Operational Framework for

Regional Observatorio

Part One
Guide for the Implementers of the Regional Observatorio

Part two
Building Evidences of Effective Development Cooperation to
Empower Citizens

1 Operational Framework for Regional Observatorio | PART 1

PART 1
Guide for the Implementers of the Regional Observatorio:
A checklist of things an initiative under the Regional Observatorio should ensure to possess

If “yes” or “to some extent” please state how. If not, please

Areas of Concern
state reason(s).
CONTENT
1. Is your Regional Observatorio monitoring the quality or quantity of any of
the aspects of international development cooperation identified as means of
implementation in the SDGs?
a. Financial

Official Development Assistance (non-concessional or concessional loans and

grants)

Private sector flows and instruments (equities, guarantees, etc.)

Private-public partnerships (PPPs)

Impact investments
Humanitarian aid
Domestic resource mobilisation, i.e., taxation, illicit financial flows (as a
conditionality for development cooperation)

Others (identify)
b. Non-financial
Multistakeholder partnerships
INTENDED OUTPUT/S
2. Is your Regional Observatorio producing any of the following outputs?
a. Regional database (case studies, scorecards, citizens’ statistical database, etc.)
b. Capacity–building (training on evidence-based policy advocacy, consultative
conferences, etc.)
3. Is your Regional Observatorio has all of the following criteria?
Consensus-based
a. Has a thorough consultation process been undertaken with CSOs and other
stakeholders?

2 Operational Framework for Regional Observatorio | PART 1

 Independence from government and aid bodies
b. Are you collaborating with government and aid bodies?
c. Are you complementing instead of duplicating the work of government
statistical bodies? If you are duplicating the work of official statistical bodies, how
do you manage the integrity of your statistics?
Action-oriented
d. Is your Regional Observatorio an input to a policy process? Which one?
e. How is your output going to reach your target audience/s or decisionmakers to
affect change?
f. How will your output contribute to existing initiatives by CSOs or governments?
4. Is your Regional Observatorio enhancing the accountability of any of the following
stakeholders? How?
g. interministerial body
h. government or any of its agency
i. private sector

j. civil society

3 Operational Framework for Regional Observatorio | PART 1

PART 2
Regional Observatorio: Building Evidences of Effective Development Cooperation to Empower Citizens
A draft framework paper on the Regional Observatorio
It has been agreed that the ambitious goals set forth in the 2030 Agenda1
cannot be met by governments alone for the multidimensional, structural,
and transborder challenges that the world faces today such as unsustainable
consumption and production patterns, climate change, inequality, peace,
and conflict. Funding the Sustainable Development Goals alone requires an
approximate USD6 trillion to USD9 trillion in annual investments for over 15
years.2 International public finance alone will not be sufficient to finance these
goals.
Agreed in a time of stagnating development finance flows, the current modes
of financing now differ in many ways in comparison with traditional modes.
What appeared to be low-key recommendations in structural adjustment
programmes are now outrightly spelled out as mandates in the purview of
autonomy and fairness. Developing countries have been told to raise resources
domestically through increased taxation and tighter controls on illicit financial
flows. This is despite being cash-strapped, controlled by multinationals, and
riddled with political issues such as conflict, corruption, and climate change.
There is also an increasing reliance on private sector finance, using innovative
financial instruments and Private-Public Partnerships despite an alarming lack
of mechanisms to place private finance to account for its misdeeds. The yet to
be understood South-South Cooperation (SSC) has also gained attention as
a potential source of financing. Critics say that cooperation for development
purposes and a cooperation purely for trade and investments particularly in
the context of the role of southern powers such as China, Russia, and India in
the formation of new multilateral development banks (MDBs) such as the New
Development Bank and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank must have
demarcations to ascertain whether these cooperations seen as “alternatives”
or “direct challenge” to northern-led MDBs do really promote power-sharing
and sustainable development or are merely complementing and replicating the
same problems in the delivery and aspirations of current development financing
architecture.
1 In September 2015, heads of state and government at the UN Summit in New York adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development comprising the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Agenda 2030 explicitly links
economic, social and environmental development goals for the first time and combines poverty alleviation and sustainability. The SDGs are complemented by Financing for Development (FfD) conference in Addis Ababa in July
2015 that created a global framework for financing sustainable development and in December 2015 a new global climate agreement was adopted in Paris. Together, this forms the world’s agenda for development until 2030.
2 http://blog.cbm.org/sdg-financing-inaction-is-a-greater-cost-for-all-of-us/
3 http://www.unescap.org/2030-agenda/means-of-implementation
4 A/RES/70/224, para. 2
4 Operational Framework for Regional Observatorio | PART 2
Yet, even if the financial resources are met, other critical resources that are
non-financial, which are spelled out in the SDGs as Means of Implementation
(MOI), still need to be moblised to ensure transformative shifts. MOI refers to
the means of achieving the SDGs globally and nationally. It is also detailed
under each of the SDGs. Because the absence of MOIs was a weakness of
the Millennium Development Goals, this time around it has been given prime
importance in the SDGs as a goal (SDG 17) with specific targets that address
issues such as finance, technology, capacity building, trade, and systemic
issues. (See Annex A)
Addressing systemic issues in MOIs directs Member States to respond to long-
standing issues including policy and institutional coherence, multistakeholder
partnerships, data production, monitoring, and accountability.3
Recognising that the global challenges are far beyond the capacity of States,
the UN called on Member States to form multi-stakeholder partnerships
(MSPs) as a means to implement the SDGs. Target 17.16 of the SDGs defines
the critical importance of MSPs by calling on Member States to “Enhance
the global partnership for sustainable development, complemented by
multistakeholder partnerships that mobilise and share knowledge, expertise,
technology, and financial resources, to support the achievement of the
sustainable development goals in all countries, in particular developing
countries.”
Currently, there is no single definition of MSPs but the most recent biennial UN
resolution on “Towards global partnerships” defines partnerships as “voluntary
and collaborative relationships between various parties, both public and non-
public, in which all participants agree to work together to achieve a common
purpose or undertake a specific task and, as mutually agreed, to share risks and
responsibilities, resources and benefits.4”
The 2030 Agenda as it stands is a success as it reflects the ability of world
leaders to unite on development goals and on how development shall be
delivered. This success, however, may fail without adequate commitment
in ensuring that the MOIs are in place to deliver the goals. International
development cooperation will have a critical role in ensuring that the MOI
are present and that they adhere to the principles of effective development
cooperation (EDC) despite the lack of resources and other challenges.
From aid to development effectiveness
The Busan High Level Meeting of the Global Partneship for Effective
Development Cooperation (Busan Partnership) shifted the discourse from
aid effectiveness, which was centred on technical issues to overarching
development issues. From mere fine-tuning of development delivery
procedures and systems, the Busan Partnership presents a new way of
delivering development which has put all stakeholders accountable to the
principles of EDC established in Busan: country ownership, focus on results,
inclusive development partnerships, and transparency and accountability
to each other. Civil society organisations (CSOs) now carry a much more
important role in ensuring that aid and development programs produce
development results amid the complex interplay of interests.
Achieving the SDGs will be as much about the effectiveness of development
cooperation as it is about the quantity and form such cooperation takes.
The 2030 Agenda is marked by inclusivity, integration, and universality, with
an expected fundamental shift in the development finance architecture.
Improving the effectiveness, quality and impact of development cooperation
in this context will require inclusive partnerships, innovative approaches, and
the application of lessons at country level.
What to monitor and why
CSOs’ contributions should then extend in planning and implementation of
development interventions, and also in monitoring the application of EDC
principles in the delivery of international development cooperation.
International development cooperation for this project will be defined
as “international action intended to support development in developing
countries.” It goes beyond Official Development Assistance (ODA) and will
include other sources of financing, in some instances this will be blended
in various ways, and involve a range of different development cooperation
actors. It includes technology facilitation and capacity development, as
well as multistakeholder partnerships grouped around sectorial or thematic
issues. It also includes normative guidance and policy advice to support
implementation of agreed goals.
5 Operational Framework for Regional Observatorio | PART 2
There are two dimensions of international development cooperation that needs
to be monitored by citizens and put into account by the global community. The
first relates to financial resources; these are traditionaly composed of ODA which
remains to be the largest source of external financial support to developing and
least-developed countries. Due to the massive amount of resources required for
the 2030 Agenda, SDG 17 stipulates the need for “additional financial resources”
to be moblised “for developing countries from multiple sources.” These are
defined as “innovative” sources and usually take the shape of unaccounted forms
of blended financing, PPPs, SSC, and philanthropic contributions.
The development of these innovative forms of financing were conceived to
arrive at a win-win scenario that fits the interest of the private sector in deriving
income from its investments and at the same time contribute to development.
This modality of catering to profit-oriented actors that may be in conflict
with the required transformative shifts of the 2030 Agenda has by no means
escaped criticism. The overwhelming influence of private business and the
technocratic and profit-oriented approaches it encourages raise the need to
monitor financial flows and blending activities from this sector.
The second dimension relates to the non-financial commitments under SDG17
which ranges from technology to capacity building, policy and institutional
coherence, and multi-stakeholder partnerships that include collaboration and
commitment from different actors, ranging from governments, to CSOs, private
sector, academia, media, and others.
MSPs have proven successful in mobilising resources, have brought efficiency
gains in programme delivery, and have also helped to build consensus around
controversial issues. Yet, when not carefully built, overseen, and implemented,
some MSP efforts, in experience, have had a poor track record of promoting
systemic change and may have resulted to a greater fragmentation of financing.
MSPs that failed to address power imbalances, differing interests, and lack
of governance structures and inclusion of the poor as primary stakeholders
in the design, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of development
interventions merely defy the intents of effective development cooperation.
As a result, these have had vague contributions to human rights, poverty
reduction, and sustainable development.
For SDGs alone, there are around 2,000 MSPs registered for purposes ranging
from providing strategic directions and normative policy advice, to knowledge,
services, and standards. While these MSPs create a semblance of ownership
and democracy, it hardly is the case.
A detailed review was undertaken by the International Civil Society Centre (ICSC)
in 2014 of 330 World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) partnerships.
The study found that:
“
Thirty-eight per cent of all partnerships sampled are simply not active or do
not have measurable output. Twenty-six per cent of all partnerships show
activities but those are not directly related to their publicly-stated goals
and ambitions. An underlying problem was that many multistakeholder
partnerships have vague and diffuse goals and lack appropriate monitoring
and reporting mechanisms, making the causality between the output of the
partnership and impact on the ground difficult to establish. A key finding

