Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Informal stakeholder meeting_zambia-rashid
Informal stakeholder meeting_zambia-rashid
Informal stakeholder meeting_zambia-rashid
Informal stakeholder meeting_zambia-rashid
Informal stakeholder meeting_zambia-rashid
Informal stakeholder meeting_zambia-rashid
Informal stakeholder meeting_zambia-rashid
Informal stakeholder meeting_zambia-rashid
Informal stakeholder meeting_zambia-rashid
Informal stakeholder meeting_zambia-rashid
Informal stakeholder meeting_zambia-rashid
Informal stakeholder meeting_zambia-rashid
Informal stakeholder meeting_zambia-rashid
Informal stakeholder meeting_zambia-rashid
Informal stakeholder meeting_zambia-rashid
Informal stakeholder meeting_zambia-rashid
Informal stakeholder meeting_zambia-rashid
Informal stakeholder meeting_zambia-rashid
Informal stakeholder meeting_zambia-rashid
Informal stakeholder meeting_zambia-rashid
Informal stakeholder meeting_zambia-rashid
Informal stakeholder meeting_zambia-rashid
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Informal stakeholder meeting_zambia-rashid

203

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
203
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. FOSTERING EQUITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY IN THE TRADING SYSTEM (FEATS) PROJECT: MEETING WITH KEY STAKEHOLDERS 29 MARCH 2010 Inclusiveness of Trade Policy Making in Zambia: Presentation of the Main Findings of the First Phase Research By Rashid S. Kaukab Deputy Director and Research Coordinator, CUTS Geneva Resource Centre www.cuts-grc.org
  • 2. STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION
    • Introduction
    • Trade policy making process in Zambia: key consultative mechanisms
    • Challenges in participation: views of stakeholders
    • Measuring inclusiveness: the Inclusive Trade Policy Making (ITPM) Index
    • Conclusions and Recommendations
  • 3. I. INTRODUCTION
    • FEATS first phase research focus on trade policy making process and role of stakeholders in Kenya, Malawi, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia
    • Importance of inclusive trade policy making to ensure national multi-stakeholder ownership
    • Two publications titled “ Towards More Inclusive Trade Policy Making: Process and Role of Stakeholders in Select African Countries ” (full research publication) and “ Improving Ownership through Inclusive Trade Policy Making Process: Lessons from Africa ” (short advocacy monograph)
    • Measuring inclusiveness: Inclusive Trade Policy Making (ITPM) Index
  • 4. II. TRADE POLICY MAKING PROCESS IN ZAMBIA: KEY CONSULTATIVE MECHANISMS Consultative Mechanism Mandate Composition National Working Group on Trade (NWGT) Agriculture Consultative Forum (ACF) Trade Expansion Working Group Steering Committee of Secretaries All trade issues Agriculture issues Trade issues All issues Multi-stakeholder Multi-stakeholder Public and private sector Inter-ministerial coordination
  • 5. II. TRADE POLICY MAKING PROCESS IN ZAMBIA: KEY CONSULTATIVE MECHANISMS Mandate/Membership Multi-stakeholder Public-Private sectors Only governmental Multiple issues including trade Zambia SCS All trade issues Zambia NWGT Zambia TEWG Specific trade issues
  • 6. III. CHALLENGES IN PARTICIPATION AS VIEWED BY STAKEHOLDERS
    • Ministry of Commerce, Trade and Industry (MCTI)
    • Limited number of technical staff
    • Need to improve the information flow to all stakeholders, particularly non-state actors
  • 7. III. CHALLENGES IN PARTICIPATION AS VIEWED BY STAKEHOLDERS
    • Other relevant Government Ministries and Agencies
    • Need for coherence in various policies, strategies and plans to avoid contradictions
    • Lack of capacity of all relevant ministries and government agencies to understand and implement the linkages between trade policy and their respective areas
    • Issues of coordination among governmental machinery
    • Lack of regular and timely information flow on trade issues
  • 8. III. CHALLENGES IN PARTICIPATION AS VIEWED BY STAKEHOLDERS
    • Private Sector Umbrella Organizations
    • Lack of analytical capacity
    • Lack of interest in broad trade policy issues
    • Need for reconciling multiple interests
  • 9. III. CHALLENGES IN PARTICIPATION AS VIEWED BY STAKEHOLDERS
    • Civil Society Organisations (CSOs)
    • Lack of capacity and technical human resources
    • Lack of domestic specialists on trade issues
    • Need for better coordination and information sharing among CSOs
    • Limited opportunities for effective participation
  • 10. 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
  • 11. 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
  • 12. 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
  • 13. IV. MEASURING INCLUSIVENESS: THE INCLUSIVE TRADE POLICY MAKING (ITPM) INDEX
    • MCTI SCORE
    Action Variable Score A. Identification of all key stakeholders 0.75 (most identified) B. Creating awareness about the need for trade policy 0.75 (many efforts made) C. Establishment of formal consultative mechanisms 1.00 (Yes) D. Regular functioning of formal consultative mechanisms 0.75 (functioning most of the time) E. Regular information flow to the stakeholders including on the content of trade policy 0.50 (irregular information flow) Total MCTI 3.75/5.00
  • 14. IV. MEASURING INCLUSIVENESS: THE INCLUSIVE TRADE POLICY MAKING (ITPM) INDEX
    • Scores by Other Groups of Stakeholders
    Action Variables Score by Other Relevant Government Ministries Score by Private Sector Organizations Score by CSOs F, I, and L. Regular participation in the process and feedback to the relevant authorities 0.75 (most of the time) 1.00 (Yes) 1.00 (Yes) G, J, and M. Faithful representation of and regular feedback to the represented constituencies 0.50 (occasional faithful representation and/or irregular and feedback) 0.50 (occasional faithful representation and/or irregular and feedback) 0.50 (occasional faithful representation and/or irregular and feedback) H, K, and N. Acquiring relevant knowledge and expertise 0.50 (some knowledge and expertise) 0.50 (some knowledge and expertise) 0.50 (some knowledge and expertise) Total 1.75/3.00 2.00/3.00 2.00/3.00
  • 15. 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
  • 16. 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
  • 17. 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
  • 18. V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
    • Several consultative mechanisms on trade issues established; however
      • Lack legal mandates and adequate resources
      • 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
  • 19. V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
    • 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
  • 20. V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
    • Identification and involvement of remaining stakeholders: action by government and concerned ministries needed
    • Awareness-raising on trade issues: action by all actors needed
    • Regular information flow on trade issues to key stakeholders: action by concerned ministries needed
    • Rationalization and strengthening of consultative mechanisms: action by government and concerned ministries needed
    • Better coordination among relevant government ministries and agencies on trade issues: action by government needed
  • 21. V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
    • Better opportunities for CSO participation: action by MCTI needed
    • Better feedback and input loops between CSOs and the private sector umbrella organisations on the one hand, and their constituencies on the other: action by private sector umbrella organizations and CSOs needed
    • Investment on knowledge and expertise building: action by all including development partners needed
    • Promotion of a culture of dialogue and inclusiveness: sustained efforts by all stakeholders needed
  • 22.
    • Inclusiveness will generate national ownership which is the best guarantee for effective implementation of trade policy as part of overall development policy
    • For further information please contact [email_address] or [email_address]

×