2011.03-Working Paper-South-South Cooperation A Concept Paper

South-South Cooperation: A Concept Paper—Philippa Brant1

Introduction

　　south-South Cooperation (SSC) is a concept that is used widely but is not necessarily widely understood. As the international system responds to changes in the economic, financial, political, and development structures and situations, the role of ‘the South’has become particularly pertinent. These changing global dynamics are prompting further participation of developing countries and newly emerging economies. Questions are increasingly being asked as to what role they can and should play, and how different experiences can be utilised and shared.
　　In this context, the past decade has seen a proliferation in agreements, institutions, forums, activities and projects of South-South Cooperation. This Working Paper seeks to draw together the existing literature and discussions on SSC in the global context. Whilst SSC is often applied to elements ranging from foreign direct investment, to cultural exchanges, to trade agreements, there is also a more specific focus on South-South
Development Cooperation.
　　This Working Paper will address two core questions: what is South-South Cooperation; and how and why it is different from North-South or ‘traditional’ development cooperation. In doing so, it traces the history and development of the concept, core institutional arrangements, main elements, and perceived benefits and
challenges – in an international context. Through this, it provides a basis for further research on specific country partnerships and case studies, and offers a global framework for understanding both China’s and IPRCC’s contribution to South-South Cooperation.

What is South-South Cooperation?

　　South-South Cooperation has been used to describe and refer to a plethora of activities involving the ‘global
South’.Thus, it can include forms of economic integration, trade partnerships, regional mechanisms, negotiating blocs within multilateral institutions, military alliances, cultural and educational exchanges, development cooperation, and so on. Cooperative relationships encompass state-led activities and agreements, as well as exchanges through private enterprises and civil society organisations. ‘In general, SSC is employed to refer to a broad set of phenomena involving relations among developing countries’ (Iara Costa Leita).
　　However, the term is also used more specifically in the context of development cooperation, where SSC is often
classified as a specific modality. A study provided by the UN Economic and Social Council in 2009 proposed a definition of South-South development assistance/ cooperation as consisting of: ‘grants and concessional
loans, including export credits (emphasis added) provided by one Southern country to another to finance projects, programs, technical cooperation, debt reliefand humanitarian assistance and its contributions to multilateral institutions and regional development banks.’ This definition is, however, still subject to much debate and not used consistently in the literature or official reports on SSC. What tends to be agreed upon, though, is that focusing only on ODA, as defined by the OECD-DAC, excludes many important elements of development cooperation undertaken in the South-South context.
　　It is important to note as well that there is also no cohesive systematised data or definitions used by
‘Southern’ countries either. For example, in the UN ECOSOC report, data referring to ‘aid’ given by China and India, for example, included export credits, whereas Brazil, which only considers technical cooperation to be SSC, excluded financial flows for trade production and grants related to humanitarian assistance. Thus, not only are there definitional inconsistencies, it is not yet possible to compare data on SSC. It is therefore imperative for each report to
clearly outline and define the terms being used and the scope of the data.

History & Development: When did SSC emerge and how has it changed?

　　The history and development of SSC not only reflects the changing nature of the international system, but has
also helped in shaping and redefining it. South-South Cooperation has a ‘long and notable’ history; a point
made by nearly all reports and existing literature and, as shall be explored later, a key element of its engagement.
The roots of SSC are fundamental to how the concept is presented and perceived.
　　SSC emerged in the 1950s in the context of the decolonisation movement and so-called ‘Third World’struggles. As such, it has a very specific political and ideological foundation. In particular, the Bandung Conference held in Indonesia in 1955 provided the institutional impetus for the development of various South-South alliances. It called for the ‘promotion of world peace and underscored the need for developing nations to reduce their dependence on industrialised
　　countries by providing technical assistance to one another’(UNCTAD 2010, 7). The Non-Aligned Movement and G77 were important elements of SSC in the international political arena at this time. Forms of South-South development cooperation were also established during this period. Despite their current classification as ‘emerging donors’, many Southern institutions and developing countries have been providing development assistance for many decades. The Kuwait Fund for Arab Economic Development, for example, was the first fund of its kind to be establishedby a developing country, and was set up in 1961. The first strategic framework for South-South technical cooperation was developed in 1978 with the adoption of the Buenos Aires Plan of Action (BAPOA), the outcome of the UN Conference on Technical Cooperation among Developing Countries. The declared aims of
BAPOA were to: strengthen economic, social and political interdependence among developing countries;
accelerate development; and correct distortions in the international system resulting from asymmetric power relations between developing and industrialised countries (UNCTAD 2010, 7).
　　The period of the 1980s and 1990s is generally regarded as a low-point in South-South Cooperation. In part, the
debt crisis resulted in countries focusing internally on domestic issues, and thus reduced mutual cooperation
efforts (Morais de Sa e Silva 2010, 3). The perceived lack of success regarding economic self-reliance and
political independence that had been at the forefront of developing countries’ mobilisation and cooperation
efforts also contributed to the decline in SSC activities and rhetoric during this time.
　　The turn of the twenty-first century has, however, seen the resurgence of the South-South Cooperation concept
and a renewed desire to utilise its potential. A number of factors have converged to contribute to this dynamic.
Trade between developing countries has expanded dramatically, from 7 per cent of world trade in 1985 to
approximately 20 per cent in 2008 (UNCTAD 2009). This changing geography of trade and investment has helped to shape and reinforce other aspects of South- South Cooperation, as new regional mechanisms are developed and development cooperation hasexpanded. As the UN Secretary General’s 2009Report states: ‘Paradoxically, the rapid deterioration of the global economy over the past several years has created a number of new opportunities for South-South cooperation, as many countries now look to one another and to their innovative cooperation mechanisms to facilitate market recovery and ensure greater stability in future at the global and local levels’ (B.14). In addition, the momentum has also been driven by middle-income countries (also termed newly emerging economies) such as Mexico, India, South Africa, Brazil and China, whose relative economic success and social gains offer potential lessons and models for other countries.
　　At the same time, questions regarding the effectiveness and legitimacy of the current aid system have gained
voice, with an increasing desire and necessity for new models and processes of development cooperation,
opening a space for ‘non-traditional’ (Southern) actors to play an important role. Interestingly, this expansion of SSC in terms of development assistance has been strongly supported, and financed, by‘traditional’ bilateral agencies and international organisations, which, as Morais de Sa e Silva (2010, 4) explains, ‘have served as important bridges for the exchange of experiences among countries of the South. Naturally, (though), these organisations and agencies have their own interests in this process’.
　　This current phase of SSC retains many of the core political attributes of the initial period, but has also expanded significantly in scope, embracing new actors, practices and sectors. SSC thus now seems to be driven more by economic considerations rather than purely political alliances, and appears to be playing amuch more significant role in the economic and social development of countries, compared with previous periods. There is also a significant trend towards more formal frameworks, including dialogue forums and actions plans (UNCTAD 2010, 9).

International Mechanisms & Frameworks for South- South Cooperation

　　The development of the concept and practices of SSC has been coupled with international institutions, mechanisms and frameworks to help guide, understand and facilitate SSC. The 2009 UN Secretary General
Report explains: ‘The international community is increasingly using SSC as a practical framework and a flexible modality for partnership-building and collaboration towards achieving internationally agreed development goals, including the MDGs. Numerous national governments, regional and intergovernmental groupings, multilateral organisations and donor agencies have intensified support for SSC through establishing or supporting innovative South-to-South, East-South, public-private and North-South-South triangular partnership arrangements’(D.37). In the international context some important multilateral frameworks, which have been expanding in scope and stature, include theUN system and the Task Team on SSC platform.

United Nations System

　　The main institutional body within the UN system is the Special Unit of South-South Cooperation (SUSSC),
which was set up by the UN General Assembly in 1972 and was known as the Special Unit for Technical Cooperation Among Developing Countries (TCDC) until 2004. Under the UNDP, the Unit’s mandate is to promote, coordinate and facilitate South-South and triangular cooperation. As such, it has made concerted efforts to institutionalise a global and multilateral South-South support architecture. In August 2008, for example, the Secretary General issued a decision requiring all heads of the UN system organisations, specialised agencies, funds and programs and regional commissions to give priority to promoting SSC (UN Secretary General Report 2009, E.51). The Special Unit now has three important platforms: the first is a policy dialogue and development platform designed to improve the position of SSC within the international development agenda; the second is designed to showcase well documented, successful, scalable ‘Southern-grown Development Solutions’, with the aim of marketing
and furthering development impact; and the third is the South-South Global Assets and Technology Exchange
(known as SS-GATE), a market-based, transparent, South-South knowledge and technology transaction mechanism (Zhou 2008).

　　As a political grouping within the UN, the G-77 has played a key role in placing the development agenda at the forefront of international negotiations and has been a leading voice in promoting measures to enhance South-South responses to global challenges. Recent initiatives include the Development Platform for the South, developed and adopted by Ministers of the G-77 in 2008, and the South Fund for Development and Humanitarian Assistance.

Task Team on South-South Cooperation

　　The other large-scale influential multilateral institutionis the Task Team on South-South Cooperation (TTSSC).
The TT-SSC is a southern-led platform hosted by the Working Party on Aid Effectiveness (WP-EFF) at the OECD-DAC, and emerged from the Accra Agenda for Action’s commitment to inclusive partnerships. Launched in September 2009, it brings together partner countries, especially middle income countries, donors, civil societies, academia, and regional and multilateral agencies under the leadership of its Secretariat in Colombia, to undertake evidence-based dialogue on experiences and practices of SSC in the context of aid effectiveness. Its core aim is to contribute to defining the role of partner countries and Southern perspectives in the evolving global aid architecture (TTSS June 2010, OECD ‘At a Glance’ Fact Sheet)

　　The most recent meeting was the High Level Event held in Bogota, Colombia, in March 2010, which was attended by more than 400 participants and featured the presentation of case studies of more than 100 instances of SSC. The key outcome of the event was the Bogota Statement, which has become the prime international declaration on South-South Cooperation. According to the TT-SSC itself, the Bogota Statement‘recognises the aid effectiveness agenda as avaluable reference for SSC and sets out a series of concrete steps to invest in horizontal partnerships and make South-South knowledge exchange and mutual learning more effective (TTSS June 2010). As such, the TT-SSC will now focus its work according to three main areas: (1) Deepening its analytical work through case studies and identifying and agreeing on good practices of SSC in the context of aid effectiveness, generating clear-cut policy recommendations for the Korea HLF in 2011; (2) Creating a Community of Practitioners hosted at the TT-SSC which will share experiences…within a knowledge exchange platform; and (3) Engage in practice-based policy outreach
with other SSC platforms and actors.

　　Of course, in addition to these large multilateral bodies, a number of global civil society organisations have developed in response to the expansion of South-South Cooperation. Many are still in their formative stages; however, serve as an important platform for information sharing, exchange and cooperation. One of the most notable examples is‘The South South Opportunity’, an online community of professionals dedicated to SSC. The site aims to‘explore, develop and advance the growing work in South-South cooperation, knowledge exchange and learning by bringing together a diverse range of actors and experts to discuss emerging topics, share best practices, explore design and methodological considerations of learning , and connect with colleagues in the wider South-South community’(southsouth.info). As SSC continues to expand, such virtual communities will no doubt become an integral part of the international development landscape.

Norms , Principles and Practices of South-South (Development) Cooperation

　　This next section seeks to identify the core elements of SSC in the context of development cooperation. An important point to highlight is the diversity that exists within the umbrella of SSC, in terms of frameworks, priorities, modalities and instruments of cooperation.That being said, the significance of SSC perhaps lies in its overall character or ‘flavour’, particularly in regard to the approach and management of these ‘South-to- South’ relationships.

　　SSC is presented as being significantly different to traditional ‘North-South’ cooperation, in its form, approach and underlying principles. The 2008 Accra Agenda for Action thus affirms that: ‘South-South cooperation on development aims to observe the principle of non-interference in internal affairs, equality among developing partners and respect for their independence, national sovereignty, cultural diversity and identity and local content. It plays an important role in international development cooperation and is a valuable complement to North-South cooperation’.
　　The Reality of Aid South South Development Cooperation Special Report (2010, 8) reminds us that: ‘As with
traditional Northern donors, it is important to distinguish between the official rhetoric of emerging donor governments and their actual development cooperation practice as evident in the pattern of aid flows and the terms of their disbursement’.

