GENERAL MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE CONTRACT (GMAC) Contract No: 674-C-OO-01-1 0051-00 GEAR Agricultural Privatization Project Mid term Evaluation Report Prepared by .KatherineS. Naughton' January 2003 This report was prepared under Mega-Tech, Inc.'s prime contract with USAID and addresses USAID/South Africa's Strategic Objective No.5: Increased Employment Opportunities BESTAVAILABLE COpy . ~. '.': '~.:;:".. ' '.': :...," >. '. . _ __ i~',~'-...:.-·;;~·. .........,__ '~ .. -. •.• _ .._ ..:', ••- - ";';;"._~ .~;';': .~•.•• , ••..•••_ ........ '.........-0•. __•• , • __,:_, ••. '." •• _ ..... " .._ ..... ~. '-'--"- ---.-'--_.':'.'--'-_.- _.- Abstract The GEAR Agricultural Privatization Project ("GAPP") is being evaluated on its progress since May 2000 towards meeting certain objectives, targets, and indicators., Recommendations are made as to whether each of these should be continued, modified, or deleted. Overall management of the. project, pOSSible project in~lprovememts, technical assistance and expertise,specific objectives,' problems/stumbling blocks, overall impact of privatizations, and GApP effectiveness are discussed. Recommendations are made as -to overall project modifications. 2 Executive Summary￾of GEAR Agricultural Privatization Project Mid term Evaluation Report The GEAR Agricultural Privatization Project ("GAPP~) is being evaluated on its progress since May 2000 towards meeting certain objectives, targets, and indicators. Recommendations are niade-as to whether each of these should be continued, modified, or deleted~ Overall management of the project, possibleprojectimprovements, technical-assistance and expertise, specific objectives, problems/stumbling blocks, overall impact of privatizations, and GAPP effectiveness are discussed. Recommendations are made as to overall project modifications. Evaluation Methodology The evaluation methodology for this report consisted of: • Interviewing/visiting selected projects • Interviewing/visiting selected rejected projects • Interviewing project personnel • Interviewing SA government officials • Interviewing USAID officials • Reviewing original contract and subsequent modifications • Reviewing quarterly reports A table presenting data relating to the GAPP objectives, performance targets, and indicators was prepared. The table is attached as Appendix 5. Program- Description/History/Background GAPP isa modification of Contract PCE-I-00-97-00016';'OO Delivery order no" 800, Black Private EnterpriseProject, which began on October 1, 1997. The original purpose of this contract was to assist bidders participating in transactions involving the restructuring or transfer of state-owned assets to the historically disadvantaged population of South Africa. This was one of several contracts starting at that time, all of which focused on assistance to historically disadvantaged entrepreneurs, with the purpose of developing a stronger base of middle market companies in South Africa, and increasing the size of the historically disadvantaged middle class. In May 2000, the Contract was modified to restrict assistance to the transfer of state-owned agricultural assets. What Has Worked and Why GAPP has been effective as a means of achieving and promoting equity and employment through the divestiture of state-owned agricultural assets: over $55 million worth of assets have been transferred from state ownership to historically disadvantaged farmers, and over 10,000 jobs have been created or sustained, a result with a significant positive impact on the beneficiaries. The longevity of the project and of project personnel, ahd the relationships established by project personnel with provincial government officials and bidding groups have been key to this success. Both the bidding groups and provincial government are extremely conservative and inexperienced in these processes and these constraints are only overcome through tenacity, persistence, and repetition. What has not Worked and Why Restrictions imposed on the project by USAID, such as assisting with the transfer of state-owned agricultural assets only, only working in specified provinces, and focusing on a limited number of financing sources, have resulted project performance which, while satisfactory, is lower than might otherwise have been achieved with the same USAID resources. Because of the conservatism and inexperience of the bidders, government, and financing sources, transactions are very difficult to bring to a conclusion, hence GAPP must be able to take advantage of opportunities where ever they may arise. 3 ~. -----_ .. __ ..- .. . '-'- ~,.- --.-.- Opportunities There is an opportunity to increase project success by allowing GAPP to focus on the transfer of agricultural assets from any source, not just government, to previously disadvantaged beneficiaries. The restriction to privatizations by a government entity limits success due to the very slow implementation by government of the privatization process. There may well be private owners willing to'transfer assets to thesebeneficiaries, but unable to doso due to both parties' ... lack of experience with the process.· .. Constraints_ The main constraints faced by GAPP relate to a lack of experience by both government and bidding groups with the privatization process and with business in general. GAPP is able to overcome these constraints with bidding groups through careful selection, persistence, and education. It can also apply persistence and education to government, and assess which government individuals or entities will be most productive to work with at any given time. GAPP's success in meeting its objectives, targets, and indicators demonstrates that these constraints do not preclude it from being successful. Lessons Learned • transactions involving agricultural assets and government entities take years, not months, to conclude • continuity of personnel is key to establishing and maintaining the trust necessary to conclude a transaction • flexibility on geographic location of assets, owner of assets, structure of the transaction, and structure of financing produces the optimum level of successful transactions Progress Against GAPP Objectives Progress towards GAPP objectives is good. Of the 6 objectives, 5can be assessed, of which 3 are being met fully. One of the 2 objectives not being met,·the·requirement to work only in 3 provinces, would in fact be a constraint on the achievement of other GAPP objectives if it were being met. It is recommended that, of the 6 objectives, 1 be continued as is, 1 be deleted, and 4 be modified.. • Objective 1 calls for GAPP to provide technical assistance to potential bidders for state￾owned agricultural-assets and agribusinesses and this has been achieved in 41 (100%) of the 41 reported GAPP transactions. Recommendation: This objective be continued. The project has demonstrated not only its ability to provide the required assistance in all transactions (indeed it is the basis on which project transactions are selected), but also that there are a sufficient number of such transactions for it to work on. • Objective 2 calls for GAPP transactions to be located in the Eastern Cape, Northern Cape, and KwaZulu Natal. This objective is not being achieved as only 15 (37%) of the 41 reported projects are located in these areas. Recommendation: This objective be modified to allow GAPP to work in any South African province. Project personnel have found that a key factor in successful transactions is the willingness of provincial government to implementthe privatization process, which is variable. Thus limiting GAPP to work in specific provinces reduces GAPP's ability to be effective. • Objective 3 calls for post privatization support in business and management skills to be provided and this objective is being achieved as such support has been provided to 5 (24%) of the 21 GAPP trans_actjons reported as closed. Recommendation: This objective be modified to require GAPP to co-ordinate the provision of post privatization assistance, but not provide the assistance itself. GAPP has limited resources and it would not be cost-effective to continue to provide Gauteng-based post-privatization assistance to transactions. Developing localfy-based sources of such assistance is more sustainable. Given the bidders' lack of experience in business and management, post privatization assistance is a key factor in their continued success once their bid has been successful. . • Objective 4 calls for project personnel to have maintained contacts with the Land Bank and the IDC Agro-Industries unit and this is being achieved. Recommendation: although this 4 • objective is being achieved, it is not clear that it adds anything to project delivery and could be deleted. Objective 5 calls for the creation of database of foreign investors (focus on American investors) in agricultural assets. This objective cannot be assessed as the database has not yet been finished (target completion date is June 2003). Recommendation: The database is . likely to prove useful to GAPP and any successor projects, but only if it is maintaine,d an'd . updated on a regular basis. If it is ,developed and not updated any money 'spent on ' developing it will have been wasted. ' Objective 6 calls for the creation of a separate website for GAPP. This has not been achieved' nor is one in progress. A section on another website (www.southafricaprivatization.com) has been developed and is available. This section lists current agribusinesses for sale, but does not yet include information on privatization, manuals on methods of privatization, papers and research on privatization in South Africa, or links to other privatization websites. The section has not been advertised. and no brochure has been published. Recommendation: The website as described in the objective could be useful and will be a cost-effective way to' source potential foreign investors in South African agricultural assets. However, no compelling case has been made for a separate website and it would be preferable to modify this objective to require only that a list of current agribusinesses for sale be available on an existing website, and that extensive links to the list be maintained. Progress Against GAPP Indicators (see also the table attached as Appendix 5) The project has made good progress towards meeting these indicators. Signi'ficant progress has been made in assisting potential bidders to evaluate the costs and benefits of specific transactions, to develop strategies and options for the privatization of agricultural assets, to develop the bids using expertise in a range of areas, and in identifying strategic partners for the . bidders. Less progress has been made in identifying potential investors in these transactions, in . building linkages between small arid large agribusinesses~ and in providing post privatization' assistance. Assistance has been provided mainly by the three key project personnel and legal assistance is outsourced to local firms. The project's success in working with the bidders is due to: the understandable lack of bidders' expertise in privatization, the lack of such assistance available from other sources, and project personnel's ability to establish a relationship of trust with the bidders. This relationship of trust, which is a key component of the project's success, is a result of the longevity of the project and its key personnel, and the project's perceived independence of any South African government structures. Simply put, bidders believe that project personnel have their interests at heart. The relatively small percentage of transactions for which potential investors and other linkages have been identified is due to the nature of the projects, many of which (irrigation schemes, silos) are not of interest to anyone except the local community. The transactions nevertheless have value in empowering local farmers. Progress towards each indicator is as follows: • Indicator 1 calls, for GAPP to evaluate and assess the costs and benefits of specific transactions and thishas been achieved in 41 (100%) of the 41 GAPP transactions reported. Recommendation: continue. • Indicator 2 calls for GAPP to assist in developing privatization strategies and options and this has been achieved in 40 (98%) of the 41 GAPP transactions reported. Recommendation: continue. • Indicator 3 calls for GAPP to assist potential bidders from evaluation through development of bid strategies and supporting documentation and this has been achieved in 40 (98%) of the 41 GAPP transactions reported. Recommendation: continue. • Indicator 4 calls for GAPP to provide expertise in business analysis, marketing, business development, financing, legal and regulatory issues, and/or structuring and this has been achieved in 41 {1 OO%} of the 41 GAPP transactions reported. The objective also calls for 5 • • '.. • GAPP to provide post privatization assistance'and this has been achieved in 5 (24%) of the 21 GAPP transactions reported as closed. -Recommendation: continue. ' Indicator 5 calls for GAPP to identify strategic partners and this has beenachi~ved in 26 . (63%) of the 41 GAPP transactions reported. Recommendation: continue. Indicator 6 calls for'GAPP to identify potential investors in these transactions and this has' been achieved in ,3 (7%}of the41 GAPP transactions reported. Recommendation: continl:ie. Indicator 7 calls forGAPP to help build linkages between small and large agribLJsinesses and . this has been achieved in 5 (12%) of the 41 GAPP transactions reported. Recommendation: continue. Indicator Bcalls for GAPP to provide post privatization assistance in financial marketing . management, marketing, and operations and this has been achieved in 5 (24%) of the 21 GAPP transactions reported as closed. Recommendation: continue. ' Review overall management of the project Overall management of the project is effective, in that the planned objectives and performance targets of the project are being met. Strengths Project strengths are: • focus on beneficiaries • perceived independence of advisors, Le. no formal link to South African government • use of local staff with existing ,contacts in South African agriculture. • long term nature of the project: the agriculture market is conservative hence it can take a long time to win the confidence of potential clients. • experience of personnel on the project Weaknesses .' .,'. . . A key project weakness is the inexperience and lack of farrliliarization with the details entailed in completing a transaction of both the bidding groups and some segments of the pubic sector. Recommendations Recommendations Requiring no Action • report amount of time spent on each transaction to better estimate cost effectiveness of assistance. .' > .. Recommendations Requiring Administrative Action • clarify in writing that the Statement of Work and the associated targets in Modification No.3 supersede and replace th~ Statement of Work and targets contained in Contract PCE-I-OO￾97-00016-0Q Delivery order No.BOO and Modification Nos. 1 and 2 thereto.· • monthly reports continue to be submitted, with the form of the monthly report to be agreed between the GAPP Chief of Party and the USAID Senior Agribusiness and Agricultural Adviser and specified in writing. • ,formalize expansion of GAPP scope to include the transfer of agricultural assets to historically disadvantaged beneficiaries other than through the privatization of state-owned assets. Recommendations Requiring Policy Action • the requirement that GAPP work only in Eastern Cape. Northern Cape, and KwaZulu Natal be modified to allow GAPP to work in any South African province. • the requirement that GAPP provide post privatization assistance closed transactions be modified to require GAPP to co-ordinate the provision of post privatization assistance, but not provide the assistance itself. 6 - __ ..:.... ~,~: -:. ..~_ .• '.0., • the definition of a "closed"transaction be a transaction in which one or more of the events - listed has occurred: (1) creation of a shareholders! trust; (2) creation of a company to purchase the assets; (3) bidders beginning work on the land; (4) financing raised; (5) announcement by government of transfer of assets' to bidders; or (6) transfer of legal title to the assets. ." " ". the requirement to maintain contacts with the Land Bank and the IDCAgro-lridustries unit be deleted since the objective should be to secure firiaf1cingfrorn any potential reputable source. • the requirement to develop a website listing agribusiness for sale be modified to require that" a list of current agribusinesses for sale 'be available on an existing website, and that extensive links to the list be maintained. • consider more use of out-sourced local resources such as retired executives and other USAID/other donor supported projects to provide post privatization support to transactions. • if feasible and requested, fund an expert on the financing of agricultural projects to sit in National Department of Agriculture. • define employment to include jobs sustained as well as created. • consider establishing links with other donor-funded projects (Agrilink II, SAIBL) or local resources (Local Business Service Centers, private service providers) which can provide training in business skills and entrepreneurship. • eliminate the requirement for the investor database to be housed on the website. It should be developed and updated by GAPP, and then transferred to a private sector entity or a follow￾on project to be continued. . •. ensure that there is a mecnanism for the database to be maintained once it is developed. 7 ,.' •. .::··1...·:·':. GEAR Agricultural Privatization Project Mid term Evaluation Report, The GEAR Agricultural Privatization Project ("GAPP") effectively began in May 2000 with Modification No.3 to Contract PCE-I-00-97-00016-00 Delivery order No.BOO dated September 1997. ' . .',.,', , ,,'," ' ' , • Note/hat ModificationNo. 3 states thaUts intention is to "incorporate"Agricultural , Privatization activities into the Statement 'of Work" of the original contract. Project personnel understood this to mean that the Statement of Work ofthe original contract was replaced by the activities described in Modification No.3, and proceeded accordingly. USAID has concurred in this assumption, implying that this was in fact the intent. If this is the case, it should be made clear in·writing that the Statement of Work and the associated targets in Modification No.3 supersede and replace the Statement of Work and targets contained in Contract PCE-I-OO-97-00016-00 Delivery order No. BOO and Modification Nos. 1 and 2 thereto, as the use of the term "incorporate" could be interpreted to mean "added to"rather than ' "supersede". This evaluation has been undertaken in accordance with the assumption that the' intent was to replace the Statement of Work and targets contained in Contract PCE-I-00-97-00016-00 Delivery order No.BOO and Modification Nos. 1 and 2 thereto with the Statement of Work and targets contained in Modification No.3. GAPP is a modification of Contract PCE-I-00-97-00016-00 Delivery order no. BOO, Black Private Enterprise Project, which began on October 1, 1997. The original purpose of this contract was to assist bidders participating in transactions involVing the restructuring or transfer of state-owned assets to the historically disadvantaged population of South Africa. This was one of several contracts starting at that time, all of which focused on assistance to historically disadvantaged entrepreneurs; with the purpose of developing a stronger base of middle market companies in South Africa, and fncreasing the size of the historically disadvantaged middle class. In May 2000, the Contract was modified to restrict assistance to the transfer of state-owned agricultural assets. Evaluation Methodology The evaluation methodology for this report consisted of: • Interviewing/visiting selected projects • Interviewing/visiting selected rejected projects • Interviewing project personnel • Interviewing SA government officials . • Interviewing USAID officials • Reviewing original contract and subsequent modifications • Reviewing quarterly reports' A list of individuals interviewed is attached as Appendix 1. A list of documents reviewed is attached as Appendix 2. Two questionnaires were prepared for use in the interviews: one for use with successful and unsuccessful bidders and one for use with other interviewees. Bidders were interviewed to determine how useful they, as the intended beneficiaries of GAPP, found the project. Other interviewees were provincial government officials and service providers, interviewed to elicit their suggestions as to ways in which GAPP might be more effective. Copies of these questionnaires are attached as Appendix 3. A table presenting data relating to the GAPP objectives, performance targets, indicators, and financing sources was prepared. The table is attached as Appendix 5. 8 Review progress against GAPP objectives Progress towards GAPP objectives is good, with 3 of the 5 objectives which can be assessed being met. Progress towards 1 of the 6 objectives (the database) cannot be assessed. One ofthe 2 objectives not being met (the requirement to work only in 3 provinces), would 'in fact be a constraint on the achievement of other GAPP objectives if it were being met. Progress towards each objective is as follows: 1. Objective 1 calls for GAPP to focus on Agricultural Privatization activities (Modification No 3 effective May 2000), specifically: • to provide technical assistance to potential bidders for state-owned agricultural assets and agribusinesses and • to emphasize assistance to individuals, employees and families employed currently on the agricultural assets being privatized. This objective has been achieved in all 41 reported GAPP transactions. Recommendation: this objective be continued. The project has demonstrated not only its ability to provide the required assistance in all transactions (indeed it is the basis on which project transactions are selected), but also that there are a sufficient number of such transactions for it to work on. 2. Objective 2 calls for GAPP to focus on privatization of assets located in Eastern Cape, Northern Cape, KwaZulu Natal (Modification No 3 effective May 2000). This objective has not yet been achieved: only 37% of the 41 reported GAPP transactions have been located in the Eastern Cape, Northern Cape, and KwaZulu Natal • Eastern Cape - 12 (30%) • North West - 11 (27%) • Mpumalanga - 9 (22%) • Limpopo - 4 (10%) • KwaZulu Natal...;. 3 (7%) • Gauteng -1 (2%) • Western Cape -1 (2%) Recommendation: this objective be modified to allow GAPP to work in any South African province. There is no compelling reason to limit the project to working in specific provinces. Project personnel have found that a key.factor in successful transactions is the willingness of provincial government to implement the privatization process. This Willingness can not be predicted in advance, and it varies over time from province to province. Thus limiting GAPP to work in specific provinces reduces GAPP's ability to be effective. 3. Objective 3 calls for GAPP to provide post as well as pre-privatization assistance to these transactions (Modification No 3 effective May 2000) and this has been achieved: post privatization assistance has been provided to 5 (24%) of the 21 GAPP transactions reported as closed. As the number of completed transactions increases GAPP may find that its resources are insufficient to provide assistance both to closed transactions and to on-going transactions. However, experience indicates that post privatization assistance is crucial to the future success of the privatized entity. Recommendation: this objective be modified to require GAPP to co-ordinate the provision of post privatization assistance, but not provide the assistance itself. GAPP has limited resources and it would not be cost-effective to continue to provide Gauteng-based post-privatization assistance to transactions. Developing locally based sources of such assistance is more sustainable. Given the bidders' lack of experience in business and management, post privatization assistance is a key factor in their continued success once their bid has been successful. Identification of strategic partners is another way to address this issue; however in many cases the assets privatized are not attractive to an outside investor. • Note that a definitional issue has arisen as to when a transaction is closed. GAPP reports a transaction as closed when it has concluded its activity with the beneficiaries. Often the GAPP activity is concluded before the assets are privatized. A clear written definition of the term ':closed transaction': should be agreed between GAPP and USAID. The suggestions for a definition of 'lclosed" are based on the occurrence of specific events, listed below. A table 9 applying these indicators to the reported transactions is attached in Appendix 5, and the number of transactions which would qualify as "closed" under these indicators is also given below: • creation of a shareholders' trust- 34 (83%) of 41 reported transactions • creation of a company to purchase the assets - 7 (17%) of 41 reported transactions • bidders beginning work on the land - 31 (76%) of 4.1 reported transactions • financing raised - 39 (95%) of41reported transactions • announcement by government of transfer of assets to bidders - 10 (24%) of 41 reported transactions • transfer oflegal title to the assets - 3 (7%) of 41 reported transaction Recommendation: that the definition of a "closed" transaction be a transaction in which one or more ofthe events listed above has occurred. 4. Objective 4 calls for GAPP to work closely with the Land Bank and IDC Agro-Industries (Modification No 4 effective June 2001). This objective has been achieved: project personnel have maintained contacts with the Land Bank and the IDC Agro-Industries unit. . • the Land Bank has provided SLAG/LRAD grants to assist with the financing of 29 (71 %) of the 41 reported transactions. • IDC Agro-Industries unit has not provided many leads or financing assistance. Recommendation: this objective is being met; however it is not clear that it adds anything to project delivery and could be deleted. 5. Objective 5 calls for GAPP to develop a database of foreign investors (focus on American investors) in agricultural asSets to be housed on a website (Modification No 5 effective June 2002). There is insufficient information to assess progress towards this objective, as the database of foreign investors (focus on American investors) in agricultural assets has not yet been finished (target completion date is June 2003). Recommendation: The database is likely to prove useful to GAPP and any successor projects, but only if it is maintained and updated on a regular basis. If it is developed and not updated any money spent on developing itwill have been wasted. . 6. Objective 6 calls for GAPP to maintain, enhance, and update a website (Modification No 5 effective June 2002). This objective has not been achieved. A section on another website (www.southafricaprivatization.com)hasbeendevelopedandisavaiiable.This section lists current agribusinesses for sale, but does not yet include information on privatization, manuals on methods of privatization, papers and research on privatization in South Africa, or links to other privatization websites. Nor does it yet include the database of potential investors. Indeed, it may never include this database, as for reasons of privacy protection, the permission of ·~he investors must be secured before any information about them can be listed on the website. And finally the section has not been advertised and no brochure has been published. Recommendation: The website as described in the objective could be useful and will be a cost￾effective way to source potential foreign investors in South African agricultural assets. However, no compelling case has been made for a separate website and it would be preferable to modify this objective to require only that a list of current agribusinesses for sale be available on an existing website, and that extensive links to the list be maintained. Review progress against GAPP performance targets All GAPP performance targets are being met or exceeded. Progress towards each performance target is as follows: 1. Target 1 calls for GAPP to assist a minimum of 15 agricultural privatization transactions during 12 months, all involving HDls (Modification No 3 effective May 2000). This target is being met: • from May 2000-May 2001 work on 20 (133%) GAPP transactions was reported • from June 2001-May 2002 work on 26 (173%) GAPP transactions was reported • from June 2002 to date work on 20 (133%) GAPP transactions was reported Recommendation: continue this target. 10 2. Target 2 calls for GAPP to submit monthly reports (Modification No 3 effective May 2000). . This target is being met: monthly reports have been submitted verbally. • Note' that the form of submission of the monthly reports should be clarified, as there appears to be a miscommunication between the GAPP Chief ofParty and the USAID Senior Agribusiness and Agricultural Adviser as to whether the reports should be verbal or written. If it is determined that verbal reports are sufficient, it would be advisable in any case that there bea memo in GAPPand USAID files confirming each month that a verbal report was submitted. . Recommendation: continue this target. 3. Target 3 calls for GAPP to submit quarterly reports (Modification No 4 effective June 2001). This target is being met: written quarterly reports have been submitted since June 2001. Recommendation: continue this target. Review progress against GAPP indicators (see also the table attached as Appendix 5) The project has made good progress towards meeting its indicators. Significant progress has been made in assisting potential bidders to evaluate the costs and benefits of specific transactions, to' develop strategies and options for the privatization of agricultural assets, to develop the bids using expertise in a range of areas, and in identifying strategic partners for the bidders. Less progress has been made in identifying potential investors in these transactions, in building linkages between small and large agribusinesses, and in providing post privatization assistance. Assistance has been provided mainly by the three key project personnel, and legal assistance is outsourced to local firms. The project's success in working with the bidders is due to: the understandable lack of bidders' expertise in privatization, the lack of such assistance available from other sources, and project personnel's ability to establish a relationship of trust with the bidders. This relationship of trust, which is a key component of the project's success, is a result ofthelongevity ofthe project and its key personnel, and the project's perceived independence of any South African government structures. Simply put, bidders believe that project personnel have their interests at heart. The relative lack of success in identifying potential investors and building linkages is due to the nature of the projects, many of which (irrigation schemes, silos) are not of interest to anyone except the local community. The transactions nevertheless have value in empowering local farmers. Progress towards each indicator is as follows: 1. Indicator 1 calls for GAPP to evaluate and assess costs and benefits of specific transactions (Modification No 3 effective May 2000). This indicator has been met in 41 (100%) of the 41 GAPP transactions reported. Recommendation: continue this indicator. 2. Indicator 2 calls for GAPP to assist in developing privatization strategies and options (Modification No 3 effective May 2000). This indicator has been met in 40 (98%) of the 41 GAPP transactions reported. Recommendation: continue this indicator. 3. Indicator 3 calls for GAPP to assist potential bidders from evaluation through development of bid strategies and supporting documentation (Modification No 3 effective May 2000.This indicator has been met in 40 (98%) of the 41 GAPP transactions reported. Recommendation: continue this indicator. 4. Indicator 4 calls for GAPP to provide expertise in business analysis, marketing, business development, financing, legal and regulatory issues, structuring expertise, and post privatization assistance (Modification No 3 effective May 2000). This indicator has been met in: • business analysis - 41 (100%) of the 41. GAPP transactions reported • marketing - 37 (90%) of the 41 GAPP transactions reported • business development - 41 (100%) of the 41 GAPP transactions reported • financing - 41 (100%) of the 41 GAPP transactions reported 11 • legal and regulatory issues - 18 (44%) of the 41 GAPP transactions reported • structuring expertise - 41 (100%) of the 41 GAPP transactions reported • post privatization assistance - 5 (24%) of the 21 GAPP transactions reported as closed. Recommendation: continue this indicator. 5. Indicator 5 c~lIs for GAPP to identify strategic partners (Modification No 4 effective June 2001). This indicator has been met in 26(63%) of the 41 GAPP transactions reported. Recommendation: continue this indicator. . . 6. Indicator 6 calls forGAPP to identify potential investors (Modification No 4 effective June 2001 ).This indicator has been met in 3 (7%) of the 41 GAPP transactions reported. Recommendation: continue this indicator. 7. Indicator 7 calls for GAPP to help build linkages between small and large agribusinesses to ensure knowledge-sharing (Modification No 4 effective June 2001 ). This indicator has been met in 5 (12%) of the 41 GAPP transactions reported. Recommendation: continue this indicator. 8. Indicator 8 calls for GAPP to provide post privatization assistance focused on financial management, marketing, and operations (Modification No 4 effective June 2001). This indicator has been met in 5 (24%) of the 21 GAPP transactions reported as closed. Recommendation: continue this indicator. Review overall management of the project Overall management of the project is effective, in that the planned objectives and performance targets of the project are bein~ -met. Strengths Project strengths are: • focus on beneficiaries • perceived independence of advisors, Le. no formal link to South African government • use of local staff with existing contacts in South African agriculture. • long term nature of the project: the agriculture market is conservative hence it can take a long time to win the confidence of potential clients. • longevity of personnel on the project • contractor is part of a larger international entity which can assist with • agricultural expertise • sourcing potential investors/partners • checking out potential investors/partners • ability to utilize existing local infrastructure of contractor • more cost effective to rent space and administrative services than to have to source them independently • can draw on local firm skills, especially in liquidations and accounting Weaknesses The primary program weakness is the lack of effective support for the objectives of the project at the national, provincial, and local levels of government. This lack of support is a combination of: • . lack of political will • lack of capacity • lack of administrative skills • union opposition to privatization: although this is focused on manufacturing more than agriculture, it appears to affect government attitudes towards privatization at the national and provincial levels . Additional program weaknesses are: • limited use of short term specialist skills • limited resources for post privatization support 12 Review possible project improvements Possible improvements in GAPP could focus on: • expanding its ability to complete transactions by mobilizing more effective South African government support for the project. This should NOT involve a formal link between the GAPP and any government entity, nor should it be an objective of the project itself. Rather USAID should consider what other resources it has or could make available to improve national, provincial,andlocal government's will and ability to manage the process of privatization of agricultural assets more effectively.. • expand the scope to include all provinces • co-ordinate with other donor activities in agriculture, particularly those with a focus on creating market linkages, such as Agrilink II, by encouraging the project to identify and work more closely with these activities. Assess technical assistance and expertise provided Technical assistance Technical assistance in all areas of project effort was rated by the beneficiaries as: • caliber - good • quality - good • timeliness - good Expertise Expertise prOVided was rated by the beneficiaries as: • business analysis - good • marketing - good • business development - good • financing - good • legal and regulatory issues - good • transaction structuring - good Post privatization assistance to new owners was rated good by the recipients. Expertise and assistance are rated as good, with limitations being seen as due to the environment (lack of government support) rather than GAPP. Post privatization assistance is necessarily limited by the small number of assets which have been privatized; however as this num·ber grows GAPP could be constrained in its ability to provide such assistance. Copies of the CVs of key project personnel are attached as Appendix 6. Review database and website Database No review of the database of potential foreign investors could be performed as it is not due to be completed until June 2003. In principle there is no reason to believe that it will not prove to be a useful tool for matching investors with agricultural privatization opportunities. A database of, say, medium to large-sized agri-processing companies could be sued to notify such companies of possible investment opportunities in pending privatizations. Website No website has been developed. A list of current agricLlltural transactions has been created and placed on an existing website. A web-based list of transactions can be a cost-effective way to attract outside investors, and it is therefore recommended that the list be maintained. No further website development should be undertaken. For privacy reasons the database of investors cannot be listed on a website without each investor's permission to use their name, therefore it is recommended that the database not be included on a website, but developed and maintained separately. It is key that such a database be maintained in the future, otherwise the funds spent 13 on developing it will be wasted. In principle there is no reason to believe such a database will not prove to be a useful tool for matching investors with agricultural privatization opportunities. Consider problems/stumbling blocks faced by GAPP Problems/stumbling blocks The problems/stumbling blocks faced by GAPP primarily relate to government at a!llevels: • government does not take decisions or actions in a timely manner • there is a lack of government understanding of what privatization actually is • government has been unwilling to adopt phased approach: say long term lease with option to buy; decisions tend to be all or nothing • particularly at the provincial level there are questions about the government's commitment to the privatization of agricultural assets • the preference to act only after a consensus is reached slows the process down • tender awards are often made on political rather than economic grounds • the privatization of agricultural land is an especially emotive issue, particularly when combined with a lack of understanding of privatization • in some instances the assets being privatized cannot be operated commercially or as a stand alone business, for example if the land has no water rights • government delays privatization but does not invest in the assets; when the assets are finally privatized the capital cost to the new owners is a burden • government often is IJnwitiing to privatize an asset until the entity has run out of money; however once it has run out of money they would rather shut it down than admit ithas failed • access to LRAD financing for the purchase of privatized agricultural assets is hampered by lack of knowledge or misinformation about this program among employees of the Land Bank, which is in charge of administering the LRAD program Other problems/stumbling blocks faced by the GAPP relate to working with groups of beneficiaries: • the internal politics of beneficiary groups slow the process down - the main reason cited by GAPP personnel as to why projects do not go forward is the beneficiaries' inability to form a functional unit - • related to the above is the need by bidding groups to reach consensus on what actions they wish to take also slows the process down • the fact that the GAPP services are free can also mean that beneficiary groups do not take ·consultants seriously and waste their time, hence effort must be spent on qualifying such groups. Although an argument can be made that charging for project services might reduce this risk, as a practical matter this is not feasible. The bidders are usually unemployed farmers with no assets (and often no income), so they will not be able to pay; and financing is most often through LRAD grants, from which it would be difficult to take a fee. This stumbling block should not be taken as an indication that bidders do not value GAPP assistance. Bidders' appreciation of GAPP assistance is evidenced through their requests for post￾privatization assistance and through their referrals of other transactions to GAPP. • the bene"nciaries' lack of education and lack of management experience • - the beneficiaries refuse to accept the need for privatization until government stops paying them, then there may not be enough time to form a bidding group before the assets -are shut down • the beneficiaries often have no understanding of communal responsibility A key factor in the success of any beneficiary group is the existence of 1 or 2 strong leaders to drive the formation of the group, the bidding process, and the management of the assets. This role is often filled by an outside investor. Actions taken by GAPP to overcome problems/stumbling blocks The main actions taken by contractor to overcome the above problems/stumbling blocks are: 14 • careful selection of projects on which to work • persistence in dealing with problems/stumbling blocks • education of both the government and the beneficiaries As the GAPP results indicate, the contractor actions taken to overcome problems/stumbling blocks are satisfactory. Most of the problems can only be solved over the very long term. In addition, all transactions move at their own pace, which is very difficult to change. Assess overall impact of privatizations and other transactions Impactofprivaffzailons The overall impact of the privatizations has. been very positive. Successful privatizations have: • enabled previously disadvantaged farmers to own their own land and farms • assisted the South African government to deliver on its promise to privatize state-owned agricultural assets • given local communities a stake in the "new" South Africa • transferred assets valued at over $55 million to historically disadvantaged beneficiaries • created 