Transcript Document 7160472

AID EFFECTIVENESS:
Implications for Emerging Donors
Presentation by George Carner
Vice Chair and
U.S. Representative to the
OECD’s Development Assistance
Committee
OUTLINE
•
•
•
•
•
•
The Paris Commitments
Plans for Monitoring Progress
Early Baseline Survey Observations
Dilemmas for Emerging Donors
Some Tips
A Golden Opportunity
What makes aid ineffective
Limited country leadership and
capacity to plan and implement
programs
Donors develop own plans and
programs.
Too little coordination among
donors
Dispersed effort, suboptimal
use of resources
Too many projects with different
procedures.
Countries cannot handle these
demands.
Result: sub-optimal impact.
THE PARIS
DECLARATION
PARIS
DECLARATION
DEVELOPMENT RESULTS
4
2
Ownership
(Partner countries)
Alignment
(Donor — Partner)
3 Harmonisation
(Donor — Donor)
Partners
set the
agenda
Aligning with
partners’
agenda
Using
partners’
systems
Establishing Simplifying
common
procedures
arrangements
Sharing
information
Managing for Results
1
MUTUAL COMMITMENT TO:
• Concerted action at the country level:
– Translating Paris Declaration into local action plans.
– Greater coherence among donors and between donors and
partner countries around shared objectives.
– More mature partnership based on mutual accountability.
• More ownership by recipients:
– Greater ability to plan and prioritize aid. = better PRS
– More transparent and accountable aid governance practices
that meet acceptable standards. = strengthened PFM &
Procurement Systems
– More direction to aid funded development programmes.
•
Alignment of aid with country priorities
-- Support PRS implementation, Sector strategies
•
Harmonized approaches, lessen burden on recipients through:
– More coordinated implementation arrangements.
– Less duplicative donor missions, reports…
– More reliance on strengthened country systems.
– Complementary use of various aid modalities
– Transparency on aid delivery (commitments, disbursements…)
– Simpler procedures
•
Shared Results:
– Use of common results frameworks and reporting to measure
impact of plans and programs.
– Mutual review of progress.
PLANS FOR MONITORING PROGRESS
Aim: To encourage and track improvements and behaviour change
• 56 monitorable commitments:
– Assessed at country level (CGs, RTs etc.) and…
– Monitored internationally.
• 12 Indicators of Progress with measurable targets:
– Measure progress of donors and partners.
• Based on “collective” action, building on local processes.
• DAC’s WP-EFF coordinating the international partnership:
– Designed methodology & provided technical guidance.
– Aggregating country data and drafting progress reports.
MONITORING STAGES
• 2006 Baseline Survey and Report
(A summary baseline report will be submitted to the DAC SLM and the
final report will be ready by March 07 for HLM and other fora).
• 2008 Progress Survey and Report
(as input for HLF3 in Ghana in 2008)
• 2010 Final Survey and Report
(supplemented by cross- country evaluation, peer reviews, global
monitoring).
Framework of Indicators
Indicators
Survey
1
Ownership – Operational PRS
2a
Quality of PFM systems
2b
Quality Procurement systems
3
Aid reported on budget

4
Coordinated capacity dev.

5a
Use of country PFM systems

5b
Use of country procurement system

6
Parallel PIUs

7
In-year predictability

8
Untied aid
9
Use of programme-based approaches

10
Joint missions & country analytic work

11
Sound performance assessment framework
12
Reviews of mutual accountability
Desk review
WB CDF/AER
WB CPIA
JV-Proc.
OECD DAC
WB CDF/AER

EARLY SURVEY OBSERVATIONS
•
•
•
•
•
•
Progress on ’05 data collection so far, so good.
Forty countries participating, 30 have submitted data.
High donor participation covering about 80% of ODA .
Managing the survey has been very demanding.
Useful in opening a dialogue.
Improving understanding of status of aid effectiveness
indicators in country and what needs to improve.
• Baselines show starting from a limited base but
progress apparent in many countries.
DILEMMAS FOR EMERGING DONORS
•
•
•
•
•
Choice of aid modalities (projects vs. programs )
Showing the flag vs. joining others
Assuring accountability vs. using country systems
Tying vs. Untying of procurement
Attending to implementation vs. local donor
coordination
• Signing onto PD implementation plans
• Managing for results
TIPS: Aid modalities
• Pay attention to partner priorities and local capacity
building needs when designing programs
• Consider using program-based approaches:
--For example, favor aligned projects with sector
programs over free standing projects
--Try some sector budget support.
• In deciding on implementation modalities, look to
maximize complementarity with other donor programs.
TIPS: Using country systems
• Use country institutions, systems, procedures for
implementation, financial management, procurement,
accounting, and audit, to the extent possible.
• Or if not reliable, use existing donor systems (e.g. WB
procurement procedures) rather than creating own
systems.
• Join others in strengthening local capacities/systems
• Look to favor local sourcing, procurement and
spending through use of local contracts and grants;
engaging host country experts, NGOs and firms, and
purchasing more goods locally.
TIPS: Local Donor Coordination
• Explore delegated cooperation opportunities.
• Participate in implementing local aid effectiveness
action plans and monitoring processes or delegate to
other donor.
• Join other donors in endorsing local compacts, MOUs,
agreements, to greatest extent possible.
TIPS: Managing for Results
• Build results into your programs at the outset.
• Join other donors in helping strengthen partner results
monitoring and reporting systems rather than setting
up your own, which are costly and staff intensive.
• Rely on others’ data collection and reporting systems.
A GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY
•As Emerging donors you do not
need to retrace the footsteps of
longer standing donors.
•You have the chance to set up
your development cooperation
systems on a 21st Century model
• In spirit of Paris Declaration,
adopt best practices to achieve
greater aid effectiveness &
development impact.