Development and Cooperation


	Contributions from the Column Focus A model for other world regions – progress in Europe New consensus The view from Paris. What the French government thinks of co-ordination “Contribute at the global level” – ideas and priorities of accession countries “More of the same” is not an option: putting support for ACP countries on a new base For NGOs, support from Brussels means a lot of money – and a lot of work 12/2005		“An important step forward” “3 Cs” – coordination, coherence and complementarity – are the core principles for the development cooperation of the European Union and its member states. From a German perspective, reform has brought good progress on this front over the past years. The recent “European Consensus on Development” (see p. 454) is likely to speed up the process, as Development Minister Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul explained in an interview with D+C/E+Z. [ Interview with Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul ] The European Commission thinks that EU development efforts should be better coordinated. What do you say? We have achieved a great deal on that score already. When I became development minister in 1998, there were all sorts of problems with EU development policy: lack of coordination and coherence, long and complicated procedures. Together with others of a like mind, we launched a reform process based on proposals stemming, not least, from the German EU presidency in 1999. Since then, a lot of positive things have happened. European development policy has become more focused, the aid poor people need reaches them faster. Those are major achievements. But I think it makes good sense that Commissioner Louis Michel is pushing for further improvements, especially as the EU now has 25 member states. What are the weak points of EU development policy? Generally speaking, the Commission needs to deepen and widen the reform process that has been initiated in order to make assistance more effective. There is scope for improvement on several levels. For example, many procedures could be speeded up. And even more should be done to increase coherence. I particularly see a need for action on the CAP, Europe’s common agricultural policy. In view of the current WTO round, a good deal needs to be done in this area. The EU deserves a certain amount of credit for decoupling subsidies from production, but I think abolishing agricultural export subsidies and lowering tariff barriers significantly would be appropriate steps for the EU to take. Tasks for the Commission are spelled out in such general terms that almost any activity seems to fit the description. Shouldn’t the division of labour be more precisely defined? We have just passed a joint declaration on European Development Policy at the General Council, which focussed on development issues. This „European Consensus on Development“ is a document which, for the first time in 50 years, defines a common guideline on development for the member states as well as for the Community. I am very satisfied that the EU has made this important step forward. Our goal in the debates on the matter was to make the Commission only become active in those fields where it has an advantage in comparison with the member states. Regional integration is such a field, for instance. The member states, on the other hand, should become active in those fields that they are particularly competent in. That is the way we can act in cooperation, rather than in competition. It took some effort to convince the European Commission. What is the EU’s special strength? The EU is a shining example of how peace can be achieved through economic cooperation. I was born during the Second World War and grew up in the post-war years. The creation of the European Economic Community – nearly 50 years ago now – by a treaty between the former enemies France and Germany together with Italy and the Benelux countries laid foundations for the political unification of the continent as well as for the affluence which, despite all our problems, we enjoy in Europe today. We know what European integration means for long-term peace. In that sense, we can be a model for other regions of the world that agree to cooperate after long-standing hostility. The achievement you refer to dates back two generations. You should not underestimate the European Union’s capacity for change. EU enlargement has overcome the East-West division of our continent. And the experience thus gained makes European development cooperation a credible actor in any post-conflict situation. Another definite strength of the EU lies in its work as an “honest broker” for peace worldwide, its fundamental support for consensus, discussion and multilateral engagement. In short, it puts the power of the law before the law of the powerful. Donor harmonisation is a strategy to strengthen recipient country ownership. Where does the EU itself need to harmonise? Thanks to EU initiatives, the international debate has progressed far beyond the issue of harmonising donor processes and procedures. Essentially, the aim is to re-gear cooperation processes towards greater effectiveness. To give you an example: in some countries, the donor community advises partner countries on drafting comprehensive national development strategies called Joint Assistance Strategies. The purpose is to establish mandatory and uniform standards for all donor programmes – providing transparency, facilitating management of development programmes by the recipient countries themselves and enabling donors to coordinate their activities better. We support that process because it is a move in the right direction. But is it happening fast enough? In view of EU enlargement and the most welcome rise in the number of donors, we need to make more vigorous progress to coordinate our activities. Overall, we need to achieve a greater international division of labour that harnesses the specific strengths of the various donors more effectively. In Germany, we have already defined priority areas for our engagement and thus laid an important foundation for re-organising international development cooperation in tune with a more pronounced division of labour. What role does budget support play in EU development cooperation and what role should it play? Budget support can be a very valuable development instrument in many countries. Compared with traditional development approaches, it increases the ownership of the recipient country and thus helps to make support more effective. All summed up, budget support now accounts for around one fifth of cooperation with ACP states. Before we can fund budget support, however, certain conditions must be met. The way the funds are used needs to be clearly verifiable. For that to happen, better financial structures need to be set up in many developing countries. In that sense, reliable management of governmental budgets is not just a prerequisite of budget support but also a goal. How is it ensured? The Commission has taken appropriate measures to minimise fiduciary risks. For one thing, the conditions that need to be met for budget support to be granted are strictly defined. For another, monitoring instruments have been developed to enable the Commission to assess the standard of public financial management, the reforms proposed and the progress made in implementation. According to a study by the European Court of Auditors, those instruments have been improved significantly. So should we switch to budget support completely? No, budget support will certainly not take the place of other, time-honoured tools. Ultimately, poverty reduction can only be achieved by using those instruments of development cooperation that make the best sense in any given situation. How could EU development policy be made more effective? Since 2000, the Community has undergone a radical reform process that has resulted in many positive developments. One, for instance, is the devolution of more responsibility and implementation to the EU delegations in partner countries. Therefore, it has become much easier to decide according to locally prevalent conditions. We have also agreed that member states and Commission should pay close attention to the “3 Cs” - coordination, coherence and complementarity. This is one way, for example, to minimise transaction costs. But our visions go far beyond doing only that. Development cooperation funds should not be used to compensate developing countries for not having access to our markets. In the Paris Declaration of March 2005, the EU and we member states set tangible, verifiable targets through to 2010 to further raise the quality and effectiveness of our work. These include, for example, drafting common country programmes by the Commission and the member states on the basis of joint analysis. EU co-financing is another instrument in this context. Policy coherence is a tricky issue even at the national level. In the case of the EU, both migration policy and trade policy are criticised as being hostile to development. How can coherence be achieved in a Union of 25 countries? First of all, policy coherence is a stated aim of the Treaty on European Union. But, I’m afraid, that does not always translate into in practice, especially in trade issues. The present system of world trade with high tariffs and subsidies denies many poor countries important development potential. It therefore presents obstacles to poverty reduction. The current world trade round is intended to significantly reduce that discrimination. Here, the EU could certainly do more, especially in terms of lowering tariff barriers on agricultural products. But there are reservations about that in the EU, reservations harboured in all European regions. However, that does not stop me from exerting the appropriate pressure in my role as development minister. Where else do you see a need for action? Migration is a very emotive issue. Politicians active in the field of development must address it with sober arguments. For one thing, migration needs to be viewed from different angles. I believe European development policy has a duty, above all, to help create prospects for people in their countries of origin. This involves important tasks such as peacekeeping and conflict prevention as well as truly sustainable poverty reduction. To what extent do post-colonial relationships – francophone-anglophone competition, for example – stand in the way of better coordinating development efforts in the EU? We need to take a differentiated view of how countries deal with their colonial past. All former colonial powers have a special responsibility – ourselves included. That is why I have committed personally to promoting reconciliation with Namibia and why I asked the Herero, Nama and Damarra for forgiveness for our wrongs. But it is a different matter entirely where EU member state interests are not directly or necessarily rooted in colonialism. As a general rule, all forms of self-interest, regardless of provenance, may run against the grain of harmonisation and coherence efforts within the EU. So we need to remind ourselves constantly that our work will ultimately be judged by our success or failure in achieving the Millennium Development Goals. All self-interest needs to be subordinated to that. Questions by Hans Dembowski. Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul has been Germany’s Federal Minister for Economic Cooperation and Development since the red-green coalition took office in 1998. She will retain that brief under Chancellor Angela Merkel in the grand coalition. http://www.bmz.de