Project Implementation Process (CREW Project)

1. Project Implementation Process(CREW Project) RijitSengupta CUTS International FIRST PAC MEETING CREW PROJECT 14th March 2013 Jaipur, India

2. Outline • Introduction • About the Project • Project Phases • Management & Programmatic issues

3. I. INTRODUCTION

4. 1. Genesis of CREW Project • Competition can promote consumerandproducer/business welfare – not much doubt • Competition not an end in itself, but a means for achieving developmental goals • Presence of competition law not adequate, a comprehensive approach necessary - competition reforms • DCs suffer from implementation challenges: - Government support often meager - Limited stakeholder understanding & support - Development partners’ priorities - Etc.

5. 2. Competition Reform Defined Competition reforms = A + B + C A: Enabling government policies that promote competition in markets B: Appropriate regulatory framework, institutions and actions for promoting competition in sectors C:Well defined competition legislation and effective enforcement mechanisms

6. 3. Motivation for CREW • Some research had been done to establish the link between competition and productivity, growth and consumer welfare • Experience of competition and regulatory agencies accentuated the link between well-functioning markets and resulting welfare • Why was CUTS Interested? - Is it possible to better demonstrate positive effects of competition reforms on producers and consumers in DCs? - Is there a way to isolatethe such positive effects of competition reforms, given the problem of attribution?

7. II. ABOUT THE PROJEC T

8. 1. Goal & Objectives Goal To better demonstrate measurable benefits from effective competition reforms in DCs, for ensuring long-term support for competition Objectives • Enhance understanding of benefits from competition reforms in DCs • Develop & Test a Methodology to assess efficacy of competition reforms in benefitting consumers and producers • Advocate to key actors (National & International) for greater support to competition reforms in DCs • Sustain momentum on competition reforms and take it forward

9. 2. Outputs & Outcome Outputs • Documented evidence of benefits from competition reforms in key markets • Dialogues involving multiple stakeholders on benefits of competition reforms in DCs • Strategy for capacity building of DC competition agencies and sector regulators • Framework (Tool) guiding process of competition reforms in DCs • Demand from elsewhere for similar exercise Outcome Greater attention and impetus for competition reforms in key DC markets resulting in consumer and producer benefits

10. 3. Implementation Plan Phase I: Identify the degree and nature of competition in the two sectors – main competition concerns (Diagnostic Report) – RESEARCH & OUTREACH/CONSULTATIONS • 4 Countries & 2 Sectors Phase II:Develop methodology for assessing benefits of competition reforms in two sectors (Framework + Methods + Tools) – DESIGN THE FRAMEWORK (with METHODS/TOOLS) & CONSULTATIONS Phase III:Apply sectoral FCPs in micro-locations in 4 project countries – MICRO-LEVEL TESTING, ADVOCACY & PUBLIC EDUCATION

11. 4. CREW Project Actors Program Level • CREW Implementation Team: CUTS+Advisers+Nathan • PAC Country Level • Country Partner Organisation • National Reference Group (NRG) • National Entities: Competition/Sectora Regulator, Business Associations, Research Organisation/CSO, Media

12. 5. Coordination Mechanism - Actors NRG-2

13. 6. CREW Actors: Information & data flow

14. III. PROJECT PHASES

15. 1. PREPARATORY ACTIVITIES:Selection of Project Countries • Presence/absence of a national competition law, agency • Local (research and advocacy) institutions with orientation on competition and consumer protection issues • 2 countries each from the regions: Africa and Asia • One country in each region of DFID’s interest • One member state each of SADC and ASEAN • CUTS experience of having implemented an earlier competition project • CUTS confidence of implementing the activities

16. 1. PREPARATORY ACTIVITIESSelection of Sectors • High impact on the poor • Availability of data • Essential goods and services • Nature of sector regulatory framework

17. 2. PHASE I Activities Diagnostic Phase(RESEARCH & OUTREACH/CONSULTATIONS) • Gather information about prevailing state of competition (including competition concerns) in two sectors of four project countries • Collect evidence of benefits/losses accruing to consumers and producers in the two sectors • Identify ‘enabling’ and ‘opposing’ factors for countries to derive these benefits • Collate experience from four countries for each sector - inputs for the design phase (Phase-II)

18. 3. Programme Logic (Phase-I)

19. 4. Phase IIDesign Phase[DESIGN THE FRAMEWORK (with METHODS/TOOLS) & CONSULTATIONS] Draw Inputs from the Diagnostic Phase (for preparing 2 sectoral FCPs) in terms of: • Indicators of benefits of competition reforms for consumers and producers • Evolve a common methodological framework • Selection of applicable Methods and Tools

20. 5. Benefits of competition reforms for Consumers(Possible Indicators) • Access: Goods and services reach consumers in areas where they were not available earlier • Quality: Quality of goods and services enhanced by firms to attract customers • Choice: New firms/products enter otherwise ‘concentrated’ markets • Price: Prices are reduced in a ‘contestable market’ • Time savings by consumers

21. 5. Benefits of competition reforms for Producers(Possible Indicators)  Access to essential services: Firms can easily access infrastructure networks, etc.  Free movement of goods & services: Mobility not affected by policies, practices (inputs & outputs)  Predictability of regulatory actions: Legislations enforced by autonomous yet accountable institutions

22. 5. Benefits of competition reforms for Producers (Indicators)  Cost savings: Effective implementation of strategies to reduce costs, e.g. improved application of ICT tools  Fair market processes: Easy entry and exit in markets; considerable ‘ease of doing business’  Level-playing field: principle of ‘competitive neutrality’ is observed  Transparency in market: Well laid out policies and predictable implementation processes (market regulators)

23. 6. How to measure benefits? BENEFITS Methods = Qualitative + Quantitative

24. 7. Phase III: Validation Phase(MICRO-LEVEL TESTING, ADVOCACY & PUBLIC EDUCATION) • Research: (a) competition distorting policies & (b) impact of ACPs on producers, consumers • Parliamentary outreach and discussions • Government-Business Forum • Media (information) campaign • Training Workshop for CAs and Sector Regulators - Enhance enforcement capacity (based on market studies) - Highlight need for coordination of actions (CA + SR) • National Orientation Workshop (other sectors) - Expanding support for competition reforms - Better buy-in (other sectors)

25. IV. MANAGEMENT & PROGRAMMATIC ISSUES

26. 1. Technical oversight Advisers • Two Advisers (R ShyamKhemani & Fred Jenny) • Point out relevant techniques, methods • Guide in developing ToRs of reports, etc. • Advise on sources of useful information • Secure useful reports, data • Help draft and re-draft parts of reports • Play an active role in outreach • Get involved in capacity building activities Associate Organisation(Nathan Associates) • Performs Core Research function • Draft the background paper • Prepare sectoral FCPs

27. 2. Development partners Role • Propose PAC members • Guide project implementation process • Participate in ‘internal review’ • Involve closely with ‘external evaluation’ • Stock-take project progress, periodically • Act in coordination • Engage country-offices in project countries/region • Involve other donors & IGOs • Other donors to join in supporting CREW subsequently

28. 2. Development partners Reporting & Management • Donor Coordination • Reporting arrangements • GAANT Chart • Operational Strategy Note (OSN)

29. 3. Project Advisory Committee (PAC) Role • Point sources of useful information (techniques, methods, data ) at country/sector levels • Quality control of project reports, briefs, etc. • Strategic advise (advocacy & outreach) • Finalisation of project countries (4) • Advise for choosing sectors (2) • Address challenges in implementation • Get involved in capacity building

30. 3. PAC: Confirmed Members • Fred Jenny, OECD Competition Committee (Chair) • Pradeep S Mehta, CUTS • DFID Representative (Miguel Laric) • GIZ Representative (Eiko Kauffmann) • Martha Licetti, Competition Team, World Bank • Eberhed Feess, Frankfurt School of F&M, Germany • Natalie Timan, OFT, UK • Rafaelita Aldaba, PIDS, Philippines • Deunden Nikomborirak, TDRI, Thailand • David Ong’olo, Kenya • George Lipimile, COMESA Competition Commission • Yannis Katsoulacos, AUEB, Greece

31. 3. PAC: Meetings & Engagement • Physical meetings once a year (CREW meetings) • Special Invitees • Meetings on sidelines of international conferences (OECD GCF, UNCTAD IGE, ACF, etc.) • SKYPE meetings (bi-annual) • Quarterly reports and feedback • Any other possibilities

32. 4. Update about Preparatory Phase • Planning Meeting (8-9 Nobember 2012, Bonn) • Drafting the Operational Strategy Note (OSN) • Identification of PAC members • ToR of Project Adviser(s) • Identification of Project Associate Organisation (PAO) • Drafting of background paper by PAO, ‘Measuring impacts of competition reforms : suggested approaches & methods’ • Inception Meeting in March 2013 (Jaipur, India) - Identification of project countries - Identification of sectors - Partners orientation

33. Thank You CUTS Team Beginnings are always exciting!