A STUDY ON AID EFFECTIVENESS IN REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

A STUDY ON AID EFFECTIVENESS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF EDF AND
OTHER DONOR FUNDED PROJECTS BY COMESA, EAC, IGAD AND IOC
By
Emmerentia Erasmus
Commissioned by the IRCC
Financed under the 9th European Development Fund
July 2008

The opinions expressed in this document represent the author’s points of view which are not
necessarily shared by the IRCC, the EU or any of the parties that were contacted for the Study.

CONTENTS
Executive Summary i
Introduction: the Objectives and Structure of the Study 1
CHAPTER ONE
1.1 The Global Aid Effectiveness Agenda 2
1.2 Regional Organisations and the Aid Effectiveness Agenda 3
1.3 Implementing the Paris Declaration Principles in ROs 3
1.4 The EU and its Aid Effectiveness Agenda 6
CHAPTER TWO
2.1 Aid Effectiveness in COMESA 7
2.2 Aid Effectiveness in EAC 11
2.3 Aid Effectiveness in IGAD 15
2.4 Aid Effectiveness in IOC 20
CHAPTER THREE
3.1 Linking the Multiple Levels of Aid Effectiveness 24
3.2 Final Recommendations for Further Action 26
ANNEX 1. Abbreviations and Acronyms
ANNEX 2. List of People Interviewed and Contacted
ANNEX 3. Background Documents

i
Executive Summary
The Objectives and Structure of the Study
The overall objective of this Study is to contribute to the effective use of aid in the implementation
of projects and programmes in support of the mandates, agendas and work plans of the Eastern
Southern Africa and Indian Ocean (ESA-IO) Regional Organisations (ROs). The effective use of
aid enables the ROs to fulfil their mandates and realise their long-term visions. The ESA-IO ROs
are already active in developing instruments and measures to enhance aid effectiveness. This
Study looks at what aid effectiveness means for the ROs, assesses the state of aid effectiveness in
each of the ESA-IO ROs, and proposes a way forward for crafting an aid effectiveness agenda for
each of the ROs. Each RO will need to develop its own aid effectiveness monitorable indicators
and targets, which should be shaped by its donor picture, procedures, and vision. The Member
States (MSs) that constitute the ROs should drive and sustain this process -they provide the ROs
with a mandate, and are best placed to link aid effectiveness efforts at national and regional levels.
CHAPTER ONE
1.1 The Global Aid Effectiveness Agenda
Aid effectiveness became topical in the 1990s and culminated in the 2005 Paris Declaration, which
contains a practical action-oriented roadmap aimed at improving the quality of aid and obtaining
development results. It contains the key principles of the aid effectiveness agenda, which have
been mainstreamed globally in development processes.
1.2 Regional Organisations and the Aid Effectiveness Agenda
The Paris Declaration was designed as a roadmap to enhance aid effectiveness in recipient
countries, and the ESA-IO ROs are not signatories of the Declaration. However, aid effectiveness
is fundamental to the success of the ROs, as it is channelling and implementing aid in a way which
achieves better development results on the ground. The ROs should lead the implementation of
these Principles to ensure that it serves their interests.
1.3 Implementing the Paris Declaration Principles in ROs
Ownership – the RO exercises effective leadership over its own strategy and agenda, and
coordinates its programmes, development actions and support.
Alignment – Development Partner (DP) support is aligned to the strategy of the RO and its
implementation plans and channelled through the systems of the RO.
Harmonisation – DPs actions are more harmonised, transparent and collectively effective.
Managing for Results – managing resources in order to achieve results; informing all planning,
decision-making and programming by the results that the RO aims to achieve.
Mutual accountability – DPs and ROs are held accountable for development results.

ii
CHAPTER TWO
2.1 Aid Effectiveness in COMESA
COMESA’s medium-term Strategic Plan is clearly connected to its long term vision as its shares
the same overall objectives of regional integration: to become a fully integrated Regional Economic
Community. The Strategy should be supplemented with multiannual action plans that connect
activities to results, thereby providing a practical pathway to the medium-term goals. The action
plans should be used to mobilise resources and coordinate funding. The connection between
COMESA’s regional integration agenda and other areas of activity should be made clear in its
goals and action plans.
COMESA’s primary mandate is regional integration and therefore the principle of ownership is
largely enforced through the Regional Integration Support Programme (RISP), which is funded
through the 9th
European Development Fund Eastern Southern Africa and Indian Ocean Regional
Strategy Paper.
The process of becoming eligible for a Contribution Agreement (CA) with the EC has upgraded
COMESA’s financial management and procurement systems to international standards. The funds
for the RISP are channelled directly to COMESA’s systems through the CA, which has enhanced
the predictability of aid, ownership, alignment and harmonisation.
The COMESA Fund, a regionally-owned funding mechanism which is currently being established,
will also enforce these principles, and boost development by financing large-scale investments in
infrastructure.
The EU is COMESA’s most important DP, it has however diversified its resource base and should
strive to harmonise aid delivery mechanisms.
COMESA should restart its results-based Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) system to boost
development results.
2.2 Aid Effectiveness in EAC
EAC aspires to complete economic and political integration. Its 2006 to 2010 Development
Strategy is connected to its long-term vision and incorporates its various sectors of operation. Its
action matrix should be enforced by a result-oriented budget. The M&E system which will be
established to monitor the implementation of the Strategy will spur ownership and mutual
accountability.
EAC’s ownership of its central mandate, regional integration, is also largely carried out by the
RISP. Until EAC becomes CA eligible its RISP activities are implemented using COMESA
procedures.
The EAC Partnership Fund, a basket funding mechanism, has mobilised EAC’s shift to a
programme-based approach, and increased ownership, harmonisation and alignment. Its Steering
Committee is an important forum for information sharing and coordination inside and outside of the
Fund. DPs are contemplating concentrating their support on and partnering in sectors, which will
aid harmonisation and reduce transaction costs.
EAC is planning to establish an EAC Development Fund, which will be similar to the COMESA
Fund in its objectives and mode of operation. EAC is expected to finalise a protocol with COMESA
in the near future, which will enable all its MSs to benefit from the COMESA Fund. The EAC
Development Fund and COMESA Fund should be carefully coordinated.

iii
2.3 Aid Effectiveness in IGAD
IGAD’s mandate covers food security and environmental protection; the promotion and
maintenance of peace and security and humanitarian affairs in the region; and economic
cooperation and integration. IGAD’s vision is to become the premier regional organisation for
achieving peace, prosperity and regional integration in the IGAD region.
IGAD’s 2004 to 2008 Strategy is implemented through annual work plans which provide a clear
pathway to obtaining its goals. However, many activities are never financed and ownership,
alignment and harmonisation are undermined by short-term, piecemeal support. IGAD has two DP
forums which should be reinvigorated and used to achieve greater DP coordination. IGAD’s next
Strategy for the period 2009 to 2013 presents an opportunity to make a strong call on DPs for
coordinated support.
IGAD is planning to develop various funding instruments to overcome its DP dependency and shift
to a programme-based approach. These instruments are: a basket funding mechanism; Public-
Private-Partnerships; an IGAD Endowment Fund; and an Environment Endowment Fund.
IGAD’s Conflict Early Warning and Response Mechanism (CEWARN) has established a CEWARN
Rapid Response Fund; a basket fund which finances short-term projects aimed at preventing, de-
escalating or resolving pastoral and related conflicts in the IGAD region.
IGAD has formulated an Institutional Strengthening Action Plan; its anticipated results will advance
aid effectiveness and include: strengthening existing linkages with DPs; becoming eligible for a CA;
establishing a basket fund; and implementing Results-Based Management and Results-Oriented
Performance Appraisal tools.
2.4 Aid Effectiveness in IOC
IOC’s primary mandate is to promote the sustainable development of its western Indian Ocean
islands. Its 2005 strategic framework outlines its four main areas of activity: political cooperation;
economic and trade cooperation; sustainable regional development; and strengthening of a
regional cultural identity. IOC does not a have strategy which outlines clear actions and results. It
recently launched a strategic refocusing process to determine its future mandate and objectives.
The MSs are contemplating providing IOC with a stronger mandate to address the regional
challenges they are facing. Expanding IOC’s role will require investments in capacity building.
Once MSs have defined IOC’s future mandate and vision, they should embark on developing a
synthesised, result-oriented strategy, which encompasses all its areas of activity, builds its
capacity, and contains prioritised and sequenced actions that are enforced by a budget. The
strategy can be used to call on DPs for coordinated support. Its implementation should be
monitored by a results-based M&E system.
IOC follows a project-based approach, which may be the most effective approach with a limited
number of projects. IOC’s new strategic orientation will determine whether coordinated support for
projects or a programme-based approach, will best fulfil its vision. IOC is contemplating developing
a pool fund to sustain activities over time. The EU is IOC’s most important DP - IOC should initiate
the process of becoming eligible for a CA to allow for capacity building, greater predictability of aid,
ownership and harmonisation.
CHAPTER THREE
3.1 Linking the Multiple Levels of Aid Effectiveness
Aid effectiveness is an integrated agenda which calls for enforcement at national and regional
levels, and for coordination between them to be truly effective. The process of building a focussed

iv
aid effectiveness agenda within each RO has to occur within the context of its linkages to the
national level, to other ROs, and to DP coordination efforts at the regional level. The MSs of ROs,
who are engaged in national and regional level initiatives, are best placed to link the multiple levels
of aid effectiveness and should assume responsibility for driving, owning and sustaining the
process of building holistic, regional aid effectiveness agendas. The Inter-Regional Coordinating
Committee (IRCC) can play a central role in connecting the ESA-IO ROs to actors and processes
that impact on their work, and should also be a forum through which they coordinate their aid
effectiveness agendas. The overlapping memberships of the ROs make them interdependent - it is
vital that their aid effectiveness agendas and instruments are developed in coordination with one
other.
3.2 Final Recommendations for Further Action
COMESA
Medium-Term Strategic Plan
Develop the 2011-2014 Medium Term Strategic Plan on the basis of the results it should
achieve.
Incorporate the Paris Declaration Principles into the Strategy.
Action plans for each sector/area of operation, containing the results in that area, and the
activities which will lead to the results, should supplement the Strategy.
The results should be monitored by a results-based M&E system.
Organise a DP Forum meeting and ‘sell’ the logic of the Strategy and its accompanying action
plans to the DPs.
Encourage DPs to jointly support an action plan.
Encourage DPs to switch to aid delivery through COMESA’s systems.
Make Aid Effectiveness a Priority
Develop aid effectiveness indicators for each of the action plans and incorporate them into the
M&E system.
Develop overall aid effectiveness targets based on the indicators.
The COMESA Secretariat, COMESA MSs and DPs jointly draft an aid effectiveness
declaration.
Convene a COMESA staff retreat to raise awareness on aid effectiveness.
Discuss aid effectiveness and means to improve it during the COMESA policy organ meetings.
Build and maintain an updated programme database.
It should indicate funding support and needs, and be used to ‘market’ the action plans.
EAC
Development Strategy
Incorporate a result-oriented budget into the action matrix.
Establish the M&E system which is to monitor the execution of the Strategy.
Develop aid effectiveness indicators and incorporate them into the M&E system.
The EAC Secretariat, EAC MSs and DPs jointly draft an aid effectiveness declaration.
Convene an EAC staff retreat to raise awareness on aid effectiveness.

v
Discuss aid effectiveness and means to improve it during the EAC policy organ meetings.
EAC Partnership Fund
Develop a multiannual strategy for the EAC Partnership Fund.
Encourage DPs to stipulate the amounts and dates of disbursements for the Partnership Fund.
Encourage all DPs to attend the EAC Partnership Fund Steering Committee meetings.
Discuss aid effectiveness during the Steering Committee meetings.
Aid Effectiveness in Sectors
Encourage DPs to concentrate on, or lead in certain sectors.
Encourage DPs that want to support activities that fall outside of the scope of the Fund to
switch to aid delivery through EAC’s systems.
EAC Development Fund
Discuss with COMESA how the EAC Development Fund and COMESA Fund will be
harmonised to promote aid effectiveness.
IGAD
2009- 2013 Strategy
Use IPF and ISIC meetings to raise awareness about the IGAD Strategy and make a strong
call for coordinated support.
Encourage DPs to concentrate on, or partner in sectors.
Use the Strategy as a basis for selecting and developing projects.
Implement results-based management of programs.
Establish a results-based M&E system to monitor the implementation of the Strategy.
Advertise the Strategy to new and non-traditional DPs.
‘Sell’ the Strategy on the IGAD website.
Use the logical framework to identify funding gaps and to approach DPs for support.
Establish a basket funding mechanism.
Establish an IGAD Endowment Fund.
Develop Public-Private-Partnerships.
Establish National Steering Committees to allow for better coordination between MSs and the
IGAD Secretariat.
The IGAD Secretariat, IGAD MSs and DPs jointly draft an aid effectiveness declaration.
Convene an IGAD staff retreat to raise awareness on aid effectiveness.
Discuss aid effectiveness and means to improve it during the IGAD policy organ meetings.
DP Forums
Openly discuss the lack of DP coordination in IPF and ISIC and establish clear priorities and
objectives for these forums.
Allow and encourage DPs who are not members of IPF to attend its meetings as observers.
Discuss aid effectiveness in the DP forums.

vi
IOC
Medium-Term Strategy
MSs must define and commit to a future mandate and vision for IOC.
A synthesised, result-oriented strategy should be developed to enforce IOC’s future role.
Incorporate the Paris Declaration Principles into the strategy.
The implementation of the strategy should be monitored by a results-based M&E system.
Convene a DP forum to discuss the new strategic orientation of IOC and funding for its
strategy.
Mobilise the process of qualifying for a CA.
IOC’s new strategic orientation will determine whether coordinated support for projects or a
programme-based approach, will best fulfil its vision.
The IOC Secretariat, IOC MSs and DPs jointly draft an aid effectiveness declaration.
Convene an IOC staff retreat to raise awareness on aid effectiveness.
Discuss aid effectiveness and means to improve it during the IOC policy organ meetings.
IRCC
Serve as a Forum for Regular Dialogue on Aid Effectiveness:
to enable the ESA-IO ROs to develop their aid effectiveness agendas and instruments in
coordination with one another;
harmonise the aid effectiveness efforts of the ESA-IO ROs, SADC and the EU;
bring other regional stakeholders such as Non State Actors, the private sector and the MSs of
the ROs into aid effectiveness discussions;
engage DPs on their aid effectiveness commitments;
bring various possesses which potentially impact on aid effectiveness, such as Aid For Trade,
into aid effectiveness discussions.
Develop an IRCC-Specific Aid Effectiveness Indicator and Related Targets
The indicator and relevant target should take into account the coordination and harmonisation
of DP funded projects and programmes between the ESA-IO ROs, and be included in their aid
effectiveness agendas.
Enhance Use of the CA
Use IRCC meetings to exchange information and experiences on accomplishing a CA and to
generate means to maximise its aid effectiveness potential.

1
Introduction: the Objectives and Structure of the Study
The overall objective of this Study is to contribute to the effective use of aid in the implementation
of projects and programmes in support of the mandates, agendas and work plans of the Eastern
Southern Africa and Indian Ocean (ESA-IO) Regional Organisations (ROs). The effective use of
aid enables the ROs to fulfil their mandates and realise their long-term visions. The ESA-IO ROs
are already active in developing instruments and measures to enhance aid effectiveness. This
Study looks at what aid effectiveness means for the ROs, assesses the state of aid effectiveness in
each of the ESA-IO ROs, and proposes a way forward for crafting an aid effectiveness agenda for
each of the ROs. This Study is limited in terms of time and scope. Its purpose is to kick-start
broader, more in-depth processes on aid effectiveness within and between the ROs, which will lead
to composing focussed aid effectiveness agendas with monitorable indicators and targets for each
of the ROs.
Aid effectiveness is based on simple concepts which have complex implications. Consolidating aid
effectiveness will be an individual process for the ROs, which each have unique dynamics and
challenges to overcome. This is a process which requires commitment, and will grow over time and
with experience. Each RO will need to develop its own aid effectiveness indicators and targets,
which should be shaped by its donor picture, procedures, and vision. The Member States (MSs)
that constitute the ROs should drive and sustain this process - they provide the ROs with a
mandate, and are best placed to link aid effectiveness efforts at national and regional levels.
The first chapter explains the origins and Principles of the Paris Declaration, and how they are
relevant to the effective delivery and implementation of aid in ROs. It also briefly highlights the EU’s
aid effectiveness agenda, which is a very important Development Partner (DP) for all the ESA-IO
ROs and has committed strongly to the Paris Declaration Principles.
Following on the explanation of what aid effectiveness means for ROs, the second chapter makes
a qualitative assessment of the state of aid effectiveness within each of the ESA-IO ROs. It lays out
the instruments and measures they are developing to enhance aid effectiveness, and makes
proposals on how to consolidate and improve aid effectiveness within the ROs.
The last chapter focuses on the different levels of aid effectiveness – national, regional and global.
It notes that aid effectiveness is a holistic concept which demands the synchronisation of aid
effectiveness initiatives at the various levels. The process of developing a focussed aid
effectiveness agenda for each of the ROs has to be integrated with national level aid effectiveness
agendas, DP coordination at the regional level, and coordination between the ROs. The Study
concludes with final recommendations for each of the ESA-IO ROs on the process of composing a
prioritised aid effectiveness agenda. Recommendations are also made for the Inter-Regional
Coordinating Committee (IRCC), which should play a central role in connecting the ESA-IO ROs to
the actors and processes that impact on their work and the development results that they plan to
achieve.

2
CHAPTER ONE
1.1 The Global Aid Effectiveness Agenda
1. The rise of the international aid effectiveness agenda took hold in the 1990s, as the
development community increasingly recognised the aid inefficiency produced by the different and
uncoordinated agendas and requirements of donors and aid agencies. In 2002 the Monterrey
Consensus committed the global community to more and better aid, and in 2003 the Rome High-
Level Forum on Harmonisation maintained the momentum by calling for aligning aid to partners’
strategies, harmonising donors’ policies and procedures, and implementing principles of good
practice in development cooperation.1
The aid effectiveness agenda culminated in the 2005
Paris Declaration which contains a practical action-oriented roadmap aimed at improving
the quality of aid and obtaining development results. The Declaration, signed by more than
one hundred donor countries, multilateral donors, recipient countries, and civil society observers,
has been internationally recognised as one the cornerstones of development cooperation. The
Paris Declaration contains the key principles of the aid effectiveness agenda, which have been
mainstreamed globally in development processes.
2. The implementation of these principles is monitored through 12 global targets for 2010. For
recipient countries achieving these targets include operational development strategies and reliable
procurement and public financial management systems. Donors, on the other hand, need to align
aid flows to recipients’ national priorities, strengthen recipient country capacity, increase aid
predictability, as well as the proportion of untied aid and the use of common arrangements or
procedures, and share analysis. Mutual accountability is enforced through partner countries having
mutual assessment reviews in place by 2010.
3. In September 2008 the Third High-Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness will be convened in Accra.
The agenda will include: taking stock of the progress made in aid effectiveness, expanding the
dialogue to newer actors, and shaping the next steps for continuing international efforts to enhance
aid effectiveness.3
1
OECD (2005) “Harmonisation, Alignment, Results: Progress Report on Aid Effectiveness”.
2
(2005) “Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness”.
3
http://www.accrahlf.net .
THE PARIS DECLARATION PRINCIPLES
Ownership - partner countries exercise effective leadership over their development policies and
strategies, and coordinate development actions.
Alignment - donors base their overall support on partner countries’ national development
strategies, institutions and procedures.
Harmonisation - donors’ actions are more harmonised, transparent and collectively effective.
Managing for Results - managing resources and improving decision-making for results.
Mutual Accountability - donors and partners are accountable for development results.2

3
1.2 Regional Organisations and the Aid Effectiveness Agenda
4. The ESA-IO ROs are not signatories of the Paris Declaration. The Paris Declaration was
designed as a roadmap to augment the effectiveness of aid within recipient countries, and its
indicators measure the implementation of aid effectiveness principles in recipient countries. The
second draft of the Accra Agenda for Action, the forerunner to the final version to be adopted at the
High-Level Forum in September 2008, also does not make any reference to ROs. However, as
recipients of aid, implementing the principles of the Paris Declaration enables the ROs to fulfil their
mandates and achieve their goals. Aid effectiveness is not an end in itself: it is simply
channelling and implementing aid in a way which achieves better development results on
the ground. ROs have an important role to play in optimising the effectiveness of aid, as they are
created to meet the gap between what can be achieved on a national level, and what needs to be
achieved on a regional level. For the aid effectiveness agenda to be sustained and truly in the
interest of the ROs, they need to be in the driver’s seat. The commitments made by DPs across
the world to the Paris Declaration, and the continuing international focus on aid
effectiveness with the upcoming Accra High-Level Forum, empowers the ROs to demand
and lead on the application of the Paris Principles. These Principles are also reflected in the
10th
European Development Fund (EDF) ESA-IO Regional Strategy Paper (RSP), as they are
recognised as essential to achieving the overarching objectives of the RSP: the eradication of
poverty and attaining the MDGs. It is globally acknowledged that more funds are needed to attain
the MDGs. The EU’s Aid Effectiveness Roadmap to Accra and beyond rightly points out, that for
the scaling up of aid to make a significant difference, it needs to be matched by more efficient
delivery.
1.3 Implementing the Paris Declaration Principles in ROs
Ownership – the RO exercises effective leadership over its own strategy and agenda, and
coordinates its programmes, development actions and support.
5. Ownership starts with having a unified strategic framework: a long-term vision clearly connected
to a medium-term strategy which contains prioritised, sequenced actions, that are tied to a budget
and enables the RO to fulfil its mandate and vision. The planning, development and
implementation of the medium-term strategy needs to be driven and shaped by the results it will
actuate. Programmes have to be harmonised and grounded in the strategy, thereby collectively
implementing the strategy, realising the results it set as targets, and building towards the long-term
vision of the RO.
Alignment – DP support is aligned to the strategy of the RO and its implementation plans,
and channelled through the systems of the RO.
6. The principles of alignment and ownership are entwined - the RO needs to have a
comprehensive, outcome-oriented medium-term strategy, translated into harmonised
implementation plans which funds can be aligned to. Many ROs become stretched thin over a
spectrum of activities and sectors, without having a clear plan of how all their activities and sectors
are strategically linked to fulfil their overall mission. The funding constraints of ROs may cause
them to take on funding and activities that do not subscribe to priorities, exhaust limited capacities
and impede the accomplishment of set goals. A good strategy that DPs can ‘buy into’, facilitates

4
the RO’s control over its own mandate and future. Naturally, DPs may still want the RO to
implement specific projects that do not match its strategy, in spite of its logic and vision. Exercising
effective leadership in these cases may mean turning down funds, when the overall impact of
taking on the project is negative for the RO. Central to ownership is coordinating the support of
donors in order to realise the RO’s objectives.
7. The second element of alignment entails developing reliable public financial management and
procurement systems for aid delivery within the RO. Using different systems for different DPs
imposes high transaction costs, and capacities built in using these systems are rendered
redundant once the funding ends. By contrast, use of the RO’s systems presents a lasting
opportunity to build its own management capacity, strengthen its own systems and align
aid, whilst also fostering mutual accountability and harmonisation. A further aspect of
alignment is the predictability of aid - the RO cannot effectively plan and implement its strategy
amidst unpredictable aid flows. This is a problem generally experienced by ROs - DPs are often
unable to predict future funding, and their bureaucracies tend to hinder the timely delivery of aid.
Aid being untied is also factored into alignment. Aid accompanied by conditions undermines
ownership and alignment, and often also the most efficient use of resources. The World
Bank estimates that tied aid raises the cost of goods and services by up to 30%, in addition to
being a procedural obstacle to joint operations.4
Tied aid in the case of ROs may mean that the
source of technical assistance and procurement is given, or that certain countries are excluded as
a procurement source.
8. A Contribution Agreement (CA) with the EC offers a promising opportunity to the ESA-IO
ROs to boost ownership, alignment and most importantly the predictability of aid. The EC is
a core partner for the ROs, and a CA enables the channelling of aid through the RO’s own
systems. The RO is subjected to a diagnostic study which reviews its financial management and
procurement systems, and determines the changes required for them to meet international
standards. The RO becomes eligible for a CA once these recommendations are successfully
implemented. The CA should also encourage other DPs to move to using the RO’s systems.
Harmonisation - DPs’ actions are more harmonised, transparent and collectively effective.
9. For ROs moving from a project to a programme-based approach is key to facilitating
harmonisation. As DPs pursue their own priorities, ROs may find themselves subjected to
piecemeal, project-based support which hampers the integration of their projects and programmes
into their overall vision. A comprehensive, synthesised strategy should serve as an impetus and a
platform for DP coordination. Instruments for harmonisation, which also nurture ownership and
alignment, include joint financing, such as pool funds and other common arrangements for the
management and delivery of aid; joint and harmonised assistance strategies; sharing of analysis;
and joint reviews. Harmonisation action plans, set in a time bound format with responsibilities
within sectors, or programmes assigned to DPs or clusters of DPs is a further option. Fundamental
to DP coordination is transparency of funding - sharing fully current and future disbursement plans
to allow for strategic planning. Multiannual funding, facilitated though the CA or pooled funds, is
encouraged to enforce harmonisation, ownership, alignment and predictability of aid. In cases
where DP coordination is quite advanced, DPs may wish to operate though the division of labour in
4
EC (2008) “An EU Aid Effectiveness Roadmap to Accra and beyond”, p.22.

5
order to counter the transaction costs which the fragmentation of aid imposes; hence DPs may give
up certain sectors and concentrate on others where they have a comparative advantage, or lead,
follow or partner in a sector. Effective and sustainable partnerships for harmonisation will
take time to develop and require an initial investment to reap the benefits in the medium-
term. RO and DP staff need to be made aware of the cost and long term pay-offs of harmonisation
and be motivated to sustain the process. Harmonisation activities that generate the greatest impact
should be selected.
Managing for Results – managing resources in order to achieve results; informing all
planning, decision-making and programming by the results that the RO aims to achieve.
10. Result-oriented thinking should be embedded within all processes of the RO. Managing for
results begins with identifying key goals and developing strategies to realise them. In programming,
activities should be selected on the basis of the results that they will accomplish; the anticipated
results should inform the budgets of programmes and the implementation of the activities.
Documentation for all assistance programmes should include a results framework containing the
anticipated results and the actions leading to those results. Results-based monitoring and
evaluation (M&E) systems are important to manage ongoing programmes, demonstrate
progress achieved and steer strategic planning. DPs should harmonise their results reporting
requirements with the results-based monitoring and evaluation system of the RO.
Mutual Accountability – DPs and ROs are held accountable for development results.
11. Joint assessments of programmes and commitments made provide opportunities for shaping
future cooperation and improving on results. On the part of the DPs, mutual accountability will be
strengthened by comprehensive, timely, and transparent information on aid flows. ROs can
contribute to this relationship by producing timely and high quality reports. MSs of ROs should
demonstrate their commitment by paying their contributions on time and regularly attending the
meetings of their RO, such as policy organ meetings.
INSTRUMENTS AND MECHANISMS TO ENHANCE AID EFFECTIVENESS
Joint Financing, such as Pool Funds and other Regionally-Owned Funding Mechanisms
Joint and Harmonised Assistance Strategies
Harmonisation Action Plans
Multiannual Funding
Division of Labour
Sharing Analysis
Joint Reviews
Results- Based Monitoring and Evaluation Systems
Comprehensive, Timely and Transparent Information on Aid flows
Accurate and Timely Reporting on Programmes

6
1.4 The EU and its Aid Effectiveness Agenda
12. As mentioned earlier, the ROs should capitalise on the commitments made by DPs to the aid
effectiveness agenda. The EU is a very important DP of all four the ESA-IO ROs, and has taken
several steps to embed aid effectiveness within its development cooperation. In 2005 the EU for
the first time adopted a set of common values, principles and objectives for its development policy;
the European Consensus for Development would guide the development cooperation of the EU at
Member States and community levels. It endorsed the principles of ownership, partnership,
delivering more and better aid and policy coherence for development5
. Other important policy
developments that followed include the 2006 EU Aid Action Plan; EU Aid: Delivering, more better
and faster, containing a list of concrete measures to be developed and implemented by 2010, and
the 2007 EU Code of Conduct on Division of Labour in Development Policy, which endeavours to
promote complementarity and division of labour among EU donors. It recognises that development
cooperation is part of donor countries' foreign policy toolbox, and that domestically it is expected of
donors to appear visible in poverty-reduction related sectors, such as education and health. In
order to address these political hurdles the Code of Conduct, inter alia, proposes: at least one EU
donor to be active in a strategic sector; establishing partnerships with other donors, thereby acting
as a lead or in delegated cooperation with other donors in a sector; applying these principles of in-
country division of labour to cooperation with regional institutions, whose activities and volumes of
aid are growing. The 2008 EU Aid Effectiveness Roadmap to Accra and beyond also recognises
regional organisations as increasingly important actors, as the EU strives to strengthen its strategic
partnerships with regions around the world. As drivers for progress, the use of recipient’s
systems is regarded as key to capacity building, and budget and sector support as the best
instruments for supporting ownership, alignment and lowering transaction costs in
international aid.
5
Policy Coherence for Development recognises that policies other than development cooperation have a strong impact
on developing countries. Hence the EU should take into account its development cooperation objectives in all policies
that it implements which are likely to affect developing countries.

7
CHAPTER TWO
2.1 AID EFFECTIVENESS IN COMESA
13. COMESA, consisting of 19 MSs,6
has as its core mandate regional integration, and as its
vision to become a fully integrated Regional Economic Community. COMESA, founded in 1994,
originates from the Preferential Trade Area for Eastern and Southern Africa, created in 1981 as
part of the OAU Abuja Treaty. COMESA is to be one of the building blocks of the African Economic
Community, a continental goal set for 2025. COMESA launched its Free Trade Area (FTA) in 2000,
and is preparing to launch its Customs Union by 2008. It plans to achieve a Common Market by
2014 and a Monetary Union by 2018.7
COMESA’s mandate and objectives are guided by its
Treaty, its 1999 Vision and Strategy, designed to be a roadmap for the long-term implementation of
COMESA’s objectives, and its 2007-2010 Medium Term Strategic Plan, which is to provide for the
gradual and coherent implementation of its regional integration agenda. The medium-term Strategy
outlines three strategic orientations, or directions to be pursued over the four year period. Broad,
long-term goals are associated with these strategic orientations, which are to be met through
strategies - actions, decisions or policies that should guide COMESA MSs towards the respective
goal.
Ownership starts with having a unified strategic framework: a long term vision clearly connected
to a medium-term strategy which contains prioritised, sequenced actions, that are tied to a
budget and enables the RO to fulfil its mandate and vision.
14. The Strategy is clearly connected to COMESA’s long-term vision, as it shares the same overall
objective of regional integration and lays out the general actions and policies needed to steer the
organisation in the medium-term towards the attainment of its long-term objectives. The Strategy
should be supplemented with multiannual action plans that connect activities to results,
and in doing so provides a practical pathway to the medium-term goals. The action plans
should contain prioritised, sequenced, actions clearly connected to the results, which are set to
timelines and enforced by a budget. A strategy clearly spelled out in action plans will help the RO
maintain ownership of its development, stay on course to its long-term vision and ensure that
funding is aligned to its priorities. The action plans can be used as a platform to engage DPs,
mobilise resources, and lead on coordination of funding and programmes, as well as
identify funding gaps which are hampering the attainment of certain goals. The action plans
will help to discern whether funding or projects proposed by DPs will contribute to meeting
COMESA’s objectives, or in fact detract from it and place unnecessary strain on administrative
capacities. It may also serve as an entry point to joint financing, as DPs are convinced of the logic
of the strategy and the need for predictability and alignment of funding to enact it successfully. The
commitment of MSs is vital to safeguard the chosen priorities from being changed in mid-course by
6
The MSs are Burundi, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Libya,
Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Rwanda, Seychelles, Sudan, Swaziland, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe.
7
“ESA-IO 10th
EDF RSP”, April 2008 draft, p.9.

8
technical committees or other bodies, as has been the experience in the past with COMESA’s work
programmes.
15. Although COMESA’s mandate is primarily one of regional integration, it also operates in other
areas which impact on trade and development, such as health and peace and security. How these
areas are linked to COMESA’s overall vision and are integrated with its economic focus, should be
made clear in its goals and action plans. A strategy tied to practical action plans would aid the
coordination between the different sectors and programmes and prevent duplication and the
wastage of resources; it would also facilitate the integration of the various programmes into the
long-term vision of the RO.
16. The principle of ownership is largely enforced through the Regional Integration Support
Programme (RISP) – the RISP implements COMESA’s regional integration agenda, which is
its primary mandate. The RISP falls under the Economic Integration and Trade focal area of the
9th
EDF ESA-IO RSP. Its overarching objective is to contribute to the ESA-IO region’s integration
process by supporting the regional integration programmes of the ESA-IO ROs. COMESA and
EAC, as the ROs with specific regional integration agendas, are the direct beneficiaries of the
RISP. IOC and IGAD, whose treaties include an integration mandate, support the implementation
of the COMESA integration agenda through respectively a MoU and a Protocol with COMESA. The
RISP aims to strengthen the capacity of the ROs and their MSs in policy formulation,
implementation and monitoring of regional integration, as well as multilateral and regional trade.
17. The RISP, which is implemented through a CA, has been a catalyst for change. A diagnostic
study by the EC highlighted the programming, and financial and procurement systems and
management changes that had to be made in order to become eligible for a CA. Following the
implementation of various recommendations, the CA was signed between COMESA and the EC on
the 22nd
of July 2005. Ownership, alignment and predictability of aid have therefore been greatly
enhanced. Commitments can now be made on the budget and activities in the work plan
implemented, without needing the prior approval of the EC. Support is long-term and control ex
post, which allows for effective planning and more predictable programme actions. The RO has the
flexibility to adapt and improve its systems, which is not possible when using a DP’s procedures.
The fact that the EC has trusted COMESA with a CA, should also encourage the other DPs, who
still follow a project-based approach, to switch to using COMESA’s systems for aid delivery.
18. The RISP also enforces the principle of managing for results; it is structured around
nine key expected results and has an activity-based and result-oriented budget. In this sense
the RISP is a pilot project for COMESA, whereby once its success has been demonstrated its
approach can be expanded to other programmes. The mid-term evaluation of the RISP, which is
expected to take place in the near future, will determine to what extent the objectives of the RISP
have been met. It will also indicate the degree to which the CA has delivered as a tool for
ownership, alignment and predictability of aid, and the opportunities for further improvement.
Regionally-owned funding mechanisms cultivate ownership, alignment and harmonisation.
19. The COMESA Fund constitutes a regionally-owned funding mechanism and comprises two
windows: the COMESA Infrastructure Fund (CIF) and the COMESA Adjustment Facility.

9
Substantial investment in infrastructure is required to generate economic growth which will fuel
meaningful reductions in the levels of poverty in the region. The CIF, consisting of a Pooled Fund,
is designed to finance regional infrastructure projects that spur regional integration and reduce the
cost of cross-border transactions. The CIF could also be used to support pressing regional
concerns, such as agricultural development, food security and renewable energy. Although the CIF
will be similar to other infrastructure funds operating in Africa, it will have a unique focus on trade
and integration objectives.8
The CIF will receive contributions from MSs, donors, International
Financing Institutions (IFIs) and other private sector actors. MSs will be expected to contribute to
the CIF first, demonstrating their commitment. These funds, together with grants and soft loans
from donors, will form the basis of permanent capital, and would provide for the launching of the
CIF. The CIF will have to be sold as an attractive investment opportunity to other investors, whose
support will make the large-scale projects the CIF envisions possible. Exactly how the CIF will be
structured and function is still to be determined; this window is not yet operational. The modalities
of the CIF9
foresee the establishment of an Infrastructure Fund Committee, with representatives of
MSs who have ratified the Protocol and paid contributions into the Pooled Fund, and donors and
IFIs who have contributed to the Pooled Fund. In order to ensure that COMESA MSs maintain
ownership of the CIF, they would retain 50% of the vote, allocated equally to each participating MS.
The other 50% would be allocated to donors and IFIs, in proportion to their contributions made to
the Pooled Fund. Discussions are also ongoing as to other measures which could be used to
safeguard MSs and the region’s interests. The day to day management of the CIF will be the
responsibility of a Fund Manager, who will have to be of significant standing to attract the
necessary investments and produce the desired results. Through the use of the Pooled Fund
significant progress can be made in aligning long-term predictable funds to COMESA’s
integration agenda and fulfilling its development objectives, especially if ownership of the
CIF is carefully managed to remain in service of COMESA’s priorities.
20. The Adjustment Facility, which consists of grants, is already operational. It was initially devised
to provide budgetary support to MSs who, as COMESA shifted to a FTA and reduced tariffs, would
suffer short-term shortfalls in national budgets. In November 2007 the EC signed for 78 million
Euros to fund the Regional Integration Support Mechanism (RISM), which falls under the
Adjustment Facility. The RISM’s purpose is to assist countries in addressing short-term constraints
experienced at the national level in implementing trade liberalisation policies. The COMESA
Secretariat has been trying to recast the Adjustment Facility to meet social adjustment costs
associated with integration, as national budget shortfalls have been less than expected and MSs
started reducing tariffs before funds were mobilised for the Facility. Thus using the Facility now to
reward those who joined the FTA later, as opposed to those who joined earlier without benefiting
from compensation, is not a productive incentive scheme. Shifting gear to provide support to social
adjustment costs should urge motivation for and adaptation to further trade liberalisation in the
region.
21. Aid for Trade (AFT) to target supply-side constraints to trade, could also be channelled through
the COMESA Fund, namely trade-related infrastructure through the CIF and adjustment support
through the Adjustment Facility.10
AFT will serve as an additional resource mobilisation mechanism;
8
Pearson, M. (2008) “Brief for the Door VC on the COMESA Fund”.
9
“Annex 10 Modalities of the COMESA Infrastructure Fund”, ESA-IO 10th
EDF RSP, April 2008 draft.
10
Pearson, M. (2008) “Brief for the Door VC on the COMESA Fund”.

10
COMESA, EAC and SADC are developing a common AFT strategy which will be used to develop
attractive packages of projects for financing at the regional and national levels. This strategic
approach will help to coordinate interventions in the infrastructure sector, of which a number
already exist for Africa, such as the EU Partnership on Infrastructure and the G8 Initiative on
Infrastructure. The influx of funds via the COMESA Fund will alter COMESA’s donor picture
as private investors and IFIs step in; this may generate new dynamics and serve as an
opportunity for greater coordination, whilst requiring innovative thinking on coordination.
22. The EU is still COMESA’s most important DP, although its resource base has diversified with
support progressively expanding to include a number of DPs: the African Capacity Building
Foundation; African Development Bank (ADB); AU/NEPAD; Canada; China; Commonwealth
Secretariat; UK Department For International Development (DFID); France; Germany; India;
Japan; United Nations Industrial Development Organisation (UNIDO); United States Agency for
International Development (USAID) and the World Bank.11
There is no official coordination between
DPs; informal contact takes place between DPs funding the same programme and some DPs show
more flexibility in combining activities than others. The prioritisation of DPs cause some activities in
the COMESA work programme to be fixed, prior to its development, which negatively impacts on
ownership and alignment. The harmonisation of delivery mechanisms would reduce
transaction costs and aid strategic planning. Until now joint reviews by donors have not taken
place, although there may be some informal sharing of analysis. And assessments of programmes
are taking place on an individual basis.
23. In 2007 COMESA started developing a results-based M&E system which would be used
throughout the organisation and enforced as part of staff responsibilities. It was to entail the
adoption of predictable and standardised planning and M&E cycles, including quarterly reviews.
Staff changes have temporarily brought the system to a standstill - it is important to restart this
crucial work. If these systems are well established and the information which it generates on
opportunities for improvement fed into decision-making and the implementation of programmes,
significant gains can be made in achieving development results. It should also bolster mutual
accountability as information on progress is regularly generated which can be shared with DPs.
MSs should nourish mutual accountability by paying their contributions in full and on time, and DPs
by delivering aid on time.
11
COMESA (2007) “COMESA Annual Report”, p. 64.

11
Coordination mechanisms between
regional and national levels, which
focus on the coordination of projects
and programmes, and have been
established by the RO.
Intergovernmental Committee, an
interdisciplinary body composed of senior
government officials from MSs, it is
responsible for the development and
management of programmes and action plans
in different sectors of cooperation.
It synthesises the recommendations of
technical committees and transmits reports to
the Council of Ministers.
Technical Committees consist of experts in
various sectors. They guide and monitor the
implementation of cooperation programmes in
their sector.
Donor to Donor Coordination
Mechanisms
Informal Coordination
Donor to RO Coordination Mechanisms Informal Coordination
Aid Delivery mechanisms established
or proposed by the RO to enhance Aid
Effectiveness
COMESA Fund
2.2 AID EFFECTIVENESS IN EAC
24. EAC profits from a history of cooperation in East Africa, with the first East African Community
spanning ten years, from 1967 to 1977. The Treaty establishing the EAC of today was signed in
November 1999. EAC’s core focus is its regional integration mandate. It launched the Customs
Union in 2005, which it plans to complete by 2010; the Common Market and Monetary Union is to
follow in 2010 and 2015 respectively.12
EAC, like COMESA and IGAD, is one of the eight building
blocs (Regional Economic Communities- RECs) of the AU driven African Economic Community. In
contrast to the other ESA-IO ROs, EAC also aspires to becoming a Political Federation, thus
seeking deep economic, social and political cooperation and integration. Hence EAC is active in a
range of areas, including agriculture, tourism and wildlife management and peace and security.
EAC benefits from having a small number of MSs which makes coordination and ownership of the
RO less cumbersome and lengthy. The five MSs13
share a regional identity which drives political
commitment to EAC. Its enlargement to include Rwanda and Burundi in 2007 has posed some
challenges as these are young, maturing democracies, but plans to fast-track their integration have
been making headway.
25. EAC’s current mid-term strategy, the 2006 - 2010 Development Strategy, has as its primary
objectives to consolidate and complete the Customs Union, establish the Common Market, and lay
12
“ESA-IO 10th
EDF RSP”, April 2008 draft, p.9.
13
The five MSs are Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Uganda.

12
the foundations for the Monetary Union and the Political Federation; it is therefore in line with the
long-term vision of the RO which centres on these four pillars. The Strategy highlights the
shortcomings of the previous 2001 - 2005 Development Strategy and the challenges which
obstructed its fruition; the current Strategy is to be informed by the lessons from the previous. It
notes that the policy action matrix which it contained would have been better implemented if
associated with detailed and time-bound action plans. Hence the current strategy contains an
action matrix indicating Development Objectives; various Strategic Interventions which contribute
to meeting the relevant objective; Success Indicators; a Timeframe for Completion; and
Responsibility indicating those who have to undertake the Strategic Intervention. The inclusion of
the various sectors in which EAC is active in the action matrix, should ensure coordination
and integration of its programmes into its long-term vision. DPs have been encouraging EAC
to break down its Strategy even more, possibly into sectors, to makes its implementation more
pragmatic. The Strategy is given as the basis from which projects and programmes are to be
derived. The action matrix should be enforced by a result-oriented budget. The mid-term review of
the Strategy, which is scheduled to start in the second half of 2008, will reveal the advancement of
the Strategy. It would be useful to make reference to the Paris Declaration Principles in the review,
particularly to get a sense of how the new Strategy has enhanced ownership and alignment and
how it can be further reinforced during its implementation.
Results-based monitoring and evaluation systems are important to manage ongoing
programmes, demonstrate progress achieved and steer strategic planning.
26. The Strategy foresees an M&E system which will continuously monitor its execution, act as a
warning system where targets are likely to be missed and produce regular updates to all
stakeholders on the progression of the Strategy. The M&E system’s reporting is to be in sync with
the general reporting system of EAC. Accomplishing this M&E system will spur ownership by
advancing the fulfilment of its mandate and vision; regular progress reports that inform
subsequent interventions will succour mutual accountability. The M&E Framework is not yet
in place, but EAC is expecting to launch the process of developing it soon.
27. Like COMESA, EAC’s ownership of its central mandate, regional integration, is largely
carried out through the RISP.14
EAC has been subjected to an institutional diagnostic and
subsequently implemented various recommendations; it is expected to become eligible for a CA
soon. Until such time, a MoU with COMESA allows for EAC’s RISP activities to be implemented
using COMESA procedures. EAC will also benefit from the RISM15
through the agreement with
COMESA. Ownership, alignment and predictability of aid are expected to be nourished by the use
of the CA.16
28. The EAC Partnership Fund, a regionally-owned funding mechanism, has put in motion
EAC’s shift from a project-based to a programme-based approach. The Fund was launched in
November 2006 and has now been operational for two and a half years. The specific objective of
the Fund is to finance activities which advance EAC’s regional integration agenda. For the financial
year June 2007 to July 2008 the priorities funded were common market negotiations; fast tracking
14
Please see paragraph 16 on the RISP.
15
Please see paragraph 20 on the RISM
16
Please see paragraphs 8, 17 and 18 on the CA.

13
the integration of Rwanda and Burundi; capacity building of EAC; support to studies; and support to
salaries. The Regulations for the EAC Partnership Fund, encourage DPs and EAC MSs to jointly
contribute to the Fund. The financial year now ending received contributions from Sweden,
Denmark, Norway and Germany.17
Pledges for the upcoming financial year have been made by
Canada, Denmark, DFID, Finland, France, Germany, Norway and Sweden. The daily management
of the Fund is the responsibility of a Fund Management Team, consisting of EAC staff appointed by
the Secretary General. The Team meets quarterly to review all projects and priorities, facilitate the
harmonisation of projects, prevent duplication and identify new projects. The EAC Secretariat
prepares a draft annual Activity Plan and budget, which includes ongoing and new activities to be
financed by the Fund and outlines the proposed activities’ purpose, budget and timelines. The
Steering Committee meets twice a year and approves, by consensus, all activities and financing of
the Fund. One representative from EAC, one representative from each of the DPs who have
contributed to the Fund, and one representative from each of the MSs form the Steering
Committee. The Steering Committee appoints a Chairperson from the representatives of the DPs
and MSs, currently being the representative of Norway, for a period of one year. For greater
transparency and coordination, an attempt is made to channel all communication through
the Chairperson. Transaction costs are also reduced by aiming to coordinate all missions of
the DPs to EAC though the Chairperson. The Chairperson visits EAC almost quarterly, thereby
remaining well informed of the operations of EAC. DPs can also attend the Steering Committee
meetings as observers. The Friends of EAC is a group of DPs, which includes almost all of EAC’s
DPs, and of which some contribute to the Fund. Their members regularly attend Steering
Committee meetings and include representatives from Canada, Denmark, EC, UK (DFID), Finland,
France, Germany, GTZ (German Agency for Technical Cooperation), Japan (Japan International
Cooperation Agency), Norway, Sweden and the World Bank. Some of them have made pledges to
the Fund and will contribute in future, others are unable to due to their own funding regulations.
The Steering Committee meetings are very productive sessions which affords an overall update of
EAC’s activities, general issues which affect its operations, and information sharing among and
between the DPs, MSs and EAC Secretariat. Most of the DPs who finance the Fund also fund
specific projects outside of the Fund. Hence the Steering Committee is both an important
formal instrument for ownership, harmonisation and alignment, and an informal instrument
which sharpens aid effectiveness by sharing information which is helpful to collaboration
outside of the Fund.
29. There is still a need for greater information sharing outside of the Fund, which is likely to
expand as the benefits of sharing information within the Fund is increasingly appreciated; to aid
this process EAC, MSs and DPs must implement the decisions and recommendations of the
Steering Committee. Although the Fund has an annual work plan, priorities still tend to shift every
six months. Ownership of and alignment to the long-term objectives of the Fund will be
consolidated by adhering to the work plan and engaging in longer term planning. Mutual
accountability will grow, and motivate other DPs to join the Fund.
17
EAC (2008) “Report of the Sixth Meeting of the Steering Committee for the Partnership Fund”.

14
Effective and sustainable partnerships for harmonisation will take time to develop and require an
initial investment to reap the benefits in the medium-term.
30. A further challenge facing the Fund is the predictability of aid. Some of the DPs have a
contract which stipulates amounts and times for disbursements. Others sign a MoU with EAC,
which does not stipulate or enforce the amounts or timeliness of disbursements. The authority of
these agreements needs to be toughened to ensure better alignment. On the other hand, some
DPs may only be able to contribute via these types of agreements at present. Employing more
binding mechanisms may take time as mindsets within the donor community gradually shifts to a
programme-based approach fully supportive of the aid effectiveness agenda. In the same vein,
the internal rules of certain DPs cause them to ring-fence their Fund contributions for
specific activities; over time their policies will hopefully change as the advantages of
entrusting contributions to the Fund system is confirmed. Furthermore effective planning is
also hampered by the time lag between pledges and delivery, which is often caused by slow
internal procedures. Decisions are ultimately endorsed by Head Quarters and the representatives
attending the Steering Committee meetings do not have sufficient authority to guarantee the timing
of pledges. The current formula of making pledges in May with funds starting to come in in
September and October undermines strategic planning. Hence EAC is encouraging DPs to move
to multiyear pledges and contributions. The amounts given to the Fund has also not been that
significant, amounting to just under 2 million US Dollars for the last financial year. The DPs’ need
for visibility and the fact that the Fund has only been operational for a relatively short time are
reasons in part. Pledges for the upcoming financial year is higher, amounting to 7,800 000 US
Dollars, with a number of new DPs expected to join the Fund. This positive trend should hopefully
continue with a steady increase in funds and a push towards harmonisation. The EC will only be
able to contribute to the Fund once the CA with EAC is signed. The institutional diagnostic
undertaken for the CA has been instrumental in encouraging other DPs to join the Fund. The
recommendations which have been implemented as a result of the diagnostic has demonstrated
EAC’s commitment to bringing their systems on par with international standards. The
recommendations include financial management improvements and increasing the staffing
capacity. Discussions are taking place between the DPs on stronger harmonisation, with
certain DPs choosing to lead in or concentrate on funding certain areas, such as
programmes geared at building the Common Market. As harmonisation and alignment
augment, a joint assistance strategy may become the way forward to consolidate aid effectiveness.
31. EAC is planning to establish a second pool fund, the EAC Development Fund. EAC too
recognises the need for substantial investment in infrastructure to serve as an impetus for regional
integration and social and economic development in general. The Development Fund is a potential
instrument to mobilise and finance regional infrastructure investment. It will be similar to the
COMESA Fund which attracts DPs and a variety of investors, and acts as a legal entity which can
borrow funds.18
So far only the terms of reference for a consultant to draft a proposal for the
functioning of the Development Fund has been drawn up. The Protocol of the Development Fund is
expected to be finalised by the end of 2008. EAC is also expected to sign a MoU with COMESA to
enable its MSs to benefit from the COMESA Fund, who are all MSs of COMESA except for
18
Please see paragraphs 19, 20, and 21 on the COMESA Fund.

15
Tanzania. Having two largely similar funds with overlapping memberships will require some
reflection on efficiency and mindful coordination.
32. MSs pay equal contributions to EAC to allow for equal ownership of the RO; EAC staff are also
balanced by country, with many new staff members being recruited following Burundi and
Rwanda’s accession to EAC. The system of equal contributions may be reviewed at a later stage
once they have fully accomplished the Customs Union and the Common Market, as it is recognised
that there are big economic differences between the MSs. The payments of MSs go towards the
running of the organisation and not the programmes, and have traditionally been honoured.
Recently, however, with the new MSs joining there have been shortfalls in the MSs’ contributions.
Ensuring that MSs’ contributions are paid on time and in full will foster mutual accountability.
EAC Ministry, each MS has a ministry
dedicated to EAC, its serves as general link
between EAC and the MS.
Sector Committees consist of Permanent
Secretaries, and relevant Ministers and
technical officers in EAC. They propose
priorities and programmes to the Council, and
monitor the implementation of programmes.
Mechanisms
Partnership Fund Steering Committee
Friends of EAC
Donor to RO Coordination Mechanisms Partnership Fund Steering Committee
ADB and EAC Ministers of Infrastructure
yearly meeting. ABD provides grants for the
design of Infrastructure projects, which is
coordinated by the EAC Secretariat. The
construction of the projects is financed through
a loan to the MS concerned.
Effectiveness
EAC Partnership Fund
EAC Development Fund
2.4 AID EFFECTIVENESS IN IGAD
33. In 1986 the Intergovernmental Authority on Drought and Development (IGADD) was
established to coordinate the efforts of Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda, Somalia and Sudan in
combating desertification and promote efforts to mitigate the effects of drought. In 1996 it was
revitalised as the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), and its mandate expanded
to cover economic and political affairs. Its vision is to become the premier regional organisation for
achieving peace, prosperity and regional integration in the IGAD region. IGAD’s mission is to assist
and complement the efforts of its MSs to achieve through increased cooperation, food security and

16
environmental protection; the promotion and maintenance of peace and security and humanitarian
affairs in the region; and economic cooperation and integration. IGAD is one of the eight RECs, but
supports the implementation of COMESA’s integration agenda through a Protocol with COMESA.
At the last Council of Ministers session in June 2008, Ethiopia presented a concept paper on
enhancing the role of IGAD as a REC and having a stronger focus on regional economic
integration in its next strategic plan which commences in 2009. The Summit responded by directing
the Secretariat to develop and implement regional integration policies and programmes that make
IGAD relevant as a REC building block for the AU. Exactly how these calls for a stronger focus on
regional economic integration will play out remains to be seen; such endeavours will have to be
carefully coordinated with COMESA, whose integration agenda IGAD currently supports, and EAC,
who has a solid regional integration mandate and to which some of IGAD’s MSs belong.
34. IGAD’s seven MSs19
are situated in one of the most conflict prone regions in the world, which
has propelled its work in the area of peace and security. Not only has it played a very active role in
peace processes in the region, it is sometimes the only forum which can bring these
countries to sit around the same table when regional tensions run high, pointing to the
ownership which these countries display towards IGAD. The region is also plagued by high
levels of poverty and natural disasters, calling for a common regional approach to address cross-
cutting issues and cross-border concerns.
35. IGAD’s 2004 to 2008 Strategy lays out the three priority areas which its programmes will
emanate from: food security and environmental protection; economic cooperation in the areas of
trade and infrastructure development; conflict prevention, management and resolution and
humanitarian affairs. The Strategic Plan is a coherent framework which incorporates all IGAD’s
areas of work and has as purpose to guide IGAD’s priority development initiatives. It highlights the
challenges experienced in the past, internal and external, which it aims to overcome with its current
approach. The actual implementation of the Strategy and its related Implementation Plan occur on
the basis of annual operational plans. The 2008 Operational plan and the Strategy are both steps
towards fulfilling IGAD’s vision and mission. These annual work plans are prepared by the
Programme Managers and structured in logical frameworks which make clear each project’s
objectives; expected results; activities required; time frame; division responsible; partner who is
funding it; funding required for the project; and funding obtained. The milestones include the
anticipated results, as well as the evidence and the means to verifying the results. IGAD fares well
in the first element of ownership; having a strong unified strategic framework. In addition,
managing for results and mutual accountability are enforced by stipulating the expected
results and the IGAD division and funding partner responsible.
Central to ownership is coordinating the support of donors in order to realise the RO’s
objectives.
36. Alignment requires substantial improvement. Tied aid undermines alignment and
ownership, as well as the most efficient use of resources. IGAD experiences tied aid in terms of
19
Eritrea became the seventh member of IGAD after attaining independence in 1993. Eritrea has suspended its
membership in response to regional tensions, but has not fully withdrawn from the RO and efforts are being made for it
to resume its participation. Eritrea is still a beneficiary of IGAD’s programmes.

17
procurement restrictions, and stipulations regarding technical assistance - funds are forthcoming
on the condition that the technical assistant supplied as part of the project is from the donor country
providing the funds. A further impediment to alignment is short-term, project-based funding which is
channelled through the DP’s systems. IGAD still largely follows a project-based approach, and
as a recent joint assessment by CIDA and IGAD20
points out, has suffered from short-term,
piecemeal support; DPs’ activities in the IGAD region have been uncoordinated and lacked
a common purpose. This has led to a focus on stand-alone projects as opposed to programme-
based, integrated programming. IGAD acknowledges in its Strategy that past programmes were
planned with the hope that DPs would fund it, and that lack of funds and timeliness of funds have
led to the shelving of various projects. IGAD staff interviewed estimated that at least half of their
programmes do not get funding. It takes resources to develop programmes, which are then wasted
if they are not implemented. Hence greater harmonisation of DP support is crucial; DP
support should collectively be in service of IGAD’s objectives to fully realise ownership. The
deconcentration process of the EC has improved access to its funds, as contact is made with the
Delegation in Ethiopia as opposed to Head Quarters in Brussels, which was a lengthy process, to
discuss funding opportunities.
37. IGAD has developed a number of sector strategies, which are derived from IGAD’s main
Strategy. Programmes should be developed on the basis of the sector strategies, thereby
ensuring the integration of the various programmes into achieving the overall goals of the
Strategy. The strategies have multiyear implementation plans which will facilitate a shift to a
programme-based approach. The Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) of the MSs inform
the sector strategies; the sector strategies are designed to supplement the PRSPs by aiming to
fulfil MSs’ needs which cannot be met at the national level. Efforts are also made to link the sector
strategies with one other and with regional and international development processes, thereby
aiding the achievement of better development results.
38. IGAD has two established DP forums. In 1997 IGAD decided to formalise its relationship
with the Friends of IGAD, a group of partners who work closely with the Secretariat, and
established the IGAD Partners Forum (IPF). The IPF consists of representatives of MSs at
ambassadorial level and representatives of DPs. The IGAD Chairperson is also the Chairperson of
the IPF and the Co-Chairperson is a DP, currently being the Government of Italy. The DPs who are
members of the IPF are Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, EC, France, Greece, Germany, the
International Organisation for Migration (IOM), Ireland, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway,
Sweden, Switzerland, UK, UNDP, USA and the World Bank. This forum approves action plans and
assessments and presents an opportunity to share views on IGAD and the region. At the first Joint
Ministerial Meeting of the IPF in January 1998, it was decided to establish the Project
Implementation Committee (PIC) which was tasked with discussing projects. The PIC was later
transformed into the IGAD Strategy Implementation Committee (ISIC) which widened its scope to
include IGAD’s strategy. ISIC’s functions are to review programmes and projects; advise the
Secretariat on the execution of its mandate; serve as a forum to engage all stakeholders on the
formulation, monitoring and evaluation of the IGAD Strategy and Implementation Plan; serve as a
forum for information exchange; and look to ways to strengthen cooperation among IGAD
stakeholders. ISIC consists of representatives of the IGAD Secretariat, representatives of MSs’
20
CIDA and IGAD (2006) “Assessment of Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD)”.

