Turning the Tables: Aid and accountability under the Paris framework a civil society report | Aids | Aid Effectiveness

Please download to get full document.

View again

of 60
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Information Report
Category:

Documents

Published:

Views: 29 | Pages: 60

Extension: PDF | Download: 0

Share
Related documents
Description
This is a joint NGO report written by the European Network on Debt and Development (Eurodad), based on analysis of aid effectiveness using factual data and interviews conducted in seven countries: Cambodia, Honduras, Mali, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Niger and Sierra Leone. Each case study brought evidence and opinions to help generate understanding and debate ahead of the official aid effectiveness processes taking place in 2008. This report is endorsed by ten African and European organisations. These are: ActionAid International, CAFOD, Campaign for Good Governance, Centre National de Coopération au Développement, Fédération des Collectifs d’ONG du Mali, Ibis, Oxfam International, Réseau des Ong de Développement et Associations de Défense des Droits de l’Homme et de la Promotion de la Démocratie, Trócaire and the UK Aid Network.
Transcript
  A civil society report April 2008 Turning the Tables Aid and accountability under the Paris framework RODADDHD Niger  Turning the Tables : Aid and accountability under the Paris framework This is a joint NGO report written by the European Network on Debt and Development (Eurodad), based on analysis of aid effectiveness using factual data and interviews conducted in seven countries: Cambodia, Honduras, Mali, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Niger and Sierra Leone. Each case study brought evidence and opinions to help generate understanding and debate ahead of the official aid effectiveness processes taking place in 2008. This report is endorsed by ten African and European organisations. These are: ActionAid International, CAFOD, Campaign for Good Governance, Centre National de Coopération au Développement, Fédération des Collectifs d’ONG du Mali, Ibis, Oxfam International, Réseau des Ong de Développement et Associations de Défense des Droits de l’Homme et de la Promotion de la Démocratie, Trócaire and the UK Aid Network.The report has been written by Lucy Hayes and Javier Pereira. Many others have contributed. We would like to thank all of the individuals from Eurodad members and southern organisations involved in producing country case studies and who also provided comments and corrections on this draft. They include: Christian Lawrence, Valnora Edwin, Caoimhe de Barra, Tanya Kleibl, Etienne du Vachat, Mamadou Traoré, Carlos Pacheco, Julia Metcalfe, Sally O’Neill, Joanne McGarry and Gaspard Denis. Thanks in addition to Hetty Kovach, Jesse Griffiths, Nils Sjard-Schulz, Stefan Meyer, Nancy Alexander, Katja Jobes and Romilly Greenhill for their helpful comments. Particular thanks are due to Alex Wilks (Eurodad) and Sarah Mulley (UK Aid Network) for their extensive editorial input. 3 About this report Country Title Source Cambodia Making aid more effective? An independent www.actionaid.org assessment of accountability and ownership in the aid system Honduras Avances de Honduras en armonización de la Cooperación www.trocaire.org Internacional después de la Declaración de Paris: Una evaluación desde la perspectiva de sociedad civil Mali Déclaration de Paris, encore de l’ingrédient pour assaisonner www.fecong.org la foire des chats marchands au Mali ? Mozambique Moçambique: Uma análise independente www.trocaire.org.uk da apropriação e prestação de contas no sistema www.cafod.org de ajuda ao desenvolvimento Nicaragua Consideraciones sobre la Efectividad de la www.trocaire.org Cooperación Externa oficial www.cafod.org.ukNiger Quelle efficacité de l’aide publique au développement au Niger? www.rodaddhd.org Etude indépendante pour une approche citoyenne de l’APD Sierra Leone Old habits die hard: Aid and accountability in Sierra Leone www.eurodad.orgOverview Report Turning the Tables: Aid and accountability under the Paris Framework www.eurodad.org   Contents About this report  .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Acronyms  .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Executive summary  ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 1. Introduction  ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 12 The Paris Declaration: progressive but limited  .............................................................................................................. 13 Beyond official views: this report’s contribution  ......................................................................................................... 13 Accountability and ownership: the vital foundations  ................................................................................................ 14 2. Delegating policy decisions, opening ownership ............................................................................................................... 16 Interpreting ownership: The Paris Declaration’s limited definition  ...................................................................... 16 Donors fund their own priorities ........................................................................................................................................ 17 Donors hold upper hand in aid negotiations  ................................................................................................................ 18 Continuing conditionality  ..................................................................................................................................................... 19 3. Citizen participation in policy decisions  .................................................................................................................................. 24 Policy dialogue: high costs, what gain? ....................................................................................................24 Policy dialogue: limited scope for participation .......................................................................................26 Supporting citizens’ groups to enhance accountability ............................................................................29 4. Falling in line: Do donors back national priorities?  ........................................................................................................... 32 Using country systems: donors still reluctant  ............................................................................................................... 32 Budget support: on the rise?  ............................................................................................................................................... 33 Project aid: a constant presence ......................................................................................................................................... 36 Predictably precarious aid  .................................................................................................................................................... 38 Technical assistance still supply driven  ........................................................................................................................... 42 5. Mutual accountability requires citizens’ engagement  ..................................................................................................... 45 Country level actions  .............................................................................................................................................................. 45 Policy mechanisms for mutual accountability  ............................................................................................................. 46 Insufficient donor transparency  ......................................................................................................................................... 48 Governments can do more to inform their citizens  .................................................................................................... 49 CSOs push country level accountability  .......................................................................................................................... 50 International level actions also required  ......................................................................................................................... 51 6. Conclusion and recommendations  ............................................................................................................................................. 53 Disclaimer This report is a Eurodad paper, but the analysis presented does not necessarily reflect the views of all Eurodad member organisations. The report was financed by the UK Department for International Development, which provided funding while giving Eurodad complete freedom to determine its research approach and editorial line. DFID funded this research in order to increase the contribution of the perspectives of southern civil society and southern governments to the aid effectiveness process. 4
Recommended
View more...
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks