- 1. FOSTERING EQUITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY IN THE TRADING SYSTEM
(FEATS) PROJECT: MEETING WITH KEY STAKEHOLDERS 29 MARCH 2010
Inclusiveness of Trade Policy Making in Zambia: Presentation of the
Main Findings of the First Phase Research By Rashid S. Kaukab
Deputy Director and Research Coordinator, CUTS Geneva Resource
Centre www.cuts-grc.org
2. STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION
- Trade policy making process in Zambia: key consultative
mechanisms
- Challenges in participation: views of 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: Inclusive Trade Policy Making (ITPM)
Index
4. II. TRADE POLICY MAKING PROCESS IN ZAMBIA: KEY CONSULTATIVE
MECHANISMS Consultative Mechanism Mandate Composition National
Working Group on Trade (NWGT) Agriculture Consultative Forum
(ACF)Trade Expansion Working Group Steering Committee of
Secretaries All trade issues Agriculture issues Trade issues All
issues Multi-stakeholder Multi-stakeholderPublic and private
sectorInter-ministerial coordination 5. II. TRADE POLICY MAKING
PROCESS IN ZAMBIA: KEY CONSULTATIVE MECHANISMS Mandate/Membership
Multi-stakeholder Public-Private sectors Only governmental Multiple
issues including trade Zambia SCSAll trade issues Zambia NWGTZambia
TEWGSpecific trade issues 6. III. CHALLENGES IN PARTICIPATION AS
VIEWED BY STAKEHOLDERS
- Ministry of Commerce, Trade and Industry (MCTI)
- Limited number of technical staff
- Need to improve the information flow to all stakeholders,
particularly non-state actors
7. III. CHALLENGES IN PARTICIPATION AS VIEWED BY
STAKEHOLDERS
- Other relevant Government Ministries and Agencies
- Need for coherence in various policies, strategies and plans to
avoid contradictions
- Lack of capacity of all relevant ministries and government
agencies to understand and implement the linkages between trade
policy and their respective areas
- Issues of coordination among governmental machinery
- Lack of regular and timely information flow on trade
issues
8. III. CHALLENGES IN PARTICIPATION AS VIEWED BY
STAKEHOLDERS
- Private Sector Umbrella Organizations
- Lack of analytical capacity
- Lack of interest in broad trade policy issues
- Need for reconciling multiple interests
9. III. CHALLENGES IN PARTICIPATION AS VIEWED BY
STAKEHOLDERS
- Civil Society Organisations (CSOs)
- Lack of capacity and technical human resources
- Lack of domestic specialists on trade issues
- Need for better coordination and information sharing among
CSOs
- Limited opportunities for effective participation
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 0.75 (many efforts made) C.Establishment of
formal consultative mechanisms 1.00 (Yes) D.Regular functioning of
formal consultative mechanisms 0.75 (functioning most of the
time)E.Regular information flow to the stakeholders including on
the content of trade policy 0.50 (irregular information flow) Total
MCTI 3.75/5.00 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) 1.00 (Yes) G, J, and
M.Faithful representation of and regular feedback to the
represented constituencies 0.50 (occasional faithful representation
and/or irregular and feedback) 0.50 (occasional faithful
representation and/or irregular and feedback) 0.50 (occasional
faithful representation and/or irregular and feedback) H, K, and
N.Acquiring relevant knowledge and expertise 0.50 (some knowledge
and expertise) 0.50 (some knowledge and expertise) 0.50 (some
knowledge and expertise) Total 1.75/3.00 2.00/3.00 2.00/3.00 15.
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. 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. 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
-
- Not all trade issues covered by consultative fora
-
- 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
- Awareness-raising on trade issues:action by all actors
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 MCTI
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
- For further information please
contact[email_address]or[email_address]