1. Mozambique: Is the PRSP Process Effective?
National Directorate of the Budget
&
Cabinet of Studies
Ministry of Finance

2. Structure of the Presentation
Background
Policy Formulation
Actors – Ownership, Political Leadership, Accountability and Capacity
Lessons Learned and Best Practices of PRSP II
Conclusions

3. Priorities defined in the Government Program
I. Background
Priorities defined in the Government Program
Balance economic and social development
Reduce absolute poverty;
Consolidate peace, national Unity and democracy
Apply he rule of law in all areas
Improve education and health services
Strenghen International Cooperation

4. Instruments of Planning (Linkages)
I. Background:
Instruments of Planning (Linkages)
PROGRAMAÇÃO DE MÉDIO PRAZO
PLANOS OPERACIONAIS ANUAIS
Planos Estratégicos Sectoriais
e Provinciais
Cenário Fiscal de Médio Prazo
(CFMP )
PLANO ECONÓMICO E SOCIAL
(PES)
BUDGET STATE
(OE)
PROGRAMA QUINQUENAL DO GOVERNO
Integração da política
e estratégia sectorial
Enquadramento dos recursos
e afectação inter -
sectorial
Ceillings
Expenditure
Consistência da orçamentação
com acções e
objectivos de política
Cenário macro e
Integration of
Objectives and
Sectorial targets
Marks +
Plano de Acção para a Redução
da Pobreza Absoluta
(PARPA)
Harmonização da política
Afectação
prioritária de
recursos
PROGRAMMING OF MEDIUM PERIOD
ANNUAL OPERATIONAL PLANS
Strategic Plans Sectorials
And Provinces
Medium Term Framework Expenditure
(MTFE)
ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL PLAN
(ESA)
(BS)
QUINQUENAL PROGRAM OF THE GOVERNMENT
Integration of the it
Politicizes and Strategy
Sectorial
Framing of The Resources and
Affectation Interr
Integration
Of Goalss
Coordination in
The Monitory
process
Plan of Action for Reduction of the
Absolute Poverty
(PRSP)
Harmonization of the it Politicizes
And Sectorial Strategyl
Priority
Affectation of
resources
BUDGET STATE

5. PQG, PARPA II, CFMP, PES e OE
II. Policy Formulation
PQG, PARPA II, CFMP, PES e OE
Appointment Book 2025
To Create a national vision of long period;
To Prepare a National Strategy of Development;

6. PQG, PARPA II, CFMP, PES e OE
II. Policy Formulation
PQG, PARPA II, CFMP, PES e OE
Government Program (five years)
Guides government action during the tenure period ( );
Was formulated in coordination with several line ministries;
Reflects the main ambitions of Country.

7. II. Policy Formulation
PARPA II
Three aspects became PARPA the effective process:
(1) Instrument of Operacionalization;
(2) Strategic Instrument;
(3) Paternship development instrument;

8. II. Policy Formulation PARPA II
- Links specific priorities and resource allocation
- Coordination across sector policies;
- Defines specific targets
- Outlines a vision about medium-term priorities
- Accepted by cooperating partners (donors) as a basis for budget support and concessional finance
- Likely to “survive” political changes
Methodology of PARPA II:
Protagonists: Government institutions; civil society and donors

9. Methodology of PARPA II
II. Policy Formulation
Methodology of PARPA II
Thematics Groups
Work Group
Macroeconomics and Poverty
Economic growth and macro stability
Analysis of poverty and monitoring systems
Management of public finance
Governance
Decentralisation of Public Sector
Legal and justice reform
Economic Development
Financial Sector
Private Sector
Agriculture; Infrastructure: Roads, Telecommunications, Ports and Railway, Infrastructure; Energy
Human Capital
Health
Education
Water and Sanitation
Cross-Cutting Issues
Demining; Environment; Desaster prevention
HIV/AIDS; Gender; Nutrition and Food Security
Science and Technology
Rural Development

10. II. Policy Formulation Stages of preparation of PARPA:
Stage I: Elaboration of PARPA II:
3nd Poverty Observatory
Pillars: Governing, Human Capital and Economic Development
(ii) Stage II: Work Groups:
Preparation of documents (Operational Matrix and Strategic Matrizes)
Elaboration of preliminar version of PARPA II

11. Linkage between CFMP and PARPA II: Pillars
II. Policy Formulation
PARPA II versus MTEF
CFMP: Medium Term Strategic Document
Linkage between CFMP and PARPA II: Pillars
Assumptions: GDP growth, inflation rate and exchange rate;
Resources allocated through the CFMP reflect the actions and activities defined in PARPA II

12. PES and OE are annual slices of the PARPA
II. Policy Formulation
PARPA versus PES and OE
PES and OE are annual slices of the PARPA
Methodology of PES and OE:
Ceilings are provided to spending units at the 31st of May
Spending units (ministries, provincial directorates) submit their proposals to MF e MPD until 31 of July
Analysis and aggregation of proposals by MPD and MF – August
Proposals of PES and OE to Economic Council: 15 of September
Proposals of PES and OE to Economic Council: 19 of September
Proposals of PES and OE to Parliamento: 30 of September

13. Translating Political Priorities into Sound Policy Proposals
II. Policy Formulation
Translating Political Priorities into Sound Policy Proposals
Define general and specifics objectives;
Delineate effective and realistic strategies
Define temporal horizon and areas which are key to the objective to reduce poverty from 54% in 2003 to less of 45% in 2010
Stakeholders: Government, Civil Society and advice by Donors;
Results can be monitored and measured
Prepared within the expected resources envelope (not a wish list, not the tabulation of needs)

14. Available financial resources Duplication of activities
II. Policy Formulation
Challenges Found in Preparation of Solid Proposals on Formulation Policy
Available financial resources
Duplication of activities
Multiplicity of planning instruments

15. Evaluation Phase, Policy Adjustments and the Role of Donors
II. Policy Formulation
Evaluation Phase, Policy Adjustments and the Role of Donors
Commitments of Government are monitored through the PES implementation report (“Balanço do PES”),
Integration of indicators of the Performance Assessment Framework (PAF) in other planning instruments like the PES improved.
Responsible for monitoring: Ministry of Planning and Development - MPD
Audit of Resources Use : General Inspectorate of Finance and Audit Court

16. Evaluation Phase, Policy Adjustments and the Role of Donors
II. Policy Formulation
Evaluation Phase, Policy Adjustments and the Role of Donors
PES Implementation Report
Identify the weaknesses of inter-sectorial approach
Provide responses in terms of descentralisation of and participation in monitoring
Results and changes communicated to actors within the same proces
Role of the Donors: degree and volume of funds affect the objectives and the results that can be achieved

17. Evaluation Phase, Policy Adjustments and the Role of Donors
II. Policy Formulation
Evaluation Phase, Policy Adjustments and the Role of Donors
Five Fundamentals Principles:
Integration
Indicators of Outcomes versus indicators of Output
Combination of monitoring of quantitative and qualitative aspects
Monitoring of PARPA
Participative Approach

18. Efficacy of Instruments of Planning versus Governance
II. Policy Formulation
Efficacy of Instruments of Planning versus Governance
Traditional Model of Decision Making
Preparation of Calendar (Goals of long, medium and short run)
Research, Discussion and Presentation of Proposals
Study/ Ponderousneoss of Costs and Benefits of each proposal
Decision Making
Implementation of Action Plan
Evaluation

19. Council of Ministers: Design and follow-up strategies
III. Actors - Ownership, Political Leadership, Accountability and Capacity
Perspectives and Interest: Government, Civil Society and Donors: Harmonisation
Assembly of the Republic: Substance Legislate require Ministries Accountability;
Council of Ministers: Design and follow-up strategies

20. Distrits: Identify potentials for acceleration of economic growth
III. Actors- Ownership, Political Leadership, Accountability and Capacity
Line Ministries: rational use of public resource and execution in 100% of programs activities;
Distrits: Identify potentials for acceleration of economic growth
Civil Society : advise the Government in the process of defining public policies
Donors: Assume realistic commitment and disburse according to agreed schedules.

21. IV. Lessons Learned and Best Practices of PARPA
POSITIVE FACTORS
Both PARPA I e PARPA II were quite participative processes.
Defining strategies together with those who benefit from them and who who live the reality improves policy design.
Positive Results so far: Poverty fell from 69.4% to 54,1% between 1996/7 and 2002/3;
Expansion of basic public services in priority areas

22. IV. Lessons Learned and Best Practices of PARPA
Negative Factors
Monitoring instruments still need to be improved considerably (PES/BdPES);
Impact assessments of policy changes (PSIAs) has not been applied enough so far.
Alignment of decentralisation process with requirements for participation: Poverty Observatories at national and provincial level

23. Conclusion
1. PARPA II is well aligned with the other instruments, and adds value through:
Emphasis on complementarities;
Long-term vision;
More specific on objectives and targets than other instruments
2. Participation has led to country ownership:
Likely to survive changes of government and ministers,
Accepted by donors as business basis.
3. Weaknesses:
Objectives and targets were not really costed
Objectives sometimes formulated too vaguely to cost them.
4. Absence of regional Dimension:
Average, national targets are not broken down by province
No minimum coverage per district defined

24. Thank You