Update on Cooperation Among Multilateral Development Banks African DevelopmentBank Asian DevelopmentBank EuropeanBank for Reconstructionand Development Inter-AmericanDevelopmentBank World Bank March2004 Table of Contents Page I. Introduction 1 11. StrategicCoherence 1 111. Harmonizing Policies,Procedures 3 and Practices IV. Stronger Cooperation at the Country and 6 Regional Level V. Going Forward 9 Boxes: Box 1: Developments in Harmonization Work 4 Box 2: Second International Roundtable on 5 Managing for Development Results Box 3: Examples of Cooperation on Strategies, Sectors and 7 Themes at the Country Level Box 4: Examples of Cooperation in Lending and Investment 8 Operations Annexes: Annex 1: Joint Statements by MDB Presidents in 2003 and 2004 11 Annex 2: Summary of Working Group Activities 15 Annex 3: Examples of Cooperation in Country and Regional 21 Operations Annex 4: Update on MDB/IMF Working Group on Gender 25 Annex 5: The Rome Declaration on Harmonization 27 Annex 6: The Marrakech Roundtable: Core Principles 31 and Action Plan Update on CooperationAmong Multilateral Development Banks I. Introduction 1. At the request of the Presidents of the Multilateral Development Banks' (MDBs), and following a similar report in the spring of 2003, this report has been prepared jointly by the five banks, to inform Governors and Executive Directors of the direction and progress in strengthening coherence and building partnership among MDBs, during the calendar year 2003 and early 2004. 2. Acting as a group, the MDBs play a very important role in development cooperation. Through their work on country level alignment, harmonization of operational policies procedures and practices, and their leadership in developing an agenda on managing for development results, they are at the center of international efforts to strengthen coherence in development cooperation. Using theirjoint convening power to build support for the common approach and broaden its practical application, MDBs are increasingly reaching out to other development partners. In particular, MDB cooperation with other Multilateral Financial Institutions* (MFIs) and with DAC has deepened considerably in the last couple of years. Furthermore, MDB Presidents have expressed common views and positions on key development issues of the day, recently voicing disappointment at the failure of the Cancun trade negotiations and calling for a return to a multilateral approach to world trade issues, and -more directly linked to MDB operations - endorsing core principles and action plan on managing for development results. 3. Through initiatives of recent years and consistent pursuit of stronger partnership, the structure of an MDB network for cooperation and coordination is now firmly in place, but there is still much work to be done to turn strategic decisions into action on the ground. Going forward, the MDB leadership is open to recommendations that would further strengthen the efficiency and relevance of the MDB group and support from its owner- and partner countries. 11. Strategic Coherence 4. The year that passed saw good progress in the MDB partnership, as the Presidents and other senior managers moved forward with an agenda of deeper and broader cooperation among the MDBs, placing MDBs at the forefront of efforts to strengthen coherence and effectiveness, and to reduce transaction costs in the delivery of development cooperation: 5. The MDBsjointly sponsored the Rome High Level Forum on Harmonization (with OECDDAC and the Italian Government) and demonstrated their commitment to the broad harmonization agenda, originally launched by the MDBs, with the personal participation of The African Development Bank (AfDB), the Asian Development Bank (AsDB), the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), the World Bank (WB, IBRD). For example, the Islamic Development Bank, the European Investment Bank, the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD). 1 the MDB Presidents in the Forum. The MDBs played a central role in formulating and supporting the Rome Declaration on harmonization, which is seen as the central reference point on further progress with harmonization of policies, procedures and practices. The MDBs (with the OECDDAC) will be co-sponsors of a second high level forum, to be hosted by the French government and currently scheduled for early 2005. This event will have a broader development effectiveness focus and will cover alignment, harmonization and results, as part of the push for greater effectiveness. 6. In Monterrey, the Presidents launched MDB cooperation in managing for development results with ajoint statement ("Measuring,Monitoring and Managing for Development Results"). In June 2002, to start the work on this agenda, the MDBs brought together key actors - from MDBs, other development agencies and client countries, for a jointly sponsored first roundtable on development results. In 2003 the MDB Presidents endorsed the formation of a working group on managing for development results, and in February 2004 the MDBs, in cooperation with OECDDAC,jointly sponsored the second roundtable on development results in Marrakech. As was the case with harmonization, the Presidents demonstrated their commitment to the results agenda with their personal participation in the meeting, and through participation by other members of MDB senior management. In conjunction with the Results Roundtable, the MDB Presidents held their own meeting for discussions on strategic and operational issues. Among issues discussed were challenges in supporting progress toward MDGs, and an enhanced role for MDBs in infrastructure in developing and transition countries. Among decisions made was strengthening technical cooperation among MDBs on infrastructure issues, capacity building, and debt sustainability analysis and policies. 7. The Presidents continued their recent practice of issuingjoint statements that at times give guidance on how to take MDB cooperation forward, while in other cases they express a common view of the MDB leadership on key development trends or events. In addition to endorsing the Rome Declaration on Harmonization, in 2003 the MDB Presidents issued ajoint statement on the importance of gender equality in MDB operations and in the daily work of the banks. In Dubai they issued ajoint press release expressing their concern at the outcome of the Cancun negotiations on trade and recommending a vigorous resumption of multilateral negotiations on trade. Most recently, in February 2004 at the Marrakech roundtable on development results, the MDB Presidents and the DAC Chairman issued ajoint statement, in which they endorsed "Core Principles" and an "Action Plan" for development agencies in promoting a harmonized approach to managing for development results. 8. Building on and supporting the strategic direction of the Presidents, during 2003 other senior managers engaged in a dialogue on policy and operations, and technical working groups addressed issues of cooperation and harmonization, including such diverse issues as performance-based allocation of concessional resources, memoranda of understanding, piloting harmonized approaches at the country level, and coordinating country assistance strategies in specific countries. A senior liaison group actively provides general coordination and advice, and provides ajoint link to other external partners. 9. While the structure for partnership is in place, the cooperation does not always proceed smoothly. There is at times friction at the operational level, as institutional concerns and points of view tend to be strong. There may be a need to explore new 2 approaches to address some key frictions (e.g., country level planning cycles and approaches, PRSPs, FSAPs, occasional different approaches or conclusions in sector work, different views on some harmonization work) more effectively. 111. Harmonizing Policies, Procedures and Practices 10. Building on their early lead in promoting and working towards harmonization of their policies, procedures and practices, the MDBs have increasingly reached out to other partners to broaden participation and deepen the impact of this work. In particular, cooperation with OECDDAC is now a feature of this work and all MDBs are members of the DAC Working Party on Aid Effectiveness and the DAC Joint Venture on Managing for Development Results. Other MFIs have also become more involved in harmonization efforts and several of them now regularly participate in activities of various working groups. 11. The Rome Forum on Harmonization, co-sponsored by the MDBs and OECDDAC, was an important international event, which took the work on harmonization forward, deepened the agenda to include the alignment of donor support with partner country strategies, put the partner country center stage, including explicitly agreeing to harmonize around strengthened government processes and systems, and built a much broader coalition of development partners for harmonization than previously. The Rome Declaration, endorsed by multilateral and bilateral institutions and partner countries that participated in the Forum, now provides an internationally acknowledged set of principles and an agenda for action for all development agencies. 12. Following the Rome Forum, regional workshops in Asia, Africa and the Pacific have since been held to give developing countries that did not participate in the Forum an opportunity to become familiar with the direction and opportunities it opens, and to build a region-specific case for action. Harmonization and alignment is now being pursued in over 50 partner countries, involving 18bilateral donors and 16multilateral institutions. 13. While post-Rome, country implementation became the main focus on harmonization work in the coming years, MDBs also continued work on unfinished institutional harmonization issues and looked to add further important issues to this agenda. Legal documentation and disbursement procedures are examples of issues that have recently become subjects of institutional harmonization discussions and will be taken forward. Existing working groups continued their work on institutional harmonization in tandem with their country level work. For example: The Financial Management working group completed good practice papers and protocols, and continues to work with relevant professional bodies on an International Accounting Standard for development operations, which may be completed by end of 2004. In addition to country-level capacity building in procurement, the Procurement Group completed work on harmonized bidding documents for goods, prequalification for civil works and for civil works contracts, and for selection of consultants. Additionally, they have developed a harmonized strategy for electronic government procurement (e-GP). Currently, they are working on harmonization of "turn- key contracts," expected to be finished by 2005. The Environmental Group agreed on a common framework for environmental impact assessments, which they continued to update, and on terms of reference for EIA and for environmental management plans, as well as guidance on environmental audits. The Evaluation Group began development of a good 3 practice paper for the evaluation of structural/ policy based lending and followed up on good practice papers on public and private sector evaluations, through a benchmarking exercise on private sector evaluations and scheduled a similar exercise for the public sector for 2005. Futurejoint country evaluations have also been discussed. Box 1: Developments in Harmonization Work Key developmentssinceRome include a shift in focus from institutionalpolicy agreementsto country-levelimplementation and an expansionof coverageto includeboth harmonizationand the alignmentwith country-owned strategiesand development frameworks. The internationaldevelopment community,includingthe MDBs, is followingup on the Rome Declarationcommitments to build awareness,broaden ownership,and create networks of practitioners. They are briefing their field-basedstaff and some are reviewingtheir internal incentivesand reward systemsto promote harmonization-friendlybehavior. Informationon harmonization is being disseminated through a Development Gateway-based harmonization website for practitionersand through the OECD website. The MDBs and other institutiondagencieshave supported three regional workshops to introduce an additional35 partner countriesto country experiencesand good practices in harmonizationand alignment-in Tunis in August 2003 and Hanoi and in Fiji in October 2003. Examples of implementationof this broader alignmentagenda at the country level include: In Bangladesh, 11donors which used to fund 27 separateeducationprojects, arenow coming together, under AsDB leadershipwith World Bank support,to fund one sector-wideprogram for the most part relying on government'sown procedures. In Niger, the Government and participatingdonors (includingAfDB and WB) are moving towards a sector-wideprogram in supportof the Government'sTen-YearEducation Development program. Severaldonors (includingAfDB and WB) have also initiated ajoint Public ExpenditureReview and ajoint CountryFinancial AccountabilityAssessment. In Honduras, with Government leadership,bilateral and multilateraldonors (includingthe IADB and the WB), have agreed on coordinatedsupport for the PRSP, including SWAPSin education, health, agro-forestry,water and sanitation,and safety;alignment with the Government'sbudget cycle; alignment of mechanisms,procedures and instruments;joint assessment,planning and evaluation;informationsharing;and use of national systems. In Africa, five countrieshave signed budget support "frameworks"or "memorandaof understanding"with the donors (includingboth the AfDB and the WB), of which three, Uganda, Rwanda, Ghana were signed in 2003 with the objectiveof ensuringthat budget support is aligned with poverty reduction strategyreview processes,is more predictable, and is provided in alignmentwith budget years. In Serbia, donors (includingthe EBRD and the WB) have agreed tojointly review the Government'sexisting procurement policy,procedures and practices, as a first step towards a longer-termobjective of increased donor reliance on a strengthenedGovernmentprocurement system. In parallel to the country-levelwork, the multilateraldevelopmentbank working groups- rocurement, financialmanagement,environmentand evaluation-continue to advance armonizationthrough their technical work (see Annex 2). A new institutionalarchitecturefor armonizationand alignment is emerging,with MDBs and OECDDAC members and secretariat iorkingcloselytogether within the Working Party on Aid Effectiveness and Donor Practices. 4 14. To take forward a common MDB focus on development results, following the Presidents' statement on this issue in Monterrey and the first roundtable on results, in 2003 a new group on Managing for Development Results was formed. It has started cooperating with a similar OECDDAC group and led the preparations for the Marrakech Roundtable in February 2004. Performance based allocations of concessional financing (IDA, AfDF, AsDF, FSO) is seen as an important part of a results focus and of considerable interest to donors and borrowers alike. MDB cooperation on this issue, including the assessments of country performance and results and the formula for subsequent allocation of funding, continues and now includes emerging issues, such as disclosure. Box 2: Second International Roundtable on Managingfor Development Results To take stock of progress,chart the course for futureaction, and to continueto strengthen and broaden the internationalpartnershipon managing for developmentresults, the MDBs in collaborationwith OECDDAC co-sponsoreda "Second InternationalRoundtable on Managing for Development Results." At the invitationof the Government of Morocco and hosted by the President of the African Development Bank, Mr. Omar Kabbaj,the Roundtable was held in Marrakech,on February 4 and 5. It brought togethermore than 60 representativesfrom developing countries and 50representativeseach frombilateral and multilateraldevelopmentagencies - including severalheads of agencies - for two days of discussionsin a combinationof four informal seminarsand a plenary session. Immediately following the Roundtable,the MDB working group and OECDDAC "JointVenture on Managing for Development Results" met to discusstaking the agenda of the Roundtableforward. President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda, a country which has successfullyexperimentedwith various aspects of a results-focusedapproachmade a keynote address to the Roundtable,and both the Prime Minister and FinanceMinister of Moroccomade interventionsthe Roundtable,as did the Nigerian Minister of Finance and other senior officialsfrom developingcountries. Similarly,heads 3r senior officialsof MDBs and other multilateralfinancialinstitutionsand bilateral agencies participatedactively in discussions. In a Joint Memorandumthe MDB Heads and OECDDAC Chairmanendorsed a set of "Core Principles"and an "ActionPlan" for taking forward the results agenda. They encouraged jevelopment agencies and partner countries to work along the same lines. The text of the Joint Memorandumis in Annex 1to this report. The Core Principlesand the Action plan are in Annex 6. The Core Principlesemphasizethat agencies shouldrely on and support partner countries'own xiorities, objectivesand results, coordinatewith other developmentagenciesunder partner country eadership,and strengthenpartner countries'own institutions,systems and capabilitiesto plan and mplement projects and programs,report on results, and evaluate their developmentprocesses and Iutcomes, avoidingparallel donor-drivenmechanisms. Five principles are offered in support of hese understandings: I.At allphases-fromstrategicplanningthroughimplementationtocompletionandbeyond-focus he dialogueon results for both partner countries and developmentagencies. !. Align actual programming,monitoring,and evaluationactivitieswith the agreed expected results. 1. Keep the results reportingas simple, cost-effective,and user-friendlyas possible. F. Manage for, not by, results. i.Use resultsinformationfor managementlearningand decisionmaking,as well as forreporting md accountability. 5 15. Also of crucial importance to the poorer MDB member countries is the HIPC initiative, by now a longstanding issue on which the MDBs continue to cooperate closely, recently broadened to include a dialogue on such associated challenges as debt sustainability and arrears clearance. This broadening of cooperation on the debt agenda was endorsed by the Presidents at their Marrakech meeting. 16. Reflecting emerging common priorities, cooperation on infrastructure financing and analysis has been revived and a working group is now actively looking at opportunities for cooperation in this field. MDB cooperation in infrastructure was one of the topics discussed by MDB Presidents at their Marrakech meeting, which agreed to make cooperation in this area a priority for the coming years. They also decided to considerably strengthen cooperation on another emerging common issue, namely capacity building, a key part of any plan to achieve the millennium development goals. 17. The Gender group of the MDBs has continued to advocate attention to these issues in MDB country operations as well as within the banks themselves. On the occasion of the international women's' day, March 8,2003,the MDB Presidents and the Managing Director of IMF issued ajoint statement in support of gender equality and empowering women. In late 2003, the Gender Group, in cooperation with corresponding group within DAC and the UN system, organized an international workshop on gender and MDGs. A separate update on gender issues is provided in Annex 4 to this report. 18. As the thematic cooperation among MDBs grows and deepens, new working groups or coordination forums continue to be formed. For example, managers of Trust Funds and Co-financing in the MDBs recently established their own consultation forum, seeking to align the approach to mobilizing and managing trust fund resources and to look at ways to strengthen coherence in co-financed operations. IV. Stronger Cooperationat the Countryand Regional Level 19. The quality of MDB cooperation at the country operations level is the crucial test for determining the benefits this partnership can bring to the clients. While frequently there still is tension between operational staff of different banks and competition for operations and influence, there are in some cases good indications of an improved relationship in operations, and better strategic and thematic coherence is gradually showing up in specific operations. This progress has been facilitated by coordination at senior and operational management level, including consultation meetings between operational Vice Presidents and their management teams from the World Bank and the respective Regional Development Bank. Most recently, in December 2003, AfDB hosted the World Bank's Africa management team for consultations on a cooperation program for the coming couple of years. 20. .Memorandaof Understanding have become strategic tools for setting the course for cooperation in specific countries and sectors. These MoUs are now reviewed and updated regularly. A review of the AfDBNB MoU was completed in 2003, and the above- mentioned consultation meeting agreed on a corresponding action plan for country, sector and regional thematic cooperation under the MoU. The IDBNB MoU is currently under review, to be completed in early 2004, and a review of the AsDBNB MoU will be completed in calendar 2004. EBRD and the World Bank are co-signatories to three country 6 and issues specific MoUs, which are reviewed periodically. For example, the MoU on cooperation for accession preparation of central and east European countries, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey was revised in 2003. Box 3: Examples of Cooperation on Strategies, Sectors and Themes at the Country Level AsDB and World Bank Afghanistan: preparation of preliminary needs assessment. China: Institutional development for the China Development Bank; social assessment manual for domestic practitioners; first international conference of the StateElectricity Regulatory Commission in 2003. Cambodia: Joint process for new country strategies;joint gender assessment; integrated fiduciary assessment and PER,joint CPAR; public expenditure tracking survey. &, joint assessment on gender planned. Philiuuines: Studies on decentralization and service delivery, investment climate assessment;joint portfolio reviews. Indonesia: Financial sector strategy; CPAR and procurement reforms;joint portfolio review. Vietnambroad harmonization Uzbekistan:Joint portfolio reviews; cooperation on health reform. AfDB and World Bank Ethiopia: Budget support framework. Niger: PER, CFAA. Senegal: CFAA; CPAR; PRSP support. Tanzania:CPAR. Angola: CPAR.Burundi: CFAA. Ghana: CPAR. Malawi: common framework for SWAPS. Uganda: CASICSP. EBRD and World Bank Kvrnvz Reuublic:CASICSA. Taiikistan CASICSA. South East Euroue regional infrastructure strategypapers. Serbia and Montenegro:policy dialogue. CIS-7:policy advice and support. IADB and World Bank Bolivia: Banlung and corporate reform; fiscal sustainability, sector strategy workshops; PERs and CFAAs; donor assistance reviews. Guatemala: policy dialogue and CS/CAS, CG meetings. Honduras, Nicaragua: CASKS; PERs, CFAAs and CPARs; PRSP preparation support; HIPC completion, CG meetings; PBL and PRCS matrix for Honduras. Colombia, Ecuador: Country strategy (CSB,CAS), CFAAs, PER (Ecuador). Guyana: CPAR,CFAA, CS/CAS. Peru: PER, CFAA. Jamaica: Sector reform. 21, Support for regional integration and cooperation has also become part of MDB cooperation. AfDB and the World Bank cooperate closely in their support for the NEPAD initiative in Africa. Similarly IDB and the World Bank cooperate on various regional initiatives in Latin America, a regional health initiative with PAHO being a notable example. Recently, the AsDB, EBRD and the World Bank extended their regional cooperation through their joint support for and participation in a second Ministerial Conference on Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation, and EBRD and the World Bank work with others on regional infrastructure in South East Europe, within the framework of an "Infrastructure Steering Group." Similarly, AsDB and the World Bank cooperate in support of the Greater Mekong Subregion program and on ajoint East Asia infrastructure study. 22. All MDBs are committed to supporting countries in preparing PRSPs and to basing their assistance strategy on the PRSPs or other such country-owned strategies, and to coordinate the strategy with the other MDBs. Cooperation in support of the PRSP process 7 is progressing, but there is a recurring friction over the different roles of the World Bank Assessments. After an uncertain start, coordination of WB CASs and RDB CSP/CSs is (and IMF)and the RDBs, not least in relation to the preparation of the Joint Staff now becoming more accepted, with recent good examples from Nicaragua, Honduras, the Kyrgyz Republic and Tajikistan. Discussions have taken place on closer coordination or evenjoint country strategies in Cambodia, Papua New Guinea, Mongolia, Sri Lanka, the Pacific Islands and Uganda. The viability and relevance of such coordination, particularly in larger middle-income countries, is not uniformly accepted and will continue to be discussed. 23. MDBs have continued to strengthen cooperation on analytical work of various kinds, at times doing such workjointly and in other cases dividing the work between them. For example, the EBRD and World Bank cooperate extensively on enterprise surveys that are important tools for analyzing the business environment in partner countries. Cooperation with other partners is also becoming more common, and government leadership is now accepted as the norm to aim for. Joint portfolio reviews, public expenditure reviews, fiduciary assessments, procurement assessments are examples of this type of cooperation, as are activities in support of PRSP preparation. Box 4: Examples of Cooperation in Lending and Investment Operations AfDB and World Bank: Ethiopia:road sector. Madagascar: rural transport. Sierra Leone:basic education. Chad: education sector. Tanzania: water supply. AsDB and World Bank Bannladesh: education. Vietnam: guarantee. Cambodia:rural electrification and transmission. Lao:environment and conservation fund. Philippines: health sector projects. Timor Leste: multi donor trust fund. EBRD and World Bank Bulgaria: district heating. South East Europe: regional infrastructure. Poland: railway restructuring. Romania: railways. Croatia: roads. ASDB and EBRD Azerbaiian: roads. Kazakstan: roads. Kyrgyz Republic: roads. Uzbekistan: railways and leasing. IADB and World Bank Colombia: social sector adjustment. Ecuador: national parks and biodiversity. Guatemala: financial sector reform. Mexico: savings and credit sector; rural finance development, trade policy. Peru: rural education, competitiveness reform, and urban transport. 24. Similarly, there is a growing number of examples of joint or coordinated lending or grant operations, in education, infrastructure, environment, etc. The MDBs continue to be each other's main co-financing partners, with cross-MDB co-financing of around USD 7 billion during the last three years. Ajoint return to a greater emphasis on infrastructure work and financing is expected to increase the number of coordinated or co-financed operations. 8 V. Going Forward 25. As this report demonstrates, cooperation between MDBs has continued to grow during the year since the latest joint update on cooperation. Through the cooperation on harmonization and on managing for results, including major international high level events, and growing cooperation in analytical work and operations, MDBs are clearly at the forefront in a partnership approach to development activities. But more needs to be done to turn good intentions and strategic alignment into real results. Among the issues we will be looking at for the coming years are the following: 26. In anticipation of the next high-level forum on harmonization, in 2005, we will strengthen our work on the implementation of the Rome Declaration, including completing commitments to institutional harmonization of policies and procedures, and moving forward on country pilots and capacity building. 27. We will strengthen our common results focus, through implementation of the Core Principles and the Action Plan which we endorsed at the Marrakech Roundtable on Managing for Development Results. MDB staff is encouraged to engage fully with the bilateral community in the OECDDAC Joint Venture on Managing for Development Results, and with developing and transition country partners, to put the commitments made into action at the country level. 28. We will improve our cooperation in support of PRSP preparation in client countries, seehng to reduce tensions that have arisen in the process in past years. All MDB country partnership strategies (CAS, CSP, CS) in PRSP countries will be aligned with the PRSP and coordinated with the corresponding strategy of the other MDB (and with other key partners). We will look for opportunities for similar coordination in middle income countries. 29. We will work with each other and with other partners to improve capacity building work, which in the past has often been inadequately coordinated, supply driven and delivered piecemeal. A more strategic approach, linking capacity building to MDGs and PRSP formulation and implementation will be high on the agenda. 30. We will continue to deepen operational cooperation, particularly in such areas of emphasis as infrastructure (including water), education for all, communicable diseases and investment climate. Similarly, we will strengthen cooperation on analytical work and advisory services, and seek to streamline this work through division of labor, sharing of work,joint peer reviews of analysis, etc.. Strengthening country leadership and capacity will guide our cooperation in these activities. 31. We will join hands in support of country led, in-country coordination of activities, and also seek to improve MDB in-country coordination. In some cases, this may include examining possibilities of co-location and sharing of some staff in selected countries. 32. We will continue current efforts to strengthen MDB cooperation with key multilateral partners, including the IMF, the UN, other MFIs and OECDDAC, particularly around harmonization efforts, managing for development results and a strategic approach to capacity building. 9 ANNEXES 1. Joint statements by the MDB Presidents in 2003 and early 2004 (Gender; Outcome of the Cancun trade round; Managing for Development Results). 2. Summary of Working Group activities. 3, Overview of country and regional operational cooperation. 4. Update on gender issues in MDB operations and organization. 5. Rome Declaration on Harmonization. & CorePrinciples and Action Plan on Managing for Development Results. 10 Annex 1 Joint Statements by MDB Presidentsin 2003and 2004 STATEMENT FROM MDB/IMF HEADS ON INTERNATIONAL WOMEN'S DAY (MARCH 8,2003) We, the Heads of the Multilateral Development Banks/International Monetary Fund, affirm the importance of promoting gender equality and empowering women for achieving the Millennium Development Goals. Gender equality is not only a goal in its own right, but is important for reducing poverty and hunger, ensuring education for all, reducing child mortality, promoting maternal health, combating HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases, and ensuring environmental sustainability. Research and on-the-ground experience show that providing females and males with equal access to capacity, resources, opportunities and voice increases productivity, accelerates economic growth, makes poverty reduction more achievable, and improves the well-being of children, women and men. It also supports international conventions and treaties, including the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). Gender equality in our organizations is not only an issue of fairness; it strengthens our work. Organizational research and experience show that a more balanced workplace contributes to a diversity of approaches to the complex problems of development. In light of this, we affirm our continued commitment to promoting gender equality in our organizations and in the work of our organizations to assist member countries. Omar Kabbaj Tadao Chino Jean Lemierre African Development Asian Development Bank European Bank for Bank Reconstruction and Development Horst Kohler Enrique Iglesias James Wolfensohn International Monetary Inter-American Development World Bank Fund Bank 11 Press releasefrom the Presidents of the Multilateral Development Banks on the outcome of the Cancun negotiations The lack of an agreement in Cancun is disappointing. But success in negotiating improved trade rules that benefit all countries - and especially poor people in developing and transition countries - is crucial. We, the Presidents of the Multilateral Development Banks, urge all parties to capitalize on the progress that has been made, and put the multilateral process back on track as soon as possible. Important progress was made in the months preceeding the meeting. Parties to the talks can recapture this momentum, particularly on the crucial issues of agriculture. We continue to believe that rich countries, which have benefited so much from the expansion in world trade, should take the lead. At the same time, overcoming special interests that benefit from the status quo will require significant political will on all sides. We hope that the WTO members will soon find a way forward on the key stumbling blocks. We wish to stress that the stakes are huge. A good, development oriented agreement that lowers tariff peaks and averages in both rich and poor countries could produce up to $520 billion in income gains, with both rich and poor countries gaining substantially. Such an agreement would increase growth in developing countries, and would lift an additional 140 million out of poverty by 2015. We are re-committing our support to developing and transition countries in their efforts to make the most of the opportunities offered by global trade. This includes providing financial support for improvements in ports, customs, and other trade-related infrastructure as well as financing for the transitional costs of trade adjustment, the fiscal effects of tariff reductions, and the economic impacts of the erosion of trade preferences. Importantly, we will renew our efforts to assist developing countries in capacity building in support of trade negotiations and trade reforms. Omar Kabbaj, Tadao Chino, President, President, African Development Bank Asian Development Bank Jean Lemierre, Enrique Iglesias, President President, European Bank for Reconstrution Inter-American Devellopment Bank and Development James D. Wolfensohn, President, World Bank (Dubai, September 21,2003) 12 Managing for Development Results C . 1 A K K I \ K l < t.( ,onn 5 E E 0 N P ! N 1 E R N AT Z 0N A I V 0 81 N D 7 A R L Joint Marrakech Memorandum We the heads of the African Development Bank, Asian Development Bank, Inter- American Development Bank, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and World Bank, and the chairman of the Development Assistance Committee of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, affirm our commitment to fostering a global partnership on managing for development results. We would like to thank the Government of Morocco for hosting this Second International Roundtable on Managing for Development Results in Marrakech. We also wish to thank participants from around the globe who have contributed to this Roundtable. Clearly, awareness is growing that getting better development results requires management systems and capacities that put results at the center of planning, implementation, and evaluation. We accord the highest importance to supporting countries in strengthening their capacity to better manage for development results. Since the International Conferenceon Financingfor Development in Monterrey, Mexico, in 2002, the development community has embraced a new partnership-one that calls for developing and transition countries to strengthen their commitment to policies and actions that reduce poverty and stimulate economic growth, and for developed countries to provide increased and more effective aid coupled with more coherent trade and other relevant policies. Within this global partnership, countries must take the lead in managing their development and transition processes. To steer the development process toward the goals they have defined, countries need stronger capacity for strategic planning, accountable management, statistics, monitoring, and evaluation. We recognize that our development agencies, within their different mandates and modalities for providing country support, need to enhance their organizational focus on results. This means that we need to align cooperation programs with desired country results, define the expected contribution of our support to country outcomes, and rely on- and strengthen-countries' monitoring and evaluation systems to track progress and assess outcomes. As agencies with regional or global reach, we pledge to better distill the lessons of countries' experiences and disseminate knowledge about what gets results in different country contexts. We are committed to fostering the global partnership that has emerged since the first Roundtable on Managingfor Results in 2002. We acknowledge that it is only through such partnership that some of the greatest challenges in managing for results can be addressed. A global effort is needed to support countries in generating reliable and timely data to assess progress toward the Millennium Development Goals and other country goals, and to strengthen international reporting mechanisms. A global partnership is also essential to reduce the burden on countries of multiple, agency-driven reporting requirements and monitoring and evaluation systems. We encourage all agencies to join in this partnership to harmonize results reporting through country-led processes 13 We are encouraged by the work that agencies and countries have undertaken, individually and collectively, to better manage for development results. Through the extensive discussions and preparations that have led to today's Roundtable, a consensus is emerging on the content and priorities for this far-reaching agenda, and on the critical next steps. It will be essential to widen the circle of this consensus, in part through regional workshops to be held in the months to come. We believe that the attached core principles and action plan can serve as an initial foundation for building a broader consensus and taking effective action in the years to come. They will be refined through further consultations, including through the Joint Venture on Managing for Development Results, and emerging experiences. We endorse these principles and action plan on this basis, and encourage all bilateral and multilateral development agencies and developing countries to embrace them as well. Extraordinary efforts are required on the part of developing and developed countries to accelerate progress on economic growth and poverty reduction. Commitment and accountability by all partners are essential if we are to work together to achieve better development results. The challenge is enormous, but so are the potential rewards: healthy and educated children, productive youth, empowered communities, and a safer and more equitable world. Marrakech, Morocco February 5,2004 Annex 2 I Summary of MDB Working GroupActivities Complementing and providing guidance to operational cooperation at the country level, several working groups have been established to promote convergence in operational policies and strengthen collaboration on sectoral, thematic, regional and global issues. In addition to these formally established worlung groups, there are several other fora of professional or functional interaction, particularly at the management level. The Rome High Level Forum on Harmonization in 2003 was an important milestone for several working groups and their focus has changed since, reflecting the outcome of the Forum. Key developments since Rome include a shift from institutional policy agreements to country-level implementation and an expansion of coverage to include both harmonization and the alignment with country-owned poverty reduction strategies and development frameworks, systems, and processes. The development community, including the MDBs, are following up on the Rome Declaration commitments to build awareness, broaden ownership, and create networks of practitioners, in support of enhanced implementation of harmonization and alignment at the country level. MDBs are briefing their field-based staff and some are reviewing their internal incentives and reward systems to promote harmonization friendly behavior. Information on harmonization, particularly the growing body of implementation experience, is being disseminated through a Development Gateway-based harmonization website for practitioners, and through the OECD website. 14 To facilitate increased implementation of harmonization and alignment at the country level, the MDBs and other institutions/agencies have supported three regional workshops to introduce an additional 35 partner countries to the growing body of country experiences and good practices in harmonization and alignment-in Tunis (AfDBWB) in August 2003 and Hanoi (AsDBDFID) and in Fiji (Pacific ForudAusAidNB)in October 2003. Examples of implementation at the country level: In Bangladesh, where 11donors used to fund 27 separate education projects, these 11donors are now coming together, under AsDB leadership with World Bank support, to fund one sector-wide program for the most part relying on government's own procedures. In Niger, harmonization efforts are focused on the education sector, where the Government and participating donors (including AfDB and WB) are moving towards a sector-wide,program-based approach in support of the Government's Ten-Year Education Development program. Several donors (including AfDB and WB) have also initiated ajoint Public Expenditure Review and ajoint Country Financial Accountability Assessment that will serve as a basis for a capacity enhancement program to strengthen Niger's public finance systems. In Honduras, with Government leadership, bilateral and multilateral donors (including the IaDB and the WB), have agreed to provide coordinated support for the PRSP including implementation of Sector-Wide Approaches (SWAps) in education, health, agro-forestry, water and sanitation, and safety; alignment with the Government's budget cycle; alignment of mechanisms, procedures and instruments;joint assessment, planning and evaluation activities; information sharing; and use of national systems rather than parallel donor systems. In Africa, five countries have signed budget support "frameworks" or "memoranda of understanding" with the donors (including both the AfDB and the WB), of which three, Uganda, Rwanda, Ghana were signed in 2003 with the objective of ensuring that budget support is aligned with poverty reduction strategy review processes, is more predictable, and is provided in alignment with budget years. In Serbia, donors (including the EBRD and the WB) have agreed tojointly review the Government's existing procurement policy, procedures and practices, as a first step towards a longer-term objective of increased donor reliance on a strengthened Government procurement system. In Cambodia and in Papua New Guinea, donors (including AsDB and WB) and partner governments are working towards joint country strategy development. In a project in Uzbekistan, the EBRD now relies on the WB for assurance on the acceptability of financial management arrangements, including those on external audit. The MDBs havejoined with bilateral OECD donors and partner countries within a new international architecture to support harmonization and alignment. In May 2003, the DAC created the Working Party on Aid Effectiveness and Donor Practices (WP-EFF) to facilitate, support and monitoring progress on harmonization and alignment at the country level, The Working Party has broader multilateral participation than its predecessor (the Task Force on Donor Practices). In addition to the bilateral agencies and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), and World Bank, which are already participating actively as observers, Working Party participation also includes the Strategic Partnership for Africa (SPA) and the Regional Development Banks (AfDB, AsDB, EBRD, and IDB). Fourteen partner countries have been invited to 15 participate in the work of the Working Party.3 The Working Party plans to report on progress of harmonization and alignment to the OECD's Senior Level Meeting in late 2004 and to the 2ndHigh Level Forum planned to be held in France in early 2005. Indicators to measure progress are currently being developed and field-tested. I. Working Groups The OperationalPolicy Roundtable The Roundtable is a coordination forum, established particularly to promote and oversee the harmonization efforts that are a key part of the remit of some MDB working groups. The Roundtable is also the vehicle chosen for dialogue on reports on progress to the Development Committee, submitted by WB and IMF, and was also the coordinating forum for MDB collaboration in organizing the Rome High Level Forum on Harmonization in 2003. The Roundtable works closely with the MDB Senior Liaison Group,which oversees and coordinates MDB cooperation more broadly. Evaluation Cooperation Group The Evaluation Cooperation Group previously completed Good Practice Standard Papers for both public and private sector project evaluations. The good practice standard for the private sector has been benchmarked and updated. The public sector good practice standards will be benchmarked in 2005. The ECG is currently developing good practices for evaluating policy-based lending operations. Other work program areas discussed at the January 14,2004 meeting include revision of the ECG template on governance and independence of evaluation; project and program evaluability; and a possible addendum to the public sector operations evaluation good practice paper to address the special case of technical assistance instruments (not covered by loans) among MDBs. Environmental Group The MFI-WGE held meetings in Washington 2003 hosted by the World Bank and Bangkok in December 2003 hosted by the Asian Development Bank. These meetings focused on reaching agreement on additional elements of the "Common Framework" and on completion of work on Common Approaches to Areas Covered by EIA (InterAmerican Development Bank and World Bank), Terms of Reference for EIA and for Environmental Management Plans (Asian Development Bank); Guidance on Environmental Audits (European Bank for Reconstruction and Development). Other MFI-WGE work currently under way includes Strategic Environmental Assessment (African Development Bank and World Bank), Assessment of Cumulative Impacts (Asian Development Bank); and a paper on Borrower Capacity Building (African Development Bank). The International Finance Corporation (IFC) has mobilized adequate resources to allow for initial activities for the collaborative updating of the World Bank Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook. Members of the MFI-WGE are also working together at the country level to undertake targeted harmonization efforts related to environmental assessment procedures such as in Sri Lanka and Vietnam where the Asian Development Bank, Japan Bank for International The fourteen countries are: Bangladesh, Bolivia, Cambodia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Kyrgyz Republic, Morocco, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Niger, Senegal, Tanzania, Vietnam and Zambia. 16 Cooperation and World Bank are working together with national governments. It is anticipated that over the next year these country level efforts will represent an expanded area of cooperation between MFI-WGE members and cooperating governments. The next meeting of the MFI-WGE, which will be hosted by the Nordic Investment Bank and held in Helsinki in June 2004. This will be followed by a meeting that will focus on finalization of MFI-WGE inputs to the Second High Level Forum to hosted by the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, to be held in London in November 2004. Financial Management A joint venture on public financial management is being created with both bilateral and multilateral donor participation within the new DAC/OECD Workmg Party on Aid Effectiveness and Donor Practices, with representation from partner countries. Thisjoint venture will discuss performance indicators to track progress, and will explore the development of good practices for ensuring predictable external resources (including commitments, budgeting and recording expenditures, and merging donor funds with the exchequer). Meanwhile, the multilateral development bank (MDB) group has agreed on common approach notes on diagnostic work, including protocols for document sharing and use; on financial reporting and auditing; and on financial analysis. Moving forward, the group is refocusing efforts on country-level implementation and will continue to work with the DAC through the new arrangements for the technical subgroup on financial management. Work is continuing by the International Federation of Accountants to develop accounting standards for development assistance (expected completion date is end- 2004). The MDBs are also supporting shared staff learning programs. To facilitate common procedures among all donors, all financial management staff of the MDBs will attend the WB Fiduciary Forum in March 2004. Financial management staff in the AsDB and Islamic development Bank attended a week-long learning event organized by the WB in November 2003. The AfDB and WB (with involvement from the IMF, Sweden and WBI) are alsojointly organizing six client learning workshops in public expenditure and financial accountability. Procurement The ongoing harmonization effort of the heads of procurement (HOP) of various public international financial institutions (IFIs), including multilateral development banks (MDBs), has resulted over the last several years in significant progress towards harmonization of IFI-financed procurement. The most recent meeting of HOP, the technical working group (TWG) for procurement under the MDBs' "roundtable on harmonization", in October 2003 at the Caribbean Development Bank has maintained and continued the substantial harmonization of procurement policies and practices. HOP had been meeting informally on common procurement concerns since the 1990s.HOP harmonization objectives and outcomes have been directed towards similarity rather than uniformity as was recognized by the then G7 nations in April 1998. Objectives include continuing the harmonization effort, building sustainable procurement, promoting good governance in procurement, and identifying "best practices". Outcomes, many already achieved, include completion of MBDs and issue of corresponding, harmonized standard bidding documents (SBDs); 17 0 country-level harmonization including common documents and procedures for national or local competitive bidding; 0 joint country procurement assessments andjoint efforts toward country-level procurement reform; 0 cooperation against fraud and corruption in procurement; "policy convergence"; and 0 introduction of electronic government procurement as well as environmentally responsible procurement. Perhaps the most obvious outcome has been the agreed MBD for procurement of goods and its consequent issue and use as SBDs by four MDBs, Asian Development Bank (ADB), African Development Bank (AfDB), Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) and World Bank. First agreed and used in 1999,the MBD and related SBDs for goods were updated for continued use in 2002. The master document for civil-works prequalification was finalized in October 2002 by HOP and its resulting standard prequalification document was issued by the MDBs in early 2003. The draft MBD for civil works has also been recently agreed and is expected to be issued and used as SBDs in early 2004. The master document for request for proposal (RFP) from consultants was also completed in 2003, including the harmonized documentation for consultant contracts. The early harmonization effort by HOP had resulted in MDBs' cooperation with their member countries but was a less noticeable though quite substantial step towards harmonization among MDBs with results on the ground: the country "pilot projects" of ADB and the World Bank in Asia, of AfDB and World Bank in Africa, of European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) and World Bank in Europe, and of IDB and World Bank in the Americas. These have been aimed at implementing, among other activities, national procurement reforms to ensure good governance and local capacity as well as use of common documents and procedures for national competitive bidding. Such work encompassesjoint Country Procurement Assessment Reports (CPARs) by ADB and the World Bank, AfDB and World Bank, EBRD and World Bank, and IDB and World Bank. Less remarkable but not less important are the individual steps taken by ADB, IDB and the World Bank to incorporate environmentally responsible procurement into their operations and by ADB, IDB and the World Bank to address e-procurement, activities which are shared with and monitored by HOP. Harmonization of procurement policies and practices - policy convergence -has been continued by HOP at their meetings in 2003. At these and earlier meetings HOP compared and analyzed at length essential issues or concerns on the basis of comparison of IF1procurement policies and practices. That effort resulted in the conclusion that MDBs and other IFIs have advanced significantly in being "substantially harmonized." That effort also highlighted that the remaining differences require decisions from other stake-holders such as the MDBs' owners; for example, eligibility of suppliers and other bidders, consultants and other contractors to participate in procurement financed by individual IFIs is restricted by the charters of individual IFIs and thus cannot be reconciled by HOP efforts, or there are varying schemes for domestic preference. The pursuit of harmonization of procurement policies and practices by HOP has essentially encompassed identifying and implementing best practices under IF1financing; 18 and, thereby, assisting IF1beneficiaries in their pursuit of economy and efficiency. HOP will continue their work on this basis, bridging or resolving differences as needed. Gender The Gender group was established in 2001 with the aim of strengthening information sharing and collaboration among MDBs on gender equality in operations in client countries as well as within each MDB and IMF, which is also a member. Two sub- groups pay particular attention to each of the two facets of the overall group's work, while the full group focuses on cross-cutting issues and the broad policy environment for advancing gender equality. A full update on the group's work is attached in Annex 4. Infrastructure A Private Infrastructure Group was established to increase the flow of information among MDBs in a fairly new field at the time, to exchange lessons learned and establish closer working relations. This group was, however, not very active. With the growing emphasis on infrastructure analysis and financing, in 2003 it was decided to turn the working group into a broader working group on all aspects of MDB and IF1work on infrastructure. Poverty The Poverty Group was established to promote and strengthen collaboration, particularly around PRSPs and their implementation. The group prepared ajoint "Protocol on collaboration among MDBs/IMF in the preparation of Poverty Reduction Strategies in developing countries" In 2000-2002 the group prepared a "Global Poverty Report," outlining major challenges in attaclung poverty and progress toward the MDGs, globally and regionally. The poverty reports were forwarded to MDB Governors put to various uses, including as background documents for G8 Summits. The role of the group is under review and it will probably take on a broader mandate, looking at all aspects of achieving the MDGs. 11. Functional CoordinationGroups Complementing the collaboration among the MDB Presidents, several other senior managers have established their own informal fora for cooperation, information sharing and cross-institutional learning. Key examples include: Chief Financial Officers consult regularly on a host of issues and meet at least once a year in a CFO Forum. 0 Controllers meet annually through their Controllers Forum and also maintain regular contact throughout the year. 0 Legal Counsels regularly share information and discuss legal developments and specific rulings of interest and importance for MDBs. 0 Chief Information Officers have maintained the information sharing network, originally established in preparation for the millennium safeguards. 19 0Trust Fund and Co financing;Managers have recently started a dialogue on trust fund policies and management and on strengthening the strategic focus of co financing activities. Treasurers meet annually and also maintain regular contact throughout the year. Auditors consult regularly and on a variety of issues and normally meet at least once a year. Secretaries (Corporate Secretaries) also maintain consultation on a variety of issues. 20 Annex 3 Examples of Cooperationin Country and Regional Operations Operational cooperation among MDBs normally consists of cooperation between one regional development bank and the World Bank. The exception is central Asia, where countries are members of three MDBs, AsDB, EBRD and the World Bank. In addition various other multilaterals, primarily from the group of multilateral financial institutions, frequently are key partners for one or both MDBs in a given country or region, for example EC and EIB in Europe and central Asia and the Islamic Development Bank in northern and sub-Saharan Africa. The cooperation is guided by Memoranda of Understanding, with specific action plans attached, between the World Bank and each regional development bank, and between EBRD and AsDB. An MDB/IMF protocol on supporting countries preparing and implementing PRSPs,joint statements by the MDB Presidents, outlining institutional priorities for cooperation, and various endorsed agreements, including the Rome Declaration on Harmonization, also play an important role in setting the stage for cooperation at the country and regional level. While cooperation at the country level is growing and, by and large, proceeding well, this is typically where tensions arise between the banks. There is at times competition for specific projects or investments, and in other cases technical experts from different banks come to different conclusions in their sector analysis, etc. The MoUs and the general institutional drive to strengthen the partnership helps solve or diffuse most such tensions, and in most cases they can be kept within the boundaries of creative tension. The following are a few selected examples of cooperation at the country and regional level: Asian Development Bank and World Bank Cooperation between the two banks has intensified significantly in recent years, both at the management and task team levels. Several high level World Bank officials have visited AsDB for consultations, reciprocated to some degree by AsDB visits to World Bank headquarters. As stated in an attachment to the current MoU between the banks, location necessitates that most such visits are by World Bank officials to AsDB headquarters in Manila, as such visits can normally be combined with operational field visits. of regional cooperation in central Asia, working on a unified vision and mechanism for Currently the banks, with EBRD (and IMFand UNDP) are worlung on coordination coordinated orjoint programs. They co-sponsored a ministerial conference of central Asian countries, in Tashkent in November 2003. Similarly, coordination of sector strategies has been strengthened, with discussions among sector managers on human development and infrastructure strategies. A meeting to discuss modalities for cooperation in the main human development sectors (health, education and social protection) in central Asia took place in Bangkok in early 2003. The banks jointly run the clean air initiative for Asian 21 cities, and in mid-2003 they also organized ajoint workshop on country environmental analysis. In China there is routine cooperation on major conferences and analytical work, including the upcoming Shanghai conference on scaling-up poverty reduction, a recent Northeast Forum in Lianing, and the first international conference of the StateElectricity Regulatory Commission. An example of joint analytical work is China's financial sector, including support to China Development Bank. Another example is a China social assessment manual, in a Chinese language for domestic practitioners. There is also work on harmonization of procedures for lending. In preparing its country strategy (2004 to 2006) AsDB drew on World Bank analytical work, while the World Bank CAS (2003 to 2005) referred to ASDB analytical work. In Cambodia there is agreement on ajoint process for preparing new country strategies (with DfID also partnering). The banks are co-financing a rural electrification and transmission project. In public financial management the banks jointly published a 2003 integrated fiduciary assessment and public expenditure review, they recently organized ajoint mission on public financial management and are both providing funding for the 2004 public expenditure tracking survey. Similarly, a draft country procurement assessment report was preparedjointly, as was a country gender assessment. In Lao PDR the banks have establishedjoint review missions in education. They are cooperating on an umbrella fund for the environment and conservation. Also, a joint country gender assessment was done and ajoint country poverty assessment is planned. In Vietnam the banks are cooperating on harmonization of procedures (with JBIC and others coming in). In the Philippines there is cooperation on water sector issues, including support for the Philippines water conference, and continued collaboration on a decentralization and service delivery study and on an investment climate assessment, as well as onjoint portfolio reviews. In Indonesia there is coordination of activities in the education sector and alignment of health sector projects, and common positions on decentralization, financial sector reform, etc. Joint portfolio reviews are now becoming routine. In PNG there is cooperation on ajoint country strategy (with AusAid) andjoint analytical work on public expenditure, health, education, transport and procurement. Both banks re-engaged with the Solomon Islands through ajoint assessment mission in 2003 and will coordinate programming missions in 2004. A plan for close consultation has been agreed as new Pacific assistance strategies are developed in 2004. In Timor Leste the banks are working together under the banner of the multi-donor trust fund. In Uzbekistan the banks cooperated on a health reform program and on country portfolio reviews. Joint country portfolio reviews were also done in the Kyrgyz republic. And in Bangladesh the banks (with other partners) are co-financing an education sector program. African Development Bank and World Bank After a period where cooperation was influenced by the circumstances that led to AfDB's relocation to new, temporary headquarters, interaction between the banks is again growing. Review of the MoU between them was completed in 2003, followed by technical work to identify priority areas of cooperation. In consultations at the end of 2003 an agreement was reached on an action plan, which identifies specific primary areas of cooperation, including countries of emphasis, water, regional infrastructure, Nepad, post- conflict, governance, HIV/Aids, capacity building, harmonization and staff development. Countries of emphasis selected were Benin, Ethiopia, Madagascar, Mozambique, Uganda, Burundi, DRC, Sierra Leone and Egypt. Strategic cooperation on water, under the action 22 plan, has already been initiated. Both banks are active participants in the Strategic Partnership with Africa (SPA) initiative. In Ethiopia the banks cooperate with others on coordination of budget support to the government, and on a co-financed road sector program. In Niger they cooperated on a public expenditure review and on a country financial accountability assessment. In Senegal there was cooperation on a country financial accountability assessment and on a country procurement assessment review. In Tanzania they cooperate within the structure of coordination between external partners and the government, and worked together on a country procurement assessment review and co-financed a water supply and sanitation project. In Burundi they started preparing for ajoint country financial accountability assessment, while in Ghana they worked together on a country procurement assessment review. In Malawi they participated in a health sector program. In Madagascar they co- financed a rural transport project. In Sierra Leone they are co-financing a basic education program and in Chad an education sector reform program. European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and World Bank The relationship between the two banks is in many ways different from the relations between the World Bank and other MDBs, given that EBRD has a mandate that specifically highlights private sector development and transition to democracy. Nevertheless, cooperation on policy and operations has increased significantly in recent years, often based around specific regional or country focused. The support for the CIS-7 countries, the Stability Pact coordination, the regional infrastructure for south east Europe, the EU accession and candidate country support and regional integration in central Asia are all examples of such cooperation, also involving other partners, within a defined development or transition framework. In an example of cooperation between three MDBs, EBRD, AsDB and the World Bank joined hands with joint support and participation in a second ministerial conference on central Asia regional economic cooperation. In the partnership for developing regional infrastructure in south east Europe, the two banks are active in the joint infrastructure steering group, which has contributed to important sector analysis (e.g., "Regional Balkans infrastructure study") and coordinates financing and implementation of specific projects. In Bulgaria they cooperated on a district heating project. In Poland they cooperated on railways restructuring operations. In Romania they coordinated lending to the railways company. In Croatia they are co-financing a road project. In north eastern Europe the banks are cooperating within the Northern Dimension Environmental Partnership. Asian DeveloDmentBank and European Bank for Reconstruction and Development Cooperation between AsDB and EBRD and relatively new and limited to the countries of central Asia that are members of both banks. To underpin the cooperation a Memorandum of Understanding has been prepared. Frequently the cooperation also includes the World Bank, including in thejoint support the banks provide for regional cooperation and integration in the region. 23 In Kazakhstan AsDB and EBRD cooperate on road sector operations and in Uzbekistan there is cooperation on railways operations. Inter-American Development Bank and World Bank. The two banks have a long history of cooperation, including probably the single largest co-financing relationship in development cooperation. In recent years the cooperation has been guided by a Memorandum of Understanding, which is currently under review. The review will be completed in early 2004. Among countries currently seen as key cooperation countries under the banner of harmonization are Bolivia, Honduras, Jamaica and Nicaragua, and among areas of priority are procurement, financial management and infrastructure. Cooperation has also been strong around survey data, research and analytical work, as well as on the design and organization of publications and conferences. During the recent economic challenges in Argentina the banks have maintained a close relationship. And in the health sector both banks have continued their joint partnership with PAHO. In Honduras they jointly prepared a country financial accountability assessment and are preparing a country procurement assessment review. The IDB-CS and World Bank- CAS were closely coordinated. In Jamaica they have joined with others in discussions on a proposed action plan for harmonization and on ajoint country procurement assessment report. In Nicaragua they coordinated their country strategies andjointly prepared a country financial accountability assessment. In Mexico they also cooperated on a country financial accountability assessment and co-financed a program for savings and credit sector strengthening, as well as an adjustment loan for rural finance development. In Colombia they co-financed a social sector adjustment operation. In Ecuador they co-financed a national parks and biodiversity project and cooperated on public expenditure reviews and country financial accountability reviews. There was good collaboration on the preparation of each other's country strategy. In Peru the banks co-financed a rural education program andjointly produced a public expenditure review and a country financial accountability assessment. In Bolivia they cooperated on public expenditure reviews and country financial accountability assessments, and they collaborate closely on banking and corporate reform. 24 Annex 4 Update on MDB/IMF Working Group on Gender The MDBs and IMF have in recent years increased their attention to gender equality in their operations and in their organizations. To take ajoint approach forward, the MDBs and LMF established a Working Group on Gender. The Working Group consists of two sub- groups: gender and development; and organizational gender issues. While in 2003 the Workmg Group met once as a full group at IDB Headquarters (February 13-14,2003), the sub-groups also met independently and group members kept in touch through electronic communication. The group is seen as important for exchanging experiences, and for its potential to leverage attention to gender issues in their respective institutions. A group that brings together the internal and external aspects of gender, to foster synergies between institutional and operational policies is also seen as highly valuable. In 2003 for the Working Group was instrumental in promoting the importance of gender by working with the MDB/IMF Heads to prepare ajoint statement on the importance of gender, which the Heads issued in observance of International Women's Day (March 8,2003). Cooperation in sponsoring an international workshop on "Gender, Equality and the Millennium Development Goals" was another important event. Highlights of the work of the sub- groups are summarized below. I. Genderand Development In 2003, the efforts of the Gender and Development sub-group focused on sharing processes and best practices in the drafting of gender action plans (ADB, AfDB and IDB) and in analyzing the work of external advisory bodies (ADB, IDB and WB). Interagency collaboration in regional work was indicated in the drafting of Gender Country Assessments (CGA), evaluating gender in PRSPs and sharing of good practices in mainstreaming gender in lending. Progress on this front has already materialized in the CGA for Cambodia and the Gender and PRSP workshop for the Asian Region jointly coordinated by ADB and the WB. Collaboration was also present in IDB/ADB activities to exchange institutional perspectives in developing financial and non-financial products and to compare experiences from Asia and Latin America and the Caribbean in areas such as domestic violence reduction (Latin American experts visited ADB and Asian NGOs), combating trafficking in persons (workshop in Washington, D.C.), and underscoring the role of women in the promotion of social development (seminar in Japan). Significantly, the Gender in Development sub-group committed itself to work closely on the fulfillment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Collaboration on this front entailed the organization of an international workshop on Gender Equality and the Millennium Development Goals, which was hosted by the World Bank in Washington, D.C., on November 19-20,2003, and jointly sponsored by the UN Interagency Network of Women and Gender Equality, the OECDDAC Network on Gender Equality, and the MDB/IMF Working Group on Gender. The workshop succeeded in identifying how gender-specific actions can be better integrated into policies and interventions intended to achieve the MDGs and in promoting coordination among development agencies in their efforts to integrate gender issues into the MDGs. 25 II. Organizational Gender Issues The efforts of the organizational sub-group have focused on developing a common framework for cross-institutional comparison of gender statistics in member institutions. The table below presents data as of December 31,2003; updates will be provided annually. Name Professional Management The data show that despite variations among institutions, at the professional levels almost all of the members have reached the critical mass (at least 30%)needed for a minority group to be able to influence decision-makmg in an organization. The low representation of women at the management levels indicates the area in all of the member institutions where significantly more effort is needed, for example in recruitment and career development. The sub-group intends to develop a set of core quantitative and qualitative indicators which could guide all of the member organizations in moving beyond a strict numeric approach to measuring representation of women by grade groups. Such indicators include share of women in different career streams, operations units, recruitment, promotions, assignments, performance appraisals (ratings, written comments). The sub-group has also focused learning about the different strategies and approaches to addressing organizational gender issues in member institutions, as a basis for identifying best practices and areas for collaboration. Some members address gender as a stand-alone, others within a wider diversity program. The mechanisms for addressing ADB, EBRD) to designated Diversity focal points (e.g., IMF,World Bank). The sub-group gender vary, ranging from integration into the portfolios of Human Resources staff (e.g., carried out an internal benchmarking exercise on planning and accountability frameworks (including organizational focal point, diversity plans, monitoring metrics, responsibility for implementation, monitoring and reporting requirements). Members of the organizational sub-group will continue to exchange information on policies and plans as the basis for developing shared approaches. managerial staff Professional=Professionalstaff levels 1-6; Management=Levels 7-IO+ 1Level 6 Director+1Level 7 Non- Management=Business Group Directors, Directors and Heads of Unit (Professional=grades 09-02; management=Executive,R, 01). Professional=A9-A15; Management=B1-B5 Covers HQ-appointed staff (professionakgrades GE-GG; management=GH+). 26 Annex 5 ROMEDECLARATION HARMONIZATION ON Rome, Italy, February 25,2003 1. We, the heads of multilateral and bilateral development institutions and representatives of the IMF, other multilateral financial institutions, and partner countries gathered in Rome, Italy, on February 24-25, 2003, reaffirm our commitment to eradicating poverty, achieving sustained economic growth, and promoting sustainable development as we advance to an inclusive and equitable global economic system. Our deliberations are an important international effort to harmonize the operational policies, procedures, and practices of our institutions with those of partner country systems to improve the effectiveness of development assistance, and thereby contribute to meeting the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). They directly support the broad agreement of the international development community on this issue as reflected in the Monterrey Consensus (Report of the International Conference on Financing for Development, March 2002, para. 43). We express our appreciation to the governments of Jamaica, Vietnam, and Ethiopia, and to the bilateral donors and international institutions that sponsored and coordinated regional workshops in Kingston, Hanoi, and Addis Ababa in January 2003, in preparation for the Rome Forum. The key principles, lessons, and messages synthesized in the reports of these workshops have provided valuable input to the Forum. Improvementsin DevelopmentEffectiveness 2. We in the donor community have been concerned with the growing evidence that, over time, the totality and wide variety of donor requirements and processes for preparing, delivering, and monitoring development assistance are generating unproductive transaction costs for, and drawing down the limited capacity of, partner countries. We are also aware of partner country concerns that donors' practices do not always fit well with national development priorities and systems, including their budget, program, and project planning cycles and public expenditure and financial management systems. We recognize that these issues require urgent, coordinated, and sustained action to improve our effectiveness on the ground. 3. We attach high importance to partner countries' assuming a stronger leadership role in the coordination of development assistance, and to assisting in building their capacity to do so. Partner countries on their part will undertake necessary reforms to enable progressive reliance by donors on their systems as they adopt international principles or standards and apply good practices. The key element that will guide this work is a country- based approach that emphasizes country ownership and government leadership, includes capacity building, recognizes diverse aid modalities (projects, sector approaches, and budget or balance of payments support), and engages civil society including the private sector. Good Practice Standardsor Principles governance structures, and authorizing environments vary, in many instances we can 4. We acknowledge that while our historical origins, institutional mandates, 27 simplify and harmonize our requirements and reduce their associated costs, while improving fiduciary oversight and public accountability and enhancing the focus on concrete development results. We endorse the good practice work by the technical groups of the DAC/OECD Task Force and the multilateral development banks (MDBs), and look forward to the expected completion next year of the UN harmonization work that is being coordinated by UNDGO. We are ready to follow existing good practices while continuing to identify and disseminate new ones. Going Forward 5. We agree that, for both donors and partner countries, the progress we make on the ground in programs and projects will be a concrete and important measure of the success of our efforts. We recognize that such progress can be facilitated and enhanced by harmonization efforts at the international and regional levels. Building on the work of the DAC/OECD and MDB working groups and on country experience, including the recent country initiatives, we commit to the following activities to enhance harmonization: 0 Ensuring that development assistance is delivered in accordance with partner country priorities, including poverty reduction strategies and similar approaches, and that harmonization efforts are adapted to the country context. 0 Reviewing and identifying ways to amend, as appropriate, our individual institutions' and countries' policies, procedures, and practices to facilitate harmonization. In addition, we will work to reduce donor missions, reviews, and reporting, streamline conditionalities, and simplify and harmonize documentation. 0 Implementing progressively-building on experiences so far and the messages from the regional workshops-the good practice standards or principles in development assistance delivery and management, taking into account specific country circumstances. We will disseminate the good practices (synthesized in Annex A) to our managers and staff at headquarters and in country offices and to other in-country development partners. 