Enhancing Trade Policy Ownership through Inclusive Processes: Insights from CSEND and CUTS
This presentation explores the importance of inclusive trade policy-making processes to enhance domestic ownership and effective implementation of trade policies. It discusses recent research findings from CUTS, addressing stakeholder participation challenges, and introduces the Inclusive Trade Policy Making (ITPM) Index designed to assess and improve inclusiveness. Key recommendations emphasize broadening consultations, strengthening consultative mechanisms, and linking inclusivity to trade outcomes. The insights are valuable for stakeholders in Kenya, Malawi, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia, fostering dialogue and coordination for sustainable development.
Enhancing Trade Policy Ownership through Inclusive Processes: Insights from CSEND and CUTS
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Improving Ownership of Trade Policy through Inclusive Processes Presentation to CSEND and CUTS Book Vernissage: “Inter-ministerial Coordination and Stakeholder Consultation of Trade Policy Making” 19 July, 2010 By Rashid S. Kaukab Deputy Director and Research Coordinator, CUTS Geneva Resource Centre rsk@cuts.org www.cuts-grc.org
Structure of Presentation • Introduction • Trade policy for development: stakeholders and formal consultative mechanisms • Effective participation: challenges as viewed by stakeholders • Measuring inclusiveness: the Inclusive Trade Policy Making (ITPM) Index • Conclusions and way forward to maximize inclusivity pay-offs
I. Introduction • Importance of trade and trade policy as a means to achieve growth and development • Importance of inclusive trade policy making to ensure relevance and effective implementation • Based on recent CUTS research under the FEATS project with focus on Kenya, Malawi, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia
II. Trade Policy for Development: Consultative Mechanisms Categorization by Mandate • On specific trade negotiations (e.g. EPA, WTO) • On all trade issues • On larger set of issues that includes trade Categorization by Membership • Only governmental actors • For public and private sectors • Multi-stakeholder
III. Effective Participation: Challenges as Viewed by Stakeholders Common Challenges • Lack of capacity and technical human resources to deal with diverse and evolving issues • Issues of internal and external coordination • Lack of regular and timely information flow on trade issues
III. Effective Participation: Challenges as Viewed by Stakeholders Challenges Specific to Categories of Stakeholders • Ministry responsible for trade: Lack of financial and human resources to ensure regular functioning of consultative mechanisms • Other relevant government ministries/agencies: Issue of primary mandate • Private sector: Need to improve opportunities for less powerful business associations • CSOs: Occasional tensions with the government and limited opportunities for participation
IV. Measuring inclusiveness: the Inclusive Trade Policy Making (ITPM) Index Objectives of ITPM Index • Assessing the inclusiveness of a country’s trade policy making processes in terms of the capacities and participation of main stakeholders in these processes • Identifying the weaknesses and gaps that should be the target of related capacity building and other activities by the governments, donors, and various stakeholders • Allowing for comparisons across countries to identify the good practices as well as prompting actions by countries lagging behind • Improving prospects for domestic ownership of trade policies through development and application of more inclusive trade policy making processes
IV. Measuring inclusiveness: the Inclusive Trade Policy Making (ITPM) Index
IV. Measuring inclusiveness: the Inclusive Trade Policy Making (ITPM) Index
IV. Measuring inclusiveness: the Inclusive Trade Policy Making (ITPM) Index
V. Main Conclusions • Improved (and further improving) inclusiveness, better informed stakeholders, and emerging culture of dialogue at nation al levels But • Not all relevant stakeholders involved (e.g. parliamentarians, informal sector, consumers), and • Consultative forums lack effective mandates And • Further efforts also needed to maximize inclusivity pay-offs in an evolving setting
V. Way Forward to Maximize Inclusivity Pay-Offs for Trade-Led Development: Some Recommendations • Broadening national consultations: identification and involvement of all relevant stakeholders • Strengthening national consultative mechanisms: more resources and better mandates • Linking with results: measure impact of improved inclusivity/ownership on trade policy content and outcomes • Focusing on specific areas: make better use of inclusivity processes for EIF and Aid for Trade • Addressing the regional dimension: build similar processes at the regional level among RECs
Inclusiveness can generate national ownership leading to effective implementation of trade policy as part of overall development policy
