DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION IN ASIA PACIFIC: OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES DON K. MARUT ASIA PACIFIC TRADE UNION COOPERATION NETWORK MEETING BANGKOK 3 – 5 DECEMBER, 2014

OUTLINE Aid and Development Effectiveness – High Level Forums Flash Back on Commitments Busan Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation Istanbul Principles and CSOs Development Effectiveness CSOs Engagement in International Development Cooperation Asia Pacific Development Effectiveness Facility (APDEF) New Opportunities and Challenges Next Steps

HIGH LEVEL MEETINGS ON AID AND DEVELOPMENT EFFECTIVENESS GPEDC HLM HLF- 4 Busan Nov 29-Dec 1, 2011 HLF-3 HLF-2 Accra Action Agenda Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness HLF-1 Mexico Declaration Rome Declaration on Harmonisation Here I talked about how these declarations, signed or endorsed by donors and governments, are available to us as tools for holding them accountable. I also emphasized that the Busan Partnership is the first one that civil society endorsed, and all civil society organizations are implicated. Therefore, it is important that we know what is expected of us especially if we intend to hold others accountable. GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP FOR EFFECTIVE DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION Monterrey Consensus 2014 2002 2003 2005 2008 2011

Flash-Back 2000: UN Millennium Declaration  Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) 2002: Monterey Consensus: Developed countries committed to contribute 0.7% of GNI to support development in poor countries. Until 2014, only two countries fulfilled (with questions of accounting issues) 2003: Rome Declaration on Harmonization  donors to harmonize development aid. 2005: Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness. 1 paragraph emphasized the achievement of MDGs. 2008: Accra Agenda for Action: CSOs are recognized as development actors in their own rights.

Busan Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation Paragraph 22 of Busan Outcome Document: …we will: Implement fully our respective commitments to enable CSOs to exercise their roles as independent development actors, with a particular focus on an Enabling Environment, consistent with agreed international rights, that maximizes the contributions of CSOs to development. Encourage CSOs to implement practices that strengthen their accountability and their contribution to development effectiveness, guided by the Istanbul Principles and the International Framework for CSO Development Effectiveness. In reality: Enabling environment is still problem in Asia Pacific. Killing of CSOs activists still take place in some countries in Asia. The emerging of China and India in development cooperation in Asia Pacific raise big challenges.

CSOs Effectiveness: 8 Principles for CSO Development Effectiveness (Istanbul Principles)

CSOs Engagements After Accra: Two Platforms After Busan: Open Forum Better Aid After Busan: Open Forum and Better Aid merged  CPDE (CSO Partnership for Development Effectiveness). CPDE Structure: Global Council  Global Coordinating Committee: 5 co-chairs Regional Representatives Sectoral Representatives: Rural, Labor, Feminist, Faith-Based organization, Indigenous Peoples, Youth Groups International NGOs Regional Coordinating Committee Sub-regional Coordinating Committee Country Coordinating Committee

Asia Pacific Region: countries and sectors are represented Five Sub-regions: North East Asia Sub-region West Asia Sub-Region Pacific Sub-region South Asia Sub-region South East Asia Sub-region Sectoral Representatives at Regional and Sub-regional Levels: Labor Rural Feminist Indigenous Peoples Faith-Based Youth

GPEDC After Busan, the development actors establish a forum called Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation Three Co-chairs Steering Committee members: Government Representatives: North and South (OECD and Non-OECD) Business representatives CSOs Representatives: 2 persons

Opportunities and Challenges

1. Asia-Pacific Development Effectiveness facility In preparation to Mexico HLM, donors, governments, business, parliaments and CSOs in Asia Pacific established a Facility for coordination and support for the implementation of Busan partnership commitments, and to prepare for high level meeting in Mexico. The Facility is called APDEF – Asia Pacific Development Effectiveness Facility, established in Dacca, Bangladesh in September 2013. Civil society is represented in APDEF. APDEF is also linked to Asian Development Forum – a forum of the ministries of development planning and ministries of finance. APDEF has conducted several meetings before Mexico HLM, and two meetings/workshops after Mexico High Level Meeting.

2. Role of Middle Income Countries Asia-Pacific, and South East Asia in particular, consist of middle income countries or emerging markets. Some of the countries in South East Asia are now becoming donors, such as Malaysia and Thailand. Numbers and roles of CSOs in middle income countries are actually significant: development, human rights, democracy, etc. Contradictions in middle income countries: Number of poor population is high Highly indebted Problems in health and education are severe. Environmental issues are endemic CSOs spaces are shrinking. The middle income countries still need external financial support, but will be mostly excluded from the list of foreign aid.

3. South-south cooperation and Triangular cooperation South-South cooperation has been increasingly paid more attention, that include: Governments, Business sectors CSOs: CPDE is active in formulating and assessing south-south cooperation Triangular cooperation is mainly focused on knowledge sharing and promoting the roles of business sectors. South-South and Triangular Cooperation in Asia Pacific Region need to be promoted. CSOs have been long involved in South-South cooperation: networking, exchange visits, joint trainings and workshops, sharing knowledge and skills, etc. Challenges: Replication of projects from one country to other countries within triangular frameworks have not been well assessed, to include the perceptions and opinions of the local communities in the country of origins about the benefits of the projects.

4. CSOs vs. Business sector In Mexico HLM, business sector was the champion. Governments and donors provided more spaces for business sectors rather than other development actors, particularly CSOs. The participation of CSOs in Mexico was not as significant as that in Busan (my own observation). CSOs were not well organized, although there was special CSO Forum. CSOs were mainly “invited participants” rather than “the main actor” in the HLM. The emergence of business sectors in Asia Pacific will bring new resources for development. But at the same time, the emergence of the business sectors in development arena in Asia Pacific also challenges the CSOs. The questions: Do business sectors respect human rights, environmental sustainability, gender equality, etc?

5. New challenges: China and India onboard After APDEF held a workshop on middle income countries and South- South cooperation in Seoul, China held a workshop on middle income countries in Beijing. The workshop in Beijing mainly discussed: The roles of business sector The indicators of South-South cooperation, which refused indicators made by OECD-DAC. The questions about the roles of CSOs. China and India refused to include CSOs in international development cooperation. The involvement of China and India in Asia Pacific development cooperation might pose significant challenges for CSOs in Asia Pacific. Investments of China and India (and Russia) in Asia Pacific are increasing, and these will challenge development cooperation in the region.

Next Steps Strengthening CSOs at country level Improve engagements with governments and business sectors at country levels and local levels. Strengthening the engagements with parliaments at national and local level. Promoting more dialogues and strengthening networks among CSOs sectors at country level and at regional level.