Document Library

Participation in PRSP Processes: Conditions for Pro Poor Effectiveness

Author: N Molenaers
Date: 2006
Size: 36 pages (387)

Access full text: available online

Summary

What conditions should be in place for participation to make a meaningful contribution to Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs)? Is participation always relevant? This paper from the Institute of Development Policy and Management (University of Antwerp) focuses on the role of participation for poverty reduction. It argues that participation makes sense only under restrictive conditions, and proposes a four-level readiness assessment framework to bring structure and sequencing into donors’ engagement with local civil society.

Participation, and specifically civil society participation in macro-level policy debate, has become fashionable among donors, who do not hesitate to impose it on governments as a condition for continued aid. This type of participation figures prominently in the PRSP approach, where it is expected to contribute to the objectives of (broad-based) ownership, accountability, and pro-poor effectiveness. However, the approach to participation in the PRSP does not recognise the trade-off between the goals of democracy and poverty reduction. In addition, the widespread donor view of participation as an unmitigated good can be criticised as being simplistic or naïve, either too optimistic or too ambitious, and in some respects simply wrong.

Participation makes a lot of sense, but only under restrictive conditions. If these conditions are not sufficiently met, participation may not make any meaningful contribution, or be positively harmful.

The basic prerequisites for a PRSP are a strong government commitment to poverty reduction and a minimum institutional capacity.
In practice, the PRSP has become a standard approach for low-income countries, and the need for selectivity has been ignored. This suggests that PRSPs have been a mistake in many countries.
Even if a country is ready for the PRSP, this does not mean it is ready for participation. Where this is the case, other actions by government and donors may give better value for money.
Civil society organisations should not be expected to affect poverty outcomes on a par with governments and donors. Government and donors jointly set the stage for civil society involvement.
Participation is easy to manipulate. With some exceptions, the willingness of government to engage in the type of dialogue with civil society envisaged by donors is limited.
Given that civil society in most low income countries is weakly organised and embryonic, there is no automatic guarantee that civil society participation will bring the interests of the poor to the negotiation table.

Participation is not a universal answer, but rather one possible instrument among others in the pursuit of aid effectiveness. The associated trade-offs and contradictions indicate the need for priority-setting.

Selectivity is important. Differences in countries’ governance situations should be reflected in both aid flows and modalities. Programme aid should be given only where there is good governance.
The assessment matrix could be of most use to donors when dealing with the large ‘middle group’ of countries than fall between the poor and good governance categories.
Sequencing is vital; each set of conditions in the matrix (PRSP prerequisites; PRSP issues to be addressed; participation prerequisites; and participation issues to be addressed) must be tackled before moving on to the next.
When there is no political space for real participation, donors should not push for it, and then applaud the cynical manipulation of the government.
Where a government is committed to poverty reduction but threatened by an external push for participation, the best thing may be to drop this conditionality for the time being.
Donors must gain more insight into the organisational mechanisms and decision-making processes of the civil society organisations they wish to support.

Access full text: available online

Source: Molenaers, N. and Renard, R., 2006, 'Participation in PRSP Processes: Conditions for Pro Poor Effectiveness', University of Antwerp, Antwerp
Author: Institute for Development Policy and Management (IDPM), http://www.sed.manchester.ac.uk/idpm/