Influencing Poverty Reduction Strategies-- A Guide

Influencing Poverty Reduction Strategies: A Guide


Contents

Introduction..........................................................................................................2

Section one. Background: Participation in Planning and the PRSP process 3

Section two. Participation by Civil Society in Policy Monitoring and Implementation.................................................................................................7

Participation........................................................................................................7

Section three. Influencing the Content of Policy..............................................7

Influencing policy content: promoting policy choices..........................................7

Influencing policy content: gender and diversity.................................................7

How to maximise policy influence......................................................................7

Section four. Monitoring the Implementation of Policy....................................7

Implementation; critical for the credibility of the PRSP initiative.........................7

Monitoring policy implementation: gender and diversity.....................................7

Monitoring policy implementation: the role of budgets.......................................7

Beyond budgets: monitoring outcomes..............................................................7

Annex one. Influencing Policy Content: Reform debates in low-income countries...........................................................................................................7

Annex two. Links to other sources of information..................................................7

1


Introduction

Use of document

This document is intended as a resource for Oxfam staff and for other organisations concerned with influencing and monitoring national policy making in developing countries to the benefit of the poor. The document will focus on policy making in low-income countries, because current donor conditionality demands civil society participation in planning and in the implementation of plans under the new Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper programme (PRSP) introduced by the World Bank and IMF. However, many of the areas covered will be useful to organisations working in middle-income, or even developed countries.

Structure of this Document

This document is split into four sections.

Section one gives a background and introduction to the increasing opportunities for civil society to participate in policy formulation and implementation in low income countries, and in particular the new opportunities created by the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper programme introduced jointly by the World Bank and IMF.

Section two looks at what is meant by the participation of Civil Society organisations in policy formulation and implementation, and particularly those organisations made up of or representing the poorest sections of society and women. It gives a definition of the different levels of participation and what is required to ensure that meaningful participation is achieved. As such it provides a resource for influencing and assessing the participatory process in individual countries.

Section three looks at the policy formulation process, and specifically how the content of policies can be influenced by Civil Society to ensure that they are pro-poor and will ensure poverty reduction. It therefore provides a resource for Civil Society Organisations seeking to influence the content of national policies and in particular PRSPs. Annex one then contains a table of the typical policy reforms mooted for low-income countries and the arguments for and against.

Section four looks at monitoring of policy implementation. It examines the role Civil Society Organisations can play in ensuring that pro-poor policies are actually implemented and the impact on poverty reduction is maximised.

Gender and diversity

In each of the sections there will be a particular focus on the involvement of women and other marginalised groups in national poverty strategies and PRSPs

Lastly annex two contains useful links to other sources of information on each area and on PRSPs as a whole.

2


Section one. Background: Participation in Planning and the PRSP process

Participation and planning

Developing country governments produce a range of plans to guide development; these can range from long-term plans such as Vision 2020 (Ghana, Malawi, Cambodia), National Poverty Eradication Strategy to 2010 (Tanzania)to medium term plans such as the Ninth Five-Year Plan 2001-5 in Vietnam., or the Socio-Economic and Development Plan II in Cambodia for 2001-5. Frequently such plans develop ‘wish-lists’ of projects for donor funding, rather than prioritising public spending in the short and medium term; most have addressed poverty reduction as an ‘add-on’ to a national development strategy. At present many developing country governments also develop policies at national and local levels with extremely limited participation of poor women and men, civil society, and also the legislature. Even within government, in many cases weaker Ministries have limited influence, with the Ministries of Finance and Planning generally dominating the policy debate. Much policy design is influenced by the political elite, the wealthy, and by international financial institutions and donors, particularly the IMF and WB. Donor influence has been greatly enhanced through adjustment programmes in both low and middle-income countries, and debt crises of various sorts have deepened such influence enormously.

3


It is not just in government policy development where the views of poor people are rarely heard, the same also applies to policy implementation in legislation and in practice, or in sector/programme design and implementation. During the past decade substantial experience has developed with poor peoples’ participation in project design, particularly through PRA/RRA1 techniques. These approaches have been further developed into Participatory Poverty Assessments (PPAs), which have the potential to become an extremely useful tool for poverty reduction planning and implementation. National problems are mirrored at decentralised levels, and in many countries even worsened by decentralisation, since systems of accountability and minimum standards of practice are frequently weaker than at central level.

In a key part of this, budgets, where priorities are actually delivered through the allocation and expenditure of government and donor resources, poor people have little influence. Again, with decentralisation, rather than enhancing public accountability in government spending, the situation is often worsened, with the centre achieving some level of public accountability (e.g. publishing the national budget), but frequently without a similar standard of practice at decentralised level.

Recent changes

Over the past few years this position has changed slightly. There has been increased donor emphasis on government ownership and leadership, and on civil society involvement in the design and implementation of policies and plans.

During the past decade substantial experience has also developed with poor women and mens’ participation in project design, particularly through PRA/RRA2 techniques. These approaches have been further developed into Participatory Poverty Assessments (PPAs), which have the potential to become an extremely useful tool for poverty reduction planning and implementation.

At the same time, partly through the recognition by donors of the failure of structural adjustment programmes to make sufficient inroads on reducing poverty, and partly through moves towards linking increased debt relief to poverty reduction (as a result of the Jubilee 2000 debt campaign), there has been a renewed emphasis on poverty reduction as the central theme of government action in low-income countries. This move has also been influenced by the widespread agreement to achieve the international development goals for 2015 (see box below). The goals have been adopted by the

1 Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA)/Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA)

2 Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA)/Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA)

4


World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the members of the Development Assistance Committee of the OECD, and many other agencies. They found a new expression in the Millennium Declaration of the United Nations, adopted by the General Assembly in September 2000. As such they are the key targets towards which all development planning should aim.3

International Development Goals

Poverty The proportion of people living in extreme poverty in developing countries and the proportion of malnourished children should be reduced by at least one half between 1990 and 2015.

Education There should be Universal Primary Education (UPE) in all countries by 2015.

Gender Equality Progress toward gender equality and the empowerment of women should be demonstrated by eliminating gender disparity in primary and secondary education by 2005.

Infant and Child Mortality The death rates of infants and children under the age of five years should be reduced in each developing country by two-thirds the 1990 level by 2015.

Maternal Mortality The rate of maternal mortality should be reduced by three- fourths between 1990 and 2015.

Reproductive Health Access should be available through the primary health care system to reproductive health services for all individuals of appropriate ages and the spread of HIV/AIDS should have begun to be reversed, no later than the year 2015.

Environment There should be a national strategy for sustainable development, in the process of implementation, in every country by 2005, so as to ensure that current trends in the loss of environmental resources are effectively reversed at both global and national levels by 2015. The proportion of the population without access to an improved water source should be reduced by at least one-half between 1990 and 2015.

(see appendix: there is no appendix; There are two alternatives: (1) Ask Tony, or, (b) use the set of indicators circulated by Chris Roche a while ago, which are very nicely presented), including halving the number of people living in extreme poverty, which arose from UN conferences during the 1990s.

IMF/World Bank and Poverty Reduction Strategies

In September 1999, the IMF and World Bank, with donor support, agreed to increase the amount of debt relief on offer to eligible low-income countries through the Heavily Indebted Poor Country (HIPC) initiative. This was conditional on countries developing a Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP), and as a short-term measure, an Interim PRSP. It was also agreed that PRSPs would be required from all low-income countries4, not just the 41 HIPC countries, as a way of increasing the quality and poverty reduction focus of IMF and World Bank support. The PRSP replaced the PFP (Policy Framework Paper), which was supposed to be a joint IMF/World Bank document, but which was generally written by the IMF and rarely used by the World Bank.

Clearly the approach has been donor led, with the IMF/World Bank deciding that in future national government should lead in the development of plans. There was no consultation

3 Further information on the IDT can be found at www.developmentgoals.org

4 77 countries with 1999 per capita GNP below $885.

5

http://www.developmentgoals.org/


with developing country governments in the development of this approach. At the same time, there are numerous problems around the approach, some critics claim that nothing has changed in IMF/World Bank approaches, and that PRSPs are just an attempt to coat adjustment in a more human façade. There are numerous concerns around whether governments are actually in the driving seat, given that PRSPs require ‘endorsement’ from the Boards of the IMF and World Bank before these IFIs will provide finance and other support. Others note that given the substantial influence the IFIs and other donors have over the decisions made by poor countries, the IFIs help make decisions but have passed the responsibility and the blame for failure to governments. There are also problems in that these plans are medium term, and such a short-term planning framework can easily ignore longer-term issues with regards to achieving the 2015 or similar goals in a sustainable fashion that also integrates environmental concerns.

Other donor planning adds to the range of processes underway in many countries. In some countries the UN is attempting to co-ordinate its assistance through the UN Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF), and in many cases has supported the development of long-term national strategies; other Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) such as the Asia Development Bank (ADB), support other planning process, in Cambodia for instance, the ADB has supported the 5-year plan, while the World Bank has been demanding a 3-year PRSP, with both MDBs causing confusion and overburdening the government.

According to the World Bank and IMF the PRSP is based on six core principles:

They should be results oriented, with targets for poverty reduction that are tangible and monitorable

It should be comprehensive, integrating macroeconomic, structural, sectoral and social elements

It should be ‘country driven’ representing the consensus in a country on what steps should be taken

It should be participatory; all stakeholders should participate in its formulation and implementation

It is based on partnerships between government and other actors

It is long term; focusing on reforming institutions and building capacity as well as short term goals5

partly derived from the World Bank Comprehensive Development Framework (CDF)6. The stated intention of this framework is to balance economic and human development, the core principles being: the development of a long-term vision and strategy; enhanced country ownership of goals and actions; more strategic partnership amongst stakeholders, and accountability for development results. In late 1999, the IMF and WB agreed the PRSP approach, and key principles:

"The Committee emphasised that the strategies set out in the new Poverty Papers should be country-driven, be developed transparently with broad participation of elected institutions, stakeholders including civil society, key donors and regional development

5 These six core principles are taken from the World Bank ‘Overview of PRSPs’ www.worldbank.org/poverty/strategies/overview.htm#core_principles

6 Developed by the World Bank President, Jim Wolfensohn in early 1999. Currently piloted in West Bank and Gaza, and 11 countries: Bolivia, Cote d’Ivoire, the Dominican Republic, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kyrgyz Republic, Morocco, Romania, Uganda and Vietnam.

6


banks, and have a clear link with the agreed international development goals - principles that are embedded in the Comprehensive Development Framework."7

Governments are supposed to prepare a national Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS) of some form, for instance, in Uganda, their strategy, which was developed before the PRSP process was agreed, is called the Poverty Eradication Action Plan, other governments have other names for their plans and processes. The PRS is supposed to form the basis of the PRSP, although in many cases the PRS is submitted as the PRSP.

Given that it takes time to develop a PRSP, with accompanying Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF), the IMF/World Bank agreed that countries could submit an Interim PRSP in order to allow IFI assistance to continue, or interim HIPC debt relief to be provided. The Interim PRSP was intended to be a brief document, mainly setting out a ‘road-map’ of a process to reach a full PRSP, including necessary participatory processes. Participation in the development of the Interim PRSP was not an IFI condition. In practice, most Interim PRSPs have become substantial documents, although of varying quality, and with limited participation.

IMF and World Bank staff, through a Joint Staff Assessment (JSA)8 review the Interim PRSP or the full PRSP, and provide advice to the Boards of the IMF and World Bank as to whether the strategy provides a credible basis for concessional assistance from the IMF and World Bank, as well as feedback to the country on the content of the strategy.

Endorsement of the Interim PRSP is a basis for HIPC countries to receive interim debt relief, and for on-going IMF and World Bank assistance to be provided. This endorsement is known as Decision Point. Following this, foror HIPC countries, the endorsement of the full PRSP and one year’s (?) successful implementation, allows countries to reach Completion Point whenin HIPC whereby debt relief is irrevocably provided.

Concerns over the new PRSP approach

There are a number of concerns being expressed by critics about the new PRSP approach, some of which are listed below:

It has been a donor led process from its inception. The concern with national ownership and participation still largely comes from the donors, not the governments themselves.

Many feel that this is no real change from the previous Structural Adjustment approach and is more an attempt to coat those policies in a more human façade9

There are concerns over whether governments are really in the driving seat given that PRSPs require ‘endorsement’ from the boards of the WB and IMF

Also there is a concern that given the substantial influence IFIs and donors continue to have over decisions made by poor countries, PRSPs offer little more than a chance to pass the responsibility and the blame for failure to governments.

There is also the problem that there is not a clear link in many cases between the PRSP process and existing processes of national planning. The links are often cosmetic and duplication of effort is a genuine concern.

7 World Bank Development Committee Communiqué, September 27th, 1999.

8 All JSAs are published, and are available on the IMF and WB websites together with a number of other country documents.

9 This fear is increasingly being validated as full PRSPs are beginning to be completed. For all PRSPs there has been minimal change in terms of the macro-economic policy core, which continues to mirror the PRGF arrangement held with the IMF.

7


Lastly there is a concern that the short/ medium term cycle of PRSPs undermines commitment to longer term planning and especially the development of National Sustainable Development Plans that mean that longer-term environmental concerns are being avoided.

Policy advice and lending from the IMF and World Bank are supposed to be derived from the country owned PRSP. This alters the design of IMF and World Bank support.

IMF support

Policy advice and lending from the IMF and World Bank are supposed to be derived from the country owned PRSP. This alters the design of IMF and World Bank support. The IMF renamed its concessional lending facility, from the Enhanced Structural Adjustment Facility (ESAF), to the Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility (PRGF). The PRGF has seven ‘key features’:

Broad participation and greater ownership

Embedding the PRGF in the overall strategy for growth and poverty reduction

Budgets that are more pro-poor and pro-growth

Ensuring appropriate flexibility in fiscal targets

More selective structural conditionality

Emphasis on measures to improve public resource management/accountability

Social impact analysis of major macroeconomic adjustments and structural reforms10

Loans under the PRGF are for three years, and carry an annual interest rate of 0.5 percent, with repayments made semi-annually, beginning five-and-a-half years and ending 10 years after the disbursement

The IMF is currently carrying out a review of the 35 PRGFs in place to date. Independent assessments have shown that although there has been some progress in areas such as streamlining conditionality (reducing the number of conditions attached to PRGFs) the overall core of macroeconomic prescriptions remain unchanged. There has been virtually no entertaining of alternatives or choices in terms of macro-economic policy in the PRGFs to date11 The fact that most PRGFs have now been negotiated in advance of full PRSPs does not help this, and rather than following the PRSP, the opposite seems to be more the norm with the PRSP macro-economics policy in most cases mirroring the PRGF.The IMF is committed, for instance, to supporting:

broad participation and ownership;

embedding the PRGF in the overall strategy for growth and poverty reduction;

budgets that are more pro-poor and pro-growth;

ensuring appropriate flexibility in fiscal targets;

more selective structural conditionality;

emphasis on measures to improve public resource management and social impact analysis of major macroeconomic adjustments and structural reforms.