10,166 jobs Project personnel also believe that the GAPP has had a positive influence on government privatization policy. Impact ofother transactions The GAPP has had its mandate expanded to include the transfer of agricultural assets to historically disadvantaged beneficiaries other than through the privatization of state-owned assets. Note I have not seen this in writing. No such transactions have yet been worked on, hence their impact on historically disadvantaged beneficiaries and employment creation cannot be assessed. . Assess GAPP effectiveness The GAPP is effective as a means of achieving and promoting equity and employment through the divestiture of state-owned agricultural assets. Over $55 million worth of assets have been transferred from state ownership to historically disadvantaged farmers, and over 10,000 jobs have been created. • Note that approximately $1.6 million has been allocated to GAPP. Based on the table of expected project results, this means: . • $1.00 ofproject moriey will leverage $34.90 of assets privatized • each job created/sustained will be created/sustained at a cost of$115 This data should be compared to comparable data from other projects to determine the cost￾effectiveness of GAPP. Recommend modifications Specific modifications to the strategy which might improve program results are: • clarify the definition of "closed" transactions to mean the occurrence and documentation of . one or more of the following events: • creation of a shareholders trust by the bidding group • creation of a purchasing company by the bidding group • commencement of work by the bidding group on the land to be privatized • financing raised by way of loan, provisiqn of services, supplier credit, or other similar means • public announcement by the privatizing entity of the transfer of assets to the bidding group • legal transfer of title to the assets from the privatizing entity to the bidding group 15 • consider more use of out-sourced local resources such as retired executives and other USAID/other donor supported projects to provide post privatization support to transactions, by • using local business resources, such as the Chamber of Commerce, local NAFCOC or FASCOS chapters, or a Local Business Service Center, to source executives willing and able to work with the bidding group • requiring the GAPP personnel to contact other donor-funded projects with details of projects which require post-privatization support • fund an expert on the financing of agricultural projects to sit in National Department of Agriculture • definition of employment should include jobs sustained as well as created: if project waits until jobs are lost before assistance it costs more to re-start the farm • typically in a privatization jobs are initially lost as the enterprise moves to a commercial level of employment, then jobs are created over the next several years as the enterprise expands • privatization is intended to ensure sustainability of existing jobs rather than creation of new jobs • consider either providing more training in business skills and entrepreneurship, or establishing links with other donor-funded projects or local resources which can provide such training • report amount of time spent on each transaction to better estimate cost effectiveness of assistance • formalize expansion of GAPP scope to include the transfer of agricultural assets to historically disadvantaged beneficiaries other than through the privatization of state-owned assets • eliminate focus on relationships with Land Bank and IDC in favor of relationships with all possible financing sources • expand GAPP toa/low work in all provinces (this does 'not mean increase in activity, but an increase in the geographic scope within which existing activity can occur) • eliminate the requirement for a stand-alone website and replace it with a requirement for a list of current agricultural transactions to be housed on an existing website • eliminate the requirement.for the investor database to be housed on the website • ensure that there is a mechanism for the database to be maintained once it is developed 16 APPENDIX 1 Individuals and entities interviewed 1. Lisbon Estates • Robinson Nxumalo - Former employee/prospective oV'fner - PO Box Klanor 1351 - tel 072-112-6311 • Vicky Mashele - Former employee/prospective owner -PO Box Klanor 1351 - tel none 2. Frankfort Avocado Estates • Hudson Malebe - shareholder in Katope Frankfort Estates (Pty) Ltd - PO Box 3085, Acornhoek 1360 - tel 082-691-5770 • Alvinia Makhubedu - shareholder in Katope Frankfort Estates (Pty) Ltd - PO Box 440, Levovo 1273 - tel 082-703-3342 3. Smith Tabata Attorneys -Jonathan Clark - attorney - PO Box 11146, Southernwood Docex 80, East London 5247 - tel 043-726-0894 (0), 082-809-1211 (cell) - fax 043-726-8015- email: jonocra:.smithtabata.co.za 4. Peddie Pineapples • Lulama Mtya - manager of Pineco - PO Box 14, Peddie 5640 - tel 082-977-2308 - fax 040-673:..3771 • Sizwe Skemfile - maf1~ger of Cornfields Farm - PO Box 14, Peddie 5640 • Mpumelelo Nkamisa - manager of Tainton Farm - PO Box 14, Peddie 5640 5. Ncera Agricultural Development Corporation (pty) Ltd - A. Styli~nou - Chairman - PO Box 1, Kidds Beach 5264 - tel 043-781-1694 (0),082-771-0113 (cell) - fax 043-781-1640 - email: nadc@mweb.co.za 6. . Eastern Cape Department of Agriculture - Zukile Pityi - Chief Director, Agriculture and Rural. Development - P/Bag 0040, Department of Agriculture, Bisho 5605 - tel 040-609-3474- email: zuksCa!agrmduk.ecape.go\".za 7. Kat River Citrus • Eric Nohamba - farmer - PO Box 723, FB 5720 - tel 082-429-9153 • Merricks Noqekwa - farmer - PO Box 961, Alice 5700 - tel 082-566-5229 • Daniel Motsoane - procurement officer, Capespan - PO Box 12531, Centrahil 6006 - tel 083-326-9323 • ,Sydney Mpahla - farmer - PO Box 1032, King Williams Town 5600 - tel 082-974-2514 8. Keiskammahoek Irrigation Scheme •. Zola Manona - Agricultural Technician, Eastern Cape Department of Agriculture - PO Box 60, Keiskammahoek 5670 - tel 082-837-9327 • Mountain Hoya - General Worker, Eastern Cape Department of Agriculture - PO Box 60, Keiskammahoek 5670 - tel 073-211-9253 9. 'Ryton E'states (Pty) Ltd - Bruce Andrews - manager - PO Box 89, Ngodwana 1209 - tel 013-734-4706 (0),082-453-5941 (cell) - fax 013-734-4820 10. Inala Farming Company (pty) Ltd - Piet de Wet - Chief Executive Officer - PO Box 1308, Malelane 1320 - tel 082-776-3654 11. Agricultural and Rural Development Corporation, Limpopo - Cornelis Erasmus - Senior Manager - PO Box 2608, Polokwane 0700 - tel 015-295-7090 (0), 083-626-5635 (cell)- email: mphahlelerv@agricho.norprov.gov.za 12. Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu • Wendy Clements - Chief of Party, GEAR Agricultural Privatization Project - Private Bag X6, Gallo Manor 2052 - tel 011-806-5408 (o), 082-724-3400 (cell) - fax 011-806-5465 _ email: wclements(Qjdeloitte.co.za • Terry Heslop·- Seniore Corporate Finance Adviser, GEAR Agricultural Privatization Project - Private Bag X6, Gallo Manor 2052 - tel 011-806-5408 (o), 082-330-9714 (cell) - fax 011'-806-5465 - • David Cooper - Agricultural Industry Expert, GEAR Agricultural Privatization Project _ Private Bag X6, Gallo Manor 2052 - tel 011-806-5408 (0), 082-895-1967 (cell) - fax 011- 806-5465 -email: davidcooper@worldonline.co.za APPENDIX 2 Documents Reviewed 1. 1997 Contract PCE-I-00-97-00016-00 Delivery order NO.800 2. Modification ~o 1 effective June 1998 3. Modification No 2 effective Oct 1999 4. Modification No 3 effective May 2000 5. Modification No 4 effective June 2001 6. Modification No 5 effective June 2002 7. Quarterly 'Reports APPENDIX 3 Questionnaire for Projects 1. Technical assjstance in all areas of project effort a. caliber b. quality c. timeliness 2. Expertise provided in a. business analysis. b. marketing c. business development d. financing e. legal and regulatory issues f. transaction structuring 3. Post privatization assistance to new owners 4. If inadequate, what .more could be done 5. Overall impact of privatizations a. impact on historically disadvantaged beneficiaries positive or negative b. impact on employment creation positive or negative 6. Recommend changes to project/strategy to improve program results 7. Any other comments Questionnaire for Other Interviewees 1. Overall mana.gement of the project a. program strengths b. program weaknesses 2. Improvements in a. project management b. project direction 3. Consider a. problems faced by project b. stumbling blocks faced by project c. actions taken by contractor to overcome above 1. satisfactory? .. 2. could more be done? 4. Assess overall strategy of program as a means for achieving a. equity b. employment through divestiture of state-owned ag assets 5. Recommend changes to project/strategy to improve program resufts APPENDIX 4 KATHERINES. NAUGHTON c/o Rosenfeld 245 West 107th Street, #8F New York, New York 10025 (212) 222-8635 (0) (212) 866-5235 (h) ksnaughton@smith.alumnae.net(e-mail) SEl''IOR LEVEL INVESTMENT PROFESSIONAL with extensive experience in all aspects of direct investment in public and privately held companies. Outstanding analytical ability together with excelient communications skills and an extensive resource network have resulted in a proven track record as an effective problem solver. .experience CAMBRIDGE CAPITAL New York, New York 1991 - Present A private investment firm founded to acquire and/or provide corporate finance advice to small and medium sized businesses. o Johannesburg. South Africa - 2001: corporate fll1ance consultant specializing in accessing finance for SMEs; clients include: a venture capital finn raising its second fund and several SMEs seeking finance to expand their export sales. o Johannesburg. South Africa - 1997/2001: started and led a USAID supported project to facilitate access to financing to small and medium-sized enterprises; activities include development of a database of financing sources, transaction analysis for several venture capital funds, management consulting and corporate finance advice to entrepreneurs. In 4 years the project raised over $35 million in capital for 42 companies. o Harare. Zimbabwe - 1996: closed first acquisition of the Zimbabwe. Progress Fund; provided organizational and finance advice topo.rtfolio company management; assisted in·raising capital for the Fund. o Tallinn Estonia - 1993/1995: provided technical assistance under a USAID funded contract to the Privatization Agency of the Republic of Estonia with respect to the privatization of state-owned businesses. Over 450 such businesses were sold through the end of 1995. Tasks included negotiating transactions from initial bid through fInal contract, providing corporate fInance analysis and valuation of objects for sale, training local staff, and leading a team of 4 experienced consultants. Other advisory assignments include: o due diligence, structuring and document negotiation on behalf of a foreign acquirer of a $70 million manufacturer of special metals; o business planning and financing trammg for women-owned. start-up companies under a program administered by The American Women's Economic Development Corporation. McCOWN DE LEEmV & CO. Nell" York, New York 1986 - 1991 Initiated,· analyzed, valued, structured, negotiated and closed direct investments for a U.S. investment fund. Provided management assistance and investment banking services to portfolio company managers. Wrote offering memorandum and marketed finn's second fund to outside investors. Completed Transactions o $34 million franchiser of retail pet stores and distributor of pet care products: initiated investment; negotiated terms on behalf of investor group for initial and two subsequent investments; prepared industry study; advised on terms and negotiated documents for acquisition which doubled sales; advised on restructuring; represented MDC at all Board meetings. o $5 million manufacturer of custom office products: originated transaction; negotiated tenns of purchase and fmancing; advised CEO on operational issues during difficult turnaround period; structured and negotiated two debt restructurings; director of the company. o $24 million sawmill and secondary \vood manufacturing operation: valued company arid sold it for a price which resulted in a 118 % return on MDCI S investment: managed on behalf of investor group settlement of dispute on buyer holdbacks resulting in complete recovery. Katherine S. Naughton. CITIBANK, N.A. Nelli York, New York Assistant Vice President/Transaction Manager 1980 - 1986 Corporate fmance activities included mergers and acquisitions, swaps and trade fmance. o Key role on team which completed Division's fIrst leveraged buyout, valued at $60 million; negotiated portion of overseas fInancing. o Valued companies aggregating $2.5 billion in assets as valuations specialist for mergers and acquisitions unit. o Structured highly innovative bank equity stakeout/merger valued at $22 million; fIrst such transaction approved by Federal Reserve Board. . a. Completed $200 million of currency swaps; marketed interest rate swaps. o Structured and completed Division's fIrst gold lease, valued at $11 million. LEHMAN BROTHERS LTD. London, England Associate 1974 - 1978 Responsibilities included .general corporate fInance and Eurobond syndications. Reported directly to Managing Partner of London offIce. o Structured arid implemented call of $25 million Eurodollar convertible bond with highest conversion rate in market history. o Listed $700 million company on London Stock Exchange; marketed listings on major European and Asian stock exchanges to U.S. clients. o Developed investor relations program which increased clients from 1 to 23 fIrms in two years. o Featured contributor on international mergers and acquisitions for Euromoney magazine. KLEINWORT, BENSON LTD. London, England Securities Analyst 1972 - 1974 Analyzed and made investment recommendations on stocks in various sectors of British stock market, including specialty steels, heavy industrials, shipping, office equipment and conglomerates. education Columbia University University of Cambridge Smith College professional affiliations and associations MBA, Finance MUtt, History BA, History (Dean's List) 1980 (J000 Nichols Prize) (Dean's List) 1970 1973 American Women's Economic Development Corporation 1991 - Present Financial Women's Association 1988 - Present Smith College Club of New York Board - Treasurer; Fund Raising Chairman 1988 Northfield Mount Hermon Alumni Association - Steering Committee Columbia University - MBA Management Consultants - President; Univ. Senator 1980 University of Cambridge, Lucy Cavendish College - Student President 1971 1982 - 1985 - 1986 1978 ,.; APPENDIX 5 Data Table 1 I \' I Date i Date i Est Close: Progress against objectives and targets 2001 ! .1 01 550! O! I Total I i I 1.031 200: 8001 1.0001 X ! 2.301 200: 2.561 f ! !Dollar ValueI Jobs j Jobs ,Sustainabfe jWork with 1 ! ($millions) ICreatedi Sustained I Employmentl Land Bank IDe i i i I fEastern Cape Dept of Agriculture !Eastem Cape ;Fanners !Eastern Cape Dept ofAariculture !Eastern Cape !Farmers IPrivatizina llocatl:ln I IEntity !of Assets IEntity Assisted iii ILimpopo Dept of Agriculture iUmpopo iEmpIoyees 13 .Kat River Citrus Farms 13 Peddie Pineapples GEAR Agricultural PrivatiZation Projec;l 1 : Oet·98: May-C3' 55 'Usbon Estates Farm 2 I Jan-99: Feb-OO I ! i 3 ; Apr·99I May-CO; 4 Apr·99I Jun-01: 26 Zebedia Citrus Fann l"Limpopo Dept of Agriculture I limpopo IEmployees 2.001 Of 6e8j I I 6681 X i !RSA Department of Land Affairs ;Eastern Cape IEmpbvees 3.80I 01 a-;:...5...., ;.....Ap~r_.9_9_'D;.....e.:....;·c_-oo-r- l 2_0---o.·Jo"--ha;.....Me--'-.,:....:...;sburg Fresh Produce Market :Johannesbura City Council i I 2091 2001 X i 209i ·2001 I 3.331 OJ I ! IGauteng IStakeholders . 6 jMay·OOi I May-03' 38 :Magwa Tea Estate 401 X 7001 01 1401 0.301 40i 13 Kwa Ndebele Farms iRSA Department of Land Affairs ;Mpumalanga iFanners 3.901 560; -a.-:-iI~y.·oOT~~.91 . .....::1_=_3----=Q=.:ama:::.::::.::ta:..;l:;.:.mg.:.!!·.::.;atJO:::·:;.:.n-=S;.:::ch:..:.:em:::.:.:::e ~!R~S=A..:....D::.:e::..!:p:..=a:..::rtm:;.:.e:=:.nt=of:....::L:..=a:.:.:nd:..:A~ff=a::.:..:irs=__;...=:E:..=as=t:=:.ern.:..:.....::.C.=.!ap::.:e=--;-:iF--=ann=ers:.:..::..... -+I__--='~.50:..::H+_--=800::.=..;.,----=2=OO.::.:I~-~1~.OOO=-:I~ __-+--1 i I 2.:~~Y-qo; Jun-01 i 13 Ncora Irrigation Scheme iRSA Department of land Affairs :Eastern Cape IFarmers 3.701 2.3OO! 2001 2.500i I I i -9~~~a'i.OO~~·~~~:~t:~-~~ .:.1_=_3---:.H..:..:ere::....::..:.(O:=:.rd.=...:....F.::.;atm..:..:..:- --L.:R~SA:=:...:....D::.:e::..!:p:..=a:..:;rtm..:..:.e=.n.:..:...t..::.:of:....::L=.;and A~airs :Mpumalanga !Farmers 0.301 1201 301 1501 1·Q~__!~~~_~I=~~~j== . 13 Funda Milimi Training Farm IRSA Department of Land Affairs ,Mpumalanga ;Fanners. employees I IT''Jun:OO~~01 ' , 12: Jun-ool Jut-01: 13 .Swartkoppies Farm :RSA Department of Land Affairs i Mpumalanga !Fanners 0.441 o! 501 SOl X 13: Jut-oo! Aug-01! 13 Sd10emansdal Coffee Project iRSA Department of land Affairs ;Mpumalanoa !Ngugwane Fanners 1 1 0.581 80! OJ 80! 14i Jul-OOI Aug-Ol i 13 Land i i RSA Department of Land Affairs !MpumaJanga ISingleton Farmel'S I 0.301 401 01 i 40\ 151 Jul-OOI Ju1-01: 12 'Majola Tea Estate !RSA Department of Land Affairs :Eastern cape iEmployees 1.02i 400! 100i 500; X 16: Jul-OO; Aug-Ol 12 :zat1yokwe Irrigation Scheme ,RSA Department of land Affairs !Eastern Cape IFarmers i 0.021 75i 0: 751 r-;-7' Jul-ool Aug-01' 12 Keiskammahoek Irrigation Scheme iRSA Department of Land Affairs iEastern Cape IFanners 0.051 75i O! 75i 18 Jul-OO I Jan-01' ~P.LFerreiraFatmS iRSADepartmentofLandAffairs iEasternCape IEmployees 0.20; 1001 0; 1 1001 X i 19, Aug-OO' Sep-01: 13 Tsitsikamma Trust :RSA Department of Land Affairs !Eastern cape iFanners i 0.381 40: 10: SOj X 20i Aug-oo! Sep-O1 13 Riverside Farms ,RSA Department of Land Affairs ;Eastern Cape iEmployees 1.00! 56; 141 701 X 21 iSep-OOi Jun-011 10 Port Shepstone Fresh Produce Market I Port Shepstone City Council IKwa Zulu Natali Staehofders I 22'May-01: Jan-03 20 Agridlicks :North West Dept of Agriculture INorth West !Employees 23' Jun-01! Aug-01: ,Land Dept of Water Affairs and ForestryiLimpopo iCommunitv I j 0.001 0, 10.001 1,490: 3.701 928r 01 01 01 01 X 1.4901 X 9281 24 Jun-01' Oet-Q1 "Mashashane Hatchery UmpopoAROC iLimpopo :Fanners O.ooi Oi 941 941 X 01 X 300! X 01 2921 01 81 0.001 North West :Fanners 0.75! ,RSA Dept of Agriculture ,North West :Farmers ;RSA Dept of Agriculture .~S-NoY:g_!.- __. Jun-03 19 Vrytaof Silo ?~~~~~~~_ Jun-03 19 Kraaipan Silo ?..:...7_.:..N.:.=O..:....v::_=_0-~1_-- __=_Ju=.n-O.:.....:....:3~_1~9__._;S:..::pmg:..:..:.·:....;~bo..::.:k~p;.;;;a~n;.;;;S;.;.:ilo=---- -:,R...;...S=-A;.....O=-e=p;.....to.:.....f_A~gn_·cu'_'__'..;ltu~re ....,N-o-M-W-es_t__;F_a_rmers ;.....O;.;...OO~I __O;._i____=_O.;.....I _=_O.;.....I_..:..:X:..__4_-.1 28' Noy-01 Jun-03 19 Mimo~a Nest West Poultty Farm :North West Dept of Agriculture !North West )Employees I 0.001 0: 01 01 X I 29! Noy-Ol i Jun-03: 19 Mimosa Nest East Poulby Fann North West Dept of Agriculture :NoM West !Employees 0.251 8: 12\ 201 X ! 30i Noy-Ol; Jun-03 : 19 Oinokana Irrigation Scheme North West Dept of Agriculture :North West IFanners 0.15! 23: 71 30; X 31: Noy·Ol: Jun-03' 19 Molatedi Irrigation Scheme ;North West Dept of Agriculture !North West IFanners O.oo! 0: 401 401 X 32, Mar-02' Mar-03 13 Frankfort Avocado Estate SAFCOl i MpumaJanga IEmployees 0.75i 01 75! 751 X ! 33:May-02; 34iMay-02~ Mar-03 10 Tsholofelo Citrus Estate Mar-03 10 Land RSA Dept of Agriculture ;North West IEmployees RSA Department of land Affairs I Mpumalanoa ICommunity . 4.601 2101 0.901 250i 501 OJ 2601 X 2501 X 35·May-02: ; Mar-Q3; 10 Land .RSA Dept of AgriCUlture INorth West iCommunity 0.901 250; 01 2501 X : 36: May-02 i Mar-03, 10 :Land :Port Shepstone City Council iKwa Zufu Natal! Farmers O.65i 100: 01 1001 X 37. Sep-02 i 38: Sep-02 1 Sep-03, 12 C3ce Town Fresh Produce Market Sep-03 12.Lard Cape Town City Council RSA Dept of Agriculture ;Western Cape ,Employees , i :North West iEmployees 0.001 138: 0.33\ 75: 121 01 1501 X 75f X 39 Sep-02i Jun-03' 10 lnata Farm RSA Dept of Agriculture ;MpumaJanga iEmpfoyees 1.61i 0: 3301 3301 X Sep-03' _ 12 M~Jenge Irrigation Scheme RSA Dept of Agriculture j Eastern Cape iEmployees 0.251 25O! ot 250: X Se~03 12 Majindi Farm Irrigation Scheme Kwa Zulu Natal Dept of Agriculture, Kwa Zulu Natal'Employees TotalI avg mont 15 55.55! 10.166' 3.731j 13.897: 29 _.-. . V.,-a_lu...;;..e~fo~r_=_M_:_:o:_ne-'-y=_=._:__-----.------------~-_;:;_;;;;:_;;;:=_-----4..--_----.;...---~----.;~ June 2QOO-May 2001 275.000 ; June 2001.May2002 500.026 June 2002-May2oo3 816.715: 1.591.741 $34.90i $157 $427' $115; :per $1 Soentl oer 100 De( iob: periob: BEST AVAlLABLE COpy 10 x x 31 39 Creellon of Creallon or Clena F'naI'lClno PtbIe L.- Transrer 370 102 258 t 150 200 333 390 4) 30 0.30 4) 58 2.30 038 030 044 002 005 0201 380 100 1)00 10.00 310 000 000 075 ')00 i ')00 I) 25 015 000 0.75 460 I 1j90 I 'iW 000 033 161 0.25 QO 5555 34 ($mtons) . lIYooon transfer) 0.-0 ~ar V~ Trust Company WOf1< I(directlY or 0' Transfer to Ass«s I I I Pnvl!CIZlM Lor.abon Entlty Iof Assets EntJtyAssist9d Lllt1C'OCO Deot of AQneueu-e ILIn'OOOO EmolOvees t Easttm Caee Dept 01 A01cull.n lEastemCaoe Farmers Eastem Caee Deat of A,CJ1euClr. IEastemCaoe Farmers I Llmooco Deot 01 AlJI'lcull.J'e ILllnQOOo Emotovees 'j JonamesOU'IJ City COU'lCII QatAeM Stakeholders I RSA Departmene or Land Alfillrs IEasternCaoe Emplovees I RSA DtCartment or L3llIoveu IKwa Z~ Natal Dept ot A;ncUlbs9 iKweluJuNatai Emplovees Tctal I I I I I I I 8 iF l Ferr..ra Farms 13 IF!'». Plneepples 13 F\fl::8 ....". Trlllr1l1'lO Farm 13 1~«"'$IOtFarms 10 !P:tt Sl'\eostone Frest1 Prcouee Mar1<.e( 12 !Mat:oI8 reS"Estat. Jun.03 19 IMt'I"IC-s.1 Nest West PcYlrv Farm Jun-03 19 i~lmoation~.em. Jun-il3 19!&r~anSilo 1 Jun-03 10 lIra! Farm Mar-03 10 i TVClIOfeiO CllnJS Estate Sap-03 12;Marr-.J1 Farm ImIJaDon Scheme Seo-03 12 IL......, May-03 55 IL~ Estates Farm Dale Oate EstClos. I StarteO C:Cs9t.l 2 Jan-99 Fec-<:tQ 1 Oct·98 May~QO Mav-03 36 IMb>'Wa rea Estate I j Jln.03 19 I ImlJallon Sc~ Data Table 3 I Indicators fcf' Closed Transacllons I ! 10 Jun-OO ';'..;)1 14 JlJl-OO ~!i'}-')11 27 Nay-01 ~1 Seo-OO ~'Jl , 13 J~OI) ;'c"·:i1 301 Nov-O1 391 Sep-02 S81 S~o-02 34iMav··j2 331Ma -02 37lSeo-,n I VeJue r:f'Monev 275.000 500.026 816.715 IlJ'o'9lMr.tr1 15 i iGEAR Agricultural Privatization Project I IData Table 4 I IFinancing Sources I I Financing Sources Date Date Est Close Financing LRAD SLAG Other Started Closed Date Length Assets Privatized I I 1 Oqt-98 May-03 55 Lisbon Estates Farm I X X Strategic partner 2 1 Jan-99 Feb-DO 013 Peddie Pineapples X X Growers association i 3 Apr-99 May-OO 13 Kat River Citrus Farms X X Custoriiercredit 4 I Apr-99 Jun-01 26 Zebedia Citrus Farm . I X X X Land Bank I 51Apr-99 Dec-OO ... 20 Johannesburg Fresh Produce Market I X X Fidelity Bank i I 6 !May-OO May-03 36 Magwa Tea Estate I X X 1 7 : May-OO Jun-01 13 Ncora Irrigation Scheme I X X Dept Public Works, CPPP I ! ! 8 ; May-OO Jun-01 13 Qamata Irrigation Scheme X X Dept Public Works, Dept Agriculture I i 9 May-OO I Jun-01 13 Hereford Farm I X X ! o. j 10i Jun-OO Jul-01 13 Funda Milimi Training Farm I X X I I j 111 Jun-OO Jul-01 13 Kwa Ndebele Farms X X ! i 121 Jun-OO Jul-01 13 Swartkoppies Farm I X X I 131 Jul-OO Aug-01 13 Schoemansdal Coffee Project X X i I I I 141 Jul-OO Aug-01 13 Land X X X Private investor , . i 151 Jul-OO Jul-01 12 Majola Tea Estate i X X I I ; i 16i Jul-OO Aug-01 12 Zanyokwe Irrigation Scheme I X X Dept Public Works ! i I 17! Jul-OO I Aug-011 12 KeiskammahoeK Irrigation Scheme I X X Dept Public Works I , I 181 Jul-OO Jan-01 6 P.L. Ferreira Farms X X I j I 191 Aug-OO I Sep-O1I 13 Tsitsikamma Trust X X· ; .j I .. I 20! Aug-OO! Sep-01 13 Riverside Farms i X X P.L. Ferreira i ! 21: Sep-OO Jun-01 10 Port Shepstone Fresh Produce Market J X X Land Bank I t I 22: May-01 , I Jan-031 20 Agrichicks I X X X Land Bank, oBSA, private investor I i I I I 23: Jun-01 Aug-01 3 Land i X X I ! : I 241 Jun-01 Oct-01 4 Mashashane Hatchery I f X X I I 25i Nov-01 Jun-03 19 VryhofSilo X X ! ! : 261 Nov-01 Jun-03 19 Kraaipan Silo I X X j 27; Nov-01 Jun-03 19 Springbokpan Silo X X i i 281 Nov-01 Jun-03 19 Mimosa Nest West Poultry Farm X X X Farmers' union 291 Nov-011 Jun-03 19 Mimosa Nest East Poultry Farm X X Private investor ! I 30! Nov-01 Jun-03 19 Dinokana Irrigation Scheme X X I I 31! Nov-01 Jun-03 19 Molatedi Irrigation Scheme X X I i I I 321 Mar-02 Mar-03 13 Frankfort Avocado Estate X X X Strategic partner, commercial bank I I 331 May-021 tw1ar-03 10 Tsholofelo Citrus Estate X X i I 34' May-021 j Mar-03 10 Land X X i I , I : 35. May-021 I Mar-03 10 Land X i X i I I 361 May-02' Mar-03 10 Land X X X IPort Shepstone City Council ; I i I 3]: Sep-02 Sep-03 12 Cape Town Fresh Produce Market X X Commercial bank i I I I 381 Sep-021 Sep-03 12 Land X I i X Lonmin , i I i I 39i Sep-021 I Jun-03 10 Inala Farm X X I i i i I I 40: Sep-02! i Sep-03 12 Malenge Irrigation Scheme X X I i I ! I t i 41; Sep-02\ I Sep-03 12 Majindi Farm Irrigation Scheme X I X I l 41 i 25 3 19 I I !avo monthl 15 i I , ! APPENDIX 6 --'. - -, ....:-':. -.~..;":.:-:.-- ... ... ' .... _ ... --_ .. CLEMENTS, 'Vendy Larsen Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Proposed Position: Senior Privatization Adviser KEY QUALIFICATIONS: Ms. Wendy Clements is a seasoned management consultant with proven effectiveness at serving clients in emerging markets. Ms. Clements joined Deloitte & Touche in 1995 and became director of the overall practice office in Tashkent, Uzbekistan. She has extensive consulting and project management experience in a broad range of sectors, including privatization projects and enterprise restructuring engagements involving the raising of new investment capital. She has worked in challenging, cross￾cultural situations for much of her career and has adapted quickly, tactfully and effectively to new environments. Ms. Clements is currently managing a three year engagement, funded by USAlD to assist the historically disadvantaged in South Africa to buy entities which the Government is privatizing. The objective of this innovative program is promotion of equity and redistribution of wealth so that the historically disadvantaged have a stake in the new economy. The Department of Public Enterprises (DPE) has periodically requested feedback from the buyer's perspective to improve its privatization record. EDUCATION: • B.A., Anthropology and Sociology, Elmira College, Elmira, New York • M.B.A., Finance, Babson College,Wellesley, Massachusetts EXPERIENCE RECORD: • 1997-present • 1995-1997 • 1993-1995 • 1981-1993 • 1979-1981 • 1979 Deloltte Touche Tohmatsu Emerging Markets, Johannesburg, South Africa Deloitte & Touche CIS, Tashkent, Uzbekistan US Peace Corps, Tashkent, Uzbekistan Booz, Allen & Hamilton Inc., Arlington, Virginia Coopers & Lybrand, Washington, DC Inverness Venture Capital, Alexandria, Virginia EXPERIENCE DETAILS: Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Emerging ~Iarkets • Chief of Party, South Mrica (USAID) . 1997-2001 Privatization project focuses on assisting the historically disadvantaged in South Africa to buy entities which the Government is privatizing. The objective of the program is to promote equity and the redistribution of wealth so that the historically disadvantaged, in conjunction with a strategic partner, develop a stake in the new economy. Assistance consists of identifying and negotiating with strategic partners. developing bid strategies and tender documents, raising financing, and negotiating purchase price with the Government. The project assisted in a broad range of transactions including but not limited to the divestiture of several print shops, a number of resorts owned by the government, a travel agency, outsourcing of waste management services, a fresh produce market, and numerous state owned fanns. Emphasis was placed on assisting small. and medium enterprises. Post privatization support has included assistance in corporate governance, financial management, and strategic planning. The project has assisted in more than 40 transactions. ... : .-. _... ...".... Deloitte & Touche CIS 1995-1997 • Project Manager, Uzbekistan (the World Bank) This privatizatidn project focused on attracting foreign investors to Uzbekistan as well as the development ofthe Uzbek capital market. The project included describing and analyzing all sectors of the economy; screening public enterprises of potential interest for foreign investors; preparing . business profiles and business plans; enterprise valuation; identification ofpotential foreign investors; a direct investor contact program; and negotiation support. Expertise was required in diagnosing which enterprises had realistic potential for direct foreign investment and how best to facilitate that process. Assistance was provided in structuring transactions leading to the following investment decisions: Ownership Investment Uzbektelekom, City ofChirchik. Deutsch Telecom and Alcatel $15,100,000 Uzpharmprom, Technoparm, the Uzbek Scientific Research $9,000,000 Chemical Pharmaceutical Institute, and Core Healthcare ofIndia Myasamolprom and Nestle $20,000,000 World Plastic 3~500,000 Uzbektelekom and Daewoo $192,400,000 Uzbektelekom, Siemens, STET Italy, and Simets Italy $11,200.000 The capital market component resulted in the development of a Capital Market Framework Model, which was a useful source of inspiration to the Government of Uzbekistan in the fmalization. of a concept for the development ofthe capital market. • Perfonnance of a financial due diligence on an Uzbekistan State Owned Enterprise (SOE) in the cement industry for a Swiss investor. The infonnation gained in the due diligence assisted both sides in developing creative financing measures for a joint venture to operate one cement plant and to begin negotiations to operate a second plant. • Performance of a business valuation on a hotel owned· by the Tashkent City ivlunicipality. The valuation assisted the City by developing a realistic assessment of a hotel property, which had attracted numerous foreign investors over a five-year period without conclusion of a deal because of unrealistic expectations on the part ofthe City. • Joint Venture Facilitation. Performed market research on the value of land as a contribution to a joint venture in an environment where there is no private ownership of land and no market for land. Research resulted in a protocol to develop a joint venture to build and operate a hotel where previously negotiations had been stalled for a year. The joint venture will be between the Tashkent City Munic~pality and a large French construction company. • Enterprise Valuation Performance of a business valuation on an Uzbekistan SOE, a tea processing and packaging company for the State Committee for State Property ivIanagement and Entrepreneurship Support (GosKomImushchestvo (GKI». Uzbekistan is one of the largest per capita tea consuming countries in the world. The valuation led to the company's decision to seek fmancing based on the profit potential of the business rather than a joint venture partner to modernize operations. • Private Sector Development. Assisted in the development of the first Uzbekistan brand for agricultural products 'MR HIZJ\tIAT' TIvI, which is registered with the newly established association of independent retailers 'ERKIN SAVDO' TM. Assisted in business planning. • Valuation and Corporate Finance Advisory Services. Performance of a fmancial due diligence on a Kazakhstan SOB in the petrochemical industry for the GKI.The valuation led to the company's decision to seek-financing rather than a joint venture partner to modernize operations in this strategic asset; Peace Corps 1993-1995 • Uzbekistan Administrative Officer for the establishment of the Peace Corps program in Uzbekistan. Managed cash flow under conditions of high inflation and the three-phased introduction of a new currency. Managed program in accordance with all local labor laws and all foreign and local currency regulations. • Kyrghyzstan Consultant to the Administrative Officer for the establishment of the Peace Corps program m Kyrghyzstan. Implemented fmancial accounting system. • Turkmenistan Consultant to the Administrative Officer for the establishment of the Peace Corps program ill Turkmenistan. Booz, Allen & Hamilton 1981-1993 • Team Leader, Sa.udi Arabian Government Developed and implemented a financial management and reporting system. The project included