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 2 JP: Joint programming in contexts of fragility, conflict and crisis

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.

 

 

Joint programming in contexts of fragility, conflict and crisis

In its 2016 conclusions, the European Council highlights the opportunity to expand joint programming in fragile situations and conflict-affected countries. This commitment to ensure a more coherent and holistic engagement is taken forward by the EU’s Integrated Approach to external conflicts and crises and its policy on resilience, providing a strategic basis for coherent EU programming.

The EU is committed to engaging effectively in fragile and crisis-affected situations. The new European Consensus on Development provides an assurance that ‘the EU and its Member States will also pursue enhanced coordination and synergies in fragile and conflict-affected countries, including through joint programming processes and joint conflict analysis.’

A study on applying joint programming in these situations was commissioned by the EU in 2018. The study confirmed that joint programming must be adapted to each country context to be responsive and flexible. While it may not be feasible or useful to embark on a full-fledged medium-term joint programming process from the start, many of the ‘working better together’ principles and tools have proven to be all the more relevant in such contexts, often marked by a high level of aid fragmentation.

 

The Humanitarian-Development-Peace Nexus

In its 2017 conclusions on operationalising the Humanitarian-Development Nexus, the Council recognised that short-term humanitarian relief, medium- to long-term development cooperation, and conflict prevention and/ or peacebuilding approaches and diplomacy are all required to effectively work together in fragile and crisis contexts. Based on lessons learnt and good practices from a number of pilot countries, the EU is looking at options for developing guidance to further implement what is now known as the Humanitarian-DevelopmentPeace nexus, or triple nexus.

The Humanitarian-Development-Peace nexus builds on several EU frameworks, in particular the Global Strategy, the new European Consensus on Development, the Commission communication on Forced Displacement, the Strategic Approach to Resilience, and the EU’s comprehensive approach to external conflict and crisis.

The triple nexus reinforces the Comprehensive Approach and should be understood as a process to shift the work culture towards more systematic and up-front coordination between humanitarian, development and peace actors in headquarters and on the ground, among EU Institutions, EU Member States and other relevant actors, and in full compliance with their respective mandates and roles.

At the international level, the EU, UN and OECD commitments frame the definition of the triple nexus. This paper should be read in line with the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee Recommendation on the Humanitarian-Development-Peace Nexus, and UN efforts to move towards a “new way of working” by operationalising the nexus.

While each country context is unique and the triple nexus will apply differently in each of them, the guidance package proposes steps towards greater coordination between the humanitarian, development and peace communities. The joint programming exercise can build upon and inform an ongoing nexus approach in contexts of fragility, conflict and crisis. Planning must take into account any nexus coordination activities already under way on the ground, to make the best use of (limited) resources and staff.

 

Supporting joint programming in fragile and crisis situations: recommended activities

Fragile states are vulnerable to aid fragmentation, poorly designed interventions and ineffective practices. A proliferation of overlapping humanitarian and development actors, limited government coordination capacity, and a rapidly evolving context present challenges that are specific to each situation. Team Europe may be constrained by limited presence, security considerations and high staff turnover.

The EU’s comprehensive approach to external conflict and crises therefore identifies a number of practical steps:

w-_16-what-is-joint-programming_blue.png

 

Under the NDICI regulation, a conflict analysis must be conducted as part of the programming process for countries and regions in crisis or post-crisis, as well as for fragile and vulnerable situations. This ensures that the programming is conflict-sensitive and takes into account the special needs of the countries and regions concerned, so as to avoid any actions that unintentionally exacerbate conflicts.

In crisis contexts, it is also key to systematically include DG ECHO and consult with other humanitarian actors in joint programming processes, in order to design holistic and coherent responses to the needs of the population.

 

Assessing the value of conducting a conflict analysis

Starting a joint programming process with a conflict analysis builds risk assessment into the joint planning and response exercise. Based on a shared understanding of the conflict drivers, a joint and timely conflict analysis offers an evidence-based foundation for the effective prevention and resolution of violent conflicts and effective peacebuilding programming. In addition, conflict analysis helps to ensure that integrated EU engagements in fragile countries are conflict-sensitive. Informed, timely and effective conflict prevention reduces the risk of human suffering and further harm. In turn, failed prevention may cause forced displacement and migration or increased human rights violations, reverse years of development, increase the need for costly reactive engagements and undermine the credibility of international diplomacy.

 

Developing and incorporating a conflict analysis

Conflict analysis is a structured analytical process that offers key insights into the risks for violent conflict and conflict dynamics in a specific area, country or region. While the analytical approach remains flexible to accommodate different timelines and environments, key elements of the analysis generally include: 1) a brief overview of the historical and current environment, describing the type and scope of past or ongoing violent conflict, or related risks; 2) structural and proximate causes of (potential) violence, and patterns of resilience; 3) actors that shape the conflict (including parties to the conflict, people affected by it and those with an interest or stake therein); 4) potential scenarios for violence; 5) mapping of ongoing conflict prevention and stabilisation activities; and 6) recommendations to ensure conflict-sensitive engagement and conflict prevention.

In the context of joint programming, two main options can be explored (see chapter 8):

  1. A conflict/situational analysis in the initial phase of the joint programming process. A conflict scan through a desk study and workshop, for example, could precede the joint programming analysis and response.
  2. A conflict/situational analysis to inform the existing joint programming process. An established joint programming initiative can be reviewed and revised, for example if the need arises to formulate a combined humanitarian and development response.

It is useful to start with an overview of Team Europe members’ ongoing and future priorities in the partner country, for example through a mapping of their main concerns, support modalities and programming cycles. Conducting a survey or similar information-gathering exercise could be of use before embarking on a conflict/ situational analysis. Some partners may have already conducted their own analysis that can be incorporated.

The conclusions of the conflict/situational analysis are important inputs to the joint programming process and provide the underlying foundation for the joint analysis. This will then inform a conflict-sensitive joint response. In countries where a nexus plan exists, the joint programming process should, if possible, build on it.

t-_23-question_mark_blue.png

Should my Delegation/Service conduct or participate in an EU conflict analysis?

 

 

  • Is there a significant risk of violent conflict in the country?
  • Could EU action possibly aggravate tensions, divisions, violence?
  • Does the EU have a significant (ongoing or plan) interest or engagement in the country (e.g. through political instruments, development corporation and humanitarian assistance or CSDP)?
  • Is there an up-to-date conflict analysis available?
  • Could the delegation benefit from additional expertise and capacity to do more on conflict prevention and conflict sensitivity?

 

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: