More effective donor cooperation to fight rural poverty and hunger
Canadian International Development Agency, Ottawa
February 3-6, 2008
More effective donor cooperation to fight rural poverty and hunger
Canadian International Development Agency, Ottawa
February 3-6, 2008
2
The Global Donor Platform on Rural Development (GDPRD)
Is a strategic alliance
Includes like-minded donors, development agencies and international finance institutions, all of which agreed to establish the Platform to increase aid effectiveness (AE) in agriculture and rural development (ARD) efforts.
Acts as a mechanism for greater development assistance impact through its three main pillars:
Advocacy and outreach
Knowledge and innovation
Aid effectiveness
3
WBG
OECD
IADB
IFAD
FAO
Danida
ADB
KfW
USAID
SDC
Sida NMFA MFAN
MFAF
MAE Lu
MFA
MFE
MAE
AFD
DFID
CIDA
GTZ
NoradADA
29 members at present(bi- and multilateral)
Board/Steering Committeeis the decision-making body (6 members)
The Platform Secretariat is hosted by the German Ministry of Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ)
FAO BMZ
EC
WBDFID
CIDADGDC
UNODCIA
Organization and Governance
Civil Society and Aid Effectiveness in Agriculture and Rural
Development
A summary of country consultations
Mushtaq Ahmed
5
BackgroundConsultations from Nov 2007 – Jan 2008
13 countries, 600 participants 250 CSOs50 government ministries
30 donor organizations
Three outcomes
6
Findings
Outcome 1: Recognition and voiceNeed for greater recognition and voice for CSOs in ARD – special challenges of the sector
Outcome 2: Applying and enriching the AE agenda
Low awareness among CSOs about PD, AECSOs acknowledge need to strengthen AELimited capacity and challenges to overcome in the rural settingConsultations did raise awareness
7
Findings
Outcome 3: Improved understanding of good practice
Collaboration with community is strong but needs more inclusive consultation processes
Collaboration with other CSOs at times hindered by competition, poor leadership
Collaboration with governments requires clarification of roles and openness to dialogue collaborate
8
Findings (cont’d)
Outcome 3 (cont’d)
North-South CSO collaboration needs more consultation and mutual appreciation of respective roles between partners
Relations with donors are mainly donor/recipient or CSOs are seen as implementing agencies; CSOs often more accountable to donors than to community; not enough engagement with smaller ARD CSOs
9
A focus on good practice
Policy dialogue: legal protection for Andean producers
Influence of national policies: free trade and food security in Peru
Exploiting market failures – Mozambique
Strategic network building – fish sanctuaries in Bangladesh
Innovative approaches – Egypt canal project
10
Recommendations: some highlights
Southern CSOs – should be consulted, strengthen networks and promote AE
Northern CSOs – should strengthen attitude of mutual respect, ensure full participation of community
11
Recommendations: some highlights (cont’d)
Governments – should provide enabling environment
Donors – should involve CSOs in project/policy design, monitoring; support adequate voice for CSOs; provide flexible funding; promote participatory processes; support work of smaller local CSOs
12
Conclusions
CSOs play major role in AE in ARD:
Development agents/implementing agencies
Promoting member participation
Empowering specific social groups
Defining the rights of citizens
Monitoring the use of public resources
The nature of ARD in itself exacerbates the challenges faced by CSOs