English

Agricultural R&D spending in Swaziland decreased considerably between 2009 and 2011. The country’s main government agency, DARSS, is almost entirely supported by the government, but its funding— which was already comparatively small—declined in recent years. As a result, funding levels have only been sufficient to cover staff salaries. No capital investments were made in 2011, and operating costs were also cut, seriously compromising DARSS’s ability to conduct meaningful research.

National spending on agricultural research grew during 2008–2011 due to increased salary expenses and capital investments at AREU, the country’s main government agricultural research agency. These investments were funded by the government and various donors.

The national government provided almost all of the funding for agricultural R&D between 2009 and 2011; donor funding, although minimal, is still an important source of support for actual research activities.

From 2009 to 2011, agricultural R&D spending contracted by 34 percent as a result of declining government funding to DAR, the main agricultural research agency in the country.

INIDA is the only agency involved in agricultural R&D in Cabo Verde. Despite an increase in the number of MSc-qualified researchers in recent years, the institute lacks a critical mass of PhD-qualified researchers.

Agricultural R&D spending increased gradually between 2009 and 2011. Although Cabo Verde’s 2011 agricultural R&D intensity ratio (at 1.12 percent) was well above the African average—which is not uncommon for a small, arid country—more investment is needed, particularly in staff training and upgrades to research laboratories.

Overall, the number of researchers holding PhD degrees doubled in Botswana during 2000–2011, and the number of researchers qualified to the BSc-degree level tripled.

Agricultural R&D in Botswana is almost entirely funded by the government. Spending on operating and program costs increased significantly during 2005–2007, but contracted again from 2008, when government funding to many public-sector agencies was cut due to spiraling inflation.

Agricultural research spending and staffing levels in Zimbabwe recovered during 2009–2011 after the adoption of a multicurrency regime, which brought economic stabilization and ended the years of hyperinflation.

Only 12 percent of agricultural researchers held PhD qualifications in 2011, which is very low compared with other countries in Africa.

Agricultural R&D in Zimbabwe is primarily funded by the government, but for the most part that support only covers salaries and not the operating costs or capital investments associated with conducting research.

Total spending on agricultural R&D in Uganda grew by 15 percent during 2008–2011, mainly stemming from increased spending by the country’s main agricultural R&D agency, NARO.

The Ugandan government doubled its funding to NARO during 2008–2011 (in inflation-adjusted terms); development bank loans and donor contributions continued to be important funding sources as well, but have been highly volatile over time.

The number of public agricultural researchers in Rwanda grew significantly during 2008–2011. Moreover, the number of FTE researchers qualified to the PhD level increased by more than two-thirds (from 13.3 to 21.9 FTEs), while the number qualified to the MSc level more than doubled.

Following a period of slow growth, agricultural R&D spending grew substantially during 2008–2011, mostly stemming from increased government support to RAB.

From 2008 to 2011, human resource capacity in agricultural research increased only slightly, whereas spending grew by more than two-thirds, driven by higher levels of capital investments at DART and the Directorate of Fisheries.

Only 13 percent of agricultural researchers held PhD qualifications in 2011, which is very low compared with other countries in Africa.

The national government provided almost all of the funding for agricultural R&D between 2009 and 2011; private sector and donor funding were negligible.