|
|
|
PARPA/PRSP and poverty reduction in Mozambique: Challenges to national and international agents
|
|
|
3. PARPA as a PRSP for Mozambique
|
| |
Building the instrument
PARPA is a priority plan for the government of Mozambique (GoM) meant to manage medium term macro and sector policies relating to poverty reduction and development (GoM, Consultative Group 2001:iv).
It underwent several stages in its development. At the outset consultations were at national and sector level. It contemplated strategy, priorities, resources, constraints, and effectiveness of interventions. An inter-sector technical group (Annex V, Gov. of Mozambique: 3) brought together the contributions in a draft that was accepted as Interim PRSP.
Subsequently consultations extended to province authorities, international partners and civil society. The main purpose was to get contributions and discuss methodology for the development of integrated provincial plans of action incorporating existing policy instruments like Food Security and Nutrition Strategy and HIV/AIDS Strategy Plan.
The issue of monitoring and evaluation was raised with these partners to incorporate into PARPA adjustment to change and its function as a rolling instrument.
At a later stage the consultations aimed at gaining consistency in PARPA overall vision, priorities and targets and institutional co-ordination. Consultation mechanisms by sector and administrative level, social and economic policy implications, flow of information, issues in governance and legal framework were main issues (Annex V, Gov. of Mozambique:4-5).
So, PARPA has evolved as an instrument centred on the Ministry of Planning and Finance on behalf of GoM and has to a certain extent opened to GoM partners and interested parties in civil society.
The concept of PARPA as a rolling instrument was adopted with a strategy for monitoring and evaluation discriminated in a separated chapter of the final draft and open to wider participation of actors in the society.
Ministry of Planning and Finance has given priority to co-ordinating the various policy and management instruments for medium term and its articulation with yearly ones that is being refined in 2002 (GoM, Consultative Group 2001:23-4). Hence, degree of preparedness at the centre appears to be made in a sound way.
|
|
Related documents