European Development Co‐operation via Technical Assistance: An Outside‐in Perspective

Abstract

Existing research typically sees European Union (EU) development co‐operation as one of its tools for influencing third countries. By contrast, in focusing on technical assistance as a part of EU development co‐operation, this article examines third countries' influence on this co‐operation. The article builds on unique data on the EU's technical assistance to third countries and third countries' requests for technical assistance from the largest EU technical assistance instrument – the Technical Assistance and Information Exchange. The findings demonstrate that third countries are selective in the assistance that they request and that via such requests third countries can influence the extent of technical co‐operation with the EU. The article provides a novel outside‐in perspective on the EU's development co‐operation and contributes to our understanding of how the EU's technical assistance functions.

Managing networks: Cohesion and fluidity in EU climate cooperation with European neighbours

“…Although the terms are sometimes used interchangeably, network governance also differs from multilevel governance. While both concepts refer to non-hierarchical and fluid cooperation settings, most multilevel governance research does not consider non-state actors to be part of governance processes and instead privileges state actors at the international, national, regional and local levels (Slaughter and Hale, 2013). The notion of network governance best captures the EU's climate policy networks, which are open to the participation of both state and non-state actors at different levels.…”

“…Similar to international organizations, policy networks reduce transaction costs and provide information that facilitates both effective monitoring and flexible problem-solving at the international level (Slaughter and Hale, 2013). Unlike the cooperation that takes place within international organizations, however, policy networks cannot take recourse to enforcement mechanisms (McGuire, 2013: 439).…”

“…The existing network governance literature has identified three main functions of policy networks: managing external dependencies, improving the institutional capacity of partner countries and providing support for less advanced partners (Slaughter and Hale, 2013). In the context of EU policy networks on adaptation and mitigation, we argue that these functions can co-occur but are analytically distinct.…”

“…Enhance institutional capacity. Another important function of policy networks is to address capacity gaps in partner countries (Slaughter and Hale, 2013). From this vantage point, developing an adequate and effective response to global challenges such as climate change requires functional state institutions.…”

“…First, network governance theory is uniquely suitable for studying the international governance of complex issues such as climate change, as this governance is often characterized by interdependent and interconnected sets of actors. To capture the dynamics in these forms of governance, network governance theory acknowledges the interdependence of actors in a network (e.g., Agranoff and McGuire, 1999; McGuire, 2002; Slaughter and Hale, 2013). Network governance is defined as decision-making in relation to cross-border challenges and situations when joint problems require policy solutions from interdependent actors (cf.…”