CAMEROON - World Bank

December 20, 2006
1. Partners have operational national development strategies
a. Coherent long-term vision with medium-term strategy derived from vision
The Government adopted a Poverty Strategy Declaration in 1998 following
extensive consultations, and later developed a long-term vision for 2015 in the context of
the preparation of the Document de Stratégie de Réduction de la Pauvreté (DSRP),
Cameroon’s PRS.1 The DSRP endorses and is linked to all the MDGs. The 1998
Declaration expresses the Government’s commitment to guarantee sustainable and
equitable economic growth, reallocate substantial public resources to basic social and
economic areas, manage human resources efficiently, and undertake specific actions for
women and structurally vulnerable groups.
The DSRP articulates a medium-term strategy through 2006. It is an evolving
strategy that will be fine-tuned as new sector strategies are prepared and implemented.
Specifically, the Government sees the DSRP as a single framework for (i) integrated
development, (ii) short- and medium-term financial coherence, (iii) coordination of
Government action and external assistance, (iv) consultation with civil society, the
private sector and development partners, and (v) orientation of analytical work to support
development management. The Government is actively working on a second generation
DSRP, focused on results and using performance indicators developed for Medium-Term
Expenditure Frameworks (MTEFs) and sectoral programs. It aims to be more operational,
with specific emphasis on private sector and growth as key elements in fighting poverty.
A timetable for its finalization has not yet been announced.
b. Country specific development targets with holistic, balanced, and well
sequenced strategy
The DSRP focuses on seven strategic pillars, namely i) promotion of a stable
macroeconomic framework, ii) diversification of the economy, iii) development of the
private sector as the main engine of growth, iv) development of basic infrastructure and
natural resources, as well as protection of the environment, v) acceleration of regional
integration in the framework of the Central African Economic and Monetary Community,
vi) capacity building and strengthening of human resources, and vii) improvement of the
institutional framework and fostering of good governance. The DSRP addresses crosscutting issues such as the environment and gender equality, expressing a commitment to
enhance the living conditions of women and their socio-legal status. However, limited
recognition has been given to gender during DSRP implementation.
The Government has developed sector strategies in public works, ICT, health,
rural development, forestry, and gender equality promotion. It has completed a draft
industrial development sector strategy and a National Governance Program 2006-10 to
strengthen good governance and fight corruption, with priority actions and targets for
The DSRP was completed in April 2003. Progress Reports were finalized in April 2004, September 2005
and February 2006.
December 20, 2006
2006-07. It is finalizing a National HIV/AIDS Strategic Plan 2006-10, to update the
2001-05 HIV/AIDS Strategic Plan and move toward greater focus on priority actions. It
prepared a draft gender strategy. It is also completing a comprehensive education
strategy, addressing educational and administrative needs for basic, primary, secondary
and tertiary education.
c. Capacity and resources for implementation
The Ministry of Economy and Finance (MINEFI) has prepared a global MTEF
consistent with the strategic priorities laid out in the DSRP, and some progress has been
made toward aligning the budget with DSRP priorities. Overall allocations to social
sectors have increased, but they have been largely absorbed by recurrent expenditures.
Between 2005 and 2006, investment in basic education, secondary education, health and
public works decreased by 1.8 percent, 21.5 percent, 29.6 percent and 18.5 percent
The Government is currently strengthening its effort to establish an MTEF in
priority sectors where sector strategies exist or are being finalized. Sector-level MTEFs
through 2015 have been prepared in education, health, and public works, and the
Government is developing one in the rural sector. For the preparation of the 2006 budget,
the ministries of education, health and public works used for the first time the respective
sectoral MTEFs to align appropriations with priority programs. The Government is
working on a program to extend MTEFs to all ministries. Performance-based budgeting
has not yet been introduced, but it could be a next step when all ministries have been
engaged and have prepared a MTEF.
Capacity is a major challenge to DSRP implementation. The institutional capacity
to execute public expenditure programs is weak. Administrative capacity needs to be
strengthened, as does technical capacity to monitor the DSRP.
d. Participation of national stakeholders in strategy formulation and
There is a Comité Interministériel, chaired by the Prime Minister and aimed at
supervising DSRP implementation, and a Comité Technique de Suivi et d’Evaluation du
DSRP (CTSE/DSRP). The CTSE/DSRP is assisted by a Technical Secretariat comprised
of a Central Coordination Unit and five thematic groups in charge of the follow-up of
governance, infrastructure, production, indicators, and macroeconomic planning. The
Department of Statistics and National Accounting chairs the thematic group on
indicators, and the Ministry of Planning, Development Programming and National and
Regional Development (MINPLAPDAT) chairs the other thematic groups. There is also a
HIPC Consultative and Follow-up Committee (CCS/PPTE), established by the Prime
Minister in December 2000 and chaired by MINEFI, to monitor allocation of HIPC
resources. Dialogue between MINPLAPDAT and MINEFI is, however, limited. The
Constitution mandates the establishment of an Economic and Social Council, the
composition, duties, and organization of which are to be determined by law. The
Economic and Social Council is not yet operational.
NGOs, labor unions, religious groups, professional organizations, communitybased groups, Groupements d’Initiative Commune, youth and women’s associations were
December 20, 2006
all involved in the various steps of DSRP formulation. CSOs participate in the
CTSE/DSRP. Two NGOs also participate in the HIPC Consultative and Follow-up
Committee (CCS/PPTE), without however rotating as originally envisaged to facilitate
participation of a wider range of civil society organizations. In 2006, four CSOs released
a joint report on the performance of anti-corruption units within ministries with the
support of a multi-stakeholder program, the Programme Concerté Pluri-acteurs (PCPA),
aimed at strengthening civil society capacity. Fragmentation across civil society is,
however, limiting civil society impact on policy making. Limited progress has been made
towards establishing CSO networks.
To facilitate local participation in DSRP implementation, in December 2003, the
Government appointed provincial DSRP Monitoring Committees for participatory
follow-up of the DSRP. They convened local authorities, administrative officials and
other stakeholders, and held four thematic workshops on social infrastructure, production
and governance, as well as discussions in plenary sessions. The first semi-annual
participatory evaluation review of the DSRP was conducted in March 2004 through
extensive provincial consultations. Consultations were also conducted for the 2006
Progress Report, relying on these mechanisms. There are also local development
committees, the function of which is currently being revised by MINPLAPDAT, and
investment committees, established by MINEFI, to track execution of public investment.
Coordination between these structures and the DSRP Monitoring Committees has been
limited. There is also a participatory development program, the Programme National de
Développement Participatif (PNDP), which is the operational mechanism to facilitate
participatory implementation. The PNDP was drawn up with a view to reducing poverty
and promoting sustainable development in rural areas by organizing beneficiaries and
communes and building their capacities. Dialogue on formulation and implementation of
sector strategies is, however, limited. Local councils do not routinely participate in
strategy formulation and revision. Some elected local council officials are involved in the
participatory DSRP follow up, but their involvement is generally limited.
There is a national forum for Government-private sector dialogue, the Comité
interministeriel élargi au secteur privé, which convenes annually and is chaired by the
Prime Minister. The last meeting took place in November 2006. A committee to facilitate
customs operations is also operational. It is chaired by the president of the employers’
business association (GICAM) and is composed of representatives of port and maritime
operators, private sector and public officials. Community credit unions and savings and
loan cooperatives were involved in DSRP formulation consultations and these
organizations had several chances to comment on the draft DSRP. Private sector
representatives participate in the CTSE/DSRP and the CCS/PPTE. The Chamber of
Commerce, the Chamber of Agriculture, GICAM, and the Movement of Businessmen are
represented in the DSRP Monitoring Committees. There is, however, limited
coordination among private sector groups.
Parliamentary involvement in strategy development remains limited. The National
Assembly as an institution was not directly involved in DSRP formulation. Its individual
members took part in the consultations for DSRP formulation, and some of them are
involved in participatory DSRP follow-ups. The National Assembly oversees the DSRP
indirectly through its annual budget approvals. In addition, the National Assembly is
December 20, 2006
required by the Constitution to identify the objectives of the economic and social sectors.
The National Assembly does not routinely receive and discuss government reports on
progress in implementing policies, programs and budget. There is no parliamentary
committee in charge of monitoring DSRP implementation.
