100 likes | 210 Views
Why do we need to engage? . the ?high cost' of fragility vs. low cost of preventive policies and actionTheory vs. Reality: address structural causes of fragility vs. less, ?stop-and-go' and emergency-type of aid to just a few. Primary responsibility lies with the country leadershipPossible suppor
E N D
1. An ECDPM - IEEI Study for the Portuguese Presidency of the EU An Adequate EU Response Strategy
to address situations of fragility
and difficult environments
Fernanda Faria and Patrícia Magalhăes Ferreira
July 9, 2007
2. Why do we need to engage? the ‘high cost’ of fragility vs. low cost of preventive policies and action
Theory vs. Reality: address structural causes of fragility vs. less, ‘stop-and-go’ and emergency-type of aid to just a few.
Primary responsibility lies with the country leadership
Possible supportive role (coherent & coordinated) of international community.
3. Need for adapted responses Several common features of fragility:
Weak governance and institutional capacity
Lack of authority/control of territory/monopoly on the use of force
poor/declining economic performance and uneven development
high corruption levels and lack of transparency
higher risk of political instability and violent conflict (outcome/driver)
lack of a democratic culture
regional linkages and implications
4. Need for adapted responses (cont.) ‘no size fits all’: complex and unique contexts
Fragility is dynamic: contiguum vs phased approaches
Adapting policies to a qualified ‘fragility spectrum’ (weak, failed, collapsed): unable vs. unwilling
The ‘fatal attraction’ of reactive responses
5. WHAT EU ADDED-VALUE ? Largest presence in the world
Wide-range of policies
Economic and political clout to make a difference (if... ‘one voice’)
Potential driver of other donors’ engagement
Ability to engage with wide range of actors
Dialogue: the ownership potential
EU action: Human Security driven
6. Improving EU processes ... Assessment and policy analysis
strategy design
Programming (PCD, joint programming)
Implementation, impact assessment and mainstreaming lessons learned
Dialogue
...across the institutional divide
7. Addressing capacity constraints at all levels At Brussels level (cross institution joint training, assessment, analysis, planning, joint WGs)
EC/MS: information-sharing, fostering common understanding
In the field
8. Security – Development – Governance Overcoming the cultural devide: clarity of mandates and roles, but more joint work
Institutional reform
Power politics vs. Reality (‘let the ground speak’...)
Short-term vs. long-term: understanding the linkages
‘Invest’ more in governance
Empowering delegations
9. Taking Africa as the starting point A partnership with history
Experiences of engagement in situations of fragility and in difficult partnerships: policy mix at use; lessons to be learned
Common concern of EU and AU (on-going cooperative efforts)
EU-Africa Summit and Joint Strategy: moment of opportunity (forge a common understanding and approach, coordinate efforts, coherent and consistent support to home-grown strategies and approaches).
10. THANK YOU! ... and apologies for the length of the paper !
Comments welcomed !
(e.mail addresses indicated in the 2nd page)