European Development Days 2009: the power of networking

Last week Stockholm hosted the European Development Days, a three day event involving a number of heads of State and thousands of development professionals and students from all over Europe, indeed the world. You can read it all on the official EDD-website.

Even though Euforic – as readers of this blog will know – is scaling down its operations, we were present in Stockholm to promote one of the many exciting projects Euforic has been involved in over the last few years: R4D, an information service providing free access to information on DFID (co)financed research for development programs and over 20,000 outputs of these research efforts.

Several Euforic members presented panel discussions at the European Development Days, or the Development D-days as Rajendra Pachauri, Director General of the Energy Resources Insitute in New Delhi and one of the keynote speakers, called them. CTA invited twelve partners from the South to have stands at the Development Village and organized an important event about land acquisition (also known as “land grabbing”). At an event co-organized by AFD, Koos Richelle, head of AIDCO and others examined aid practices. AFD also organized with DFID and DIE a debate about the evolving aid architecture. Concord co-organized an event about development education, sharing ideas and experiences around involving and mobilizing citizens for development. Citizens were also central to the ECDPM-organized event about the EU-Africa Partnership. EADI together with the Development Gateway Foundation looked at the future of European Development Cooperation: Development Beyond 2015 and APRODEV, CIDSE and Concord staged an event on Copenhagen, Climate Justice and the Right to Development. SNV had a session on Accountability and Transparency and cheered us all up with a musical spectacle at the end of the second day.

Most events attracted quite some interest. A crowd of EDD-visitors lined-up outside the forum on Media and Development. In the panel, Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf, President of Liberia, Raile Odinga, Prime Minister of Kenya, blogger and digital activist Ndesanjo Macha and others discussed the role of media in development. Dominique Darmon of SNV was lucky to get in and reported that there was an extensive discussion around the role of new media. Nowadays in Africa over 17 million phones are in use ... or at least, in use when there is electricity, as Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf noted, underlining that energy and infrastructure are critical priorities for investment in this continent. Odinga explained how he used a blog to communicate with the electorate during the recent presidential election campaign in Kenya, but someone in the audience noted that comments from readers of the blog were screened and the comments criticizing Odinga actually never made it to his blog. So new media can promote interaction and participation but they do not eliminate exclusion, whether because of lack of electricity or because of censorship.

Written communication does not reach too many Africans because of the high illiteracy rates, television is important but technically much more demanding than radio which is the number one “old” means of communication in the continent. At the same time, mobile devices are changing the way the good old radio is operating, boosting its use through for example podcast. During the session several other examples of mobile phone use were highlighted for example how they were used to warn people during recent floodings in Burkina Faso. Phones can also be used to hold the government accountable as the HIVOS/SNV project Twaweza demonstrates.

Some participants in the audience felt that new media pose a greater risk of misinformation while others laud their potential to promote democracy. A BBC reporter asked the politicians in the panel what at the end of the day would make them more uncomfortable: a bad news paper story, or a critical blog ... thus showing that the good old newspaper remains critically important.

Having to attend my R4D stand in the Development Village I saw few live presentations. But I made an exception for the “testimonies” on climate change that were given in the morning of the last day, 25 October. Michelle Duvivier Pierre-Louis, Prime Minister of Haiti and former executive of the Soros-sponsored Knowledge and Freedom Foundation told about the seven (7) hurricanes that hit her country over the last few years and asked for fairness and just reparations as part of the strategy to confront the climate change crisis, “The market mechanism is not going to save the planet”, she insisted. Moderator Sackur, known from BBC’s “Hard Talk” highlighted her systematic emphasis on fairness and justice and he asked her whether – when talking with European leaders, she felt they actually “got it”. Very honestly she replied that her gut feeling was not very good, but she also made it clear she will not give up fighting for climate justice.

President Emanual Manny Mori of the Federated States of Micronesia explained how his country has been fighting for climate justice for quite some time already. The small islands state is very much exposed to the potentially disastrous effects of the sea level increase. To anyone who doubts whether this is a serious crisis he urged to reflect “Who are you fooling? Not the oceans and disappearing species”. Mori insisted that all nations will have to bite the bullet: “We will face a different world in our lifetime”

Mary Simon has been an activist for Inuit interests for decades. “My homeland is melting” she stated, “the situation is terrifying, villages just sink in the ground because of melting permafrost”. The changes may very well exceed the traditional capacities op her people to adapt. Simon concludes that previous efforts to reduce carbon emissions have not done the job, public policies have fallen short and emissions have continued to grow. Simon stressed the interrelation between economic and environmental security and calls for massive investments in clean technology. A Climate Change Adaptation Fund of 20 billion euro needs to become operational now, not by 2022 as current proposals suggest. Besides climate change, Simon also warned for what she labeled to be misguided policies that affect the Inuit people like the upgrade in CITES of the polar bear which makes them an endangered species, and the EU ban on seal products. It is climate change that endangers the polar bear, she said, Inuit hunting practices are sustainable. She felt that such policies negatively affect the Inuits capacity to adapt and preserve their livelihoods.

Back at my R4D stand, I listened to Margot Wallström, Vice-President of the European Commission, through a video live-stream. She said that the political realities will force the EU to be more ambitious about reduction of CO2 emission and deliver climate justice. With Michelle Duvivier and the others we continue to hope (but fear her gut feeling).

For more stories on the European Development Days, check the official EDD-site and sites of Euforic member organizations.

by Rosien Herweijer

See also Euforic's newsfeeds on Euforic cooperative life on European Development Days and on Information, knowledge, and communication

Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum to meet in November

Source: EU News, issue 5, July 2009.

In its Communication of December 2008 on the Eastern partnership, the Commission proposed “to support the further development of Civil Society Organisations” (CSOs) and, in particular, “to establish an Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum to promote contacts among CSOs and facilitate their dialogue with public authorities”.

To ensure transparency of the process leading to the establishment of the Civil Society Forum, all interested parties were invited to provide their opinion. The consultation process started on 25 March and was closed on 25 April. Some 40 contributions were received, mainly from civil society organisations based in the Eastern Partner countries but also from several EU-based organisations. A reasoned analysis of the contributions received can be found under Results of the consultations with CSOs and NGOs.

In the Eastern Partnership joint Prague Declaration, from 7 May 2009, “the participants of the Prague Summit invited the European Commission to develop and propose modalities for the establishment of a Civil Society Forum of the Eastern Partnership”. The Commission proposed the following Concept-paper.

On June 29 the Commission invited all interested parties, i.e. grass roots organisations, trade unions, employers' organisations, professional associations, NGOs, think-tanks, non-profit foundations, national and international CSOs/networks and other relevant Civil Society actors, to submit their Expressions of interest to participate in the Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum, using the following form. Note that information and the form are also available in Russian here.

The deadline for submission of expressions of interest is set at 31 August 2009.

The European Commission, together with the EU Presidency and the European Economic and Social Committee, will organise the launch of the Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum in mid-November 2009 in Brussels.

See also Euforic's newsfeeds on EU neighbourhood and civil society

Priorities of the Swedish Presidency

Source: EU News, issue 5, July 2009.

On the 1st of July, the Czech Republic handed over the Presidency of the European Union to Sweden. In this time of crisis, the Swedish Presidency has nominated economy and climate change as its key priorities for the next six months.

With regards to development issues, the Swedish Presidency will focus on climate and democracy. It wants to bring on the one hand development and democracy-building and on the other hand development and climate change agendas closer together. For the latter, the Swedish Government will use the report of the International Commission on Climate Change and Development that was launched in May and will encourage actions towards climate proofing investments, increasing attention to adaptation and finding ways to better integrate climate change into development assistance. Furthermore, the Swedish Presidency emphasizes the importance of aid effectiveness and policy coherence for development. Sweden aims to prioritize the Policy Coherence for Development (PCD) agenda with the European Commission’s submission of its second EU biennial PCD report in October.

The Presidency will also call for an action-oriented response to the commitments made in the Paris Declaration and the Accra Agenda for Action.

Increased free trade continues to be a major priority under the Swedish Presidency. Trade negotiations are being prioritized, primarily a rapid conclusion of the Doha Round, but also progress in negotiations with regional groupings. The Presidency aims to work towards making substantial progress in the negotiation and conclusion of regional Economic Partnership Agreements (EPA) between the EU and the Africa, Caribbean and the Pacific countries and in the negotiations on a revised Cotonou-agreement.

It is the Swedish Presidency’s ambition to strengthen EU preparedness to deal with the unexpected and coordinate its actions in crisis situations, in particular in Africa. Therefore, it wants to use all of the EU’s instruments; from civilian and military crisis management operations to dialogue and diplomacy within the common foreign and security policy, and trade and development policy initiatives.

The Swedish Presidency aims to enhance the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) both with regard to the Eastern dimension through the Eastern Partnership, concerning Ukraine, Moldova, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia and Belarus, and to the Mediterranean dimension, within the Union for the Mediterranean. Sweden will oversee the development of the new ENP Action Plans, with particular emphasis on policy reform, good governance and human rights. The work on enlargement will also continue under the Swedish Presidency, with the continuing of the accession process of the Western Balkan states and Turkey. Croatia’s negotiations with the EU could enter a final stage during the autumn. Moreover, the Presidency will work to make further progress in the EU integration process of the countries of the Western Balkans.

Regarding asylum and migration, the Presidency strives for common policies and systems, focusing on the common asylum system, and resettlement (see article on Stockholm Programme). The Swedish Presidency supports the Stockholm Programme, which should allow increased labour immigration to the EU, and the EU Global Approach to Migration, which Sweden considers as an important tool to strengthen the positive link between migration and development, and to counteract irregular immigration.

More at www.se2009.eu/en
CIDSE Presidency Outlook for Development available soon at www.wdev.eu and www.cidse.org

See also Euforic's newsfeed on the EU presidency

What our members are doing on climate change

Climate change is high on the international agenda these days. During the UN Climate Change Talks in Bonn (1 - 12 June) politicians, experts and activists aim to make progress in the preparation of a Post-2012 Climate Change Agreement. Obviously, the toughest task remains to find a compromise between industrialized countries, emerging economies and the developing world.

Within our diverse Euforic network several of our members are very active in the field of climate change. This is a good opportunity to present an overview of their activities.

Advocacy on climate change aims to influence the ongoing climate change negotiations on the regional and global level. Organisations involved wish to influence policy processes in a strategic way and make sure that the interests of the developing world are heard.






CIDSE is mainly engaged in the campaigning activities towards climate justice and a comprehensive new Climate Change Agreement. During the Bonn Climate Change Talks the network presents its report on the importance of adaptation technology for the Post-2012 Climate Agreement and - amongst other activities - organizes a video conference between Southern experts and conference participants on the issue of disaster risk reduction and adaptation.

APRODEVs Working Group on Climate Change and Concord are focusing on strategically influencing EU policies aiming to ensure that they are coherent with stated poverty eradication and development policies.

Research on climate change focuses on the impact of the phenomenon on the environment and livelihoods as well as on adaptation strategies to cope with these effects.





A research program of IDS is looking at cross-cutting issues between climate change and adaptation, policy, low carbon growth, building of networks and knowledge sharing as well as at training, teaching and mentoring. During the Bonn conference IDS organizes a panel discussion on 'Strengthening knowledge sharing on climate change adaptation in Africa'.

Also the Danish Development Research Network (DDRN) prioritizes climate change in its research. As well as the Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS) whose research activities focus on the issue of climate change from a number of different perspectives ranging from security and international politics to trade, development, and livelihood.

ISS looks at the effects of climate change on resources, the environment and livelihoods. And ODIs research is trying to identify how increasing knowledge of the science of climate change impacts can be used to understand potential implications for developing countries, particularly in social, economic and political terms. Secondly it looks at how to ensure that emerging climate change mitigation and adaptation policies work for the poor.

Training courses provide services for policy makers to increase their knowledge on climate change and the international policy processes and negotiations.




DIPLO, the training institute for diplomacy, recognizes the importance of climate change negotiations on the global and regional level and developed a training course for diplomats and government officials involved in climate change policy processes.

Latest news, research and policy documents on Climate Change and related topics are provided by several Euforic members:

• EADI - Information portal on climate change and energy
  
• ECDPM - Newsfeed on climate change and development
  
• IPS - News alert on climate change
  
• ILEIA - Dossier on climate change, rural development and agriculture
  

Policy perspectives are given by the public institutions among our membership.




FINNIDA focuses on the Clean Development Mechanism and its political dimension as well as on the nexus between gender and climate change.

The Annual General Meeting which Euforic organizes alongside the meeting of EADIs Information Management Working Group takes place in Copenhagen from the 10 - 12 June. The meeting will shed light on the challenges of climate change and communication. See Mike Shanahan (IIED) talk about this issue:

Click To Play

by Martin Behrens

See also Euforic newsfeeds on climate change; information/knowledge, and from the 2009 annual workshop

Learning about gender mainstreaming in the World Bank

“You need money to mainstream gender, not much, but you do need money” was the critical lesson Ms. Mayra Buvenic, Director for Gender and Development at the World Bank shared with gender focal points of Brussels-based development NGOs at a meeting on 4 May 2009. The informal exchange of experience was organized by Concord and hosted by Aprodev. Members of the Concord Working Group on Gender and other participants learned about the recent work of the World Bank in this domain. At the same time, Ms. Buvenic was briefed on Concord activities related to gender equity in EU development cooperation and external relations.

De World Bank Gender Action Plan 2006-2010 is based on three key elements:

• A focus on economic sectors, a key area for the Bank
  
• A business case approach (“we show people in the Bank that gender equity pays”)
  
• Financial incentives to promote attention for gender
  

The World Bank plan is entitled "Gender Equality as Smart Economics". According to Ms. Buvenic, it works. Until now, donors - including the World Bank - have pledged 60 million US$ to the programme and within two years the number of World Bank operations in economic sectors that have moderate or detailed gender equity components has risen from 25% to 34%. In World Bank terms the Gender Action Plan is a small program, if not minute. But the key is that the grant programme leverages money and involves staff previously not engaged with gender. The grant money is allocated internally with WB-task managers submitting proposals. Over 70% of the proposals that were honored in the last round, came from staff who had never before been involved in gender.