2. Reliable country systems
Following a Country Procurement Assessment Review released in January 2003
based upon a joint review conducted in October 2000 by a World Bank team and a
national committee representing all sectors, the Government introduced a new
procurement code and established a new government agency responsible for public
procurement. However, implementation of the procurement code has been at times
difficult, with insufficient follow up on non-compliance, and limited application of the
procedures to award concessions and licenses to private operators. Following a Country
Procurement Assessment Review conducted by the Government jointly with the World
Bank in 2005, the Government prepared a procurement improvement action plan for
2006-08, which is currently under implementation. Based on OECD-DAC baseline
indicators for public procurement, Cameroon’s national procurement system receives a
score of 69 on a scale of 100.
Some action is being taken to strengthen transparency of public accounts. To
audit public accounts, the Government has established a Chambre des Comptes. Twenty
two magistrates were recruited in late 2005. The Chambre des Comptes became
operational in January 2006 and started examination of the 2004 financial accounts. The
mandate of the Chambre de Comptes, however, is not yet fully in line with the
International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions (INTOSAI) norms. The
Government is implementing a program to strengthen public financial management. The
Government has developed an integrated public financial management system known as
SIGEFI, which allows for computerized processing and monitoring of public expenditure
from commitment to payment. As a result, timeliness and quality of monthly data on
budget execution improved during the course of 2005. The Government regularly
produces monthly Treasury balances, and a Government flow-of-funds table. However,
the level of delegation of the national budget to local authorities is still very weak. Local
councils have been sidelined in the execution of investment budgets especially in public
tendering procedures. The 2005 World Bank Country Policy and Institutional Assessment
(CPIA) performance criterion that assesses the quality of budgetary and financial
management places Cameroon at 3.5 on a scale of 1 (very weak) to 6 (very strong).
Corruption is perceived as a major challenge to the establishment of transparent,
efficient and effective country systems. Cameroon ranks 138th of 163 in the 2006
Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index. On a scale from 0 (highly
corrupted) to 10 (highly clean), it received a score of 2.3. It received a score of 2.0 in the
2000 Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index. Anti-corruption units
within MINEFI and the Ministry of Secondary Education have made some progress in
identifying and addressing corruption cases within the respective ministries. However,
most ministerial anti-corruption units are not operational. In 2006, the Government took
some preliminary actions towards strengthening the institutional structure for combating
December 20, 2006
corruption. It established a National Agency for Financial Investigation to investigate
financial crimes, including misappropriation of public funds. It also disbanded the
National Anticorruption Observatory, established in 1997 and widely perceived as
ineffective. In February 2006, Cameroon ratified the United Nations Anti-Corruption
Convention. In March 2006, it established a new anti-corruption body, the Commission
Nationale Anti-Corruption (CONAC), reporting directly to the President, to coordinate
all government policies against corruption. However, government policies continue to be
widely perceived as ineffective. For example, the Constitution requires public officials to
disclose their assets, but the provision has not been enforced.
3. Aid flows are aligned on national priorities
a. Government leadership of coordination
Government leadership in external partner coordination and development
assistance management has been weak, with responsibilities split between
MINPLAPDAT and MINEFI. The Direction de la Coopération Économique et
Technique (DCET) is not playing a strong enough role, and inter-ministerial coordination
is still largely ineffective. There are no regular in-country meetings led by the
Government to facilitate macro-level dialogue with development assistance agencies.
France, Germany, Canada, Japan, the EC and the UN participate in the HIPC
Consultative and Follow-Up Committee, which is the only Government-external partner
forum. The World Bank and the IMF participate in this Committee as observers. At the
sector level, the Government has started playing a more active role in coordinating
external partners. For example, there is a Comission mixte de suivi, chaired by the
Ministry of Health, which coordinates all external partner support in the fight against
HIV/AIDS. There is a Consultation Forum for Partners (CCPM), which meets monthly
and is now considered as the privileged interlocutor by the Ministry of Forestry and
Wildlife and the Ministry of Environment and Protection of Nature.
External partners started to coordinate among each other in 2004, through the
creation of the Comité multi-bailleurs (CMB), which meets on a bi-monthly basis. There
are also sector working groups composed of external partners in health, education,
HIV/AIDS, public financial management, which are mostly informal and ad hoc in
character. In February 2005, the World Bank and France organized a meeting in Yaoundé
with other external partners, aimed at launching a discussion on ways to strengthen
alignment and harmonization efforts. This led to the establishment of an informal
working group on harmonization, alignment and results, including Canada, the EC,
France, Germany and the World Bank. Since end-2005, a working group known as “8+6”
focuses on governance and anti-corruption. The group is composed of the ambassadors of
seven EU countries and the EC Delegate plus the ambassadors of Canada, the USA,
Japan, and the resident representatives of the IMF, UNDP and the World Bank. While
these are steps forward, external partner coordination is still at an early stage.
b. Partners’ assistance strategy alignment
External partners have aligned their strategies with the DSRP. The five major
external partners are France, Germany, the World Bank, the EC and the African
Development Bank, accounting for approximately 85 percent of gross ODA in 2003-04.
December 20, 2006
Net ODA accounted for 5.3 percent of GNI in 2004.2 Canada also plays an active role.
The World Bank Interim Strategy Note for FY07-08 strengthens support for governance,
anti-corruption and public financial management and continues supporting DSRP
objectives on private sector development, human development, urban and rural
development and infrastructure. The EC Country Strategy Paper for 2001-07 is also
aligned with the DSRP, following a mid-term review that took into account the strategic
goals outlined in it, as is the 2002-07 UN Development Assistance Framework. In 2003,
CIDA modified its Country Development Programming Framework to reflect DSRP
priorities: good governance and human resources development, two of the DSRP pillars,
are among its focus areas of intervention. France, too, has modified its Country Strategy
Paper to support DSRP objectives. In 2005, the AfDB finalized a Country Strategy Paper
for 2005-09, aligned with the DSRP and focusing on support for good governance and
infrastructure. The PRGF for 2005-08, launched in October 2005, recognizes the DSRP
as the guiding framework for IMF support.
c. Partnership organization
Several development assistance agencies are increasing their presence in the
country to better take part in daily decision-making. The World Bank Country Director is
moving to Cameroon. The World Bank Country Office in Yaoundé has been
strengthened, and there is a regional IFC Office in Douala. Some responsibility to
supervise day to day implementation for World Bank financed projects has been
transferred to staff based in Yaoundé. Among the other major external partners, France,
Germany, the EC, CIDA, and the UN have decentralized their decision-making processes
and increased their presence both in the country and in the region. External partners are
also making efforts to share in-country staff in various sectors. For example, through
cooperation between the World Bank and DFID and the World Bank and GTZ, technical
staff to support the forestry sector and human development, respectively, is posted in the
World Bank Country Office.
4. Strengthen capacity by coordinated support
Coherent and coordinated capacity support
Although still fragmented, capacity building is being conducted by external
partners in an increasingly coordinated manner. In the forestry sector, external partners
provide joint technical assistance through a multi-donor basket fund, jointly managed by
the Ministry of Forests and Wildlife and GTZ-International Services. The EC, France and
the World Bank provide joint support for statistical capacity building and DSRP
monitoring. The EC, France and the World Bank have also coordinated capacity support
for public procurement. Building on enhanced coordination around capacity support for
fiduciary systems, development partners also finalized a Dialogue Platform, jointly
agreed with the Government, to coordinate support for public financial management,
which is leading to a clear division of responsibilities among partners. The EC is
supporting a program aimed at improving public financial management. Canada is
sponsoring a project aimed at supporting civil society organizations and external
oversight over public financial management. The Government, with the support of the
See OECD/DAC Aid Statistics at
December 20, 2006
World Bank, is preparing a Transparency and Accountability Capacity Building Project,
which is aiming at consolidating the public finance agenda in preparation for a possible
PRSC, aligned with the Dialogue Platform. Also, the OECD, Germany, the UK, the
Netherlands, the World Bank and UNDP are planning to jointly support a program to
strengthen government and civil society capacity to fight corruption. However, according
to a survey conducted in 2005 among external partners, only 9 percent of technical
assistance is provided jointly. To address this issue, within the Dialogue Platform, the
Government and external partners aim at building a consensus matrix of policy which
will include a capacity building strategy and concrete activities to strengthen national
5. Use of country systems
Donor financing relying on country systems
Commitment to harmonizing with country systems is emerging. According to a
survey undertaken by external partners in 2005, disbursement of 44 percent of external
funds relies on country fiduciary systems. Multi-donor budget support, spearheaded by
DFID and the World Bank, is being provided in the forestry sector. The World Bank is
envisaging a PRSC for FY07, depending on progress achieved in strengthening public
financial management. All external partners perceive the Government’s weak financial
capacity as an obstacle preventing them from fully engaging in budget support.
