Successfully reported this slideshow.
Your SlideShare is downloading. ×

Decentralised Development Cooperation ODA Extended by local and regional governments

Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Upcoming SlideShare
DDC Emerging paradigms
DDC Emerging paradigms
Loading in …3
×

Check these out next

1 of 19 Ad

Decentralised Development Cooperation ODA Extended by local and regional governments

Download to read offline

Presentation on Decentralised Development Cooperation ODA Extended by local and regional governments made at the 5th Assises of Decentralised Cooperation, held in Brussels, Belgium on 10 July 2017. Presentation by Aziza Akhmouch and Jens Sedemund

Presentation on Decentralised Development Cooperation ODA Extended by local and regional governments made at the 5th Assises of Decentralised Cooperation, held in Brussels, Belgium on 10 July 2017. Presentation by Aziza Akhmouch and Jens Sedemund

Advertisement
Advertisement

More Related Content

Slideshows for you (20)

Similar to Decentralised Development Cooperation ODA Extended by local and regional governments (20)

Advertisement

More from OECDregions (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Advertisement

Decentralised Development Cooperation ODA Extended by local and regional governments

  1. 1. Aziza Akhmouch Head of Unit, OECD Jens Sedemund Senior Policy Analyst, OECD 5th Assises of Decentralised Cooperation Brussels, 10 July 2017 ODA EXTENDED BY LOCAL AND REGIONAL GOVERNMENTS AND EMERGING PARADIGMS IN DDC Supported by
  2. 2. Rationale for an OECD Study on Decentralised Development Cooperation (DDC) • Evolving context in EU countries (territorial reforms, fiscal consolidation, etc.) • Increasing recognition of LRGs as key actors in development cooperation • Changing DDC patterns and modalities – time to take stock • Localising Global Agendas (SDGs, COP, Urban): which role for DDC?
  3. 3. Statistical update of the OECD 2005 report (DAC Journal) Aid Extended by local and state governments Analyse recent trends and evolutions in DDC • DDC-related ODA flows • Legal and institutional frameworks • Key actors and strategic partners • Core motivations, thematic/geographical priorities • Multi-level governance • Evaluation of DDC results • Best practices/challenges Identify emerging paradigms Propose policy recommendations for effective DDC across levels of government Objectives of the OECD Study
  4. 4. ODA extended by LRGs (DAC Credit Reporting System)
  5. 5. • Countries views vary on role of sub-national players • Varying data coverage across countries • 9 countries in 2005 – 13 countries in 2017 Evolving work on DDC Reporting on DC 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Austria Belgium Canada ##### ##### ##### Czech Republic ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### France ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### Germany Greece Italy Japan Portugal Spain Switzerland United Kingdom ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####
  6. 6. • DDC volumes over the past 10 years have continued to increase despite the 2008 financial and economic crisis (+1% per year over the period 2005-15) - from USD 1.7 billion in 2005 to USD 1.9 billion in 2015 DDC data analysis : 2005, 2010 & 2015 DDC volumes 2005, 2010 and 2015 USD million, disbursements, 2015 prices Donor comparison in 2005, 2010 & 2015 DDC volumes and growth rates 0 500 1000 2005 2010 2015 USD million DDC volume 2005 2010 2015 rate of growth 2005-15 Germany 1012.9 933.4 975.5 -4% Canada .. 90.8 253.9 .. Spain 473.6 570.1 209.5 -56% Austria 36.8 22.7 169.5 360% Belgium 74.0 97.6 85.8 16% France .. 69.6 63.6 .. Switzerland 43.3 48.9 62.6 44% Italy 19.9 26.3 27.7 39% United Kingdom .. 0.0 18.5 .. Japan 6.2 3.7 3.3 -46% Czech Republic .. 0.0 0.3 .. Portugal 4.7 0.0 0.1 -97% Greece 0.8 0.0 0.0 -100% Total 1672.5 1863.7 1870.3 12%
  7. 7. • China figures as the top recipient in 2005, 2010 and 2015 (representing 15%, 10% and 11% of total DDC respectively). This mainly because of imputed student costs in Germany. DDC data analysis: 2005, 2010 & 2015 China 15% Unspecified 9% Morocco 5% Turkey 4% India 4% Cameroon 4% Ukraine 3% Peru 3% Iran 2%Bolivia 2% Indonesia 2% Other 47% 2005 Unspecified 26% China 11% India 5% Asia, regional 5% Iran 3% Cameroon 2% Turkey 2% Morocco 2% Syrian Arab Republic 2% Ukraine 2% Brazil 2% Other 38% 2015Unspecified 17% China 10% Haiti 3% Peru 3% Morocco 3% Cameroon 3% Turkey 3% India 2% West Bank and Gaza Strip 2% Ukraine 2% Syrian Arab Republic 2% Other 50% 2010
