1. A comparative analysis (mainly based on DAC peer reviews) Geert Laporte European Institute for Asian Studies, Brussels 28 May 2013 Japan and the EU: Development Partners

2. Independent foundation working on EU-Africa relations for more than 25 years: 1.Non-partisan facilitation of dialogue 2. Practical and policy relevant analysis 3. Linking key players in the EU and Africa, through networks and partnerships 4. Capacity building in Africa to bring more balance in the partnership with the EU 5. Building alliances with non-EU players in development (Japan, BRICS, USA, South Korea, Switzerland…) WHAT IS ECDPM? Page 2

3. THREE PARTS: 1.The changing development context 2.Comparative analysis Japan-EU 3.Where can Japan and EU join forces? STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION ECDPMPage 3

4. 1.Global financial and economic crisis, particularly affecting EU 2.Declining aid budgets (ODA) but increasing needs for different sources of finance to tackle development and global challenges (e.g climate change) 3.New players in development (BRICS, G-20, private sector, development foundations,…) 4.A more political vision of development: Busan: “…it is essential to examine the inter­dependence and coherence of all public policies – not just development policies…” THE CHANGING DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT ECDPMPage 4

5. JAPAN Economic power- house but little political power Losing influence to new competitors, mainly in Asia (China, Korea,…) PLACE IN GLOBAL LANDSCAPE Page 5ECDPM EUROPEAN UNION Trade giant but political dwarf (in spite of Lisbon Treaty) “EU is a payer not a player” Losing influence to emerging economies (BRICS etc)

6. JAPAN From biggest aid donor (1991-2000) to 5 th donor (2013) Presence in some 140 countries Not considered to be a leader in the policy debates and agenda- setting but quite an effective implementer PLACE IN DEVELOPMENT Page 6ECDPM EUROPEAN UNION EU “formidable player” (DAC): 60% of all aid in the world (EU & MS) & largest humanitarian donor…but declining budgets Network of 136 Delegations Strong on policy and strategy development (EU Consensus on Development, Agenda for Change,…)…but weak on implementation

7. JAPAN Focus on economic transformation (“self help” + own development experience ): economic growth, infrastructure, industrial production, agriculture,..) Commercial and business interests Fragile states and human security has been added Strong focus on technical cooperation Principle of non- intervention POLICY ORIENTATIONS Page 7ECDPM EUROPEAN UNION Poverty reduction Value driven agenda (good governance) Inclusive growth Support to regional integration (own role model) Rather normative development approach (…with double standards)

8. JAPAN Key focus = (East) Asia (but also doubling of aid to Africa in recent years ) Focus on middle income countries GEOGRAPHIC FOCUS Page 8ECDPM EUROPEAN UNION Key focus=Africa Least developed countries (“direct aid where it is most needed”) Increasing differentiation: no more aid to upper middle income countries

9. JAPAN 0,18% of GNI (approx 10 billion $) Rather traditional approach: projects rather than programmes, loans, technical cooperation, tied aid,… Strong preference for bilateral earmarked aid (84% in 2008) Need to increase use of programmatic approaches and core/institutional funding VOLUMES & MODALITIES Page 9ECDPM EUROPEAN UNION 0,44% of GNI (2010) = 70 Billion $ ODA Collective ODA level of 0,7% of GNI will not be reached in 2015 Strong focus on regional organisations Need to increase use of flexible core funding

10. JAPAN Quite centralised and hierarchical More responsibility to implementation and coordination agency (new JICA) Need to delegate more authority to the field Separate and additional reporting for Japanese earmarked funds= high transaction costs ORGANISATION AND MANAGEMENT Page 10ECDPM EUROPEAN UNION Complex institutional architecture (unclear role division and duplication EEAS-DEVCO) Several financial instruments with heavy procedures Increased devolution of authority and staff to the field Intense scrutiny by EP, Council, European Court of Auditors, think tanks, NGOs

11. JAPAN ‘go-it alone approach’ Resistance to harmonisation COORDINATION & HARMONISATION Page 11ECDPM EUROPEAN UNION Strong declarations but little action on coordination and complementarity

12. JAPAN No explicit policy statement, institutional mechanisms and monitoring and reporting systems on PCD POLICY COHERENCE FOR DEVELOPMENT (PCD) Page 12ECDPM EUROPEAN UNION In spite of solid strategic framework with appropriate institutional mechanisms, independent analytical capacities and tools to track progress … little concrete progress has been achieved

13. JAPAN Key focus on national governments Low involvement of civil society organisations/NGOs (only 3% of budget) Rather modest pro- development lobby and limited involvement of Japanese NGOs in implementation PARTNERS & PUBLIC SUPPORT Page 13ECDPM EUROPEAN UNION Key focus on governments and CSOs Structured dialogue with CSOs and local authorities Strong public support for development in most EU countries

14. Africa increasingly important for both partners TICAD V (1-3 June 2013 Yokohama)- EU-Africa Summit (April 2014) Common concerns, priorities and interests that could be different from emerging development players Complement “traditional” MDG development focus with new Post 2015 development vision WHERE CAN JAPAN AND EU JOIN FORCES? ECDPMPage 14

15. Thank you gl@ecdpm.org www.ecdpm.org www.slideshare.net/ecdpm Page 15