Evaluation Insights: West African Competitiveness Programme in Sierra Leone

by

Series Evaluation Insights for Policy and Programming

Increasing Sierra Leone’s Competitiveness through Enhanced Productivity and Trade Compliance in Selected Value Chains


Context

Sierra Leone’s economy is heavily dependent on mining, making it structurally vulnerable to external shocks. Agriculture accounts for nearly half of GDP and employs more than three-quarters of the population, yet micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs) struggle to deliver competitive agricultural products that meet the quality, health, safety, and environmental requirements of target markets. The country also lacks sufficient national infrastructure to ensure compliance with local, regional, and international standards.

Against this backdrop, the West African Competitiveness Programme (WACOMP) was designed as a regional initiative linking the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the European Union. The Sierra Leone component (WACOMP-SL) addresses a dual challenge: strengthening the productive and quality capacities of individual firms and cooperatives, while simultaneously improving the institutional environment for trade and investment. The intervention is aligned with ECOWAS regional industrialization priorities and Sierra Leone’s Medium-Term National Development Plan, including the government’s Big Five Agenda on economic transformation.

The strategic relevance of the intervention is reinforced by its connection to the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) and the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) negotiations between the EU and West Africa, both of which open market access opportunities that Sierra Leone can exploit only if its private sector meets international standards.

Intervention Overview

WACOMP-SL was financed under the 11th European Development Fund (EDF) Regional Indicative Programme, with a national budget of approximately EUR 8.9 million. The EU Delegation in Sierra Leone served as Contracting Authority. Implementation was managed indirectly through a Delegation Agreement with the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) in Vienna, with the International Trade Centre (ITC) in Geneva subcontracted by UNIDO via an interagency agreement.

Implementation began in December 2018 and was extended twice, reaching a final end date of June 2024. The Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) served as the principal national partner. The programme pursued two specific objectives: (1) to improve the performance, growth, and contribution to industry, regional trade, and exports of cassava, cocoa, and palm oil value chains; and (2) to improve the climate for business at the national level.

The intervention was organized around three outputs. Output 1.1 targeted competitiveness at the firm level through a clusters approach. Output 1.2 aimed to strengthen intermediate organizations and expand service delivery to MSMEs in areas such as quality standards, market access, and green solutions. Output 2.1 sought to mainstream regional industrial competitiveness policies into the national environment. An innovative feature was the complementary role division between UNIDO, focused on product quality and market conformity, and ITC, focused on export readiness and market linkages.

Evidence: What Worked

Institutional quality infrastructure. The most concrete and durable results were recorded in the national quality system. WACOMP-SL supported the Sierra Leone Standards Bureau (SLSB) in establishing an accredited Management Systems Certification Body, which was accredited in March 2022. Two pilot companies were certified to ISO 9001, and foundational work was done on ISO 22000 food safety certification. The National Notification Authority was made fully functional at the Ministry of Trade and Industry, and National Enquiry Points for Technical Barriers to Trade and Sanitary and Phytosanitary measures were established.

Capacity building at pilot level. In selected cooperatives and MSMEs, the combination of training, direct technical assistance, and coaching produced measurable results. Pilot cooperatives in the cocoa and cassava value chains, particularly Moawoma and Yormata, demonstrated improved production quality and increased readiness for export. Moawoma gained competitiveness through organic certification and began supplying a new warehouse network with certified cocoa, improving traceability and facilitating fair trade links to European buyers. Capacity building in GlobalGAP practices improved yields, community cohesion, youth engagement, and household health in remote areas with limited public services.

Trade policy and public-private dialogue. The project exceeded its targets on public-private dialogue (PPD), organizing five dialogues against a target of four, and completing more than 125 percent of planned advocacy training sessions. Policy papers on cocoa trade policy, modernizing produce inspection rules, and improving access to agricultural inputs were produced and submitted to government. The Trade Obstacle Alert Mechanism was operationalized in Sierra Leone.

University cooperation. A Memorandum of Understanding signed in May 2023 between the University of Sierra Leone and the University of the West of Scotland laid the groundwork for quality management courses, promising a future pipeline of qualified local professionals in business development services.

Evidence: What Did Not Work

Limited reach beyond pilot cases. The tailor-made, hands-on technical support model, while effective at the individual firm level, reached only a small number of cooperatives and MSMEs beyond training workshops. The quantity of farmer organizations and cooperatives reached in the value chains was too small to make a measurable difference in national competitiveness, which was the stated overall objective. The project effectively raised awareness and knowledge within the MSME ecosystem but could not translate this into systemic change.

Insufficient institutional service delivery. National institutions and intermediary organizations were not sufficiently engaged to extend piloted services to additional MSMEs after the project. Trade support institutions such as SMEDA, SLIEPA, and PMB were not involved enough in firm-level activities to accumulate institutional learning. The outcomes of training events were insufficient to improve service delivery, as other structural constraints remained unaddressed. Engagement between supported public bodies and the private sector was weak, and the sustainability of support services remained uncertain.

Siloed joint implementation. The coordination between UNIDO and ITC was found to be inadequate at the country level. Decisions were made primarily at respective headquarters in Vienna and Geneva rather than in Freetown, creating a verticalized and fragmented implementation structure. Beneficiaries perceived support from each agency separately rather than as a coherent WACOMP intervention. Project documentation was stored separately by each agency, with no joint repository created, making learning and oversight difficult.

Weak monitoring and evaluation. The monitoring and reporting system was output-driven and did not measure medium- or long-term results. Outcome monitoring was scheduled only toward the end of the project, which was too late to enable adaptive management. There were no feedback loops to adjust activities to the evolving needs of private sector actors and trade support institutions. Progress reports showed inputs frequently exceeding results, and the absence of a clear link between costs and outcomes made value-for-money assessment impossible.

High international expert costs. More than half of project costs were attributable to international experts, partly because the required technical competence was not available at the local level. This raised unit costs considerably and reduced the number of beneficiaries that could be supported.

Lessons Learned

The central lesson of WACOMP-SL is that outputs alone do not produce systemic change. The project completed most of its scheduled activities but had little overall impact on Sierra Leone’s trade competitiveness as measured at the national level. This gap between outputs and outcomes reflects a broader pattern in trade competitiveness programmes that underestimate the importance of the enabling environment, institutional learning, and feedback-driven management.

Training is necessary but not sufficient. Cooperatives and MSMEs that combined training with direct technical assistance and coaching achieved the greatest gains. Where training was the only modality, beneficiaries often lacked the capital, infrastructure, or institutional support to apply new knowledge. A top-down approach to building large numbers of trained participants did not translate into enhanced institutional capacity.

Proximity to the field is operationally decisive. COVID-19 lockdowns severely disrupted implementation, but the structural lesson is that both UNIDO and ITC operated primarily from headquarters, limiting their responsiveness to country-level dynamics. Programmes that concentrate decision-making at the national level and maintain permanent field presence are better positioned to adapt, build trust, and achieve results in complex institutional environments.

Baseline indicators set at zero signal sustainability risk. When all indicators begin at zero, the intervention is building on nothing that existed before and may leave nothing behind when it ends. Future project designs should capture existing capabilities and integrate capacity building into institutional systems with budgets, rather than creating parallel structures.

Exit strategies and sustainability planning must be built into programme design from the outset, not addressed at programme closing. Without sustainable business models for national testing, certification, and business development service providers, the quality infrastructure built under the project risks becoming dormant.

Implications for Policy and Programming

Redesign the management architecture. The forthcoming Business Environment and Competitiveness for Salone (BECS) programme should establish a Technical Assistance Team and a Management Coordination Committee to coordinate implementing partners, improve EU Delegation oversight, and enable real-time result tracking. In-country teams should have the authority to make key decisions, and a joint data repository accessible to all partners and the EU Delegation should be mandatory.

Adopt result-based monitoring from day one. All new actions should use EU OPSYS Core Indicators for design and monitoring, and the Theory of Change must specify how actions contribute to improved national quality system efficacy and a better business environment. Outcome monitoring must be integrated throughout the project lifecycle, not scheduled as a terminal activity.

Embed gender and climate crosscutting requirements. Gender-disaggregated indicators must be aligned with the EU Gender Action Country-Level Implementation Plan. Climate resilience, given the agricultural focus of the intervention, must be systematically integrated into the Theory of Change and monitored.

Prioritize systemic over pilot-based approaches. The next programme phase should move beyond isolated pilot cases by documenting and codifying successful approaches for replication, and by ensuring that national trade support institutions co-design and co-deliver services from the outset. An institutional capacity assessment at the start of BECS is strongly recommended.

