book1

are priori� zed in the PRSPs or Na� onal Development Plans. However,
when gender equality and priori� es are not adequately mainstreamed
in the na� onal development plans and the budgets, donors own gender
equality priority becomes ineff ec� ve. In Nepal's case such problems may
not be encountered because Nepal's development plans, par� cularly TYIP
(2007-2010) seemed to be several steps ahead of donors in its vision and
goals of building a gender equitable, inclusive and just society through
structural reforms, and gender and inclusion sensi� ve policies, strategies
and programs. Problems, however, may be encountered in implementa� on
on the part of GON and changing donor agenda and non-fulfi llment of
commitments made by them.
Harmoniza� on and coordina� on of partnerships between donors and
aid recipient governments is supposed to be achieved through structures
that enable joint working for improved eff ec� veness and effi ciency in
aid delivery. Considering the transac� on costs that the diversity of donor
approaches and repor� ng demands places on developing countries,
harmoniza� on is a commendable ini� a� ve. The issue is to ensure adequate
gender mainstreaming in these mechanisms so that gender equality
and inclusion remain a priority agenda not only in planning but also in
implementa� on.
Managing for results requires data to measure progress and assessment
of diff eren� al impact of policies, plans, programs and development
assistance against the priori� zed na� onal goals. It also requires adequate
use of this informa� on in formula� on of further policies and programs.
The Paris Declara� on iden� fi es twelve process monitoring indicators for
measuring public fi nancial management, accoun� ng and audi� ng systems,
procurement systems, results frameworks, transparency and capacity.
However, originally, none of the assessment tools incorporated elements to
monitor gender and social equity. The limita� on of the system to monitor
gender, inclusion or MDGs was acknowledged a� er intensive lobbying by
UNIFEM, the DAC Network, and civil society organiza� ons world over, since
2010 new gender dimension has been added to the monitoring formats.
Transparency and mutual accountability demands answers from public
authori� es on deliverance on commitments. Accountability needs to be
seen in a broader frame as the accountability of public authori� es, whether
donors or developing country governments, not just to each other, but to
their own socie� es.
The Aid Eff ec� veness Agenda has introduced and assigned increasing
role to new modali� es for aid – direct budget support, sector wise
assistance program (SWAp) joint programs, and NGO funding. However,
the declara� on men� oned gender only once. The focus was en� rely on
fi nancial discipline and priva� za� on while development goals stayed only
in the background. The GBA and GRB have acquired new importance in
this context – as comprehensive measures to ensure adequate fi nancing is
in place for mainstreaming gender into the mechanisms and instruments
Changing paradigms of aid eff ec� veness in Nepal 97