REGIONAL SURVEYS ON THE IMPACT OF THE AID EFFECTIVENESS AGENDA – DRAFT VERSION
AID EFFECTIVENESS SURVEY
ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF THE AID EFFECTIVENESS AGENDA
ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT THROUGHOUT THE WORLD
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
THE AID EFFECTIVENESS AGENDA
Since the mid-1990s, official development agencies, under the leadership of the Development Assistance
Committee of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), have been re-examining the
way they deliver aid in an effort to generate greater impact in terms of social and economic development.
During a High Level Conference in Paris in 2005, donors and partner countries agreed that while volumes of aid
should increase to achieve the Millennium Development Goals, aid effectiveness must increase significantly as well
to support partner country efforts to strengthen governance and improve development performance.
The declaration of this conference, the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, was signed by all OECD countries
and endorsed by many developing countries. It reflects a consensus on a series of recommended actions which
official development agencies and partner countries could undertake to enhance aid delivery and management.
These actions include, amongst others: i) national ownership of development strategies; ii) alignment with national
development strategies; iii) harmonization of development interventions; iv) managing for results; and v) mutual
accountability and transparency.
Two key weaknesses of the aid effectiveness agenda are the great emphasis placed by donors on the mechanics of
aid delivery rather than the development impact generated by aid, as well as the absence of key development
stakeholders (i.e. local governments and civil society) in the policy discussions. While many of the Paris
Declaration principles are widely supported by the development community, there is a growing concern that the
Paris Declaration fails to recognize local governments, civil society or other actors for their role in development
and the contribution they make to aid effectiveness.
CHALLENGES FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
From a local government perspective, there has been limited analysis on the impact that the Paris Declaration has
had on the relationship between national and local governments but there is some initial evidence that the focus
on the new delivery mechanisms have reinforced the responsibility of central governments in the planning and
implementation of sector policies and programs, while marginalizing the role of local governments. It has been
suggested that local governments have been relegated to the role of an executing arm of line ministries, as
influence and decision-making authority is consolidated with national governments and donors. There is the risk
of undermining decentralisation efforts if all the responsibilities and resources for local development are
concentrated in the hands of the national administration.
Of equal concern is the lack of involvement of local government representatives, or other non-state actors, in
helping to inform and shape the planning and design of national development policies.
As a result of the lobbying efforts undertaken by UCLG and its members, the 2008 Accra Agenda for Action (which
was drawn up to deepen the implementation of the Paris Declaration) recognized LG as important stakeholders.
Following this inclusion, UCLG has been acknowledged as a formal partner in the two main international Aid
Effectiveness forums; the OECD Working Party on Aid Effectiveness and the advisory board of the UN Development
Cooperation Forum. At the European level, UCLG is involved in the European Commission Structured Dialogue on
the involvement of LG and CSO in the development cooperation policies for the new phase of programming (2012-
2017), of which Aid Effectiveness is one of the main themes.
The UCLG Capacity and Institution Building (CIB) Working Group, bringing together the most active UCLG members
in development cooperation, developed the UCLG Position Paper on Aid Effectiveness and Local Government,
adopted by the UCLG World Council in 2009.
NEW AID MODALITIES
As detailed above, the Aid Effectiveness agenda has been marked by a significant shift in the methods by which
development assistance funding is spent and managed. In an effort to more effectively coordinate and harmonize
development assistance, a much higher volume of funds (66% of aid flows) are being pooled in a comprehensive
budgetary process (through mechanisms such as Budgetary Support, Programme Based Approaches and Sector
Wide Approaches) over which the central government, in collaboration with coalitions of donors, plays a
leadership role in determining where and how resources will be allocated.
Budget Support: donor-to-government relationship based on supporting the implementation of a national
development plan, via a transfer of funds from the donor government to the treasury of the recipient government.
The transfer of money is made upon the fulfilment of certain general conditions, usually centred on
implementation of national development plans, macro-economic strategies and public financial management
reforms.
Sector Wide Approach (SWAp): brings together key stakeholders (recipient government, donors and other
stakeholders) within any sector to increase national ownership over sector policy and resource allocation as well as
to reduce transaction costs.
The high importance of these mechanisms is in contrast to more traditional means where donors would plan
projects and contract the services of development partners, either from their own country or third party countries,
to provide specific goods or services to recipient countries.
Even though this shift implies a strengthened local ownership from the Southern government, given their state-
centric focus these new aid modalities imply a top-down approach, thus potentially threatening progress on
decentralisation and local development.
The role of LG and their associations (LGA) should be more systematically taken into account when working with
Budgetary Support or SWAps. Further research and proper evaluation should be carried out particularly regarding
the impact of budget support and sector-wide approaches on decentralisation and on the role of LRA, as well as
more broadly as of the Declaration of Paris.
SURVEY PURPOSES
In preparation of the next High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness in Seoul (November 2011) – moment in which the
Aid Effectiveness agenda progress will be evaluated –, UCLG, its Decentralized Cooperation Committee and the CIB
Working Group are trying to assess, with the support of the UCLG Regional Sessions, the impact of the aid
effectiveness agenda on the local governance sector.
The aim is to gather anecdotal evidence of the impact, especially regarding the involvement of LG and LGA in the
development and implementation of GBS and SWAps.
AID EFFECTIVENESS SURVEY
ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF THE AID EFFECTIVENESS AGENDA
ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT THROUGHOUT THE WORLD
1. GENERAL
1.1 Are you aware of the Aid Effectiveness agenda? How do you receive information on this theme? Has your local
government/local government association debated the aid effectiveness principles (ownership, alignment,
harmonization) or taken a (formal) position on this topic?
Click here to access to the main documents: The Paris Declaration and the Accra Agenda for Action
2. DEVELOPMENT POLICY DISCUSSIONS (OWNERSHIP)
2.1 Has your local government / local government association been involved in consultation processes at national
level regarding national development cooperation strategies? How regularly are the contacts with the ministry
and parliament regarding the development cooperation strategies? Is there a formal mechanism for involvement
of local government? Since when and what has your role been in the discussions? Are you being invited directly or
was there a need to lobby for inclusion?
For example: the LG sector is being consulted and included in the elaboration of Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers
2.2 Have you been involved in consultation processes of multilateral (for example: European Union, UNDP,
UNCDF, UN Habitat, etc) and bilateral donors regarding their cooperation policies and strategies? Since when?
How did you get involved? Are this regular consultations (once a year, every six months)?
For example through the EC delegation in your country (i.e .the LGA of Zambia has got involved in the dialogue on
strategies and programmes of ACP-EU cooperation, even though this was initially rejected)
2.3. What mechanisms should be developed at national level by the International Institutions or Bilateral donors,
to improve dialogue with LGs and support their participation in the definition of the national development
strategies?
3. NEW AID MODALITIES (ALIGNMENT)
3.1 Do you have information on the implementation of new aid modalities in your country (i.e. Budgetary support
and Sector Wide Approach programmes)? Do you know if any of these programmes are related specifically to LGs
(i.e. Bugetary support) or if they target the LG sector (i.e. Sector Wide Approaches)?
If so, please specify the modality and/or sector (i.e. Health, Waste, Education or General Budgetary Support – for
example the Ugandan Local Government Development Programme or the Health Basked Fund in Tanzania)
3.2 If the answer to question 3.1. is positive: in which way do LG and/or your LGA participate in the definition
and/or implementation of these programmes? Role of your city/LGA, for example: how did you or did you not
succeed in advancing your priority issues or participate in the planning for budget support?
Please detail the process
3.3 If the answer for the question 3.1. is positive: what are the main contributions (or problems) that these new
modalities have made to the improvement of local governments in general, on financial management, on service
delivery systems, on local governance and accountability, or on the decentralization process?
3.4. How to promote and improve the participation of LGs in new aid modalities, particularly in national and
sectoral budget support? How can international partners contribute to the involvement of LGs in new aid
modalities?
4. HARMONIZATION AND COORDINATION
4.1 Do you play an active role in ensuring coordination among the partners (donors, NGOs, local governments
from developed countries, etc.) that are working with you or in your community? How do you avoid overlap
between the various programmes implemented by partners?
4.2 Is there a national strategy for municipal sector strengthening, aligned with the country’s national
development strategies?
4.3 How could LGAs/cities ensure that municipal international cooperation interventions are being mapped at a
national level to allow the impact is being assessed? Do you have a database of municipal international
cooperation in your country? Do you know which municipality is working with which partner municipality from
abroad on which topics?
5. MANAGING FOR RESULTS AND MUTUAL ACCOUNTABILITY
5.1 Are you or your members involved in evaluations of programmes of donors/States/NGOs related to Local
Governments?
5.2 What are your experiences with international cooperation projects? What works best for you and why? What
are the most effective projects/programmes that you are working with? Why? How do you prove the
sustainability of these programmes?
6. IMPROVING NORTH/SOUTH LOCAL GOVERNMENT COOPERATION
6.1 Is there any way in which Northern local governments help local governments to be involved in national
development processes and policies in the South?
For example through capacity building in planning, budgeting and financial management to strengthen the basis
for the implementation of development programmes
6.2 What characterises Northern-Southern local government relationships? What reforms would Southern local
governments like to see in the way that Northern local governments work with them?
For example: Are the projects embedded in the local plans?