Briefing Papers Number 13, December 2011 | Page 2

Implications for the Paris Declaration in Busan and Beyond “Global problems require global solutions” is not just a truism—it’s a reality. Yet until recently, the field of international development placed little emphasis on accepting and acting on the need for holistic, coordinated, sustainable solutions to problems such as widespread hunger and poverty. The international aid effectiveness movement began taking shape in the late 1990s. Multilateral institutions, donor countries, and countries in the developing world alike are making efforts to make development assistance more effective. A single statistic—the world is home to nearly 1 billion chronically undernourished people—is enough to show that these efforts are urgently needed. We must use development resources efficiently because the lives of millions of people and the quality of life of hundreds of millions more depend on it. The current effort to assess progress to date is the Fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness (Busan, Korea, from November 29, 2011 to December 1, 2011). The Journey to Busan Experience over the past decades teaches us that coordinating development assistance and development programs will, quite simply, improve our results. Coordination helps build transparency, accountability, and legitimacy in global poverty reduction efforts. Yet to a large extent, these programs continue to be fragmented. Aid that isn’t coordinated erodes opportunities for progress, including the prospects for achieving the U.N. Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The MDGs are an unprecedented worldwide effort to make progress by 2015 on collectively identified, achievable goals whose progress can be measured. The eight MDGs include targets for reducing hunger, deep poverty, child and maternal mortality, environmental sustainability, and the toll taken by diseases such as AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis. The MDGs also call for a global partnership between developed and developing countries. A key obstacle to an effective partnership is that donors have varied requirements and procedures to design, assess, monitor, and evaluate aid. Donors often have different timetables for reporting since their fiscal years end on different dates, making it necessary to make several field visits to a given country in one year. It is a time-intensive and financially costly process for everyone, especially partner countries. For example, the 2008 Paris Monitoring Survey found that Vietnam had received 752 missions from donors during the previous year.1 The sheer number of meetings took significant time and energy away from implementing development programs and added to the pressure on already limited government capacity. In Morogoro, Tanzania, district health officials spent 25 working