Latest Documents

The report provides an overview of development finance with biodiversity-related objectives from a wide range of sources: bilateral Development Assistance Committee (DAC) members, non-DAC and South-South and triangular co-operation providers, multilateral institutions, private finance mobilised by development finance, and private philanthropy. The estimates are based on OECD statistical data. The report identifies the main gaps between biodiversity-related priorities and investments, and provides detailed estimates on financial allocations to the fight against illegal wildlife trade; nature-based solutions; indigenous peoples and local communities; the mainstreaming of biodiversity; gender equality; and climate change. These elements can help DAC members and other stakeholders to step up and target their biodiversity-related investments, notably to implement the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework under the Convention on Biological Diversity.

The OECD’s Development Assistance Committee (DAC) conducts peer reviews of individual members once every five to six years. Reviews seek to improve the quality and effectiveness of members’ development co-operation, highlighting good practices and recommending improvements. A DAC member since only 2016, Hungary has achieved impressive growth in its official development assistance (ODA). Bilateral co-operation has increased, in particular, and relies on close consultation with partners. Hungary champions sustainable water management, combining diplomacy, domestic expertise and development co-operation. In fragile contexts, it focuses its support to local civil society organisations, and in particular faith-based actors. As it continues to make progress towards established DAC standards and ways of working, an institutional reorganisation provides Hungary with significant opportunities for further reform. This peer review provides a set of recommendations to increase the impact of Hungary’s engagement in partner countries, deepen collaboration across institutions and with stakeholders, strengthen internal systems, and balance tensions between domestic and global objectives.

This paper provides an overview of the main trends in development finance with biodiversity-related objectives for the period 2011 to 2020, using available OECD statistical data, from various sources. The resources covered are: Official Development Assistance and non-concessional development finance, both bilateral and multilateral, from members of the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) as well as non-members, including South-South and Triangular Co-operation; private finance mobilised by public interventions; and private philanthropy. In addition, this paper assesses financing provided by bilateral DAC members that are Parties to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, looking at how they fared collectively against the Aichi Target 20 on development finance. The paper was prepared by the DAC ENVIRONET Secretariat, with inputs from the OECD Environment Directorate, and with guidance from a group of DAC members.

Nearly three years after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, a succession of mutually reinforcing crises and a challenging global context are putting the multilateral development system under pressure. Multilateral development finance is stretched across an ever expanding list of priorities, ranging from humanitarian crisis response to the provision of global and regional public goods. The urgent nature of these crises requires renewed efforts to strengthen the financial capacity of the multilateral development system but should not divert attention from other parts of the reform agenda, such as the need to reduce the fragmentation of the multilateral architecture. This third edition of the Multilateral Development Finance report presents recent trends in multilateral development finance in order to inform decisions by the members of the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) on their strategic engagement with multilateral organisations. It presents an overview of challenges and ongoing reform efforts, and examines the evolution of financial flows to, and from, multilateral organisations. The report is supplemented by online statistics on DAC members’ multilateral contributions, available in the Development Co-operation Profiles.

The OECD’s Development Assistance Committee (DAC) conducts peer reviews of individual members once every five to six years. Reviews seek to improve the quality and effectiveness of members’ development co-operation, highlighting good practices and recommending improvements. The United States has led with substantial ODA contributions in response to multiple crises. Twenty-one US government agencies programme and deliver foreign assistance. USAID systematically incorporates collaboration, learning and adapting in its programme cycle and works to increase diversity, equity and inclusion by championing locally-led approaches. This peer review provides a set of recommendations for the United States to mitigate negative transboundary effects of its policies, promote more flexible budget appropriations in line with needs, equip its development finance institution to deliver and adopt a clearer approach to multilateral partnerships. It recommends that the United States puts development effectiveness at the heart of localisation, reinforce human resources, and consider conflict prevention in all country programmes.

Successive crises including COVID-19, Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine and the climate emergency are exacerbating inequalities between and within countries and stifling progress to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Paris Agreement. While developed countries deployed historic stimulus packages to build back better, developing countries lacked fiscal and monetary buffers to respond. Countries with the fewest resources face challenging trade-offs between short-term rescue and long-term financing for a sustainable recovery. The SDG financing gap in developing countries grew due to a drop in available resources called upon in the Addis Ababa Action Agenda coupled with rising financing needs. Official Development Assistance (ODA), or aid, played an important role to help narrow the gap, but could not do so on its own. Global crises open a window of opportunity for SDG alignment of broader resources to narrow the gap. Growing trillions in developed countries aim to reduce risks, including environmental, social, and governance (ESG) criteria. However, resources are not reaching the countries most in need. Urgent action is needed to remove bottlenecks for a more equitable and needs-based allocation of sustainable finance.