JOINT CONSULTATION PAPER Towards a new partnership between the European Union and the African, Caribbean and Pacific countries after 2020
Date: 2015-10-06
Institutions: Directorate-General for International Cooperation and Development, European Commission
Subjects: ACP countries, ACP-EU relationship, EU aid, cooperation policy, development aid, economic development, migration, poverty, sustainable development

EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION 

HIGH REPRESENTATIVE
OF THE UNION FOR
FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND
SECURITY POLICY

Strasbourg, 6.10.2015  
JOIN(2015) 33 final 

JOINT CONSULTATION PAPER 

Towards a new partnership between the European Union 
and 
the African, Caribbean and Pacific countries after 2020 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
  
 
I. Introduction: A valued partnership 

The purpose of this document is to initiate a broad public consultation, on the key questions 
pertaining to the partnership and relations after 2020, between the European Union (EU) and 
the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States1 (ACP). In this regard, it 
is important to take stock of the current Partnership Agreement, to explore the extent to which 
it  remains  valid  for  the  future  and  offers  a  platform  to  advance  joint  interests. A  thorough 
review  is  needed  of  the  assumptions  on  which  the  partnership  is  based,  of  its  scope, 
instruments and ways of working. The outcomes will form a major component of the analysis 
and as such contribute to evaluate the current Agreement and to set out policy proposals for 
the future relationship.  

Relations between the EU and the ACP are longstanding, dating back to before 1975 and the 
first Lomé convention. The latter was a successor to the first Convention of Yaoundé in 1963 
binding the then European Economic Community and former colonies of some of its Member 
States. Successive partnership agreements have shaped the relationship up to the present time.  

The current ACP-EC Partnership Agreement was signed on 23 June 2000 in Cotonou, Benin – 
hence the name 'Cotonou Partnership Agreement' (CPA). It was revised in 2005 and 2010, in 
accordance with its provisions. It was concluded for a twenty-year period and will expire on 
29  February  2020.  The  partnership  is  comprehensive;  it  includes  a  political  dimension, 
economic  and  trade  cooperation  as  well  as  development  finance  cooperation.  It  is  mainly 
financed  by  the  European  Development  Fund  (EDF),  an  extra-budgetary  multiannual  fund 
composed  of  direct  contributions  from  EU  Member  States  and  is  complemented  in  parts  by 
the external financing instruments sourced from the EU budget. The CPA is a legally binding 
agreement; it establishes joint institutions and provides a framework for dialogue with each of 
its members. In fact, the Agreements with the ACP have been a central piece of EU external 
policy for many years. 

A rapidly evolving context  

This  review  of ACP-EU  relations  is  taking  place  in  a  fast-changing  and  increasingly  multi-
polar world. The forces governing the global transformation that started in the early 1990s are 
reshaping the world ever more strongly and rapidly. The world is becoming more populated, 
connected,  interdependent,  complex  and  with  new  security  challenges.  Global  trade  has 
increased  and  diversified  tremendously.  Asia's  growing  economic  and  political  importance 
looks  set  to  continue,  together  with  the  emergence  of  other  economic  powers  in Africa  and 
Latin America. 

Over the last two decades the EU and the ACP Group of States have both evolved, and major 
developments have taken place within the relationship. The Group of ACP States has grown 
to 79, and the EU has increased its members to 28, together representing a majority of states 
within the United Nations and a total population of some 1.5 billion people. The relationship 
has long since expanded beyond development cooperation and trade. The partnership with the 

1 The African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States was created by the Georgetown Agreement in 1975. 

2 

 
                                                            
three  regions  that  compose  the  ACP  Group  has  been  strengthened  outside  -  although  in 
synergy  with  -  the  Cotonou  Agreement.  This  is  reflected  by  the  Africa-EU  strategic 
partnership2, the joint Caribbean-EU partnership strategy3 and the strategy for a strengthened 
the  Pacific  Islands4.  Cooperation  with  regional  and  sub-regional 
partnership  with 
organisations has been stepped up as well, particularly on economic matters and in the area of 
peace and security. Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) have been concluded, defining 
a new framework for trade relations with regional groups of ACP countries.  

At  the  international  level,  a  new  global  framework  on  Sustainable  Development  Goals 
(SDGs) and its financing has been adopted in September 2015, addressing at the same time 
the  interlinked  challenges  of  poverty  eradication  and  sustainable  development.  It  is 
underpinned  by  a  new  'global  partnership',  mobilising  all  means  of  implementation  and  all 
actors. Intended to apply universally to all countries, it reflects a dramatic change in outlook 
on development and will impact on future ACP-EU relations.  

As  regards  economic  performance,  the  situation  across  the  ACP  Group  is  varied.  All 
Caribbean countries, except Haiti, have reached middle- or high income status but still face 
major  challenges,  in  particular  related  to  their  vulnerability  to  external  shocks  and  natural 
disasters. Pacific states have experienced very diverse economic development and most face 
serious constraints due to their size and location. They are also facing similar vulnerabilities 
to  the  Caribbean  countries.  Africa  overall  has  seen  strong  economic  performance  and  a 
majority of countries have enjoyed ten or more years of high uninterrupted economic growth. 
The fight against poverty within the ACP countries has advanced, as reflected by the progress 
made  towards  the  Millennium  Development  Goals  (MDGs).  Major  challenges  in  regard  to 
human development, poverty eradication, and inequality remain – which in some parts have 
spilled  over  into  open  conflict,  increased  fragility,  protracted  crisis  and  increased  migration 
flows globally. Linkages with regional and global value chains have been limited, particularly 
for Least Developed Countries (LDCs). 

II. Shared principles and common interests (the 'what') 

The initial emphasis of the ACP-EU partnership was on development aid and trade matters, 
reflecting a donor-recipient relationship. As circumstances and the relationship have changed, 
the  partnership  has  come  to  focus  on  pursuing  common  interests.  The  CPA  signed  in  2000 
significantly  strengthened  the  political  pillar  of  the  partnership  through  the  inclusion  of  a 
substantive political dialogue with the ACP countries and regions. However, it has not been 
quite  successful  in  bringing  the  EU  and  the  ACP  Group  together  as  joint  partners  on  the 

2 Based on the Joint Africa-Europe Strategy adopted by Heads of State and Government at the second EU-Africa Summit in 

2007. The current Roadmap 2014-2017 was agreed at the 4th EU-Africa Summit in 2014. 

3 In November 2012 the EU Council endorsed the Joint EU-Caribbean Partnership Strategy, which had been developed on 
the basis of the decision of the May 2010 EU-CARIFORUM Summit in Madrid. CARIFORUM Ministers endorsed the 
new Strategy at their annual ministerial meeting in November 2012. 

4 COM(2006) 248 final 

3 

 
 
                                                            
international scene. The CPA also introduced a peace and security dimension that has evolved 
fastest in the Africa-EU partnership, whilst the growing cooperation on citizen security with 
the Caribbean and on climate risk and gender equality in the Pacific, bears further testament 
to this evolution. The conclusion of EPAs with a majority of ACP States has transformed the  
trade pillar of the CPA into a multi-pronged relationship with a number of regional groupings.  

The  future  relationship  will  have  to  adapt  to  the  new  realities  of  a  multi-dimensional  and 
multi-stakeholder partnership. Bearing in mind that best results are obtained when the agenda 
of  the  EU  and ACP  partners  is  truly  shared,  identification  of  strong  common  interests  and 
shared  values  is  crucial  to  the  future  direction  of  the  partnership. A  preliminary  assessment 
points  to  the  following  main  common  interests  and  shared  principles,  requiring  further 
consultation and reflection. 

Common global interests in a multipolar world  

Robust  political  alliances  based  on  common  interests  and  shared  values  form  the  basis  of 
successful cooperation on global issues. ACP countries and the EU have a common interest in 
promoting  sustainable  management  of  global  public  goods  and  challenges  such  as  climate 
change  and  water-,  energy-  or  food  security.  Other  global  challenges  with  an  impact  across 
the  board  in  EU  and  ACP  countries  include  peace  and  security  (including  terrorism, 
extremism and international criminality), environment (in particular biodiversity), migration, 
health, and financial issues (including international financial architecture, financial flows and 
taxation).  

Climate change provides a clear example of an area in which the EU is a world frontrunner 
and in which the ACP countries have a particular interest as its consequences will hit some of 
these regions hard. A new global agreement on climate change is expected to be adopted in 
December this year and the active involvement of ACP countries is crucial in this respect.  At 
the same time, many ACP countries have great potential for renewable energy production and 
blue growth, areas where significant private sector investment will be required.  

1. To which degree has the partnership been effective in tackling global challenges?  

2. What would be needed to strengthen results in this respect and on which global challenges 
could the partnership add most value in the future, in the context of the new SDGs framework 
and in relevant international fora? 

Human rights, democracy and rule of law, as well as good governance  

Respect  for  human  rights,  democracy  and  the  rule  of  law,  as  well  as  good  governance 
constitute  the  foundation  of  the  ACP-EU  partnership.  These  values  are  crucial  for  a 
sustainable  development  model.  Progress  is  being  made,  but  many  challenges  remain.  The 
CPA  provides  for  different  forms  of  political  dialogue,  including  regular  political  dialogue 
(Article 8) as well as for intensified political dialogue and the opening of ad-hoc consultations 
if there is a breach of its essential elements (human rights, democratic principles and the rule 
of  law)  or  in  case  of  serious  cases  of  corruption  by  a  partner  country.  In  this  context,  it 

4 

 
envisages  the  adoption  of  appropriate  measures,  including  suspension  of  cooperation  as  a 
measure of last resort, if deemed necessary (Articles 96-97). Consultations in this regard have 
been opened in 24 cases since 2000, of which one in relation to corruption. 

3.  Have  the  mechanisms  provided  for  in  the  CPA  (i.e.  political  dialogue,  financial  support, 
appropriate  measures,  suspension  of  the  agreement)  achieved  meaningful  improvements  on 
human  rights,  democracy,  rule  of  law  and  good  governance,  including  the  fight  against 
corruption? Should the future partnership do more in this regard, and in what way? 

4.  Has  the  involvement  of  local  authorities  and  non-state  actors  (i.e.  civil  society 
organisations, the media), national parliaments, courts and national human rights institutions 
in the partnership been adequate and useful to promote human rights, democracy and rule of 
law as well as good governance? Could they contribute more and in what way? 

Peace and security, fight against terrorism and organised crime 

As  recognised  in  Article  11  of  the  CPA,  peace  and  security  are  required  for  sustainable 
development  and  poverty  eradication,  and  the  reverse  is  equally  true:  fragile  or  conflict-
affected countries have largely failed to meet the MDGs. Interstate violent conflict has been 
increasing. Addressing  conflict  and  fragility  requires  a  comprehensive  approach  combining 
diplomatic, security and development tools and a focus on conflict prevention, peace-building 
and  state-building  activities.  Support  for  democratic  processes  is  also  widely  assessed  as 
contributing  to  peace  and  stability.  These  broad  issues  are  an  integral  part  of  the  political 
dialogue between partners under the CPA. In addition, the EU and ACP countries have been 
confronted in recent years with trans-regional security threats related to terrorism and violent 
extremism, all forms of trafficking, including of human beings, of weapons and of drugs, as 
well  as  piracy. These  risks  are  heightened  by strong population  growth in Africa, combined 
with challenges such as rapid urbanisation, persistent or growing inequality, and high levels of 
unemployment, particularly amongst young people. Many of these challenges are interlinked 
across continents, and to address them effectively, the EU and the ACP countries have to draw 
on its variety of tools in a coherent way. 

5. Are  the  provisions  on  peace  and  security  in  the  CPA  appropriate  and  useful  and  has  the 
balance between regional and ACP involvement been effective? 

6. Should the future partnership provide for more effective joint action on conflict prevention, 
including early warning and mediation, peace-building and state-building activities, as well 
as on tackling transnational security challenges? Should this be done in the EU-ACP context? 

Sustainable and inclusive economic growth, investment and trade 

Promoting  sustainable  and  inclusive  economic  growth  is  crucial  to  long-term  economic 
development  and  poverty  reduction  and  vital  for  addressing  the  demographic  challenges. 
Although results differ by country and over time, economic performance in the ACP region 
has  been  remarkable,  creating  larger  domestic  markets  and  providing  for  new  economic 
opportunities. On the other hand, industrialisation, digitalisation and economic diversification 

5 

 
have been limited in many ACP countries. Poverty and inequalities have not been reduced as 
much as expected and underemployment and size of the informal economy have remained too 
high. Building resilience of the most vulnerable people is still a challenge. With its population 
set  to  double  by  2050  and  abundant  natural  resources, Africa's  economic  potential  remains 
globally very significant. Sustainable use of the oceans, including the rich fisheries resources, 
aquaculture  and  mineral  deposits  can  create 
  important  economic  and  investment 
opportunities.  Countries  such  as  Brazil,  China  and  India  are  strategically  positioning 
themselves  in  these  regions  with  an  increased  presence,  growing  investment  and  trade 
relations, and a growing cooperation portfolio. 

7.  How  effective  has  the  partnership  been  in  promoting  sustainable  and  inclusive  economic 
development? 

8. Taking  into  account  the  new  SGDs  framework,  should  the  future  partnership  do  more  in 
this respect, and what? 

Maintaining  macroeconomic  stability,  including  financial  system  stability,  is  a  prerequisite 
for sustained and inclusive development. Many ACP countries improved their macroeconomic 
framework  during  the  last  decade  of  high  growth  rates,  enabling  some  to  mobilise  more 
international  and  domestic  capital. The  recent  financial  and  economic  crisis  has  highlighted 
the  damage  to  living  standards  and  spill-over  effects  that  can  result  from  macroeconomic 
instability.  This  is  particularly  relevant  in  the  context  of  an  increasingly  interconnected 
economic and financial world, with many emerging economies and related financial markets.  

Despite sustained growth rates and abundant natural resources, many countries have not been 
able to collect the domestic revenues that are needed for sustainable development. Putting in 
place fair and efficient tax systems and collection authorities sets the ground for sustainable 
revenues.  However,  substantial  challenges  such  as  tax  avoidance,  tax  evasion  and  illicit 
financial flows remain. 

9.  How  effective  has  the  partnership  been  in  supporting  macroeconomic  and  financial 
stability?  In  which  areas  would  there  be  added  value  in  ACP-EU  cooperation  on 
macroeconomic and financial stability? 

10.  How  effective  has  the  partnership  been  in  improving  domestic  revenue  mobilisation,  in 
promoting fair and efficient tax systems and in combatting illicit financial flows? Would there 
be added value and more efficiency in stronger ACP-EU cooperation on these matters?  

There  is  increased  recognition  of  the  significant  potential  of  private  sector  engagement, 
together with social, traditional and cooperative forms of economy, for poverty reduction and 
sustainable  development.  Private  financial  flows,  like  remittances,  foreign  investments  and 
finance from institutional investors, are already larger than all public resources combined. To 
fully  capitalise  on  the  potential  of  the  private  sector  it  is  necessary  to  create  enabling 
conditions  for  private  initiative,  trade  and  finance,  for  sustainable  investments  and  decent 
employment creation, and to bring informal activities into the formal sector. It also requires a 

6 

 
strong commitment by companies to catalyse private sector investment in areas where market 
gaps exist and to engage in responsible practices as part of their core business strategies.  

Official  development  assistance  (ODA)  can  act  as  a  catalyst  to  unlock  private  finance  for 
sustainable development. For this purpose new instruments such as blending, debt and equity 
investments  and  other  forms  of  innovative  financing  have  been  developed,  in  particular  in 
transport  and  energy  infrastructure.  A  sustainable  energy  sector  is  crucial  for  sustainable 
development.  

The information and communication technologies sector could play a major role to leapfrog 
development,  to  bridge  the  digital  divide  and  to  develop  knowledge  societies,  as  does 
scientific and technological innovation across a broad range of areas. 

Specific attention must be paid to the agricultural and livestock sector which in many ACP 
economies employs a majority of the population. As such, it represents a sector with a major 
multiplier  effect  for  growth  and  employment,  and  for  reducing  rural  poverty.  However,  the 
development  of  the  agriculture  sector  faces  major  challenges,  such  as  climate  change,  price 
instability and meeting trading standards, such as for food safety. 

11. Has the partnership been able to contribute substantially to mobilising the private sector 
and attracting foreign direct investment?  

12.  How  could  the  potential  of  the  EU  and  ACP  private  sector  be  better  harnessed?  What 
should  be  the  main  focus  of  EU  and  ACP  private  sector  cooperation  in  a  post-Cotonou 
framework, and what might be the role of ODA in this? 

13. In this setting, what opportunities do you see for the new, digital economy?  

14.  To  what  extent  has  the  partnership  been  able  to  contribute  to  increase  agricultural 
development and trade? 

Trade and the integration of the ACP countries in the world economy have a huge potential 
effect  on  sustainable  development.  At  the  international  level  the  Doha  Round  of  trade 
liberalisation has stalled. The ACP as a whole has maintained a trading surplus with the EU in 
the  last  decade,  and  the  EU  remains  the  main  trade  and  investment  partner  of  most  ACP 
countries. However, trade diversification and trade between ACP countries has been limited. 
Emerging economies are rapidly expanding their presence. Within the context of the CPA, the 
ACP-EU trade relations have been set on a new footing with the negotiation of the reciprocal 
– but asymmetric – EPAs with a majority of ACP countries. The EPAs are fully compatible 
with the rules of the World Trade Organisation. The CPA remains the framework agreement 
for EPAs, which refer to the objectives and essential elements of the CPA. Beyond defining 
EPAs  as  the  new ACP-EU  trading  arrangements,  the  CPA  also  contains  provisions  on  trade 
cooperation,  including  on  trade  in  services  and  trade  related  areas,  which  concern  all ACP 
States.  For ACP  countries  that  are  not  party  to  EPAs,  trade  with  the  EU  is  governed  by  the 
Generalised Scheme of Preferences, including Everything But Arms for LDCs, or under Most 
Favoured Nation treatment (upper middle income countries and higher).  

7 

 
15. What has been the contribution of the partnership trade preferences to the integration of 
ACP countries in the world economy and to its development goals? 

16.  Is  there  still  a  need  for  specific  provisions  on  trade  cooperation  in  the  post-Cotonou 
framework, also taking into account the ACP countries which have not signed an EPA? If so, 
what could/should they cover? 

Human and social development  

The  world  today  is  facing  the  key  interrelated  challenges  of  eradicating  poverty,  which  is 
central to the CPA and the main objective of development cooperation under the Treaty on the 
Functioning  of  the  European  Union,  and  achieving  sustainable  development  in  its  three 
dimensions.  Progress  is  being  made  towards  the  eradication  of  poverty,  but  results  differ 
greatly  by  region  and  country.  In  many  countries,  gender  inequalities  persist  and  violence 
against women and girls continues to undermine efforts to reach all goals.  

Recurring crisis and fragility, as well as a variety of possible external shocks, remain inherent 
factors  in  annihilating  or  reversing  development  gains.  The  link  between  development 
assistance  and  humanitarian  assistance  has  therefore  become  stronger.  Not  only  the  poorest 
are vulnerable, but also those at risk of poverty or even the new middle classes in emerging 
countries  remain  vulnerable,  and  the  resilience  of  these  groups  needs  to  be  strengthened. 
Furthermore,  inequality  of  wealth  and  income  is  increasing  worldwide.  There  is  a  negative 
relationship  between  inequality  (i.e.  in  income;  in  access  to  health  and  social  services;  in 
gender;  amongst  groups)  and  human  development,  undermining  social  cohesion  and 
contributing  to  political  instability  and  unrest.  Rapidly  growing  challenges  such  as  climate 
change, strong population growth, youth unemployment, urbanisation, migration and human 
mobility will have to be tackled to avoid regression and maintain progress. Policy coherence 
at all levels will thus be necessary to foster sustainable human development.  

17.  Has  the  partnership  delivered  on  its  human  development  objective  in  an  effective  and 
efficient way, in particular on poverty eradication, and also concerning gender equality and 
empowerment of women? How could it be improved? 

18. Taking  into  account  the  new  SDGs  framework,  what  are  the  main  challenges  related  to 
human development that the future partnership should focus on?  

Migration and mobility 

Migration and mobility are extremely important, both within and between the ACP and the 
EU. The EU applies a comprehensive approach addressing migration-related issues. 

Challenges  related  to  irregular  migration  need  to  be  tackled,  as  well  as  the  root  causes  of 
migration,  which 
,  poverty,  conflict,  demographic  pressure,  climate  and 
environmental challenges, violations of human rights, fundamental freedoms and rule of law 
as well as the lack of decent work opportunities and basic social protection schemes. Due to 

include 

8 

 
the  unprecedented  scale  of  forced  displacement,  systematically  addressing  this  issue  from  a 
developmental angle alongside humanitarian aid is key. 

Supporting  third  countries  in  their  efforts  to  develop  effective  migration  policies  is  also 
important. Migration opportunities should be harnessed through enhanced legal migration and 
mobility,  especially  for  educational,  scientific,  cultural,  training  and  professional  purposes, 
which have a positive effect on economies and societies alike.  

Article  13  of  the  CPA  provides  for  an  ACP-EU  dialogue  on  migration  that  is  ongoing. 
Addressing  more  efficiently  irregular  migration  is  particularly  important,  including  the 
fighting of related criminal networks and return and readmission of persons with no rights to 
stay  in  the  EU.  Ensuring  the  protection  of  refugees  and  asylum  seekers,  with  particular 
attention to vulnerable groups, is critical.  

19.  Has  the  partnership  been  a  useful  vehicle  for  discussing  migration  issues  and  has  it 
positively contributed? Has Article 13 CPA been fully applied? 

20.  Should  a  future  partnership  do  more  in  this  regard,  and  on  which  particular  aspects 
should it focus (legal migration and mobility, addressing root causes of migration, return and 
readmission, tackling human trafficking and smuggling, international protection)? 

III. Towards a more effective partnership (the 'how') 

This  section  draws  further  on  the  lessons  learned  from  the  long-standing  relationship,  and 
particularly the implementation of the CPA. The questions raised here seek to explore how the 
partnership can become a more effective vehicle for promoting both EU and ACP interests. 

A stronger political relationship  

The  CPA  provides  a  strong  framework  of  shared  fundamental  principles,  enshrined  in  a 
legally binding agreement.  It forms  the basis for engagement with the members of the ACP 
Group  of  States  as  a  whole  and  with  each  country  or  (sub)-region  separately.  Its 
implementation  is  built  on  a  broad  political  dialogue  taking  place  at  different  levels,  both 
national  and  regional,  and  through  the ACP  –  EU  joint  institutions.  EU  Member  States  are 
party  to  the  CPA,  which  means  that  their  bilateral  relations  with  ACP  countries  are  also 
framed by the Agreement. 

21. How effective has the political dialogue been and at which level is it the most effective: 
national,  regional  and  through  the  joint  EU-ACP  institutions?  Should  the  scope  of  political 
dialogue be widened or narrowed? 

22. Would  a  stronger  involvement  of  EU  Member  States,  associating  their  bilateral  policies 
and  instruments  to  the  political  dialogue  at  national  level,  enhance  the  dialogue's 
effectiveness and efficiency? 

23. Has the fact that the agreement is legally binding been instrumental to its implementation 
as compared to other regional partnerships based on political declarations? 

9 

 
Coherence of geographical scope  

The  geographic  coverage  of  the ACP-EU  partnership  has  expanded  considerably  over  time. 
For  reasons  of  coherence  and  efficient  cooperation,  it  might  be  of  interest  to  bring  other 
countries with similar challenges within the overarching framework. The strengthening of the 
African continental agenda led in 2007 to the establishment of the Africa-EU Partnership. It 
includes the Northern African countries, which are not contracting parties to the CPA. South 
Africa is a contracting party, but one to which not all the provisions apply. Most of the world's 
LDCs  are  members  of  the  ACP  Group  of  States  and  the  move  towards  a  more  'universal 
agenda'  of  Sustainable  Development  Goals  supports  a  unified  approach  to  this  group  of 
countries. In that context, the review should also consider the current geographical coverage 
and whether a wider coverage of the partnership at ACP level combined with more regional 
anchoring could be beneficial for the parties. The balance and division of labour between the 
EU's relations with the ACP States as a whole and those relations with the constituent regional 
groupings is one of the core issues to be explored. The regional context may involve in some 
cases  neighbouring  countries  outside  the ACP  framework.  The  Caribbean  countries  are  for 
instance members of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States. 

24.  Could  a  future  framework  be  usefully  opened  up  to  other  countries  than  the  current 
members of the ACP Group of States? Which countries would that be? 

25. What kind of framework should govern EU and ACP relations? How could an ACP-EU 
successor  framework  relate  to  the  more  recent  EU  regional  partnerships  with  Africa, 
Caribbean  and  Pacific  States?  Could  a  future  ACP-EU  framework  include  distinct 
partnerships with regional partners? 

26. Is there scope for building in more structured relationships with Asia, Latin America, the 
Middle East and North Africa? 

