by Anna Lauridsen
Since its beginning, the international aid effectiveness agenda has primarily focused on the policies of national governments and bi- and multilateral organisations. Fortunately, this policy debate is increasingly trickling down to civil society organisations (CSOs).
In early July, civil society organisations were invited to take part in the consultations of the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI) in Brussels. Launched in September 2008 at the Accra High Level Forum, the IATI brings together donor countries, developing country governments, non-governmental organisations, and experts in aid information to agree on ways of sharing more and better information about aid.
The IATI CSO consultations in Brussels had the purpose of better understanding the kinds of information about donor aid flows that European CSOs require and to identify recommendations in developing the IATI standards. Similar consultations will be held with CSOs from the developing world.
In June 2009 some 170 representatives from CSOs, donors and governments from nearly 50 countries from around the world gathered in Prague for the conference “Civil Society Organizations Development Effectiveness”. The conference was organised by the Czech NGDO platform “FoRS” in collaboration with CONCORD.
Participants were invited to tackle questions such as: What are the key principles of development effectiveness? What is the specific role of CSOs in development that could best contribute to their full potential? How is effectiveness influenced by external conditions and how to turn these conditions into advantages? The Prague conference concluded with a statement which sets out principles of CSO development effectiveness. Participants committed to deepen discussions of these principles within the Open Forum for CSO effectiveness.
These two CSO gatherings point to two things. Firstly, the gathering momentum of the aid effectiveness agenda (and how to put it into practice) and, secondly, the need for a broad-based, inclusive effort. In other words, the involvement of development experts from various organisations and structures, be it national governments and civil society pulling in the same direction. With these kinds of initiatives, the aid effectiveness agenda stands a chance of succeeding.
Showing posts with label Europe. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Europe. Show all posts
Friday, July 17, 2009
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Sweden begins its EU presidency
by Anna Lauridsen
On July 1 the Czech Republic handed over the EU torch to Sweden.For those not living in Brussels or simply lacking a passion for European politics, this week’s major event must have gone by more or less unnoticed. As I did a quick search on the websites some ofEurope ’s major newspapers, the news was overshadowed by national events, forcing me to scroll down while attentively looking for the key words: “Swedish” “Presidency”.
The Presidency of the Council of the European Union is one of the most important instruments for promoting the interests of EU member states and influencing the activities of the European Union. Accordingly, member states hold the presidency on a rotating basis following a predetermined schedule broken down into six-month terms.
Normally, the presidency is expected to handle at least one major crisis during its time at the steering wheel. Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt will be forced to hit the ground running with the current global political and financial climate. In the coming months, a few crucial decision will be made as to whether Mr. Barroso will stay on as the President of the European Commission, who his commissioners will be and if the Lisbon Treaty will be successfully ratified by the Member States.
As for the presidency’s ambitions for international development, we have so far been told that it will work on specific measures to make EU development cooperation more effective and to ensure that different policy areas work together to contribute to sustainable global development, i.e. policy coherence for development. This change is seen in the light of the economic downturn which is affecting the poorest countries hardest.
Undoubtedly, the Presidency’s development agenda will culminate in the European Development Days, Stockholm, 22–24 October. The European Development Days is a three-day get together for the movers and shakers of international development, including development ministers, heads of national aid agencies, international aid organizations, NGOs and the like. The Development Gateway will participate for the second year in a row. Please check our website for our booth number closer to the date. You can also read about Development Gateway’s success in DRC.
On July 1 the Czech Republic handed over the EU torch to Sweden.For those not living in Brussels or simply lacking a passion for European politics, this week’s major event must have gone by more or less unnoticed. As I did a quick search on the websites some of
The Presidency of the Council of the European Union is one of the most important instruments for promoting the interests of EU member states and influencing the activities of the European Union. Accordingly, member states hold the presidency on a rotating basis following a predetermined schedule broken down into six-month terms.
