IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/idospb/335913.html

Transparency portals in development cooperation: More effectiveness and better communication?

Author

Listed:
  • Janus, Heiner
  • Röthel, Tim

Abstract

Transparency portals in development cooperation serve two main functions: accountability to a specialist audience and communication with the wider public. In this policy brief, we conduct an international comparison to demonstrate how transparency portals could better fulfil these requirements. As part of a broader effectiveness agenda, donors are pursuing the goal of greater transparency. In line with this international agenda, transparency is intended to promote learning and improve predictability for partner countries, as well as combatting corruption and fulfilling accountability requirements. Taken together, these factors can contribute to greater development effectiveness. Donors also hope that their work will receive greater public support. By providing detailed information, experts will be better able to assess the quality of development projects. The aim is to initiate a process of learning and improvement, and to convince the general public that taxpayers' money is being used effectively. Citizens can use the portals to understand project content and develop their own views. However, current debates suggest a more complex dynamic. The "Bike Lanes in Peru" project caused a scandal in Germany. Against the backdrop of the closure of the US Agency for International Development (USAID), individual projects became politicised. Accordingly, transparency portals can also have unintended consequences. For example, information can be taken out of context, leading to misunderstandings and legitimate criticism of individual projects going unanswered. Donors can mitigate these negative effects by redesigning transparency portals. In times of declining approval ratings and cuts to development budgets, they should use the portals to communicate in a targeted manner and demonstrate a greater willingness to engage in honest debate. The following recommendations could help with this: • Even greater transparency of impact data: Although progress is being made in transparent reporting on project content and financial data, detailed project data on impact measurement and results, as set out in logical frameworks (logframes), is lacking. Increasing transparency in this area could improve development effectiveness. • Additional investment in communication: Information that is provided in accordance with internationally comparable standards must be translated for a lay audience. In many donor countries, a large proportion of the population has no fixed positive or negative attitude towards development cooperation. Targeted, group-oriented communication should appeal to these people more directly. • Openness to criticism and discourse: Development policy actors often resist critical examination of their work in public debate. They tend to respond defensively to criticism, whether general or specific. However, informed discussions based on project data from the portals offer an opportunity to openly discuss ineffective projects and, if necessary, replace them with effective ones.

Suggested Citation

  • Janus, Heiner & Röthel, Tim, 2025. "Transparency portals in development cooperation: More effectiveness and better communication?," IDOS Policy Briefs 37/2025, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS), Bonn.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:idospb:335913
    DOI: 10.23661/ipb37.2025
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/335913/1/1947866311.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.23661/ipb37.2025?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Howard White, 2019. "The twenty-first century experimenting society: the four waves of the evidence revolution," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-7, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ashrita Saran & Howard White & Hannah Kuper, 2020. "Evidence and gap map of studies assessing the effectiveness of interventions for people with disabilities in low‐and middle‐income countries," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), March.
    2. Riedmiller, Sebastian & Sutter, Matthias & Tonke, Sebastian, 2025. "Designing Effective Interventions," IZA Discussion Papers 18273, IZA Network @ LISER.
    3. Kaplan, Lennart & Kuhnt, Jana & Steinert, Janina I., 2020. "Do no harm? Field research in the Global South: Ethical challenges faced by research staff," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    4. Prachi Pundir & Ashrita Saran & Howard White & Ramya Subrahmanian & Jill Adona, 2020. "Interventions for reducing violence against children in low‐ and middle‐income countries: An evidence and gap map," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), December.
    5. Christopher Mikton & Marie Beaulieu & Yongjie Yon & Julien Cadieux Genesse & Kevin St‐Martin & Mark Byrne & Amanda Phelan & Jennifer Storey & Michaela Rogers & Fiona Campbell & Parveen Ali & David Bur, 2022. "PROTOCOL: Global elder abuse: A mega‐map of systematic reviews on prevalence, consequences, risk and protective factors and interventions," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(2), June.
    6. Richard Manning & Ian Goldman & Gonzalo Hernández Licona, 2020. "The impact of impact evaluation: Are impact evaluation and impact evaluation synthesis contributing to evidence generation and use in low- and middle-income countries?," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2020-20, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    7. Salguero, Ricardo Alonzo Fernandez, 2025. "El Consenso de Washington una revisión narrativa de su evidencia, impactos y transformaciones," SocArXiv krshu_v1, Center for Open Science.
    8. Falko T. Buschke & Christine Estreguil & Lucia Mancini & Fabrice Mathieux & Hugh Eva & Luca Battistella & Stephen Peedell, 2023. "Digital Storytelling Through the European Commission’s Africa Knowledge Platform to Bridge the Science-Policy Interface for Raw Materials," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 1141-1154, June.
    9. Ricardo Alonzo Fern'andez Salguero, 2025. "The Crisis Simulator for Bolivia (KISr-p): An Empirically Grounded Modeling Framework," Papers 2510.16537, arXiv.org.
    10. Ruth Stewart & Harsha Dayal & Laurenz Langer & Carina van Rooyen, 2019. "The evidence ecosystem in South Africa: growing resilience and institutionalisation of evidence use," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-12, December.
    11. Sebastian Riedmiller & Matthias Sutter & Sebastian Tonke, 2025. "Designing Effective Interventions," CESifo Working Paper Series 12279, CESifo.
    12. Mundy, Karen, 2023. "Living and learning in the field of international development education," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    13. Ariel Aloe & Eric Barends & Douglas Besharov & Zulfiqar Bhutta & Xinsheng ‘Cindy’ Cai & Marie Gaarder & Ruth Garside & Neal Haddaway & Elizabeth Kristjansson & Brandy Maynard & Lorraine Mazerolle & Ro, 2020. "Editorial: Fifty Campbell systematic reviews relevant to the policy response to COVID‐19," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(3), September.
    14. Janus, Heiner & Marschall, Paul & Öhler, Hannes, 2020. "Eine integrierte Perspektive auf die Wirksamkeit von Entwicklungszusammenarbeit," Analysen und Stellungnahmen 11/2020, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    15. Esser, Daniel E. & Janus, Heiner, 2025. "Everything, everywhere, all at once? Donor bureaucrats struggle with four dimensions of development effectiveness," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    16. Avdeenko, Alexandra & Frölich, Markus, 2020. "Research standards in empirical development economics: What’s well begun, is half done," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:idospb:335913. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ditubde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.