Over the past year, I’ve been able to see how an idea goes from a proposal in a discussion to a principle in an international consensus document.
The principle started with a simple concept: effective organizations innovate (look for new ways of doing things) and learn (keep track of what they’ve done, evaluate it, and modify their behavior accordingly).
From the Paris Principles to the International Framework
This came out of a consultation of U.S.-based NGOs in Washington, DC in mid-2010. I proposed the innovation part, a colleague spoke about learning, and the ideas were combined. Similar conversations were going on in 55 other countries around the world, and the list of principles that came out of all of those discussions went to Turkey later in the year, where they were reviewed and approved by 170 civil society organization (CSO) representatives and became known as the Istanbul Principles. This year, in June, the principles were discussed again, at a Global Assembly held in Cambodia. The result: a new document called the International Framework for CSO Development Effectiveness.
This entire process was inspired by an earlier set of consultations led by the Development Assistance Committee of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD DAC), which produced its own documents called the Paris Declaration of Aid Effectiveness (2005) and the Accra Agenda for Action (2008). These frameworks intended to set the global standard for how international development assistance should be funded and implemented. They have, indeed, become the international benchmarks (for those countries which still care about things like international benchmarks), but CSOs saw them as having a big limitation: they were focused on the role of governments, with civil society in the Paris document relegated to a single line.
That did change a bit with the Accra Agenda, which identified CSOs as “independent development actors in their own right” and encouraged them to determine how they could apply the Paris Principles to make their own development efforts more effective. The new International Framework can be seen, in part, as a response to that challenge.
Knowledge and learning
One of the new principles adopted in the International Framework (the full name, which I would have made up as a parody of a title chose by international consensus if it hadn’t actually been real, is the “Siem Reap Consensus on the International Framework for CSO Development Effectiveness”), is “Create and share knowledge and commit to mutual learning”:
“CSOs are effective as development actors when they … enhance the ways they learn from their experience, from other CSOs and development actors, integrating evidence from development practice and results, including the knowledge and wisdom of local and indigenous communities, strengthening innovation and their vision for the future they would like to see….”
The basic idea remains, but a lot has changed from what had been discussed back in 2010. A key sentence from the rough draft didn’t make it into the final document: “This applies to technical methodologies, organizational procedures and processes, and new tools and interventions.” Now the focus is on the softer sociological issues that are stereotypically thought of as being in the CSO domain: “areas of local knowledge, cultural issues, gender relations, values, spirituality and different ways of working.”
These are all important categories, but it would be a mistake to think that the only knowledge CSOs have to share is about those cultural issues. Yes, many CSOs represent or defend various cultural traditions, and in many cases that may be the reason why they were started in the first place, but that doesn’t mean that that’s the only area they can play in. Their cultural heritage can potentially inspire them to come up with new solutions for their communities – social, economic, and technological solutions. If they really are going to be seen as critical development partners, then they should be welcome in discussions on agriculture and telecommunications as well as on cultural issues. Hopefully, then, people will interpret this principle broadly and boldly.
One additional note about the International Framework: one of the most important things it does to help CSOs play a more prominent role is to also call on CSOs to hold themselves more accountable for their actions. I think this will go a long way toward helping the document to be taken seriously.
Here is the full list of CSO Effectiveness principles:
- Respect and promote human rights and social justice
- Embody gender equality and equity while promoting women and girl’s rights
- Focus on people’s empowerment, democratic ownership and participation
- Promote Environmental Sustainability [capitalized in the original]
- Practice transparency and accountability
- Pursue equitable partnerships and solidarity
- Create and share knowledge and commit to mutual learning
- Commit to realizing positive sustainable change




















Recent Comments