November 2014 This publication was produced at the request of the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared independently by DNA Economics under Order No. AID- 613-O-14-00010 ZIMBABWE STRATEGIC ECONOMIC RESEARCH & ANALYSIS (SERA) PROGRAM MID-TERM EVALUATION (FINAL REPORT) Front cover picture caption: Kaguvi Building - ZIMSTAT’s offices in Harare Acknowledgements We would like to thank all stakeholders who have been involved in this evaluation; without your inputs this evaluation would not have been possible. We must give special thanks to the USAID Program Office and Economic Growth teams in Harare, and SERA personnel, for their responsiveness and openness throughout this study. We would also like to thank SERA’s partners at ZEPARU and ZIMSTAT and the numerous other beneficiaries of the Program. The value of your support in providing documents, assisting with consultations and speaking to us, was invaluable. ZIMBABWE STRATEGIC ECONOMIC RESEARCH & ANALYSIS (SERA) PROGRAM EVALUATION – FINAL REPORT To assist the Government of Zimbabwe in rebuilding economic capacity and generating the quality of data and analysis needed to make appropriate policy decisions, USAID partnered with the Ministries of Finance and Economic Planning to develop the Zimbabwe Strategic Economic Research and Analysis (SERA) Program. The core objectives of this partnership were to: • Improve the economic environment for inclusive growth through evidence-based policy analysis and research. • Strengthen capacity for policy development institutions. • Improve economic data for use by researchers, policy makers, and other stakeholders. This review covers the three year period from 2011 to 2014 and specifically focusses on four components of this program: • Support to the Zimbabwe Economic Policy Analysis and Research Unit (ZEPARU). • Long-term and short-term training. • Support to ZIMSTAT’s data collection and dissemination activities. • Economic policy research. November 2014 RFTOP- SOL- 613-14-000004 DISCLAIMER The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. CONTENTS Acronyms ..................................................................................................................................... i Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... iii Purpose .................................................................................................................................. iii Program Background .............................................................................................................. iii Evaluation design and limitations ............................................................................................ iii Summary of findings and recommendations ........................................................................... iv Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 Program Background ................................................................................................................. 1 Development context and problem ......................................................................................... 1 Program objectives and logic .................................................................................................. 2 Program outputs ..................................................................................................................... 6 Program Evaluation ................................................................................................................... 9 Evaluation purpose ................................................................................................................. 9 Evaluation methodology ......................................................................................................... 9 Constraints and limitations .....................................................................................................12 Findings, Conclusions & Recommendations .............................................................................13 Zimbabwe Economics Policy Analysis and Research Unit (ZEPARU) ...................................13 Training .................................................................................................................................19 Zimbabwe National Statistics Agency (ZIMSTAT) .................................................................25 Policy Studies ........................................................................................................................31 Summary of Findings and Recommendations (by Evaluation QuestionS) .................................40 Appendix I: SERA Program Performance ..................................................................................45 Appendix II: Evaluation Matrices ...............................................................................................52 Appendix III: Questionnaires .....................................................................................................63 Appendix IV: Interviewees .........................................................................................................72 Appendix V: MSc Bursary Beneficiary List ................................................................................74 Appendix VI: Data Available on ZIMSTAT’s Website.................................................................75 Appendix VII: Assessment of ZEPARU Research Papers .........................................................80 Appendix VIII: Zeparu Research Papers ...................................................................................91 Appendix IX: SERA Training Costs ...........................................................................................94 Appendix X: Cost of Quantitative Training .................................................................................96 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Triangulation of methods and data .............................................................................10 Figure 2: Most influential economic research institutions in Zimbabwe (perceptions) ................14 Figure 3: Awareness of ZEPARU research (perceptions) (n = 22) ............................................16 Figure 4: Beneficiary perceptions of short term courses ............................................................22 Figure 5: Short term training – average number of events per trainee (up to end-Year 3) .........24 Figure 6: Perceptions of ZIMSTAT Data....................................................................................29 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: SERA – components iii Table 3: SERA Outputs – ZEPARU 7 Table 4: SERA Outputs - ZIMSTAT 8 Table 5: Evaluation questions 10 Table 5: Fieldwork sample 11 Table 6: Economic research institutions in Zimbabwe 14 Table 7: ZEPARU staff profile 15 Table 8: Comparison of ZEPARU to regional think tanks 17 Table 10: Participation in short-term courses (end Year 3) 21 Table 11: Summary of beneficiaries of short term course - International only 23 Table 12: Summary of SERA-ZEPARU policy studies 32 Table 13: Summary of SERA-ZEPARU policy studies 35 Table 14: The 5 most popular online ZEPARU research papers 37 i ACRONYMS ACBF African Capacity Building Foundation AfDB African Development Bank AFRODAD African Forum and Network on Debt and Development BIDPA Botswana Institute for Development Policy Analysis CBR Central Business Register CGE Computable General Equilibrium (Models) CoP Chief of Party COMESA Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa COS Census of Services CZI Confederation of Zimbabwe Industries DFID Department for International Development DMO Debt Management Office DSGE Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium (Models) EA Enumeration Areas EPRC Economic Policy Research Center (Uganda) GOZ Government of Zimbabwe IMF International Monetary Fund KIPPRA Kenya Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis LEDRIZ Labour and Economic Development Research Institute of Zimbabwe MEFMI Macroeconomic & Financial Management Institute of Eastern & Southern Africa MIC Ministry of Industry and Commerce MOFED Ministry of Education & Training in Swaziland. NECF National Economic Consultative Forum PICES Poverty Income and Expenditure Survey RBZ Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe SADC Southern Africa Development Community SERA Strategic Economic Research and Analysis Program ii SIRDC Scientific and Industrial Research and Development Centre SS Survey of Services StatsSA Statistics South Africa TL Team Leader ToR Terms of Reference UCT University of Cape Town UNDP United Nations Development Program USAID United States Agency for International Development USG United States Government UZ University of Zimbabwe WITS University of the Witwatersrand ZCTU Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions ZELA Zimbabwe Environmental Law Association ZEPARU Zimbabwe Economic Policy Analysis and Research Unit ZIMASSET Zimbabwe Agenda for Sustainable Socio-Economic Transformation ZIMRA Zimbabwe Revenue Authority ZIMSTAT Zimbabwe National Statistics Agency ZNCC Zimbabwe National Chamber of Commerce ZSE Zimbabwe Stock Exchange iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Purpose The purpose of this assignment is to conduct a performance evaluation of specific elements of the Zimbabwe Strategic Economic Research and Analysis (SERA) Program in order to inform the future programming of USAID economic interventions in Zimbabwe and its economic policy work elsewhere. Program Background SERA was developed in partnership with the Ministry of Finance to assist the Government of Zimbabwe in rebuilding economic capacity and generating the quality of data and analysis needed to make appropriate economic policy decisions. The core objectives of this partnership were to: • Improve the economic environment for inclusive growth through evidence-based policy analysis and research. • Strengthen capacity for policy development institutions. • Improve economic data for use by researchers, policy makers, and other stakeholders. The four activities supported by SERA in Zimbabwe and evaluated in this report are summarized in the table below. Table 1: SERA – components Project Description ZEPARU capacity building SERA seeks to raise the quality of research and improve the dissemination and impact of one of Zimbabwe’s leading economic think tanks. Training SERA provides funding for short term and long term training: • 29 training local and regional events for government employees by end-year 3 • A bursary Program for MSc students studying part-time at the University of Zimbabwe and 3 PhD students studying in South Africa ZIMSTAT capacity building SERA provides technical and financial support to ZIMSTAT to improve the availability and quality of economic data. To date most of this support has focused on the completion of the Poverty Income and Expenditure Survey (PICES) and the development of a Central Business Register (CBR) and Survey of Services (SS). Policy studies SERA has commissioned 24 policy studies through ZEPARU over its first 3 years. Most of these studies involve a combination of ZEPARU researchers and external experts, though more recently, some studies have been entirely ‘outsourced’ to non-ZEPARU consultants. Evaluation design and limitations In conducting this evaluation the team reviewed all available documentation; met with USAID, the project implementing partners and beneficiaries; and consulted with as many external stakeholders as possible. In total, more than 70 stakeholders were interviewed during the fieldwork phase of the project. In addition, to comment on the effectiveness and impact of the program, the team conducted an electronic survey with a sample of the project beneficiaries; and reviewed the quality and use of the data and reports produced with SERA assistance. iv Together, these different methods and sources of information provide for three unique data sets against which the overall success of the program can be evaluated. Some problems were encountered in securing interviews with senior government officials and in obtaining specific information from SERA partners, but these shortcomings did not have a major influence on the outcome of the evaluation. Summary of findings and recommendations Zimbabwe Economic Policy Analysis and Research Unit (ZEPARU) The research and training activities commissioned by SERA, through ZEPARU, has raised the profile of the institution and has impacted on the policy discourse in Zimbabwe. But the involvement of ZEPARU researchers in this research has declined over time and the organization is confronted by serious capacity and financial constraints. These constraints might put the long-term sustainability of ZEPARU at risk. Specific recommendations to further develop the capacity and reach of ZEPARU over the final year of the Program include: • Consideration should be given to recruiting a senior (and respected) economist, with prior experience in managing donor-funded research programs, to work with ZEPARU on a full-time basis. • ZEPARU should be encouraged to convene a second High Level Conference. • SERA should seek to strengthen relations between economic researchers and institutions in Zimbabwe (such as ZEPARU) and other regional economic think tanks. Short-term and long-term training Beneficiaries of SERA-funded training interventions report that these activities have assisted them in the workplace and in their interactions with external experts. Whereas overall numbers of trainees are high, the program was unable to meet its gender-specific training targets. Moreover, there are some indications that the initial selection of candidates and courses for the short term training was not sufficiently rigorous. Specific recommendations to improve the targeting and gender representivity of future training initiatives include: • Efforts by SERA to tighten selection criteria should be supported, especially for external training. • Future support to post-graduate training in economics should not be limited to Government employees and should seek to address the specific constraints experienced by female students in Zimbabwe. • Training courses on economic modelling should be reconsidered; and possibly replaced with more targeted assistance in the form of a long-term mentorship arrangement with the modelling unit in the RBZ. v ZIMSTAT SERA’s support to the implementation of the PICES (Poverty, Income and Consumption Expenditure Survey) and the design of the Central Business Register (CBR) and Census of Services (COS) - now Survey of Services (SS) - is widely acknowledged and has helped to fill an important gap in Zimbabwe’s statistical resources. But ZIMSTAT remains cautious about sharing the detailed data that it collects, and it’s methodology, with external individuals and entities. Specific recommendations to enhance the availability of ZIMSTAT data and methods include: • SERA should continue to encourage ZIMSTAT to make its data more readily available and should require ZIMSTAT to report more fully on progress made against specific technical or quality measures. • Consideration should be given to facilitating closer linkages between ZIMSTAT and other, well-capacitated statistical agencies in the region. • Consideration should be given to conducting workshops with researchers and other organizations (such as ZEPARU); to specifically encourage the use of new ZIMSTAT data for economic policy analysis Policy studies The policy research supported by SERA and mostly conducted through ZEPARU has made a positive contribution to the debate around key economic issues, most notably in the mining and financials sectors. Research involving senior and well-known experts has had more impact; especially when these experts are given direct exposure to Government at high level policy events. On the other hand, the involvement of external experts is of much lesser value to junior researchers at ZEPARU, most of who require significant supervision and support and prefer a mentorship approach. Specific recommendations to support further economic policy research in Zimbabwe include: • SERA should continue to bring respected regional and where appropriate international experts to Zimbabwe in order to encourage debate and provide different perspectives. • Consideration should be given to establishing a non-partisan steering group that is able to guide and take ownership of the research generated by SERA. 1 INTRODUCTION Zimbabwe’s socio- economic and institutional challenges are severe and well known. Partly as a result of these difficulties the country has experienced a long-term exodus of skilled labour. This has contributed further to institutional weakening, including in the areas of economics and statistics. To assist the Government of Zimbabwe in rebuilding economic capacity and generating the quality of data and analysis needed to make appropriate policy decisions, USAID partnered with the Ministries of Finance and Economic Planning to develop the Zimbabwe Strategic Economic Research and Analysis (SERA) Program. The core objectives of this partnership were to: • Improve the economic environment for inclusive growth through evidence-based policy analysis and research. • Strengthen capacity for policy development institutions. • Improve economic data for use by researchers, policy makers, and other stakeholders. Three years into the implementation of this Program it is important to assess the extent to which economic capacity and data in Zimbabwe have in fact been enhanced and, critically, whether these improvements have contributed to better policy decisions. Whereas the outputs of this Program are regularly reported on and can be easily measured through conventional monitoring techniques, evaluating the impact of economic institutions and the data and reports that they produce is much more difficult, especially in the short-term. The specific objectives of this particular evaluation are therefore two-fold. • Firstly, at the project level, it is important for USAID and its partners to understand whether the Program is performing in line with its expected targets and that it is contributing to the right results. This can be done through a rigorous assessment of the quality and quantity of the Program’s outputs. • Secondly, and at a much higher level, the SERA Program and this evaluation are expected to inform future USAID programming in the area of economic policy research, analysis and capacity building. This requires an assessment of the likely effect of such interventions on the policy making process and ultimately the economic environment in Zimbabwe. The target audience for the evaluation therefore includes USAID, the Government of Zimbabwe, the project implementation team (Nathan Associates), key implementation partners such as ZEPARU and ZIMSTAT, and other donors active or considering activities in Zimbabwe. PROGRAM BACKGROUND Development context and problem Zimbabwe experienced a severe economic crisis between 1999 and 2009. Whilst the causes of this crisis might be debatable, the resulting spike in the inflation rate, decline in national output, 2 and diminished employment prospects not only led to a mass exodus of skilled labour but also created a complex environment for policy development. Specifically - hyperinflation, coupled with rapid currency depreciation, made the available economic data unreliable; while existing economic and statistical agencies were confronted with cut-backs in budgets and staff. The unavailability and unreliability of economic data over this period has led some policy analysts to refer to this time as “the lost decade”. In 2009, the Zimbabwean government began to adopt a first round of needed structural reforms. The Zimbabwean dollar was abandoned in favour of a multi-currency regime (mainly the US dollar); which immediately brought monetary and price stability. And the government adopted austerity measures such as a cash budgeting system, a wage freeze for all civil servants as well as a moratorium on new hires. Whereas these changes served to address the immediate financial and fiscal crisis, they did not serve to restore confidence and growth in the Zimbabwean economy. In 2010, the then Finance Minister (Mr. Tendai Biti), approached USAID to assist the Government in developing the necessary evidence and capacity to enhance economic governance and policy making in Zimbabwe. In response, the SERA program was designed to equip a new team of economic decision makers with the skills, information and technical support needed to implement appropriate reforms. This was to be achieved directly, through targeted training, workshops and research papers on key policy issues; and indirectly, through investment in specific institutions and in long-term economic education. In 2011, USAID, awarded a US$13 million four year contract to implement the SERA Program to a consortium led by Nathan Associates. The field office opened on 1 November 2011 and was fully staffed by 5 December 2011. The Program is now in its fourth and final year of implementation. Program objectives and logic The stated objectives of the SERA program can be summarized as follows:. • To develop the capacity of Zimbabwean policy development institutions to deliver specialized training and engage on priority areas of economic policy reform. • To support public sector agencies, the private sector and civil society organisations in Zimbabwe to undertake the analysis needed to review and reform the policy and regulatory environment. • To improve the ability of the Zimbabwe National Statistics Agency (ZIMSTAT) in collecting, producing and disseminating the statistics needed for evidence-based analysis. To achieve the first of these two objectives, USAID (and therefore SERA) committed initially to work with the Zimbabwe Economic Policy Analysis and Research Unit (ZEPARU) as its principal 3 implementing partner. In doing so, SERA sought to raise the capacity and profile of ZEPARU directly, as a means to provide ministry officials and parliamentarians with the evidence and skills needed to make better economic policy decisions. The logic of this component of the SERA program is illustrated and ‘tested’ in figure … below. The underlying logic of this particular set of interventions is clear and sensible. By investing in economic skills and policy research, SERA sought to increase the volume and quality of evidence available to inform economic policy reform; and the capacity of Government to absorb this evidence. However, for these inputs to be translated into meaningful outputs and outcomes, two critical assumptions must hold. • Firstly, in tying the delivery of this component of the program to ZEPARU, the credibility and performance of SERA is highly dependent on the willingness and ability of ZEPARU to partner with USAID in the production and dissemination of appropriate and accurate research. • Secondly, for this research to inform policy debates and ultimately economic decisions, it is essential that the Government of Zimbabwe (officials and parliamentarians) are willing and able to engage with the evidence generated by ZEPARU. In order to achieve the third program objective, SERA set out to provide ZIMSTAT with the knowledge and tools needed to collect and disseminate the economic data required by policy researchers and decision makers. The logic of this component is described in figure … below. Again, for this logic chain to hold, it is critical that the outputs generated with SERA support are accurate and used. This in turn depends on the willingness and ability of ZIMSTAT to produce and disseminate this data, and the corresponding demand and use of this data by the Zimbabwean research community. The high level of dependency of this program on its external partners is to be expected of a policy-oriented intervention of this kind; and is particularly appropriate in Zimbabwe, where the political climate is uncertain and is often unfriendly to external advice. On the other hand, the program’s reliance on just two specific entities for the delivery of most of its outputs does introduce a high degree of risk, which needs to be carefully monitored and managed. For this reason, most of the attention of this evaluation is focused on the capacity, reputation and sustainability of these two institutions. 4 USAID SERA Program Logic Model: Zimbabwe Economic Policy Analysis and Research Unit (ZEPARU) Intervention Inputs Activities Outcomes Short Medium Long Outputs USAID SERA Funding ZEPARU Bursary Programme: Govt economists to pursue M.Sc. degree at UZ Dissemination activities such as high level economic forums and workshops - Long term training courses resulting in skilled govt. economists • MSc • PhD - Skilled staff after short term training courses for ZEPARU staff and govt. economists • Local • International ZEPARU Bursary Programme: Govt economists to pursue PhDs in South Africa Local workshops & conference and funding for conferences Improved human capacity - Production of high quality work for evidence based economic policy analysis and research Review output & systems & support to ZEPARU to improve economic barometer Increased awareness and use of evidence based research by policy makers and the public Increased dissemination of high quality research Strengthened research institutions providing analytical support to economic Increased attention to gender issues in ZEPARU research outputs Assumptions 1. Willingness of ZEPARU to engage with SERA 2. Sufficient absorptive capacity at ZEPARU 3. Willingness of legislators to participate in training 4. Policy research is disseminated widely 5. Willingness of senior government officials to engage with research findings 6. No inherent gender bias amongst economists in Government External Factors 1. Change in political leadership in the cluster of finance ministries Strengthen the capacity of policy development institutions Strengthened institutional capacity of government departments Improved economic environment for inclusive growth through evidence based policy analysis USAID SERA Technical Support ZEPARU short term courses for economists ZEPARU training for parliamentarians Support to ZEPARU to produce policy studies Assistance to Min. Finance on planning & managing a conference Gender mainstreaming in working with ZEPARU Increased female participation ZEAPARU researchers access better data & research Skilled parliamentarians 5 USAID SERA Program Logic Model: ZIMSTAT Intervention Inputs Outcomes Short Medium Long Activities Outputs USAID SERA Funding Data collection and processing for the Poverty, income and Consumption Expenditure Survey (PICES) Preparation and training for Census of Services (COS) - Supplies & survey material - Trainers workshop - 2 x regional field trips - 2 x consultant statisticians Preparation and training for Central Business Register (CBR) Extra personnel and overtime for PICES Improved sampling techniques Provision of hardware and software for data mgmt. & warehousing PICES survey completed Acceleration of PICES fieldwork CBR is updated and COS completed. Both results are disseminated Improved data content on ZIMSTAT website Assumptions 1. Willingness and capacity of ZIMSTAT to engage with USAID SERA 2. Willingness of ZIMSTAT to make data available in a usable form 3. Depth and reliability of data 4. Ability to absorb and use data correctly External Factors 1. Amount of co-funding from the government and other donors 2. Government IT infrastructure 3. Participation is surveys Improved economic data for use by researchers, policy makers and other stakeholders Improved quality, timeliness and availability of economic data Improved economic environment for inclusive growth through evidence based policy USAID SERA analysis Technical Support Expert review of PICES data Other organizations for data research, production and dissemination Expert review of FinScope/ZIMSTAT financial sector data Training ZIMSTAT staff Review and upgrade ZIMSTAT web interface Public information events, and training for ZIMSTAT data users Trained ZIMSTAT staff (incl. online courses) Public participation, Direct electronic links to policy researchers and govt. ministries Improved hardware & software data manual and metadata published on website Improved response rates on key surveys and use of data More efficient management of data Real-time access to timely data for economic research 6 Program outputs Almost all SERA outputs are delivered through or to ZEPARU and ZIMSTAT and are largely confined to training programs and events; the production and dissemination of research and data; and technical assistance. In terms of SERA’s own reporting, the program M&E plan differentiates between direct (level 1) output indicators; and the expected intermediate results (level 2) and outcomes (level 3) of the program. The level 2 and 3 indicators are intended to measure the effect and impact of the program. These issues are dealt with in more detail though this evaluation. However, in order to assess the performance of this program against these higher level results, it is first important to consider whether SERA has delivered on its planned outputs over the first three years of the program. Table 2 shows the performance of SERA against its annual targets for all work channeled through ZEPARU. It reveals that the project was slow to get started on this work component; but that there have been marked improvements in performance in year 3. Specifically, there has been a significant increase in the number of policy studies and dissemination workshops concluded. Conversely, there has been a drop-off in the amount of training and technical assistance delivered over the last year. The main failings of this component have been in the parliamentary training – with no seminars taking place over the last three years; and in the gender orientation of the program. An explanation for this shortcoming is provided in the findings, conclusions, and recommendations section of this report. In most cases, the number of woman attending short and long-term SERA training activities has been below program targets and there has been a small shortfall in the number of policy studies completed by ZEPARU with gender content. Table 3 shows the performance of SERA against its ZIMSTAT targets. Here, the program has failed to deliver against most of its specified outputs. In particular, SERA’s plans to produce data manuals, facilitate public information events and develop a distance training program, have not taken place. And no training events have taken place in year 3. The underlying reasons for this are discussed in the findings, conclusions, and recommendations section of this report. On the other hand, SERA’s support to the development of a number of important statistical surveys is not reflected in this table, but is instead specified as a (successful) intermediate result of the Program. SERA’s performance against the program’s level 2 (intermediate result) and level 3 (outcome) indicators is shown in Appendix I. 7 Table 2: SERA Outputs – ZEPARU Activity/Finding Targets Actuals Research & analysis Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Number of completed policy studies outsourced by ZEPARU with SERA support: total, (gender content in parenthesis) 2(1) 4(2) 4(2) 0 0 5(5) Number of completed policy studies by ZEPARU with SERA: total, (gender content in parenthesis) 6(3) 8(4) 8(4) 8(2) 3(3) 8(3) Person-hours of training completed in fiscal policy and fiscal administration supported by USG assistance (USAID PMP indicator): total, (women in parenthesis) 1500 (750) 2500 (1250) 6500 (3250) 1680 (400) 7600 (1895) 5537.5 (1577.75) Number of days of SERA technical assistance in fiscal policy and fiscal administration (USAID PMP indicator) 150 360 400 285 442 316 Parliamentary training Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Number of SERA supported seminars for Parliamentarians, on economic policy and economic literacy 4 seminars 6 seminars 12 seminars 0 0 0 Number of Parliamentarians trained with SERA support, total (women in parenthesis) 60 (30) 100 (50) 200 (100) 0 0 0 Short-term Training Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Number of SERA-supported customized short-courses for training economists 4 5 5 1 6 6 Number of economists attending customized short-courses: total (women in parenthesis) 80 (40) 100 (50) 115 (58) 17 (4) 121 (47) 92 (30) Number of individuals sponsored to attend external training courses: total (women in parenthesis) 8 (4) 20 (10) 33 (17) 12 (5) 31 (12) 21 (2) Long-term Training Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Number of individuals with SERA bursaries to part-time MSc in Economics at the UZ: Total (females in parenthesis) 20(10) 20(10) 20 (5) 18(2) 15(4) 11(4) Number of individuals with SERA bursaries to PhD in Economics at UCT or comparable universities: Total (females in parenthesis) 5(3) 5(3) 3 (0) 0 3(0) 3(0) Workshops (outreach/dissemination) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Number of SERA supported outreach/dissemination workshops 8 3 3 4 3 5 Number of participants in SERA supported workshops or seminars: Total (Women in Parenthesis) - (150) 300 (150) (81) 262 (No data) 612 (No data) Number of participants in SERA supported workshops or seminars: government/private sector/ ZEPARU or SERA/ other None None None 166/62/49/ 89 85/51/34/- 50/97/17/9 9 Key: Green – achievement or near achievement, Yellow – significant achievement, but with limitations, Red – Limited achievement 8 Table 3: SERA Outputs - ZIMSTAT Activity/Finding Targets Actuals Improve organization and coordination Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Number of documents containing meta-data and data manuals produced and posted on-line with SERA support 0 2 2 0 1 0 Number of SERA-supported public information events on economic statistics, through ZIMSTAT 2 3 3 0 0 0 Number of participants in SERA-supported public events through ZIMSTAT: Total (women in parenthesis) 100 (50) 150 (75) 100 (50) 0 0 0 Develop physical, IT and statistical infrastructure Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Number of SERA supported training events for ZIMSTAT staff 1 2 2 3 2 0 Number of participants in SERA supported training courses for ZIMSTAT staff: Total (women in parenthesis) 20 (10) 40 (20) 150 (75) 32 (6) 183 (48) 0 Cumulative number of distance learning training modules in economic statistics developed/supported by SERA Plans established 1 6 0 3 - Key: Green – achievement or near achievement, Yellow – significant achievement, but with limitations, Red – Limited achievement 9 PROGRAM EVALUATION Evaluation purpose The purpose of this assignment is to conduct a performance evaluation of specific elements of the Zimbabwe SERA Program in order to inform the future programming of USAID economic interventions in Zimbabwe and more widely. As such, this report does not provide an evaluation of all activities or components of SERA, but seeks to address a number of priority evaluation questions under three themes related to (a) the strengthening of institutional capacity within project partners (b) the development of human capacity in the area of economic analysis and policy-making and (c) the production of high quality and timely economic data and research. (a) Strengthening of institutional capacity SERA has invested significant resources in developing capacity within ZEPARU and ZIMSTAT. To what extent has capacity in areas that SERA have supported been strengthened; and to what extent are these institutions now capable of generating better research and data? Looking forward, is this capacity likely to be sustainable without the support of SERA. (b) Improved human capacity SERA has also provided direct support to individuals within key Government Ministries by financing short-courses and long-term study Programs. How have these individuals benefited from this training and have they been able to use these learnings to improve themselves and their performance in the workplace. (c) Improved economic data and research Through all of its activities, SERA has supported the production of new research and statistics. How has this research been undertaken and used, and to what extent has the data and studies produced with SERA assistance informed economic policy debates in Zimbabwe. Evaluation methodology In conducting this evaluation the team reviewed all available documentation; met with USAID, the project implementing partners and beneficiaries; and consulted with as many external stakeholders as possible. In addition, to comment on the effectiveness and impact of the program, the team conducted an electronic survey with a sample of the project beneficiaries; and reviewed the quality and use of the data and reports produced with SERA assistance. Together, these different methods and sources of information provide for three unique data sets against which the overall success of the program can be evaluated. This approach is summarised in Figure 1 and discussed in more detail below. 10 Figure 1: Triangulation of methods and data Evaluation questions and matrices Table 1 sets out the evaluation questions, as specified in the terms of reference; and indicates the primary methods used to answer these questions. Table 4: Evaluation questions Evaluation questions (EQ) Judgment Criteria (JC) Collection method EQ1: What is ZEPARU’s capacity in key areas that SERA supported? • Is ZEPARU known for developing quality research? • To what extent is ZEPARU moving towards financial sustainability? • How effective is ZEPARU at disseminating policy research? • Are there other economic research organisations that would be suitable beneficiaries? • Consultations and interviews • Document and data analysis EQ2: To what extent is the project building human capacity within the GOZ • Which ministries benefited and to what extent from SERA training opportunities? • What were bursary and short-term recipients’ perceptions of the training provided? • How have beneficiaries used /applied this new knowledge on the job? • What were their professional plans and objectives post-graduation? • What was the perception within the economic ministries of SERA supported training? • Why were female economists within the GOZ underrepresented? • Consultations and interviews • Document and data analysis EQ3: To what extent are SERA activities with ZIMSTAT supporting the availability, timeliness and reliability of economic statistics • What were SERA’s key contributions in the improvement of economic statistics? • Which interventions were central to these improvements? • How effective were SERA supported activities in building capacity at ZIMSTAT? • What are the users of economic statistics perceptions? • How could these perceptions be improved? • To what extent are economic statistics reported publicly in a timely manner? • Consultations and interviews • Document and data analysis Case studies of: • Mining policy Tourism • Financial sector • Currency regime • Employment policy • How were these studies developed? • How were the recommendations and findings carried forward and disseminated? • What impact has this research had on legislation, policy and regulations? • Has the research had an impact on the public-private dialogue? • Are the private sector and non-government parties better empowered? • What were the key factors of the more influential studies? • What were the key differences between studies? • Consultations and interviews • Document and data analysis • Policy tracking Face to face consultations and interviews Document and data analysis Policy and beneficiary assessment 11 Based on these questions, the evaluation team developed a set of three evaluation matrices and a series of questionnaires to guide the consultations with stakeholders. The evaluation matrices also identify potential sources of evidence which can be used to address the evaluation sub-questions. The evaluation matrices are attached as Appendix II. Based on the evaluation matrices, different questionnaires were prepared for the Program implementation team and their partners; direct beneficiaries of the Program; and other stakeholders. These are attached as Appendix III. In addition an on-line questionnaire was developed for the purpose of collecting information from almost 300 beneficiaries of SERA funded workshops and capacity building initiatives. Fieldwork The evaluation began with a one-week visit to Zimbabwe to meet with key personnel from SERA, USAID and the program’s direct partners. This initial visit served to confirm the evaluation objectives; to provide the team with a better understanding of the program design and activities; and to generate a longer list of potential interviewees. Two of the evaluation team members remained in Zimbabwe for a further 3 weeks, meeting with a wide range of stakeholders from Government, other donors and civil society. These face-to-face interviews were supplemented with a limited number of telephonic interviews. In addition to these direct interviews, the team distributed an on-line survey to all beneficiaries of SERA training interventions. Of the 297 individuals contacted, 50 responded to this survey. A full list of the people consulted is included in Appendix IV. Table 5: Fieldwork sample Beneficiaries Populatio n Sample target Approach Actual Total % Female PhD students 3 3 Face-to-face interview 3 0% Masters students 15 5 Focus group 7 14% Short-term courses participants 297 20 Face-to-face/telephonic interview 18 39% Online survey 49 33% ZEPARU researchers 14 8 Face-to-face interview 8 50% ZIMSTAT 8 4 Face-to-face interview 4 0% Other parties 29 25 Face-to-face/telephonic interview 38 13% Total 366 65 Total (excl. online survey) 78 21% Document review and analysis Relevant documents and other information was collected and reviewed from SERA, ZEPARU and ZIMSTAT. These included technical publications, quarterly and annual reports and 12 baseline studies. Moreover, in order to assess the potential impact of some of the policy work completed through SERA, an electronic media search was undertaken and the results were captured and compared. Most information was sourced through the large number of face-to-face and electronic interviews that were conducted over the course of the study. These extensive consultations allowed for the cross-checking of the evidence that was collected. Moreover, the questionnaires were specifically designed in such a way so that many of the answers were closed; and the resulting data could then be captured, aggregated and analyzed quantitatively in an excel database. The analysis of the information collected through the document review and the consultation was then used to draft the findings, draw conclusions and make recommendations. These findings were tested through further interactions with key stakeholders, including a fact￾checking session at USAID’s office in Harare. Constraints and limitations The design and implementation of this evaluation was confronted by five main challenges. First, being a policy-focused intervention, most of the beneficiaries and interviewees were employees of the Government of Zimbabwe. As such, their perceptions about the policy environment in Zimbabwe would likely be biased. Second, many of interviewees were direct beneficiaries of the SERA program. To counter these biases, the evaluation team did meet with non-government organisations and independent researchers; but also asked all interviewees to provide specific examples in support of their views. Third, the team encountered difficulties in arranging appointments with some stakeholders. Specifically, delays experienced in meeting with senior officials at MOFED and MIC had an adverse impact on the level of interaction with these institutions, as other (more junior) officials could not be interviewed until these first meetings had taken place and authorization had been granted. Fourth, ZEPARU’s unwillingness to share information on its overall funding and its performance prior to the implementation of SERA, limited the team’s ability to assess the impact of SERA on the output and sustainability of this key partner. Finally, it is important to recognize that building capacity and making policy change takes time. Whereas it is possible to measure and assess SERA’s direct outputs, most of the longer term and indirect impacts of this program cannot yet be determined. As such, it is difficult to attribute any specific actions taken by the Government of Zimbabwe to the research, training and data generated through SERA. Future evaluations of USAID’s work in Zimbabwe will need to take the work and individuals supported by SERA into account. Despite these challenges, appropriate mitigation actions were taken to ensure that they did not have a major influence on the outcome of the evaluation. 13 FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS Zimbabwe Economics Policy Analysis and Research Unit (ZEPARU) Findings Until very recently, all economic research, training and discussion funded by SERA, in Zimbabwe, was channeled through ZEPARU. This was intended to cement ZEPARU’s standing as the pre-eminent economic think tank in Zimbabwe; and in doing so, to raise the level, quality and relevance of evidence-based policy research produced and disseminated through ZEPARU and the country more widely. According to most respondents, the reputation and output of ZEPARU has been enhanced by the SERA Program. Most of the recent publicly available research output of ZEPARU has received some form of support from SERA – seven of the eight of papers published by ZEPARU on their website in 2014 were led by SERA-funded researchers and the eighth received technical support from a SERA-funded advisor. Likewise, six of the seven studies published in 2014 received support from SERA. Whilst ZEPARU produces a monthly Zimbabwe Outlook Report for the AfDB and also conducts additional research for other institutions, this research is generally not published and is not available from their website. What is of some concern is that the overall number of policy studies produced annually by ZEPARU does not appear to have increased over the SERA program; whereas the contribution made by ZEPARU researchers to these studies has fallen markedly over the last few years. SERA’s positive contribution to the capacity building and dissemination activities of ZEPARU is clear. The number of ZEPARU policy and training workshops has increased from around 2 a year in 2011, to 29 in the third year of the SERA Program. ZEPARU has also coordinated the master’s bursary Program and assisted around 300 government employees to attend internal and external training events, with funding from SERA. The number of website hits recorded by ZEPARU has increased from a baseline of 568 hits and 353 downloads to 7 585 hits with 2 750 downloads in year 2 and 20 168 hits with 9 459 downloads in year 3 of the SERA Program1 . Almost all respondents recognise ZEPARU’s contribution to economic research and capacity building in Zimbabwe; though it is important to acknowledge that most interviewees have in some way benefited from assistance channeled through ZEPARU. Respondents in the survey and face-to-face interviews were also unable to name any other influential economic research institutions in Zimbabwe, with the possible exception of LEDRIZ. 1 SERA (2014) Year 3 Annual Report 14 Figure 2: Most influential economic research institutions in Zimbabwe (perceptions) Moreover, with reference to table Table 6 below, the only other institution with a significant concentration of skilled researchers is the University of Zimbabwe. Table 6: Economic research institutions in Zimbabwe ZEPARU* LEDRIZ ZELA* University of Zimbabwe (Economics Department) No. of professional staff 11 6 5 19 No. of staff with PhDs 1 1 0 5 No. of staff with a Masters 10 5 1 14 Main areas of research Macroeconomic & development policy, public policy economy Legislation on natural resources, democracy & good governance in natural resources All economic related fields (Trade, Microeconomics, Macroeconomics, Montary, Agriculture, etc) No. of Publications : Jan ’13-Dec’13 8 6 6 10 Jan ’12-Dec’12 8 5 4 12 * From the institution's website It is noteworthy that with few exceptions (travel allowances, two vehicles and printing equipment), SERA did not provide any direct funding to ZEPARU. As such, almost all USAID expenditure went directly towards the achievement of specific deliverables – largely in the form of research, training and dissemination activities. However, to assist ZEPARU in the delivery of these activities, SERA did provide extensive management support to the organisation (partly through a senior advisor and also through short-term technical and strategic assistance); funded a full-time training coordinator to facilitate the training and dissemination workshops; and financed the cost of 3 research interns. The overall cost of delivering this work Program was therefore reasonably low; with most of ZEPARU’s 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 SIRDC Trades Centre ZELA Afrodad LEDRIZ Other There are none University of Zimbabwe ZEPARU Survey results (sample size n=41) Face-toface interviews (sample size n=36 respondents) 15 overheads covered by other donors (largely the African Capacity Building Foundation). SERA has also provided direct support to individual ZEPARU researchers by involving them as co-authors in SERA-funded studies; through the establishment of a formal mentorship arrangement with Prof. Daniel Makina of the University of South Africa (UNISA); and by financing their participation in numerous workshops and training events. The success and limitations of each of these specific support mechanisms is discussed elsewhere in this evaluation. With reference to the table below, most of ZEPARU’s professional staff are recent graduates, and with the exception of the Executive Director, the average researcher at ZEPARU has just 3.5 years of research experience at ZEPARU. The extent and type of support provided therefore seems well-justified. However, when these researchers were asked to rate the usefulness of the SERA Program in terms of building their capacity to design research and then undertake analysis, the average scores (out of 10) were surprisingly low at 6.9 and 5.9 respectively. Table 7: ZEPARU staff profile Name Designation Gender Highest qualification Institution Year graduated Started at ZEPARU Dr. Gibson Chigumira Director Male PhD Uni. of Strathclyde (UK) - 2004 Mr. Ngosi Shumba Fin. & Admin. Manager Male - - - - Dr Sehliselo Mpofu Former Deputy Director Female PhD WITS (SA) 2011 April 2011 Sanderson Abel Former Senior Research Fellow Male - - - - Jecob Nyamadzawo Senior Research Fellow Male MSc Econ. UZ 2009 2010 Ms Erinah Chipumo Senior Research Fellow Female MSc Econ. UZ 2004 2011 Cornelius Dube Senior Research Fellow Male MSc Econ. UZ 2004 2010 Wellington Matsika Research Fellow Male MSc Econ UZ 2011 2011 Evangelista Mudzonga Research Fellow Female MSc Econ & MBA UZ 2011 2012 Gamuchirai Chiwunze Research Fellow Male MSc Econ. UZ - 2011 Ethel Sithole Intern Female MSc Econ. UZ 2012 2013 Mike Nyawo Intern Male MSc Econ. UZ 2012 2013 Ivy Mananike (Nee Gurure) Intern Female MSc Econ. UZ 2010 2013 Evidence Ndari Training Coordinator Female MSc Econ. UZ - - Grace Msauki Librarian Female - - - Source: Face-to-face interviews, ZEPARU website and LinkedIn Specifically, where research was outsourced to an external consultant, it was regarded as the least useful by ZEPARU researchers. Conversely, where an external consultant was engaged 16 as a mentor, researchers reported that they were better equipped to conceptualize and conduct research. ZEPARU researchers also indicated that their capacities were enhanced after attending short courses funded by USAID SERA. Most researchers claimed that these courses were relevant and constructive. The final focal area of support to ZEPARU has been in the dissemination of research conducted by ZEPARU staff or commissioned through ZEPARU. This has included work on the upgrading of the ZEPARU Economic Barometer, technical and financial support to a new ZEPARU website; and the hosting of 4 conferences and 8 validation workshops. Of particular value, according to respondents, was the High-Level Economics Forum jointly convened by the Ministry of Finance and ZEPARU at Victoria Falls in August 2012. The event exposed senior Government Ministers and officials to a wide range of research and experts; and according to some of these experts, has directly contributed to the ongoing use of this research in policy discussions. The net result of these dissemination activities is reflected in Figure 3 below. General awareness of the research produced by or disseminated through ZEPARU, amongst interviewees, is high. Moreover, amongst those interviewees that claimed to be aware of ZEPARU research, about 70% were able to refer to a specific report that they had come across or read. In terms of how this research is accessed, the largest single source was the ZEPARU website (27% of respondents), followed by conferences (15%) and references from colleagues (15%). This suggests that SERA support to the ZEPARU website and workshops has been appropriate. Figure 3: Awareness of ZEPARU research (perceptions) (n = 22) Challenges Despite the apparent progress made by ZEPARU in raising its profile and its output, the institution is currently in a precarious position. This is for two main reasons. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% If "yes" can you recall the topic of the report? Are you aware of economic research produced by ZEPARU? Yes No Not sure 17 Firstly, the organisation is confronted by a possible funding crisis. For the last ten years, ZEPARU’s activities have largely been financed by transfers from central government and grants from the African Capacity Building Foundation (ACBF). The fiscal shortfall in Zimbabwe has resulted in significant reduction in funding from the government over the last two years. This has been compounded by the fact that financial support from the ACBF is also due to end soon; with a no cost extension granted up to November 2014. ZEPARU is looking to close this funding gap through increased consulting or fee-based work; but with reference to a study commissioned by SERA to assist ZEPARU in making this transition, the organisation is not well equipped for this change in approach. Based on the SERA Year 3 Annual Report, under the 2013 National Budget, ZEPARU was allocated a budget vote of US$200,000. However, over the course of SERA Year 2, ZEPARU received just US$85,000 from the GoZ. ZEPARU did however manage to raise an additional $54,595 from other sources. Similarly, in Year 3, ZEPARU received $32,362 of its $140,127 in total revenue from the GoZ. During this period revenues from consulting work done for the AfDB ($24,000), UNDP ($18,450), DfID’s ZIMBISA ($8,000) and others provided significant alternative sources of funding. Unless the Government or an alternative donor is able to step-in and make-up for the loss of ACBF funding, it is unlikely that ZEPARU will be able to cover its current operational costs without a significant increase in consulting work. Secondly, and despite the support provided by SERA, the organisation remains constrained by a lack of management and technical capacity. According to most respondents, ZEPARU is slow to process research work, reluctant to disseminate the results, and is unable to retain senior researchers. Moreover, as indicated in Table 8, most ZEPARU staff, (when compared to similar think tanks such as KIPPRA2 , BIDPA3 , EPRC4 , among others), are relatively young and inexperienced. Whereas the success of the SERA Program (as reflected in the theory of change) depends heavily on the ability of ZEPARU to influence economic policy though rigorous research; it would seem that USAID overestimated the competency of the organisation to play this advocacy role. Table 8: Comparison of ZEPARU to regional think tanks ZEPARU EPRC KIPPRA BIDPA Total no. of researchers 11 17 38 25 No. of researchers with a Doctorate 1 7 Unknown 10 Source: Institution websites It is also important to note that USAID’s approach, whereby SERA support was largely confined to technical assistance and out-sourced research and events, limited the ability of SERA to leverage sustainable change within ZEPARU. According to respondents from both 2 Kenya Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis 3 Botswana Institute for Development Policy Analysis 4 Economic Policy Research Center (Uganda) 18 within and outside of ZEPARU, the incremental impact of SERA’s support to ZEPARU has declined over time. For example, SERA’s investment in the ZEPARU Economic Barometer has been undermined by ZEPARU’s inability or unwillingness to continue this activity on its own budget; the release of research papers funded by SERA has been significantly delayed, awaiting final review by ZEPARU management; and the volume of published work led by ZEPARU researchers has fallen markedly. This is partly because of the capacity constraints referred to above, but it also because the impending financial shortfall has incentivised ZEPARU to prioritise its work on fee-earning activities (which do cover overhead costs) relative to the SERA-funded work Program (which cannot cover overhead costs). Finally, there is little evidence of formal collaboration between ZEPARU and other research institutions within Zimbabwe or more widely. Whereas individual researchers from outside of ZEPARU have been involved in ZEPARU studies and ZEPARU staff have attended external events (all with SERA funding), ZEPARU seems relatively insular when compared to like￾minded think tanks elsewhere in the world. Conclusion and recommendations Based on interviews with respondents and a scan of the institutional landscape in Zimbabwe, ZEPARU does seem to be the most appropriate partner for an economic policy research program such as SERA. That said, the organization is confronted by serious financial and technical challenges; which have been temporarily aided but far from resolved with support from USAID. Unless the Government of Zimbabwe steps in, ZEPARU clearly needs to diversify its funding base in order to survive. And even if the Government is able to provide some short-term support, in the longer-term, it would be undesirable for ZEPARU to rely on Government as its sole benefactor. The report by Stephen Yeo, commissioned by SERA, suggests numerous avenues through which ZEPARU could seek or compete for alternative funds. But this report also highlights the needs for ZEPARU to improve its ‘operational performance’ if it is to take advantage of these opportunities. Likewise, ZEPARU is unlikely to generate the research outputs expected from SERA, unless there is a significant improvement in ZEPARU processes and their commitment to the program. Thus, for SERA to achieve its own research targets and to assist ZEPARU in becoming sustainable, operational improvements within ZEPARU are needed. Such improvements are unlikely to happen without some form of management change. Serious and urgent consideration should therefore be given to recruiting a senior (and respected) development practitioner, with prior experience in managing donor-funded research programs, to work with ZEPARU on a full-time basis over the final year of the Program. This ‘research manager’ could be tasked with assisting ZEPARU management to implement the recommendations of the Yeo report, to raise the organisation’s profile amongst other donors and outside of Zimbabwe, and to provide continuous advice and support to junior researchers. Movement on this recommendation would however require a corresponding commitment from the ZEPARU Board and Executive Director; including their formal response to the Yeo report. The most well-known and influential research produced by ZEPARU, with SERA support, was concluded in the first year of the project. The reasons for this are discussed in more detail in 19 the following section, but the High-Level Economics Forum of 2012 played an important part in making senior government officials aware of the work done by SERA-funded consultants. SERA has been encouraging ZEPARU to convene a similar event and it would be appropriate to do so in the final year of the Program. This forum should not only serve to disseminate work already completed by SERA, but should also serve as an opportunity to bring senior economists from outside of Zimbabwe to the country to comment on this research and to contribute to the domestic policy debate. Finally, in order to develop longer-term relations between ZEPARU and other economic think tanks in the region, and to increase interest and interactions between economists from within and outside of Zimbabwe, SERA could look to support collaborative activities between ZEPARU and other research organisations. The main purpose of such collaboration would be to link ZEPARU (and other Zimbabwean institutions) into regional networks and projects; but it would also serve to bring different economic experiences and perspectives to Zimbabwe. This could be achieved by encouraging or requiring collaboration through the proposed research grant mechanism; or by sponsoring regional organisations to participate in workshops or conferences in Zimbabwe, or to host regional events in Zimbabwe. For example, SERA could consider approaching Economic Research Southern Africa (ERSA), an organisation that specifically seeks to deepen economic research capacity and networks in Southern Africa, about expanding its existing workshop and capacity-building Program into Zimbabwe. Training Findings SERA supports a wide array of training and capacity building initiatives, all of which are facilitated by ZEPARU. This includes: • The provision of full bursary support for up to 20 government employees to pursue a Master’s degree in Economics at the University of Zimbabwe (UZ) and for up to 5 government employees to pursue PhDs at regional institutions outside of Zimbabwe. • A short term training Program that supported a large number of government workers to attend in-country customised courses as well as regional and international training courses. • The training of parliamentarians on economic literacy. Findings from each of these initiatives are discussed separately below. PhD Bursary Program SERA provides bursaries to 3 PhD candidates; all from the RBZ’s newly formed Policy Research and Modelling Unit. These students have all been placed at South African Universities, are progressing well, and have no plans to leave the Bank; though none of them have completed their studies. The RBZ management is strongly supportive of the program and in furthering the education and skills of its staff; and the bursary participants confirmed that they would not have applied to undertake PhDs in South Africa without the financial support provided through SERA. 20 It is important to note that the PhD bursaries were initially restricted to government employees – thereby excluding the RBZ – but that this criterion had to be relaxed due to the lack of applicants. Respondents from within Government indicated that line Ministries has encouraged officials to apply; but that the potential benefits of the program were not widely accepted across Government. For example a bursary applicant from the Ministry of Finance, who had been accepted into a South African PhD Program, was denied leave by the Ministry of Public Service. MSc Bursary Program. USAID SERA has provided bursary support to 22 students (5 female) pursuing a Master’s degree with the University of Zimbabwe through their part-time Program5 . Of these two (both male) were dropped from the program because they failed, and the status of a third female student was unclear. This bursary program was previously funded by the ACBF. Students on the part-time Program are generally expected to complete their studies within two to three years at a cost of approximately US$1400 per student per semester. SERA support covered tuition and fees; laptops and IT support for the duration of the studies, a transport allowance, and thesis support for final year students. According to bursary recipients, these costs are generally unaffordable for government employees. Moreover, given the current moratorium on new hires, government employees are reluctant to leave their jobs for full-time study. Due to the part-time nature of the program, beneficiaries indicated that they were able to apply their learnings in workplace; and that the knowledge gained from their studies gave them greater confidence in their interactions with international counterparts, particularly those from the World Bank, IMF or AfDB. The program is also of significant benefit to the University; in that without these bursary students, the Economic Department would not be able to sustain a part-time Program. All the MSc bursary recipients interviewed declared an intention to pursue doctoral studies. The only shortcoming of this program was that SERA was unable to attract sufficient applicants in general, and female applicants in particular. The resulting gender imbalance is largely a reflection of the overall profile of economists in the Government of Zimbabwe (most officials consulted by the evaluation team were male); but according to some respondents, it is often difficult for women (particularly married women) to be away from their families to attend part time studies for a prolonged period of time. Short-term Training In the first year of SERA, a dedicated meeting was conducted with senior officials from MOFED, ZEPARU, RBZ, MEFMI the University of Zimbabwe and some training providers to identify the priority training needs of the Government. As of the end of Year 3 SERA had 5 See - Appendix V: 21 funded 297 individual training opportunities (the number of individual beneficiaries was much less as many attended more than one course) across the economic ministries, ZIMSTAT and ZEPARU to attend various short term courses. Most of the training provided (79% of the beneficiaries, from 18 different entities) took place within Zimbabwe; though internal courses accounted for just 44% of the overall cost of the short-term training component. On average, the regional and international training has cost SERA US$3 700 per training opportunity over the first three years of the program; compared to US$830 per beneficiary for the in-country customised training. Only 6 entities participated in the regional or international training. With just one exception, all external training took place within the African region - the institutions used most often were the African Tax Institute, ESAMI, MEFMI and TIPS. ZEPARU was the single greatest beneficiary of the short-term training; followed by the Reserve Bank. Overall, just 34% of training beneficiaries were female. Table 9: Participation in short-term courses (end Year 3) Ministry/Institution % Female % Local Total Trainings ZEPARU 29% 73% 62 Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe 33% 80% 60 Min. of Finance 47% 76% 59 Min. of Finance & Economic Development 21% 65% 43 Min. of Economic Planning & Investment Promotion 39% 89% 36 Min. of Industry & Commerce 22% 100% 9 ZIMSTAT 0% 83% 6 Others 41% 100% 22 Grand Total 34% 79% 297 Source: DNA Economics Calculation Feedback from the on-line survey of beneficiaries of this training was very positive. See Figure 4 below. These findings were generally confirmed in the face-to-face interviews - respondents indicated that most short courses were in line with their respective work duties and allowed GoZ officials to update their knowledge and skills. For example, a respondent that attended a MEFMI balance of payments course reported how the beneficiaries were using this new knowledge to migrate the national BOP data from Version 4 to Version 6. Other MOFED officials reported how the training on trade negotiations had helped them prepare for a new round of regional discussions. Moreover, the inclusion of private sector representatives in this training helped to create dialogue between government and other interest groups on trade matters. Likewise, a number of respondents reported that the Microsoft Excel course had helped them in managing large data sets better, and exposing them to time saving functions such as pivots and macros. 22 Figure 4: Beneficiary perceptions of short term courses With reference to the external training, beneficiaries of the African Tax Institute Trainings at the University of Pretoria noted that it was particularly useful to interact with counterparts from other African countries, who are dealing with similar issues and socio-economic contexts. A beneficiary that had attended the course on Mining Taxation reported that this training had enabled the Ministry to make its input into the then proposed review of mining royalties and rates of taxation for minerals. The face-to-face consultations did also reveal some areas of concern; largely with regards to the delivery and content of the economic modelling courses. Four respondents on the Applied Econometrics Training Course held in Harare reported that the facilitator, who is an international authority on DSGE modelling, used software which is not consistent with that currently used by the Government of Zimbabwe. Moreover, the RBZ economist, who is currently in the process of developing a DSGE model, was not represented at this training. As such, the prospects of learners making use of the skills learned at this particular course are slim. Similar concerns were raised on the CGE training provided in South Africa – beneficiaries complained that the course was too short and theoretical. Parliamentary training SERA planned to train at least 100 Members of Parliament in economic concepts by the end of Year 2. Under advisement from the Clerk of Parliament, this intervention was delayed until after the 2013 elections. In the meantime SERA, in collaboration with ZEPARU, developed an economic “Tool Kit” to be used in the proposed training seminars. At the time of this evaluation, this training manual had been finalized and printed, but there is no indication as to whether or when the seminars will take place. One potential obstacle is USAID’s unwillingness to pay per diems to Parliamentarians attending such training. Despite these problems, the Clerk of Parliament reported that the manuals would be distributed to Parliamentarians during the month of November prior to the announcement of the National Budget in December. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Have the knowledge and skills you have learnt improved your ability to engage with external experts Have you received an increase in responsibilities as a result of the training? Do you think that the training will have a positive impact on your career path Has the knowledge or skill that you learnt led to a specific research output? Has the knowledge of skills that you learnt led to any specific policy recommendation Yes No Not sure 23 Challenges The main challenge in connection with the implementation of the long-term training was in finding sufficient qualified candidates, and in particular, women candidates. SERA responded by relaxing the qualifying criteria; but have still been unable to achieve the initial targets. This is disappointing given the overwhelmingly positive feedback received on this component of the program. SERA has been more successful in rolling out the short-term training; but there are concerns that the program may have been too liberal in doing so. Although the choice of training interventions was determined early in the program through consultations with Government, the selection of individuals to attend this training has been less rigorous. Most respondents indicated that they were accepted on the nomination of their supervisor, and not on the basis of a specific needs assessment; and in one case the reason given for this nomination was the need for someone to represent the department. Table 10: Summary of beneficiaries of short term course - International only Ministry/Institution % Females Total trainings funded Number of Individual beneficiaries ZEPARU 24% 17 9 Ministry of Finance & Economic Development 7% 15 14 Ministry of Finance 43% 14 13 Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe 42% 12 11 Ministry of Economic Planning & Investment Promotion 75% 4 4 ZIMSTAT 0% 1 1 Source: DNA Economics Calculation from SERA Participant Tracker Data Moreover, from the available data, it seems that certain entities and individuals have benefited disproportionately from this training. As shown in Figure 5 below, not only was ZEPARU the greatest single beneficiary of the training; but on average, each ZEPARU trainee attended 3 local training interventions. A quarter of all external training opportunities were allocated to ZEPARU staff. One ZEPARU respondent on the online survey reported having attended 10 courses. According to SERA there has been a tightening of the selection criteria over the last year and the number of participants in external training events has fallen from 31 in Year 2 to 21 in Year 3. 24 Figure 5: Short term training – average number of events per trainee (up to end-Year 3) Source: DNA Economics Calculation from SERA Participant Tracker Data Finally, as discussed above, respondents raised questions about the focus and appropriateness of some of the quantitative economic training. These courses accounted for 23% of the total spend on short-term training6 . Specifically, in the first two years of the Program, 37 beneficiaries attended courses in econometric modelling and Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) modelling. Despite this support, none of the ministries have a working macroeconometric model for Zimbabwe in place and none make use of CGE techniques. This is partly because the Government does not have access to the required software; partly because the required data for such models does not exist; and partly because the material covered in the modelling courses was largely theoretical. Whereas there are benefits to attending theoretical economic training, these benefits are quickly diminished if trainees are not able to apply such learnings in the workplace. 6 Appendix X: Cost of Quantitative Training 25 Conclusion and recommendations Based on SERA’s experience to date, and given the overall objective of USAID to strengthen economic capacity in Zimbabwe, future support to post-graduate training in economics should not be limited to Government employees. Rather, it would seem more appropriate for USAID to engage with universities in Zimbabwe (and potentially the region) in order develop a longer-term capacity building Program, which seeks to identify the most deserving economic students and enable them to continue into post-graduate study. USAID could also seek to enforce more stringent gender targets; and explore means to address the specific constraints experienced by female students. With regards to the short-term training, recent efforts by SERA to tighten selection criteria should be supported, especially for external training. Conversely, the evidence suggests that the customised training is not only more cost-effective, but in many instances, also more useful. Such training should therefore be continued. Finally, the extensive investment in training on economic modelling does not appear to be bearing fruit; and is probably not the most effective means to develop appropriate skills in this area. Consideration should instead be given to providing more targeted assistance, probably through a long-term mentorship arrangement, to those individuals who do have the mandate and competency to do such work. Specifically, given the support that has already been provided to the three PhD students at the RBZ, it may be opportune to develop a dedicated intervention which encourages them to work together, with an external advisor, on an appropriate economic model for Zimbabwe. The RBZ management is apparently developing an incentive structure to assist the institution in retaining employees that further their education and this support could potentially be linked into this structure. Zimbabwe National Statistics Agency (ZIMSTAT) Findings ZIMSTAT is generally well respected by its users and has continued to collect and disseminate national statistics despite the uncertain economic environment in which it operates. That said, the organisation has experienced a loss of experienced staff to regional counterparts7 , notably in South Africa, and has been unable to recruit new statisticians as a result of the current moratorium on new hires across the Government of Zimbabwe. Thus, whereas the organisation is currently sustained by a core team of skilled individuals, there is some risk that these skills will not be transferred to the next generation of statisticians. ZIMSTAT does however have an internship programme in place through which students from tertiary institutions are recruited on a temporary basis as part of their studies. 7 During the face-to-face interview with senior management at ZIMSTAT, it was stated that the institution had lost a number of skilled members of staff to South Africa’s official statistics agency StatsSA. 26 ZIMSTAT is assisted by multiple donors that focus on two different areas of support, economic statistics and social statistics. Funding for the economics group is coordinated by a committee, which includes the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), the World Bank, USAID and DFID. The SERA project team invested considerable effort in developing a technical relationship with ZIMSTAT – initially through the direct engagement of the COP – but also through the support provided by a senior international statistician, Dr Beverley Carlson. As such the project has not only been able to react to specific requests arising from ZIMSTAT’s existing work Program through the donor coordinating mechanism; but has also been proactive in identifying other areas of need for potential assistance. SERA’s support to the implementation of the PICES (Poverty, Income and Consumption Expenditure Survey) and the design of the Central Business Register (CBR) and Census of Services (COS) - now Survey of Services (SS) - is widely acknowledged by ZIMSTAT, other donors and the technical experts working with ZIMSTAT. Moreover, the level of experience and quality of advice brought to ZIMSTAT by SERA consultants was considered useful and of a high quality. Specifically, and according to multiple respondents, if SERA had not been willing and able to step-in to fund a critical funding gap during the fieldwork phase of the PICES project, which could not be covered by the other donors, this specific project would have been delayed considerably. This may have had serious ramifications for the completion of the survey. SERA also provided technical oversight to this survey and contracted additional personnel to accelerate the data processing exercise. Whereas ZIMSTAT downplays the value of the technical assistance received, they readily acknowledge that they did not have the staff and budget to complete this survey and that SERA was ready to “answer our needs at a very opportune time”. In doing so, the Program (together with other donors) has filled an important gap in Zimbabwe’s statistical resources. According to one respondent, ZIMSTAT has historically been strong in the production of demographic and social statistics, but economic statistics have been lacking. The previous income, consumption and expenditure survey was undertaken in 2001 (in South Africa, by contrast, such surveys are undertaken every five years), and there is no authoritative data available on the contribution of the services sector to the Zimbabwean economy. Without this information it is difficult to construct a reasonable estimate of the size and structure of the Zimbabwean economy, and to monitor how the people of Zimbabwe have adjusted to the dramatic economic shocks of recent years. The PICES is a five yearly survey that provides the statistical base for the regular re￾calculation of the consumer price index (inflation). An attempt to conduct the PICES in 2007/08 ran into budgetary problems, adding to the importance of the most recent survey. The PICES provides Government and researchers with a rich set of data on the level and changes in welfare and poverty across different demographic and socioeconomic groups. As such, this data is of critical importance in evaluating the impact of past policies and practices on different household groups over the last decade; but it should also assist the Government and donors to improve the targeting and monitoring of future interventions. This 27 information has also been used to derive the contribution of the informal sector to national income. ZIMSTAT is currently distributing the PICES summary tables online and hard copies funded by USAID SERA are also available. Challenges Despite the fact that much of ZIMSTAT’s recent work has been supported by donors and consultants, the organization is cautious about sharing the detailed data that it collects with external individuals and entities. Specifically, ZIMSTAT will not provide the microdata that it has collected through its surveys, often arguing that it is unable to anonymize the data. ZIMSTAT also argues that the provision of this information might harm participation in future surveys and would be in contravention of the Statistics Act. All of these assertions were challenged by multiple respondents. Box 1: International practice on access to statistical microdata It is generally accepted that the sharing microdata from surveys “fosters diversity of research, increases transparency and accountability, and can mitigate duplication of data collection work and increase the quality of data through feedback received from data users”8. The increased availability of statistical software that enables users to create customised statistical tables has fuelled the demand for microdata. Using the United Nations Fundamental Principles as a benchmark, international best practice requires that “Individual data collected by statistical agencies for statistical compilation, whether or not they refer to natural or legal persons are to be strictly confidential and used exclusively for statistical purposes”9 . In Europe the Guidelines and Core Principles of Confidentiality and Microdata Access state that “It is appropriate for microdata collected for official statistical purposes to be used for statistical analysis to support research as long as confidentiality is protected. (...) Making available microdata for research is not in contradiction with the sixth UN Fundamental Principle as long as it is not possible to identify data referring to an individual”10. Direct identifiers such as names, addresses, ID numbers, reference numbers, and telephone numbers are usually removed. Common methods for anonymising data include aggregation or “coarsening” (e.g. releasing ages in five year intervals or reporting only incomes above a certain threshold. In the US, the Census Bureau provides Census microdata files called Public Use Microdata Samples (PUMS) of 1% samples of the long-form questionnaire, stripped of any personal identifiers and grouped in special geographic units of at least 100,000 people to protect confidentiality11. The weaknesses of this approach are that geography is largely suppressed, information on data collection is seldom included, and the possibility of using overlapping external data means that some 8 (UNSTATS, 2014) 9 (UNSTATS, 2014) 10 ( United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) and Conference of European Statisticians, 2007) 11 (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2014) 28 components of the data may be suppressed12. In South Africa, the Statistics Act, Act 6 of 1999 obliges the official statistical agency, Stats SA, to ensure that statistics produced are also used. This means providing statistics to users in formats that are readily usable by them. The Act also protects the confidentiality of information provided by respondents. However, research shows that many South Africans are concerned that information they provide to Stats SA in the course of a census or survey may be disclosed to third parties. Gavin, et al (2007) noted that these concerns could potentially affect the accuracy of data provided by respondents during surveys. Thus, although StatsSA did release complete Enumeration Area (EA) level data from the 1996 census; in the 2001 census all EAs with a population of less than 500 were combined with adjacent EAs13 . The above largely applies to data on individuals and households. Business or firm level data comes with its own risks. This is because many large businesses are easily recognisable from certain variables in the data e.g. the largest coal producer in Zimbabwe. The anonymization of business microdata is therefore more complex and in most countries very little business micro-data is publically available. The data that is publically available from ZIMSTAT is generally provided in either hardcopy form or can be downloaded in pdf format from the website14. This makes it difficult to use for analytical purposes and respondents report having to input data from ZIMSTAT publications in order to create simple charts and tables. Other users report that in order to access data from ZIMSTAT, a researcher must first apply to ZIMSTAT for authorization. Once this has been granted, the individual is then able to send an email request to the relevant ZIMSTAT official. Despite these hurdles, the users interviewed as part of this evaluation were satisfied with the quality, accessibility and timeliness of the data provided by ZIMSTAT. (See Figure 6 below). That said, there were some specific reports of missing and inconsistent data, particularly in the national income accounts and data on resource outputs. Moreover, except for price indices and some of the trade data, most of the data are only available at an annual interval. 12 ( United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) and Conference of European Statisticians, 2007) 13 (Gavin, E. Naidoo, N. Christians, E. , 2007) 14 See Appendix VI for a detailed description of the data that is currently available on the ZIMSTAT website 29 Figure 6: Perceptions of ZIMSTAT Data ZIMSTAT generally does not provide supporting documentation on the method used to collect and analyse public data, response rates or any adjustments made to this data. This despite the fact that SERA specifically targeted the release of such information as an output of the program. It is therefore difficult to independently assess the quality of much of the data produced by ZIMSTAT. According to the SERA team, the project has tried to encourage a more outward and open approach by ZIMSTAT. This has been pursued through study tours and international reviews, such as the benchmarking assessment of the ZIMSTAT website. One of the beneficiaries of a study tour to the US reported that he was inspired by how quickly the authorities were able to collect and disseminate information, and the immediate impact that this had on markets. But despite these individual learnings, it would seem that SERA’s wider efforts to improve data transparency across ZIMSTAT have yet to bear fruit. According to one consultant, “these elements of the Program have not been of much interest to ZIMSTAT”. Likewise, outside of the support to the major surveys, technical advice provided by SERA has not always been fully used or appreciated. According to one respondent, ZIMSTAT does not make good use of consultants, and some of the short-term international experts were frustrated by how ZIMSTAT officials were not ready to work with them. This is partly because of the general lack of capacity at ZIMSTAT; but it also seems to reflect the “bureaucratic” nature of the institution. Another consultant suggested that SERA could have done more to keep its own consultants informed on progress and problems relating to the ZIMSTAT workplan; but acknowledged that communication has improved recently. Finally, ZIMSTAT clearly lacks modern equipment, technology and facilities; and donors are reluctant to support the purchase of such items. Whereas this does not appear to have constrained current activities, the organisation will at some stage need to invest in its staff and systems in order to retain good people and enhance its operations. Conclusion and recommendations SERA plans to continue its support to the finalisation of the Central Business Register and the implementation of the Survey of Services over the final year of the Program. Given the apparent success of the PICES and the impressive progress made in greatly expanding the existing business register (by ten-fold, according to ZIMSTAT), further investment in these 1 3 5 7 Quality Availability Timeliness Rate 1-10, where 10 is excellent and 1 is very poor, (N=34) 30 areas would be useful and appropriate. In doing so, SERA should also continue in its efforts to enhance the transparency of ZIMSTAT methods and the dissemination of ZIMSTAT data. The support provided to the development of the website is an important part of this process, but unless there is a parallel commitment from ZIMSTAT to use this website to make more information available and in a more appropriate form, the website itself will not resolve this concern. Whereas SERA cannot require ZIMSTAT to make its data more readily available, it could encourage the organisation to do so; and this might involve additional study tours to other statistical agencies or the ‘peer review’ of ZIMSTAT services by independent experts. Moreover, where SERA is providing direct support to specific surveys, such support could be made conditional upon regular reporting by ZIMSTAT to SERA on progress made against specific technical or quality measures, and the actions or systems that are being put in place to address any data problems. This would not only serve to improve the recording of ZIMSTAT methods and procedures; but would also enable SERA to respond to challenges, on an informed basis, as they arise. A standardised mutually agreed (between ZIMSTAT and potential donor/development partner) reporting template could be developed to aid this process. Likewise, to support the ongoing development of capacity within ZIMSTAT, and in a more sustainable manner, consideration should be given to working more closely with well￾capacitated statistical agencies within the region. This could include support for secondments or technical advice from neighbouring agencies, such as Statistics South Africa, specifically in the area of data analysis and dissemination. SERA funding could potentially be used to kick-start a longer-term and deeper technical relationship between these agencies. There would also be strong technical and financial advantages to strengthening cooperation between ZIMSTAT and the Zimbabwe Revenue Authority, though this might be beyond the reach of this particular Program. To address longer term questions around ZIMSTAT’s current capacity and future needs, and specifically, claims made by ZIMSTAT that they do not have the necessary equipment and facilities; it would be useful to conduct an independent assessment of the organisation’s current operational, human and technical capacity. This could be conducted by an external consultant or by using some form of self-assessment tool, if available. The results would provide all donors with an objective reference point in discussions on the future needs of the organisation, and would also provide ZIMSTAT with the information that it requires to engage with Government and other potential funders on its future budget and plans. Finally, there do not appear to be strong linkages between the support provided by SERA to ZIMSTAT, and the analytical work undertaken through ZEPARU. As the Program enters its final year consideration should be given to conducting joint research or workshops; to specifically encourage the use of new ZIMSTAT data for economic policy analysis and to demonstrate to ZIMSTAT the importance of making this data available to external users. 31 Policy Studies Findings One of the primary objectives of SERA has been to increase the amount and quality of policy-relevant economic research and to ensure that this work is disseminated effectively in Zimbabwe. Given the divisive political climate in Zimbabwe, ZEPARU was identified by USAID as the most appropriate channel for commissioning such research and making this work accessible to Government. As per the logical framework described above, the success of this component of the Program therefore depends heavily on the ability of ZEPARU to manage an effective research Program; and the willingness of Government to accept and act on the evidence presented to it. Here, SERA has pursued three different approaches: • SERA funded external experts (or organisations) to prepare research outputs, working with ZEPARU researchers as co-authors. • SERA funded a ‘mentor’ to assist ZEPARU staff to develop and write their own research. • SERA made funding available for ZEPARU to ‘outsource’ work entirely to external experts (or organisations). All of the resulting research, regardless of authorship, was then to be published as ZEPARU Research Papers. In order to further enhance the dissemination of this research and the profile of ZEPARU, the SERA Program provided support (financial and logistical) for research seminars, the production of policy briefs, and the enhancement of the ZEPARU website. SERA also funded three interns with Master’s degrees in economics on one year contracts to assist ZEPARU’s research and analysis activities. At the time of the evaluation, the following reports had been completed and published online or in hard copy: 32 Table 11: Summary of SERA-ZEPARU policy studies Titles SERA Funding Research model 2014 Research Papers Enhancing Zimbabwe's Regime for Resolving Corporate Financial Distress  STTA led Agro-Industries/Foods and Beverages Value Chain Diagnostic Study  Outsourced Financial Inclusion Strategies for Making Financial Markets work for the poor  STTA led Engineering and Metals Industries Value Chain Study  Outsourced Zimbabwe Cotton to Clothing Value Chain Study  Outsourced Zimbabwe Chemical Industries Value Chain Study  Outsourced Financial inclusion strategies for making financial markets work for the poor in Zimbabwe  STTA led Financial Liberalisation Crisis: Experiences and Lessons for Zimbabwe  ZEPARU led 2013 Research Papers Positioning the Zimbabwe Tourism Sector for Growth: Issues and Challenges.  STTA led A Review of Zimbabwe's Optimum Future Currency Regime  STTA led The Nexus Between Growth, Employment and Poverty in Zimbabwe: The Economics of Employment Creation  Outsourced Capital Account Restrictions in Zimbabwe in the Multi-currency period..  ZEPARU led Access to Bank Credit As a Strategy for Re-industrialisation. - ZEPARU led Financial Regulation and Supervision in Zimbabwe - An Evaluation of Adequacy Options  STTA led Contributions and Challenges facing the Financial Sector in Zimbabwe  ZEPARU led 2012 Research Papers Mining Sector Policy Study  STTA led Financial Sector Development and Resource Mobilisation: Situation analysis and Policy Option for Zimbabwe  STTA led Building Agricultural Competitiveness in Zimbabwe: Lessons from the International Perspective.  STTA led Strengthening Policy Making Process in Zimbabwe - ZEPARU led An Assessment of the Performance and Competitiveness of Zimbabwean Exports: 2000 – 2010 ZEPARU led ZEPARU led Public Enterprises Restructuring in Support of Sustainable Economic Growth in Zimbabwe - ZEPARU led 2011 Research Papers ZEPARU led ZEPARU led Does the Zimbabwe Stock Exchange (ZSE) have Potential to Support Economic Growth During the Multicurrency system - ZEPARU led A Conducive Investment Climate Vital for Sustained Economic Growth in Zimbabwe: Options and Strategies - ZEPARU led Exploring the Role of Small and Medium Enterprises in Economic Development - ZEPARU led ZEPARU led Pursuing Inclusive Financial Development for Economic Growth in Zimbabwe: Options and Strategies. - ZEPARU led Linking Electricity Supply to Economic Growth in Zimbabwe - ZEPARU led Digital Opportunities for Economic Growth and Development for Zimbabwe - ZEPARU led ZEPARU led Positioning Zimbabwe Manufacturing Sector as a Growth Driver: Lessons from Singapore and Taiwan - ZEPARU led 2010 Research Papers The Scope for the Private Partnerships for Infrastructure Development in Zimbabwe ZEPARU led Sustainable Financing Options for Agriculture in Zimbabwe - ZEPARU led ZEPARU led Preconditions for Adopting Single Currencies in Southern African Development Community (SADC) and COMESA ZEPARU led Feasibility and Rationale for Establishing a Debt Management Office (DMO) in Zimbabwe ZEPARU led The Growing Sino-Indo-Africa Trade: Prospects, Challenges for Zimbabwe ZEPARU led ZEPARU led Measures to Enhance Zimbabwe’s Fiscal Space ZEPARU led 2006-2009 Research Papers Currency Reform in Zimbabwe: An Analysis of Possible Options ZEPARU led 33 Inflation Dynamics in Zimbabwe ZEPARU led ZEPARU led Zimbabwe’s Cotton Sector: Growth and Prospects under a Changing Trade Environment. ZEPARU led The Impact of HIV and AIDS on the Zimbabwean Economy ZEPARU led ZEPARU led Source: Compiled by DNA Economics from USAID SERA monitoring reports For the purposes of this evaluation, the specific policy papers reviewed were selected by USAID. The statement of work requires that these policy papers should be reviewed to assess the process that was followed in writing and disseminating this research, the quality of the final product, and the impact that the selected work has had on policy discussions in Zimbabwe. Complete descriptions and assessments are provided in Appendix VIII. The main findings are summarized below. Mining Sector Policy Study This study was led by Dr. Paul Jourdan, a South African mining sector expert, and included researchers from ZEPARU and the Chief Economist of the Zimbabwe Chamber of Mines. The preliminary findings from the report were first presented at the High Level Economics Forum jointed coordinated by ZEPARU and the Ministry of Finance in August 2012, and were subsequently discussed at the Mining Indaba15 and the 2013 Chamber of Mines Annual General Meeting. The study received wide attention in the media and within Government and some of its recommendations (such as the proposed provisions on transparency and accountability) have been incorporated into the new Draft Minerals Policy. Changes to the taxes levied on minerals as per the 2014 National Budget appear to also be based on the findings from the policy study. The paper’s primary author has now been directly engaged by the Ministry of Mines to assist Government to develop the new minerals policy and Minerals Act. The report (as uploaded in April 2013) had been accessed 931 times in 547 days at the time of this evaluation. This was 333 more views than the next most popular paper. These statistics do not account for the hard copies that were printed and distributed. Positioning the Zimbabwe Tourism Sector for Growth: Issues and Challenges. (i.e. The Tourism Policy Study) The tourism study was led by ZEPARU staff under the mentorship of a lecturer from the University of Zimbabwe’s Tourism Studies Department. The findings of the study highlighted the need to improve the passage of tourists through the country. The report also recommended that exit surveys should be conducted16 in order to monitor the sector’s performance against the expectations of visitors. The 2014 National Budget included an allocation for this research but the actual funding has not yet been received. In terms of online statistics, this is the second most popular ZEPARU study, with 598 views in 464 days. 15 An annual conference for all stakeholders 16 In the face-to-face interview, the authors suggested that the capacity building mandate of the SERA Program could be magnified if tourism students were used to conduct the exit survey 34 The Nexus between Growth, Employment and Poverty in Zimbabwe: The Economics of Employment Creation (i.e. the Employment Policy Study) This study was outsourced to the Labour and Economic Development Research Institute of Zimbabwe (LEDRIZ) – a think tank associated with the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU). It was the first outsourced study commissioned through ZEPARU. The first draft of the LEDRIZ report required substantial edits to meet the minimum quality requirements of SERA and the final report was substantially delayed. Moreover, our own review of this paper reveals significant similarities between sections of the LEDRIZ report and the 2009 Zimbabwe National Employment Policy Framework. Despite these concerns, the report appears to have been well received by Government and the Zimbabwe Agenda for Sustainable Socio￾Economic Transformation (ZIMASSET) incorporates a number of explicit targets relating to the findings of this study. Media coverage has been good but has focussed mainly on the historical analysis (rather than the policy recommendations). A Review of Zimbabwe's Optimum Future Currency Regime (Optimum Currency Regime Policy Study) This research was led by Dr. Keith Jefferies with research support provided by ZEPARU. The study was largely a repeat of research that Dr. Jefferies had already done for MEFMI; though the presentation of this work at the High Level Economics Forum ensured that it was heard by senior policy makers (we were informed that a senior Central Bank official specifically requested a copy of the report). Importantly, the findings from this report ran in stark contrast to ZANU and Central Bank pronouncements at the time, but subsequent to the release of this research, there has been a significant policy shift. Both the 2014 National Budget and ZIMASSET (the medium term economic plan) state that there are no plans to end the multi-currency regime. The extent to which this study contributed to this policy shift is unknown, as it was one of a number of similar reports, but it certainly contributed to the public debate on this issue. Financial Sector Studies Following on from the initial financial sector study conducted by Dr. Makina on financial sector reform and resource mobilisation in Year 1, there were five additional financial sector studies produced by USAID SERA. These were primarily authored by ZEPARU staff under the mentorship of Dr. Makina. The evaluation team assessed the following reports: (i) Financial Regulation & Supervision in Zimbabwe Evaluation of adequacy & options (ii) Financial inclusion strategies for making financial markets work for the poor in Zimbabwe Findings from the first report were presented at a dissemination workshop in July 2013, however the finalised report was only uploaded onto the ZEPARU website a year later in June 2014. The financial inclusion paper was not finalised in time for the dissemination workshop. Delays in the finalisation of the drafts meant that there has been limited dissemination (and therefore impact) of these reports to date. 35 Table 12: Summary of SERA-ZEPARU policy studies Title Main Findings & Recommendations Main Authors Local sector expert Research approach Dissemination method Assessed weaknesses structure, content* Evidence of: External (non￾ZEPARU) Regional Sector Expert ZEPARU Staff Awareness Policy discussion Impact on Policy Mining Policy Study • Mining to underpin development • Improved transparency provisions • Local beneficiation • Greater transparency and accountability • Collection of rent/tax    STTA led (Dr. Paul Jourdan) • MOF High level Economics Forum • Chamber of Mines AGM 2013 • Mining Indaba 2013 • 931 website hits     Tourism Policy Study • Improve the passage of tourists • Conduct further research   ZEPARU led (STTA mentor) • Dissemination workshop • Reference Group Meeting • 598 website hits    Employment Policy Study • Include employment targets in all policies • Move labour to productive sectors • Encourage growth and formalisation of SMMEs • Develop linkages   Outsourced (Dr. Godfrey Kanyenze & LEDRIZ) • Dissemination workshop • 320 website hits     Optimum Currency Regime Policy Study Cannot reintroduce local currency due to: • Central Bank’s loss of credibility • Lack of reserves • SADC objectives towards a CMA   STTA led (Dr. Keith Jefferies) • MOF High level Economics Forum • 339website hits     Financial Regulation & Supervision in Zimbabwe Evaluation of adequacy & options • Adoption of twin peaks model • Greater independence of RBZ • Establishment of Committee of Financial Regulators • Adoption of Basel I, II, & III • Improve bank supervision   ZEPARU led (STTA mentor) • Validation workshop • 134 website hits   Financial inclusion strategies for making financial markets work for the poor in Zimbabwe • Developing a national financial inclusion strategy with set objectives and targets • Transforming the People’s Own Savings Bank & promoting Microfinance Banks; • Promoting infrastructure development, technological innovation and cooperation amongst banks • Reviewing banking laws and regulations • Promote the expansion of product portfolios   ZEPARU led (STTA mentor) • Validation workshop • 162 website hits   Key:  Significant;  Limited * DNA Assessment against baseline study. See Appendix VII 36 Based on the case studies it is possible to draw a number of observations about the relative successes and shortcomings of the different studies. However, in doing so, it is important to note that these observations are based on an early review of just 6 of the completed studies. Approach The feedback from all ZEPARU staff interviewed was that the mentorship approach allowed them to develop their own research skills and to claim greater ownership of the final product. Conversely, they report that their involvement in the expert-led studies was largely reduced to data collection and the formatting and editing of the final report. The research interns, on the other hand, reported that even under the mentorship approach, they were given limited opportunities to improve their research skills. Composition of the research team The make-up of the research team in general, and the choice of lead author in particular, does seem to have had an influence on the relative outcome of the research. The involvement of well-respected regional experts (such as Paul Jourdaan and Keith Jefferis) or well-known Zimbabwean sector experts (such as Dr. Kanyenze of LEDRIZ and Shepherd Nyaruwata from the UZ Tourism Department) serves to attract the attention of senior policy makers and senior industry officials. Both the Mining Sector Policy Study and the Tourism report included local private sector experts whilst the Tourism report even included a ministry official amongst its authors. Although the Financial Regulation and Supervision study included a banker amongst its authors, the report was the least popular of the studies reviewed. The report had the least number of hits and no evidence of its impact on policy could be established. Table 13: The 5 most popular online ZEPARU research papers Year Titles Uploaded Hits per day Total Hits 2012 Research Paper Mining Sector Policy Study 19/09/2014 1,70 931 2013 Research Paper Positioning the Zimbabwe Tourism Sector for Growth: Issues and Challenges. 10/07/2013 1,29 598 2011 Research Papers Does the Zimbabwe Stock Exchange (ZSE) have Potential to Support Economic Growth During the Multicurrency system 22/04/2012 0,66 591 2012 Research Paper Financial Sector Development and Resource Mobilisation: Situation analysis and Policy Option for Zimbabwe 22/04/2013 1,00 542 2013 Research Paper A Review of Zimbabwe's Optimum Future Currency Regime 19/11/2013 1,01 339 Source: ZEPARU website Dissemination All of the reports reviewed have been presented at a workshop; and are available for download from the ZEPARU website. Moreover, with reference to Figure 3, there does seem to be good awareness of ZEPARU’s research output. It is however notable that some of the research presented at the High level Economics Forum in 2012 has had the greatest policy impact; largely due to the attendance of senior Ministers and officials at this forum. Output There have been significant delays in the publication of research that has been completed. This is a recurring theme in all monitoring reports and face-to-face interviews. One specific example was the Mining Policy Study - which was presented at the High Level Economics 37 Forum in August 2012 - but was only submitted to USAID six months later in March 2013. More recently, the 7 “in-house” studies on small to medium enterprises and women in business that were due to commence in Quarter 10 have been stalled because ZEPARU staff had not completed other outstanding studies. No further mention of these reports is made in the Quarter 12 report. Quality of the research In July 2012 SERA commissioned a review of past research output by ZEPARU. This review highlighted a number of critical shortcomings in the quality of this work. Specifically, ZEPARU papers generally avoided discussing controversial issues, contributed little to the existing literature, findings were not based on evidence provided, and the report template was used inconsistently. The six reports reviewed have been assessed against this baseline report. The results indicate that there has been an improvement in terms of the quality of the work disseminated through ZEPARU; although one of the ZEPARU-led research papers (on the financial sector) did not meet all of the minimum quality requirements identified in the baseline report. It is also of concern that the paper by LEDRIZ on employment included numerous direct and unreferenced excerpts from the Zimbabwe National Employment Policy Framework. Focus of the research Undoubtedly and unsurprisingly, the work that has been done on priority and in cases contentious policy issues, such as mining, the currency regime and tourism, have attracted wider attention than research on financial regulation. Most of the ZEPARU-led work has been on financial sector matters and is therefore targeted at a narrower audience. The Central Bank officials interviewed during this evaluation reported that they do read the ZEPARU reports, but do not always use them for policy guidance. This is largely because the Central Bank conducts a significant amount of its own policy research internally. It is worth noting that the Ministry of Finance, which was a key partner in the design of the SERA program, has requested very little in the way of policy research from ZEPARU. Conclusion and recommendations The case studies and consultations reveal that research involving senior and known experts has more impact; especially when these experts are given direct exposure to Government at high level policy events. On the other hand, this type of research is of much lesser value to junior researchers at ZEPARU, most of who require significant supervision and support. This suggests that a two-pronged approach is needed. Specifically: • SERA should continue to provide mentorship to young researchers in Zimbabwe, as they have done on financial sector issues with ZEPARU. This support should be targeted at a wider range of priority economic policy matters in order to broaden the scope of knowledge and skills at ZEPARU. Specific attention might need to be given to supporting the development of the interns funded by SERA at ZEPARU. It is unlikely that ZEPARU senior management or the external experts contracted on individual research projects will be able to provide the level of support that is required, and it is partly for this reason that SERA should consider appointing a full￾time research manager to assist ZEPARU over the final year of the program. 38 • SERA should continue to bring respected regional and where appropriate international experts to Zimbabwe in order to encourage debate and provide different perspectives on current economic policy matters. Whenever possible, these experts should be expected to work with appropriate Zimbabwean researchers. This form of professional collaboration should be distinguished from the mentorship role proposed above, and should not be limited to ZEPARU. In both cases, the research agenda needs to be well-targeted at priority policy concerns; and the resulting recommendations need to be of interest (or concern) to Government. This is important for the Program to have an impact, as described in the logical framework presented earlier. Currently, the ZEPARU research agenda is determined by the ZEPARUA Board, sometimes in response to specific requests from specific Ministries, and then SERA and USAID determines which particular studies to support. Because this approach is demand driven, it does lend itself to the development of a pro-active research Program. Looking forward, consideration should be given to establishing a non-partisan steering group that is able to guide and take ownership of the research generated by SERA. 39 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (BY EVALUATION QUESTIONS) This report reviews the performance of the USAID Zimbabwe’s Strategic Economic Research and Analysis (SERA) Program. In doing so, it identifies numerous administrative and technical issues and proposes multiple recommendations for the consideration of SERA and USAID. In the table below, the main issues and recommendations emerging from this review are presented against the specific evaluation questions posed by USAID. Evaluation questions Findings Recommendations What is ZEPARU’s capacity in key areas that SERA has supported? • Compared to other regional think tanks, the ZEPARU team is relatively young and inexperienced and this is reflected in their research output. • Research commissioned by SERA, though ZEPARU, has raised the profile of the institution and has impacted on the policy discourse in Zimbabwe. But the involvement of ZEPARU researchers in this research has declined over time. • ZEPARU researchers have benefited extensively from the training and mentorship provided through SERA; but there is little evidence to show that this has been translated into improved outputs. • To provide ZEPARU with the required level of capacity support and enable SERA to achieve its own research targets, serious and urgent consideration should be given to recruiting a senior (and respected) economist, with prior experience in managing donor-funded research programs, to work with ZEPARU on a full-time basis over the final year of the program. • This ‘research manager’ could be tasked with assisting ZEPARU management to implement the recommendations of the Yeo report, to raise the organisation’s profile amongst other donors and outside of Zimbabwe, and to provide continuous advice and support to junior researchers. Is ZEPARU capable of and known amongst the economic ministries, Parliament, the RBZ, and other key economic policy stakeholders for developing quality economic policy research? • ZEPARU is regarded as the pre-eminent economic think tank in Zimbabwe and is widely known across all of Government. • Most of the recent policy research published by ZEPARU has been led by external researchers. Whereas this work is of high quality, it is not an accurate reflection of the capacity of the organization. To what extent is ZEPARU moving towards financial and institutional sustainability? • ZEPARU is confronted by a possible funding crisis. The fiscal shortfall in Zimbabwe has resulted in significant reduction in funding from the government over the last two years. This has been compounded by the fact that financial support from the ACBF is also due to end soon. • ZEPARU is looking to close this funding gap through increased consulting or fee￾based work; but the organisation is not well equipped for this change in approach. How effective is ZEPARU’s strategy for and practice of policy research dissemination? • There is a high level of awareness of ZEPARU’s research output; though the most well-known and influential research produced by ZEPARU, with SERA support, was concluded in the first year of the project • The number of website hits has increased dramatically from a baseline of 568 hits and 353 downloads at the start of SERA; to 7 585 hits with 2 750 downloads in year 2 and 20 168 hits with 9 459 downloads in year 3 of the SERA Program. • ZEPARU should be encouraged to convene a second High Level Conference and it would be appropriate to do so in the final year of the Program. This forum should not only serve to disseminate work already completed by SERA, but should also serve as an opportunity to bring senior economists from outside of 40 Zimbabwe to the country to comment on this research and to contribute to the domestic policy debate. Are there other economic research organisations that would be suitable beneficiaries of future USAID support to strengthen local capacity for evidence based policy analysis? • Interviewees in Zimbabwe were unable to name any other influential, domestic economic research institutions, with the possible exception of LEDRIZ and the University of Zimbabwe. • There is little evidence of formal collaboration between ZEPARU and other research institutions within Zimbabwe or more widely. • ZEPARU remains the most appropriate vehicle for economic policy research in Zimbabwe; though this should not prevent USAID from supporting and encouraging collaboration with other institutions. • USAID should seek to strengthen relations between economic researchers and institutions in Zimbabwe and other regional economic think tanks. To what extent is the project building human capacity within the GoZ? • Through ZEPARU, SERA has provided bursaries to 3 PhD students and 15 Masters students; and has provided 297 short-term training opportunities. Given the current fiscal shortfall in Zimbabwe and the ending of ACBF support to ZEPARU, it is unlikely that this training would have taken place without direct support from SERA. • From the available data, it seems that certain entities and individuals have benefited disproportionately from this training. ZEPARU (a non-government organization) was the greatest single beneficiary of the training; on average, each ZEPARU trainee attended 3 local training interventions. A quarter of all external training opportunities were allocated to ZEPARU staff. • The customized, local training is not only more cost-effective, but in many instances, more useful. Such training should therefore be continued E • Efforts by SERA to tighten selection criteria should be supported, especially for external training. • Training courses on economic modelling should be reconsidered; and possibly replaced with more targeted assistance, in the form of a long-term mentorship arrangement, for those individuals who do have the mandate and competency to do such work (such as the modelling unit in the RBZ). Which Ministries benefited and to what extent, from SERA funded training opportunities? • All 3 PhD bursary beneficiaries are from the RBZ’s Policy Research and Modelling Unit. • MSc bursary beneficiaries were from MOFED, MIC, Zimbabwe Revenue Authority, Ministry of Youth Development, Indigenization and Empowerment, and Ministry of Transport, Communication and Infrastructural Development. • Beneficiaries for short term training were mainly from ZEPARU, the RBZ, MOFED, and the Ministry of Economic Planning and Investment Promotion. What were bursary and short term recipients’ perceptions of the usefulness of the training provided? • More than 80% of respondents to the on-line survey indicated that the training enabled them to produce a specific research or policy output; and more than 95% indicated that it assisted them in their engagements with external experts. • The usefulness of quantitative training courses was hindered by lack of access to the relevant software as well as the absence of a social accounting matrix for CGE modelling. • Some regional courses were especially useful in that they enabled participants to interact with counterparts from other African countries, who are dealing with 41 similar issues and socio-economic contexts. What were some examples of how beneficiaries used/applied new knowledge on the job? • Officials from MIC reported that that the training helped them to refine their strategy for upcoming trade negotiations. • Microsoft Excel training assisted officials in managing large data sets better, and exposing them to time saving functions such as pivots and macros. Assisted the RBZ to migrate national BOP data from Version 4 to Version 6. • MOFED officials were better able to address new taxes on mining as well as to provide advice on the draft mining policy. Assuming all recipients remained in their GoZ positions, as required in the bursary Program, what were their professional plans and objectives post￾graduation? • The beneficiaries interviewed indicated a willingness to stay within the public service even beyond their contract with SERA, provided that their financial needs were adequately met. • All of the MSc bursary recipients interviewed declared their intention to pursue doctoral studies. What was the perception within MOFED and other key economic ministries of SERA supported trainings and trained individuals? • MOFED and the RBZ management were strongly supportive of SERA training, including for PhDs. • One bursary applicant from the Ministry of Finance, who had been accepted into a South African PhD Program, was denied leave by the Ministry of Public Service. • More than 60% of respondents to the on-line questionnaire reported that they had been given increased responsibilities as a result of the training; and more than 95% believed it would have a positive impact on their careers. Why were female economists within GoZ underrepresented in the long term training Program? • The design of the SERA program incorrectly assumed equal representation of females amongst government economists • Respondents indicated that in Zimbabwe, it is difficult for women to participate in a part-time Master’s program which is offered after working hours, because it conflicts with their ‘family responsibilities’. • Similarly, it is difficult for women to pursue a PhD if this requires that they are away from their families for a prolonged period of time. • Future support to post-graduate training in economics should not be limited to Government employees. • USAID should engage with Universities in Zimbabwe (and potentially the region) in order develop a longer-term capacity building Program, which seeks to identify the most deserving economic students and enables them to continue into post-graduate study. • In doing so, USAID should also seek to enforce more stringent gender targets; and explore means to address the specific constraints experienced by female students in Zimbabwe. To what extent are SERA activities with ZIMSTAT supporting, timeliness and • SERA’s ability to step-in to fund a critical funding gap during the fieldwork phase of the PICES project, which could not be covered by other donors, prevented • Ongoing support to the Central Business Register and the implementation of the Survey 42 reliability of economic statistics? significant delays in this survey. • ZIMSTAT continues to draw on technical support from SERA-funded statisticians and financial assistance at key stages in the design and implementation of their current survey work. of Services is appropriate. • Consideration should be given to facilitating closer linkages between ZIMSTAT and other, well-capacitated statistical agencies within the region. This could include support for secondments or technical advice from neighbouring agencies, such as Statistics South Africa, specifically in the area of data analysis and dissemination. • It would be useful to conduct an independent needs assessment of ZIMSTAT’s current operational, human and technical capacity. What were SERA’s key contributions in the improvement of economic statistics? Which interventions were central to these improvements? • As part of a multi-donor team, SERA played an important part in the completion and dissemination of the PICES. This data provides the statistical base for the re￾calculation of the consumer price index (inflation); and provides Government and researchers with important insights into the level and changes in welfare and poverty across different demographic and socioeconomic groups • Technical, training and financial assistance provided by SERA to the development of the Central Business Register and Survey of Services has contributed to the development of a greatly improved sampling framework for future business surveys. How effective were SERA supported activities in building capacity at ZIMSTAT? • SERA has provided extensive funding for the training of enumerators, but just 6 ZIMSTAT officials have taken advantage of the short-course Program. • The distance learning program was delayed, and has not been implemented, as the completion of the surveys was prioritised. • SERA has invested in the design of a new website for the dissemination of ZIMSTAT data and are currently supporting the implementation of this important upgrade. What are users of economic statistics perceptions of reliability of ZIMSTAT economic data? How could these perceptions be improved? • The users interviewed as part of this evaluation were satisfied with the quality, accessibility and timeliness of the data provided by ZIMSTAT • ZIMSTAT generally does not provide supporting documentation on the method used to collect and analyse public data, response rates or any adjustments made to this data. It is therefore difficult to independently assess the quality of much of the data produced by ZIMSTAT. • SERA should encourage ZIMSTAT to make its data more readily available; and this might involve additional study tours to other statistical agencies or the ‘peer review’ of ZIMSTAT services by independent experts. • Where SERA is providing direct support to specific surveys, such support could be made conditional upon regular reporting by ZIMSTAT to SERA on progress made against specific technical or quality measures, and the actions or systems that are being put in place to address any data problems. • Consideration should be given to conducting joint research or workshops; to specifically encourage the use of new ZIMSTAT data for economic policy analysis and to demonstrate to ZIMSTAT the importance of making this To what extent are economic statistics reported publicly in a timely fashion? • ZIMSTAT is cautious about sharing the detailed data that it collects with external individuals and entities. Specifically, ZIMSTAT will not provide the microdata that it has collected through its surveys • The data that is publically available from ZIMSTAT is generally provided in either hardcopy form or can be downloaded in pdf format from the website . This makes it difficult to use for analytical purposes. • In order to access electronic data from ZIMSTAT, a researcher must first apply to ZIMSTAT for authorization. 43 data available to external users. Case studies: What were the key factors of the more influential studies? • The make-up of the research team in general, and the choice of lead author in particular, does seem to have had an influence on the relative outcome of the research. The involvement of well-respected regional experts or well-known Zimbabwean sector experts serves to attract the attention of senior policy makers and senior industry officials. • Research presented at the High level Economics Forum in 2012 has had the greatest policy impact; partly due to the attendance of senior Ministers and officials at this forum. • The work that has been done on priority and in cases contentious policy issues, such as mining, the currency regime and tourism, have attracted wider attention than research on financial regulation. • SERA should continue to provide mentorship to young researchers in Zimbabwe. But this support should be targeted at a wider range of priority economic policy matters in order to broaden the scope of knowledge and skills at ZEPARU. • SERA should continue to bring respected regional and where appropriate international experts to Zimbabwe in order to encourage debate and provide different perspectives on current economic policy matters. • Consideration should be given to establishing a non-partisan steering group that is able to guide and take ownership of the research generated by SERA. 44 APPENDIX I: SERA PROGRAM PERFORMANCE 45 Output indicators: Assistance to ZEPARU and MOFED Activity/Finding Targets Actuals Research & analysis Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Number of completed policy studies outsourced by ZEPARU with SERA support: total, (and with gender content) 2(1) 4(2) 4(2) 0 0 5(5) Number of completed policy studies by ZEPARU with SERA: total, (and with gender content) 6(3) 8(4) 8(4) 8(2) 3(3) 8(3) Person-hours of training completed in fiscal policy and fiscal administration supported by USG assistance (USAID PMP indicator): total, (and women in parenthesis) 1500 (750) 2500 (1250) 6500 (3250) 1680 (400) 7600 (1895) 5537.5 (1577.75) Number of days of SERA technical assistance in fiscal policy and fiscal administration (USAID PMP indicator) 150 360 400 285 442 316 Parliamentary training Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Number of SERA supported seminars for Parliamentarians, on economic policy and economic literacy 4 seminar s 6 seminars 12 seminars 0 0 0 Number of Parliamentarians trained with SERA support, total (women in parenthesis) 60 (30) 100 (50) 200(100) 0 0 0 Short-term Training Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Number of SERA-supported customized short-courses for training economists 4 5 5 1 6 6 Number of economists attending customized short-courses: total (women in parenthesis) 80 (40) 100 (50) 115 (58) 17(4) 121 (47) 92 (30) Number of individuals sponsored to attend external training courses: total (women in parenthesis) 8 (4) 20 (10) 33 (17) 12(5) 31 (12) 21(2) Long-term Training Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Number of individuals with SERA bursaries to part-time MSc in Economics at the UZ: Total (females in parenthesis) 20(10) 20(10) 20 (5) 18(2) 15(4) 11(4) Number of individuals with SERA bursaries to PhD in Economics at UCT or comparable universities: Total (females in parenthesis) 5(3) 5(3) 3 (0) 0 3(0) 3(0) Workshops (outreach/dissemination) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Number of SERA supported outreach/dissemination workshops 8 3 3 4 3 5 Number of participants in SERA supported workshops or seminars: Total (Women in Parenthesis) - (150) 300(150) (81) 262(No data) 612(No data) Number of participants in SERA supported workshops or seminars: government/private sector/ ZEPARU or SERA/ other None None None 166/62/49/89 85/51/34/- 50/97/17/99 Key: Green – achievement or near achievement, Yellow – significant achievement, but with limitations, Red – Limited achievement 46 Output indicators: Assistance to ZIMSTAT Activity/Finding Targets Actuals Improve organization and coordination Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Number of documents containing meta-data and data manuals produced and posted on-line with SERA support 0 2 2 0 1 0 Number of SERA-supported public information events on economic statistics, through ZIMSTAT 2 3 3 0 0 0 Number of participants in SERA-supported public events through ZIMSTAT: Total (women in parenthesis) 100 (50) 150 (75) 100 (50) 0 0 0 Develop physical, IT and statistical infrastructure Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Number of SERA supported training events for ZIMSTAT staff 1 2 2 3 2 0 Number of participants in SERA supported training courses for ZIMSTAT staff: Total (women in parenthesis) 20 (10) 40 (20) 150 (75) 32 (6) 183 (48) 0 Cumulative number of distance learning training modules in economic statistics developed/supported by SERA Plans established 1 6 0 3 - Key: Green – achievement or near achievement, Yellow – significant achievement, but with limitations, Red – Limited achievement 47 Intermediate result indicators: Assistance to ZEPARU and MOFED Activity/Finding Targets Actuals Research & analysis Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Number of policy briefs/studies analysed and drafted with USG assistance, presented for public/stakeholder consultation and that contribute to new policies approved/passed for implementation: Total (with gender in parenthesis) TBD in consultation with USAID 2 (1) 2 (1) 0 2 (2) 3 (1) Number of policy briefs/studies drafted and presented for public/stakeholder consultation with USG assistance: Total (with gender content in parenthesis) 8 (4) 10 (5) 8 (4) 6 (3) 5 9 (5) Number of economic research material available through online library on the ZEPARU website ≥ 30 papers ≥ 60 papers ≥ 110 research material Data not available 27 (16 research papers, 9 economic baromete rs, 2 policy briefs), 77 economic resource links 48 (31 research papers, 10 economic barometers , 2 policy briefs, 5 presentatio ns), 77 economic resource links Parliamentary training Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Number of MPs completing certificate Program: Total (women in parenthesis) - 10 (5) 40 (20) - 0 0 Training of economist Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Cumulative number of semesters completed by government economists pursuing MSc Economics at UZ with SERA support: Total (females in parenthesis) 8 48 (24) 80 (12) 6 (0) 40 (2) 70 (10) Workshops (outreach/dissemination) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Number of press releases published or positive news reports on SERA-supported research or outreach/dissemination events: Total (gender content) 10 (5) 10 (5) 10 (5) 9 (0) 4 (0) 21 (0) Key: Green – achievement or near achievement, Yellow – significant achievement, but with limitations, Red – Limited achievement 48 Intermediate result indicators: Assistance to ZIMSTAT Activity/Finding Targets Actuals Improve organization and coordination Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Number of economics reports produced by ZIMSTAT with lag of no more than 12 months 1 6 9 4 7 4 Develop physical, IT and statistical infrastructure Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Completion and publication of PICES Survey/Data entry completed Report completed and disseminated - Field work, data entry, processing and SERA STTA completed draft PICES report PICES report completed and launched - Completion Central Business Registry (CBR) Fieldwork conducted Results dissemination Complete field work and disseminate results Fieldwork was delayed due to a change in plans. Training of enumerators and team leaders to take place Data collection, processing and compilation of 76,000 licensed businesses completed. CBR data coding and entry completed in July, CBR technical report was drafted and finalized in September Completion and publication of Census of Services/Survey of Services Plan approved SS completed. Index of services developed SS completed and disseminated. Index of services developed Plan approved but being reconsidered following study tours and STTA input SS to take place in Year 3 after CBR is finished SS to commence in Year 4 since the CBR was finalized Number of ZIMSTAT staff using/completing SERA supported distance learning training modules: Total (women in parenthesis) Online training plan established Online training courses to be developed with ZIMSTAT in SERA Year 2 40 (20) Online training courses to be developed with ZIMSTAT in Year 2 - - Key: Green – achievement or near achievement, Yellow – significant achievement, but with limitations, Red – Limited achievement 49 Outcome indicators: Assistance to ZEPARU Activity/Finding Targets Actuals Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Number of policy briefs/studies analysed and drafted with USG assistance, presented for public/stakeholder consultation and that contribute to new policies approved/passed for implementation: Total (with gender in parenthesis) TBD in consultation with USAID 2 (1) 2 (1) 0 2 (2) 3 (1) Number of policy briefs/studies analysed and drafted with USG assistance, presented for public/stakeholder consultation and that contribute to new policies approved/passed where implementation is confirmed to have begun: Total (with gender in parenthesis) - 1 2(1) - 2(2) 0 Number of participants/percent of respondents able to demonstrate knowledge retention by identifying three specific learning objectives from SERA supported training at least 6 months after each training event (with women in parenthesis) 68(34) 83 (42) - 49 (19) 80 (24) Number of participants/percent of respondents reporting at least one example of on-the-job utilization of content from USAID supported training at least 6 months after each training event (with women in parenthesis) 68(34) 83 (42) - 64 (26) 83 (28) Number of “hits” and downloads of policy briefs/reports/studies posted on ZEPARU website 50% increase over baseline of 568 hits, 353 downloads 100% increase 100% increase No data as website was down 7585 hits, 2750 downloads (to Sept. 2013) 37213 hits, 9459 downloads Amount of funding for ZEPARU excluding SERA and ACBF support $200,000, 2012 budget vote $300,000, including $200,000 budget vote and other sources $300,000, including $200,000 budget vote and other sources $78,550 (of which $65,000 was from GoZ) $139,595 (of which $85,000 was from the GOZ) $140,127 (of which $32,362 was from the GoZ) Key: Green – achievement or near achievement, Yellow – significant achievement, but with limitations, Red – Limited achievement 50 Outcome indicators: Assistance to ZIMSTAT Activity/Finding Targets Actuals Assistance to ZIMSTAT Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Improved National Income and Product Accounts (NIPA) statistics using PICES data and economic surveys that benefit from CBR PICES data collection complete CBR update and COS data complete Second revision to NIPA using Survey of Services PICES data data processing complete. First draft of PICES report completed for technical committee review. CBR, COS training for enumerators planned for October 2013 PICES report completed and launched April 2013, CBR data collection, processing and compilation of 76,000 licensed businesses completed. CBR inquiry started in early august PICES report completed. CBR data coding and entry completed in July. CBR technical report was drafted and finalized in September Number of economic reports available on the ZIMSTAT website with lag of no more than 12 months 1 4 8 3 5 4 Key: Green – achievement or near achievement, Yellow – significant achievement, but with limitations, Red – Limited achievement 51 APPENDIX II: EVALUATION MATRICES For each evaluation sub-question we have identified the primary source of evidence (marked in red) and the secondary sources of evidence (marked in yellow). We have then tried to identify the specific information we would seek to acquire from each source of evidence under each evaluation sub-question. 52 Evaluation Matrix I: Evaluation procedure to assess the Strengthening of institutional capacity Questions Evidence from different sources Monitoring documents Partners ( & ZEPARU) Project Implementation Team Individual beneficiaries Policy makers, universities, industry bodies, stakeholders & development partners Desktop Research Specific Task Requirement. What has been the impact of SERA on the institutional capacities of its main partners i.e. ZEPARU and ZIMSTAT? (What are the lessons, factors for greater sustainability and recommendations?) Evaluation Questions. (1) ZEPARU  Is ZEPARU capable of developing quality economic policy research?  Is ZEPARU moving towards financial and institutional sustainability?  Are there other economic research organisations that would be suitable beneficiaries of future USAID support to strengthen local capacity for evidence based policy? (2) ZIMSTAT  How effective were SERA activities in building capacity at ZIMSTAT KRA 1. ZEPARU quality of research, relevance and sustainability KRA 1.1: Quality and relevance of ZEPARU research Quality and number of research reports (review of research documents) Since the SERA Program began, has there been a change in quality or quantity of output? Has SERA been instrumental in bringing in additional research capacity, knowledge or techniques? How many research reports have been produced with the assistance of SERA? How has this research been disseminated? How can the quality of the research be improved? Was the logic for the What was the logic behind the intervention? Was the Program well designed to reach the set objectives? How was the quality of SERA outputs assessed and strengthened? Can the design of the intervention be improved? How has SERA helped ZEPARU to develop quality economic policy research? Has the intervention reached the desired goals? How has the SERA Program helped ZEPARU researchers? What specific forms of support were provided and what has been most useful? Has the quality or quantity of your research improved and in what way? What research produced by ZEPARU are you aware of? How did you receive /become aware of this research? Has this helped you in your work? How would you rate the quality of this research work and have you noted any changes over the last few years? Has any of this research been used during policy preparations or discussions? How can the quality and relevance of this research be Any evidence of the publication or use of ZEPARU research outputs beyond the dissemination of the actual report. 53 intervention sound? What challenges faced by ZEPARU were addressed by SERA? What are the key features of the SERA Program that should be taken into account in the design of similar Programs? What were the challenges faced during the Program’s implementation, and what can be done about them? improved? KRA 1.2: Potential for funding other economic research organisations in the future as part of USAID’s aims to promote the capacity for evidence based policy Can you name any other local research institutes that produce policy research similar to your own? Do you collaborate/compete with any of these organizations? Would they benefit from the type of support that you received from SERA? How was ZEPARU selected as the primary beneficiary? What other organisations were considered? Did the SERA Program encourage collaboration between ZEPARU and any of these organisations? Are you aware of any other organizations that produce research similar to that of ZEPARU? How would you rate their research output relative to that of ZEPARU (in terms of quantity, quality and relevance)? Other economic research organisations, policy development institutions and think tanks in Zimbabwe KRA 1.3.: Financial sustainability What are the institute’s main revenue sources? What specific activities have been funded by SERA that would not have taken place without this support? When SERA ends, will any of these activities continue, and with what funding? What are the main financial How have sustainability considerations been incorporated into the project design and implementation? What is the proposed phase-out plan? Does ZEPARU offer good value to money to donors and government clients? Are you concerned about the sustainability of your position post-SERA funding? Have you been consulted on these matters? What funding is available for economic research and capacity building in Zimbabwe? How is this expected to change over the next few years? Would you consider funding or paying for research generated by ZEPARU? How many economic policy research institutions are active in Zimbabwe? How do the financials of ZEPRAU compare against these other think tanks? 54 management challenges faced by ZEPARU? What changes might be needed to improve its financial sustainability? KRA 1.4.: Institutional sustainability What is the organizational structure of ZEPARU? What is the institutional focus of ZEPARU? How has this changed over the last few years? Has internal research capacity increased with SERA funding? How will the projects assisted by SERA continue operating after the SERA Program ends? What is/ needs to be done now to ensure the sustainability of the projects assisted by SERA? Can you identify lessons in terms of future design, planning, implementation, management structure for similar interventions in the future? What measures were taken to maximise opportunities for skills transfer when external consultants were used? What measures were taken to increase internal capacity? How likely is that the projects assisted by SERA keep going when the SERA Program ends? Are there any elements of the SERA Program that will continue to receive support from USAID after the Program ends? What is/needs to be done now to ensure the sustainability of the projects assisted by SERA? Can you identify lessons in terms of future design, planning, implementation, management structure for similar interventions in the future? What skills/knowledge have you learned with SERA support? What needs to be done now to ensure the sustainability or continuation of the projects in which you are involved, which were assisted by SERA? What risks, if any, are foreseen if these projects were to end with SERA funding? What follow up activities would you suggest? How would you rate the management capacity at ZEPRU? How would you rate the depth of research capacity at ZEPARU? The size, structure and capacity of other economic research institutions in Zimbabwe and their performance over time. 55 KRA 2. ZIMSTAT quality of data and sustainability of the intervention KRA 2.1.: Quality of ZIMSTAT activities supported by SERA Quality and number of surveys conducted with SERA support, economic data produced and updated. Since the SERA Program began, has there been a change in quality or quantity of output? Was SERA instrumental in getting additional surveys conducted? How many datasets have been published with the assistance of SERA? Was the logic for the SERA intervention sound? What challenges faced by ZIMSTAT were addressed by SERA? What are the key features of the SERA Program that should be taken into account in the design of similar Programs? What was the logic behind the intervention? Was the Program well designed to reach the set objectives? How was the quality of the SERA Program’s output assessed and strengthened? Can the design of the intervention be improved? How has SERA helped ZIMSTAT to develop quality economic data? Has the intervention reached the desired goals? What were challenges faced during the Program’s implementation and what can be done about them? What data produced by ZIMSTAT that is relevant to your sector, are you aware of? How did you become aware of the dataset, and how do you access it? How would you rate the quality of this data? Have you noticed any changes in the last couple of years? In what ways can the data and its dissemination be improved? Has the data been used during policy debates? Evidence of ZIMSTAT data being reproduced for reputable global datasets such as the World Bank Development Indicators, or the IMF World Economic Outlook Database KRA 2.1.: Sustainability of ZIMSTAT activities supported by SERA What are ZIMSTAT’s main revenue sources? What specific activities have been funded by SERA that would not have taken place without this support? When the SERA Program ends, will any of these activities continue, and with what What measures were taken to maximise opportunities for skills transfer when external consultants were used? What measures were taken to increase internal capacity? Are there any elements of the SERA Program that will continue to receive support from What skills/knowledge have you learned with SERA support? What needs to be done now to ensure the sustainability or continuation of the projects in which you are involved, which were assisted by SERA? What risks, if any, are foreseen if these Would you consider funding or paying for data published by ZIMSTAT? How would you rate the depth of human resource capacity at ZIMSTAT? 56 funding? Has ZIMSTAT’s internal capacity increased following the intervention of the SERA Program? What is/ needs to be done now to ensure the sustainability of the projects assisted by SERA? Can you identify lessons in terms of future design, planning, implementation, management structure for similar interventions in the future? USAID after the Program ends? What is/needs to be done now to ensure the sustainability of the projects assisted by SERA? Can you identify lessons in terms of future design, planning, implementation, management structure for similar interventions in the future? projects were to end with SERA funding? What follow up activities would you suggest? Evaluation Matrix II: Improved human capacity Questions Evidence from different sources Monitoring documents Government partners (ZIMSTAT, ZEPARU and other training beneficiaries) Project Implementation Team Individual beneficiaries Industry bodies, universities, stakeholders & development partners Desktop Research Specific Task Requirement. To what extent did the SERA Program assist the government of Zimbabwe in building its human capacity (specifically in the area of policy making)? N.B.: A distinction between short term and long term training will be made, as well as between the Masters Program and PhD Program. Evaluation Questions  Which ministries benefited? To what extent?  What were the perceptions of beneficiaries regarding the usefulness of the training provided? Examples of how they have used the knowledge that they acquired in doing their jobs?  Assuming that all recipients remained in their government of Zimbabwe jobs as required by the bursary Program, what were their professional plans and objectives post-graduation?  What is the perception within the Ministry of Finance and economic ministries of the SERA supported training and trained individuals? 57  What is the reason for the under-representation of female economists within the government of Zimbabwe? KRA 1. Trainings supported by SERA KRA 1.1.: Benefits to the Government of Zimbabwe Profile of beneficiaries (Ministries, gender, level; by Program) . Structure, focus and curricula of training Programs. Linkages with other initiatives (SERA and more widely). How were beneficiaries and courses selected? What contribution (time or cost) did the Government make towards these training interventions? Has the increase in trained personnel had a positive impact on the overall quality/quantity of policy related output? Which Ministries/agencies were targeted and why? What courses or Programs were supported and why? Are there any other government agencies/ministries that may be targeted in the future? What were the challenges faced during the Program’s implementation and what can be done about them? Why did you participate in this training activity and how were you selected? What specific knowledge or skills did you expect to learn? Did this training meet your expectations? How have you applied the learnings from this training in the workplace? How has this benefited the quality of your work? What capacity exists in Government/Parliament for economic analysis and how has this changed over time? What are the main constraints to increasing or sustaining this capacity? Data on the number and level of economists in the Government in general, and the institutions supported, over a period of time. KRA 1.2.: Benefits to individuals How has this training contributed to the progression or career development of beneficiaries? What challenges have been experienced in making use of trainees (or the knowledge and skills they have learned) in the workplace, and what can be done about them? What mechanism is in place to monitor the ongoing performance and progression of trainees? Have you received a promotion or salary increase following this training, and if so, do you think this training played a role? Has this training influenced your career goals or plans in any way? What are your future training needs or plans? Are you aware of any of the training activities supported by SERA and do you know any beneficiaries? KRA 1.3.: Benefits to the wider community Can you provide any examples where the knowledge or skills learned by a training Can you provide any examples where the knowledge or skills learned by a training beneficiary has led to Can you provide any examples where the knowledge or skills that you learned has What are the key skills capacity constraints in Zimbabwe in the area of economics? What Programs or course are 58 beneficiary has led to specific research output or policy change? specific research output or policy change? led to specific research output or policy change? Are there any other ways that you have used this knowledge to the benefit of your family or community? available to address these constraints? 59 Evaluation Matrix IIII: Improved Economic Data & research Questions Evidence from different sources Monitoring documents and policy papers Government partners (ZIMSTAT & ZEPARU) Project Implementation Team Individual beneficiaries Industry bodies, universities, stakeholders & development partners Desktop Research Specific Task Requirement. (1) Economic studies Evaluation Questions.  ZEPARU  Is ZEPARU known among economic Ministries, Parliament, the Reserve Bank, and other key policy stakeholders?  How effective is ZEPARU’s strategy for and practice of policy research dissemination?  Review the SERA funded policy studies on (1) Mining policy (2) Tourism (3) the Financial Sector (4) Currency regime and (5) Employment policy. The review should consider the development, recommendations and dissemination of the policy studies and evaluate the extent to which the recommendations correlate with subsequent legal, policy and regulatory changes in policy. What has been the impact of the studies on policy dialogue? o What were the recommendations made in each report? (Including recommendations for maintaining the status quo) o Who used or referred to a policy study supported by SERA for advocacy or public-private dialogue, regardless of whether or not the dialogue resulted in policy reform? o What are the key factors of the most influential studies? o What are the key differences between the studies? (Make up of research teams or lead, dissemination strategies, sector or focus (2) Economic statistics  What are users of economic statistic’s perceptions of the reliability and availability of ZIMSTAT economic data? How can these perceptions be improved?  To what extent are economic statistics produced by ZIMSTAT reported publicly in a timely fashion KRA 1. Economic research – General economic research by ZEPARU KRA 1.1: The dissemination of general Research by ZEPARU What has been the strategy for disseminating policy research? What data is available on how and where this research has been disseminated? What has been the strategy for disseminating policy research? Which approaches work best and which particular studies have been most ‘popular’? Has this translated into a higher number of downloads/views? Has SERA assisted in the dissemination of ZEPARU’s other policy research? How does SERA decide on the research topics to support? How much funding and attention is given to the dissemination of this research? What monitoring mechanism is in place to assess the dissemination and use of research supported by SERA? What specific support did you receive from SERA in the design and dissemination of your research? Do you feel that your research has been made available to the right audience and in the most effective way? What more could be done to improve the dissemination of your research? Are you aware of any research done by ZEPARU (please list specific examples)? Have you attended any workshops or conferences at which this research was presented? How else have you accessed this research? What more should ZEPARU do to disseminate its research output? Number of reports, academic papers and articles referencing ZEPARU research papers 60 KRA 2. Economic research – Policy studies KRA 2.1.: Selection of the focus areas for the policy studies Program logic for the selection of the sectors or focus areas How were the topics of the policy studies identified? What other topics were considered? How were the topics of the policy studies identified? What other topics were considered? Relevance of the topics selected (given current policy priorities in Zimbabwe) KRA 2.2.: Composition of the policy study research teams What was the composition of the research teams? Who were the lead researchers? How many experts were on the team (distinguishing local from international) What was the role of ZEPARU/Government in the selection of the research teams? What was the contribution of the authors (ZEPARU vs consultants) to the final output? What challenges were experienced in managing these teams? What additional opportunities have emerged from this collaboration? How were the research teams selected? Was the selection and appointment of the team affected by funding or any other limitations? What other local think tanks and research groups were involved? What was the contribution of the authors (ZEPARU vs consultants) to the final output? What challenges and opportunities did you encounter in participating in this research? KRA 2.3.: Findings and recommendations coming from the policy studies All recommendations from each report. How were the findings and recommendations disseminated? How were the findings and recommendations received, by different parties? How have these reports been used? What requests have you received for follow-up advice or research based on these studies? Which of these reports has been most influential/useful and why; and which has been of been least value? How were the findings and recommendations disseminated? What mechanism is in place to assess the use and impact of these reports? What feedback have you received from different parties? Which of these reports has been most influential/useful and why; and which has been of least value? How were the findings and recommendations disseminated? How were the findings and recommendations received, by different parties? How have these reports been used? What requests have you received for follow-up advice or research based on these studies? Are you aware of the specific policy studies being reviewed? How accurate and useful were the findings and recommendations? How have these reports been used and by who? Have they led to any policy changes (and if so provide evidence) or contributed to any policy discussions (and if so, amongst who)? How could the content or dissemination of these reports be Review government gazette and other publications for changes in policy. Scan for references to policy studies. 61 improved? KRA 3. Economic statistics KRA 3.1.: The dissemination of economic data produced by ZIMSTAT Number of SERA funded statistical series/publications. Timing of the release of these publications. What specific support has SERA provided to improve the quality, availability and timeliness of ZIMSTAT data? What improvements have been made and what major gaps/challenges remain? How has SERA helped ZIMSTAT to increase access to and the use of economic data? What specific support has SERA provided to improve the quality, availability and timeliness of ZIMSTAT data? What improvements have been made and what major gaps/challenges remain? How has SERA helped ZIMSTAT to increase access to and the use of economic data? What specific support has SERA provided to improve the quality, availability and timeliness of ZIMSTAT data? What improvements have been made and what major gaps/challenges remain? How has SERA helped ZIMSTAT to increase access to and the use of economic data? What ZIMSTAT data do you currently use, and how? What is you perception of the quality of this data? Is ZIMSTAT data made available in a timely fashion? How can the data be improved? What other data do you require that is currently not made available by ZIMSTAT? Independent review of the availability and robustness of the data series supported by SERA. 62 APPENDIX III: QUESTIONNAIRES Questionnaires I: for Partners Background information: Organisation Name of respondents Position of respondent Venue Date ZEPARU and Economic Departments ZIMSTAT Strengthening Institutional Capacity Quality and relevance of ZEPARU output Quality and relevance of ZIMSTAT output ­ How has SERA helped you in your work? Since the SERA Program began, has there been a change in the quality or quantity of output? ­ What additional research capacity, knowledge or techniques has SERA supported? ­ How many research reports have been produced with the assistance of SERA? How has this research been disseminated? ­ How can the quality of the research be improved? ­ Was the logic for the intervention sound? ­ What challenges faced by ZEPARU were addressed by SERA? ­ What are the key features of the SERA Program that should be taken into account in the design of similar Programs? ­ Since the SERA Program began, has there been a change in quality or quantity of output? ­ Was SERA instrumental in getting additional surveys conducted? How many datasets have been published with the assistance of SERA? ­ Was the logic for the SERA intervention sound? ­ What challenges faced by ZIMSTAT were addressed by SERA? ­ What are the key features of the SERA Program that should be taken into account in the design of similar Programs? Other policy research institutes in Zimbabwe ­ Can you name any other local research institutes that produce policy research similar to your own? ­ Do you collaborate/compete with any of these organizations? ­ Would they benefit from the type of support that you received from SERA? Financial sustainability Sustainability ­ What are the institute’s main revenue sources? ­ What specific activities have been funded by SERA that would not have taken place without this support? ­ When SERA ends, will any of these activities continue, and with what funding? ­ What are the main financial management challenges faced by ZEPARU? ­ What changes might be needed to improve its financial sustainability? ­ What are ZIMSTAT’s main revenue sources? What specific activities have been funded by SERA that would not have taken place without this support? ­ When the SERA Program ends, will any of these activities continue, and with what funding? ­ Has ZIMSTAT’s internal capacity increased following the intervention of the SERA Program? ­ How will the projects assisted by SERA operating after the SERA Program ends? What is/ needs to be done now to ensure the sustainability of the projects assisted by SERA? Institutional sustainability ­ Has internal research capacity increased with 63 SERA funding? ­ How will the projects assisted by SERA continue operating after the SERA Program ends? ­ What is/ needs to be done now to ensure the sustainability of the projects assisted by SERA? ­ Can you identify lessons in terms of future design, planning, implementation, management structure for similar interventions in the future? ­ Can you identify lessons in terms of future design, planning, implementation, management structure for similar interventions in the future? Improved human capacity ­ Benefits to the government o How were beneficiaries and courses selected? o What contribution (time or cost) did the Government make towards these training interventions? o Has the increase in trained personnel had a positive impact on the overall quality/quantity of policy related output? ­ Benefits to the individual o How has this training contributed to the progression or career development of beneficiaries? o What challenges have been experienced in making use of trainees (or the knowledge and skills they have learned) in the workplace, and what can be done about them? ­ Benefits to the country o Can you provide any examples where the knowledge or skills learned by a training beneficiary has led to specific research output or policy change? Improved economic data and research Economic research – General economic research by ZEPARU Economic statistics from ZIMSTAT ­ What has been the strategy for disseminating policy research? Which approaches work best and which particular studies have been most ‘popular’? ­ Has this strategy translated into a higher number of downloads/views? ­ Has SERA assisted in the dissemination of ZEPARU’s other policy research? ­ What specific support has SERA provided to improve the quality, availability and timeliness of ZIMSTAT data? ­ What improvements have been made and what major