Loans under the PRGF are for three years, and carry an annual interest rate of 0.5 percent, with repayments made semi-annually, beginning five-and-a-half years and ending 10 years after the disbursement

10 'IMF Lending to Poor Countries—How does the PRGF differ from the ESAF?' IMF, April 2000

11 ‘PRGF Stocktaking Exercise on behalf of DFID’ Adam, C and Bevan, D Department of Economics Oxford University October 2001

8


World Bank support:

The World Bank will continue to define its assistance in the Country Assistance Strategy (CAS), which is intended to be a medium-term ‘business plan’ for the World Bank, and be derived from the PRSP. The World Bank will continue to provide Structural Adjustment (SAL), Sector Adjustment Loans (SECAL) and project loans; however the World Bank is presently developing guidelines for Poverty Reduction Support Credits (PRSCs) – which could become a major route for increased adjustment lending, and which have already been developed for Burkina Faso, have already been provided PRSCs to Uganda and Vietnam. These loans are provided from the International Development Association (IDA – of the World Bank), and are provided with no interest, with a small service charge, a grace period of ten years, and then repaid over forty years. As such, almost 70% of these loans are, in effect, a grant.

The institution is also revising its Operational Directive on Adjustment Lending and revising it into an Operational Policy/Bank Procedure (OP/BP) format, and will consult with civil society on these changes. Lessons from current PRSCs will feed into the new OP. According to the draft Guidelines on PRSCs12, the PRSC would be presented to the Board of the World Bank “simultaneously with or shortly after the PRSP/I-PRSP, JSA and CAS.”

Opportunities and challenges for civil society created by PRSPs

The agreement of the IMF and WB to provide assistance through a PRSP offers numerous opportunities for Oxfam and other civil society organisations NGO to influence policy-making at the national level and to strengthen the civil society networks, However, at the same time it also time that presents real challenges for them to be proactive. It also means running the risk s of getting engaged with nothing else than rhetoric. It is up to Oxfam and its partners to evaluate the field of opportunities and maximise their impact.

Content: Increased poverty focus

Firstly it provides the PRSP provides a framework to prioritise poverty reduction in the policy of all all low-income countries. In government, but also IFI, and donor, policy and programming – and in all areas, from setting poverty reduction targets, to macro-economic and structural reform, the issue of pro-poor growth and redistribution, budgets, gender equity, to social sector provision, agriculture, industry, poverty monitoring and governance.

The PRSP also requires the development of greater efficiency, transparency and accountability in public expenditure management (PEM).an MTEF - essentially a three year rolling budget. The focus is on targeted and costed policies, and as such on implementation and measurable impact. Prioritisation of the budget, public spending and monitoring, and efficiency of spending are all important areas highlighted in the PRSP approach.

As such the PRSPThis offers Oxfam and other NGOs major opportunities to influence policy and practice at local, national and international levels, both at the formulation and the implementation stages.

Process: Increased participation

It is a requirement of the PRSP process that the strategy is drawn up by Government together with a broad range of national stakeholders including civil society. This obviously offers the potential for the further development of institutional obligations towards increased civil society participation. While this process of change is fraught with problems, it provides substantially improved access for civil society to policymaking and implementation. The PRSP process potentially offers particular opportunities and challenges for marginalised groups, including women and ethnic minorities, who have

12 ‘Interim Guidelines for Poverty Reduction Support Credits’, World Bank, April 10th 2001 http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/html/eswwebsite.nsf/PRSC/Guidelines+PRSC

9


historically been left out of the policy making process. There is a need to make the most of this opportunity to maximise the amount of civil society input to the policy process in these countries, to get the more marginalised voices at the table, and to institutionalise this involvement so that it becomes the norm in all future policy debates.

The following sections look in further detail at these opportunities and challenges. The first section looks at participation, and the following two sections look at influencing policy formulation and policy implementation.

10


Section two. Participation by Civil Society in Policy Monitoring and Implementation

Participation

Oxfam’s view is that poor women and men have a ‘right to be heard’ and that ‘voice poverty’, the denial of people’s right to influence the decisions that affect their lives, and the lack of accountability of decision-makers, are central causes of impoverishment and suffering in the world. We have three central concerns:

Where people living in poverty are systematically excluded from institutions, decision-making processes, and resource allocation decisions, they are less likely to benefit from development investments.

Systematic denial of people’s right to participate erodes the accountability and effectiveness of organisations, institutions, companies, and governments, making these much more prone to poor decision-making, and the corruption, malpractice and malfeasance that exacerbate poverty.

The exclusion of women and marginalised groups from policy making leads to an imbalanced perspective on development priorities, and to exclusion from the benefits of development for significant sectors of the population.

The World Bank also highlights ‘voicelessness and powerlessness’ as one of the four main dimensions of poverty, as defined by the poor themselves:

‘those materially deprived feel acutely their lack of voice, power and independence. This helplessness subjects them to rudeness, humiliation, shame, inhumane treatment, and exploitation at the hands of the institutions of state and society’13

This lack of voice can only be countered by empowering the poor women and men to participate and become involved in influencing the structures and institutions that have power over them.

The World Bank defines participation as

“The process through which stakeholders influence and share control over priority setting, policy-making, resource allocations and access to public goods and services.”14

It also notes that PRSPs should:

“Be developed transparently with broad participation of elected institutions, stakeholders including civil society, key donors and regional development banks” 15 Development Committee Communiqué, September 27th, 1999).

13 World Bank World Development Report 2000-2001: Attacking Poverty.

14 ‘Organising Participatory Processes in the PRSP’, S.Tikare, D.Youssef, P.Donnelly-Roark, P.Shah, World Bank, April 2001

15 Development Committee Communiqué, World Bank September 27th , 1999. Both these definitions can be used as tools to challenge the Bank/ IMF and Governments when participation does not achieve these levels (i.e. most cases to date).

11


Participation, Gender and Diversity

It is often assumed within the official literature that Civil Society is homogenous and naturally in agreement. This idea that Civil Society naturally has ‘one voice’ has rightly been criticised by a number of commentators, especially those who are examining the process from a gender perspective: ‘male dominated NGOs, trade unions or professional associations are unlikely to prioritise the gender interests of poor women. Instead it is likely that “speaking with a single voice” would mean subordinating women’s gender interests to mens’16.

Oxfam and other CSO groups have a responsibility to do their utmost to ensure the participation of women and marginalised groups in the PRSP processeses. There needs to be a constant awareness of the particular constraints faced by these actors in getting involved and strategies developed to overcome these. Often these groups face particular barriers, e.g. lack of resources, lack of time, lower levels of economic literacy and unequal power relations.

Lastly, in assessing the level of participation, there needs to be a constant awareness of the importance of involving women and marginalised groups in policy debate. The following section gives suggestions on concrete ways in which participation can be assessed.

Assessing Levels of participation

In influencing PRSP processes, the aim is to maximise the level of participation, particularly by groups that are most often excluded from policy formulation. There are often significant differences as to what different stakeholders mean by participation, and it is important that Civil Society Organisations are clear on what level of participation they expect and also that they assess what level actually is the case.

It is essential that Civil Society Organisations have the tools to give a comprehensive and critical assessment itself of how participatory the process has been. This is particularly true given that the Guidelines for the Joint Staff Assessment currently do not require IMF/WB staff to assess the quality of the participatory process in producing a PRSP, only to describe it.

The following sections outline first the four levels of participation, and then go on to look at specific criteria that need to be fulfilled if we are to reach the higher levels of participation during PRSP processes. Both can be used as resources when calling for greater participation or giving an assessment of how good participatory processes should be.

Varying levels or intensities of participation in policy and practice can be described in the following way17:

Information sharing:

A basic requirement for participation and increased transparency, but limited in many contexts – from access to information regarding a World Bank loan to government budget analysis. A key issue is when access to information is given – in the policy formulation stage? As access to a draft? Or after the event? Another question is whether the information is accessible, for instance, a budget that is over 1,000 pages long will be hard for civil society groups to access. If those in power are serious about sharing information, then it should be accessible to an informed reader, in relevant languages, and with clear summaries.

16 ‘Engaging with the World Bank and the IMF: a report for the Gender and Development Network’ Terry, Geraldine 2001

17 ‘Participation in Poverty Reduction Strategies: A synthesis of experience with participatory approaches to policy design, implementation and monitoring’, R McGee and A Norton IDS Working Paper 109, 2000.

12


Consultation:

The next level up, whereby those in power ask for views. The key issue with regards to consultation, and the difference between it and full participation, is that generally there is no obligation to listen to the views of others or to incorporate those views. Consultation can merely mean ‘consult and ignore’, and is often used to legitimate the actions of the powerful. Unless consultation is meaningful, it can be a waste of the scarce resources of civil society organisations, and an additional burden on poor women and men in balancing their productive and household roles. Another problem is whether those consulted, CSNGOs or Parliamentarians, are adequately representing the views of those they work with, or represent. Specific methodologies: Participatory Poverty Assessments; Surveys and Public fora are required to ensure that the voices of women and marginalised groups are adequately represented.

Joint decision-making:

Whereby those consulted have some rights with regards to decision-making. In national policy making this is extremely rare, and where it takes place, is likely to be an ill-defined process. As clearly joint decision-making is related to power, donor stakeholders frequently have substantial power with regards to government decision-making, and thus can be involved in joint decision-making. For civil society organisations and particularly for women and marginalised groups, this is much more difficult, but strong civil society advocacy and campaign platforms, or close relations with Parliaments can help considerably to increase the voice of these groups (civil society) in decision-making. The creation of government sector working groups, an overall poverty reduction working group, women’s caucuses etc. are structures where civil society should be present, and where joint decision-making can develop.

Empowerment- initiation and control by stakeholders:

In a sense, an ultimate objective with regards to poor women and men’s influence over initiatives, but within the Poverty Reduction Strategy process, very rare, since the whole process is led by government. There are unlikely to be policy initiatives fully initiated and controlled by Civil Society, although it is possible, for example an organised campaign for abolishing cost recovery in health could well have an impact. Overall this level of participation is more likely to occur in terms of Civil Society monitoring of policy implementation. Developing independent monitoring initiatives gives Civil Society the chance to really take control over the process. However, strong and well-founded civil society initiatives, for instance to push for a free basic health care package, could be advanced at the time when civil society has some leverage, for instance when endorsement of the PRSP is required. It should be remembered, as some commentators have noted, that the right to a voice is not the same as a vote. In most countries, there are democratic processes whereby people are represented through an electoral process, where the executive is held accountable by the legislature, as such, participatory processes should not undermine legitimate political mechanisms. Similarly, women’s groups have succeeded in influencing policy by establishing independent monitoring of the gender impact of specific policies.

13


18Below is a checklist19 that contains some issues that should be addressed within any participatory process20 . It provides a basic resource to assess participation in policy formulation, implementation and monitoring. Given that all processes will be context specific, it will be important to look beyond this list to issues that may be relevant in a particular national context.

Expectations: Ensure that stakeholder expectations are clearly defined and reconciled, that level of participation is clear, and that timetables for decision-making are transparent.

Appropriate time frame: ensure that the process has an appropriate time frame to ensure adequate participation.

Transparency: ensure different stages of policy development, including decision making, implementation and monitoring are visible to stakeholders.

Access to information: ensure that stakeholders have access to timely and adequate information in a form that is relevant and understandable (language, content), and which allows proper time for preparation of views. Within national processes, ensure use of media for dissemination of issues. Ensure access to alternative views and analysis.

Meaningful capacity for engagement: ensure that civil society has the capacity, resources and support required to ensure that it can engage in an informed and constructive constrictive (I think Tony means constructive) way in participatory processes. Participation must be realistically viewed as a costly and time-consuming process.

Meaningful capacity for choice: ensure that participants are presented with options, are able to discuss the impacts and trade offs between various choices, and have the opportunity to express preferences. Use ‘independent facilitators/advisors’ where relevant to promote more equal discussion of issues. Promote capacity building of Civil Society to develop alternatives.

Comprehensive: ensure that all stakeholders have at least the opportunity to participate throughout, with specialist groups involved at relevant stages. However, care should be taken to ensure targeted involvement that will maximise Civil Society input and minimise chances of ‘participation fatigue’.

Accountability: ensure that the process is procedurally and periodically answerable to different groups, and by who; that inputs are recorded, decisions on whether inputs have been taken on board are made explicit, including broad rationale for final decisions.

Who participates? Ensure process of selecting participants is based on a transparent rationale, rather than individual preferences, and ensure that marginalized groups – the poor, women, remote groups (unable to access the capital easily), ethnic minorities, children are represented. Selection of participants should be

18 From Oxfam experience and numerous sources: ‘Participation in Poverty Reduction Strategies: A synthesis of experience with participatory approaches to policy design, implementation and monitoring’, R McGee and A Norton IDS Working Paper 109, 2000 (which pulls together many sources and is available on the net- see annex two for links); Uganda Debt Network, Malawi Economic Justice Network, Tanzania Coalition on Debt and Development, Maarifa/Tanzania Education Network, NGO Forum in Cambodia, ASONOG in Honduras, CCER in Nicaragua, and Jubilee 2000 in Bolivia.

19 From Oxfam experience and numerous sources: McGee/Norton (which pulls together many sources); Uganda Debt Network, Malawi Economic Justice Network, Tanzania Coalition on Debt and Development, Maarifa/Tanzania Education Network, NGO Forum in Cambodia, ASONOG in Honduras, CCER in Nicaragua, and Jubilee 2000 in Bolivia.

20 Given that all processes will be context specific, it will be important to look beyond this list to issues that may be relevant in a particular national context. However, these give a basic starting point for reference.

14


participatory. Because of their importance, outreach and influence, religious groups (e.g. Churches) should particularly be involved.

Recognising Diversity There is a mistaken perception that Civil Society will or can speak with ‘one voice’. This threatens to cut out the voices of marginalized groups such as women. True participation, while always seeking consensus, must recognise the diversity of civil society and civil society opinions.

Institutionalise participation: in the medium and long term, and resulting from mutual trust building, improved participation in policy-making should become an institutionalised and irreversible process with legal obligations. It is then sustainable in the long-term, rather than reliant on good will, or donor pressure etc.

Non-alienation: ensure that participation is designed in an inclusive, non-threatening and meaningful way. This can often mean organising processes where government is absent and where views etc. are fed back to government in other fora.

Economic literacy: of NGOs and of CSO will be crucial to understand the macro-economic framework for PRSPs, and will be fundamental for developing a proactive engagement in policy-making. It will help also to build a common language for engaging into a substantive dialogue with other sectors in society.

Experience to Date

Currently participation in PRSPs has generally ranged between mixed and poor, and Civil Society Organisations around the world have raised this as a major issue21 . This is due to a number of reasons.

Firstly the time frame, and in HIPC countries, the carrot of debt relief, has meant that many countries have gone through the process extremely quickly. This is partly influenced by the nature of existing reforms and policy-making approaches; where governments believe that substantial progress has been made previously then they have felt able to move forward quickly.

Secondly, contrary to the initial guidance given by the IMF and World Bank on the nature of Interim PRSPs, numerous governments have developed substantial interim documents. Given that IPRSPs did not require participation, the end result in some countries has been that substantial policy-making has been undertaken with no participation at all, and the opportunities to modify the IPRSP and develop the full PRSP have now become severely constrained in many countries.

Thirdly, many civil society organisations have been ill prepared for strong engagement in the development of PRSPs; in many countries, Parliaments have also played a marginal role.

Lastly these above reasons are further compounded for women’s groups and those civil society organisations concerned with gender. They have found it particularly difficult to be involved in the PRSP formulation processes, and the PRSPs currently completed a very poor in terms of addressing gender in policy planning and formulation22 .

Despite these problems, the PRSP still represents an opportunity for policy influence by civil society, however small. Civil society should commit to doing its utmost to exploit this opportunity whilst continuing to push for greater participation and involvement at all times.

The following section looks at how to maximise the use made of this opportunity to influence policy formulation and implementation.

21 See for example ‘Ignoring the Experts’ Christian Aid October 2001 (available on the internet- see links in annex two)

22 ‘Gender in PRSP’s: A Stocktaking’ World Bank PREM August 9th 2001

15


16


Section three. Influencing the Content of Policy

The PRSP process offers an unprecedented23 opportunity for Civil Society to influence the policy process and to push for policies that are pro-poor.

The policy process (formulation and implementation) is a complex and most importantly ‘intensely political matter’24. It involves many competing interests vying for the distribution of scarce resources. This point seems obvious, but instead the tendency in many official documents is to see the process as a far more rational and apolitical one where the most rational policy choices make themselves evident through open debate and dialogue. Although this may well be the ideal to which we all aim, it is very important when seeking to influence policy to have a more realistic view of the way the policy process works.

In terms of formulation, this means that it is only by giving a realistic appraisal of the different interests and power being exercised in the process of drawing up policy that we can maximise the influence we can have over its content.

Civil Society, and particularly marginalized interests such as women or the poor have traditionally had minimal access to the policy ‘circle’25 and as such minimal power in the formulation of policy. The development of PRSPs in low-income countries are an opportunity to begin to address this imbalance and institutionalise participation of Civil Society in the development of national policy-making and implementation, and there is a range of understanding around what makes for good participation and how this is judged (see above).

However, while creating an environment for participation is one thing, what civil society says is another. The challenge for civil society is to enter the debate not just with criticisms, but with proposals too. Developing proposals requires consultation within civil society, coupled with research and analysis if necessary. Taking proposals forward requires an advocacy strategy to maximise the impact of proposals and to undertake all measures to ensure they are adopted. Ultimately the development of a national development plan, or a poverty reduction strategy, is a political process. Aside from political action, civil society can help to influence the political debate by mobilising public campaigns – to show to political representatives of the people that there is genuine public concern around public policy-making.

In this section there is a discussion of the need to generate genuine discussion over genuine policy choices, followed by a discussion of how policy content can be influenced to reflect concerns around gender and diversity. The rest of the section is then made up of a series of tips and suggestions on how to influence policy content.

Influencing policy content: promoting policy choices

National policy in low-income countries has in the past rarely been openly debated, and is often very much the product of the preferences and priorities of the major donors. The PRSP process offers the potential to change this and to begin to generate genuine discussion over genuine policy choices. Central to this is calling on the major donors and country governments to carry out assessments of the policy options available and their potential impact on poverty.

23 The opportunity is indeed unprecedented, but nevertheless a very long way from ideal.

24 ‘Governance, Administration and Development: Making the State Work’ Turner, Mark and Hulme, David 1997 London Macmillan.

25 Ibid.

17


In recent years the bank and the fund have come under increasing pressure to agree to carry out Poverty and Social Impact Assessments (PSIA): these are assessments of the social and poverty impacts of policy reforms they are proposing.

These assessments can be backward looking (ex post) where they assess the impact of previous reforms, and also importantly they can and should be forward looking (ex ante) where they examine the possible impact on poverty of reforms that are being proposed. They can be carried out by the donor directly, or by governments and/ or civil society with donor support. The important point is that any major policy reform should be openly debated and more than one option entertained.

The commitment to carrying out and supporting PSIA by the World Bank and IMF can be used when advocating around particular policy reforms in your country. They have committed to carrying these out and as such they can be asked when and how they intend to do them and how they will involve all stakeholders26.

In addition there is a range of other studies that the Bank and Fund already carry out when assessing a country and devising policy prescriptions. They have a number of models which they use both at a macro-economic and a sectoral level. A forthcoming paper by the Bretton Woods Project will detail this process and the entry points for advocacy. The overall point is that if you can influence the content of official studies you are more likely to have an impact, whether through influencing the terms of reference, who carries out the study and in what ways.

Although insider strategies such as this are very useful, there is also always a place for good quality independent research to influence policy debates and generate policy choice. Civil society has a pivotal role in generating such research. Tips on doing this are contained in the section below.

Influencing policy content: gender and diversity.

Gender and diversity are very rarely discussed during the process of designing and choosing policies. As a result very few policies that governments seek to introduce make any attempt to address issues of gender. Government policies are often assumed to affect everyone more or less equally: to serve the ‘public interest’ and the needs of the ‘general person’. In particular there is often no particular mention of women, but no particular mention of men either. This is often described as being ‘gender neutral’. However, many have pointed out that this gender neutrality is in fact in most cases more like gender blindness.

Government policies are not neutral, but instead reflect the values of a country and its policy makers. As such, the way most policies are formulated ‘usually ignores the different, socially determined roles, responsibilities and capabilities of men and women. These differences are usually structured in such a way as to leave women in an unequal position in relation to men in their community, with less economic, social and political power’27.

Civil society can play a key role in raising these issues of gender blindness in the formulation of policy. This can involve many actions, but are essentially about ensuring gender issues are integrated into all national policies rather than simply regarding women as a special interest group.

26 For commitments from the Bank and the Fund see ‘Poverty Reduction Papers: Progress in Implementation’ Development Committee Communique April 18th 2001 (http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/DCS/devcom.nsf/(documentsattachmentsweb)/April2001EnglishDC20010010/$FILE/DC2001-0010(E)-PRSP.pdf). Also at the recent PRSP review in Washington in January 2002 the president of the World Bank, James Wolfenson told CSO representatives that Poverty and Social Impact Assessments would be mainstreamed in three to six months.

27 Elson, Diane ‘Gender Budget Initiative: Background papers’ Commonwealth Secretariat 2001

18

http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/DCS/devcom.nsf/(documentsattachmentsweb)/April2001EnglishDC20010010/$FILE/DC2001-0010(E)-PRSP.pdf

http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/DCS/devcom.nsf/(documentsattachmentsweb)/April2001EnglishDC20010010/$FILE/DC2001-0010(E)-PRSP.pdf


A gender-aware policy appraisal involves the development of an analysis which reflects an understanding of a policy’s gender implications by:

Identifying implicit and explicit gender issues

Identifying the corresponding resource allocations

Assessing whether the policy will continue or change existing inequalities between men and women and in what ways.

For example, in Mali Oxfam GB works with three NGOs (ADESAH, GARI and TASSAGHT) alongside the Government’s Programme Decennal de Development de l’Education (PRODEC) (this is the organisation responsible for the reform of the educational system in Mali in the context of decentralisation). The work is specifically oriented at Gao, in the North of Mali (where the majority of people are nomads and where the education statistics are among the worst in the world). Most of their work is advocacy to increase girls education and change perceptions of policy makers and communities on girls rights to education. One example is advocacy to see government policy implemented to prevent very young marriages that are a major obstacle to girl’s education.

How to maximise policy influence

Focus

There are in any policy debate many different issues to be discussed, and especially in a PRSP which focuses on plans for the whole country. When faced with influencing an entire national plan, it is easy to try to do too much. It is vital that civil society groups focus down on areas that they believe have the most impact on the poor, or on areas where they have the most expertise. Within any national or local coalition of civil society, different actors can lead on different issues depending on their strengths and weaknesses. Prioritisation is about picking 3-5 key issues and doing them well. This means ignoring other issues, and making tough choices.

Firstly it is important to review the overall poverty reduction strategy with regards to the impact of proposed strategies on the poor. Secondly, any strategy will be built on sectoral strategies e.g. in education or roads, specialist civil society groups can scrutinise existing sector strategies to review pro-poor measures and so on. Thirdly it is equally important to examine the prioritisation within the strategy: do the sectoral and overall priorities identified, including budget allocations look acceptable to civil society?

This kind of process will allow the identification and prioritisation of key issues. You should then clarify why advocacy is necessary and appropriate for the issues.

Research

All too often Civil Society is accused of simply criticising without giving good arguments or alternatives. This undermines the credibility of Civil Society, and the extent to which its views are heeded. Although strong arguments do not guarantee success, nevertheless you have to know what you are talking about if you are to successfully influence policy. As such central to this is targeted research on the policy areas you are seeking to influence.

Identify the purpose of the research, i.e. to change policy and implementation.

Research done by civil society for advocacy is not the same as academic research. It needs to be credible, but it should be research that helps you achieve your advocacy objectives, and communicate your arguments well.

19


However, this does not mean that the research cannot involve Academics from the country. Academia is very much part of Civil Society. Where you can identify academics or researchers working in your country who are sympathetic to your cause they can prove an invaluable resource.

Clarify how the information will be obtained. Use existing work where possible.

Ensure that research is informed by a strong analysis of gender and social relations. How are women and men affected differently? What about age, ethnicity and other aspects of social identity? Make every attempt to generate disaggregate information that establishes the specific impacts on women and marginalised groups.

The research needs to identify how the poor could lose through proposed or existing reforms or policy measures, and how this situation could be changed by introducing alternative measures. Wherever possible these need to be costed and the economic implications addressed.

Linking micro experience of civil society with macro policies and issues, and including interviews with poor women and men concerning reform measures or existing circumstances will enhance the strength of research. Clearly showing how policy affects the poor, and highlighting how poor women and men feel about the effects of certain policies provides an extremely convincing argument that everyone can understand. Include quotations from the poor and case studies to further underline your points.

Key Messages

Civil society organisations have substantial experience in opposing reforms and polices, frequently in political and economic climates where there has been little room to promote alternatives. With growing openings for increased participation, there is now more room to propose alternatives. This requires developing different kinds of messages than in the past.

Establish clear and simple messages stating:

What is good for poor women and men in current government action and proposed reforms

What may be harmful for poor women and men, in particular from your experience and analysis (this is where research is critical).

What alternative measures could be implemented instead, and why these would benefit the target populations.

It is important where possible to simplify complex messages. The message should be framed in a compelling way, to be convincing and win over policy makers, but also to get the widest possible public support.

Briefings

Preparing written briefings on issues - short, clear and concise, with a few key recommendations are vital (4 recommendations are better than 10). Briefings are an important tool in influencing government officials, politicians, media etc. Again, with many government officials or advisors, one of the most useful inputs are practical proposals for change rather than criticism alone. Be critical, but be constructive too, and give praise where it is due.

Targets

For each objective, identify the targets: the decision-making institutions or bodies concerning the policy changes or implementation sought. This could include the decision-making body where power lies, but also other actors that could influence the decision-

20


maker. A useful approach is what is known as an ‘insider/outsider’ strategy, whereby civil society organisations develop close contacts inside the target in order to influence them, but retain a tougher external or public position in meetings, in the media and in campaigning. When combining advocacy with strong campaigning, this approach is essential, but again, care is needed if relationships become too close – you need to always keep in mind your overall objectives and purpose.

In most countries undertaking PRSPs, the Ministry of Finance has generally taken over management of the process, and thus poverty reduction has gained a higher profile and higher importance within government (rather than being seen as some add-on in the Ministry of Social Affairs for example). Clearly officials in the Ministry of Finance will become key targets, but other line ministries are important too, the Cabinet, the President and his/her office, key Parliamentary committees or other similar structures in the legislature and lastly key donors. With increased decentralisation, district or municipal authorities often become more powerful and are therefore also targets.

Research the decision-making processes in the targets, and identify individuals within them.

Be aware of their constraints and problems, and the pressures on them from others.

Be clear where the power lies and who has influence (e.g. it may be more effective to target the advisers rather than a minister); be aware of conflicts between actors or ministries. Assess whether you are likely to be effective working internally through direct advocacy or externally through campaigning and media pressure, or both.

Be prepared to negotiate, be clear about your bottom line.

Who influences the target? In some countries certain Parliamentarians, e.g. Finance Committee, may have influence in the Ministry of Finance. Other targets may be influenced internationally, as well as nationally, e.g. World Bank – it may be useful to ally yourself with civil society groups internationally who are seeking ensure that the World Bank is genuinely pro-poor in its lending and policy advice.

Timing - what external opportunities exist for you to link your messages to? E.g. key meetings, elections, national or international conferences etc.

Know your opponents – in government, amongst donors, in the media.

Know your allies too – in the media, politicians, academics, policy makers. Build relationships, trust and credibility.

Remember both can change; your opponent on one issue could be a key ally on the next; the IFIs can help put more pressure on for a longer consultation period for example, but can also be targets in terms of issues such as excessive conditionality or promotion of policies that are harmful to the poor. The thing to remember is ‘no permanent friends and no permanent enemies’.

Lobbying: Attending Meetings

Meetings are an important part of lobbying, but it should be remembered that without other pressure, meetings alone are unlikely to be sufficient to achieve the change you want. Access does not equal influence. Informal meetings are very useful, over a drink or something to eat, they help build relationships and trust, and share ideas while avoiding fixed positions.

Prepare well for meetings, think through persuasive arguments, think through counter-arguments (most of which are predictable), be well briefed (you’ll be more confident and persuasive), aim high, and seek firm commitments to act.

Before a meeting try to confirm the agenda, who will be there, how long the meeting will be etc. Keep your message to only 3 short points, only use one third of the meeting time to present them.

21


Meet the right people, frequently lower level civil servants are the ones working directly on an issue, and could have substantial influence since they brief those higher up. Try also to meet secretaries to ministers, key academics, influential media etc.

Sometimes it may be appropriate to be tough in a meeting, but it is rarely appropriate to be confrontational. Generally engagement is more effective than condemnation.

At the end of the meeting, thank people for their time, summarise what has been agreed and any follow-up. After the meeting, write a letter to confirm what has been agreed, future actions etc.

Review whether you are making progress towards your objectives. Be aware of being co-opted, and of becoming so close that you are unable to be critical.

Large meetings

With increasing ‘participation’, civil society gets invited to numerous meetings. It is important to review whether such a meeting is useful in order to achieve your aims. Many are not useful, and many are used to pretend ‘participation’ or ‘consultation’ took place. If you do decide to go, then speak – sitting quietly serves no one’s interests.

Before such meetings, it is often useful for civil society organisations to prepare positions beforehand, or to pre-meet, and work out who will say what, on what issue. Governments and institutions have the advantage that they are one body with a clear hierarchy and position, in order to deal with them, civil society organisations need to co-ordinate well together. If there are strong differences between various civil society positions, be aware that ‘divide and rule’ is an age-old tactic. Recognise and accept differences in opinion as early as possible, and focus on common ground.

Building Effective Coalitions/Alliances

One of the key strengths of civil society is also its weakness. This is its diversity. All too frequently civil society undermines itself through lack of co-operation. Sometimes civil society groups can be more concerned with their own profile, or fundraising efforts, than in working together for policy change. However, the fact remains that with regards to influencing national or local strategies, civil society can achieve far more together than separately. Forming a coalition or alliance is vital, whether it be a national alliance to address the PRSP or an alliance on Land Reform or Education.

Think as widely as possible: it may be possible to form alliances with unlikely groups. Think of different sector issues, regional issues and so on. Consider the full range of Civil Society; for example Churches, Unions, women’s organisations, Academia, Professional Associations as well as NGO’s

Develop consensus over aims and objectives. Establish whose agenda you are working to; and work through differences of emphasis or tone before implementation. Remember at all times to focus and prioritise. You can only achieve results if you focus on a small number of objectives.

Agree bottom line objectives; don’t expect to agree on everything but instead aim for consensus on one or two issues.

Decision-making: make sure there are clear decision-making, consultation and information sharing mechanisms amongst the stakeholders.

Identify different roles. Ensure that everyone knows what is expected of them. Decide who takes responsibility for setting the direction of the advocacy campaign, who speaks for the alliance, and how members are delegated responsibility for taking decisions and undertaking different aspects of the work throughout the process.

22


Think about how beneficiaries are involved/informed, if not directly part of the alliance/coalition. Be aware of potential empowerment, and risk of dis-empowerment.

Do not let gender slip off the agenda in the interests of what is commonly predominantly male collaboration. Make sure women’s views are fed into all stages of the process and ensure that women participate directly in consultations.

At the first meetings ensure as broad a representation as possible, but do not be disheartened if the real work is done by a handful at first. As you build your reputation others will become more involved; in the meantime consult them and inform them of all decisions.

Media Strategy

Unless your advocacy has to be carried out behind the scenes use the media as an important ally to achieve your aims. What follows are a few tips on working with the media.

Who are you trying to influence?

Where do they get their information from?

Be familiar with the media.

How can you get your message carried by the media?

Develop a relationship with key journalists; find out what they are interested in, what they will cover.

In many countries, radio is the main media source for the poor. However, often it is controlled by the state so there is a limit to what news it will cover. Here positive and constructive criticism based on issues is most likely to be successful.

Think globally, international media can put pressure on your government or international institutions and donors.

What do you want to say? - Draw up a press release (see box below).

Timing – Think of when will you have most impact with your media work

23


Writing a Press Release

A press release is extremely useful, but needs to be produced with care. It is more likely to be used by the media if it is clear and easy to read. Obey some simple rules: a press release is essentially a news story, think of the five “W’s”

What is happening,

Who is doing it,

Where it is happening,

When it is happening,

Why it is happening.

The W’s should be in the first few sentences of your press release. It is this first sentence or two that is the key to winning media interest. Always follow up a press release with a meeting or phone call with journalists to further sell your story and to influence the piece they write. One note of caution; be careful with what you say and what is officially on or off the record to ensure you are not misrepresented.

Public Action - Campaigning

Advocacy alone is often not enough. Frequently measures to address the poor require another group in society to lose. For instance, increasing basic health spending could mean reduced spending on tertiary hospitals used by the elite; pro-poor market liberalisation could reduce the power of dominant private sector industries. Where there are vested interests involved and serious obstacles to change, more pressure is required. A strong public campaign on an issue can help push for change in a powerful way, building substantial public support for pro-poor change. Identify activities that will help develop a groundswell of public opinion in favour of your message. Be aware of how a campaign may affect your relationships inside government or institutions when these are the targets of your campaign. A good campaign should:

have a realistic chance of changing policy and changing public attitudes: the target is susceptible to change and may be influenced

have a simple and strong message

be supported by strong evidence

enable the public to have a real and direct influence on the change required, in volumes appropriate to the change required

elicit an emotional response/outrage amongst audiences through clearly demonstrated injustice

be topical and distinctive

have a sense of urgency

be sustainable through a progression of actions and milestones, while being flexible and reactive: focus on actions that the public at large can take such as petitions, demonstrations, lobbying MPs etc.

SWOT Analysis

It is very useful to make an assessment of internal Strengths and Weaknesses, and external Opportunities and Threats

24


Strengths & weaknesses of your organisation and the advocacy alliance:

Is the issue rooted in your experience - direct, or that of counterparts? How relevant and important is it to your programme? Do you have the necessary resources and capacity to influence? Do you have sufficient appropriate information to sustain advocacy work? Are you respected by public opinion and/or decision makers? Are the particular skills of your staff/organisation appropriate and sufficient? Do you have the necessary financial resources?

Opportunities and threats in the external environment:

What are the risks?

What is the likelihood of successful achievement of objectives? Can you identify concrete and realistic changes to propose? How much leverage is there? How fixed are current positions? How will you counter the arguments of your adversaries? Are there particular and sufficient influencing opportunities? Is the issue recognised by decision-makers or public opinion as important? Can the issue be simplified sufficiently to gain necessary public support without compromising the objectives?

Is there a sufficient movement for change? What allies could there be? Can a coalition be formed? Is your networking good? How strong is public opinion? How strong are social organisations that relate to the sector(s) affected by the issue?

Plan of Activities

Draw up timetabled outline of activities required to implement the strategies. Make sure that the component parts interrelate:

Specify who will do what.

Bear in mind the particular opportunities for influencing - e.g. key governmental meetings.

Be realistic about the time-scale. Allow flexibility.

Identify materials that you will use to further the strategy. Think carefully about materials appropriate to the different targets - e.g. press releases or politicians' briefings should be short (one page), pithy, accurate and convincing. Materials must include thoroughly researched information, be well argued and objective.

Identify allies (beyond the coalition) who can be approached at different points in the implementation of the strategy - e.g. individuals within the State apparatus? Researchers?

25


Working on poverty reduction strategies

What does all of this mean for civil society work on poverty reduction strategies or national development plans?

Firstly, as far as Oxfam is concerned, it is vital that poor people and civil society organisations have greater role to play in defining policies and measures that affect poverty. The development of PRSPs in low-income countries are a major opportunity to institutionalise participation in the development of national policy-making and implementation, and there is a range of understanding around what makes for good participation and how this is judged (see above).

Currently participation in PRSPs has generally ranged between mixed and poor. This is due to a number of reasons. Firstly the time-frame, and in HIPC countries, the carrot of debt relief, has meant that many countries have gone through the process extremely quickly. This is partly influenced by the nature of existing reforms and policy-making approaches; where governments believe that substantial progress has been made previously, then they have felt able to move forward quickly.

Secondly, contrary to the initial guidance given by the IMF and World Bank on the nature of Interim PRSPs, numerous governments have developed substantial interim documents. Given that iIPRSPs did not require participation, the end result in some countries has been that substantial policy-making has been undertaken with no participation at all, and the opportunities to modify the IiPRSP and develop the full PRSP have now become severely constrained in many countries.

Thirdly, many civil society organisations have been ill-prepared for strong engagement in the development of PRSPs; in many countries, Parliaments have played a marginal role.

While creating an environment for participation is one thing, what civil society say is another. The challenge for civil society is to enter the debate not just with criticisms, but with proposals too. Developing proposals requires consultation within civil society, coupled with research and analysis if necessary. Taking proposals forward requires an advocacy strategy to maximise the impact of proposals and to undertake all measures to ensure they are adopted. Ultimately the development of a national development plan, or a poverty reduction strategy, is a political process. Aside from political action, civil society can help to influence the political debate by mobilising public campaigns – to show to political representatives of the people that there is genuine public concern around public policy-making.

Below is a checklist on doing advocacy, campaigning and media work.

26


Section four. Monitoring the Implementation of Policy

Implementation; critical for the credibility of the PRSP initiative

Over the next few months, a significant number of countries will be finalising their full PRSPs.

Although it is stressed that these are only the first iteration of ‘living documents’ it remains the case that in these countries the emphasis will now move towards the implementation of the strategies they have developed.

Arguably implementation is the most difficult element of the policy process. Often Governments are happy to talk and even agree to new policy initiatives. Instead it is rather at the stage of actually having to implement new policies and reforms that the process runs the highest risk of not actually happening. New policies are often sidelined and resisted at this stage and as a result are not implemented, or instead are implemented in ways completely opposite to what was intended when the policy was drawn up.

Many actors have dedicated a lot of time and effort to the PRSP formulation processes. It is critical that if the PRSP initiative is to remain credible that these papers are now implemented and not simply left on the shelf.

PRSP implementation; the critical role of monitoring

Quite simply, the only way to know whether or not a policy is being implemented is to monitor whether or not this is the case. Equally monitoring shows us whether or not when implemented the policy in question has actually had an impact on poverty.

As such, viable, accessible and robust monitoring systems are essential if we are to be able to discover whether policies have been and are being implemented. They provide governments with an opportunity to show that their policies are working, and equally provide those who scrutinise policy the ability to see when they are not.

As a result, monitoring is far from being simply a technical activity; instead it is a key part of what is a highly charged political process which involves considerable vested interests, many of whom are keen that the true nature of the situation should be concealed as much as possible.

Unfortunately to date most of the PRSP’s produced have been weak on having concrete strategies towards viable monitoring systems. Where they do exist they are often very elaborate and unrealistic in terms of the resources required to actually carry them out. They are also on the most part based on technical information to be collected by governments themselves rather than based on the engagement of citizens to generate the kind of flexible feedback that actually makes a difference to policy. As such arguably the model being pushed will make greater the divide between states and civil society as well as being inoperable in societies with very low levels of bureaucratic capacity.

Monitoring policy implementation: gender and diversity

In monitoring the implementation of any policy, it is important at this stage not to neglect considerations of gender and diversity. Often it is aspects of policy relating to these

27


issues that are the most prone to ‘evaporation’ where what actually happens is completely unrelated to the actual policy commitments.

The essential question should be whether policy commitments related to gender and diversity have actually been met and in what ways. Of particular relevance is how these commitments have been reflected in the budget process. An example of looking at a budget from a gender perspective is given in the section on budgets below.

Monitoring policy implementation: the role of budgets

The way all policy is translated into actual activities on the ground is by having resources allocated to it within the annual budget of a country. As such the budget is the main vehicle for Civil Society to monitor whether or not a policy is being implemented.

The budget itself is also a process, made up of a number of stages each of which offer opportunities for influence by Civil Society.

Stage one: Budget formulation.

In the two to three months preceding the end of the financial year the Government puts together its budget for the next year. It is during this formulation that decisions are made over the amount of resources to be allocated to programmes and sectors, and as such to what extent policy commitments will actually be honoured.

The budget formulation process is in the vast majority of countries a very secretive one, and hard to access. However, this is beginning to change in a number of countries largely under pressure from the IMF and the World Bank to make the process more accessible and transparent. Pre-budget consultations with Civil Society are becoming more common in a number of countries, which represent limited opportunities to influence. In addition there are always more informal channels, particularly in specific sectors if relationships already exist with Government.

Budget reform processes are also underway in many countries, with the move towards Medium Term Expenditure Frameworks (MTEFs) and Management Information Systems (MIS). The MTEF is a system that tries to move budget formulation more towards being based on activities and outputs rather than simply on line item expenditures. For example instead of teacher training simply having an amount attached it will be based on a certain output (e.g. number of teachers trained). It is based on a three year rolling budget to give a more long-term perspective and to try and improve the link between policy and the budget that is often very weak. Similarly MIS systems involve the standardisation and computerisation of financial information to improve public expenditure management.

Both these reforms are of course very welcome, and make the monitoring of budgets by Civil Society much easier. However, they are far from being implemented in most countries and are subject to the same resistance to reform as any new policies or initiatives. As such it is important to begin the process of monitoring as Civil Society rather than to wait for reforms that can be a long time in coming, and also at the same time to advocate for these reforms to be taken up by Governments.

Again the PRSP offers an opportunity to further open this process, to the extent that it actually represents the costed policy options decided on by stakeholders. In an ideal world these would be comprehensive and based on sound macro-projections and expenditure ceilings agreed by everyone and the budget would simply be a vehicle for implementing the first year’s costings. Of course this is far from being the case in most countries, but where the PRSP does offer costings for implementing agreed policies these are important advocacy tools for influencing budget content. For example if free primary education has been agreed as the policy choice and costed, then Civil Society can call for the correct amount to be allocated in the budget to achieve this.

28


This process will also identify resource gaps, which can be a tool for advocating to development partners for more budget support. For example in the case of Tanzania, the PRSP includes an Education Sector Development Programme (ESDP) that has been costed at US$969m over the three-year period ending in 2004. The Tanzanian Government is meeting just over half of the cost, with an International Development Association loan from the World Bank covering another US$150m. This leaves a financing gap of US$92m per year to be met through donor contributions. At the Dakar Education Conference in 2000, Donors promised that any country with a good plan for education would be given the resources. This is a powerful argument to use with donors to get them to commit more resources to the budget.

As with the policy formulation process, Civil Society is far more likely to be successful if it focuses on a few key policies and pushes hard on these for inclusion in the budget. This has been done in some countries, with a focus on key priority poverty expenditures grouped together in a ‘virtual fund ‘ within the budget28. The government should then guarantee to provide the resources for these expenditures and equally important to provide timely information and figures on each of them as the year progresses. Although not ideal as they can divert attention from the rest of the budget, these mechanisms are good in the interim for building capacity for monitoring by Civil Society and capacity for good budgeting and expenditure management by Government whilst more wider reforms are implemented.

Analysing budgets from a gender perspective

Sharp et al29 make a division of government expenditure into three categories:

1. Specifically targeted expenditures by government departments and authorities to women or men in the community. (eg. Programmes for women with disabilities).

2. Equal opportunity expenditures (eg. Provision of paid parental leave)

3. General expenditures which make goods and services available to the community, and are assessed for their gender impact (for example, agricultural extension- this is often implicitly directed at men by focusing on crops they traditionally grow)

Around 99% of expenditures fall into category three, showing the importance of a gender analysis of mainstream expenditures.

A good example of analysing expenditure for category three is from Australia.

‘The role of the ombudsman’s office is to determine and resolve complaints made by the public. Analysis shows that women access the services of the Ombudsman less than men (around 30% of cases) and this has remained the same during the three years 1995- 1998.

To try to rectify this in the financial year 1998-1999 a number of initiatives will target women…. [expenditures] will be reallocated to new activities such as information presentations about the services of the Ombudsman to be made to target groups of women, highlighting the services that are available.’

Northern Territory Government ‘Women in the Budget 1998-1999’ Budget related paper.

This shows that analysis need not be complex; it is more a process of changing the lens through which we view the budget and mainstream resource allocations, to see it from the point of view of promoting gender equality. See the links section for a number of links to

28 This has most famously been done very successfully in Uganda with the Poverty Action Fund. A similar fund has been proposed in the Honduran PRSP. The fund can also potentially focus on cross cutting expenditures such as those policies within sectors that have a gender component. However, it is important to remember that the aim should always be to eventually monitor the whole budget.

29 ‘Short Changed: Women and Economic Policies’ Sharp, Rhonda and Broomhill, Ray 1998

29


useful resources on gender budgeting.

Stage two: Budget debate and analysis

In the majority of countries once formulated the Budget is subject to debate and approval by the legislature or parliament. This offers the second opportunity for CSO input to the Budget process and therefore the implementation of policy. Unfortunately Budgets are often passed in a hurry with minimal scrutiny for a number of reasons. Often the legislature is dominated by representatives of the ruling party; also representatives in low-income countries rarely have the skill or resources to analyse the budget in a useful way and lastly often very little time is allowed for scrutiny of the budget.

The budget itself is always an enormous and obtuse document that is very difficult to read or analyse. In addition it is often released at the last minute making analysis even more difficult. This is further compounded in countries where decentralisation has reached an advanced stage because then each district or sub-national level then produces its own budget, which is often of a very poor quality and even harder to access or scrutinise.

However, Civil Society can, despite these obstacles, have a key role to play, and what follows are a number of suggestions as to how this can be best done:

Focus: It cannot be stressed enough how important it is that CSOs focus on a few critical areas as this is the key to effective influence.

Working with parliaments- especially with Budget and Finance Committees where they exist, giving them information and analysis to feed into the debate.

Use your allies; academics in particular are very useful at this stage for providing technical assistance.

Keeping it simple: do not be daunted by the size of the budget documents, the key questions are still simple ones and so are the key messages (see box on doing budget analysis)

A lot of potential resources and experience exist around the world on Civil Society involvement in the budget process. See the ‘links’ section at the end for more details.

30


Analysing a Budget: Some Tips

There are two simple questions to be answered in analysing a budget which will give you good analysis:

1) Have allocations to programmes or sectors actually increased since the previous year, and

2) How do they compare to expenditures in other programmes or sectors?

This is easier to do with sectors (e.g. Health) than with programmes (eg. Primary Health Care) as information is often not disaggregated in a budget in such a way as to make this possible. (For example, Primary Health Care could be made up of 40 separate budget lines and would itself be undefined as a budget category).

To calculate real increases or decreases there is a need to deflate the proposed figures to last years prices. To do this the following steps need to be followed:

1. First take the approved figures for last year (not the revised figures as these are unreliable although you can still highlight huge differences between approved and revised where they exist)30.

2. Then take the comparable figure for this year’s proposed figures.

3. Find the agreed average inflation figure for last year (called the ‘deflator’ and available from the World Bank/ IMF and the National Statistics Office in most cases).

4. Reduce the proposed figure for this year to make it comparable in real terms to last year. This will enable you to demonstrate the real change. To do this take the official deflator figure (say it is 30%) and subtract that from the proposed amount. So if for instance the Government is proposing to spend $100 million on education this year, up from $80 million last year but the deflator is 30% then in real terms education spending is $70 million which is actually a decrease31.

Once you have these real figures you can then make comparisons not simply with last year but also with other expenditures. For example it can be useful to do the calculations for social sectors and also ‘accountability agencies’ such as Audit Offices, Human Rights Commissions and Ombudsmen and then compare these to ‘non poverty reducing expenditures’ such as State Residences, Defence and Debt Service.

If data is available at a programme level, you can do the same thing for intra-sectoral expenditures. For example how does the amount spent at the Health Ministry Headquarters compare with the amount spent on Primary Health Care?

These simple calculations can often give you very powerful conclusions and points to make either through Parliament or through the Media. However, make sure you check your figures very carefully and use the same source documents for all of them.

Lastly, always try to make concrete suggestions for alternative allocation of resources that would be more pro-poor.

30 There may be a separation into recurrent and development budgets that mean the figures simply need to be combined. When the amount actually spent (revised figure) differs from the proposed figure this is due to supplementary budgets passed during the year; these need to be monitored also.

31 To do this on a calculator simply type the proposed figure, then minus, then the percentage deflator, and finally the percentage button to give you the real figure. To do this manually deduct the deflator figure from 100% (so if it is 30% this subtracted from 100% is 70%). Turn this into a decimal (so 70% becomes 0.7) and then multiply the proposed figure by this decimal. (so say $100 million x 0.7). This will give you the figure in real terms.

31


Stage three: Monitoring budget implementation

Once it is approved by the legislature, the budget enters the next stage: implementation. As is the case with policy documents in many countries, Budgets are often more or less fictional documents in many situations, and bear very little relation to how the money is actually spent in the end. The reasons for this are manifold and range from barefaced corruption to simple bureaucratic incapacity but the point remains that timely monitoring of whether the money allocated in the budget is actually being spent on what it was intended to be is a crucial way of influencing policy implementation.

In looking at monitoring of budget implementation, it is useful to make a distinction between monitoring inputs and monitoring outputs.

Monitoring Budget Inputs

By monitoring budget inputs, what is meant is monitoring whether or not the actual money has been received as revenue and checking whether it has then left the treasury to go to the relevant ministry and programme. For example, has the money for training nurses left the treasury? Is it with the Ministry of Health, or has it been sent to the different colleges already?

Timely monitoring of this kind of information as the financial year progresses can have a big impact on ensuring the money goes where it should. By asking difficult questions either directly or more desirably through parliament, accountability and the efficient use of resources can be promoted.

Unfortunately, accessing this kind of information, especially in a timely manner is remarkably difficult in most countries. If figures are ever released it is usually years after the event, and they are often also untrustworthy. However, there is a lot of pressure from the World Bank and IMF in this area to try and improve Public Expenditure Management in low-income countries, and the situation has definitely improved in some cases.

Again, if the figures are not directly available, there are other ways to access information and maximise the effectiveness of your input monitoring:

Informal Contacts are very important within Ministries and at a lower level at cost centres such as colleges or district offices

Use Parliament often parliament and parliamentary committees hold more sway and have more chance of eliciting figures from governments.

Work with different Ministries in Government. Often the Ministry of Finance is an ally when line ministries are mis-spending, and equally line ministries can be forthcoming if the Ministry of Finance is not giving them adequate resources. Equally district offices can give you information if they feel they are losing out to central government.

Use Donors and WB/ IMF. These often have a strong interest in Public Expenditure Management and at the same time exercise a lot of leverage over Governments. This will increasingly be the case as many of them move towards direct budget support and sector wide approaches (SWAPS) and away from discrete projects. Increasingly donors are actually putting staff inside ministries and these in particular can be invaluable sources of information. Developing a good relationship with these donors is essential.

Focus, focus, focus! Again it cannot be stressed enough how important it is to prioritise and focus on only a few key expenditures to monitor.

Develop proxies. As described earlier, often the way the budget is drawn up bears no relation to what you may want to monitor. ‘Essential Drugs’ for example may appear as hundreds of separate budget lines under many different titles and cost centres. It is important therefore if no clarity is given in the budget to develop proxies as Civil Society for what you have decided to call ‘Essential Drugs’. The important

32


point here is to be very clear what you decide to include and why from the outset. Again academics and particularly sectoral economists can help you here.

Overall success in monitoring inputs depends enormously (but not entirely) on success at the formulation phase in getting a clear and accessible budget and a commitment to release regular expenditure figures. Again this looks set to improve in the next few years as governments come under considerable pressure from the IFIs in the context of increased social expenditures due to HIPC.

Monitoring Budget Outputs

The output of a particular policy is what it actually produces; the actual activity on the ground whether it be more books in schools, numbers of teachers trained or number of extension visits carried out. Civil Society with its often-considerable outreach into rural areas is uniquely positioned to give a regular and independent assessment of the extent to which planned policies are actually producing planned outputs.

As with inputs, timely monitoring of outputs can result in a powerful set of advocacy messages as the financial year progresses. If civil society can show that a policy is not delivering and why half way through the year or at the beginning of the next this means that the chances of having a positive impact are much greater. For example a Public Expenditure Tracking Survey (PETS) in Uganda in 1995 discovered that only 30% of allocated funds per student was reaching schools. Once this was made public the government took action that led to this figure increasing rapidly to nearly 100% in 199932.

What follows are some tips on monitoring outputs:

There are two comparisons you can make; between the amount allocated this year and the amount so far spent, and between the increase from last year in the budget and the actual increase in outputs. For example, 1. Given the resources transferred this month for teaching and learning materials (TLM), what is the value of the TLM actually received?, and 2. Given the increased allocation to TLM this year as compared to last year, what is the actual increase in TLM experienced in schools? Both with give you powerful conclusions.

Often HIPC money has led to a massive increase in the budget for certain items; this can be a helpful starting point.

Keep your survey tools as simple as possible.

Use the existing outreach of those members of Civil Society involved. The Church and Trade Unions in particular often have a significant outreach that can be drawn on in carrying out a survey.

Having said this, try and keep your sample as statistically robust as possible; draw it as far as possible randomly and from a spread that will cover regional divisions. The more statistically valid your conclusions the more powerful they will be.

In addition however, do develop particular case studies to add further weight to your case. For example if you can say ‘we found that only 20% of books had reached schools nationwide’ and then follow that up with a particular case of a school where books are shared between 10 or more students then this will make the point very powerfully.

Wherever possible, do carry out these surveys during the financial year as this gives more chance for the Government to rectify the situation within that current budget.

Try and focus on the positive and constructive as well as the negative; show how things worked when they did, and make suggestions for how the performance could be improved.

32 ‘Do Budgets really matter?’ Ablo, E and Reinikka, R World Bank 1998

33


Beyond budgets: monitoring outcomes

Beyond the immediate impact or output of a policy lies its longer-term effect on outcomes. The overall targeted outcome is a reduction in poverty, and other targeted outcomes contribute to this. For example an increase in levels of education is generally agreed to contribute to a reduction in poverty. In turn, certain outputs can be generally assumed to contribute to certain outcomes. More books and teachers in schools are likely to lead to improved education levels.

It is certainly the case that in the past 5 years there has been a significant improvement in the measuring of poverty levels and poverty reduction outcomes in low-income countries. PRSPs have added further emphasis to this.33 In addition to the considerable number of household surveys being carried out in many countries, there has also been a growing recognition of the complex nature of poverty and the value of qualitative data. Participatory Poverty Assessments have been carried out in many countries, often together with more quantitative survey data. Oxfam has played a major role in managing and implementing PPA’s in a number of countries34. Civil Society with its outreach and experience can play a key role in monitoring whether government policies are producing the expected outcomes, and if not why not and how they can be changed to ensure they do. There is significant information on carrying out PPAs available (see the links section for further details).

There is also no doubt that the PRSP process will lead to a further expansion in these processes, and will seek to make them more country owned and institutionalised. Each of the PRSP’s completed to date makes reference to the development of poverty monitoring systems (PMS) that will enable countries to keep track of poverty levels from a variety of different perspectives.

There are some concerns over the sustainability of these often quite ambitious (and largely donor supported) PMS, but this does not detract from the major step forward the PRSP seems to be ensuring in monitoring levels of poverty and as such just what impact policies have on poverty reduction.

Civil Society should continue to play a part in measuring outcomes, particularly in continuing to promote a multi-faceted understanding of poverty and the causes of it. However, it is equally important not to focus exclusively on outcomes at the expense of inputs and outputs. There is a tendency for this to happen as outcomes are the least contentious area to monitor and have the least impact on the policy process, ‘information on the final outcomes of policy rarely has practical implications, a) because it typically arrives too late and with too many difficulties of attribution to reflect directly on current policy; and b) because new policy is not typically evidence based anyway……this means information on upstream issues of performance may be more powerful in influencing policy processes…..than final outcome monitoring can hope to be’35. This is an important concern given the scarce resources available to CSOs and the need to maximise impact and leverage in advocating for pro-poor policies.

33 ‘PRSPs: Desk Study of Good Practice in the Development of PRSP Indicators and Monitoring Systems’ Booth D and Lucas H ODI 2001. For more information on PPAs see ‘ A Rough Guide to PPA’s’ Norton, Andy ODI 2001.

34 Oxfam has been particularly involved in Uganda, and also in Vietnam. See Norton et al ‘A rough guide to PPAs’ ODI 2001

35 ‘Desk Study of Good Practice in the Development of PRSP Indicators and Monitoring Systems: Initial Review of PRSP Documentation’ Booth, D and Lucas, H ODI

34


Advocacy, Campaigning and Media work: checklist

Oxfam defines Campaigning as: “Activities such as direct lobbying, media work and popular campaigning aimed at influencing policy and decision makers to alleviate the causes and consequences of poverty. Popular campaigning refers to motivating and mobilising a critical mass of people and getting them to take an action that will make the targets of the campaign (e.g. governments) "sit up and listen". A campaign is successful if it results in, or contributes to, changes in policy, practice, ideas, or beliefs felt by defined communities that Oxfam works with around the world.”

And Advocacy as: “The promotion of a specific message and/or course of action in order to influence or contribute to the development and implementation of public policies which will alleviate the causes and consequences of poverty.”

1. Prioritising the Issue

When faced with influencing an entire national plan, it is easy to try to do too much. It is vital that civil society groups focus down on areas that they believe to have the most impact on the poor, or on areas where they have the most expertise. Within any national or local coalition of civil society, different actors can lead on different issues depending on their strengths and weaknesses. Prioritisation is about picking 3-5 key issues and doing them well, this means ignoring other issues, and making tough choices.

Firstly it is important to review the overall poverty reduction strategy with regards to the impact of proposed strategies on the poor (a matrix below is intended to help with this). Secondly, any strategy will be built on sectoral strategies e.g. in education or roads, specialist civil society groups can scrutinise existing sector strategies to review pro-poor measures and so on. Thirdly, do plan priorities, including budget allocations look acceptable to civil society?

This kind of process will allow the identification and prioritisation of key issues., Yyou should then clarify why advocacy is necessary and appropriate for the issues.

. Aims and Objectives

Establish clear aims. What do you want to achieve in the medium/long term? For instance, the education sector plan might not include plans to end school fees, a key aim may be to push for the sector plan/PRSP to include such a measure; or fiscal targets set by the IMF in agreement with government, may be too conservative and constrain pro-poor government spending, the aim would be to increase fiscal flexibility.

It helps to define policy change or institutional objectives for the achievement of the aims:

They should be SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Time-bound. However, it is always also worth identifying or describing the more fundamental

35


changes which are needed to ensure that pragmatism does not prevent you addressing the root causes of problems.

Assess feasibility: what is the likelihood of achieving change? Bear in mind human and financial resources at your disposal.

State your success indicators to measure the success of the strategy, or its component parts. Consider not only the achievement of stated objectives, but also the effects of meeting the objectives (or not) and of the process.

3. Key Messages

Civil society organisations have substantial experience in opposing reforms and polices, frequently in political and economic climates where there has been little room to promote alternatives. With growing openings for increased participation, there is now more room to propose alternatives. This requires developing different kinds of messages than in the past.

Establish clear and simple messages stating:

What is good for poor people in current government action and proposed reforms

What may be harmful for poor people, in particular frorm your experience and analysis.

What alternative measures could be implemented instead, and why these would benefit the poor.

It is important to simplify complex messages. The message should be framed in a compelling way, to be convincing and win over policy makers, but also to get widest possible public support.

Briefings

Preparing written briefings on issues - short, clear and concise, with a few key recommendations are vital (4 recommendations are better than 10). Briefings are an important tool in influencing government officials, politicians, media etc. Again, with many government officials or advisors, one of the most useful inputs are practical proposals for change rather than criticism alone. Be critical, but be constructive too, and give praise where it is due.

4. Targets (lobbying)

For each objective, identify the targets: the decision-making institutions or bodies concerning the policy changes or implementation sought. This could include the decision-making body where power lies, but also other actors that could influence the decision-maker. A useful approach is what is known as an ‘insider/outsider’ strategy, whereby civil society organisations develop close contacts inside the target in order to influence them, but retain a tougher external or public position in meetings, in the media and in campaigning. When combining advocacy with strong campaigning, this

36


approach is essential, but again, care is needed if relationships become too close – you need to keep being reminded of your overall objectives and purpose.

In most countries undertaking PRSPs, the Ministry of Finance has generally taken over management of the process, and thus poverty reduction has gained a higher profile and higher importance within government (rather than being seen as some add-on in the Ministry of Social Affairs for example). Clearly officials in the Ministry of Finance will become key targets, but other line ministries are important too, the Cabinet, the President and his/her office, key Parliamentary committees or other similar structures in the legislature; key donors. With increased decentralisation, district or municipal authorities have become more powerful and are thus targets.

Research the decision-making processes in the targets, and identify individuals within them.

Be aware of their constraints and problems, and the pressures on them from others.

Be clear where the power lies and who has influence (e.g. it may be more effective to target the advisers rather than a minister); be aware of conflicts between actors or ministries. Assess whether you are likely to be effective working internally through direct advocacy or externally through campaigning and media pressure, or both.

