Presentation on theme: "Ownership, Dialogue and Conditionality Richard Batley May 2006."— Presentation transcript:
Ownership, Dialogue and Conditionality Richard Batley May 2006
Paris, 9 May 2006Ownership, dialogue, conditionality2 Aims To indicate findings on interactions between ownership, accountability, dialogue and conditionality To indicate recommendations and conclusions
Paris, 9 May 2006Ownership, dialogue, conditionality3 GBS and National Ownership OECD guiding principles Ownership/partnership v. imposed conditions Step-change in dialogue and conditionality Conditions are owned and agreed Strengthening of national leadership, responsibility, accountability for reform Whose ownership? Whose accountability?
Paris, 9 May 2006Ownership, dialogue, conditionality4 Broad Assessment PGBS has strengthened government ownership in four of seven countries. o attention to planning, budget and PFM Underlying factors: Willing partner government Basic trust in donor/government relationship Significant consensus on development strategy Ambition tailored to capacity
Paris, 9 May 2006Ownership, dialogue, conditionality5 Main Findings Change in dialogue and conditionality - more in the eyes of donors? Clearer joint alignment with national strategies - how well owned are national strategies? Strengthened national systems, policy-making and budget control - but link of policy to expenditure planning…. Strengthened scope for domestic accountability Accountability to donors and government Mutual accountability
Paris, 9 May 2006Ownership, dialogue, conditionality6 Partnership and conditionality Management of tensions between partners: Autonomy of governments v. poverty focus of donors Donor perspectives on PGBS and conditionality Governments are not homogeneous Government v. country ownership
Paris, 9 May 2006Ownership, dialogue, conditionality7 What is to be done? PGBS offers compromise between ownership and conditionality - ownership with influence: Dialogue about priorities, actions and indicators Agreed performance targets Integrated with national PRS Joint monitoring and accountability Disbursement based on overall performance Long term donor commitment plus More local office discretion Less turnover of donor staff Focused demands on government time