06.01.2013 Views

A Decade of NEPAD - Economic Commission for Africa - uneca

A Decade of NEPAD - Economic Commission for Africa - uneca

A Decade of NEPAD - Economic Commission for Africa - uneca

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

56 A <strong>Decade</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>NEPAD</strong>: Deepening <strong>Africa</strong>n Private Sector and Civil Society Ownership and Partnership<br />

promote <strong>NEPAD</strong>, meant that stakeholders <strong>of</strong>ten were<br />

challenged to figure out how to engage with the <strong>NEPAD</strong><br />

programme at the national governmental level. This<br />

deficiency also meant that “<strong>NEPAD</strong> projects”, even<br />

those acknowledged as part <strong>of</strong> the STAP initiatives and<br />

as part <strong>of</strong> the <strong>NEPAD</strong> Plan <strong>of</strong> Action, faltered because<br />

there was little domestic support <strong>for</strong> the programmes<br />

and initiatives, financial or otherwise.<br />

ӹ Inadequate Coordination at the Continental Level and<br />

Duplicity at the Regional Level – Again, the OSSA<br />

research confirmed the assessment made by the AU<br />

and UNECA, finding that within the first ten years <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>NEPAD</strong> private sector (and CSO) stakeholders were<br />

<strong>of</strong>ten confused and confounded by the lack <strong>of</strong> communication<br />

among the RECs, the lack <strong>of</strong> galvanizing<br />

leadership, weak follow-up mechanisms, and the lack<br />

<strong>of</strong> REC goals and priorities translating into national<br />

goals and priorities. Furthermore, the fact that there<br />

was significant (and increasing) overlap in terms <strong>of</strong><br />

strategy and programmes among the RECs, meant<br />

that stakeholders were also confronted with duplicative<br />

initiatives with no strong rationale given to make participation<br />

in one REC the priority or more compelling<br />

than the other. For <strong>Africa</strong>n enterprises, belonging to<br />

multiple regional business associations or programmes<br />

was also taxing financially, and in terms <strong>of</strong> time and<br />

resource investment. Lastly, during the OSSA discussions,<br />

stakeholders complained that there was a further<br />

complication in terms <strong>of</strong> duplicity in that the various<br />

G8/ donor initiatives <strong>of</strong>ten seemed to compete <strong>for</strong> the<br />

attention, resources and support <strong>of</strong> local stakeholders.<br />

Thus, the UK supported <strong>Commission</strong> <strong>for</strong> <strong>Africa</strong>, the<br />

Clinton Initiative <strong>of</strong> <strong>for</strong>mer U.S. president Bill Clinton,<br />

the U.S.’ Millennium Challenge Account, the Chinese<br />

and Indian initiatives vis-à-vis <strong>Africa</strong>, Japan’s TICAD,<br />

along with the <strong>Africa</strong>-EU Partnership, and various UN<br />

and World Bank initiatives were not always aligned,<br />

individually, nor in regard to “support” <strong>for</strong> <strong>NEPAD</strong>,<br />

and this created “noise” in regard to the implementation<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>NEPAD</strong>.<br />

ӹ Inadequate Engagement Ef<strong>for</strong>ts Made to Attract <strong>Africa</strong>n<br />

Private Sector and CSO Stake Holders – the duplicity<br />

mentioned above also was confounded by perceptions<br />

that inadequate outreach ef<strong>for</strong>t was made by <strong>NEPAD</strong><br />

to engage domestic <strong>Africa</strong>n stakeholders with the same<br />

fervour that ef<strong>for</strong>ts were made to engage donor partners.<br />

Very little input was asked <strong>of</strong> the <strong>Africa</strong>n private sector<br />

(or CSO community) and thus very little ownership<br />

was felt among <strong>Africa</strong>n stakeholders in the <strong>NEPAD</strong><br />

“process”, programmes or in the implementation <strong>of</strong><br />

projects. Furthermore, the perception was that very<br />

little ef<strong>for</strong>t was made to segment the private sector<br />

stakeholder communities (i.e. <strong>Africa</strong>n trans-national<br />

corporations, <strong>Africa</strong>n chambers <strong>of</strong> commerce, <strong>Africa</strong><br />

pr<strong>of</strong>essional and sector associations, SMEs capable<br />

<strong>of</strong> playing a role at national level, in<strong>for</strong>mal enterprise<br />

that could benefit from resources/ technical assistance<br />

mobilized via <strong>NEPAD</strong>) and toward developing messages<br />

that spoke to them individually.<br />

ӹ Lack <strong>of</strong> Consistent and Positive Media Coverage – NE-<br />

PAD was also poorly publicized in the media over its<br />

first tenyears, internationally, and particularly on the<br />

<strong>Africa</strong>n continent. In <strong>Africa</strong>n coverage by international<br />

press (BBC, Al Jazeera, Canal Plus, CNN), <strong>NEPAD</strong> was<br />

periodically mentioned but rarely very prominently<br />

after its inaugural few years. Also very little has been<br />

done to consistently unpack <strong>NEPAD</strong>, particularly by the<br />

<strong>Africa</strong>n broadcast media community. Ef<strong>for</strong>ts to translate<br />

<strong>NEPAD</strong> into local languages across the continent <strong>for</strong><br />

national radio and television transmissions have also<br />

been negligible.<br />

ӹ Restrictive Domestic and Regional Business Climates<br />

– Although as mentioned above, <strong>Africa</strong>n nations have<br />

been undertaking macroeconomic re<strong>for</strong>m initiatives <strong>for</strong><br />

much <strong>of</strong> the past 20 years and progress has been made,<br />

overall business climate optimization has lagged behind<br />

and this has and continues to impede <strong>Africa</strong>n private<br />

sector growth and development. This phenomenon has<br />

help lead to the significant number <strong>of</strong> in<strong>for</strong>mal <strong>Africa</strong>n<br />

enterprises that find it too cumbersome to <strong>for</strong>malize<br />

their businesses. While not specifically intended to be a<br />

constraint to private sector involvement with <strong>NEPAD</strong>,<br />

these general business climate challenges and impediments<br />

(bureaucracy and red tape, lack <strong>of</strong> procurement<br />

transparency, poor infrastructure, corruption, poor<br />

strategic planning, limited project in<strong>for</strong>mation dissemination<br />

mechanisms, limited capital markets, high<br />

costs <strong>of</strong> <strong>for</strong>mal business administrative compliance) all,<br />

indirectly, hampered private sector focus on <strong>NEPAD</strong>.<br />

ӹ (Perhaps unintended) Preference Given to Foreign Transnational<br />

Corporations Over <strong>Africa</strong>n Private Sector –<br />

Where there have been opportunities to design, develop<br />

and implement <strong>NEPAD</strong> projects – <strong>for</strong> fees or as in-kind<br />

contributions – disproportionately international corporations<br />

and firms have been given these opportunities.<br />

Or at least that is the perception that many in the<br />

<strong>Africa</strong>n private sector have had. This has not helped<br />

engender ownership sentiments about <strong>NEPAD</strong> within

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!