SECOND FEATS INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE

HARNESSING AGRICULTURE FOR DEVELOPMENT THROUGH TRADE

GENEVA, 21 FEBRUARY 2011

Further Development of Inclusive Trade Policy Making Index (ITPMI)

By Dr Lichia Saner-Yiu and Rashid S. Kaukab

yiu@csend.org, rsk@cuts.org 1

STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION

Beginning: Objectives and conceptual development

First Application: FEATS first phase country research studies on

trade policy making processes and role of stakeholders (2009)

Evolution: Technical improvements

Second Application: Results of 2010 survey during second phase

FEATS research

Way Forward2

I. BEGINNING

Why Inclusiveness?

Key aspect of good governance

Legitimacy

Quality of outcomes

Ownership and implementation

Inclusive process inclusive development

3

I. BEGINNING

Objectives of ITPM Index

Raising awareness about political economy aspects

Assessing inclusiveness of a country’s trade policy making process

Identifying the weaknesses and gaps for targeted actions and capacity building

Identifying best practices by cross-country comparison

Improving domestic ownership of trade policies

4

I. BEGINNING

Conceptual Development

Development of analytical framework

Constructing initial ITPM Indices for five project countries

Validation of the framework and the initial IPTM Index values and finalization

5

I. BEGINNING

ITPMI: Main Actors

1. Ministry Responsible for Trade Policy Making

2. Other Relevant Government Ministries

3. Private Sector

4. CSOs

6

I. BEGINNING

ITPMI: Action Variables

7

2, 3, 4

Regular participation and inputsFaithful representation

Investment in knowledge and expertise

1

Identification of stakeholdersCreation of awareness

Establishment of consultative forumsRegular functioning of forums

Regular information flow

I. BEGINNING

8

ITPMI: Values for Action Variables

• maximum value of 1• when appropriate action has been taken by the actor

concernedYes

• high value of 0.75• when quite a lot has been done but some gaps remain

Many/Most

• intermediate value of 0.5• when action has been taken but is not sufficientSome

• low value of 0.25• when some action has been taken but much remains

Few / Little

• 0 value assigned• when no action has been taken by the actor concerned No

II. FIRST APPLICATION: ITPMI 2009

9

ITPM Action Variable KENYA MALAWI TANZANIA UGANDA ZAMBIA

Part I. Ministry responsible for Trade 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 3.50/5.0 3.25/5.0 2.50/5.0 2.75/5.0 3.75/5.0

II: FIRST APPLICATION: ITPMI 2009

10

ITPM Action Variable KENYA MALAWI TANZANIA UGANDA ZAMBIA

Part II. Other relevant government

ministries/agencies

F. Regular participation in the process and feedback to the relevant authorities

1.00 0.75 0.50 0.75 0.75

G. Faithful representation of and regular feedback to the represented constituencies

0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50

H. Acquiring relevant knowledge and expertise 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50

Part II Score 2.00/3.0 1.75/3.0 1.50/3.0 1.75/3.0 1.75/3.0

II: FIRST APPLICATION: ITPMI 2009

11

ITPM Action Variable KENYA MALAWI TANZANIA UGANDA ZAMBIA

Part III. Private sector and business umbrella

organizations

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 2.00/3.0 2.00/3.0 2.00/3.0

II: FIRST APPLICATION: ITPMI 2009

12

ITPM Action Variable KENYA MALAWI TANZANIA UGANDA ZAMBIA

Part IV. Civil society organizations

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 1.25/3.0 1.50/3.0 1.75/3.0 2.00/3.0

ITPM Index Score 9.50/14.0

8.50/14.0

7.50/14.0

8.25/14.0

9.50/14.0

II: FIRST APPLICATION: ITPMI 2009

13

KenyaMalawi

TanzaniaUganda

Zambia

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

ITPMI Score

II: FIRST APPLICATION: ITPMI 2009

14

KenyaMalawi

TanzaniaUganda

Zambia

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

CSO

CSO

II: FIRST APPLICATION: ITPMI 2009

15

KenyaMalawi

TanzaniaUganda

Zambia

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

PS

CSO

PSCSO

II: FIRST APPLICATION: ITPMI 2009

16

KenyaMalawi

TanzaniaUganda

Zambia

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

G

PS

CSO

GPSCSO

II. FIRST APPLICATION: ITPMI 2009

Gaps and challenges classified in three broad categories

Related to capacity

Related to institutional and structural issues

Related to challenges internal to each group of stakeholders

17

III. EVOLUTION Collaboration with CSEND started in 2010. The aim was to strengthen the methodological aspects of the Index making A second generation of the ITPMI questionnaire was developed jointly Data was collected during the FEATS conferences in the participating countries in

late 2010. The aim of the 2nd round of data collection and analyses was to validate the

action variables The 2010 survey also serves as a pre-test to assess the effectiveness of the

ITPM Questionnaire

18

CHANGES MADE TO THE 2009 QUESTIONNAIRE

1. Adaptation of the questions according to the action variables (AVs) based on the results of the 2009 questionnaire

2. Systematic inclusion of the actor types3. Assessment of relative importance of

AVs4. Adding qualitative questions to check

completeness of the Index

19

IV. SECOND APPLICATION: ITPMI 2010

The 2010 Questionnaire has 27 quantitative questions and 2 open questions Total number of respondents, n = 100

20

Countries Total = 100

Kenya 14

Malawi 14

Tanzania 28

Uganda 21

Zambia 23

ACTOR TYPES

Actor Types No of Responde

nts

% Valid %

Ministry/Government

29 29 32.6

Private Sector 22 22 24.7

CSO 38 38 42.7

Missing values 11 11 -

Total n = 100 100 100

21

RESULTS OF SECOND APPLICATION (EXAMPLES)

QS2H- Do you feel that you have benefited from participating in the trade policy consultation process (knowledge & expertise) ?

22

NoLittl

e

Som

ewha

t

Quite

a b

itYe

s0

10

20

30

40

50

60

%

%

RESULTS OF SECOND APPLICATION (EXAMPLES) QS2C- Did the ministry responsible for trade policy

making and implementation establish formal consultative mechanisms?

23

No For a few TPIs

For some TPIs

For most TPIs

For most all TPIs

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

%

%

RESULTS OF SECOND APPLICATION (EXAMPLES)

QS2F2 - Can you provide inputs on trade policy to relevant authorities?

24

No A little Irregular Most of the Time

Yes05

10152025303540

%

%

2ND APPLICATION: ITPMI 2010

Kenya Malawi Tanzania Uganda Zambia0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4Weighted Mean Index

Weighted Mean In-dex

25

FACTOR ANALYSIS

Method: Principal Component Analysis / Varimax Rotation Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of

sampling adequacy: 0.779 Bartlett's Test of Sphericity: .000 Total variance explained: 59.20% Factors extracted: 3

26

FACTOR ANALYSIS

Result: Three theoretical dimensions can be

meaningfully bundled together through factor analysis;

Questions regarding governance, participation and representativeness constitute a factor on their own.

27

ROTATED COMPONENT MATRIX 1

28

Questions Gover-nance

Partici-pation

Representation

S2C: Estab Consultative Mechanism 0.825

0.147

S2B: Create Awareness by Ministry Resp.

0.751

S2A: Identify Key Stakeholders 0.746

S2D: FuncConsMech established 0.711

0.359

S2E: Regular Info Flow 0.650

0.132 0.251

S2G3: Faith RepGov 0.561

0.327 0.364

Factor 1: Governance

ROTATED COMPONENT MATRIX - 2

29

Questions Gover-nance

Partici-pation

Representation

S2H: Acquired Relevant Knowledge & Expertise

0.743

S2F1: Regular Participation 0.724

0.172

S2F2: Regular Participation & Inputs 0.157 0.699G

rou

p 2

ROTATED COMPONENT MATRIX - 3

30

Questions Gover-nance

Partici-pation

Represen-tation

S2G1: Faithful Representation (Private Sector)

0.821

S2G2: Faithful Representation (CSO)

0.186

0.781

Gro

up

3:

Rep

rese

ntt

ion

V. WAY FORWARD

31

ENVISAGED IMPROVEMENTS

Technical improvements

Wider data base and benchmarking

EFFECTIVE USAGE FOR INCLUSIVE DEVELOPMENT APPROACH

Beyond one-off exercise

Beyond FEATS project countries

Beyond trade policy

THANK YOU !

32