Development Co-operation Report

2074-7721 (online)
2074-773X (print)
Hide / Show Abstract

The annual report of the Chairman of the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC). It provides detailed statistics on and analysis of each member’s foreign aid programmes (offical development assistance - ODA) as well as an overview of trends and issues currently being discussed in the development community.

Also available in French, German
Development Co-operation Report 2013

Development Co-operation Report 2013

Ending Poverty You or your institution have access to this content

Click to Access:
  • PDF
  • ePUB
  • READ
05 Dec 2013
9789264220010 (EPUB) ; 9789264201019 (PDF) ;9789264200999(print)

Hide / Show Abstract

The Development Co-operation Report (DCR) 2013 explores what needs to be done to achieve rapid and sustainable progress in the global fight to reduce poverty. The world is on track to achieve the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) target of halving the proportion of people whose income is less than USD 1.25 a day. Nonetheless, we are far from achieving the overarching MDG goal of eradicating extreme poverty. While we have learned much about what works in terms of reducing poverty, “getting to zero” remains a challenge in the face of the intractable difficulties of reaching those mired in extreme poverty.

The report  focuses on the very poor and will set out, in concrete terms:
• The nature and dimensions of poverty today
• What development co-operation – and the global partnerships it supports – can do in the fight against poverty

The DCR 2013 will focus on the positive experiences of countries, highlighting policies and approaches that have worked.

loader image

Expand / Collapse Hide / Show all Abstracts Table of Contents

  • Mark Click to Access
  • Foreword

    Ending poverty is an international priority that cannot be put on the back burner. Although we have halved the proportion of people living in poverty, achieving the first Millennium Development Goal (MDG), our job is far from complete. Today, 1.2 billion people are still living in poverty. It is therefore critical that the global community take further steps by 2015 and beyond to achieve the overarching goal of eradicating poverty completely and enduringly: we must get to zero and stay there.

  • Acronyms and abbreviations
  • Editorial: We can, and must, end poverty

    Poverty has been a scourge since time immemorial. It is a continuing affront to our sensibilities, our moral principles, our very humanity. But it doesn’t have to be that way anymore. We live in an age of promise and opportunity, where technological advances, successful development experience and political will can be summoned to eliminate poverty – and in particular to end extreme poverty. Today, we can end poverty and free future generations from its devastating, tenacious grip.

  • Executive summary

    The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) galvanised political support for poverty reduction. The world has probably already met the MDG target of halving the share of the population living in extreme poverty (USD 1.25 per day). Yet progress towards the MDGs across countries, localities, population groups and gender has been uneven, reflecting a fundamental weakness in current approaches. As the United Nations and its partners shape a new global framework to take the place of the MDGs in 2015 (), they face the urgent challenge of ending poverty once and for all. As this Development Co-operation Report (DCR) makes clear, this will take more than business as usual.

  • Add to Marked List
  • Expand / Collapse Hide / Show all Abstracts Defining and measuring poverty

    • Mark Click to Access
    • What will it take to end extreme poverty?

      The world has probably met the first Millennium Development Goal (MDG) target: to halve the share of the population living in extreme poverty. Can the world now end extreme poverty by 2030? Using a range of scenarios based on economic growth and income inequality forecasts, the author shows that strong economic growth coupled with a fall in within-country inequality could end extreme poverty. If growth is weak and inequality is not tackled, however, extreme poverty could remain around 1.3 billion in 2030. Ending USD 1.25 per day poverty does not mean ending all poverty. Nutrition and health poverty, multidimensional poverty and higher poverty lines need to be considered as well. This is why providers of concessional funding should not concentrate attention solely on the poorest countries and should remember the “new bottom billion” in middle-income countries (MICs). A new system of country classification would help to address this challenge. The focus of development co-operation with MICs should be on: supporting economic growth that is equitable and addressing poverty reduction as a national distribution issue; co-financing global, regional and national public goods; ensuring that development and other OECD polices (on trade, migration and others) are coherent and mutually supportive; encouraging new modalities of finance, such as joint funding by traditional and new “donors” of programmes with benefits beyond borders (vaccination programmes, green infrastructure, etc.); and supporting the exchange of knowledge and experience on poverty reduction.

    • Is it time for a new international poverty measure?

      Since 1990, the World Bank and the United Nations have tracked global poverty trends using a common international poverty line – the so-called USD 1.25 per day line. This indicator has been helpful for comparing global poverty over time and for monitoring progress against key development targets such as the Millennium Development Goals. However, it appears to be reaching the limits of its usefulness and relevance. This is partly because of the increasing number of poor people in middle-income countries – where per capita consumption and national poverty lines are substantially above USD 1.25 per day. Other considerations also raise questions as to the appropriateness of this measure to reflect levels and trends in world poverty: the multiple dimensions of poverty, the disconnect between national and international poverty lines, comparability over time, the need to measure not only absolute, but also relative poverty, etc. As the world works towards a new set of international goals it will be critical to address and resolve these issues. This chapter supports a new approach for measuring global poverty that takes these weaknesses into account: an internationally co-ordinated national poverty measurement.

    • How to measure the many dimensions of poverty?

      Ending poverty measured by USD 1.25 per day is unlikely to mean the end of the many overlapping disadvantages faced by poor people, including malnutrition, poor sanitation, a lack of electricity, or ramshackle schools. Ending poverty means addressing its multiple dimensions. This chapter makes the case for a new headline indicator to measure progress towards eradicating poverty in its many dimensions. This indicator could be an adaptation of the Multidimensional Poverty Index, or MPI, that is already being used internationally in the Human Development Report (HDR) and by many countries around the world. The index combines ten indicators reflecting education, health and standards of living; experience in using it suggests that it would be a feasible indicator to complement an income-poverty measure. It would help to bring into view the overlooked poor and to unleash energies for ending other dimensions of poverty as well. This measure would inform, guide and monitor multidimensional poverty reduction policies, adding real value for policy makers. It would also help to monitor the degree to which economic growth is equitable and to show the important links between poverty and sustainability. Eradicating poverty as measured by this new multidimensional index would dismantle a critical mass of deprivations, achieving much more than eradicating USD 1.25 income poverty alone.

    • How do we get to zero on poverty – and stay there?

      Nearly half a billion people around the world are chronically poor. Chronically poor people are trapped in extreme poverty, which persists for many years and even across generations. Policy makers who really want to eliminate poverty for good need to design policies that not only get people out of poverty and vulnerability, but that also stop people slipping back into poverty, and that address the causes of chronic poverty. This includes paying serious attention to the large share of chronically poor who live in fragile states. Governments wishing to end chronic poverty need to offer social protection policies that provide an income floor for the chronically poor – as for example employment guarantees, social assistance schemes, conditional cash transfers, pensions, child and disability allowances, etc. They also need to undergo a root-and-branch re-orientation and reprioritisation of policies and programmes – especially in agriculture, education, energy and employment. And they need to clearly distinguish among policies to prevent impoverishment, help people escape poverty and address the root causes of poverty. Establishing a target for each of these trajectories would help to improve the quality of policies. What would such targets look like?Target 1: Increase and sustain escapes from poverty until extreme poverty is all but eliminated.Target 2: Reduce impoverishment to zero.Target 3: Reform institutions and eliminate social (including gender) discrimination, norms and inequalities that keep people poor.

    • Local solutions for measuring poverty in Bangladesh, Guatemala, Indonesia, Mexico and Uganda

      The previous four chapters in this DCR have offered a rich theoretical palette of ways of improving the definition and measurement of poverty, in its many forms. In this chapter, practitioners and policy makers from Africa, Asia and Latin America share practical examples of how some of these ideas have been put into practice. They have helped to identify the vulnerable across a range of poverty dimensions in Mexico; pin down and tackle specific deprivations through participatory approaches in Indonesia; and gauge women’s empowerment – from the women’s point of view – in Bangladesh, Guatemala and Uganda.

    • Add to Marked List
  • Expand / Collapse Hide / Show all Abstracts Policies that tackle poverty

    • Mark Click to Access
    • How are countries using social protection to benefit the poor?

      A decade ago, the notion that social protection would promote economic growth was sometimes dismissed as fantasy. Yet today the World Bank describes social protection as investment, and economists around the world are building credible evidence that rigorously links social protection to economic growth. This chapter looks at the role of social protection in countries ranging from Bangladesh to Zambia that have made dramatic advances in reducing poverty in all its facets. It outlines what social protection encompasses, focusing on three areas of innovation: universal rights-based approaches; designing social protection so that it triggers broader development; and holistic policy frameworks that integrate social protection into national development plans. It describes mounting evidence of how social protection promotes skills development and productive investments, strengthens households’ capacity to take productive risks, boosts livelihoods and employment, increases national economic resilience, builds social cohesion and allows the poor to reap the benefits of economic reforms.

    • What are the politics of poverty?

      Brazil has experienced a quiet revolution in recent years. Between 2001 and 2011, GDP per capita increased by 29% and the poorest 20% of people saw their income grow seven times as fast as the top 20%. Brazil also reduced by half the number of people living in poverty – in half the time expected. In this chapter, the man at the helm of this remarkable transformation – Luis Ignacio Lula da Silva – explains how this was enabled by a democratic decision to put social policy at the heart of the country’s development strategy. The flagship Bolsa Família (Family Stipend) programme transferred cash to low-income households in exchange for enrolling children in school and ensuring regular medical check-ups and vaccinations (conditional cash transfers). The programme has benefitted an entire generation by helping to break the vicious circle of poverty. The country is now focusing on the last bastion of poverty – the extreme poor – through the strategy called Brazil Without Extreme Poverty Plan. Brazil’s move to reshape its development shows how aligning social and economic policies, transferring cash to poor families (97% to women) and offering public services to those who most need them can have multiple benefits, but that courage and determination are required in choosing such a path.

    • What can Africa learn from China's agricultural miracle?

      Although many sub-Saharan African countries have seen notable economic growth recently, this has not always translated into good poverty reduction rates. This chapter shows how China’s dramatic poverty reduction was largely driven by growth in smallholder farming, teasing out possible lessons for Africa. The Chinese experience underlines the importance of focusing on effective agricultural growth as a means of poverty reduction in countries where most people live in rural areas, as is the case in many African countries. The author cautions, however, against encouraging poor people to move off the land and out of agriculture before they have increased their incomes, as this can trap them in poverty. Instead, policies should promote high growth in agricultural productivity – particularly in basic food crops – coupled with diversification to enable the large farming population to generate a surplus, offer lower food prices for consumers and reduce the costs of industrial and service-sector development. The growing agricultural sector provides raw materials, capital and markets for manufacturing and other sectors that stimulate broader economic development and growth in off-farm employment; this, in turn, helps absorb surplus labour from agriculture. The challenge for Africa will be to avoid some of the negative by-products of the Chinese experience, which include environmental damage and growing inequity between rural and urban areas.

    • What works on the ground to end poverty?

      How do the poor perceive poverty, and what can we learn from the poor about the type of development that works to overcome poverty? This chapter explores these two questions through a review of the poverty literature and four case studies of development projects (in Ethiopia, India and Tanzania). The studies highlight the many facets of poverty as understood by the poor; they emphasise clear linkages between economic deprivation and the non-economic dimensions of poverty, such as poor health, access to education, lack of dignity and participation in village matters. Succesful projects shared the following features: grassroots participation ownership and empowerment, social policy frameworks, a pro-development agenda and a functioning institutional infrastructure for public services – including service delivery systems accessible to poor people.

    • Local solutions for tackling poverty in Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Sri Lanka, Uganda and Viet Nam

      This chapter brings together stories from Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Sri Lanka, Uganda and Viet Nam relating approaches, ideas and policies that have had measurable impact on reducing poverty. Numerous themes emerge: participatory processes are a powerful force for development (Dominican Republic and Viet Nam); adding value to farmers’ production pays dividends – in the form of jobs and income – across rural communities (Dominican Republic, Uganda and Viet Nam); egalitarian social protection policies can help reduce poverty and ensure a minimum standard of living for all (Sri Lanka); and getting the incentives right can protect nature and biodiversity, mitigate climate change, and at the same time promote rural development and alleviate poverty (Costa Rica).

    • Add to Marked List
  • Expand / Collapse Hide / Show all Abstracts A new framework for ending poverty

    • Mark Click to Access
    • The United Nations High-Level Panel's vision for ending poverty

      In May 2013, a High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons delivered to the UN its vision of what a new development framework could look like once the Millennium Development Goals expire in 2015. This chapter summarises this vision, which retains poverty as the central focus. The approach it takes has four dimensions:1. end poverty in all its forms (multidimensional poverty);2. end poverty not only where it is easiest to do so, but also where it is hardest to make progress (by having both a global goal and targets that are set nationally);3. address inequality of opportunities (by disaggregating indicators according to income, gender, location, age, disabilities and social group; and by agreeing that a target is only considered to be achieved if it is met for all relevant income and social groups);4. pay attention to vulnerabilities and resilience.In order to make reductions in poverty permanent, the authors stress the need to not only fight the symptoms, but also the causes of poverty. They highlight the need to move away from charity-based poverty programmes to providing a level playing field of equal opportunity that gives every person the tools necessary to build a prosperous life without depriving future generations of their opportunities to do the same.

    • Delivering the vision of the Millennium Declaration

      Although the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) have been highly effective in raising public awareness and galvanising political support for ending poverty, they have not delivered the vision of the United Nations Millennium Declaration: globalisation as a positive force for all, based on ethical principles of solidarity, equality, dignity and respect for nature. The MDGs have a narrow scope, lack a strategic approach and do not foster new thinking. To live up to the promises of the Millennium Declaration and tackle key contemporaty challenges, the new international agenda should recapture the vision of the Millennium Declaration and its ethical commitments to shared values and human rights. To do so, it will need to encompass goals that can effectively communicate core aspirations, targets that facilitate monitoring and strategies for economic and social transformation.

    • Accelerating poverty reduction through global public goods

      Policy making needs to change so that we do not endlessly forget about the poor. How can we anchor concerns for ending poverty in governance systems, both nationally and internationally? This chapter outlines how providing global public goods (GPGs) – such as peace, a stable climate and freedom from communicable diseases – can contribute to ending poverty. The author argues that a focus on GPGs can strengthen people’s resilience to economic, climate and other shocks; help tap the opportunities presented by freely and universally available information and technology; ensure the public nature not only of consumption of GPGs, but also of their use and decision making about them; and build fairness into the international decision-making architecture. The author outlines some specific steps for achieving this, such as fitting GPGs into national and international governance systems; twinning GPGs and poverty concerns; refurbishing the toolbox of international co‑operation; and instilling smart sovereignty based on the recognition that fair – and poverty-focused – international co-operation is both a solution to many global challenges and the best way of meeting a country’s own, national interests.

    • Making international development co-operation smart enough to end poverty

      In the fast-evolving landscape of development financing, this chapter asks What role now for official development assistance? For many years, it has made a difference for millions of people all over the world – will this continue to be the case in the future given the economic crisis in Europe, the rise in private sector development finance, the growing reliance on domestic taxes to fuel development, and the strengthening role of co-operation among countries of the South? The answer to the question is yes, but only if aid gets smart: in other words if it’s effective, well-targeted (to the poorest countries and communities) and well co-ordinated. The author outlines key steps for making aid (official development assistance or ODA) smart enough to help the global community end poverty. These include ensuring that development assistance adapts nimbly and effectively to the needs, challenges and priorities that will define the post-2015 development framework; establishing a new development finance framework that brings together all the options provided by OECD countries – not only ODA; and holding each other accountable through an internationally recognised, open and transparent system to report on and publicise development financing efforts and the resources that actually flow to developing countries.

    • Sustaining the global momentum to end poverty

      This chapter presents key themes discussed at the OECD’s recent Global Forum on Development. It argues that the monitoring of progress against global averages masks impressive progress in many – especially African – countries. This could be better captured by using a two-level approach: global goals and national targets. The chapter also highlights the need to consider both income and non-income dimensions of poverty, as well as a broader range of people than those falling below a defined income threshold. The chapter calls for linking poverty and inequality, integrating poverty with environmental objectives, strengthening multidimensional measures, developing statistical capacity and improving development co-operation and finance. Clear messages and measures that better reflect current understanding of poverty will help sustain global momentum as well as national efforts to end poverty in all its forms.

    • Global approaches for building gender equality, empowerment, capacity and peace

      This chapter brings together five approaches to issues that will need to be addressed through international co-operation if we are to end poverty by 2030. All have implications for the post-2015 framework. To start with, the agenda for promoting the status of women needs to be much more ambitious than what is envisaged in the current MDG 3 goal. Global Approach 1 proposes a twin-track approach to gender equality: a standalone goal of gender equality and women’s empowerment; coupled with the explicit demarcation of gender gaps that need to be closed in all other goals and targets. Whichever poverty goals are ultimately selected in a post-2015 framework, they will need to be measured and monitored so that all can be held accountable. To take this seriously, PARIS21 argues that a global strategy for the development of statistics should be endorsed in parallel with the post-2015 framework (Global Approach 2). As official development assistance struggles to keep up with the growing needs of the South (), Chile’s support to poorer countries in its region offers an inspirational approach for a form of co-operation that remoulds the traditional donor-recipient relationship into a productive and long-lasting partnership among Southern countries (Global Approach 3). With half the world’s poor predicted to be living in fragile low and middle-income countries by 2015, getting to grips with poverty in these complicated settings will be essential; the post-2015 global development framework must recognise peace and the reduction of violence as foundations of poverty eradication (Global Approach 4). And last but not least, Global Approach 5 reminds us that getting anywhere near to ending poverty is an inherently political process. This challenges us to see poverty in terms of power and to understand how power shifts can be influenced by development cooperation agencies, political movements or civil society organisations.

    • Add to Marked List
  • Expand / Collapse Hide / Show all Abstracts Profiles of development co-operation providers

    • Mark Click to Access
    • Development Assistance Committee members' ODA performance in 2012

      According to preliminary data, in 2012 members of the Development Assistance Committee provided USD 125.9 billion in net official development assistance (ODA), representing 0.29% of their combined gross national income (GNI). This was a drop of 3.9% in real terms compared to 2011. Since 2010, the year it reached its peak, ODA has fallen by 6.0% in real terms. Disregarding 2007, which saw the end of exceptional debt relief operations, the fall in 2012 is the largest since 1997. This is also the first time since 1996-97 that ODA has fallen in two successive years. The financial crisis and euro zone turmoil led many governments to implement austerity measures and reduce their ODA budgets. Despite the current fiscal pressures, however, some countries have maintained or increased their ODA budgets in order to reach their set targets.

    • Australia

      Australia is among the few DAC members to increase ODA in 2012, having escaped the global economic and financial crises without a recession and being relatively unaffected by the current euro area turmoil. In 2012, Australia’s net ODA was USD 5.44 billion, a 10.4% increase in real terms over 2011 due to larger bilateral grants. Australia has kept the annual growth rate of its ODA at 9% since 2006.

    • Austria

      In 2012, Austria’s net ODA amounted to USD 1.11 billion. Compared to 2011, when Austrian ODA dropped in real terms by 14%, the 2012 ODA volume represents a 6.1% increase. This increase is mainly due to debt relief operations within sub-Saharan Africa.

    • Belgium

      In 2012, Belgium’s net ODA amounted to USD 2.30 billion. After sustained increases – of 15% annually on average – between 2008 and 2010, Belgium’s net ODA decreased in 2011 and continued to fall – by 13% in real terms – in 2012.

    • Canada

      Canada’s net ODA was USD 5.68 billion in 2012, making it the 6th largest DAC member in terms of volume. Following a 5% drop in 2011, Canada’s ODA increased in real terms by 4.1% in 2012 due to an increase in debt relief and its continued commitment to major regional initiatives.

    • Czech Republic

      In 2012, the Czech Republic’s ODA totalled USD 219 million, representing 0.12% of its GNI. While ODA increased in real terms by 2.7% between 2010 and 2011 – predominantly due to a rise in contributions to multilateral organisations – the Czech Republic’s ODA fell by 4.2% in 2012. All assistance was provided in the form of grants. The Czech Republic’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) stands by its EU commitment to meet the ODA/GNI target of 0.33%, but acknowledges that it will take longer than 2015.

