Exploring Public Engagement Effectiveness in Canada
Aid Effectiveness vs. Development Effectiveness – Is There A Difference?
1. What is effective development? (And what makes it
different from effective aid?) – PART I
Public Engagement Hub Webinar, October 31, 2011
2. 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
3. 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
4. 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
5. 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
6. 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
7. 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…
8. …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
9. Paris and the aid
effectiveness journey
Korea HLF-
Bogota Statement 4 (2011)
on SSC (2010)
Accra Agenda for
Action – HLF-3
(2008)
Paris Declaration Dili Declaration
on Aid Effectiveness on fragile states
– HLF-2 (2005) (2010)
Rome
Declaration on
Harmonisation –
HLF-1 (2003)
Monterrey
Consensus (2002)
10. …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
11. …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
13. 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
14. “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
15. 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 […] ”
16. 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
Development
effectiveness
Aid Etc.
Aid
Security effectiveness
Trade
Invest- Immigra-
ment tion
17. Aid vs. Dev’t. Effectiveness
Charity Justice
Symptoms of poverty Root causes
Human needs Human rights
Trickle-down Equitable distribution
Short term results Long-term outcomes
Donor driven All dev’t actors*
Women’s equality Gender equality
Jobs Decent work
A-political delivery Politics and power
19. 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)
