1. ANTI-CORRUPTION IN AID PROCUREMENT A Survey Lena Diesing, lena.diesing@oecd.org 9th Annual Conference on Government Procurement in the Americas 17-19 September 2013

2. Context: – 1996 Recommendation – Survey Legal and Policy Frameworks Donor-managed procurement Recipient-managed procurement Accountability measures and sanctions Outline

3. USD 130 billion in aid 15 – 20 % in procurement 1996: Recommendation by the Development Assistance Committee 2013 survey: stock taking among DAC members and multilaterals 24 DAC members plus multilaterals asked 16 countries responded, plus Senegal Context

4. CountryNet Official Development Assistance in 2011 (USD million) Australia4,983 Austria 1,111 Belgium2,807 Canada5,457 Denmark2,931 Germany14,093 Japan10,831 Korea 1,328 Netherlands6,344 Norway4,934 Portugal708 Sweden5,603 Switzerland3,076 United Kingdom 13,832 USA 30,924 EstoniaN.A. Total108,962 Survey Respondents 4 Multilaterals Asian Development Bank European Commission Inter-American Development Bank United Nations Development Programme

5. Legal and Policy Framework

6. 5 respondents verify bidder claims – Canada, Belgium, Estonia, Germany, UNDP 4 respondents do not conduct routine verification of bidder claims – Australia, Norway, Sweden, UK 4 respondents have limited checks – Belgium, Portugal, ADB, IDB Donor-managed procurement

7. Yes Percent No Percent Strengthened oversight of aid-funded procurement?90%10% Independent complaints system in place? If so, decision published? 95% 41% 5% 59% Debarment in the past?47%53% Regular audits, implementation of recommendations?79%21% Obligation to report… - To law enforcement authorities? - Internally (management, committee, ombudsman…) 63% 100% 37% 0% Protection of whistleblowers?83%17% Donor-managed procurement

8. Recipient-managed procurement Procurement rules of donor/Agency Country procurement systems and procedures Hybrid system OECD-DAC Member Countries Australia (AusAID) ✓✓ Austria (ADA) ✓ Belgium (BTC) ✓✓✓ Belgium (FPSFA) ✓ Canada (CIDA) ✓ Denmark Germany (BMZ. GIZ, KfW) Japan ✓ Korea KOICA ✓ ✓ Netherlands ✓ Norway Portugal ✓ Sweden (Sida) ✓✓✓ Switzerland ✓ USAID ✓✓✓ USA (MCC) ✓ International organizations ADB IDB ✓✓✓ UNDP ✓ ✓ Other organizations ARMP, Senegal ✓

9. YesNo Most common additional safeguards Minimum requirements 33%67% Prior reviews (“No objection” procedures) 42%58% Post reviews 33%67% Spot checks 33%67% Audits 63%37% Social audits 4%96% Do you use a red flag indicator system? 21%79% Recipient-managed procurement Accountability Measures 82 per cent assess relevant national procurement systems

10. Which sanctions are applied?Responses Cancellation of aid programs/projects/contracts 12 Suspension of aid programs/projects/contracts 15 Termination of aid programs/projects/contracts 14 Other sanctions/reactions10 Recipient-managed procurement Sanctions

11. Donors aware of corruption risks Safeguards and sanction policies in place Goal: close gap between policy and practice Additional emphasis needed on verification, due diligence systems, and sanctions Main Messages and Conclusions