Dialogues on market systems development takes off in Myanmar!

Insights on a new local learning initiative in Myanmar.

Partly inspired by the findings from BEAM research on local learning networks, partly because implementing market systems in Myanmar is a challenge in itself and requires collective effort to build an ecosystem, CARE International in Myanmar has initiated a 'dialogue on making market systems work for the poor in Myanmar'.

Drawing from the experiences from Market Development Forum in Nepal and Bangladesh, these dialogues aim to bring in diverse range of organisations that are implementing/involved in projects or interested in market systems development in Myanmar.

Market systems development in Myanmar is still at an early stage. There is a lack of understanding on how the approach will work in a country where local and international NGOs, and civil society organisations have been delivering most of the development outputs and outcomes through a more “direct” approach. There is more emphasis on livelihood, peace building and humanitarian assistance; there are issues of conflict zones, fast changing government policies; and there is a local lack of experience and expertise on market based development. The donors also have limited experience of funding such projects in Myanmar and are still learning what works and what does not.

However on the positive side, Myanmar is more than ready to adopt market based development projects in different sectors of the economy. There is a thriving and dynamic private sector thanks to recent and ongoing economic reform; the government has the willingness to support the development priorities, local people are entrepreneurial, women in Myanmar are dynamic, entrepreneurial and connected to the market. Myanmar has leapfrogged on to technology platforms, for example 4G networks were within use just a few years after the introduction of private sector mobile phone networks and nearly everyone seems to own a smart phone.

With all these changes and challenges, its very important to have local learning networks that can potentially play a significant role in supporting the development of an ecosystem with relevant capacity building of local staff, awareness on private sector and government policies, and most importantly be able to collaborate and leverage from the learning of different organisations.

So far the organisations that have attended and actively participated in the dialogues are CARE Myanmar, Winrock International, Adam Smith International, Swisscontact, UNDP, MEDA, World Vision, Mercy Corps, Helvetas and Business innovation Facility. We have seen interest from donors such as DFID and Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC).

We have had two formal dialogues, exchanges of different research papers and participation on webinars relevant to market systems development. For now we plan to keep it as an informal group of practitioners coming together to share and collaborate. This will allow us to identify and shape the collective agendas specific to the context of Myanmar and generate more interest and incentives of the participating organisations to take this dialogue forward in a meaningful manner. But when people turned up for at the first dialogue over breakfast at 7am, we knew there is some interest and this is just the beginning.

The group has identified a few thematic areas, which we plan to discuss more, share available resources and information and if possible collaborate under some of these thematic areas.

• Designing and implementing strategies: This is about exploring the different approaches used to plan and design sector/market strategies, how balance is achieved between structure and flexibility in planning them, how much paper trail is required, the structure and frequency of strategy planning meetings, who the key decision makers are in strategy development, how to determine when and how much research to undertake, and whether value for money is taken into account when strategies are designed. We touched down on this, when we talked about exit strategies, hand off approach, knowing where to stop, or taking a step back and also about having the flexibility.
• Negotiating deals with the private and public sector: This is the core of M4P relationship building; how do programmes understand their partners and their partners’ businesses? How are influence and motivation gained? Where programmes work with co-implementers and co- investors, how much control do they feel they really have? How do programmes handle and share risk? Is there enough capacity within the staff to be able to make those deals?
• Team structures and capacity building: This was one area where everyone seems to be having some difficulties in Myanmar. How do programmes orient, train and mentor new staff and partners on the M4P approach/implementing M4P, and if implementation is done via third parties (e.g. co- implementers), how do programmes ensure they follow the same approach/ensure the same level of quality? How do teams stay connected with field level dynamics? How do they deal with cultural barriers (both between expatriate managers and staff, and between staff and partners/co-implementers)?
• Managing for ‘impact’: how do teams get the best out of their relationships between the technical and monitoring staff? How do programmes manage donor needs for results ‘in the short term’ vs. systemic change in the longer term, and is there local capacity in monitoring market based project?
• Working in early stage/fragile markets/conflict zones: What do programmes do when markets are thin or dysfunctional, for example in remote areas, fragile situations, or where markets are in their infancy? Do teams attempt to mainstream gender issues and if so, how? And in thin markets, is there a need to be more holistic, for example by incorporating the livelihood approach, rather than only focusing on market dynamics? What does that look like in practice?
• From direct to facilitative approaches: The idea is to explore the impact of M4P on the work of programmes that use different approaches. This might include agencies giving handouts and emergency relief, and government agencies.

This is just the beginning, I have helped to coordinate the dialogue, with CARE acting as the host. However we have seen interest from organisations to host and support the network. We hope the network will have a real impact in developing the ecosystem, helping the organisations learn which can be translated into effective programme management and also convey critical messages to the funders around the complex challenges and opportunities of market system development in Myanmar. For now we are just experiencing the take off, much of the journey is yet to be discovered and will require the network members support to evolve into something meaningful.