Managing multilaterals’ effectiveness: which way forward?

There has been an increase in the attention paid to the measurement of the performance of development aid and of aid agencies. While the monitoring and evaluation of aid delivered by bilateral agencies has been a well-established practice for quite some time, the measurement of the performance of Multilateral Organizations (MOs) by bilateral back-donors, and the use of this information in improved bilateral policies towards these same MOs is more recent. But of late there has been a mushrooming of bilateral initiatives that try to assess MO performance. Currently bilateral donors seem to be moving toward a more harmonized approach through the introduction of assessments that are organized by networks of donors. How the information from these assessments is being used in policy-making, however, is far from clear. This paper analyzes the current state of affairs in the field of assessing multilaterals. It feeds into the debate on how bilateral donors should effectively and efficiently manage the performance of the MOs they fund. The analysis of three country cases (Belgium, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom) reveals significant differences in the performance management of multilaterals by bilaterals. The paper examines these differences in the light of the literature on performance measurement. It argues that while donors are increasing their efforts in measuring the performance of multilaterals, the use of this information often remains insufficient. The good example set by the UK is closely linked to administrative and political features of this country and difficult to just duplicate by other countries. The field of managing the performance of MOs remains scattered, unsystematic, and above all, challenging.