Open forum on CSO development effectiveness
as a response to Paris Declaration
Daniel Svoboda
Co-authors: Franz Josef Berger and the Global Facilitation Group
Development Worldwide, civic association
DWW, Machova 23, 120 00 Prague 2, Czech Republic (www.dww.cz)
Summary:
Paris Declaration has been an important step for improvements of development agenda but better aid, even if really reached, is not enough. Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) have been challenging donors and governments to look beyond the aid and to focus more on development, human aspects and development partnership schemes. After regional and global consultations, the CSOs decided not to sign the Paris Declaration for two reasons – a) they were not invited to participate in its preparation and thus could not influence its content, and b) the targets of the Paris Declaration are mostly technically oriented and they follow neither the full meaning of the key principles nor the focus on inclusiveness, real benefits for people and sustainability of impacts.
However, during the preparations for the 3rd High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness in Accra 2008, multiactors debates led to recognition of the need to strengthen donors´ commitments to better aid and their enforcement and monitoring at one side and to support enabling environment for participation of all development actors including focus on their own responsibilities on the other side. CSOs took up both challenges and two complementary CSO global processes have started.
The presentation will briefly explain the roles of the Better Aid Coordinating Group (BACG) and of the Global Facilitation Group (GFG) of the Open Forum for CSO Development Effectiveness. Both processes should enhance ownership and mutual cooperation of all development actors and lead to new paradigms of development. In this respect, evaluation roles and approaches can and should get new dimensions as well.
1. Aid Effectiveness or Development Effectiveness?
Paris Declaration has been a very important step towards necessary improvements of development agenda. The declaration summarized five basic principles for effective official development assistance and concrete targets and indicators. If followed by the signatories (donors and governments), it might really lead to better providing of aid. On the other hand, civil society actors criticized the Paris declaration mainly for two aspects:
1) The process of its preparation was missing larger consultations and participatory approaches. Therefore the voices of other actors than donors and governments were not listened to.
2) However the key five principles are really significant, the concrete targets remain focused on technicalities only and they do not reflect CSIO priorities - human rights or development partnerships based on diverse roles that CSOs play, and they do not lead to real impacts.
Although the first response to the critical voices and concrete recommendations of civil society actors consisted in challenging NGOs either to sign the Paris Declaration too or to take a critical look at their own activities, the consultations during the preparation of the 3rd High Level Forum in Accra opened a new dimension of multi-actors cooperation. Firstly, civil society organisations (CSOs) launched their own global process of identifying principles of CSO Development Effectiveness, and secondly, the governments and donors recognized this process and also the importance of more inclusive approaches and mutual consultations.
What are the key challenges for the CSO Development Effectiveness process?
First of all, we understand that better aid is not enough, the aim is sustainable development and it cannot be reached by more efficient ODA flows only. Therefore we are speaking about development instead of aid and we do not consider the Paris Declaration targets sufficient. And that is the reason we are going to contribute to the global development with our own views and commitments and we believe they might enrich efforts of all development actors.
Regarding main development principles, there are much more challenges than stated in the Paris Declaration (PD) and in the Accra Agenda for Action (AAA):
Ownership
While PD speaks about number of national operational development strategies we are calling for democratic ownership - for multi-stakeholders participation since preparation of these development strategies and for their stronger links to people and their human rights.
Alignment
PD speaks about financial management and national procurements systems but also about predictability and untied aid. We would like to stress also the diversity and complementarity of different development actors and systems as well as the need of capacity building and of inclusive and enabling policies. The alignment principle must not undermine diversity and autonomy of civil society and threaten its critical voice.
Harmonization
PD speaks about programme-based approach and joint work of donors. We can add topics of transparency, partner-driven (not donor-driven) programmes, autonomy and diversity of all development actors, and especially need for partnership across sectors based on our common goals.
Mutual accountability
PD speaks about mutual reviews only. There is no remark about accountability to people, about accountability for impacts, about partnership principles, or about country-led evaluations that might enhance both local ownership of and responsibility for development programs.
Managing for Results
PD mentions transparent and monitorable performance but many development interventions are still in fact activity-driven and there is still a limited focus on impacts. We would like to widen the space for innovations and right of initiative, for more flexibility at activity level and for more responsibility for real and sustainable results. This point is also closely linked to enabling environment and cross-sectoral multi-actors cooperation (a.o. reduction of administrative constraints, increasing predictability and transparency of ODA mechanisms, and full participation at policy and programming level).
There are much more challenges for defining and introducing new framework principles of development cooperation and CSOs are aware of their responsibilities.
2. Global CSO processes post-Accra linked to the aid effectiveness agenda
Civil society played a strong role in the lead-up and at the third High-Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness in Accra (HLF-III) in September 2008. Participation of civil society organisations in the debate was primarily organized by the International Steering Group of the Better Aid Platform (now called Better Aid Coordinating Group, BACG) and the – now dissolved - Advisory Group on Civil Society and Aid Effectiveness (AG) to the Working Party on Aid Effectiveness (WP-EFF) of the OECD DAC.
While the AG consultations have allowed building understanding and a constructive dialogue among multiple stakeholders on key development issues, the ISG/BACG has brought the wealth of experience and expertise of civil society into the debate. Both processes have therefore considerably enriched and broadened the discussions, as manifested by the Accra Agenda for Action (AAA), the outcome document of the HLF-III.
One of the indicators for the enlarged focus of the aid effectiveness debate post-Accra is the recognition, by donors and governments in the AAA, of CSOs as development actors in their own right. Also, there has been an increasingly growing interest on both government and CSO side in widening the debate from its initial sole focus on the effectiveness of donors and governments to also include CSO effectiveness. CSOs have taken up this challenge by proposing, in 2008, a CSO-led multi-stakeholder process towards defining and promoting CSO development effectiveness (Open Forum). Donors and governments have, in the AAA (paragraph 20), welcomed this proposal and committed to engage in this process and to promote it:
We will deepen our engagement with civil society organisations
20. We will deepen our engagement with CSOs as independent development actors in their own right whose efforts complement those of governments and the private sector. We share an interest in ensuring that CSO contributions to development reach their full potential. To this end:
a) We invite CSOs to reflect on how they can apply the Paris principles of aid effectiveness from a CSO perspective.
b) We welcome the CSOs’ proposal to engage with them in a CSO-led multistakeholder process to promote CSO development effectiveness. As part of that process, we will seek to i) improve co-ordination of CSO efforts with government programmes, ii) enhance CSO accountability for results, and iii) improve information on CSO activities.
c) We will work with CSOs to provide an enabling environment that maximizes their contributions to development.
Hence, there are today two separate, but complementary global CSO processes:
· The policy and advocacy process of the Better Aid Platform, led by the BACG, focused on monitoring and influencing the AAA implementation in order to ensure a CSO voice in the discussions on development effectiveness and addressing it within reform of international aid architecture in the lead-up to the fourth High-Level Forum in 2011. In order to facilitate this, the BACG has been granted full membership in the WP-EFF.
· The Open Forum, led by the Global Facilitation Group, to define and promote a development effectiveness framework for CSOs. This process will also involve dialogue with donors, governments and other development stakeholders because they shape the environment which fosters or constrains the ability of CSOs to reach their full potential in development.
To reach their goals, both processes plan to implement a consultative CSO-process at country, regional, thematic and international levels with distinct but complementary objectives, mandates and target organisations (see below). While the BACG consultations, following an advocacy logic, will gather CSO policy officers and aim at triggering a monitored AAA-implementation process at country and global level, the Open Forum will need the expertise of a mix of practitioners, policy officers, senior management and M&E specialists and focus on the enabling environment, the overall roles of CSOs in development and the internal mechanisms and factors that determine CSO development effectiveness.
Commensurate with these clearly distinguished mandates, there is a need to clearly distinguish management and funding of the two processes. Official and private donors are invited to put their contributions into two CSO-managed funding pools – one for the BACG, one for the Open Forum. The pools are proposed to be managed by the respective lead organisations of the two processes (a consortium under CONCORD for the Open Forum, AWID and IBON for the BACG).
Open Forum / Better Aid PlatformSteering / Global Facilitation Group (GFG)
(25 member organisations) / Better Aid Coordinating Group (BACG)
(20 member organisations)
Co-chairs / Azra Sayeed (APWLD)
Deepali Sood (Plan) / Antonio Tujan (IBON)
Cecilia Alemany (AWID)
Managing lead organisations / A consortium coordinated by CONCORD and including Civicus, InterAction, Asia Pacific Research Network (APRN), Latin American Association of Development Organisations (ALOP), All African Conference of Churches (AACC) / AWID (Association for Women in Development) and IBON (tbc)
Mandate / Facilitate and manage a multi-stakeholder consultation process at country, regional, thematic and international levels to define a development effectiveness framework for CSOs
Engage in a dialogue with donors, governments and other stakeholders on the enabling environment for CSOs in development (as follow-up to the Accra Agenda for Action, paragraph 20) / Facilitate CSO monitoring and evaluation of implementation of the AAA at country, regional and international levels
Create policy space for increasing civil society dialogue on the aid effectiveness agenda and its implementation at the country level
Broaden the aid effectiveness agenda in the lead up to the fourth High-Level Forum
Ensure effective CSO representation in official OECD DAC processes on the aid effectiveness agenda
Time frame / 2009-2011 (HLF-IV) / 2009-2011 (HLF-IV)
Country-level consultations / Facilitated by and (partly) funded through Open Forum consortium
Target group: mix of practitioners, policy officers, senior management and M&E officers
Subject: principles, guidelines and mechanisms for CSO development effectiveness / Facilitated by and funded through IBON
Target group: policy officers
Subject: AAA implementation at country-level
Historical origin and background / Launched at a global CSO gathering in Paris on 29 and 30 June 2008
Based on recognition that CSOs need to take up the challenges to their effectiveness
Welcomed by donors and governments in paragraph 20 of the AAA / Started in January 2007 to organize a CSO-led process of dialogue on aid effectiveness agenda in parallel to the official donor process
Culminated in the CSO Parallel Forum on Aid Effectiveness in Accra in August/September 2008
Strong linkage to AG process
Questions of mutual interest and coordination / Common goal is to improve the enabling environment for CSOs in development and to shift the discussions from aid effectiveness to development effectiveness
Both strive to formulate a CSO input for the Forth High-Level Forum in 2011
Both want to engage in a dialogue with governments and donors
Coordination mechanisms are yet to be determined, but will inter alia be ensured by individuals/organisations active in both processes
Web site / www.cso-effectiveness.org / www.betteraid.org
Donors / Preparatory phase financed by official donors from Austria, France and Spain
Funding for main consultation phase is yet to be mobilized / Previously funding from UNDP, CSOs and some governments
Bridge funding to finance first full meeting after Accra by SIDA
Current outputs / Progress report on CSO development effectiveness (document available on www.cso-effectiveness.org)
Outreach toolkit on CSO development effectiveness / Policy position
CSO statement for the High-Level Forum in Accra
Statements and positions on AAA
(documents available on www.betteraid.org)
Envisaged outcomes / 1. An open process inclusive of all CSO development actors
2. A vision on development effectiveness
3. An agreement on common principles
4. An agreement on guidelines on how to apply these principles and a documentation of good practices for context-relevant mechanisms
5. A CSO proposal for a tripartite agreement on minimum standards for an enabling environment (at the Fourth High-Level Forum in 2011) / 1. Policy Development - define key policy prescriptions of development effectiveness
2. Advocacy - influencing governments and international institutions
3. Mobilization and Outreach - ensure coherence and promote agendas with other groups
4. Promote Democratic Ownership and Accountability within the development effectiveness framework as a pre-requisite for genuine implementation of the AAA
5. Development Effectiveness and the road to HLF 4
Elements of the political dialogue
Donor practices and overall framework for the development process in so far as they have an influence on civil society / Donor practices and overall framework for the development process
Building understanding and awareness on CSO needs, challenges and principles / -
Monitor implementation of AAA with a focus on paragraph 20 / Monitor implementation of AAA
Create policy space at country-level for civil society to help improve the enabling environment / Create policy space on aid effectiveness agenda and its implementation for civil society at country-level
Shift debate from aid effectiveness to development effectiveness / Shift debate from aid effectiveness to development effectiveness
3. Work plan of the Open Forum for CSO Development Effectiveness