Transcript Document
MUTUAL ACCOUNTABILITY: LESSONS FOR POST-BUSAN PROGRESS
Matthew Martin Director Development Finance International DfID Mutual Accountability Seminar 14 January 2013 1
CONTEXT/BACKGROUND
Worked with more than 35 governments on mutual accountability frameworks and assessing aid quality (part-funded by DfID, results used in MAR) Technical Advisor to developing country negotiators in Accra Agenda for Action, mutual accountability key focus of discussions Member of pre-Busan Task Team and post-Busan building block on mutual accountability (now added results) Senior Advisor to UN Secretary General on Development Cooperation as part of Development Cooperation Forum (DESA) Major technical studies on progress/what works in MA Based on survey covering 104 countries – of MA and results progress – results presented to DCF and BB on Results 2
MA PROGRESS – KEY PILLARS (%)
40 30 20 10 0 80 70 60 50 Aid Policy Donor Targets Donor Asst Dev Strat Partner PAF Partner Asst Non-Execs
3
KEY AREAS FOR FUTURE PROGRESS
1.
2.
3.
Most vital: targets and annual assessments for individual donors - has greatest influence on donor performance and increased results, + increased MA balance also encourages gvt progress Enhancing domestic accountability with MA – folding MA into national structures/processes and increasing role of parliaments and civil society Aid policies – incl. reducing aid dependence + MIC aid phaseout by enhancing domestic resource mobilisation – aid “working out of a job”
4
CASE STUDY PROGRESS (Q1 2012)
Afghanistan 19/104 – in top 20%: lacking individual donor targets, needs to involve non-executive sholders could improve devt strategy and targets Sierra Leone 37/104 – in top 40% no donor targets or assessment could improve devt strategy and targets, and non-exec involvement 5
BROAD RANGE OF DFID COUNTRIES
Quite a few DfID priority countries score highly in top 20% – Mozambique, Rwanda, Malawi, Kenya, Tanzania Some surprising countries lagging on donor targets/assessment – Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Ghana, Liberia, Uganda, Zambia many DfID countries virtually no progress – Nepal, DRC, South Africa, OPT, Kyrgyz, Jamaica, Nigeria, N&S Sudan, Guyana, Pakistan, Tajikistan (+ those in conflict – Yemen, Somalia, Iraq, Myanmar, Zimbabwe)
HIGH CORRELATION FRAGILITY ↔ LOW PROGRESS
6
HOW TO GET THERE: PROMOTING KEY ENABLING FACTORS
Government leadership essential: ensure clear lead institution/unity within government Like-minded donor group and key sponsors who will push others through peer pressure Trust – advance on key issues, sectors to demonstrate rapid progress is possible New Deal should be key step forward for fragile states – but
must be integrated into broader MA steps; not be used as excuse for “second-best”, but as route to full-fledged MA Coordinate MA/transparency initiatives – eg aid databases include MA and link to results
7
HOW TO GET THERE: OVERCOMING KEY BARRIERS
Lack of capacity/understanding among government/donor/non-exec staff Capacity-building programmes for partner governments and parliaments/CSOs as part of broader accountability drives Ensure strong donor HQ leadership on MA and integration into work practices and incentives (DfID a leader)
Ensure continued monitoring and analysis of progress in context of Global Partnership (DCF survey and analysis to continue/expand) Political “events” disrupting/reversing progress
Lack of information on global best practice very careful definition of process for rowing back and keeping funds flowing to the poor
8
KEY WAYS FORWARD
Still a lot of work to do in DfID priority countries – especially to prioritise fragile states Have clear minimum standards (country-led aid policies, targets + annual assessments for individual donors, non-executive inclusion, ND compliance) and adapt to country needs/circumstances Work with other like-minded to ensure remains among top issues globally and nationally Continue to share information on progress and enabling factors/barriers (in DfID and beyond) – DESA establishing web repository on best practice Get the Building Block working more effectively – set targets for its results as TT did - to keep this at centre of Global Partnership 9