Introduction l Main objective l The logical framework
The OECD and the WTO established an aid-for-trade monitoring framework based on the recommendation by the WTO Task Force on Aid for Trade of establishing two accountability mechanisms, which help track progress in the implementation and enhance the credibility of the Aid for Trade Initiative:
- at the local level, to foster genuine local ownership and ensure that trade needs are integrated into national development strategies and adequately addressed
- at the global level, to increase transparency about what is happening, what is not, and where improvements are required
The objective of the monitoring framework is to promote dialogue and encourage all key actors to honour commitments, meet local needs, improve effectiveness and reinforce mutual accountability. The value of this joint OECD-WTO monitoring framework lies in creating incentives through enhanced transparency, scrutiny and dialogue (i.e. putting a "spotlight" on progress) so as to foster synergies between trade and other economic policy areas in developing countries and improve the coherence of aid for trade with overall donor strategies. These are all essential components of effective aid delivery as embodied in the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness.
The logical framework to assess whether progress is being made towards the desired aid-for-trade goals consists of the following four elements:
1. mainstreaming and prioritising trade (demand)
2. trade-related projects and programmes (response)
3. enhanced capacity to trade (outcome)
4. improved trade performance and reduced poverty (impact)
Demand is obtained through partner-country self-assessments based on an OECD-WTO partner country questionnaire. In addition, these assessments also provide information about mainstreaming trade in development strategies, trade-related priorities, the delivery of aid for trade and co-operation between partner countries and donors.
» Consult the 2013 partner-country self-assessments.
Assessment of the response consists of the following:
- quantitative information (i.e. aid-for-trade flows) on trade-related projects and programmes is extracted from the OECD DAC Creditor Reporting System (CRS) database for the categories that are most closely related to the WTO Task Force definition. »Access specific aid-for-trade related CRS queries aid-for-trade statistics
- Qualitative information concerning the response is derived from donor self-assessments, based on an OECD-WTO donor questionnaire. These self-assessments highlight the progress made by donors in developing operational aid-for-trade strategies, the extent to which these are implemented in line with the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, and the different steps taken to improve the quality of aid-for-trade programmes. » Consult the 2013 donor self-assessments: DAC members; Non-DAC members; International Organisations.
For the 2011 global review of aid for trade, case stories provide an important source of additional information. The focus of this global review lies on the outcome and impact of aid for trade, with the aim of probing deeper into aid-for-trade objectives, challenges and processes. Case stories were well suited to offer a large group of stakeholders an opportunity to share experiences about what is working (or not) at the national and regional level, why it is working (or not) and what improvements are needed.
The outcome and impact of the Aid for Trade Initiative are presented in a series of country fact sheets, which present a number of facts and indicators to capture the four main elements outlined above. Thes sheets allow for country comparison at a glance. In addition, the fact sheets could form the starting point of a more comprehensive in-country national stakeholder dialogue involving governments, donors, civil society and the private sector to promote transparency about the demand for and supply of aid for trade, and greater accountability on building trade capacities.
Developing a credible monitoring mechanism is a work in progress. It is important that monitoring does not become a passive activity, but is complemented and reinforced by an active review process - one that promotes change by submitting feedback to donor and partner countries, providing an environment for dialogue, knowledge-sharing, exchange of good practice and information on unfunded trade-related priorities and available donor funding.