18
technical ministries and representatives of DPs. IPF and ISIC meetings have not always taken
place regularly and have not delivered in terms of effective DP coordination, as is evident
from the lack of coordinated support. They need to be reinvigorated and their meetings
used to raise awareness among DPs on the importance of harmonisation. During his last
Council of Ministers meeting in June 2008, the outgoing Executive Secretary, Dr. Attalla Hamad
Bashir, recommended that the Joint IGAD-IPF Ministerial meetings be institutionalised and given
clear terms of reference to enhance development cooperation. The Council of Ministers
recommended to the Summit that the role of the IPF be reassessed with the view to streamline and
upgrade its commitment and assistance to IGAD. These recommendations should be followed up
on. A positive element of the IPF is that it facilitates joint missions to IGAD, thereby reducing
transaction costs to the RO. Transaction costs are imposed costs by a high number of DP
assessments of IGAD; the problem has been acknowledged and the IPF agreed not to have any
assessments for the time being.
A comprehensive, synthesised strategy should serve as an impetus and a platform for donor
coordination.
39. The next IGAD Strategy for the period 2009-2013 presents an opportunity to engage DPs
and call for coordinated support. An IGAD Institutional Strengthening Action Plan (IISAP) has
been developed on the basis of the recommendations made by the CIDA-IGAD assessment, the
mid-term review of the IGAD Strategy and an institutional diagnostic undertaken by the EC. The
IISAP was presented at a meeting of ISIC and a meeting of the IPF in 2007 to garner support for it.
The DPs commended IGAD for proactively leading its growth process. The EC has signed for 1
million Euros to support the implementation of the IISAP through its Institutional Strengthening and
Capacity Building programme, and other DPs have made pledges. Gathering DPs around the new
Strategy should be the next logical step in IGAD’s growth process. The IPF and ISIC meetings
should be used as forums to promote the Strategy, raise awareness on the financing it requires,
and to make a strong call for coordinated support. One of the anticipated results of the IISAP is the
strengthening of these existing linkages with DPs. Real change in IGAD’s productivity requires
DPs to set aside their own agendas and work towards harmonised, programme-based
support. The onus is on IGAD to lead and enforce this process. One of the indicators of the
IISAP is the establishment of a basket funding mechanism. How the basket fund will function is not
yet certain, but its purpose will be to provide broad support to all sectors and to ongoing
institutional strengthening. IGAD staff explains that projects take time to reach fruition; project
funding which is for a fixed period of time means that funding can be cut just as the project
starts to thrive. Hence a basket funding mechanism which sustains activities will make a
considerable difference to the development results produced. However, the basket fund may take
time to develop and steps towards more coordinated support should already be taken with the
commencement of the new Strategy in 2009. DPs should be transparent about their funding
intentions and combine efforts to ensure that the priority programmes of the Strategy are
funded, in stead of stand-alone projects which come up over time.
40. A study on a basket funding mechanism for IGAD is in the pipeline. Due to internal funding
regulations not all DPs will be able to enter the basket fund, as is the case with basket funds of
other ROs. The EC will only be able to support the fund once IGAD becomes eligible for a CA. One
of the indicators to be achieved through the IISAP is the conclusion of a CA with the EC, which

19
should also encourage other DPs to shift to aid delivery through IGAD’s systems. Other
mechanisms that have been put forward to facilitate reliable funding are: Public-Private-
Partnerships, to cover all sectors and set as a anticipated result of the IISAP; an IGAD
Endowment Fund, proposed in the IGAD Strategy; an Environment Endowment Fund
proposed in IGAD’s Environment Strategy, and planned to be established within the
medium to long-term. An endowment fund should attract DPs as well as private sector actors,
and produce interest which can be used to sustain programmes.
41. IGAD’s Conflict Early Warning and Response Mechanism (CEWARN) has established a
CEWARN Rapid Response Fund, which has been operating informally to respond to current
needs. This basket fund provides CEWARN with the flexibility and capacity to respond rapidly, and
finance short-term projects aimed at preventing, de-escalating or resolving pastoral and related
conflicts in the IGAD region. DPs, IGAD MSs, the private sector, foundations and philanthropists
are encouraged to contribute to the Fund, in the form of grants. Austria, Denmark and the UK have
already contributed to the Fund. Pledges have been made by a number of other DPs, including the
EU and Italy. A Steering Committee, which still needs to be further developed, will oversee the
management of the activities of the Fund.
42. Programmes are financed by DP support. IGAD states in its Strategy that it would like to
gradually move away from this dependency on external funding for its programmes and
increasingly look to the region as a support base. This is a fundamental reason for its desire to
broaden its scope of cooperating partners and attract non-traditional DPs and new DPs, including
China; India; the Islamic world, such as the Kuwait Fund; Japan; Russia; and Turkey. IGAD MSs
fund IGAD’s operational budget and need to enhance mutual accountability by honouring the
payment of their contributions. IGAD’s 2007 Annual Report points out that the Secretariat has
made progress in the collection of payments for arrears covering previous years. Ethiopia was
however the only MS who paid its contribution for 2007 in full. One of the anticipated results of the
IISAP is to ensure the timely payment of contributions by the MSs. Another impediment to
ownership and mutual accountability has been MSs’ absence during IGAD’s policy organ meetings;
reviewing the structure and composition of IGAD’s policy organs and the scheduling of its meetings
to elicit better participation, is set as a key result to be achieved by the IISAP. DPs should do their
part for mutual accountability by providing timely funding and transparent information on aid flows.
43. Managing for results is to be improved by the implementation of the IISAP. The EC sponsored
institutional diagnostic indicated that IGAD lacks results-based management. As part of the IISAP,
Results-Based Management and Results-Oriented Performance Appraisal tools will be adopted.
The new IGAD Strategy will also be formulated using Results-Based Management.

20
IGAD Focal Points consist of one
representative form each MS, they assist the
Secretariat in coordinating, monitoring, and
evaluating programmes, and serve as links to
the line ministries in MSs.
The creation of National Steering Committees
in MSs was proposed at the last Council of
Ministers Ordinary Session in June 2008. They
would consist of representatives of ministries
involved in implementing IGAD programmes
and meet regularly to coordinate IGAD
programmes in their MS. The Focal Point
would be either the Secretary or the Chair of
the National Steering Committee and would
liaise with the IGAD Secretariat on decisions
taken by the National Steering Committee.
Mechanisms
IGAD Partners Forum
IGAD Strategy Implementation Committee
Donor to RO Coordination Mechanisms IGAD Partners Forum
IGAD Strategy Implementation Committee
Effectiveness
CEWARN Rapid Response Fund
Basket Funding Mechanism
Public Private Partnerships
IGAD Endowment Fund
Environment Endowment Fund
2.4 AID EFFECTIVENESS IN IOC
44. IOC’s primary mandate is to promote the sustainable development of its western Indian Ocean
islands; Madagascar, Mauritius, Seychelles and Comoros. Its fifth member, Réunion, is an
Outermost EU Region, which belongs to France, and thus in contrast to the other MSs forms part
of the developed world. IOC was founded in 1984 through the Accord de Coopération Rgionale de
Victoria, which broadly sets out its areas of cooperation as diplomatic, economic, agriculture (sea
fishing and the conservation of resources and ecosystems) and cooperation in the fields of culture,
science and education. In 2005 a new strategic framework was launched which centres on four
main areas of activity: political cooperation, which includes election monitoring and diplomatic
mediation; economic and trade cooperation; sustainable regional development, particularly the
protection of fisheries and marine resources; and strengthening of a regional cultural identity. This
framework serves as a general guide to its operations, but does not specify concrete actions and
outcomes. IOC has developed strategies in certain sectors, such as tourism and culture, to which it
tries to link its ongoing activities. They are, however, still draft working documents.
45. In March 2008 a conference was held in Seychelles to discuss IOC’s future orientation;
Globalisation and Regional integration: the future of the IOC. To steer this dynamic process, it

21
enjoyed the attendance of donors, international organisations, the private sector and experts in the
maritime and air industries. The recommendations of the Conference have not yet been endorsed
and mark the beginning of a process to shape its future mandate and objectives. The
recommendations point to enhancing IOC’s role in the following areas: the promotion of the
interests of its insular island economies; the advancement of the maritime and air industries of its
MSs; the consolidation of partnerships with the private sector; and the mobilisation of funds for
regional economic projects.
46. IOC’s last annual report expresses partners’ concern regarding its absorptive capacity and
ability to take on new tasks. The IOC Secretariat is constrained by its limited number of staff.
Financial management and procurement systems lack capacity. A diagnostic study by the EC has
been undertaken to facilitate the signing of a CA, but its recommendations are yet to be approved.
If approved and implemented, IOC’s financial management and procurement systems should gain
sufficient strength to meet international standards. MSs fund the operational budget of the
Secretariat, whereas DP support finances the projects. Increasing the capacity and portfolio of IOC
will require endorsement by the MSs and is likely to mean an increase in their contributions. MSs
defaulting in their contributions is currently a problem jeopardising the effective functioning of the
Secretariat, as well as mutual accountability.
47. Studies for the restructuring of IOC are being discussed at the level of government and are still
awaiting approval. The Conference indicated that the changing global economic environment
and the challenges facing the island economies, such as food security, high fuel costs,
natural disasters and climate change, call for IOC to take a leading regional role on these
issues and bring together the MSs to find regional solutions. These concerns demand a
common approach and mechanisms to be effectively addressed. It is now important to make the
necessary investment which will enable IOC to heed to these calls. The MSs are specifically
interested in heightening IOC’s focus on economic and trade issues. At present IOC has a MoU
with COMESA which, inter alia, grants support to the implementation of COMESA’s regional
integration agenda. Expanding its role in this area will have to be coordinated with COMESA.
The principles of alignment and ownership are entwined - the RO needs to have a
comprehensive, outcome-oriented, medium-term strategy, translated into harmonised
implementation plans which funds can be aligned to.
48. The strategic refocusing process is an opportunity for IOC to develop a synthesised,
result-oriented strategy, which encompasses all its areas of activity, builds its capacity, and
contains prioritised and sequenced actions that are enforced by a budget. Its implementation
should be monitored by a results-based M&E system. Such a strategy can be used to make a
strong call on DPs for coordinated support, thereby enhancing ownership, alignment and
harmonisation. First however, MSs must determine and commit to IOC’s future mandate and vision
- they are responsible for driving and sustain it over time, and making the necessary investment to
launch its emboldened purpose.
49. IOC’s MSs belong to a number of other ROs, but IOC has a unique mandate and role to
promote the specific interests of its insular island states. IOC has found that regional
programmes tend to focus on the African mainland, giving IOC an important niche in looking after

22
its MSs’ interests. IOC is also regarded as a leader in the field of fisheries and maritime concerns,
particularly control and surveillance, and fighting against illegal and unreported fishing. One of the
difficulties which IOC faces in promoting the interests of its MSs, is their varying levels of economic
development and hence their different needs. Madagascar and Comoros which are LDCs have
similar needs and receive substantial support. Seychelles and Mauritius are Middle Income
Countries, with the Seychelles having a sufficient level of GDP per capita not to qualify for grants.
And Réunion, as mentioned earlier, forms part of the developed world. What brings them together
is their small size, distance from large markets and vulnerability to economic and natural shocks.
This is of course less so in the case of Réunion which is part of the EU.
50. IOC follows a project approach. Each project has its own project implementation unit which
uses the procedures of the relevant DP, and submits regular reports of activities to the IOC
Secretariat. The IOC Officer in Charge of this area and the accounts division validate these reports
in order to facilitate payment by the Regional Authorising Officer. New projects are proposed either
by the IOC Secretariat or MSs, and tend to build on what has already been implemented in a
certain area. Réunion does not benefit from the ESA-IO RSP; it only benefits from development
projects if they are financed by France. For other projects it engages by providing support in the
form of know-how and expertise. The EU is IOC’s most important DP and all of its projects are
implemented through EDF procedures. France follows the EU as the second most important DP.
IOC does not have an overall M&E system; projects are monitored on an individual basis. The EU’s
institutionalised approach requires a mid-term review, end of term review and yearly audit of the
account of each project. IOC has gradually diversified its resource base and now receives support
form the ADB, World Bank and UN agencies. It hopes to build on this positive trend, and sees it as
an important part of the strategic refocusing process it is now embarking on. It would like to move
away from its heavy reliance on DP support, without which there would be no budget to fund its
programmes.
51. A project-based approach may be the most effective approach if a RO has a limited
number of projects that are easily synchronised and integrated into its objectives. A
programme-based approach requires capacity and is beneficial with a significant level of DP
support. The EU, as IOC’s most important DP, does provide it with substantial funding – signing a
CA with the EC will build the capacity of IOC’s systems and allow for greater predictability of aid,
alignment, ownership and harmonisation. The question is whether it presently makes sense to
push for a programme-based approach for the remainder of its projects. As IOC decides on its
future role and objectives, it will have to determine which approach is most supportive of what it
wants to achieve.
Multiannual, programme-based funding, facilitated though the CA or pooled funds, enforces
harmonisation, ownership, alignment and predictability of aid.
52. One of the issues raised at the Conference was to look into developing a pooled fund. One of
the impediments to achieving development results is the fact that once a project ends capacities
developed in that area dissolve - a regionally-owned funding mechanism with multiannual funding
commitments will be instrumental in sustaining projects. Holding a DP forum to highlight these
issues is being contemplated by IOC. At present there is no official coordination mechanism
between the DPs; coordination is pursued on an informal basis at the will of the DP. Most projects

23
are funded by one funding agency, which sometimes receives in-kind contributions from the
beneficiary states. Multiple DP funded projects have steering committees where DPs come
together to discuss the project.
Permanent Liaison Officer- an officer from
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of each MS, who
acts as the main channel of coordination
between the Secretariat and the MS.
Mechanisms
Steering Committees of multiple DP funded
projects
Donor to RO Coordination Mechanisms Informal Coordination
Effectiveness
Pooled Fund

24
CHAPTER THREE
3.1 Linking the Multiple Levels of Aid Effectiveness
53. Aid effectiveness is a holistic concept. The process of building a focussed aid
effectiveness agenda within each RO has to occur within the context of its linkages to the
national level and to other ROs. There is currently a gap between the aid effectiveness agenda
at the national level and regional level initiatives. Joint Assistance Strategies, for countries such as
Rwanda, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia, are among the instruments that are making headway in
harmonising support and driving national ownership of development processes. Some countries,
such as Tanzania, are internationally known for their highly advanced aid effectiveness agendas.
However, countries that are members of the ESA-IO ROs and proactively engaged in aid
effectiveness measures, are generally not linking their national aid effectiveness efforts and
discussions to their ROs. Aid effectiveness is an integrated agenda which calls for
enforcement at the national and regional level, and for coordination between them to be
truly effective. In fact, aid effectiveness demands a global approach, which is why the Paris
Declaration emerged and is regarded as a landmark agreement in achieving development
results. As the ROs embark on developing an aid effectiveness agenda, it is crucial that they profit
from the lessons learned at the national level, and connect their agendas to the aid effectiveness
processes within their MSs.
54. The final draft of the Accra Agenda for Action does not make reference to ROs, and places the
onus for leading this harmonisation venture on countries.
In order to improve the way aid is coordinated and allocated, we will take the following
actions to improve division of labour:
a) At the country level, developing countries will lead in determining the role of donors in
supporting their own development efforts at various levels — national, regional and
sectoral. Donors will respect developing countries’ priorities and preferences, avoid
duplication and make best use of development resources at all levels.
Countries constitute ROs and provide them with a mandate. Countries are engaged in national and
regional level development initiatives, and are therefore best placed to link the multiples levels of
aid effectiveness. The MSs of ROs should assume responsibility for driving, owning and
sustaining the process of building holistic, regional aid effectiveness agendas.
55. ROs’ aid effectiveness agendas should also spring from and be synthesised with ongoing
coordination and harmonisation between the ROs. On a regional level the joint implementation of
the 9th
EDF ESA-IO RSP/Regional Indicative Programme (RIP) for the period 2003-2007 has
spurred the effective use of aid. The decision to undertake a joint ESA-IO RSP/RIP was driven by
the aspiration to have better coordination and harmonisation of the various programmes
implemented by the ROs, as well as greater efficiency and effectiveness of programmes funded by
the EDF for the region. COMESA, EAC, IGAD and IOC have overlapping memberships and
mandates, which potentially undermine the success of regional integration and development

25
programmes - effectiveness is reduced by duplicating development initiatives. All countries of the
ESA-IO region, except for Somalia, are members of at least two ROs. Under the Cotonou
Agreement ROs with overlapping memberships can participate in a common RIP in order to ensure
coherence and prevent the duplication of efforts in projects and programmes financed by the 9th
EDF. The IRCC was created to coordinate the implementation of the 9th
EDF ESA-IO RSP with the
ESA-IO ROs, the EC and SADC, who are all members of the IRCC. It operates under the authority
of the Chief Executives of the ESA-IO ROs, in their roles as Regional Authorising Officers.
56. Cooperation and coordination under the 9th
EDF ESA-IO RSP/RIP was recognised as
constructive by the ROs, having contributed to better harmonisation, and hence cooperation will
continue under the 10th
EDF. The terms of reference of the IRCC are being revised to allow for
improved coordination and harmonisation of the programmes of the ROs, as well as the
enforcement of aid effectiveness. The ROs are now in the process of finalising the 10th
EDF ESA-
IO RSP for the period 2008 to 2013, which incorporates the Paris Declaration Principles. The 10th
EDF ESA-IO RSP will follow both a project approach, through using financing agreements for aid
delivery, and a programme-based approach through the use of CAs. It is foreseen that all of the
ESA-IO ROs will become eligible for a CA during the period of the 10th
EDF RSP, thereby allowing
for a substantial switch to a programme-based approach for funding from the EU. Under the 10th
EDF co-financing between the EC and EU MS is supposed to be possible21
, and therefore EU MSs
could potentially also channel their funds to the ROs through the CA.
57. Other important developments in terms of coordination include the COMESA-SADC-EAC
Tripartite. These three ROs have similar regional integration aspirations and overlapping
memberships which makes coordination essential if regional integration is to prosper. The Tripartite
strives to harmonise their trade liberalisation and integration instruments, and are in the process of
developing a common AFT Strategy22
.
58. Preparation for the 10th
EDF ESA-IO RSP highlighted that donor coordination at the regional
level had been limited.23
Two meetings on coordinating support at the regional level was held in
2007, which was followed up by a meeting in the margins of the IRCC Dar Es Salaam meeting in
July 2008. The need for improved coordination and alignment to regionally-owned funding
mechanisms was recognised as central to promoting aid effectiveness at the regional level. These
discussions on DP coordination need to be incorporated into the process of developing a
focussed aid effectiveness agenda for each of the ROs, and vice versa. These initiatives are
entwined and should be developed in tandem – the IRCC has an important role to play in
synchronising these processes.
59. SADC adopted an aid effectiveness declaration in 2006: the Windhoek Declaration on a New
Partnership between the Southern African Development Community and the International
Cooperating Partners. It has also developed a Windhoek Declaration Implementation Action Plan.
The ESA-IO ROs can benefit from sharing ideas with SADC and learning from its experiences.
21
EC (2008) “Annex 4 Co-financing”, An EU Aid Effectiveness Roadmap to Accra and beyond.
22
Please see paragraph 21 on AFT.
23
EC Zambia Delegation (2007) “Minutes of the Regional Programmes Coordination Meeting”.

A STUDY ON AID EFFECTIVENESS IN REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

A STUDY ON AID EFFECTIVENESS IN REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (19)

Ähnlich wie A STUDY ON AID EFFECTIVENESS IN REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

Ähnlich wie A STUDY ON AID EFFECTIVENESS IN REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS (20)

A STUDY ON AID EFFECTIVENESS IN REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS