January 1999

• Evaluation of EC aid
• EC aid to ACP countries. 
• European Commission Services.
• Hot Spots
• European Code of Conduct
• Amazonia Meeting
• EU Forest Agenda

In June 1995, a global evaluation of EC aid was requested by the Development Council. The evaluation covers the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP), Asia Latin America (ALA) and Mediterenean (MED) regions. The synthesis reports, now available for ACP and MED regions, are based on desk and field studies. They conclude that the new European Commission (EC) Common Service (SCR) will improve the management of EC aid. However, a key problem in the EC is lack of communication between services. Absence of clear mandates for the External Directorates will lead to further mismanagement.

The evaluation states the EC has focussed, not on achieving results, but on administrative procedures and levels of disbursement. Constraints on EC aid include: lack of clear objectives, insufficient operational flexibility, inadequate monitoring of EC aid results.

The limitations within the EC are:

        1. A fragmented structure. Policy and operational units in DG VIII are unduly separated, which has resulted in              a culture of weak team-work and limited accountability.

2. Inadequate systems and procedures. The EC relies on limited and unsystematic information flows.

3. The excessive demands. Administration, policy dialogue and donor coordination have over-stretched the EC’s capacity. In terms of staffing there is a clear shortage of in-house specialist skills in institutional development, poverty reduction and priority areas, including environment.

4. There is little demand for lessons learnt. The capacity to ensure knowledge and best practice are          systematically incorporated is weak.

At the policy level, the report highlights the lack of prioritisation by the European Council and the Commission. DG IB should also operationalise policy documents.

MED aid is characterised by a range of instruments and programmes. This enables aid to be adapted to country needs. However, proliferation of budget lines has created inconsistencies, complicated by low disbursement leading to two parallel frameworks for MED cooperation.

Out of 46 identified evaluations covering 12 countries between 1986-95, only 33 could be physically located. These evaluations show that aid achievements are not encouraging.

The new practice of indicative and performance based cooperation, although not fully operational, is seen as fostering a closer dialogue between the EC and its partners. EC aid should be decentralised to its delegations.

The evaluations recommend that Member States help identify a strategic role for EC aid and provide

greater operational flexibility. EU coordination should be improved by appointing lead coordinators for the intervention sectors in each recipient country. EC delegations should be given technical assistance to support their capacity to monitor and implement programmes.

The evaluations see the creation of the SCR as a solution. However, further fragmentation and the lack of clear task allocation could easily increase the mismanagement of EC aid.

The Permanent Representatives' Committee will examine the evaluation to prepare the Development Council meeting on 21 May 1999.

The German Minister for Development, Ms Wieczoreck-Zeul, has stated that coordination between the EC and Member States needs to improve. As the EC and the large EU donors are working in the same areas, improved coordination is a priority for the German presidency. She stressed that EU aid needs a clear focus. At its next meeting, the Development Council will adopt recommendations to improve EC aid based on recent evaluations.

The Dutch Minister for Development, Ms Herfkens, has expressed strong criticisms of EC aid which she described as 'disastrous'. Despite the shift in the Dutch budget from bilateral to multilateral aid, she would decrease the Dutch contribution to the EC programme, if she could.

1. http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/dg08

2. http://www.euromed. net/ q

The European Commission Directorate General for Development Cooperation with ACP countries, DG VIII, has created a new unit for environment and natural resources, headed by Mrs Maria Savvaides-Polyzou. Within this unit, Mrs Anne de Ligne, is in charge of forest policy.

DG IB has appointed a new forester to replace Mr Andy Roby as National Detached Expert: Mr John Bazill. DG XI has appointed Mr Dieter Schöne to manage the global environment budget line.

In the new Common Service (SCR), Mr Zimmer is the head of the forest and environment technical unit, responsible for the management of ongoing forest and environment projects. Mr Pironio is in charge of ACP projects and Mr Mascagni for ALA-MED projects. Five staff manage approximately 595 forest and environment projects1 as well as gender projects.

1. excluding the new 1998 commitments

The Tropical Ecosystem Environment Observation by Satellites (TREES) managed by the EC Joint Research Center (JRC) has published a study: Identification of Deforestation Hot Spot Areas in the Humid Tropics1.

It locates areas of deforestation and characterises population movement, transport networks, agriculture and forest product schemes i.e. plantations as key forces of forest cover change.

The study concludes that deforestation may be irreversible in certain areas and conservation efforts should redirect their focus from sustainable management to the preservation of a few areas not identified as current or impending hotspots.

1.available from JRC fax: +39(0332)789960 q

On 15 January 1999, the European Parliament (EP) adopted a Resolution on EU standards for European enterprises operating in developing countries1.

The proposals brought forward by R. Howitt MEP, include a legal basis to govern companies' operations worldwide in respect of logging and other environmental agreements as well as labour and human rights.

The EP calls on the European Commission to set up an independent European monitoring body in close collaboration with social partners, NGO's and representatives of Indigenous and local communities. The EP states that the EC should develop a mechanism to cut its funding when companies breach fundamental rights.

NGOs, grassroots organisations and trade unions have increased pressure on companies to improve working conditions and respect environmental standards.

The report stresses that although voluntary regulation can promote better practice, binding rules are necessary to prevent the worst offences.

1. available from Fern

Amazonia Meeting

                       EU Forest Agenda

• 26 September: DG IB - VIII NGO Co-ordination Meeting on Tropical Forest Communication, Brussels

• 4 March: DG III Advisory Committee Group Meeting, Brussels

• 2-5 March: Workshop of the Congo Basin Forest Policy Dialogue and Training Programme, Lambarene, Gabon