[EQ] Working Together to Make Aid More Effective

Working Together to Make Aid More Effective

Ninth Report of Session 2007–08 - Volume I

UK House of Commons International Development Committee –July 2008

 

Available online as PDF file [65p.] at:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmselect/cmintdev/520/520.pdf

 

“…..If the millions of people still living on less than $1 a day are to be lifted out of poverty donors need to provide more effective aid not simply larger quantities of aid. The UK has performed well against almost all of the targets in the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, the central agreement in this area, but global progress has been patchy and slow. The Accra High Level Forum in September is an opportunity to shine a spotlight on this lack of progress. The UK’s Department for International Development should aim to make progress there in two key areas: the division of labour among donors; and developing country ownership of the development process.

The principle of ownership—that the development process should be led by developing countries themselves—is critical to the success of international commitments on aid effectiveness. Aid should be driven by need and demand. DFID should commit to achieving a technical assistance portfolio which is 100% coordinated and demonstrably demand-driven.

The Accra High Level Forum should lead to more effective mechanisms to monitor progress against a greater range of targets linked to ownership. DFID must consistently define ownership as a democratic process which fully involves parliaments, civil society and citizens. Efforts to make aid more effective depend on credible evidence which links particular actions with better development outcomes. Large pieces of this evidential base are missing. DFID must ensure that it is not simply joining a plausible consensus but has done the research to prove to us and, equally importantly, the taxpayer that its approach delivers more effective aid. Without it, DFID is operating on well-intentioned guesswork. Credible monitoring and evaluation of development impact is needed to show objectively that aid can make a difference. DFID should actively support independent and recipient-led monitoring and evaluation initiatives and should submit to—and encourage other OECD donors to submit to—reviews conducted other than by peers.

 

Cooperation with other donors cannot simply be on DFID’s terms. Working with others to make aid more effective requires a certain flexibility of approach. DFID has so far found this difficult to achieve. It needs to reassess its engagement on aid effectiveness with other donors so as to give greater priority to effective coordination over promotion of its own way of working.

 

Joint working between DFID and other donors, and indeed DFID working through other donors, is likely to become a more frequent occurrence. This has implications for the scrutiny performed by this Committee. DFID must work proactively to ensure that we have meaningful oversight of all of its work, however the budget is spent.

 

The principles contained in the Paris Declaration are as applicable to new donors, such as China, India and Brazil, as to other donors. DFID must seek opportunities to share with new donors its own experience of working towards more effective aid but also to support efforts by developing countries to draw new donors into a recipient-led dialogue on aid effectiveness.

Implementing the Paris Declaration requires some changes in the way DFID operates. Staff buy-in is crucial to the success of any change programme and DFID must ensure its frameworks for assessing staff performance make aid effectiveness targets a priority….”

 

Content

Summary

Introduction

1 More effective aid

The aid “burden”

The Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness

Monitoring the Paris Declaration

The benefits of better coordinated aid

Transaction costs

DFID’s promotion of its own model

2 Ownership

Democratic ownership

The limitations of ownership

Technical assistance

Predictable aid

3 Division of labour

The Role of the EU and OECD as coordinating institutions

4 Next steps in implementing the Paris agenda

Delivering results at the Accra High Level Forum

Beyond Accra

Budget support

Staff performance assessment

Evaluating impact

5 Conclusion

List of recommendations

Annex A: The Committee’s visit programme in Ghana

Annex B: The Committee’s visit programme in Rome, Berlin  and Copenhagen

Appendix

 

 

 

 

*      *      *     *

This message from the Pan American Health Organization, PAHO/WHO, is part of an effort to disseminate
information Related to: Equity; Health inequality; Socioeconomic inequality in health; Socioeconomic
health differentials; Gender; Violence; Poverty; Health Economics; Health Legislation; Ethnicity; Ethics;
Information Technology - Virtual libraries; Research & Science issues.  [DD/ IKM Area]

“Materials provided in this electronic list are provided "as is". Unless expressly stated otherwise, the findings
and interpretations included in the Materials are those of the authors and not necessarily of The Pan American
Health Organization PAHO/WHO or its country members”.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PAHO/WHO Website: http://www.paho.org/

EQUITY List - Archives - Join/remove: http://listserv.paho.org/Archives/equidad.html

 

 

    IMPORTANT: This transmission is for use by the intended recipient and it may contain privileged, proprietary or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient or a person responsible for delivering this transmission to the intended recipient, you may not disclose, copy or distribute this transmission or take any action in reliance on it. If you received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately by email to infosec@paho.org, and please dispose of and delete this transmission. Thank you.