Mutual Engagement between EU delegations and civil … · Mutual Engagement between EU delegations...
-
Upload
truonghanh -
Category
Documents
-
view
221 -
download
0
Transcript of Mutual Engagement between EU delegations and civil … · Mutual Engagement between EU delegations...
About the report and its purpose
The report is based on a survey: sample at a given moment, qualitative more than quantitative, no statistics but reflecting shared and individual perceptions, experience and expectations from a broad range of CSOs worldwide, allowing to identify good practice and recommendations
It is not the first time CONCORD organises a survey on EU delegations: previous surveys on financing, EDF programming, 1st phase of porgramming, needs assessment by Danish platform
What is new with this report and why: Looks at all dimensions of mutual engagement beyond funding and consultation in line with new approach through country roadmaps. Report is a tool for awareness raising and identifying good practice not a blaming and shaming exercise
About the survey
How many respondents, how it was analysed: 229 responses from 70 countries (138 EN, 41 FR, 50 SP). Responses processed by EUD group with help of consultant. Report drafted by EUD group.
Limitations: 46.8% INGOs, 87.1% NGOs – less than 3 responses in majority of countries. Only 4 EUD interviewed. Reflects lower capacities, interest and knowledge at local, community based CS level. Reflects general outreach problem.
How it could be improved in future: involving partner platforms and networks and EU institutions from the onset, simplifying survey, engaging more delegations, roadmap as a basis.
The 4 chapters of the survey
CS involvement in the EUD
programming cycle and
budget planning
CS involvement
in the development
of broader national and EU policies
EU roadmaps
for engagement
with CS
CSOs as beneficiaries
of EU cooperation
funds
Findings: CS consultation on the country MIP
• Only 23.3% said they were invited. INGOs more often present than local ones. Need to reach out to more local CSOs outside the capital, to go beyond CSOs already in contact with EUD through funding.
Not open and inclusive enough
• Priority sectors were main issue discussed. Variety in assessment of the process from mere information session to well organised open and participative process in several stages. HoD present in 44.6%.
Content: information or real consultation?
• Some level of coordination in 52% of cases through existing NW or platforms or ad hoc groups, 73% in FR speaking. In some cases, effort done to involve and consult smaller local CSOs.
CS coordination in 52% of cases
• Main weaknesses: information arriving too late, no follow-up (74%) still 63% consider it was part of on-going dialogue and 21% feel their views were taken into account.
Weak in preparation and feedback
• Need to learn from practice on both sides and to spread good examples at both EUD and CS levels. Reaching out effort necessary on both sides.
Need to Promote good practice
Findings: broader national and EU policies
• 30% of respondents are in dialogue with EUD on a wide range of policy issues - often initiated by CSOs Dialogue EUD-CSOs
• 22% invited by EUD to discuss HR and fundamental freedoms - 26.8% receive EU funding for human rights or gender actions - 45% are not aware of the existence of an EU Human Rights strategy for the country
Dialogue on Human Rights
• only 14.6% were invited by EUD to exchange on restriction of the CS space – the issue is a sensitive one
Dialogue on enabling environment
• Only 15% (37 CSOs) get support from EUD to facilitate their participation in policy making or political dialogue – different forms of support exist
Supporting Political role of CS
• Good examples exist but EUD could do more to support the CS enabling environment and political space through dialogue with the government
Promoting CS space
Findings: CS consultation on the roadmaps
• Compared to MIP, more CSOs invited by EUD to take part in consultation (43.2% against 23.3%). Broader group and range of actors, including PS but still judged not inclusive enough by 65% .
Outreach and inclusiveness
• Head of EUD present in 32% of cases and MS in only 25.5%. New models of consultation used (decentralised meetings, E-tools, consultancy) to reach out requiring additional resources.
Tools and mechanisms
• Not systematic (35% only) but good examples exist and could lead to better structuration of CS and more structured dialogue with EUD.
CS coordination
• Content judged relevant by 71%: political and legal context, dialogue CSOs – EUD, priority actions to strengthen CS role, capacity building and operational support to CSOs. Not enough time to prepare and coordinate; lack of follow-up but process is on-going.
Content and quality
• Positive exercise that could become a framework for on-going structured and inclusive dialogue between CS, EUD and MS embassies. More CSOs involved than in programming but less coordinated. Cross –learning between the 2 processes would be good.
Way forward
Findings: CS0s as beneficiaries of EU funding
• 68% of respondents applied for EU funding in last 3 years and half of them were successful, 91% through calls for proposals
CSOs are active fundraisers
• EU funding is too complex for local and small NGOs to compete in the bidding processes. Efforts to simplify made in HR area could be improved and generalised
INGOs are the main recipients
• 76% considered that the process was transparent and sufficiently predictable but improvements are needed on feedback on rejected proposals and management of timing and information before the call
Quality of granting process
• Only 22% claimed that EUD offers capacity-building activities on grant management and presented good practice but these sessions are aimed at grants recipients and small local CSOs feel excluded
Capacity building for grant management
Recommendations to EU institutions and CSOs
Coherent engagement
strategy
Link the RBA tool-box, EU action plan on human rights and
democracy, HR country strategies and EU country roadmaps
Improve coordination between EUDs at regional level
MS to participate more actively, or play a leading role in the
roadmap
Engage constructively and consistently in the development,
implementation and regular review of EU country roadmaps
and human rights strategies
Permanent and structured dialogue
Establish permanent and holistic EUD-CS dialogue
Strengthen multistakeholder dialogue
Create more targeted dialogue spaces with specialised CSOs
Proactively share your analyses and concerns with EUDs and invite them to the events you organise in relation to
the political situation, or particular policy issues that are important in your
country
CS Enabling environment
Participate in and promote both tripartite (EUD-CS-GOV) and bilateral (CS-GOV) dialogue
Where needed, act as a liaison or facilitator between civil society
and government
Through the EU country roadmap process, share your
analysis and concerns regarding an enabling environment with
EUD and together with them see how they can represent these
concerns in their political dialogue with governments
Supporting CS political role
Map the mechanisms for dialogue between CSOs and their
government and see how the EUD could support or participate
Support dialogue and cooperation between civil society and local
authorities
Strengthen CSOs’ engagement in multi-actor dialogue on national development strategies and sectoral policies, including
through the dialogue with EUDs on programming
INGOs have a role to play is spreading information and knowledge about the
EU’s policies and programmes and strengthening local civil society's
capacity for advocacy and policy work
Effective consultation
processes
Reach out to the wider civil society outside the capitals (e-tools,
decentralised meetings)
Share documents well in advance of a consultation meeting
increase transparency and improve feedback mechanisms
Platforms of CSOs could take the lead and report back to the EUD afterwards. In such cases, the EU and INGOs should also provide
financial and/or logistical support for the organisers
Supporting CS structuration and
networking
Strengthen multi-stakeholder dialogue by including academia,
parliamentarians, local authorities and other CSO actors
Dialogue with an EUD can play a role in structuring and strengthening civil
society.
Strengthen horizontal networking and coordination between civil society actors at all levels, from local grassroots movements to
INGOs.
Effective granting process
Consult CSOs and organise information sessions ahead of calls for proposals
Provide more qualitative feedback on why a proposal was rejected
Apply more flexibility in calls for proposals, tailored to the needs and
capacities of smaller, local organisations
Spread good practice in capacity building
Develop a civil society strategy for notifying CSOs in-country of EU funding
opportunities and consultations
INGOs and national platforms to provide advice and information to local CSOs
Flexible & long-term funding
Support long-term projects, provide more seed funding, support
knowledge-sharing and cross-project learning as well as
networking and sector approaches
INGOs have an important role to play in building capacities and disseminating information on
funding trends and grant management.