Follow-Up on SAPRI Participation:  Questions for Investigation

 

 25 January 2006

 

SAPRIN had various objectives in undertaking SAPRI/CASA, and it accomplished a number of the things it set out to do.  Utilizing participatory processes and a political-economy methodology, it succeeded in analyzing, documenting and publicizing the real, local-level impact of a wide range of economic adjustment policies in a number of countries.  Given the joint nature of SAPRI, these findings constituted another significant challenge to World Bank operations, reinforced by the equally critical World Commission on Dams and Extractive Industries Review that followed.  The national initiatives also mobilized hundreds of organizations and thousands of people around the adjustment issue in ways that contributed to national movement building, public-policy debates and, in some countries, dialogue with government.

 

Another, equally important purpose of SAPRI/CASA from SAPRIN's point of view was demonstrating that civil society could make an effective input into national economic policymaking, which has been traditionally dominated by elite actors and, in recent years, imposed from overseas.  How the national SAPRIN teams carried out the national policy assessments utilizing unique participatory methodologies and what was learned that is relevant to the policymaking process is an important story that has not yet been told in a comprehensive way.  The techniques utilized -- from citizen mobilization through the forums organized with policymakers by civil society -- contrast sharply with those used in such IFI instruments as PRSPs and CASs, an issue that is of significant interest to NGO and other observers.  There are now signs that there will be increased space in a number of countries around the globe for more indigenously defined economic policies and policymaking, and it is thus important that we share the collective experience and learning that was SAPRI/CASA.

 

The learning that took place, including the relevance of the Initiative to the policymaking process, can best be gleaned from those who participated in the country investigations, as well as from the SAPRI/CASA files.  Of particular importance is to elicit from them what happened thoughout the various stages of the Initiative, how it happened, what worked, what didn't, and why. SAPRI/CASA was an important participatory review that brought a wide array of new actors to the table to demonstrate the need for more appropriate and effective economic policies.  Both SAPRIN and the Initiative itself thus have much to contribute to changing the nature of future economic policymaking.

 

The experiences and analysis of the SAPRIN national team are key, but just as important is the work done by the local organizers and the perspectives of participating organizations and individuals in the sites where the outreach and investigations took place.  Discussions in Mexico helped sharpen the focus of the issues to be explored, which will be further refined in upcoming meetings in Zimbabwe, Ghana and El Salvador.  The lead operative questions are as follows:

 

1.  How was the initiative organized so as to maximize effective participation? 

 

  1. What was the nature of the process of outreach to local organizations and populations around the country?

 

  1. Did the outreach process engender widespread civil-society mobilization and effective organization around the adjustment issue?

 

  1. How did the SAPRIN civil-society team negotiate the design details of the national investigation with government and the Bank? 

 

  1. Were the national fora effective mechanisms for eliciting and affirming local knowledge about the impact of adjustment policies in a participatory and transparent manner?

 

  1. Was the research methodology ulilized in SAPRI/CASA an effective means for collecting information essential to sound economic-policy planning?

 

7.       Was the capacity and ability of civil society to negotiate the future direction of national economic policy permanently enhanced by the SAPRI process?          

 

8.       What strategic actions were (or could have been) taken by SAPRIN to hold the Bank and government accountable to the rules and results of SAPRI?  To what extent were they successful?