Feedback Mechanisms in Malawi

Key challenges and way forward

Ministry of Finance and Development Planning

MALAWI

Feedback mechanisms in Malawi

• Joint Review of the MGDS• Sector reviews • Common Approach to General Budget Support (CABS)• Other mechanisms• General challenges and way forward

Joint reviews Government -DPs

MGDS Annual Review:• Up to now four reviews have been conducted• Providing opportunity for Government and DPs to review

progress on implementation of sector plans and MGDS indicators, budget performance, and aid effectiveness targets

Reviews within sectors:• Forum for negotiation, policy dialogue, and agreement

of plans among Government and its DPs at sector level• Assessing performance on how targets on core sector

outputs are achieved • Participation of DPs, but also CSOs and private sector

The reviews as input into policy and decision-making

• MGDS reviews major input into budget planning process• Prerequisite- timeliness of the reviews • Policy dialogue between Budget and Planning

Divisions in MoFDP and OPC to address key issues from the review should atke place before the start of the budget process

• The reviews on the basis of SWGs provide important opportunity for dialogue between Government, CSOs, the private sector, and the DPs for better planning, budgeting and implementation of agreed sector plans

• The reviews act as mutual accountability and management for results mechanism

CABS mechanism

• Joint framework for budget support cooperation between Government and CABS DPs

• Bi-annuals reviews are conducted• High quality of discourse and high level of

representation of both Government and CABS DPs • Incentive for adherence to the underlying principles of

the CABS partnership ( both economic and non-economic)

• Pre-CABS review meetings successful innovation in the CABS review process

• Participated by government representatives, CABS DPs, other DPs (observers), parliamentarians, CSOs, and private sector representatives

Other Mechanisms

• Other dialogue structures with development stakeholders include Group on Financial and Economic Management (GFEM), SWGs and High Level Forum

• These structures have been strengthened and have important influence on policy making

• Government also insures wider consultations with stakeholders on key policy decisions

• To reach the wider public, government publishes and disseminates several aid effectiveness reports such as Aid Atlas, Monitoring Reports for Donor Funded Projects, Annual Debt and Aid Report, e.t.c.

Challenges

• The overall organization and operationalization of sectors (SWGs) to carry out reviews

• Capacity for M&E in sectors and management of monitoring and reporting on progress

• Availability of baseline data and problems in setting of targets

• Budget performance challenges • Reaching aid effectiveness targets on donor

harmonization and use of country systems• Inter- and intra-governmental coordination • Weak coordination within the sectors themeselves • Funding issues – resource constraints for strengthening

and conducting M&E

General Challenges

• Inadequate appreciation of PD and aid effectiveness agenda by important stakeholders

• Little knowledge of the aid effectiveness and development effectiveness agenda results in little participation of some stakeholders in implementation process

• Frequent changes of senior staff both in Govt and Donor offices has derailed progress in most cases.

• Some donor headquarter requirements and procedures provide little flexibility for effecting change in donor behaviour to meet aid effectiveness targets Harmonization, joint analytical work, alignment with country

procedures and use of country systems remain challenging principles

Way forward

• Addressing capacity constraints in government – requires support from DPs

• Wider dissemination about aid and development effectiveness to parliamentarians, CSOs, private sector, line ministries, district level official and wider public Ensures greater awareness at all levels and empowers

all stakeholders to participate in the change agenda• High level economic and political leadership to reform.

• developed a PFEM Reform Programme, • implemented budget reforms (MTEF),• Strengthened aid information management systems, • committed to building capacity for results based

management.

THANK YOU!