1. NORTH AND SOUTH “Are you with us or against us?” Michael Ellis, DFID, October 2012

2. Factors affecting North Domestic politics G77 Sovereign nature of donors Impact in developing countries

3. What this leads to... Push for clarity of purpose Very careful definition of ODA Push for homogeneity Complex rules-based system Fixation with aid volumes Less commercial - less political Learning by evidence and analysis

4. Increasing focus on impact Focus on developing country priorities Programmes centred on DC national strategy Use of DC`s own systems Donor harmonisation Better evidence and lesson-learning Better consultation

5. How the North feels Wedded to current system – averse to change Increasingly coordinated Increasingly good for developing countries Increasingly effective

6. Factors affecting the South National interest –Foreign policy –Trade and investment Little or no domestic political pressures Solidarity Real world, technocratic approach Desire to avoid the northern path

7. This leads to.... Aversion to quantification and classification Lack of rules Learning by doing Merging of development, political and commercial actions Merging of public and private actions

8. How the South feels Innovative Flexible – no fixations Demand-driven and responsive Equitable Unconditional Good for its own country Right!

9. How does South see North? Old-fashioned, unresponsive to change Inflexible, rules-bound Development paradigm is northern construct.......and still northern-dominated Conditionalised Not respecting of other models Missing the point

10. How does North see South? Uncertain of purpose Uncooperative and frustrating Confusing Old-fashioned in development solutions Lacking rigour Focused on national interest

11. Perfect development cooperation paradigm Commercial interests Political interests ´New` development partner

12. Perfect development cooperation paradigm Commercial interests Political interests ´New` development partner

13. Perfect development cooperation paradigm Commercial interests Political interests ´New` development partner

14. So now what...?

15. Positions breaking down... Busan more south-facing and inclusive Both sides studying each other closely Move by southern technocrats to start analysing their cooperation Some impatience from developing country partners But, change still very slow

16. Some assumptions... Continuing fragmentation very likely. E.g. BRICS unlikely to be very cohesive force Continuing fragmentation desirable...as least bad option? Underlying desire by North and South to work out co-habitation agreement More areas of common ground than we think - and certainly than currently identified

17. So what are some possible common areas? Practical effectiveness Practical experience Focus on developing country priorities (whatever driving force for intervention...) Global sector policies Development Goals

18. Disadvantages? Messy Unstrategic Difficult to track, measure and assess High risk of some wasted or harmful development effort In short, not very ´northern`

19. Advantages... No need to throw out trusted paradigms (or lack of them) Focus on needs of developing countries......and development effectiveness Developing country governments and people can be ultimate arbiters of value