RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT IN RELATION WITH THE EU's DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION POLICY - RESOLUTION

I. Introduction

1. . The Council recalls its statement of 1st June 1995 on "Development Research" and reiterates the importance of the contribution that Research and Technological Development (R.T.D.) can make to achieving the objectives of the European Union's development policy.
2. 2. The 11-13 March 1997 Conference in Leyden, the Netherlands on "Research Partnerships for Sustainable Development", provided a valuable forum for discussions, involving representatives of the Commission, Member States and developing countries, on future cooperation in this field.
3. 3. At a time when the 5th Framework Programme for Research, which contains a chapter on international cooperation, is being formulated, and when discussions are taking place on future development policy, the Council stresses the strategic role RTD could play for enhancing sustainable development.
4. 4. The Council therefore welcomes the Commission's communication on "Scientific and Technological Research - a strategic Part of the European Union's Development Cooperation with Developing Countries". It appreciates the analysis carried out and the overall strategy proposed for the use of RTD to promote sustainable development, to facilitate the integration of developing countries into the global economy.

II. Coherence of Instruments

•  5. Support for RTD is provided within the Community notably through two different types of instruments (the international cooperation component of the Framework Programme and the development cooperation programmes); the strategy must define a coherent overall approach in order to articulate its various elements and better coordinate the actions undertaken.

III. General Principles

• 6. - Partnership at both policy and operational levels, promoting the developing countries' ownership in order to optimise effectiveness.
• -Differentiation in order to take into account the different needs and circumstances of individual countries and regions.
• -Mainstreaming development research as an integral part of development programmes and policies geared toward a better understanding of development processes, while not excluding specific research activities.
• -An integrated approach to solving specific problems, which will entail interdisciplinary collaboration, including the social sciences and will associate the end users of research and technology.

IV. Implementation

• 7. Considering that increased attention should be paid to RTD as a tool for economic, social, political and cultural development, the Council stresses the need to develop a policy dialogue on RTD needs and priorities with developing countries involving the government, the research community and civil society.
• 8. The Council attaches particular importance to institution building, especially under development programmes, and strengthening research capacities in developing countries, notably the least developed and poorest countries, as well as to supporting the elaboration of the research strategy, which comprises both specific (often short-term) problem solving research and basic or strategic (often long-term) research. Special attention should be paid to the existence of a policy to create a facilitating environment for science and higher education, including universities.
• 9. Regarding RTD, the Council stresses the importance of maintaining specific activities for research cooperation for sustainable development, in the context of the fifth Framework Programme and to enhance development relevance, based on mutual interests, of these RTD activities.
• Furthermore, according to the mainstreaming approach an adequate proportion of existing and future development resources should be devoted to RTD activities, subject to the rules and conditions applied to those resources.
• 10. The Council welcomes the Commission's intention to enhance regional activities and strengthen South - South links between RTD institutions.

V. Coordination/Complementarity

1. 1. Recalling its May and December 1993 conclusions, the Council reiterates the importance of coordination within the Commission through enhanced interservice planning, and between the Commission, the Member States, other donors and the beneficiairies. The strategy proposed should be implemented in a coordinated way in order to ensure coherence and complementarity, to increase synergy and efficiency and to avoid cases of duplication.
2. 2. Furthermore, the Council welcomes the Commission's intention to convene an informal expert group on development research, comprising experts from the Commission and the Member States, in order to exchange informations and lead a common reflection on the implementation of the overall strategy.
3. In order to strengthen the policy dialogue between the EU and the developing countries/regions on RTD, and to take into account the needs and priorities of the South, that expert group should also invite experts from developing countries whenever appropriate.
4. Policy dialogue could also take place with interested developing regions on their research priorities and the ways and means to support them.

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES - CONCLUSIONS

The Council invited the Commission to present a policy paper on co-operation with and support for indigenous peoples. On the basis of that paper, the Council will prepare a resolution to be adopted at its meeting of November 1997.

FOLLOW-UP TO THE SOCIAL SUMMIT

The Council took note of Commissioner PINHEIRO's presentation of the communication on the EU's follow-up to the World Summit for Social Development held in Copenhagen in March 1995.

OTHER BUSINESS

- ALA REPORT

The Council invited the Commission to present as soon as possible the report on Cooperation with Asia and Latin-American Countries for the period 1991-1995.

- UNGASS

The Ministers discussed the preparation for the United Nations General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) 5 years after UNCED to be held in New York from 23 to 27 June. In this context, the Presidency proposed that the EU's Development and Environment Ministers meet on 22 June in New York.

- SOMALIA

Commissioner PINHEIRO indicated that the Commission would seek approval to allow the use of European Development Fund resources in SOMALIA , despite the fact that this country, because of its internal situation, has not been in a position to ratify the Revised Lomé Convention.

OTHER DECISIONS

(Adopted without discussion.)

Evaluation of the Food Aid Programme - Resolution

The Council takes note of the joint evaluation of Member States and Community programme food aid (P.F.A.) covering the years 1989-1994. It notes that the conclusions question the usefulness of programme food aid as an aid instrument and that the evaluators consider that, on average, Community actions were relatively more cost-effective than those of bilateral donors. It also notes that the Commission has already embarked on a major restructuring of its food aid to make it a more effective instrument for supporting food security.

