In order to foster the participation of all interested stakeholders, NGOs would like to encourage prompt translation into Khmer language of all draft documents, enabling Cambodian civil society to read and understand the plans and thus facilitating Cambodian input.  NGOs are particularly concerned that no non-NGO, community or grassroots level participation has been elicited in the drafting process of the PRSP.  In particular, special attention should be drawn to include vulnerable and marginalized groups such as the poor, women, disabled, children, ethnic minorities, etc.  Vulnerability and marginalization are both causes and consequences of poverty, and poverty reduction is unlikely to be achieved unless the rights and the needs of these groups are taken into account.

No Khmer translations were produced until the document was complete, though there is some reference to need for timely Khmer translations (2.2 Lessons Learned). The PPA, which elicited grassroots input, was apparently not used in the initial drafting the matrix and poverty reduction actions – Chapter 3, on “Dimensions of Poverty”, was drafted later.

Regarding participation in the process as a whole, NGOs are concerned that elements of the PRSP such as the macro-economic framework may have substantial input from the World Bank and the IMF before there is any wider discussion among stakeholders.  NGOs hope that the PRSP will remain a participatory process, and that the concept of participation will extend to all elements of the PRSP.  Further, NGOs encourage establishing explicit indicators of the level of participation involved in all components of the final PSRP as well as that of the external documents that are linked to the PRSP process, especially the Public Expenditure Review (PER), the trade policy and the development-related plans of line ministries.  NGOs would like to see a country-driven PRS in which the level as well as the quality of participation in each section of the PRSP is not only strongly encouraged but also clearly stated in each section of the final document. 

Indicators of participation not included.

Measurement of the level and quality of participation in each section of the PRSP document not included.

¨                   NGOs encourage government, donor and NGO coordination to avoid duplication of tasks and additional burden for government officials.  NGOs propose building on previous lessons learnt and maintain an alive and flexible PRS document to adapt to the changing needs of the Cambodian reality.  In particular, the overlapping timelines and agendas of the World Bank/IMF requirement for a three-year “country-owned” PRS and the Cambodian Constitutional requirement for a five-year development plan need to be reconciled.  Otherwise, they have the potential to duplicate efforts and slow down the planning processes.  Maintaining a flexible and alive poverty reduction strategy document would potentially allow better coordination among all players and avoid the draining of human resources.   Different timelines on both government- and donor-driven requirements could be built into a long-term process or re-evaluation of poverty priorities for Cambodia.   The input from the Poverty Monitoring and Analysis Technical Unit of the Council for Social Development (PMATU), among others, could be invaluable for the evolution of Cambodian poverty reduction priorities.

Flexibility of document is clearly stated.

Envisions that the next SEDP and corresponding NPRS will be “developed and presented as a single document in 2005…” Also, reference to merging the SEDP11 and NPRS monitoring process as much as possible.

The role of PMATU is covered.