Development Cooperation Providers

Azerbaijan
Azerbaijan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs is responsible for setting the overall development co-operation guidelines of the country. Project implementation is the responsibility of the Azerbaijan International Development Agency (AIDA), which was established in 2011 within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The AIDA’s annual budget allocation is provided from the state budget. The AIDA co-ordinates the activities of all relevant government bodies in the field of development, ensuring that their activities are consistent with Azerbaijan’s foreign policy objectives (OECD 2017).

Australia
Australia’s system for managing aid is highly concentrated. In 2011/12, 83% of Australia’s ODA was managed by AusAID. The Department for Immigration and Citizenship administered 8.1%, Australian Federal Police 3.4%, Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR) 1.8%, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade 0.6%, while around 20 other authorities accounted for the remaining 2.7% (OECD 2013).

AusAID is directly accountable to the Minister for Foreign Affairs and takes the lead in coordinating the Australian Government’s delivery of official development assistance. The Director General reports directly to the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade on all development policy matters, the administration of AusAID and its programme while being fully autonomous within the foreign affairs portfolio (OECD 2013).

In accordance with the Public Service Act 1999, AusAID’s status as an Executive Agency was approved on 8 July 2010 by order of the Governor-General, on advice from the Prime Minister. AusAID is formally responsible for providing development policy advice, planning and managing poverty reduction activities, leading responses to humanitarian and disaster crises and representing Australia on development internationally (OECD 2013).

Austria
There are nine government institutions involved in Austrian aid. Besides the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA), six federal ministries are involved in managing Austrian development co-operation (Finance; Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management; Defense and Sports; Interior; Education and Women’s Affairs; and Arts and Culture, Constitution and Media) in addition to the Austrian Development Agency and the Austrian Development Bank, both of which implement Austrian aid (OCED 2015).

The Federal Act on Development Co-operation gives the MFA (Division VII) overall responsibility for development co-operation, including coordinating and formulating policy and conducting dialogue within Austria and at the international level. In reality, the MFA is one among equals and has no formal authority over other ministries, which operate independently with separate mandates and discretionary budgets. This makes the MFA’s coordinating role a challenging task. Since the MFA manages only 4.18% of Austria’s total ODA (as well as the ADA’s operational and administrative budget), this ministry has little leverage (OCED 2015).

The Austrian Development Agency (ADA) implements development programmes together with other public institutions, NGOs and private enterprises. Its operational budget has shrunk significantly, from EUR 103 million in 2008 to EUR 66 million in 2012. The budget was stabilized in 2013 and 2014 despite expected cuts. Further cuts were planned in 2015 and beyond but the Committee was informed that no cuts are expected in 2015 (OCED 2015).

Belgium
According to the March 2013 Law on Development Cooperation and Humanitarian Aid, development co-operation is the responsibility of the Directorate-General for Development Cooperation and Humanitarian Aid (DGD), which is part of the FPS Foreign Affairs. DGD manages 60% of the development assistance budget, with the other 40% mainly allocated as European contributions and to cover internal costs. DGD, under the authority of the Minister of Development Cooperation, devises strategies, allocates funds, and monitors and assesses development cooperation programmes and projects. Management contracts are signed between the government and the main cooperation actors – Belgian Technical Cooperation (BTC) and Belgium Investment Company for Developing Countries (BIO) (OECD 2015).

The federal entities of Flanders, Wallonia-Brussels International and Brussels-Capital have their own development cooperation legislation and policy frameworks, while also having specific competence in areas likely to affect development in partner countries (OECD 2015).

Belgium’s budget process allows its partners to know their funding levels several years ahead. A budget envelope is attached to each Indicative Cooperation Programme (ICP), which usually covers four years. The downside is that DGD has less leeway to adapt funding to changing requirements and capacities of partner countries and to evolving contexts (OECD 2015).

A wealth of Belgian NGOs and other non-governmental actors – including universities, towns, communes, mutual insurance funds, scientific and community institutions, and trade unions – are very active in development. They attract high numbers of volunteers who are engaged in building public awareness and political campaigning for development. Strategic and technical coordination committees at headquarters facilitate dialogue with these non-governmental actors (OECD 2015).

Brazil
The Ministry of External Relations oversees Brazil’s development co-operation, while the Brazilian Cooperation Agency provides technical co-operation. Apart from technical co-operation, Brazil’s bilateral co-operation includes humanitarian assistance, scientific and technological co-operation, scholarships and imputed student costs, and refugee costs (OECD 2017).

Brazil is also engaged in triangular co-operation, partnering with several international organizations (e.g. the United Nations Development Programme; the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; the World Food Programme; the International Labor Organization; the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime; and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization and DAC members (e.g. Germany, Japan, Spain and the United States). These programmes support developing countries (e.g. South American countries, Lusophone African countries, Haiti and Timor-Leste) in areas such as agriculture, food security, health and public administration. Brazil’s development co-operation to multilateral organizations was primarily channeled through the United Nations (57%) in 2015 and the Inter-American Development Bank (43%) (OECD 2017).

Canada
The Official Development Assistance Accountability Act came into force on June 28, 2008. Its purpose is to ensure that all Canadian official development assistance (ODA) is focused on poverty reduction and is consistent with aid effectiveness principles and Canadian values. It applies to all federal departments and agencies that provide ODA. The Government of Canada disbursed $4.82 billion in Official Development Assistance (ODA) in 2015-2016 through 17 federal departments and agencies. Key commitments to increasing environmental sustainability were from Global Affairs Canada; Department of Finance Canada; International Development Research Centre; Environment and Climate Change Canada; Parks Canada. (Canada 2016)

Global Affairs Canada is the lead department responsible for providing Canada’s international assistance. Development assistance was provided to more than 80 countries around the world in 2015-2016, but was concentrated in 25 countries of focus for more targeted, effective and accountable cooperation. In 2015-2016, ODA programming focused on the current international assistance thematic priorities of stimulating sustainable economic growth, increasing food security, securing the future of children and youth, advancing democracy, and promoting stability and security, along with crosscutting themes of gender equality, environmental sustainability and governance. In times of disaster, crises, or severe conflict, Global Affairs Canada provides humanitarian assistance to save lives and alleviate suffering. The department works with country partners, key multilateral partners, Canadian organizations, private sector partners, other donor countries and other government departments to deliver its programming.

The Department of Finance Canada provides support to the World Bank Group to achieve results in all of the Government of Canada’s current international assistance thematic priority areas. This includes core support to the International Development Association, which provides grants and concessional loans to low-income countries, and grants to fragile and conflict-affected states and other countries at risk of debt distress. In addition, the Department of Finance Canada provides support to the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative to contribute toward decreasing debt-service payments in developing countries.

Canada’s International Development Research Centre (IDRC) invests in knowledge, innovation and solutions to improve lives and livelihoods in the developing world. Bringing together the right partners around opportunities for impact, it builds leaders for today and tomorrow and helps drive change for those who need it most. IDRC’s work focuses on three thematic areas: agriculture and environment, social and economic policy, and technology and innovation. By the end of 2015-2016, IDRC had supported 697 global projects that were carried out by 569 research institutions.

Environment and Climate Change Canada recognizes the importance of international cooperation on environmental issues. In 2015-2016, the department largely provided ODA through support for multilateral environmental organizations that provide technical cooperation and capacity building to developing countries.

Parks Canada’s ODA includes Canada’s annual core contribution to UNESCO's World Heritage Fund, membership dues to the International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property and membership dues to the International Union for Conservation of Nature.

Chile
In 2015, the Chilean Agency for International Co-operation was renamed the Chilean Agency for International Co-operation and Development (AGCID) to emphasize its developmental focus. Chile released a policy in 2015 that sets out its vision to 2030 based on the following principles: 1) promoting people’s dignity; 2) strengthening democracy; 3) promoting peace; 4) strengthening the role of Latin America and the Caribbean in global governance; and 5) supporting regional integration and convergence in Latin America and the Caribbean. This vision is being implemented through a strategy for 2015-18 that emphasizes promoting inclusive and sustainable development, the need for strong partnerships, and the importance of consolidating Chile’s national system for international co-operation, including a stronger role for AGCID. The agency manages and co-ordinates incoming and outgoing bilateral, triangular and regional development co-operation (OECD 2017).

Chile’s priority partner countries are primarily in Latin America and the Caribbean. Its co-operation programme is spread across a range of sectors, including governance and institutional strengthening; poverty reduction and social development; and support to industry, innovation and competitiveness. Chile’s bilateral co-operation is mostly provided in the form of technical assistance and scholarships (OECD 2017).

Chile is also engaged in triangular co-operation, partnering with several international organizations (e.g. the Inter-American Development Bank and the World Food Programme), Mexico and DAC members (e.g. Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Korea, Japan, New Zealand, Spain, Switzerland and the United States) to support development in other developing countries (e.g. Bolivia, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala and Paraguay). Chile’s development co-operation through multilateral organizations was primarily channeled through the United Nations (50%) and the Inter-American Development Bank (50%) in 2015 (OECD 2017).

China (People’s Republic of)
China’s Eight Principles for Economic Aid and Technical Assistance to Other Countries, announced by Premier Zhou Enlai in 1964, set out the core principles of China’s foreign development co-operation (Government of China, 1964). The Ministry of Commerce’s Department of Foreign Assistance is at the center of the Chinese system and manages over 90% of its bilateral funding. It is responsible for drafting the development co-operation budget and regulations, managing foreign development co-operation joint ventures, programming zero-interest loans and grants, and coordinating concessional loans with the China Exim Bank (the latter are not included in OECD estimates because little information is available on their objectives or financial terms) (OECD 2017).

China does not have specific priority countries (aside from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea). Its grant aid is distributed more or less equally to some 120 partner countries. The main sectors are public facilities, industry and economic infrastructure. China offers eight different forms of co-operation with complete projects (turn-key projects) being the major modality. China also provides humanitarian assistance (OECD 2017).

China engages in triangular co-operation, partnering with several international organizations (e.g. the United Nations Development Programme, the United Nations Industrial Development Organization and the World Bank) and DAC members (e.g. the Netherlands, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States) (OECD 2017).

China’s development co-operation through multilateral organizations was primarily channeled through the United Nations (89%) and the regional development banks (9%). China is also a founding member of the new Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, a multilateral development bank with its headquarters in China (OECD 2017).

Colombia
The Colombian Presidential Agency of International Co-operation (APC-Colombia), created in 2011, sets priorities and ensures alignment of Colombia’s development co-operation with its National Development Plan and foreign policy. The agency manages and co-ordinates Colombia’s incoming and outgoing development co-operation and, through the Roadmap for International Co-operation, sets out Colombia’s strengths and good practices that can be shared with other countries. It has also introduced a national co-ordination scheme as well as monitoring systems(OECD 2017).

Through its South-South co-operation, Colombia shares its knowledge and experience in areas such as entrepreneurship, security, food security, culture, agricultural innovation, social development, climate change and disaster risk management, tourism, statistics, and employment. Seventy-four countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, Africa, Asia, and the Middle East benefited from Colombian programmes and policies in support of their own development efforts in 2015. In addition, Colombia is an active partner in developing projects in regional mechanisms such as the Pacific Alliance, the Ibero-American General Secretariat and the Forum for East Asia-Latin America Cooperation (OECD 2017).

Colombia is also engaged in triangular co-operation, partnering with several international organizations (e.g. the United Nations Population Fund and the Organization of American States) and DAC members (e.g. Australia, Canada, Germany, Japan, Korea and the United States) to support other developing countries – mainly in Central America and the Caribbean – in a wide range of areas. In 2015, Colombia’s development-oriented contributions through multilateral organizations were channeled through the United Nations (43%), the Inter-American Development Bank (37%) and the Central American Bank for Economic Integration (17%)(OECD 2017).

Costa Rica
The Directorate General for International Co-operation of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs manages Costa Rica’s incoming and outgoing development co-operation. Fundecooperación para el Desarrollo Sostenible is a non-governmental organization that is in charge of monitoring and administering the Programme of South-South Cooperation on Sustainable Development with Benin, Bhutan and Costa Rica as well as some triangular co-operation projects. It also acts as a platform for alliances among the government, civil society, academia and private stakeholders (OECD 2017).

Costa Rica mainly provides development co-operation in the form of technical co-operation through bilateral and regional initiatives. Spain has a triangular co-operation fund to support Costa Rica in its triangular co-operation projects with other Central American and Caribbean countries (e.g. El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras) in areas such as social cohesion, competitiveness and production, and participative democracy. Costa Rica also participates in projects of the German regional fund for the promotion of triangular co-operation in Latin America and the Caribbean (OECD 2017).

In 2015, Costa Rica’s multilateral development co-operation was primarily channeled through the International Development Association (30%) and the Central American Bank for Economic Integration (25%) (OECD 2017).

Czech Republic
According to the 2010 Act on Development Cooperation and Humanitarian Aid, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs should lead, coordinate and oversee the delivery of the Czech Republic’s official development assistance. The Czech Republic has two main instruments to coordinate development cooperation at headquarters. First, the inter-ministerial Council for Development Cooperation serves as an important forum for discussing and approving development strategies and plans, strengthening development practixes through its working groups and getting cross-government buy-in. Second, the annual plan for development cooperation is a whole-of-government expenditure plan with an indicative budget outlook for the following two years. This plan is discussed in the council and approved by the government. The Czech Development Agency is an implementing body (OECD 2016).

Denmark
Management of Denmark’s development cooperation system is anchored within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) and is based on the vision outlined in Denmark’s 2012 development cooperation strategy, The Right to a Better Life. Overall development cooperation policy is coordinated at headquarters, largely through the Centre for Global Development and Global Cooperation at the MFA, which also provides technical advisory support to embassies and missions developing country-level strategies. The center also works closely with the six others in the ministry on a range of core policy objectives, including Centre for Global Politics and Security, Center for Europe and Northern America, Centre for the Trade Council, Centre for Consular Services and Public Diplomacy, Center for Legal Services, and Centre for Resources and Operations (OECD 2016).

From 2011 to 2016, the MFA was headed jointly by the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister for Development Cooperation (until 2014) who was later replaced by the Minister for Trade and Development. Following the 2015 national elections, foreign affairs, trade and development portfolios were united under the responsibility of one minister, the Minister of Foreign Affairs (OECD 2016).

The MFA’s administrative responsibility for Danish official development assistance is declining. The share administered by the Ministry of Refugees, Immigration and Integration Affairs increased from 4% in 2011 to 30% in 2016. Denmark’s Peace and Stability Fund, operated under the Prime Minister’s authority and managed jointly by the ministries of Foreign Affairs, Defence and Justics increased from less than half in 2010 to more than two-third in 2016. 20% of ODA for private sector development programmes is implemented by the Investment Fund for Developing Countries and other departments, as well as through bilateral and multilateral partners (OECD 2016).

The Danida Board, created in 1971 to provide technical advice to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, was abolised in 2013 by the International Development Cooperation Act. The revamped Council for Development Policy now provides strategic advice direct to the responsible minister, rather than through the board, on all new policies and strategies (OECD 2016).

The Grant Committee advises the minister on grant proposals with a budget above DKK 37 million; the internal MFA grant committeee for proposals below DKK 37 million has been abolished (OECD 2016).

Estonia
Estonia’s development co-operation is provided in line with its Strategy for Development Co-operation and Humanitarian Aid for the period 2016-20. This strategy sets out the goals and objectives of Estonia’s development co-operation, its sectoral and geographical priorities, as well as its estimated financial allocations for ODA. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is the key institution responsible for managing and coordinating Estonia’s development co-operation (OECD 2017).

European Union institutions
A new Directorate General for Development and Co-operation EuropeAid (also known as DG DEVCO) was established in January 2011. The merger of parts of the former Directorate General for Development and the EuropeAid Co-operation Office brings under one roof the policy and management of most of the EU’s financial instruments for development co-operation. A new service for Foreign Policy Instruments was also set up within the Commission in January 2011. The intention is to create a more efficient structure, cut duplication and increase learning across instruments and regions. Once merged, EuropeAid restructured in June 2011 by cutting the number of departments from 10 to 9, clarifying line management responsibilities for the deputy directors general and, most notably, giving the majority of staff new roles (OECD 2012).

The level of ODA managed by the EU institutions is determined within the EU multi-year financial framework, which translates the European priorities into financial terms. The EU institutions’ development assistance comes from both the EU budget (around 70%) and the European Development Fund (EDF – around 30%). The EU has a limited number of financial instruments covering geographic and thematic budget lines and tailored to each geographic and policy area (OECD 2012).

The EU institutions manage a large volume of ODA. The development co-operation budget managed by them amounted to USD 12.68 billion in 2010, making them the third largest DAC member. This is all grant aid, coming from the European Union budget and the European Development Fund. The EU aid architecture also includes the European Investment Bank (EIB), active in over 150 countries outside the EU, where it provides long-term finance in support of EU external cooperation and development objectives. In 2010, the EU extended loans and equities to partner countries totaling USD 8.3 billion gross, a significant contribution to development (OECD 2012).

Finland
Finland’s Ministry for Foreign Affairs is responsible for managing 74% of all ODA - eligible funds. These funds include Finland’s contribution to the European Development Fund (EDF), contributions to multilateral organizations, NGOs, humanitarian aid and country and region-specific development co-operation. The remaining 26% of funds that qualify as ODA include Finland’s contribution to the EU’s Development Co-operation Instrument (DCI), which is managed by the Ministry of Finance, and other flows such as refugee costs and the Finnish development finance company’s (Finnfund) loans and equities. (OECD 2012).

The Department for Development Policy both provides overall guidance on the implementation, planning and monitoring of Finland’s development co-operation policy, and holds direct responsibility for the operational activities for development co-operation. Regional departments are responsible for bilateral and regional development co-operation, including implementing the policy in developing countries through country plans and annual budget frameworks and for managing programming cycles. The country desk officers in regional departments steer operations and form a “country team” with their counterparts in a Finnish embassy. Relevant sectoral or thematic advisors at headquarters and specialists in embassies also participate in country teams. (OECD 2012).

All departments are interlinked and on an equal footing: the four regional departments can take their own initiatives and they implement policies according to guidance given by the three policy departments, including for development. Two formal mechanisms ensure internal co-ordination and oversight: the Development Policy Steering Group and the Quality Assurance Board. The Development Policy Steering Group is chaired by the Director General (DG) of the Department for Development Policy and brings together all directors of the MFA. Its mandate is to guide relevant stakeholders in the MFA on all development policy issues and to approve country strategy papers. The Quality Assurance Board screens all project and programme proposals for compliance with policy, guidelines and quality. It then makes recommendations to the Minister or the Director General for Development Policy on whether proposals should be approved. (OECD 2012).

France
The President of the Republic, the Prime Minister, the Minister Delegate for Development, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister of the Economy and Finance are jointly responsible for framing development policy. In administrative terms, the system is jointly steered by the General Directorate of Global Affairs, Development and Partnerships at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (DGM/MAE), which takes the lead in defining strategy, and the Treasury Directorate General (DG Trésor) at the Ministry of the Economy and Finance (MEF). These two institutions have joint aegis over AFD, the operator which delivers two-thirds of bilateral ODA. (OECD 2013)

Apart from MAE and MEF, nine other ministries (Education, Ecology, Youth, Social Affairs, Higher education and research, Health, Agriculture, Labor and Interior) are involved in co-operation, some of them for very significant amounts (especially the Ministry of Higher Education and Research), as well as eight specialist operators (AEFE, Campus France, Canal France International, France Expertise Internationale, France Volontaires, GIP Esther, Institut français), few of which focus exclusively on this mission (OECD 2013).

Germany
Germany has taken steps to further streamline its complex development cooperation system, but key features have remained unchanged for a decade. A dedicated ministry (BMZ), represented at cabinet level, leads on development policy. BMZ was reorganized in 2014 to increase its efficiency as well as to ensure the implementation of the new main political focal points: the 2030 Agenda; climate change, and the special initiative, “One world – no hunger”. BMZ disbursed USD 5.13 billion and the Federal Foreign Office USD 1.28 billion out of a total of USD 10.85 billion og German ODA in 2013. (OECD 2015)

A wide range of German stakeholders implement Germany’s development policy. These include two powerful agencies (GIZ and KfW), as well as other government ministries, federal states, political foundations, church-based organizations, NGOs, scientific and training institutions. (OECD 2015)

Financial and technical cooperation have separate budgets and are implemented by different institutions. GIZ manages technical cooperation, and KfW is responsible for financial cooperation. In 2011, three agencies, GTZ (technical cooperation), InWEnt (human resource development and training) and DED (volunteer services and secondments were merged into a new organization, GIZ. GIZ is an entirely government-owned federal enterprise, supporting the German Governmenet in achieving its sustainable development objectves. In 2013, GIZ’s budget was over EUR 1.9 billion, with commisions from BMZ amounting to EUR 1.4 billion. The second largest commission ministry after BMZ was the German Federal Foreign Office, with EUR 119 million, followed by the Ministry of Environment with EUR 87 million. (OECD 2015)

KfW Development Bank carries out Germany’s financial cooperation with developing countries. In 2014, it managed EUR 1.66 billion from the federal budget. In addition, it raised EUR 5.36 billlion on the capital market to finance development programmes in developing countries. (OECD 2015)

Federal states and local governments channel most of their support (USD 1.02 billion in 2013) through training institutions and research instittuions (USD 856 million in 2013). The majortiy of this support consists of imputed student costs. (OECD 2015)

Greece
Greece’s aid is institutionally dispersed. Between 2007 and 2009 less than one-fifth of Greece’s bilateral aid was allocated by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which itself has several sources for financing development projects. Despite being responsible for development co-operation, DG Hellenic Aid manages a decreasing share of the aid budget. Moreover, DG Hellenic Aid’s budget is the only state budget line dedicated to development co-operation. The remaining four-fifths of bilateral aid are channeled by other government departments through their international co-operation budgets. Each ministry’s contribution to ODA is calculated at the end of the financial year. (OECD 2011)

Hungary
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade has overall responsibility for formulating Hungary’s development co-operation policy and for coordinating aid activities.

Iceland
In 2016, Iceland integrated its bilateral development agency, ICEIDA, within the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, which had been overseeing all of Iceland’s multilateral development cooperation, including the bilateral programmes implemented by international organizations and non-government organizations. The Ministry for Foreign Affairs now managers around 88% of Iceland’s ODA, and within the ministry, the Directorate of International Development Cooperation is now responsible for Iceland’s development cooperation policy formulation, planning, administration, evaluation and coordination. (OECD 2017)

India
The Development Partnership Administration within the Ministry of External Affairs co-ordinates India’s bilateral development co-operation. It manages grants and the Indian Technical & Economic Cooperation Programme. The Ministry of Finance manages multilateral assistance and exercises administrative oversight over the concessional loans and lines of credit provided by the Exim Bank. (OECD 2017)

Indonesia
Several government regulations, national plans and presidential instructions guide Indonesia’s development co-operation. The National Development Planning Agency (BAPPENAS) is responsible for developing and coordinating Indonesia’s national strategy for development co-operation. Together with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Finance and the State Secretariat, BAPPENAS constitutes the National Coordination Team on South-South and Triangular Cooperation. Indonesia co-operates bilaterally with around 40 partner countries, most of them in Asia, in a variety of sectors. Bilateral co-operation consists mainly of scholarships and technical co-operation projects. (OECD 2017)

Indonesia is also engaged in triangular co-operation, partnering with several international organizations and DAC members such as Germany, Japan, Norway, the United States and others. According to OECD estimates, in 2015 Indonesia channeled all of its multilateral development co-operation through the United Nations. (OECD 2017)

Ireland
The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) is responsible for 80% of the ODA budget managed by its Development Co-operation Division (DCD). The remaining 20% comprises ODA eligible contributions from other government departments, notably the Department of Finance, the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (DAFM) and the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government.

Israel
Israel’s Agency for International Development Co-operation – MASHAV, a division of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs – is in charge of planning, implementing and coordinating Israel’s development co-operation. (OECD 2017)

Italy
Law 49/87 (Article 5) gives the Minister of Foreign Affairs overall responsibility for development co-operation. The Ministry’s Directorate General for Development Cooperation (DGCS) is responsible for overall policy and budget allocations to partner countries. It organizes periodic meetings with the MFA’s other departments to ensure that the programming exercise is coherent with Italy’s foreign policy. DGCS has a steering committee in which all MFA’s departments, the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Economic Development are permanent representatives. The committee endorses the strategic orientations and planning of Italian development co-operation, approves programmes and projects of over EUR 1 million, and decides on the establishment of field offices and the long-term assignment of staff to those field offices. The Inter‑Institutional Table on Development Co-operation (IITDC), which was revived in December 2013, provides the platform needed for information exchange and debate among Italian actors.

The Italian system relies mostly on the Ministry of Economy and Finance (MEF) and DGCS to deliver on Italy’s policies and commitments. The Department of Civil Protection is competent to operate in international crises in co-operation with the MFA and answers to the Presidency of the Council of Ministers. Other major ministries involved (e.g. Defence, Health, Internal Affairs and Environment) together manage approximately 4% of Italian ODA. These ministries operate independently of the MFA, including at field level.

Regions and municipalities, as well as civil society actors, play a decisive role in implementing projects with funding from DGCS. A number of rules and guidelines provide a co-operation framework for these actors within the Italian system. At field level, Italian ambassadors bring these actors together to the extent possible, mostly for information sharing and exchanges.

Japan
Following its reorganization in 2008, JICA is now responsible for implementing more than 60% of total bilateral ODA, using a country-based approach in which grants, loans and technical co-operation are brought together into a single country envelope. (OECD 2014)

There is a clear and well understood division of labor between MOFA and JICA, in accordance with an Action Plan for clarifying the division of roles (approved in August 2011). MOFA has consequently been able to enhance its policy making capabilities and JICA its implementation capabilities. MOFA has reduced the percentage of all grants that it manages directly from 30% in 2008 to 13.4% in 2012. In addition, the ODA roles and functions of the Ministry of Finance (MOF) and the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) are clearly established and well coordinated. (OECD 2014)

Kazakhstan
The Foreign Policy Concept of Kazakhstan 2014-2020 guides Kazakhstan’s contribution to the international community’s development co-operation efforts. The ODA Concept of Kazakhstan (April 2013) sets out a roadmap for becoming a provider of development co-operation. Law No. 263-V on Official Development Assistance (December 2014) describes the main objectives, principles, competences and sectoral priorities of Kazakhstan’s ODA. (OECD 2017)

The ODA Law provides the legal basis for establishing an agency under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, provisionally known as the Kazakhstan Agency for International Development Assistance, to implement development co-operation activities. For the moment, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is the designated authority to implement the main lines of Kazakhstan’s ODA policy, including ODA activities. (OECD 2017)

Korea, Republic of
Korea’s aid system is based on two main pillars: grants and loans, the former managed by MOFAT (and its agency, KOICA) and the latter by MOSF (and its agency, EDCF). Under the first pillar (grant-based aid), MOFAT sets the grant aid policies and KOICA carries them out with a high level of decentralized authority once projects have been approved. KOICA has a limited role in policymaking by providing input into the decisions of the Ministry. Under the second pillar (loan-based aid), MOSF sets policy directions and oversees the Eximbank’s execution of the EDCF including the approval of its loans. MOSF chairs the Fund Management Council, which is responsible for the EDCF’s operation and management. While the amount, terms and conditions of the loans are determined by MOSF, once approved, EDCF has the authority to enter into the loan agreement with the partner country and make operational decisions. (OECD 2012)

In 2011, the Export-Import Bank of Korea was responsible for 33% (USD 433.98 million), Korea International Cooperation Agency 31% (USD 408.01 million), Ministry of Strategy and Finance 19% (USD 247.78 million), Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade 6% (USD 75.96 million), Prime Minister's Office 0.2% (USD 2.39 million). (OECD 2012)

The Framework Act mandates the Prime Minister’s Office (the CIDC secretariat) to co-ordinate Korean development co-operation. It does so in close co-operation with MOFAT and MOSF. At the center of Korea’s aid system is the strengthened and high-level Committee for International Development Co-operation (CIDC). CIDC is chaired by the Prime Minister and comprises 15 ministers (the Prime Minister’s Office; Foreign Affairs and Trade; Strategy and Finance; Education, Science and Technology; Justice; Public Administration and Security; Culture, Sports and Tourism; Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries; Knowledge and Economy; Health and Welfare; Environment; Employment and Labor; Gender Equality and Family; Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs; and the Chairperson of The Korea Communications Commission), the heads of KOICA and Eximbank, and seven civilian experts appointed by the Prime Minister. The CIDC was established in 2006 as the country’s highest decision-making body – an “ODA control tower” – to oversee and strengthen policy co-ordination and the strategic aspects of Korean ODA. (OECD 2012)

The Framework Act recognizes technical ministries and local government as implementing agencies; the Presidential Decree allows them to participate as “members of the CIDC and executing bodies of ODA programme…to administer international development co-operation”. Technical ministries have particular expertise and some prefer to maintain their own aid budgets for ensuring “predictability” (as opposed to relying on KOICA for project implementation). While there were more than 30 other ministries, agencies and municipalities involved with ODA in 2011, these accounted for only 12% of the total (mostly in the form of technical co-operation). (OECD 2012)

Kuwait
Kuwait’s Law No. 35 of 1961 created the legal basis for the KFAED to act as an implementing agency in all developing countries on behalf of the Kuwaiti government. The KFAED acts under the overall supervision of the Prime Minister, who in practice delegates this mandate to the Minister of Finance. Other ministries, public authorities and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) also contribute to promoting development internationally, notably the Ministry of Foreign Affairs which can also provide humanitarian assistance. (OECD 2017)

The Kuwait Fund primarily provides concessional loans and loans to co-finance projects with other international, regional or national development partners. In addition, the fund provides guarantees. It also administers Kuwaiti government grants (outside its budget) and provides some grants for technical, economic and financial studies and assistance. (OECD 2017)

Latvia
Latvia’s development co-operation is provided in line with the Latvian Development Co-operation Policy Strategy 2016-20, which defines the goals, principles and directions of Latvia’s development co-operation. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is responsible for formulating development co-operation policy and for coordinating activities. (OECD 2017)

Lithuania
The Law on Development Co-operation and Humanitarian Aid, adopted in 2013 and updated in 2016, provides the framework for Lithuania’s development co-operation policy and outlines its mission, goals, principles, priorities, responsibilities and financing. The main principles of Lithuania’s development co-operation are: partnership with partner countries, partner country’s ownership, solidarity, efficiency, transparency and responsibility, co-ordination and complementarity, and policy coherence. In 2016, Lithuania adopted a new inter-governmental Development Cooperation Action Plan for the period 2017-19, which aims to support effective development policies in line with achieving the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030 and in accordance with the needs of partner countries. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is responsible for implementing and coordinating Lithuania’s development co-operation. (OECD 2017)

Luxembourg
The Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs (MAEE) manages around 85% of Luxembourg’s ODA while the Ministry of Finance is responsible for around 10%, focusing on multilateral development banks and the International Monetary Fund. The remaining 5% mainly comprises Luxembourg’s share of its contribution to the EU general budget, excluding the contribution to the European Development Fund, which was allocated by the European Commission to development Cooperation. The MAEE’s Directorate for Development Cooperation (DCD) is responsible for designing and implementing Luxembourg’s development cooperation policy while the development cooperation agency, LuxDev, executes around one-third of Luxembourg’s bilateral ODA on behalf of the state. (OECD 2017)

Mexico
The Law on International Co-operation for Development (2011) mandated the government to set up the International Development Co-operation Program and the Mexican Agency of International Development Cooperation (AMEXCID), as well as the tools necessary to programme, co-ordinate, implement, monitor, report and evaluate development co-operation. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has overall responsibility for Mexico’s development co-operation, which is coordinated by AMEXCID and implemented through public institutions. (OECD 2017)

Netherlands
In 2012, a new ministerial post combining foreign trade and development cooperation was created alongside the Minister of Foreign Affairs. The resulting policy shifts, embodied in A World to Gain, have been accompanied by changes in the organization and management of Dutch development cooperation. (OECD 2017)

Within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA), the Director-General for International Cooperation (DGIS) unit continues to be responsible for development cooperation policy and for its coordination, implementation and funding. A new directorate for foreign economic relations has been created to cover the trade agenda, in collaboration and coordination with DGIS. The proportion of ODA spent outside of the DGIS is very small (5%). The Netherlands Enterprise Agency (RVO) implements substantial private-sector development programmes funded by the MFA and through ODA. (OECD 2017)

Only 10% of Dutch ODA is channeled through embassies, including priority countries. More and more funding is directed to instruments and tenders originating from the Hague. (OECD 2017)

New Zealand
Following the integration of the International Development Group (IDG) into the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade in 2009, a business model “refresh” was initiated in late 2010 and resulting structural changes were implemented from May 2011 (OECD 2015)

IDG is one of eight groups within the ministry. It has five divisions: Pacific Development; Global Development; Partnerships, Humanitarian and Multilateral; Sustainable Economic Development; and, Development Strategy and Effectiveness. The structure of IDG, therefore, reflects the policy and geographic priorities of the development programme. The thematic and sectoral advisory function is embedded across the divisions with the intention of bringing policy, advisory and programming together in a matrix approach. The Minister has delegated authority to approve up to NZD 25 million, the Chief Executive up to NZD 7 million, the Deputy Secretary International Development up to NZD 5 million, directors up to NZD 1.5 million, and deputy directors and heads of mission up to NZD 500 000. (OECD 2015)

The ministry has entered into “partnership arrangements” with other key government agencies with an interest in Pacific (and broader) development outcomes. These include the Ministry of Primary Industries (responsible for agriculture, biosecurity, fisheries and forestry), New Zealand Police, New Zealand Customs Service, and Audit New Zealand. These practical partnerships enable the New Zealand aid programme to draw on the strengths of others and encourage a whole-of-government approach to key challenges and opportunities facing the region. (OECD 2015)

Norway
The majority of Norwegian development co-operation is administered through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) and its embassies. The Ministry is responsible for decisions on policy, for setting the strategic direction for Norway’s development co-operation, and for overseeing its management and implementation. The Ministry’s two ministers – the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister of International Development – share management of ODA, although the Development Minister is responsible for the majority (around 70%) of its aid portfolio. The Minister of Foreign Affairs is in charge of co-operation in the Middle East, Afghanistan and Pakistan as well as humanitarian aid, peace initiatives, human rights, and global health. The Minister of International Development is responsible for ODA to Africa, Asia, and Latin America as well as for support through multilateral organizations, civil society, environment, and sustainable development, natural disasters, private sector development, democracy support, and research and education. (OECD 2013)

The Ministry oversees three agencies that also administer Norwegian ODA: Norad, the Norwegian Peace Corps (Fredskorpset or FK Norway) and Norfund, a wholly state-owned development finance institution. Norad administers grants for civil society, research and higher education, industrial and commercial financing facilities, and technical assistance. In terms of multilateral ODA, both policy and implementation are handled largely within the Ministry itself by the Department for UN, Peace and Humanitarian Affairs. (OECD 2013)

Increasingly, Norway’s development co-operation priorities are pursued through thematic initiatives, many of which are global in nature, even if not necessarily in scale: the International Climate and Forest Initiative, the International Energy and Climate Initiative, the Oil for Development, and the Tax for Development. (OECD 2013)

Poland
The 2011 Act for Development Cooperation outlined the roles and responsibilities of Poland’s development cooperation system. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is responsible for defining development cooperation policy and strategy, and for coordinating, planning and implementing the Multiannual Development Cooperation Programme and the annual financial plans for development cooperation. Within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Department of Development Cooperation has built a functioning structure for development cooperation and works closely with embassies, and the part-time development counsellors, in partner countries. The Ministry of Finance decides on Poland’s concessional lending and debt relief, in consultation with Foreign Affairs. Other government departments and public institutions are implementers through technical assistance, scholarships and training. (OECD 2017)

In 2014, the special reserve budget, managed by the MFA, accounts for just 29% of Poland’s bilateral ODA and 10% of total ODA. Ministry of Finance accounts for 37% of bilateral ODA, Ministry of Science and Higher Education 26%, and other aid-spending ministries 8%. These ministries have all committed to deliver on Poland’s strategic priorities, which are approved by the Council of Ministers. (OECD 2017)

Portugal
Portugal’s development cooperation system involves 57 different public entities, each with its own aid budget and implementation ability. The Secretary of State for foreign Affairs and Cooperation is responsible at the political level for ensuring Portugal has a strategic and coordinated development cooperation programme. The day-to-day management is done by Camões I.P., created in 2012 through the merger of Portugal’s former development agency (IPAD) and its language and cultural promotion institute (the Camões Institute). Despite being directly responsible for only 7.3% of the ODA budget, it is tasked with directing, coordinating and overseeing all of Portugal’s development cooperation on behalf of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (OECD 2016)

Qatar
Qatar views development co-operation as an integral part of its foreign policy. The Office of the Minister’s Assistant for International Cooperation Affairs in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is responsible for development co-operation and humanitarian assistance, although most other ministries and governmental agencies can also work on development co-operation. The Qatar Development Fund is a public organization established through Law 19 of 2002 mandated to co-ordinate and implement foreign development assistance on behalf of the state of Qatar. (OECD 2017)

Romania
Law No. 213/2016 provides the legal basis for the development co-operation and humanitarian aid activities financed from Romanian public funds. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is the national coordinator of Romania’s development co-operation and humanitarian aid policy. It monitors progress made in achieving the objectives and commitments assumed by Romania, reports annually to the government on activities implemented, and signs funding agreements. An Advisory Committee, composed of representatives from line ministries, public institutions, civil society, academia and the private sector, is responsible for ensuring the co-ordination and unity of strategic planning and priorities in the field of development co-operation. Law No. 213/2016 also created an Agency for International Development Cooperation, RoAid, which is responsible for implementing development co-operation and humanitarian aid-related activities. (OECD 2017)

