1 / 26

Ireland as an EU Donor Coherence & coordination: Yes but What about complementarity?

Ireland as an EU Donor Coherence & coordination: Yes but What about complementarity?. James Mackie ECDPM Maastricht, The Netherlands www.ecdpm.org. Objectives. Consider Irish White Paper debate from two angles: What is debate at EU level ? To help situate Irish debate

griffith-smith
Download Presentation

Ireland as an EU Donor Coherence & coordination: Yes but What about complementarity?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Ireland as an EU DonorCoherence & coordination: Yesbut What about complementarity? James Mackie ECDPM Maastricht, The Netherlands www.ecdpm.org

  2. Objectives Consider Irish White Paper debate from two angles: • What is debate at EU level ? • To help situate Irish debate • Role Ireland might play on EU scene • Try to bring in some fresh ideas

  3. Starting point for policy formulation • How does Ireland compare? • Ireland’s strengths as a donor … its handicaps … assets … weaknesses? • In what international fora does Ireland have influence? … EU … the like-minded group … UN … development banks …?

  4. EU Framework The ‘acquis’: • 50 years cooperation experience • The ‘3Cs’ of the Maastricht Treaty • Reform of EC External Assistance • Good progress has been made • Growing consensus on policy • Strong joint effort on ODA levels • Common commitment to UN … “…effective multilateralism”

  5. EU Framework Current debates and issues • Exploring the Policy Mix concept • New additions to EU framework: • Financial Perspectives 2007-2013 • Draft Constitution (?) • An EU all-Africa policy • Review of DPS

  6. Joint EC Development Policy Statement, Nov 2000 Main features: • Primary objective: poverty eradication • 6 focal sectors for EC aid • Cross-cutting issues – limited success Key improvements required: • New thinking: MDGs, DDA, policy mix… • Ownership levels, status …

  7. New Development Policy Statement Broad agreement emerging: • Primary aim: poverty eradication • MDGs as a framework • To cover all developing countries • Differentiated approach LDCs/LICs/MICs • Country ownership • Policy coherence

  8. New Development Policy Statement Open questions: • Statement for EC or EU? • Focal sectors or looser themes? • EC comparative advantage? • Complementarity at EU level • One way or 2-way complementarity • Implications for Member States

  9. Comparative advantages of EC Possibly use 3 categories: • Objective characteristics of EC as a donor → Volume of aid, global reach, grants, range of instruments, EC own experience and competence • Points dependent on political will of MS → EC focal point for coordination/collective action • Relative and subjective characteristics → EU political neutrality, European values

  10. Complementary Policies? National MS Policy Statements ? European Policy Statement Best Role for EU At present Member State policies tend to say: “… Europe is an opportunity … … work to ensure EC aid is more efficient …” Should MS policies not also be adjusted to match EC policy ? Best Role for MS? But…

  11. Ireland & Complementarity?What is Ireland best at? 0.4% ODA/GNI & going up Politically neutral image Target countries for aid Popular interest in aid Positive DAC Peer Review Active NGO movement Public support for growing aid budget Strong on HIV / AIDS Reputation as a good broker in EU Council

  12. How does Ireland compare with other EU Member States? On ODA Levels (2003): > €5b pa : D, F, UK €1 - 5b pa: NL, I, S, E, B, DK €0.5 - €1b pa: FIN, A, IRL < €0.5b pa: P, GR, L + 10 new MS

  13. How does Ireland compare? On ODA / GNI ratios (2003): > 0.7% : DK, NL, S, L 0.35 - 0.69%: IRL, FIN, F, B 0.25 - 0.34%: A, D, P, E, UK < 0.25%: GR, I

  14. How does Ireland compare? On Concentration of Aid: N° of countries targeted in Africa: • >15 F, D, UK • 10-15 B, DK, F, D, NL, E, S • <10 FIN, IRL, L, P …though according to the DAC Peer Review (2003) there are ‘signs of dispersion’ in Irish aid…

  15. How does Ireland compare? Volume of ODA - Ireland is 12th MS in EU On Sectoral Concentration: • Health: 7th • Relief Food Aid: 7th • Food Aid: 8th • Programme Assistance 9th • Water & Sanitation 10th • Education: 11th

  16. Policy statements: Sweden “Shared Responsibility: Sweden’s Policy for Global Development” May, 2003 • 2 underlying perspectives: • A rights perspective • The perspectives of the poor • Strong emphasis on policy coherence • ‘Holistic view … embrace all areas of policy & political decision making…’ • ODA target: 1% of GNI

  17. Sweden (contd.) 8 Central components of the policy • Respect for Human Rights • Democracy & good governance • Gender equality • Sustainable use of natural resources • Economic growth • Social development & social security • Conflict management & human security • Global public goods

  18. Policy statements: Finland Development Policy – Govt. Resolution February 2004 • Coherence: “Development policy refers to coherent activity in all sectors of international cooperation and national policy that have an impact on the status of developing countries …” • ODA/GNI target – 0,44% by 2007 – 0,7% by 2010

  19. Finland (contd.) Main principles: • Values & goals of the MDGs • National commitment & policy coherence • Rights-based approach • Sustainable development • Comprehensive financing for development • Partnerships for development • Respect for integrity & responsibility of partners • Long-term commitment & transparency

  20. On the European Union Sweden ‘…offers great scope for learning … opportunities for influencing policy … quality & effectiveness should be strengthened …’ Finland ‘ … membership has increased Finland’s influence …coherence, effectiveness of aid & improved quality [is] key for presidencies’ But neither mention complementarity …

  21. Complementarity • In 2000 DPS – 6 focal areas fixed for EC • MS reluctant to take up debate • Except on large scale funding projects • Yet all agree harmonisation important • But argue coordination best done in country … not in EU • But also using EU frame seems obvious • Urgency: with new MS … will get worse

  22. In sum Ireland is: • Medium but upcoming donor in EU group • Already strong on ODA/GNI ratio • More targeted than some • By country and by sector • Strong focus on HIV/AIDS • Policies in line with others • Good collaboration with others • Irish EU Presidency went well

  23. Could Ireland provide leadership on complementarity in the EU? Why Ireland ? → respected medium scale donor → targeted programme Larger donors will not take lead How ? → alliance with other similar MS? … Finland … Austria … Poland … ? Someone has to take the first step

  24. Steps to complementarity Dialogue with other MS on: • Distribution of target countries • Choice of target countries • Avoid over-concentration • Focal sectors • Sectors for specialisation • Eg. focus on HIV/AIDS ? • Own programmes … but also: • Offer specialist support to others

  25. Conclusions • Policy orientations: growing consensus • Ireland should not work on its own • Some good models (eg. S, FIN, …) • Ideas on Coherence & how to achieve it & should try to break new ground • Ireland may be a smaller donor but … … does not exclude showing leadership

  26. Thank you for your attention… James Mackie jm@ecdpm.org For more information on ECDPM’s work on ACP-EU relations: www.ecdpm.org

More Related