    • Denmark

      In 2012, Denmark’s net ODA amounted to USD 2.72 billion. Compared to 2011, this figure is a real decrease of 1.8% and follows the 3% drop in 2010. The decrease in 2012 was mainly due to unforeseen events that affected disbursements of funds for specific development programmes. As for many DAC members, these are the first decreases after steady ODA increases – in the case of Denmark, by an average real annual rate of 2% between 2007 and 10.

    • European Union institutions

      In 2012, net disbursements by EU Institutions to partner countries and multilateral organisations were USD 17.57 billion, a 8% increase in real terms from the 2011 total of USD 17.39 billion, due essentially to an increase in loans.

    • Finland

      In 2012, Finland’s net ODA amounted to USD 1.32 billion. In real terms, this figure represents a slight decrease from 2011 (0.4%), making 2011 the second consecutive year that ODA decreased. Finnish ODA grew quickly between 2008 and 2009 at an average annual rate of 12% in real terms, but it started to slow down in 2010.

    • France

      In 2012, France’s net official development assistance (ODA) amounted to USD 12.1 billion, a 0.8% decrease from 2011. The ratio of ODA to gross national income was unchanged at 0.46% in 2011 and 2012, but below the level reached in 2010 (0.50%). France projects that ODA will rise to EUR 10.9 billion, or 0.48% of GNI, in 2015. The government has announced that the upward trend towards 0.7% of GNI would resume as soon as growth was restored in France.

    • Germany

      In 2011, Germany’s ODA was USD 13.11 billion, making it the third largest DAC member in terms of volume. This 0.7% decrease in real terms from 2010 is due to reduced contributions to multilateral institutions.

    • Greece

      In 2012, Greece’s net ODA amounted to USD 324 million, down from USD 425 million in 2011. This 17% decrease in real terms is a direct consequence of the country’s severe economic crisis. Greek ODA did increase in 2007 (+5%) and 2008 (+27%) before starting to decline in 2009 (–13%).

    • Iceland

      In 2012, Iceland’s net ODA was USD 26 million, representing 0.22% of its GNI or a 5.7% increase in real terms from 2011. This was the first increase after three consecutive years of decreasing net ODA.

    • Ireland

      Ireland’s ODA in 2012 was USD 809 million, a 5.8% decrease in real terms from 2011. Although Ireland increased its ODA in 2007 and 2008 (by 6% and 8% respectively), it had to cut ODA by 18% in 2009 due to the onset of the economic crisis in 2008; ODA has continued to decrease since then.

    • Italy

      In 2012, Italy’s net ODA amounted to USD 2.64 billion. This 34.7% decrease in real terms from 2011 is mostly due to lower levels of ODA to refugees arriving from North Africa and reduced debt relief grants, which temporarily increased Italian ODA by 36% between 2010 and 2011. Overall, Italian ODA has fluctuated between 2006 and 2012.

    • Japan

      In 2012, Japan’s net ODA amounted to USD 10.49 billion, a 2.1% decrease in real terms from 2011, largely due to a fall in bilateral grants and reduced contributions to international organisations. This reduction was, however, kept at a low level thanks to a 7% increase in bilateral ODA.

    • Korea

      In 2012, Korea’s net ODA amounted to USD 1.55 billion, a 17.6% increase in real terms from 2011. This is due to the overall scaling up of its development co-operation to achieve an ODA/GNI ratio of 0.25% by 2015.

    • Luxembourg

      In 2012, Luxembourg’s net ODA amounted to USD 432 million at current prices, a 9.8% increase in real terms from USD 409 million in 2011. This was due to an increase in bilateral grants, and follows two years of decrease in real terms. Luxembourg’s ODA volume is now nearly back at 2009 levels.

    • Netherlands

      In 2012, the Netherlands’s net ODA stood at USD 5.5 billion, a 6.6% decrease in real terms from 2011 due to overall budget cuts. This is the second successive year of cuts to the Netherlands’ ODA budget; ODA also decreased by 6.4% between 2010 and 2011.

    • New Zealand

      After the ODA decreases of 2009-10, in 2012 New Zealand continued the ODA growth trend initiated in 2011, reaching a net ODA volume of USD 455 million, up from USD 424 million in the previous year. In real terms, New Zealand’s ODA increased by 3% between 2011 and 2012, reflecting the commitment to reach the ODA target of USD 600 million.

    • Norway

      In 2012, Norway’s net ODA amounted to USD 4.75 billion, placing it as the tenth largest DAC donor. After two years of declining net ODA, Norway’s ODA saw a 0.4% growth in real terms between 2011 and 2012.

    • Portugal

      In 2012, Portugal’s net ODA totalled USD 567 million, a 13.1% decrease compared to 2011 and a deepening of the 3% decline recorded in 2011. Between 2008 and 2010, net ODA fluctuated from +23% in 2008 to –15% in 2009 to +32% in 2010 (all of which are year-on-year variations).

    • Spain

      In 2012, Spain’s net ODA amounted to USD 1.95 billion, a 50% decrease in real terms from 2011 and the largest percentage decrease in ODA of any DAC member for that year. The global economic crisis and its aftermath have caused severe cuts in Spain’s ODA budget. Spain’s ODA has been in decline since 2009, averaging at an annual rate of –23% between 2009 and 2012. Spain had significantly scaled up its ODA between 2006 and 2008, with average annual increases of nearly 22% in real terms.

    • Sweden

      In 2012, Sweden’s net ODA amounted to USD 5.24 billion, a 3.4% decrease in real terms since 2011. This was due to reduced capital subscriptions to international organisations, although cash disbursements to these organisations increased. The budget for Swedish ODA is linked to the country’s gross national income (GNI) – in line with its commitment to provide 1% of its GNI to ODA – and has fluctuated in recent years as a result of this linkage.

    • Switzerland

      In 2012, Switzerland’s net ODA amounted to USD 3.02 billion, a 4.5% increase in real terms compared to 2011. Switzerland is one of the few DAC members that have not recorded a contraction of ODA in both 2011 and 2012. These increases reflect Switzerland’s efforts to scale up its development co-operation in order to reach the target of 0.5% of GNI by 2015.

    • United Kingdom

      In 2012, the United Kingdom’s net ODA amounted to USD 13.66 billion, a 2.2% drop in real terms from the 2011 level. This followed the 1% decrease recorded in 2011. Firm budget allocations were put into place, however, to ensure that the ODA to GNI ratio reached 0.56% in 2012 and 0.7% from 2013 onwards.

    • United States

      In 2012, the United States’ net ODA amounted to USD 30.46 billion at current prices, a 2.8% drop in real terms that followed the 1% decrease recorded in 2011. The 2012 fall is mainly due to a reduction in bilateral net debt relief compared to 2011. As a result, ODA as a share of GNI also fell from 0.20% in 2011 to 0.19% in 2012.

    • Add to Marked List
  • Mark Click to Access
  • OECD DAC peer reviews

    In 2012, Finland adopted a new development policy that built on Finnish expertise and emphasised a human rights-based approach to development. The strengths of Finland’s development co-operation include longstanding priorities, openness to dialogue with a broad range of stakeholders, and good co-operation and division of labour with other donors. Finland is also a strong international advocate of human rights, the environment, policy coherence for development and aid effectiveness. It is seen as a constructive partner within the development co-operation and humanitarian communities, and in its partner countries.

  • Notes on other OECD providers of development co-operation

    The OECD currently has 34 member countries, 25 of which are members of the DAC, as is the European Union. This section highlights the ODA flows from the nine OECD countries that are not DAC members: Chile, Estonia, Hungary, Israel, Mexico, Poland, the Slovak Republic, Slovenia and Turkey.

  • Notes on non-OECD providers of development co-operation

    This section provides information on the volumes and key features of the development co-operation of 18 countries that are not members of the OECD; 13 of these report their ODA flows to the OECD. Brazil, People’s Republic of China, India, Indonesia and South Africa – the OECD’s Key Partners – have been making important contributions to international development co-operation for many years. The figures in this section are based on official government reports, complemented by web-based research in the case of Brazil and Indonesia. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is the only private funding entity reporting to the OECD.

  • Statistical annex

    Net OOF flows were negative in 2000-01, 2003-04 and 2006-08.

  • Technical notes: Notes on definitions and measurement

    The coverage of the data presented in the Development Co-operation Report has changed in recent years. The main points are as follows.

  • Glossary of development terms

    (Cross-references are given in CAPITALS)

  • Add to Marked List
Visit the OECD web site