Monitoring the
Paris Declaration in 2011
Preliminary Findings
Working Party on Aid Effectiveness
Paris, 5-8 July 2011
Overview
1. Monitoring and the 2011 Survey
- Why? What? How?
2. What do the findings tell us?
3. Some notes on the process
4. What next?
Monitoring the Paris Declaration
Why? What? How?
2005: Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness
Five principles,
56 commitments
... and agreement to monitor progress
against targets established for 2010
12 indicators of
progress
measured at the
country level
Monitoring the Paris Declaration
Why? What? How?
 Aims of the Survey
1. Stimulate dialogue at the country level:
•
•
•
Identify opportunities and bottlenecks to make aid
more effective
Foster a shared understanding
Track progress over time
2. At the global level:
•
•
Monitor implementation of the PD, supporting
political accountability
Evidence and learning – a key input to HLF-4
Monitoring the Paris Declaration
Why? What? How?
 What is being monitored?
– Progress towards agreed targets using standard
indicators
– Efforts in other areas not captured by the
indicators
• e.g. elements of the Accra Agenda for Action
• Qualitative observations on opportunities and
challenges at the country level
• Complementary evidence through optional modules
(gender equality; inclusive ownership)
• Monitoring the Fragile States Principles
Monitoring the Paris Declaration
Why? What? How?
 How is progress monitored?
– Three successive Surveys
• 2006 Baseline Survey (the state of play in 2005)
• 2008 Survey (stock-taking, informing HLF-3)
• 2011 Survey (were the 2010 targets met?)
– A country-led process
• Managed by national co-ordinators in partner
countries, with support from donors
• Dialogue with a broad range of stakeholders
• Global co-ordination and support (OECD, UNDP
and World Bank)
Monitoring the Paris Declaration
Why? What? How?
 Increasing Survey coverage
2011
2008
2006
34 partner countries
36% of global aid
55 partner countries
58% of global aid
76 partner countries
76% of global aid
% of global core aid covered by the Survey (est.)
 Broader stakeholder participation
(emerging donors, civil society, parliamentarians
more involved in some countries)
Have the 2010 targets been met?
(Preliminary 2010 aggregates, 32 baseline countries)
2005 Baseline
2010 Target
1. Operational Development Strategies 19%
50%
2a. Reliable Public Financial Management (PFM) systems
75%
38%
3. Aid flows are aligned on national priorities 44%
50%
85%
43%
50%
4. Strengthen capacity by co-ordinated support 49%
5a. Use of country PFM systems 40%
47%
6. Strengthen capacity by avoiding Parallel PIUs 1 696
54%
1 145
565
7. Aid is more predictable 42%
71%
40%
8. Aid is untied 87%
9. Use of common arrangements or procedures 43%
10a. Joint missions 20%
10b. Joint country analytic work 41%
51%
>87%
46%
66%
40%
22%
44%
11. Results-oriented frameworks 7%
12. Mutual accountability 44% 48%
66%
25%
38%
100%
89%
Findings beyond the 12 indicators

More participatory approaches in development strategies, but
challenges for civil society activity in some countries

Technical co-operation better co-ordinated, but further efforts
needed to ensure support for capacity development is demand-driven

Improved country systems in 1/3 of countries, but a decline
observed in others

Donors are not making systematic use of country systems
where these are more reliable

Transparency – some promising initiatives, but work in progress

Efforts to enhance medium-term predictability of aid limited

Limited efforts to reduce the fragmentation of aid
Looking beyond the headlines
 Significant variations across countries
and donors on many indicators and issues
 Particular challenges in fragile states and
situations
 There may also be variations across donor
types, regions and groups of partner
countries
– Analysis of these trends is ongoing
Some notes on the process
 Report on Progress since Paris
– Evidence from the Surveys...
– ... and other relevant and credible evidence
– Country chapters – detailed analysis of
progress and challenges in each partner country
 These findings are provisional
– Data validation and verification is ongoing
– Findings are still subject to change
– Final Report available September 2011
What next?
July 2011
• Validation of data at country level
• First drafts of country chapters
July/August
• Additional analysis / refine findings
• Finalise global report and country chapters
September
• Launch of Report on Progress since Paris
• Full Survey dataset available on OECD.Stat
29 November – 1 December
HLF-4, Busan, Korea
Further information
 Draft Report on Progress since Paris
(room document for discussion)
 Survey website: www.oecd.org/dac/pdsurvey
www.busanhlf4.org