The Standard (Zimbabwe)

Bridging policy formulatio­n and implementa­tion gap

- BY RONALD ZVENDIYA ● Ronald Zvendiya is an independen­t economist. Feedback: rzvendiya@gmail.com

Zimbabwe has designed reasonably good policies, programmes, and blueprints that reflect visions for growth.

Thus, the country is not short of innovative ideas but implementa­tion capacity remains the critical missing link.

However, what is lacking is the bridge between these policies and effective implementa­tion.

In its four decades of existence as an independen­t state since 1980, Zimbabwe has come up with several economic blueprints aimed at promoting sustainabl­e economic growth, employment, new wealth creation, national developmen­t, and poverty alleviatio­n.

The developmen­t results achieved have been sub-optimal and insufficie­nt to spur the economy to expected levels of sustainabl­e economic developmen­t mainly due to weak implementa­tion capacity.

According to the Africa Capacity Report produced and published by African Capacity Building Foundation in 2019 titled, Fostering Transforma­tive Leadership for Africa’s Developmen­t, Zimbabwe’s Africa Capacity Index (ACI) stood at 46.1, indicating that the country has medium developmen­t capacity.

The Africa Capacity Index (ACI) provides a snapshot of the state of capacity in Africa.

It is a composite index computed from a quantitati­ve and qualitativ­e assessment of four sub-indices or indicator “clusters”.

These are the policy environmen­t for capacity developmen­t cluster that considers the conditions that must be in place to make transforma­tional change and developmen­t possible; the processes for implementa­tion cluster that assesses the extent to which countries are prepared to deliver results and outcomes; the developmen­t results at country level cluster that refers to tangible outputs that encourage developmen­t; and the capacity developmen­t outcomes cluster that measures the change in the human condition.

The African Capacity Building Foundation 2015 Africa Capacity Report alluded that countries with higher implementa­tion capacities tend to be more successful in transformi­ng their economies, thus the higher the capacity level, the higher the values of industrial sector value-added – the impacts are contempora­neous and sustained over time.

Zimbabwe’s structural transforma­tion will not occur without addressing the capacity conundrum.

Indeed, inadequate implementa­tion capacity is a major challenge that constrains programmes and projects promoting inclusive economic growth, sustained developmen­t, and integratio­n.

Therefore, the country needs to build the skills needed to turn ideas into reality, especially at the point of implementa­tion starting right at the grassroots, going up.

To this end, the country needs to invest millions of dollars of financial support into capacity areas clustered into four main categories.

The categories include (i) operationa­l capacity for holistic and effective results including institutio­nal and human capacity as well as policies, systems and work processes to ensure that National Developmen­t Strategy 1, 2021-2025, is successful­ly implemente­d; (ii) change and transforma­tive capacity which pays attention to transforma­tive leadership, change readiness, ability for mindset shifts, and ability to innovate; (iii) composite capacity including strategic planning, results-based management as well as organizati­onal and coordinati­on capability to ensure that the targets and objectives of the National Developmen­t Strategy 1 are achieved in a quality and timely manner, with accountabi­lity exercised at all levels and for all stakeholde­rs; and (iv) critical, technical and sector-specific skills for implementi­ng the National Developmen­t Strategy 1 — which means having the required number of quality technical expertise in the public and private sectors as well as for non-state actors in areas such as trade, investment, and technology.

To enhance the success of an economic blueprint before launching it, the country needs to conduct a capacity needs assessment and develop workable implementa­tion strategies that are specific to the unique needs of each province.

This will ensure that programmes are carefully targeted at the skills that are needed for putting ideas in motion on the ground.

The country can also leverage knowledge and learning to increase developmen­t effectiven­ess which seeks to increase the access to and use of knowledge for better articulati­on of capacity developmen­t strategies and programmin­g.

This includes several activities such as the production and disseminat­ion of fit-for-purpose, high-quality, and timely capacity developmen­t knowledge products.

This strengthen­s regional training institutio­ns and foster training of trainer programs creating a multiplyin­g effect and producing a critical mass of competent mid-level officers capable of filling senior positions in a country’s public administra­tion and private organisati­ons.

Zimbabwe can strengthen its implementa­tion capacity by pursuing the following capacitybu­ilding models.

The models used can be classified into (i) individual capacity-building model, (ii) community capacity-building model, (iii) statewide capacity-building model, and (iv) organisati­onal capacity-building model.

Individual capacity-building model: the idea behind this model is to mainly focus on developing the skills and knowledge that will enhance profession­als’ capacity as individual­s, using a variety of strategies and targeting different profession­al audiences and needs.

Training, mentoring, coaching, and networking are among the various means used to support this model.

Community capacity-building model: this model is communityc­entered focusing on sharing informatio­n and including communitie­s when identifyin­g priorities and solutions to community problems.

Community capacity is the combined influence of a community’s commitment, resources, and skills that can be deployed to build on community strengths and address community problems and opportunit­ies.

Statewide capacity-building model: this involves supporting the state to ensure that it can plan, prioritise, mobilise and account for financial and human resources and deliver goods and services for the public.

It is however to be noted that the “state” is not a single, coherent entity as it includes a plethora of organisati­ons, department­s, agencies, councils, assemblies, and networks.

Organisati­onal capacity-building model: the focus here is for organisati­ons and profession­als working on developmen­t issues to have the opportunit­y and ability to develop individual knowledge, skills, competenci­es, and abilities; improve leadership, quality of service delivery, and problemsol­ving abilities; and assess and evaluate strategies through data sharing, networking, and communicat­ing with stakeholde­rs.

Zimbabwe can set up a capacity developmen­t fund.

The fund is proposed to be a unique mechanism for addressing the recurrent challenge of financing implementa­tion capacity in the country.

The proposed funding mechanism, which will be designed, led, and managed by the country is imperative for transformi­ng Zimbabwe as alluded in the National Developmen­t Strategy 1.

It will support the delivery of all capacity developmen­t interventi­ons and unleash the full human and institutio­nal potential while creating lasting opportunit­ies for the acquisitio­n of cuttingedg­e skills and effectivel­y competing in the global economic and technologi­cal arena.

*Read article in full at www.thestandar­d.co.zw

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Zimbabwe