This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Strengthening Country Systems for Aid Effectiveness in Viet Nam
Cao Manh Cuong Deputy Director General FERD/MPI
The views in this presentation are the views of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), or its Board of Governors, or the government they represent. ADB does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this presentation and accepts no responsibility for any consequence of their use. Terminology used may not necessarily be consistent with ADB official terms.
PART I. AID EFFECTIVENESS VIET NAM PART II. DEVELOPMENT EFFECTIVENESS PART III. NEXT STEPS TO STRENGTHEN PARTNERSHIP ON PART III NEXT STEPS TO STRENGTHEN PARTNERSHIP ON COUNTRY SAFEGUARD SYSTEM
PART I. AID EFFECTIVENESS VIET NAM
Global Aid Effectiveness Journey
Dili Declaration on fragile states (2010) Accra Agenda for Action (2008) Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness ff (2005) Bogota Statement on SSC (2010)
Korea HLF (29 Nov. (29 Nov – 1 Dec. 2011)
Monterrey Consensus (2002)
Rome HLF on Rome HLF on Harmonisation (2003)
PARIS DECLARATION ON AID EFFECTIVENESS (PD)
56 Commitments and 12 Targets
HANOI CORE STATEMENT (HCS) LOCALIZED PD TO VIETNAMESE CONTEXT
PARTNERSHIP GROUP ON AID EFFECTIVENESS (PGAE) (2004-2010)
WHAT CONTAINS IN HCS?
• HCS is the joint commitment of the GoV and Donor Community at the country level to implement PD in Viet Nam. • “Localizing” means that the contents, indicators and targets of the PD are selected with fine-tuning to adapt to Vietnamese circumstances ensuring the feasibility and success of implementation in a country context. • HCS contains 28 Partnership Commitments and 14 Indicators around the 5 PD key principles.
PD vs HCS MONITORING INDICATORS
12 PD Indicators: #1, 2 & 8 (untied aid) - no #1 HCS equivalent 14 HCS Indicators:
#8 - EIA / SIA (Environmental & social safeguard indicator) #10 - Common project tools #12 – Aid delegation
PD/HCS/AAA IMPLEMENTATION IN VIET NAM
1. Organizational Structure 2. Communication Strategy 3. Thematic studies for Policies Dialogues 4. PD/HCS Monitoring and Evaluation Framework
1. ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE
Vietnam Business Forum
Aid Effectiveness Forum Events Aid Effectiveness Forum Executive Committee
Thematic Groups (TGs)
Dual Track: Aid Effectiveness and Development Effectiveness
2. COMMUNICATION STRATEGY
Implementing the instructions of the Prime Minister, MPI disseminated the spirit and contents of HCS to the Line Ministries and Provinces (including the publication of HCS and AAA – Questions and Answers Book). Meeting ith ll Sector Partnership M ti with all S t P t hi Groups and International Support Group. Develop the HCS Communication Strategy. Holding workshops on HCS Communication
2. THEMATIC STUDIES FOR POLICY DIALOGUES
Establishment of GoV-Donor Co-chairing Thematic Groups (TGs): 1. Procurement 2. Public Financial Management (PFM) 3. Social and Environment Impact Assessment (EIA and SIA) 4. ODA-on-budget g 5. Cost Norms 6. HCS Communication 7. 7 Independent Monitoring
The outcomes of policy dialogues are regularly updated in the Aid Effectiveness Report at the Mid-term and Annual CGs
3. PD/HCS MONITORING AND EVALUATION
1. Conduct baseline survey (2005) to define the current status and the gaps to the indicative targets in HCS. 2. Conduct HCS Independence Monitoring (2007 and 2008). 3. In cooperation with OECD-DAC to carry out Phase I and Phase II of PD/HCS Evaluation (2008 and 2010) and PD/HCS Monitoring Surveys (2005 2006 2008 2011) (2005,2006, 2008, 2011).
GLOBAL PD MONITORING AND EVALUATION
Monitoring and evaluating the Paris Declaration
2005: Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness Five principles, 56 commitments ... and agreement to monitor and evaluate
12 indicators to monitor progress. progress
Have the 2010 targets been met?
(Preliminary 2010 aggregates 32 baseline countries) aggregates,
1. Operational Development Strategies 19% 2a. Reliable Public Financial Management (PFM) systems 3. Aid flows are aligned on national priorities 44%
2010 Target 50% 38% 75% 50% 85% 50% 47% 1 145 54% 565 71% >87% 46% 22% 44% 25% 66% 40% 66% 38% 100% 89% 51%
4. Strengthen capacity by co-ordinated support 49% 4 St th it b di t d t 5a. Use of country PFM systems 40% 6. Strengthen capacity by avoiding Parallel PIUs 1 696 7. Aid is more predictable 42%
8. Aid is untied 87% 9. Use of common arrangements or procedures 43% 10a. Joint missions 20% y y 10b. Joint country analytic work 41% 11. Results-oriented frameworks 7% 12. Mutual accountability 44% 48%
VIET NAM: RESULTS OF 2011 PD MONITORING SURVEY
PD/HCS MONITORING SURVEY 2011
Paris Declaration Indicators 1: Ownership 2a: Q lit 2 Quality of PFM f 2b: Quality of procurement systems 2005 Baseline B-rating 4-points 4 i t D-level Progress in 2007 AER (World Bank) CPIA (W ld Bank) (World B k) OECD-DAC Achievement for 2010
3: Alignment to national priorities 4: Co-ordinated capacity development d l t 5a: Use of GoV PFM system 5b: Use of GoV procurement system
81% 66% 32% 33%
80% 68% 63% 56%
93% 59% 62% 65%
PD/HCS MONITORING SURVEY 2011
Paris Declaration Indicators 2005 Baseline 111 78% --34% 10% 24% Progress in 2007 58 70% --58% 20% 54% AER (World Bank) Annual assessment/ independent monitoring Achievement for 2010 16 90% --58% 16% 54%
6: Avoiding parallel PMUs 7: Aid is more predictable 8: Aid is increasingly untied 9: Use of common arrangements or procedures 10a: Joint mission 10b: Shared CAWs 11: Performance measurement frameworks 12: Mutual accountability
Environmental Safeguard Indicator
HCS Commitment: GoV and donors improve environmental and social safeguards (d l specialized i t l d i l f d develop i li d technical and policy capacity and enforcement of legislation) I di t 8 P Indicator 8a: Percent of E i t f Environmental I t l Impact t Assessments (EIAs undertaken for individual projects such as a dam motorway or for plans programmes and policies) dam, plans, implemented to international standards and using g government systems y
2010 Target: At least 100% of EIAs under donor-funded projects implemented to international standards and at least 30% of these carried out using government systems.
