There remains
a big gap between the macro and micro levels when it comes to implementation of
international development policies. Macroeconomic compulsions, emphasised by International
Financial Institutions have compelled developing countries towards fiscal
austerity in order to curb their budget deficits and to promote growth through
increasing economic liberalization. Whereas poor people in developing countries
have had little influence of highlighting their needs in contrast to these
broader macroeconomic compulsions.
While research
and experience now increasingly acknowledge that poverty reduction is deterred
by use of predetermined planning, we still know much less about the specific
strategies needed for pro-poor growth in particular situations. Particularly,
knowing which set of policies within a country or region will alleviate or
aggravate poverty are not evident enough to apply a fix it all prescription to
alleviating poverty.
Therefore what
is really needed is a stakeholder recipe that can ensure that the various
stakeholders – including the poor themselves – are in fact involved in the
formulation of poverty reduction strategies. Increasingly the donor community,
including international financial institutions, have begun to realise that they
need to address this issue of local ownership. As a result new concepts have
been proposed to put participatory efforts for poverty alleviation into
practice. ‘Local ownership’ and ‘sector-wide approaches’, varying arguments for
‘pro-poor growth’ and even the approach espoused by the ‘Poverty Reduction
Strategy Papers’ are offshoots of this given imperative. I will specifically
focus on the PRSP, which seems to offer a significant opportunity for
meaningful policy change if the rhetoric used to justify this approach could in
fact be turned into reality.
The Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) were introduced by the IMF and the World Bank in
1999, with the intention of becoming the basis for all
foreign aid to poor countries. Both these international
financial institutions have used their influence in the developed world to
convince major bilateral donors to use the PRSP criteria while making grant
assessments. Subsequently all highly indebted poor countries began
to work on formulating individual PRSPs to qualify
for concessional lending. In addition, a number of
countries that receive a blend of concessional and
non-concessional lending (including Pakistan), have also prepared PRSPs as a
basis for their assistance programmes.
The PRSP approach claims to provide
ownership within countries – ownership that ensures that aid is coordinated,
that a country’s economic policies are under its own control, and that there is
pro-poor growth in a way which is specifically useful to that country. However,
real ownership requires that the poor and those working with the poor also be
involved in the process of strategizing to make sure that the help from outside
is coordinated accordingly.
Unfortunately, many voices from across
the developing world say that civil society was either consulted symbolically
or not listened to at all in most countries that formulated a PRSP. This is a
serious problem, which undermines the very legitimacy of the PRSP process. To
see what real life real life issues and hurdles emerged tainting consultative
processes for formulating a PRSP that was meant to be both participatory and
representative, I propose to focus on the example of Pakistan and
retrospectively draw lessons from this experience which may be useful in making
salient international development processes like the PRSP more participatory.
Pakistan
is a poor country with an estimated population of 150 million people. The
vicious cycle of poverty has been accentuated in the country the governance
structures exclude the most vulnerable from the decision making process.
Despite successive government’s efforts with due donor support, it has failed
to bring relief to the issues of poverty. The current military regime initiated
work on an Interim Poverty Reduction Strategy Program, used as a base for the
PRSP approved by the joint assessment of the IFIs
earlier this year. The PRSP for Pakistan is dovetailed with the process of
decentralization. Yet the decentralization model is also having its own
teething troubles and not yet demonstrated its ability to improve delivery
mechanism or to better represent the aspirations of the masses.
It is a common belief
in the country that Pakistan’s relationship with international donors cannot be
considered independent of geo-political considerations. Such views seem
reinforced by the fact that there has been little domestic ownership of policy
prescriptions in Pakistan, and there have also been serious design and
implementation flaws in many structural adjustment interventions. Now many
bilateral donors have focused their funding initiatives on so-called governance
issues, the Decentralization Support Program funded by the Asian Development
Bank is one example.
Parallel to the
claims of devolution of political power resulting in increased representation
of grassroots aspiration in the political arena, had been the rhetoric
accompanying the formulation of the PRSP, which mentioned that extensive
participatory exercises through which views and opinions of a wide variety of
stakeholders have been solicited. Yet vocal critics said that the only
‘participatory’ meetings that took place were those that invited government
functionaries with a scattering of individuals who have no formal affiliation
with government. One must concede that involvement of district level officials
does not necessarily translate into the claim that the views of people at the
district level have been solicited. The fact that political parties, the
organizations from which a democratic process selects the representatives of the
people, were not involved in the PRSP is also undeniable. Neither is there
evidence of involvement of trade unions, people’s movements, civic, and
professional bodies. Conversely, reports of NGOs and other civil society
representatives staging walkouts from the PRSP consultative process splashed
all over the local press.
Despite the rhetoric
of participation espoused by the PRSP in Pakistan, its formulation and
subsequent implementation has presented a serious challenge to legitimacy of
development policymaking in the developing nation context. The stakes are
particularly high for a country like Pakistan where a third of the population
is poor and where the PRSP process has been intrinsically linked to the
devolution of power in the country.
Specific Objective
The objective of this
study is to improve the quality of analysis, highlight lessons learned and to
provide recommendations to enhance ownership of international development
initiatives by encouraging greater participation through means feasible to both
the Pakistan government and its donors, which is vital for ensuring greater
effectiveness of international development efforts to help alleviate poverty.
To achieve the
objective of making suggestions to enhance the sense of ownership and
participation in international development policies, a retrospective analysis
of the PRSP consultative process provides a perfect opportunity. Policy and
process analysis in this regard will be based on authoritative sources
including the Ministry of Finance and other relevant sources like the
Multi-donor Support Unit in Islamabad. The relevance of the PRSP approach will
be contextualized in comparison to the overall quantum of development aid flows
coming into the country.
For examining the
specific experience of participation in the PRSP process in Pakistan,
viewpoints presented by various stakeholders within the country will be
solicited in the form of informal and open-ended interviews. In contrast to
theoretical principles, the practice of participation as interpreted by
relevant stakeholders will be analyzed to see what roles different actors
assumed in translating these principles into practice.
The IFI and GoP documentation of PRSP process
in Pakistan and civil society perceptions will be used to ascertain how the
PRSP looked in practice. A further attempt will be made to identify the
implications of a participatory approach to formulating a poverty reduction
strategy by focusing on specific sectors like micro-finance for example.
Collaboration with
relevant OSI networks (as outlined in the OSI cooperation proposal) will
facilitate realization of this broad based methodological approach. Guidance
solicited from IPF Advisors should help the research remain focused and to
avoid unnecessary duplication.
An attempt will be
made to directly draw upon lessons learnt from elsewhere in the developing world from implementation
of the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper. This broader linkage would also
facilitate identification of economic policies that are more conducive for open
society promotion.
Proposed Outcome
The research will
attempt to highlight not only the real
value that civil society has been able to add but also the potential value that could have added if
its participation had been secured. This will in turn enable identification of
a comprehensive framework for enhancing participation and gaining more
recognition for future multilateral development initiatives in Muslim, and
other developing countries, of the world.
By studying the experience of Pakistan, lessons will be learnt for
enhancing ownership and representation of international development programmes
in general. The findings of this research study will be circulated amongst relevant
government ministries in Pakistan, the International Financial Institutions
(IMF and World Bank), International Non-Government Organizations, bilateral
donors and a range of civil society organizations across Pakistan and abroad.
Pakistan is undergoing thorough
several transitions at present. It is trying to implement democracy at the
grassroots level under the ironic patronage of military rule. It is
experiencing a thaw in tensions with India and with the Western world. After a
decade of increasing poverty, Pakistan is achieving better economic indicators,
providing it with the fiscal space to improve its human development indicators.
In a sense, Pakistan presents an ideal opportunity to the international
community to help an Islamic country transform itself economically, socially,
politically and culturally. If Pakistan were able to achieve the goals of
development and poverty reduction, with the assistance of the international
community, it would serve as a heartening example of constructive engagement
with the international community to other developing countries, particularly
those in the Muslim world.