Commonwealth Secretariat
PRSP Learning Event
9 July 2003
Impetus behind the PRSP initiative

Mixed record on poverty reduction in 1990s

International Development Targets/MDGs

Multilateral funding for debt relief (HIPC II)

Findings on aid effectiveness
Pro-poor policy reforms have been failing for lack of
real
country commitment (“ownership”)

When country authorities really don’t want to do
something,
conditionality does not make them do it
(properly)


2
Projects get around the immediate problem but further
weaken commitment and capacity (disincentives +
What are PRSPs?

They replace the old Policy Framework Papers as a
basic condition for IMF and World Bank (IDA)
concessional lending

They play a similar role in Enhanced HIPC debt relief, for
eligible countries

They are increasingly the focus for bilateral donors
(DAC, SPA, etc.) for improving the quality of aid
3
Core PRSP Principles

Country-led/owned, based on broad-based participation

Comprehensive – macro, structural, social, environmental

Long term perspective

Results-oriented

Costed & prioritised

Partnership-oriented
4
What’s new?

‘Costed’ poverty reduction strategy linked to macro &
budget framework (encouraging the tough choices!)

Outcome/monitoring focused; making the links
between policy & results

Opening-up the policy process to participation

New incentives, new partnership possibilities & new
forms of aid delivery
5
PRSPs are…


…NOT a sophisticated new technical device - a
“magic bullet” that will solve fundamental problems
of development and cooperation
…offering important opportunities:



6
for poverty to be “mainstreamed” in national systems,
providing priorities for both aid and the national budget
for poverty reduction efforts to be more “country owned” and
thus more successful
But these are not certainties - the success of the
PRS initiative depends on three gambles ...
Gamble 1
If governments are obliged to discuss
poverty, and what they are doing about it,
with citizens, then they are likely to take it
more seriously and be held to account
more effectively
7
Gamble 2
If partners have a national PRSP to
coordinate around, then donor
behaviour and aid management will
improve - leading to lower transaction
costs, and less damage to national
institutions
8
Gamble 3
If the PRS is taken seriously by all parties,
then relations between partners and
governments will change more
fundamentally - with increased domestic
accountability, more effective aid and
better poverty outcomes
9
PRS Schedule
Preparation
Status
Report
PREPARATION
I-PRSP
1st Annual
Progress
Report
IMPLEMENTATION & MONITORING
PRSP (I)
9-24 months
HIPC(II)
Decision
Point
10
2nd APR
PRSP (II)
2-5 years
HIPC(II)
Completion
Point
How many PRSPs?

The PRSP initiative is now 3.5 years old

65 countries are engaged in the PRSP process in some
way

Currently 28 countries have full PRSPs – 9 of these are
Commonwealth countries

37 more are in the process of producing a PRSP (or IPRSP) – 8 of these are Commonwealth countries

17 (of 54) Commonwealth countries involved in the
PRSP process
11
Examples from the C’wealth




12
Tanzania – completed its full PRSP October 2000 and
it went to the Boards in November 2000. Has
completed two Annual Progress Reports since then –
most recently April 2003
Mozambique – completed its full PRSP in April 2001
and it went to the Boards in September 2001
Sri Lanka – Full PRSP went to the Boards in April 2003
Guyana – completed its full PRSP Feb 2002 (macro
addition April 2002) - went to the Boards in September
2002
PRS Process
Policy
formulation
Poverty
analysis
Like projects, PRSs are supposed
to involve a series of steps, so that
design is based on evidence and
is then improved by learning (M&E)
Monitoring and
evaluation
13
Financing
Communication
Policy
implementation
Engaging with the PRS process
Policy
formulation
Poverty
analysis
Financing
Like Shared
projects, PRSs are supposed
to involve
a series work;
of steps, so that
analytical
design is based on evidence and
TA defined by
is then improved by learning (M&E)
Communication
govt; support
civil society
inputs
Monitoring and
evaluation
14
Policy
implementation
Engaging with the PRS process
Policy
formulation
Poverty
analysis
Financing
Like projects, PRSs are supposed
on policy
led);
toTA
involve
a series(govt
of steps,
so that
design is based
on society;
evidence and
engaging
civil
is then improved by learning (M&E)
Communication
country strategies linked
to goals, targets and
macro framework in
PRSP
Monitoring
and
Policy
evaluation
15
implementation
Engaging with the PRS process
Policy
formulation
Financing
Financing on-budget; in
Poverty
analysis
Like projects, PRSs are supposed
with
budget/MTEF
toline
involve
a series
of steps, so that
design isconditions
based on evidence
cycle;
& and
is then improved by learning (M&E)
Communication
benchmarks streamlined
with PRSP matrix
Monitoring and
evaluation
16
Policy
implementation
Engaging with the PRS process
Policy
formulation
Poverty
analysis
Financing
Consultative
Like
projects, PRSsand
are supposed
to transparent
involve a series process;
of steps, so that
design is based on evidence and
supporting others’
is then improved by learning (M&E)
Communication
communication efforts
Monitoring and
evaluation
17
Policy
implementation
Engaging with the PRS process
Policy
formulation
Poverty
analysis
Financing
Projects/programmes
Like
projects, PRSs are supposed
tosupport
involve a series
PRS;of steps, so that
design is based on evidence and
implementation
is then improved by learning (M&E)
Communication
managed by govt
agencies
Monitoring and
evaluation
18
Policy
implementation
Engaging with the PRS process
Policy
formulation
Financing
Monitoring, review &
Poverty
analysis
Like projects, PRSs are supposed
govt.
to audit
involve drawing
a series of on
steps,
so that
design
is based
on evidence
and
systems;
annual
PRSP
is then improved by learning (M&E)
Communication
review; support creation
of M&E strategy;
support involvement of
CS
Monitoring
and
Policy
evaluation
19
implementation
Reminder: Gamble 1
If governments are obliged to discuss
poverty, and what they are doing about it,
with citizens, then they are likely to take it
more seriously and be held to account
more effectively
20
Progress on Gamble 1
21

PRSs are beginning to provide focus for allocation and
use of domestic and external resources – they are
being taken seriously

They show improved analysis of poverty, and this is
used to justify PRS priorities

But policy detail often has limited poverty focus, and
lacks a critical review of past failures

Implementation is seriously limited by enduring
weaknesses in budget and public-sector management
More on Gamble 1

Some opening of policy debate to broader participation
by domestic constituencies


But domestic accountability structures remain (very)
weak, so not clear how much increase in real
commitment

22
consultations, PPAs, civil society involvement in policy working
groups, and monitoring (tho involvement of formal political
institutions weak so far)
Difficulties sustaining gains from participatory processes disappointment following (unreasonably) high initial
expectations
Reminder: Gamble 2
If partners have a national PRSP to
coordinate around, then donor
behaviour and aid management will
improve - leading to lower transaction
costs, and less damage to national
institutions
23
Progress on Gamble 2

A wide range of experience in respect of partner
behaviour with some significant changes by some
agencies

In general, partners are coordinating their PRSP work but
this is not the same as realigning agency programmes to
PRSP priorities

Realigning priorities requires strong national strategy with
clear priorities (and good sector/local policies) – many
PRSPs fall short of this
24
Reminder: Gamble 3
If the PRS is taken seriously by all parties,
then relations between donors and
governments will change more
fundamentally - with increased domestic
accountability, more effective aid and
better poverty outcomes
25
Progress on Gamble 3

Not clear that domestic accountability institutions will
soon be able to “take over” from donor accountability

There is little evidence of streamlined conditionality possibly an increase


26
Some tentative moves towards “mutual accountability” e.g. the Independent Monitoring Group in Tanzania, and
SPA
Partners supporting PRSs will continue to face a
dilemma on strengthening the poverty impact of policy
versus encouraging a good country-specific process