Helping or hindering? Aid, donors and fragile states- the context for peacekeeping ops Karin Christiansen Centre for Aid and Public Expenditure, ODI International Day of United Nations Peacekeepers 23rd May 2007

This presentation 1.Does aid work generally? 2.Does aid work in (post-)conflict situations? (note on terminology) 4.Policy recommendations for aid actors 5.Beyond aid- towards ‘coherence’?

1. Does aid work - generally? Work to do what? (state building, growth, democracy etc, plus range of non-dev objective) Evidence suggest probably a net benefit (to growth) But it is small and marginal Causality appears to be through quality of institutions: better institutions  better policy and implementation  higher growth

So, what do we know about aid building institutions? Track record on institution/capacity building is mixed to poor And may even inhibit institutional development/formation (see next slide) And what does this mean for aiding places where institutions are particularly weak?

Impacts of aid practice on institutions? Weak state systems, avoided by funders & implementers  undermining the development of a state that can make policy/deliver services Parallel & fragmented activities & systems Inefficiency & ineffectiveness of both aid & government spending/activities Distorts institutional & political relationships Fragmented accountability, to donors

2. Aid and fragile states What (if anything) is different about aid in fragile states? What do we know about patterns of aid relationship in fragile states? Findings on impact of different types of aid relationships

What is different about aid in fragile state environments? Often involves: Weaker national institutions High inflow of external finance Large number of external actors; fragmented national actors  complex fragmented set of relationship/interfaces Humanitarian delivery  institutionalising parallel systems (Understandable) state avoidance assumption

Patterns of aid relationships 4 main clusters of experiences: i.strong country leadership ii.strong donor leadership weak country leadership iii.fragmented donors iv.isolated countries/“most difficult partnership” Most experience reviewed to fell into iii with some in ii & iv and a very few in i

Findings on impact of ii-iv? Donor behaviour matters more in fragile states than else where Current practices may be undermining:  aid efficiency and effectiveness  their own proximate objectives  domestic/local institutions (forming)  potential for state formation/social contract to develop

3. Recommendations for aid actors 1.Much higher degree of realism 2.Undertake joint diagnostics of the country context, processes and systems across all actors 3.Where possible, align donor activities to all stages of the government’s strategy, policy implementation cycle and systems

Recommendations… 4.Where possible align with government systems and policies; where you can’t harmonise aid actors and shadow systems align 5.Selectivity and sequencing of interventions are critical 6.Support policy making & aid management in recipient government 7.Monitor progress at a country level

“Shadow systems alignment” Does not give control of resources to recipient govt BUT does use similar rules as state system Ensuring compatibility with, for example:  administrative layers/boundaries  planning, budgeting cycles, classifications  accounting, procurement & audit systems  monitoring & evaluation systems  staffing structures & hierarchies Adjustment cost to aid agencies NOT recipients

5. Beyond aid? Do these recommendations apply to non-aid actors? Yes and more so, with more actors, interests, objectives, operational modalities & mindsets the challenges increase Moves us into joined-up (no10 term) “coherence” (aid), “comprehensive” (UK mil), “effects based” (US mil) terrain are multiplying But currently in parallel! And not fully acknowledge the reality of the dilemmas and challenges…

But we can do better than this.

Thank you Centre for Aid and Public Expenditure Overseas Development Institute 111 Westminster Bridge Road London SE1 7JD Tel: Fax: Website: