Monitoring and evaluation under the PRSP: solid rock or quicksand?
Over the last few years a shift has taken place in the aid instruments advocated for low-income countries, characterised by a conversion from project to more programme-oriented aid and by the inclusion of 'broad-based civil society participation' as an aid conditionality. Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) constitute a new framework for policy negotiations with the recipient government as well as a new set of rules for aid implementation. So far scant attention has been paid to strengthening monitoring and evaluation. This paper contributes to this under-exploited field of research by stocktaking and assessing different aspects of M&E systems for a selected number of Sub-Saharan African countries. Findings of our desk study confirm that M&E is among the weaker parts of the new aid architecture. The PRSP approach seeks improvements in M&E, but its unrealistic ambitions put embryonic national M&E systems under undue stress.
Holvoet
N
N
University of Antwerp, Institute of Development Policy and Management, Antwerp, Belgium. nathalie.holvoet@ua.ac.be
Renard
Robrecht
R
D017954:Africa South of the Sahara; D003256:Community Participation; D003906:Developing Countries / Q000191:economics*; D005376:Financial Management / Q000379:methods*; D005381:Financing, Organized / Q000639:trends*; D006801:Humans; D007390:International Agencies / Q000191:economics / Q000639:trends*; D007391:International Cooperation; D011203:Poverty / Q000517:prevention & control*; D016730:Program Development / Q000379:methods; D015397:Program Evaluation / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards