skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Welcome
***Please Note: the deadline for submitting comments on the Donor Guidance has now passed***
This Blog has been created to provide a space in which individuals can post comments or feedback on the Donor Guidance produced by the Business Environment Working Group of the Donor Committee for Enterprise Development.
To view the Donor Guidance please click here
General feedback and comments concerning a specific chapter or issue are both warmly welcomed. To view existing comments, or to post your own, please click on the relevant heading. If you would like to suggest additional categories, please email me.
This Blog has been created to provide a space in which individuals can post comments or feedback on the Donor Guidance produced by the Business Environment Working Group of the Donor Committee for Enterprise Development.
To view the Donor Guidance please click here
General feedback and comments concerning a specific chapter or issue are both warmly welcomed. To view existing comments, or to post your own, please click on the relevant heading. If you would like to suggest additional categories, please email me.
1 comment:
Please find below a few comments to the (great) draft on practical guidance for development agencies on business environment reforms:
I saw a lot of repetition - the language and presentation should be sharpened and should fit on one page with a few clear headings, I would suggest something like this (I include a few substantial suggestions within):
a) diagnostics - identifying key binding constraints - here I would emphasize the need to include industry level analysis to our classic diagnostic tool box because many of the binding constraints are industry specific (e.g. product market reforms) and are overlooked by Doing Business indicators, Enterprise Surveys, etc
b) sequencing reforms - here we should say that one should not miss the opportunities for bold/difficult reforms in times of crisis, changes in governments, etc. In steady state environments, the government should go for a pilot approach (to test and demonstrate) in addition to going for the easier quick wins. Product market reforms are also a good place to start because they unleash competitive pressures for more reforms - e.g. India manufacturing sector is now putting pressure on the government to reform the electricity sector so that they can compete following the lowering of tariffs. This is also consistent with using the competitiveness agenda as the trojan horse for pushing tough domestic reforms (e.g. Rwand reforming land markets for tourism, Morocco reforming education system for being competitive in the ICT sector)
c) More should be said on how to manage key stakeholders - e.g. mobilizing and empowering winners while "neutralizing" losers/vested interests (e.g. through dividing them, grandfather clauses, package of reforms, gradual change, etc)
d) steering the reform agenda - critical institutional weakness for most our clients, research underway shows that the most successful developing countries have relied on small but worldclass dedicated reform teams connected to the top of government and often in charge of donor coordination - this gave them the clout and leverage of steering reforms through reluctant administration
e) applying change management techniques to ensure proper implementation: e.g. developing specific M&E to set targets, deadlines and budgets. Each specific reform initiative should have ONE person accountable. M&E should also be a pillar for strategic communication.
best
vincent palmade
Post a Comment