Roundtable Topic 7: Aid effectiveness in situations of fragility and conflict

Roundtable 7 will review progress in implementing the Paris Declaration within the particularly challenging contexts of situations of conflict and fragility. It will provide an opportunity to i) deepen the dialogue on how international engagement can contribute to development, peace and the building of resilient states and ii) to agree on specific follow up activites beyond Accra.

This page comprises information on background resources for Roundtable 7, compiled by the United Nations Development Programme. It does not necesserily represent the views of the Third High Level Forum organizers.

To access detailed information on the background resources for Aid effectiveness in fragile states and conflict situations listed below, please visit the UNDP Aid Effectiveness Portal.

Background Resources

OECD/DAC, Principles for Good International Engagement in Fragile States and Situations
There are ten basic Principles: (i) Take context as the starting point; (ii) Do no harm; (iii) Focus on state-building as the central objective; (iv) Prioritise prevention; (v) Recognise the links between political, security and development objectives; (vi) Promote non-discrimination as a basis for inclusive and stable societies; (vii) Align with local priorities in different ways in different contexts; (vii) Agree on practical coordination mechanisms between international actors; (ix) Act fast but stay engaged long enough to give success a chance; (x) Avoid pockets of exclusion. 

OPM, “Support to piloting the principles for good international engagement in fragile states: Synthesis Report”, October 2006
OPM has been providing support to the piloting exercise for the Principles. Based on its experience, this report notes that donors approved of the idea of a set of Principles for fragile states, and considered that it was possible to develop a national aid-effectiveness agenda on this basis.  However, they stressed the need for flexibility in the application of the Principles, to adapt them to country context. They also noted the tendency of different actors to reach very different conclusions about what the Principles actually mean. There were concerns that the Principles were silent on gender, human rights, democratisation, corruption and the role of the private sector – all of which were considered very important in fragile states.

DAC, “Whole of Government approaches to fragile states”, 2006
This DAC reference document provides guidance on ‘whole of government approaches’ (WGAs) to fragile states – that is, coherent policies and actions across the security, political and economic affairs, as well as the provision of humanitarian and development aid. It notes that these sphere often come into conflict, and government departments often have strong disincentives to work in cooperation with each other. It recommends that WGAs are overseen by the highest level of government, and involve consultations across a wide range of stakeholders, upfront investment in joint analysis and country-specific joint operational strategies. 

Nicholas Leader and Peter Colenso, “Aid instruments in fragile states”, March 2005
This review by DFID of the choice of aid instruments in fragile states looks at joint frameworks for strategic planning and coordination, programme aid (e.g., balance of payments support, debt relief and budget support), technical cooperation, projects, social funds, pooled funding arrangements, multi-donor trust funds, global funds and partnerships, and humanitarian assistance. It notes that the traditional approach of donors was to offer limited funding, mainly humanitarian projects delivered through NGOs, with short time commitments, with TA as an attempt to improve government policies but little attention to alignment. This was exactly the reverse of the Paris Declaration principles. It argues for a new approach, which recognises the diversity of fragile states contexts and, while recognising the element of risks, work nationally and programmatically rather than through projects. Programmatic interventions should work with the state, as well as a broad range of other actors. Strategic frameworks such as Consolidated Action Plans and Transitional Results Matrices can help to provide coherence within and between donors. The general principles of the Paris Declaration should be applied as far as possible, recognising that harmonisation among donors is not substitute for alignment. It recommends careful selection and sequencing of aid effectiveness, based on the interplay of commitment and capacity for poverty reduction. 

ODI, “Harmonisation and alignment in fragile states”, report to the Senior Level Forum on Development Effectiveness in Fragile States, London, January 2005
This study, commissioned by the DAC, assesses whether the harmonisation and alignment agenda is relevant to fragile states. It argues that aid-effectiveness principles are even more important in fragile states, given the potential for donor behaviour to undermine fragile state-building processes. It stresses the differences among fragile states, depending on the level of country leadership and political relations with donors. It introduces the concept of ‘shadow’ systems alignment, whereby donors work in a way that is as compatible as possible with government systems, without necessarily aligning to government policies – for example, using national budgetary classifications and timetables, with a view to moving towards full alignment over time. It contains recommendations around diagnostics, progressive alignment, harmonisation, selectivity and sequencing of interventions, support to policy-making processes and monitoring.

Agulhas, “Developing Poverty Reduction Strategies in Low-Income Countries Under Stress”, January 2005
This report, commissioned by the World Bank and DFID, argues that the PRSP approach is directly applicable to LICUS countries (that is, countries with the lowest CPIA scores). While the undertaking is more difficult and the results more modest, the PRS is nonetheless a useful tool for addressing deep-seated institutional problems. The focus should be on progressive introduction of PRS practices into donor and government behaviour, as and when country conditions allow. Where a PRSP is impractical, donors can rely on a Transitional Results Matrix as a transitional step. It recommends that PRSPs in fragile states should focus more on governance reforms and institutional requirements for poverty reduction, and to focus monitoring more on the process of institutional change. The report is based on six case studies, including Lao PDR, Yemen and Timor Leste. 

Stephen Baranyi & Kristiana Powell, “Fragile states, gender equality and aid effectiveness: a review of donor perspectives”, August 2005
This report notes that gender equality is a central feature of state fragility, and that the burden often falls disproportionately on women and girls. At the same time, gender relations can equally support or undermine political progress. The paper reviews the policies of AusAID, DFID, the DAC, selected UN agencies, USAID and the World Bank. It suggests that they have not begun to bring their expertise on gender into their work on fragile states, concentrating at most on minimalist priorities like providing basic education to girls rather than embedding gender equality in their approach good governance. It recommends more involvement of stakeholders representing women, reviewing analytical frameworks to incorporate gender dimensions and incorporate more gender equality programming tools.

Lisa Chauvet & Paul Collier, “Development effectiveness in fragile states: spillovers and turnarounds”, 2004
This famous econometric study find that, once a state enters ‘fragility’, it is likely to take considerable time to exit that status. The costs of fragility, both to the state itself and its neighbours, are extremely high, estimated at around $80 billion. It stresses the importance of a ‘turnaround’, when a fragile state begins to improve its policies and institutions. It finds that TA delivered before a turnaround has begun has no discernible effect, but can be highly effective after that – that is, it is effective only when a country both wants and needs it. Other forms of assistance are most effective during the middle of the first decade of reform (5th to 8th year of the turnaround). More of Collier’s work can be found on his website. 

DAC Network on Conflict, Peace and Development Co-operation (CPDC)
CPDC is an international forum bringing together conflict prevention and peace-building experts from donor governments, the EC, the UN system and the International Financial Institutions. 

Governance and Social Development Resource Centre (GSDRC)
DFID’s open-access GSDRC contains a useful topic guide on fragile states, including publications on policy coherence, harmonisation and alignment, aid allocation and aid instruments.

World Bank on fragile and conflict-affect states
The World Bank site links through to a large number of publications and sites on conflict analysis, governance and participation, security sector reform, environment, social drivers of conflict and many other issues. The publication “Making aid work in fragile states: case studies of effective aid-financed programs” (2005) contains case studies from Timor Leste and Cambodia.

Conference: Engaging with Fragile States – Challenges and Opportunities, Addis Ababa, July 2007
This event, hosted by the World Bank’s Independent Evaluation Group, was designed to share experience on working in fragile states. It included sessions on governance, capacity building, donor coordination and post-conflict transition. 

Senior Level Forum on Development Effectiveness in Fragile States, London, 13-14 January 2005
This high-level meeting on aid effectiveness in fragile states helped to shape current policy approaches in fragile states. The website contains an extensive list of background papers, on topics such as defining fragile states, policy coherence, aid instruments and service delivery, aid allocation and harmonisation and alignment. 

United Nations – World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNWIDER)
UNWIDER has an extensive list of publications on fragile states and post-conflict recovery, that can be searched on their publications page.