What are Southern perceptions of the international aid system? This paper from the Overseas Development Institute (ODI) analyses the forces that shape the structure and operations of the system. It examines current – mostly Northern – perceptions of problems inherent in, and reforms necessary to, the aid architecture and explores Southern responses to this. There is significant scope for improving the current system. Encouraging Southern civil society organisation (CSO) engagement in the process is essential.
A new paradigm of ‘effective aid’ has emerged in the past few decades based on the concepts of country ownership, partnership and mutual accountability. Reforming the aid system to maximise the benefits of aid flows has become a priority among donors and recipient governments, at least in principle. Calls for ‘scaling up’ aid have also increased substantially adding urgency to questions about aid architecture.
The debate, however, has mainly been undertaken among donors themselves. Voices of Southern constituents in shaping such trends have been muted, especially among Southern-based CSOs. Reasons for this include a lack of appropriate fora to promote dialogue and information sharing among Southern CSOs, weak capacity, language barriers, inadequate funding and high transaction costs.
Some of the major concerns from both Northern and Southern CSOs include the following:
- There is a lack of accountability on the part of donors. There is also a lack of either an effective market-based discipline or an overall external regulator for the aid system. Furthermore, donors have generally been slow to move on untying aid.
- There is a perception among Southern CSOs of a pre-existing commitment by donors to maintain a market-oriented global economic system.
- While both Northern and Southern CSOs are critical about economic conditionalities, Southern CSOs tend to be more favourable towards the use of political conditionalities.
- Both Northern and Southern CSOs are concerned that current programmatic approaches to aid delivery make performance measurement more difficult, encourage corruption, bring donor micro-management and loss of sovereignty, and prioritise government recipients at the expense of civil society.
- Southern CSOs have concerns regarding aid to corrupt governments, donor security agendas, and the issue of aid dependence, which can become ‘crippling’ in the long-term.
- International non-governmental organisations (INGOs) are increasingly perceived as competing unfairly with local CSOs for resources. They are seen as undermining the growth and effectiveness of an independent and autonomous indigenous civil society sector.
Southern CSO voices need to be further encouraged. An initial list of the issues that need to be explored from a Southern CSO perspective includes:
- Conditionality: Are some forms of conditionality (e.g. political) better and more acceptable to Southern CSOs than others (e.g. economic)? How could Southern CSOs go about helping define such conditionalities so that they are not imposed from above and/or the outside?
- Regulation of the aid system: Should there be some kind of global arbiter regulating the international aid system, and if so, is the UN the best institution to be made responsible for that? If not the UN, what other kind of international forum that is broadly representative would be suitable?
- INGOS: Should there be a code of conduct for Northern CSOs?
