COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Accompanying the document REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Annual Report 2014 on the European Union's development and external assistance policies and their implementation in 2013
Date: 2014-08-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU financial instrument, European neighbourhood policy, democracy, development aid, foreign aid, peace, poverty, sustainable development, undernourishment













EUR-Lex - 52014SC0258 - EN











|



52014SC0258

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Accompanying the document REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Annual Report 2014 on the European Union's development and external assistance policies and their implementation in 2013 /* SWD/2014/0258 final */









Table of Contents 
1..... Chapter
1 - Delivering on commitments.. 4
1.1.     EU
response to world developments in 2013. 4
1.2.     Leading
the way in development policy. 6
1.2.1.      A
more strategic approach: implementing the ‘Agenda for Change’ 7
1.2.2.      Responding
to global challenges and supporting long-term reforms  9
1.2.3.      Making
a difference: new instruments and aid modalities. 11
1.3.     Keeping
long-term promises. 14
1.3.1.      Progress
in achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and preparation of the
post-MDG framework. 14
1.3.2.      Focusing
on poverty. 17
1.3.3.      Financing
for development 19
1.3.4.       Policy Coherence for Development and
some/selected related policies  20
1.3.5.      Strengthening
human rights and good governance. 22
1.3.6.      Mainstreaming
of cross-cutting issues. 23
1.3.7.      Cooperation
with non-state actors and local authorities. 26
1.3.8.      The
role of the private sector. 27
1.4.     Better
and more effective aid. 27
1.4.1.      Aid
effectiveness and joint programming.. 27
1.4.2.      Cooperation
with the donor community. 29
1.4.3.      Cooperation
with international organisations. 29
1.5.     Outlook
2014. 32
2..... Chapter 2 - Implementation: geographic overview... 33
2.1.     European
Neighbourhood and the Middle East 34
2.1.1.      European
Neighbourhood and Russia. 34
2.1.2.      Middle
East 46
2.2.     Africa
and all African, Caribbean and Pacific states (ACP) programmes. 50
2.2.1.      Africa-EU
Strategic Partnership.. 50
2.2.2.      Sub-Saharan
Africa. 51
2.2.3.      South
Africa. 63
2.2.4.      Intra-ACP
programmes. 65
2.3.     Latin
America and the Caribbean.. 67
2.3.1.      Latin
America. 67
2.3.2.      Caribbean.. 76
2.4.     Asia,
Central Asia and the Pacific. 81
2.4.1.      Asia. 81
2.4.2.      Central
Asia. 89
2.4.3.      Pacific. 96
2.5.     Overseas
Countries and Territories (OCTs) 101
3..... Chapter 3 - Implementation: thematic overview... 104
3.1.     The
thematic programmes. 104
3.1.1.      Investing
in people. 104
3.1.2.      Non-state
actors and local authorities in development 106
3.1.3.      Migration
and asylum... 108
3.1.4.      Environment
and sustainable management of natural resources including energy. 109
3.1.5.      Food
security. 112
INTRODUCTION 
The European Union (EU) and its Member States as a whole continued to be the largest donor of official development
assistance (ODA) during 2013. It collectively provided EUR 56.5 billion which
amounted to 52% of the total global ODA during the year. In 2013 the EU
committed EUR 14.86 billion on external assistance.
The EU modernised its development
cooperation policy by implementing the 'Agenda for Change'[1] e.g. within
the  development aid programming exercise 2014-2020. As a result the EU will
focus its support on countries that are most in need and concentrate activities
on maximum 3 sectors per country.The EU will also make increased use of
innovative financial instruments and  joint programming with EU Member States
and other donors.
Progress has been made in the
implementation of actions included in the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and
Democracy. The EU has continued to actively support civil society organisations
and specific human rights dialogues were held with over 20 countries. The EU
deployed Election Observation Missions (for example in Kenya, Pakistan and Mali) to supported democracy and democratisation.
Within
its Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) the EU launched two new missions,
the EU Training mission in Mali and EU Border Assistant Mission in Libya. In total, the EU deployed more than 7 000 civilian and military personnel in
2013, in 12 civilian missions and four military operations. 
As one of the world's leading
humanitarian donors, the EU – its institutions and Member States – has
throughout 2013 responded with determination to natural disasters, armed
conflicts and protracted crises. The relief assistance provided by the European
Commission alone amounted to over €1.3 billion and was implemented in more than
90 countries. 
International cooperation is vital in
the ever more challenging humanitarian landscape. Embracing the motto ‘Acting
together for those in need’, the EU through the Commission is chairing the OCHA
Donor Support Group (ODSG) in the period from July 2013 to July 2014. This is
an important mechanism for humanitarian donor consultation on the activities of
the United Nations’ Office for Coordination of Humanitarian affairs (OCHA).
As a staunch supporter of
multilateralism, the EU continued to work towards strengthening the United
Nations (UN). The EU continued to focus on the promotion of international peace
and security, sustainable development and human rights, democracy and the rule
of law, as well as on the improvement of the effectiveness of the UN. 
Within the framework on the UN General
Assembly (UNGA) the EU contributed actively to several High Level Meetings with
an impact on development, notably the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)
Special Event, the High level meeting on Disabilities and Development, the
first meeting of the High Level Political Forum (HLPF) of Sustainable
Development agreed at Rio+20, and the High Level Meeting on Migration and
Development. 
In view of the MDGs and reflecting on
the post 2015 scenario, the European Commission released ‘A decent life for all:
ending poverty and giving the world a sustainable future’[2]. The paper is advocating for a single overarching
post 2015 framework bringing together development (MDG process) and
environmental (Rio +20 process including the elaboration of Sustainable
Development Goals) concerns. 
The EU has at its disposal many external
relations policies and tools that span diplomatic, security, defence,
financial, trade, development and humanitarian aid, as well as the external
dimension of EU internal policies to deliver the end result that Member States
and the international community seek. This is the EU’s main strength as an
international actor.
In December 2013, the European
Commission and the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
adopted a Joint Communication on the EU’s Comprehensive Approach to
external conflict and crises[3]
with a view to further increasing its efforts to make its global action more coordinated,
coherent and effective, drawing on the full range of its instruments and
resources.
EU Children of Peace: Echoing the Nobel Prize
into the future
Children are among the most vulnerable victims
of conflict. Following the receipt of the 2012 Nobel Peace Prize for its
achievements in peace on the European continent, the EU decided to dedicate the
prize money to help girls and boys around the world who are deprived of the
opportunity to grow up in peace. In Colombia, children benefit from a project
that prevents child recruitment by armed groups. In South Sudan the funds are
used to help children begin new lives following years of conflict. In Pakistan, the EU Nobel Prize initiative supports education and protection to children
displaced by conflict. Altogether, over 28 000 girls and boys benefit from this
initiative. In November 2013, the EU confirmed its decision to continue the
‘Children of Peace Initiative’ by announcing additional funds for new projects
in 2014.

1.        
Chapter
1 - Delivering on commitments

                   

1.1.      EU
response to world developments in 2013

During
2013 the EU continued to be fully engaged in efforts to support its partner
countries in poverty reduction and sustainable development, as well as
facilitate political and economic transition. 
The
EU’s policy priorities towards Africa on the political and security side, that
is promoting peace, democracy and stability, were increasingly balanced with
efforts on the economic and global front in areas such as trade, investment and
climate change. 
Since
the outbreak of new violence in late 2012 in Central African Republic (CAR),
the EU has been at the forefront of international efforts to address
humanitarian needs, stabilize the situation and restore a more stable
government in the country. Commissioner Georgieva has visited the country twice
in 2013. In mid-August the European Commission adopted a EUR 10 million
stabilization programme in response to the post-coup crisis under the
Instrument for Stability (IfS). The EU also granted EUR 50 million to the
African-led International Support Mission in CAR (MISCA or AFISM-CAR).
The EU has been a long-time partner to Somalia, with more than EUR 1.2 billion provided since 2008 to support the Somali people’s
basic needs and improve security in the country. In September 2013, the land
mark EU-Somalia Conference in Brussels endorsed a New Deal Compact for Somalia,
and raised additional EUR 1.8 billion (of which EU contributions amounted to
EUR 650 million) to implement the most pressing priorities for rebuilding the
Somali State during the period 2013-2016.
The International Donors Conference to help rebuild Mali, co-organised by the EU in May 2013, mobilised EUR 3.25 billion and deliberated on regional
aspects with the conviction that Mali's development will contribute to the
development and security of its neighbours and of the African continent.
Budget
support in fragile situations: State-building contracts in Mali and Ivory Coast
A
State Building Contract worth EUR 225 million for Mali was signed in May 2013
as part of the EUR 523.9 million aid package announced by the European
Commission at the International Donor Conference, ‘Together for a New Mali’.
This budget support helps the government to ensure the provision of basic
services and restore the rule of law for the country’s whole population.
The
State Building Contract for Ivory Coast worth EUR 115 million is a key
component of the general EU strategy aimed at stabilising the country,
restoring the State’s authority and promoting inclusive growth. The most
tangible results achieved so far include: the proper functioning of all Courts
of First Instance in the country, in which civil and criminal hearings take
place, and the proper functioning of 90 % of police stations in the
country.
The
EU has invested in building political relations with the African Union, ECOWAS
(Economic Community of West African States), SADC (South African Development
Community) as well as closer economic ties with EAC (East African Community).
It has been engaged in finding solutions to political problems in countries
under Article 96 of the Cotonou Agreement (Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Madagascar,
Zimbabwe); it has also sent election observation missions to Kenya, Mali and
Guinea Conakry; electoral expert missions to Djibouti, Mauritania, Rwanda and
Guinea Bissau; and has provided assistance to electoral processes in Libya,
Tunisia, Mali, Zimbabwe, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Burkina
Faso, Madagascar, Kenya, Sierra Leone, Malawi, Zambia, Comoros, as well as to
the Southern Africa Development Community Election Support Network (SADC-ESN)
to prevent electoral violence in Southern African Countries. The EU and Eastern
and Southern Africa (ESA consisting of Zimbabwe and the Indian Ocean nations of
 Mauritius, Madagascar and Seychelles) took steps to ensure the implementation
of the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) in 2013. In addition negotiations
continued with other sub-Saharan African regions marked by two visits by Trade
Commissioner Karel de Gucht.
The
EU has been involved in addressing the deepening polarisation in Egypt. EU assistance to Egypt has been reviewed following the difficult situation in the
country and the outbreaks of violence following the ousting of President
Mohammed Morsi. As mandated by the Foreign Affairs Council in August, EU
assistance has focused on the socioeconomic sector benefiting people most in
need, and in favour of support to civil society. The EU will observe the
upcoming electoral cycle that starts with the referendum of the Constitution in
January 2014.
On
24 June 2013, the High Representative and the Commission issued a joint
communication proposing the main elements of a comprehensive EU approach to the
  Syria crisis. It also included an additional financial package of €400
million for 2013 to cover priority needs of affected population in Syria and the region.
Syria
continued to be embroiled in an armed conflict that causes a humanitarian
catastrophe impacting on the stability of neighbouring countries, in particular
 Lebanon and Jordan. The EU has played an important role in maintaining
political dialogue with stakeholders to bring about a political settlement in Syria, and took an active role in the preparations for the peace conference in Syria (Geneva II). In 2013, the EU decided to modify its sanctions regime to the benefit of
the Syrian population and the Syrian opposition while maintaining the pressure
on the regime itself. The EU has actively supported the implementation of the
United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolution 2118 on the elimination of
chemical weapons in Syria and has provided material support to the UN /
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) mission. The EU and
its Member States remain the largest donors of humanitarian assistance (over
EUR two billion) for the people affected by the conflict.
The
EU has actively supported the implementation of the United Nations Security
Council resolution 2118/13 and the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical
Weapons (OPCW) Executive Council decisions on the elimination of chemical
weapons in Syria and has provided contribution in kind (armoured cars,
technical assistance amounting to close to 5 million EUR) to the Joint OPCW-UN
Mission and a financial contribution of 12 million EUR to the Special Trust
Fund through the IfS. In 2013 the EU and its Member States remained the largest
donors of humanitarian assistance (over EUR 2 billion) for people affected by
the Syrian conflict. It is estimated that about half of the beneficiaries of
the Commission's humanitarian assistance are children.
The
EU continued to encourage and support the on-going transition in Myanmar/Burma
in 2013. The Joint Statement of President Van Rompuy, President Barroso and
President U Thein Sein, issued during the Myanmar President’s visit to Brussels, marked an important milestone in EU-Myanmar relations by establishing a vision
to build a lasting partnership and contribute to plans for democratisation,
national reconciliation and economic liberalisation. The EU Comprehensive
Framework for Myanmar sets out the EU and Member States’ goals and priorities
towards building a lasting partnership and promoting closer engagement with the
country. It is a collective effort involving actions by EU Member States and EU
institutions to support peace, democracy, development and trade.
The
EU worked closely with Pakistan in order to support the on-going reform of the
electoral cycle in the country. An EU Electoral Observation Mission, led by
Chief Observer Michael Gahler MEP, was established in the country for Pakistan’s general elections in May 2013. The outcome of these historic elections were
welcomed by the Council as marking a strengthening of democracy through the
first ever successful handover from one civilian government to another in the
country.
The
Council conclusions of June reaffirmed the long-term commitment of the EU and
its Member States to support Afghanistan during transition and the decade of
transformation. The Council prolonged the mandate of the European Union Police
Mission in Afghanistan (EUPOL AFGHANISTAN) in support of civilian policing and
the rule of law until 31 December 2014. In 2013, the EU committed EUR 196.5
million to support local development and governance, credible and transparent
elections, Afghanistan regional cooperation with its neighbours, the
development of agriculture, and the police.
The
EU is the world's largest donor for food and nutrition security and
agricultural development, providing at least EUR one billion for food and
nutrition security each year (not including emergency food aid in response to
crises). EU support is aimed at fighting under-nutrition, increasing food
availability and improving access to food for people who are at risk of hunger.
In March 2013, a Communication ‘Enhancing Maternal and Child Nutrition in
External Assistance[4]’
was adopted by the Commission, and endorsed by the Council in May. A key
element of the Communication is the commitment to support partner countries to
reduce stunting in children under five years old by at least 7 million in 2025.
A Nutrition Action Plan describing the steps to be taken to attain this target
is expected to be finalised by the first half of 2014.

1.2.      Leading
the way in development policy


1.2.1.             
A more strategic approach: implementing the ‘Agenda for
Change’

The
Foreign Affairs Council (FAC) in May 2012 endorsed the Communication ‘Increasing
the Impact of EU Development Policy: An Agenda for Change’ which sets out a
number of strategic measures that aim to further increase the impact of EU
development policy on poverty reduction and improving results with respect to
the MDGs.
To
this end, the Agenda for Change proposes a series of major changes in the way
EU assistance is delivered. These include, amongst others, a differentiated
approach to ensure that grant aid is directed where it is most needed and can
have the greatest impact in terms of poverty reduction; a focus on a maximum of
three sectors per country; a priority focus on the areas of support for good governance,
democracy and human rights, and inclusive and sustainable growth; greater use
of innovative financing mechanisms; improved policy coherence and increased
coordination and joint actions with Member States. More detail on this aspect
is available in chapter 1, part 4.
The
recommendations of the Agenda for Change have been integrated into the
financial instruments for the period 2014-2020 and the European Development
Fund (EDF).  The differentiated approach has been applied for bilateral
allocations within the context of the Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI)[5] and the
EDF. Bilateral aid to most upper middle income countries and certain large
emerging economies, which have sufficient domestic resources to address
poverty, will now be stopped or significantly reduced and new forms of
partnership with these countries will be developed. The differentiation process
has been based on the transparent use of internationally recognised indicators
reflecting the criteria of needs, commitment, performance, capacity and
potential EU impact.  The results are encouraging with consequent transfer of
resources from upper middle income countries to least developed countries.
The
programming exercise on bilateral aid initiated in 2012 has made good progress.
The programming documents prepared in close cooperation with partner country
governments and EU Member States, and in wide consultation with civil society
and private sector, were in an advanced stage at the end of 2013 for many
partner countries.  Although draft programme documents have not been finalised
for each country, based on the preliminary analysis, the key principle of
concentrating EU bilateral cooperation in three sectors is being applied, and
helping to reduce existing fragmentation.  
Further,
the proposed sector choices present a strong focus on the two main areas of
support defined by the agenda for Change, governance, human rights and the rule
of law, and inclusive and sustainable growth. Energy and food security,
education and health are now among the priority sectors in most countries to
support inclusive and sustainable growth. Public Financial Management (PFM)
reforms, justice sector reforms, security sector reforms, state building and
democratisation are among the preliminary areas of intervention in support of
governance goals.    
A
major effort has also been made to ensure that programmes complement each other
and avoid duplication of interventions at different level of intervention
(national, regional and global) and between different EU financial instruments.

In
this area the EU and its Member States have also taken steps to improve
coordination and joint programming is an important vehicle for change here (see
chapter 1 part 4). Clear progress has been made and joint programming will now be
taken forward in around 40 partner countries for the period 2014-2020. However
continued support and commitment of all partners is essential to sustain the
process and ensure continuing success. Within efforts to increase coordination
and coherence, the EU and its Member States have made good progress on Policy
Coherence for Development (PCD), as reflected in the EU 2013 report on PCD and
also recognised by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD) in its most recent PCD review. 
The
implementation of a firm commitment to improve reporting on results across all
levels, at project and programme level, at country level and at an
organisation-wide level, is gaining pace. A Commission Staff Working Document ‘Paving
the way for an EU Development and Cooperation Results framework’[6] was issued
in December 2013 in which the overall approach and a number of issues relating
to the reporting framework that will bring together aggregated information on a
number of key development results in one place was set out. This SWD will be
followed by the further elaboration of the framework, which is to be adopted in
the second half of 2014. This is to enable the Commission to proceed to a first
reporting on the basis of this new framework in 2015. At a further stage the
framework will need to be further developed to reflect the new international
post-2015 development framework that is currently under preparation. Thus, EU
aid will be aligned against some clear indicators allowing better monitoring
and measurement of results. The results framework will set the overarching
goals, as well as the specific outcomes and outputs it contributes to, and it
will also show how aid is converted into real results. This effort of including
measurable indicators in the programming documents will help to provide solid
evidence of how EU aid contributes to partner countries’ development results.
The
approach to future EU budget support to third countries was endorsed by the FAC
on 14 May 2012 and implemented. For further details see chapter 4 part 2.2. 
To
further strengthen policies in priority areas, the Commission issued specific
communications in 2013 on ´A Decent Life for all: ending poverty and giving the
world a sustainable future`, on ´Enhancing Maternal and Child Nutrition in
External Assistance: an EU Policy Framework` and on ´Empowering Local
Authorities in partner countries for enhanced governance and more effective
development outcomes`[7].
EU
support for sustainable change in transition societies’

In
2013, the European Commission and the European External Action Service (EEAS)
have moved to implement the Joint Communication ‘EU support for sustainable
change in transition societies’[8].
In July, the Joint Communication and the Council Conclusions were sent to all
EU Delegations for information and to follow up where relevant. The EU offers
support to partner countries undergoing transition, both at bilateral and
regional level. Given the varying levels of progress in different countries
support is tailor-made, bearing in mind each country’s specific political and
socioeconomic contexts. 
For
example, in the southern European Neighbourhood transitions are increasingly
complex and multidimensional and require a coordinated mobilisation of a wide
range of EU instruments. The EU supports democracy-related reforms in the areas
of justice, governance and human rights. Security has become a new area of
cooperation as development cannot take firm root in the absence of peace and
security. The EU further contributed to short-term security actions as well as
to long-term support to develop institutional capacity for Security Service
Reform. In addition, the EU further enhanced support to civil society,
including support to create a conducive environment for the development of civil
society organisations.  
At
headquarters level, a platform for better sharing knowledge was set up as a new
public group on capacity4dev[9]
and was made operational for the European Development Days in November 2013.
This platform on transition will allow members of the group to find relevant
information on EU support for sustainable change. Members of the group will
also be allowed to share information on capacity4dev’s blog pages.

1.2.2.             
Responding to global challenges and supporting long-term
reforms

At least 20 % of the European Union budget
for 2014-2020 will be spent on climate-related projects and policies, following
the European Parliament's approval in November 2013 of the 2014-2020 EU budget
(Multi-annual Financial Framework, MFF). The 20 % commitment triples the
current share and could yield as much as EUR 180 billion in climate spending in
all major EU policy areas over the seven year period. The EU’s development
policy will contribute to achieving the 20 % overall commitment, with an
estimated EUR 1.7 billion for climate spending in developing countries in
2014-2015 alone. This is on top of climate finance from individual EU Member
States. This budget highlights the EU's role as promoter of clean and
competitive low-carbon economy supporting partner countries in their
climate-resilient, low carbon development.
International climate negotiations and
developing countries
The
19th Conference of Parties of the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC COP) took place in Warsaw, Poland, in November 2013. The conference agreed a time plan for all countries to table their
contributions to reducing or limiting greenhouse gas emissions under a new
global climate agreement that will be adopted in 2015 and enter into force by
2020 at the latest. Efforts to deepen emission cuts over the rest of this
decade will be accelerated, and a mechanism to address 'loss and damage' caused
by climate change in vulnerable developing countries be established. 
The
  Warsaw conference agreed to enhance the implementation of a range of
measures, including finance to support developing countries, combating tropical
deforestation, and transparency in reporting on emissions. The 'Warsaw international mechanism' aims to enhance action and support for loss and damage, improve
knowledge and strengthen coordination. Efforts to reduce emissions from
deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries (the REDD+ agenda)
marked a major step forward with agreement on a package of decisions providing
the necessary methodological framework. The 'Warsaw Framework for REDD+'
largely completes the 'rulebook' for implementing REDD+.
Addressing the challenges in
fragile and conflict-affected countries
Addressing
the challenges of fragile and conflict-affected countries is a top priority for
the European Union as outlined in the Agenda for Change amongst other policy
initiatives. In December 2013, the Joint Communication from the High
Representative and the European Commission on the EU's comprehensive approach
to external conflict and crises presented proposals for how to strengthen the
coherence, comprehensiveness and effectiveness of EU external action, with a
particular focus on conflict and crisis situations. In October 2013 two internal
joint guidance notes on ‘Addressing conflict prevention, peace-building and
security issues under external cooperation instruments’, and the ‘Conflict
Analysis in support of EU external action’ were also issued and are contributing
to a more conflict sensitive programming approach.
Special
attention to fragile contexts was further demonstrated by the adoption of the
new budget support guidelines, which offer the possibility to use
State-building Contracts in transition countries, the possibility of using
flexible procedures in crisis situations, the attention to fragility and crisis
affected countries across the various policy documents issued, and training
more than 180 people on engagement in fragile and crisis situations during 2013.
Since 2011 November, and the Launch of the ‘New Deal for
Engagement in Fragile States’[10],
substantial progress has been made in implementing the New Deal provisions at
country level and through reforms. Policy dialogue on fragility and conflict
has been strengthened with key international and strategic bilateral partners,
as the EU is playing an active and role in the International Network on
Conflict and Fragility and in the International Dialogue on Peace-building and
State-building. 
As regards country level implementation, the EU has taken
the lead international partner in Somalia, in the Central African Republic (together
with France) and has also offered its help to Timor Leste in support of Australia.
In September 2013, the first New Deal Compact was
endorsed in Brussels, as a joint engagement of the Federal Government of
Somalia and of the donor community on a set of priorities aligned with the five
Peace-building and State-building Goals, accompanied by a mechanism for aid
architecture and a mutual accountability framework. In Central African Republic the EU is supporting the stabilisation process and is preparing to
co-sponsor the New Deal implementation once the situation allows. In Timor
Leste EU interventions have strong state-building elements. The EU is a strong
supporter of the New Deal also in countries where others have taken up the role
of lead donor, such as in Liberia, Sierra Leone and, eventually, South Sudan. For more details please refer to the relevant countries in Chapter two.
The New Deal and its approach, which can be used as a
framework also in non-G7+ countries and adapted to the local context, will
continue to stay high on the agenda. In the ongoing programming exercise the EU
is striving to ensure consistent and congruent links between the focal sectors
of EU support and Peace- and State-building goals in the eighteen G7+ countries
and beyond as well as aligning with the overall principles of the New Deal
framework.
The work to take forward the principles and priorities of
the EU's comprehensive approach will further strengthen the security-development
nexus and contribute to state-building and peace-building.
Building resilience
in crisis prone countries
In
2013, the EU stepped up efforts to build resilience in crisis prone countries.
With the May 2013 Council Conclusions, Member States expressed strong support
for the Communication of October 2012 ‘The EU Approach to Resilience: Learning
from Food Security Crises’[11]
that committed the European Commission to building resilience and established
that increasing resilience will be a central aim of EU external assistance in
countries that face recurrent crises.
Food
and nutrition security has traditionally been the initial entry point for
resilience. The resilience approach now incorporates fragility, natural hazards
and the increasing impact of climate change, often in the context of rapid
population growth and increased vulnerability. The Commission’s Resilience
Action Plan of June 2013[12]
provides the framework for a continuation and scaling up of the EU efforts to
build resilience with an expanded geographical scope  and operating at
different levels: from policy and advocacy to tools and methods.  It complements the promising results of the European Commission's
resilience-boosting initiatives in the Sahel and the Horn of Africa, namely the
‘Global Alliance for Resilience Initiative’ (AGIR-SAHEL) and the ‘Supporting
the Horn of Africa's Resilience’ (SHARE) Initiative. The
Resilience Action Plan is also informed by the
Global Climate Change Alliance (GCCA), an EU Initiative supporting most vulnerable
countries to tackle climate change challenges and resilience (see Chapter three).
AGIR
is led by regional organisations, including the Agriculture Commissions of the
Economic Community of West Africa (ECOWAS) and the West African Economic and
Monetary Union (WAEMU), and the Permanent Inter-State Committee for Drought
Control in the Sahel (CILSS). The EU has been mobilising Technical and
Financial Partners (TFPs) and other stakeholders, and providing both political
and financial support. The EU has committed EUR 1.5 billion to strengthen
resilience in West African countries for 2014-2020. The AGIR Regional Roadmap,
providing a Regional Guidance Framework, was adopted in Paris on April 2013.
Inclusive national dialogues were launched by AGIR’s stakeholders at
ministerial level in Abidjan on November 2013 and are expected to lead to the
definition of Country Resilience Priorities (CRP-AGIR). 
For
SHARE, the EU committed EUR six million to the regional project on animal
disease surveillance with the Intergovernmental Authority for Development (IGAD)
and the African Union-Interafrican Bureau for Animal Resources (AU-IBAR), while
EUR two million has been allocated for IGAD capacity building, including
regional agricultural and livestock policies. 
Future
cooperation under the 11th EDF (2014-2020) with the majority of
countries in the region will include a focus on agriculture and food security,
providing a continuing basis for prolonged support to resilience activities. 
In 2013, the EU’s Intra-ACP strategy committed an
additional EUR 100 million to put into operation the African
Union Commission’s Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) as well as to
pursue the goals of the Caribbean Disaster Management
Strategy. These initiatives, together with a EUR 20 million allocation to
support Safety and Resilience in the Pacific, are now available to the
sub-regions, countries and communities in the African, Caribbean and Pacific
(ACP) most vulnerable to natural hazards. This further strengthens support
launched in 2011 through the ACP-EU Natural Disaster Risk Reduction Programme.
These initiatives
will also build on the early achievements of a new EU project with the UN
Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) to strengthen capacities for
unified climate change adaptation (CCA) and DRR in approximately 40 countries
in the ACP, Asia and Latin America. This project has received EUR seven
million from the Thematic Programme on Environment and Sustainable Management
of Natural Resources including Energy (ENRTP).
The
resilience approach allows for more effective EU collaborative action, bringing
together humanitarian assistance, long-term development cooperation and
on-going political engagement. Ultimately, this approach is expected to lead to
a reduction in humanitarian needs and more sustainable development gains,
addressing food insecurity and disaster risks, particularly those associated
with climate hazards.

1.2.3.             
Making a difference: new instruments and aid modalities

2007-2013: a strong legacy 
Over the past few years, the EU and its Member States have provided more than half (56 %) of global aid to developing countries. To
highlight a selection of notable achievement, the EU has provided aid to the
poorest people in more than 150 countries worldwide notably through the
Development and Cooperation Instrument (DCI) which has had a significant impact
in Latin America, Asia, Central Asia, the Middle East and South Africa: regions
that are home to 70 % of the world's people living on less than USD 1.25 per
day. 
In our immediate neighbourhood, a number of strategic
developments have been successfully achieved with partners to the East and
South of the EU’s borders including the deepening of bilateral relationships,
the launch of key regional initiatives and active support for democratic
transition processes in our Southern Neighbourhood.
The results obtained through the external financing
instruments during the last financial period have paved the way for new,
improved and adapted tools. 
2014-2020: new challenges require new
and sufficient targeted resources
The new external financing instruments
proposed by the Commission in December 2011 which provide the strategic
tools for more effective and flexible action over the period 2014-20 have now
been adopted by the Council and the European Parliament and will be implemented
from 2014.
In a changing and globalised world that is
affected by uncertainty and long term crisis, and where emerging
economies like China, India and Brazil are asserting their influence, Europe must stand together and be an active partner in shaping global change. The
external financing instruments funded by the EU budget and the European
Development Fund will ensure that the EU can speak with a united and stronger
voice and promote poverty reduction, democracy, peace solidarity, stability and
prosperity, both in our immediate neighbourhood and across the world. 
Pursuing the external strategic objectives of
the Europe 2020 strategy[13],
the new instruments translate, into operational terms, the priorities of the
Agenda for Change and of the new vision for the European Neighbourhood Policy. Four
policy priorities are at stake: enlargement, neighbourhood, cooperation with
strategic partners, and development cooperation. With regards to the latter, the
overall priority remains to help the poorest in the world and work towards
achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and contribute to a global
agenda for sustainable development post-2015.
Over the period
2014-2020 the total amount in current prices, for the six following external
relations instruments is EUR 51.4 billion: Development Cooperation Instrument[14]:
EUR 19.6 billion; European Neighbourhood Instrument[15]:
EUR 15.4 billion; Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA II)[16]:
EUR 11.7 billion; Instrument contributing to Stability and Peace[17]:
EUR 2.3 billion; European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights[18]:
EUR 1.3 billion; and Partnership Instrument[19]: EUR 0.9 billion. 
In addition, the
Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation[20] and the Instrument for
Greenland[21], both adopted by the
Council, will respectively provide EUR 0.22 billion and EUR 0.19 billion from
the EU budget. 
A further EUR 30.5 billion will be made available for
cooperation with African, Caribbean and Pacific countries as well as Overseas
Countries and Territories through the 11th European Development
Fund, which will remain outside of the EU budget over the next period. 
Overall funding for all external instruments including
all those mentioned above totals EUR 96.8 billion.
What are the main changes?   
The EU will seek to target its resources where they
are needed most and where they can have most impact. This more differentiated
approach to partnerships and aid allocation driven by the specific country
context will be a core principle of the new Development
Cooperation Instrument and European Neighbourhood Instrument. With the new
Development Cooperation Instrument, the partner countries most in need, in
particular the least developed countries, will be given priority. 
Compared to the 10th EDF (European Development Fund) the amount of the
11th EDF remains stable.  The main areas of change were to insert
changes foreseen by the second revision of the Cotonou agreement (such as
creation of regional envelopes for unforeseen needs and a new shock absorbing scheme),
as well as to align as much as possible the 11th EDF Implementation
and Financial Regulations with the other financial instruments of EU
development cooperation.
With the new European Neighbourhood Instrument an
incentive based approach, which is one of the key aspects of the renewed
Neighbourhood policy, will allow the EU to adapt its support for partner
countries who are genuinely implementing deep and sustainable democracy,
including respect for human rights, and agreed reform objectives.
When it comes to strategic emerging economies, the EU
will focus primarily on partnerships in areas of mutual interest and will seek
to more effectively promote its own strategic interests. 
Differentiation
also means a flexible use of implementation methods. Innovative financial
instruments such as blending – the combination of grants and loans or equity to
enable investments – will help graduating partner countries to tap into capital
markets and close financing gaps in the poorest countries. 
The
EU will have a greater focus on human rights and will provide
more support to democracy and good governance, mainly through the new
European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights that will better
support the development of thriving civil societies.
The
EU will also concentrate external spending in 3 sectors to ensure large-scale
impact resulting from sectorial dispersion and aid fragmentation and will aim
for donor-recipient mutual accountability in allocating and disbursing funds.  
The
programming of the DCI, EDF and ENI will ensure that the ‘Agenda for Change’
will be implemented.  The key principles set out in the ‘Agenda for Change’ –
namely prioritisation, concentration, differentiation and EU coordination –
will continue to inform the programming process through the different
instruments of the 2014-2020 Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) and the
European Development Fund (EDF).  
The European
Parliament will be involved in the setting of priorities for EU external
cooperation prior to the programming of the external financial instruments. The
Commission will conduct an informal strategic dialogue with the European
Parliament in the preparation of its programming documents.
Finally,
the new instruments will allow more flexibility to further increase the
EU’s capacity to respond to unforeseen events and simplified rules and
procedures for programming and delivering assistance will be more effective. 
            

1.3.      Keeping
long-term promises
1.3.1.             
Progress in achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)
and preparation of the post-MDG framework

Poverty,
hunger and nutrition
The
global target of halving the number of people living in extreme poverty of the
MDGs was met five years ahead of the target completion date of 2015. And yet
poverty  remains a global issue with 1.2 billion people still living below the
poverty line. 
Between
2007 and 2012, the employment rate for the global working-age population
increased from 60.3 to 61.3 %. In order to promote inclusive growth that
enables the poorest to participate in income generation activites, the EU
assistance has benefited 8.8 million people and helped to provide 7.7 million
people with Technical and Vocational Education between 2004 and 2012. 
Enhancing
social protection systems worldwide
In
2013 the EU launched a peer-to-peer technical assistance facility (SOCIEUX[22]) seeking
to enhance the capacities of partner countries to better design inclusive,
effective and sustainable social protection systems and to extend social
protection coverage to poor and vulnerable populations.  
In 2013, the International Community stepped up its
efforts to tackle malnutrition and ensure food security. A series of high level
events culminated in commitments from donors and partner countries to increase
funding to fight hunger and malnutrition. The Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN)
movement, of which Commissioner Piebalgs is an active member, was instrumental
in raising awareness on nutrition. The EU coupled its policy commitment to
support partner countries in reducing stunting of 7 million children by 2025
with the announcement that EUR 3.5 billion will be allocated to this issue
between 2014 and 2020. 
Education 
Progress
in primary school enrolment has been remarkable, with the global average net
enrolment rate reaching 91 % in 2011. However, large disparities between
countries persist. 57 million primary-aged children remain without access to
education: the majority of these children are girls. 
In
the programming period 2007-13, the EU supported education and training in 42
countries as a focal sector with EUR 2.9 billion. EU higher education
programmes were supported with EUR 1.3 billion. Between 2004 and 2012, it is
estimated that the EU contributed to the enrolement of 13.7 million children in
primary education and to the training of 1.2 million teachers.
More
inclusive education in Bangladesh
Through the Supporting the
Hardest to Reach Children through Basic Education (SHARE) initiative, the EU
provides basic education to hard-to-reach children. During its first year in
2010, 137 000 boys and 144 000 girls were enrolled in the programme, almost 5
000 non-formal primary schools were established and 5 600 teachers recruited
and trained. By 2018, more than 650 000 children are expected to have completed
pre-primary education through this initiative.
A
high-level Conference on Education and Development was successfully organised
in May 2013 and made an important contribution to the education debate. The
Commission remained active in the Global Partnership for Education as well as the
Association for the Development of Education in Africa to promote education
policy dialogue between African partners and donors.
Culture
Culture
continues to be supported as a cross-cutting dimension of human and
socioeconomic development, social inclusion, freedom of expression as well as
of democratisation and peace building processes. The EU and the Member States are parties to the UNESCO 2005 Convention on the Protection and Promotion of
the Diversity of Cultural Expressions and the EU is promoting its ratification
beyond the EU through its external policies. In particular in developing
countries the European Commission is supporting cultural diversity and the role
of civil society in human rights and governance policies. The Commission is also
implementing a preparatory action on strengthening the role of culture in
external relations, with a focus on Neighbourhood countries and EU strategic
partners.
Gender
equality 
While
progress has been made in terms of eliminating gender disparities in education,
women’s position in economic, traditional and cultural circles is often weak
and their freedom limited. 
The
EU continues to give special attention to access to education for girls,
helping 300 000 female students enrol in secondary education. In addition,
almost 13 000 female higher education students have taken part in EU mobility
schemes such as Erasmus Mundus. 
The
EU also works to improve women’s economic and social status by promoting equal
rights for women and men and by ensuring that women have control over and
access to resources. The EU supports women’s political participation, for
example facilitating their contribution in peace and statebuilding processes.
As an example, between 2004 and 2012, the EU supported 736 civil society
organisations to work on gender equality issues. 
Health
There
is good progress towards the health-related MDGs with significantly less
children and women dying due to preventable causes. Global HIV infections are
declining. However, achievements are often not evenly distributed both with
countries and across regions. 
The EU provided comprehensive health sector support to 42
developing countries during the 2007-2013 period. Thanks to EU support at
country level, an additional 18.3 million children were vaccinated against
measles between 2004 and 2012. Also, over this period, the EU made it possible
for 7.5 million births to be attended by skilled health personnel.
Basic
health for all in Afghanistan
Since 2001, the EU has
committed EUR 341 million to the health sector in Afghanistan, including a
government-led Basic Package of Health Services (BPHS) and an Essential Package
of Hospital Services (EPHS). These serve 10 provinces in Afghanistan including some of the most insecure and neglected areas of the country. The
number of health facilities supported by the EU in the 10 districts has
increased from 292 in 2008 to 406 in 2012; the services they provide reach a
total of over 5.2 million people.
The
EU supported the International Health Partnership in promoting the harmonisation
and alignment of health support to one national health strategy, one health
budget and one monitoring framework. It also provides support through
international funds such as the financial support given to the Global Fund to
Fight AIDS, Malaria and Tuberculosis; Global Polio Eradication Initiative; and
the Global Alliance for Vaccines and immunisations. 
Environmental
sustainability
The
EU supports partner countries to manage natural resources sustainably. Between
2004 and 2012, it helped protect 1.9 million km2 of forests and
enabled the continued conservation of 1.1 million km2 of protected
areas. In 2013, the EU led internationally recognised initiatives on
environmental sustainability for example though the Global Climate Change
Alliance (GCCA) which supported over 48 programmes in eight regions and the EU
Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT) Action Plan 
Energy
Around the world about
1.4 billion people have no access to electricity and almost three billion
people rely on solid fuels, such as traditional biomass and coal, for cooking
and heating. As commitment to the UN’s Sustainable Energy for All initiative, the
EU set itself the target of enabling access to sustainable energy for 500
million people by 2030. 
In 2013,
the EU supported energy generation projects throughout the developing world
through its blending facilities. In Sub-Saharan Africa, EUR 400 million has
been allocated under the EU-Africa Infrastructure Trust Fund (ITF) to leverage
significant investments of EUR 4 to 8 billion. Initiatives such as the EU's
Technical Assistance Facility worth EUR 80 million is available to assist
partner countries in refining and developing their policies so that they can
attract the necessary private investments to develop a sustainable energy
sector.  
Water and
Sanitation
The
MDG target to halve the proportion of people without access to clean drinking
water was reached five years ahead of the 2015 deadline.[23] This
achievement reflects the concerted effort of the international community, to
which the EU made a prominent contribution. Since 2004, the EU assistance has
helped to connect 70.2 million people to drinking water and 24.5 million people
to sanitation facilities. 
The EU MDG Initiative
Globally, huge advances had
been made on the MDGs by 2010. However, ten years after they were agreed, many
countries are still far away from achieving some MDGs. The EU therefore created
a new MDG Initiative, making available needs-based and performance-based
funding, worth EUR 1 billion. Of this EUR 700 million targets the most
off-track MDGs, such as hunger, maternal health, and child mortality, while EUR
300 million targets countries with a good track record in implementing aid. To
date the MDG Initiativehas funded 70 projects in 46 countries.
The
post-2015 framework
Looking
at the development framework after the MDGs have crossed their finish line in
2015, the EU has been strongly involved in the international discussions on the
post-2015 development agenda. Based on the Commission Communication ‘A Decent
Life for All: Ending poverty and giving the world a sustainable future’[24] launched
in February 2013, EU Member States agreed on a common position that, amongst
others, guided negotiations at the 2013 UN Special Event on MDGs as well as the
on-going discussions in the Open Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals
(SDGs).
In
order to set its future work on a solid basis and to enhance the voice of the
public in the process, the EU organised the 2013 European Development Days ‘A
Decent Life for All By 2030: Building Consensus For a New Development Agenda’[25] which
enabled an open and constructive dialogue among policy-makers, civil society,
research organisations and the private sector from developed and developing
countries.

1.3.2.             
Focusing on poverty 

The
Lisbon Treaty puts fighting poverty at the core of the European external and
development policies. The EU remains committed to poverty reduction and in
particular to the achievement of the MDGs. The EU and its Member States collectively provide more than half of global official development assistance ODA and
remain the largest supporter of developing countries in achieving the MDGs,
despite the constraints posed by the present economic crisis. The EU
contributes to poverty reduction through strengthening access to basic services
such as health and education, enhancing institutional capacity and improving
sector policies. It also supports partner countries’ efforts in improving their
governance and public financial management systems for more effective service
delivery. It also continues to invest in infrastructure in order to contribute
to the long-term economic growth and job creation that is needed to reduce
poverty. 
Progress in reducing poverty 
All partner countries in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus covered by the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) are now
classified as Middle-Income Countries (MICs). While poverty in the region has
been reduced, social inequality and exclusion are still increasing at country
and regional levels. Although the Republic of Moldova (hereafter ‘Moldova’)
has been reclassified as a low–middle income country it remains Europe’s poorest country. EU assistance in the Eastern Neighbourhood countries has
contributed to poverty reduction through sector budget support operations
focused on agriculture and rural development as well as through regional
development programmes which support sustainable economic development and job
creation. Mediterranean countries covered by the ENPI also have to cope with
poverty (all of these countries, apart from Israel and Palestine[26], belong to
the MIC category) and policy reforms undertaken during the regions' transition
processes should enable poverty eradication. Consequently the EU has fully
supported reforms through bilateral and regional cooperation programmes that
have had direct and indirect impact for poverty reduction: for instance in the
area of socioeconomic reforms in Tunisia or agricultural and rural development
in Algeria. Assistance has been allocated to reduce the consequences of the
Syrian refugee crisis and also to Palestine, where 25 % of the population lives
below the poverty line. 
 
The political and security situation worsened during 2013
in both Iraq and Yemen despite some positive signals such as the finalisation
of the Iraqi National Development Plan and progress observed in the Yemeni
National Dialogue Conference. However the general poverty situation in both Iraq and Yemen remains a key challenge. More than 18 % of the Iraqi population lives below the
poverty line and in Yemen most MDG indicators have worsened in the aftermath of
the 2011 crisis. The EU addresses these challenges by striving to improve
governance in Iraq and facilitate the delivery of basic services in Yemen.
Sub-Saharan Africa has managed to cope with the recent
global economic crisis better than expected and its growth rates are above
pre-crisis levels. As a result, many African countries have made progress
towards the MDGs, especially with regards to poverty reduction: about 700
million people were lifted out of extreme poverty between 1990 and 2010.
However, serious challenges remain. With less than 1 000 days until the 2015
target for reaching the MDGs, it is important that progress is sustained and
accelerated. Indeed, about half of the population of Africa still lives on USD
1.25 a day or less, and development progress often fails to reach those most in
need and the most vulnerable groups. Another challenge for Africa is weak
governance and institutions in partner countries. Adequate structures need to
be put in place to maintain Africa's development trajectory beyond the MDG
target timeline of 2015.
While Asian economies
have shown remarkable recent growth, poverty is still widespread on the
continent. Most countries in the region face challenges due to uneven regional
development. Moreover, increasing income inequality is a matter of concern. EU
cooperation through the Development Cooperation Instrument focuses mainly on
governance, education and health, food security, rural development, climate
change, environmental protection and trade integration, all of which have
beneficial effects on reducing poverty and achieving the MDGs.
All the countries in the
Pacific region have now attained at least lower middle income category. Several
are rich in natural resources and some are now candidates for graduation from
development assistance. The distribution of wealth is, however, uneven within
most Pacific Island nations and malnutrition is a problem in the Solomon Islands and Timor-Leste. Safeguarding sustainable forestation, energy access,
fisheries, raw materials extraction, trade and tourism are core issues for many
  Pacific Island countries. Moreover, democratic structures, including women's
rights and civil society, require particular attention. 
The Central Asia region has met the MDG target to reduce poverty by half and almost met the
target of halving hunger. The proportion of undernourished people has decreased
from 13.9 % in 1990 to 7.4 % in 2012. However, income inequalities and poverty
remain widespread in the region. Key challenges include unemployment, risks to
water and food security, and the cost of health care and energy - the latter
affecting low income households in particular. To address these challenges, the
EU support in the region focuses on supporting economic development in rural
areas, improving access to social protection and health services, introducing
sustainable energy development and environmental protection including the
management of water resources.
2013 witnessed the graduation from EU financial support
for a number of Latin American and Caribbean countries that have reached a
middle or high income status. After a decade of economic progress, however, the
global economic and financial crisis and the rising cost of food and energy
have slowed the macroeconomic performance of the region. In absolute terms,
poverty remained stable in 2013 compared to 2012. However, the number of
extreme poor reached 68 million in 2013 which represents a slight increase on
2012. Even though inequality in income distribution has been reduced, this
issue also remains one of the region's main challenges. 
Haiti remains the poorest country
in this region. It is estimated that 78 % of Haitian population live on less
than USD two a day and that more than half live in extreme poverty (less than
USD one per day), with these figures increasing in rural areas. The new EU
policy of concentrating efforts on the poorest countries of the world has
guided the design of cooperation strategies under the 11th EDF with
the poorest countries, and with Haiti in particular. These strategies are
expected to significantly reduce poverty and inequalities in the region.

1.3.3.             
Financing for development 

The
Commission continued to mobilise the EU and Member States to act as one on
financing for development and promote a comprehensive and integrated approach
to all financing sources and objectives. The Commission Communication ‘Beyond
2015: towards a comprehensive and integrated approach to financing poverty
eradication and sustainable development’[27]
put forward possible elements of a common EU approach to financing beyond 2015,
advocating an integrated approach to all resources and processes. Supported by
the Council Conclusions of December 2013[28],
the EU approach has been a strong contribution to the international discussions
on the financing of the development agenda including beyond 2015.
Accompanying
the Communication, the 11th annual EU Accountability Report
consolidated reporting on progress against commitments, and provided
transparency for the EU and Member States’ actions in support of financing for
development. The Report covered all aspects of development finance as framed by
the Monterrey Consensus and the Doha Declaration. It showed that mobilising
more development financing from all available sources was a necessary, but not
sufficient, condition to fight poverty and foster development. It also showed
that the EU’s contribution to supporting developing countries went far beyond
its ODA.
The
EU and Member States have made substantial progress on its commitments
concerning private investment, trade, finance relating to climate change
adaptation and mitigation, Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) and
innovative financing sources and instruments. Moderate progress has been made
on the commitments concerning domestic resource mobilisation, debt
sustainability, remittances, biodiversity protection and development
effectiveness. At the same time, the EU and Member States have still some way
to go to reach its collective and individual ODA targets by 2015. The EU’s
collective ODA amounted to a total of EUR 56.5 billion in 2013, corresponding
to 0.43 % of combined Gross national Income (GNI). Collectively the EU remains
the world’s largest donor, providing more than half of total ODA.
In
light of international developments, and building on the constructive and open
dialogue with all stakeholders on post-2015 financing and reporting, the
Council has agreed that the position of the EU and its Member States’ on
financing and other means of implementation will be further defined and
adapted, including on policy coherence, illicit flows and synergies between
funding streams. 

1.3.4.         
Policy Coherence for Development and some/selected related
policies

Policy
coherence for development
As
the EU is a major global actor, its policies can have a strong impact, positive
or negative, on developing societies and economies. The Lisbon Treaty requires
the European Union to take the objectives of development cooperation into account
in all its policies. Besides making an effort to avoid negative impacts by
identifying the most damaging consequences of policies and, where possible,
amending them, this also entails looking for synergies between the objectives
of EU development policies and other EU policies to make them more effective
for both EU and developing societies and economies. This principle is referred
to as Policy Coherence for Development (PCD)[29]. 
The
Commission issued a PCD work programme to guide efforts in promoting PCD across
EU policies for the period 2010–2013. The work programme included goals and
targets covering the five priority challenges for PCD: trade and finance, food
security, climate change, migration, and security. For each of these
challenges, the Commission promoted discussion between non-development and
development policy areas in order to attempt to integrate development
objectives, the realities of developing countries and the interests and
potential impacts of EU policies on developing countries, better into account
in EU policy-making.
In
2013, the European Commission published its fourth biennial EU 2013 Report on
PCD[30]
which was launched during the European Development Days in November. The
report, comprising references to various external studies
and assessment, highlighted the EU's leading role in
promoting PCD and showed growing interest and political will to promote PCD in Member States and EU institutions beyond the Commission. The report presented many good
examples of PCD and pointed out some of the remaining challenges where more
progress is needed.
The
Council Conclusion[31]
was adopted in December 2013. The Conclusions reaffirmed the Council's
commitment to PCD and called for more regular political and thematic
discussions in FAC on development. The Conclusions also called on the
Commission to continue developing a stronger evidence base for PCD and
encouraged further strengthening of PCD, both within the EU and beyond,
particularly in the Post-2015 Development Agenda. Furthermore, the Standing Rapporteur
for PCD in the European Parliament announced a draft resolution on the EU 2013
Report. This follow-up process is important for ensuring shared ownership of
and commitment to PCD among EU institutions and Member States.
In
order to inform policy-making and strengthen the evidence base for PCD, in July
2013, the Commission and EEAS requested Heads of most EU Delegations to provide
a first report on PCD-specific country level feedback. These reports were
expected in January 2014 and will provide input on the impact of EU policies on
a country level basis on PCD processes and initiatives and allow for
identifying EU priorities for further progress.
The
Commission actively supports progress on measuring PCD through studies to
measure the impacts of EU policies on developing countries. For instance, in
2013 the Commission published a study assessing the impacts of biofuel
production in developing countries from a PCD perspective[32].
In 2013 the Commission also launched an external study to assess the impact of
EU trade policies on developing countries (expected to conclude in Q2 2014).
Under the Horizon 2020 framework the Commission launched a call for research to
progress the measurement of PCD including evaluating the cost of incoherencies
and develop appropriate targets and indicators. Furthermore, exchanges on
measuring the development friendliness of policies and their impacts on
developing countries have been conducted with EU Member states, the OECD and
with relevant policy think tanks.
To
raise awareness and promote good practice of PCD public information and
communication work included frequent exchanges with civil society and
participation in conferences and seminars. The Commission is providing PCD
trainings for its own staff and this training is also open to Member States.
Some/selected
related policies
Higher
education plays a crucial role in producing high quality human resources, in
disseminating scientific discovery and advanced knowledge through teaching and
educating future generations of citizens, high level professionals and
political leaders, who in turn can contribute to better governance,
socioeconomic development and cohesion.  
The
new Erasmus+ programme will contribute to this strategy by offering a
balanced mix of actions through two types of mobility actions which will have
an impact on the personal development and employability of students and also a
structured and sustainable impact on universities and a capacity building
action working at both institutional level and on the national systems.
The
new Horizon 2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie
Actions will support the career development and training of researchers, with a
focus on innovation skills in all scientific disciplines through worldwide and
cross-sector mobility. 
Furthermore,
young people and volunteers from partner countries will be able to participate
in projects, youth exchanges and volunteering activities which aim to foster
the active participation of youth in society and target young people with
limited opportunities.
Research
and innovation are means to foster development by enhancing human potential and
infrastructures as well as developing new services and products. In addition,
research provides evidence in support of development policies.
The
communication on ‘Enhancing and focusing EU international cooperation in
research and innovation: A strategic approach’[33],
adopted by the Commission in 2012, sets “supporting the Union’s external
policies” as one of its three main objectives. As foreseen in this
communication, roadmaps for further cooperation in research and innovation with
key countries and regions started being developed in 2013 and will be finalised
in 2014.
DG
Research and Innovation continued to invest, through the Seventh Framework
Programme (FP7, 2007-2013), in cooperation between researchers in Europe and
developing countries that contribute to the achievement of the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs) and other International Commitments such as Rio+20. FP7
has channelled about EUR 192 million for STI projects with over 960
participants from developing and emerging countries within the framework of 325
Specific International Cooperation Actions (SICAs)[34]. SICAs are
aimed at encouraging the participation of countries that lack capacity to
participate in other topics of the general FP7 Cooperation programme. This is
out of a total of EUR 330 million granted in FP7 to more than 2 500 researchers
in developing countries from Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Southern
Mediterranean region participating in more than 1 500 collaborative projects
with European researchers.
Under
Horizon 2020 (2014-2020), the new EU Framework Programme for research and
innovation, developing countries will continue to participate through the
principle of general opening. They will also remain eligible for automatic
funding in selected proposals. Moreover, developing countries will benefit from
targeted initiatives under various calls under Societal Challenges and Enabling
Technologies in Horizon 2020. The first calls for Proposals under Horizon 2020
were launched on 11 December 2013.

1.3.5.             
Strengthening human rights and good governance 

The
EU has continued to strive to place human rights and democracy at the centre of
its activities. Progress has been made in implementing actions included the EU
Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy. Highlights include completion of a
worldwide network of human rights and democracy focal points, progress on
economic social and cultural rights, a rights based approach in development
(which was incorporated in the Multiannual Financial Framework 2014-2020 and
notably in the Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI), and is being taken
into account during the actual development aid programming exercise), revised
guidelines on the death penalty, children and women’s rights, as well as
establishing guidelines for LGBTI (Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and
intersex) people and FoRB (Freedom of Religion or Belief) issues. Political
dialogue, including under the Cotonou Agreement, played an increasingly key
role in promoting respect for human rights. Throughout the year the EU has
continued to actively support civil society organisations and specific human
rights dialogues were held with over 20 countries. In addition the work of the
EU Special Representative for Human Rights has enhanced coherence and visibility
of human rights in the EU’s foreign policy. 
The
EU has continued to be a committed actor on human rights at the UN,
contributing towards building and defending strong standards and mechanisms for
the promotion and protection of human rights at the UN. In particular the EU
actively participated in the work of the Human Rights Council and the UN
General Assembly and presented several initiatives on particular countries of
concern as well as important thematic issues.
In
2013, EU continued to support electoral processes around the globe by sending
Election Observation Missions (EOMs) and Electoral Expert Missions (EEMs) as
well as providing electoral assistance, and support to domestic election
observers. EOMs were deployed to Jordan, Kenya, Paraguay, Pakistan, Mali, Guinea Conakry, Madagascar, Kosovo, Nepal and Honduras. EEMs were sent to Bhutan, Cambodia, Togo, Swaziland, Rwanda, Maldives, Zimbabwe and Mauritania. 
Among
the actions included in EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy is the
completion of work on nine pilots developing new methods of work in support of
democracy and democratisation. These pilot countries were Bolivia, Ghana, Benin, Indonesia, Mongolia, Solomon Islands, Kyrgyzstan, Maldives, and Lebanon. The work was done jointly by EEAS, DG Development and Cooperation (DEVCO) and EU
country delegations and focused on the six action areas identified in Council
conclusions from 2009: coherence, coordination, dialogue, country-specificity,
partnership, international cooperation, mainstreaming, and visibility. Clear
deliverables for each country were a democracy profile and a democracy support
action plan. To the extent that the local context permits, work is ongoing to
deepen cooperation between the EU, EU Member States, the partner governments
and other key actors. A second generation of pilots was launched towards the
end of 2013 that build on the results of the first tranche and aiming for a
global roll-out of the initiative by the end of 2015.
The
European Endowment for Democracy, a joint project by the EU and its Member States, became operational in 2013. The European Endowment for Democracy assists
pro-democratic civil society organisations, movements and individual activists
acting in favour of a pluralistic multi-party democratic system regardless of
their size or formal status.  

1.3.6.             
Mainstreaming of cross-cutting issues 

Environment
and climate change
The
‘Agenda for Change’ stipulates that “EU development policy should promote a
‘green economy’ that can generate growth, create jobs and help reduce poverty
by valuing and investing in natural capital”. In line with this commitment, and
building on the outcomes of Rio+20, the Commission has initiated measures to
promote a transformation towards a green economy in partner countries through
the development of new training modules and the organisation of awareness
raising workshops. A paper outlining the approach to integrate the green
economy into the EU’s development and cooperation programmes is being prepared
and should be finalized by the end of 2014.
Climate
change remains an important cross-cutting issue in the EU’s development
assistance and efforts have continued and enhanced to integrate and mainstream
actions for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and to adapt to the impacts of
climate change across the portfolio of programmes and initiatives. Training
workshops and regional seminars for EU delegations were organised to train
staff on the integration of environment and climate change in development and
cooperation and on the green economy. In 2013, a new course was introduced for
EU staff on country-led environmental and climate change mainstreaming. This
course built on the successful experience of the GCCA in training over 200
senior officials from Ministries of Finance, Planning and Environment around
the world in an effort to catalyse the mainstreaming of climate issues in
national planning and budgeting process.
On
the other hand, it is increasingly acknowledged by the international community
that conserving healthy natural ecosystems and averting global biodiversity
loss are key to ensuring sustainable development and human well-being. EU
development and cooperation is fully committed to pursuing this goal and
therefore continues its efforts to properly address the biodiversity-poverty
eradication linkage. This way, it contributes to the EU’s biodiversity strategy
to 2020, in particular target 6, as well as the Convention on Biodiversity CBD
Strategic Plan for biodiversity 2011-2020 and the Aichi Targets[35].  The
launching of the ‘Biodiversity for Life’ flagship initiative provides the
conceptual framework able to address these biodiversity challenges and to
deliver on the Hyderabad commitment to double international funding for
biodiversity in developing countries by 2015.
The
Commission measures aid that contributes to meeting the objectives of the three
Rio Conventions' objectives on biodiversity, climate change and desertification
using the ‘Rio marker’ system. This system relates to the reporting to the
OECD‘s Development Assistance Committee (OECD DAC) through its Creditor
Reporting System database. Based on this tracking it is estimated that around
to EUR 900 million were committed to climate change activities and EUR 300
million to biodiversity activities in 2013.  
The
tables below show the variation in the proportion of EU’s development
assistance that related to climate change and biodiversity during the 2007-2013
Multi-annual Financial Framework.   
 Year || Total (revised) || Total portfolio (M€) || % of Total portfolio 
 2007 || 492,075,527 || 7,350,000,000 || 6.7% 
 2008 || 401,483,928 || 8,480,000,000 || 4.7% 
 2009 || 722,290,336 || 7,497,000,000 || 9.6% 
 2010 || 600,215,920 || 6,843,000,000 || 8.8% 
 2011 || 653,935,708 || 7,454,000,000 || 8.8% 
 2012 || 790,917,567 || 8,735,000,000 || 9.1% 
 2013 || 876,040,105 || 9,948,300,000 || 8.8% 
 2007-2013 || 4,536,959,092 || 56,307,300,000 || 8.1% 
   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   ||   ||   
 Year || DCI (revised) || DCI total || % of DCI total 
 2007 || 125,323,161 || 2,195,000,000 || 5.7% 
 2008 || 281,960,958 || 2,321,000,000 || 12.1% 
 2009 || 265,382,758 || 2,419,000,000 || 11.0% 
 2010 || 257,307,920 || 2,462,000,000 || 10.5% 
 2011 || 357,427,070 || 2,591,000,000 || 13.8% 
 2012 || 315,089,600 || 2,697,000,000 || 11.7% 
 2013 || 220,920,000 || 2,715,400,000 ||   
 2007-2013 || 1,823,411,467 || 17,400,400,000 || 10.5% 
   ||   ||   ||   
 Year || ENPI (revised) || ENPI total || % of ENPI total 
 2007 || 161,626,400 || 1,666,000,000 || 9.7% 
 2008 || 63,260,741 || 1,634,000,000 || 3.9% 
 2009 || 38,993,272 || 1,576,000,000 || 2.5% 
 2010 || 93,600,000 || 1,735,000,000 || 5.4% 
 2011 || 123,241,494 || 1,976,000,000 || 6.2% 
 2012 || 236,130,750 || 2,312,000,000 || 10.2% 
 2013 || 232,509,903 || 2,486,700,000 || 9.4% 
 2007-2013 || 949,362,560 || 13,385,700,000 || 7.1% 
   ||   ||   ||   
 Year || EDF (revised) || EDF || % of EDF portfolio 
 2007 || 205,125,966 || 3,489,000,000 || 5.9% 
 2008 || 56,262,230 || 4,525,000,000 || 1.2% 
 2009 || 417,914,306 || 3,502,000,000 || 11.9% 
 2010 || 249,308,000 || 2,646,000,000 || 9.4% 
 2011 || 173,267,144 || 2,887,000,000 || 6.0% 
 2012 || 239,697,217 || 3,726,000,000 || 6.4% 
 2013 || 422,610,202 || 4,746,200,000 || 8.9% 
 2007-2013 || 1,764,185,065 || 25,521,200,000 || 6.9% 
Culture
Culture
continued to be supported as a cross-cutting dimension of economic development,
social inclusion, freedom of expression and promotion of diversity. In 2013
more than seventy projects have been awarded under three calls for proposals
covering Neighbourhood countries, the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP)
region and the whole developing world.
It
is also important to highlight that the ‘Media and Culture for development in
the South Mediterranean region’ call for proposals will result in the
distribution of about one hundred grants via the newly developed sub-granting
mechanism, which allows EU-funded projects to redistribute their financial
support to other parties.

1.3.7.             
Cooperation with non-state actors and local authorities

Civil
Society
In
September 2012  the European Commission adopted the Communication ‘The roots of
democracy and sustainable development: Europe’s engagement with Civil Society
in external relations’[36]
and 2013 proved a fundamental year in translating it’s provisions into
substantive actions. The new policy aims at achieving an enhanced and more
strategic approach to EU engagement with local civil society organisations
(CSOs) in developing, neighbourhood and enlargement countries. It will focus on
civil society’s contribution to building stronger democratic processes and
systems of accountability, achieving better development outcomes through constructive
relations between states and CSOs, and direct support to CSOs. Due
consideration has been given to country-specific issues, in particular where
there are highly volatile political or security contexts. 
The
EU and Member States are also committed to developing country roadmaps for
engaging with CSOs in the long term to improve the impact, consistency,
predictability and visibility of EU actions. A guidance note for EU Delegations
on EU Country Roadmaps for Engagement with Civil Society was developed in 2013.

At
the regional and global levels the EU is committed to supporting CSOs, networks
and alliances in tackling global challenges, monitoring PCD, delivering on aid
commitments, and promoting global citizen awareness. In November 2013, the
‘Policy Forum on Development’ was launched after an interim phase to develop
its structure, membership, and work programme. It gathers together
representatives of CSO networks (Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs), Trade
Unions, Cooperatives, Chambers of Commerce, Foundations, etc.) and local
authority (LA) networks from the EU and partner countries twice a year.  
Local
Authorities
In
May 2013, the European Commission adopted the Communication ‘Empowering Local
Authorities in partner countries for enhanced governance and more effective
development outcomes’. It promotes a more strategic EU engagement with LAs and
their Associations in partner countries in order to unlock their full
potential, focusing on good governance at the local level, and a territorial
approach to development. It will support decentralisation and reforms, help
capacity development of LAs, propose smart solutions for sustainable
urbanisation, and reinforce Associations of LAs at national, regional and
international levels. The policy will be implemented over the 2014-2020 period
by EuropeAid and EU Delegations in partner countries through policy dialogue
and different EU instruments for external cooperation, in particular, with LAs.

DEAR
Following
the publication of a Staff Working Document on Development Education and
Awareness Raising (DEAR) in Europe in December 2012, EuropeAid has deepened its
commitment to critically inform and engage EU citizens in development issues.

1.3.8.             
The role of the private sector

The
importance of private sector development for growth is widely recognised. In
the first place, the private sector creates jobs and income, which are the best
insurance against extreme poverty. In the second, the private sector also
provides goods and services to the poor, such as food, telecommunications and
financial services. Some businesses provide very specific products and services
such as microfinance, micro insurance or generic medicines. A dynamic private
sector can therefore be a source of innovation to meet the specific needs of the
poor. Furthermore, the private sector generates tax revenue which enables
public authorities in partner countries to provide basic infrastructure, create
a business-enabling environment and to provide social safety nets to the
poorest. Lastly, a stronger and more diversified private sector can help to
strengthen civil society by empowering marginalised groups, generating income
and offering wider access to education and health services. Overall, private
sector development is one of the most effective ways to achieve the objectives
of sustainable growth and poverty reduction.
The
importance of improving the business environment, promoting a competitive local
private sector and improving access to business and financial services was
reaffirmed in the ‘Agenda for Change’ in 2011. In addition, it acknowledged
that a more active engagement with the private sector is not limited to tapping
the potential of businesses to stimulate and sustain growth and improve
people's lives, but also to leverage additional private funding for development
assistance. It therefore emphasised the importance of developing new ways of
engaging with the private sector, notably to leverage its activity and
resources to deliver public goods and to extend the scope and scale of the EU
regional blending facilities to further leverage financial resources for
development.
In
2013, the Commission launched a study to increase knowledge and assist policy
development on how to engage with the private sector in development and to
extend the financial blending activities of the EU. The study will explore
substantive possibilities and options for improving and scaling up existing
blending mechanisms, including the development of private sector involvement
within these facilities. It will also provide solid recommendations for
improving engagement with the private sector including enhancing public private
partnerships and dialogue. Results of the study are expected during 2014.
The
Commission also finalised two thematic Global Evaluations of the EU’s Support
to Trade-related Assistance Support and Private Sector Development in Third
Countries. All these elements, and an extensive on-going consultation process
with a wide range of actors, contributed to the preparation of a new
Communication on ‘Strengthening the Role of the Private Sector in Achieving
Inclusive and Sustainable Growth in Developing Countries’, officially launched
in October 2013. 
The
Communication, planned to be adopted in the first half of 2014, will enable the
EU to formulate in more operational terms its strategy for implementing the
objectives in the ‘Agenda for Change’ to achieve sustainable and inclusive
growth and engage more actively with the private sector. 

