Intelligent Funding Mini plenary

CIVICUS World Assembly 2008
Name of Session: Mini Plenary 1 – Intelligent Funding Track
Financing for Development: Innovation and Reform
Time/Date:
Venue:
09:00-10:30, 19th June 2008
Lomond
Moderator:
Bisi Adeleye-Fayemi, Co-Founder and Executive Director, African Women’s Development
Fund
Alpha Bacar Barry, Consultant on youth employment issues in Africa
Charles Mutasa, Executive Director, African Forum & Network on Debt & Development
(AFRODAD)
Elisa Peter, Deputy Co-ordinator, UN NGO Liaison Service
Albert Tucker (Big Lottery Fund)
Speakers:
No. of Participants: approximately 150 people
Gender Breakdown: Male 44%, Female 54%, Neither 2%
Rapporteur: Liz Robson, CIVICUS
Highlights of the Session:
•
•
•
•
Summary of current agreements, processes and forums for debate on issues of aid – evolution of
discussions and current opportunities for CS to play a role.
Reflections on the intended impact of aid and reaching the most in need/local change agents – how
to bring local realities into funding decision making?
Suggested new modalities for funding and possible diversification of resource sources.
CS is increasingly at the table for these discussions - invitation to get involved in upcoming meetings
and active processes.
Introduction by the Moderator/Facilitator:
Bisi Adeleye-Fayemi (BAF): Welcome, mini-plenary will look at what is happening in the area of civil society
(CS) finance, governance and development. How do we know if we are on the right track? Are we allocating
resources intelligently? Are resources being accessed in a timely manner?
Audience voting pad session:
What is your gender?
Where do you come from?
Which sector are you from?
Female
Male
None of the above
TOTAL votes cast
Asia & Pacific
Europe
Latin America & Caribbean
Middle East & North Africa
North America
Sub-Saharan Africa
TOTAL votes cast
Government/
intergovernmental organisation
Civil Society
Corporate sector
TOTAL votes cast
54
44
2
100
20
44
10
4
11
23
112
15
85
2
9
111
1
CIVICUS World Assembly 2008
What are your expectations of this
session?
To better understand the aid effectiveness debate
53
To gain knowledge about innovations in fundraising
To get to know how to fundraise better
To take a break from other sessions where I have to play
a role or concentrate more
TOTAL votes cast
39
19
6
117
Chen Guancheng, China, profiled as part of the Civil Society Behind Bars campaign.
Opening Remarks by the Speakers:
Charles Mutasa (CM): AFRODAD and Advisory Group on Aid Effectiveness, involved since 2001 in Reality
of Aid network, publications include ‘Does Africa really need aid?’ Following up financing for development
processes following Monterrey meeting in 2002 and monitoring of Paris Declaration.
Elisa Peters (EP): UN Office responsible for liaising with NGOs, mandated to increase the policy space
available to CS in global institutions. Involved in financing for development for a long time but 2008 is 5
years since the Monterrey meeting – up coming meeting in Doha to review implementation of Consensus.
Albert Tucker (AT): Big Lottery Fund (BLF), donor driving this Track and largest non-governmental funding
body in UK. Grapple with questions on Aid Effectiveness in own grant making.
Alpha Bacar Barry (ABB): From West Africa, works with young people aged 15-35 and main question raised
by these people is why there is all this talk about money when they see none of it on the ground? Young
people are neglected in development strategy and need access to funding.
BAF to CM: What is the Paris Declaration, why is the forthcoming meeting in Accra significant for us and
what outcomes are expected?
CM: Paris Declaration came out of 2005 High Level Forum convened by OECD bringing together a number
of countries and partner agencies to discuss how to make aid effective. Agreed five principles:
• Ownership
• Alignment
• Harmonisation
• Management for development results
• Mutual accountability
Debate dates back to 1970, when UN resolution 26/26 set target of 0.7% GNP for aid budget, since then aid
has become a political tool. In 2000 the Millennium Declaration and establishment of MDGs got UN and
others talking about how to achieve the goals. 2002 meeting in Mexico resulted in Monterrey Consensus on
how to make aid more effective – move towards 0.7% and recipient countries must put mechanisms in place
to prevent misappropriation of funds etc. Have been lots of initiatives to measure progress. Increase in
development aid in 04-05 but since then has been declining. Last year, against backdrop of rising food,
commodity and fuel prices, it fell by 8.4%.
Consultations pre-Accra (national and regional) to get ideas from multi-stakeholder debates. Paris
Declaration was not done with CS consultation (resulted from government and donor discussion), so
seeking broad input and talking about how to make CS part of process in organised way. Recognition that
CS are key development actors and change agents as well as recipients of funding and donors in their own
right – 40 billion US$ of total 107 billion US$ going to development passed through CSOs. Need
mechanisms to factor in the role and recognise CS, as well as create a conducive environment for them to
interact with governments and donors.
Implications for engagement are:
2
CIVICUS World Assembly 2008
1) CS engaged in follow up of social justice issues and ensuring development dividends are properly
used – monitoring of governments brings CS into discussion
2) Key for CS to feel part of the process as they are working at grassroots level – need to look at aid
and reaching the poorest and most marginalised – are custodians on behalf of the people.
BAF to EP: Aid Effectiveness is part of a broader debate. What is CS role in that and what are the different
challenges facing CS in the North and South?
EP: Aid is only one of the resources for financing development and reaching the disadvantaged and it is so
politicised that it can actually be quite dysfunctional. Paul Collier estimates that 40% of development aid to
Africa ends up indirectly supporting military spending. Donors recognised that and adopted Monterrey
Consensus. Important because:
• For the first time acknowledged that developing countries are in the driving seat for national
development together with CS – led to Paris Declaration principle of alignment.
• Based on principles of multilateralism – inclusive and participatory – relatively equal footing of actors.
UN responsibility for follow up and 2008 conference offers opportunity for open debate.
• Acknowledged that aid is important and should be increased but also supported by international
finance systems, e.g. that trade should support development not undermine it.
Monterrey Consensus has 6 chapters outlining innovative financing mechanisms, highlighted 3 aspects:
1) Ch 1 is about mobilising domestic resources and breaking aid dependencies – progressive taxation
and prevention of capital flight to help meet some needs (400 billion US$ is lost to Southern
governments through tax evasion – this is four times the ODA budget from Northern donors).
2) Recognises new actors and new donors with new ways of operating (e.g. Brazil, China) that are
focused more on technical support and have less conditionalities (their 200 billion US$ represents
two times the traditional style ODA from Northern donors).
3) Recognises CS as critical to development co-operation and poverty alleviation. Process to involve
and gather input from CS.
2008 review meeting Nov 28 to Dec 3 in Doha – will be an NGO Forum preceding the main conference and
provides opportunity to present innovative financial options such as taxation on currency transactions or
multilateral agreement to share taxation information.
BAF to AT: What innovations are happening within the BLF to strengthen CS organising and any reflections
on how funds reach the ground?
AT: Rather than just focusing on innovation, need to also stop and think about what we know works. BLF
has been looking at itself, want to be intelligent funder and the struggle to become one is vital if we are to
ensure we are making a difference and limit the amount of funding going to ineffective programmes. Money
is important and needs to be used effectively – this is a constant quest with a moving target.
BLF is driven by partnership and collaboration – ways for government and CS to work together to ensure
longer term sustainability and future for projects. Also provide longer term funding with components to
strengthen infrastructure, research and evaluation (what evidence is there that things are working and
having desired results?), and establish, as well as invest in, good practice. In an economic downturn there
will be fewer resources available so need to understand what works and simplify processes for supporting
that. BLF has diverse stakeholders and needs to be able to defend funding decisions under public scrutiny.
Need evidence that what we believe works is actually effective or how can we make decisions?
Also need communities to identify problems that cut across themes and issues and identify solutions,
including economic empowerment and social enterprise, so not dependent on aid in future. If people are
involved in designing such programmes then it is far more likely that the funds and impact thereof will reach
them on the ground.
3
CIVICUS World Assembly 2008
Trends of individual philanthropy from rich entrepreneurs, business individuals that get involved in
development – are some risks with this, business methodologies won’t always deliver for development.
BAF to ABB: Challenges faced in accessing resources and other non conventional donor sources of
support?
ABB: refer back to CM – does Africa need funding from outside? 300 billion US$ is lost in Nigeria to
corruption, where is this money going? Collaboration with government in these situations is a joke – even
publicly challenging them is difficult.
When there are consultations should start in Africa with target groups, not send ‘experts’ that speak no
African languages to drive around in 4x4s and not meet with people on the ground. They can’t understand
the problems but are telling Africans what to do.
Not looking just for funds but also to develop entrepreneurship – get young people access to small amounts
of funding through structures set up in Africa rather than administered by UK NGOs.
Audience voting session:
How do you view the current situation on
funding for civil society work in
development?
What kind of aid coordination should be
improved most?
Which source of funding for civil society
activities should be increased the most in
the next 5 years?
Quite good
1
It is improving but we are still short on innovative and
easy-to-use funding schemes
It is not easy to understand what is happening and the
system is too complicated
We urgently and desperately need good solutions as we
see so much dysfunction.
Don’t know
TOTAL votes cast
12
142
Among governments
10
Within and among multilateral institutions
(UN, World Bank, regional Development Banks, etc)
Between governments/
TOTAL votes cast
22
98
23
153
Bilateral and multilateral aid
47
Private foundations
Corporate contributions and investment
Individual contributions
Self-generated income from fees for services
TOTAL votes cast
8
54
14
33
156
27
37
65
Speaker responses to the voting results:
CM: Surprised to see some but agree that need solutions to aid architecture and that there is more to do in
co-ordination of government and CS – enabling environment clearly very important.
EP: See trend from Northern governments towards ODA through direct budget support – northern NGOs
can’t channel that money and Southern NGOs concerns may not be addressed unless they are part of the
governments budget process.
AT: danger in seeing any single solutions, in every area things can be adapted and changed. Greater
investment is needed from whatever source.
4
CIVICUS World Assembly 2008
ABB: Working with young people wondering if there is a need for an ‘IMF for CS’. Convinced by importance
of collaboration with government and participation in budget debates and other national issues, if not then
have no voice.
Questions/Issues/Challenges from the audience:
India: Talking of aid effectiveness in absence of trade and debt issues seems meaningless. When talking of
evidence based research and evaluation, what is the credibility of such evaluations? WB evaluation findings
are difficult to accept.
Switzerland: Complex issues. Mention of Development Co-operation Forum at ECOSOC and more
oversight of who doing what in development aid.
Nigeria: Is different in different countries, uniform prescriptions are problematic. Trend where for profit
organisations are leading consortiums on development – challenge around role and small organisations only
have access to funding via for profits.
Afghanistan: Security challenges, where donors feel they cannot monitor they will not grant assistance even
though there may be great need and CSOs willing to undertake the work. Also lack of co-ordination between
government and donors.
Nigeria: What geographical and thematic funding does BLF do?
Speaker responses:
CM: Aid effectiveness goes with trade and debt issues and should be looking beyond aid for exit strategies.
CSOs have a role in monitoring and evaluation, institutions should self monitor but independent voices also
needed. Development Forum ties all these issues together – it is important to have consistency and
coherence.
EP: UN sees aid as part of the solution but system needs to be fixed – co-ordination, reaching the most in
need, avoiding capture by elites and diversion – this is way Development Forum was put in place by
ECOSOC to provide high level policy discussion. More inclusive than the OECD discussions and enables
CS participation. How to include the voices of the people who need the money most – importance of
democratic governance at the international level.
AT: CS activity and social development plays a role alongside entrepreneurs etc. Challenge is how to
decide who to fund with limited resources. Have to assess what works but also use information from the
ground to inform taking risks. Whole chain of support and range of income sources needed.
ABB: Need to talk about wider context – is debt aid or business? Don’t talk about aid to the US, one of the
most indebted countries. Should Africa wait for aid or find own solutions, mobilise own resources based on
own values – do not need to adhere to traditional models and be always putting out hands, can co-operate
and exchange for better modalities. Need to set up frameworks to talk to target groups and ensure that their
voices are heard – funders are preoccupied with self interest and find it difficult to take risks but have to
remove barriers of access to funding for most in need.
Conclusions / suggestions for Action:
BAF: Thanks to speakers and participants. Reminder of other IF track sessions over coming days. Surprised
by voting results as believes that individual and self generated income is important to fund own revolutions.
Katsuji Imata:
• Thanks to BAF for moderating,
5
CIVICUS World Assembly 2008
•
•
•
Minutes will be available online,
You can also review the Better Aid position paper prepared for Accra at ww.betteraid.org.
CIVICUS has had role at Development Co-operation Forum and in order to play role effectively need
your input – you can send emails to [email protected] on how CIVICUS can be a better
conduit.
6