1 / 9

Political Dimensions of Poverty Reduction: Summary, Findings, and Questions

This document summarizes the findings from the conference on the Political Dimensions of Poverty Reduction and raises questions for further consideration. It explores the role of political will, government-civil society relations, and donor-recipient relations in poverty reduction efforts. The document emphasizes the need for broad participation, institutional support, and the development of state capacity. It also highlights the challenges of implementation, neopatrimonialism, and the dissemination of information at the local level. Overall, it encourages discussions and actions to effectively address the complex interplay between politics and poverty reduction.

jonathone
Download Presentation

Political Dimensions of Poverty Reduction: Summary, Findings, and Questions

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Some Summary Findings and Questions Benjamin Roberts Conference on the Political Dimensions of Poverty Reduction Mulungushi Conference Centre, Lusaka 9-11th March 2005

  2. Introduction • Macro perspective • Global-local (Cheru), regional (Roberts), comparative national case study (Ssewakiryanga) • Zambia: political system and enabling envt (Mejns), PRSP framework (Seshamani) donor politics (Eberlei) • Zambian case studies • Sector specific : agriculture, tourism, safety nets • Cross-cutting: Gender, HIV/AIDS • Public resource management • Civil society participation in implementation

  3. Summary Findings: Recurrent Themes • Consensus on PRSP participation • Expanding space for broad range of social actors • More and deeper involvement • Gov – civil society relations improved • BUT: lack of institutionalisation of CS involvement (ad hoc): little participation in monitoring (info from donors rather than gov) • Role of parliament in PRSP has been limited • Need for institutional support/development • PRSP offers opportunities BUT requires development of state capacity • Difficulty of accountability in a weak state: capacity issue • Capacity to implement state reforms • Weakness of local political structures (SNs, gender mainstreaming) • ‘Capable’ or ‘Enabling’ State (Cheru, Mejns)

  4. Summary Findings: Recurrent Themes • Political will: • Neopatrimonialism practices are deeply rooted • Slow implementation of PRSP (implementation gaps) • Need for political commitment from the top to push public sector reform, decentralisation, etc. • BUT also need for similar commitment at lower levels of government and across sectors (broadening and deepening). • Ownership in donor-gov relations • Need “policy space”: increasing policy options • IFIs still “financial engine behind the PRSP train”: continued dependency on donor support • Given magnitude of challenge, external pressure for reform not been matched by resource flows • Harmonising and simplifying donor support has been disappointing relative to pace of adoption of PRSP framework by Zambia

  5. Summary Findings: Recurrent Themes • Absence of a broad debate about alternate policies • Content remains the same (growth, stability, etc) • Dissemination of information • Lack of awareness and understanding on PRSP at local level

  6. Missing or under-emphasised elements • Ability to generalise findings • From localised case studies to national lessons • Tease out implications for second generation PRSP: new opportunities for ‘policy space’ (Lise – issue of IFI approval) • Policy Content • Some case studies emphasised process, polity BUT presentations tended to reflect much less on content (policies) • New wine, old wine?? Sufficient to make a substantive enough change to reduce policy.

  7. Missing or under-emphasised elements • Neopatrimonialism question • Aim of project: “To establish whether the institutionalisation of good governance and the implied broad participation of civil society will be able to effectively weaken the neopatrimonial structures, which have impeded development, and facilitate progress on the road towards poverty reduction” • Need to take case studies and link them more strongly to the aim of the study. • Not seeing enough detailed case study reflection of what the macro papers are showing. • Impact of macro-conditions on local PRSP implementation • The role of debt and HIPC, aid dependency, etc. not really mentioned in case studies

  8. Closing the Circle: Questions for consideration • Four major gambles in the PRSP Approach: • Has it led govt to take poverty more seriously (political will)? • Has it delivered on the promise of enhancing govt – civil society interaction (participation)? • Has it delivered on the promise of increasing govt accountability? (good governance / neopatrimonialism) • Has it democratised donor-recipient relations? (ownership) • Emerging evidence on the outcomes for the poor?

  9. Concluding thoughts • Politics and the PRSP Approach • Little pre-existing research • Real contribution: rich case study material, focus on implementation • Provokes thinking for different stakeholders, both locally and regionally • Dissemination of findings going to be critical: should not just be a book and a national workshops (short policy briefings, community radio discussions, etc). • A word of thanks!

More Related