HLF4 happening in Korea
“Political spaces and strategies for
gender cross-cutting into Busan”
Youngsook CHO
*Chair, International Solidarity Center, Korean Women’s Association United (KWAU)
*Steering Committee Member, Korea Civil Society Forum on International Development
Cooperation (KoFID)
OECD HLF4 Busan
- Venue: Busan, BEXCO
- Dates: 29 November ~ 1 December 2011
- Estimated Delegations: 2,000 (GO, UN, IDA (1,500),
CSOs(300), Business(100))
- CSOs Forum: 26~28 November
Structure of KWAU
-6 Regional Sections and 28 Member Organizations
Timeline for Political Debates on Aid
Effectiveness/Development
2011
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Deadline for submission of proposed themes
Menu of Options – identifies themes for events, of
any kind, at HLF 4 (incl. potential organisers based
on expressed interest) and of the outcome doc.
Start of negotiation process. Decision on major
themes for the outcome doc; attribution of
responsibilities for related events
[depending on state of negotiation process]
Decision on interactive sessions & political
debates
On-site negotiation of the Busan Outcome Document:
The format and link with the Political Debates will be defined in
due course.
*
Road to Busan 2011
HLF-4
The aid effectiveness journey
Busan
Istanbul principles on 29 Nov – 1Dec
CSO effectiveness
2011
HLF-3
HLF-2
Dili Declaration on
Fragile States
HLF-1
Accra Action
Agenda
Monterrey
Consensus
2002
Bogota Statement
on SSC
Paris Declaration
Rome
on Aid
Declaration on
Effectiveness
Harmonisation
2003
2005
2008
2010
2011

Exclusion of CSOs & GE in the
HLF-2/PD
(2005)
5 Pillars of the Paris Declaration (PD) on Aid Effectiveness 
highly technical process, donor driven, focused on aid
management not on impacts
1. Ownership
2. Alignment
3. Harmonization
4. Managing for Results
5. Mutual Accountability
Limited inclusion of CSOs and GE in the
HLF-3/AAA(2008)
1. Para 3: Gender equality, respect for human rights, and environmental sustainability
are cornerstones for achieving enduring impact on the lives and potential of poor
women, men, and children.
2. Para 13(a) : Developing country governments will work more closely with
parliaments and local authorities in preparing, implementing and monitoring
national development policies and plans. They will also engage with CSOs.
3. Para 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.
Needs for gender cross-cutting to HLF4
 Lacks of Gender Perspectives of PD and AAA
 Low levels of integrations of women’s rights and gender equality
into the national development planning and budgeting (not only
recipient but also donor countries as well)
 Gender equality and women’s rights are not fully included into
the development paradigm
 Majority of development NGOs based on charity and religious
perspectives and also not familiar with the RBA and GE
How to make alternative development
paradigm for the future?: ’MBA’
 To Recognize of gender equality, environmental sustainability and
respect for human rights, as cornerstones for development: by treating
policy priority issues as sectors with indicators and specific resources
allocated in national budgets.
 To build democratic, inclusive, multi-stakeholder approach and clear
mechanisms for the participations of women’s rights organizations as
part of civil society.
 To align the PD/AAA implementation with international agreed
development goals including MDGs, CEDAW, BPFA, UN Security
Council Resolution 1325 etc.
 To make government’s Poverty Reduction Strategies (PRS) focused on
the gender equality and women’s rights.
Road to HLF4 and Beyond
2011
2005/08 Busan
PD/AAA
2002
Monterey
2000
MD/MDGs
2015
MDG+15
2011 Historical Context : Where to start?
 50th Anniversary of OECD
 25th Anniversary of the UN Declaration on the Right to




Development (R2D)
10th Anniversary of “9.11 Attacks” : Defense, Diplomacy,
Development (DDD), US and ROK- US MOU on IDC (June
2011)
After LDC IV and before Rio+20 (June 2012) and “Beyond
2015”
Ongoing multiple crisis (Climate Change, Food,
Fuel/Energy, Financing, etc.) : USA and Europe, Japan, etc.
UN Women and Reappointment of Ban Ki-moon as UNSG
What is HLF4 Busan?
