WNAD PRSP Learning Event

1. WNAD PRSP Learning Event West and North Africa Department January 2002

2. WNAD PRSP Learning Event I.Background – PRSP principles and the role of participation II.Challenges and Opportunities in supporting participatory processes III.Ways forward for DFID engagement

3. Origins of the PRSP Idea • Poor record on poverty reduction in 1990s • Findings on aid effectiveness (limits of projects, undermining of govt. systems & capacity…) • Limits of conventional conditionality • Justification for big increase in multilateral funding for debt relief (HIPC II)

4. Core PRSP Principles Sept. 1999 the PRSP replaced the PFP (Policy Framework Paper) as the governing contract between the IMF/World Bank & client countries.Central to it are five principles: • Country-led/owned based on participation • Outcome oriented • Comprehensive – analysis of poverty • Medium to long term perspective • Donor partnership under government leadership

5. PRSP Schedule & Key Elements Preparation Status Report 1st Annual Progress Report 2nd Annual Progress Report etc.. I-PRSP PRSP (I) PRSP (II) 9-24 months 3 years HIPC(II) Completion Point HIPC(II) Decision Point

6. Preparation Status Report 1st Annual Progress Report 2nd Annual Progress Report etc…. I-PRSP PRSP (I) PRSP (II) PRSP elements: • Poverty analysis • Goals/targets • Policy actions • Med-term budget fw • Financing plan • External assistance • Participatory process 3 years 9-24 months HIPC(II) Decision Point

7. What’s New? • Linking strategy to the fiscal & macro framework • Reducing the disconnect between policy & results (structuring actions viz. impact on poverty) • Opening up strategy process to broad-based participation • Opportunities for new ways of delivering aid (pooled funding of general budget, joint appraisal, common performance assessment)

8. Expectations about Participation • Participation can help deliver broad-based ownership & strengthen accountability where poverty is related to weak governance • Policies more likely to succeed if their choice is influenced by civil society consultation & voices of the poor • Participation can help alter the power balance between governments and donors

9. But… • Participation in the dev. of national policy for poverty reduction is relatively new…uncharted territory for some (finance ministries etc.) • Different actors hold different understandings of what participation can achieve in relation to poverty reduction or policy making • Confusion over participation as ‘mandatory’ & calls for greater national ownership

10. Recent Experience • Participatory processes have taken a broadly similar format – working groups/national wkshps • Participation has generally been limited to consultation with only limited feedback • Some opening of the ‘policy space’ • Strong CS advocacy on key themes – gender, inequality, HIV/AIDs but nothing on macro- economic policy

11. Areas of Value-Added • CS lobbying has improved the process e.g. Kenya consultations exceeded expectations despite weak political commitment from the ‘top’; Malawi process was extended • Cameroon/Chad – Govt. officials consulting directly with communities, possibly for the first time • Rwanda – extensive consultations crucial part of reconciliation efforts

12. But weaknesses too … • Tanzania – process rushed, CSOs attempted parallel process but weak impact on final PRSP • Ghana – PRSP process treated ‘lightly’ & CSOs poorly galvanised (compared to SAPRI) • ‘Kampala Declaration’ – consortium of NGOs critical of PRSP framework & restricted form of participation • Mali – “la société civil, c’est Moi! “ President of the National Assembly

13. Conclusions • Where Govt. already keen to foster CS participation in policy processes, PRSP processes have strengthened it & left actors on all sides better equipped (Uganda) • Elsewhere the risk is that poorly conducted consultative processes, with ambivalent outcomes, will undermine chances that a more participatory culture will develop (Mozambique?)

14. Obstacles • Participation is just a process, de-linked from analysis & decision-making • Participation is an intrusion to/& undermines existing democratic processes • Capacity weaknesses and conflicts within CS • Donors as ‘brokers of participation’

15. DFID Engagement • DFID support more consistent than many other donors, largely supportive/mediating rather than interventionist • Supports efforts to coordinate & harmonise approaches to participation • Working to strengthen both sides (CS and Govt.) to engage with each other (avoid donor as ‘broker’)

16. Examples • Kenya – SAIC CS Adviser seconded to PRSP Secretariat • Tanzania – funding for CSOs to strengthen poverty policy work • Tanzania/Uganda – popularising PRSP/dissemination • Mozambique – work with like-minded donor group on how to strengthen CS participation in PRSP implementation & monitoring • Zambia – providing information, analysis & funds for Regional networking • Ethiopia – supporting public debate through funding of NGOs and assisting coordination of CS response to PRSP