Page 1 of 32

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal – Vol. 10, No. 11

Publication Date: November 25, 2023

DOI:10.14738/assrj.1011.15905

Kanyamuna, V., Siamabele, B., Phiri, M., Mubita, A., & Kalonje, V. (2023). Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation Arrangements in

Zambia’s Public Sector: Shifting Sands or a Solid Rock? Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 10(11). 382-413.

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation Arrangements in Zambia’s

Public Sector: Shifting Sands or a Solid Rock?

Vincent Kanyamuna

School of Humanities and Social Sciences,

Department of Development Studies,

University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia

Brivery Siamabele

School of Humanities and Social Sciences,

Department of Development Studies,

University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia

Million Phiri

School of Humanities and Social Sciences,

Department of Population Science, Monitoring &

Evaluation, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia

Aurick Mubita

School of Humanities and Social Sciences,

Department of Social Work and Sociology,

University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia

Valentine Kalonje

School of Humanities and Social Sciences,

Department of Development Studies,

University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia

ABSTRACT

The paper asks a prime question: Are Zambia’s Planning, Monitoring and

Evaluation arrangements Shifting Sands or a Solid Rock? The country, through its

policy and legislative instruments has in the recent years articulated and adopted

clear frameworks for national planning, budgeting, monitoring and evaluation of

public interventions. However, despite these efforts, there still remain a lot of

critical questions unanswered. Do the current planning, budgeting, monitoring and

evaluation arrangements address Zambia’s development agenda? Are different

development plans at national, line ministry, provincial and district level aligned

towards a streamlined effort to alleviate the country out of abject poverty? Is there

evidence that national annual budgets are directly derived from programmes and

activities from various development plans at line ministry, provincial and district

levels? Can we track programmes in national development plans (NDPs) within

annual budgets? In the literature reviewed, answers to these questions are mixed.

While other questions are in the affirmative, many of them have weak evidence.

Page 2 of 32

383

Kanyamuna, V., Siamabele, B., Phiri, M., Mubita, A., & Kalonje, V. (2023). Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation Arrangements in Zambia’s Public

Sector: Shifting Sands or a Solid Rock? Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 10(11). 382-413.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.1011.15905

There are strong indications that Zambia’s frameworks for planning, budgeting,

monitoring and evaluation would require restructuring to remove redundancies,

repetitions and unnecessary bureaucracies. Even when the policies and legislation

are clear on what plan needed to be developed and implemented at various levels,

in many cases, these remain in draft forever or worse off non-existent. These

challenges are more prominent at decentralised levels where plans and M&E

practices are weak and fragmented a great deal. Many plans have been prescribed

at provincial and district level, yet they are not actualised. They cause staff fatigue

on one hand while crowding-out development evidence on the other hand.

Therefore, it is recommended that a detailed study is undertaken, one that take the

form of a readiness assessment to map out what plans, M&E arrangements and

budget frameworks are working well, not working well and reasons why. Such a

report will be a good starting point to reform the planning, budgeting, monitoring

and evaluation architecture for Zambia. A focused approach will be sound and will

lead to a predictable and sustainable development agenda for the country.

Keywords: planning, budgeting, implementation, monitoring, evaluation, M&E, national

development plans, Zambia

INTRODUCTION

Zambia is a land-locked or in other views land-linked country, centrally situated in the southern

Africa region. Eight countries share borders with Zambia. These include Malawi to the east,

Tanzania to the north-east, Angola to the west, Zimbabwe, Botswana, Namibia, and

Mozambique to the south, and the Democratic Republic of Congo to the north. In terms of

location, it is situated between latitudes 8° and 18° south and longitudes 22° and 34° east and

has a total surface area of 752,612 square kilometres.

Zambia is a member of the SADC region and shares common development prospects with

neigbouring countries. In that regard, the country enjoys social, economic, political and cultural

relationships with these countries and a stronger M&E culture and practice in Zambia would

increase Zambia’s development engagements with them. Figure 1 below is the locational map

depicting Zambia at the centre of the southern African region.

On 24 October 1964, Zambia gained independence from Britain through its first republican

president Dr Kenneth David Kaunda. Upon gaining political independence, the new government

embarked on a structured approach to national growth and development through the Interim

National Strategic Plan in 1964, which was succeeded by the First National Development Plan

(FNDP 1966 – 1970). Other successive NDPs were implemented, but the first NDP yielded

positive results and to date is regarded as having presented a successful development story

that led to Zambia being classified as a middle-income country in 1969. During that period, the

gross domestic product (GDP) per capita for Zambia became one of the highest in Africa, and

exceeding those of South Korea, Malaysia, Brazil, and Turkey. This came at a time that Zambia

was the third largest world producer of copper (after the Soviet Union and the United States)

and largest producer among the developing nations by producing 12.2 per cent of total world

copper (1,3,5). Despite these gains in the early years of Zambia’s political emancipation,

economic growth and development prospects continued to dwindle. The living standards of the

majority of Zambians leave much to be desired and this is happening in the advent of

democratic tenets and more budgetary allocation to public projects and programmes. As at the

Page 3 of 32

384

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 10, Issue 11, November-2023

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

close of 2017, national socio-economicstatistics for Zambia looked gloomy (see Human

Development Index (HDI), Gross Domestic Product (GDP), Corruption Index, per capita income,

national poverty, rural/urban poverty, etc). Since independence, Zambia has implemented

seven NDPs, including the current Seventh National Development Plan (7NDP 2017 – 2021).

This period, covering the NDPs implemented from 1964 to the current 7NDP (2017-2021)

forms the basis for this study’s analysis about the arrangements and functionality of Zambia’s

public sector WoGM&ES.

Figure 1: Map showing location of Zambia within the SADC region

Source: https://www.victoriafalls-guide.net/zambia-geography.html

METHODOLOGY

This study was a desk-based review of relevant literature. It was understood that to ascertain

what was going well, what was not going well, and reasons why would be both insightful and

useful to making remedial measures towards a better environment for Zambia’s public sector

planning, monitoring and evaluation arrangements vis-à-vis results focused national

development.

A wide range of sources were employed to gather information on planning, monitoring and

evaluation arrangements for the public sector in Zambia. Among others, key literature and

reports reviewed include the following:

• National Monitoring and Evaluation Policy (2019)

• National Planning and Budgeting Policy (2014)

• National Planning and Budgeting Act (2020)

• Vision 2030

• National Development Plans (first, second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, revised sixth,

seventh & eighth)

• Annual Progress Reports (government reports on NDP progress)