• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Inclusiveness of trade_policy-rashid
 

Inclusiveness of trade_policy-rashid

on

  • 341 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
341
Views on SlideShare
341
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Inclusiveness of trade_policy-rashid Inclusiveness of trade_policy-rashid Presentation Transcript

    • IMPROVING INCLUSIVENESS OF TRADE POLICY MAKING IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES Presentation to CUTS Geneva Resource Centre Session during the WTO Geneva Week 6 May, 2010 By Rashid S. Kaukab Deputy Director and Research Coordinator, CUTS Geneva Resource Centre [email_address] www.cuts-grc.org
    • STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION
      • Brief Introduction
      • Trade policy making process: main stakeholders and some features of formal consultative mechanisms
      • Challenges as viewed by stakeholders
      • Measuring inclusiveness: the Inclusive Trade Policy Making (ITPM) Index
      • Conclusions and Recommendations
    • I. INTRODUCTION
      • Importance of trade and trade policy as a means to achieve growth and development
      • Importance of inclusive trade policy making to ensure relevance and effective implementation
      • Based on recent CUTS research under the FEATS project with focus on Kenya, Malawi, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia
    • II. TRADE POLICY MAKING: MAIN STAKEHOLDERS Features of an Inclusive Trade Policy Key Elements of Inclusive Trade Policy Making Process Relevant Stakeholders Based on national development policy Clear guidance/directions from national development policy makers National development policy makers (e.g., President’s Office, Ministry for Planning and Development, parliament, etc) Linked with other governmental policies Timely inputs and feedback from other government ministries/departments Other relevant government ministries/departments (e.g., those dealing with agriculture, employment and labour,, competition, etc.) Linked with international commitments (to implement the commitments as well as to guide the positions regarding future possible commitments) Timely inputs and feedback from relevant ministries and negotiators Relevant ministries (e.g., Ministry of Foreign Affairs, etc.) and negotiators (e.g., dealing with the WTO and EPA negotiations) Balancing the interests of all key stakeholders Regular inputs and feedback from key non-state stakeholders Key non-state actors (e.g., representatives of the private sector, farmers, consumers, and the civil society) Clear implementation plan with adequate resources Articulation of implementation plan and commitment of required resources Relevant government ministries (e.g., Ministries of Trade, Finance, Planning) and donors (multilateral and bilateral)
    • II. 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
    • II. 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
    • II. 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
    • II. 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
    • II. TRADE POLICY MAKING: CONSULTATIVE MECHANISMS
      • Categorization by Mandate
      • On specific trade negotiations (e.g. EPA, WTO)
      • 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
    • II. TRADE POLICY MAKING: CONSULTATIVE MECHANISMS Mandate/Membership Multi-stakeholder Public-Private sectors Only governmental Multiple issues including trade Uganda ACF Kenya JICCC Malawi PPD Tanzania NBC Uganda PEC Kenya IMCs Malawi IMCs Tanzania IMTC, Zambia SCS All trade issues Malawi NWGTP Uganda IITC Zambia NWGT Zambia TEWG Kenya Cabinet sub-committee on trade Specific trade Negotiations Kenya NCWTO Kenya NDTPF Malawi NDTPF Tanzania NETT Uganda NDTPF
    • III. CHALLENGES 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
    • III. CHALLENGES 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
    • III. CHALLENGES 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?
    • III. CHALLENGES 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 ?
    • IV. 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
    • IV. 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
    • IV. MEASURING INCLUSIVENESS: THE INCLUSIVE TRADE POLICY MAKING (ITPM) INDEX
      • IPTM Index: Action Variables, Actors and Values
      • Part I: Ministry Responsible for Trade Policy
      Action Variable Possible Action Value A. Identification of all key stakeholders Yes = 1 No = 0 Most identified = 0.75 Some identified = 0.5 Few identified = 0.25 B. Creating awareness about the need for trade policy Yes = 1 No = 0 Many efforts made = 0.75 Some efforts made = 0.5 Few efforts made = 0.25 C. Establishment of formal consultative mechanisms Yes = 1 No = 0 Established for most trade policy issues = 0.75 Established for some trade policy issues = 0.50 Established for few trade policy issues = 0.25 D. Regular functioning of formal consultative mechanisms Yes = 1 No = 0 Functioning most of the time = 0.75 Irregular functioning = 0.5 Ad hoc functioning = 0.25 E. Regular information flow to the stakeholders including on the content of trade policy Yes = 1 No = 0 Information flowing most of the time = 0.75 Irregular information flow = 0.5 Ad hoc information flow = 0.25
    • IV. 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
      Action Variables Possible Action Value F, I, and L. Regular participation in the process and feedback to the relevant authorities Yes = 1 No = 0 Most of the time = 0.75 Irregular = 0.5 Little and / or ad hoc = 0.25 G, J, and M. Faithful representation of and regular feedback to the represented constituencies Yes = 1 No = 0 Most of the time = 0.75 Occasional faithful representation and/or irregular feedback = 0.5 Little faithful representation and / or ad hoc feedback = 0.25 H, K, and N. Acquiring relevant knowledge and expertise Yes = 1 No = 0 Substantial knowledge and expertise = 0.75 Some knowledge and expertise = 0.5 Little knowledge and expertise = 0.25
    • IV. 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
    • IV. MEASURING INCLUSIVENESS: THE INCLUSIVE TRADE POLICY MAKING (ITPM) INDEX ITPM Action Variable KENYA MALAWI TANZANIA UGANDA ZAMBIA Part I. Ministry responsible for Trade A. Identification of all key stakeholders 0.75 0.50 0.50 0.75 0.75 B. Creating awareness about the need for trade policy 0.75 0.50 0.50 0.25 0.75 C. Establishment of formal consultative mechanisms 0.75 1.00 0.75 1.00 1.00 D. Functioning of formal consultative mechanisms 0.75 0.75 0.50 0.50 0.75 E. Regular information flow to the stakeholders including on the content of trade policy 0.50 0.50 0.25 0.25 0.50 Part I Score 3.50/5.00 3.25/5.00 2.50/5.0 2.75/5.00 3.75/5.00
    • IV. MEASURING INCLUSIVENESS: THE INCLUSIVE TRADE POLICY MAKING (ITPM) INDEX ITPM Action Variable KENYA MALAWI TANZANIA UGANDA ZAMBIA Part II. Other relevant government ministries/agencies F. Regular participation in the process and feedback to the relevant authorities 1.00 0.75 0.50 0.75 0.75 G. Faithful representation of and regular feedback to the represented constituencies 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 H. Acquiring relevant knowledge and expertise 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Part II Score 2.00/3.00 1.75/3.00 1.50/3.00 1.75/3.0 1.75/3.00 Part III. Private sector and business umbrella organizations I. Regular participation in the process and feedback to the relevant authorities 1.00 1.00 0.75 1.00 1.00 J. Faithful representation of and regular feedback to the represented constituencies 0.50 0.75 0.75 0.50 0.50 K. Acquiring relevant knowledge and expertise 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Part III Score 2.00/3.00 2.25/3.0 2.00/3.00 2.00/3.00 2.00/3.00
    • IV. MEASURING INCLUSIVENESS: THE INCLUSIVE TRADE POLICY MAKING (ITPM) INDEX ITPM Action Variable KENYA MALAWI TANZANIA UGANDA ZAMBIA Part IV. Civil society organizations L. Regular participation in the process and feedback to the relevant authorities 0.75 0.25 0.50 0.25 1.00 M. Faithful representation of and regular feedback to the represented constituencies 0.75 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 N. Acquiring relevant knowledge and expertise 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.75 0.50 Part IV Score 2.00/3.00 1.25/3.00 1.50/3.00 1.75/3.00 2.00/3.00 ITPM Index Score 9.50/14.0 8.50/14.00 7.50/14.00 8.25/14.00 9.50/14.00
    • V. 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
    • V. 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
    • V. SOME RECOMMENDATIONS
      • Identification and involvement of all relevant 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
    • V. 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