Roundtable Topic 1: Country Ownership

This page comprises information on background resources for Roundtable 1, compiled by the United Nations Development Programme. It does not necesserily represent the views of the Third High Level Forum organizers.

To access detailed information on the background resources for Participation listed below, please visit the UNDP Aid Effectiveness Portal.

Background Resources: Participation

David Booth, “Missing links in the politics of development: learning from the PRSP experiment”, ODI Working Paper 256, October 2005
ODI’s David Booth is one of the leading academic commentators on the politics of development. He points out the dilemma for donors: effective participation is a function of healthy, democratic political processes, which by their nature cannot be ‘engineered’ by external actors. He concludes that the theory that more participatory policy processes will be more effective has proved to be “naïve”. His studies of the political economy of LICs suggest that real decisions on resource allocation are taken behind the scenes by small groups of politicians, and that formal policy processes are largely “window dressing”. However, there is greater potential in MICs, where there is informed public opinion, a degree of effective parliamentary scrutiny and an active media.  

Booth, David, Arturo Grigsby & Carlos Toranza, “Politics and Poverty Reduction Strategies: Lessons from Latin American HIPCs”, ODI Working Paper 262, December 2005
Elsewhere, based on a review of Latin American PRSPs, Booth reached three conclusions about participatory processes: (i) it is much easier to have effective consultations around discrete issues, than to generate the kind of broad agreements needed for a comprehensive PRSP; (ii) participatory processes generate short-term demands on government to fix problems, but don’t produce solutions to complex problems involving conflicting interests and trade-offs; (iii) the key factor for successful participation is whether government is willing to be influenced by the process. His overall conclusion is very pessimistic: “PRS processes as currently conceived do not help to create the political interest in formulating and carrying out pro-poor public policies.”

Driscoll, Ruth with Alison Evans, “Second-generation Poverty Reduction Strategies: new opportunities and emerging issues”, Development Policy Review, Issue 23(1), 2005
Driscoll notes that that the PRSP initiative has brought about an “unprecedented level of civil society engagement” in the policy process, but that it could go much deeper. Formal democratic and accountability institutions – parliaments, audit offices, public-sector watchdogs, the media – are often bypassed. Participation has mostly been limited to urban NGOs, rather than grass-roots organisations, and demand-side accountability to poor people has not increased. She criticises the World Bank and other donors for their “unwarranted faith in a technocratic, depoliticised mode of governance”.

Agulhas, “Does the country-led approach deliver results? A synthesis of emerging evidence”, Paper commissioned by DFID, April 2006
This document reviews the literature on participation, and finds a number of common concerns, including: a bias towards urban NGOs; lack of participation by the private sector and trade unions; artificial deadlines preventing participants from absorbing materials and preparing responses; language constraints (including use of technical language); poor organisation of participatory sessions; and a tendency to steer away from macroeconomics and other controversial policy areas. It argues that participation should not be ‘projectised’ as an ad hoc series of consultations during PRSP formulation, but should be institutionalised in the regular policy-making and budget processes.

ActionAid, “Rethinking participation: questions for civil society about the limits of participation in PRSPs”, April 2004
ActionAid charges that participation has been limited to narrowly defined ‘poverty reduction’ issues, namely spending priorities in health and education. Civil society has been excluded from discussion of controversial subjects such as industrial policy, trade, fiscal policy, price supports, regulation of foreign investment and interest rates, which are ultimately more important for poverty reduction. It argues that the IFIs continue to narrow the space for domestic policy by imposing restrictive macroeconomic policies.

Masud Mozammel and Sina Odugbemi, “With the support of multitudes: using strategic communication to fight poverty through PRSPs”, World Bank, 2005
This World Bank publication makes a strong case for the importance of strategic communications to support the development process. Strategic communications are planned, deliberate and long-term, not ad hoc and reactive. They involve opening up the development policy process, ensuring free flow of information to opinion makers in society, using the mass media for foster debate, and using communications to boost awareness of national development strategies. The book contains useful examples of good communications practices from around the world, including from the Kyrgyz Republic, Cambodia and Pakistan. A follow-up book is to be released in 2008. 

Scott Hubli and Alicia Mandaville, “Parliaments and the PRSP process”, World Bank Institute Working Paper, 2004
This is one of many reports concluding that parliamentary involvement in the PRPS process has been weak, and that this limits prospects for effective implementation. The document goes through the PRSP preparation, implementation and monitoring cycle, suggesting numerous points at which parliament could be better engaged.