Be prepared to negotiate, be clear about your bottom line.

Who influences the target? In some countries certain Parliamentarians, e.g. Finance Committee, may have influence in the Ministry of Finance. Other targets may be influenced internationally, as well as nationally, e.g. World Bank – it may be useful to ally yourself with civil society groups internationally who are seeking ensure that the World Bank is genuinely pro-poor in its lending and policy advice.

Timing - what external opportunities exist for you to link your messages to? E.g. key meetings, elections, national or international conferences etc.

Know your opponents – in government, amongst donors, in the media.

Know your allies too – in the media, politicians, academics, policy makers. Build relationships, trust and credibility.

Lobbying meetings

Meetings, are an important part of lobbying, but it should be remembered that without other pressure, meetings alone are unlikely to be sufficient to achieve the change you want. Access does not equal influence. Informal meetings are very useful, over a drink or something to eat, they help build relationships and trust, and share ideas while avoiding fixed positions.

Prepare well for meetings, think through persuasive arguments, think through counter-arguments (most of which are predictable), be well-briefed (you’ll be more confident and persuasive), aim high, and seek firm commitments to act.

Before a meeting try to confirm the agenda, who will be there, how long the meeting will be etc. Keep your message to only 3 short points, only use one third of the meeting time to present them.

Meet the right people, frequently lower level civil servants are the ones working directly on an issue, and could have substantial influence since they brief those higher up. Try also to meet secretaries to ministers, key academics, influential media etc.

37


Sometimes it may be appropriate to be tough in a meeting, but it is rarely appropriate to be confrontational. Generally engagement is more effective than condemnation.

At the end of the meeting, thank people for their time, summarise what has been agreed and any follow-up. After the meeting, write a letter to confirm what has been agreed, future actions etc.

Review whether you are making progress towards your objectives. Be aware of being co-opted, and of being too close that you are unable to be critical.

Large meetings

With increasing ‘participation’, civil society get invited to numerous meetings. It is important to review whether such a meeting is useful in order to achieve your aims, many are not useful, and many are used to pretend ‘participation’ or ‘consultation’ took place. If you do decide to go, then speak – sitting quietly serves no one’s interests.

Before such meetings, it is often useful for civil society organisations to prepare positions beforehand, or to pre-meet, and work out who will say what, on what issue. Governments and institutions have the advantage that they are one body with a clear hierarchy and position, in order to deal with them, civil society organisations need to co-ordinate well together. If there are strong differences between various civil society positions, be aware that ‘divide and rule’ is an age old tactic.

5. Research

It is likely you will need additional information to carry out your advocacy work.

Good research that offers alternatives based on experience is the key to developing a convincing and credible argument.

Identify the purpose of the research, i.e. to change policy and implementation.

Research done by civil society for advocacy, is not the same as academic research. It needs to be credible, but it should be research that helps you achieve your advocacy objectives, and communicating your arguments well.

Clarify how the information will be obtained. Use existing work where possible.

It needs to identify how the poor could loose through proposed or existing reforms or policy measures, and how this situation could be changed by introducing alternative measures.

The strength of research is enhanced by linking micro experience of civil society with macro policies and issues, and including interviews with poor people concerning reform measures or existing circumstances. Clearly showing how policy affects the poor, and highlighting how poor people feel about the effects of certain policies provides an extremely convincing argument that everyone can understand. Include quotations from the poor.

6. Coalitions/Alliances

One of the key strengths of civil society is also its weakness. This is its diversity. All too frequently civil society undermines itself through lack of co-operation. Sometimes

38


civil society groups can be more concerned with their own profile, or fundraising efforts, than the aims of the alliance, and use the alliance for self-promotion. With regards to influencing national or local strategies, civil society can achieve far more together than separately. Forming a coalition or alliance is vital, whether it be a national alliance to address the PRSP or an alliance on Land Reform or Education.

Think as widely as possible: it may be possible to form alliances with unlikely groups. Think of different sector issues, regional issues and so on.

Develop consensus over aims and objectives. Establish whose agenda you are working to; and work through differences of emphasis or tone before implementation.

Agree bottom line objectives.

Decision-making: make sure there are clear decision-making, consultation and information sharing mechanisms amongst the stakeholders.

Identify different roles. Ensure that everyone knows what is expected of them. Decide who takes responsibility for setting the direction of the advocacy campaign, who speaks for the alliance, and how members are delegated responsibility for taking decisions and undertaking different aspects of work throughout the process.

Consider the profile of the alliance.

Think about how beneficiaries are involved/informed, if not directly part of the alliance/coalition. Be aware of potential empowerment, and risk of dis-empowerment.

7. Media Strategy

Unless your advocacy has to be carried out behind the scenes use the media as an important ally to achieve your aims:

Who are you trying to influence?

Where do they get their information from?

Be familiar with the media.

How can you get your message carried by the media?

Develop a relationship with key journalists, find out what they are interested in, what they will cover.

In many countries, radio is the main media source for the poor.

Think globally, international media can put pressure on your government or international institutions and donors.

What do you want to say? - Draw up a press release.

A press release is extremely useful, but needs to be produced with care. It is more likely to be used by the media if it is clear and easy to read. Obey some simple rules: a press release is essentially a news story, think of the five “W’s” – what is happening, who is doing it, where it is happening, when it is happening, and why it is happening. The W’s should be in the first few sentences of your press release. It is this first sentence or two that is the key to winning media interest. Always follow up a press release with a meeting or phone call with journalists to further sell your story and to influence the piece they write.

Timing – Think of when will you have most impact with your media work

39


8. Public Action - Campaigning

Advocacy alone is often not enough. Frequently measures to address the poor, require another group in society to lose. For instance, increasing basic health spending could mean reduced spending on tertiary hospitals used by the elite; pro-poor market liberalisation could reduce the power of dominant private sector industries. Where there are serious obstacles to change, more pressure is required. A strong public campaign on an issue can help push for change in a powerful way, building substantial public support for pro-poor change. Identify activities which will help develop a groundswell of public opinion in favour of your message. Be aware of how campaign may affect your relationships inside government or institutions when these are the targets of your campaign. A good campaign should:

have a realistic chance of changing policy and changing public attitudes: the target is susceptible to change and is influenceable may be influenced

have a simple and strong message

be supported by strong evidence

enable the public to have a real and direct influence on the change required, in volumes appropriate to the change required

elicit an emotional response/outrage amongst audiences through clearly demonstrated injustice

be topical and distinctive

have a sense of urgency

be sustainable through a progression of actions and milestones, while being flexible and reactive

9. SWOT Analysis

Make an assessment of internal Strengths and Weaknesses, and external Opportunities and Threats

strengths & weaknesses of your organisation and the advocacy alliance:

Is the issue rooted in your experience - direct, or that of counterparts? How relevant and important is it to your programme? Do you have the necessary resources and capacity to influence? Do you have sufficient appropriate information to sustain advocacy work? Are you respected by public opinion and/or decision makers? Are the particular skills of your staff/organisation appropriate and sufficient? Do you have the necessary financial resources?

opportunities and threats in the external environment:

What are the risks?

40


What is the likelihood of successful achievement of objectives? Can you identify concrete and realistic changes to propose? How much leverage is there? How fixed are current positions? How will you counter the arguments of your adversaries? Are there particular and sufficient influencing opportunities? Is the issue recognised by decision-makers or public opinion as important? Can the issue be simplified sufficiently to gain necessary public support without compromising the objectives?

Is there a sufficient movement for change? What allies could there be? Can a coalition be formed? Is your networking good? How strong is public opinion? How strong are social organisations which relate to the sector(s) affected by the issue?

9. Plan of Activities

Draw up timetabled outline of activities required to implement the strategies. Make sure that the component parts interrelate:

Specify who will do what.

Bear in mind the particular opportunities for influencing - e.g. key governmental meetings.

Be realistic about the time-scale. Allow flexibility.

Identify materials which you will use to further the strategy. Think carefully about materials appropriate to the different targets - e.g. press releases or politicians' briefings should be short (one page), pithy, accurate and convincing. Materials must include thoroughly researched information, be well argued and objective.

Identify allies (beyond the coalition) who can be approached at different points in the implementation of the strategy - e.g. individuals within the State apparatus? researchers?

10. Monitoring and Evaluation

Identify how monitoring & evaluation will take place to guarantee effectiveness and flexibility of your plans.

41


Annex one. Influencing Policy Content: Reform debates in low-income countries

Reform programmes in low-income countries

Are reforms pro-poor?

This is the key perspective through which civil society should scrutinise any reform programme, sector policy, legislation etc. Frequently reforms are proposed that do not a have clear rationale for poverty reduction, and which do not show exactly how proposed policies will benefit the poor. Instead too much is assumed. The history of adjustment programmes in low-income countries is that both growth and poverty reduction have been minimal, and yet adjustments (reforms) have been substantial.

Poverty, social and environmental impact assessments are required to ensure reforms are pro-poor, re-designed if not pro-poor, and that if there are subsequent short-term and acceptable negative impacts, that these are compensated for. Discussions around choices and trade-offs between reforms should be participatory. The IMF and the World Bank have agreed to undertake these Poverty and Social Impact Assessments (PSIA) and to help governments develop their capacity to do so. In lobbying the World Bank and the IMF it is important to push them to undertake these around any proposed policy reforms. Civil Society can also play a big role in carrying out these assessments.

The impact of reforms on women, as well as other marginalized groups, must be integrated into the analysis, policy design and implementation. Disaggregating who the ‘poor’ are is vital to ensuring that the right groups are targeted, and that unintended effects are addressed at the outset. Most PRSPs are extremely weak with regards to their gender analysis.

Policy Reforms Impact of reforms on the poorPositive Negative

MacroeconomicGrowth

How will policies to promote growth benefit the poor? Who wins and who looses from such policies?

Can redistribution be achieved

Growth is necessary for poverty reduction; in poor countries, poverty reduction is not possible without growth, since average incomes will not increase, and poverty focused public spending cannot increase. The question is – whaty type of growth is best for poverty

Growth alone is not enough, but must instead be accompanied by equity. Programmes that address growth without addressing distribution reduce the potential for poverty reduction. In a significant number of countries, redistribution has had a greater effect on



without harming growth? What policies will achieve that?

reduction? The larger the share of any increment to growth captured by the poor, the faster the rate of poverty reduction. In Brazil, the poorest 20% accounts for 2.5 per cent of national income, compared to 9.2 per cent in Indonesia. As a result, Brazil has to grow at almost four times the rate as Indonesia to achieve the same average income gain for the poorest 20 per cent.

poverty reduction than growth. Highly unequal countries are bad at converting growth into poverty reduction because they have to grow faster than more equal countries to achieve the same level of income gain for the poor. Extreme inequalities reinforce poverty - they act as a barrier to growth by restricting the productive potential, undermining investment, and limiting the capacity of a large section of the population from responding to incentives created through market reforms.

Also it is important to bear in mind regional implications, whereby poor regions can be left behind, or urban growth far greater than rural growth yet rural areas contain greatest number of poor.

Monetary policy: Inflation

Do inflation targets undermine pro-poor spending? Interest rate rises increase the cost of borrowing. What are the trade offs between very low and low inflation?

Reducing inflation can be pro-poor. High levels of inflation harm the poor, firstly by reducing growth, and secondly by reducing the value of cash held by the poor (note however, many poor women and men are not integrated into the cash economy). In stabilised economies, growth rather than lower inflation as a policy objective is more pro-poor.

Very low inflation may harm the poor, if measures to achieve low inflation targets restrict pro-poor spending and growth. IMF targets are frequently too low. International evidence varies on what is an acceptable level with regards to positive impacts on the poor and on growth – some argue high single digits or greater, while IMF programmes frequently aim for low single digits. Trade-offs between public spending, the social cost of high interest rates, and inflation should be made explicit for informed decision-making on pro-poor impacts.

Monetary Policy: Floating and not Fixed Exchange rate Overvalued exchange rates can raise the international

value of exports, reducing competitiveness. If the currency is allowed to devalue this will make the exports more competitive and lead to increased local currency income for exporters, although it also means the cost of their inputs may rise if they are imported.

Price of imports will increase due to devaluation (could include foodstuffs, fertiliser, fuel, medicines etc.). A volatile exchange rate can also undermine economic growth and inhibit foreign investment.



Capital flows

Capital Account Liberalisation is where countries are encouraged to remove restrictions on their Capital Accounts to allow capital to flow in and out of their country without hindrance.

The IMF and others have claimed that capital account liberalisation (CAL) contributes to increased growth in developing countries, and thus poverty reduction. It is claimed that it will lead to an increase in private capital inflows and that this can substitute for declining aid and that CAL is the natural extension of Trade Liberalisation.

There is little evidence to suggest that CAL is of benefit to the poor. The impacts of recent crises caused by CAL (particularly in South East Asia) – in terms of reduced growth, reduced social expenditure, increased unemployment and reduced real wages – have been very harmful to the poor. Any capital account liberalisation must address problems of short-term, destabilising flows, and the IMF should demonstrate proven benefits before any liberalisation takes place.

Fiscal policy: Taxation

Measures to increase revenue from taxation, and thus the potential for increased pro-poor domestic expenditure, can be pro-poor. Taxing well-off groups is an important route for redistribution of wealth, and promotion of greater equity. Pro-poor policies should look at exemption, zero rating or low taxation of items used by the poor. However, progress in raising revenues in many developing countries is slow, and many governments are shifting to measures such as VAT where it is easier to ensure compliance. Some argue that the tax burden is too high in many poor countries, given their current state of development.

Are tax policies regressive, i.e. have negative impact on the poor? Note impact of decentralised taxation, as well as national level taxation. Potential of tax cuts to have negative impact on pro-poor spending over the long-term. Tax benefits to investors may reduce revenue, and do little to attract investors. VAT may be easy to implement, and could help raise revenue, but regressive in that items consumed by the poor (and particularly women) will be taxed – exemptions are important. For example Petroleum taxes may raise revenue, but have implications regarding cost of transport; for example paraffin taxes could penalise the poor. Any proposed reforms should be preceded by a full poverty assessment and particularly an assessment of the impact on women.

Fiscal policy: International reserves There is a need for a country to keep sufficient foreign

reserves (expressed in terms of number of months cover) to ensure some stability in the face of external shocks and fluctuations.

Although this is the case we can ask whether the target is realistic and necessary? How does it compare with predictable donor flows that could cover shocks? Often donor flows although assured are not used in the calculations of the IMF leading to too much caution,



which inhibits pro-poor expenditure.

Fiscal policy: Debt sustainability

Note that a large portion of PRSP countries continue to have serious debt problems. Current debt relief measures are inadequate.

Need an explicit strategy to maintain borrowing at sustainable levels and avoid debt crisis. Pro-poor borrowing (i.e. lending for plan priorities) is not necessarily a bad thing but must be carefully done. Ministry of Finance should manage all public borrowing.

In low-income countries there should be Parliamentary or legal constraints on contracting of public debt (including levels of concessionality). There should be care over borrowing by public enterprises. Transparency and accountability – on the part of both borrower and creditor – is vital.

Frequently borrowing is unsustainable and badly managed, frequently not directed at development priorities. Also the practice of external lenders, e.g. Export Credit Agencies of rich countries is frequently not pro-poor.

All other sources of Grant funding should be fully explored before a country takes on further debts.

