OutcomeHarvestingEvaluation

ActionAidDenmarkTaxJusticeProgrammeEvaluationReport

August2017

2

Acknowledgements

I wish to thank all the change agents of the Tax Justice programme who participated in thisevaluation.Ireallyappreciatetheireffortandcommitmenttoformulatetheiroutcomesinaveryshort timeframe. I am especially grateful to Helene Bach for her amazing coordination of thisevaluationfromthesideofAADK.IalsoreallyappreciatedherenthusiasmanddedicationtofindtherightmonitoringandevaluationtoolsthatenableAADKtodemonstratetheresultsoftheTaxJusticeprogramme.

3

Tableofcontent

Introductionandevaluationdesign 5

2. TheActionAidTaxJusticeProgramme 53. Usersanduses 64. Evaluationquestions 65. ScopeoftheEvaluation 66. Abouttheevaluator 7

Theevaluationprocess 8

1. AboutOutcomeHarvesting 82. Datacollection 93. Analysisandinterpretation: 104. Substantiation 115. Limitationsoftheevaluation 12

Findingsoftheevaluation 13

1. Generalfindings 13Location 13Time 14Significance 14Unintendedoutcomes 152. Answerstoevaluationquestions 16InwhichsocialactorsisActionAidinfluencingchange? 16TowhatextenddotheoutcomesrepresentpatternsofprogresstowardsthestrategicobjectivesoftheTaxJusticeprogramme? 18HowdidtheTaxJusticeProgrammecontributetotheoutcomesthroughitsprogrammemodalities(Training4Change,TaxAdvisor,supporttogovernanceprogramming,GlobalTaxCampaign,InspiratorandActivista)? 20TowhatextentdotheoutcomesachievedbyAADKshowthattheworkofAADKonTaxJusticeislocallyrooted? 25Towhatextentdotheoutcomesshowlinkagesbetweenthelocal,national,regionalandgloballevelofadvocacy? 27Towhatextentdotheoutcomesshowalinkbetweenprogressivetaxationandimprovedsocialservices? 30

Overallconclusions: 33

4

ANNEXES:ANNEX1:OutcomesoftheTaxJusticeProgrammeANNEX2:OutcomeformatANNEX3:OverviewofdocumentsconsultedANNEX4:ParticipantsoftheOutcomeHarvestingworkshopANNEX5:Tableofsubstantiators

ListoffiguresFigure1Overviewofnumberofoutcomespercountry____________________________________________13Figure2Numberofoutcomesperyear ________________________________________________________14Figure3Numberofoutcomespersignificancelevel______________________________________________15Figure4Numberofoutcomespersocialactor___________________________________________________17Figure5Numberofoutcomesperobjective ____________________________________________________19Figure6Numberofoutcomesperobjectiveandactor ____________________________________________20Figure7Numberofoutcomesperprogrammemodality___________________________________________21Figure8Numberofoutcomesperpercentageofcontribution______________________________________23Figure9Numberoflocallyrootedoutcomes____________________________________________________26Figure10Percentageofoutcomesperchangelevel______________________________________________27Figure11Numberofoutcomesforimprovedsocialservicesandprogressivetaxation___________________30

5

Introductionandevaluationdesign

2. TheActionAidTaxJusticeProgrammeTheprogrammaticfocusofActionAidDenmark(AADK)isongoodgovernance,withtwointerlinkedoverall programme objectives: 1. Securing improvement in the quality, equity and genderresponsiveness of public services for people living in poverty; 2. Securing fair redistribution ofresourcesthroughtaxation.In2010,AADKjoinedtheActionAidFederationandinlate2014,AADKwasdelegatedtheresponsibilityforcoordinationandlearningrelatedtoallgovernanceworkinthefederation.ThisdelegationisreferredtoastheDemocraticGovernanceDelegation.AkeyfocusofAADKhasbeentofurtherintegratetheworkonaccesstopublicservicesandtaxjustice,aswellasintegrating thevariousactivitieson tax justice intoa common tax justiceprogramme. Since2012,ActionAidDenmark(AADK)hasbeenengagedintaxjusticeactivitiesatnationalandgloballevel.Inthefirstyears,substantialresourceswerespentonbuildingupcapacitiesandknowledgeinthefieldoftaxjusticeandsince2014,theTaxJusticeactivitiesareincreasinglyshowingresults.AADKprovidedprogrammesupportandcapacitydevelopmentto theAADKpartnershipcountries,andbroadercivilsocietypartners.Summingup,AADKhassupportedthetaxjusticeprogrammeinthefollowingways:

• Programmesupporttopartnershipcountries,entailingfinancialandtechnicalassistanceongovernanceandtax

• Support to the ActionAid International (AAI) Global Tax Campaign to undertake globalresearchandadvocacy

• SupporttoActionAid’sglobalyouthnetwork,Activista• AADKownresearchandpolicyworkfocusingonaDanishandEuropeanpolicycontext,e.g.

onDoubleTaxationTreaties(DTT)andresponsiblecorporatebehaviour• LeadontheDemocraticGovernanceDelegationoftheAA(ActionAid)Federation,including

cross-countrylearningaroundprogressivetaxation

AADKintegratedcapacitybuildingmodalitiesconsistingof:• People4Change(P4C):facilitatingface-to-facementoringandcapacitydevelopmentthrough

placementofInspirators(upto9months)andlong-termtechnicalAdvisorswithpartnersorActionAidoffices

• TheGlobalPlatformsareaglobalnetworkofyoutheducationalcentresprovidingtrainingandfacilitatingyouthengagement(Training4Change)

• TCDCistheAADKtrainingCentreforDevelopmentCooperationinTanzaniaprovingtrainingforAAstaffandpartnersone.g.governanceandtax(Training4Change).From2012to2016,357peopleweretrainedontaxjusticeatTCDC.

In2016,oneTaxAdvisorwasplacedinMozambique,oneinTanzaniaandoneinZambia.From2013to2015,aTaxAdvisorwasplacedinUganda.Inaddition,oneTaxInspiratorwasplacedinUgandafromMay2015toFebruary2016andoneinTanzaniafromNovember2016toJuly2016.TheActionAidInternationalmonitoringandevaluation(M&E)systemcaptureswelltheachievementsrelated to access to public services, where AADK has valid data documenting that, since 2012,approximately 2,100,000 people living in poverty got access to improved public services in the 9

6

partnershipcountriesthatAADKsupported.Thisworkistakingitspointofdepartureattheverylocallevel,mobilisingcommunitiestodemandqualitypublicservices,linkingittotaxthroughnationalleveladvocacyandpolicywork.TheexistingAAGlobalMonitoringSystemandindicatorsontaxjusticearenot fully suited to capture policy processes and changes in complex settings and thereforeachievementsrelatedtoredistributionandtaxjusticearenotequallywellcapturedanddocumented.As a response to this, AADK decided to undertake an Outcome Harvesting Evaluation aimed atdocumentingresultsofthetaxjusticeactivities.AADKalsointendstointroduceOutcomeHarvestingasamethodintheM&EsystemofAADKandAA.This reportwill startbyexplainingtheevaluationdesignandtheevaluationapproach.Thiswillbefollowedbythefindingsoftheevaluationandtheoverallconclusions.

3. UsersandusesTheAADKleadershipteam,theDemocraticGovernanceteam,aswellastherelevantcountryofficesandAAIunitswishtogetabetterunderstandingoftheresultsoftheTaxJusticeProgrammeandtheapproach/combinationofprogrammemodalitiesthatcontributedtotheseresults.Theywillusetheevaluationfindingstoadjustfutureprogrammedesignandapproach.Moreinspecific,theywillusethefindingstointegratethedifferentactivitiesofActionAidonTaxJusticeintoacoherentprogramme.TheAADKM&Eunit(AccountabilityUnit)willusetheOutcomeHarvestingEvaluationtoinformtheM&Eframeforthenextphaseofthegovernanceprogramme.Inaddition,theywillusethefindingstosupport their fundingapplicationtoDanida.Furthermore, theywillusethecapacity inapplyingOutcome Harvesting that they will gain during the evaluation process, to integrate OutcomeHarvestingintothemonitoringsystemofAADK.

4. Evaluationquestions1. InwhichsocialactorsisActionAidinfluencingchange?2. Towhatextentdotheoutcomesrepresentpatternsofprogresstowardsthestrategicobjectives

oftheTaxJusticeprogramme?3. How did the Tax Justice programme contribute to the outcomes through its programme

modalities (Training4Change, Tax Advisor, support to governance programme, Global TaxCampaign,InspiratorandActivista)?

4. TowhatextentdotheoutcomesachievedbyAADKshowthattheworkofAADKonTaxJusticeislocallyrooted?

5. Towhatextentdotheoutcomesshowlinkagesbetweenthelocal,national,regionalandgloballevelofadvocacy?

6. Towhatextentdotheoutcomesshowalinkbetweenprogressivetaxationandimprovedsocialservices?

5. ScopeoftheEvaluationIn2016,AADKprovidedprogrammesupportto8partnershipcountries(Nicaraguawasphasedoutin2015).Notallpartnershipcountriesimplementtaxrelatedactivities,anditwasdecidedtofocustheOutcomeHarvestingEvaluationonUganda(AAU),Zambia(AAZ),Mozambique(AAMoz)andTanzania(AATZ),aswellasresearchandadvocacyrelatedactivities inDenmarkandthroughtheGlobalTaxCampaign.

7

ThisOutcomeHarvestingEvaluationtookplacebetweenFebruary2017andMay2017.TheevaluationsoughttoidentifytheoutcomesthatoccurredbetweenJanuary2014toDecember2016.ActionAidDenmarkcontractedtheevaluator,GoeleScheers, tocarryoutthisOutcomeHarvestingevaluation. The evaluator was assisted by Helene Bach, PME Coordinator, who coordinated theevaluationwithinAADK.

6. AbouttheevaluatorGoeleScheersisanindependent,internationalconsultant,withafocusonmonitoringandevaluationin complex settings. She supported a range of organisations and networks across the world indeveloping and improving their Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation (PM&E) systems. Goele isparticularlyspecialisedinOutcomeMappingandOutcomeHarvestingandhasmorethan10yearsofexperienceinusingthesemethods.Priortobecominganindependentconsultant,shewasworkingat‘The Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict (GPPAC)’. As the Coordinator forPlanning,Monitoring,Evaluationand Learning she setupanetwork-widePM&E systembasedonOutcomeMappingandOutcomeHarvesting.SheholdsaMasterin‘InterculturalWorkandConflictManagement’, a Master in International studies, a bachelor in Social Work and a bachelor inPsychology.Seewww.goelescheers.beformoreinformation.Forquestionsaboutthisevaluation,pleasesendane-mailtogoelescheers@gmail.com

8

Theevaluationprocess ThischapterwillexplainhowOutcomeHarvesting,theevaluationapproach,wasusedintoevaluatetheresultsofActionAid’sTaxJusticeprogramme.

1. AboutOutcomeHarvestingOutcomeHarvestingisautilisation-focused,participatorytoolthatenablesevaluators,grantmakers,and programmemanagers to identify, formulate, verify, andmake sense of outcomes they haveinfluencedwhenrelationshipsofcause-effectarenotalwaysknown.Unlikemostotherevaluationmethods, Outcome Harvesting does not measure progress towards predetermined outcomes orobjectives,butrathercollectsevidenceofwhathasbeenachieved,andworksbackwardtodeterminewhetherandhowtheprojectorinterventioncontributedtothechange1.

TheOutcomeHarvestingapproachconsistsofsixsteps:

1. Designtheharvest�2. Reviewdocumentationanddraftoutcomes�3. Engagewithchangeagents2�4. Substantiate�5. Analyse&interpret�6. Supporttheuseoffindings�

OutcomeHarvestingfocusesonoutcomesdefinedasthechangesinbehaviour,practices,relationshipsandactionsofactorsthattheTaxJusticeprogrammehasinfluenced3

.Inthatsense,theactivitiesandoutputsoftheTaxJusticeprogrammedonotcountasoutcomesbecausetheyareunderActionAid’scontrolanddonotshowtheeffectsoftheprogramme’sefforts.Atypicalexampleistheattendanceofparticipantsatatrainingmeeting,whichisnotanoutcomebutanoutput,ittellssomethingabouttheprocess,goodorserviceproducedbythenetwork.OutcomeHarvestingfocusesonthepotentialeffectsofsuchatrainingeventatthelevelofthechangeofbehaviourorpracticeoftherespectiveparticipants.

Outcomesgenerallytaketimetoemergeandsomeactivitiesmayneverleadtoanoutcome.Often,activitieswillcontributeindirectlyandpartiallytooneormoreoutcomes.OutcomeHarvestingseekstoavoidassessingresultsthroughalinear,cause-effectmind-set.Instead,itseekstoidentifycausalityin theactivitiesoroutputsof theTax Justiceprogrammethatcontributed inasmallor largeway,directlyorindirectly,andintentionallyornottotheoutcomes.Inaddition,OutcomeHarvestingdoesnotlimitassessmenttopredefinedresults,butalsoaimstocaptureunexpectedresults.Oneofthevaluesofoutcomesisthattheyrevealaprocessofchange.Thus,someoutcomesgeneratedbytheTaxJusticeprogrammemayberelativelyminororpreliminarycomparedtoothers.Thatisnot

1Formore informationabouttheOutcomeHarvestingmethod,seeWilson-Grau,R.,Britt,H.,OutcomeHarvesting,FordFoundation,20132Achangeagentisanindividualororganisationthatinfluencesanoutcome.�

3OutcomeHarvestingisbasedonOutcomeMappingandusesthesamedefinitionofoutcomes.SeeSarahEarl,FredCarden,and Terry Smutylo, Outcome mapping: building learning and reflection into development programs, IDRC, 2001. Seehttp://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-26586-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html.

9

aproblembecausetheimportanceofanoutcomeisusuallyitsrelationshiptootheroutcomes.Forexample,aMinistryofFinancehastorecognisethevalueofprogressivetaxationbeforeitwillchangeitspoliciesaroundtheissue.

2. DatacollectionDuringanOutcomeHarvestingevaluation,data iscollectedthroughadocumentreviewaswellasthroughengagementwiththechangeagents.a)Document review:Theevaluator reviewedallprogress reports, case studiesanddonor reportsprovidedbyAADK.Due to the timingof theharvestworkshop, part of thedocument reviewwasfinalisedaftertheworkshopandcomplementedtheoutcomesdefinedbythechangeagents.Forafulloverviewofdocumentsconsultedandthenumberofpotentialoutcomesidentifiedfromthesedocuments,seeANNEX3:Overviewofdocumentsconsulted.b)Engagementwithchangeagents:ThechangeagentsoftheTaxJusticeProgrammeinvolvedinthisevaluation were staff from the AA offices, two Advisors and partners from Uganda, Tanzania,Mozambique,ZambiaandDenmark,aswellasstafffromtheGlobalTaxCampaign.AnOutcomeHarvestingworkshopwasorganisedfrom1-2March2017inCopenhagen,Denmark.Infollow-up to thisworkshop, the evaluator engagedwith the change agents via e-mail and googledocuments to fine-tune the outcomes. For a list of the participants in theworkshop, please see:ANNEX4ParticipantsoftheOutcomeHarvestingworkshop.

Duringthefirstmorningoftheworkshop,anintroductiontothe Outcome Harvesting methodology was given to thechangeagentsaswellasinterestedstafffromtheAADKoffice.Duringtherestoftheworkshop,theevaluatorsupportedthechangeagentsinharvestingtheiroutcomes.Theparticipantsreflected in groups per country on the behavioural changesthatwereobservedduringtheevaluationperiod.Afterwards,they repeated this process in cross-country groups.Participants shared, discussed and reviewed the observedchanges followed by the formulation of anoutcome description. Outcome descriptions state thechanges in behaviour of a particular actor that the Tax Justice Programme has influenced. Thedescriptionsclearlyexplainwhathappened,bywhom,whenandwhereithappened.Theoutcomedescriptionsarebriefstatementsofapproximately2-3sentences.Inadditiontotheformulationoftheoutcomes,participantswereaskedtodescribethesignificanceoftheoutcomesonthenational,regionalandgloballevel,aswellastoarticulatethecontributionoftheTaxJusticeprogrammetotheoutcome.

ExampleofanoutcomefromtheTaxJusticeProgramme

OutcomeDescriptionIn2015,theMinisterofFinanceofMozambiquerecognisedthenegativeconsequencesofDoubleTaxation

Treaties(DTTs),stoppedsigningnewonesandisawaitingreviewofthecurrent9DTTsinMozambique.

Significance:Mozambiquehas9DTTsofwhichmostofthemgiveawaysignificanttaxingrightsonRoyalties,Dividends,

InterestandService Fees, especially theoneswith SouthAfrica,UAEandMauritius. Therewas the round

trippingofinvestmentsandtreatyshoppingbyinvestorsthroughMauritiusandUAE.Asaresultoftheabove,

theMozambicanGovernmentwaslosingverysignificantrevenuewhichcouldhavebeenusedforprogressive

10

spendingtoimprovequalityofeducationwhichisverylowwithsomepupilslearningundertreesandstudying

seatedon the floors. Theamount lost toDTTs in FiscalAreasofMaputo,Beira, TeteandNacala in 2014

amounted to over 1.97 BillionMeticais, equivalent to over US$119 million. After the recognition by the

MinisterofFinance,anewunitspecificallyworkingonDTTsintheMozambiqueTaxAuthoritywassetup.

Contribution:AADKprovidedtechnicalandfinancialsupportwhichenabledAAMozto:

• Conductastudyon“Socio-economicimplicationsofDTTsinMozambique”in2015 • Carry out debates and conferences in 2015 on how to improve Domestic ResourceMobilisation

(DRM)byreviewingthecurrentgenerousDTTframeworkwiththeMinistryofFinance,ThePlanning

andBudgetCommittee,MozambiqueTaxAuthorityandCSOsincludingyouthActivistainMaputo,

Mozambique. • ConductvalidationmeetingsofthestudyonDTTswiththeTaxAuthorityandMinistryofFinancein

2015 • Publishanopen letterontheDTTattendedtotheMinisterofFinance inanationalnewspaper in

March2015.AfterpublishingoftheletterAAMozwasinvitedbytheMinisterofFinancetodiscuss

DTTs.

TheP4CAdvisorwasinstrumentalin:

• DevelopmentoftheTORsforthestudyonDTTs • HiringofconsultanttoconductstudyonDTTs • Reviewingandvalidatingthestudy • Designingadvocacystrategybasedonrecommendationsfromthestudy

Inaddition,YouthActivistacontributedtoalargerpublicdebateforgovernmenttoreviewtheDTTsandthe

MinistryofFinanceactivelyparticipated.

Examplesofoutcomeswillbegiventhroughoutthereport.Forafulloverviewoftheoutcomes,seeANNEX1:OutcomesTaxJusticeProgramme.

3. Analysisandinterpretation:Inadditiontoformulatingtheoutcomes,thechangeagentswereaskedtoclassifytheiroutcomes,inordertoenabletheevaluatortoanswertheevaluationquestions.Thefollowingcategorieswereusedfortheclassification:

Classificationfield CategoryYear Country SocialActor Objectives Intended/Unintended Changelevel • Local

• National• Regional• Global

Programmefocus • Improvedsocialservices• ProgressiveTaxation

11

Significancelevel • Major

• Important• Minor

%Contribution ProgrammeModalities • TaxAdvisor

• Training4Change• Inspirator• Programmesupport• GlobalTaxCampaign• Activista

TheevaluatorreviewedallcategorisationwithsupportfromHeleneBach. Duringtheentireprocess,documentationreviewandoutcomeharvestingworkshop,theevaluatorhasworkedtowardsoutcomedescriptionsthatareSMART4:Specific: The outcome is formulated in sufficient detail so that someone without specialised subject orcontextualknowledgewillbeabletounderstandandappreciateit.Measurable:Containingobjective,verifiablequantitativeandqualitative information, independentofwhoiscollectingdata.Howmuch?Howmany?Whenandwheredidthechangehappen?Achieved:Thedescriptionestablishesaplausible relationshipand logical linkbetweentheoutcomeandthechangeagent’sactionsthatinfluencedit.Inotherwords,howdidthechangeagentcontributetotheoutcome,inwholeorpart,indirectlyorindirectly,intentionallyorunexpectedly?Relevant:Theoutcomerepresentsasignificantsteptowardstheimpactthatthechangeagentseeks.Timely:Whiletheoutcomeoccurredwithinthetimeperiodbeingevaluated,thechangeagent’scontributionmayhaveoccurredmonths,orevenyears,before.ThisevaluationprocessandproductwasguidedbythefourstandardsofevaluationoftheAmericanEvaluationAssociation5.Thus,theevaluatorensuredthattheevaluation’sfindingswerenotonlyvalidbutalsocredible to the intendedusers.Theevaluatoralso took intoaccount thewelfareof thoseinvolvedintheevaluation,aswellasthoseaffectedbyitsresultswithquestionssuchasconfidentialityofdataandsourcesaddressedheadon.Finally,theevaluatorensuredthattheevaluationprocedureswerepracticalandcost/effectiveandcausetheminimumdisruptionofActionAid’songoingactivitiesrequiredtoachievethemaximumnecessaryinformation.

4. SubstantiationDuringthedesignphase,theevaluatoraskedtheuserswhatwouldmakethewholesetofoutcomescredibleenoughfortheusesoftheevaluation.Thefollowingcriteriawereagreedupon:

a) Theoutcomeswereprovidedbyinformantswhowereknowledgeableabouttheoutcomes.b) Thechangeagentsagreedtogoonrecordwiththeinformationtheyprovidedaboutoutcomes.c) Theoutcomedescriptionsconcernobservablefactsandarespecificandconcreteenoughto

beverifiable.

4Wilson-Grau,R.,Britt,H.,OutcomeHarvesting,FordFoundation,2013,p.10.5SeetheuniversalstandardsforevaluationoftheAmericanEvaluationAssociationatwww.eval.org:

12

d) Thechangeagentswereaskedtoprovideanydocumentsthatcontainedevidencetosupporttheoutcomechangeaswellastheircontribution.Thedocumentsprovidedasevidencewereamongstothers:Invitationsformeetingsfrome.g.theMinistriesofFinance;MemorandumsofUnderstanding,lawsandpolicies;nationalbudgets;newspaperarticles;researchreportsandpolicyrecommendations.Thesedocumentswereverifiedbytheevaluatorandwerefoundtoprovideevidenceforasubstantialpartoftheoutcomestatements.

e) TherelationshipbetweenhowtheTaxJusticeProgrammecontributedandtheoutcomeswasjudgedbytheevaluatortobeplausible.Insomecases,thecontributiondescriptions,althoughprovidingalotofinformationonwhattheTaxJusticeProgrammedid,donotcontainanexplicitlink between the contribution and the outcome statement. The documentation that wasprovidedhowever clarified that link.Only 4 outcomeswere not included in the evaluation,becausetheywerenotconsideredcredibleenough.

f) Therewascross-validationbetweendifferentAAcountryoffices,AIandAADK.

Additionally, the evaluator sent a representative set of outcomes to third parties - who wereindependentbutknowledgeableabouttheoutcomes-toenhancethevalidityaswellasthecredibilityof the findings. The evaluator andHelene Bach selected 20 of the outcomes thatwere sent to 8substantiators.7ofthemrespondedandsubstantiated18outcomes.Thesubstantiatorsfullyagreedwith13oftheoutcomedescriptionsandpartiallyagreedwiththeother5.Foranoverviewoftheseoutcomesandthecommentsofthesubstantiators,pleaseseeANNEX5:Tableofsubstantiatorsandtheir agreement to the outcomes. Where relevant, the outcomes were revised based on thecommentsofthesubstantiators.

5. LimitationsoftheevaluationCoincidingwiththeOutcomeHarvestingreview,theapplicationprocesstobecomeastrategicpartnerto Danidawas launched. Thismeant that all staff from the AA country office and theGlobal TaxProgrammepresentattheOutcomeHarvestingworkshophadtodevelopdocumentsforexpressionofinterestandsubsequentlyproposalsforcountryprogrammes.TheAAstaffpresentattheOutcomeHarvestingWorkshopalsotookpartinthisprocess,whichmadeitchallengingforthemtoallocatesufficienttimetofinalisetheoutcomesandprovidedocumentsforsubstantiationaftertheworkshop.Theprocesswasthusdelayed,butallmaterialandinformationwassubmitted.

13

FindingsoftheevaluationThischaptersummarisesthemainfindingsoftheevaluation.Afterlookingatsomefindingsonthewholesetofoutcomes,thereportfocussesonansweringtheevaluationquestions.Thefindingsarebasedontrendsandpatternsthatcouldbedetectedintheoutcomes.Examplesofoutcomeswillbeused to illustrate the findings. Every section ends with conclusions and recommended points fordiscussion.

1. GeneralfindingsIn total, 53 outcomes were collected during this Outcome Harvest. This was not an exhaustiveinventory of the outcomes achieved by the Tax Justice Programme during the evaluation period.Proportionatelymoreoutcomesmaybegatherediftheexercisewasextended.Theoutcomesinthisevaluation reflect a representative set of changes based on the insights and observations of thechange agents within the programme. At the end of the harvesting workshop, the participantsreflectedonthetotalsetofoutcomestheyhadcollected.Theyidentifiedchangeareasthatwerenotyet represented or they thoughtwere underrepresented. In theweek after theworkshop, a fewoutcomeswereaddedintheseareas.Afterthat,thechangeagentsagreed,thattheoutcomeswererepresentativeforthechangesachievedbytheTaxJusticeProgrammeduringtheevaluationperiod.

LocationThepicturebelowshowsthespreadoftheoutcomesoverthecountriesinvolvedinthisevaluation.Inaddition,13globaloutcomeswerecollected.Theseareoutcomesrelatedtoglobalresearchandadvocacy,thusnotdirectlylinkingtospecificnationalcontextsbute.g.aimedatrelevantinternationalinstitutions.Figure1Overviewofnumberofoutcomespercountry

Tanzania

Mozambique

Uganda

Zambia

14

TimeThisevaluationaimedtolookforoutcomesthatoccurredbetween2014-2016.Afewoutcomesfrombefore 2014 were taken into account, because they were regarded as being valuable for thisevaluation.Figure2shows,thatmostoutcomestookplacebetween2015-2016,withapeakin20166.Naturally, people tend to have the most recent outcomes in their mind or those that are mostmemorable.Thismightinfluencethisfigure.

Figure2Numberofoutcomesperyear

SignificanceBesidesdescribingtheoutcomeandthecontribution,thechangeagentswereaskedtodescribethesignificanceoftheoutcomeonthenational,regionalandgloballevelandtoratethissignificance.Although most of the significance descriptions are only meaningful in relation to the individualoutcomes,somerecurrentissuescouldbeidentified.Onthenationallevel,changeagentsthoughttheoutcomesweresignificantbecausethey:

• openedupspaceforcivilsocietytoengageonTaxJusticewithMinistriesofFinance,whichdidnotexistbefore.

• ledtoenhancedunderstandingoftaxrelatedissuesamongstmembersofthepublic• enhancetransparencyandaccountabilityinthemobilisationandutilisationoftax.• strengthenedpublicsupportforTaxJustice.• pushedgovernmentstointroduceprogressivetaxpolicies.• puttaxontheagenda,ofgovernments,mediaandCSOs.• arestepstowardsamoretransparentandfairtaxsystem.• DTT’swerepreviouslynotsubjecttoanypoliticaldiscussion.• communitiesbecameawareabouthowthetaxsystemshouldfunction.

6Incasetheoutcometookplaceduringacertainperiod,thestartingyearwasmentioned

15

Ontheregionalleveltheoutcomeswereregardedassignificantbecausethey:

• helpedbuildaregionalmovementforspecificcampaigns.• bringnationaltaxissuestotheregionallevel.• learningaboutGovernment/CSOengagementintheregionispassedontootherCSOsinthe

region• caninput/inspireregionaladvocacy.

Theoutcomeshadsignificanceonthegloballevelbecause:

• nationaloutcomesgaveinputtogloballobbying.• issuesonprogressivetaxationwereputontheagendaofglobalfora.• Theyhelpedcreatingaspaceforsharedlearningoninfluencinggovernments• Research reportsofferagoodbasis tomove fromsimplycriticizing towardsestablishinga

moreconstructivedialoguewithbusinesses.Thereportshaveinspiredothercountriestotakeaction.

• theyshowthatAAisacrediblepartneronTaxJusticeforgovernments.Theoutcomeswereeitherreportedasimportantormajorchangesbythechangeagents.Onlyafewoutcomes(6%)werereportedasminorchanges.Thispicturemaybeinfluencedbythefactthatinafirstharvest,changeagentstendtofocusonthebiggeroutcomes.ItwillbeinterestingforAADKtoseehowthispictureevolveswhentheycontinueusingOHastheirmonitoringapproach.

Figure3Numberofoutcomespersignificancelevel

UnintendedoutcomesMostoutcomes(87%)werereportedasintendedoutcomes.Only13%wasidentifiedasunintendedoutcomes.All,exceptone,oftheunintendedoutcomestookplaceinZambia.UnintendedoutcomesoftheTaxJusticeProgramme:

In2016,thegovernmentofZambia(particularlytheMinistryofFinance)nominatedActionAidZambiatobe

partofthereferenceteamthatwillbeconsultedbyMinistryofFinancetodiscusstaxreforms&expenditure

tofeedintothenationaleconomicrecoveryprogramme;andtheMinistryofFinanceproposedthatCSOs

16

shouldbeinvolvedinthetaxtreatyformulationprocess.ActionAidZambiawasgiventheroleof

coordinatingtheparticipationofCSO’sinthetaxtreatiesformulationprocess.Themeetingshavebeen

regulartwice(2)inaquarter.[31]7

InNovember2016,TheAfricanUnionPermanentRepresentativesCommittee(PRC)invitedAAZambia

countrydirectortomakeapresentationtotheCommitteeonmeasuresAfricangovernmentsshouldadopt

tocombatIllicitFinancialflows.[33]

In2016,inhis2017budgetspeechtheZambianMinisterofFinancesaidthatfundswillbeallocatedfor

investmentsintechnologiestoensureminimisationofwastageofpublicfunds.[34]

In2016,theNationalRoadFundAgency(NRFA)inZambiahasbeguntheprocessofrequiringallcontractors

andconsultantsworkingforNRFAtoregularizetheirtaxpositionwiththeZambiaRevenueAuthority(ZRA)

beforetheNFRApayscontractororconsultant.[35]

In2016,theZambiaInstituteofMassCommunication(ZAMCOM)introducedthatthestudentsaspartof

theirassignmentswriteabouttheimpactoftaxinjusticeontheeconomy.[38]

In2014,300citizensorganizedtoprotestagainstthetaxavoidanceoftheLondon-basedmininggiant

VedantaowningKonkolaCopperMine(KCM).[39]

In2014,therevenueauthoritiesofZambiaundertookaforensicauditofcompanyKonkolaCopperMine

(KCM).[40]

2. Answerstoevaluationquestions

InwhichsocialactorsisActionAidinfluencingchange?ActionAidDenmarkwantedtounderstandinwhichsocialactorstheTaxJusticeProgrammehadbeenabletoinfluencechange.Theevaluatorclassifiedtheoutcomesaccordingtothesocialactors.Figure5 shows that the Tax Justice Programme mainly influences national governments. 47% of theoutcomes demonstrate a change in behaviour of national governments, 26% ofwhich are aboutMinistriesofFinance.

7Thenumbersinbrackets[0]refertotheoutcomenumbersinAnnex1:OutcomesoftheTaxJusticeProgramme.Whentherearenumerousoutcomes,thenumberswillbelistedinfootnotes.

17

Figure4Numberofoutcomespersocialactor

8

MostoftheoutcomesrelatetotheMinistryofFinanceandnationalgovernmentscollaboratingonprogressive taxationwithActionAidandotherCSOs,adopting their recommendationsor changingtheirpoliciesandpracticesaroundprogressivetaxation.AfewexamplesofoutcomesrelatedtotheMinistriesofFinancebeingwillingtocollaboratewithAADKandotherCSOs:In2014,thePresidentoftheMozambiqueTaxAuthority(ATM)signedanMOUforexchangeofinformation

andcollaborationonworkwithActionAidMozambiqueontaxeducation,researchandregistrationofcitizens

fortaxpurposesinMozambique.[1]

In2015,theMinistryofFinanceinTanzaniainvitedtheTanzaniaTaxJusticeCoalition,acoalitionofCSOsof

whichActionAidTanzaniaisamember,for3consultationmeetingsondomesticresourcemobilisationthrough

taxcollection,especiallyduringthebudgetaryplanningprocesses.[12]

In2015, theMinisterofEconomyandFinance inMaputo,Mozambique invitedActionAidMozambique to

provideexplanationsontheFinanceforDevelopmentprocesstoimprovethedomesticresourcesmobilization

tofinancesocialsectors,especiallyeducation,healthandwater.[8]

In2016,thegovernmentofZambia(particularlytheMinistryofFinance)nominatedActionAidZambiatobe

partofthereferenceteamthatwillbeconsultedbyMinistryofFinancetodiscusstaxreforms&expenditure

to feed into thenationaleconomic recoveryprogramme;and theMinistryof Financeproposed thatCSOs

shouldbeinvolvedinthetaxtreatyformulationprocess.ActionAidZambiawasgiventheroleofcoordinating

theparticipationofCSO’sinthetaxtreatiesformulationprocess.Themeetingshavebeenregular(twiceina

quarter).[31]

In addition to collaboration, the outcomes also demonstrate how Ministries of Finance are adoptingrecommendationsbyActionAid.Afewexamples:In2015,theMinistryofFinance-TaxPolicyDepartmentinUgandaadoptedtherecommendationbySEATINI-

UgandaandActionAid research to re-negotiate tax treaties that are harmful toUganda’s tax base. They

draftedapolicytoguidethenegotiations,whichiscurrentlyunderdiscussion.[17]

In2017,theMinisterofFinanceadoptedthefollowingproposalsmadebyActionAidZambiaandtheZambia

TaxPlatforminitsbudgetfor2017:

8RIGO=RegionalIntergovernmentalOrganisation(e.g.EU,AU)

18

• EnhancingpowersoftheZambianRevenueAuthorities(ZRA)tocooperatewithothergovernment

agenciesonmattersoftaxation.

• Appointsomegovernmentagenciestoserveastaxagentsandcollecttaxfromsuppliersofgoods

andservicesengagedbythesegovernmentagenciesandremittoZRA.

• Buildlinkagesbetweentaxationandbanking."[36]

IntheFinancialyear2015/16,thetaxpolicydepartmentoftheMinistryofFinance(MoF)inUgandaadopted

the recommendation by the CSO Tax Justice Alliance to develop a policy framework for Double taxation

agreements(DTA)negotiations.[21]

Finally,theoutcomesshowevidenceofMinistriesofFinancechangingtheirpoliciesandpractices.In2015,theMinisterofFinancerecognisedthenegativeconsequencesofDoubleTaxationTreaties(DTTs),

stoppedsigningnewonesandisawaitingreviewofthecurrent9DTTsinMozambique.[2]

In 2016, the Mozambique Tax Authorities (ATM) introduced guidelines for corporates to seal alcoholic

beveragesandtobaccoproductsleavingthecountryasithadrevenueimplicationstoSouthAfrica,Swaziland,

MalawiandZimbabwe.[10]

In2016,theNationalRoadFundAgency(NRFA)inZambiahasbeguntheprocessofrequiringallcontractors

andconsultantsworkingforNRFAtoregularizetheirtaxpositionwiththeZambiaRevenueAuthority(ZRA)

beforetheNFRApayscontractororconsultant.[35]

Conclusionsandrecommendedpointsfordiscussion:ActionAid ismainly influencing national governments andMinistries of Finance through its TaxJusticeProgramme.Theoutcomesfollowacommonsequenceofoutcomesintermsoflobbying.Ministries of Finance and national governments first need to recognise the importance ofprogressivetaxationandbewillingtocollaboratewithCSOsaroundthisissue,beforetheyaccepttheirinputandfinallychangetheirpoliciesandpractices.TheoutcomesrelatedtochangesinthenationalgovernmentandMinistriesofFinancedemonstrate,thatActionAidisseenasanexpertandcrediblepartnerontheissueofTaxJusticebytheseactors.Duringtheharvestingworkshop,thechangeagentsweresurprisedthattheseactorsformedthelargestcategory.TheMinistriesofFinanceareakeyactorrelatedtopoliciesontaxationandtheimplementation of these laws, however ActionAid could in the next phase of the Tax JusticeProgrammediscussifthereareotheractorsthattheprogrammeshouldaimtoinfluenceinamorestrategicway. Inaddition,AADKcoulddiscusshowitcanbuildonthesuccess inchangingtheseactorstoinfluenceNationalGovernmentsandMinistriesofFinanceinothercountries.

Towhat extenddo theoutcomes represent patternsof progress towards thestrategicobjectivesoftheTaxJusticeprogramme?The various interventions on tax of ActionAid have previously been coordinated, but not fullyintegratedintooneprogrammewithcommonlysharedobjectives.DuringthefirstdayoftheOutcomeHarvestingworkshop,thedifferentintermediateobjectivesoftheindividualprojectswerediscussedandmergedinto5commonlyagreedobjectives.

19

Thechangeagentswereaskedtoclassifytheoutcomesaccordingtothese5strategicobjectives.Figure5Numberofoutcomesperobjective

GiventhattheTaxJusticeProgrammeismainlyinfluencingnationalgovernments,itisnotsurprisingthatmostoutcomes relate toobjectivenumber1:governmentsmakeprogressive/fairer tax rules.Onlyafewoutcomesrelatetoobjective2,4and5.Oneoutcomeiscategorizedasother.Thisoutcomerelatestofunding:In2015,NORADallocated3millionEUROsfor3yearsandOpenSocietyFoundation

USD $100,000 for one years allocated for 6 countries (ActionAid Tanzania,Mozambique,Malawi,

Nepal,EthiopiaandMyanmar)forActionAidInternationalfortheprogrammeonfinancingincreased

government investment in high quality public education especially for girls through progressive

taxation[49].Figure6shows,whichactorstheTaxJusticeprogrammeisinfluencingundereachoftheseobjectives.

ThestrategicobjectivesoftheTaxJusticeprogramme:

1. GOVERNMENTSMAKEPROGRESSIVE/FAIRERTAXRAISINGRULES(INCREASESIZEOFREVENUE/BUDGET)

Ensure governments develop and enforce fair and transparent rules on corporate taxation and aprogressivesystemoftaxation.

2. BETTERCORPORATEPOLICY/PRACTICEMakeitsociallyindefensibleforcorporationstoavoidtaxorlobbyfortaxincentives

3. STRONGPUBLICANDCIVILSOCIETYBuildaglobalmovementfortaxjusticewithstrongpoliticalclout.4. FAIRALLOCATIONTOSERVICES(INCREASESHAREOFBUDGET)governmentsincreasebudgetallocations

and or actual disbursement for public services in health, education, and agriculture as a result ofimplementingprogressivesystemoftaxation

5. COMMUNITIESMONITORINGSPENDINGANDQUALITYOFSERVICES(INCREASESCRUTINY/SENSITIVITYOFBUDGET)Accountabilityandcommunitymonitoringofspending,onandqualityof,publicservices

20

Figure6Numberofoutcomesperobjectiveandactor

Conclusionsandrecommendedpointsfordiscussion:The Tax Justice Programme is mainly making progress on objective 1: Governments makeprogressive/fairertaxraisingrules.ActionAidshouldthereforediscusswhat itcandotoachievemoreprogresson theotherobjectives aswell. Since theobjectivesweredevelopedduring theharvestingworkshop,itwouldbeadvisabletoconfirmthemwiththeprogrammepartnersaswellasrevisethembasedonthefindingsfromthisoutcomeharvest.

How did the Tax Justice Programme contribute to the outcomes through itsprogrammemodalities (Training4Change, Tax Advisor, support to governanceprogramming,GlobalTaxCampaign,InspiratorandActivista)?In addition to formulating the outcomes, Outcome Harvesting identifies the contribution of thechangeagenttotheoutcomes.ItrecognisesthefactthatnotalloftheseoutcomeswereachievedbyActionAidalone,butthatotheractorsandfactorsalsocontributedtothesechanges.The change agents were asked to describe how the Tax Justice Programme contributed to theoutcomes.Thiscontributioncouldbepartial,directorindirect.Additionally,thechangeagentstaggedthe programme modalities that contributed to the outcomes (multiple answers possible). ThedifferentprogrammemodalitiesoftheTaxJusticeprogrammeare:Training4Change(TCDCandtheGlobalPlatforms),TaxAdvisors,programmesupport,GlobalTaxCampaign,InspiratorandActivista9.

9SeeIntroductionforadescriptionofthesemodalities.

21

Figure7Numberofoutcomesperprogrammemodality

Figure7 shows, thatmostof thecontributionof theTax JusticeProgrammeto theoutcomeswasthrough programme support and Tax Advisors. The programme support consists of the financialcontributionandtechnicalsupportofAADKtothecountryofficestoenabletheiractivities.Inthatsense, it was never reported as the sole contribution to any of the outcomes. The Tax Advisorscontributed to 32% of the outcomes. The contribution descriptions clearly demonstrate how theAdvisors were instrumental in supporting the activities of the country offices. They had a crucialcontributionto38outof53outcomes.Youthactivitiesplay a smaller role in theTax JusticeProgramme than inotherpartsof theAADKgovernanceprogramme.ActionAidDenmarkisplanningtoputmorefocusonyouthintheTaxJusticeProgrammetoo in thecomingyears. In thisharvest, thechangeagents reportedacontributionofActivistato9%oftheoutcomes10.TheircontributionconsistedinorganisingdebatesonTaxationandDevelopment in which the Ministry participated and collecting signatures for petitions andcampaigning.TheActivistamodalitywasneverthesolecontributionintheseoutcomes,butalwayssupportedtheotherprogrammemodalitiesintheTaxJusticeProgrammeininfluencingtheoutcomes.The evaluator observed, that the change agents present during the harvesting workshop mainlyreportedon themodalities that theyweredirectly involved in (workdoneby their countryoffice,Advisorplacedintheiroffice,researchfromtheGlobalTaxCampaignthattheyusedorwereinvolvedin). No youth from Activista were present. This might explain partly, though not fully, why theircontribution is underreported. Annual reports from the four countries and other additionaldocumentsdidnotprovideanyadditionaloutcomesrelatedtoyouthengagementorinvolvementofActivistaeither.ThecontributionofthemodalityTraining4Change(7%)andInspirators(2%)totheoutcomeswasrathersmall.ThefollowingdiagramillustrateshowtheTaxJusticeProgrammecontributedtochangesrelatedtoDoubleTaxationTreatiesandshowstheconnectionsbetweentheoutcomesinthisarea.

10Outcomenumbers1,2,3,4,13,14,16,26,30,38,41

world’spoorestcountriesofvitalrevenue.

InMarch2016,TheDanishMinisterforTax invited AADKandtheDanishdevelopmentorganisation IBIS for ameeting to discuss DoubleTaxationTreaties(DTT).

In April 2015, the Tax Commission of theDanishParliamentheld,forthefirsttimeapublic meeting with the participation ofCSOs on where principles for the DoubleTaxation Treaties (DTT) and policycoherencewerediscussed.[51]

In November 2014, members of theDanish Parliament called the Ministerfor Tax for the first time for aconsultation on Double TaxationTreaties (DTT)and their impacton thedevelopingcountries.[53]

InMarch2016,TheDanishMinisterforTax invited AADK and the Danishdevelopment organisation IBIS for ameeting to discuss Double TaxationTreaties(DTT).[52]

AADKResearch‘TimeforChange’2014

AADKlobbiedpoliticians

AAmozstudyonDTTsinMozambiqueAADKfinancialand

TechnicalsupportIn2015,theMinisterofFinancerecognised

thenegativeconsequencesofDoubleTaxationTreaties(DTTs),stoppedsigningnewonesandisawaitingreviewofthecurrent9

DTTsinMozambique.[2]

P4CAdvisorMozambique

AAmozreviewingtheDTTswithMinistry

AAmozpublishesopenletteronDTTsto

Ministryinnewspaper

Activistacontributedtolargerpublicdebatefor

governmenttoreviewDTT

SEATINIsetupworkinggroupandguidelinesforrevampingTJA

P4CAdvisorUganda

IntheFinancialyear2015/16,thetaxpolicydepartment of the Ministry of Finance(MoF) in Uganda adopted therecommendation by the CSO Tax JusticeAlliancetodevelopapolicyframework forDouble taxation agreements (DTA)negotiations.[21]

Between 2014-2015, Regionalnetworks in Uganda rely onSEATINI-U to boost regionaladvocacy on DTT/As by jointlyimplementing activities related toDTAs/Tax.[22]

AAUtrainingontreatiesforCSOsandmedia

In 2014, The Tax Justice Alliance inUganda became fully operational and isinfluencing progressive tax policies in amorecoordinatedwaychairedbySEATINI-Uganda.[19]

FinancialsupportAAU

AAdevelopedthereport

‘Mistreated’

From February 2016 and the following yearpoliticians discussed for the first time about thescale of negative impact of thecurrentglobal taxtreatiesnetworkonthedevelopingworldbasedontheActionAidInternationalreportMistreated.[43]

FromFebruary2016andthefollowingyearmediadiscussed for the first time about the scale ofnegative impact of the current global tax treatiesnetwork on the developing world based on theActionAidInternationalreportMistreated.[44]

In 2016, the European Commission made arecommendation to the member statesthrough its “Anti-Tax Avoidance Package” tolook into tax treaties signed by EUMemberStateswithdevelopingcountries.[45]

AADKfinancialandTechnical

support

Uganda

Mozambique

ZambiaSugarCase

Between2012and2016,theZambiangovernmentreviewedandrenegotiatedtheZambia-UKDoubleTaxationAgreement(DTA)andtheZambia-IrelandDoubleTaxationAgreement(DTA).[32]

AADKfinancialandtechnicalsupport

AAmozusesresearchtolobbygovernment

Zambia

Thechangeagentswerealsoaskedtoratetheextentoftheircontributionsinpercentages.Theextent

ofthecontributiontotheoutcomeswaspositivelyjudgedbythechangeagents,generallyabove60%

withamajority(19outcomes)with80%contributionbytheTaxJusticeprogramme.

Figure8Numberofoutcomesperpercentageofcontribution

3Outcomeswereidentifiedwherethecontributionwasjudgedas90%.Theseoutcomes11

were:

FromFebruary2016andthe followingyearmediadiscussed for the first timeabout thescaleofnegativeimpactofthecurrentglobaltaxtreatiesnetworkonthedevelopingworldbasedontheActionAidInternationalreportMistreated:Thetaxtreatiesthataredeprivingtheworld’spoorestcountriesofvitalrevenue.[44]Contribution:Theresearchhasfortheveryfirsttimeeveranalysedandcomparedmorethan500internationaltaxtreatiesthatalllowandlower-middleincomecountriesinEasternandSouthernAsiaandSub-SaharanAfricahavesignedfrom1970until2014.Itscoredhowmuchataxtreatyrestrictsthewaythatthelowerincomecountrycantaxthreetypesoftax(profittax,withholdingtaxandothertaxingrightsincludingcapitalgainstax).Itenableskeystakeholderstocomparethetreatiestowhichtheirgovernmentispartytoneighbouringorsimilarcountries.AspartoftheTaxJusticeProgrammeresearch,qualityassuranceandpackagingofthereportforeasyunderstandingforpolicymakers,journalistsandpublicwasdonebytheGlobalTaxCampaign.In2016,ActionAidZambiaandActionAidUganda,aspartofthegovernanceprogramme/TaxJusticeprogramme,organisedtaxtreatiestrainingsinLusakaandKampalarespectivelyattendedbycivilsocietypartners,journalistsandprivatesectorrepresentativesfromZambia,Malawi,Uganda,andTanzania.ThetrainingcontributedtocreatingadebateinZambiaandUgandaonthetaxtreatiestakingthepointofdepartureintheresearchpresentedintheMistreatedreport.InApril2015,thePresidentoftheRepublicofMozambiquevisitedprimaryschools,threeinMaputoandoneschoolinGazaprovinces.Attheseschools,530desksweredistributed,benefiting3180students.[9]Contribution:InMarch2015,AAMOZsentanopenlettertothePresidentonthestateofeducationsectorlinking the financing for public education to tax. This letter thatwas published byAAMoz and led to thepresidentvisitingtheschools.AAMoz,withthehelpoftheTaxJusticeAdvisorandincollaborationwithTJN-AandtheDanishEmbassyinMozambiqueheldaconferenceonIllicitFinancialFlowswhereMinistryofFinanceofficials participated and contributed. After that, the Transparency and Tax Justice Coalition, under theguidanceofAAMoz,producedandpublishedanopenlettertothepresidentoftherepubliconhowtaxjusticecouldbeusedtocleareducationfinancingproblemsinthecountry.InNovember 2014,members of theDanish Parliament called theMinister for Tax for the first time for aconsultationonDoubleTaxationTreaties(DTT)andtheirimpactonthedevelopingcountries.[53]

11

SeeAnnex1forafulldescriptionoftheoutcomesandtheircontribution.

24

Contribution:TheAADKresearch‘Timetochange’,ontheDTTwithGhanacombinedwithlobbyingmembersofparliamenttocalltheMinisterforTaxforconsultation.

For3outcomesthecontributionoftheTaxJusticeProgrammewasratedsmall(20-30%).Forthelast

twooftheseoutcomes,ActionAiddidalottocontributetothechange.However,theyrecognisethat,

sinceitconcernshigh-levelchanges,manyotheractorsandfactorscontributedtothatchange.

In2015,basedonhigherrevenuesmainlyfromthetaxingoftheminingindustry,thegovernmentofZambiahasincreasedtheallocationforsocialsectorse.g.ineducationsectorwhere5,000teacherswillberecruited.The continuation of the School Feeding Programme, which enables a number of children from poor andvulnerablefamiliestostayinschool.[37]Contribution: AAZ contributed to the change through the Zambia Tax platform by advocating for highertaxationoftheminingindustry.Thiswasdonethroughresearchandadvocacywork.In 2016, the European Commissionmade a recommendation to themember states through its “Anti-TaxAvoidancePackage”tolookintotaxtreatiessignedbyEUMemberStateswithdevelopingcountries.[45]Contribution:ThereportMistreatedwaslaunchedattheEuropeanParliamentinApril2016,andpresentedtothePlatformforTaxGoodGovernance(akeyadvisorybodytotheEuropeanCommissionontax)inJanuary2016.Thereportgivesrecommendationstowhatthememberstatescoulddoonreviewingtaxtreaties.Thelaunchofthereportcontributedandstrengthenedtheinterestandpointedtotheneedtoreviewtaxtreaties.The parliament is more progressive related to fair taxation, and the Mistreated report with therecommendation strengthened the arguments of the European Parliament towards the Commission, byprovidingfactsandsubstantialbackgroundinformation.Also,advocacywasdonebyAADKthroughEurodad(theEuropeanNetworkonDebtandDevelopment)anetworkof47civilsocietyorganisations(CSOs).ThiswassupportedbytheActionAidInternationalpolicyanchorplacedwithAAUKandtheAApolicyofficerinBrussels.AtthethirdInternationalUNFinancingforDevelopment(FfD)intergovernmentalconferenceinAddisAbaba,Ethiopia in July 2015, the group of 77 Heads of State of developing countries led by chair South Africangovernment, tabledamotion for the introductionofan intergovernmental taxbodyunderauspiceof theUnitedNationstosetglobalnormsontaxandfoughtforitsinclusion,despiteintheendcompromisingonitduetosignificantpressurefromdevelopingcountries.[42]Contribution:-ActionAidattendedUNconsultationsonFinancingforDevelopmenttoworkwithothercivilsocietypartnerstoinputourkeymessagesinNewYork(January,April,June,2015).-ActionAidAfricaRegionalAdvocacyCoordinatorbuiltrelationshipswiththeAfricanUnionandUNEconomicCommissionforAfricaandopeneddoorsforAfricanCivilSocietypartnerstomeetwithandinfluenceAfricaRegionalConsultationaheadofFfDconference(March2015).-ActionAidledandorganisedCSOFfDforum’staxdiscussion(July2015)andhelpeddrafttaxtextintheCSOFfDdeclarationandtaxlobbyingpositionforCSOs,togetherwithEurodad.-ActionAidhelpedleadthediscussionontaxintheAWIDWomen’sRightsForumtogetkeywomen’srightsmovementalliestoincludetaxjusticekeymessages(July2015)intherunuptoFfD.-ActionAidstaffandAdvisorspresentatFfDsummithelpedcoordinateCSOdiscussionsandagreementontactics(policy,lobbying,media,stunts).-ActionAidpolicybriefing“Levellingup”providedexamplesofconcreteactionsgovernmentscouldtakerelatedtoensurecorporatespayingafairertaxshare,whichwasauniquecontributiontoempoweringdevelopingcountrygovernmentswithstrongargumentsandnarrativetouse.-ActionAid(staffandAdvisors)lobbiedandliaisedwithkeygovernmentdelegatespresentattheFinancingforDevelopmentConference.-15ActionAidofficerstookactiontobringpressuretobearonpolicymakersfortaxjusticeforfinancingfordevelopment,suchaslobbyingtheirnationalgovernmentswithlettersmeetingsandbriefings,mobilisingcitizensthroughsocialmedia,petitionsandstunts,andmediawork.-ActionAidtalkedtojournaliststogetmediacoverageonkeymessages,gotopinioneditorialspublishedandwroteblogs.CoverageincludedReuters,Bloomberg,CCTVandAlJazeera,BBCWorldService,EPS,EBC

25

[EthiopianBroadcastingCorporation],UNRadio,andSouth-SouthNews.-ActionAidspokeatororganisedanumberofsideeventsandpaneldiscussionontaxatFfDsummit

Asdescribedabove,theratingofthecontributionwasbasedontheperceptionofthechangeagents.

Theevaluatorverifiedthedocumentationprovidedbythechangeagentsasevidenceandadjusted

thepercentagesifnotenoughproofwasfound.Additionally,thesubstantiatorswere,independent

fromthechangeagent,alsoaskedtoratethecontributionoftheTaxJusticeProgramme.Ofthe18

outcomesthatweresubstantiated,mostcontributionswereratedthesameorevenhigheras the

ratingbythechangeagents.Only3outcomeswereratedashavingcontributedlessthanjudgedby

thechangeagents.Theoutcomewithmostdifferenceinratingisoutcome48whichwasjudgedat

90%bythechangeagentandonlyat50%bythesubstantiator.(SeeANNEX5:Tableofsubstantiators)

Conclusionandrecommendedpointsfordiscussion:ThecontributionoftheTaxJusticeProgrammetotheoutcomeswasmainlythroughprogramme

support from AADK and through thework of the Tax Advisors. The contribution of Activista is

significantlysmaller.Thisisinlinewiththeset-upoftheprogramme,whereAADKplannedtofirst

focusoncapacitybuildingandinthenextphaseontheinvolvementofyouth.AADKcouldanalyse

theoutcomesrelatedtoActivistafurthertoidentifymodels,lessonslearnedandpossiblebarriers

foryouthengagementtoinformfuturestrategies.

Furthermore,AADKcoulddiscussifActivistayouthcouldbeinvolvedintheharvestingofoutcomes.

Inthisharvest,thechangeagentswereaskedtodescribethecontributionandtagtheprogramme

modalitiesthatcontributed.Anotheroptionforasubsequentharvestmightbetoaskthechange

agentstospecifythecontributionforthedifferentprogrammemodalities.Forexample:

HowdidtheTaxJusticeprogrammecontributetotheoutcomethroughitsprogrammemodalities?

• Activista:Pleaseexplain

• GlobalTaxprogramme:Pleaseexplain

• People4Change:Pleaseexplain.

Thiswouldallowforamoredetailedanalysisofthecontributioninfunctionofthemodalities.

AADK should also reflect on the reason for the low contribution of the Training4 Change and

Inspiratorstotheoutcomes.

TowhatextentdotheoutcomesachievedbyAADKshowthattheworkofAADKonTaxJusticeislocallyrooted?AkeytrademarkofActionAidisthatitsworkislocallyrootedincommunitiesandwithpeopleliving

inpoverty. Thiswas forexampleacknowledged inanexternal stock-takingdone in201612

. In this

section,theevaluatorexaminedifthiswasalsoakeyfeatureinActionAid’sworkonTaxJustice.

Theevaluatoridentifiedwhichoftheoutcomedescriptionswerelocallyrootedbasedonthefollowing

3criteriadefinedbyAADK:

• Interactionandinvolvementwithcommunitiesatlocallevel

• LocalCSOsengagedaskeyactors13

;

• Engagementofthegeneralpublic

12

AAIexternalStock-takingbyconsultantsLiepolloLebohangPheko,DannyBurns;TobinAldrichandJamesCrowley,2016

13

ThiscriterionappliestolocalCSOswhoarenotthechangeagentorpartofthegroup/coalitionformingthechangeagent

(theindividualororganizationthatinfluencesanoutcome).InmanyoftheoutcomesCSOs(AA,partnersandthenational

taxcoalitions)werethechangeagent.

26

Ifoneofthesecriteriaappliedtoanoutcome,itwasclassifiedaslocallyrooted.Thesecriteriawere

onlyapplied to theoutcomes,not thecontribution. Inotherwords, theevaluatorexamined if the

outcome description showed evidence of the 3 criteria and not if ActionAid involved local CSOs,

communitiesandthepublicinitscontributiontotheoutcomes.

Intotal,1714

outof53outcomes,or32%oftheoutcomeswereidentifiedaslocallyrooted.

Figure9Numberoflocallyrootedoutcomes

Figure9alsoshowsthelocallyrootedoutcomesaccordingtothecriteriabywhichtheywerejudged.

Thelocallyrootednessismainlyshownthroughtheinvolvementoflocalcommunities(17%).

Exampleslocallyrootedoutcomes:In2016,thecommunitiesinNamaacha,Marracuene,Chibuto,Bilene,Jangamodistrict,Mocuba,MaganjadaCosta,Nammaroi, Inharrime,MontepuezandMocímboadaPraiainMozambiquedemandedtransparencyfromtheauthoritiesinthecollectionandallocationofrevenuesfromtaxes,throughpublicdebates,inter-facemeetingswithauthoritiesand,localmonitoring.[7]In 2016, Citizens and media in Uganda campaigned against Members of Parliament’s move to exemptthemselvesfrompayingtaxontheirallowances.4.3MillioncitizenssignedthepetitionandhandeditovertotheMinistry.[20]In2014,300citizensinZambiaorganizedtoprotestagainstthetaxavoidanceoftheLondon-basedmininggiantVedantaowningKonkolaCopperMine(KCM).[39]

Conclusionandrecommendedpointsfordiscussion:The outcomes of the Tax Justice programme illustrate good examples of being locally rooted.

However,onthetotalnumberofoutcomes,only1/3couldbeidentifiedaslocallyrooted.

14

OutcomeNumbers20,23,27,39,40,4,6,7,11,13,14,15,30,38,19,24,28

27

AADKcouldthereforereflectonhowitcanbuilduponitsstrengthtoachievelocallyrootedresults

inotherprogrammes,inordertoachievemoreoutcomesintheTaxJusticeprogrammethatare

locallyrooted.

Inasubsequentharvest,AADKcouldconsidertoapplythecriteria for locallyrootedalsotothe

contributionbyaskingthesocialchangeagentstodescribehowtheyinvolvedcommunities,CSOs

andthepublicininfluencingtheoutcomes.

To what extent do the outcomes show linkages between the local, national,regionalandgloballevelofadvocacy?

In2014,AADKwasdelegatedtheresponsibilityforcoordinationandlearningofallgovernancerelated

workintheAAFederation.ThisisorganisedundertheDemocraticGovernanceDelegation.Akeyfocus

oftheDemocraticGovernanceDelegationhasbeentoconnectthecountrylevelinterventionsboth

horizontalformutuallearningandverticalforregionalandglobaladvocacy.Theevaluatorassessed

inhowfartheoutcomesshowthattheselinkageshavebeenachieved.Thechangeagentswereasked

toclassifytheoutcomesaschangesonlocal,national,regionalorgloballevel.

Definitionoflevels:

Local:communities

National:Country

Regional:Africa,relevantinstitutionsasAfricanUnion;Europee.g.DoubletaxationTreatiesaffectingcountriesintheGlobalSouth;country-by-countryreportingagreement

Global: relevant global treaties and institutions e.g. UN Committee of Experts on International

CooperationinTaxMatters

Most outcomes of the Tax Justice Programme (68%) relate to changes happening at the national

level15

.

Figure10Percentageofoutcomesperchangelevel

15

Thispicturemaybeinfluencedbythefactthatofthe16changeagentsthatharvestedoutcomes,only3changeagents

wereassignedtoharvestoutcomesonthegloballevel.

28

Verticallinkages:Intotal,theevaluatoridentified17outcomeswithclearlinkagestootherlevels.

Theoutcomesonlocalleveldonotshowalinkwiththegloballevel.Themajorityofthenationalleveloutcomeshappenedbecauseof a contributionbyAAMozambique,AAUganda,AAZambiaorAA

Tanzaniaandpartnersonly,withsupportfromAADK.Anexceptiontothisisthecollaborativeresearch

byAADKandAAGhana‘TimetoChange’whichcontributedtothefollowingchanges:

InNovember 2014,members of theDanishParliament called theMinister for Tax for the first time for aconsultationonDoubleTaxationTreaties(DTT)andtheirimpactonthedevelopingcountries.[53]InApril2015,theTaxCommissionoftheDanishParliamentheld,forthefirsttimeapublicmeetingwiththeparticipationofCSOsonwhereprinciplesfortheDoubleTaxationTreaties(DTT)andpolicycoherencewerediscussed.[51]InMarch2016,TheDanishMinisterforTaxinvitedAADKandtheDanishdevelopmentorganisationIBISforameetingtodiscussDoubleTaxationTreaties(DTT).[52]

ItwasthefirsttimethattwoActionAidoffices(DenmarkandGhana)cooperatedonaresearchlike

this.ThishasbeenamodelthathasinspiredotherActionAidofficestoundertakeasimilarprocess

e.g.UKwithSenegalandMalawiandIrelandwithZambia.

In addition, 916

out of 35 outcomes on the national level had a contribution by the Global Tax

programme. This contribution mainly constitutes of the reports developed by the Global Tax

Campaign, suchas the research ‘Getting togood’17

, ‘Race to thebottom-Taxcompetition inEast-

Africa18

’aswellasthe‘Mistreated19

’report.Theevidenceprovidedinthesereportswasusedbythe

nationalActionAidofficesintheirlobbyandadvocacyeffortstowardstheirgovernments.

Forexample:outcome[32]describeshowtheZambiaSugarcase20thatwasdevelopedincooperationwiththeGlobalTaxCampaignwasusedtolobbytheZambiagovernmenttoillustratethelossofdomesticrevenuesduetounfairtaxagreements.ThiscontributedtotheZambiangovernmentreviewingandrenegotiatingtheZambia-UKDoubleTaxationAgreement (DTA)and theZambia -IrelandDoubleTaxationAgreement (DTA)between2012and2016.

8ofthese9outcomesthatshowalinktothegloballevelwereclassifiedasmajorchanges.

Ontheregionallevel,3outcomes[22,41,45]weresupportedbytheGlobalTaxCampaign.

Here,outcome41isaniceexampleofadvocacybeingdoneatthenationalandregionallevelandevidenceusedtoadvocatewassharedbetweenthenationalandgloballevel.ThishadgreatinfluenceontheAfrican

16

9,16,17,18,21,29,32,47,50

17

Getting to good– toward corporate responsible taxbehavior,AADK,2015.https://www.ms.dk/rapport/getting-good-

toward-responsible-corporate-tax-behaviour

18

Race to thebottom-Taxcompetition inEast-Africa,AA,2012.http://www.actionaid.org/shared/tax-competition-east-

africa-race-bottom

19

Mistreated - The tax treaties that are depriving the world’s poorest countries of vital revenue, AAI, 2016.

https://www.ms.dk/rapport/mistreated

20

SweetNothing,AA,2013.http://www.actionaid.org/publications/sweet-nothings

29

HeadsofStatewho,atthe24thAfricanUnionSummit from23-31January2016 inAddisAbaba,adoptedstrong recommendations to stop illicit financial flows fromAfrica,which theyagreed to implementat thenationallevel.TheserecommendationswerecontainedinthereportbytheAfricanUnion’sandUNEconomicCommissionforAfrica’sHighLevelPanelonIllicitFinancialFlowschairedbyThaboMbeki(formerpresidentofSouthAfrica).

Twooutcomeswereidentifiedbythechangeagentasrelatingtoboththenationalandregionallevel.

Theseareoutcomesonthenationallevel,whichhadpositiveimplicationsontheregionallevel:

In 2016, the Mozambique Tax Authorities (ATM) introduced guidelines for corporates to seal alcoholicbeveragesandtobaccoproductsleavingthecountryasithadrevenueimplicationstoSouthAfrica,Swaziland,MalawiandZimbabwe.[10]In2015,NORADallocated3millionEUROsfor3yearsandOpenSocietyFoundationUSD$100,000foroneyearsallocatedfor6countries(ActionAidTanzania,Mozambique,Malawi,Nepal,EthiopiaandMyanmar)forActionAid International for theprogrammeon financing increasedgovernment investment inhighqualitypubliceducationespeciallyforgirlsthroughprogressivetaxation.[49]

Horizontallinkages:These linkagesoften tendtobeunderreported ina firstharvest,because they relate tounfunded

activitiessuchasadvisefromonenationalofficetotheother,useofbestpracticesandresearchby

anothernationaloffice.Nevertheless,theevaluatorfound13outcomesthatdemonstratehorizontal

linkages.For6oftheseoutcomes[3,4,9,51,52,53]AA/AADKhadadirectroleinfacilitatingthehorizontallearningandsharingintermsoffacilitationofexchangevisitsbetweencountries,sharing

ofresearchmodelsaswellassharingoftoolsandmodelsthroughtheAADKfacilitatedDemocratic

Governance Delegation as well as through ActionAid sharing its skills on campaigns. The other 7

outcomes[2,12,19,20,21,28,31]demonstratethatmodelsandexperiences,developedbyAAwere

sharedinforathatAADKwasnotresponsiblefor.

Conclusionandrecommendedpointsfordiscussion:Thestrongestlinkagesbetweenlevelsareinthosecaseswhereresearchreportsandcasestudies

fromtheGlobalTaxCampaignwereusedforlobbyandadvocacyonthenationalorregionallevel.

Theseledtomajorchangesinnationalgovernmentsandregionalinstitutions.

AADKcoulddiscuss:

• Is the national level where ActionAid wants to achieve most results with the Tax Justice

Programme?WhatcanAADKdotostimulateresultsontheotherlevels?

• WhatcanAADKdotostimulatehorizontallinkages?HowcanAADKmakehorizontallinkages

visualintheoutcomereporting?

• HowcanActionAidbuildonitsstrengthsinestablishinglinkagesbetweennationalandglobal

leveltoalsocreatelinkagesbetweenthelocal,nationalandgloballevel?

30

Towhatextentdotheoutcomesshowalinkbetweenprogressivetaxationandimprovedsocialservices?

TheAADKgovernanceprogrammeconsistsoftwoelements:GenderResponsivePublicServicesand

Tax Justice, where the end goal at impact level is instances of governments increasing budget

allocationsand/oractualdisbursementforpublicservicesasaresultofimplementingaprogressive

systemoftaxation.21

Notwithstandingthefact,thatresultsonimprovedsocialservicesareseenas

impact level changes for the Tax Justice Programme, AADK was interested to see if any of the

outcomeswouldshowamoredirectlinkbetweenprogressivetaxationandimprovedsocialservices.

To answer this question, the change agentswere asked to classify22

their outcomes as related to

progressivetaxationorimprovedsocialservices.

Figure11Numberofoutcomesforimprovedsocialservicesandprogressivetaxation

Themajorityoftheoutcomes,41outof53,relatetoprogressivetaxation.Onlysixoutcomesrelate

toimprovedsocialservices.Inaddition,thechangeagentsidentified6outcomesthatrelatetoboth

progressivetaxationandimprovedsocialservices.

Outcomesthatrelatetobothprogressivetaxationandimprovedsocialservices:

In 2016, theDistrictGovernment of JangamoAdministration inMozambique regularly invited the districtplatform,consistingoflocalbasedCBOsworkingonGenderResponsivePublicServices(GRPS)andTax,fordialogueonlocalleveltaxationandservicedeliveryfortheDistrictPlatforminJangamo,Inhambane.[4]In2015,theauthoritiesoftheChibutodistrictinMozambiqueestablishedaccountabilityprocedureslinkedtowastetaxesandwasteservices,whichimprovedthewastemanagementfor32,000peopleinChibutodistrict[6].

21

IndicatorfromGlobalMonitoringMatrix

22

Allclassificationwasreviewedbytheevaluator

31

In2016,thecommunitiesinNamaacha,Marracuene,Chibuto,Bilene,Jangamodistrict,Mocuba,MaganjadaCosta,Nammaroi,Inharrime,MontepuezandMocímboadaPraiainMozambique,demandedtransparencyfromtheauthoritiesinthecollectionandallocationofrevenuesfromtaxesthroughpublicdebates,inter-facemeetingswithauthoritiesandlocalmonitoring.[7]In2016,thePrimeMinisterofTanzaniaorderedtheMarinePark(AtourismunitoftheMinistryofTourism)intheMafiaDistrictofTanzaniatopay91000000-00TanzaniaShillings(USD42000-00)intaxarrearstotheMafiaDistrictCounciltoenhancetheprovisionofqualitypublicservices.[15]InNovember2015,majorwomen’srightsandtaxjusticecivilsocietyadvocates(including:theGlobalAllianceforTaxJustice;theEuropeanCommission-funded“TaxJusticeTogether”project;InternationalTradeUnionCongress;PublicServicesInternational;AssociationforWomen'sRightsinDevelopment;CentreforEconomicand Social Rights; Christian Aid; Oxfam International; Tax Justice Network UK; and National Tax PayersAssociationKenya)cametogetherforthefirsttimetoorganisethefirstTaxJusticeforWomen’sRightsGlobalDaysofAction,targetingnationalgovernmentstodemandtheyfulfiltheircommitmenttosecuringwomen’srightsandeconomicequalitybytakingactionfortaxjustice.ThedaysofactiontookplaceontheoccasionofInternationalWomen’s Day and the annual UN Commission on the Status ofWomen intergovernmentalmeetinginNewYork,from8–24March2017.[45]In2015,NORADallocated3millionEUROsfor3yearsandOpenSocietyFoundationUSD$100,000foroneyearsallocatedfor6countries(ActionAidTanzania,Mozambique,Malawi,Nepal,EthiopiaandMyanmar)forActionAid International for theprogrammeon financing increasedgovernment investment inhighqualitypubliceducationespeciallyforgirlsthroughprogressivetaxation.[48]

Outcome6 and15demonstratewell the link betweenprogressive taxation and improvedbudget

allocationsforsocialservicesorimprovedsocialservices.Outcome4exemplifieshowActionAidwas

includedindiscussionswiththedistrictgovernmentaboutprogressivetaxationandimprovedsocial

services,butdoesnotindicatethatthesocialserviceshaveactuallybeenimproved.Outcomes7and

45 describe how CSOs are demanding for progressive taxation and improved social services and

outcome48 is about funding forActionAid to improvegovernment investment in improved social

services.

The6outcomes[8,9,11,13,14,34]thatwerecategorisedasrelatingtoimprovedpublicservices

have improved public services as the entry point for engagement with ministries, government

institutionsorcommunities,linkingittotaxationasanecessaryfundingsources.

Conclusionsandrecommendedpointsfordiscussion:TheentrypointforthisOutcomeHarvestingEvaluationwasprogressivetaxation.ADDKwas

howeverinterestedtoseeiftheoutcomeswoulddemonstratealinkbetweenprogressive

taxationandimprovedsocialservices.Only2-3outcomesprovidedevidence,sothelinkdidnot

becomevisiblethroughtheoutcomes.Inthesefewcases,thelinkbetweentaxationand

improvedsocialservicesisrelativelyeasytomake(e.g.wastetaxesforwastemanagement).Most

likely,thelinkbetweentaxespaidandspecificsocialservicesbeingimprovedwillbeverydifficult

tomakeinmanycases.Thiswasalsonotedbyoneofthechangeagentsduringtheharvesting

workshop,whoemphasizedthatlinkingrevenuefrom,forexample,wastetaxdirectlytospending

onwastemanagementmaynotresultinprogressivepublicspendingbenefittingthemost

marginalized.Thespendingshouldrathercorrespondtotheprioritiesofthecommunitiesand

peopleatthereceivingend,whereitmaybedifficulttomakeadirectlinkbetweenanincreasein

taxrevenueduetoaconcretepolicychange,totheimprovementinpublicservicesatcommunity

level.

32

Therefore,AADKshouldreflectonwhetheridentifyingdirectlinkagesbetweentaxpaymentsand

improvedsocialservicesisrecommendableandapplicableorwhetherotherwaysofanalysingthe

connectionbetweentaxandimprovedpublicservicesmightbemorerelevant.

33

Overallconclusions:

The findings of this OutcomeHarvest are just one ofmany important factors to determinewhat

decisionsoractionstheuserswilltake.Thereareusuallymanyotherfactors(e.g.political,legal,public

perception,financial,programmatic)thatmustbeconsideredwhichareunknowntotheevaluator.

Consequently, evaluators of an outcome harvest can rarely make recommendations for action.

Instead,theycanrecommenddiscussionpointsaroundharvestfindingsandsupportorfacilitatethe

useofthefindingsoftheharvest.23

Specificconclusionsandrecommendedpointsfordiscussionhave

beenprovided in thesectionswith theevaluationquestionsandwillhencenotbe repeatedhere.

Since ActionAid is considering integrating Outcome Harvesting into its monitoring system,

recommendedpointsfordiscussionontheuseofOHhavealsobeenprovided.

All in all, the 53 outcomes harvested in this evaluation demonstrate that ActionAid is influencing

significantoutcomesthroughitsTaxJusticeProgramme.Itisclear,thatmanymoreoutcomescould

havebeencollectedifmoretimewouldhavebeenavailable.TheHarvestrevealed,thattheTaxJustice

Programmemainly contributed tonational governments andministriesof financebeingwilling to

collaboratewithActionAid,adoptingrecommendationsandchangingpoliciesandpracticesaround

Tax Justice. In that sense, the Tax Justice programme is mainly making progress on objective 1:

Governments make fairer/progressive tax raising rules. The contribution to these outcomes was

mainly through theTaxAdvisorswithprogrammesupportbyAADK.Theoutcomes illustrategood

examplesofresultsthatarelocallyrooted.Theseexamplescouldbeusedtobroadenthescopeof

locally rooted results. The link betweenprogressive taxation and improved social services did not

reallybecomevisiblethroughtheoutcomes.Itishoweverquestionableifitispossibletodemonstrate

this inanoutcomeevaluation.Theoutcomesdohowevershowstrong linkagesbetweendifferent

levels inthosecaseswhereresearchreportsandcasestudies fromtheGlobalTaxCampaignwere

usedfor lobbyandadvocacyonthenationalorregional level.Thefindingsalsodemonstrate, that

ActionAidisabletoworkbothatlocallevelengagingcommunities;atnationallevelandatgloballevel

influencingglobalfora–takingupissuessuchasDoubleTaxationTreaties(DTT)acrossthevarious

levels. Inaddition,theoutcomesconfirmtheactiverolethatcivilsocietycanplayatthesevarious

levels.

Asmentioned in the introduction, before the harvest, the various interventions on Tax Justice by

ActionAidwerenotseenasaprogramme.Interestingly,thisOutcomeHarvestshowsthattheresults

achieved by these various interventions are very coherent. In addition, by bringing the various

partners together, the Outcome Harvesting evaluation contributed to building amore integrated

programme approach, embracing both national and global policy and advocacy work as well as

engagement with corporates and programme work at national level. The 5 commonly agreed

objectivesweremainlybasedontheobjectivesfortheGlobalTaxCampaignprogramme,sincethe

countryprogrammesandthepolicywork inDenmarkhadveryspecificprojectbasedintermediate

objectives. In the next phase of the tax justice activities, a more integrated programme will be

developed.

ConclusionsonthevalueoftheOutcomeHarvestingapproachforActionAid:

23

Wilson-Grau,R.,Britt,H.,OutcomeHarvesting,FordFoundation,2013,p.25.

34

Untilnow,ActionAidhasmainlybeenreportingontheoutputlevelfortheTaxJusticeprogramme,

andcasesillustratingoutcomeandimpactlevel,butwithoutaclearsystematicapproachincollecting

and analysing the cases. AADK would benefit from continuing to use Outcome Harvesting as a

monitoring tool and identifying the outcome changes of the Tax Justice Programme over time.

OutcomeHarvestingwouldbeausefultoolinthissense,sincetheresultstheTaxJusticeprogramme

isaimingforareaboutbehaviouralchangeandtheapproachoftheProgrammeisnotatriedand

provenmodel. In addition, the changeagentswere really engagedduring theHarvest. Theywere

dedicatedtoworkontheiroutcomesduringtheworkshopandtoinvesttimeaftertheworkshopto

refinetheiroutcomes.Thesearegoodprerequisitesforimplementingthemethodfurther.Outcome

Harvesting couldeasilybe integrated into theexistingmonitoringproceduresofAADK. This initial

OutcomeHarvesting forms a goodbasis for discussionwithinAADKonhow to adapt themethod

furthertotheneedsoftheorganisation.