The 2009-2011 strategy attempts to identify priority sectors and countries to ensure the greatest concentration of the Italian interventions due to limited financial resources.
The regional aid distribution commits to international consensus with Sub.-Saharan Africa receiving 50% of bilateral aid, including loans . However, in terms of aid effectiveness, the predictability of absolute country flows on three-year period is not mention, though more significant than the share of total resources. For example, between 2008 and 2009, while maintaining 50% of available resources, Sub-Saharan Africa’s absolute aid might halve due to the 56% cut to the total aid appropriations. The strategy could have clarified its commitment to maintain constant trends in a 3 year period in the priority partner countries at least. It is important to note that predictability is different from volatility. It only refers to timely reporting of aid to Partners countries rather than constant financial flows. However, ensuring a constant flow in aid resources in the main priority countries reduces aid volatility improving its quality.
It is important to stress that the planned aid geographical shares do not reflect the current proportions of regional Italian aid allocations between 2006-2007. Balkans -the Mediterranean and the Middle East Region as a whole had received 45% net-of-debt aid, while it is supposed to receive only 25% over the next three years. Compliance with the new geographical concentration will oblige the Italian cooperation to reduce its aid share in the Mediterranean to the advantage of the American region and Sub-Saharan Africa. This change together with a reduction in total financial resources is likely to result in a significant reduction in absolute aid to the Balkans, the Mediterranean and Middle East Region.
However, this regional planned share seems unlikely to be implemented due to the financial commitments to Libya, stemming from the Italy-Libya Treaty. In fact, the agreement allocates around 200 million euros a year for the next 20 years - equivalent to the resources currently available for all DGCS aid activities in 2009- to development cooperation activities.
Furthermore, the document highlights 23 priority countries, 15 countries with medium priority and 20 countries, whereby over the next three years the Italian cooperation is to phase out. In total, there are 58 partner countries for development aid over the next three years. It is a major improvement, significantly reducing Italian aid fragmentation. In 2007 94 countries received Italian aid, 86 partner countries in 2006. The 2009 concentration is in line with other European countries. In 2007, Spain pointed out 52 partner countries, Sweden set a list of 33 partner countries and Finland only 8 countries. The list of 23 priority countries will force a partial shift in the strategic allocation of Italian aid. In fact out of the first 23 Partners in 2006-2007 only 15 were among the first 23.
The Strategy does not make clear the difference in aid activities between high and medium priority countries. Only in sub-Saharan Africa, the strategy states that in high priority country Italy will directly implement, while in medium priority country Italy will deliver- almost delegating – via international organizations.
The listed priority sectors are eight, but rise up to ten, with other areas listed throughout the document of intervention. The sectoral concentration is still poor as total DAC sectors are only 12 , far away from the EC Code of Conduct on Division of Labour.
The regional aid distribution commits to international consensus with Sub.-Saharan Africa receiving 50% of bilateral aid, including loans . However, in terms of aid effectiveness, the predictability of absolute country flows on three-year period is not mention, though more significant than the share of total resources. For example, between 2008 and 2009, while maintaining 50% of available resources, Sub-Saharan Africa’s absolute aid might halve due to the 56% cut to the total aid appropriations. The strategy could have clarified its commitment to maintain constant trends in a 3 year period in the priority partner countries at least. It is important to note that predictability is different from volatility. It only refers to timely reporting of aid to Partners countries rather than constant financial flows. However, ensuring a constant flow in aid resources in the main priority countries reduces aid volatility improving its quality.
It is important to stress that the planned aid geographical shares do not reflect the current proportions of regional Italian aid allocations between 2006-2007. Balkans -the Mediterranean and the Middle East Region as a whole had received 45% net-of-debt aid, while it is supposed to receive only 25% over the next three years. Compliance with the new geographical concentration will oblige the Italian cooperation to reduce its aid share in the Mediterranean to the advantage of the American region and Sub-Saharan Africa. This change together with a reduction in total financial resources is likely to result in a significant reduction in absolute aid to the Balkans, the Mediterranean and Middle East Region.
However, this regional planned share seems unlikely to be implemented due to the financial commitments to Libya, stemming from the Italy-Libya Treaty. In fact, the agreement allocates around 200 million euros a year for the next 20 years - equivalent to the resources currently available for all DGCS aid activities in 2009- to development cooperation activities.
Furthermore, the document highlights 23 priority countries, 15 countries with medium priority and 20 countries, whereby over the next three years the Italian cooperation is to phase out. In total, there are 58 partner countries for development aid over the next three years. It is a major improvement, significantly reducing Italian aid fragmentation. In 2007 94 countries received Italian aid, 86 partner countries in 2006. The 2009 concentration is in line with other European countries. In 2007, Spain pointed out 52 partner countries, Sweden set a list of 33 partner countries and Finland only 8 countries. The list of 23 priority countries will force a partial shift in the strategic allocation of Italian aid. In fact out of the first 23 Partners in 2006-2007 only 15 were among the first 23.
The Strategy does not make clear the difference in aid activities between high and medium priority countries. Only in sub-Saharan Africa, the strategy states that in high priority country Italy will directly implement, while in medium priority country Italy will deliver- almost delegating – via international organizations.
The listed priority sectors are eight, but rise up to ten, with other areas listed throughout the document of intervention. The sectoral concentration is still poor as total DAC sectors are only 12 , far away from the EC Code of Conduct on Division of Labour.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment