1 / 17

What is the PRSP?

Mainstreaming MDGs & HIV/AIDS into National Development Instruments and PRSPs Vladimir Mikhalev, UNDP Bratislava Regional Center RESPONDING TO HIV/AIDS IN EUROPE AND THE CIS 4th RBEC Community of Practice Meeting Moscow, 5-7 June 2007. What is the PRSP?.

amiel
Télécharger la présentation

What is the PRSP?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Mainstreaming MDGs & HIV/AIDS into National Development Instruments and PRSPsVladimir Mikhalev,UNDP Bratislava Regional CenterRESPONDING TO HIV/AIDS IN EUROPE AND THE CIS4th RBEC Community of Practice MeetingMoscow, 5-7 June 2007

  2. What is the PRSP? • PRSPs emerged from 1999 as a result of WB & IMF initiative intended to improve development outcomes • PRSP is a short-term national policy framework comprising key development objectives and policy tools aimed at poverty reduction • PRSPs operationalise long-term objectives such as MDGs by specifying concrete public policies and expenditure priorities • Serve as a framework for all external assistance geared towards poverty reduction

  3. PRSPsunderlying principles • County-driven, involving broad-based participation • Comprehensive in recognizing the multi-dimensional nature of poverty • Result-oriented and focused on outcomes that benefit the poor • Partnership-oriented involving coordinated participation of development partners • Based on long-term perspective for poverty reduction

  4. IFIs support to PRSPs • PRSPs introduced a new way of providing assistance to low income countries by WB & IMF • Low income countries were required to develop PRSPs in order to get access to concessional resources and debt relief under HIPC programme • IMF aligned support to PRSP through PRGF as the main lending instrument • WB introduced PRSC to support PRSPs

  5. PRSPs / PRSs in EECA region • PRSP countries that rely heavily on IFI financing: • Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova, Albania, Serbia & Montenegro, Bosnia-Herzegovina • Other countries having PRS but not linked to IFI funding: • Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Ukraine • No PRSs: • Russia, Belarus, Turkmenistan • New EU member states and EU accessions countries incorporate poverty reduction policy in EU social inclusion agenda

  6. PRSP policy components • Macroeconomic programme • including growth projections and key fiscal choices • Pro-poor structural and sectoral polices, • including private sector & SME development, financial and trade liberalisation • Polices for social inclusion and equity: • employment policies, rural development, education, health, social protection • Governance and public sector management • Prioritised and costed action plans in all policy components

  7. Strengths of PRSPs • Improved focus on poverty • Based on sound poverty diagnostics • Capture multidimensional income and non-income poverty aspects • Gather sector strategies and expenditure plans under poverty reduction umbrella • Enhanced monitoring systems • Broad participation

  8. Weaknesses of PRSPs • Lack of understanding of sources of growth and its social impact • Too broad objectives, lack of vision and operational guidance (road maps) • Weak linkages between growth and poverty reduction, between macroeconomic growth and sectoral policies (e.g. fiscal polices and SME support) • Pro-poor policy choices focus on public expenditures on health, education and other social programmes but lack attention to infrastructure and rural development • Poor costing and prioritisation (wish lists) and weak links to budgetary processes (MTEF) • Imperfect monitoring indicators and lack of data • Limited participation in PRS implementation and monitoring by parliaments, civil society, private sector

  9. Poverty reduction outcomes • Poverty in EECA in 1998-2003 decreased • from 20 % to 12 % of the population; 40 million moved out of poverty; poverty did not decreased in Georgia, Poland & Lithuania • Inequality declined with the exception of Georgia and Tajikistan • Mixed progress on non-income poverty: • improvements in education, but in Western Balkans, Tajikistan & Kyrgyzstan enrolment declined; • HIV and TB spread in many countries, high infant mortality and increased maternal mortality in Central Asia and Caucasus, • poor access to safe water in lower income countries • Growth failed to generate enough jobs • Growth in low income counties did not increase productivity in agriculture and small trade; incomes of large sections of workforce employed there did not increased • Regional inequalities increased – gap between capital cities and rural areas & small towns

  10. Policy challenges • The projected rates of growth are insufficient to achieve MDG poverty reduction targets by 2015 • higher rates of growth are needed • growth needs to be more pro-poor • Core policy areas are employment generation and private sector development • Non–income MDGs, especially in health are unlikely to be met • public investment needs to be strengthened to improve social infrastructure and services

  11. What is needed in new PRSPs • Build on the good experience of the previous PRSP • Incorporate MDGs and focus on particular aspects of human poverty: quality of education and skills, health, gender, water and sanitation • Focus on regions and tailor made for specific regional needs • Broad participation of development partners • Result-orientation and focus on outcomes • Robust monitoring and evaluation system

  12. Mainstreaming MDGs into PRSPs • PRPS have direct references to MDGs • Armenia, Azerbaijan, Moldova, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan explicitly establish relationship between PRSP & MDGs and targets • Armenia PRSP have special tables linking PRSP to MDG targets and indicators • Tajik PRSP establishes 2015 as target year and MDG targets as PRSP targets • PRSPs plan increased resource flow to MDG sectors: job creation, micro financing, education, health, environment • Despite increase in funding it is not sufficient for MDG achievement • PRSP & MDG monitoring is aligned • Time consistency • PRSPs are mid-term 3-5 year strategies, targets are aligned with 2015 MDGs based on assumption of linear progress • Armenia PRSP are long-term having 2015 time horizon

  13. Prominence of HIV/AIDS in PRSPs The new Welfare Improvement Strategy in Uzbekistan • Acknowledges HIV/AIDS epidemic as the fastest growing in the region • Key groups at risk: intravenous drug users and prison population (but no mention of sex workers and men having sex with men) • Increasing transmission of HIV from mother to child National goal: halting and beginning to reverse the spread of HIV/AIDS by 2015

  14. Measures combating HIV/AIDS • Preventive measures focused on groups at risk • Create conducive legal environment to work with high risk groups • Increased availability of voluntary testing • Counselling • Building capacity of health professionals • Involvement of civil society • Better access to medical care for those infected • Availability of antiretroviral treatment, especially for pregnant women and children • Supportive environment for and protection of the rights of people living with HIV / AIDS • Targeted safety nets

  15. Key problems: costing and funding • Experience of Tajikistan • Costing model developed for UNAIDS by Futures Group • Estimates are highly speculative • No funds available for HIV / AIDS in the health budget other than at the expense of other interventions • Financing gap amounts to almost all HIV / AIDS costing and is likely to go uncovered without external assistance • Lack of sufficient detail on HIV/AIDS in PRSPs; need for link to health SWAPs / health care reform programmes

  16. Tajikistan: Financial Estimations for combating HIV/AIDS, 2005-2015 (US$ million)Source: MDG Needs Assessment, Republican Centre on AIDS Prevention and Control of the MoH, 2005

  17. HIV /AIDS costing methods • Cost estimates depend on • Pace of epidemic expansion • Price of drug therapies • Range of care and treatment offered • Assumptions in the resource model for Tajikistan • Adult prevalence rate rises to 5.4 by 2010 and remains constant thereafter • Annual 10-per cent reduction in the cost of palliative therapies • Peer education for 20 percent of the labour force each year • Unit costs of interventions based on regional average in some cases adjusted to Tajikistan’s specifics

More Related