Report Turin Workshop on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
ILO Workshop
on
Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
Turin, 1-3 July 2002
Sponsored by INTEGRATION and CODEV
1/25
Report Turin Workshop on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
Background & Objectives
The workshop was organised jointly by INTEGRATION, CODEV and TURIN and
involved participants from all sectors and regions. The programme (Annex 1) and the
list of participants (Annex 2) are attached. A statement by the Director General,
delivered at the start of the workshop, is attached as Annex 3.
The objectives of this workshop were three-fold:
To review the various approaches to poverty which are being pursued within ILO
and to consider how a more coherent approach could be adopted.
It is increasingly desirable that ILO should have a coherent approach to poverty
because it is being called upon to show how it is meeting internationally agreed
targets for poverty eradication-and to explain how it is doing this in partnership with
others. Further, this coherent approach should underpin ILO‟s contribution to the
PRSPs and to achieving the MDGs.
To share experiences of work in practice on poverty-including methods being
developed for monitoring impact
ILO has a long history of working on poverty so it is necessary to reflect on what has
been achieved and how impact has been measured. Providing guidance on these issues
and making sure experience is shared between staff in field and headquarters is
essential.
To consider how ILO can improve its contribution to poverty reduction through
the regular budget and technical cooperation
The current programming framework in the ILO does not specifically address the
issue of poverty reduction. In the preparation process for the Programme & Budget
2004-05, poverty reduction is included in the proposals coming from the regions,
building upon the ILO‟s strategic objectives around Decent Work. It is necessary to
orient programmes and resources to have an impact on poverty reduction. Including
poverty reduction and social inclusion as one of six cross-cutting objectives to which
Programmes are supposed to respond in their proposals for the P&B 2004-05 should
facilitate this.
Setting the stage
INTEGRATION and CODEV set the stage for this workshop, underlining the
importance for the ILO to reflect on and mobilize its efforts to contribute further
to poverty reduction.
2/25
Report Turin Workshop on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
The ILO has a long tradition of working towards poverty reduction as part of its
overall mandate to promote social justice. ILO has contributed substantially to
international approaches to poverty reduction which are now taken for granted within
the development community. Projects and programmes in past decades have in some
cases contributed to reducing poverty. The poverty reduction aspect of much of this
work has not always been made explicit or recognized.
Work on the social dimensions of globalisation has shown that there is a need to
change the rules for inclusion and sharing of benefits if globalisation is to contribute
to poverty reduction. The ILO is therefore advocating an integrated approach to
combat poverty through the Decent Work Agenda .
The internationally agreed „Millenium Development Goals‟ provide an overall
framework for the ILO to integrate its work both at the national level and at the
global level with the countries and the development partners. From the first
experience on the national „Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSP) process, it has
become clear that ILO needs to do more to make its voice heard and to have an
effective and convincing participation in the debate.
The ILO is facing major challenges in linking the Decent Work Agenda to poverty
reduction. It needs to show it can make a visible impact. The means at the disposal of
the ILO to do this are limited, with a zero-growth regular budget around US$ 500
million per biennium, mainly dedicated to staff resources and with limited scope for
re-alignment. Extrabudgetary funding, which offers a much greater opportunity to
address poverty reduction, amounted in the last biennium to some $ 250 million
The multi-bilateral donors to the ILO have a clear view about the strengths and
weaknesses of the organisation. The donors are keen to see closer integration of
regular budget and extrabudgetary resources under a common programming
framework. They also want to see the ILO to become more involved in UN
coordination and noticed initial lack of involvement in the MDG campaign. Future
support to the ILO will depend to a large extent on the way in which the ILO can
demonstrate it is contributing to MDGs and PRSPs.
Partly in response to these pressures, the ILO has recently joined the United
Nations Development Group and strengthened its work around the PRSP process.
Further, efforts are underway to improve overall quality in design and delivery of
technical cooperation, ensuring the programmes are relevant to the major
development frameworks (MDGs, PRSPs, CCA/UNDAF). In the 2004-05 P&B
preparations, the technical cooperation dimension will be integrated into the
proposals from sectors and regions under one set of objectives. The MDGs represent
an opportunity to make the ILO programme more visible at the country level, working
as part of the UN country team in assisting in the preparation of the MDG reports.
3/25
Report Turin Workshop on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
Trade unions have particular contributions to make in relation to MDGs that touch
upon agriculture and other areas of poverty concentrations, as well as those relating
to measures to reduce poverty, such as in the provision of education and health
services. Action by employers' organizations in relation to job creation, training and
promotion of entrepreuneurship is also quite pertinent to poverty reduction.
This will be facilitated by the experiences emerging from the Decent Work Pilot
Programmes and in general by future Decent Work Country Programmes that lay out
the national priorities for ILO action. In this process it is essential to involve the
constituents to ensure ownership and stakeholder involvement in ILO‟s programme.
Involving the trade unions and employers organizations in the PRSP and MDG
processes as relevant representatives of civil society can allow the ILO to boost the
participatory nature of such processes while at the same time putting forward the
decent work agenda.
As part of the outcome of the workshop and within the context of the development
of the indicators for Decent Work, it is essential to also define indicators on ILO‟s
contribution to poverty reduction, which in turn will facilitate the dialogue with
donors and development partners.
Workshop structure and approach
The workshop was structured around some of the different approaches and
frameworks for poverty (rights-based approaches, social exclusion, governance and
empowerment and sustainable livelihoods) and provided the opportunity for discussion
of the relevance of such frameworks for the ILO „s approach to decent work and
poverty reduction and to consider whether coherence was possible. Approaches
covered also included income/consumption, basic needs, and participatory approaches.
It was noted that poverty was multidimensional and that it was essential that
responses to poverty were multi-sectoral and integrated.
There were some heartfelt reminders from field participants that the reality of poor
people „s lives needed to drive ILO programmes, which tended to be supply driven.
In annex 4 an overview is given of the outcome of the different working group
sessions that tried to identify the issues the ILO needs to address at this stage. On
the basis of the different panel discussions and presentations on day 1 and 2 of the
workshop, the insights gained by the participants are also reflected in Annex 4.
4/25
Report Turin Workshop on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
Conclusions on the way forward
Among the participants a strong consensus emerged on the following issues (see also
the attached questionnaire and outcomes, Annex 6)
a) A need for an exercise which made clear the links between the Decent Work
Agenda and the Poverty Reduction Agenda to guide future work in the ILO.
b) This was essential so that ILO could be more focused and effective in
contributing to the PRSP and in developing a strategy for achieving the
MDGS in partnership with other key UN organisations.
c) Tackling poverty reduction effectively particularly posed challenges to ILO as
it required an integrated approach. This would need continual rethinking of
ILO s ways of doing things -in particular ways in which ILO HQ and field
relationships could be structured and strengthened to meet the needs of
constituents, country priorities and poor people themselves.
d) It was strongly felt that ILO‟s work should begin with country priorities and
here constituents needed to be key actors.
e) All ILO sectors/field offices should have an equal stake in poverty reduction
policies. Different approaches as represented by different sectors had equal
value as entry points in contributing to poverty reduction in the framework
of the decent work approach. Each sector should ensure that this approach is
appropriately flanked by the aspects of decent work covered primarily by other
sectors.
f) Social partners had to be key partners in taking forward this agenda and
opportunities presented themselves for helping them strengthen their capacity
as well as for strengthening ILO‟s capacity for understanding and working with
social partners.
g) Monitoring and Evaluation needed strengthening with the development of a
more consistent and coherent approach across ILO.
h) Program and Budget processes should provide more specific guidance on how
poverty reduction should be addressed in the design of proposals.
The consensus around these issues was captured in the format of a logical framework
that sets out the goal, purpose and outputs for the ILO to make a contribution to
poverty reduction on the basis of the Decent Work Agenda.
5/25
Report Turin Workshop on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
This framework is attached as Annex 5 and indicates the need for action in the
following areas:
1. Providing a conceptual framework as the basis for the articulation
between Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
2. Implementing operational programmes in field and headquarters that
contribute to poverty reduction
3. Supporting and involving the constituents in the poverty debate at
country, regional and global level
4. Providing resources, developing skills and enabling structures that
promote ILO‟s contribution to poverty reduction
5. Providing tools, guidelines, research to support the overall process
At the closure of the workshop it was agreed to submit the findings to the Senior
Management Team for their consideration and endorsement as part of overall ILO
strategy. It was also recognized that the workshop outcomes must be linked up to a
matching resource strategy but also integrated into a wider political strategy for the
whole Organization and its constituents to address the challenges of poverty
reduction.
Clearly the underlying conceptual framework for this is the Decent Work Agenda.
Within that framework more work is needed on the interfaces between the different
components (e.g. rights and employment) and the relevance for the informal economy
but also the rural economy.
On the operational level, the workshop outcomes tie in with ongoing efforts around
the office. The National Policy Group (INTEGRATION) is already working on Decent
Work Country Programmes and Frameworks that would incorporate poverty
dimensions. Lessons learnt in pilot countries are to be captured and disseminated. The
involvement of ILO in the PRSP process has to go ahead in many countries and
immediate guidance for the field is needed for that. A paper on Decent Work
Indicators is also coming out shortly. ILO will actively participate in the Millennium
Project on the MDGs, with INTEGRATION facilitating the involvement of different
parts of the Office.
ILO‟s development partners and especially the donors have shown strong support to
move forward on the issues coming out of the workshop. In setting priorities for
extrabudgetary funding and in designing technical cooperation programmes, the
contribution to poverty reduction will be increasingly important. CODEV is working on
guidance in this area.
6/25
Report Turin Workshop on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
Annex 1 Programme
Session I. Introduction and perspectives
Date Time Topic Speaker Facilitator/Chair
8.45-9.00 Organisational arrangements Secretariat
Monday1
July
9.00-9.30 Opening remarks: “The challenges for ILO” Presenters: Fred Fluitman
Gerry Rodgers
Mary Johnson
9.30-9.45 Participant introductions
9.45-10.30 Panellists:
Setting out the workshop objectives Dermot Shields
Different definitions of poverty Pat Holden
Key issues on the International Poverty Agenda Rolph van der Hoeven
10.30-11.00 Coffee
11.00-11.45 Perspectives on Poverty: Presenter: Ann Trebilcock
Different approaches to poverty eradication: Simon Maxwell, Director
Is coherence possible or desirable? ODI London
11.45-12.45 Discussion in Plenary Discussants:
Samir Radwan
Nomaan Majid
Naomi Cassirer
12.45-14.00 Lunch
7/25
Report Turin Workshop on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
Session II. Sub-theme: Rights-based approaches
Date Time Topic Speaker Facilitator/Chair
Monday 14.00-14.45 Rights-based approaches to poverty: Presenter: Azita Berar-Awad
1 July What are the current debates? Robert McCorquodale
14.45-15.30 Discussion in Plenary Discussants:
Janine Rodgers
Emmanuel Reynaud
Steven Oates
15.30-16.00 Tea
16.00-16.45 Group work, 4 groups: Group leaders:
“The ILO was there at the beginning, but has not been Elisabeth Morris
effective in ensuring that „employment‟ is central on the Ibrahim Awad
current poverty related agenda.” Kamil Kamuluddeen
- Why? Anne Herbert
- How should this issue be addressed?
16.45-17.30 Reporting back
17.30-17.45 Summing up Dermot Shields / Fred
Fluitman
8/25
Report Turin Workshop on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
Session III. Sub-themes: Livelihood and governance approaches
Date Time Topic Speaker Facilitator/Chair
8.30-9.00 Livelihoods-based approaches to poverty: Presenter: Youyun Zhang
Employment and what else? Dermot Shields
Tuesday
2 July
9.00-9.45 ILO‟s experience with livelihoods-based approaches to Panellists:
poverty eradication Bernd Balkenhol
Christine Evans-Klock
Mpenga Kabundi
9.45-10.30 General Discussion
10.30-11.00 Coffee
11.00-11.30 Poverty: Role of governance and social dialogue Presenter: Stephen Pursey
Patricia O‟ Donovan
11.30-12.15 ILO‟s experience with social dialogue, participation and Panellists:
poverty eradication Jurgen Schwettmann
Virgilio Levaggi *
Claude Akpokavie
12.15-12.45 General discussion
12.45-14.00 Lunch
* presentation was made by Eduardo Araujo
9/25
Report Turin Workshop on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
Session IV. Sub–theme: Social exclusion
Date Time Topic Speaker Facilitator/Chair
Tuesday 14.00-14.45 Poverty and Social Exclusion: Presenter: Alejandro Bonilla
2 July What does it mean? Jordi Estivill, University of
Barcelona
14.45-15.30 Discussion in Plenary Discussants:
Hamid Tabatabai
Amy King Dejardin
Christian Jacquier
15.30-16.00 Tea
16.00-16.45 Group work, 4 groups: Group leaders:
“Poverty can be „viewed‟ from different angles: Decent Philippe Marcadent
work; Rights, Livelihoods, Dialogue, Exclusion. Yousef Qaryouti
Questions: Eduardo Araujo
(a) “Sum-parts” Is the „sum‟ of the ILO‟s poverty-related Girma Agune
activities greater than the parts?
(b) What is now needed? How can the capacities of
different parts of the organisation be used more
effectively for poverty reduction?
16.45-17.30 Reporting back Dermot Shields / Fred
17.30-17.45 Summing up Fluitman
10/25
Report Turin Workshop on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
Session V. An integrated approach?
Date Time Topic Speaker Facilitator/Chair
8.30-9.30 Design, implementation and evaluation of ILO activities Panellists: Jean Majeres
on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction Iqbal Ahmed
Wednesday
Graeme Buckley
Herman van der Laan
3 July Judith Hoyles
9.30-10.30 Group work, 4 groups, 2 topics: Group leaders:
Given current ILO policies, plans and activities related to Reynold Simons
decent work and poverty reduction, Corinne Vargha
(i) what more could/should be done Jacobo Velasco
(ii) how could/should things be done Ali Ibrahim
better/differently
10.30-11.00 Coffee
11.00-12.00 “May we now speak of a Turin consensus on Decent Dermot Shields / Fred
Work and Poverty Reduction?” Fluitman
12.00-12.30
Summing up
12.30-13.00 Next steps… Gerry Rodgers
Mary Johnson
13.00-14.00 Lunch
11/25
Report Turin Workshop on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
Annex 2 Participants (Officials contacted in some units were unable to participate due
to other commitments.)