 “Last station of PD journey since 2005”
 “Last push for MDGs”
 “Beyond Busan to Rio”
 For ROK Government, Busan is one of
several international meetings since G20
Summit(2010), Nuclear Security Summit
(2012), …
International Conference on Development, Aid Effectiveness, and the Busan Agenda
March 28, Lotte Hotel
Making Development Effective
: Opportunities and Challenges for Busan
Enna Park
Director General for Development Cooperation
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Republic of Korea
13
II. G20: Growth and Development (1/3)
G20 Approach to Development
 Focus on removing bottlenecks and creating an
“enabling” environment for development from a
medium- to long-term perspective
 Focus on economic growth
• Best allows it to add value to the complex development landscape
• Fits well with the G20’s key objective to promote strong,
sustainable and balanced growth
• The economic growth of low income countries contribute to
global rebalancing and sustainable growth through capacity
building
II. G20: Growth and Development (2/3)
Outcome of the G20 Seoul Summit
 “Seoul Development Consensus for Shared Growth” and
“Multi-Year Action Plan on Development”
 G20 Development Principles
• Focus on economic growth
•
•
•
•
•
Strengthen equal partnerships, particularly with LICs
Address global or regional systemic issues
Enhance private sector participation
Complement existing development efforts
Produce tangible outcomes
 9 Key Pillars
• Infrastructure • Private Investment and Job Creation • Human Resource
Development • Trade • Financial Inclusion • Growth with Resilience • Food
Security • Domestic Resource Mobilization • Knowledge Sharing
II. G20: Growth and Development (3/3)
G20’s Contributions to the Busan Process
 Firm political commitment to development as an issue of
shared interest of the global community
 Values of holistic and comprehensive approach
• strong impetus for looking beyond aid issues
• driving force for a shift of paradigm toward development
effectiveness and impact
 Strengthening global development partnerships
• bridging developed countries and BRICs
• partnerships with international organizations in implementing the
Multi-Year Action Plans
HLF4 and Civil Society in Korea
 ROK is chair of Core Group as host of HLF4
 ROK is the new member of OECD (1996) and
DAC (2009), ODA Increase to 0.25 before 2015
 ROK is driving force of “Seoul Development
Consensus” and “Multi-year Action Plan”
-> What is ROK’s political interest and role on
agenda of the HLF4?
Challenges to Civil Society
 KoFID (Korea Civil Society Forum on International
Development Cooperation) was a civil society
response to emerging role of the ROK in the field
of international development cooperation
 CSOs’ Policy engagement with the ROK
- G20 development agenda
- Korean Development Model/Style ?
- Korean ODA
Challenges to Women’s organizations
 WEF GGI (Gender Gap Index) : 115th (2009)/ 105th
(2010) among 134th countries
 Women in National Assembly : 13.7% (2010)
 Women in Local Assembly : 20.3% (2010)
 63.4% of women workers are non-regular workers
 Wages of women are 38% less than men (2010)
 Burden share and time spending of ‘domestic labors’
between wives and husbands both are working (2010)
 The wife spend 2hrs and 38minutes and the husband
spend 24 minutes (7 times differences)
19
Busan HLF4 Main Disputes
1) Aid Effectiveness  Development Effectiveness
2) Development Effectiveness  Development Accountability
3) Paradigm: Economic Growth Centered(G20)  ‘Human
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
Development’
OECD  UN DCF
Role of OECD : Technical  Political
IDC as a binding treaty?
ODA (official development assistance) and PDA (private
development assistance)
CSOs and Private Company
Donor countries : OECD DAC  Non-DAC
New Financing ?
Aid/Development Discussion Frame I
Millennium
Declaration UN
IADGs
/MDGs
Monterey
Consensus
PD/
AAA
OECD
Aid/Development Agenda Frame II
Development
(ESCP)
Int’l Development
Cooperation (IDC)
Financing for
Development (FfD)
Aid: ODAPDA
Post Busan : Gender Cross-cutting
Gender Cross-cutting into the
Development Paradigm for
Women’s E•S•CR and C•PR
Gender cross-cutting into
the International
Development
Cooperation/MDGS
Financing for Gender
Equality and Women’s
Rights
gender crosscutting into the
aid effectiveness
(PD/AAA)
Gender Cross-cutting into
Development Paradigm
UN
DCF
OECD
/DAC
G20
Strategies for Gender Cross-cutting
on the road to Busan HLF-4
1.
Inputs for prioritizing gender issues for the ‘Busan Outcome
Documentations’ and/or separate statement?
2.
Using the new space of establishment of UN Women and also with the
partner countries to promote political will for the gender cross-cutting into
the Busan HLF-4.
3.
Collaborations with Women’s groups in BetterAid Coordinating Group
(BACG) during the WP-EFF and ExCOM meeting in upcoming September
4.
High expectations for the Korean GO’s Initiatives for the gender crosscutting on the road and beyond Busan HLF-4.
Where to start?
 Strategize to raise gender issue to be
discussed and included into to the outcome
documents of the HLF4
 Organize gender inputs to make impacts for
the HLF4 procedures
 Who can be our allies?  “Partner
Countries Inputs on Gender Issues”
Thank you !