Three vacancies at CONCORD, Brussels

CONCORD is the European confederation representing, through its 40 members, over 1800 European NGOs for relief and international development. The Secretariat of CONCORD is looking for:

• An experienced INTERNAL SERVICES MANAGER
  
  The manager will be responsible for the timely provision of statutory information for Belgian authorities and for the Board and General Assembly of CONCORD, managing CONCORD’s overall budget and ensuring the production of timely management accounts, coordinating CONCORD’s fundraising activities, developing and overseeing financial and procurement procedures, developing HR policies, systems and processes, ensuring the smooth functioning of CONCORD’s internal infrastructure and ensuring that CONCORD respects its statutory obligations.
  
  The postholder will manage a small team of experienced and qualified finance and support staff and will join CONCORD’s management team.
  
• A PERSONAL ASSISTANT
  
  The post is a key role within the organization directly supporting the work of the Director, of the Management Team and of the Board and handling sensitive information.
  
  The successful candidate will be able to demonstrate 3 + years similar experience, organizational and planning skills, enthusiasm, energy and discretion, be English mother tongue and fluent in French with an understanding of NGO culture.
  
• A FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION OFFICER (for 30 months, 4 days per week)
  
  The officer will ensure efficient, effective and transparent administration and oversight of the finances, donor relations, core meetings and communications of the Open Forum on CSO Development Effectiveness, a global process of Civil Society Organisations. CONCORD is leading a consortium of 6 regional and global CSO networks supporting the Open Forum. The Finance & Administration Officer will report to the CONCORD Internal Services Manager.

Also check out Euforic's newsfeeds on CONCORD, and on civil society

Spring Alliance to ensure that the EU puts people and the planet first

The 'Spring Alliance' is a movement created by the European civil society organizations: the European Environmental Bureau, the European Trade Union Confederation and Social Platform. It was recently joined by Concord, the European NGO Confederation for Relief and Development. Furthermore the Alliance is supported by a network of organizations from all corners of civil society and beyond.

According to the initiators the Spring Alliance aims to shift the policy focus of the European Union from 'growth and jobs' towards more sustainable policies which prioritizes the welfare of Europe's people and puts the planet first. In the light of a newly elected European Parliament and the upcoming changes in the European Commission the network wants to ensure that the policies of the European Union pursue simultaneously economic, environmental and social goals.

To find out more see the Manifesto of the Spring Alliance or visit its website.

Fore more information, also check Euforic's newsfeed on EU cooperation policy

Next Brussels Development Briefing on IUU fishing and ACP countries

The next Brussels Development Briefing will be held on 29th April 2009 (8h30 - 12h30) and will deal with 'Fighting against Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated fishing (IUU): Impacts and challenges for ACP countries'.

The session will review the main economic, social and environmental challenges that IUU poses at global and regional levels, especially in the ACP context, and the existing global and regional initiatives against IUU. Moreover the 2008 EC regulation which aims to prevent and deter IUU fishing will be discussed, along with the challenges for its implementation in ACP countries and the need for technical assistance to comply with the new requirements.

For the programme and registration form, please check http://brusselsbriefings.net/.

Earlier Brussels Briefings looked at 'Land access and rural development: New challenges, new opportunities', 'How does international migration affect ACP rural development?', 'Rising food prices: an opportunity for change?', 'New drivers, new players in ACP rural development', 'Does Fair Trade contribute to sustainable development?', 'The climate challenge for ACP agriculture', 'Aid for Trade', 'Advancing African Agriculture' and 'Challenges to rural development in ACP countries.'

Sign up for the Brussels Briefing newsfeed; see also the Euforic newsfeed on ACP fisheries

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

Civil Society: One year of Africa-EU Partnership

A year after the Africa- Europe Strategic Partnership Agreement was signed with great expectations, actors in development take stock.

The Joint Strategy was launched in December 2007 during the Lisbon Summit of the Portuguese EU-Presidency. Its aim was multifaceted cooperation between equal partners. A 3-year Action Plan was adopted as well including objectives to carry out until the next summit which is planned for 2010.

A report (pdf-file) by Coordination Sud, Terre des Hommes and Secours Catholique looks at the role of Civil Society within the implementation of the partnership Action Plan. It shows that participation of Civil Society actors in Europe made some progress, although the level of involvement differs significantly within different activity areas.

Additionally the authors look at the implementation within the different policy areas which range from Peace and Security, Governance or Migration to Science or Energy. Hereby the report criticizes among other aspects the use of EDF funds for non-development related issues like security and migration. Furthermore the authors lament that the whole working programme is strongly driven by European interests.

Regarding this, there is the expectation that the EU-ACP Cotonou Partnership Agreement which is due for a revision this year might also be influenced by the new 'spirit' of the EU-Africa Partnership.

