1

Ireland as an EU Donor

Coherence & coordination: Yesbut

What about complementarity?

James MackieECDPM

Maastricht, The Netherlandswww.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 FrameworkThe ‘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

StatementsEuropean Policy

Statement

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 ?

BestRole for

MS?

BestRole for

EU

But…

11

Ireland & Complementarity?

What is Ireland best at?0.4%

ODA/GNI & going

upPopular interest in

aid

Strong onHIV / AIDS

ActiveNGO

movement

Targetcountries

for aid

Public support forgrowing aid

budget

Politically neutral image

Reputation as a good

broker in EU Council

Positive DAC Peer

Review

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: FinlandDevelopment 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