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

ak@cuts.org

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