February 3, 2012
The high share of aid provided to relatively better-off middle income countries is one of the biggest challenges to the aid record of the European Commission. But what are the reasons behind this?
Simon Maxwell sets out to explore the issue in this EDCSP Opinion.
January 11, 2012
Over on his website, Simon Maxwell looks at the outcome of the climate talks in Durban, focusing on the central role played by the EU. Simon notes:
“The most interesting aspect for me is the role of the EU in brokering this deal, first by developing the idea of a ‘road-map’ to a post-Kyoto framework, and second by stitching together an alliance across the traditional dividing lines of Annex 1, Annex 2 and non-Annex 1 countries, as well as large and small emitters. I can’t say that I have studied the internal EU processes in any detail, nor been able to disentangle the role of European institutions versus Member States, but at first sight Connie Hedegaard, the EU Climate Commissioner, deserves a great deal of credit. There are a couple of implications.
First, Durban may well provide a case study of why it is sensible for Member States to work together through the EU, and of how to do it. At a time of political crisis in Europe, there are valuable lessons about the benefits of developing an EU-wide vision and set of targets, as well as specific instruments like the European Emissions Trading Scheme, however flawed (but NB worth celebrating and defending, especially given the current row with the Chinese, Americans and others about bringing airline emissions into the Scheme). Are there implications for development ministers working on climate change, but also more widely?
Second, it is interesting to speculate whether and how EU momentum will be sustained. Is it sensible to think, for example, that the global public good would be served if EU Member States concentrated more of their climate change energy through Brussels institutions rather than bilaterally – giving Connie Hedegaard more bargaining power in the negotiations over a new treaty? From a development angle, there might be implications for the funding of the EU’s Global Climate Change Alliance, so far very poorly funded, and for the allocation of bilateral funds, like the UK’s International Climate Fund.”
To read more, click here.
December 20, 2011
In development circles, we often ask what ‘Europe’ can contribute to our development objectives. However, with Europe in financial and perhaps even political crisis, isn’t time we asked what development can contribute to our European objectives? Simon Maxwell sets out three answers to this question in his latest EDCSP blog.
December 6, 2011
As the European Commission is on the eve of releasing legislative proposals on the future financial instruments and regulations for external action, researchers from the European Think-Tanks Group identify six key points for Members of the European Parliament to keep an eye on.
Read more here.
Also published by EurActiv.
October 31, 2011
In this ODI blog, Heidi Tavakoli analyses the European Commission’s new strategy for budget support.
As one of the biggest providers of budget support, any policy changes by the EC will not only affect the budget support landscape, but may also drive changes in many of its member states. Heidi notes that the new proposal introduces two significant changes: firstly, the EC proposes that budget support becomes a political instrument; and secondly, as with DFID, the EC will change the name of its budget support instruments to better reflect its objectives. Read more here to see how this could be both a ‘name changer’ and a ‘game changer’.
October 28, 2011
Following the Commission’s launch of its latest mission statement on development policy – ‘An Agenda for Change’ – the EDCSP’s Mikaela Gavas, with German Development Institute’s Svea Koch and Dr. Mark Furness, have written an article questioning is it really an Agenda for Change? Is it ambitious enough to equip the Commission to tackle global challenges such as poverty, the food crisis, the economic slump, climate change, and insecurity? And will it be able to deliver greater impact?
Read their analysis here (English) and here (German).
