Appendix
PARIS DECLARATION ON AID EFFECTIVENESS
Ownership, Harmonisation, Alignment, Results
and Mutual Accountability
I. Statement of Resolve
78. We, Ministers of developed and developing
countries responsible for promoting development and Heads of multilateral
and bilateral development institutions, meeting in Paris on 2
March 2005, resolve to take far-reaching and monitorable actions
to reform the ways we deliver and manage aid as we look ahead
to the UN five-year review of the Millennium Declaration and the
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) later this year. As in Monterrey,
we recognise that while the volumes of aid and other development
resources must increase to achieve these goals, aid effectiveness
must increase significantly as well to support partner country
efforts to strengthen governance and improve development performance.
This will be all the more important if existing and new bilateral
and multilateral initiatives lead to significant further increases
in aid.
79. At this High-Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness,
we followed up on the Declaration adopted at the High-Level Forum
on Harmonisation in Rome (February 2003) and the core principles
put forward at the Marrakech Roundtable on Managing for Development
Results (February 2004) because we believe they will increase
the impact aid has in reducing poverty and inequality, increasing
growth, building capacity and accelerating achievement of the
MDGs.
Scale up for more effective aid
80. We reaffirm the commitments made at Rome
to harmonise and align aid delivery. We are encouraged that many
donors and partner countries are making aid effectiveness a high
priority, and we reaffirm our commitment to accelerate progress
in implementation, especially in the following areas:
i. Strengthening partner countries' national
development strategies and associated operational frameworks (e.g.,
planning, budget, and performance assessment frameworks).
ii. Increasing alignment of aid with partner
countries' priorities, systems and procedures and helping to strengthen
their capacities.
iii. Enhancing donors' and partner countries'
respective accountability to their citizens and parliaments for
their development policies, strategies and performance.
iv. Eliminating duplication of efforts and rationalising
donor activities to make them as cost-effective as possible.
v. Reforming and simplifying donor policies and
procedures to encourage collaborative behaviour and progressive
alignment with partner countries' priorities, systems and procedures.
vi. Defining measures and standards of performance
and accountability of partner country systems in public financial
management, procurement, fiduciary safeguards and environmental
assessments, in line with broadly accepted good practices and
their quick and widespread application.
81. We commit ourselves to taking concrete and
effective action to address the remaining challenges, including:
i. Weaknesses in partner countries' institutional
capacities to develop and implement results-driven national development
strategies.
ii. Failure to provide more predictable and multi-year
commitments on aid flows to committed partner countries.
iii. Insufficient delegation of authority to
donors' field staff, and inadequate attention to incentives for
effective development partnerships between donors and partner
countries.
iv. Insufficient integration of global programmes
and initiatives into partner countries' broader development agendas,
including in critical areas such as HIV/AIDS.
v. Corruption and lack of transparency, which
erode public support, impede effective resource mobilisation and
allocation and divert resources away from activities that are
vital for poverty reduction and sustainable economic development.
Where corruption exists, it inhibits donors from relying on partner
country systems.
82. We acknowledge that enhancing the effectiveness
of aid is feasible and necessary across all aid modalities. In
determining the most effective modalities of aid delivery, we
will be guided by development strategies and priorities established
by partner countries. Individually and collectively, we will choose
and design appropriate and complementary modalities so as to maximise
their combined effectiveness.
83. In following up the Declaration, we will
intensify our efforts to provide and use development assistance,
including the increased flows as promised at Monterrey, in ways
that rationalise the often excessive fragmentation of donor activities
at the country and sector levels.
Adapt and apply to differing country situations
84. Enhancing the effectiveness of aid is also
necessary in challenging and complex situations, such as the tsunami
disaster that struck countries of the Indian Ocean rim on 26 December
2004. In such situations, worldwide humanitarian and development
assistance must be harmonised within the growth and poverty reduction
agendas of partner countries. In fragile states, as we support
state-building and delivery of basic services, we will ensure
that the principles of harmonisation, alignment and managing for
results are adapted to environments of weak governance and capacity.
Overall, we will give increased attention to such complex situations
as we work toward greater aid effectiveness.
Specify indicators, timetable and targets
85. We accept that the reforms suggested in this
Declaration will require continued high-level political support,
peer pressure and coordinated actions at the global, regional
and country levels. We commit to accelerate the pace of change
by implementing, in a spirit of mutual accountability, the Partnership
Commitments presented in Section II and to measure progress against
12 specific indicators that we have agreed today and that are
set out in Section III of this Declaration.
86. As a further spur to progress, we will set
targets for the year 2010. These targets, which will involve action
by both donors and partner countries, are designed to track and
encourage progress at the global level among the countries and
agencies that have agreed to this Declaration. They are not intended
to prejudge or substitute for any targets that individual partner
countries may wish to set. We have agreed today to set five preliminary
targets against indicators as shown in Section III. We agree to
review these preliminary targets and to adopt targets against
the remaining indicators as shown in Section III before the UNGA
Summit in September 2005; and we ask the partnership of donors
and partner countries hosted by the DAC to prepare for this urgently.[106]
Meanwhile, we welcome initiatives by partner countries and donors
to establish their own targets for improved aid effectiveness
within the framework of the agreed Partnership Commitments and
Indicators of Progress. For example, a number of partner countries
have presented action plans, and a large number of donors have
announced important new commitments. We invite all participants
who wish to provide information on such initiatives to submit
it by 4 April 2005 for subsequent publication.
Monitor and evaluate implementation
87. Because demonstrating real progress at country
level is critical, under the leadership of the partner country
we will periodically assess, qualitatively as well as quantitatively,
our mutual progress at country level in implementing agreed commitments
on aid effectiveness. In doing so, we will make use of appropriate
country level mechanisms.
88. At the international level, we call on the
partnership of donors and partner countries hosted by the DAC
to broaden partner country participation and, by the end of 2005,
to propose arrangements for the medium term monitoring of the
commitments in this Declaration. In the meantime, we ask the partnership
to co-ordinate the international monitoring of the Indicators
of Progress included in Section III; to refine targets as necessary;
to provide appropriate guidance to establish baselines; and to
enable consistent aggregation of information across a range of
countries to be summed up in a periodic report. We will also use
existing peer review mechanisms and regional reviews to support
progress in this agenda. We will, in addition, explore independent
cross-country monitoring and evaluation processes—which
should be applied without imposing additional burdens on partners—to
provide a more comprehensive understanding of how increased aid
effectiveness contributes to meeting development objectives.
89. Consistent with the focus on implementation,
we plan to meet again in 2008 in a developing country and conduct
two rounds of monitoring before then to review progress in implementing
this Declaration.
II. Partnership Commitments
90. Developed in a spirit of mutual accountability,
these Partnership Commitments are based on the lessons of experience.
We recognise that commitments need to be interpreted in the light
of the specific situation of each partner country.
OWNERSHIP
Partner countries exercise effective leadership
over their development policies, and strategies and co-ordinate
development actions
91. Partner countries
commit to:
- Exercise leadership in developing
and implementing their national development strategies[107]
through broad consultative processes.
- Translate these national development strategies
into prioritised results-oriented operational programmes as expressed
in medium-term expenditure frameworks and annual budgets (Indicator
1).
- Take the lead in co-ordinating aid at all levels
in conjunction with other development resources in dialogue with
donors and encouraging the participation of civil society and
the private sector.
92. Donors
commit to:
- Respect partner country leadership and help strengthen
their capacity to exercise it.
ALIGNMENT
Donors base their overall support on partner
countries' national development strategies, institutions and procedures
Donors align with partners' strategies
93. Donors
commit to:
- Base their overall support—country
strategies, policy dialogues and development co-operation programmes—on
partners' national development strategies and periodic reviews
of progress in implementing these strategies[108]
(Indicator 3).
- Draw conditions, whenever possible, from a partner's
national development strategy or its annual review of progress
in implementing this strategy. Other conditions would be included
only when a sound justification exists and would be undertaken
transparently and in close consultation with other donors and
stakeholders.
- Link funding to a single framework of conditions
and/or a manageable set of indicators derived from the national
development strategy. This does not mean that all donors have
identical conditions, but that each donor's conditions should
be derived from a common streamlined framework aimed at achieving
lasting results.
Donors use strengthened country systems
94. Using a country's own institutions and systems,
where these provide assurance that aid will be used for agreed
purposes, increases aid effectiveness by strengthening the partner
country's sustainable capacity to develop, implement and account
for its policies to its citizens and parliament. Country systems
and procedures typically include, but are not restricted to, national
arrangements and procedures for public financial management, accounting,
auditing, procurement, results frameworks and monitoring.
95. Diagnostic reviews are an important—and
growing—source of information to governments and donors
on the state of country systems in partner countries. Partner
countries and donors have a shared interest in being able to monitor
progress over time in improving country systems. They are assisted
by performance assessment frameworks, and an associated set of
reform measures, that build on the information set out in diagnostic
reviews and related analytical work.
96. Partner countries
and donors
jointly commit to:
- Work together to establish
mutually agreed frameworks that provide reliable assessments of
performance, transparency and accountability of country systems
(Indicator 2).
- Integrate diagnostic reviews and performance
assessment frameworks within country-led strategies for capacity
development.
97. Partner countries
commit to:
- Carry out diagnostic reviews
that provide reliable assessments of country systems and procedures.
- On the basis of such diagnostic
reviews, undertake reforms that may be necessary to ensure that
national systems, institutions and procedures for managing aid
and other development resources are effective, accountable and
transparent.
- Undertake reforms, such as public management
reform, that may be necessary to launch and fuel sustainable capacity
development processes.
98. Donors
commit to:
- Use country systems and procedures
to the maximum extent possible. Where use of country systems is
not feasible, establish additional safeguards and measures in
ways that strengthen rather than undermine country systems and
procedures (Indicator 5).
- Avoid, to the maximum extent possible, creating
dedicated structures for day-to-day management and implementation
of aid-financed projects and programmes (Indicator 6).
- Adopt harmonised performance assessment frameworks
for country systems so as to avoid presenting partner countries
with an excessive number of potentially conflicting targets.
Partner countries strengthen development capacity
with support from donors
99. The capacity to plan, manage, implement,
and account for results of policies and programmes, is critical
for achieving development objectives—from analysis and dialogue
through implementation, monitoring and evaluation. Capacity development
is the responsibility of partner countries with donors playing
a support role. It needs not only to be based on sound technical
analysis, but also to be responsive to the broader social, political
and economic environment, including the need to strengthen human
resources.
100. Partner countries
commit to:
- Integrate specific capacity
strengthening objectives in national development strategies and
pursue their implementation through country-led capacity development
strategies where needed.
101. Donors
commit to:
- Align their analytic and financial
support with partners' capacity development objectives and strategies,
make effective use of existing capacities and harmonise support
for capacity development accordingly (Indicator 4).
Strengthen public financial management capacity
102. Partner countries
commit to:
- Intensify efforts to mobilise
domestic resources, strengthen fiscal sustainability, and create
an enabling environment for public and private investments.
- Publish timely, transparent and reliable reporting
on budget execution.
- Take leadership of the public financial management
reform process.
103. Donors
commit to:
- Provide reliable indicative
commitments of aid over a multi-year framework and disburse aid
in a timely and predictable fashion according to agreed schedules
(Indicator 7).
- Rely to the maximum extent possible on transparent
partner government budget and accounting mechanisms (Indicator
5).
104. Partner countries
and donors jointly commit to:
- Implement harmonised diagnostic
reviews and performance assessment frameworks in public financial
management.
