Setting the context: GBS vs Rwanda Civil society back ground

1. Setting the context: GBS vs Rwanda Civil society back ground Gaspard AHOBAMUTEZE,Independent consultant Cabinet VALEO,RWANDA Presentation prepared for the Southern Voices for Change in the International Aid System Workshop London, 14-16 November 2005

2. This presentation covers 2 main parties  Increasing of GBS Support ( Rwanda)Current condition of Civil Society (Rwanda) • The objective is to set up issues of Civil Society within a context of an aid system that is increasingly in form of Budget Support and de-emphasizing project aid  • This presentation attempts to give response to following questions : • What budget support is? • How GBS is organized in Rwanda ? • Whether and to what extend donors have increased GBS in Rwanda ? • Which are advantages and disadvantages in Rwanda context ? • Why may feel SCOs marginalized as a result ? • What is Rwanda SCOs background ? • Which are its strengths, weaknesses and constraints in general view? • Roles of SCOS vis-à-vis governmentalization of aid ? • How partenership can be organised to strengthen SCOs ? • Capacity of LSCOs in that growing of governmentalization of aid ? 2

3. GBS definition • programme aid can be divided into food aid and financial programme aid. • Financial programme aid includes both budget support and balance of payments support (such as debt relief and import support). • Budget support in turn can be divided into sector budget support and general budget support (GBS). • Components of GBS • Finance • Dialogue/conditions/TA and capacity building • Harmonisation and alignment 3

4. General Definition of Budget Support and GBS

5. CAUSALITY MAP GBS study Rwanda case

6. Effects of PGBS on Planning and Budgeting Systems and Public Expenditure Performance • PGBS inputs (increased and regular funding) and immediate effects on aid management systems  better budget financing (volume, fungibility, predictability/ timeliness) • PGBS inputs (funding, policy, dialogue, conditionality and TA/CB) and focus on key policy and PE issues  more resources for government priorities (priority programs etc.) including service delivery • PGBS inputs and immediate effects on aid management systems  Govt. empowered to strengthen (planning and budgeting) systems • Improved fungibility and predictability in external funding plus empowered Govt. to strengthen systems  increased allocative and operational efficiency of PFM systems • More resources available for Govt. priorities including service 6

7. Effects of GBS on policy-making, policies and service delivery • Increased ownership/Government empowered  Scope for more accountable policy making processes, strengthened intra-government incentives and enhanced democratic accountability, and for better public expenditure (PE, covered in other group/matrix)  Policies (service delivery and growth-related) more accountable and effective in being pro-poor, improved justice and respect for human rights (HR), thereby enhancing people’s confidence in government. • Assuming more resources are flowing to service delivery agencies (from better PE and budgetary process), and sector policies address market failures, this results into more and more responsive/pro-poor, accountable services being delivered. 7

8. Effects of PGBS on macroeconomic performance and growth • PGBS funding  More external resources available for Gov’t budget; more external resources ‘on budget’ and more regularity of aid funding  better budget financing (fungibility, predictability) which, together with improved PFM)  Improved fiscal discipline • Policy dialogue/conditionality, TA/CB focused on key (macro) policy issues and H&A (behind agreed macro policies)  Improved fiscal discipline • Improved fiscal discipline  Macroeconomic variables favorable to private investment and economic activity which, together with private sector friendly policies  conducive environment for real private sector-led growth 8

9. ON/OFF BUDGET ISSUE Source : draft report on baseline on aid coordination 9

10. GBS as % of ODA

11. Shifts toward non-project aid by GBS donors

12. Focuses attention on PFM systems Increases govt control over resource allocation and supports govt systemsincreasing govt confidence SCOs resource can be more reduced by aid governmentalization As consequency, risk of decreasing of improved democratic accountabilty GBS Advantages & disadvantages ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES

13. Why may feel SCOs marginalized as a result ? • This can be analyzed as understanding problem or difficulty of adaptation on the change in aid modalities. • We will present in our part 2 the current SCOs situation • This workshop will attempt to deep on that?

14. Rwanda Civil society back ground • Recognition of an emergency face: • The first attempt to put in place a civil society body was in 1993 in stormy political period: Rwanda was facing war and pressure from newly created political parties. The initiative was undermined by the 1994 genocide • In 1996, another attempt was lunched but faced problems due to genocide aftermaths. People had no consensus on society vision; there was suspicion and tensions among people, even within organizations • After on, workshops were hold on civil society. CCOAIB and other umbrella organizations organized a workshop on civil society, Government and donors partnership(2001) 14

15. Rwanda Civil society back ground • In 2003, The civil society Commission at the President office organized another workshop on Government and civil society partnership. Unfortunately, no action point from the two workshop was taken forward. • Since 2001, Christian Aid and Trocaire jointly tried to bring together their respective partners in order to discuss what civil society was and what should be its role in Rwanda. The initiative gave birth to an INGOs’ and a LNGOs’ task forces on PRSP. Only the INGOs one could work up to March 2004.. • From July 2004, putting into place of a civil society forum but according to many actors, it is not representative of the whole civil society community • Civil Society today is weak and under reconstruction • “Visible” organized part of SC is mostly town based especially in Kigali capital 15

16. Strength and opportunities • Civil Society concept not includes public power (Civil society institutions don’t include public services) • There are few networks but they lack of willingness or capacity to play the expected important role

17. Weaknesses and constraintsin general view • Civil Society concept not well defined • Tendency to consider CS as NGOs while churches, other form of worship, Universities, schools centres, ,medias … • Inadequate coordination among CSOs so difficult for them to effectively participate in national programme • Lack of capacity (human, financial , material resources, ) • Weak organisational structuring then not functional • Lack of relevant policy governing the relationships between Government and SC, • Lethargic SC • Lack of legal status for many SC organizations

18. Weaknesses and constraints in general view • The Government has always been considered as very strong, paternalist by the population. According to history, citizens expected so much from their governments, though they became much dependent from them. Participation was and is today limited. • Lack of a Long Term strategic vision • SC as unified partner by sector of intervention is not there • Weak representativeness of actual plate forme ( less NGOS embeded in the community) • Lack of acceptable speaker as SC ( lack of capacity in national intermediate SCOs • Lack of holistic developpement

19. ‘Weaknesses and constraints • Task force of LSCOs exists but not functional because of financial depending on project support and not program support • No strategic thinking: programs elaborated according to available financing not in the spirit of real community problems ( lack of vision, synergy and analytical capacity) • Superficial answer to pro poor problems: LSCOs address issues seen by theirs own eyes but not those seen by poor eyes • No clear linkage/ interrelation o f LSCOs activities with PRSP: many LSCOs live in isolation • Lack of mutual information sharing GoR & SC because no consultation framework and no concerted action framework • Who is accountable to whom? Gvrnt to SC or inverse • SC activities not integrated in PRSP APR

20. ‘Role of C S Org. against a backdrop of the growing “governmentalization” of Aid • To convince International Development Partners ( IDP) to: • Reinforce LCSO in order to be a fully-fledged partner in government system because sometimes Government willing is less • Shift from project support to programmes support (Support LSCOs strategic plan including institutional support) with the focus of empowerment community using CSOs and Government structures in decentralisation to facilitate poor people in changing their environment and economic status  Help CSOs networks in participating in official clusters ( Rural development, Education, Governance, economics infrastructures, …) and have enough representatives • Support LSCOs in the process of legal status recovery : shifting from temporally district authorization to legal personality (Support LSCOs in advocacy of obtaining that legal status) • Instead of à CSOs coordination body, there might a liaison one • Donors to supportCSOs in acquiring relevant staff/advocacy desk ( institutional support)

