December 2010

Looking forward at 50

As OECD and the DAC celebrate 50th years of activity, it remains clear that aid – if indeed just one tool for achieving development goals – can serve as an important catalyst for progress. The DAC increasingly looks at aid within the context of the broader issues of development – such as conflict, investing in women and girls, building smarter partnerships and financing climate change – to ensure that it is delivered effectively, and that policies are sound, as well as coherent across the board. In addition, OECD has recently been tasked to work with other international organizations on six of the nine pillars of the G20’s new action plan for development – an important vehicle for affirming the relevance of our work.



Go directly to: 
New DAC-DCD website!
Eckhard Deutscher steps down as DAC Chair
Growth and development – for whom and by whom?

News from the Cancun Climate Change Conference

Achieving the Millennium Development Goals: Actions that will make the difference

The road to Busan

Feature Article

News in Brief

DAC Peer Reviews



New DCD-DAC website!

We invite you to take a few minutes to visit our new website at www.oecd.org/dac! Explore this new window on our work, take a spin through the gallery featuring highlights from the DAC over the past 50 years, or visit AidFlows, produced in partnership.


Eckhard Deutscher steps down as DAC Chair

December 2010 marks the end of Eckhard Deutscher’s term as Chair of the Development Assistance Committee; in January 2011, Brian J. Atwood will assume this role. In parting, Mr. Deutscher reflects on his term as DAC Chair, and on the challenges to come.


In January 2008, when I came to the DAC, the world was undergoing far-reaching changes. It was becoming evident that while globalisation could offer huge potential for development, if left to itself it could also cause crises on a vast scale. During the three years of my term, the degree and pace of change faced by human society manifested itself through profoundly transformative events – from the food and fuel crises to the financial and economic crisis and the emergence of the G20.


Yet despite the crises, development at a global level has continued to advance, with emerging economies becoming the primary source of growth in the world. Further down the income ladder, many countries are sustaining an encouraging dynamic of growth, with rising potential to accelerate their progress towards the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). A simple aggregation of key indicators of the first seven MDGs highlights five countries in sub-Saharan Africa as the top absolute MDG performers (ODI, 2010).


Looking more closely at this encouraging overall picture, however, we see that recent years have also exposed vulnerabilities within and across countries and that the poor are suffering disproportionately from the crises. Development has stalled in a number of countries, with fragile states most off track from meeting the MDGs – on average 40‐60% behind. And while growth in developing countries offers the potential to lift hundreds of millions of people out of abject poverty, this very growth risks becoming a central factor in other major development challenges, such as climate change, and food and fuel prices. Globalisation has brought unprecedented development opportunities, but it has also created an unprecedented degree of interdependence, and knock-on effects on developing countries are becoming strikingly evident.


Meanwhile, the approach to development has been changing. While it is still very much at the core of the international agenda, development today is less defined through aid. There is a stronger emphasis on investment, trade and domestic or market-based resource mobilisation in the strong-performing countries, and on security, stability and international drivers of fragility in the weak performers. And the number and different types of players getting involved in development is increasing, contributing to a highly complex picture.


As I hand over to my successor, the DAC – together with OECD – is celebrating its 50 year anniversary. 2010 also marks the coming of age of the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness. As the world tackles new development challenges in a rapidly changing global landscape, development co-operation will need to evolve. I have set out 10 Theses on key dimensions of the evolution it will need to undergo. Because development co-operation will remain relevant, and indeed essential: the major challenges human society faces this century can only be met if their development dimensions are dealt with. In the 20th century, security affected all areas of policy-making – in the 21st century, development will. 



Growth and development – for whom and by whom? 

In a recent post to the OECD Insights blog on the occasion of the launch, at OECD headquarters in Paris, of the UNPD Human Development Report, DCD’s Deputy Director Stephen Groff reflected on the significance of the report’s figures – and on the G20’s growing development agenda.


UNDP’s Human Development Report stresses that today’s development challenges require a new outlook. Rather than trying to replicate past experience, we need to focus on new opportunities. Rather than attempting to apply policy prescriptions, we need to adapt general principles and guidelines to the local context. And we must address major new challenges − in particular, climate change − and build democratically accountable global institutions to deal with them. Our analysis must go deeper, and we must carefully consider the multidimensionality of development objectives.


The Human Development Index was one of the first serious attempts to broaden the debate around just how we measure development. Over time, the development community has moved from rather simplistically equating increased GDP to development, to an array of indicators for ranking how countries and people are faring. In recent years, the debate has become much more pronounced with the Stiglitz-Sen-Fitoussi commission and the OECD’s work on measuring the progress of societies.


Measurements are important. They are our means of defining success. But it is vital to consider development outcomes in their multiple facets − not just poverty or income growth levels. Growth is a means to an end and not an end in itself. The Human Development Report confirms this central truth, and also makes it clear that there is no single pathway to success. Each country must have the ownership, capacity and resources to find their own solutions to their own development challenges.


In this respect, it is very positive to see the G20’s growing focus on development. The G20 is uniquely placed to provide leadership in advancing the international development agenda and achieving the MDGs by improving their own policies, sharing their development experiences, providing assistance to build capacity and offering strategic guidance to international organisations. In Seoul (11-12 November 2010), the G20 adopted the Seoul Development Consensus for Shared Growth and an action plan comprising nine pillars to promote growth in low-income countries.


Like the G20, the OECD takes a comprehensive approach to development and knowledge sharing, engaging a range of policy communities. We are pleased to be mandated by the G20 to work closely with the UN, the World Bank and other international organisations to contribute to implementing the Seoul action plan. The G20 approach to development is underpinned by a fundamental belief in the core importance of growth. We agree that growth is a necessary component of development, but believe that it is fundamental important to remember that poverty reduction depends on the pattern, and not only the pace, of growth. One of the key messages of the HDR - and one that I know the G20 will heed - is that growth does not automatically equate to other aspects of development.


We are keen to share our experience on what makes growth benefit the poor − something we have been exploring for years in the DAC and its Network on Poverty Reduction. More generally, we will continue to put a strong emphasis on measuring the progress of societies, because people, as the HDR says, are the real wealth of nations.



News from the Cancun Climate Change Conference

Two weeks of climate change discussions concluded in the early hours of Saturday 11 December in Cancun. Despite some lingering substantive concerns, a deal on climate change was reached under the skilful chairmanship of the President of the Conference of the Parties (COP16), Patricia Espinosa, Mexico’s Foreign Minister.


Some people call the Cancun Agreement a modest deal and the fact is that the Summit may have done more to save the UN negotiating process from collapse than protecting the planet against climate change. Many more see this outcome as a good and necessary step forward in the long journey of negotiation, however, and as good grounds for hope.


Christiana Figueres, head of the UN’s Climate Treaty affirmed: “Cancun has done the job! Nations have shown they can work together under a common roof, to reach consensus on a common cause.”


From the first day, Cancun was clearly different from last year’s Copenhagen Summit: fewer heads of state and government, less media and celebrities, and considerably lower expectations. Nonetheless, the Mexican Government conducted a well disciplined and extensive campaign aimed at restoring faith within and among the global delegations. The commitment to a transparent and inclusive process was reinforced throughout the two weeks, first by giving parties the opportunity to bring forward views and wishes in each of the negotiating avenues, and then in the final days by seeking ‘compromise text’.


The following are a few highlights from the Cancun Agreement:


The Green Climate Fund was established to address both fast-start and long-term financing. It creates a Standing Committee under the COP, to be set up in 2011, that will assist parties in overseeing operations. Poorer countries welcome this move, as they will outnumber rich countries on the supervisory panel. Although no figure has been set for how much money will go into it, Ministers confirmed the political commitments they made in Copenhagen to raise USD100bn in climate financing by 2020, starting with USD30bn by 2012 for fast-start financing.


Pledges by the rich countries to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 under the Copenhagen Accord were formally put into UN documentation at Cancun. In addition, and for the first time, developing countries agreed to look at how they can cut emissions in the near future. None of the pledges, however, are legally binding and what’s more, analysis[1] suggests that even if the pledges are fulfilled, there will still be a 3.2 degree rise in temperature, much higher than scientists’ recommendations.


REDD (reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation) – a long awaited decision – obliges rich countries to pay poorer nations for curbing deforestation. While this sends a clear signal that the international community is considering positive incentives, details on when and exactly what form the scheme will take are still vague.


Decisions on the future of the Kyoto Protocol were effectively deferred until Durban next year. This international treaty – which binds developed countries to cut emissions – runs through 2012. Whether countries will sign up for a second period remains to be seen.


With many details left to be ironed out, the Durban Summit in 2011 will be faced with turning Cancun’s compromise into a real action plan. The OECD-DAC has expertise to contribute in a number of key areas, in particular on the urgent topic of climate financing: monitoring ODA and other resource flows to developing countries; assessing international public climate financial flows; advising on scaling up public finance; analyzing how public policies can best leverage private flows; joining-up government departments and demonstrating how lessons learned from aid and development effectiveness can apply to climate change financing. This knowledge and guidance – gathered over fifty years – can greatly support the pledging countries in meeting their financial commitments.


OECD Secretary-General Angel Gurría underlined: “We cannot afford to delay action on climate change; the costs and consequences are simply too high.”


For more information on OECD’s participation and recommendations, click here.

Researchers from Climate Change Tracker has reached this conclusion based on all mitigation pledges submitted so far by member countries. More information on Climate Change Tracker, http://www.climateactiontracker.org/



Achieving the Millennium Development Goals: Actions that will make the difference

At the UN Millennium Development Goals Summit (New York, 20-22 September 2010), the OECD organised a series of side-events and materials to highlight key actions that can make the difference in achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).


Investing in women and girls to achieve the MDGs: None of the MDGs will be achieved unless there is greater equality between women and men and increased empowerment of women and girls. This was clearly reflected in messages delivered at several Summit events, as well as in the Summit’s outcome document. In particular, increased investments in four key areas will have catalytic and multiplier effects:

  • ensure that financial assets are in the hands of women

  • keep girls in school

  • improve reproductive health and access to family planning

  • support women's leadership.


Smarter partnerships to achieve the MDGs: Smarter partnerships between development actors lie at the heart of the success of the MDGs. Recommendations on building smarter partnerships – agreed upon at a side event co-organised by the OECD – include:

  • strengthen inclusiveness and voice by building partnerships that are real, effective and equal

  • keep promises by delivering on commitments on aid, trade, debt, climate change and rights

  • improve development practice through innovative and flexible solutions that are delivered coherently to tackle inequality and reach the most vulnerable.


Addressing conflict, fragility and armed violence: Countries affected by conflict and fragility are furthest away from achieving the MDGs. The United Kingdom and Timor-Leste partnered with the International Dialogue on Peacebuilding and Statebuilding and the World Development Report 2011 on Conflict, Security and Development to raise awareness about the role conflict, fragility and armed violence play in impeding MDG progress.


"We advocate a new paradigm as a means to meeting the MDGs by placing peacebuilding and statebuilding at the forefront of international engagement," said President José Ramos-Horta of Timor-Leste.


Enhancing international investment for climate change: To counter-act the threat that climate change poses to achieving the MDGs, policy responses should mobilise finance while maintaining international support for poverty reduction. Concrete actions call to:

  • ensure complementarity between development and climate change objectives, and mainstream climate change into all aspects of national economic and development strategies

  • co-ordinate financing streams at the global level

  • actively seek innovative financing options to complement and leverage traditional financing sources for climate change finance.



The road to Busan

Preparations are well under way for the Fourth High Level Forum(HLF4) in Busan (29 November to 1 December 2011), where ministers and specialists will take stock of what has been advanced in implementing the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness (2005) and will be expected to set out a new framework for increasing the quality of aid in the broader development context. The pillars for assessing progress are the 2011 Survey on Monitoring the Paris Declaration and the second phase of the independent Evaluation of the Implementation of the Paris Declaration.


Monitoring the Paris Declaration: Over 80 countries have confirmed their participation in the final round of monitoring the Paris Declaration, which will take place in early 2011. In late 2010, national co-ordinators and donor focal points from participating countries familiarised themselves with the survey process and methodology during a series of regional workshops. Co-organised by the OECD and UNDP, the workshops were held in Cape Verde, Tunisia, Cambodia, Guatemala and Jordan, providing an opportunity for partner countries to voice their interests and expectations for the HLF4. The Paris Declaration Monitoring Survey dedicated website provides updates, information, materials and support for national co-ordinators and donor focal points.


In addition, 14 countries and territories have decided to take part in a survey of the DAC Fragile States Principles. These Principles are complementary to the Paris Declaration principles, adapting them to fragile states and providing guidance on substantive themes such as statebuilding, peacebuilding, security, and social inclusion for better development outcomes.


In the 14 countries and territories taking part in both surveys, these have been integrated and share the same national coordinator and donor focal points. In the final report that goes to the HLF4, a single chapter for each country will capture the conclusions from both surveys.


Evaluation of the Implementation of the Paris Declaration: The evaluation of the implementation of the Paris declaration at the country level is an independent process that complements the Monitoring Survey. The results from the two processes will deepen the understanding of progress and challenges in the implementation of the Paris Declaration and help to assess why things did or did not work. The Evaluation will also assess whether the implementation of the Paris Declaration has strengthened the contribution of aid to sustainable development results. Phase 1 of this Evaluation was conducted in 21 partner countries in 2010, complemented by seven donor agency studies. The synthesis report of Phase 2 of the Evaluation will be finalized in May 2011. Read more.


Keep tuned to DACnews in 2011 for future updates.



Feature Article

Due diligence for clean minerals

Since 2008, the DAC and the OECD Investment Committee have worked together to deepen the understanding of how companies can invest in countries where governments are unwilling or unable to assume their responsibilities, especially when faced with risks or ethical dilemmas. An important motivation for this work was the UN Expert Panel’s report on the illegal exploitation of natural resources in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The International Network on Conflict and Fragility has helped to produce Due Diligence in the Mining and Minerals Sector, OECD guidance on investing in clean minerals in conflict zones. This follows on a bill passed by the United States Congress on the same topic, and brings together businesses, donors, governments of conflict-affected countries and advocacy groups. Professor Peter Rosenblum of Columbia University explains the importance of this guidance and shares his views on why this initiative is so timely.


The conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo has proven to be among the most destructive and intractable of the last decades. The numbers testify to the extremes: over 5.4 million casualties, 19,000 UN troops deployed in the world’s largest United Nations mission, costing over one billion dollars yearly. OECD countries, in particular, have invested billions of dollars seeking peace in DRC, in the form of support for UN peacekeeping, bilateral assistance and aid channelled through civil society organizations (CSOs).


Today the OECD is involved in a new initiative – a targeted one compared to the grand engagements of the recent past: the drive for a “Due Diligence Framework for Responsible Supply Chain Management of Minerals”. The aim is to change the economic incentives of conflict by setting clear standards for tracing the origins of raw materials, and thereby to help guarantee the products that use them are not tainted. Donor fatigue shouldn’t inhibit anyone from supporting this initiative, and the OECD is well positioned to promote it.


Why is this so timely? The DRC elections in 2006 were supposed to mark the end of conflict. And although most of the DRC is now at peace, the vast swath of hilly territory along the border with Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi – where the war began in 1996 – is one major exception. During the war, all sides played a role in fuelling local armed groups for their own purposes. So when the fighting officially stopped and foreign troops departed, an entrepreneurial class of warlords was left behind in the east of the country – deeply implanted in the society and with vested interests in the statu quo – making it impossible to ignore the continuing horrors as armed factions multiplied there.


Eastern DRC is spotted with metals such as gold, tin, tantalum and tungsten. The latter three – which have become known as the “three Ts” for their role in the conflict – are all widely used in the consumer electronics industry, from mobile phones to laptops. The mines for these ‘conflict minerals’ are mostly artisanal, spread out over difficult terrain and fed into the world market though both legal channels and illegal smuggling. Recent military efforts to change the dynamics of violence in eastern Congo have only exacerbated the problem; and ironically, the rebound of the international minerals market after the global downturn in 2008 made things even worse.


The link between armed conflict and the mineral trade has been well documented over the years by a United Nations Group of Experts that reports to the Security Council, by CSOs like Global Witness and Human Rights Watch, and more recently by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (see the report released 1 October 2010). The Corporate Social Responsibility movement, which has been growing strongly for more than a decade, laid the ground for this work. The work of John Ruggie, the UN Special Representative on the Issue of Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and other Business Enterprises, gave a further boost to its legitimacy and reach. The pressure brought to bear by the UN Group of Experts and CSOs has had an impact on a range of companies connected with minerals from the Congo, including metal producers and electronics firms. These companies have recognized the need to protect their reputation, but their own industry efforts have not been particularly fruitful. In this context, the OECD's current engagement is particularly opportune.


The OECD initiative aims to provide guidance for companies that operate at different points on the mineral supply chain that will help them conduct due diligence to ensure their products are not fuelling conflict. Behind the guidance is a multi-stakeholder engagement that has drawn together mining and manufacturing companies, governments (OECD and non-OECD), regulators and civil society organisations in continuous dialogue over the course of a year. This process is already notable for having successfully held together a wide array of frequent adversaries.


The OECD process was already well underway when it got its most recent boost. Late this summer, the US Congress adopted a law specifically addressed to the link between conflict and minerals in the DRC. The Dodd-Frank Act, as this law is called, will be come into force next Spring, making it essential for companies with securities traded in the United States who buy minerals from eastern DRC to meet a number of disclosure requirements. The US Securities and Exchange Commission has worked out the regulatory details, referencing the OECD Guidelines. The passage of this law puts an end to any hesitation companies may have had in addressing the issues directly.


At a consultation in Nairobi in late September, the extensive participation of CSOs, governments, and corporations testified to the central place that the Guidelines can play in the struggle to sever the link between conflict and minerals in the DRC. Companies are pushing hard for manageable guidelines that will give them reasonable protection from the actions of lawmakers and CSOs. CSOs are equally anxious to have realistic guidelines that can be implemented in eastern DRC – and implemented now. The risk of not doing this is a de facto embargo on all minerals from the DRC, and this is definitely not the desired outcome: clean minerals is.


The OECD initiative is getting buy-in from all sides, including support from the eleven member countries of the DRC International Conference on the Great Lakes Region (Lusaka Declaration, 15 December 2010), non-OECD countries such as South Africa and the UN Security Council (Resolution 1952, 13 November 2010). Nonetheless, agreeing to the guidelines is only half the process: getting them to work on the ground is the other half. The engagement of the donor community, in particular, is central to:

  • raise awareness of the ‘clean minerals’ initiative in OECD countries

  • improve the coherence of policies from diverse departments of governments in OECD countries

  • strengthen capacity on the ground to monitor the integrity of the supply chain (seed funding, certification schemes, whistle blowing mechanisms, capacity of local CSOs)

  • improve wider governance systems beyond the mineral sector, including a working regulatory and judiciary framework, greater presence of the state, improved tax collection and border management, and accountable security forces.


With donors on board, the Guidelines could establish an excellent model for Corporate Social Responsibility mechanisms and eliminate the last incentives for conflict in the Congo.



Also in this issue...

News in Brief

India hosts OECD forum on public finance

The OECD-DAC Task Force on Public Financial Management met in New Delhi on December 15-16 to tackle one of the major barriers to development: lack of capacity in public financial management (PFM). Hosting the meeting, Mr. Vinod Rai, Comptroller & Auditor General of India, expressed his confidence that this network will promote experience sharing for better targeting of aid, resource mobilization, and sustainable debt management. The Auditor General highlighted the importance of sharing experiences to ensure the desired outcomes of public expenditure in partner countries.


Participants from 35 countries and institutions exchanged views on using, assessing, and strengthening country PFM systems and accountability institutions, including parliament. Partner countries also shared their views on key messages for the Fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness (29 November–1 December 2011, Busan, South Korea). Jon Lomoy, Director of the OECD Development Cooperation Directorate, highlighted the need to strengthen ‘networks of influence’ like this one to enable low income, middle income and OECD countries to engage, exchange views, build consensus, review best practices, and propose key findings and messages for international fora such as the G20.


The meeting conclusions were reported in a number of news outlets in India (see http://tinyurl.com/3423jv9; http://tinyurl.com/2eu8b42).


Measuring aid for trade

Aid-for-trade experts reviewed the use of indicators for aid-for-trade monitoring and evaluation on 22 October at OECD Paris headquarters, also exchanging views on country efforts to improve results management by using common indicators.


The results of the joint OECD/WTO Aid-for-Trade Initiative can be measured in three areas: greater awareness; increased aid-for-trade resources; and more effective aid-for-trade interventions. The monitoring exercise has measured progress in the first two dimensions in particular, and has embarked on the third through a call for case stories to solicit information about what is working and what is not at the national and regional level. Further work is required in the area of results measurement, setting the stage for the experts’ meeting. Indicators are a tool to assess at a glance the results of aid-for-trade projects and programmes at country level.


World Statistics Day: 50 years of official development assistance
In celebration of World Statistics Day on 20 October 2010, the DAC Secretariat debuted data reflecting ODA over fifty years. Presented in a dynamic graphic, the data shows official development assistance has risen steadily over the last 50 years and is expected to reach USD 126 billion in 2010. By contrast, total ODA as a percentage of DAC countries' combined gross national income (GNI) fell between 1960 and 1970, and then oscillated between 0.27% and 0.36% for a little over twenty years.


Between 1993 and 1997, ODA flows fell due to fiscal consolidation after the recession of the early 1990s. Aid then started to rise in real terms in 1998, but was still at its historic low as a share of GNI (0.22%) in 2001. Since then, a series of high-profile international conferences have boosted ODA flows.


Despite the recent financial crisis, ODA flows have continued to rise to 2009, demonstrating how effective aid pledges can be when they are made on the basis of adequate resources and backed by strong political will.  


Lessons learned in Africa’s fragile states
To highlight lessons learned in fragile states (both positive and negative), a conference entitled “États fragiles: ultime frontière” (Fragile states: the final frontier) was co-hosted in Paris on 19 October by the OECD DAC’s International Network on Conflict and Fragility (INCAF) and the Institut français des relations internationales (IFRI), a Paris-based think tank. The event – spanning French ministries and agencies involved in post-crisis recovery – focused on African states affected by conflict and fragility.


China’s development efforts in supporting infrastructure
Just a month after the celebration of 60 years of China’s development efforts, the China-DAC Study Group held an event in Beijing, China, on 19-20 September 2010 to bring together a truly international group of experts from China, African countries and the OECD to share their expertise on infrastructure and development. Specifically, they:

  • reviewed the development path, strategies, achievements and challenges of China and African countries in three dimensions of infrastructure: ensuring sustainability, achieving efficiency and increasing impact

  • analysed the means through which investment in infrastructure have brought about economic growth and poverty reduction in China, and consider the relevance of this experience for countries in Africa

  • examined the increasing role of China’s engagement in Africa’s infrastructure, its potential impact, and its implications on lessons learnt by international donors

  • explored the opportunities for, means toward and benefits of better co-operation and support to infrastructure between China, DAC donors and African countries.


The private sector role in aid effectiveness
Reflecting the growing need for the Working Party on Aid Effectiveness to make the debate on aid effectiveness more inclusive by bringing together all relevant stakeholders, including the private sector, an informal meeting on 22 June 2010 brought together DAC members and 12 representatives from for-profit companies, private foundations and multilateral development banks for a frank discussion on common issues and challenges. While diverse in experiences, interests and methods, these representatives held shared values: achieving development based on sustainable growth. This meeting marked the first in a potential series of further exchanges with the private sector – an important partner in dialogue for more effective development.  



DAC Peer Reviews

New Zealand: New Zealand plans sharp increase in aid funding

New Zealand’s official development assistance fell by 4% in 2009, to USD 313 million, but the country plans a sharp increase over the coming years, according to a peer review of aid policies by the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee (DAC).


Portugal: Improving aid policies, but volume remains low

Portugal will need to triple development assistance over the coming five years if it is to meet an EU target of giving 0.7% of gross national income (GNI) to aid by 2015.

Germany: Development assistance still below target

Although Germany spent only 0.35% of its national income (GNI) on official development assistance in 2009 – falling short of its promise to raise the proportion to 0.51% by 2010 - it does intend to keep its promise of increasing ODA to 0.7% of GNI by 2015.

United Kingdom: OECD commends UK efforts to reduce global poverty

The United Kingdom’s aid was USD 11.5 billion in 2009, representing 0.52% of its gross national income (GNI). Its planned expenditures for 2010/11 put it on track to reach its target of 0.7% of GNI by 2013.

Japan: Japan raises the quality of its aid but should also increase the quantity

The budget for Japanese development co-operation has suffered years of decline. Now, a promising budget increase in 2008 has been cancelled out by a sharp fall in the 2009 budget, according to a peer review of Japan’s aid policies by the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee (DAC).

Belgium: Belgium improves the quality and volume of its aid

The OECD’s Development Assistance Committee (DAC) commends Belgium’s commitment to improve the quality and volume of its aid, particularly at a time of global economic crisis. Belgium spent USD 2.6 billion on official development assistance (ODA) in 2009, which amounted to 0.55% of its gross national income (GNI).




Resource Flows to Fragile and Conflict-Affected States, Conflict and Fragility series: A tool to better monitor the levels, timing and composition of resource flows to fragile states, and presents salient facts on aid flows to fragile states, the impact on fragile states of the three crises and the need for a whole-of-government response.


Transition Financing: Building a Better Response, Conflict and Fragility series: More effective, rapid and flexible transition financing through an in-depth examination of current policies and practices in financial flows, and recommendations on implementing procedural and cultural changes in donor administrations to maximise the use of available financing.


OECD Journal on Development, Issue 3, Volume 10: The OECD Journal on Development brings together a unique record of recent development co-operation work undertaken by the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee (DAC). This issue includes Development Co-operation Reviews of Ireland, Austria and Sweden.


OECD Journal on Development, Issue 4, Volume 10: This issue includes an article on division of labour in the aid system, and the DAC Peer Reviews of Italy and Switzerland.


Products related to COP16:

Financing Climate Change Action and Boosting Technology Change: Public and private financing will need to be scaled up in the coming years – to USD30 billion over 2010-12 and a longer-term goal of USD100 billion per year by 2020.


Addressing International Competitiveness in a World of Non-Uniform Carbon Pricing: Lessons from a Decade of OECD Analysis: How to tackle climate change is not yet clear. International competitiveness of energy-intensive industries could suffer if emission reduction targets are adopted in some countries but not in others. Yet delaying or reducing action could be even more costly.


Costs and Effectiveness of the Copenhagen Pledges: Assessing Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions Targets and Actions for 2020: While the emission targets pledged by a wide range of countries under the 2009 Copenhagen Accord are a good start, they are not ambitious enough to limit the average global temperature rise to 2°C.


Products related to the MDG summit:

Smarter partnerships for development: Partnerships lie at the heart of MDG success stories. From public-private partnerships to South-South co-operation, these alliances leverage maximum development impact from development resources, including aid.


Achieving the MDGs - addressing conflict, fragility and armed violence: Progress in MDG achievement has been slowest in fragile and conflict-affected states: no fragile or conflict-affected country has yet achieved a single Millennium Development Goal, and countries affected by conflict and fragility account for the majority of the MDG deficit. Accelerating progress toward achieving the MDGs will require a fundamental and systemic shift in orientation.


Financing climate change challenges: Climate change effects threaten to limit and even reverse progress towards the MDGs, especially among the poorest. Policy responses to climate change risks require significant investment that must be balanced with other development support.


Investing in women and girls: The breakthrough strategy for achieving all the MDGs: None of the MDGs will be achieved unless there is greater equality between women and men and increased empowerment of women and girls. It is time to back political promises with the investments and resources needed. Increased investments in four key areas will have catalytic and multiplier effects.


Accelerating Progress towards the MDGS through Pro-Poor Growth: Meeting the MDG poverty reduction goals requires a pro-poor approach that emphasises employment, social protection and empowerment.


Other products:

Global Governance for International Development: Who's in Charge?” by Brenda Killen and Andrew Rogerson (July 2010): There is no single way in which countries can agree on how to make their development more effective, and make these decisions stick. This brief asks: how can this situation be improved?


The DAC Policy Statement on Integrating Biodiversity and Associated Ecosystem Services into Development Co-operation: Thirty key actions that international donors can help to halt to loss of biodiversity and associated ecosystems. Endorsed by the DAC on 15 April 2010.


Aid in Support of Gender Equality in Fragile and Conflict-affected States: A brief analysis of aid from DAC members in support of gender equality in fragile and conflicted-affected states.


Integrating gender equality dimensions into public financial management reforms: Using gender-responsive budgeting to integrate a gender equality perspective into public financial management in partner countries.



OECD DAC countries' ODA in 2009

USD 120 billion up 1% in real terms and
0.31% of DAC members’ combined GNI

OECD DAC Statistics including Aid at a Glance charts for DAC members, recipient countries, and by region.

About Us
The OECD DAC is the main global forum where bilateral donors, alongside multilateral donors, work together to achieve real development progress for poorer countries.
Inside the DAC. What is the DAC? How does it function? This brochure will give you all the answers.

More information about
OECD work on development. 


Click here to register to receive DACnews. If you know someone who would like to subscribe, please forward the following link to them (you can also use it to unsubscribe): www.oecd.org/dac/newsletter/register.




Read previous issues of DACnews.