In order to continue prioritising sustainable development in a changing domestic and international context, Finland should re‑establish its ambition on and political leadership for policy coherence for development across government and society, ensuring that regulatory impact assessments consider transboundary development issues and the National Commission on the 2030 Agenda is adequately resourced.
In line with its international commitments and objectives, and to provide greater predictability across government cycles, Finland should:
reverse the decline in its ODA and build consensus for a roadmap with intermediary targets to provide 0.7% of GNI as ODA and 0.2% of GNI as ODA to least developed countries by 2030, as recommended in its 2017 DAC peer review
retain its focus on reducing poverty and inequalities as well as its commitment to untying ODA as it increasingly seeks to use development co‑operation to promote Finnish business.
In adapting the MFA’s structure to a changing foreign policy context and in seeking to more closely link international trade and development objectives, Finland should:
address longstanding challenges in attracting and retaining development expertise in the ministry especially at senior positions
allocate resources to enable the MFA to deliver on its priorities including multilateral co‑operation, EU delegated co‑operation and Global Gateway which requires development expertise and knowledge garnered from country presence
in outsourcing MFA tasks to other actors, ensure that necessary steering functions and capabilities remain within the MFA, in line with its mandate.
To support robust and inclusive policy formulation and implementation, and to guide the changes in policy currently underway, Finland should continue to use evidence for decision making, including investing in strategic evaluations, tailoring its results-based management practice to more integrated objectives and drawing on the expertise in its Development Policy Committee.
In order to maintain high public support for its international development engagement and co‑operation, the MFA should continue to partner with diverse civil society actors, maintain commitments to transparency including by further strengthening digital tools, and adequately resource its development communications and awareness work.
As Finland closes bilateral country programmes, the MFA should ensure that co‑operation continues to be led by partner country-owned development priorities, and manage for the risk of fragmentation through continued strategic planning that takes into account all Finnish engagement in a given context.
To maintain its influential approach to multilateral partnerships with fewer resources and more limited country presence, Finland should ensure its funding to the multilateral system is flexible and predictable and prioritise joint approaches.
As the MFA seeks to involve a greater number of Finnish private sector actors in development co‑operation, it should:
continue to focus on additionality, development impact and a human rights-based approach drawing on evidence from recent practice
ensure that Finnfund remains an effective development finance institution with a poverty focused mandate as its responsibilities and legal framework evolve.
Building on existing MFA practice, Finland should ensure risk management systems and tools continue to support informed decision making, including by moving towards portfolio approaches to risk management and ensuring risk analyses are grounded in the context and go beyond an emphasis on fiduciary risks and control to take a comprehensive and risk-informed approach.
In taking forward its unwavering support for Ukraine’s reconstruction and as it prepares the second element of its national plan, Finland should ensure its support is guided by development effectiveness principles, considers the complex governance landscape, takes into account private sector appetite and is well co‑ordinated among all Finnish actors including civil society.
OECD Development Co‑operation Peer Reviews: Finland 2024
