1

AID & DEVELOPMENT EFFECTIVENESS

 

EU JOINT PROGRAMMING

1st Interim Meeting of the Policy Forum on DevelopmentBrussels, 11 May 2012Alex GerbrandijEEAS/Development Cooperation Coordination Division

Joint Programming – Background

– Momentum: Council Conclusions for Busan of November 2011; Agenda for Change

– Aid effectiveness purpose- Reduced fragmentation through division of labour- Increased transparency and predictability- EU donors as part of problem and solution

– Strengthened EU external action purpose: joint undertaking COM-EEAS

– Final product: single joint programming document, hopefully replacing at least partly individual programming documents

Joint Programming – Main features (1)

Scope

– Joint analysis/response to partner countries’ national plans

– In-country division of labour for all sectors of intervention (not cross-country division of labour)

– Indicative financial allocation per sector and donor (not country allocations)

– Not bilateral implementation plans

Joint Programming – Main features (2)

Change of approach

– Focus work at partner country level: Brussels light

– Synchronisation with partner countries’ cycles: ownership by partner country government

– ‘Strategy’ light

– Maximum of 3 sectors

– Open to committed non-EU donors, but EU as a driving force

Joint Programming – Next steps (1)

Joint programming to be conducted in 2012

– Following letter from HR/VP Ashton, Commissioners Piebalgs and Füle of January 2012, Heads of Missions reports received early March from the potential 11 partner countries

– Positive assessment for 2012: Ethiopia, Ghana, Guatemala, Laos, [Mali], Rwanda

– No conducive environment for joint programming or for later: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Moldova, Tunisia, Ukraine

Joint Programming – Next steps (2)

Preparing ground for possible next waves

– On the basis of 2012 and South Sudan experience

– Assessment by Delegations in 2012 as part of programming; consultation with stakeholders including civil society proposals by September 2012

– Possibility for interim period before new partner countries’ cycles start

7

Many EU cooks in the aid kitchen…..

88

Where fragmention will lead to: health in Kenya

Contra-ceptives and

RHequipment

STIDrugs

EssentialDrugs

Vaccinesand

Vitam in ATB/Leprosy

BloodSafety

Reagents(inc. HIV

tests)

DFID

KfW

UNICEF

JICA

GOK, W B/IDA

Source offunds for

com m odities

Com m odityType

(colour coded) M OHEquip-m ent

Point of firstw arehousing

KEM SA Central W arehouse

KEM SARegionalDepots

Organizationresponsible

for delivery todistrict levels

KEM SA and KEM SA Regional Depots (essential drugs, m alaria drugs,

consum able supplies)

Procurem entAgent/Body

Crow nAgents

Governmentof Kenya

GOK

GTZ(p rocurem ent

im plem entationunit)

JSI/DELIVER/KEM SA LogisticsM anagem ent Unit (contraceptives,

condom s, STI kits, HIV test kits, TBdrugs, RH equipm ent etc)

EU

KfW

UNICEF

KEPI ColdStore

KEPI(vaccines

andvitam in A)

M alaria

USAID

USAID

UNFPA

EUROPA

Condomsfor STI/

HIV/AIDSprevention

CIDA

UNFPA

USGov

CDC

NPHLS store

M EDS(to M issionfacilities)

PrivateD rug

Source

GDF

Governm ent

NGO/Private

Bilateral Donor

M ultilateral Donor

W orld Bank Loan

Organization Key

JapanesePrivate

C om pany

WHO

GAVI

SIDA

NLTP(TB/

Leprosydrugs

Commodity Logistics System in Kenya (as of April 2004) Constructed and produced by Steve Kinzett, JSI/Kenya - please com m unicateany inaccuracies to skinzett@ cb.jsikenya.com or telephone 2727210

Anti-RetroVirals

(ARVs)

Labor-atorysupp-

lies

GlobalFund forAIDS, TB

and M alaria

The"Consortium"

(Crow n Agents,GTZ, JSI and

KEMSA)

BTC

M EDS

DANIDA

M ainly District level staff: DPHO, DPHN, DTLP, DASCO, DPHO, etc or staff from the Health Centres,Dispensaries com e up and collect from the District level

M EDS

Provincial andDistrict

HospitalLaboratory

Staff

Organizationresponsible fordelivery to sub-

district levels

KNCV

M SF

M SF

Aid Fragmentation in Uganda source: OECD

Aid Fragmentation in Uganda- 2008

IDA26%

United States14%

United Kingdom

8%EC8%

Denmark6%

Netherlands5%

AfDF5%

Ireland4%

Germany4%

Sweden4%

Norway3%

Canada3%

The Global Fund3%

Japan1% 11 donors

5%

Belgium1%

Aid Fragmentation in Uganda- 2008EU MS together

IDA25%

United States14%

AfDF5%

Norway3%

Canada3%

The Global Fund3%

European Union43%

6 donors3%

Japan1%

Joint Programming

In conclusion:

– Joint programming offers a strong political as well as operational instrument for the EU to work better together, to increase its coordination and to strengthen its impact on poverty reduction.