TOWARDS COORDINATED PRIVATE SECTOR ENGAGEMENTS
FOR DEVELOPMENT: OLD OBSTACLES AND NEW STEPS IN PERU
AND COLOMBIA
Jose Di Bella
DSA Annual Conference
Birmingham, UK November 2013
INDEX
- Background
- Private Sector for Development
- Aims of the Research
- Questions and Methodology
- Findings
- What this means for a Post-2015 agenda?
Background
•
•
•
•
Busan 2011
Emerging donor strategies
Business and International Development
Southern perspective
4
Private sector for development
“Firms’ active pursuit of positive development outcomes. This occurs through,
funding and/or carrying out development projects, adopting and implementing
inclusive business models, aligning core activities to explicitly contribute to the
achievement of development outcomes, creating inclusive value chains, adopting
and supporting the widespread adoption of responsible business practices in areas
such as environmental sustainability and human rights, improving accountability and
transparency in business operations, and targeting the transfer of technologies to
host communities” (Di Bella et al., 2013)
5
Aims of the Research
•
•
Provide insight into the policies and practices of key southern
development organizations to articulate private sector for
development
Identify constraints, challenges and new steps taken from a
Southern Perspective
6
Research Questions
•
How are key development organizations engaging the private
sector in Peru and Colombia?
•
What are the main obstacles to further private sector
contributions to development?
•
What are the factors that enable/hinder private sector
engagements for development?
7
Methodology
•
•
•
•
•
Preliminary review of Cooperation Agencies policies in Latin America
Choice of country (indication of private sector engagements and feasibility)
Mapping of other key and prominent development actors
Field visit and semi-structured interviews
Snowball approach
Organizations part of the sample
Peru
Colombia
Peruvian Agency for International Cooperation (APCI)
Colombian Presidential Agency for International Cooperation
(APC)
Ministry of Social Inclusion (MIDIS)
Department of Social Prosperity (Ministry DPS)
PERU 2012 (NGO for Private Sector)
National Agency for Combating Extreme Poverty (ANSPE)
GESTINARSE (NGO - Development Consultancy for Private Sector)
National Science Granting Council (ColCiencias)
Entrepreneurs Against Poverty (SEP)/National Society of Industries
Social Investment Bank
GEA Group (NGO – Advisory Services for private sector)
Gift to Colombia (Foundation)
Economic and Social Research Consortium (CIES Think Tank)
Compartamos ( Capacity building foundation – NGO)
8
Engagement for Development
•
•
•
•
•
No involvement at Agency level
No objection practice at Agency level
National Ministry taking a lead to
articulate private sector through “tax
for works” programs
Ministry setting a out government
priorities and “rules of the game”
Private Sector initiative working
closely with national ministry – Quipo
comission
•
•
•
•
•
Involvement at Cooperation Agency
level
New government programs to
provide “predictability” and clear
rules
Social Alliances mechanisms provide
entry points for firms
Capacity building and information
sharing complementary activities by
foundations and NGOs
Ministry move towards grading firms
and matching social investments to
the local level
9
Results
Main differences in Private Sector articulation at Agency level
APCI Peru
APC Colombia
Lack of conceptual clarity
Clear identification of private sector as Firms
Legal constraints
Specific mandate to engage with private actors
No objection process
Provide information and channel resources to regions
Lack of information about private social investments
Partial information and tag of resources (international/national)
No strategy for private sector engagement
No written strategy, but clear practice of how to engage
10
Factors that hinder engagements - Old Problems
• Lack of development expertise in firms (iso factor)
• Need for knowledge and learning exchange spaces
• Traditional views on the role of private sector
• Re-vindicatory and ideological discourses in meetings
• Lack of systematic information on private sector social
investments
• Perceived saturation of bad projects and multiple requests
for contributions
11
Enable Engagement - New Steps
• Recognition of the shift from philanthropy to CSR to Core
Business Models
• Baseline information and coordinated approaches
• Opening new paths for engagement with “predictable”
rules and clear State development priorities
• Private sector guilds involved in discussions with
Government
• Government and international actors presence to
legitimize initiatives
12
Discussion – A Coordinated Approach
• Agreed objective among multiple development actors to articulate the
private sector (shared value proposition)
• Clear agreement on what is being asked from private sector
• Clear conceptual clarity opens basic engagements documentation to
more sophisticated tracking and measuring strategies in development
organizations for private sector for development interventions
• This emerging approach is leading to complex and coordinated
interventions to the local level. (Vertical – Horizontal coordination)
13
What this means for a Post -2015 Agenda?
•
Call for streamlined agenda needs organizational streamlined
strategies
•
Converging tools, methods and evaluation
•
Move beyond traditional views of private sector obligations in the
framework of the New global alliance
•
Donors and Governments can play a key role in identifying, promoting
and enabling new inclusive business models and firms (What type of
SME’s are created?)
14
Thank you.
Corporate Strategy and Evaluation Division
Policy Team
jdibella@idrc.ca