Distribution and Priority Sectors
　　On the whole , Southern bilateral development cooperation tends to be focused within neighbouring countries or sub-regions. In many ways this is logical, as countries may share cultural and/or historical links and are likely to have a better understanding of countries’ situations and needs. Of course, like‘traditional’ donors, the distribution of resources is also based upon political and strategic considerations, economic opportunities, and is used for promoting regional influence (ECOSOC 2008, 17-18). Although some have been criticised for not paying ‘sufficient
attention’to human rights and regime corruption when determining the direction of their assistance, an
important element is that they are increasingly providing funds to assist fragile and conflict-affected states, often
not a priority of traditional donors (UNCTAD 2010, 60). In terms of the types of cooperation, a broad feature of South-South partnerships is that they tend to cover a range of areas – political, economic, social and cultural. Broadly speaking, South-South development assistance is provided more to support the infrastructure and production sectors, compared with traditional donors who provide more to the social sectors, although this is changing in recent years.
Instruments & Modalities
　　Like ‘traditional’development assistance, SSC features assistance provided in the form of concessional
loans, grants, technical cooperation and capacity building, and debt relief. The most widespread instrument tends to be concessional loans; with the recent UNCTAD report (2010, 62) suggesting this is because ‘it is often used to catalyse trade and investment activities expected to yield mutual benefits to the lender and borrower’. Although there have been initial concerns that loans from Southern lenders may have a negative impact on the debt-sustainability of some countries, evidence suggests that ‘Southern development assistance is not necessarily less
concessional than Northern donor assistance’ and thus it should not be considered as having an increased
risk (ECOSOC 2008, 23).
　　A significant distinction can be seen in the channels used to provide assistance, with most SSC being
project-based rather than program, SWAps or direct budget support, although there are instances of assistance being channeled into government frameworks (ECOSOC 2008, 12). Technical cooperation is a major focus of bilateral assistance. Governments are also the main stakeholders in SSC, but again there are increasing examples of efforts being made by some partners to involve the private sector and civil society. Large Southern partners, such as China and India, also use their export-import banks as channels for providing development assistance, which contrasts with the practice of traditional donors, whose funds are channeled through specialised development agencies (UNCTAD 2010, 55). Another feature of SSC is the tendency towards ‘tied aid’; using one’s own
companies, products, or personnel, which contrasts with guidelines for traditional donors to move away from such
practices. The percentage of Southern development assistance channeled via multilateral organisations and
regional banks also varies among Southern partners, as it does with ‘traditional’ donors.
Core Principles
　　South-South Cooperation is said to be based on the principle of solidarity and equality; core tenets of the initial Non-Aligned Movement which continue to underpin South-South relationships in the twenty-first century. As such, Southern countries are reluctant to use the terms ‘donor’/‘provider’and ‘recipient’as they do not want to be perceived as reproducing traditional donor-recipient hierarchies (ROA SSDC Special Report 2010, 9). Emphasis is instead placed upon ideas of mutual respect, mutual benefit, and‘win-win’partnerships, which are often supported by high-level official visits and formal agreements designed to cement political solidarity.
　　The other key principle of SSC –and arguably the element that has produced the greatest global debate–is the principle of respect for sovereignty and noninterference in internal affairs. This principle manifests itself vis-à-vis traditional donors in two distinctive (and related) ways: in relation to country ownership and the practice of conditionality. As the UNCTAD report (2010,73) explains, non-interference arises in part ‘because of their experience as former or current recipients of aid’ and the belief that countries should determine their own development priorities and strategies. This leads to the practice of not attaching policy conditions alongside development assistance. Very few Southern countries engage in macroeconomic or social policy dialogue with partner governments; assistance does not necessarily require associated policy reforms; and procedural conditions –such as feasibility or appraisal studies, cross-financing clauses, the establishment of project implementation units etc –are not always required before grant or loan agreements become effective (ECOSOC 2008, 21). In this regard, SSC is perceived and presented as operating quite differently from traditional North-South cooperation, although there are significant instances of non-policy conditions (such as in procurement) being attached to South-South development assistance.
　　Box 1 below further outlines the core principles of South-South Cooperation, as stipulated by the 2009 Ministerial Declaration of the G77 and China.

G77 and China guiding principles for South-South Cooperation
　　a. South-South cooperation is a common endeavour of peoples and countries of the South and must be pursued
as an expression of South-South solidarity and a strategy for economic independence and self-reliance of the South based on their common objectives and solidarity
　　b. South-South cooperation and its agenda must be driven by the countries of the South
　　c. South-South cooperation must not be seen as a replacement for North-South cooperation. Strengthening
South-South cooperation must not be a measure of coping with the receding interest of the developed world in assisting developing countries
　　d. Cooperation between countries of the South must not be analyzed and evaluated using the same standards
as those used for North-South relations
　　e. Financial contributions from other developing countries should not be seen as Official Development Assistance from these countries to other countries of the South. These are merely expressions of solidarity and
cooperation borne out of shared experiences and sympathies
　　f. South-South cooperation is a development agenda based on premises, conditions and objectives that are
specific to the historic and political context of developing countries and to their needs and expectations. South-South cooperation deserves its own separate and independent promotion
　　g. South-South cooperation is based on a strong, genuine, broad-based partnership and solidarity
　　h. South-South cooperation is based on complete equality, mutual respect and mutual benefit
　　i. South-South cooperation respects national sovereignty in the context of shared responsibility
　　j. South-South cooperation strives for strengthened multilateralism in the promotion of an action-oriented
approach to development challenges
　　k. South-South cooperation promotes the exchange of best practices and support among developing countries
in the common pursuit of their broad development objectives (encompassing all aspects of international relations and not just in the traditional economic and technical areas)
　　l. South-South cooperation is based on the collective self-reliance of developing countries
　　m. South-South cooperation seeks to enable developing countries to play a more active role in international
policy and decision-making processes, in support of their efforts to achieve sustainable development
　　n. The modalities and mechanisms for promoting South-South cooperation are based on bilateral, sub-regional,
regional and interregional cooperation and integration as well as multilateral cooperation
　　Source: Ministerial Declaration, Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the Group of 77 and China, New York, 25 September 2009, Para. 70

Benefits of SSC

　　The rapid expansion of SSC over the past decade can be attributed in many ways to some of the distinctive
advantages and benefits offered by South-South development cooperation.

　　Arguably the most celebrated advantage of SSC (in and of itself as well as vis-à-vis traditional donors) is the existence of common situations and shared experiences. Thus, SSC is said to ‘allow developing countries to address common objectives, agree jointly on partnerships and take advantage of the experience of peers at similar levels of development’ (Karen Selaya, Development Cooperation Forum, 2008b, 2). This manifests particularly in the ‘technical assistance’and ‘capacity building’components of SSC. Technical cooperation from ‘Southern donors’is generally regarded as being more appropriate to local conditions, relevant to the needs of the country,
providing more appropriate skills and technologies, and at a more reasonable cost. There is a focus on transferring ‘best practice’ programs from one country to another, where they are able to draw upon their own experiences in responding to similar challenges (Morais de Sa e Silva 2010, 4).
　　SSC offers advantages in terms of the implementation process as well. There is a general sense that the
processes are less cumbersome. This is in part due to less procedural requirements and fewer administrative
delays, but also reflects the state-sponsored-, state and/or private sector involvement- characteristic of the cooperation (M’cleod & Kebbay 2010, 22). In many large infrastructure development projects, for example, the executing agency is usually a company with imperatives to deliver ‘on time and on budget’. Chinese assistance, in particular, is often cited as being very valuable and efficient in this regard. Furthermore, a current concern with traditional donor aid is with the (un)predictability of flows. Partner country governments are encouraging all donors
to provide multi-year commitments as it enables more effective fiscal planning. Whilst there are no
rigorous and systematic studies of the predictability of Southern official flows, it is often cited as providing
more predictable support, as it is disbursed on schedule within the financial year (UNCTAD 2010,73-74 ) . In addition, many Southern bilateral contributors make multi-year commitments within the context of formal bilateral agreements, usually made during high-level official visits (ECOSOC 2008, 28). From the perspective of partner country governments, therefore, these ‘practical’ elements lead to some distinctive benefits of South-South development cooperation.
　　The other feature of SSC that is appealing to partner governments is the apparent ‘alternative’ that this engagement can represent. SSC is resulting in an increase and diversification of the financing available to developing country governments. As this is occurring against a backdrop of increasing disillusionment with the current aid system and some of the traditional aid practices, SSC can potentially offer new forms, approaches and practices of development assistance. The increase in this form of engagement is also presented as offering greater political voice and bargaining power for many partner country governments (UNCTAD 2010, 2).

　　Despite the fact that new development ‘models’ are touted by some leaders, commentators and officials, the
real benefit of SSC appears to lie in the emphasis on the importance of self-reliance in determining development
policies. Certainly, SSC offers new sources of financing, and with this comes new policy ideas (Malhotra 2010, 8),
broadening the menu of options that partner countries can draw upon in support of their development needs and efforts. Most Southern providers are, however, hesitant to portray themselves as offering a complete new ‘model’ of development, stressing instead the lessons they have learnt from their own experiences.

Future Challenges

　　The continued expansion of SSC , especially development assistance, offers a range of challenges and opportunities to the current development system. Both Southern donors and traditional donors must reexamine their policies and practices to ensure that their cooperation really is aligned with the needs and desires of other developing countries. Partner governments, too, are faced with a new opportunity, and challenge, to utilise these changing dynamics towards the benefit of their own people. The early years of the twenty-first century brought initial euphoria about the potential of SSC but as more specific details, in depth case studies, and improved data emerge, the difficulties facing the provision of effective SSC have become more apparent.
A ‘North’ within the ‘South’?
　　One of the most important principles of SSC is that of mutual benefit and equality, however, in both South-South trade and development assistance there is the potential for this cooperation to perpetuate existing inequalities. This is because the countries involved in SSC are by no means homogenous and there are clear differences in how countries see the development cooperation system and their participation in it (Better Aid Update 2010). Unless due respect is paid to the unequal conditions of partnership that often exist, a‘North within the South’ may undermine the very conditions of equality that SSC is hoping to achieve. As such, as Ladd (2010, 5) argues, ‘it remains to be
seen whether this will have any impact on the tradition of solidarity that has developed…’.
　　In this regard, one of the greatest challenges for partner countries will be to manage these relationships. Currently, many Southern providers have been driving the cooperation, and have formulated clear strategies
and policies for their engagement. Partner countries and regional organisations must also develop and articulate
a coherent approach to ensure they can manage these partnerships for their own (mutual) benefit. In addition to
articulating strong policies to determine and direct the cooperation, it is crucial that South-South Cooperation
is mainstreamed into their development strategies, and that governments set up systems and mechanisms to
ensure they can undertake strong negotiations and develop good ‘win-win’ agreements (M’cleod & Kebbay 2010). The recent UNCTAD report clearly states this challenge for African countries, which could no doubt apply to other developing countries and regions around the world: ‘(The potential of SSC) can only be realized to the extent that African countries are more proactive in the process and use the leverage they have with Southern partners to persuade them to strike a balance between their commercial or strategic interests and the region’s development needs. It will also be realized to the extent that African countries are able to reconcile their national interests and avoid a race to the bottom (UNCTAD 2010, 26)’.

State and Non-State Actors

　　Despite the influential involvement of civil society in progressing SSC, particularly in terms of knowledge and exchange, development assistance from Southern donors has in any in stances been restricted to government-to-government affairs, with little opportunity for civil society organisation participation thus far. The Bogota Statement recognises the importance of expanding the forms of engagement: ‘To derive maximum benefits from SSC requires deepening ownership by promoting demand-driven approaches and engaging the participation of civil society, parliaments, private sector, and other nongovernmental actors in development matters’(2.c.iii). It is vital that
non-state actors are included in SSC processes as they not only can offer valuable knowledge but also have a crucial role to play in ensuring it successfully contributes to poverty alleviation and sustainable development outcomes.
Aid Effectiveness
　　The ‘architecture’ for international development assistance is becoming increasing complex, particularly
through the proliferation of actors and aid channels. In response, ‘traditional’ donors and partner countries
have been developing principles, guidelines and best practices to help address these challenges and ensure
the effectiveness of aid. The 2005 Paris Declaration, signed by more than 150 countries and international
organisations, outlines five overarching‘aid effectiveness’ principles.

Box 2: The Paris Declaration

　　Ownership: Partner countries exercise effective leadership over their development policies and strategies, and coordinate development actions
　　Alignment: Donors base their overall support on partner countries’ national development strategies, institutions, and procedures
　　Harmonisation: Donors’ actions are more harmonized, transparent, and collectively effective
　　Managing for Results: Managing resources and improving decision-making for results
　　Mutual Accountability: Donors and partners are accountable for development results

