Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Helen O’Neill National University of Ireland, Dublin UN and EU Development Goals: Some quantitative and qualitative aspects.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Helen O’Neill National University of Ireland, Dublin UN and EU Development Goals: Some quantitative and qualitative aspects."— Presentation transcript:

1 Helen O’Neill National University of Ireland, Dublin UN and EU Development Goals: Some quantitative and qualitative aspects

2 Quantitative Aspects UN Development Goals ODA: 0.7% of GNP/GNI Accepted in principle by almost all MSs in 1970 MDGs First agreed within the OECD in early 1990s (published in Shaping the 21st Century in 1996) Agreed by all MSs at UN Millennium Summit in 2000

3 EU Development Assistance Targets (Monterrey/Barcelona targets) Each MS to reach ODA/GNI 0.33% by 2006 Combined EU to reach ODA/GNI 0.39% by 2006

4 Current Situation and Prospects regarding ODA Targets ODA/GNI target of 0.7% All donors:0.25% in 2003 EU:0.35% in 2003 Prospects for EU in 2006 ODA set to exceed Monterrey target & reach 0.42% in 2006 (Nielson, October 2004) Several EU MSs have identified date to reach UN 0.7% target Nielson says EU should make new ODA offer in UN in 2005

5 Current Situation and Prospects regarding MDGs IFAD Rural Poverty Report 2001 Goal to halve extreme poverty is ‘doomed to fail’ because of decline in aid to agriculture and rural areas where most poor people live UNDP HDR Report 2003: ‘Unless progress accelerates, MDGs will not be reached by 2015’ The world is on track for some goals but in many countries poverty grew in the 1990s, life expectancy fell due to HIV/AIDS and access to basic health and school enrolments fell due to conflicts.

6 Current Situation and Prospects regarding MDGs World Bank/IMF Global Monitoring Report 2004 ‘Now past the halfway mark for goals set in the early 1990s, prospects for reaching many of the MDGs are ‘bleak’. If present trends continue, only one (halving the number living below $1 a day) will be met. Even that one will be due to successes in China and India. SSA will fall well short’. Among the priorities for donors, is a big increase in ODA. At least an extra $30 billion p.a. could be absorbed by DCs. If their policies and governance were improved, they could absorb an extra $50 billion p.a.

7 Motivations for providing ODA Humanitarian/moral Economic Political/security

8 Links between aid programmes of EC & Member States (MS) EU BUDGET European Development Fund (EDF) (extra-budgetary) Including: Food Aid Emergency aid Aid to Mediterranean Aid to ALA Co-financing with NGOs Lomé and Cotonou Conventions EU MEMBER STATE Including: PCs NGOs Dev. Ed. World Bank UN EC Multilateral ODA Bilateral ODA

9 Some qualitative aspects: the three Cs Necessary precondition for effective aid Cooperation and coordination Complementarity Policy coherence

10 Legal Basis of 3 Cs within EU Treaty of Maastricht 1992, Arts 130u-130y and Amsterdam Treaty 1999, Arts 177-181 EC development cooperation policy, which shall be complementary to MS policies, shall foster; sustainable development, integration of DCs into the global economy, and campaign against poverty The EC shall take account of above objectives in policies likely to affect DCs (coherence) The EC and MS shall co-ordinate their policies

11 Types of Co-ordination Donor-partner (EC/DC, MS/DC) Donor-donor (EC/MS, MS/MS, EC and MS/other donors Donor/international organisations (EC and MS/WB and UN) Among international organisations (WB/IMF, WB/IMF/WTO, among UN agencies)

12 Burdens on Aid Recipients Donor-driven priorities and systems Difficulties with donor procedures Uncoordinated donor practices Excessive demands on time Delays in disbursements Lack of information Demands beyond national capacity OECD(2003), Guidelines on Harmonising Donor Practices

13 Key areas for improvements Simplify procedures Harmonise procedures Align procedures on partners’ systems Share information Untie aid Respect national priorities and strategies Strengthen local capacity Move to budget support and SWAps

14 Has Co-ordination improved? UN level: UN reforms but co-ordination among agencies imperative UNDA framework supposed to bring all UN funds together in DC Donors coordinating their consultations with UN agencies

15 Has Co-ordination improved? WB/IMF/WTO level: Cooperation between WB/IMF/WTO improved since UR Agreements signed: IMF/WTO 1996, WB/WTO 1997 WB and IMF attend WTO General Council on Coherence since 2003 Specific examples of cooperation include: IMF’s Trade Integration Mechanism Sectoral Cotton Initiative Trade Facilitation

16 Has Co-ordination improved? WB/IMF/EU level: WB study of PRSPs reported some positive results OECD level: ‘Rome Declaration’ on Harmonisation 2003 to improve aid effectiveness

17 Has Co-ordination improved? EU level: Some improvements following 1999 EC reforms; Cotonou Agreement; 2000 Joint Statement on development Policy; and simplification of Financial Regulation Nordic+ group EU spoke with one voice in Monterrey and Jo’burg EU provides 55% of global ODA but one voice needed in int’l fora Overall report card: Could do much better!

18 What is Complementarity at EU Level? C2 concerns the relationship between aid programmes and policies of EC and MS Entails sharing of compentences. It is neither the ‘Europeanisation’ of EU aid, nor the ‘re- nationalisation’ of EU aid Related to comparative advantage, value added, leadership, and concentration Also related to role of partner country which should be ‘in the driver’s seat’

19 What is the problem? EU provides over 50% of global aid but is not perceived as an ‘aid leader’ EU speaks with many voices on aid Overlaps and duplication of activities EU’s ‘place in the world’ vs. MS ‘place in the world’

20 Is Complementarity improving in EU? EC actions to be focused on 6 areas: link between trade and development; regional integration and cooperation; support for macroeconomic policies; transport; food security and sustainable rural development; institutional capacity-building and x- cutting issues incl. HRs, gender equality, env’ment Country Strategy Papers can promote complementarity and co-ordination However, information exchange still weak

21 What is Coherence? Ensuring that all policies of international organisations and donors that are likely to affect DCs do not run contrary to what they are trying to achieve with their direct development cooperation policies and development assistance It applies at all levels, UN, IFIs, OECD, EU, and national levels

22 Where did it come from in EU? Article 130u of Maastricht states that EC development cooperation policy shall foster: sustainable socio-econ. dev. of DCs; smooth and gradual integration of DCs into global economy; campaign against poverty in DCs Article 130v states that the EC shall take account of those objectives in the policies it implements that are likely to affect DCs Article 130v (177 of Amsterdam) is the ‘coherence Article’

23 However…. Article 3, as amended by Nice, states that: ‘The Union shall in particular ensure the consistency of its external activities as a whole in the context of its external relations, security, economic and development policies’ It does not say which policy takes precedence over the others

24 …and, more recently, in the 2000 joint Policy Statement…. ‘There must be greater coherence between the various Community policies focused on sustainable development. Efforts must be made to ensure that Community development policy objectives are taken into account in the formulations and implementation of other policies affecting the DCs.’

25 Types of policy incoherence Internal, development: e.g., food aid Internal, other: e.g, CAP, fisheries, environment, consumer protection, immigration External, development: EC & MS/DC, EC/MS, EC & MS/WB & UN External, other: Trade, external relations, CFSP

26 Some attempts to improve C3 in EU... Since early 2000s, using impact assessment systems intended to identify potential economic, social and env’l impacts of all major policy proposals Since 2001, iQSG examines all CSPs wrt ia 3 Cs (iQSG incls. reps of all services involved in ext’l rels with DCs - although not CAP, CFP, consumer protection) March 2004 EC Working Paper:All MS and most AC agree shared C3 analysis Coherence units established

27 …but continued concerns Recent DAC Peer Reviews of MS and EC MS : All urged to improve; some regressing because of national interests EC 2002: weak coherence between CAP, CFP and development policies; ‘complex’ procedures; weak analytical capacity EC 1998: I mpossible to be consistent in all matters at all times...avoid contradictory policies…anticipate consequences

Download ppt "Helen O’Neill National University of Ireland, Dublin UN and EU Development Goals: Some quantitative and qualitative aspects."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google