instituting broad-based, robust consultation mechanisms. Coordination would be more effective through the widening of stakeholder participation to include a broader segment of civil society organisations and the private sector, and expanding the aid coordination process and mechanism to local levels. It is also recognised that there is under-investment in the core capacity of ministries to manage sector working groups effectively. Aid effectiveness is enhanced when donors use common arrangements to manage and deliver aid in support of partner country priorities. In 2010, only 18 per cent of total aid provided to Laos made use of programme-based approaches, an increase of 9 per cent from 2007. Line ministries, donors and civil society organisations do not yet share a common understanding of programme-based approaches and much room remains for improvement in developing sector strategies, costing them and increasing capacity at the central and local levels. In order to reduce aid fragmentation, the Government of Laos recognises the benefits of more joined-up programming, co‑financing and delegated co‑operation arrangements. However, it is not at the stage of promoting synergies between similar activities in development areas undertaken at the national, regional and local levels. The sector working are deemed to be groups’ secretariats and unable to play a significant role in facilitating collaboration and thus reducing the fragmentation caused by the delivery of aid in many small pieces from many donors. Development initiatives in rural development As indicated earlier, progress towards the target of reducing hunger by half, as part of attaining the Millennium Development Goal 1 (MDG 1) is noted as being seriously off-track (Government of Laos/United Nations 2010). The Poverty Hunger Index indicates that progress on poverty overall is being undercut by persistent levels of chronic malnutrition and inequalities. This kind of a situation illustrates the inadequacy of on-going development interventions in terms of making a significant traction in rural poverty reduction. The impact of most programs on reduced household poverty are undermined by limited expertise in analysing and facilitating improvements in rural market value chains, the limited access to financial services for poor farmers, and an inability to find appropriate development solutions for many of the most vulnerable households. These them from being able to participate in traditional households’ circumstances preclude donor programs that provide agriculture and other rural livelihoods strengthening services. Integration of these services with approaches that transfer assets and provide other forms of social protection is an area which has received little donor attention to date.
instituting broad-based, robust consultation mechanisms. Coordination would be more effective through the widening of stakeholder participation to include a broader segment of civil society organisations and the private sector, and expanding the aid coordination process and mechanism to local levels. It is also recognised that there is under-investment in the core capacity of ministries to manage sector working groups effectively. Aid effectiveness is enhanced when donors use common arrangements to manage and deliver aid in support of partner country priorities. In 2010, only 18 per cent of total aid provided to Laos made use of programme-based approaches, an increase of 9 per cent from 2007. Line ministries, donors and civil society organisations do not yet share a common understanding of programme-based approaches and much room remains for improvement in developing sector strategies, costing them and increasing capacity at the central and local levels. In order to reduce aid fragmentation, the Government of Laos recognises the benefits of more joined-up programming, co‑financing and delegated co‑operation arrangements. However, it is not at the stage of promoting synergies between similar activities in development areas undertaken at the national, regional and local levels. The sector working groups’ secretariats are deemed to be and unable to play a significant role in facilitating collaboration and thus reducing the fragmentation caused by the delivery of aid in many small pieces from many donors. Development initiatives in rural development As indicated earlier, progress towards the target of reducing hunger by half, as part of attaining the Millennium Development Goal 1 (MDG 1) is noted as being seriously off-track (Government of Laos/United Nations 2010). The Poverty Hunger Index indicates that progress on poverty overall is being undercut by persistent levels of chronic malnutrition and inequalities. This kind of a situation illustrates the inadequacy of on-going development interventions in terms of making a significant traction in rural poverty reduction. The impact of most programs on reduced household poverty are undermined by limited expertise in analysing and facilitating improvements in rural market value chains, the limited access to financial services for poor farmers, and an inability to find appropriate development solutions for many of the most vulnerable households. These households’ circumstances preclude them from being able to participate in traditional donor programs that provide agriculture and other rural livelihoods strengthening services. Integration of these services with approaches that transfer assets and provide other forms of social protection is an area which has received little donor attention to date.