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. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Common CharacteristicsPolitics and Leadership • Leadership, Governance, and Effective Government • Political leadership and effective, pragmatic and when needed activist government • A focus on inclusive growth: combined with persistence and determination • Willingness to experiment, act in face of uncertainty about policy impacts, and avoid paralysis • Government that acts in the interests of all the citizens of the country – as opposed to itself or subgroups
Where do we come from in development cooperation • Start 1949: technical assistance through UNDP in Indonesia
Where are we now? • Full fledged programme with: • Transfers of cash • Technical advice • NGO funding • Profit sector engagement • Multilateral financing • Knowledge build up • Debt relief • ….
How did we proceed? • Thinking in development cooperation shifted, based on experience To be distinghuished: • Role of donor • Role of partner • Paradigm
The real start: 1960’s • Poor countries lacked financial, physical and human resources to catch up with developed countries. • The gap analysis was the driving force for action • A strong geographical feature in development thinking
After the start • As from 1970 we can distinguish between different phases: • Basic needs: micro perspective strong • Structural adjustment: macro perspective strong • Human development: service delivery strong • Governance: ownership strong • Integrative approaches: security strong • Throughout: trade/aid balance shifting
4 typical programmes (1) • 1970’s : countervailing power • Characteristic: the expert Features: • Gap thinking • Purpose to build uip countervailing power • Technical advise • Modesty by donor
4 typical programmes (2) • 1980’s: counterparts • Characteristic: social mobiliser Features: • From gap to cooperation and exchange • Donorship • Island approaches • Focus shifted to constraints
4 typical programmes (3) • 1990’s: ownership • Characteristic: the advisor Features: • Connectivity: linking micro, sector, macro • Sectorwide approaches • Governance focus
4 typical programmes (4) • 2000: holistic, integrated approaches • Characteristic: security-development nexus Features: • Defense, diplomacy, development • Accountability • Partnership • multitakeholder
Paradigm shifts (1) • Gap thinking • investments • Capacity building • technical assistance • Social mobilisation • from power to governance • Resolving constraints • technocratic solutions
Paradigm shifts (2) • Donorship-ownership-partnership -conditionality • Multistakeholder approaches – ngo’s and private sector • Delivery modus to knowledge modus • Scaling up
Policy shifts (1) • Poverty at the core • shifting ideas what poverty is :issue-itis • DAC model of poverty with 5 dimensions • Governance at the core • Public sector reform • Public finance management • Right based approaches
Policy shifts (2) • From economic growth to service delivery and back again • From governance to accountability • From eonomic stability to governance stability • From delivery to cooperation • From development to aid and back again
Shifting approaches (1) • Broadening • DAC poverty model • Aid + coherence isues + knowledge • Multiple stakeholders in donor and partner countries • Channels for aid delivery: bilateral, multilateral, civilateral and comercial
Shifting approaches (2) • From solidarity to investment • Bussineslike approaches: contracts • Conditionality: from throughput conditions to results conditions • Policy space: a new agenda of building trust • From technics to politics
Shifting approaches (3) • From partner focus to donor focus • From projects to programmes: process orientation • Paris agenda and Accra: results and evidence • Donor coordination: reducing costs only? • Trust in donor institutions diminishing • New grounds for multilateralism?
Some conclusions (1) • Development is back into public debate • Development is as much about ‘ them’ as about ‘ us’ . • Shifting ideas, paradigms and approaches are a sign of learning, not of experimentation • Development is a global interest
Some conclusions (2) • How to organise poverty reduction as a global public good? • Global public goods are affected by all public policies • Coherence, knowledge and aid are intrinsinkly linked • How to shift development thinking to the core of public policy making