A CALL FOR BREAKTHROUGHS NOT BREAKDOWNS

The Financing for Development (FfD4) conference takes place at a critical moment for international development cooperation, particularly Official Development Assistance (ODA), which faces unprecedented pressure. Over the past years, it has become increasingly evident that the community of traditional donors is struggling to meet long standing commitments. On top of these persistent challenges, we are currently witnessing unilateral decisions that are reshaping the development landscape, in ways that contradict the fundamental principles of development cooperation of democratic ownership, transparency and accountability, inclusive partnerships, and a focus on results.

As we head towards the Seville conference, we must seize the opportunity to reset the discussion, and insist on the track that honors the foundational commitments of international cooperation.

Since the early 2000s, the UN’s Financing for Development (FfD) process has pledged to enhance both the quantity and quality of development cooperation. But today, we face multiple global crises, a derailing of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and a beleaguered aid system. It must then be the duty of the Seville conference to rally member states and all development actors to heed the call of the times, and reboot development cooperation to effectively address these urgent challenges.

Against this backdrop, the Zero Draft falls short of being the transformative document it needs to be. It provides clear references and messages, but lacks ambition in the areas of time-bound commitments, actionable priorities, and substantive reforms.

The Zero Draft, for example, presents reflections on such critical aspects as country ownership, ODA, integrated national financing frameworks (INFFs), Total Official Support to Sustainable Development (TOSSD), and the indispensable roles of the Development Cooperation Forum (DCF) and the Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation (GPEDC).

Notably, the initial sections of the Zero Draft (paragraphs 6 to 9) also have plenty of language that can be traced back to the effectiveness conversation – a testament to the continuing relevance of the agenda. References to inclusiveness and effective governance, mentions of aligning with today’s realities and countries’ policy space (para 6), discussions on country-led financing strategies (para 7), and an explicit acknowledgment that countries bear primary responsibility for their strategies, are most welcome. In the same vein, the Draft emphasises effectiveness, efficiency, and transparency in resource mobilisation as well as commitment to developing effective, accountable, and inclusive democratic institutions (para 8), and highlights the role of civil society (para 9). There is a section on development effectiveness (para 40) that underscores ongoing systemic challenges, such as fragmentation, smaller transactions, earmarking, and circumvention of government budgets.

While these are all appreciated, they simply reaffirm existing commitments on ODA and development effectiveness principles, without raising the ambition, correcting digressions, or establishing credible mechanisms to ensure compliance.

In order to put forth a responsive and meaningful Outcome Document, CPDE calls on UN Member States to:

1. Uphold past commitments, but push the limits on aid volume. The agreement to scale up and achieve the 0.7 GNI target not only needs to be restated; an accompanying agreement on mechanisms for enforcement must also be clarified to beat the inertia of this unfinished business. With the dilution of what can be classified as aid and the difference between what is committed and what is disbursed, there has been an alarming decline in the share of ODA that reaches developing countries that must be immediately addressed. The concessional nature of ODA must be preserved, and alignment with the SDGs must be a precondition. ODA is a unique and important resource even when compared to other forms of development cooperation, and its disbursement is determined by public policy that is flexible, traceable, and accountable. To make a significant impact the cumulative shortfall in Development Assistance Committee’s (DAC) commitment estimated at USD 7.1 trillion must be recognised as unmet ODA debt that can be delivered to countries of the Global South over time in full and unconditionally. Recovering unmet targets from previous years as an additional mechanism for financing development initiatives can help ease financing stress and address top socio-economic priorities in developing countries, such as poverty eradication, health, education, gender equality, and social protection. In the context of recent developments, volatility and predictability challenges that affect actual flows to partner countries need urgent attention.
2. Revitalise effectiveness agenda to put countries in the drivers’ seat. The Zero Draft cites broad consensus that the effectiveness agenda needs to be revitalised and its implementation better monitored. The emphasis on addressing fragmentation, elevating country leadership, improving alignment, and supporting policy coherence may indicate the direction of this revitalisation process. While these are all important aspects of safeguarding aid quality, revitalisation should ensure that ODA and any other form of development cooperation and development partnership is effective, rights-based, accountable, and directed towards democratic country ownership, which includes locally-led development. A strict set of rules must be developed around how development cooperation and, in particular, ODA should be used, and fulfill its core mandate of eradicating poverty and addressing inequalities, with the development priorities set by the right-holders at the centre. Finally, this revitalisation should recognise and support the vital role of civil society in ensuring an effective aid architecture – one that is locally-led and focused on addressing poverty and inequalities. A sound and credible discussion on financing for development—specifically in the case of ODA—must be firmly grounded in robust evidence. This is especially crucial when assessing the effectiveness of development cooperation. With this in mind, we urge all relevant parties to actively engage in existing monitoring mechanisms and accountability frameworks. In particular, we emphasise the importance of participation in the ongoing monitoring exercise within the GPEDC, a multi-stakeholder platform leading the implementation of effectiveness principles. Active engagement in such processes is essential in enhancing transparency, accountability, and impact in development cooperation efforts.
3. Define decisive mechanisms to turn commitments to change. A key issue in determining the level of ambition in both resource quantity and quality is enforcement. The levers of power in the international development system are grossly imbalanced, and decisions are often made behind closed doors, without input from those that they impact the most. Given the current state of traditional development cooperation, which faces many legitimate criticisms, and the urgency required to address the polycrises, there is a fundamental need to reconsider where decisions on development cooperation are crafted. In our view, the United Nations remains the most appropriate forum, as the only institution that enjoys universal membership and legitimate representation. UN has the power to bring together diverse stakeholders and rebalance the fragmented governance of development cooperation, ensuring a more inclusive and effective approach. FfD4 can and should decide to establish a UN intergovernmental process towards agreeing on a legally binding convention on development cooperation that includes developing measurable, time-bound, and enforceable indicators for the fulfilment of these targets. Amid the extraordinary aid freeze by one of the world’s biggest ODA contributors , the international community must step up and send a strong statement that its commitment to leave no one behind is unwavering. We need a breakthrough in asserting the effectiveness agenda in development finance, or we face the breakdown of our shared aspirations around sustainable development.

About CPDE
CSO Partnership for Development Effectiveness (CPDE) is a platform that unites civil society organisations (CSOs) from six regions and seven major sectors (feminist, indigenous peoples, international CSOs, labour, migrants, rural, and youth) around the world on the issue of effective development cooperation. It participates in the CSO-FfD Mechanism under the International Development Cooperation Workstream. Visit csopartnership.org to learn more.