0 Intensifying donor efforts to work through delegated cooperation at the country level and increasing the flexibility of country-based staff to manage country programs and projects more effectively and efficiently. ` 0 Developing, at all levels within our organizations, incentives that foster management and staff recognition of the benefits of harmonization in the interest of increased aid effectiveness. 0 Providing support for country analytic work in ways that will strengthen governments' ability to assume a greater leadership role and take ownership of development results. In particular, we will work with partner governments to forge stronger partnerships and will collaborate to improve the policy relevance, quality, delivery, and efficiency of country analytic work. 0 Expanding or mainstreaming country-led efforts (whether begun in particular sectors, thematic areas, or individual projects) to streamline donor procedures 28 and practices, including enhancing demand-driven technical cooperation. The list of countries presently involved includes Ethiopia, Jamaica, Vietnam, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Cambodia, Honduras, Kenya, Kyrgyz Republic, Morocco, Niger, Nicaragua, Pacific Islands, Philippines, Senegal,and Zambia. Providing budget, sector, or balance of payments support where it is consistent with the mandate of the donor, and when appropriate policy and fiduciary arrangements are in place. Good practice principles or standards-including alignment with national budget cycles and national poverty reduction strategy reviews-should be used in delivering such assistance. 0 Promoting harmonized approaches in global and regional programs. 6. We wish to record that a positive by-product of our collaboration on harmonization has been increased information sharing and improved understanding of commonalities and differences during the preparation or revision of our respective operational policies, procedures, and practices. We will deepen this collaboration in the future, and will explore how such collaboration could help to ensure that new or revised policies are appropriately harmonized or "harmonizable" with those of the partner countries and donor institutions. 7. We recognize the global work on monitoring and assessing the contribution of donor support to the achievement of the MDGs. We will track and, as necessary, refine lead indicators of progress on harmonization such as those described in the DAC/OECD Good Practice Papers. 8. We acknowledge the potential contribution of modern information and communication technologies to promoting and facilitating harmonization-already demonstrated by the use of audio and videoconferencing facilities in the staff work on harmonization, the Development Gateway, the Country Analytic Work website, and the early work on e-government, e-procurement, and e-financial management. We commit to further efforts to exploit these technologies. Next Steps 9. Partner countries are encouraged to design country-based action plans for harmonization, agreed with the donor community, that will set out clear and monitorable proposals to harmonize development assistance using the proposals of the DAC/OECD Task Force and the MDB technical working groups as reference points. In turn, the bilateral and multilateral agencies will take actions to support harmonization at the country level. As part of their self-evaluation processes, bilateral and multilateral agencies and partner countries will assess and report on progress in applying good practices, and on the impact of such practices. Whenever possible, we will use existing mechanisms to develop such plans and to assess and report on progress, and we will make these plans available to the public. 10. We will utilize and strengthen, including through partner country participation, existing mechanisms to maintain peer pressure for implementing our agreements on harmonization. In this regard and in the context of the New Partnership for Africa's Development, we welcome regional initiatives, such as the work by the Economic 29 Commission for Africa, for a joint annual aid effectiveness review in a framework of mutual accountability that would also address harmonization issues. Reflecting our experience over these last two days, we plan stocktaking meetings in early 2005 following the review already scheduled in DAC/OECD in 2004. This follow-up would assess progress in and sustain the momentum for fundamental changes that enhance aid delivery, and would contribute to the review of the implementation of the Monterrey Consensus, the timing and modalities for which are expected to be determined by 2005. 30 Annex 6 ~ ~Development Results n a for ~ n ~ g 7 {@NO ` N T I R N b l l O H I RC J P l i ) i A 8 l i M 4 R R 4 1 t C W 3004 PROMOTING A HARMONIZED APPROACH MANAGING TO FOR DEVELOPMENT RESULTS: COREPRINCIPLES In line with the spirit and commitments of the Monterrey Conference on Financing for Development, managing for development results' aims at improving the performance of countries and development agencies to achieve sustainable improvements in country outcomes for long-term impact on poverty reduction and increased standards of living. It promotes a partnership approach and organizational change through organizational learning and accountability. Managing for development results combines a coherent framework for development effectiveness with practical tools for strategic planning, risk management, progress monitoring, and outcome evaluation. For maximum effect, it requires objectives that are clearly stated in terms of expected outcomes and beneficiaries, as well as intermediate and higher-order outcome indicators and targets, systematic monitoring and reporting, demand for results by partner countries and development agencies alike, an effective and continuous dialogue on results, and strengthening of country capacity to manage for results. Managing for development results builds on the principles set by the development community in the domains of country ownership, donor harmonization, and alignment. These principles, endorsed in the Rome Declaration on Harmonization in February 2003 and further developed in the DAC Good Practice Paper "Harmonizing Donor Practices for Effective Aid Delivery," provide that development agencies should: Rely on and support partner countries' own priorities, objectives, and results. This implies alignment with the national strategy (a sound poverty reduction strategy or equivalent, with national linkage to the Millennium Development Goals as applicable) and use of reliable national systems and procedures (including the government's budget, reporting cycle, and monitoring timetable). Coordinate with other development agencies under partner country leadership and promote joint action whenever possible (including through delegated cooperation-that is, one donor acting on behalf of another). Strengthen partner countries' own institutions, systems, and capabilities to plan and implement projects and programs, report on results, and evaluate their development processes and outcomes, avoiding parallel donor-driven mechanisms. 'The Glossary of Key Terms in Evaluation and Results Based Management (DAC Network on Development Evaluation, OECD, 2002)defines results-based management as "a management strategy focusing on performance and achievement of output, outcomes and impact." The DAC Network on Development Evaluation is an international forum of bilateral and multilateral evaluation experts from DAC member countries, the multilateral development banks, and other international agencies. 31 These principles recognize the importance of ownership by partner countries and support an approach by development agencies that strengthens partner countries' accountability to their citizens. Further, they recognize the partnership between partner countries, development agencies and other stakeholders and the critical importance of strengthening local capacity. They also recognize that development agencies should provide support for sound national management systems and for reforms and institutions to enhance the business environment and foster the development of the private sector as the main engine of growth. In this context, although partner countries and development agencies have different roles and responsibilities in development, managing for development results means that they each have accountabilities-to their own constituencies and to each other-for achieving development results. It also means that leadership in both partner countries and development agencies is especially critical for strategic vision, honest assessment of progress, and institutional flexibility to adapt to new information. Five core principles for managing for development results emerge from these understandings: 1. At all phases-from strategic planning through implementation to completion and beyond-focus the dialogue on results for partner countries, development agencies, and other stakeholders. In managing for results, it is important to have a coherent approach: (a) ex ante, at the strategy and planning phase, when expected results are articulated and their likely costs and expected impact on poverty reduction and development are analysed; (b) during progradproject implementation, when monitoring is needed to assess progress and identify necessary midcourse corrections; (c) ex post, upon completion, when the results are assessed against objectives and other factors, and (d) also when sufficient time has passed to be able to assess sustainability. 2. Align actual programming, monitoring, and evaluation activities with the agreed expected results. When partner countries, development agencies and other stakeholders focus on expected results and associated results indicators, they can better align actual programming (including financial support), monitoring, and evaluation activities with agreed results objectives. Partner country priorities and constraints must remain the starting point for development agencies' support strategies, and the development agencies' planned operations, analytic support, and technical assistance must be consistent with the partner country's sound development strategy. 3. Keep the results reporting system as simple, cost-effective, and user- friendly as possible. The indicator framework for managing for results should, to the extent possible, (a) be simple; (b) rely on country systems, supporting capacity building to the maximum extent; (c) be geared to learning as well as accountability functions; and (d) be harmonized to minimize system transactions costs and facilitate comparative analysis. The partner country and development agencies should consult on a short list of key indicators, preferably from a standardized list, for monitoring progress and assessing achievement of results. It is important to take into consideration the chain of expected results. Managing for results aims at improved efficiency; therefore, it is essential to be selective (and not to try to 32 measure everything) and realistic (in terms of feasibility and cost) in choosing indicators. The results reporting system should remain pragmatic; start with whatever baseline data is available, including proxies; use meaningful qualitative indicators to complement quantitative indicators, or to compensate if quantitative indicators are not available; and include support for cost-efficient measures to improve data availability and country or project monitoring systems. The end goal should be a sound results-based management system that includes specific, quantifiable indicators connected to a timeline with baseline data and periodic assessments of project and program performance against defined targets. 4. Manage for, not by, results. Managing for results involves a change in mindset-from starting with the planned inputs and actions and then analysing their likely outcomes and impacts, to focusing on the desired outcomes and impacts (for example on poverty reduction) and then identifying what inputs and actions are needed to get there. It also involves establishing baselines and identifying upfront performance targets and indicators for assessing progress during implementation and on program completion. Missing key targets should be a signal for partners to analyse together whethedwhy things have gone off track and how they could be brought back on track, if necessary. It should not be a trigger for the rigid application of penalty rules. 5. Use results information for management learning and decision making, as well as for reporting and accountability. Information on results should be publicly available. While one of the goals of managing for results is to use results monitoring information for reporting and accountability (for both partner countries and development agencies), this may potentially prompt behaviors that are overly risk-averse. Two approaches can mitigate this possibility: (a) using reports on results in a positive way for management learning and decision making, takmg into account lessons for better future action; and (b) when using reports for accountability purposes, setting performance measures that reflect the level of responsibility of the actor (whether a country, development agency, ministry, institution, NGO, and other stakeholders) and results that the actor can reasonably achieve; this approach recognizes that even with good performance in managing for results, external factors may hinder the achievement of expected outcomes. 33 5 E C O N D I N T E R N AT1 0 N A L RO U N D T A B L E M A R R A K E C W 2 0 0 4 Action Plan onManagingfor Development Results SECOND INTERNATIONALROUNDTABLE MANAGING DEVELOPMENT ON FOR RESULTS Marrakech,Morocco-February 5,2004 1. The past two years have seen the emergence of a community of practice on managing for development results. Through discussion and exchange of views, this community has defined results as "sustainable improvements in country outcomes," and managing for results as "a management strategy focusing on performance and the achievement of outputs, outcomes, and impact." Managing for results involves using information to improve decision-making and steer country-led development processes toward clearly defined goals. Formal bodies have been established to advance work in this area: the multilateral development bank (MDB) Worlung Group on Managing for Results and, most recently, the Joint Venture on Managing for Development Results sponsored by the Development Assistance Committee of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD-DAC). These bodies, in collaboration with long-standing communities of practice of statisticians and evaluators, have begun to define the global actions needed to support developing countries in their efforts to better manage for results. This action plan identifies seven areas for global action in the coming year as part of a medium-term agenda on managing for development results. Roundtable participants are encouraged to seek their agency's and government's support for the action plan in the coming year. 2. Endorse Core Principles. Since 2002, the post-Monterrey partnership has called upon developing countries to maintain their Monterrey commitment to adopting policies that will achieve results, and upon development agencies to contribute more effectively to these results. The focus has turned to practical results-based approaches, but adapting such approaches from the private sector and developed countries' governments has required conceptualization of the objectives and principles that underlie managing for development results. The document "Promoting a Harmonized Approach to Managing for Results: Core Principles for Development Agencies" spells out a set of core principles that the presidents of the MDBs and the Chairman of the DAC are expected to endorse at the Marrakech Roundtable. Other development agencies are encouraged to endorse these core principles, and partner countries are encouraged to consider the need for a similar set of principles to underpin their efforts to manage for development results. 34 LEADRESPONSIBILITY MEDIUM- TERM CONTRIBUTING PROGRESS Partner Devt. OBJECTIVE ACTIONS 2004 IN INDICATORS countries Agencies Development Seek developmentagencies' Number of J agencies use core broad endorsement of development principles to adopt a "Promotinga Harmonized agencies endorsing consistent approach Approach to Managing for core principlesby to measuring, Results: Core Principles for end-2004. monitoring, and DevelopmentAgencies." managing for ................................................................................................................................................................... ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Partner countries are Partner countriesendorse the use Number of J better supported by of core principles by developing development agencies developmentagencies and countries endorsing and make better consider the applicabilityof the the use of core progress in managing principles to their own principles by for results. developmentprocesses. development 3. Focus National Strategies and Systems on Country Results. To get better development results, countries need well-articulated strategies that are based on analysis of appropriate data, are fully costed, and have clear monitoring and evaluation systems that allow adaptation as necessary to achieve objectives. Developing such a strategy requires a country to have strong strategic planning capability, access to useful data, analytic capacity and institutional flexibility to respond to changing circumstances, and political will and sufficient public sector incentives to manage for results. LEADRESPONSIBILITY PARTNER MEDIUM-TERM CONTRIBUTING COUNTRIE DEVT. OBJECTIVE ACTIONS IN 2004 PROGRESS INDICATORS S AGENCIES National Improve results frameworks for Annual PRSP Progress J development national strategies to include Report provides more strategies, clearer articulation of outcomes favorable assessment of including poverty and intermediateoutcomes, results focus in recent reduction definition of realistic and poverty reduction strategies, have measurable progress and outcome strategies . stronger results indicators, and transparent focus. monitoring and evaluation svstems. Increase civil society involvement Number of M&E J in design, monitoring and reports prepared by evaluation of national development civil society watch strategies, including poverty groups. reduction strategies. increasingly aligning their cooperation programs with country priorities articulated through 4. Align Cooperation Programs with Country Results. Development agencies are a poverty reduction strategy or other national strategy. However, broad alignment needs to be strengthened through a framework for contributing to results that clearly links agency support to expected country outcomes. 35 LEADRESPONSIBILJTY PARTNER MEDIUM-TERM CONTRIBUTING PROGRESS COUNTRIE DEW. OBJECTIVE ACTIONS IN 2004 INDICATORS S AGENCIES Cooperation Introduce a results-based approach programs are to planning and implementing Number of agencies J underpinned by an cooperation programs, with introducinga results- explicitresults . well-defined outcomes and based approach to framework with measurable indicators that are cooperation .. well-articulated directly related to program ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... programs. causal links to support; Share of country J countrypriorities clear linkage to higher-order cooperation programs and planned results. country outcomes; and with explicit results greater support for frameworkby agency strengtheningnational .................................................................................................................................................................................. planning, statistical, and M&E Increased aid to J capacity and systems. strengthencountry capacity to manage foE results...................................................................................................................................................................... Better understand Explore theory and emerging Report published J J divergent views on trends in the use of results the role of results reporting for resource allocation in reporting in budget development. and aid allocation decisions. on country ownership, strategic vision, and donor alignment through the poverty reduction 5. Harmonize Results Reporting. Developing countries have made significant progress strategy process, but many continue to struggle with monitoring progress and evaluating results. While working to strengthen country capacity in this area, the international community also needs to reduce individual agency requirements for results reporting and avoid fragmented, donor-driven monitoring and evaluation systems. LEADRESPONSIBILITY PARTNER MEDIUM- TERM CONTRIBUTING COUNTRIE DEW, OBJECTIVES ACTIONS IN 2004 PROGRESS INDICATORS S AGENCIES Countries monitor Undertake a country-led Initial diagnosis of progress and process of harmonizing results monitoring and evaluation J J evaluate outcomes at reporting in at least four systems and reporting the national and partner countries. requirements by June 30, sectoral levels on the 2004. basis of a manageable number of indicators that they assess and report on within frameworks agreed ................................................................................................................................. by all partners. Establish common results Number of countries that J J reporting mechanisms and adopt harmonized results increase support for national reporting mechanisms and sectoral monitoring and based on national M&E evaluation systems. systems by Dec. 31,2004. 36 6. Improve Statistical Systems. Managing for results requires timely and reliable statistics at the country and global level. However, serious problems beset measurement of many key indicators, including the MDG indicators. Many countries need greater capacity to produce reliable statistics and make use of them for effective decision-making. To help improve the availability and quality of basic data, since the first Roundtable on Results in 2002, the statistical community has been working to improve national and international statistical systems. A number of initiatives are showing progress, but much more needs to be done if better data for evidence-based planning and global monitoring are to be available for the 2005 and 2010 reviews of the MDGs and the 2015 target year. LEADRESPONSIBILITY PARTNER MEDIUM- TERM ACTIONS IN COUNTRIE DEW. OBJECTIVES 2004 PROGRESS INDICATORS S AGENCIES National statistical Improve data for the MDG (timeliness and coverage). Improved MDG data set systems can meet the 2005 monitoring report. V1 v/ monitoring and evaluation requirements of PRSPs, MDGs and other national ................................. developmentplans. .......................... ....................................................... .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ......................................................................................................................... Develop a proposal for Proposal adopted. J J global preparations for the 2010 censusround. Improved international Increase agencies' Joint declaration of best cooperation to better COmrnitment to J practices to improve support countries' coordinate statistical international needs and pool data activities at the global accountability. v monitoring. for MDG level and harmonize technical and financial support to strengthen countries' statistical capacity. Countries are able to Reposition PARIS21 and Number of countries with J J prepare and implement the Global Trust Fund for a fully costed, integrated an integrated statistical Statistical Capacity statistical action plan. plan covering all data Building to focus on sectors and users. supporting countries' strategic planning. 7 . Assess Development Agency Performance. Within a country-led development model, agencies increasingly support national and sectoral programs in which outcomes are achieved collectively through the actions of governments, donors, and other stakeholders. Shareholders and taxpayers who support development agencies want to ensure that these agencies make a positive contribution to these collective outcomes. They also want to assess agency performance-that is, whether the agency has met its own standards and norms for good behaviour. The international community has no common definition of agency performance (although behaviours related to the quality of interventions, timeliness of response, partnership, and country ownership are often considered), Agencies need to 37 use clearly-defined criteria to asses their performance, the results of which should be available in the public domain. LEADRESPONSIBILITY PARTNER MEDIUM-TERM ACTIONS IN PROGRESS COUNTRIE DEW. OBJECTIVES 2004 INDICATORS S AGENCIES Encourage agencies Define clear assessment criteria .Number of agency to assess their own for individual agency performance J performances and performance. assessment reports make the results published. ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ publicly available. Consult with partner countries on Number of assessment criteria and agency consultations 4 J performance. conducted by each agency. 8. Disseminate Good Practice. Countries and agencies want to draw on the methods and tools that have helped others to better manage for development results. Many of these methods and tools have been highlighted during the Marrakech Roundtable. Although there are many positive examples, knowledge sharing across agencies and countries is limited. LEADRESPONSIBILITY PARTNER MEDIUM-TERM ACTIONS IN PROGRESS COUNTRIE DEW. OBJECTIVES 2004 INDICATORS S AGENCIES Increase awareness Organize regional seminars as Number of regional inpublic follow-up to the Marrakech seminars held. J J administrationsand Roundtable, to highlight case development agencies and action plan. studies and discuss principles of the importance of managingfor development results. ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Provide pragmatic Prepare an international .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. Outline prepared and to staffon "Sourcebook on Emerging case studies under J J Good Practice in Managing way by June 30, how to better manage for Development Results," 2004. First draft for results. highlighting both agency and available for country examples. discussion by December 31,2004. .............................................................. Launch a searchable global Website available website to serve as an and updated J J information warehouse on regularly. managing for development results. 38