1. 2011 Survey on Monitoring the Paris Declaration
2011 Survey on Monitoring the Paris Declaration
First analysis of Finland’s results
Timo Olkkonen
Department for Development Policy

2. Finland’s results in EU context
Finland’s results in EU context
The EU as Finland’s main reference group
EU 2010 average results above global average on all indicators but one (untying)
Consistent improvement across all indicators > 2009
Finland belongs to better performing EU half
Ranking 7/15 on EU scorecard
Above EU average on 3 indicators
Below EU average on 6 indicators
EU improvement 2007 – 2010 when comparing fixed group of 32 countries…
Development Policy Programme
March 2009

3. Finland vs. EU average scores (all countries)
Finland vs. EU average scores (all countries)
OWNERSHIP 1
Partners have operational development strategies
ALIGNMENT 2
Reliable country systems  3
Aid flows are aligned on national priorities (55%>52%) 4
Strengthen capacity by co-ordinated support (51%<60%) 5a
Use of country PFM systems
 (56%>53%) 5b
Use of country proc. systems (60%<62%)  6
Strengthen capacity by avoiding PIUs (+33% vs. -58%) 7
Aid is more predictable  (46%<51%) 8
Aid is untied  (N/A)
HARMONISATION 9
Use of common arrangements or procedures (47%<50%)
10a
Joint missions to the field (27%>26%)
10b
Joint country analytic work (50%<56%)
MANAGING FOR RESULTS 11
Results-oriented frameworks
MUTUAL ACCOUNTABILITY 12
Mutual accountability

4. Preliminary analysis for Finland
Positive
Progress from 2005 baseline on all indicators except untying
Belong to better performing EU half
Exceed global averages on 7 indicators
Achieved iIlustrative targets for coordinated capacity building and joint analytic work
Development Policy Programme
March 2009

5. Preliminary analysis for Finland
Challenges
Regression from 2007 on most indicators (7/10)
Programme Based Approaches
Identified as key principle in MFA (2009), training and workshops carried out
Finland’s PBA’s decreased by 17.5% including in 6/8 priority partner countries
Parallel implementation units, joint missions & analytic work
With Finland’s national emphasis on PBAs and Use of Country systems → we should do well on these indicators
Should be achievable, if definitions and criteria are clear
→ Need to clarify concepts more explicitly, increase training, emphasise challenges in Development Policy Action Plan?
Development Policy Programme
March 2009

6. Preliminary conclusions
Prioritising and focusing reform efforts matters
The indicators where we have made progress (in both 32 country group and all countries) are the exact themes that we have prioritised in our own reform work:
using country public financial management systems
strengthening the predictability of our aid
Implications for future efforts/priorities?
Development Policy Programme
March 2009

7. Preliminary conclusions
Aid quality argument for partner country concentration?
As a general rule, better performance in priority partner countries
long-standing cooperation,
adequate resourcing and
sufficient volume and scale of operations
…help to deliver better quality aid.
Significance for reducing fragmentation?
Development Policy Programme
March 2009