Transparency Initiative (EITI)

83
9.4 CONCLUSION
Effects of the M-EITI are monitored on the activity and
output level. On the outcome and impact level hypotheses
in the areas of fiscal transparency and public debate are
plausible, however only supported by qualitative data and
perceptions. There is no evidence for strengthened anticorruption
or improved trade and investment climate. The
following key challenges and responding recommendations
have been identified:
1. Persistent lack of funding for M-EITI activities: The
M-EITI process has been primarily donor funded
since Mozambique became a Candidate country in
2009. Insufficient and sometimes delayed financing
for its core activities has constrained the M-EITI from
implementing all of its planned activities in a timely
manner.
• M-EITI seeks more government support in order
for the Initiative to be sustainable and benefit from
a higher level of government ownership. M-EITI
should urgently develop and implement a mediumterm
fund raising strategy targeting the GoM, private
sector, as well as donors, and particularly focusing on
raising core funding for the Initiative.
• M-EITI adopts a solid monitoring and evaluation
framework with proper baseline indicators, so that
progress against the newly developed work plan objectives
can be tracked over time. This case study has
provided input at developing such a framework.
2. Declining political leadership of M-EITI: the lack of
high-level GoM representation at the MSG meetings
has negative spillover effects on the level of representation
of other stakeholders, including for the private sector
representatives.
• The Minister starts engaging more with the M-EITI
process, to enhance ownership of the process and implicitly
encourage other stakeholders to do the same.
This will likely lead to a stronger and more influential
M-EITI process.
3. The M-EITI Secretariat appears small for its mandate
and engagement by the MSG in M-EITI operations is
low. The MSG in Mozambique operates more like a governing
board than a working board; hence, the M-EITI
Secretariat is in principle tasked with executing all decisions
made by the MSG. Moreover, there are no subcommittees
within the MSG. With the increasing scope
of the EITI process, the current staffing of only four
people in the M-EITI Secretariat is not sustainable. In
particular, report dissemination and outreach to local
communities is not achievable without more staff, but
more importantly, greater engagement of the MSG.
• The MSG considers transitioning from being a governing
board to a working board, possibly introducing
sub-committees to divide the workload amongst
members. This could also create positive spillover effects
on the M-EITI MSG members’ level of engagement
within each of their constituencies, further supporting
mainstreaming of the M-EITI process.
4. Mainstreaming the M-EITI process: although the
M-EITI is already credited with improving some GoM
systems with regards to the taxpayer identification,
no distinct efforts have yet been made to integrate
the M-EITI processes into government financial and
other oversight systems of public administration.
However, M-EITI is planning to take a first step in
this direction by introducing an e-reporting module
to allow government agencies to set up electronic
reporting systems that draw data directly from
existing government and company systems, thereby
simplifying the current data collecting process, which
is currently done manually parallel to other processes.
The installation of an IT network within the Ministry
of Mineral Resources and Energy which is supported by
World Bank seems to be unattainable before 2018.
• Over the longer term, extractive industry transparency
should become an integral and routine feature
of how governments manage the sector. It is recommended
that M-EITI also introduce the online reporting
system as envisaged under the current work
plan and that data collection is subsequently conducted
through the online cadaster and portal.
5. Further challenges relate to Institutionalizing and/or
decentralizing the M-EITI; establishing a revenue
sharing mechanism; engaging Parliament in the M-EITI
process, including through encouraging the use of
M-EITI reports as input for budget discussions; as well
as strengthening collaboration with Mozambican
academia/students.