Methodological notes on the Development Co-operation Profiles 2023
General point: unless otherwise stated, and except for data on official development assistance (ODA) allocation by sector, and ODA supporting gender equality, nutrition, disability, and environment objectives (whose figures refer to commitments), all figures in the profiles refer to gross bilateral disbursements. The term' DAC country average' refers to weighted averages of Development Assistance Committee (DAC) countries for the specific allocation. Allocations by the European Union institutions are excluded from this calculation. References to 'DAC average' (particularly in the context of the policy markers, discussed later in this note) include outflows from the European Union institutions in the calculation of the average. All of the data presented in the profiles is publicly available at: www.oecd.org/dac/financing-sustainable-development and effectivecooperation.org.
This annex describes the methodology and sources for: ODA grant equivalent methodology; financial instruments (grants and non-grants); untied ODA covered by the DAC Recommendation; Grant element of ODA; ODA for Ukraine; ODA for COVID19; allocations to multilateral organisations; Sustainable Development Goal focus; country programmable aid; in-donor refugee costs; bilateral ODA by type of expenditure; bilateral ODA by channel of delivery; bilateral ODA provided to civil society organisations; bilateral ODA unspecified/unallocated; ODA to least developed countries; support to fragile contexts; triangular co-operation; bilateral allocable aid; domestic resource mobilisation; Gender Equality Policy Marker; environment policy markers; ocean-related data; aid for trade; disability and nutrition markers; amounts mobilised from the private sector; ODA disbursed through government agencies; effectiveness of development co-operation; private development finance; Total Official Support for Sustainable Development (TOSSD). All methodologies and sources on ODA, except for TOSSD, described in the following sections are also applicable to the concept of private development finance used in the profiles of philanthropic foundations.
In 2014, members of the OECD's DAC decided to modernise the reporting of concessional loans by assessing their concessionality based on discount rates differentiated by income group and introducing a grant-equivalent system for calculating ODA figures. Instead of recording the actual flows of cash between a donor and recipient country, DAC members agreed that the headline figure for ODA would be based on the grant equivalents of aid loans, i.e. the "gift portion" of the loans, expressed as a monetary value. The grant equivalent methodology would provide a more realistic comparison of the effort involved in providing grants and loans and encourage the provision of grants and highly concessional (or soft) loans, especially to low-income countries.
In 2016, DAC members also decided to apply the grant equivalent measure to other non-grant instruments, such as equities and private sector instruments (PSI) to better reflect the donor effort involved. Whilst DAC members agreed on a methodology for counting the grant equivalent of bilateral sovereign loans and loans to multilateral institutions, in 2018 they only agreed on a provisional agreement for PSI. Pending more permanent directives, either contributions to Development Finance Institutions (DFIs) and other PSI vehicles may be counted at face value (using an institutional approach) or certain loans and equities made directly to private sector entities may be counted on a cash-flow basis (using an instrument approach), with any equity sale proceeds capped at the value of the original investment. The review of rules governing reporting of PSIs is on-going in 2022-23 to make it consistent with the grant equivalent measurement. Once agreed upon, it will result in finalising the implementation of past High-Level Meeting (HLM) decisions.
The switch to grant equivalent accounting of bilateral sovereign and multilateral loans took effect in 2019 with the publication of the preliminary 2018 ODA. This methodology has been used in subsequent publications of the Development Co-operation Profiles.
The new "grant equivalent" headline ODA figures are no longer comparable with the historical series on "cash basis". In the cash basis, the net capital flow over the lifetime of a loan is nil because repayments of principal are deducted when made; interest payments are not taken into account. In the grant equivalent method, both principal and interest payments are considered but discounted to the value they represent in today's money.
In order to be fully transparent, the OECD will continue to also publish ODA data on a cash basis, but not as the headline ODA figure to measure donors' performance in volume or as a percentage of gross national income (GNI).
In DAC statistics, financial instruments classified as grants comprise: grants, capital subscriptions, debt forgiveness, interest subsidies and other subsidies. Financial instruments classified as non-grants comprise loans, reimbursable grants, debt rescheduling, debt securities (bonds and asset-backed securities), mezzanine finance instruments, equity and shares in collective investment vehicles.
In December 2018, the DAC agreed to broaden the country coverage of the Recommendation on Untying ODA, initially limited to least developed countries and heavily indebted poor countries, to include also other low-income countries and those countries and territories classified by the World Bank as eligible for support only from the International Development Association (IDA-only). This decision took effect in January 2019. The Recommendation covers most forms of bilateral ODA, but excludes free-standing technical co-operation, while it was left up to members to decide whether they would untie food aid.
OECD (2019), DAC Recommendation on Untying Official Development Assistance, OECD Legal Instruments, Paris, https://one.oecd.org/document/DCD/DAC(2018)33/FINAL/en/pdf.
For further information, see: https://www.oecd.org/dac/financing-sustainable-development/development-finance-standards/untied-aid.htm.
The DAC Recommendation on Terms and Conditions of Aid (1978) invites DAC members to extend their ODA commitments with an average annual grant element of at least 86% overall. In addition, the average grant element for LDCs from a given provider should either be at least 86% to each least developed country over three years, or at least 90% annually for the least developed countries as a group.
For flows until and including 2017, the methodology for ODA eligibility of loans was based on a grant element with a single threshold (25%) and a single discount rate (10%). As of 2018 flows, the new methodology for ODA eligibility takes into account the income group of the recipient and uses different thresholds (45% for Least Developed Countries and Low income countries, 15% for Lower Middle Income Countries and, 10 for Upper Middle Income Countries) calculated with differentiated discount rates (respectively 9%, 7%, and 6%).
OECD (2021), DAC Recommendation on Terms and Conditions of Aid, OECD Legal Instruments, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/dac/DAC_Recommendation_on_terms_and_conditions_of_aid.pdf.
In their preliminary reporting on 2022 aid statistics, members reported on a memo item related to their bilateral net ODA to Ukraine in 2022, as well as an additional memo item on their bilateral humanitarian ODA to Ukraine. These estimates are preliminary and subject to revision in the release of the detailed aid statistics in December 2023.
Activities for COVID-19 are tracked in the Creditor Reporting System (CRS) through a health sector code (i.e. 12264 – COVID-19 control) and a keyword ("#COVID-19"). The sector code includes actions in immunisation, testing, pandemic prevention, treatment and post-recovery therapies. In contrast, the keyword captures providers' response to the pandemic across other sector and non-sector aid (e.g. humanitarian aid, budget support etc.).
The longstanding DAC rules allow for aid in kind to be reported as ODA. Vaccines count as in kind. To ensure consistency, transparency and comparability in ODA reporting, the OECD recommended that an average price of USD 6.66 per vaccine dose should be used in 2022 ODA (USD 6.72 in 2021 ODA), as determined by GAVI and aligned with the COVAX Facility. As safeguards, expired doses cannot be counted as ODA and donated doses are required to have a shelf life of a minimum of six months upon arrival in-country. For the sake of ODA integrity, members should verify the aggregate ODA figure reported for donations against their actual outlay in any given year and make a downward adjustment if needed, in order to not overstate their donations. Donations can be recorded in ODA disbursements when the beneficiary country has taken delivery of doses. Pledges should not be reported in ODA.
Not all OECD members have elected to report their excess COVID-19 vaccine supply donations as ODA.
This term refers to all funds channelled to and through multilateral organisations. It encompasses core contributions to multilateral organisations and earmarked resources channelled through multilateral organisations (also known as non-core resources or multi-bi funding).
Core contributions to multilateral organisations are resources transferred to multilateral organisations and that the governing boards of these organisations have the unqualified right to allocate as they see fit within limits prescribed by the organisation's mandate.
Earmarked contributions are resources channelled through multilateral organisations over which the donor retains some degree of control on decisions regarding the disposal of the funds. Such flows may be earmarked for a specific country, project, region, sector or theme, and they technically qualify as bilateral ODA.
Tightly earmarked contributions are resources strictly earmarked for specific use at the project level, leaving no, or limited flexibility to the recipient organisation on their allocation. These resources include contributions to project-type interventions (aid type C01 in the DAC/CRS list of codes), as well as contributions in terms of donor country personnel (aid type D01) and other technical assistance (aid type D02). [See the DAC/CRS List of codes: https://www.oecd.org/dac/financing-sustainable-development/development-finance-standards/dacandcrscodelists.htm]
Softly earmarked contributions are resources that are earmarked with a greater degree of flexibility. These resources include contributions to specific-purpose programmes and funds managed by implementing partners (aid type B03) and to basket funds/pooled funding (aid type B04).
The profiles provide an overview of both core and earmarked contributions to multilateral organisations in the section "ODA to and through the multilateral system" and delve into the features of earmarked funding in the section "Geographic and thematic focus of ODA".
The figure "Core and earmarked contributions to multilateral organisations" groups multilateral organisations by category. In particular, "UN Funds and Programs" includes the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), the United Nations Human Settlement Programme (UN Habitat), the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) and the World Food Programme (WFP).
For further information, see the methodological note on tracking development co-operation through international institutions in DAC statistics: https://www.oecd.org/dac/stats/tracking-flows-through-international-institutions.htm.
The Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) focus is a voluntary field reported in the Creditor Reporting System (CRS) for which reporting started from 2018 flows. Thus the reporting coverage might be incomplete. Up to 10 Sustainable Development Goals or targets can be reported against each individual aid activity in the CRS. The share of SDG-related aid is calculated as the sum of all bilateral ODA commitments marked for a specific SDG over the sum of all bilateral commitments. The figure "Sustainable Development Goal Focus" differentiates between the share of bilateral ODA marked against a single SDG and the share marked against two or more SDGs, visualising SDG overlaps. The portion of bilateral ODA reported as not contributing to any SDGs is visualised as "not marked". Given that activities can be simultaneously marked for more than one SDG, the sum of the shares of all SDGs is normally higher than 100%, and the shares from different SDGs should not be added up together. For more methodological information, please see: https://one.oecd.org/document/DCD/DAC/STAT(2018)41/REV1/en/pdf.
Country programmable aid (CPA) is a subset of gross bilateral ODA that tracks the proportion of ODA over which recipient countries have or could have a significant say. It reflects the amount of aid that involves a cross-border flow and is subject to multi-year planning at the country/regional level.
CPA is defined through exclusions by subtracting from total gross bilateral ODA activities that: 1) are inherently unpredictable (humanitarian aid and debt relief); 2) entail no cross-border flows (administrative costs, imputed student costs, promotion of development awareness, and costs related to research and refugees in donor countries); 3) do not form part of co-operation agreements between governments (food aid, aid from local governments, core funding to non-governmental organisations, ODA equity investments, aid through secondary agencies, and aid which is not allocable by country or region).
CPA is measured on a gross disbursement basis and does not net out loan repayments since these are not usually factored into country aid decisions. CPA is derived from the standard DAC and CRS databases.
Source: OECD (2021), "Country programmable aid (CPA)", OECD International Development Statistics (database), http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=CPA.
For further information, see: www.oecd.org/development/effectiveness/country programmableaidcpafrequentlyaskedquestions.htm.
A refugee is a person who is outside his/her home country because of a well-founded fear of persecution on account of his race, religion, nationality, social group or political opinion. Assistance to persons who have fled from their homes because of civil war or severe unrest may also be counted under this item.
Official sector expenditures for the sustenance of refugees in donor countries can be counted as ODA during the first twelve months of their stay. This includes payments for refugees' transport to the host country and temporary sustenance (food, shelter and training); these expenditures should not be allocated geographically. However, this item also includes expenditures for the voluntary resettlement of refugees in a developing country, allocated geographically according to the resettlement country. Expenditures on deportation or other forcible measures to repatriate refugees should not be counted as ODA. Amounts spent to promote the integration of refugees into the economy of the donor country, or resettle them elsewhere than in a developing country, are also excluded.
For further information, see: https://one.oecd.org/document/DCD/DAC/ STAT(2018)9/FINAL/en/pdf.
Because in-donor refugee costs are not allocated geographically, reporting these costs can increase the share of bilateral ODA that is not specified by country.
Humanitarian and food aid are based on data extracted from table DAC2a on ODA disbursements, column 216, which considers the whole humanitarian aid sector, including emergency food aid. Aid to non-governmental organisations (NGOs) includes ODA to NGOs only. Another is the residual between gross bilateral ODA and the other categories. See https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=TABLE2A.
The channel of delivery tracks bilateral funding channelled through multilateral organisations, NGOs, PPPs and other channels. It also distinguishes between public and private implementing partners. The channel of delivery is the first implementing partner. It is the entity that has the implementing responsibility over the funds and is normally linked to the extending agency by a contract or other binding agreement and is directly accountable to it. Where several levels of implementation are involved (e.g. when the extending agency hires a national implementer, which in turn may hire a local implementer), the first level of implementation is reported as the channel of delivery. The principal implementer (e.g. the entity receiving the most funding) is reported where activities have several implementers. In the case of loans, the borrower (i.e. the first entity outside the donor country that receives the funds) is reported.
Channels of delivery are identified by their codes. Titles and definitions for channel codes are available in DAC statistical reporting directives (e.g. multilateral organisations are coded in series 40000, universities, research institutes or think tanks are coded in series 50000.)
The most up-to-date version can be found in the list of codes, worksheet "channel-codes", available at http://www.oecd.org/dac/financing-sustainable-development/development-finance-standards/dacandcrscodelists.htm.
Public sector institutions include central, state or local government departments (e.g. municipalities) and public corporations in donor or recipient countries. Public corporations refer to corporations over which the government exercises control by owning more than half of the voting equity securities or otherwise controlling more than half of the equity holders' voting power; or through special legislation empowering the government to determine corporate policy or to appoint directors.
Private sector institutions include "for-profit" institutions, consultants and consultancy firms that do not meet the definition of a public sector institution (see above).
1. Donor-country based NGOs (Channel Code 22000): an NGO organised at the national level, based and operated either in the donor country or another donor country.
2. International NGOs (Channel Code 21000): an NGO organised on an international level. Some international NGOs may act as umbrella organisations with affiliations in several donor and/or recipient countries.
3. Developing country-based NGOs (Channel Code 23000): an NGO organised at the national level, based and operated in a developing (ODA-eligible country).
Some flows are reported as Undefined (Channel Code 20000): NGOs in this category are reported by the donor under the code 20000 in the DAC questionnaire by donors.
See the DAC/CRS List of codes: https://www.oecd.org/dac/financing-sustainable-development/development-finance-standards/dacandcrscodelists.htm.
Some activities may benefit several recipient countries. Regional projects and programmes are reportable under the most specific available "regional/multi-country" category (e.g. South of Sahara) and are not attributed to a specific recipient country.
The category "bilateral, unallocated" is used if an activity benefits several regions. It is also used for a number of activities undertaken in donor countries, such as administrative costs not included elsewhere.
ODA to least developed countries (LDCs) is presented in different manners. Bilateral flows reflect the funds a donor country provides to an aid-recipient country.
However, when calculating a donor's total ODA effort regarding the UN target for LDCs, an estimate needs to be made to impute aid by multilateral organisations back to the funders of those bodies, as well as regional amounts flagged as spent for LDCs. For more information on imputed multilateral flows, see: http://www.oecd.org/dac/financing-sustainable-development/development-finance-standards/oecdmethodologyforcalculatingimputedmultilateraloda.htm.
Support to fragile contexts corresponds to gross bilateral ODA to fragile contexts identified using the multidimensional model in OECD States of Fragility 2022.
For further information, see: https://doi.org/10.1787/c7fedf5e-en and http://www3.compareyourcountry.org/states-of-fragility/about/0/. The criteria used to define flows as benefitting the different pillars of the humanitarian-development-peace nexus may be found here: http://www3.compareyourcountry.org/states-of-fragility/about/0/.
These activities are where there are at least three partners and where three main roles can be identified as follows:
A beneficiary partner who has requested support to tackle a specific development challenge and which is an ODA-eligible country;
A pivotal partner who has relevant domestic experience of addressing the issue in a context similar to that of the beneficiary country and that shares its financial resources, knowledge and expertise; and
A facilitating partner that may help connect the other partners and supports the partnership financially and/or with technical expertise.
Partners may include countries (at national and sub-national levels), international organisations, civil society, private philanthropy, the private sector and academia. The pivotal partner is often an actor or institution from another developing country or the beneficiary's region.
Coded with Bi_Multi=8 in the CRS. Data from selected providers is provided by the Total Official Support for Sustainable Development (TOSSD) platform.
See the DAC/CRS list of codes: https://www.oecd.org/dac/financing-sustainable-development/development-finance-standards/dacandcrscodelists.htm.
Bilateral allocable aid is the basis of calculation used for all markers (gender equality, environmental, nutrition and disability markers). It covers bilateral ODA with types of aid A02 (sector budget support), B01 (core support to NGOs), B03 (specific funds managed by international organisation), B04 (pooled funding), C01 (projects), D01 (donor country personnel), D02 (other technical assistance) and E01 (scholarships).
See the DAC/CRS List of codes: https://www.oecd.org/dac/financing-sustainable-development/development-finance-standards/dacandcrscodelists.htm.
The figures on the amount of ODA that supports the mobilisation of domestic resources in developing countries come from the DAC/CRS database. This database contains detailed information on individual aid activities, including the purpose of aid. A purpose code (CRS code 15114) is used to identify domestic resource mobilisation-related activities. This code was established as an official purpose code in 2016.
Source: OECD (2021), "Creditor Reporting System: Aid activities", OECD International Development Statistics (database), https://doi.org/10.1787/data-00061-en.
The DAC Gender Equality Policy marker is a statistical instrument to measure aid focused on achieving gender equality and women's empowerment. Activities are classified as "principal" when gender equality is a primary objective, "significant" when gender equality is an important but secondary objective, or "not targeted". In the DCR country profiles of DAC and non-DAC providers, the basis of calculation is bilateral allocable, screened aid.
Gender marker statistics are only shown for donors with sufficiently high coverage –more than 50% of the donor's bilateral allocable aid is screened for the policy marker. Cross-country averages only take into account these donors.
Source: OECD (2019), "Aid projects targeting gender equality and women's empowerment (CRS)", OECD International Development Statistics (database), http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=GENDER.
Aid in support of the environment and the Rio Conventions encompasses activities marked with either the "aid to environment" marker or any of the four Rio markers: biodiversity, desertification, climate change mitigation and climate change adaptation. Aid focused on environmental issues as a principal objective includes only activities marked as "principal" by the "aid to environment" marker.
Aid focused on climate change overall comprises activities classified as "principal" or "significant" by either the climate change mitigation or adaptation marker; projects marked with both Rio markers are subtracted from the total to avoid double counting. Shares of aid targeting climate change mitigation and climate change adaptation specifically do not exclude this overlap; thus, the two should not be added together. More details are available at: http://www.oecd.org/dac/environment-development/rioconventions.htm.
The table "Performance against environment and Rio Markers" captures activities marked by each of the following markers: aid to environment, biodiversity, desertification, climate change mitigation and climate change adaptation. For climate change, the table presents data on aid supporting both mitigation and adaptation (i.e., activities marked with both the markers), only climate change mitigation (i.e., activities marked with the climate change mitigation marker, but not climate change adaptation) and only climate change adaptation (i.e., activities marked with the climate change adaptation marker, but not climate change mitigation). Since the same project may be marked for multiple markers, the figures for each marker should not be added, as this can cause double counting.
For the aforementioned statistics, the basis of calculation is either total bilateral allocable aid or screened bilateral allocable aid. The denominator is screened for bilateral allocable aid if the statistic is based on a single marker (e.g., only the biodiversity marker). If the statistic is based on a combination of multiple markers (e.g., both the climate change adaptation and mitigation marker), the denominator is total bilateral allocable aid. Environment and Rio marker statistics are only shown for donors with sufficiently high coverage – that is, more than 50% of the donor's bilateral allocable aid is screened for the marker. Cross-country averages only take into account these donors.
The figure "Climate and environmental focus by sector" presented in each provider profile nets out the overlaps between Rio and environment markers: it shows climate-related aid as a sub-category of total environmental aid; biodiversity and desertification are also included (either overlapping with climate-related aid or as additional – other – environmental aid) but not separately identified for the sake of readability of the figure. One activity can address several policy objectives at the same time. This reflects the fact that the three Rio conventions (targeting global environmental objectives) and local environmental objectives are mutually reinforcing. The same activity can, for example, be marked for climate change mitigation and biodiversity, or for biodiversity and desertification.
Source: OECD (2019), "Aid activities targeting global environmental objectives", OECD International Development Statistics (database), http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx? DataSetCode=RIOMARKERS.
As part of the OECD Sustainable Ocean for All initiative, the Development Co-operation Directorate has started to quantify and track global development finance supporting sustainable ocean economies in developing countries. Better ODA tracking in this area is an important step for (i) providing transparency and accountability for ODA spending contributing to sustainable ocean economies; (ii) fostering a common understanding, across development partners, of what activities can be considered sustainable; and (iii) identifying good practices and encouraging mutual learning across stakeholders.
The profiles present data on the "ODA for the Sustainable Ocean Economy" indicator, which identifies ocean conservation activities and support for ocean-based industries that integrate sustainability concerns. For instance, projects supporting mangrove restoration and projects on sustainable coastal tourism or fisheries would be captured. As part of the OECD Sustainable Ocean for All initiative, two more main indicators were developed:" ODA for the Ocean Economy" and "ODA for land-based activities that impact the ocean".
The full scope, sources and destinations of ocean-relevant ODA until 2020 are available on the Data Platform on Development Finance for the Sustainable Ocean Economy. Figures for 2021 will be made available on the platform in June 2023. The 2020 report Sustainable Ocean for All: Harnessing the Benefits of Sustainable Ocean Economies for Developing Countries provides a detailed analysis of ODA towards the ocean economy. The report also contains an extensive methodological note detailing how these figures have been calculated. Note that figures may differ slightly from those reported in last year's profiles due to the change in the base year for computing constant prices and possible revisions to CRS data.
According to the World Trade Organization (WTO) Task Force on Aid for Trade, projects and programmes are part of aid for trade if these activities have been identified as trade-related development priorities in the partner country's national development strategies. Furthermore, the WTO Task Force concluded that to measure aid-for-trade flows, the following categories should be included: technical assistance for trade policy and regulations, trade-related infrastructure, productive capacity building (including trade development), trade-related adjustment, and other trade-related needs.
The DAC/CRS database was recognised as the best available data source for tracking global aid-for-trade flows. CRS does not provide data that match exactly all of the above aid-for-trade categories. The CRS provides proxies under four headings: trade policy and regulations, trade-related adjustment, economic infrastructure and building productive capacity (they correspond to all purpose codes from categories 2**** and 3****, except 24050 and 32310). The CRS covers all ODA, but only those activities reported under the above four categories can be identified as aid for trade. It is not possible to distinguish activities in the context of "other trade-related needs". To estimate the volume of such "other" activities, donors would need to examine aid projects in sectors other than those considered so far – for example, in health and education – and indicate what share, if any, of these activities has an important trade component. A health programme, for instance, might permit increased trade from localities where the disease burden was previously a constraint on trade. Consequently, accurately monitoring aid for trade would require a comparison of the CRS data with donor and partner countries' self-assessments of their aid for trade.
Source: OECD (2021), "Creditor Reporting System: Aid activities", OECD International Development Statistics (database), https://doi.org/10.1787/data-00061-en. The full list of Aid for Trade purpose codes is published at www.oecd.org/dac/aft/OECD-Aid-for-Trade-sectors.xlsx.
The OECD Nutrition policy marker is a statistical measure that targets development co-operation activities intended to address malnutrition's immediate or underlying determinants. This can encompass a range of projects across various sectors, including maternal health, WASH and agriculture. A project is eligible for the nutrition policy marker if it is reported under the basic nutrition purpose code (12240) or contributes to a nutrition-sensitive outcome, and the project document includes an explicit nutrition objective or indicator.
Development co-operation activities can be marked as either principal or significant objective, not targeted or not screened. All projects under the purpose code 12240 "basic nutrition" are marked principal by default unless multiple purpose codes are used. All flows can be marked: ODA, OOF and philanthropic flows. All development co-operation activities can be marked, except for administrative costs and core contributions to multilateral institutions.
More information at Converged Statistical Reporting Directives for the Creditor Reporting System (CRS) and the Annual DAC Questionnaire –2023 update Annex 19: https://one.oecd.org/document/DCD/DAC/STAT(2023)9/ADD2/en/pdf
The OECD policy marker on inclusion and empowerment of persons with disabilities is a statistical measure that targets development co-operation activities classified as being inclusive of persons with disabilities when: a) they have a deliberate objective of ensuring that persons with disabilities are included, and able to share the benefits, on an equal basis to persons without disabilities; b) they contribute to promote, protect and ensure the full and equal enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms by all persons with disabilities, and promote respect for their inherent dignity in line with Art. 1 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities; or c) they support the ratification, implementation and/or monitoring of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Regarding the eligibility criteria, support to activities that contribute to respect, protection and fulfilment of the rights and inclusion of persons with disabilities through specific measures explicitly promoted in activity documentation which:
Promote and protect the equal enjoyment of all human rights by all persons with disabilities, and promote respect for their inherent dignity (Art. 1 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities).
Ensure empowerment and accessibility for persons with disabilities to the physical, social, economic and cultural environment, health and education, information and communication.
Promote social, economic or political inclusion of persons with disabilities; or develop or strengthen policies, legislation or institutions to support effective participation in society of persons with disabilities and/or their representative organisations.
Development co-operation activities can be marked as principal objective, significant objective, not targeted or not screened. All flows can be marked: ODA, OOF and philanthropic flows. All modalities can be marked, except for administrative costs and core contributions to multilateral organisations.
And the Converged Statistical Reporting Directives for the Creditor Reporting System (CRS) and the Annual DAC Questionnaire –2023 update Annex 19: https://one.oecd.org/document/DCD/DAC/STAT(2023)9/ADD2/en/pdf
In the OECD DAC statistics, mobilisation means the stimulation by specific financial mechanisms/interventions of additional resource flows for development. The methodologies for reporting on amounts mobilised are defined instrument by instrument (see Annex 6 of Addendum 1 to the DAC Reporting Directives). Overall, they reflect the principles of causality between private finance made available for a specific project and an official intervention, as well as pro-rated attribution to avoid double counting in cases where more than one official provider is involved in a project mobilising private finance. The amounts mobilised from the private sector cover all private finance mobilised by official development finance interventions regardless of the origin of the private funds (provider country, recipient country, third country). The objective of data collection by the OECD DAC on amounts mobilised from the private sector is two-fold: i) to improve data on the volume of resources made available to developing countries (recipient perspective); and ii) to valorise the use by the official sector of mechanisms with a mobilisation effect (provider perspective). Data are collected through the regular CRS data collection for the following financial instruments: syndicated loans, guarantees, shares in collective investment vehicles, direct investment in companies/project finance special purpose vehicles, credit lines and simple co-financing arrangements.
Private sector instruments (PSI) include non-grant instruments primarily used when working with the private sector, such as loans to the private sector, equity investments, mezzanine finance instruments, reimbursable grants and guarantees. Mostly extended by Development Finance Institutions (DFIs), PSI typically convey limited levels of concessionality. A review of the provisional reporting methods for PSI in ODA is on-going in 2022-23.
The Global Partnership monitoring is a partner country-led exercise to promote collective accountability in development co-operation through the lens of the four effectiveness principles: country ownership, focus on results, inclusive partnerships, transparency and mutual accountability. Detailed guidance on how to participate in the 2023-26 monitoring round is available here. The guidance also includes a detailed methodological note which explains how results are calculated.
Private Development Finance (PDF) includes cross-border transactions from the private sector having the promotion of the economic development and welfare of countries and territories included in the DAC List of ODA Recipients as their main objective, and which originate from foundations or other private organisations' own resources, notably endowment, donations from corporations and individuals (including high net worth individuals and crowdfunding), legacies, bequests, as well as income from royalties, investments (including government securities), dividends, lotteries and similar. More information can be found at http://www.oecd.org/development/financing-sustainable-development/development-finance-standards/beyond-oda-foundations.htm.
The data in the profiles of Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Indonesia, Mexico and Peru are based on the Total Official Support for Sustainable Development (TOSSD) statistical measure. TOSSD is an international standard for measuring resources to promote sustainable development in developing countries. It is designed to monitor all official resources flowing into developing countries for their sustainable development, but also private resources mobilised through official means. It also measures contributions to International Public Goods.
TOSSD data are organised in two pillars. Pillar I tracks cross-border flows to developing countries, while Pillar II tracks regional and global expenditures with substantial benefits to developing countries. In addition, amounts mobilised from the private sector are shown separately.
TOSSD adopts a recipient perspective, and data are based on gross disbursements. Further details, e.g. on the providers and amounts committed, are available in the data downloads (see http://tossd.online Browse Activities / Export Results). The methodology (TOSSD Reporting Instructions) is available at https://www.tossd.org/methodology/.
TOSSD sector data are collected using either CRS or ISIC sector classifications. A mapping enables to display the data according to both classifications, but note that this is approximate as some sectors cannot be easily mapped. Among the countries displayed in DCR profiles, Brazil reports using the ISIC sector classification. An analysis is shown in CRS using the abovementioned mapping for comparability purposes.
Data presented only include data that comply with the TOSSD Reporting Instructions. Therefore, these data may not reflect the entirety of a given provider's co-operation portfolio. Activities in non-recipient countries carried out by some providers in the framework of South-South Co-operation do not appear in the export feature of the TOSSD online visualisation tool nor in the total financial amounts displayed in the tool.
To know more about TOSSD classifications and methodology, please consult the TOSSD Reporting Instructions and the TOSSD code list available on www.TOSSD.org.