HIGH LEVEL FORUM ON AID EFFECTIVENESS, BUSAN

How to ensure wide and active participation of different stakeholders?

WHO IS INVOLVED IN ENHANCING AID EFFECTIVENESS?

• Paris Declaration addressed partner countries and traditional DAC donors.

• AAA recognised wide range of partnerships and actors including South-South cooperation, middle-income countries, CSOs and global funds.

• Wide participation is not new: objective in Busan is to deepen the engagement of different actors involved in enhancing development results.

NON-TRADITIONAL DAC DONORS

• Particular focus is on deeper engagement of China, India and Brazil.

• Increasingly important partners, but critical on labels such as ‘donor’ or ‘aid’. Also recipients of ODA.

• Possible contributions in Busan: Champions of South-South cooperation. Pragmatic experience on transition to Middle-Income-Country (MIC) status.

PRIVATE SECTOR

• Divided into non-profit and for-profit private sector.

• Non-profit (global funds) are addressed in AAA (par 19c)

• For-profit private sector has experience on how to work with aid (aid as a catalyst, public-private partnerships).

• Possible contribution in Busan: deepened commitment to AE (non-profit) and participation in discussion and consensus-building on development partnerships (for-profit).

HOW TO OPERATIONALISE WIDE PARTICIPATION IN BUSAN OUTCOME?

• Challenge in Busan: how to combine inclusiveness and ambition.

• Ways to operationalise participation: taking part in preparations, taking part in the event, adherence to Busan outcome and commitments.

• One solution is to agree on global principles and differentiated responsibilities expressed in the outcome document.

• View of partner countries is important but so far partner countries have not been vocal on the wide participation in Busan.

SESSION III: QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION

• How to combine ambition and inclusiveness in Busan outcome?

• Should Busan outcome differentiate responsibilities and commitments between different stakeholders?

• What could be the specific contributions of the non-traditional donors and private sector for Busan?

HIGH LEVEL FORUM ON AID EFFECTIVENESS, BUSAN

Themes for wider agenda: climate change finance and

countries in fragile situations

ADDRESSING AID EFFECTIVENESS IN WIDER DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT

• Consensus on addressing aid effectiveness in wider development context in an operational manner.

• We have to selective in the themes to be included. Criteria to be used:

added-value feasibility political relevancelinkages with ODA

• Views of partner countries important but not yet clear.

CLIMATE CHANGE FINANCE

• Climate change finance represents significant and growing development finance with complex aid architecture.

• EU Council Conclusions on Climate Change (2009) calls special attention to the application of PD and AAA.

• ‘Bangkok Call for Action’ (2010) lists aid effectiveness commitments in climate change finance.

• Follow-up to Copenhagen/Cancun takes place at the same time as Busan. Cooperation with UNFCCC is important.

COUNTRIES IN FRAGILE SITUATIONS

• Countries in fragile situations showcase differentiated country contexts.

• Several international inputs: OECD Principles for Good International

Engagement (2007) and their monitoring. Dili Declaration (2010) International Dialogue on peacebuilding

and statebuilding

• EU Council Conclusions on situations of fragility (2007) emphasises division of labour.

CLIMATE CHANGE FINANCE AND SITUATIONS OF FRAGILITY

IN BUSAN OUTCOME

• Climate Change Finance Aid Effectiveness principles and

commitments for climate change Agreement on monitoring framework Providing input to Durban negotiations

and beyond

• Countries in fragile situations International objectives on

peacebuilding and statebuilding Agreement on commitments Agreement on monitoring framework

SESSION III: QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION

• Should specific principles and commitments on climate change finance and countries in fragile situations be included in the Busan outcome?

• How to organise the monitoring of differentiated commitments on climate change finance and countries in fragility?

• What else should be included in Busan outcome on the wider development agenda? How could it be addressed in an operational manner?