Japan and the EU: Development partners.

612 views

Published on

A comparative analysis mainly based on DAC peer reviews. Presentation given by Geert Laporte at the European Institute for Asian Studies, Brussels, 28 May 2013

Published in: News & Politics, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
612
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
196
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Japan and the EU: Development partners.

  1. 1. A comparative analysis(mainly based on DAC peerreviews)Geert LaporteEuropean Institute for Asian Studies, Brussels 28 May 2013Japan and the EU:DevelopmentPartners
  2. 2. Independent foundation working on EU-Africarelations for more than 25 years:1. Non-partisan facilitation of dialogue2. Practical and policy relevant analysis3. Linking key players in the EU and Africa,through networks and partnerships4. Capacity building in Africa to bring morebalance in the partnership with the EU5. Building alliances with non-EU players indevelopment (Japan, BRICS, USA, SouthKorea, Switzerland…)WHAT IS ECDPM?Page 2
  3. 3. THREE PARTS:1.The changing developmentcontext2.Comparative analysis Japan-EU3.Where can Japan and EU joinforces?STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATIONECDPM Page 3
  4. 4. 1. Global financial and economic crisis, particularly affectingEU2. Declining aid budgets (ODA) but increasing needs fordifferent sources of finance to tackle development andglobal challenges (e.g climate change)3. New players in development (BRICS, G-20, privatesector, development foundations,…)4. A more political vision of development: Busan: “…it isessential to examine the inter-dependence and coherenceof all public policies – not just development policies…”THE CHANGING DEVELOPMENTCONTEXTECDPM Page 4
  5. 5. JAPAN• Economic power-house but littlepolitical power• Losing influence tonew competitors,mainly in Asia(China, Korea,…)PLACE IN GLOBAL LANDSCAPEPage 5ECDPMEUROPEAN UNION• Trade giant butpolitical dwarf (inspite of LisbonTreaty)• “EU is a payer not aplayer”• Losing influence toemergingeconomies (BRICSetc)
  6. 6. JAPAN• From biggest aid donor(1991-2000) to 5th donor(2013)• Presence in some 140countries• Not considered to be aleader in the policydebates and agenda-setting but quite aneffective implementerPLACE IN DEVELOPMENTPage 6ECDPMEUROPEAN UNION• EU “formidable player”(DAC): 60% of all aid inthe world (EU & MS) &largest humanitariandonor…but decliningbudgets• Network of 136 Delegations• Strong on policy andstrategy development(EU Consensus onDevelopment, Agendafor Change,…)…butweak on implementation
  7. 7. JAPAN• Focus on economictransformation (“self help” +own development experience): economic growth,infrastructure, industrialproduction, agriculture,..)• Commercial and businessinterests• Fragile states and humansecurity has been added• Strong focus on technicalcooperation• Principle of non-interventionPOLICY ORIENTATIONSPage 7ECDPMEUROPEAN UNION• Poverty reduction• Value driven agenda(good governance)• Inclusive growth• Support to regionalintegration (own rolemodel)• Rather normativedevelopment approach(…with doublestandards)
  8. 8. JAPAN• Key focus = (East)Asia (but alsodoubling of aid toAfrica in recent years)• Focus on middleincome countriesGEOGRAPHIC FOCUSPage 8ECDPMEUROPEAN UNION• Key focus=Africa• Least developedcountries (“direct aidwhere it is mostneeded”)• Increasingdifferentiation: nomore aid to uppermiddle incomecountries
  9. 9. JAPAN• 0,18% of GNI (approx 10billion $)• Rather traditionalapproach: projects ratherthan programmes, loans,technical cooperation, tiedaid,…• Strong preference forbilateral earmarked aid(84% in 2008)• Need to increase use ofprogrammaticapproaches andcore/institutionalfundingVOLUMES & MODALITIESPage 9ECDPMEUROPEAN UNION• 0,44% of GNI (2010) =70 Billion $ ODA• Collective ODA level of0,7% of GNI will not bereached in 2015• Strong focus on regionalorganisations• Need to increase useof flexible corefunding
  10. 10. JAPAN• Quite centralised andhierarchical• More responsibility toimplementation andcoordination agency(new JICA)• Need to delegate moreauthority to the field• Separate and additionalreporting for Japaneseearmarked funds= hightransaction costsORGANISATION AND MANAGEMENTPage 10ECDPMEUROPEAN UNION• Complex institutionalarchitecture (unclear roledivision and duplicationEEAS-DEVCO)• Several financialinstruments with heavyprocedures• Increased devolution ofauthority and staff to thefield• Intense scrutiny by EP,Council, European Courtof Auditors, think tanks,NGOs
  11. 11. JAPAN• „go-it alone approach‟• Resistance toharmonisationCOORDINATION & HARMONISATIONPage 11ECDPMEUROPEAN UNION• Strong declarationsbut little action oncoordination andcomplementarity
  12. 12. JAPAN• No explicit policystatement, institutionalmechanisms andmonitoring andreporting systems onPCDPOLICY COHERENCE FORDEVELOPMENT (PCD)Page 12ECDPMEUROPEAN UNION• In spite of solidstrategic frameworkwith appropriateinstitutionalmechanisms,independent analyticalcapacities and toolsto track progress …little concreteprogress has beenachieved
  13. 13. JAPAN• Key focus on nationalgovernments• Low involvement of civilsocietyorganisations/NGOs (only3% of budget)• Rather modest pro-development lobby andlimited involvement ofJapanese NGOs inimplementationPARTNERS & PUBLIC SUPPORTPage 13ECDPMEUROPEAN UNION• Key focus ongovernments and CSOs• Structured dialogue withCSOs and localauthorities• Strong public supportfor development inmost EU countries
  14. 14. • Africa increasingly important for both partners• TICAD V (1-3 June 2013 Yokohama)- EU-AfricaSummit (April 2014)• Common concerns, priorities and interests thatcould be different from emerging developmentplayers• Complement “traditional” MDG development focuswith new Post 2015 development visionWHERE CAN JAPAN AND EUJOIN FORCES?ECDPM Page 14
  15. 15. Thank yougl@ecdpm.orgwww.ecdpm.orgwww.slideshare.net/ecdpmPage 15

×