1 / 27

Karin Christiansen Spring Meetings, DC, 13th April 2011

Democratizing Development through Open Data Aid transparency and what do we need to make open data work for CSOs? . Karin Christiansen Spring Meetings, DC, 13th April 2011. What do CSO need from open aid data?. Information on aid should be published proactively

lilka
Télécharger la présentation

Karin Christiansen Spring Meetings, DC, 13th April 2011

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. Democratizing Development through Open DataAid transparency and what do we need to make open data work for CSOs? Karin Christiansen Spring Meetings, DC, 13th April 2011

  2. What do CSO need from open aid data? • Information on aid should be published proactively • Information on aid should be comprehensive, timely, accessible & comparable • Everyone can request and receive information on aid • The right of access to information about aid should be promoted

  3. (mock up)

  4. Publish many times, use rarely

  5. Publish Once, Use Often

  6. A project in DFID’s project-level database

  7. The same DFID project in the IATI XML format

  8. http://iatiregistry.org/

  9. So what do we know about aid transparency so far? Aid Transparency Assessment 2010 2011 Aid Transparency Tracker Plans

  10. Aid Transparency Assessment 2010

  11. Aid Transparency Assessment 2010: Findings Finding 1: There is a lack of comparable and primary data Finding 2: There is wide variation in levels of donor transparency, across different types of donors Finding 3: There are significant weaknesses across indicators

  12. 1st attempt: Aid Transparency Tracker • Sampled: for each donor, 1 country and 1 project • Three parts: • Organisation-level information • Country-level information • Activity (or project)-level information • For each piece of info: • Is it published? (Y/N) • systematically for all recipients/projects all of the time • just for some recipients/projects some of the time? • If you don’t publish it, do you collect it? • Evidence: show where this information is (the URL)

  13. Preliminary Results

  14. What needs to happen next? • More donors sign up to the international standard • Sorting budget compatibility • IATI implementation • Busan/HLF4 • Support civil society & analysts to use it • And: DEMAND IT

  15. Thank You&Contacts www.publishwhatyoufund.org info@publishwhatyoufund.org

  16. Organisation-level questions • Does this donor publish aid allocation policies and procedures? • Does this donor publish its procurement procedures? • Does this donor publish the total development budget for the next three years, as submitted to parliament? • Does this donor publish their annual forward planning budget for assistance for the next three years?

  17. Country-level questions Choose your donor’s biggest recipient country (e.g., India). Then answer these questions: • Does this donor publish the country strategy paper for India? • Does this donor publish forward planning budget or documents for the institutions they fund in India for the next three years? • Does this donor publish its annual audit of its aid programmes in India?

  18. Activity-level questions • This is the specific detail about aid flows, needed for informed decisions about where aid is / should be going • This is the level needed for coordination, alignment, results/evaluation, ownership, and esp. accountability • E.g. Is it good use of Polish aid to build a school in Gikongoro or Butare? • USAID is already building a school in Gikongoro. • The Rwandan government can support the ongoing cost of only one school – in Butare or Gikongoro.

  19. IATI Signatories • World Bank • Asian Development Bank • The European Commission (EC) • United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) • Global Alliance for Vaccines & Immunisation (GAVI) • Hewlett Foundation • Australia - AusAID • Denmark - Ministry of Foreign Affairs • Finland - Ministry for Foreign Affairs • Germany - Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperatn & Dev (BMZ) • Ireland - Irish Aid • Netherlands – Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs – Development Cooperation • New Zealand – NZAID • Norway - Norad • Spain – Spain Ministry of Foreign Affairs & Cooperation • Sweden - SIDA • Switzerland - Swiss Agency for Development & Cooperation (SDC) • UK - DFID AND US &France

  20. IATI Endorsers • Sierra Leone • Liberia • Bangladesh • Honduras • Republic of Congo • Democratic Republic of Congo • Ghana • Rwanda • Indonesia • Nepal • Viet Nam • Papua New Guinea • Moldova • Montenegro • Colombia • Burkina Faso • Malawi • The Dominican Republic • Syria

More Related