ENP workshop on Joint
Programming
Case study PALESTINE
Brussels 29-30 January 2015
Sergio Piccolo EU Delegation - Johan Schaar SWEDEN
Jerusalem
Context
Overcrowded
22 EU MS (10/15 active) + 2 strong alike-EU donors (NOR-SWI)
closely associated to the JP process since 2013
Fragmented
Politically and geographically: Area A/B/C, East Jerusalem, Gaza
Strip (weakening Palestinian Authority)
Highly politicised
Politicisation of all operational issues
Strategic interest to achieve an EU "critical mass"
JP: experience
Pragmatic and flexible approach
EU Local Development Strategy (2011 and 2013, revision 2014)
endorsed by HoCs and HoMs
2 local HoMs Reports on EU JP (02 and 11.2013)
Pilot Phase with two sectors (2013 – led by 2 EU MS-NL/DK)
16 EU MS Sector Fiches (policy-dialogue tools) endorsed by HoCs
and HoMs (12.2014)
6 SF in pilot (2015)
JP: Lessons learnt
EU JP process needs to remain "decentralised" (at
field level)
Strong involvement of EU MS is crucial (pilot phase +
EU MS Sector Strategy Fiches revised by EU MS lead
and active donors)
Phase towards a more Results-Oriented Approach
JP Palestine: 2017 (in line with the Palestinian
National Development Plan 2017-19)
Potential gains
Development effectiveness principles
Alignment with Palestinian priorities, division of labour, convergence of
actions, inclusion of non EU MS (NOR-SWI), etc.
= almost a "given" in the context of Palestine
 Increased alignment EU DEV and POL objectives
 In line with the different EU Council's Conclusions
 Ensuring EU JP helps implementing policies in line with EU and
Palestine objectives
EU JP: double purpose
Next steps 2016-2017 (1)
Implementation of the 3rd Phase of the
Roadmap
Joint sector assessment, some joint response,
consultations (PA and CSO), endorsement of
the EU JP by December 2016
Clear distribution of responsibilities between
EU Delegation and EU MS (and EU-alike)
Next steps 2016-2017 (2)
Probable outcome: one EU JP Document +
additional bilateral strategies putting more focus on
bilateral issues and specificities
Challenges: Involvement of PA/Consensus
Government (solidity ? legitimacy ? Leadership?
clear strategic vision? Integration of Gaza?)
Involvement of civil society (not always wellrooted and "legitimate")
CONCLUSIONS
A fairly advanced pragmatic coordination
EU/MS towards an EU JP by 2017
A complex fragmented overcrowded ever
crisis context
THANKS
Sergio & Johan
On behalf of all EU/MS HoCs in Palestine