Common menu bar links
Institutional links
Proactive Disclosure
Expert Panel Moderator's Report
December 22, 2005
First Meeting of the Expert Panel on Partnership Programming
(October 24 and 25, 2005)
Introduction
Views on the Global Context, the Roles of Non-State Actors in Development Cooperation, and the Value of Partnership Programming
Essential Prerequisites and Elements of Partnership
Marginalization of Civil Society
Democratization of Developing Countries
Aid Effectiveness
Role of the Private Sector
Public Engagement
Marginalization of Civil Society
Democratization of Developing Countries
Aid Effectiveness
Role of the Private Sector
Public Engagement
Identifying and Understanding Issues in Partnerships
Shaping a Framework for Effective Partnership
Next Steps
Annex I: List of Participants
Annex II: Meeting Agenda
Annex III: Terms of Reference
Annex IV: Starting Points for a Framework on Effective Partnerships
Annex V: Shared Statement for Operational Issues/Accountability Subgroup
Introduction
Background
The Canadian International Policy Statement, released in April 2005, commits to reviewing the partnership programs of the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA): "With the help of a panel of respected voluntary and private sector leaders from Canada and developing countries, CIDA will review its partnership programs with a view to promoting excellence and innovation in development cooperation."
The Minister of International Cooperation has invited knowledgeable and experienced individuals from Canada, developing countries and international organizations to form a Panel providing advice on CIDA's review and renewal of partnership programming. The Agency is also using other means to consult with Canadian and international partners, and knowledgeable individuals, to inform the review.
This panel of leading thinkers will provide advice to review, help shape and promote CIDA's partnership programming with its partners.
The first meeting of the Expert Panel was held on October 24 and 25 in Ottawa at the International Development Research Centre (IDRC).
Twenty of the 22 Panel members attended the meeting. Annex I provides the list of participants and regrets.
The purpose of the first Panel meeting was to:
- Develop a shared understanding of what partnership with non-state actors means in development, and the principles, key issues and opportunities for partnership programming;
- Share best practices in partnership programming for development from Canadian and international experience; and
- Provide initial advice on shaping a framework for effective partnerships.
About this Report
This report is a moderator's report reflecting the discussions of the Panel and its advice to CIDA. It is not intended as a formal report to CIDA but is provided to CIDA, which is posting it on the website. It is also intended for use by Panel members and CIDA partners for discussions within their own organizations, constituencies, and interest groups.
Agenda
The meeting agenda is provided in Annex II. One panellist emphasized the need for discussion on trends and issues facing civil society in developing countries. Another panellist expressed concern about broader issues on partnership being overshadowed by discussions about operational issues.
Terms of Reference
The Panel discussed its draft terms of reference and requested changes to emphasize that the Panel is to consider the value of partnerships in meeting development objectives, and the range of relationships inherent in partnerships involving non-state actors. The final Panel Terms of Reference are provided in Annex III. For the purposes of its work in advising CIDA on renewal of partnership programming, the Panel members agreed with the term "non-state actors" to encompass civil society and the private sector.
Opening Remarks and Scene Setting
The Minister of International Cooperation, the Honourable Aileen Carroll, welcomed the Panel and thanked the panellists for their participation and their work. The Minister stated that partnerships are an essential part of the coordinated effort to combat poverty. She also stated that changes by CIDA and its partners are required and reaffirmed CIDA's commitment to renewal of partnership programming, as demonstrated in the International Policy Statement (IPS).
Robert Greenhill, President of CIDA, made brief introductory comments, emphasizing that the Panel has latitude to give its best advice to the Minister and the Agency, and to set out its vision for partnerships in the future.
A series of presentations were made by the following CIDA officials to set the Canadian context: Diane Vincent, Executive Vice-President of CIDA, Stephen Wallace, Vice-President Policy Branch, Jennifer Benimadhu, Vice President Canadian Partnership Branch, and Michael Jay, Director General, Canadian Partnership Branch. Presentations were then made by Kumi Naidoo and Christian Lehembre who helped set the southern and international contexts, respectively.
Views on the Global Context, the Roles of Non-State Actors in Development Cooperation, and the Value of Partnership Programming
Panel members engaged in a free-flowing discussion about the broader context for partnerships - major trends in developing countries, in Canada, and at the international level - that need to be understood before discussing the roles of non-state actors, and the value of partnerships. Several themes emerged in the discussion, including:
- Essential prerequisites and elements of partnership;
- The role of non-state actors in relation to international and national trends, including:
- the democratization of developing countries, and
- initiatives for aid effectiveness at both the international level (e.g. OECD Paris Declaration) and in Canada (IPS);
- The marginalization of non-state actors, especially civil society, both in Canada and in developing countries, due to the trends listed above and other factors;
- The role of the private sector; and
- Public engagement.
Essential Prerequisites and Elements of Partnership
Definitions of Partnership
The Panel discussed partnerships in development in broad terms. For the work of the Panel, partnership involves non-state actors (civil society and private sector) and their relationships with each other and with governments.
Some panellists requested clarification on whether partnership should be treated as a philosophy or an instrument. The Panel recognized that many definitions of partnership exist.
Basis for Partnership and Essential Elements
Panellists agreed that partnerships should be rooted in the needs of developing countries (e.g. poverty reduction, protection of the environment, management of disease). They also emphasized that the basis for partnerships should be justice. On this point, one panellist stated that the media portray developing countries as dependent on charity from the north while not acknowledging their wealth (e.g. mineral wealth in Africa). Another panellist described partnerships as a vehicle for long-term accompaniment that supports the right of peoples to determine and carry out activities that further their own destiny.
Panellists offered their views on some elements that they believed were essential for entering into, shaping, and maintaining partnerships. One panellist emphasized the need to be honest about power differentials between partners, and to address capacity deficits. Another stated that partnership is not possible if the differential is too large. Variations on this point were expressed by other panellists who spoke of the need for joint risk taking, and for mutuality in relationships (including mutual accountability) between partners. One panellist also raised the question of how to design partnerships around power differentials as well as among equals.
There was a range of opinions on the need for establishing common goals between partners. While most panellists agreed that partners should be compatible and have mutually agreed and understood goals, one panellist argued that it was possible for partners to have distinct goals but still benefit each other.
One panellist stated that the comparative advantages of actors, state and non-state (both civil society in its various elements, and the private sector), need to be analyzed to shape effective partnerships.
Marginalization of Civil Society
A few panellists noted that there has been a decline in how CIDA has been engaging civil society. This marginalization includes treating civil society organizations increasingly as service providers, resulting in concerns that partners are being "instrumentalized" or are simply becoming an arm of CIDA programming.
Similarly, it was noted that some multilateral organizations compartmentalize policy and service provision, which leads them to see civil society more comfortably as service deliverers and to be less receptive when civil society wants to assert a policy role.
Democratization of Developing Countries
The democratization of developing countries and its implications for non-state actors was raised at various points in the discussion. Several panellists questioned the underlying assumptions of this characterization, namely, that a rise in elections represents a rise in democracy, and that the democratic models to which developing countries are being compared are indeed democratic. One panellist stated that after the space was created by civil society, democratization has led to less engagement by governments with civil society. Another panellist had concerns with the governance structures of international financial institutions (IFIs) involved in development funding.
Notwithstanding different perceptions of democratization, most panellists agreed that one result of this trend is a shift of development funding towards government and away from non-state actors and partnership arrangements. Civil society is considered to be essential to good governance and a key player in the democratization process. Therefore, there were concerns about decreasing engagement of civil society organizations as democratization advances. Related to this point, the panellists added the following concerns, questions, and implications:
- What do government to government partnerships mean when the quality of democracy is reduced, or the model of democracy being transported is questioned?
- With governments that truly respect civil society and the democratic process the shift may be appropriate, but with governments that do not it may raise concerns. In either case, the shift has implications for the role of non-state actors.
- Governments in the South are requiring non-state actors to bid on development projects and to compete, in some cases, with non-governmental organizations (NGOs) formed by government officials and politicians. It was noted that this was happening in some of the 25 partner countries listed in the IPS.
- In some cases, governments in developing countries are pulling back their involvement with non-state actors, possibly because non-state actors, especially civil society, have reached a level of maturity where these governments feel threatened by their power.
- It is not wrong for CIDA to engage directly with governments, but engagement should continue to happen at various levels, centralized and decentralized.
Aid Effectiveness
Global Context - Paris DeclarationOne panellist provided an overview of the Paris declaration. The motivation for the declaration was a concern that the large number of development proposals and projects in developing countries, and the lack of coordination between donors, result in high transaction costs and exceed countries' management capacities. The solution, according to the Declaration, lies in a shift from a culture dominated by donors to one of local ownership. It was suggested that this has the following implications for civil society: i) that the advocacy role include advocacy for aid effectiveness; ii) that the monitoring/"watchdog" role target good governance and proper use of funds; and iii) that the service provision role include the formation of consortia, and responding to requests for proposals directly from developing country governments instead of from donors.
Another panellist noted that while the Declaration is not directly applicable to non-state (civil society and private sector) partners, its challenges should none-the-less be put to them.
One panellist stated that decisions in reforming development approaches have not always been made jointly and was concerned about losing sight of development effectiveness in the pursuit for aid effectiveness. For example, harmonization initiatives in some countries have resulted in reduced engagements with civil society and with the democratic institutions they helped to support and build (e.g. parliaments).
Canadian Context - International Policy Statement
A few panellists questioned whether all Canada-based partnerships should align fully with the IPS and questioned the assumption that all interests support the policy. They saw value in funding research and advocacy that is critical or dissenting of government policy, and believe that alternative viewpoints should not be lost in conversations of instrumentality nor in the implementation of specific frameworks, such as the IPS.
Role of the Private Sector
While most of the discussion focused on partnerships involving civil society, the following points concerning the private sector were made:
- The private sector is concerned with how the Canadian government defines its role in development, and feels that partnerships are not functioning as well they should.
- CIDA should examine and articulate the role of international trade in development given the fact that the cost of tariffs and quotas dwarfs Official Development Assistance (ODA). It should also address the nature of contractual relationships with the private sector, while recognizing these two points are not part of the partnership review per se.
- Different mechanisms and different mixes of partners - civil society and private sector - have roles to play at different stages of development.
Public Engagement
Panellists made the following comments on public engagement on international development in general and partnerships specifically:
- There is a need to channel Canadians' charitable impulses and to foster global citizenship, where Canadians understand 21st century Canada in the context of international development.
- CIDA should deal explicitly, honestly, and openly with the benefits for Canada of its international development work; CIDA's budget will otherwise continue to be relatively vulnerable to cuts.
- It is important to work with First Nations, with labour, and anti-poverty groups in Canada and make linkages with partners facing similar issues in the developing world.
Another panellist commented on the experience of a large Southern NGO now receiving funding directly from CIDA, rather than through a Canadian partner organization. While this funding arrangement is seen as practical and efficient, it has also resulted in reduced interactions with Canadian volunteers and the Canadian public. According to the panellist, the NGO sees value in these interactions with Canadian organizations and regrets their loss.
Identifying and Understanding Issues in Partnerships
The Panel members spent substantial time trying to identify and understand the key issues facing CIDA and its partners in Canada and in the South. The Panel asked CIDA to state what dilemmas it sees in its partnership programming, and Panel members provided their perspectives on the issues they are facing. The Panel concluded that there are two levels of issues that need to be treated separately, at least initially:
- Operational issues which include understanding and defining accountabilities, and more detailed questions around relationships and mechanisms for partnership programming; and
- The larger issues which will help shape a renewed approach to partnerships in the form of a framework.
Many panellists commended CIDA for initiating the partnership review and renewal process and for the open manner in which it is engaging the Panel.
Dilemmas and Challenges
CIDA stated that many of the dilemmas and challenges regarding partnership programming are outlined in the Discussion Paper which had been provided to the Panel, but that this paper is in no way intended to be seen as CIDA policy or strategy. It is rather a starting point for discussion.
In the meeting, the following issues, questions, and dilemmas facing CIDA and its partners where highlighted for further discussion:
- How to move partnerships forward with the policy goals of CIDA as reflected in the International Policy Statement, including becoming more focused, achieving clear results and better aid effectiveness? How best to invest the partnership budget to achieve this?
- What are the effects of the changing global context on partnerships?
- What are the impacts (opportunities and threats) and the new roles for partners when i) aid is being untied, and ii) development work has shifted from non-state actors to governments?
- What are the challenges of success for civil society in developing countries that are becoming successful democracies?
- How do we value Canadian partners and their contributions towards the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)? We need consensus on what are Canadian strengths.
- How do we improve public engagement and what is the partnership role in this?
- How does CIDA meet its accountability obligations to taxpayers as defined by the Auditor General?
- CIDA needs to define what can and cannot be done by partnerships.
- How can CIDA's relationship with partners become more efficient?
- How can partnership be more than a separate program and span all of CIDA's programs?
Operational Issues
Initially much of the discussion focused on issues of respect. Operational issues in the CIDA/Partner relationship, including accountability issues, and the relationship between these issues and aid effectiveness (IPS, Paris declaration) emerged as a major themes. The panellists also proposed ways to begin addressing these issues.
Respect in Relationships
Panellists commented on issues of respect in the relationship between CIDA and its partners.
- Disrespect is felt by some partners. They feel that they are perceived as complainers and as entitled to funding, but point out that past cuts in aid funding were felt primarily by the civil society sector and not by CIDA.
- Some of this is rooted in a lack of common understanding on what partnership is and is not. The review and renewal process needs to lead to common understanding and, in turn, more clarity on accountability.
- NGOs have not always shown respect for CIDA and its program. NGOs should recognize this and that the program is now beginning to turn around and has potential to be one of the best.
Accountabilities
Panel members, especially those familiar with the operational details of CIDA's relationship with its partners, agreed that certain accountability issues were the cause of many complaints by partner organizations and discord in the relationship. Panel members acknowledged that accountability was an issue for which both CIDA and its partners carry responsibility.
Panellists raised the following issues concerning accountability:
- There is a distinction between fiscal accountability for funds received and accountability to beneficiaries in terms of results;
- Accountability should not be viewed as just an enforcement exercise with punitive or narrowly focused responses. Accountability mechanisms must also allow for learning.
Learning
Panellists reiterated the need for separation of accountabilities between i) Canadian partners and their Southern partners (development results and learning) and ii) between CIDA and partners (for fiscal accountability for funds provided), and that different timeframes and benchmarks are required for each.
Several panellists identified the importance of including learning, as a result of partnerships, in the accountability equation. Panellists offered the following insights on learning and how to foster it in partnerships:
- The parallel process of learning is as important as funding, and donors who provide both are highly valued.
- Development consists of hypotheses that must be constantly tested.
- It is difficult to foster learning since it requires trust, respect, and a plurality of approaches.
- There is much to be learned from best practices already in place involving Canadian, Southern and other partners in development programs.
Panellists agreed that the large number of partners (currently approximately 700) creates management challenges and that Canadian partners need to be engaged in addressing this issue with CIDA.
The Panel first offered the following explanations as to why CIDA currently has so many partners:
- The large number of partners is a product of CIDA's own policy and the nature of its programs in the past.
- Partners were carrying the mandate of CIDA. CIDA valued this and had increasingly relied on them.
- The number of partners is a product of the number of funding windows. The number of funding windows could be reduced to improve management and efficiency.
- Improving the efficiency of partnership relationships requires a transparent process with timeframes that allow for transition.
- One cannot simply reduce the number of funding windows without considering other mechanisms. The Swedish model for NGO funding may be useful to consider: forming an "umbrella" partner group for each funding window, where each group is the primary contact to SIDA and through which funding is channelled to smaller groups. To avoid losing contact with smaller groups, other mechanisms for direct dialogue must be set up
- Umbrella groups or networks need to be created by civil society itself, not by governmental or intergovernmental entities.
- Existing "umbrella type" arrangements with CIDA have developed as thematically and sectorally specific funds.
- The South Asia Partnership and Partnership Africa Canada were identified as successful approaches.
- One panellist stated 'everybody thinks they can do international development' and believed that there is a lot of amateurism in the field. Another panellist suggested that CIDA could address this issue by changing its proposal evaluation system to place more importance on experience and on established relationships with Southern partners.
- Panellists agreed that CIDA could have a role in providing incentives and requirements for collaboration and clustering. One suggested that some partners could act as "replicators" to spread initiatives abroad.
- Certain actors treasure their access to CIDA and are reluctant to collaborate for that reason.
- Different incentives and mechanisms to encourage collaboration are required for different types of partnerships. Competitive bidding processes may in fact encourage multiplication of expertise. It should also be recognized that some Canadian NGOs have already formed alliances with other organizations, but that these alliances are more common in advocacy than in service provision.
- Reversing the trend of marginalizing of civil society organizations (diminishing voice, role, and funding) does not necessarily mean increasing the number of NGOs. However, this marginalization does need to be addressed, otherwise the NGO sector risks failing.
Broader Issues in Partnerships
Autonomy and Responsive Programming
Panellists emphasized the importance of autonomy of partners and the key role of responsive programming. They offered the following observations and suggestions:
- Donors need to support those funding arrangements, such as responsive programming, that support the autonomy of Canadian and Southern partners, especially in light of the pressures faced by these groups due to: shifts towards contracting mechanisms administered by governments, restrictive accountability frameworks, and policy objectives and guidelines (e.g. sectors and areas of concentration).
- There is a need to maintain a good mix of both policy and service provision.
- Most innovation has arisen from responsive mechanisms, which has been transferred to, and benefited, other programs and mechanisms in CIDA.
- Responsive mechanisms are not an impediment to the priority country focus or the poorest country focus of the IPS.
Panellists expressed the need for strategies to build a "nuanced and mature" Canadian base for development cooperation, and suggested looking to Sweden for examples of development education. One panellist also commented on the importance of young Canadians visiting developing countries in a way that exposes them to the day-to-day realities of living outside Canada, and not necessarily in a teaching or other service provision role.
Implications of International Trends
Some panellists were concerned about the impact of aid effectiveness declarations and other trends, including the shift to contracting arrangements directly with governments. There was concern that some governments in the South may be disinclined to accept civil society organizations as partners. Therefore, maintaining spaces for the work of civil society organizations in these countries depends on offshore pressure. This can be done through investing in helping civil society actors find and build partnerships globally; and, in models of support that enhance their autonomy.
Untying aid can offer opportunities for Canadian partners in the global marketplace to look for funding elsewhere (i.e. from other donor agencies), and for doing policy work elsewhere, thereby lessening dependency on CIDA as the sole funding source.
There is a willingness to embrace the progressive elements of the Paris Declaration (harmonization, effectiveness, alignment) but development also benefits from tension. NGOs feel that governments will not maintain this tension, and that this is a necessary role for NGOs. Another panellist stated that partnership should provide a counter-weight to "top down" development by governments.
Contributions of Partnerships to MDGs and International Policy Statement
Several panellists were not in favour of focusing partnerships only on the 25 development partner countries listed in the IPS. These panellists believed that partnerships should be based on potential for effective relationships and on areas of expertise most required.
Some participants argued that responsive programming is already broadly consistent with IPS focus areas, and that imposing further focus may not be useful. They encouraged CIDA to not shift entirely to an approach of imposing issue guidance, coherence, and alignment, and to continue allowing civil society organizations to range more freely within general CIDA policy and guidelines. Some panellists also saw potential value in CIDA supporting partners offering alternative models or working on initiatives outside of the IPS and the MDGs. They saw the MDGs as the "tip of the iceberg" and felt that there is a broader range of issues that also require attention.
Niches for Canadian partnerships
Panellists agreed that Canadian civil society organizations are recognized and valued as early "decentralizers" through their engagement with Southern civil society partners; for fostering local ownership in developing countries; and for helping to connect Southern partners with other Canadian resources, including academic and community actors.
Panellists stated that Canadian civil society organizations played key roles in programming in developing countries where the government's capacity is limited. The Primary Education Development Program in Bangladesh was offered as an example.
Differentiating Non-State Actor Partnerships
Some panellists suggested that the review and renewal of partnership programming requires separate analyses for the different types of non-state actors - civil society organizations (NGOs, universities, and other) and the private sector. They recommended that CIDA gather evidence and indicators to develop separate story lines/scenarios for each actor. Other Panel members wondered whether it is too ambitious to treat the private sector and civil society together in the review and renewal of partnerships.
Shaping a Framework for Effective Partnership
Panel members discussed initial elements of a possible framework for partnerships stressing a number of points, including:
- The need for mutuality in relationships, rooted in the constituencies of the respective Canadian and Southern partners, and building synergies through collective self-interest;
- The importance of recognizing benefits to Canada - economic and values-based - and publicly demonstrating that these are helpful to Southern partners as well as to Canadian partners; and
- The need for a broader education objective in partnership programming.
The results of this discussion are shown in Annex IV, which provides an initial outline for a Framework for Effective Partnership, organized under the following chapter headings:
- Background and the story so far
- Non-state actors in a changing world - global, partner country and Canadian contexts
- The Value of non-state actors - a Canadian and international balance sheet
- Choices for effective partnerships
- Objectives, principles and roles
- Actions to be taken
Next Steps
Operational Issues/Accountability
The Panel established a Subgroup to help it address the questions of accountability, relationships, and operational concerns that were raised during the meeting. The Panel considered progress on these issues, and in particular developing a shared understanding of accountabilities, to be essential to a productive second meeting. The Subgroup was asked to develop a work plan on how CIDA should analyse these issues, and to identify what further research is needed. Tim Brodhead, Sulley Gariba, Eva Asplund, and Perrin Beatty agreed to participate in the group.
The work of the Subgroup should help deal with some of the operational issues before the next meeting and to help the Panel develop "ground rules" for clear accountabilities, and for addressing irritants in the relationships between CIDA and its partners. The Canadian Voluntary Sector Initiative (VSI) provides a strong set of philosophical guidelines for government/voluntary sector partnerships in Canada. Panellists recommended building on the VSI, and not duplicating previous efforts. Panellists also identified the CCIC Code of Ethics as another useful source for principles and guidance.
The Subgroup and CIDA will report the results of this work at the next me eting of the Panel.
One Panel member suggested that the subgroup work towards the development of a goal statement to be adopted by partners and CIDA. A possible draft statement was proposed and is provided in Annex V.
Engagement and Testing
Four Panel members offered to form another Subgroup to advise CIDA on how to proceed with engagement of Canadian constituencies in elaboration of the partnership framework. This group will also work to ensure links are made between this engagement process and the Panel. Claire Dansereau, Perrin Beatty, Gerry Barr, and Michel Chaurette offered to participate.
Second Expert Panel Meeting
Panel members strongly supported holding a 2nd meeting with the purpose:
- To review the draft Framework for Effective Partnerships, to be drafted by CIDA; and
- To review the results of work on accountabilities and operational issues.
The Panel requested that the information that was submitted or referenced by various panellists at the meeting be distributed to all Panel members, and they agreed to ongoing exchange of information before the next meeting.
Annex I: List of Participants
Canada
- Dr. Pierre Duplessis
- Madame Claire Dansereau
- Madame Anne Gaboury
- Monsieur Michel Chaurette
- Mr. Ian Smillie
- Mr. Tim Brodhead
- Ms. Cherie Klassen
- Ms. Maureen O'Neil
- Mr. Gerald K. Barr
- Ms. Claire Morris
- Mr. David Runnalls
- The Honourable Perrin Beatty
- Mr. Bernard Wood
Mr. Daniel Gagnier
International
- Mr. Simon Maxwell
- Mr. Kumi Naidoo
- Dr. Sulley Gariba
- Mr. Fazle Hasan Abed
- Mrs. Eva Asplund
- Ms. Zehra Aydin
- Mr. Christian Lehembre
Mr. Jorge Eduardo Saavedra Durão
Annex II: Meeting Agenda
Annotated Agenda
Expert Panel on Partnership Programming
in CIDA
Meeting October 23 - 25, 2005
Ottawa
Meeting Objectives
- Develop a shared understanding of what partnership with non-state actors means in development, and the principles, key issues and opportunities for partnership programming
- Share best practices in partnership programming for development f rom Canadian and international experience
- Provide initial advice on shaping a framework for effective partnerships
17:30 - 20:00 Welcome Reception
Hosted by Mr. Robert Greenhill, President, CIDA
(Refreshments and light food will be served)
Monday October 24 (8:00 - 16:45 IDRC Boardroom)
8:00 - 8:30 Continental breakfast buffet
8:30 - 8:45 1. Welcome
Mr. Robert Greenhill, President, CIDA
and
The Honourable Aileen Carroll,
Minister of International Cooperation
8:45 - 9:00 2. Review of Meeting Objectives and Agenda
George Greene, moderator
9:00 - 10:30 3. The Context for Discussions - Presentations
Canadian Setting
- Introduction
Diane Vincent, Executive Vice-President, CIDA - Implementing the International Policy Statement
Stephen Wallace, Vice-President, Policy Branch, CIDA - Partnership Programming and Renewal - CIDA
Jennifer Benimadhu, Vice-President and
Michael Jay, Director General, Canadian Partnership Branch
Kumi Naidoo
International/Development Cooperation Agency Perspective
Christian Lehembre
10:30 - 10:45 Break
10:45 - 11:30 4. The Value of Partnership Programming in Development
Starting Points for Discussion:
A. Attributes of partnership
- Collaborative arrangements with non-state actors;
- Support sustainable development, poverty reduction, and MDGs;
- Shared development, humanitarian, and public engagement goals;
- Co-investment - financial and in-kind; and
- Responsive funding to specific areas, or core support to further non-state development efforts.
- Building the capacity of non-state actors;
- Providing services, e.g. i) basic social services, and ii) technology transfer and investment in private sector;
- Facilitating policy development and influence; and
- Engaging Canadians to build support for the aid program and to leverage resources, knowledge, and expertise.
2. What other attributes and roles are needed?
Introductory Remarks by Panel Members
(developing country, international, Canadian)
Discussion
11:30 - 12:30 5. Key Issues/Challenges/Opportunities for Partnership Programming
Development Issues:
- What is the role of partnership programming in achieving the MDGs within the context of the International Policy Statement priorities - sectoral and country?
- How does partnership programming relate to the principles of aid effectiveness?
- What are Canadian strengths in partnership programming?
- How can the Canadian public be engaged so as to promote global citizenship?
- How to define and promote clear accountabilities for CIDA, Canadian partners, and developing and transition country partners?
- How can CIDA and its partners build trust and a shared understanding of the rationale, role, and value of partnerships?
- How can CIDA improve its partnership mechanisms to optimize the contribution of Canadian partners?
