Making Aid More Effective Through Gender, Rights and Inclusion: Evidence from Implementing the Paris Declaration
Start Date:
October 2007
End Date:
June 2008
Country:
Bangladesh, Bolivia, Kenya, Sierra Leone, Uganda, Vietnam
Client:
DFID, Irish Aid, Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation
Funder:
DFID, Irish Aid, Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation
Project Information
In collaboration with Social Development Direct and workingtogether ltd, OPM carried out a study focusing on how effectively gender, rights and exclusion are being addressed through the aid instruments, country level dialogue, relationships and decision-making processes through which the Paris Declaration is being implemented. The study involved six country case studies. Evidence from the country case studies was complemented by desk studies of relevant experience and initiatives from other countries, as well as a wider review of the literature.
The study found that country ownership of the equity and rights agenda was not broad-based, and that although Paris Declaration-related instruments and processes had contributed to stronger policy commitments on equity and rights being articulated in national documents, there were often substantial obstacles to implementing these commitments. Civil society typically lacks both a formalised role, and the capacity to engage effectively, in the policy process. Government ministries charged with mainstreaming equity and rights (especially gender equality) are often weak and marginalised. Donors strongly committed to equity and rights often have relatively minor influence in the most significant forums for discussion between governments and development partners, and harmonisation around these issues has often been weak.
However, there are important examples of positive experience and strong government leadership that provide useful indications of how progress may be made.
The main recommendations from the study are the following:
- The principle of country ownership should translate into a participatory dialogue on aid and development effectiveness that recognises the legitimacy of civil society engagement in the democratic ownership of the policy process.
- Civil society organisations that advocate on behalf of poor and excluded groups need to build their capacity to engage effectively in policy dialogue, implementation and monitoring, understand the changing aid and policy making environment, seek opportunities for collaboration regionally and internationally, and find ways to fund their activities that ensure they remain responsive and accountable to the constituencies they seek to represent.
- Those donors and international agencies with capacity to promote and build capacity for mainstreaming equity and rights goals need to harmonise effectively to maximise their influence both within the donor community and in national policy dialogues. Other major donors (including the multilateral development banks) need to review their policies and processes to ensure that sufficient priority is given to building capacity for equity and rights mainstreaming.
- Governments need to have effective instruments and processes, with accompanying capacity building, to implement policy commitments on equity and rights.
- Donors should contribute to strengthening democratic governance through building the capacity and enhancing the accountability of the judicial and legislative branches of the State.
- The international human rights framework provides a set of standards for mutual accountability and for building partnerships based on the Paris Declaration, with its focus on the institutions and processes necessary for supporting democratic ownership and mutual accountability.
- Effective implementation of national human rights commitments requires the building of specific forms of capacity within a wide range of government systems at central and local levels. This in turn requires strong government leadership and coordinated and long-term support from development partners, including the systematic use of programmatic approaches to address cross-cutting social issues.
- Shared results-based frameworks can be a powerful tool for agreeing priorities and providing a basis for alignment to pursue social goals. They need to be supported by strengthening the social component of monitoring and evaluation systems and disaggregated (qualitative and quantitative) data collection.
- Mainstreaming social screening procedures, through national systems of social impact assessment, may be a powerful instrument for increasing attention to rights and equity issues.
