3.1 ACTION LINE 3.1: DEVELOPMENT, DESIGN AND
IMPLEMENTATION OF A COMPREHNISIVE MONITORING SYSTEM
- DESIGN AND
- LEVEL OF
- MONITORING METHODS
AND DATA SOURCES
In light of the proposed recommendations, a
monitoring system is of principal importance for the success of the
IPC project as it would perform at least two functions:
- To monitor the direct impact of policy decisions
and to assess the effectiveness of policy change efforts in the SME
- To provide relevant vehicles (based on analyses and
relevant data) to decision makers that would both inform them of
developments in the SME sector and provide support for policy
The importance and validity of different types of
monitoring systems have increased significantly in recent years.
Monitoring systems have also become widely used by businesses and
governments in decision making. Such monitoring systems include,
the Index of Economic Freedom developed by the Heritage Foundation,
the International Corruption Ranking developed jointly by the
University of Goetingen and Transparency International, and others
developed by the Economist Intelligence Unit, the EBRD, etc.
Effective monitoring systems include quality information and
analysis and reporting and policy recommendations that have
approved by the relevant policy and/or decision makers.
The objective of this action line is to design and
implement a comprehensive monitoring system to determine whether or
not policy recommendations are being administered and enforced, and
ultimately, if the desired level of success is has been achieved.
The heart of this monitoring system will be the Center for the
Study of Democracy ("CSD"). Since 1990, the CSD has gained
considerable experience in monitoring public attitudes,
privatisation and economic reform, and media and audience behavior
as an independent public policy research institution.
The actions foresee:
- the design an implementation of the monitoring
system (DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION).
- the development of at least two levels of
monitoring, one on the macro level and one specific IPC related
activities (LEVEL OF MONOTORING).
- the acquisition of data regarding the
implementation of programs and the development of basic instruments
to be used to quantitatively and qualitatively analysis the data
(MONITORING METHODS AND DATA SOURCES).
DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION
The main output of the monitoring system will be a
Report to be produced every 6 months. The findings in this report
will be reviewed periodically, e.g., in six month cycles, in both a
workshop discussion and a policy forum. The objective of the
workshop discussion will be to assess on an expert level the
relevance and the objectivity of the report of findings. The report
of findings (approved by experts) will provide the background for
discussions in the policy forum. The main objective of the forum
will be to give public approval to the Report and to discuss
eventual future activities.
Both the discussion group and the policy forum will
also provide guidance for the development and implementation of the
monitoring system itself. Specifically, the precise format and
level of the monitoring must be outlined, the exact information and
analyses needs to be designed, and the main indicators of the
monitoring system need to be agreed upon.
LEVEL OF MONITORING
At least two levels of monitoring must be included
in the system: a macro level and a specific IPC related activities
On the macro monitoring level, the system would
monitor macro-economic performance and developments in the country
based on a comprehensive system of indicators. Ideally this could
be done using the group of ten indicators of The Index of Economic
Freedom (see B.T. Johnson, T.P. Sheeny, THE INDEX OF ECONOMIC
FREEDOM: The Heritage Foundation, 1995, p. 11-21) and by using
modified scales and interpretation. These indicators are:
- Trade policy
- Taxation policy
- Government consumption of economic output
- Monetary policy
- Capital flows and foreign investment
- Banking policy
- Wage and price controls
- Property rights
- Regulation policy
- Black market
With respect to specific IPC related activities,
monitoring at this level is dependent on the specific design of the
IPC project and the activities to be undertaken.
MONITORING METHODS AND DATA
Part of the basic information covering the levels of
monitoring outlined above could be obtained by the National
Statistical Institute and by using the survey research database of
CSD. The latter includes surveys on economic reforms,
privatization, public attitudes, as well as registration
information on companies in the state and the private sector.
The other part of the information will be obtained
through a combination of survey research methods. The basic
instruments to be used will be quantitative and qualitative surveys
- Focus groups with experts Focus groups could be
used in the initial stage of the project to help specify the
relevant system of indicators on which the monitoring system will
be based. At later stages focus groups could be used to obtain
qualitative assessments of the legal and economic environment of
the SME sector.Suggested number of groups: 2-4
- Quantitative surveys of experts This type of
surveys could be used to obtain expert assessment of
ongoing/projected changes in legislation, economic situation,
etc.Sample: non-representative sample of 70-100 experts.
- Quantitative surveys of business leaders This type
of surveys could be used to obtain assessments of the impact of
ongoing/projected changes over the SME sector.Sample: sample
composition would depend on the type of impact monitored. It could
be constructed to monitor developments as a result of IPC, or
developments of the economy in general.
- Quantitative surveys of the public Surveys of the
public could be used to assess the overall acceptance of reform
efforts, attitudes towards economic policies, etc.Sample: surveys
of that type should be based on a representative sample of the
population 18+ of about 1000 respondents.
Each monitoring cycle research focus will include a
combination of statistical information and surveys of the
aforementioned four types. Including all four types of surveys
would be necessary in order to adequately cover the different
aspects and impacts of change. Depending on priorities, information
needs of decision makers the composition of each cycle could be
3.1.4 EXPECTED RESULTS
THIS SECTION PURPOSELY LEFT BLANK