Partner Report on Support to Statistics PRESS 2011 ROUND FINAL REPORT DECEMBER 2011 PARTNERSHIP IN STATISTICS FOR DEVELOPMENT IN THE 21 ST CENTURY

Transcription

1 Partner Report on Support to Statistics PRESS 2011 ROUND FINAL REPORT DECEMBER 2011 PARTNERSHIP IN STATISTICS FOR DEVELOPMENT IN THE 21 ST CENTURY

2 1

3 Table of Contents List of Acronyms... 4 Executive Summary... 8 I. Introduction Objectives Methodology Limitations of Results II. Summary of Main Findings from PRESS Key Findings, by Recipient Key Findings, by Co-operation Provider Key Findings, by Statistical Area Trends Emerging across PRESS Rounds III. Alignment with NSDSs METHODOLOGY ANNEXES Countries Covered in PRESS Exchange Rates Period Average Classification of Statistical Activities, adjusted for the reporting of provider and recipient activities DATA ANNEXES Support to Statistical Development Commitments, , by Recipient Country Support to Statistical Development Commitments, , by Provider of Development Co-operation Support to Statistical Development Commitments, , by Statistical Activity Planned Support to Statistical Development, by Provider of Development Co-operation

4 List of Tables, Figures, and Maps Table A: Estimated Annual Commitments, by Geographical Region & Percentage of Global Total, Pre Table B: Estimated Commitments to Main Recipient Countries, , and as % of GDP Figure 1: Relationship between Total Estimated Commitments and Statistical Capacity Scores Table C: Small Island Developing States Receiving Commitments Exceeding US$ 1M, during Table D: Fragile States Receiving Commitments Exceeding US$ 10M, during Map A: Active Commitments, By Recipient, Table E: Estimated Annual Commitments, by Key Co-operation Provider, Pre-2009 to Map B: Active Commitments, By Main Provider of Development Co-operation, Figure 2: Financial Support Committed, by Statistical Categories Table F: Commitments to 2010 Round of Population Census Figure 3: Comparison of Global Estimated Commitments Across PRESS Rounds Figure 4: Trend in Global Estimated Commitments over Past Three Years Figure 5: Trend in the Concentration of Aid to Statistics Table G: Comparison of Global Estimated Commitments from the Top Three Providers of Development Cooperation, Relative to Global Totals, Across PRESS Rounds

5 AAA ACBF AfDB AFESD AFRISTAT AFRITAC AIDS AITRS AsDB ASEAN BCEAO BEAC BiH CDB CAN CAR CARICOM CEMAC CISSTAT COMESA CPLP CRESS CRS CWIQ DAC DIAL DCD DFID DHS DRC EAC EASTC EC ECA ECOWAS EFTA ENEA Accra Agenda for Action n Capacity Building Foundation n Development Bank List of Acronyms Arab Fund for Economic and Social Development Observatoire économique et statistique d Afrique subsaharienne (Economic and Statistical Observatory for Sub-Saharan ) n Regional Technical Assistance Centre (IMF) Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome Arab Institute for Training and Research in Statistics Asian Development Bank Association of Southeast Asian Nations Banque Centrale de l Afrique d Ouest (Central Bank of Western n States) Banque des Etats de l Afrique (Bank of n States) Bosnia and Herzegovina Caribbean Development Bank Comunidad Andina (Andean Community) Central n Republic Caribbean Community Central Economic and Monetary Community Statistical Office of Commonwealth of Independent States Common Market for Eastern and Southern Communidade dos Paises de Lingua Portuguesa (Community of Portuguese-Speaking Countries) Country Report on Support to Statistics Creditor Reporting System (OECD) Core Welfare Indicators Questionnaire Development Assistance Committee (OECD) Développement, Institutions, Analyses de Long-terme Development Co-operation Directorate (OECD) Department for International Development (United Kingdom) Demographic and Health Survey Democratic Republic of Congo East n Community East n Statistical Training Centre European Commission Europe and Central Asia Economic Community of West n States European Free Trade Association Ecole Nationale d Economie Appliquée (Senegal) National School of Applied Economics ENSEA Ecole National Supérieure de Statistique et d Economie Appliquée (Côte d Ivoire) National Higher School of Statistics and Applied Economics EU European Union 4

6 EUROSTAT FAO GDDS GDP HIV HLF-4 HMN IADB ICP IDA IHSN IPA ILO IMF IsDB ISSEA ISWGNA ITU LAC LAS LMIC LSMS M&E MAPS MDG MECOVI MENA MERCOSUR MICS NSDS NSO NSS ODA OECD PALOP PARIS21 PNG PRESS PRSP PPP SADC Statistical Office of the European Communities Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations General Data Dissemination System Gross Domestic Product Human Immunodeficiency Virus Fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness Health Metrics Network Inter-American Development Bank International Comparison Program International Development Association International Household Survey Network Instrument de pre-accession Pre-Accession Instrument (EU programme) United Nations International Labour Organization International Monetary Fund Islamic Development Bank Institut sous-régional de Statistique et d Economie Appliquée Sub-regional Institute of Statistics and Applied Economics Inter-Secretariat Working Group on National Accounts International Telecommunication Union Latin America and Carribbean League of Arab States Lower Middle Income Countries Living Standards Survey Monitoring and Evaluation Marrakech Action Plan for Statistics Millennium Development Goals Mejoramiento de la Encuestas de Hogares y la Medición de Condiciones de Vida (Program for the Improvement of Surveys and of Living Conditions in Latin America and the Caribbean) Middle East and North Mercado Comun del Sur -- Southern Common Market (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay) Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey National Strategy for the Development of Statistics National Statistical Office National Statistical System Official Development Assistance Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Países nos de Língua Oficial Portuguesa (n Portuguese-Speaking Countries) Partnership in Statistics for Development in the 21 st Century Papua New Guinea Partner Report on Support to Statistics Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper Purchasing Power Parity Southern n Development Community 5

7 SCB SESRIC SIDS SNA SPC SRF SSA STATCAP TFSCB UK UNAIDS UNCTAD UNDP UNECA UNECE UNECLAC UNEP UNESCAP UNESCWA UNESCO-UIS UNFPA UNICEF UNIDO UNSD UNSIAP USA USAID WAEMU/UEMOA WHO Statistical Capacity Building Statistical, Economic and Social Research and Training Centre for Islamic Countries Small Island Developing States System of National Accounts Secretariat of the Pacific Community Statistics for Results Facility Sub-Saharan Statistical Capacity Credit/Loan Trust Fund for Statistical Capacity Building United Kingdom Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS United Nations Conference on Trade and Development United Nations Development Programme United Nations Economic Commission for United Nations Economic Commission for Europe United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean United Nations Environment Programme United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and Pacific United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization Institute for Statistics United Nations Population Fund United Nations Children s Fund United Nations Industrial Development Organization United Nations Statistics Division United Nations Statistical Institute for Asia and Pacific United States of America United States Agency for International Development West Economic and Monetary Union World Health Organization 6

8 7

9 Executive Summary Since the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness was adopted in 2005, the international community has stepped up efforts to improve the effectiveness of development interventions. The 2008 Accra Agenda for Action (AAA) and the recent Fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness (HLF-4) further crystallised this agenda. The Partner Report on Support to Statistics (PRESS) is a tool to assist development stakeholders in implementing the best practices and respecting the principles of aid effectiveness. The Partnership in Statistics for Development in the 21 st Century (PARIS21) designed and administers the PRESS exercise to provide a snapshot of ongoing support to statistical development worldwide. The present report outlines results from the 2011 round of the PRESS, covering ongoing activities supporting statistical development over the period The results are presented by recipient country, provider of development co-operation, and statistical activity. Key Findings by Recipient Country Financial commitments to statistical development for the period ed to roughly US$ billion. received 41% of total statistical support, equivalent to US$ 668M in commitments while Asia-Pacific received US$ 476M (29%), Latin America and the Caribbean US$ 175M (11%), and Europe US$ 104M (6%). A further US$ 210M were committed to global, non country-specific projects and programmes. Support continues to be highly concentrated. Fifteen countries (India, Rwanda, Indonesia, Tanzania, Bolivia, Afghanistan, Uganda, Nigeria, Kenya, Mozambique, Ukraine, China, Pakistan, Albania, and Haiti) had estimated commitments exceeding US$ 25M per country. They combined to equal 45.1% of total estimated commitments (including unallocated support) and 62.4% of total country-specific commitments. Key Findings by Co-operation Provider PRESS 2011 includes data gathered from 57 co-operation providers, down from 63 in the 2010 round, 60 in the 2009 round, yet up from 48 in the 2008 round. The top three (World Bank, United Kingdom, European Commission) provided 53% of total commitments. Bilateral donors (including the UK and EC) combined to provide 54% of all commitments, regional institutions 9%, and international organisations 37%. Applying a methodology developed by the OECD to measure the fragmentation of aid, one finds that 44.3% of donor recipient relationships in the statistical sector were non-significant the least desirable relationship from the perspective of recipient countries. These non-significant relationships represented a mere 1.41% of combined commitments to the top 15 countries. Responses on future activities indicate that more than a dozen providers of development co-operation, including the major players in statistical support, have statistical activities under preparation. These activities include significant financial support to the implementation of National Strategies for the Development of Statistics (NSDS) in Comoros, Côte d Ivoire, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ghana, and Rwanda. 8

