Making Development Co‑operation More Effective Progress Report 2026

Twenty years on, the Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation monitoring exercise is now well established, with its findings prompting dialogue and action on effective development co-operation in partner countries. Evidence from the 2023-26 monitoring round draws on reporting by 44 partner country governments, 93 development partners, civil society organisations (CSOs) in 37 countries, trade unions in 16 countries, and private sector representatives in 20 countries. Overall, out of 52 countries – 28 partner countries and 24 bilateral development partners – over half (62%) report a decline in multi-stakeholder development effectiveness monitoring frameworks (SDG indicator 17.16.1), underscoring the need for renewed efforts to strengthen effective partnerships for the 2030 Agenda.

Whole-of-society approaches could be bolder and more inclusive

Engaging the whole of society is vital if development co-operation is to benefit everyone. While partner country governments and development partners alike engage a wide range of domestic stakeholders when formulating their development policies, CSOs feel that consultations could be more inclusive and substantive. The CSO enabling environment could be improved by more predictable funding, protective legal frameworks and greater advocacy by development partners on CSOs’ behalf. Development partners see scope for CSOs to strengthen the effectiveness and inclusivity of their own co-ordination mechanisms.

In a context of declining development resources, the role of the private sector is increasingly recognised, although development partners are more optimistic than other stakeholders about the added value of private sector engagement (PSE) in development co-operation. Partner countries and development partners are strengthening policy frameworks and organising dialogues on PSE. However, private sector actors find that partnerships with development partners are challenging and that dialogues could be used to greater effect, especially to build trust.

Data gaps limit the ability to identify and track results for those at risk of being left behind

The share of partner country governments with systems in place to track and publicly report budget allocations for gender equality and women's empowerment has increased, reflecting progress on SDG indicator 5.c.1, despite a decline in the public availability of such allocations. Partner country governments and development partners report setting priorities for some population groups, but harder-to-reach groups are at risk of their needs being unmet. Although partner countries recognise the value of disaggregating targets and results indicators, data gaps constrain the ability to monitor progress for the most vulnerable. Closing gaps will require partner countries’ commitment to improve their statistical systems and development partners can increase their support and co-ordinate their funding through existing initiatives.

Strengthening and using countries’ own systems will require renewed joint action

Using partner countries’ own systems improves country ownership and strengthens the systems in the process. Almost all partner country governments have a national development plan, most of which include development priorities, targets and results indicators, but gaps remain in monitoring progress and in budget transparency. Development partners’ use of country results frameworks (SDG indicator 17.15.1) has stagnated, and their use of country data and systems is particularly low and declining. Public financial management (PFM) system quality has improved in key areas, but procurement and budget transparency require further strengthening. Development partners make only modest use of country PFM systems, with use of procurement systems particularly limited. Progress will require joint action by governments and development partners, including adjustments to providers’ policies to address institutional rigidities that hinder greater use.

Functioning information management systems (IMS) for development co-operation can provide partner country governments with an overview of international development funding flowing to the country, enabling ownership and transparency. IMS are broadly in place, but are not always fully operational and reporting by development partners is partial, especially in challenging contexts. Efforts are needed to ensure the systems are sustainably maintained, connected to other government processes, and supported by more consistent reporting.

Efforts are needed to improve the predictability of development co-operation funding

Predictable development co-operation funding is essential for effective development planning, resource allocation and country ownership of development efforts. Yet the medium-term predictability of development co-operation funding has stagnated, limiting partner countries’ ability to plan and budget effectively. While annual predictability remains relatively high overall, development partners continue to fall short on providing longer-term forward expenditure plans that support coherent and sustainable development planning and enable governments to integrate development co-operation into national budgets and planning processes.

Faltering transparency and mutual accountability structures call for more flexible partnerships

Transparency is a precondition for building trust, mutual accountability and inclusive partnerships. While more development partners report to global information systems and standards, fewer than two-thirds make their country strategies publicly available. Although most partner countries publish their national development plans, only around half publish related progress reports. Parliaments tend to receive development co-operation information on request rather than systematically, and development co-operation recorded on country budgets has fallen sharply, from 61% in 2018 to 41% in 2026, limiting parliamentary oversight and reducing governments' ability to integrate external funding into their planning.

Few partner countries have quality mutual accountability mechanisms in place. While over half have a policy framework to guide development co-operation, these often lack specific roles and targets for diverse actors, highlighting the need for more inclusive frameworks.

Progress on untying official development assistance has stalled

Untied aid can help strengthen country ownership and increase the effectiveness of development co-operation by allowing partner countries greater flexibility in how resources are used. The share of Development Assistance Committee (DAC) members’ untied bilateral official development assistance (ODA) has stagnated, declining slightly from 82% in 2017 to 79% in 2024, despite earlier positive trends following the 2001 DAC Recommendation on Untying ODA.

A new approach moves from monitoring evidence to country-level action

A new phase of reflection, dialogue and action in partner countries allows development actors to address monitoring findings through jointly agreed policy action. By May 2026, 22 partner country governments had brought together development partners and non-state actors, resulting in commitments to strengthen national results frameworks, PFM systems, and the integration of development co-operation into national planning and budgeting processes. Development partners agreed to increase alignment with country systems, improve the predictability and transparency of their co-operation, and make greater use of national data and reporting mechanisms. Stakeholders also prioritised stronger national statistical systems and IMS, expanded use of disaggregated data, and follow-up mechanisms to track progress and sustain multi-stakeholder dialogue. Overall, five key areas were commonly discussed in these dialogues: (1) alignment with national planning and country results frameworks; (2) national statistical systems, IMS, and transparency; (3) predictability and budget integration; (4) reliance on PFM systems; and (5) inclusive engagement with non-state actors.