DWCP process and practices for developing country context

1. DWCP process and practices for developing country context Stocktaking: DW Country Level Policy Analysis Team Information & Knowledge Management Lotta Nycander

2. Purpose • Identify good practices in preparing the country context (prior to developing DWCPs) • Learn from these good practices • Ensure that a DWCountry policy analysis template builds on & adds to these practices

3. 7 sets of key questions In the preparation process for developing the country context: • How was it done and who did it? How much time did it take of ILO staff and others to prepare the DWCP context? • What were the types of data, statistics, sources, including Decent Work Indicators used? • What was the coverage of ILO´s four strategic pillars of the DW agenda?

4. Key questions continued • What was the adherence to DWCP Guidebook for the preparation of DWCPs? • What was the financial cost of preparing the DWCP country context? • What was the time line for preparing the DWCP context? • How was gender equality issues brought up/mainstreamed in the country context?

5. Methodology Qualitative inquiry: • 15 in-depth 1 ½ skype/telephone interviews with ILODirectors, Programme Officers • Focus on DWCPs covering 25 countries, receiving info about 31 DWCPs. • Extensive documentation review: DWCPs, DWC Profiles, Evaluations/Reviews, UNDAFs, PRSPs, Mid-Term Frameworks..

6. DWCPs/countries in focus Burkina Faso, Senegal, Lesotho & Tanzania (AFRICA) (Port of Spain office:) Antigua, Barbuda, Dominica, Grenada, Montserrat, St Kitts and Nevis, St Lucia, St. Vincent & the Grenadines (under Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States – OECS) (AMERICAS) Jordan (ARAB STATES) Kyrgyz Republic, Indonesia, Cambodia, Afghanistan & Viet Nam (ASIA) Armenia, Bosnia & Herzegovina & Ukraine (EUROPE) These were discussed but not in focus: The Bahamas, Jamaica, Argentina & Guyana, Botswana, Namibia, Swaziland, South Africa & Azerbaijan.

7. Findings & perspectives from the field

8. Preparation of DWCP country context • Clearly – political sensitivities • Challenges: In all countries solutions found - despite challenges: Political circumstances, frequent shifts of Governments.. Some had scarce resources and not adequate data • “What has worked” earlier influenced contents • Tilting toward certain strategic objectives/pillars (typically employment)  less focus on other pillars

9. Preparation of the country context.. continued • In a few countries only 3 out of 4 pillars were mentioned (e.g. social dialogue in Jordan absent) • Availability of data also also to determine how much attention a strategic objective would be given in the country context

10. Preparation of the country context..continued • Some countries ILO good capacity to facilitate/drive the work on country context, e.g. Director in Kabul & Port of Spain & Sr. Economist in Jakarta, Sr. Analyst in Amman • In other countries: Very few ILO staff (e.g. Bosnia & Herzegovina, Kyrgyz Republic and Zimbabwe)  placed a lot of burden on individual ILO programme officers

11. Preparing the country context • Some claimed that ILO must prepare the country context internally (e.g. countries in Southern Africa) – no external consultants • Some had good use of external consultants (e.g. Vietnam, Cambodia, OESC countries, Zimbabwe, Senegal, Burkina Faso)

12. Preparing the country context 2 important findings:Leading to a faster process (efficiency) & more reliable results (effectiveness) – and more commitment for the DW Agenda: • Participatory approaches and/or strategic planning in tripartite workshops to identify issues for the analysis for the overall DWCP - often together with identifying priorities. • More engaging & serious consultations with constituents & partners emphasizing increased national ownership of the process (e.g. OECS countries, Lesotho consultations without pre-prepared background analysis - which influenced other S.A. countries)

13. Preparation of the country context..continued Influencing factors for stalled processes were often changes in national governments - outside the control of the ILO In some countries, strategic planning was started - but the process was still drawn out in time - sometimes for 1-2 years, even longer.

14. Preparation of the country context..continued • In some countries, ILO was in the driving seat for the country context preparation (e.g. Afghanistan, Indonesia, Cambodia, & Jordan) • In others, the Government (Ministry of Labour) took charge of what it should contain from the beginning (ILO Moscow sub-region countries) and/or what sources of data could be used (e.g. in Lesotho and Southern Africa) • Some interviewees emphasised the role and actions taken by the established DWCP Steering Committees, e.g. in Zimbabwe, to get things moving.

