The Power of Persistence: Education System ... - EQUIP123.net

management and administration that had been lost, during the second republic
(1972-1991). The development of activity-based budgeting, the medium-term
expenditure framework and strategic planning were carried forward into the
MOESP and the FNDP. According to a senior MOE advisor who served in the
PIU during BESSIP:
[In the BESSIP PIU] a number of factors that had to be done differently from the way
the government was going on: Meeting of targets; monitoring goals; writing reports;
accounting for resources. …There was a new work culture that was not so common
to the MOE.
Capacity and leadership developed under BESSIP was retained as all but one
MOE staff member supporting BESSIP was promoted during the MOESP period.
During the reform period, the MOE contribution the education budget has
increased slightly in real terms, but dropped as a percentage of Zambia’s GDP.
Cooperating partner contribution has accounted for 20 to 35 percent of the
education budget during the reform period. Concerns about MOE absorptive
capacity of external funding rose during the first year of BESSIP, when, in
1999, only 19 percent of the pooled funds were actually spent.” (Chisala and
Cornelissen, 2003, p. 86)
Political Dimensions
The inconsistent strength of MOE leadership has resulted in the uneven
articulation, management and implementation of programs supporting policy
goals. During BESSIP development, concerns about weak leadership from the MOE
and the dominant role of the World Bank were alleviated when the former Zambian
vice-president became Minister of Education in December 1997 and “convened a
conference with donors in February 1998 to give his clear vision and authority for
the development of a sector program.” The World Bank and MOE staffs cite this
leadership as useful in giving potential donors a clear impression of government
leadership of BESSIP. The focused support of the PIU and the then-Permanent
Secretary provided further focus and clarity during BESSIP implementation. The
presidential aspirations of the Minister during the run-up to the 2001 presidential
election and subsequent departure of the Minster mid-way through BESSIP left
a leadership vacuum. DEB capacity development and the perception of Zambia’s
education sector as being in the vanguard of decentralization in Zambia have been
both assets and liabilities. Ongoing DEB capacitation and inclusion into MOE
processes demonstrate the possibilities of decentralization. However opposition
party gains in districts and provinces in 2006 made forward movement on
decentralization unfeasible politically as the central government demonstrated
reticence in decentralizing authority to political opponents.
122
SECTION 2: lESSONS fROM COUNTRY CASE STUdIES