Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

A Stronger and More Dynamic RPCA

88 views

Published on

Presentation by Sibiri Jean Zoundi (SWAC/OECD) at the meeting of the Strategy and Policy Group (SPG) of the Sahel and West Africa Club (SWAC), 16 June 2017.

Présentation par Sibiri Jean Zoundi (CSAO/OCDE) à la réunion du Groupe d'orientation politique (GOP) du Club du Sahel et de l'Afrique de l'Ouest (CSAO), le 16 juin 2017.

Published in: Government & Nonprofit
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

A Stronger and More Dynamic RPCA

  1. 1. SPG MEETING, JUNE 2017 A STRONGER & MORE DYNAMIC RPCA Mr Sibiri Jean ZOUNDI, SWAC/OECD Secretariat PARIS, 16 JUNE 2017
  2. 2. 1. INTRODUCTION ⇒ RPCA Overview 2. REFORMS REQUESTED ⇒ Approach/method 3. ROADMAP 4. CONCLUSION OUTLINE
  3. 3. 1984: RPCA created in a context of uncoordinated & ineffective food aid « … the dysfunctions of food aid gave rise to the RPCA… » INTRODUCTION
  4. 4. Institutional Framework 1). «The Network must be informal, this informality underpins its success». «…a flexible Network, informal means avoiding ‘institutionalising’ food aid, a concern for all donors who wish to avoid creating a new institution in this area… ». 2). Crisis Prevention Network - governments’ objective is to guarantee a minimum supply to vulnerable populations and therefore « prevent » crises rather than simply « forecast and manage » them. Network based on existing structures/institutions INTRODUCTION
  5. 5. Mandate/Functions Original 1). Evaluating production, identifying vulnerable emergency zones, dissemination of information 2). Improving procedures: supply & demand of food aid 3). Helping resolve logistical issues 4). Improving the roll out of aid 5). Improving the incorporation of food aid into policies Refocusing on two key functions (due to evolution of food aid) 1). Generating, analysing and disseminating information, building consensus [PREGEC MECHANISM] 2). Dialogue, co-ordination & synergy (making collective action more efficient) INTRODUCTION
  6. 6. REFORMS REQUESTED
  7. 7. Methodological Approach A • Review of major reforms since 2006: achievements & shortcomings B • Consultation with RPCA «ELDERS» C • Draft 0 & brainstorming with Restricted Committee of Members D • Draft 1 & consultation with Members for comments REFORMS REQUESTED
  8. 8. AIM: Make the RPCA an effective tool for decision- making on FNS and resilience 1. Better «PREVENTION» of food and nutrition crises 2. Efficient «MANAGEMENT» of crises: i) short-term, unpredictable with diverse origins (climate, socio-political environment, security…); ii) recurring & predictable during the lean season Guiding principle: Refocus the RPCA around the fundamentals - analysing, production & disseminating information; consensus building; dialogue; co-ordination; fostering synergies - and make decision-making more effective REFORMS REQUESTED
  9. 9. PILLAR I: POLITICAL GOVERNANCE Reform 1: Strengthen political leadership & ties with decision- making bodies C1: Establish joint ECOWAS-UEMOA ministerial meetings C2: Establish a regional co-ordination platform C3: Define governance over decision-making REFORMS REQUESTED
  10. 10. PILLAR II: TECHNICAL GOVERNANCE Reform 2: Make the RPCA more results-based C1: Review format of Network’s meetings C2: Revitalise the Network’s original CO-ORDINATION function NEW: 1. Advance preparation by States on political & financial implications of CH results before each restricted & annual meeting 2. At each restricted meeting: adopt a « Commitments Dashboard » 3. At each annual meeting: systematically review the « Commitments Dashboard » REFORMS REQUESTED
  11. 11. PILLAR II: TECHNICAL GOVERNANCE Reform 3: Enhance the effectiveness of technical leadership C1:Revitalise the CILSS- Club Secretariat co- animation of the Network C2: Strengthen CILSS capacity to manage the innovation process of PREGEC tools Establish a unit within CILSS entirely dedicated to animating the Network REFORMS REQUESTED
  12. 12. PILLAR II: TECHNICAL GOVERNANCE Reform 4: Broaden and enhance the scope of the Network’s analyses & recommendations C1: Strengthen the Network’s questioning capacity on « PREVENTION » C2: Include other determining factors of FNS in the Network’s analyses Produce a bi-annual report on the broad FNS & resilience trends and progress made in implementing long-term structural policies REFORMS REQUESTED
  13. 13. PILLAR II: TECHNICAL GOVERNANCE Reform 5: Significantly increase visibility & ownership of RPCA in the countries C1: Operationalise dialogue & M&E instruments promoted by PREGEC Charter C2: Set up national PREGEC mechanisms C3: Conduct intensive communication campaigns on PREGEC Charter - Support from CSOs C4: Intensify communication through the media REFORMS REQUESTED
  14. 14. Step 1: Initiate reforms not requiring major institutional changes or significant additional financial resources Reform 1: Strengthen political leadership and ties with decision-making bodies ⇒C1 & C2: Consultation/dialogue with ECOWAS, UEMOA & CILSS: ◊ Establish joint ministerial ECOWAS-UEMOA meetings ◊ Clarify governance over decision-making within the Network ⇒C3: Consultation/dialogue with stakeholders: ◊ Set-up a « regional co-ordination platform » Reform 2: Make the RPCA more results-based ⇒C1: Put in place new format for meetings ⇒C2: Create space for dialogue on « CO-ORDINATION » Step 2: Detailed evaluation of technical & financial implications of implementing the reforms & communication with all Members ROADMAP
  15. 15. 1. Avoid creating a « monster » : RPCA can’t be everything! It’s not a policy, programme, or institution. RPCA provides instruments to: • strengthen collective capacity for better decision-making on FNS and resilience issues • guide action (policies and programmes on FNS & resilience) and strengthen effectiveness 2. PROGRESSIVE & INCLUSIVE approach to implementing the reforms envisaged ensuring ownership, success, better impact & sustainability CONCLUSIONS
  16. 16. www.food-security.net Thank you

×