21. ‘‘Role of C S Org. against a backdrop of the growing “governmentalization” of Aid • Deep restructuring of actual SCos in their : • Mode of service delivery • Advocacy • Research /education • Representativeness • To organize grassroots based organizations by embarking them in human rights • As mostly best organized SCOs are town based ( Rwanda case), these should play a role of grassroots based organization capacity building in advocacy. Actually, grassroots organizations take the former for donors instead of feeling themselves as constituents

22. Role of C S Org. against a backdrop of the growing “governmentalization” of Aid • GoR is willing to open up and work with CSOs legal statements, SCOs are enthusiastic to participate in national GoR programmes in terms of services delivering. Dialogue is needed to shed light on some of the unclear areas governing this relationship lack commitment for “ sortir coquille” • Advocacy and participation: CSOs have to develop technical capacity and expertise so that they can be able to discuss some the current issues with confidence • Advocacy on participation statute: need to develop a national participation statute or law to clarify the criteria for participation, who participates in what and at what level and when?

23. Role of C S Org. against a backdrop of the growing “governmentalization” of Aid as “service deliverers” • In the context of SWAPs and Budget Support, CSOs have to play a bridging role between state and citizens (joint planning of policy implementation so can provide useful contributions on the basis of their closeness to “grassroots”  ”It is in services delivery that the majority of CSOs engage with policy processes”  “It is in contact with service delivery that the vast majority of poor people have contact with ‘ policy’ and ‘politics’” • It is at the level of decentralisation that CSOs can cause to be wary, can demonstrate that the state is not the only provider of essential services • To find relevant ways of participating in policy development • To play the role of watchdog

24. Role of C S Org. against a backdrop of the growing “governmentalization” of Aid in “PRS dimension” • Source of table : Robrech Renard and Nadia Molenaers

25. Role of C S Org. against a backdrop of the growing “governmentalization” of Aid as “invited contributors to policy formulation” • Advocacy to have seats at the table in both cross-sectoral processes and in sectoral planning fora and be able to participate in official delegations at international negotiations • To be involved in many sectors with government and other Gvt official bodies in the formulation of specific policies at level district But their influence can be affected by following challenges: • the overall dynamics of the process which may lie outside their control, including relationship between ministries, and ministries and donors, • Internal CSOs Weaknesses such as their lack of capacity to grasp technical issues, lack understanding of government procedures and ability to interact within environment that may seem intimidating; • Lack of SCOs capacity and appropriate time to prepare, consult constituencies for consistently and effectively attending meetings or workshop

26. Possible role sco in PRSP

27. Role of C S Org. against a backdrop of the growing “governmentalization” of Aid as “pressurisers” • To exert pressure on Grnt in terms both policy formulation and implementation, mainly campaigning and lobbying • To create and keep an updated data base of Information related to policy formulation, implementation and evaluation

28. Guidelines for partnership Grnt • Before engaging in partnership CSOs should:  Make an adequate analysis of the national Grnt agenda  To clearrly understand the roles to be played by both SCOs/ Government Clarify their inputs into the partnership  Assess their own capacity to fulfil such roles • When working together with government, SCOs should: • Actively engage in policy formulation etc… • Actively participate in programme design, implementation and evaluation Establish their legitimacy through expertise and fulfilling commitments  Generate facts through their presence on the ground

29. Guidelines for partnership: values and principles • Transparency / accountability • Mutual respect / trust • Respect of law • Complementarity • Other considerations  To build partnership through strong LSCOs networks than can relate with Government CSOs should share information amongst themselves ( and with government) and build their mutual capacity for partnership etc…

30. At donors side • Leave paternalism attitude / overhand on programmes • Set up benchmarks that Government must respect in its relation with Civil society • Pressure on Gvrnts to establish fair and transparent framework for the operation of CSOs • Institutional and financial support to SCOs in order to be able to take up their role in development

31. With reguard to Governement • Grvs should more open up space and guarantee freedom of expression ( respect of law /putting in place relevant laws) • Grvs to financially support CSOs according Cotonou agreement • Grvs to make information available accessible to whom may need to use it.

32. « What you do for me without me is against me »I.Gandhi MURAKOZE