NN41, December 2008
The New Politics of Partnership: Peril or Promise?
Engendering Country-Led Partnership: Ministry of Education as a Cluster Leader
By Emefa Takyi-Amoako , St Anne?s College, Oxford University
Email: emefa.amoako@st-annes.ox.ac.ukKeywords
Ghana, Ministry of Education (MoE), donors, country-led partnership, cluster-leader
Summary
Country-led partnership could be achieved in MoE-donor interactions if both the MoE and donors would revolutionise their cultures and promote the former as a cluster-leader in their interactions.
First, it is absurd to talk about partnership, a notion that denotes equality, in aid donor-recipient relations shaped fundamentally by power asymmetries. However, on the basis of findings derived from a qualitative study of the Ministry of Education (MoE)-donor interactions in Ghana, this article argues that one way (among others) in which the MoE-donor interactions in Ghana could probably be transformed to a country-led partnership is if the MoE effectively assumes the role of a ?cluster-leader?.
The data reveal that in order for a country-led partnership to become a reality in the MoE-donor interactions for effective education delivery, it is imperative that both the MoE and donors transform their distinct cultures, practices, perceptions and actions. The MoE with a resumed sense of agency has to recognise that there are many dimensions that need partnership: the MoE and its agencies and divisions working together with other relevant ministries and institutions, civil society and development partners (both local and foreign aid donors, lenders and non-governmental organisations [NGOs]) and if relevant, other entities. Subsequently, the MoE needs to facilitate this partnership of many dimensions to assume the role of a cluster-leader. The MoE as a cluster-leader represents a crucial link in the chain of dimensions. Each of the rings in a dimension represents a dialogue. While these distinct dimensions are connected in a chain-like fashion, within each a similar process must occur at the same time with the MoE as facilitator. For instance, while the MoE dialogues on education with these different entities, simultaneously, it must facilitate dialoguing and information sharing among the divisions and units within itself. It is also essential that it harmonises and coordinates the activities and views of not only the different units and divisions it is made up of and other Government agencies but also other stakeholders that constitute the various strands of civil society. This is because it has the responsibility to filter the thought processes of these sub-dimensions within it, as well as others in order to engage and dialogue effectively with donors. Yet, it was noted at the time of data generation that even some of the key players in the MoE had not yet fully grasped the notion of its newly developed Education Strategic Plan (ESP). Evidence also indicates that:
'sometimes the ministries/ sectors do not talk amongst themselves very much. While a particular ministry can work hand in hand with another one in order to reach informed decisions on policy issues, in others this is not happening?This is what the Government or Ministry (MoE) must be doing in order to lead in the coordination and harmonisation of donor activities?It is not only a question of partnership but harmonisation of all stakeholders and the involvement of civil society and other organizations'. (Interview)
As a result, the data show that it is important that the MoE assumes the lead position, for example, by developing an effective communication structure amongst its divisions as well as with other relevant entities, during which it needs to gather data annually to measure success and self-evaluate. These are regarded as characteristics of what an interviewee identified as ?partnership-leadership-MoE in the driving seat? (Interview).
According to this interviewee, ?partnership is harmonisation which implies sharing information and making sure everybody is informed? (Interview). Another interviewee also maintained that before harmonising donor support, the most essential step for the MoE to take to strengthen their position is to coordinate the views within the education sector in order to assume the leadership mantle. He stressed that it was important to know how the MoE listened to the teacher unions and the various units that form the polity and allowed them to express their views. He therefore posed the question:
'To what extent are our people [the MoE] listening more to themselves than to outsiders. How do they ask whether the opinion of the directors count just as well as the external partners? To what extent are their views expressed and how are they listened to?' (Interview)
In his view, the MoE must hold and own the education programme by listening more to the local voices, an act more important than coordinating support. However, if the MoE wants to be successful in harmonising donor support it ?...has to hold its programme tightly by collectively involving the different directors and start managing their roles...and continue developing its own educational programme. And when this is done, genuine ownership will be achieved? (Interview) and country-led partnership would emerge. For the MoE to achieve harmonisation, it will have to secure the ?driving seat? by being abreast with the local (and some global) knowledges that are relevant to education in Ghana so as to keep all stakeholders including the donors informed. Since this had not yet happened, it was acknowledged in the Ghana Proposal for Inclusion into Education for All Fast Track Initiative, that the lack of stakeholder coordination could be a threat to the successful implementation of the ESP and the Education for All Fast Track Initiative (EFA FTI) component. It was also alleged that the lack of collaboration between the MoE and other Government ministries coupled with its lack of strong educational programme or plan led to the ineffectiveness of some donor support programmes. For instance, according to an interviewee,
'even before the (QUIPS) [1] programme was introduced to MoE...for endorsement the signature of the Ministry of Finance had already been obtained without any consultation with the MoE officials to determine if the programme was feasible. However, QUIPS went ahead to be implemented. USAID also contracted US NGOs to implement the programme in Ghana which did not help the MoE/GES' (Interview).
To address this, it was said that the MoE had begun taking steps to strengthen its leadership, management systems and capacity in general for better coordination and mainstreaming. A senior MoE official claimed that there were now
'opportunities available for training in order to expose them (MoE personnel) and have an efficient running institution. We are putting more stress on deadlines, showing results, accounting for time spent from week to week, day to day. What we are focusing more now on is the designing of a system that will help in reporting back. When you are encouraging people, there should be a system that should feed you, link up everybody (e.g. intranet), track systems. Correspondence should not sit on the table without being dealt with. Once we?ve done that, the directors will be challenged to focus more on the quality aspect of their job to increase output'. (Interview)
It appears the MoE system, through a seemingly growing strong leadership, was being geared up to harmonise donor support and assume the leadership position in the MoE-donor interactions. Another interviewee also added that because of this growing sense of strong leadership in the MoE,
'on the donor side there has been a very big improvement in the respect for the position of the Ministry. We have consistently trumpeted the fact that their issues should be congruent to the Ministry?s priorities. We are no longer pushovers. We insist on things that will be in the interest of the Ministry... though we recognise this is collaboration... However, we?ve made them aware that everybody has to toe the line. What we need to do is to demonstrate that we are willing to build the capacity required, if we mean to mainstream donor support in the Ministry'. (Interview)
Almost certainly, it seems palpable as far as the data are concerned that the ability of the MoE to strengthen its management / knowledge capacity and strongly own their education programme would enable efficient harmonisation of donor support for mainstreaming which may culminate in an MoE-donor partnership that is country-led. Nevertheless, the fact still remains that for a country-led partnership to truly prevail, the MoE as a cluster-leader equally needs to strengthen its financial capacity and reduce its foreign aid dependency.
Footnote
[1] Quality Improvement in Primary Schools
Full contents of NORRAG NEWS 41.
Download the full issue of NORRAG NEWS 41 in pdf.