- 1. FOSTERING EQUITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY IN THE TRADING SYSTEM
(FEATS) PROJECT: MEETING WITH KEY STAKEHOLDERS KAMPALA, 9 MARCH
2010 Inclusiveness of Trade Policy Making in Uganda: Presentation
of the Main Findings of the First Phase Research By Atul Kaushik
Director, CUTS Geneva Resource Centre [email_address]
www.cuts-grc.org
2. STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION
- Trade policy making process in Uganda: key consultative
mechanisms
- Challenges in participation as viewed by stakeholders
- Measuring inclusiveness: the Inclusive Trade Policy Making
(ITPM) Index
- Conclusions and Recommendations
3. 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: Using the Inclusive Trade Policy
Making (ITPM) Index
4. II. TRADE POLICY MAKING PROCESS IN KENYA: KEY CONSULTATIVE
MECHANISMS Consultative Mechanism Mandate Composition Presidents
Economic Council (PEC) / The National Forum Inter-Institutional
Trade Committee (IITC) Uganda National Development and Trade Policy
Forum (NDTPF) All issues All trade issues EPA negotiations only
High level public and private sectorMulti-stakeholder
Multi-stakeholder 5. II. TRADE POLICY MAKING PROCESS IN UGANDA: KEY
CONSULTATIVE MECHANISMS Mandate/Membership Multi-stakeholder
Public-Private sectors Only governmental Multiple issues including
trade Uganda ACF Uganda PECAll trade issues Uganda IITCSpecific
trade negotiations Uganda NDTPF 6. III. CHALLENGES IN PARTICIPATION
AS VIEWED BY STAKEHOLDERS
- Ministry ofTourism, Trade and Industry (MTTI)
- Lack of capacity and technical human resources to deal
effectively with all trade policy issues
- Lack of full engagement by non-state stakeholders
- Lack of financial and human resources to ensure regular
functioning of consultative mechanisms
7. III. CHALLENGES IN PARTICIPATION AS VIEWED BY
STAKEHOLDERS
- Other relevant Government Ministries and Agencies
- Lack of involvement and participation
- Issues of coordination among governmental machinery
- Lack of capacity to fully implement necessary reforms
- Lack of regular information flow on trade issues
8. III. CHALLENGES IN PARTICIPATION AS VIEWED BY
STAKEHOLDERS
- Private Sector Umbrella Organizations
- Lack of ownership and sense of real participation
- Limited capacity to regularly follow all trade policy
developments and engage with the relevant government
authorities
- Need to balance the interests of all members
- Who represents the informal sector?
9. III. CHALLENGES IN PARTICIPATION AS VIEWED BY
STAKEHOLDERS
- Civil Society Organisations (CSOs)
- Limited capacity to do sustained and research-based
advocacy
- Limited outreach to rural areas and the grassroots
- Occasional tensions with the government:limited trust between
government and civil society since civil society does not agree
with many aspects of the governments neo-liberalapproach
- Lack of official mandate and effective consulting with their
own stakeholders
10. IV. MEASURING INCLUSIVENESS: THE INCLUSIVE TRADE POLICY
MAKING (ITPM) INDEX
- IPTM Index: Action Variables, Actors and Values
- Part I: Ministry Responsible for Trade Policy
Action Variable Possible Action Value A.Identification of all
key stakeholdersYes = 1No = 0 Most identified = 0.75Some identified
= 0.5 Few identified = 0.25 B.Creating awareness about the need for
trade policy Yes = 1No = 0 Many efforts made = 0.75Some efforts
made = 0.5 Few efforts made = 0.25 C.Establishment of formal
consultative mechanisms Yes = 1No = 0 Established for most trade
policy issues = 0.75 Established for some trade policy issues =
0.50 Established for few trade policy issues = 0.25 D.Regular
functioning of formal consultative mechanisms Yes = 1No = 0
Functioning most of the time = 0.75 Irregular functioning = 0.5Ad
hoc functioning = 0.25 E.Regular information flow to the
stakeholders including on the content of trade policy Yes = 1No = 0
Information flowing most of the time = 0.75 Irregular information
flow = 0.5Ad hoc information flow = 0.25 11. IV. MEASURING
INCLUSIVENESS: THE INCLUSIVE TRADE POLICY MAKING (ITPM) INDEX
- IPTM Index: Action Variables, Actors and Values
- Parts II, III, and IV: Other Relevant Government Ministries,
Private Sector, and CSOs
Action Variables Possible Action Value F, I, and L.Regular
participation in the process and feedback to the relevant
authorities Yes = 1No = 0 Most of the time = 0.75Irregular = 0.5
Little and / or ad hoc = 0.25 G, J, and M.Faithful representation
of and regular feedback to the represented constituencies Yes = 1No
= 0 Most of the time = 0.75 Occasional faithful representation
and/or irregular feedback = 0.5 Little faithful representation and
/ or ad hoc feedback = 0.25 H, K, and N.Acquiring relevant
knowledge and expertise Yes = 1No = 0 Substantial knowledge and
expertise = 0.75 Some knowledge and expertise = 0.5 Little
knowledge and expertise = 0.25 12. IV. MEASURING INCLUSIVENESS: THE
INCLUSIVE TRADE POLICY MAKING (ITPM) INDEX
- Explanation 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
13. IV. MEASURING INCLUSIVENESS: THE INCLUSIVE TRADE POLICY
MAKING (ITPM) INDEX
Action Variable Score A.Identification of all key
stakeholders0.75 (most identified) B.Creating awareness about the
need for trade policy 0.25 (few efforts made) C.Establishment of
formal consultative mechanisms 1.00 (Yes) D.Regular functioning of
formal consultative mechanisms 0.50 (irregular
functioning)E.Regular information flow to the stakeholders
including on the content of trade policy 0.25 (ad hoc information
flow) Total MTTI 2.75/5.00 14. IV. MEASURING INCLUSIVENESS: THE
INCLUSIVE TRADE POLICY MAKING (ITPM) INDEX
- Scores by Other Groups of Stakeholders
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 0.75 (most of the time) 1.00 (Yes) 0.25 (little and/or
ad hoc) G, J, and M.Faithful representation of and regular feedback
to the represented constituencies 0.50 (occasional representation
and/or irregular feedback) 0.50 (occasional representation and/or
irregular feedback) 0.50 (occasional representation and/or
irregular feedback) H, K, and N.Acquiring relevant knowledge and
expertise 0.50 (some knowledge and expertise) 0.50 (some knowledge
and expertise) 0.75 (substantial knowledge and expertise) Total
1.75/3.00 2.00/3.00 1.75/3.00 15. IV. MEASURING INCLUSIVENESS: THE
INCLUSIVE TRADE POLICY MAKING (ITPM) INDEX ITPM Action Variable
KENYA MALAWI TANZANIA UGANDA ZAMBIA 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 Score 3.50/5.00
3.25/5.00 2.50/5.0 2.75/5.00 3.75/5.00 16. IV. MEASURING
INCLUSIVENESS: THE INCLUSIVE TRADE POLICY MAKING (ITPM) INDEX 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
Score 2.00/3.00 1.75/3.00 1.50/3.00 1.75/3.0 1.75/3.00 Part 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 Score 2.00/3.00 2.25/3.0 2.00/3.00
2.00/3.00 2.00/3.00 17. IV. MEASURING INCLUSIVENESS: THE INCLUSIVE
TRADE POLICY MAKING (ITPM) INDEX 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 Score 2.00/3.00 1.25/3.00 1.50/3.00
1.75/3.00 2.00/3.00 ITPM Index Score 9.50/14.0 8.50/14.00
7.50/14.00 8.25/14.00 9.50/14.00 18. V. CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
- Several consultative mechanisms on trade issues established;
however
-
- Lack legal mandates and adequate resources
-
- Irregular andad hocfunctioning
- Improved stakeholders participation; but
-
- Not all stakeholders being represented
-
- Not all stakeholders have equal opportunities to
participate
19. 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
20. 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
21. V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
- Better opportunities for CSO participation:action by MTTI
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
22.
- Inclusiveness will generate national ownership which is the
best guarantee for effective implementation of trade policy as part
of overall development policy