introduction hlf overview 2006 survey 2008 survey tom beloe undp regional centre for asia and the...
Post on 27-Dec-2015
217 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Introduction
HLF Overview
2006 Survey
2008 Survey
Tom BeloeUNDP Regional Centre for Asia and the Pacific
Jakarta 12th February
How did we get where we are?
2003 Rome High-Level Forum on harmonisation (HLF-1)
2005 Paris HLF on Aid Effectiveness (HLF-2)– 100 countries and organisations.– Set indicators and targets for 2010– Framework for mutual accountability.
2008 Accra HLF on Aid Effectiveness (HLF-3)– Assess progress in implementing Paris Declaration.– Deepen implementation & respond to emerging
issues– Take action & revitalise agenda.
2011 HLF-4 – venue to be decided
The event
A 3 day meeting held in Accra on 2-4 September 2008.
800-1000 participants expected from:– 80 Partner countries (approx 5 per delegation).– 50 Donor countries or organisations.– Civil Society organisations.
Representation at Ministerial or Heads of Agency level.
Links to Ecosoc and Doha process;
The purpose
Create high-level support for reform.
Take stock and review progress.
Decide on actions that will increase the impact of aid on development (Accra Action Agenda).
The structure of the event
MA
RK
ET P
LA
CE
DAY 1 RT
1
PLENARY SESSION
RT 2
RT 3
am
pm
DAY 2 RT
7RT 8
RT 9
am
pm
DAY 3
MINISTERIALam
pm
RT 4
RT 5
RT 6
MINISTERIAL
Purpose of the RTs
Opportunity for in-depth discussion at Accra.
Identify actions that:– Advance the agenda & remove
bottlenecks.– High impacts on development.– Require high-level commitment.
Results captured in a publication.
List of Round Tables
1. Country ownership
2. Alignment - use of country systems, untying, predictability.
3. Harmonisation - rationalising aid delivery, complementarity, division of labour.
4. Managing for results and Development impact.
5. Mutual accountability.
6. Role of CSOs in advancing aid effectiveness
7. Aid Effectiveness in Fragile States and conflict situations
8. Sector application of the Paris Declaration: health, education, infrastructure
9. Aid architecture – South-South partners, vertical funds
Preparations
Consultations– Accra Agenda for Action– Round tables– Asia perspective document
Government of Ghana led strategy
Survey and country contributions
2006 Survey on Monitoring the Paris
DeclarationKey findings & challenges
Jakarta • 12th February 2008
2006 Survey findings
Policy and enabling environment: key determining factor
Summary of results based on three themes:– Predictability– Accountability– Cost effectiveness
Predictability of aid
Aid is predictable when donors actually disburse:– What was previously agreed…– …when it was agreed.
Countries cannot make full use of aid when it is unpredictable.
Predictable aid contributes to achieving development results.
Was aid predictable in 2005?
41% of aid was disbursed on schedule in 2005
EGYPT
AID SCHEDULED
AID RECEIVED
$ 1
420
m
$ 99
8 m
AFGHANISTAN
$ 1
061
m$
1 26
2
m
ZAMBIA
$ 93
0 m
$ 69
6 m
Accountability of aid
Aid is accountable when it is:– Connected to country policies & policy
processes.– Subject to normal democratic scrutiny.
Scrutiny mechanisms are often weak:– Parliamentary scrutiny of budgets.– Supreme Audit Institutions.– Large chunks of aid are not recorded
in budgets.
Was aid accountable in 2005?
42% of aid was recorded in countries’ budgets
GOV.BUDGET ESTIMATES
AID DISBURSED
EGYPT
$ 58
1 m
$ 99
8 m
ZAMBIA
$ 36
1 m
$ 69
6 m$
885
m
$ 62
8 m
BOLIVIA
Cost-effectiveness of aid
The benefits of aid need to outweigh the cost of delivering it.
Transaction costs are high…and increasing.– Scaling-up of aid– More donors.– New business model is expensive.
Is aid cost effective?
800
750
700
650
600
550
450
Vietnam (791)
Cambodia (568)
Honduras (521)
Mongolia (479) Uganda (456)
10 453 missions in 34 countries in 2005
Number of donor missions in 2005
1. Why monitor?
2. How is the survey set up?
2008 Survey process and products
3. How to manage the survey?
4. How to get help and FAQs?
WHY MONITOR?
Making aid work better
Knowing where we are today…– Accurate picture of aid practices
…and moving to where we want to be.
– Stimulate dialogue– Share understanding– Track progress – Get action
OUTPUTS
National level outputs
Two reports from OECD DAC– Country chapters– Overview of Results
Key reports for HLF 3
PARTICIPATING COUNTRIES
ASIA & PACIFIC (11)
AfghanistanBangladesh Cambodia IndonesiaMongoliaNepalVietnamPhilippinesTongaLao PDRKyrgyz Republic
Africa: 27 Arab states: 4Europe: 3Latin america & the caribbean: 7
Total 53 participating countries
12 INDICATORS PRINCIPLES INDICATORS SURVEY REVIEW
S
Ownership 1 National development strategies
Alignment 2 Quality of country systems
3 Alignment: aid is on budget
Harmonisation
4 Coordinated support for capacity development
5 Use of country systems
6 Parallel PIUs
7 In-year predictability of aid
8 Aid is untied
9 Programme-based approaches
10 Joint missions & analytic work
Managing for Results
11 Results-oriented frameworks
Mutual Accountabilit
y
12 Reviews of mutual performance
ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES
National Coordinator: – Manage the survey – Ensure relevant stakeholders are
informed of the survey – Convene and chair meetings
needed to complete the survey– Ensure quality control and
consistency of data Submit Results to
hlfsurvey@oecd.org
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Donor Focal Point – Support the National Coordinator – Collect questionnaire from donors
in a timely manner– Consolidate donor questionnaire
data in the Country Spreadsheet– Identify additional support.
SURVEY TOOLS
1. Explanatory Note
2. Donor Questionnaire
3. Government Questionnaire
4. Country Spreadsheet
5. Country Report
6. Definitions and Guidance
www.oecd.org/dac/hlfsurvey
Agree on the process
Donor questionnaires are distributed to all donors providing ODA in the country.
Government questionnaire is prepared by coordinating inputs from all parts of government managing ODA.
Definitions and Guidance used for definitions and criteria.
1. DATA COLLECTION
2. DATA CONSOLIDATION
Donor Questionnaires are returned to the Donor Focal Point;
Donor questionnaire returns are consolidated into the Country Spreadsheet
Government questionnaire results consolidated into the Country Spreadsheet
3. VALIDATION & DIALOGUE
Review Country Spreadsheet;
Prepare Qualitative assessment of the survey
Meeting with donors, government, and CSOs to finalise and validate documents
Survey results (one Country Spreadsheet and one Country Report) submitted to hlfsurvey@oecd.org by 31 March
4. ANALYSIS
Country chapters will be prepared by OECD;
First draft of the country chapters shared with national coordinators for comments between May – Sept.
The Overview of Results finalised
In –country analysis and possible cross country analysis for region
Recording aid
What is recorded? ODA – Aid provided by official donors– Aid for development & concessional
(loans).– Aid disbursed at country level.
What is not recorded?– Private flows (CSOs, Gates foundation)– Debt cancellation & rescheduling. – Humanitarian assistance.– Regional programmes.
Aid for the government sector
Definition:Aid disbursed in the context of an agreement with administrations (ministries, departments, agencies or municipalities)…….authorised to receive revenue or undertake expenditures on behalf of central government.
Can aid provided by a donor to an NGO/Private Company count as aid for the government sector?
Yes… as long as the NGO/Private company is implemeting a development programme on behalf of government.
Delegated cooperation
Example:Japan gives $ 1 million to Unicef for a development programme in Vietnam.
Who completes the questionnaire? Japan or Unicef?
Unicef should complete the questionnaire (not Japan).
Why?Survey measures effective aid delivery.Not ‘efforts’ made by donors.
HOW TO GET HELP?
UNDP survey orientation workshops
Help Desk (hlfsurvey@oecd.org) UNDP Aidan Cox and Tom Beloe (Asia-Pacific)Gert Danielsen (East/South Africa, Latin America) Julien Chevillard(Francophone Africa) Artemy Izmestiev (ECIS)
World Bank Soe Lin Bee Ean Gooi Janet EntwistleFilippo Cavassini
OECD Misaki WatanabeSimon Mizrahi Sara Fyson
top related