(developing country, international, Canadian)
Discussion:
- Identification and characterization of challenges
- Best practices and lessons learned on how to improve partnerships
- Results to be achieved from partnerships
13:30 - 15:30 5. Key Issues/Challenges/Opportunities for Partnership Programming (continued)
- Preparation for Break-out Groups
- Break-out Group Discussions
15:45 - 16:45 5. Key Issues/Challenges/Opportunities for Partnership Programming (continued)
- Reports from Break-out Groups and Discussion
17:30 - 20:00 Reception
Hosted by Minister of International Cooperation
Tuesday October 25 (8:00 - 12:30, IDRC Boardroom)
8:00 - 8:30 Continental breakfast buffet
8:30 - 8:45 Recap of Day 1 Discussions
8:45 - 10:30 6. Shaping a Framework for Effective Partnerships
Discussion:
- Objectives
- Principles for partnership
- Issues to be addressed
- Key elements of a framework
- Process for elaboration of a framework
- Engagement and testing
10:30 - 10:45 Break
10:45 - 11:45 6. Shaping a Framework for Effective Partnerships (continued)
Discussion
11:45 - 12:15 7. Wrap-up and Next Steps
For the Work of the Panel and Participants
George Greene, Moderator
12:15 - 12:30 8. Closing of Meeting by Minister Carroll
Lunch
Annex III: Terms of Reference
Terms of Reference
Expert Panel on Partnership Programming in CIDA
Background
The Canadian International Policy Statement, released in April 2005, commits to reviewing the partnership programs of the Canadian International Development Agency: "With the help of a panel of respected voluntary and private sector leaders from Canada and developing countries, CIDA will review its partnership programs with a view to promoting excellence and innovation in development cooperation."
The Minister of International Cooperation has invited knowledgeable and experienced individuals from Canada, developing countries and international organizations to form a Panel providing advice on CIDA's review and renewal of partnership programming. The Agency is also using other means to consult with Canadian and international partners, and knowledgeable individuals, to inform the review.
Mandate of the Panel
The role of the Panel of Experts is to provide advice to the CIDA review and renewal of partnership programming, within the context of implementation of Canada's International Policy Statement, and the preparation of a Framework for Effective Partnerships.
The Panel will report to the Minister of International Cooperation and the executive of CIDA, in an advisory capacity. It will undertake its work during the period October 2005 to February 2006.
Tasks
- Share international and Canadian perspectives and experience to inform the review and renewal of partnership programming in CIDA
- Develop a common understanding on the role of non-state actors (non-state to non-state and non-state to state relationships) and the value of partnerships in achieving development objectives
- Explore how partnerships can be effectively mobilized to promote excellence and innovation in development cooperation
- Provide advice and recommendations on development of a CIDA framework for effective partnerships, including addressing key issues, challenges and opportunities in implementation of the International Policy Statement
- Provide advice on engagement of Canadian public to promote global citizenship
- Participate in two meetings of the Panel
- Identify and make available to CIDA sources of information relevant to the review and renewal of partnership programming
- Provide review comments on draft issue papers prepared by CIDA, including background studies and drafts of a framework for effective partnerships
- Panel members will participate in their individual capacity, with no alternates
- CIDA will propose an agenda for the meetings of the Panel, for review and agreement by the Panel
- Discussions of the Panel will be in confidence and not for attribution, to permit frank and open exchange of views
- Panel advice and recommendations to CIDA will be made on a consensus basis to the extent possible; where consensus is not reached, or the Panel members agree consensus is not desirable, the range of views of Panel members will be recorded
- Results of meetings will be reported in the form a "moderator's report"; reports will be publicly posted by on the CIDA website, once agreed by the Panel members, and will be available for Panel members to share with their communities of interest.
Annex IV: Starting Points for a Framework on Effective Partnerships
Starting Points for a Framework
Canadian Partnerships (Programming): The Next 10 Years?
Elements of an Outline
Chapter 1: The Story So Far
Background in the CIDA Discussion Paper including:
- History of interaction between CIDA and its partners, including impact of past policy and funding decisions
- Definition and scope:
- Partnership as philosophy + way of doing development and/or as an instrument
- Non-state actors - civil society in all its forms, and the private sector
- Current picture of partnership programming in CIDA
- Successes and constraints
- Rationale for the Review
- Key Challenges Going Forward
Global Context
- Major issues:
- Poverty
- Environmental degradation
- Global disease management
- Rise of civil society in the South
- Paris Declaration and MDGs (#8):
- Aid effectiveness - e.g. local ownership and positioning of civil society actors
- Incomplete in terms of involvement of civil society - more work needs to be done to recognize the role of civil society and the private sector in international development
- Democratization not real in many countries - including some developed
- Governance not democratic in some powerful IFIs - creates distrust
- Untied aid creates an increasingly global marketplace - opportunity for new collaborations, or threat?
- Need for justice not charity
- The challenge of success as governments become more democratic
- People left behind who worked on democratization/less space for enga gement of civil society (e.g. Ghana)
- Need to face honestly power differentials among developed and developing country actors
- State-to-state (donor-developing country) dialogue also leaves civil society out
- Donor funding directly to states for civil society activity leading to funding relationships with local NGOs that may not benefit the poor or leading to relationships that reduce the advocacy value of NGOs relying on contracts.
- Cuts in aid
- Engagement of private sector on science and technology for develop ment.
- Voluntary sector initiative (VSI)
- Private sector development
- IPS - more focused (countries and sectors) and commitment to aid effectiveness
- Distinctive characteristics of Canadian development partners
- Canadian strengths and niches
- Other instrument/mechanisms need to be treated in other processes, e.g. contracting Canadian private sector, trade with developing countries
- Opportunity presented for an honest dialogue
- Important to not lose memory/lessons of what has worked
- Benefits to Canada (values and economic) - be clear and not shy in raising these
- Opportunity to better channel Canadians' charitable impulses and to increase involvement as global citizens
- Canada seen as early decentralizers/innovators in involvement of non-state partners - but sense that leadership is being lost
- Strongly embedded in Canadian society
- Developing country civil society organizations see benefits
- Working with Canadian volunteers
- Interaction with Canadian public
- Long-term relationships
- High dependence on public funding
- Lots of small NGOs - positive on public engagement, diversity, versus administrative burden of 30 funds
- At present, not limited geographically by IPS, but Canadian NGOs are focussing their work in support of poverty reduction and the MDGs.
- Niche
- Capacity on disaster response
- Promoting role of civil society in developing countries
- Fostering global governance
- Look at NGOs, Private Sector, and academia/other civil society actors through separate analysis e.g.) comparative advantages of each actor;
- Are separate tracks needed? E.g. private sector, NGO, academic
- Follow priority countries vs. selection of partner countries based on relationships and expertise needed (note: Canadian civil society is ahead of CIDA average, with 52% of partnerships focused on 25 countries - this has happened organically)
- Quality vs. quantity
- Follow IPS sectors/MDGs - alignment vs. more flexibility?
- Policy role partners?
- Demand-driven (ability of developing country partners to canvass for Canadian partners to meet their needs) vs. supply driven
- One fund or many?
- Roles policy or delivery?
Basis:
- Partnership should be recognized as a distinctive and valued feature of how Canada undertakes development - as a given to build on
- There is a shared vision that poverty reduction is the ultimate goal and that partnerships should be rooted in the needs of the south.
- Results matter and quality matters
- 10 Year vision to get ahead of, or respond to, new realities
- Deepening and strengthening partnerships for civil society in the South, by structuring donor relationships to support these realities
- 3 types of objectives:
- Development
- How can Canadian partners best contribute to global and local development objectives?
- Partnership is rooted in the needs of developing countries
- CIDA engagement of Canadian partner organizations
- Getting value out of these relationships for development
- Public engagement in Canada
Maintaining autonomy:
- of Southern civil society actors
- of Canadian partners in relationship with CIDA (threatened or supported depending on CIDA mechanisms and requirements)
- Diversity of partners and of development approaches
- Innovation and acceptance of risk
- Need to fund NGOs having "dissenting" opinions
- On development approaches (e.g. Canadian)
- On development issues (e.g. partner countries)
- Responsive approaches are key to maintaining diversity, autonomy, and producing innovation
- Innovation captured and shared through strong commitment to learning.
- Understanding 21st century Canada and development realities
- Consequence: appreciation and support for Canada's development cooperation objectives and activities.
- Deliberate initiatives to deepen the engagement of Canadians in international issues relevant to poverty reduction and achieving the MDGs
- Increasing collaboration among partners
- Lowering administrative burden of CIDA and its partners
- Creating opportunities and synergies through participation in the global marketplace
- Better positioned to support the diverse roles of NGOs in the South
- Canadian values
- Trust
- Respect
- Synergy
- Clear accountabilities in context of distinct partner roles
- Financial (CIDA, Canadian recipients, developing country partners)
- Legitimacy and governance (what is expected)
- Effectiveness in intervention (How to measure; audit and evaluation)
- Accountability to the Canadian public
- Knowledge building
- Not punitive but learning
- Separation of fiscal accountability from accountability to beneficiaries
- Promotion of democratic culture
- Mutuality of partnerships - agreed goals, accountabilities
- Collective self-interest
- Transparency
- Equity in relationships
- Joint risk taking and decision making
- Learning
- Solidarity
- Diversity
- Investing in civil society for learning
- Programme implementation/service provision/delivery
- Monitoring/watchdog of government accountabilities
- Policy research, advocacy, consensus building
- Enabling capacity building
- Constituency building
- Leveraging funding
Annex V: Shared Statement for Operational Issues/Accountability Subgroup
Proposed Shared Statement
CIDA and its Canadian Partners, motivated by their long-term relationship and by their understanding their value to each other, agree to:
- Undertake to share responsibility to further/foster an environment of mutual trust and respect;
- Create a space for learning, disagreement, and on-going dialogue and analysis
- Foster open communication and a commitment to disseminate generated knowledge and goals; and
- Go forward and in good faith in deepening our partnership.
