Karen Del Biondo

The European Commission’s implementation of budget support and the Governance Incentive Tranche in Ethiopia: democracy promoter or developmental donor?

The complex relationship between democracy and development has been extensively discussed in academic literature. However, we do not have much knowledge of how this translates into donor practices. How does the European Commission (ec) deal with tensions arising from promoting democracy and development? To answer this question, this article operationalises the distinction between ‘democracy promoters’ and ‘developmental donors’, focusing specifically on budget support and governance incentive tranches. Empirically we examine the implementation of the ec’s budget support and Governance Incentive Tranche in Ethiopia (2005–10), a case where the dilemma between democracy promotion and development cooperation is particularly strong. Investigating the position of the ec along the democracy promoter versus developmental donor continuum, we conclude that the ec’s position lies between these extremes. However, in the case of budget support, a shift has been made away from the Commission being a democracy promoter and towards the role of developmental donor.

Norms or interests? Explaining instrumental variation in EU democracy promotion in Africa

This article investigates the causes for instrumental variation in EU democracy promotion in Africa. Can instrumental variation better be explained from a realist or from an idealist perspective? Realism would predict that sanctions are more likely in the absence of historical, security or commercial interests. Idealism would suggest that sanctions are more likely in the case of grave violations of democracy and human rights, in countries that are unstable and economically underperforming, and when there is pressure from regional organizations and domestic actors. Empirically, the article compares two cases (Guinea and Niger) where the EU imposed sanctions and two non�?cases (Ethiopia and Rwanda) where the EU was reluctant to do so. Contrary to the prevalent thesis in the literature, the article finds stronger evidence for idealism (which is confirmed in all the cases) than for realism (which is only confirmed in the cases of Guinea and Ethiopia).

The European Union's “Comprehensive Approach” in Chad: Securitisation and/or Compartmentalisation?

The European Union (EU) aims for a comprehensive approach to security in developing countries. As a result, attempts have been made to enhance the nexus between the EUs security policy and other policy areas, particularly development, humanitarian assistance, and democratic governance. This article analyses the EUs comprehensive approach in the case of Chad, focusing on two questions. First, has the EUs comprehensive approach been able to supersede the compartmentalisation of the EUs political system? Second, has it led to the securitisation of non-security policy areas? These questions are answered by investigating the nexus between the EUs security, democracy, development and humanitarian aid policies in Chad from 2006 onwards. This analysis confirms the compartmentalisation scenario, especially regarding development and humanitarian aid where the relation with security policies was at times openly conflicting. While the EUs democracy promotion policies are found to be securitised, this is not the case for development and humanitarian aid.

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

Although the EU has shown a strong ambition to put a distinctive stamp on the international aid agenda over the past 15 years, it has also been pointed out that its policies suffer from a series of collective action problems. This article explores how both relate to one another. This article examines the EUs normative distinctiveness in contrast to the World Bank, focusing on policy norms in the field of governance, aid effectiveness and social development. We argue that collective action problems do not necessarily hamper EU distinctiveness: they are also a symptom of a strong EU desire to pressure European actors to come up with norms that pacify disagreements.

The EU, the United States and Partnership in Development Cooperation: Bridging the Gap?

ABSTRACT This paper investigates the degree to which EU and United States development policies reflect partnership, meaning that aid is based on negotiations on an equal basis. It finds that, while the EU has traditionally been more focused on partnership than the United States, in recent years the gap is narrowing. The EU is increasingly providing aid based on a security rationale and has become reluctant to give budget support, while the United States is starting to work more with local actors. Changes in public support for aid, the EU’s growing role as a security provider and institutional changes can explain this trend.This paper investigates the degree to which EU and United States development policies reflect partnership, meaning that aid is based on negotiations on an equal basis. It finds that, while the EU has traditionally been more focused on partnership than the United States, in recent years the gap is narrowing. The EU is increasingly providing aid based on a security rationale and has become reluctant to give budget support, while the United States is starting to work more with local actors. Changes in public support for aid, the EU’s growing role as a security provider and institutional changes can explain this trend.