Upload
andrew-haynes
View
212
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
KEY DEVELOPMENTS ON THE CONFLICT & FRAGILITY AGENDA: 2008-2011
1. Creation of International Network on Conflict and fragility:More close linking of peacebuilding, statebuilding and security agendas; recognition thatdifferent approaches are required in fragile and conflict-affected states
2. The International Dialogue on Peacebuilding and Statebuilding:Working to change the way aid is delivered in fragile and conflict-affected states;
emerging set of international peacebuilding and statebuilding objectives that center on political dialogue, basic security & justice, economic recovery and statebuilding
3. OECD Statebuilding Guidance: Development of resilient and legitimate states require parallel support to political
settlements, state responsiveness & capacity and society’s needs and expectations; limited role of donors and need for long-term engagement.
4. Forthcoming OECD guidance on transition financing:Aid delivery (and instruments used) needs to fundamentally change to deliver better
results during war-to-peace transitions.
5. Risks and results:Successful engagement in high-risk contexts requires better risk management and
mitigation, based on collective approaches and better results definition
In addition, UN SG’s report on peacebuilding, World Development Report etc
FRAGILE STATES PRINCIPLES SURVEY
INTERNATIONAL DIALOGUE
INCAF work
High Level
Meeting Busan
(end-2011)
THE CONFLICT & FRAGILITY AGENDA: LOOKING AHEAD
SOME CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
1. Traditional approaches not delivering in fragile and conflict-affected states
Traditional approaches to aid delivery and effectiveness to complex in situations of conflict and fragility. Different approaches needed – flexibility, speed, risk tolerance
2. More clarity on goals and priorities
MDGs not sufficient in conflict and fragility. Complimentary peacebuilding and statebuilding goals being developed –provide narrative for donor engagement/evaluations
3. Fragile states principles guide donor engagement
FSP provide design parameters that donors have agreed to use to shape their engagements. Monitoring survey provides evidence on use; can serve as baseline for evaluations
4. Peacebuilding and statebuilding highly complementary
Peacebuilding and statebuilding challenges, objectives and activities are largely identical. CPPB evaluations need to consider SB engagement and implications for programming