Updated 5 March, 2004
 
 
NSSD Home

Resource Book
Key Documents
Reference Area
The Project
Documents
Country Area
Links
Tools
Search
About NSSD
 

OECD/DAC Dialogues with Developing Countries on National Strategies for Sustainable Development

Status Review of
National Strategies for Sustainable Development
in Ghana

June 2001

Contents

<< Previous

Next >>


5. Integrating Institutions and Initiatives

5.1 Issues of the current situation of strategy work

The current situation of strategy development and implementation has been discussed in earlier Sections 3 and 4 with respect to when they were initiated, the main focus and aims, status of preparation and implementation, key stakeholders, main preparation process, observations on outcomes and effectiveness, and, linkages to Ghana Vision 2020, if any.

This sections covers other issues of the integrating institutions and initiatives within which the frameworks for sustainable national development were prepared and implemented. The discussion also supplements that on the institutional context of the frameworks.

5.1.1 Local level formal strategy and planning process: the District Development Plans

As noted earlier, the Vision 2020 policy framework was operationalized by a series of 5-year medium-term plans prepared and implemented by the District Assemblies.

The 1992 Republican Constitution specified a decentralized local government system that ensures that functions, powers, resources and responsibilities are transferred from the central government to local government. To effect the 1992 constitutional provisions, the Local Government Act of 1993 (Act 462), which replaced PNDC Law 207, established the district assemblies as district planning authorities within the framework of the new decentralized planning system which was legislated under the National Development Planning Commission Act 1994 (Act 480) and the National Development Planning (Systems) Act.

5.1.2 Linkage with global conventions

The development of Vision 2020 framework for long-term development was not linked explicitly to global conventions such as on biodiversity, climate change, desertification, and the Law of the Sea, but these issues (except that relating to the sea) were considered by the CSPGs in integrating environmental concerns into the framework and medium-term plans.

5.1.3 Inter-relationships between current processes

Opportunities exist for complementarities among the various strategic approaches and for integration between them. This is because, due to its long-term vision, comprehensiveness, and integrated approach, the Vision 2020 frameworks provides an over-arching strategic framework for development administration programming in Ghana. The Ghana Vision 2020 provides the guiding framework for several of the current strategic processes while at the same time incorporating many of the processes directly within its framework.

The development of some planning initiatives started before the finalization of the Vision 2020 framework. However, these were either a system of managing development administration (such as decentralization) or sectoral strategies (such as the RNRS or the medium-term agricultural development strategy and programme). Indeed, the decentralization programme started before the preparation of the pre-cursor to the Vision (the NDPF) was initiated. However, in the spirit of building on existing work, Vision 2020 took on board strategy work in existence at the time of its preparation, such as the poverty strategy and SAPRI.

Regarding the Ghana Poverty Reduction Strategy (GPRS), its objectives informed the goals and approach adopted for poverty alleviation in the Vision 2020 while the revision of the GPRS is being undertaken within the framework of the preparation of the second medium term plan of the Vision 2020.

As a planning approach, Ghana - Vision 2020 adopted the participatory approach to and promoted ownership of development policies and programmes through national consensus building on strategic development issues that cover the whole spectrum of Ghana's development needs. This strategic approach to identifying and proposing ways of addressing development issues through consensus mechanisms also underlie the preparation of the CDF.

The core development ingredient of the World Bank's Comprehensive Development Framework (CDF) and the United Nations' Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) and Japan's Integrated Human Development Programme (IHDP) for Ghana have been adequately captured under Ghana - Vision 2020. These three initiatives fit into the strategies and methodology adopted under the policy issues contained in Ghana - Vision 2020 document. For example, the network of Sectoral Coordinating Groups under the CDF cover essentially the thematic areas under the Second Step Policy Framework of the Ghana-Vision 2020.

5.1.4 Cross-sectoral linkages between government institutions

Regarding the extent and efficacy of cross-sectoral linkages between government departments and institutions, all key strategic frameworks envisaged strong linkages. For example, the Vision 2020, CDF and CCA all utilized cross-sectoral planning or coordinating groups, and, identified lead and supporting implementing MDA for each thematic areas covered in their frameworks. Correspondingly, there are several instances of cross-sectoral linkages among MDAs at the level of project design and implementation. For example, under the Village Infrastructure Project (VIP), the lead agency of the Ministry of Food and Agriculture collaborates with the Ministries of Roads and Transport, and the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development. As another example, all developments in mining are controlled by the Ministries of Mines and Energy, Lands and Forestry, and the EPA. Also, there are many inter-ministerial coordinating mechanisms, such as for the GPRS. Overall, however, intersectoral coordination in development programme implementation is generally weak.

5.2 Roles and responsibilities

Section 4 discussed in some detail the involvement of various institutions in strategy development. In this section, we focus on the Vision 2020 and the Medium-Term implementation plans.

A very wide variety of governmental, non-governmental, private sector and civil society groups have been involved in developing the First and Second Step Policy Frameworks. These included the NDPC, MDAS, Ghana Real Estate Developers Association, private think tanks, private press houses, the Private Enterprise Foundation, National Council on Women and Development, Ghana National Association of Farmers and Fishermen, the universities, organized labour groups, and traditional authorities.

The scope of participating institutions has been very broad in an attempt to facilitate an all-inclusive involvement of key stakeholder groups. Nonetheless, a few notable groups or institutions relevant to sustainable development could have been included at the formulation stage of the medium-term policy framework. These include: constitutional bodies such as the National Council for Civic Education and CHRAJ, queenmothers (as distinct from chiefs who tend to dominate participation by traditional leaders), religious leaders, micro-finance operators, representatives of the association of private schools and hospitals, and the Conference of Heads of Assisted Secondary Schools.

The nature of preparation approach adopted by NDPC was such that no specific roles or responsibilities were assigned to participating institutions to produce background papers on the basis of institutional affiliation. Instead, all institutions contributed to the common agenda and programmes of the CSPGs in which they participated. Thus, it is difficult to assess the effectiveness of different institutions in relation to their roles regarding the development of the Vision 2020 framework.

The structure and institutional representation on CSPG were determined by the NDPC based on factors such as: the need for adequate representation of all major stakeholder groups, inclusion of key knowledgeable individuals, the need for a manageable size of the CSPGs, and, the availability of financial resources to support the activities of the groups and the entire process. A consultant serviced each CSPG. The Terms of Reference (TORs) developed to guide the work of the CSPGs and the consultants were adequate. However, the TORs did not include grassroots consultations due to time and financial constraints.

5.3 Enabling institutional conditions for strategy work

There is no unique national steering mechanism for overseeing the preparation of the various strategic frameworks as each adopted its own mechanism. The NDPC has oversight responsibilities for the preparation, coordination, implementation and monitoring of the medium-term plans and strategic plans prepared by the District Assemblies (DAs) and the MDAs. The preparatory mechanism utilized by the NDPC involves the CSPGs that prepare draft policy frameworks and report to the Commission which reviews and finalizes the medium term development policy framework and issues planning guidelines to inform the actual preparation of development plans and strategies by the DAs and the MDAs. Thus, the CSPG mechanism involves both preparation and oversight responsibilities.

A similar structured approach was adopted for steering the preparation of the Ghana Poverty Reduction Strategy (GPRS). As shown in Section 3, the coordination and oversight responsibilities for the preparation of the GPRS was ultimately entrusted to the inter-ministerial coordinating group via the NDPC (Poverty Reduction Unit). Regarding the CDF, a smaller group comprising representatives of the government and the World Bank coordinated the sectoral groups while UNICEF and the UN Resident Coordinator performed the steering role for the Common Country Assessment (CCA).

To a large extent, the District Assemblies follow the planning process entailed in the Vision 2020 medium term planning process more than the MDAs. Although this is their second experience with the planning process, the DAs appear to have assimilated the routine of 5-year medium term planning. The DAs understand their roles and responsibilities under the new planning system, particularly that they are responsible for preparing and implementing their own plans.

On its part, the NDPC fully understands its roles and responsibilities regarding the preparation, coordination, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of development planning in Ghana. It has been very alive to its responsibilities to the best of its abilities, despite the many constraints it faces. These include: inadequate financial and human resources, low visibility in the public eye, low support of the executive to enable NDPC enforce compliance with responsibilities of partner institutions necessary for effective discharge of its responsibilities, and, the generally slow progress towards integrating the planning function in the practice of development administration in Ghana.

Despite efforts at enhancing the participatory nature of strategy development, the top-down mentality persist in development programming. For example, the District Assemblies (DAs) have not been involved in the formulation of policy frameworks for the First and Second Step periods of the Vision 2020. The DAs were not represented in the Cross-Sectoral Planning Groups that prepared the Frameworks, as their role was limited to receiving and complying with Planning Guidelines from the NDPC after the preparation of the Frameworks. Similarly, the DAs were not involved in preparing the CDF and the CCA.

The participation in the planning process and the effectiveness of that involvement by the District Assemblies have been hampered by several constraints. These include:

  • low financial resource base of the assemblies,
  • inadequate skills, manpower and methodology to fully operationalize bottom-up planning
  • lack of clarity regarding the nature and management of the intended shifts in power, functions and resources among various levels and agencies of government under decentralization
  • uncertainty among staff of decentralized agencies regarding their institutional allegiance
  • uncoordinated donor support activities at the local level

Overall, the implementation process of the First Step was unable to achieve programmed goals due to several factors, including:

(a) low awareness of the Vision among the populace

(b) inability of the NDPC to effectively coordinate sector planning by the MDAs due to a low resource base and the tendency of MDAs to view their programmes in isolation

(c) inadequate budgetary resources for development work

(d) poor linkages between the goals and targets of many MDAs to the First Step targets

(e) inability of the District Assemblies to achieve their goals and targets

One noteworthy feature of development programme implementation in Ghana is the high dependence on donor funding for financing the cost of implementing the strategies. During the period 1996-1999, for example, 61 percent of total government capital expenditure was foreign financed.

5.4 Country development framework coordination

A key aspect of assessing the institutional context for the development of national strategies for sustainable development is the effectiveness of coordination. Regarding the Vision 2020, coordination between the NDPC and MDAs in the preparation of medium-term policy framework has been fairly effective since most MDAs participated in the development of the frameworks. However, coordination between the NDPC and the MDAs regarding the preparation of sector strategic plans by the latter has been less than effective as the MDAs often prepared their plans with little input from NDPC or notification to NDPC of their intentions and arrangements.

Regarding the development of district plans under the Second Step of the Vision 220, resource constraints slowed the timeliness of completion of the policy framework in time for the DAs to initiate the preparation of the second 5-year plans. Consequently, to enable the DAs meet their cyclical timeframe and to ensure coordination of the preparation of those plans, the NDPC completed the planning guidelines for the 2001-2005 medium-term plans before finalizing the second step policy framework.

Coordination between strategic initiatives, particularly between Vision 2020 and the CDF and CCA has been at the level of ensuring consistency among the objectives of the various initiatives. However, since the CDF and CCA are of shorter-term duration than the Vision, it is not clear how the milestones in the two donor-driven initiatives relate empirically to the Vision 2020 targets.

A clear case of less than adequate coordination exists between the institutions responsible for strategic initiatives and the Ministry of Finance and the Ghana Investments Promotion Centre. Two points are worth noting regarding strategic planning and public sector financing. First, although the thematic issues of the Vision 2020 policy framework include the programming of public finances to support the achievement of programmed goals and targets, there is a dichotomy among the two as public finance programming develops a life of its own that is often unrelated to programmed requirements. Second, Ghana adopted a medium-term expenditure framework (MTEF) in 1999 involving the specification of mission statements and objectives, strategic plans and the prioritization and costing of MDAs policies and programme outputs. However, this system is yet to be synchronized with Vision 2020.

Another aspect of the content for strategic initiatives is the relationship between strategic initiatives and international and cross-border issues and commitments. The Second Step Policy framework of the Vision 2020 explicitly deals with regional issues by including regional cooperation and integration as one of the thematic areas aimed at: (a) implementing ECOWAS priority programmes designed to accelerate regional integration, (b) establishing a Ghana-Nigeria fast-track mechanism to push the regional integration agenda forward, (c) improving national capacity to manage ECOWAS programmes more effectively.

5.5 Monitoring

One of the most important yet difficult mechanisms in the strategy process has been monitoring the Vision 2020 and its implementation through the medium-term plans. The NDPC has developed monitoring formats that they would use to collect feedback information from MDAs and the DAs. However, the NDPC has been unable to implement this system, as it expected the MDAs and DAs to regularly submit monitoring information. Furthermore, most of the indicators developed to monitor the First Step framework were implementation steps or output variables keyed to the Action Plans and could not be used to track progress on achieving the main Vision 2020 goals and targets.

 

 

 


 


© NSSD 2003  
NSSD.net Home
Top of Page