OECD Home › Development Co-operation Directorate (DCD-DAC) › Publications & Documents
Publications & Documents
Promoting Pro-Poor Growth: Agriculture takes a fresh look at the important contribution of agriculture to pro-poor growth.
Promoting Pro-Poor Growth: Policy Statement (2006) contains recommendations to donors on how to make their support to pro-poor growth more effective.
The glossary of key terms in evaluation and results-based management should serve as a valuable reference guide in evaluation training and in practical development work.
English, , 1,115kb
POVNET has prepared guidance to donors on promoting pro-poor growth. The policy statement is developed in the attached document. POVNET has also produced reports on promoting the contribution of private sector development, agriculture and infrastructure to pro-poor growth.
English, , 14kb
In this issue, new figures just released show that aid from OECD countries to developing countries rises to a record high of over USD 100 billion. OECD DAC Chair Richard Manning ask, will so-called 'emerging donors' like China and India change the face of international co-operation? Environment and development ministers get together for the first time in 15 years; Germany's aid is reviewed; and we invite you to bookmark a link to this
English, , 1,816kb
The DAC Quality Standards for Development Evaluation identify the key pillars needed for a quality development evaluation process and product.
English, , 5kb
Hardly a major international development event goes by without calls for more aid to be untied. In response, DAC members have decided to untie small contracts (less than USD 1 million) covered by the Untying Recommendation.
English, , 133kb
This user's guide to the HIV/AIDS Aid Activities online database provides you with information on the origin of the data as well as instructions on how to use this database.
List of countries, territories and organisations that have adhered to the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness (March 2005) and AAA (Sept. 2008).
English, , 106kb
UNDP Response to the Peer Review