15. Preparation of the country context..continued Some lessons shared from the field on regional influences (trends) • ILO lessons in Lesotho strongly influenced approach in South Africa, Namibia, Botswana, Swaziland (& engagement with the Southern African Development Community) • ILO lessons in Moscow sub-region (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kyrgyz, Armenia) was that governments must be in charge of the process. • Bringing constituents together effectively is a must when covering small island countries - good experience of ILO in Port of Spain, T&T ---as opposed to the practice in several countries in Americas – each constituent had to be approached separately

16. Preparation of the country context..continued • In some countries, ILO had supported NJP Country Scans, DW Country Profiles and Country Reviews/Evaluations (e.g. in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Jordan, Afghanistan, Indonesia). • Most of the interviewees emphasised these were very helpful when timely, to • Fill in knowledge gaps about decent work deficit • Generate commitment among constituents for the DW Agenda – not only the DWCP

17. Preparing the country contexts continued • Some countries had seen large ILO delegations with experts/specialists involved in both national Job Pact Scans (e.g. Indonesia) and country analysis/contexts – sometimes viewed as a necessary and fruitful approach in e.g. the gathering of data. • Others viewed large delegations as counter-productive to building commitment and ownership among the stakeholders (e.g. Lesotho and Southern African countries lessons had been learned to keep the process simple). Conclusion: Although there are benefits of large delegations with specialists coming together for a particular purpose, there is a risk these are counter productive to generating commitment by governments/constituents (a step backwards to ILO’s heydays in the 1970s and 1980s..?).

18. Preparing the country contexts continued • Only in Azerbaijan and Armenia under the Moscow sub-region was it possible to synchronize and coordinate the process of these various ILO initiatives - in order for the Profile and Review to actually feed into the DWCP including the country context. • In Zimbabwe, regarding a Review of a previous DWCP: “We took a ride on that exercise” and “we were killing two birds with one stone”.

19. Who prepared the country contexts? • ILO staff: Directors, Economists, Sr. Analysts, National Coordinators, Programme Officers • External consultants • Constituents made inputs

20. How much time did it take, continued The process to develop the country context typically took between three months and one year/or one and a half year. Time to prepare the country context often could not be differentiated from the overall process for the DWCP. The respondents often perceived the country context and the rest of the document as being part of the same process/exercise and inter-connected.

21. How much time did it take, continued The question is raised – did the country context provide a platform for the DWCP priorities? In some cases the process was very drawn out and as long as the period to produce the overall DWCP document. (e.g. in Kyrgyz Republic and the countries falling under the ILO regional office in Moscow it was considered not practical to prepare the country context separately from the rest of the DWCP).

22. Types of data and sources Acquiring reliable data was part of the challenges in producing country analysis/contexts. • All country contexts refer to the national statistics – but not always found reliable or adequate. • Most include internationally produced statistics including statistics produced by international development partners • Sometimes data from specific surveys was used.

23. Types of data and sources, continued • In one country (Senegal), it was informed that all data were from the national Poverty Reduction Strategy in process. • Some countries lack a Labour Force Survey was problematic (e.g. Afghanistan). • Where DW Country Profile existed – this was very useful as a reference and to build upon for the country context • World Bank and IMF sources for data not accepted by GO officials some countries (e.g. Southern Africa). UN & AfDB more acceptable.

24. Inclusion of ILO´s four strategic pillars, continued • Vast majority of the DWCPs in focus included the four pillars at various depth • But country contexts descriptions of the main labour and social issues and policies - not always placed in the forefront in the country context – on issues that ILO may be expected to help address, based on its comparative advantage. • Some felt that if all four ILO strategic objective areas are described in the country contest this would necessarily direct the priorities and outcome sections of the document. • Three DWCPs have included only three out of four strategic objectives in the country context narrative. Social dialogue missing (Jordan) – in others freedom of association was neglected..

25. Inclusion of ILO´s four strategic pillars Availability of data in certain areas also determined how much attention to give to a certain strategic pillar (e.g. Jordan, Bosnia and Herzegovina).