For the future Ms Buvenic indicated that it was essential that in the next replenishment of IDA (International Development Association - IDA-16) significant funding becomes available for gender. Also she announced that a future World Development Report was going to be dedicated to gender.

Eef Wuytz (International Planned Parenthood Federation - IPPF), representing the Concord Working Group on Gender, indicated that gender equity will be a key priority for Concord in its new Strategic Plan. The Concord Working Group currently undertakes various activities such as monitoring the development of an EU-EC Gender Action Plan for Equality and Empowerment in External Relations. This joint initiative of Council and Commission was launched last year and is evolving slowly – quite slowly actually. Ms. Wuyts expects that the Council and the Commission will adopt this comprehensive Gender Action Plan early 2010 during the Spanish Presidency.

More on gender and EU development policies is available on the websites of Concord and WIDE

See also Euforic's newsfeeds on Concord, Aprodev, and gender

Click To Play

Aid for trade, a key priority of the EU in Africa

Source: EU News, Issue 3, April 2009

At several occasions, EC high officials and Commissioner Michel have emphasised the necessity to support ‘connectivity’ at regional and pan-African level and the added value of EC cooperation in that area. Recent EU-Africa debates and agreements confirm that approach that is also well illustrated in the recently published Aid for Trade monitoring report 2009.

The report provides many data showing that the EU (EC + Member States) is the largest global provider of grants in the Aid for Trade area and that Africa is the main recipient with 43,9% of total EU aid for trade in 2005-2007.
It is important to note that the definition of Aid for Trade used in the report is quite broad and includes both Trade Related Assistance (€ 1.98 million in 2007 from EU) as well as productive capacity building, trade related infrastructures and trade related adjustment as well as ‘other trade related needs’ not classified by the OECD. General budget support and non-earmarked support to multilateral organisations are not included in the calculations. With such a definition it is not surprising that total EU commitments for Aid for Trade reached € 7.17 billion in 2007 (4.74 from Member States and 2.43 from the EC) representing 10.45% of total EU ODA.

Support to regional integration captures an increasing share of the Aid for Trade (AfT) funding and the preparation of regional aid for trade packages for the ACP countries, to be supported jointly by the EC (EDF) and the Member States, is top of the EC agenda for 2009. The signing of the 10th European Development Fund (EDF) Regional Indicative Programmes in November 2008 is seen as a milestone in that process.

The North-South Corridor pilot AfT project to improve infrastructure and remove regulatory barriers between three Regional Economic Communities of Africa (the Common Market for Eastern and Southern African (COMESA), the East African Community (EAC) and Southern African Development Community (SADC)) perfectly illustrates this approach. The goal is to improve regional trade and give countries faster access to international markets, thereby boosting growth and jobs. The €115 million contribution from the EC consists mainly of funding from the 10th EDF.

The package of measures proposed by the EC in its 8 April communication on supporting developing countries in coping with the crisis also includes the recommendation to increase by 2010 to €500 million the grant inlay in the EU-Africa Infrastructure Trust Fund. The Commission, for its part, will allocate €200 million for 2009-2010 (from 10th EDF), doubling its current inlay, and calls on Member States to join this effort in order to raise €500 million. Achieving this target would leverage €2.5 billion in soft loans to support infrastructure. In the area of agriculture, the Commission insists in particular on the necessity to invest in agricultural corridors and to align investments in support of linking markets and production areas.
Whether Member States will inject such a level of fresh money into the Trust Fund is questionable considering their low contribution so far (around 28 million from 11 Member States by October 2008).

Another example of the EC support for a trade and export oriented economy in Africa is the "Better Training for Safer Food in Africa – BTSF-Africa” initiative launched by EU Health Commissioner, Androulla Vassiliou at the African Union headquarters in Addis Ababa. This is a 10 million specific programme targeted at Africa, with the view to promoting compliance with international Sanitary and Phyto-Sanitary (SPS) measures as key to bilateral trade, both within Africa and with the rest of the world, and to increasing food safety for citizens.

Finally, it is also interesting to note a new agreement between the European Commission and the African Union Commission on the principle of a common strategic framework to develop safer and more sustainable air transport in Africa. It includes supporting the Yamoussoukro Decision aiming at creating a single airspace in Africa with one provisions being the principle of free market access of (eligible) air carriers for intra-African connections. The EC will support the development and evolution of the Executing Agency for implementing the Decision and assist in the definition of the appropriate regulatory environment and market access. In other words this agreement is the best way to open the internal African aviation market to European carriers.

Supporting trade and an export oriented economy in the ACP states with EU development policy and budget is clearly a top priority of the EU but to what extend are trade policies and agreements under negotiation actually supporting development objectives? Take the recent proposal made by the EC to reduce the current banana tariff of 176 Euros/ton to most favoured nations (of Latin America) to 136 Euros/ton by 2011. Effectively, this means favouring large plantations in Latin America with low environment standards and exploitative and dangerous labour conditions at the expenses of small banana producers in ACP countries. Such a policy is clearly at odds with the EU principle of policy coherence for development. Not surprisingly, the ACP group, in a recent press release strongly criticises the EC proposal. The substantial tariff cuts would have dire consequences for ACP export trade, for which the current preferences are of vital importance. The sharp reductions proposed between 2009 and 2011 cannot be reconciled with any of the EU commitments towards ACP Countries, specifically the recently signed Cariforum-EC Economic Partnership Agreement which provides that tariff reductions should not only be "unavoidable" but "should be phased in over as long a period as possible". … Bananas for ACP countries are not only about trade, but about development. Bananas have a direct impact on environment, migration and integration in ACP countries. Now that the world is suffering from a global financial crisis, ACP countries cannot afford to sacrifice their few sources of hard currency on the altar of free trade.
Note that this concern is also highlighted in the resolution adopted at the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly session in Prague on Economic partnership Agreements and their impact on ACP states.

The impact of Economic Partnership Agreements on development in the ACP countries is indeed a major concern for many ACP officials and civil society actors following the unfinished EPA negotiations. This critical policy coherence issue was at the core of the workshop organised on 24 March by One World Action, APRODEV and the Commonwealth Secretariat on EPAs: Trade efficiency or development for all? Gender analysis of trade liberalisation and its impact.

The Roundtable provided a forum to appreciate the relevance of systematic gender analysis to inform negotiation positions and to provide nuanced understanding of the gender impact on distributional effect. Integrating principles of responsive governance into trade policy-making and trade negotiations is needed, as well as effective EPA monitoring to enhance positive EPA impact and minimise potential harm. Suitable indicators, including gender indicators, to chart progress on implementation and impacts of EPAs are key tools in putting into practice the development and poverty reduction ambitions of EPAs.

From that point of view, organisers particularly appreciated the fact that certain recommendations from the APRODEV background paper on EPA indicators were reflected in the resolution of the European Parliament on the Cariforum EPA, as following:

Suitable development indicators should serve three key purposes:
1. to trigger implementation of EPA commitments by Cariforum States or to qualify them for exemptions;
2. to monitor the impact of EPA implementation on sustainable development and poverty reduction;
3. to monitor the implementation of EC commitments, in particular disbursement and effective delivery of pledged financial and technical assistance

The report of the workshop will be available shortly; in the meantime, you can view the available presentations, the background paper on indicators and the concept note here.

