SusLalnable uonors SLraLegles and racLlces ln

Clvll SocleLy uevelopmenL (CSuev) ln Lhe 8alkans

rof Adam lagan
ur lndraneel Slrcar
22 november 2011
ro[ecL overvlew
CompleLed by Lhe 8olkoo clvll 5oclety
uevelopmeot Netwotk (8CSun) and Lhe 5cbool of
lolltlcs ooJ lotetootloool kelotloos Ooeeo Moty
uolvetslty of looJoo
lunded by tbe 8olkoo 1tost fot uemoctocy a
pro[ecL of Lhe Cetmoo Motsboll looJ and
compoqolo Jl 5oo loolo

esearch Cb[ecLlves
ldenLlfy pasL and presenL sLraLegles
pracLlces employed by lnLernaLlonal donors ln
Lhe WesLern 8alkans for CSuev
llnd Lrends paLLerns amongsL donors acLlve
ln Lhe reglon
rovlde recommendaLlons Lo lmprove CSuev
ln Lhe WesLern 8alkans by lnLernaLlonal
donors esp Lhe Lu
uaLa CollecLlon
Webbased quesLlonnalre whlch asked
respondenLs abouL acLlvlLles aLLlLudes
relevanL Lo CSuev and examples of besL
pracLlce !unSep 2011 (n48)
Lmall and Lelephone quesLlonnalre Lo map
overall sLraLegles by counLry or uslng exlsLlng
sLraLegy documenLs CcLnov 2011
art 1 Interv|ews w|th donors
espondenLs
Maln CSuev relaLed donors ln W8 counLrles
(boLh PC counLy offlces) eg
MulLllaLeral Lu CSCLunu W8
8llaLeral uSAlu SluA ullulZ SuC
rlvaLe CSl MoLL LS1L oberL 8osch 81u
klng 8audouln Ll8 nLu Cak loundaLlon
WesLmlnsLer loundaLlon for uemocracy
CuesLlonnalre espondenLs
Country Freq.
Albania 7 14.58
BiH 7 14.58
Kosovo 2 4.17
Macedonia 5 10.42
Montenegro 2 4.17
Serbia 6 12.50
Regional 19 39.58
1ypes of AsslsLance
0
10
20
30
40
30
60
70
80
90
100
ShorLLerm pro[ecL granLs
(up Lo 24 monLhs)
Long Lerm core fundlng
noL Lled Lo pro[ecLs
Servlce conLracLs and
Lenders
eglonal granLs lnvolvlng
several organlzaLlons
CLher
MulLllaLeral
8llaLeral
rlvaLe
1ypes of acLlvlLles
uonor CoordlnaLlon
uonor rlorlLles
CLher llndlngs
Synergles and besL pracLlces bulldlng
capaclLles and bulldlng neLworks
uonors belleve LhaL CSCs are learnlng Lo be
effecLlve buL are noL proacLlve
ComplemenLary focus of large and smaller
donors wlLh Lhe laLLer worklng more aL Lhe
grassrooLs level
art 2 Donor matr|x tab|e
Summary
Lu ls Lhe mosL lnfluenLlal donor ln Lerms of Lhe amounL of asslsLance and ln lLs fundlng
reperLolre
MosL small donors and prlvaLe foundaLlons prlorlLlse clvll socleLy developmenL
Small and medlum slzed donors (lncl prlvaLe foundaLlons) seem Lo clusLer Lhelr
asslsLance around parLlcular prlorlLles (; who |s sett|ng th|s agenda? Is |t the LU?)
Larger bllaLeral and mulLllaLeral donors comblne supporL for clvll socleLy developmenL
wlLh capaclLy asslsLance for ellLes and sLaLe lnsLlLuLlons plus some asslsLance LargeLed
Lowards Lransformlng Lhe process of pollLlcal declslon maklng / pollLlcs
1here ls a core of larger mulLllaLeral and bllaLeral donors (eg World 8ank uSAlu Cpen
SocleLy) promoLlng very slmllar lssues Lo Lhe Lu
8uLLhe Commlsslon ls Lhe only donor supporLlng po/itico/ deve/opmento/ and
qovernonce reform
u in o very stronq position to determine the focus of democrocy promotion oqendos
ond ossistonce
1he commissions intervention is o critico/ driver of how internotiono/ ossistonce in
the western 8o/kons is perceived ond /eqitimised
More effecLlve coordlnaLlon beLween donors would mean greaLer speclallsaLlon wlLh
cerLaln donors becomlng synonymous wlLh parLlcular lssues across each counLry -o
such potterns is observob/e
lnsLead Loo many donors offerlng Loo llLLle money congregaLe around Loo wlde a seL
of lssues
;est|ons (for LU)
As oLher donors wlLhdraw ls Lu asslsLance susLalnable llkely
Lo lncrease?
Pow can Lhe Lu lead a process of greaLer speclallsaLlon and
coordlnaLlon amongsL donors?
1he Lu relles on small donors / foundaLlons Lo provlde maLch
fundlng core fundlng and local developmenL asslsLance
WhaL wlll happen as Lhls fundlng decllnes?
uoes Lhe Lu requlre dlfferenL or addlLlonal lndlcaLors for
measurlng Lhe lmpacL of lLs asslsLance ln Lhe W8?
Should asslsLance be LargeLed more closely Lo supporLlng
value based chapLers of Lhe acquls (Ch 23 and 24)?
ln Lhe absence of any prospecLs for enlargemenL (8lP kosovo
Albanla) ls Lhe revlsed Ln sLraLegy a more approprlaLe
democracy promoLlon approach?
ont|ned
Can Lhe Lu sLeer Lhe wlLhdrawal of oLher donors and
help bulld susLalnable exlL sLraLegles?
1ransnaLlonal neLworks proved crlLlcal ln sLlmulaLlng
clvll socleLy developmenL ln CLL So far Lhe Lu has had
llmlLed success ln sLlmulaLlng Lhe lnLegraLlon of W8
CSC wlLhln panLuropean neLworks WhaL sLraLegles
does Lhe Commlsslon envlsage Lo deal wlLh Lhls
problem?
uonors from nMS deploy asslsLance dlfferenLly (Lo uS
or wesL Luropean foundaLlons) and beLLer undersLand
Lhe requlremenLs of candldaLe sLaLes (eLrova 2011)
?eL CLL donors hardly lnvolved ln W8 Pow can Lhelr
role be sLlmulaLed by Lhe Commlsslon?
ecommendaLlons Lo ald CSu (all donors)
More effecLlve exlL sLraLegles
reaLer coordlnaLlon and collaboraLlon as ald ls
raLlonallsed
8ulld ln susLalnable legacles lnLo ald programmes
from Lhe ouLseL
Share besL pracLlce more effecLlvely and rouLlnely
locus more on grassrooLs neLworklng and llnklng Lhls
Lo nC neLworks
ConLlnued supporL for reformlng legal envlronmenL
for CSCs
8eLLer lnformaLlon on Lhe CSC secLor ln nelghbourlng
sLaLes and across Lhe reglon
uevlse fundlng sLraLegles Lo deal wlLh decllne ln core
fundlng and wlLhdrawal of small donors
Is deve|opment |n W8 fo||ow|ng a LL
tra[ectory?
ConLesLed pollLlcal auLhorlLy / [urlsdlcLlon of new sLaLes
Susplclon of Lhe lnLernaLlonal communlLy (warLlme legacles)
lorelgn donor lnvolvemenL abouL emergency ald refugee reLurn
raLher Lhan envlronmenL rlghLs and ldenLlLy pollLlcs
lnLernaLlonal lnLervenLlon shared soverelgnLy raLher Lhan
democracy promoLlon
uonor sclerosls raLlonallzaLlon posL 2008 Lu domlnaLlon of ald
(Lechnlcal experLlse raLher Lhan advocacy)
ulvlded (eLhnlclzed) socleLles sLrong personal neLworks hard Lo
peneLraLe or moblllze
Collapsed economles lack of lul perslsLence of sLaLe conLrol of Lhe
economy
Weak Lu accesslon perspecLlve CSCs noL engaged ln governance
or lmplemenLaLlon
ow does the LU see s?
new governanceob[ecLlve (desplLedemocracyand clvll
socleLyframlng / narraLlve
CSCs as nonsLaLe acLors acceleraLors of sLaLe reform agenLs of
change
key alm englneer a shlfL Lowards less hlerarchlc declslon maklng buL
resLorlng agency of Lhe sLaLe
CSCs as sources of pollcy knowledge and experLlse
Lechnlcal capaclLy more lmporLanL Lhan lssues or campalgn focus
CSCs as lmplemenLlng agenLs enforcers regulaLors and waLchdogs
lA / LluP fundlng noL deslgned as sole source of revenue for CSCs
Lhe lessons of CLL CSCs lacked pollcy capaclLy dlsconnecLed from
governmenL eLc
1 lmpacL ower
number of small donors lnvolved ln Lhe lssue area
AmounL of Lu fundlng dlrecLed Lo lssue
AcLlvlLles of oLher donors (dev / pol / gov)
AmounL of core fundlng avallable for CSCs
AmounL of maLch fundlng avallable for parLlcular lssue area
eglonal lnlLlaLlves
number of CSCs lnvolved and Lhelr capaclLles
2 SusLalnablllLy measure
uonors lnvolved (o)
Core fundlng avallable for CSCs (t)
Local" fundlng avallable (t)
Local" agencles lnvolved (o)
3 arLnershlp ower
number of acLlve parLners (o)
Cverall amounL of fundlng commlLLed ()
kotlo of Lu fundlng Lo oLhers
Core and regranLlng fundlng avallable ()
maLch fundlng avallablllLy ()
1erms of commlLmenL of oLher key donors (y)