Strengthen national procurement systems
105. Partner countries
and donors jointly commit to:
- Use mutually agreed standards
and processes[109]
to carry out diagnostics, develop sustainable reforms and
monitor implementation.
- Commit sufficient resources to support and sustain
medium and long-term procurement reforms and capacity development.
- Share feedback at the country level on recommended
approaches so they can be improved over time.
106. Partner countries
commit to take leadership and implement the procurement reform
process.
107. Donors commit
to:
- Progressively rely on partner
country systems for procurement when the country has implemented
mutually agreed standards and processes (Indicator 5).
- Adopt harmonised approaches when national systems
do not meet mutually agreed levels of performance or donors do
not use them.
Untie aid: getting better value for money
108. Untying aid generally increases aid effectiveness
by reducing transaction costs for partner countries and improving
country ownership and alignment. DAC Donors will continue
to make progress on untying as encouraged by the 2001 DAC Recommendation
on Untying Official Development Assistance to the Least Developed
Countries (Indicator 8).
HARMONISATION
Donors' actions are more harmonised, transparent
and collectively effective
Donors implement common arrangements and simplify
procedures
109. Donors
commit to:
- Implement the donor action plans that they have
developed as part of the follow-up to the Rome High-Level Forum.
- Implement, where feasible, common arrangements
at country level for planning, funding (e.g. joint financial arrangements),
disbursement, monitoring, evaluating and reporting to government
on donor activities and aid flows. Increased use of programme-based
aid modalities can contribute to this effort (Indicator 9).
- Work together to reduce the number of separate,
duplicative, missions to the field and diagnostic reviews (Indicator
10); and promote joint training to share lessons learnt and
build a community of practice.
Complementarity: more effective division of labour
110. Excessive fragmentation of aid at global,
country or sector level impairs aid effectiveness. A pragmatic
approach to the division of labour and burden sharing increases
complementarity and can reduce transaction costs.
111. Partner countries
commit to:
- Provide clear views on donors'
comparative advantage and on how to achieve donor complementarity
at country or sector level.
112. Donors
commit to:
- Make full use of their respective
comparative advantage at sector or country level by delegating,
where appropriate, authority to lead donors for the execution
of programmes, activities and tasks.
- Work together to harmonise separate procedures.
Incentives for collaborative behaviour
113. Donors
and partner countries jointly commit to:
- Reform procedures and strengthen
incentives—including for recruitment, appraisal and training—for
management and staff to work towards harmonisation, alignment
and results.
Delivering effective aid in fragile states[110]
114. The long-term vision for international engagement
in fragile states is to build legitimate, effective and resilient
state and other country institutions. While the guiding principles
of effective aid apply equally to fragile states, they need to
be adapted to environments of weak ownership and capacity and
to immediate needs for basic service delivery.
115. Partner countries
commit to:
- Make progress towards building
institutions and establishing governance structures that deliver
effective governance, public safety, security, and equitable access
to basic social services for their citizens.
- Engage in dialogue with donors on developing
simple planning tools, such as the transitional results matrix,
where national development strategies are not yet in place.
- Encourage broad participation of a range of national
actors in setting development priorities.
116. Donors
commit to:
- Harmonise their activities.
Harmonisation is all the more crucial in the absence of strong
government leadership. It should focus on upstream analysis, joint
assessments, joint strategies, co-ordination of political engagement;
and practical initiatives such as the establishment of joint donor
offices.
- Align to the maximum extent possible behind central
government-led strategies or, if that is not possible, donors
should make maximum use of country, regional, sector or non-government
systems.
- Avoid activities that undermine national institution
building, such as bypassing national budget processes or setting
high salaries for local staff.
- Use an appropriate mix of aid instruments, including
support for recurrent financing, particularly for countries in
promising but high-risk transitions.
Promoting a harmonised approach to environmental
assessments
117. Donors
have achieved considerable progress in harmonisation around environmental
impact assessment (EIA) including relevant health and social issues
at the project level. This progress needs to be deepened, including
on addressing implications of global environmental issues such
as climate change, desertification and loss of biodiversity.
118. Donors and partner
countries jointly commit to:
- Strengthen the application
of EIAs and deepen common procedures for projects, including consultations
with stakeholders; and develop and apply common approaches for
"strategic environmental assessment" at the sector and
national levels.
- Continue to develop the specialised technical
and policy capacity necessary for environmental analysis and for
enforcement of legislation.
119. Similar harmonisation efforts are also needed
on other cross-cutting issues, such as gender equality and other
thematic issues including those financed by dedicated funds.
MANAGING FOR RESULTS
Managing resources and improving decision-making
for results
120. Managing for results means managing and
implementing aid in a way that focuses on the desired results
and uses information to improve decision-making.
121. Partner countries
commit to:
- Strengthen the linkages between
national development strategies and annual and multi-annual budget
processes.
- Endeavour to establish results-oriented reporting
and assessment frameworks that monitor progress against key dimensions
of the national and sector development strategies; and that these
frameworks should track a manageable number of indicators for
which data are cost-effectively available (Indicator 11).
122. Donors
commit to:
- Link country programming and
resources to results and align them with effective partner country
performance assessment frameworks, refraining from requesting
the introduction of performance indicators that are not consistent
with partners' national development strategies.
- Work with partner countries to rely, as far as
possible, on partner countries' results-oriented reporting and
monitoring frameworks.
- Harmonise their monitoring and reporting requirements,
and until they can rely more extensively on partner countries'
statistical, monitoring and evaluation systems, with partner countries
to the maximum extent possible on joint formats for periodic reporting.
123. Partner countries
and donors jointly commit to:
- Work together in a participatory
approach to strengthen country capacities and demand for results
based management.
MUTUAL ACCOUNTABILITY
Donors and partners are accountable for
development results
124. A major priority for partner countries and
donors is to enhance mutual accountability and transparency in
the use of development resources. This also helps strengthen public
support for national policies and development assistance.
125. Partner countries
commit to:
- Strengthen as appropriate the parliamentary role
in national development strategies and/or budgets.
- Reinforce participatory approaches by systematically
involving a broad range of development partners when formulating
and assessing progress in implementing national development strategies.
126. Donors commit
to:
- Provide timely, transparent
and comprehensive information on aid flows so as to enable partner
authorities to present comprehensive budget reports to their legislatures
and citizens.
127. Partner countries
and donors commit to:
- Jointly assess through existing
and increasingly objective country level mechanisms mutual progress
in implementing agreed commitments on aid effectiveness, including
the Partnership Commitments. (Indicator 12).
III. Indicators of Progress
To be measured nationally and monitored
internationally
| OWNERSHIP
| TARGET FOR 2010
|
| 1 | Partners have operational development strategies—Number of countries with national development strategies (including PRSs) that have clear strategic priorities linked to a medium-term expenditure framework and reflected in annual budgets.
| At least 75% of partner countries have operational development strategies.
|
| ALIGNMENT
| TARGETS FOR 2010
|
| 2 | Reliable country systems—Number of partner countries that have procurement and public financial management systems that either (a) adhere to broadly accepted good practices or (b) have a reform programme in place to achieve these.
| (a) Public financial management—half of partner countries move up at least one measure (i.e., 0.5 points) on the PFM/CPIA (Country Policy and Institutional Assessment) scale of performance.
|
| | | (b) Procurement—One-third of partner countries move up at least one measure (i.e., from D to C, C to B or B to A) on the four-point scale used to assess performance for this indicator.
|
| 3 | Aid flows are aligned on national priorities—Percent of aid flows to the government sector that is reported on partners' national budgets.
| Halve the gap—halve the proportion of aid flows to government sector not reported on government's budget(s) (with at least 85% reported on budget).