See also a recent summary of the European Parliament's Draft Report: 'One year after Lisbon: The Africa-EU partnership at work' (pdf-file), on ECDPM's Europafrica.org.

Here, you also find additional information and documents on the EU-Africa Strategic Partnership.

by Martin Behrens

See also the Euforic newsfeed and dossier on EU-Africa cooperation.

Almost 100 national NGO platforms gather in Paris

Source: Concord Flash, nr. 55, October 2008

During the French presidency of the European Union, in Paris on Thursday 30 October 2008 Coordination SUD, in partnership with CONCORD, organised an international conference entitled “World Views on Europe”. Here, for the first time in history, representatives of national NGO platforms from almost 100 countries came together. The conference, which was open to the press and the public, was an opportunity – at this time of world crisis – to compare the visions of NGOs from all over the world with those of the French, EU and international institutions on four major challenges for the future of humankind: globalisation, sustainable development, building a peaceful world and human rights.

The participants took the opportunity to give Mr Joyandet, French State Secretary for Cooperation with responsibility for the French-speaking World, a road map entitled "Messages from the World to the European Union". This asks the EU for a reform of world governance that would be in the service of the most vulnerable and calls on it to review all its trade, farming, environmental and economic policies, to make them contribute to genuinely sustainable development, north and south, and to the fight against inequality.

According to Bakary Doumbia, President of FECONG (Malian NGO Platform), "European development cooperation focuses on the fight against illegal immigration, promoting the interests of European companies and fighting terrorism, instead of strengthening the policies on education, health and equality between men and women".

Mike Mathias, Chairman of CONCORD’s Policy Forum, explained that "the European model of development must be reexamined from scratch. The planet cannot bear the consumption by the economically privileged populations of the world. The current model, based on economic growth alone, does not allow for a better distribution of wealth".

Click here to see some videos made at "World Views on Europe".

"World Views on Europe" briefing

See also Euforic's newsfeeds on EU cooperation, and on Concord

Communicating Europe's development efforts, to or with citizens?

At yesterday's seminar in Paris, one of the workshops was on ways that European aid is being addressed and communicated.

Nathalie Lhayani from euractiv.fr shared some journalistic perspectives from this network/agency on the issue “how to create a public space [on Europe and solidarity issues] so democratic life can come alive and citizens can participate in it.” She explained how euractiv works through a network of partners in different EU countries where the members help to ‘localize’ European issues into national frameworks. She saw the role of euractiv as a sort of agency that reaches citizens via other intermediary channels, like civil society, mainstream media, employers, etc. In her experience, the best way to put European issues on the agenda is not to give them a European focus, but to place information on Europe inside other sectoral contexts or issues.

Agnès Philippart from CONCORD reflected on the challenges of tracking and placing European development news into the media. While complimenting the European Commission for its recently renewed communication activities, she concluded that there is not enough ‘cooperation in communication’ with information scattered across numerous locations. After three hectic days in the recently-ended European Development Days, she concluded: “Europe is not sexy when you sell it under a European label” – reinforcing Natahlie’s take home message. Note: One effort CONCORD has launched is to foster a ‘communication network’ among its national platforms and networks – see a blog set up at its recent meeting in Brussels.

Euforic’s Peter Ballantyne updated participants on ways that emerging ‘social media’ are empowering citizen to citizen communication. He argued that while the ‘European’ development community and its activities need to be better communicated, and can use many innovative tools to better connect with citizens, the real revolution is perhaps at the level of citizens and citizens’ groups who are already meeting and discussing online – and sharing actions – on many aspects of development and solidarity.

While communicating ‘to’ citizens is an important part of a ‘responsible’ Europe; communication by and among citizens, as the new social media increasingly allows, is a vital way that citizens can become more responsible for the impacts of their own actions, and mobilizing to take actions.

He concluded that the challenges for communicators of a responsible ‘Europe’ include:

• Realizing that citizens (and ‘experts’) increasingly communicate and share among themselves. The question is ‘how do we join them?’
• Finding ways for social actors like NGO’s to create opportunities – and issues – around which conversations can take place, on the issues we care about. This is something like trying to create very infectious ‘viruses’ that citizens will discuss and spread, and act upon.
• Ensuring that information and content is open and friendly to social and web 2.0 enabled, so it can ‘flow’ across platforms, across organisations, and across communities. The information needs passports to travel and blue cards to migrate.
• Going where the communities, citizens and users (already) are; using their tools, engaging on their terms, learning to ‘let go’ and to give up control.

Reflecting on the day’s discussions, in the train from Paris to The Hague, some final thoughts include:

• Several times, people argued that the citizens need to be thought of as development ‘players’ and actors not as beneficiaries or consumers. Yet we still talked much in the media session on ‘getting’ Europe into media that will reach citizens.

• As social media gain momentum, we will have increasing need for intermediary services, such as journalists and other platforms, to help guide and inform citizens and discussions. Lots more information and choice can be empowering, it also has the potential to lead to greater confusion.

• It is as important that we have awareness and education of what the citizens and their countries are doing in development – not just what ‘Europe’ (the EU) is doing. There seems to be growing divide between very dynamic action-oriented local initiatives and what are perceived to be rather static public/national/Europe efforts.

• Which begs the question: Who is the ‘Europe’ that needs to be communicated in and with the media? Is it the ‘Brussels’ communities and their concerns and policies that need to reach citizens, and which often seems to be unexciting to journalists and citizens alike? Or is it the activities of citizens who comprise Europe, who are increasingly the ones taking actions and engaging in cooperation, and who may actually have the stories that journalists and politicians seek? In both cases, and both are needed, the communication opportunities will be different.

by Peter Ballantyne

See euforic newsfeeds on public support for development; french development cooperation, EU cooperation; and information and communication

Communication, citizenship and the construction of a fair and responsible Europe

Today, Coordination Sud and EducaSol organised a seminar in Paris – ‘What role for citizens in the construction of a fair and responsible Europe?’

Part of the programme of the French EU presidency, it brought together actors interested in Europe and international solidarity – to exchange information and enhance the coherence of development education interventions, especially by civil society.

Opening speakers reflected on the challenges communicating on ‘Europe’ to citizens. Ghislaine Deschaumes of the Maison de l’Europe de Paris argued that Europe has for many years treated its citizens as ‘consumers’ rather than ‘players’ to be engaged and empowered.

She argued that recent ‘no’ votes at the EU level were a “major shock’ to the system, leading to increasing efforts to communicate the Europe ‘project.’ But, she concluded, can the citizens have ownership of this ‘European project’ without wide discussion and engagement? And are there practical ways for citizens to discuss the European project among themselves?

She saw an important role for civil society groups, but an urgent need to give ourselves the means to be competent in developing our own agendas, to get overviews of ongoing policy agendas, and being able to contribute to them. We need to “make sure that civil society is actively present” in the various discussions on development policies.

The second session looked into the ‘facts’ – how do citizens perceive Europe and Europe’s development aid efforts?

The OECD’s Robert Zimmerman kicked off with the results of recent Eurobarometer polls on the perception of European aid by its citizens..

His main conclusions: For the past 20 years, we have had strong positive public opinion on development aid; most citizens favour increasing aid; Citizens want to ‘do good’ for others … but they lack knowledge, and self confidence and guidance/education.

The most striking contradiction from the survey is that while the majority favour more aid, the majority also perceive that much public aid is wasted.

Of concern for the upcoming EU presidency, one of his charts showed how communications directors of OECD aid agencies ranked the interest of their parliamentarians in development issues. Among the countries with lowest rankings: the Czech Republic.

Zimmerman was followed by Jean-Daniel Levy from CSA who reported on a recent phone survey of French citizens for Coordination SUD. He qualified his remarks with the news that the poll was complicated by the emerging financial crisis: When people feel less secure personally, they are likely to be less committed to international actions.

Answers to the 3 questions indicate that French citizens: 1) favour solutions to the financial crisis that strike a balance between European and developing country interests (over putting Europe first, or putting developing countries first), 2) favour Europe maintaining its funding for development aid (60% of respondents), and 3) suggest that development actors who should be most involved to improve the role of Europe in the world are, in order of most highly regarded, EU member state governments, EU institutions, private enterprise, civil society …

Jean Jacques Mbella Abega from a youth and democracy network Cameroun commented on some different points mentioned in the surveys, asking “who is Europe?” He observed from personal experience that European citizens are mostly not well-informed about development. He called for a more bottom-up approach to development education and awareness raising, based around real local dialogues. He drew on examples in Africa that could inform what Europe needs to do.

In the afternoon, participants broke into groups to discuss various issues – the group on medias explored ways that European aid is being addressed and communicated.

by Peter Ballantyne

See euforic newsfeeds on public support for development; french development cooperation, EU cooperation; and information and communication

European Development Days: A rough guide

The European Development Days (EDD08) are underway in Strasbourg with over 55 events crammed into 3 days, a development village of 116 stands and over 1000 participants. Tracking everything that is happening is a little difficult, but here is your quick guide (or try the full programme).

The key themes fall into six areas:

• Media and Development
• Decentralised cooperation
• Development cooperation new issues
• Local governance
• Millenium Development goals
• Youth and education

Bernard Petit introduces the concept and the background to the meeting.

Click To Play

As part of the events on Media and Development the Lorenzo Natali Grand Prize for 2008 was awarded to Larisse Houssou, a journalist from Benin, for his article on Darfur entitled "Trained to kill...".

Media and development has been a key part of the whole meeting with numerous teams reporting on the event, both European broadcasters such as TV5monde and African journalists supported by CTA.

A series of parallel panel discussions have focussed on the role of the media and development and Tumi Makgabo an indepent producer, who worked with Inside Africa for CNN had some interesting insights to share.

Click To Play

Decentralised cooperation discussions and events have covered the twinning of towns from Europe with those in developing countries. Mayors from around the world exchanged experience of local development activities through international networks. The development village contains stands from a number of regions in europe with development activities around the world. The President of the mayoral association of francophone africa and a Mayor from Cameroon tell more on euforic.blip.tv.

New issues for development cooperation came to the fore as the plenary focussed on the impact of the global financial crisis. The challenges were matched by the opportunities for development apparent on the myriad of stands from organisation working with development who all had a story to tell of succesful results or promising projects. Some euforic members give their examples.

Local governance and the role of new actors, was tackled in a parallel session organised by EDC2010 with discussions on the role of new countries working in Africa dominating the debate.

Progress towards the Millenium Development Goals was reviewed in the session "Where do we stand and where do we need to go?"
Engaging youth in the event has been more a part of the event than in previous years, with a young reporters team from Plan International covering the event and YARD Young Ambassadors for Rural Development.

You can hear more from Plan International and the Global Donor Platform about this project on euforic.blip.tv.

subscribe to news from the European Development Days in Strasbourg at http://feeds2.feedburner.com/eudevdaysall

The EU, Africa and China: Opportunities and challenges of a trilateral cooperation

The EDC2020 project coordinated by EADI aims to inform the public and policy-makers about future scenarios and their likely effects on European Development Cooperation to 2020. The project wants to encourage close collaboration between researchers and policy-making communities.

Dealing with "The EU, Africa and China: opportunities and challenges of trilateral cooperation" a Briefing Session for Parliamentarians and Policy Makers recently took place on 27 October 2008 in Brussels. The session was co-organized with Society for International Development Europe (SID Europe).

In light of a recently published communication of the European Commission entitled "The EU, Africa and China: Towards trilateral dialogue and cooperation" (pdf) a high-ranking panel chaired by Sven Grimm (DIE) including Xuewu Gu (Ruhr-University Bochum), Helmut Reisen (OECD Development Centre), Uwe Wissenbach (EU Commission), Rene van der Linden (Dutch Senate) discussed the opportunities and challenges for this ambitious plan.

Talking about the general idea of the EDC2020 project, Jos van Gennip (SID Europe) stressed in his opening speech the need for intense North-South dialogue between policy makers, researchers and politicians. Tha the African panel speaker, Olusanya Ajakaiye (African Economic Research Consortium), could not participate due to visa problems showed the difficulties facing us.

Sven Grimm (DIE) outlined the programme of the briefing, beginning with a close look into the EC Communication, as starting point for a discussion of the diverse interests and positions among the EU, Africa and China.

Uwe Wissenbach (European Commission) working on the African relations with non-European countries within DG DEV, was closely involved in the drafting process of the communication. He felt that different perceptions between the main actors and an emotional discussion within the European media about China's role in Africa had a negative impact on EU-China Relations. The communication attempts to build common ground for a close dialogue and practical cooperation with China in Africa.

Africa needs to realize that there is already a long relationship between the EU and China. A perspective which sees Chinese engagement only as an opportunity to increase negotiation leverage in the EU-Africa dialogue can be contra-productive. Nonetheless the EU needs to accept that China's engagement leads to a less exclusive relationship between the EU and Africa. Africa is more important for global governance and new actors are in Africa for resources, geopolitical interests and diplomatic concerns. Wissenbach stressed that the EU is not only cooperating with Africa because of charity but also for the same reasons.

The EC communication identifies key areas of cooperation including security, infrastructure and agriculture. Wissenbach sees it as a pragmatic approach that looks at the opportunities of cooperation, which is why critical issues discussed within the continuing EU-China dialogue are not included. Consultation on the paper took place since 2005 with China and with African representatives since 2007. The communication should be seen as a starting point for further dialogue with China and Africa.

Xuewu Gu, from the Institute of East Asian Politics at the Ruhr-University Bochum looked on the issue from China's perspective. He saw several challenges for a successful partnership with China. He sees China's actions in Africa as touch-stone for larger geopolitical ambitions. China's interests in closer cooperation with the EU are based on a wish to appease Europe and to improve China's international reputation - while the EU intends to integrate and direct China into a favourable direction.

A future cooperation needs to deal with the different philosophies on both sides. According to Gu, the EU believes it knows what is best for Africa and puts itself into a role of a protector of 'African interests'. China rejects the idea that it can teach new values, but wants to make pure business. This does lead to different crisis management approaches where Europe is ready to sanction African countries but China will not go beyond negotiation.

In practical terms, China focuses on infrastructure and the EU on institution building, good governance and a strong civil society. Gu concludes that due to these diversities a trilateral dialogue will become very difficult.

Helmut Reisen, Research Director of the OECD Development Centre looked at the economic aspects of Chinese cooperation in Africa, which he sees as mainly positive. As negative aspects, he named the resource trap African countries are put in and the insistence by China to implement its projects with Chinese workers. Furthermore, China faces strong criticism regarding its lending and debt policy in Africa.

Positive aspects are the new leverage for Africa in negotiation processes and the highly effective and efficient implementation of Chinese infrastructural projects. Reisen points out that Western protectionism regarding natural resources forced China to increase the supply side by investing in Africa. Finally, China has large financial resources to deploy and looks at Africa as a test ground for Chinese companies on their way to going global.

Europeans bring highly advanced technologies to Africa which will often lack sustenance in the long-term. On the other hand, China has a comparative advantage since it offers intermediary technologies which can easily be maintained. Reisen rejects the complaint that the Chinese only use Chinese labour, which is highly effective, fast and efficient. In fact, African governments often do not want to use African labor but prefer the fast results of the imported staff.

Looking at the EC communication, Reisen stressed the opportunity to engage more with Africa and China and to make more use of African institutions, such as the African Development Bank, since China is rather skeptical of Western dominated institutions like the World Bank and IMF.

Rene van der Linden spoke from the perspective of a EU Member State. He feared that public support for EU aid is under pressure, mainly because of doubts about its effectiveness. In his opinion, the EU-Africa Strategic Partnership as well as the EC Communication are defensive reactions of the EU to these circumstances. Van der Linden proposed that the communication should include other areas of cooperation, most importantly health and education.

The expert panel was followed by a lively discussion. Among other issues, this focused on the 'real' European interests in a dialogue with China on Africa. Wissenbach denied the standpoint that the EU strives to contain Chinese policy in Africa. He argued that China plays an important role on the continent which could be more effective with closer cooperation with European partners. China tends to see everything in terms of 'us and them' and that everybody is 'ganging up' against it and consequently looks for evidence for it.

Nonetheless, Wissenbach underlined that the EU has nothing to fear. Taking the example of Chinese investments, he pointed out that European companies are strong enough to choose other and more attractive regions for investment while Chinese companies need to go to Africa. The main aim of the EU is to take out the negative dynamics within the trilateral relations which is in the interest of all actors.

by Martin Behrens

Nadarajah Shanmugaratnam (NORAGRIC) comments on the discussion:

Click To Play

More videos of the conference can be found here

Visite www.edc2020.eu for information about future events.

See also the Euforic newsfeed on EU-Africa relations.

EC Annual Action Plan 2008: bi-annual calls for all NGOs and implications for the New Member States

Source: Concord Flash, nr. 58, 2008

The annual action programme 2008 was adopted on 12 August 2008. After the “Non-State Actors and Local Authorities in Development – NSA-LA Strategy Paper 2007 – 2010" it is the basic document in which the European Commission gives detailed conditions and guidelines for the different calls for proposals sent out under its financing instruments. CONCORD regrets that the budgets for 2008 and 2009 will be combined and that the calls for proposals will be published for a biannual period. The Working Group on Funding for Development and Relief (FDR) hopes that the EC will stick to its line that this is exceptional, and that as of 2010 the calls for proposals will again be launched on an annual basis. It seems, however, that the next Call for Proposals for Investing in People is to be launched for the years 2009-2010. In this way, it will alternate with the Call for Proposals for NSA-LA which would cover the 2008-2009 budgets.

After a lot of lobbying work done by CONCORD over the past year, and thanks to the input of different players, the EC has added 10 more countries to the list of those covered by the new programme (Cape Verde, Djibouti, Haiti, Liberia, Mauritania, Solomon Islands, Togo, Afghanistan, Morocco and Tunisia), while Malawi is no longer on the list.

The European Commission’s Non-State Actors and Local Authorities in Development thematic programme, which succeeded the former NGO Co-financing and Decentralised Co-operation budget lines, aims at supporting small-scale initiatives in the area of development proposed and/or carried out by civil society organisations and/or local authorities from the European Union and partner countries. The programme’s three main objectives are to support:

1. Development actions to be implemented by non-state actors or local authorities in close cooperation with the local communities and most vulnerable population groups, aiming at promoting an inclusive and empowered society in partner countries
2. Actions in the EU and acceding countries aiming at raising public awareness of development issues and promoting education for development (DE) to mobilise greater public support for poverty reduction
3. Actions aiming at achieving more efficient cooperation, facilitating structured dialogue in the area of development.

What is the same as in the previous Annual Action Plan regarding New Member States? In the thematic programme on development education (see the second objective above), the actions proposed by organisations from the 12 New Member States are favoured: the rate of EC co-financing can be as high as 90% of an action's budget and the EC grant can be lower than for old member states, namely EUR 25,000. It also seems that some other eligibility criteria will be kept as smooth as in the last Development Education Call in 2007.

Note that the Calls will be launched in November/December 2008! The EC is preparing the launch of five Calls for Proposals to be issued in November/December 2008 (In-country Actions, Multi-country actions NSA, Multi-country actions LA, Development Education and Networking), while at the same time 70 EC delegations are working to launch their local calls. An overview of all the centralised and local NSA and LA calls and their main objectives will be published on the EuropeAid website.

For more information contact Petra Kreinecker, TRIALOG and An Van Goey, CONCORD

See the Euforic newsfeeds on Concord and on civil society and development education

Reforming European business instead of voluntary CSR

Brussels, May 29 - Disappointed by the Commission's inaction and focus on voluntary actions in the field of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), European NGOs and national coalitions working on corporate accountability decided in 2005 to launch the European Coalition for Corporate Justice (ECCJ).

ECCJ aims to promote an ethical regulatory framework for European business, wherever in the world that business may operate. Now, three years later, ECCJ with the PSE (Socialist Group in the European Parliament) held a conference on 'Smart regulation: Legislative opportunities for the EU to improve corporate accountability' (agenda). The aim was to present three concrete legislative proposals that could close the regulatory gap and create a level playing field.

Noreena Hertz, author of 'The Silent Takeover' and 'The Debt Threat', gave a very optimistic introduction to the day. She stressed the increased forces pressuring for change: more consumers buy fair trade, more investors value environmental standards. "History has shown us that most of the calls have been heard", Hertz explained, referring to the abolition of slavery or the mainstreaming of the green movement. "There are precedents, and the timing is good." she continued, referring to the window of opportunity opening with the appointment of a new Commission next year. "Together we can create a new global order! Together, we can change the course of history!"

The first and most ambitious proposal, Extending Parent Company Liability, suggests that parent companies should be held liable for for any environmental and human rights violations caused by their subsidiaries and contractors. As lawyer David Chivers explained, the extension of the EU law to non-EU companies that have a direct or indirect presence in the EU is necessary to avoid unfair competition. Lee Swepston, former ILO Senior Advisor on Human Rights, added that higher costs are not an argument. "In former times, business also argued that limiting child labour to 12 hours per day will ruin business. And it didn't!" Raül Romeva i Rueda, MEP for the European Greens, closed arguing that we "should not care about how realistic the proposal is, but how real it is." We should fight for the proposal which should be real one day, and not for the one which is most realistic.

Olivier de Schutter, recently appointed UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, presented the second ECCJ proposal, the Duty of Care. According to the proposal, companies should take reasonable steps to identify and prevent human rights or environmental abuses within their sphere of responsibility. If the parent company does not take all reasonable steps, it can be held legally liable. De Schutter did not conceal the problems of the proposal, for example that the Duty of Care could be interpreted as the imposition of Northern standards on Southern countries. Moreover, the question of remedies remains. The aim is to push Northern companies to support their partners with technical and financial support, building up local capacities to comply with the social and environmental standards, instead of cutting relations. Kate MacDonald from the London School of Economics strongly underlined de Schutter's last point, which she called "external misalignment between power and responsibility."

The third area of legal reform, Mandatory Social and Environmental Reporting, seemed to be the most feasible proposal, because it is already practiced in eight EU Member States, including France. CEO's could be held legally liable if reporting standards are not observed. According to Filip Gregor, ECCJ lawyer, the resulting increased transparency would spur voluntary improvements. However, the risk of greenwashing, and weak comparability between reports persist. Crucial support came from Matt Christensen, Executive Director of the European Social Investment Forum. He was "very positive regarding the proposal," if it is not too much work for the directors, and if investors can find the information in one document. Inspired by Christensen, Diana Wallis, liberal MEP, already thought there are some concrete steps to realize mandatory social and environmental reporting to be seen within the window of opportunity opened by climate change, such as the UK carbon reporting.

According to its website: the ECCJ "believes that these [three] proposals would lead to a coherent and harmonised approach to business regulation, putting an end to the unfair competition caused by companies who profit from human rights and environmental abuses," says Ruth Casals, coordinator of the network. "These proposals will provide long needed justice for victims of environmental or human rights abuses by companies based in Europe."

by Birthe Paul

The EU as saviour of the African Union?

