1. -0- June 2006 Roles & Responsibilities vs. STAP Implementation

2. -1- June 2006 Historical Perspective STAP was put together in 2002 in order to kick start the NEPAD process in infrastructure STAP was put together in 2002 in order to kick start the NEPAD process in infrastructure In a context where multinational / regional projects are the most difficult initiatives to implement… In a context where multinational / regional projects are the most difficult initiatives to implement… With limited track record of cooperation between countries… With limited track record of cooperation between countries… …STAP proved successful in building the “NEPAD” brand name and fostering donors’ attention …STAP proved successful in building the “NEPAD” brand name and fostering donors’ attention … and led to regional physical projects being implemented in all sectors across the continent … and led to regional physical projects being implemented in all sectors across the continent STAP focuses on regional infrastructure projects and programmes STAP focuses on regional infrastructure projects and programmes 4 years later, pending the outcome of the MLSTF, it is necessary to agree on a flexible framework for moving regional infrastructure forward, within the NEPAD framework 4 years later, pending the outcome of the MLSTF, it is necessary to agree on a flexible framework for moving regional infrastructure forward, within the NEPAD framework Need to rethink roles & responsibilities and project selection

3. -2- June 2006 ICA Key Stakeholders and Mandate Stakeholders’ involvement with ICA A tripartite relationship (bilateral donors, multilateral agencies, African institutions) A tripartite relationship (bilateral donors, multilateral agencies, African institutions) Membership on the African side Membership on the African side Led by AfDBLed by AfDB Participants: sub-regional development Banks chosen by AUParticipants: sub-regional development Banks chosen by AU Observers: AU Commission, NEPAD, RECsObservers: AU Commission, NEPAD, RECs Private sector will be engaged through information and best practice sharing Private sector will be engaged through information and best practice sharing ICA is open to “others who make significant contributions” ICA is open to “others who make significant contributions” – October 6th 2005 communiqué – October 6th 2005 communiqué Key roles to be played by the Consortium Based on African priorities, Help members pool efforts and improve aid effectiveness Advocate for more resources in the sector Act as a platform to broker more donor financing Promote capacity building support to the RECs, NEPAD Secretariat and the AU Help consolidate good governance principles, regulatory mechanisms Work with countries to help overcome political barriers to progress Support data gathering Foster development of appropriate financial instruments Key roles to be played by the Consortium Based on African priorities, Help members pool efforts and improve aid effectiveness Advocate for more resources in the sector Act as a platform to broker more donor financing Promote capacity building support to the RECs, NEPAD Secretariat and the AU Help consolidate good governance principles, regulatory mechanisms Work with countries to help overcome political barriers to progress Support data gathering Foster development of appropriate financial instruments

4. -3- June 2006 AfDB’s Mandate The Bank’s mandate to support infrastructure development in RMCs is informed by the need to bridge the “infrastructure deficit” This mandate has received greater impetus from the NEPAD Initiative, and is guided by 5 Strategic Priorities: Improving impact on economic competitiveness and poverty reduction in RMCsImproving impact on economic competitiveness and poverty reduction in RMCs Support for sector reforms and institutional strengtheningSupport for sector reforms and institutional strengthening Development of regional infrastructure linkagesDevelopment of regional infrastructure linkages Increasing Private Sector Participation in infrastructure development and financing, andIncreasing Private Sector Participation in infrastructure development and financing, and Enhancing the development impact of projects through Economic and Sector Work, other analytic inputs for project preparation, and effective supervision of the portfolioEnhancing the development impact of projects through Economic and Sector Work, other analytic inputs for project preparation, and effective supervision of the portfolio

5. -4- June 2006 AU, NEPAD, REC levels – issues & proposals Key issues Hidden bottlenecks due to overlapping / unclear roles and responsibilities AU and NEPAD Secretariat NEPAD Secretariat and RECs Duplication of efforts / wasting resources Miscommunication / “seeking visibility” (e.g., STAP vs. REC Action Plan vs. AU Action Plan vs….) Geographical overlap amongst RECs Country – REC ownership struggle Power to change rests with member states No alignment of priorities Limited Program management skills Strategy for reform adoption Plan, stepping stones, monitoring Project ownership Suggested pointers to AU / NEPAD Africa Partnership Forum, May 2006 – Need for AU to clarify the division of responsibilities with NEPAD, RECs and countries Commitment AU to communicate to next Consortium meeting in November 2006. They will: Clarify relationships between AU, NEPAD, 8 “building block” RECs, other regional organisations, countries Address delegation of authority / supranational power transfers Agree on recourse mechanisms, monitoring Agree on rationalization action plan for geographical overlap issue Agree on coordinated process to prioritize projects

6. -5- June 2006 Which perspectives for the RECs? RECs are viewed as stepping-stones towards the realization of African integration. In that context, RECs are viewed as stepping-stones towards the realization of African integration. In that context, “How much of investment effort should be directed at building their capacities […]?” “How much of investment effort should be directed at building their capacities […]?” “To what extent should the capacities existing in them be duplicated at the AU level?” “To what extent should the capacities existing in them be duplicated at the AU level?” “If they must exist side-by-side with the AU, how can their roles, mandates and capacity needs be made to complement those of the AU?” “If they must exist side-by-side with the AU, how can their roles, mandates and capacity needs be made to complement those of the AU?” « AU/NEPAD and RECs, some burning questions » Excerpt from Draft Report of ACBF on REC Capacity Building Back Up