THEMATIC EVALUATION EC GOVERNANCE SUPPORT

1
THEMATIC EVALUATIONEC GOVERNANCE SUPPORT

• Final Restitution Seminar
• Brussels 18 September 2006

2
Governancea messy arena
3
EVALUATION IS

• Research
• Listening
• Useful?

4
Why this thematic evaluation?

• Governance booming field (priority programming
  10th EDF)
• Emerging policy and operational framework
• Experiences not yet capitalised
• Demands from the field for guidance
• gt gtgt COMMON LEARNING EVALUATION

5
(No Transcript)
6
Definition of governance

• Terms of Reference
• Governance refers to the rules, processes and
  behaviour by which interests are articulated,
  resources are managed and power is exercised in
  society
• Societal transformation processes

7
Key policy documents

• 1) EC Communication on Governance
• 2) Draft Handbook on governance, proposing an
  over-arching definition with 6 clusters
• Human rights (indirectly covered in evaluation)
• Democratisation (indirectly covered in
  evaluation)
• Rule of Law and Administration of Justice
• Public Sector Reform (public finances)
• Civil Society
• Decentralisation and local governments

8
3 ways of promoting it

• As a key principle
• As a priority sector
• As an issue to be mainstreamed

9
Guiding principles

10
Governance Site under construction!
11
Specific challenges of this evaluation

• New emerging field (confusion no
  institutional memory, huge variety of
  experiences)
• Broad (and expanding) scope (all regions)
• Need to recognise regional diversity
• Impact hard to measure, rather trends
• Moving target

12
Setting the scene

• Rapid ascent of governance as a political
  priority
• Also strong push for it in third countries
• Good governance obligation of donors (mutual
  accountability coherence)
• Wide range of actors involved/concerned
• Paris Agenda on Alignment and Harmonisation

13
Evaluative approach

• 10 EQs agreed upon with EC
• Comprehensive desk study
• Different methods of data collection (8
  countries 23 questionnaires, 35 CSP, 3 focus
  groups)
• Mixed teams (international well connected local
  officials)
• Wide variety of actors interviewed during field
  work

14
Focus evaluation (1)

• 10 evaluation questions
• Extent of prioritisation and mainstreaming?
• Effectiveness of projects/programmes as tools for
  promoting governance (including capacity
  support)?
• Effectiveness sector and budget support?

15
Focus of evaluation (2)

• 4) Effective use policy and political dialogue?
• 5) Sensibility to partner needs/flexibility?
• 6) Coordination, complementarity and coherence?
• 7) Integration cross-cutting issues?

16
Focus of evaluation (3)

• 8) Achievement of objectives
• gt regional
• gt thematic (rule of law, civil society,
  public administration, decentralisation)
• 9) Has EC followed multi-actor and multi-
• level approaches?
• 10) Institutional capacity EC?

17
Conclusions

• EC has made the right choice to put governance at
  the top of its political priorities
• societal demand
• key to achieving EC objectives
• cross-cutting issue
• link with new aid delivery instruments
• link with good governance agenda donors and
  with global governance debate

18
Conclusions

• EC has made substantial progress in dealing with
  governance
• Six positive developments/trends
• Solid policy framework gradually built
• Governance is increasingly prioritised and
  mainstreamed
• Strategic approaches to promoting governance are
  emerging
• Growing use of political/policy dialogue
• New aid modalities with potential impact on
  governance (budget support)
• Capacity development takes place (learning by
  doing)

19
Conclusions

• The EC is contributing to achieving general and
  region-specific objectives
• but impact on systemic change is uncertain

20
Conclusions

• The role of EC as a change agent needs to be
  clarified
• place, role and added-value of EC in promoting
  governance?
• strong perception that ECs primary role (and
  focus of interest) is management and
  administration

21
Conclusions

• 5) Major gaps between policy and practice
• limited use of existing policies, knowledge and
  experiences
• ownership deficit
• lack of integrated approaches to promoting
  governance
• limited progress with application 3 Cs
• lack of clarity on institutional development
  strategy underpinning governance programmes

22
Conclusions

• 6) Systemic institutional constraints hamper
  effective and efficient action
• challenge of harmonious co-existence and
  cross-fertilisation of 3 identities (and related
  set of competencies and institutional cultures)

23
(No Transcript)
24
Conclusions

• 7) The knowledge base is not adapted to scope and
  complexity of governance agenda
• learning organisation?
• still limited availability of specialised staff
• under-utilisation local/international sources
  of knowledge

25
What direction?

• Who drives the process?
• Who sets the agenda?
• How to provide effective support?
• How to strengthen overall EC/EU capacity?

26
OVERALL RECOMMENDATION

• gtgtgt Challenge of helping to build legitimate
  and effective governance systems in third
  countries
• gtgtgt Governance as a means of building a
  renewed and effective partnership model (rather
  than as a conditionality), based on mutual
  accountability

27
OVERALL RECOMMENDATION

• This implies a strengthening of
• Political response capacity (to be an effective
  political player)
• Development response capacity (to support
  complex processes of societal transformation with
  right mix of instruments
• Institutional response capacity (to ensure
  institutional incentives, processes and
  procedures fit strategic objectives)
• gtgtgtgt WIDE RANGE OF STRATEGIC AND OPERATIONAL
  RECOMMENDATIONS

28
Political response capacity

• Give a clear mandate to EC Delegations as well as
  resources to implement it
• Improve the quality of governance assessments
• Promote domestic alliances for change
• Provide pro-active support to diversity of
  governance actors (political society, civil
  society)

29
Development response capacity

• Effective governance support depends on
• -Country ownership
• -Multi-actor dialogue processes
• -Multi-donor support
• -Flexibility and rapid response capacity
• Refine strategies to ensure ownership
• Improve quality programming

30
Institutional response capacity

• Create a corporate understanding and culture
• Empower the EC Delegations
• Promote thematic networks (e.g. on
  Decentralisation and local governance)

31
OVERALL RECOMMENDATION

• PROCESS RECOMMENDATION
• Governance challenges EC (like other donors)
  to change ways of doing cooperation
• Huge agenda to be addressed over time (short-
  medium term)
• Building on promising innovations
• Make the change process a living thing
  (networking approach)

32
Working together!

• Invest in
• multi-actor dialogue processes
• innovative partnerships
• joint learning