Two recent reports (in German) by the German Institute of Global and Areas Studies look at Eu-Africa cooperation. Analysing the current status of African continental integration, Christian von Soest concludes that the new African Union Commission faces a major challenge to reduce the economic divides between Africa's various regional blocs before they become greater threats to continental unity. Further, although the African Union Commission should steer the integration process, it lacks the operative capacity doing so.

GIGA's Siegmar Schmidt further examines the role of the African Union in the EU development policy framework for Africa. He looks to EU programmes to help close the capacity gap of the AU. He notes that the EU counts on the AU as central partner within the new EU-Africa partnership, but argues that the AU can hardly meet these high expectations without external help. Consequently the EU supports various areas including peace and security, institutional architecture and the development program NEPAD.

Schmidt warns that even with external donor support, the AU might not yet be a reliable partner. This is shown by the weak reactions taken to deal with the crisis in Zimbabwe. With the raise of Chinese cooperation in Africa, there is furthermore the possibility that some states might lose interest in cooperation with Europe.

Against this background, the EU's engagement will likely be increased so as not to lose influence on its neighbouring continent.

by Martin Behrens

Subscribe to Euforic newsfeed on EU-Africa relations.

Multi-Stakeholder Process on Development Education in Europe on the right track

Source: Concord Flash 51, April 2008

Last November the European Development Education Consensus was officially unveiled during the European Development Days in Lisbon. Since then this framework on objectives, principles and challenges for development education (DE) has been receiving growing recognition: Commissioner Louis Michel stated that “this Consensus on Development Education is as important as the European Consensus on Development”. The European Parliament “welcomed” the DE consensus in its 13 March plenary session and adopted a resolution highlighting the “importance of a report on development education and its role in the implementation of the European Consensus on Development”. The European Commission will provide translations into all 22 official EU languages and will publish the document on the DG Development website.

The initial purpose of this multi-stakeholder process seemed to have been fulfilled: the European Union now has a reference document for DE which is gaining increasing support from different players. However, these stakeholders (from the European Parliament, European Commission, Member States, international organisations and civil society), think differently: “The real work starts now”, insisted Robert Zimmerman from the OECD Development Centre. If the DE Consensus were to become a real political strategy for DE in Europe, the group would need a new mandate for implementing it, with precise political objectives, indicators and an action plan. As host Hannu Takkula (MEP, Vice-Chair of the Culture and Education Committee) said in his opening speech: “Now the challenge is to put [the Consensus] into practice, at the local, national and European levels!”.

At the international conference on “Development Education and Intercultural Dialogue” on 9 and 10 June in Slovenia, the multi-stakeholder steering group will seek to be given this new mandate until after the EU elections in June 2009, in order to transform the DE Consensus into real politics. One more reason to come to Ljubljana and join the European Multi-Stakeholder Process on Development Education, Version 2.0!

For more information contact Tobias Troll (DEEEP Advocacy Officer)

Read more...

See also Euforic's newsfeeds on CONCORD and development education

Policy coherence for development: rhetoric or reality?

Brussels, November 26. SID European Programme, in partnership with EADI and the Evert Vermeer Foundation (EU Coherence Programme), organised today a briefing session on policy coherence for development. Base for the discussion was the European Union's first Report on Policy Coherence for Development that the EC issued late September to "highlight the interactions and complementarities between development policy and twelve other internal and external EU policies that have an impact on developing countries."

The reactions on the report have been very critical, most of all from civil society organisations. The briefing session presented critical analysis and information on the issue from different perspectives.

The session was chaired by Paul Engel (Director, ECDPM). The programme included a keynote speech by Louis Michel (Commissioner for Development Cooperation and Humanitarian Aid) presentations by Louka Katseli (former Director, OECD Development Centre), Anders Wijkman (MEP), Françoise Moreau (DG Development), and Peter Heintze (Director, EVS/EU Coherence Programme).

Read more at http://www.sid-europe.org/

Also check out the Euforic dossier on coherence

10th EDF: Democratic scrutiny of ACP Country Strategy Papers

Until very recently, EC development cooperation with Africa, Caribbean, and Pacific States was subject to little democratic scrutiny and left mostly to the discretion of the European Commission and Member States in discussions behind closed doors. Following the European Parliament Development Committee's new right of scrutiny of Country Strategy Papers (CSPs) for Asian and Latin American countries covered by the Development Cooperation Instrument, in April Member States accorded the right to oversee ACP CSPs to the EU-ACP Joint Parliamentary Assembly (JPA), which will receive the draft CSPs at the same time as the Member States' EDF committee. While this will be officially for information only, the Joint Parliamentary Assembly's feedback will have to be taken into account by the European Commission. At the same time, Member States acknowledge the need for greater support for the capacity of the JPA, given significant resources and structures required to effectively scrutinize 78 Country Strategy Papers.

In April, the CONCORD Cotonou group participated in an informal exchange on the EDF with Member States and the Commission. It became clear that there will be no global qualitative review of the 9th EDF and its impact on poverty reduction. Lessons learned are expected to be drawn at country level and taken up in the new Country Strategy Papers (CSP). The reallocation of 9th EDF funds will be agreed by the EU-ACP Council of Ministers meeting on 25 May.

Regarding civil society consultation in the 10th EDF programming, the Commission believes it is responding to concerns expressed by civil society: Louis Michel sent a letter to EC Delegations earlier this year underlining the importance of consulting civil society. The Commission is asking Delegations to fill out a questionnaire on their consultation process, which will lead to a report to inform the mid-term review process. It was noted that existing consultation guidelines should be evaluated and updated if needed.

On the sensitive issue of governance, it was noted that the governance profile is an EU tool, not a shared tool with the partner country government, Parliament, civil society. In reponse to the EC assessment, governments are asked to make commitments on governance reform. The profile and government commitments will be annexed to the CSP (so, made public when the final CSP is). The Commission will in May make a proposal to Member States on the awarding of the governance incentive tranche (0-35% of the national envelope, to be used on focal sectors, not necessarily on governance reform). The methodology for the proposal is not yet finalized, but will be based on the EC's assessment of the ambition, relevance, and credibility of the government's commitments on governance reform, measured against the weaknesses identified in the profile. The proposal will not be made available outside the EC/Member States, as aid allocation is an EU responsibility only.

Source: EU News - Issue 3, May 2007 (APRODEV, CIDSE, Caritas Europa).

See also Euforic dossier on ACP-EU cooperation

CONCORD at the EU-ACP Joint Parliamentary Assembly

The Joint Parliamentary Assembly brought together parliamentarians from ACP countries with Members of the European Parliament to discuss the issue of governance in a hearing on 21 March 2007. CONCORD had the opportunity to sent two representatives: Angela Haynes, from HelpAge International and representing BOND, who presented the European NGO perspectives, and Paul Samangassou, Incoming Executive Secretary of Caritas Africa, who presented perspectives from African civil society.

Angela Haynes emphasised the importance of good governance for sustainable development and highlighted the need for a European Union concept of good governance to be based on international human rights law, to promote domestic accountability and to include an international dialogue for all countries to share learning and best practice. She also raised key concerns highlighted in the Cotonou Working Group's paper "Whose Governance", calling for clarification on the criteria, indicators and forms of measurement to be used in the "governance profiles" which will assess a country's performance and its eligibility for funds from the 2.7 billion Euro incentive tranche. She stressed the need to work within the framework of the Cotonou Agreement to ensure real partnership between the ACP and EU countries in developing an owned good governance agenda, and real participation by parliaments and civil society, including the most marginalised.

Paul Samangassou highlighted some of the negative consequences of poor governance including abuse of power due to lack of government accountability and elections which are not fair or transparent. He identified the need for increased participation by citizens in decision-making in order to achieve good governance. The role for civil society organisations (CSO) in this is to create spaces to facilitate participation by citizens, but they need to work with public institutions. He gave the example of Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers: while this is an example of how CSOs can play a role, it is not enough in terms of good governance.

The ensuing debate was wide-ranging and included a discussion on the role of governance in the Cotonou Agreement, the ACP's understanding of good governance, the African Peer Review Mechanism and need for best practice examples, and the role of CSOs. Some ACP parliamentarians criticised CSO criticism and monitoring of governments, arguing that they should work with their governments instead. Others welcomed the distinct role of CSOs in ensuring participation, accountability and scrutiny of government, but there was agreed recognition of the distinct roles played by civil society and parliaments. There was consensus on the fact that donor funds should not go to corrupt governments, but also concern that EU member states need to address their responsibility in causing or perpetuating bad governance in ACP countries.

Angela Haynes concluded that European NGOs fulfill a range of roles, but one very important one is holding their governments and the EC to account for their actions and behaviour in relations to partners in the South. While NGOs are not in favour of externally imposed conditionality, they do support conditionality from below, where calls for governance reforms by broad-based coalitions of in-country actors including parliamentarians and civil society are supported by external donors. For his part, Paul Samangassou concluded that the role of parliaments and CSOs are complimentary, as was demonstrated in Cameroon where CSOs organised workshops to raise parliamentarians' awareness on issues relating to the EPAs. CSOs have also stepped in in situations where governments have not been capable of playing their role, taking on their functions.

For further information: Angela Haynes, EU Representative HelpAge International: ahaynes@helpageinternational.org

Source: CONCORD Flash - March 2007.

See also Euforic dossiers on ACP-EU cooperation and governance.