Definition of what is a sustainable debt burden is inadequate under HIPC. Should instead be fixed at a maximum of 10% debt service to revenue. All debt should be cancelled for those countries that will clearly spend the proceeds to deliver poverty reduction.

Fiscal policy: Fiscal deficit

Fiscal deficits not covered by external resources can lead to growth in public debt – the demand for domestic credit may lead to higher domestic interest rates and crowding out of private sector investment. It is therefore important to keep the deficit as low as possible.

Although managing the deficit prudently is critical to sound macroeconomic stability, it should be adjusted wherever possible to the highest prudent level, where covered by external finance, in order to maximise pro-poor spending to achieve IDGs/other development goals. In addition the deficit should always be calculated after guaranteed grants plus grant element of concessional loans to give a more realistic and positive picture of a countries finances.

IMF has made commitments to increased flexibility regarding the fiscal deficit, however the IMF is frequently



not proactive in this area, and too conservative.

Structural

Privatisation

Intended to lower costs, improve quality, and expand access.

Often low-income states spend a lot of revenue on subsidising inefficient state enterprises.

Reduction in public subsidies through privatising public enterprise, allows transfer of public finance to pro-poor expenditure, plus income receipts from privatisation.

Often leads to the loss of a lot of jobs, and retrenchment frequently not accompanied by adequate compensation.

New privatisation agenda also focuses not just on parastatals, but also utilities such as water and electricity, and areas of social sector delivery.

-Regulation frequently weak – what incentives are there for the private sector to address needs of the poor, or remote populations?

-Social pricing is also often ignored, e.g. concessions for the poor.

-There is also often deterioration in labour conditions.

-Growth of private monopolies can force prices up.

-Privatisation sales frequently badly managed, and with reduced values of sales receipts – both anti-poor.

Trade liberalisation

In theory, trade liberalisation will promote an efficient allocation of domestic resources through specialisation in those sectors in which the country has a comparative advantage; will reduce the price of imports, will help contain inflation.

Prioritisation of the liberalisation of products which account for a high proportion of poor women and men’s expenditure, or that constitute important inputs for labour-intensive agricultural and manufacturing sectors, particularly for the production of higher-value goods and services can be potentially be pro-poor.

Even if Trade Liberalisation is seen as good for the poor in the long term there must be a precautionary approach to the liberalisation of sectors on which large numbers of poor women and men depend for their livelihoods is required, particularly in the agricultural sector. Also note that government revenue may be reduced as tariffs are eliminated

Careful sequencing of liberalisation, with the implementation of measures to promote the ability of poor women and men to take advantage of new market opportunities, and to protect themselves from increased



Several studies claim that countries with open markets grow faster than closed economies, and that this has a positive impact on development.

Liberalisation of imports, for example though reduced duties can increase the income of producers and improve competitiveness on world markets.

Increased openness to trade can give better access to new technologies which can create employment.

For consumers, lower trade barriers can mean lower prices for important goods. For example through reduced import duties on vital goods such as mosquito nets or essential drugs

exposure to risk associated with closer integration into the market system can help. These measures might include improved access to land, credit, marketing infrastructure, skills training, basic health care, and primary education.

A balance should be struck the short-term gains to be derived from the liberalisation of certain capital and investment goods, with a longer-term policy of building a strong domestic economy through strategic investment in those industries and sectors that have genuine potential to achieve international competitiveness.

Regular consultations must be held with all relevant stakeholders, to make trade policy-making processes more transparent and accountable, for example by increasing democratic scrutiny by national parliaments.

There needs to be consideration of the nature of the global market when determining which sectors require support or protection in order to promote national development objectives, including time-bound protection for infant industries. For example, a developing country may have the potential to become internationally competitive in certain agricultural products, but be held back by distortions in world market prices caused by high levels of EU and US subsidies.

Note that WTO rules are substantially skewed in favour of rich countries and rich corporations. Trade liberalisation in agriculture can lock poor countries into competition with subsidised agriculture in rich countries. Intellectual property agreements affect technology transfer to developing countries, and poor women and men’s ability to buy affordable medicines, seeds, and other technology-rich products.



Financial markets

Banking sectors in low-income countries are often inefficient, monopolistic and corrupt.

Reforms may promote confidence in the banking sector, and reduce unproductive lending by state banks. Such reforms should increase credit available to the private sector to stimulate growth.

The key challenge is to expand the coverage of micro-finance finance services to supply all poor women and men with financial products, credit and savings, appropriate to their needs, and to cushion poor savers during times of seasonal or other distress. Frequently banking sector reform eliminates large state-owned national banks that may have provided banking service to the poor – while reforms may have been necessary on efficiency grounds, they should be coupled with attention to pro-poor financial services. Need to address the potential high transaction costs for poor, collateral constraints, etc.

Domestic markets/prices- deregulation Need increased emphasis on enabling small and

medium businesses, which are frequently labour intensive and connected to the informal economy, to operate effectively, including regulatory reform, access to finance, investment in skills etc.

Often focus is on enabling large enterprises, frequently ignoring small and medium enterprises. Frequently exacerbates inequality.

Foreign Direct Investment

FDI is often viewed as the most worthwhile form of international development capital. It has been seen as increasingly important as official aid flows have declined. Deregulating government controls over foreign investment may provide greater certainty for investors and is supposed to attract more investment

FDI can transfer technologies and skills. It can also give poor countries access to intra-company markets, which now account for a third of world trade.

FDI largely flows to a relatively rich group of developing countries which have markets, infrastructure, critical levels of domestic investment, and to areas where it can make a commercial return, and so cannot substitute for official aid flows in poor countries. Developing countries can do little to alter these key location attributes in the short term, and relying on deregulation and financial incentives, may merely reduce potential development benefits from FDI without resulting in significantly increased flows. Also development benefits of FDI depend on its quality, which is in turn conditioned by the



policy environment. The ability of governments to screen foreign investment and impose certain performance requirements on incoming corporations (e.g. to screen out companies with undesirable environmental or human rights records, or ensure local content in production, restrict repatriation of profits, hire minimum numbers of staff, provide certain level of technology transfer etc) is vital if the investment is to be madke to work in the best interests of the country, not just the investor.

Legal/Regulatory/Judicial reform Clear and legally enforceable framework for the rights of

the poor, particularly women (e.g. in land), ensures poor have access to the legal system.

Financial legal framework should be in place; clearly separated audit and finance acts giving independence and resources to the audit function. Strong powers of scrutiny should be given to legislatures and particularly parliamentary committees together with adequate resources and training to carry out their jobs.

Legal and regulatory reform is frequently focused on protecting property and contract rights of investors rather than focussing on the interests of the poor.

Labour market reforms

Labour is the main asset of the poor so it is important that the pattern of growth is labour absorbing . Labour market deregulation has been promoted in some instances as an important element of structural adjustment programmes. Labour market distortions and regulations are seen as artificially raising the cost of labour and thereby reducing demand for labour, and also preventing resources being allocated to labour intensive industries where many poor countries have a comparative advantage

Labour market regulation and labour costs are unlikely to be the main cause of unemployment and low growth are in many developing countries. Other factors such as overly deflationary macro economic policies and high interest rates, unselective trade liberalisation, unequal access of poor producers to land, credit, skills and markets are far more likely to be the cause. Moreover while flexible working patterns may benefit some categories of skilled workers there are also social costs including growing job insecurity, a growth in the numbers of working poor, and growing inequality. There may also be economic costs such as reduced domestic demand



and low productivity resulting from worsened working conditions. If greater labour market flexibility is needed, it is vital that this does not undermine fundamental workers rights, and that part time, casual, temporary, home-based, sub contracted workers , have the same rights as permanent ones.

Governance and Accountability There should be substantial investment in ‘accountability

agencies’ particularly legislatures and judiciary but also ombudsmen, anti corruption bureaus, auditor generals and human rights commissions among others. These need substantial resources to operate effectively.

The rule of law must be promoted through increased transparency and accountability: this will require not just the legal reform but widespread civic education of leaders especially in nascent democracies.

New ‘accountability agencies’ run the risk of being ineffective white elephants. Political will is often lacking and these agencies or the need for them are often the result of donor pressure and conditionality.

Stiffer penalties for Civil Servants are only as effective if the orders do not come from their political superiors. The role of political considerations in enforcing the rule of law cannot be underestimated; legal and regulatory reform will only take you so far.

‘Corruption fatigue’ is a serious problem; those caught should be seen to be punished.

Civil service reform

Reducing size of government leads to salary savings; increasing efficiency and accountability of the civil service seen as pro-poor. Sometimes coupled with increasing salaries to bring up to living wage.

Often carried out too rapidly with limited compensation, and badly managed.

Decentralisation

Promoted as a development panacea. By bringing Government closer to the people there are advantages of both efficiency in the effective allocation of resources and in accountability enabling people to scrutinise their government with less difficulty.

Great idea, often fails in practice due to failure of central government to let go of power.

Minimum national standards of accountability and practice are frequently not met at a decentralised level.

Decentralisation must be supported by adequate decentralised finance, decentralised bodies must have



adequate power, mechanisms must exist to hold elected representatives and bureaucrats accountable at decentralised level. Ensure decentralisation is accompanied by redistributive transfers to address regional disparities – equalisation grants. Capacity building vital – prior and during decentralisation process.

Risks of decentralised organs becoming too politicised.Infrastructure

Do policy choices concerning communications, energy, housing, and transport infrastructures support the livelihood needs and strategies of poor women and men?

Well functioning and adequate infrastructure is an essential pre-requisite of growth.

Investment in rural feeder roads is pro-poor (increasing access of poor to markets, health centres etc.) as is the provision of access to safe water. Low cost housing for the poor is also good together with access to cheap electricity and telecommunications facilities.

Often big infrastructure projects are anti poor in any ways. Many focus on urban and peri-urban projects that for example privilege private, automobile transport over public transport and can disadvantage poor women and men in many ways.

In addition the project nature of funding means that recurrent costs for upkeep are often missed or underestimated leading to existing infrastructure falling apart. Often it is better to focus first on the rehabilitation of existing infrastructure, especially at first.

Push for public consultation and poverty assessments of any major proposed infrastructure projects.

Utilities

Inefficient and loss-making utilities divert resources away from pro-poor investments.

Reforms such as privatisation can potentially improve efficiency and effectiveness of provision e.g. electricity. Market rates can ensure utilities are not loss making, and can improve investment rates. Subsidies/compensation for the poor are important ways of ensuring that access to utilities are maintained for the poor e.g. electricity

Privatisation of electricity/move to market rates can

Shifts to market rates can exclude the poor and lead to huge price increases. Privatisation of utilities can replace a state monopoly with a private one, leading to monopoly profits. Regulatory measures are often weak.



undermine poor women and mens access.

Environment

Which natural resources does the national economy most rely on? What trade-offs are being made – either consciously or not – that threaten to undercut national growth strategies? Across the board – from fiscal measures to agriculture, education, energy and transport plans – policy reforms can be of help to ensure that ecological limits are not surpassed, and that the rights of poor communities to clean and safe environments are preserved.

Environmental concerns are critical to PRSP’s for two reasons. Firstly there is the direct role natural resources play in economic growth (e.g. water and soil fertility as agricultural inputs, fuel wood as energy source for small-scale production). Trade offs must be identified between long-term sustainability and short-term growth in many cased. Secondly there is the role environmental goods and services play on poor women and mens’ environmental health and quality of life (and by inference, their productive capacities. Lack of adequate water and sanitation are for example critical problems that undercut productive activity and contribute to the poverty cycle.

Successful integration of these concerns and specific measures to address them within national strategies will ensure the long-term viability and success of efforts to overcome poverty. Identification of those issues most relevant to poverty will allow for win-win opportunities to be taken where economic growth and conservation overlap, and will force value-driven debates when trade-offs are necessary. Where feasible, national PRS development should be considered as one with national strategies for sustainable development (NSSD), and the principles behind the NSSD should be fully incorporated in the PRSP. The experience from integration of sustainability measures in Uganda’s PRS suggests that it is possible, and that measures were gladly incorporated once their merits and central importance to the needs of

Failure to address environmental sustainability, consideration apart from issues of finance and economic development or relegation of environmental management to weak or ineffective government agencies will inevitably undercut growth rate projections and poverty reduction strategies – particularly since most HIPCs comprise large rural populations highly dependent upon agriculture and – by extension – environmental services.

PRSPs with their short-term timescale (3-5yrs) have generally failed to adequately address environmental concerns, and to link fully to the principles embodied in the development goal relating to National Strategies for Sustainable Development (NSSD).



poor communities wereas understood.

Land reform

For people in many parts of the world land remains their primary asset and their livelihoods depend on secure access to it and the ability to exploit it.

Land reform may increase access and security of investors to land and thus promote investment.

International experience shows that more equal land distribution leads to higher growth. Land redistribution can be a major component of pro-poor growth, since production from land is a key livelihood strategy for the poor in many countries. Security of title can promote higher agricultural productivity, noting that small farms are also efficient.

Pro-poor land reform should have a poverty focus; be gender-aware, e.g. ownership rights often favour men; should involve genuine consultation and participation; be sensitive to cultural norms. Land alone is not enough, must be coupled with support for improved land use, such as access to financial services, agricultural inputs, advice. It must also be coupled with enough investment in infrastructure such as schools, roads and clinics.

Often recently a market-based approach to land reform has been pushed by the WB in particular. A market-based approach to land reform is likely to be unaffordable to the would-be beneficiaries because the 'market' value of land exceeds the agronomic value of the land. If implemented, large-scale market-based agrarian reform can drive up land prices, effectively excluding poor farmers from the benefits of reform. Would-be beneficiaries of market-based agrarian reform lack access to affordable private credit markets to finance their share of the land cost.

The empirical record of market-based reforms offers little evidence that this approach will result in rapid or significant redistribution of land. Uncertainty in the agricultural sector can best be addressed by a clear commitment to rapid completion of conventional – compulsory acquisition-based - agrarian reform.

In addition, giving land rights and security of tenure needs to be carefully managed, as does the phasing out of customary tenure to avoid distress sales, landlessness and particularly a negative effect on women.

Social sector

Education

Education is recognised as the single most powerful weapon in the fight against poverty. It saves lives. It

There has been a continuation of moves to shift costs of education onto the household. This is exacerbated by



gives people a chance to improve their lives. It gives them a voice.

Pro-poor policy includes increasing basic education expenditure, shifting expenditure from tertiary to primary level, where the poor benefit from public investment; rapid elimination of all school fees (formal and informal) at primary and lower secondary level; measures to improve girls access to schooling, and completion of schooling; measures to improve quality at primary and lower secondary including reducing class size, teacher training etc., skills provision/vocational training and adult literacy programmes.

Governments, with the assistance of donors should provide free primary education for all, in line with the international development goals. The IMF should help government review fiscal implications of increased spending on education and how it can be resourced.

decentralisation that provides decentralised responsibility for provision but insufficient resources. Costs to poor households include official user fees, informal fees such as a desk charge or exam charge, indirect costs such as labour, uniforms, books etc. In almost every developing country it costs the poorest 40 per cent of the population over 10 per cent of annual income to send two children to primary school36. The equivalent amount for the average family in the USA would be more than US$400037.

In addition, community participation in management is promoted as way of increasing ownership, but ignores opportunity costs for poor

Health

Poor health promotes human suffering, undermines economic growth, and increases poverty and vulnerability. Lack of coverage and poor quality contributes to reduced health outcomes – reforms generally address priorities, policies and institutions.

