Joint Programming Overview, State of Play DEVCO DEVELOPMENT DAYS Working Groups on JP 03 March 2015 DEVCO/A2 Aid and Development Effectiveness and Financing EEAS/VI.B.2 Development Cooperation Coordination Division

Joint Programming commitment: Single multi-annual country strategy of EU and MS Council Conclusions November Joint analysis of and joint response to partner country’s development strategy 2.Identification of sectors of intervention and in-country division of labour: who is working in which sectors 3.Indicative multi-annual financial allocations per sector and donor Principles: 1.It is mainly an in-country process led by EU Delegations and MS embassies 2.Alignment and synchronisation with partner country planning 3.Gradual approach

Joint Programming: The value added  Speak with one voice  Improve complementarity of political message and action, which might lead to more impact  Gives EU a visible face  Improves transparency, predictability, accountability  Facilitates joint implementation  Potential to reduce bureaucracy, fragmentation and costs for all actors involved  Living up to our aid effectiveness commitments

Illustration of potential Mozambique Country Programmable Aid (CPA) Data source: OECD/DAC 2013 When EU+ acts as one Fragmented aid

In-country progress 14 Joint Programming documents agreed ( ):  Burma/Myanmar, Burundi, Cambodia, Chad, Comoros, Ghana, Guatemala, Laos, Mali, Namibia, Rwanda, Senegal, South Sudan, Togo 4 Joint analysis/response strategies agreed ( ):  Bolivia, Ethiopia, Cote d'Ivoire, Palestine 5 additional Joint Programming documents in 2015:  Armenia (joint analysis), Georgia, Kenya, Paraguay, Uganda 30+ countries for

Windows for JP per year ? BoliviaArmeniaAfghanistanAlgeria?Cambodia phase 2Azerbaijan Burma/MyanmarGeorgiaBangladeshBolivia phase 2HondurasBelarus BurundiKenyaBeninBurundi phase 2Kenya phase 2Jordan CambodiaParaguayBurkina FasoEgypt?NicaraguaLebanon ChadUgandaChad phase 2Georgia phase 2Paraguay phase 2Libya Comoros Côte d'Ivoire phase 2Ghana phase 2Rwanda phase 2 Côte d'Ivoire El SalvadorGuatemala phase 2 Ethiopia Ethiopia phase 2Liberia Ghana HaitiMali phase 2 Guatemala Laos phase 2Moldova? Laos MalawiPalestine Mali MauritaniaPhilippines Namibia MoroccoSenegal phase 2 Rwanda MozambiqueSierra Leone Senegal NepalSouth Sudan phase 2 South Sudan NigerTogo phase 2 Togo PakistanUkraine? Tanzania Tunisia Vietnam Yemen Zimbabwe

From Joint Programming towards Joint Implementation  Joint Programming facilitates Joint Implementation  Division of labour within sectors:  sector mapping and coordination; sector dialogue; who does what (best), donor roles (lead, active); managing exits; indicative allocations  Use toolkit on Division of Labour (June 2009)  Joint sector results frameworks:  joint goals/indicators built on partner country systems; joint monitoring, evaluation and reporting; ensure joint EU+MS visibility  From sector coordination towards:  joint analysis/appraisals and sector response; joint aid modalities (budget support, pooled funding, delegated cooperation, trust funds, TA pooling)  facilitating work with non-EU donors

In-country progress Quality of documents has improved: Better analysis Increased division of labour Inclusion of indicative allocations First move towards results frameworks and monitoring

Regional breakdown Dark green = Joint programming agreed Middle dark = Potential, but not agreed yet Light green = No Joint Programming at this stage

Financial impact of Joint Programming

Regional Joint Programming workshops  Objectives: update from HQ; guidance; exchange experiences; address local challenges; identify good practice and support needed  Target group: EU Delegations and MS embassies (Heads of Cooperation's); also participation of EEAS, Commission and MS HQs  Regional Workshops were organised in:  Latin America,  Central, East & Southern Africa,  West Africa, and  Neighbourhood  Planning:  Asia, Myanmar/Burma, April 2015

The way forward 1. Focus on implementation of JP commitments by EU and MS through “JP Roadmaps”, led by the EU Delegations. 2. Monitoring & Evaluation 3. Technical support consultants 4. EU JP Guidance Pack

Objectives and components of the Guidance Pack  Objectives:  Provide practical guidance to EU Delegations and MS Embassies on Joint Programming and also to HQs staff, based on 3 years of experience and good practices  Components:  Quick Guide  FAQs  Joint Analysis menu  Joint Response menu  Roadmap menu

FAQs: providing answers to key/recurrent questions (FAQs)  Benefits of joint programming  How to achieve, implement and monitor  Division of labour and synchronisation  Role of partner country  Role of capitals/HQs  Role of non-EU donors, civil society and private sector  Joint programming in fragile states and Middle Income Countries  Support and helpdesk functions

Joint Analysis menu  Political situation  Economic situation  Social situation and vulnerability  Environmental situation  Regional integration and cooperation  Country capacities  Donor presences  Overarching issues (Agenda for Change, ENI policies)

Joint Response menu  Advice on drafting process  Overview of EU+MS (current) cooperation  Overall vision on country  European values, common positions  Strategic objectives  Sectors of intervention  Synchronisation and (future) division of labour (process)  Fragile states: development/security, linking relief, rehabilitation and development (LRRD)  Indicative allocations  Monitoring, evaluation and communication

Roadmap menu  Overview:  why JP; state of play; summary of country specific approach  Delivery schedule/process:  goals; added value; consultation government and other actors; structure of JP doc; endorsement procedure (with HQs); which (EU) donors participate; timeline/planning incl. intermediary steps  Communication to HQs:  what to expect from HQs to enable process; request for substitution of bilateral programming by JP  Challenges and risks

Consultative process with EU MS & status Consultative Process:  The Guidance pack was drafted under the direction of DEVCO and EEAS  It has been submitted to EU MS for consultation and comments Status:  Positive response by EU DGs  Finalising in the course of Feb; EEAS/DEVCO to share with EU DELs and MS HQs, which share with embassies  Posted on Cap4Dev: guidance-pack-2015

Further info on: