International aid in transition

"A paradigm shift in international development cooperation is now underway. As an aid donor, we must move away from the imposition of conditions and let our partner countries assume responsibility for development."
This is the view of Ambassador Jan Cedergren, currently chair of the Working Party for Aid Effectiveness, an OECD-led working group that is currently preparing a major meeting in Accra, Ghana, to follow up the 'Paris Declaration' on increased effectiveness and results in development assistance.

"The primary significance of the Paris Declaration is to alter the power relations between donors and recipients," says Jan Cedergren. "The responsibility for development must to a greater extent be transferred to partner countries at the expense of donors. Donors have done pretty much as they wished for quite some time now, and this has not been beneficial for the developing countries. It is of key importance that partner countries 'own' their own development."

The Paris Declaration was adopted in March 2005 by 120 aid donors and their partner countries, as well as international organisations. The Declaration allows partner countries (recipients) to assume greater responsibility for their own development through financial and political reforms. It also calls on aid donors to pledge to better adapt their aid to each individual partner country and to coordinate among themselves so that everyone is not busy doing the same things in the same areas.

One of the commitments of the eighth goal of the Millennium Declaration and the Millennium Development Goals that were adopted in 2000, aimed specifically at rich countries, is that development assistance is to increase. And development assistance has increased, if not at the rate and volumes promised. But in order to deal with these increased volumes of aid, aid distribution must become more effective. This is what brought about the Paris Declaration with its agenda of measurable indicators, which is to be fulfilled by 2010.

"The Paris Agenda means greater effectiveness and cooperation for better results. But effectiveness is not a goal in itself. Instead, it is a matter of improving the conditions for poor people," says Jan Cedergren.

"If taken seriously, the Paris Agenda signifies a paradigm shift in development assistance. The work will be quite different if the power is transferred from donor to recipient."

Doesn't everyone take it seriously?

"It's easy to sign declarations and attend conferences," Jan replies. "Implementing what has been agreed on is another matter. After all, the whole idea is to bring about change at country level.

"These issues are not obvious for all donors. Not everyone sees that we donors must work via the partner countries´ budget and reporting systems, and adapt ourselves to them. We must move away from the imposition of conditions and instead produce contracts where we agree on the results we want to jointly achieve. That's the essence of mutual accountability."

Five requests from partner countries

The second follow-up meeting of the Paris Agenda will be held in Ghana's capital Accra in September. The purpose of the meeting is to give fresh impetus to the implementation of the Paris Agenda.

The partner countries have six key areas they want to emphasise at this meeting:

• Building institutions and developing capacity on their own terms. That support of this kind is not to be tied to the expertise of industrialised countries, but instead be adapted to conditions in the developing countries
• Increasing predictability in donor commitments. More long-term commitments and information as to what they entail.
• The imposition of conditions must be changed. There must be fewer actors working in fewer areas.
• There is a need to further untie aid. All experience shows that tied aid is expensive for the partner countries.
• Increased incentives for donor countries to work in accordance with the priorities of the Paris Agenda, which, for example, may mean increased delegation to field offices.

The donor community wants to highlight the following issues at the Accra meeting:

• Improved budget and procurement systems in the partner countries.
• Good governance, respect for human rights and tackling the problems with corruption.

The success of and progress made at the meeting in Accra is also of importance to two other conferences this autumn. One is a conference in New York under the auspices of the UN to follow up the Millennium Development Goals, and the other is the conference in Doha on the financial commitments for development made in Monterrey in 2002.

"In both these contexts, it is difficult to show any major progress, and there is a risk of a 'betrayal debate' breaking out. It is therefore important that donors at the Accra conference create credibility for their actions by showing that they are prepared to take certain steps forward," Jan Cedergren maintains.

New actors in a changed world

"Another important issue to discuss at the Accra meeting is that aid is not the same as it was in 2005," Jan continues. "The world has changed a great deal and a number of new major aid actors have entered the arena. These include large foundations like the Gates Foundation, the Hewlett-Packard Foundation and others, which give large sums of money to particular issues, such as HIV/AIDS. Then there are donors outside of the OECD circle, such as China, India, Brazil, Mexico, the Arab countries and others that must be included in the international cooperation.

"In addition, we have the role of civil society with non-governmental organisations. They have been active in the planning process for Accra. They seek recognition as actors in their own capacity and contribute on the basis of their own principles".

"Previously, the OECD countries had a monopoly on aid. Now they have competition from other actors. The partner countries can choose China in preference to the OECD or the World Bank. We have a totally new situation. The time is therefore appropriate to show that the donor community in the OECD is an attractive alternative."

Will it succeed?
"Change occurs in small steps. It depends on the will of the large actors to move ahead. Many 'like-minded' countries (including Sweden) are prepared to do so, while other large actors are not so eager. A consensus must be found. This will involve compromises as opposed to grandiose results".

"But I am an optimist," Jan concludes. "I believe that results can be achieved. Opportunities exist. It´s just a question of seeing them."