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 noneconomic)
• 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!