NAME OF INVITEE DEPARTMENT E-MAIL
1 Girma AGUNE IFP SKILLS agune@ilo.org
2 Iqbal AHMED CODEV ahmed-iqbal@ilo.org
3 Claude AKPOKAVIE ACTRAV akpokavie@ilo.org
4 Eduardo ARAUJO LIMA araujo@lima.oit.org.pe
5 Ibrahim AWAD CAIRO awad@ilo.org
6 Bernd BALKENHOL EMP/SFU balkenhol@ilo.org
7 Alejandro BONILLA PROTECT bonilla@ilo.org
8 Azita BERAR INTEGRATION berar@ilo.org
9 Graeme BUCKLEY INTEGRATION buckleyg@ilo.org
10 Naomi CASSIRER MANILA cassirer@ilo.org
11 Christine EVANS-KLOCK IFP/SEED evans-klock@ilo.org
12 Jordi ESTIVILL PASCUAL University of Barcelona ges@gabinet.com
13 Fred FLUITMAN TURIN f.fluitman@itcilo.org
14 Ann HERBERT SECTOR herbert@ilo.org
15 Pat HOLDEN INTEGRATION holden@ilo.org
16 Judith HOYLES PROGRAM hoyles@ilo.org
17 Ali IBRAHIM DAR-ES-SALAAM aliibrahim@ilo.org
18 Christian JACQUIER STEP jacquier@ilo.org
19 Mary JOHNSON CODEV johnsonmc@ilo.org
20 Mpenga KABUNDI ABIDJAN kabundim@abidjan.ilo.sita.net
21 Kamil KAMALUDDEEN ABIDJAN kamaludden@ilo.org
22 Ytha KEMPKES CODEV/COMBI kempkes@ilo.org
23 Amy KING DEJARDIN INTEGRATION king-dejardin@ilo.org
24 Virgilio LEVAGGI LIMA levaggi@ilo.org
25 Jean MAJERES EMP/RECON majeres@ilo.org
26 Nomaan MAJID EMP/STRAT majid@ilo.org
27 Philippe MARCADENT STEP marcadent@ilo.org
28 Simon MAXWELL ODI- UK s.maxwell@odi.org.uk
29 Robert McCORQUODALE University of Nottingham Robert.Mccorquodale@nottingham.ac.uk
30 Elisabeth MORRIS BANGKOK morrise@ilo.org
31 Steven OATES ED/NORM oates@ilo.org
32 Patricia O‟DONOVAN IFP/DIALOGUE odonovan@ilo.org
33 Stephen PURSEY CABINET pursey@ilo.org
34 Yousef QARYOUTI BEIRUT qaryouti@ilo.org
35 Peter RADEMAKER CODEV rademaker@ilo.org
36 Samir RADWAN CABINET radwan@ilo.org
37 Emmanuel REYNAUD SOC/POL reynaud@ilo.org
38 Gerry RODGERS INTEGRATION rodgers@ilo.org
39 Janine RODGERS DECLARATION rodgersj@ilo.org
40 Jurgen SCHWETTMANN COOP schwettmann@ilo.org
41 Dermot SHIELDS Consultant Dermot_Shields@LineOne.net
42 Reynold SIMONS PORT OF SPAIN simons@ilo.org
43 Hamid TABATABAI IPEC tabatabai@ilo.org
44 Anne TREBILCOCK INTEGRATION trebilcock@ilo.org
45 Jacobo VELASCO MDT SANTIAGO velasco@oitchile.cl
46 Rolph VAN DER HOEVEN WORLD COMMISSION hoeven@ilo.org
47 Herman VAN DER LAAN NEW DELHI
48 Corinne VARGHA INTEGRATION
49 Youyun ZHANG GENDER vanderlaan@ilo.org
zhangy@ilo.org
vargha@ilo.org
13/25
Report Turin Workshop on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
Annex 3 Statement by the Director-General
The majority of our constituents are familiar with the needs of poor people on a day-
to-day basis. As we heard at the recent ILO Conference, they recognise the
importance of decent work to poor people in rich and poor countries alike. We have to
ask ourselves - What is decent work for the women who work as porters in the
markets of Accra, Ghana. Young women who have been forced to move south because
of the collapse of rice production in the north as a result of globalisation, and who
work as sex workers in the evening? What is decent work for West Africans working
in New York City as supermarket deliverers illegally treated as independent
contractors and paid a wage that violates the minimum wage? Or construction
workers in the Philippines and Argentina pushed into subcontracting from regular
employment in order to reduce costs for employers. These are some of the challenges
we face when talking about poverty eradication.
ILO has a long history of pursuing action against poverty. The Declaration of
Philadelphia of 1944 states that “poverty constitutes a danger to prosperity
everywhere”. Recent events have shown how prescient this statement was. We have
learnt to our cost that we can no longer ignore the links between human security and
poverty. And that new manifestations of poverty call for new approaches.
The Copenhagen Summit of 1995 where ILO was a key player was the first global
gathering to make the links between human security and poverty: and the first to
endorse the eradication of poverty by a target date. At the Millennium Assembly,
Heads of State from around the world reinforced this in the Millennium Development
Goals (MDGs) as “halving , by 2015, the proportion of people whose income is less than
one dollar a day” .
This is an enormous challenge-but one which has been remarkably successful in
mobilising the International Community into an action-inspiring belief that something
can be done to tackle the eradication of poverty. As part of the UN family, as a
member of the UNDG, ILO with its mandate to promote social justice, is well placed
to respond to this challenge. Many taken–for-granted approaches to poverty, basic
needs, social exclusion, rights-based approaches were first developed in ILO. We
have much to be proud of. As I said at the Conference “We must demand policy
coherence on the goals of our system of international organisations, but promote
policy pluralism on the means to achieve these goals.” Your meeting over the next few
days can be an important contribution to looking at how ILO can make itself relevant
to the needs of our constituents and help deliver the goals of poverty eradication-
and in considering where ILO s strengths lie in contributing to the goals.
The challenge today is to build on the past-to produce a more coherent approach .One
on which the four pillars of ILO s work are all shown to have mutually reinforcing
14/25
Report Turin Workshop on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
roles in addressing poverty eradication. There is tremendous scope for pooling
together the range of our country level projects and, through social dialogue,
developing them into national decent work programmes for poverty eradication rooted
at the local level. Amongst other things this will need a closer integration of our HQ
and field level structures.
Employment is the main route out of poverty for many people. But as ILO work has
shown, poverty is about more than income. It is about lack of dignity,
disempowerment, inability to organise and lack of self-worth. This is where ILO‟s
approach which addresses abuse, exploitation and seeks to enhance quality of life and
livelihoods has much to offer the current situation in the world. The old taken for
granted assumptions of development that people will accept work at any cost have
been shown to be hollow. Poor and rich alike need respect and dignity at work. This is
reinforced by the rights-based approach development which is now finding
resonances and meaning for people especially in the context of globalisation.
Women are said to constitute the majority of the poor globally. There are many
reasons for this –but what is clear is that no discussion of poverty eradication can be
conducted without recognising that gender equality is a pre-requisite for poverty
eradication. At the Beijing Conference, the human rights of women were recognised
for the first time. This constituted a recognition that some human rights remain
hidden from dominant discourse of the day- and need to be highlighted and acted
upon. For example, violence against women in the domestic sphere was given new
visibility. In similar ways, decent work serves also to give new voice to the excluded –
to the recognition of their rights. But it also helps in the practical business of getting
people out of poverty. It is not surprising that those key areas which we focus on in
the Declaration are most likely to affect poor people –and are areas we have to
address in tackling poverty.
There are now new international instruments for addressing poverty eradication. In
response to the debt crisis, many countries are now preparing Poverty Reduction
Strategies (PRSPs). These are intended to be country-owned and to involve civil
society. ILO is committed to enhancing and expanding its contribution to the PRSP.
The challenge is how to respond to this process which in many countries now
determines the framework for donor operations. ILO has begun to be actively
involved in both influencing the PRSP in the area of decent work, and in working with
social partners so that they can get involved. But more has to be done.
This workshop, organised by Turin, the Policy Integration Department and CODEV, is
a welcome opportunity to work towards a more coherent, integrated framework for
action in tackling poverty based on the Decent Work agenda, both at the national and
international levels.
I look forward to the conclusions of the workshop and follow-up action.
15/25
Report Turin Workshop on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
Annex 4 Proceedings of the Workshop
Below is an overview of the outcomes of the working sessions and the collective insights at
the end of each day. Full details on group work and on the presentations by key-note speakers
and panellists can be found on the workshop website (http://training.itcilo.it/decentwork)
Day 1
A. Theme of working group session:
“The ILO was there at the beginning, but has not been effective in ensuring that „employment‟ is
central on the current poverty related agenda.”
a) Why? b) How should this issue be addressed?
B. Summary of results of working groups:
‘Logic model’ lacks consensus and acceptance:
- Effect of Decent Work on growth and poverty reduction
- Affects the ILO brand and image
Strategy:
- is too fragmented
- has activities which are not mutually reinforcing or integrated
- is not open to new ideas
- does not include alliances and partnerships
- has no specific strategy to influence Bretton Woods Institutions and others
Engagement process has limited effectiveness:
- constituents not working in areas of poverty
- working through governments restricts access to the poor (who are often unaffected by
Government services)
- in particular, the Ministry of Labour, who do not really engage with the poor
C. Insights at end of Day 1
Theme Insight
CONTENT Employment is the core cross-cutting theme
The role of government is very important
Targeting is beset with problems
Supply-demand linkages need to be understood
PRSP‟s are the replacement for „employment missions.
Activity focus needs to be grounded in a country
POVERTY Poverty is a complex issue, with many uncertainties
Analysis is required at two levels: the conceptual and the field
RBAs Rights based approaches are do-able
Need for better instruments for RBAs
The RBA and income/employment approaches are in conflict
Trade-off between these approaches only really meaningful in a specific setting
ILO The ILO could do better in addressing poverty alleviation
There is a willingness to work in new ways within the ILO
We need to refocus our work – and search for a role in the debate
Too much thinking is still in the past
The past influences current thinking and mindframe
Still worried about the replacement of „employment‟ by „decent work‟
ILO needs to restate convictions and not just sway with other agencies
Constituents ILO has not made full use of its tripartite structure
ILO should go beyond the tripartite constituents
16/25
Report Turin Workshop on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
Day 2
A. Theme of working group session
“Poverty can be „viewed‟ from different angles: Decent work; Rights, Livelihoods, Dialogue,
Exclusion. Questions:
(a) “Sum-parts” Is the „sum‟ of the ILO‟s poverty-related activities greater than the parts?
(b) What is now needed? How can the capacities of different parts of the organisation be
used more effectively for poverty reduction?
B. Summary of results of working groups:
Theme/ issue Consensus
Vision DW provides an overarching framework ?????
Level of integration The country programme is where integration should take place ?????
Instruments More focus on PRSPs: ?????
Increased knowledge base ?????
Management New management style required with a focus on „results‟ and indicators
?????
New organisational structure required ?????
Incentives No incentives for „joined up‟ working ??????
Constituents Constituents are both in a position to articulate demand and provide local
capacity ?????
Partnerships Form alliances ?????
C. Insights at end of Day 2
Theme Insight
CONCEPTUAL Need to map overlap PR and DW agenda
ISSUES Still conceptual differences, also in activities and vision
Still need for conceptual work to bring DW and Poverty together
Clarification on exclusion and gender
Working with cooperatives offers a lot of opportunities
Longer term commitment
PROCESS ISSUES Field perspective + people‟s perspective must be articulated
Danger of a „lack of trust in constituents‟
INTEGRATION Need for ILO to change towards integration (policy, structure, administrative)
There are programme and budgetary constraints to integration
Diversity of views: integration is not rooted in the culture
„Integratability„ is the missing link for more integration
INCENTIVES and Weak on evaluation, learning from experience
LEARNING Instead of rewarding people working in an integrated way, should penalise
those who do not work in an integrated way
WILL and There is a sense of urgency to address poverty issues
URGENCY Need to sell DW better
Has ILO the will to commit itself to poverty reduction, including resources,
staff etc.)
We are not prepared to do what we want to do on poverty
Why has SMT not acted so far?
POETRY SECTION The plumber‟s toolkit is still empty, but it is not the poet who will fill it.
WORKSHOP People are tired
PROCESS Group formation?
17/25
Report Turin Workshop on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
Annex 5 Logical Framework to integrate ILO’s poverty reduction programme / activities
Programme Structure Progress Indicators Means of verification Assumptions
Goal To contribute to poverty reduction on the basis Reduce DW deficits for Purpose to Goal
of the Decent Work agenda poor people
# of working poor
Women‟s
participation in
workforce
Labour force
participation
Define more
indicators beyond
income
Purpose To ensure the ILO is effectively and efficiently # of PRSPs, UNDAFs Output to Purpose
involved in and contributing to: showing ILO involvment
process of national poverty programmes # of instruments
global and regional agenda-setting on supportive of DW goals
poverty
Outputs Progress Indicators Responsibility Time frame
1. Decent work/poverty reduction framework
defined and communicated
2. Poverty related field operations enhanced
3. Constituent-focused perspective
developed
4. Enabling management structures in place
5. Support and resources provided
18/25
Report Turin Workshop on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
Activities Sub-activities/tasks Responsibility Time frame
1. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND GUIDELINES
1.1 Develop ‘Decent Work and Poverty’ framework
1.1.1. Complete DW + MDGs paper (mapping) INTEGRATION October
1.1.2. Identify field level needs CODEV October
1.1.3. Ensure DW indicators are sensitive to poverty issues INTEGRATION Ongoing
1.1.4. Communicate and disseminate framework CODEV / INTEGRATION December
1.1.5. Produce 2003 DG report or WER on „DW and poverty reduction‟ ??? ???
2. OPERATIONS
2.1 Support development of DW country programmes which
demonstrate how poverty can be addressed more effectively.
2.1.1. Produce circular on DW County programmes which include PROGRAM / CODEV 1 October 2002
guidance on poverty –focused outcomes
2.1.2. Build on and disseminate the experiences of the DW Pilot INTEGRATION Ongoing
Programmes
2.1.3. Develop criteria for country prioritisation for work on poverty CODEV, Regional Offices 1 October 2002
2.1.4. Develop TC programmes with poverty focus, addressing PRSPs and
MDGs Regions, Sectors with CODEV Ongoing
2.1.5. Ensure adequate resources allocated for poverty-related
activities (including integrated approaches between field and PROGRAM Ongoing
across sectors), also include allocations for evaluating impact
(P&B 2004-05).
2.2 Establish multi-bi and IFIs engagement strategy
2.2.1. Develop strategy / action for engagement with multi-bi donors, INTEGRATION, CODEV, „Quite soon‟
IFIs („missing link‟ ?) EXREL,
3. CONSTITUENTS
3.1 Develop ‘package’ for constituents
3.1.1. Work with constituents to develop socio-economic DIALOGUE/ACTRAV/ACTEMP 1st meeting Sept
perspective
3.1.2. Develop work in support of constituents –so that they can be INTEGRATION
19/25
Report Turin Workshop on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
more actively involved in the PRSP. DIALOGUET et al Ongoing
3.1.3. Further develop work on Social Dialogue and PRSPs.
4. MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATION
4.1 Ensure poverty is highlighted in 2004-05 P&B
4.2.1. P&B 2004-05 Programme to include poverty reduction as an PROGRAM On-going
explicit strategy component, including with specific indicators
4.2 Ensure organisational support to poverty-related activities
4.2.2. Establish cross-sectoral DWCP working groups with field INTEGRATION
representation around poverty-related themes (rights-based,
social exclusion, employment creation)
4.2.3. Establish small teams of „integrators‟ to help ILO country INTEGRATION, Regional DW
officers to present their activities under a DWCP in an teams and HQ staff?
integrated way that connects to Poverty Reduction Strategies
(they would help with the drafting of such programmes).
4.2.4. Develop „alliances‟ with other agencies who are working on poverty INTEGRATION
to enhance ILO s comparative advantage.
4.2.5. Review the links between sectors (structure and functions) and ???
poverty activities.
4.2.6. Develop poverty-related skills and capacity through sub-regional CODEV, INTEGRATION,
workshops and work –related training sessions TURIN
4.3 Create better incentives & reporting on poverty-related
issues
5.1.1. Develop an integrated system for monitoring and evaluating PROGRAM
poverty focused initiatives.
5. SUPPORT AND RESOURCES
5.1 Develop resource base and support materials INTEGRATION
ITC/Turin – website
5.1.2. Develop a website as:
a „knowledge‟ base and
a portal to external resources
5.1.3. Commission research/synthesis studies as a basis for „evidence-
based‟ policy formulation
20/25
Report Turin Workshop on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
5.1.4. Produce an ILO resource book
5.1.5. Provide support to Interregional learning
5.2 Next Steps results from this workshop
5.2.1 Disseminate results of the workshop INTEGRATION/CODEV
5.2.2 Take outcomes to the SMT
21/25
Report Turin Workshop on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
Annex 6: Poll on Decent Work
Statements about the ILO, decent work and Agree Disagree
eradicating poverty
1 Decent Work is a great way of summing up what the ILO is all 80% 4%
about
2 Decent Work is a multi-dimensional (complex) concept 93% 2%
3 Decent Work is a powerful, useful and practical framework for 56% 24%
reducing poverty
4 Decent Work is a relative concept 67% 13%
5 Poverty is a multi-dimensional (complex) concept 96% 0%
6 Where there is decent work for all there is no poverty 62% 20%
7 In reality there are decent work deficits and there is poverty in all 93% 0%
countries of the world
8 Decent work deficits and poverty to a large extent affect the same 64% 20%
people
9 Decent work deficits are more serious in poor countries 89% 4%
10 Decent work deficits are often the results of poverty 44% 33%
11 Poverty is often the result of decent work deficits 69% 16%
12 Poverty affects more women and girls than men and boys 82% 7%
13 Decent work deficits and poverty are the same thing 13% 71%
14 Social exclusion is a useful concept in relation to ILO work on 71% 11%
poverty
15 Rights-based approach to development is useful in relation to ILO 89% 2%
work or poverty
16 Livelihood approach is useful in relation to ILO work on poverty 78% 9%
17 The ILO needs an explicit strategy to influence policies and 96% 2%
processes of the Bretton Woods Institutions
18 The outside world sees the ILO as a positive force in poverty 24% 38%
reduction processes
19 We need a poverty strategy within the decent work agenda 87% 9%
20 ILO should focus more of its efforts on eradicating poverty 87% 0%
21 The ILO is not good at forging alliances with other international 76% 11%
organizations that have complementary roles
22 The ILO is not a development agency 18% 64%
23 The agenda of the ILO is driven by its constituents 60% 24%
22/25
Report Turin Workshop on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
24 The ILO’s business is to reduce decent work deficits world wide 87% 7%
25 The ILO has no other business 13% 69%
26 In reducing decent work deficits the ILO contributes to reducing 91% 2%
poverty
27 Reducing decent work deficits and reducing poverty are related 87% 2%
and partly overlapping processes
28 Other international agencies than the ILO have defined poverty 91% 2%
reduction as their main business
29 By reducing poverty they are bound to contribute to reducing 58% 27%
decent work deficits
30 The ILO effort at reducing decent work deficits consists 87% 9%
essentially of meeting four objectives: full employment, respect
for fundamental rights at work, full social protection, and effective
social dialogue
31 These objectives can and should be addressed simultaneously 73% 13%
32 The objectives should in all circumstances be addressed in an 64% 27%
integrated manner
33 While the objectives can be seen as mutually reinforcing, they 71% 16%
might present trade-offs, such as between more and better jobs
34 In addressing decent work deficits, the ILO may be said to 80% 4%
combine elements of a rights-based and livelihoods-based
approach to poverty reduction
35 The ILO should ensure that employment and income feature 91% 9%
prominently in the PRSPs
36 The ILO should ensure that other parts of the decent work agenda 93% 4%
also feature prominently in the PRSPs
37 It should do this by mobilizing and giving advice to its tripartite 96% 0%
constituents at the national level
38 By relying on seeking to promote consensus among its 60% 22%
constituents, the Office tends to shy away from taking a clear
stand in favor of the working poor
39 The ILO should not explicitly deal with sensitive issues such as 4% 87%
income and asset redistribution
40 The ILO will only succeed in dealing with issues such as income 82% 13%
and asset redistribution if its strategy has the support and
participation of its constituents
41 Reducing decent work deficits and reducing poverty are political 93% 2%
processes
42 The main weakness of ILO action lies in its political strategy 42% 29%
43 The ILO cannot realistically be held responsible for failing to meet 51% 38%
any of the MDGs
44 Most ILO work could benefit from stronger partnership with other 87% 2%
sectors
45 The ILO cannot realistically be held responsible for failing to 29% 56%
meet Target 16 under goal 8 of the MDG’s “in cooperation with
developing countries develop and implement strategies for decent
and productive worth for youth”
23/25
Report Turin Workshop on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
46 The ILO has a contribution to make on a number of the MDGs 96% 0%
47 As a member of the UNDG the ILO shares responsibility for 89% 7%
meeting the MDGs
48 Poverty has different dimensions, hence the ILO should not 96% 2%
propose a”one-size fits all” prescription
49 In developing its capacity on poverty reduction, the ILO should 91% 4%
not only be driven by PRSP processes
50 Unemployment is a meaningless indicator in most developing 87% 2%
countries, the ILO needs to develop 2 or 3 indicators related to
poverty to be part of the debate
51 The ILO’s credibility on poverty reduction is compromised by the 56% 22%
lack of gender balance in the leadership of workers’ and
employers’ organisation
52 Headquarters units do not respond to the needs identified by the 62% 22%
field
53 Headquarters units need to devote more of their own resources to 82% 7%
work on poverty reduction
54 The ILO should work in a few countries in a more concentrated 82% 7%
manner in relation to poverty reduction
55 ILO programmes should report regularly on indicators regarding 96% 2%
their work on poverty reduction
56 Making a serious effort on poverty reduction will not happen 40% 44%
unless the ILO drops other items
57 The ILO should concentrate on developing its decent work agenda 64% 24%
instead of running after other organizations’ agendas/priorities
58 The PRSP process provides a key opportunity for the ILO 87% 4%
59 Policy integration on poverty reduction is someone else’s 4% 84%
responsibility in the ILO
60 Policy integration on poverty reduction is everyone’s 89% 4%
responsibility in the ILO
61 The programme and budget process in the ILO encourages 18% 60%
integration of work on poverty reduction
62 There should be a cross-sectoral (HQ including field) ILO team 73% 20%
on poverty reduction
63 ILO work on poverty reduction must start at the country level 76% 13%
64 In the field there is sufficient capacity to address poverty reduction 9% 78%
65 At headquarters, there is a sufficient capacity to address poverty 31% 51%
reduction
66 ILO constituents are well placed to pursue poverty reduction 18% 60%
agendas
67 The ILO has done enough research on employment and poverty 9% 76%
issues
68 ILO contacts with Governments should not be confined to 93% 4%
Ministries of Labour
69 Country programmes are the place where integrated approaches to 87% 4%
poverty should be formulated
70 An analysis of country problems should be the starting point for 87% 4%
ILO Programmes
24/25
Report Turin Workshop on Decent Work and Poverty Reduction
71 Field staff need content guidelines on the ILO’s approach to 78% 2%
poverty reduction from HQ
72 Field staff need process guidelines from HQ on how to engage in 78% 4%
National poverty reduction processes
25/25