Publications & Documents

As the 'Decade of Action' begins, the world needs an effective multilateral development finance system to deliver on the promises of the 2030 Agenda and support the recovery of developing countries from the coronavirus (COVID-19) crisis. Even before the crisis, the system, torn between high expectations and growing criticism of its perceived lack of accountability and effectiveness, was showing signs of stress. This report looks at recent trends in the multilateral development system in order to provide the clearest possible picture to those deciding on its future. It presents the evolution of multilateral inflows and outflows, and analyses the strategic implications of the contributions by members of the Development Assistance Committee (DAC). The report looks at the activities that multilateral organisations finance, and explores their respective strengths. This year’s edition is supplemented by a series of policy briefs, as well as online statistics on DAC members’ multilateral contributions, available in the Development Co-operation Profiles.

Total official support for sustainable development (TOSSD) is a new international statistical measure that provides a complete picture of all official resources and private finance mobilised by official interventions in support of sustainable development and the SDGs. It consists of two pillars: cross-border resources to developing countries (pillar I) and support to international public goods and global challenges (pillar II). To test the TOSSD concept and operationalise the reporting, a data survey was carried out in 2019 on 2017 resources. This paper analyses the main lessons learnt from the survey with the objective to help further refine the TOSSD Reporting Instructions and data collection process, and provide evidence to the international community about the usefulness, relevance and feasibility of TOSSD as a measurement framework for the SDG era. TOSSD can respond to developing countries’ needs for information on external financing for sustainable development (pillar I), with estimates showing that between 18% and 26% of the volume of resources captured in the survey relate to additional data captured in TOSSD. TOSSD can fill a key information gap on financing for international public goods (IPGs) that support the achievement SDGs (pillar II). The TOSSD framework is appropriate for various providers of financing for sustainable development, including traditional providers, South-South Co-operation providers and multilateral institutions. To enhance the usefulness and relevance of TOSSD, efforts will need to continue to fill the remaining data gaps and enhance data quality.

Countries often face similar challenges in statistical reporting on development finance. Through Peer Reviews on Development Finance Statistics, Development Assistance Committee (DAC) members and non-DAC providers, together with the OECD, jointly assess how countries collect, report and disseminate data on their development co-operation. These reviews help countries cope with an increasing demand for comprehensive, reliable and accessible statistics on development finance, in a context of frequent changes to the reporting requirements, staff-turnover and often complex, decentralised reporting systems. In the period from 2017 to 2019, the OECD conducted seven reviews (Australia, Canada, Denmark, France, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland). The Peer Reviews on Development Finance Statistics have proven to be useful and enriching for all participants, identifying several recommendations on how to improve the quality and use of development finance data. Building on the findings from the seven reviews, this working paper shares lessons learnt, including best practices, strengths and challenges.

This working paper aims to better understand the process of graduation from least developed country (LDC) states in a Pacific small island developing state (SIDS), and provides the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) and other development partners with evidence-based analysis and recommendations on how to better manage transition in such context. Solomon Islands is engaged in a multifaceted transition stage with financial, technical, geopolitical and environmental dimensions. Solomon Islands is scheduled to graduate from the category of LDC by 2024, and the global alliance for vaccines and immunisations (GAVI) financial support by 2022. The transition finance approach used in this study shows that Development Assistance Committee (DAC) members have a crucial role to play to support the country’s transition and should utilise their official development assistance (ODA) in a way that maximises its impact. This would entail: helping the country move towards a sustainable economic model (both in terms of environmental and financial/debt sustainability), supporting the progressive substitution of ODA by other financing sources (in particular domestic resources and private investment), and adapting their role and strategy to the country’s evolving circumstances and needs (for example by establishing new economic partnerships in support of the country’s strategy of economic diversification and promotion of higher value-added trade and private investment).

La communauté de la coopération au développement doit innover pour relever les défis mondiaux à venir. Bien qu'elle ait fait ses preuves en matière de partenariats, d'instruments de financement et de technologies innovants, ces réussites ne sont pas suffisantes pour atteindre les objectifs de développement durable. Ce rapport synthétise les enseignements tirés d'un exercice d'apprentissage entre pairs du Comité d'aide au développement de l'OCDE sur la manière dont les efforts d'innovation peuvent être renforcés, individuellement et collectivement, pour réussir la mise en œuvre du Programme à l’horizon 2030. Le rapport s'articule autour de trois blocs – stratégie, gestion et culture ; organisation et collaboration ; et processus d'innovation – et fournit des recommandations sur la manière dont l'innovation peut profiter au mieux aux populations pauvres et vulnérables du monde entier.

For many OECD countries, how to ensure the safe and dignified return to their origin countries of migrants who do not have grounds to remain is a key question. Alongside removal, return and reintegration assistance have become an integral part of the response. Development cooperation is expanding its activity to support the capacity of countries of origin to reintegrate all returning migrants. Sustainable Reintegration of Returning Migrants: A Better Homecoming reports the results of a multi-country peer review project carried out by the OECD, with support from the German Corporation for International Cooperation (GIZ) on behalf of the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ). It examines factors that can help improve the sustainability of reintegration at the individual level and at the programme level in countries of destination and origin. The report examines how casework and community-based programmes can increase uptake and improve outcomes. It identifies key elements of an effective individual reintegration programme, including outreach and counselling, case management and referral, and partnerships. The report makes proposals about how to improve programme design, evaluation, and monitoring, indicating areas where countries could co-operate more in implementation of programmes and in coordination with origin countries.

The OECD’s Development Assistance Committee (DAC) conducts reviews of the individual development co‑operation efforts of DAC members once every five to six years. DAC peer reviews critically examine the overall performance of a given member, not just that of its development co‑operation agency, covering its policy, programmes and systems. They take an integrated, system‑wide perspective on the development co‑operation activities of the member under review and its approach to fragility, crisis and humanitarian assistance. Japan combines diplomatic, peace and development efforts to achieve sustainable development and implements the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) through a whole-of-society approach. It values self-reliant development, country ownership and the mutual benefits of development co-operation for Japan and its partner countries. Japan is recognised as a global champion of disaster risk reduction. Increasing official development assistance could strengthen Japan's leadership and commitment to the SDGs and a mechanism would help ensure coherence between domestic policies and global sustainable development objectives. Whole-of-government country policies would ensure synergies across Japan's portfolio and it could be more explicit about how programmes reduce poverty. More streamlined systems and procedures would make Japan a more agile donor.

Peacebuilding thinking and practice have evolved significantly over the past decade. The business case for the effectiveness of peacebuilding has been established. Successful interventions underscore the importance of peacebuilding initiatives, as do the high-profile failures that occur when peacebuilding is absent, fragmented or insufficient. With the emergence of new approaches to peacebuilding led by the United Nations Peacebuilding Architecture Review, this paper examines the state of peacebuilding operations and finance in fragile contexts and, building on established trends and debates, identifies four areas that could be critical for driving progress on peacebuilding over the next decade. The paper is one of ten working papers supporting States of Fragility 2020. Together with the papers entitled 'Diplomacy and peace in fragile contexts', 'Conflict prevention in fragile contexts', and 'Security actors in fragile contexts', It provides a comprehensive background to Chapter 2 on peace in States of Fragility 2020.

Building green is not only imperative to achieve global climate and development commitments in this 'decade for delivery', but will also be critical to sustain socio-economic development during the COVID-19 recovery. Private investment in particular is needed to bridge the infrastructure investment gap, given institutional investors’ large pools of long-term capital. After several years of efforts to upscale institutional investment in infrastructure, where does the level of investment stand today? This report provides a first-of-its-kind empirical assessment of investment in infrastructure by institutional investors domiciled in OECD and G20 countries, presenting a snapshot from February 2020. Based on a new detailed view of investment channels, financial instruments, sectoral allocations, regional preferences and trends, the report provides guidance on policy levers and priorities to scale-up institutional investment in green infrastructure.