The Malawi Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper: the right approach?

Malawi is one of the poorest countries in the world. The World Bank is the country’s largest creditor, which means that Malawi stood to benefit from debt relief under the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) agreement. The Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) became the essential step on its road to debt relief. Prior to the PRSP process, Malawi had no history of serious poverty reduction plans. And it is highly doubtful that the intention of the PRSP – to change the nature of donor and recipient relationship, and to encourage local responsibility and commitment towards poverty reduction policy – will hold in the case of Malawi now.

Researchers associated with the Overseas Development Institute, UK discuss the process of developing the Malawi PRSP. They ask what this process can tell us about the usefulness of the PRSP approach. In Malawi – where liberal politics is only slowly taking root, and where there are deep divisions between government and opposition – the PRSP process has not been easy. And, while Malawi has had anti-poverty policies before, they have never been implemented.

The interim PRSP was formulated through a closed, non-consultative process. Backstage battles were fought within government over who should control the PRSP. It was difficult for the government and the World Bank to promote the PRSP as a new form of participatory development planning. Nonetheless, to formulate the full PRSP, a regional consultation was held, and a series of technical committees worked on the content of the strategy.

Technical, analytical work on the PRSP was held back by a lack of official and political commitment. The PRSP was not seen as a priority as this was linked to widespread misunderstanding of the process. Researchers also found that:

• Donors played a significant role in developing the PRSP. The macro-economic framework relied on agreements made beforehand with the IMF and World Bank.
• Although local non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and community organisations are weak, a network has come together to interact with government and donors on economic policy issues. It has both engaged in discussions around the PRSP, and become a focus for co-ordinated protest.
• The PRSP has not contributed much to improving general systems of planning, budgeting and expenditure management. Patterns of actual public expenditure continue to bear little resemblance to what has been planned.

PRSPs seem to promise a new kind of relationship between governments, donors and local people. Conditionality is supposed to be replaced with partnership. In Malawi, the potential for this new kind of relationship is small. This is partly because of the ‘command and control’ mindset of World Bank and IMF officials. But government weaknesses, especially about policy implementation, are also important.

The researchers recommend:

• Conditionalities on donor aid should be made completely transparent, and publicised widely. This would do away with suspicions that donors and government are working together, which has made relationships with local NGOs very difficult.
• Local organisations should be involved in monitoring all aspects of the agreed, publicised conditionalities. Details of what governments must do are not enough – there also needs to be agreement on how their actions should be assessed.
• The entire process of a PRSP should be laid out clearly at the start. In Malawi, the arrangements for drafting the PRSP emerged only slowly, near the end of the process, leading to huge disappointments for many of who were involved up to that point.

Despite all these problems, the PRSP formulation process is among the most participatory policy-making exercises Malawi has experienced. But important constraints – lack of political commitment to reform, and lack of an overhaul of conditionality by World Bank and IMF – look likely to remain.

Source(s):
Chapter Four: ‘Malawi’ in Fighting Poverty in Africa: are PRSPs making a difference? edited by David Booth, London: Overseas Development Institute, by Rob Jenkins and Maxton Tsoka, 2004.

Funded by: GTZ, Japan Bank for International Co-operation, Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, Department for International Development (UK)

id21 Research Highlight: 13 October 2004

Further Information:
Rob Jenkins
Birkbeck College,
University of London.

Tel: + 44 (0) 20 7631 6789
Fax: + 44 (0) 20 7631 6787
Contact the contributor: r.jenkins@bbk.ac.uk

Birkbeck College, University of London

Maxton Tsoka
Centre for Social Research,
University of Malawi,
Zomba,
Malawi

Tel: + 265 524 800
Fax: + 265 524 578
Contact the contributor: csr@sndp.org.mw

Centre for Social Research, University of Malawi

Other related links:
'Mainstreaming the poverty-reduction agenda'

'Poverty reduction in the Americas: on course to deliver debt relief?' >

'Climbing the ladder: involving the poor in poverty reduction strategies' >

'IMF/World Bank Poverty Reduction Strategy: effective, participatory and locally owned?'

'PRSPs investigated: structural adjustment in another guise?' >

'Annual review of country experiences with PRSPs' ELDIS

'FAD Desk Review of the PRSP Process in Eastern and Southern Africa' EURODAD