gaps/challenges remain? ­ How has SERA helped ZIMSTAT to increase access to and the use of economic data? Economic research – Policy studies ­ Selection of the policy study topics o How were the topics of the policy studies identified? o What other topics were considered? ­ Composition of the research teams o What was the role of ZEPARU/Government in the selection of the research teams? o What was the contribution of the authors (ZEPARU vs consultants) to the final output? o What challenges were experienced in managing these teams? o What additional opportunities have emerged from this collaboration? ­ Findings and recommendations o How were the findings and recommendations disseminated? o How were the findings and recommendations received, by different parties? o How have these reports been used? 64 o What requests have you received for follow-up advice or research based on these studies? o Which of these reports has been most influential/useful and why; and which has been of been least value? OTHER OBSERVATIONS 65 Questionnaire II: Questionnaire for Project the Implementation Team Background information: Organisation Name of respondents Position of respondent Venue Date ZEPARU and Economic Departments ZIMSTAT Strengthening Institutional Capacity Quality and relevance of ZEPARU output Quality and relevance of ZIMSTAT output ­ What was the logic behind the intervention? ­ Was the Program well designed to reach the set objectives? How was the quality of SERA outputs assessed and strengthened? ­ Can the design of the intervention be improved? ­ How has SERA helped ZEPARU to develop quality economic policy research? ­ Has the intervention reached the desired goals? ­ What were the challenges faced during the Program’s implementation, and what can be done about them? ­ What was the logic behind the intervention? ­ Was the Program well designed to reach the set objectives? How was the quality of SERA outputs assessed and strengthened? ­ Can the design of the intervention be improved? ­ How has SERA helped ZIMSTAT to develop quality economic data? ­ Has the intervention reached the desired goals? ­ What were challenges faced during the Program’s implementation and what can be done about them? Other policy research institutes in Zimbabwe ­ How was ZEPARU selected as the primary beneficiary? ­ What other organisations were considered? ­ Did the SERA Program encourage collaboration between ZEPARU and any of these organisations? Financial sustainability Sustainability ­ How have sustainability considerations been incorporated into the project design and implementation? ­ What is the proposed phase-out plan? ­ Does ZEPARU offer good value to money to donors and government clients? ­ What measures were taken to maximise opportunities for skills transfer when external consultants were used? ­ What measures were taken to increase internal capacity? ­ How likely is that the projects assisted by SERA keep going when the SERA Program ends? ­ Are there any elements of the SERA Program that will continue to receive support from USAID after the Program ends? ­ What is/needs to be done now to ensure the sustainability of the projects assisted by SERA? ­ Can you identify lessons in terms of future design, planning, implementation, management structure for similar interventions in the future? Institutional sustainability ­ What measures were taken to maximise opportunities for skills transfer when external consultants were used? ­ What measures were taken to increase internal capacity? ­ How likely is that the projects assisted by SERA keep going when the SERA Program ends? ­ Are there any elements of the SERA Program that will continue to receive support from USAID after the Program ends? ­ What is/needs to be done now to ensure the sustainability of the projects assisted by SERA? ­ Can you identify lessons in terms of future design, 66 planning, implementation, management structure for similar interventions in the future? Improved human capacity ­ Benefits to the government o Which Ministries/agencies were targeted and why? What courses or Programs were supported and why? o Are there any other government agencies/ministries that may be targeted in the future? o What were the challenges faced during the Program’s implementation and what can be done about them? ­ Benefits to the individual o What mechanism is in place to monitor the ongoing performance and progression of trainees?? ­ Benefits to the country o Can you provide any examples where the knowledge or skills learned by a training beneficiary has led to specific research output or policy change? Improved economic data and research Economic research – General economic research by ZEPARU Economic statistics from ZIMSTAT ­ How does SERA decide on the research topics to support? How much funding and attention is given to the dissemination of this research? ­ What monitoring mechanism is in place to assess the dissemination and use of research supported by SERA? ­ What specific support has SERA provided to improve the quality, availability and timeliness of ZIMSTAT data? ­ What improvements have been made and what major gaps/challenges remain? ­ How has SERA helped ZIMSTAT to increase access to and the use of economic data? Economic research – Policy studies ­ Selection of the topic o How were the topics focused on in the policy studies identified? o What other topics were considered? ­ Selection of the research team o How were the research teams selected? o Was the selection and appointment of the team affected by funding or any other limitations? o What other local think tanks and research groups were involved? ­ Findings and recommendations o How were the findings and recommendations disseminated? o What mechanism is in place to assess the use and impact of these reports? o What feedback have you received from different parties? o Which of these reports has been most influential/useful and why; and which has been of least value? OTHER OBSERVATIONS Questionnaire III: Questionnaire for Individual Beneficiaries (and Focus Groups) 67 Background information: Organisation Name of respondents Position of respondent Venue Date ZEPARU and Economic Departments ZIMSTAT Strengthening Institutional Capacity Quality and relevance of ZEPARU output Quality and relevance of ZIMSTAT output ­ How has the SERA Program helped ZEPARU researchers? ­ What specific forms of support were provided and what has been most useful? ­ Has the quality or quantity of your research improved and in what way? Other policy research institutes in Zimbabwe Financial sustainability Sustainability ­ Are you concerned about the sustainability of your position post-SERA funding? ­ Have you been consulted on these matters? ­ What skills/knowledge have you learned with SERA support? ­ What needs to be done now to ensure the sustainability or continuation of the projects in which you are involved, which were assisted by SERA? ­ What risks, if any, are foreseen if these projects were to end with SERA funding? ­ What follow up activities would you suggest? Institutional sustainability ­ What skills/knowledge have you learned with SERA support? ­ What needs to be done now to ensure the sustainability or continuation of the projects in which you are involved, which were assisted by SERA? ­ What risks, if any, are foreseen if these projects were to end with SERA funding? ­ What follow up activities would you suggest? Improved human capacity ­ Benefits to the government o Why did you participate in this training activity and how were you selected? o What specific knowledge or skills did you expect to learn? o Did this training meet your expectations? o How have you applied the learnings from this training in the workplace? o How has this benefited the quality of your work? ­ Benefits to the individual o Have you received a promotion or salary increase following this training, and if so, do you think this training played a role? o Has this training influenced your career goals or plans in any way? o What are your future training needs or plans? ­ Benefits to the country 68 o Can you provide any examples where the knowledge or skills that you learned has led to specific research output or policy change? o Are there any other ways that you have used this knowledge to the benefit of your family or community? Improved economic data and research Economic research – General economic research by ZEPARU Economic statistics from ZIMSTAT ­ Section of the focus areas o What specific support did you receive from SERA in the design and dissemination of your research? o Do you feel that your research has been made available to the right audience and in the most effective way? o What more could be done to improve the dissemination of your research? ­ Selection of the research teams o What was the contribution of the authors (ZEPARU vs consultants) to the final output? What challenges and opportunities did you encounter in participating in this research? ­ Findings and recommendations o How were the findings and recommendations disseminated? o How were the findings and recommendations received, by different parties? o How have these reports been used? o What requests have you received for follow-up advice or research based on these studies? ­ What specific support has SERA provided to improve the quality, availability and timeliness of ZIMSTAT data? ­ What improvements have been made and what major gaps/challenges remain? ­ How has SERA helped ZIMSTAT to increase access to and the use of economic data? OTHER OBSERVATIONS 69 Questionnaire IV: Questionnaire for Other Affected Parties Background information: Name of area Name of respondents Position of respondent Venue Date ZEPARU and Economic Departments ZIMSTAT Strengthening Institutional Capacity Quality and relevance of ZEPARU output Quality and relevance of ZIMSTAT output ­ What research produced by ZEPARU are you aware of? ­ How did you receive /become aware of this research? Has this helped you in your work? ­ How would you rate the quality of this research work and have you noted any changes over the last few years? ­ Has any of this research been used during policy preparations or discussions? ­ How can the quality and relevance of this research be improved? ­ What data produced by ZIMSTAT (that is relevant to your sector), are you aware of? ­ How did you become aware of the dataset? ­ How do you access it? ­ How would you rate the quality of this data? ­ Have you noticed any changes in the last couple of years? ­ In what ways can the data and means of accessing the data be improved? ­ As far as you are aware, has the data been used during policy debates? Other policy research institutes in Zimbabwe ­ Are you aware of any other organizations that produce research similar to that of ZEPARU? ­ How would you rate their research output relative to that of ZEPARU (in terms of quantity, quality and relevance)? Financial sustainability Financial sustainability ­ What funding is available for economic research and capacity building in Zimbabwe? ­ How is this expected to change over the next few years? ­ Would you consider funding or paying for research generated by ZEPARU? ­ Would you consider funding or paying for data published by ZIMSTAT? Institutional sustainability Institutional sustainability ­ How would you rate the management capacity at ZEPRU? ­ How would you rate the depth of research capacity at ZEPARU? ­ How would you rate the depth of human resource capacity at ZIMSTAT? Improved human capacity ­ Benefits to the government o What capacity exists in Government/Parliament for economic analysis and how has this changed over time? o What are the main constraints to increasing or sustaining this capacity? 70 ­ Benefits to the individual o Are you aware of any of the training activities supported by SERA and do you know any beneficiaries? ­ Benefits to the country o What are the key skills capacity constraints in Zimbabwe in the area of economics? o What Programs or course are available to address these constraints? Improved economic data and research Economic research – General economic research by ZEPARU Economic statistics from ZIMSTAT ­ Are you aware of any research done by ZEPARU (please list specific examples)? ­ Have you attended any workshops or conferences at which this research was presented? ­ How else have you accessed this research? ­ What more should ZEPARU do to possibly increase the dissemination of its research output? ­ What ZIMSTAT data do you currently use, and how? ­ What is you perception of the quality of this data? ­ Is ZIMSTAT data made available in a timely fashion? ­ How can the data be improved? ­ What other data do you require that is currently not made available by ZIMSTAT? Economic research – Policy studies ­ Findings and research o Are you aware of the specific policy studies being reviewed? o How accurate and useful were the findings and recommendations? o How have these reports been used and by who? o Have they led to any policy changes (and if so provide evidence) or contributed to any policy discussions (and if so, amongst who)? o How could the content or dissemination of these reports be improved? 71 APPENDIX IV: INTERVIEWEES Designation SERA Management and Consultants Dr. Daniel Ndlela COP Ms Advent Emmanuela Matorofa M&E Officer/SERA Training Coordinator Dr. Bruce Bolnick Ex-COP Mr. Peter Miller Project Director Dr. Keith Jefferis Consultant Dr. Daniel Makina Consultant Ms. Beverley Carlson Consultant Ms. Rita Choto Imani Development USAID Mr. Joshua Smith Economist ZEPARU Dr. Gibson Chigumira Director Mr. Ngosi Shumba Finance and Administration Manager Jecob Nyamadzawo Senior Research Fellow Erinah Chipumo Senior Research Fellow Cornelius Dube Senior Research Fellow Wellington Matsika Research Fellow Evangelista Mudzonga Research Fellow Ethel Sithole Intern Mike Nyawo Intern Ivy Mananike (Nee Gurure) Intern ZIMSTAT Mr Mutasa Dzinotizei Director General Mr. Moffat Nyoni Deputy Director General Mr. Nelson Taruvinga Director: income Analysis Mr. Tigere Majoni Chief Programmer Mr. Mana Viriri Chief Statistician Tidings Matangira Manager: Labour Market information Systems Ronald Mhlanga Manager External Trade and Balance of Payments Statistics Fidelis Kupara Statistical Officer Grown Chirongwe Manager Finance Statistics Coordinated PICES Ministry of Finance and Economic Development Mr. Z. R. Churu Principal Director - National Budgets Mr. Jailos Stewart Acting Director - Human Resources Mr. Kholisani Moyo Principal Economist - Revenue and Tax Policy Mrs. Ratidzai Mutonono Principal Economist - Recurrent Expenditure Mrs A. Tsuro Senior Economist - International Cooperation Mr. Tavonga Vhezha Economist - International Cooperation Douglas Muzimba Principal Economist - Revenue and Tax Policy Unit- Customs and Excise Tapiwa Gumbo Principal Economist - Revenue and Tax Policy Unit - International Revenue Memory Madondo Principal Economist - Revenue and Tax Policy Unit - Customs Revenue Tapiwa Mucheri Senior Economist R Musakaruka Economist Ministry of Industry and Commerce Mr. Charles Mujajati Director Mr. Thulani Chitopo Economist Mrs. Clarieta Mutsiveri Economist Mr. Amon Nyahada Economist 72 RBZ Dr. Kupukile Mlambo Deputy Governor and team at first meeting Mr. Simon Nyarota Senior Division Chief Mr. William Kavila Deputy Director, Policy Research, Modelling and Publications Ms. Sibonokuhle Ngwenya Economist Mr. Simelizwe Ncube Economist Admire Chirume Economist Abigail Murudziwa Debt Monitor Tongai Tarubona Principal Economist Kenneddy Kupeta Senior Economist Research & Publicationis Rangarirai Sibanda Senior Economist Real Sector formerly Monetary Getrude Machingura Principal Economist Domestic Statistics and Analysis Mr. Nebson Mupunga Principal Economist, Policy Research and Modelling - Stephen Prudence Moyo Economist, Policy Analysis and Economic Modeling MSc Focus Group Douglas Muzimba Ministry of Finance and Economic Development Getrude Njokwe Ministry of Industry and Commerce Pepukai Chirore NECF Edwin Chihava Ministry of Finance and Economic Development Felix Mufunda Ministry of Finance and Economic Development Smart Manda Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe Patrick Tuluzawu Ministry of Finance and Economic Development Ministry of Tourism & Hospitality Industry Mr. Runyowa Director Parliament Mr Austin Zvoma Clerk of Parliament LEDRIZ Dr. Godfrey Kanyenze Executive Director and Labour Economics Consultant University of Zimbabwe Dr. Pheneas. Kadenge Chairman – Department of Economics Dr. Takawira Mumvuma Lecturer (Former Chairman) Dr. Honest Zhou Lecturer (Post Graduate Studies Coordinator) Mrs Lucy Mutuma Information and Office Manager Shepherd Nyaruwata Tourism Consultant World Bank Dr. Seedwell Hove Economist DFID Mr. Dave Mollat Economic Adviser - Zimbisa/BEEP Zimbabwe Environmental Lawyers Association Shamiso Mtisi Director MEFMI Raphael O. Otieno MEFMI Director - Debt Management Dr. Sehliselo Mpofu MEFMI Director - Macroeconomic Management UNDP Amarakoon Bandara Economic Adviser 73 APPENDIX V: MSC BURSARY BENEFICIARY LIST Name Gender 1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year 1 Mtisi, Kosheni M  Done Done 2 Shenje, Tawanda Emmanuel M  Done Done 3 Chihava, Edwin M  Done Done 4 Mugandani, Alwyn M    5 Tuluzawu, P M   Done 6 Mfunda Felix M   Done 7 Smart, Manda M   Done 8 Chimombe, S M    9 Chivore, Pepukai M    10 Gwandiregera, B M    11 Makacha, K M    12 Masiwa, Innocent M    13 Mudhunguyo, Cathbert M    14 Muzimba, Douglas M    15 Njokwe, Getrude F    16 Manyere, Anna F  Unknown Unknown 17 Willie Adam M   Done 18 Chigumira, Takesure M  Failed 19 Kudzurunga, Obidience M  Failed 20 Sowa, Betty F   21 Chikwede, Klery F   22 Ncube, Sukoluhle F   Source: USAID SERA Annual Reports for Years 1 to 3 74 APPENDIX VI: DATA AVAILABLE ON ZIMSTAT’S WEBSITE Main Publications Zimstat Download Publications • Quarterly Digest of Statistics 2nd Quarter 2014 • Quarterly Digest of Statistics 1st Quarter 2014 • Quarterly Digest of Statistics 4th Quarter 2013 • Quarterly Digest of Statistics 3rd Quarter 2013 • Quarterly Digest of Statistics 2nd Quarter 2013 • Quarterly Digest of Statistics 1st Quarter 2013 • Quarterly Digest of Statistics 4th Quarter 2012 • Quarterly Digest of Statistics 3rd Quarter 2012 • Quarterly Digest of Statistics 2nd Quarter 2012 • Quarterly Digest of Statistics 1st Quarter 2012 Agriculture Hard Copy Publications at Head Office • Agriculture and Livestock Survey (ALS) Crop Production Time Series (1993-2010) • Monthly Pig Slaughtering 2010 (TABLE) • Agricultural production in Communal Lands Irrigation Schemes report • Production Account of Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing (excluding small scale market gardening) • Annual Census of registered Deciduous Fruit Growers’ report. • Quarterly Census of registered Poultry Producers’ report. • Quarterly Census of Registered Butchers. • Quarterly Census of Hides and Skins availability Quarterly Census of Tanneries Industrial Production Statistics in Zimbabwe Download Publications • Census of Industrial Production (CIP) 2011 • Census of Industrial Production (CIP) 2010 • Census of Industrial Production (CIP) 2009 • Business Tendency Survey (BTS) Jan-Apr 2013 o Business Tendency Survey (BTS) May-Aug 2013 • Importance of Company Data to Zimstat and the Nation • Business Tendency Survey (BTS) 2009 • Business Tendency Survey (BTS) 2010 • Volume of Manufacturing Index (VMI) Summary 2010 • Volume of Manufacturing Index (VMI) August 2010 Transport, Infrastructure, ICT and Science and Technology Statistics in Zimbabwe Download Publications • Airport Traffic, Excluding Transit Passengers by Airport Environment Statistics in Zimbabwe Hard Copy Publications at Head Office • Environment Statistics, 2010 75 • Assessment and Description of the Environment Sector Statistics System in Zimbabwe, 2009 • Environment Statistics, 2000 • Environment Statistics, 2004 • Environment Statistics User Inquiry, 2005 National Accounts Statistics in Zimbabwe Download Publications • Final Gross Domestic Product (GDP)2013 • Poverty Income Consumption and Expenditure Survey 2011/12 Report • Poverty and Poverty Datum Line Analysis in Zimbabwe 2011/12 Report • Revised GDP 2009-2012 Hard Copy Publications at Head Office • Income, Consumption and Expenditure Survey 2001 Price Statistics in Zimbabwe Download Publications • Latest Inflation Figures • Consumer Price Index August 2014 • Consumer Price Index July 2014 • Consumer Price Index June 2014 • Consumer Price Index May 2014 • Consumer Price Index April 2014 • Consumer Price Index March 2014 • Building Materials Price Index March 2014 • Quarterly Prices Statistics Bulletin March 2014 • Civil Engineering Materials Price Index April 2014 • Producer Price Index March 2014 • Consumer Price Index February 2014 • Poverty Datum Lines February 2014 • January 2014 Consumer Price Index,Poverty Datum Lines • December 2013 Building Material Price Index Civil Engineering Materials Index • Consumer Price Index • Price Bulletin • Producer Price Index • October 2013 • Consumer Price Index • Poverty Datum Lines • September 2013 • Producer Price Index • Consumer Price Index Building Materials Price Index • Poverty Datum Lines Civil Engineering Materials Index Bulletin of Price Index • Poverty Datum Lines 76 Financial Statistics in Zimbabwe Download Publications • Finscope Consumer Survey Zimbabwe 2011 • Launch of Finscope Consumer Survey Zimbabwe 2011 Hard Copy Publications at Head Office • Education Statistics Report • Zimbabwe Stock Exchange Indices 2011 • Central Government Revenues 2010 • Central Government Expenditure 2010 • Classifications of Functions of Government 2010 • Various banking statistics Available in Digest up to 2007 External Trade Statistics in Zimbabwe Download Publications • Summary of External Trade January-August 2014 • Bulletin of External Trade Statistics Second Quarter 2014 • Summary of External Trade January-June 2014 • Summary of External Trade January-April 2014 • Monthly Summary of External Trade Statistics 2014 • Quarterly Bulletin of External Trade Statistics 2014 • Statement of External Trade Statistics 2014 • Bulletin of External Trade Statistics Quarter Four 2013 • Exports: January to August 2013 • Imports: January to August 2013 • Statement of External Trade 2008 to 2012 Employment Statistics in Zimbabwe Download Publications • Employees and Earnings by Industrial Sector 2010 - 2012 • 2011 Child Labour Report • 2011 Labour Force Survey • Importance of Company Data to Zimstat and the Nation • 2004 Child Labour Report • 2004 Labour Force Survey Report Hard Copy Publications at Head Office • Labour Statistics, 2004 • 1999 Indicator Monitoring- Labour Force Survey, 2000 • 1994 Indicator Monitoring- Labour Force Survey Report, 1996 Education Statistics in Zimbabwe Hard Copy Publications at Head Office • Education Statistics Report • Education Report Gender Statistics in Zimbabwe Download Publications • Child Labour Survey Report 2011 • Women and Men in Zimbabwe Report 2012 77 Health and Vital Statistics in Zimbabwe Download Publications • Zimbabwe National Health Profile 2011Finscope • Zimbabwe National Health Profile 2010 • Zimbabwe National Health Profile 2009 • Health Statistics Fact Sheet 2013 • Multiple Indicator Monitoring Survey 2009 Preliminary Report • Multiple Indicator Monitoring Survey 2009 Final Report Hard Copy Publications at Head Office • 2007 Mortality Report • 2005 Mortality Report International Migration and Tourism Statistics in Zimbabwe Download Publications • Migration in Zimbabwe a Country Profile 2012 • International and Tourism and Migration Table of contents • IMT Summary of Arrivals and Departures 2006-2013 Hard Copy Publications at Head Office • Monthly Migration and Tourist Statistics, September 2013 • The 2009 Zimbabwe Migration Profile • Quarterly Migration and Tourist Statistics, June 2013 • Annual Migration and Tourist Statistics, 2012 Judicial and Social Welfare Statistics in Zimbabwe Download Publications • Zimbabwe Prison census Reports 2012 1st Quarter • Zimbabwe Prison census Reports 2012 2nd Quarter • Zimbabwe Prison census Reports 2012 3rd Quarter • Zimbabwe Prison census Reports 2012 4th Quarter • Zimbabwe Prison census Reports 2011 1st Quarter • Zimbabwe Prison census Reports 2011 2nd Quarter • Zimbabwe Prison census Reports 2011 3rd Quarter Population Census Zimbabwe Download Publications • Census 2012 National Report • Provincial Reports • Manicaland • Harare • Bulawayo • Midlands • Matabeleland North • Matabeleland South • Mashonaland Central • Mashonaland East • Mashonaland West • Masvingo • HIV Prevalence: Data from the 2010-2011 ZDHS • Zimbabwe Demographic and Health Survey Report (ZDHS) Key Findings 2011 78 • Zimbabwe Demographic and Health Survey Report (ZDHS) 2011 • Population Census 2002 • Zimbabwe Demographic and Health Survey Reports (ZDHS) 2006 • Zimbabwe Demographic and Health Survey Reports (ZDHS) 1999 • Zimbabwe Demographic and Health Survey Reports (ZDHS) 1994 • Zimbabwe Demographic and Health Survey Reports (ZDHS) 1988 Cartography Statistics in Zimbabwe Hard Copy Publications at Head Office • Census Atlas Report 2002 Sampling Statistics in Zimbabwe Hard Copy Publications at Head Office • Zimbabwe Master Sample Frame Report 2002 79 APPENDIX VII: ASSESSMENT OF ZEPARU RESEARCH PAPERS Quality assessment A review of Zimbabwe's optimum future currency regime The nexus between growth, employment & poverty in Zim: The economics of employment creation Financial regulation &supervision in Zimbabwe: An evaluation of adequacy & options Mining Sector Policy Study Positioning the Zimbabwe Tourism Sector for Growth: Issues and Challenges Financial inclusion strategies for making financial markets work for the poor in Zimbabwe Keith Jefferies, Gibson Chigumira, & Erinah Chipumho Godfrey Kanyenze and LEDRIZ John Nhavira, Evangelista Mudzonga, Everisto Mugocha Paul Jourdan; Gibson Chigumira; Isaac kwesu, and Erina Chipumho Sanderson Abel; Jecob Nyamadzawo; Shepherd Nyaruwata and Carlton Moyo Daniel Makina, Gamuchirai Chiwunze, Evidence Ndari Currencies Labour Financial Mining Tourism Financial 2013 2013 2013 2012 2013 2014 The Report Structure Is the overall report logically structured (e.g. background and objectives are presented before findings, and findings before conclusions and recommendations) YES NO NO YES YES YES Title page and table of contents provide key basic information 1. Title of paper YES YES YES YES YES YES 2. Date of report YES YES NO YES YES YES 3. Country or region of relevance YES YES YES YES YES YES 4. Name of author(s) YES NO YES YES YES YES 5. Name of organisations that commissioned the study YES YES YES YES YES YES 6. Table of contents YES YES YES YES YES YES 7. Acronyms YES NO NO YES YES YES Executive summary is a stand-alone 2-3 pager 1. Overview of the paper YES YES NO YES YES YES 2. Paper objectives and intended audience YES NO YES YES YES NO 3. Methodology NO NO NO YES YES NO 80 4. Most important findings and conclusions YES YES NO YES YES YES Body of the Study 1. Referenced literature is recent and relevant YES YES NO YES YES YES 2. All citiations and statistics are referenced properly NO YES YES YES YES YES 3. All acronyms are defined YES YES YES YES YES YES Content of the Report Methodology 1. The report describes data sources/samples and provides reasons for their selection and limitations NO YES NO YES YES NO 2. Scale and geographic boundaries of the report are clear and consistent (e.g. with paper title) YES YES YES YES YES YES Analysis 1. Addresses issues of gender NO YES NO NO NO NO 2. Addresses or acknowledges controversial/contentious issues where relevant YES YES NO YES YES YES Findings 1. Are based on evidence provided in the report YES YES NO YES YES YES Relevance and dissemination Relevance 1. Do recommendations specify the targeted group? YES YES YES YES YES YES 2. Are recommendations prioritised YES YES NO NO YES NO Dissemination 1. Have the findings from the report been presented at a workshop/conference? YES YES YES YES YES YES 2. Has the research been published by ZEPARU? YES YES YES YES YES YES 3. Has the research been published in a recognised journal? NO NO NO NO NO NO Skills transfer Local involvement 1. Was a ZEPARU researcher/s involved in the production of this research? YES YES YES YES YES YES 2. Approximately what percentage of the overall work was done by ZEPARU researchers - according to ZEPARU? 40% 100% 81 3. Approximately what percentage of the overall work was done by ZEPARU researchers - according to consultant? 25% N/A Acknowledgemen t 1. Has this work been presented by a ZEPARU researcher at a workshop or conference? Yes YES YES YES 2. Has ZEPARU been requested to provide any follow-up research or advice on this topic? YES YES NO YES YES Assessment of Impact Sector: Mining Title: Authors: Mining Policy Study Paul Jourdan (International/Regional STTA), Isaac Kwesu (Chamber of Mines), Gibson Chigumira (ZEPARU), Erina Chipumho (ZEPARU) Recommendations Evidence of awareness Evidence of policy discussion Evidence of policy change Date uploaded (No. of days on ZEPARU website*) No. of hits (ave. daily hit rate) Other • Minerals Governance: The current “free-mining” colonial mineral regime is not appropriate for using minerals as the basis for wider development and industrialization. • Fiscal Linkages: The current minerals fiscal regime does not capture resource rents nor optimise the developmental impact of mineral extraction. • Forward (downstream) Linkages: Minerals and mineral products constitute critical inputs into a range of downstream sectors such as manufacturing, agriculture and 19/09/2014 (35) 931 (26,60) • The study was presented at a workshop where a number of stakeholders including the Ministry of Mines and Mineral Development. At the workshop, stakeholders had time to comment and discuss the study in its totality and also its recommendations • In the interview with Zimbabwe Environmental Law Association (ZELA), it was reported that many of the recommendations of the Mining Policy Paper had been incorporated into the Draft Minerals Policy. • • In response Draft Minerals Policy that was developed using this report, ZELA has published "A review of Zimbabwe's Draft Minerals Policy" taking a critical look at the draft policy with a lot of focus on transparency, accountability and good governance. The assessment concludes that the draft policy contains progressive provisions that promote good governance of mineral resources. These provisions are based on the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative which specifically • The Draft Minerals Policy references many of the recommendations from this paper such that the international consultant that provided technical assistance during the study has been contracted by the Dept of Mines to assist in the development of the Mineral Policy. • Sections 1035-1038 of the 2014 National Budget stated the Government’s intention to penalise export of unprocessed minerals in order to encourage greater local beneficiation. Beginning 82 infrastructure. • Knowledge Linkages: Skills and technology development is critical to developing the backward/forward linkages. • Develop spatial linkages: Mineral endowments can have significant spatial linkages both through the development of local communities and the collateral use of mineral infrastructure (transport, power, water) by other sectors. looks at access to information, value addition and beneficiation, and the role of other stakeholders (i.e. communities, civil society organisations, and artisanal and small scale miners) 17 1 January 2013. Government will, therefore, levy an export tax on un-beneficiated Sector: Tourism Title: Authors: Positioning the Zimbabwe Tourism Sector for growth: Issues and Challenges Sanderson Able (ZEPARU), Jecob Nyamadzawo (ZEPARU), Shephered Nyaruwata (Local STTA) and Carlton Moyo (ZEPARU) Recommendations Evidence of awareness Evidence of policy discussion Evidence of policy change Date uploaded (No. of days on ZEPARU website*) No. of hits (ave. daily hit rate) Other • There is need to ensure the smooth passage of tourists at ports of entry, and enroute to various resorts in the country. This implies reforming the country’s visa regime and rehabilitation of the road network and reduction of needless delays on police road blocks. • Positioning the tourism sector 10/07/2013 (464) 598 (1.29) • The study was presented at a workshop where a number of stakeholders including the Ministry of Tourism were present. Stakeholders at the workshop, stakeholders had the opportunity to comment and discuss the study’s methodology, findings and recommendations. • • Section 869 of the National Budget, Min. Chinamasa proposed the allocation of funds for the following tourism sector surveys: i. Visitor exit survey ii. Tourism employment survey iii. Domestic and outbound market survey and iv. Census of services • Key informants reported that whilst there is no noticeable policy change, the Ministry of Tourism is in the process of following up on some of the recommendations such as exit surveys etc which it intends to implement as soon as the funding is available. 17 See - (ZELA, 2013) Available from http://hrbcountryguide.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Review-of-Draft-Zimbabwe-Minerals-Policy-.pdf 83 on a sustainable growth path require: a conducive and well co-ordinated institutional framework and policy environment • Establishment of a tourism revolving fund to support investment in the sector. • Improvement in internal airline connections • Human resources development • Improvement in the marketing coverage to both domestic and international tourists. survey. Sector: Financial Title: Authors: Financial inclusion strategies for making financial markets work for the poor in Zimbabwe Daniel Makina, Gamuchirai Chiwunze, Evidence Ndari Recommendations Evidence of awareness Evidence of policy discussion Evidence of policy change Date uploaded (No. of days on ZEPARU website*) No. of hits (ave. daily hit rate) Other The strategies suggested as essential for fostering financial inclusion in Zimbabwe include, among others: • Developing a national financial inclusion strategy with set objectives and targets; • Transforming the People’s Own Savings Bank (POSB); • Promoting the Setting up of Microfinance Banks, technological innovation, infrastructure development; • Reviewing banking laws and regulations; • Promoting expansion of product portfolio; and • Promoting increased 22/10/2011 (127) 102 (1.28) • The study was presented at a ZEPARU dissemination workshop on 26 July 2013 • Very limited given that the study became publicly available in ZEPARU website mid-June 2014 • • Very limited given that the study became publicly available in ZEPARU website mid-June 2014 84 cooperation among banks Sector: Currencies Title: Authors: A review of Zimbabwe's optimum future currency regime Keith Jefferies (International/Regional STTA), Gibson Chigumira (ZEPARU), and Erina Chipumho (ZEPARU) Recommendations Evidence of awareness Evidence of policy discussion Evidence of policy change Date uploaded (No. of days on ZEPARU website*) No. of hits (ave. daily hit rate) Other • Given the loss of credibility of the central bank, the recent history of hyperinflation and loss of monetary control, a credible nominal anchor for prices is an essential prerequisite of a sustainable monetary and exchange rate policy arrangement. This cannot be achieved under the control of the domestic monetary authorities in the short term. • A new Zimbabwean currency under the current 19/11/2013 (335) 339 (1.01) • Preliminary findings were presented at the High Level Conference in Victoria Falls • Other articles opposed to the reintroduction of the Zimbabwe dollar include Colls Ndlovu (2013)18 • The findings of this paper are however not new or unique and are similar to the findings from previous studies other authors such as Seeraj Mohamed (2008)19, Andreas Freytag and Peter Draper(2009)20, Kramarenko, et, al. (2010)21, Mutengezanwa, M. Mauchi, • In 2011 and 2012, the Central Bank Governor Dr. Gideon Gono proposed the reintroduction of the Zimbabwe dollar as a gold￾backed currency23. The Governor argued that the multiple currency regime had contributed to the informalisation of the economy. This undermined fiscal policy by prejudicing the government of tax revenue. Dr. Gono also stated 18 (Colls Ndlovu , 2013) 19 (Seeraj Mohamed , 2008) 20 See - (Andreas Freytag and Peter Draper, 2009) Available from http://www.voxeu.org/article/future-monetary-policy-zimbabwe. They argued that Zimbabwe does not have sufficient reserves for a currency board, would be tempted to deviate from the fiscal policy conditions it would be given by South Africa in order to use the Rand. The paper therefore concludes that the peg of a Zimbabwean currency to a basket of goods would be possible provided there was a changing of the guard at the central bank and Ministry of Finance. 21 (Kramarenko, V. Engstrom, L. Verdier, G. Fernandez, G. Oppers, S. Hughes, R. McHugh, J. and Coats, W. , 2010) 85 circumstances could work if it placed under a currency board arrangement of membership to the CMA. • In the short to medium term require an external currency to be used either as legal tender or for domestic currency to be pegged to it. The main choices are the ZAR and USD. Unilateral adoption of the ZAR is however not feasible and the use of the ZAR would require requesting permission from the CMA. This would take time. F. Njanike, K. Matanga, J. Gopo, R. (2012)22 that in a multicurrency environment the Government’s options to deal with shocks are confined to external borrowing i.e. no seignorage24 • ZANU PF's 2013 Election Manifesto suggested that after being elected it was likely to reintroduce the local currency due to the liquidity pressures faced by citizens. The election promise did however have a proviso stating that "when the economy has reasonably recovered and stabilised and after full and transparent consultations with key stakeholders in the economy and financial sector, the next ZANU PF government would work out the necessary fiscal and monetary modalities and timeframe for bringing back the Zimbabwe dollar to 23 See - (Business Reporter, 2011) and (Golden Sibanda, 2012) 22 See - (Mutengezanwa, M. Mauchi, F. Njanike, K. Matanga, J. Gopo, 2012) - The latter article argued that the country was not ready for the re-introduction of a local currency because the monetary authorities were not committed to maintaining price stability. 24 (Gideon Gono, 2012) 86 function along with the multicurrency system"25. Starting in 2013 the government’s position appears to shift: • One of the underlying assumptions of Zimbabwe’s latest 5 year economic development plan called Zimbabwe Agenda for Sustainable Socio-Economic Transformation (ZimAsset)26 is the continued use of the multi-currency system. • The 2014 National Budget presented on 19 December 2013 makes it clear that the multi-currency regime shall remain in the short term27. • In the new central bank Governor’s announced that “"Government’s consistent and official position is that the country is using the multiple currency system….The local currency would only be resuscitated when the country’s foreign exchange reserves and domestic production levels are significant enough to 25 (ZANU PF, 2013) 26 (Government of Zimbabwe, 2013) 27 (Ministry of Finance and Economic Development, 2013) 87 sustain its rebirth...... It would therefore be economic suicide for Government to do so without foreign exchange reserves to anchor the local currency”28. Sector: Employment/Labour Title: Authors: The nexus between growth, employment and poverty in Zimbabwe: The economics of employyment creation Dr. Kanyenze and LEDRIZ Associates (Local STTA), DR. Chigumira and ZEPARU Associates Recommendations Evidence of awareness Evidence of policy discussion Evidence of policy change Date uploaded (No. of days on ZEPARU website*) No. of hits (ave. daily hit rate) Other • Need to change the manner in which employment and social goals are treated • Generate national and sectoral employment targets to be integrated in the relevant policy documents. • Promote the movement of labour from low productivity communal and informal sectors to high productivity sectors. This can be built into Programs such as the land reform Program. • Rebuild the linkages between agriculture and the rest of the economy which can facilitate re￾industrialization 11/02/2014 (253) 320 (1.26) • The study was presented at a ZEPARU workshop for stakeholders to comment • • Some discussions in the local media mention the paper but the focus appears to be on one issue i.e on the fact that unemployment was worsening even before the height of the economic crisis in 2008. • A BH24 article looks at the proposal to establish value￾chains in mining and improve the sector's capacity to contribute more effectively to the country's overall economic growth. • Concerns about the size of the informal sector were also raised by the Central Bank *NOT ENTIRELY SURE THAT THE POLICY DIRECTIONS TAKEN ARE THE RESULT OF THIS PAPER ALONE BUT THERE IS SOME CLEAR CORRELATION WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE REPORT* • ZimAsset is an example of a plan with employment targets e.g: i. Energy and Power to create between 5300 and 6300 jobs, ii. Manufacturing to create 1000 jobs through the establishment of diamond cutting and polishing centres. 28 88 • The potential for sectors like mining can be maximised through building resource linkages with the rest of the economy comprising backward linkages (supply chain), forward linkages (value chain/beneficiation) etc. • Facilitate broad-based participation and ownership, which in 2012 estimated that US$2 billion was circulating outside the formal banking system to finance transactions in the informal sector. N.B.: The evaluation team was however concerned about section 5.1 of the the report titled "Review of the Economic Policy framework". Large portions of this section were taken word for word from Section 1.4.1. ("Review of the economic Policy Framework) of the 2009 Zimbabwe National Employment Policy Framework without referencing. iii. Leather processing to create 5610 jobs. • The 2014 National Budget articulates the need to target the development of small to medium enterprises to generate growth and provide backward and forward linkages in the mainstream supply chain e.g. the Pharmaceutical industry had "the potential to promote linkages with the packaging, distribution and marketing industries, thereby creating employment". The budget also emphasized the need to increase local beneficiation in order to avoid exporting jobs. Sector: Financial Title: Authors: Financial regulation and supervision in Zimbabwe: An evaluation of adequacy and option John Nhavira (Local STTA), Evangelista Mudzonga ZEPARU) , Everisto Mugocha (ZEPARU) Recommendations Evidence of awareness Evidence of policy discussion Evidence of policy change Date uploaded (No. of days on ZEPARU website*) No. of hits (ave. daily hit rate) Other • Adoption of a twin-peak model for Zimbabwe's financial sector. • Increase the independence of the Central Bank from political 12/06/2014 (132) 134 (1.02) • The study was presented at a ZEPARU dissemination workshop on 26 July 2013 • ZEPARU researchers were interviewed and the recommendations in this report are discussed in two • Whilst there are come discussions on the new Draft Banking Bill, the focus of these has tended to focus on 89 interference • Establish a Standing Committee of Financial Regulators that will ensure the overall coordination of financial regulation. (There will also be a need to continue the current financial stability committee) • Zimbabwe introduce a national credit register and accompanying legislation to pre-empt credit risks. • BIS prudential guidelines such as Basel I, II and III should be incorporated into the relevant legislation • Encourage good corporate governance by amending the Banking Act 2000 and the Companies Act to confer on directors and officers, a duty of care • No more than 10 percent of any class of share in a bank may be owned by a single shareholder, or by shareholders acting together. 2013 reports in the media by Kudzai Chawafambira 29 ownership thresholds 29 See - (Kudzai Chawafambira, 2013) and (Kudzai Chawafambira, 2013) 90 APPENDIX VIII: ZEPARU RESEARCH PAPERS Year Titles Funde r Uploaded Day s Hits per day Hits Authors 2014 Research Papers Enhancing Zimbabwe's Regime for Resolving Corporate Financial Distress USAID 28 May 2014 146 1,29 188 Daniel Fitzpatrick (STTA) Gibson Chigumira Cornelius Dube Isaac Tausha (Competition & Tariff Commission) 2014 Research Papers Agro-Industries/Foods and Beverages Value Chain Diagnostic Study USAID 01 July 2014 113 1,63 184 SIRDC I. Nyemba 2014 Research Papers Financial inclusion strategies for making financial markets work for the poor in Zimbabwe USAID 17 June 2014 127 1,28 162 Daniel Makina (STTA) Gamuchirai Chiwunze Evidence Ndari 2014 Research Papers Engineering and Metals Industries Value Chain Study USAID 01 July 2014 113 1,12 126 SIRDC I. Nyemba 2014 Research Papers Zimbabwe Cotton to Clothing Value Chain Study USAID 02 July 2014 112 1,08 121 Africonsult Sam Geza Tararama Gutu Eli Mtetwa Owen Tshabangu 2014 Research Papers Zimbabwe Chemical Industries Value Chain Study USAID 01 July 2014 113 1,05 119 SIRDC E. Zimhunga 2014 Research Papers Financial Liberalisation Crisis: Experiences and Lessons for Zimbabwe USAID 24 July 2014 90 0,87 78 Gibson Chigumira Albert Makochekanw a 2013 Research Paper Positioning the Zimbabwe Tourism Sector for Growth: Issues and Challenges. USAID 10 July 2013 464 1,29 598 Sanderson Abel Jecob Nyamadzawo Shepherd Nyaruwata (UZ) Carlton Moyo (Min. of Tourism) 2013 Research Paper A Review of Zimbabwe's Optimum Future Currency Regime USAID 19 Nov 2013 335 1,01 339 Keith Jefferies (STTA) Gibson Chigumira Erinah Chipumho 2013 Research Paper The Nexus Between Growth, Employment and Poverty in Zimbabwe: The Economics of Employment Creation USAID 11 February 2014 253 1,26 320 LEDRIZ Godfrey Kanyeze 2013 Research Paper Capital Account Restrictions in Zimbabwe in the Multi-currency period.. USAID 22 May 2014 152 1,89 287 Gibson Chigumira Sehliselo Mpofu Wellington Matsika 2013 Research Paper Access to Bank Credit As a Strategy for Re-industrialisation. - 21 August 2014 63 3,49 220 Cornellius Dube Sanderson Abel Everisto Mugocha 2013 Research Paper Financial Regulation and USAID 12 June 132 1,02 134 John Nhavira Evengelista Everisto 91 Supervision in Zimbabwe - An Evaluation of Adequacy Options 2014 Mudzonga Mugocha 2013 Research Paper Contributions and Challenges facing the Financial Sector in Zimbabwe USAID 17 June 2014 127 1,03 131 Sehliselo Mpofu Wellington Matsika 2012 Research Paper Mining Sector Policy Study USAID 19 September 2014 35 26,60 931 Paul Jourdan (STTA) Gibson Chigumira Isaac Kwesu (Chamber of Mines) Erinah Chipumho 2012 Research Paper Financial Sector Development and Resource Mobilisation: Situation analysis and Policy Option for Zimbabwe USAID 22 April 2013 542 1,00 542 Daniel Makina (STTA) 2012 Research Paper Building Agricultural Competitiveness in Zimbabwe: Lessons from the International Perspective. USAID 22 April 2013 542 0,39 214 C. Martin Webber (STTA) Gibson Chigumira Jecob Nyamadzaw o 2012 Research Paper Strengthening Policy Making Process in Zimbabwe - 25 June 2013 479 0,09 45 ZEPARU 2012 Research Paper An Assessment of the Performance and Competitiveness of Zimbabwean Exports: 2000 – 2010 2012 Research Paper Public Enterprises Restructuring in Support of Sustainable Economic Growth in Zimbabwe - 2011 Research Papers Does the Zimbabwe Stock Exchange (ZSE) have Potential to Support Economic Growth During the Multicurrency system - 22 April 2012 902 0,66 591 Sehliselo Mpofu 2011 Research Papers A Conducive Investment Climate Vital for Sustained Economic Growth in Zimbabwe: Options and Strategies - 23 April 2013 541 0,45 243 Willie Nyakunyada 2011 Research Papers Exploring the Role of Small and Medium Enterprises in Economic Development - 22 April 2012 902 0,22 198 Tawanda Chinembiri 2011 Research Papers Pursuing Inclusive Financial Development for Economic Growth in Zimbabwe: Options and Strategies. - 23 April 2012 901 0,21 191 Alex Bara 2011 Research Papers Linking Electricity Supply to Economic Growth in Zimbabwe - 22 April 2011 1262 0,14 171 Erinah Chipumho 92 2011 Research Papers Digital Opportunities for Economic Growth and Development for Zimbabwe - 22 April 2012 902 0,16 142 Jecob Nyamadzawo 2011 Research Papers Positioning Zimbabwe Manufacturing Sector as a Growth Driver: Lessons from Singapore and Taiwan - 22 April 2011 1262 0,09 115 Cornelius Dube 2010 Research Paper s The Scope for the Private Partnerships for Infrastucture Development in Zimbabwe 22 April 2011 1262 0,16 201 Cornelius Dube Gibson Chigumira 2010 Research Paper s Sustainable Financing Options for Agriculture in Zimbabwe - 10 April 2011 1274 0,11 143 Nicholas Masiyandima Gibson Chigumira Alex Bara 2010 Research Paper s Preconditions for Adopting Single Currencies in Southern African Development Community (SADC) and COMESA 22 October 2011 1082 0,10 107 Erinah Chipumho 2010 Research Paper s Feasibility and Rationale for Establishing a Debt Management Office (DMO) in Zimbabwe 22 April 2011 1262 0,07 83 Albert Makochekanwa Gibson Chigumira Jecob Nyamadzaw o 2010 Research Paper s The Growing Sino-Indo-Africa Trade: Prospects, Challenges for Zimbabwe 23 October 2011 1081 0,06 67 2010 Research Paper s Measures to Enhance Zimbabwe’s Fiscal Space Hard copy only Gibson Chigumira 2006-2009 Research Papers Currency Reform in Zimbabwe: An Analysis of Possible Options 22 January 2014 272 0,25 67 Gibson Chigumira Erinah Chipumho Shephard Shamu 2006-2009 Research Papers Inflation Dynamics in Zimbabwe Hard copy only William Kavila 2006-2009 Research Papers Zimbabwe’s Cotton Sector: Growth and Prospects under a Changing Trade Environment. Hard copy only M. Rusare Collins Chihuri Tasara Muzorori 2006-2009 Research Papers The Impact of HIV and AIDS on the Zimbabwean Economy Published Innocent Matshe Obert Pimhidzai 93 APPENDIX IX: SERA TRAINING COSTS Course Title No: of Participants funded Date Venue Total Cost External Training - SERA Year 1 Introduction to GCE Modelling 5 5-9 Mar 2012 Pretoria, South Africa $11 657,00 BLS International Seminar on Economic Indicators 3 7-18 Mar 2012 Washington DC $28 685,10 MEFMI, Data Requirements for Economic Management SNA 2008 2 4-15 Jun 2012 Arusha, Tanzania $6 564,00 ESAMI, Financial Management for Donor Funded Projects 2 20 Aug-14 Sept 2012 Durban, South Africa $14 516,00 MEFMI, Quantitative Methods & Analysis for Debt & Reserves Mgt 2 3-13 Sept 2012 Lilongwe, Malawi $6 138,00 Total External Training Costs For Year 1 $67 560,10 External Training - SERA Year 2 MEFMI, Economic Modelling & Forecasting 2 15-19 Oct 2012 Lilongwe, Malawi $2 895,42 MEFMI, Debt Management Using DFMAS 6.0 2 11-20 Feb 2013 Luanda, Angola $8 918,85 MEFMI, Debt Operations & Management 2 4-13 Mar 2013 Kigali, Rwanda $5 543,50 MEFMI, Fiscal Policy & Aid Coordination 2 8-19 Apr 2013 Kampala, Uganda $6 899,40 ESAMI, Engendering National Budgets 3 15-26 Apr 2013 Arusha, Tanzania $15 547,00 ESAMI, Advanced Public Sector Financial Management 3 15-26 Apr 2013 Mombasa, Kenya $13 006,50 MEFMI, Advanced Macroeconomic Analysis & Management 4 13-24 May 2013 Kigali, Rwanda $14 410,00 Introduction to CGE Modelling 3 13-18 May 2013 Pretoria, S. Africa $8 651,00 MEFMI, Balance of Payments Manual 6 2 17-28 Jun 2013 Maseru, Lesotho $4 706,76 MEFMI, Methodologies for Public Debt Sustainability Analysis 2 15-24 Jul 2013 Maseru, Lesotho $5 635,76 ATI, Introduction to Tax Analysis & Revenue Forecasting 2 22-26 Jul 2013 Pretoria, S. Africa $7 912,28 ATI, Fiscal Regimes for Mining & Petroleum 1 29 Jul-2 Aug 2013 Pretoria, S. Africa $4 102,25 MEFMI, Macroeconomic Management in Natural Resource Rich countries 2 5-18 Sept 2013 Nairobi, Kenya $9 570,00 MEFMI, Financial Markets Regulation & Reforms 1 9-13 Sept 2013 Victoria Falls, Zim $1 645,00 Total External Training Costs For Year 2 $109 443,72 External Training - SERA Year 3 MEFMI, Debt Statistics Compilation & Reporting 1 14-23 Oct 2013 Gaborone, Botswana $3 042,67 MEFMI, Medium Term Debt Management Strategy 2 4-13 Nov 2013 Mombasa, Kenya $5 916,00 Introduction to CGE Modelling 4 11-15 Nov 2013 Pretoria, S. Africa $9 533,04 ESAMI, Financial Planning & Modelling 2 10-21 Mar 2014 Kampala, Uganda $10 675,42 COMESA Advanced Application of Panel Modelling to Transmission Mechanism of the Monetary Policy 2 2-13 Jun 2014 Nairobi, Kenya $6 286,00 MEFMI, Foundations for Debt Management 1 30 Jun – 11 Jul 2014 Lilongwe, Malawi $3 377,50 ATI, Fiscal Decentralisation & Local Taxation 1 21-25 Jul 2014 Pretoria, S. Africa $2 780,16 ATI, Introduction to Tax Analysis & Revenue Forecasting 1 21-25 Jul 2014 Pretoria, S. Africa $3 665,55 ATI, Advanced Tax Analysis & Revenue Forecasting 1 28 Jul-1 Aug 2014 Pretoria, S. Africa $3 401,75 ATI, Fiscal Regimes for Mining & Petroleum 1 28 Jul - 1 Aug 2014 Pretoria, S. Africa $3 401,75 MEFMI, External Sector Data Compilation & Reporting 3 28 Jul-01 Aug 2014 Kampala, Uganda $6 681,60 ESAMI, Performance Budgeting 2 8-19 Sept 2014 Kampala, Uganda $10 519,82 Total External Training Costs For Year 3 $69 281,26 94 Customized Training (in-country) SERA Year 1 Macroeconomic Analysis & Management 17 10-20 Jul 2012 Mutare $42 516,35 SERA Year 2 Financial Programming & Policy 25 3-14 December 2012 Harare $33 318,17 ZEPARU/IMF/Afritac Macroeconomic Framework 29 5-19 July 2013 Mutare $18 279,00 ZEPARU/TRALAC Regional Negotiations Agenda 26 3-7 June 2013 Kadoma $39 437,00 SERA Year 3 Applied Econometrics 19 7-18 October 2013 Harare $30 702,10 Survey Methodology 23 24-28 February 2014 Harare $5 406,00 Economic Modelling 10 25-29 August 2014 Harare $5 886,64 Total Cost: Customized Training $175 545,26 Advanced Excel SERA Year 2: 15 22-23 January 2013 Harare $3 010,00 15 26-27 February 2013 Harare $3 010,00 12 23-24 April 2013 Harare $2 434,00 SERA Year 3: 14 3-4 December 2013 Harare $2 818,00 12 20-21 May 2014 Harare $1 994,00 13 30 Sept - 1 Oct 2014 Harare $2 146,00 Total Cost: Excel Training $15 412,00 95 APPENDIX X: COST OF QUANTITATIVE TRAINING Course Title No: of Participants funded Date Venue Total Cost Introduction to GCE Modelling 5 5-9 March 2012 Pretoria, South Africa $11 657,00 MEFMI, Economic Modelling & Forecasting 2 15-19 October 2012 Lilongwe, Malawi $2 895,42 Introduction to CGE Modelling 3 13-18 May 2013 Pretoria, South Africa $8 651,00 Introduction to CGE Modelling 4 11-15 November 2013 Pretoria, South Africa $9 533,04 Applied Econometrics 19 7-18 October 2013 Harare $30 702,10 Economic Modelling 10 25-29 August 2014 Harare $5 886,64 Total 43 $69 325,20 Total training cost $300 400,98 96 U.S. Agency for International Development 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20523