10 Key Findings by Statistical Area The statistical category that received the most support in PRESS 2011 was strategic and managerial issues of official statistics at national and international level, which accounted for 13% of total commitments. Sector statistics continue to receive relatively little financial support, as does formal statistical training. NSDS processes attract significant support, through World Bank managed programmes such as the Trust Fund for Statistical Capacity Building, STATCAP, and Statistics for Results Facility as well as allocations from the Asian Development Bank, European Commission, and the United Kingdom. Support to population censuses represented a little under 10% of total commitments in PRESS This figure is down from 15% in PRESS 2010, even though 41 of 118 PRESS countries have yet to participate in the 2010 census round (spanning the period 2005 to 2014). Trends Emerging across PRESS Rounds Since the initial PRESS round in 2008, global estimated commitments have risen by more than 60% (from approximately US$ 1 billion to more than US$ 1.6 billion in the 2011 round). Looking more closely at the numbers in the 2011 PRESS round, however, reveals that the individual years within this three-year cycle have experienced a roller coaster ride of commitments: estimated commitments rose 12% between 2009 and 2010 then dropped 24% between 2010 and Since the PRESS 2008 round, the regional distribution of commitments to statistics has steadily shifted away from, primarily to the benefit of the Asia-Pacific region. Alignment with NSDSs With the development of the online questionnaire for the previous PRESS round, PARIS21 used the opportunity to insert an additional question to measure the alignment of donor aid with NSDSs. In the 2010 round, 50% of responses confirmed that the supported activity was indeed aligned, 6% responded that it was not, and the remaining 44% answered that they did not know. In the 2011 round, 52% of projects were confirmed as being aligned with the country s NSDS. Only 3% of projects were reported as not being aligned with a statistical strategy, while for 27% of projects reporters did not know. For the remaining 18% of projects, no response was provided. 9

11 I. Introduction Objectives 1. Since the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness was adopted in 2005, the international community has stepped up efforts to improve the effectiveness of development interventions. The 2008 Accra Agenda for Action (AAA) and the recent Fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness (HLF-4) further crystallised this agenda. HLF-4 deliberations, in fact, emphasized a shift from aid effectiveness to development effectiveness 1, an agenda which relies heavily on inputs from the statistical community. 2. The Partner Report on Support to Statistics (PRESS) is a tool to assist development stakeholders in implementing the best practices and respecting the principles of aid/development effectiveness. The Partnership in Statistics for Development in the 21 st Century (PARIS21) designed and administers the PRESS exercise to provide a snapshot of ongoing support to statistical development worldwide. 3. The specific objectives of the PRESS exercise are to: Identify the current and future projects/programmes of providers of development co-operation 2 (i.e., bilateral agencies, multilateral institutions, private foundations, and other actors providing technical or financial support) in support of the development of national statistical systems (NSS); Share this information with recipient countries and providers of development co-operation in order to facilitate collaboration/co-ordination and to identify countries or areas of statistics in need of more support; and Raise the profile of statistics within the overall context of aid to developing countries. 4. As such, the PRESS will be invaluable to both developing countries and co-operation providers in respecting the principles of development effectiveness. It provides information that can be used, inter alia, to align support with nationally owned strategies and plans, harmonise that support across co-operation providers, and improve the predictability of planned aid 3. When establishing national partnerships to co-ordinate support to the statistical system (a mechanism gaining increasing prominence worldwide), countries can also use PRESS information to identify co-operation providers which are active in supporting statistics. 5. Furthermore, developing countries will find PRESS information particularly useful in planning the development of their statistical system. The PRESS is an important initial input into a Country Report on Support to Statistics (CRESS), the country-level counterpart to the PRESS. The CRESS an initiative led by the country to 1 The results of the HLF-4 discussions are available in the official Busan outcome document here: 2 The drafters of the HLF-4 outcome document prefer the term providers of development co-operation to donors. The present report adopts this new terminology, where appropriate. 3 Greater detail on the principles and commitments of the Paris Declaration and the AAA can be found at: Details on the HLF-4 are available at: 10

12 gather all data relating to the funding of the NSS, whether deriving from domestic resources or external support is then in turn an important input into the design of the country s National Strategy for the Development of Statistics (NSDS). The inventory of support to the NSS that the CRESS provides will help the country identify gaps in funding the implementation of the NSDS and eliminate duplication of development interventions. The ultimate objective of both the PRESS and CRESS is to improve efficiency of the NSS through better co-ordination and better information sharing. Methodology 6. The PRESS exercise is conducted annually. The present report outlines the results of the 2011 round, covering ongoing activities during the three calendar years Results are also available from the three previous rounds (conducted in 2008, 2009, and 2010) on the PARIS21 website The methodology used in compiling PRESS data is largely that described in the 2009 PRESS methodology report 5. Briefly, the exercise begins with an extraction of data from the OECD s Creditor Reporting System (CRS) 6. For countries and institutions that do not report to the CRS, the PARIS21 Secretariat supplements these data with an online questionnaire. 8. The questionnaire enables respondents to update their previous years submissions with the click of a button, importing them directly into the current round with relevant modifications. Pre-filled fields also facilitate completion of the form. To simplify the presentation of data, PARIS21 has consolidated some respondents into a single country or institution in the tables below (e.g., the U.S. Agency for International Development and the Millennium Challenge Corporation are merged under the title USA. ). 9. The recipient countries 7 covered in the PRESS exercise fall into three sub-categories: all those eligible to borrow from the International Development Association (IDA) 8, lower middle income countries (LMIC) as defined by the OECD s Development Assistance Committee 9, and all n countries. Although PARIS21 activities and reporting focus on the poorest countries, the upper middle income countries of are nevertheless included in this exercise because the 2006 Light Reporting Exercise (LRE) the process that evolved into the PRESS reported on support to statistics across the entire n continent. By retaining all n countries in the PRESS, users interested in statistical development in are able to sketch from the original LRE. The overall group of countries covered in PRESS (currently 118 in all) are also those covered in PARIS21 s report on progress See See The CRS is the official source of information on aid commitments from OECD member countries, as well as a number of multilateral organisations. See This document and all maps included herein are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. Although there are presently 80 IDA borrower countries ( for the purposes of coherence across PRESS and NSDS reports, PARIS21 reports on those countries with IDA borrowing status as of November 2009 (79 in all), when the PARIS21 strategy for was agreed. Although the DAC list of Official Development Assistance recipients ( was updated in October 2011, PARIS21 reports on those countries with LMIC status as of November 2009 (39 in all). 11

13 in designing and implementing NSDS 10. The complete list of countries is available in the methodology annexes below. Support that is not country-specific is shown in the tables and maps below under the category unallocated. 10. At the request of members of the Committee for the Coordination of Statistical Activities (CCSA who represent a large sample of PRESS respondents), the present report focuses on commitments rather than disbursements. However, as with previous rounds, the 2011 round collected data on disbursements along with commitments. The raw data collected are available for free download on the PARIS21 website as an Excel pivot table In this 2011 round, PARIS21 incorporated a number of improvements to the exercise, thanks to a close collaboration with a regional partner. In the margins of its Committee on Statistics in December 2010, the UNESCAP Statistics Division launched a regional version of the global CCSA (dubbed the Partners for Statistics Development in Asia-Pacific), in which participants decided that a first step towards the improvement of cooperation and collaboration in statistics is to share information. The group agreed to make full use of the PRESS as a basis for this information sharing and decided to assess the usefulness of PRESS for this purpose. To this end, PARIS21 and the partnership secretariat (UNESCAP) conducted an assessment and made several recommendations 12. In particular, the assessment requested clarification on specific fields in the questionnaire, which inspired PARIS21 to produce a Guide for Reporters to PRESS 2011 Round 13. The assessment also recommended that the online questionnaire be kept open year-round to enable reporters to update their submissions as new projects are approved, rather than wait until the regular reporting period re-opens. To address this point, PARIS21 has agreed to keep the questionnaire open with the exception of the brief period from September to November of each year when the report is being prepared and to post updated PRESS data in Excel in December and March of each year. Limitations of Results 12. While improvements to the PRESS methodology increase one s confidence in the figures, it is nevertheless important to recognise the limitations of the data collected. Some of the findings may be over-estimated or even under-estimated. Potential over-estimations: Identifying the of financing allocated to statistical activities in multi-sector operations is often difficult. Double-counting, especially for activities financed and implemented by different organisations, is filtered out to the greatest extent possible. Potential under-estimations: Not all support is captured in the PRESS exercise (especially where it is embedded in a broader sector programme), and figures are usually estimated by dividing a project See See The results from this study are available at: See 12

14 evenly across the project period (which can often extend beyond either end of the three-year reporting period). 13. Comparing figures of individual years with those in previous rounds should be approached with great caution. Reporters often update data submitted in previous rounds, the result being that global estimated totals reported for 2010, for example, may differ in the 2010 and 2011 rounds. 14. It has been noted that reporters whose decision-making on aid allocations are decentralised to their country offices may have difficulty in reporting their support, since PRESS contacts are typically from the headquarters level. However, in the 2011 PRESS round, UNFPA shared the link to the PRESS questionnaire with all of their offices worldwide, resulting in data on support to more than 30 countries. This experience which also helped refine the online system demonstrates that a simple good faith effort on the part of reporters can yield a wealth of information useful to all. 15. PRESS figures are expressed in US dollars, converted from the currencies used in bilateral agencies and multilateral institutions. Exchange rates have of course fluctuated considerably over the past few years 14 ; these fluctuations will also affect one s interpretation of the results. 16. The financial figures collected in PRESS are of course very helpful, even if they should be used cautiously. However, the PRESS is intended to serve as a tool to facilitate collaboration and co-ordination among developing countries and providers of development co-operation, rather than as a purely accounting exercise. 14 The exchange rates used in the PRESS are outlined in the methodology annexes. 13

15 II. Summary of Main Findings from PRESS The data annexes at the end of this document provide tables showing all commitments reported, by recipient country, provider of development co-operation, and statistical activity. The present chapter offers some brief analyses of the data. Key Findings, by Recipient 18. Financial commitments to statistical development for the period ed to roughly US$ billion. This includes activities committed prior to, but still active during, the reporting period. received a little less than half (41%) of total statistical support, equivalent to US$ 668M in commitments while Asia-Pacific received US$ 476M (29%), Latin America and the Caribbean US$ 175M (11%), and Europe US$ 104M (6%). A further US$ 210M were committed to global, non country-specific projects and programmes. See Table A for specific details. Table A: Estimated Annual Commitments, by Geographical Region & Percentage of Global Total, Pre Region Commitments (US$ millions) Pre Grand Total % Asia-Pacific % Europe % Latin America and Caribbean % * % Total , % % * Refers to activities not allocated to specific countries or regions. NB: Totals may not add due to rounding. 19. Approximately 81.6% of country-specific commitments went to IDA borrower countries and 18.9% to lower middle income and non IDA n countries. Support continues to be highly concentrated. Fifteen countries (India, Rwanda, Indonesia, Tanzania, Bolivia, Afghanistan, Uganda, Nigeria, Kenya, Mozambique, Ukraine, China, Pakistan, Albania, and Haiti) had estimated commitments exceeding US$ 25M per country. They combined to equal 45.1% of total estimated commitments (including unallocated support) and 62.4% of total country-specific commitments. For most of these top recipient countries, commitments represented under 0.4% of their GDP. Table B provides greater detail on commitments to the top recipient countries, and Map A provides a graphic representation of worldwide active commitments, by recipients. 14

16 Table B: Estimated Commitments to Main Recipient Countries, , and as % of GDP Recipient Country Total Commitments (US$) Commitments as % of GDP 1. India 107,297, % 2. Rwanda 71,473, % 3. Indonesia 65,374, % 4. Tanzania 64,153, % 5. Bolivia 63,558, % 6. Afghanistan 54,956, % 7. Uganda 49,281, % 8. Nigeria 40,181, % 9. Kenya 39,826, % 10. Mozambique 33,737, % 11. Ukraine 32,729, % 12. China 30,398, % 13. Pakistan 29,978, % 14. Albania 27,427, % 15. Haiti 25,723, % Source: GDP figures from the IMF. 20. By matching the figures on commitments with the country statistical capacity scores from the World Bank 15, one can begin to determine if a relationship exists between the volume of statistical support provided to countries and their need for developing capacity. Although a robust analysis would require, inter alia, a consideration of factors such as population size and actual funding needs of each individual country, PRESS data and the World Bank s scores can provide an initial view of the situation. To this end, Figure 2 plots total estimated commitments to PRESS countries against their corresponding statistical capacity scores 16. To highlight the extremes, the PRESS country with the lowest statistical capacity score (Somalia) received US$ 2.7M in reported commitments whereas the country with the highest score (Georgia) received US$ 2.2M. Among the top 15 recipients, statistical capacity scores ranged from 47 to 89. The data suggest that little relationship can be drawn between the volume of support to statistics and the recipient s statistical capacity On an annual basis, the World Bank measures a country-level statistical capacity indicator based on a set of criteria consistent with international recommendations. This indicator on a scale of 0 to 100 is available for more than 140 countries. See This Figure excludes those PRESS countries for whom the World Bank has not calculated a statistical capacity score (i.e., DR Korea, Kosovo, Palestinian Adm. Areas, and Tuvalu). 15

17 Figure 1: Relationship between Total Estimated Commitments and Statistical Capacity Scores Estimated Commitments (US$ millions) Overall Statistical Capacity Score Small Island Developing States 21. Among the many development challenges resulting from their small population size, small island developing states (SIDS) 17 often face the additional burden of being aid orphans. In fact, only one country among the top 15 recipient listed in Table B above is a SIDS (Haiti). In the 2010 round, Haiti ranked 8th in commitments received, whereas in the present round it ranks 15th. The SIDS receiving the second most support (Dominican Republic) is 20th in the list, followed by the Solomon Islands at 62nd. 22. Haiti and the Dominican Republic combined to total 68% of all statistical aid to SIDS (in the 2010 round they accounted for 74%), while the sum of commitments to all SIDS represented less than 6% of total country-specific commitments worldwide in PRESS These figures must of course be understood within the context of the countries small size: SIDS represent a mere 0.7% of the combined population of all PRESS countries. Table C shows the support to SIDS whose commitments exceeded US$ 1M. 17 For the purposes of this report, the definition for a small island developing state (SIDS) is drawn from the World Bank. 16

18 Table C: Small Island Developing States Receiving Commitments Exceeding US$ 1M, during Recipient Country Commitments (US$ thousands) /Programme Period Haiti 25, Dominican Republic 19, Solomon Islands 2, Cape Verde 2, Timor-Leste 1, Comoros 1, Papua New Guinea 1, Total of all SIDS 66,049 Fragile States 23. Fragile states 18, on the other hand, receive considerable attention from the development community, although that support is also highly concentrated. Commitments to these countries exceeded US$ 238M over the period Afghanistan, Nigeria, and Haiti combined to total half (50.7%) of all statistical aid to fragile states. The sum of commitments to all fragile states represented 20.2% of total country-specific commitments worldwide in PRESS Table D shows the support to all fragile states who received more than US$ 10M in commitments. Recipient Country Table D: Fragile States Receiving Commitments Exceeding US$ 10M, during Commitments (US$ thousands) /Programme Period Afghanistan 54, Nigeria 40, Haiti 25, Chad 21, Sudan 17, Cambodia 14, Total of all Fragile States 238, For the purposes of this report, the definition for fragility and the identification of countries satisfying those criteria are drawn from the World Bank. 17