|
| 4 | Strengthen capacity by co-ordinated support—Percent of donor capacity-development support provided through co-ordinated programmes consistent with partners' national development strategies.
| 50% of technical co-operation flows are implemented through co-ordinated programmes consistent with national development strategies.
|
| 5a | Use of country public financial management systems—Percent of donors and of aid flows that use public financial management systems in partner countries, which either (a) adhere to broadly accepted good practices or (b) have a reform programme in place to achieve these.
| PERCENT OF DONORS
|
| | | Score*
| Target
|
| | | 5+
| All donors use partner countries' PFM systems.
|
| | | 3.5 to 4.5
| 90% of donors use partner countries' PFM systems.
|
| | | PERCENT OF AID FLOWS
|
| | | Score*
| Target
|
| | | 5+
| A two-thirds reduction in the % of aid to the public sector not using partner countries' PFM systems.
|
| | | 3.5 to 4.5
| A one-third reduction in the % of aid to the public sector not using partner countries' PFM systems.
|
| 5b | Use of country procurement systems—Percent of donors and of aid flows that use partner country procurement systems which either (a) adhere to broadly accepted good practices or (b) have a reform programme in place to achieve these.
| PERCENT OF DONORS
|
| | | Score*
| Target
|
| | | A
| All donors use partner countries' procurement systems.
|
| | | B
| 90% of donors use partner countries' procurement systems.
|
| | | PERCENT OF AID FLOWS
|
| | | Score*
| Target
|
| | | A
| A two-thirds reduction in the % of aid to the public sector not using partner countries' procurement systems.
|
| | | B
| A one-third reduction in the % of aid to the public sector not using partner countries' procurement systems.
|
| 6 | Strengthen capacity by avoiding parallel implementation structures—Number of parallel project implementation units (PIUs) per country.
| Reduce by two-thirds the stock of parallel project implementation units (PIUs).
|
| 7 | Aid is more predictable—Percent of aid disbursements released according to agreed schedules in annual or multi-year frameworks.
| Halve the gap—have the proportion of aid not disbursed within the fiscal year for which it was scheduled.
|
| 8 | Aid is untied—Percent of bilateral aid that is untied.
| Continued progress over time.
|
| HARMONISATION
| TARGETS FOR 2010
|
| 9 | Use of common arrangements of procedures—Percent of aid provided as programme-based approaches.
| 66% of aid flows are provided in the context of programme-based approaches.
|
| 10 | Encourage shared analysis—Percent of (a) field missions and/or (b) country analytic work, including diagnostic reviews that are joint.
| (a) 40% of donor missions to the field are joint.
|
| | | (b) 66% of country analytic work is joint.
|
| MANAGING FOR RESULTS
| TARGET FOR 2010
|
| 11 | Results-orientated frameworks—Number of countries with transparent and monitorable performance assessment frameworks to assess progress against (a) the national development strategies and (b) sector programmes.
| Reduce the gap by one-third—Reduce the proportion of countries without transparent and monitorable performance assessment frameworks by one-third.
|
| MUTUAL ACCOUNTABILITY
| TARGET FOR 2010
|
| 12 | Mutual accountability—Number of partner countries that undertake mutual assessments of progress in implementing agreed commitments on aid effectiveness including those in this declaration.
| All partner countries have mutual assessment reviews in place.
|
Important Note:
In accordance with paragraph 9 of the Declaration, the partnership
of donors and partner countries hosted by the DAC (Working Party
on Aid Effectiveness) comprising OECD/DAC members, partner countries
and multilateral institutions, met twice, on 30-31 May 2005 and
on 7-8 July 2005 to adopt, and review where appropriate, the targets
for the twelve Indicators of Progress. At these meetings an agreement
was reached on the targets presented under Section III of the
present Declaration. This agreement is subject to reservations
by one donor on (a) the methodology for assessing the quality
of locally-managed procurement systems (relating to targets 2b
and 5b) and (b) the acceptable quality of public financial management
reform programmes (relating to target 5a.ii). Further discussions
are underway to address these issues. The targets, including the
reservation, have been notified to the Chairs of the High-level
Plenary Meeting of the 59th General Assembly of the United Nations
in a letter of 9 September 2005 by Mr Richard Manning, Chair of
the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC).
