Effectiveness of European Union development aid for food security in Sub-saharan Africa

The European Court of Auditors has assessed whether EU development aid for food security in sub-Saharan Africa is effective by analysing whether EU development aid for food security is relevant to the countries’ needs and priorities and whether EU interventions are effective. The audit focused on interventions supported through the European Development Fund (EDF), which is the prime framework for cooperation with individual sub-Saharan countries, as well as three thematic instruments financed through the general budget of the European Union (the Food Security Budget Line - FSBL, the Food Security Thematic Programme - FSTP and the Food Facility).

The Court concludes that EU development aid for food security in sub-Saharan Africa is mostly effective and makes an important contribution to achieving food security. However, there is scope for significant improvement in several areas:

• In countries where food security is part of the EDF cooperation strategy, EU development aid is highly relevant to needs and priorities. The Commission focused its development aid on countries with the highest number of undernourished people. However, the Commission did not sufficiently consider the potential scope for EU support in other countries which also suffer from chronic food insecurity other countries.
• The European Development Fund (EDF) and the Food Security Thematic Programme (FSTP) complement each other. The Food Facility, set up in order to react to the impact of the 2007–08 food price crisis, was not designed to address long-term food price volatility.
• EU aid properly addresses countries’ needs and priorities as regards food availability and access to food. However, the Commission has not placed adequate emphasis on nutrition.
• EU interventions are mostly effective. They are well designed, are based on a sound knowledge of needs and priorities, and involve close dialogue with the governments of the partner countries and a wide range of stakeholders. Often, however, the interventions do not set sufficiently clear objectives and sometimes overly ambitious.
• Despite strong ownership by partner governments and beneficiaries, large governments agricultural and social transfer programmes are not financially sustainable and depend on continued significant donor support.

European court of auditors – March 2012