1

1
SPA action-learning missions to Ethiopia,
Rwanda and Senegal
SPA

• Harmonization of support for Poverty Reduction
  Strategies

Owen Barder, DFID Gilles Hervio, EC
2
Are the PRSPs really making a difference ?

• Countries have made progress defining
• Participative...
• ...Comprehensive...
• ...Country-driven...
• ...Result-oriented
• Poverty Reduction Strategies

• Donors have welcomed the PRS process but
  what did they change ?

3
General findings Some progress...

• alignment of donor strategies with PRSPs
• alignment of conditionalities with
  PRSPs(Mozambique, Benin, Burkinabut not
  Uganda? Tanzania?)
• common framework for budget support (Malawi,
  Mozambique, Burkina, Tanzania, Benin )

4
but . . .

• number of conditions or donor policy measures
  increased(eg Tanzania, Uganda)
• negotiation process not transparent(eg Burkina,
  Tanzania, Uganda)
• reporting requirements not aligned(everywhere
  though progress in Ghana, Mozambique)
• review processes not driven by PRS (everywhere
  except Burkina?)

5
Danger with PRSPs
Continue business as usual, with PRSP being an
additional burden
6
Somewhere in Africa .
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
Projects design and review
Budget MTEF
Donor CG meeting
WB PRSC Mission
Donor Budget Support
IMF PRGF Mission
Donor Budget Support
PRSP Report Review
WB PRSC Mission
Donor Budget Support
WB PRSC Mission
IMF PRGF Mission
Sector reviews
7
Purpose of the missions

• Understand Governments and local donor visions of
  process for implementing PRSs
• Consider concrete prospects for harmonizing donor
  policies, practices and procedures with
  Government PRS processes and systems

8
Three missions

• Ethiopia, Rwanda, Senegal
• Sept. 16th to Oct. 31st - 5 days each
• co-led by DFID and EC
• jointly with the WBs pilot on harmonization in
  Ethiopia
• jointly with the presentation of the DACs
  Guidelines on Poverty Reduction in Rwanda and
  Senegal
• Participants
• WB in all missions Finland, France, Ireland,
  Japan, Sweden, ADB, OECD-DAC
• IMF and UNDP at local level

9
Main findingsProblems with donor practices

• Very high dissatisfaction with the way donors
  provide support
• complex procedures and slow implementation
• donor extremely prescriptive (sectors,
  conditions)
• multiple reporting requirements and missions
• lack of predictability
• lack of information reporting on donor support
• very limited changes after PRSP

10
Main findingsKey questions to be addressed

• PRSPs, even good ones, are mainly strategy
  documents
• Risk operationalisation through various
  donor-specific instruments / matrixes
• How to move to operationalisation/implementation
  respecting PRS principles (ownership,
  transparency, result-orientation) ?

11
Main findingsOpportunities

• Strong willingness from government and donors to
  change and make the PRSP the main framework
• It seems possible to move from a PRS paper to a
  PRS implementation process which respects PRS
  principles
• In all three countries, strong willingness from
  government to move to budget support
• an opportunity the annual PRS review

12
PRS annual reviewClarify objectives

• assess (government AND donors) progress on the
  implementation of the PRS
• provide Gov. an opportunity to adjust priorities,
  strategies and targets for the coming year
• chance for open and transparent policy dialogue
  with Parliament, CS and donors
• review progress by donors in meeting their
  commitments, and the amount of support to the PRS
• inform Gov. about donor commitments and
  conditions for the coming year

Open exercise involving all stakeholders but
also light enough to be manageable
13
but this implies changes from Governments

• Translating medium term indicators, targets and
  policy commitments into annual goals against
  which progress can be measured
• Ensuring consistency between PRS and MTEF/budget
  allocations
• Aligning Annual PRS Review, sector reviews and
  budget cycle

14
and from donors

• Agreeing to use the Annual PRS Review to assess
  and review of country performance and
  conditionalities
• Notify Government, in advance, the specific
  information donors would like to see included in
  the annual reviews, and to streamline their
  requests
• Stop making additional ad hoc requests for
  information (new matrixes, LoDPs, indicators)
• Support Government through capacity building and
  appropriate technical assistance

Major challenge for BWIs budget support donors
15
Time to move from powerpoint to action
Budget MTEF
Sector reviews
PRSP Report Review
donor review