Self

Self-Assessment

This presents a self-assessment of the strides ACEG has made towards achievement of its broad objective of promoting the adoption of policies that work to accelerate economic development and reduce poverty in sub-Saharan Africa.

(a) Research undertaken with partner institutions

Since its establishment¹, ACEG has completed five major policy research projects and is in the finishing stage of two more. All the completed assignments were undertaken in Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Ghana and Zimbabwe. Even though the policy research projects so far done have not covered many countries in Africa, they have been undertaken with collaborative efforts of experts from many more countries than those covered, and have, in tandem, ended up benefiting policy discourse in many more countries. The Regional Integration Study for Eastern Africa, for instance, had, at its design, benefited from experts from seven other countries and was, indeed, be conducted under the team leadership of an expert from an institute outside the countries of study, the University of Ibadan, Nigeria. On the other hand, the studies so far undertaken continue to draw significant commentary from many more countries in Africa.

From the 1999 MSE Baseline study, for instance, ACEG already received requests for various levels of collaboration in the design and implementation of similar studies in Malawi, Namibia and South Africa. In addition, as will be noted in Section 13.3, ACEG’s dissemination activities have been reaching research, training, and policy making agencies in 16 countries in sub-Saharan Africa, establishing a network for information sharing, a platform from which ACEG plans to build stronger collaborative research activities. Indeed, partly as a result of the strides made by ACEG in this direction, the Executive Director of the Centre has been nominated to be a resource person in a newly launched initiative by the ECA on ‘Africa Knowledge Network Forum’ (AKNF). This initiative has been established to provide a continuos link and feedback loop between African research networks, policy-makers and training institutions with a view to strengthening knowledge production and use in the continent.

(b) Quality of research analyses

Going by the commentary of various stakeholders on ACEG’s works, the quality of the center’s policy analyses can safely be judged as high. For instance, following the release of the 1999 MSE baseline survey report, ACEG received a total of 23 written comments within the following month, all ranking it highly in their various scales of quality – relevance, applicability, depth of analysis, among others. The Royal Netherlands Embassy in Nairobi described it as “..useful addition to the understanding of the MSE sector in Kenya.. “ the National Council of Women of Kenya described it as “.. already a great reader in our Resource Centre ….”, while a Professor from the University of Botswana indicated “ .. I read it with a lot of interest …”. On receiving complimentary copies of the report, the USAID Director in Malawi indicated “ .. there are good lessons that we can learn from the Kenyan experience.. and .. of practical relevance for our design process ..”, requesting for more copies to share with USAID’s development partners in the country.

Comments from the work on ‘Corruption and Poverty in Kenya’ have been equally positive if not surpassing those made on the MSE Baseline survey. The head of the public service and secretary to the cabinet in Kenya, Dr. Richard Leakey, described the work as “ .. a most commendable initiative ..”. He went on to add that “ .. It would seem to me that the ACEG Policy Brochures should be released to all secondary schools in the country and become the focus of at least one class per week..”. Indeed, closely related to Dr. Leakey’s line of thinking, the Director of GTZ in Kenya wrote that “.. I greatly commend your endeavours in the fight against corruption..” adding “… please let me know what it would cost to print and distribute the book and information briefs more widely. …”.

On the whole, direct positive comments from readers, numerous requests for inclusion in mailing list and, interest and coverage by the media are all indications that the quality of ACEG’s analyses is rated highly.

Using the level of utilization of ACEG policy research results and adoption of recommendations as an indicator for quality, Section 13.4 below shows that there are sufficient grounds to place the quality of the Center’s analyses as high. The Permanent Secretary of the Government ministry coordinating the intervention efforts in the MSE sector wrote that “.. ACEG has made a significant contribution in helping to chart the way forward regarding the future policy direction of the MSE sector, including its overall coordination…”. Indeed, it may be noted here that it is out of ACEG’s recommendations that the coordination of MSE activities within government have now been pooled into one ministry and the unit doing that upgraded to the level of a Department.

(c) Quality of dissemination and dialogue activities

Linking policy research, policy dialogue, building of consensus and implementation in most African countries is one of ACEG’s key areas of focus. ACEG addresses this through three interrelated activities:

Synthesis of research reports into policy information briefs that are easy to read, understand and apply from a policy perspective;

Publication and distribution of a bi-monthly ‘Research for Development’ bulletin discussing policy research outputs and their implication on the development challenges facing the continent; and

Holding of dissemination and dialogue forums bringing together various stakeholder groups to discuss and build consensus on policy issues related to social and economic development.

To date, ACEG has synthesized a total of 19 research reports into concise and easy to understand information/policy briefs. All these have been printed and widely distributed within Kenya, Africa and beyond. ACEG’s current mailing list has a total of 624 regular recipients of its publications, 553 of these in Kenya, 66 in Africa including 15 USAID missions, and 5 outside Africa. This list grows by the month from requests for inclusion from interested readers.

Going by commentary on ACEG’s publications; number of requests for inclusion in mailing list; feed back on issues raised in the bulletins; number and caliber of participants at dissemination workshops, and the diversity of views and healthy discourse on issues raised, ACEG can be said to be making significant strides in this area.

(d) Impact analysis

“.. improving a policy environment is not a once-and-for-all affair, but rather, a slow and continuous process that involves taking new initiatives, seeing their effect, and then amending them or further refining their implementation… We believe that ACEG has made a significant contribution to this process …”.

USAID-Kenya; July 2000

The impact of ACEG’s activities on policy change can, perhaps, be best judged in light of the above comments made by USAID’s mission in Kenya while acknowledging the role played by ACEG in influencing policy change in the country in relation to the MSE sector. ACEG’s self-assessment is that, while the process of influencing policy change has been slow as expected, there is already concrete evidence that the Center has contributed to setting up of various building blocks on the basis of which further policy changes will be established. Four of these are mentioned below:

Policy influence in the MSE sector. From ACEG’s activities related to the MSE policy environment in Kenya, two changes have already been made:

Revision of the Government’s policy and strategy document on the MSE sector. Under ACEG’s coordination, the Government’s blueprint on the sector has been revised to address weaknesses identified by various stakeholders and take into account updated information adduced from various research studies on the sector. With the adoption of this paper as the official government policy expected to be done later this year, ACEG is confident that the policy environment in Kenya will be much more supportive to the growth of the MSE sector than it has been before.

mproved coordination of MSE sector initiatives. Through recommendations made by ACEG, the coordination of MSE activities within the Kenya Government has been consolidated under one Ministry and the unit responsible for this activity upgraded to a full Department. With this, there are all indications that initiatives directed towards the growth of the sector will have a higher likelihood of bearing fruit.

Policy influence in the rooting-out of corruption in Kenya. ACEG’s policy research, dissemination and dialogue activities on the link between corruption and poverty in Kenya have already influenced the policy environment at four points:

Appointment to the Kenya Anti-Corruption Authority (KACA). As a direct result of ACEG’s work on this subject, the Government has appointed the Chief Executive of ACEG to be a member of the national anti-corruption steering committee. From this position, ACEG has been given an opportunity to influence policy issues related to the country’s integrity system on a continuous basis.

Contribution in the drafting of the Kenya Anti-Corruption Bill. From ACEG’s work on corruption, the Center was requested to prepare discussion papers and participate in a series of discussion sessions with the Parliamentary Select Committee on Anti-corruption to help the committee prepare a bill on anti-corruption. This bill has now been presented in parliament and is expected to be enacted to become law in the coming months of this year.

Initiatives to introduce lessons on “Corruption and its Effects on Society” in Kenyan schools. As a direct result of ACEG’s work in this area, the head of the Public Service in Kenya has written to ACEG requesting the Center to look into ways of distributing materials on the subject to all secondary schools in the country. This, the Government has indicated, would be in preparation towards the introduction of a curriculum on corruption issues in schools as a way of addressing the menace from the bottom as efforts to fight it from the top continue.

Availing of information on corruption to the cabinet. Following ACEG’s work on corruption, the Executive Director made the publications developed available to the cabinet, believing that an important start-point in fighting corruption is information. With this information made available at the topmost decision-making body in the country, it can be hoped that the slow process of influencing policy from this front will have begun.

¹ This relates to September 1999 when ICEG Africa Program became locally incorporated as ACEG.