The Council underlines the Regulation on food aid and food security adopted in June 1996, that represents a new approach which in particular stresses that programme food aid should contribute to food security. Keeping in mind the agreed principles for mobilization of products in this regulation, the Council also points to the large increase in local purchases and triangular operations which has taken place since 1994.

The Council considers that the following orientations should guide future PFA actions:

• I. Prioritization

• 1. Without prejudice to article 9 of the Regulation on food aid and food security, in particular, the possibility of targeting food aid to specially vulnerable groups of the population, PFA should in priority be concentrated on a limited number of low income food deficit countries, notably in two specific circumstances:

• -  First, in crisis situations PFA can be made available to help sustain food availability in the long term and meet temporary food gaps provided that:

• = commitments and deliveries can be made in time;
• = commitments can be reassessed and modified if the crisis situation changes rapidly;
• = the risks of negative effects on food availability in the long term are minimized.

• -  Second, PFA can be provided as part of a wider support for combatting chronic food insecurity or endemic poverty. Account should be taken notably of the existence of:

• = a coherent national food security strategy oriented to the poor;
• = a clear need for import support;
• = a suitable marketing system; and
• = satisfactory donor coordination on policy priorities, procedures and logistics.

II. Form of assistance

• 2. In all circumstances, the relative merits of different instruments (balance of payments support, finance for food imports or food aid) and all purchasing modalities set out in article 11 of the Regulation on food aid and food security should be considered. The choice of instrument or modality should be based on explicit consideration of:

• -effectiveness; food security implications for consumption and nutrition, local production and markets and
• -efficiency; in operational terms (timeliness, commodity appropriateness) and cost-effectiveness.

• 3. Programme Food Aid could preferably be provided as financial support instead of commodity aid in countries where food imports are partly or fully liberalized. However, in case of expected inefficient purchasing by the recipient country, the provision of commodity aid could be considered, taking account of the possibility of local and triangular purchases where economically viable compared to purchases in the Community market.

• 4. Balance of payments support will be considered, where appropriate, for those LIFDC's which have liberalized the economy, including the external financial and commodity markets, and where a coherent national food security policy oriented to the poor exists.

• 5. In order to ensure coherence, stronger coordination of PFA-activities with regard to other EU supported development activities is necessary in particular in relation to rural development and poverty alleviation.

• PFA support to longer term household food security and poverty alleviation should preferably be placed within the framework of a sectoral agreement which includes explicit targeting criteria.

III. Counterpart funds

• 6. The Council recalls its conclusion, in which it endorsed to move away from targeting counterpart funds towards more general allocation, as soon as progress has been made in improving the policy dialogue, effectiveness of the monitoring instruments, programming and budget implementation, and as regards internalization of reviews of public expenditure.

• 7. Before committing funds for PFA, an explicit agreement should be reached on arrangements for pricing and the deposit of funds with specific attention to cost-effectiveness. CPF's should be managed within an appropriate public expenditure framework. In case of PFA aimed at responding to the needs resulting from crisis situations and when CPF's can be constituted, such CPF's should be used to strengthen the recipient's capacity to prevent or manage food crises.

• 8. The donor-recipient agreement on CPF's should include practicable and transparent procedures that take into account the recipient's budgetary practice. The agreement will be either part of a common CPF agreement or consistent with parallel agreements by other donors. The Council invites the donors to continue to encourage the harmonization of procedures for the management of CPF, including the provision of technical support if appropriate.

IV. Donor coordination

• 9. The Council notes that the evaluation makes clear the importance of good donor coordination. It recalls and confirms the provisions concerning coordination between the Commission, Member States and other actors contained in its resolution on food security of November 1994. In particular, coordination should cover the following aspects:

• -Regular and consistent exchanges of information on food security;

• -Harmonization of procedures, particularly at recipient country level;

• -Integration of PFA into wider reform including mitigation of short term negative effects of adjustment;

• -Building on country-specific circumstances and, where appropriate, taking into account the regional context;

• -Where appropriate, joint liaison to assist the recipient government in producing a country-specific strategy for the provision, monetisation and distribution of PFA, which is integrated into a national economic strategy;

• -Mutual information between the Commission and Member States on Food Aid.

V. Code of conduct

• 10. The Council supports the principle of an international code of conduct on Food Aid and invites the Commission and Member States to pursue their work on this in collaboration with other donors.

• The Commission is invited to report to the Council on further progress in this respect.

VI. Evaluation

• 11. The Council endorses the need to evaluate instruments in support of food security, other than programme food aid.

• At the next Council meeting further consideration will be given to such an evaluation, also taking into account the evaluation requirements in the Regulation on food aid and food security and the Global Evaluation.

Court of Auditor's Report concerning EU Humanitarian Aid - Conclusions

• 1. The Council has taken note of the Court of Auditors' report on EU humanitarian aid and the Commission's reaction with great interest. The report is of particular importance in view of the growing number of international humanitarian emergency situations in recent years and the corresponding increase of humanitarian aid to a level of about 700 MECU annually.

