By Mariella Di Ciommo, Senior Analyst, Development Initiatives
The main goal of the post-2015 agenda, the future global framework for development to be agreed this year, is to end poverty – in all its forms, everywhere - within a broad vision that includes social, economic and environmental dimensions. This ambitious agenda needs contributions from all development players. Emerging providers of development cooperation should be prominent among them and provide resources, expertise and knowledge to achieve this goal.
Better data can strengthen emerging providers’ development cooperation efforts
The recent Finance for Development’s Elements paper, which presents a package of elements to implement the post-2015 agenda, calls for an increase in contributions by Southern providers, based on principles of South-South cooperation. This increase should be supported by a more effective UN system able to support triangular and South-South cooperation. Importantly, it calls for “systematic collection of data and evidence on South-South cooperation”.
The added value of development cooperation from emerging providers would be clearer with better data. Estimates of these flows only cover a limited number of country providers and are likely to be underestimates.[1] Rising trends over time are partly due to improvements in data availability and quality, rather than solely from increased allocations, making a clear trajectory hard to discern.
The Development Initiatives` paper Development Cooperation for the Future explores data limitations and shows that they prevent comprehensive and timely analysis. Most data are difficult to access, dated or presented in a format which is not conducive to simple analysis. Comparisons between countries are difficult as national definitions of development cooperation differ, if they exist at all.
Development cooperation is small in comparison with other flows, but on the rise
Available data suggest that development cooperation from emerging providers remains small in comparison with other public and private international flows. It corresponded to 10% of global official development cooperation (DAC and non-DAC providers combined) in 2011, less than half of development finance institution’s resources, less than one fifth of broader official financing (other official flows). It is small when compared with foreign direct investment.
Current estimates show that development cooperation increased fourfold from 2000 to 2011, whereas DAC ODA only doubled. Between 2010 and 2011, development cooperation from emerging providers increased 7.1% (US$1.1 billion), while DAC ODA decreased by 1.1% (but the latter grew by 10% between 2012 and 2013).
Development cooperation from government providers outside the DAC increased by four times between 2000 and 2011, due in part to improving data
Gross disbursements, US$ billions, 2000–2011
Development cooperation could add value through poverty-focused partnerships
A detailed picture of where these flows go is not possible. But data show that current allocations by most emerging providers do not respond to poverty needs, rather seem to prioritise neighbouring countries or strategic regions. The Middle East and Africa alone received three quarters of total flows in 2011, amounting to US$ 5 billion each. The largest providers, China and Saudi Arabia, drove these allocations.
The potential of these additional resources for ending poverty should be explored, in particular to envision synergies with other public and private resources. Although smaller than other resources, ODA is the public resource that can be specifically targeted at the poorest people and could be used to target those in the global poorest 20%. Triangular cooperation offers opportunities to add value through poverty-focused partnerships between ODA and development cooperation from emerging providers.
More transparency can have a positive impact in providers and partners countries
Challenges to increasing transparency are numerous, but potential gains are substantial. They include better decision-making, accountability, allocation and impact. An informed and inclusive discussion could benefit by building of domestic constituencies equipped to positively contribute to policy dialogue. Governments in provider countries could more easily coordinate efforts across different departments and with other providers. Partner countries could have an incisive voice on which resources they receive and how they are spent.
Brazil is a small development cooperation provider, but allocations grew in recent years
Brazilian development cooperation more than doubled between 2005 and 2010, reaching US$1 billion in 2010. But Brazil’s contributions were small when compared to the size of its economy (less than 0.1% of GNI in 2010). Although comparisons between countries are a challenge, current estimates show that this is lower than South Africa, Turkey, China and Saudi Arabia among others (Investments to End Poverty: Chapter 7 (Global profile) and Chapter 9 (country profiles)).
Although some of Brazilian development cooperation reaches the poorest countries, allocations are smaller than those to relatively less poor Latin American neighbours. Haiti is the biggest exception. The country is one of the poorest in the world and the largest recipient of country allocations by Brazil (32% of those).
Development cooperation from Brazil goes mainly to neighbours
Under the Lula administration, Brazil strengthened its development cooperation, with a clear focus on sharing successful national policies with other developing countries. President Dilma Rousseff has put less emphasis on foreign policy than her predecessor Lula and the Brazilian economy has lost momentum. Effects on development cooperation provided by Brazil are still unclear. Lack of information and a weak national multi-stakeholders debate are the two main reasons.
Brazil has made steps towards transparency
Brazil has made some progress towards transparency. IPEA, a national public research institute, compiled two reports on Brazilian development cooperation that cover together 2005 to 2010. These publications are a welcomed step ahead but are insufficient to meet knowledge needs.
Available data are not timely and detailed enough. Their format does not allow easy access. Inconsistent publication of information is also a limitation: a new report that should usefully complement the other two is under preparation, but it is unclear when it will be released.
Publication of data on Brazil’s development cooperation in a common, open format would increase the value of this information to potential users. One option for consideration would be publication to IATI, a voluntary multi-stakeholder initiative, hosted by a UN-led consortium
, that seeks to improve the transparency of development cooperation in order to increase their effectiveness in tackling poverty.
Better information can contribute to a more democratic development cooperation
More transparency on development cooperation would be in line with Brazil’s commitment to open government and the national legislation on access to information, including the use of open data standards. This information would contribute to a more informed national debate and strengthen national constituencies of academics, civil servants, decision-makers and civil society committed to build a more effective and democratic engagement of Brazil abroad.
Contact: Mariella.diciommo@devinit.org
Notes
All data are in 2011 constant prices
DAC = the Development Assistance Committee in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
IATI = International Aid Transparency Initiative
IPEA = Institute for Applied Economic Research
ODA = Official Development Assistance
[1]Countries included are: Brazil, Bulgaria, China, Chinese Taipei, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, India, Israel, Kuwait (KFAED), Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Romania, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, South Africa, Thailand, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates. Czech Republic, Iceland, Poland, the Slovak Republic and Slovenia have joined the DAC since 2011 and their contributions are accounted in accordance since then.
Mariella holds a masters degree in Social Anthropology from the London School of Economics and a masters in Economic, Social and Statistical Sciences from Bocconi University. She is researching on Brazil as an international actor, and is building knowledge and relationships with stakeholders engaged in the areas of development cooperation, access to information, transparency and the post-2015 development agenda.
