Transcript Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) - Are they making a difference? Carol Healy, Development Education and Research Network (DERN) [email protected] http://www.nuigalway.ie/dern.

Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers
(PRSPs)
- Are they making a difference?
Carol Healy, Development Education and Research
Network (DERN)
[email protected]
http://www.nuigalway.ie/dern
Synopsis
•
•
•
•
Background
Principles and Goals of PRSPs
Positive Elements
Critique of PRSPs in their current form
– Goals and principles in practice
– Political Issues
– Implementation
Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers
(PRSPs)
• What are they?
– Introduced in 1999
– National Programme for Poverty Reduction
– Established to ensure the proper use of debt
relief under the Enhanced Highly Indebted
Poor Countries Facility (HIPC2).
• HIPC countries are entitled to debt relief
after 1 year of successful implementation
of the full PRSP
Background to PRSPs
• 2000: World Bank “Voices of the Poor”
Survey.
• World Development Report 2000 – 2001
• Now the new “pro-poor” development plan
– Promoting opportunities
– Facilitating empowerment
– Enhancing security
PRSPs
• Interim PRSPs (I-PRSPs)
– Outline the causes of poverty as well as the
consultation process for the drafting of the
final PRSP
• Full PRSPs
– Established once countries submit an interim
PRSP and consult with the World Bank and
IMF (in a “Joint Staff Assessment”)
PRSP Core Principals
•
•
•
•
•
1. Country- driven
2. Results Orientated
3. Comprehensive
4. Partnership-orientated
5. Based on a long term perspective of
poverty reduction
• 6. Participatory
PRSP Goals
• 1. Promote Pro-poor growth
• 2. Promote empowerment by encouraging
good governance (includes fiscal
management and decentralised
government)
• 3. Enhance human capital through
improvements in health and education
Positive elements of PRSP
• Poverty reduction now at the core of the PRSP
agenda
• Better coordination between states, donor
agencies and beneficiaries as poverty reduction
now the responsibility of finance ministers
• Improved dialogue: policy makers consult with
the population on the limitations caused by
poverty. (Helped to prioritise the needs of the
poor)
Positive elements of PRSP
• Better accountability?
– Governments obliged to discuss poverty and what
they are doing about it with their citizens, they may
take poverty reduction more seriously , and be held to
account more effectively
– Increased trend towards scrutiny of local and national
government officials by citizens on budget
expenditure issues
• Civil society has a deepened knowledge of
budgeting / financial issues
Problems with the PRSP
PRSPs and Goal 1: Promoting Pro-poor
growth
• Pro-poor growth reduces inequality , so
that the poor benefit proportionally more
than the rich
• BUT: Redistribution issues
• BUT: Macro-economic policies similar to
Washington Consensus policies
Polarization AND deprivation – the poor ARE falling
further behind and the incomes of 40% are too low
1992
UNDP HDR1992, 2005
2005
Problems with the PRSP
• The PRSP and the Poverty Reduction and
Growth Facility (PRGF)
• Participation in the PRGF
• Aligning the PRGF to the PRSP??? (EG
Mozambique)
Mozambique PRGF and PRSP
• PRGF
2004
• 2nd PRSP
June 2007
March 2006
Issue of: Ownership?
Problems with the PRSP
• Goal 2: Promote empowerment by
encouraging good governance
• - Empowerment and good governance can
be achieved through decentralisation
• - Empowerment achieved by greater
participation
• BUT: meaning of participation?
• 2005 IMF and World Bank PRSP Review:
‘Participation does not imply final consensus
or that views garnered through
participatory processes will necessarily be
reflected in final programmes. Instead,
participation should enable policy choices
to be better informed’
Problems with the PRSP
• EGs of Uganda, Honduras, Nicaragua,
Zambia, Tanzania
• Role of Parliaments?
• Format of consultations
• Language
• Dissemination (Mozambique)
Problems with the PRSP
• Issue of capacity to participate in the process?
• -‘Supply-driven’ civil society? (getting involved in
what is currently fashionable)
• PRSP has been criticised for not openly
discussing:
– Industrial policy
– Trade protection
– Subsidy support to domestic markets
• Invited versus Created spaces
Problems with the PRSP
• Goal 3: Enhancing human capital by
improving health and education
• Increased funds for health and education
• Focus on AIDS, TB and malaria: donor
priorities or national priorities?
Politics and the PRSP
• Mandate of the IMF and World Bank
prevents them from being involved in
politics. This has meant the PRS process
has been highly technocratic
• Line ministries beyond Education and
Health are often only very loosely involved
• PRSP and decentralisation (EG Ethiopia)
• New governments (Honduras and
Nicaragua)
Implementing the PRSP
• Discrepancies in terms of policy
documents and their implementation (EG
Zambia)
• Annual Progress Reports
Case Study – Tanzania
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Tanzania:
60% of Tanzania’s population lives below the poverty line.
BUT:
Genuine government commitment to reform,
Donors have galvanised around the PRSP,
Important shifts in policy; eg free primary school education.
Success:
Poverty reduction has been on Tanzania’s policy agenda since
1964.
• PRSP is based on the country’s Vision 2025 document, and it’s
National Poverty Eradication Strategy, both of which were adopted
in 1997.
• Government commitment to poverty reduction before the
implementation of the PRSP.
Case Study - Malawi
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Malawi
Prior to the PRSP, Malawi had no real poverty reduction policy
1994: launched a poverty alleviation programme,
BUT: no real plans on how, how much, or when poverty would be
reduced.
1996 it published Vision 2020, but this was not followed by fundable
action.
Malawi has not had the fiscal management that Tanzania has:
expenditure ceilings are frequently ignored by line ministries and
other government agencies.
Countries with a prior commitment to poverty reduction have greater
ability to implement the PRSP?
Why?
– higher degree of national ownership
Conclusion
• Legacy of Participation but…
– No radical change (neo-lib with a friendly
face?)
– Civil Society weak/ ignored
– A political technocratic debate
– Other drivers (donors/politics)
• Invited versus Created spaces
Recommended Reading
• D. Booth (2003) Are PRSPs making a difference? The African
Experience. Development Policy Review, Vol 21, No. 2
• D. Booth (2005) “Missing Links in the Politics of Development:
Learning from the PRSP Experiment” ODI Working Paper 256
• D. Craig and D. Porter (2003) ‘Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers: a
New Convergence’ World Development Vol 31, No 1
• J. Gould (ed) (2005) The New Conditionality. The Politics of Poverty
Reduction Strategies. Zed Books
• IIED (2005) Participatory Learning and Action. Civil Society and
Poverty Reduction. IIED
• Oxfam (2004) ‘From Donorship to Ownership? Moving Towards
PRSP Round 2. Oxfam Briefing Paper 51
• F. Stewart and M. Wang (2003) ’Do PRSPs empower poor countries
and disempower the World Bank, or is it the other way round?’ QEH
Working Paper Series. Working Paper No. 108