Normally, the presidency is expected to handle at least one major crisis during its time at the steering wheel. Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt will be forced to hit the ground running with the current global political and financial climate. In the coming months, a few crucial decision will be made as to whether Mr. Barroso will stay on as the President of the European Commission, who his commissioners will be and if the Lisbon Treaty will be successfully ratified by the Member States.
As for the presidency’s ambitions for international development, we have so far been told that it will work on specific measures to make EU development cooperation more effective and to ensure that different policy areas work together to contribute to sustainable global development, i.e. policy coherence for development. This change is seen in the light of the economic downturn which is affecting the poorest countries hardest.
Undoubtedly, the Presidency’s development agenda will culminate in the European Development Days, Stockholm, 22–24 October. The European Development Days is a three-day get together for the movers and shakers of international development, including development ministers, heads of national aid agencies, international aid organizations, NGOs and the like. The Development Gateway will participate for the second year in a row. Please check our website for our booth number closer to the date. You can also read about Development Gateway’s success in DRC.
Friday, June 26, 2009
Until 2015: How can we optimise the implementation of the MDGs?
by Anna Lauridsen
This week, development practitioners, experts and academics gathered in Brussels to discuss the state of play of the Millennium Development Goals at After 2015: Promoting Pro-Poor policy After the MDGs. Co-organised by DFID, ActionAid, the EADI, and the Development Studies Association, the event attracted panelists from across the development field.
The conference set out to tackle two ambitious questions: 1) What has been the impact of the MDG paradigm on poverty reduction to date and what does that mean for an MDG plus agenda? and 2) What are the key meta-processes shaping development over the next 10-15 years and what do they imply for an MDG plus agenda? The conclusions from the conference were meant to feed into the upcoming 10 year review of the MDGs in 2010.
Despite the doom and gloom surrounding the MDGs and how they are not expected to be achieved (especially in the light of the financial, food and fuel crises) a few suggestions were made on turning the situation around, or at least improving it. Some speakers suggested a new paradigm of global sustainable development, including poverty, and others proposed additional millennium goals of social inclusion. However, at this point in time, what is really needed? If the MDGs are failing, would it really be wise to add new ones at this stage? Are we risking an intellectualisation of the MDGs, and of development at large? Perhaps the answer is more practical and straightforward and less high-level and policy oriented.
To date, the MDGs have worked and failed to various degrees in different countries. As most of the developed and developing world has entered the information and communication age it is high time to ask how this change could benefit the poor. Undoubtedly, MDG 5 of improving maternal health, which has been the biggest failure across the board, could have been alleviated by better infrastructure and information, but also by the use of information technology. There is no question that the use of mobile phones and other web based tools to exchange information must be further explored and integrated in all development work.
Finally, to what extent can countries learn from each others' success and failures? How could a system for peer review be set up among countries implementing the MDGs in order for them to monitor each others progress? Is there for the possibility for more locally defined measures and indicators? Louis Kasekende highlighted how the tracking of progress is undermined by the lack of current and reliable data and how poor quality of data makes monitoring difficult. The multiplicity of players also contributes to a lack of coherence, coordination, and duplication of effort. The need for reliable data and targets points to yet another role ICT can play in achieving the international development agenda.
The conference provided the opportunity to discuss the approaching deadline of the MDGs and what can be done to ensure that all of the efforts used to achieve them – regardless of success – was not completely wasted. The questions raised by the participants show clearly that there is a growing need for information and communication technology in the future of development.
Please consult http://www.thebrokeronline.eu/ for further reading
This week, development practitioners, experts and academics gathered in Brussels to discuss the state of play of the Millennium Development Goals at After 2015: Promoting Pro-Poor policy After the MDGs. Co-organised by DFID, ActionAid, the EADI, and the Development Studies Association, the event attracted panelists from across the development field.
The conference set out to tackle two ambitious questions: 1) What has been the impact of the MDG paradigm on poverty reduction to date and what does that mean for an MDG plus agenda? and 2) What are the key meta-processes shaping development over the next 10-15 years and what do they imply for an MDG plus agenda? The conclusions from the conference were meant to feed into the upcoming 10 year review of the MDGs in 2010.
Despite the doom and gloom surrounding the MDGs and how they are not expected to be achieved (especially in the light of the financial, food and fuel crises) a few suggestions were made on turning the situation around, or at least improving it. Some speakers suggested a new paradigm of global sustainable development, including poverty, and others proposed additional millennium goals of social inclusion. However, at this point in time, what is really needed? If the MDGs are failing, would it really be wise to add new ones at this stage? Are we risking an intellectualisation of the MDGs, and of development at large? Perhaps the answer is more practical and straightforward and less high-level and policy oriented.
To date, the MDGs have worked and failed to various degrees in different countries. As most of the developed and developing world has entered the information and communication age it is high time to ask how this change could benefit the poor. Undoubtedly, MDG 5 of improving maternal health, which has been the biggest failure across the board, could have been alleviated by better infrastructure and information, but also by the use of information technology. There is no question that the use of mobile phones and other web based tools to exchange information must be further explored and integrated in all development work.
Finally, to what extent can countries learn from each others' success and failures? How could a system for peer review be set up among countries implementing the MDGs in order for them to monitor each others progress? Is there for the possibility for more locally defined measures and indicators? Louis Kasekende highlighted how the tracking of progress is undermined by the lack of current and reliable data and how poor quality of data makes monitoring difficult. The multiplicity of players also contributes to a lack of coherence, coordination, and duplication of effort. The need for reliable data and targets points to yet another role ICT can play in achieving the international development agenda.
The conference provided the opportunity to discuss the approaching deadline of the MDGs and what can be done to ensure that all of the efforts used to achieve them – regardless of success – was not completely wasted. The questions raised by the participants show clearly that there is a growing need for information and communication technology in the future of development.
Please consult http://www.thebrokeronline.eu/ for further reading
Friday, June 5, 2009
Enough of aid ineffectiveness
by Anna Lauridsen
In a recent communication, the EC predicts that the cost of not fully implementing the Accra Agenda for Action adopted in 2008 may amount to as much as € 5 to € 7 billion euro a year until 2015. Such a figure is not only mindboggling, but also utterly indefensible. In the current climate of economic and financial downturn, resources are scarce in both the so called developed, as in the developing, world. Subsequently such a loss of the total EU aid budget due to “aid ineffectiveness” is unlikely to go down well with either the European taxpayers or the aid recipient countries.
In a recent communication, the EC predicts that the cost of not fully implementing the Accra Agenda for Action adopted in 2008 may amount to as much as € 5 to € 7 billion euro a year until 2015. Such a figure is not only mindboggling, but also utterly indefensible. In the current climate of economic and financial downturn, resources are scarce in both the so called developed, as in the developing, world. Subsequently such a loss of the total EU aid budget due to “aid ineffectiveness” is unlikely to go down well with either the European taxpayers or the aid recipient countries.
Despite the billions of euro that are potentially lost, the Triple Fs, in other words, the three crises: food, fuel and finance, have resulted in calls for increased levels of development aid from the donors. As most governments were already failing to fulfill the target of committing 0,7% of their countries' GDP to Official Development Assistance, even before these financially sour times washed over the globe as a giant tsunami, it is unlikely that aid levels will increase.
One may even be so bold as to ask whether more money is really the answer or if it would merely be a way of throwing money at the problem. If the financial crisis has taught us anything it must be that good management is key, and something which has been lacking for a long while. Why not take advantage of the current situation to look over the regulations and management tools ruling the aid industry (for it is an industry of proportions) just as we are imposing similar demands on the banking and financial systems? Progress has been made; big summits have been held and declarations signed (for instance, the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, the AAA, and the IATI. Now is the time to take it one step further and put them into practice. That way, we could avoid wasting taxpayer’s money and make sure it reaches those it was intended for.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