19 Map A: Active Commitments, By Recipient,

20 Key Findings, by Co-operation Provider 24. PRESS 2011 includes data gathered from 57 co-operation providers, down from 63 in the 2010 round, 60 in the 2009 round, yet up from 48 in the 2008 round. It should be noted that these 57 respondents include some who reported that they had no activities supporting statistics during the period. A number of countries or institutions did not respond to the request for data and do not report to the CRS; these include bilateral agencies from non OECD and new OECD member states, foundations, regional institutions (primarily in ), statistical training schools, and several UN agencies. 25. A large share of global support to statistics comes from a very small number of providers. The top three providers of development co-operation in statistics (World Bank, United Kingdom, European Commission) provided 53% of total commitments. Bilateral donors (including the UK and EC) combined to provide 54% of all commitments, regional institutions 9%, and international organisations 37%. UNFPA deserves special recognition for its appearance as the fourth largest provider of development co-operation in the 2011 round, thanks to its tireless efforts in involving its country offices around the world in the collection of data. In the 2010 round, UNFPA ranked as the 23rd largest provider. 26. Table E outlines support from the top 10 providers. These figures include support committed prior to, but still active during, the reporting period. Map B illustrates to which countries and regions the key providers committed their aid to statistics. Table E: Estimated Annual Commitments, by Key Co-operation Provider, Pre-2009 to 2011 Provider of Development Co-operation US$ thousands Pre Total World Bank 157,026 3, ,030 80, ,015 United Kingdom 121, ,740 23,925 3, ,319 European Commission 112,754 67,232 48,737 17, ,768 UNFPA 22,922 32,393 45,372 30, ,359 Canada 62,319 3,701 5,824 8,232 80,077 Netherlands 62, ,666 Sweden 35,409 11,694 47,103 n Development Bank ,390 17,000 39,520 Food and Agriculture Organization 13,688 2,490 5,397 10,064 31,639 AFRISTAT 18,798 10, ,501 NB: Totals may not add due to rounding. 19

21 Aid Fragmentation 27. After the 2008 Accra Agenda for Action called on signatories to reduce the fragmentation of aid, the OECD s Development Co-operation Directorate (DCD) developed a methodology 19 to measure the extent to which developing countries receive too little aid from too many donors. The methodology classifies aid relationships into four categories: (a) concentrated and important, (b) concentrated, (c) important, and (d) non-significant. The latter category is the least desirable from the perspective of the recipient country. 28. Applying this methodology to the top 15 PRESS recipients reported in Table B above 20, 44.3% of donor recipient relationships in the statistical sector were non-significant (category D) 21. These non-significant relationships represented a mere 1.41% of combined commitments to these 15 countries. Nearly half of aid relationships therefore accounted for less than one-fiftieth of support to countries. This level of fragmentation is higher than that recorded in the 2010 PRESS round, in which 37.5% of donor recipient relationships were nonsignificant and they represented 4.02% of combined commitments. Planned Activities 29. Responses on future activities indicate that more than a dozen providers of development co-operation, including the major players in statistical support, have statistical activities under preparation. These activities include significant financial support to NSDS implementation in Comoros, Côte d Ivoire, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ghana, and Rwanda. Details on all reported planned activities can be found in the data annexes at the end of this report See the 2009 OECD Report on Division of Labour: Addressing fragmentation and concentration of aid across countries: For the purposes of simplicity, PARIS21 modifies the DCD methodology to consider only commitments (not disbursements) and to retain all reported support, even that which is not considered country programmable aid (CPA). This figure is slightly higher than the results in the 2009 DCD report, which found that 39% of overall donor recipient relationships were non-significant. 20

22 Map B: Active Commitments, By Main Provider of Development Co-operation,

23 22

24 Key Findings, by Statistical Area 30. Excluding the miscellaneous category of multiple statistical areas, the category that received the most support in PRESS 2011 was strategic and managerial issues of official statistics at national and international level (category 5), which accounted for 13% of total commitments (or 34%, excluding multiple categories from the total). Support targeting general statistical items and methodology of data collection (category 4) the category receiving the second most in commitments dropped significantly from US$ 327M in PRESS 2010 to US$ 166M in PRESS Sector statistics continue to receive relatively little financial support, as does formal statistical training (category 5.4) despite the recognition of its keen importance, as evidenced by the creation of regional working groups targeting statistical training 22. Figure 2 breaks down support by major statistical category. The full list of categories and subcategories can be found in the methodological annexes. 31. NSDS processes continue to attract significant support. TFSCB grants are supporting NSDS design in a dozen countries, while STATCAP and Statistics for Results Facility projects supporting the implementation of NSDSs are ongoing in Afghanistan, Burkina Faso, Indonesia, and Ukraine. In addition to these World Bank managed programmes, other providers of development co-operation such as the Asian Development Bank, European Commission, and the United Kingdom also allocate resources to support NSDS processes (for example in Afghanistan, Benin, Kosovo, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Zambia). 32. As the single largest statistical operation that a country will typically undertake, the census is often a target of significant external support. Support to population censuses represented a little under 10% of total commitments in PRESS This figure is down from 15% in PRESS Although the 2010 census round (spanning the period 2005 to 2014) is nearing its end, there are still a significant number of countries who have yet to conduct their census. In fact, the UN Statistics Division reports that, as of November 2011, only 77 of the 118 countries covered in PRESS have completed their census in the 2010 census round. Of the remaining 41 countries, 37 have scheduled one 23. See Table F for a summary of support to the current census round For example: (i) the n Group on Statistical Training and Human Resources AGROST and (ii) the UNESCAP Working Group on the Coordination of Statistical Training. See UNSD (2 November 2011), Progression of the Census Round 2010, 23

25 Figure 2: Financial Support Committed, by Statistical Categories Commitments (US$ thousands) 1,200 1, Demographic and social statistics 2 Economics statistics 40 3 Environment and multi-domain statistics General statistical items and methodology of data collection Strategic and managerial issues of official statistics at nat'l and int'l level 1,005 6 Multiple statistical areas 24

26 Table F: Commitments to 2010 Round of Population Census Recipient Providers Total (USD thousands) Bolivia World Bank 50,000 Rwanda UNFPA 28,912 Afghanistan EC 18,918 Albania EC 10,127 Chad EC, UNFPA, Switzerland 8,548 Bangladesh EC 5,570 Malawi UNFPA 3,140 Regional: SSA EC 2,885 Togo EC 2,849 Mali Canada 2,790 Sudan France 2,634 Bosnia and Herzegovina EC 2,532 Kosovo UK, EC 2,499 Solomon Islands UNFPA 2,200 Mozambique UNFPA 2,050 Regional: Latin America and Caribbean IADB, UK, UNFPA 2,038 El Salvador USA 813 Regional: Pacific UNFPA 794 Ghana Denmark 561 Kyrgyz Republic UK, UNFPA 547 Regional: Asia UNFPA 521 Papua New Guinea Australia 412 Bhutan World Bank 300 Regional: Europe and Central Asia UNECE, CISSTAT 240 Guatemala UNFPA 201 Sri Lanka UNFPA 112 South UNFPA 71 Philippines UNFPA 17 UNSD Grand Total 152,281 NB: Totals may not add due to rounding. 25

27 Trends Emerging across PRESS Rounds 33. PRESS 2011 marks the fourth round of this annual exercise; trends can now be drawn with greater confidence. Since the initial PRESS round in 2008, global estimated commitments have risen by more than 60% (from approximately US$ 1 billion to more than US$ 1.6 billion in the 2011 round) 24. Despite the end of a US$ 144M census project in Nigeria, global estimated commitments are up by nearly 2% from the previous round. The significant increase in global estimated commitments since the 2008 round may be due in part to an increased response rate of PRESS reporters (see section above on key findings by co-operation provider). Figure 3 shows the progression of global estimated commitments over the past four PRESS rounds. Figure 3: Comparison of Global Estimated Commitments Across PRESS Rounds US$ billions Period Covered by PRESS Round 34. Looking more closely at the numbers in the 2011 PRESS round, however, reveals that the individual years within this three-year cycle have experienced a roller coaster ride. Figure 4 shows that estimated commitments rose 12% between 2009 and 2010 then dropped 24% between 2010 and Readers who wish to compare these figures with those in previous rounds are warned that reporters often update figures from projects in previous years. The global estimated totals reported for 2010, for example, may differ in the 2010 and 2011 rounds. 24 Total commitments to active projects/programmes supported by providers of development co-operation in the 2011 PRESS round may cover a longer period than Aggregated financing totals should therefore be viewed cautiously. 26

28 Figure 4: Trend in Global Estimated Commitments over Past Three Years US$ millions Year 35. It should be noted that the s in Figure 4 refer only to estimated commitments during the years in question (and not, as with Figure 3 above, over the life of the projects). Nevertheless, the drop is considerable. 36. Furthermore, the share of aid to statistics relative to total Official Development Assistance (ODA) has declined. In the period , the share was 0.23% and in it had decreased to 0.19%. Disaggregated ODA figures that would allow the calculation of this percentage for 2010 and 2011 were not available at the time the present report was written; however, a recent OECD survey 25 suggests that most providers of development co-operation will increase aid over the coming three years, albeit at a reduced rate. Therefore, since the trend in support to statistics would appear to be downward (see Figure 4) and ODA figures over the next three years are expected to rise, the share of aid to statistics relative to total ODA is likely to sink even further in the future. 37. Since the PRESS 2008 round, the regional distribution of aid commitments to statistics has steadily shifted away from. While the n continent remains the region with the highest share of commitments (41% of global totals in PRESS 2011), its share has decreased steadily from the 2010 round (45%), 2009 round (52%), and 2008 round (59%). This change has primarily been to the benefit of the Asia-Pacific region, whose share has risen from 15% in the 2008 round, 17% in the 2009 round, 31% in the 2010 round, and finally a slight decline to 29% in the present round. All other regions have more or less levelled off. 38. Figures released in the 2010 round suggested that support to statistical development was becoming less concentrated. The 2008 round had seen the top 15 recipient countries combine to equal about 47% of total commitments worldwide and 67% of total country-specific commitments. In PRESS 2009, the top 15 accounted 25 OECD/DAC. April Development: Aid increases, but with worrying trends. OECD: Paris. 27

29 for only 39% and 58%, respectively, indicating a decrease in the concentration of support. The top 15 in PRESS 2010 accounted for 45% of global commitments and 48% of country-specific commitments, suggesting a slight uptick in concentration. In the present round, however, figures are approaching the highs recorded in the 2008 round: the top 15 received 45% of global commitments and 62% of country-specific commitments. The concentration of statistical support to a small number of aid darlings therefore remains quite high. Figure 5 illustrates the trend in the concentration of aid to statistics to the top 15 PRESS recipients over the four rounds. Figure 5: Trend in the Concentration of Aid to Statistics Percentage of commitments of top 15 PRESS recipients 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% % of global commitments % of country-specific commitments 67% 62% 58% 47% 45% 48% 45% 39% PRESS Round 39. Across all PRESS rounds, three providers of development co-operation (the European Commission, the United Kingdom, and the World Bank) have provided a significant share of global totals. However, their individual trends in the overall share are diverging. The European Commission s volume of support is decreasing (from US$ 342M in the 2008 round to US$ 246M in 2011) as is their percentage of global totals (34% in 2008 to 15% in 2011). The UK s volume is increasing (US$ 189M to US$ 259M) but its percentage is decreasing (19% to 16%), while the World Bank s volume (US$ 184M to US$ 366M) and percentage (18% to 22%) are both increasing. Collectively, the sum of the three institutions has dropped from the 2010 round in terms of volume (US$ to US$ 871.1) and share of overall commitments (61.8% to 53.4%). In conclusion, the individual situations are fluid whereas the three combined remain by far the main providers. Table G shows the progression of support from these top three providers and their share relative to global totals. 28

30 Table G: Comparison of Global Estimated Commitments from the Top Three Providers of Development Cooperation, Relative to Global Totals, Across PRESS Rounds Top Three Providers US$ M % of total US$ M % of total US$ M % of total US$ M World Bank % % % % United Kingdom % % % % European Commission / Eurostat % % % % Total of the Top Three % % % % Total Global Commitments 1, % 1, % 1, % 1, % NB: Totals may not add due to rounding. % of total 29

31 III. Alignment with NSDSs 40. In the 2010 PRESS round, PARIS21 used the opportunity provided by the then recently launched online questionnaire to insert an additional question on the alignment of aid with NSDSs. This same question appears in the 2011 iteration. The data collected through this question will be useful in monitoring progress in respecting the development effectiveness principle of alignment that is, the extent to which providers of development cooperation base their overall support on recipient countries national development strategies. 41. PRESS respondents are asked if each reported activity is aligned with the country s NSDS. In the 2010 round, 50% of responses confirmed that the supported activity was indeed aligned, 6% responded that it was not, and the remaining 44% answered that they did not know. In the 2011 round, 52% of projects were confirmed as being aligned with the country s NSDS. Only 3% of projects were reported as not being aligned with a statistical strategy, while for 27% of projects reporters did not know. For the remaining 18% of projects, no response was provided. 42. To understand these figures, one must refer to the recently updated NSDS status report 26, which shows that 85% of PRESS countries in are either implementing or designing an NSDS, 72% in Asia-Pacific, 56% in Latin America and the Caribbean, and 100% in Europe. 26 Available at : 30

32 METHODOLOGY ANNEXES Countries Covered in PRESS 2011 IDA Borrower Countries 1 Afghanistan 2 Angola 3 Armenia 4 Azerbaijan 5 Bangladesh 6 Benin 7 Bhutan 8 Bolivia 9 Bosnia and Herzegovina 10 Burkina Faso 11 Burundi 12 Cambodia 13 Cameroon 14 Cape Verde 15 Central n Republic 16 Chad 17 Comoros 18 Congo, Democratic Republic 19 Congo, Republic 20 Côte d Ivoire 21 Djibouti 22 Dominica 23 Eritrea 24 Ethiopia 25 Gambia, The 26 Georgia 27 Ghana 28 Grenada 29 Guinea 30 Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Honduras India Kenya Kiribati Kosovo Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Lesotho Liberia Madagascar Maldives Malawi Mali Mauritania Moldova Mongolia Mozambique Myanmar Nepal Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Pakistan Papua New Guinea Rwanda Samoa Sao Tome and Principe Senegal Sierra Leone Solomon Islands Somalia Sri Lanka St. Lucia St. Vinc. & Grenadines Sudan Tajikistan Tanzania Timor-Leste Togo Tonga Uganda Uzbekistan Vanuatu Vietnam Yemen, Republic Zambia Zimbabwe Lower Middle Income & Remaining n Countries 80 Albania 110 Seychelles 81 Algeria 111 South 82 Botswana 112 Swaziland 83 China 113 Syrian Arab Republic 84 Colombia 114 Thailand 85 Dominican Republic 115 Tunisia 86 Ecuador 116 Turkmenistan 87 Egypt 117 Tuvalu 88 El Salvador 118 Ukraine 89 Equatorial Guinea 90 Fiji 91 FYR Macedonia 92 Gabon 93 Guatemala 94 Indonesia 95 Iran, Islamic Republic. 96 Iraq 97 Jordan 98 Korea, DR 99 Libyan Arab Jamahiriya 100 Marshall Islands 101 Mauritius 102 Micronesia, Federated States 103 Morocco 104 Namibia 105 Niue 106 Palestinian Admin. Areas 107 Paraguay 108 Peru 109 Philippines Source: The definition for IDA borrowers is drawn from the World Bank ( as of November The definition for Lower Middle Income Countries (LMIC) is drawn from the OECD DAC list ( as of November NB: Not all countries listed above received support to their statistical systems during the reporting period. This document and all maps included herein are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. 31