|
A.
BACKGROUND
Uzbekistan is a
country with a sound basic and technical education system, strong and
experienced leadership, and established processes of making and
implementing economic policy decisions. The country is, however, facing
economic policy and economic management challenges, associated with the
assumption of sovereignty and the decision to change economic systems,
which are beyond its prior experience.
In the past,
the public sector was mainly concerned with implementing policies
designed at the level of the Union. Now, the Government must design its
own policies, establish international economic relationships, set up new
economic management systems in such fields as taxation, banking, joint
ownership of enterprises and the management of unemployment, and create
a legal framework for private enterprise activities in most areas of the
economy. In addition, the civil service must develop new skills and
attitudes to enable its members to facilitate the economic transition
effectively.
In seeking
solutions to its wide range of problems there are few reliable models to
follow. The Government of Uzbekistan is determined to avoid the economic
and political instability that often accompanies profound and rapid
changes of systems. Consequently, Government officials need to be fully
informed about the experience of other countries of the former Soviet
Union and Eastern Europe, but they also need access to successful
experience in other parts of the world. Even though old relationships
will remain close, openings to the outside world are necessary in order
to have as wide a choice of innovations as possible.
The Government
has established significant policy and operational dialogues with
international and bilateral agencies that can provide substantial
assistance to Uzbekistan. Although firmly committed to shift its
economic system from a command to a market economy, the Government has
chosen to chart its own course on economic liberalization and
privatization in order to minimize hardship and instability during the
transition period.
Under these
circumstances, the UNDP seeks to devise a program with distinctive
attributes that the Government will find unusually responsive to its
needs. We have therefore sought to identify the characteristics of a
program Government officials seem to value most. Those characteristics
can be summarized briefly as follows:
·
The program should not have preconceived positions concerning the
pace or style of reforms; instead, it should support Government policy
and enhance its ability to articulate its positions;
·
The program should be innovative and responsive to the changing
agenda of problems that arise to confront officials in dealing with
transition issues;
·
The program should have the ability to respond quickly to
requests for exposure to different ways of analyzing policy objectives
and different means of managing or implementing policy choices.
B.
ASSISTANCE REQUIREMENTS
The Mission has
held useful discussions with officials from the Committee of State
Property and Privatization, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of
Labor, the Central State Taxation Board, the Ministry of Higher
Education, the State Committee on Economic Forecasting and Statistics,
the Central Bank, the Tashkent State Economics University, the
University of World Economy and Diplomacy (UWED), and the Tashkent
Financial Institute.
The types of
cooperation needed cover a very wide range of activities, but most of
them center around the desire to improve access to the experience of
other countries through visits by Uzbek officials, consultants coming to
Uzbekistan, attending courses abroad, and presenting courses here. All
of these activities involve the transfer of knowledge and experience in
one form or another.
The topics on
which information and experience appear to be needed cluster around the
policies and systems needed to perform new economic tasks. Prominent
topics include tax administration, savings institutions, unemployment
services, labor exchanges, private and public sector management
techniques, systems of national accounts, national currency issues,
money circulation analyses, credit policy, foreign debt management,
measures for valuing enterprises, commercial law drafting, foreign
investment management procedures, development of private consulting
firms, antitrust legislation, budget policy, accounting and auditing
techniques, computerization, commercial bank regulation, and how to
create a stock exchange. In each case, the need is not only for policy
information and management techniques, but also for computer equipment
and training.
The list of
topics on which the Government is called upon to devise new policies and
management systems is extensive and still incomplete. Every day or every
week new challenges will confront decision makers as unforeseen issues
arise from domestic developments or events abroad. In this situation,
the UNDP can be of most assistance to the Government not by simply
providing expert advice on a particular issue, but by helping the
Government to organize itself to examine policy issues as they arise.
In the long
run, the new orientation of Government policies will require major
changes in central structures, civil service practices and procedures,
and methods of dealing with the private sector. The more immediate
priority, however, is to improve the capacity of existing institutions
to understand the nature of the challenges confronting them and the
range of policy and management alternatives available in dealing with
them. Only when the most important policy options have been decided will
the Government need to consider the detailed structural and procedural
reforms necessary to institutionalize the changes.
II.
PROPOSED PROGRAM
The proposed
program would have three major objectives: to broaden the experience of
senior Uzbek officials and economists responsible for the analysis of
critical economic policy and economic management issues; to provide a
mechanism for conducting background studies and economic analysis
relative to policy options; and to provide training on the techniques of
economic analysis and public sector management as practiced in market
economies.
Few
methodologies or systems found elsewhere are likely to be suitable for
direct adoption by Uzbekistan. Most will need to be tailored to the
circumstances, traditions, resources, and preferences of Uzbek leaders
before they can be implemented. For this process of adaptation, Uzbek
academicians, senior officials and economists need the means of
analyzing the economic implications of policy options, and considering
the responses of other countries to similar policy problems. For this
reason, the program will contain the possibility of providing
consultants on priority policy issues, in addition to sponsoring visits
abroad by economic policy makers and analysts. In addition, the program
will seek to adapt imported course curricula to the needs of the
country.
The program
would thus consist of four sets of activities, in two clusters, as
follows:
A. Economic policy and management issues
1. Visits to
other countries by senior Uzbek officials to provide first-hand exposure
to the policy framework and managerial mechanisms through which those
countries deal with comparable issues. Since other sources of funding
will be available for visits to a number of countries, the UNDP program
will emphasize visits to countries without strongly established
technical cooperation programs, such as a number of newly industrialized
Asian countries, and possibly successful experiences in Eastern Europe
or the CIS.
2. Study groups
composed of academicians and government officials would consider the
implications of policy alternatives, through comparative research on the
experience of other countries and through economic analysis. Consultants
from abroad would, where appropriate, work with the study groups to
provide comparative experience and employ the sort of economic analysis
used in market economies. The consultants would also, when requested,
assist Uzbekistan officials to select and adapt appropriate strategies
to deal with problems. Suitable consultants might, for example, be
identified during trips abroad by senior officials.
B. Short courses on priority issues
1. Short
courses dealing with techniques for analyzing policy options and
utilizing managerial methodologies could be offered at UWED with
appropriate curricular and instructional support from training
institutions abroad. Initially the program would rely upon existing
courses offered by multilateral institutions and high-quality
development studies centers in advanced countries. Although these
courses will not generally be available in the Russian language, some
may have already been translated. Others could be taught by Uzbek
instructors sent abroad to attend the courses and then supported by a
senior instructor from the originating institution.
2. Imported
courses could be translated and adapted to local conditions by faculty
of the UWED assisted by the UNDP. A locally based training expert would
offer courses for training of trainers. The translated and adapted
courses could be given broader dissemination through other institutions,
such as the Tashkent State Economics University or the Tashkent
Financial Institute.
Government
already has a number of special committees designed to cut across
ministerial boundaries in order to consider problems from multiple
points of view. These committees are task forces or action agencies,
however, not research or study groups. In order to generate analyses and
comparative research in support of the work of such task forces, a small
unit based in a university could organize study groups of academicians
and government officials, which could conduct comparative studies and
analyses related to these topics. The unit could also be enabled to
provide workshops, seminars and short courses on priority topics, with
support from appropriate institutions abroad.
This kind of
unit would allow the Government the opportunity to study policy
alternatives carefully, without being forced to reach a conclusion
simply on the basis of urgency or outside pressures. The unit could not
only examine issues in depth, it could also articulate its conclusions
in professional terms, to improve the understanding of external agencies
of the positions adopted by the Government.
The unit should
be issues-oriented; that is, it should focus its efforts on a selected
number of priority issues selected for attention in consultation with
the Government.
If the program
is to be responsive to the priority concerns of the Government in a
timely fashion, its staff will need access to senior economic
policy-makers and managers. For this reason, consideration could be
given to locating the project within one or another of the economic
agencies of government. This would facilitate government economists’
participation in study groups while continuing to perform their regular
duties, and it would provide the unit with convenient access to official
data.
Another option
would be to find a base in a university such as UWED, with close
relations with government departments. Clearly, the training aspects
would benefit from such a base, but it might also have advantages for
the aspects of the program involving the consideration of policy
options. Applied research generally can best be conducted somewhat
removed from the pressures of day-to-day decision-making. If it is too
far removed from the policy process, however, it can quickly become
irrelevant. To ensure regular interaction between the unit and the
economic agencies of Government, a program committee of economic policy
makers could guide the unit’s work.
To create such
a unit, the full cooperation of the faculty of the UWED would be
required, as well as the part-time secondment of qualified staff from
Government agencies, made possible on a case by case basis. The unit
would have the services, initially, of a senior expatriate economist and
an experienced trainer supplied by the UNDP.
It can be
anticipated that if this unit succeeds in performing a useful applied
research and analysis service for the Government, other donor agencies
may be willing to add to its resources. If this were to happen, the unit
could grow into an economic policy institute able to undertake a broader
range of activities in support of policy makers and policy implementers.
Such an institute could, for example:
·
conduct seminars, lectures and short courses;
·
conduct research for and advise policy makers as requested;
·
facilitate cooperation between western experts and local policy
makers and academics;
·
develop a library of economics texts, historical studies of
policy reforms, policy analyses, etc;
·
translate economics materials into Russian and/or Uzbek;
·
publish and disseminate materials to policy makers, academicians,
and other opinion leaders; and
·
build a database of economic information on Uzbekistan.
The creation of
this sort of an institute would take time and substantial resources. We
believe it would be better to begin with a relatively modest program and
expand it if the Government finds the approach useful. A Project
Steering Committee on which the Government, the University, and all
participating donor organizations were represented could be established
to guide the evolution of the organization.
If the
Government desires a program along these lines, the UNDP would be asked
to provide the following types of support:
·
Arrange and provide funding for visits abroad, especially to
Asian countries, to observe alternative means of dealing with economic
policy and economic management issues;
·
Supply the services of short-term consultants on priority
economic and management issues of interest to the Government;
·
Arrange for the participation of Uzbek academicians and
government officials in selected short courses, workshops and seminars
abroad, related to priority economic policy and management issues;
·
Arrange for the presentation of short courses and workshops in
Uzbekistan on topics of priority interest, with the assistance of
development institutions abroad;
·
Assist in the translation and adaptation of imported short
courses and workshops to meet the needs and circumstances of Uzbekistan;
·
Supply the services of a senior economist with broad knowledge of
development experience, who would be attached to an Uzbek institution,
where he would assist his local colleagues to identify priority policy
and systems problems suitable for inclusion in the program. They would
together determine the advisability and itinerary of visits abroad by
Uzbek officials, and/or of consultation requirements for foreign
specialists. They could also organize study groups to analyze the
implications of policy alternatives and to compare the experience of
other countries;
·
Supply the services of a training expert, to be based at the UWED,
to help schedule and arrange for courses for senior officials to be held
at the Management Development Institute. The trainer would be
knowledgeable of sources of appropriate courses abroad, and would
arrange for participation in them by UWED instructors, or their
presentation with the assistance of interpreters. The trainer would also
conduct Training of Trainers courses, and assist in organizing the
translation and adaptation of imported courses by UWED staff;
·
Provide equipment including computers and audio-visual equipment
for training activities to UWED; and
·
Provide funds for holding seminars and workshops at UWED, and for
employing staff from UWED, other universities and the Government for
part-time participation in program activities.
The UWED would
need to provide office space for the UNDP experts, space for meetings
and classes, secretarial support, and office supplies.
If the
Government of Uzbekistan finds that a program along these lines would
address some of its priority concerns, guidance on the issue of location
of the activities would be appreciated. We assume that the training and
retraining of senior officials and economists would be based in a
university, and that the University of World Economy and Diplomacy would
be an appropriate location. The choice of location for the macroeconomic
analysis study groups between UWED and a central government Ministry,
Committee or Department remains to be made.
Attaching the
unit directly to a government department would ensure that its efforts
would focus on topics of high priority. Policy-makers would have ready
opportunity to review its work, and the program committee task of
maintaining the unit’s focus would be relatively simple.
If the unit was
attached, with the training component, to UWED on the other hand, it
could more readily involve university researchers along with government
officials in the study groups. Moreover, it is often advantageous to
conduct studies in a place slightly removed from day-to-day activities
because the urgency of the latter tends to overshadow the former. The
function of the program committee in keeping the unit focused upon
priority topics would be very important in this case.
If the decision
is taken to attach the analytical unit to a department of government, it
would be important to receive an early indication as to which department
that would be. As soon as a positive decision is taken about the general
outlines of the program, and the location of its activities, the Mission
will devote its remaining time to an attempt to quantify the assistance
described above, and to work out a detailed plan of cooperation with
appropriate institutions. The UNDP will give its highest priority to the
process of completing the preparation of the program and achieving its
approval by the Government and the UNDP governing process. It is
anticipated that the program could be launched within six months from
the date of approval in principle by the Government.
|
