| MULPOCs (Multinational Programming and Operational Centres)
Strengthening ECA's Subregional Presence April 1997
Background
The Conference of Ministers, in
Resolution 810 (XXXI) of 1996 requested the Executive Secretary "... to take
necessary steps to strengthen the Multinational Programming and Operational
Centres.....". This was only the latest effort at strengthening the MULPOCs:
RECALLING previous resolutions to
strengthen MULPOCs in:
This Conference in 1987 defining a
new role in accelerating subregional economic integration;
1990 further strengthening in
support of regional economic integration;
1991 also on strengthening to
accelerate regional economic integration;
1993 on strengthening and
rationalization of MULPOCs.
Other Actions On Mulpocs Include:
In-house discussions on the new
strategic vision of the Commission confirmed the relevance of MULPOCs. These discussions
were initiated during the open space sessions in 1995, the drafting of the new strategic
directions, the new ECA programme;
JIU report on UN-NADAF confirmed the
need to strengthen MULPOCs.
Member States in various fora
expressed need to strengthen MULPOCs: reports of ICE meetings, for example.
Actions Taken By The Secretariat
Deputy Executive Secretary's
consultation missions on modalities for strengthening MULPOCs. Missions were to Lusaka,
Niamey, Tangier.
In-house Task Force established by
Executive Secretary: report presented several options for strengthening MULPOCs: Vis -
mandate, geographic coverage, Headquarters location, institutional issues, operational
modalities, etc.
Consultative missions to member
States and partner institutions on the above proposals results to be reviewed shortly.
Executive Guidelines were developed
outlining immediate actions on the above recommendations. Some of these have already
effected, notably:
Deployment of 25 per cent staff
resources to MULPOCs. A good number have already gone. At full force, average 10 staff
member per centre;
Consultative missions to member
States and partner institutions on proposed actions to further strengthen the MULPOCs.
Result of these consultations formed basis of recommendations formed basis of
recommendations for your consideration.
Work Programme of MULPOCs drafted to
reflect the orientation of proposed strengthened MULPOCs. These have been reviewed at
recent ICE Meetings.
Executive Secretary's consultative
missions to Tanzania and Uganda, also included consultations on MULPOC.
What Were Results Of These
Consultations?
REGARDING THE Overwhelming support
to
MANDATE: revise mandate to reflect
the new orientation of the Commission. These include:
Act as operational arms of ECA at
the country and subregional levels.
Be instruments for ensuring improved
coordination between subregional and regional programme orientation and those defined on
the strategic directions.
Provide advisory services to member
States, regional economic communities and subregional development operators.
Facilitate subregional economic
cooperation, integration and development.
Promote gender issues
Act as centres for policy dialogue
and collect and disseminate information.
Act as coordination of UN system
activities for regional integration. Obviously this has to be carried out within the
framework on the ground, such as the UN system coordinator.
Results Of Consultations
Membership and Headquarters Location
Let's recall the objectives for
which these centres were established - to support the process of regional economic
cooperation and integration.
Since the regional economic
communities have been designated as the building blocks for the African Economic
Community, ECA, along with the Organization of African Unity (OAU) and the African
Development Bank (ADB), within the framework of the Joint Secretariat, has undertaken the
responsibility for strengthening the regional communities. Among the activities to be
carried out in this respect are institutional support to the regional economic communities
for capacity building and rationalization of IGOs in the subregions. Consequently, the
country coverage of the MULPOCs should correspond, to the extent possible to those of the
regional economic communities. This constitutes the principal criterion for grouping
countries under each MULPOC region.
However, while the regional economic
communities form the anchor for MULPOC activities in the subregions, other factors must be
considered as well in determining the most effective configuration of MULPOC membership
and location. These factors include:
a) Similarities of
problems/priorities among countries in a given subregion;
b) historical and cultural
background of the countries and organizations in a particular subregion which may have a
bearing on integration activities (e.g., language affinity and organizations);
c) the number of countries to be
served by each MULPOC; and
d) Proximity of the MULPOC office to
countries and regional economic communities.
These factors constitute the
criteria to guide the proposed groupings. Of course, other factors will come into play in
considering the implementation of these proposals; these include financial and physical
constraints.
Three scenarios considered:
Maintain status quo
- Lusaka for Eastern and Southern
region (23)
- Gisenyi for the three Great Lakes
countries
- Niamey for 16 West African
countries
- Yaounde for 7 Central African
countries
- Tangiers for the six North African
countries
Separate MULPOCs for Eastern and
Southern Africa
Single MULPOC for all SADC and
COMESA countries - a total of 25 countries.
Outcome:
Separate MULPOCs for Eastern and
Southern Africa favoured some reservations were expressed, regarding COMESA.
Headquarters:
Central - Yaounde
West - Niamey
North - Tangier (Rabat?)
Southern - Lusaka
Eastern - To be determined in
consultations with the member countries involved.
The proposed Geographic Coverage of
the new
ECA Subregional Development
Centres
| North Africa |
West Africa |
Central Africa |
East African & Indian Ocean Islands |
Southern |
| MEMBER STATES |
| Algeria Egypt
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya
Mauritania
Morocco
Sudan
Tunisia |
Burkina Faso Benin
Cape Verde
Côte d'Ivoire
The Gambia
Ghana
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Liberia
Mali
Niger
Nigeria
Senegal
Sierra Leone
Togo |
Cameroon Central African
Republic
Chad
Congo
Equatorial Guinea
Gabon
Sao Tome and
Principe
Zaire |
Burundi Comoros
Djibouti
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Kenya
Madagascar
Rwanda
Seychelles
Somalia
Tanzania
Uganda |
Angola Botswana
Lesotho
Malawi
Mauritius
Mozambique
Namibia
South Africa
Swaziland
Zambia
Zimbabwe |
| 7 States |
15 States |
8 States |
12 States |
11 States |
Obviously some fine-tuning may be
necessary.
Institutional Framework
The issue of the policy organs of
these centres was also considered among the alternatives we considered:
Reinstate Ministerial Councils:
here, one needs to remember that they were abolished partly as a result of poor attendance
by the Ministers.
Maintain ICE which were established
in 1987
Joint Policy Organs with RECs
Abolish all policy organs in the
subregion.
Outcome:
Lack of unanimity on the two
favoured alternatives.
Joint policy organs with RECs
cost-effective but difficult
Maintaining ICE necessary for
legislative and programming purposes.
Resource Allocations
General support for decision by the
Executive Secretary to deploy more resources to the subregions
Operational Modalities
General support for close
programming coordination between MULPOCs and the relevant regional organizations.
Recommendation To The Conference
Revise the mandate of MULPOCs as
proposed
Change the name MULPOCs to
Subregional Development Centres - SRDCs in order to better reflect their role in the new
ECA.
Adjust the distribution of countries
for effective coverage
Establish separate SRDCs for Eastern
and Southern Africa
Decision on location of headquarters
of SRDCs to be made in consultation with the countries of the region
Maintain ICE as a policy organ for
SRDC in line with the proposed inter-governmental machinery of ECA
Endorse allocation of additional
resources to SRDCs in order to strengthen their operational capacities
Endorse proposed operational
modalities for cost-effective operations of these centres, by forging partnerships with
the RECs, IGOs and cooperating development agencies in the subregion. |