1. International party assistance – what do we know about the effects? Lars Svåsand University of Bergen

2. International party assistance – what and why? “The organizational effort to support democratic political parties, to promote a peaceful interaction between parties, and to strengthen the democratic political and legal environment for political parties”(Burnell & Gerritts, 2010) Motivations: Parties as necessary institutions in democracies Parties and civil society Problems: International actors involved in domestic processes Contextual challenges Does IPA work?

3. Dimensions of International Party Assistance (IPA) 1. Objectives of IPA, 2. Organizational model 3. Financial scale of intervention 4. Modes of intervention 5. Timing of intervention 6. Geographic focus

4. 1.Objectives of IPA Overall goal: Contribute to democratic consolidation Sub-goals: a)Contribute to a stable party system b)Contribute to viable political parties Operational targets: 1. Securing a particular political outcome 2. Support for particular single parties 3. Supporting all or multiple parties 4. Improving the party system 5. Supporting groups of political actors

5. Party affiliated organizations (Germany, United States, Sweden,Norway 2010-) Party affiliated and inter-party institution (United Kingdom, Denmark, Norway (2002-2010) Inter-party institution (The Netherlands) Multilateral IIDEA Int. Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance UNDP: United Nations Development Program 2. Donors and organizational models

6. 3. Financial scale of intervention DonorYear(s)million EUR/year Sweden: PAO 2011-2014 8.8 Denmark: DIPD2011-2013 3.4 Norway: Pol. parties2013 0.8 UK: WFD2013-2014 2.6 the Netherlands: NIMD201512.4

7. 4. Modes of intervention Direct vs indirect IPA Examples of direct IPA: Cash support for specified projects (strengthening party HQ) Capacity building (training election monitors for party candidates) Exchange visits Creating arenas for inter-party dialogue Examples of indirect IPA: Strengthening parliament as an institution Supporting the electoral management body Increasing media plurality

8. 5. Timing of intervention  Pre-transition  Transition phase  Democratic consolidation

9. Donor institution KASFESFNSNDIIRINIMDWFD Swedish PAO Total Africa 1019 520 9 9 424 100 Latin- America 1220 2 8 9 5- 3 59 Asia 1119101311 2 1 8 75 Eurasia 2 8 9 9 6 1 1 6 42 Middle East 610 16 8 1 4 5 60 Balkan 5 7 7 5 3- 1 533 6. Geographic focus New democracies 2014 with representation for the three largest German foundations, the two US foundations, NIMD, WFD and project countries for Swedish PAO

10. Methodological challenges - Data across time and levels - Understanding causal mechanisms Assessing the effects of IPA

11. No consistent effects of IPA across types of donors Some improvements in party organizations such as, strengthening party headquarters, internal party communication,and transfer of skills to individual participants Some improvements in inter-party relations Increase in women’s recruitment to political offices But: Problems of sustainability Problems of party system institutionalization

12. “The effects of party aid also tend to be quite limited because the main determinants of the make-up and methods of parties in the recipient countries are an array of underlying economic, political, social, and cultural conditions that are largely beyond its ambit” (Carothers, 2006)

13. Factors likely to impact on IPA success IPA factors: Ownership Lack of institutional commitment Short-term or single-event projects Financially small projects Environmental factors: Unfavorable political and institutional environments Unfavorable socio-economic and cultural conditions

14. Concluding reflections A New IPA agenda? Should IPA be maintained? If IPA is maintained – what should be done?

15. “Building effective party structures is an endless task. Healthy organizations can and will adapt to changing circumstances” National Democratic Institute on twitter (accessed 07.10.14)

16. Takk for oppmerksomheten