Transcript Slide 1

1
IMPROVING OWNERSHIP OF TRADE POLICY
THROUGH INCLUSIVE PROCESSES
Presentation to CSEND and CUTS Book Vernissage:
“Inter-ministerial Coordination and Stakeholder
Consultation of Trade Policy Making”
19 July, 2010
By Rashid S. Kaukab
Deputy Director and Research Coordinator, CUTS Geneva Resource Centre
[email protected]
www.cuts-grc.org
STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION
2
 Introduction
 Trade policy for development: stakeholders and formal
consultative mechanisms
 Effective participation: challenges as viewed by stakeholders
 Measuring inclusiveness: the Inclusive Trade Policy Making
(ITPM) Index
 Conclusions and way forward to maximize inclusivity pay-
offs
I. INTRODUCTION
3
 Importance of trade and trade policy as a means to achieve
growth and development
 Importance of inclusive trade policy making to ensure
relevance and effective implementation
 Based on recent CUTS research under the FEATS project
with focus on Kenya, Malawi, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia
II. TRADE POLICY FOR DEVELOPMENT: MAIN
STAKEHOLDERS
Features of an Inclusive Trade
Policy
4
Key Elements of Inclusive Trade
Policy Making Process
Relevant Stakeholders
Based on national development
policy
Clear guidance/directions from
national development policy makers
National development policy makers
(e.g., President’s Office, Ministry for
Planning and Development, parliament,
etc)
Linked with other governmental
policies
Timely inputs and feedback from
other government
ministries/departments
Other relevant government
ministries/departments (e.g., those dealing
with agriculture, employment and labour,,
competition, etc.)
Linked with international
commitments (to implement the
commitments as well as to guide the
positions regarding future possible
commitments)
Timely inputs and feedback from
relevant ministries and negotiators
Relevant ministries (e.g., Ministry of
Foreign Affairs, etc.) and negotiators
(e.g., dealing with the WTO and EPA
negotiations)
Balancing the interests of all key
stakeholders
Regular inputs and feedback from
key non-state stakeholders
Key non-state actors (e.g., representatives
of the private sector, farmers, consumers,
and the civil society)
Clear implementation plan with
adequate resources
Articulation of implementation plan
and commitment of required
Relevant government ministries (e.g.,
Ministries of Trade, Finance, Planning)
II. TRADE POLICY FOR DEVELOPMENT:
CONSULTATIVE MECHANISMS
5
Categorization by Mandate
 On specific trade negotiations (e.g. EPA, WTO)
 On all trade issues
 On larger set of issues that includes trade
Categorization by Membership
 Only governmental actors
 For public and private sectors
 Multi-stakeholder
II. TRADE POLICY FOR DEVELOPMENT:
CONSULTATIVE MECHANISMS
6
Mandate/Membe
rship
Multistakeholder
Public-Private
sectors
Only
governmental
Multiple issues
including trade
Uganda ACF
Kenya JICCC
Malawi PPD
Tanzania NBC
Uganda PEC
Kenya IMCs
Malawi IMCs
Tanzania IMTC,
Zambia SCS
All trade issues
Malawi NWGTP
Uganda IITC
Zambia NWGT
Zambia TEWG
Kenya Cabinet subcommittee on trade
Specific trade
Negotiations
Kenya NCWTO
Kenya NDTPF
Malawi NDTPF
Tanzania NETT
Uganda NDTPF
III. EFFECTIVE PARTICIPATION: CHALLENGES
AS VIEWED BY7 STAKEHOLDERS
Common Challenges
 Lack of capacity and technical human resources to deal with diverse and
evolving issues
 Issues of internal and external coordination
 Lack of regular and timely information flow on trade issues
III. EFFECTIVE PARTICIPATION: CHALLENGES
AS VIEWED BY8 STAKEHOLDERS
Challenges Specific to Categories of Stakeholders
 Ministry responsible for trade: Lack of financial and human resources to
ensure regular functioning of consultative mechanisms
 Other relevant government ministries/agencies: Issue of primary
mandate
 Private sector: Need to improve opportunities for less powerful business
associations
 CSOs: Occasional tensions with the government and limited
opportunities for participation
IV. MEASURING INCLUSIVENESS: THE INCLUSIVE
TRADE POLICY MAKING
(ITPM) INDEX
9
