Date: 10 July 2006
 
Speakers:
Melanie Rein, Senior Associate, University of Cambridge Programme for Industry
Janice Giffen, International NGO Training and Research Center (INTRAC)
Discussants: Clare Denvir, DG Development, European Commission
Pierre Berthelot, Director, Programme to support the integration of ACP States into the multilateral trading system, Emerging Markets Group
 
The meeting was the third in a series of seminars aimed at disseminating some of the studies carried out by distinguished scholars within the framework of the DFID-funded European Community Poverty Reduction Effectiveness Programme (EC-PREP). During the event, two studies dealing with horizontal development-related issues were presented by Dr. Melanie Rein, Senior Associate at the University of Cambridge Programme for Industry, and Mrs. Janice Giffen, of the International NGO Training and Research Center (INTRAC).
 
Rein started by presenting her study A Critical Analysis of Cross-Sector Partnerships in Southern Africa. First and foremost she explained that the very concept of partnership was embedded in the South African culture. She then went on to give a definition of partnership (based on two commonly accepted notions) and explaining that institutions, civil society and the business community are the three key actors in cross-sector partnerships. Rein also referred to the challenges that this modus operandi poses, dwelling in particular on the risk of greenwashing, i.e. the process through which private corporations promote their activities in the social sector in calculated marketing moves. The Cambridge scholar then explained that her work was based on various case studies carried out in Zambia and South Africa, and looking at issues such as agriculture, education and health. This analysis was then used to draw conclusions and issue recommendations, with a view in particular to establishing innovative ways of dealing with development problems, based on cooperative efforts that would bring together financial and non-financial resources, such as the expertise of the participants and their networks. Furthermore, after the completion of their work, the researchers were keen to stress the need to develop mechanisms that could provide a ‘voice’ to those communities or groups that are not heard from within the existing system.
 
Against this background, Rein highlighted the importance of taking into account the context in which the partnerships are affected. In her view, processes can be replicated in different regions and against different backgrounds, but they cannot simply be copied, since there is a need to learn from different experiences. In addition, in order for the partnerships with private actors to work, there is a need to be clear about what the incentives are. Otherwise one risks losing the participation of the partner halfway through, as well as the willingness of the private sector to participate in the long run. A related consideration is the sustainability of the projects, which have to be based on realistic expectations. Here, Rein cited the example of a health project in South Africa, which revolved around an HIV clinic. The participants in the project had relied on the expectation that the government would at one point take over the running of the clinic, without realising that this was in fact not the kind of venture on which the government could embark. Cases like this make it evident why it is necessary to adopt a business-minded approach to the partnership, developing a model that takes into account both the costs involved and the current and potential skills required. In terms of recommendations, Rein called for an improvement in the governance structure and the communications within the partners as the only recipe for an increased efficiency of the ventures. She also pointed out that in certain cases government-instigated partnerships may have an edge over spontaneous ones, since they provide an opportunity to come up with tailor-made solutions for the local problems in hand.
 
Pierre Berthelot, from the Emerging Markets Group, made a few additional remarks, explaining how his experience in the field confirms the finding of the study carried out by Dr. Rein, and in particular the complexity of the partnership, and the challenges faced in trying to make them work effectively to deliver ever-improving results. Berthelot also stressed the importance of empowering all of the actors in the partnership who all have to be equally strong for it to work. In this respect, he commended DFID for the work it was doing and in particular for the way in which it was enhancing the understanding of how best to meet the development need.
 
Janice Giffen, of INTRAC, then outlined the main findings of her paper Reviewing civil society’s role in European Community development assistance in Kenya, Senegal, Bolivia and India. A first notable remark was that there had been a higher degree of involvement of civil society in the African, Carribbean and Pacific countries than in the Asia and Latin America. But also within the two ACP countries that had been analysed, there remained different interpretations and approaches as to the possibility to interact with non-governmental actors. This was obviously attributable to the different contexts, but, according to the speaker, it also reflected a difference in understanding of the situations on the part of the EC officials in Brussels as well as of the EC representations in the countries concerned. In particular, some of the officials seemed to adopt an approach based on the idea that participation of civil society can only happen at the project level, and that the main instrument to enhance participation is an increase of the funding opportunities available to NGOs. Giffen clearly believed that such approaches did not go far enough, and she emphasised that there is room for improvement, in particular by raising the awareness of officials about the benefits that derive from the inclusion of civil society representatives in the early stages of the policy debates. She went as far as advocating the training of Commission officials about the possible mechanisms for such inclusion. However, also some of the civil society actors were sometimes not equipped to make effective contributions and they therefore also needed to be trained in order to build up their participative capacity. The situation was rendered more complex by the fact that, in most countries, there exist two different types of civil society actors: the larger, city-based and advocacy-focused NGOs, and the local grass-root ones, which are more preoccupied with the actual improvement of the living conditions of the poor, and which, by virtue of this, have more direct insight sinto the needs of the local communities. Thus, in order to have a balanced approach, Giffen called for the involvement of both types of NGOs in the policy dialogue (although the mechanisms for their involvement could, and probably should, remain different). Furthermore, the British scholar pointed out the inconsistency of the EU system, which splits development money between two distinct Directorates-General of the European Commission, leading to obvious problems in terms of the coordination and coherence of the policy action. Coordination also has to occur at another level, namely with regard to the interaction with other donors (third countries and private development organisations). Here, the solution has to be the development of working relationships with other actors, to ensure complementarity in the consultation processes with civil society and in order to avoid the waste of setting up parallel structures and multiple consultation processes. Finally, if the EC wants be more effective in its fight against poverty and with regard to the inclusion of civil society, it should be more consistent in issuing instructions to that end to its delegations in the different countries, since otherwise there would be little incentive for them to act on the issue.
 
Clare Denvir, from DG Development of the European Commission, by and large agreed with the statements of Giffen. However, she explained that in her experience the division between DG development and EuropAid had not led to major inefficiencies, and that the two bodies were now coordinating their work in a much more effective way. Indeed, both of the DGs were now guided by the principle of how to use the (scarce) available resources to impact efficiently and effectively on poverty. On the substance, Denvir picked in particular one of the points made by the speaker, i.e. the importance of training of both officials and NGO workers. Here, the Commission official insisted that the prerequisite to be effective was information and awareness, which should become the mantra of all those involved in the development world.