Evaluation of Finland’s Aid for Trade
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Like this? Share it with your network


Evaluation of Finland’s Aid for Trade

Uploaded on

Presentation held at House of Estates, Helsinki, 29th August 2011...

Presentation held at House of Estates, Helsinki, 29th August 2011

Kate Bird, Liz Turner, Maria Suokko, Laura Rovamaa, Joseph Muraguri Gathii

More in: Technology , Business
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads


Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds



Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

    No notes for slide


  • 1. Evaluation of Finland’s Aid for Trade Kate Bird, Liz Turner, Maria Suokko, Laura Rovamaa, Joseph Muraguri Gathii Säätytalo, Helsinki 29th August 2011
  • 2. 1. Introduction2. Aims and methods of the study3. Findings and recommendations
  • 3. What is Aid for Trade?Source: OECD
  • 4. Finland’s AfT priorities Sectors Themes • Agriculture • Private Sector • Forestry • Information Society • Energy • Environment • Cross-cutting themes AfT categories Geographical • Building productive focus capacity • Countries • Economic infra • Regions • Trade policy and regulations • Multilateral organisations
  • 5. AfT categories covered by the evaluation• Trade policy and regulations (TP&R) - Approximately 8% of Finland’s bilateral AfT (2006-09; disburs.) - Bulk of support provided through multilateral organisations• Economic infrastructure (EI) - Approximately 20% of Finland’s bilateral AfT (2006-09; disburs.) - Main areas of intervention related to AfT are energy (including environment) and ICT (e.g. Tanzania, Zambia)• Building productive capacity (BPC) - Approximately 72% of Finland’s bilateral AfT (2006-09; disburs.) - Main areas of intervention related to AfT are PSD, agri-business, forestry, agriculture and mining
  • 6. 1. Introduction2. Aims and methods of the study3. Findings and recommendations
  • 7. Aims of the evaluation• Rationale – Share lessons-learned – Make practical, concrete recommendations (particularly on Finland’s future AfT policy and support)• Purpose – Assess the present AfT Action Plan (targeting, organizational set-up and implementation)• Main objective – Present an overview of Finland’s AfT to help the MFA to enhance its role and effectiveness
  • 8. Overall approach• Thematic evaluation – Three thematic case studies (Economic Infrastructure, Building Productive Capacity and Trade Policy and Regulations)• Systemic approach• Four phases – Inception phase; desk study; field study; final reporting
  • 9. Methodology• Evaluation matrix – Matrix developed, based on ToR• Document review – Review of a sample of 21 bilateral and 14 multilateral project and programme documents• Key informant interviews – MFA officials, embassy staff, donors, government and private sector representatives and implementing organisations – In six partner countries in Africa and Asia – 11 international and multilateral organisations in Geneva and Brussels
  • 10. Evaluation criteria (1)• Relevance – Intervention is in line with beneficiary needs and policy environment• Coherence – Policies taken into account in planning and implementation (Finland’s and partner country’s)• Complementarity – Interventions supporting one another and partners contributing usefully• Co-ordination – Two or more development partners working well together (mobilising aid or harmonise activities)
  • 11. Evaluation criteria (2)• Efficiency – Good use of resources to generate outputs/ results (quantity, quality, time)• Effectiveness – Intervention has achieved what it set out to• Impact – Has there been progress towards the overall objective(s)• Sustainability – Continued benefits from intervention after external support ends• Finnish added value – The added value provided by Finnish support
  • 12. AfT – conceptual framework
  • 13. 1. Introduction2. Aims and methods of the study3. Findings and recommendations
  • 14. Linkages between Improve Recommendation 1Finding 1 sectors and the wider understanding of economy, including trade context by trade, are not always identifying national well understood and and regional binding articulated. constraints to trade through deeper reviews of existing analysis or through jointly commissioning gap-filling work.
  • 15. Some MFA officials Clarify the purpose of Recommendation 2Finding 2 and implementing AfT, identifying the partners understand relative importance Finnish AfT as Finnish of trade promotion aid for Finnish trade for Finnish (in other words, companies, products trade promotion), and expertise versus partly because of development ambiguity around the objectives for partner promotion of Finnish countries, including Value Added. Finnish Value Added.
  • 16. The AfT Action Plan is Develop a conceptual Recommendation 3Finding 3 relevant and in line with framework that better the overall Development articulates the links Policy Programme. between AfT, pro-poor However, there is no growth and poverty clear conceptual reduction, indicating framework showing how how sectoral AfT contributes to interventions can link to enhanced trade the enhanced volume performance of different and value of goods sectors. traded by partner countries.
  • 17. Few AfT All interventions Recommendation 4Finding 4 interventions classified as AfT articulate how should have a their interventions results chain will achieve trade- identifying the related outcomes. contribution that Most focus on they will make to inputs, activities trade-related and – rarely - outcomes. outputs.
  • 18. The AfT portfolio Adopt a more Recommendation 5Finding 5 contains over 90 strategic approach bilateral, regional, to identifying and multilateral and planning AfT joint interventions interventions, and with the smallest rationalise the contributions number of amounting to just projects and 160 000 Eur per programmes. annum.
  • 19. Project and programme Identify common high- Recommendation 6Finding 6 level targets tend to be level results anticipated weak. The indicators of AfT and develop used are often not clearly articulated high- SMART (Specific; level SMART indicators Measurable; Achievable; and targets at the Relevant; and Time- goal/impact level. bound) and are often limited to the input and activity level and not outcome and impact levels.
  • 20. MFA officials Communicate and Recommendation 7Finding 7 (advisors and explain the AfT embassy staff) do conceptual not always framework and understand how encourage their sector fits collaboration within the AfT across sectors and agenda. implementing partners.
  • 21. At present, Build advisory Recommendation 8Finding 8 internal guidance capacity and for designing, resources so that implementing and sectoral advisors monitoring AfT is can provide more inadequate. support on AfT across the MFA and to embassies.
  • 22. Guidance on how to Improve guidance for Recommendation 9Finding 9 achieve trade-related AfT by incorporating outcomes through the new AfT sectoral interventions conceptual (without weakening framework into the sector specific new AfT Action Plan achievements) is (or similar) as well as weak. MFA’s new project/programmes planning system.
  • 23. Quality assurance Improve quality Recommendation 10Finding 10 processes are insufficient assurance across sectors to ensure that trade- and aid modalities. related outcomes are clearly articulated in (broad definition) AfT interventions or that poverty reduction, pro- poor growth or cross- cutting issues are sufficiently integrated.
  • 24. The mix of aid Promote greater Recommendation 11Finding 11 modalities, linkages synergies between and potential interventions funded complementarities under different are not always modalities, through considered and improved projects and information sharing, programmes are particularly between often considered in the multilateral and isolation. bilateral portfolios.
  • 25. The coverage of the Rebalance the Recommendation 12Finding 12 AfT portfolio across Finnish AfT portfolio the different by increasing the categories lags proportion of funds behind current global allocated to current trends in AfT. global priorities (e.g. regional economic integration and trade-related infrastructure).
  • 26. Little evidence of AfT Integrate cross-cutting Recommendation 13 programmes integrating issues systematically an understanding of throughout all AfT power (gender relations), interventions by with coverage of cross-Finding 13 improving guidance, cutting issues relatively providing additional low. advisory resources. For instance, on gender interventions tend to deal with gender at the level of numbers of women benefiting from an intervention.
  • 27. Lesson learning is ad hoc Enhance internal Recommendation 14Finding 14 and embassy staff and learning by maximising implementing partners opportunities to identify do not have access to and share lessons of systematic case studies good practice by or guidance on AfT. communication between AfT-related interventions, developing and distributing short guidance notes on different aspects of AfT (e.g. at MFA in-weeks and through the intranet system).
  • 28. Thank you for your attention!