FAO.org

Home > Partnerships > Resource Partners > How to partner with FAO

Resource Partners

Examples of resource partnerships with FAO

FAO aims to engage in resource partnerships, ensuring mutual benefit and responding to the priorities of its Members according to its comparative advantage. This section provides a range of best practices for FAO's resource partnership, and highlights through a number of case studies how resource partners share the responsibility to align voluntary contributions to FAO's Strategic Objectives. This joint responsibility responds to the principles laid out in the Paris and Accra Declarations on aid effectiveness.

Diverse funding modalities to achieve common goals

Diverse funding modalities to achieve common goals

A large bulk of FAO’s Trust Funds falls under the Government Cooperative Programme (GCP) category, whether they are for development or emergency assistance. A GCP is an agreement between several parties: FAO; one or several resource partners; and one or several beneficiary countries.

The GCP represents a financing modality under which a resource partner entrusts funds to FAO for the provision of technical assistance services (eg policy advice, normative activities, training) to a specific developing country or group of countries.

GCP programmes are increasingly multi-donor funded. The shift from individual projects financed by a single partner to large programmes funded by several partners represents a major development in the way FAO collaborates with the international resource partner community and recipient countries. This growing trend reflects the emphasis placed on the need for long-term planning for the delivery of development assistance in order to achieve positive results and sustainable impact. Pooled funds, often coming in the form of Multi-donor Trust Funds (MDTFs), benefit from economies of scale, which allow for lower transaction costs per dollar of investment. When resources are intended for multi-agency operations, they are allocated through Joint Programmes.

Example

UN Joint Programmes are multi-donor funding mechanisms that are set up where UN agencies, with national partners and resource partners, see clear gains in effectiveness and efficiency from combining their efforts and resources in a common work plan and budget. Most of the existing UN Joint Programmes and Multi-Donor Trust Funds are administered by the UNDP MDTF Office, including those from the global MDG Achievement Fund (MDG-F) and the global “Expanded Delivering as One Funding Window” (EFW). The EFW in particular provides resources to support nationally-led and owned programming processes to help UN Country Teams to deliver as one. In 2010, FAO’s share of the One UN fund represented 12 percent of the total (USD 1.2 million). UN agencies together with governments, civil society and other partners set priorities in accordance with countries' needs in order to better coordinate the UN response and the corresponding resource mobilization. The National Forest Programme Facility which provides grants to national forest programme stakeholders in developing countries (with a focus on capacity building and information sharing) is financed through a multi-donor trust fund supported by 13 funding partners. The FishCode, an umbrella programme whose main objective is to raise the economic, social and nutritional benefits obtained from fisheries and aquaculture, is a multi-donor trust currently funded by over 20 resource partners, including individual countries, as well as the EC, the World Bank and several other international agencies.

Lightly earmarked funds allow flexibility

Lightly earmarked funds allow flexibility

The FAO Multipartner Programme Support Mechanism (FMM) is a novel funding mechanism where voluntary contributions are no longer tied to a specific programme or project but contribute to FAO’s integrated budget and match the assessed contributions from member countries. Depending on the resource partner, resources are either completely unearmarked or loosely associated to Strategic or Functional Objectives. Sweden and the Netherlands are the first resource partners to provide funds to the FMM, providing USD 26 million to be deployed until 2013. The FMM comes as a direct outcome of FAO’s renewal, and Sweden and the Netherlands’ willingness to commit such a substantial amount to the mechanism is seen as a concrete sign of greater trust in the Organization and the reforms that are underway.

Upfront resources for a swift response

Upfront resources for a swift response

The Special Fund for Emergency and Rehabilitation Activities (SFERA) is a non-earmarked multi-donor funding mechanism. It provides FAO with the flexibility and financial means to react promptly to humanitarian crises before resource partner funding is secured. The fund allows for early participation in interagency assessments, the initiation of coordination activities in support of all actors involved in agricultural relief, and the timely preparation of context-specific emergency programmes. It also enables the Organization to acquire logistical equipment and inputs for the quick launch of field activities.

Domestic financing for national priorities

Domestic financing for national priorities

Governments may directly pay for the services of FAO when priorities are aligned. Unilateral Trust Fund (UTF) agreements are arranged between FAO and a recipient country. This funding modality allows developing countries to benefit from the Organization’s technical expertise through funds which are financed entirely by the beneficiary countries themselves, either from national resources or from the proceeds of loans, credits and grants made available by international finance institutions or bilateral resource partner contributions have been negotiated to assist FAO’s work.

Example:

At the request of the Government of Nepal , FAO began the process of developing the CPF, which, as an initial step, included support to the government in defining its National Agriculture Sector Development Priorities for the medium-term (NASDP). Both the CPF and NASDP processes and documents have been central to the development of various resource partner proposals. A proposal has been submitted for funding to the Global Agriculture and Food Security Program (GAFSP) Trust Fund which was guided by NASDP and was prepared in partnership by the GoN and its development partners (including FAO). The Government of Nepal is hopeful that millions of dollars will be available through this funding to enhance household food security in selected locations through increased productivity of agriculture and improved capacity for food utilization. In addition, FAO, in collaboration with World Health Organization and the World Food Programme, has also prepared and submitted a project proposal to United States Agency for International Development for funding to improve food and nutrition security and incomes of rural poor households.

Expanding FAO partnerships - private sector, decentralized cooperation

Expanding FAO partnerships - private sector, decentralized cooperation

FAO’s funding and resource base is expanding and diversifying, including partnerships with the Private Sector and Foundations and through the Decentralized Cooperation Programme with local authorities, for example.

Examples

Private Sector Support: An interesting case of partnership with an individual company was with Accor Services, a world leading company in prepaid products and services such as lunch and childcare vouchers. The company entered into partnership with FAO to appraise a fertilizer voucher scheme in Mali called “Ticket Agri”. In this case, it was Accor who took the first step of approaching FAO. The sponsorship contribution was small, just EUR 50,000, but both parties found mutual benefit in entering into partnership.

Decentralized Cooperation: Thanks to the partnership between the Cities of Milan and Dakar, FAO provided assistance to 4000 urban residents, mostly women, to start up micro-gardens in low- income areas of Dakar (Senegal). The project, jointly funded by the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the City of Milan, won the UN-HABITAT’s Dubai Award for Best Practice to Improve the Living Environment in 2008.

In-kind contributions - South-South Cooperation, Seconded Human Resources

In-kind contributions - South-South Cooperation, Seconded Human Resources

In addition to financial resources, in-kind contributions such as human resources, or goods and services, may support programme or project delivery.

Examples

South South Cooperation: FAO organizes special South-South Cooperation (SSC) agreements, so that technicians and experts from emerging developing countries can work directly with farmers in host countries, sharing their knowledge and skills. Over 1400 experts and technicians have worked in the field in such a capacity and FAO is committed to making SSC a key component of its National Programme for Food Security (NPFS) activities. Technical support to NPFS and RPFS is being increased significantly by making more strategic use of SSC’s potential to reach out quickly to large numbers of people at a relatively low cost with appropriate technology. Efforts are under way for FAO to move towards Strategic SSC Alliances with selected countries in support of NPFS and RPFS. A recent example is the agreement reached with China, in March 2010, on the establishment of a USD 30 million trust fund in support of SSC in selected countries. Other agreements through Strategic Alliances have been signed with Indonesia and Argentina and are under discussion with India and Morocco.

Goods and resources: In response to the UN Indian Ocean Earthquake - Tsunami Flash Appeal, the Government of the People’s Republic of China donated USD 2 million (USD 1.6 million in-kind and USD 400 000 in cash) to FAO’s component of the appeal, its first contribution to FAO’s emergency programme. FAO went on to deliver a variety of fishing equipment, from engines and material to help reconstruct damaged vessels to nets and refrigerating containers, to help the fishers and the communities they support resume their activities and ensure the food security of thousands. In many cases, the in-kind contributions delivered successfully fulfilled the goal of ‘’Building Back Better’’ by providing fishermen fishers with new equipment that allowed them to exceed their levels of productivity prior to the tsunami.