Aid Effectiveness vs. Development Effectiveness – Is There A Difference?

What is effective development? (And what makes it

different from effective aid?) – PART I

Public Engagement Hub Webinar, October 31, 2011

Part I: Presentation

• Part I: What is aid effectiveness?

•Paris, Accra and on to Busan

• What is development effectiveness?

•Initial ideas

•Four strands and the CSO take

•Aid vs development effectiveness

•DE in practice

Part II: Presentation

•Part II: The Istanbul Principles (IP) – in

principle and practice

•Accra and civil society

•The Open Forum Process

•The IP and the Siem Reap Consensus

•Enabling environment

•Where are things at in Busan?

•Looking ahead – CCIC, the ICN, Canada and

the Open Forum

What is aid effectiveness?

“…relates to measures that improve

the quality of the aid relationship,

primarily focusing on the terms and

conditions of the resource transfer

itself.”

And anticipates countries being able to

handle scaled-up degrees of aid

The Paris Declaration

To guide donors and partner governments

be more effective in their aid delivery:

• Ownership

• Alignment

• Harmonization

• Managing for results

• Mutual accountability

Monitoring framework

35 donors; 26 multilaterals; 56 recipients

Why does this matter?

• 4000 aid relationships globally (56 countries)

• 50 % of all relations represent only 5% aid

• 14,420 missions in 55 countries (2007),

with 752 alone in

Vietnam and 590

in Indonesia

OECD stats

The downsides of Paris

• Ownership – donor to government, but…

• Alignment – to donor priorities, and now…

• Harmonization – projects to programs…

• Managing for results – from short term

results , to “value for money”

• Mutual accountability –

upwards more than

downwards

• Current small levels of aid…

…and on to Accra …

• Mid-way review to 2010

• Action on predictability, transparency (IATI),

orphans, and (again) on untying aid

• Ownership through country systems (TA,

procurement) and broader inclusion

• CSOs as independent development actors

and members of the WP-Eff

• BUT maintained

conditionalities; no time-bound

monitorable commitments

Paris and the aid

effectiveness journey

Korea HLF-

4 (2011)

Monterrey

Consensus (2002)

Rome

Declaration on

Harmonisation –

HLF-1 (2003)

Paris Declaration

on Aid Effectiveness

– HLF-2 (2005)

Accra Agenda for

Action – HLF-3

(2008)

Bogota Statement

on SSC (2010)

Dili Declaration

on fragile states

(2010)

…and now Korea…then?

BOD - Reaffirmation of Paris and Accra,

but…what to do about:

• New donors (BASIC, Gates, Vertical funds)

• New actors (emerging, CSOs, private sector)

• New issues (aid orphans, S-S, fragile states,

fragmentation, climate)

• And an uncertain

architecture

…and what of Canada?

• Frozen aid budget

• Three strategic priorities : MNCH, food

security, sustainable economic growth

• Focus!

• And for Busan:

• Results and “value for money”

• New era of aid transparency

• Accountability (but to whom)

• The Private Sector as the engine of everything

What is development

effectiveness?

What do you

think??

Reflections from the video

• Democratic ownership and listening gov’ts

• Sharing the benefits of development

• Improving the conditions of people’s lives and

the outcomes and impacts of aid

• Enhancing people’s ability to exercise rights

• Addressing the causes + impacts of poverty

• Meaningful, sustainable, accountable dev’t

• That women are part of development

• About actors and lives, not aid

“Development effectiveness”

• “No clear definition (or universally accepted

definition) of development effectiveness”

• Four strands (NSI) of DE:

• As organizational effectiveness (WB, IADB);

• As policy coherence (how non-aid affects aid);

• As development outcomes from aid (e.g.

mechanisms to achieve gender equality);

• As overall development process and outcomes.

• DE now a big issue for Busan

Civil society and DE

“…[DE] addresses the causes as well

as the symptoms of poverty, inequality

and marginalization, through the

diversity and complementarity of

instruments, policies and actors

[…and] deepen[s] the impact of aid and

development cooperation on the

capacities of poor and marginalized

people to realize their rights […] ”

DE 1, 2, 3 vs. DE 4

“Conditions for realizing development

effectiveness goals must include

measureable commitments to improve

the effectiveness of aid.”

Development

effectiveness

Aid

effectiveness

Development

effectiveness

Aid

Trade Invest-

ment

Immigra-

tion

Security

Etc.

Aid vs. Dev’t. Effectiveness

Charity

Symptoms of poverty

Human needs

Trickle-down

Short term results

Donor driven

Women’s equality

Jobs

A-political delivery

Justice

Root causes

Human rights

Equitable distribution

Long-term outcomes

All dev’t actors*

Gender equality

Decent work

Politics and power

So now what?

CSO response post-Accra: The BetterAid Platform

Changing the discourse

Evaluate and deepen Paris and Accra

Move beyond aid to development effectiveness

(results → outcomes)

Centrality of rights-based approach, gender

equality and decent work

Support CSOs as development actors and

commit to an enabling environment

Make current aid architecture equitable and just

Q and A (Part II – next week Nov 8)

No of hte

Fraser Reilly-King

Policy Analyst (Aid)

+1 613 241-7007, ext. 315

freillyking@ccic.ca

www.nsi-ins.ca/english/

pdf/NewAgendaV7.pdf

www.betteraid.org

www.cso-effectiveness.org

www.ccic.ca

THANK YOU!!