EU development policy

Americans were once appalled to hear and see countries in Africa or Asia or Latin America and elsewhere around the globe descent into political chaos because of the tribal, dysfunctional political system and identity politics. Today the same phenomena that once bewildered them are slowly but steadily itching into the social and cultural fabric that once made America a great nation. Ever since the election of Donald J. Trump in November 2016, the political Left or radical Left to be precise, i.e., the Social Justice Warriors, the Moral Crusaders of Hollywood, the overtly Bias Media Establishment and the Disgruntled Never Trumpers, though on the fences as of late, have unleashed an ideological and cultural war, that if left unchecked, will bring down the American Republic. The Justice Kavanaugh’s hearings have shown that the majority of Democrats and their radical supporters have not come to grips with the loss of the elections in November 2016. The resistance to accept the reality coupled with the personal hatred against President Trump have gone from sheer political disagreements and policy outcomes to pure betrayal of the political principles that have kept America glued by its institutions of law such as the Supreme Court of Justice and the United States Congress. That said, no matter what the political ideologies or inclinations of both parties may be, the personal hatred towards the President and the use of the identity politics as the means to divide and categorize Americans are stoking division and tearing the country apart.

La cooperación al desarrollo de la Unión Europea (UE) atraviesa por un importante proceso de reforma ante el ciclo presupuestario y de programación 2021-2027. Esa reforma pretende dotar a la UE de los recursos y herramientas necesarios para conciliar sus valores e intereses ante un escenario más complejo, disputado e interconectado y, al tiempo, contribuir a una cooperación eficaz para alcanzar los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible (ODS) de la Agenda 2030. Este documento de trabajo examina ese proceso de reforma a partir de las características diferenciadas de los países relativamente más avanzados de América Latina, más allá de clasificaciones de renta, y, en particular, su situación de “desarrollo en transición”. Se parte de una revisión crítica del enfoque y marco de actuación vigentes en el período 2014-2020, y se examinan otros hitos como la adopción del nuevo Consenso Europeo de Desarrollo (CED) en 2017 y la propuesta de Marco Financiero Plurianual 2021-2027, que incluye un n...

El objetivo general de las Jornadas de Diálogo UE-Centroamérica es proporcionar una plataforma para renovar el diálogo político y técnico con vistas a reforzar y dar visibilidad a la asociación birregional, a la vez que se debaten y proponen formas de abordar conjuntamente los retos de desarrollo pendientes en el marco de la recuperación pos pandémica sostenible. Los siguientes aspectos serán fundamentales en estas Jornadas:
- Hacer hincapié en la resiliencia económica, social e institucional.
- Perseguir la construcción institucional, la transferencia de conocimientos y la planificación.
- Fortalecer la asociación, cooperación y la financiación.
Las Jornadas de Diálogo UE-Centroamérica se celebrarán el 1 y 2 de junio en el Palacio Bolívar en Ciudad de Panamá.

This article provides a chronology of the evolution of European Union development policy from its origins in the Treaty of Rome through to present day, linking this with key theoretical debates in international development, from the state-led models of development’s ‘Golden Age,’ to the market-led Neoliberal counter-revolution in development economics and the rise of Human Development. It demonstrates that, perhaps uniquely to the development arena, EU policy has been subject to significant influence exerted by such exogenous theoretical constructs, which have played a key role in shaping and colouring the framework of the European Union’s relations with developing countries. In elucidating these linkages, and examining key dynamics relating, for example, to the instances of Structural Adjustment and the place of gender in development, the article makes the case that, rather than conceiving EU development policy in entirely endogenous terms, this external theoretical context must be considered when exploring the Union’s relations with the developing world.

The European Union (EU) has always been a major actor in development policy. Paradoxically, however, literature on development policy within the discipline of EU studies is relatively limited in terms of quantity and relatively light in terms of theorizing. Perhaps this is because its complexities – as will be shown in this chapter – make it particularly challenging to study EU development policy. Against this background, we argue in this chapter that an abductive research strategy is well-suited to study EU development policy. Abduction basically involves the continuous interaction between theory and empirics. Hence the objective of this chapter is twofold: (1) arguing why abduction is useful and even necessary for studying EU development policy, and (2) concretely illustrating how this can be done in practice.

It has become a commonplace comment that the 20th century was about oil, while the 21st will be about water. As a complex and increasingly scarce resource, transboundary waters are both source of tensions and chance for enhanced cooperation among shareholding actors within a river basin. Decreasing water availability, compounded by the rising demands in areas which lack international cooperation on shared waters, is likely to increase tensions further.
Consequently, Water Diplomacy is on the rise to find measures to foster cooperation on, and joint management of common waters. Third-party actors such as the UN, NGOs and national organisations play a crucial role in enhancing technical abilities of local actors, and in promoting transboundary cooperation and coordination by supporting the establishment of joint international platforms: River Basin Organisations(RBOs).
This paper analyses the role of the European Union (EU) as a new emerging actor in the field of international Water Diplomacy. Since the Council declaration in July 2013, it has developed concrete strategies to foster transboundary water management in its priority areas: The Nile Basin and Central Asia, but also in the Lower Mekong region. Furthermore, the EU is supporting water related programs in the Sahel region and the Middle East. The EU strategy builds on the engagement and expertise of its member states, which the EU is closely cooperating with. Strategies and actions in EU Water Diplomacy are guided by UN-principles and its own experiences from European RBOs. Thus, the EU adopts the approach of the international community, calling for basin-wide organisation and collaboration to accompany international cooperation. The responsibility for establishing a functional framework among the shareholding parties of common waters rests in the hands of the riparian states, while third-party actors such as the EU aims to engage and enable local actors to overcome tensions over shared waters and collaborate.

The European Centre for Development Policy Management (ECDPM) aims to link policy and practice in international cooperation. This book seeks to explore the dilemmas facing the European Union as it aims to reconcile its values and interests in a changing world. These challenges will be relevant for the next leadership of the EU institutions and throughout the EU’s budgetary period of 2014-2020.

The increasing linkages between international relations and development policy has created a new agenda for international cooperation. For the European Union and its member-states to remain relevant and influential in a world driven by globalisation, the rise of middle-income countries and one of the longest recessions in recent history, it must respond to these changes and address the challenges upfront.

This book explores these issues to give readers an overview of current developments and future challenges. ECDPM strives to go beyond analysis and provide realistic options to bridge the policy to practice divide and not shy away from the political fundamentals that have to be addressed.

The book covers issues such as the implementation of the EU’s new development policy the Agenda for Change, EU joint programming, budget support in fragile states, EU support to transition, and engagement with middle income countries. In addition the book looks at the Mali crisis and EU-Africa relations, and the future of ACP-EU relations as well as a specific section on recent developments in Policy Coherence for Development.

The developments and dilemmas presented in this book paint a picture of considerable evolution in the EU’s international cooperation agenda and policy. Despite adaptation and change, persistent questions are still raised of whether the EU is moving fast enough with regards to implementation. This book explores particularly the challenge of bridging the policy to practice divide – a key consideration for a more effective European response to global challenges in the future.

Instability and conflict in Africa create a range of security problems for Europe. Rapidly increasing migration via the Mediterranean Sea, extremism and terrorism, as well as cross-border crime, all have implications for security in Europe, but are spill-over effects of instability outside Europe. The European Union has a considerable interest in a stable Africa, and also seems willing to assume a special responsibility for the continent.

This Clingendael report focuses on the European Union’s role as a security actor in Africa. It considers the use of all the policy instruments at the EU’s disposal. The authors concentrate mainly on the question how the integrated approach is evolving, and what consequences this has for the Common Security and Defence Policy.

Este informe presenta los resultados del proyecto “Study on Relations between the European Union and Latin America: New perspectives” (Contrato RELEX-I-2-2004- LATIN AMERICA), realizado por el Instituto Complutense de Estudios Internacionales (ICEI), bajo la dirección y coordinación de Christian Freres y José Antonio Sanahuja. El informe principal fue elaborado a partir de cinco estudios de países y subregiones de América Latina, nueve estudios referidos a Estados miembros de la Unión Europea, y un estudio sobre la perspectiva de las instituciones de la UE en Bruselas. Además, se elaboraron cinco estudios sobre temas de relevancia transversal. Para la elaboración de dichos estudios se contó con la colaboración de un amplio grupo de especialistas latinoamericanos y europeos (en el anexo se ha incluido la relación completa de dichos estudios, con sus respectivos autores/as). En el periodo de realización del Estudio, entre enero y julio de 2005,se realizaron más de 250 entrevistas a personas implicadas en las relaciones euro-latinoamericanas en las dos regiones y en Estados Unidos.

This study evaluates the performance of the EU external financing instruments (EFIs) in the light of the results of the European Commission’s mid-term review and discussions on their post-2020 architecture. This evaluation finds that the existing architecture and geographic/thematic coverage of the EFIs has, overall, been relevant to the EU policy objectives set in 2014. However, they were less responsive to recipients’ needs, and implementation weaknesses persist. At the strategic level, weaknesses in EFIs that need attention in the post-2020 architecture include: balancing short-term expediency with long-term needs; ensuring EU security needs and interests do not marginalise EU values; and safeguarding the development-oriented agenda of EFIs. At an operational level, the EFIs need to overcome the ‘silo’ approach to implementation, and develop solid monitoring and evaluation systems that assess the EFIs’ impact in recipient countries. This study provides options for tackling these limitations, including the need to integrate simplification, ensure sustainability of EU action, strengthen flexibility while remaining consistent and committed to EU fundamental values, create multi-actor partnerships, link EU action to EU strategies, and strengthen EU strategic communication. The annexed expert paper found that EU support to civil society in Turkey, Ukraine and Egypt has improved in recent years, but it still struggles to meet new challenges. Neither radical simplification of the EFIs nor a dedicated civil society instrument would necessarily improve civil society support, and may involve serious drawbacks. The EU’s most pressing challenges are to link civil society more effectively to reform-oriented aid; find ways to support new civic actors; temper the current assault on civil society organisations; and to find more nuanced ways to link civil society to strategic goals.

English abstract (German version below):
EU-ACP relations and especially the relations to the Southern African Development Community stand at the center of this book. The change of this postcolonial relationship is analyzed as a change of governance rationales and practices, which culminates in the advent of characteristic liberal and postliberal governmentalities. This implies replacing the protectionist EU-ACP regime by a mode of liberal governance shaped by equal partners and harmonizing, self-disciplining policies. An important aspect for this process is the manifestation of "normative power", which turns out to act as a highly contested political instrument within a postcolonial setting. The book informs the debate on "Normative Power Europe" from the perspective of governmentality studies and outlines a research agenda for Critical Governance Studies in the fields of International Relations respectively EU Studies.
__________________________________________________________________

Die Studie untersucht den Wandel der EU-AKP-Kooperation und analysiert ihn als Wandel der Regierungsweisen, in dessen Folge sich charakteristische liberale und postliberale Gouvernementalitäten herausbilden. Dies meint den Übergang von einem nachkolonialen protektionistischen Regierungsmodell hin zu einer Governance-Variante, die von der Eigenverantwortlichkeit und Gleichheit der Akteure ausgeht und mit harmonisierenden und (selbst)disziplinierenden Politiken arbeitet. Ein wesentliches Moment für diesen Prozess ist die Ausübung "normativer Macht", die sich gerade in einem postkolonialen Setting als problematisch erweist und mit der Kontestation liberaler Normen verknüpft ist. Untersucht wird dies am Beispiel der Beziehungen zur Southern African Development Community. Die Studie akzentuiert dabei die Debatte um "Normative Power Europe" aus gouvernementalitätstheoretischer Sicht und entwickelt Perspektiven für Kritische Governanceforschung in den Internationalen Beziehungen und in der EU-Forschung.

El debate sobre las “perspectivas financieras” —el presupuesto indicativo plurianual de la UE— para el periodo 2014-2020 también comporta una reflexión sobre las prioridades de su política de cooperación al desarrollo. Reflexión que también reclama la redefinición y reequilibrio de las relaciones entre una América Latina en ascenso y una UE en crisis, en el contexto de un sistema internacional caracterizado por rápidos e intensos desplazamientos del poder y la riqueza y de cambios en las agendas internacionales de desarrollo. 
Este memorando analiza las propuestas de cambio de la política de desarrollo de la UE y sus implicaciones para América latina, en el contexto más amplio de las transformaciones del sistema internacional y de las agendas de desarrollo de esta última región. Como se mostrará, América Latina es más diversa y heterogénea y enfrenta desafíos de desarrollo más complejos y diferenciados, que no responden bien a la agenda definida por los Objetivos de Desarrollo del Milenio (ODM). A partir de ese análisis se plantearán, finalmente, algunas cuestiones relevantes para el debate sobre las propuestas de la cooperación al desarrollo de la UE para América Latina.

Este cuaderno examina los desafíos que enfrenta la política de desarrollo de la UE en América Latina, una región de renta intermedia en la que los flujos de ayuda pierden relevancia en el conjunto de la financiación externa. Es necesaria una estrategia específica que responda a las exigencias de la agenda internacional de eficacia de la ayuda, a las políticas de desarrollo del “regionalismo postliberal”, y a la creciente relevancia de la cooperación sur-sur. En ese contexto, se analizan los cambios experimentados por la política de desarrollo de la UE, su estrategia hacia América Latina, y los instrumentos y programas regionales. Se plantean también diversas propuestas para asegurar la relevancia y eficacia de dicha política.

