Growing pains: development policy in the new Europe

New European member states are struggling to meet EU standards on development policy, says Simon Lightfoot.

In 2003, a BOND briefing paper argued that the planned 2004 enlargement of the European Union (EU) “has the potential to radically change EU aid policies and regional focus”. Four years on, has this prediction come true?

The 2004 enlargement was significant. Never before had so many recipients of EU aid joined the Union and taken on the commitment to become aid donors.

Previous to the 2004 accession, the Directorate General for Development highlighted that the new member states’ development policies were characterised by:

low governmental commitment
lack of significant constituency for development cooperation
low prioritisation of poverty reduction
lack of funds for overseas development assistance
lack of broad-based participation in policy-making.

Forecasts regarding for the new members states’ ability to meet the commitments they had signed up to were not optimistic.

Geographical focus problematic

A particularly problematic issue faced by the Central and Eastern European (CEE) states was the geographical focus of EU development policy.

The new member states were seen to have limited historical connections to developing countries and a major focus on neighbouring countries, in particular the former Yugoslavia and Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS).

This can be seen by examining the priority countries of the new member states: nearby Moldova, Ukraine, and Georgia are examples of countries where new member state donors are active. As the rapporteur for a recent European Parliament Report, Danute Budreikaite MEP, stresses: "Historically the new member states have worked very closely with neighbouring countries. Now they should also be aware that development policy is part of their obligations and that certain international commitments must be fulfilled.”

Of particular interest are the EU’s relations with the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) bloc, with commentators noting subtle changes in attitudes towards the ACP group, in part due to the lack of historic connection between the new member states and Africa. Having said that, recent revisions to aid policies in the Czech Republic and Poland have seen them prioritise Zambia and Tanzania respectively, and both, along with Bulgaria (who joined the EU in 2007), also prioritise Angola.

In light of the need for policy coherence and complementarity, it is argued that it makes more sense for new member states to be active in those countries and sectors where they have a comparative advantage. These sectors include democratisation, market liberalisation, and managing transition to EU membership. Of particular relevance to this study is the fact that the new member states have experience in managing the transition from aid recipients to donors.

Poverty focus under threat

The focus on these sectors has lead to concerns that enlargement would shift EU development policy away from its poverty focus.

Of all the new member states, only Hungary had an unequivocal commitment to poverty reduction in its official documents. Latvia had a priority of “smooth integration into the world economy”, whilst for Lithuania and Poland, issues such as democracy, the rule of law and human rights were prioritised. These positions of course have not prevented the recent commitment to poverty reduction as part of the EU-Africa Strategy.

So what are the overall implications of enlargement for EU development policy?

To a large extent, the new member states do not at present have the political and public will, nor the government structures in place, to significantly alter its current direction.

Development is still not a high political priority, due, in part, to a “lower level of familiarity with development aid issues” (EuroBarometer, 2007). Excellent work being carried out by NGOs to raise public awareness in these states but it is unlikely that this situation will change in the near future, as the new member states continue to grapple with the effects of their rapid economic transition.

Simon Lightfoot is a lecturer in European Politics at the University of Leeds.
Email: s.j.lightfoot@leeds.ac.uk