Effective implementation of the Compromiso de Sevilla, adopted at the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development (FfD4), will require stronger country-level monitoring, real-time data, and broader participation beyond governments, speakers observed at a policy dialogue jointly organised by the Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD), Bangladesh, and the Starling Institute, New York.
Held on the sidelines of the ECOSOC Financing for Development Follow-up Forum, the dialogue—“Does FfD Work Where It Matters? Strengthening Accountability through Country-Level Monitoring”—brought together representatives from the United Nations, international organisations, think tanks, philanthropic foundations, and country practitioners to examine how the accountability architecture established under the Compromiso de Sevilla can translate into measurable development outcomes at the national level. The discussion focused on strengthening localisation of the FfD follow-up process and identifying practical approaches to track implementation and impact.
Delivering the keynote presentation, Dr Debapriya Bhattacharya, Distinguished Fellow at CPD and Founding Board Member of the Starling Institute, argued that the global development financing landscape has become increasingly uncertain following FfD4. Rising geopolitical tensions, declining official development assistance, mounting debt vulnerabilities, fragmented multilateral cooperation, and widening data gaps have made it more difficult to assess whether international financing commitments are delivering tangible results for developing countries. At the same time, he noted that important positive developments—including reforms in development cooperation, progress on beneficial ownership transparency, and the establishment of national FfD focal points—provide opportunities to strengthen accountability.
Dr Bhattacharya proposed a People-Centred Accountability Framework for Tracking the Commitments of FfD4, designed to complement existing intergovernmental monitoring mechanisms through a bottom-up, country-led approach. The proposed framework seeks to connect financing commitments with actual development outcomes by combining government data with evidence generated by civil society, the private sector, and other non-state actors. It would emphasise real-time country-level evidence, disaggregated data, and development outcomes rather than compliance reporting alone, while amplifying perspectives from the Global South in global policy discussions. Initial pilot implementation is envisaged in Bangladesh, Kenya, Senegal, and Brazil.
Highlighting the rationale for such an initiative, Dr Bhattacharya noted that major gaps persist in tracking climate finance, foreign direct investment, philanthropic flows, illicit financial flows, and aid effectiveness because comparable country-level data remain limited. He also pointed to evidence suggesting that country-owned statistical systems are often underutilised by development partners despite being widely available, underscoring the need for more systematic use of national data in global accountability processes.
The subsequent panel discussion brought together Mariangela Parra-Lancourt of the UN Financing for Sustainable Development Office, Olivier Cattaneo of the OECD, André de Mello e Souza of Brazil, Kwame Owino of Kenya’s Institute of Economic Affairs, Towfiqul Islam Khan of CPD, Kizito Byenkya of the Open Society Foundations, Sander Glas of the Gates Foundation, and other participants.
Speakers broadly agreed that while the Compromiso de Sevilla provides a stronger institutional architecture for follow-up than previous Financing for Development outcomes, its success will depend on effective implementation at the country level. They stressed the importance of nationally owned monitoring systems, stronger domestic institutions, improved data quality, and greater collaboration among governments, civil society, development partners, and philanthropic organisations. Participants also highlighted the need to reduce fragmentation across existing monitoring initiatives and to ensure that evidence generated through country-level processes informs global policy deliberations.
Reflecting on Bangladesh’s experience, Towfiqul Islam Khan observed that countries facing declining concessional financing, debt pressures, illicit financial flows, and graduation-related challenges require stronger multilateral cooperation as well as more effective domestic accountability mechanisms. He argued that country-level monitoring can help demonstrate how global financing commitments influence national development outcomes while strengthening the evidence base for policy engagement.
The dialogue concluded with participants emphasising that stronger accountability will require practical, evidence-based monitoring systems capable of linking international commitments to measurable improvements in financing access and development outcomes. The proposed people-centred accountability framework was presented as a complementary initiative that could strengthen both national ownership and global accountability by bringing country-level evidence into future Financing for Development reviews.