Resumen: El ascenso de los países emergentes y la cooperación Sur-Sur plantea un escenario de adversidad para la UE en el ámbito de la cooperación al desarrollo. Afecta a su posición de liderazgo, influencia, legitimidad y normatividad. Este artículo examina este desafío y la respuesta de la UE a través de
las importantes reformas adoptadas a partir de 2011 y, en particular, del «Programa para el cambio» de la política de desarrollo y los nuevos instrumentos que vinculan comercio y
desarrollo. El artículo concluye que la UE se ha situado entre un difícil acomodamiento y el atrincheramiento en un paradigma de ayuda Norte-Sur tradicional, que impide buscar fórmulas de cooperación triangular y nuevas asociaciones para el desarrollo de carácter horizontal con los países de renta media.

Abstract: The rise of the emerging countries and South-South cooperation has created a scenario of adversity for the EU in the field of development cooperation. It affects its leadership position, its influence, legitimacy and normatively. This article examines this challenge and the EU’s response to it through the significant
reforms adopted from 2011 onwards, particularly, the «Agenda for Change» of the development policy and the new instruments
that link trade and development. The article concludes that the EU has found itself stuck between a difficult adjustment and entrenchment in a traditional North-South aid paradigm
that impedes the search for triangular cooperation formulas and new associations for development of a horizontal nature with
middle-income countries.

The need to enhance the coherence of EU security and development policies is stressed in numerous EU policy declarations.This article analyses this commitment against the background of the legal architecture of EU foreign policy.This demonstrates that the political simplicity with which this commitment is often put forward tends to hide the complexity of this undertaking in an external action system that submits the policy fields of development cooperation and the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) to different rules and procedures.While the EU institutions have increasingly targeted development and security policies at the mutual challenges of insecurity and poverty, the lack of a shared and comprehensive strategy leads to significant improvisation. On the one hand, the ad hoc replies to this commitment have resulted in the development of a particularly fragmented EU toolbox to deal with these challenges. On the other hand, this raises important questions regarding the choice of appropriate legal bases for the
various policy initiatives that span the security-development nexus. It is argued that the Lisbon Treaty, by interlinking the CFSP and development cooperation both constitutionally and
institutionally, creates significant opportunities that, combined with the necessary political will, allow the EU to move beyond its ad hoc approach.

Despite its generally critical nature, gender has been largely absent from the mainstream literature on development policy. As the European Union (EU) has long claimed gender equality to be part of its core values and identity in the world, a gender perspective is indispensable to understand the EU’s role as global actor. Scholarship has shown a rhetorical emphasis on gender, but when push comes to shove, the results are uneven: gender is not systematically mainstreamed across the EU’s development policy and often instrumentalised to support economic goals. It has shown how seemingly gender- neutral policy is gendered and gendering, both reflecting as well as producing (unequal) gender relations. This scholarship has also investigated gender imbalances and male work cultures in EU development policy- making, demonstrating that ‘who decides what matters’ is a highly gendered matter, with real life consequences for men and women across the world. This chapter starts with an overview of EU development policy, introducing its history, main themes, and policy actors as well as some key directions in scholarship. Next, I trace the emergence of gender from the fi rst attempts to integrate women’s issues in European development until present day. Then I delve into the respective scholarship and sketch the main routes it has taken so far. Following, I discuss some limitations within this scholarship, including a focus on decision- making and ‘policy on paper’ rather than on impact on the ground, as well as a compartmentalised and at times rather Eurocentric approach focussed mainly on gender alone and on the European Commission as the key policy actor. Finally, I discuss how the EU is currently at a crossroad in a volatile global context and propose directions for future research.

This report presents the results of the project, “Study on Relations between the European Union and Latin America: New perspectives” (RELEX-U-2-2004-LATIN AMERICA Contract), carried out by the Instituto Complutense de Estudios Internacionales (ICEI), under the direction and coordination of Christian Freres and José Antonio Sanahuja. The main report was drawn up on the basis of five studies conducted in countries and sub-regions in Latin America, nine studies on member States of the European Union, and one study on the perspective of EU institutions in Brussels. Five other studies on subjects that are of cross-cutting relevance were also written. For the preparation of these studies, a wide- ranging team of Latin American and European experts were involved (a complete list of these studies and their respective authors has been included in the Appendices.) Between January and July 2005 some 250 interviews were conducted with persons involved in Euro–Latin American relations in the two regions and in the United States

In the European Commission proposal for the next long-term budget 2021-2027 of the European Union (EU), the proposed Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) Regulation introduces an innovative unified financial architecture to crowd in private sector investment outside the EU, based on three pillars: the European Fund for Sustainable Development-plus (EFSD+), a unified budgetary guarantee-the External Action Guarantee (EAG), and financial assistance. The EFSD+ is conceived as a flexible mechanism, but some of its features remain too sketchy. These features could be not only much better specified but also better connected to a range of important issues, such as climate objectives, gender equality and women's empowerment principles, youth focus, linkages to business environment, geographical balance, targeting of fragile and poorer countries, specification of investment windows, provision of grievance mechanisms, and addressing tax governance issues. The governance of the EFSD+ could also be much more elaborated. The current proposal delegates great power to the European Commission on shaping these questions during the implementation of the EFSD+. Careful attention should also be given to systemic issues related to the EU architecture for investment outside the EU. This includes the place and role of the European Investment Bank (EIB) as the EU bank, unspecified in the proposed regulation. It also relates to the coherence and synergy of the EFSD+ proposal with broader reform ambitions for the EU architecture for external investment. Building on an open and flexible system, the European Commission proposal for the EFSD+ and EAG is an important step in the right direction towards a more effective EU financial architecture. It benefits from the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) and NDICI momentum, an opportunity which should not be missed. The EU has an opportunity to show it can innovate in a responsive manner to changing times and increasing challenges. This requires collective efforts, within the EU, but also in partnership with multilateral institutions and initiatives, and most of all partner developing countries. Ensuring that major concerns are addressed in the NDICI Regulation should thus be a priority if the EU is to use in a timely fashion the opportunity of leveraging its next budget for more effective sustainable development finance.

https://ecdpm.org/dp243

La Unión Europea está adaptando su política exterior y de cooperación al desarrollo a un escenario internacional más complejo, interconectado y disputado, de cambio de poder y de imperativos de desarrollo sostenible como el cambio climático. Este artículo examina ese proceso a través de tres documentos clave de política en restas materias que se han negociado en el periodo 2015-2019: la Estrategia Global de Seguridad de la UE de 2016, del Consenso Europeo de Desarrollo de 2018, y el capítulo de acciones exteriores del Marco Financiero Plurianual propuesto por la Comisión Juncker en 2019. De su enfoque y contenido se derivan importantes dilemas normativos y de política, entre una acción exterior que pretende conciliar las metas de la Agenda 2030 de Desarrollo Sostenible, y la visión geopolítica y securitaria que también está presente en esos documentos.

The European Union (EU) has been struggling to find a shared course on African migration since the entry into force of the Schengen Agreement (1995). It has done so through two interrelated processes of negotiation. To begin, parties have negotiated internal and external migration policies. In addition, they have negotiated narrative frames about migration and whether migration should be interpreted rather as an opportunity or as a threat. In times in which narrative frames increasingly shape policy negotiations, it becomes very important to analyse how policymakers negotiate narrative frames on migration and how these shape policy responses. However, such an analysis is still missing. This article investigates how the negotiation of EU policies on African migration from 1999 until 2019 has been influenced by a simultaneous process of negotiation of narrative frames on migration. It does so based on policy analysis and interviews with European and African policymakers. It finds two major trends in EU negotiation processes: migration-security narratives have strengthened national-oriented approaches, and migration-development narratives have strengthened transnational-oriented approaches. The two approaches have always been interlinked. However, in the last years, security-oriented national approaches have increasingly influenced development-oriented transnational approaches.

http://www.kluwerlawonline.com/abstract.php?area=Journals&id=EERR2019028

La crise sanitaire a porté un coup dur au modèle de la coopération internationale au développement par projets, la modalité la plus répandue. Finies (ou presque, ou en tout cas mutées à des modalités de télétravail) les myriades de gestionnaires de projets et d’experts internationaux et nationaux pour des missions de formulation, d’assistance technique, d’évaluation. Plus possibles les formations, les séminaires, les consultations avec la société civile, les dialogues régionaux, les voyages d’étude. Le business model d’une grande partie de la coopération semble compromis et une réorientation s’impose. En même temps, une opportunité pour repenser l’ensemble du système d’aide au développement émerge. Mais, depuis les années 1960, la coopération par des projets a la peau dure, malgré toutes les critiques sur son efficacité et son efficience (et surtout sur son impact sur le développement). Et il n’est pas à exclure qu’elle revienne avec force une fois la pandémie maitrisée…mais probablement à une échelle réduite.