Strengthen public-private dialogue architecture. Sector-specific PPDs should be linked to a formal regulatory framework with defined priorities and expected outcomes. The National Coordinating Committee on Trade should be restored and modernized, and Thematic Working Groups should be established to sustain policy coordination beyond individual project cycles.

Integrate financing with technical support. Testing, certification, and quality services must be accompanied by access to loans or grants for cooperatives and MSMEs to enable them to apply new standards. Engaging EU enterprises and investors in public-private dialogue can help promote a more favorable investment climate.

Potential for Scaling and Transferability

The quality infrastructure achievements, particularly the accredited Management Systems Certification Body at SLSB and the National Enquiry Points for TBT and SPS, represent genuine institutional advances that can be built upon. Their sustainability, however, depends on developing self-financing business models for the SLSB, as the project provided no clear financial sustainability or exit strategy for these services.

The GlobalGAP approach combining training, coaching, and technical assistance has demonstrated effectiveness in remote areas and holds strong potential for replication across additional cooperatives and value chains. Its transferability requires: (a) adequate documentation of the pilot cases, which is currently insufficient; (b) local availability of training providers; and (c) continued field presence to ensure adoption of practices between harvesting seasons.

At the regional level, the lessons from WACOMP-SL are applicable to other national components of the WACOMP programme and to similar EU-funded trade competitiveness initiatives across ECOWAS member states. The key enabling conditions for scale are a result-based M&E system, in-country decision-making authority, joint coordination between implementing agencies, and a private sector engagement strategy built into programme design.

Methodological Notes

The evaluation was conducted by Karsten Weitzenegger (Team Leader) and Elisabetta Grassia (Evaluation Expert), selected by the AESA Stantec Consortium. It covered the period December 2019 to October 2023, with evaluation activities conducted from October 2023 to July 2024, including a field mission to Bo, Kenema, and Pujehun districts in January 2024.

The evaluation applied four OECD-DAC criteria: efficiency, effectiveness, impact, and sustainability, as well as the EU-specific criterion of EU added value. Relevance and coherence were assessed through a prior Remote Outcome Monitoring review in August 2021. The team conducted approximately 73 interviews and held 5 focus group meetings with stakeholders across government, implementing agencies, civil society, MSMEs, cooperatives, and complementary programmes.

A principal limitation was the absence of a joint electronic repository, which dispersed documentation across agencies and impeded systematic analysis. Outcome data was being collected at the time of the evaluation, and commercial viability figures were not shared by MSMEs, making cost-benefit analysis and value-for-money assessments impossible. Many activities had only recently begun after COVID-19 delays, making it too early to assess long-term impact with confidence.

Stakeholder Perspectives

Beneficiary cooperatives and MSMEs confirmed improved competitiveness, primarily in the domestic market, as a positive contribution — though they noted this fell short of the project’s original ambitions for enhanced national and export competitiveness. Farmers in focus groups described tangible co-benefits: improved community spirit, better cooperative governance, higher on-farm awareness of good agricultural practices, and greater youth retention in rural areas.

National institutional stakeholders, including the Ministry of Trade and Industry and trade support institutions, participated in training events and some hosted activities, but consistently reported insufficient involvement in planning processes and limited ability to provide learned services independently after the project. Several institutions indicated they had not been resourced for joint implementation.

Implementing agencies (UNIDO and ITC) and the EU Delegation recognized coordination deficiencies, particularly the absence of a joint documentation system and the vertical decision-making structure, and noted that the COVID-19 pandemic compounded pre-existing structural weaknesses. Private sector representatives and some institutional stakeholders attended Project Steering Committee meetings irregularly, missing opportunities for sustained coordination.

Further Resources and Links

Implementing Organizations

Donors and Funding Partners

Evaluation Tools and Knowledge Platforms

Related Projects and Knowledge Platforms

Report Citation

Weitzenegger, Karsten, and Elisabetta Grassia. West African Competitiveness Programme (WACOMP) in Sierra Leone. Final Evaluation. CRIS FED/2018/401-233, AESA Stantec Consortium, Brussels 2024. international-partnerships.ec.europa.eu/publications-library/final-evaluation-wacomp-sierra-leone_en. Accessed 20 May 2026.

Disclaimer: The author participated in this evaluation. The opinions expressed are solely those of the author and cannot be attributed to any affiliated organizations. Portions of the text and images were supported by artificial intelligence.