•  2. The Council has taken note of the overall positive assessment of the Court of Auditors' report, which notably recognizes that the Commission has deployed under difficult and sensitive circumstances an enormous amount of humanitarian aid.

• 3. The report covers the years 1992 to 1995. In this respect, the Council recalls that the European Community Humanitarian Office (ECHO) was set up in 1992 and that the Council regulation concerning humanitarian assistance was only adopted in June 1996.

• 4. The Council notes with satisfaction that the evaluation of humanitarian aid which it has requested is about to begin following the approval of terms of reference drawn up by the Member States and the Commission. It trusts that the evaluators will take account of the work done by the Court of Auditors and of the comments on the report made by the Commission, of the outcome of discussions in other relevant fora as well as of experience since the entry into force of the regulation.

• 5. The Council attaches particular importance to the following aspects which are highlighted in the Audit Court report and will look at them among others in the light of the evaluation referred to in 4. above:

• a) Strengthening cohesion of measures

• The Court recommends strengthening the cohesion of the measures undertaken on the basis of the different relevant regulations with a view to enhancing operational effectiveness. In this regard, the Council took note of the Court's recommendations concerning a general policy document.

• b) Coordination of EU policies and activities.

• Though linked to the above mentioned issue, the Council is convinced of the need for further improvement of the coordination of policies and activities and in particular for ensuring the linkages between relief, rehabilitation and long-term development. It will follow closely the Commission's efforts in this field and will at its meeting of November 1997 have a further exchange of views aiming at developing detailed guidelines on strengthening the linkages between relief, rehabilitation and development, as foreseen in the relevant Council conclusion of 28 May 1996.

• c) Coordination and cooperation between the various actors in the field of humanitarian aid.

• The Council acknowledges the need for greater coordination and cooperation within the Commission and between the Commission, the Member States, the UN and other relevant international organisations, as laid down in Article 10 of the basic regulation, and whenever possible, the recipient countries as well as for strengthening cooperation with NGOs. The Council in particular noted the suggestions to use the instrument of global plans to improve coordination and complementarity, and the need, in general, to promote harmonization of donor procedures to improve effectiveness and efficiency of humanitarian assistance.

• As far as coordination and cooperation between the Commission and the Member States are concerned, the Council highlights the role of the Committee on Humanitarian Aid set up by the basic regulation and welcomes the initial discussions in this Committee on the relationship with UN and other international organizations.

• d) Revision of the Framework Partnership Agreement (FPA).

• The Council takes note of the Court's recommendation to differentiate the FPA according to the different types of partners and operations in order to reflect the respective roles and mutual commitments of ECHO and its partners as well as the Commission's intention to further examine this question. To facilitate effective project identification, preparation, implementation and monitoring, the FPA should be clear in objectives and criteria, adjusted to volatile conditions on the ground and promote cooperation with local partners. In this regard, the Council took note of the Court's comments on the control and monitoring of the global aid programmes and on the need to strengthen effective control of funds and results of operations while, at the same time, allowing operational flexibility.

• e) Visibility of humanitarian aid.

• While reiterating the importance of highlighting the Community character of humanitarian aid and of maintaining public support, the Council takes note of the Court's comments on visibility policy and underlines the need to further balance and examine this issue.

• f) Budgetary procedures

• The Council notes the Court's comment and the Commission's reply on the budgetary procedures governing the financing of humanitarian aid, the mobilization of the budgetary reserve and carry-overs from year to year. This question requires further consideration.

• g) Organization and procedures for the evaluation of humanitarian activities.

• While recognizing the specificity of the humanitarian activities, the Council takes note of the Court's suggestion regarding the integration of the evaluation function concerning humanitarian, rehabilitation and development aid outside the operational services in order to ensure its autonomy, and the need for proper feedback mechanisms based on achieved results.

• h) Staffing

• The Council, whilst recognising the Commission's responsibility for allocating staff, also notes the Court of Auditors' statement that ECHO is inadequately staffed, taking into consideration the nature of its work and the need for a stronger field supervision.

Co-financing of NGOs

The Council approved a common position on the Regulation concerning cofinancing operations with European non-governmental development organizations (NGOs) in fields of interest to the developing countries, which will be forwarded to the European Parliament (cooperation procedure).

The proposed Regulation provides that the Community shall cofinance operations in the field with European non-governmental development organizations (NGOs) to meet the basic needs of disadvantaged people in developing countries. Such operations shall be proposed by European NGOs and conducted in cooperation with their partners in the developing countries and shall be aimed at poverty alleviation as well as at enhancing the target group's quality of life and own development capacity.

The Community shall also cofinance with European NGOs public awareness and information operations in Europe about development problems in the developing countries and their relations with the industrialized world. Such operations shall be proposed by European NGOs and shall be designed to mobilize public support in Europe for development and for strategies and operations benefiting people in the developing countries.

The Community shall also cofinance operations designed to reinforce cooperation and coordination between NGOs from the Member States, and between NGOs from the Member States and the Community Institutions.