Study on Communicating Development Results

"Communication is emerging as a crucial factor in the process of results management as well as in strengthening accountability relationships."

This study is part of a process leading to the development of guiding principles for results communication. The process is being undertaken by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Informal Network of Development Assistance Committee (DAC) Development Communicators (DevCom Network). Initially, author Peter da Costa prepared a background paper, "Managing for and Communicating Development Results", which provided an overview of the benefits as well as challenges of integrating communication into results-based management. That background paper informed discussions at the meeting of the Joint Venture on Managing for Development Results (JV MfDR) on February 5 2009 and DevCom's Communicating Results Working Group meeting on February 6 2009. The present study reflects the core issues discussed in the background paper as well as key points of agreement in the two meetings.

Da Costa begins by spelling out why results are at the heart of the effort to improve development effectiveness in the changing aid system. For reasons he outlines, the focus has shifted from aid effectiveness to development effectiveness, which means that attribution of agency to specific actors must give way to communicating how aid is making a significant contribution to wider development efforts. "In this endeavour, communication assumes increasing importance. Results communicators must move beyond reporting about input-output towards telling a story about how the aggregate contribution of several donors, working in partnership with partner country governments in a collective effort, is bringing about structural change." As this assertion implies, there is a new emphasis on building the capacity of partner country governments to be able to communicate results effectively.

Next, da Costa offers a conceptual framework aimed at situating the role of communication in the wider results agenda. At its core is the distinction between two interdependent types of communication. The purpose of the first type, communicating about results (related to "corporate communication"), is to strengthen donor accountability to key high-level policy-makers, parliaments, and donor publics. The second type, communication for results (which da Costa claims is akin to "communication for development" (C4D) or "strategic communication"), is a tool as well as a process for the effective delivery of aid. "C4D approaches privilege a role for communication throughout the programme cycle, as opposed to exclusively as a dissemination function at the end of the programme. Integrating communication as a management tool for project or programme has internal as well as external dimensions..." Ideally, da Costa argues, communicators should be integrated as results professionals, and efforts should be made to ensure that the two types of communication are integrated seamlessly"

In addressing the question of what results should be reported and communicated, the study identifies the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) as a key set of targets around which a consensus could be reached. However, a number of other targets present themselves, including human rights and governance standards, as well as aid effectiveness indicators. The study finds these standards to be mutually reinforcing, contributory to the aggregate story about how development is progressing, and measurable and reportable using the same approach and system. One lesson learned from the experience of Norway is that whatever standards are used, bad as well as good results need to be reported as this provides the best chance of engaging the public in honest, frank debate.

Da Costa then reflects on the growing momentum behind ownership, as reflected in the core commitments made in the Paris Declaration as well as the Accra Agenda for Action (AAA). This underscores, on the one hand, the need for partner countries to own and lead communication on development effectiveness and, on the other hand, the need for donor communication efforts to be better harmonised, aligned with, and integrated into partner country communication systems. This shifting focus is inspiring results professionals to address how partner countries can report and communicate their own results. While the donor country government may be eager to report results that show how well their aid is working, the partner country governments are more likely to attribute development results to their own policy actions. "Another finding is that given the fact that most governments have credibility and trust problems, their sole responsibility for gathering, aggregating, and communicating results may be called into question."

The following excerpted material indicates some recommendations for the way forward:

1. "Maintain the Momentum Post-Accra: The need to focus on development results emerged as a key outcome of the Accra High-Level Forum. The AAA made specific reference to communicating results....In the immediate term, it remains important to showcase this breakthrough, since it positions communicating results firmly as part of the post-Accra MfDR agenda...
2. Pilot Approaches in Donor and Partner Countries: Concrete work is needed to demonstrate the value-added of communication as a tool for development effectiveness....This should involve pilot approaches and initiatives, as well as advocacy and tangible support for partner country results communication....The potential for partner country-led and owned results communication is significant, and the opportunity now exists to make real headway.
3. Improving Results in Donor Agencies: The proposal by Switzerland to develop a results reporting approach among OECD donor agencies, presented to the JV MfDR meeting on 5 February 2009...constitutes another important entry point to embed the communicating results agenda, and formal collaboration needs to be established between DevCom and the work stream, via JV MfDR.
4. Collaborate with the CoPs: The regional Communities of Practice [CoPs]on MfDR in Asia, Africa and Latin America...have grappled with communication for the past 2-3 years and would welcome collaboration with the DevCom network. Ways need to be found to concretely collaborate. The CoPs will be important allies to the JV MfDR and DevCom as they explore potential initiatives to strengthen partner country capacity to communicate results.
5. Bringing statistics down to earth:...In the spirit of advancing ownership, the objective should be to enhance the capacity of partner countries so that they can gather their own data and tell their own story. It is entirely conceivable that a 'results value chain' can be developed that situates partner countries at the heart of the collection, aggregation, reporting and communication of their own results. This will effectively move the agenda beyond short-term questions of attribution, towards a sustainable and mutually reinforcing paradigm of donor country support for partner countries which results in enhanced development effectiveness."

• This 18-page study is not currently available online. Please contact the author for further information.
• A 2-page issues brief, titled "Communicating Development Results", was prepared by OECD (date: June 10 2009). To request a copy, please contact Stefan Schmitz or Steffen Beitz at the addresses below.