The presentation of our Aid Transparency Assessment in Paris

1. Aid Transparency Assessment
Karin Christiansen
Paris, 25 October 2010

2. Aims & Objectives
• We know that aid is not always delivering the
maximum impact possible
• Aid transparency is fundamental to delivering
on donors’ aspirations and the promise of aid
• Essential to AAA specific aid transparency
commitments as well as Paris Dec and HLF4
• Our attempt to undertake a comparative stock
take of the current levels of aid transparency

3. The Publish What You Fund Aid
Transparency Principles
1. Information on aid should be published
proactively
2. Information on aid should be comprehensive,
timely, accessible and comparable
3. Everyone can request and receive information
on aid processes
4. The right of access to information about aid
should be promoted

4. Approach & Methodology
• Aim to assess levels of publication for the full
range of information types in terms of their
comprehensiveness, timeliness and
comparability
• But methodology was driven by lack of
primary data available
• Peer review committee established to advise
on approach and methodology

5. Methodology
• 30 donors – because they were in the datasets
• 7 indicators in 3 categories
• 8 data sources (from 2006 to 2010)
• 3 categories given equal weighting

6. Indicators & data sources

7. Findings
Finding 1: There is a lack of comparable
and primary data
Finding 2: There is wide variation in levels
of donor transparency, across different
types of donors
Finding 3: There are significant weaknesses
across indicators

8. Finding 1:
There is a lack of comparable and
primary data

9. Finding 2:
There is wide variation in levels of
donor transparency, across
different types of donors

10. Overall Score

11. Finding 3:
Significant weaknesses across
indicators

13. Performance across the three categories

14. Conclusions
Conclusion 1: The lack of primary data means
that it is not currently possible to assess donor
aid transparency in the degree of detail
desirable
Conclusion 2: Even so, we know enough to be
confident that there is room for improvement
across all indicators assessed

15. Recommendations
Recommendation 1: Donors have
demonstrated they can make information
available, so they should
Recommendation 2: Transform more
information into better information
through a common standard – mappable,
searchable, useable
Recommendation 3: Ensure common
standard delivers for everyone – recipient
systems esp. budgets, donors internal
systems, HLF 4

16. Future aid transparency assessments
• Future assessments would ideally cover greater
range of aid agencies (e.g. all donor govts incl. ‘emerging’
donors, humanitarian agencies, INGOs, private companies,
contractors)
• Disaggregate donor performance country by
country, programme by programme – variation
inside agencies
• Cover range of info types from aid policies/ procedures;
aid strategies; aid flows; terms of aid; procurement;
assessments of aid & aid effectiveness; integrity procedures;
public participation; to access to info mechanism
BUT need your help and suggestions on way forward

17. Feedback & Questions
Other data sources?
Approaches to next year’s assessment?
Possible partners?
Our contacts:
Rachel.Rank@PublishWhatYouFund.org
Karin.Christiansen@PublishWhatYouFund.org