National strategies for rural poverty reduction A comparison of experiences

1. National strategies for rural poverty reductionA comparison of experiences

2. Objective of the Presentation • The achievement of the MDGs highlights the importance of Poverty Reduction Strategies (PRS) • The purpose of this presentation is to identify common features and differences in terms of: objectives, ownership, participation and implementation • The range of strategies has evolved in recent years, but three broad categories can be distinguished: • PRSPs linked to HIPC • PRSPs linked to concessional loans • PRS developed outside the PRSP framework • Country classification is becoming increasingly difficult as processes are evolving and gradually converging } PRSP monitored by the Bretton Woods Institutions

3. Poverty Reduction Strategies in developing countries • From a sample of 139 countries, 97 countries (i.e. 70%) have or are in the process of formulating a poverty reduction strategy. • Of these 97 countries: • Almost half are implementing a PRSP and almost a third a PRS, while the rest are in the process of formulating a strategy. • In Sub-Saharan Africa and in Eastern and Central Europe PRSP prevails • For Near East and North Africa region, half of the countries have developed or are developing strategies outside the PRSP framework • In Asia, many and the most populous countries have developed best practice national PRS processes outside the PRSP framework • In Latin America, most countries have a strategy for poverty reduction, with a majority of PRS outside the PRSP framework.

4. A variety of approaches - but some common features: • PRSPs • process is coordinated by a single unit • role of donors is influential and increasingly coordinated • consultation is mandatory • PRS outside of the PRSP framework • better integrated within existing government structures • donor-government relationship is not uniform • less established participation standards

5. Ownership • Experience shows that country ownership is of key importance. • However: • Ownership is often limited to the government executive branch • The process is often dominated by key central ministries, failing to take into consideration its full political dimension • Ownership is frequently stronger in PRS experiences outside the PRSP framework • Influence of donors is decreasing although still present for some PRSP cases Fragile ownership has a negative effect on continuity and sustainability for the implementation of all kind of PRS processes

6. Participation • With a few exceptions, limited participation is a common feature of poverty reduction strategy processes • Participation is directly related to the strength of civil society, prevailing attitudes and political traditions • The extent and quality of participation is strongly influenced by government appreciation of the role of civil society in this process • Participation has taken place mainly at the formulation phase and not during implementation Poverty reduction strategies involve a large number of stakeholders. This makes the achievement of broad participation processes difficult

7. Participation and regional differences • PRSP “ad hoc” consultative processes may have contributed to the exclusion of democratically elected institutions such as parliaments • In some regions, for example in Eastern and Southern Africa, participation of civil society has mainly involved NGOs with weak or non-existent linkages with rural areas • Overall, progress is being made regarding the involvement of CSOs – particularly in Latin America • Democratisation, decentralisation, and civil society contribution to policy dialogue – particularly in Asia and the Pacific region – are at the core of the PRS strategy processes

8. Scope and instruments • Most strategies have not considered the full range of policy actions required for growth and poverty reduction • The focus is largely on public expenditure for social sectors rather than on pro-poor policy reforms • PRSPs started as all-encompassing and general strategies, but are becoming better focused with increasing linkages to existing policy tools. • The use of PSIA methodologies is raising the quality of the debate on the sources of growth and its distributional impact

9. PRS in rural areas • The first generation of PRSPs and many strategies outside this framework have been weak in identifying the rural dimension of poverty reduction • Strategies featuring the rural sector tend to: • be oriented towards agriculture sector in general rather than on the livelihoods of poor rural people • lack an intersectoral approach to rural development • emphasize market liberalization and export promotions, without showing how the rural poor could benefit from these opportunities • lack a set of clear instruments and policies that effectively target the rural poor • These limitations are gradually being tackled with the development of specific tools for PRS implementation

10. Poverty Reduction Strategies as part of the New Development Architecture • Emerging tools for PRS implementation: • At the international level: • Agenda on Harmonization & Alignment (Declarations of Rome 2003 and Paris 2005) • At the national level: • PRS processes are essential strategic instruments to reach the MDGs • Medium Term Expenditure Frameworks, which link the PRSP to the budget with a multi-year planning tool; • Territorial based action plans are increasingly used, particularly in Latin America • Sector Wide Approaches, which are action-programmes for sectoral PRSP implementation

11. Emerging features of PRS implementation Outside the PRSP framework: • strategies are better integrated in national policies and budgetary processes • implementation is through existing mechanisms and frameworks • great variety of situations and outcomes. Noticeable progress in targeting and pro-poor policies in some cases PRSPs: • on average, implementation is still relatively recent (2 years). Nonetheless, with marked country differences • institutionalisation within existing policies and budgetary mechanisms is still embryonic in many countries, while already in progress in a number of African countries

12. IFAD and poverty reduction strategies The Fund has a key role to play in the development of rural poverty reduction strategies given its specific mandate and the identified weaknesses of PRS in tackling rural poverty. It can contribute to: • Ownership: IFAD supports partner governments in developing rural strategies and investment programmes that are country-driven • Participation: IFAD promotes broad based participatory processes, inter alia enabling rural CSOs to participate in PRS development and implementation processes • Implementation: IFAD supports programmes and projects to operationalise PRS strategies

13. Questions for discussion: some suggestions • What should be the main components of PRSs? Who should lead the process and how? • What are the critical lessons learnt and to what extent PRS countries could benefit from the experiences developed by PRSP countries, and vice versa? • What should be the role of IFAD supported projects and policy dialogue in the design and implementation of PRSs? • What is the future of PRSs and what shape will they take in the long term?