informal stakeholder meeting_kenya_ppt-atul
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
FOSTERING EQUITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY IN THE TRADING SYSTEM (FEATS) PROJECT:
MEETING WITH KEY STAKEHOLDERSNAIROBI, 8 MARCH 2010
Inclusiveness of Trade Policy Making in Kenya: 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 Kenya: key consultative mechanisms
Challenges in participation faced by 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 KENYA: KEY CONSULTATIVE
MECHANISMSConsultative Mechanism Mandate Composition
National Committee on the WTO (NCWTO)
Joint Industrial and Commercial Consultative Committee (JICCC)
Kenya-European Union Post-Lome Trade Negotiations (KELPOTRADE)
Support Programme / National Development and Trade Policy Forum
(NDTPF)
Cabinet’s Sub-Committee on Trade
Inter-Ministerial Committees (IMCs)
WTO issues
All issues, including trade
EPA negotiations
Trade issues
All issues
Multi-stakeholder
Public and private sectors only
Multi-stakeholder
Inter-ministerial
Inter-governmental
4
II. TRADE POLICY MAKING PROCESS IN KENYA:
KEY CONSULTATIVE MECHANISMS
5
Mandate/Membership
Multi-stakeholder
Public-Private sectors
Only governmental
Multiple issues
including trade
Kenya JICCC Kenya IMCs
All trade issues
Kenya Cabinet sub-committee on trade
Specific trade negotiations
Kenya NCWTO Kenya NDTPF
III. CHALLENGES IN PARTICIPATION AS VIEWED BY STAKEHOLDERS
Ministry of Trade (MoT)
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
Need for clear and institutional coordination mechanisms to coordinate with the Ministry of EAC
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
Need to balance the interests of members
Need for more organised and sustained lobbying
8
III. CHALLENGES IN PARTICIPATION AS VIEWED BY STAKEHOLDERS
Civil Society Organisations (CSOs)
Limited technical understanding of complex issues
Need to strengthen research-based advocacy Need for better coordination and information sharing among CSOs
Limited opportunities for participation
Lack of resources to maintain sustained engagement and retain the knowledge and expertise gained on trade issues
Influence could increase by developing closer relationships with the private sector where interests align
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) INDEXMoT SCORE
13
Action Variable Score
A. Identification of all key stakeholders 0.75 (most identified)
B. Creating awareness about the need for trade policy
0.75 (many efforts made)
C. Establishment of formal consultative mechanisms
0.75 (several established)
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 MoT 3.50/5.00
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
1.00 (Yes) 1.00 (Yes) 0.75 (most of the time)
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)
0.75 (most of the time)
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 2.00/3.00 2.00/3.00 2.00/3.00
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
Multiple fora with overlapping membership
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 MoT 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