* Note on Indicator 5:
Scores for Indicator 5 are determined by the methodology used
to measure quality of procurement and public financial management
systems under Indicator 2 above.
Appendix A [to the Declaration]:
Methodological Notes on the Indicators
of Progress
The Indicators of Progress provides a framework in
which to make operational the responsibilities and accountabilities
that are framed in the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness.
This framework draws selectively from the Partnership Commitments
presented in Section II of this Declaration.
Purpose—The Indicators
of Progress provide a framework in which to make operational the
responsibilities and accountabilities that are framed in the Paris
Declaration on Aid Effectiveness. They measure principally collective
behaviour at the country level.
Country level vs. global level—The
indicators are to be measured at the country level
in close collaboration between partner countries and donors. Values
of country level indicators can then be statistically aggregated
at the regional or global level. This global aggregation
would be done both for the country panel mentioned below, for
purposes of statistical comparability, and more broadly for all
partner countries for which relevant data are available.
Donor / Partner country performance—The
indicators of progress also provide a benchmark against which
individual donor agencies or partner countries can measure their
performance at the country, regional, or global level. In
measuring individual donor performance, the indicators should
be applied with flexibility in the recognition that donors have
different institutional mandates.
Targets—The targets
are set at the global level. Progress against these targets is
to be measured by aggregating data measured at the country level.
In addition to global targets, partner countries and donors in
a given country might agree on country-level targets.
Baseline—A baseline
will be established for 2005 in a panel of self-selected countries.
The partnership of donors and partner countries hosted by the
DAC (Working Party on Aid Effectiveness) is asked to establish
this panel.
Definitions and criteria—The
partnership of donors and partner countries hosted by the DAC
(Working Party on Aid Effectiveness) is asked to provide specific
guidance on definitions, scope of application, criteria and methodologies
to assure that results can be aggregated across countries and
across time.
Note on Indicator 9—Programme
based approaches are defined in Volume 2 of Harmonising Donor
Practices for Effective Aid Delivery (OECD, 2005) in Box 3.1 as
a way of engaging in development cooperation based on the principles
of co-ordinated support for a locally owned programme of development,
such as a national development strategy, a sector programme, a
thematic programme or a programme of a specific organisation.
Programme based approaches share the following features: (a) leadership
by the host country or organisation; (b) a single comprehensive
programme and budget framework; (c) a formalised process for donor
co-ordination and harmonisation of donor procedures for reporting,
budgeting, financial management and procurement; (d) Efforts to
increase the use of local systems for programme design and implementation,
financial management, monitoring and evaluation. For the purpose
of indicator 9 performance will be measured separately across
the aid modalities that contribute to programme-based approaches.
APPENDIX B [to the Declaration]:
List of Participating Countries and Organisations
| Participating Countries
|
| Albania | Australia
| Austria |
| Bangladesh | Belgium
| Benin |
| Bolivia | Botswana
| [Brazil]* |
| Burkina Faso | Burundi
| Cambodia |
| Cameroon | Canada
| China |
| Congo D.R. | Czech Republic
| Denmark |
| Dominican Republic |
Egypt | Ethiopia
|
| European Commission |
Fiji | Finland
|
| France | Gambia, The
| Germany |
| Ghana | Greece
| Guatemala |
| Guinea | Honduras
| Iceland |
| Indonesia | Ireland
| Italy |
| Jamaica | Japan
| Jordan |
| Kenya | Korea
| Kuwait |
| Kyrgyz Republic | Lao PDR
| Luxembourg |
| Madagascar | Malawi
| Malaysia |
| Mali | Mauritania
| Mexico |
| Mongolia | Morocco
| Mozambique |
| Nepal | Netherlands
| New Zealand |
| Nicaragua | Niger
| Norway |
| Pakistan | Papua New Guinea
| Philippines |
| Poland | Portugal
| Romania |
| Russian Federation |
Rwanda | Saudi Arabia
|
| Senegal | Serbia and Montenegro
| Slovak Republic |
| Solomon Islands | South Africa
| Spain |
| Sri Lanka | Sweden
| Switzerland |
| Tajikistan | Tanzania
| Thailand |
| Timor-Leste | Tunisia
| Turkey |
| Uganda | United Kingdom
| United States of America
|
| Vanuatu | Vietnam
| Yemen |
| Zambia |
| |
* To be confirmed.