“
of the ICSC study was that a lack of monitoring and reporting mechanisms
have generally limited the effectiveness of MSPs. Improved monitoring,
evaluation and reporting are tools that will help to assess progress vis-à-vis
targets and goals and will no doubt enhance the credibility of the MSPs.5

In the context of shrinking and closing civic spaces, CSOs find it difficult
to participate fully in asserting normative and expert opinion in policy
formulation and in sharing their experiences and resources in service delivery.
It is therefore essential to monitor the legitimacy of these partnerships
and success conditions necessary for this. Beyond typologies (cross-sector,
thematic, knowledge platforms, etc.) of essential aspects to be monitored
in MSPs are inclusion particularly of primary stakeholders, power sharing,
clarity in roles and accountabilities, and contributions to the 2030 Agenda to
determine the legitimacy and impacts of such formations.

Monitoring for advocacy and campaigning

The Regional Observatorio serves as a regional platform for citizen-

based monitoring of development cooperation. Monitoring delivery and
use of relevant financial and other development cooperation resources
help to track progress against commitments and to provide information
for review processes and dialogue among governments, partners, and
other stakeholders. It identifies lessons and practices and provides the Figure 1. Framework for CSO-driven Monitoring
evidence base for improving development results and holding stakeholders
accountable to each other.
for human rights-based, equitable, and sustainable development through
The Regional Observatorio is aimed at capacitating CSOs as drivers of monitoring development cooperation and how it aligns with EDC principles.
accountability at various levels, in monitoring the results, and encouraging Whether Regional Observatorios choose to monitor specific SDGs, it must be
national debates around development cooperation as a means of related to the following CPDE policy areas of priorities:
implemenation of the 2030 Agenda. (See Figure 1.)
1. CSO development effectiveness
By monitoring development cooperation and how the principles of effective 2. Enabling environment for CSOs
development cooperation are operationalised by stakeheholders through 3. Private sector accountability
financial and non-financial means, including establishment of effective 4. Conflict and fragility
and inclusive structures for multistakeholder partnerships, the Regional 5. South-south cooperation
Observatorio can be used to empower citizens in advocacy and campaigning

5 http://www.un.org/en/ecosoc/newfunct/pdf15/2015partnerships_background_note.pdf

6 Operational Framework for Regional Observatorio | PART 2

Regional Observatorios will be monitoring the delivery of financial and
non-financial resources with particular interest in MSPs through development
cooperation. This can be done thematically along the SDGs. CSOs that are
experienced and possesses expert knowledge in specific areas can effectively
monitor progress, identify implementation challenges, and bring findings to
appropriate government and accountability bodies.
The work of Regional Observatorios may focus on the progress of SDG targets
but will not be in the business of the production of statistical data for the SDG
indicators that are already supplied by statistical agencies of Member States.
This is unless the objective of an initiative under the project is to challenge
the data collected by governments. Primarily, Regional Observatorios can
come up with their own substitute or complementary indicators that may
provide a complete picture of the progress of a goal. It can build its own
database or be a repository of existing databases from privately-operated
sattelites, independent surveys of CSOs, and practices to add to the richness
and veracity of official monitoring exercises. This orientation towards
complementation and supplementation of official databases in the stead of
duplications will create an important value in driving meaningful changes in
policy and practice brought by informed and engaged citizenry.
Monitoring for empowerment and accountability
Monitoring reflects priorities and values of interest groups. In as much as
goals-setting undergoes a political and policy development process, metrics
and indicators also reflect a bias or vision of how impacts should look like,
such as having relevance to developing countries and its poor citizens. Thus
for a Regional Observatorio to be an effective tool for CSOs in holding
stakeholders accountable, choosing what and how to measure should involve
both technical expertise and shared consensus with CSOs. This lays down
concensus-based metrics as the first criteria of the Regional Observatorio.
The second criterion is the independence from government and aid
bodies particularly in identifying metrics used in measuring development
cooperation. While there are benefits of bringing technical expertise of
governments to monitoring bodies, there will also be a risk of holding on
to traditional metrics that have the risk of inability to spot new trends, local
realities, rising gaps in funding, or the quality of MSPs for development
cooperation.
6 Adapted from Citizen-based Monitoring of Development Cooperation to Support Implementation of the 2030 Agenda 2016 Development Cooperation Forum Policy Briefs. ECOSOC Development Cooperation Forum. October
2015, No. 9
7 Operational Framework for Regional Observatorio | PART 2
The third criterion of the Regional Observatorio is its action-oriented purpose.
The power of monitoring reports can be most useful when these are used
to make States and the private sector explain and justify their performance
in fulfilling the 2030 Agenda commitments. Monitoring exercises of inputs,
processes, and outcomes have been popular among CSOs and have been
used effectively in engaging various levels of policy discussions to challenge or
improve current modes of delivery and in identifying gaps and potential areas
of interventions.6 (See Figure 2 on the following page)
Monitoring can be most powerful when information is gathered to place
institutions to account for development interventions that had resulted to
violations on collective and individual rights and environmental degradation.
Very few spaces, however, are available at the national, regional, and global
levels to hold powerful institutions to account for their actions. Multilateral
development banks (MDBs) have internal accountability mechanisms where
project-affected communities can file complaints. Some multilateral, regional,
and national institutions have multistakeholder formations but these are seldom
for accountability. CSOs can use national, regional, and global instruments to
trigger existing accountability mechanisms or policy reviews using evidence.
Currently, peer reviews and global monitoring spaces have institutionalised
CSO representation in which the Regional Observatorio can be used as a
complementary and supplementary source of information on progress towards
the SDGs. In the absence of such mechanisms, outputs of the Regional
Observatorio will be useful in holding stakeholders to account by supplying
findings to policy processes or evidence-driven campaigning around the goals
at the national, regional, or global levels.
For CPDE, development cooperation and multi-stakeholder partnerships are
pivotal areas that will be crucial for CSOs to monitor as these will bring in
the resources and shape the directions and quality of resources that will have
greatest impact for the 2030 Agenda. Through capacity building in research
and training, Regional Observatorios shall drive evidence-based citizen
engagement in policy advocacy and campaigning.
Figure 2. Citizen’s use of monitoring exercises for engagement
Local/
subnational national Regional Global
Government-Initiated
Engaging
Mechanisms Service MDB
Local Development delivery review Compliance
• Citizen engagement forums government cooperation conferences Household Mechanisms
• Development cooperation forums forums surveys
coordinating forums Peer review
SDG review Global mechanisms
multistakeholder monitoring
forums mechanisms

Citizen-Initiated
Mechanisms Budget Citizens’
Service tracking Citizens’ surveys
• Service delivery monitoring delivery hearings
• Budget monitoring scorecards Regional
• Multistakeholder Social databases
Partnership monitoring audits Case studies/
best practices

Government-Initiated
Mechanisms
Citizens’ Open data
• Data transparency report cards initiatives
• Budget tracking
Legal case
advocacy Budget
transparency

8 Operational Framework for Regional Observatorio | PART 2

Annex
List of SDG Indicators
Targets
Finance
17.1
Strengthen domestic resource mobilisation, including through international support
to developing countries, to improve domestic capacity for tax and other revenue
collection
17.2
Developed countries to implement fully
their official development assistance
commitments, including the commitment
by many developed countries to achieve
the target of 0.7 per cent of ODA/
GNI to developing countries and 0.15
to 0.20 per cent of ODA/GNI to least
developed countries; ODA providers are
encouraged to consider setting a target
to provide at least 0.20 per cent of ODA/
GNI to least developed countries
17.3
Mobilise additional financial resources
for developing countries from multiple
sources
17.4
Assist developing countries in attaining
long-term debt sustainability through
coordinated policies aimed at fostering
debt financing, debt relief, and debt
restructuring, as appropriate, and
address the external debt of highly
indebted poor countries to reduce debt
distress
9 Operational Framework for Regional Observatorio | ANNEX
Indicators
17.2.1
Net official development assistance,
total and to least developed countries,
as a proportion of the Organization
for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) Development
Assistance Committee donors’ gross
national income (GNI)
17.3.1
Foreign direct investments (FDI), official
development assistance and South-South
Cooperation as a proportion of total
domestic budget
17.3.2
Volume of remittances (in United States
dollars) as a proportion of total GDP
17.4.1
Debt service as a proportion of exports
of goods and services
Targets
Finance
17.5
Adopt and implement investment
promotion regimes for least developed
countries
Technology
17.6
Enhance North-South, South-South and
triangular regional and international
cooperation on and access to science,
technology and innovation and enhance
knowledge sharing on mutually
agreed terms, including through
improved coordination among existing
mechanisms, in particular at the United
Nations level, and through a global
technology facilitation mechanism
17.7
Promote the development, transfer,
dissemination and diffusion of
environmentally-sound technologies
to developing countries on favourable
terms, including on concessional and
preferential terms, as mutually agreed
17.8
Fully operationalise the technology
bank and science, technology and
innovation capacity-building mechanism
for least developed countries by 2017
and enhance the use of enabling
technology, in particular information and
communications technology
Indicators
17.5.1
Number of countries that adopt and
implement investment promotion
regimes for least developed countries
17.6.1
Number of science and/or technology
cooperation agreements and
programmes between countries, by type
of cooperation
17.6.2
Fixed Internet broadband subscriptions
per 100 inhabitants, by speed
17.7.1
Total amount of approved funding for
developing countries to promote the
development, transfer, dissemination
and diffusion of environmentally sound
technologies
17.8.1
Proportion of individuals using the
Internet
Annex
List of SDG Indicators
Targets
Capacity-building
17.9
Enhance international support for
implementing effective and targeted
capacity-building in developing countries
to support national plans to implement
all the sustainable development goals,
including through North-South, South-
South and triangular cooperation
TRADE
17.10
Promote a universal, rules-based,
open, non-discriminatory and equitable
multilateral trading system under the
World Trade Organization, including
through the conclusion of negotiations
under its Doha Development Agenda
17.11
Significantly increase the exports of
developing countries, in particular with
a view to doubling the least developed
countries’ share of global exports by
2020
17.12
Realise timely implementation of duty-
free and quota-free market access on
a lasting basis for all least developed
countries, consistent with World Trade
Organization decisions, including
by ensuring that preferential rules of
origin applicable to imports from least
developed countries are transparent
and simple, and contribute to facilitating
market access
10 Operational Framework for Regional Observatorio | ANNEX
Indicators
17.9.1
Dollar value of financial and technical
assistance (including through North-
South, South-South and triangular
cooperation) committed to developing
countries
17.10.1
Total government revenue as a
proportion of GDP, by source
17.10.2
Proportion of domestic budget funded
by domestic taxes
17.10.1
Worldwide weighted tariff-average
17.11.1
Developing countries’ and least
developed countries’ share of global
exports
17.12.1
Average tariffs faced by developing
countries, least developed countries and
small island developing States
Targets Indicators
SYSTEMIC ISSUES
POLICY AND INSTITUTIONAL COHERENCE
17.13 17.13.1
Enhance global macroeconomic stability, Macroeconomic Dashboard
including through policy coordination
and policy coherence
17.14 17.14.1
Enhance policy coherence for sustainable Number of countries with mechanisms
development in place to enhance policy coherence of
sustainable development
17.15 17.15.1
Respect each country’s policy space and Extent of use of country-owned results
leadership to establish and implement frameworks and planning tools by
policies for poverty eradication and providers of development cooperation
sustainable development
SYSTEMIC ISSUES
MULTI-STAKEHOLDER PARTNERSHIPS
17.16 17.16.1
Enhance the global partnership for Number of countries reporting progress
sustainable development, complemented in multi-stakeholder development
by multistakeholder partnerships effectiveness monitoring frameworks
that mobilise and share knowledge, that support the achievement of the
expertise, technology and financial sustainable development goals
resources, to support the achievement
of the sustainable development goals
in all countries, in particular developing
countries
17.17 17.17.1
Encourage and promote effective Amount of United States dollars
public, public-private and civil society committed to public-private and civil
partnerships, building on the experience society partnerships
and resourcing strategies of partnerships
2020
Annex
List of SDG Indicators
Targets
SYSTEMIC ISSUES
DATA, MONITORING AND ACCOUNTABILITY
17.18 17.18.1
By 2020, enhance capacity-building
support to developing countries,
including for least developed countries
and small island developing States, to
increase significantly the availability of
high-quality, timely and reliable data
disaggregated by income, gender,
age, race, ethnicity, migratory status,
disability, geographic location and
other characteristics relevant in national
contexts
17.19
By 2030, build on existing initiatives
to develop measurements of progress
on sustainable development that
complement gross domestic product,
and support statistical capacity-building
in developing countries
11 Operational Framework for Regional Observatorio | PART 2
Indicators
Proportion of sustainable development
indicators produced at the national level
with full disaggregation when relevant
to the target, in accordance with the
Fundamental Principles of Official
Statistics
17.18.2
Number of countries that have national
statistical legislation that complies with
the Fundamental Principles of Official
Statistics
17.18.3
Number of countries with a national
statistical plan that is fully funded and
under implementation, by source of
funding
17.19.1
Dollar value of all resources made
available to strengthen statistical
capacity in developing countries
17.19.2
Proportion of countries that (a) have
conducted at least one population and
housing census in the last 10 years;
and (b) have achieved 100 per cent
birth registration and 80 per cent death
registration
 CONTACT
Jodel Dacara
membership@csopartnership.org

Mayang Azurin
comms@csopartnership.org

csopartnership.org

CSOPartnership_

CSOPartnerships

12 Operational Framework for Regional Observatorio | PART 1