Document Library

Key Text Good Practice in the Development of PRSP Indicators and Monitoring Systems

Author: D Booth and H Lucas
Date: 2002
Size: 73 pages (376 KB)

Access full text: available online

Summary

How can poverty reduction strategies best be monitored? And how can monitoring lead to greater success in reducing poverty? This study by the Overseas Development Institute (ODI) draws conclusions about best practice from a review of Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) and suggests ways in which monitoring can be improved. PRSP monitoring calls for fresh thinking. It needs to be geared to what is new and challenging about the PRSP initiative – particularly the effort to engage a wider range of stakeholders in policy dialogue about poverty reduction at the national level. It also needs an understanding of the relevant policy processes and the possible uses of information in enforcing new kinds of accountability and learning about poverty reduction.

Furthermore, the greater results-orientation that is a feature of the PRSP approach should not be taken to imply an exclusive interest in monitoring final results or impacts. PRSPs are leading to a major upsurge in final poverty-outcome measurement. However, there is much less evidence of renewed interest in measuring the intermediate processes and achievements that will be necessary to produce the desired final outcomes. This is a serious deficiency, as rapid feedback on this level of change is what matters most for accountability and learning. The poor quality of the administrative reporting systems on which much of the relevant data depend is being ignored.

PRSPs also pay little attention to the possibility of using alternative methods to compensate for the unreliability of routine information systems. Furthermore, it is unclear how stakeholders will be incorporated into PRSP monitoring arrangements, and generally how information will be used to improve policy and implementation. Some of the key findings are:

A multidimensional approach to final poverty outcomes is increasingly accepted but still poses significant challenges
Knowing which intermediate variables to monitor is not easy. The selection needs to involve strategic thinking
Tracking financial and non-financial inputs can lead to policy improvements that are important for poverty reduction
Despite its aura of technical superiority, survey-based analysis of poverty trends can be very inaccurate
Improvements in routine information systems are possible, but they call for both realism and a very imaginative approach
Service-delivery surveys, problem-oriented commissioned studies and participatory impact monitoring (PIM) have been proven to be useful complements to administrative data.

In order for PRSP monitoring to lead to an improvement in poverty reduction, the following should be taken into account:

It is useful to distinguish between long-term institutional solutions to the lack of demand for poverty-related information, and worthwhile interim measures
Successful arrangements are likely to be those that are well supported politically and also permit swift executive action when necessary.

Access full text: available online

Source: Booth, D. and Lucas, H. 2002, 'Good Practice in the Development of PRSP Indicators', Overseas Development Institute (ODI) Working Paper 172, ODI, London
Author: David Booth , d.booth@odi.org ; Henry Lucas , h.lucas@ids.ac.uk
Overseas Development Institute (ODI), http://www.odi.org.uk/
Organisation: Overseas Development Institute (ODI), http://www.odi.org.uk/