Development effectiveness

The Global Partnership established at the 4th High Level Forum on Aid effectiveness in Busan (2011) called for the creation of a set of indicators to monitor progress against the commitments made in Busan, alongside with those set out in Paris and in Accra (2015 targets).The Busan indicators are built on the Paris indicators. The following below table presents the ten Busan indicators along with their source of information for monitoring the indicators.

  Source of information for monitoring the indicators
Indicators List national level data Other data source
Indicator 1
Extent of use of country results frameworks by co-operation provider
 
Indicator 2
Civil society operates within an environment that maximizes its engagement in and contribution to development
 
Indicator 3
Engagement and contribution of the private sector to development
(Open Budget Survey & WWG indices)   
Indicator 4
Transparency - information on development co-operation is publicly available
  √  (IATI and OECD-DAC)
Indicator 5

Indicator 5a
annual predictability - proportion of aid disbursed within the fiscal year within which it was scheduled by co-operation providers

Indicator 5b
medium-term predictability - proportion of aid covered by indicative forward spending plans provided at the country level
 
Indicator 6
Aid is on budgets which are subject to parliamentary scrutiny
 
Indicator 7
Mutual accountability strengthened through inclusive reviews
 
Indicator 8
Gender equality and women’s empowerment
 
Indicator 9

Indicator 9a
Quality of developing country PFM systems

Indicator 9b
Use of developing country PFM and procurement systems
√ (CPIA)               
Indicator 10
Aid is untied
  √ (OECD-DAC)

The recent 2016 Global Partnership Effective Development Cooperation (GPEDC) monitoring exercise was conducted to monitor the progress made in implementing the Bussan Partnership using the above ten indicators.  Among the ten indicators used globally, eight indicators were measured based on the data gathered at national level.

2016 Global Partnership on Effective Development Cooperation (GPEDC) Monitoring Survey result

In 2016, Ethiopia participated in the second Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation monitoring survey. The government and its partners have effectively managed development co-operation initiatives to deliver results. Global Partnership data show significant progress in alignment, country ownership and mutual accountability. Official Development finance predictability and use of country systems feature as key areas for progress that requires collective effort from the government and its partners.

Country Ownership

As per 2016 GPEDC monitoring survey result, 97% of new interventions of development cooperation’s objectives were drawn from Government results frameworks or other planning documents, including national development plan, joint donor government strategies, and sectoral strategies. The share of results indicators that rely on data provided by country- led monitoring system is 67% and 80% of interventions plan evaluations supported by the government. In all the three indicators, the national result was above the global average score.

Countries receiving aid has endorsed Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness in 2005 and agreed to strengthen their national system and donors agreed to use them to the maximum extent possible. These commitments were reiterated in the Accra Agenda for Action (2008) and the Busan Outcome Document (2011), where it was agreed that the use of country system (UCS) should be the default approach to channel aid.

However, overall use of country’s public financial management and procurement systems has declined in 2016 GPEDC monitoring survey( 45%) when compared to the last two surveys result 2010 (66%) and 2013/14 (51%).  The 2016 survey results registered decrease in the four areas: national budget execution (25%), financial reporting (42%), National auditing (76) and Use of nation procurement system (33%). Despite all this, CPIA indicator indicated that the quality of Ethiopia’s public finance management system (PFM) has increased  to 4 out of 6 in 2016 monitoring survey compared to the last two surveys 2010 and 2013 (3.5 in both years).

Aid on budget examines the proportion of scheduled disbursements actually recorded in Government’s annual budget (and approved by Parliament). In 2010 only 49% of aid was recorded in the Government’s annual budget, but great progress was made in the latest round of monitoring (2016), with 63%. The indicator serves to record domestic oversight and accountability for the use of development cooperation funding and results (funds can be recorded on budget even if they do not pass through the country’s treasury).

Inclusive Partnership for Development

During 2016 GPEDC monitoring survey, Ethiopia has scored 3.5 out of five for engagement of and contribution of private sector to development. Participation of private sector in the economy is growing and development plans and policies are increasingly consultative with citizens at all levels. In general, the country has set platforms for inclusive multi-stakeholder dialogue on public – private partnership, including trade unions and civil society organizations.

On gender equality and women’s empowerment Ethiopia is cited as one of the few countries with a system in place to track and make public allocations on gender equality and empowerment. Ethiopia finalized its national gender-responsive budgeting guidelines for mainstreaming gender in the program budget process in November 2012. The focus should now be on the implementation of these guidelines.

Transparency and Accountability

Availability of information of development cooperation in the annual and medium term is critical in the efficient allocation and utilization of development resources.

Availability of information of development cooperation in the annual and medium term is critical in the efficient allocation and utilization of development resources. Annual predictability result has declined, 72%  of the total funds disbursed as planned in 2016, compared to 89% in 2013-14 and 88% in 2010.Medium term predictability declined to 33% in 2016, from 85% in 2013/14. This decline could be attributed to changes in sourcing of data. Previously medium term disbursement was predicted by MoFEC based on previous year’s disbursement, while in 2016 the prediction was based on data provided by development partners themselves. Both annual aid predictability and mid-term predictability were below the global average 84% and 74% respectively.

Ethiopia meets the requirement on mutual accountability, by having country-level targets, assessments toward targets, involving non-executive stakeholders, and public results. Although Ethiopia does not have an aid policy or partnership policy, the Development Assistance Group (DAG) and the Ministry of Finance and Economic Cooperation (MoFEC) have previously agreed on an aid effectiveness action plan with clear indicators to measure progress. In addition, the Government and the DAG jointly monitor the Second Growth and Transformation plan and have agreed on common indicators to track progress. The annual High Level Forums (HLF), together with various sector working group and program meetings, regularly discuss the implementation of sector strategies and national priorities. Non-government organizations and CSOs are involved through participation in ad hoc sector working group meetings.

Indicators 2016 Survey result 2016 Global average 2013 Survey result 2010 Survey result

Indicator 1- Providers alignment and use of country led result frameworks

       

 Alignment with Gov objective

97%

85%

   

 Alignment with Gov. result indicators

75%

62%

   

 Monitoring systems

67%

52%

   

 Joint Evaluations

80%

48%

   

Indicator 2. Inclusive partnership for development

       

Indicator 5a Annual Predictability

(Percentage of disbursements made as per schedule)

72%

84%

88%

89%

Disbursed beyond scheduled

(percentage of disbursements made above their plan

47%

     
Indicator 5b Mid-term predictability for the next 3 years

33%

74%

85%

85%

Indicator 6 Aid on Budget

63%

 

66%

49%

Indicator 7 Mutual Accountability

       

Indicator 8 Gender Empowerment

       

Indicator 9a Strengthen of PFM

4/6

 

3.5

3.5

Indicator 9b Use of Country system

  National Budget Execution

  Financial Reporting

  Use of National Audit

  Use of National Procurement system

45%

25%

42%

76%

33%

51%

51%

66%

Indicator 10 Aid is untied

74%

79%