Report from group on the global child poverty study

1. Report from group on the global child poverty study Countries 1. Burundi 6. Niger 2. Cameroon 7. Nigeria 3. Congo 8. Senegal 4. DRC 9. Sierra Leone 5. Ghana * University of Bristol *

2. Content • Progress made by countries (countries experiences) • Bristol methodology as element of conceptual framework • Methodological issues and solutions • General Recommendations

3. Progrès réalisés par les pays 4 categories • 3 pays sont avancés, la question se pose recalibrer l’analyse selon les TDR de l’étude Globale: Congo, Mali & Sierra Leone • 2 pays ont démarré avec des trvaux pélimiaires: Cameroun, Ghana • 4 pays sont prets pour démarrer au plus tard foin février: Nigeria, Senegal, DRC, Burundi, • 1 pays doit conceptualiser l’étude pour l’intégrer au processus en cours de l’ANSIT : Niger

4. Progress made by countries (countries experiences) Etude comme une opportunité • Connaissance complémentaire sur la pauvreté des enfants; • Influencer les processus d’élaboration des plans de développement encours (DSRP, Rapport de suivi charte africaine, MICS, one UN…); • Renforcement des capacités nationales et des partenariats

5. Progress made by countries (countries experiences) cont. • Methodologie • Adaptation of Global TOR to the national context; • Equipe multidiscipinaire avec 2 sous-groupes statistical and policy templates, thematic analysis; • Regular meeting (weekly, 2 per month, monthly); • Focus group with children • MICS, DHS and LSMS; • Leadership au Gouvernement;

6. Progress made by countries (countries experiences) cont. • Main findings • Results exhibit strong correlation between child poverty and various determinant like household poverty status, region (urban or rural),...; • l’étude Pauvreté des enfants et les disparités offre une opportunité d’apporter cette connaissance complémentaire sur la pauvreté des enfants, qui n’apparaît pas dans les études générales sur la pauvreté; • cadres conceptuels intéressants développés sur l’analyse des facteurs influençant la pauvreté des enfants.

7. Progress made by countries (countries experiences) cont. • Issues • Méthodologie complexe;  • Modèle statistique trop vaste; • contradictions entre données nationales et internationales; • traduction française pas très fiable; • Problème de conceptualisation de la pauvreté de l’enfant et de l’étude; • Ressources humaines nationales limitées; • Données inexistantes • Modalité d’appui technique de l’Université de Bristol

8. Bristol methodology as element of conceptual framework • University of Bristol to produce tables – at the latest by April 20th; • Defining poverty for policy purposes using 1995, 1998 and 2007 UN definitions as agreed by governments; • In measuring Poverty, deprivation can be thought of as a continuum – from no deprivation to extreme deprivation, need to identify thresholds

9. Methodological issues and Solutions • Framework • Bristol work, Monee project, Situation Analysis • look at outcomes and policy interventions • Child poverty versus child well-being/child rights • disparities versus equalities • Deep and relevant disaggregation to clearly present targets and scope of the analysis

10. Methodological issues and Solutionscont. • Poverty concept • Internationally agreed definition; • National definition; • Bristol approach plus monetary dimension as common framework • Sequencing • Full statistical template then some parts of the policy template • Two way relation between statistical and policy analysis

11. Methodological issues and Solutions cont. • Timeline • Allocate sufficient time for the analysis; • Deadline for the final report end of July; • Submit to Bristol all the necessary data sets by end of February; • Inconsistencies in policy and statistical templates &statistical discrepancies • National “validated” data as reference; • In case of internal discrepancy use the “best” data source; • Report on it;

12. Methodological issues and Solutions cont. • Minimum statistical tabulation • Absolute figures for working tables and percentages for the report in most cases; • University of Bristol will produce all tables B as indicated in the TOR assuming they receive datasets on time from countries; • Adapt at the country level the number and the structure of tables as relevant; • Disaggregation by religion and ethnicity on country basis

13. Methodological issues and Solutions cont. • Policy Template • Realistic number of policies • To a very large extend derived from statistical template; • Use Qualitative data; • Common methods by all countries; • Horizontal sharing of ideas.

14. How to use the study to influence policy • The structure of the team matters; • Focus the report on one or two messagesthat will trigger other necessary policy changes; • Link as much as possible study to relevant country frameworks; • Elaborate communication plan for the report; • Involve at country level, donors, UN agencies, IFI, NGOs and Civil society at the earlier sage of the study and media; • Establish an advisory panel of “independent” experts who can accompany the study; • Capacity building and partnerships; • building networks.

15. General recommendations To Technical team • Translation of statistical templates in French; • Improve Global study guide French translation. Countries should liaise with HQ for improvement; To country team • Be simple and avoid sophisticated statistical models, as policy makers, because of the difficulty to capture, might be reluctant to use results; • Link the study to relevant national development framework; • Involve key donors represented locally, NGO, Civil society, Un agencies; • Set an advisory local panel to accompany the team