Objectives of ITPM Index
 Assessing the inclusiveness of a country’s trade policy making processes in terms
of the capacities and participation of main stakeholders in these processes
 Identifying the weaknesses and gaps that should be the target of related capacity
building and other activities by the governments, donors, and various
stakeholders
 Allowing for comparisons across countries to identify the good practices as well as
prompting actions by countries lagging behind
 Improving prospects for domestic ownership of trade policies through
development and application of more inclusive trade policy making processes
IV. MEASURING INCLUSIVENESS: THE INCLUSIVE
10
TRADE POLICY MAKING (ITPM) INDEX
ITPM Action Variable
Part I. Ministry
responsible for Trade
KENYA MALAWI
TANZA
NIA
UGAND
A
ZAMBI
A
A. Identification of all key
stakeholders
0.75
0.50
0.50
0.75
0.75
B. Creating awareness about the
need for trade policy
0.75
0.50
0.50
0.25
0.75
C. Establishment of formal
consultative mechanisms
0.75
1.00
0.75
1.00
1.00
D. Functioning of formal consultative
mechanisms
0.75
0.75
0.50
0.50
0.75
E. Regular information flow to the
stakeholders including on the
content of trade policy
0.50
0.50
0.25
0.25
0.50
Part I Score
3.50/5 3.25/5.0
.00
0
2.50/ 2.75/5.0 3.75/5.
5.0
0
00
IV. MEASURING INCLUSIVENESS: THE INCLUSIVE
11
TRADE POLICY MAKING (ITPM) INDEX
ITPM Action Variable
Part II. Other relevant
government
ministries/agencies
F. Regular participation in the process
and feedback to the relevant
authorities
G. Faithful representation of and
regular feedback to the represented
constituencies
H. Acquiring relevant knowledge and
expertise
Part II Score
Part III. Private sector and
business umbrella
organizations
KENYA
MALAWI TANZANIA UGANDA ZAMBIA
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.75
0.75
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
1.75/3.0
1.75/3.0
0
2.00/3.0
1.75/3.00
0
1.50/3.
00
I. Regular participation in the process
and feedback to the relevant
authorities
1.00
1.00
0.75
1.00
1.00
J. Faithful representation of and
regular feedback to the represented
constituencies
0.50
0.75
0.75
0.50
0.50
K. Acquiring relevant knowledge and
expertise
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
Part III Score
2.00/3.0
2.25/3.0
2.00/3.
2.00/3.00
2.00/3.0
IV. MEASURING INCLUSIVENESS: THE INCLUSIVE
12
TRADE POLICY MAKING (ITPM) INDEX
ITPM Action Variable
Part IV. Civil society
organizations
KENYA
MALAWI TANZANIA UGANDA ZAMBIA
L. Regular participation in the
process and feedback to the
relevant authorities
0.75
0.25
0.50
0.25
1.00
M. Faithful representation of and
regular feedback to the
represented constituencies
0.75
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
N. Acquiring relevant knowledge
and expertise
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.75
0.50
Part IV Score
2.00/3.0
1.25/3.00
0
1.50/3.
2.00/3.0
1.75/3.00
00
0
ITPM Index Score
9.50/14. 8.50/14.0
0
0
7.50/1 8.25/14.0 9.50/14.
4.00
0
00
V. MAIN C
13ONCLUSIONS
 Improved (and further improving) inclusiveness, better informed
stakeholders, and emerging culture of dialogue at nation al levels
But
 Not all relevant stakeholders involved (e.g. parliamentarians, informal
sector, consumers), and
 Consultative forums lack effective mandates
And
 Further efforts also needed to maximize inclusivity pay-offs in an evolving
setting
V. WAY FORWARD TO MAXIMIZE INCLUSIVITY PAYOFFS FOR TRADE-LED DEVELOPMENT: SOME
RECOMMENDATIONS
14
 Broadening national consultations: identification and involvement of all
relevant stakeholders
 Strengthening national consultative mechanisms: more resources and
better mandates
 Linking with results: measure impact of improved inclusivity/ownership
on trade policy content and outcomes
 Focusing on specific areas: make better use of inclusivity processes for
EIF and Aid for Trade
 Addressing the regional dimension: build similar processes at the
regional level among RECs
15
Inclusiveness can generate national ownership
leading to effective implementation of trade
policy as part of overall development policy