1. Lessons Learned from the
Livestock Master Plan and
Future Investment Priorities for
Animal Resources Development
Workshop and Seminar
Kigali, Rwanda
9th March 2023

2. New Opportunities for Livestock
Sector Analysis and Planning
Joseph Karugia
Principal Scientist, ILRI
Presented at IFPRI/ILRI/NPS Seminar on “Lessons Learned from the
Livestock Master Plan and Future Investment Priorities for Animal
Resources Development”
Kigali, Rwanda, 9th March 2023

3. www.cgiar.org
• LMPs – help in the identification and prioritization of
livestock investments to achieve national development
objectives
• Livestock matter for:
• Economic opportunity – rising demand
• Nutrition and food security
• Health
• Gender and social inclusion
• Climate and environment
Introduction

4. 3
Lessons learned from rolling out 4 LMPs
Six critical factors that would lead to successful future LMP development and implementation:
Integrate investor
consultations
Align budgeting
with national
systems/processes
Establish data collection &
monitoring systems
Institutionalize
the LMP
Contextualize
for local use
Increase stakeholder
involvement
Data
Systems
1
2
3
4
5
6

5. www.cgiar.org
• Opportunity to support the development of PSTA 5
• Improved tools for ex-ante assessments
• Livestock sector (Multi-market) model
• Livestock value chain analysis tools
• Integrate gender and environment dimensions
• Linking with economy-wide modeling – livestock in economy –
national planning and budgeting processes and
institutionalization of LMP
• Ex-ante assessment of livestock system change – combinations
of technology (genetics, feed, health), policy and institutional
changes
• Support implementation of plans – program design, M&E
Livestock Sector Analysis

6. www.cgiar.org
• Value chain analysis – assess/evaluate impacts of programs
on value chain actors
• impacts on income, nutrition, gender, etc
• Assess/evaluate impacts of livestock programs on the
economy
• impacts on consumption/demand, prices,
supply/availability, agriculture GDP, national GDP
• Adapting to country context innovative, inclusive and
scalable institutional arrangements for improved value
chains
Ex-post Assessments

7. www.cgiar.org
• Capacity of MINAGRI in livestock sector and value chain
analysis with a focus on evaluating policies
• Enhanced presence in the country
• Partnership with MINAGRI, IFPRI/RSSP, and other partners
• Optimize on existing data sets and tools
Capacity sharing in support of PSTA5

8. THANK YOU

9. Better lives through livestock
Lessons learned from Livestock Master Plan (LMP)
development and implementation – Rwanda
ILRI Team
Felix Ngamije

10. 9
Table of Content
1. About Livestock Master Plans (LMPs)
2. LMP Assessment
1. Objectives
2. Methodology
3. Common Lessons Learned from the 3 Countries and 1 Indian State
Assessment
3. Findings from Rwanda’s LMP Assessment
4. Conclusions and Final Observations

11. 10
Livestock Master Plan
Detailed sector analysis and investment plan
• Demand-driven & inclusively developed, LMPs are highly
appreciated by national governments.
• Aim is to identify investment options in livestock value chains
through evidence-based sector analysis.
• ILRI has supported 3 countries and 1 State in India develop LMPs
that are being implemented. Currently, we are supporting 2
countries and 1 State in India develop their first LMPs.

12. 11
Assessment objectives
• Establish the status of implementation of the LMP and how it has
informed partners’ investments and projects.
• Assess drivers of implementation and challenges faced.
• Provide lessons for adapting current implementation and future LMPs.

13. 12
Assessment methodology
a. Review background information to ascertain: a) achievement of projected targets
and b) identify key stakeholders for consultation.
b. Stakeholder consultations i.e., government, development partners, private sector,
NGOs etc.
c. Review information collected and write initial report that captures what is working,
what is not working and why.
d. Present findings to national teams.
e. Revise initial report in line with comments received.
f. Write and share the final report.
The assessment was carried out in 3 countries and a state in India (Ethiopia, Rwanda,
Tanzania and Bihar State) where the LMPs have been operational for over 2 years

14. 13
Common lessons learned from rolling out 4 LMPs
To build on the positive momentum of the previous LMP, the assessment identified 6 critical factors that would
lead to successful future LMP development and implementation. These are:
Integrate investor
consultations
Align budgeting
with national
systems/processes
Establish data collection &
monitoring systems
Institutionalize
the LMP
Contextualize
for local use
Increase stakeholder
involvement
Data
Systems
1
2
3
4
5
6

15. RWANDA
LIVESTOCK MASTER PLAN
Findings from the Assessment

16. 15
Organisations planned to meet and actually met
1. Public officials- Government representatives
• Rwanda Agriculture and Animal Resources Development Board (RAB)
• Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINAGRI)
• District Veterinarians/10-15 DVOs and sector vets- 3 sectors/ district (90
sector vets ) (East: Nyagat, Gatsibo, Kayonza. Kirehe Nort:Gicumbi,
Rulindo, Musanze. West: Nyabihu, Rubavu, Karongi. South: Ruhango,
Nyanza, Huye, Kigali: Kicukiro)
• National Agricultural Export Development Board (NAEB)
• Ministry of Finance ( MINICOFIN) – Livestock financing office
• Ministry of Commerce , Trade and Industry (MINICOM)
• Rwanda Agriculture & Livestock Inspection and Certification
Service (RALIS)- RICA
• Rwanda FDA
• RSB
• NIRD
• AGRIC- INSURANCE (CROPS & LIVESTOCK ) Insurance @
MINAGRI- Tekana Muhinzi-Mworozi Urishingiwe-
2. Private sector (Processors (meat, milk), feeds manufactures, Producers: poultry, dairy, piggery etc. farmers
3. Developmental Partners & Donors
• Rwanda Dairy Development Project (RDDP) –IFAD (SPIU Coordinator)
• Project for Inclusion Small Livestock Markets (PRISM)- IFAD (ENABEL team)
4. INGOs (Engaged in Livestock activities)
5. Local NGOs- Faith based NGOs
6. Research & Academia institutions

17. 16
Changes-livestock population: LMP 2016-2019
Type 2016 2017 2018 2019 No. change % Change
Cattle 1,214,244 1,166,187 1,293,768 1,371,828 157,584 13.0
Goats 2,605,780 2,923,706 2,731,795 2,387,898 -217,882 (8.4)
Sheep 637,068 664,703 601,836 541,416 -95,652 (15.0)
Pigs 1,684,709 1,716,438 1,330,461 1,385,769 -298,940 (17.7)
Rabbit 1,387,669 1,347,860 1,264,734 688,788 -698,881 (50.4)
Poultry 5,238,497 5,272,725 5,442,152 5,306,254 67,757 1.3
1,214,244
2,605,780
637,068
1,684,709
1,387,669
5,238,497
1,166,187
2,923,706
664,703
1,716,438
1,347,860
5,272,725
1,293,768
2,731,795
601,836
1,330,461
1,264,734
5,442,152
1,371,828
2,387,898
541,416
1,385,769
688,788
5,306,254
COW S G OA TS S HE E P P I G S R A B B I T P OU LTR Y
TREND OF LIVESTOCK POPULATION
2016 2017 2018 2019
2016-2019, the
population of
cattle and
poultry has
increased, while
the population
of Goats, Sheep,
Pigs, and Rabbits
has decreased.

18. 17
Change: Animal products
Product 2016 2017 2018 2019 No. change % Change LMP
projection %
Milk 776,284 816,791 847,178 864,252 87,968 11.33
18.2
Meat 138,231 152,029 162,470 168,687 30,456 22.03
52
Fish 26,732 28,705 31,465 32,756 6,024 22.53
Eggs 7,347 7,475 7,936 7,972 625 8.51 39
Honey 4,738 5,105 5,200 5,500 762 16.08
Hides & skins 5,506 6,781 6,567 6,305 799 14.51 15
776,284
138,231
26,732
7,347
4,738
5,506
816,791
152,029
28,705
7,475
5,105
6,781
847,178
162,470
31,465
7,936
5,200
6,567
864,252
168,687
32,756
7,972
5,500
6,305
M I LK M E A T F I S H E G G S HONE Y HI DE S & S K I N
ANIMAL PRODUCTS 2016 - 2019
2016 2017 2018 2019
372,619
70,928
15,007
5,203
442,337
73,633
15,526
5,736
503,130
74,519
17,566
6,324
648,395
91,087
24,550
6,757
703,606
118,348
25,450
6,973
731,014
131,366
26,732
7,347
776,284
138,231
26,732
7,347
816,791
152,029
28,705
7,475
847,178
162,470
31,465
7,936
864,252
168,687
32,756
7,972
M I LK M E A T F I S H E G G S
ANIMAL PRODUCTS 2016 - 2019
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
 Animal
production
have
significantly
increased,
but less
than the
projection
of LMP

19. 18
Export of hides & skins July-May 2020-2021/ July-May 2019-2020
 In May 2021, 100% of hides and skins went to Nigeria. (NAEB 2020)
Export of Hides and skins 2020-2021 Export of Hides and skins 2019-2020
Quantity in kg Values USD Quantity in kg Values USD
July - - 25,537 21,323
August - - 102,103 70,463
September - - 76,216 48,998
October 4,192 187,552 76,233 48,534
November - - 50,859 42,683
December 4,205 1,663 149,760 83,349
January 22,886 4,621 98,019 69,772
February 93,776 63,362 244 272
March 1,238 1,647 53,833 39,217
April 60,766 37,498 - -
May 10,179 5,356 - -
Total 197,242 301,700 632,804 424,611
Source: MINAGRI, 2020

20. 19
Export of meat July-May 2020-2021/ July-May 2019-2020
 In May 100% of meat went to DRC. It was characterized by a high decrease of
89.2%
Export of Meat 2020-2021 Export of Meat 2019-2020 % Change in values
Quantity in kg Values USD Quantity in kg Values USD
July 83,082 129,010 503,330 1,309,785 (90.15)
August 11,960 16,489 580,474 1,496,465 (98.90)
Sept 42,533 101,254 493,614 1,318,241 (92.32)
October 33,902 62,404 574,739 1,406,949 (95.56)
November 211,713 195,973 537,350 1,338,069 (85.35)
December 93,044 100,350 363,661 917,779 (89.07)
January 77,002 89,397 469,131 1,155,333 (92.26)
February 39,221 55,743 504,777 1,254,502 (95.56)
March 237,059 151,984 275,266 771,238 (80.29)
April 215,070 215,796 4,510 10,363 1,982.36
May 44,155 72921.56 36,016 60,776 19.98
Total 1,088,740 1,191,322 4,342,868 11,039,500 (89.21)
Source: MINAGRI, 2020

21. 20
Export of dairy products July-May 2020-2021/ July-May
2019-2020
 Most of the milk was exported to the DR Congo
Export 2020-2021 Export 2019-2020
Quantity in kg Values USD Quantity in kg Values USD % Change in values
July 215,760 420,702 605,045 339,269 24
August 78,030 53,774 1,016,648 531,796 (90)
September 189,170 275,482 1,190,522 754,228 (63)
October 176,680 238,051 855,121 383,749 (38)
November 260,669 277,731 800,928 460,885 (40)
December 129,465 163,578 698,825 422,559 (61)
January 220,348 343,128 868,633 377,352 (9)
February 250,692 245,586 1,031,469 623,279 (61)
March 277,928 551,884 551,495 474,013 16
April 261,595 370,291 364,138 270,045 37
May 363,536 456,567 195,891 117,086 290
Total 2,423,872 3,396,773 8,178,714 4,754,262 (29)
Source: MINAGRI, 2020

22. 21
Livestock Investments- Rwanda
Projects
2017/2018
Executed Budget
2018/2019
Executed Budget
2019/2020
Executed Budget
Total/program
2017-2020
Gako Integrated Beef Project 2,658,214,595 5,965,075,715 8,623,290,310
One Cow Per Family 316,225,417 225,661,576 114,999,000 656,885,993
Rwanda Dairy Development Project (RDDP) 6,930,931,713 10,114,176,105 8,820,920,225 25,866,028,043
Aquaculture and fisheries development 877,085,524 150,159,803 1,091,460,266 2,118,705,593
Livestock Infrastructure Support Program (LISP) 21,365,000 36,005,222 101,182,705 158,552,927
Livestock Intensification Program (LIP) 1,524,553,284 1,647,733,126 2,014,161,592 5,186,448,002
One Cup of Milk per Child Program 46,000,000 46,000,000
Sustainable Animal Resources Production and Productivity 2,259,559,727 2,259,559,727
Animal Resources Policy, Strategies Development 91,846,344 91,846,344
TOTAL (RWF) 10,122,791,711 17,183,356,498 18,107,799,503 45,413,947,712
TOTAL (USD) 98,279,531 166,828,704 175,803,879 440,912,114
Source: MINAGRI REPORTS: 2017-2020

23. 22
Total proposed investment vs actual investment, by species
LMP-RLI VS GoR INVESTMENTS
Investments ( Billion) Cost share RLI-LMP
LMP-RLI
GoR
Investment GoR % Private %
Dairy 51 42 58
Meat 130 n/a n/a
Chicken 51 n/a n/a
Pig 13 16 84
Total 245 45.4 29 71
GoR investment is
about 18% of the
targeted LMP- RLI
investments

24. 23
Recent Investments/ Initiatives
• Powdered milk factory- under construction – Nyagatare District
• Black soldier fly larvae initiative (alternative source of proteins)- pipeline

25. 24
Consultation methods
• Focus groups discussions ( Farmers, Vets, NGOs)
• Individual discussions (High ranked officials/ Gov’t & Donors)

26. 25
Districts consulted
• Nyagatare, Gatsibo, Kirehe ( Eastern)
• Ruhango, Nyanza, Huye (South)
• Musanze, Gicumbi (North)
• Nyabihu, Karongi, Rubavu (West

27. 26
Findings/Results
• Private sector:
 Farmers (dairy, poultry, pigs)
- Farmers have not heard about LMP, or what LMP contains
- Farmers expressed interest in LMP
 Manufacturers: (Animal Feeds, dairy products)
- All processors didn’t know about LMP
- Expressed interest in LMP- in case it handles processing components & markets
- They requested to be involved during the next LMP development

28. 27
Public sector
• MINAGRI & RAB:
o They implemented LMP (line ministry)
o They use it so often during planning, resource mobilization and investment planning
o They are custodian of LMP
o Resourceful during PSTA4 development & Livestock sector analysis
o LMP used to develop extension manuals/ materials
o LMP state livestock scenarios- useful for policy makers
o Considered LMP as important document- for gov’t officials.
• MINICOM & MINICOFIN:
 Implement it indirectly (MINICOM- on export & Meat value chain project- current implementation)
 MINICOFIN: Finances livestock projects submitted by line ministry & its agencies

29. 28
Policies
• Prime Minister’s Office and MINICOFIN :
 Rely on MINAGRI’ livestock projects, policies and strategies proposed
 LMP- good reference for policy or strategy formulation (livestock)

30. 29
District level
• District: DVOs- use it for DDP/S
• Sector: Sector vets- implements plans from districts & RAB
• Sector vets- have no idea about LMP

31. 30
Development partners
• NGOs- use LMP during project proposals development only.
• Faith Based NGO (World Vision & ADRA):
Don’t use LMP- ‘’consider needs assessment’’
• Donors ( USAID & ENABEL)- Use LMP for funding decisions
• Donor (IFAD) – don’t use LMP- funds what MINAGRI Proposes

32. 31
Research & Academia
• UR & Rwanda TVET Board
Know LMP, but don’t implement it
LMP doesn’t provide good academic support
They confirmed its importance- can be resourceful for curriculum development &
revisions

33. 32
Effects of COVID-19
• Markets: Producers ( milk, eggs, meat) failed to get markets
• Business closed: Broilers- due to failure in getting market
• Feeds: Costs doubled- farmers fail to buy (raw material are imported)
• Vet services:
oSome Vets failed to move during lockdown
oMany vets were infected with covid-19

34. 33
Factors affected implementation
• Weak dissemination of LMP
• LMP doesn’t suit all stakeholders (academia, private sectors)
• Weak integration of all categories of stakeholders during LMP development
• Strengthened market: livestock products market pull is needed (domestic & Export)

35. 34
Conclusions
• Private sector: Recommended another LMP & to be consulted during development
• NGOs: Recommended to have another LMP- for further reference for grants proposal
development
• Donors: Recommended another LMP- help to refer to-funding decisions
• Government officials: Recommended another LMP- further consultation
• Research & Academia: Want LMP to put academia into consideration

36. 35
Assessment conclusion
• All stakeholders: Recommended another LMP for future reference
• Investments: Guides investments
• Donors: Will trust such government plan- for support decisions
• Dissemination: Next LMP should be widely disseminated to all levels
• PSTA4: Was highly disseminated- stakeholders could confuse the two
LMP 2022/2023 – 2026/2027 is Highly recommended for Sector development

37. THANK YOU