SLOGA Platform in cooperation with the European network CONCORD organised on Thursday, 14 October, an international conference on current trends and the future of Official Development Assistance (ODA) in the EU and Slovenia in the coming years. The conference brought together stakeholders from both the governmental and non-governmental sectors as well as from the EU institutions in three panels to analyse the quantity and quality of EU ODA and to reflect on the potential for achieving the ODA commitments of smaller EU Member States in the light of the 2030 Agenda.
Presentation of the Aidwatch Shadow Report
The opening panel discussed the latest Aidwatch report with Erica Gerretsen, Acting Director of the INTPA Directorate (in charge of “sustainable finance, jobs and growth, for an economy that works for people”), EC, Milan Brglez, MEP, Igor Jukič, Director General of the Directorate for Multilateral and Development Cooperation, MFA, and Elomo Andela (Jeudis de Cotonou) from Africa and Tanja Hafner Ademi (TACSO) from the Western Balkans, as representatives of NGOs from partner countries.
As an introduction to the debates, Luca De Fraia from CONCORD presented the key messages of this year’s AidWatch Report. He started with the good news: ODA has increased, which is good because it shows that it can increase. But then he began to give less good news. For example:
- if we take inflation into account, the figures are less impressive.
- It is not just the quantity of ODA that matters, it is the effectiveness. And in this area, the situation is red in one indicator and orange in others.
- ODA is not going to the countries that need it most, so ODA is ineffective in tackling inequalities.
Last but not least, with the current growth trend, raising the share of ODA to the promised 0.7% of GNI will not be achieved in 2030, but in 2038.
Igor Jukič was optimistic that Slovenian ODA would remain at the same level, that it would not shrink, perhaps even increase, stressing that smaller countries can make a major contribution to international development – by their commitment, their efforts to work more closely together and their positive experiences, they are a good example for the partner countries.
Trends are encouraging, said Erica Gerretsen; the EU is still the leading donor in the world. After all, the increase in ODA was a nominal 15 percent compared to 2019. Aid levels were maintained, with significant increases in 17 countries – and this at a time when economies were under pressure from the pandemic. ODA alone will not achieve the 2030 Agenda’s goals, she added, and consideration must be given to how to achieve a mix of private and public finance (blended finance). She also felt that the negative assessment in the AidWatch report on domestic resource mobilisation was not justified, saying that the European Commission had done a lot in this area in the past year.
Aidwatch comes at a time when we are facing new challenges, covid and climate change, said MEP Milan Brglez. As a member of the Environment Commission, he sees a clear link between development cooperation and climate change. He also stressed the importance of protecting indigenous peoples, which must be ensured in all projects, and of creating jobs for them to help them resist climate change. Parliament is also aware of the threat to biodiversity and demands that part of the ODA should also be devoted to biodiversity conservation.
Elomo Andela used the example of African agriculture to illustrate the shortcomings of current development aid. More effective development aid needs to start from the evidence of what is needed and effective. She also advocated a gender-based approach: “ODA should work harder for women.”
She advocated blended finance, without the private sector it will not work, joining a theme touched on by several panellists.
Later in the debate, Elise Hadman, representing the European Commission, stressed the importance of working with national policy partners and engaging additional resources (from private sources) in order to achieve the SDGs and stressed the importance of the Integrated Finance Framework (INFF), i. e. to record all the different types of resources from abroad and then integrate them with national development strategies.
Tanja Hafner Ademi, as an expert on ODA in the future Member States, pointed out that while the third generation of IPAs is bringing big money to the Western Balkans, it is not necessarily benefiting civil society, as much of this money is for crisis assistance in the fight against covid.
In her view, a better EU ODA would benefit from better links to local initiatives, for example on gender equality, but also on climate change and the fight against poverty. Dialogue is particularly important, and future Member States should be involved in EU processes. Last but not least, coherence between the EU and the new Member States, including Slovenia, for which the Western Balkans is a priority area, is important. We could get more quality support from them for less money, Hafner Ademi added.
Development Finance in South-Eastern Europe
The situation of development finance in South-East Europe was discussed by Daniel Kaba (Ambrela, Slovakia), Inese Vaivare (Lapas, Latvia), Kristijan Kovačić (CROSOL, Croatia) and Maruša Babnik (Ekvilib Institute, Slovenia). The panel was moderated by Nerea Craviotto, Eurodad.
It is the exchange of views and experiences that they considered very useful. It is clear that the countries discussed in the panel are still navigating the new terrain of development cooperation (Croatia, for example, only became an ODA donor in 2011, having been a recipient before). Also, NGOs are often under attack in these countries, long-term and strategic projects are lacking (Baltic: We take what is available, what is already happening, we do not look at the needs of partner countries), a lot of ODA goes to multilaterals (in Croatia, which reached 15% of its GNI in ODA for years, in reality, a large part of ODA goes to the Croatian diaspora around the world), there is a lack of a structured dialogue with governments and other decision-makers.
The Slovenian plan to reach 0.33% of GNI for ODA
The third panel was moderated by Dr Jana Arbeiter (Faculty of Social Sciences) and featured Dr Maja Bučar (Faculty of Social Sciences), Dr Robert Kokalj, Head of the Development Cooperation and Humanitarian Aid Division at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Tadej Baškovič, Director of the Centre for International Cooperation and Development (CMSR), Peter Tomažič, Secretary-General of the Slovenian Karitas, and Max Zimani, Global Institute.
Dr Robert Kokalj started by pointing out that Slovenia, with 0.17% of ODA in GNI, is ranked third among the thirteen EU Member States, which is a solid base, according to the MFA. However, the situation is not in favour of an increase in ODA.
Peter Tomažič explained that, from the NGO point of view, it was simply necessary to adopt an action plan and to allocate as many resources to it as possible. In the experience of Karitas, international development projects need to respond to people’s needs and, in particular, to involve people in the project so that they internalise it. Karitas Slovenia has 300 Africans working on its projects in Africa.
We are optimistic when writing documents – there is nothing to fault the content – but we get stuck in the projection of funds, pointed out by Dr Maja Bučar. “We will do our best” is a non-binding formulation. The key will be a change in the policy attitude towards development cooperation. ODA is a foreign policy tool, but there is currently no awareness that ODA can be an important investment in Slovenia’s future.
Dr Kokalj commented that funding for MFA-funded projects has been increasing in recent years. In addition, the MFA co-finances projects that NGOs win in international calls for proposals. In order to ensure regular dialogue and exchange of good practices, the renewed Expert Council of the MFA, which also includes representatives of NGOs, will soon hold its first meeting.
The blended finance was also discussed several times. The partnership that Karitas Slovenia recently entered into with the MoFA was also conditional on working with a company, “which was quite a challenge for us,” said Tomažič. To work together, it is important to find companies that are socially and environmentally responsible.
Peter Tomažič also stressed the importance of a long-term, stable foreign policy focus, so as not to, for example, move away from the Balkans overnight. Dr. Bučar agreed: “Long-term commitments are important for everyone, for our country, for the recipient countries, for NGOs, and last but not least for the companies that might decide to participate in blended finance.”
“A few million euros of aid could have a multiplier effect,” she said.
Tadej Baškovič, using the example of the CMRS, stressed the importance of building the confidence of funders in implementing institutions, which also requires aid effectiveness and then promoting that effectiveness.
The issue of ODA is a political issue, stressed Max Zimani. The low share of 0.14% of GNI in actual aid is not due to a lack of resources, but a matter of political priorities. He sees the role of NGOs as being mainly to raise awareness of the importance of ODA through global learning, to promote international cooperation. Global learning involves raising public awareness, mobilising citizens, and through this, we can reach the media and decision-makers.
Photo: The panel on the Slovenian pledge to reach 0.33% of GNI for ODA. Source: SLOGA