Learning from Past Experiences: Ways to Improve EU Aid on Reforms in the Eastern Partnership
Learning from Past Experiences: Ways to Improve EU Aid on Reforms in the Eastern Partnership
Author(s): Elżbieta Kaca, Anita Sobják, Konrad Zasztowt
Contributor(s): Elżbieta Kaca (Editor), Brien Barnett (Editor), Dorota Dołęgowska (Editor)
Subject(s): Politics / Political Sciences, Politics, History, Social Sciences, Economy, Supranational / Global Economy, Sociology, Economic history, Economic policy, Government/Political systems, International relations/trade, Economic development, EU-Accession / EU-DEvelopment, Fiscal Politics / Budgeting, Geopolitics
Published by: PISM Polski Instytut Spraw Międzynarodowych
Keywords: Past experiences; historical lessons; European Union; aid on reforms in Eastern partnerships; EU-oriented countries; EU standards; EU legislation; administration reforms;
Summary/Abstract: The EU aid approach in the Eastern Partnership countries is to financially support concrete reforms: sector budget support operations are most commonly used. The pace of fulfilment of conditions differs much among the partners. This results mainly from the various levels of willingness of the EaP governments to conduct EU-oriented reforms. Therefore, one can distinguish two groups of countries, EU-oriented (Moldova, Georgia) and non-EU-oriented (Armenia, Azerbaijan), where the latter are interested only in selective sector cooperation. The status of Ukraine is still unclear due to the recent political crisis: a pro-EU government is in place but the country will soon face presidential elections and is generally under increasing pressure from Russia. Still, in analysing recent years under the presidency of Viktor Yanukovych, the country was not committed to EU integration in real terms. A comparative picture of budget-support use in five Eastern Partnership countries shows numerous similarities. The initial experiences prove that it helps with legal approximation to EU standards in various sectors. This makes budget support, based on conditions and results, a more efficient tool in guiding some sector reforms than purely advisory instruments. For EUoriented countries, budget support is a suitable tool to guide the reforms needed to follow the association agenda. For non-EU-oriented countries, budget support cannot be an instrument that will encourage the government to start comprehensive reforms, but can be used as partial support in some sector cooperation. In that case, it has a fundamental advantage of obliging the government to work closely with the EU, going to the substance of the reform, and change, at least partially, the situation. In order to make budget support a more effective tool, several challenges common to the EaP countries must be addressed. The biggest problem with this approach appears to be that budget-support operations enhance legislative changes while failing to address the implementation side of reform, that is the government measures and actions aimed at the introduction of relevant policy instruments, procedures, and institutional interactions in order to achieve the planned reform. The reasons for this, besides political unwillingness, are as follows. First, the engagement of relevant ministries in implementation is lower than it could be as the funds are directed to the state budget and not to them directly. Second, the conditions applied to the aid sometimes are not shaped properly (they are too broad, ambitious or numerous). To some extent, this is derived from the limited capacities of national administrations to draft conditions and the inexperience of both sides in their first operations together. The programming period lacks wide consultations with stakeholders, other than the government, to discuss if the selected conditions are the most relevant. In addition, budget support is highly inflexible in terms of changing indicators once the financial agreement is signed, which risks outdated conditions. In some cases, the EU side is mainly to blame, as it avoids calculations of the overall costs of reforms and linking concrete activities with money as it fears the aid it provides would be treated as insufficient by the beneficiary.
Series: PISM Reports
- E-ISBN-13: 978-83-62453-79-5
- Page Count: 54
- Publication Year: 2014
- Language: English
The Budget Support System in Eastern Partnership Countries
The Budget Support System in Eastern Partnership Countries
(The Budget Support System in Eastern Partnership Countries)
- Author(s):Elżbieta Kaca
- Language:English
- Subject(s):Supranational / Global Economy, Economic policy, Government/Political systems, International relations/trade, Economic development, EU-Accession / EU-DEvelopment, Fiscal Politics / Budgeting, Geopolitics
- Page Range:15-18
- No. of Pages:4
- Keywords:European Union; Eastern partnership countries; budget support system; bilateral financial resources; national administration and EU delegation; sector budget support;
- Summary/Abstract:Here we present the general aims and characteristics of budget support in the EaP region, the volume of support and a breakdown by country. Budget support is the predominant EU tool in the Eastern Partnership countries, as around 60% of bilateral financial resources are scheduled to be spent through such means. This comprises financial assistance supporting government reforms and paid directly to the state budget of a specified country. Therefore, it requires close cooperation between the national administration and the EU delegation, ensured by frequent communication as well as the participation of common monitoring committees. Two types of budget support have been in use in the EaP region: general budget support and sector budget support. Under the former, funding is provided for a broad range of reforms planned by the government for a given period of time, for instance, implementation of the association agenda or action plans. The latter, sector budget support, goes for reforms only in a given sector, e.g., energy or health. Sector budget support has been the dominant form of support in all of the EaP countries except Armenia, where general budget support was employed.
Moldova: Good Grades, but Could Try Harder
Moldova: Good Grades, but Could Try Harder
(Moldova: Good Grades, but Could Try Harder)
- Author(s):Anita Sobják
- Language:English
- Subject(s):Supranational / Global Economy, Economic policy, International relations/trade, Economic development, EU-Accession / EU-DEvelopment, Fiscal Politics / Budgeting, Geopolitics
- Page Range:19-23
- No. of Pages:5
- Keywords:Moldova; budget support; social assistance; sector budget support; European Union; EU assistance;
- Summary/Abstract:This section presents how budget support has been used in Moldova. In this country, several budget support programmes were launched in the years 2007–2013. Currently, there is one implemented operation in social assistance, five operations ongoing in the health, water, rural development, energy and justice sectors, and two new ones planned for launch on visa liberalisation and vocational education. The total amount of money planned for these eight operations (including the two newest ones still under preparation) is €332.2 million, of which some 52% has already been disbursed. Sector budget support has been the main EU assistance tool in Moldova, making up about 74% of the overall financial envelope proposed by the National Indicative Programme (NIP) for 2007–2010 (€209.7 million) and approximately half of the budget in the NIP for 2011–2013 (€273.14 million). Such a contribution looks particularly impressive if compared to the state budget of Moldova, of which it represents about 4–5% (the highest contribution among the EaP countries). Moldova has obtained additional resources under the “more for more” principle (€28 million).
Georgia: A Bright Spark Struggling with the Homework
Georgia: A Bright Spark Struggling with the Homework
(Georgia: A Bright Spark Struggling with the Homework)
- Author(s):Elżbieta Kaca
- Language:English
- Subject(s):Supranational / Global Economy, Economic policy, Government/Political systems, International relations/trade, Economic development, Fiscal Politics / Budgeting, Geopolitics
- Page Range:25-29
- No. of Pages:5
- Keywords:Georgia; European Union; budget support; national budget; financial grants; government’s priorities;
- Summary/Abstract:This section presents how budget support has been spent in Georgia. Budget support expenditures amounted to €258 million in 2007–2013 and made up 60% of Georgia’s national budget. This sum consisted of €216 million planned for budget support, including €49 million allocated under the “more for more” rule to some operations and the rest for technical assistance and other grants. In this period of time, 12 programmes were planned, out of which two projects were finalised, six are still under implementation, and four are in the planning process. The majority of the financial resources have been disbursed, as the level of EU conditions met for each tranche hovered around 90%. The EU de-committed only €2.5 million as Georgia had not fulfilled some EU conditions due to changes in the government’s political priorities.
Ukraine: Too Big for School
Ukraine: Too Big for School
(Ukraine: Too Big for School)
- Author(s):Elżbieta Kaca
- Language:English
- Subject(s):Supranational / Global Economy, Economic policy, Environmental and Energy policy, Government/Political systems, International relations/trade, Economic development, Fiscal Politics / Budgeting, Geopolitics
- Page Range:31-36
- No. of Pages:6
- Keywords:Ukraine; European Union; sector budget support; EU assistance tool; energy sector; improving energy efficiency; EU aid;
- Summary/Abstract:This section presents how budget support has been used in Ukraine. Sector Budget Support (SBS) is the predominant EU assistance tool in Ukraine, with around 60% of all EU aid to the country planned to be spent in this way in the years 2007–2013. Six agreements were signed in the sectors of energy, energy efficiency, trade facilitation, environment, transport, and border management, and another is awaited in energy for an overall sum of €389 million. However, in total Ukraine received payments of no more than one third of this amount (€111.14 million) because since 2011 the EC has limited transfers for all operations. The main reason for this was non-fulfilment of a precondition on PFM, as since 2011 the country’s public procurement law and budgetary transparency have significantly deteriorated. This crucial condition ensures that funds are not fraudulently used. After two years of futile discussion on the implementation of this condition, the Ukrainian government finally adopted a PFM strategy in September 2013 (not made public) as this issue was made an EU condition to sign an AA.
Armenia: Butter Wouldn’t Melt
Armenia: Butter Wouldn’t Melt
(Armenia: Butter Wouldn’t Melt)
- Author(s):Konrad Zasztowt
- Language:English
- Subject(s):Supranational / Global Economy, Economic policy, Government/Political systems, International relations/trade, Economic development, Fiscal Politics / Budgeting, Geopolitics
- Page Range:37-40
- No. of Pages:4
- Keywords:Armenia; European Union; sector budget support; EU aid; financial aid; funding reforms;
- Summary/Abstract:This section presents how budget support has been used in Armenia. In 2007–2013, several budget support operations were implemented in Armenia for an overall sum of €134.9 million. The programmes have seen 85% of targets achieved on average. Some delays in paying the tranches took place when specific conditions were not achieved. Such cases are not publicized by the EU delegation, probably in order not to strain cooperation with the government. In terms of management, the Armenian Ministry of Economy is the major coordinator, while on the EU side the delegation manages the process, both in its operational and financial aspects, with a staff consisting of 7–8 people. The programming usually takes 1–2 years, while implementation of budget support operations usually lasts 3-4 years. The programmes are helped by a set of all of the usual TA tools.
Azerbaijan: Just Boxticking
Azerbaijan: Just Boxticking
(Azerbaijan: Just Boxticking)
- Author(s):Konrad Zasztowt
- Language:English
- Subject(s):Supranational / Global Economy, Economic policy, Government/Political systems, International relations/trade, Economic development, Fiscal Politics / Budgeting, Geopolitics
- Page Range:41-44
- No. of Pages:4
- Keywords:Azerbaijan; European Union; budget support; financial resources; financial aid; financing reforms; EU assistance;
- Summary/Abstract:This section presents how budget support has been used in Azerbaijan. The EU has planned relatively modest financial resources for Azerbaijan in the scope of budget support. This is not only due to the fact that it is the wealthiest country in the EaP region and can finance its own ongoing reforms but also because of its limited absorption capacity and the execution of the “more for more” rule. Azerbaijan has oil and gas reserves that provide significant revenue to the budget and it has a relatively stable economy. This, unlike other EaP countries, implies no great interest on the government’s behalf for financial assistance from the EU. Moreover, contractual relations with the EU are not as dense as, for instance, with Georgia or Moldova. Azerbaijan does not aim to integrate economically with the EU, therefore the scope of potential legal approximation is limited. In the years 2007–2013, four operations took place of the overall planned amount of €60 million (which is almost half of all EU assistance planned in Azerbaijan in this period), while only one operation in energy was finalised.
A Cross-Country Picture: Towards More Efficient EU Aid
A Cross-Country Picture: Towards More Efficient EU Aid
(A Cross-Country Picture: Towards More Efficient EU Aid)
- Author(s):Elżbieta Kaca
- Language:English
- Subject(s):Supranational / Global Economy, Economic policy, Government/Political systems, International relations/trade, Economic development, EU-Accession / EU-DEvelopment, Fiscal Politics / Budgeting, Geopolitics
- Page Range:45-47
- No. of Pages:3
- Keywords:European Union; EU aid; sector budget support; financial aid; Eastern Europe; pro-European governments; EU-oriented countries;
- Summary/Abstract:The EU approach in the Eastern Partnership countries is to financially support concrete reforms: sector budget support operations are most commonly in use. Theoretically, such a tool, given teeth by precise conditions and indicators, should allow the smooth completion of the sector integration planned in the scope of the EaP. In practice, an analysis of the first years of use (2007–2013) shows that this instrument has potential in countries willing to integrate with the EU, while in the others its use has limited impact on guiding comprehensive reforms. The pace of fulfilment of budget support conditions differed much among the partners. This resulted mainly from the various level of willingness of the EaP governments to conduct Euoriented reforms. For Moldova and Georgia, the political will to integrate with the EU is clear, as proved by their determination to sign an AA. On the contrary, Armenia and Ukraine withdrew from signing such deals, a step that confirmed they were not interested in or were hesitant about EUbacked reforms. In Armenia, the EU had to stop support for DCFTA implementation and reshape its assistance, whereas for Ukraine the new pro-European government has signed the political part of the AA after an internal crisis. Azerbaijan is a case apart, as budget support was aimed to develop sector cooperation, but in the meantime it has shown it is not interested in complying with aid conditions on PFM: in this case, the EU help is rather useful in terms of advice on the directions of some reforms. Therefore, one can distinguish two groups of countries, EU-oriented and non-EU-oriented, with the latter being interested only in some sector cooperation.