The delivery of aid into conflict affected or fragile states brings its own complications and requires different attention to aid in more stable areas. Recognition of these differences was not fully captured in the agreements drawn up in Accra in 2008, and Busan represented a chance to raise these issues infront of the key most interested and influential parties. In December, 2011 the ‘New Deal’, and the peacebuilding and statebuilding goals, were signed up to by 38 countries in Busan. The concept emerged from a preparatory process called ‘the international dialogue on peacebuilding and statebuilding’ (IDPS), which followed the previous High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness in Accra, Ghana, in 2008. Between 2008 and 2011, donor and recipient governments undertook a range of multi-stakeholder evaluations and consultations to develop the proposals adopted at the Busan event.

‘New Deal’ – What is the theory?
The ‘New Deal’ has been pitched by its advocates as a fresh approach to peacebuilding and statebuilding, drawing on past experience of what worked and did not work in support to countries affected by conflict.

At the heart of the concept is the notion of the international community and national governments in conflict countries negotiating a ‘compact’ (‘new deal’) in which both sides spell out commitments towards consolidating peace. Those commitments could span both political and funding issues. While the content of each ‘New Deal’ will necessarily be context-specific, they are to be informed by a set of five peacebuilding and statebuilding goals:
  • Legitimate Politics – Foster inclusive political settlements and conflict resolution
  • Security – Establish and strengthen people’s security
  • Justice – Address injustices and increase people’s access to justice
  • Economic Foundations – Generate employment and improve livelihoods
  • Revenues and Services – Manage revenue and build capacity for accountable and fair service delivery.

The process going forward is that the ‘New Deal’ will be piloted in a select number of countries. Pilot countries are Afghanistan, Central African Republic, DRC, Liberia, Sierra Leone, South Sudan and Timor Leste. Initial consultation meetings were held in Nairobi and Copenhagen at global level, and notes are yet to have been shared from these discussions. Beyond the pilot process, there are also discussions at global level about if and how there might be a new peace and security-related goal adopted as part of the post-2015 millennium development goals agenda. As such, experience with the ‘New Deal’ pilots is likely to have wider influence on global aid policy and what follows the MDGs.

The details of how the ‘New Deal’ will be implemented remain to be worked out. Challenging questions include:
  • To what extent will civil society or communities across the conflict divides have a voice in defining the ‘new deal’ in each country?
  • To what extent will the ‘new deal’ embody a holistic approach to mutual accountability between donors and recipient governments, or governance and peacebuilding at country level?
  • Or will the ‘new deal’ just result in uncritical alignment and new development funding for the central government?

For a fuller briefing on the New Deal, its predecessors, the piloting process and anticipated challenges please download a four page briefing document from CIUK available here:

  • Briefing Paper - Currently being reviewed.

Further Resources:

How care CARE and the Conflict Community of Practice engage?