JOINT STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Accompanying the document Joint Communication to the European Parliament and the Council A renewed partnership with the countries of Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific
Date: 2016-11-22
Institutions: Directorate-General for International Cooperation and Development, European Commission
Subjects: ACP countries, climate change policy, cooperation agreement (EU), cooperation policy, employment policy, human rights, migration policy, negotiation of an agreement (EU), revision of an agreement, sustainable development

EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION 

HIGH REPRESENTATIVE
OF THE UNION FOR
FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND
SECURITY POLICY

Strasbourg, 22.11.2016  
SWD(2016) 381 final 

JOINT STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

Accompanying the document 

Joint Communication to the European Parliament and the Council 

A renewed partnership with the countries of Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific 

{JOIN(2016) 52 final} 
{SWD(2016) 380 final} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
Proportionate  impact  assessment  on  the  future  relations  between  the  European  Union  and  the  African, 
Caribbean and Pacific countries after 2020 

Executive Summary Sheet 

Why? What is the problem being addressed? 

A. Need for action 

The  Cotonou  Partnership  Agreement  (CPA)  governs  relations  between  the  EU  and  79  members  of  the  African, 
Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Group of States and is due to expire in February 2020. In light of existing provisions, 
negotiations between the parties must start by no later than August 2018. The purpose of this initiative is to identify 
the  best  format  to  organise  and  govern  relations  with  partners  in  Africa,  the  Caribbean  and  Pacific,  taking  into 
account the changing global context and the results of the CPA evaluation. Main challenges to be addressed are: 1) 
uneven patterns of development across ACP countries, particularly in the context of a strong population growth; 2) 
growing  security  challenges,  linked  to  terrorism  threats  and  uncontrolled  migration  flows,  as  well  as  untapped 
economic opportunities; 3) insufficient recognition of the deepened regional dynamics within and beyond the ACP 
countries;  4)  rising  global  challenges;  and  5)  lack  of  inclusive  multi-stakeholder  partnerships  for  effective 
governance. The impact assessment will accompany the Communication on the future relations of the EU with the 
ACP  countries  after  2020,  and  will  serve  as  a  basis  for  the  subsequent  recommendation  and  annexed  negotiating 
directives. 

What is this initiative expected to achieve? 

The general objective is to shape relations with the ACP countries after 2020 as to best achieve the EU's interests. 
The specific objectives are as follows: 1) foster sustainable development in ACP countries; 2) enhance EU security 
and economic prosperity; 3) encompass evolving regional dynamics within and beyond the ACP countries; 4) ensure 
stronger  alliances  to  tackle  global  challenges;  and  5)  strengthen  inclusive  participation  of  stakeholders  at  various 
levels. 

What is the value added of action at the EU level?  

The challenges faced by the EU and its citizens require a comprehensive and joined-up approach. Thanks to its broad 
set of policies and instruments, the EU is well placed to confront such challenges and seize the opportunities ahead. 
Action  at  EU  level  has  an  added  value,  in  terms  of  political  and  financial  leverage,  that  is  larger  than  the  sum  of 
individual Member State actions. Importantly, some policy areas, most notably trade are exclusively the competence 
of  the  EU.  Furthermore,  this  initiative  directly  contributes  to  the  EU  as  'A  stronger  global  actor'  which  was 
highlighted as one of the political priorities presented by the European Commission’s President in 2014. The specific 
external  action  priorities  are  further  defined  by  the  EU  Global  Strategy  and  the  EU  Consensus  for  Development 
which is currently being reviewed, as well as other relevant sector EU policies. Finally, the global network of EU 
delegations ensures a (political) presence in countries where many Member States are not represented.  

B. Solutions 

What legislative and non-legislative policy options have been considered? Is there a preferred choice or not? 
Why?  

Of the broad number of options that have emerged from the consultation process only those that were deemed likely 
to achieve (most of) the new EU objectives have been subject to a full assessment. The current CPA projected into 
2020  represents  the  baseline  against  which  other  options  are  assessed.  The  first  option  envisages  no  specific 
partnership  between  the  EU  and  the  ACP  countries,  as  existing  policies  and  strategies  are  deemed  well  suited  to 

2 

 
 
achieve  the  new  objectives.  The  second  option  assumes  that  a  new  partnership  is  agreed  upon,  with  the  various 
objectives being pursued either with all ACP countries, through more regionalised approaches, or a combination of 
the two. In this respect, three different sub-options are considered: 1) a common agreement with all ACP countries; 
2) three distinct regional agreements with respectively the countries in Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific; 3) an 
agreement consisting of three distinct regional partnerships under a common umbrella.  

Based  on  a  thorough  analysis,  the  preferred  option  is  option  3:  a  new  partnership  agreement,  that  includes  an 
overarching umbrella that lists shared principles, values and goals and identifies avenues for cooperation between the 
EU and the ACP countries in international contexts, and incorporates three regional partnerships set respectively for 
African,  Caribbean  and  Pacific  countries,  which  will  integrate  existing  regional  strategies.  This  option  enables  the 
preservation  of  all  the  positive  elements  of  the  current  CPA  (as  highlighted  by  the  CPA  evaluation).  Most 
importantly,  it  will  put  in place  the  right  conditions  for  the  EU  to  meet  its  new  objectives,  including  that  of  more 
effectively  pursuing  its  political  and  economic  interests,  increasing  its  impact  in  the  international  arena,  and 
improving the prospects of implementing Agenda 2030. Moreover, by taking into account deepened regionalisation 
dynamics and the increased heterogeneity of ACP countries, it will enable actions to be taken at the most appropriate 
level, in line with the subsidiarity principle. Finally, it is expected that the new partnership will be legally binding. 
The  implementation  of  joint  commitments  is  more  likely  to  be  achieved  when  the  political  will  is  reinforced  with 
binding provisions. This will enable the respect of the essential elements of the new partnership through enhanced 
political  dialogue  and  guarantee  a  platform  for  the  implementation  of  the  Economic  Partnership  Agreements.  The 
legally binding nature is seen as having produced a number of advantages and no substantive disadvantages. 

Who supports which option?  

The consultation process has shown that some significant changes must be made to the existing EU arrangement with 
ACP countries. The achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals and the implementation of Agenda 2030 are 
universally seen as key priorities. EU Member States have expressed a strong desire for a political partnership and 
for strengthening provisions that enable a more effective promotion of vital EU interests. General consensus exists on 
the  need  to  take  account  of  deepening  of  regional  dynamics  and  avoiding  overlap  between  different  frameworks. 
However,  there  are  differences  of  opinion  as  regards  the  degree  of  regionalisation  that  should  take  place.  Many 
support building alliances with the ACP partner countries to best promote common interests and values in different 
international contexts. Civil society organisations have called for a more inclusive involvement of different types of 
non-state actors in all aspects of EU-ACP relations. ACP countries have repeated their determination to 'stay united 
as  a  group’  and  that  the  EU-ACP  partnership  should  be  consolidated  through  a  formalised,  comprehensive,  and 
legally binding framework. 

C. Impacts of the preferred option 

What are the benefits of the preferred option (if any, otherwise main ones)?  

The preferred option enables the achievement of all the objectives listed above. In particular, the EU will be able to 
promote  its  economic  and  political  interests,  including  enhanced  security,  orderly  management  of  migration, 
increased  economic  prosperity,  and,  more  generally,  sustainable  and  inclusive  development  (particularly  in  ACP 
countries) with the view to contributing to the successful implementation of Agenda 2030. It will do so by enabling 
the promotion of EU tailored actions in the three ACP regions and strengthening the common framework. This will 
therefore  create  the  ideal  conditions  for  building  strategic  alliances  with  a  group  of  79  ACP  countries,  This  is 
important in view of tackling global challenges, particularly climate change and other aspects of the 2030 Agenda, as 
well as maximising the impact of the EU in the international arena. The impact could be increased by reaching out to 
North  African  countries  and  the  non-ACP  members  of  the  group  of  least  developed  countries  and  small  island 
developing states. Moreover, it preserves the positive aspects of the CPA as highlighted by the evaluation: maintains 

3 

 
 
the  strong  commitment  to  the  promotion  of  human  rights  and  democratic  governance  and  the  inclusion  of  key 
stakeholders  in  the  development  process;  maintains  the  general  provisions  that  underpin  trade  cooperation;  makes 
significant adjustments to the system of co-management, including the joint institutional framework. 

What are the costs of the preferred option (if any, otherwise main ones)? 

The  costs  are  not  significant.  The  revision  of  the  system  of  co-management  (e.g.  Joint  Institutions,  National 
Authorising Officer) and the integration of existing EU regional strategies for Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific 
will help to reduce costs and avoid duplication of management and implementation tasks across the different levels. 
The costs associated to the implementation of aid programmes and projects are not expected to change significantly 
from existing practices.  

How will businesses, SMEs and micro-enterprises be affected? 

Sustainable and inclusive economic growth and private sector development including trade and investment are part 
of  the  specific  objectives  of  this  initiative.  This  will  provide  new  economic  opportunities  for  EU  companies, 
including SMEs. 

Will there be significant impacts on national budgets and administrations?  

The main financial instrument underpinning the CPA, the European Development Fund (EDF), is an extra-budgetary 
fund financed by direct contributions from EU Member States. The appraisal of the EDF is not within the scope of 
this  impact  assessment.  The  future  of  the  EDF  will  be  tackled  in  the  context  of  the  next  multiannual  financial 
framework (MFF) review. There are no other significant impacts on national budgets or administrations envisaged. 

Will there be other significant impacts?  

NA 

Proportionality  

The preferred policy option is fully coherent with and complementary to EU Member States' bilateral actions. It does 
not impose supplementary burdens on EU Member States or economic operators. Furthermore, it focusses on a more 
efficient and effective partnership, aligning it to the increased regionalisation of EU relations with the ACP countries. 
The  evaluation  of  the  current  CPA  has  also  shown  administrative  weaknesses  in  several  decision-making  and 
management processes that will be addressed. 

When will the policy be reviewed?  

D. Follow-up 

Monitoring and evaluation of the specific objectives will take various forms since they belong to various policy areas 
and they are not all equally quantifiable. Nonetheless, by allowing regular joint reviews, they will provide a system 
for identifying areas of the partnership that need to be adapted or strengthened. Furthermore, they will offer relevant 
information  to  feed  into  internal  management  decisions,  thereby  strengthening  the  framework  for  ensuring 
effectiveness of EU funding for external action. 

4