Selection of CREW Countries & Sectors Pooja Pokhrel Nathan India (Pvt.) Ltd. 15 March 2013, Jaipur Partners’ Meeting

CREW Country Selection Conditions 2 countries from Africa and 2 from Asia At least one SADC country At least one ASEAN member state At least two DFID priority countries History of CUTS engagement in each country Only Anglophone countries in Africa 1

Empirical Evidence Very few studies deal with what contributes to the highest impact of reform Kronthaler (2010) studies what contributes to effectiveness of competition reform Level of economic development, Control of Corruption, and the time a competition law exists matter 2

Data seems to confirm… 3

Data seems to confirm… (Contd.) 4

Country Selection Approach Start with 99 countries in Asia and Africa Employ a 3-step screen: ―Step 1: Income considerations ―Step 2: Considerations of effectiveness in existing policies ―Step 3: CREW implementation considerations 5

Step 1: Income Considerations Focus on developing countries (only LI & LMI) ―Immediately eliminates 32 countries, including Brunei and Singapore in ASEAN Screen out countries with per capita income of less than $600 ―Proxy for level of economic development ―44 countries remaining 6

Step 2: Effectiveness of Policies Avg. WEF index “Effectiveness of anti-monopoly policies” for past 2 years<= 3.5 ―Variable of interest ―33 countries remaining Avg. WGI “Regulatory Quality Index” for past 5 years<= -1.0 ―Competition policy embedded with regulatory environment ―19 countries remaining Avg. WGI “Control of Corruption Index” for past 5 years <= -1.0 ―Consistent with Kronthaler & data correlation ―16 countries remaining 7

Step 3: Implementation Considerations Countries with CUTS experience Only Anglophonic countries Arrive at a list shortlist of 8 countries, of which 2 (Nigeria & Ghana) do not have a competition law in place Final shortlist of 7 countries ―Africa: Ghana, Zambia ―Asia: India, Indonesia, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Vietnam 8

Sector Selection Approach Based on sector characteristics ―Existence of sector policies and other signs of sectoral reform ―Nature of market ―Impact on the poor ―Data Availability Assign scores to make objective cross- country comparisons 9

Sector policies & reform Score ranging from 0 to 4. ―0: No sector regulation or policy ―1: Sector policy but no sector regulation ―2: Sector policy and/or sector regulatory law ―3: Also a sector regulator ―4: Additional signs of reform. 10

Nature of Market Review number of market players, market shares, influence of SOEs Score ranges from 1 to 3 ―1: Primarily a monopoly or if there are no organized market players ―2: Has one or a few large players with some other smaller participants ―3: Seems to have multiple market players and competition. 11

Data Availability Reviewed based on proposed CREW methodology Assign score ranging from 1 to 3 ―1: Aggregate-level data available ―2: Micro-level household and/or firm data available ―3: Relevant data, particularly at the micro- level available, both before and after reform. 12

Impact on the poor Review focused on current reach of the sector to the poor, proportion of the poor’s expenditure on sector Assign score between 1 and 2 ―1: Relatively less impact ―2: Relatively high impact 13

Sector Selection Reviewed 6 sectors ―Domestic Fuel ―Electricity ―Passenger Transport ―Pharmaceuticals ―Staple Food ―Telecommunications For 7 shortlisted countries Only sectors, not product markets 14

Country/Sector Scorecard 15 ElectricityTelecom.Pharm. Domestic Fuel Passenger Transport Staple FoodTOTAL Ghana India Indonesia Philippines Sri Lanka Vietnam Zambia TOTAL

Proposed Countries & Sectors Sectors ― Passenger Transport, Staple Food Countries ―Ghana, India, Philippines, and Zambia 16

17 Thank you!