Russian Federation
The Russian Federation’s development co-operation is provided in line with the Concept of Russia’s State Policy in the Field of International Development Assistance, approved by the President of the Russian Federation in 2014. The concept sets out the objectives, principles and priorities of the Russian Federation’s development co-operation, as well as the criteria for providing assistance to partner countries. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Finance, in co-operation with other government agencies, play a leading role in formulating the Russian Federation’s development co-operation policy and supervise its implementation. In 2015, the Russian Federation provided its bilateral development assistance mainly to the members of the Commonwealth of Independent States,6 as well as Syria, Serbia and Guinea. The priority sectors of the Russian Federation’s bilateral development co-operation were health, public finance, food security, nutrition and education. The Russian Federation provides its bilateral development co-operation in the form of technical assistance projects, capacity building and scholarships, as well as budget support and debt relief. (OECD 2017)

Slovak Republic
The Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs has overall responsibility for formulating Slovak development co-operation policy and for coordinating aid activities.

Slovenia
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ (MFA) State Secretary, acting as Minister for Development Cooperation, convenes an inter-ministerial working body (MDT) and is responsible for coordinating development cooperation activities and budgets across the government. The Expert Council advises the Foreign Minister and the MFA on development cooperation policies. (OECD 2017)

The Ministry of Finance reviews ministries’ proposals and recommends budget allocations for Slovenia’s ODA, manages the financing of multilateral cooperation and provides bilateral ODA by funding projects implemented by the Centre for International Cooperation and Development (CMSR). CMSR is a private, independent and non-profit foundation that was established by the Republic of Slovenia and the Slovene Export and Development Bank (SID Bank). (OECD 2017)

In addition, six other ministries and public administrations are included in the Framework Programme of Development Cooperation and Humanitarian Assistance of the Republic of Slovenia 2016-2019 as providers of ODA, including the Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning, the Ministry of Defense, the Ministry of Interior, the Ministry of Labor, Family, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities, and the Ministry of Education, Science and Sport as well as the Administration for Civil Protection and Disaster Relief. Other Slovenian ministries can also engage in development cooperation even if their expenditure is not incorporated in the Framework Programme. For instance, the ministries of health, justice, and agriculture, forestry and food all support small projects and list their administrative costs as part of Slovenia’s overall ODA. (OECD 2017)

In 2015, 15 ministries and public sector institutions, 4 foundations established by the government and 11 non-governmental organizations implemented a total of 96 development activities with a total volume of EUR 4.8 million. (OECD 2017)

South Africa
The Strategic Plan 2015-20 (Government of South Africa, 2015) of South Africa’s Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO) emphasizes co-operation with “the African continent” and “strengthening South-South relations”. DIRCO is responsible for strategy and foreign policy formulation, and other line ministries are involved in the implementation of development co-operation projects. The National Treasury has a coordinating function in terms of managing incoming ODA and funds for outgoing development co-operation. DIRCO and the National Treasury are on the advisory committee of the African Renaissance and International Cooperation Fund (ARF). All South African departments are eligible to apply for ARF funding for development co-operation projects. South Africa’s development co-operation structures may change when the South African Development Partnership Agency becomes operational under the Department of International Relations and Cooperation. (OECD 2017)

Spain
Spanish development cooperation involves several minsitries, AECID and other central, regional and local government bodies with ODA resources. According to the 1998 international development cooperation law, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation (MAEC) is the lead institution in the development cooepration system, even though its share of the ODA budget has declined. Within MAEC, the Secretary of State for International Cooperation and Ibero-America (SECIPI) is responsible for foreign policy in Ibero-america, international development cooperation, and the corodination of cultural action abroad. The Office of the Secretary General of Intenraitonal Development Cooperation (SGCID) assists SECIPI in those duties. It drafts the 4-year ODA master plans and plan, monitoirs and evlauations its yearly application. AECID, established in 1993, is the central organization that manages Spanish cooperation, with its own Strategic Plan. In 2013, the Secretary General assumed all the duties of AECID’s Director, with AECID still the implemetnign body and SGCID retaining its straegic policy, planning and evaluation functions. There are three coordiantion bodues: the Development Cooperation Council, the Inter-ministerial Committee for Development Cooperation, and the Inter-territorial Commission for Development Cooperation. (OECD 2016)

Three ministries disbursed 87% of total ODA in 2013: Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation 28%, Ministry of the Treasury and Public Administration Services 44% almost exclusive multilateral, Minsitry of Economic Affairs and Competitiveness 15%. Spain’s autonomous communities allocated 7.77% of ODA, and local authorities a further 2.62%. (OECD 2016)

Sweden
Sweden’s institutional set up for development co-operation largely follows its general model of government. The Swedish Government, as a whole, is responsible for decisions on policy, for setting the strategic direction for Sweden’s development co-operation and for overseeing its management. Several government agencies are responsible to the overall Swedish Government for implementation. These include: the Nordic Africa Institute (a center for research, documentation and information on Africa in the Nordic region); the Folke Bernadotte Academy (dedicated to enhancing the quality and effectiveness of international conflict and crisis management); Rikspolisstyrelsen (The National Police Board); Kriminalvården (Swedish Prison and Probation Service); the Swedish Institute; Myndigheten för samhällsskydd och beredskap (Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency); and Vetenskapsrådet (The Swedish Research Council). Furthermore, an additional number of Swedish agencies are engaged by Sida when a particular agency is deemed relevant for particular interventions and can offer specific expertise required for their implementation. (OECD 2013)

Most of Sweden’s ODA system is concentrated in just two institutions: the Ministry for Foreign Affairs (MFA) and Sida. In 2013 77% of Sweden’s ODA was allocated through the MFA and Sida. The relationships between the Government and its implementing agencies are set out in annual ordinances and/or appropriation letters that communicate the Government’s priorities and requirements to each agency. The only exception to this arrangement is multilateral ODA, where both policy and implementation is handled largely within the MFA itself. Sweden also has a development finance institution – SwedFund AB – a wholly state-owned company overseen by the MFA. (OECD 2013)

The MFA and Sida have established a clearer division of labor and co-ordination between these institutions has improved. While the MFA is organized along geographical and functional lines, Sida is set up according to country types and themes. In Stockholm there are quarterly meetings between the Director General of Sida and the Minister for International Development Co-operation to discuss issues of strategic significance. In addition, regular operational meetings are held every six weeks involving the Deputy Director General of Sida, the Head of the Department for Aid Management and key staff at Sida and MFA. There are also twice yearly formal geographical and thematic consultations held between the MFA and Sida to look at country, regional and thematic strategies. In the field, Sida delegates its authority to the ambassador and Sida staff work side by side with their MFA colleagues in the embassies. (OECD 2013)

Switzerland
The two federal ministries involved in making Swiss development policy and implementing it are: the Swiss Agency for Development and Co-operation (SDC), which is a federal office within the Department of Foreign Affairs, and the Economic Co-operation and Development Domain of the State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO), which is a federal office within the Department of Economic Affairs, Education and Research. SDC completed reorganization in 2012: overhaul the organizational structure at headquarters and delegate more authority to the field while simultaneously improving working methods. The Economic Co-operation and Development Domain of SECO introduced a new organizational set-up in 2013, ensuring that the Economic Co-operation and Development Domain’s structure and management processes matched its strategic objectives and the increasing financial resources it must deliver effectively and efficiently. (OECD 2013)

Turkey
Turkey’s development co-operation is provided in line with the Statutory Decree on the Organization and Duties of the Turkish Co-operation and Co-ordination Agency (TIKA), adopted in 2011. The Agency designs and co-ordinates Turkey’s bilateral development co-operation activities and implements projects in collaboration with other ministries, NGOs and the private sector. TIKA is an autonomous institution attached to the Prime Minister’s Office. Other public institutions, NGOs and the private sector also implement projects and programmes funded through Turkey’s ODA. (OECD 2017)

United Arab Emirates
Up until its merger with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in February 2016, the former Ministry of International Co-operation and Development, created in 2013, maintained overall responsibility for setting policy, geographical and sectoral priorities; identifying modalities and mechanisms for foreign aid distribution and implementation; and documenting aid flows. In December 2016 the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation launched the UAE’s new development co-operation strategy for 2017-21 (Government of the United Arab Emirates, 2016). (OECD 2017)

United Kingdom
The International Development Act 2002 gives the Secretary of State a clear mandate with Department for International Development (DFID) being the lead government department for development co-operation. DFID manages the bulk of the development co-operation programme (87.8% in 2013). Among the other departments involved, the most important are the Department for Energy and Climate Change (DECC) (3.6% of the ODA budget in 2013) and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) (2.5%). The Inter-Departmental Conflict Pool managed 1.7% of the UK’s ODA volume in 2013. (OECD 2014)

DFID has a seat in Cabinet and in the National Security Council (NSC). DFID is represented in the Cabinet by the Secretary of State for International Development. In the House of Commons the Secretary of State is supported by a Minister of State and a Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, and in the House of Lords by a Spokesperson. DFID therefore drives the development agenda and decides on most funding decisions, whether bilateral or multilateral allocations. In a few cases where DFID is not the lead department, mechanisms are in place to ensure that there are consistent messages and agreed lines on how funding is decided, such as in the areas of climate finance and conflict prevention, where Inter-Departmental Funds are established. In addition, in complex situations, the UK puts in place whole-of-government approaches led by the National Security Council. (OECD 2014)

A number of institutional and organizational changes have taken place in DFID since 2010. These have been driven both by the 2012 UK civil service reform and by the need to strengthen DFID’s capabilities and ensure it delivers a bigger programme efficiently. A Departmental Board chaired by the Secretary of State for International Development has been created. DFID’s Permanent Secretary, four director-generals and four non-executive directors sit on this board, which meets quarterly to advise on and monitor delivery of the Secretary of State’s strategy and policy priorities. The board and a series of accompanying measures – such as lowering ceilings for ministerial approval – has increased ministerial oversight of the programme. In addition to its departmental board, DFID has an Executive Management Committee, chaired by the Permanent Secretary, which oversees the management of DFID operations, staff and financial resources. This Committee is supported by five subcommittees dealing respectively with development policy, audit, investment, security and senior leadership. (OECD 2014)

The delimitation of DFID’s four directorates was slightly adjusted to allow the creation of a new directorate for economic development, reflecting DFID’s new focus. Other changes reflect DFID’s new approach to results and value for money, in particular strengthening of the Research and Evidence Division, placed under the leadership of a chief scientific adviser and a chief economist, and the creation of new cadres for programme managers and commercial advisers to improve their finance and commercial skills. The decentralized nature of DFID and its forward-looking human resources strategy enable it to have skilled staff in country offices, who are well equipped to deliver the programme efficiently and in a flexible and autonomous way. (OECD 2014)

United States
The 2010 Presidential Policy Directive on Global Development (PPD-6) provided the government of United States with a clear, high-level and whole-of-government vision for tis development cooperation. As a result of OOD-6, USAID and the State Department jointly reviewed their policies through regular Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Reviews. USAID’s position in the system has been restored. It created the Bureau for Policy, Planning, and Learning (PPL) in 2010 to perform policy analysis and strategic Planning. The Office of Budget and Resource Management (BRM) was created to enable USAID to tie budget decisions more explicitly to policy priorities, strategic plans and evidence-based results. The roll-out of Country Development Cooperation Strategies (CDCSs) closed the loop between policy, budget and operations. (OECD 2016)

There are over 21 government agencies with foreign assistance budget lines – although 95% of all foreign assistance is concentrated in only five of them. Most bilateral ODA is provided through USAID, representing 60% of the total in 2014. PPD-6 established policy coordination mechansms across the US government - the interagency Policy Committee on Global Development, led by National Security Staff and reporting to the National Security Council (NSC). Its aim was to set priorities, facilitate decision-making where agency positions diverge, and coordinate development poluc across the executive branch, including the implementing of PPD-6. This committee includes the following agencies: Department of State, the Treasury, Defense, Justice, Agriculture, Commerce, Labour, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Office of Management and Budget, United States Trade Representative, Represenative of the US to the UN, Council of Economic Advisers, Office of Science and Technology Policu, Office of the Director of National Intelligence, USAID, Export-Import Bank, Joint Chiefs of Staff, Peace Corps, Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), Millennoum Challenge Corporation (MCC) and the United States Trade and Development Agency. (OECD 2016)

The relationship between the State Department and USAID has evolved. The QDDR and Joint Strategic Plan processes have delivered a clearer development footprint in foreign policy and strategy. In terms of budgeting and planning, whilst the Office of US Foreign Assistance Resources retains the overall coordination role, it has counterparts at both USAID in the form of BRM and PPL, and at the State Department’s Office of Budget and Planning. (OECD 2016)

  • United Nations
  • United Nations Environment Programme