See also Euforic's newsfeeds on Aid for Trade and ACP trade, and the Brussels Development Briefing on Aid for Trade

G20 outcomes: the end of the promise of a new world order?

Source: EU News, Issue 3, April 2009

The much-anticipated G20 London Summit ended in an anti-climax. The measures announced appear to be more of the same old solutions the world has relied on so far to deal with financial problems. Have we arrived at the ‘beginning of the end’ of a promise of a new world order rather than at the ‘beginning of the beginning’ of a new world order? CIDSE’s main criticisms of the outcomes:

• The IMF with a slight face-lift will continue to regulate global finance. The IMF, bastion of industrialised country influence, will be given a 500 billion USD boost to continue to be the guardian of the global financial system, a role it has failed at so far. The G20 acknowledges the need to reform the mandates, scope and governance of these institutions by increasing the voice and representation of emerging and poor economies; ‘to take steps’ to make them more accountable and credible; and to appoint the heads and senior management on merit through open and transparent process. Will this make a difference to the numerous low income countries who are recognised to be the most adversely affected by the crisis? Highly unlikely.
  
  
• Tax havens will continue to flourish so long as they sign bilateral agreements that have proven not to be effective. The black-listing measures that the G20 announced will do little to return the millions of euros that have been illegally taken out of developing countries and deposited in secret European Bank Accounts. The OECD’s new black list will be reduced to no more than a diplomatic exercise. Countries like Liechtenstein, Monaco, Switzerland, Luxemburg, Belgium and Austria have found an easy way to stay off the list through bilateral tax agreements, while hardly changing their bank secrecy rules. Such bilateral agreements have delivered meagre results until today.
  
  
• The announced 50 billion USD for low income countries is little more than a repackaging of existing resources. With many countries in the EU set to default on their aid commitments, the Summit’s reaffirmation of donors’ commitment to achieve their respective Official Development Assistance pledges can only be believed if followed by concrete allocations to development budgets.
  
  
• A balanced and development-friendly system for international monetary stability remains elusive. The current monetary system disproportionately affects the currencies of non-reserve currency countries. The preliminary recommendation of the Expert (Stiglitz) Commission of the UN General Assembly President on reforms of the international monetary and financial system to adopt a new Global Reserve System, and the call by China to review the current monetary system based on a single reserve currency, is not reflected in the communiqué.
  

In conclusion, the G20 with its limited membership and interests is not the forum that can provide the global response to the financial crisis. Instead, the G20 should feed this outcome into the broader process to prepare the June UN Conference on the financial and economic crisis and its impact on development. Through such a dialogue, the G20 can ensure that its commitments and further policy orientations are informed by the needs and interests of this larger group of states that have as much if not a greater stake in ensuring that a new global order is carved out of the present crisis.

See CIDSE’s new policy paper, "From Collapse to Opportunity: Development Perspectives on the Global Financial Crisis" (April 2009), full G20 analysis and the Christian Aid response to the G20.

See also Euforic's newsfeed on the financial crisis

Major evaluation of EC aid channelled through Civil Society Organisations

Source: EU News, Issue 1, February 2008

This evaluation, undertaken by a consortium of consultancies, responds to ambitious terms of reference to assess almost all EC aid channelled through civil society organisations (CSOs) in the period 2000 -2006 (except ECHO and CARDS). Over that period, the total amount channelled through CSOs amounts to 5.3 billion €, and a clear increase of CSO channelling can be observed. All in all, 76% of total specified payments have been channelled through Northern CSOs and 24% through Southern CSOs.

The evaluation included 6 field missions to Benin, Cambodia, Georgia, Lebanon, Peru and Somalia with 6 case studies on specific issues. The evaluators interviewed some 350 persons and analysed an estimated 500 documents.

The Evaluation Team found evidence of major gaps between EC policy commitments towards civil society and actual implementation practices in using the CSO channel. In the field, innovative approaches co-exist with traditional ‘top-down’, ‘supply-driven’ and/or ‘instrumental’ approaches to working with CSOs.
These gaps (i) reduce the overall consistency of the EC’s strategy towards civil society; (ii) make it difficult to tap the full potential of CSOs as aid delivery mechanism; (iii) reduce the chances of achieving sustainable impact and (iv) affect the credibility of the EC as a global player and development partner.

Main findings are:

• The EC participatory development agenda is gradually changing the use of the CSO channel
• The EC has not yet developed a clear and consistent strategy to using the CSO channel
• The added value of the CSO channel is not optimally used by the EC who is not well-equipped to properly deal with the question all along the cooperation cycle from the identification phase to the design phase and related choice of modalities.
• There is a mixed record with regard to results, impact and sustainability. Evidence has been collected of positive effects on a project level. However it is less evident to draw firm conclusions with regard to the sustainable impact of these interventions, particularly considering that broader processes of societal change require a longer time span to achieve results.
• The prevailing institutional culture within the EC is not conducive to a strategic management of the CSO channel; the overall EC institutional environment is a major bottleneck for a strategic management of the CSO channel. This contrasts with mere instrumental approaches whereby CSOs are primarily seen as beneficiaries of project funding.

Main recommendations are:

• Provide a clearer political and stronger managerial leadership in pushing for an effective implementation of policy commitments towards CSOs
• Champion space for civil society in the policy and political dialogue with partner governments; the EC should make more effective use of its political position and leverage to stand up in the political dialogue with partner governments for respect of laws and agreements concerning civil society;
• Enhance the quality of the partnership through improving dialogue with CSOs and through more adapted CSO support modalities.
• Enhance, through genuine participatory processes, the overall quality of programming aid through civil society; the EC should improve knowledge of Civil Society within its own institution and develop country-specific strategies to involve them better in order to improve the strategic programming of how to use Civil Society in cooperation.
• The Evaluation findings clearly indicate that the overall relevance, effectiveness and sustainability of the CSO channel is likely to be considerably improved if the EC seriously rethinks and refines its current implementation strategies using existing good practices as starting point.

(Source: evaluation report and summary of evaluation report).

The outcomes of this major evaluation were presented to Member States and civil society representatives on 4 February. CONCORD FDR, invited on short notice, prepared a short response welcoming the report’s main findings and recommendations and making 8 proposals on the way to reduce the implementation gap between EC policy commitments and actual practices towards CSOs, in summary:

• Support CSOs in focussing primarily on their accountability towards the people they work with and for, rather than towards donors
• In evaluating CSOs’ work and funding new projects, reward quality and long-term impact rather than short-term outputs and efficient spending
• Avoid pitching the Northern and the Southern organisations against each other in competition for funds
• Involve CSOs in your programming processes – both geographic and thematic – and in-country policy dialogue
• Support CSOs’ engagement with Local Authorities in governance processes while helping them to protect their autonomy and operational space
• Make the necessary resources available to build vibrant civil societies in partner countries
• Explore alternative (to the call for proposals) methods of funding CSOs
• Support own CSOs initiatives focused on enhancing joint responsibility and mutual accountability for results of all development actors

CONCORD FDR is ready to work on the evaluation recommendations and on these 8 proposals together with EU officials in a constructive way.

Summary and full text of the evaluation report available here.
CONCORD FDR response available on request from Karine Sohet

See also Euforic's newsfeeds on aid evaluation, civil society, CIDSE and APRODEV

Food crisis: the high level Madrid conference on Food Security for All

Source: EU News, Issue 1, February 2008

The EU Council approved the EU's contribution to a high-level meeting on "Food Security for All" that is due to take place in Madrid on 26 and 27 January.

The EU wishes the Madrid conference to urge the donor community to engage in a joint, coordinated and coherent response to the challenge of food security in developing countries. It further calls on the conference to launch a consultation process between all stakeholders of the global food system - developing countries, donor countries, international organisations, private sector, NGOs and civil societies - which would lead to the formation of a "global partnership for agriculture and food security". The global partnership would allow all stakeholders to renew their commitment to achieve a comprehensive and coherent long-term response to hunger and malnutrition.

The Ecumenical Advocacy Alliance (EAA) and faith-based organizations and leaders around the world hailed the recognition, at the High Level Meeting on Food Security for All, of the essential role of the Right to Food in combating hunger.

In his closing remarks in Madrid, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon challenged the international community to add a third track to the food aid and safety response:”the right to food - as a basis for analysis, action and accountability."

"We welcome this outcome and look forward to the concrete elaboration of how the Right to Food will be linked to the actions proposed by the UN High Level Task Force; it is essential that this statement is much more than lip service, but will be made operational and guide actions at country level," said Rudolf Buntzel, chair of the APRODEV working group on Trade and Food security, one of the three e faith-based delegates to the Madrid meeting advocating for more just policies to benefit the poorest and most vulnerable.

In Madrid, together with the EU, some participants were promoting a new Global Partnership for Agriculture and Food Security (GPAFS). However, the relevance of a new global partnership for the people that suffer hunger was highly criticized by many civil society organizations and some governments. The establishment of the partnership was not formalized during the meeting and will undergo further discussion.

APRODEV representatives questioned whether the complex process proposed during the conference (GPAFS) will lead to a more efficient structure rather than only improving the functioning of the international organizations that currently have the lead in tackling hunger such as FAO, IFAD and WFP.

The UN Secretary-General called for urgent commitment and action. "The way forward must link actions to reduce hunger, improve food and nutrition security, broaden social protection for the vulnerable, improve agricultural production, and make trading systems work for the world's poorest," he said. "We must raise the political profile of actions in all of these areas, advocating for finance, action and results."

The Ecumenical Advocacy Alliance (EAA), the broad international network of churches and Christian organizations cooperating in advocacy recently launched a broad campaign on Food. For more information and for the EAA press release on Madrid Conference, see the EAA website.

See also Euforic's newsfeeds on the food crisis, CIDSE and APRODEV

Europe, developing countries and the financial crisis: response from different actors

Source: EU News, Issue 1, February 2008

The global financial crisis that erupted in 2008 will have dramatic economic, social, environmental and political consequences for all countries during 2009 and beyond. The developing world has been marginalized in many of the discussions to date, though it is directly affected. An important first step was taken with the G-20 Washington summit in November 2008 which acknowledged the need to include Southern countries in the reform of global governance.

Such a reorganization of the global system of governance raises the question on the role which Human Rights will play in the future. Social Watch – an international NGO that monitors poverty eradication and gender equality – emphasizes Human Rights as the solution in its “Social Watch Report 2008 - Rights is the answer” launched on 7th of January 2009 at the European Parliament, in the presence of Luisa Morgantini, Vice-President of the European Parliament. There concern was expressed about the risk that donors may reduce support for development and poverty eradication in view of the economic crisis. Others argued that an increase in spending on the efforts to improve Human Rights, gender equality and decent work will, in the long run, help in dealing with the crisis.

The consequences of the financial crisis for developing countries constituted one of the topics discussed on 30 January at the Informal Meeting of EU Development Ministers held in Prague, attended by European Commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aid Louis Michel and representatives of the European Parliament Committee on Development.

Although the effects of the financial crisis on developing countries are not yet fully visible, they are likely to be considerable, the Ministers declared. It was also observed that, therefore, it is all the more important that the European Union and other developed countries fulfil their obligations in the area of development aid, from the perspective of quantity as well as quality (effectiveness of aid). During the debates on the reform of the international financial architecture, the ministers also evaluated possibilities of taking into consideration developmental aspects, including more influence for the developing countries themselves in the IFIs. Particularly disappointing however is the reluctance on the side of the UK and a few other member states to undertake any action in favour of combating tax evasion and better regulate and control tax havens. It is also surprising that a new round of debt cancellation has not been given more consideration, given that it could quickly release extra revenues to many developing countries facing serious fiscal pressures.

A major challenge for development (and environment) ministers will be to make sure that their concerns regarding the impact of the financial crisis on developing countries and climate change finance inform the debates of the EU finance ministers and the G-20. A proposal for a “support plan for the developing world” is currently being developed by the European Commission, to be finalized together with Development Ministries in March as an input to the EU position for the G-20 summit.

European civil society organises itself in response to the global financial crisis
The next G-20 meeting will take place in London on 2 April 2009. This will be the first high level summit on this issue with the new US president and opportunities for change are now higher. Strong measures must urgently be taken by world leaders not only to deal with the symptoms but also address the causes of the crisis. In preparation of the G20 summit, Eurodad and a number of other European networks and European trade unions launched a process to organise joint strategies and mobilisation efforts. This process started in Paris during the second week of January, with a cross network meeting gathering more than 130 CSO representatives from across Europe, including APRODEV. Main topics analysed during the meeting were: causes; major social and environmental consequences; challenges of the crisis, together with opportunities for change; the financial system; and the trade and regulatory framework. A specific focus has been given on Europe’s responsibilities and responses, and CSOs.

The declaration adopted in Paris and other information is available on the Eurodad website.

See also Euforic's newsfeeds on the financial crisis, CIDSE and APRODEV

Climate change: EU Council’s decision on the energy package and Poznan Conference

Source: EU News, Issue 8, November/December 2008

While delegates from all over the world were debating at the 14th Conference of parties of the UNFCCC adopted a roadmap for the negotiations that should lead to a post Kyoto agreement in Copenhagen at the end of 2009, the European Heads of States reached a compromise on the EU “Energy package” in Brussels.
The proposal to share post-2012 greenhouse gas reductions between EU countries, known as ‘Effort Sharing’, is one of the key elements of EU action against climate change. It sets the reduction targets for sectors not covered by emissions trading, such as agriculture, transport and households representing 55% of EU emissions.
The Council adopted a target of 20 % reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 and confirmed the EU's commitment to increasing this reduction to 30 % within the framework of an ambitious and comprehensive global agreement in Copenhagen … on condition that the other developed countries undertake to achieve comparable emission reductions and that the economically more advanced developing countries make a contribution commensurate with their respective responsibilities and capabilities.

