|
  Reforming Technical Cooperation for Capacity Development
Ready for Change?
The Donor Side - Terms of Reference
All of the major donors are members of the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC). They
have in principle agreed on a new vision of partnership, which puts national ownership at the centre of
development efforts, including technical cooperation. Hence in adopting the programme approach, donors
accept that their contributions must be part of and fully integrated into a national programme. The
implication of this is that each national development programme can have only one management
structure, including a single accounting and reporting system, and most important, one person – a national
– must have overall responsibility for all elements, whether local or external.
The reality is usually far from the principles and procedures outlined above. Donors still tend to dominate
the identification, design and implementation of projects and to bypass legitimate parliamentary and
budgetary processes. Development agencies, staff and systems seem poorly equipped to make the
transition. Domestic pressures and broader interests often result in competition rather than cooperation
with other partners. In addition, bilateral; and multilateral vested interests drive and maintain existing
attitudes and approaches. However, there are also promising departures from this reality.
Objectives of the study:
- Assess what has changed in the conception of TC, aid and development since the 1993 Rethinking TC
Study? What are the evolving philosophic underpinnings, perceptions and strategies pursued?
- Analyse the different conditions (abilities and limitations) under which different donor agents operate
as well as the power constellations, habits and pressures that impact on technical cooperation and the
ability to radically reform it (domestic constituency, legislation, inertia, stereotyped opinions, etc.);
- Explore examples of failed and promising transitions and identify favourable factors (political, economic, social, cultural) for reform.
Issues to be considered include:
- What is the general development framework in donor countries today, in terms of broad outlook and
strategies on poverty reduction, aid flows, donor coordination etc.
- Are development practitioners willing to change? (attitudes, organizational culture and skill profiles,
work systems, hierarchy, incentive structures, conditions of service, etc.);
- New skills and competencies needed to move to iterative, process-oriented, flexible approaches;
- Are donors willing to change? What are the vested interests and pressures that constrain them?
- Which factors impact on TC policy and practice: tax payer resistance, public opinion, domestic
politics, election cycle, economic trends, foreign politics, strategic and economic considerations, the development industry, “governing bodies” and others;
- What is the role of public notions of TC, which may be stereotyped, fragmentised and outdated and cause reluctance among politicians to move to new practices?
- Short-term rationales versus the need for long-term perspectives;
- Factors that impede coherence among various aspects of donor international policy;
- Factors that prevent harmonization among donors, including “branding” for higher visibility;
- What are the vested interests in maintaining the existing system? How do these exert pressure?
- What bureaucratic pressures restrict change, e.g., accountability systems, management structures (such as aid ministries subservient to the interests of more powerful ministries), etc?
- What are some of the countervailing pressures which can be brought to bear to encourage donors to change their approaches?
- How have some donors brought about major changes in their approaches?
Other "Ready for Change"? Focus Studies
General Information (applicable to all Focus Studies)
|
|
