How an American recession might hit Asia

Next stop Asia?

How an American recession might hit Asia
Jan 23rd 2008 HONG KONG

http://www.economist.com/world/asia/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10559036

This is an interesting article posted over at NEDA N! Online which is worth the read! As doomsayers are not shrugging off American recessions, countries in Southeast Asia need to brace itself for the impact. But here's the thing, the economic 'decoupling' theory is not a myth.
To know more, just click on the link above. :)

The Importance of M&E in the PPBIME Cycle

A Reaction Paper presented during the Project Exit Conference of the British Embassy funded “Transparent Accountable Governance through Monitoring and Evaluation (TAG-ME)” Project

By:
Gilberto A. Altura
Supervising Economic Development Specialist
Plans and Policy Formulation Division
NEDA Region VI

At the outset, on behalf of NEDA Region VI Office and our OIC-Director Arturo Valero, I congratulate the I-CODE and the Provincial Government of Iloilo, together with the British Embassy for this inspiring project of making M&E as tool and mechanism for achieving transparency and accountability in governance. It is inspiring because we will get lessons that should urge us to do more about our function as a socio-economic planning agency of government.

One thing on the project results that really struck me is the big difference (40%) between the total cost of monitored projects and actual funds received by the project implementers, thus leading to a low physical completion of projects (60%) despite a high financial efficiency (97%).

This implies lack of due diligence on part of projects designers, implementers and fund-givers leading to these questions: Why give only a certain amount for projects that need more funds? Why start project implementation with no firm funding sources? Is it because we want to show to our constituents that, at least, we had a project implemented? Are we seeing projects as ends in its self, or are we really after the development results that should be brought about by a completed project?

The results of your TAG-ME project also manifested the weak development management structure and system that we at NEDA had been overseeing with the Regional Development Council. That is macro system of the coordination in Planning, Programming, Budgeting, Implementation and Monitoring and Evaluation (PPBIME) in the local development councils - from the Barangay up to the Provincial Development Council and then up to the RDC. There could be so many things lacking or inadequate in the whole system, but it is the M&E that brings them all out in the open.

So, it made me feel good that M&E was given focus under this project. Let me now share my reflections on this aspect of the development management cycle. The M&E in the PPBIME cycle has been least emphasized, often just lip-serviced. Theories and principles about M&E had evolved over time. From the purely external monitoring which proved to be conflict-rousing among project implementers and monitors, to internal monitoring that was often just a self-serving exercise, until participatory modes have been developed to promote transparency and accountability among all project stakeholders.

M&E tools also evolved from the use of a simple project work program to a project design using logical framework or matrix. External government assistance had also emphasized over the years the importance of M&E towards effective management of the overall development process. The Germans, for example, developed project cycle management and objectives oriented planning tools, adding on adjustment mechanisms in M&E. The USAID and AUSAID had comparable thrusts on project benefits M&E. The ADB is now strongly into Managing for Development Results emphasizing measurement of results on the ground. And the British Government thrust on M&E for good governance as experienced in this project.

Recently, the NEDA and RDC VI, under the auspices of GTZ-Decentralization Program, conducted a very short Technical Assistance project on streamlining regional and local M&E systems. It consisted of consultation workshops among the oversight agencies and provincial/city government units. Basically, the TA revealed to us that local governments and even line agencies are more concerned about M&E of programs and projects, but there is very weak or no link at all with the overall development plan. NEDA is continuing and increasing its advocacy on M&E Plan inclusion in all development plans in all levels.

If we liken development to a journey, the vision of the plan tells us where we want to go or to be. The mission is a resolve to embark on a journey to the envisioned destination. The strategies and policies are guides on how to get there. The plan objectives and targets are the landmarks and milestones along the way. The implementation of programs and projects are the different kinds of vehicles we use to travel the path towards our vision. The budget serves as gas and maintenance that we need for our vehicles. M&E system provides the radar that guides our steering wheel, constantly checking that we take on the right course in our journey.

M&E is really concerned about attribution of development results – that is also the essence of transparency and accountability. The results of our programs and projects will always bug us, whether we monitor and evaluate them or not, because the people that we want to serve especially as public officers will always see and feel the effects. So, M&E is really a win-win mechanism in governance. It makes clear to all what we want to do and what to achieve. People would love you if you do the right things in the right way. More people would love you if you know where you have gone wrong and try to make things right. So, let us love M&E more!