Global experience in monitoring the Paris Declaration, and agreements on monitoring Busan commitments

Brenda KillenAid Quality and Architecture DivisionDevelopment Co-operation Directorate, OECD

LESSONS FROM PARIS…

“We’ll always have Paris”

HLF 4: an evidence-based process

• Monitoring the implementation of the Paris Declaration and AAA– Surveys (2006, 2008, 2011): 78 countries

in 2011 (incl. 12 countries looking at Fragile States Principles)

• Evaluating the Paris Declaration (independent process)– 22 countries and 18 donors/agencies

• Additional sources of information

3

Quick overview on PD evidence:

1. Operational Development Strategies

2a. Reliable Public Financial Management (PFM) systems

3. Aid flows are aligned on national priorities

4. Strengthen capacity by co-ordinated support

5a. Use of country PFM systems

6. Strengthen capacity by avoiding Parallel PIUs

7. Aid is more predictable

8. Aid is untied

9. Use of common arrangements or procedures

10a. Joint missions

10b. Joint country analytic work

11. Results-oriented frameworks

12. Mutual accountability

2010 Target2005 Baseline

75%

50%

54%

38%

19%

40%

7%

52%

38%

48%

22%

85%

565

71%

66%

40%

66%

100%

44%

1 696

42%

43%

20%

41%

44%

46%

1158

43%

48%

22%

44%

50%

50%

>87%

49%

87%

51%

89%

(32 baseline countries)

What have we learned?

1. Survey helped to maintain interest2. Survey stimulated dialogue at

country level3. Ownership from participants4. Regional approach was useful5. Scope for more locally-owned

analysis6. Survey only tells part of the story

Increased interest in the survey

20062008 2011

% of global core aid covered by the Survey (est.)

34 partner countries36% of global aid

55 partner countries58% of global aid

76 partner countries76% of global aid

MONITORING BUSAN PARTNERSHIP…

“I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship”

A country focussed – globally light approach

COUNTRY LEVEL FRAMEWORKS

Own indicators and targets

Lead by the countryResults made public

INTERNATIONAL LEVEL FRAMEWORK

Selective indicators and targets, measured globally or

aggregating country-level information

Monitor progress on a rolling basis

Managed by the Global Partnership

+

Why a global monitoring framework?

SUPPORTS ACCOUNTABILIT

Y

STIMULATE BROAD-BASED

DIALOGUE AND

LEARNING

SERVE AS A REFERENCE POINT FOR COUNTRY

LEVEL FRAMEWORKS

Approach to global monitoring

• Global progress reports produced to inform ministerial-level meetings

• No more centrally managed surveys – use of existing sources of data when and as they become available

• Data collection at country level to be grounded in existing national monitoring processes

• Continued support through a Global Help Desk Facility

• Overall assessment of progress to draw on indicators and complementary qualitative evidence

• Periodic reviews of global indicators and underpinning methodology through the Steering Committee

Thematic Indicator1 Development co-operation is focused on

results that meet developing countries’ priorities

Extent of use of country results frameworks by co-operation providers (specific criteria to be finalised).

2 Civil society operates within an environment which maximises its engagement in and contribution to development

Enabling Environment Index

3 Engagement and contribution of the private sector to development

Measure to be identified

4 Transparency: information on development co-operation is publicly available

Measure of state of implementation of the common standard by co-operation providers

5 Development co-operation is more predictable

a) annual: proportion of aid disbursed within the fiscal year within which it was scheduled by co-operation providers;

b) medium-term: proportion of aid covered by indicative forward spending plans provided at the country level

6 Aid is on budgets which are subject to parliamentary scrutiny

% of aid scheduled for disbursement that is recorded in the annual budgets approved by the legislatures of developing countries.

7 Mutual accountability among development co-operation actors is strengthened through inclusive reviews

% of countries that undertake inclusive mutual assessments of progress in implementing agreed commitments.

8 Gender equality and women’s empowerment

% of countries with systems that track and make public allocations for gender equality and women’s empowerment.

9 Effective institutions: developing countries’ systems are strengthened and used

(a) Quality of developing country PFM systems; and (b) Use of country PFM and procurement systems.

10

Aid is untied % of aid that is fully untied.

Global indicators5 new indicator

s

Thematic Indicator1 Development co-operation is focused on

results that meet developing countries’ priorities

Extent of use of country results frameworks by co-operation providers (specific criteria to be finalised).

2 Civil society operates within an environment which maximises its engagement in and contribution to development

Enabling Environment Index

3 Engagement and contribution of the private sector to development

Measure to be identified

4 Transparency: information on development co-operation is publicly available

Measure of state of implementation of the common standard by co-operation providers

5 Development co-operation is more predictable

a) annual: proportion of aid disbursed within the fiscal year within which it was scheduled by co-operation providers;

b) medium-term: proportion of aid covered by indicative forward spending plans provided at the country level

6 Aid is on budgets which are subject to parliamentary scrutiny

% of aid scheduled for disbursement that is recorded in the annual budgets approved by the legislatures of developing countries.

7 Mutual accountability among development co-operation actors is strengthened through inclusive reviews

% of countries that undertake inclusive mutual assessments of progress in implementing agreed commitments.

8 Gender equality and women’s empowerment

% of countries with systems that track and make public allocations for gender equality and women’s empowerment.

9 Effective institutions: developing countries’ systems are strengthened and used

(a) Quality of developing country PFM systems; and (b) Use of country PFM and procurement systems.

10

Aid is untied % of aid that is fully untied.

Global Indicators: Info to be provided by countries

Country level monitoring

• Essential for realising the Busan commitments as delivery is at the country level.

• Led by developing countries according their specific demands

• Existence of country level monitoring reinforces global monitoring.

• Could be coordinated regionally

Linkages between global and country level

GlobalIndicators

Country level

indicators

Country level data needed for global

level

Gives a reference onhow others are doing

Country results could

be reported at the Global Partnership

Regional organisations key for

support and accountability

Joint OECD/UNDP could provide

support for menu of indicators

Thank you !