banner WBT

Working Better Together

Resource
public
Working Better Together as Team Europe Through joint programming and joint implementation Guidance
0
 Views

Table of contents

Section 4: Conducting stakeholder consultations

Working Better Together as Team Europe
Through joint programming and joint implementation

Guidance

A tool to help EU Delegations work better together with Member States as Team Europe and with like-minded partners and country stakeholders, through joint programming and implementation.

 

 

Conducting stakeholder consultations

Partnership and collaboration are at the heart of joint programming. Inclusive consultation — before, during and after programme formulation — is central to the entire process

Consultation, dialogue and communication are key to identifying priorities, strengthening partnership dynamics, soliciting input and feedback, and ensuring a responsive approach to joint programming. The objective of consultation, policy dialogue and communication activities is to engage the partners, ensuring an inclusive, effective, legitimate and accountable approach to joint programming and implementation of the SDGs.

Effective communication and inclusive consultation are an explicit acknowledgement of the need for joint programming to develop in a strategic and organised manner. They enable Team Europe to engage both internally and externally to:

  1. identify priorities and modalities to implement the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development;
  2. understand partnership dynamics that can help or hinder a joint European action;
  3. provide input and feedback at strategic points in the joint programming process;
  4. be responsive to emerging trends and changing context;
  5. complement objective monitoring with different perspectives.

A strategic approach to consultation, dialogue and communication is therefore essential.

 

What is different about joint programming consultations?

Although there are many normative principles that apply to all forms of consultation, there are some particular features of joint programming that are useful to keep in mind:

  • Joint programming is intended to promote a coherent European position that enables systematic joint messaging to maximise political and financial leverage.
  • The joint nature of consultations, the combined resources and the diversity of actors attracts more attention — and potentially a more serious level of engagement — from all types of stakeholders.
  • The scope of the joint programme may imply a wide range of topics, some of which may be sensitive and demand more preparation and choreographing between European partners during consultation.
  • A joint consultation requires more preparation to identify stakeholders, agree agendas, craft the messaging, design meeting formats, and assign lead roles.
  • The joint programme’s division of labour may inform different levels of dialogue and responsibility.

 

Principles and practices for a successful consultation

The new European Consensus on Development (the European Consensus) calls for stronger and more inclusive multi-stakeholder partnerships and national coordination and dialogue mechanisms, especially in support of the 2030 Agenda.

Successful partnering and dialogue are informed by principles that should shape the preparation of all consultation events:

  • awareness of motivation for engaging in dialogue and the stakeholder’s perspective to prepare a constructive response that offers depth and nuance;
  • identifying shared goals, mutual interests and partnering principles for each consultation;
  • ensuring added value for participants, not only the organiser, with follow-up actions if required;
  • investing in the ‘soft skill set’, including negotiation skills, that drives a successful outcome.

In line with the rights-based approach working principles on participation and inclusion, any consultation process should:

  • make for meaningful participation (i.e. timely notification, language, location, timing, and adequate time for participants to seek other opinions);
  • be accessible to all, including women, and people living in marginalised situations or remote locations (e.g. people with disabilities, youth, the elderly, and indigenous peoples);
  • consider dedicated consultation events for specific audiences or themes.

 

Stakeholder identification and analysis

Understanding the perspectives of those who influence the design and future success of joint programming is essential. From a joint programming perspective, stakeholders that are important in the formulation stage can represent four categories:

  1. Internal participants in the joint programme, i.e. the EU and its Member States together with any other participants, who are responsible for design and accountable for results.
  2. External counterparts, for example partner country governments and other national development actors (civil society and the private sector), who will be involved in joint programme formulation and implementation.
  3. Other development partners that operate in the same context and, while not being involved in the joint programme, may have a relevant view on its value and impact.
  4. Objective peers from across the EU that have no vested interest but may be able to contribute to learning, exchange of experiences and establishing good practice based on their own experience.

 

Country-based consultations

The legitimacy and credibility of the joint programme will be determined by the extent to which consultations demonstrate that they are responsive to the perspectives and objectives of participating partners, national counterparts and other development partners working on similar activities. The stakeholder analysis should identify the ‘who, what and when’ and this can be incorporated into the roadmap (chapter 19).

Building on the components of the working better together approach outlined in the preceding chapters, there are four stages when the need for consultations should be considered.

Joint analysis Key stakeholders can inform and enrich the EU’s analysis with their perceptions and specific focus (i.e. ‘people focus’ for civil society, ’local focus’ for local authorities, ’growth focus’ for the private sector, etc.) Joint analysis Key stakeholders are often involved at this stage as major actors being interviewed or consulted when the analysis is undertaken. If deemed relevant, particularly in sensitive/fragile environments and in contexts where there may be a ’gap’ between national governments and major country-level actors, dedicated sessions can be organised to share the results of the analysis and obtain key stakeholder feedback.
Joint response Consultation sessions can be organised to obtain feedback from key stakeholders on the selected joint priorities, the suggested division of labour, the joint results indicators, the design of the overall or sector Joint response Joint implementation Monitoring and evaluation strategies, etc. The earlier stakeholders are consulted, the better they can inform the process and drafting of the joint programming document. That said, the approach and timing for the consultations must be feasible and appropriate within the specific country context.
Joint implementation Beginning at the joint analysis stage, internal consultation is necessary to identify the potential for joint implementation and then to establish the required modalities. The division of labour, also an important part of joint implementation, will likewise be informed by earlier discussions but it is at the commencement of the implementation phase that further consultation and clarification will be required, including with external stakeholders if they are affected by new modalities.
Monitoring and evaluation Key stakeholders can also be invited to provide their feedback on the joint programming progress monitoring report(s). This helps check the national statistical picture against the realities on the ground and highlight the priorities to be addressed going forward. This provides inclusive follow-up to the process.

 

Consulting with government

In some country contexts, it will be advantageous to involve the government or national authorities from a formative stage while in others it might be better to do so once there is some agreement on the scope of joint programming and the process to be undertaken.

palestine-small.png

PALESTINE

In Palestine, European donors were fully committed to having joint programming aligned with and directly supporting the Palestinian Authority’s (PA’s) national development plan (the National Plan for Action). European donors represent a very large amount of development financing in Palestine. This means that joint programming would largely reduce fragmentation and transaction costs, while also improving impact by strengthening the standing of the Palestinian Authority as the legitimate development planning authority. EU support to help deliver Palestine’s national development plan was strongly welcomed by the Palestinian Authority and the Office of the Prime Minister took responsibility for regular dialogue with European development counsellors. The ongoing dialogue between the PA’s Office of the Prime Minister and the European development partners created an invaluable environment of trust. The Palestinian Authority and European donors met repeatedly to exchange views on draft texts before they were officially endorsed. This gave the European donors confidence that the PA was responding to their concerns in finalising Palestine’s National Policy Agenda. As European donors were willing to exchange views on their draft strategy with the PA, Palestinian officials became more confident in their development partnership with European donors.

 

The European Consensus highlights that ‘partner country appropriation and ownership are essential’ and that ‘joint programming should be led by the partner country’s development strategy and aligned to the partner country’s development priorities’. In its 2016 conclusions on stepping up Joint Programming, the Council ‘encourages the EU and Member States to strengthen their efforts to raise awareness among partner governments and other stakeholders of joint programming in order to strengthen and encourage ownership and alignment by timely consultations and dialogue.

Partner country government engagement in joint programming should not be taken for granted. During the preparatory stages, there should be some discussion to reconcile the perspectives and priorities of the participating donors and the partner government. Concerted effort should be made, especially by Heads of Mission and Cooperation, to accommodate government priorities on sectors and modalities in line with the national development plan and respective sector strategies and reform programmes.

laos-small.png

LAOS

 

In Laos, open communication on sensitive issues was key in changing the government’s initial concern about losing bilateral relationships to a more positive and constructive attitude. Every opportunity was taken to reinforce the positive aspects of joint programming, including arranging meetings with the neighbouring Cambodian authorities on their joint programming process. The consultations gave European partners the chance to clarify certain misperceptions with Lao government officials. These related to:

  1. the impact/implications of joint programming on existing bilateral relations, with no risk of it being at the expense of existing bilateral mechanisms;
  2. the expectation of co-signing the joint programming document;
  3. the positive effects in terms of reducing transaction costs and offering more value for money (not less money), with the potential to increase the efficiency of European ODA disbursed in Laos; and
  4. the instrumental role joint programming will play in implementing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Addis Ababa Action Agenda.

 

Country experiences of joint programming processes show that scepticism related to issues such as ‘losing’ bilateral relationships or funds can be overcome through:

  1. emphasising the flexible and country-driven approach;
  2. scheduling regular, timely engagement; and
  3. ensuring timely communication that emphasises the tailored approach and the benefits of joint programming to both sides of the partnership.

 

Consulting with the wider development partners group

All development partners in the country should be consulted during the joint programming formulation process to ensure that it is coordinated with their ongoing work. In some countries, similar processes such as the preparation of the United Nations Development Assistance Framework can also provide opportunities for shared analysis and lesson learning.

Moreover, non-EU partners can be invited to join the joint programming process if this is considered advantageous by Team Europe. When non-EU partners join the process, it is important to also agree and set out mechanisms to allow them to participate at relevant Heads of Mission discussions on joint programming.

cambodia-small.png

CAMBODIA

In Cambodia, European partners consulted the government, civil society, the private sector and other development partners before finalising the joint programming document. Consultations with the government were organised together with the government’s lead agency for aid coordination, which then communicated arrangements to all government ministries and agencies. The consultations were co-chaired by the government minister and the EU ambassador. However, each European ambassador presented an aspect of the joint programming strategy that was part of the consultations. Consultation with civil society was organised with Cambodian civil society networks, utilising and supporting their role as umbrella organisations. All documents for consultations were translated into the Khmer language to ensure that Cambodian stakeholders could prepare fully for the consultations and simultaneous interpreting was provided to enable all stakeholders to participate meaningfully. Consultations helped give the joint European group visibility from early in the process and served to facilitate subsequent dialogue around the first monitoring report on the implementation of the Cambodia joint programming document.

 

Types of consultation

There are two distinct types of consultation processes: dedicated consultation events around the joint programming process and ‘blended’ consultations:

  • Dedicated events: joint programming events with a defined agenda and objective.
  • Blended consultations: making use of established coordination mechanisms (both formal and informal) to consult on elements of the joint programming process. Blended consultations can include meetings related to the implementation of the EU Gender Action Plan, CSO Roadmap (see chapter 19) or the Human Rights and Democracy Strategy in the partner country.
moldova-small.png

MOLDOVA

Moldova faces major challenges due to the sustained outward economic migration of Moldovans. On the one hand, there is a hollowing out of Moldova’s productive capacity with the country’s educated youth looking abroad for work and business opportunities. On the other hand, the outward migration of household breadwinners presents an overwhelming social protection problem, with Moldova’s elderly, children and disabled often left behind with threadbare social services struggling to protect these vulnerable groups. In conducting a joint analysis, European donors in Moldova acknowledged the pressing need to rethink development cooperation in a way that demonstrates to Moldovans the visible benefits from combating this problem. Unless development partners are able to deliver a credible promise of a better future, Moldova’s outward migration will continue unabated with devastating consequences both for the viability of donor programming and for the integrity of the nation state as a whole.

The joint analysis led the EU to agree to focus programming more on demonstrating tangible and visible benefits. To do this, it needed to conduct a wider and deeper consultation with a large portion of the population that has increasingly questioned the value of the partnership with Europe. In 2016, the EU and other European donors held two one-day workshops with 20 government ministers in attendance to reflect on the analysis and provide a more critical space in which to approach future programming.

At the same time, European donors also held a consultation with civil society that included representatives of disabled people, the diaspora and the private sector. This laid the foundation for the shaping of a shared approach to joint programming in Moldova, because it raised awareness of the need for a shift in programming that emphasises the importance of demonstrating value to Moldovans. In this way, coalitions can be developed in support of the hard reforms Moldova needs to implement to realise its economic, social and cultural potential.

 

Managing the challenges of consulting stakeholders

Feedback from current joint programming initiatives shows that targeting and/or identifying the right actors continues to be critical in making consultations effective and inclusive. Particularly in sensitive, politically challenging and fragile contexts, a stakeholder analysis should be conducted at the joint analysis stage. The consultation process itself can raise expectations on the part of key stakeholders, and managing those expectations is very important, along with a systematic consideration of the political economy of national stakeholder dynamics. Careful attention should be given to developing shared key messages on joint programming in clear and concise language, openly sharing information, and providing timely feedback and updates.

Consultations also raise operational challenges. They require time and add an extra workload to the existing tasks of the EU Delegation and MS. They may involve organising meetings, preparing questionnaires, translating documents into local languages, providing access, facilitating reflection and exchange, assessing and compiling results and providing feedback to the key stakeholders on the outcomes of the consultations and how their input was taken into account.

Each section or chapter may be used separately to fulfil a specific need for guidance, which means there may be some overlap between the different parts of the document.

If you have any questions, you may contact the relevant helpdesk or functional mailbox: