1. 1 Use of Strategic Positioning Tools for Division of Labor March 2007

2. 2 For the Bank, we have to try to be more selective in the context of the CAS: where do we have a comparative advantage? Better selectivity For the Government, financing gap is not the only problem, who can bring what and in which sector? Better coordination of development aid Context & Objectives

3. 3 Two perspectives…  Country strategy for each development partner  Aid coordination by the Government … which motivate the use of two distinctive tools:  a “multi-sector / mono-donor” tool  a “multi-sector / multi-donor” tool Approach

4. 4 “Multi-sector / Mono-donor” Tools

5. 5 For a donor, the tool helps answer three questions:  In which sector should I strengthen my expertise, if I want to be part of the game?  Which sector can I leave, if I lack resources?  Am I present in sectors that really need it? These are usual questions in the private sector. We found them important but difficult to answer because we lacked a bottom line. The tools we developed try to address this issue. Specific Objectives

6. 6 Tool specifically for donors’ use A donor can visualize its portfolio according to:  The need for a sector, measured according to 4 criteria: Relative financial gap, Analytical gap, Risk not to attain the MDG, Number of development partners present in the sector  The relative added value of a given donor in a given sector, based on an evaluation by the government  Its relative weight in the sector (in terms of financial amount of aid, all donors considered) Description

7. 7 The “bubble” diagram presents:  The sector’s need (Y axis)  The donor’s comparative advantage (X axis)  The donor’s relative weight determines the size of the bubble The diagram is divided in 4 areas, to help a donor develop its strategic positioning within a given sector How to read the diagram

8. 8 Need Strengthen Abandon Build teams’ capacity or leave it to the most competent ones Dilemma Should I stay in the sector? Can the least competent leave? Relative added value

9. 9

10. 10 The diagram helps us represent:  Operations (current & future)  Sectors in which the donor is absent  Studies (completed & planned) This tool is meant to trigger a discussion, not to replace a decision This tool does not provide a pre-cooked answer; it is supposed to feed into the strategic thinking leading to a decision Diagram Analysis

11. 11 “Multi-sector / Multi-donor” Tools

12. 12 Tool for donors’ and Government’s use Helps visualize:  Sectors’ needs  Donors’ comparative advantages in each sector  Size of the financial envelop provided by each donor in the different sectors Description

13. 13 This tool helps a given donor visualize its comparative advantage in the different sectors, compared to other donors It also helps the Government to get an overview of each sector’s needs and the level of expertise of the donors involved in each sector Description

14. 14 For a donor, this tool answers the following questions:  In which sector should I strengthen my expertise, if I want to be part of the game?  Which sector can I leave, if I lack resources?  Am I present in sectors that really need it?  Should I be present in a given sector? For the Government, this tool answers the following questions:  Which donor is best positioned to take the lead?  Are we spreading too thin in a given sector?  Are there financial gaps in a given sector? Specific Objectives

15. 15 Sectors are organized by level of need Each donor is identified by a color Example Comparative advantage Sectors, by increasing level of need

16. 16 Sector # 1 : The yellow donor may question the pertinence of its contribution (it is less competent and provides less funding). It can therefore consider to leave the sector – or the Government can suggest it Sector # 2 : The yellow donor is more competent, but does only contribute marginally. The country could therefore consider:  Asking the donor for an increase in its allocation in the sector, or  Setting up a multi-donor program to capitalize on the expertise of the yellow donor and the financial resources of the others, in order to maximize overall impact Diagram Analysis

17. 17 The Mauritania CO experience Process & Lessons Learned

18. 18 Process & Dialogue Government  Sector needs have been assessed through government data (MTEF, PRSP)  The tool was presented by the government during its Transition meeting (March 6) Transition meeting Development partners  The CAS collaborative process helped define analytical gaps (sector needs) and partners positioning (sector needs / relative weight)  The tool has been designed in collaboration with the UNDP  The EU used the tool to feed into its strategic document (FED)

19. 19 Lessons Learned Key factors of success:  Shared sense of urgency to change  Shared will to enhance the aid efficiency  Leadership by the government  Transparency and integrity of the information shared among donors and with the government Governmental assessment of the Bank’s relative added value led to a constructive dialogue on sectors: no ambiguity of expectations, action plans by sector, Results Agreements for next year Sharing data about sector needs fosters collaboration among partners Internally, the tool has been used as an input for the Mauritania CAS (e. g. of fisheries, PSD, transport, decentralization)

20. 20 Next Steps

21. 21 Ensure full ownership of the tool by the Government and its dissemination to all other partners Have the expertise of each development partner assessed by all the others Capitalize on Government feedback to analyze and discuss potential discrepancies between self- assessment and Government perceptions Internally, feedback will potentially be used in Staffs’ results agreements Next steps