Myths and Dangers of PRSPs

In this commentary, Demba Moussa Dembele states that Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs), required by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank to qualify for debt relief assistance, are "loaded with a number of myths that should be debunked." Dembele identifies three myths: national ownership, pro-poor policies, and poverty reduction.

The Myth of National Ownership

Dembele suggests that the large-participatory process involving the government, civil society organisations (CSOs) and the private sector in which PRSPs are supposed to be written is more theoretical than practical. In many cases, African governments don't consult with the other participating organisations and submit PRSPs that are written according to what the Bretton Woods Institute (BWI)* would like to see rather than what the poor may really need.

The Myth of 'Pro-Poor' Policies

"The privatisation of public and essential services, like water, health and education, is at the core of the BWIs' policies and has contributed to spreading poverty." Examples specific to Senegal are provided.

The Myth of 'Poverty Reduction'

Dembele asserts that BWI's focus on poverty reduction is in the interest of global capitalism and is one of the causes of increased poverty in African countries. "… local industries have been destroyed by cheap imports in the name of free trade imposed by the BWIs."

Dembele concludes that PRSPs create "the illusion of poverty reduction while continuing the same failed policies", promote “a superficial national consensus…" and drive "a wedge between so-called 'reasonable' and 'radical' civil society organizations". In order to implement successful policies and programs, Dembele recommends that a "sincere partnership should be based on mutual respect and trust" and Northern NGO's should respect that African NGO's know what is best for their people.

*The BWI is a collaborative effort between the World Band and IMF.

Click here for the full article online.