NEW DEVELOPMENT FINANCE MEASURE SHOULD BE TOSSD OUT THE WINDOW!

The document critiques the OECD's proposed Total Official Support for Sustainable Development (TOSSD) metric, arguing it is a tool for wealthy nations to inflate their contributions to the Sustainable Development Goals without binding commitments. The author highlights concerns over the inclusion of non-concessional loans, in-donor costs, and the misappropriation of 'mutual benefit' rhetoric from South-South cooperation. It suggests that instead of a new composite measure, the OECD should focus on ensuring donors meet the 0.7% GNI target for ODA and improving statistical capacities in recipient countries.

• The development of the TOSSD statistic has been conducted without meaningful consultation with developing countries, despite agreements at the third UN Conference on Financing for Development to ensure inclusive and transparent discussions.
• TOSSD lacks the binding commitments associated with Official Development Assistance (ODA), such as the target for industrialised countries to provide 0.7% of their gross national income (GNI) to fight poverty.
• There are concerns that TOSSD will be used to count domestic expenditures and in-donor costs, such as refugee support beyond the first year and national efforts to reduce greenhouse emissions, as contributions to sustainable development.
• The inclusion of non-concessional loans and 'publically-mobilized private financing' in TOSSD is problematic because it allows governments to claim credit for commercial investments and profit-making private sector activities.
• The use of 'mutual benefit' rhetoric in TOSSD is viewed as a misappropriation of South-South cooperation principles, which are inappropriate for North-South relations given the historical responsibilities of developed nations.
• TOSSD's focus on financial inputs overlooks critical non-financial contributions like technology transfer and knowledge exchange, and relies on donor self-reporting which is prone to inflation.
• The author argues that a new composite measure is unnecessary and that the OECD should instead prioritize improving Country Programmable Aid (CPA) and supporting the statistical capacities of developing countries.

APA

Besharati, N. (2017). NEW DEVELOPMENT FINANCE MEASURE SHOULD BE TOSSD OUT THE WINDOW! South African Institute of International Affairs. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Policy-Insights-45.pdf

Chicago

Besharati, Neissan. NEW DEVELOPMENT FINANCE MEASURE SHOULD BE TOSSD OUT THE WINDOW! South African Institute of International Affairs, 2017. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Policy-Insights-45.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Besharati |first1=Neissan |title=NEW DEVELOPMENT FINANCE MEASURE SHOULD BE TOSSD OUT THE WINDOW! |publisher=South African Institute of International Affairs |date=May 2017 |url=https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Policy-Insights-45.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{besharati2017new, author = {Besharati, Neissan}, title = {{NEW DEVELOPMENT FINANCE MEASURE SHOULD BE TOSSD OUT THE WINDOW!}}, institution = {South African Institute of International Affairs}, year = {2017}, month = may, url = {https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Policy-Insights-45.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }