The success of the Economic Development for Poverty Reduction Strategies (EDPRS) depends on tackling major structural problems which have been identified for further discussion and should be addressed through the EDPRS.

It has not been possible to report adequately on results in all sectors since few performance targets were set in the first Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP). This has contributed to generally weak results focus on interventions in the various sectors.

Many sectors recognised this in their evaluations and the difficulty has been most pronounced in infrastructure and private sector development. In some sectors (e.g. health) targets or objectives have changed.

A results focus should give meaning to the actions undertaken by government institutions, motivating their planning and budgeting and helping identify prioritise between unplanned actions as time passes.

A shift to a results focus needs to be supported by strong monitoring and evaluation in all sectors, the demand for which is only just emerging.

The lack of data presented in any of the evaluations and concerns over accuracy of certain data (e.g. in agriculture) mean that monitoring and evaluation (M&E) capacity building of staff in all institutions is a priority. M&E needs to be seen as a core function, alongside planning and budgeting.

Technical assistance may be needed to identify the information gaps, appropriate sources of data and establish reliable data collection mechanisms.

Where they are currently weak, M&E systems should start small and develop in complexity over time: the requirements for data should be in proportion to the capacity to produce the data if it is to be of reliable quality.

PRSP I led to the development of individual sectors and their own ideas and strategies. The synergies between the sectors remain to be established. There was no cross-government growth strategy at the time of the PRSP.

The DTIS makes clear the importance of several sectors coming together to support private sector development. In this respect, many strategies are not outward focused, for example infrastructure is not specifically targeting reductions in transport costs.

Policy analysis has been significantly restricted in this regard: for example, the linkages between land reform and poverty reduction, the trade offs between energy use and environmental degradation, the balance between tough rules on immigration and promoting a flexible labour force all need closer consideration.

The recommendation for the future is a system of shared accountability between different sectors and ministries where they jointly contribute to high level performance targets.

Few sectors succeeded in showing how their interventions contributed to economic growth and poverty reduction. Part of this is a problem of lack of performance data and the length of time from an action to the results.

However, there often appears to be little conceptual understanding of the broader significance of strategies. For example, water and sanitation contributes to better health, but data on water-born diseases are not sought as performance information by the sector.

 
ICT strategies often claim that the linkages to economic growth and poverty reduction are well understood, but do not target and report on reductions in costs of doing business, or the extent to which employers are satisfied with the IT skills of the labour force. Poverty and growth linkages can and should be extended to the area of good governance.

Although decentralisation of service delivery has very clear links to these objectives, more needs to be done to show the contribution of justice, security and citizen empowerment to meeting these goals e.g. looking at the contribution of these sectors to producing a stable investment environment and to ensuring the representation of marginalised groups and the very poorest.

The linkage between budget lines and objectives is weak. Although budget execution has generally improved over the period, this was from a low base, and many sectors have experienced unsatisfactory execution rates in many of their programmes.

Part of this problem relates to weaknesses in cash planning by Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, an area which has been improved recently.

More usually, it reflects unclear planning of budgets, where it is difficult to tell from the budget presentation which programmes contribute to which targets and how resources should be disbursed throughout the year.

Several sectors have difficulty in demonstrating how there budget contributes to their objectives and work is needed on restructuring ministries’ Medium Term Expenditure Frameworks to become more performance focused.

Recent work in the agriculture and justice sectors shows that progress can be made in this area, and how a clearer MTEF can help ensure donor alignment.

Ends