Box: Tensions Among the CDF Principles

A long-term, holistic approach to development is essential for embarking on a broad set of economic, social, and political changes. However, various tensions derive from the development process that must be acknowledged and managed if they are not to defeat the good intentions of the CDF and PRSPs.

• One tension is between country ownership and partnership. Country ownership implies a situation in which the balance of decisionmaking is in the hands of governments and other domestic stakeholders receiving external funding. By fostering country-led partnerships, the CDF encourages governments to only accept external aid in line with country-owned policies. In addition, it encourages development assistance agencies to align their assistance with country-owned strategies rather than to impose conditions developed at donor headquarters. The tension between ownership and partnership stems largely from the asymmetry of power between the recipient country and donors. Despite the rhetoric to the contrary, the recipients are never completely in the driver’s seat. The case studies are replete with examples of long-standing tensions between recipient countries and donors over such issues as health (Vietnam), civil service reform (Ghana), and coca eradication (Bolivia).

• Another tension is between the long-term focus and the emphasis on results. Long term in development can mean decades or more, but political pressures in aid-giving countries often demand indicators of results within a year or two. Frequently the more quantitative and shorter term the results indicators, the less they have to do with the impact of aid. Short-term indicators do not necessarily reflect causality, a relationship that can be obscured in the eagerness to show positive outcomes.

• A third tension involves the possible divergence between the need for a framework for long-term, holistic development and the reality of economic decisionmaking in a democratic, market economy. Although some suggest that the CDF implies a form of indicative planning that is inappropriate for free market economies and democratic discourse, the six case study countries show that planning using the CDF and PRSP approach is consistent with free markets and broad participation of the population, including in national elections.

• A fourth tension is between ownership and participation. For governments to consult widely with their citizens on development strategies and programs can be extremely useful, but this process is time-consuming and costly, and it may not produce clear-cut preferences. Indeed, it could well produce conflict, as different interests demand different approaches. The CDF recognizes that, in the end, elected governments should be responsible for policymaking and must decide on the extent of consultations, weighing the time needed to consult widely and the risk that broad consultations can raise expectations that will inevitably disappoint some groups.

In 2000, the OECD Development Assistance Committee Task Force on Donor Practices surveyed a number of recipient country officials from central governments, line ministries, project implementation units, and relevant civil society organizations in Bangladesh, Bolivia, Cambodia, Egypt, Mozambique, Romania, Senegal, Tanzania, Uganda, and Vietnam. The recipient country officials named several problem areas of donor practices which ranked by the Task Force (see table).

Source: P. Amis and L. Green, Survey on Partners’ Priorities and Perspectives on Harmonizing Donor Practices (Birmingham, U.K.: University of Birmingham, International Development Department, School of Public Policy, 2000).