1. Governance, Fragility and Conflict Assessments in German Development Cooperation
DeLoG Annual Meeting 2017
Thematic session 2: Decentralization and local governance in fragile contexts (Working group 3, 17 May 2017)
German Development Cooperation draws on a number of internal and external analytical tools to inform strategic decision-making and country/portfolio management in fragile contexts. In this working group, Kerstin Remke (BMZ) will give an overview of three of the tools used: Crisis Early Warning, Politico-Economic Analysis, and the Governance “Catalogue of Criteria” (which uses an analysis of deficiencies in the core functions of the state - authority, legitimacy, and capacity - as an indicator of fragile statehood). She will briefly elaborate on the (direct and indirect) implications for the project cycle in German Development Cooperation and will use a discussion of some challenges that BMZ faces with regard to these instruments as the stepping off point for the working group discussion that follows.
The ensuing discussion aims at comparing different DeLoG members’ approaches and identifying common challenges that could be followed-up within the DeLoG Network in an action plan.
Kerstin Remke
Division 301: Sectoral and thematic policies; Governance, Democracy; Rule of Law

2. Contents Overview of analytical tools Early Crisis Warning
Politico-Economic Analysis
Governance „Catalogue of Criteria“
Potential challenges
Background: Topic came up at the last annual meeting  aim to exchange experiences, aim to start the process with this presentation.
In German development cooperation (both at ministerial level/BMZ and in the implementing organizations/GIZ and KfW) we have a number of analytical tools that one way or another impact on strategic decision-making and country and portfolio management on the ground. Some instruments have direct/binding management implications, others to enrich background information.
I will shortly give an overview of three of the tools used (Crisis Early Warning, PÖK, Catalogue of Criteria) and then close with some challenges that we face with regard to these instruments.

3. 1. Overview of analytical instruments
Peace and Conflict Assessment
Governance Assessment
Strategic decisions; Country and Portfolio Management
Peace and Conflict Assessments (PCA)
GIZ/KfW
„Catalogue of Criteria“
Assessment matrix („country types“)
Statehood deficits
Crisis Early Warning
Escalation potential (long-term trends)
Politico-Economic Analysis (PEA)
External
External / BMZ
BMZ
BMZ Sectoral Strategy:
“Development for Peace and Security” (2013)
BMZ Sectoral Strategies:
Development-Oriented Transformation (2007), Promotion of Good Governance (2009)

4. 2. Crisis Early Warning
Externally commissioned on a yearly basis  finalized in- house, management tool
Analysis of crisis and conflict potential (36 indicators): (A) structural conflict factors, (B) conflict-prone processes, (C) strategies of conflict management and use of force, (D) assessment of conflict phase
Aim: identify countries with need for conflict prevention 
Direct implications for “yellow” and “red” countries (e.g. obligatory Peace and Conflict Assessment (PCA); elaboration of peacebuilding needs in strategic documents)

5. 3. Politico-Economic Analysis (PEA/”PÖK”)
Externally commissioned (yearly); independent governance assessments (no direct management implications!)
Country-specific studies assessing actors and institutions with their power- and conflict patterns:
1: Governance-Performance, development orientation and reform requirements
Sustainable policy design; Human Rights; Democracy/rule of law; Capacity and transparency; Cooperative stance within the international community)
2: Patterns of power and legitimacy
Drivers and spoilers of change; Power resources; Legitimacy and functionality
3: Power – and conflict patterns
Escalation potential and structure of conflicts; Actors and affected groups of violence and conflict; Roots and dynamics of violence and conflict; Potential for civil conflict management; Peace and security needs
4: Outlook
Evolving scenarios

6. Analysis and Assessment Process “Catalogue of Criteria”
4. Governance “Catalogue of Criteria”
Sources
Analysis and Assessment Process
Utilization (Aim)
Plausibility check
(sectoral dep’t)
Internal Discussion and comments
(country dep’t)
“Catalogue of Criteria”
annual qualitative & quantitative assessment of partner countries:
development orientation
governance level
Sustainable policy design
Human rights
Democracy and the rule of law
Capacity and transparency
Cooperative stance within int’l community
(1) “country types” (matrix)
Policy conclusions (country departments)  basis for integrated budget planning, country strategies, portfolio steering and political dialogue
External indexes & reports
(country specific)
Externally Commissioned studies (GIGA)
Crisis early warning
PEA / “PÖK”
Internal information
Embassy reports
HR status reports
Assessment results (country and regional reports) & generic recommendations
(2) Analysis of statehood deficits (fragility)

7. 4.1 “Catalogue of Criteria”: country types
Based on quantitative assessment of governance level (average of 35 questions; scale 1-5) and development orientation (+/o/-)
Generic recommendations for action given according to country type
high governance level: 3,5 – 5,0
“good (enough) performer”
medium governance level: 2,5 - 3,5
“transitional states”
Low governance level: 1,0 – 2,5
“very low performer”
“low performer”
“developmental – low governance states”
no development orientation
low development orientation
Development -oriented

8. 4.2 “Catalogue of Criteria“: statehood deficits
Underlying concept (DIE/GDI): fragile statehood as deficiencies in one or more of the core functions of the state (authority, legitimacy and capacity)
Analysis of deficits based on quantitative assessment of selected questions for each dimension (since 2016)

9. 5. Potential challenges Methodology: National vs. local level?
Subjective element
Practical issues:
Limited personal capacities
generic vs. country-specific recommendations for action?
Difficult to share results due to security issues