Date post: | 18-Nov-2014 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | julien-grollier |
View: | 241 times |
Download: | 1 times |
FOSTERING EQUITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY IN THE TRADING SYSTEM (FEATS) PROJECT:
MEETING WITH KEY STAKEHOLDERSDAR-ES-SALAAM, 3 MARCH 2010
Inclusiveness of Trade Policy Making in Tanzania: Presentation of the Main Findings
of the First Phase ResearchBy Atul Kaushik
Director, CUTS Geneva Resource Centre
www.cuts-grc.org
1
STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION
Introduction
Trade policy making process in Tanzania: key consultative mechanisms
Challenges in participation: views of stakeholders
Measuring inclusiveness: the Inclusive Trade Policy Making (ITPM) Index
Conclusions and Recommendations
2
I. INTRODUCTION FEATS first phase research focus on trade policy making process
and role of stakeholders in Kenya, Malawi, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia
Importance of inclusive trade policy making to ensure national multi-stakeholder ownership
Two publications titled “Towards More Inclusive Trade Policy Making: Process and Role of Stakeholders in Select African Countries” (full research publication) and “Improving Ownership through Inclusive Trade Policy Making Process: Lessons from Africa” (short advocacy monograph)
Measuring inclusiveness: Inclusive Trade Policy Making (ITPM) Index
3
II. TRADE POLICY MAKING PROCESS IN TANZANIA: KEY CONSULTATIVE
MECHANISMS
Consultative Mechanism
Mandate Composition
National Business Council (NBC)
National EPA Technical Team
(NETT)
Inter-Ministerial Technical Committee
(IMTC)
On all issues, including trade
EPA negotiations
On all issues, including trade
Public and private sectors only
Multi-stakeholder, including governmental, private sector, and CSO representatives
Only inter-ministerial
4
II. TRADE POLICY MAKING PROCESS IN TANZANIA: KEY CONSULTATIVE
MECHANISMS
Mandate/Membership
Multi-stakeholder
Public-Private sectors
Only governmental
Multiple issues
including trade
Tanzania NBC Tanzania IMTC
All trade issues
Specific trade negotiations
Tanzania NETT
5
III. CHALLENGES IN PARTICIPATION AS VIEWED BY STAKEHOLDERS
Ministry of Industry, Trade and Marketing (MITM)
Lack of capacity and technical human resources
Issues of internal and external coordination Lack of financial and human resources to ensure regular
functioning of consultative mechanisms
Complex and evolving nature of trade issues
6
III. CHALLENGES IN PARTICIPATION AS VIEWED BY STAKEHOLDERS
Other relevant Government Ministries and Agencies
Lack of capacity and technical human resources
Issues of coordination among governmental machinery Lack of regular and timely information flow on trade issues
Trade is not primary mandate
7
III. CHALLENGES IN PARTICIPATION AS VIEWED BY STAKEHOLDERS
Private Sector Umbrella Organizations
Limited technical understanding, and advocacy capacities
Tight timelines to provide feedback on trade issues
Need to improve opportunities for less powerful business associations
How to represent the informal sector?
8
III. CHALLENGES IN PARTICIPATION AS VIEWED BY STAKEHOLDERS
Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) Limited technical understanding of complex issues
Need for better coordination and information sharing among CSOs
Occasional tensions with the government
Limited opportunities for participation
Lack of resources to maintain sustained engagement and retain the knowledge and expertise gained on trade issues
Issues of representation and mandate?
9
IV. MEASURING INCLUSIVENESS: THE INCLUSIVE TRADE POLICY
MAKING (ITPM) INDEXIPTM Index: Action Variables, Actors and Values
Part I: Ministry Responsible for Trade Policy
10
Action Variable Possible Action ValueA. Identification of all key stakeholders Yes = 1 No = 0
Most identified = 0.75 Some identified = 0.5Few identified = 0.25
B. Creating awareness about the need for trade policy
Yes = 1 No = 0Many efforts made = 0.75 Some efforts made = 0.5Few efforts made = 0.25
C. Establishment of formal consultative mechanisms Yes = 1 No = 0Established for most trade policy issues = 0.75Established for some trade policy issues = 0.50Established for few trade policy issues = 0.25
D. Regular functioning of formal consultative mechanisms
Yes = 1 No = 0Functioning most of the time = 0.75Irregular functioning = 0.5 Ad hoc functioning = 0.25
E. Regular information flow to the stakeholders including on the content of trade policy
Yes = 1 No = 0Information flowing most of the time = 0.75Irregular information flow = 0.5 Ad hoc information flow = 0.25
IV. MEASURING INCLUSIVENESS: THE INCLUSIVE TRADE POLICY
MAKING (ITPM) INDEXIPTM Index: Action Variables, Actors and Values
Parts II, III, and IV: Other Relevant Government Ministries, Private Sector, and CSOs
11
Action Variables Possible Action Value
F, I, and L. Regular participation in the process and feedback to the relevant authorities
Yes = 1 No = 0Most of the time = 0.75 Irregular = 0.5Little and / or ad hoc = 0.25
G, J, and M. Faithful representation of and regular feedback to the represented constituencies
Yes = 1 No = 0Most of the time = 0.75Occasional faithful representation and/or irregular feedback = 0.5Little faithful representation and / or ad hoc feedback = 0.25
H, K, and N. Acquiring relevant knowledge and expertise
Yes = 1 No = 0Substantial knowledge and expertise = 0.75Some knowledge and expertise = 0.5Little knowledge and expertise = 0.25
IV. MEASURING INCLUSIVENESS: THE INCLUSIVE TRADE POLICY
MAKING (ITPM) INDEXExplanation of Possible Action Values
• Yes = maximum value of 1 = when appropriate action has been taken by the actor concerned
• Many/Most = high value of 0.75 = when quite a lot has been done but some gaps remain
• Some = intermediate value of 0.5 = when action has been taken but is not sufficient
• Few / Little = low value of 0.25 = when some action has been taken but much remains
• No = 0 value assigned = when no action has been taken by the actor concerned
12
IV. MEASURING INCLUSIVENESS: THE INCLUSIVE TRADE POLICY
MAKING (ITPM) INDEXMITM SCORE
13
Action Variable Score
A. Identification of all key stakeholders 0.5 (some identified)
B. Creating awareness about the need for trade policy
0.5 (some efforts made)
C. Establishment of formal consultative mechanisms
0.75 (established on some issues)
D. Regular functioning of formal consultative mechanisms
0.5 (irregular functioning)
E. Regular information flow to the stakeholders including on the content of trade policy
0.25 (ad hoc information flow)
Total MITM 2.5/5.0
IV. MEASURING INCLUSIVENESS: THE INCLUSIVE TRADE POLICY
MAKING (ITPM) INDEXScores by Other Groups of Stakeholders
14
Action Variables Score by Other Relevant
Government Ministries
Score by Private Sector
Organizations
Score by CSOs
F, I, and L. Regular participation in the process and feedback to the relevant authorities
0.5 (irregular participation)
0.75 (most of the time)
0.5 (irregular participation)
G, J, and M. Faithful representation of and regular feedback to the represented constituencies
0.5 (occasional/irregular representation and
feedback)
0.75 (most of the time)
0.5 (occasional/irregular representation and
feedback)
H, K, and N. Acquiring relevant knowledge and expertise
0.5 (some knowledge and expertise)
0.5 (some knowledge and
expertise)
0.5 (some knowledge and expertise)
Total 1.5/3.0 2.0/3.0 1.5/3.0
IV. MEASURING INCLUSIVENESS: THE INCLUSIVE TRADE POLICY MAKING
(ITPM) INDEX
15
ITPM Action Variable KENYA MALAWITANZA
NIAUGAND
AZAMBI
A
Part I. Ministry responsible for Trade
A. Identification of all key stakeholders
0.75 0.50 0.50 0.75 0.75
B. Creating awareness about the need for trade policy 0.75 0.50 0.50 0.25 0.75
C. Establishment of formal consultative mechanisms
0.75 1.00 0.75 1.00 1.00
D. Functioning of formal consultative mechanisms
0.75 0.75 0.50 0.50 0.75
E. Regular information flow to the stakeholders including on the content of trade policy
0.50 0.50 0.25 0.25 0.50
Part I Score3.50/5
.003.25/5.0
02.50/5.0
2.75/5.00
3.75/5.00
IV. MEASURING INCLUSIVENESS: THE INCLUSIVE TRADE POLICY MAKING
(ITPM) INDEX
16
ITPM Action Variable KENYA MALAWI TANZANIA UGANDA ZAMBIA
Part II. Other relevant government
ministries/agencies
F. Regular participation in the process and feedback to the relevant authorities
1.00 0.75 0.50 0.75 0.75
G. Faithful representation of and regular feedback to the represented constituencies
0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
H. Acquiring relevant knowledge and expertise 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Part II Score2.00/3.0
01.75/3.00
1.50/3.00
1.75/3.01.75/3.0
0Part III. Private sector and
business umbrella organizations
I. Regular participation in the process and feedback to the relevant authorities
1.00 1.00 0.75 1.00 1.00
J. Faithful representation of and regular feedback to the represented constituencies
0.50 0.75 0.75 0.50 0.50
K. Acquiring relevant knowledge and expertise 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Part III Score2.00/3.0
02.25/3.0
2.00/3.00
2.00/3.002.00/3.0
0
IV. MEASURING INCLUSIVENESS: THE INCLUSIVE TRADE POLICY MAKING
(ITPM) INDEX
17
ITPM Action Variable KENYA MALAWI TANZANIA UGANDA ZAMBIA
Part IV. Civil society organizations
L. Regular participation in the process and feedback to the relevant authorities
0.75 0.25 0.50 0.25 1.00
M. Faithful representation of and regular feedback to the represented constituencies
0.75 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
N. Acquiring relevant knowledge and expertise
0.50 0.50 0.50 0.75 0.50
Part IV Score2.00/3.0
01.25/3.00
1.50/3.00
1.75/3.002.00/3.0
0
ITPM Index Score9.50/14.
08.50/14.0
07.50/1
4.008.25/14.0
09.50/14.
00
V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Several consultative mechanisms on trade issues established; however
Lack legal mandates and adequate resources
Not all trade issues covered by multi-stakeholder consultative fora
Irregular and ad hoc functioning
Improved stakeholders participation; but
Not all stakeholders being represented
Not all stakeholders have equal opportunities to participate
18
V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Remaining challenges classified in three broad categories
Related to capacity (limited technical, human, and financial capacities of stakeholders)
Related to institutional and structural issues (design and functioning of consultative mechanisms)
Related to challenges internal to each group of stakeholders
19
V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Identification and involvement of remaining stakeholders: action by government and concerned ministries needed
Regular information flow on trade issues to key stakeholders: action by concerned ministries needed
Rationalization and strengthening of consultative mechanisms: action by government and concerned ministries needed
Better coordination among relevant government ministries and agencies on trade issues: action by government needed
20
V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Better opportunities for CSO participation: action by MITM needed
Better feedback and input loops between CSOs and the private sector umbrella organisations on the one hand, and their constituencies on the other: action by private sector umbrella organizations and CSOs needed
Investment on knowledge and expertise building: action by all including development partners needed
Promotion of a culture of dialogue and inclusiveness: sustained efforts by all stakeholders needed
21
Inclusiveness will generate national ownership which is the best guarantee for effective implementation of trade policy as
part of overall development policy
22