  8. 8. • China completely disappears from the ranking. Other countries emerge in both 2010 and 2015 as Peru, Bolivia, El Salvador, The West Bank of Gaza Strip and Senegal. DDC data analysis: excluding imputed student costs Unspecified 30% Haiti 6% Peru 5% West Bank and Gaza Strip 3% Guatemal a 3% El Salvador 3%Bolivia 2% Senegal 2% Rwanda 2% Nicaragua 2% Ecuador 2% Other 40% 2010 Unspecified 59% Malawi 3% Peru 2% Morocco 2% Senegal 2% Nepal 2% Mozambi que 1% West Bank and Gaza Strip 1% Dem Rep. of Congo 1% Bolivia 1% El Salvador 1% Other 25% 2015
  9. 9. • Social sectors concentrated 59% of sector allocable DDC in 2010 and 34% in 2015. DDC sectors: 2010 vs. 2015 sector-allocable basis Education,23% Multisector, 13% Agriculture, 10% Gov. & civil society, 12% Health, 12% Unspecified, 7% Other social, 7% Humanitarian assistance, 6% Water, 5% Other, 5% 2010 Multisector,21% Unspecified, 20% Gov. & civil society, 8% Health, 12% Education, 8%Agriculture, 10% Other, 10% Water, 6% 2015 Humanitarian assistance, 5%
  10. 10. • In 2014-15, climate change-related DDC amounted to USD 41 million, representing 11% of total bilateral allocable DDC volumes screened by the climate markers • Climate adaptation activities are highly targeted among DDC projects. In 2014-15 “adaptation only” aid activities represented 44% of the total DDC climate-related amounts while these account for only 28% for non-DDC activities. Policy objectives in DDC: climate change-related aid
  11. 11. • In 2014-15, total gender-focused aid reached 43% of total sector allocable DDC (38% for non-DDC aid). • Spain is leading on DDC focusing gender equality (with USD 122 million on average per year in 2014-15 or 66% of the total volumes of its DDC). Policy objectives in DDC: Gender equality and women’s empowerment
  12. 12. Channels of delivery • Over the 2010-15 period, universities and research institutes represented the top channel through which DDC financing was provided, reaching USD 1.1 billion in 2015 • Belgium, Canada and Spain have channelled the highest proportions of DDC through multilateral institutions, throughout the 2010-15 period (16- 18%, 3-4%, and 3-2%, respectively)
  13. 13. Emerging Paradigms beyond ODA (OECD 2017 Survey to 12 DAC)
  14. 14.  Most countries have legal or institutional frameworks for DDC  Specific laws mentioning LRGs for development cooperation  Strategic frameworks  Decrees  Half countries have DDC guidelines at national level and one fourth have a standard definition for DDC  Highest level of interaction is between local actors in provider and partner countries  All countries reported the existence of evaluation mechanisms to assess the impact, costs and benefits of DDC projects (e.g. reports) Legal and institutional frameworks
  15. 15. Main kind of DDC technical assistance Note : Austria, Belgium, Italy, Portugal, Spain, France, Netherlands and Sweden replied to this question  DDC activities : mainly peer to peer learning activities and transfer of technology and know-how  Others: capacity building, infrastructure, social welfare services, national policy dialogue, training and professional exchange 0 5 10 15 20 25 2005 2010 2015 Main Kind of DC Technical Assistance Cultural co-operation Students exchange/ research Others Transfer of technology and know how Peer to peer learning
  16. 16. Geographical DDC priorities Note: Austria, Belgium, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain, France, Netherlands and Sweden replied to this question  Main criteria: level of poverty and addressing global priorities, such as SDGs, G7, G20, COP,  Historical and political parameters and priority countries defined by central aid authorities also key
  17. 17. Sectoral DDC priorities Note : Austria, Belgium, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain, France, Netherlands and Sweden replied to this question  Local governance, democracy and decentralisation and Social inclusion: two main policy and service areas in 2015, followed by Health Main policy and services areas for DDC (2005-2015)
  18. 18. • A diversity of DDC situations across and within DAC countries • An important component of LRGs’ international cooperation despite the crisis • DDC goes beyond ODA (peer-to-peer learning, twinning etc.) • Global Agendas are gaining traction in the criteria for DDC priorities and activities • Relevance of a typology of DDC modalities/ players for a territorial approach • Lessons learned : framework conditions provide common solutions to common problems Take away messages
  19. 19. • Survey to LRGs (ongoing) • Survey to partner countries (forth) • 4 case studies – Water in France – Gender in the Basque Country, Spain – SDGs in Tuscany, Italy – Healthcare, Agriculture and food security in Flanders, Belgium • Launch of the final report : Q1 2018 Next steps

×