4.7.1.2. Step 2: Joint Intervention Logic
#graybox { border: solid 1px gray; background: lightgray; padding: 2% }
A Joint Intervention Logic (JIL) provides the overall framework that connects all the pillars and components of a TEI and seeks to make the whole greater than the sum of its parts. In line with this principle, a JIL should focus on higher-level results and a few key indicators.
The JIL defines the impact, specific objectives, pillars, outputs84 and components of the TEI. Pillars are the areas on which the TEIs will focus and within which components will be implemented. Components are all the actions, projects or programmes that TEI members are funding, that fall under the TEI objectives and pillars and that are ongoing during its timeframe (usually 2021-2027). The JIL should also briefly summarise the participating members, the modalities to be used and the operational structure. The JIL is presented in the form of a table (see the example in the box below as well as Annex 4.5 on MORE guidance) and can be updated as and when.
To ensure ownership, the JIL must ‘speak’ to the partner countries by using where possible the language/ objectives and results indicators of the national development plan and/or sectoral policies. However, at the TEI outcome and output level, the Team Europe approach group may select some indicators which more specifically reflect their Team Europe approach contributions (e.g. the EU Global Europe Results Framework – GERF – indicators). Moreover, it is advisable for each JIL to include, where relevant, at least one impact and one outcome/output level indicator of an established list of globally prioritised indicators (Annex 4.5, Table 1).
Ecuador’s government prioritises the country’s ecological transition and preserving biodiversity is enshrined in the constitution. The TEI Green Deal Ecuador- Economic green recovery through circular and bio-economy respond to and align with these national priorities. TEI members and the government have drafted and are about to sign a memorandum of understanding (‘TEI Ukumari: Forest Partnership Ecuador – Team Europe’) in support of the objectives of the TEI. To strengthen the engagement of local governments across Ecuador, a jointly implemented project (EU and Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ)) is focusing on strengthening the capacity of local administrations to attract sustainable financing and investment. The TEIs also provide support to the implementation of the interregional trade agreement between the EU, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru that supports the development of sustainable supply chains, capacity building on bio trade certification and the attraction of much needed investment.
A human rights-based approach85 and mainstreaming priorities (including the environment and climate change; gender equality and empowerment of women and girls; human rights; disability; reduction of inequalities and social cohesion; democracy and civil society participation; conflict sensitivity, peace and resilience; disaster risk reduction; anticipatory action and other relevant considerations) need to be considered when designing a TEI and its JIL. For example, the integration of CSO roadmap indicators could be considered. Other key European strategies, such as the ‘EU Global Health Strategy (i.e., applying a ‘One Health approach’ when it comes to the TEI design) are also to be considered as relevant to the thematic area.
The TEI on Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (SRHR) in Sub-Saharan Africa was launched during the second International Conference on Public Health in Africa (CPHIA 2022) in Kigali, Rwanda in December 2022 *. The TEI SRHR is a key action under the EU-Africa Global Gateway package and the EU Global Health Strategy. It relies on partnership between the Commission, 10 Member States ** and three African Regional Economic Communities (RECs) ***. The aim is to align with and reinforce REC priorities. The TEI SRHR builds on a joint analysis of gaps, needs and lessons learnt; and prioritises areas where a regional perspective can complement global and country-level investments. The overall aim is to improve SRHR in Africa, particularly among adolescent girls and young women, with a focus on three specific objectives: (1) increase the implementation of continental and regional commitments on SRHR in the health and education sector; (2) improve the availability, affordability and acceptability of quality-assured SRHR goods for all, especially women and girls; and (3) strengthen advocacy and accountability to ensure that SRHR needs are met.
* https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_22_7738
** Belgium, Czechia, Denmark, Germany, Ireland, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Finland and Sweden.
*** the East African Community (EAC), the West African Health Organization (WAHO) of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the Southern African Development Community (SADC).
In addition and in line with the 85% target of EU GAP III, TEIs and their different contributions should be designed so that they respect the requirements of the OECD DAC policy marker. All TEI participants should aim at integrating gender equality into the components they contribute to. All components should either have gender equality as a significant (mark G1) or principal (mark G2) objective, or should give reasons for any actions deemed to be not contributing to gender equality (mark G0). Context- and/or sector-specific gender analysis (in the areas relevant to TEIs, such as green deals, digitalisation and governance) and the use of sex and age-disaggregated data (and other intersectional aspects such as disability, where appropriate) are key to ensuring that TEIs effectively contribute to gender equality and women’s empowerment 86. Based on a mandatory gender analysis, the TEI’s JIL should include specific gender-equality objective(s) and result(s) backed by at least one gender-specific indicator and disaggregation of data by sex. A commitment to report on the gender-equality results that have been achieved should also be included in the TEI/JP results-based framework. The GAP III Staff Working Document contains a menu of outcome and impact indicators, which are available in OPSYS.
While updating their mappings, TEI participants in Zimbabwe flagged the need to have commonly agreed criteria for including programmes under the TEI on Gender Equality and Women Empowerment – due to the particularly broad and cross-cutting nature of this TEI. It was decided to use the OECD definition of ‘programmes with gender as a principal (G2) or a significant (G1) objective’ as a base criterion, using the guidance for practitioners contained in an EU GAP III briefing note on designing G1 interventions as a reference. Zimbabwe is the only country in the world that has so far developed a national TEI exclusively focused on gender and women’s empowerment. At the outcome level, national gender policy indicators were systematically integrated. Team Europe approach-specific indicators (e.g. from the CLIP) were added at output level to measure the collective impact of TEI-contributing programmes.*
TEIs and their different contributions should also be designed and implemented in line with the requirements of the OECD DAC disability policy marker. The guidance on the use of the OECD DAC disability policy marker 87 and the scoring criteria should be used when defining the intervention.
Moreover, some TEI participants in countries (Bolivia, Rwanda and Zimbabwe) also expressed a wish to use the JIL to assess the effectiveness of working better together by taking a Team Europe approach. They therefore decided to add some ‘effectiveness indicators’ (not only indicators from the OECD, for example, but also indicators to measure the effectiveness of working together). It should also be noted that ‘effectiveness indicators’ were added under the assumption that they were not binding, and that they would therefore not be obliged to report on them by the MORE guidance. This was facilitated in certain countries (e.g. Bolivia) by the fact that such indicators had already been identified for the joint programming process – so a baseline already existed for each of them and was monitored annually through the joint programming reports. For other countries that do not have such a baseline, a baseline will need to be established by the TEI group and progress will be measured through the TEI reports.
The TEI on Sustainable Cities members group in Rwanda is currently proposing and debating the inclusion of a set of effectiveness indicators to complement the JIL. These indicators are meant to assess the impact of TEIs on the level and quality of joint implementation, joint monitoring, joint policy dialogue and joint visibility between TEI members.
A short narrative could be written to accompany the document in order to further explain the logic and theory of change behind the JIL.
Once the TEI intervention logic draft has passed its first country-level validation phase (TEI member-internal), the government and other partners in a Team Europe approach (civil society, private sector, local authorities, etc.) should be consulted, taking into account the specific country context. As outlined in Chapter 1(3) of the present guidance, consultations should be well-planned, inclusive and gender-responsive. To avoid consultation fatigue, they should be streamlined as far as possible with those organised within the framework of other relevant country processes (i.e. CSO Roadmap, GAP/GLIP, Human Rights and Democracy Strategy).
⇒ For a more detailed guidance on how to design a JIL, please consult Annex 4.
84 The methodological note on TEI design refers to ‘(i) results, (ii) specific objectives and (iii) impact’. However, in the MORE framework, ‘results’ should be considered as outputs. This clarification on terminology is needed in order to ensure consistency with the OECD DAC definition of ‘results’ (i.e. results are there defined as the outputs, outcomes or impacts of development interventions), which the Commission has endorsed for EU external action.
85 See Annex 5.1.
86 See Annex 5.2.
87 Guidance note Leaving no one behind. Disability inclusion in EU external action.
* Adapted based GAP III Brief No. 6 Designing a G1 intervention – Guidance for EU practitioners.