1.4.      Better and
more effective aid
1.4.1.             
Aid effectiveness and joint programming 

The
Fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness in Busan in 2011 was a key framing
event for aid and development effectiveness.  It placed a clearer emphasis on
results, strengthening aid's role as a catalyst for development results and
went beyond the traditional aid effectiveness issues to cover issues like
climate change finance, private sector and south-south cooperation. The High
Level Forum agreed to set up a new inclusive global governance structure, the
Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation.  The EU is one of the
three representatives of donor partners in the 15 strong Steering Committee,
which first met in December 2012.  In 2013, there were three more meetings in
Bali, Addis Ababa and Washington.  
Joint
Programming has emerged as a core element of the EU’s common aid effectiveness
agenda, based on the Council Conclusions of November 2011[37]. Under
Joint Programming, EU Delegations, together with Member State and ECHO field
offices and increasing involvement of the European Investment Bank, develop a
shared analysis, define a common strategic vision, mobilise their different
strengths and capacities according to their comparative advantages, and decide
on a division of labour. Joint Programming processes are open to other
like-minded donors; in most cases they are led and facilitated by EU
Delegations.  
Following
the successful launch of the Joint Programming process in a number of
front-runner countries, EU Heads of Mission in countries with potential for
Joint Programming were contacted in early 2013 with the majority returning
positive replies. In most countries Joint Programming is planned to start
within four years, in line with the timing of the national development plans of
the partner country.  
By
the end of 2013:

 Final
     or draft Joint Programming documents were finalised in five countries
     (underlined), with nine more being finalised (Burma/Myanmar, Burundi,
     Cambodia, Chad, Ghana, Guatemala, Laos, Mali,
     Namibia, Paraguay, Rwanda, Senegal, South Sudan and Togo);
 Joint
     analysis and response documents had been produced in three countries (underlined)
     and under preparation in four (Bangladesh, Bolivia, Comoros, Côte d'Ivoire, Ethiopia, Liberia and Kenya);
 Preparatory
     work started in 13 countries (Algeria, Georgia, Honduras, Malawi, Mauritania,
     Mozambique, Nepal, Niger, Nicaragua, Palestine, Tanzania, Uganda and
     Yemen);
 Joint
     Programming work was scheduled to start for 2015-17 in six countries (Benin, Burkina Faso,       El Salvador, Sierra Leone, and Philippines); and, 
 There
     is a recognised potential, while the decision to go ahead with Joint
     Programming has still to be made, in 13 countries (Afghanistan, Armenia, Egypt, Haiti, Jordan, Libya, Moldova, Morocco, Pakistan, Somalia, Tunisia, Vietnam, Zimbabwe).

Joint
Programming countries are widely spread geographically and include a number of
fragile states such as Burma/Myanmar, Mali, and South Sudan.  The Joint
Programming process is, where possible, led by the partner country government
and aligned to their development strategies and synchronised to their planning
cycles. It is conducted primarily at partner country level to respond to
specific needs and the situation on the ground. All donors involved in the
process develop their own bilateral implementation plans, but they will be
aligned to the joint response. Joint Programming takes account of donor-wide
strategies as far as they already exist to avoid parallel processes and
duplication. The scheme is open to other committed donors.
As
the EU, the Member States and other donors progress towards joint analysis and
multi-annual joint response strategies, Joint Programming has also a positive
impact on the transparency of our work and actions, on improved EU coordination
and strengthened political dialogue, and on increased predictability and impact
of our policies and financial support with our partner countries. 

1.4.2.             
Cooperation with the donor community 

OECD
Close
cooperation with the OECD on develop­ment issues continued at all levels.
Throughout the year, the Commission participated actively in the work of the
OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC), of which the EU is a full member.
In particular, the Commission contributed to discussions at senior and
ministerial level, covering issues of relevance for the future global
development agenda, such as the post-2015 development goals, the Global
Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation, and external financing for
development. The latter subject was the subject of the June Tidewater
conference in which Commissioner Piebalgs participated. The EC also contributed
to promoting a more active involvement for emerging donors in the OECD's work. Four
EU countries – the Czech Republic, Poland, the Slovak Republic and Slovenia (plus Iceland) – joined the DAC, with EU support, in 2013.
Bilateral
relations with traditional donors and emerging economies
As
part of the broader EU-US strategic dialogue, the Commission chaired regular
consultations with its US counterparts (The US Agency for International
Development (USAID) and the US State Department) in the context of the EU-US
development dialogue. This was established in 2009 with the aim of deepening
cooperation on the ground and at policy level and last year was able to raise
political awareness at global level around the post-2015 development agenda and
other issues of common interest such as resilience, energy, private sector
development and human rights. It was also able to better coordinate actions in
the field.  As an example of
enhanced coordination, a number of EU delegations and USAID offices are now
closely cooperating, sharing country assessments, comparing strategies and
exploring synergies at sector level. Strong synergies are being developed in
food security and resilience, sectors where both sides are very active, notably
in the Sahel and the Horn of Africa. 
Our development dialogue with Japan was resumed in 2013
with consultations held in Tokyo in May and further impetus in the relationship
was provided by the EU-Japan summit in November 2013. Field cooperation between
the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) and EU Delegations has been
enhanced.  Contacts have also been developed throughout 2013 with Korea on development related issues. Our close relationship with Australia in the
development field has continued to develop with joint implementation programmes
in Fiji and South Sudan. 
In 2013, emerging economies have become more involved in
global processes and fora on global development, such as the Busan Global
Partnership, G20, post-MDG High Level Panel, and the BRICS (Brazil, Russia,
India, China and South Africa) or IBSA (India, Brazil, South Africa) fora. The
Commission continued to deploy efforts to engage with these new donors and to
progressively shift its relationships with them away from bilateral cooperation
through projects and programmes towards more strategic partnerships on global
and regional development issues. 
Contacts have been established with relevant authorities
in China on global development issues (Post-2015, Busan, financing for
development) and on the sharing of lessons learned in poorer countries.  The
EU-China summit in November 2013 endorsed the launch of a senior level
development dialogue. Similar discussions have also started with India. 

1.4.3.             
Cooperation with international organisations

United Nations
During the course of 2013, the European Commission was
involved in different UN related activities having an impact on development. It
participated actively in the main UN conferences, contributed to debates at the
UN General Assembly (UNGA) and in the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC)
and launched preparatory work in anticipation of the EU’s active participation
in the UN Third International Conference of Small Island Developing States
(SIDS) in September 2014. 
Within the framework on the UNGA the Commission
contributed actively in several High Level Meetings with an impact on
development, notably the High Level Meeting on Disabilities and Development on
23 September 2013, the inaugural meeting of the High Level Political Forum on
Sustainable Development on 24 September 2014, the Special Event to follow up
efforts made towards achieving the MDGs on 25 September 2013 and the High Level
Dialogue on Migration and Development held on 3 to 4 October 2013. The
meetings resulted in the adoption of
‘outcomes documents’, for which the EU
provided relevant input.
Over the year, the Commission contributed to the adoption
of more than 50 UNGA Resolutions with a direct impact on development. The
Commission also contributed to the adoption of several Resolutions of the UN
ECOSOC related to development and to the outcomes of the 51st Session of the UN
Commission on Social Development and of the 57th session of the UN Commission
on the Status of Women. The Commission also actively contributed to the work of
the Sustainable Development Goals Open Working Group and the Intergovernmental
Committee of Experts on Sustainable Development Financing. 
The Commission was involved in major UN Secretary General
initiatives in the field of development, such as the High Level Panel on the
Post-2015 Development Agenda, Sustainable Energy for All, the Scaling Up
Nutrition Movement and the Global Education First Initiative. 
The Commission continued its financial support for the
UNESCO (United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organisation) Expert
Facility whose aim is to contribute to the implementation of the UNESCO 2005
Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural
Expressions.
 
Working in partnership with the UN system and ensuring a
fruitful cooperation with UN Agencies, Funds and Programmes (UN AFPs) remained
an important objective for the Commission with a particular attention to
communicating results that were jointly achieved. On food and nutrition
security, a key priority for the EU, the annual UN-EU Saving and Improving
Lives series report (‘Partnership for food and nutrition security 2008-2012’[38]) was
released. We contributed to the EU-UNDP (United Nations Development Programme)
10-year anniversary report of the Strategic Partnership Agreement to be
published in February 2014 and also produced an assessment of our cooperation
with United Nations Industrial Development Organisation (UNIDO), one year after
the signature of the Memorandum of Understanding. Annual Senior Official Meetings
with UNIDO (including the participation of Commissioner Piebalgs) and United
Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) were organised in Brussels. Finally,
together with our EU Delegation in Geneva, we engaged actively with the Unite
Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) Trade and Development
Board and the two UNCTAD Commissions.
G20 
During 2013, the Russian G20 Presidency concentrated on
Food Security, Human Resource Development, Financial Inclusion, Infrastructure,
Domestic Resource Mobilisation and support to the post-2015 process. All of
this was underpinned by an Accountability Framework.  A St. Petersburg
Development Outlook was agreed which sets out some of the key achievements from
the original 2010 Seoul Action Plan on Development and indicates how the next
Multi-Year Action Plan on Development will be finalised. The EU continued to
press for concerted G20 action on Inclusive Green Growth as part of the
Development Agenda.  The Green Growth agenda is designed to help structurally
transform economies on to a climate friendly path over the medium term and to
help build the capacity of developing countries to design and implement Green
Growth policies and strategies. The EU has also pressed hard for action on the
critically important issue of Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform. 
As the 2014 G20 Presidency, Australia initiated
discussions, at the end of 2013, on its priorities for the G20 Development
Working Group. It narrowed the Development agenda even further by prioritising
Financial Inclusion, Infrastructure and Domestic Resource Mobilisation. The EU
is supporting all three priority areas by taking action to involve Member
States in the work to drive down the costs of sending remittances, by linking
the infrastructure work to a German-led initiative to involve the private
sector in green infrastructure investment, and by developing programmes to
support tax authorities in Lower Income Countries (LICs).

G8
In 2013, the main focus of the development-related work
of the G8 continued to be on agriculture and food security. The ‘New Alliance
to improve food security and nutrition' was expanded. The EU continued to play
an active role with other G8 leaders to build the partnership between
governments in Africa, G8 countries and the private sector to lift 50 million
people out of poverty in the next ten years through supporting agricultural
development. During 2013 the Commission provided strong support to the UK initiative on Trade in Africa.  A UK-led G8 Transparency Initiative covered several important
areas including: the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, Aid
Transparency, tax transparency and reducing money laundering and improving tax
systems in developing countries. These are all areas where the EU is very
active. Support was provided specifically in the context of Extractive
Industries where the EU Accounting Directive is an important new legislation.
The UK presidency led a process to create a comprehensive G8 Accountability
Report. The G8 also continued to deliver on the Deauville Partnership with
Arab Countries in Transition. 
International Financial Institutions
Thanks to the 2011 initiative to create a Taskforce for
an enhanced dialogue with international financing institutions in 2013
EuropeAid intensified its overall engagement with the International Monetary
Fund (IMF), World Bank Group (WBG), African Development Bank (AfDB), Asian
Development Bank (AsDB) and Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). 
Based on a set of converging development policy
priorities, the Commission strengthened strategic partnerships with the IMF for
Sub Saharan Africa and Middle East and North Africa (for example on PFM,
vulnerability and shock absorption mechanisms, fragility, and capacity
building) and with WBG and AfDB on Africa (for example on budget support in
fragile contexts, sustainable energy for all, food and nutrition security). 
With the IDB, the partnership was strengthened with a
Memorandum of Understanding signed by Commission Vice President Rehn,
Commissioner Piebalgs and President Moreno and the launch of a joint action
plan on priority areas of shared interest including budget support, citizen
security and regional initiatives and financial blending. The Commission also
engaged in various contacts between EuropeAid and the AsDB, for example on the
regional economic outlook, post-2015 development framework and regional
integration. 
Finally, Commissioner Piebalgs addressed the 87th and
88th Development Committee meeting, as observer, at the IMF/WB Spring and
Annual meetings, in April and October in Washington.

1.5.      Outlook
2014   

To
deliver on its commitments and keep its long-term promises, in 2014 the EU will
pursue and step up its development actions on a number of fronts.
First
and foremost we will continue implementing the 'Agenda for Change' with a view
to increasing the impact of the EU's development cooperation, meeting modern
development challenges head-on and targeting our aid where it is most needed
and can deliver long-lasting, catalytic change. 
The
key principles set out in the ‘Agenda for Change’ – namely prioritisation,
concentration, differentiation and EU coordination – will continue to inform
the programming process through the different instruments of the 2014-2020
Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) and the European Development Fund (EDF). 

We will
further pursue cooperation with new partners like the private sector. To this
end, the practical means of strengthening the role of the private sector in
achieving inclusive and sustainable growth, in line with the ‘Agenda for
Change’, will be further developed in a Commission Communication to be
presented in the first half of 2014.    
The
‘Agenda for Change’ also calls for the EU to move to a Rights-Based Approach
(RBA). In response, we will develop an EU Toolbox for a ‘Rights–based approach,
encompassing all human rights, to EU Development’ to systematically integrate
human rights principles and standards and to make their achievement an outcome
of the whole development process of planning and design, implementation,
monitoring and evaluation.
In
2014, work will also continue on making development cooperation more efficient
and effective through improved coordination, coherence of polices and
accountability. In this regard, we will finalise the development of an
ambitious EU Results Framework to show EU citizens and partner countries alike
how we convert aid into real development results on the ground. We will further
improve coordination with Member States and other donors to avoid unnecessary
overlaps and work more effectively. EU joint programming processes will be
moved forward in over 40 countries. The EU will work towards a common position
ahead of the first High-level Meeting of the Global Partnership for Effective
Development Cooperation, which will take place in Mexico in April 2014. In the
area of PCD, the main challenge will be the introduction of PCD issues at
international level, improving country-level reporting and dialogue on PCD with
partner countries.  We are committed to making all data and information
available in a user-friendly way. Together with EU Member States we have agreed
on the EU Transparency Guarantee to provide more and better aid information. We
have been working on transparency, including through the implementation of the
common standard, and will continue to do so in 2014. Also, in conjunction with
DG ECHO, early in 2014 we expect to launch a new transparency website, EU Aid
Explorer, which will map information about aid flows worldwide. 
We
will also be reporting on progress in a key development areas. For instance, we
will issue the annual EU accountability Report on Financing for Development.
And we will report on how the EU action plan on gender equality and women’s
empowerment in development 2012-2015 is being implemented. In addition, we will
keep on engaging with CSOs and LAs to support their contribution to sustainable
and inclusive development. We will continue striving to place the EU at the
forefront of efforts to combat food and nutrition insecurity. And social and
human development must be fully embedded in our programmes in order to ensure
growth is inclusive and able to benefit all citizens.
To
improve the performance of our operational framework, we will continue to
promote innovative ways of delivering aid more efficiently and leveraging
additional funds with it, including the use of blending. The implementation of
the new methods for budget support will also remain a priority. 
In
2014 we will, of course, carry on with our efforts to meet the MDGs. We will also
continue working alongside our partners on a post-2015 framework that will
pursue the twin aims of poverty eradication and sustainable development.
With
2015 being such a crucial year for development, it is only right that it should
have been designated the ‘European Year for Development’. EYD2015 will provide
the European Union and its Member States with an ideal opportunity to show
citizens that EU development cooperation brings added value and delivers real
and lasting results, thanks to the EU’s unique ability to draw on the combined
strengths of its Member States to fight poverty and champion sustainable
development everywhere. The preparatory work we accomplish in 2014 for EYD2015
will be crucial to its success.
Post-2015
The
year 2014 will greatly contribute to the shaping of discussions on the
post-2015 framework and the EU intends to continue to be actively involved in
this process.
At
UN level, the UN Open Working Group (OWG) on SDGs was established as a
follow-up to the UN Conference on Sustainable Development in Rio in June 2012.
The OWG will make a proposal on SDGs to the 69th UNGA in September 2014. In
parallel, the UN Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on a Sustainable
Development Financing will also present its final report to the 69th UNGA, which
will have important implications for the financing aspects of the post-2015
agenda.
Subsequently,
an intergovernmental process should start in the second half of 2014 which will
prepare the post-2015 summit scheduled to take place in September 2015 with the
aim of finding a final agreement on the post-2015 agenda. This
intergovernmental process will build on a report from the UN Secretary-General
which will synthesise the various proposals made, including the OWG report, the
report of the UNSG's High-Level Panel on post-2015 and the sustainable
development finance committee. 
At
the EU level, the Commission and EEAS continues to work towards a common EU
position in the various phases of the discussions and negotiations in
particular those related to the OWG SDG and the preparations for the post-2015
summit. The Commission and EEAS will work in close cooperation with EU
Delegations to enhance its outreach activities and enhance the EU’s dialogue
with strategic partners in the context of various fora, including the
Africa-EU-Summit in Brussels in April and the Third International Conference on
Small Island Developing States (SIDS) in Samoa in September 2014.  A
Communication on the post-2015 agenda is envisaged for 2014.

2.        
Chapter
2 - Implementation: geographic overview

Introduction
EU
development cooperation is mainly based on three “geographical” financing
instruments: the European Development Fund (EDF), the Development Cooperation
Instrument (DCI) and the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument
(ENPI) [39].
The
EDF is the main source of financing for EU assistance to Sub-Saharan Africa
(with the exception of South Africa), the Caribbean and the Pacific (ACP)
regions. The fund is separate from the EU budget and is directly funded by EU
Member States and managed by a specific independent committee. 
The
DCI and the ENPI are financed by the EU budget. The DCI covers geographic
programmes supporting cooperation with 47 developing countries in Latin
America, Asia and Central Asia, the Gulf region (Iran, Iraq and Yemen) and South Africa, as well as thematic programmes benefiting all developing countries[40]. The ENPI
supports the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) and covers 16 partner
countries in the EU's southern and eastern Neighbourhood and Russia.
Some
relevant figures and data will be highlighted in this chapter, but
comprehensive and detailed financial information can be found in Chapter 5: the
Financial Annex of this report. 
This
report does not cover the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP)[41]
or the current Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA)[42]
although some data on IPA allocations are included in the tables in the annex
to this report. A short section of this report is dedicated to humanitarian
assistance[43].

2.1.      European
Neighbourhood and the Middle East


2.1.1.             
European Neighbourhood and Russia

Introduction 
                                      European
Neighbourhood
The
European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) remains the basis to establish an area of
prosperity with the EU’s neighbours notably through enhanced political
association, economic integration and closer cooperation. In 2013 the EU
continued its efforts to support and encourage democratic transitions in the
region, inter alia through political engagement, economic and financial support
and enhanced cooperation with regional organisations.
The EU remains the single most important trade partner for almost all countries
in the Neighbourhood.
As for previous years,
mutual accountability and a shared commitment to human rights, democracy and
the rule of law remain at the core of the ENP providing a framework for the
EU's relations with its neighbours in the East as well as in the South. Closer
economic integration and stronger political cooperation on governance reforms,
security and conflict resolution including joint initiatives in international
fora on issues of common interest are key aspects in this regard. 2013 has seen
some progress towards achieving the ENP objectives and continued reform
efforts, both in Eastern and Southern ENP countries, which were supported by
the EU.
In line with the political
and strategic approach of the renewed ENP, the EU is implementing an
incentive-based approach to the assistance provided in the Neighbourhood
region. This means that in addition to assessing partner countries political,
social and economic needs, the EU also assesses the performance of partner
countries in terms of implementing agreed reform objectives, in particular in democracy-related areas and respect for
human rights. The incentive-based approach involves a high level of differentiation
and gives each partner country scope to develop its relationship with the EU
according to its aspirations, needs and capacities. 
In 2013, the umbrella
cooperation programmes which are translating this incentive-based approach into
operational terms - the Support for Partnership, Reform and Inclusive Growth
(SPRING) programme in the South and the Eastern Partnership Integration and
Cooperation (EaPIC) programme in the East – were continued and provided
substantial additional funding to selected partner countries in the Eastern and
Southern Neighbourhood.
Significant progress
was made in the implementation of the Eastern Partnership (EaP) in 2013. The
Eastern Partnership Summit held in Vilnius in November 2013 was a milestone in
the EU’s relationship with the EaP countries and reviewed the
considerable progress made in the Partnership since the September 2011 Warsaw
Summit in bringing Eastern European partners closer to the EU and agreed on an
ambitious agenda for the way ahead. The Summit Declaration
sets out a series of goals to be attained by the Partnership by 2015, and
together with the new Association Agendas and other existing and future
documents guiding bilateral relations and Work Programmes of the multilateral
Platforms, constitutes a clear plan of action for the Eastern Partnership in
2014-2015.
The negotiations of Association
Agreements, including the creation of Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Areas
(DCFTA), with the Republic of Moldova and Georgia were completed and the
Agreements initialled. Progress made by some
Eastern Partnership partners towards Visa Liberalisation through the
implementation of the Visa Liberalisation Action Plans was welcomed. 
In the southern
Neighbourhood, DCFTA negotiations have been held with Morocco; exploratory dialogues on how to deepen trade and investment relations have taken place with
 Jordan, Tunisia and Egypt. A mobility partnership has been signed with Morocco in June 2013 and negotiations with Tunisia aiming at the conclusion of a mobility partnership
were completed end of 2013 (signature March 2014). The dialogue on migration,
mobility and security launched with Jordan in December 2012 was further
advanced throughout 2013. 
Work progressed in 2013 on
preparing the future European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI), and an agreement
was reached towards the end of the year in the context of the Multi-Annual
Financial Framework (MFF) for 2014-2020. The renewed ENP and its key principles
have been reflected in this agreed new European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI)
Regulation.
Russia
The EU continued to engage with Russia as an indispensable, yet often challenging, partner. A successful visit by the College of Commissioners to the Russian Government in March gave fresh impetus to EU-Russia
cooperation over a wide range of areas and also launched formal dialogues in
new fields. The EU-Russia Energy Roadmap 2050 was signed: a significant step in
our energy cooperation. 
The 31st EU–Russia Summit took place in June
2013 in Yekaterinburg. It confirmed the determination of both sides to further
develop EU–Russian cooperation, in particular in view of Russia’s interest in modernisation, but it also made clear that differences remain where
further work is needed.
Aid
effectiveness and donor coordination        
During the last five years, the EU has played a key role
in donor coordination in the whole Neighbourhood region. For instance in Georgia, Moldova and Tunisia working groups or councils have been
established in key cooperation sectors. Furthermore, in Georgia, the National Roadmap has been adopted in agreement with the government, and
a map of donors' activities and an online database have been developed. 
In many Neighbourhood countries, for example Moldova,
Morocco, Libya, Lebanon, Egypt
and Tunisia, coordination between the EU and other donors, in particular
European donors, has continued to be solid and has improved with the EU in the
lead or as a very active participant. Coordination between EU and Member States is ensured through regular meetings in order to promote consistency of
programmes. In Morocco, in an effort to bring cooperation to a higher
state of integration, the EU and Member States have embarked on a Joint
Programming process together with the Member States active in Morocco. In   Libya, the EU is fully participating in the United Nations Support
Mission in Libya (UNSMIL) coordination structure and is organising regular
in-country EU/MS's coordination meetings. 
Furthermore, when line ministries are in charge of
coordinating a working group, the EU Delegation provides sectorial or technical
support. National authorities are met on a regular basis by EU services to
promote policy dialogue and to define together future programmes and monitor
on-going actions. Consultations with civil society and professional
organisations has been promoted and strengthened throughout 2013.
In the case of Syria, donor
coordination in such a complex and multidimensional crisis is a key element to
ensure the quality of the international response. That is why the EU, as the
biggest donor in the context of the Syria crisis, has maintained its leading
role in donor coordination in order to increase information sharing and
synergies between the various types of support provided by the main donors.
With regard to aid effectiveness, budget support and
blending facilities such as the Neighbourhood Investment Facility (NIF) have
been important to increase ownership and aid effectiveness in line with the
Paris Declaration[44]
and the Backbone Strategy[45].
Cooperation aligned with national policy targets kept an
effective balance among delivery methods and maintained harmonisation among
donors to avoid aid fragmentation. The full respect of ownership, alignment and
harmonisation principles has improved EU's aid effectiveness in the Neighbourhood
region.
Working towards the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs)  
EU assistance
has contributed to fighting poverty in the Neighbourhood region (MDG 1), in
particular through providing support to reduce the consequences of the Syrian
crisis and to assist Palestine, where 25% of the population lives
below the poverty line. In the Eastern Neighbourhood, budget support programmes
on agriculture, rural and regional development helped to reduce poverty in Moldova, Azerbaijan and Georgia.
EU support contributed to improve quality and access to
education in Morocco (TAYSSIR: a pilot programme to fight against the
abandonment of education), Egypt and Palestine (MDG 2). In
the context of the Syrian crisis, Syrian refugee children benefited from
access to education in host countries (Jordan and Lebanon). 
Specific focus
was put on supporting gender equality, empowerment of women, education for
girls, and fighting gender-based violence in Syria and Tunisia (MDG 3).
A programme in Lebanon seeks the mainstreaming
of the gender dimension at policy and sector levels.
An ongoing project in Armenia has promoted women’s participation in local communities and
elections. East Regional Programmes have included a Study on Gender Country
Profiles. Through the Regional South
Programme "Spring forward for women", the access and effective
participation of marginalised women in economic and public life has been
supported.
EU support has
helped improve child and maternal health as well as combat HIV and Malaria and
other diseases in Morocco, Tunisia, Palestine, Libya and Egypt (MDGs 4, 5 and 6).
This support includes primary health care and upgrading primary health centres,
training of staff and accreditation of health units. Food Security Budget
Support on Childcare in Armenia helped to strengthen the quality of
child protection systems. Budget support on health in Moldova accompanied reforms in primary healthcare system. Eastern Neighbourhood
Regional projects built the capacities of non-state actors on HIV-AIDS
prevention, treatment and care.
Environmental
sustainability, water quality, wastewater services, and solid waste management
have been promoted in Tunisia, Egypt and Lebanon (MDG 7). Various regional projects and regional programmes have
contributed to environmental sustainability in the Eastern and Southern
Neighbourhood Region. These include, for example, INOGATE – a
programme supporting energy cooperation between the EU and the coastal states
of the Caspian Sea, ESIB – an energy saving initiative in the construction sector
in Eastern European and Central Asian countries, EU water initiatives, the
EaP-GREEN project that is looking to ‘green’ the economies of the Eastern
neighbourhood, and water legislation in Georgia.
Regarding MDG
8, a specific project in Moldova, as well as actions
funded under the Southern regional communication programme, have raised
awareness and promoted dialogue on the MDGs.
            
Implementation and results 
Bilateral cooperation
Bilateral
South
Cooperation dialogue with Algeria has
deepened and widened over the past years, which was reflected by over EUR 350
million of bilateral cooperation funding over the period 2007-13. In 2013,
cooperation programmes focused on rural development and agriculture,
accompanied by social actions, targeting less-favoured parts of the country and
vulnerable population groups. Cooperation in these areas is crucial for the
diversification of the Algerian economy, as well as for the inclusiveness of
its socioeconomic policies.
Due to the political events which occurred throughout
2013, EU assistance to Egypt has been reviewed. Support to the
socioeconomic sector and to civil society continued and has been enhanced.
Three programmes were signed in support of the water sector, Technical and
vocational education and training (TVET) and employment schemes, for a total of
EUR 130 million. Two new programmes supporting rural development and solid
waste management for a total of EUR 47 million were also adopted.
As in the previous year, EUR
2 million was allocated for twinning programmes between Israeli and EU Member
State institutions designed to align Israel to EU standards and norms.
An additional EUR 500 000 was allocated to the Civil Society Facility.
Cooperation with Jordan included two new
initiatives targeting the microfinance sector (EUR 35 million) and support to
the implementation of the Action Plan (EUR 12 million). In addition, the EU
mobilised support to existing programmes on PFM (EUR 11 million) and energy
sector (EUR 9 million). To alleviate the increasingly dramatic impact of Syrian
refugees in Jordan, the EU provided development assistance, principally
education and support to host communities, of EUR 50 million through working
with the United Nations Children’s Funds (UNICEF) and directly with the
Jordanian Government. Jordan also benefited from additional funding of EUR 31
million via the SPRING programme, which supported good governance and host
communities.
During most of this highly challenging year, Lebanon was affected by a major political crisis and by the increasing spill over
effects of the Syria Crisis. EU cooperation in 2013 worth a total of EUR 22
million supported three actions: reinforcing social cohesion, support to the
Lebanese security sector for stability and national cohesion and improvement of
housing and health conditions of the most vulnerable Palestine refugees in Lebanon. Moreover the EU mobilised additional funding to assist Lebanese host communities
and the refugee population in the areas of education, health, infrastructures,
economic recovery, support to Palestine refugees from Syria, delivery of humanitarian assistance to the most vulnerable, and to build the
capacities of the Lebanese Government to deal with the crisis.
The EU continued to support the transition in Libya by supporting its institutions and in particular the General National
Congress and the High National Commission for Elections. Civil society
programmes have also contributed to this crucial phase by empowering local
CSOs, in particular with relation to the constitution awareness campaign and
the reconciliation processes. In the security sector, a programme has started
supporting the Ministry of Interior and the Ministry of Justice to strengthen
the rule of law, good governance and civilian culture, and organised training
and awareness raising seminars. Other sectors like migration, health,
education, as well as TVET have also been supported.
In Morocco, the EU continued to support the
Government’s efforts on justice reform, in improving the quality and access to
health and education services and supported the country’s ambitious endeavour
to establish a medical insurance scheme for its most vulnerable families. The
EU also continued to assist Morocco in making its regulatory framework
approximate with the EU’s framework with a view to bring the country closer to
the European market. Moreover, new assistance programmes were adopted in the
fields of agriculture, education, social protection, support to Small and
Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs), and regulatory convergence. For these purposes
the EU committed EUR 378 million in 2013.
In Palestine, the EU continued to provide direct
financial support to the Palestinian Authority, in particular through the
PEGASE mechanism for socioeconomic support, by paying doctors, nurses and
teachers and social allowances to the most vulnerable members of society. A new
channel was opened with a contribution of EUR 13 million towards the unpaid
bills of patients referred by the Ministry of Health to East Jerusalem
hospitals, which are a vital part of the fabric of Palestinian society in the city. A EUR 80 million contribution was also made
to UNRWA, the UN Agency providing health, education and social services to Palestine refugees, not only in the West Bank and Gaza Strip but also in Syria, Jordan and Lebanon. 
Amongst the other projects funded were a
series of activities aimed at reinforcing the Palestinian presence in Area C,
the 60% of the West Bank under full Israeli civil and security control, notably
for assistance to develop master plans for small infrastructure,
capacity-building in the Ministry of Agriculture and help for small herders and
other farmers.
In Syria, the EU
has suspended all cooperation with the Syrian government since 2011. However,
in 2013, it remained committed to delivering aid in support the Syrian people,
refugees, students, human rights defenders and civil society in general.
Complementing humanitarian assistance, a total of EUR 278 million for
development assistance was mobilised in 2013 to assist the Syrian population
and host communities in neighbouring countries across various sectors:
education, vocational training, health, support to livelihoods and income
generation, protection of cultural heritage and capacity building of Syrian
CSOs. Support has also been provided to human rights organisations and NGOs to
promote activists networking and advocacy, the monitoring of human rights
violations, and support to the independent media.
In Tunisia, the EU continued to support through the 2013 Annual
Action Programme (AAP) economic recovery (EUR 65 million), democratic
transition and reforms to strengthen economic and democratic governance,
including justice reform. Additional support has been provided through the
Erasmus Mundus and the Tempus programmes, the project for the environmental
governance of the Gabès area and a programme in the area of agriculture in the
framework of the ENPARD (European Neighbourhood Programme for Agriculture and
Rural Development) initiative. Tunisia benefited from SPRING funds in 2013 with
a total amount of EUR 55 million.
Bilateral East
In Armenia, EU funding supported reforms in key areas such justice, public finance,
education and food security. Ongoing support in the area of vocational
education and training (VET) has brought some visible results, including
improved quality of education and greater access. EU assistance to national
reforms in PFM led to greater transparency and debt management.  In line with
the ‘more-for-more’ concept, Armenia was granted extra funds in 2013 in recognition
of progress towards democracy and human rights.
In Azerbaijan, sector
budget support operations accompanied reforms in energy, justice and rural
development. The dialogue on PFM continued. The
twinning instrument remained a successful instrument with one of the highest
implementation rates in the region. Work with civil society increased sharply
in 2013, with activities on human rights, media freedom, elections, or local
initiatives promoting employment in rural areas.
The major areas of EU cooperation activities in Belarus were environment, energy efficiency and civil society. Thanks to EU support,
two towns were fully equipped and trained on how to better manage solid waste,
12 standards on water management and seven standards on ecological certification
were adopted, and one project paved the way for the presidential decree joining
the Bern Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural
Habitats. Other key projects supported students, vulnerable migrants, and
ex-offenders.  
In Moldova, ongoing work on sustainable
development and poverty reduction continued in different areas such as rural
development and energy. For instance, renewable energy projects helped improve
heating systems in public buildings by using waste straw from local
agricultural enterprises and helped increase awareness about renewable energies
in general. Confidence building activities continued to bring together people
from the two banks of the river Nistru through infrastructure and social
investments, environmental protection projects, business development and civil
society support. EU assistance also supported crucial reforms for future
political association and economic integration with the EU. Following the
‘more-for-more’ approach, additional funds were granted to Moldova and will be used to boost economic opportunities in rural areas, advance reforms in
the energy sector and increase cooperation with the Council of Europe.
In Georgia, the EU continued to support reforms in
the areas of agriculture, regional development and public finance. EU support
in regional development has led to the creation of nine Regional Development
Councils and the development of strategies for their regions. EU assistance to
reform PFM resulted in better internal financial control systems and external
audit and public procurement. EU support to agriculture also yielded positive
results in 2013 including the creation of 50 new service centres offering
advice to farmers. EU cooperation also accompanied the process towards political
association and economic integration with the EU. Following the ‘more-for-more’
approach, additional funds were allocated to Georgia in support of employment
and vocational education and training.
Relations with Ukraine in 2013 were
focussed on facilitating the country's readiness to sign the Association
Agreement including the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (AA/DCFTA). At
the end of November 2013, the Government of Ukraine announced its decision to
suspend the signature of the AA/DCFTA. That said, progress since then
was considerable. Disbursements on budget support programmes, which had been on
hold because of concerns relating to PFM, were finally released reflecting the
steps taken by the Ukrainian authorities in developing a PFM strategy and
Action Plan.
The EU continued its work to support civil society
in Russia, despite the law on ‘foreign agents’
adopted by the Russian government in 2013 that impedes the activities of CSOs
working in the field of human rights and democracy.  EU funding under the
Partnership of Modernisation focused on justice and trade-related activities. 
Regional Cooperation
Throughout 2013, the EU
continued to strengthen its engagement in regional
cooperation and with key regional actors. 
In the southern Neighbourhood,
the EU remained actively engaged with regional organisations, such as the
League of Arab States and the Union for the Mediterranean (UfM). A new impetus
was given to the 5+5 Dialogue through the Economic Forum of the Western
Mediterranean held at the UfM Secretariat in Barcelona. 
Day-to-day activities of the
Union for the Mediterranean (UfM), where the EU holds the Northern
Co-Presidency, intensified with regular organisation of senior officials
meetings as well as the project oriented work of the UfM Secretariat in Barcelona. In autumn 2013 the UfM Ministerial meetings resumed with three being organised
on the following topics: on ‘women’ in September, on ‘transport’ in November
and on ‘energy’ in December 2013. Comprehensive political cooperation and
implementation of the joint work programme with the League of Arab States (LAS)
continued in 2013, marked by regular meetings of senior officials, mutual
visits of high ranking officials as well as bilateral meetings between High
Representative Ashton and the LAS Secretary-General. Also, the Organisation of
the Islamic Cooperation (OIC) opened its Permanent Observer Mission to the EU
in Brussels.
In the Eastern Neighbourhood, ministerial meetings on
Culture (June), Justice (October) and Transport (October) and Eastern
Partnership Informal Dialogues on Transport (February) and Higher Education
(September) brought forward cooperation with the six Eastern partners. The
annual meeting of Foreign Affairs Ministers and Senior Officials meetings were
also held. The regular meetings of Eastern
Partnership multilateral platforms and panels continued to support regional
cooperation in democracy, good governance and stability, economic integration
and convergence with EU policies, energy security and people to people
contacts.
Ambitious regional climate change projects (Clima East,
Clima South) saw their operational start in the neighbourhood region in 2013.
Regarding the cooperation
side, some cross-cutting issues such as e.g. environmental protection,
combating sea pollution, fighting organised crime and terrorism are most
effectively tackled at a regional level, complementing bilateral East and South
cooperation programmes.
Regional South
One
key element of regional cooperation in the southern Neighbourhood has been
working with civil society, and its recognition as a solid partner for
change, which has been ensured through the Regional South Neighbourhood Civil
Society Facility. The European Commission also increased its support to the
Anna Lindh Foundation (ALF), which facilitates the action of civil society by
promoting shared values and intercultural dialogue in the Mediterranean region.
In 2013 the EU institutions, the Commission, EEAS and the European Economic and
Social Committee, and the ALF worked towards creating mechanisms for structured
dialogue between civil society, governmental authorities and the EU. 
Cooperation
projects with the Council of Europe and UN Women in the fields of human rights,
gender equality, democracy and good governance have continued to strengthen
institutional dialogue at regional level while promoting policy changes and
legislative reforms. 
In
the field of youth, two new programmes have been launched addressing,
respectively, youth unemployment and the competencies of young men and women so
that they can exercise their rights and actively engage in decision-making
processes in the region.
The
private sector was supported through three new projects launched in 2013
to improve the business enabling environment for SMEs, the development of
quality Business to Business linkage services, and to foster entrepreneurial
cooperation in the cultural and creative industries.
In
the area of transport, a new project was launched aiming to facilitate,
through better connectivity between transport networks and modes, the trade of
goods between Southern partner countries and the EU; this directly contributing
to a UfM project with the same objective. 
In
the field of energy, substantial efforts went into the joint preparation
of the Mediterranean Solar Plan and the launching of energy related activities
at the local level through the new project ‘Cleaner Energy Saving Mediterranean
Cities'. The areas of sustainable consumption and production as well as climate
change were tackled through the launch of the innovative Switch Med programme[46] as well as
a new project in the area of climate change to support partner countries to
migrate towards resilient and low carbon economies.
In
the area of civil protection, the Euro-Mediterranean (Euromed) Programme
for Prevention, Preparedness and Response to Natural and Man-made Disasters
will contribute to the improvement of the national response capacities through
preparedness and the strengthening of prevention and mitigation.
Regional East 
Significant support to empower civil society at
regional and local level was provided through the Neighbourhood East Civil
Society Facility in 2011-2013 (EUR 37.6 million). The Facility also supported
projects aimed at reinforcing the Secretariat of the Eastern Partnership Civil
Society Forum and at strengthening the EaP Civil Society Forum national
platforms. 
A main focus of EU support to the Eastern
Neighbourhood was on Youth. The EUR 31.5 million which was allocated to the
Eastern Neighbourhood Youth Window to the Youth in Action programme allowed during
2012-2013 the involvement of an additional 34 000 young people and youth
workers from Eastern Partnership countries and Youth in Action Programme
countries into more than 1 500 joint activities like European Voluntary
Service, Youth Exchanges and Training and Networking projects such as study
visits and seminars.
Based on a needs analysis, priority was given to projects
supporting young people with fewer opportunities living in rural or deprived
areas and projects aiming at further improving the quality of youth work.
Importantly, the Eastern Partnership Youth Window allowed youth organisations
from Eastern partnership countries for the first time to apply directly to the
Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA), giving them full
ownership in the projects submitted.
A decision on a possible continuation of the Eastern
Partnership Youth Window wil be taken later in 2014 following an evaluation and
subject to teh availability of funds.
 
Moreover, the first Eastern Partnership Youth Forum –
a Lithuanian EU Presidency event and side event of the Eastern Partnership
Summit, supported by the Eastern partnership Platform 4 -  brought together
young people, youth researchers and youth policy makers from Europe and the
region to enhance the quality, visibility and recognition of youth work and
non-formal learning. In addition a symposium for Eastern European and Caucasus countries on the ‘Role of youth work in education for
democratic citizenship and participation’ was also organised within the
framework of the EU-Council of Europe Youth Partnership.
The Tempus IV and Erasmus Mundus programmes
continued supporting the improvement of higher education in partner countries.
Over the past years, Erasmus Mundus helped 626 students from Eastern
Partnership (EaP) countries to improve their academic and professional
prospects by obtaining an EU Masters' degree. Over 30 partnerships between EaP
and EU universities have been funded since 2007 to enable mobility for more
than 4 000 students and 700 staff from EaP countries. The EU extended the
eTwinning programme to schools in EaP countries allowing teachers and pupils to
develop projects of common interest.
Dialogue
on cultural policy continued with partners from the Eastern Partnership
countries and the first Eastern Partnership Ministerial Conference on Culture
was organised. The Tbilisi Conference Declaration conveys a strong message
about a shared commitment to support culture as a driver for growth and
stability in the region, as well as including culture in development agendas. 
The EU continued to support democracy in the EaP
region with the extension of the Council of Europe Facility until the end of
2014 in view of the launch of the 2015-2020 strategic framework between the EU
and the Council of Europe. 
Support to stability and security in the region
was enhanced through various projects including police cooperation to address
cross-border crime (EUR 5 million) and Integrated Border Management. The EU
also recently launched a new project to better prevent, prepare and respond to
man-made and natural disasters in the region (EUR 5 million).
In 2013, the EU has also increased its cooperation in the
field of economic development with a new EUR 10 million Regional Action
Programme within the framework of the SME Flagship Initiative. 
The EU also increased its support to transport networks
of regional importance with an additional EUR 10.5 million to the NIF. The
Eastern Partnership Transport network, linking Eastern neighbours to the EU’s
TEN-T (Trans-European Transport) network was endorsed by Ministers of EU Member
States and EaP countries in October 2013.
The EU has also been very active in the field of energy
and environment. In order to increase energy efficiency and use of
renewable energy sources, the EU provided technical assistance (EUR 5 million)
to the Covenant of Mayors' secretariat in Kiev and Tbilisi and supported pilot
projects (EUR 12 million) in the signatory cities in the region to help them
implement their ‘Sustainable Energy Action Plans’ developed with the assistance
of the Covenant of Mayors secretariat.  The EU also launched a new programme
aimed to support countries with coastlines on the Black Sea to protect their
common marine environment. 
Inter–regional dimension 
To
complement bilateral assistance, a specific type of institution building
support is provided to Southern and Eastern partners, namely through ‘Technical
Assistance and Information Exchange Instrument’ (TAIEX) and the ‘Support
for Improvement in Governance and Management’ (SIGMA). 
TAIEX
aims to foster political and economic cooperation in a number of areas,
primarily approximation, application and enforcement of EU legislation through
short-term expertise, workshops and study-visits. 
SIGMA
is a joint EU-OECD initiative and assists partner countries in their governance
reform process, by providing European expertise in specific fields such as PFM
including Audit and Public Procurement and Civil Service Reform. 
Moreover,
the 2012-2014 Regional Communication programme has contributed to a
greater understanding of EU policies and showcased cooperation activities
carried out in the Neighbourhood area. 
Regarding
support to higher education in the ENP region, for the third consecutive
year, the Erasmus Mundus programme was allocated extra funding for Southern Mediterranean and Eastern Partnership countries. Projects involving universities
from these regions were selected under the Tempus programme for supporting
institutional cooperation between the EU and neighbouring countries to
modernise their higher education systems. Ministerial meetings, seminars,
policy dialogue meetings and information sessions have also been held with
stakeholders from these regions.
All
EaP countries in the East and Tunisia in the ENP south have joined the pilot
extension of the eTwinning action ("eTwinning Plus") which allows for
virtual cooperation between schools and teachers.
In
the area of research and innovation, around 200 contracts were signed by
the end of 2013 with the Mediterranean partner countries, with an EU
contribution of over EUR 60 million. In the same period, the EU contribution to
the participation of research organizations from the Eastern Partnership
countries exceeded EUR 40 million. Three Neighbourhood countries requested
association with Horizon 2020, the new EU Research and innovation Programme: Israel, Moldova and Armenia. Ukraine, which also expressed interest in association, has already a
Science and Technology Agreement in place which is planned for renewal in 2014.
Russia
is the most active international cooperation partner in Research and
Innovation, with Russian participants involved in over 300 grant agreements
under FP7, receiving around EUR 70 million of EU funding. The EU-Russia Year of
Science 2014 was launched in November 2013 with high level attendance by EC and
Russian authorities, scientists and stakeholders.
Cross
Border Cooperation (CBC)
During 2013 all 13 CBC programmes established along the
EU’s external borders in the East and the South finalised the contracting of
all the projects selected for funding. In total, for the duration of the seven
year programme, over 900 projects were contracted with a total value of
approximately EUR 950 million. 127 projects have already been finalised, and
over 800 are still being implemented. The projects are implemented in a diverse
range of fields including environmental protection, tourism, education and
culture.  
Case studies 
Libya:
supporting Civil Society 
The programme ‘Support to
civil society in Libya’ trained 60 constitutional 'ambassadors', out of which
27 % are women, covering the 60 basic constituencies on which the elections of
the Constitutional Drafting Assembly (CDA) will be based. The training aimed to
develop the participants’ skills to run a national constitutional awareness
campaign. Educational material was developed and is being used by the
'ambassadors' during the conferences and workshops (20 so far) organised across
  Libya to stimulate debate and awareness of the constitutional process, which
is vital for the transition to democracy. The campaign will be intensified in
the run up to the elections, and it is intended to submit a set of
recommendations to the CDA, once it is elected, that were gathered during the
conferences and workshops. The programme also supported the development of a
National Public Opinion Survey on constitutional issues, which gained
insights into the views and feelings of citizens regarding the process of
developing the new constitution.
Syria: providing school education for refugee children in need
Through
EU support, at least 780 000 children in Syria, Jordan and Lebanon, many in refugee camps or internally displaced, have been receiving school
education, that is adapted to the Syrian curriculum so that they can continue
their schooling. Around 10 000 teachers have been trained in teaching methods
or psycho-social support in Syria, Jordan and Lebanon to help them teach and
support the affected children more effectively. 
In
addition, a special focus on people with specific vulnerabilities when exposed
to conflict and violence, such as women, children, the elderly, migrants or
persons with disabilities is helping 300 000 children and women with
protection, specialised psycho-social and gender-based violence support.
Southern Neighbourhood:
preparing students to respond to natural and man-made Disasters
125
000 copies of a CD ROM- based computer game that aims to develop preventative
techniques through awareness-raising amongst young people have been distributed
to schools by the Lebanese Civil Defence Organisation as part of the Euromed
Programme on Prevention, Preparedness and Response to Natural and Man-Made
Disasters. The educational game was chosen due to its interactive nature. Its
aim is to learn to manage the various dangers that threaten all citizens in
their everyday lives and how to respond to accidents that can happen in the
event of earthquakes and fires. The game can also be downloaded free-of-charge
online. More than 300 000 children have already benefited from this project.
Armenia:
promoting Equal Rights and Opportunities
The
EU, UNDP and the government of Armenia have united their efforts to promote
gender equality through a three-year ‘Women in Local Democracy’ project. 
The project has supported the participation of women from urban and rural
communities in the local electoral process and has helped to reduce
gender-specific constraints that women face in social and economic
decision-making processes in Armenia. Supporting the development of a stronger
civil society and media able to engage in gender and democratic governance
issues, as well as to promote a non-stereotyped portrayal of women and men has
been one of the main aims of the project.
Eastern
Neighbourhood: enhancing Integrated Border Management
The
Integrated Border Management Flagship Initiative in the Eastern partner
countries has helped to improve cross border movement of people and goods and
at the same time increased security and reduced smuggling and human trafficking
on the borders between the Eastern Partnership countries. So far, 10 projects
have been financed to boost regional integration and connectivity as well as
contribute to the socioeconomic development on both sides of the border. Additional
investments have been mobilised via the NIF and European Financial
Institutions. For example, a NIF grant, blended together with loans from the
European Investment Bank (EIB) and the European Bank for Reconstruction and
Development (EBRD), is being used to modernise border crossing points between
the Republic of Armenia and Georgia at Bagratashen, Bavra and Gogavan.
Monitoring
In 2013, results-oriented monitoring (ROM)
missions were implemented in all ENPI countries, except Syria. ROM coverage reached 43 % of all ongoing projects and programmes and 32 %
of the budget. In all, 489 ongoing
interventions (264 national, 60 regional, 161 sub-regional and four budget
support) were reviewed and 37 assessed ex-post. The total budget in the
monitored interventions was over EUR 1.5 billion. 
National projects scored, in average, 2.87.
About 78 % of the Neighbourhood portfolios scored ‘very good’ (category I) or
‘good’ (category II). This was 5 % down from 2012 and reflected a growing share
of projects ‘performing with problems’ (category III) (18.5 %) while reducing
the share of
‘non-performing projects’ (category V) at 3.8 %.  Hence, the overall
performance of the regional portfolio also decreased to 2.83 compared to 2.95
in 2012.  
Relevance and impact scored high in more than
80 % of the national and regional projects, and potential sustainability was as
at least ’good’ for about 70 %. However, substantial challenges remain in
efficiency. About 31.5 % of all ENPI national and 37 % of regional projects
need to improve their performance in terms of inputs used, work with partners
and implementation of activities. In addition, effectiveness is problematic in
35 % of national and 30 % of regional interventions.  
                                  
The majority of interventions were in the social infrastructure
and services sectors, where 74.86 % of national and 80.25 % of regional
portfolios showed good performance. Projects
implemented in the government and civil society sub sectors contributed
significantly to good overall sector performance. Projects in the economic
infrastructure and services, and production sectors followed closely behind.

Perspectives
The EU remains committed to
building partnerships with each of its neighbours reflecting their respective
needs, capacities and reform objectives. The partners' reform paths and
ambitions as regards their relations with the EU, and the challenges individual
countries face, are becoming more and more diverse. This will require relations
between the EU and its partners to become more differentiated and thereby
respond better to the expectations and needs of each partner. 
The ENP, with its policy
instruments, will continue to enable the EU to respond to this challenge while
at the same time providing a common framework for relations with its
neighbours. The EU's funds for the Neighbourhood under the new MFF 2014-2020
provided under the ENI will remain on a broadly similar level as for the
previous seven-year period (2007-2013).
In terms of future assistance, EU assistance to the
Southern Neighbourhood will focus mainly on governance and socioeconomic
development including further support to consolidating transition processes.
Support to civil society will remain an essential element. The EU will continue
supporting Palestine and the Palestinian people and will maintain
cooperation with Israel through twinning. 
In Libya and Syria, EU action will
also depend on the situation on the ground. The EU will keep providing support
to the population affected by the Syrian crisis, both inside Syria and in the neighbouring countries.
Regional South cooperation will support human rights,
democracy, good governance and inclusive and sustainable growth. Support
to private sector, civil society and local and regional authorities
will contribute to creating a vibrant regional dynamic to support democratic
processes. 
In the Eastern Neighbourhood, the EaP will remain a major
framework of cooperation. EU assistance will centrally support implementation
of AA/ DCFTAs and partners' agendas of convergence with EU norms. Cooperation will
further address governance, agriculture/ rural development, and private sector development,
for example in Armenia, Georgia and Moldova. Support to Confidence Building Measures in Transnistria will be maintained. In
  Ukraine, the EU remains committed to support economic
and financial stabilisation of the country. 
Regional East cooperation will support democracy
building, good governance, poverty reduction and sustainable development. The
EU will strengthen the role, structures and organisation of civil society and
local authorities, for example in Belarus, Azerbaijan and Russia, and will also reinforce support to migration and border management issues.

2.1.2.             
Middle East

Introduction 
MIDDLE
EAST PEACE PROCESS (MEPP)
The EU continued its full support to the MEPP in 2013. EU
diplomatic activities within the Quartet, with the Arab League and other
partners re-enforced the US efforts leading to the resumption of negotiations
in July.  The EU supported the US MEPP initiative in the UNSC in April,
welcomed the resumption of peace talks in its July FAC Council Conclusions and
co-signed the September Quartet statement of support to the parties' commitment
to reach a permanent status agreement within nine months. The December FAC sent
a strong signal of EU readiness to contribute substantially to post-conflict
arrangements and offered an unprecedented package of European political,
economic and security support to both parties in the context of the achievement
of a final status agreement.  
In line with its commitment to a two-state solution, the EU
pursued its financial and technical assistance to Palestinian state-building
efforts, private sector development and humanitarian aid,
while EUPOL
COPPS, the EU Police Mission in the Palestinian Territories, helped improve the Palestinian security and justice sectors. High
Representative Ashton hosted the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee (AHLC) in April and
participated in the September meeting. The
EU Partnership for Peace programme continued to support civil society initiatives towards
peace, tolerance and non-violence.
The EU warned against acts that undermine the negotiations and threaten
the viability of a two-state solution, in particular the expansion of Israeli
settlements in the occupied Palestinian land, including in East Jerusalem,
which were the subject of several High Representative statements. In line with
EU non-recognition of Israel's sovereignty over occupied territories, the
Commission issued Guidelines in July to ensure that Israeli entities and their
activities in these territories will not benefit from EU grants, prizes and
financial instruments. The EU also expressed grave
concern regarding incitement and incidents of violence in the occupied
territory. 
Fully recognising Israel’s legitimate security needs and taking into consideration the Gaza ceasefire agreement of
November 2012, the EU reiterated its appeal for an end to the Gaza Strip
blockade while continuing to provide humanitarian aid. There was no
implementation of the 2011 reconciliation agreement between Fatah and Hamas.
The EU maintained the European Union Border Assistance Management (EUBAM)
Rafah mission's preparedness to redeploy to the Rafah Crossing Point once
political and security conditions allow.
In Palestine[47], the
EU continued its state- and capacity-building support to the Palestinian
Authority through the 'Mécanisme Palestino-Européen de Gestion de l’Aide Socioeconomique'
(PEGASE). A special report by the European Court of Auditors published in
December 2013 concluded that, despite the difficult circumstances, the EU was
successful in implementing direct financial support through PEGASE while noting
reservations as to its sustainability. Alongside direct financial support to
the Palestinian Authority, the EU continued to provide support to the General
Fund of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine
Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), which provides essential health, education
and social protection to Palestinian refugees in its five fields of operation.
Additional support was mobilised to UNRWA in view of the crisis in Syria.   In line with the EU-PA Action Plan adopted in April 2013, the third
component of bilateral cooperation with Palestine consisted of development
projects in the focus sectors of governance, private sector development and
water and land management.  Through its East Jerusalem programme the EU also
continued to provide support to the Palestinian population with a view to
ensuring their access to services in East Jerusalem.  
The political environment remained very challenging throughout
2013 in Iraq. Internal sectarian tensions, exacerbated by the conflict
in neighbouring Syria, continued to undermine stability and the country
experienced the worst year of sectarian killings since 2008. The Government
response included a sharp increase in the use of the death penalty, over which
the EU regularly voiced its concerns. Highly divisive positions amongst the
country’s political leaders represented a significant burden to effective
administrative activity. The High Representative visited Iraq in June to promote bilateral cooperation and to discuss ways of addressing the root
causes of the violence. 
Bilateral relations
progressed substantially with the operational start of implementing the EU-Iraq Partnership and Cooperation
Agreement signed in 2012 and currently under provisional application. The first
technical expert-level meetings were successfully held and covered energy,
trade, democracy, human rights and related policies, followed by a senior
officials' meeting in November. 
The EU continued its bilateral support with a strong focus on
technical assistance and capacity building to help Iraq realise its full
economic potential.
Yemen lived
through a crucial year for its political transition. The implementation
of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) brokered agreement, an agreement to which
the EU had made substantial efforts to ensure its success, moved forward with
the launch of a National Dialogue Conference (NDC). According to the original
timeline the NDC should have concluded its works with the production of
different sets of recommendations for the future national constitution by 18
September 2013, however at the end of the year the work was still continuing.
The NDC finally got to a conclusion on 25 January 2014. Drafting of a new
Constitution and holding of a Constitutional referendum and general elections
will be the next steps.    
Aid effectiveness and donor
coordination        
The
Commission was instrumental in setting up and funding multi-donor trust funds
in Iraq. This multilateral approach has allowed the priorities of the Iraqi
authorities to be taken into account alongside those of the EU. EU cooperation
is therefore moving from joint assistance with UN agencies to more direct
cooperation targeting the development of sector policies and strategies. This
is a key factor in developing a culture that targets national interest via
national policies and will also be the opportunity to improve donor
coordination and division of labour.
Donor
coordination advanced at the donor conference on Yemen in Riyadh in September
2012, where USD 7.8 billion worth of pledges for the country’s development were
set aside. In 2013, the G10 group composed of Ambassadors from the five
countries that are permanent members of the UNSC (P5), the EU and the four Gulf
countries present in Yemen continued to coordinate and to monitor Yemen’s transition process, and also started to disburse some of the pledges made in Riyadh. The end of the NDC should enhance donors’ confidence in the direction of the
transition and bring an even greater surge in support for urgent transition needs.
One of the areas with most stringent needs is PFM, given the looming fiscal
crisis Yemen faces; this was at the same time an area that saw excellent donor
coordination in 2013, with the government and donors agreeing on an updated
Action Plan for PFM reform.
Working towards the MDGs      
Iraq
has made progress enrolling children in primary education. The percentage of
enrolment is now 98.1%. However, net enrolment ratio in secondary education is
still low at 48.6 %. Iraq faces considerable challenges in its efforts to meet
the 2015 MDGs, particularly in gender equality (27% of seats are held by women
in the national parliament) and access to improved water sources (at 70.6%).
The EU is addressing these challenges by improving gender equality and water management
services as well as enhancing access to quality secondary education.[48]
Most
MDG indicators have worsened in the aftermath of the 2011 crisis in Yemen: poverty and food insecurity have affected half the population and many children
remain out of school. The EU addresses these challenges by improving basic
services in social protection and health (including an important focus on
nutrition), and by launching economic development programmes, primarily
targeting youth, the unemployed and women.       
Implementation and results: 
In
2013 two programmes for the benefit of Iraq have been adopted: Good Governance
and Rule of Law (EUR 22 million) and Education and Labour Market (EUR 18.2
million). Their implementation should be conducted over a period of
approximately four years.
The
year 2013 saw the most significant EU support to Yemen since bilateral
cooperation started. EUR 52 million was allocated to projects increasing
resilience both in terms of the rural population and of the government’s basic
service distribution systems, such as social protection and health. These
allocations were significantly increased due to the commitments taken at the Riyadh donor conference in 2012 to support Yemen’s transition process.
Due
to the ongoing dispute over the country’s nuclear programme the EU’s mandate
for cooperation with Iran is limited. Implementation of projects by local or
European CSOs is hampered by administrative obstacles such as difficulties in
issuing visas and carrying out international bank transfers. 
Case
study
 Support to PFM reforms in Yemen For the past three decades, the fiscal position of Yemen has not been sustainable and, despite its oil revenue, the country has remained constantly in need of external financial support. In addition, the political crisis following the 2011 revolution has revealed the weakness of the PFM system and the timidity of past reforms has failed to contain on-going fiscal challenges. While the international community has put in place the Transitional Programme for Stabilisation and Development 2012-2014, it appears that the PFM mechanisms for executing the programme either do not exist or are highly inefficient. In practice, the Government does not have a PFM system that will allow it to swiftly implement emergency measures to strategically reinforce the economy or to provide support to impoverished provinces. In Yemen, PFM reforms have to be geared both towards urgent fiscal recovery and towards longer-term consolidation. In 2013 the EU has provided assistance to the Government of Yemen to define a short term action plan to solve ‘urgent issues’ and to focus on ‘quick wins’. Donors consider that success of this action plan is essential to ensure the country's stability and quickly improve PFM processes before supporting deeper PFM reforms. This action plan has now been endorsed by the Government of Yemen and donors. It will provide a comprehensive framework for all stakeholders during the transition period.   
Monitoring
Due
to the tense security situation in Iraq, the EU is not in a position to carry
out regular monitoring of projects. Some ongoing projects are reviewed by
independent experts. Additional monitoring actions are carried out in the form
of monthly reports, steering committees and monitoring missions. 
While
the situation is similar in Yemen, an evaluation of EU-Yemen cooperation
between 2002-2012 was launched in early 2013 and its results are expected in
early 2014 and will most likely guide the direction of Yemen programmes after 2015.
Perspectives
EU support in the areas of governance, democracy and the
rule of law, and education remains crucial for Iraq. In 2013, the EU continued
the preparation of the 2014-2020 bilateral development cooperation with Iraq. In line with the ‘Agenda for Change’, the EU has taken significant action to align
future development cooperation programming to Iraq’s National Development Plan
2013-2017.
Yemen is undergoing a mostly
successful transition process with a unique National Dialogue shaping the
future state and political scene. At the same time, it is still facing enormous
challenges in terms of security and its socioeconomic situation, which need to
be tackled through resolute and imminent reform. 
Within
the wider context of the Arab Spring, and further to the election of President
Rohani in June 2013, the country context seems to be becoming more conducive to
civil society work in Iran. The potential impact of the agreement recently
reached on a Joint Plan of Action with regard to the nuclear issue will also
have to be monitored.

2.2.      Africa and
all African, Caribbean and Pacific states (ACP) programmes 


2.2.1.             
Africa-EU Strategic Partnership

In 2007, the EU and Africa adopted a new strategic framework for their relations, the Joint Africa-EU Strategy
(JAES), which has been implemented by means of jointly identified priorities
and actions. The JAES is based on common values aiming to promote shared
interests and to tackle common challenges.  The Joint Strategy has until now
focused on eight key areas of cooperation: peace and security; democratic
governance and Human Rights; trade, regional integration and infrastructure;
Millennium Development Goals; energy; climate change and environment;
migration, mobility and employment; science, information society and space.
The fourth Africa-EU Summit
taking place in Brussels on 2-3 April 2014 will be dedicated to the theme
“Investing in People, Prosperity and Peace”.  It will take stock of tangible
results achieved so far in the context of the JAES and provide new impetus to
the partnership for the years to come.  An EU-Africa Business Forum to be held
at the eve of the Summit will gather business representatives with a view to
intensify economic and investment ties between both continents. More
information can be found on the JAES website[49].
Under the African Peace
Facility (APF), the key instrument for implementing the Africa-EU Partnership
on Peace and Security, more than EUR 1.2 billion of assistance has so far been
channelled. The APF combines short-term funding for crisis response with a
longer-term support of institutional capacity building. In 2013, considerable
support was provided to the African-led peace support operations AMISOM in Somalia, MICOPAX in the Central African Republic and AFISMA in Mali. Furthermore, capacity building
programmes are being implemented to support the implementation of the African
Peace and Security Architecture (APSA)[50]
at the continental and regional level. Through the Early Response Mechanism
(ERM), financial support has been provided to seven actions in 2013 namely focused
on mediation and prevention activities but also on Human Rights and
post-conflict efforts.  A comprehensive external
evaluation of the APF was also completed in 2013 and will inform the next
multi-annual programming of the APF[51].
Africa-EU
cooperation within the framework of the JAES has steadily gained momentum and
delivered concrete results at political and operational levels. For instance,
in 2013 the JAES-Support Mechanism, allowed for significant progress for the
‘Copernicus’ (previously known as the ‘Global Monitoring for Environment and
Security (GMES)) programme in Africa which resulted in three thematic Action
Plans expected to be adopted at the  fourth Africa-EU Summit. 
The
10th AU-EU (African Union- European Union) Human Rights Dialogue in Brussels on
20 November 2013, preceded by an AU-EU civil society seminar, focused on
elections, the International Criminal Court (ICC), rights of migrants, people
with disabilities and human rights concerns in Europe and Africa. Under the
JAES Support Mechanism, seminars on Women and Children in Armed Conflict, Peace
and Security, as well as on sexual violence were organised. 
The
African Higher Education Harmonisation and Tuning pilot initiative, launched in
the framework of the Joint Africa-EU Strategy, was successfully concluded in
2013. Sixty universities from across the continent are now publishing results
in scientific journals and disseminating their research in specialised press at
continental and international level. Given the success of the pilot initiative
both at grassroots and at policy level, preparations are being made for wider
scale initiatives. An EU-Africa Summit side event on the harmonisation of
higher education and portability of qualifications will take place in March
2014. Interest in both the Erasmus Mundus and the Intra-ACP Mobility Programme
increased during 2013. New activities for Maritime Security and Counter-Piracy
focus on the Eastern Africa and Western Indian Ocean region. More information
on key achievements of the JAES can be found on the website
of the Africa-EU Partnership. 
Moreover,
in 2013 preparations have started for a new Pan-African
Programme, which will provide dedicated support to the Strategic
Partnership. It will be funded under the EU’s Development Cooperation
Instrument with a financial envelope of € 845 million for the period 2014-2020.
More information can be found on the
APF website.

2.2.2.             
Sub-Saharan Africa

Introduction 
Throughout
2013, the EU continued to focus a reinforced partnership with Africa on three
pillars: peace, prosperity, and the common challenges that we face together.
The EU has drawn together all the elements of policy in the Sahel and
the Horn of Africa regions into strategies that provide a comprehensive
approach to achieving solutions. Preparation for further strategies covering
other areas and challenges was stepped up in 2013. Development and the fight
against poverty, as well as peace, security, stability, good governance, human
rights and the rule of law continued to be at the centre of EU action. 
The
implementation of the EU Strategy for Security and Development in the Sahel continued throughout 2013, with a review demonstrating solid progress and
delivery in all the four main strands: political, development, security, and
countering violent extremism. In that context, efforts were made to mobilize
EUR 5 billion for the Sahel region including Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali,
Mauritania, Niger and the West African regional programme for the coming seven
years (2014-2020).
Since
the beginning of the political and security crisis in Mali, the EU has continuously supported Mali's territorial integrity, its return to
constitutional order and a political settlement of the crisis through dialogue.
In February 2013, following the adoption of a political roadmap, the EU resumed
its political dialogue with the interim administration and provided substantial
support to the transition process towards full restoration of constitutional
normality, peace and order and the rule of law. Successful and transparent
presidential and legislative elections marked a decisive turning point in 2013.
The EU also gradually resumed its development cooperation once the political
roadmap was adopted. On 15 May 2013, more than EUR 3.25 billion was pledged
during the Brussels high level donors' conference for Mali with the EU alone
announcing EUR 1.28 billion including budget support. By the end of 2013 EUR
521.3 million, equivalent to 99.7% of the pledges announced by the Commission,
were committed and EUR 238 million had been paid. The Commission is also fully
engaged in the international follow-up mechanism, in order to guarantee the
best effectiveness and transparency possible in the disbursement of the fund. 
In
2013, the EU also continued to actively implement its Strategic Framework for
the Horn of Africa, in further pursuit of a comprehensive approach to
its actions in the region. Political, finacial and security support was
provided to Somalia and the African Union for the African Union Mission in
Somalia (AMISOM). The EU took a lead role in supporting the development of a
Somali Reconstruction Plan (a ‘Compact’) for 2014-2016, in the framework of the
New Deal agreement for fragile countries, to assist the establishment of peace
and the building of Somali state institutions. In September, the EU and Somalia co-hosted a high level conference at which the international community endorsed the
Somali Compact and pledged EUR 1.8 billion in support of its implementation.
In
2013, the EU increased its attention on the continuously deteriorating
security, political and humanitarian situation in the Central African Republic (CAR) where the physical protection of civilians and
the defence of human rights became a major challenge. The EU strongly supported
the regional and international efforts to find a political resolution to the
crisis and to restore security, including through African Peace Facility (APF)[52]
support to African forces (MICOPAX – the Mission for the Consolidation of Peace
in Central African Republic followed by MISCA – African-led International
Support Mission to the Central African Republic). In 2013, the European
Commission and EU Member States also provided over EUR 76 million (compared to
EUR 20 million in 2012) in humanitarian assistance to CAR. 
The
EU continued to contribute to pursue durable peace and security in the Great Lakes region, supporting international efforts to bring stability, to address
the root causes of conflict, to fight poverty and promote economic development.
During 2013 the EU began preparations to preserve and maintain the achievements
of two CSDP missions (EUSEC RD Congo and EUPOL RD Congo) on Security Sector
Reform (SSR) with a long-term package of activities, conducted in partnership
with the DRC authorities, using available EU instruments and resources.
The
EU continued firmly to support regional integration as a fundamental element to
ensure African ownership and leadership in confronting African challenges, to
enhance competitiveness, and to promote peace, development and good governance
throughout the continent.
Aid
effectiveness and donor coordination        
The EU’s aid effectiveness
initiatives on joint programming, results, mutual accountability and
transparency all have their impact on Sub-Saharan Africa.  Joint Programming,
for instance, has become more prevalent.  In Sub-Saharan Africa, twenty-one
countries are expected to engage in the Joint Programming process during the
2014-20 programming period.  These include several countries in fragile
situations such as Burundi, Chad, Mali, South Sudan and Togo.  The EU and Member States will base their interventions on the development
plans of partner countries, including synchronising their programming with
those of national cycles.  They will respond jointly and ensure an efficient
division of work between the parties.
Donor
coordination was pursued in Sub-Saharan Africa with EU Member States and key
development partners.  Draft joint programming documents were prepared in a
number of countries including Chad, Ghana, Rwanda and Togo.  Coordination groups and exchanges were pursued across the region.  In Togo, for example, a donors’ group was established and has regular exchanges on PFM
and Budget Support issues. It includes the EU, EU Member States, the World
Bank, the International Monetary Fund, United Nations Development Programme and
the African Development Bank. Through this group, actions can be coordinated to
ensure better complementarities within the donor community and with the
Togolese government.  While the group’s work could be further extended it
already allows for regular discussions and follow-up such as six-monthly
reviews on the government's PFM reform programme.
In
Eastern Africa, the EU has been the lead donor for Somalia since the New
Deal process was launched at the end of 2012. On 16 September 2013 the EU
hosted the Somalia Brussels Conference where the Somali Compact was endorsed.
With this New Deal Compact, the international community and Somali government,
civil society and regions have committed themselves to focus on a limited
number of top priorities over the coming three years (2014-2016). The Compact,
the result of a nationally-owned process, identifies not only priority actions
in the area of inclusive politics, security, justice, economic foundations and
revenue and services, but it also sets out mutual partnership commitments for
more effective international assistance. These principles will guide all
international assistance provided to Somalia and will shape the design of aid
operations. The 11th EDF for Somalia is entirely structured around the
priorities set-out in the Compact.
Research
and innovation
In
the context of the Joint Africa-EU Strategy work has continued on the
implementation of the second action plan with a focus on capacity building in
the area of science and technology. By 2013 some 300 contracts had been signed
with Sub-Saharan Africa countries with an EU contribution of well over EUR 100
million.
The
first initiative of European and African countries to jointly fund
collaborative research projects was agreed in the framework of the FP7
international cooperation ERANET action (ERAfrica). The joint call was launched
in January 2013 with a budget of EUR 11 million and offered research funding in
the areas of renewable energy, interfacing challenges and idea driven research.
At
its meeting in November 2013, the EU-Africa High Level Policy Dialogue selected
food and nutrition as a priority topic for further future cooperation.
Working towards the MDGs      
Africa
is the second fastest growing region in the world and yet it struggles to
achieve the first goal of the MDGs: halving the rate of extreme poverty by
2015. However, in 2012, 15 out of 20 countries that progressed the most in
terms of MDGs were from Africa and 30 sub-Saharan African countries have
experienced an accelerated progress towards the achievement of MDGs over the
last three years. Specifically, Burkina Faso, Mozambique and Namibia lead the way in faster progress for 16 of the 22 indicators
regarding poverty reduction. Substantial advances were made as well in the
field of health, notably halting the spread of HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and
malaria, and the improvement of maternal health. Sub-Saharan Africa has also
strived hard to provide wider access to primary education for children with an
increase from 60% to 77% between 2000 and 2011. Further efforts should now
concentrate on strengthening institutions in order to build up further progress
towards the goals. Indeed, stronger, more development-oriented and politically
stable countries tend to show better results in attaining the MDGs.  
MDGs
in Ethiopia 
Ethiopia is
making progress in reducing food insecurity (MDG 1c). One major example is Ethiopia’s Productive Safety Net Programme (PSNP). Annually, since 2005, the PSNP has
provided predictable assistance (via cash or food) to about 7.5 million
vulnerable people in return for participation in public works. For
participating households this has meant that their average number of months when
they experienced food security increased from 8.4 months in 2006 to 10.1 months
in 2012. It also led to a 62 % reduction in distress sales allowing
beneficiaries to maintain their assets in crisis times, thereby giving them a
better chance to improve their livelihoods afterwards. Moreover, the PSNP has
prevented the re-emergence of large-scale famines in Ethiopia, including during
the 2011 drought in the Horn of Africa, while improving overall nutritional
intake for beneficiaries. As a multi-donor programme it is financed by ten
development partners, including the EU. Over the past five years, the EU
allocated EUR 125 million to the programme disbursing EUR 31.5 million in 2013.
MDGs
in Rwanda 
The EU supported the national poverty
reduction and economic growth strategy to reinforce positive trends in terms of
MDGs by providing a total of EUR 53.75 million in 2013 through sectorial budget
support programmes in the field of social protection and agriculture as well as
general budget support. The country is on track to achieve three MDGs:
universal primary education, promoting gender equality; and reducing child
mortality. Significant progress has also been made in eradicating poverty and
improving maternal health.
The combination of improved infrastructure
and agricultural productivity supported by the EU has contributed to a fall in
rural poverty rates in Rwanda: in the last five years rural poverty fell
from 61.9% to 48.7% and extreme rural poverty fell from 39.5 % to 26.4 %. In
terms of security progress includes the scaling up of the flagship programme
‘Vision 2020 Umurenge’ Programme, which targets poor households with financial
and social development assistance, and granted direct support (cash transfers)
to 100 % of eligible households.
Update and overview of the
EU Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Initiative
Launched in 2010, the EU’s
MDG Initiative aims to foster faster progress on the most off-track MDGs in ACP
countries. EUR one billion of funds from the 10th European Development Fund
(EDF) have been committed through 69 projects being implemented by
non-governmental organisations, member state agencies and international
organisations in 46 countries of Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific.
The last 12 projects of the
MDG Initiative were signed during 2013. One of these new actions has started in
 Malawi and will contribute to national efforts to achieve the MDGs for
sustainable water supply and environmental sanitation, specifically in 15
districts and seven cities of Malawi. The contribution of the MDG Initiative
will reach EUR 24 million in three years. Approximately 500 water points will
be constructed or rehabilitated and 50 health centres will receive an
appropriate piped water supply system, among many other activities on
infrastructure, capacity building, education and communication. The end
beneficiary of this programme will be the poor urban and rural population of Malawi, in particular women who are in charge of the household water supply, children going
to school, and patients of health centres. The line ministries (water, health,
rural development and education) and local authorities will be also the
beneficiaries of capacity building initiatives. 
Another action has started
in Guinea-Bissau aiming at sustaining improved access to basic, quality
healthcare for pregnant women and children under five years old in Biombo,
Cacheu, Oio and Farim. The MDG Initiative contribution is EUR eight million and
the implementation is in partnership with local institutions, UNICEF and
several NGOs.
Implementation and results: 
The 10th EDF was fully
committed in 2013
In 2013, the Commission
committed EUR 4.78 billion under the EDF surpassing the target that had been
fixed for the year by 14 %. For Sub-Saharan Africa, the target was also
exceeded (by 11 %) and a total of EUR 3.95 million was committed. Significant
efforts by Commission services to commit as much as possible before the final
date for commitments under the 10th EDF on 31 December 2013 made it possible to
achieve these results. With regard to payments, the Commission also surpassed
targets for 2013, paying over EUR three billion under the EDF and over EUR 2.5
billion in Sub-Saharan Africa alone. By the end of 2013, all the funds
allocated for the 10th EDF had been committed (a total of EUR 21.2 billion) and
the Commission had already managed to disburse almost 50 % of these
commitments. 
Establishing
the legal basis for the new programming period 2014-2020
Each
EDF is established by EU Member States, outside the EU Budget, on the basis of
an ‘Internal Agreement’. The
11th EDF Internal Agreement was signed by Member States in June 2013. It includes the overall
amount of the 11th EDF (EUR
30 506
million), the breakdown of funds by broad financial envelopes (resources for
cooperation with ACP countries, resources for cooperation with Overseas
Countries and Territories, resources to be managed by the EIB, support
expenditure for implementation of the EDF by the Commission etc.), as well as
Member States’ contributions and voting rights. It has to be ratified by all
Member States before it can enter into force. 
The
11th EDF Internal Agreement entails only minor modifications compared to the
10th EDF; the main areas of change were to further align Member States'
contributions keys under the EDF with the keys used for the EU budget and to
insert changes foreseen by the second revision of the Cotonou agreement[53] (creation of regional
B-envelopes for unforeseen needs and a new shock absorbing scheme). The Cotonou agreement was
also updated through the insertion of a new financial protocol for the
multiannual financial framework 2014-2020 (annex Ic), adopted in June 2013 by
the ACP-EU Joint Council of Ministers. 
Detailed
provisions on programming and implementation of development cooperation as well
as monitoring, reporting and evaluation requirements are defined in the
Implementation Regulation. The Commission proposal for the 11th EDF
Implementation Regulation was adopted by the College of Commissioners in June
2013 and Council negotiations should be finalized early 2014. The EDF
Implementation Regulation is aligned as much as possible with development
cooperation instruments financed under the Budget, to simplify and harmonize
the procedures of EU development cooperation, while preserving compliance with
the Cotonou Agreement. 
In
addition, the financial rules for the 11th EDF are set in the Financial
Regulation, for which Council negotiations were concluded in January 2014. The
11th EDF Financial Regulation is also aligned to the maximum extent possible
with the Financial Regulation of the General Budget. As there will be a delay until the entry into
force of the 11th EDF, due to the ratification process, transitional measures
(‘Bridging Facility’) were set up to cover the period between January 2014 and
the entry into force of the new EDF in order to avoid a hiatus in commitments.
As the funds available under the ‘Bridging Facility’ will be limited, they will
be used for responses to emergencies and for priority actions that cannot be
postponed until the 11th EDF comes into force.
Eastern and Southern Africa
and the Indian Ocean
The final year of the 10th
EDF and the programming exercise for the multi-annual financial framework
2014-2020 shaped the bilateral and regional cooperation activities of the EU
with Eastern and Southern African and Indian Ocean countries (ESA-IO) that
amounted to more than EUR 1.5 billion of new committed operations in 2013. In
total, over EUR 800 million were disbursed to fund projects in the region. 
EU bilateral cooperation
with countries in the ESA-IO region helped to improve the lives of millions of
people. Budget Support programmes in the region have a particular emphasis on
supporting the implementation of existing national poverty reduction strategies
and PFM reforms. EU development aid programmes also focus on specific national
sector reforms that are expected to contribute positively to national
‘pro-poor’ economic growth in areas such as agriculture, education, good
governance and energy.
In particular, the EU put in
place a number of budget support programmes in 2013 in line with the new Budget
Support Guidelines. Overall commitments amounted to EUR 190.2 million with
payments amounting to EUR 174.9 million in 2013. Payments were below the
maximum potential owing to the suspension of disbursements where grant
conditions were not being met. In a number of countries programmes were
interrupted due to issues surrounding the macroeconomic framework (Zambia and  Mozambique) and corruption (Malawi and Uganda). In the case
of Malawi the EU together with other resident development partners offered
technical assistance to H.E. President Joyce Banda. The economic situation of Malawi stabilised and a domino-effect of deterioration was prevented.
 
The Commission continued to
support reforms to improve PFM. This entailed the formal assessment of PFM
systems through the Public Expenditure and Accountability (PEFA) framework in
four countries (Tanzania, Botswana, Uganda and Zambia) and a continuous assessment of performance for all countries receiving
budget support. 
With respect to fragile
states, the Commission explored the possibilities of providing State Building
Contracts in Somalia and South Sudan. In Somalia this proved to be premature, but the work undertaken has provided a good basis for
framing support to key institutions such as the Central Bank and the Ministry
of Finance. In South Sudan the Commission moved ahead with plans to implement
budget support and adopted a EUR 85 million State Building Contract aimed at
covering the salaries of education and health workers on the Government's
payroll system for two fiscal years. Although the signature of a Financing
Agreement for a State Building Contract took place in December 2013, it was not
possible to make a first disbursement before the end of the year as the country
failed to meet the key prior action on exchange rate liberalisation (part of
the IMF programme) and the breakout of the politico-military conflict on 15
December 2013.
Case studies
A
Village Saving and Loans group meets in rural Kassala, East Sudan (Photo by Ivo
Freijsen)
Central
and Western Africa
EU bilateral cooperation
with countries in Western and Central Africa contributed to development in some
of the poorest parts of the world.  In 2013 over EUR 1.7 billion was committed
for new operations in West and Central Africa and overall payments amounted
over EUR 1.2 billion for regional and bilateral cooperation with the region. 
EU Budget Support programmes bolstered implementation of the national poverty
reduction strategies as well as PFM reforms and, along with other EU
programmes, helped support economic and social development. The year was
significant for making final financial commitments under the 10th EDF and for
taking forward exchanges with partners on the programming exercise for the
multi-annual financial framework 2014-2020.  
Under budget support
operations, the Commission put in place 14 new or significantly revised
programmes in 2013 and in doing so made full use of the range of budget support
instruments foreseen in the new Budget Support Guidelines. Overall new budget
support commitments in West and Central Africa amounted EUR 470.13 million with
payments amounting to EUR 469 million. In 2013, the Commission was not able to
make budget support disbursements to Ghana because macroeconomic conditions
were not met.  
The Commission continued to
support reforms in favour of improved PFM. In addition, formal assessment of
PFM systems through the PEFA framework was made in 10 countries. Assessment of
performance for all countries receiving budget support is made through specific
reporting set out in the Budget Support Guidelines. These reports provide
evidence of the important role played by the Commission in pursuing dialogue
and fostering reforms in this critical area. 
In the area of support to
fragile states, the Commission concluded two new State Building Contracts (SBC)
with Mali and Togo, and explored the possibilities of providing
one in Central African Republic. In Togo, the SBC was negotiated in
2012, but was finally implemented in 2013 due to the general macroeconomic
conditions.
In Mali, EU provided budget support to the government under a SBC, with a total amount of EUR
225 million and the aim to help ensure basic services and restore the rule of
law in the country. EU support has helped the Malian authorities to address the
complex challenges the country has been facing after the 2012 crisis. The
contribution of the EU enabled the deployment of an election observation
mission to support the successful presidential and legislative elections held
in 2013, and supported 900 000 people requiring food assistance.  In addition,
our work provides direct support to more than 70 % of health centres in
northern Mali and 2 500 hectares of irrigated plots in the area of
​​the Office du Niger were built in 2013, which will increase rice
production and create jobs for 2 000 small family farms.
Case studies 
Focus: EU cooperation with Central African Republic
Since the fall of President
Bozizé in March 2013, the Central African Republic has experienced a disturbing
period of armed conflict. Throughout the year, the EU continued to implement
aid projects in Bangui, Bouar and Bozum (in the northwest of the country) and
in Bamingui (in the northeast). Most EU experts stayed in the country. The
project "Poles of development" continues in Bouar and Bozum where the
NGO CIDR maintained teams until the arrival of the French Army in December
2013. In response to the needs driven by this current crisis, the on-going
programmes were restructured. EUR 23 million were mobilised from the 10th EDF
to strengthen several projects: justice and police services (EUR 5 million);
restructuring of the public finances (EUR 1,5 million); road maintenance and
drainage via a high intensity workforce (EUR 14,2 million); strengthening of
support to the administration (EUR 1 million) and strengthening of the
Technical Cooperation Facility (EUR 0,8 million).
Donor conference for Mali
The EU, in close cooperation
with Mali and France, has been able to gather the international community
around common objectives for the reconstruction of Mali. The Conference of 15
May mobilised 55 delegations willing to join forces to support the
reconstruction of Mali following the crisis of 2012. Pledges reached a total of
EUR 3.285 billion. In total, the EU itself committed EUR
523 million, which represents nearly 16 % of the total amount earmarked for Mali. The follow-up mechanism that was established has had a two-fold effect: it has
contributed to maintaining a high attention and momentum on Mali while putting pressure on the International Community to commit and disburse funding
in a timely manner following their pledges and on the Government of Mali to
launch and adopt reforms and take action in a timely manner. 
In Senegal, focal sectors included regional and commercial integration, sanitation as
well as general budget support under the 10th EDF with an overall allocation
exceeding EUR 340 million. The EU encouraged Senegal's efforts in environment
policy through a sector budget support programme. 2013 has been a turnaround
year for Senegal in terms of environment. The Environment and Natural Resources
Sector Policy Letter (LPSERN) was revised during 2013 with a better
consideration of the impact of climate change in other sectors (agriculture,
livestock, installation of extractive industries, infrastructures, and
urbanisation) and with new orientations such as the promotion of the green
economy and sustainable development. The Coastal Law has been improved and
submitted to the national Parliament.  In addition, the efficiency of public
actions in the fight against bushfires were enhanced. 
The
cooperation effort between the EU and Burkina Faso is one of the most
important in West Africa with an allocation of around EUR 700 million under the
10th EDF (2007-2013). The EU's financial contribution to Burkina Faso’s state budget allowed for substantial progress in social sectors. With the
EU’s general budget support of West African Francs (CFA)
225 billion, the budget of the Ministry of Health
increased by 30 % between 2007 and 2011.  During a similar timeframe, the rate
of assisted delivery and the gross school attendance rose from 65 % to 82 % and
from 67% to 78% respectively between 2008 and 2012. A further CFA 24 billion
were granted in order to address mother and child health issues. 
In Niger, more than EUR 100 million of budget support has been disbursed since 2008,
boosting the ability of the government to deliver social services. Between 2008
and 2012, primary school completion rates increased from 48 % to 55.8 %, and
child mortality was halved to 63 per 1000 in 2010. 600 kms of roads have been,
or are being, renovated opening up many regions of the country for the delivery
of healthcare and education as well as boosting trade. 
Case
studies
State-building
contract in Côte d’Ivoire 
The
EU-funded State-Building Contract (EUR 144 million) is a key component of the
general EU strategy towards the Côte d'Ivoire aimed at stabilising the
country and restoring public authority. The programme is supporting state
reconstruction in a post-conflict situation following more than a decade of
successive socio-political crisis. With the implementation of this programme a
range of tangible results have been achieved so far are including:
•           Health
districts are better staffed and have an increased budget to carry out their
daily work improving child and maternal health;
•           50
police stations have been rehabilitated and now comply with national standards.
The whole police chain of command has been trained on ethics and the police now
abide by a new citizen's charter;
•           The
justice sector policy has been adopted and is now under implementation ensuring
an independent and fair justice system.
Building
resilience to floods in Cameroon
In
 Cameroon, the 10th EDF has been targeting disaster prevention at Lake Nyos by installing degassing devices and eliminating flood risks through strengthening
the natural dam that holds the lake and supporting the resettlement of the
victims of a carbon dioxide eruption in the deeper layers of the lake. This
catastrophe killed more than 1 700 people, displaced more than 10 000 and
severely depleted the local livestock population in 1986. The building of the
dam will allow displaced people to resettle in their original environment. It
is based on the technique of jet grouting (injection of concrete up to 55
meters in depth) and the construction of a slab to reinforce the natural dam to
prevent erosion by surface water, especially during floods. The second phase of
the work involved the construction of a weir. In addition, three grant
contracts for the implementation of support measures for the resettlement of
the victims in the area around the lake are currently under preparation. EU
assistance has also supported the rehabilitation and construction of 3.5 kms of
access roads to Lake Nyos.  
The
Regional Integration Support Mechanism (RISM) starts to work for COMESA
countries
 
RISM
is a performance-based financing mechanism that supports COMESA (Common Market
for Eastern and Southern Africa) countries to implement their regional policies
and regulations at national level.  RISM is managed by the COMESA Secretariat
and funded by the 9th and 10th EDF (EUR 78 and EUR 23.5 million). About EUR 44
million was already disbursed to meet country-specific performance commitments
and other trade related programmes on regional integration. The funding
incentives are yielding positive results in bolstering regional integration.
For example, out of the 15 COMESA Member States, in 2013: 
•           Six
had functioning National Coordinating Committees; 
•           15
resolved on average 79 % of non-tariff barriers reported against them in 2012;
•           Five
were able to adopt some COMESA standards.
A
significant challenge for the programme relates to the limited capacity at the Member State level to satisfy reporting requirements for verification of performance.
Looking forward, it is hoped that from 2014 onwards more COMESA countries will
be brought on board the RISM programme.
Smallholder Irrigation Project in Swaziland
Swaziland is
one of the 18 target countries of the Accompanying Measures for Sugar Protocol
(AMSP). One of the AMSP measures in Swaziland was the Smallholder Irrigation
Project (SHIP) which ran from 2009 and was extended until the end of 2013 due
to its success. 
Objectives of the project are to enhance
profitability, sustainability and competitiveness of smallholder farms which
produce irrigated sugarcane: a valuable cash crop. Preparation of land for
irrigation and the establishment of effective farmer companies (FC) through
pooling of land are key elements of the programme.  Although challenges such as
high production and operating costs, and management obstacles had to be tackled
by the end of 2013 100 % of the FC had adopted proper business planning, 95 %
of the boards of the FC were democratically elected and 83 % of the FC had
implemented the recommended irrigation measures. Overall 1 500 farmer families
benefited from the programme and were supported to escape extreme poverty.
Support Programme to Orphans and Vulnerable
Children (OVC) in partnership with UNICEF in Lesotho 
In Southern Africa, the case of Lesotho shows how the EU has offered long-term, sustainable and effective support
while completing the second Phase of the Support Programme to Orphans and
Vulnerable Children (OVC) in partnership with UNICEF's Child Grants Programme
(CGP). This programme is providing quality social protection measures,
including education, health, life skills and food security for vulnerable
children. In October 2013 the extremely successful grants programme was taken
over by the Government of Lesotho in its recurrent budget. This demonstrates a
high-level of sustainability and aid effectiveness in the delivery of EU aid
and cooperation with international and African development partners. The EU,
UNICEF and the Government of Lesotho underlined the positive social and
economic impact of the Child Grants Programme in Lesotho and the constructive
collaboration among stakeholders. A third and final phase of support in the
framework of the OVC programme is currently planned under the 11th EDF.
Monitoring                     
In
2013, 392 on-going national projects and 27 on-going regional programmes,
amounting to a total EU commitment of more than EUR 1.9
billion, were reviewed by independent experts in 43 sub-Saharan African
countries using the Results-Oriented Monitoring (ROM) methodology. In addition,
68 completed national projects and three completed regional programmes (ex-post
ROM), representing a total EU contribution of nearly EUR 192 million, plus nine
Sector Policy Support Programmes were also assessed using ROM in 2013. 
The
analysis of the results shows that 67.9% of on-going national projects are
performing well or very well (categories I or II), 24.2 % encountered some
problems (category III) and 7.9% face major difficulties (category IV). These
results are slightly less positive than in 2012 when the percentage of national
on-going projects facing major difficulties was 4.7%. However, the comparison
is not based on the same sample of projects.
In
terms of assessment of closed national operations, 61.8% received good marks
(compared to 67.2% in 2012 out of a sample of 67 projects).
In
general, 82.9% of assessed on-going national projects received very good and
good ratings in relation to their relevance and design. These projects are
still facing significant constraints in terms of efficiency (43.62% of the
projects of this type face problems in terms of input used and implementation of
activities), effectiveness (with 39.8% experiencing some problems in delivering
results) and sustainability (39.8 % of projects with problems). Although there
remains a  significant gap between good scores achieved in terms of relevance
and design on the one hand and efficiency, effectiveness and sustainability on
the other hand, this gap has narrowed slightly compared to 2012. Potential
impact remains very good or good for almost 77% of this type of project (79% in
2012).
As
in 2012, the sectors mostly concerned by on-going national monitoring were
social infrastructure and services (with 213 reports covering a budget of
almost EUR 780 million) and economic infrastructure
and services (57 reports, EUR 683 million). Nearly 70% of social infrastructure
projects assessed received very good and good marks while for economic
infrastructure this figure rises to 71.9%. The rate of projects with major
difficulties accounted for 8.45% and 5.3%, respectively. The productive sectors
(for example agriculture, fishing, industry, etc.) have received significant
monitoring coverage in 2013: 61 national reports were produced covering a total
budget of EUR 221 million. Results are positive with 57.4% of projects
performing very well or well and 13.11% facing major difficulties in this
sector.
Perspectives                   
The
first preparatory phase of the country programming process for the period
2014-2020 has been achieved. At country level, it has benefited from a wide
consultation, though with differing intensities, with Partner Governments, Member States and Civil Society. The second phase is currently on-going and relates to the
preparation of the draft Multi Annual Indicative Programmes (MIPs): the key EU
programming document. Preliminary indications coming from the field confirm
that the EU programming strategic approach implementing the ‘Agenda for Change’
is fully addressed, and that we are achieving our ambition of reforming the
development policy of the EU. 
The
process has so far focused on preparing the strategic basis for the programming
which would include the indicative country allocations, the choice of sectors,
the key expected results and key indicators. The EU’s strategic approach is to
reduce poverty, achieve the MDGs, and support partner countries by targeting
resources where they are needed most. The MIPs will be predominantly based on
the countries’ national and sector development plans, leaving only a few
countries with a separate EU Country Strategy Paper (CSP). The EU has further
strengthened the concentration of its aid in a limited number of sectors and
the EU will be looking much more at promoting responsible governance, economic
development and job creation in our partner countries and concentrate on new
sectors with a high development multiplier effect.
Another
important change is that the majority of the MIPs are to cover the full
programming period with a flexible approach to agreeing ad hoc reviews as and
when necessary (which may, for example, be needed with the start of a new
country policy cycle, after elections, in case of crisis or natural disaster,
or for reasons of division of labour with other donors). The country
programming process is furthermore marked by a significant step-up of joint
programming compared to past programming, either as from 2014 or from a
subsequent year with the start of a new country cycle.
For
the first time the Commission is implementing a substantial, in-depth exercise
to ensure that bilateral, regional and thematic programming are consistent
between themselves so that we can deliver a strong, coherent EU programming
product by the end of this phase. The current programming process has provided
an opportunity to design the five ACP regional indicative programmes and the
intra-ACP envelope in relation to each other’s programmes and to national
programming. The programmes may address the same areas/sectors, but this does
not mean that the corresponding activities overlap. Programmes have been
designed to create a functional division between the various levels. This
exercise had never been conducted before. 
Promoting
regional integration has been a long-standing objective of EU development
policy and is set to remain so, as the Commission has clearly reiterated its
commitment to regional integration in its ‘Agenda for Change’: the blueprint
for a higher-impact, more results-oriented EU development policy going forward.
For the 11th EDF, the EU and Duly Mandated ACP Regional
Organisations (DMROs) have decided to draw lessons from the past and agreed on
a new approach. EU and African partners are currently devising results-oriented
regional strategies based on specific and limited objectives. The EU will
support regional organisations based on a shared, realistic roadmap taking into
account their respective mandates, implementation capacities and real added
value in terms of nurturing growth and political stability within their
respective regions. 
Furthermore,
the DMROs agreed to allow national authorising officers, specialist
institutions, regional development banks and other relevant technical bodies to
be responsible for implementing regional programmes, especially trans-border or
national projects with a specific regional dimension. In this way we can be
sure that regional programmes are being implemented by the most efficient
stakeholders and that there is more coherence between the national and regional
levels. Such an approach could also encourage DMRO Member States to embrace
regional integration and to implement their regional commitments because this
would enable direct access to regional funds. 
To
build further on this opportunity, DMROs and their Member States agreed, during
a regional programming seminar held in Brussels at the end of 2013, to
strengthen political dialogue with the EU at regional level. They agreed to put
in place for each RIP a regional steering committee to associate DMROs, their Member States and all relevant actors in the region, to monitor regional integration, to
raise political dialogue and ensure consistency of the actions implemented.

2.2.3.             
South Africa

Introduction
    
In
2013, development cooperation, one of the three pillars of the EU-SA Trade,
Development and Cooperation Agreement (TDCA) continued to impact South Africa's
citizens' lives while further action was undertaken to consolidate the EU-South
Africa Strategic partnership's achievements and
to strengthen dialogues in a number of key areas such
as job creation, investment and youth employment, development cooperation,
energy, science and technology, migration and mobility, peace and security
including maritime security, and global challenges from climate change to human
rights and the post-2015 agenda.
Political,
trade, economic and development cooperation with South Africa was further consolidated
during the year 2013 under the EU –South Africa Strategic Partnership.
In
preparation for the Sixth South Africa Summit High Representative Ashton on 10
June hosted the 12th Ministerial Political Dialogue in Brussels with South
African Minister of International Relations and Cooperation M. Nkoana Mashabane
in attendance. 
The Sixth EU-South Africa Summit was
held in Pretoria on 18 July 2013 Nelson Mandela International day. The EU was
represented by H. Van Rompuy, President of the European Council, and by J. M.
Barroso, President of the European Commission. Commissioner for Development
Piebalgs and Commissioner for Trade De Gucht were also in attendance.
EU and South African leaders
reaffirmed the strong spirit of cooperation  between Pretoria and Brussels  as
reflected by the impressive range of joint political, trade and economic
activities and dialogues on key issues such as education, science and
technology, energy, migration and health. 
Interestingly the Summit focussed on a
key theme for both Europe and South Africa: ‘Job creation, economic growth
investment and
skills’. It was emphasised that growth and jobs are at the
heart of the South African National Development Plan whose implementation the
EU is already supporting through joint cooperation. 
This  Summit was also a precious
moment of joint reflection on a number of key issues, in particular key peace
and security topics in Africa and beyond, global governance, climate change,
trade, development issues, and relations between Africa and Europe as a whole,
as set down in the joint Africa-EU strategy.
Education continued to be one of the main
threads of the EU-South African dialogue and cooperation. A first Senior
Officials Meeting was organised to discuss educational issues including
education quality, how to address drop-outs and unemployment, innovation, VET
and open educational resources. The meeting was followed by a workshop on the
internationalisation of higher education, where stakeholders identified areas
for future cooperation.
Interest in the higher education Erasmus
Mundus programme continued to be high in 2013, as well as participation in the
Intra-ACP Mobility Programme and a number of grants have been awarded
under the Culture Programme to civil society organizations from the EU and
South Africa.
Aid effectiveness and donor
coordination
The Sixth EU-SA summit
recognised that the attainment of the MDGs up to 2015 and beyond remains one of
the key development priorities and it was agreed to take concrete measures
to implement the sustainable development commitments of the Rio+20 Conference
outcomes and to consult on the Post-2015 Development Agenda.
The EU Delegation has
performed well with about 70% of its aid committed in the form of budget
support. Efforts to strengthen donor cooperation, particularly between EU
Member States present in South Africa, were maintained. 
Implementation and results
In 2013, the EUR 100 million
Infrastructure Investment Programme for South Africa (IIPSA), a EUR 25 million
programme on socioeconomic justice; EUR 4.6 million for the Erasmus Mundus
mobility programme and a EUR one million top-up for the Trade Development
Cooperation Agreement (TDCA) Facility were approved. EUR 2.4 million from the
instrument for cooperation with industrialised and other high-income countries
and territories was committed for mobility of students from Europe to South
Africa under the Erasmus Mundus. At the end of 2013, 100 % of the 2007-2013
envelope of EUR 980 million for South Africa had been committed. 
In the area of health, the
EU disbursed EUR 33.3 million on the Primary Health Care Sector Policy Support
Programme. Support focussed on the access and the quality of primary health
care, school health and district specialist teams, and the implementation of
government's plans to fight HIV/AIDS and Tuberculosis. 
The National Development
Policy Support Programme (NDPSP) progressed well and EUR 54 million was
disbursed. It helped create or save some 55 000 job opportunities, supported 17
250 artisan learners, 1 430 students in science, technology and engineering,
helped provide water to 95 % of households, and reached 2.4 million households
through providing access to roads.
In the area of employment,
EUR 22.9 million was disbursed in 2013 on the Employment Creation SPS
Programme. Since its inception this programme has supported the creation of
more than 22 000 job opportunities. 
Budget support evaluation
A budget support evaluation
was conducted in 2012/13 in South Africa with final results presented in
November 2013. The evaluation objective was to assess to what extent EU Budget
Support (BS) operations in South Africa contributed to achieving sustainable
results in relevant sectors over the period 2000-2011. The evaluation covered
16 Sector Budget Support (SBS) operations, for a total amount of EUR
984 million. Of this 32 % was allocated to Employment and
Private Sector Development, 25 % to Water and Sanitation, 7 % to Governance
(Legislative and Justice), 17 % to Health, 12 % to Education and 7 % to Urban
Renewal. The OECD-DAC three step approach was followed.
The main conclusions of the
evaluation[54]
are that EU BS to South Africa in the period 2000-2011 represented a positive
experience that should be continued and further integrated into the SA-EU
Strategic Partnership. Budget support has been adapted to the evolving country
context, while ensuring both Government ownership and strategic relevance of EU
support. It has supported policy innovation by enhancing specific innovative
programmes, often with the participation of CSOs, within wider priority
sectors, with a focus on fighting poverty and inequality and supporting
democracy. SBS funds have created good opportunities to test policy and
institutional processes through innovative and risk-taking initiatives. 
Perspectives
The EU will continue to
implement its existing programmes in 2014. The country-specific IIPSA will
start operating and the piloting of blending loans and EU grant funds in South
Africa will be started with an expected leverage effect of five to 10.
The new socioeconomic
justice programme will show its first results in terms of promotion and access
to socioeconomic rights in 2015. 
In the context of the
Strategic Partnership, people-to-people and institution-to-institution
contacts, exchange of information and knowledge and trilateral
cooperation will be maintained both under existing programmes and the TDCA
facility, and in subsequent programmes.
Next year, work will
continue on the preparation of the first interventions under the 2014-2020
Multi-annual Indicative Programme, in close collaboration with Member States.
Discussions related to implementation of the Global Partnership for Development
Effectiveness, the post-2015 development framework, Rio+20 and sustainable
development goals, as well as the G20 Development Agenda can be expected. 

2.2.4.             
Intra-ACP programmes  

Under the 10th EDF, EUR
2.895 million was allocated to the intra-ACP programme that has been put in
place to address the shared challenges that all or many African, Caribbean and
Pacific (ACP) countries face. Out of this amount, 99 % has been committed for
the agreed policy objectives and the activities have either been completed or
are currently being implemented. 
            
An independent evaluation of
the 9th and 10th EDF intra-ACP programme finalised during the year concluded
that intra-ACP cooperation remains a key instrument for ACP states to turn
their common political priorities into substantive action. The evaluation found
evidence that intra-ACP contributions have led to a number of positive results
in several priority areas. For example, the contribution of EUR 315 million
provided through the Global Fund has substantially increased access to
preventive measures and treatment against tuberculosis, malaria and HIV.
Furthermore, it was established that a reinforcement of policy and regulatory
frameworks in ACP countries has taken place thanks to the programme in the
sectors of agriculture, health systems and access to energy. 
This evaluation also
insisted on the necessity to focus on fewer sectors in order to maximise
development impact. This approach has been already initiated with the 10th EDF
mid-term review of the intra-ACP programme and implemented through the annual
action programme 2013. Involving an allocation of EUR 325 million, this will
target trade and private sector support, environment, disaster risk reduction
and agriculture, PFM and education. Projects will address poverty alleviation,
sustainable development and integration of the ACP countries into the world
economy.
A similar approach will be
adopted for the preparation and the negotiation of the 11th EDF intra-ACP
strategy during 2014. It will focus on identifying those key sectors where
intra-ACP programmes can have an added value in complementing other
instruments, such as supporting global initiatives and experience sharing amongst
ACP countries.
Climate Change
In 2013 there were a number
of highlights in progress to deal with climate change. For instance, the EUR 60
million programme ‘ACP-EU Natural Disaster Risk Reduction Programme’ has
delivered good results and supported 45 projects in over 30 countries to
complete a number of key activities such as risk assessments, building
community-based resilience, analysing flood impacts, better planning of
land-use, risk financing, dyke assessment and rehabilitation, slope stabilisation,
early warning systems and post disaster risk assessments. In 2013, the
programme notably supported the establishment of a Regional Technical Centre
for Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation for Southern Africa
and leveraged from other funding an additional USD 18 million for community
flood preparedness and land degradation activities in Togo and USD 106
million for Cameroon’s dyke rehabilitation and flood management.
Environment
In the environment sector,
the programme ‘Capacity Building related to Multilateral Environmental
Agreements in ACP Countries’ provided assistance to ACP countries in
identifying national priorities for the implementation of chemical conventions.
Achievements so far include an inventory, safeguarding and safe disposal of
persistent organic pollutants and other obsolete pesticides. National teams in
26 countries were trained and equipped to undertake and complete inventories of
obsolete pesticides. This permitted the safeguarding of 237 tons of obsolete
pesticides in the Caribbean and the disposal of obsolete pesticides and
associated wastes was tendered for 350 tons in Benin, 80 tons in Swaziland,
70 tons in Botswana and 26 tons in Samoa. 
Inventory of obsolete
pesticides and associated wastes in Benin
photo
provided by FAO@2013
Social affairs
In the social sector, the
project ‘Tackling Child Labour through Education’ implemented activities in 12
ACP countries to support efforts to end child labour, with an emphasis on the
worst forms, through education and training. An independent evaluation found
evidence of improvements in child labour and children’s enrolment and retention
in schools in all beneficiary countries. This evaluation also identified that
all countries were adhering to the relevant International Labour Organisation (ILO)
conventions. 
Health services
In the area of health, the
programme ’Renewed ACP/EU/WHO Partnership on strengthening pharmaceutical
systems’ builds on the achievements and experiences of the initial Partnership
on Pharmaceutical Policies. It aims at contributing to improved cost-effective
health care and better patient health outcomes, and is implemented in 15 ACP
countries, with an overall budget of EUR 10 million. During the first year of
implementation, countries have selected specific activities within the five
result areas identified in the programme to suit their specific needs and to
coordinate actions implemented by other development partners. Notable
achievements within the result area of medicine quality include improving the
collection, safety and quality of blood products and updating of the reporting
systems on patients' adverse reactions to medicines.
Water
and sanitation
In
2013, EUR 25 million was contracted for three programmes under the Pooling
Mechanism of the Water Facility and eight contracts on the reserve list from
the third Call for Proposals. A second phase programme to support the African
Ministers’ Council on Water was also contracted. The remaining funds of the
Water Facility were committed for audit and visibility actions. A Water
Facility project in Namibia was the laureate in Africa of the Communication
Award 2013 of DEVCO. The Final Evaluation of the Facility has been launched.
2013 was the final year for both the 9th and 10th EDF Water Facilities. Since 2004,
319 actions were contracted amounting to EUR 633.221 million. In 2013, three
quarters of the projects under the Pooling Mechanism were contracted. It was
intended to provide catalytic funding for private sector and loan financing for
the development of larger scale infrastructure. The report of the impact of EUR
40 million of the Facility used to support water partnership projects was
presented. This is particularly relevant to the very first European Citizens’
Initiative (ECI) ‘Water and sanitation are a human right! Water is a public
good, not a commodity! ‘.
Access
to energy
Worldwide,
about 1.2 billion people have no access to electricity. In 2013, in response to
this challenge, the EU supported energy generation projects in the developing
world by blending grants with loans through our blending facilities. In
Sub-Saharan Africa alone, EUR 330 million has been
allocated under the EU-Africa Infrastructure Trust Fund (ITF) to leverage
substantive investments of EUR 4-8 billion. In addition, the EU's Technical
Assistance Facility of EUR 80 million was launched to assist countries in
refining policies which allow for greater investment in energy. For riskier
projects, EUR 50 million was provided to engage with International Finance
Institutions (IFIs) and private financiers. New scalable business models for
sustainable energy investments in rural and off-grid areas are promoted through
a top up of EUR 20 million under the EU Sustainable Energy for All (SE4All)
Window of the Global Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Fund (GEEREF) that
helps other funds leverage investments. Specific challenges of the energy poor
were addressed through a call for proposals for rural electrification with a
total financial contribution of EUR 95 million, while EUR 15 million was
allocated to target energy in fragile states. In addition, over 25 countries
have indicated their intention to choose energy as a focal sector for their
bilateral cooperation with the EU within the context of the next multi annual
framework (2014-2020).

2.3.      Latin
America and the Caribbean


2.3.1.             
Latin America

Introduction 
The EU-CELAC Summit of Heads of State and Government took place in
Santiago de Chile in January 2013, under the general theme ‘An Alliance for
Sustainable Development to Promote Investments of Social and Environmental
Quality’. It was the seventh bi-regional Summit, but the first one held with
the Community of Latin America and the Caribbean (CELAC) structure as the EU's
counterpart. Several associated events on topics involving business, academia,
and civil society, took place in the run-up to the Summit. An EU-CELAC Senior
Officials Meeting took place in October, in order to follow up on the decisions
taken in Santiago de Chile.
Progress has been made in relation to the EU-Central America Association
Agreement, as its trade pillar is now provisionally in force. In the margins of
the EU-CELAC Summit in Santiago, a political dialogue at the highest level was
conducted with this sub-region. In addition, President Barroso participated in
the 42nd Summit of Heads of State of the Central American Integration System
(SICA) in December 2013. SICA has as members six Central American countries
with whom the EU has concluded its first ever region-to-region association
agreement. The EU has been granted the status of observer to SICA. President
Barroso went subsequently on to visit Colombia where he confirmed the EU's
willingness to provide financial support for the implementation of the
agreement that could be reached in 2014.
At the Summit in Santiago, the EU and Mercosur (Southern Common
Market) agreed to reinvigorate negotiations for an Association Agreement and
proceed to an exchange of offers on goods, services and establishment and
government procurement.
Also in the margins of the Santiago Summit, Mexico and the
EU held a meeting between the new Mexican President and European Council and
Commission Presidents. Both sides have set up a working group to analyse the
possibility of modernizing the EU-Mexico Global Agreement. 
The Sixth EU-Brazil Summit was held in Brasilia in January 2013.
Soon after, ministerial level contacts took place in the margins of the
EU-CELAC Summit in Santiago. The EU and Brazil held sector dialogues in
areas related to international peace and security in July in Brussels, and for
the first time on drug issues in June.
In 2013, the EU-LAC Foundation, through its headquarters in
Hamburg, continued implementing activities to support the overall EU-CELAC
partnership. A meeting of the Foundation’s board of Governors took place in October.
With regard to thematic EU dialogue with the region, a number of 
EU-CELAC high-level meetings took place last year on Migration, Coordination
and Cooperation Mechanism on drugs, Gender Issues, Science and Technology, and
Corporate Social Responsibility. 
Bilateral and regional projects and programmes totalling EUR 369
million were committed for Latin America in 2013 out of the DCI. 
The Latin American Investment Facility (LAIF) continued its
successful implementation with a total of five projects being approved by the
Operational Board in 2013. This represents a total LAIF contribution of EUR 29
million helping to mobilise funds that totalled nearly EUR 1.2 billion. The
LAIF contributed to projects in the transport, water and sanitation and energy sectors
in 2013.  
The year 2013 was also marked by the preparation of the future
cooperation framework with the countries of the region eligible for bilateral
cooperation and with the region itself.  In this context, Commissioner Piebalgs
visited the region on two occasions: in August 2013 with visits to Bolivia
and Paraguay, and in October with visits to Guatemala, El
Salvador and Nicaragua.  
Finally, the partnership with the Inter-American Development Bank
was enhanced through the renewal of the Memorandum of Understanding linking the
Bank and the EU. This memorandum was signed by Commissioners Piebalgs and Rehn
during April and has led to the formulation of specific actions, particularly
in the field of security in Panama and fiscal reform in Nicaragua.
Aid effectiveness and donor coordination        
The
Joint Programming process became a reality in the region during 2013 with Guatemala,
Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Bolivia and Paraguay taking
concrete steps. This resulted in a strengthened coordination locally and for
the aid effectiveness agenda in general. 
In
this context, and thanks to an intense work on coordination with national
authorities and the EU Member States, a ‘European Co-ordinated Response’ was
jointly drafted in Bolivia and will serve as a joint EU Country
Strategy. There is now a formal commitment by all parties involved to move to
full Joint Programming as from 2017, aligning EU programming cycles with
Bolivian ones. 
2013
was marked by the future programming cycle for the period ahead. In the spirit
of the ‘Agenda for Change’, draft Multi-annual Indicative Programmes for all
eligible countries in the region were produced based on national development
plans and characterised by an effort to focus on a few key sectors. 
2013
was the last year of the phasing out exercise for bilateral cooperation with
eight upper middle income countries in the region: Brazil, Argentina,
Uruguay, Chile, Venezuela, Panama, Costa Rica and Mexico.  Because
of this, it was also a year of dialogue with these countries around other forms
of cooperation including triangular cooperation in the region. 
Research
and innovation
In
the area of research and innovation over 500 contracts have been signed with
Latin America and over 20 with the Caribbean since 2007 with EU contributions
of around EUR 85 million and EUR three million respectively.
Under
the EU-LAC Joint Initiative for research and innovation, a regular science,
technology and innovation dialogue has been established. Progress has been made
as regards the roadmap and four thematic working groups for implementing the
initiative. This work was recognised at the EU-LAC Summit held in January 2013.
Interest in the Erasmus Mundus programme
continued to be high in 2013 in Latin America and a last call for the programming
period was launched in December.
The
second EU-Brazil Senior Officials Meeting was held followed by a Joint Expert
Seminar on Academic Mobility, Internationalisation and Innovation. Both parties
agreed to the need to remove obstacles to academic mobility and enhance
visibility of existing programmes and cooperation. 
As
part of the EU-Brazil Joint Programme on Culture, a seminar on culture and
sustainable development was organised and the proceedings are to be published.
Working towards the MDGs      
According
to the 2013 UN MDG report, the Latin America region has made notable progress
towards achieving the nine MDGs. A number of them, for example MDG 1 on
eradicating extreme poverty or MDG 2 on universal access to education, are
already virtually met. Nevertheless, like other regions, Latin America still
lags behind in the MDGs associated with maternal health and access to
sanitation.
Despite the fact that 32 million Latin
Americans continued to live on less than USD $ 1.25 a day in 2012, the region
managed to reduce the percentage of people living in extreme poverty from 12 %
in 1990 to 6 % by 2010. Seventy-two million people have been lifted out of
poverty and 50 million joined the ranks of the middle class.
At a country level, the most urbanised
nations, including Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Mexico and Peru,
have made the most remarkable progress toward meeting the MDGs. However, no
country has achieved the goal regarding maternal health and only Peru
has achieved the required reduction in child mortality.  Malnutrition and child
mortality remained a huge challenge in 2013 for countries like Guatemala.
Today, 14 countries have met targets for
access to safe drinking water, whereas just 10 have achieved targets associated
with access to sanitation. 
Given
that the MDGs reflect the basic needs of all citizens, both urban and rural
areas face the challenge of reducing poverty and improving living conditions
for the poor. Around the world, slums are growing rapidly in cities both large
and small. If urbanisation is not well managed, slums could further
proliferate. In Latin America, 13.4 % of the population reside in slum areas.   
Implementation and results: 

Bilateral cooperation including budget support 

During
2013, bilateral development cooperation projects were carried out in all 18
countries of the Latin American region covered by the Development Cooperation
Instrument (DCI). Commitments amounted to EUR 397.6 million and payments to EUR
298.4 million, corresponding to 100 % of available resources. The increase in
the degree of social cohesion continued to be one of the main concerns of EU
interventions. Particular attention has been paid to the promotion of dialogue,
joint actions and partnerships with international institutions active on the
continent, such as the Inter-American Development Bank, the Central American
Bank for Economic Integration, and the Economic Commission for Latin America
and the Caribbean. 
In Brazil
during 2013, cooperation has continued to be implemented successfully. Over 30
dialogues have been established so far between Brazil and the EU through the
implementation of the ‘sector dialogue support programme’. This process has
given a solid basis to the EU-Brazil Strategic Partnership. Brazil is also
participating actively in the DEVCO funded Regional Programmes for Latin
America and in the EU – Mercosur projects. Moreover, Innovation, Science and
Technology including Information Society is an important aspect of EU – Brazil
relations and many activities are being financed under the Research Technology
and Development (RTD) Framework Programme. Brazil has also benefited from the
Latin American Investment Facility (LAIF).
For Colombia,
a new support programme for the rural development sector policy (EUR 39.2
million) was approved in 2013. The programme aims at supporting the
transformation of prioritised rural territories in view of improving the
capacities of families and communities concerned. As such, it supports the
current government’s policy and dialogue is focussing on results. 
In Ecuador,
policy dialogue was further strengthened in relation to education and
sustainable economic development, and in key areas of PFM.
In Bolivia,
cooperation continued its positive implementation particularly in the area of
Budget Support where two new programmes in the area of water management (EUR 8
million) and the fight against drugs (EUR 24 million) were approved. In
addition, an ‘Action Plan on Policy dialogue’ was put in place in order to
better monitor progress in the implementation of various ongoing operations.
In Peru,
the Sector Policy Support to the Strategic Peruvian Malnutrition Programme (EUR
60.8 million) successfully moved to a last payment. This coordinated approach
in the fight against malnutrition led to clear results, with a substantial
improvement of public services and child malnutrition in the poorest districts
of the Apurimac, Ayacucho and Huancavelica. Moreover, a new programme
supporting the implementation of the National Anti-Drug Strategy 2012-2016 (EUR
32.3 million) was approved.
In Costa
Rica, a range of projects were successfully implemented to support the
integration of the country into regional and global markets as well as to take
advantage of the opportunities offered by the EU – Central America Association
Agreement.  The three main projects in this area ‘PROCALIDAD, PROMESAFI,
EMPRENDE’ focused on standards and technical requirements for industrial
products, sanitary and phytosanitary measures, and promotion of women’s entrepreneurial
capacities respectively.
In Panama,
the EUR 28 million Security Cooperation project ‘SECOPA’ was launched. The
action will enhance the national institutional framework responsible for
citizens' security in terms of prevention and control of criminal activity as
well as violence. The project was launched by President Barroso and President
Martinelli.
In El
Salvador, the Social Prevention of Violence with Youth Participation
(PROJOVENES II) programme ended in December 2013. This programme, to which the
EU contributed with EUR 11.3 million, some 100 000 vulnerable youngsters and
their families were offered alternative options to gang involvement. The
implementation of this project through a participative approach in the 14
municipalities and 78 communities concerned enabled a good level of ownership
at the local level by the beneficiaries.
In Guatemala,
the EUR 21 million project in support of the countries’ Rural Development
Policy contributed to reducing poverty in selected rural areas by promoting
smallholders’ agriculture and sustainable agricultural practices. Some 100 000
rural people or 16 500 families in 22 municipalities are expected to benefit
from the programme. Furthermore, in 2013 the EU confirmed its support to fight against
impunity and organised crime in the country by allocating an additional EUR 4
million to the UN-backed International Commission against Impunity in Guatemala
(CICIG) programme. This scheme supports the country’s fight against organised
crime and helps to dismantle clandestine and illegal groups.
In Honduras,
with the new ‘EuroJusticia’ programme to promote fair and accessible justice,
to which the EU is contributing EUR 27.5 million, the focus is being put on
modernizing the judicial system. The justice system of the country will provide
faster and broader services to the most vulnerable groups, in particular women,
children and the indigenous people.   
In Nicaragua,
two projects have been signed with the Nicaraguan Government during 2013. One
project supports a more equitable and efficient tax system, while the other
project promotes sustainable economic development for the people in the
Caribbean region of the country. 
In Uruguay,
cooperation activities continued in a smooth way and policy dialogue started to
move towards a new paradigm of partners in development. Uruguay attached
particular importance to the objective of taking stock of the lessons learnt
with 2007-2013 cooperation, as well as maintaining the policy dialogue built
under this framework. 
In
Argentina, another ‘graduated country in the region., cooperation
activities continued smoothly despite the fact that the implementation of the
‘Policy Dialogue’ project did not kick off during 2013 as initially foreseen.  
In Mexico
the second phase of the EU-Mexico Social Cohesion Laboratory has been
signed during a high-level ceremony in the country. The project worth EUR 22
million will focus on human rights, security, access to justice and the
prevention of social exclusion, especially in the states of Oaxaca and San Luis
Potosi. The EU and Mexico started to work to upgrade their relations during
2013, in particular by modernising the Global Agreement signed in 2000 which
covers the three pillars of cooperation, trade and political. 
In Paraguay,
2013 was national elections year. In this context, the EU successfully provided
an Election Observation Mission (EUEOM), strengthening its relationship with
the country. The majority of the EUEOM's recommendations are being implemented.
In addition, significant improvements have been observed in 2013 in the field
of PFM and poverty related expenditures to areas of EU support. 
In
Chile, bilateral development cooperation
programmes ended their operational phase in January 2013. The rest of the year
was devoted to the closure of projects and programmes including final evaluations
and audits and closure of visibility actions. 
Our
cooperation with Mercosur continued without any major obstacles in all
sectors despite significant internal difficulties within Mercosur due to the
suspension and re-admission of Paraguay and the membership of Venezuela. These
difficulties had a negative impact on the decision-making structure of
Mercosur, but had virtually no impact on the implementation of our bilateral
projects.
In
line with commitments to support socioeconomic cohesion in the Andean
Community (CAN), the EU further enhanced its activities by awarding grants
to four cross border projects. Implementation of 17 local economic development
projects started in the most vulnerable rural areas of the four CAN countries.
In Central
America, cooperation focussed on supporting SMEs and the implementation of
the EU-Central American Association Agreement. The ‘ADESEP’ programme, worth
EUR seven million, will support SME development at the Macro, Meso and Micro
level in the region, and will be implemented by the regional centre for the
promotion of SMEs.
Budget
support programmes represent almost 50 % of
bilateral cooperation in Latin America committed in 2013, with actions approved
in Guatemala, Bolivia, Colombia and Peru. The majority of budget
support operations in the region are in the form of sector reform contracts.
The main areas supported include biodiversity, water and sanitation in urban
and suburban zones, as well as rural and territorial development.
Budget
Support programmes have made a substantial contribution towards the achievement
of the development goals for Latin American countries. For example, in Bolivia,
budget support programmes disbursed in 2013 in the sectors of water and
sanitation in rural and suburban areas contributed to the achievement by that
country of the MDG on sustainable access to safe drinking water. 
Regional
cooperation
Several
regional programmes for Latin America continued in 2013. They include: ALFA III
(a higher education cooperation programme between the EU and Latin America);
EUROSOCIAL II (that promotes social cohesion in Latin American societies); and
COPOLAD (a regional programme aimed at strengthening the capacity of
participating countries to formulate sound drug-related policies). Other
ongoing Latin American programmes include: Erasmus Mundus Action II, which
contributes to the promotion of partnerships and institutional cooperation
exchanges between higher education institutions from Europe and Latin America
as well as to students and academics mobility, and EUROCLIMA which is an EU -
Latin America climate change programme aiming at knowledge sharing, fostering
structured and regular dialogue at all levels, and ensuring synergies and
coordination of current and future actions.  
Furthermore,
a CELAC-EU network brings together 19 partners in Research and Technology from
both regions and the initiative ‘Strengthening the dialogue between the EU and
LAC to establish management models on migration and development policies’, and
an EU targeted project aimed at strengthening capacities in Latin America and
the Caribbean in the area of migration. At the same time, in South America, the
EU-FLEGT action plan, implemented in Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru,
aims to reduce illegal logging and to improve forest governance.
The
EU supports the Latin American Centres of Excellence in the water sector RALCEA
‘Red Latino Americana de Centros de Excelencia en Recursos Hidricos’ in
promoting multi-stakeholder dialogue, capacity building, institutional support
and south-south cooperation. The Joint Research Centre (JRC) has facilitated
Latin American policy makers and the Centres of Excellence in identifying
sector needs in terms of research, higher education and capacity building, as
well as in implementing activities in the three identified priority areas:
regional hydrologic balance, water quality and sanitation, and stakeholder
mapping and participation.
A
new project, ‘Strengthening the influence of the main Latin American small
producers' networks on food security governance’ started implementation at the
end of 2013. In addition, the European and Latin America Business Services and
Innovation Network (ELAN) was approved  at the end of 2013 and intends
facilitating  better penetration and access for European SMEs doing business in
Latin American markets by providing transparent information. It also aims to
foster technology transfer by the creation of an institutional network of
European and Latin American research centres. Furthermore it plans to deepen
connections and linkages between European SMEs and EU and Latin American
research and innovation centres. 
In
2013, additional financial support through the Latin American Investment
Facility (LAIF) and the Erasmus Mundus – Action II programme was approved while
several programmes in the region entered the last year of implementation. These
are URB-AL III which targets cooperation on social cohesion matters between
local authorities in the EU and Latin America, AL-INVEST IV which promotes the
consolidation of Latin American SMEs into the global market, and the Alliance
for the Information Society (@ LIS 2) which pressed ahead to reduce the
‘digital divide’ affecting the region. Finally, the implementation of
EURO-SOLAR came to an end during 2013. This programme helped rural communities
without electricity in eight countries of the region to access renewable
electric energy. 
Case
studies (bilateral programmes)
BRASIS:
A EU-Brazil Sector Dialogue Project on Basic Sanitation
This
project is part of the ongoing EU-Brazil Sector Dialogue. The overall aim of
the project is to share experience and information on water supply and
sanitation and improve the Brazilian Information System for monitoring Water
Supply and Sanitation services. The joint work by Brazil and the Commission has
led to a thorough analysis of existing data and to the issuance of specific
recommendations related to water supply and sanitation infrastructures.
EU
supports Financial Inclusion in Bolivia through Budget Support
The
results achieved so far by the Programme for the Improvement of the Financial
and Fiscal Environment of Small Business (PAMEFF) are very encouraging. The
programme improves access to finance for economic agents and sectors generally
excluded from commercial financing sources. The final objective is to create
employment, generate income and economic growth, promote economic fairness, and
more equitable socioeconomic development.
According
to official data, the programme contributed to the creation of 84 260 new jobs.
Thanks to its strong gender component the ratio of women having access to
financing exceeded the target by more than 12 %, reflecting a continuously
expanding role for women in the productive sector of the country.
Supporting
22 000 smallholder farms in rural Colombia
Under
the ’Rural Development, Peace and Stability’ programme the EU supports the
peasant economy in Colombia as a means to reduce poverty and food security in
the country’s conflict ridden rural areas and hence as an instrument for peace.
Nearly 200 municipalities involving some 22 000 small farms are involved.
Thanks to the EU support the participating families increased their production
by 50% on average and their income increases three-fold.
Sustainable
management of 28 000 hectares of forest in Honduras
The
Caribbean Biological Corridor in Honduras represents nearly 6 % of the nation’s
territory. The area is home to 1.4 million inhabitants of different ethnicity
of which almost two-thirds live below the poverty line. The PROCORREDOR project
focused on addressing the degradation of biodiversity and natural resources in
the area. 800 hectares were reforested and the sustainable management of 28 000
hectares of broadleaf forest was supported by the project. Moreover, 529 000
hectares were regenerated or had their management improved, and 33 000 people
received improved access to water. 
Case
studies (regional programmes)
Improving
the energy sector in Paraguay 
In
the past 10 years, energy demand in Paraguay has grown by more than 8.1 % per
year. To adequately service this growing demand a EUR 10 million contribution
from the Latin American Investment Facility (LAIF) has been allocated. This
supports, amongst others projects, the construction of a high voltage
transmission line and an Energy Loss Reduction programme to increase security
of energy supply and efficient use of available renewable electricity
generation.
EUROCLIMA:
facilitating the integration of climate change mitigation and adaptation
strategies and measures into Latin American public development policies and
plans
Through
the launch of the second phase of EUROCLIMA, the EU is contributing a total of
EUR 16.45 million to strengthen knowledge sharing and exchange of information
and experience in the field of climate change. By doing this, the programme
facilitates the formulation of public policies and capacity building in this
field. Thematic studies have resulted in the development of guides, manuals and
inventories as tools for public policy development. As an example, Climate
Change and Risk Management, and Vulnerability Analysis of Coastal Marine
Infrastructures in Latin America have been two of the topics addressed and
developed through a regional perspective.
Monitoring       
In
2013, Latin America Result Oriented Monitoring (ROM) carried out 20 missions
broken down in  17 country missions, one regional programme mission and two
country sector policy support missions (in Bolivia and Honduras)  producing a
total of 201 mission reports. The total value of ongoing projects monitored in
2013 amounts to EUR 699 million. This monitoring exercise covered 43 % of the
overall value of ongoing projects in the region. In addition, a total of 24
completed projects or programmes were monitored ex-post.     
As
the table below shows, 4 % of projects in Latin America are performing very
well and 74 % are performing well (categories I and II respectively), while 16
% have some problems (category III) and 6 % experience major difficulties
(category IV). Both the percentages of projects doing well and of those facing
difficulties have remained virtually the same over the period 2011 - 2013. The
most significant change is related to the projects doing very well which
increased from 1 % in 2011 to 4 % in 2013.
Table
1: Latin America – performance of ongoing projects 
More
than 78 % of the ongoing projects/programmes monitored in 2013 in Latin America
have been positively assessed for design, relevance, and sustainability.
However, nearly half of them showed weaknesses in terms of effectiveness and
efficiency. Amongst the reasons for lower performance levels with regard to
efficiency and effectiveness are weak implementation arrangements and
efficiency in applying EU procedures resulting in a lack of ownership by the
beneficiary, late arrival or absence of technical assistance, changes in
relevance of project strategy for the implementing institution, and weak risk
management and performance indicator frameworks.    
Perspectives
In
line with the ‘Agenda for Change’ eight upper middle income countries in Latin
America (Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, Venezuela, Chile, Panama, Costa Rica and
Mexico) have ‘graduated’ to be countries that will no longer benefit from
bilateral EU development aid after 2013. Aid will instead target the remaining
ten countries in the region which are in greater need of external support
and/or in a fragile situation where support can have a greater impact. These
countries are Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Paraguay,
Colombia, Ecuador, Peru and Cuba. 
In
the eight ‘graduated’ countries development cooperation was already in phasing
out mode in 2013 with a few last projects initiated and finalising ongoing
projects. However, cooperation with these countries will continue after 2013
through regional and thematic programmes coupled with the newly established
Partnership Instrument (PI), intending to target cooperation with middle income
countries. 
In
the majority of the countries that will continue to receive development
cooperation after 2013, the focus was on both implementation of ongoing
programmes and formulation of new ones, as well as on the programming cycle for
the period 2014 – 2020. 
Both
groups of countries will continue to benefit from new ways of financing
development, such as mechanisms for blending grants and loans.
As
for regional programmes for Latin America, a wide range of stakeholders from
sectors such as trade, SMEs, climate, science and technology, education, and
migration have benefited through ongoing programmes. Regional cooperation is
also part of the programming cycle for the period 2014 – 2020 which covers the
whole continent and has a specific component for Central America. The priority
sectors already defined include sustainable economic growth and regional
integration, environment and climate change, good governance and the security –
development nexus.
Key
element of the next programming cycle was the Joint Programming exercise that
kick started in the majority of the countries in the region, and is expected to
be consolidated in 2014. Joint Programming aims at achieving greater
coordination, coherence, and impact of EU action in those countries receiving
bilateral cooperation, and thus bringing the aid effectiveness agenda to a
higher level of implementation. 

2.3.2.             
Caribbean 

Introduction 
Caribbean
states met in Santiago de Chile with the EU in January 2013 for a high-level
bi-regional dialogue within the framework of the Community of Latin American
and Caribbean States (CELAC). Heads of States agreed at the Summit that
investments in the region should comply fully with the economic, social and
environmental dimensions of sustainable development. In this context, the
importance of the green economy and improved regional integration were
emphasised. 
A
seminar headed by Commissioner Piebalgs took place in Georgetown, Guyana in
September 2013, in the context of programming for the 11th EDF for the
Caribbean region. This meeting resulted in political agreements on the focal
sectors for future EU cooperation with countries in the region. 
In
December, the annual forum between the EU and Overseas Countries and
Territories (OCTs), took place in Brussels. The Single Programming Document
and corresponding financing decisions for Anguilla, Aruba, Montserrat, Turks
and Caicos as well as for the Dutch OCTs (St Maarten, Bonaire, Curacao,
Saba and St Eustatius), were approved for a total combined amount of EUR
54.5 million. This was complemented with two financing decisions of EUR 7.6
million under the OCTs’ 10th EDF ‘B’ envelope.
In
the process towards the Third Conference of the Small Island Developing States
(SIDS), taking place at the beginning of 2014, the Caribbean countries have
undertaken the initiative to have their status recognised by the international
community in order to better design cooperation and raise awareness of the
negative impact of Climate Change. 
Haiti
remains a priority country in the region for the EU.  A new budget support
programme of EUR 112 million was adopted in 2013 through 10th
European Development Fund (EDF) resources, focusing on state administration
reforms, with a particular focus on the education sector. With this new
programme, the EU fulfilled its ‘pledge’ announced at the New York donor
conference in March 2010. The foreseen ‘Cadre de coordination de l'aide
externe au développement (CAED)’ was successfully launched in May 2013 with
the aim to become an effective coordination mechanism among national and
international partners.
Five years
after the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) coming into effect, many of the
Caribbean Forum of African, Caribbean and Pacific States (CARIFORUM)
commitments in terms of institutional and administrative arrangements have
gradually started. The EU has fulfilled its commitment to enable virtually all
exports from the CARIFORUM countries to access the EU market duty-free and
quota-free. 
Year 2013
was marked by the preparation of future programming. In the spirit of the
‘Agenda for Change’, National Indicative Programmes for all countries in the
region, except the Bahamas, were drafted based on national development plans.
Bahamas, being an upper middle income country, ‘graduated’ to become a country
that will not receive EU bilateral development cooperation after 2013. The rest
of the partner countries in the region that have reached the status of middle
income country will receive a reduced allocation. Only Haiti, Belize and
Suriname saw their bilateral funding envelopes increased. Despite these
changes, the overall allocation to the Caribbean will remain stable around EUR
one billion, largely thanks to a significant increase to the regional envelope
that will include a sizeable allocation to the Caribbean Investment Facility
(CIF).
The CIF
was launched in Barbados in March 2013 as a grant loan blending mechanism and
has already approved four projects (one in Dominica, two in Guyana,
and one in support of the Caribbean Development Bank) with a total grant
contribution of EUR 34.7 million. 
Aid effectiveness and donor coordination        
The
level of EU coordination on development cooperation in the Caribbean region
varies from country to country. The CARICOM (Caribbean Community) Secretariat
remains delegated by the Caribbean Member States to coordinate international,
regional and national institutions to achieve the objectives of the CARICOM
Community on Aid Effectiveness, and to ensure the participation of civil
society and the private sector. Moreover, there is increased coordination and
dialogue through senior level meetings to set priorities and ensure effective
coordination of EU cooperation activities in the field. 
The
preparation of the 11th EDF programming documents in 2013, via the
National Indicative Programmes (NIPs), has represented a good opportunity to
strengthen donors’ coordination in the region through consultation with the key
actors involved including governments, civil society, the private sector, and
financial institutions. In Haiti, the EU moved into a Joint Programming
exercise which should be consolidated in 2014.
Working towards the MDGs
The
Caribbean has seen relatively high growth rates, with several countries
improving income distribution, raising per capita social public expenditure and
applying macroeconomic policies that avoided the worst of the global economic
and financial crisis.
Progress
has been very positive on reducing extreme poverty, providing access to safe
drinking water and eliminating gender disparity in primary education, with
these targets already achieved several years ahead of the 2015 MDG deadline.
According
to the latest MDG report for the region (UN 2013 report on MDGs) the proportion
of people in the region living on less than USD 1.25 a day fell from 12% in
1990 to 6% in 2010 and this positive trend is continuing. The proportion of
undernourished people in the total population has decreased from 15% in
1990-1992 to 8% in 2010-2012. Access to primary education has been expanded
with the adjusted net enrolment rate for children growing from 88% in 1990 to
95% in 2011. Over the same period, the number of children of primary school age
who are out of school declined by more than half from seven million to three
million. The region has achieved parity in primary education between boys and
girls.
The
Caribbean is also very close to reaching the target of halving the proportion
of people without basic sanitation. The proportion of the population using an
improved sanitation facility, such as a latrine or toilet, increased from 68%
to 82% between 1990 and 2011. Meanwhile, the Caribbean has reached the safe
drinking water target (MDG 7c) five years ahead of the target date of 2015. The
proportion of the population using an improved water source increased from 85%
to 94% between 1990 and 2011. The region is also close to reaching the target
of reducing the child mortality rate, with the rate of deaths of children under
five years old falling by 64% between 1990 and 2011.
Haiti, however,
continues to be the country in this region that is well behind the average in
achieving the MDGs.
Implementation and results

Bilateral cooperation 

The
entire 10th EDF for all Caribbean countries was committed in 2013
with commitments  reaching  EUR 386 million and payments  EUR 163 million. This
represented a 30% increase with respect to 2012 (EUR 126 million paid). Because
2013 was the last year for committing 10th EDF funds, a significant
number of projects were adopted (24 projects in nine countries). The EDF funded
interventions covered a large number of sectors, from education in the Dominican
Republic to securing sea defences in Guyana, Public Finances Reform
programme in Jamaica and a EUR 112 million budget support operation
(State Building Contract) in Haiti, focusing on key state reforms and 
the delivery of basic services and education.
The Sugar
and Banana accompanying measures came to an end in 2013. All projects and
programmes under these facilities were engaged on time and fulfilled the
objectives set for the year. For the Accompanying Measures for Sugar Protocol
countries (AMSP) commitments reached EUR 91 million in 2013 and payments EUR 79
million. Payments in 2013 represent a 15% increase with respect to 2012 when
EUR 63 million was paid. The beneficiary countries include Barbados, Belize,
Guyana, Jamaica and St Kitts and Nevis and Trinidad and Tobago.
As
for the Banana Accompanying Measures - BAM (2012-2013) and its predecessors,
the Special System of Assistance (SSA from 1994-1999) and the Special Framework
of Assistance (SFA from 1998-2008), commitments reached EUR 9 million and
payments EUR 10 million. Belize, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Jamaica, St.
Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, and Suriname benefited from the BAM.

The
breakdown per country for AMSP and BAM committed to Caribbean countries in 2013
was:
 Country || Sugar (EUR) || Banana (EUR) || Implementation modality 
 Barbados || 13 358 000 ||   || Budget Support 
 Belize || 10 449 000 || 9 415 779 || Project 
 Guyana || 24 345 000 ||   || Budget Support 
 Jamaica || 29 570 000 ||   || Budget Support 
 St Kitts and Nevis || 12 763 000 ||   || Budget Support 

Budget Support

As
far as new budget support programmes (commitments) are concerned, progress in
2013 was good. Budget Support programmes represent almost 59% of bilateral
cooperation with the Caribbean under EDF funds and 80 % of budget
(sugar-related) in 2013, with budget support programmes approved mainly in Haiti,
Guyana, Jamaica, Dominican Republic and, Trinidad and Tobago. The
main sectors supported through the budget support modality included
modernisation of the sugar sector, modernisation of the state, education, and
environment.
Budget
Support programmes make a substantial contribution towards the achievement of
the country's development goals. For example, in Jamaica, budget support
disbursements have contributed to reconstruction efforts after Hurricane Sandy
that struck the country in 2012 and helped keep the country’s macroeconomic
stability. In relation to the consolidation and modernisation of the sugar
sector in Jamaica, EU budget support has facilitated the approval of 5,300
micro-grants to vulnerable workers to provide alternative livelihood options.
In addition, development has been observed in the improvement of access to
health and education services for ex-plantation workers, as well as in road
infrastructure and drainage systems in Guyana.

Regional Cooperation 

By
December 2013, the entire regional programme allocation of EUR 160 million was
committed. The decision to launch the last three regional programmes pending
under the 10th EDF for a total amount of EUR 23 million, was taken.
These projects concerned the ‘Wider Caribbean Programme’ aimed at promoting
cooperation between the Caribbean region and other neighbouring regions
including the French Outermost Regions; the ‘CARIFORUM Crime and Security
Cooperation Programme’ promoting a holistic approach to the overall safety of
citizens and the improvement of the security environment in the region; and the
programme on ‘Support to facilitate participation of CARIFORUM Civil Society in
the Regional Development and Integration process’ partially linked to the
implementation of the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA). While the 10th
EDF is fully under implementation, the region and the European Commission have
focused in 2013 on the preparation of the 11th EDF Caribbean
Regional Indicative Programme for which approximately EUR 350 million have been
reserved. 

Case study (bilateral programmes)

Four
years on from the Haiti earthquake, the EU aid reaches one in every two
Haitians. 
Since
2010, the EU has committed EUR 570 million for financing projects in a number
of priority areas, such as supporting the state's budget, rehabilitation of
roads, re-launching agriculture production, supporting primary education,
promoting the defence of human rights, assuring food security, electoral
assistance and support to trade. At the same time, the EU and Haiti are engaged
in a regular political dialogue aimed at advancing democracy, human rights, the
rule of law, security and regional cooperation.
In
relation to the agricultural sector and related sectors of food security and
rural development the EU has provided EUR 69.2 million to Haiti between 2008
and 2013. Results include support for micro credit through 11 financial
cooperatives (EUR two million), support for the fishing industry on the Ile de
la Gonâve thus benefiting 600 fishermen and 16 associations (EUR 1.5
million) and support for food security for around 5 000 rural families in the
centre west and Central Plateau regions, through hill lakes and rehabilitation
of irrigation systems.
In
relation to infrastructure development, one of the main investments of the EU
to help Haiti’s reconstruction is the provision of support to a sustainable
transport policy and network. To date, the EU has rehabilitated 367 kms of
primary road network and implemented a road maintenance fund. This has allowed
the reduction of the travel time between Cap Haitien and Ouanaminthe (the
border with Dominican Republic) from six hours to only 45 minutes.  In
addition, investment by the EU in the Route Nationale 3, between Port au Prince
and Cap Haitien, has contributed to increased foreign investment in Cap
Haitien, Haiti’s second urban and industrial centre. 
Case
study (regional programmes)
Contributing
to private sector development 
Caribbean
Export Development Agency (CEDA) is the only regional trade and investment
promotion agency in the ACP. Established in 1996 by an Inter-Governmental
Agreement as the trade promotion agency of the 15 Member States of CARIFORUM,
it expanded its activities also thanks to the continued support of the EU and
has become one of the EU’s most reliable partners in the region. Under the 10th
EDF the EU has been supporting the agency with a contribution agreement of over
EUR 28 million for the ‘Regional Private Sector Development Programme’. The
Programme was launched in 2011 in the context of support to the Economic
Partnership Agreement (EPA) and envisages a wide range of activities to support
competitiveness and the capacity of the Caribbean private sector to export. In
2013, activities continued with both grant schemes in favour of local firms
with export potential and capacity building for private and public entities in
the region.
            
Monitoring       
In
the framework of the Results Oriented Monitoring (ROM), a total of five
missions visited 20 countries in the Caribbean Region in 2013 and produced 76
reports, of which 50 were based on ongoing projects, nine were ex-post on
completed projects, five were on budget support programmes and 12 on regional
programmes. The total number of projects covered amounted to EUR 440.8 million.
Four % of ongoing projects monitored in the region showed a very good
performance (category I) and 78% showed good performance (category II),
compared to 74% in 2012.  Some 18% of the projects monitored proved to be
underperforming with problems or major difficulties (categories III and IV
respectively) as opposed to 25% in 2012. Overall, the 2013 results are better
in comparison with 2012, as there is an increase in positively assessed
relevance and quality of design. A lesser increase is observed with regard to
efficiency, effectiveness and sustainability of projects. 
For
ongoing national and regional projects, 76% of reports gave good performance
scores compared to 77% in 2012; this proportion remaining fairly stable since
2009 as shown by the following graphic.
            
Perspectives    
In a
meeting of CARICOM Heads of State in July 2013, CARICOM member states outlined
their vision and expectations on the Post-2015 Development Agenda. The focus
was on eradication of poverty and promotion of the welfare and well-being of
people through more social inclusion, gender equality and the empowerment of
women.
The
specific needs of Small Island Developing States (SIDS), for example challenges
related to climate change and energy security, were also identified as a
priority for the region. An Accountability Mechanism should be established in
2014 to promote and monitor the implementation of commitments made.
For
the EU, 2014 will be marked by the expected launch of the 11th EDF
in all Caribbean countries including the regional programme, with the exception
of Cuba, mainly supported by the Development Cooperation Instrument
(DCI). 
The
Caribbean islands are heavily dependent on imported energy. Some of these
islands are developing renewable energy programmes to address this problem.
2014 will see renewable energy projects developed in several island states with
partial support from the EU through the 11th  EDF. The Caribbean
Investment Facility (CIF) is expected to play a major role in this context.  
Acknowledging
the importance of fostering cooperation between Overseas Countries and
Territories (OCTs), Outermost Regions and ACP countries, closer cooperation is
expected between DG DEVCO and DG REGIO.          

2.4.      Asia,
Central Asia and the Pacific


2.4.1.             
Asia      

Introduction 
2013 has been a year of consolidation for the EU's relations with
its partners in Asia. In the context of a series of changes of leadership in
several countries, the EU's objectives have been to reconfirm its engagement
with its four main Asian strategic partners: India, China, Japan and South
Korea. At the same time, the EU continued to play its role in terms of support
to the stability and security of the region. High level dialogues, regular
political consultations, economic and sector policy dialogues and assistance
provided to Asia remained at the highest level of activity. This activity rate
is confirmed by the excellent pace in the negotiation of most Framework or
Partnership and Cooperation Agreements (PCA) and Free Trade Agreements (FTA).
The PCA with Mongolia was signed in April. PCA negotiations with Singapore
and Thailand were initialled by the chief negotiators in the autumn. The
EU continued to support Asian countries in their democratic and economic
transition including through election observation or expert missions in, for
example, Pakistan, Bhutan and Nepal.  
The EU continued to invest in a robust and intense cooperation
with the Association of South-East Nations (ASEAN) as a group, and with its
members. EU-ASEAN cooperation was further strengthened, through the
implementation of the Brunei Plan of Action 2013-2017. Working towards a
more ambitious EU-ASEAN political partnership several high-level visits and
meetings took place that confirmed the positive momentum, including the
EU-ASEAN Ministerial in Brunei Darussalam in July.
2013 was the last year that six Asian countries (China, India,
Indonesia, Thailand, Maldives and Malaysia) will be recipients of
bilateral development aid. Preparations were therefore started to develop new
cooperation relationships with these ‘graduated’ countries.
Aid effectiveness and donor coordination        
The
EU is among the most active donors in Afghanistan in the key sectors of
development interventions such as agriculture and rural development, governance
(including elections), health and security.
The
EU channels a growing part of its funds through the major multi-donor trust
funds for Afghanistan. At the same time, the EU is a major partner in policy
dialogue; it has a leading role in steering policy discussions on agriculture
and rural development, subnational governance, health, and human rights with
particular focus on women's rights.
In
terms of governance, the EU is a strong advocate for programmes that also
strengthen governance in terms of service delivery and local development. 
The
government and donors coordinate their intervention closely in Bangladesh
and have elaborated a Joint Cooperation Strategy which provides a division of
labour and establishes guidelines on effective EU collaboration to achieve key
development outcomes. The EU and Member States have published a “Blue Book”
which gives an overview of their various development cooperation activities in
Bangladesh.
All
bilateral support to Cambodia in 2013 was aligned with national
priorities. The EU further encouraged Government ownership by increasing the
use of aid methods that support country systems and Government ownership
(partial decentralisation, education sector budget support). Under the joint
programming exercise initiated in 2013, under the leadership of the EU, a joint
EU strategy was prepared in 2013 and will ensure that the EU and Member States'
programmes in Cambodia are coordinated and aligned behind the Government's new
National Strategic Development Plan.
Laos
is one of the first wave of countries where EU Member States have agreed to
undertake a joint programming exercise. The EU is an active player in the local
donor coordination structures through the Roundtable Table process and the
Sector Working Group (SWG) mechanism. The EU is an active
member of several other SWGs including Trade and Private Sector Development,
Education, Agriculture and Rural Development, Good Governance and unexploded
ordnance and demining activities.
In Myanmar, the EU is
fully engaged in efforts to improve development partner coordination locally,
and committed to proceeding towards Joint Programming of EU and Member States
development aid. The EU-Myanmar Task
Force, which met from 13 to 15 November 2013 in Yangon and
Naypyitaw, is the most visible expression of the lasting partnership that the
EU and Myanmar are building.
 
The EU delegation played a
pro-active role in promoting the aid effectiveness agenda in Nepal
namely by the prominent role played in various policy dialogue fora (Peace and
Stability, Education, and PFM).  In 2013, the EU continued its dialogue about
future EU assistance with the Government of Nepal as well as with the civil
society, development partners and other stakeholders. The three potential areas
identified for action are education, rural development and governance. 
In Pakistan, the EU is
actively seeking structured donor coordination and providing synergies and
ensuring activities are complementary. Rural development, education and good
governance are development areas for the programming period 2014-2020. 
Research and innovation
In
the area of research and innovation, Asian participation in FP7 was led by
China (over 320 participants with an EU contribution of over EUR 30 million),
India (over 250 participants and around EUR 40 million contributed) and ASEAN
(210 participants and over EUR 27 million of funding).
The
first meeting of the EU-China High Level Innovation Cooperation Dialogue took
place in 2013 and the first EU-China flagship initiative for food, agriculture
and biotechnology was launched at the EU-China summit of 2013.
Following
on from the joint declaration on research and innovation signed at the EU-India
Summit in 2012 enhanced cooperation between India, the EU and its Member States
took place. An EU-India call for proposals on energy was published in 2013 with
funding from seven European Funding Organisations and the Indian Department of
Science and Technology.
Central
Asian countries increased their participation in the Erasmus Mundus and Tempus
higher education programmes in 2013. 
A
first Senior Officials' Meeting on education and
culture was held in Delhi, India to exchange information and views on each
party’s policies in the field of education, cultural heritage and the cultural
and creative sectors.
The
EU-China High Level People-to-People Dialogue (HPPD) brings together under a
single roof previous sectorial dialogues in education, vocational training,
multilingualism, culture and youth. The mai achievements of the HPPD have been
the first meeting of the Higher Education Platform China-EU; the launch of the
China TUNING; the implementation of the EU-China Year of Intercultural
dialogue; the report on Culture and External Relations; the organisation of a
China-EU symposium on Youth Work development,; the organisation of an EU-China
Expert Seminar on Youth Entrepreneurship; the support of joint cooperation
projects between youth organisations by the Youth in Action and the EU-China
Youth Partnership for Friendship programmes; a
first mapping of the EU-China cultural and creative landscape; and the
organisation of seminars in
the field of cultural and creative industries in China.
Reflections
are currently being undertaken to identify new follow-up actions for 2014 to
2016 to be decided at the next HPPD meeting in September 2014. This may broaden
to include visa questions, migration and tourism issues. 
Working towards the MDGs      
According
to the 2012 Bangladesh MDG Progress Report the country has achieved
remarkable progresses in the areas of poverty alleviation, primary school
enrolment, gender parity in primary and secondary level education, lowering of
infant and under-five mortality rate and maternal mortality ratio, improving
immunization coverage and reducing the incidence of communicable diseases. The
incidence of poverty has been declining at an annual rate of 2.47% in
Bangladesh from 1991-1992 to 2010, and the target of halving the population
living under the poverty line was already achieved in 2012. However, challenges
in achieving MDGs in several key areas remain: the education sector faces
significant issues in achieving some of the targets including ensuring survival
rate to grade V, improving the quality of primary education, increasing the
share for education in government budgets and increasing coverage and improving
quality of adolescent and adult literacy programmes.
Laos
is still off-track for some MDGs including MDG 1 on nutrition and MDG 2 on
primary education. The EU is committed to contribute to the improvement of food
security and nutrition in the poorest rural areas of the country, to enhance
access to quality primary education and to strengthen the institutional and
legal framework for the rule of law in Lao People’s Democratic Republic (PDR).
In
the Philippines, support to the health sector through sector budget
support has resulted in the expansion of health insurance benefits, renovation
of health facilities and a significant increase in drug availability,
particularly for the poor. 83% of Filipinos are already insured including the
poorest 40%. The number of births attended by skilled birth attendants and
facility based deliveries has increased, which is likely to result in future
progress on maternal health and maternal mortality. Child health is mostly
improving and the target for MDG 4 on reducing child mortality is likely to be
achieved by the Philippines.       
Implementation and results
During 2013 the EU committed EUR 197.5 million to support Afghanistan
in the areas of agriculture, rural development, local governance, the election
process, the rule of law and regional cooperation. This pledge is fully in line
with the International Community's commitment to aligning 80% of aid with
Afghanistan's National Priority Programmes and channelling at least 50% of
international development assistance through the country's national budget. 
In Bangladesh, the last programme under the current
programming cycle was approved in 2013 in the form of a EUR 20 million programme
of support to health and nutrition of the poor in urban Bangladesh, bringing
the total commitment in 2011-2013 to EUR 198
million.  The
specific objective is to improve the utilisation of sustainable,
integrated and comprehensive health, nutrition and population services by the
urban poor. The
Government of Bangladesh is strongly committed to accelerate inclusive growth
and reduce poverty with the aspiration of accessing middle income country status
by 2021. In 2013, GNI per capita reached USD 1 044. However, structural causes
of chronic poverty are not properly addressed by most poverty reduction
programmes, and the risk of falling under extreme poverty due to recurrent
natural disasters and shocks is acute.
In
2013, the EU committed EUR 63 million to Cambodia, 60% of which was
channelled through budget support. On the basis of a good track record in the
education sector, further support was provided (EUR 37 million) to the sector
budget support programme, which is accompanied by technical support from
UNICEF. The positive results of this support became particularly visible in
2013, thanks to the EU enhancing its structured policy dialogue with the
government and other donors. This policy dialogue contributed to an increased
attention to education financing, budget allocations and execution efficiency.
An increase in education’s share of the budget has also been announced,
reversing a previous declining trend.  
An
additional  EUR three million was committed in 2013 to support the
international side of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia
(ECCC) or Khmer Rouge Tribunal, allowing for continuity in the court's handling
of cases, including those covering crimes against humanity related to the
forced movements of the population, and execution of soldiers. An additional
commitment of EUR eight million was made to support the country's PFM reforms,
which are at the heart of Cambodia's reform agenda, with continued progress
being made across the three platforms:  budget credibility, financial
accountability and programme budgeting. The EU is also supporting Cambodia's
decentralisation reforms.
In 2013,
the EU signed three financing agreements with the Government of Laos for
EUR 25.5 million in the sectors of health, education, trade, and governance.
The EU has been working with the World Bank to assist the Government of Lao PDR
to improve macroeconomic and fiscal management and PFM systems and to
contribute to the improvement of the performance of the education and the
health sectors in line with the national sector development plans.
In the
trade sector, the EU has been supporting Laos to comply with the rules and
commitments under ASEAN and the World Trade Organization (WTO) accession process.
Laos joined the WTO in February 2013.
In the
governance sector, the EU programme focuses on improving Lao citizens’ access
to rights and administrative services. The EU has also been supporting PFM
reforms, the Public Administration Reform and the National Assembly. The
National Assembly has become more effective as an institution and has
intensified its work with its constituency offices while its oversight
functions and capacities to draft laws have been strengthened. 
In 2013,
the EU has adopted a new programme to support rural development and improve
livelihoods in the rural areas of the Northern provinces of Laos (EUR 6.5
million) while supporting capacity building for civil society
organizations and improving their operating environment continues.
In
the Maldives, a EUR 6.5 million Climate
Change Trust Fund (CCTF) implemented by the World Bank produced good results in
2013. On renewable energy, solar panels were procured and shipped to the
project site and installation will begin on community buildings in 2014. With
regard to coral reef monitoring, the web-enabled coral reef monitoring database
development was completed.  Training of communities and local authorities
on waste management and composting were carried out while civil works related
to the Island Waste Management Centre will be completed by mid-2014. In 2013 an
additional allocation of EUR four million provided by the Commission to ensure
a seamless continuation of EU support to climate change issues in the Maldives
up until 2017. 
In
2013, the EU’s cooperation with Mongolia took into account the rapid
economic and social changes taking place in the country as a result of the
recently signed mining deals.  New projects that promote economic
diversification and aim to strengthen the economic governance of revenues from
Mongolia’s mineral wealth were adopted. The EU responded to the Government of
Mongolia’s specific request for assistance to modernise the Mongolian
standardization system, adapting and adopting EU principles, norms and standards.
The EU supports the Government’s strategy on economic development and the goal
of inclusive and sustainable development.  
The
Comprehensive Framework,
which sets out EU policy and support to ongoing reforms in Myanmar was
adopted by the Foreign Affairs Council on 22 July 2013. The EU is fully engaged
in efforts to improve development partner coordination locally and committed to
proceeding towards Joint Programming of EU and Member States development aid.
The overall aim of the Joint Programming process is to coordinate donor
contributions in order to focus effectively on key areas. The first EU-Myanmar
Task Force, which took place on 13-15 November 2013, comprised several
high-level events where EU support and the countries development challenges were
discussed and resulted in a joint statement from High Representative Ashton and
President U Soe Thein.
Nepal
remains a post-conflict and fragile country and ranks as the third poorest
country in South Asia. Despite the political impasse, it has reduced its
incidence of extreme poverty from 4 2% in 1996 to 25.2 % according to the Nepal
Living Standard Survey III conducted in 2011. However, the incidence of poverty
in rural areas is almost double than that of urban areas. One of the main
focuses of future EU assistance will be on integrated rural development with
the aim to reducing poverty in rural areas to 20 %.  Net enrolment in primary
school increased from 64 % in 1990 to 90 % today with a target of more than 95
% in 2015. The EU will continue its assistance to the education sector in Nepal
to further improve access and equity in education, to improve the quality of
education (including teacher development), to improve institutional capacities
with focus on school management committees and parent/teacher associations, and
to improve PFM and governance across the education system. It will also start
working on improving the vocational training system.
In 2013, the EU continued
its assistance in the education sector, through Sector Budget Support (School
Sector Reform Programme with EUR 31.6 million committed in 2012) in order to
increase access and improve the quality of school education.  The assistance to
‘Stability, Peace consolidation and Governance’ was also continued to support
the capacity of the Nepali State to implement sustainable peace building
activities pursuant to the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, and also through
support to the electoral process via a programme financed through UNDP.
Constituent Assembly elections took place in Nepal in November 2013. Moreover,
the EU will launch a EUR 10 million programme to enhance PFM at central level,
through a multi-donor Trust Fund managed by the World Bank, and at local level,
through a project implemented by the Asian Development Bank.  The activities of
the programme ‘Building Climate Resilience’, funded under the Global Climate
Change Alliance (GCCA) with additional contributions from Cyprus and the UK
government’s Department for International Development (DFID), launched in
February 2012.
In
the Philippines, the EU's support focuses on the health sector,
governance, trade and providing assistance to vulnerable populations. In 2013,
EU specific targeted and thematic assistance continued in Mindanao and progress
has not only been made in peace building and conflict resolution, but also in
improving livelihoods, restoring community based infrastructure and in the
return and recovery of internally displaced people. In the trade sector, the EU
has provided support to areas of trade policy and export development, standards
conformity, and food safety as well as trade facilitation. 
General
elections took place in Pakistan in May 2013 and a new Government took
office shortly afterwards. While the political situation remains tense with the
Government engaged in a three-way political struggle between the executive, the
judiciary and the military, there has been a certain degree of political
stability. The new Government also faces major macroeconomic challenges, not
least in the form of the reforms to the energy sector and in public finances
that are required urgently. 
2013 saw
significant progress in development cooperation with Pakistan, first and
foremost in the fields of education and rural development. The EU approved
support for a large budget support programme on education and a programme on
enforcing the rule of law: both programmes taking place in the Province of
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Cooperation on PFM was strengthened in the Province of
Sindh as well as at the federal level in Punjab. 
The EU has
been supporting Technical and Vocational Education Training (TVET) via
small-scale projects for human capital building and job creation for some
years. The effectiveness of this aid was demonstrated at a major event,
organised in Islamabad in November 2013, on the occasion of the visit of the EU
representatives for the Subgroup Development Cooperation.
Political
relations have been increasing in prominence since the launch of a strategic
dialogue in June 2012. Relationships have further improved following the
establishment of the new Government after the elections in early 2013 and a
successful EU election observation mission.
In
2013 the main achievements in Sri Lanka arose from the ‘Assistance to
Conflict Affected People programme’ (EUR 53 million) which came to an end. The
programme provided assistance to about 500 000 internally displaced people
(IDP) helping them to get their lives back on track after resettlement through
enhanced food security and the benefits of various forms of livelihood support.
In addition 52 schools, 55 community buildings and 27 healthcare centres were
reconstructed, and several thousand hectares of agricultural land were
rehabilitated. Finally, a number of supporting measures such as legal aid
assistance, empowerment of women and vocational training were also successfully
completed.
The
EU has also funded housing programmes over the years in response to urgent
needs, particularly in the North, but also in the East of Sri Lanka where
clusters of previous displaced people have recently resettled since 2011 and
live in precarious conditions and in provisional shelter. The first phase of
the programme came to an end in July 2013 and produced excellent results,
providing housing for more than 10 000 people after their release from their
camps. Under the second phase of the programme implemented by UN Habitat, which
will be finalised in March 2014, close to 3 700 houses will have been built or
repaired. Under the third and ongoing phase of the programme, around 3 000
houses will be completed by June 2015, bringing the total number of houses
provided by the EU to close to 20 000 in the North and East.
In Vietnam,
a EUR 114 million support to the reforms in the Health Sector has been decided
in December, further enhancing EU support to access and quality of health
services for the poor, facilitating the provision of universal health insurance
coverage and an improvement of health system management. € 6.4 million have
been committed to strengthen key public finance institutions with the aim of
assisting Vietnam’s plan for an increased transparency and accountability in
the use of public funds.
Case
Studies
Afghan wheat
The EU currently
supports a total of 104 private enterprises in 28 provinces in Afghanistan
producing a total of 25 000 metric tonnes of certified wheat seeds each year,
thus improving food security in the country. 10 000 metric tonnes were sold and
delivered to Afghan farmers for the 2013-14 sowing season. More than 500 000
certified fruit saplings were sold to farmers to replace poor quality and older
varieties with higher yield and high market-value species.
Over 70 000
Bangladesh farmers trained to increase production.
Since 2010, the
Commission has helped more than 70 000 farmers (both husbands and wives),
and over 3 000 government extension officials with hands-on training in crop
intensification in seven coastal districts. Food prices in Bangladesh have
risen dramatically since 2007 resulting in serious problems of malnutrition. In
addition, southern Bangladesh was hit by two devastating cyclones in 2007
(Sidr) and 2009 (Aila). In response, Bangladesh’s Government launched a
campaign to increase local production.
Houaphanh boosts Bamboo Development Strategy. 
The province of Houaphanh in Northern Laos has abundant and
largely untapped natural bamboo resources. The provincial government recognises
the potential of bamboo to contribute significantly to the local economy and
help to alleviate the high incidence of poverty in the area. To that end, it
has developed a Bamboo Development Strategy which the EU is supporting. Sixty
bamboo producer communities, processors and traders in three districts have
increased revenues along the bamboo value chains, have developed bamboo
plantations while managing the forest sustainably, and initiated locally based
handicraft and pre-processing units for markets and industry.
Improved Cook Stoves in Laos
The overall objective of this programme is to contribute to
poverty reduction and sustainable economic growth in Lao PDR by developing a sustainable
value chain around improved cook stoves. The Improved Cook Stoves promote the
efficient use of wood and charcoal and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Through
the project, 15 SME stove producers were able to sustainably produce 100 000
high quality Improved Cook Stoves. An estimated 100 000 low income households
will directly benefit from this initiative.
Cambodia boosts rice exports
The
EU supports SME development in Cambodia through a EUR 8.6 million input
to a Multi-Donor Trust Fund (MDTF) managed by the International
Finance Corporation (IFC). With the EU as the main
contributor, the programme is improving SME competitiveness
in the rice sector. This includes the upgrading of rice
milling capacity in the country as well as support to marketing Cambodian rice
which won the ‘Best World Rice’ award for 2012 and 2013. As a result, the value
and volume of exports more than doubled in 2013. 
Development for
Stabilisation and Peace in Pakistan

In 2013 an EU-financed sector
budget support programme was launched to reinforce local development in the
militancy and flood affected Swat Valley of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Province. This
programme builds on earlier humanitarian and recovery assistance. It
contributes to the consolidation of peace and a return to normality for the six
million inhabitants of a mountainous region that is also the home place of
the 2013 Sakharov prize winner Malala Yousuf: a young woman who is currently in
Europe where she is recovering following an attempt to kill her and silence her
calls for improved access to education for girls.
Monitoring
The 2013 monitoring exercise covered a total of 191
projects in Asia which represents an increase of almost 7% compared with 2012.
The total value of projects monitored in Asia this year amounts to EUR 747
million, which represents a decrease of almost 4% compared to 2012 (EUR 777
million). Notwithstanding security concerns in certain Asian countries,
particularly with reference to Pakistan, Afghanistan and North Korea, missions
to these three countries were organised and successfully undertaken in 2013.
 
Reports produced vs. projects monitored in
Asia by type 2013
 Projects || Number of projects monitored || 191 
 Ongoing projects || 163 
 National projects – ongoing || 142 
 Regional projects - ongoing || 21 
 Ex-post || 27 
 National projects - ex-post || 26 
 Regional projects - ex-post || 1 
 Budget Support || 1 
 Reports || Number of MRs produced || 191 
 MRs Ongoing || 163 
 MRs Ongoing for national projects || 142 
 MRs Ongoing for regional projects || 21 
 MRs Ex-post || 27 
 MRs ex-post for national projects || 26 
 MRs ex-post for regional projects || 1 
 Budget Support || 1 
 Total budget covered ||   ||   EUR 747 million 
Overview of performance by DAC criterion of
MRs for ongoing national projects in Asia
 Asia || Very good (Cat I) || Good  (Cat II) || Problems (Cat III) || Serious deficiencies (CAT IV) 
 Ongoing (national) projects 
 Relevance || 18% || 59% || 23% || 0% 
 Efficiency || 10% || 49% || 39% || 2% 
 Effectiveness || 7% || 49% || 41% || 3% 
 Impact || 14% || 62% || 23% || 1% 
 Sustainability || 7% || 61% || 31% || 1% 
 TOTAL ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Total Number of MRs ||   ||   ||   ||   
Breaking the data down by sub criteria provides some
interesting insights. Of note is the consistency in the performance of the
respective sub criteria: efficiency problems are mainly linked to problems with
inputs (human and financial), and management weaknesses. On the other hand, while
there are very high levels of relevance there are also significant weaknesses
in design. In summary, problems identified in the 2013 ROM portfolio (and in
previous years) are concentrated in the areas of:

 Availability of inputs (staffing
     problems and delayed financial transfers) that are generally more
     prevalent in the earlier stages of the project life cycle;
 Management (inappropriate organisational
     set up; lack of adequate management tools, poor communication, weak
     monitoring systems);
 Financial sustainability/viability; and
 Poor design (overly ambitious; wrong
     choice of partners; lack of clarity re roles and responsibilities and lack
     of involvement of key stakeholders etc.).

The overall performance of regional programmes in 2013 is
similar to that recorded in 2012: they consistently score fairly on average in
terms of Efficiency, and the closely related Effectiveness criteria. These poor
ratings are mainly due to the problems encountered in achieving a consistent
implementation of activities and achievement of outputs and results across a
heterogeneous group of countries. By their nature they are more difficult to
implement due to the varying contexts within which they operate and the
differing capacities of the participating countries. 
            
Perspectives    
The EU's
dialogue and cooperation with Asian partners should keep focusing on
sustainable development and access to resources. Energy and water are important
issues that need to be addressed and areas of cooperation such as good
governance, the rule of law, economic growth and integration will continue to
require attention. 
While Asian economies
have shown remarkable recent growth, poverty is still widespread on the
continent. Most countries in the region face challenges due to uneven regional
development. Moreover, increasing income inequality is a matter of concern. EU
cooperation through the DCI focuses mainly on governance and social sectors,
namely education and health, food security, rural development, climate change,
environmental protection and trade integration, all of which have beneficial
effects on reducing poverty and achieving the MDGs.
In
Afghanistan, in line with the EU's high level political commitments, the
multi-annual programme under preparation for Afghanistan (2014-20) aims to
maintain funding levels comparable to those of the preceding period
(2007-2013). The new programme will be centrally informed by the principles of
the Tokyo Mutual Accountability Framework (TMAF) that sets out a series of
commitments by the Government of Afghanistan and donors including the EU.
In
Myanmar, the proposed main sectors for development cooperation with for
2014 – 2020 will be rural development, education, governance and support to
peace. Although the bilateral assistance budget hasn’t been formally approved
by the European Parliament and the European Council, EU support could increase
up to EUR 90 million per year. Support for the Ethnic Peace Process is a key EU
priority and although there is much good will and appropriate structures for
coordination in place, the issue remains complex and sensitive. The challenge
is to assist the government as it defines its development strategy for the
country, while also supporting the key area of ethnic peace. 

2.4.2.             
Central Asia

Introduction 
The
EU continued to strengthen its relations with Central Asian countries (Kazakhstan,
the Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan)
throughout 2013 on the basis of the EU’s Central Asia Strategy and the review
of the Strategy and future orientations and key actions outlined in the Third
Progress Report. Cooperation continued to develop notably in the regional
initiative areas of education, the rule of law and the environment and water,
as well as on energy, human rights promotion and the action plan on drugs and
border management. A first EU-Central Asia High Level Security Dialogue was
held in Brussels in June 2013 at the level of Deputy Foreign Ministers,
reflecting the increased importance of security issues in relations. In
November 2013, the revised EU-Central Asia Action Plan on Drugs was approved;
this was welcomed by the EU-Central Asia Ministerial Meeting on 20 November
2013 in Brussels. 
During 2013, the EU-Central Asia policy dialogue intensified at
various levels: ministerial conferences, regional technical groups and national
level dialogue (notably under the Flagship Initiatives established for the
priority areas) enhanced further cooperation and promoted the effective
implementation of projects at regional and bilateral level. To diversify economies and to promote regional cooperation,
structural reforms remain crucial; it is particularly important to strengthen
private sector development. As a land-locked region, Central Asia also faces
important challenges in terms of geography. In addition, it is highly prone to
natural disasters and extremely vulnerable to climate change. National policies
for environmental governance and sustainable energy development, which would
bring substantial benefits to the population and the wider regional economy,
have emerged at the top of the policy agenda in all countries.
Aid effectiveness and donor coordination        
Donor
coordination is improving across the region, thanks in part to the EU-Central
Asia Strategy and its implementation mechanisms, and as a result of efforts at
country level. The EU has also increased its cooperation with international
financing institutions, enhancing overall coordination and enabling a sharper
focus on priority areas to improve the impact of assistance.
During
2013, the Commission continued to foster donor coordination and implement the
EU Code of Conduct on the division of labour in Central Asia. Notable results
have been achieved in Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, where joint
cooperation strategies with other donors have been in place since 2008 - 2009.
In Kyrgyzstan, the EU became co-chair of the broader donor group (the
Development Partners Coordination Council) which meets monthly. In Uzbekistan,
the Commission Delegation and EU Member States held regular coordination
meetings.  Although Turkmenistan is not yet a signatory to the Paris
Declaration, recently regular coordination meetings have been held in Ashgabat
where EU and non-EU actors discuss their activities in key sectors for
development. The EU cooperates with the UN across the region on issues
including: elections, human rights, social protection, prison reform, women’s
rights and border management issues. 
In Tajikistan,
work on the division of labour in the country is mainly dealt with through the
Development Coordination Council. Within this framework donors are looking for
greater transparency about current and planned activities with the aim of
avoiding double funding and to increase synergies between activities.
Cooperation in Tajikistan aims to use country systems wherever specific
conditions are met. Substantial support is thus channelled through country
systems (42% of 2013 disbursements) mainly through sector budget support
programmes. 
Working towards the MDGs      
Central Asia is, in general,
in line with 13 MDG indicators, slow in another five (child, infant and
maternal mortality, skilled birth attendance and access to water), and
regressing or making no progress in two (primary school enrolment and HIV
prevalence). As a whole the region has made some progress on poverty reduction,
in particular as regards the number of people living on less than USD 1.25 per
day, and has stopped the spread of tuberculosis. By 2015 it is expected that
the region will meet the following MDG targets: country line poverty, provision
of health services on antenatal care, and proportion of land area covered by
forests.
Kazakhstan has achieved MDGs 1,
2 and 3 and has set more ambitious ‘MDG+’ goals: halve poverty among the rural
population; achieve universal secondary education; ensure gender mainstreaming
in national planning and budgeting; prevent violence against women; and
increase women’s representation in legislative and executive bodies. It has
also achieved the indicators: skilled birth
attendance (MDG 5) and tuberculosis incidence and prevalence (MDG
6). However, there are some troubling
trends in the underweight children indicator (MDG 1). 
The
Kyrgyz Republic has made considerable progress in the achievement of the
MDGs. The target benchmarks for a number of indicators for MDGs 1, 2, 3 and 8
have already been reached. The country has also attained the MDG 6 targets on
tuberculosis incidence and prevalence, but has decreased the proportion of
protected areas. Nevertheless, a number of goals need an increased attention,
including those related to reduction of maternal and child mortality rates and
combating HIV/AIDS. 
Tajikistan
has attained MDGs 1 and 2, and has reduced tuberculosis prevalence and
incidence (MDG 6). However, progress is slow with some of the gender equality
indicators (MDG 3). The country has met the targets on CO2
emissions and basic sanitation. Tajikistan being one of the countries implementing
‘MDG Acceleration Frameworks’ (MAFs) identified lack of access to energy as a
barrier to achievement of the goals on poverty, child and maternal health,
education, and has applied the MAF to unlock bottlenecks to the achievement of
these targets.
Turkmenistan
has attained most of MDG 7 targets related to emerging
environmental issues: reduction of CO2
emissions, increase of protected
areas; and improvement of basic sanitation facilities. The country has also
reduced the prevalence of tuberculosis (MDG 6). However, it is regressing
in providing access to safe drinking water (MDG 7). 
Uzbekistan has attained the
MDG 6 target on tuberculosis incidence, but is the only country in Central
Asia still to achieve MDG 2 primary enrolment and completion target. While the
country is coming close to reaching its MDG of reducing the rate of population
living below poverty line to 14 % in 2015, poverty remains a serious problem in rural areas.
Implementation and results
In
2013, EU development cooperation commitments to Central Asia totalled EUR 95.3
million. 
In Kazakhstan,
the EU approved a new programme ‘Supporting Kazakhstan's transition to a Green
Economy Model’ in 2013 and continued the implementation of the programmes on
public sector reform, economic diversification and foreign investments.
In Kyrgyzstan,
implementation of the Social Protection sector budget support programme
continued, contributing not only to progress in PFM reform (notably the
realisation of an internal audit), but also to the adoption of several
government programmes aiming to improve care of children living in
institutions.
Furthermore,
implementation of two new programmes started in 2013: a EUR 20 million
education sector reform contract and a EUR 13.5 million programme promoting
respect for the rule of law. The implementation architecture for the latter is
still under preparation, including negotiations with EU Member States regarding
the establishment of a consortium for the two major components ‘Enhancing
Capacity and Oversight Mechanisms’ and ‘Judiciary Reform’. Progress in
education reform, however, was tangible, and combined with progress in
improvement of PFM allowed for a first disbursement of the sector budget
support in December.
In
addition, the prison reform programme was concluded in 2013. Results included
training of prison staff, the establishment of income-generating activities for
inmates and the refurbishment of designated prisons. These positive results
were confirmed by an assessment mission and also directly through positive
feedback from beneficiaries.
In Tajikistan,
six projects focused on poverty alleviation in rural areas were finalised.
Several agribusiness cooperatives were established and are successfully
operating, more than 20 000 tree seedlings have been planted, and over 3 350
farmers benefited from training in energy efficiency and natural resources.
Work on further expansion of social services at the community level continued.
Four Social Services development projects started in 2013 and several day care
centres and outreach services have been established. The Targeted Social
Assistance scheme, after successful piloting in two districts in 2011-2012, has
been expanded to an additional eight districts. In health,
with EU and other donors support, the government has started piloting per
capita financing for primary health care and revised the basic benefit package.
EU has also supported the Government in its final efforts to gain WTO
accession. Tajikistan has become the 159th member of WTO.
In Turkmenistan the EU has concluded a programme
to support the interpretation and application of International law. This EUR
1.4 million project has upgraded the level of expertise of judicial and legal
professionals involved in legal drafting and implementation. As a result, over
300 participants were trained in International law and related practices.
In the area of human rights, the EU has finalised the
implementation with UNDP and the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human
Rights (OHCHR) of a EUR 2.2 million first wide donor programme aiming to engage
Turkmenistan in complying with its international human rights standards.
In 2013, the EU has focused its support in the area of
Vocational Education and Training (VET). The EU bilateral cooperation to
modernise professional education in Turkmenistan will continue in the years to
come with the aim of extending the reform process to key sectors of the VET
system.
In Uzbekistan, the EU programme in support to the Reform of
the Criminal Justice Sector in Uzbekistan, implemented by specialised agencies
from EU Member States, provides capacity building at strategic and operational
levels within the Uzbekistan Supreme Court Research Centre, the General
Prosecutor's office, the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Internal
Affairs. Phase II of the EU programme aiming at the
Improvement of Mother and Child Health Services in Uzbekistan is contributing
to ongoing health reforms in Uzbekistan by implementing an integrated package
of new-born and child survival interventions, thus bringing the country closer
to attaining its Millennium Development Goals (see case study).
The Investment Facility for Central Asia (IFCA) continued to
provide targeted assistance by blending EU grants with loans from European
financial institutions and banks to gain financial and
qualitative leverage and thereby increase the impact of EU cooperation. IFCA is now active in the areas of environment (renewable
energies and energy efficiency), energy (renewable energies and energy
efficiency), and with SMEs. In the future, a possible extension to include
social infrastructure investments and transport is envisaged. In 2013, four
projects have been financed for a total amount in IFCA grants of nearly EUR 16
million contributing to projects amounting to a total value of  EUR 185
million. These projects are Framework for strengthening Infrastructure in
Central Asia, the Bishkek Solid Waste Project, the Framework for Technical
Assistance in Kazakhstan, and the Technical Assistance to KazAgro Climate loan
for SMEs, Midcaps and microSMEs.
The regional EU-Central Asia Rule of Law Platform project
continued activities in 2013 in support of the implementation of the political
EU Rule of Law Initiative for Central Asia. The project organised several
national and regional events including a regional seminar on the right to a
fair trial in Bishkek, a study visit to administrative courts and
institutions in Latvia, Germany and France and to European institutions in
Strasbourg, a training workshop for the development of the professional skills
of enforcement agents in Dushanbe, and a round-table on fair trials and defence
rights in Almaty.
The
implementation of the Regional Environmental Programme (EURECA) continued as
well as the activities of the EU-Central Asia Platform for Environment and
Water cooperation, with the fourth EU-Central Asia high level conference
organised in Bishkek in February 2013 on water and environmental protection. 
The
EU-Central Asia Education Platform responds to the need for a more structured
dialogue on education modernisation in the region and for coordination of EU
and Member States cooperation initiatives in this sector. Within this project
in 2013 series of national events were organised including a regional workshop
on VET in Kazakhstan and national human resource management seminars in Kyrgyzstan
and Uzbekistan. On the basis of a needs assessment and stakeholder
consultations, topics chosen so far for policy dialogues are: Quality in
Vocational Education and Training (VET) and Higher Education (HE); Human
resource management in VET and HE; teacher policies, education and training.
The
implementation of the fifth phase of the EU regional programme Central Asia
Drug Action Programme (CADAP) which gives support to drug demand reduction in
Central Asian was completed in the second semester of 2013. The implementation
of the programme by a consortium of EU Member States has yielded good results
demonstrating institutionalisation of EU best practices in drug related
agencies of the region. The sixth phase of CADAP will support drug prevention
and reduction measures preventing and reducing drug use and drug-related harm
to health and society. 
Phase
eight of the Border Management Programme in Central Asia (BOMCA), supporting
integrated border management, continued in 2013. It gave a strong focus to
sustaining border management reforms on the lines of the Integrated Border
Management concept widely applied in Europe. The 11th annual Central Asia
Border Security Initiative (CABSI) meeting was held in October 2013 in order to
take stock of the implementation of security programmes in the region over the last
decade. Participants expressed their commitment to improving the security
issues along Central Asian borders by promoting integrated border management.
Case studies
Improvement of Mother and Child Health Services in Uzbekistan,
Phase II
This
project contributes to ongoing health reforms in Uzbekistan by implementing an
integrated package of new-born and child survival interventions to help bring
the country closer to attaining its Millennium Development Goals. It serves as
a successful example of how a national commitment to large-scale policy reform
and introduction of high-impact, cost-effective health interventions can make a
real difference. With EU support, over 2 700 health professionals are able to
provide quality health services. Ten training centres were created in six pilot
regions to support this process. The Ministry of Health is being assisted in
updating the most important regulatory frameworks in the area of mother and
child health. In addition, the project is focused on improving the health
culture of the population by making positive changes to family behaviours and
practices in health, nutrition and hygiene.
Support
to Public Internal Financial Control II in Tajikistan (2011-2013)
This
Programme focused on the development and implementation of methodology for
Financial Management and Control and Internal Auditing; the strengthening of
internal financial control systems in the areas of budget preparation, control
of spending and financial reporting in the core Tajikistan ministries and the
professional certification of internal auditors.
In
2013 intensive training was implemented to build
the capacity of various ministries. This allowed the extension of the
preparation of detailed budget plans according to the Medium Term Expenditures
Framework from the three initial social ministries (Health, Social Protection
and Education) to a total of six ministries (including the ministries of
energy, agriculture and transport). Procedures were approved to implement the
Law on PFM and the Medium-term Budget was prepared in accordance with the Law.
In
2013, for the first time in Tajikistan, the certification of internal auditors
was achieved by using computer-based testing and web-based training programmes;
in total, sixty-one public sector internal auditors have been certified.
Internal Audit and Financial Management Control were strengthened in the
Ministry of Finance and several line ministries. The Chamber of Accounts has
also been established and started the first audit ever of the Tajikistan budget
The
Law on Internal Audit in Tajikistan’s public sector has become a model law for
the Commonwealth of Independent States of the former Soviet Union.
 Supporting the modernisation of professional education in Turkmenistan   Following this two year, EUR 2.6 million bilateral programme on ‘Support to quality and relevance of Vocational Education and Training (VET)’ professional qualifications have been developed for three first pilot sectors in Turkmenistan: construction, agriculture and tourism. This will help to improve the population's employability in the context of lifelong learning. The project has cooperated with 11 pilot schools in the relevant sectors and has provided training to over 200 VET school teachers and directors.   The establishment of Working Groups on VET as well as the organisation of study visits abroad to European VET centres have been additional achievements for the project involving relevant stakeholders in the selected sectors.    This project is the first EU funded intervention in the overall VET policy in Turkmenistan. It has been implemented in parallel to major education reforms that occurred in 2013, namely the transition to 12 year general secondary education, which also brings changes in professional education in the country.   
Monitoring       
The 2013 monitoring exercise covered a total of 46
projects in Central Asia which represents a decrease of almost 19% compared
with 2012, and a decrease of 27% compared to 2011. However, the total value of
Central Asian projects monitored this year amounts to EUR 123 million, which
represents an increase of almost 6% compared with 2012 (EUR 116 million).
Reports produced vs. projects monitored in
Central Asia by type 2013
 Projects || Number of projects monitored || 46 
 Ongoing projects || 38 
 National projects - ongoing || 29 
 Regional projects - Ongoing || 9 
 Ex-post || 8 
 National projects - ex-post || 7 
 Regional projects - ex-post || 1 
 Budget Support || 0 
 Reports || Number of MRs produced || 63 
 MRs Ongoing || 55 
 MRs Ongoing for national projects || 29 
 MRs Ongoing for regional projects || 26 
 MRs Ex-post || 8 
 MRs ex-post for national projects || 7 
 MRs ex-post for regional projects || 1 
 Budget Support || 0 
 Total budget covered ||   || EUR 123 million 
Overview of performance by DAC criterion of
MRs for ongoing national projects in Central Asia
 Central Asia || Very good (Cat I) || Good  (Cat II) || Problems (Cat III) || Serious deficiencies (Cat IV) || Average 
 Ongoing (national) projects 
 Relevance || 7% || 76% || 17% || 0% || 2.94 
 Efficiency || 7% || 59% || 31% || 3% || 2.79 
 Effectiveness || 7% || 59% || 31% || 3% || 2.84 
 Impact || 3% || 69% || 28% || 0% || 2.84 
 Sustainability || 0% || 83% || 17% || 0% || 2.84 
 TOTAL ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2.85 
 Total Number of MRs ||   ||   ||   ||   || 29 
The overall average score for the portfolio of ongoing
national projects monitored in Central Asia during 2013 (29 reports) was 2.85
as compared with 2.99 for 42 reports in 2012. The highest rated criterion in
2013 was Relevance and Quality of Design (2.94) and the lowest rated criterion
is Efficiency (2.79).  This year’s ratings show a slight decrease in all
criterion compared with the situation recorded in 2012.
The overall performance of regional programmes in Central
Asia in 2013 has registered an improvement compared to 2012: scoring 2.80
compared with 2.60. Although generalisation about programmes is very difficult
to make given the very diverse nature of EU support to regional initiatives in
the targeted countries, they do seem to suffer particular problems in terms of
Impact and Efficiency (2.69 and 2.77), although this still represents a slight
improvement in comparison with 2012 (2.63 and 2.60 respectively).The EC
regional cooperation strategy in Central Asia focuses on three main areas of
intensified policy dialogue and enhanced co-operation: rule of law, education,
and environment. These three platforms were monitored this year and the scores
awarded show that two of the three are experiencing serious difficulties (2.40
being the overall score for the Rule of Law Platform and 2.46 for the Education
Platform). On the other hand, the Environment Platform was rated relatively
positively (2.77) which would indicate that there is scope for an exchange of
experiences and best practice between the three areas.
Perspectives    
The EU’s Multiannual Indicative Programme allocation for Central
Asia for 2011-13 was EUR 321 million and
covered both regional and bilateral cooperation. The new programming period for
2014-2020 is under preparation and the future EU cooperation with Central Asia
will focus at bilateral level on the specific focal sectors identified for each
country, while concentrating at regional level on the key areas of sustainable
socioeconomic development and regional security for development. 

2.4.3.             
Pacific

Introduction

In
September 2013, the annual Pacific Island Forum (PIF), the region's key annual
political meeting gathering all the nations' leaders, took place in the
Marshall Islands with the theme “Marshalling a Pacific response to the climate
challenge”. Commissioner Hedegaard represented the EU and engaged in talks
aimed at driving the international and regional climate change agenda forward
and to highlight the immediate negative effects of climate change on the
region. The EU's support in addressing the impact of climate change was backed
up by the signing of the ‘ACP-EU Building Safety and Resilience in the Pacific’
programme. 
The
EU also signed up with its climate change targets to the Majuro Declaration for
Climate Leadership adopted by the PIF. In the Declaration Pacific Island
Countries committed to phase down their own greenhouse gas emissions with a
view to putting pressure on other much bigger polluter regions. The partnership
between committed Pacific and European (as well as African and other) parties
to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is a main driving
force in international climate negotiations. 
The
EU continues to encourage the region to ratify and implement UN conventions on
human rights as well as the Rome Statute on the International Criminal Court.
The Pacific suffers from the lowest level worldwide of female political
representation and an unacceptable level of gender-based violence. The EU is
ready to further support the region to tackle gender issues as a key constraint
to achieving sustainable development.
Based
on Fiji's new Constitution, preparations started with a view to
elections in September 2014 to which the EU is providing support. In accordance
with the appropriate measures agreed under article 96 of the Cotonou Agreement,
assistance continued to be channelled through civil society and regional
organisations.
Pacific
regional cooperation supports the economic integration efforts of Pacific
countries in areas such as trade, including negotiations of a Pacific
Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement. Following informal suspension,
following Papua New Guinea’s decision to withdraw, negotiations are
expected to continue once the Pacific side has agreed on a common position on
the way forward.
From
a research and innovation perspective a new network, PACE-NET Plus, was
launched in 2013 to continue supporting the EU-Pacific policy dialogue in
Science and Technology, including dialogue on innovation issues.
Aid
effectiveness and donor coordination        
The EU supports the
2009 Cairns Compact which seeks to enhance aid effectiveness in the Pacific by
encouraging development partners (states and regional organisations) to lead
donor coordination. As of 2011 delegated cooperation and transfer agreements
had become possible with Australia that allowed the EU and Australia to use one
another's experience and implement programmes on each other's behalf. Australia
has decided to provide funding to an EU intervention in the food security
sector in South Sudan. On its side, the EU has agreed to fund an Australian
technical and vocational training programme to sugar industry dependants in
Fiji.
The
success of the Pacific Energy Summit in Auckland in April 2013, co-hosted by
New Zealand and the EU, created a momentum in the coordination of development
aid between the European Union and New Zealand and contributed to fast track
renewable and energy efficiency investments in the Pacific. In
2013, the EU endorsed the Pacific Region Infrastructure Facility (PRIF) Charter
which provides a platform from which Australia, New Zealand, the Asian
Development Bank, the World Bank, the Commission, European bilateral Investment
Banks, the EIB and, more recently, Japan can coordinate infrastructure
projects. 
As
a whole, the presence of the EU in the Pacific operates through EU delegations
in Papua New Guinea, in the Solomon Islands, where the EU office was upgraded
to a fully-fledged delegation, and the Delegation to the Pacific region based
in Fiji. Small offices in New Caledonia and Samoa also reinforce the EU role as
a strategic partner in the region. The office in Vanuatu was, however, closed
down on 31 December 2013.
Working
towards the MDGs      
Despite continued and
coordinated efforts, several countries in the Pacific are still falling behind
on their MDGs and progress, in general, is slow compared to 2012, where only
the Solomon Islands showed marked progress (on MDGs 4 and 5). Papua New
Guinea, Solomon Islands and Kiribati are not yet on track
with any MDGs [55].
Hunger and
malnutrition is relatively rare in the Pacific region, but Timor Leste
is an exception with relatively high levels of malnutrition. In order to improve
this situation, the EU in 2013 contributed EUR 10.2 million to a nutrition
programme
to be implemented in partnership with UNICEF. The Pacific lag on MDG 1
mainly refers to poverty in terms of people lacking access to basic services
and opportunities to participate in socioeconomic life and meet basic human
needs.[56]
Whereas tracking poverty in the Pacific is problematic because of poor
statistics, Cook Islands, Fiji, Niue, Palau, Marshall Islands and Tuvalu,
are now classed as High Middle Income Countries[57], (New
Caledonia and French Polynesia being classified as high income). In
the region all countries belong to at least the lower middle income category[58].
Progress has been
made towards achieving universal primary education, MDG 2, where only Kiribati
and Papua New Guinea are off track. Similarly, for MDG 3 progress in empowering
women is off track only for Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands, but shows
mixed results for most other countries. Papua New Guinea is now the only
Pacific country off track with regard to reducing child mortality (MDG 4)but
many are also on track to achieve maternal health goals.   
With the exception of
Papua New Guinea, Kiribati and the Marshall Islands, most Pacific
island countries are likely to achieve the MDG targets on HIV/AIDS, malaria and
other diseases by 2015 (MDG 6). 
Concerning
environmental sustainability (MDG 7), energy security remains a key priority in
the region as most countries are highly dependent on imported fossil fuels.
Access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation remain a concern in many
Pacific states. Overall global warming and climate change pose significant
threats to most Pacific island nations that are highly vulnerable to rising sea
levels. Progression towards environmental sustainability is slow in Papua
New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Kiribati and Nauru, but,
for instance, Timor Leste has vastly expanded its protected areas. Also
in Timor Leste a programme of the Global Climate Change Alliance for
EUR four million was approved and will start in 2014 in partnership with the
state aid organisations GIZ (Germany) and CICL (Portugal). 
Implementation
and results
2013
represented the final year of execution of the 10th EDF and implementation
showed good progress in many countries, particularly in countries where budget
support is in place or programmed (Samoa, the Solomon Islands, Tonga,
Vanuatu and the Cook Islands) in support of sectors such as water
and sanitation, energy and health. The Global
Climate Change Action covers the entire region and the EU is now funding
climate change and environment programmes in every Pacific region country
subject to its development aid.
For
the Cook Islands, the Commission took the Decision to finance the Sanitation
Sector Reform Contract for an amount of EUR 2.550 million.
A military coup in Fiji in December 2006 led to
the suspension of most of the EU's cooperation with the country. Since 2007,
assistance is channelled through NGOs or regional organisations. The main
source of EU funding to Fiji is therefore the Accompanying Measures for Former
Sugar Protocol Countries that aims to provide social mitigation measures to
alleviate poverty by promoting farm income and agriculture. Programmes have
started to yield results as a significant number of farmers and those who have
lost their livelihoods have benefited from new income earning opportunities
through vocational training and access to credit for farmers. In total EUR 48
million were committed between 2011 and 2013 for social mitigation programmes,
key services to agriculture, complementary livelihood opportunities and support
to the sugar industry. In 2013, the EU also supported the democratization
process through civic education and support to elections and the Parliament. 
In Kiribati,
two successful EU programmes in 2013 saw follow-on allocations of funding
in the EUR 3.4 million Kiribati Water and Sanitation programme phase II, and an
extension of the Environmentally safe aggregates in Tarawa (see example
programme) brought the funding up to EUR 5.2 million.
In
2013 the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Niue, Tuvalu
and Palau all received funds to enhance their Technical Cooperation
Facilities to support the administrative implementation of programmes.

The
EU has continued to provide important assistance to support the implementation
of the Samoan’s water and sanitation sector policy in 2013. 
In Timor-Leste,
the EU approved budget support for EUR four million that will enable scaling
up future budget support. Meanwhile a mid-term review of an ongoing EDF10 rural
development programme (EUR 23 million) commented very positively on a
labour-based rural road component implemented by ILO, whereas a Health Sector
programme (EUR 10 million) performed less satisfactorily. Tendering for a District
Road project (EUR 20.5 million) was started in 2013 and will be launched
in 2014. Other major ongoing programmes concern support to democratic
governance (EUR 10.5 million) and support to None State Actors (NSAs) (EUR 4
million).
In 2013 three projects completing
the 10th EDF in favour of Papua New Guinea were approved,
namely; the EUR 26 million Human Resources Development Programme II, the EUR 6
million Trade Related Assistance II and the EUR 32.28 million Rural Economic
Development II. 
2013 also paved the way for
a significant support for Tonga’s Energy Sector Reform.
The EU's
programmes for regional cooperation (EUR 114 million
for the 10th EDF, 2007-2013) complement national assistance programmes and aim at tackling
challenges with a regional dimension. In 2013, new
decisions were adopted to support climate change
adaptation and to promote sustainable energy for a total of EUR 35.5 million.
There were also actions to strengthen NSAs’ engagement in regional policy development
and implementation. Two regional fisheries projects already in place since 2012
continued to yield good results and contributed to tracking and surveillance systems for sustainable management of migrating fish such
as Tuna and prevention of illegal fishing. Another project, aimed at
strengthening Pacific economic integration through trade led to, among other
things, trade legislation reviews in Palau, the Federated States of
Micronesia and Tuvalu, and to technical support for WTO engagement
and trade negotiations. 
Case studies
Renewable
energy in the Pacific
In
three Northern Pacific Island states, the Renewable Energy and Energy
Efficiency Programme (EUR 15.49 million
in 2010-15), seeks to replace expensive imported petrol
products with clean, safe and affordable renewable electricity in remote
islands. The programme simultaneously decreases dependence on fossil fuels and
has a net positive impact on the Islands’ balance of payments. In the Republic
of Marshall Islands, the project completes electrification of all outer
island communities by installing 1 500 solar home systems in 14 atolls, giving
7 000 people access to basic electricity for the first time and enabling the
country to meet its target of electrification of 95 % of rural outer atoll
households. By the end of the project 37 % of the country's total population
will receive electricity exclusively from renewable sources. In the Federated
States of Micronesia, standalone solar systems have been installed in 10
schools, four health centres and charging stations for 3 500 solar lanterns has
provided 7 000 people with better lighting. In addition, 900 people have access
to reliable and affordable electricity with the installation of a solar
micro-grid. The project has also rehabilitated a hydro power plant. In Palau,
the project is actively promoting renewable energy and energy efficiency
through the installation of a solar grid connected system in public buildings. 
Sanitation
for Samoa
In
Samoa, the Water and Sanitation Sector Policy Support Programme
(EUR 49.9 million in 2012-14) primarily aim to sustainably improve access to
clean and affordable water supplies and access to basic sanitation and waste
water systems. It also seeks to improve watershed management, flood mitigation
measures and reinforce the country’s water sector governance. An estimated 96 %
of the population have benefited from the EU support to this sector. The
European Union is the lead donor in the water sector, contributing 70 % of the
financing, and therefore 16 000 people have been given access to improved water
sources and 11 000 people access to improved sanitation over the past decades.
Monitoring       
A total of four ROM-missions
covered 19 pacific countries and overseas territories in 2013, producing
a total of 75 reports, of which 39 were ongoing, five ex post and 31 regional
MR (including 20 component reports). The total value of projects covered
amounted to a budget of EUR 196.86 million (on-going, including EUR 23.65
million ex-post). This makes the Pacific region the most thoroughly covered by
monitoring activities in the whole ACP-area.
Of the total ongoing
national projects monitored in the Pacific region, 87 % were considered
relevant and 70 % delivering a good or very good impact. The programmes that
were considered to deliver a very good impact fell however from 5.8 % to 2.6 %
and around 55 % of the programmes had problems with sustainability, efficiency
and effectiveness. Yet, overall 64 % showed good performance, which is an
improvement compared to 2012, when only 40.4 % showed good performance.
Therefore, while most programmes are considered relevant, there are strong
concerns with regard to efficiency, effectiveness and sustainability. Yet
again, the ROM monitors judged the impact of the projects to be high.
The overall performance of
regional programmes in the Pacific is significantly higher than national
projects, with 82 % demonstrating good performance, especially when it comes to
relevance and sustainability. 
The specific geographic
conditions in the Pacific continue to affect the implementation of country
projects. Typical problems include the great distances involved, an absence of
reliable statistics and indicators, lack of continuity in project management,
including lack of trained project management staff.
The
following graph shows the evolution of the overall performance of the portfolio
in the Pacific from 2010. The year 2013 reflects an increase in the number of
projects with good performance between 2012 and 2013.
The monitoring consultants
for the Pacific (EPTISA) in 2013 were asked by the Commission services to
present the aggregate results of their Results Oriented Monitoring (ROM) in the
Pacific for the period 2000-2013. The presentation of monitoring data from
previous EDFs was used for the first time directly in the programming for the
coming EDF 11 (2014-2018). One of the main conclusions from the monitoring carried
out in the Pacific is that performance of country portfolios is directly linked
to the level of ownership by recipients and to their capacity to effectively
manage projects. Many Pacific countries have significant constraints in terms
of managerial capacities and also the financial sustainability of EDF
interventions is a major concern in smaller Pacific countries. These caveats
can be mitigated by long term engagement in key sectors to build capacities and
progressively improve performance. Also, multi-country interventions and
regional bodies in the Pacific have proven to be relatively effective, when
combining high levels of country ownership and alignment with enhancement of
regional expertise that can support the countries with limited administrative
capacities. Clear and commonly agreed objectives and performance indicators are
also key to success, which calls for good access to data and statistics. In
small countries, concentration of interventions to a single sector is
appropriate to make the best of limited resources and maximise synergies. In
addition to the monitoring, a broader Pacific evaluation took place that issued
a draft report in October 2013.
Perspectives
   
The
year 2013 was the final year for commitments under the 10th EDF and
all the 2013 relevant funds were committed by the end of the year, representing
EUR 214.9 million in the Pacific ACP countries..
Programming
priorities for the 11th EDF (2014-2020) began in 2013 with a
dialogue between the Pacific EU delegations and the Pacific island states.
Initial proposals were discussed and jointly reviewed by the Commission and
EEAS services in 2013 and confirmed when the new Commission and Parliament is
elected in 2014. The 11th EDF programming is, for most Pacific
countries, focusing on energy access, water and sanitation and environmental
sustainability, often in combination with rural development.
The European Commission is
increasingly seeking to enhance donor coordination in the Pacific region along
with use of country systems. Given the state of public governance in many
pacific countries, the Commission will seek to channel funds via multilateral
institutions and regional programmes, where the experience is favourable. 2013
saw the start of implementation of the EU Pacific Investment Facility, which
will blend grants and loans and facilitate donor coordination. As far as
possible budget support will be the preferred implementation method. All
programmes will focus on so called SMART objectives and performance indicators.

2.5.      Overseas
Countries and Territories (OCTs)

Introduction     
In
accordance with part four of the EU Treaty, the OCTs are closely associated
with the European Union. The purpose of this association is "to promote
the economic and social development of the countries and territories and to
establish close economic relations between them and the Union as a whole".
Legislative
proposals
Based
on a Commission proposal, the Council adopted the Overseas Association Decision
(OAD) on 25 November 2013. The OAD is the legal basis that lays down the rules
and procedures governing the political, commercial and financial relations
between the EU and the OCTs. The OAD reflects a paradigm shift from poverty
reduction to cooperation on issues of mutual interest and gives a special
emphasis on issues relevant for the OCTs including enhancing the OCTs’
competitiveness; strengthening their resilience and reducing their
vulnerability, and promoting cooperation between OCTs and their regional,
European and international partners.
Moreover,
the Internal Agreement on the 11th EDF establishes a total fund of
EUR 364.5 million for OCTs. 
In
addition, discussions continued at Council regarding the Commission’s proposal
for an EU-Greenland Partnership for the period 2014 – 2020. The adoption of the
draft Council decision is expected in the first quarter of 2014 following
scrutiny in the European Parliament.
Policy
dialogue, the OCT-EU Forum and training
The 12th
OCT-EU Forum took place in Brussels on 5-6 December 2013. In addition to
OCT authorities, representatives of the Member States and the Commission;
Members of the European Parliament, the EU Presidency, the European Investment
Bank, and the President of the conference of the Presidents of outermost
regions attended the Forum. Discussions focused on the launching of the
programming exercise for resources allocated to OCTs under the 11th EDF and on
the Council Decision on the association of the OCTs with the EU for the post
2013 period.
In
the margin of the OCT-EU Forum further meetings took place with individual OCTs
in presence of the Member States to which they are linked. The Commission also
organised a training seminar on EDF for Territorial Authorising Officers of
OCTs. 
Finally,
the Commission organised and chaired six tripartite and several ad hoc meetings
with OCTs and Member States representatives. A partnership working party on
Environment, Climate Change and Biodiversity was also organised in September
2013 with the participation of experts from OCTs and the relevant Commission
services. 
Implementation            
Atlantic
and / or isolated OCTs
During
2013, EU cooperation with Greenland continued to support the education
sector with a new financing decision of € 28 717 140. The Greenland Education
Programme aims at increasing student intake in post-elementary education and
providing vocational training for unskilled workers. On an annual basis
Greenland submits to the Commission reports providing evidence of the progress
made and the results achieved concerning students attending vocational
training, high schools and higher (tertiary) education and students obtaining a
job within one year of graduation. The programme reached most of the targets
set in the Territory's Annual Work Plans.
The
Commission has initiated contacts with Greenland regarding the Programming
Document for the period 2014-2020. Consultations focused on defining the process
to be followed in the programming exercise, assessing the political, economic
and social situation of Greenland and defining the policy framework of the
Government of Greenland. Furthermore, the possible sector for financial
cooperation for the period 2014-2020 was discussed. 
In
June 2013, the Falkland Islands’ Single Programming Document was
approved and the relevant Financing Decision adopted (EUR 4.13 million), aiming
to support economic diversification by focusing on tourism and agriculture and
reduce an over-reliance on fisheries. 
For
the Atlantic OCTs of Saint Pierre et Miquelon, the budget support
programme (EUR 20.7 million) aims to enhance the economic development of the
territory and promote the diversification of its economy. In 2013, first and
second tranches were disbursed with a total value of EUR 6.9 million.
In
Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha, EU assistance provides
support for the transport infrastructure through a sector budget programme (EUR
16.6 million). In 2013, EUR 5.8 million was disbursed for this purpose.
Caribbean
OCTs
In
October 2013, the Single Programming Documents for Turks and Caicos Islands
were approved and the Financing Decision adopted by the Commission (EUR
11.85 million). The EU funds will support the implementation of the 2013-2017
Turks and Caicos’ Development Strategy, with special focus on the improvement
of the environment for private sector development. 
For
Anguilla, the EU assistance aims to support the implementation of the
Medium Term Economic Strategy 2010-2014 of the Government of Anguilla (EUR
11.7million). In 2013, EUR 3.6 million was disbursed.
The
Single Programming Document for Montserrat (EUR 15.66 million) foresees
support for the implementation of the Territory's Sustainable Development Plan
and the Sustainability Roadmap. In 2013, the second tranche of an amount of EUR
4.7 million was disbursed.
In
the case of the former Netherlands Antilles, the Single Programming
Document (EUR 24 million) targets support for urban infrastructures for
socially deprived areas in Curacao and Saba; sewerage for St. Maarten and
Bonaire; and port development for St. Eustatius. In 2013, the five Financing
Agreements for the former Netherlands Antilles were signed, enabling
implementation to start in 2014.
For
Aruba, the budget support programme (EUR 8.88 million) supports the
implementation of the National Education Plan. In July 2013, the first fixed
tranche was disbursed for an amount of EUR two million.
Indian
Ocean OCTs
In
December 2013, following an ad hoc review, the Commission decided to allocate
an additional amount of EUR six million, to be added to the current Single
Programming Document of Mayotte. The total EU assistance (EUR 29.7
million) will assist Mayotte to implement its territorial development plan and
improve the PFM in the territory. Mayotte will become an Outermost Region on 1
January 2014.
Pacific
OCTs
In
2013, three Single Programming Documents were approved and the corresponding
Financing Decisions were adopted by the Commission (EUR 38.7 million): 
In
French Polynesia (EUR 19.8 million) for two
projects have been approved: support to sanitation infrastructure in the island
of Tahiti and reinforcement of institutional capacities to build water sector
policy. 
In
Wallis and Futuna (EUR 16.5 million) the funds
were allocated for a project to rehabilitate port infrastructure. 
For
Pitcairn (EUR 2.4 million) the funds of the territorial envelope will
support the Pitcairn Tourism Development Strategy through budget support. 
Following
the damages suffered during Cyclone Evan the Reserve B was mobilised in favour
of Wallis and Futuna.  The Commission decided to allocate EUR 1.6
million in order to ensure the rehabilitation of the electrical supply system
in the island of Wallis. 
The
implementation of the budget support programme in favour of the vocational
training in New Caledonia (EUR 19.81 million) continued in 2013 through
the disbursement of a total amount of EUR 6.5 million.
Regional
Programme and provision of experts for capacity building purposes 
Regional Programme
Following the approval in
2011 of the Single Programming Document for Regional Cooperation for OCTs (EUR
40 million) the Commission, in close cooperation with the relevant OCTs,
proceeded with the implementation of the following regional strategy projects: 
The
‘Caribbean OCTs Small and Medium Enterprises programme’ (EUR 15
million) contributes to the economic diversification of Caribbean OCTs by
improving the competitiveness of SMEs in the territories. The tendering phase has
been concluded in 2013 and implementation will start in 2014.
‘Initiative
des Territoires pour la Gestion Régionale de l'Environnement
INTEGRE’ programme (EUR 12 million) supports conservation and
management of natural resources and ecosystems in the four Pacific OCTs. 
‘Gestion
durable du patrimoine naturel régional de Mayotte et des Iles Eparses (TAAF)’
project (EUR three million) was approved by the Commission in 2012 and the
respective Financial Agreement was signed in early 2013.
‘Technical
Assistance to the OCT Association’ (EUR five million) provides long and
short-term technical assistance to the OCT Association and allows for the
organisation of the annual OCT-EU Fora in 2014 and 2015. 
Provision of experts 
Several
short-term service contracts were signed in 2012 under the Technical
Cooperation Facility II and were implemented in 2013. The contracts provided
for the elaboration of a Mapping study of the NSAs in New Caledonia, a
study on Renewable energies and green policy in the OCTs, a study to support
the Anguilla Air and Sea Port Authority, and a seminar on the
reinforcement of the capacities of local authorities in French Polynesia.

In
addition, a Commission Decision regarding the Technical Cooperation Facility
III was adopted in 2013 for the amount of EUR 2.4 million and two short-term
service contracts were signed: Mapping study of the NSAs in French Polynesia
and an update of the Environmental profiles of the OCTs. 

3.            
Chapter
3 - Implementation: thematic overview

                   

3.1.    The
thematic programmes


3.1.1.             
Investing in people

In
2013 the third report on the implementation of the Action Plan for Gender
Equality and Women’s Empowerment (GEWE) in development cooperation (covering
the period 1 July 2012 to 30 June 2013) was prepared and will be discussed by
the Council before the end of the year. Some of the results from the report are
listed below:
Gender
equality is increasingly mainstreamed in fields that are not usually engendered
such as infrastructure. This is the result of the effort paid to sensitise
colleagues to issues in these areas, through initiatives such as the
Headquarters-supported programme implemented by the UN Women-International
Training Centre International Labour Organisation (ITC ILO): ‘Financing for
Gender Equality’. The number of sectors using sex-disaggregated indicators has
increased this year from five to 18. This includes sectors that provide water
and sanitation facilities, agriculture and forestry, regional development,
environment and public financial reform. For instance, in Chad, following the gender analysis launched in February 2012 the gender perspective is
being integrated in every step of a water and sanitation project. In practical
terms this means that women are recruited among the project staff; women are
equally involved in the decision-making process about location of the drinkable
water sources, about the price of water supply etc. A “gender team” has been
created in the Ministry for water and sanitation; gender training is being
provided to several stakeholders involved in the programme implementation (for
instance to the Cellules de Conseil et d'Appui à la Gestion (CCAG) and finally
meetings with men and children are organised to open discussion about water and
sanitation priorities. 
Women’s
empowerment is one of the indirect results expected from an EU-funded programme
on forestry in Morocco. The issue of gender equality is taken into
account in activities such as the realisation of studies and evaluations on
areas where women play an important role (e.g. collection of firewood and
energy production); the update and review of the forestry policy, also covering
firewood/energy aspects, and ensuring the involvement of the civil society;
pilot actions aiming to reduce the use of firewood, which should have an
important impact on women’s workload; grants to NSAs for forest and protected
areas management, including socioeconomic inclusion opportunities for women;
and the reinforcement of consultative mechanisms at central, regional and local
level to improve the governance of the forestry sector, which will also ensure
women’s involvement.
The
Gender Action Plan foresees the elaboration of a Gender Country Profile in each
country where the EU cooperation takes place. The Gender Country Profiles are
baseline documents intended to help in the identification and development of
programmes and projects by providing an accurate and precise picture of the
state of play of gender equality in the country. Twenty-five Gender Country
Profiles have already been published and more are in the pipeline. Among those
realised in 2013, are profiles for the six Eastern Partnership countries (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine). They highlight
key facts and figures on gender equality, provide inputs on gender-related
challenges in key sectors of cooperation, and an assessment of relevant
national statistical capacities. The profiles will inform future cooperation
policy dialogue, in particular with regard to gender mainstreaming in the new
bilateral and regional programming documents as well in the design of future
actions.  Over the period 2014-2020, the Eastern Partnership will be covered
under the new European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI) and it is envisaged that
“proper integration of cross-cutting issues, in particular gender and
environment and climate change” will be ensured; and “the main efforts should
be to mainstream these within wider interventions”.
The
EU continues to provide its support for capacity-building on UN Security
Council Resolutions 1325 and 1820 on fragile states. For instance the EU just
concluded a cross-regional programme ‘Women Connect across Conflicts: Building
Accountability for Implementation of UNSCR 1325, 1820, 1888, 1889’ which aimed
at enhancing the capacity of women’s human rights activists and gender equality
advocates to effectively and meaningfully engage, influence, and mobilise for
dialogues on security and peace issues at various levels nationally and
regionally in the South Asia (Afghanistan and Pakistan), the Southern
Caucasus (Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia) and the Central Asia /
Fergana Valley (Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan) regions.
In
the framework of the ‘African Union Support Programme’, the EU directly
supports the ‘AUC Women, Gender and Development Directorate’ in the
implementation of their work plan (17.61 % of the AUC 2013 programme budget
approved) and meetings have been held to strengthen the gender perspective in
current cooperation inclusively in the Peace and Security dimension.
In
October 2012, the EU launched a new joint regional programme for the South
Mediterranean Region. The programme, which was co-funded by UN Women, aims at
supporting national and regional stakeholders to empower women economically and
politically in the follow-up to the Arab Spring. 
The
‘Spring Forward for Women’ programme will support initiatives by national
and regional institutions and CSOs to ensure women's active engagement in
decision-making, to empower women economically and to enhance regional
knowledge and experience sharing on women's political and economic rights.
In
January 2013 a ‘EU-CELAC Action Plan 2013-2015’ was adopted which identifies
instruments and activities that should lead to concrete results guaranteeing
ownership and capacity building in eight different areas one of  which is
gender.  
In
this area, the main objective is to prioritise the gender equality issue in the
context of bi-regional relations and underscore the political will in both
regions to guarantee gender equality and the protection, exercise and promotion
of women’s rights, including political participation by women; elimination of
all forms of violence against women and girls, including sexual violence; and
economic  empowerment of women and their participation in the world of work and
in all decision-making processes.
In
order to enhance relations with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations
(ASEAN), the ASEAN Commission on the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of
Women and Children (ACWC) visited the EU in Brussels at the invitation of EEAS
in February 2013. This visit was financed under the existing Regional EU-ASEAN
Dialogue Instrument. The ACWC delegation comprised two members (one for women
and one for children's rights) from each of the 10 ASEAN Member States. The
purpose of the visit was to expose the ACWC to EU views, approaches and
institutions and to engage in dialogue in the area of the rights of women and
children.
The
new Research and Innovation Programme, Horizon 2020, launched in December 2013,
includes research directly relevant for the priority themes in development. In
particular, Horizon 2020 includes a Societal Challenge on ‘Climate Action,
Environment, Resource Efficiency and Raw Materials’, one on ‘Food Security,
Sustainable Agriculture and Forestry, Marine, Maritime and Inland Water
Research and the Bioeconomy’ and one on ‘Europe in a changing world –
Inclusive, innovative and reflective societies’ which addresses migration
issues as well as democracy and human rights.
The
research calls launched in the last phase of FP7 included topics on sustainable
management of resources, climate change, food security, migration, and
involving developing and Neighbourhood countries. In addition dedicated
research and innovation cooperation activities were also launched, for example,
with ENP countries.

3.1.2.             
Non-state actors and local authorities in development 

A
final evaluation was conducted of the ‘Non-State Actors and Local Authorities
in Development’ (NSA-LA) thematic programme that spanned 2007-2013 and funded
EUR €1.3 billion for projects from Civil Society Organisations (CSO) and EUR
235 million for Local Authorities (LA) in 2013. Through its support for
substantive activities and dialogue at policy level the programme contributed
to raising the profile of CSOs and LAs from the EU and partner countries on the
global development agenda.
In
2013, cooperation continued to be strengthened in terms of volume of resources,
but also in the inclusion of CSO-LA in the development processes. The Annual
Action Programme allocated EUR 46.3 million for NSA-LA (EUR 210.4 million in 80
countries for NSA and EUR 35.9 million in 40 countries for LA). Areas of
intervention included capacity building, democratic governance, MDG issues and service delivery. 
Under
the regional ENPI South 'Cleaner, Energy-saving Mediterranean Cities'
project, in 2013 the Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) started to support the extension of the Covenant of Majors initiative, one of the most
promising implementing mechanisms of the EU Action Plan for Energy Efficiency,
to the Southern Mediterranean partner countries[59]. The JRC provides local authorities with technical and scientific assistance, analysis and capacity
building to support the formulation, implementation and monitoring of
Sustainable Local Energy Plans (SEAPs), and helps them match the EU commitment
to meet and exceed the 20 % CO2 reduction objective by 2020. 
Civil
Society
In
2013 the Commission began to work on providing EU Delegations with guidance on
the preparation of roadmaps for engaging with civil society based on the 2012
Communication 'The Roots of Democracy and sustainable development, Europe's
engagement with civil society in external relations'[60]. The analysis of the
bilateral programmes demonstrated that CSO are increasingly participating in
all the phases of project cycle management.
The
Policy Forum for Development, which emerged from the Structured Dialogue
process, was also set up in 2013 and brings together representatives of
transnational networks of CSOs, Local authorities from the EU and partner
countries, Trade Unions, Chambers of Commerce, Business Associations,
Foundations, and Cooperatives.
Local
Authorities
The
Communication ‘Empowering Local Authorities in partner countries for enhanced
governance and more effective development outcomes’[61], adopted in May 2013,
focuses on good governance at the local level and a territorial approach to
development. It aims at supporting decentralisation, reforms, capacity
development of LAs, smart solutions towards sustainable urbanisation and the
reinforcement of Associations of LAs at national, regional and international
levels. 
DEAR
EuropeAid
has also furthered its engagement in Development Education and Awareness
Raising (DEAR) in Europe.  A multi-stakeholder consultation process[62] has
led to the publication of a 'Staff Working Document'[63] in December 2012 that
identifies areas of intervention that are now informing the Commission’s
2014-2020 DEAR strategy. In 2013 the Commission continued its engagement with
stakeholders, including CSOs, LAs, Member States, and the European Parliament.
A Call for Proposals[64]
was launched for EUR 35 million to NSA-LA focusing on the European Year of
Development 2015, issues raised by the Communication ‘A Decent Life for All:
Ending poverty and giving the world a better future’[65], and interdependencies
between developing countries and Europe.
Case
study
Raising
awareness of MDGs 
Since
2009, this European Commission-funded project has helped more than 70 000
primary and secondary school students, 4 500 teachers, 500 students and
teachers in primary and secondary schools for children with disabilities, and
over 2 000 officials in municipalities and the education sector across Sweden,
the UK, Estonia and the Slovak Republic increase their knowledge of the MDGs.
Working through a twinning programme between schools in the four EU countries
and Afghanistan the project of the Swedish Committee for Afghanistan has also
focused on breaking stereotypes and promoting a better understanding of Muslim
cultures and similarities between children and youth in the two continents.

3.1.3.             
Migration and asylum

During
2013, the EU policy framework for migration and development was significantly
strengthened. In May 2013, the Commission adopted a new Communication on
'Maximising the Development Impact of Migration'[66], which was
prepared jointly by the DG for Home Affairs and the DG for Development and
Cooperation – EuropeAid. The Communication underlined the significant impacts
of increasing human mobility on all three pillars of sustainable development.
The
Communication served as the basis for the EU’s joint position for the UN
High-level Dialogue on International Migration and Development in October 2013.
The EU played a leading role in preparations for this High-level Dialogue which
renewed and strengthened political commitment at international level for links
between migration and development.
The EU
Adaptation Strategy on Climate Change was adopted in April 2013 with the aim of
setting out actions that will contribute to making Europe resilient to climate
change. The Strategy notes the importance of global climate impacts and their
repercussions in the EU as well as on neighbourhood countries. The strategy
takes account of global climate change impacts, such as disruptions to supply
chains or impaired access to raw materials, energy and food supplies, and their
repercussions on the EU. A Staff Working Document on Climate Change,
Environmental Degradation and Migration[67], which
was adopted with the Strategy showed that there is little evidence to
suggest that climate change would significantly increase the number of migrants
into the EU..
The paper also recommends that more should be done to harness the potential of
migration to make a positive contribution to supporting climate change
adaptation and disaster risk reduction, for example by  facilitating remittance
transfers to environmentally vulnerable regions.
In
line with these important policy developments at EU level, the Thematic
Programme for Migration and Asylum complemented geographical EU funding with
continued assistance to partner countries in all migration related areas with a
strong focus on maximising the development impact of migration. 
In
the area of migration and development, an operational research initiative was
launched jointly with OECD to enhance the capacity of 10 low- and middle-
income countries in Asia, Latin America, the Middle East and Africa to
incorporate migration into their development strategies and other public
policies.
2013 also saw the
continuation of EU support to partner countries in enhancing their capacities
to better address refugee situations, in particular in the Horn of Africa and
in North Africa. With an overall objective to improve the protection and the
delivery of assistance to refugees and asylum seekers, the activities included
capacity building and training for governmental and non-governmental partners
while improving educational opportunities and income-earning possibilities for
refugees and asylum seekers, including for host communities. 
In the context of recent
policy development at EU level, a Regional Development and Protection Programme
was launched in relation to the refugee crisis in and around
  Syria that will be fully operational in 2014. It will focus on assistance and
capacity building to both refugees and to host communities in Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq to address the challenge of the significant influx of refugees
from Syria. 
Following the signature of
the EU-Morocco Mobility Partnership in May 2013, an EU programme was launched
to support its implementation. Activities under the project include training
and capacity building to Moroccan authorities to engage and support their
diaspora in Europe through the design and
implementation of programmes aimed at mobilising their human, social and
financial capital for the development of Morocco. The support also includes
reinforcement of capacities to better manage labour migration and to support
the socioeconomic reintegration of returning migrants.

3.1.4.             
Environment and sustainable management of natural resources
including energy

Environment,
climate change and green economy remained key topics in 2013. The Thematic
Programme on Environment and sustainable management of Natural Resources,
including Energy (ENRTP) supports global or regional
partnerships, agreements with international organisations, innovative policies,
good practices, capacity-building and governance of global public goods. Many geographical programmes address these issues too,
leading to a higher allocation of resources to the environment portfolio.
In line with the
Agenda for Change, the programming 2014-2020 and the Rio+20 Conference, the
water sector has shifted focus taking into account the economic aspects of
water (energy and agriculture).
The
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) remained a solid partner for
implementing the Commission’s efforts to promote sustainable management of
natural resources. In addition EUR 20 million committed to support the Switch
Africa Green programme, UNEP received an additional allocation of EUR 7.5
million for the strengthening of international environmental governance.
Through UNEP, the Commission also supported the work of a number of
Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs[68])
for which UNEP provides the Secretariat.
As
a contribution to the UN Sustainable Energy for All (SE4ALL) initiative, the JRC carried out a geoeconomic analysis identifying the least-cost rural electrification options
for sub-Saharan Africa[69].
Calculations showed that in 2012 photovoltaic (solar PV) was the cheapest
electricity source for one-third of the overall African population. The
energy-related local data and regional geo-information were organised in
user-friendly maps, which can help African decision-makers to plan their own
least-cost rural electrification scenarios and help to reduce the energy
poverty gap in Africa.
The JRC also published a report investigating the possible impact
of climate change in the next few decades on the availability and
exploitability of different renewable energy resources in Africa. Based on
outcomes of state-of-the-art climate models, the JRC investigated the expected
changes in the amount and the geographical location of resources for solar,
hydro, wind and biomass energy. The results provide guidance for investors and
policy makers dealing with energy systems planning and development in Africa[70].
The
 JRC has further developed the Digital Observatory of Protected Areas (DOPA), a
biodiversity information system that combines a set of distributed databases
and open, interoperable web services to provide a large variety of end users
with means to assess, monitor and forecast the state and pressure on Protected
Areas (PAs) at the global scale. Developed in collaboration with several
international organisations[71],
DOPA fosters the prioritisation of PAs according to their biodiversity and the
pressures to which they are exposed, and eventually supports decision-making
and fund allocation processes. The first of the three planned interfaces, DOPA
Explorer, was released in four languages (English, French, Portuguese, and
Spanish) in November 2013. 
The
European Commission’s ACE-Water project run by the JRC in support of the AU’s
New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) Water Centres of Excellence
(CoEs) was successfully completed in 2013. Its main achievements were presented
by the CoEs to their governments and to the main African continental actors in
the water sector such as the African Ministers’ Council on Water (AMCOW), the
African Union, the ECOWAS and the SADC during a final workshop held in Dakar in October 2013. The AMCOW mandated the NEPAD Water CoEs to define the Pan African
Strategy for capacity building in the water sector. 
Following
a request from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) to the Commission in
October 2013, the JRC, in collaboration with the European Forest Institute,
provided technical support for the assessment of deforestation and forest
degradation reference levels in the Mai-Ndombe province. The results from JRC's analysis were communicated to the DRC to support the revision of the Emissions Reduction
Programme “Mai-Ndombe REDD+”.
In
2013, the JRC provided scientific support to the EU Global Climate Change
Alliance (GCCA) to enhance, through ranking and priority-setting, the
allocation of funds to the developing countries most vulnerable to climate
change. The support benefited from advances in the recent international
literature on climate change and community-based disaster risk assessment.
Case study highlights of
2013
 Forest law excludes illegal loggers   More countries have partnered with the EU through the Forest Law Governance and Trade Action Plan (FLEGT) that aims to exclude illegal timber from the global market and ensure that forests contribute to a country’s development. Sixteen countries are now negotiating or implementing FLEGT Voluntary Partnership Agreements. The EU Timber Regulation aims to eliminate illegal timber from the EU market and entered into force on 3 March 2013.   Support was also provided to a results based payment system for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.   
 Mitigating climate change   In an effort of keeping global temperature increase below 2°C, the EUR 54.5 million climate change mitigation project portfolio was further expanded with an additional EUR 19.5 million contribution. The provision of significant support to Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs), Low-Emission Development Strategies (LEDS) and New Market Mechanisms (NMM) was completed with an ‘International Cooperative Initiative’ on Fossil Fuel Subsidies and Energy Efficiency (EUR 10 million). Support was also given to mitigation measures in the aviation sector (EUR 6.5 million) and climate benefits from phase out of hydrochlorofluorcarbons (HCFCs).   
 Global Climate Change Alliance (GCCA) expands initiatives   The GCCA, launched in 2007 to support developing countries in tackling climate change challenges and with a funding envelope close to EUR 300 million, covers 37 countries and eight sub regions across Africa, Asia, Caribbean and Pacific.   The GCCA fosters policy dialogue and exchange of experiences to integrate climate change into national policies and budgets. It also supports interventions on climate change mainstreaming and adaptation, REDD+ (efforts to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation), carbon market and disaster risk reduction. It also helps countries increase their absorptive capacities and receive long-term finance by strengthening planning capacities, PFM and establishing multi-donor funds and nationally-owned trust funds.   
 Biodiversity hotspots   The Voluntary Scheme for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services in Territories of European Overseas (BEST) provided EUR four million to 16 projects implemented by NGOs on protected areas, invasive species, ecosystem services, species migration monitoring, policy tools, and capacity building. EUR two million was committed to support the consolidation of the BEST scheme.   EUR 18 million was allocated to the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund, a multi-donor scheme for strengthening civil society organisations across 30 biodiversity hotspots worldwide and EUR five million was granted to the Amazon Vision Initiative to support the protected areas network for the eight Amazon basin countries.   Five biodiversity projects from the calls for proposals were completed in 2013, covering ecosystem resilience to climate change, payment for ecosystem services, protected areas and biodiversity conservation at watershed level.   The EU also contributes to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Strategy for Resource Mobilisation, for example through assessment of funding needs for biodiversity and the integration of biodiversity into national planning by supporting the United Nations Environment Programme on the Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (UNEP–TEEB) National Implementation; the UNDP – Biodiversity Finance Initiative; and World Bank Wealth Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services.   
 Great Green Wall for the Sahara and Sahel    Nearly EUR seven million was allocated to the Great Green Wall for the Sahara and Sahel Initiative, a flagship programme addressing the causes of land degradation.   The ENRTP also supports FLEUVE (Front Local Environnemental pour une Union Verte) which aims to strengthen the capacity of local authorities in sustainable management of natural resources and climate vulnerability in local planning.   
Sustainable
Energy 
Technical
Assistance Facility (TAF) – EUR 80 million 
TAF’s
purpose is to deliver technical assistance at country and regional level and support
committed countries to reach the SE4All objectives. Areas of support under TAF
include:
- Stocktaking, technical
support for development and implementation of national energy sector policies
and reforms;
- Capacity building for
policy and regulation; 
- Technical support in
preparation for investment projects; 
- Mobilisation of funds and
facilitation of partnerships; 
- Industrial and technology
cooperation, project demonstration.
Two
Technical Assistance contracts totalling EUR 37.5 million covering sub-Saharan Africa were launched in late 2013. The TAF services will primarily support priority
countries that have energy as a focal sector for cooperation. Likewise,
TAF services could assist in the identification and preparation of priority
investment programmes and projects to be selected for support under the
national or regional energy cooperation programmes. TAF expert services
may also support Delegations to better respond to any technical challenges
faced in the implementation of the projects co-financed under the Energy
Facility Calls for Proposals to optimise their results.
Two
million for SE4ALL Coordination 
The EU has allocated EUR two
million to enable the coordination, dissemination and tracking of the global
effort under the SE4ALL initiative over a three year period.

3.1.5.             
Food security

For
the period 2007-13, the EU’s support for the improvement of food and nutrition
security has been financed by several types of instrument. The implementation
of food security policy at national and regional level is supported by
geographical instruments, notably the European Development Fund in the ACP countries and the Development Cooperation Instrument in Latin America, Asia and South Africa.
Food
security issues at global, continental and regional level are addressed by the
Food Security Thematic Programme (FSTP). The
programme’s efforts go hand in hand with direct bilateral cooperation with
partner countries and with the geographical instruments.
With
an overall budget of EUR 258 million for 2013, the FSTP has three main
priorities: agricultural research, technology transfer and innovation;
governance; and support for the poor and vulnerable in fragile situations.
Given these priorities, initiatives are undertaken which are designed to help
achieve the MDGs, particularly MDG1, and tackle structural causes of national
food insecurity. 
Agricultural
research, technology transfer and innovation
This part of the FSTP focuses on the creation of public goods in
the form of knowledge, technologies and capacity. These are made accessible to
the rural poor to improve food security and nutrition and reduce poverty. New
programmes worth EUR 91 million were designed in 2013. This
support complemented ongoing research and innovation programmes but placed
particular emphasis on nutrition consistent with the 2013 Communication and
Action Plan.
Support was given to two organisations with a global perspective:
the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) and the
Global Forum on Agricultural Research (GFAR), and also to three regional
organisations to strengthen African institutional capacity: the Forum for
Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA), the Association for Strengthening
Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa  (ASERECA), and the Centre
for Coordination of Agricultural Research and Development for Southern Africa
(CCARDESA).
Recent reforms to CGIAR have resulted in 15 major research
programmes (CRPs) focusing on poverty reduction, food security, nutrition and
natural resource management. EU support was directed at 11 CRPs focusing on
agriculture for nutrition and health, climate change, and agriculture and food
security, including post-harvest management of roots, tubers and bananas in Uganda. 
The African organisations (FARA, ASARECA, CCARDESA) are
implementing new medium term operational plans (MTOPs), developed in
consultation with their stakeholders, and EU support is structured around
multi-year support to these plans. 
Support has also been provided to the Platform for African-European
Partnership on Agricultural Research for Development (PAEPARD) to pilot an innovative mechanism to fund
farmer-led research and development projects. 
In
2013 Result Oriented Monitoring (ROM) reviews were conducted on three research
projects. Monitoring and evaluation activities focus on identifying activities
which improve food security and farmer livelihoods, such as the Agriculture and
Nutrition Extension Project (ANEP).
The
 JRC supports sustainable food security through its modelling and monitoring
work of agricultural resources with timely forecasts, early assessments and
scientific underpinning. In November 2013 the JRC officially launched its new
software for satellite time series analysis for agricultural monitoring
(SPIRITS) at the AFRICAGIS 2013 Conference in Addis Ababa. 
Further
achievements in 2013 were the contribution to the OECD/FAO 2013 Agriculture
Outlook through the modelling of agricultural market outcomes[72] and the
launch of the first ever Soil Atlas of Africa, which reveals the diversity of
soil across the African continent in a comprehensible and attractive way.
Produced in collaboration with the African Union, the FAO, the African Soil
Science Society and soil scientists from Africa and Europe, this unique
reference document aims at raising awareness at all levels, from politicians to
the general public, of the significance of soil to life in Africa.
The
 JRC also released a report[73]
in July 2013 analysing the impact of EU and country policy measures in the
agri-food sector on selected African economies at farm/ household level, and
organised several technical workshops with topics ranging from factors
affecting wheat yields and index-based insurance in developing countries, to
the effects of higher agricultural productivity growth in Africa[74] or the
policy options to enhance food security in the Southern Mediterranean region.[75] Regarding
the contentious issue of land grabbing, the JRC produced a report[76] on the
recent wave of international Large-Scale Land Transactions (LSLT) to provide an
overview of the scale, speed, drivers, key players and main expected
consequences in terms of local and global food security. 
With
regard to data on agriculture and food security in Africa, the JRC, following the Commission’s commitments at the G8 Open Data Conference[77] (and its
agreement with the African Development Bank), gave access to its data
management tool (DataM) to several African countries, as recommended by the FAO
African Commission on Agricultural Statistics (AFCAS)[78].

Case
study
Governance
ANEP
– The Agriculture and Nutrition Extension Project
ANEP,
financed within the Asia Technology Transfer for Food Security Programme, is
implemented by a consortium led by International Development Enterprises, a
non-governmental organisation (NGO), and involves three CGIAR research centres.
Drawing on the results of CGIAR research, ANEP has introduced smallholders to a
range of sustainable agriculture and aquaculture practices and technologies
including improved vegetable or more nutritious crop varieties, new seed
storage technologies, mechanisation, water pumps, and aquaculture. The project
also develops commercial linkages between rural producers and urban consumers,
and aims to strengthen farmers’ organisations ability to commercialise their
products, for example by connecting Nepali seed producers to viable markets in Bangladesh. To date, ANEP has reached 5 000 households in Bangladesh and 4 200 in Nepal forming 450 producer groups. 
Seven new programmes were developed in 2013 under the governance component
of the FSTP, disbursing more than EUR 71 million. Land issues, information
systems, fishery and nutrition were at the core of these programmes. 
Following
the adoption of the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of
Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security
(VGGT), and the EU’s commitment to the New Alliance
for Food Security and Nutrition launched at the G8 summit, a new EUR 33
million programme was launched to strengthen national land governance in 10
African countries (Angola, Burundi, Ethiopia, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Malawi,
Niger, Somalia, Swaziland and South Sudan). The projects foster rights based
approaches, pro-poor access to land and the respect for customary rights. 
As risk and uncertainty are inherent to
agriculture and agricultural markets, farmers face various price and yield
risks that make their incomes unpredictable. This year the EU provided support
to the Platform for Agricultural Risk Management (PARM), which was established
in December 2013 to address agricultural risk management. 
Two initiatives have been adopted to enhance the contribution of
fisheries to food security and economic growth in Africa. They aim to
improve the institutional and policy environment for sustainable management and
utilisation of fisheries.
The 2012 support provided to the Secretariat of the Scaling Up
Nutrition (SUN) movement is producing results. In 2013, some 45 developing
countries joined SUN. These countries are home to 80 million of the world’s 165
million stunted children. 
The poor and vulnerable in fragile situations
The FSTP plays an important role in developing coherence and
synergies between emergency and development operations. As a consequence, EU
regional initiatives have been funded, namely AGIR (Alliance Globale pour
l’Initiative Résilience) in the Sahel and West Africa and SHARE (Supporting
Horn of Africa Resilience) in the Horn of Africa. Support has also been
provided to farmers and agricultural systems in the Central African Republic, Djibouti, Haiti, Laos, Niger, Sudan and South Sudan. 
[1] COM(2011) 637 final, 13.10.2011
[2] COM(2013) 92 final, 27.2.2013
[3] JOIN(2013) 30 final, 11.12.2013
[4] COM(2103) 141 final, 12.3.2013
[5] Regulation (EU) No. 233/2014, OJ L 77, 15.3.2014, p. 44.
[6] COM(2013), 530 final, 10.12.2013
[7] COM(2013) 280
final, 15.5.2013
[8] JOIN(2012) 27
final, 3.10.2012
[9]
http://capacity4dev.ec.europa.eu/
[10]
http://www.newdeal4peace.org/
[11] COM(2012) 586 Final, 03.10.2012
[12] SWD(2013) 227 Final, 19.06.2013
[13] http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/index_en.htm
[14] Regulation (EU) No. 233/2014; OJ L 77, 15.3.2014, p. 44.
[15] Regulation (EU) No. 232/2014; OJ L 77, 15.3.2014, p. 27.
[16] Regulation (EU) No. 231/2014; OJ L 77, 15.3.2014, p. 11.
[17] Regulation (EU) No. 230/2014; OJ L 77, 15.3.2014, p. 1.
[18] Regulation (EU) No. 235/2014; OJ L 77, 15.3.2014, p. 85.
[19] Regulation (EU) No. 234/2014; OJ L 77, 15.3.2014, p. 77.
[20] Regulation (Euratom) No. 237/2014; OJ L 77, 15.3.2014, p. 109.
[21] Council Decision 2014/137/EU; OJ L 76, 15.3.2014, p. 1.
[22] http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/what/social-protection/socieux_en.htm
[23] 'Progress on Drinking Water and Sanitation
2012' produced by the WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply
and Sanitation (http://www.wssinfo.org/)
[24] COM(2013) 92 final, 27.2.2013
[25] http://eudevdays.eu/theme/a-vision-for-the-post-2015-agenda
[26] This designation shall not be construed as recognition of a State
of Palestine and is without prejudice to the individual positions of the Member
States on this issue
[27] COM(2013) 531 final, 16.7.2013
[28] 17553/13
[29] Article 208 of the TFEU
[30] SWD
(2013) 456 final, 31.10.2013 
[31] Council Conclusions from 12 December 2013           http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/140063.pdf
[32]http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/what/development-policies/documents/biofuels_final_report_assessing_impact_of_eu_biofuel_policy_pcd_22022013_en.pdf

[33] COM(2012) 497 final, 14.9.2012
[34] SICAs under FP7 are
international cooperation instruments for undertaking research dedicated to
third countries where there is mutual interest with the EU on the basis of both
the scientific and technical (S&T) level and the needs of the countries
concerned.
[35] https://www.cbd.int/sp/
[36] COM(2012) 492 final, 12.9.2012
[37] the EU Common Position for the Fourth High Level Forum on Aid
Effectiveness of 14 November 2011
[38] http://www.unbrussels.org/report2013/
[39] Under the 2014 to 2020 multi-annual financial framework, the ENPI
is being replaced by the European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI).
[40]    See Chapter 3, Implementation: Thematic overview.
[41]     For more information on CFSP visit  http://www.eeas.europa.eu/cfsp/index_en.htm
[42]     For more information on the IPA visit http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/instruments/overview/index_en.htm

[43]     For more information on humanitarian assistance go to http://ec.europa.eu/echo/index_en.htm

[44]
http://www.oecd.org/dac/effectiveness/parisdeclarationandaccraagendaforaction.htm.
[45]
http://capacity4dev.ec.europa.eu/article/backbone-strategy-core-documents.
[46] http://ec.europa.eu/environment/marine/pdf/SWITCH-MED_project.pdf

[47] This designation shall not be construed as recognition of a State
of Palestine by the Member States and is without prejudice to their individual
positions on this issue
[48] 2015 Millennium Development Goals – Iraq (UNDP – Report 2013) - http://www.undp.org/content/dam/iraq/docs/mdgs/MDG%20Booklet%202013_C_FIN-EN.pdf
[49] http://www.africa-eu-partnership.org/

[50] http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/where/acp/regional-cooperation/peace/capacity_building/apsa_en.htm

[51] http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/where/acp/news/21112013_en.htm

[52] http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/where/acp/regional-cooperation/peace/index_en.htm

[53] http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/where/acp/overview/cotonou-agreement/index_en.htm 
[54] Evaluation of Budget
Support in South Africa - Ref. 1322:        http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/how/evaluation/evaluation_reports/2013/1322_docs_en.htm
[55] Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat, 2013, ''MDG Tracking Report''
[56] Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat, 2013, ''MDG Tracking Report'', 6
[57] http://mdgs.un.org/unsd/mdg/Host.aspx?Content=Data/Regional/oceania.htm
[58] World Bank, 2014
[59] Algeria, Egypt, Israel,
Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Palestine, Syria (cooperation presently suspended),
and Tunisia
[60] COM(2012) 492 final, 12.9.12 
[61] COM(2013) 280 final, 15.5.2013 
[62] ‘Study on the Experience and Actions of the
Main European Actors Active in the Field of Development Education and Awareness
Raising’
[63] (SWD(2012) 457 final, 20.12.2012
[64] EuropeAid/134863/C/ACT/Multi, 16.11.2013
[65] COM(2013) 92 final, 27.2.2013
[66] COM(2013) 292 final, 21.5.2013
[67] SWD(2013)138 final, 16.4.2013 
[68] Including the
Convention on Biological Diversity and the Basel, Rotterdam, and Stockholm
Conventions related to the sound management of hazardous chemicals and wastes
[69] Results were presented in an article
published in Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 
[70] JRC-IET (2013) The availability of
renewable energies in a changing Africa – assessing climate and non-climate
effects. Available at http://iet.jrc.ec.europa.eu/remea/availability-renewable-energies-changing-africa
[71] including the Global Biodiversity Information Facility,
the UNEP-World Conservation Monitoring Centre, Birdlife International and the
Royal Society for the Protection of Birds
[72] OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook 2013, www.oecd.org/site/oecd-faoagriculturaloutlook
[73] JRC-IPTS (2013) Modelling
Agri-Food Policy Impact at Farm-households Level in Developing Countries
[74] JRC-IPTS (2013) African
‘green revolution’ in Prospects for Agricultural Markets and Income in the EU
2013-2023, DG AGRI Pub.
[75] JRC-IPTS (2013) Economic Growth in the Euro-Med Area through Trade Integration: Focus on
Agriculture and Food, JRC Scientific and Policy Reports (i) Regional Impact,
(ii) North Africa case studies
[76] JRC-IPTS (2013), An
Overview of International Large-Scale Land Transactions in the context of Food
Security
[77] https://sites.google.com/site/g8opendataconference/home
[78] www.fao.org/economic/ess/ess-events/afcas/afcas23/en
Table of Contents 
3.2.     Democracy and human rights. 3
3.3.     Stability  9
3.3.1.      Crisis
response and preparedness. 9
3.3.2.      Global
and regional trans-border challenges. 12
3.4.     Nuclear
safety. 13
3.5.     Humanitarian
assistance. 15
3.5.1.      Introduction.. 15
3.5.2.      Humanitarian
aid.. 15
3.6.     Macro-Financial
Assistance. 18
4..... Chapter 4 - Managing aid for results.. 19
4.1.     Monitoring
project performance. 19
4.1.1.      Project
results: results-oriented monitoring.. 19
4.1.2.      Evaluation:
review of the 2013 work programme. 20
4.1.3.      Lessons
learned.. 22
4.2.     Developments
in Aid delivery modalities and channels. 23
4.2.1.      Budget
support 23
4.2.2.      Using
EU grants strategically via blending.. 25
4.3.     Progress
in aid management 26
4.3.1.      Progress
on qualitative issues in aid management 26
4.3.2.      Simplification
of procedures. 28
4.4.     Communication
and transparency. 29
4.4.1.      Communication
and visibility. 29
4.4.2.      Transparency. 30
5..... Chapter 5 - Financial annex.. 31
5.1.     Introduction
to financial tables. 31
5.2.     Financial
tables. 33

3.2.          Democracy and human rights

The European Instrument for Democracy and Human
Rights (EIDHR)[1]
is the concrete expression of the EU commitment to support and promote
democracy and human rights in third countries.
In force since
2007, the EIDHR currently supports more than 1 500 projects in more than 130
countries worldwide. These projects, mainly implemented by NGOs, support real
change on the ground.
Building on the
EIDHR’s added value
With a budget
for 2013 of EUR 128 million, this year EIDHR launched 500 new key operations.
These build on
the EIDHR’s added value, namely, its independence of action allowing
interventions in the most difficult country situations worldwide without the
consent of the host government, creating synergies and complementing ongoing
actions where geographical instruments could not normally act.
The instrument
allows for unique actions not covered by other instruments, for example in
cases of serious human rights violations or an urgent need for protection, or
in thematic advocacy such as the fight against torture, the death penalty or
discrimination, election observation, support to the International Criminal
Court (ICC), etc.
In those
contexts, the EIDHR focuses on helping the survival of weakened or shattered
civil society and media, thereby opening the door to dialogue and change.
While limited in
financial scope, its flexible tools have worked very well and are essential;
for example in providing direct support to human rights defenders, direct small
grants, working with informal partners and re-granting.
They achieved
significant results in supporting human rights and the defenders of human
rights in the most difficult situations, in fighting for democracy, justice,
children and women rights, in fighting against torture and ill treatment, the
death penalty and all forms of discrimination, and in supporting civil society
to enable environment and strategic dialogues. These projects addressed all
civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights.
Endowed with
specific fast reaction mechanisms and addressing individual cases, the EIDHR
worked as a small and dedicated, but essential, component of the EU response to
crisis in 2013 in countries such as Central African Republic, Mali, South Sudan, Syria or Ukraine.
A Worldwide
instrument
The EIDHR is a
worldwide instrument. It continued in 2013 to expand its reach to mainstream
democracy and human rights operations in the field. While Delegations were
implementing 44 Country-Based Support Schemes (CBSS) in 2007, the number of
schemes reached 107 countries during 2013. One country dropped from the list, Croatia, as it join the EU in 2013.
The instrument operated
in 2013 through 107 local calls for proposals (worth EUR 71.9
million) supporting the
development of thriving civil society organisations on the ground, empowering
them in their quest for and defence of democracy and human rights and in their
specific role as actors for positive change.
In total EIDHR
actions have supported a total of 1851 local projects since 2007. 
Specific focus
2013
The EIDHR reinforced
the EU's capacity to address the most difficult situations, to react quickly to
human rights emergencies, to provide urgent
protection needs, and to support a
comprehensive EU Human Rights Defender (HRD) mechanism, through a global call on human rights and their defenders in the
most difficult situations (EUR 15 million) and through hundreds of cases of
direct support to Human Rights Defenders.
A specific focus
was also put also on anti-discrimination activities and another dedicated call
for proposals was launched (EUR 20 million). This will allow actions to be
launched against discrimination with a four-fold interlinked support to
activities dedicated to fighting discrimination that targets
Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transsexual and Intersexual (LGBTI) people, freedom of
religion and beliefs, indigenous peoples and girl-children.
Moreover,
several targeted actions allowed provision of support to the UN Office of the
High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), the implementation of UN Human Rights Treaties Section, the work of the International
Criminal Court (ICC), the Inter-American Human Rights System, the Indigenous Peoples' Centre for Documentation, Research and
Information (DoCIP), the supervisory bodies of the International Labour Office (ILO)
monitoring ILO conventions on Indigenous and Tribal peoples' Rights, and UN Women in addressing targeted actions on violence against women.
Finally the
EIDHR continued in 2013 to support the European Inter-Universities Center
(EIUC) and its regional networks of universities covering most regions of the
world to provide to hundreds of students with postgraduate educational
opportunities in human rights and democracy.
Moving towards a
Rights Based Approach to Development
The ‘Agenda for Change’, the
EU Strategic Framework on Human Rights and Democracy, the Communication Towards
a Post–2015 Development Framework, all call for the EU to move to a Rights
Based Approach to EU Development (RBA). This will require the inclusion in
project design and monitoring in all sectors of an analytical approach that
assesses the negative and positive impact on Human Rights and targets in
particular the project end-users. This will require a new approach from the
traditional exclusive needs-based approach.
To assist in
this process the Council Conclusions of June 2012 mandated that the Commission
develop a ‘toolbox for working towards a rights based approach encompassing all
human rights’. 
To achieve this
mandate during 2013 the Commission held several consultations with all
development stakeholders.
It also
organised in November 2013 an important Brainstorming Seminar on ‘How to
work towards a Rights Based Approach, encompassing all Human Rights, for EU
development cooperation’, addressing some key issues, conceptual
considerations and implementation strategies, for the establishment of the
toolbox.
Having gathered
these important inputs, the Commission is planning to adopt this toolbox during
the first semester of 2014 as an important contribution strengthening the
interactions between Human Rights and Development in the context of the post
MDG agenda.
Case study
Protecting Human Rights Defenders
The Guinea Bissau League of Human Rights (GBLHR) is a very active
organisation in the field of human rights promotion in Guinea Bissau. It
strongly opposed the coup d'état perpetrated by the military in April 2012 and
since then has repeatedly denounced human rights violations all around the
country. In a context characterised by continuous intimidation and aggressions
by the military against its opponents, the President of the GBLHR reacted
publicly to a declaration made by the spokesperson of the Armed Forces against
the organisation. When he saw a group of military being deployed around his
office, he left the building and came to the EU Delegation asking for support
and protection. Thanks to the use of article. 9.1 of the EIDHR Regulation, 48
hours later the EU had mobilised the necessary means to allow the President of
the GBLHR to leave the country in safety.
Indeed, more than 400 HRDs and organisations in over 30 countries
have received this type of direct support, totalling just over EUR one million.
Examples of support include coverage of legal fees (Belarus, China, Uzbekistan); medical expenses including rehabilitation of torture victims (DRC, Russia, Syria); operational survival for local organizations (Ethiopia, Libya), or urgent relocation
of HRDs at risk (Colombia, Yemen). 
Regional breakdown of Human
Rights projects and programmes

3.3.           Stability


3.3.1.       Crisis response and
preparedness

The
EU can respond to crises by using the Instrument for Stability (IfS), whose
implementation comes under the responsibility of the Commission's Service for
Foreign Policy Instruments (FPI). Working in close cooperation with the EEAS,
as well as EU Delegations and relevant Commission Services, the IfS is deployed
to prevent, mitigate or respond to crises requiring rapid reaction. In doing
so, it is used to complement geographic external assistance programmes wherever
appropriate.
Reflecting world events, the
EU addressed several major crises that prevailed and/ or escalated following
the ‘Arab Spring’ upheavals across North Africa and the Middle East and which,
in turn, directly impacted on stability in the Sahel region. These events are
reflected in the predominant distribution of crisis response measures across
the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region in 2013. Alongside this, the EU
also responded to crises in other parts of the world, all of which required
effective and timely interventions in situations of fragility and/or
post-crisis. These actions sought to help stabilise countries and enhance
resilience. 
In 2013, the IfS committed
EUR 214.6 million through some 45 short-term crisis response measures. The
examples that follow illustrate the range of areas in which the IfS was used to
intervene:
Syria:
The protracted crisis in Syria has seen ongoing IfS support both inside Syria and in the neighbouring countries. In Turkey, Iraq, but mainly Jordan and Lebanon, the IfS was instrumental in supporting the authorities in their reception and
hosting of the increasing number of Syrian refugees. Refugees are also directly
assisted, for example through the provision of cash rental subsidies and the
improvement of their living conditions, including in the  governance structures
of the camps, the provision of alternative education and in the sphere of
psycho-social support. In Lebanon, the IfS is providing significant support to
the local healthcare sector, which is under huge strain given the additional
demands placed on it by the presence of large  numbers of refugees.
Within Syria itself, access and other conditions for
providing non-humanitarian support are clearly more challenging. Nevertheless,
the IfS has still been able to provide some direct assistance in the form of
primary healthcare, increased food security and basic education. 
Mali: In
early 2013, the IfS was one of the first instruments the EU was able to deploy
as part of the wider EU response effort to the crisis in Mali. The EUR 20 million IfS package of assistance provided support mainly in the areas of
security and justice, assistance for re-establishing the presence of the Malian State in the north of the country and towards the first stages of the electoral
process. The response was also emblematic of IfS measures paving the way for a
comprehensive approach to the crisis, with follow-on assistance secured through
the longer-term EU instruments as well as actions of individual EU Member
States. 
Niger:
During 2013, security threats in Niger increased due to the rebellion and
military conflict in northern Mali. The return of an estimated 250 000 economic
migrants from Libya to Niger alone, including ex-combatants and mercenaries,
further exacerbated the situation.  Building on existing IfS support towards
security and stabilisation in the northern regions of Niger and Mali, follow-on
support was agreed in 2013 to assist in the areas of municipal policing, income
generating activities and support to peace and reconciliation initiatives
launched by regional and national authorities. These measures contributed to
attaining the objectives of the EU Sahel Strategy, complementing EU development
assistance and humanitarian aid and will create synergies with the CSDP
EUCAP Sahel mission in Niger.
Central
African Republic: After the coup d’état of
March 2013, the scope of existing IfS support for the demobilisation of
ex-combatants and a consequent reinsertion programme was broadened to include a
wider geographic coverage reflecting the new situation on the ground. This was
followed with: support packages to civilian security forces, which could also
pave the way towards comprehensive efforts on security sector reform later on;
support to media to allow for objective and conflict sensitive information to
be available in Bangui and the provinces; the deployment of human rights’
observation missions; and the fostering of inter-community dialogue through
civil society efforts. The
EU institutions together with France are also preparing for the country- led
New Deal implementation once the situation allows.
Côte
d’Ivoire: Following the appoint of a national authority
to implement the government’s 2012 policy on disarmament, demobilisation and
reintegration (DDR), the EU provided assistance through IfS measures that
included; capacity-building and technical assistance, including the orientation
and preparation of demobilised ex-combatants who were to be reintegrated;
support to the economic and social reinsertion of approximately 5 000
previously de-militarised and de-mobilised ex-combatants and parallel
assistance to host communities in order to create an environment favourable to
such reintegration; and the close, regular monitoring of the DDR programme to
ensure that this participative approach caters for the needs of host
communities as well as those of ex-combatants.
Burma/Myanmar:
Following earlier interim support to the peace process, including the creation
of the Myanmar Peace Centre (MPC) in 2012, the IfS agreed in 2013 on an
18-month support package that also complements a number of ongoing and planned
actions under other EU instruments.
Following
approaches from both the Office of the President and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, and
in line with the Foreign Affairs Council Conclusions of April 2013, the EU has,
through an 18 month IfS intervention, been able to initiate assistance to the
capacity building of the Myanmar Police Force in order to improve police
respect for human rights as well as their accountability and professionalism in
the areas of crowd management and community policing.
In
addition to these crisis response actions, the EU committed a further EUR 26
million of IfS programmable funds for pre- and post-crisis preparedness and
related capacity-building, in the framework of the ‘IfS Peace-building
Partnership’. Focus was put on civil society capacity building; early warning;
natural resources and conflict; and peace-building and fragility. In doing this
the EU worked with a wide range of stakeholders, including: the UN, and other
international bodies; EU Member State agencies; NGOs and other civil society actors.

Investment in civil society at a grass-root level helped
increase its capacity to engage in peace-building and conflict prevention
actions across 14 conflict affected countries, notably in the areas of
mediation and dialogue; media and conflict; fragility and conflict; human
security; and women, peace and security.
Through the Civil Society Dialogue Network (CSDN), a
viable forum for dialogue on peace-building issues has been established between
the EU and civil society actors, providing the latter with an opportunity to
input to the EU’s policy making processes. As a result 40 dialogue meetings had
been held by the end of 2013, which enhances the long-term capacity of civil
society in third countries, as well as their European partners, to better prepare
for crisis prevention.
Online training modules and analytical guidance materials
for practitioners and policy makers on natural resources and conflict (NRC)
were produced through the first two phases of the EU-UN partnerships on land,
natural resources and conflict (NRC). These knowledge products support
global dialogue and advocacy on NRC, particularly in regions of key EU
political interest such as Africa’s Great Lakes. 
Under the ENTRi programme (Europe's New Training
Initiative for Civilian Crisis Management), the capabilities of staff
(including both EU and non-EU nationals) that are deployed in international
civilian crisis management missions have been strengthened through customised
training. Amongst others topics, training sessions included: training on
conflict analysis and conflict sensitivity; training on rule of law; mediation
and negotiation training; and gender-sensitisation.  In addition, a total of 19
pre-deployment courses for 407 experts have been delivered and completed to
date and interoperability and harmonised approaches to training have been
fostered as a result. 
Assistance was provided towards facilitating mediation
dialogue, notably relating to high profile crisis situations in Syria, Egypt, Mali and South Sudan. The ERMES (European Resources for
Mediation Support) facility, that was defined and put in
place at the end of 2013, paves the way for further facilitating the provision
of EU technical support to third parties engaged in inclusive peace, mediation
and dialogue processes at international, regional and/or local levels. This
will provide the EU with vital capacity to provide, at very short notice, a
range of technical assistance and training inputs in support of peace
processes, support for the organisation of relevant seminars and meetings and
the facilitation of third party events. Assistance has already been provided in
this field with regard to mediation dialogues.
In
order to enhance our partners’ capacities in pre- and post-crisis preparedness,
the League of Arab States (LAS) continued developing its Regional Crisis Centre
with EU support. Based at LAS headquarters in Cairo, the Crisis
Centre has already helped enhance the capacities of LAS on early warning as
well as supporting the development of political dialogue between the EU and
LAS. A final phase of training for LAS staff and senior officials is currently
ongoing until April 2014 and aims to cover policy areas of interest to future
LAS work such as humanitarian assistance, disaster risk reduction, post-crisis
needs analysis (PCNA), mediation and gender and conflict.  
Cooperation
with ASEAN on emergency response commenced with a view to enhancing the
latter’s capacity to respond as a regional organisation to emergency situations
as well as to improve inter-connectivity between the ASEAN Secretariat and the
national crisis centres of ASEAN Member States. In this context, a first
training for future staff of the Myanmar National Crisis Centre took place in
November 2013 in the presence of High Representative Ashton.  
With
regard to early warning systems (EWS), support has been provided at a global
level via a grant contract with Saferworld and Conciliation Resources to
strengthen the capacity of in-country and regional actors outside the EU,
principally civil society organisations to analyse conflict risks and dynamics
and to alert national and EU policy makers to emerging tensions across 32
theatres of potential conflict. In addition, support is provided to the
International Crisis Group (ICG) to provide high quality conflict analysis for
some 27 countries to policy makers and civil society with recommendations for
early response measures. 

3.3.2.       Global and regional
trans-border challenges

Actions
to address global and regional trans-border challenges are funded under the
long-term component of the IfS. These cover trans-regional security threats, as
well as chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) risks. Projects
focused on new needs in Syria, the Middle East, the Horn of Africa and North
Africa and the Sahel, including Mali. 
A
total of EUR 58 million was committed in 2013 for all the priorities related to
global threats in 2013. The partitioning of the funds per priority was as
follows:
-        
Fight against organised crime: EUR 9.5
million
-        
Countering violent extremism: EUR 13 million 
-        
Protection of critical infrastructure: EUR
5.5 million 
-        
CBRN risk mitigation: EUR 36.8 million
The
Commission’s JRC provided technical support and undertook technical projects in
several regions in the field of nuclear detection by providing equipment,
technical assistance and training to front line officers. Support is also being
provided to countries to help develop their capacities in biosafety and
biosecurity and in export controls. 
A
landmark decision was to make an amount of EUR 12 million available for the
destruction of chemical stockpiles in Syria. By doing so, the European
Commission contributed to the implementation of UNSCR 2118 and the joint
international efforts in this unprecedented and historical work to remove
chemical weapons.
The
CBRN Centres of Excellence initiative, which aims to build institutional
capacities to mitigate the risk of CBRN and threats to third partner countries,
was further implemented in 2013 and five secretariats were operational by the end
of the year.
The
JRC has been instrumental in supporting the CBRN Centres of Excellence
initiative, providing technical support such as evaluation and quality
controls, needs assessment and knowledge management. In 2013, secretariats were
opened in Amman (for the Middle East), and in Tbilisi (for South East Europe,
the Southern Caucasus, Moldova and Ukraine), in addition to the already
operating secretariats in Manila (South East Asia) and Rabat (African Atlantic
Façade). The secretariats facilitate information sharing, assess CBRN needs in
the partner countries and implement and monitor projects in the regions. As of
December 2013, there are 34 projects in 42 partner countries.
New
actions on countering the financing of terrorism in the Horn of Africa and Yemen, cybercrime, improving aviation security and countering falsified medicine were also
taken. 
In
the area of organised crime, work continued in ten countries on the Heroin Route (including Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan), as well as a project on human
trafficking. This also supports the new 2012-2016 EU Strategy for the
Eradication of Trafficking in Human Beings. 
Under
the Cocaine Route Programme, three joint airport interdiction task forces are
now operational in Cape Verde, Senegal and Togo, to support the fight against
organised crime on the cocaine route (three countries are covered in West
Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean). A project continued which is setting
up a regional police information system in West Africa with Interpol and there
was a commitment to prevent the diversion of drug precursors in Latin America. 
In
order to fight the illicit accumulation and trafficking of firearms, projects
continued with the African Regional Centre for Small Arms, (RECSA, EUR 2.7
million), the Security Commission of the Central American Integration System
(SICA, EUR 20.3 million) and INTERPOL (EUR 1.5 million). These actions are
complementary to ongoing work on illicit firearms in Sub-Saharan Africa and South America. Moreover, the EU promoted the full and effective implementation of the UN
Programme of Action on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons (SALW)
at its 2012 Review Conference. This is to combat and eradicate the illicit
manufacture, transfer and circulation of SALW, including firearms, and to
reduce and prevent their negative humanitarian and development impact. 
Maritime
security is of paramount importance for the shipping community. This makes
maritime security one of the priority areas under the IfS. The EU has set up
Critical Maritime Routes programmes. The aim is to strengthen capacities to
fight piracy and armed robbery. Much depends on the participating countries in
terms of mutual trust in information sharing and having the necessary
administrative and legal structures in place. In 2013, a new programme started
in the Gulf of Guinea following increased piracy in this region. Simultaneously
a programme was established to support national law enforcement agencies in Kenya, Seychelles, Mauritius, Djibouti and Somalia to efficiently respond to maritime piracy at the
regional level. 
Support
to projects fighting terrorism at national and regional levels continued in
2013 in line with the EU Counter-Terrorism Strategy. In Mali, implementation of
the project 'Contre Terrorisme Sahel' which benefits Niger, Mali and Mauritania
began in earnest with training on terrorist attack responses, investigative
techniques, intelligence gathering and use, as well as counter terrorism legal
proceedings. A new project which will contribute to counter terrorist financing
in the Horn of Africa and Yemen was prepared. In South-East Asia, the IfS were
engaged in a joint EU-UNODC (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime)
anti-terrorism initiative. The IfS also provided support to the Malta-based Institute of Justice and the Rule of Law through a mapping assignment to inform their
future counter terrorism related work. Finally, as an important element of the
EU Counter-Terrorism Strategy, a number of actions under the PREVENT strand
were prepared, including in the Horn of Africa and Pakistan, as well as a
global training activity on Countering Violent Extremism targeting EU staff in
Delegations and EU embassies.

3.4.           Nuclear
safety

The
Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation 2007-2013 has come to completion
achieving its main objectives of promoting a high level of nuclear safety,
radiation protection, sound waste management and the implementation of
efficient and effective nuclear safeguards in non-EU countries. A review of the
achievements and lessons learned is being executed by external experts that
will feed into the new programming cycle.
A
new Regulation was adopted at the end of 2013 for the period 2014-2020 covering
the same objectives. Priority will be given to work in the Accession Countries
and countries in the European Neighbourhood Area. The priority focus will be on
support to Regulatory Authorities. These efforts started under the previous
Instrument on waste management and remediation activities will continue and
Nuclear Safeguard activities will also be supported. 
The
Strategy Paper 2014-2020 and the Multi-annual Action Programme 2014-2017 are
being prepared and define the future work priorities. A first Annual Action
Programme (2014) was also prepared in 2013.
A
budget of EUR 52.44 million was committed in 2013, of which EUR 25.105 million
was allocated to the Chernobyl Shelter Fund managed by the European Bank for
Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). This contribution completes the EU
support to the international efforts to address the consequences of the Chernobyl catastrophe. A total of EUR 361.6 million has been made available for this
purpose under the Technical Assistance to the Commonwealth of Independent
States (TACIS) and Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation (INSC) programmes.
Support
from the Commission to Nuclear Regulatory Authorities and TSOs of partner
countries continues to expand. In 2013, the JRC has supported the development
of new projects for Armenia, Thailand, Belarus, Jordan, Indonesia and Vietnam as well as supporting the implementation of previously programmed projects.
Radioactive Waste Management activities continue to be strongly supported in
Central Asia, particularly related to the remediation of contaminated former
nuclear sites and mines, and in Ukraine, where JRC has supported DEVCO in
particular in preparation for the contracting of several projects in the 2010
and 2011 programmes. In the field of nuclear safeguards, the JRC is providing
safeguards equipment and training to the Argentinean-Brazilian Agency for
Accounting and Control of Nuclear Materials (ABACC).
In Belarus, where the construction of their first Nuclear Power Plant is progressing on
schedule, the support to Regulatory Authorities has been strengthened with a
special support programme of EUR 4.5 million involving a consortium of European
and Ukrainian Regulators and their Technical Support Organisations (TSOs). This
project also demonstrates the maturity that has been reached by the Ukrainian
organisations partially thanks to the past 15 years of EU support.
The
Armenian National Regulatory Authority has received additional support to
address the national strategy for nuclear and radioactive waste management
being developed in the country under EU contract.
Support
to Ukraine has been limited to the extension of the Joint Support Organisation
that helps the Commission in the implementation of the INSC in the country and
is the largest beneficiary of the programme.
Jordan
is on its way to producing nuclear electricity and a Research Reactor is being
built by South Korea. Negotiations are on-going with Russia to construct a new
Nuclear Power Plant. Since the inception of the peaceful programme, the EU is
assisting the country in establishing an independent and competent Regulatory
Authority. A further EUR two million has been committed under the Annual Action
Programme 2013.
South
 East Asia is a region where many countries are
seriously considering the nuclear option in their Energy mix. Support to the
Regulatory Authorities in Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam for a total of EUR
five million has been planned. Following the Fukushima accident, the region
also recognised the need to address Emergency Preparedness and Response to
nuclear accidents on a regional basis. The EU is funding a feasibility study
with the participating countries that will review the current procedures in
place, assess the gaps and corresponding needs and propose an Action Plan. This
project benefits from the creation of an ASEANTOM organisation that recognises
the added value of the EURATOM (European Atomic Energy Community) model. 
The
completion of feasibility studies and environmental impact assessment for the
remediation of the Uranium mining legacy in Central Asia has been funded under
the 2013 programme. The corresponding proposal also includes a provision for
urgent practical measures for contaminated water currently used by the local
population. An overall budget of EUR three million has been committed.
A
feasibility study will be funded to deal with the issue of sunken radioactive
objects in the Arctic sea. The study will provide technical and financial
options to retrieve the most dangerous objects, in particular the two Russian
nuclear submarines that still have their nuclear power reactor on board.
Based
on the success and visibility of previous projects, a new provision amounting
EUR three million for training and tutoring activities targeting the Regulatory
Authorities and their TSOs has been included in the 2013 programme.

3.5.           Humanitarian
assistance
3.5.1.    Introduction

The European Commission, principally through its Directorate
General for Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection (ECHO), takes the lead in
formulating EU humanitarian aid policy and for managing humanitarian aid
to the victims of conflicts or disasters, both natural and man-made, in non-EU
countries. The European Union, with its Member States and the Commission, is the world leading humanitarian donor. The mandate of the European Commission in this area is to save and
preserve life, to reduce or prevent suffering and to safeguard the integrity
and dignity of people affected by humanitarian crises by providing relief and
protection. The Commission also helps to facilitate coordination with and
between EU Member States on humanitarian assistance. The overall priority is to
ensure that the aid is managed in the most effective and efficient way possible
so that the help Europe delivers to people in need has the maximum effect,
whilst respecting the principles of international law and the principles of impartiality,
neutrality, humanity, non-discrimination and independence.
Responses to natural and man-made disasters are also provided
through the Civil Protection Mechanism, which is under the remit of the same
Commission DG (DG ECHO) and is the responsibility of the European Commissioner
for International Cooperation, Humanitarian Aid and Crisis Response. This instrument covers interventions in
Member States, as well as in non-EU countries. 

3.5.2.    Humanitarian aid

Worldwide,
natural disasters are increasing in frequency, complexity and severity, and are
aggravated by challenges such as climate change, rapid urbanisation and
under-development. Armed conflicts and protracted crises also show worrying
trends across the globe. As the world’s leading
humanitarian donors, the EU has throughout 2013 responded with determination to
these challenges. The relief assistance provided by the European
Commission alone in 2013 amounted to over EUR 1.3
billion that helped people in more than 90 countries around the world. 
In November
2013, the tropical cyclone Haiyan[2]
hit the Philippines[3].
The typhoon, which was among the strongest ever recorded, caused massive
destruction, left thousands dead, around four million were displaced and the
disaster affected over 14 million people. Teams of EU humanitarian and civil
protection experts were deployed to the worst hit areas within hours of the
disaster to support relief efforts and assess the most acute needs. To ensure
coordination of the European relief efforts and facilitate logistics, the EU
Civil Protection Mechanism[4]
was activated. The EU and its Member States provided considerable humanitarian
aid and in-kind assistance, which exceeding EUR 150 million in the immediate
aftermath of the disaster. The Commission also committed support to assist the
medium-term rehabilitation of the affected areas and help the local population
to rebuild their lives. 
In
  Syria[5],
an estimated 9.3 million people, nearly half of them
children, are affected by the on-going violence and require humanitarian
assistance. Around 6.5 million people are internally displaced, whilst the
number of refugees in neighbouring countries (more than 2.3 million and
growing) underlines the complex, regional dimension of the disaster. European
assistance reaches up to 80 % of the population affected by the crisis and brings
tangible results with immediate impact for those affected by the Syria crisis. In 2013 the European Commission has mobilised an additional EUR 350 million
for humanitarian aid, bringing the EU's total response to more than EUR two
billion since the end of 2011. In addition, considerable material assistance
has been provided to neighbouring countries hosting the Syrian refugees
including ambulances, space heaters, blankets and hygiene parcels. 
Across
the Sahel[6],
vulnerable households are struggling to recover after the severe food and
nutrition crisis that hit the region in 2012. Aggravated by the on-going armed
conflict in Mali, almost 16 million people remain at risk from lack of food,
among them eight million in need of emergency food assistance. Building
resilience for the most vulnerable communities to withstand future crises has
also been a priority in 2013. To this end, the European Commission was a
driving force in establishing the AGIR-Sahel[7]
initiative, which brings together all stakeholders around the pursuit of a ’Zero
Hunger’ goal for the Sahel
over the next 20 years.
The
EU is also committed to helping those caught up in the world's ‘forgotten
crises’, dedicating around 15 % of its total humanitarian aid budget to meet
the needs of people that largely escape the attention of media and donors. The
Central African Republic (CAR)[8]
is experiencing a catastrophic humanitarian situation, which has for too long
been ignored by the wider international community. Inter-communal violence
escalated dramatically towards the end of 2013, forcing hundreds of thousands
in the capital Bangui and throughout the country to flee their homes. The
Commission allocated EUR 39 million of humanitarian aid to CAR; making it the
country's main donor. In addition, the EU organised repeated airlifts into the
country to support the transport of humanitarian relief and aid personnel in a
very challenging security environment.
Three
years after the devastating 2010 earthquake, the humanitarian needs in Haiti[9] remained
high. The EU stays fully committed and in 2013 has scaled up humanitarian aid
by EUR 30.5 million to help those Haitians still homeless as a result of the
earthquake, cholera victims and those badly affected by hurricane Sandy and tropical storm Isaac. Backed by EU funding, humanitarian organisations carried
out a wide range of emergency operations across the country.
Policy priorities in the field of humanitarian aid focussed, in
2013, on aid effectiveness, results-orientation and impact. The development of
clear guidance on thematic and cross-cutting issues such as resilience,
disaster risk reduction, WASH (water, sanitation and hygiene), gender, and
nutrition amongst others, as well as targeted dissemination, training
strategies and monitoring of implementation, are helping to the best value for
money and ensure that the needs of the most vulnerable crisis-affected
populations are addressed efficiently and effectively. Furthermore, substantive
efforts are undertaken in the disaster preparedness programme and to guide and foster the implementation of the Commission's
Resilience Communication and the link between humanitarian and development
actions. 
International
cooperation
is vital in the increasingly challenging humanitarian landscape. Throughout
2013, the EU continued provide a strong voice in multilateral forums. Taking a
leading role in the Transformative Agenda, the EU is aiming to enhance the
collective humanitarian response through improved global coordination,
leadership and accountability. Embracing the motto ‘Acting together for those
in need’, the EU through the Commission is chairing the OCHA Donor Support
Group (ODSG) in the period July 2013 to July 2014. This is an important
mechanism for humanitarian donor consultation on the activities of the United
Nations' Office for Coordination of Humanitarian affairs (OCHA).
Finally,
the regulation for the establishment of the EU Aid Volunteers programme has
been adopted, the challenge now will be completing
the preparatory steps necessary for implementing the programme. The
objective of the EU Aid Volunteers initiative
is to contribute to strengthening the EU's capacity to provide needs-based
humanitarian aid aimed at preserving life, preventing and alleviating human
suffering and maintaining human dignity and to strengthen the capacity and
resilience of vulnerable or disaster-affected communities in third countries.
In particular this wil be achieved by means of disaster preparedness, disaster
risk reduction and by enhancing the link between relief,
rehabilitation and development.
3.5.3.    Civil protection
Natural
and man-made disasters, acts of terrorism, technological, radiological and
environmental accidents can strike anywhere, at any time. When they happen, the
role of the EU Civil Protection Mechanism is to ensure a rapid and coordinated
response to help people caught up in disasters by drawing on the expertise and
capacity available across the EU. 
In
situations like tropical typhoon
Haiyan, which hit the Philippines in November, the European
Commission's Emergency Response Coordination Centre (ERCC) was the operational
heart of the EU response. The Centre operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Launched in May 2013, the ERCC further strengthens the EU's disaster response
capacity both inside the EU and globally. The ERCC collects real-time
information on disasters, monitors hazards and ensures that interventions are
effectively coordinated. This is supported by the Copernicus Emergency
Management Mapping Service, which was activated by the ERCC in the Philippines to deliver damage assessment products that facilitate the interventions of
humanitarian relief organisations. In the Philippines, the ERCC facilitated the
delivery of over 20 Participating States' personnel and relief material
supplies, as well as supported the transport of civil protection assets into
the region.
Assistance
to fight forest fires in Greece, Portugal, Montenegro, Bosnia Herzegovina and Albania in 2012 - 2013 and the help provided to refugees in Syria's neighbouring countries are other
recent examples of emergency responses to help people in distress inside and
outside the EU.
The
EU Civil Protection Mechanism has reacted to over 180 disasters worldwide since
its creation in 2001. All EU Member States as well as the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway participate in the
Mechanism. Action focuses on those areas where a common European approach is
more effective than separate national interventions.
Revised
Civil Protection legislation was agreed in 2013 and will further improve the
planning of European disaster response operations. The new law will ensure more
effective, efficient and coherent disaster management. Among other features, it
enables the creation of a voluntary pool of Member States' assets (including
response teams, equipment etc.) that are available for immediate deployment as
part of a joint European intervention. Prevention and preparedness are also
covered by the revised legislation.
3.5.4.    Budget
Following its needs-based approach, humanitarian and civil
protection assistance were provided to the following regions (in EUR millions):

3.6.           Macro-Financial
Assistance

Macro-financial
assistance (MFA) is an external financial instrument available to countries
close to the EU that addresses exceptional external financing needs in the form
of balance of payments support. MFA therefore contributes to strengthening
macroeconomic and financial stability in countries neighbouring or geographically
close to the EU, while encouraging the implementation of appropriate structural
reforms. It complements and is conditional on the existence of an adjustment
and reform programme with the IMF. MFA can take the form of loans, for which
the Commission borrows the necessary funds in capital markets and lends the
funds to the beneficiary country or, in some cases, grants, financed by the EU
budget, or a combination of loans and grants.
In
2013 the co-legislators finally adopted the 2011 Commission's legislative
proposal to extend MFA to Georgia for EUR 23 million in loans and EUR 23
million in grants. However, the Georgian authorities are not planning to borrow
under the ongoing precautionary IMF programme, and since a disbursing IMF
programme is a pre-condition for the implementation of MFA, no MFA disbursement
is foreseen in the near future. The 2011 Commission proposal to extend MFA to
the Kyrgyz Republic for EUR 15 million in loans and EUR 15
million in grants was also adopted and the Commission is now discussing with
the Kyrgyz Republic's authorities the various MFA-related documents (Memorandum
of Understanding, Loan Agreement, Grant Agreement etc). Disbursements of both
the first and second tranches of this MFA are foreseen in 2014. Finally, the
legislative decision was adopted to extend EUR 180 million in loans to Jordan. The Commission is now finalising with the Jordanian authorities the
associated Memorandum of Understanding and Loan Facility Agreement.
Disbursements of both the first and second tranches of this assistance are
foreseen in 2014.
For Bosnia and Herzegovina (EUR 100 million in loans), the disbursement of both tranches
of EUR 50 million was implemented in the first and third quarter of 2013.
On 5
December 2013, the Commission adopted a proposal for a MFA operation of up to
EUR 250 million in loans for Tunisia. The proposal was increased to EUR
300 million and adopted by the Parliament and the Council in April-May 2014. The
Commission is now finalising with the Tunisian authorities the associated
Memorandum of Understanding and Loan Facility Agreement.
While
decisions to extend MFA worth EUR 610 million to Ukraine were adopted in
2002 and 2010, implementation has been delayed by a protracted negotiation
process. The Memorandum of Understanding and Loan Agreement were signed in
February and March 2013 respectively, and the documents were submitted to the
Ukrainian Parliament for ratification in October 2013.

4.         Chapter
4 - Managing aid for results

       

4.1.           Monitoring
project performance
4.1.1.       Project results:
results-oriented monitoring 

For
more than 10 years, EuropeAid's Results Oriented Monitoring (ROM) system has
been used to assess the performance of projects funded by the European Union. As
such it forms a part of the overall quality assurance cycle, which starts
during the design of projects and ends after their implementation. 
The
ROM system is based on onsite visits where monitoring personnel interview
project and programme staff, review key project documents and, most
importantly, interview relevant stakeholders including the beneficiaries. At
the level of a project or programme it gives feedback to project managers on
the performance of the operations under their responsibility and gives
recommendations on how to improve them, if necessary. It can contribute lessons
learned for the preparation of new projects.
More
than 1500 ongoing projects and programmes have been assessed in 2013.
In
2013 the ROM system covered, in financial terms, roughly one-third of the total
funding portfolio.
A
reform of the monitoring system with respect to projects and programmes is
under preparation, which includes the approaches and modalities which will be
needed to implement the reporting on the basis of the future EU Development and
Cooperation Results framework referred to in section 1.2.1. The reform will
also include the ROM system with a view to set up an appropriate articulation
of the monitoring and reporting systems and levels needed over the coming
years. 

4.1.2.       Evaluation: review of the
2013 work programme
Overview

The
Evaluation Unit directly manages strategic evaluations covering geographic,
thematic and sector programmes, and aid delivery mechanisms (project-level
evaluations are dealt with in section 4.1.1). Evaluations are carried out by
independent external consultants following a standardised methodology and in a
transparent way. All evaluation reports and the responses to their
recommendations are made public[10].


The 2013 work programme

In
2013, the Evaluation Unit finalised and published six evaluations: a regional
evaluation on EU support to European Neighbourhood Policy Regions; two Budget
Support evaluations (for Tanzania and South Africa); and three thematic
evaluations (on Private sector development; Trade-related assistance; and
support to integrated border management and fight against organised crime).
Fifteen
evaluations were launched during the year: nine geographic evaluations (Bolivia, Georgia, Jordan, Central America, Haiti, Palestine, Togo, Madagascar and Timor-Leste); two
evaluations of Budget Support (Mozambique and Burundi); and four thematic
evaluations (on Environment, Gender, Research and Innovation, and Transport).
Eight
evaluations, launched in 2012, were on-going: Asia (regional), Burundi (joint geographic evaluation), Cameroon, Kenya, and Morocco (Budget Support), Pacific
(regional), Democratic Republic of Congo and Yemen. 
Seminars
were organised in Brussels and in the respective countries to share the results
of the evaluations. Following the evaluations of the provision of budget
support to Tanzania and South Africa, seminars were held both in-country and in
  Brussels due to the interest generated.
Transversal
and methodological work 
Evaluation
Policy
DEVCO
and the EEAS are working on an Evaluation Policy for EU external development
cooperation. This document makes explicit, at a strategic level, why, how and
for what purpose evaluations are conducted. It sets the key principles which
drive evaluation within the external co-operation services. It should be
published in 2014 after a widespread consultation process.
Evaluation
Correspondents’ Network
An
internal Network of Evaluation Correspondents within DEVCO and the EEAS has
been launched. Its objective is to enhance the evaluation culture and available
expertise by increasing awareness about evaluation, its use and usefulness,
raising evaluation skills and allowing better communication about evaluation
results between the Evaluation Unit and the Delegations and between the
Delegations. 
Joint
evaluations
DEVCO
encourages joint evaluations in the framework of aid effectiveness. It is a
logical consequence to the commitment to increased joint programming, but it is
also justified in its own right as a means of coordinating donor approaches and
reducing transaction costs. Joint evaluations allow both parties to align with
aid effectiveness priorities and to deliver the EU commitment to increased
joint programming and joint interventions. 
Capacity
Development 
The
Evaluation Unit has developed and tested a results-oriented methodology to
evaluate Capacity Development support. The methodology is currently being
disseminated internally and externally through training and seminars.

Summary of evaluations

 
European
Neighbourhood Policy Regions (East and South) (2004-2010): In
the period 2004-2010, EUR 1.4 billion was committed for regional cooperation
out of the ENP total of EUR 9.6 billion. The evaluation concluded that EU
support stimulated regional policy dialogue and contributed to stability, a
critical achievement in a difficult context. The regional interventions have a
strong added value but limited linkages with other EU interventions. At country
level, the priorities differ sometimes from those of regional cooperation,
leading to weak support from some countries. The key recommendations include
paying more attention to sustainability, carefully assessing at the design
stage the differences in the willingness and capacities of regional partners;
considering cooperation only with countries with clear political priorities and
ensuring that interventions allow flexibility in the choice of local partners.
Tanzania
Budget Support (2005-2011): This evaluation covered
budget support provided by 14 donors, which amounts to almost USD five billion
from 2005 to 2011. The evaluation provides evidence showing that the additional
funds provided to the budget have had a positive effect on economic growth, on
improved outcomes in the education sector and on improvements in non-income
poverty. However, the evaluation also shows that the accompanying measures for
budget support, namely policy dialogue and capacity building measures have not
been as effective as they could have been. In particular the policy dialogue
was characterised by a low level of government ownership, high transaction
costs, technical weaknesses in the indicators of the Performance Assessment
Framework, and the lack of a strategic, policy-solving orientation. As a
result, in a number of important areas, weaknesses in policy design and in
reform implementation have persisted.
South
  Africa Budget Support (2000-2011): The
evaluation covered 16 Sector Budget Support operations for at total of EUR 984
million. EU Budget Support to South Africa represents a positive experience
that should be continued and further integrated into the SA-EU Strategic
Partnership. Budget Support has been adapted to the national context ensuring
both Government ownership and strategic relevance of EU support. The evaluation
shows that budget support has been effective and had an impact on Government
policies which would not have been achieved through traditional projects. 
However evaluation shows that as well as the provision of funds, policy
dialogue and capacity building need to be adapted and strengthened in order to
foster better knowledge sharing on key development issues. 
Private
sector development (2004-2010): Over
2004-2010, the EU provided EUR 2.4billion grant funding for PSD. This made the
EU an important player in PSD, both financially and in terms of the scope
covered. The EU positioned itself as a ‘generalist’ capable of funding a very
wide range of activities. It has achieved results at macro- and meso-levels
(institutional and regulatory frameworks, access to finance, and some elements
of support to enterprise competitiveness) rather than at the micro-level. The
main weaknesses are in its lack of strategy to maximise its impact, on its
failure to fully exploit its expertise, and a lack of information from the
monitoring and evaluation of its interventions. Recommendations are made on
these issues as well as on the necessity to adapt its support to the
specificities of middle income countries and to improve internal and external
communication on the EU’s PSD support.
Evaluation
of the European Union’s Trade-related Assistance (TRA) in third countries: The
EU’s TRA achieved significant results in most of the priority areas. TRA, and
EU-supported trade reform processes, were often successful when implemented in
partnership with com­mitted governments and where robust capacities to
implement broader policy processes were available. In the least developed
countries (LDCs) and fragile state contexts TRA has often managed to stabilise
or even expand trade volumes, and has therefore had some success in one part of
the core TRA objective: to increase trade. However, it has had less success in
the other part of the objective: diversifying trade for the poorest and most
fragile countries. Here there is more work to do to better integrate these
countries into the world economy. 
EU
support to integrated border management and fight
against organised crime (2002-2010): Through 2002-2010, the EU committed
EUR 900 million to support integrated border management and the fight against
organised crime and achieved significant positive results. The EU’s perceived
impartiality and experience was a recognised added value. The impact was
reduced by over-emphasis on large-scale ‘difficult’ projects and insufficient
attention was given to comprehensive reforms. Furthermore, sustainability is
weak. Recommendations include a better balance between security and trade
and/or traffic facilitation, more management-related reforms, early planning
for sustainability and increased assistance through regional interventions.
Outlook
for 2014
The
following evaluations are scheduled to be launched before the end of 2014:
·        
Geographic
evaluations : Chad, Lesotho, Côte d'Ivoire, Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Central Asia (regional)
·        
Budget
Support evaluations: Ghana, Paraguay, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Uganda, and Vietnam
·        
Thematic
evaluations: Higher Education, Combat of Drought and Famine in Sahel and Horn of Africa, Democracy, and Access to Rural Energy, 
·        
Instrument
: Blending

4.1.3.       Lessons learned
The
‘fiches contradictoires’, a key tool to ensure the follow-up of
evaluation recommendations

The fiche
contradictoire presents in tabular form: the main recommendations of an
evaluation; the response of the services and actions to be taken; and the
follow-up of these actions one year later.  Every fiche contradictoire is
available on the Evaluation Unit website[11].

Synthesis
of key lessons learned

The private Sector
Development and Trade Related Assistance evaluations confirmed the clear
connection between PSD and TRA and contributed to identifying the common
lessons learnt and the synergies of these interventions 
§  Over the last decade,
third countries have deepened their integration into the world economy, but the
degree of progress varied according to their different contexts. Most progress
has been made in countries where the private and public sector were strongly
trade-oriented and where the link to trade agreements provided an incentive for
reforms. The EU should better adapt its approach to the specific country
context and especially to the level of development of the country. 
§  A more systematic mainstreaming
of poverty reduction and employment creation in the EU TRA and PSD support
would increase the overall impact of the EU’s support.  Poverty reduction and
employment creation has not been sufficiently mainstreamed in the design and
implementation of TRA and PSD interventions.
§  There is still a need
for stronger involvement of private sector and non-state actors (NSA) in the
design, implementation and monitoring of EU support. Interactions with the
private sector have often been weak and the involvement of NSA has been only
marginal in TRA. This has limited the understanding of the most important
actors, dynamics, needs and issues. 
The
recently finalized Budget Support (BS) evaluations in Tanzania and South-Africa (SA) provided key findings and lessons learned on BS. A more
complete synthesis, including the results from Morocco and Mozambique BS
evaluations, is planned to be undertaken in mid-2014.
§  All evaluations of BS
provide evidence that BS has made a contribution to the achievement of the
agreed objectives with each respective government. Each of the evaluations
revealed the strengths of the operations and identified some areas of
weaknesses. In particular deficiencies on policy dialogue, as one of the core
components of BS, needs to be addressed.
§  The evaluation for Tanzania shows that budget support tends to be very effective in situations where there is
a need to scale up resources to address basic needs and that neither project
funding nor common basket funding could have achieved these same results with
the same degree of efficiency, effectiveness and sustainability. 
§  The evaluation of
budget support to South Africa shows that budget support can also be effective
in situations where the funds represent a marginal proportion of the country’s
budget and where the scaling up of resources to address basic needs is less of
a problem. The budget support funds have been used by the Government for
specific innovative activities and pilot activities that had an impact on
Government policies. It is unlikely that a similar impact would have been
achieved if those pilot activities had been financed through traditional
projects, which inherently tend to be less owned by the Governments. 

4.2.           Developments
in Aid delivery modalities and channels


4.2.1.       Budget support 

2013
was the first year of full implementation of the new policy on Budget Support
and experiences with the new approach have been very positive. 
The differentiation
into three contracts (Good Governance and Development Contracts (GGDC), State-Building
Contracts (SBC) and Sector Reform Contracts (SRC)) has allowed the Commission
to respond better to the specific context of the partner country and to reflect
EU Policy objectives more clearly. In particular State-Building Contracts have
supported progress in fragile situations like in Mali and Ivory Coast.  
The respect
of Fundamental values has been strengthened overall in all Budget Support
operations and is a precondition for the Good Governance and Democracy
contract. Furthermore, the Fundamental Values are systematically analysed in
the context of the Risk Management Framework (RMF) for all on-going Budget
Support operations.
The governance
of Budget Support is improved through the establishment of a Budget Support
Steering Committee (BSSC) and the introduction of Risk Management Frameworks
(RMF). The BSSC provides strategic guidance early in the decision-making
process on all new BS programmes and disbursements. In 2013, twenty BSSC
meetings were organised covering:

 Three
     GGDC: Falkland Islands, Ghana and Morocco.
 Six
     SBC: Tunisia, Mali, Central African Republic (before the political
     crisis), South Sudan (before the unrest), Haiti and the Ivory Coast (rider).
 45
     SRC
 141
     payments 
 Two
     assessments of fundamental values in view of GGDCs (Burkina-Faso and Tanzania)

In
2013, 73 Risk Management Frameworks (RMFs) have been completed and they are now
an essential tool allowing for a comprehensive country-level and global
analysis of risk profile. The RMFs have become a complementary tool in
designing and implementing operations and to inform policy dialogue.
There
is a stronger focus on accountability and transparency: the role of oversight
bodies such as the Parliament, the Supreme Audit Institution and the general
public being strengthened through systematic, public availability of budgetary
documents as a new eligibility condition for (new) budget support operations.
Budget
Support remains an important instrument in cooperation. 
At
the end of 2013, 256 BS programmes were being implemented or under preparation
in 84 countries, including Overseas Countries and Territories (OCTs) for a
total amount of EUR 10.8 billion.  Sub-Saharan Africa and the Neighbourhood
region are by far the largest recipients of budget support funds. The average
amount of budget support commitments per country varies from EUR 437 million in
ENP-S to EUR 12 million in the Pacific and OCTs. 83 % of BS contracts are
sector budget programmes (SBS/SRC), most often in the education sector. Good
Governance and Development Contracts (GGDCs) represent 5 % and State-Building
Contracts (SBCs) represent 4 %, most of which are being implemented in
Sub-Saharan Africa. The remainder are general budget support programmes that
pre-date the new policy. 
In
2013, BS disbursements amounted to EUR 1.5 billion, representing 22 % of total
disbursements (EUR 6.8 billion) of both the budget and the EDF. New commitments
in 2013 amounted to EUR 2.4 billion.
Domestic
Resource Mobilization, Transparency and Public Finance Management
Domestic revenue mobilisation is of increasing importance in the
international agenda as a vital factor for sustainable and accountable economic
growth. In 2013 the Commission continued international efforts to craft a
common analytical tool to assess a country’s tax administration. In addition,
the Commission carried out analytical work on the success factors for reforms
in taxation and on the vulnerability of tax revenues. 
The EU commitment towards increasing transparency and
accountability in the extractive industries has crystallised in the strong
support provided to the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI)[12]
which aims at improving transparency and accountable management of revenues
from natural resources worldwide. Disclosure of taxes and other payments made
by oil, gas and mining companies to governments helps to ensure that these
resources can benefit all citizens. There are now 39 EITI implementing
countries, with two-thirds of these countries now EITI Compliant. EITI was a
priority topic in the recent G8 agenda and more OECD countries have announced
their intent to implement EITI. In May 2013, a new EITI Standard was adopted
setting clearer rules for reporting which will result in the provision of more
relevant and reliable information. 
The Commission has continued the Tripartite Initiative with the
World Bank and the OECD to strengthen Transfer Pricing efforts. The
reinforcement of partner countries' capacities is helping to reduce tax
avoidance and evasion, improve business certainty, and reduce corruption and other
malpractices. For example, the Commission supports a joint strategy to build Vietnam's capacities in Transfer Pricing through training focussed on specific industry
sectors. The Commission also contributed to the UN Manual on Transfer Pricing
for Developing Countries launched in May 2013. 
As
one of the PEFA (Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability) partners, the
Commission participates in the revision of the PFM Performance Measurement
Framework, leading the task team on indicators for control, audit and
procurement.  The revised framework should be ready for consultation and
testing in 2014.
The
Commission is the lead donor in about one-third of all PEFAs undertaken since
2005 (129) and participated in another 61 PEFAs. In 2013 alone, the Commission
led seven assessments and participated in a further 18 assessments.
To
assist partner countries, the Commission has co-sponsored a Good Practice Note
on Sequencing PFM Reforms published in January 2013[13].
The
Commission supports capacity building in the area of PFM through many projects
and specific assistance associated with all budget support operations. 

4.2.2.       Using EU grants strategically via blending

Blending,
which combines EU grants with loans or with equity from other public and
private financiers, can leverage additional resources for an increased impact
of EU aid. Since the concept was first introduced at the beginning of the MFF
2007-2013 blending has gradually evolved into an important tool of EU external
cooperation, complementing other implementation methods. EU regional blending
facilities have been set up in all regions and other blending instruments such
as the Global Energy Efficiency Renewable Energy Fund (GEEREF) have been
established.  
In
the last seven years, EUR 1.6 billion grants from the EU budget, the EDF and Member States financed 200 blended projects. The EU grant contributions have leveraged
approximately EUR 16 billion of loans by European finance institutions and
regional development banks. By strategically combining EU grants with market
financing, blending helps unlock investments with an estimated volume of EUR 40
billion in EU partner countries. Without the EU grant these projects would not
have gone ahead, or only at a later stage, or at an unsustainable cost for the
partner country. Another common benefit is that the project now reaches more
beneficiaries that otherwise would have been excluded. 
In
2013 a total of almost EUR 400 million in EU grants went to support blending
projects with an expected investment volume of about EUR seven billion. The
largest contributions went to projects in Sub-Saharan Africa (33%), the Eastern
neighbourhood (23%) and Southern neighbourhood (19%). Smaller contributions
went to the Caribbean (9%), Latin America (7%), Asia (5%) and Central Asia
(4%). In terms of sectoral coverage the majority went to energy projects (55%).
The main reason for this is the EU activity in the context of the Sustainable
Energy for All (SE4ALL) initiative through the EU-Africa Infrastructure Trust
Fund. In addition 21 % of EU grant contributions went to transport projects, 12
% to water and sanitation projects, 7 % to support private sector development
and 4 % to environmental projects.  
In
December 2012, the EU Platform for Blending in External Cooperation[14] was
launched to further increase the effectiveness of blending. The Platform is led
by a Policy Group which makes recommendations based on work carried out in
technical groups. The Policy Group is chaired by the Commission and involves
representatives from Member States, the European Parliament and the EEAS. In
the technical groups the Commission works together with experts from finance
institutions and Member States. In 2013 the Platform’s technical groups worked
on a review of existing blending mechanisms, reviewed the ex-ante technical and
financial analysis of projects, the indicators for measuring results,
monitoring and reporting, and also looked at further development of financial
instruments. The results of the technical groups were presented to the Policy
Group in December. On this basis a report to the European Council and
Parliament will be prepared. 
The
majority of investments supported via blending so far have been public, but the
potential of blending as a catalyser for private financing is becoming ever
more visible. Support to local businesses is already an area in which blending
leverages private financing to help enterprises grow and create jobs. At the
2013 European Development Days the Commission organised a brainstorming event
where donors and finance institutions discussed with civil society
representatives how to further exploit the potential of blending as a catalyser
for private financing, notably through innovative financial instruments and
Public-Private-partnerships (PPPs).   

4.3.           Progress
in aid management 
4.3.1.       Progress on qualitative
issues in aid management 

Thematic
and methodological knowledge sharing
Continuous
learning and skills development for staff and partners involved in the
development programmes is a key factor in ensuring quality standards and
sustainable results. In 2013 the Commission continued to support this process
promoting learning events, knowledge sharing and methodological guidance. In
2013 methodological support and training targeted areas such as programme
monitoring, budget support, capacity development, policy dialogue, fragility
and crisis management, decentralisation and local governance, support to civil
society, and blending mechanisms amongst other topics.
Training
courses, workshops and other learning events have been promoted to improve the
quality of aid management, the dialogue between partners for better results and
increased capacities in partner countries. In 2013, 1 849 individuals benefited
from 92 methodological courses, of which 23 were organised in partner
countries.
Otherwise,
the exchange of knowledge can be implemented through the EU corporate knowledge
sharing platform on development and cooperation: capacity4dev. In 2013 the
platform continued to grow both in terms of contents and new members: over 1
000 new blog items were posted, 4 000 documents and 350 workshops were shared,
and 62 new ‘Voices and Views’ featuring video interviews and articles by
colleagues or other development stakeholders were published. Over 2013, an
external usability study was also performed, which should lead to improvements
in the platform to make it more interactive. Web rationalisation has been
continuing, notably with the integration of a former community of practice (ROSA) on food security. In addition the platform now allows the creation of working spaces
specifically designed to enhance knowledge sharing between EU Member States,
the Commission and EEAS. Such working spaces will be instrumental to foster
convergence.
Quality
of Design
The
effectiveness of any development operation depends fundamentally on the quality
of its design. To ensure that the operations’ design meets the highest
standards, an internal peer review process is in place through Quality Support
Groups (QSG), which are composed of thematic and geographic experts from
EuropeAid, EEAS and other relevant Commission DGs. The QSG assess and support
each new action in two phases: at the beginning of the design phase to check
the relevance and likely feasibility of the identified action (the identification
phase); and at the end of the design phase to assess the overall quality of the
proposed action providing recommendations for improvement (the formulation
phase).  
During
2013, 77 projects were screened for identification, and 443 projects were
screened for formulation. The low number of identification processes is
explained by the fact that 2013 was the very last year of the previous seven
year MFF (2007-2013).
Capacity
development is a key element of quality across aid modalities: the concept of
capacity development continues to be prominent in the global development agenda
and this was affirmed at the High Level Meeting on Aid Effectiveness in Busan[15] as a
key factor to achieve sustainable results. Similarly, the Agenda for Change
calls for increasing the impact of  EU Development Policy and this is possible
if the capacities of partner countries are also strengthened through effective
support and dialogue. The Commission continues to mainstream Capacity
Development through the different stages of the project and programme cycle. 
Staff development: training
and knowledge sharing
Continuous
development and updating of knowledge and expertise of its staff is a high
priority for the Commission. A wide-ranging learning programme is provided on its
core business and new approaches in development cooperation policies. In 2013 528
learning events were organised by EuropeAid, corresponding to 13 736 training
days. Workshops are also organised to discuss lessons learned together with other
knowledge sharing activities including discussion forums and communities of
practice. 
The Commission
also offers a wide range of online courses that give its staff in Delegations
the same access to relevant training opportunities. 
The Commission
seeks synergy effects and enhanced quality in learning through its cooperation
with other donors in the ‘learn4dev’ donor competence development network,
where the Commission acts as part of the network’s steering committee. Major
bilateral and multilateral donors work together, harmonising learning
approaches with the final aim of speaking with one voice and thus enhancing the
efficiency of development cooperation. The network also serves as a knowledge
sharing platform, providing mutual access to learning possibilities, avoiding
duplication of existing offers and thus ensuring efficiency gains.

4.3.2.       Simplification of
procedures

In
2013 significant measures to simplify procedures were put in place. Most of
them have their origin in the new provisions of the Financial Regulation and
its Implementing Rules[16].
They were all incorporated and supplemented in the 2013 version of the
Practical Guide to contract procedures for European Union external actions
(PRAG)[17].
The
main measures introduced to simplify procedures were:
-
Raising of the procurement thresholds, which allows the use of lighter
procedures in many cases
-
Introduction of the possibility to conclude contracts under negotiated
procedure after the D+3 following an early termination of an ongoing contract 
- An
increase in the threshold for requirement of pre-financing guarantees, and
their total suppression for low-value procurement 
-
Shorter payment deadlines for pre-financing.
In
the case of service contracts:
-
Free choice between the framework contract and the competitive negotiated
procedure for procurement between EUR 20 000 and EUR 300 000
-
Maximum percentage for subcontracting is lifted
-
Tacit approval of reports after 45 days
-
Possibility to introduce lump-sum payments under the fee-based contracts
-
Flexibility introduced to determine the number of days of work for each expert
-
Introduction of a guide for the evaluator of service tenders
-
Possibility to have several riders to the contract for additional services up
to 100 % of initial value
-
Possibility to replace a key expert prior to the signature of the contract but
not with an expert from another offer in the same tender.
In
the case of supply contracts:
-
The maximum percentage for subcontracting is lifted
-
The possibility to use the negotiated procedure after one failure of the
competitive negotiated procedure
-
Variant solutions reintroduced
In
the case of works contracts:
-
The possibility to use the negotiated procedure after one failure of the
competitive negotiated procedure
-
Variant solutions reintroduced
-
Commencement order linked to access to the site
-
Suspension of the contract by the contractor allowed in the case of delays of
payments
In
the case of grant contracts:
-
Introduction of the multi-beneficiary grant contract with co-beneficiaries and
affiliated entities
-
Possibility to have multi-annual work programmes
-
Two additional exceptions to the no-profit rule 
-
Pro-rata recovery of potential profit in proportion to the Commission’s
contribution to eligible costs
-
Possibility of electronic submission and management of call for proposals
-
Increased flexibility in the requirement of documents to prove eligibility and
selection criteria
-
Lighter requirements on many aspects for low value grants (less than EUR 60
000)
-
Additional possibilities for financial support to third parties 
-
Introduction of the simplified cost options (lump-sums, unit costs, flat-rates)
-
Interest on pre-financing not due any more (for DG BUDGET only)
-
Increased flexibility in rules for currency conversion
-
Increased flexibility in unilateral modifications to the contract by grant
beneficiaries
-
Record keeping periods for supporting documents by beneficiaries shortened
-
Introduction of breakdowns of expenditure to replace expenditure verification
reports

4.4.           Communication
and transparency


4.4.1.       Communication and
visibility 

As
this full report shows, EU development cooperation makes a real difference to
the lives of millions of people in our many partner countries around the world.
Communicating the results and achievements of our programmes and projects is a
critical part of this work: it strengthens our accountability towards citizens
and contributes to maintaining a high level of support for the EU's policies
and funding. 
Eurobarometer
surveys carried out in 2013 show that Europeans remain staunch supporters of
development aid: 83 % of Europeans think it is important to help people in
developing countries, two-thirds of Europeans think that tackling poverty in
developing countries should be one of the main priorities of the EU and more
than six out of ten respondents think that aid to developing countries should
be increased, despite Europe’s economic problems.
However,
faced with constricting national budgets across our Member States, it has never
been more important to demonstrate that the EU is really making a difference. A
results-focused brochure, "EU Contribution to the Millennium Development
Goals"[18],
was published in September 2013 and launched at the UN General Assembly with an
impressive uptake from the media. The brochure provides easy-to-read figures
and concrete examples of EU action in the field gathered by staff in EU
Delegations worldwide. 
In
addition to press releases on major policy initiatives, responses to global
events and regular journalist seminars, in 2013, press trips were organised to
accompany Commissioner Piebalgs' visits to Burundi, Guatemala, Malawi and Zambia, also generating considerable media coverage. 
Several
high-level political events took place in Brussels. In May, the Donor
Conference for Development in Mali brought together 108 delegations and more
than 400 high level representatives of governments, local authorities, civil
society, the Malian diaspora, women and private sector. This major event
gathered pledges of EUR 3.08 billion towards the country's recovery; with 174
newspapers, radio and TV stations and other media outlets covered the
conference on site. 
In
November, the eighth edition of the European Development Days (EDD2013) looked
into the theme: "A decent life for all by 2030 – Building a consensus for
a new development agenda". EDD2013 was open to a wide range of
stakeholders, practitioners, policy-makers, academics and experts, with a
record-breaking 7 100 attendees (a 25 % increase over 2012). Thanks to the
involvement of EU Delegations, local events were simultaneously organised in
several partner countries to develop local angles to global issues and
involving young people, journalists and development partners. 
Together
with the UNDP, eight high level academic lectures (the Kapuscinski Development
lectures) were organised in EU Member States' universities and at Columbia University in New York during the UN General Assembly. The lectures, featuring eminent
speakers such as Esther Duflo and Aung San Suu Kyi, offered students a unique
opportunity to learn and discuss about development issues. 
EuropeAid's
web presence has been entirely rethought and its content redeveloped in view of
the launch of a new website in spring 2014. We intensified our communication
via social media (notably Facebook and Twitter) to organically grow our
followers and built relations with partners inside and outside the Commission
to further enhance our reach. 
Finally,
in 2013, the Commission presented a legislative proposal to mark 2015 as
European Year for Development. A crucial year on the international development
agenda, 2015 is both the deadline for achieving the Millennium Development
Goals and the possible starting point for a revised international framework.
This will be the first ever European Year dealing with external action policies
of the EU. The European Year for Development 2015 will offer a unique
opportunity to work with Member States to directly engage with citizens,
showcase our shared commitment to eradicating poverty worldwide and to
communicate on the impact and benefits of EU development cooperation for
beneficiaries and also for EU citizens. 

4.4.2.       Transparency

Improved
transparency was one of the key EU deliverables at the 2011 Fourth High Level
Conference on Aid and Development Effectiveness in Busan[19].
In 2013 the Commission made significant progress in improving the transparency
of its external assistance services. The Commission successfully rolled-out the
implementation of the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI) project,
which is now concluding its third phase, across all its main aid-providing
departments. The results achieved include substantial improvements in the
performance of DG Enlargement and the Service for Foreign Policy Instruments.
The Commission is progressively implementing the common transparency standard
and is sharing its experience and cooperates with the EU Member States to
improve aid transparency across Europe. 
Developed
by the JRC in close collaboration with DG DEVCO and DG ECHO, and launched
during the European Development Days in November 2013 (EDD2013), EU
Aid Explorer[20]
is a unique web tool that provides easy access to clear, complete and accurate
data on development and humanitarian aid around the world. Maps and infographics
help visualisation of which donor is active where, which sectors and countries
receive how much assistance and how funding changes over time. Completed with a
project search tool, EU Aid Explorer facilitates donor coordination, ensures
transparency and improves accountability to citizens. 

5.         Chapter
5 - Financial annex


5.1.           Introduction
to financial tables

This Annual Report provides an overview of policies,
objectives and achievements in 2013. The tables and graphs which follow present
the main data on EU development assistance in 2013 by country, region, or
sector and per source of funding, such as the different instruments of EU
external assistance. Please note that for reference purposes some tables
(notably Tables 5.18, 5.19, 5.20, 5.22 and 5.23) include data on financial
allocations made under the IPA instrument.
The geographic cooperation with the ACP countries, is
based on the Partnership Agreement with the ACP signatory states and is mainly
financed, South Africa excepted, from the European Development Fund which is
separate from the EU budget. External assistance for other geographic areas and
the thematic programmes with worldwide coverage are financed from the general
EU budget. 
Data for 2013 again show improved overall Official
Development Assistance (ODA) levels. Figure 5.1 shows the importance of
external assistance in the overall expenditure of the European Commission.
Defined as the resources used to foster programmes and projects outside the EU,
external assistance accounted for 10% of the total allocation in 2013 (general
EU budget and EDF taken together). 
A global overview of the share of resources is given in Figure
5.2. A detailed breakdown of the budget by policy areas can be found in Table
5.3. A similar breakdown for the EDF is presented in Table 5.4. 
The concept of ODA used throughout the tables and figures
is that defined by the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee (DAC). Not all
EU external assistance can be reported as ODA. Whether an action, programme or
project is classified as ODA or not depends on the recipient country and the
purpose and content of the aid. Figure 5.5 shows the share of the EU's
external assistance classified as ODA. In all, almost 93% of EU aid committed
in 2013 is considered reportable as ODA, indicating a continuing focus on
development in external financial allocations. 
Figures 5.6 and 5.7
show the evolution from 2005 to 2013 of external assistance and ODA. Figure
5.6 shows the commitments evolution of the main sources of funding: external
assistance from the EU Budget and EDF, indicating the share managed by
EuropeAid. Figure 5.7 shows the disbursements evolution of the sector
breakdown of ODA. 
Figure 5.8 and Table
5.9 present the breakdown per region. For this breakdown, it is necessary
to differentiate between bilateral and multilateral aid. Bilateral aid, as
defined by the DAC, is direct cooperation by the Commission with a country (or
region) where the Commission controls the activities and knows how, when and
where the resources are being spent. Multilateral aid comprises direct
contributions to the core funding of multilateral agencies, who report back to
the Commission at a later stage on how the money was spent. 
Figure 5.8 provides
a breakdown of EU ODA per region. Africa tops the list (39% of ODA) with,
Sub-Saharan Africa receiving 34% of total ODA in 2013. A more detailed
breakdown, per country and region, in line with the OECD/DAC recipient list, is
presented in Table 5.10 (Commitments) and Table 5.11 (Disbursements).
Figure 5.12
focuses on ODA recipients classified under the four UN/OECD categories based on
GNI. The table monitors disbursements in 2013 by DAC recipient and by main OECD
sectors. One indicator shows ODA disbursement per capita. 
It is also important to identify the main sectors of
activities that receive support. Table 5.13 shows this breakdown of EU
ODA per main sector as defined by the DAC. 
A more detailed sector breakdown of ODA is provided in Table
5.14 for commitments and in Table 5.15 for payments. 
Tables 5.16 and 5.17 give
an overview of the ODA managed by EuropeAid, with a breakdown per sector and
region. In these tables, the definition of region reflects the country
groupings used in the EU instruments and corresponding budget structure. 
Tables 5.18 and 5.19 show
the sector breakdown of ODA per EU external assistance instrument and
sub-component within the instruments, with the associated Figure 5.20 providing
a closer look.
Table 5.21 focuses
on budget support commitments 2012 by EU instruments.
Tables 5.22 and 5.23
provide an overview of the breakdown by country and instrument – payments and
disbursements.
Please note that where references are made in the
following tables to 'EU budget', this refers to the budget managed by the
European Commission and does not cover EU Member States' national budgets for
development assistance.

5.2.           Financial
tables

Table
5.1 Percentage of EU budget committed to external assistance in 2013
 Table 5.2 Sources of external assistance in 2013   
Table 5.5 Proportion of external
assistance used for Official Development Aid (ODA)
[1] http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/how/finance/eidhr_en.htm
[2] http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/aid/countries/factsheets/philippines_haiyan_en.pdf
[3] http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/aid/countries/factsheets/philippines_en.pdf
[4] http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/aid/countries/factsheets/thematic/civil_protection_en.pdf
[5] http://ec.europa.eu/echo/aid/north_africa_mid_east/syria_en.htm
[6] http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/aid/countries/factsheets/sahel_en.pdf
[7] http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/aid/countries/factsheets/sahel_agir_en.pdf
[8] http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/aid/countries/factsheets/car_en.pdf
[9] http://ec.europa.eu/echo/aid/caribbean_pacific/haiti_en.htm
[10]
http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/how/evaluation/evaluation_reports/index_en.htm
[11]
http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/how/evaluation/evaluation_reports/index_en.htm
[12] http://eiti.org/
[13] http://www.pefa.org/
[14] http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/news/2012-12-12-platform-blending-funds_en.htm
[15] http://effectivecooperation.org/

[16] Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of 25/10/2012 and Commission
Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1268/2012 of 29/10/2012.
[17] http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/work/procedures/implementation/practical_guide/index_en.htm
[18] http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/documents/mdg-brochure-2013_en.pdf
[19] See the EU Common Position for the Fourth High Level Forum on Aid
Effectiveness of 14 November 2011
[20] https://tr-aid.jrc.ec.europa.eu/
Table of Contents 
5.2.         Financial tables (cont'd)
 Table 5.10 Country breakdown of European Commission development aid in 2013 
 Commitments ( € Million )  ||   ||   
 Country/Region || Budget EuropeAid || Budget non EuropeAid || EDF || Grand Total 
 Part I : Developing Countries & Territories (ODA) ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Europe, Total || 664.19 || 1,822.72 ||   || 2,486.91 
   ||   || Albania ||   || 86.74 ||   || 86.74 
   ||   || Belarus || 31.71 ||   ||   || 31.71 
   ||   || Bosnia and Herzegovina ||   || 61.45 ||   || 61.45 
   ||   || Kosovo (1) ||   || 220.04 ||   || 220.04 
   ||   || fYRoM ||   || 111.27 ||   || 111.27 
   ||   || Republic of Moldova (2) || 135.00 ||   ||   || 135.00 
   ||   || Montenegro ||   || 35.71 ||   || 35.71 
   ||   || Serbia ||   || 183.88 ||   || 183.88 
   ||   || Turkey ||   || 900.73 ||   || 900.73 
   ||   || Ukraine || 206.50 ||   ||   || 206.50 
   ||   || States of ex-Yugoslavia unspecif. ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Europe, Regional || 290.98 || 222.89 ||   || 513.87 
 Africa, Total || 1,095.90 || 704.44 || 3,501.71 || 5,302.05 
   North Of Sahara, Total || 658.89 || 45.99 ||   || 704.88 
   ||   || Algeria || 50.00 || 10.00 ||   || 60.00 
   ||   || Egypt || 47.00 || 0.24 ||   || 47.24 
   ||   || Libya || 30.00 || 35.71 ||   || 65.71 
   ||   || Morocco || 339.90 ||   ||   || 339.90 
   ||   || Tunisia || 137.05 || 0.05 ||   || 137.09 
   ||   || North Of Sahara, Regional || 54.94 ||   ||   || 54.94 
   South Of Sahara, Total || 413.28 || 653.67 || 3,456.18 || 4,523.13 
   ||   || Angola ||   ||   || 90.30 || 90.30 
   ||   || Benin ||   ||   || 47.80 || 47.80 
   ||   || Botswana ||   ||   || 22.62 || 22.62 
   ||   || Burkina Faso ||   ||   || 110.21 || 110.21 
   ||   || Burundi ||   ||   || 28.90 || 28.90 
   ||   || Cameroon || 7.24 ||   || 7.60 || 14.84 
   ||   || Cape Verde ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Central African Rep. ||   || 35.05 || 40.58 || 75.63 
   ||   || Chad || 8.00 || 37.00 || 6.68 || 51.68 
   ||   || Comoros || 3.00 ||   || 1.13 || 4.13 
   ||   || Congo, Dem. Rep. || 3.50 || 90.83 || 53.25 || 147.58 
   ||   || Congo, Rep. ||   ||   || 0.26 || 0.26 
   ||   || Cote d'Ivoire || 11.31 || 20.00 || 36.48 || 67.79 
   ||   || Djibouti || 9.00 || 39.10 || 10.00 || 58.10 
   ||   || Equatorial Guinea ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Eritrea || 0.16 ||   || 4.22 || 4.39 
   ||   || Ethiopia ||   || 29.43 || 255.91 || 285.34 
   ||   || Gabon ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Gambia ||   ||   || 13.45 || 13.45 
   ||   || Ghana ||   ||   || 26.50 || 26.50 
   ||   || Guinea ||   || 18.45 || 185.49 || 203.94 
   ||   || Guinea-Bissau ||   ||   || 21.90 || 21.90 
   ||   || Kenya || 7.50 || 29.33 || 143.60 || 180.43 
   ||   || Lesotho ||   ||   || 10.98 || 10.98 
   ||   || Liberia ||   || 0.00 || 22.20 || 22.20 
   ||   || Madagascar || 4.77 || 4.93 || 134.00 || 143.69 
   ||   || Malawi || 11.00 || 0.00 || 75.42 || 86.42 
   ||   || Mali ||   || 79.90 || 383.63 || 463.53 
   ||   || Mauritania || 4.00 ||   || 61.70 || 65.70 
   ||   || Mauritius || 51.09 ||   || 12.29 || 63.38 
   ||   || Mozambique ||   || 3.11 || 125.49 || 128.60 
   ||   || Namibia ||   ||   || 24.58 || 24.58 
   ||   || Niger || 9.00 || 25.20 || 181.10 || 215.30 
   ||   || Nigeria ||   || 16.90 || 42.60 || 59.50 
   ||   || Rwanda ||   ||   || 81.88 || 81.88 
   ||   || St.Helena ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Sao Tome & Principe || 3.00 ||   || 3.40 || 6.40 
   ||   || Senegal ||   || 3.50 || 87.34 || 90.84 
   ||   || Seychelles ||   ||   || 0.85 || 0.85 
   ||   || Sierra Leone ||   ||   || 110.27 || 110.27 
   ||   || Somalia ||   || 27.13 || 48.00 || 75.13 
   ||   || South Africa || 130.58 ||   ||   || 130.58 
   ||   || Sudan ||   || 97.00 || 36.00 || 133.00 
   ||   || South Sudan ||   ||   || 189.00 || 189.00 
   ||   || Swaziland || 1.80 ||   || 17.27 || 19.07 
   ||   || Tanzania || 8.00 ||   || 80.20 || 88.20 
   ||   || Togo ||   ||   || 12.43 || 12.43 
   ||   || Uganda || 10.00 ||   || 28.20 || 38.20 
   ||   || Zambia ||   ||   || 40.80 || 40.80 
   ||   || Zimbabwe ||   || 3.81 || 9.79 || 13.60 
   ||   || South Of Sahara, Regional || 130.32 || 93.00 || 529.90 || 753.22 
   Africa, Regional || 23.73 || 4.78 || 45.53 || 74.04 
 America, Total || 493.40 || 49.04 || 356.79 || 899.22 
   North & Central, Total || 236.49 || 19.86 || 308.02 || 564.36 
   ||   || Anguilla ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Antigua & Barbuda ||   ||   || 0.68 || 0.68 
   ||   || Belize || 19.86 ||   || 2.11 || 21.97 
   ||   || Costa Rica ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Cuba || 13.00 ||   ||   || 13.00 
   ||   || Dominica ||   ||   || 6.90 || 6.90 
   ||   || Dominican Republic ||   ||   || 38.12 || 38.12 
   ||   || El Salvador ||   || 0.13 ||   || 0.13 
   ||   || Grenada ||   ||   || 0.15 || 0.15 
   ||   || Guatemala || 27.10 ||   ||   || 27.10 
   ||   || Haiti || 13.30 || 15.10 || 137.19 || 165.58 
   ||   || Honduras || 27.50 || 2.63 ||   || 30.13 
   ||   || Jamaica || 29.57 ||   || 69.06 || 98.63 
   ||   || Mexico ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Montserrat ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Nicaragua || 53.05 ||   ||   || 53.05 
   ||   || Panama || 28.00 ||   ||   || 28.00 
   ||   || St.Kitts-Nevis || 12.76 ||   ||   || 12.76 
   ||   || St.Lucia ||   ||   || 0.23 || 0.23 
   ||   || St.Vincent & Grenadines ||   ||   || 5.04 || 5.04 
   ||   || West Indies, Regional ||   ||   || 48.54 || 48.54 
   ||   || N. & C. America, Regional || 12.34 || 2.00 ||   || 14.34 
   South, Total || 172.45 || 25.18 || 48.77 || 246.40 
   ||   || Argentina ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Bolivia || 34.00 || 0.11 ||   || 34.11 
   ||   || Brazil || 5.59 ||   ||   || 5.59 
   ||   || Chile ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Colombia || 60.60 || 13.00 ||   || 73.60 
   ||   || Ecuador ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Guyana || 24.35 ||   || 48.07 || 72.42 
   ||   || Paraguay || 10.50 || 0.01 ||   || 10.51 
   ||   || Peru || 32.20 ||   ||   || 32.20 
   ||   || Suriname ||   ||   || 0.70 || 0.70 
   ||   || Uruguay ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Venezuela ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || South America, Regional || 5.21 || 12.06 ||   || 17.27 
   America, Regional || 84.47 || 4.00 ||   || 88.47 
 Asia, Total || 1,666.41 || 851.19 || 4.00 || 2,521.60 
   Middle East, Total || 662.06 || 524.52 ||   || 1,186.58 
   ||   || Iran ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Iraq || 40.20 || 24.56 ||   || 64.76 
   ||   || Jordan || 137.40 || 0.05 ||   || 137.45 
   ||   || Lebanon || 103.00 || 32.08 ||   || 135.08 
   ||   || Palestine || 224.00 || 44.69 ||   || 268.69 
   ||   || Syria || 51.00 || 386.64 ||   || 437.64 
   ||   || Yemen || 52.00 || 36.00 ||   || 88.00 
   ||   || Middle East, Regional || 54.46 || 0.51 ||   || 54.97 
   South & Centr. Asia, Total || 643.67 || 283.16 ||   || 926.84 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Afghanistan || 197.48 || 119.39 ||   || 316.86 
   ||   || Armenia || 67.00 ||   ||   || 67.00 
   ||   || Azerbaijan || 25.00 ||   ||   || 25.00 
   ||   || Bangladesh || 29.25 || 12.16 ||   || 41.41 
   ||   || Bhutan || 5.60 || 0.12 ||   || 5.72 
   ||   || Georgia || 78.78 || 27.10 ||   || 105.88 
   ||   || India ||   || 9.00 ||   || 9.00 
   ||   || Kazakhstan || 8.80 ||   ||   || 8.80 
   ||   || Kyrgyz Rep. || 0.06 || 1.80 ||   || 1.86 
   ||   || Maldives || 4.00 || 0.06 ||   || 4.06 
   ||   || Myanmar (Burma) || 42.00 || 42.00 ||   || 84.00 
   ||   || Nepal || 6.00 || 3.88 ||   || 9.88 
   ||   || Pakistan || 83.84 || 52.01 ||   || 135.85 
   ||   || Sri Lanka ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Tajikistan || 30.54 ||   ||   || 30.54 
   ||   || Turkmenistan || 14.50 ||   ||   || 14.50 
   ||   || Uzbekistan || 4.00 ||   ||   || 4.00 
   ||   || Central Asia, Regional || 40.93 || 1.05 ||   || 41.98 
   ||   || South Asia, Regional || 3.30 || 14.60 ||   || 17.90 
   ||   || South & Central Asia, Regional || 2.60 ||   ||   || 2.60 
   Far East, Total || 281.88 || 43.50 || 4.00 || 329.38 
   ||   || Cambodia || 46.00 || 2.00 ||   || 48.00 
   ||   || China || 7.00 ||   ||   || 7.00 
   ||   || Indonesia || 11.50 ||   ||   || 11.50 
   ||   || Korea, Dem. || 13.00 || 0.00 ||   || 13.00 
   ||   || Laos || 9.50 ||   ||   || 9.50 
   ||   || Malaysia || 0.50 ||   ||   || 0.50 
   ||   || Mongolia || 3.57 ||   ||   || 3.57 
   ||   || Philippines || 47.99 || 39.50 ||   || 87.49 
   ||   || Thailand || 6.50 ||   ||   || 6.50 
   ||   || Timor-Leste ||   ||   || 4.00 || 4.00 
   ||   || Viet Nam || 122.42 || 2.00 ||   || 124.42 
   ||   || Far East Asia, Regional || 13.90 ||   ||   || 13.90 
   Asia, Regional || 78.80 ||   ||   || 78.80 
 Oceania, Total || 30.66 || 13.32 || 194.54 || 238.51 
   ||   || Cook Islands ||   ||   || 2.55 || 2.55 
   ||   || Fiji || 30.66 || 0.90 || 3.80 || 35.36 
   ||   || Kiribati ||   ||   || 5.30 || 5.30 
   ||   || Marshall Islands ||   ||   || 1.35 || 1.35 
   ||   || Micronesia, Fed. Sts. ||   ||   || 0.20 || 0.20 
   ||   || Nauru ||   ||   || 0.20 || 0.20 
   ||   || Niue ||   ||   || 1.05 || 1.05 
   ||   || Palau ||   ||   || 0.18 || 0.18 
   ||   || Papua New Guinea ||   ||   || 68.12 || 68.12 
   ||   || Samoa ||   || 0.90 || 2.33 || 3.23 
   ||   || Solomon Islands ||   ||   || 17.40 || 17.40 
   ||   || Tokelau ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Tonga ||   ||   || 0.47 || 0.47 
   ||   || Tuvalu ||   ||   || 0.15 || 0.15 
   ||   || Vanuatu ||   ||   || 12.82 || 12.82 
   ||   || Wallis & Futuna ||   ||   || 18.11 || 18.11 
   ||   || Oceania, Regional ||   || 11.52 || 60.50 || 72.01 
 Bilateral unallocated || 1,481.82 || 327.58 || 339.99 || 2,149.39 
 Part I (ODA) Bilateral, Total || 5,432.38 || 3,768.28 || 4,397.03 || 13,597.69 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Public Private Partnerships ||   ||   ||   ||   
 United Nations || 95.69 || 2.48 ||   || 98.17 
   ||   || UNRWA || 91.79 ||   ||   || 91.79 
   ||   || UNDP ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || WFP ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || WHO ||   || 0.45 ||   || 0.45 
   ||   || FAO || 1.28 || 1.20 ||   || 2.48 
 International Monetary Fund (IMF) ||   ||   ||   ||   
 World Bank Group ||   ||   ||   ||   
 World Trade Organisation ||   || 2.55 ||   || 2.55 
 Regional Development Banks || 25.11 ||   ||   || 25.11 
 Other Multilateral Institutions ||   || 1.10 ||   || 1.10 
      GFTAM ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Others ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
    Part I (ODA) Multilateral Aid,Total || 120.80 || 6.13 ||   || 126.92 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
    Part I (ODA), Total || 5,553.18 || 3,774.41 || 4,397.03 || 13,724.61 
 Part II: Countries and Territories in Transition (non ODA) ||   ||   ||   ||   
 More Advanced Developing Countries || 15.36 || 97.08 || 106.06 || 218.49 
   ||   || Aruba ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Bahamas ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Bahrain ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Barbados || 13.36 ||   || 5.81 || 19.17 
   ||   || Bermuda ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Brunei ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Cayman Islands ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Falkland Islands ||   ||   || 4.13 || 4.13 
   ||   || French Polynesia ||   ||   || 19.79 || 19.79 
   ||   || Gibraltar ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Hong Kong, China ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Israel || 2.00 ||   ||   || 2.00 
   ||   || Korea ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Kuwait ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Macao ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Mayotte ||   ||   || 29.72 || 29.72 
   ||   || Netherlands Antilles ||   ||   || 24.00 || 24.00 
   ||   || New Caledonia ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Oman ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Pitcairn Islands ||   ||   || 2.40 || 2.40 
   ||   || Qatar ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Saint Pierre and Miquelon ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Saudi Arabia ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Singapore ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Taiwan ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Trinidad & Tobago ||   ||   || 8.35 || 8.35 
   ||   || Turks & Caicos Islands ||   ||   || 11.85 || 11.85 
   ||   || United Arab Emirates ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Virgin Islands (UK) ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || MADCT Unallocated ||   || 97.08 ||   || 97.08 
 CEEC's/NIS || 48.38 || 133.26 ||   || 181.64 
   ||   || Bulgaria ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Croatia ||   || 85.84 ||   || 85.84 
   ||   || Cyprus ||   || 32.72 ||   || 32.72 
   ||   || Czech Republic ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Estonia ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Greenland || 28.72 ||   ||   || 28.72 
   ||   || Hungary ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Iceland ||   || 10.84 ||   || 10.84 
   ||   || Latvia ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Lithuania ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Malta ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Poland ||   || 0.00 ||   || 0.00 
   ||   || Romania ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Russia ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Slovak Republic ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Slovenia ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Europe Unallocated || 19.67 || 3.86 ||   || 23.53 
   ||   || CEECs Unallocated ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Part II (Non-OA) Bilateral Aid, Total || 63.74 || 230.33 || 106.06 || 400.13 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || EBRD ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Part II (non-ODA) Multilateral Aid, Total ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
  Part II (non-ODA), Total || 63.74 || 230.33 || 106.06 || 400.13 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Grand Total Part I & Part II || 5,616.92 || 4,004.74 || 4,503.08 || 14,124.74 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Breakdown by country/region of external aid financed on the general Commission budget and the European Development Fund (EDF) in 2013. 
   ||   || Bilateral and multilateral ODA / non-ODA countries. 
   ||   || (1) UNSCR 1244/99 ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || (2) henceforth Moldova ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Table 5.11 Country breakdown of European Commission development aid in 2013 
 Disbursements ( € Million ) ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Country/Region || Budget EuropeAid || Budget non EuropeAid || EDF || Grand Total 
 Part I : Developing Countries & Territories (ODA) ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Europe, Total ||   ||   || 426.25 || 1,099.80 ||   || 1,526.05 
   ||   || Albania || 0.63 || 47.70 ||   || 48.33 
   ||   || Belarus || 14.09 || 0.02 ||   || 14.10 
   ||   || Bosnia and Herzegovina || 2.24 || 89.46 ||   || 91.70 
   ||   || Kosovo (1) || 0.46 || 173.82 ||   || 174.28 
   ||   || fYRoM || 0.49 || 27.83 ||   || 28.32 
   ||   || Republic of Moldova (2) || 68.36 || 0.17 ||   || 68.53 
   ||   || Montenegro || 0.76 || 19.31 ||   || 20.07 
   ||   || Serbia || 1.25 || 126.36 ||   || 127.61 
   ||   || Turkey || 3.39 || 400.04 ||   || 403.43 
   ||   || Ukraine || 162.92 || 0.02 ||   || 162.95 
   ||   || States of ex-Yugoslavia unspecif. || 0.00 || 0.18 ||   || 0.18 
   ||   || Europe, Regional || 171.67 || 214.88 ||   || 386.55 
 Africa, Total ||   ||   || 766.97 || 727.40 || 2,401.89 || 3,896.25 
   || North Of Sahara, Total || 279.94 || 50.99 || 0.10 || 331.03 
   ||   || Algeria || 38.99 || 11.88 ||   || 50.87 
   ||   || Egypt || 27.37 || 2.59 ||   || 29.96 
   ||   || Libya || 10.96 || 34.29 ||   || 45.25 
   ||   || Morocco || 86.60 ||   ||   || 86.60 
   ||   || Tunisia || 86.28 || 2.23 ||   || 88.51 
   ||   || North Of Sahara, Regional || 29.75 ||   || 0.10 || 29.86 
   || South Of Sahara, Total || 448.76 || 670.39 || 2,251.60 || 3,370.75 
   ||   || Angola || 6.78 ||   || 17.09 || 23.87 
   ||   || Benin || 2.53 || 0.84 || 44.39 || 47.76 
   ||   || Botswana || 0.00 ||   || 14.54 || 14.54 
   ||   || Burkina Faso || 8.13 || 22.95 || 120.00 || 151.07 
   ||   || Burundi || 3.23 || 2.79 || 50.59 || 56.61 
   ||   || Cameroon || 10.90 || 3.32 || 55.51 || 69.72 
   ||   || Cape Verde || 1.48 ||   || 11.18 || 12.65 
   ||   || Central African Rep. || 2.60 || 11.73 || 14.30 || 28.63 
   ||   || Chad || 12.37 || 36.18 || 61.11 || 109.66 
   ||   || Comoros ||   || 0.03 || 6.39 || 6.41 
   ||   || Congo, Dem. Rep. || 15.75 || 91.17 || 124.94 || 231.87 
   ||   || Congo, Rep. || 4.31 || 0.20 || 9.53 || 14.04 
   ||   || Cote d'Ivoire || 5.25 || 12.41 || 85.91 || 103.57 
   ||   || Djibouti || 0.09 || 8.11 || 15.43 || 23.63 
   ||   || Equatorial Guinea ||   ||   || 0.17 || 0.17 
   ||   || Eritrea || 1.73 ||   || 8.06 || 9.79 
   ||   || Ethiopia || 7.50 || 44.82 || 48.65 || 100.97 
   ||   || Gabon || 1.00 ||   || 4.62 || 5.62 
   ||   || Gambia || 0.58 || 1.43 || 10.63 || 12.64 
   ||   || Ghana || 1.86 || 0.24 || 22.94 || 25.04 
   ||   || Guinea || 2.53 || 6.83 || 22.10 || 31.46 
   ||   || Guinea-Bissau || 4.33 || 2.18 || 7.60 || 14.12 
   ||   || Kenya || 32.13 || 39.16 || 84.64 || 155.93 
   ||   || Lesotho || 0.66 || 0.24 || 37.07 || 37.97 
   ||   || Liberia || 4.14 || 5.71 || 18.55 || 28.40 
   ||   || Madagascar || 5.05 || 4.50 || 48.28 || 57.83 
   ||   || Malawi || 5.60 || 0.32 || 75.17 || 81.09 
   ||   || Mali || 3.53 || 62.11 || 157.84 || 223.49 
   ||   || Mauritania || 2.32 || 12.60 || 45.26 || 60.18 
   ||   || Mauritius || 27.89 || 0.27 || 1.83 || 29.99 
   ||   || Mozambique || 8.79 || 2.68 || 86.71 || 98.17 
   ||   || Namibia || 1.93 || 0.24 || 29.12 || 31.29 
   ||   || Niger || 1.70 || 48.63 || 87.98 || 138.31 
   ||   || Nigeria || 1.63 || 15.07 || 81.16 || 97.86 
   ||   || Rwanda || 3.32 || 1.04 || 86.53 || 90.89 
   ||   || St.Helena ||   ||   || 5.80 || 5.80 
   ||   || Sao Tome & Principe || 1.27 ||   || 4.61 || 5.88 
   ||   || Senegal || 2.87 || 7.42 || 39.95 || 50.24 
   ||   || Seychelles || 0.18 ||   || 1.89 || 2.07 
   ||   || Sierra Leone || 9.66 || 0.93 || 46.57 || 57.15 
   ||   || Somalia || 7.52 || 54.54 || 52.54 || 114.60 
   ||   || South Africa || 128.65 ||   ||   || 128.65 
   ||   || Sudan || 11.02 || 69.66 || 9.07 || 89.74 
   ||   || South Sudan || 0.46 || 83.49 || 12.70 || 96.64 
   ||   || Swaziland || 24.44 ||   || 3.77 || 28.21 
   ||   || Tanzania || 2.99 || 2.92 || 74.08 || 79.99 
   ||   || Togo || 1.06 || 0.66 || 22.97 || 24.69 
   ||   || Uganda || 7.23 || 2.26 || 55.44 || 64.93 
   ||   || Zambia || 3.45 || 0.05 || 47.36 || 50.85 
   ||   || Zimbabwe || 22.22 || 9.17 || 35.90 || 67.29 
   ||   || South Of Sahara, Regional || 34.09 || 1.48 || 243.17 || 278.74 
   || Africa, Regional || 38.26 || 6.02 || 150.18 || 194.47 
 America, Total ||   ||   || 478.43 || 100.61 || 139.47 || 718.51 
   || North & Central, Total || 191.67 || 61.02 || 131.30 || 383.99 
   ||   || Anguilla ||   ||   || 3.81 || 3.81 
   ||   || Antigua & Barbuda || 0.16 || 0.02 || 0.65 || 0.83 
   ||   || Belize || 7.11 || 0.02 || 5.27 || 12.39 
   ||   || Costa Rica || 5.57 || 0.06 ||   || 5.63 
   ||   || Cuba || 6.51 || 3.22 ||   || 9.73 
   ||   || Dominica || 1.85 || 0.31 || 6.68 || 8.84 
   ||   || Dominican Republic || 4.22 || 2.25 || 32.11 || 38.58 
   ||   || El Salvador || 22.97 || 2.30 ||   || 25.26 
   ||   || Grenada || 0.00 || 0.33 || 0.15 || 0.48 
   ||   || Guatemala || 15.91 || 3.02 ||   || 18.93 
   ||   || Haiti || 6.36 || 39.63 || 33.30 || 79.30 
   ||   || Honduras || 12.19 || 3.74 ||   || 15.93 
   ||   || Jamaica || 26.98 || 0.47 || 22.05 || 49.50 
   ||   || Mexico || 5.25 || 0.44 ||   || 5.69 
   ||   || Montserrat ||   ||   || 4.70 || 4.70 
   ||   || Nicaragua || 43.86 || 2.40 ||   || 46.25 
   ||   || Panama || 2.33 || 0.07 ||   || 2.41 
   ||   || St.Kitts-Nevis || 10.71 || 0.05 || 0.18 || 10.94 
   ||   || St.Lucia || 2.10 || 0.11 || 7.88 || 10.10 
   ||   || St.Vincent & Grenadines || 1.80 || 0.31 || 1.95 || 4.06 
   ||   || West Indies, Regional || 0.76 ||   || 11.07 || 11.83 
   ||   || N. & C. America, Regional || 15.03 || 2.27 || 1.50 || 18.81 
   || South, Total || 248.81 || 39.04 || 8.17 || 296.02 
   ||   || Argentina || 4.90 || 1.09 ||   || 5.99 
   ||   || Bolivia || 56.17 || 5.68 ||   || 61.85 
   ||   || Brazil || 17.49 || 0.40 ||   || 17.89 
   ||   || Chile || 3.63 || 0.82 ||   || 4.45 
   ||   || Colombia || 23.81 || 17.84 ||   || 41.65 
   ||   || Ecuador || 16.74 || 3.29 ||   || 20.03 
   ||   || Guyana || 20.84 || 0.11 || 3.30 || 24.25 
   ||   || Paraguay || 10.85 || 4.61 ||   || 15.46 
   ||   || Peru || 26.40 || 3.48 ||   || 29.87 
   ||   || Suriname || 0.18 || 0.11 || 4.87 || 5.16 
   ||   || Uruguay || 5.69 || 0.15 ||   || 5.84 
   ||   || Venezuela || 2.23 || 1.20 ||   || 3.44 
   ||   || South America, Regional || 59.90 || 0.26 ||   || 60.15 
   || America, Regional || 37.95 || 0.55 ||   || 38.50 
 Asia, Total ||   ||   || 1,336.06 || 644.22 || 12.39 || 1,992.68 
   || Middle East, Total || 519.70 || 375.31 ||   || 895.02 
   ||   || Iran || 0.95 || 1.88 ||   || 2.83 
   ||   || Iraq || 10.33 || 53.17 ||   || 63.50 
   ||   || Jordan || 100.80 || 67.00 ||   || 167.80 
   ||   || Lebanon || 66.33 || 69.73 ||   || 136.06 
   ||   || Palestine || 227.74 || 42.57 ||   || 270.30 
   ||   || Syria || 31.57 || 105.51 ||   || 137.08 
   ||   || Yemen || 23.08 || 34.23 ||   || 57.31 
   ||   || Middle East, Regional || 58.91 || 1.22 ||   || 60.13 
   || South & Centr. Asia, Total || 577.88 || 244.91 ||   || 822.79 
   ||   || Afghanistan || 116.40 || 72.01 ||   || 188.41 
   ||   || Armenia || 37.27 || 0.31 ||   || 37.58 
   ||   || Azerbaijan || 13.02 || 0.07 ||   || 13.09 
   ||   || Bangladesh || 73.61 || 16.75 ||   || 90.36 
   ||   || Bhutan || 3.62 || 0.54 ||   || 4.16 
   ||   || Georgia || 55.79 || 26.66 ||   || 82.44 
   ||   || India || 70.14 || 10.56 ||   || 80.70 
   ||   || Kazakhstan || 10.43 || 0.27 ||   || 10.71 
   ||   || Kyrgyz Rep. || 24.12 || 2.15 ||   || 26.27 
   ||   || Maldives || 0.12 ||   ||   || 0.12 
   ||   || Myanmar (Burma) || 21.21 || 32.66 ||   || 53.87 
   ||   || Nepal || 24.21 || 5.98 ||   || 30.19 
   ||   || Pakistan || 40.28 || 66.60 ||   || 106.88 
   ||   || Sri Lanka || 24.96 || 7.28 ||   || 32.24 
   ||   || Tajikistan || 12.78 || 0.67 ||   || 13.45 
   ||   || Turkmenistan || 2.24 || 0.00 ||   || 2.24 
   ||   || Uzbekistan || 9.17 || 0.00 ||   || 9.18 
   ||   || Central Asia, Regional || 31.39 || 1.56 ||   || 32.95 
   ||   || South Asia, Regional || 3.07 || 0.82 ||   || 3.89 
   ||   || South & Central Asia, Regional || 4.05 || 0.00 ||   || 4.05 
   || Far East, Total || 181.12 || 24.00 || 12.39 || 217.51 
   ||   || Cambodia || 21.77 || 1.26 ||   || 23.03 
   ||   || China || 32.73 ||   ||   || 32.73 
   ||   || Indonesia || 49.84 || 0.74 || 0.00 || 50.58 
   ||   || Korea, Dem. || 7.45 || 2.26 ||   || 9.72 
   ||   || Laos || 7.77 || 0.74 ||   || 8.51 
   ||   || Malaysia || 2.11 ||   ||   || 2.11 
   ||   || Mongolia || 3.67 || 0.04 ||   || 3.71 
   ||   || Philippines || 12.35 || 11.63 ||   || 23.99 
   ||   || Thailand || 8.91 || 6.05 ||   || 14.96 
   ||   || Timor-Leste || 2.20 || 0.22 || 12.39 || 14.81 
   ||   || Viet Nam || 27.71 || 0.51 ||   || 28.22 
   ||   || Far East Asia, Regional || 4.60 || 0.56 ||   || 5.15 
   || Asia, Regional || 57.36 ||   ||   || 57.36 
 Oceania, Total ||   ||   || 12.36 || 5.92 || 53.90 || 72.18 
   ||   || Cook Islands ||   || 0.04 || 0.26 || 0.30 
   ||   || Fiji || 5.57 || 0.99 || 3.14 || 9.70 
   ||   || Kiribati ||   || 0.04 || 2.76 || 2.80 
   ||   || Marshall Islands ||   || 0.13 || 0.09 || 0.23 
   ||   || Micronesia, Fed. Sts. ||   || 0.07 || 0.61 || 0.68 
   ||   || Nauru ||   || 0.01 || 0.84 || 0.85 
   ||   || Niue ||   || 0.01 || 0.40 || 0.41 
   ||   || Palau ||   || 0.04 || 0.00 || 0.04 
   ||   || Papua New Guinea || 0.95 || 1.09 || 3.99 || 6.03 
   ||   || Samoa || 1.50 || 0.99 || 0.78 || 3.28 
   ||   || Solomon Islands || 0.59 || 0.96 || 4.77 || 6.32 
   ||   || Tokelau ||   || 0.01 ||   || 0.01 
   ||   || Tonga || 0.00 || 0.09 || 0.41 || 0.50 
   ||   || Tuvalu ||   || 0.01 || 1.89 || 1.91 
   ||   || Vanuatu || 0.23 || 0.84 || 2.72 || 3.79 
   ||   || Wallis & Futuna ||   ||   || 2.32 || 2.32 
   ||   || Oceania, Regional || 3.52 || 0.59 || 28.90 || 33.01 
 Bilateral unallocated ||   ||   || 533.12 || 259.79 || 85.45 || 878.35 
 Part I (ODA) Bilateral, Total || 3,553.18 || 2,837.74 || 2,693.10 || 9,084.02 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Public Private Partnerships ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 United Nations ||   ||   || 102.78 || 3.57 ||   || 106.35 
   ||   || UNRWA || 91.13 ||   ||   || 91.13 
   ||   || UNDP ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || WFP ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || WHO ||   || 0.51 ||   || 0.51 
   ||   || FAO || 0.78 || 0.70 ||   || 1.48 
 International Monetary Fund (IMF) ||   ||   ||   ||   
 World Bank Group ||   ||   || 1.25 ||   || 50.60 || 51.85 
 World Trade Organisation ||   ||   ||   || 1.67 ||   || 1.67 
 Regional Development Banks || 11.56 ||   ||   || 11.56 
 Other Multilateral Institutions || 6.21 || 0.44 ||   || 6.66 
   ||   || GFTAM ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Others ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Part I (ODA) Multilateral Aid,Total || 121.81 || 5.68 || 50.60 || 178.09 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Part I (ODA), Total || 3,674.99 || 2,843.42 || 2,743.70 || 9,262.11 
 Part II: Countries and Territories in Transition (non ODA) ||   ||   ||   ||   
 More Advanced Developing Countries || 39.82 || 53.31 || 59.99 || 153.12 
   ||   || Aruba ||   ||   || 2.17 || 2.17 
   ||   || Bahamas ||   ||   || 0.04 || 0.04 
   ||   || Bahrain ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Barbados || 3.01 ||   || 5.29 || 8.29 
   ||   || Bermuda ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Brunei ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Cayman Islands ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Falkland Islands ||   ||   || 1.03 || 1.03 
   ||   || French Polynesia ||   ||   || 10.77 || 10.77 
   ||   || Gibraltar ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Hong Kong, China ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Israel || 5.83 || 0.26 ||   || 6.09 
   ||   || Korea ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Kuwait ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Macao ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Mayotte ||   ||   || 26.51 || 26.51 
   ||   || Netherlands Antilles ||   ||   || 0.07 || 0.07 
   ||   || New Caledonia ||   ||   || 0.10 || 0.10 
   ||   || Oman ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Pitcairn Islands ||   ||   || 1.16 || 1.16 
   ||   || Qatar ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Saudi Arabia ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Saint Pierre and Miquelon ||   ||   || 6.90 || 6.90 
   ||   || Singapore ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Taiwan ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Trinidad & Tobago || 15.46 ||   || 4.75 || 20.21 
   ||   || Turks & Caicos Islands ||   ||   || 0.37 || 0.37 
   ||   || United Arab Emirates ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Virgin Islands (UK) ||   ||   || 0.32 || 0.32 
   ||   || MADCT Unallocated || 15.52 || 53.05 || 0.51 || 69.08 
 CEEC's/NIS ||   ||   || 108.13 || 253.77 || 0.02 || 361.92 
   ||   || Bulgaria || 0.01 || 10.68 ||   || 10.70 
   ||   || Croatia || 2.12 || 179.70 ||   || 181.82 
   ||   || Cyprus || 1.48 || 19.50 ||   || 20.98 
   ||   || Czech Republic ||   || 0.00 ||   || 0.00 
   ||   || Estonia || 1.63 ||   ||   || 1.63 
   ||   || Greenland || 26.35 ||   ||   || 26.35 
   ||   || Hungary ||   || 0.02 ||   || 0.02 
   ||   || Iceland ||   || 0.71 ||   || 0.71 
   ||   || Latvia ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Lithuania || 0.88 ||   ||   || 0.88 
   ||   || Malta ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Poland || 6.16 || 0.00 ||   || 6.16 
   ||   || Romania || 9.88 || 24.64 ||   || 34.52 
   ||   || Russia || 26.67 ||   ||   || 26.67 
   ||   || Slovak Republic ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Slovenia || 1.29 || 0.67 ||   || 1.95 
   ||   || Europe Unallocated || 31.65 || 17.84 || 0.02 || 49.52 
   ||   || CEECs Unallocated ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Part II (Non-OA) Bilateral Aid, Total || 147.95 || 307.08 || 60.01 || 515.04 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || EBRD ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Part II (non-ODA) Multilateral Aid, Total ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Part II (non-ODA), Total || 147.95 || 307.08 || 60.01 || 515.04 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Grand Total Part I & Part II || 3,822.93 || 3,150.50 || 2,803.71 || 9,777.15 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Breakdown by country/region of external aid financed on the general Commission budget and the European Development Fund (EDF) in 2013. 
   ||   || Bilateral and multilateral ODA / non-ODA countries. 
   ||   || (1) UNSCR 1244/99 ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || (2) henceforth Moldova ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Table 5.12 ODA Recipient by main OECD sector in 2013 ||   ||   
 Disbursements in € million  ||   ||   ||   ||   
   || ODA per Capita (Euro / Capita) (1) || Total || Social Infrastructures || Economic Infrastructures & Services || Production || Multisector / Crosscutting || Budget Support, Food Aid, Food Security || Action relating to debt || Humanitarian Aid || Other / Unallocated 
 Least Developed Countries (LDC) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Afghanistan ||           6.00    || 188.41 || 114.23 ||   || 13.82 || 9.13 || 5.18 ||   || 44.91 || 1.14 
 Angola ||           1.25    || 23.87 || 17.11 || 0.02 || 0.34 || 1.79 ||   ||   || 4.39 || 0.23 
 Bangladesh ||           0.61    || 90.36 || 41.43 || 0.07 || 10.66 || 4.35 || 16.13 ||   || 17.61 || 0.11 
 Benin ||           5.40    || 47.76 || 16.56 || 11.91 || 2.05 || 1.12 || 15.13 ||   || 0.84 || 0.15 
 Bhutan ||           5.73    || 4.16 || 1.56 ||   || 0.31 || 1.85 ||   ||   || 0.44 ||   
 Burkina Faso ||           9.17    || 151.07 || 28.59 || 21.64 || 3.58 || 0.57 || 71.91 ||   || 24.78 ||   
 Burundi ||           6.75    || 56.61 || 10.51 || 13.93 || 8.49 || 2.38 || 18.68 ||   || 2.55 || 0.06 
 Cambodia ||           1.63    || 23.03 || 13.03 || 0.47 || 6.01 || 0.67 || 1.39 ||   || 1.15 || 0.30 
 Central African Rep. ||           6.51    || 28.63 || 4.48 || 6.27 || 0.57 || 3.36 || 0.15 ||   || 13.81 ||   
 Chad ||           9.77    || 109.66 || 35.47 || 13.60 || 3.98 || 11.73 || 8.42 ||   || 35.68 || 0.77 
 Comoros ||           8.73    || 6.41 || 1.17 || 5.17 || 0.03 ||   ||   ||   || 0.03 || 0.01 
 Congo, Dem. Rep. ||           3.51    || 231.87 || 90.41 || 48.77 || 10.45 || 3.88 || 3.31 ||   || 73.85 || 1.20 
 Djibouti ||          26.59    || 23.63 || 15.18 || 6.13 || 0.01 ||   || 0.02 ||   || 2.29 ||   
 Equatorial Guinea ||           0.25    || 0.17 || 0.17 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Eritrea ||           1.86    || 9.79 || 3.71 ||   || 5.86 ||   || 0.22 ||   ||   ||   
 Ethiopia ||           1.22    || 100.97 || 15.44 || 1.18 || 6.67 || 1.28 || 35.30 ||   || 40.81 || 0.30 
 Gambia ||           7.31    || 12.64 || 1.50 || 6.31 || 2.39 || 0.43 ||   ||   || 1.53 || 0.49 
 Guinea ||           3.15    || 31.46 || 17.22 || 8.15 || 1.41 || 0.19 || 1.27 ||   || 3.21 || 0.01 
 Guinea-Bissau ||           9.32    || 14.12 || 10.85 || 1.74 || 1.29 || 0.13 ||   ||   || 0.12 ||   
 Haiti ||           7.94    || 79.30 || 16.83 || 9.93 || 6.62 || 4.19 || 1.29 ||   || 40.42 || 0.03 
 Kiribati ||          28.12    || 2.80 || 1.22 || 1.54 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.04 ||   
 Laos ||           1.37    || 8.51 || 2.09 ||   || 1.51 || 0.73 || 3.44 ||   || 0.74 ||   
 Lesotho ||          17.49    || 37.97 || 21.76 || 1.57 || 0.05 ||   || 10.85 ||   || 3.73 || 0.01 
 Liberia ||           7.11    || 28.40 || 17.91 || 0.83 || 3.35 || 0.20 ||   ||   || 5.42 || 0.69 
 Madagascar ||           2.79    || 57.83 || 44.47 || 3.62 || 6.75 || 1.52 || 0.31 ||   || 1.16 || 0.01 
 Malawi ||           5.44    || 81.09 || 29.40 || 9.38 || 22.77 || 10.65 || 3.08 ||   || 5.29 || 0.52 
 Mali ||          14.54    || 223.49 || 42.93 || 3.54 || 6.46 || 1.55 || 127.53 ||   || 41.36 || 0.10 
 Mauritania ||          17.39    || 60.18 || 10.86 || 10.38 || 0.85 || 0.04 || 25.46 ||   || 12.60 ||   
 Mozambique ||           4.20    || 98.17 || 16.29 || 18.77 || 12.98 || 4.72 || 42.56 ||   || 2.61 || 0.24 
 Myanmar (Burma) ||           1.12    || 53.87 || 29.42 || 0.15 || 0.36 || 4.39 || 0.81 ||   || 18.56 || 0.18 
 Nepal ||           1.01    || 30.19 || 22.45 || 0.02 || 1.20 || 0.72 || 1.27 ||   || 4.50 || 0.01 
 Niger ||           8.92    || 138.31 || 22.73 || 29.68 || 5.73 || 3.10 || 35.89 ||   || 37.49 || 3.69 
 Rwanda ||           8.56    || 90.89 || 12.66 || 34.66 || 6.20 || 0.67 || 35.75 ||   || 0.93 || 0.03 
 Samoa ||          17.91    || 3.28 || 2.20 ||   ||   || 0.09 ||   ||   || 0.99 ||   
 Sao Tome & Principe ||          35.55    || 5.88 || 1.96 || 3.30 || 0.62 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.00 
 Senegal ||           4.04    || 50.24 || 11.96 || 10.44 || 1.41 || 18.26 || 1.79 ||   || 6.06 || 0.32 
 Sierra Leone ||           9.74    || 57.15 || 17.94 || 13.09 || 5.04 || 1.87 || 17.18 ||   || 1.98 || 0.05 
 Solomon Islands ||          11.74    || 6.32 || 3.69 || 0.68 || 0.14 || 0.92 ||   ||   || 0.85 || 0.04 
 Somalia ||          12.28    || 114.60 || 37.39 || 7.26 || 7.73 || 4.26 || 1.32 ||   || 56.63 || 0.01 
 South Sudan ||          10.52    || 96.64 || 16.68 || 0.03 || 3.31 || 0.07 || 0.03 ||   || 76.49 || 0.02 
 Sudan ||           2.61    || 89.74 || 13.99 ||   || 0.23 || 2.51 || 6.65 ||   || 66.35 || 0.02 
 Tanzania ||           1.78    || 79.99 || 13.64 || 11.82 || 2.33 || 1.16 || 47.75 ||   || 3.26 || 0.04 
 Timor-Leste ||          13.17    || 14.81 || 4.30 || 0.32 || 3.22 || 6.05 || 0.92 ||   ||   ||   
 Togo ||           4.10    || 24.69 || 6.35 || 0.04 || 0.21 || 4.42 || 13.64 ||   || 0.01 || 0.02 
 Tuvalu ||        193.93    || 1.91 || 1.69 || 0.20 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.01 ||   
 Uganda ||           1.94    || 64.93 || 9.38 || 36.26 || 14.79 || 1.54 ||   ||   || 2.81 || 0.16 
 Vanuatu ||          15.83    || 3.79 || 1.55 ||   || 1.22 || 0.18 ||   ||   || 0.84 || 0.01 
 Yemen ||           2.38    || 57.31 || 18.01 || 1.26 || 4.83 ||   ||   ||   || 33.14 || 0.08 
 Zambia ||           3.89    || 50.85 || 8.31 || 33.80 || 6.27 || 0.45 || 1.72 ||   ||   || 0.30 
 South Of Sahara, Regional - LDC's ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Asia, Regional - LDC's ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Total Least Developed Countries ||           3.45    || 2,867.76 || 898.65 || 387.91 || 204.10 || 117.11 || 556.34 ||   || 692.27 || 11.39 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Other Low Income Countries (OLIC) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Kenya ||           3.85    || 155.93 || 18.66 || 46.95 || 18.76 || 28.69 ||   ||   || 42.80 || 0.07 
 Korea, Dem. ||           0.40    || 9.72 || 0.36 ||   ||   ||   || 7.10 ||   || 2.26 ||   
 Kyrgyz Rep. ||           4.92     || 26.27 || 17.46 || 2.96 || 4.35 || 0.70 || 0.78 ||   || 0.00 || 0.02 
 Tajikistan ||           1.96    || 13.45 || 10.61 || 0.02 || 1.01 || 1.23 ||   ||   || 0.53 || 0.05 
 Zimbabwe ||           5.35    || 67.29 || 32.91 || 0.49 || 21.16 || 3.71 || 1.45 ||   || 7.52 || 0.05 
 Total Other Low Income Countries ||           3.04    || 272.65 || 80.00 || 50.42 || 45.28 || 34.33 || 9.32 ||   || 53.11 || 0.19 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Lower Middle Income Countries (LMIC) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Armenia ||          12.15    || 37.58 || 26.63 || 4.01 || 1.63 || 0.22 || 4.84 ||   || 0.19 || 0.06 
 Belize ||          39.76    || 12.39 || 1.45 || 2.62 || 5.01 || 2.87 ||   ||   || 0.43 ||   
 Bolivia ||           6.23    || 61.85 || 32.49 || 3.62 || 11.45 || 7.27 || 3.14 ||   || 3.89 ||   
 Cameroon ||           3.56    || 69.72 || 9.12 || 26.74 || 15.57 || 9.48 ||   ||   || 8.66 || 0.14 
 Cape Verde ||          25.51    || 12.65 || 3.12 || 0.02 || 0.23 || 0.23 || 9.06 ||   ||   ||   
 Congo, Rep. ||           3.47    || 14.04 || 7.11 || 1.05 || 3.00 || 2.04 ||   ||   || 0.75 || 0.09 
 Cote d'Ivoire ||           5.25    || 103.57 || 14.51 || 6.34 || 11.02 ||   || 56.07 ||   || 15.48 || 0.14 
 Egypt ||           0.37    || 29.96 || 19.69 || 3.65 || 0.49 || 5.04 ||   ||   || 1.03 || 0.06 
 El Salvador ||           4.08    || 25.26 || 15.21 || 6.00 || 2.20 || 0.29 ||   ||   || 1.57 ||   
 Fiji ||          11.27    || 9.70 || 4.44 || 0.03 || 4.60 || 0.02 ||   ||   || 0.59 || 0.02 
 Georgia ||          18.94    || 82.44 || 61.00 || 2.39 || 11.58 || 1.75 || 0.02 ||   || 5.29 || 0.41 
 Ghana ||           1.03    || 25.04 || 4.78 || 12.20 || 2.75 || 0.00 || 5.07 ||   || 0.22 || 0.03 
 Guatemala ||           1.32    || 18.93 || 11.37 ||   || 3.37 || 0.29 || 0.87 ||   || 3.02 ||   
 Guyana ||          32.14    || 24.25 || 0.67 ||   || 21.78 || 1.64 ||   ||   || 0.11 || 0.05 
 Honduras ||           2.10    || 15.93 || 6.84 || 0.46 || 2.06 || 4.54 || 0.23 ||   || 1.79 || 0.02 
 India ||           0.07    || 80.70 || 65.76 || 3.48 || 0.25 || 0.28 ||   ||   || 10.92 ||   
 Indonesia ||           0.21    || 50.58 || 40.64 || 0.11 || 4.84 || 4.03 ||   ||   || 0.93 || 0.04 
 Iraq ||           2.00    || 63.50 || 38.65 || 0.02 ||   || 0.15 ||   ||   || 24.28 || 0.40 
 Kosovo (2) ||          95.46    || 174.28 || 142.72 || 3.47 || 8.58 || 7.88 || 0.75 ||   || 9.55 || 1.32 
 Marshall Islands ||           4.17    || 0.23 || 0.09 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.13 ||   
 Micronesia, Fed. Sts. ||           6.14     || 0.68 || 0.00 || 0.61 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.07 ||   
 Republic of Moldova ||          19.18    || 68.53 || 26.16 || 23.14 || 15.49 || 2.48 ||   ||   ||   || 1.25 
 Mongolia ||           1.35    || 3.71 || 0.52 ||   || 2.54 || 0.60 ||   ||   || 0.04 || 0.01 
 Morocco ||           2.71    || 86.60 || 54.80 || 14.29 || 7.34 || 6.42 || 3.62 ||   ||   || 0.13 
 Nicaragua ||           7.99    || 46.25 || 34.41 || 0.88 || 4.50 || 0.30 || 3.68 ||   || 2.40 || 0.09 
 Nigeria ||           0.62    || 97.86 || 39.08 || 0.49 || 3.58 || 46.01 ||   ||   || 8.70 || 0.00 
 Palestine ||          66.92    || 270.30 || 217.54 || 1.54 || 5.28 || 4.87 || 6.25 ||   || 34.69 || 0.13 
 Pakistan ||           0.62    || 106.88 || 30.27 || 0.47 || 3.86 || 7.29 || 5.30 ||   || 59.59 || 0.10 
 Papua New Guinea ||           0.88    || 6.03 || 2.62 || 0.06 || 1.23 || 1.04 ||   ||   || 1.09 ||   
 Paraguay ||           2.40    || 15.46 || 10.81 ||   || 2.30 || 0.01 ||   ||   || 2.34 || 0.01 
 Philippines ||           0.26    || 23.99 || 9.90 || 0.30 || 3.10 || 0.66 ||   ||   || 9.96 || 0.07 
 Sri Lanka ||           1.55    || 32.24 || 10.12 ||   || 1.34 || 3.69 ||   ||   || 16.93 || 0.17 
 Swaziland ||          23.79    || 28.21 || 2.71 || 8.69 || 14.87 || 1.64 ||   ||   ||   || 0.29 
 Syria ||           6.72    || 137.08 || 37.10 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 87.40 || 12.57 
 Tokelau ||           9.52    || 0.01 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.01 ||   
 Tonga ||           4.77    || 0.50 || 0.09 ||   ||   ||   || 0.10 ||   || 0.09 || 0.23 
 Turkmenistan ||           0.44    || 2.24 || 1.94 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.00 || 0.30 
 Ukraine ||           3.59    || 162.95 || 46.47 || 83.40 || 8.68 || 24.03 ||   ||   ||   || 0.37 
 Uzbekistan ||           0.33    || 9.18 || 8.08 || 0.54 || 0.56 ||   ||   ||   || 0.00 ||   
 Viet Nam ||           0.32    || 28.22 || 20.27 ||   || 5.78 || 0.98 || 0.14 ||   || 0.51 || 0.54 
 Total Lower Middle Income Countries ||           2.69    || 2,039.52 || 1,059.21 || 210.61 || 190.85 || 148.01 || 99.15 ||   || 312.66 || 19.03 
   Upper Middle Income Countries (UMIC) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Albania ||          15.08    || 48.33 || 27.23 || 0.90 || 4.57 || 3.31 || 11.95 ||   ||   || 0.38 
 Algeria ||           1.43    || 50.87 || 23.74 || 5.14 || 9.57 || 0.00 || 0.13 ||   || 11.58 || 0.70 
 Anguilla ||        248.08    || 3.81 || 0.02 || 0.12 ||   ||   || 3.67 ||   ||   ||   
 Antigua & Barbuda ||           9.30    || 0.83 || 0.79 || 0.01 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.02 ||   
 Argentina ||           0.15    || 5.99 || 4.46 ||   || 0.43 || 0.01 ||   ||   || 1.09 ||   
 Azerbaijan ||           1.42    || 13.09 || 9.04 || 0.51 || 1.48 || 1.88 ||   ||   || 0.10 || 0.09 
 Belarus ||           1.47    || 14.10 || 8.36 || 2.15 || 1.95 || 1.62 ||   ||   ||   || 0.03 
 Bosnia and Herzegovina ||          24.39    || 91.70 || 70.55 || 6.06 || 10.04 || 3.68 ||   ||   ||   || 1.37 
 Botswana ||           7.25    || 14.54 || 13.09 ||   ||   || 1.35 ||   ||   ||   || 0.10 
 Brazil ||           0.09    || 17.89 || 7.81 || 2.29 || 2.73 || 4.41 ||   ||   || 0.40 || 0.25 
 Chile ||           0.26    || 4.45 || 1.20 ||   || 1.20 || 0.20 || 0.90 ||   || 0.82 || 0.13 
 China ||           0.02    || 32.73 || 10.02 || 5.67 || 6.91 || 8.05 ||   ||   || 2.08 ||   
 Colombia ||           0.90    || 41.65 || 23.09 ||   || 3.10 || 2.44 ||   ||   || 13.02 ||   
 Cook Islands ||          14.92    || 0.30 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.24 || 0.06 
 Costa Rica ||           1.21    || 5.63 || 3.15 ||   || 2.42 ||   ||   ||   || 0.06 ||   
 Cuba ||           0.86    || 9.73 || 2.38 || 0.23 || 1.98 || 0.56 || 1.36 ||   || 3.22 ||   
 Dominica ||        130.47    || 8.84 || 1.64 || 1.25 || 0.51 ||   || 5.12 ||   || 0.31 || 0.00 
 Dominican Republic ||           3.89    || 38.58 || 25.60 || 1.52 || 1.32 ||   || 4.85 ||   || 4.40 || 0.89 
 Ecuador ||           1.38    || 20.03 || 12.88 ||   || 2.63 || 1.02 ||   ||   || 3.50 ||   
 fYRoM ||          13.74    || 28.32 || 16.99 || 0.61 || 2.20 || 8.24 || 0.07 ||   || 0.03 || 0.17 
 Gabon ||           3.73    || 5.62 || 1.47 || 1.34 || 2.69 || 0.12 ||   ||   ||   || 0.00 
 Grenada ||           4.62    || 0.48 || 0.15 ||   || 0.00 ||   ||   ||   || 0.33 ||   
 Iran ||           0.04    || 2.83 || 0.69 ||   ||   || 0.08 ||   ||   || 1.88 || 0.17 
 Jamaica ||          18.06    || 49.50 || 2.07 || 0.44 || 26.95 || 0.28 || 18.83 ||   || 0.87 || 0.05 
 Jordan ||          27.12    || 167.80 || 62.82 || 17.07 || 1.98 || 8.50 || 10.53 ||   || 66.77 || 0.14 
 Kazakhstan ||           0.67    || 10.71 || 8.69 || 0.18 || 0.20 || 1.42 ||   ||   || 0.21 ||   
 Lebanon ||          32.18    || 136.06 || 59.20 || 0.24 || 7.45 || 3.26 || 2.97 ||   || 62.42 || 0.52 
 Libya ||           7.12    || 45.25 || 42.22 ||   ||   || 0.73 ||   ||   || 1.56 || 0.74 
 Malaysia ||           0.07    || 2.11 || 0.21 || 0.97 || 0.16 || 0.78 ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Maldives ||           0.39    || 0.12 ||   ||   ||   || 0.12 ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Mauritius ||          23.08    || 29.99 || 2.26 ||   || 0.00 || 0.38 || 27.26 ||   ||   || 0.09 
 Mexico ||           0.05    || 5.69 || 3.87 || 0.42 || 0.74 || 0.22 ||   ||   || 0.44 ||   
 Montenegro ||          31.78    || 20.07 || 9.86 || 5.08 || 1.94 || 2.88 ||   ||   ||   || 0.31 
 Montserrat ||        792.47    || 4.70 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 4.70 ||   ||   ||   
 Namibia ||          13.70    || 31.29 || 28.69 ||   || 0.30 || 0.99 ||   ||   || 0.30 || 1.00 
 Nauru ||          83.15    || 0.85 ||   || 0.62 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.23 ||   
 Niue ||        279.60    || 0.41 ||   || 0.40 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.01 ||   
 Palau ||           1.95    || 0.04 || 0.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.04 ||   
 Panama ||           0.68    || 2.41 || 2.12 ||   ||   || 0.21 ||   ||   || 0.07 ||   
 Peru ||           1.03    || 29.87 || 21.01 || 0.22 || 4.34 || 0.52 || 0.29 ||   || 3.48 || 0.01 
 Serbia ||          15.89    || 127.61 || 74.88 || 27.67 || 11.71 || 9.89 || 0.23 ||   || 1.94 || 1.30 
 Seychelles ||          23.95    || 2.07 || 1.87 ||   ||   || 0.16 || 0.04 ||   ||   ||   
 South Africa ||           2.57    || 128.65 || 70.27 || 0.19 || 0.17 || 3.31 || 54.00 ||   ||   || 0.71 
 St.Helena ||     1,408.45    || 5.80 ||   ||   ||   || 5.80 ||   ||   ||   ||   
 St.Kitts-Nevis ||        208.68    || 10.94 || 0.18 || 0.04 ||   || 6.33 || 4.34 ||   || 0.05 ||   
 St.Lucia ||          57.93    || 10.10 || 4.84 ||   || 5.14 ||   ||   ||   || 0.11 ||   
 St.Vincent & Grenadines ||          37.17    || 4.06 || 2.74 || 0.05 || 0.94 || 0.03 ||   ||   || 0.31 ||   
 Suriname ||           9.83    || 5.16 || 0.35 || 4.51 || 0.18 || 0.01 ||   ||   || 0.11 ||   
 Thailand ||           0.22    || 14.96 || 5.00 || 0.04 || 0.51 || 3.52 ||   ||   || 5.82 || 0.07 
 Tunisia ||           8.44    || 88.51 || 33.20 || 4.76 || 4.49 || 19.03 || 25.00 ||   || 2.02 || 0.01 
 Turkey ||           5.55    || 403.43 || 143.41 || 77.24 || 32.81 || 129.29 ||   ||   || 20.59 || 0.10 
 Uruguay ||           1.73    || 5.84 || 4.94 ||   || 0.13 || 0.63 ||   ||   || 0.15 ||   
 Venezuela ||           0.12    || 3.44 || 2.15 ||   ||   || 0.08 ||   ||   || 1.20 || 0.01 
 Wallis & Futuna ||        170.84    || 2.32 || 0.21 || 1.43 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.68 ||   
 Total Upper Middle Income Countries ||           0.81    || 1,810.10 || 851.44 || 169.34 || 155.86 || 235.34 || 176.24 ||   || 212.47 || 9.40 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Total LDC + OLIC + LMIC + UMIC ||           7.44    || 6,990.03 || 2,889.30 || 818.28 || 596.10 || 534.79 || 841.05 ||   || 1,270.50 || 40.01 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 By region ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Europe ||          10.00    || 1,509.54 || 716.19 || 246.57 || 108.11 || 298.83 || 13.67 ||   || 65.01 || 61.15 
 Africa ||           3.82    || 3,897.07 || 1,159.41 || 604.31 || 400.70 || 262.28 || 720.22 || 1.75 || 642.45 || 105.95 
 America ||           1.23    || 717.78 || 332.43 || 48.06 || 137.22 || 47.36 || 59.13 ||   || 89.54 || 4.04 
 Asia ||           0.52    || 2,007.00 || 1,105.74 || 50.97 || 138.04 || 94.41 || 68.32 ||   || 529.89 || 19.62 
 Oceania ||           7.92    || 72.18 || 22.00 || 10.50 || 18.41 || 7.70 || 0.10 ||   || 13.03 || 0.44 
 Bilateral unallocated ||           0.16    || 878.35 || 125.11 || 36.87 || 41.97 || 64.58 || 9.45 ||   || 47.82 || 552.55 
 Total Region ||           0.27    || 9,084.24 || 3,460.88 || 997.28 || 844.45 || 775.16 || 870.90 || 1.75 || 1,390.08 || 743.75 
 Breakdown by country/region of external aid financed on the general Commission budget and the European Development Fund (EDF) in 2013. 
 Bilateral ODA flows. ||   ||   ||   ||   
 (1) Source : World Population Prospects - United Nations Population Division - 2010 revision ||   ||   ||   ||   
 (2) UNSCR 1244/99 ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Table 5.14 Detailed description of ODA by sector in 2013 - Commitments 
 Commitments in € Million ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Sector of Destination || Total || Managed by EuropeAid || Managed by Other DG's 
 SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES || 5,376.57 || 4,117.60 || 1,258.97 
   || Education || 679.01 || 630.01 || 49.00 
   ||   || Education, level unspecified || 282.83 || 271.53 || 11.30 
   || Basic education || 75.57 || 75.57 ||   
   || Secondary education || 88.06 || 85.06 || 3.00 
   || Post-secondary education || 232.55 || 197.85 || 34.70 
   || Health || 533.97 || 511.97 || 22.00 
   ||   || Health, general || 240.82 || 240.82 ||   
   || Basic health || 293.15 || 271.15 || 22.00 
   || Population polices/programs and reproductive health || 129.85 || 129.85 ||   
   || Water supply and sanitation || 341.07 || 331.42 || 9.65 
   || Government and civil society || 2,890.48 || 1,856.57 || 1,033.91 
   || Other Social Infrastructure and services || 802.20 || 657.78 || 144.42 
 ECONOMIC INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES || 1,481.27 || 1,232.69 || 248.58 
   || Transport and storage || 906.72 || 759.63 || 147.09 
   || Communications || 7.20 || 7.20 ||   
   || Energy generation and supply || 441.35 || 376.91 || 64.44 
   || Banking and financial services || 35.00 || 35.00 ||   
   || Business and other services || 91.00 || 53.95 || 37.05 
 PRODUCTION SECTORS || 1,796.88 || 1,510.63 || 286.26 
   || Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing || 1,271.58 || 1,019.03 || 252.55 
   ||   || Agriculture || 1,191.18 || 938.63 || 252.55 
   || Forestry || 47.12 || 47.12 ||   
   || Fishing || 33.28 || 33.28 ||   
   || Industry, Mining and Construction || 181.36 || 169.89 || 11.47 
   ||   || Industry || 161.79 || 150.32 || 11.47 
   || Mineral resources and mining || 19.57 || 19.57 ||   
   || Construction ||   ||   ||   
   || Trade and Tourism || 240.05 || 217.81 || 22.24 
   ||   || Trade policy and regulation || 343.94 || 321.71 || 22.24 
   || Tourism ||   ||   ||   
 MULTISECTOR / CROSSCUTTING || 1,954.70 || 1,559.03 || 395.67 
   || General environmental protection || 491.36 || 295.55 || 195.81 
   || Other multisector || 1,463.34 || 1,263.48 || 199.86 
 COMMODITY AID AND GENERAL PROGRAMME ASSISTANCE || 867.10 || 867.10 || 0.00 
   || General budget support || 857.80 || 857.80 || 0.00 
   || Development food aid/food security assistance || 9.30 || 9.30 ||   
   || Other commodity assistance ||   ||   ||   
 ACTION RELATING TO DEBT  ||   ||   ||   
   || Action relating to debt ||   ||   ||   
 HUMANITARIAN AID || 1,556.01 || 201.04 || 1,354.97 
   || Emergency Response || 1,293.22 || 43.93 || 1,249.29 
   || Reconstruction relief and rehabilitation || 119.11 || 51.61 || 67.50 
   || Disaster prevention and preparedness || 143.67 || 105.50 || 38.17 
 OTHER / UNALLOCATED / UNSPECIFIED || 692.08 || 462.11 || 229.96 
   || Administrative costs of donors || 537.23 || 403.79 || 133.44 
   || Refugees in donor countries ||   ||   ||   
   || Unallocated/unspecified || 154.84 || 58.32 || 96.52 
 GRAND TOTAL || 13,724.61 || 9,950.20 || 3,774.41 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Breakdown by sector of Official Development Assistance (ODA) financed on the general Commission budget and the European Development Fund (EDF) in 2013. 
 Bilateral and multilateral ODA flows. ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Table 5.15 Detailed description of ODA by sector in 2013. - Disbursements 
 Disbursements in € Million ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Sector of Destination || Total || Managed by EuropeAid || Managed by Other DG's 
 SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES || 3,521.21 || 2,655.81 || 865.40 
   || Education || 642.00 || 579.58 || 62.42 
   ||   || Education, level unspecified || 207.54 || 198.69 || 8.85 
   || Basic education || 124.09 || 122.63 || 1.46 
   || Secondary education || 67.06 || 64.75 || 2.31 
   || Post-secondary education || 243.32 || 193.50 || 49.81 
   || Health || 453.31 || 446.06 || 7.25 
   ||   || Health, general || 84.94 || 79.31 || 5.63 
   || Basic health || 368.37 || 366.76 || 1.62 
   || Population polices/programs and reproductive health || 72.63 || 72.60 || 0.03 
   || Water supply and sanitation || 329.24 || 292.47 || 36.78 
   || Government and civil society || 1,548.28 || 870.70 || 677.59 
   || Other Social Infrastructure and services || 475.74 || 394.40 || 81.33 
 ECONOMIC INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES || 1,009.94 || 880.55 || 129.39 
   || Transport and storage || 599.57 || 500.91 || 98.65 
   || Communications || 30.32 || 24.84 || 5.48 
   || Energy generation and supply || 317.77 || 300.02 || 17.75 
   || Banking and financial services || 12.78 || 9.66 || 3.12 
   || Business and other services || 49.51 || 45.12 || 4.38 
 PRODUCTION SECTORS || 855.67 || 776.01 || 79.66 
   || Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing || 529.26 || 474.73 || 54.53 
   ||   || Agriculture || 460.07 || 405.89 || 54.18 
   || Forestry || 44.88 || 44.63 || 0.24 
   || Fishing || 24.32 || 24.21 || 0.11 
   || Industry, Mining and Construction || 140.12 || 130.29 || 9.83 
   ||   || Industry || 127.61 || 118.18 || 9.43 
   || Mineral resources and mining || 11.02 || 10.77 || 0.24 
   || Construction || 1.50 || 1.34 || 0.16 
   || Trade and Tourism || 111.54 || 96.24 || 15.29 
   ||   || Trade policy and regulation || 177.50 || 164.07 || 13.42 
   || Tourism || 8.79 || 6.92 || 1.87 
 MULTISECTOR / CROSSCUTTING || 865.41 || 599.92 || 265.49 
   || General environmental protection || 273.62 || 213.15 || 60.46 
   || Other multisector || 591.79 || 386.77 || 205.03 
 COMMODITY AID AND GENERAL PROGRAMME ASSISTANCE || 870.90 || 854.13 || 16.77 
   || General budget support || 701.49 || 688.26 || 13.23 
   || Development food aid/food security assistance || 169.41 || 165.87 || 3.54 
   || Other commodity assistance ||   ||   ||   
 ACTION RELATING TO DEBT || 1.75 || 1.75 ||   
   || Action relating to debt || 1.75 || 1.75 ||   
 HUMANITARIAN AID || 1,394.00 || 122.85 || 1,271.15 
   || Emergency Response || 1,208.77 || 44.13 || 1,164.64 
   || Reconstruction relief and rehabilitation || 105.91 || 40.45 || 65.45 
   || Disaster prevention and preparedness || 79.33 || 38.27 || 41.06 
 OTHER / UNALLOCATED / UNSPECIFIED || 743.75 || 527.67 || 216.08 
   || Administrative costs of donors || 567.58 || 439.40 || 128.17 
   || Refugees in donor countries || 13.77 || 0.00 || 13.77 
   || Unallocated/unspecified || 162.40 || 88.26 || 74.13 
 GRAND TOTAL || 9,262.63 || 6,418.69 || 2,843.94 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Breakdown by sector of Official Development Assistance (ODA) financed on the general Commission budget and the European Development Fund (EDF) in 2013. 
 Bilateral and multilateral ODA flows. ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Table 5.16 EuropeAid in 2013: A closer look. Sectoral breakdown per region 
 Commitments in € Million ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Sector of Destination || ENPI East || ENPI South || ENPI || Asia || Latin America || ACP || Multi Region || Total 
 SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES || 425 || 752 ||   || 552 || 180 || 1,634 || 574 || 4,118 
   || Education || 96 || 251 ||   || 118 || 39 || 111 || 14 || 630 
   ||   || Education, level unspecified ||   || 120 ||   || 62 ||   || 75 || 14 || 272 
   || Basic education ||   || 46 ||   ||   || 5 || 25 ||   || 76 
   || Secondary education || 25 || 17 ||   || 24 || 15 || 4 ||   || 85 
   || Post-secondary education || 71 || 68 ||   || 32 || 20 || 7 ||   || 198 
   || Health || 8 || 50 ||   || 213 ||   || 161 || 80 || 512 
   ||   || Health, general || 8 || 50 ||   || 133 ||   || 25 || 26 || 241 
   || Basic health ||   ||   ||   || 81 ||   || 136 || 55 || 271 
   || Population polices/programs and reproductive health ||   || 5 ||   ||   ||   || 47 || 78 || 130 
   || Water supply and sanitation ||   || 86 ||   || 2 || 17 || 226 ||   || 331 
   || Government and civil society || 295 || 135 ||   || 179 || 76 || 836 || 335 || 1,857 
   || Other Social Infrastructure and services || 25 || 225 ||   || 39 || 48 || 253 || 67 || 658 
 ECONOMIC INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES || 54 || 61 ||   || 13 || 0 || 1,053 || 52 || 1,233 
   || Transport and storage || 1 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 759 ||   || 760 
   || Communications ||   ||   ||   || 7 || 0 ||   ||   || 7 
   || Energy generation and supply || 53 || 16 ||   || 6 ||   || 250 || 52 || 377 
   || Banking and financial services ||   || 35 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 35 
   || Business and other services ||   || 10 ||   ||   ||   || 44 ||   || 54 
 PRODUCTION SECTORS || 103 || 145 ||   || 91 || 106 || 964 || 101 || 1,511 
   || Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing || 25 || 93 ||   || 44 || 76 || 683 || 98 || 1,019 
   ||   || Agriculture || 25 || 93 ||   || 44 || 76 || 622 || 79 || 939 
   || Forestry ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 28 || 19 || 47 
   || Fishing ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 33 ||   || 33 
   || Industry, Mining and Construction || 23 || 48 ||   || 7 || 30 || 62 ||   || 170 
   ||   || Industry || 23 || 48 ||   || 3 || 30 || 46 ||   || 150 
   || Mineral resources and mining ||   ||   ||   || 4 ||   || 16 ||   || 20 
   || Construction ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   || Trade and Tourism || 55 || 4 ||   || 41 ||   || 219 || 3 || 322 
   ||   || Trade policy and regulation || 55 || 4 ||   || 41 ||   || 219 || 3 || 322 
   || Tourism ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 MULTISECTOR / CROSSCUTTING || 213 || 344 || 64 || 241 || 108 || 521 || 67 || 1,559 
   || General environmental protection || 13 || 20 ||   || 24 || 6 || 190 || 41 || 296 
   || Other multisector || 200 || 324 || 64 || 217 || 101 || 331 || 26 || 1,263 
 COMMODITY AID AND GENERAL PROGRAMME ASSISTANCE || 55 || 212 ||   ||   ||   || 600 ||   || 867 
   || General budget support || 55 || 212 ||   ||   ||   || 591 ||   || 858 
   || Development food aid/food security assistance ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 9 ||   || 9 
   || Other commodity assistance ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 ACTION RELATING TO DEBT ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   || Action relating to debt ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 HUMANITARIAN AID || 6 || 40 ||   || 15 ||   || 141 ||   || 201 
   || Emergency Response ||   ||   ||   || 5 ||   || 39 ||   || 44 
   || Reconstruction relief and rehabilitation ||   || 40 ||   || 10 ||   || 2 ||   || 52 
   || Disaster prevention and preparedness || 6 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 100 ||   || 106 
 OTHER / UNALLOCATED / UNSPECIFIED || 37 ||   ||   || 10 ||   || 53 || 363 || 462 
   || Administrative costs of donors ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 52 || 352 || 404 
   || Refugees in donor countries ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   || Unallocated/unspecified || 37 ||   ||   || 10 ||   || 1 || 11 || 58 
 GRAND TOTAL || 893 || 1,555 || 64 || 922 || 394 || 4,965 || 1,157 || 9,950 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Breakdown by sector and region of external aid financed on the general Commission budget managed by EuropeAid and the European Development Fund (EDF). 
 Bilateral and multilateral ODA flows. 
 On budget side, region is identified following geographical budget lines and recipient countries for thematic budget lines. 
 ENPI East: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Republic of Moldova, Ukraine. (Russia excluded) 
 ENPI South: Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Palestine, Syria, Tunisia. (Israel excluded) 
 Asia : Iran, Iraq, Oman, Yemen, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Rep., Maldives, Myanmar (Burma), Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Korea, Dem., Laos, Malaysia, Mongolia, Philippines, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Viet Nam. 
 Latin America : Costa Rica, Cuba, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, Venezuela 
 ACP : South Of Sahara + Oceania + Anguilla, Antigua & Barbuda, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Grenada, Haiti, Jamaica, Montserrat, St.Kitts-Nevis, St.Lucia, St.Vincent & Grenadines, Trinidad & Tobago, West Indies, Regional, Guyana, Suriname.  (Turks & Caicos Islands excluded) 
 Multi region: covering several regions or unspecified location. 
 Table 5.17 EuropeAid in 2013: A closer look. Sectoral breakdown per region 
 Disbursements in € Million ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Sector of Destination || ENPI East || ENPI South || ENPI || Asia || Latin America || ACP || Multi Region || Total 
 SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES || 234 || 561 || 5 || 483 || 260 || 1,030 || 84 || 2,656 
   || Education || 44 || 176 ||   || 143 || 76 || 136 || 4 || 580 
   ||   || Education, level unspecified || 3 || 58 ||   || 60 || 12 || 64 || 2 || 199 
   || Basic education || 0 || 53 ||   || 21 || 22 || 26 || 1 || 123 
   || Secondary education || 12 || 17 ||   || 17 || 7 || 11 || 1 || 65 
   || Post-secondary education || 29 || 49 ||   || 44 || 36 || 36 ||   || 194 
   || Health || 1 || 26 ||   || 149 || 21 || 209 || 41 || 446 
   ||   || Health, general || 0 || 23 ||   || 25 || 2 || 30 || 0 || 79 
   || Basic health || 1 || 3 ||   || 124 || 19 || 179 || 41 || 367 
   || Population polices/programs and reproductive health || 4 || 2 ||   || 7 || 1 || 51 || 7 || 73 
   || Water supply and sanitation || 17 || 23 ||   || 18 || 33 || 200 || 2 || 292 
   || Government and civil society || 155 || 117 || 5 || 124 || 75 || 365 || 30 || 871 
   || Other Social Infrastructure and services || 13 || 216 ||   || 42 || 54 || 68 || 2 || 394 
 ECONOMIC INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES || 136 || 56 ||   || 23 || 25 || 623 || 17 || 881 
   || Transport and storage || 34 || 9 ||   || 7 || 4 || 448 ||   || 501 
   || Communications || 3 || 2 ||   || 5 || 4 || 12 ||   || 25 
   || Energy generation and supply || 98 || 28 ||   || 9 || 12 || 135 || 17 || 300 
   || Banking and financial services || 0 || 2 ||   || 1 || 1 || 6 ||   || 10 
   || Business and other services || 1 || 16 ||   || 2 || 4 || 22 ||   || 45 
 PRODUCTION SECTORS || 48 || 50 ||   || 93 || 60 || 487 || 38 || 776 
   || Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing || 14 || 14 ||   || 39 || 20 || 352 || 35 || 475 
   ||   || Agriculture || 14 || 9 ||   || 33 || 13 || 310 || 26 || 406 
   || Forestry || 0 || 5 ||   || 5 || 5 || 20 || 9 || 45 
   || Fishing ||   || 1 ||   || 1 || 1 || 22 ||   || 24 
   || Industry, Mining and Construction || 23 || 33 ||   || 24 || 15 || 35 ||   || 130 
   ||   || Industry || 23 || 32 ||   || 24 || 12 || 28 ||   || 118 
   || Mineral resources and mining ||   ||   ||   || 0 || 3 || 8 ||   || 11 
   || Construction || 0 || 1 ||   || 1 ||   || 0 ||   || 1 
   || Trade and Tourism || 11 || 3 ||   || 30 || 25 || 99 || 3 || 171 
   ||   || Trade policy and regulation || 10 || 2 ||   || 27 || 25 || 97 || 3 || 164 
   || Tourism || 1 || 1 ||   || 3 || 0 || 2 || 0 || 7 
 MULTISECTOR / CROSSCUTTING || 44 || 141 || 14 || 64 || 31 || 267 || 40 || 600 
   || General environmental protection || 26 || 8 ||   || 26 || 16 || 98 || 39 || 213 
   || Other multisector || 18 || 133 || 14 || 37 || 15 || 168 || 2 || 387 
 COMMODITY AID AND GENERAL PROGRAMME ASSISTANCE || 5 || 49 || 0 || 43 || 16 || 735 || 5 || 854 
   || General budget support || 5 || 42 ||   || 3 || 4 || 634 ||   || 688 
   || Development food aid/food security assistance || 0 || 6 || 0 || 40 || 12 || 102 || 5 || 166 
   || Other commodity assistance ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 ACTION RELATING TO DEBT ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2 ||   || 2 
   || Action relating to debt ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2 ||   || 2 
 HUMANITARIAN AID || 6 || 13 ||   || 27 || 0 || 76 || 1 || 123 
   || Emergency Response || 1 || 6 ||   || 1 ||   || 35 ||   || 44 
   || Reconstruction relief and rehabilitation || 5 || 5 ||   || 22 || 0 || 8 ||   || 40 
   || Disaster prevention and preparedness ||   || 1 ||   || 3 || 0 || 33 || 1 || 38 
 OTHER / UNALLOCATED / UNSPECIFIED || 46 || 7 || 8 || 5 || 3 || 108 || 352 || 528 
   || Administrative costs of donors || 4 || 0 ||   || 0 || 0 || 90 || 345 || 439 
   || Refugees in donor countries ||   || 0 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0 
   || Unallocated/unspecified || 42 || 7 || 8 || 4 || 2 || 18 || 7 || 88 
 GRAND TOTAL || 518 || 876 || 27 || 739 || 395 || 3,326 || 537 || 6,419 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Breakdown by sector and region of external aid financed on the general Commission budget managed by EuropeAid and the European Development Fund (EDF). 
 Bilateral and multilateral ODA flows. 
 On budget side, region is identified following geographical budget lines and recipient countries for thematic budget lines. 
 ENPI East: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Republic of Moldova, Ukraine. (Russia excluded) 
 ENPI South: Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Palestine, Syria, Tunisia. (Israel excluded) 
 Asia : Iran, Iraq, Oman, Yemen, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Rep., Maldives, Myanmar (Burma), Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Korea, Dem., Laos, Malaysia, Mongolia, Philippines, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Viet Nam. 
 Latin America : Costa Rica, Cuba, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, Venezuela 
 ACP : South Of Sahara + Oceania + Anguilla, Antigua & Barbuda, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Grenada, Haiti, Jamaica, Montserrat, St.Kitts-Nevis, St.Lucia, St.Vincent & Grenadines, Trinidad & Tobago, West Indies, Regional, Guyana, Suriname.  (Turks & Caicos Islands excluded) 
 Multi region: covering several regions or unspecified location. 
 Table 5.18 External aid in 2013: A closer look. Sectoral breakdown per instrument 
 Commitments in € million ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Sector of Destination || ENPI || EDF || DCI - Geo (2) || DCI - Thema (3) || Food Facility (4) || EIDHR || IFS || NSI || CFSP (5) || IPA || Echo || Other || Total 
 SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES || 1,163 || 1,578 || 724 || 524 ||   || 168 || 190 ||   || 333 || 698 ||   || 0 ||            5,377    
   || Education || 347 || 106 || 162 || 14 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 49 ||   ||   ||               679    
   ||   || Education, level unspecified || 120 || 75 || 62 || 14 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 11 ||   ||   ||               283    
   || Basic education || 46 || 25 || 5 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||                76    
   || Secondary education || 42 || 4 || 39 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 3 ||   ||   ||                88    
   || Post-secondary education || 140 || 2 || 56 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 35 ||   ||   ||               233    
   || Health || 58 || 146 || 183 || 125 ||   ||   || 20 ||   ||   || 2 ||   ||   ||               534    
   ||   || Health, general || 58 || 25 || 133 || 26 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||               241    
   || Basic health ||   || 121 || 50 || 100 ||   ||   || 20 ||   ||   || 2 ||   ||   ||               293    
   || Population polices/programs and reproductive health ||   || 46 ||   || 84 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||               130    
   || Water supply and sanitation || 86 || 222 || 12 || 11 ||   ||   || 2 ||   ||   || 8 ||   ||   ||               341    
   || Government and civil society || 421 || 811 || 280 || 215 ||   || 168 || 168 ||   || 333 || 494 ||   || 0 ||            2,890    
   || Other Social Infrastructure and services || 250 || 246 || 87 || 75 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 144 ||   ||   ||               802    
 ECONOMIC INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES || 80 || 1,053 || 7 || 42 ||   ||   ||   || 51 ||   || 249 ||   ||   ||            1,481    
   || Transport and storage || 1 || 759 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 147 ||   ||   ||               907    
   || Communications ||   ||   || 7 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||                  7    
   || Energy generation and supply || 34 || 250 ||   || 42 ||   ||   ||   || 51 ||   || 64 ||   ||   ||               441    
   || Banking and financial services || 35 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||                35    
   || Business and other services || 10 || 44 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 37 ||   ||   ||                91    
 PRODUCTION SECTORS || 248 || 717 || 198 || 344 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 281 ||   || 10 ||            1,797    
   || Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing || 118 || 441 || 120 || 339 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 253 ||   || 1 ||            1,272    
   ||   || Agriculture || 118 || 396 || 120 || 305 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 253 ||   || 0 ||            1,191    
   || Forestry ||   || 28 ||   || 18 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1 ||                47    
   || Fishing ||   || 17 ||   || 16 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||                33    
   || Industry, Mining and Construction || 71 || 57 || 36 || 5 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 11 ||   ||   ||               181    
   ||   || Industry || 71 || 41 || 33 || 5 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 11 ||   ||   ||               162    
   || Mineral resources and mining ||   || 16 || 4 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||                20    
   || Construction ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||                 -      
   || Trade and Tourism || 59 || 218 || 42 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 17 ||   || 8 ||               344    
   ||   || Trade policy and regulation || 59 || 218 || 42 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 17 ||   || 8 ||               344    
   || Tourism ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||                 -      
 MULTISECTOR / CROSSCUTTING || 622 || 312 || 429 || 170 ||   ||   || 10 ||   ||   || 384 ||   || 27 ||            1,955    
   || General environmental protection || 33 || 94 || 22 || 146 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 194 ||   || 1 ||               491    
   || Other multisector || 589 || 218 || 407 || 24 ||   ||   || 10 ||   ||   || 190 ||   || 26 ||            1,463    
 COMMODITY AID AND GENERAL PROGRAMME ASSISTANCE || 267 || 545 ||   || 55 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0 ||   ||   ||               867    
   || General budget support || 267 || 540 ||   || 51 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0 ||   ||   ||               858    
   || Development food aid/food security assistance ||   || 5 ||   || 4 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||                  9    
   || Other commodity assistance ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||                 -      
 ACTION RELATING TO DEBT ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||                 -      
   || Action relating to debt ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||                 -      
 HUMANITARIAN AID || 46 || 141 || 15 ||   ||   ||   || 14 ||   ||   || 58 || 1,283 ||   ||            1,556    
   || Emergency Response ||   || 39 || 5 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 3 || 1,247 ||   ||            1,293    
   || Reconstruction relief and rehabilitation || 40 || 2 || 10 ||   ||   ||   || 12 ||   ||   || 56 ||   ||   ||               119    
   || Disaster prevention and preparedness || 6 || 100 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2 ||   ||   ||   || 36 ||   ||               144    
 OTHER / UNALLOCATED / UNSPECIFIED || 52 || 52 || 66 || 82 ||   || 10 || 8 || 1 || 8 || 72 || 10 || 330 ||               692    
   || Administrative costs of donors (1) || 52 || 52 || 56 || 45 ||   || 10 || 8 || 1 || 0 || 48 || 10 || 255 ||               537    
   || Refugees in donor countries ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||                 -      
   || Unallocated/unspecified ||   || 1 || 10 || 37 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 7 || 25 ||   || 75 ||               155    
 GRAND TOTAL || 2,477 || 4,397 || 1,439 || 1,216 ||   || 178 || 222 || 52 || 340 || 1,742 || 1,293 || 367 ||          13,725    
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 (1) Column "Other" includes expenditure concerning other instruments. 
 Breakdown by sector and region of external aid financed on the general Commission budget and the European Development Fund (EDF). 
 Bilateral and multilateral ODA flows. 
 (2) DCI - Geo : Asia, Latin America, South Africa 
 (3) DCI - Thema : Migration, Food security, Non-state actors, Environment, Human & social development, ACP sugar programmes 
 (4) Food Facility : facility for rapid response to soaring food prices in developing countries, pilot project — Finance for agricultural production 
 (5) CFSP is financed on the general Commission budget managed by DG FPI 
 Table 5.19 External aid in 2013: A closer look. Sectoral breakdown per instrument 
 Disbursements in € Million ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Sector of Destination || ENPI || EDF || DCI - Geo (2) || DCI - Thema (3) || Food Facility (4) || EIDHR || IFS || NSI || CFSP (5) || IPA || Echo || Other || Total 
 SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES || 725 || 813 || 678 || 304 ||   || 130 || 147 ||   || 270 || 438 ||   || 16 || 3,521 
   || Education || 219 || 116 || 206 || 30 ||   || 0 || 0 ||   ||   || 62 ||   || 9 || 642 
   ||   || Education, level unspecified || 61 || 60 || 68 || 8 ||   || 0 ||   ||   ||   || 9 ||   || 2 || 208 
   || Basic education || 52 || 21 || 40 || 10 ||   || 0 || 0 ||   ||   || 1 ||   || 0 || 124 
   || Secondary education || 29 || 5 || 20 || 12 ||   || 0 ||   ||   ||   || 2 ||   || 0 || 67 
   || Post-secondary education || 78 || 31 || 79 || 0 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 50 ||   || 6 || 243 
   || Health || 26 || 141 || 198 || 81 ||   ||   || 1 ||   ||   || 6 ||   || 0 || 453 
   ||   || Health, general || 23 || 26 || 24 || 7 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 6 ||   || 0 || 85 
   || Basic health || 3 || 116 || 174 || 74 ||   ||   || 1 ||   ||   || 1 ||   ||   || 368 
   || Population polices/programs and reproductive health || 1 || 36 || 3 || 32 ||   || 0 || 0 ||   ||   || 0 ||   ||   || 73 
   || Water supply and sanitation || 40 || 191 || 45 || 16 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 37 ||   || 2 || 329 
   || Government and civil society || 223 || 284 || 125 || 114 ||   || 130 || 144 ||   || 270 || 252 ||   || 6 || 1,548 
   || Other Social Infrastructure and services || 216 || 45 || 101 || 32 ||   || 0 || 1 ||   ||   || 80 ||   || 0 || 476 
 ECONOMIC INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES || 154 || 605 || 41 || 23 ||   ||   || 5 || 51 ||   || 129 ||   || 2 || 1,010 
   || Transport and storage || 42 || 437 || 10 || 12 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 99 ||   || 0 || 600 
   || Communications || 5 || 12 || 8 || 0 ||   ||   || 0 ||   ||   || 5 ||   ||   || 30 
   || Energy generation and supply || 89 || 130 || 17 || 10 ||   ||   || 5 || 51 ||   || 18 ||   ||   || 318 
   || Banking and financial services || 2 || 6 || 2 || 0 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 3 ||   ||   || 13 
   || Business and other services || 16 || 21 || 5 || 1 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 4 ||   || 1 || 50 
 PRODUCTION SECTORS || 96 || 333 || 130 || 210 ||   ||   || 0 ||   ||   || 75 ||   || 11 || 856 
   || Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing || 27 || 208 || 36 || 200 ||   ||   || 0 ||   ||   || 55 ||   || 3 || 529 
   ||   || Agriculture || 22 || 181 || 33 || 168 ||   ||   || 0 ||   ||   || 54 ||   || 2 || 460 
   || Forestry || 5 || 8 || 3 || 27 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0 ||   || 1 || 45 
   || Fishing || 1 || 19 || 1 || 4 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0 ||   ||   || 24 
   || Industry, Mining and Construction || 55 || 29 || 39 || 7 ||   ||   || 0 ||   ||   || 10 ||   || 0 || 140 
   ||   || Industry || 54 || 22 || 35 || 7 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 9 ||   || 0 || 128 
   || Mineral resources and mining ||   || 7 || 3 || 0 ||   ||   || 0 ||   ||   || 0 ||   ||   || 11 
   || Construction || 1 || 0 || 1 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0 ||   ||   || 1 
   || Trade and Tourism || 14 || 96 || 54 || 3 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 11 ||   || 8 || 186 
   ||   || Trade policy and regulation || 12 || 95 || 51 || 3 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 9 ||   || 7 || 177 
   || Tourism || 2 || 2 || 3 || 0 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2 ||   || 0 || 9 
 MULTISECTOR / CROSSCUTTING || 193 || 208 || 75 || 122 ||   || 0 || 0 || 0 ||   || 264 ||   || 3 || 865 
   || General environmental protection || 32 || 61 || 31 || 89 ||   || 0 ||   ||   ||   || 59 ||   || 2 || 274 
   || Other multisector || 161 || 147 || 44 || 33 ||   || 0 || 0 || 0 ||   || 205 ||   || 1 || 592 
 COMMODITY AID AND GENERAL PROGRAMME ASSISTANCE || 47 || 607 || 71 || 124 || 5 || 0 || 4 ||   ||   || 13 ||   || 0 || 871 
   || General budget support || 47 || 548 || 57 || 36 ||   || 0 ||   ||   ||   || 13 ||   ||   || 701 
   || Development food aid/food security assistance || 0 || 60 || 13 || 88 || 5 ||   || 4 ||   ||   || 0 ||   || 0 || 169 
   || Other commodity assistance ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 ACTION RELATING TO DEBT ||   || 2 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2 
   || Action relating to debt ||   || 2 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2 
 HUMANITARIAN AID || 17 || 76 || 25 || 5 ||   || 0 || 13 ||   ||   || 61 || 1,198 ||   || 1,394 
   || Emergency Response || 6 || 35 || 1 || 2 ||   || 0 || 3 ||   ||   || 1 || 1,160 ||   || 1,209 
   || Reconstruction relief and rehabilitation || 10 || 8 || 22 || 0 ||   ||   || 7 ||   ||   || 58 ||   ||   || 106 
   || Disaster prevention and preparedness || 1 || 33 || 1 || 3 ||   ||   || 2 ||   ||   || 1 || 38 ||   || 79 
 OTHER / UNALLOCATED / UNSPECIFIED || 72 || 99 || 59 || 80 ||   || 10 || 21 || 1 || 7 || 52 || 9 || 335 || 744 
   || Administrative costs of donors (1) || 53 || 89 || 53 || 43 ||   || 10 || 7 || 1 || 0 || 45 || 9 || 257 || 568 
   || Refugees in donor countries || 0 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 13 ||   ||   || 1 ||   ||   || 14 
   || Unallocated/unspecified || 19 || 9 || 5 || 37 ||   || 0 || 1 ||   || 7 || 6 ||   || 77 || 162 
 GRAND TOTAL || 1,304 || 2,744 || 1,078 || 869 || 5 || 141 || 189 || 52 || 276 || 1,032 || 1,206 || 366 || 9,263 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 (1) Column "Other" includes expenditure concerning other instruments. 
 Breakdown by sector and region of external aid financed on the general Commission budget and the European Development Fund (EDF). 
 Bilateral and multilateral ODA flows. 
 (2) DCI - Geo : Asia, Latin America, South Africa 
 (3) DCI - Thema : Migration, Food security, Non-state actors, Environment, Human & social development, ACP sugar programmes 
 (4) Food Facility : facility for rapid response to soaring food prices in developing countries, pilot project — Finance for agricultural production 
 (5) CFSP is financed on the general Commission budget managed by DG FPI 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Table 5.22 Breakdown by Country and Instrument - Commitments 
 Commitments in € million 
 Country/Region || ENPI || DCI - Geo (1) || DCI - Thema (2) || Food Facility (3) || EIDHR || IFS || NSI || CFSP || IPA || Echo || Other || Total BUDG || EDF || Grand Total 
 Part I : Developing Countries & Territories (ODA) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Europe, Total || 610.56 ||   || 46.14 ||   || 0.90 || 3.90 || 7.50 || 123.33 || 1,694.58 ||   ||   || 2,486.91 ||   || 2,486.91 
   ||   || Albania ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 86.74 ||   ||   || 86.74 ||   || 86.74 
   ||   || Belarus || 27.21 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 4.50 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 31.71 ||   || 31.71 
   ||   || Bosnia and Herzegovina ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 3.90 ||   || 5.29 || 52.26 ||   ||   || 61.45 ||   || 61.45 
   ||   || Kosovo (5) ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.90 ||   ||   || 111.87 || 107.26 ||   ||   || 220.04 ||   || 220.04 
   ||   || fYRoM ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 111.27 ||   ||   || 111.27 ||   || 111.27 
   ||   || Republic of Moldova (6) || 135.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 135.00 ||   || 135.00 
   ||   || Montenegro ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 35.71 ||   ||   || 35.71 ||   || 35.71 
   ||   || Serbia ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 183.88 ||   ||   || 183.88 ||   || 183.88 
   ||   || Turkey ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 900.73 ||   ||   || 900.73 ||   || 900.73 
   ||   || Ukraine || 203.50 ||   || 0.00 ||   ||   ||   || 3.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 206.50 ||   || 206.50 
   ||   || States of ex-Yugoslavia unspecif. ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Europe, Regional || 244.85 ||   || 46.14 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 6.18 || 216.71 ||   ||   || 513.87 ||   || 513.87 
 Africa, Total || 653.89 || 130.58 || 311.43 ||   || 15.00 || 97.01 ||   || 74.21 ||   || 518.01 || 0.21 || 1,800.34 || 3,501.71 || 5,302.05 
   || North Of Sahara, Total || 653.89 ||   || 5.00 ||   || 0.31 ||   ||   || 35.57 ||   || 10.00 || 0.12 || 704.88 ||   || 704.88 
   ||   || Algeria || 50.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 10.00 ||   || 60.00 ||   || 60.00 
   ||   || Egypt || 47.00 ||   ||   ||   || 0.16 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.07 || 47.24 ||   || 47.24 
   ||   || Libya || 30.00 ||   ||   ||   || 0.14 ||   ||   || 35.57 ||   ||   ||   || 65.71 ||   || 65.71 
   ||   || Morocco || 334.90 ||   || 5.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 339.90 ||   || 339.90 
   ||   || Tunisia || 137.05 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.05 || 137.09 ||   || 137.09 
   ||   || North Of Sahara, Regional || 54.94 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 54.94 ||   || 54.94 
   || South Of Sahara, Total ||   || 130.58 || 282.70 ||   || 14.70 || 97.01 ||   || 33.86 ||   || 508.01 || 0.09 || 1,066.95 || 3,456.18 || 4,523.13 
   ||   || Angola ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 90.30 || 90.30 
   ||   || Benin ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 47.80 || 47.80 
   ||   || Botswana ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 22.62 || 22.62 
   ||   || Burkina Faso ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 110.21 || 110.21 
   ||   || Burundi ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 28.90 || 28.90 
   ||   || Cameroon ||   ||   || 7.24 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 7.24 || 7.60 || 14.84 
   ||   || Cape Verde ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Central African Rep. ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 10.00 ||   ||   ||   || 25.05 ||   || 35.05 || 40.58 || 75.63 
   ||   || Chad ||   ||   || 8.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 37.00 ||   || 45.00 || 6.68 || 51.68 
   ||   || Comoros ||   ||   || 3.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 3.00 || 1.13 || 4.13 
   ||   || Congo, Dem. Rep. ||   ||   || 3.50 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 14.78 ||   || 76.05 ||   || 94.33 || 53.25 || 147.58 
   ||   || Congo, Rep. ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.26 || 0.26 
   ||   || Cote d'Ivoire ||   ||   || 11.31 ||   ||   || 10.00 ||   ||   ||   || 10.00 ||   || 31.31 || 36.48 || 67.79 
   ||   || Djibouti ||   ||   || 9.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 11.97 ||   || 27.13 ||   || 48.10 || 10.00 || 58.10 
   ||   || Equatorial Guinea ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Eritrea ||   ||   || 0.16 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.16 || 4.22 || 4.39 
   ||   || Ethiopia ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.70 ||   || 0.60 ||   || 27.13 ||   || 29.43 || 255.91 || 285.34 
   ||   || Gabon ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Gambia ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 13.45 || 13.45 
   ||   || Ghana ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 26.50 || 26.50 
   ||   || Guinea ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2.95 || 15.50 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 18.45 || 185.49 || 203.94 
   ||   || Guinea-Bissau ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 21.90 || 21.90 
   ||   || Kenya ||   ||   || 7.50 ||   || 0.01 || 2.10 ||   ||   ||   || 27.13 || 0.09 || 36.83 || 143.60 || 180.43 
   ||   || Lesotho ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 10.98 || 10.98 
   ||   || Liberia ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.00 ||   || 0.00 || 22.20 || 22.20 
   ||   || Madagascar ||   ||   || 4.77 ||   || 4.93 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 9.69 || 134.00 || 143.69 
   ||   || Malawi ||   ||   || 11.00 ||   || 0.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 11.00 || 75.42 || 86.42 
   ||   || Mali ||   ||   ||   ||   || 6.50 || 20.00 ||   ||   ||   || 53.40 ||   || 79.90 || 383.63 || 463.53 
   ||   || Mauritania ||   ||   || 4.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 4.00 || 61.70 || 65.70 
   ||   || Mauritius ||   ||   || 51.09 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 51.09 || 12.29 || 63.38 
   ||   || Mozambique ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.11 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 3.00 ||   || 3.11 || 125.49 || 128.60 
   ||   || Namibia ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 24.58 || 24.58 
   ||   || Niger ||   ||   || 9.00 ||   ||   || 18.70 ||   || 6.50 ||   || 0.00 ||   || 34.20 || 181.10 || 215.30 
   ||   || Nigeria ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 14.90 ||   ||   ||   || 2.00 ||   || 16.90 || 42.60 || 59.50 
   ||   || Rwanda ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 81.88 || 81.88 
   ||   || St.Helena ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Sao Tome & Principe ||   ||   || 3.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 3.00 || 3.40 || 6.40 
   ||   || Senegal ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 3.50 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 3.50 || 87.34 || 90.84 
   ||   || Seychelles ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.85 || 0.85 
   ||   || Sierra Leone ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 110.27 || 110.27 
   ||   || Somalia ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 27.13 ||   || 27.13 || 48.00 || 75.13 
   ||   || South Africa ||   || 130.58 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 130.58 ||   || 130.58 
   ||   || Sudan ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 97.00 ||   || 97.00 || 36.00 || 133.00 
   ||   || South Sudan ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 189.00 || 189.00 
   ||   || Swaziland ||   ||   || 1.80 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.80 || 17.27 || 19.07 
   ||   || Tanzania ||   ||   || 8.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 8.00 || 80.20 || 88.20 
   ||   || Togo ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 12.43 || 12.43 
   ||   || Uganda ||   ||   || 10.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 10.00 || 28.20 || 38.20 
   ||   || Zambia ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 40.80 || 40.80 
   ||   || Zimbabwe ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.19 || 0.61 ||   ||   ||   || 3.00 ||   || 3.81 || 9.79 || 13.60 
   ||   || South Of Sahara, Regional ||   ||   || 130.32 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 93.00 ||   || 223.32 || 529.90 || 753.22 
   || Africa, Regional ||   ||   || 23.73 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 4.78 ||   ||   ||   || 28.51 || 45.53 || 74.04 
 America, Total ||   || 381.56 || 111.84 ||   || 2.89 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 46.15 ||   || 542.44 || 356.79 || 899.22 
   || North & Central, Total ||   || 160.99 || 75.50 ||   || 2.76 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 17.10 ||   || 256.34 || 308.02 || 564.36 
   ||   || Anguilla ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Antigua & Barbuda ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.68 || 0.68 
   ||   || Belize ||   ||   || 19.86 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 19.86 || 2.11 || 21.97 
   ||   || Costa Rica ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Cuba ||   || 13.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 13.00 ||   || 13.00 
   ||   || Dominica ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 6.90 || 6.90 
   ||   || Dominican Republic ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 38.12 || 38.12 
   ||   || El Salvador ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.13 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.13 ||   || 0.13 
   ||   || Grenada ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.15 || 0.15 
   ||   || Guatemala ||   || 27.10 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 27.10 ||   || 27.10 
   ||   || Haiti ||   ||   || 13.30 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 15.10 ||   || 28.40 || 137.19 || 165.58 
   ||   || Honduras ||   || 27.50 ||   ||   || 2.63 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 30.13 ||   || 30.13 
   ||   || Jamaica ||   ||   || 29.57 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 29.57 || 69.06 || 98.63 
   ||   || Mexico ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Montserrat ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Nicaragua ||   || 53.05 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 53.05 ||   || 53.05 
   ||   || Panama ||   || 28.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 28.00 ||   || 28.00 
   ||   || St.Kitts-Nevis ||   ||   || 12.76 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 12.76 ||   || 12.76 
   ||   || St.Lucia ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.23 || 0.23 
   ||   || St.Vincent & Grenadines ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 5.04 || 5.04 
   ||   || West Indies, Regional ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 48.54 || 48.54 
   ||   || N. & C. America, Regional ||   || 12.34 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2.00 ||   || 14.34 ||   || 14.34 
   || South, Total ||   || 143.10 || 29.35 ||   || 0.12 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 25.06 ||   || 197.63 || 48.77 || 246.40 
   ||   || Argentina ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Bolivia ||   || 34.00 ||   ||   || 0.11 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 34.11 ||   || 34.11 
   ||   || Brazil ||   || 5.59 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 5.59 ||   || 5.59 
   ||   || Chile ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Colombia ||   || 60.60 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 13.00 ||   || 73.60 ||   || 73.60 
   ||   || Ecuador ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Guyana ||   ||   || 24.35 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 24.35 || 48.07 || 72.42 
   ||   || Paraguay ||   || 10.50 ||   ||   || 0.01 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 10.51 ||   || 10.51 
   ||   || Peru ||   || 32.20 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 32.20 ||   || 32.20 
   ||   || Suriname ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.70 || 0.70 
   ||   || Uruguay ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Venezuela ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || South America, Regional ||   || 0.21 || 5.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 12.06 ||   || 17.27 ||   || 17.27 
   || America, Regional ||   || 77.47 || 7.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 4.00 ||   || 88.47 ||   || 88.47 
 Asia, Total || 735.54 || 871.17 || 48.20 ||   || 4.47 || 102.87 || 11.50 || 137.70 ||   || 606.10 || 0.05 || 2,517.60 || 4.00 || 2,521.60 
   || Middle East, Total || 565.76 || 85.30 || 9.00 ||   || 0.24 || 73.64 || 2.00 || 25.59 ||   || 425.00 || 0.05 || 1,186.58 ||   || 1,186.58 
   ||   || Iran ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Iraq ||   || 40.20 ||   ||   || 0.16 || 2.00 ||   || 15.40 ||   || 7.00 ||   || 64.76 ||   || 64.76 
   ||   || Jordan || 135.40 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2.00 ||   ||   ||   || 0.05 || 137.45 ||   || 137.45 
   ||   || Lebanon || 103.00 ||   ||   ||   || 0.08 || 32.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 135.08 ||   || 135.08 
   ||   || Palestine || 224.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 9.69 ||   || 35.00 ||   || 268.69 ||   || 268.69 
   ||   || Syria || 51.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 36.64 ||   ||   ||   || 350.00 ||   || 437.64 ||   || 437.64 
   ||   || Yemen ||   || 43.00 || 9.00 ||   ||   || 3.00 ||   ||   ||   || 33.00 ||   || 88.00 ||   || 88.00 
   ||   || Middle East, Regional || 52.36 || 2.10 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.51 ||   ||   ||   || 54.97 ||   || 54.97 
   || South & Centr. Asia, Total || 169.78 || 455.51 || 14.39 ||   || 4.23 || 29.23 || 4.00 || 112.10 ||   || 137.60 ||   || 926.84 ||   || 926.84 
   ||   || Afghanistan ||   || 197.48 ||   ||   ||   || 5.00 ||   || 84.39 ||   || 30.00 ||   || 316.86 ||   || 316.86 
   ||   || Armenia || 66.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 67.00 ||   || 67.00 
   ||   || Azerbaijan || 25.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 25.00 ||   || 25.00 
   ||   || Bangladesh ||   || 21.50 || 7.75 ||   || 1.16 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 11.00 ||   || 41.41 ||   || 41.41 
   ||   || Bhutan ||   || 5.60 ||   ||   || 0.12 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 5.72 ||   || 5.72 
   ||   || Georgia || 78.78 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.43 ||   || 26.67 ||   ||   ||   || 105.88 ||   || 105.88 
   ||   || India ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 9.00 ||   || 9.00 ||   || 9.00 
   ||   || Kazakhstan ||   || 8.80 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 8.80 ||   || 8.80 
   ||   || Kyrgyz Rep. ||   || 0.06 ||   ||   ||   || 1.80 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.86 ||   || 1.86 
   ||   || Maldives ||   || 4.00 ||   ||   || 0.06 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 4.06 ||   || 4.06 
   ||   || Myanmar (Burma) ||   || 38.00 || 4.00 ||   ||   || 20.00 ||   ||   ||   || 22.00 ||   || 84.00 ||   || 84.00 
   ||   || Nepal ||   || 6.00 ||   ||   || 2.88 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.00 ||   || 9.88 ||   || 9.88 
   ||   || Pakistan ||   || 83.80 || 0.04 ||   || 0.01 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 52.00 ||   || 135.85 ||   || 135.85 
   ||   || Sri Lanka ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Tajikistan ||   || 30.54 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 30.54 ||   || 30.54 
   ||   || Turkmenistan ||   || 14.50 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 14.50 ||   || 14.50 
   ||   || Uzbekistan ||   || 4.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 4.00 ||   || 4.00 
   ||   || Central Asia, Regional ||   || 37.93 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 3.00 || 1.05 ||   ||   ||   || 41.98 ||   || 41.98 
   ||   || South Asia, Regional ||   || 3.30 ||   ||   ||   || 2.00 ||   ||   ||   || 12.60 ||   || 17.90 ||   || 17.90 
   ||   || South & Central Asia, Regional ||   ||   || 2.60 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2.60 ||   || 2.60 
   || Far East, Total ||   || 260.36 || 16.02 ||   ||   ||   || 5.50 ||   ||   || 43.50 ||   || 325.38 || 4.00 || 329.38 
   ||   || Cambodia ||   || 46.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2.00 ||   || 48.00 ||   || 48.00 
   ||   || China ||   || 7.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 7.00 ||   || 7.00 
   ||   || Indonesia ||   || 10.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.50 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 11.50 ||   || 11.50 
   ||   || Korea, Dem. ||   ||   || 13.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.00 ||   || 13.00 ||   || 13.00 
   ||   || Laos ||   || 6.50 || 3.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 9.50 ||   || 9.50 
   ||   || Malaysia ||   || 0.50 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.50 ||   || 0.50 
   ||   || Mongolia ||   || 3.57 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 3.57 ||   || 3.57 
   ||   || Philippines ||   || 47.99 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 39.50 ||   || 87.49 ||   || 87.49 
   ||   || Thailand ||   || 5.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.50 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 6.50 ||   || 6.50 
   ||   || Timor-Leste ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 4.00 || 4.00 
   ||   || Viet Nam ||   || 120.40 || 0.02 ||   ||   ||   || 2.00 ||   ||   || 2.00 ||   || 124.42 ||   || 124.42 
   ||   || Far East Asia, Regional ||   || 13.40 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.50 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 13.90 ||   || 13.90 
   || Asia, Regional ||   || 70.00 || 8.80 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 78.80 ||   || 78.80 
 Oceania, Total ||   ||   || 30.66 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 13.32 ||   || 43.97 || 194.54 || 238.51 
   ||   || Cook Islands ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2.55 || 2.55 
   ||   || Fiji ||   ||   || 30.66 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.90 ||   || 31.56 || 3.80 || 35.36 
   ||   || Kiribati ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 5.30 || 5.30 
   ||   || Marshall Islands ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.35 || 1.35 
   ||   || Micronesia, Fed. Sts. ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.20 || 0.20 
   ||   || Nauru ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.20 || 0.20 
   ||   || Niue ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.05 || 1.05 
   ||   || Palau ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.18 || 0.18 
   ||   || Papua New Guinea ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 68.12 || 68.12 
   ||   || Samoa ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.90 ||   || 0.90 || 2.33 || 3.23 
   ||   || Solomon Islands ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 17.40 || 17.40 
   ||   || Tokelau ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Tonga ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.47 || 0.47 
   ||   || Tuvalu ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.15 || 0.15 
   ||   || Vanuatu ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 12.82 || 12.82 
   ||   || Wallis & Futuna ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 18.11 || 18.11 
   ||   || Oceania, Regional ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 11.52 ||   || 11.52 || 60.50 || 72.01 
 Bilateral unallocated || 333.55 ||   || 621.91 ||   || 144.35 || 9.80 || 6.87 || 4.71 ||   || 99.39 || 40.14 || 1,260.72 || 339.99 || 1,600.71 
 Part I (ODA) Bilateral, Total || 2,333.53 || 1,383.31 || 1,170.19 ||   || 167.62 || 213.58 || 25.87 || 339.95 || 1,694.58 || 1,282.97 || 40.40 || 8,651.99 || 4,397.03 || 13,049.02 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Public Private Partnerships ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 United Nations || 91.79 ||   || 1.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 5.37 || 98.17 ||   || 98.17 
   ||   || UNRWA || 91.79 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 91.79 ||   || 91.79 
   ||   || UNDP ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || WFP ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || WHO ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.45 || 0.45 ||   || 0.45 
   ||   || FAO ||   ||   || 1.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.48 || 2.48 ||   || 2.48 
 International Monetary Fund (IMF) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 World Bank Group ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 World Trade Organisation ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2.55 || 2.55 ||   || 2.55 
 Regional Development Banks ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 25.11 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 25.11 ||   || 25.11 
 Other Multilateral Institutions ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.10 || 1.10 ||   || 1.10 
   ||   || GFTAM ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Others ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
  Part I (ODA) Multilateral Aid,Total || 91.79 ||   || 1.00 ||   ||   ||   || 25.11 ||   ||   ||   || 9.02 || 126.92 ||   || 126.92 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Part I (ODA), Total || 2,425.33 || 1,383.31 || 1,171.19 ||   || 167.62 || 213.58 || 50.98 || 339.95 || 1,694.58 || 1,282.97 || 49.43 || 8,778.91 || 4,397.03 || 13,175.94 
 Part II: Countries and Territories in Transition (non ODA) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 More Advanced Developing Countries || 2.00 ||   || 13.36 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 8.96 || 37.31 ||   || 50.81 || 112.44 || 106.06 || 218.49 
   ||   || Aruba ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Barbados ||   ||   || 13.36 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 13.36 || 5.81 || 19.17 
   ||   || Bahrain ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Bahamas ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Bermuda ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Brunei ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Cayman Islands ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Taiwan ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Falkland Islands ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 4.13 || 4.13 
   ||   || French Polynesia ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 19.79 || 19.79 
   ||   || Gibraltar ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Hong Kong, China ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Israel || 2.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2.00 ||   || 2.00 
   ||   || Korea ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Kuwait ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Macao ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Mayotte ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 29.72 || 29.72 
   ||   || Netherlands Antilles ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 24.00 || 24.00 
   ||   || New Caledonia ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Oman ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Pitcairn Islands ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2.40 || 2.40 
   ||   || Qatar ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Saint Pierre and Miquelon ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Saudi Arabia ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Singapore ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Trinidad & Tobago ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 8.35 || 8.35 
   ||   || Turks & Caicos Islands ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 11.85 || 11.85 
   ||   || United Arab Emirates ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Virgin Islands (UK) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || MADCT Unallocated ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 8.96 || 37.31 ||   || 50.81 || 97.08 ||   || 97.08 
 CEEC's/NIS || 18.17 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.50 || 1.71 || 95.62 ||   || 64.64 || 181.64 ||   || 181.64 
   ||   || Bulgaria ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Croatia ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 80.92 ||   || 4.92 || 85.84 ||   || 85.84 
   ||   || Cyprus ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.71 ||   ||   || 31.00 || 32.72 ||   || 32.72 
   ||   || Czech Republic ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Estonia ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Greenland ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 28.72 || 28.72 ||   || 28.72 
   ||   || Hungary ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Latvia ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Lithuania ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Iceland ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 10.84 ||   ||   || 10.84 ||   || 10.84 
   ||   || Malta ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Poland ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.00 ||   ||   || 0.00 ||   || 0.00 
   ||   || Romania ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Russia ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Slovak Republic ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Slovenia ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Europe Unallocated || 18.17 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.50 ||   || 3.86 ||   ||   || 23.53 ||   || 23.53 
   ||   || CEECs Unallocated ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Part II (Non-OA) Bilateral Aid, Total || 20.17 ||   || 13.36 ||   ||   ||   || 1.50 || 10.67 || 132.93 ||   || 115.45 || 294.08 || 106.06 || 400.13 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || EBRD ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Part II (non-ODA) Multilateral Aid, Total ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Part II (non-ODA), Total || 20.17 ||   || 13.36 ||   ||   ||   || 1.50 || 10.67 || 132.93 ||   || 115.45 || 294.08 || 106.06 || 400.13 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Total Part I & Part II || 2,445.49 || 1,383.31 || 1,184.54 ||   || 167.62 || 213.58 || 52.48 || 350.62 || 1,827.51 || 1,282.97 || 164.88 || 9,072.99 || 4,503.08 || 13,576.07 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 BA Lines || 54.82 || 59.29 || 46.76 ||   || 10.91 || 8.94 || 1.44 || 0.44 || 54.34 || 9.72 || 7.37 || 254.03 ||   || 254.03 
 Other Flows || 34.29 || 5.02 || 0.00 || 0.00 || 0.01 || 101.62 ||   || 2.31 || 12.60 ||   || 221.76 || 377.61 || 281.07 || 658.68 
 Total Flows || 2,534.60 || 1,447.62 || 1,231.30 || 0.00 || 178.54 || 324.14 || 53.91 || 353.38 || 1,894.44 || 1,292.69 || 394.00 || 9,704.63 || 4,784.15 || 14,488.78 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Breakdown by country/region of external aid financed on the General Commission Budget in 2013. 
   ||   || Bilateral and Multilateral ODA / non-ODA flows. 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || (1) DCI - Geo : Asia, Latin America, South Africa 
   ||   || (2) DCI - Thema : Migration, Food security, Non-state actors, Environment, Human & social development, ACP sugar programmes 
   ||   || (3) Food Facility : Facility for rapid response to soaring food prices in developing countries, Pilot project — Finance for agricultural production 
   ||   || (4) CFSP is financed on the General Commission Budget managed by DG External Relations 
   ||   || (5) UNSCR 1244/99 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || (6) henceforth Moldova ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Table 5.23 Breakdown by Country and Instrument - Disbursements 
 Disbursements in € Million      
 Country/Region || ENPI || DCI - Geo (1) || DCI - Thema (2) || Food Facility (3) || EIDHR || IFS || NSI || CFSP || IPA || Echo || Other || Total BUDG || EDF || Grand Total 
 Part I : Developing Countries & Territories (ODA) 
 Europe, Total || 324.50 || 0.03 || 50.25 ||   || 22.47 || 4.89 || 21.28 || 103.42 || 971.29 || 20.59 || 7.33 || 1,526.05 ||   || 1,526.05 
   ||   || Albania ||   ||   || 0.02 ||   || 0.62 ||   ||   ||   || 47.70 ||   ||   || 48.33 ||   || 48.33 
   ||   || Belarus || 10.85 ||   || 1.45 ||   || 1.47 || 0.02 || 0.32 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 14.10 ||   || 14.10 
   ||   || Bosnia and Herzegovina ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2.24 || 1.87 ||   || 4.85 || 82.74 ||   ||   || 91.70 ||   || 91.70 
   ||   || Kosovo (5) ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.51 || 0.13 ||   || 96.49 || 77.15 ||   ||   || 174.28 ||   || 174.28 
   ||   || fYRoM ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.49 ||   ||   ||   || 27.83 ||   ||   || 28.32 ||   || 28.32 
   ||   || Republic of Moldova (6) || 66.63 ||   || 1.48 ||   || 0.25 ||   ||   || 0.01 ||   ||   || 0.16 || 68.53 ||   || 68.53 
   ||   || Montenegro ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.76 ||   ||   ||   || 19.31 ||   ||   || 20.07 ||   || 20.07 
   ||   || Serbia || 0.01 ||   || 0.03 ||   || 1.21 || 0.03 ||   ||   || 126.21 ||   || 0.11 || 127.61 ||   || 127.61 
   ||   || Turkey || 0.70 ||   || 0.02 ||   || 2.67 ||   ||   ||   || 379.23 || 20.59 || 0.22 || 403.43 ||   || 403.43 
   ||   || Ukraine || 139.47 ||   || 3.05 ||   || 0.60 ||   || 19.80 ||   || 0.02 ||   ||   || 162.95 ||   || 162.95 
   ||   || States of ex-Yugoslavia unspecif. ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.00 ||   ||   ||   || 0.18 ||   ||   || 0.18 ||   || 0.18 
   ||   || Europe, Regional || 106.84 || 0.03 || 44.21 ||   || 11.64 || 2.85 || 1.16 || 2.06 || 210.91 ||   || 6.84 || 386.55 ||   || 386.55 
 Africa, Total || 265.56 || 127.90 || 333.71 || 2.09 || 39.44 || 76.61 || 0.16 || 67.85 ||   || 572.10 || 8.96 || 1,494.36 || 2,401.89 || 3,896.25 
   || North Of Sahara, Total || 264.66 || 2.00 || 8.25 ||   || 5.25 || 4.89 || 0.16 || 29.32 ||   || 16.19 || 0.20 || 1,494.36 || 0.10 || 331.03 
   ||   || Algeria || 36.47 ||   || 1.25 ||   || 1.57 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 11.58 ||   || 50.87 ||   || 50.87 
   ||   || Egypt || 25.16 ||   || 1.19 ||   || 0.98 || 1.36 || 0.16 ||   ||   || 1.03 || 0.07 || 29.96 ||   || 29.96 
   ||   || Libya || 9.25 ||   || 0.99 ||   || 0.80 || 3.32 ||   || 29.32 ||   || 1.56 ||   || 45.25 ||   || 45.25 
   ||   || Morocco || 84.02 ||   || 1.84 ||   || 0.61 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.13 || 86.60 ||   || 86.60 
   ||   || Tunisia || 85.24 ||   || 0.30 ||   || 0.74 || 0.21 ||   ||   ||   || 2.02 ||   || 88.51 ||   || 88.51 
   ||   || North Of Sahara, Regional || 24.52 || 2.00 || 2.68 ||   || 0.55 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 29.75 || 0.10 || 29.86 
   || South Of Sahara, Total ||   || 125.17 || 297.14 || 2.09 || 32.42 || 69.45 ||   || 33.79 ||   || 555.91 || 3.18 || 1,119.15 || 2,251.60 || 3,370.75 
   ||   || Angola ||   ||   || 6.22 ||   || 0.57 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 6.78 || 17.09 || 23.87 
   ||   || Benin ||   ||   || 1.90 ||   || 0.64 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.84 ||   || 3.37 || 44.39 || 47.76 
   ||   || Botswana ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.00 || 14.54 || 14.54 
   ||   || Burkina Faso ||   || 0.11 || 8.01 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 22.95 ||   || 31.08 || 120.00 || 151.07 
   ||   || Burundi ||   ||   || 2.87 ||   || 0.36 || 0.32 ||   ||   ||   || 2.47 ||   || 6.02 || 50.59 || 56.61 
   ||   || Cameroon ||   ||   || 10.30 ||   || 0.24 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 3.32 || 0.36 || 14.21 || 55.51 || 69.72 
   ||   || Cape Verde ||   ||   || 1.34 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.14 || 1.48 || 11.18 || 12.65 
   ||   || Central African Rep. ||   ||   || 2.39 ||   || 0.22 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 11.73 ||   || 14.33 || 14.30 || 28.63 
   ||   || Chad ||   ||   || 12.20 ||   || 0.17 || 5.47 ||   ||   ||   || 30.71 ||   || 48.55 || 61.11 || 109.66 
   ||   || Comoros ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.03 ||   || 0.03 || 6.39 || 6.41 
   ||   || Congo, Dem. Rep. ||   ||   || 13.92 ||   || 1.76 || 7.72 ||   || 15.27 ||   || 68.25 ||   || 106.92 || 124.94 || 231.87 
   ||   || Congo, Rep. ||   ||   || 4.31 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.20 ||   || 4.51 || 9.53 || 14.04 
   ||   || Cote d'Ivoire ||   ||   || 4.58 ||   || 0.07 || 0.60 ||   ||   ||   || 11.81 || 0.60 || 17.67 || 85.91 || 103.57 
   ||   || Djibouti ||   ||   || 0.09 ||   || 0.12 ||   ||   || 5.94 ||   || 2.05 ||   || 8.20 || 15.43 || 23.63 
   ||   || Equatorial Guinea ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.17 || 0.17 
   ||   || Eritrea ||   ||   || 1.64 ||   || 0.10 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.73 || 8.06 || 9.79 
   ||   || Ethiopia ||   ||   || 6.48 || 0.23 || 0.78 || 4.78 ||   || 0.29 ||   || 39.75 ||   || 52.32 || 48.65 || 100.97 
   ||   || Gabon ||   ||   || 1.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.00 || 4.62 || 5.62 
   ||   || Gambia ||   ||   || 0.57 ||   || 0.01 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.43 ||   || 2.01 || 10.63 || 12.64 
   ||   || Ghana ||   ||   || 1.28 ||   || 0.61 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.22 || 0.01 || 2.11 || 22.94 || 25.04 
   ||   || Guinea ||   ||   || 2.53 ||   || 1.88 || 4.51 ||   ||   ||   || 0.44 ||   || 9.36 || 22.10 || 31.46 
   ||   || Guinea-Bissau ||   ||   || 3.86 ||   || 0.48 || 2.06 ||   ||   ||   || 0.12 ||   || 6.51 || 7.60 || 14.12 
   ||   || Kenya ||   ||   || 31.30 ||   || 3.64 || 0.82 ||   ||   ||   || 35.43 || 0.09 || 71.29 || 84.64 || 155.93 
   ||   || Lesotho ||   ||   || 0.50 ||   || 0.16 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.24 ||   || 0.90 || 37.07 || 37.97 
   ||   || Liberia ||   ||   || 4.14 ||   ||   || 0.29 ||   ||   ||   || 5.42 ||   || 9.85 || 18.55 || 28.40 
   ||   || Madagascar ||   ||   || 3.95 ||   || 4.58 || 0.48 ||   ||   ||   || 0.54 ||   || 9.55 || 48.28 || 57.83 
   ||   || Malawi ||   ||   || 5.60 ||   || 0.05 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.27 ||   || 5.92 || 75.17 || 81.09 
   ||   || Mali ||   ||   || 2.88 ||   || 5.07 || 16.37 ||   ||   ||   || 41.33 ||   || 65.65 || 157.84 || 223.49 
   ||   || Mauritania ||   ||   || 2.21 ||   || 0.11 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 12.60 ||   || 14.92 || 45.26 || 60.18 
   ||   || Mauritius ||   ||   || 27.89 ||   ||   || 0.27 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 28.16 || 1.83 || 29.99 
   ||   || Mozambique ||   ||   || 8.20 || 0.33 || 0.33 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2.61 ||   || 11.46 || 86.71 || 98.17 
   ||   || Namibia ||   ||   || 1.44 ||   || 0.50 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.24 ||   || 2.17 || 29.12 || 31.29 
   ||   || Niger ||   ||   || 1.54 ||   || 0.16 || 4.46 ||   || 6.80 ||   || 37.37 ||   || 50.33 || 87.98 || 138.31 
   ||   || Nigeria ||   ||   || 1.11 ||   || 0.52 || 6.37 ||   ||   ||   || 8.70 ||   || 16.70 || 81.16 || 97.86 
   ||   || Rwanda ||   ||   || 2.96 ||   || 0.47 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.93 ||   || 4.36 || 86.53 || 90.89 
   ||   || St.Helena ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 5.80 || 5.80 
   ||   || Sao Tome & Principe ||   ||   || 1.27 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.27 || 4.61 || 5.88 
   ||   || Senegal ||   ||   || 2.87 ||   || 0.08 || 1.28 ||   ||   ||   || 6.06 ||   || 10.29 || 39.95 || 50.24 
   ||   || Seychelles ||   ||   || 0.16 ||   || 0.03 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.18 || 1.89 || 2.07 
   ||   || Sierra Leone ||   ||   || 8.37 || 1.24 || 0.06 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.92 ||   || 10.59 || 46.57 || 57.15 
   ||   || Somalia ||   ||   || 7.09 ||   || 0.34 || 0.15 ||   ||   ||   || 54.39 || 0.09 || 62.05 || 52.54 || 114.60 
   ||   || South Africa ||   || 125.04 || 2.19 ||   || 0.43 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.99 || 128.65 ||   || 128.65 
   ||   || Sudan ||   ||   || 9.68 ||   || 1.33 || 3.30 ||   ||   ||   || 66.35 ||   || 80.67 || 9.07 || 89.74 
   ||   || Sudan ||   ||   || 0.38 ||   || 0.08 || 1.51 ||   || 5.48 ||   || 76.49 ||   || 83.95 || 12.70 || 96.64 
   ||   || Swaziland ||   ||   || 24.13 ||   || 0.31 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 24.44 || 3.77 || 28.21 
   ||   || Tanzania ||   ||   || 2.78 ||   || 0.21 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2.92 ||   || 5.91 || 74.08 || 79.99 
   ||   || Togo ||   ||   || 0.89 ||   || 0.24 || 0.58 ||   ||   ||   || 0.01 ||   || 1.72 || 22.97 || 24.69 
   ||   || Uganda ||   ||   || 6.72 ||   || 0.51 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2.26 ||   || 9.49 || 55.44 || 64.93 
   ||   || Zambia ||   ||   || 3.44 ||   || 0.05 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 3.50 || 47.36 || 50.85 
   ||   || Zimbabwe ||   ||   || 20.02 ||   || 2.32 || 4.53 ||   ||   ||   || 4.52 ||   || 31.39 || 35.90 || 67.29 
   ||   || South Of Sahara, Regional ||   || 0.02 || 27.94 || 0.29 || 2.85 || 3.56 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.91 || 35.57 || 243.17 || 278.74 
   || Africa, Regional || 0.90 || 0.73 || 28.32 ||   || 1.76 || 2.27 ||   || 4.74 ||   ||   || 5.58 || 44.28 || 150.18 || 194.47 
 America, Total ||   || 294.86 || 155.53 ||   || 19.28 || 12.47 || 2.46 ||   ||   || 84.74 || 9.70 || 579.04 || 139.47 || 718.51 
   || North & Central, Total ||   || 93.02 || 86.86 ||   || 8.34 || 4.20 || 0.42 ||   ||   || 54.82 || 5.03 || 252.69 || 131.30 || 383.99 
   ||   || Anguilla ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 3.81 || 3.81 
   ||   || Antigua & Barbuda ||   ||   || 0.16 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.02 ||   || 0.18 || 0.65 || 0.83 
   ||   || Belize ||   ||   || 6.69 ||   || 0.07 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.02 || 0.34 || 7.13 || 5.27 || 12.39 
   ||   || Costa Rica ||   || 5.57 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.06 ||   || 5.63 ||   || 5.63 
   ||   || Cuba ||   || 2.83 || 3.68 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 3.22 ||   || 9.73 ||   || 9.73 
   ||   || Dominica ||   ||   || 0.41 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.31 || 1.44 || 2.16 || 6.68 || 8.84 
   ||   || Dominican Republic ||   ||   || 4.00 ||   || 0.22 || 0.24 ||   ||   ||   || 2.01 ||   || 6.47 || 32.11 || 38.58 
   ||   || El Salvador ||   || 20.54 || 1.75 ||   || 0.68 || 0.72 ||   ||   ||   || 1.57 ||   || 25.26 ||   || 25.26 
   ||   || Grenada ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.33 || 0.00 || 0.33 || 0.15 || 0.48 
   ||   || Guatemala ||   || 9.72 || 5.62 ||   || 0.57 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 3.02 ||   || 18.93 ||   || 18.93 
   ||   || Haiti ||   ||   || 5.59 ||   || 0.54 || 1.10 ||   ||   ||   || 38.53 || 0.23 || 45.99 || 33.30 || 79.30 
   ||   || Honduras ||   || 9.39 || 1.90 ||   || 2.83 || 0.02 ||   ||   ||   || 1.79 ||   || 15.93 ||   || 15.93 
   ||   || Jamaica ||   ||   || 25.97 ||   || 0.69 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.47 || 0.32 || 27.45 || 22.05 || 49.50 
   ||   || Mexico ||   || 2.30 || 1.96 ||   || 0.57 ||   || 0.42 ||   ||   || 0.44 ||   || 5.69 ||   || 5.69 
   ||   || Montserrat ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 4.70 || 4.70 
   ||   || Nicaragua ||   || 32.42 || 10.69 ||   || 0.75 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2.40 ||   || 46.25 ||   || 46.25 
   ||   || Panama ||   || 2.32 ||   ||   || 0.01 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.07 ||   || 2.41 ||   || 2.41 
   ||   || St.Kitts-Nevis ||   ||   || 10.71 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.05 ||   || 10.76 || 0.18 || 10.94 
   ||   || St.Lucia ||   ||   || 0.41 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.11 || 1.69 || 2.21 || 7.88 || 10.10 
   ||   || St.Vincent & Grenadines ||   ||   || 0.87 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.31 || 0.94 || 2.11 || 1.95 || 4.06 
   ||   || West Indies, Regional ||   ||   || 0.28 ||   || 0.48 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.76 || 11.07 || 11.83 
   ||   || N. & C. America, Regional ||   || 7.93 || 6.17 ||   || 0.93 || 2.12 ||   ||   ||   || 0.08 || 0.07 || 17.30 || 1.50 || 18.81 
   || South, Total ||   || 170.06 || 64.15 ||   || 10.39 || 7.87 || 2.04 ||   ||   || 29.91 || 3.44 || 287.85 || 8.17 || 296.02 
   ||   || Argentina ||   || 4.09 || 0.37 ||   || 0.44 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.09 ||   || 5.99 ||   || 5.99 
   ||   || Bolivia ||   || 48.82 || 7.12 ||   || 0.34 || 1.68 ||   ||   ||   || 3.89 ||   || 61.85 ||   || 61.85 
   ||   || Brazil ||   || 6.76 || 8.34 ||   || 1.06 ||   || 0.84 ||   ||   || 0.40 || 0.49 || 17.89 ||   || 17.89 
   ||   || Chile ||   || 1.03 || 2.21 ||   || 0.39 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.82 ||   || 4.45 ||   || 4.45 
   ||   || Colombia ||   || 18.56 || 3.78 ||   || 1.46 || 5.05 ||   ||   ||   || 12.79 ||   || 41.65 ||   || 41.65 
   ||   || Ecuador ||   || 12.39 || 4.05 ||   || 0.30 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 3.29 ||   || 20.03 ||   || 20.03 
   ||   || Guyana ||   ||   || 20.66 ||   || 0.17 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.11 ||   || 20.95 || 3.30 || 24.25 
   ||   || Paraguay ||   || 8.94 || 1.49 ||   || 2.69 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2.34 ||   || 15.46 ||   || 15.46 
   ||   || Peru ||   || 21.24 || 4.55 ||   || 0.61 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 3.48 ||   || 29.87 ||   || 29.87 
   ||   || Suriname ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.11 || 0.18 || 0.29 || 4.87 || 5.16 
   ||   || Uruguay ||   || 4.77 || 0.40 ||   || 0.52 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.15 ||   || 5.84 ||   || 5.84 
   ||   || Venezuela ||   || 0.61 || 1.10 ||   || 0.53 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.20 ||   || 3.44 ||   || 3.44 
   ||   || South America, Regional ||   || 42.85 || 10.07 ||   || 1.88 || 1.14 || 1.20 ||   ||   || 0.25 || 2.77 || 60.15 ||   || 60.15 
   || America, Regional ||   || 31.79 || 4.53 ||   || 0.55 || 0.40 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.23 || 38.50 ||   || 38.50 
 Asia, Total || 548.40 || 601.49 || 141.79 ||   || 34.28 || 73.49 || 4.42 || 98.90 || 0.00 || 468.99 || 8.53 || 1,980.29 || 12.39 || 1,992.68 
   || Middle East, Total || 457.03 || 29.23 || 26.59 ||   || 5.80 || 40.09 || 0.21 || 36.50 ||   || 298.08 || 1.49 || 895.02 ||   || 895.02 
   ||   || Iran ||   ||   || 0.57 ||   || 0.38 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.88 ||   || 2.83 ||   || 2.83 
   ||   || Iraq ||   || 10.26 ||   ||   || 0.16 || 2.07 ||   || 26.73 ||   || 24.28 ||   || 63.50 ||   || 63.50 
   ||   || Jordan || 96.36 || 2.87 || 1.11 ||   || 0.25 || 0.18 || 0.21 ||   ||   || 66.77 || 0.05 || 167.80 ||   || 167.80 
   ||   || Lebanon || 64.13 ||   || 1.72 ||   || 0.56 || 14.55 ||   ||   ||   || 54.70 || 0.41 || 136.06 ||   || 136.06 
   ||   || Palestine || 211.18 ||   || 15.65 ||   || 0.54 || 2.56 ||   || 9.30 ||   || 30.70 || 0.37 || 270.30 ||   || 270.30 
   ||   || Syria || 29.50 ||   || 0.06 ||   || 2.01 || 18.75 ||   ||   ||   || 86.76 ||   || 137.08 ||   || 137.08 
   ||   || Yemen ||   || 15.26 || 6.95 ||   || 0.79 || 1.24 ||   ||   ||   || 32.99 || 0.08 || 57.31 ||   || 57.31 
   ||   || Middle East, Regional || 55.85 || 0.83 || 0.52 ||   || 1.11 || 0.75 ||   || 0.47 ||   ||   || 0.59 || 60.13 ||   || 60.13 
   || South & Centr. Asia, Total || 91.24 || 397.00 || 66.31 ||   || 20.17 || 30.45 || 3.91 || 62.39 || 0.00 || 149.96 || 1.35 || 822.79 ||   || 822.79 
   ||   || Afghanistan ||   || 106.20 || 6.62 ||   || 0.58 || 3.24 ||   || 38.69 ||   || 33.08 ||   || 188.41 ||   || 188.41 
   ||   || Armenia || 27.73 ||   || 5.05 ||   || 1.48 ||   || 3.00 ||   ||   || 0.19 || 0.12 || 37.58 ||   || 37.58 
   ||   || Azerbaijan || 10.97 || 0.44 || 0.82 ||   || 0.80 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.07 ||   || 13.09 ||   || 13.09 
   ||   || Bangladesh ||   || 55.97 || 16.50 ||   || 1.19 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 16.70 ||   || 90.36 ||   || 90.36 
   ||   || Bhutan ||   || 3.52 || 0.10 ||   || 0.11 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.44 ||   || 4.16 ||   || 4.16 
   ||   || Georgia || 48.89 ||   || 4.47 ||   || 1.80 || 3.60 || 0.63 || 22.63 ||   || 0.43 ||   || 82.44 ||   || 82.44 
   ||   || India ||   || 63.33 || 4.73 ||   || 1.16 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 10.56 || 0.92 || 80.70 ||   || 80.70 
   ||   || Kazakhstan || 0.25 || 9.19 || 0.74 ||   || 0.25 || 0.06 ||   ||   ||   || 0.21 ||   || 10.71 ||   || 10.71 
   ||   || Kyrgyz Rep. ||   || 21.70 || 1.58 ||   || 0.84 || 2.10 ||   ||   ||   || 0.00 || 0.05 || 26.27 ||   || 26.27 
   ||   || Maldives ||   || 0.12 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.12 ||   || 0.12 
   ||   || Myanmar (Burma) ||   || 13.73 || 5.49 ||   || 1.93 || 14.51 ||   ||   ||   || 18.14 || 0.06 || 53.87 ||   || 53.87 
   ||   || Nepal ||   || 18.67 || 4.53 ||   || 3.05 || 0.16 ||   ||   ||   || 3.78 ||   || 30.19 ||   || 30.19 
   ||   || Pakistan ||   || 32.11 || 7.48 ||   || 4.59 || 4.00 ||   ||   ||   || 58.70 ||   || 106.88 ||   || 106.88 
   ||   || Sri Lanka ||   || 23.15 || 1.54 ||   || 0.27 || 0.14 ||   ||   ||   || 7.14 ||   || 32.24 ||   || 32.24 
   ||   || Tajikistan ||   || 11.77 || 0.75 ||   || 0.26 || 0.14 ||   ||   ||   || 0.53 ||   || 13.45 ||   || 13.45 
   ||   || Turkmenistan ||   || 2.23 ||   ||   || 0.01 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.00 ||   || 2.24 ||   || 2.24 
   ||   || Uzbekistan ||   || 8.68 ||   ||   || 0.22 ||   || 0.28 ||   ||   || 0.00 ||   || 9.18 ||   || 9.18 
   ||   || Central Asia, Regional || 2.64 || 22.91 || 3.44 ||   || 1.17 || 1.52 ||   || 1.07 ||   ||   || 0.20 || 32.95 ||   || 32.95 
   ||   || South Asia, Regional ||   || 1.46 || 1.30 ||   || 0.31 || 0.82 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 3.89 ||   || 3.89 
   ||   || South & Central Asia, Regional || 0.76 || 1.81 || 1.17 ||   || 0.16 || 0.14 ||   ||   || 0.00 ||   ||   || 4.05 ||   || 4.05 
   || Far East, Total ||   || 137.38 || 35.16 ||   || 7.06 || 2.95 || 0.30 ||   ||   || 20.95 || 1.32 || 205.12 || 12.39 || 217.51 
   ||   || Cambodia ||   || 14.02 || 6.14 ||   || 1.72 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.15 ||   || 23.03 ||   || 23.03 
   ||   || China ||   || 26.50 || 3.70 ||   || 1.74 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.79 || 32.73 ||   || 32.73 
   ||   || Indonesia ||   || 46.11 || 2.77 ||   || 0.96 || 0.19 ||   ||   ||   || 0.55 ||   || 50.58 || 0.00 || 50.58 
   ||   || Korea, Dem. ||   || 0.05 || 7.40 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2.26 ||   || 9.72 ||   || 9.72 
   ||   || Laos ||   || 5.22 || 2.40 ||   || 0.15 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.74 ||   || 8.51 ||   || 8.51 
   ||   || Malaysia ||   || 1.37 || 0.19 ||   || 0.02 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.54 || 2.11 ||   || 2.11 
   ||   || Mongolia ||   || 2.23 || 1.09 ||   || 0.35 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.04 ||   || 3.71 ||   || 3.71 
   ||   || Philippines ||   || 8.28 || 3.05 ||   || 0.72 || 1.76 || 0.30 ||   ||   || 9.88 ||   || 23.99 ||   || 23.99 
   ||   || Thailand ||   || 5.49 || 3.41 ||   || 0.01 || 0.23 ||   ||   ||   || 5.82 ||   || 14.96 ||   || 14.96 
   ||   || Timor-Leste ||   || 0.28 || 1.93 ||   ||   || 0.22 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2.42 || 12.39 || 14.81 
   ||   || Viet Nam ||   || 24.11 || 2.57 ||   || 1.04 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.51 ||   || 28.22 ||   || 28.22 
   ||   || Far East Asia, Regional ||   || 3.73 || 0.51 ||   || 0.35 || 0.56 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 5.15 ||   || 5.15 
   || Asia, Regional || 0.14 || 37.88 || 13.73 ||   || 1.24 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 4.37 || 57.36 ||   || 57.36 
 Oceania, Total ||   ||   || 11.22 ||   || 1.14 || 0.51 ||   ||   ||   || 5.41 ||   || 18.27 || 53.90 || 72.18 
   ||   || Cook Islands ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.04 ||   || 0.04 || 0.26 || 0.30 
   ||   || Fiji ||   ||   || 4.97 ||   || 0.59 || 0.40 ||   ||   ||   || 0.59 ||   || 6.55 || 3.14 || 9.70 
   ||   || Kiribati ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.04 ||   || 0.04 || 2.76 || 2.80 
   ||   || Marshall Islands ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.13 ||   || 0.13 || 0.09 || 0.23 
   ||   || Micronesia, Fed. Sts. ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.07 ||   || 0.07 || 0.61 || 0.68 
   ||   || Nauru ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.01 ||   || 0.01 || 0.84 || 0.85 
   ||   || Niue ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.01 ||   || 0.01 || 0.40 || 0.41 
   ||   || Palau ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.04 ||   || 0.04 || 0.00 || 0.04 
   ||   || Papua New Guinea ||   ||   || 0.71 ||   || 0.24 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.09 ||   || 2.04 || 3.99 || 6.03 
   ||   || Samoa ||   ||   || 1.50 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.99 ||   || 2.49 || 0.78 || 3.28 
   ||   || Solomon Islands ||   ||   || 0.43 ||   || 0.15 || 0.11 ||   ||   ||   || 0.85 ||   || 1.55 || 4.77 || 6.32 
   ||   || Tokelau ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.01 ||   || 0.01 ||   || 0.01 
   ||   || Tonga ||   ||   || 0.00 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.09 ||   || 0.09 || 0.41 || 0.50 
   ||   || Tuvalu ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.01 ||   || 0.01 || 1.89 || 1.91 
   ||   || Vanuatu ||   ||   || 0.23 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.84 ||   || 1.07 || 2.72 || 3.79 
   ||   || Wallis & Futuna ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2.32 || 2.32 
   ||   || Oceania, Regional ||   ||   || 3.37 ||   || 0.15 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.59 ||   || 4.11 || 28.90 || 33.01 
 Bilateral unallocated || 23.91 || 0.02 || 126.87 || 2.86 || 6.45 || 12.09 || 9.81 || 6.02 || 15.74 || 45.74 || 12.13 || 261.64 || 85.45 || 347.09 
 Part I (ODA) Bilateral, Total || 1,162.37 || 1,024.31 || 819.37 || 4.94 || 123.06 || 180.05 || 38.12 || 276.19 || 987.03 || 1,197.56 || 46.65 || 5,859.66 || 2,693.10 || 8,552.75 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Public Private Partnerships ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 United Nations || 91.13 ||   || 1.25 ||   || 7.80 || 1.67 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 4.51 || 106.35 ||   || 106.35 
   ||   || UNRWA || 91.13 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 91.13 ||   || 91.13 
   ||   || UNDP ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || WFP ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || WHO ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.51 || 0.51 ||   || 0.51 
   ||   || FAO ||   ||   || 0.50 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.98 || 1.48 ||   || 1.48 
 International Monetary Fund (IMF) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 World Bank Group ||   ||   || 1.25 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.25 || 50.60 || 51.85 
 World Trade Organisation ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.67 || 1.67 ||   || 1.67 
 Regional Development Banks ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 11.56 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 11.56 ||   || 11.56 
 Other Multilateral Institutions ||   || 0.44 || 4.67 ||   ||   ||   || 1.10 ||   ||   ||   || 0.44 || 6.66 ||   || 6.66 
   ||   || GFTAM ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Others ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   Part I (ODA) Multilateral Aid,Total || 91.13 || 0.44 || 7.17 ||   || 7.80 || 1.67 || 12.66 ||   ||   ||   || 6.62 || 127.49 || 50.60 || 178.09 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
    Part I (ODA), Total || 1,253.49 || 1,024.75 || 826.55 || 4.94 || 130.86 || 181.72 || 50.78 || 276.19 || 987.03 || 1,197.56 || 53.27 || 5,987.15 || 2,743.70 || 8,730.85 
 Part II: Countries and Territories in Transition (non ODA) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 More Advanced Developing Countries || 11.89 || 0.42 || 20.03 ||   || 1.66 || 5.05 ||   || 9.09 || 5.35 ||   || 39.63 || 93.13 || 59.99 || 153.12 
   ||   || Aruba ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2.17 || 2.17 
   ||   || Barbados ||   ||   || 2.96 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.05 || 3.01 || 5.29 || 8.29 
   ||   || Bahrain ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Bahamas ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.04 || 0.04 
   ||   || Bermuda ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Brunei ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Cayman Islands ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Taiwan ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Falkland Islands ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.03 || 1.03 
   ||   || French Polynesia ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 10.77 || 10.77 
   ||   || Gibraltar ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Hong Kong, China ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Israel || 3.60 ||   || 0.77 ||   || 1.45 ||   ||   ||   || 0.26 ||   ||   || 6.09 ||   || 6.09 
   ||   || Korea ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Kuwait ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Macao ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Mayotte ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 26.51 || 26.51 
   ||   || Netherlands Antilles ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.07 || 0.07 
   ||   || New Caledonia ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.10 || 0.10 
   ||   || Oman ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Pitcairn Islands ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.16 || 1.16 
   ||   || Qatar ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Saint Pierre and Miquelon ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 6.90 || 6.90 
   ||   || Saudi Arabia ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Singapore ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Trinidad & Tobago ||   ||   || 15.46 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 15.46 || 4.75 || 20.21 
   ||   || Turks & Caicos Islands ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.37 || 0.37 
   ||   || United Arab Emirates ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Virgin Islands (UK) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.32 || 0.32 
   ||   || MADCT Unallocated || 8.29 || 0.42 || 0.84 ||   || 0.21 || 5.05 ||   || 9.09 || 5.09 ||   || 39.58 || 68.57 || 0.51 || 69.08 
 CEEC's/NIS || 68.61 || 4.63 || 3.17 ||   || 3.81 ||   || 1.13 || 1.71 || 219.87 ||   || 58.97 || 361.90 || 0.02 || 361.92 
   ||   || Bulgaria ||   ||   || 0.01 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 10.68 ||   ||   || 10.70 ||   || 10.70 
   ||   || Croatia || 0.55 ||   ||   ||   || 1.57 ||   ||   ||   || 166.86 ||   || 12.84 || 181.82 ||   || 181.82 
   ||   || Cyprus ||   || 1.25 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.71 ||   ||   || 18.02 || 20.98 ||   || 20.98 
   ||   || Czech Republic ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.00 || 0.00 ||   || 0.00 
   ||   || Estonia || 1.63 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1.63 ||   || 1.63 
   ||   || Greenland ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 26.35 || 26.35 ||   || 26.35 
   ||   || Hungary ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.02 || 0.02 ||   || 0.02 
   ||   || Latvia ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Lithuania || 0.88 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.88 ||   || 0.88 
   ||   || Iceland ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.71 ||   ||   || 0.71 ||   || 0.71 
   ||   || Malta ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Poland || 4.25 || 1.85 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.00 ||   || 0.06 || 6.16 ||   || 6.16 
   ||   || Romania || 9.88 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 24.64 ||   ||   || 34.52 ||   || 34.52 
   ||   || Russia || 21.07 || 0.28 || 2.48 ||   || 1.71 ||   || 1.13 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 26.67 ||   || 26.67 
   ||   || Slovak Republic ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Slovenia ||   || 1.25 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.67 ||   || 0.04 || 1.95 ||   || 1.95 
   ||   || Europe Unallocated || 30.35 ||   || 0.67 ||   || 0.53 ||   ||   ||   || 16.31 ||   || 1.63 || 49.49 || 0.02 || 49.52 
   ||   || CEECs Unallocated ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Part II (Non-OA) Bilateral Aid, Total || 80.51 || 5.05 || 23.20 ||   || 5.47 || 5.05 || 1.13 || 10.80 || 225.22 ||   || 98.60 || 455.03 || 60.01 || 515.04 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || EBRD ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Part II (non-ODA) Multilateral Aid, Total ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   Part II (non-ODA), Total || 80.51 || 5.05 || 23.20 ||   || 5.47 || 5.05 || 1.13 || 10.80 || 225.22 ||   || 98.60 || 455.03 || 60.01 || 515.04 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Total Part I & Part II || 1,334.00 || 1,029.80 || 849.75 || 4.94 || 136.32 || 186.77 || 51.91 || 286.99 || 1,212.26 || 1,197.56 || 151.87 || 6,442.17 || 2,803.71 || 9,245.88 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 BA Lines || 54.03 || 56.56 || 43.94 ||   || 10.45 || 7.81 || 1.14 || 0.05 || 50.66 || 8.57 || 7.42 || 240.62 ||   || 240.62 
 Other Flows || 11.66 || 2.48 || 2.12 || 0.00 || 0.01 || 24.25 ||   || 25.23 || 39.81 ||   || 178.02 || 283.60 || 246.76 || 530.35 
 Total Flows || 1,399.69 || 1,088.84 || 895.82 || 4.94 || 146.79 || 218.83 || 53.05 || 312.26 || 1,302.72 || 1,206.13 || 337.31 || 6,966.39 || 3,050.47 || 10,016.85 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || Breakdown by country/region of external aid financed on the General Commission Budget in 2013. 
   ||   || Bilateral and Multilateral ODA / non-ODA flows. 
   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || (1) DCI - Geo : Asia, Latin America, South Africa 
   ||   || (2) DCI - Thema : Migration, Food security, Non-state actors, Environment, Human & social development, ACP sugar programmes 
   ||   || (3) Food Facility : Facility for rapid response to soaring food prices in developing countries, Pilot project — Finance for agricultural production 
   ||   || (4) CFSP is financed on the General Commission Budget managed by DG External Relations 
   ||   || (5) UNSCR 1244/99 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
   ||   || (6) henceforth Moldova ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||