With the technical support of the World Bank and as part of its efforts to improve
the efficiency of external partner-assisted projects, MINPLAPDAT is currently reviewing
ways to harmonize and simplify national policies and procedures in the hope that they
would progressively apply to all external partner-assisted programs. A timeline for the
conclusion of the review has not yet been identified.
6. Strengthen capacity by avoiding parallel implementation structures
PIUs progressively phased out
Implementation of a number of externally financed projects is still carried out by
parallel PIUs. For example, PIUs manage implementation of most World-Bank financed
projects under implementation. Little action is being taken to move away from the use of
parallel PIUs or consolidate them. In 2004, there were 97 PIUs. The Government has not
requested external partners to move away from the use of parallel PIUs. However, it has
recently expressed interest in setting up an aid management platform for externallyfinanced projects.
7. Aid is more predictable
Disbursements aligned with annual budgetary framework
There are no significant extra-budgetary funds and most external partner funds are
reported in the budget.
December 20, 2006
8. Aid is untied
Multilateral aid, which accounted for 25 percent of gross ODA in 2004, 3 is untied.
The Government is monitoring untied aid at the country level.
9. Use of common arrangements or procedures
External assistance is mainly channeled through projects, but some action is being
taken to move toward sectoral approaches relying on common implementation structures.
In 2005, the members of the Comité multi-bailleurs agreed on a common understanding
of SWAps implementation mechanisms. The Government and external partners launched
a SWAp in 2000 to design and support implementation of the National Forest and
Environment Sector Program (PSFE), which was validated in 2004. Canada, Germany,
France, the Netherlands, the UK, the EC, AfDB, the World Bank, FAO, UNDP, WWF,
SNV and the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources
(IUCN) signed a code of conduct, establishing common principles for their support to the
PSFE, including common financing mechanisms and M&E system and joint review
missions. The Government, with support of Germany and France, is preparing a health
SWAp. External partners also are also envisaging to pool funds to support
implementation of some of the programs included in the draft National HIV/AIDS
Strategic Plan 2006-10. The World Bank and the AFD coordinate parallel financing in
the transport and urban infrastructure sectors. External partner are envisaging the
establishment of a common fund to support action against avian influenza.
10. Encouraging shared analysis
a. Joint missions
Some move toward SWAps is encouraging joint missions. Building on joint
preparatory missions, external partners supporting the forestry SWAp are conducting
joint supervision missions. The World Bank and the AFD conduct joint missions in the
transport sector. External partners conduct joint review missions to support the fight
against HIV/AIDS. Also, in 2006, under the umbrella of the OECD/DAC, France,
Canada, Germany, the UK, the USA, the Netherlands and the World Bank conducted a
joint anti-corruption assessment mission to prepare for joint support. UNDP provided
overall coordination and in country support to the mission. The EC, USAID, UNDP,
FAO, UNICEF and WHO conducted a joint mission on avian influenza. However, the
large majority of missions continue to be conducted by single development assistance
agencies. Informally, the Government is inviting external partners to conduct more
missions jointly.
b. Analytical partnership
Joint analytical support in line with the country’s priorities is at early stages.
According to a survey conducted among external partners in 2005, only 10 percent of
analytical work has been conducted jointly. The World Bank and the Government
completed a Country Financial Accountability Assessment (CFAA) in June 2002, whose
purpose and findings were discussed with other external partners. In 2006, the World
See OECD/DAC Aid Statistics at
December 20, 2006
Bank conducted a Public Expenditure Management and Financial Accountability Review
which has also been shared with external partners and discussed with the Government.
External partners have posted 17 documents on the Country Analytic Work website as of
October 2006.4
11. Results oriented frameworks
a. Quality of development information
Action has been taken to improve the quality and availability of data. As the
National Institute of Statistics (NIS) becomes fully operational, the Department of
Statistics and National Accounting has been planning a series of surveys, including a
General Population and Housing Census, launched at the end of 2005, and a Multiple
Indicators Cluster Survey, launched in April 2006, aimed at collecting appropriate
statistical documentation on poverty reduction. Insufficient funding is, however, delaying
the ongoing analysis of the General Population and Housing Census data. The most
recent surveys include a 2006 survey on employment and the informal sector (Enquête
sur l’Emploi et le Secteur Informel-EESI), a 2005 survey of vaccination coverage
(Enquête Nationale de Couverture Vaccinale), a 2004 demographic and health survey
(3eme Enquête Démographique et de Santé au Cameroun-EDSC III) and a 2001
household survey (3eme Enquête Camerounaise Auprès des Ménages-ECAM II). In 2005,
with EC support, MINPLAPDAT completed a statistical development strategy, the
Programme Statistique Minimum, which is expected to lead to the establishment of a
specific statistical base for the monitoring and evaluation of the DSRP and the tracking of
progress toward the MDGs. The strategy points out the weaknesses of the current
statistical system and identifies activities to support the DSRP implementation process,
including strengthening of the capacity of the NIS and sector ministries. However, the
Minimum Statistical Program is not fully funded, and the Government is seeking
resources from external partners to conduct the next household survey.
b. Stakeholder access to development information
Stakeholder access to information is limited but some action is being taken to
improve it. In 2005, the Government endorsed the principles of the Extractive Industries
Transparency Initiative (EITI). In 2005, past audits of the national oil company, the
Société Nationale des Hydrocarboures (SNH), certified by a public accounting firm,
were made public. An action plan to implement the EITI was published in major
newspapers and discussed with civil society and oil companies prior to its adoption in
January 2006. The Government has created a technical EITI Secretariat, established a
tripartite steering committee, including representatives of oil companies, civil society and
the Government, and recruited a qualified independent conciliator to collect and reconcile
data on petroleum production, payments made by the companies to the Government and
the corresponding receipts by the Government for 2001-04 and 2005. The first EITI
report was approved by the steering committee on December 15, indicating minor
discrepancies between revenues reported by oil companies and revenues accounted for by
the Government. The report is expected to be widely disseminated in early 2007.
December 20, 2006
The Government has also started publishing budget execution data quarterly. It
plans to disseminate information on progress toward DSRP indicators through a wide
range of channels and media, including the General Data Dissemination System and
Poverty Mapping providing geographical visualization of poverty data. Several
government websites refer to the DSRP but none of them include the full strategy.5 The
DSRP has not been translated into local languages. There are over 200 local dialects, and
the official languages are French and English.
c. Coordinated country-level monitoring and evaluation
A country-level M&E system is under development. External partner coordination
to jointly support the M&E system is under discussion. The DSRP contains clearly
quantified targets that use MDGs as benchmarks, with explicit timetables for their
achievement. It contains quantitative baseline data for 2001 and projected targets for
2015, defined for 19 indicators covering all eight MDGs. However, intermediate
indicators to monitor progress have not yet been identified. The Government has
provisionally identified four different categories of indicators for methodical and
coherent follow-up and evaluation of the implementation of global and sector strategies
of poverty alleviation. These categories are: i) indicators relating to the mobilization and
use of resources, ii) indicators which have to do with the physical and financial execution
of programs and projects, iii) indicators of results, and iv) indicators of impact. The M&E
system being envisaged for the DSRP builds on existing country M&E systems that will
be strengthened and aligned to the DSRP, with support from multiple external partners.
Once completed, it is expected to be used to prepare DSRP Progress Reports, reports on
the MDGs and the quarterly and yearly reports for country policy makers.
Development effectiveness assessment frameworks
Cameroon has signed the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness. In 2005,
external partners conducted a joint stocktaking of the Paris Declaration indicators in
Cameroon. The Government and external partners have launched an independent aid
assessment to evaluate existing partnership mechanisms and identify an action plan to
strengthen development effectiveness in line with the Paris Declaration. The
Government, UNDP, the World Bank, Canada, Germany and France jointly financed the
assessment, with the Government providing approximately 50 percent of the funds.
UNDP provided administrative and technical assistance. The international panel that
conducted the assessment includes a former Prime Minister of Senegal, former senior
staff of development assistance agencies and staff of the Overseas Development Institute
(ODI), an independent research institute. The report of the international panel was
finalized in July 2006 and presented to the Government and external partners. The
Government has agreed to jointly monitor recommendations which will emerge from
discussions, facilitated by ODI, between the Government, external partners and civil
In 2006, the World Bank developed a Cameroon Development Effectiveness
Scorecard (CDES) to track implementation of 12 country-specific development
5 and
December 20, 2006
effectiveness objectives drawn from the Paris Declaration. The World Bank is using the
CDES to better integrate Paris Declaration goals and commitments into World Banksupported projects and programs, including those already under implementation. The
CDES could become a basis for a joint monitoring framework to assess progress towards
strengthening development effectiveness in consultation with the Government and other
external partners.
December 20, 2006
AFD (2005), L’Activité du Groupe de l’Agence Française de Développement au Cameroun.
Comité multi-bailleurs (2005), Harmonisation et amélioration de l’efficacité de l’aide au
développement. Rapport conjoint. Etat des lieux. Yaoundé.
______________ (2005), Premier projet sur les approches sectorielles et les approches
programmes. Yaoundé.
CIDA (2004), Canadian Development Assistance in the Countries of la Francophonie. Quebec.
EC (2001), Cadre de Stratégie de la Coopération Cameroun-Communauté Européenne.
EIU (2006), Cameroon Country Report (March). London.
Government of Cameroon (2001), Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper Preparation Status Report.
Washington DC.
__________ (2003), Document de Stratégie de Réduction de la Pauvreté (English version).
Washington DC.
__________ (2004), Progress Report on the Implementation of the PRSP. Yaoundé.
__________ (2005), Dispositif statistique de suivi/évaluation du DSRP et des OMD. Yaoundé.
__________ (2005), Memorandum of Economic and Financial Policies (July 2005—June 2008).
_________ (2006), Progress Report on Implementation of the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
as of 31 December 2005. Yaoundé.
Government of Cameroon and Development Partners (2002), Republic of Cameroon Country
Financial Accountability Assessment. Washington DC.
____________ (2005), Etat d’avancement sur l’harmonisation et l’amélioration de l’efficacité de
l’aide au développement au Cameroun. Yaoundé.
Government of Cameroon and UNDP (2005), Evaluations des Partenariat d’Aide au Cameroun.
IMF (2001), Cameroon: Report on Observance of Standards and Codes – Data Module.
Washington, DC.
______ (2006), Cameroon: First Review Under the Three-Year Arrangement Under the Poverty
Reduction and Growth Facility—Staff Report; Press Release on the Executive Board
Discussion; and Statement by the Executive Director for Cameroon. Washington DC.
IMF and World Bank (2003), Cameroon Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper Joint Staff
Assessment. Washington DC.
__________ (2005), Republic of Cameroon Poverty Reduction Strategy First Annual Progress
Report Joint Staff Advisory Note. Washington DC.
__________ (2006), Republic of Cameroon. Joint Staff Advisory Note on the Poverty Reduction
Strategy Paper Third Annual Progress Report. Washington DC.
December 20, 2006
_________ (2006), Cameroon. Enhanced Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative
Completion Point Document and Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative (MDRI). Washington
La Constitution de la République du Cameroun (1996). Yaoundé.
Rogerson, A., L. Loum and O. Lafourcade (2006), Une Arrivée et un Nouveau Départ:
Partenariats au Cameroun après le Point d’Achèvement PPTE. Rapport Final de la
Mission Indépendante de Suivi, Février-Mars 2006. London.
UN Country Team Cameroon (2001), IDT/MDG Progress. Country Report. Republic of
Cameroon. Yaoundé.
__________ (2002), Cameroon United Nations Development Assistance Framework 2002/032006/07. Yaoundé.
UNDP (2006), Note de synthèse Cameroun. 1er Semestre 2006. Yaoundé.
VENRO (2005), PRSP-Watch. Länderprofile: Kamerun (Januar). Berlin.
World Bank (2003), Country Assistance Strategy for the Republic of Cameroon. Washington DC.
__________ (2004), Republic of Cameroon Transparency and Accountability Capacity Building
Project. Project Information Document. Washington DC.
__________ (2006), Program Document for a Proposed IDA Development Policy Grant and
GEF Grant to the Republic of Cameroon for a Forest and Environment Development
Program. Washington DC.
_________ (2006), Interim Strategy Note for the Republic of Cameroon FY07-08. Washington
Related websites
CIDA Cameroon
Delegation of the EC Commission in Cameroon
Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative
French Embassy in Cameroon
German Embassy in Cameroon: Economic Cooperation
National Institute of Statistics
Prime Minister Office
Transparency International: Corruption Perception Indexes
UNDP Cameroon
December 20, 2006
World Bank Country Policy and Institutional Assessment (CPIA),,contentMDK:2093360