Poverty reduction has had a central place in Tanzanian public policy since the mid-1960s. The Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) is the most recent in a series of initiatives aiming to tackle poverty. The PRSP is modest, committing the government to relatively little that is new. Nonetheless, some aspects of the PRSP approach do represent significant innovations. These include bringing poverty reduction policy in line with existing financial frameworks, and promoting a more participatory approach to policy-making and monitoring and evaluation.

Researchers associated with the UK's Overseas Development Institute ask how much difference these innovations have made, and whether there is a real prospect of a change in the way government and donors interact for planning and implementing poverty reduction activities. Government reforms which have been under way since the mid-1990s have made slow progress. Despite the end of one-party rule, decision-making continues to be centralised, and relationships between central and local government are not strong.

The PRSP process itself was very compressed. The preparation of the interim PRSP was rushed, and non-consultative, but it did allow Tanzania to qualify for debt relief sooner rather than later. The process for preparing the full PRSP included a short-lived consultation phase, for which very few national stakeholders were prepared. This fast pace was only possible because other reforms and strategies, which overlapped with the themes of the PRSP, were already in place. Despite the hurried process, however, researchers argue that the PRSP has made a difference:

• The PRSP has increased pressure for a more participatory approach to policy-making. Donors and international NGOs now have higher expectations about the government’s willingness to engage in open debate about many areas of policy.
• Co-ordination within government has increased because of the PRSP. It has helped create better communication between the Ministry of Finance and other key ministries.
• A strategic policy shift, the elimination of primary school fees, was made possible by the PRSP – despite opposition from the Ministry of Education. The President was able to make this shift because the PRSP consultations had highlighted education as a priority for ordinary people, and the huge financial burden that user fees place on poor households.
• The creation of a comprehensive poverty monitoring system has the potential to increase the demand for evidence-based policy-making.
• A core group of donors have changed their working practices because of the PRSP. They are contributing to implementation through co-ordinated budget support, rather than through isolated projects.

These positive gains must be evaluated in the light of past experiences and patterns.  There remains a gap between policy and the practice of budgeting and planning, at the central and the local levels. Poverty monitoring remains almost exclusively focused on the needs of central government. Progress in the area of local government reform has been extremely slow. And while there are encouraging signs of better relationships between ministries in the centre, this is not the case outside the capital city.

The authors recommend that:

• It is important to manage expectations about the PRSP process. Potential difficulties and uncertainties should be freely discussed if the process is to remain credible.
• The PRSP is not the only programme being undertaken. The demands of other major reform processes, especially on government capacity, need to be carefully considered.
• Political and governance issues emerge from PRSP implementation. It is important that International Financial Institutions and donors do not respond to these with purely technical solutions.

It remains to be seen whether the PRSP and other reforms can deliver the kind of changes that are needed to get long-lasting results on poverty reduction. The outcome will depend on whether formal changes with the organisation (such as laws and regulations) are sufficient to change principles and behaviours amongst people.

Source(s):
Chapter Eight: ‘Tanzania’ in Fighting Poverty in Africa: are PRSPs making a difference? edited by David Booth, London: Overseas Development Institute, by Alison Evans and Eratso Ngalewa 2004.

Funded by: Department for International Development (UK)

id21 Research Highlight: 7 November 2004

Further Information:
Alison Evans
Overseas Development Institute,
111 Westminster Bridge Road,
London, SE1 7JD
UK

Tel: +44 (0)207 922 0300
Fax: +44 (0)207 922 0399
Contact the contributor: A.Evans@odi.org.uk

Overseas Development Institute, UK

Other related links:
'Mainstreaming the poverty-reduction agenda'

'PRSPs and decentralisation in Malawi: can they offer any progress?'

'The Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper in Rwanda: Working together to fight poverty?'

'From donorship to ownership: moving towards PRSP round two' from ELDIS

'Review of the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) approach: main findings' from ELDIS

'Politics and the PRSP approach: synthesis paper' from ELDIS

'PRSP Processes in 8 African Countries: Initial Impacts and Potential for Institutionalisation' from WIDER