Document Library

Improving the Development Response in Difficult Environments: Lessons from DFID Experience

Author: Department for International Development
Date: 2004
Size: 58 pages (664.9 kB)

Summary

How can aid programmes have an impact in fragile states? This working paper by the Department for International Developments' Fragile States Team analyses ten case studies from the South Caucasus, Azerbaijan, Afghanistan, Burma, Indonesia, Kenya, Sierra Leone, Uzbekistan, and Yemen.

In fragile states partnerships between the donor community and governments can be problematic. The "usual" mechanisms of aid such as direct budget support and Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) may not work where political willingness to reduce poverty does not exist or there is extremely weak government capacity. Poorly thought through interventions can undermine the state rather than support it. However, aid can work effectively in fragile states, both to support policy reform and bring about immediate improvement to the lives of poor people. Key conclusions from the ten case studies are that:

• The international community has crucial roles. The UN and donors can act as "honest broker" to help distrustful actors resolve problems at regional level. The UN also has a key role in leading and coordinating social protection and service delivery for the poor.
• Both high level political engagement and local level engagement with community projects can change the national policy environment.
• Security sector reform improves the lives of poor people, and strengthens the state.
• Longer-term sustainability and ownership of programmes is achieved through partnerships between state and non-state actors, and community involvement.

Successful programmes in fragile states are long-term (at least five years), require an integrated approach between different donor government departments, and commitment to predictable funding. There needs to be an excellent understanding and analysis of the beneficiary states political economy. Aid instruments that have proved appropriate in these cases are:

• Trust funds. These can provide budget support where fiduciary risk is high while building the states capacity to manage and control its own budget. They can also enable states to absorb increased aid.
• Pooled funding increases donor harmonisation and allows for a more programmatic approach.
• Social funds are effective at improving social protection, service delivery, and livelihoods when they bring together communities, providers, and local and central government.
• Donors and governments need to take innovative approaches to partnerships between state and non-state actors to improve service delivery and social protection.

Source: Department for International Development, 2004, ‘Improving the Development Response in Difficult Environments: Lessons from DFID Experience’, Fragile States team working paper 4, Department for International Development, London
Author: Department for International Development (DFID), http://www.dfid.gov.uk