**CAADP CONCEPT NOTE:**

**PILLAR 1.**

**CAADP Pillar 1 -- (**as part of the COMESA Regional Compact**)**

Extending the area under sustainable land management and reliable water
control systems

**1. Introduction**

Through the Comprehensive Africa Agricultural Development Programme
(CAADP) the African Union's New Partnership for Africa's Development
(AU/NEPAD) has provided an Africa vision and related strategic framework
in bring agriculture to bear on the continent's sustainable development
agenda. With over 60% of the continent's populations still largely rural
with livelihoods mainly and directly dependent on exploitation of
natural resources, essentially farming, NEPAD has noted the importance
and leading role of agriculture in Africa's efforts to attain
sustainable economic growth. This is ultimately to impact on reducing
poverty and food insecurity at the same time sustaining environmental
resilience.

CAADP provides a strategic framework aimed at increasing agriculture
growth rate to at least six percent per year and enable creation of
wealth needed for rural communities and households in Africa to prosper.
Four complementary pillars have been identified as central in focusing
the continent's "energies" in achieving the set CAADP agenda.

The four pillars are:

-   *Pillar 1*: Extending the area under sustainable land management and
    reliable water control systems;

-   *Pillar 2*: Improving rural infrastructure and trade-related
    capacities for market access;

-   *Pillar 3*: Increasing food supply, reducing hunger, and improving
    responses to food emergency crises; and

-   *Pillar 4*: Improving agriculture research, technology dissemination
    and adoption.

With the focus strongly shifting toward tangible implementation
initiatives, NEPAD has charged the Common Market for Eastern and
Southern Africa (COMESA), a regional economic community (REC), to
provide leadership and stimulate/facilitate implementation initiatives
around the CAADP agenda in its member countries. This is well compatible
with COMESA's own development strategies and action plans for the
region. Food insecurity and low and highly unstable agricultural
productivity are some of the main challenges for COMESA and its member
States. The COMESA Treaty and the COMESA Agricultural Policy (CAP)
identifies sustainable agricultural productivity with relevant links to
relevant national and regional markets and trade arrangements and
strategies as key to the region's foundation for socio-economic growth.

This Concept Note outlines COMESA's regional intervention thrust
focusing on Pillar 1 - Extending the area under sustainable land
management and reliable water control systems. This informs and is
informed by national frameworks and programmes underpinning sustainable
land and water management as central in the agricultural agenda and
indeed NEPAD objectives. The concept note recognizes and relates to
other CAADP Pillars and also to the NEPAD EAP Programme Areas (PA)
-particularly PA 1 and 6. 3, at the same time integrating cross-cutting
issues such as markets and supportive trade policies and strategies
etc...

Interventions under this Pillar aim to ensure that the sustainable
socio-economic growth attained is underpinned by a resilient natural
resource base.

**2. The Context**

**2.1 The Problem**

Worldwide, anthropisation (that we can define by the increased degree of
human intervention on a landscape) quickly transforms ecosystems,
impoverishing their biodiversity and causing a massive extinction of
species (Lawton et May, 1995; Vitousek *et al.*, 1997; Sala *et al*.,
2000).

Agriculture is undoubtedly the first form of ecosystem use (in term of
degree/intensity of use and in term of extent) and is affected just as
much as it affects the quality of the environment and its abilities to
sustain life and production including its own resilience. Despite
advancements in agricultural technologies (*from hybrid seed, chemical
including fertilizers through to machinery*), agricultural productivity
in SSA and specifically in the COMESA region has in best cases been
stagnant. This has in the last 1-2 decades prompted shift in focus
towards land and environmental quality. Some of the elements core to the
way farming is done are increasingly noted as significantly contributing
to land degradation; e.g. (i) tillage systems that loosen the soil and
leaves the land surface bare is central to adverse land degradation
rates and extent with implication both on and off farm; (ii) a
cropping/agronomic arrangement that has essentially translated into
nutrient mining, etc.... High incidence of compaction and hard pans on
cropped fields, high soil loss through erosion and depletion of soil
organic matter leaves the soil in a form best described as simply DEAD.

Land degradation affects 67% of SSA with some of it severe and
irreclaimable. Land degradation is possibly the major single factor
undermining the region's ability to provide desired ecosystem services
which for many is directly at the core of their efforts and means to
provide for their own livelihood needs. This is threatening
socio-economic growth and indeed the region's abilities to address
problems of poverty and food insecurity. Land degradation is a key
factor in the region's poverty spirally with increasingly numbers of
populations standing-by as their land's productive--ability is eroded.
In COMESA region, as is in most of the Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) the
environmental and human implications of land degradation are
particularly wide and severe.

Land degradation reduces the soil's ability to naturally mitigate
extreme weather conditions. This exposes communities depending on these
lands to increased vulnerability with regard to food shortages and
vagaries in weather. Land degradation has deprived large portions of the
continent's populations their only means for survival. The poor don't
just get poorer, but also more vulnerable and usually their responses
and survival strategies only go to destroy the environment further --
trapping them into a vicious poverty spiral. Use of external inputs
(inorganic fertilizers, irrigation, etc\...) on such soils is rendered
largely ineffective.

The impact of land degradation on farmland is also known to go well off
the farm -- gullies destroying community roads, siltation in water
reservoirs, hence reducing capacities to hold surface water for uses
such as livestock drinking. Much of Africa depends on hydropower for its
electricity generation. It is now common that even after just one below
normal rainfall season, the generation of power in many of the
generation stations is immediately threatened by the low water levels.

Through its influence on carbon exchange, land degradation contributes
to global warming consequences. The large amount of carbon stored in the
vegetation in the dry zones, averaging about 30 tonnes per hectare,
decreases when the vegetation is depleted or disappears. Carbon-rich
soils, frequently found in dry zones, store a substantial amount of this
element (nearly half the total quantity of carbon is stored in the
organic matter in the soil, much more than is found in the world\'s
vegetation): the destruction of these soils has a very powerful effect
on the carbon cycle and boosts the greenhouse effect as a result of the
release of carbon. Therefore, this is directly from the farming/tillage
activities as well as land clearing for farm activity to compensate for
the low productivity.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  Communities trapped in the poverty vicious cycle with situation and
  more households joining in at every turn of the cycle.

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

Addressing land degradation is made even more difficult by the demands
of a population growing at more than 3% per year as well as the emerging
challenges of social and family structure poised by HIV/AIDS and
increased marginalizing of agriculture in the national and international
arena.

The situation points to the fact that the [problem of agricultural
production/productivity in the region is just as much AN ENVIRONMENTAL
PROBLEM.]{.underline} It is when human interactions with natural in form
of farming and use of other ecosystem services is in harmony and mutual
with respect to natural resource resilience, that we shall also be able
to optimize also in terms of output/productivity from the external
inputs including fertilizers and labor.

Therefore, CAADP and indeed COMESA take the thrust on sustainable land
and water management (SLWM) as core to the agricultural agenda. Land
degradation is noted as one of the major challenges to enhance
agriculture performance.

**2.2 The thrust and growth cases of "good practice" initiatives**

Growing cases can be noted highlighting approaches and best practices
that are empowering farmers/communities into farming and land use
systems that provide for increased and stability in yields on one hand
and beneficial, even at micro level, environmental impacts (e.g. reduced
erosion), on the other.

Farmers in Southern Zambia and growing cases in Lesotho, Zimbabwe,
Tanzania among others have turned around their livelihoods -- out of
desperation and vulnerability to guaranteed food supply and growing
income flow with growing ability to invest -- from their adoption of
conservation agriculture practices (reduced tillage, soil cover and
rotations/intercropping). Even some of the most vulnerable and marginal
households have doubled their grain yields to over 2 tones/hectares.
There are other similar cases from wide range of practices including
rainwater harvesting (mainly in-field harvesting), integrated pest and
nutrient management, crop-livestock-tree integration and related
agroforestry practices. These cases are also underlined by dissemination
approaches based on and driven by participatory processes, empowerment
of local communities and organizations, people-centered learning,
community-based planning, multi-sectoral, and integrated. The farmer
field schools approach is one such approach growing in popularity also
as a tool for community mobilizations.

Low and slow adoption: However, despite these successes including
demonstrated impacts that SLWM brings a real return on investment,
sustainable adoption of these practices is slow and still very low. The
desire impact of SLWM application will essentially come from the extent
of adoption of the practices, both in terms of numbers of
farmers/households practicing as well as land size involved.

This is, therefore, the reason that the thrust in this COMESA regional
Compact under Pillar 1 relates more to identification and
stimulating/facilitating interventions to deal with barriers to
sustainable and widespread adoption of SLWM - Extending the area under
sustainable land management and reliable water control systems

**2.3 Barriers hindering SLM scale-up in the COMESA Region**

Reasons for low and slow adoption of SLWM practices in the region are
certainly complex, dynamic and would greatly vary from circumstance to
circumstance. However, analysis of past and current initiatives and
intervention in SLWM development and promotion in the region has
highlighted key barriers (and opportunity) which for purposes of this
presentation can be categorized into three main groups, namely:

##### 

##### [Knowledge and Technological Barriers]{.underline}: In the context of the COMESA Region this includes what has in the COMESA Agricultural Strategy been identified as technological constraints with the following as related to the SLM thrust:

-   Inappropriate production technologies/practices (as an underlining
    problem and largely among the main causes for land degradation,
    biodiversity loss and consequently undermining productivity

-   Over-dependence on rainfed agricultural

-   Low agricultural input (especially fertilizer) use. This element
    also highlights the low productivity of fertilizer (returns on the
    fertilizer used) and directly related to land degradation

i.  [Institutional and Governance Barriers:]{.underline} This category
    includes what the COMESA strategy identifies under "Policy related
    constraints" and relate to various issues including:

-   the general lack commitment to a shared vision and African
    leadership on SLM

-   no or little coordination and collaboration between stakeholders,
    including government and donors

-   Lack of policy harmonization and mainstreaming of SLM in expenditure
    frameworks

-   Inadequate or simply lack of appropriate incentives for SLM

ii. [Economic and Financial Barriers]{.underline}: This highlights the
    general market and pricing structures that has left SLWM attractive
    to most players and stakeholders -- from farmers through to
    private/commercial service providers, manufacturers and trades.

This Regional Compact is therefore designed to enable COMESA provide the
desire support to national programmes in ensuring that key barriers to
SLWM widespread adoption in the member countries and specifically and
critical identified and understood and programme/ project interventions
designed and implemented to deal with the identified barriers.

3\. Rationale for COMESA Implementation

The Regional Economic Communities (RECs) coming in at the core of
implementation of the CAADP is the laid out policy and implementation
strategy for the NEPAD programmes. Specifically the operationalization
of this policy and strategy with regard to COMESA has been discussed and
documented. The COMESA Agricultural Strategy identifies low productivity
as the "Primary Entry point" in identifying and addressing of barriers
to enhanced agricultural performance in a region. With the agricultural
sector accounting for more than 32 per cent of COMESA\'s gross domestic
product (GDP), directly providing livelihood to about 80 per cent of the
region\'s work force, accounting for about 65 per cent of foreign
exchange earnings and contributing more than 50 per cent of raw
materials to the industrial sector, the COMESA thrust have well
acknowledged agricultural as critical to the Region's socio-economic
development. This is also at the core of the region achieving
sustainable food security.

In line with the Regions identified primary constraints to enhanced
agricultural productivity, categorized under (i) technological, (ii)
market-related and (iii) policy related constraints, COMESA's thrust is
aligned to the NEPAD and CAADP framework. COMESA's Agricultural agenda
identifies three core activity areas which also highlight how it links
and contributes to the overall CAADP and EAP objectives.

The COMESA programme framework presented below now clearly places the
SLM thrust as key and primary element in the objective for "increased
adoption of technologies".

![](media/image1.wmf){width="5.840972222222222in"
height="3.7506944444444446in"}

a)  Streamlining of SLWM in currently underway and new regional COMESA
    Programmes/ Projects

The emphasis here is that promotion of improved technologies for
agriculture production systems will along side increased productivity
also strongly and actively take on board SUSTAINABLE LAND AND WATER
MANAGEMENT OBJECYIVES. The SIP will serve as the key guide and
operational framework under this objective.

In terms of the SLM agenda, two main Programme areas are identified.
These are:

i)  Sustainable Land and Water Management with the objective of
    reverting fertility loss and resource degradation, while ensuring
    broad-based and rapid adoption of sustainable land and forestry
    management practices in the small-holder as well as commercial
    sectors. The focus include:

    -   integrated cropping practices with both productivity and
        environmental protection objectives

    -   resource productivity (including natural resources -- land,
        water (whether irrigated or rainfed); and external input
        resources -- labor, fertilizers, seed, etc...)

ii) Irrigation and Water resource management

    -   Irrigation techniques and practices stimulating expanded access
        to irrigation

    -   Irrigation infrastructure

    -   Management of related water sources including small dams

    -   Watershed management

    -   Capacity training

4\. Implementation Arrangements

Implementation of the programme under this Concept Note, i.e. Pillar 1,
will come within the broad function of COMESA implementation of the
CAADP programme. However, special arrangements are proposed to aimed at
building and strengthening an internalized and institutional capacity
within COMESA to take on the specifically Pillar 1, i.e. the
SLM/Terrafrica SIP agenda.

Important in this regard is that the capacity is not a one-off
assignment that is lost, e.g. after Project support. The key elements of
the proposed COMESA capacity implementation arrangement are:

i.  Functions (ToR) for taking on the SLM agenda institutionalized
    within the office of the Senior Agricultural Advisor in COMESA. The
    function comes under this office also deliberately for co-ordination
    and interactions with other CAADP implementation functions

ii. Terms of Reference should be developed and agreed between NEPAD and
    COMESA within the framework of the Pillar 1 implementation thrust

iii. Identification and recruitment of the person to take on this SLM
     support/Implementation. This Project will include initial (first
     3-4 years) financing support for the post on these functions.

Key in the implementation arrangement will be the COMESA link to the
country CAADP focal persons. As per country needs and arrangement, i.e.
in countries where a specialized SLM national person/institution is
identified, deliberate efforts will be made to link the COMESA SLM
office to these national SLM offices/institutions.

5\. Pillar 1 COMESA Regional Compact

**5.1 Goal and Objectives**

With specific reference to the Pillar 1 thrust, the Goal is that COMESA
member states have streamlined SLWM in their development and agriculture
objectives and strategies with an policies and both government and
private thrust supportive to widespread SLWM adoption and consequently
supporting the attainment of national and regional food security and
socio-economic growth.

The following Objectives are specifically identified:

Objective 1: Support COMESA Member States to elaborate Sustainable Land
and Water Management (SLWM) investment frameworks related
project/programme developed and implemented

Objective 2: Establish and manage interactive SLWM knowledge and
Information management platform facilitating the sharing of evolving
knowledge/lessons/data on practices as well as tracking of SLWM impact

Objective 3: Stimulate and facilitate harmonization of the SLWM agenda
in line with the NEPAD EAP other CAADP Pillars and the UNCCD thrust
including and in particular regional and national Fertilizer strategies

Objective 4: Support and facilitate increased investment and Project
support to country and regional interventions to expand area and number
of farmers applying SLWM practices

**5.2 Key Programme Components**

The above three objectives will be pursued under the following four
interactive programme components

***a) Capacity strengthening at COMESA Secretariat and alignment of
COMESA policies and strategies to SLWM***

The following focus aspects under this component are noted:

1.  SLWM is more concretely and visibly streamlined in the COMESA
    Agricultural Strategy

2.  Build/Strengthen required capacity in COMESA Secretariat to delivery
    on services to member states on the planning of investments on
    scale-up of SLWM and coordinate the implementation of CSIF/SIP. The
    objective in this regard will be ensuring that this capacity is
    internalised and institutionalised in the operational structures at
    the COMESA Secretariat

3.  Support and backstop technical and organization articulation of SLWM
    aspects in/during the country CAADP roundtables. The Programme will
    support the country processes by facilitating specialists technical
    and management input to the roundtable processes ensuring that SLWM
    aspects are adequately and critically addressed and that the process
    benefits from wide and relevant stakeholder consultations.

4.  SLWM alignment in regional policy and development strategies and
    action plans

5.  Use and promote the SIP for regional and national alignment of donor
    support of SLWM in the region

6.  Mechanism for collaboration with the NEPAD Secretariat on SIP
    coordination

> [Outputs]{.underline}:

i.  COMESA Secretariat streamline SLWM agenda in its policies and
    programmes and capacitated to coordinate SIP

ii. SLWM Streamlined in the SIP /CSIF framework and functioning in
    leveraging and attracting new investments into SLM scaling up
    interventions

iii. At Least 50% of the COMESA countries complete SLWM Investment
     Frameworks

***b. SLWM knowledge and Information management and impact assessment***

1.  Establish a SIP M&E system including development of M&E tools for
    SIP beneficiaries to report on common program level indicators.

> The Programme will facilitate and manage an integrated SIP M&E system
> including the development of M&E tools for SIP beneficiaries to report
> on common program level indicators. In this aspect the evolving
> knowledge and information will be processed and disseminated in
> various forms and for various purposes including lobbying and advocacy
> purposes. In this process, the Programme will also stimulate and
> facilitate knowledge and information sharing and collaboration among
> the member states using the M&E and its outputs to inform and guide
> the implementation of the SLM agenda within the CAADP framework.

