There has been no major shift in the trend of international development cooperation in Ibero-America in recent years. As indicated in the previous chapter, ODA to countries in the region remains steady at approximately US$5 billion, and is not expected to grow. It may decrease in step with expected global ODA reductions owing to donor fiscal contraction. South-South and regional cooperation in the framework of consultative mechanisms and integration processes will continue to grow, taking up more energy and a larger place in national and regional dynamics.
In a context of perpetual evolution, cooperation institutions will have to continue adapting to the new world, frequently changing course and structures, and combining functions.
The next section details the principal trends and challenges countries will need to tackle in respect to their structures, institutions, legislative frameworks and planning.
1. Institutions and location
• As cooperation given gains importance, it perhaps no longer makes sense to attach cooperation institutions to Planning Ministries or Secretariats. Cooperation activities, whether on the provider or recipient side, involve close interrelations with foreign agencies. Accordingly, it would be logical to attach these institutions to the Foreign Ministry, although granting them some autonomy and the authority to interact with other ministries. They could still coordinate with the Planning Ministry or similar entities to integrate foreign cooperation with national and sector plans.
• Alternatively, the institution could report directly to the Office of the President.
• If not feasible, another option is to have two distinct institutions to resolve the double function aspect: one responsible for foreign ODA and South-South cooperation received, the other supplying cooperation and participating in regional and sub-regional programs.
• Attaching them to the Foreign Ministry would not necessarily entail subordination to the current foreign policy agenda. This is a recurring debate among donors such as Spain, inviting constant tension. Some thought has been given to creating Cooperation Ministries, although such a solution sounds somewhat extreme in the case of the principal Latin American providers.
• At the end of this chapter, a Cooperation Agency is offered as a potential best solution.
2. Legal and planning frameworks
• It would be desirable for all countries to enact legislation to protect and direct international cooperation, transcending the simple delegation of duties to the responsible institution. Although cooperation is protected by encompassing legislative frameworks such as the Constitution, there remains a need for laws specifying the principles, objectives, planning and coordination frameworks, organs and functions. Such laws will not only protect and direct, but also ensure the stability of cooperation over time.
• Such a Cooperation Law could be further complemented with regulations, policies, decrees and plans, mindful of not being excessive but necessary and practical for effective management. Multiyear master plans are a valuable tool for introducing strategy and stability.
• Cooperation received (ODA and SSC) must necessarily be linked to the country’s National Development Plan. Cooperation given should preferably follow a plan combining political orientation with the supply inventory, priorities, and processes.
• Changes are needed to improve the still limited scope and coverage of legal support afforded South-South cooperation in many countries.
3. Structure
There is no perfect structure, applicable to all cases. The particular circumstances and institutional framework of each country merits a case-by-case analysis. Nonetheless, some relevant trends may be postulated from a review of cases.
• A recipient institution may be best served by a combined geographic/players (bi- or multi-lateral) structure
complemented by some functional planning and evaluation units, with line ministries providing the sector knowledge.
• A process-based organization, such as that implemented in Ecuador, is appealing although complex unless external and internal interactions are clearly defined for each phase of a program or project. • In provider countries, on the other hand, separate units for geographic areas and players may work best,
especially considering that triangulation with traditional donors is often the preferred mode of financing. However, the cooperation institution must accrue sector experience. This suggests adopting a matrix, a complex option requiring careful thought for a clear and authoritative distribution of power within the structure. • Regional Cooperation should be afforded greater visibility in institutional organization charts. It presupposes working as a team with others in cross-cutting programs, calling for specific skills and greater relevance in the institutions.
4. Human capital
The principal challenges and trends discussed earlier in the chapter may be summarized as follows:
• It is important to provide institutions with stability at the higher levels, and staff specifically trained in international development cooperation with years of service to gain expertise in this line of work.
• Young professionals who bring new blood, sound training and energy to the institutions must be assured of job stability and continuing education.
• In addition to traditional education in project management and negotiation skills, staff should be trained in the transfer and absorption of know-how and experiences, key skills for technical cooperation.
5. Coordination with other cooperation agencies and players
• Despite advances reported by several countries, others still face the challenge of implementing powerful information systems. Many systems are incomplete, do not reflect all cooperation received, let alone cooperation provided, nor do they provide sufficient information on projects and programs. Earlier chapters in this Report discuss the inability of these systems to assess the economic value of cooperation provided. • Inter-ministerial coordination for foreign ODA inflows is strong, but not for SSC given. Cooperation
institutions know and have command over what they manage or are involved in. One way to advance inter- agency coordination would be to build synergies, and therefore efficiency, while respecting jurisdictions. Several systems support this avenue but all require political will and the appropriate framework.
• Equal importance should be given to encouraging social engagement and coordination with other players
in cooperation plans and activities. From joint policy and program discussions to coordinated sector and geographic area interventions, there is an array of opportunities for participation – insufficiently explored, with little legal coverage, therefore lacking stability and relevance. Creation of Cooperation Boards with clear competencies and sound frameworks would be a positive step forward.
6. Cooperation modalities
Too frequently, South-South cooperation is only associated with technical cooperation. This Report usually referred to it as non-reimbursable financial assistance. Moreover, a few countries in the region are actively involved in economic and financial cooperation and debt management, contributing funds to international, regional or sub-regional financial organizations or large infrastructure programs. There ought to be a closer connection between these two cooperation activities, currently split between Foreign Ministry for technical cooperation, and Ministry of Finance or of Economy for financial assistance. Such a rapport could, inter alia, make better use of contributions by at least articulating technical cooperation with nonreimbursable financial cooperation contributed by more and more countries in the region to International Financial Institutions.
7. International Cooperation Agencies
In closing, some remarks about a potentially sound institutional architecture valid for some countries. We advocate the Agency model, although the name is unimportant – it could just as well be called Institution or Secretariat. What matters are the principles and directions most frequently associated with an Agency. • A decentralized or non-concentrated entity, with some autonomy, attached to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Spain took the initiative of adding the term “and Cooperation” to the Ministry name, signaling the importance attached to international cooperation for a country’s foreign action. Alternatively, the entity could report directly to the Office of the President.
• It should have a policy-making board or council with representatives from other ministries to enhance inter- agency coordination and ownership by other public entities. In reciprocity for inviting ministries to sit on the Agency’s governing body, the ministries’ cooperation activities should be a joint effort tackled through integrated master plans and joint commissions under the Agency’s leadership.
• Governed by public administrative regulations with all applicable controls, the entity should nonetheless retain some flexibility to deal with a sensitive issue: international cooperation in complex and delicate situations.
• Properly staffed to ensure good management and bring value added to cooperation resources. Staffing should be proportionate to the volume of resources managed and the complexity of execution. Senior management and a professional corps trained in the subject matter will provide stability.
• The structure should be such as to provide value added to projects and programs, accruing experience, geographic and sector knowledge, plus skills to manage key processes, including the transfer and uptake of know-how.