140 likes | 256 Views
Technical Cooperation- its role in Capacity Development. Structured Policy Dialogue, Istanbul, 12-13 October 2006. Ben Dickinson OECD DAC Secretariat. The Problem.
E N D
Technical Cooperation- its role in Capacity Development Structured Policy Dialogue, Istanbul, 12-13 October 2006 Ben Dickinson OECD DAC Secretariat
The Problem ‘TC programmes have come under repeated criticism for being too costly, inappropriate to recipients’ needs, or fostering dependency. In the past, donors have broadly assumed that they will promote capacity development, but reality has proved much more complex’. (OECD DAC Development Cooperation Report, 2005)
Capacity Development : Gaining Prominence • Strong consensus that capacity development is central to the achievement of the MDGs, the implementation of the Paris Declaration and the scaling-up of aid. • Country capacity is the key to accelerating economic growth and reducing poverty. • Country ownership will not emerge in the absence of sufficient local capacity.
Definitions : Technical Cooperation (TC) • TC is ‘the provision of know-how in the form of personnel, training, research and associated costs’. • TC comprises study assistance through scholarships and traineeships; the supply of personnel, including experts, teachers and volunteers; research on the problems of developing countries. • These categories overlap and the boundaries are not always clear.
Definitions : Capacity Development (CD) • CD is ‘the process whereby people, organisations and society as a whole manage their affairs’. • Capacity can be viewed as the potential to perform. • CD is about retaining, unleashing, strengthening, adapting and maintaining capacity over time. This takes account of issues of ‘brain drain’ and the role of diasporas.
How do TC and CD relate to each other? • TC does not equal CD—although it is sometimes used as a proxy for CD (e.g. Paris indicators) • TC is an input, CD is an outcome. • CD occurs as well through major inputs other than TC, like national education systems, or certain financial assistance programmes. • Conversely, some TC is non-capacity enhancing such as expert substitution or gap-filling.
TC : What have we learned? • About a quarter of what DAC donors spend—or $20 billion per year—is on TC but the impact on CD outcomes is unclear. • Evaluations have not focussed sufficiently on the impact of TC on incentives or organisational capability. • TC has not been subject to the analytical rigour of other investment decisions.
CD : What have we learned ? • Four decades of experience point to the inadequacy of ad hoc, piece-meal and often supply-driven approaches to CD. • Donors have treated CD mainly as a challenge of technical transfer from North to South; insufficient attention paid to context, politics and governance. • CD is successful when the enabling governance conditions are right and ownership is strong.
The future of CD? • There is a growing consensus about how to support CD, set out in the DAC’s paper The Challenge of Capacity Development: Working towards Good Practice. Issues include: • Thinking through capacity issues at three interrelated levels: individual, organisational and enabling environment levels. • Recognising that CD is necessarily an endogenous process.
The future of CD continued? • Encouraging the emergence of country-led CD plans, taking the local context as the starting point and thinking and acting within longer time frames. • Designing strategies for making use of diasporas and for reducing ‘brain drain’. Retaining and unleashing existing capacities is a priority. • Responding to partner countries preferences for more South-to-South learning and the strengthening of South based institutions to help with CD.
The future of TC? • Although heavily criticised, TC is not ‘good’ or ‘bad’—it depends on how it is managed. • The challenge is how TC can come under more direct control by the recipient and be responsive to recipients’ real needs. • E.g. How to avoid supply-driven TC? (TC is often off budget; not procured by Government; often provided through parallel implementation units; fragmented; costs and fees lack transparency).
The future of TC continued ? • How to make the provision of TC more market-based? • How to pool TC among donors to ensure greater coherence and co‑ordination? • How to disaggregate DAC TC statistics in order to test how different instruments within the TC bundle can contribute to capacity development?
Technical Cooperation-its role in Capacity Development THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION