June 2020 DAC CSO dialogue


 June 4, 2020 | Virtual Dialogue


14h-16h30 Paris time


Background and Rationale

The overarching goal of the DAC-CSO dialogue is to offer CSOs a space to engage with and influence the DAC as well as for the DAC to leverage CSO knowledge, capabilities and their role as advocates for fighting poverty and promoting gender equality, inclusion and sustainable development. It fits within the broader DAC reform process, which prioritises increased “outreach to development actors beyond the DAC’s Membership to influence and be influenced” (strategic priority #4) and “increase[d] transparency” (strategic priority #5). 


As an integral aspect of the DAC reform process the DAC-CSO dialogue aims to achieve the following objectives: a) Facilitate interactions on issues related to the role of CSOs as development actors; b) Promote policy debate, consultation and exchange of information and experiences on DAC main reforms, policies and initiatives; c) Build relations and trust with a view to facilitate understanding, sharing of experiences and exchange on issues of mutual interest (DAC-CSO Dialogue Framework).


The second DAC-CSO Dialogue Meeting was held on 07 June 2019 at the OECD in Paris. It was chaired by DAC Chair Susanna Moorehead and co-organised with four DAC Delegates (Australia, the EU, Italy, and Ireland) with support from the OECD/DCD/FOR Civil Society Team. The DAC-CSO Dialogue Meeting brought together members of the DAC and approximately 30 representatives of CSOs and discussed the following: (1) Presentation of the DAC-CSO Reference Group; (2) Updates and discussions about the DAC’s agenda and priorities for 2019-2020 including opportunities for CSO engagement; (3) Progress made in implementing the DAC-CSO Dialogue Framework, and next steps to take this work forward and lastly (4); In-depth thematic and policy discussions on (a) Civic space; and (b) Engagement with the private sector. 



  1. Objectives, Target Outcomes
  1. Understand the DAC’s priorities and CSO opportunities for engagement in 2020 (including DAC Reform, Global Relations Strategy, and HLM agenda), ensuring inclusion of local CSO perspectives;
  2. Follow-up /seek clarity on and underscore the even greater importance of CSO calls/recommendations on some outstanding issues -  mainly  private sector instruments, peace and security, support for sustaining the Dialogue and the Reference Group, debt relief, development effectiveness, shrinking civic space, Nexus Recommendation implementation, ODA alignment with climate action, Guidance/Recommendation on CSOs.
  3. Get the DAC not just to support CSOs - both as advocacy actors and implementers - in Covid-19 response but also to (a) include CSOs in its planning, monitoring, and evaluation of immediate response and long-term development strategies, and (b) provide capacity development to CSOs given the necessary adjustments to the “new normal”;
  4. Get the DAC to strongly position and take concrete measures to confront backlash in gender equality and women and girls’ rights in member countries and developing countries. (The backlash, as reported in several UN and UE reports and resolutions, has decreased the level of protection of women and girls and reduced access to their rights; a trend that could be used by Covid for deepening vulnerabilization and attacks by extremists and fundamentalists against gender commitments adopted by DAC and OECD members (gender approach, gender mainstreaming, women's empowerment, etc.)


  1. Agenda and Participants’ Tasks


Item 1:

2020 Priorities and opportunities for engagement

Notetaker: Diego Lopez, ITUC


Opening remarks by DAC Chair

DAC’s agenda for 2020 including Covid-19 response and HLM


Presentation by a CSO representative from the Reference Group

Overview of CSO priority areas of work in 2020

  • RG Intro and Overview of Thematic Priorities (2min, Lyn Pano)
  • Climate (3min, Rachel, CAN Europe) back-up: Jurg Staudenmann
  • Development Effectiveness (3min, Jiten, CRA Manipur/CPDE) back-up: Luca de Fraia 



Reactions from CSO representatives and DAC delegates

(Max. 10 interventions) = 5 CSO interventions of 3min each on 

-Private Sector (Jennifer Malonzo, IBON International) back-up: Matt Simonds

-DAC Reform (Asa Thomasson, Concord Sweden) back-up: Jorge Rivera

-Peace and Security (Sarah Torres, ROA-AP) back-up: Rochelle Porras

-Gender and PSEAH (Nurgul Dzhanaeva, FWNK) back-up: Rosabel Aguirregomezkorta

- (plus 1 non pre-selected intervention)


Remarks by DAC Chair and DCD Director



Item 2. Joint DAC-Paris Club Debt Relief Discussion

Notetaker: Riccardo Roba, ConcordEurope

Presentation by DCD


Discussion (2 interventions from DAC delegates and 3 CSO interventions max)

- Henry Morales/Marcela Browne, ROA-LAC back-up: _______

- Nerea Craviotto, Eurodad back-up: Rebekka Blomqvist

-Leo Atakpu, ANEEJ back-up: Martin Tsounkeu


Remarks by DAC Chair and DCD





Item :

Thematic discussion on how DAC members can support CSOs more effectively in response to Covid-19

Notetaker (for this up to the Closing): Riccardo Roba

Presentation by DCD

Drawing from the 2020 Study on DAC Members and Civil Society (FINAL STUDY)



Reactions from CSO reps and DAC delegates (Max. 10 interventions) 

-Martin Tsounkeu, ADIN back-up: Jiten Yumnam

-Shannon Kindornay, CCIC back-up: Julie Seghers

-Julie Seghers, Oxfam back-up: Masum 

-Monica Novillo, Coordinadora de la Mujer back-up: Rochelle Porras 5th/non-pre-identified speaker: Jahangir Masum, CDP; back-up: ______


Responses/comments by DCD


Remarks by DAC Chair and DCD Director



Item 4:

Closing remarks

Conclusions, takeaways, next steps

Coordinator of the DAC-CSO Reference Group


DCD Director 

03 min

DAC Chair



III. ANNOTATED AGENDA (as agreed with the DAC) with KEY Messages/Questions/Concerns or Issues you want the DAC to feedback on.  


Item 1


2020 Priorities and opportunities for engagement

Greet participants.

Provide an overview of zoom instructions and protocols for participation.

Hand over to the DAC Chair to share updates on theDAC priorities for 2020.

Moderator – Ana Fernandes


02 min.

Opening remarks by DAC Chair - DAC’s agenda for 2020 including Covid-19 response and HLM (10 min)

Welcome participants to the meeting. 

Commend the collaboration between the DAC and CSO Reference Group in jointly developing the programme for today’s DAC-CSO Dialogue Meeting with support from the DCD/FOR civil society team.

Acknowledge that due to the format of the dialogue this year, not all topics of mutual interest could be covered; these can nevertheless be addressed through other channels for dialogue and information sharing going forward.

Share a general update regarding the DAC’s agenda and priorities for 2020. Suggested inputs include:

- Covid-19. 

- Postponement of many important meetings including Tidewater. 

- The effects on ODA and the reversal of development gains. Interested to hear from CSOs on what they are doing, in countries and at the global level, to make the case for ODA and other financial flows in this crisis context. 

- The DAC HLM possible agenda topics focused on supporting Covid-19 recovery in developing countries, addressing: 

O ODA volumes and allocations and leveraging possibilities; the impact on poverty and inequality: building resilience and preparedness to future crises 

O Climate, the environment and biodiversity (including possibly SIDS).

O Development effectiveness and modernising the effectiveness narrative, including as relates to partnerships with CSOs. 

O Ending Sexual Exploitation, Abuse and Harassment; and  it would be good to hear today how CSOs are taking on board the PSEAH Recommendation’s pillars of prevention and response.

O Humanitarian-Development-Peace Nexus Recommendation. It will be interesting to learn the experience of DAC members such as on the need to step up sharing of nexus-related expectations and lessons with CSO partners, who also need to adopt a nexus approach.

- Other possible topics for HLM (Communiqué) e.g. debt relief/sustainability, outreach, private sector instruments and private sector engagement, and the DAC’s work with CSOs. 

- Reiteration regarding private sector instruments (see 5 May Chair and Director response to CSO RG).


DAC Chair


08 min.

Share information on some of the OECD/DCD Covid-19 related initiatives, e.g.2021-22 PWB; a survey of DAC members; series of policy briefs and papers.

Share other updates regarding the DCD’s work : 

- Implementation of DAC-CSO Dialogue Framework.

- Development of guidance notes on Blended Finance Principles and CoP-PFSD

- Revision of the peer review methodology.

- Forthcoming important publications including the DCR (which will focus on COVID-19 and global public goods)

DCD Director


02 min.

  Thank the DCD Director

  Invite Lyn Pano (Reality of Aid and CSO Reference Group Coordinator), Rachel Simon (Climate Action Network), and Jiten Yumnam (Center for Research and Advocacy Manipur) to present an overview of CSO priorities in 2020.

DAC Chair

Presentation by a CSO representative from the Reference Group - Overview of CSO priority areas of work in 2020 Sharing of CSO Priorities for 2020

Thank you Madam Chair and everyone for this Dialogue. Slide 1 shows a glimpse of our composition - quite diverse and with diverse priorities, but with the common aim of protecting the integrity of ODA, increasing its quantity and ensuring its development effectiveness.

Slide 2 shows our common priorities. On DAC Reform, we have co-planned with you Dialogues and increased Southern CSO participation. On TOSSD, we engaged the Task Force to ensure the new metric enhances transparency for the benefit of partner countries, and stand ready to engage the challenge of increased focus on non-concessional finance and global public goods. On IDRC and migration, we engaged the WP-Stat on donors’ reporting and are ready to engage the WG on eligibility of migration-related expenditures. On peace and security, we consistently sought involvement in drafting the Nexus Recommendation’s implementation roadmap. For the other issues, we’ve organized and participated in several webinars and consultations.

With Covid-19, we persevere in our development work plus covid response work but with more difficulty for lack of funds and further shrinking civic space – some of us even need to raise bail for colleagues and constituents arrested for joining relief operations, breaking the quarantine rule in search of food, or criticizing on social media our governments’ militaristic and profit-driven Covid response. For some, survival means farming with the peasants and selling produce at low prices to help both themselves and their communities (that’s why one colleague cannot join us today).  

We cannot emphasize more the need for ODA – now. Thanks for the assurance that you will strive to protect aid budgets. Given the urgency of the situation, we need you to be more proactive, more aggressive in raising the ambition and the profile of ODA in development finance -- to protect its integrity, to provide it as grants, and ensure its effectiveness in developing countries (not on global public goods).

Covid response should not risk or be confused with development, and shifting aid to certain sectors must only serve the people better. Overcoming Covid requires direct budget support not only for health systems, but for all social services, gender equality, human rights and environmental protection – for their neglect was what made us this vulnerable in the first place.

With global poverty rising for the first time this century, we cannot and mustn’t go back to normal where ODA targets were not met and didn’t go directly to the people of the developing world. While ODA isn’t the only and primary resource for development, we know how powerful a tool it can be in shaping developing countries’ future. We are committed to support you in realizing this potential. 

  • Focus on 2 priority themes that are currently on the table at the DAC (1 slide per topic, 3 minutes each): 

    • ODA and Climate (1 slide, 3 minutes): We have formed a thematic working group on climate, to focus on climate finance contributions and alignment all development cooperation with Paris Agreement; in March we gave CSO inputs/participation during the webinar on climate (which was merged with webinar on Devcoop Report); have contacted Environet for organizing a webinar; keen to engage further with the DAC now. 
    • We welcome the reports from the OECD in 2019 on climate action and development cooperation, and efforts to better align Agenda 2030 with the Paris Agreement, since climate-resilient pathways towards net zero are essential for achieving SDGs, sustainable energy access and poverty reduction goals. It is a critically important report for DAC members to take seriously and assess their current development policies and practices in light of its recommendations. Given on-going extreme weather and climate change is compounding pandemic and associated risks in developing countries, COVID-19 underscores need to support climate resilient recovery in developing countries.
    • Building on some issues highlighted in the report – 3 main recommendations:
      • Ending support for climate harmful activities, starting by phasing out fossil fuel finance. This would free up finance to support community adaptation efforts, which are sorely underfunded. How can we get there? A commitment/declaration from OECD DAC members this year to drive forward progress; in the long term reform of eligibility criteria to exclude support for fossil fuels, and other high carbon activities; particularly in a time of constrained ODA there can be no place for funding harmful activities in recovery; and urgently increase support for affected communities’ adaptation efforts
      • Robust and consistent methodologies for accounting climate finance needed to assess where and how much is actually being allocated to real Mitigation & Adaptation measures in the spirit of Paris/Rio’92 (net benefits on top of developmental outcomes), to prevent inflation of climate finance. How can we get there? The DAC could set up a work programme on improving and aligning the climate finance reporting criteria & policies for its members; providers should work to common standards in finance, data and infrastructure.
      • Mobilised finance – mainstreaming climate objectives. With the scale up of private finance and blending, more evaluation and assessment is needed as to how this can deliver on development and climate objectives. How can we get there? The DAC should develop dedicated guidance on climate mainstreaming in blended finance instruments, on how support can be conditioned to ensure it supports 1.5°C and long term net-zero pathways, adaptation goals, is properly governed by social and environmental safeguards, and to support smaller actors and CSOs towards these goals. 
      • More work needed on mobilizing new & additional climate finance - climate change represents a new challenge on top of development challenges, therefore climate finance should represent a net new and additional contribution on top of ODA.  It is crucial to maintain flows of grants-based finance, in particular for least developed countries, fragile states, and for building adaptation and resilience (which is barely attractive for private investors and thus particularly difficult to mobilise finance for). Alliance Sud – one of our group members - recent study shows 90% of the reported climate finance stems from Swiss Aid budget, moreover this favours middle income countries over least developed countries.
    • Development Effectiveness (1 slide, 3 minutes max):

DAC commitments for DE: CSOs would like to thank the DAC Chair and all members of DAC for the dialogue with CSOs and welcome the DAC’s renewed commitment on Development Effectiveness agenda as key component of realizing the 2030 Agenda, as affirmed in DAC HLM Communique 2017 (para 22) and GPEDC’s HLM at Nairobi (para 35-36) and SLM in New York in July 2020.

CSOs reaffirm the importance of Development Effectiveness Agenda – even more so at this time of shock ofCOVID 19 pandemic, that requires all resources to be spent in the most effective means. We express our expectation that DE will be high on the agenda in the upcoming DAC HLM in October next.

Lack of Progress /unfinished business:  We express our concern with slow progress in fulfilling key areas of Development Effectiveness commitments, viz, on use of country systems, untying aid, inclusive development partnerships, enabling environment for civil society etc, as confirmed in the progress report of 3rd monitoring rounds of GPEDC in 2019.

Undermining DE in DAC Reforms: We are also concerned the recent priority areas and DAC ODA modernization processes, viz, Private Sector Instruments, Blended Finance, security issues, climate change etc risk undermining development effectiveness principles, due to overt focus on private sector without clear safeguards. We are concerned donor responses to Covid-19 pandemic also risks undermining alignment and ownership principles of DE.

Affirmations / Recommendations:

•   DAC Working Group (informal) on DE: We welcome the establishment of the DAC informal Working Group on DE. We are keen to learn more about the process and the expectations related to the newly formed Working Group. CSOs would like to request for meaningful engagement with the working group on DE. We are keen to know more on the progress and efforts to ensure compliance of DAC members’ implementation of DE commitments.

•   We call on the DAC to advance Development Effectiveness in its ongoing process to adjust ODA reform to SDGs, climate change; specifically, on responses to COVID 19 pandemic. The statement of last GPEDC Steering Committee in April 2020should be factored in properly in the process.

•   We expect DAC to spearhead implementation of the DE commitments at GPEDC-HLM and DAC HLM and for members to uphold the importance of progress monitoring against Busan principles and the unfinished business.

•       We urge the DAC to uphold private sector accountability considering the Kampala Principles, country ownership, Human Rights based approach, and uphold enabling environment for CSOs.

•   Finally, CSOs also reaffirm our commitment to Development effectiveness has been upholding the Effectiveness agenda with efforts to adhere to the Istanbul Principles. 

CSO representative from the Reference Group

Lyn Pano, RG Coordinator; Rachel Simon, CAN Europe, Jiten         Manipurpost-covid-19


  Thank Lyn Pano, Rachel Simon, and Jiten Yumnam

  Open the floor for comments, questions, reactions (35 min.)

DAC Chair

Pre-selected delegates and CSOs will be called on by the moderator to intervene. The moderator will inform pre-selected discussants that they will have 3 minutes for their intervention. If there is remaining time, the moderator will open the floor for other questions (using the hand-raising function).

Discussant 1: DAC Delegate - Canada – Monika Vadeboncoeur (3 min. max)

Share remarks on behalf of the Informal Working Group on Effective Development Co-operation which is working on the effectiveness principles, including the Kampala Principles. Discussion on effectiveness at the HLM

Discussant 2: DAC Delegate – US – Christophe Tocco (3 min. max)

Share remarks on climate. 

US will continue to work on climate with partners, but there is no consensus in the DAC on limiting ODA for fossil fuels. US and others don't support this as they consider it is not based on the reality of developing countries and it is a colonial approach. There are concerns that China would benefit if DAC members were to limit the amount of ODA going to fossil fuels.

Discussant 3: DAC Delegate – EU – Philip Xenophon Pierros (3 min. max)

Share remarks on climate.

  • all suggestions of CSOs deserve serious consideration..

The climate crisis is the challenge of the century. Fight against climate change and development are interconnected and mutually supportive. We support the initiatives that are put forward with a caveat on the issues that some members have highlighted. EU initiatives on climate have a strong compelling business case.

Discussant 4: CSO representative -  Asa Thomasson, Concord Sweden (3 min. max.)

  Probe more into DAC’s support for the Dialogue Framework and the Reference Group.

  Express support for a DAC Recommendation on CSOs and the Reference Group’s keenness to be involved in its development.

  Feedback on the quality and effectiveness of dialogue with civil society as a key stakeholder on the different areas of DAC reform


We would like to thank the DAC, DAC Chair, and DCD for continued commitment to and understanding of the importance of a meaningful, systematic dialogue with key development stakeholders in the reform of the DAC.

  • (Good to hear the DAC Chair mention some important steps taken or about to be taken to further solidify the dialogue (mention 1-2 examples from her speech which previous CSO speakers have not yet mentioned))
  • A meaningful, systematic dialogue requires a lot of learning and testing dialogue approaches for us as CSOs and for DAC delegates, secretariat and DCD staff. Dialogue is a hard-learned craft, but when we get it right it creates such added values for all parties involved (better informed and more accountable service to people living in poverty). The increased number of consultations and webinars with civil society this year is noted as a positive expression of this.


Key principles for a meaningful dialogue, examples where we have seen such benefits: 

  • The engagement framework is structured and predictable (preferably planned well ahead of time for better content and representativeness.
  • CSOs have timely access to information and transparent access to documents (Critical in the discussions on Blended Finance and Impact Standards for CSO to prepare their inputs has been access to documents. In key negotiations such as PSI or Debt Relief the reference group has submitted recommendations, but there is no structured or transparent process yet.)
  • Consultations build on practical and enabling engagement modalities (mix of in-person meetings, written consultations, telconf and webinars) which is key to enable better outreach and make the process more inclusive.
  • Feedback on recommendations and experiences taken on board (in some consultation processes it has been very good to hear back from the Secretariat about which parts of the inputs received has been integrated or not and why.


Suggested next steps:

  • A Recommendation on CSOs/civic space - which the Reference Group strongly supports and appreciates the strong support of DAC members for this. Important time to strengthen strategies and capacity to work with civil society now that the strong role civil society plays in local communities all over the world has come across even stronger in the crisis. What would be the process and timeline for jointly developing this Recommendation? What will CSO participation look like?
  • Upcoming CSO engagement opportunities - Last year, ideas proposed for further consideration and discussion included co-creation of SLM & HLM agendas, having two DAC Dialogue meetings per year in advance of SLM or HLM to maximise influencing opportunities, and structuring engagement with DAC subsidiary bodies in a clearer way. What are the prospects for these? What are the prospects for a CSO observer seat in the WP-Stat (there is a request for CSOs sent in October 2019)?  
  • Continuing to develop the quality and effectiveness of the dialogue itself:

o   Timely and proactive sharing of documents ahead of key moments, such as the Nexus Recommendation Implementation Roadmap;

o   Clear feedback on which CSO inputs were adopted (which weren’t and why) from consultations such for the studies on how the DAC works with CSOs and Digital Transformation’s impact on Enabling Environment, and the consultations on blended finance and impact standards;

o   Ensuring that documents and consultations are made available in Spanish and French (colleagues who would like to contribute to the discussions are hampered by the language barrier)  

o   Last year the DAC Chair expressed DAC’s commitment to strengthen the Dialogue, and RG members also asked for support for the Reference Group. Can the DAC share the plans in regard to how the Dialogue will be resourced during this coming year and whether the DAC is considering support for the coordination of the RG itself?

Discussant 5: CSO representative - Jennifer del-Rosario Malonzo, IBON International (3 min. max.)

Raise the following points related to private finance:

o Considering the DAC’s reflections on channelling ODA to the private sector in the recent years and the vulnerability and inability of the public sector to respond to the pandemic, are there any changes in the DAC’s approach to partnering with the private sector and the amount of aid going to them?

o Question on where discussions on PSI are at and the possibility for negotiations to resume in 2021 and how CSOs will be included in those discussions towards finalising the temporary reporting measures.


ODA and private finance

·   We acknowledge that the private sector (PS) has a role to play in sustainable development, from providing decent jobs to paying the right taxes, to ensuring their operations are not climate-harmful, and so on. But we’re also well aware of their profit-oriented nature, the many cases of undesirable behaviour and negative impacts on communities, which is why PS engagement in development cooperation and ODA support to the PS need robust normative frameworks and compliance with strong safeguards and criteria.


·   As we’ve previously expressed (in letters and discussions), the inclusion of PSI in ODA without agreed implementation details is highly problematic, with risk of undermining the quality of ODA and its impact on addressing poverty and inequalities, as well as the credibility of OECD data. We stress the fundamental concessional character of ODA and that additionality (finance & development), while important, should never be a substitute for concessionality in determining ODA eligibility. As such, there remains a strong case for counting donor investments in PSI as Other Official Flows, rather than ODA. Going forward, we’d like to ask where discussions on PSI are at, will negotiations resume in 2021 and how will CSOs be included in those discussions towards finalising the temporary reporting measures?


·   Partnering with the PS should not overshadow support to the public sector. What the coronavirus pandemic has clearly shown us is the importance of strong public institutions and services, from healthcare to water supply and decent housing. In fact the pandemic reveals that many aspects of development cannot be delegated to the PS but must remain with public financing and control in order to ensure the people’s right to health and development. We thus look forward to a strong DAC leadership on further guidance and incentives for DAC members to prioritise and strengthen public systems. And perhaps we can hear about the DAC’s reflections on channelling ODA to the private sector in recent years and the vulnerability and inability of the public sector to cope and respond to the pandemic, are there any changes in the DAC’s approach to partnering with the private sector and the amount of aid going to them?


·   We are ready to hear your updates and also continue engaging in consultations, dialogue and debates. [Note that this bracketed part wasn’t said in the Dialogue, but just including it in the submission to DAC, anyway: We are keen to continue contributing to reflections at the DAC on PSI, Blended Finance Principles, Impact Standards for Financing Sustainable Development, etc. as we actively participate in the consultations and dialogues (also through the Community of Practice on Private Finance for Sustainable Development). For example, on the proposed Impact Standards, we have highlighted in the stakeholder consultations the primacy of human rights, democratic ownership, and transparency and accountability.]

 Discussant 6: DAC Delegate (Finland, Suvi Tuominen) (3 min. max)

    Share remarks on private finance/PSI.

  • update on PSI: a report was presented in the DAC meeting in February and there will be a discussion in the WP STAT meeting at the end of June. 
  • reflection on PS - we need to look at a variety of resources, we need to ensure accountability, transparency and devt objectives guide our work. we have tools, loans..different instruments for different purposes. dialogue is very crucial to achieve results. CSo role in challenging us and holding us accountable. 
  • can you share your experience about cooperation with PS, where do you see the opportunities and challenges…
  • CoP - its a form of dialogue; currently working on impact standards and guidelines of PF Principles; CSO input has been very valuable, take part in the future; omre structured participation - COP doesn’t have that, always different participants on case-by-case basis depending on the agenda
  • Kampala Principles…

Discussant 7: CSO representative Sarah Torres, ROA-AP (3 min. max.)

  Inquire into the status and timetable for implementing the Nexus Recommendation, the adherents to date, implications of the nexus on ODA budget.

  Request some info about updates on implementation of the UN Women, Peace and Security Agenda, previsions for 2020, especially when knowing that WPS Agenda has been left behind, as other programs and commitments, during COVID... leaving refugees, asylum seekers and migrants left behind.


Thank you for including the Nexus Recommendation as one of the DAC’s priorities. We share your position that  this health crisis must not overshadow our longer-term objectives and that coherence, joined-up programming, and international cooperation  is more important than ever. The pandemic (and responding to it) exposed how vulnerable conflict-affected, fragile states are across all sectors - from insufficient public health infrastructures to undemocratic governance systems - they’ve been harboring these long-standing problems even before COVID-19. It is also in conflict-affected, fragile states where migrants, refugees, women and children, and other marginalized sectors are most poor. And they’re heavily relying on humanitarian aid. But, we all know that conflict and fragility will only be addressed when we address political and economic drivers - the root causes - that impede people-centered development. With this context in mind, we have 5 key asks: 


  1. We ask the DAC to ensure the space and voice of the DAC-CSO Reference Group in the implementation and monitoring of the Recommendation following earlier commitments of the DAC and INCAF to work closely with the group.  For instance, which DAC members have started to implement  and how are they implementing nexus programs? What do nexus budgets look like? 
  2. Champion localized and contextualized programming. With increased support to, and not only through CSOs, local and national CSOs in partner countries will be able to propose and implement nexus programs better. The localization agenda has been long sought by CSOs working on the ground, but without institutional and financial support, CSOs are left to figure out how to make the nexus work. This becomes crucial with COVID in the picture - how can the nexus address the cross-sectoral issues of the pandemic? 
  3. Ensure that women and other vulnerable sectors’ needs, along with peace and security principles, are at the heart of any emergency and reconstruction response. For instance, how has the DAC contributed to the implementation and financing for the UN Security Council Resolution 1325, “Monitoring Women, Peace and Security Agenda”? 
  4. Prioritize and increase ODA for conflict prevention, which as the DAC reported, only at 2% last 2017. Preventing conflict means addressing the root causes of poverty and  inequality such as corporate capture of development, land and resource grabbing, and militarization, among others, as these lead to multidimensional crises.  
  5. Monitor how development actors, especially IFIs and the private sector, adhere to the nexus programming in accordance with development effectiveness principles and human rights standards. Consultations and grievance mechanisms must be put in place, and must be effective and efficient. Prior to COVID-19, IFIs and the private sector were already heavily criticized for enabling the corporate capture of development leading to worsening vulnerabilities related to climate, health, and displacement, for instance.  

Discussant 8: CSO representative - Nurgul Dzhanaeva, FWNK (3 min. max.)

  Ask and/comment on the DAC GenderNet work so far and plans in the run up to Beijing+25.

  Ask about plans on improvement of tracking the proportion of official development assistance (ODA) that is invested in the promotion of gender equality and the empowerment of women.

·       We would like to remind of the high Importance of adequate implementation with effective funding of and effective accountability for the Women’s Rights and Gender Equality commitments formulated in UN conventions, SDG, Beijing platform for action. The impacts of Covid-19, which are setting back gender justice and WR, and increasing risks of SEA, make this agenda all the more urgent.


·       THANK the DAC for their commitment to promote gender justice and to end SEAH. In particular, we recognize significance of the DAC Recommendation aimed to embody an ambitious standard to build systems best fit to prevent and respond to SEA and SH.

·       CSOs are committed to ending SEAH.

o   CSO’s have been working together in the sector, alongside UN agencies and key donors, to develop a multitude of resources – including training materials, awareness raising opportunities. For example, the CSO platform ICVA (International Council of Voluntary Agencies) has worked together with UNHCR to launch a PSEA outreach and communication Fund to provide rapid, targeted financial support to NGOs (1200 CSO applications received).

o   However, additional dedicated resourcing is still needed. Our ASK: Continued and further resourcing – in particular, to promote (i) GBV/SEA service provision; (ii) survivor-centred investigation capacity; and (iii)  effective monitoring.


·       How can we (DAC-CSO RG) and the DAC can move together

§  We encourage the DAC (through the work of the DAC GenderNet) to continue and improve funding, monitoring and coordination of DAC donors’ aid to gender equality in order to address effectively the needs of women and reducing gender gaps.

o   Regarding the next step for implementing the DAC SEA Recommendation:

§  Enhance Women`s and feminist organisations, including local ones,’s access to policy discussions at various levels related to planning, implementation and monitoring of the DAC Recommendation on PSEAH.

§  CSOs as active agents in PSEAH should be taken into account for monitoring the implementation.

§  Timely information sharing and collaboration on engagement of local WRO

A final request for the DAC: In light of the backlash in gender equality and women’s and girls’ rights we are seeing in many countries, the DAC should continue strongly championing the role of ODA to achieve gender justice and support women’s rights. We highly appreciate DAC positioning, in line with UN and EU institutions, defending gender policies and women`s and girls rights and make explicit the concrete measures to confront it as gender equality and gender mainstreaming are key principles and core values to the DAC.


CSO representatives and DAC delegates


35 min.


Moderation of discussion supported by Ana Fernandes


►   Thank DAC delegates and CSOs for their comments.

►   Welcome DAC Chair and DCD Director to provide some additional remarks.


Many of these conversations need to happen in another context - dedicated webinar or smaller groups. DCD, take note of the CSo inputs/requests. 

Moderator – Ana Fernandes

►   Share feedback on the main points raised by participants during the discussion, including:

ü  Opportunities/areas for consultation

ü  Issues raised by the DAC for CSOs to consider or take action on

ü  Issues raised by CSOs for the DAC to consider or take action on

Many of these conversations need to happen in another context - dedicated webinar or smaller groups. DCD, take note of the CSo inputs/requests.

DAC needs to be more persuasive on ODA levels (not aggressive), needs the voice of civil society. have not yet heard arguments that are not new in the current context. Want some good ideas from CSOs how we persuade people who do not see this as a priority.

Many of the suggestions on climate are extremely useful...critical issue is behavior change. --??-- most divisive...what can we do collectively to really change how developing countries tread low-carbon path that will support their need and the planet’s

DE - will have this in the HLM. Ministers get excited about DE technical issues. we need to frame this in a way that will excite political leaders. I want to hear about mutual accountability esp southern partners. it’s also contingent upon partner govts to promote mutual accountability. 

last intervention - DAC Chair personal commitment to promote women and girls rights. situation in the current crisis is even worse, so rest assured won’t give up on this. I’d really like to hear from CSOs what has changed in your organization.

DAC Chair


02 min.

►   Provide additional clarifications where needed.

 narrative about ODA and beyond, billions to trillions, Adis - facing huge test; upcoming data shows drop in remits, FDIs, DRM is higher than any potential drop in oda, so we have to protect oda but it’s not sufficient. it’s not a question of IF (for PS) but how. 

DCR will focus on global public goods, but also public debts (term not sufficiently accepted). we have a powerful opportunity now to better frame ..

ongoing consultation with CSOs already on PS (IS and BF principles)

WP Stat seat - will be discussed in June; 

Nexus - implementation will be part of peer reviews


Recomms require behavior change so not automatically implemented. 

Climate and Effectiveness - invite you to take a 2nd look on climate investment rules. no reason to revisit those, we are all in the same page. 

DCD Director


02 min.


Item 2


Joint DAC-Paris Club debt relief discussion

  Indicate the start of item 2 of the agenda: Joint DAC-Paris Club debt relief discussion.

  Invite Julia Benn from the DCDto take the floor.

Moderator – Ana Fernandes


01 min.

  Acknowledge the CSO RGLetter to the DAC on the Joint DAC/Paris Club meeting on debt relief.

    Share factual information on the latest developments, including an update about the process and timeline to-date and going forward.

 Introduction from DAC Chair:

-        Debt Relief discussion: not a new issue - since 2014.

-        Issue hugely technical: the compromise won’t be statistical but political (something that does not favour lending over granting, not disincentive debt relief).


Presentation by DCD: Julia Benn (OECD):

-        Background

o   HLM 2014 and its communique as starting point:

§  Agreed that changing ODA measurement system from net flows to risk-adjusted grant equivalents will also change the basis on which debt relief of ODA loans is reported;

§  Conclusion: existing rules for reporting debt relief should expire and replaced by new rules (in time for 2018 reporting, when new system is standard);

§  Agreement on cost of risk not to be double counted;

§  Need to encourage debt relief initiatives (ex. HIPC, …)

o   Why rules not agreed yet?

§  Process of revision debt relief rules longer than expected: DAC didn’t have agreement by publication of 2018 ODA.

§  After HLM 2014: DAC Sec worked on different proposals on treatment of debt relief in ODA, how grants equivalent would be calculated.

§  Main logic of several proposals was to make distinction between ODA claims and non-ODA claims. Only for ODA claim part there were more issues.

§  For non ODA claims: switch to grant equivalent not problematic so far.

§  For ODA claims: proposals try to work out 2 issues:

1.     No inflating ODA by double counting the cost of risk: risk-adjusted grant equivalent system takes risk into account up front granting greated ODA credit for loans to riskier countries.

2.     Avoid creating disiventices for reconstruction of debt: Paris club very concerned for possibility not to count any new ODA for debt relief of ODA claims

o   Rules not agreed yet because DAC members see it as single package.

o   Joint working group was set up à reason: on dev finance, need to put together expertise and energy to resolve issue of debt relief. Group planned regular discussions in spring (COVID19 didn’t allow). Last mtg in Feb: understanding common issues. Following technical mtg: looking at concrete proposals, excels, IT tools, etc. Mtg in May: how accounting ODA. Next mtg will be end of June/July.

-        State of current discussion:

o   Current proposals are based on comparison between new and original grant equivalent of ODA loan – ODA for debt relief would record additional concessionally involved in debt operation.

o   How to do calculations? Issues discussed in the group are:

1.     Time value: able to do it in time, reference dates, date of treatment; choice of discount rate.

2.     Ceiling, looking at pros and cons of having a ceiling in ODA report, no ODA inflation VS no introduce biases for bilateral negs.

3.     Loans committed before 2018: different treatment? Potential to apply different ones, as loans were not originally recorded on a grant equivalent basis.

-        Demand CSOs and initial feedback

o   From CS letter and initial feedback.

o   For loans granted after 2018, debt relief should not be counted as ODA, to avoid double counting, inflating ODA:

§  OECD concern: defend ODA integrity, credibility;

§  Debt relief of ODA: currently small share of ODA;

§  Need to reconcile views on double-counting + creating disincentives for debt reconstruction in multilateral framework (only count additional concessionality involved in debt operations; potential application of ceiling)

o   For loans before 2018, include as ODA only additional budgetary space, not full face-value on the loan:

§  work focusing on adjusting rules to grant equivalent system (no record of face value of loans)

o   Debt relief for non-ODA claims should not be reported as ODA:

§  Current discussions based on principle that debt relief of non-ODA claims counts as ODA. 

Julia Benn


08 min.


{PPT 2}

Pre-selected delegates and CSOs will be called on by the moderator to intervene. The moderator will inform pre-selected discussants that they will have 3 minutes for their intervention. If there is remaining time, the moderator will open the floor for other questions (using the hand-raising function).

Discussant 1: CSO representative (3 min. max.), Henry Morales and Marcela Browne, RoA-Latin America and Caribbean

Thank Ms. Julia Benn for the updates on latest developments in the negotiations with the Paris Club on how Debt Relief should be reported under the grant equivalent approach. And for the opportunity to discuss this subject as discussions with the Paris Club take place. In the months to come it is likely debt relief will become a more important aid modality:

  1. The donor community needs to ensure transparency around debt related issues (currently,  there is little information available on practices of lenders, including DAC members) and guarantee that new credits to developing countries are legitimate and their reimbursement sustainable, including debt restructurings or cancellations. 
  2. In the current context, it is a priority and an urgent need to grant debt relief to partner countries. Furthermore, in the current situation donor countries should reduce the levels of indebtedness of partner countries and avoid new debts, while looking for other types of funding that generate new and additional resources for partner countries that do not affect the capacity of partner countries to face the pandemic and its social and economic impacts.
  3. To avoid ‘aid inflation’, donors should exclude all debt relief on ODA loans from future ODA reporting. As a very minimum, they should fix the current system fault in the Grant Equivalent reporting which allows for debt relief to be double counted (loans previous to 2018).
  4.  Ahead of the negotiations with the Paris Club the DAC community needs to ensure: 
  • DAC members should ensure that the agreements made do not lead to double counting and/or the inflation of ODA figures;
  • DAC members should ensure non-ODA flows as loans should stay out of ODA;

In the midst of the Covid-19 crisis and the response to it, this is the time to scale-up ODA resources, in line with the international commitments taken, and mobilise genuine ODA in the form of grants. There is a risk that the results of this Paris Club discussion lead to a formula that inflates ODA levels, without bringing in new and fresh resources. 


Discussant 2: DAC Delegate – Norway – Hege Haaland (3 min. max.)

Thanks to the Sec for making and agreement and CSOs community.

  • Reaching an agreement on debt relief report is more urgent than ever, need to ensure rules are right.
  • All DAC members need to discuss internally and externally.
  • Matter very technical but also political. COVID19 gives opportunity.
  • NOR principled, flexible approach. Number of donors (inside and outside of the joint group) share concerns: integrity of ODA is at risk if rules allow double counting. any counting of additional ODA would violate HLM2014 agreements.
  • Appreciate ODA loans, important not to favourite loans over grants. Many strong political incentives on debt relief.
  • Be constructive and find common grounds. 

Discussant 3: CSO representative (3 min. max.) Nerea Craviotto

Thanks for the  information provided today on this very relevant discussion, this is much appreciated. Yet it is still difficult for us to properly engage in this discussion, first, we are still lacking access to the relevant documents, and second, because the 30 minutes today will not allow us to cover all the technical questions triggered by the presentation and thus a more detailed conversation.

Still sharing I would like to share some thoughts, our position is that the grant equivalent methodology includes already the eventuality of debt relief. Yet, we understand that for some members of the DAC it is important to still be able to report ODA should debt relief be granted, as an incentive to indeed grant it. But then we should at least acknowledge there will always be some level of “double counting” and thus what is critical here is to resolve the equation that ensures ODA integrity and the credibility of ODA statistics. Without further incentivising loans, versus grants.

The implications of the time value selected, the ceilings, can have huge implications in terms of double counting and the inflation of ODA - can you tell us more about those elements? How ODA reporting could be impacted? With the pressure of the Covid-19 context on debt relief it is important to fully understand what would be the implications for ODA integrity of one option versus another. Critical to understand those implications too will be to improve transparency on the terms and conditions of ODA loans, as was recommended in an OECD-DAC publication last week.

We also would like to better understand what is being discussed in terms of different treatment for loans previous to 2018, as those are currently the ones at higher risk of default.

Last, in the spirit of the DAC-CSO dialogue framework we would like to request a new opportunity to properly discuss debt relief, similar to the positive examples in the past with consultations with CSOs on the DAC ODA code on migration.


Discussant 4: DAC Delegate Japan– Yurie Komine(3 min. max.)

  • Debt relief one of most important discussion for Japan;
  • Concern about double counting: Japan agree to avoid double counting.
  • Rules must appropriately be determined: grants, loans and debt relief all equally important.

Discussant 5: CSO representative (3 min. max.) Leo Atakpu, ANEEJ / Martin Tsounkeu, ADIN


  • It has been a matter of high concern, even long before the COVID-19 outbreak that many developing countries are confronted with increasing and unbearable debt services. Debt unsustainability is a serious issue in Africa, which the pandemic has exacerbated. In fact, Sub-Saharan Africa is facing a sovereign debt crisis and many countries are borrowing to finance huge 2020 budget deficits in the social sector. Economic projections at the same time were foreseen to be the worst in 30 years.
  • The solutions provided by donors are most of the time too late and too weak. The recent G20 decision to provide a time-bound suspension on debt service payments for the poorest countries is welcome, just as steps taken by the IMF and the World Bank to provide liquidity and other support measures to ease the debt burden of developing countries. But all this is far too insufficient.  
  • The analysis of debt vulnerability should look beyond the present crisis, to reshape the ODA-Debt canvas, with the perspective of recreating the Domestic Resource Mobilization (DRM) capacity of developing countries. This reasonably places debt cancellation and ODA for DRM as the beginning of a long lasting solution, because rising debt payments by developing countries divert fiscal revenue and reduce amounts available for financing public goods and essential services, whereas, at all levels, health, economic and social institutions in Africa are already overstretched.
  • But as earlier stressed by Colleagues, addressing debt burden with debt relief or cancellation should not lead to inflated ODA volumes in the ODA accounting system. This could mean less ODA resources available for developing countries to tackle the crisis. Including debt relief as ODA risks distorting aid flows and creating bad incentives for donors. Accounting debt relief as ODA (in addition to what is already accounted upfront) incentivises loans. The share of loans in ODA for the most vulnerable countries has been increasing steadily over recent years, while the level of concessionality has been decreasing. Fixing the rules for accounting debt relief as ODA should also incentivise much-needed grants over loans.


  • Ask space for consultations, role of CSOs as watchdogs, calendar of negotiations and how they plan to engage CSOs. 
  • Update/status of implementation of principles on ensuring incentives only to responsible sustainable lending practices. What efforts have been done since last year? What role for CSOs?

Discussant 6: DAC Delegate – France - Stephane Cieniewsk (3 min. max.)

  • Support to Japan’s presentation
  • value of ODA, risk of incentivising loans, grants should be better incentivized, and concessional loans should not be accounted as ODA
  • France disagree with this, concessional loans, value for partner countries. Grant equivalent methodology very successful reform, more ODA generating,
  • France one of the greatest providers of concessional loans. grant eq accounting method is very good; we should not overestimate the danger of incentivising concessional loan. loan defaults lead to additional costs on donors.
  • Double counting: standaraised discount rate, need to recognize when default is coming, need to take that into account.

 DAC Chair - 

  • Nothing particularly new to create consensus from this discussion: some DAC members favour loans, some others grants. There’s a need broader discussion on counting. Fear of debt levels in developing countries will increase. Need to find ways to maximise fund flows.
  • Urge CSOs to talk to your colleagues in countries, DAC members in process of working on that position, arguments on both sides.
  • When looking at debt burden, a significant portion is not DAC member debt à need CSOs lobbying non-DAC members and borrowing gvts to make sure that set of rules are different between group of donors à need for common rules, real global response.

-If time allows, the DAC Delegate – UK - Hannah Binci, will be invited to take the floor.  

CSO representatives and DAC delegates




15 min.


►   Thank DAC delegates and CSOs for their comments.

►   Invite the DCD Directo, Julia Benn and Haje Schütteto provide some responses/remarks.


Moderator – Ana Fernandes

►   Acknowledge the key points raised and provide some overarching responses or clarification to questions posed.

DCD Director/Julia Benn/Haje Schütte


02 min.

►   Invite theDAC Chair to provide some additional remarks.

Moderator – Ana Fernandes

►   Provide additional comments on the main points raised, and when possible the DAC’s position vis-à-vis these points.

DAC Chair


02 min.

►   Announce 10 min. break.

►   Ask that participants remain connected (turn video off and unmute mics).

►   Indicate that the next session will begin at 15:40.

Moderator – Ana Fernandes


01 min.

Item 3


Thematic discussion on how DAC members can support CSOs more effectively in response to Covid-19 

  Welcome back participants to the meeting.

  Indicate the start of item 3 of the agenda: Thematic discussion on how DAC members can support CSOs more effectively in response to Covid-19.

  Invite Jacqueline Wood from DCDto take the floor.

Moderator – Ana Fernandes


01 min.

  Greet participants.

Point out that CSOs should be all the more enabled to play their role as key partners in tackling Covid-19 consequences.

Provide an overview of and some positive examples of policy and practice changes by DAC members to make their support for CSOs more effective in the Covid-19 context; changes by CSOs; civic space challenges.

Refer to the Development Assistance Committee Members and Civil Societystudy and that though the study was developed before the world was hit by the Covid-19 pandemic, the study’s action points remain highly relevant for DAC members to better work with CSOs in response to crises such as Covid-19.

  Link policy and practice changes to relevant action points in the Study.

Highlight how other action points in the study can contribute to promoting enabling environments for civil society in the Covid-19 response.

  Thank participants and welcome their reactions in the discussion.

Jacqueline Wood


07 min.


{PPT 3}

  Thank Jacqueline Wood for her intervention.

  Open the floor for comments, questions, reactions (35 min.)

DAC Chair


01 min.

Discussion on how DAC members can support CSOs more effectively in response to Covid-19

Discussant 1: CSO representative (3 min. max.) Martin Tsounkeu, ADIN - general comments on the Study, ODA and DAC work’s impact on developing countries

 Comments on the study: 

  • Welcome this work, and encourage the DAC to build on this Study to develop an OECD Recommendation, which would signal OECD members’ strong political support for a CSO enabling environment. This is deeply needed at a time of increasing clamp down on civic space across the world, now worsened by Covid (reference to Civicus’ new State of Civil Society Report 2020 which shows that before the pandemic struck, only three per cent of the world’s population lived in countries where the core civic freedoms of association, peaceful assembly and expression were widely respected)
  • Focus on 2 or 3 key points we particularly value in the study (and if relevant push even further?) - for example:
    • Consideration  of the fact that CSOs are both implementing partners and independent development actors in their own right. For a more fruitful partnership with Civil Society, it is important for the DAC to seriously factor that in their collaboration approach.  This means that donors should shift their preference from  instrumental towards institutional funding of CSOs. They should "co-create" their country strategies and interventions with input from local civil societies.
    • Importance of more support to southern-based organisations (DAC study shows only 7% of ODA going to CSOs goes directly to southern-based CSOs - although these flows are on the rise)
    • importance of more core support (reflecting on the current imbalance revealed by the Study between ODA ‘to’ CSOs (i.e. core support, only 15%) and ODA through CSOs (i.e. support for implementing programs, 85%). Covid-19 reveals how important core support is to allow for more flexibility etc. Core support is vital to achieve the goal DAC donors have set themselves to ‘strengthen a pluralistic and independent civil society’ 
  • In light of the covid crisis, many private foundation donors have demonstrated ability to implement quick changes in their support to CSOs (more flexibility, converting projects to general support, streamlining reporting and grants management), and have noted that they cannot foresee going back to the previous way of doing things. This shows that the kinds of changes CSOs are calling for are not theoretical but in light of covid are actually taking place in some parts of the donor landscape, and that DAC members should be keeping up not lagging behind.

Impact of ODA and DAC work in developing countries: we could shortly raise the point that it is important to consider supporting CSOs’ work with communities on self-assessment of ODA impact, referring to the 2030 Agenda, particularly about how people at the grassroots feel regarding SDGs’ achievement. This is in line with the idea that DAC members’ financial flows should be geared towards responding to CSOs priorities and strategies and promote enabling environment for CSOs.

Discussant 2: DAC Delegate Belgium - Pieter Vermaerke  (3 min. max)

  •  That has been presented is similar to what we know and have seen, and how to move forward
  • Strong in heath - responding to needs
  • In dialogue with CSO to see how we can integrate à flexible programming
  • Civic space is an area of concern
  • COVID is an accelerator of trends, and regarding shrinking space it is very worrying
  • However, there are new forms of activism. Opportunity for mobilization.
  • Conference in December: how can we strengthen work on shrinking space
  • A ‘whole of society’ approach →  look to more actors – social media platforms or parliament when it comes to questions on civic space
  • Human rights-based approach is key.

Discussant 3: CSO representative (3 min. max.) Shannon Kindornay - CCIC experience / good practice

In terms of the approaches CSOs have identified by donors in the COVID-19 response, we see a number of good practices emerging in the Canadian context. 

 •Dialogue with CSOs

    • There has been a robust dialogue with CSOs on Canada’s COVID response and the issues they face as partners. We have had two Town Halls with the Minister for International Development, roundtables on key dev issues continue,  senior and technical level Global Affairs Canada staff had made themselves available for webinars to discuss a range of issues, notably related to flexible funding, adaptive programming and streamlining administrative and financial requirements. Sector letters to the Minister have seen quick responses, and the department recently launched a survey of its partners to understand the financial and human resource implications of the crisis and inform their approach, with a promise to share back aggregate results to the sector. 
    • importantly, we are in the process of establishing a  COVID Engagement Forum. The Forum include  a Dialogue group consisting of 5 representative coalitions (4 CSO and 1 private sector) and GAC staff with decision making authority. This group identifies key challenges together, which then are sent to a ‘Solutions Team’ consisting of CSO, private sector and government experts to quickly resolve identified issues. We are in the early stages of setting this up, but hopeful that this model will facilitate collaborative problem-solving on key issues related to programming, reporting and contracting, among other issues
    • These are examples of good stakeholder engagement even in a difficult time - transparent communications with the sector, inclusion through diverse opportunities to engage with civil society, respect for the representative nature of coalition bodies and the formalization of an iterative, institutionalized engagement process.
  • We have yet to see specific allocation to civil society organizations, though I suspect our messaging regarding the critical role of civil society in reaching the furthest behind has been heard clearly.
  • At the highest level GAC has been directed to ensure flexibility with partners - in programming as well as administrative and financial requirements.  
  1. This has included Guidance on acceptable costs in light of pandemic and updated FAQ
    1. some examples: 
      1. reporting deadlines extended by 2 months
      2. flexibility for re allocations b/w budget lines, possibility to wave in-kind contributions (after exploring other options)

Where flexibility has not reached every partner and program, the COVID Engagement Forum offers us an important opportunity to continue discussing issues related to flexibility with the department and quickly finding solutions. 

Discussant 4: DAC Delegate Czech Republic – Gabriela Boiteux-Pilna   (3 min. max)

Discussant 5:  CSO representative (3 min. max.) - Julie Seghers, Oxfam - INGO experience

  • Cooperation with local CSO: it is crucial in crisis to reach most in need.
  • Local NGO har crucial here. We appreciate working to involve more local partners.
  • Engagement on private sector is also part of the work
  • Good cooperation: have a committee where all implementing partners meet. They all know each other from meeting in this committee and therefore easier to work together in crises like this.
  • Bring solutions from private sector and NGO knowledge of the culture and local context →  work better together.
  • In conclusion the wider partnership is the way forward. And can offer complex solutions and sustainable solutions together. 

Oxfam’s response to Covid-19. Rapid action, with our partners, to help protect the most vulnerable communities and to tackle the inequalities that have been deepened as a result of the crisis: 

  • Oxfam goal of a €100m coronavirus response program around the world, which we hope to achieve both through new programs & repurposing.
  • Programs: mobilizing our expertise in clean water, sanitation and public health promotion programs, on meeting food needs and on protection – since March we’ve reached over 4 million people in 55 countries. Feedback from our programs and partners point to urgent need for donor support to :  women’s rights organisations, tackling the looming food crisis and defending civic space.
  • Advocacy and campaigning: working to influence decision-makers on the immediate and longer-term responses to the crisis (e.g. on debt relief, or for free access to vaccines for all)

Impact of Covid-19 on Oxfam’s finances and ways of working. The pandemic has hit our finances hard, like many others in the sector (severe financial loss linked to closing of our charity shops, cancellation of fundraising events, etc). In response, we’ve had to:

  • Take immediate and temporary actions to reduce spending (incl. recruitment freeze, travel budget cuts, and voluntary salary cuts particularly by senior staff)
  • When the pandemic hit, we were in the process of reviewing our global strategy and presence to become more focused, impactful and sustainable. Covid has forced us to accelerate these changes:
    • Better tailor our work to specific local contexts: concentrate on delivery of humanitarian aid and support in poorer and more fragile countries; while in other countries concentrate on being part of and supporting local civil society’s efforts to influence the big decisions that affect local communities. This has also led to the tough decision – accelerated by Covid - to close 18 of our 66 country offices (phasing out will be gradual).
    • Working differently in the countries in which we will remain : shifting more decision-making power to our offices in the global south; further work through local partners wherever possible; efforts to rationalise and streamline our capacity and resources.

Discussant 6.DAC Delegate, UK Hannah Binci  

  • CSO is critical partner also through COVID
  • Communication effective with CSO – informed by their expertise
  • DFID set up 7 working group with CSO to ensure cooperation
  • Donor need to be flexible and DFID has worked on the funding flexibility 
  • Donor should ensure resilience in the sector
  • It is not a time to abandon focus on the commitment to CSO 
  • It is important to ensure that women and girls are part of both the immediate response and longer term 
  • Work against shrinking space – especially on minority discrimination and media 

Discussant 7. CSO representative  (3 min. max.) - Monica Novillo, Coordinadora de la Mujer - experience and practices of a southern-based feminist groups and how the DAC can support

Good afternoon!

The Covid-19 pandemic is a setback for gender justice, for women and girls rights, and for efforts to prevent Sexual explotation abuse and harrasment

Covid’s impacts are exacerbated for women and girls in all aspects of their lives, from health to the economy and from security to social protection.

Despite the situation and lack of conditions, many organisations have developed studies, regarding negative gender impacts of the COVID  in women’s lives and livelihoods, like the one we developed in Bolivia with women’s grassroots organizations, feminist and women’s organizations,  highlighting some key issues such as access to health care, sexual and reproductive services, gender-based violence, care burden, and more broadly on ODA and Gender,  also organising ourselves to demand concrete actions to our governments in order not to leave behind vulnerable women (migrants, indigenous, afrodescendants, disabled, families lead by women, victims of violence, women in prostitution, etc.)

Latin America is – as some of you know, the most unequal region of the world. COVID has shown the cruel face of structural inequalities in our countries and among them, gender inequality, poverty and the weakness of our states to address the root causes of inequality, and to assure social protection (especially employment, health and education)

Women’s rights and feminist organizations are facing huge challenges to survive and to continue with their work responding to the absence of the state and public policies to face gender issues such as violence against women.  

The flows of funding for women’s issues and their organizations have decreased in the last years and this have a direct impact in the closure of NGOs in their efforts to achieve gender equality.

We would also like to call your attention on the attacks focused on feminist activists, and their organizations, coming from conservative sectors with fundamentalists visions that opposes to gender equality and the advancement of women’s human rights, restricting the civil space for women’s and feminists of CSO.

We also have evidences that CSOs around the world are experiencing how COVID is being used to attack feminists and women`s rights defenders in Europe and Latin America (Red de Defensoras report on impacts and attacks to feminists ex from CEIM in Spain, where the extreme right and the right wing blame the March 8 protest to be the origin of the pandemic in Spain and set measures against women`s rights advances).

Discussant 8: DAC Delegate –Sweden – Josefine Holmquist (3 min. max)

  • Operation with CSO is already flexible with broad objective and long term funding
  • SIDA has suspended CSO need to have “co-funding” from own fundraise
  • Promoting free media in the south and partnering with local CSO
  • Women and girls' rights are important, and we have some experience during Ebola e.i. girl leaving school for marriage and pregnancy. Fokus on contraceptives
  • Support a DAC instrument and both in the light of COVID and Agenda 2030 à make coherence between donors 

Note for moderator: 2 additional participants wishing to intervene

Discussant 9: CSO representative - Jahangir Masum, CDP (3 min. max.)

CDP experience and the Bangladesh context, and how the DAC can support while ensuring respect for democratic ownership and avoiding instrumentalization of CSOs

In Bangladesh, till to date, from all the tested people (around 0.3 million, around 2000 people tested per million), 16% has identified with COVID positive. However, in the last week, 22% of the tested people have been identified with COVID positive and the virus has spread in all the 64 districts. If such COVID positive trend continues, Bangladesh is going to be one of the worst affected countries in the World by the coronavirus.

Daily wage earners in the informal sector are the most affected persons. Garment workers were forced to join in the work despite a nationwide coronavirus lockdown to produce masks and PPE for the developed countries. Due to population density, it is difficult to maintain social distancing measures. It is very difficult for the low-income population in a city who lives in one room with a shared kitchen and toilet to maintain corona safety guidelines. Poor people are living like refugees in their own country and surviving on the mercy of others. The worst situation is in slums.

Due to lack of proper awareness raising, earlier people were not serious about the virus. It is ironic that the government has not used the CSOs capacity to aware people and support people in the time of such crisis. Government is totally dependent on government officials and party people to address the crisis which has already shown its weaknesses. Government is not even using NGO hospitals in the cities. 

Communities are continuously contacting us to get and health food support. We are trying our level best to provide some support to both slums and rural areas where we used to work. If we cannot support them in such a crisis, they might lose trust in us. People remember even tiny help during the crisis. We have raised funds from our own personal savings and donations from our friends and families (We donated the money that we were supposed to spend for clothes and gifts for the biggest festival in the country). 

Our work is severely hampered due to COVID and cyclone Ampan. We have to extend our ongoing projects, probably with no cost extension. One good thing is that our colleagues are learning how to work from home using the Internet technologies and coordinating our work through social media in this new situation. However, as everybody is using the Internet, the speed and reliability of connection is getting down and hampers our work, especially in attending virtual advocacy meetings and conferences at international level.

Discussant 10: DAC Delegate –US – Christophe Tocco (3 min. max)

  •  Work with CSO on the pandemic response
  • Looking at listening partners including CSO – many from local partners. Many implementing partners have asked for one point of contact à has been implemented
  • Learning lab – that are updating constantly and online for all
  • New partnership
  • We support a DAC recommendation for supporting civic space
  • A paper is available on civic space
  • 5 millions UDS located to focus on citizen mobilization in governance

Support for CSOs in COVID-19 response and CSO inclusion in response strategies - 

    1. What has been the DAC’s response to the Belgrade Call to Action and issue of shrinking civic space especially now that many governments are using the pandemic to further shrink civic space; (also ask more information about the Observatory on Civic Space)
    2. Funding support for the humanitarian work of CSOs, especially for those working at the local level implementing localized and contextualized responses; ensuring that these support do not merely instrumentalize CSOs to implement donors’ Covid responses
    3. Core support for CSOs, especially in the South, to contribute to recovery and development as well as support for capacity development given adjustment to “new normal”. Support for CSOs should be institutionalized, not just occasional or in emergency situations; CSOs should be included from the designing stage of covid response and long-term development strategy; 
    4. Donors should ensure a portion of their ODA for domestic resource mobilization to ensure that countries are able to recover and develop amid pressures on donor budgets 
    5. How are donors implementing the PSEAH Recommendation in their Covid-19 response? (Perhaps we CSOs should also be ready to respond to this?)
    6. How are donors adjusting/reprogramming their support for CSOs?
    7. How are donors recording their covid-response funds? Are they recorded distinctively and in addition to ODA?
    8. Include CSO into after COVID not just in implementation but also in strategy planning, monitoring, and evaluation processes and bodies  
    9. DAC should ensure its engagement with CSOs recognize CSOs both as implementing partners and as independent development actors in their own right
    10. DAC should prioritize and increase support to small and local organizations in developing countries 
    11. DAC funding should strengthen civil society in partner countries. DAC members financial flows be geared towards responding CSOs priorities and strategies.  
    12. DAC engagement with CSOs should recognize the rights and recognize Development effectiveness principles and promote enabling environment for CSOs 

CSO representatives and DAC delegates


35 min.


Moderation of discussion supported by Ana Fernandes


  Thank CSOs and DAC delegates for their comments.

  Invite Jacqueline Wood to provide some responses/remark

Moderator – Ana Fernandes

  Acknowledge the key points raised and provide some overarching responses or clarification to questions posed.

Jacqueline Wood


04 min.

  Thank Jacqueline Wood.

  Invite the DAC Chair and DCD Director to provide some additional remarks. 

Moderator – Ana Fernandes

  Highlight the importance of effective international co-operation and partnerships/dialogue with CSOs to get through crises.

  Refer to the role of CSOs, the challenge of shrinking civic space in the COVID-19 context and the need for enabling environments for CSOs.

  Welcome the Development Assistance Committee Members and Civil Society 2020 Study and its relevant and timely recommended action points; call on all DAC members and CSOs to continue to pursue effectiveness in their relationships, particularly in response to Covid-19.

Notes from DAC Chairs intervention

    • This session has ben particular interesting
    • Share what is happening real time from CSO and DAC
    • Impossible to underestimate importance of CSO
    • The prioritization and the flexibility and determination to help partner countries and most valuable people is commendable – also commend DAC members on their flexibility
    • Say to colleagues that are delivering in developing countries that is an impressive first wave of response – not enough, it never is. But very good.
    • Need to find means and a way to share information
    • DAC members have done it through their agencies à think about how we can have light peer-learning à a real time learning
    • Glad for the repot on how to work with CSO
    • We will have to take forward this agenda in the changing circumstance
    • Need to be clear in own mind of how we work with CSO – some of it is why (protecting civil space or service delivery) and some of it is what and how?
  • We need to actively consideration and clarify what we want to achieve and deliver and tailor an instrument that is best for that.

DAC Chair



  Share an update on the roll-out of the DAC Recommendation on Ending Sexual Exploitation, Abuse and Harassment.

  Indicate that Item 3discussion raises issues of relevance for a DAC instrument on civil society.

  Share that strong support has been heard for an ambitious instrument (in the form of a recommendation (TBC)).

  Indicate that work on an instrument is included in the 2021-22 PWB and would be mutually reinforcing with other ongoing initiatives of the DAC.

DCD Director



Item 4


Closing remarks: takeaways and next steps

  Indicatethat we are now coming to the end of the meeting.

  Indicate that we will now hear some closing remarks from CSOs, the DCD Director and DAC Chair.

  Indicate that we will now hear from the Coordinator of the DAC-CSO Reference Group.

  Invite Lyn Pano (Reality of Aid, and Coordinator of the DAC-CSO Reference Group) to take the floor.

DAC Chair with support from moderator – Ana Fernandes


01 min.

  Summarize the key points of interest and positions of CSOs based on the discussion.

  Highlight the areas where further consultations, continued dialogue and/or collaboration would be welcome.

Thank you Susanna,... From everything that’s said, allow us to underscore/reiterate the following points, on the request of colleagues:

...we’d like underscore the great urgency to make more resources and solidarity available to people living in poverty facing this crisis and supporting low income and highly indebted countries through this; the vital role that the DAC has here, and encouraging them to reach out to us civil society organisations and joining together in raising awareness in DAC member states. On this, we expect leadership from the DAC on really highlighting the need to think of extra crisis packages also  in partner countries, not just in each DAC country.

On climate - We welcome the messages from the DAC and the EU representatives on this call with regard to the need to support green resilient recovery, and would like to emphasize 2 key aspects:

  1. Firstly, new and additional climate finance is urgently needed to address the climate challenge; particularly as poor communities face the COVID-19 crisis (German chancellor Angela Merkel recently urged OECD-countries not to neglect international climate finance in the light of COVID-19, but “on the contrary to enhance it”)
  2. Secondly all development as well as Corona crisis finance needs to be aligned with the Paris Agreement and biodiversity objectives to ensure a resilient recovery in developing countries. Swift ending support for fossil fuels & climate harmful activities would further free up needed finance to support adaptation and build resilience.

On peace and security, we request revisiting policies towards military-related aid, or how DAC members are ensuring that ODA is not instrumentalized to violate human rights and curtail people’s freedoms. This is critical and urgent given the highly militarized lock downs during COVID19 crisis in countries in the Global South. There is a clear impact on the development effectiveness in terms of militarization in the Global South. Peace and security principles should be at the heart of any emergency and reconstruction response, including adherence to the Nexus programming in accordance with development effectiveness principles and human rights standards.

We also look forward to more opportunities to discuss Debt Relief with interested CSOs in the weeks to come with access to information that could allow an informed input from us and an engagement at the technical level. 

On the Chair’s points regarding holding non-DAC members to account, we chose to focus our comments today on DAC donors because we are speaking to you today', nevertheless, we assure you that we constantly engage with them and expect high standards from them as well, precisely why many of us are targets of political repression and shrinking civic space. In as much as we criticize these non-DAC and developing country governments and public institutions, we still would like to acknowledge and reiterate the importance of ‘public’ (Institutions, financing, services, as shown by the pandemic - response & beyond (hopefully a transformed future). 

but perhaps, first and foremost for us to continue holding our governments to account, to continue sharing evidences and concrete recommendations with you, to continue engaging in more dialogues with you - we urge you to issue strong statements and urgently implement the actions you mentioned that would reverse shrinking civic space and increase core support to ensure our very existence and contribution to development.

Lyn Pano - Coordinator of the DAC-CSO Reference Group


03 min.

  Thank Lyn Pano.

  Hand-over to the DCD Director to provide closing remarks.

DAC Chair


01 min.

  Thank and congratulate participants for this fruitful exchange.

  Reiterate the importance of regular dialogues and consultations with CSOs.

  Highlight some key takeaways from today’s dialogue.

DCD Director


03 min.

  Thank participants for the constructive dialogue.

  Commend the overall progress made in implementing the DAC-CSO Dialogue Framework and importance to further improve it going forward.

  Highlight some of theChair’s main takeaways/messages from today’s dialogue.

Notes from final intervention from DAC Chair 

  • Little doubt the importance of CSO in DAC works and for feedback. A critical role to holding us to account and dialogue is an important part
  • We are committed to continue
  • Agree, that we while we work virtually – there are benefits, but we need to structure the agenda differently. We cannot cover everything, and a different structure is needed
  • Especially interesting to learn from CSO on how to work on the crisis, but also encouraged to see the flexibility by DAC members
  • Scale of the challenge we have: sadly there is little doubt that progress on SDG is under threat à we need to do some thinking on this.
  • How do we have persuasive narrative rather than an aggressive one?
    • Where are the new arguments/narratives?
  • There may be issue which we disagree on, but there was little purpose if we all agree, but a reminder that DAC is a consensus based organisation à as we work to build agreement we need to be pragmatic
    • Climate and debt relief and private sector - everyone must compromise à essential and something we should all reflect on. Everyone should think about their room for compromise and the red line.
  • We will make the case for ODA, but also other forms for finance
    • We need CSO to lobby bilaterally and multilaterally 

DAC Chair


03 min.


From the Chatbox:

Rosabel - it would be great to hear a bit more about how DAC is planning to ensure CSOs participation and involvement in the monitoring and implementation of the Recommendations. We definitely need more time for the dialogue, and it will be interesting to see how the idea of webinars and other spaces for dialogue proposed by Mrs. Moorehead takes shape.

From GER_Thomas Piesch to Everyone:  09:38 PM

I support Chair's proposal; all items deserve proper  attention; bear with participants that have ZOOM sessions twice a day.

From FI_Suvi Tuominen - FI Deleg to OECD to Everyone:  09:59 PM

Finland shares many of the concerns of Norway and others. 

From IRL_Susanna Morrison Metois to Everyone:  10:01 PM

Ireland shares the issues raised by Norway and hopes to continue the discussions, including bilaterally with CSOs.

From SP_Javier Salido - SP Deleg to OECD to Everyone:  10:03 PM

Spain also shares the possitions expressed by Norway and the need to further discuss this issue with CSOs.

From SP_Ana Henche - MFA to Everyone:  10:03 PM

there are diferent proposals for ceilings .some are more meaninful than others

From BE_Nerea Craviotto Ortega - EURODAD to Everyone:  10:06 PM

For us CSOs is difficult to provided a more helpful input without having a good understanding on the different options being discussed. But we are very much looking forward to provide our perspective further down the process.

From GER_Thomas Piesch to Everyone:  10:10 PM

Germany fully agrees with what has been presented by Japan and France. 

From JPN_Akio Takayanagi - JANIC to Everyone:  10:14 PM

I want to make it clear that CSOs in Japan have quite different views from those of our government. 

From EU_Filippos PIERROS to Everyone:  10:15 PM

DAC chair raises some very pertinent points on debt relief

From UK Hannah Binci DFID to Everyone:  10:15 PM

Thank you all for this interesting discussion. The UK is able to approach this from a relatively neutral position as we are not a major ODA lender. We believe all parties ultimately want the same thing: to provide incentives to maximise development outcomes with the resources available so we encourage all parties to engage in the debate in this spirit.  Thank you

From ONE_Jorge Rivera to Everyone:  10:16 PM

Hoping we can hear from the DAC and the Secretariat on the very clear request raised by Eurodad on access to documents and proposals on accounting for debt relief

From NL_Robert-Jan Scheer to Everyone:  10:23 PM

Netherlands: Important to strengthen our local CSO partners and encourage innovation as we see local. 

  • Need to monitor the impact of COVID-19 responses and continue support to rule of law programs to ensure the protection of civic space. We support the idea of developing an instrument.


From OECD_DCD/FOR_Ana Fernandes to Everyone:  10:28 PM

we will share all the presentation after with all participants

From IT_Alessandra Pastorelli to Everyone:  10:48 PM

Italy has an intense dialogue with CSOs, key partners of the Italian Development Cooperation, since the beginning of the COVID 19 crisis. We set up a „working group COVID 19 emergency“ with representatives of CSOs, MoFA and Italian Agency in order to promote a dialogue taking into account the needs of NGOs during the crisis. Following the discussions within such WG, the Agency set up several mechanisms of flexibility to adapt the contracts in place to the new needs required by the crisis. New financial solutions are under evaluation in order to help the CSOs dealing with the financial constraints linked to the COVID crisis.

From OECD_DCD/FOR_Ana Fernandes to Everyone:  10:55 PM

Thanks Alessandra for sharing 

From IRL_Susanna Morrison Metois to Everyone:  10:56 PM

Ireland has similarly aimed to increase flexibility in support to CSO partners, support women's rights organisations and work in close consultation with our partners in each country context. We also strongly support a DAC CSO policy instrument as recommended by the study, with strong preference for a DAC Reccomendation.

From OECD_DCD/FOR_Ana Fernandes to Everyone:  10:59 PM

Thanks for sharing also we will add this examples to the summary . 

From Me to Everyone:  11:05 PM

From Jahangir Masum: In Bangladesh, till to date, from all the tested people (around 0.3 million, around 2000 people tested per million), 16% has identified with COVID positive. However, in the last week, 22% of the tested people have been identified with COVID positive and the virus has spread in all the 64 districts. If such COVID positive trend continues, Bangladesh is going to be one of the worst affected countries in the World by the coronavirus.


Daily wage earners in the informal sector are the most affected persons. Garment workers were forced to join in the work despite a nationwide coronavirus lockdown to produce masks and PPE for the developed countries. Due to population density, it is difficult to maintain social distancing measures. It is very difficult for the low-income population in a city who lives in one room with a shared kitchen and toilet to maintain corona safety guidelines. 

Poor people are living like refugees in their own country and surviving on the mercy of others. The worst situation is in slums.


Due to lack of proper awareness raising, earlier people were not serious about the virus. It is ironic that the government has not used the CSOs capacity to aware people and support people in the time of such crisis. Government is totally dependent on government officials and party people to address the crisis which has already shown its weaknesses. Government is not even using NGO hospitals in the cities. 


Communities are continuously contacting us to get and health food support. We are trying our level best to provide some support to both slums and rural areas where we used to work. If we cannot support them in such a crisis, they might lose trust in us. People remember even tiny help during the crisis. We have raised funds from our own personal savings and donations from our friends and families (We donated the money that we were supposed to spend for clothes and gifts for the 

From PH_Sarah Torres - RoA-AP to Everyone:  11:07 PM

Last part of Masum’s intervention: Our work is severely hampered due to COVID and cyclone Ampan. We have to extend our ongoing projects, probably with no cost extension. One good thing is that our colleagues are learning how to work from home using the Internet technologies and coordinating our work through social media in this new situation. However, as everybody is using the Internet, the speed and reliability of connection is getting down and hampers our work, especially in attending virtual advocacy meetings and conferences at international level.

From OECD_DCD/FOR_Ana Fernandes to Everyone:  11:14 PM

Yes Maria please do so

Dear Maria please share your experience with everyone also and others please do so also on what are you doing on the COVid context to engage with CSO

From EU_Filippos PIERROS to Everyone:  11:15 PM

Please share all PPTs

From OECD_DCD/FOR_Ana Fernandes to Everyone:  11:15 PM

We will

From EU_Filippos PIERROS to Everyone:  11:15 PM

and if possible the interventions of CSOs colleagues

From Me to Everyone:  11:16 PM

we will :) 

From CH_Jürg Staudenmann - AllianceSud to Everyone:  11:16 PM

and if possible the interventions of DAC & country representatives too, please

From EU_Filippos PIERROS to Everyone:  11:17 PM

happy to share mine

From CH_Jürg Staudenmann - AllianceSud to Everyone:  11:18 PM

Thank you very much; please send to Lyn or me ([email protected])

  1. Reference Materials
  1. DAC Roadmap 2020 
  2. Notes From June 2019 Dialogue 
  3. Official Minutes of the June 2019 Dialogue
  5. Other documents available in the Dialogue Google Drive: DAC and RG Participants List, Dialogue Protocols, Jiten and Akio’s analysis of the Final Study on DAC and CSOs
  6. Covid’s impact on CSOs:
    1. https://www.bond.org.uk/news/2020/05/programmes-at-risk-as-more-ngos-face-closure


  1. Participants (30) - The DAC/DCD opts to keep it to 30 CSOs and 30 DAC Delegates (plus the DAC Chair and DCD Director) to not set a precedent whereby CSOs and Capitals will expect to be included in the succeeding annual Dialogues. 15 from the North, 15 from the South.
  2. Selection Criteria - 15 should be from the North and 15 from the South; gender balance (half from the North and South should be women), individual expertise on any of the priority issues; one representative per organization
  3. Selection Process and timeline - Expressions of Interest from May 18-22, Processing/Selection by Core Group (May 22, 25-26 EOB), Announcement and Submission to the DCD of the Participants List and other materials (May 26)

iii. Participants List - (see Google Folder for all EOIs and summary)



  • Overview of the DAC’s agenda for 2020 and opportunities for engagement (and the role of the DAC-CSO Reference Group)


        1. Update on ODA modernisation process (in particular debt relief, PSI, any other changes to DAC rules?)
        2. More information on: the DAC working group on development effectiveness (and more broadly the DAC’s agenda vis-à-vis GPEDC), the revision of the peer review methodology
        3. More information on key upcoming events in 2020: Tidewater, HLM
        4. DAC members have committed to increase investment in social protection, gender equality and human rights. How is it going and how COVID response is going to affect it?


  • Peace & Security


      1. Nexus Recommendation Roadmap for Implementation and CSOs’ role 
      2. Budget for Conflict Prevention is at the minimum (only at 2%) despite the donors’ push to increase overall funds for Conflict and Fragility 
      3. Linkages and synergies between Nexus recommendation and Women, Peace and Security Agenda: improving coordination and interrelations when implementing
      4. Donors’ leveraging ODA for IFI and private sector funding

Be the first to comment

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.