Cooperation tailored more towards groups of countries with similar development level  

To  ensure  that  EU  development  assistance  is  targeted  where  it  is  most  needed  and  has  the 
greatest  impact  on  poverty  eradication,  the  EU  has  recently  reinforced  the  principle  of 
differentiation. This has led a number of the EU's partner countries to graduate from bilateral 
development  aid.  The  last  two  decades  have  shown  that  the  ACP  Group  faces  a  growing 
diversity development patterns, in particular between 'booming' middle-income countries and 
least developed and fragile states. Around half of the 79 ACP countries remain today LDCs, 
whereas a number of them have advanced to lower middle income (11), upper middle income 
(23)  or  high  income  status  (4).  Given  this  evolution,  graduation  from  bilateral  development 
assistance  should  be  considered  for  more  developed  ACP  countries.  High  degrees  of 
inequality  and  poverty  remain  within  countries,  including  those  in  the  higher  economic 
categories. More tailored types of cooperation, such as through technical assistance, transfer 
of  knowledge  and  research,  allowing  for  co-creation  and  co-development  of  solutions,  are 
needed to match the different challenges ACP partners face depending on their development 
stage.  

10 

 
27.  Is  the  current  system  of  allocation  of  development  resources,  based  on  need  and 
capacities  as  well  as  performance,  sufficient  for  channelling  funds  towards  those  countries 
where  the  highest  impact  can  be  obtained?  Should  allocation  of  resources  continue  to 
prioritise countries most in need, including fragile states? 

28. What kind of cooperation could help to cover the specific needs of more developed ACP 
countries with a view to attaining more equitable and sustainable growth? 

Strengthen the relationship with key actors 

The  CPA  provides  a  framework  for  a  broad  and  inclusive  relationship  that  goes  beyond 
national governments, by recognising the role of parliaments, local authorities and non-state 
actors (civil society, private sector, trade unions) in development. It has formalised their role 
both  in  the  conduct  of  political  dialogue  and  in  the  programming  and  implementation  of 
cooperation  programmes.  Still,  real  involvement  of  several  of  these  actors  has  been  limited 
and their potential has not been fully realised.  

29.  Has  the  current  model  of  stakeholder  engagement  been  conducive  to  attaining  the 
objectives of the partnership in an efficient way? Which actors could play a more significant 
role in the implementation of the partnership? How could this be addressed?  

30. What  could  be  done  to  promote  effective  and  efficient involvement of both international 
and  domestic  private  sector,  civil  society,  social  partners  and  local  authorities  in  the 
partnership?  

A  number  of  new  actors  have  become  very  active  in  the ACP  region  in  the  economic  and 
development fields; these include emerging economies like Brazil, China, India or Indonesia, 
as well as the Arab states of the Persian Gulf and private foundations. In addition, some ACP 
countries, while still facing major development challenges, now have higher GNI per capita 
than some EU Member States. Some are themselves providing development support to other 
ACP countries. 

31. Should the partnership be open to new actors as referred above? 

32.  In  this  regard,  should  the  possibility  of  opening  up  the  partnership  to  'associated 
members' or 'observers' be considered?  

33. How could a new framework promote triangular and South-South cooperation, including 
the  increased  involvement  of  ACP  States  as  development  actors  in  support  of  other  ACP 
countries? 

Streamline the institutional set-up and functioning of the partnership 

The review of the partnership should also look at the institutional set-up and functioning in 
terms  of  more  effective  decision-making  at  the  appropriate  level. An  elaborated  set  of  joint 
institutions  has  developed  over  the  years,  including  those  created  by  EPAs.  Moreover,  the 
review  should  take  into  account  the  fact  that  institutions  such  as  the  African  Union  and 

11 

 
regional  organisations  in  Africa,  the  Caribbean  (CARIFORUM)  and  the  Pacific  (Pacific 
Island Forum) have strengthened their position in the global arena and in particular regarding 
their relations with the EU. 

34.  Has  the  joint  institutional  set-up  (with  the  ACP-EU  Council  of  Ministers,  the  ACP-EU 
Committee of Ambassadors, and the Joint Parliamentary Assembly) been effective in debating 
and  promoting  common  views  and  interests  and  in  providing  political  guidance  and 
momentum to the EU-ACP partnership and the implementation of the CPA?  

35.  What  is  the  added  value  of  the  joint  ACP-EU  institutions  as  compared  to  more  recent 
regional and regional economic community frameworks for dialogue and cooperation?  

36. What institutional arrangements would most effectively help address common challenges 
and promote joint interests? 

37.  Should  a  higher  degree  of  self-financing  of  this  functioning  (ACP-EU  Joint  institutions 
and ACP secretariat) by the ACP States be required? 

