1 / 22

Session 5 The new indicators

Session 5 The new indicators. Rationale and approach for the new indicators UNDP-OECD Joint Support Team www.effectivecooperation.org. Refining the new indicators. 5 new indicators were introduced to reflect broader scope of Busan

dunbar
Télécharger la présentation

Session 5 The new indicators

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. Session 5The new indicators Rationale and approach for the new indicators UNDP-OECD Joint Support Team www.effectivecooperation.org

  2. Refining the new indicators • 5 new indicators wereintroduced to reflect broader scope of Busan • Indicator 8 (gender equality) – successfully monitored in 1stround. • Indicators 1,2,3,4 - still under development during 1st round  Methodologies refined during 2015, in consultation • with a broad range of stakeholders.

  3. Indicator 1: Use of country results frameworks

  4. Indicator 1 looks at the extent to which "development co-operation focuses on results that meet country's priorities" • Why is this Busan commitment important? • Overwhelming evidence shows that country ownership of development co-operation efforts ensures greater effectiveness and sustainability; • Focus on country priorities helps to aid coordination and harmonisation; • Monitoring providers’ behavior  Aims to prevent parallel results frameworks, or creating the need for additional M&E efforts not related to the country’s own priorities.

  5. The process of defining & refining indicator 1 underwent several rounds of consultations & country testing • Initial approach piloted in countries • Budget supportas a proxy to measure the extent of use of country results frameworks; • However: • Other aid modalities can also rely on country results frameworks; • Some providers emphasize some aid modalities vs others. • Refined approach light tested in additional countries • Assessment of providers’ use of CRFs in two selected sectors, at project design stage and at project reporting stage; • However, sampling issues and heavy process at the country level. • Final revised approach for 2nd Round • Basic assessment of use of CRF and/or other government planning tools by providers in approving new projects, with providers’ inputs; • Focus on all new 2015 projects above US$ 1 million, and look at project objectives, results indicators, M&E systems used.

  6. Indicator 1: Main characteristics of the refined approach • Highlights of the current methodological approach • Indicator emphasizes a focus on providers’ behavior (+country context) • Focus on sector level instead of national (operational CRFs often at sector level) • Broad concept of “CRF”  more accurate picture of different country and sector-level realities • Data useful as entry point for country-level dialogue on CRF use & on needs for planning/M&E strengthening. • How is it measured? • Country-sourced data (country-led process): • 1a. The degree to which (and the ways in which) providers use Country-led Results Frameworks (CRFs) project level measurement • 1b. Existence and characteristics of CRFs  qualitative assessment

  7. Indicator 1: Focus on use of Country Results Frameworks, complemented by country context info • 1a. How is “use of CRFs” being measured? • 1b. How is the “country context” assessed? • Brief qualitative self-assessment; • Complemented by: • Evidence from section 1a; • A quick mapping of existing planning tools. For each new dev. project (2015) above US$ 1 million in the country Objectives/Focus Gov. Sector Plans Results Indicators % Sector Planning RFs Indicator Sources % Use of Gov. Sources Final Evaluation Gov. Participation

  8. Indicator 2: CSO enabling environment and development effectiveness

  9. Why is it relevant to monitor CSO enabling environment and CSO development effectiveness? • CSOs – key development actors • Promoting rights-based approaches • Shaping dev. policies and partnerships • Implementing dev. programmes and projects (raising funds) • Complementing the action of the states by delivering services to citizens • Busan (building on Accra): • recognition of CSOs as independent dev. actors in their own right • call for: • an EE in which CSOs can maximise their contribution to dev. • CSOs to strengthen their accountability & contribution to DE • 2030 Agenda andAAAA • engagement of all stakeholders to achieve SDGs, incl. CSOs • CSO EE not explicitly mentioned, but embedded as a component ofGoals 16 and 17 • Inclusive follow-up and review mechanism of the SDGs  key role to play for CSOs

  10. CSO Enabling Environment • What does it refer to? • Political, financial, legal and policy conditions (national and international) within which civil society operates. It can include: • Law, policy and practice respecting freedom of association,the right to operate without state interference, the right to pursue self-defined objectives, and the right to seek and secure funding from national & international sources • Institutionalised, inclusive and transparent multi-stakeholder dialogue fora • Effective support from development providers to empower CSOs • What is the state of play? (CPDE, 2015) • Progress: • basic rights inscribed in constitutions • laws enabling access to public information • creation of institutionalised spaces for dialogue • Challenges: • Complex registration processes • limitations on foreign funding access • restricted right to work on certain topics • shrinking space for CSO advocacy

  11. CSO development effectiveness • What does it refer to? • Istanbul Principles – CSOs are effective as development actors if they: • Respect and promote human rights and social justice • Embody gender equality and equity while promoting women’s and girls’ rights • Focus on people’s empowerment, democratic ownership and participation • Promote environmental sustainability • Practice transparency and accountability • Pursue equitable partnerships and solidarity • Create and share knowledge and commit to mutual learning • Commit to realising positive sustainable change • What is the state of play? (CPDE, 2015) • Progress • e.g. Cambodian CSOs adopting a code of conduct in the spirit of Istanbul Principles • Challenges • lack of timely access to information • capacity issues • misappropriation and inadequacy of funds • minimal collaborations between CSOs

  12. How was the indicator developed? • Since Busan, efforts to build a meaningful indicator: • Step 1. First monitoring round – lessons learned (2013-14) • CIVICUS originally envisaged • Step 2. Refining the indicator (Dec 2014- July 2015) • Close collaboration with the Task Team on CSO DE and EE (incl. CPDE) • Consultation: informal working group, light country testing, broad consultation • Step 3. Second monitoring round (2015-16) • Further strengthening the indicator, on the basis of feedback from round 2 for subsequent rounds:

  13. Key features of the indicator • Key objectives: sparking dialogue around CSO EE and DE, building a multi-stakholder assessment, identifying progress made and room for improvement • Grounding the indicator at the country level – contextual approach • Holding each stakeholder group accountable (governments, providers and CSOs), through a questionnaire: • qualitative assessment (primary data) • 15 questions structured around 4 modules : • Space for multi-stakeholder dialogue on national policies; • CSO dev. effectiveness; • Official dev. cooperation with CSOs; • Legal and regulatory framework. • Building on the work of the CPDE, Task Team, Istanbul Principles, OECD/DAC 12 lessons for partnering with CSOs • Government-led exercise, through a multi-stakeholderprocess for data collection & validation.

  14. Indicator 3: Quality of public private dialogue

  15. Why is it relevant to monitor the quality of public-private dialogue? 633C • The private sector – key development actors • advancing innovation • creating wealth, income and jobs • mobilising domestic resources • in turn contributing to poverty reduction • Busan • The for-profit private sector is a central driver of dev. • Importance of inclusive dialogue • Call for the participation of the private sector in the design and implementation of dev. policies & strategies to foster sustainable growth and poverty reduction. • 2030 Agenda andAAAA • Vital role of the private sector to finance the 2030 Development Agenda • Increasing role of ODA as a catalyzer of private finance • SDG 17 – effective partnerships with the private sector • Indicator 3 can inform the SDG monitoring framework, particularly SDG 17

  16. Public-Private Dialogue • What does it refer to? • Structured interaction between the public and the private sector to: • Promote right conditions for PSD • Ensure more inclusive and sustainable policy reforms • Example: • The Philippines’ National Competitiveness Council (NCC) • “Promoting a more competitive Philippines and instill a culture of excellence, through PP sector collaboration as means to reduce poverty through inclusive growth.”

  17. How was the indicator developed? • Since Busan, efforts to build a meaningful indicator: • Step 1. First monitoring round (2013-14) • Step 2. Refining the indicator (Nov 2014- June 2015) • Close collaboration with the World Bank • Piloting in 3 countries • Consultation: PPD international workshop in Copenhagen, discussions with private sector representatives of the GPEDC’ SC • Step 3. Second monitoring round (2015-16) • Further strengthening the indicator, on the basis of feedback from round 2 for subsequent rounds

  18. Key features of the indicator • Focus on the quality of PPD (proxy to capture private sector engagement in improving public policies) • Key objectives: sparking multi-stakeholder dialogue, building a joint assessment of the state of quality of PPD, incentivisingbehaviourchange • Rather than a single indicator, a PPD country profile, combining global data (i.e. module 1) and country-sourced data (i.e. module 2&3) • Overview of the country-level context for PPD and assessment of a given dialogue platform, through 3 modules: • Legal and regulatory context for PPD • Existing quantitative indices – compiled by the JST • Country’s readiness to host, create or sustain a dialogue process • Country-level qualitative questionnaire / assigned score • Government-led exercise, through a multi-stakeholder process for data collection & validation • Effectiveness of a given platform • In-depth assessment on the quality of a selected PPD Platform (optional, commissioned by the Government)

  19. Indicator 4: Transparency

  20. Indicator 4: Transparency Indicator • What is being measured? • Degree of transparency of development co-operation flows and information • How is it being measured? • 3 dimensions in the common approach, asagreed in Busan: • Classifies providers within broad categories, depending on degree of progress in implementing the common approach. • What global sources of information? • + Transparency Dimensions Timely Comprehensive Forward-looking

  21. Indicator 4: Transparency Indicator • What is the current challenge with this indicator? • Instead of converging towards the common standard, OECD & IATI methodologies are starting to diverge (e.g. type scoring, indicator composition, reporting, year). • Proposed GPEDC approach for consultation • Proposal reflecting technical consensus. • Ongoing consultation (Sept-Dec): IATI, OECD Working Party-Statistics, GPEDC stakeholders. • GPEDC Steering Committee endorsement (in early 2016 meeting or virtual) • Data becomes available in Dec 2015  included in 2nd Monitoring Round

  22. Thank you তোমাকে ধন্যবাদ ありがとう Gracias Dankjewel Hvala Merci Asante مننه شكرا Obrigado Salamat

More Related