330 likes | 430 Views
The First FEATS International Conference Improving Ownership through Inclusive Trade Policy Making Processes: Lessons from Africa Geneva, 1 October 2009 Presentation of the Main Findings of the First Phase Research. By Rashid S. Kaukab
E N D
The First FEATS International Conference Improving Ownership through Inclusive Trade Policy Making Processes: Lessons from Africa Geneva, 1 October 2009 Presentation of the Main Findings of the First Phase Research By Rashid S. Kaukab Deputy Director and Research Coordinator, CUTS Geneva Resource Centre rsk@cuts.org www.cuts-grc.org
Structure of Presentation • Introduction: background and objectives • Trade policy making process: main stakeholders and key consultative mechanisms • Challenges in participation: views of stakeholders • Measuring inclusiveness: the Inclusive Trade Policy Making (ITPM) Index • Conclusions and Recommendations
Introduction • Focus on five African countries: Kenya, Malawi, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia • Importance of trade and trade policy as a means to achieve growth and development • Importance of inclusive trade policy making to ensure national multi-stakeholder ownership • Interactive and inclusive methodology to study an area of political economy of trade • Data issues
Introduction Objectives • To understand the political economy landscape of the country to focus future trade-related work on key actors and processes • To collect and collate information and to analyze the information to identify the main groups of stakeholders as well as the consultative mechanisms in the project countries • To draw lessons to facilitate targeted actions by governments and other stakeholders in the project countries to improve domestic buy-in for national trade policies • To develop a template/model that can be used to conduct such studies in other developing countries as well
INTRODUCTION Main Economic and Social Indicators
Trade Policy Making: Main Stakeholders 1. Government Ministry Responsible for Trade Policy • Role of the ministry as the primary institution to deal with all trade policy issues is generally recognized now and reflected in governmental procedures • Responsible for trade policy making, and monitoring its implementation • Also generally responsible for developing negotiating positions for various trade negotiations • Entrusted with the task of consulting all relevant stakeholders on trade policy issues including through the establishment and functioning of consultative mechanisms
Trade Policy Making: Main Stakeholders 2. Other Relevant Government Ministries and Agencies • Providing overall policy direction to ensure coherence with the long term development vision and strategy, e.g. President’s Office, Ministry for National Planning • Providing specific, expert inputs on issues that are under the mandate of a particular ministry/government agency, e.g., Ministry of Agriculture • Implementing trade policy measures that are covered under the mandate of a particular ministry/government agency, e.g. National Revenue Authority, District Commercial Officers, etc
Trade Policy Making: Main Stakeholders 3. Private Sector • Organized in overall umbrella organizations (e.g. National Chamber of Commerce and Industry) as well as on sectoral basis (e.g. associations of fresh fruit exporters, textiles and garments industry, etc) • Representation generally through large umbrella and / or sectoral associations but occasionally individual firms also play key role • Informal sector generally not represented
Trade Policy Making: Main Stakeholders 4. Civil Society Organizations • Organization: international, regional, national; faith-based; project, policy; network • Focus of activities: awareness-raising, advocacy, research, capacity building, project execution, networking • Substantive issue coverage of activities: human rights, trade and development, gender and youth issues, finance and monetary issues • Issues of representation and mandate
Trade Policy Making: Consultative Mechanisms Categorization by Mandate • On a specific trade issue (e.g. EPA negotiations) • On all trade issues • On larger set of issues that includes trade Categorization by Membership • Only governmental actors • For public and private sectors • Multi-stakeholder
Challenges in Participation as Viewed by Stakeholders Ministry Responsible for Trade Policy • Lack of capacity and technical human resources • Issues of internal and external coordination • Lack of financial and human resources to ensure regular functioning of consultative mechanisms • Diversity and evolving nature of issues • Changes in governments/restructuring of ministries
Challenges in Participation as Viewed by Stakeholders Other relevant Government Ministries and Agencies • Lack of capacity and technical human resources • Issues of coordination among governmental machinery • Lack of regular and timely information flow on trade issues • Issue of primary mandate
Challenges in Participation as Viewed by Stakeholders Private Sector • Limited technical understanding, and advocacy capacities • Need to balance the interests of members • Tight timelines to provide feedback on trade issues • Need to improve opportunities for less powerful business associations • Representation of informal sector?
Challenges in Participation as Viewed by Stakeholders Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) • Limited technical understanding of complex issues • Need to strengthen research-based advocacy • Need for better coordination and information sharing among CSOs • Occasional tensions with the government • Limited opportunities for participation • Lack of resources to maintain sustained engagement and retain the knowledge and expertise gained on trade issues • Issues of representation and mandate ?
Measuring inclusiveness: the Inclusive Trade Policy Making (ITPM) Index Objectives of ITPM Index • Raising awareness about the political economy aspects of trade policy making • Assessing the inclusiveness of a country’s trade policy making processes in terms of the capacities and participation of main stakeholders in these processes • Identifying the weaknesses and gaps that should be the target of related capacity building and other activities by the governments, donors, and various stakeholders • Allowing for comparisons across countries to identify the good practices as well as prompting actions by countries lagging behind • Improving prospects for domestic ownership of trade policies through development and application of more inclusive trade policy making processes
Measuring inclusiveness: the Inclusive Trade Policy Making (ITPM) Index Methodology • Development of analytical framework: defining main features of inclusive trade policy; linking these features with elements of trade policy making process and relevant stakeholders; and developing action variables to assess performance • Constructing initial ITPM Indices for all five countries based on the analytical framework and the information collected during the study • Validation of the framework and the initial IPTM Index values and finalization after incorporating the comments
Measuring inclusiveness: the Inclusive Trade Policy Making (ITPM) Index IPTM Index: Action Variables, Actors and Values Part I: Ministry Responsible for Trade Policy
Measuring inclusiveness: the Inclusive Trade Policy Making (ITPM) Index IPTM Index: Action Variables, Actors and Values Parts II, III, and IV: Other Relevant Government Ministries, Private Sector, and CSOs
Measuring inclusiveness: the Inclusive Trade Policy Making (ITPM) Index Explanation of Possible Action Values • Yes = maximum value of 1 = when appropriate action has been taken by the actor concerned • Many/Most = high value of 0.75 = when quite a lot has been done but some gaps remain • Some = intermediate value of 0.5 = when action has been taken but is not sufficient • Few / Little = low value of 0.25 = when some action has been taken but much remains • No = 0 value assigned = when no action has been taken by the actor concerned
Measuring inclusiveness: the Inclusive Trade Policy Making (ITPM) Index
Measuring inclusiveness: the Inclusive Trade Policy Making (ITPM) Index
Measuring inclusiveness: the Inclusive Trade Policy Making (ITPM) Index
Main Conclusions • Improved economic performance in recent past, however, poverty, unemployment and under-development challenges remain • Improved policy framework in place with trade policy at various stages of mainstreaming in overall development policies • Importance of trade well recognized; comprehensive trade policies are in place/being prepared; clearer mandates and better resources for ministries dealing with trade • More open political and bureaucratic culture encouraging stakeholder consultations, particularly with the private sector
Main Conclusions • Several consultative mechanisms on trade issues established; however • Lack legal mandates and adequate resources • Multiplicity of consultative fora • Not all trade issues covered by consultative fora • Irregular and ad hoc functioning • Improved stakeholders participation; but • Not all stakeholders being represented • Not all stakeholders have equal opportunities to participate
Main Conclusions • Remaining challenges classified in three broad categories • Related to capacity (limited technical, human, and financial capacities of stakeholders) • Related to institutional and structural issues (design and functioning of consultative mechanisms) • Related to challenges internal to each group of stakeholders
Some Recommendations • Identification and involvement of remaining stakeholders: by governments and concerned ministries • Awareness-raising on trade issues: by all actors • Regular information flow on trade issues to key stakeholders: by concerned ministries • Rationalization and strengthening of consultative mechanisms: by governments and concerned ministries • Better coordination among relevant government ministries and agencies on trade issues: by governments
Some Recommendations • Better opportunities for CSO participation: by concerned ministries • Better feedback and input loops between CSOs and the private sector umbrella organisations on the one hand, and their constituencies on the other: by private sector and CSOs • Investment on knowledge and expertise building: by all including development partners • Promotion of a culture of dialogue and inclusiveness: by all
Inclusiveness will generate national ownership which is the best guarantee for effective implementation of trade policy as part of overall development policy