Pro-poor policy includes increasing basic health care provision and quality, elimination of user fees for basic health care – and development of a free minimum health care package. Introduce cost sharing at tertiary level, and shift resources from tertiary to primary level. Need drug policy addressing - access, price, quality. Community participation should be equated with decision-making power, including for women and young people, and includes education and rights work.

There is often a focus on cost recovery to generate additional finance. User fees for basic health care maintained or re-named as ‘health insurance’ and are actually a form of ‘creeping privatisation’ increasingly shifting the burden of health care costs to the poorest. Promotion of privatisation as alternative to public health sector leads to greater inequity and poor health outcomes. Community participation is often equated with payment. International experience with exemption systems at primary level show that they are generally

36 ‘Educating all the Children’ Chris Colclough, Institute of Development Studies 1993

37 Based on US census figures for 1999. More detail on Education Charges can be found in the Oxfam Policy Paper ‘Education Charges: A Tax on Human Development’ Oxfam November 2001 (see links in annex two).



ineffective, and are costly. Willingness to pay does not imply ability to pay. Impact of HIV/AIDS is not well integrated into existing reforms. Without capacity building, appropriate support and allocation of resources (particularly addressing needs of poor regions) decentralisation can be a process of devolution of responsibility from central government. Health worker retention and training is a critical problem yet there is a limited focus on quality, training, supervision, and proper salaries.

Water Supply and Sanitation

Pro-poor policy includes increased expenditure in these areas. Basic provision of a minimum of 20 litres per person per day should be available to all free of charge. Need to develop maximum distance to water source across the country to reduce labour time, and risk of using nearer polluted sources.

Growing use of fees and other cost-sharing measures undermine access of poor to clean water, undermine health, and force women to travel further. Privatisation of water supply leads to higher costs, and reduced access of the poor to clean water.

Social Protection/ Safety Nets

Defined by the Word Bank as including both social insurance (for those unable to earn an income for a period of time) and social assistance (for the very poor)

If well designed, institutionally mainstreamed, with poor women and mens’ participation, and with reasonably sized transfers (greater than immediate consumption needs), safety nets may have positive impact and prove an important element of poverty reduction. Wherever possible, the programme should look at giving the means to the poorest to work their own way out of poverty.

Seen by some as simply a way to make an inadequate reform programme more acceptable; does not address core structural problems that maintain people in poverty.

-Often may be used for political ends.

-Can stigmatise the poor

-Can have limited focus

-Targeting does not often work

Prevention is better than cure. Efforts to develop measures and reforms to prevent shocks that have a negative impact on the poor (e.g. trade measures, financial crisis, floods) are better (and economically more rational) than helping the poor afterwards.



Public Expenditure Management (PEM)

Reform of Public Expenditure Systems All low-income countries need substantial reform of their

systems of public expenditure. The World Bank and IMF are generally promoting two main key reforms. These are a move towards output based budgeting through the drawing up of Medium Term Expenditure Frameworks (MTEFs) and the development of comprehensive management information systems (MIS).

These system reforms are often complemented by changes in the legal framework such as the separation of finance and audit capacities of Government and the introduction of stiffer penalties for miss-allocation and corruption.

Weak or non-existent MTEF and MIS in the majority of low-income countries; long term reforms with little political commitment in many cases.

Often there is no link between priorities stated in the countries plan (its PRSP in most cases) and proposed expenditures. Donors continue to provide project aid – frequently incoherent, disconnected from national priorities, high administration cost - particularly for government. Sometimes it is also linked to tied-aid, inadequate support for recurrent costs, promotes differences in coverage, lack of government ownership and undermines government capacity. Donor projects sometimes lead the shape of the MTEF rather than agreed priorities.

A short-term solution is the potential use of ‘virtual poverty funds’ as interim measure for coherent pro-poor budgeting and monitoring in the absence of longer-term reforms. Such funds focus on several key expenditures for poverty reduction and monitor these. Government guarantees not to divert money from these and to ensure it is spent, and all revenue (Govt, Donor and HIPC where available) is pooled towards these agreed objectives. This can begin to build a culture of scrutiny and sound public expenditure management, but in the long-term this should be expanded to the whole budget to ensure overall scrutiny and accountability.

Annual budget Cycle- Budget Formulation and Presentation Budgets need to be formulated with extensive

consultation. Budget often prepared in secrecy with minimal chances for discussion or input. Budget often very obtuse and



Once produced they need to be transparent, clear and easy to understand. There must be sufficient time for review by legislature.

The budget should be closely linked to national plan/ PRSP, pro-poor in terms of prioritised spending. Disaggregated budgets to sectoral, and sub-sectoral levels e.g. primary education enable monitoring and analysis. It is also helpful if it is disaggregated in terms of key cross cutting themes such as the gender implications of proposed expenditure.

Donors should commit to predictable and long-term provision of assistance. MTEF useful framework for providing donor support. Government should highlight budget areas that would be cut in the case of economic shocks or reductions in external assistance, and areas to be protected.

hard to analyse and understand. Time allowed for discussion and analysis is usually very short.

There is often a problem of ‘supplementary’ budgets i.e. expensive Mercedes Benz cars or transfers to Military during year. Military spending frequently hidden in various parts of the budget. Review Presidential and other high cost and potentially unproductive areas.

When analysing the budget it is helpful to identify poor groups (gender, region, ethnic, elderly, children, primary level vs. tertiary). Compare military with social expenditure. Transparent budgets help with pro-poor policy making. Note use of media, public notices and ‘citizen’s budgets’ to increase public awareness and promote accountability. Promotion of ‘gendered’ budgets can help with targeting. Parliament should have clear oversight role. Cost prioritised sector strategies, set out choices for government (increase resources, reduce costs, choose priorities), translate costed plans into budget, develop realistic and achievable plan.

Annual Budget Cycle- Budget Implementation and Monitoring Involvement of Civil Society in monitoring both inputs

and outputs. Tracking the resources from the central level to the bottom (Ministry of Education to school level for example, and then measuring the outputs (numbers of books in schools). (See section on monitoring for more details in main text)

Important to be happening during the process of budget implementation wherever possible.

Budgets often not followed, and bear little relation to actual spending patterns. Auditing and monitoring of expenditure often minimal and happens a long time after the fact. Figures often wrong and released with a long delay.

Monitoring Poverty Reduction Outcomes



Beyond the Budget:

Monitoring outcomes

Requires accurate and timely data on poverty and social indicators (use of household surveys, Participatory Poverty Assessments (PPAs), service delivery surveys). Combining qualitative surveys such as PPAs with quantitative such as household surveys are a powerful way to both monitor progress from a range of aspects, but also to feed into policy design and implementation.

Incentives to improve policy increased when policy makers held accountable; requires timely and appropriate information, made publicly available

Often too much focus on long term outcomes and their monitoring can distract resources away from monitoring short-term policy outputs and impacts that have potentially more effect on policy implementation.


Annex two. Links to other sources of information.

The following offers a selection of internet links to other information on each of the sections and on PRSP and policy influence generally. Lastly if you cannot get a particular document or are interested in a particular area then contact [email protected] / Max Lawson, Policy Advisor, Policy Department, Oxfam, 274 Banbury Road, Oxford UK OX2 7DZ. These can be emailed to you where possible in ZIP format if you have trouble accessing the web.

General

Information on the Development Goals http://www.developmentgoals.org/

Information on Debt http://www.debtchannel.org/

http://www.jubilee2000uk.org/

PRSP General

World Bank PRSP pages http://www.worldbank.org/poverty/strategies/index.htm

The PRSP sourcebook is a useful resource, with chapters on Participation and the major sectoral issues. The gender chapter is particularly good.

http://www.worldbank.org/poverty/strategies/sourcons.htm

IMF PRSP pages (Including all PRSP country documents)

http://www.imf.org/external/np/prsp/prsp.asp

NGOs Working on WB/IMF/ PRSP Issues

The following are just a key selection. More can be found at the Bank Information Centre’s Links Page:

http://www.bicusa.org/links.htm

Eurodad is an excellent resource on PRSPs and runs a listserve which you can sign up to:European network on Debt and Development (Eurodad):

www.eurodad.org

The Bretton Woods Project produces an excellent newsletter which you can get by email and many other resources. Bretton Woods Project:

www.brettonwoodsproject.org.

The Globalization Challenge Initiative provides some excellent guides on how to understand IMF and WB documents:

www.challengeglobalization.org

Other NGOs working on PRSPs/WB/IMF

http://www.challengeglobalization.org/

http://www.brettonwoodsproject.org/

http://www.eurodad.org/

http://www.bicusa.org/links.htm





http://www.worldbank.org/poverty/strategies/index.htm

http://www.worldbank.org/poverty/strategies/index.htm

http://www.jubilee2000uk.org/

http://www.debtchannel.org/

http://www.developmentgoals.org/

mailto:[email protected]


50 Years is Enough www.50years.org

Alternative Information & Development Centre, South Africa

http://aidc.org.za/

Bank Information Centre www.bicusa.org/index.html

Oxfam GB www.oxfam.org.uk

SAPRIN, Structural Adjustment Participatory Review International Network

www.igc.org/dgap/saprin/index.html

Third World Network, Ghana http://www.twnside.org.sg/

Ugandan Debt Network, Uganda http://www.udn.or.ug

World wildlife Fund for Nature (WWF) www.wwf.org

Policy work relating to gender and diversity

The World Bank sourcebook chapter on gender is very good.

http://www.worldbank.org/poverty/strategies/chapters/gender/gender.htm

Another key site is the Commonwealth Institute: http://www.thecommonwealth.org/gender/index1.htm

The IDS BRIDGE project is a good source of information:

http://www.ids.ac.uk/bridge/budgets.pdf

There is a specific site on gender and budgets: www.gender-budgets.org

Idasa have also done a lot on gender and budgets:

http://www.idasa.org.za/

PRSP Participation

The Participation Group on the World Bank site is a good resource:

http://www.worldbank.org/participation/PRSP.htm

The Institute for Development Studies at Sussex is another good source of information:

http://www.ids.ac.uk/ids/particip/index.html

and IDS has also recently finished research on participation in PRSPs to date:

http://www.worldbank.org/poverty/strategies/review/ids1.pdf

And the Christian Aid paper gives a good summary of participation in PRSPs to date:

http://www.christianaid.org.uk/indepth/0110prsp/prsp.htm

PRSP Policy Formulation

The Bank Information Centre has compiled a list of resources on key policy issues:

http://www.bicusa.org/ptoc/index.htm












http://www.gender-budgets.org/



http://www.thecommonwealth.org/gender/index1.htm

http://www.thecommonwealth.org/gender/index1.htm




http://www.wwf.org/

http://www.udn.or.ug/

http://www.twnside.org.sg/

http://www.igc.org/dgap/saprin/index.html

http://www.oxfam.org.uk/

http://www.bicusa.org/index.html

http://aidc.org.za/

http://www.50years.org/


The Bretton Woods Project also has good links on various policy issues:

http://www.brettonwoodsproject.org/links/index.html

IDS and ODI also have a lot of information, papers and links on pro-poor policy formulation

Institute of Development Studies (IDS) - Poverty and Social Policy Team

http://www.ids.ac.uk/ids/pvty/

Overseas Development Institute (ODI)- Poverty and Public Policy Group

http://www.odi.org.uk/pppg/index.html

For economics try the Centre for Economic and Policy Research

http://www.cepr.net/IMF/index.html

or the Centre for Economic and Policy Analysis (more academic)

http://www.newschool.edu/cepa/papers/index.htm

On privatisation, the Public Sector International Research Unit is very good:

http://www.psiru.org/

Oxfam has a broad range of papers on policy issues, and especially Education and Trade.

http://www.oxfam.org.uk/policy.html

latest education paper: http://homepage/policy/function/advocacy/briefings/Briefing%20papers/OxfamEducationChargesPaper.doc

latest trade paper: http://www.oxfam.org.uk/policy/papers/8broken/8broken.rtf

and a specific site on Land Reform: http://www.oxfam.org.uk/landrights/resource.htm

World Development Movement also has a range of policy papers.

http://www.wdm.org.uk/campaign/resource.htm

With one of the best being a paper by Charles Augbre of Third World Network/ ISODEC in Ghana:

http://www.wdm.org.uk/cambriefs/Debt/sappoor.pdf

Christian Aid policy papers: http://www.christianaid.org.uk/indepth/index.htm

CAFOD policy papers: http://www.cafod.org.uk/policy/

ActionAid policy papers: http://www.actionaid.org/resources/

PRSP Policy Implementation and Monitoring

Budgets

Idasa in South Africa is home to the Africa www.idasa.org.za


http://www.actionaid.org/resources/

http://www.cafod.org.uk/policy/

http://www.christianaid.org.uk/indepth/index.htm

http://www.christianaid.org.uk/indepth/index.htm





http://www.oxfam.org.uk/landrights/resource.htm

http://www.oxfam.org.uk/landrights/resource.htm

http://www.oxfam.org.uk/policy/papers/8broken/8broken.rtf

http://www.oxfam.org.uk/policy/papers/8broken/8broken.rtf

http://homepage/policy/function/advocacy/briefings/Briefing%20papers/OxfamEducationChargesPaper.doc



http://www.oxfam.org.uk/policy.html

http://www.psiru.org/



http://www.cepr.net/IMF/index.html



http://www.ids.ac.uk/ids/pvty/




Budget Project and the Womens Budget Project and is a major resource.

The International Budget Project at the Centre for Budget and Policy Priorities is also excellent

www.internationalbudget.org

It has a guide to budget work and a collection of experiences from Civil Society worldwide which can be downloaded:

http://www.internationalbudget.org/resources/guide/guide1.pdf and

http://www.internationalbudget.org/resources/success.pdf

The World Bank is also an excellent source of information on Public Expenditure Monitoring. The main PEM website is World Bank public expenditure online, but a lot can also be found regarding Civil Society on the Participation website as well.

Public Expenditure Online:

http://www1.worldbank.org/publicsector/pe/

Participation Group: www.worldbank.org/participation/web/webfiles/cepemsynthesis.htm and

www.worldbank.org/participation/web/webfiles/cepem.htm

Participatory Poverty Assessments

IDS has a good introductory document: http://www.ids.ac.uk/ids/particip/research/ppa/ppareader.pdf

ODI has an excellent guide to the process: http://www.odi.org.uk/pppg/cape/papers/ppa.pdf

There is a whole website dedicated to the Uganda PPA:

http://www.uppap.or.ug/

http://www.uppap.or.ug/

http://www.odi.org.uk/pppg/cape/papers/ppa.pdf

http://www.odi.org.uk/pppg/cape/papers/ppa.pdf

http://www.ids.ac.uk/ids/particip/research/ppa/ppareader.pdf

http://www.ids.ac.uk/ids/particip/research/ppa/ppareader.pdf

http://www.worldbank.org/participation/web/webfiles/cepem.htm

http://www.worldbank.org/participation/web/webfiles/cepem.htm

http://www.worldbank.org/participation/web/webfiles/cepemsynthesis.htm

http://www.worldbank.org/participation/web/webfiles/cepemsynthesis.htm





http://www.internationalbudget.org/resources/guide/guide1.pdf

http://www.internationalbudget.org/resources/guide/guide1.pdf

http://www.internationalbudget.org/

Influencing Poverty Reduction Strategies-- A Guide

Documents

Transcript of Influencing Poverty Reduction Strategies-- A Guide