At the recent Monterrey conference, the EU’s progressive stance on development aid contrasted very favourably with that of the US. Yet criticisms abound of the way that EU aid is allocated and administered, and there are fresh doubts about the value of the Cotonou Agreement that replaces the longstanding Lome aid-and-trade pacts with developing countries in Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific. Has the Commission’s overhauling of aid to create EuropeAid yet yielded any concrete benefits?
Featuring:
Giorgio Bonacci, EC Director General of EuropeAid and Co-operation Office
Jorge Braga de Macedo, President, OECD Development Centre
Jean Bossuyt, Programme Director, European Centre for Development Policy Management(ECDPM)
~~~~~~~~~~~~ Summary of Debates ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On 17 June 2002, development policy experts met at La Maison de l'Europe to debate whether Europe -- the biggest provider of aid to the developing world -- can "be proud of its aid policies". The trialogue, which was organised in association with the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung and in collaboration with Kauri, inspired lively participation by audience members, who questioned whether EU actions are compatible with its rhetoric. Moderator Keith Richardson, Trustee of Friends of Europe, noted at the outset that there is "no issue more important" than the gap between rich and poor, in part because the "world is not safe where inequality persists" on a massive scale. "We do not actually know what to do about the problem," he added, but a growing consensus "doubts the effectiveness of throwing money" at it.
Giorgio Bonacci, Director General of the EuropeAid Co-operation Office in the European Commission, gave a broad yet detailed overview of the EU's development activities around the world. Current reforms are rationalising the EU's activities, which have been shaped by the gradual accretion of various policies and instruments over time, and are thus characterized by a wide array of concepts, instruments and intensities. Development policy was the external policy of the Community until the 1990s, when there was an explosion of external activities that were "not necessarily related to development." The need to work with post-communist countries fostered the shift towards a co-operation paradigm "based on clear concepts of partnership and ownership". The year 2000 brought a clear policy statement linking development to poverty alleviation.
Mr. Bonacci summarised the strengths and weaknesses of EU development policy. On the positive side, he pointed to a "monetary breakthrough" that provided significant resources for development and cooperation in various countries, and to the EU's propensity to work with government, private sector and civil society actors. On the negative side, he identified numerous problems that are being addressed by current reforms. First, the "natural tension" between external and development policies must be resolved. Second, coherent trade-offs must be achieved between development and external policies, on the one hand, and internal policies, on the other. Third, there are "too many instruments and tools to provide assistance." The new budget contains 50-60 budget lines for development, some of which are "fungible". This results in additional administrative and managerial burdens, which exacerbate the shortage of sufficient human resources for implementing the EU's policies.
Mr. Bonacci gave a positive assessment of the Commission's reforms, but cautioned that there are no easy answers, and that the EU must "become more relevant". The goals of the reform are to: improve the quality EU activities, act more quickly, ensure that high international standards are met, ensure greater impact of action on beneficiaries, and render EU activities more visible. The reforms implement a "coherent, country-based strategy" in which activities are harmonised through the EuropeAid Co-operation Office. Key reforms are designed to improve the internal management system and to delegate administrative responsibility to delegations around the world.
Jorge Braga de Macedo, President of the OECD Development Centre, applauded the ambitious new global development paradigm, and urged the EU to pursue a "flexible integration model" within this framework. The Monterrey Consensus, though derided by some as the "Washington Consensus with a sombrero", includes a "major innovation. For the first time, international organisations -- the IMF, WTO, UN, and World Bank -- cooperated with each other." Monterrey thus signals a new process, on top of its commitment to the principle of "helping developing countries to help themselves". Success will require hard work, coherent implementation and continued collaboration. Mr. Braga de Macedo called for a move away from the "the UN model" and towards "selective membership organisations" incorporating the NGO and business communities. The EU, which a Development Aid Committee report labels the "timid giant" of development policy, should use "more imagination" to devise "instruments of convergence and cohesion". Schengen and the Euro show that flexible integration works. Once the EU "gets some policies right" there is a snowball effect. A central problem in the EU is the lack of a coherent European identity in development. Instead, a "numbers game" results from the definitional ambiguity surrounding the plethora of policies and instruments. "Poverty is not the same as inequality," and the EU must "be clear about what it is measuring". Finally, he urged the EU to apply the principle of "peer pressure" outside the "First World", include "major players in setting best practices" and avoid "regression towards the mean".
Jean Bossuyt, Programme Director for the European Centre for Development Policy Management (ECDPM), reacted to the report's statement that the EU is a "ship adrift lacking direction" by noting how difficult it is for an oil tanker to change direction. This problem is acute, since the EU and the public have different objectives in mind. This is a transitional moment when "we must decide what we stand for". Mr. Bossuyt's answer to the question whether the EU can be proud of its aid policies is "yes, but…" The EU contributes much money and is active worldwide, but "what do we really buy for it," and "will it last"? He applauded current efforts to improve the quality of aid, but added that a big implementation gap remains, and expressed concern that expedited "delivery might be at the expense of quality". Finally, he called for "fundamental radical transformation" of the EU and other donors in the next five years, and warned the EU against letting development policy slip behind.
Audience members voiced serious misgivings about the EU's priorities (e.g., the shift from Africa towards the "near abroad" in Central/Eastern Europe) and about the risk that development policy will be "absorbed into" or become "just an instrument of foreign policy". Many are upset about the proposal to scrap the Development Council and integrate it into the Foreign Affairs Council, which would undermine the "autonomy" of EU development policy in a "highly negative" way. In response, Mr. Bonacci stressed the need for "mechanisms and instances" for ongoing dialogue to achieve consensus on policies and implementation tools, while Mr. Braga de Macedo said "more or less Councils is not the issue," and that the Development Council should be abolished "if it does not deliver." The real issues, in his view, are the need for innovation followed by implementation.
Some audience members expressed hefty criticism of the EU's activities, such as the "huge mess" in Bosnia, while others taking a longer view observed that development policy involves "learning from decades of successes and failures" and constant adaptation to changing conditions. Moderator Richardson concluded the trialogue on a modestly positive note, and called upon the EU to take a greater lead in addressing the ultimate causes of poverty and hunger. It is "naïve to think" that international gatherings alone can "contribute a great deal" to solving the problem. Nor can focusing on trade and investment alone solve it, since they foster inequality within developing countries themselves by spreading the benefits of growth unevenly. The contemporary emphasis on good governance -- i.e., helping developing countries to help themselves -- sounds good but is difficult to implement on the ground. The debate showed clearly that the issues facing the EU are not just ones of technique, but rather, fundamental questions about which policies to pursue. The EU is at a dangerous juncture of trying to do more with less: just when "taxpayers are close to going on strike, the EU has ever greater ambitions." In closing, Mr. Richardson urged the business community to "do more" and called for "political pressure within the EU" to encourage ministers to shun short-term thinking. Long-term development policy is needed to address the root causes of the so-called "immigration problem", which has its origins in misery.
Written by Helen Hartnell