1 / 15

Helping or hindering? Aid, donors and fragile states- the context for peacekeeping ops

This presentation explores the effectiveness of aid in fragile states, examining the impact on institution building and development. It provides policy recommendations for aid actors and discusses the need for a more coherent approach.

tmurray
Download Presentation

Helping or hindering? Aid, donors and fragile states- the context for peacekeeping ops

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Helping or hindering? Aid, donors and fragile states- the context for peacekeeping ops Karin Christiansen Centre for Aid and Public Expenditure, ODI International Day of United Nations Peacekeepers 23rd May 2007

  2. Does aid work generally? Does aid work in (post-)conflict situations? (note on terminology) Policy recommendations for aid actors Beyond aid- towards ‘coherence’? This presentation

  3. 1. Does aid work - generally? • Work to do what? (state building, growth, democracy etc, plus range of non-dev objective) • Evidence suggest probably a net benefit (to growth) • But it is small and marginal • Causality appears to be through quality of institutions: better institutions  better policy and implementation  higher growth

  4. Track record on institution/capacity building is mixed to poor And may even inhibit institutional development/formation (see next slide) And what does this mean for aiding places where institutions are particularly weak? So, what do we know about aid building institutions?

  5. Weak state systems, avoided by funders & implementers  undermining the development of a state that can make policy/deliver services Parallel & fragmented activities & systems Inefficiency & ineffectiveness of both aid & government spending/activities Distorts institutional & political relationships Fragmented accountability, to donors Impacts of aid practice on institutions?

  6. What (if anything) is different about aid in fragile states? What do we know about patterns of aid relationship in fragile states? Findings on impact of different types of aid relationships 2. Aid and fragile states

  7. Often involves: Weaker national institutions High inflow of external finance Large number of external actors; fragmented national actors  complex fragmented set of relationship/interfaces Humanitarian delivery  institutionalising parallel systems (Understandable) state avoidance assumption What is different about aid in fragile state environments?

  8. 4 main clusters of experiences: strong country leadership strong donor leadership weak country leadership fragmented donors isolated countries/“most difficult partnership” Most experience reviewed to fell into iii with some in ii & iv and a very few in i Patterns of aid relationships

  9. Donor behaviour matters more in fragile states than else where Current practices may be undermining: aid efficiency and effectiveness their own proximate objectives domestic/local institutions (forming) potential for state formation/social contract to develop Findings on impact of ii-iv?

  10. Much higher degree of realism Undertake joint diagnostics of the country context, processes and systems across all actors Where possible, align donor activities to all stages of the government’s strategy, policy implementation cycle and systems 3. Recommendations for aid actors

  11. Where possible align with government systems and policies; where you can’t harmonise aid actors and shadow systems align Selectivity and sequencing of interventions are critical Support policy making & aid management in recipient government Monitor progress at a country level Recommendations…

  12. Does not give control of resources to recipient govt BUT does use similar rules as state system Ensuring compatibility with, for example: administrative layers/boundaries planning, budgeting cycles, classifications accounting, procurement & audit systems monitoring & evaluation systems staffing structures & hierarchies “Shadow systems alignment” Adjustment cost to aid agencies NOT recipients

  13. Do these recommendations apply to non-aid actors? Yes and more so, with more actors, interests, objectives, operational modalities & mindsets the challenges increase Moves us into joined-up (no10 term) “coherence” (aid), “comprehensive” (UK mil), “effects based” (US mil) terrain are multiplying But currently in parallel! And not fully acknowledge the reality of the dilemmas and challenges… 5. Beyond aid?

  14. But we can do better than this.

  15. Centre for Aid and Public ExpenditureOverseas Development Institute 111 Westminster Bridge Road London SE1 7JD Tel: 020 7922 0300 Fax: 020 7922 0399 Email: k.christiansen@odi.org.uk Website: www.odi.org.uk Thank you

More Related