Transcript The role of impact assessment in promoting Policy Coherence for Development Meeting of the national focal points for Policy Coherence for Development 1 October 2010, OECD.

The role of impact
assessment in promoting
Policy Coherence for
Development
Meeting of the national focal points for
Policy Coherence for Development
1 October 2010, OECD Paris
Introduction
ECDPM aims to improve relations between the EU and
countries in Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific
Selected work on PCD since 2003:
Scoping Study and Joint Evaluation of EU efforts to promote PCD
(Led by France) - 2006/2007
Evaluation of the Dutch PCD Unit - 2008/2009
Impact study of EU policies in six developing countries and,
review of EU progress, contributions to EU Report on PCD - 2009
Discussion paper: analysis of Working Paper and assessment of
PCD – 2010 (copies in the room)
PCD is about development effectiveness,
not aid
OECD Policy Coherence Cycle
© OECD 2008 ■
We know what to do; are we doing it?
General agreement on what is
needed to ensure PCD
1) Broad political commitment to, and action
on PCD, across countries and parties
2) National and international administrative
and policy coordination mechanisms for
screening relevant policy decisions, creating
synergies and resolving incoherencies
3) Adequate systems for monitoring, analysis
and reporting
Achieving PCD is a complex, political
process
Political
Context
Source: ECDPM
NSA
Pressures
i. Policy
statements
of intent
ii. Institutional &
administrative mechanisms
to:
b. Resolve
a. Strengthen
incoherencies
coherence
iii. Knowledge
Inputs &
Assessment
capacity
Knowledge
Approach to
Communities
Governance
What makes achieving PCD impact
so difficult?
Achieving PCD is a political process; always diverse
strategic interests involved; it needs permanent
broad political momentum to be able to advance
Complexity of multi-stakeholder processes leading to
PCD, or lack of it; continuous feedback is essential
Legal ambiguity: i.e. EU has legal obligation to make
an effort (Lisbon Art 208), yet no obligation to be
successful
For the EU: The absence of clear PCD objectives,
indicators and baselines; adds to ambiguity
So far, little interest in systematic evidence-based
monitoring, research and impact assessment for
PCD
EU: Consensus on the way forward?
Lack of EU operational PCD focus was recognized
by the EU Council in November 2009: “Further work
is needed to set up a more focused, operational and
result-oriented approach to PCD”
It also recognised the need to create political
momentum, and was served by the new European
Parliament, who took up PCD very seriously, i.e.
agreeing on a standing rapporteur
The Work Program prepared by EC between endDecember 09 and April 2010 however received a
lukewarm reception from the Council of Ministers in
June.
Current practices for assessing PCD
Screening texts for potential synergies/ incoherencies
between new policies (e.g. comparing with Treaty
provisions)
Questionnaires/interviews to monitor progress
regarding PCD implementation
Incident-based studies (finding our what went wrong;
localized evidence of the impact of one policy)
Composite indices based on available quantitative
data
Very few empirical studies/evaluations of impact of
more than one international policy (incipient efforts EC)
- complex and resource-intensive
Vital elements for assessing impact
are still missing
Any impact assessment or report is as good as
the information/field data it is based upon
No clear commitment as yet to gather fieldbased evidence on PCD impact in a systematic
way; i.e. no PCD focal points in EU Delegations
Regional and in-country PCD/development
impact assessment can only be organised
jointly with partners; incipient efforts yet no
agreed upon joint frameworks/spaces available
No effective recourse mechanisms for those
adversely affected (Art 12 CPA)
Some ideas for improving PCD impact
assessment
Strengthening ‘across-policy’ linkages between (1) ex-ante
development impact assessments, (2) ex-post joint evaluations
and (3) joint programming and monitoring systems
Increase available resources for (i) methodology
development, (ii) field data gathering (iii) multi-actor information
production and exchange, (iv) specialized components in (joint)
development impact assessments
Systematically inform on PCD results, the global public and
governance fora, in order to enable political debate and
momentum for development effectiveness
Enhance multi-stakeholder monitoring of PCD impact,
including recourse mechanisms for those who feel affected by
international policies
The OECD should lead on developing and
promoting an evidence-based PCD, i.e.
development impact, assessment
framework
Thank you!
For more information about ECDPM’s work on ACP-EU
relations please visit:
www.ecdpm.org
Paul Engel – [email protected]