1. This section shows the destination countries of UK bilateral assistance and, for multilateral assistance, the organisations to which flows are directed. It also presents the UK imputed share of Multilateral ODA by country.
2. In this section, Tables 9 to 17 show aid flows to individual countries, regions and country groupings. Table 18 gives details of UK multilateral assistance and Table 19 shows UK flows to Civil Society Organisations. Some tables report GPEX/ DFID data and others ODA, as indicated by the table titles.
3. In 2010/11 DFID provided bilateral assistance to 78 countries, of which 36 countries received direct financial aid . These 36 countries received a total of £2,265m in 2010/11 (of which £1,184m was direct financial aid); excluding humanitarian assistance this totalled £2,149. This is equivalent to 85 per cent of DFID bilateral country specific expenditure (excluding humanitarian assistance), down from 91 per cent in 2009/10.
4. Tables 9 to 11 highlight the top twenty recipient countries of DFID bilateral assistance and UK ODA (the former is shown including and excluding humanitarian assistance). Table 12 shows the top ten recipients of DFID humanitarian assistance.
5. In 2010/11 India continued to receive the greatest amount of DFID bilateral assistance to an individual country (£279m, a reduction on previous years), followed by Ethiopia (£251m) and Pakistan (£203m). In total, the top twenty recipients of DFID’s bilateral assistance accounted for 83 per cent of DFID bilateral aid that could be allocated to a country. (Table 9)
6. Of UK net bilateral ODA, India (£421m), Ethiopia (£263m) and Pakistan (£193m) were the top three recipients in 2010. (Table 10). The increase in bilateral aid to Pakistan compared to £140m in 2009/10 was driven by £83m in humanitarian assistance.
7. Sudan received the largest value of DFID bilateral humanitarian assistance (£84m in 2010/11), closely followed by Pakistan (£83m). Sudan ranked 8th in terms of overall receipt of DFID bilateral assistance, 20th excluding humanitarian assistance. (Tables 9 & 11)
8. Table 13 summarises data on DFID expenditure and GPEX for regions and a range of country groupings (e.g. Commonwealth countries, HIPC countries). Table 14 expands on Table 13 and reports by country.
9. Figure 10 summarises the DFID Bilateral Programme by region over the last five years. In 2010/11 44 per cent of DFID’s bilateral programme was spent in Africa, 26 per cent in Asia, 2 per cent in Europe, the Americas and the Pacific. The remaining 28 per cent was not allocated to a particular region as it benefited a number of partner countries across regions.
10. The proportion of non-country specific bilateral expenditure in 2010/11 remained at similar levels to 2009/10 when it increased to 29 per cent from 18 per cent (or by £555m). This was due to DFID contributions to bilateral pooled funds from which it was not possible to directly track the funding to a particular country. For example, £203m to the Global Trade Liquidity Fund; £100m to the Environmental Transformation Fund; and £100m to the IDA Social Protection and Crisis Response fund.
11. UK multilateral assistance cannot be directly allocated to any one country. However, Tables 13 and 14 contain estimates of the UK’s imputed share of multilateral ODA by country and region . Of the UK’s core contributions to multilateral organisations in 2009/10 ; £1,159m was spent as ODA in Africa, £563m in Asia, £287m in Europe, £153m in the Americas and £16m in the Pacific (Table 13).
12. Table 15 breaks down the DFID bilateral programme by income group of the recipient countries. In 2010/11, 82 per cent of the £2,830m country specific DFID bilateral assistance was spent in low income countries.
13. Table 17 compares the percentages of bilateral ODA given to low, middle and high income countries for all DAC donors and for multilateral agencies in 2010. 72 per cent of the UK’s bilateral ODA went to low income countries. Table 17 shows that the UK gave a higher proportion of its bilateral ODA to low income countries than a number of other DAC donors. Six countries gave less than 50 per cent of their bilateral ODA to low income countries; Austria, France, Germany, Greece, Korea, and Spain.
14. Table 18 shows both DFID and UK Other Government Departments multilateral assistance to different organisations. In 2010/11 DFID provided £3,222m of multilateral assistance, with the greatest amounts going to the European Commission (£1,269m), World Bank (£927m) and United Nations (£355m).
15. In 2010/11 contributions to the Global Fund to Fight Aids, TB and Malaria (GFATM) more than doubled from £163 million in 2009/10 to £349 million. Contributions to Regional Development Banks were £203 million. Multilateral contributions are discussed further in Section 3.
16. CSOs are non-governmental organisations which play a vital role in building global alliances in support of eliminating world poverty. Table 19 shows expenditure in the last financial year to these agencies and the types of arrangements through which funds were given (terms are explained in the glossary).
17. In total, funds disbursed through UK CSOs fell to £329m in 2010/11 from £362m in 2009/10. Save The Children was the single largest recipient of DFID funding (£34m), followed by VSO (£31m) and Oxfam (£26m).
18. Of the total funds disbursed through CSOs in 2010/11, £116m was from Programme Partnership Agreements; £13m from the Civil Society Challenge Fund; £16m from the Governance Transparency Fund; £66m for humanitarian assistance; and £117m came from other DFID bilateral programmes.
Bookmark with:
What are Bookmarks?