　　Whilst there has, to date, been mixed results from traditional donors and partner countries in adhering to these in practice, the increasing number and role of Southern partners has the potential to exacerbate issues of fragmentation and (lack of) coordination. Traditional donors and international organisations belong to the OECD-DAC (Development Assistance Committee) and use this forum toincrease harmonisation efforts. In SSC, harmonisation amongst  Southern contributors is, in contrast, not really formalised, with the exception of the Arab institutions through the Arab Coordination Group and cofinancing arrangements (ECOSOC 2008, 33). There is,
however, beginning to be coordination among some Southern donors with traditional donors, particularly within a region. For example, according to the ECOSOC report (2008, 34), Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand coordinate with the ADB, UN agencies and Japan through regional initiatives in Cambodia, Lao and Vietnam.
　　Although some Southern donors are reluctant to adhere to existing norms and agreements as they are regarded as (and in many ways are) outcomes of an aid and development system in which they are underrepresented, South-South Cooperation must address aid effectiveness issues in order to ‘gain legitimacy in the broader debate about the need to reform the governance of the global aid system, and to rebalance the highly asymmetrical relationship between developing and OECD countries (Sanahuja 2010,19). As Ladd (2010, 6) highlights, the involvement of
Southern donors and other actors can help to reduce the existing aid oligopoly, ‘…but it is also possible that
official development assistance will become even more splintered, uncoordinated and untransparent than it is already…’.
　　As highlighted earlier, the inconsistencies in the definitions and data used and reported by Southern providers are an ongoing challenge, which is in many ways compounded by the overall lack of transparency in South-South development cooperation. Some countries have joined or report to the DAC (e.g. South Korea and Turkey) and the Arab Coordination Secretariat publishes reports on loans and technical assistance twice per year, but there is no collective reporting institution at the global level for SSC.The ECOSOC report( 2008 ,9 ) identifies three main issues that currently constrain information management and disbursement in SSC: (i) technical and institutional problems of data and collection; (ii) lack of coordination of data collection at country level; and (iii) lack of a forum for coordinating the collection of such data. In fact, the Bogota Statement identifies the imperative for this aspect of SSC to improve: ‘…South-South Cooperation practices can be further enhanced by adapting to the lessons in the aid effectiveness context, especially by improving transparency and accounting for results through strengthening capacities for information management and mutual accountability, especially at country and local levels’ (Bogota Statement, 2.c.i, 2010).
　　Another significant challenge that SSC brings, for both providers and partner countries, is in the actual implementation of development cooperation projects.‘While Southern contributors may be able to implement projects faster and at lower costs, there is some concern that this may be because of less due diligence
with respect to environmental standards and social impact…’(ECOSOC 2008, 31). Much is dependent
on the willingness and capacity of partner countries to undertake quality control and ensure their own national
– as well as international – standards are being met. Failure to do this can potentially result in unsustainable
development practices. In addition, the increase in initiatives, structures, processes and so forth to
facilitate SSC (together with the rapid expansion of other development actors such as NGOs and global funds)
adds enormous burden on already weak capacity. Different SSC partners have established their own
development cooperation frameworks and processes, which, in many ways undermines the benefits of their
more practical ‘recipient-focused’ approach. UNCTAD’s recent conclusion is one worth supporting:
‘It would be useful for Southern partners to identify areas where each country has a comparative advantage and channel their resources and activities to those areas to reduce competition and maximize the development impact of their activities’ (UNCTAD 2010, 27).

　　In order to avoid repeating the mistakes of previous development assistance practices, it is crucial that Southern partners instigate clear and effective monitoring and evaluation (M&E) frameworks. This will not only assist in measuring the impact of a particular project, but will also enable other Southern (and Northern) actors to learn important lessons from each others’ experiences; truly embodying the spirit of SSC. The Bogota Statement identifies this priority: ‘There is a strong need to improve measurement, monitoring, and transparency of SSC to facilitate effective planning and implementation. It is critical to promote peerlearning and SSC on data collection and information management with a focus on strengthening country systems (3.d.iii). Since the Paris Declaration stipulated the importance of ‘managing for results’, traditional donors, multilateral organisations, NGOs and research institutes have been developing tools and frameworks to enable effective M&E of development projects. Southern partners could utilise these existing modules and methodologies to enable more streamlined processes
for recipient countries, which in turn will enhance harmonisation.

Conclusion: Making SSC Work
　　The increase in South South development cooperation is leading to changes in the understandings and practices of international development cooperation. It is thus crucial that Southern perspectives be incorporated into reforms that are occurring at the international, regional and bilateral levels. However, many Southern partner countries do not yet have mechanisms in place, particularly at the policy and implementation levels, to effectively utilise the development cooperation from Southern providers; their institutions and frameworks are still geared
towards the requirements of traditional donors and international financial institutions, and thus SSDC, in reality, acts as ‘additional’ or complementary funding rather than as a complete alternative (M’cleod & Kebbay 2010, 23). Having said that, SSC can contribute strong ideas to the principles and practices of aid effectiveness, particularly relating to efficiency, technical cooperation, and mutual learning around common development challenges. As such,
SSC programs need to be analysed and best practice outcomes disseminated and promoted.
　　The current period of South-South Cooperation clearly indicates that there is strong political will to create, utilise and sustain new SSC efforts, particularly in the area of development assistance. The expectation that this heralds a new era of and for development is very high, and the challenge, therefore, is how to maintain this cooperation and ensure programs and policies become truly effective development tools. The current consensus is that SSC is promising, but should be viewed with care as it ‘remains to be seen whether… negative factors associated with Northern aid will be less evident in the case of SSC’(M’cleod & Kebbay 2010, 22). Discussions must move beyond descriptions and anecdotal case studies towards analysis based upon strong evidence and with an open space for critical analysis (Better Aid Update 2010). One of the most fundamental challenges is to build capacity within Southern providers themselves. ‘Adapting policies from one context to other calls for much experience,
planning, knowledge of the foreign context and dialogue based on mutual expectations’.
Inallofthis , it is crucial to hold South - South development cooperation and Southern providers to the same level of accountability as traditional donors, to avoid accusations of ‘double standards’and to ensure a more inclusive, effective, and equitable international development agenda.

Reference List

　　Andrade, Melissa, International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth, ‘Is the South Ready for South-South Cooperation?’, One Pager, No. 77, February 2009
　　Andrade, Melissa, ‘South-South Cooperation: The Same Old Game or a New Paradigm?’, International Policy
Centre for Inclusive Growth, in Roy & Andrade (eds) 2010
　　Better Aid Update, Spotlight on South-South Cooperation, Issue 1, April/May 2010
　　Davies, Penny, ‘South-South Cooperation: Moving Towards a New Aid Dynamic’, in Roy & Andrade (eds) 2010
　　Kwa, Aileen, South Centre, Geneva, ‘The Challenges Confronting South-South Trade’, in Roy and Andrade
(eds) 2010
　　Ladd, Paul, UNDP Bureau for Development Policy, ‘Between a Rock and a Hard Place: LDCs in a G-20 World’,
in Roy & Andrade (eds), 2010
　　Leite, Iara Costa ,‘South-South Cooperation: A Conceptual Essay, http://www.southsouth.info/profiles/blogs/articleon-the-concept-of-ssc
　　Malhotra, Kamal, UNDP Malaysia, ‘South-South Cooperation: Potential Benefits for the Least Developed
Countries’, in Roy & Andrade (eds) 2010
　　M’cleod, Herbert and Kebbay, Fatmata Sesay, Office of the President, Sierra Leone, ‘South-South Cooperation in Post-Conflict Sierra Leone’, in Roy & Andrade (eds) 2010
　　Morais de Sa e Silva, Michelle, International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth, ‘South-South Cooperation in Timesof Global Economic Crisis, One Pager, No. 76, February 2009
　　Morais de Sa e Silva, Michelle, ‘How Did We Get Here? The Pathways of South-South Cooperation’, in Roy &
Andrade (eds), 2010
　　Roy, Rathin and Andrade, Melissa (Guest Editors), ‘South-South Cooperation: The Same Old Game or a New
Paradigm?’, Poverty In Focus: International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth, Poverty Practice, Bureau of Development Policy, UNDP, Number 20, April 2010
　　Sanahuja, Jose Antonio, ‘Post-Liberal Regionalism: S-S Cooperation in Latin America and the Caribbean’, in
Roy & Andrade (eds) 2010

　　Task Team on SSC, TT-SSC work plan 2010-11, Launched during the Steering Committee meeting in NYC, 30 June 2010
　　The High Level Event on South South Cooperation and Capacity Development, ‘Bogota Statement: Towards
Effective and Inclusive Development Partnerships’, Final Version, March 25th 2010, available at: http://www.
un.org/en/ecosoc/newfunct/pdf/bogota-statement-final.pdf
　　UN ECOSOC, Background Study for the Development Cooperation Forum, Trends in South-South and triangular
development cooperation, United Nations, April 2008
　　United Nations, Economic Development in Africa Report 2010: South-South Cooperation: Africa and the New Forms of Development Partnership, UNCTAD, 2010 (UNCTAD/ALDC/AFRICA/2010)
　　United Nations General Assembly, 64th Session, Item 60(b), Operational activities for development: South-South
cooperation for development, ‘The state of South-South cooperation’, Report of the Secretary-General, 24
　　August 2009 (A/64/321) Zhou, Yiping, Director, Special Unit for SSC at the Opening of the Asia-Pacific DCF Regional Workshop on Trends
　　and Progress in Triangular and SSC, (Remarks), Bangkok, 21 October 2008