Dialogue in Pursuit of Development - Are you looking for one of ...

70
trained personnel, but I see this as a minor problem compared to other
issues within this field. Take for example the problems all the different
donors in a single country cause. They all come with different agendas. Sometimes
two donors might push for the same question, but in totally different
directions. This situation certainly does not assist development in that country,
but I see no immediate solution to that problem. I had great hopes that
the EU could act as an aid coordinator at least for the European countries,
but for the time being, everybody seems to be so critical about the way the
EU handles its own development assistance that a logical conclusion is instead
that we should cut down on the development co-operation of the
EU.
GBA: I see it from another perspective. Development co-operation is
about finding approaches to reforms and interventions that can promote
sustainable development in the partner country. We in the main donor countries
have acquired experiences in the course of our own transformation
and development that are sometimes appropriate to share with countries
that are ‘latecomers’ in modern development. As donors we have also gained
useful experience and developed theories, for example, in our discussions
within the DAC and other, far too often donor dominated, fora. However
it is a problem that we have relied too much on these perspectives in our
dialogue with partners in the south. Our prescriptions have varied over the
years and I have doubts about the whole approach of thinking that we could
convey useful messages through a dialogue sometimes linked to
conditionality sometimes not. Even with the best intentions it tends to
become paternalistic and if so it will seldom lead to good and lasting results.
That is why it is so important that opportunities are actively searched for
where developed and developing countries meet more as equal partners.
The major UN conferences have often been criticised for being too big and
costly and producing too many words. I do not share that criticism. Their
most fundamental contribution has been that they have provided a platform
for a dialogue on more equal terms than ever before across development
and cultural gulfs. We need more not less of such a dialogue. Our
European experience tells us that peer learning and peer pressure among
equals yield results. It is therefore also encouraging that, for instance, African
countries through the new African Union and NEPAD have expressed
their intention to assume greater responsibility for development and monitoring
of governance and policy in their own continent. It is a tremendous
advantage if bilateral relationships and partnerships at country level where
all or most donors cooperate can build on such mutually agreed and established
norms and approaches.
An important element in management and staff training within aid agencies
should be to follow closely and deepen the understanding of an existing
agreement and how its implementation can be a purpose as well as
leverage in the development co-operation. That is how the EU-aquis is ap-