Brenda Killen Aid Quality and Architecture Division Development Co-operation Directorate, OECD

1. Global experience in monitoring the Paris Declaration, and agreements on monitoring Busan commitments Brenda Killen Aid Quality and Architecture Division Development Co-operation Directorate, OECD

2. “We’ll always have Paris” Lessons from Paris…

3. HLF 4: an evidence-based process • Monitoring the implementation of the Paris Declaration and AAA • Surveys (2006, 2008, 2011): 78 countries in 2011 (incl. 12 countries looking at Fragile States Principles) • Evaluating the Paris Declaration (independent process) • 22 countries and 18 donors/agencies • Additional sources of information

4. Quick overview on PD evidence: (32 baseline countries) 2005 Baseline 19% 2010 Target 52% 75% 50% 38% 85% 44% 46% 49% 51% 50% 40% 54% 48% 1158 1 696 565 42% 71% 43% 89% 87% >87% 66% 43% 48% 40% 20% 22% 66% 44% 41% 38% 7% 22% 100% 44% 50%

5. What have we learned? • Survey helped to maintain interest • Survey stimulated dialogue at country level • Ownership from participants • Regional approach was useful • Scope for more locally-owned analysis • Survey only tells part of the story

6. Increased interest in the survey 34 partner countries 36% of global aid 55 partner countries 58% of global aid 76 partner countries 76% of global aid % of global core aid covered by the Survey (est.)

7. “I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship” Monitoring BUSAN partnership…

8. A country focussed – globally light approach COUNTRY LEVEL FRAMEWORKS Own indicators and targets Lead by the country Results made public + INTERNATIONAL LEVEL FRAMEWORK Selective indicators and targets, measured globally or aggregating country-level information Monitor progress on a rolling basis Managed by the Global Partnership

9. Why a global monitoring framework? SERVE AS A REFERENCE POINT FOR COUNTRY LEVEL FRAMEWORKS SUPPORTS ACCOUNTABILITY STIMULATE BROAD-BASED DIALOGUE AND LEARNING

10. Approach to global monitoring • Global progress reports produced to inform ministerial-level meetings • No more centrally managed surveys – use of existing sources of data when and as they become available • Data collection at country level to be grounded in existing national monitoring processes • Continued support through a Global Help Desk Facility • Overall assessment of progress to draw on indicators and complementary qualitative evidence • Periodic reviews of global indicators and underpinning methodology through the Steering Committee

11. 5 new indicators Global indicators

12. Global Indicators: Info to be provided by countries

13. Country level monitoring • Essential for realising the Busan commitments as delivery is at the country level. • Led by developing countries according their specific demands • Existence of country level monitoring reinforces global monitoring. • Could be coordinated regionally

14. Linkages between global and country level Gives a reference on how others are doing Country level data needed for global level Regional organisations key for support and accountability Joint OECD/UNDP could provide support for menu of indicators Country results could be reported at the Global Partnership

15. Thank you !