Social Safeguard Indicator
HCS Commitment: GoV and donors improve environmental and social safeguards (develop specialized technical and policy capacity and enforcement of legislation) Indicator 8b Percent of S di 8b: f Social Impact Assessments l (SIAs relate to issues of resettlement and ethnic minority impacts as a result of development projects) implemented to international standards and using government systems y
2010 Target: At least 100% of SIAs under donor-funded projects implemented to international standards and at least 30% of these carried out using government systems.
HCS Indicator 8: EIAs & SIAs
8a. GoV and donors improve environmental safeguards ( g (EIA) ) y 9% by number of EIAs 64% with additional safeguards 0.4% by number of SIAs SIA 82% with additional safeguards
8b. GoV d donors 8b G V and d improve social safeguards (SIA)
Indicator 8a: 2005-2010 Progress
• Achieved 2010 target (30%) • Donors support environment safeguard i f d through EIA TWG
• Note: 49 EIAs surveyed in 2010
Recent EIA initiatives
L Law on Environmental Protection (2005), Decree E i t l P t ti (2005) D 80/2006 & Circular 005/2008 Development of SEA legislation
As part of the Law on Environmental Protection Decree 29/2011 on EIA-SEA & Circular 26/2011 EIA SEA SEA for Socio-economic Development Strategies, Master Plans, Plans SEA for the forestry sector, etc. f th f t t t Capacity building, EIA technical guidelines
Indicator 8b: 2005-2010 Progress
• Almost achieved 2010 target (30%) • Gaps & DP safeguard measures
• Note: 29 SIAs surveyed in 2010
EIA and SIA Harmonization Efforts with ( , , , , ) the 6 Banks (ADB, AfD, JICA, KEXIM, KfW WB)
1. 1 Based on the Joint Action Plans for Improving the Performance of Programmes and Projects between the GoV and 6 Banks in the given period (2008 – 2009 and 2010 – 2011) and results of Joint Porfolio Performance Reviews (JPPRs) between the Government ( ) ODA Inter-ministerial Taskforce (IMTF) and the 6 Banks. 2. The Joint Action Plans consists of specific actions with agencies incharge, deadlines and monitoring indicators. 3. The 6 Banks are also the champions in the EIA and SIA Thematic Groups under the f G d th former P t Partnership G hi Group on Aid Effectiveness Eff ti (PGAE) and currently the Aid Effectiveness Forum (AEF).
VIET NAM: RESULTS OF 2011 PD/HCS EVALUATION
1. Strong Government ownership and leadership in g the development agenda. 2. Significant progress in alignment of development partners to the Government systems systems. 3. Improvement in aid predictability and the reduction of number of parallel PMUs. 4. Good 4 G d progress i M in Management f Development t for D l t Results (MfDR) 5. Strong mutual accountability structures
Constraints and Challenges
1. 2. 2 3. 4. Lack of connection between planning and budgeting Complexity of decentralization. decentralization Aid is still fragmented (PBA, DoL, aid predictability) Challenges in harmonization and alignment (international standards) (get down to technical level). 5. Constraint in capacity at sub-national level. p y 6. Lack of joint programming,delegated cooperation, joint missions and analytical works among DPs. 7. 7 Not so strong national aid architecture linking aid effectiveness and development effectiveness.
PART II. DEVELOPMENT EFFECTIVENESS
Safeguard System as part of Development
1. 1 Bussan Partnership Document (BPd) provides a good opportunity for Viet Nam to integrate Aid Effectiveness into the development. 2. In the Post-Bussan period, Viet Nam is committed to work with development partners to further improve p p p country systems. Safeguard systems are very high on both the aid effectiveness and development effectiveness agenda agenda.
Remaining Challenges and the need f donor support for
1. Though a lot of progress has been made in the country safeguard systems the gaps between the Government and DPs and between the country and international standards or good practices in terms of the policies and institutional framework and the capacity constraint stills exist th t require th continued supports f t i t till i t that i the ti d t from donors. 2. 2 Donors are not yet using the country system representing an obstacle to harmonization and alignment and reducing the spillover impacts.
PART III. NEXT STEPS TO STRENGTHEN PARTNERSHIP PART III. NEXT STEPS TO STRENGTHEN PARTNERSHIP ON COUNTRY SAFEGUARD SYSTEM
Next Step and Initiatives
1. In line with the commitments of the Bussan Partnership Document (BPd), South-South (BPd) S th S th and “t i d “triangular” cooperation needs t b l ” ti d to be promoted in efforts of strengthening Partnership on Safeguard Systems, specially through the Global Building Blocks on Better Governance and on Climate Change Financing Financing. 2. In the Asia – Pacific region a kind of network or a community of practice in this area should be set up for knowledge sharing and exchange of experiences.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION