1.4.1.2 The timing of consultations and dialogue
The legitimacy and credibility of the Team Europe approach will depend on the extent to which consultations and dialogue respond to the perspectives and objectives of: (i) the actors following a Team Europe approach and partner countries (in particular objectives in their national development plans); (ii) key stakeholders such as local CSOs, local authorities and the private sector; (iii) other development partners working on similar activities. Where relevant and feasible, try to align the timing of the Team Europe approach consultations with existing national consultation processes (e.g. for national development plans or other national policy documents) to avoid consultation fatigue.
There are four stages in particular when the need for consultations and dialogue should be considered:
| Joint analysis |
Key stakeholders can inform and enrich the analysis of the actors following a Team Europe approach with their perceptions and specific focus (e.g. a ‘people focus’ for civil society, a ’local focus’ for local authorities, and a ’growth focus’ for the private sector, etc.). Key stakeholders are often involved at this stage as major actors who are interviewed or consulted when the analysis is undertaken. If deemed relevant, dedicated sessions can be organised to share the results of the analysis and get feedback from key stakeholders, particularly in sensitive or fragile environments and in contexts where there may be a ’gap’ between national governments and major country-level actors (e.g. sensitive, politically challenging environments). |
|---|---|
| Joint response/TEI concept notes/ joint implementation concept notes and joint results frameworks/joint intervention logics |
Consultation sessions can be organised to obtain feedback from key stakeholders on the selected joint priorities, the joint results indicators, the design of the overall or sector strategies, the design of the joint intervention logic and their review processes etc. The earlier stakeholders are consulted, the better they can inform the process and the drafting of documents such as the Joint Programming or TEI document, the joint results framework and joint intervention logic, or joint intervention concept notes. That said, the approach and timing for the consultations must be feasible and appropriate within the specific country context. As much as possible, consultations should be aligned with other relevant consultation processes, whether national consultations or those led by other development partners, such as those on the EU civil society roadmaps, GAP III/CLIP, the human rights and democracy strategy or implementation of the EU Youth Action Plan. |
| Joint programming and TEI implementation, implementation of joint implementation initiatives. |
For the TEIs and JI initiatives, regular meetings between the organisations implementing TEI programmes could be organised to make their approaches more consistent and to share information. All TEI participants (the EU, Member States and other like-minded countries) can suggest other organisations to be invited and provide the contact details to the EU Delegation or the Member State that organises the meeting (the responsibility for this can rotate, and is usually at Heads of Cooperation (HoC) level). Where applicable, the TEI secretariat or support facility can help with sending invitations and preparing and chairing the meeting. For both JP and TEIs, it is of utmost importance to regularly involve CSOs and the private sector in joint communications, joint policy dialogue and joint visibility activities. Existing processes, such as the CSO roadmap process, could be used to that end. The role of the private sector is particularly relevant in a Team Europe approach to regularly discuss scaling potential, or the potential to engage the private sector to reach TEI objectives. Young people should also play a continuous advisory role in TEI discussions through the established youth sounding boards. |
| Monitoring and evaluation | Key stakeholders should also be invited to provide feedback on the TEI or joint programming monitoring report(s). These reports on progress may be annual, biannual or mid-term in frequency, depending on what is agreed. This helps check the national statistical picture against the realities on the ground and highlight the priorities to be addressed going forward. It is important ensure that the follow-up to these consultation processes is inclusive. |