The uganda psia demonstration exercise
1 / 14

The Uganda PSIA Demonstration Exercise - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

The Uganda PSIA Demonstration Exercise. Presentation to DFID PSIA Seminar Series, London 12 March 2003 David Booth, Deborah Kasente, George Mavrotas, Gloria Kempaka Mugambe and Abdu Muwonge. PSIA: What is it? Why now?.

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' The Uganda PSIA Demonstration Exercise' - vielka-dawson

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
The uganda psia demonstration exercise

The Uganda PSIA Demonstration Exercise

Presentation to DFID PSIA Seminar Series, London

12 March 2003

David Booth, Deborah Kasente, George Mavrotas, Gloria Kempaka Mugambe and Abdu Muwonge

Psia what is it why now
PSIA:What is it? Why now?

  • Ex ante PSIA = looking at the likely consequences of a policy before implementing it

  • 1997-1999: self-criticism at IMF and World Bank for not doing it much

  • 1999: PRSPs - general adoption of Uganda’s PEAP model: poverty reduction efforts and analysis need to be Government-led, consultative

The process in uganda
The process in Uganda

  • MFPED agreement with DFID to sponsor a “demonstration exercise”

  • Purpose: to show it can be done, is helpful to policy, and what the problems are likely to be

  • Approach: Open-ended discussions between initial research team and stakeholders (April 2002)

  • Topic selected and team finalised

Deciding what to focus on
Deciding what to focus on

  • Principles:

    • something topical and important

    • something “do-able”, using mostly existing data

    • try out a range of quantitative and qualitative methods

    • don’t try to be comprehensive: add value to existing debate

  • Decision:

    • look at neglected aspects of the Strategic Exports Initiative (STRATEX)

    • focus on coffee and fish to keep it manageable

Why strategic exports
Why strategic exports?

  • A recent presidential initiative - partly arising from concern about excessive dependence on donor support

  • Controversial with donors - public-private split, supply- versus demand-driven, etc.

  • Some analytical work done, but scope for new knowledge to make a difference

  • Not widely debated - thus, an important challenge for keeping the PEAP dialogue vigorous and inclusive

Which impact issues what previous work


Which impact issues?/ What previous work?



World market prospects signalled?

Does production structure favour equitable distribution of benefits?

Are there incentives to sustainable production?


Are redistributive mechanisms needed?

Are incentives reaching the farm gate?

Are marketing margins fair to producers?


Gender division of labour and supply response?

Will higher earnings improve nutrition, health and education?


Which impact issues what previous work key
Which impact issues?/ What previous work?KEY

  • Roman text = main focus of debate until now: consultants’ reports suggesting world market prospects poorly signalled; method supply-driven rather than facilitative

  • Italic text = partially covered: good work on marketing chains especially

  • Bold text = entirely absent

What did we ask
What did we ask?

  • What does the 1999/2000 survey say about households in coffee and fishing?

  • What do local studies and interviews with experts tell us about macro-micro-submicro links, for new crops and export fishing?

  • What was in the initial PPA2 reports on fishing communities?

  • On what topics could a quick study add value to the policy debate?

Key findings
Key findings

1) Opportunities for poverty reduction through coffee are by no means exhausted

2) But STRATEX will work badly if it doesn’t confront 2 consequences of gender division of income:

  • male bias of household spending is likely to prevent improvement in welfare of women and children - especially dramatic in export-fishing

  • women’s position on export crops also likely to weaken supply response in coffee

What is the policy issue
What is the policy issue?

  • STRATEX needs to address micro-issues, if it is to work

  • And it is running in parallel with GoU’s own instrument for micro-level facilitation of commercialisiation - PMA

  • Some project experience shows facilitating cooperative solutions to crop-choice and resource utisation can work

  • PMA/NAADS’ demand-driven approach is suitable for scaling-up these successes


  • Harmonise STRATEX and the PMA

  • Adjust STRATEX methods in the light of existing criticisms

  • But also:

    • deliberate targeting of women farmers by NAADS is crucial

    • facilitation for cooperative gender solutions, and women’s de facto land access

    • stronger focus on adult literacy for women

    • more resources for gender mainstreaming in all sector-wide strategies

What did we learn 1 about data
What did we learn?1: about data

  • The survey analysis was disappointing

    • Poverty-measurement surveys area not ideal for exploring income scenarios in detail

    • Tailor-made surveys needed?

  • Relevant local case study evidence was abundant - Uganda and international

    • Although well-known in research circles, not taken into account by policy makers

    • So there can be “value-added” from just making research-policy linkages

What did we learn 2 about method
What did we learn?2: about method

  • Practical snags obstructed intellectual integration and timely reporting

    • Go for a simpler organisational model?

  • Report unwieldy for Ugandan policy purposes

    • Be clearer about audience

    • Include fewer of the “frills” required for international public

  • Focus on gap-filling, value added and experimentation doesn’t persuade readers?

Way forward in uganda
Way forward in Uganda?

  • Use the PEAP research programme to mainstream PSIA

  • identify issues and commission PSIAs in good time

  • Schedule next ones ahead of the 2003 PEAP revision

  • Separate commissioning and research roles, and keep the former close to policy