1. UNDP Priorities in Anti-Corruption Programming at the Global Level for 2011-2013 Anga Timilsina, Coordinator, PACDE Regional Workshop, Bratislava, 28 March 2011 Global Thematic Programme on Anti-Corruption for Development Effectiveness (PACDE) 2008 - 2013

2. PACDE: Background 1.PACDE a $10m programme: To provide support to COs and programming countries –Corporate policy and approach –Capacity development (both internal and external) –Advisory support (practice architecture) –Partnership and coordination –Global advocacy and leadership on emerging issues –Knowledge tools/methodologies 2.First phase (2008-2009); Second phase (2010-2013) 3.Second phase: country level focus 2008-2013

3. The Practice Architecture/PACDE Operational Modality Panama Regional Centre New York BDP HQ/DGG Dakar Regional centre Johannesburg Regional Centre Bratislava RC Cairo Regional Centre/POGAR Regional Centre Bangkok Oslo Gov Centre Suva Pacific Centre Regional centres/programmes an entry point

4. Building Synergies DGTTF PACDE Other Global Programmes CO Regional Programmes

5. Why Global Programme? We are much stronger and effective when we pull together our expertise and experiences at global, regional and country levels

6. PACDE Achievements (first phase) Overall achievements at the global level Achievements by Region 1. Clarifying UNDP’s niche (e.g., prevention, mainstreaming, going beyond the minimum) 2.putting necessary management architectures in place 3.Building internal capacities (global and regional CoPs) 4.Strengthening regional networks and service delivery platforms 5.Taking a lead in knowledge & awareness 1.Asia-Pacific: UNCAC review gap analysis 2.Europe and the CIS: the capacity of ACAs (ACPN) 3.Arab region: regional dialogue and network, UNCAC review, integrity in sectors 4.Africa: Contextualization, capacity of CSOs in Francophone Africa 5.LAC: Transparency and accountability in local governments

7. Global Thematic Priorities for 2010-2013 1.Climate Change-Our work with UN-REDD 2.UNCAC review mechanism: Training of reviewing and countries to be reviewed, UNDP niche national dialogue ( Going Beyond the Minimum) 3.Anti-Corruption for MAF: Work in sectors and civil society monitoring, etc. 4.AC in post-conflict and recovery contexts 5.Illicit financial flows 6.Anti-corruption campaign

8. 1. Mitigating Corruption Risks in Climate Change (in the context of REDD+): Awareness and Knowledge; Multi-Stakeholder Engagement; Capacity Development UN-REDD Programme countries receiving direct support to National Programmes: Bolivia, Cambodia, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Ecuador, Indonesia, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, the Philippines, Solomon Islands, Tanzania, Viet Nam and Zambia Other partner countries: Argentina, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Central African Republic, Colombia, Costa Rica, Gabon, Guatemala, Guyana, Kenya, Mexico, Nepal, Nigeria, Republic of Congo, Sri Lanka and Sudan

9. 2. Support to UNCAC implementation To date, 150 parties; each party has to go through the UNCAC review UNDP approach: Prepare the country for review mechanism but encourages broad national stakeholder consultations and going beyond the minimum requirements Group of Eastern European States: State Parties under UNCAC Review Year 1Lithuania, Croatia, Bulgaria, Ukraine Year 2 Slovakia; Serbia; Montenegro; Estonia; Azerbaijan; Russian Federation; Georgia Year 3 Hungary; Slovenia; Latvia; Romania; The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia; Armenia Year 4Poland; Belarus; Bosnia and Herzegovina; Albania; Republic of Moldova

10. 3a. Anti-Corruption in Sectors: “Creating the Missing Middle” Addressing corruption vulnerabilities in specific sectors helps improve service delivery (removing corruption bottlenecks) Depoliticization of problem; contextualized use of tools provides concrete evidence on gaps for policy makers Exiting tools, methodologies, good practices: What we found? Next steps: country level interventions

11. 3b. Strengthening Civil Society and Media --Involving civil society to monitor government expenditures (e.g.,– India, Bolivia, Uganda, Zambia) -- Empowering community to monitor and improve services (India, Nigeria, Kenya, the Philippines) --Training for CSOs on reporting and monitoring corruption (e.g., with UNECA) --Training on investigative journalism – South-South Cooperation (MISA, PCIJ)

12. . Strengthening Anti-Corruption Capacities in Post-Conflict and Recovery Context : Securing peace and stability vs. fighting corruption 1.Advisory support 2.Strengthening internal capacities 3.Coordination and harmonization (Iraq and Afghanistan) 4.Mainstreaming AC on governance and other initiatives (e.g., DRC)

13. 4. Illicit Financial Flows: Hidden Resource for Development Illicit Financial flows (GFI estimates in USD) Resources required annually for the MDGs (UN estimates in USD) Capital outflows about $1 trillion (10 times the amount of OECD-DAC ODA ) Estimates of the funds held offshore- USD11.5 trillion (Annual loss of tax revenue USD 250 bn) Commercial trade mispricing $100bn annual 1.Education for all targets: 30bn 2. HIV/Aids : $25bn 3.Water and sanitation : $18bn 4. Infrastructure investment: $55bn Resources lost from the illicit financial flows are more than enough to fund the resources estimated for meeting the MDGs; but discussion so far is up-scaling resources not preventing leakages

14. Changing Environment: Governance/AC not Just a Monopoly of UNDP 1.New players on Governance, WB, UNCEF, OECD etc. Hence partnership particularly with UNODC more important (CoSP). Decision in BKK for joint COPs, joint fundraising with AUSAid, WG meetings, etc. 2.Donors changing and working in fewer priority countries and working with UNDP as a partner (e.g., GIZ, NORAD, CIDA) hence the division of funder and implementer getting blurred

15. The Role of the Regional Centres and of the Country Offices from the Global Perspective Regional Centres: Strengthen practice architecture; synchronize workplan with COs workplan (Yes, priority one is country level support to see what impact UNDP is making) Country Offices: 1.Take a lead on UNDP’s areas of comparative advantages (e.g., preventive measures, capacity development, engagement with CSO and media; sectoral approach, etc); identify entry points (PACDE contributes the seed money) 2.Increase access to knowledge products, translations, portals, e- discussions, etc. 3.Reporting for impact: Presenting a coherent view hence need to rationalize reporting at national level (ROAR)

16. Thank You!