Practitioners’ Network for European Development Cooperation

1. AECID: Overview of experience in DelegatedCooperation/ Belgium-Defensoriadel Pueblo (Peru) case Practitioners’ Network for European Development Cooperation Workshop of Thematic Group “Implementation of European Division of Labour Brussels, November 20, 2012 Christian Freres, Senior Expert, Planning, Effectiveness and Aid Quality Unit, AECID email: christian.freres@aecid.es

2. 1. Overview of AECID’s experience in delegated cooperation • Working Group on Delegated Cooperation (WG-DC) created in 2008 • Main role was initially to prepare operational guidelines (1st ed: 2009; 2nd 2011; 3rd 2012) • First operations in 2009: AECID delegated in Mali (Netherlands) and Camboya (GiZ) • European Commission accredits AECID in July 2011 • WG-DC gradually taking on advisory and monitoring roles

3. 2. Evolution of Operations since 2009 8 operations between 2009 and 2011 Important jump since 2011 in number and volume of operations Between 2009 y 2011 there was balance between role as silent partner/leader; since 2011 the role of leader is dominant (in LAC) Before 2011, operations only with bilateral donors; now DC with European Commission is by far the prevalent channel

4. 3. AECID-Belgium (BTC)-Defensoría del Pueblo case Some Background on Defensoría del Pueblo (DP) • Peru is fast growing MIC, but important deficiencies in governance, human rights and large numbers of people are poor and/or excluded. Peru is in the process of building inclusive social public policy and services • DP is autonomous public institution (like a Ombudsman) responsible for defending human rights and supervising state administration and adequate provision of public services • One of Peru’s most recognized public institutions • DP has received support from numerous donors since its creation in 1995

5. Belgium (BTC)/AECID and DP BTC and Defensoría • Belgium has supported DP since 2002 (+8M€) • In 2010, as part of sector concentration in Peru, Belgium decides to terminate programmes in governance • In the transition period, Belgium sought to maintain support to DP through delegated cooperation AECID and Defensoría • AECID is one of DP’s oldest external partners since its creation • Provided over 2M€ through Common Fund since 2007 • Commitment to support DP during current strategic plan (2011-15)

6. Basket Fund for DP • Donor Basket Fund created in 2006 (Canada, Spain Switzerland and Sweden). Spain first as observer and in 2007 as member. • Key to DP’s position: Currently it represents 17.5% of DP’s total resources and provides support for key activities • Switzerland and Sweden have left fund (Australia is considering entering in 2013) • BTC has always been observer to fund • Peruvian cooperation agency (APCI) is also member • External evaluation in 2011: positive in terms of contribution to increasing DP’s capacities • Fund set to continue until end of 2015 • Spain since it is part of the basket fund has had to introduce administrative and procedural changes to accommodate this new instrument • Increasing alignment of Basket Fund with DP procedures and planning framework over time (adoption of Results-based DP’s Strategic Plan 2011-2015 as framework for Basket Fund)

7. Delegated Cooperation Belgium→AECIDProgramme: Promotion of Equity and Inclusion for Human Rights • In 2009, Belgium decides to support DP and contacts AECID about delegated cooperation for its support • DP and APCI support the initiative • May 2011: MoU signed (March 2012: Operative Plan signed between AECID and Defensoría) • Period: 2011-end 2013 • Amount: 2 M€ (2 payments: 500.000 in 2011; rest in 2012) • Belgium delegated support to be provided by AECID to DP through Basket Fund • 1% indirect costs included • AECID will provide all Basket Fund reports to BTC and both donors will meet each 6 months to review, although in fact Belgium continues to be involved in all meetings of the Basket Fund committee as observer

8. Overall assessment (1) • This was one of AECID’s first experiences with Basket Funds and it was a learning process; flexibility in internal administrative procedures was key for success • First operation in which a bilateral delegates to AECID: although highly interested from outset, posed many administrative challenges • For AECID: operation justified because contributes to consolidated mechanism (fund); low risks; high opportunity cost of not doing it • Recognition of AECID’s leadership in governance in Peru • Through delegated cooperation, AECID increases weight in Basket Fund’s governance • BTC contribution is key in period when 2 bilaterals exit fund • Operation coincides with new phase in Basket Fund of increasing alignment (with support to overall Strategic Plan and not specific programmes)

9. Overall assessment (2) • Given the existence of Common Fund, management of delegated cooperation is relatively easy • Delegation preceded AECID accreditation by EC: first step in possible reciprocal delegation (in other regions) • No significant problems with each others’ procedures (MoU follows standard model) • Delays on both sides due to changing contexts in Belgium and Spain (in AECID coincided with change in mgmt.) • Although governance will continue to be a priority sector for Spain in Peru, the specific focus needs to be defined in Partnership Framework Agreement which should be prepared in 2013 • Current budget cuts may affect future level of support (after BTC funds are used in 2013)

10. More infomation at:AECID: http://www.aecid.pe/proyectos/index.php?accionExt=proyectDetail&idProy=22BTC:http://www.btcctb.org/en/countries/peruDefensoria del Pueblo:General: http://www.defensoria.gob.pe/index.phpDelegated Cooperation: http://www.defensoria.gob.pe/modules/Downloads/resoluciones/2012/RA-012-2012-DP.pdf