Bilateral Collateral
Common Sense?
Joint Strategy
For
Nepal
2016-22
Commitments
Joint Strategy
For
Nepal
2016-22
CONTENTS
- Analysis
- The EU Way
- Sectors
- Common Positions
- Results
“The strategy would not go into details of how individual
DPs carry out their work, i.e. aid modalities, individual
initiatives to be pursued… instead left to bilateral
implementation plans”
The JP Study
Administration
Programming
Document
Where & What
E C (D C I)
·
·
Criteria: Commission-level decision.
Trends: informal policy of moving out of middle-income countries.
·
·
Criteria: national priorities, regional priorities, global sectoral commitments.
There is an ability and willingness to adjust sector focus based on priorities expressed by
partner countries.
·
Country / Regional Strategy Paper
See: http://www.eeas.europa.eu/countries/index_en.htm
http://www.eeas.europa.eu/regions/index_en.htm
Purpose
·
Policy Document and earmarker of funds.
Timing
·
·
Standard programming cycles are used with the current period being 2007-13.
This cycle has been dictated by the EC’s financial perspectives cycle which serves as its multiannual financial framework.
·
·
It takes 22-26 months to draft and approve a new programming document.
Drafting
guidelines
are
followed
(“Programming
Guidelines”
http://ec.europa.eu/development/how/iqsg/index_en.cfm ) which have been set by European
Commission Headqauerters.
The local country office and European Commission Headquarters are primarily responsible for
drafting.
The document is approved by DG DevCo with the Commissioner giving the final authorisation.
Reviews allow for a change in approach and/or funding for the current programming
document, however the local country office has no authority to change the focus of the
programming document during implementation.
Choice of Country
Choice of Sectors
Name of
Programming
Document
Drafting &
Approval
·
·
·
·
Funding
·
·
Programming
·
·
Ability to do Joint
Programming
·
Decisions are made on the level of financing to allocate to each partner country as part of yearly
budgets approved by the budgetary authority.
Funds are committed for 7 years, divided into successive 4 and 3 year periods.
Financial allocations to partner countries are revised during a mid-term review process and via
ad-hoc reviews where necessary.
Unused funds are returned to the general budget and redirected to other development activities.
Partner country offices are required to take account of other donors’ on-going and planned work
when drafting a programming document and are required to consider joint programming as an
option.
The programming cycle cannot be adjusted to match the national planning cycle nor may rolling
strategies be used (this would require a change in financial rules and regulations which would
need Commission approval and take longer than a year to achieve).
The JP Study
A joint strategy should = change on the ground: “so far, so bad”
“While documents purporting to be joint programmes were found in
many countries, these were largely compendia of bilateral strategy
papers or general statements of intent and principles”
Problems: include keeping bilateral strategies & synchronisation
The JP Study
“70% of EU MS don’t need a bilateral strategy if there’s a joint one”
“50% make their main programming decisions on the ground”
“58% can synchronise to the partner country planning cycle”
In Practice - Myanmar
In Practice - Bolivia
“Each capital is asked to confirm whether
this will be possible and whether any
additional content would be needed in the
joint strategy to facilitate such replacement.”
In Practice - Nepal
Risk Analysis
Joint Strategy
For
Nepal
Value for Money
2016-22
Operating Costs &
Efficiency Savings
Thank You
[email protected]