design, development and implementation of an automated system to monitor over S9B of funds among over 65' independent budget units. Developed and implemented a fmancial management and control system for a S45M training program. • Program l\tIanager, Germany Program Manager on a German government fmanced project to develop and implement fmancial management systems for a technical support program. • Team Leader, France Team Leader on a French government fmanced project to develop and' implement fmancial management systems for a technical support program. • Program l\tIanager, Colombia Progiaffi Manager on a US Government fmanced project to develop the fmancial plan and management system for a counter drug program. • Program l\iIanager, Brazil . Program Manager on a US Government frnanced project to develop the frnancial plan and management system for a training program. • Program l\tIanager, Morocco Program Manager on a US Government frnanced project to develop the frnancial plan and management system for a training program. • Program Manager, Egypt Program Manager on a US Govemment financed project to develop the financial plan and management system for a training program. Automated systems strategy and improvement plan for large electrical hardware company. Development of business/program plan for.a high technology organization. Assignment required development ofsophisticated computer simulation model to assist in assessing the potential of competing technologies. Development of business/program strategy for a high technology organization responding to a changing market environment. Assignment extensively utilized gaming techniques. Development of a business/program plan for an aircraft repair facility. The project included a detailed strategy review, review of the management and organization structure, human resource management, design and training in budget procedures, management reporting and control, as well as system implementation support. Development of a marketing planning for an association in the electronics industry. The project included a detailed sector analysis, industry survey of export market, and identifieation of potential export markets. . Coopers & Lybrand 1979-1981 Development of business plan for a university. The project included a detailed strategy review, review of management and organization structure, human resource management, and budgeting procedures. Development ofmerit based appraisal system for a multi-billion dollar organization. Inyerness Venture Capital Development of a business plan for a weekly newspaper owned by a venture capital fmn. . LAi.~GUAGES: 1979 English Russian French Speaking Excellent Good Poor Reading Excellent Poor Fair Writing Excellent Poor Poor POSTAL ADDRESS: HOME ADDRESS: PHONE: FAX: HOME: HIGH SCHOOL: UNIVERSITY: CURRICULUM VITAE DAVID COOPER POBOX 306 WITS 2050 012319-7298(work) 012321-7219 EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS Matriculated, 1968. qenera1 Smuts High School, Verreniging 1969 -1972 B.Sc Agriculture, University ofNatal, Pietermaritzburg. Major Subjects, Agricultural Production and Agricultural Economics. 1977 - 1978 M. Sc. Agricultural Extension at University ofReading, United Kingdom. A one year degree, with a thesis on the effects of Rural-urban migration in rural development. ·. - EMPLOYMENT CURRENT EMPLO\TMENT April 1999 . Independent Consultant I have undertaken the following: Policy on State Land Management: Department ofLand Affairs. This involves examining the policies in terms of which state land can be disposed ofto empower farmers in former homeland areas or on state agncultural enterprises. Evaluation ofFarm Africa Eastern Cape project and Ncora Farmers support programmes. This was a short-term consultancy for the Land Bank Evaluation of Farm Africa Eastern Cape project and Ncora Farmers support programmes. This was a short-term consultancyJor the Land Bank Transformation ofthe Agricultural Research Council- short-term consultancies on Resource Poor Agriculture and institutional restructuring. Assessment of High Value Agricultural Crops for Gauteng Department of Agriculture - Co-ordination ofjoint study by i\RC and CSIR. PREVIOUS EMPLOYMENT: Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs, Pretoria (March 199i - March 1999): Employed as a consultant responsible fo~ a number of projects in the Minister's Office, namely: Minister's representative on Task Team for restructuring Parastatals, National Task Team And Eastern Cape. The national Task Team on State-Owned Agricultural Enterprises advised the Minister on agricultural enterprises owned by the National or Provincial Departments, and the likely ways of restructuring these, either by privatisation, joint ventures, management or worker buy-outs, handovers to communities or closures. It involved close liaison with provincial government, as well as parastatal corporations. I was responsible for on-going liaison with the Eastern cape government over closure ofthe Parastatals, retrenchment ofsome 4000 government employees, and the transfer of assets to community entities, all in the face ofsevere budget constraints. The most successful transformation to date has been the hand-over of Magwa tea to a workers' co￾operative, and a tum-around from R20 million losses to a R5 million surplus. This work involves socio-economic and policy implication analysis at macro and micro level. Between November 1998 and March 1999, I was asked to prepare proposals for large-scale land reform projects. I identified a number of land state- and privately owned companies where restructuring would lead to worker equity participation. A number of projects such a Lisbon Estates and Zebediela were identified and I co-ordinated the planning and presentation of proposals to the Minister. I also served as Director in the following bodies that played an active role in restructuring state owned agricultural projects: " Agricultural and Rural Development Corporation (Northern Province) 1995 - 1998 Rural Strategy.Unit (Free State) 1994 - 1998 Inala Farms (Mpumalanga), as chairperson (Current) Co-ordinator"ofWorking Group for Policy on Agricultural Support Services As chair ofthis working group, I commissioned policy papers in three areas, extension services, agricultural research, and agricultural training. The working group has produced comprehensive policy recommendations for restructuring agricultural support services, involving improved management ofresources, outsourcing ofservices, and rationalisation of overlapping responsibilities. Co-ordinator of working group on restructuring Agricultural Research Council The ARC is the primary recipient of government funding of agricultural research. I was appointed co-leader of a team evaluating the ARC. The review recommended changes in management ofthe ARC at senior level, and reorientation ofits role to meet the needs ofsmall scale and resource poor fanners. Between January and October 1998 I co-ordinated a committee responsible for preparing a restructuring plan for the ARC. Consultancy work in the Forestry Sector (July 1997 - December 1998) Fonn Homelands Forestry Option Study. I served as a consultant for LH..J\ Associates, which produced a report on restructuring the former homeland forests. Essentially, the study recommends that the forests be privatised and sold in clusters. I was particularly responsible for analysing community and worker responses to the forestry industry, and for reporting on land issues in the forestry sector. The key recommendation is to maintain the status quo of government land ownership during restructuring, while recognising underlying land rights of communities. Employment and community access are critical issues in any restructuring, and especially local employment and processing need to be preserved in the face ofretrenchment of government forestry workers which is necessary in the restructuring. Forestry legislation steering committee I served on the steering committee overseeing the preparation ofnev.' forestry legislation. This draws on previous experience on forestry policy. In addition, I served on the National Forestry Advisory Council and as a member ofthe National Forest Action Programme Steering Committee. Land and Agriculture Policy Centre (1993 - February 1997) I was fIrst the Advocacy Director and then the Executive Director, responsible for.initiating this Centre as a Section 21 Company in 1993. It is a policy research·Centre developing policy options for the new government on land redistribution, agricultural reform, rural development and natural resource . management. I started LAPC with an initial annual budget of approx. RI million, and with a staff . complement of7. In 1996, its budget was in excess ofRl5 million, and its staff complement over 40, as well as many consultants employed. I have been involved in many policy processes on forestry agriculture, land refonn and natural resource management, drawing up terms ofreference for studies and managing a number ofstudies personally, as well as being ultimately responsible reportiI:lg to the Board ofDirectors on all aspects ofthe LAPC. I was responsible for all aspects ofthe Center's operations, including general management, initiating policy processes, commissimiing and reviewing research, and publication. Major research projects, which I initiated and co-managed with my staff included: • Land redistribution options (1993), a study of land reform options done in cooperation with the World Bank; • Natural resource management in South Africa·(1994), a review of natural resource management, in cooperation with the World Bank; • Agricultural Marketing in South Africa (1993-19960, a major review ofmarketing policy in South Africa, which included participation in the Maize advisory committee which led to the restructuring ofthe maize industry. • Agricultural Po~icy ofthe ANC (1994) a document, which set out the agricultural policy ofthe African National Congress as it,' prepared for government. • Land reform in South Africa (1994-1995) a study of the issues to be faced in implementing a land refonn programme in South Africa; • Rural Livelihoods in South Africa, (1995-1997) in cooperation with the Liptons of Sussex University; • Options for St Lucia (1996) a review ofthe government policy on St Lucia; • Agricultural Development Corporations in South Africa (1995-1996), a study ofthe ADCs in the various provinces; • A review of Agricultural research in South i\frica (1994); • A review of agricultural education in South Africa (1995); • Livelihoods.in semi arid areas (1995-1996), three district studies done in cooperation with the Stockholm Environmental Institute. I have served on a number of government policy committees and task teams, including the White papers on agriculture, land reform and forestry, and sub-committees ofthe Strauss Commission