The second key decision taken by the EU Council relates to the emission permit trading system (ETS) proposed by the Commission and reflects the strong lobby of EU industry. The Directive will lay down quantitative criteria making it possible to establish by 2009 a list of the sectors and subsectors exposed to a significant risk of carbon leakage (due to competitive advantage for production in countries where no emission permits have to be purchased). Installations in sectors or sub-sectors which are exposed to a significant risk of carbon leakage will be allocated 100 % of allowances free of charge. For other sectors, the auctioning rate to be reached in 2020 is set at 70 %, with a view to reaching 100% in 2027, bearing in mind that the initial level in 2013 is set at 20 %. The proportion to be auctioned in the energy sector will, as a general rule, be 100 % by 2013. Derogations of limited scope in size and duration will however be granted when justified by specific situations.
Moreover, there is no binding commitment with regard to the utilisation of auctioning revenues; Member States will determine the use of revenues generated and the Council takes note of their willingness to use at least half of this amount for actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, mitigate and adapt to climate change.
“In the context of an international agreement on climate change in Copenhagen in 2009, and for those who wish so, part of this amount will be used to enable and finance actions to mitigate and adapt to climate change in developing countries that will have ratified this agreement, in particular in least developed countries. Further steps are to be taken at the Spring 2009 European Council in this regard."
Note that the report of Avril Doyle to be voted in European Parliament this week is much stronger on that point with the following amendment: At least 50% of the revenues generated from the auctioning of allowances shall be used in a dedicated international fund (a quarter for REDD, a quarter for mitigation and a half for adaptation measures in developing countries).

The European Parliament will adopt its reports on the EU energy package at its next plenary session (15 to 18 December) and both institutions hope that this will close the process of co-decision. Agreement between Council and Parliament has already been reached on CO2 emissions from cars (Sacconi report), monitoring and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from fuels (Corbey report) and on the Renewables Directive (Turmes report) which foresees that the share of renewable energy will reach 20% by 2020. Agreement has still to be reached on two key reports: Doyle report on ETS and Satu Hassi report on effort sharing.

The High Representative on CFSP, Javier Solana recently presented his recommendations and a joint report with the European Commission on security implications of climate change. The report lists the security and political instability risks in different regions of the globe and suggest to tackle these risks through proper analysis and monitoring at regional level, supporting early warning mechanisms and intensifying dialogue between and with third countries and regional and multilateral organisations.

The CIDSE-Caritas campaign for climate justice was launched on Sunday 7th December in Poznan with a Holy Mass dedicated to the campaign and to environmental justice, organized with Caritas Poland and with the participation of the Bishop Chairman of Caritas Bangladesh, and the Indian partner organization Laya. Through this campaign both networks will push for the new global climate change deal to be agreed in Copenhagen in December 2009 to be effective, equitable and socially just. By now, 90 Catholic Bishops from the south and the north have signed a statement in support of the campaign. In addition to the launch of the public campaign, policy staff from CIDSE were in Poznan to follow the negotiations. They met with a number of EU Member State delegations, with the delegation of the European Parliament, and with the Commission, sharing CIDSE's new policy paper Development and Climate Justice.

The Poznan conference was also the occasion for APRODEV members to launch their joint campaign, “Countdown to Co2penhagen, time to make a difference” with the possibility for supporters to sign a national or an international pledge on internet. The campaign was highly visible in Poznan with demonstrators wearing big clock suits and a high-level climate justice panel debate organised on the spot. Note as well that a joint letter of Archbishop of Canterbury, Archbishop of the Church of Sweden and Chair of the EKD Council was addressed to Nicolas Sarkozy ahead of the European Summit (available on request). See also on www.aprodev.net the APRODEV lobbying points for Poznan.
EU Council conclusions on the Energy package available here.
Outcome of the COP14 in Poznan available here.
See also CAN-Europe website and EC website on climate change.

See also Euforic's newsfeeds on the climate change, CIDSE and APRODEV

Budget 2009 – Development and foreign affairs committees of the Parliament ask more money for external relations

Source: EU News, nr. 6, September 2008

Two committees of the European Parliament, the Committee on foreign affairs (AFET) and the Committee for Development (DEVE) share the responsibility of the EU External Action budget (Heading 4). Each of them adopts amendments to the draft budget that had been adopted by the Council in July on the basis of a proposal from the Commission. In general the Parliament asks for an increase of the budget lines and also adds a few comments on the way the funds should be utilised. Here are the main requests from the two committees for the Budget 2009:

Migration and asylum: slight increase by less than 2 m€ is requested by AFET to a total of 53.1 m€.

Common Foreign and security policy: the AFET asks for a systematic reduction by 50% of all budget lines under that chapter with the argument that there is a need to improve transparency, visibility, and also accountability of actions pursued within the CFSP (particularly concerning EULEX (EU rule of law mission in Kosovo); appointment and evaluation of EU Special Representatives etc.

Human rights and democracy: AFET asks for 20 m€ increase (to a total of 130.3 m€) and adds the following comment:
- encouraging less well represented groups to gain a voice and participate in civil society and the political system, combating all forms of discrimination, and strengthening the rights of women and children and other particularly vulnerable groups, including disabled persons and older persons as well as gays, lesbians and transgender persons.

Stability Instrument – crisis response: AFET asks for 10 more m€ (total 214.8 m€) and the following comments:
- Part of the appropriation aimed at crisis response measures will be managed through a facility fund for NGO-led activities at grassroots level to prevent violent escalations.
- In 2009 the country-specific crisis response exceptional measures will take NGO proposals more into account and increase the share spent on these proposals.
European Neighbourhood and Partnership financial assistance to Palestine, the peace process and UNRWA: AFET asks for a strong increase by 286 m€ (total 447 m€) in reaction to the unjustified EC and Council’s proposals to reduce the budget compared to 2008. According to AFET, the UNRWA which is the only provider of health, education and social services assistance to people living in the Gaza strip is facing increasing financial problems when trying to alleviate the increasing poverty of the people in the Gaza strip.

Aid to Latin America and Asia: AFET wants to increase the budget for Latin America by 10 m€ (total of 364.2 m€), budget for Asia worth 517.4 m€ is maintained.
DEVE adds the following comment in budget lines for Latin America, Asia, Central Asia and South Africa:
“Where assistance is delivered via budget support, the Commission shall ensure partner countries to develop parliamentary control and audit capacities, in line with Article 25 (1) (b) of Regulation… establishing a financing instrument for development cooperation. This shall include full provision of information and the transmission of budget support agreements to parliamentary control entities and supreme audit institutions”.
And also the following comments with regard to the contribution to the Global Climate Change Alliance (which is good as the GCCA should not be funded with EDF and thematic budget line only):
– support disaster prevention and risk reduction, including climate-change-related hazards, including through contributions to support the regional implementation of the Global Climate Change Alliance (GCCA).

Aid to Afghanistan: AFET wants to increase it by 24m€ to a total of 184 m€ and to put more emphasis on social development:
The EU should increase its financial assistance to such areas in Afghanistan as health (construction and renovation of hospitals, prevention of children mortality) and education (construction of schools, vocational and literacy training), small and medium size infrastructure projects (reparation of roads network, embankments, etc.) as well as effectively implement job security ("cash for work") and food security ("food for work") schemes.
As well as Part of this appropriation is to be used for mainstreaming of disaster risk reduction, based on ownership and national strategies of disaster-prone countries.