The international trade scene is in turmoil: trade conflicts and tensions are generating uncertainty for businesses and undermining the rules-based global trading system. Trade and trade policy have long been central elements of EU external policy. Trade policy is used to pursue multiple objectives, including economic interests as well as political, developmental, environmental and values-based objectives. EU trade agreements not only aim at reducing foreign market access barriers but condition the terms of preferential access to the European single market on non-trade regulation in partner countries in areas such as social and labour standards. Is this an effective strategy? Does it come at the cost of attaining economic objectives? Has the emphasis on bilateral and preferential trade arrangements come at the expense of multilateral cooperation? This collection of essays brings together different perspectives on some of these questions. The diversity of approaches and views illustrate the complexity of the EU trade-related policy agenda and suggest that trade-offs might not always be properly assessed, and the balance struck could be improved.

CEPR Press, VoxEU.com ISBN: 978-1-912179-24-4

This eBook has been supported by funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 770680 (RESPECT: Revitalizing Europe’s Soft Power and External Cooperation and Trade).

https://voxeu.org/content/perspectives-soft-power-eu-trade-policy

This document examines EU development cooperation with Latin America, considering, first, the changes in the international development agenda that are relevant to the region, including the debate about the relevance and methods of cooperation with middle-income countries (MICs), the implementation of the Paris Declaration about the effectiveness of aid and South- South development cooperation in Latin America, in the context of the redefinition of regionalism and integration in this region. Second, it analyses EU cooperation with Latin America, considering especially its regional dimension, the strategies adopted, and the challenge represented by adapting cooperation to the creation of a ‘network’ of association agreements on which it is intended to base bi-regional relations. Special attention is paid to cooperation in science and technology, an increasingly important area of cooperation with the region, particularly with upper MICs.

The rise of emerging countries and their South-South cooperation has created a scenario of adversity for the EU that defies its leadership, influence, legitimacy and normativity in the field of development cooperation. This paper examines this challenge and specifically how the EU has reacted to it, analysing the significant reforms adopted from 2011 onwards, such as the so-called Agenda for Change, the new financial instruments, and the reform of the GSP. The paper discuss how the EU has found itself placed between, by one hand, a difficult accommodation to the changing development scenario driven by emerging powers, that hinders its legitimacy and leadership; and by the other hand, his entrenchment in a traditional North-South aid paradigm that obstructs the search for new and more balanced development partnerships with middle-income countries, including so-called triangular cooperation.

Este estudio se plantea como objetivo general el proporcionar a la Comisión una evaluación de los resultados y hallazgos de su estrategia regional teniendo en cuenta las experiencias pasadas (1996-2001), y las experiencias en curso (2002-2006) de la política de cooperación con América Latina (AL). Este objetivo ha implicado realizar un análisis de dos periodos históricos donde se ha tomado como referencia un ex – ante y un ex – post a la preparación del documento de programación denominado Regional Strategy Paper (RSP). Esta evaluación proporciona a los responsables políticos y a los responsables de la CE reflexiones para contribuir a la preparación de la futura estrategia regional en América Latina.

La actuación de la CE en AL es apropriada y valorada positivamente por los latinoamericanos. Sin embargo, la estrategia aplicada no es la más pertinente, puesto que se sustenta en un conjunto de acciones fragmentadas, dispersas e inconexas entre los tres grandes niveles de actuación: bilateral, subregional y regional y entre las grandes políticas de la CE: política agrícola y de desarrollo por ejemplo.

La estrategia de cooperación regional presentada a partir del documento RSP 2002-2006 es un primer intento de desarrollar acciones programadas a nivel regional en AL, pero su composición y alcance no son suficientes para transmitir los principios políticos, económicos y sociales que tiene la CE en la región. Su ámbito de actuación es muy restringido y se limita, en un 80%, a presentar y justificar las acciones de los programas horizontales y asume marginalmente el cumplimiento de los grandes objetivos de los programas de cooperación a nivel regional.

Uno de los grandes problemas que tienen los programas horizontales es la insuficiencia de recursos financieros y humanos para cumplir con los objetivos propuestos. Los recursos asignados no son los adecuados para satisfacer la demanda ni para cumplir con los objetivos de integración y de cohesión social. Además, sus logros y beneficios se concentran en determinados países y no llegan al conjunto de la región.

El pesado modelo burocrático en el que se mueven estos programas y la escasez de recursos administrativos son elementos añadidos que han condicionado una buena gestión de los programas horizontales.

En la ejecución y gestión de los programas horizontales predomina una práctica individual sobre una práctica más regional o centralizada de todas las acciones que se derivan de estas iniciativas. La visión regional y agregada de los programas no está debidamente asimilada, porque se anteponen los intereses individuales, de programa y de país sobre los intereses de la construcción de la integración regional.

Las acciones de la CE han contribuido a la vinculación y acercamiento entre las dos regiones y los impactos generados son significativos pero insuficientes. El flujo de actividades comerciales y el contacto político se ha incrementado. El grado de relación institucional ha permitido importantes avances en la integración, sobre todo subregional, pero a pesar del diálogo, la asociación estratégica no ha progresado. Una limitación es que el enfoque integracionista de la CE en el campo económico no es percibido claramente en la región. En AL no conocen o consideran que la UE no tiene una estrategia clara con la cual se podrían comparar los beneficios y las desventajas de integración ni en el corto ni en el largo plazo. La estrategia de “integración económica regional” de la CE es todavía considerada como muy ambigua y abstracta

Los enunciados de los objetivos y prioridades de la cooperación en AL sitúan a la cohesión social y a la lucha contra la pobreza como uno de los temas claves en los que la CE puede contribuir significativamente, sin embargo, los impactos de las acciones de la CE en la lucha contra la pobreza es incierto, sobre todo a nivel regional. Similarmente, las acciones dirigidas para actuar en el ámbito de la cohesión social son todavía muy genéricas y están pendientes de una definición y conceptualización adecuada a la realidad de cada país y de la región.

This paper aims to assess the framing of adaptation in the development discourse of the European Union (EU). Theoretically, three frames (security, growth and justice/equity) are constructed. Overall, we find clear traces of the EU’s normative aspirations as a global actor. Instead of framing climate change as a national or global security threat, human security implications of climate change are emphasised, representing it as a threat to individual livelihoods. Justice/equity considerations are also voiced, acknowledging the disproportionate impact of climate change on developing countries. In terms of agency, we find mostly a global, top-down framing of adaptation in developing countries.

The ‘new’ EU Delegations (EUDs) can be the best of both worlds – a long-term, ‘whole-of-EU’ approach to complement and work with the EU Member States’ diplomatic assets – or the worst – a disjointed technocratic approach increasingly influenced by short-term Member States’ political agendas. The image of the EU is made in-country, and at the elite level is largely influenced by the extent to which the EUD manages to earn credibility vis-à-vis the country authorities and civil society. There is pressure for the EUDs to show results: the 2014-2020 period will be a testing phase for a number of experiments in EU’s external action abroad. Yet, the ultimate success of the EUDs depends on leadership and the willingness of all actors to develop effective internal and external relationships.

Le présent document examine la coopération au développement de l’UE à l’égard de l’Amérique latine en s’attachant dans un premier temps aux changements importants pour la région dans l’agenda international du développement: le débat sur la nécessité et les modalités d’une coopération avec les pays à revenu intermédiaire, l’application de la déclaration de Paris sur l’efficacité de l’aide et le développement de la coopération «sud-sud» en Amérique latine, dans le contexte de la redéfinition du régionalisme et l’intégration dans cette région. Le document se concentre, dans un deuxième temps, sur la coopération de l’UE en Amérique latine, en s’attachant tout particulièrement à sa dimension régionale, aux stratégies qui ont été adoptées, et au défi que représente l’adaptation de la coopération au réseau existant de relations birégionales.
Le document se penche particulièrement sur la coopération en science et technologie, un aspect de plus en plus important pour la coopération avec l’ensemble de la région, et en particulier avec les pays à revenu intermédiaire supérieur.

How was ‘international trade’ between former European empires and their former colonies in Africa governed after decolonisation? In the 1960s, the vast majority of African countries became independent, and so a new arrangement was necessary to govern their economic relations with Europe. The Yaoundé Conventions were then concluded between the European Community (EC) and the bloc of postcolonial African countries. Specialised literature provides comprehensive accounts of the Yaoundé Conventions. However, little is known about the role of law and lawyers in their making and governance. Part of this story concerns political and intellectual struggles in the legal profession about which projects, ideas, and norms would be applicable. Another part concerns the work of lawyers to organise those policies, theories and visions into an emerging conception and to employ it to influence the production and management of the Yaoundé Conventions. This article combines historical and socio-legal a...

The European Union welcomed the demonstrators’ demands wholeheartedly during the Arab Spring, trying to maximize the assistance that it could offer to support genuine democratic transition, at least at a rhetorical level. This article reflects on the changes in the neighborhood policy by focusing on public perceptions measured in Europe and in countries in close proximity to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. European views on solidarity are compared to local public opinion on EU involvement in the region. Recipient views in Jordan, Egypt, Palestine, and Israel are explored by analyzing relevant results of the Arab Barometer and Neighborhood Barometer surveys. Findings indicate that the Middle Eastern public opinion tends to appreciate the EU’s gestures with the exception of Egypt, but conditionality is more in line with European public opinion.

Hans Merket looks into the EU institutions’ policy rhetoric on human security and evaluates the legal complexity of its inherent coherence rationale. He examines recent policy patterns and judicial tendencies to find out challenges and the potential of the EU to exceed the insulation of the CFSP in order to enhance a comprehensive security approach. He notes the agreement amongst the relevant EU institutions concerning the interlinking nature between development, security and human rights policies, but points to the fragile credibility that the current modalities of such interlinkages in actual policies draw.

Od beneficjenta do dawcy pomocy nowe kraje członkowskie Unii Europejskiej w polityce współpracy na rzecz rozwoju [w:] E. Małuszyńska, I. Musiałkowska, G. Mazur (red.) "Unia Europejska 10 lat po największym rozszerzeniu. Perspektywa nowych państw członkowskich", Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Poznaniu, Poznań 2015.

Akcesja państw z Europy Środkowej i Wschodniej do Unii Europejskiej w 2004 i 2007 r. była momentem, w którym przed tymi krajami otworzyły się nowe możliwości w zakresie dalszego rozwoju. Pełne członkostwo we Wspólnocie oznaczało dla tych krajów dostęp do wsparcia zachodzących w tych krajach procesów modernizacji gospodarczej i społecznej. Członkostwo to wiązało się jednocześnie z przyjęciem szeregu nowych zobowiązań. Jednym z takich obszarów, w których państwa UE-10 przyjęły na siebie nowe zobowiązania, było wsparcie na rzecz rozwoju najuboższych krajów na świecie. Włączenie do Unii Europejskiej, będącej największym w skali świata dostarczycielem pomocy rozwojowej, oznaczało dla krajów UE-10 konieczność stworzenia odpowiedniego systemu prawno-instytucjonalnego, jak również nałożyło szereg zobowiązań w zakresie zwiększenia środków finansowych przekazywanych na te cele zarówno poprzez instrumenty unijne (budżet UE, Europejski Fundusz Rozwoju – EFR), jak i w wymiarze dwustronnym. Zdobycie statusu pełnoprawnego członka UE oznaczało jednocześnie dla państw UE-10 konieczność przyjęcia celów i zasad zdefiniowanych w ramach wspólnotowej polityki współpracy rozwojowej (development policy). Celem artykułu jest przedstawienie udziału państw UE-10 w unijnej polityce na rzecz wspierania rozwoju. Artykuł składa się z czterech części. Na wstępie opisano ogólne założenia polityki rozwojowej UE. Następnie przedstawiono miejsce Unii oraz jej państw członkowskich w globalnym systemie pomocy rozwojowej. W części trzeciej scharakteryzowano najważniejsze wyzwania, z jakimi musiały się zmierzyć państwa UE-10 w pierwszej dekadzie swojego członkostwa w odniesieniu do kształtowania i zarządzania w tym obszarze. Ostatnia część jest poświęcona analizie podstawowych danych dotyczących pomocy rozwojowej przekazywanej przez kraje UE, z uwzględnieniem kontekstu polityki rozwojowej całej Unii Europejskiej.

Limited fiscal space in many developing countries demands collective efforts and EU leadership to help improve their macro-economic conditions and attract more investments for a higher impact and sustainability for recovery from COVID-19.

Recovery from COVID-19 will require the capacity to mobilise sustainable, green, inclusive and gender-sensitive investments to achieve sustainable development goals. Given the dramatic socio-economic consequences of the protracted pandemic crisis, efforts to build back better must be carried out collectively, in a cooperative and inclusive manner. Given the limited fiscal space of many developing countries, collective efforts to help improve their macro-economic conditions, and in particular more forcefully addressing their unsustainable debt vulnerabilities, has become ever more urgent. So has the need to tackle illicit financial flows, which deprive developing countries from much-needed resources for recovery. The EU is well placed to take the lead in these endeavours. International and national financial institutions for development, including those in Europe, have stepped up their efforts to respond to the crisis. But to truly unleash their potential to leverage private finance at the right scale, in a truly countercyclical and more impactful manner, their approaches must be adjusted, building on better practices and encouraging innovation in a cooperative and collaborative manner based on local needs, dynamics and actors. There too, the EU has the potential to play a more catalytic role, mobilising its wide array of instruments and institutions in a more coherent and complementarity manner, and in partnership with developing countries, notably in Africa, so as to stimulate sustainable, transformative and inclusive investment at the right scale.

Elcano Royal Institute, ARI 142/2020 http://www.realinstitutoelcano.org/wps/portal/rielcano_en/contenido?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/elcano/elcano_in/zonas_in/ari142-2020-bilal-collaborative-efforts-to-stimulate-sustainable-investment-for-covid-19-recovery-in-developing-countries