EU development cooperation

Abstract

At the beginning of the twenty-first century, the European Union (EU) stands out as an important regional organisation. It entertains formalised relations with almost all other (groups of ) states. Although much of its attention is devoted to internal integration, obviously the European Union cannot and does not wish to be an isolated entity. Instead it has expressed the desire and ambition to take up a prominent place in the working of international relations. In addition to the general goal of forging good relations with (potential) political and economic partners across the globe, the Union also wishes to use its place in international relations as a vehicle for advocating some of the values it considers important. Among these values are democracy, social welfare, human rights and liberalism.The EU perceives development cooperation policy as an important tool to serve both missions. Accordingly, an impressive and unique record of development cooperation activities and of structural and comprehensive policy has been built over time. Until the 1990s, the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) states unequivocally were Europe's most preferred developing country partners, and ACP-EU relations were the most visible and important component of the EU development cooperation programme. ACP-EU relations started at the very creation of the European Economic Community in 1957 and were elaborated first in the Yaoundé and then in the Lomé Conventions and the 2000 Cotonou Agreement. In many peoples' eyes the Lomé Convention came to symbolise EU development cooperation, more so than any other agreement (Grilli, 1993). It linked the EU with a large group of developing countries, many among the poorest, in an innovative agreement which declared itself to operate on the basis of equality of partners. In the 1970s the Lomé Convention was held up as a model for the future of North-South relations in general and EU development policy in particular. The Convention embodied many novel features which seemed to suggest that the EU was prepared to buck the trend in international development and take on board some of the arguments

Too Effective for Europe? The UK, Norm Advocacy and the Case of EU International Cooperation

“…As Chris Patten, then Minister for Overseas Development, suggested in 1988, British officials argued their case simultaneously in Washington and in Brussels (Brown, , p. 22). In fact, the priorities of EC and UK development cooperation converged over time as common European development cooperation converged towards the global consensus, which reflected liberal, multilateral norms of international relations as embodied in the Washington Consensus in the 1980s and 1990s (Arts and Dickson, ; Cumming, ).…”

Foreign Aid, Human Rights, and Democracy Promotion: Evidence from a Natural Experiment

“…One particularly salient national interest with respect to foreign policy is their preference to assist countries they favor. In particular, we expect that the ministers seek to reward their respective nations' former colonies, since former colonizers tend to have political, cultural, and economic ties to these states that stem from shared history, duty, economic benefits for their companies, political legitimacy, symbolic representations of international power, and familial connections (Arts and Dickson ).…”

“…Similarly, the UK joined the European Community under the condition that EU aid be expanded dramatically to benefit former British dominions. When Spain and Portugal then entered in 1986, they demanded that Latin American and Mediterranean states, particularly their former colonies, receive increased development assistance (Arts and Dickson ). Indeed, opinions within the EU are still divided over which states to focus assistance on, with former colonial powers seeking to direct more aid to their former colonies, and other states such as Germany, the Netherlands, Finland, and Sweden advocating broader aid policies (Arts and Dickson ).…”

The Normative Distinctiveness of the European Union in International Development: Stepping Out of the Shadow of the World Bank?

“…Focusing at the level of ‘policy ideas’ makes it possible to go beyond generalizations and discover diverging interpretations within the same paradigm. For example, many scholars found that the EU has followed ‘neoliberal’ development paradigms as developed within international institutions such as the WB (Arts and Dickson, ; Farrell, ; Hurt, ). However, at the level of policy ideas, the same neoliberal paradigm may be translated differently, for instance by putting more or less emphasis on political and social dimensions.…”