• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Quality of Aid Debate and Results - Groff
 

Quality of Aid Debate and Results - Groff

on

  • 661 views

ICGFM May 2011

ICGFM May 2011

Statistics

Views

Total Views
661
Views on SlideShare
661
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Prior to Doug’s Presentation at 10:45
  • Prior to Doug’s Presentation at 10:45
  • Prior to Doug’s Presentation at 10:45

Quality of Aid Debate and Results - Groff Quality of Aid Debate and Results - Groff Presentation Transcript

  • New directions in the quality of aid debate: Implications for support to Public Financial Management
    Stephen GroffDeputy DirectorDevelopment Co-operation Directorate
  • Outline
    The Aid Quality Agenda and Commitments
    Assessing Progress
    Paris Declaration Commitments on PFM
    New Actors and New Themes
    High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness: Implications for the future Aid Quality Agenda
  • Change ….? Why Change?
    It’s about making aid work better where it is needed
    3
  • A Day in the Life of…
    Source; Don De Savigny & COHRED
  • Ministry of Health: Kenya
    Source: S. Kinzett (2004)
  • HLF-4
    The Aid Quality Journey…
    Busan
    29 Nov – 1Dec 2011
    HLF-3
    Istanbul principles on CSO effectiveness
    HLF-2
    HLF-1
    Dili Declaration on Fragile States
    Accra Action Agenda
    Bogota Declaration on SSC
    Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness
    Rome Declaration on Harmonisation
    2010
    2008
    2011
    2002
    2003
    2005
    Monterrey Consensus
  • The Paris Declaration “pyramid”
  • Paris Declaration: what makes it different?
    • Unprecedented consensus;
    • 56 action-oriented commitments for both Donors and Partners countries;
    • Built-in mechanism for monitoring progress at country and global levels (12 Indicators); and
    • Targets set for 2010 monitored in 3 separate surveys (2005-2011).
  • Outline
    The Aid Quality Agenda and Commitments
    Assessing Progress
    Paris Declaration Commitments on PFM
    New Actors and New Themes
    High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness: Implications for the future Aid Quality Agenda
  • Progress on track 2005-2008
    36%
    59%
    88%
  • Targets requiring efforts but within reach (2005-2008))
    36%
    49%
    59%
    1483
    45%
    88%
  • Targets requiring very special efforts (2005-2008))
    22%
    36%
    49%
    59%
    43%
    42%
    1483
    45%
    88%
    42% (slippage)
    20%
    44%
    9%
    22% (No progress)
  • Outline
    The Aid Quality Agenda and Commitments
    Assessing Progress
    Paris Declaration Commitments on PFM: Key Messages
    New Actors and New Themes
    High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness: Implications for the future Aid Quality Agenda
  • Total donor PFM support, 1995-2008
    Evaluation of Donor Support to PFM Reform in Developing Countries, ODI, 2010
  • Paris Declaration and PFM
    Donors committed to:
    • Provide reliable commitments of aid over a multi-year framework
    • Disburse aid in a timely and predictable way
    • Rely on transparent partner government budget and accounting mechanisms
    • Adopt harmonised performance assessment frameworks
    Partner Countries committed to:
    • Publish timely, transparent and reliable reporting on budget execution
    • Ensure that national systems are effective, accountable, and transparent
    • Take leadership of the public financial management reform process
    • Mobilise domestic resources, strengthen fiscal sustainability
    • Create an enabling environment for public and private investments
  • Evidence on PFM: Mixed
    24%
    36%
    49%
    59%
    45%
    43%
    1483
    45%
    88%
    47%
    21%
    44%
    9%
    26%
  • ACCRA AGENDA FOR ACTION: Commitments on PFM (2008)
    DONORS will:
    • Use country systems [including PFM systems] as the first option in the public sector.
    • Be transparent when they don’t use them.
    • Support country-led reform programmes.
    • Develop corporate plans for using country systems.
    • Channel 50% (or more) of government-to-government aid through country fiduciary systems (i.e. PFM + Procurement)
    PARTNERS will:
    • lead in defining reform programmes.
    • Strengthen their budget planning processes
    • Facilitate parliamentary oversight including through more transparency in PFM
    PARTNERS & DONORS will jointly assess quality of country systems.
  • What are the different components of thePFM system that aid can “use”?
    Source: Mokoro (2010)
  • Challenges in Implementation
    Many factors lead to donors bypassing country PFM systems
    Varying perceptions of risk
    Emphasis on fiduciary risk
    Developmental risk of not using country systems
    Incentives and capacities in donor organisations
    Political constraints: visibility, traceability...
    Quality of partner country systems
    Shifting transaction costs from partner government to donor
  • Some common myths
    Using country systems means providing budget support
    Not necessarily: all aid modalities can make use of country systems
    An “all or nothing” approach?
    Different components of country systems can be used
    Pooled funds are a move towards use of national systems
    They might be, but this is more about harmonisation
    Technical co-operation cannot make use of country systems
    Need a flexible approach
  • Working Party on Aid Effectiveness support to PFM
    Assessing progress (Quality and Use of PFM Systems)
    Global Partnership on Country Systems
    Dedicated Task Forces on PFM and Procurement
    Identifying and disseminating good practice
    Developing and supporting common tools (e.g. procurement assessment)
    Country Level Work
    Lending political support, monitoring, sharing experiences
  • Outline
    The Aid Quality Agenda and Commitments
    Assessing Progress
    Paris Declaration Commitments on PFM
    New Actors and New Themes
    High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness: Implications for the future Aid Quality Agenda
  • Broadening the Partnership
    Shaping the global development architecture – i.e. G20 Development Consensus
    G20 discourse (June 2010) on the need for greater transparency, accountability and institutional governance including use of country systems
    Development actors beyond the DAC:
    Non-traditional providers of development assistance (i.e. Middle Income Countries, Emerging Economies, Arab donors etc)
    Civil society organisations
    For-profit private sector and foundations
    Bridging the divide: DAC Statement on “New Partnerships”, Bogota Statement on South South Cooperation
  • Objectives of Broadening the Partnership
    Finding convergence and common ground
    Share lessons on economic growth, poverty reduction and development co-operation
    Mutual interest in achieving results while respecting diverse ways to reach them
    Interest in improving all forms of co-operation through inclusive dialogue, mutual learning and knowledge-sharing
    Recall the enduring relevance of the Paris principles for developing countries (fragile states, MICs, LDCs)
  • New Themes
    Climate Change Financing
    Avoid pitfalls of complex funding channels
    Public Private Partnerships
    Strengthening regulatory and financial environments
    Risk Management
    Innovative Financing Mechanisms
    Additionality
    Predictability
    Aid as Catalyst towards more Effective States
  • Outline
    The Aid Quality Agenda and Commitments
    Assessing Progress
    Paris Declaration Commitments on PFM
    New Actors and New Themes
    High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness: Implications for the future Aid Quality Agenda
  • Where are we now?
    Dili Declaration
    on fragile states (2010)
    Korea HLF (29 Nov. – 1 Dec. 2011)
    Bogota Statement on SSC (2010)
    Accra Agenda for Action (2008)
    Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness (2005)
    Rome HLF on Harmonisation (2003)
    Monterrey Consensus (2002)
    27
  • 4th High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness: A Unique Opportunity
    Forging a new consensus on aid and development?
    Chance to reinvigorate the global commitment towards the MDGs;
    Refresh and reaffirm Paris / Accra principles;
    Recognise the role of aid as contributor and catalyst for development results and effectiveness;
    Improve the quality of partnerships through embracing partner country leadership, diversity and mutual respect;
    Seek convergence based on complementary strengths and differentiated responsibilities.
  • Who? Where? When?
    Apolitical eventthat attracts ministerial attendance, with decisive outcomes
    Busan, Korea. Host: Government of Korea
    29 November to 1 December 2011.
  • HLF-4- Main Objectives
    Stocktaking from the Paris / Accra process
    Agreeing on features of high quality aid and its monitoring framework towards 2015
    Situating aid in its broader development context:
    More actors, development finance effectiveness
    Diversified approach: MICs, LICs, FS, regions
    Catalyst dimension: trade, security, climate…
    Results and right-based approaches
  • Emerging Areas for Political Outcomes
    • Results and transparency for better accountability
    • Ownership and Leadership
    • Effective States and Alignment (Country Systems)
    • Diversity at country level – fragile states, middle income countries, LDCs
    • Climate Change Financing
    • Recognise all forms of partnerships (SSC, PPPs…)
    • Role of CSOs, Parliaments and local government
  • Key milestones in 2011
    Monitoring Survey:
    country level data collection
    Evidence for “Progress Since Paris”
    Deadlines: 31 March
    Themes for Busan
    Deadline: January
    Preliminary Menu of Options
    Task Force on Procurement (May)
    DAC SLM (6-7 April)
    WB/IMF Spring Meeting (16-17 April)
    WP-EFF EXCOM (9-10 March)
    WP-EFF co-chairs First Narrative Outline for Outcome Document (comments by 3 April)
    Task Force on PFM (6-7 June)
    Evaluation: Synthesis report (April 2011)
    Monitoring Survey: preliminary results 1st draft Progress since Paris (July 2011)
    Global Partnership on Country Systems (9-10 June)
    WP-EFF + ExCOM (7-9 July)
    1st draft outcome document
    WP-EFF + ExCOM (5-7 Oct)
    2nd draft outcome document
    TBC: Meeting on Effective States (Paris, October)
    Report finalisation (September 2011)
    4th High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness 29 November – 1st December, Busan, Korea
  • www.oecd.org/dac/effectiveness/pfmWWW.BUSANHLF4.ORG
  • Do donors use your country systems?
    Yes
    No
    Sometimes
  • Does your country refuse aid because of complex donor requirements?
    Yes
    No
    Sometimes
  • Is aid effective in your country?
    Yes
    No
    Sometimes