1. Simon Scott, OECD International Conference on MDG Statistics, Manila, October 2011 MDGs and Donor Behaviour

2. What would we expect if MDGs had made a difference?  Overall increase in aid  Shifts towards social sectors (especially health)  Adoption of MDGs as targets  Demand for MDG-related indicators

3. Note: Total ODA excludes exceptional debt relief to Iraq and Nigeria in 2005-06.

4. Shift towards social sectors

5. Adoption of MDGs as targets and demand for MDG indicators  UK, Netherlands and Denmark produce MDG reports (heyday early 2000s)  DAC tried a "sector approach" to measuring aid to MDGs (2002-3)  Slower growth of interest in USA, Japan, Australia  Demand for indicators: IAEG, MDG reports, Global Monitoring Report etc.

6. MDG 1: A special case  Halve the share of very poor people in developing countries  Not from a UN conference  More "growth focused" than other MDGs, though still social

7. MDG 1 results  Will be achieved, unlike other MDGs  Mostly not thanks to aid  Food security element neglected until 2008 food security crisis and 2009 L'Aquila G8

8. The “sectoral” MDGs - key donor responses  MDG2 - budget support to allow abolition of school fees  MDG3 - gender mainstreaming reversed - Danish torch campaign, Dutch MDG3 Fund  MDG4 - GAVI and rise of MNCH - Canada most recently in lead  MDG5 - Muffled reaction: MMR reduction target unrealistic; data controversies

9. The “cross-cutting” MDGs  MDG6 - Health spending skewed to AIDS; use of vertical funds (GFATM, PEPFAR); progress on malaria hobbled by DDT controversy; tuberculosis only now taking off  MDG7 - Environment spending skewed to climate change, with niche funding of other issues - e.g. Switzerland on forestry, New Zealand on fisheries. Water management still broadly supported.

10. Conclusions  MDGs have been a major mobilising force for aid donors  Overall, MDGs a positive influence, though lobbying and special interests still present  Can't judge MDGs' impact only from 2000: UN conferences in 1990s set agenda

11. Thank you For more information www.oecd.org/dac