Development Cooperation Report 2012 - UNDP Afghanistan
Development Cooperation Report 2012 - UNDP Afghanistan Development Cooperation Report 2012 - UNDP Afghanistan
CONCLUSION 45 FY 2011 was an exceptional year considering the overall level of aid committed and delivered by the international community in Afghanistan. At a level equivalent to the country’s GDP, donors committed USD 16 billion and disbursed USD 13 billion in support of development projects. It is worth noting that a major portion of aid in 2011 (i.e. 68%) was disbursed through modalities that support the security sector. If compared with the average level of aid disbursed through the security over the period 2002-10, the FY 2011 represents a sharp increase in development spending. For this and other reasons, the Ministry of Finance is not in a position to independently verify or account for an extremely large portion of development aid disbursed during 2011. As it was the case in the previous report, information on geographical distribution of aid is incomplete and as a result does not provide a useful picture of how aid was distributed across the country. This information though crucial for the public and the decision makers has been difficult to obtain and in most cases to disaggregate given the nature of some projects that target multitude of areas. Nevertheless, it was possible to show provincial distribution of aid for ten provinces of which Kabul has been identified as the largest beneficiary followed by Kandahar and Helmand provinces. The least impacted provinces, based on the data provided were Balkh, Baghlan and Herat. In terms of aid delivery modalities, USD 2.3 billion was channeled through the government systems. Although short of the 50% on-budget commitment of the Kabul conference, the donors were able to channel only 18% of their total disbursements through the government budget in 2011. Not all the money channeled through the government budget was for development purposes. Our estimates show that only USD 1,106 million was provided for development projects through the budget representing only 9% of total disbursement made during 2011. This is not an encouraging finding particularly in the face of recent findings that the local economic content of development aid through on-budget is three times higher than aid through off-budget channels. The numbers presented in the report highlight another important aspect of development aid that has received little attention in the past. The effectiveness with which aid has been delivered, in particular the predictability of aid, integration of aid into the national budget, alignment of aid with national priorities and the depth and correctness of aid reporting are major areas where progress has been lagging during 2011. As pointed out DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION REPORT
46 earlier, only 18% can be assumed to have adhered to most aid effectiveness principles, while for the remaining larger portion of aid, credible information that could be used to determine the degree to which aid has been provided in the framework of aid effectiveness principles is lacking. The preparation of NPPs and the establishment of a mutual accountability framework was an important milestone long overdue after the ANDS was endorsed in 2008. The NPPs are expected to add clarity and specificity to Government of Afghanistan’s development priorities, a rational that donors often reverted to in the past to avoid the burden of better alignment and harmonization. The TMAF, which fixes the contours of the commitments of the government and the international community, will likely guide the actions of both partners in the future. The AMP along with other global aid effectiveness initiatives sets out the government’s approach to managing the delivery of international development aid in the country. The policy is expected to accelerate the achievement of Afghanistan’s vision to move towards increasing self reliance by 2025, the commitments outlined in the Kabul and other conferences, and the short-medium term impacts of declining military and development expenditures over the next five years. DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION REPORT Lack of information to assess the effectiveness of external aid, as encountered during the preparation of this report, can be a serious problem in light of the indications that development aid will continue to decline while Afghanistan journeys through the transformation decade. In the years post transition, it will be the quality and not the quantity of aid that will determine the impact of development assistance and the delivery of development results.
- Page 2 and 3: Islamic Republic of Afghanistan Min
- Page 4 and 5: II TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD......
- Page 6 and 7: IV LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Overvi
- Page 8 and 9: VI DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION REPORT M
- Page 10 and 11: 2 funding mechanisms such as the AR
- Page 12 and 13: 4 INTRODUCTION This report is a seq
- Page 14 and 15: 6 come. As a result, Afghanistan wi
- Page 16 and 17: DISCLAIMER: this section of the rep
- Page 18 and 19: 11 Figure 4: Volume of Disbursement
- Page 20 and 21: MAIN DELIVERY CHANNELS of EXTERNAL
- Page 22 and 23: appropriated a total amount of USD
- Page 24 and 25: Figure 10: Classification of Disbur
- Page 26 and 27: AFGHANISTAN RECONSTRUCTION TRUST FU
- Page 28 and 29: 21 Despite the fact that the volume
- Page 30 and 31: sectors, which in turn resulted in
- Page 32 and 33: 25 CHAPTER 2 ANALYSIS OF AID EFFECT
- Page 34 and 35: 28 DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION REPORT U
- Page 36 and 37: 30 It is apparent from the above ta
- Page 38 and 39: 32 alignment with national prioriti
- Page 40 and 41: 34 BUILDING ON THE SUCCESS OF THE K
- Page 42 and 43: 36 investment of $30 million in the
- Page 44 and 45: 38 Table 6: DPs Financing for ANDS
- Page 46 and 47: 40 The peer review mechanism, which
- Page 48 and 49: 42 DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION REPORT S
- Page 52 and 53: ANNEX DCR 2011 TABLES
- Page 54 and 55: 49 36 Luxembourg 12 11 37 Hungary 6
- Page 56 and 57: 51 Total 1,353 723 1,092 1,141 242
- Page 58 and 59: Table 12: DELIVERY MECHANISMS OF EX
- Page 60 and 61: Table 14: SUMMARY OF DPS' COMMITMEN
- Page 62 and 63: 57 The Private Sector Development C
- Page 64 and 65: 59 14 The National Action Plan for
- Page 66 and 67: 61 TABLE 18: COUNTRIES/ORGANIZATION
- Page 68: Copyright © 2012 Aid Management Di
CONCLUSION<br />
45<br />
FY 2011 was an exceptional year considering the overall level of aid committed and<br />
delivered by the international community in <strong>Afghanistan</strong>. At a level equivalent to<br />
the country’s GDP, donors committed USD 16 billion and disbursed USD 13 billion<br />
in support of development projects. It is worth noting that a major portion of aid in<br />
2011 (i.e. 68%) was disbursed through modalities that support the security sector. If<br />
compared with the average level of aid disbursed through the security over the period<br />
2002-10, the FY 2011 represents a sharp increase in development spending. For this<br />
and other reasons, the Ministry of Finance is not in a position to independently verify<br />
or account for an extremely large portion of development aid disbursed during 2011.<br />
As it was the case in the previous report, information on geographical distribution<br />
of aid is incomplete and as a result does not provide a useful picture of how aid<br />
was distributed across the country. This information though crucial for the public and<br />
the decision makers has been difficult to obtain and in most cases to disaggregate<br />
given the nature of some projects that target multitude of areas. Nevertheless, it<br />
was possible to show provincial distribution of aid for ten provinces of which Kabul<br />
has been identified as the largest beneficiary followed by Kandahar and Helmand<br />
provinces. The least impacted provinces, based on the data provided were Balkh,<br />
Baghlan and Herat.<br />
In terms of aid delivery modalities, USD 2.3 billion was channeled through the<br />
government systems. Although short of the 50% on-budget commitment of the Kabul<br />
conference, the donors were able to channel only 18% of their total disbursements<br />
through the government budget in 2011. Not all the money channeled through<br />
the government budget was for development purposes. Our estimates show that<br />
only USD 1,106 million was provided for development projects through the budget<br />
representing only 9% of total disbursement made during 2011. This is not an<br />
encouraging finding particularly in the face of recent findings that the local economic<br />
content of development aid through on-budget is three times higher than aid through<br />
off-budget channels.<br />
The numbers presented in the report highlight another important aspect of<br />
development aid that has received little attention in the past. The effectiveness with<br />
which aid has been delivered, in particular the predictability of aid, integration of aid<br />
into the national budget, alignment of aid with national priorities and the depth and<br />
correctness of aid reporting are major areas where progress has been lagging during<br />
2011. As pointed out<br />
DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION REPORT
Change language