Aid Effectiveness ALD is mandated to monitor aid effectiveness in Uganda. This occurs through the Paris Declaration Monitoring framework and, more recently, the Performance Monitoring Framework of the Partnership Policy.
Paris Declaration and Accra Agenda for Action
In the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness (2005) the development community committed to increase efforts to reform the way in which aid was delivered to increase aid effectiveness and the contribution of aid to the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. High level officials from both developed and developing countries agreed upon the principles underlying the delivery more effective development cooperation. The five principles of Ownership, Alignment, Harmonisation, Managing for Results and Mutual Accountability underpin the specific commitments made in Paris.
Accra Agenda for Action (2008) – at the third high level forum in Accra (2008), high level officials committed to undertake actions to accelerate progress towards implementation of the Paris Declaration.
Busan (2011) The 4th High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness – The Fourth High Level Forum on aid effectiveness will take place in Busan, Korea from 29 November to 1 December 2011. There, ministers and other stakeholders will not only take stock of progress since 2008, but also set out a new framework for increasing the quality of aid in order to achieve the Millennium Development Goals by 2015. The Government of Uganda will co-chair the Task Team on the Division of Labour at Busan.
Monitoring progress in Aid Effectiveness in Uganda
Paris Monitoring Surveys
The Paris Declaration (2005) agreed a set of monitorable indicators which set the framework for measuring progress against the Paris principles, commitments and aid effectiveness more generally. In Paris (2005) quantitative targets for each indicator were set for achievement by 2010. Progress on each indicator has been monitored in Uganda through 3 rounds of surveys; in 2005 a survey was undertaken to establish the baseline against which progress could be measured. In 2007 and more recently in 2011, follow-up surveys have been undertaken in Uganda to monitor progress. A full country chapter will be available ahead of the High Level Forum in Busan prepared by the OECD-DAC. The summary of progress below is based upon MFPED’s own calculations. Details of the qualitative assessment of each indicator can be found in the Uganda Country Report
Summary of Progress, 2005-2011
Nine quantitative indicators have been assessed using data from the 3rd round Monitoring Survey.
MFPED estimates that over half of the targets set in Paris for 2010 were missed.
‘Strong Progress’ was recorded in 4 of the 9 quantitative indicators. This means that the 2010 targets set in Paris for these indicators were met. ‘Moderate Progress’, referring to indicators where the 2010 target was missed but where some improvement was recorded since 2005, was found for 2 indicators. ‘No Change’, referring to indicators where the 2010 target was missed and little or no change was found, was recorded for 1 indicator and a ‘Declining Performance’, whereby the indicator not only missed the 2010 target but the position worsened between 2005 and 2010, was recorded for 2 indicators.
|2011 Target Met||2010 Target Missed|
|Strong Progress||Moderate Progress||No change||Declining Perfomance|
|– Indicator 3 – Alignment with National Priorities
– Indicator 4 – Cordinated Technical Assistance
– Indicator 6 – Parellel implimentation unites
– Indicator 3 – Alignment with National Priorities
– Indicator 10B – Joint Analytical Work
|– Indicator 9 – Use of Country Public Financial Management Systems
– Indicator 10A – Joint Donor Missions
|– Indicator 9 – Use of Programme Bases Approaches||– 5B – Use of Procurement Systems
– Indicator7 – Predictability
Priorities for Action on Aid Effectiveness
Whilst performance varies across the indicators for the various development partners, the general priorities to emerge from the quantitative indicators relate to strengthening and increasing the use of government systems, increasing coordination between development partners and increasing the in-year predictability and recording of aid flows.