Middle East / North Africa and the Millennium Development Goals ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Middle East / North Africa and the Millennium Development Goals Furthermore, only in relatively few cases do these papers state why German DC is supporting certain measures instead of others that might just as well contribute to reaching the goals set, i.e. why the instruments selected are assumed to be superior to others. This can give rise to the impression that instead of being derived from the goals of German DC, the measures receiving support have been defined a posteriori, as a means of creating a strategic framework broad enough to cover a number of individual DC projects. Rodenberg (2001, III) comes out in favor of formulating PSPs without any unduly unspecific statements of the following kind: “… provides a contribution to the country’s economic development and thus contributes to reducing poverty.” – Meaningfulness of and need for a German engagement: Numerous PSPs on MENA countries fail to explain why a given partner country is especially reliant on external support for the measures being conducted by German DC, i.e. where, precisely, they see a bottleneck in partner capacities that can be bridged with the aid of German DC. And seldom do these papers state precisely whether and to what extent Germany, as a bilateral donor, has comparative advantages over other donors and what these advantages consist of. Many papers get no further than the assertion that there are such advantages. – Goals not congruent with the MDG agenda: In most countries of the MENA region German DC also pursued goals that, while they may not run counter to the MDGs, are nevertheless not congruent with them. For instance, one aim pursued by German DC together with the Maghreb countries is to improve the latter’s international competitiveness and in this way to ‘get them in shape’ for the Euro- Mediterranean free-trade area. There can hardly be any objections to additional goals or reference systems. 11 Most PSPs plausibly state why they may be regarded as reasonable goals and how the measures supported may contribute to achieving these goals. However, German 11 Alternative reference systems of German DC with the MENA countries would include e.g. (i) the goal system of the EU’s Mediterranean policy and policy of good-neighborly relations, set out in the Barcelona Declaration, the Common Strategy, and the agreements on a Euro-Mediterranean free-trade area; (ii) the Arab Human Development Reports; and (iii) the Broader Middle East Initiative (BMENA). These systems differ markedly in the terms of the weight they assign to individual goals and their degree of concretization and the obligations they entail, but not in terms of their rough orientation. What this means is that they are, in the end, congruent; see Erdle / Trautner (2005); Posselt / Buchmüller (2005a). German Development Institute 143
144 Markus Loewe DC should be far more frank and assertive in dealing with this issue. It should clearly admit, and own up to, fact that several of the measures it supports have no reference to the MDGs. This would create more transparency, without detriment to the matter itself. However, documenting what German DC in fact contributes to the international goal system would require more than establishing clear-cut links between the PSPs and the MDG agenda. Since the documents in question are planning papers that are formulated ex ante, they can provide information only on the anticipated (supposed) impacts of German DC. Whether these impacts have in fact materialized can only be determined ex post, on the basis of appropriate MDG-specific analyses (Neubert 2004). Although it is entirely feasible to conduct such targeted impact analyses of German DC’s contributions to implementation of the MDG agenda at the national level (idem), thus far no systematic analyses have been performed in any partner country of German DC. The fact that other donors have not made much progress here either is no excuse. However, at present the BMZ’s MDG representative is working together with the MDG coordinators of the German implementing agencies to “align the planning and monitoring of development programs and measures to the MDGs” (Bundesregierung 2004, 5). In this connection there are also plans to align the BMZ country concepts and priority strategy papers more closely to the MDGs with a view to improving the poverty relevance of German programs and projects (Bundesregierung 2004, 6). 5.4 Policy dialogue The German government regularly addresses the MDG agenda in the framework of its political dialogue with the governments of partner countries in the MENA region. However, no efforts are made in that context what consequences the partner country governments might have to face if their efforts in implementing the MDGs prove inadequate. For their part, these partner governments do their best to avoid addressing the issue. At present the BMZ has no guidelines governing whether and in what language the MDG agenda or the state of the Millennium process should be addressed in government-level consultations and negotiations with partner countries. There is such standardized official language regarding both the German Development Institute
Page 2 and 3:
Middle East / North Africa and the
Page 4 and 5:
Studies Deutsches Institut für Ent
Page 6 and 7:
Foreword This study is the English
Page 8 and 9:
Contents Abbreviations Executive Su
Page 10 and 11:
Bibliography 163 List of Interview
Page 12 and 13:
Figure 15: Trends in the implementa
Page 14:
Table A15: Commitment of the govern
Page 17 and 18:
GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Tech
Page 19 and 20:
UN HABITAT United Nations Human Set
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
43 German Development Institute Ove
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115: Middle East / North Africa and the
Page 144 and 145: 123 Gerrman Development Institute O
Page 152 and 153: 131 German Development Institute Ov
Page 154 and 155: 133 German Development Institute Ov
Page 182: Middle East / North Africa and the
Page 185 and 186: Markus Loewe ANND (Arab NGO Network
Page 187 and 188: Markus Loewe - (2003a): Länderberi
Page 189 and 190: Markus Loewe Clemens, M. / Ch. Kenn
Page 191 and 192: Markus Loewe Fues, T. (2005): Entwi
Page 193 and 194: Markus Loewe IMF / OECD / UN / Worl
Page 195 and 196: Markus Loewe - (2004d): Maßnahmen
Page 197 and 198: Markus Loewe Pogge, T. (2003): Ein
Page 199 and 200: Markus Loewe Schüler, D. / S. Klas
Page 201 and 202: Markus Loewe - (2004a): Human Devel
Page 203 and 204: Markus Loewe - (2004g): Kingdom of
Page 205 and 206: Markus Loewe Georg Schüller, Count
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240:
Page 243 and 244:
Berichte und Gutachten 11/04 Scholz
Page 245:
Discussion Paper 16/2006 Brüntrup,
show all

Middle East / North Africa and the Millennium Development Goals ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?