Thematic budget lines:

Food Security: DEVE asks for an increase by 50 m€ (total 283.2 m€) and adds the following comment:
This instrument shall also be used to support actions aimed at responding to the crisis of soaring food prices, particularly by supporting actions
- to promote increased agricultural productivity including provision of agricultural inputs for the next agricultural cycle
- to mitigate the immediate effects of high food prices on low-income populations by support to social safety-nets and similar measures.
Another proposal from DEVE is to establish a new tiny budget line with 2m€ as a pilot project entitled Finance for agricultural production and aiming at facilitating access to small-holder farmers to financial resources which should be used to stimulate agricultural production in developing countries. These appropriations should be channelled through organisations specialised in microfinance, including local banks and associations, which conform to recognised international standards of transparency, accountability and financial probity.

DEVE’s rapporteur argues that this kind of actions does not fit into the Food security thematic programme and it is the reason why a separate project has to be established. We think however that it would be more effective to lobby for this kind of microfinance actions to be funded at a larger scale under the FS programme than to add a little budget line that will have no significant impact at field level. Something to keep in mind when reviewing the thematic programmes at mid-term (in 2010).

Non state actors: no increase of the budgets for non-state actors (184 m€) and for local authorities (32 m€) is requested. No new comment is added except a general comment that is included everywhere in the budget regarding the need include aspects of input activities and chain of results (output, outcome, impact) in evaluations of projects.

Environment and natural resources: the budget has already been increased compared to 2007 in the original Commission’s proposal to a total of 144.6 m€, the Parliament’s committee on Environment wants to add the following comment about the way to use the additional resources: The increase in funding aims to finance climate change adaptation measures, in particular measures to avoid deforestation and forest degradation.

The DEVE also asks for the pilot project on water management in developing countries to be continued with a budget of 3 m€.

Investing in people

Budget line for health: DEVE asks for an increase by 10 m€ (total 40.6 m€) and maintains the budget allocated to the Global Health Fund at 50 m€.
Gender equality: DEVE asks for an increase by 1.8 m€ (total 10 m€) with the following comment: Appropriations for 2009 for DCI countries shall be used specifically for programmes that support the participation of women as equal actors in the development of their societies and regions. With the argument that Appropriations for 2009 for this line are programmes for ENPI countries only. The increase will allow actions in DCI countries as well.

Other aspects of human and social development: DEVE asks for total of 28 m€.
Next steps in the process: Note that all these requests have now been transmitted to the Budget Committee of the Parliament that will select through a vote the amendments to be presented to the plenary session of the Parliament for the vote in first reading (end of October). The Budget committee has an arbitrary role and it may well be that not all amendments proposed by AFET and DEVE are retained.

Check Euforic's newsfeeds from CIDSE and APRODEV, and on EU cooperation,

Controversial proposal for an EU Food Facility

Source: EU News, nr. 6, September 2008

European Commission’s proposal to allocate 1 billion Euros from the margin of the EU budget’s Heading 2 dedicated to the Common Agricultural Policy and rural development to an International Food Facility continues to feed many debates both on the substance of the proposal and on its exceptional and unprecedented nature contrary to usual budgetary discipline.

Reactions inside the European Parliament and from certain member states let us think that the proposal was not sufficiently discussed and thought-through with other institutions before being tabled by the Commission.

The fact that the EU institutions recognise the urgent need to support agriculture in developing countries to help farmers feed themselves and their people is seen as a welcome move by European NGOs. The strong plea from the Development Committee of the Parliament in favour of additional funding to fulfil that objective is very important in a context of insufficient resources dedicated to external relations in EU budget. We welcome initiatives to generate fresh funds to contribute to food security, including the proposal of a ‘conversion’ of 1 billion Euros of unspent European farm subsidies. It is just and appropriate to use unspent subsidies to support the poor in developing countries who have been hit hard by the food price crisis.

APRODEV Trade and Food Security group however judges that the measures to be supported by the Food Facility, as proposed in the draft regulation tabled by the Commission, are not sustainable enough. It is the reason why APRODEV has worked together with members of the Development Committee of the Parliament to propose the following amendments relating to the fact that:

• Measures must improve access of small-scale and women farmers to sustainable agricultural inputs
• Negative impacts of agricultural inputs must be decreased and measures must respond to social and environmental concerns
• Findings of the International Agricultural Assessment (IAASTD) show innovative ways for sustainable production for the coming 50 years

Main APRODEV concerns and arguments with regard to the EC proposal are:

• The fact that the food facility measures would be restricted to providing inputs for the next cultural season (seeds and fertilisers) and to emergency safety net measures. Considering the structural nature of the present price crisis and the multiple factors that influence it, many fear that these simplistic and short-term responses will only have a limited impact.
  
  Supporting small-scale sustainable measures at community level, in the hands of farmers and consumers such as seeds banks and local food banks would bring a longer term perspective in the operation.
  
  
• This highly visible one shot generous gesture from the European Union should in no way replace a more in-depth reflection and longer term strategy with regard to the responsibility of EU policies and living style in the present international food security crisis. In line with the International Agricultural Assessment (IAASTD) whose 22 Findings based on a world-wide assessment of both formal science and technology and local and traditional knowledge, addresses not only production and productivity but also the multifunctionality of agriculture and show the necessity for the transformation of agriculture if the world in the future is to have less hunger, increased equity and a more sustainable environment.
  
  The only way to reverse the situation in a sustainable way is through an in-depth review of the world food production and market where EU agriculture and trade policies play a prominent role. A new agriculture agenda should give priority to the local control of food provision that would realise the Right to Food, rather than using agriculture exclusively as an ‘engine of economic growth’.
  
  
• The fact that the food facility will be exclusively delivered through big UN and other international organisations, all acting in concert in line with the needs assessment that will be produced by the High Level Task Force on the Global Food Crisis (see their Comprehensive Framework for Action). Coordination and effort pooling by big international actors is certainly welcome but should not take place at the expense of flexibility, environmental and social sustainability and adaptation to the local context. In the area of safety nets and food security, civil society organisations and small farmers organisations in particular have an undeniable added value with regard to reaching the poor and marginalised and integrating the measures into a longer-term and sustainable perspective.
  
  
• We would have liked to see EU response to the food security crisis debated in a broader context taking account of existing policies (such as the communication on Advancing Agriculture in Africa that is not mentioned in the Food facility regulation) and existing cooperation agreements (such as the Cotonou agreement or the EU Africa strategy) and aid instruments (DCI, EDF, Thematic programme on Food security, food aid). Such a broader debate would probably lead to a more nuanced and sophisticated response where an emergency food facility could perfectly find its place.

A main controversial issue discussed in the European Parliament and of a more legal nature is the fact that this unprecedented request from the EC infringes the inter-institutional agreement of the multi-annual financial framework by allocating appropriations dedicated to the internal Common Agricultural Policy to external actions. An advantage of the whole debate is that everybody, in the European Parliament at least, seems to agree on the fact that heading 4 is under-resourced and that its margin is far from being sufficient in face of the multiple challenges on the international scene. Catherine Guy-Quint (PES, France), from the budgetary committee, suggested at a hearing on the Food Facility that a European fund should be created in the future for world food aid in a new flexible form that would receive the surplus margins of the EU budget.

How the whole process will finish and what impact it will have on hungry people and small scale farmers in developing countries is difficult to judge at the present stage. After the vote in the Parliament the decisive step will be the conciliation meeting with the Council. Development ministers expressed their support for the initiative at their informal meeting in Bordeaux on 29 and 30 September. Their press release calls for a rapid conclusion of the decision process and states that they support an additional EU response of €1 billion while also calling for a long term concerted strategy to tackle the root causes of the crisis and relaunch sustainable food and small scale farming. (more)

See also Food for the Hungry, APRODEV discussion paper on rising food prices as well as CIDSE statement to the UN General Assembly: "Food Price Crisis Highlights the Need for Real Reform in Trade and Agricultural Policies"

Check Euforic's newsfeeds from CIDSE and APRODEV, and on food security,

Accra marks a turning point for aid, but in which direction?

Source: EU News, nr. 6, September 2008

Northern and Southern governments meeting in Accra, Ghana on 2-4 September further defined how they intend to improve the effectiveness of aid by 2010. The true depth of reforms to come will reveal whether aid will finally be used as an instrument for justice, or whether more of the same failed aid, simply polished around the edges, will signal the beginning of the end of the international aid system.

The novelties of the Accra Agenda for Action (AAA) can be counted on one hand. At least 50% of aid to governments should be managed through the country’s public finance system, as direct budget support or sectoral programmes; and aid for public sector activities which does not use country systems must be justified. Developing countries should receive three- to five-year forecasts of aid resources available to them. Monitoring of progress should begin at country level on the rationalization of donors’ roles and allocations across sectors. And donors will publish individual plans on untying of aid, though with no specific commitment to address the pressing issues of untying food aid or technical assistance.

The rest of the AAA is a rewritten, improved version of the 2005 Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness. It offers much positive language on long-overdue changes needed. However, it is no guarantee that the political will to take action on these words is any stronger than it was before Accra, when official reports on the implementation of the Paris Declaration concluded an alarming lack of progress. Will wording on “mutually-agreed conditions” and “results-based conditionality” will be enough to drastically alter the pace of change? Will the specific mention of various steps in the budgetary process requiring transparency be enough to ensure that Parliaments and civil society can play their respective roles of scrutiny and of monitoring, presenting evidence and offering critical analysis?

The negotiations in Accra were dominated by the dynamics of a unified and generally progressive European Union position, an initial disagreement followed by limited but still significant changes in the positions of United States and Japan. African voices were conspicuous by their absence, as were any other united positions by developing countries. Brazil and other emerging donors did play a role in the AAA’s acknowledgement of the particular characteristics of South-South cooperation.

The Paris Declaration was born within the OECD donors’ club, with a limited group of developing countries associated for the occasion. The Accra meeting demonstrated that the process has generated momentum, with a broader participation by developing countries. The format also recognized that a wider group of development actors, governments of emerging economies, private foundations, and civil society must be included in review of aid reform. Civil society had a welcome space to engage with decision makers, present their analysis on official aid, and share their ongoing reflection on civil society’s own development effectiveness. The constructive dialogue between CONCORD and the European Commission on the EU’s position for Accra beginning early this year was particularly appreciated.

However, an aid system with the incremental changes proposed in Accra, to be managed by an unwieldy “DAC-plus” structure, looks destined to rapidly become obsolete. Civil society has been calling for aid reform review to take place in a forum where all countries are on equal footing, such as the United Nations Development Cooperation Forum. This kind of structural question could not be resolved in Accra, but can be addressed in the upcoming UN Financing for Development conference in Doha.

See the full article: “A Turning Point for Aid, Yet Which Direction?”, World Economy & Development in brief, Sept/Oct (www.wdev.eu)

CIDSE, Caritas, and ACT Development went to Accra as part of an ecumenical delegation of Southern and Northern Catholic and Protestant Churches (SECAM, AACC) and faith-based organizations. Press release “Churches demand urgent action to back up rhetoric” (FR) Joint Ecumenical Message for the Accra High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness

Check Euforic's newsfeeds from CIDSE and APRODEV, and on aid effectiveness

Will the EU take the lead on aid effectiveness and the MDGs?

Source: EU News, nr. 5, June/July 2008

Many meetings have taken place in the last weeks around the preparation of the third High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness to take place in Accra between 2 and 4 September. At European level, the Commission prepared an EU position for Accra to be discussed with the Development Group of the EU Council and the COREPER before 16 July. It is based on the conclusions adopted by the GAERC in May (see EU News 4).

On 19 and 20 June, the EU Heads of States adopted quite disappointing conclusions with regard to aid volumes and an action plan on the MDGs. The conclusions represent a mere confirmation of previous commitments. On an EU Agenda for Action on the MDGs, the Summit conclusions are even more disappointing: The European Council welcomes the EU Agenda for Action on MDGs. The EU proposes to its partners in development to share this agenda,…

The EU agenda for action on the MDGs, was adopted by the Council through a written procedure finalised on 18 June. It contains commitments by the EU to contribute to filling the gaps identified by UN organisations (WHO on health or UNESCO on education) in achieving the MDGs. The same kind of rough estimate and commitment is made on health with the expectation of increasing EU support by € 8 billion by 2010, of which almost €6 billion would be for Africa. The support in the sector of environment (including water and sanitation) would increase by 2 billion.

All targets and figures are based on the assumption that EU aid will increase according to the 2005 commitments (0.56% by 2010), that the share of EU aid in global ODA will remain at the level of 60% and that the percentage of EU aid allocated to the different MDGs will remain at its present level. The realisation of the action plan is therefore strongly dependent on an increase in EU aid volumes. Hence, the observed decrease of EU ODA in 2007 compared to 2006 and the reluctance of certain Member States to establish firm timetables on how aid increases will be delivered cast doubt over EU credibility and commitments on the MDGs.

In parallel, the European Commission has commissioned an “independent commentary” on progress towards the MDGs from a group of researchers led by former World Bank chief economist François Bourgignon. The paper aims to situate efforts to fulfill MDG commitments within the broader context of the changing world economy (financial crisis, high oil and food prices, adaptation to climate change). It will examine some conceptual issues such as the diversity of the nature of the goals (inputs, outputs, outcomes, process) and the absence of dimensions of equity. The final paper will be issued ahead of the September UN General Assembly, with the analysis intended to contribute to the re-formulation of strategies for the achievement of MDGs by 2015 and beyond. Given the political context mentioned above, this may be a tall order.

Note finally that the MDG Africa Steering Group (that brings together the leaders of multilateral development organizations under the leadership of the UN Secretary-General) has also elaborated an action plan that includes a series of recommendations and was launched at the African Union Summit in Sharm-El-Sheikh (Egypt) on 1st July.
Read more...

Check also Euforic's newsfeeds on aid effectiveness and EU cooperation