What are the lessons learnt from disabled people’s participation in the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) process in Uganda? This paper from the Disability Knowledge and Research Programme finds that time constraints, among other things, limited the involvement of Disabled People’s Organisations (DPO) in the PRSP process. Sustaining a policy environment conducive to disabled people’s involvement requires substantial capacity building of DPOs, including recruitment of skilled staff to implement strategic programmes.
Uganda’s third PRSP, known nationally as the Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP), isits comprehensive development framework, yet the disability movement did not participate in its formulation until the second revision in 2002.
DPOs were involved at every stage of this formal process, complemented by a parallel civil society process set up by mainly international NGOs. Participation was facilitated by a government-initiated Civil Society Task Force, an umbrella organisation of DPOs, and a partnership between local governments, NGOs, academic institutions and donors. The lessons learnt and suggested improvements from the Ugandan experience include:
- Prior to the involvement of civil society, the government treated disability-related issues as a general, cross-cutting issue. The result was lack of explicit strategies and relevant policy interventions.
- The government’s commitment to consultations with civil society was instrumental in securing broad participation. The Civil Society Task Force was included in the steering committee for the PRSP process. The government also ensured that the DPOs had access to the necessary documentation and information.
- More resources could have enabled increased involvement by local research institutions, which would have significantly enriched DPOs’ engagement with the process.
- The DPO movement should have launched its PRSP process with an awareness campaign to prepare disabled people to participate in its formulation.
- A small drafting team of local and international disability consultants and DPO representatives recruited at the start of the PEAP process would have been useful. This team could manage information flows, both to and from different stakeholders.
For DPO participation to be really effective, both donors and governments have to be genuine in their stated desire for the participation of civil society. Participatory approaches are time-consuming and expensive, and require commitment from all parties. Recommendations based on the Ugandan experience include:
- Capacity building of national DPOs is necessary if they are to have greater impact on policy planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation. Local level DPOs need to build the capacity of grassroots people to monitor policy implementation.
- Local government must develop transparent and accountable systems so that grassroots communities can conduct effective monitoring. Disability indicators and performance benchmarks that cut across key sectors of government, donors, and civil society organisations should be formulated and implemented.
- Monitoring of PEAP poverty-alleviation strategies for people with disabilities should be based on both qualitative and quantitative approaches.
- Although involved in the PRSP process, the disability movement should continue to lobby for a share of resources flowing from the development co-operation and debt relief.
- A quick PRSP process aimed at instant debt relief creates time pressures that are likely to undermine the quality of the process itself.
