150 likes | 166 Views
PRSp Alignment. Finnish Aid in a PRS Context Helsinki Workshop 19-22 May 2003. Alignment – why worry?. PRSps have entered a new phase – from design to implementation Implementation requires consistent & coherent external support behind PRSP priorities (targets) & country capacity to deliver
E N D
PRSp Alignment Finnish Aid in a PRS Context Helsinki Workshop 19-22 May 2003
Alignment – why worry? • PRSps have entered a new phase – from design to implementation • Implementation requires consistent & coherent external support behind PRSP priorities (targets) & country capacity to deliver • Non-aligned donor strategies risk countries devoting scarce resources to managing donors rather than meeting targets!
Alignment – what is it? • For external partners - the extent to which all aid instruments & modalities are congruent with the discipline & cycle of the national PRS, MTEF & budget. • For partner governments - the extent to which the MTEF & the budget are subject to the national PRS (& vice versa?).
More definitions • IMF (2003) distinguishes between: • Temporal Alignment of country’s own processes with PRS & national budget cycle or donor processes with country’s processes e.g. aligning timing & phases of donor programmes with the budget/PRS cycle. • Policy Alignment, where policies supported by donor programmes are derived directly from PRS.
Harmonisation & streamlining • Related concepts • Harmonisation refers to the extent to which there is a commonality in donor policies, procedures & practices • Streamlining refers to the need to simplify, coordinate & reduce the number of procedures, indicators, missions, analytical reports etc.
Aligning with the PRSp (1) • Extent of alignment will vary with country contexts & ‘strength’ of the PRSp & PRS process • Alignment at the country level includes drawing on or complementing the PRSp in all stages of the PRS cycle • Optimally, the principal content of external partner strategies is derived directly from the PRSp (goals, targets, priorities etc)
Aligning with the PRSp (2) • Where an assistance prog. is not derived directly from the PRSp it may complement it, e.g. by addressing areas of weakness, updating analyses, feeding in lessons • Optimally, assistance programmes are implemented through existing partner Govt. institutions (disbursement, procurement, performance monitoring & review)
Aligning with the PRSp (3) • External partner schedules are aligned with Govt. budget, MTEF and planning cycles • Assistance programmes are coordinated & harmonised with other donors to promote selectivity, comparative advantage&reduce transactions costs.
Phases of PRSp Alignment Financing on-budget; in line with budget/MTEF cycle; conditions & benchmarks streamlined with PRSP matrix Country strategies linked to PRSP goals targets & macro framework Financing Policy formulation PRSP process: Results oriented, evidence based policy making? Shared analytical work; TA identified by Govt Poverty analysis Commun- ication Consultative & transparent processes M&E Policy impln Projects/programmes/ budget support complement PRSP; implementation managed by govt agencies Monitoring, review & audit drawing on govt. systems; annual PRSP review
Country Experience • Ethiopia – complex environment, many external agencies • Following end of war much re-engagement based on a relatively successful PRSp process – extensive participation • Pool of capable GoE officials; Govt. leadership in preparation of PRSP (SDPRP) clear.
Ethiopia • SDPRP starting point for common donor action; draws on sector progs. in health, educ, water, roads. • DAG Core Group/donors agreed rules of engagement for support of SDPRP process, including a Joint Donor Fund. • Commitment of most donors to build strategies on SDPRP
Ethiopia • Progress on a common framework for budget support based on common matrix for performance assessment derived from SDPRP & alignment with annual PRSP review & budget cycle • Share of GBS likely to rise to 30% • SPA a key player
Ethiopia • Harmonisation Task Force – adopted menu approach seeking to harmonise across all 3 main aid modalities: projects, programmes & GBS • Politically sensitive • Harmonisation of project aid the hardest to achieve; much assistance to SWAPs still projectised
Alignment risks & challenges • All the donors ‘eggs in one basket’! What do Govts. do when things go wrong? • Macro-frameworks & MTEF ceilings – can all aid be ‘on-budget’? • Disconnects between donor HQs and country level • Lack of alignment across/within Government
Alignment risks & challenges • Dangers of over-centralisation? i.e. heavy focus on aligning with national institutions/processes. • What’s the ‘right’ level of participation? The need to manage expectations & support a robust political process, particularly around the budget.