This thesis investigates policy formulation and implementation processes in Zambia. A number of issues emerge with respect to the weaknesses of the system and how policy decisions worsened Zambia's economic performance instead of improving it. The Kaunda era policies of nationalization had an adverse impact on productivity of industries as well as affecting the resource flow from donors and business houses. On the other hand President Chiluba's reforms in the 1990s have had both positive and negative impacts on the people of Zambia. The rapid privatization and liberalization affected employment levels thereby worsening the poverty levels. Further, the liberalization brought in stiff competition from other countries forcing most manufacturing companies to close down. The policy environment based on the Bretton Woods Institutions seems not to be working as result of not taking into account the local Zambian situation. On the other hand, there were positive macroeconomic developments such as growth in GDP, lowering of inflation and stabilizing of exchange rates as from 1996. This has however not improved the living standards of the people.

In Zambia, the shifts back and forth between strong and weak planning institutions have negatively affected policy development and implementation. There has been uncoordinated policy development; as a result, some policies in the major sectors are contradictory while in other cases policies are not linked to the resource envelope, making them un-implementable. Secondly, the institutional framework for policy development is not effective. There is generally lack of coordination among ministries, provinces and other stakeholders in planning, implementation and monitoring and evaluation of development programmes.

This thesis urges that the improving planning capacities at the national, provincial and district levels should improve the processes of policy development and implementation in Zambia, which will in turn help to reduce poverty. Further, the districts should be the centre for the bottom-up process. In order to carryout this responsibility, efforts should be made to improve their capacities. As for the top-down process, the Sector Advisory Groups should continue to participate in the planning, monitoring and evaluation so as to contribute to policy formulation and implementation. These should be coordinated by the National Development Coordinating Committee (NDCC) through a Planning Bureau.