Better adapted and more flexible development cooperation tools and methods  

The  cooperation  tools  and  methods  are  meant  to  operationalise  the  Cotonou  principles  of 
focussing on results, partnership and ownership. The programming and implementation of the 
EDF are thus designed as a joint responsibility. Procedures and systems have been developed 
to  allow  ownership  and  alignment  with  government  policies,  with  a  heavy  reliance  on  the 
National/Regional/Intra-ACP Authorising Officer (NAO/RAO) function. The NAO is a senior 
government official appointed by each ACP State to represent it and be jointly responsible for 
all EDF financed operations. This has ensured that the government/regional organisation can 
assume  full  ownership,  but  as  shown  by  evaluations,  it  has  not  always  provided  for  the 
expected efficient sector dialogue and smooth implementation, and may require updating. 

The  EDF  is  being  implemented  through  National,  Regional  and  Intra-ACP  programmes.  It 
also includes special and flexible measures for development and humanitarian interventions in 
cases of emergencies and unpredictable events.  

In  addition,  ACP  partner  countries  are  benefiting  under  the  Union's  budget  from  the  Pan-
African  Programme  or  thematic  programmes  financed  under  the  Development  Cooperation 
Instrument.5 Furthermore, the Instrument contributing to Stability and Peace6, as well as the 
European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights7 are financing numerous projects in 
the  ACP  countries.  This  multiplicity  of  instruments  has  created  challenges  in  relation  to 
concentration,  coordination  and  complementarity  of  EU  development  aid. The  expansion  of 

5 Regulation (EU) No 233/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a financing 

instrument for development cooperation for the period 2014-2020 

6 Regulation (EU) No 230/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing an instrument 

contributing to stability and peace 

7 Regulation (EU) No 235/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a financing 

instrument for democracy and human rights worldwide 

12 

 
                                                            
joint programming of the EU and Member States assistance aims at enhancing EU impact and 
aid effectiveness.  

38. Is there added value in having a dedicated financing instrument in support of the ACP-EU 
partnership? If so, what are the reasons and how would it differ from other external financing 
instruments  funded  by  the  general  budget  of  the  Union?  Is  this  instrument  flexible  enough, 
especially to address crisis situations? Can this instrument be deployed differently? 

39.  What  is  the  added  value  of  the  EDF's  co-management  system  involving  national 
authorities  in  the  programming  and  management  of  aid  programmes,  as  compared  to  other 
EU cooperation instruments in non-ACP countries? 

40. Does the current set-up of the programming process and implementation of activities lead 
to  real  ownership  by  the  beneficiaries?  What  could  be  improved?  How  can  the  EU  and 
Member States maximise the impact of joint programming?  

In  terms  of  implementation,  EU  cooperation  has  taken  various  forms  ranging  from  project 
approach to budget support, with a recent increase in blending operations and the emergence 
of  EU  trust  funds,  as  well  as  delegated  cooperation  in  favour  of  EU  development  and 
international agencies. In  considering  the  new partnership, it is appropriate to reflect on the 
right mix of implementation modalities (including giving loans rather than grants or providing 
guarantees for investment) as well as to strengthen an enabling environment for efficient and 
effective financial control and accountability.  

The  relative  importance  of  ODA  in  their  Gross  National  Income  has  diminished  for  many 
ACP countries. The financial cooperation toolbox therefore has to evolve, allowing the EU’s 
ODA funds to contribute in the most efficient manner to the overall purpose of development 
cooperation.  Synergy  with  other  sources  of  funding,  mobilisation  of  other  means  of 
implementation (including private initiatives and private investments) or new instruments, for 
example  a  twinning8  or  TAIEX9  instrument  in  the  field  of  transfer  of  knowledge,  could  be 
considered. 

41. Does the variety of existing tools adequately support the EU and ACP common principles 
and interests and are there gaps that should be addressed? How do you assess the 
effectiveness and efficiency of various implementation modalities? 

42. Should a higher degree of self-financing from the ACP States be required for activities to 
ensure  ownership?  Would  this  apply  to  all  countries?  On  which  principles  should  this  be 
based? 

8 It brings together public sector expertise from EU Member States and beneficiary countries with the aim of enhancing 

cooperative activities. 

9 TAIEX is the Technical Assistance and Information Exchange instrument of the European Commission in enlargement and 
neighbourhood  countries.  It  supports  public  administrations  with  regard  to  the  approximation,  application  and 
enforcement of EU legislation and facilitates the sharing of EU best practices. 

13 

 
                                                            
43. How can the expertise of the EU and its Member States be better mobilised, particularly 
in the middle-income countries? 

14