sector network

NEWSLETTER
No. 4 June ‘09
SECTOR NETWORK
Good Governance in Sub-Sahara Africa
Index
02
Up-date from the GGA
steering group
03
Discussions with parliamentarians
of the German Bundestag
04
Up-dates from the Houses
11
Striving for Good Governance
in Resource-rich Countries: A
Sisyphus-task?
14
Any of my business? Why
bilateral programmes matter to
regional ones and vice-versa
15
The Joint Africa-European Union
Strategic Partnership with special
reference to the Partnerships on
‘Democratic Governance and
Human Rights’
19
Membership
19
Upcoming events
Dear members of the Sector
Network Good Governance in SubSahara Africa and colleagues,
It is my pleasure to present to you the
fourth edition of the GGA newsletter.
The newsletter will provide the most
recent developments within the sector
network, specifically focussing on the
work of the steering group, the three
thematic Houses and the respective
‘rooms’ or working groups.
Special attention is given to
providing feedback from a meeting
between the steering committee
and parliamentarians of the German
Bundestag.
Three special features are included in
this edition, focusing on: the increasing
role of Resource Governance in Africa;
the Joint Africa-European Union
Strategic Partnership with reference
to the Partnerships on Democratic
1
Governance and Human Rights;
and highlighting opportunities for
linking GTZ’s bi-lateral and regional/
pan-African portfolio. I would like to
express my sincere thanks to the four
authors for compiling these inputs.
I would also like to use this
opportunity to invite you to the
Fifth GGA Members’ Assembly
and Conference taking place from
02-05 November 2009 in Dakar,
Senegal.
We hope you will enjoy this latest
edition of the newsletter and look
forward to receiving your feedback.
Yours sincerely
Hajo Junge
Chairperson: GGA Sector Network
No. 4 June ‘09
GGA at a glance
GGA Steering Group
Chairperson, 3 house speakers, 2 national/
international experts, Africa Department,
State and Democracy Division
Anticorruption
Task force
House I: National
Governance Reform
Rooms:
•Good financial governance
•State development
House 2: Regional
Governance Reform
Resource
governance
Task force
Rooms:
•Strategies
•Synergies
House 3: Decentralisation
Rooms:
•Aid modalities
•Fiscal decentralisation
•Quick-wins
•Territorial governance
•Decentralisation the African Way
Linking bi-lateral & PanAfrican programmes
Task force
1
Update from the
GGA steering group
Hajo Junge (GGA Chairperson)
The members of the GGA steering
group gathered for the second
meeting after the last conference in
April 2008 in Addis Ababa from 2324 April in Berlin. Having the meeting
in Berlin gave us the opportunity
to engage with the GTZ team coordinating the support provided
to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs –
mainly focussing on Peace, Security
and Justice Reform – and Members
of the German Bundestag to discuss
recent developments on governance
and democracy in Africa.
GGA steering group meeting, 23-24 April 2009, Berlin
2
No. 4 June ‘09
The main topics of the meeting
were an update on the progress of
the work of the sector network, the
current state of the development cooperation portfolio on governance
in Africa, implications of the new
guidelines for GTZ sector networks,
a review of the current structures of
the GGA, emerging topics relevant
for supporting governance in Africa
and the programme of the next GGA
general assembly in Dakar.
The new guidelines for sector networks
were adopted in December 2008. The
steering group commented on the draft
guidelines in close collaboration with
the sector networks SELLER and Latin
America. The GGA – its composition,
structures and processes – are in line
with the new guidelines to a great
extent. The role and composition of
the steering group has been strongly
confirmed. One reporting requirement
which we so far have not fulfilled is the
compilation of an annual report. The
integration of international, regional
and national experts, which we have
championed over the past twelve
months, is strongly encouraged by
the guidelines.
Based on the experiences over the last
four years, we have spent some time
reflecting on the organisational set-up,
structures and processes of the GGA.
The rationale for such a reflection
has been the increasing membership
and size of the sector network and
new emerging topics. On this basis
we wanted to ascertain whether the
current set-up was still conducive to
the most efficient functioning of the
sector network. The current structures
characterised by the steering group,
three thematic Houses and Rooms
(or working groups) was established
at the second general assembly in
Douala, Cameroon, in 2005. Despite
the fact that the GGA is sometimes
referred to as the ‘governance temple’
since its structure is based on Houses,
Rooms etc., we came to the conclusion
that this was still a very conducive
and effective set-up allowing us to
champion our thematic work and fulfil
our mandates. However, one decision
was the establishment of flexible and
inter-House Task Forces to be able
to take up emerging governance
topics as speedily and effectively as
possible.
Task forces have now been established
around three important emerging
topics: (1) Resource Governance,
(2) Linking Bi-lateral and Regional/
Pan-African Programmes and (3)
Anti-corruption. Since these topics
are relevant for the work of all three
Houses, the task forces will comprise
selected members of all Houses.
To highlight the importance and
relevance of the above topics, two
3
special features in this newsletter
focus on Resource Governance and
Linking the Bi-lateral and Pan-African
Portfolio. Anti-corruption will receive
attention towards the up-coming
GGA conference.
The planning of the next GGA
conference and general assembly
will receive major attention over
the next weeks and months. For the
next conference we would like to
give special attention to thematic
inputs and discussions on the state
of governance in Sub-Sahara Africa
– potentials and challenges. On this
basis the GGA conference will for
the first time include a ‘Governance
Academy Day’ and ‘Governance
Bazaar’, both organised on a dedicated
day to which external speakers will be
invited and where specific topics will
be discussed.
We would like to warmly welcome
Joachim Fritz as a new member of
the steering group. Joachim Fritz
took over from Nikolas Beckmann as
Speaker of House 3: Decentralisation
and Local Governance.
The next GGA General Assembly
and Conference will take place
from 02-05 November 2009
in Dakar, Senegal. Conference
languages will be English and
French.
No. 4 June ‘09
2
Discussions with parliamentarians of the
German Bundestag
The Director of the GTZ House in
Berlin, Mr Klaus Brueckner, invited
parliamentarians from the German
Bundestag dealing with issues on
Africa to a breakfast meeting with the
GGA steering group on 24 April 2009.
The topic of the discussion meeting
was “Supporting State, Democracy
and Governance within the framework
of a challenging political environment
in Sub-Sahara Africa”.
The group of parliamentarians
included Dr. Uschi Eid (B90/Die
Grünen), Mr. Hartwig Fischer (CDU)
and Ms. Marina Schuster (FDP) as
well as four of their technical support
staff. Dr. Däubler-Gmelin (SPD) sent
her apologies and was not able to
participate.
After a short overview of GTZ’s
governance portfolio in Sub-Sahara
Africa and the work of the sector
network, questions and the discussion
focussed on the following areas:
• Potentials for and risks of
decentralisation
and
local
governance
in
Africa;
decentralisation and corruption;
political will towards implementation
of sub-national governance reform
and fiscal decentralisation (Dr. Eid).
• Relevance of German Development
Cooperation and its strategic focus
in Africa; do the Focal Areas address
key challenges of development;
importance of skills development
and rural development, which
is often being raised by African
partners (Mr. Fischer).
• Roles and capacities of African
Union incl. budget and finance
management;
relationships
between EU and AU (Ms.
Schuster).
• Donor
harmonisation,
Paris
Declaration, AAA and beyond;
what implications does donor
harmonisation have in terms of
additional time and resources
required (all).
• Supporting governance in fragile
states and in crisis situations; what
does it mean and require; stay
engaged but differently (Guinea,
Madagascar) (Mr. Fischer).
• Role and importance of national
and regional experts for GTZ (Dr.
Eid).
The members of parliament expressed
their gratitude to GTZ for the invitation
and the open and fruitful discussion.
The meeting has reconfirmed
the importance of engaging with
parliamentarians around our work
and recent developments on a regular
basis.
Discussions with parliamentarians of German Bundestag, 24 April, Berlin
4
No. 4 June ‘09
3
Up-dates from the Houses
1
National Governance
Reform Processes
David Nguyen-Thanh (Speaker:
House 1)
Members of House 1 came together
from 28-29 April 2009 in Accra, Ghana
to review the progress against our work
programme, exchange information
and discuss latest developments in the
field of governance.
We used the unique opportunity
of having together such a diverse
number of governance experts to
discuss the new BMZ Governance
Concept. Pamela Jawad, Sector
Project Good Governance (Eschborn),
gave a stimulating overview of the
key features followed by a critical
assessment by discussant Wolfgang
Solzbacher (Madagascar). Wolfgang
Solzbacher then also spearheaded
a discussion about Governance
advisory services in conflict situations
by sharing his recent experience with
the coup d’état in Madagascar. Not
surprisingly, the discussion did not
suggest a clear answer to the difficult
question of what to do (“Should
we stay or should we go”). While
in those situations the withdrawal
of GTZ experts from key positions,
such as the Ministry of Finance, may
be understandable from a political
point of view, it was argued that the
resulting loss in trust – with trustful
relations to partners being a particular
Meeting House 1, 28-29 April 2009, Accra, Ghana
feature of GTZ projects – has to be
taken into consideration. The house
members agreed to continue the
discussion.
In terms of the work programme –
agreed upon at the last GGA general
assembly in April 2009 in Addis Ababa
(and subsequently revised) – we
managed to progress in key areas:
1.
State Development in SubSahara Africa discussion paper
finalised;
2.
Role of Governance Advisor
paper
being
extensively
discussed and final paper now
being drafted;
3.
agreement on fact sheets in
Room 2 (“Good Financial
Governance”) reached.
Discussion paper “Accra and
Beyond: Challenges for State
Development in Sub-Sahara
Africa”
The discussion paper was thoroughly
discussed and prepared by members of
Room 1 “State Development” over the
past 12 months or so, was presented to
5
the entire house: it received excellent
feedback and it was agreed that Martin
Ott and his colleague Andreas Baumert
- to whom most of the credit should go
for their continuous efforts to finalise
a final draft version - will now take up
comments given during the meeting
and prepare the final paper by early
June. In terms of the way forward, it
was agreed to present the paper to
a wider audience, possibly during a
brown bag lunch at GTZ Head Office
later this year.
The Role of Governance
Advisor Paper
The paper goes back to a discussion
we had in Addis Ababa about the
specifics of governance advisors. The
idea was that once we can identify
particular features of how we work,
this should help to improve our support
to partners but also help better design
projects in the future. Prior to the Accra
meeting, a draft paper was prepared
by Ernst Hustädt (South Africa) who
could not attend the meeting. Birger
Nerré (Eschborn) took over and gave
an overview. While still not being able
to come up with a definition of the
role of governance advisers, after vivid
discussion and fruitful brainstorming
No. 4 June ‘09
we managed to arrive at a number
of features that relate to governance
advice as opposed to other advisory
interventions. Pamela Jawad (GTZ
HQ), Marion Popp (Zambia) and
Tassilo von Droste (Mauretania)
volunteered to take up the draft from
there, incorporating the findings of our
discussion and prepare a final paper by
the time we meet again in Dakar.
Modes of Delivery
Fact sheets on GTZ Modes of Delivery
– work mainly done by Room 2
“Good Financial Governance (GFG)”
– have been prepared by a number of
member projects. It was agreed that
they will be finalised by June and sent
to GTZ Head Office shortly after for
further consideration. While it took
the house some time to finalise these
fact sheets, the good thing is that
there are now a number of excellent
and updated reference documents
that illustrate how GTZ operates in
Governance projects and how results
are actually being achieved. That’s
not too bad.
Importance of knowledge
exchange: Anti-corruption,
civil society and Capacity
Works
One of the most important features
of GGA house meetings is the
opportunity to exchange information
and experiences from the field. The
Room “State Development” revisited
the issue of anti-corruption, not
being discussed for quite some time –
Thomas Vennen (Kenya) volunteered
to re-energise the group by sending
regular updates and initiating the
exchange on that subject. The second
topic discussed was Capacity Works, a
management tool supposed to support
governance advisors. The concern was
raised that benefits should be brought
out in a better way. It was agreed
that information on application and
benefits will now be circulated to all
members on the mailing list. Finally
and with a view to the next general
assembly in Dakar, it was decided that
Room 1 would work on and present
papers based on the following areas:
Civil society, application of Capacity
Works and state development, anticorruption in state development and
the media and state development.
Good Financial Governance
Similarly, the GFG Room made
extensive use of the House meeting by
a) sharing latest developments in the
projects; b) talking about the financial
and economic crisis; and c) discussing
the potential of linkages between
regional and bi-lateral projects – on
that one, the GFG group will reach out
to colleagues in House 2. Iris Müller
has been elected as new coordinator
of the Room GFG, being the successor
of Barbara Häming – thanks again to
Barbara for her excellent work!
Resource Governance
With the issue of Resource
Governance becoming more and
more important for Development Cooperation, we used the opportunity
of the House meeting to establish an
intra-GGA “Task Force on Resource
Governance”, and by doing so,
following the recommendation by
the GGA Steering Group. The Task
6
Force will be addressing relevant
governance
issues
of
natural
resources and extractive industries.
As a start members agreed to come
up with a paper to be discussed at
the forthcoming general assembly in
Dakar. While having its home base in
House 1, the idea of a Task Forces is
to establish fruitful inter-house work
on certain topical issues. The Task
Force Resource Governance will be
coordinated by Götz von Stumpfeldt
(DRC) with active participation from
members of all three thematic Houses
as well as Head Office.
Integration of national and
regional experts
For the first time, the house meeting
accommodated national and regional
staff who accounted for four out of
30 participants. Certainly, there was a
feeling that we can do better. But at
the same time, this was seen as a very
encouraging start not only because
of the enriched discussions we had
but also the promising outlook in
terms of active participation in the
work programme, e.g. Allan Lassey
(Ghana) has volunteered to join the
newly established Task Force Resource
Governance.
All in all, the house meeting was
perceived to be an excellent platform
for exchange and discussions that
otherwise would not have taken
place. All participants have reinforced
the work and we are looking forward
to the up-coming general assembly in
November 2009 in Dakar.
No. 4 June ‘09
2
Regional Governance
Reform Processes
Dr. Armin K. Nolting (Speaker:
House 2)
State of affairs in early 2009
On the basis of the agreements
reached at our last GGA general
assembly, the following activities were
in full swing in the first months of this
year: By opening up to non Germanspeaking colleagues, amongst other
things through keeping all House
communication in English, additional
viewpoints and dynamics were taken
into consideration. In the two rooms,
colleagues condensed and focused
results and insights with a view to the
upcoming House meeting.
House meeting, March 2009
Thanks to the assistance of our
colleagues from the SPAI Programme
(Support to Pan-African Institutions)
we were able to meet in a conducive
environment on March 16 and 17,
2009. The meeting was organised
back to back with a meeting of the
Addis Group on Peace and Security
to allow colleagues with interest or
responsibilities in both fields to attend
both workshops.
Meeting House 2, 16-17 March 2009, Pretoria, South Africa
The meeting
objectives:
had
the
following
• Consolidate and finalise the work
started last year;
• Redefine working priorities of the
House and agree on subsequent
deliverables;
• Foster
integration
colleagues.
of
1.
Reporting
rooms
2.
Inputs on current issues
(development and corporate
policy)
3.
Definition of new priorities and
rooms (working groups)
new
• It was also agreed to realistically
assess available resources and
to focus our energy on products
and issues that are particularly
well suited to be addressed by a
sector network and not by other
organisational units of GTZ. It was
felt that for a small House as ours it
might not be sustainable to establish
four working groups, as attempted
during the last general assembly in
Addis Ababa. There was also broad
agreement to concentrate on midterm results to be ready for the
next meeting in November 2009.
7
In summary, the meeting can be
divided into three sections:
back
from
the
Room 1 on “modes of delivery in
regional governance programmes”
presented the summarised results of
a survey undertaken during 2008.
Although based on a small sample
the survey produced key findings that
many other colleagues could relate
to. The results of the survey will now
feature in ongoing strategic work. The
room representatives suggested to
dismantle the room in order to release
energy for upcoming challenges.
No. 4 June ‘09
Room 2 “Horizontal and vertical
linkages – pan-African, regional and
national“ organised its work in close
co-ordination with the cross-sectoral
“Afrika NA Working Group” at Head
Office. On the basis of experience
gained within the programme
“Support to Pan African Institutions”,
it was established that all continental
and regional institutions and initiatives
seem to suffer from insufficient
communication and co-ordination as
well as a lack of policy coherence. The
resulting unclear responsibilities also
present a challenge for support efforts
such as those of GTZ. Building on this
assessment, colleagues from the crosssectoral Afrika NA Working Group
revealed that increased institutional
interlinkages have synergetic potential
for our partner organisations as well
as for GTZ.
Presentations on impact chains,
recent developments in the African
Union and approaches to capacity
development complemented the
previous inputs and set the tone for an
in depth discussion that was continued
in three break-out groups which later
reported back to the plenary. On the
basis of the subsequent conversation
the following decisions were taken.
Room Strategies
One
working
group
(“Room
Strategies”) will develop a discussion
paper on the specifics of GTZ
advisory services for regional and
pan-African governance processes
in order to provide guidance to GTZ
staff working in relevant projects,
to improve our advisory capabilities
both for our partners and for BMZ
as well as to identify GTZ corporate
interests in that area. Building partly
on the results of the former Room 1
on “modes of delivery” there is an
element of continuity. The “Room
Strategies” is coordinated by AnneFriederike Röder (South Africa).
Room Synergies
In order to facilitate the better use of
synergies between Governance reform
programmes at different levels a new
working group (“Room Synergies”)
has been set up. Its first deliverable
will be a matrix that can visualise the
synergies between the continental,
regional and national level (also see
article “Any of my Business?” in this
newsletter). Apart from assisting
colleagues in Governance programmes
at all levels, the outcome of the
working group will contribute to GTZ
Annual Objective 3, priority measure
3.10 “Optimise cooperation between
regional projects and the national
portfolio in BMZ business within the
framework of the country plan”. The
“Room Synergies” is coordinated
by Tarquin Meszaros (South Africa)
and builds on the results of the
former Room “horizontal and vertical
linkages”
Charter on Communication
On the basis of a presentation
prepared by a small reflection group,
the House endorsed a “Charter on
Communication” calling for increased
cooperation between members of the
GGA through closer communication.
The charter encourages more
informal communication within the
House and posits that all members
of the house should proactively
participate in the process, whilst
House and Room coordinators bear
a particular responsibility. The status
of communication and cooperation
8
within the House will be reviewed in
November in Dakar.
The meeting of House 2 – the
first of its kind – has contributed
to consolidating work done and
redirecting energy into new and
promising directions. The new House
architecture restricted to two Rooms
seems more in line with the overall
human capacities in the House. New
colleagues and colleagues hitherto
excluded by language barriers have
been integrated into the House, others
still have to be taken on board.
The complete documentation of
the House Workshop is available on
DMS:
https://dms.gtz.de/livelinkger/livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=492
90754&objAction=browse&sort=n
ame&viewType=1
Activities since April 2009 –
next steps
Whilst the House keeps expanding
both ito number of involved
programmes as well as colleagues,
both newly established Rooms have
taken up their work. Especially with
the “Room Synergies”, collaboration
between the three Houses will be
much closer. Colleagues from House
2 will also actively contribute to the
evolving Task Force on Resource
Governance. The next opportunity to
systematically monitor our progress
will come up in late August when
many colleagues will gather for the
meeting on Regional Integration in
Africa in Eschborn. Until then the two
rooms will keep up the momentum
and the task forces cutting across
Houses will contribute strongly to the
effectiveness of this House as well as
the GGA as a whole.
No. 4 June ‘09
3
Decentralisation
Joachim Fritz (Speaker: House 3)
New House speaker
Joachim Fritz, Programme Manager of
the Strengthening Local Governance
Programme in South Africa has been
appointed as Speaker of House 3
since Nikolas Beckmann has left GTZ
by the end of March 2009. Joachim
Fritz participated in the GGA Steering
Group meeting in April in Berlin for
the first time and thanked all members
for the warm welcome and Nikolas
Beckmann for a smooth handover.
Survey of inclusion of
National and Regional
Experts in Rooms
The survey initiated earlier this year
has received a very positive response.
Programmes from eight countries (BF,
ET, GH, KAM, MW, MZ, SN, RSA)
responded, 29 National and Regional
Experts have been listed and provided
their priorities for contributing to
the work of the existing Rooms. Aid
Modalities (5); Fiscal Decentralisation
(10); Quick Wins (4); Territorial
Governance (5); Structures and
Concept of Governance in the African
Context (5). We will try to complete
the survey by inviting programmes that
have not yet participated to include
national professionals interested and
provide Room coordinators with the list
of colleagues to take further action.
Results of the external
evaluation of decentralisation
projects in Africa
The six project evaluations have
been finalised and the results being
documented in the respective reports
which are available on DMS:
https://dms.gtz.de/livelink-ger/
livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=499108
08&objAction=browse&viewType=
1#1_1__25_
The overall rating of the programmes
have been as follows: Cameroon –
3, Ghana – 4, Rwanda – 2, Burkina
Faso – 3, Malawi – 4, South Africa – 2.
Together with our colleagues from the
Head Office sector unit and regional
division we will identify a process
on how to “cross evaluate” the
results and draw lessons being learnt
particularly for better positioning of the
decentralisation and local governance
topic in Sub-Sahara Africa.
AMCOD/UCLGA
The Political Affairs desk of the
African Union Commission organised
a regional stakeholder workshop
on Local Governance on December
12-13th 2008 in Yaoundé, where
Armin Nolting and Sabine Diallo
represented GTZ. An interesting
output of the meeting consisted of the
recommendation to develop “African
guidelines on Local Governance”. Our
colleagues from the regional project
will certainly follow up and keep us
informed.
9
In January this year, a strategy
workshop on the further cooperation
with the African Ministers Conference
on Decentralisation (AMCOD) and the
United Cities and Local Government
of Africa (UCLGA) took place in
Eschborn. The positive news is that
the support project has been extended
by BMZ until end of 2010 and an
additional GTZ expert will be recruited
to intensify German support. AMCOD
support is being provided through
the
Cameroon
decentralisation
programme. Support to UCLGA
(Headquarters) is still “on hold” as
there is no progress with regard to the
conflictive situation between the two
UCLGA secretariats in Morocco and
South Africa respectively.
However, there is progress with regard
to the support of the East Africa Local
Government Association (EALGA)
and the study on the implications
of regional economic integration on
municipalities in cross border locations
has been finalised under the title:
“EALGA study on the impact of the
EAC common market protocol on local
governments in partner states”. For
more info regarding the study please
contact Godje Bialluch (Tanzania).
In the meantime UCLGA – Morocco
has officially announced that the
next Africities conference will take
place from 16-20 December 2009 in
Marrakech. The leading topic will be
Local Economic Development.
For further info go to
www.africities.org
No. 4 June ‘09
Aid modalities
Godje Bialluch, Tanzania
A first Room meeting took place from
03-04 June 2009 in Dar Es Salaam
with the participation of colleagues
from Senegal, Burkina Faso, Zambia,
Mozambique and South Africa. The
topics discussed were:
• Experience with TA Pools (input
from BF),
• An overview of main activities in
the field of fiscal decentralisation
within GTZ programmes in SSA
(best practices, experiences)
• An overview of key issues and
priorities of partner countries in the
field of fiscal decentralisation
• It is planned to present a first draft
at the Sector Unit conference in
July 2009 in Berlin.
• Experiences with the processes
of developing Joint Programme
Proposals (SN),
Quick Wins
• Programme
(MZ).
The main objective of the Room
“Quick wins” is to identify practices
and approaches that generate quick
and tangible outcomes in order
Based
Approaches
Results will be communicated in the
next newsletter and discussed in the
context of the general assembly in
Dakar.
Fiscal Decentralisation
Tim Auracher, Benin
Up to now the Room members (BN,
GH, MAL, RSA, TZ, mix of national
and international members) have
developed and received feedback on
three questionnaires, namely:
• Questionnaires on GTZ activities in
the field of fiscal decentralisation.
Feedback/filled forms received
from 9 African countries
• Questionnaires of partner country
policies and priorities in the field of
fiscal decentralisation have been
responded by 2 African countries
(SA, GH, BN being prepared)
• Questionnaires regarding challenge
of transfer of competencies and
resources from central state to
decentralised entities from 8
francophone African countries (in
preparation for the DecNet meeting
in November 08 in Mali)
• The next envisaged step will consist
of the preparation of:
Martin Dirr, Ethiopia
to maintain and increase demand
and motivation for decentralisation
reforms at various levels. Through
these positive and tangible impacts
ownership as well as domestic
accountability and support for the
decentralisation process are expected
to rise.
The members of the group (currently
LS and ET only) have compiled
experiences from LS, MZ, ET
regarding tools developed and used
by programmes that have potentials
for quick wins.
Some examples of the experiences
collected:
Mozambique:
Tool: Participatory Municipal Budgeting (PMB) in the City of Dondo
Quick Win: Increased involvement of citizens in decision-making processes
regarding to contribution of public funds. Public budget contributes more
to the actual needs of the citizens. Existence of effective accountability
mechanisms of local government
Target Group: Citizens, Local Governments
Tool: Participatory monitoring system for better service delivery on district
level
Quick Win: Through inclusion of representatives of the civil society,
increased transparency of local government performances as well as
increased ownership in local development is achieved.
Target Group: Civil society organisations, local governments
Ethiopia:
Tool: Cities’ Reform Profile
Quick Win: Easy accessible self assessment of cities allows for comparison
between cities and critical review by other cities as well as by regional and
federal institutions 
Communication between cities and between different levels initiated.
Motivation for better performance increased.
Target Group: Administrations on municipal, regional and federal level
increased.
Target Group: Administrations on municipal, regional and federal level
10
No. 4 June ‘09
Lesotho:
Tool: HIV & AIDS Essential Service
Package (ESP)
Quick Win: ESP is a nationwide
application of the GateWay
Approach. Councils identify their
priorities from a pre-structured
list of interventions based on
internationally recognizedbest
practises. Using established
financial procedures the councils
implement their plans, thus deliver
services asked for by the citizens.
Target Group: District and
Community Councils, citizens.
Territorial Governance
NN after Ina Thiel left in 12/08
The group work has come to a certain
stand still particularly due to the
departure of group members. The
main thrust of the room work was
to “Contribute to future orientation
of portfolio in policy area Territorial
Governance“. In the meantime, several
initiatives in GTZ Head Office have
evolved in the same direction, as for
example: establishment of new sector
project territorial governance in Rural
Development Division and a discussion
paper on regional governance by
the Sector Unit Decentralisation/
Municipal Development. There is
an obvious need to link the Room’s
working agenda with the colleagues in
Eschborn to explore how cooperation
could be established and how the
working group could best contribute
to existing Head Office discussions
instead of developing an own and
isolated discussion paper as originally
envisaged in the Rooms working
agenda.
Decentralisation – The
African Way – Cultural Values
and Decentralisation in Africa
Rajeev Ahal, Lesotho
Rajeev Ahal has been appointed Room
coordinator as of December 2008 and
provided the Room members with an
interesting and provocative Concept
Note and Feedback questionnaire in
January 2009 regarding the Room’s
main objective, namely “Integration
of socio-cultural elements to the
political design of decentralisation in
Africa.” The concept note and the
adherent questionnaire template is
intended to stimulate a debate among
programmes and GGA members
regarding the increasingly asked
question whether our programmes
are informed by and building upon
the African Context or are they having
limited impact because they bring in
inappropriate, foreign concepts of
Good Governance that do not sit well
with the Grain2 of African Societies.
The concept provides an excellent
opportunity to exchange our ideas
on decentralisation reform processes,
the role of civil society and traditional
authorities and the overall underlying
“value” system of state reform
processes.
At the Steering Group meeting in
April in Berlin it became obvious that
the Room initiative is closely linked to
the initiative on State Development
initiated by House 1. It has therefore
been suggested to closely align the
two Rooms and envisage organising a
joint Room meeting in July in order to
combine efforts.
Going with the Grain in African
Development?, Tim Kelsall , Development
Policy Review, 2008, 26 (6): 627-655, 2008
Overseas Development Institute.
2
11
Outlook and upcoming events
• The House decentralisation will
continue its efforts and process of
incorporation of national experts in
Rooms
• At least 24 GGA members will
participates in Sector Unit conference
(Decentralisation, Regional, Urban
and Municipal Development) from
1-3 July in Berlin. The topic is
Fiscal Decentralisation, conference
language is German.
• Africities conference: envisaged
from 16-20 December 2009 in
Marrakech (www.africities.org). We
hope that our House decentralisation
may be used as a platform to well
coordinated GTZ presence and
contributions to this important event
and encourage our AMCOD/UCLGA
project to play an important role in
coordination and communication.
Particulars
• Sabine Diallo has left her position as
Programme Manager of PADDEL in
Cameroon and is now GTZ Country
Director in Benin. Barbara Haeming
will take over the position as from
July 1st 2009. A warm Welcome
to the House Decentralisation,
Barbara.
• Same warm welcome to Dr.
Volker Moenikes who assumed
responsibility for the Decentralisation
Support Programme in Ghana as
successor of Nikolas Beckmann.
• Lena Weiler has been recruited as
support to the Steering Group and
GGA Secretariat. She will officially
start on 1st of July 2009 and will
be based in South Africa, as 50%
of her work time will be dedicated
to the GGA and 50% to the SLGP
Programme. We are looking forward
to have her on board.
No. 4 June ‘09
4
Striving for Good Governance in Resourcerich Countries: A Sisyphus-task?
Breaking the ground
for a regional GTZ
approach to Natural
Resource Governance
in Sub-Sahara Africa
Kristian Lempa, State and Democracy Division
As a punishment from the gods,
Sisyphus was compelled to roll a huge
rock up a steep hill. But before he
could reach the top of the hill, the
rock would always roll back down
again, forcing him to commence once
more. The reoccurring dynamics on
the international commodities markets
resemble this Greek mythology. Again
and again, developing countries
assisted by their partners struggle to
translate natural resource wealth into
470
450
430
410
390
370
350
330
310
290
270
250
230
210
190
170
150
130
110
90
70
sustainable development, particularly
when prices are high. Again and again,
as soon as prices start to tumble the
mood grows somber since another
time opportunities were not met with
genuine achievements.
The relationship between natural
resource wealth and development
has attracted increasing attention
in the international debate recently
(e.g. Collier 2007; Humphrey/Sachs/
Stiglitz 2007). The now predominant
concept of the “Paradox of Plenty”
(Karl 2007) depicts the disturbing
reality that more often than not
natural resource wealth correlates with
poverty, bad governance and violent
conflict instead of being the catalyst
for sustainable development and
the achievement of the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs).
The unprecedented price boom for
natural resources witnessed between
2003 and mid-2008 made this
paradox even more obvious. New
investors, such as China, with a high
demand for primary resources to
ensure their industrial development,
had entered the market, driving
prices and revenues to unexpected
highs. Again, the boom was by and
large not matched with sustainable
social and economic development
in most of the exporting countries,
particularly in Sub-Sahara Africa. A
huge opportunity for the region is
lost and it is important to understand
what went wrong.
Fig. 1: HWWI Commodity Price Index 2005-2009.
470
450
430
410
390
370
350
330
310
290
270
250
230
210
190
170
150
130
110
90
70
Gesamtindex / Total index
Nahrungsmittel / Food
Industrierohstoffe / Industrial raw materials
Rohöl / Crude oil
2005
2006
2007
2008
Monthly averages (the average for the last month shown is incomplete until the end of the month).
12
2009
No. 4 June ‘09
As a first step it is vital to establish
the number of countries concerned.
According to the IMF definition
currently there are 17 countries
in Sub-Sahara Africa classified as
resource rich.2 Of these countries
ten are regarded as Least Developed
Countries (LDCs) by the UN (2009
data). Only to take one example, a
country like the Democratic Republic
of Congo is one of most resource rich
countries globally but at the same
time has a per capita income of only
US$ 140 per year.3
All things considered there are thus at
least 10 LDCs in Sub-Sahara Africa that
are far away from the achievement of
the MDGs but have access to immense
natural resource wealth. Against this
background, a World Bank report
concluded in 2004:
“Under current scenarios overall
aid resources will be insufficient to
meet the Millennium Development
Goals (MDGs). For many developing
countries, oil, gas and mining are
important assets that should play a
role in supporting economic growth
if these countries are to achieve the
MDGs.” (World Bank 2004)
Having said that, it is common place
by now, that natural resource wealth
frequently works in the opposite
direction. The adverse effects of natural
resource wealth on development
have been subject to profound
The IMF classification is based on actual
production figures, such as the fraction of
national revenue from the extractive sector.
As the most recent data to identify resource
rich countries is from 2007, important new
players such as Niger, Mali, Madagascar
and Uganda are not yet included.
3
World Bank World Development Indicators
2007: GNI per capita, atlas method with
current US$.
2
analysis. Three main problems
have been indentified. Firstly, the
return on public investment (i.e. the
quality of public spending) tends to
decrease in resource rich developing
countries (Collier/Hoeffler 2009).
Secondly, the overall productivity of
a rentier economy4 is significantly
reduced
(Collier/Goderis
2007).
Finally, and maybe most damaging
to development, natural resource
wealth considerably increases the risk
of violent conflict (Besley/Persson
2008).
These findings encapsulate two
important insights for the work of
GTZ on governance in resource-rich
developing countries. First of all and
rather encouragingly, all the studies
qualify the effects of natural resource
wealth on development with regard
to the quality of governance in a
given country. In an environment of
good governance the curse of natural
resource wealth can be turned into a
blessing: increased national income
can be used for high rewarding
public investments, the economy
can be diversified and fair wealthsharing mechanisms can help to avoid
conflicts.
The second insight of this research
concerns the direct negative impact
of the availability of natural resource
rents5 on the quality of governance.
A rentier economy is generally defined
as an economical system where the
majority of economic actors is engaging
in the exploitation of structural shortages
(e.g. natural resource extraction)
instead of productive factor input (e.g.
manufacturing).
5
The rent from resource extraction is
calculated as the difference between the
price at which an output from a resource
can be sold and its respective extraction and
production costs, including normal return.
Normal return equals the opportunity costs
of labor and capital.
4
13
Generally speaking, resource rents
lead to the “adverse selection”
phenomenon, basically attracting
actors to the political and economic
sphere with an agenda detrimental to
good governance.
Firstly, natural resource rents set
incentives for politics of patronage
as buying loyalty is made feasible by
easily available surplus funds (and
remains cheaper than providing public
goods and services for the whole of
society). Thereby effective checks
and balances on the usage of public
money are gradually eroded or never
effectively built up.6 Secondly, rentier
economies set incentives for economic
actors to engage in less productive
economic activities with easy access to
rent funds, impeding the development
of a diverse economy.7
The challenge natural resource
wealth poses to the quest for good
governance grows with prices. The
good governance adverse incentives
set by natural resource rents follow
in their magnitude the price trends of
the primary commodity market. High
prices mean enormous, Sisyphus-task
like challenges, low prices signify an
opportunity to set things on the right
track for the future.
Figure 1 shows that at the moment we
are entering a new age of opportunity
for good governance in resource
rich countries. Prices have come
done, opening the scope for necessary
reforms. The according tasks, i.e.
the development of effective checks
In a further unfortunate spin, politics of
patronage lead to political frustration on the
side of non-patronised opposition groups,
again increasing the risk of violent conflict.
7
This constitutes the core of the famous
“Dutch Disease.“
6
No. 4 June ‘09
and balances, an economic policy
aimed at a diverse and productive
economy and the establishment of
fair and transparent wealth-share
mechanisms are by no means new to
the work of GTZ. Assisting countries
to develop and sustain good political
and economic governance is at the
centre of our consulting services in
Sub-Sahara Africa and elsewhere.
Natural Resource Governance in this
holistic understanding of GTZ enables
partner countries and institutions to
fence the various negative incentives
set by natural resource rents. One
example in this respect is the GTZ
support to the implementation of the
Extractive Industries Transparency
Initiative (EITI, e.g. Ghana, CEMAC,
DRC). Through the establishment of
revenue transparency the approach
improves checks and balances on
how public money is used. This finally
reduces the incentives for patronage
politics and therefore increases the
return on public spending.
Natural Resource Governance is
hence a combination of a political
and economic governance approach.
The GTZ portfolio in this respect is
constantly growing and diversifying in
areas such as social and environmental
standards certification (International
Conference of the Great Lakes Region)
and local economic development
(fragile states of West Africa). The
Germany Ministry for Economic
Cooperation and Development (BMZ)
clearly identifies good governance
as a key issue for its quest for
sustainable development in resource
rich countries (BMZ 2006: p. 18).
The role of natural resource wealth in
development was one of the priorities
during the German presidency of the
EU and the G8.
The overarching objective is to assist
partner countries and institutions
to overcome the Sisyphus-task of
building good governance in resourcerich developing countries and to
harness their wealth for sustainable
development in the future. We are
witnessing a time frame of opportunity
to do so at the moment. Our efforts
in this respect will be tested in the
mid-term by a re-occurrence of rising
prices. The next steep hill might finally
be overcome.
References/Further Reading
Besley, Thimothy / Persson, Torsten
(2008): The Incidence of Civil War.
Theory and Evidence: NBER Working Paper No. 14585.
BMZ (2006): Entwickelt Öl?
Möglichkeiten der entwicklungsorientierten Nutzung der Öleinnahmen in sub-Sahara Afrika:
Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn.
Collier, Paul (2007): The Bottom
Billion. Why the Poorest Countries
Are Failing and What Can Be Done
About it: Oxford University Press,
Oxford.
Collier, Paul / Goderis, Benedikt
(2007): Commodity Prices, Growth,
and the Natural Resource Curse.
Reconciling a Conundrum: Centre
for the Study of African Economies
WPS/2007-15.
14
Collier, Paul / Hoeffler, Andrea
(2009): Testing the Neocon Agenda. Democracy and Natural Resource Rents: European Economic
Review 53 (3), pp. 293-308.
Humphreys, Macartan / Sachs, Jeffrey D. / Stiglitz, Joseph E. (2007):
Escaping the Resource Curse: University of California Press, Berkeley,
CA.
Karl, Terry Lynn (2007): The Paradox
of Plenty. Oil Booms and PetroStates: University of California
Press, Berkeley, CA.
World Bank (2004): Striking a better balance. The World Bank Group
and Extractive Industries. The Final
Report of the Extractive Industries
Review. World Bank Group Management Response.: World Bank,
Washington, D.C.
No. 4 June ‘09
5
Any of my business? Why bilateral
programmes matter to regional ones and
vice-versa
The example of GTZ
support to the APRM
Anne Friederike Röder and Tarquin
Mészáros, Support to Pan-African
Institutions, South Africa
Against the background of the
dynamics of the African integration
process and the concurrent growth of
the BMZ’s regional and pan-African
portfolio in Sub-Sahara Africa, the
GGA Sector Network has realised the
need to strengthen linkages between
national, regional and continental
GTZ programmes. During the last
Meeting of House 2 “Regional
Governance Reform Processes” in
South Africa a new Room or working
group was formed to further explore
the potential for cooperation between
the various operational levels:
Information on existing and potential
linkages and synergies between the
different projects will be compiled in a
matrix. On basis of such an overview,
vertical cooperation could unfold
or be strengthened at project level.
The information could also be used
for GTZ country planning processes
or in government-to-government
negotiations. The realisation of this
multi-level agenda will require the
involvement of all three houses of
the GGA. Colleagues working in
Governance programmes at the
national and sub-national level have
already been contacted. The joint
output is meant to be presented at
the next GGA general assembly in
November 2009 in Dakar.
Whereas there is clearly a lot of
untapped potential in the context of
strengthening linkages between the
levels, there already exist some good
examples of cooperation: One is
the GTZ interplay for the support of
the African Peer Review Mechanism
(APRM).
The APRM is known as a pan-African
initiative fostering the adoption and
improvement of Good Governance
policies and practices. However, it
would be wrong to think that the
APRM is mainly concerned with the
continental level: Most of the steps
of the APRM process take place at
country level, under the leadership
of the country itself. The country has
first to organize a self-assessment. The
nd
country review, the 2 step, is led by
the continental structures, but with
the strong involvement of all country
stakeholders. The peer review - where
the concerned Head of State has to
present the country review to his/her
peers - is the only real continental part
of the process. After the peer review,
the country has to engage in the
implementation of the programme of
action that flows from of the review
process. It is also at the country level
where the APRM has eventually to
prove its impact.
On behalf of BMZ, the GTZ
programme “Support to Pan-African
15
Institutions based in South Africa”
(SPAI) supports the APRM process,
both at continental and country level.
Obviously this is not possible without
the close cooperation with GTZ offices
and relevant programmes in the
respective countries. SPAI and some
GTZ offices and bilateral programmes
have
already
forged
fruitful
cooperations in order to support
the APRM process as effectively as
possible: In Uganda, a GTZ consultant
assists the national APRM structures in
harmonizing the programme of action
with the national development plan.
In Mozambique, SPAI has provided
funding for the APRM process
whilst the Mozambican-German
decentralization programme has lent
direct support. In Zambia, the Good
Governance programme already works
with civil society on the APRM and
will, with SPAI, identify possibilities
of supporting the government in this
process, be it through the bilateral or
the regional programme.
These examples show that cooperation
between the different levels is a winwin situation which will, facilitated
by the new Room “Strengthening
Synergies and Linkages between the
National, Regional and Continental
Level”, hopefully become more
common in the future. We are looking
forward of working together with our
“bilateral” colleagues towards this
end! More information on the Room’s
activities will be sent around shortly.
No. 4 June ‘09
6
The Joint Africa-European Union Strategic
Partnership with special reference to the
Partnerships on ‘Democratic Governance
and Human Rights’
Old wine in new tubes
or a real new era of
cooperation?
Anna Elisabeth Mildeberger8
Background
1.
Ratified at the second EU-Africa
summit in Lisbon on 8 and 9
December 2007 the Joint AfricaEU Strategy (JAES) is rather
innovative in the history of Europe’s
cooperation with Africa. The first
EU-Africa Strategy, developed in
2005, was heavily criticised by
Africans as not appropriate with
African needs. The EU took note
of this criticism and developed
jointly with representatives of
African member states and the
AU Commission a Joint Africa-EU
Strategy and a first Action Plan
for the implementation of eight
thematic Partnerships (20082010).
Political Importance for the
German Government and the
BMZ
2.
Chancellor Angela Merkel and
Minister for Economic Cooperation
and Development Heidemarie
Wieczorek-Zeul
recurrently
demonstrate Germany’s interest
and political will in enhancing
cooperation
with
Africa
(Heiligendamm
2007,
G20
summit in London 2009 and other
global fora). As the JAES is a high
ranking political framework, in
which German development
and related policies should
integrate,
Germany’s
active
involvement in its implementation
is important. In doing so, aligning
GTZ-Senior Advisor, ‘Implementation of
the Joint Africa EU Strategy’ in the Federal
Ministry for Economic Cooperation and
Development (BMZ). The views expressed
herein are those of the author and should
not be attributed to the Federal Ministry of
Economic Development and Cooperation or
any other party.
3.
In accordance with BMZ’s regional
policies for Africa the Partnerships
on ‘Energy’ and ‘Democratic
Governance and Human Rights’
were selected as areas of high
importance. Germany (BMZ and
the Federal Foreign Office) and
Portugal are European Co-Chairs
The JAES – Implementation via Eight Thematic Partnerships
1.
Peace & Security
5.
Energy
2.
Democratic Governance and
Human Rights
6.
Climate Change
7.
3.
Trade, Regional Integration and
Infrastructure
Migration, Mobility &
Employment
8.
Science, Information Society and
Space
4.
8
will be taken seriously. While
the Federal Foreign Office is the
overall coordinator of the JAES on
the German side, Federal Ministry
for Economic Cooperation and
Development (BMZ) is strongly
implicated in all development
issues. Minister Wieczorek-Zeul
decided that her Ministry actively
supports implementation of a
number of JAES partnerships.
Millennium Development Goals
and
harmonizing
European
concepts and strategies will be
a major value added in increasing
development effectiveness. Thus,
the Accra Agenda for Action (AAA)
on Alignment and Harmonization
16
of the Partnership for “Democratic
Governance and Human Rights’’.
Jointly with Austria Germany cochairs the ‘Energy partnership’ on
the European side. In addition,
BMZ has a coordinating role within
the German Government in the
No. 4 June ‘09
three partnerships on ‘MDGs’,
‘Regional
Integration,
Trade,
and Infrastructure’, and ‘Climate
change’. The partnerships on
‘Peace & Security’ and ‘Migration,
Mobility and Employment’ are
coordinated within the German
Government by the Federal Foreign
Office, and the partnership on
‘Science, Information Society, and
Space’ by the Ministry of Science
and Research. BMZ department
on Regional Development Policy
for Africa is coordinating all
BMZ contributions to the eight
partnerships and acts jointly with
the Federal Foreign Office as focal
point for cross-cutting issues (e.g.
policy coherence, involvement
of civil society organizations and
parliaments).
the changing geopolitical context,
the JAES is at its core a political
relationship. It is designed to be
a people-centred partnership
whereby African and the European
member states ought to empower
and mobilize a broad spectrum
of European and African nonstate-actors. Africa is treated as
a single entity and not divided
into Northern and Sub-Sahara
Africa. The Africa-EU political
dialogue on common challenges
is upgraded to enable a strong and
sustainable continent-to continent
partnership, with the AU and the
EU commissions at the centre. It
should be noted that the JAES is
complementing but not replacing
existing policy frameworks for EUAfrica relations. Existing political
frameworks9 are not set-off; they
continue to operate in parallel for
the time being. This stresses the
need for the JAES to integrate
all relevant results of on-going
political processes in order to avoid
overlapping and duplication.
The JAES – objectives
and thematic areas of
implementation
4.
On the basis of common values,
direct
neighbourhood
and
historical, political and economic
ties, the JAES and its First Action
Plan (2008-2010) strive to find
appropriate answers to new
challenges in a rapidly globalizing
world. The new strategic AfricaEU Partnership is not more of the
same, but a new era of cooperation
which goes beyond institutions,
beyond traditional development
cooperation and beyond Africa-EU.
The active integration of African
and European member states offers
chances. Driven by integration
processes in Africa and the EU,
challenges of globalisation, and
in joint decision-making and
working arrangements10. The Joint
expert groups which are supposed
to involve CSO’s, parliaments,
and private sector are new
implementation tools. The informal
implementation teams (ITs) are
expert based bodies, mandated
to jointly implement the first and
following action plans agreed upon
by the Africa-EU summit 2007. ITs
are not allowed to take political
decisions.
6.
New architecture, new actors
and why structures matter
5.
As an overarching policy framework
the JAES requires a comprehensive
architectural set-up. Diagram 1
(on the following page) shows
the various levels of complexity
Linking the work of the eight
joint expert groups with the
commissions and governments on
both sides is politically important to
formalize the outputs of the informal
partnerships and harmonize them
with other political negotiation
processes and policies between the
two continents. It becomes evident
that the organizational set-up
and the steering of such complex
and ambitious groupings is a real
challenge. This new cooperation
culture needs time to adopt.
Nevertheless, first encouraging
progress can be acknowledged:
agreement on the architectural
set-up and preliminary road
maps including deliverables, time
tables and actors. Joint EU-Africa
declarations and positions were
issued recently, e.g. ’Climate
Change’, ‘women, peace and
security.
e.g. Cotonou Partnership Agreement
9
(CPA) and the negotiations on
Economic Partnership Agreements
(EPAs), European Neighbourhood
Policy (ENP), Trade, Development and
Cooperation Agreement (TDCA) with
South Africa.
17
It should be noted that this diagram
10
does not reflect all current varieties
of cooperation. The architecture is
evolving.
No. 4 June ‘09
AFRICA
JOINT STRUCTURES
Summits
EU MS
Ministerial Troika
Gen. Sect. Council
AU MS
GOVERNMENTS
EUROPE
Africa Working Group
(Council)
Senior Officials
Meeting
PARLIAMENTS AND
OTHER OFFICIAL BODIES
COMMISSIONS
AU Delegation
to the EU
AUC Africa
taskforce
EU Delegation
to the AU
AUC
College to College
meeting
AU-EU Taskforce
CIDO
PAP + National
parliaments
RECs
CIVIL SOCIETY
ECOSOCC
8 Partnerships:
each one has a
Joint Expert Group (JEG)
EC
Africa intra-service
taskforce
EC
Delegations
(in Africa)
B DG DEV
focal points
AF ITs
(African
implementation
teams)
EU ITs
(European
implementation
teams)
AUC
EC
AU MS
EU MS
EP
EESC
CIVIL SOCIETY
EU CSO
Steering Group
Diagram 1: Institutional architecture of the
JEAS
(ECDPM Discussion paper on the
JAES No. 87, Feb 200911)
Veronika Tywuschik and Andrew Sherriff;
Beyond structures? Reflections on the
Implementation of the Joint Africa-EU
Strategy, Discussion Paper No. 87, February
2009; www.ecdpm.org/dp87
11
18
No. 4 June ‘09
The Partnership
on ‘Democratic
Governance and
Human Rights’
Objectives and the first
action plan 2008 - 2010
The partnership on ‘Democratic
Governance and Human Rights’
is based on the understanding
that both European and African
member states acknowledge
these core values as key for
sustainable development and
for the cooperation among the
two partners. The partnership will
engage in a continent-to-continent
dialogue and cooperation in a wide
range of areas among which are:
e.g. the protection of human rights
and fundamental freedoms for all,
democratic principles, the rule of law
and equitable access to legal systems,
fight against corruption and fraud,
and global governance.
Actors and State of play
7.
Besides the partnership on ‘Peace
and Security’ the partnership on
‘Democratic
Governance
and
Human Rights’ is surely tackling the
most sensitive issues of all eight
partnerships. Hence, Democratic
Governance and Human Rights
are especially challenging topics
for this intercontinental dialogue
and cooperation. Until today, the
partnership held its second informal
Joint Expert Group meeting in
Lisbon on 30 and 31 March 2009.
Co-chaired on the African side
by Egypt (and vice-chaired by
Nigeria) and on the European side
by Germany and Portugal about 30
representatives from Africa and EU
were present and participated in
elaborating a road map for 2009
and 2010.
8.
Over the last months a mapping
of Governance and Human
Rights activities of member
states was initiated in the context
of the three priority actions: (1)
Enhance dialogue at global level
and in international for a, (2)
Promote the African Peer Review
Mechanism (APRM) and Support to
the African Charter on Democracy,
Elections and Governance, and (3)
Strengthen Cooperation in the Area
of Cultural Goods. Member States
on both sides showed interest in
conducting several joint activities.
In the area of enhanced cooperation
in International Fora the European
side presented an impulse paper to
engage participants in discussions
on possible fields of cooperation
and joint action. African and
European
participants
stated
their interest in areas like anticorruption and the Universal
Peer Review (UPR); concretization
of joint actions is expected during
the next joint meeting. Under the
Africa-EU Human Rights Dialogue
a civil society seminar was held
on ‘freedom of association and
issues of torture’. In the next joint
meeting, the Partnership will discuss
African views on support and
cooperation on African Peer Review
Mechanism (APRM) and on the
ratification and implementation of
the African Charter on Democracy,
Elections,
and
Governance.
Concrete cooperation in four
election observation programs
and in the area of decentralization
19
and
local
governance
was
already agreed upon. Based on a
paper prepared by Morocco on
strengthening networking and
exchanging experience on local
government and decentralization
joint actions will be developed.
A long way to go …
9.
The start of the implementation
of the JAES was difficult and in
many ways the process is still not
easy. Bridging cultural rifts and
reaching a common understanding
takes time, especially since the
strategic Africa-EU partnership is
de facto of an asymmetric nature
and shows different levels of
capacities, organization and
integration. Inadequate capacities
for this complex political process
are experienced on both continents.
While traditional EU member states
have lots of experiences in steering
international political processes,
new EU member states, and
especially African countries do face
capacity bottlenecks. However,
this new approach offers chances.
Added value can be reached by
exchanging expertise in groupings
beyond governmental institutions
(civil society, parliaments) and
influencing
political
decisionmaking from below. Supporting
regional initiatives and learning
platforms by coherent European
approaches and interventions will
definitely improve cooperation and
understanding on both sides. So
far all thematic Partnerships have
not yet reached this state of play.
Dialogue is still mostly confined to
the diplomatic level; discussions
are more political in nature and
abstract. There is still a lot of work
No. 4 June ‘09
to be done in order to increase
effectiveness of the Africa-EUPartnerships.
A potential role for GTZ
10.Germany’s diversified development
organizational landscape offers
comparative
advantages
regarding
other
European
institutions capacities in supporting
implementation of the strategy. Due
to its field experience and presence
in African countries, GTZ has easy
access to partner organizations governmental, non-governmental,
para-governmental. This comparative advantage could be used
to support African partners
willing to join implementation
of the JAES. Providing advice and
support to the opinion building and
positioning process of the ‘(pan)
African Voice’ in the joint activities
of the partnerships is a well-invested
endeavour. This support should
not be misunderstood as pirating
the partnership from a Donor’s
side. On the contrary, GTZ would
be providing practical capacity
building for strengthening the
pan African Governance structure
which is unquestionably needed for
building a positive future of Africa.
Such support would also link up
bilateral with EU cooperation and
thus speed up harmonization and
alignment of cooperation strategies
and concepts amongst European
Donors and increase effectiveness.
A final word
11.The
Joint Africa-EU Strategy is
not at all ‘old wine in new tubes’.
The joint strategy follows a new,
more partner- and peoplecentred approach and strives
for cooperation on equal footing.
A new cooperation culture is
envisaged. Although the above
shows that the implementation
of the Africa-EU Strategy is a
complex and challenging process
and far from being easy to handle
it, nonetheless it offers good
chances for member states of both
continents to take part in designing
the future of European-African
development cooperation and the
pan-African aid architecture. The
strategy counts on a shared vision.
There is need to include more
countries and actors to share this
vision.
Membership
We would like to welcome the
following 18 new members to the
sector network:
Robson Chakwana, SADC Reform
and Governance, Botswana
Kaputo Chenga, Good Governance,
Zambia
Tassilo
von
Droste,
Governance, Mauritania
Good
Sophia Gallina, SADC Peace, Security
and Governance, Botswana
Dedo Geinitz, Good Governance,
Zambia
Imogen Kuehn, Decentralisation
and Local Development, Senegal
Allan Lassey, Good
Governance, Ghana
Financial
Volker Moenikes, Support for
Decentralisation Reform, Ghana
Matthias Muehle, Support to Public
Finance Management Reforms,
Kenya
Helen Radeke, Implementation of
Paris Declaration, Cameroon
Stefan Raths, Advisory Office to
IGAD Secretariat, Djibouti
Stefanie Rauscher, Good Financial
Governance, Ghana
Anne-Friederike Roeder, Support
to Pan-African Institutions, South
Africa
Franziska Roetzer, Support to Office
of the Prime Minister, Uganda
Juergen Runge, Strengthening
of Resource Governance, Central
African Republic
Upcoming events
Goetz von Stumpfeldt, Resource
Transparency, DRC
The next GGA General Assembly and Conference will
take place from 02-05 November 2009 in Dakar, Senegal.
Conference languages will be English and French.
Meszaros Tarquin, Support to PanAfrican Institutions, South Africa
20
Markus Wagner, International
Conference on the Great Lakes
Region, Burundi