26. Inclusion of ILO´s four strategic pillars, continued • In two DWCPs, the missing pillar (social dialogue) in the country context section is mentioned as important in other parts of the document. • In quite a few DWCPs the country context narrates the overall socio-economic status of the country (including health, education sectors), providing many details not specifically related to the ILO DW Agenda or in areas for which the ILO could be expected to provide assistance.

27. Gender equality mainstreamed in country context • Gender issues are, in the majority of cases, mentioned in the country context sections of the DWCPs. In several cases, the DWCP documents had applied both a gender mainstreaming approach (acknowledging the fact that gender is a cross-cutting issue and therefore brought into the priorities/outcomes sections) and at the same time mentioning gender in a specific paragraph/section in the country context. • BUT only one DWCP has sex-disaggregated information mentioned in direct relation to all strategic pillars.

28. Financial cost of preparing the country context The issue of the costs specifically related to produce the country analysis/context part of the DWCP was the most difficult of the questions as perceived by the interviewees. Few were able to provide this information. The reason seemed to be that the work often was intermixed in a process of preparing the entire DWCP. The sums that were typically mentioned were in the range of USD 20,000 – 50,000, while in Cambodia USD 80,000 was mentioned and in Indonesia the sum was USD 100,000.

29. Use of the DWCP Guidebook Country context descriptions of the main labour & social issues and policies is not always placed in the forefront in the country context– or on issues that ILO may be expected to help address, based on its comparative advantage. Some country contexts give an extensive overview of the general economic, social and political situation in the country - Information on the work of partners other than the national constituents - often not done

30. Use of the DWCP Guidebook, continued Majority interviewees claimed that the Guidebook had been used in parts. The sentiment among quite a few interviewees was that the latest version was quite an improvement and less “prescriptive” than the earlier versions. In a few cases it was mentioned that it had not been relevant In some cases the latest version of the Guide had circulatedwhen the country contexts were about to be completed. In several cases, it was mentioned that the CEB Toolkit was used to guide the constituents and to increase their appreciation of what the four pillars were about (and what specifics the pillars cover).

31. Understanding the use of cross-cutting in the DWCP • It seemed that the concept of “cross-cutting” did not mean the same thing for all interviewees. • Some mentioned that social dialogue and/or international labour standards (two of the pillars) were cross-cutting issues. This makes little sense. • In some countries (e.g. in countries Southern Africa) HIV/AIDS may influence the outcomes and reaching the objectives • Child labour is also rampant in some countries (e.g. Kyrgyz Republic) therefore treated as cross - cutting

32. SOME PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS

33. ILO should always enable platforms for facilitated strategic planning as a starting point in the planning process to produce the country analysis (on which to subsequently build the country context chapter of the DWCPs) • Country analysis/country context should be treated as an integral part of the whole strategic planning process – for reasons of effectiveness and efficiency (& buy-in) (There is a tendency that strategic planning mainly involves priorities and outcomes. The use of National Job Pact Scans and Profiles should/cannot be a prerequisite as these processes are costly and time consuming.). This requires: • Availability/Capacity/Recruitment of external Facilitators, with expertise in Strategic Planning to assist countries and train others. • Appreciation of results-oriented strategic planning workshops, logical framework matrices and related planning analytical tools to, at least start up of a discussion on the country analysis (done in some countries). • Each process must involve the national constituents and be flexible enough to adapt to socio-cultural / country-specific concerns without compromising on quality.

34. ILO should find a balance in providing expert advice where it is required (avoiding large expert/specialist delegations) - at the same time maintain a “holistic” approach. • ILO specialists who provide technical inputs should be encouraged to “see the forest – not only the trees” • ILO should explain to country programme staff that coverage of the pillars in the country context - do not compel ILO to act (implement) on all pillars.

35. Cross-cutting concerns • ILO should bring about a common understanding as to what cross-cutting and mainstreaming actually means as regards the country context (there was uncertainties about this among some interviewees. Only one DWCP had mainstreamed gender throughout all four pillars in the country context. ) • The DWCP Guidebook should add HIV/AIDS and (possibly) child labour to cross-cutting concerns.

36. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING Lotta Nycander