2.  Backstopping SLM programmes to ensure integration of
    adequate/relevant tools for monitoring and assessment of SLWM
    impacts and trends

3.  Regional SLWM information and knowledge support facility in liaison
    with SAKKS, i.e. the Programme will operationalise the SIP Results
    Monitoring System at the same time integrating initiatives under the
    Regional Strategy and Knowledge Support Systems (ReSAKSS) is being
    established to serve as tools for peer review, benchmarking, mutual
    learning, and policy dialogue including supporting decision making.
    The Programme will input to the ReSAKSS benchmarks and indicators
    for SLWM monitoring and evaluation.

4.  Develop and manage a database of SLWM activities and institutions in
    the region

> [Outputs:]{.underline}

i.  Operational M&E system with clear SLWM (aligned to the SIP results
    M&E)

ii. Country CSIF and SLWM programmes integrate and participating in the
    M&E process

iii. Regional SLWM knowledge and information sharing database function
     and member state and other stakeholders using it

iv. SWLM activities and institutions database

***c. Regional Integration and harmonization***

1.  Stimulate and facilitate interaction and integration of the
    fertilizer regional and national strategies and action plans to the
    SLWM agenda

2.  Operational mechanisms for interaction and realizing synergies with
    programmes in the EAP (PA 1 and 6), the UNCCD and other related
    regional and international commitments

3.  Harmonization of SLWM related policy and regulations across the
    region in support of stronger regional integration on sustainable
    natural resource management. Supporting and facilitating the
    region's interaction with other regions and international bodies and
    donor community. A harmonized regional approach to investment will
    help unlock larger investments in SLM from ODA and domestic sources.

4.  Alignment of SLWM agenda with other regional and international
    conventions and agreements

5.  Capacity building and empowerment for regional Institutions and
    partnerships in facilitating and support SLWM including mobilizing
    and nurture pool of African specialists /expertise into SLWM at
    regional level

> [Outputs:]{.underline}

i.  The Fertilizer strategies integrated at all levels in SIP CSIF
    preparation and implementation

ii. Functional mechanisms for interaction and joint collaboration
    between NEPAD's CAADP and EAP and the UNCCD and other relevant
    commitments and conventions

iii. COMESA member states harmonizing NRM policies (Agreements on common
     NRM policies at regional level)

     d.  ***Advocacy and streamlining of political will and
         inter-sectoral collaborations and partnerships around SLWM***

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
i.  The Programme will in this respect build and strengthen active
    regional and inter-government advocacy and awareness creation
    strategies and activities aimed at enlisting wide active support for
    SLWM across sectors and disciplines including the private sector.
    The Programme will specifically target various political systems and
    mechanisms including the relevant Ministers' and Presidents'
    meetings. Relevant policy and information briefs will be prepared as
    input to these meetings.

ii. Strategic analysis and policy advocacy and building awareness among
    stakeholders on key land and water management issues, especially
    small-scale irrigation and water management, conservation
    agriculture and investments to increase the use of appropriate
    chemicals/fertilizers and other external inputs.

iii. Enlisting policy support for SLWM adoption: At policy level, the
     programme will undertaken to align and streamline policies
     supportive to SLWM scaling up. These may be in the form of farm
     produce and inputs pricing policies, relevant import --export
     policies and issue of deliberate incentives to stimulate adoption.
     Issues of land tenure and regional trade consideration may be of
     relevancy depending on circumstances.

     d.  ***Support to member states' initiatives on the scaling up of
         appropriate SLWM technologies***

Under this component, the Programme identified the following focus
areas:

1.  Alignment and integration of SLWM objectives in regional agriculture
    and marketing/trade programmes implemented by the COMESA Secretariat

2.  Support to member states' initiatives on the scaling up of
    identified SLWM best practices. The following three areas are
    identified as primary entry points.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
i.  [Sustainable farming practices:]{.underline} the programme will here
    draw attention and support interventions aimed identification and
    application (replication and scaling up) of feasible and viable
    practices compatible with SLWM. This including practices such as
    conservation agriculture, integrated fertilizer use, agroforestry,
    integrated pest management and other practices locally identified as
    feasible for wider spread adoption in the region and contributing to
    the SLWM agenda.

> Intervention in the scaling up SLWM practices will also stimulate
> consideration to elements that will support and encourage/allow the
> practicing farmers "enter" and benefits from local agricultural
> [market interactions.]{.underline} This includes aspects such as crop
> selection.

ii. [Enhanced efficient water use on farms]{.underline}: This will
    essentially focus on stimulating and facilitating increased support
    to smallholder irrigation establishments. The thrust in this regard
    will stimulate and catalyze enhanced roles for the private sector
    and other partners in the development and management of small-scale
    irrigation based farm enterprises -- with integrated consideration
    for water resource management, conveyance and irrigation techniques
    and integration appropriate agronomic and cropping patterns within
    the overall objectives of SLWM. COMESA will here link and build on
    existing activities and initiatives including the COMESA/Indian
    government irrigation support initiative

iii. [Fertilizer use/accessibility and supply support]{.underline}: The
     AU/NEPAD has underlined the critical importance of strategic use
     and management of the fertilizer component (referring to both
     organic and inorganic fertilizers) as an integral element in the
     SLWM thrust. This presents one aspect which calls for radical
     "business unusual" strategies and interventions. COMESA thrust is
     in this programme going to bring on board issues of (i) effective
     and efficient use of the fertilizers (demand factors) (ii) policies
     and strategies including government and private sector interactions
     for enhanced physical and financial fertilizer accessibility
     (supply factors). The thrust will closely relate to the AU/NEPAD
     Abuja (2006) declaration on Fertilizer.

     1.  Advocacy to improve governance and policy support for SLWM in
         the COMESA region

     2.  Strengthen regional integration, inter-country collaboration
         and policy harmonization on SLWM in the COMESA region

> [Outputs:]{.underline}

i.  COMESA Agricultural programmes aligned to also cater for SLWM
    objectives

ii. SLWM practices appropriate in various agro-ecological, farming
    systems and farmer level identified and defined

iii. Member states implementing programmes/project on SLWM

iv. Progress toward common SLWM related policies

***Cross-cutting issues and considerations***

The Programme will in itself and also stimulate desired consideration
for key cross-cutting and overriding factors. Main ones in this regard
include:

-   partnerships and coalition development and facilitation. Emphasis
    and deliberate attention will be paid to allow integration and
    participation of local institutions including traditional village
    structures, local decentralization authorities and indeed the often
    marginalized groups such as the youth and women. Factors such as
    population increase, HIV-Aids and other health consideration will
    have to be factored into the analysis.

-   ensure that analysis are adequately subjected to socio-economic and
    cultural/ traditional considerations including possible conflicts in
    use/accessing of environmental services, e.g. crop-livestock
    conflicts between crop and livestock farmers.

**6. Expected Results**

i)  COMESA institutionalize and strengthen capacity to coordinator and
    backstop the CSIF processes in member states

ii) Strengthened Capacity of COMESA member States to implement
    sustainable land and water management (SLWM) activities

iii) SIP M&E system is operational in COMESA region and being used both
     as a learning tool and in assessing impact

iv) Awareness and active interest lead to increased number of players,
    stakeholders and partnerships and activities on SLWM programmes

v)  Over 60% of the COMESA member states have fully applied the CSIF and
    getting support under the GEF facility

**7. Interaction and synergies with other NEPAD and national and
international SLWM initiatives**

The content synergies and complementarities between SLWM and other NEPAD
and COMESA strategies and programmes have been well articulated in
various documents. Additional to the various components within the CAADP
programme, these specifically include the EAP in NEPAD and the UNCCD. At
Regional level, COMESA is already undertaking and supporting various
regional and inter-country programmes on various aspects including
marketing and trade.

The focus in this Programme is on [operational mechanisms]{.underline}
(technical as well as logistical) that will allow/enable the realization
of the identified synergies and complementarities.

[International/Inter-regional:]{.underline} The SLM/Terrafrica functions
in the COMESA Secretariat will in this regard come within and relate to
an international (continental) networking establishment under the
coordination and facilitation of the NEPAD Secretariat (SIP Coordination
Office). This is a mechanism/process that will link SLM focal persons in
the RECs and EAP focal persons at country and regional levels. This
mechanism will also facilitate interaction between the NEPAD programmes
(Pillar 1 and EAP PA 1 and 6) and the UNCCD programmes and UNCCD
country/regional contact persons/institutions.

[Regional:]{.underline} Within the RECs, and in particular in COMESA,
the functions on SLWM will directly relate to and mutual interact with
programs under other relevant aspects in COMESA, e.g. marketing and
market development, trade, etc...

As indicated in other parts of this Concept Note, special efforts will
be made at both Regional and country level to integrate planned
fertilizer support strategies.