Real AccountabilityImproving aid through better

accountability

Jasmine Burnley

Policy and Campaigns

ActionAid

Presentation Outline

1. Our work on aid effectiveness

2. Aid and Accountability: Key Issues

3. Technical Assistance

4. Will mutual accountability solve these problems?

5. Recommendations

1. Our work on aid effectiveness

• ActionAid has a strong interest in work on aid effectiveness:– Real Aid 1: An Agenda for Making Aid

Work 2005

– Real Aid 2: Making Technical Assistance work 2006

Real Aid 2: Making Technical Assistance Work

1. Our work on aid effectiveness

• ActionAid has a strong interest in work on aid effectiveness:– Real Aid 1: An Agenda for Making Aid

Work 2005

– Real Aid 2: Making Technical Assistance work 2006

– Publications on conditionality

2. Accountability and Aid – some key problems

• Accountability is central to aid effectiveness, but..• The ways in which donors behave overemphasise

recipient’s accountability to donorsi. Aid focuses on meeting donor objectives not

poverty reduction – this leads to phantom aid

What is “Phantom Aid”?• Aid that is poorly targeted• Aid that is double counted through debt

cancellation• Much TA is overpriced & ineffective• Aid tying• Poor donor coordination• Immigration related costs in donor

countries• Excess administration costs

2. Accountability and Aid – some key problems

• Accountability is central to aid effectiveness, but..• The ways in which donors behave overemphasise

recipient’s accountability to donorsi. Aid focuses on meeting donor objectives not

poverty reduction – this leads to phantom aidii. Donors are not held accountable by recipientsiii. Donors take the driving seat – this undermines

ownership and effectiveness – most notorious example of this is conditionality

Whose accountability matters?

i. Conditionality can undermine the whole of the domestic accountability system

ii. It weakens governments’ ability to decide their own policies

• In turn the ability of citizens to hold their governments to account is reduced

• It also refocuses governments’ view on donors rather than citizens

iii. Bad quality aid increases expectations without delivering extra resources or results

2. Accountability and Aid – some key problems

• Accountability is central to aid effectiveness, but..• The ways in which donors behave overemphasise

recipient’s accountability to donorsi. Aid focuses on meeting donor objectives not

poverty reduction – this leads to phantom aidii. Donors are not held accountable by recipientsiii. Donors take the driving seat – this undermines

ownership and effectiveness – most notorious example of this is conditionality

iv. There are limited forums for governments to hold donors to account

‘Real Accountability’: A genuinely mutual model

Government

Civil Society

Donors

(Mutual accountability)

(Domestic accountability)

4. Technical Assistance

• Real Aid II: our research shows that delivery of TA is largely:– Ineffective

TA is ineffective

• “Almost everyone acknowledges the ineffectiveness of technical co-operation in what is or what should be its major objective: achievement of greater self reliance in the recipient countries by building institutions and strengthening local capacities in national economic management.” UNDP 2003

4. Technical Assistance

• Real Aid II: our research shows that delivery of TA is largely:– Ineffective – Over-supplied

TA is oversupplied and donor-driven

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Developingcountryaverage

Cambodia Tonga Zambia

Pe

rce

nt

of

gro

ss

do

me

sti

c p

rod

uc

t

Public spending on education

TC receipts

4. Technical Assistance

• Real Aid II: our research shows that delivery of TA is largely:– Ineffective – Over-supplied– Overpriced

TA is overpriced

• On TA:

“To all intents and purposes, the money goes back to the developed countries.” Ghanaian Finance Minister, Annual meetings of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, 2006

4. Technical Assistance

• Real Aid II: our research shows that delivery of TA is largely:– Ineffective – Over-supplied– Overpriced

• TA is a donor-driven aid instrument: – TA overemphasises some relationships of

accountability over others– TA is used to influence policy choices

Sierra Leone: A case study for TA

• Privatisation of water has been a condition for a number of World Bank and IMF loans

• TA was described as “subtle conditionality” used in conjunction with conditionality to pressure the country to privatise

• Support for this privatisation policy is not widely owned within Sierra Leone’s government

5. Will Mutual Accountability solve these problems?

• Paris Declaration 2010 target on mutual accountability: all countries to have mutual assessment reviews in place

• Paris Declaration 2010 target on TA: 50% of TA flows are implemented through co-ordinated programmes consistent with national development strategies

• This signals a greater move towards accountability but…the target is not clear

• Mutual accountability must result in meaningful change – not just tinkering

6. Recommendations:- for the Aid System

• Genuinely mutual accountable aid processes– Clear recipient government policies on criteria

for accepting aid – Mutual commitments monitored at the country

level– National and international forums to review

progress on equal footing overseen by a UN commissioner

– New mechanisms to increase the predictability of aid

Recommendations: - for TA• Allow southern countries to take the lead

in the capacity building process– Allow the country to spend funding on their

priorities– Do not provide TA outside national capacity

building plans– Provide all TA flows through government-led

capacity building mechanisms

• Donor support to Governments could be complimented by donor support for civil society to strengthen accountability