Country programmes have produced results also during the pandemic
Finland engages in long-term bilateral cooperation with developing countries on the basis of 13 country programmes or regional programmes. In 2019-2021, the country programmes accounted for 19 per cent of Finland's official development cooperation.
The country programmes define the priorities of cooperation, performance targets and key cooperation projects. Progress is continuously monitored and the results are reported on an annual basis. A synthesis report, which gives an overall picture of the performance of the country programme modality, is prepared on the basis of the country level annual reports.
The success of the work is assessed according to how well the immediate (output) and long-term (outcome) performance targets are met.
The achievement of immediate performance targets improved steadily between 2016 and 2019, but the performance level decreased significantly in 2020. The main reasons for this decline were the COVID-19 pandemic and conflicts in partner countries, which have delayed and changed the implementation of ongoing projects and, in particular, the preparation of new projects.
To some extent, the same change is also reflected in long-term performance targets. The pandemic and conflicts have had a significant impact on operating environments in partner countries and have caused backsliding in some development trends. For example, school closures further exacerbated the learning crisis, especially in Finland’s poorest partner countries. The situations in Afghanistan and Myanmar escalated to the extent that interim action plans instead of country programmes were formulated for both countries.
On the other hand, also during the pandemic, in 2020-2021, approximately 70-80 per cent of both immediate and long-term performance targets were met either well or satisfactorily. This means that at least 60 per cent of these targets were met.
Key factors behind the good performance were the long-term nature of cooperation and the utilisation of expertise and political dialogue in ways suitable for different forms of cooperation. Adjusting cooperation to the changed circumstances has been necessary, and it will also create preconditions for better results in the future. On the other hand, adjustment measures have slowed down the implementation of projects.
Today, more and more cooperation takes place in fragile contexts. In 2019-2020, the Ministry for Foreign Affairs commissioned an external evaluation of the country programmes in fragile contexts. The evaluation recommended that the country programmes take unexpected changes in the operating environment as well as cooperation between development cooperation, humanitarian aid and peacebuilding better into consideration in the future.
Together with the new country programmes adopted in 2021, the first comprehensive country strategies that take into account not only development cooperation but also the objectives of foreign and security policy and economic relations, were published. At the same time, the flexibility of the country programmes and the projects included in them to react to changes in the operating environment was increased.
- 1
An entry is made in connection with new funding decisions based on the targets set on a scale comprising human rights blind, human rights sensitive (taking human rights into account), human rights progressive (promoting human rights) and human rights transformative (addressing human rights challenges) or not specified.
- 2
The entries are made on the basis of target-setting in connection with new funding decisions. The sample contains the funding decisions which have the promotion of gender equality as the principal or significant objective.
- 3
A three-year average of decisions involving funding that supports equality. For example, the figure for 2017 shows the average for 2015-2017.
- 4
Multilateral Organisation Performance Assessment Network.
- 5
OECD DAC Corruption Risk Management Recommendations 2016. https://www.oecd.org/corruption/oecd-recommendation-for-development-cooperation-actors-on-managing-risks-of-corruption.htm
- 6
London Safeguarding Summit 2018 commitments. https://www.gov.uk/ government/collections/safeguarding-summit-commitments
- 7
The Ministry for Foreign Affairs (16 May 2022): Table 4. Development financing payments to Finland’s largest partner countries 2016-2021. https://um.fi/documents/35732/0/Tilastoliite+2021%2C+osa2. pdf/47739300-0dac-50c8-d9ce-706195ee8070?t=1649772600686
- 8
MOPAN (16 May 2022) MOPAN Assessment library https://www. mopanonline.org/assessments/
- 9
MOPAN: 2017-18 ASSESSMENTS, Global Environment Facility (GEF) 2019. https://www.mopanonline.org/assessments/gef2017-18/GEF%20 Report.pdf
- 10
MOPAN: 2017-18 ASSESSMENTS, United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) 2019.
https://www.mopanonline.org/assessments/unfpa2017-18/UNFPA%20Report.pdf(Link to another website.) - 11
MOPAN: 2017-18 ASSESSMENTS, UN Women 2019. https://www.mopanonline.org/assessments/unwomen2017-18/Final_assessment_UN_Women_2019_02_14.pdf(Link to another website.)
- 12
MOPAN: Assessment Report United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) 2021. https://www.mopanonline.org/assessments/unicef2020/MOPAN%20Assessment%20UNICEF%20web%20[for%20download].pdf(Link to another website.)
- 13
Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland (2020). Finnish Development Policy Influencing Activities in Multilateral Organisations, Volume 1, Main report. https://um.fi/documents/384998/0/Vol1+_MainReport_Evaluation+of+Finnish+Development+Policy+Influencing+Activities+in+Multilateral+Organisations+%281%29.pdf/2666cd6a-0bb2-1c76-0659-db1ac6fa30bf?t=1591860985653
- 14
A more in-depth examination was conducted by the World Bank Group, UNFPA, UNICEF, the World Food Programme WFP, UN Women, International Fund for Agricultural Development IFAD, the Food and Agriculture Organization FAO and the International Trade Centre ITC.
- 15
MOPAN: 2017-18 ASSESSMENTS, International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) 2019. https://www.mopanonline.org/assessments/ifad2017-18/IFAD%20Report.pdf(Link to another website.)
- 16
African Development Bank Group (2022). Annual Development Effectiveness Review 2022. https://www.afdb.org/en/documents/annual-development-effectiveness-review-2022(Link to another website.)
- 17
European Commission (2021). Global Europe: Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument. https://ec.europa.eu/ info/funding-tenders/find-funding/eu-funding-programmes/global-europe-neighbourhood-development-and-international-cooperation-instrument_fi
- 18
One of the organisations receiving programme support is Fingo, the members of which include 270 Finnish civil society organisations.
Adaptation of the country programme to crises: Ethiopia
The adjustment measures concerned all cooperation:
Rural development
- The implementation areas of the projects were changed due to the security situation.
- Funds were directed to the needs of internally displaced persons and to humanitarian assistance.
- Emphasis was placed on hygiene and such things as water supply at health stations during the pandemic.
- Support was allocated to refugee camps for internally displaced people and areas affected by drought.
- Basic education funding was allocated to the reconstruction of schools and school-level activities.
- One-off support has been providing to education in crisis situations together with UNICEF with the aim of getting school drop-outs in conflict areas to attend school again. One means used to achieve this has been offering school meals.
Although the conflict and pandemic slowed down the implementation of the projects and prevented access to some areas, and infrastructure was also destroyed during the war, the adjustment made it possible to minimise the damage and provide support to the groups in most vulnerable situations. The projects were ultimately able to function and produce results well in light of the situation.