UNDP WATCH: A results take-over of aid effectiveness? How to balance multiple or competing calls for more accountability

Monday, July 18, 2011

A results take-over of aid effectiveness? How to balance multiple or competing calls for more accountability

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THIS ON WWW.ODI.ORG.UK

This event is the second in a series of events focusing on aid effectiveness in the lead up to Fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness in Busan in November 2011.
The language of results is not new – it is integral to the aid effectiveness agenda. But against the backdrop of growing financial constraints, it is receiving renewed emphasis in many donor countries. This debate will explore possible tensions, as well as opportunities, where donors seek to reassure domestic publics that aid is being spent well while they also endeavour to support the needs and priorities of aid recipient countries and their citizens. How can domestic accountability to both these constituencies be supported more effectively? Are there tensions between these different stakeholders and forms of accountability, and how can they be addressed?
Speakers:
Sarah Cliffe - Special Representative and Director, World Development Report 2011: Conflict, Security, and Development
Sue Unsworth - The Policy Practice and ODI Board Member
Alan Hudson - Senior Policy Manager, Governance (Transparency & Accountability), ONE
John Morlu - former Auditor General, Liberia
Chair:
Alison Evans - Director, ODI

No comments:

Andrew Mitchell - says Helen Clark is up to no good!

1. UNDP’s partnership with the World Bank needs to be more effective, particularly in fragile and crisis-affected countries. 2. UNDP’s near universal mandate means its technical resources are spread very thinly. The Board does not provide strategic direction. HR management is weak. It has a weak results chain. 3. There is limited evidence of active senior management consideration of cost control. Country evidence points to mixed progress on demonstrating cost-efficiency. 4. The Executive Board is politicised and there is a lack of consensus on the key areas for reform. It is not clear that current plans for change will deliver the required depth and breadth of reform. 5. Evidence gathered at country level was highly critical of UNDP’s ability to deliver results. Its delivery can be undermined by staffing issues and bureaucratic processes. 6. Its performance in fragile states is mixed. It has reasonable training and a range of guidance and analytical tools but struggles to fill posts. 7. There is no evidence that the Climate Strategy was directly guiding resource allocation decisions

H.E. Dirk Niebel - German Development Minister

"I take the accusations made in the media concerning corruption and breach of fiduciary duty at the Global Fund very seriously and I am sure that the Fund will clarify the matter without delay. Germany is one of the biggest donors to the Global Fund. I have therefore seen to it that a special review will be held. I have frozen all further disbursements to the Fund until matters have been fully clarified, and I will ask a representative of the Fund to come to the BMZ to discuss the matter."

Share now information about illegal dealings at United Nations

Ban Ki Moon supports Ethics Decision on UNDP North Korea