1 / 8

International division of labour – Towards a criteria-led process? A DIE-FRIDE contribution to the donor-partner dialogu

International division of labour – Towards a criteria-led process? A DIE-FRIDE contribution to the donor-partner dialogue Sven Grimm (DIE) and Nils-Sjard Schulz (FRIDE). The practice today shows: Donor decide unilaterally on concentrating Partner countries not interested, but affected

guy
Download Presentation

International division of labour – Towards a criteria-led process? A DIE-FRIDE contribution to the donor-partner dialogu

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. International division of labour – Towards a criteria-led process? A DIE-FRIDE contribution to the donor-partner dialogue Sven Grimm (DIE) and Nils-Sjard Schulz (FRIDE)

  2. The practice today shows: • Donor decide unilaterally on concentrating • Partner countries not interested, but affected • Resulting in tension with partnership paradigm Where we are: The practice

  3. Thus far, focus on quantitative dimensions • Aid fragmentation in countries / sectors (EU) • Allocation policies (DAC) • Rather exploratory: Qualitative aspects • Criteria already used by donors • Comparative advantages emerging in partner countries Quantitative vs qualitativeapproaches

  4. DIE-FRIDE discussion paper • Two dimensions • Donors concentrating • Partner countries identifying comparative advantages • Overall conclusion: What matters is “who gives aid how”, not only “how much” Embedding DoL in partnership

  5. Czech Rep, Germany, Ireland, Sweden Formal criteria and use of rankings Self-assessed own added value Room for political decisions Inward-looking - no dialogue Donor-led criteria

  6. Cambodia, Malawi, Mauritania, Uganda Rather prudent, although affected Not money, but modality and donor’s capacities Policy coherence not relevant? Comparative assessment still not used Country-led criteria

  7. Criteria for international DoL

  8. Address tensions: Intern. DoL vs partnership Foster peer learning partner countries Improve communication among donors Ensure synergies with mutual accountability Balance DAC and UN-DCF for dialogue Towards a criteria-baseddonor-partner dialogue

More Related