negotiate with downstream communities in El Salvador for payments for compensation for soil and water conservation services. • Other fund-raising opportunities, such as cultural or educational activities, tourism, agricultural fairs and entertainment, or funds derived from the cancellation of the national foreign debt.

Supporting the local economy and environmentWith regard to the local economy, decentralization entails for the local authorities and stakeholders new responsibilities and tasks. The major policy challenges affecting production and income generation by small farmers and the rural poor are often the following:• Promoting equitable access to assets (land, water and other natural resources, credit, and technology), particularly enabling the rural poor, the landless and women to gain access to land which often is a prerequisite to access to credit and other resources.

Credit officers visiting farmers who have

requested a loan from thecentral bank in Pakistan

Honduras: Regional workshop SARD-FAO

Maize cultivation in Mali

Local food processingin Guatemala

4. Decentralization and sustainable agriculture and rural development

4. Decentralization and sustainable agriculture and rural development

SARD BRIEF SARD BRIEF

MORE INFORMATION• Rural Development Division, FAO, www.fao.org/sd/ index_en.htm• Decentralized Governance Programme, www.undp.org/governance/ decentralization.htm• European Centre for Development Policy Management, www.uneca.org/itca/ governance/ Decentralization.htm• Overseas Development Institute, UK, www.odi.org.uk • World Bank, www1.worldbank.org/ publicsector/ decentralization/index.asp

How to ensure resource mobilization and management?A large number of programmes and projects are relevant to the local economy. They may be managed and funded by government ministries, national-level institutions (such as research institutes), donors or international NGOs. The resources involved may be substantial. However, they often do not fit into any unified plan, and local authorities and local people – supposedly their clients and beneficiaries – know little about them and havelittle or no say in them. These activities soak up attention from central government, and may overwhelm the ability of local stakeholders to deal with them. Duplication of effort, fragmentation, wasted resources and inefficiency are the results. Coordination is necessary at all levels to use effectively the scarce human and financial resources in a decentralized administrative environment.

How to support the local economy and environment?Decentralization places local authorities in a new situation. They are responsible for supporting local economic viability, for example by managing investment, promoting farm and non-farm employment, and increasing incomes for the rural poor. They also have new responsibilities for environmental sustainability, in terms of natural resource management and environmental conservation. But their options for increasing production and productivity and for creating wealth are limited.

The national government has often withdrawn from providing services such as extension, training and credit. Other stakeholders, especially NGOs and businesses, now have important roles to play in providing such services, but they need an enabling environment, regulatory frameworks, incentives and monitoring that must be provided for by governments. New economic opportunities are emerging for rural areas, such as the payment for environmental services, eco-tourism, and non-agricultural industries and services. It takes time to set up and manage these new modalities, and also to create a stimulating and enabling environment for local enterprises. Boosting the local economy can often be a very difficult challenge. It also takes resources and skills that are often unavailable, especially at the local level.

Policy and institutional options and prioritiesEnsuring effective policies and regulation New models for public action are often needed or require further enhancement at the national and local levels. In some cases, basic features as follows can be relevant, and be part of the legal set up of decentralization:• An inter-ministerial mechanism or council in charge of sustainable agriculture and rural development can be set up in the central government. • Line ministry agencies at the local level function under the direction of the provincial government (e.g. state, regional, district), while implementing guidelines issued by the central government, without relating laterally to the guidelines of other ministerial agencies.• Deconcentration of power is organized, entailing that responsibilities, competences and resources are actually transferred to the local units (e.g. municipalities).• Local and sub-regional administrative units are upgraded through enhanced capabilities.

At the national level, vertically oriented ministries fail to deliver desirable policy impacts because they cannot deal with critical cross-cutting priorities. Coordination at the Cabinet level or ad hoc between ministries is inadequate. In some cases, an inter-ministerial mechanism or council for rural development at the Cabinet level can be highly effective for developing a long-term vision and coherent strategy for rural development and ensure effective planning. It could then coordinate efforts across ministries of agriculture and rural development, natural resources and the environment, planning, finance and investment, education, health and infrastructure development.

Different ministries represented in the national inter-ministerial council should work together so their mandates and priorities are flexible and can be adapted or tailored forspecific conditions, needs and opportunities at the regional levels. National priority setting and programming should benefit from feedback from regional and local institutions, NGOs and the private sector. Quite often, the setting up of such a mechanism is complex and overlaps with other inter-ministerial structures (e.g. concerning food security, or poverty reduction strategies, or environmental protection). Adjustments and ways must be found for it to be a light but effective coordinating facility. In any case, it is indispensable that, under the auspices of this type of council, or any equivalent transversal structure, a national SARD long term vision and strategy are conceived, adopted, implemented and monitored.

At the territorial or regional level, stronger leadership and management is often needed for developing strategy, formulating programmes and allocating resources, andmonitoring local development. This leadership, when needed and established, should be accountable to stakeholders at national and local levels. Examples of key areas in which this capacity should be developed are local economic development, natural resources management and the environment, human capital, physical infrastructure, research and development, safety net programmes and social transfers. At the local level, authorities must be responsible for developing a long-term vision, development strategy and plan of action. Such a plan should guide the involvement of outside donors and projects, secure the participation of all local stakeholders, and coordinate public support.

Decentralization is only possible if sub-regional administrative units are upgraded so they can plan development activities, manage finances and projects, and conduct social and environmental assessments. The Philippines offers an example of how this might work. In the 1990s, local government units were devolved power and responsibilities to plan development, deliver basic services and generate revenues. The local government works with NGOs and community organizations as key partners in development. Since rural development is a priority in the national government’s poverty alleviation strategy, the local government promotes sustainable agriculture as an integral component of this strategy. The World Bank and other donors have supported local governments to implement many activities to develop infrastructure, and build institutional capacity in education, energy, environment, health and nutrition, transportation, water supply, sanitation, and agrarian and judicial reform. Universities support the local government units by training professionals, providing extension, and adapting farming technologies to suit local conditions. Of course, the real issue is indeed whether the local government units, or any model, have managed to reduce poverty after years of operation.

Resource mobilization and managementSub-regional authorities and local units such as municipalities must mobilize resources from two major sources: first, effective transfer of financial resources and capabilities from the central government; and second, they should be legally empowered to raise their own revenues or mobilize investments. Funds available at the decentralized level generally can be a combination of the following: • Local taxes: land, “sin” taxes (tobacco, alcohol, etc.), environmental taxes (“polluter pays” principle), other taxes levied on local economic activities (taxes on businesses, hospitality services, professional services, etc.).• Transfers from the national government.• National and local safety net programmes that target vulnerable groups or affected persons, i.e. refugees, famine victims, disabled or other human-made or natural disasters.• Support from external donors. • Mechanisms to channel a share of remittances from migrants towards local socio-economic projects, based on voluntary contributions.• Community financial and in-kind contributions.• Payment for environmental services, for example through participation in the Kyoto Protocol, mechanisms ensuring payments for water quality or watershed management services. In Honduras, upstream dwellers can negotiate with downstream communities in El Salvador for payments for compensation for soil and water conservation services. • Other fund-raising opportunities, such as cultural or educational activities, tourism, agricultural fairs and entertainment, or funds derived from the cancellation of the national foreign debt.

Supporting the local economy and environmentWith regard to the local economy, decentralization entails for the local authorities and stakeholders new responsibilities and tasks. The major policy challenges affecting production and income generation by small farmers and the rural poor are often the following:• Promoting equitable access to assets (land, water and other natural resources, credit, and technology), particularly enabling the rural poor, the landless and women to gain access to land which often is a prerequisite to access to credit and other resources.

Credit officers visiting farmers who have

requested a loan from thecentral bank in Pakistan

Honduras: Regional workshop SARD-FAO

Maize cultivation in Mali

Local food processingin Guatemala

Sustainable agriculture and rural development is people-centred, and aims to achieve rural livelihoods that are productive, viable, and capable of satisfying the cultural, social, economic environmental needs and aspirations of rural people, without compromising the ability of future generations to do the same.

For this to be achieved, many developing country governments and donors have committed to decentralization. It has various advantages: it is attractive for local stakeholders; it can boost local initiatives and “ownership” of programmes, strengthen local participatory democracy, make local institutions more responsive, and improve support for sustainable rural development. Various problems, however, are emerging as decentralization is put into practice.

Policy issues How to ensure effective policies and regulation? Parliaments are responsible for the adequacy of the decentralization process legal framework. Once suitable legislation is in place, delays in implementing laws and decrees often occur at the central, provincial and local levels. Central bureaucracy or political rivalries sometimes hamper the enforcement of decrees or the transfer of funds or human resources to the decentralized level, and affect governance. Time is required to implement new rules and retrain staff, and to actually operate the deconcentration of power and responsibilities, and the transfer of resources and competences.

Good governance requires raising the capacity of local institutions (both government and non-government) to:

• Work together in planning and executing programmes. Ensuring active and sustained participation by stakeholders can be difficult, especially by the rural poor and marginalized groups, in the whole management process. There might exist also obstacles such as myths, uses and fears about participation that can be perceived as justifications for not supporting it. It can be difficult and costly to coordinate the initiatives of various stakeholders – local authorities, line agencies of ministries, national institutions, NGOs, farmers and producers, labourers, the private sector, marginalized groups and external donors.• Mobilize resources to address priorities. Often, local authorities have been given new responsibilities but lack the skills and finance to carry them out. Local governments in Honduras and Mali, for example, have articulated a local development vision, but they lack access to public money and donor funds. They also lack people with the administrative, managerial and coordination skills needed to execute their new mandates.• Respond effectively to local constituents (especially the poor), rather being controlled by a few elite or interest groups.• Be accountable to their stakeholders, e.g. marginalized groups, central government, farmers, private sector and external donors.

• Promoting access to markets through development of roads, transport, information, communication.• Understanding and promoting competitiveness – by using technological innovations to lower cost and increase efficient use of scarce resources – and realizing local potentials, within the framework of a proper, home-grown strategy.• Identifying opportunities to diversify agriculture, produce high-value commodities, develop new or niche markets, and promote small enterprises.• Identifying ways to support local post-harvest and processing to add value to the commodity, and to promote local quality products.• Identifying possibilities to diversify economic activities to boost the local economy, reduce poverty and protect the environment.

Decision makers and stakeholder groups at the decentralized level should thus compare the strengths and weaknesses of a range of possible economic sub-sectors, in relation to their local development potential, so as to adequately include them in their priorities and plans, such as: • Traditional agricultural exports are critical for small, medium and large farming units. Countries have to rely on them (i.e. cotton in Mali) in the short term because few other options are available, or because the switch is very costly.• Traditional food production is concentrated in subsistence farming units and is associated with poverty. In some cases (rice in the Philippines), the potential exists to enhance productivity through irrigation or improved varieties, while in other cases (cereals and tubers in Mali) such potential is limited. • Non-traditional exports or high-value products for national markets are important for small farmers, traders, exporters and others. Opportunities may include production of flowers, fruits, vegetables, livestock and “functional foods” for supermarkets, tourist establishments, and for export, niche, organic or fair trade markets, but quality and safety standards are essential for marketing these products. • Non-agricultural rural activities, such agri-tourism, can offer significant win–win benefits for all stakeholders – farmers, tour operators, NGOs, businesses, and local governments. It can generate income and foreign exchange, increase public revenues, and promote infrastructure development. It should be managed in a socio-culturally responsible, businesslike and environmentally sustainable manner. • Non-agricultural and non-rural options can bring various benefits to the rural area, such as less pressure on limited natural resources, inflows of remittances, new rural–urban linkages and opportunities, and less pressure on local social services. • Natural resource and environment-related options can be in the form of encouraging “sustainable agricultural practices” (agro-forestry, organic agriculture, wildlife protection, protected areas, etc), developing renewable energy sources and providing environmental services for cash payment, e.g. under the Kyoto Protocol.

Expected benefitsAppropriate decentralization should lead to the following:• Better systems of planning and implementing rural development, and greater accountability in terms of policy delivery and impact on the ground.• Allowing governments to focus on what they must do – provide overall policy and legal frameworks, regulation of food safety and quality, and monitoring their implementation • More focus on agriculture and rural development at the national level, and better achievement of international agendas such as the Millennium Development Goals, international environmental agreements and sustainable development.• Better capacity for mobilizing resources and for regional and community self reliance. • More efficient use and greater impact of local, national and external resources. • Better ability to mobilize resources and expertise, and to channel them to the local area – for example through enhanced management of national public resources and coordination of foreign assistance.• Tapping the potential offered by “twinning” arrangements. These are partnerships between local authorities in different countries – for example, between a municipality in the Philippines and a local council in Europe. The partnerships can manage resources from “decentralized cooperation mechanisms”, e.g. through the European Union’s LEADER programme, local communities from EU member countries are establishing co-funding of activities with municipalities in North-African countries.

The SARD-Farming Systems Evolution project of FAO (GCP/INT/819/MUL)aims to strengthen the ability of government and non-government stakeholders to improve policies and institutions to achieve sustainable agriculture and rural development (SARD).

The project studied how selected farming systems in Honduras, Mali and the Philippines had evolved over the long term. It identified their driving forces, current strengths and weaknesses, and outlined future policy priorities and actions for sustainable agriculture and rural development.

The project used participatory, bottom-up approaches to ensure that the views of stakeholders at all levels, including local people, were taken into account, and integrates the cultural, social, economic and environmental dimensions in the analysis of sustainability.

The SARD-FSE project, supported by the governments of France and Japan, was implemented with the Programme for Sustainable Agriculture on Sloping Lands of Central America (PASOLAC) in Honduras, the Institute of Rural Economics (IER) in Mali and the Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ANGOC) in the Philippines.

SARD-Farming Systems Evolution projectFood and Agriculture Organization of the United NationsViale delle Terme di Caracalla, Rome, Italywww.fao.org/sard

4. Decentralization and sustainable agriculture and rural development

SARD – Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development – is a people-centred approach that focuses on improving livelihoods and satisfying the needs of current and future generations. It strives to orient policy, institutional and technological change for the sustainable management of agriculture, forestry, fisheries, natural resources, and other rural activities. It rests on four pillars: environment, economic, social and cultural.

Briefs in this series:

1. Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development: the Policy Challenge2. Engaging stakeholders in policy development for agriculture and rural development3. Strengthening sustainable agricultural and rural enterprises4. Decentralization and sustainable agriculture and rural development5. Some policy priorities for sustainable agriculture and rural development 6. Participatory monitoring

and evaluation for sustainable agriculture and rural development

7. Information note on SARD Farming System Evolution Guidelines

The SARD-Farming Systems Evolution project is supported by the governments of France andJapan

SARD BRIEF

4. Decentralization and sustainable agriculture and rural development

SARD BRIEF

This SARD brief is based on the SARD-Farming Systems Evolution project of the Rural Development Division of FAO, which studied major farming systems in Honduras, Mali and the Philippines to find ways to improve policies and institutions to achieve sustainable agriculture and rural development (SARD).