Last week, over 1,000 heads
of donor agencies, aid recipient countries, and bilateral and multilateral aid agencies
gathered in Accra, Ghana for The Third High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness (HLF3).They were
joined by 80 accredited civil society delegates participating in the official
meetings, and 700 representatives of over 250 civil society organizations (CSOs)
from 50 countries taking part in external meetings. Planned CSO events included the Accra Women’s Forum and the CSO Parallel Forum on Aid Effectiveness, which both planned to produce their own sets of recommendations to ensure that CSO priorities and concerns would be addressed in the Accra
Agenda for Action (AAA), the anticipated HLF3 outcome document.
The HLF3 reviewed progress
implementing the 2005 Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness and addressed emerging issues. The Paris Declaration is supposed to increase
the impact of aid on reducing poverty and inequality, increasing economic growth,
building capacity of aid recipient countries, and accelerating achievement of
the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The Declaration outlined a framework
for improving aid effectiveness through a set of principles: (1) Promoting country ownership of development; (2) Donor
alignment with aid recipient priorities;
(3) Donor harmonization with one
another; (4) Managing for results;
and (5) Mutual accountability for
development outcomes.
The Paris Declaration and the
push for aid effectiveness emerged in response to calls to improve aid’s development impact, or improve the
impact of aid on development outcomes,
such as women’s reproductive health status. Aid has grown increasingly complex and difficult for donors, aid recipient countries, and CSOs–such as
those working to promote reproductive health–to track and manage
efficiently. The implications of new aid
modalities (or ways of delivering aid) — such as basket funds, budget support,
sector-wide approaches, and disease-specific funds — for achieving the MDGs and
improving reproductive health are not clear. And the proliferation of donor agencies and the emergence of “New Donors”
are strengthening calls for increased donor coordination and
harmonization, as time and resources are diverted away from much-needed
programs that benefit people towards managing complex aid systems.
But will aid effectiveness, currently defined as enhancing the ways aid is
delivered and managed, radically improve the aid system to produce lasting,
positive development impacts? Will aid effectiveness alone reduce poverty, income
and gender inequality; advance human rights; and promote environmental
sustainability? In Accra, did all donors
and developing country officials expand the notion of country ownership from limited government ownership, to a more inclusive definition that
guarantees parliamentarians and civil society actors (including women’s groups)
a place at the policy-making table? And
will Accra lead to a final solution for countries with unsustainable and
expensive sovereign debt, and finally compel all donors to live-up to their long-standing
promise to dedicate 0.7 percent of their gross national income to overseas
development assistance?
The quick answer: Aid effectiveness faces big challenges, but
we still have to try. Until
aid-dependant countries are self-sufficient, we must continue working to improve
and increase donor funding for key issues like reproductive health and family
planning.
CSO participation in setting
the aid effectiveness agenda — particularly involvement by women’s rights and
reproductive health groups — ensures that our concerns are voiced, no matter
what the Accra Agenda for Action includes or leaves out. Perhaps more importantly by sharing
experiences, learning, and working together, we can better plan for the
challenges and opportunities ahead.
Further resources (see in-text links above for more):