More countries than listed here have endorsed the
Paris Declaration. For a full and up to date list please consult:
www.oecd.org/dac/effectiveness/parisdeclaration/members.
| Participating Organisations
|
| African Development Bank
| Arab Bank for Economic Development in Africa
|
| Asian Development Bank |
Commonwealth Secretariat |
| Consultative Group to Assist the Poorest (CGAP)
| Council of Europe Development Bank (CEB)
|
| Economic Commission for Africa (ECA)
| Education for All Fast Track Initiative (EFA-FTI)
|
| European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD)
| European Investment Bank (EIB)
|
| Global Fund to Fight Aids, Tuberculosis and Malaria
| G24 |
| Inter-American Development Bank
| International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)
|
| International Monetary Fund
| International Organisation of the Francophonie
|
| Islamic Development Bank
| Millennium Campaign |
| New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD)
| Nordic Development Fund
|
| Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
| Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS)
|
| OPEC Fund for International Development
| Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat
|
| United Nations Development Group (UNDG)
| World Bank |
| Civil Society Organisations
|
| Africa Humanitarian Action
| AFRODAD |
| Bill and Melinda Gates Foundations
| Canadian Council for International Cooperation (CCIC)
|
| Comité Catholique contre la Faim et pour le Développement (CCFD)
| Coopération Internationale pour le Développement et la Solidarité (CIDSE)
|
| Comisión Económica (Nicaragua)
| ENDE Tiers Monde |
| EURODAD | International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN)
|
| Japan NGO Center for International Cooperation (JANIC)
| Reality of Aid Network
|
| Tanzania Social and Economic Trust (TASOET)
| UK Aid Network |
106 In accordance with paragraph 9 of the Declaration,
the partnership of donors and partner countries hosted by the
DAC (Working Party on Aid Effectiveness) comprising OECD/DAC members,
partner countries and multilateral institutions, met twice, on
30-31 May 2005 and on 7- 8 July 2005 to adopt, and review where
appropriate, the targets for the twelve Indicators of Progress.
At these meetings an agreement was reached on the targets presented
under Section III of the present Declaration. This agreement is
subject to reservations by one donor on (a) the methodology for
assessing the quality of locally-managed procurement systems (relating
to targets 2b and 5b) and (b) the acceptable quality of public
financial management reform programmes (relating to target Sail).
Further discussions are underway to address these issues. The
targets, including the reservation, have been notified to the
Chairs of the High-level Plenary Meeting of the S9th General Assembly
of the United Nations in a letter of 9 September 200S by Mr Richard
Manning, Chair of the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC). Back
107
The term 'national development strategies' includes poverty reduction
and similar overarching strategies as well as sector and thematic
strategies. Back
108
This includes for example the Annual Progress Review of the Poverty
Reduction Strategies (APR). Back
109
Such as the processes developed by the joint OECD-DAC-World Bank
Round Table on Strengthening Procurement Capacities in Developing
Countries. Back
110
The following section draws on the draft Principles for Good International
Engagement in Fragile States, which emerged from the Senior Level
Forum on Development Effectiveness in Fragile States (London,
January 2005). Back
| 
