11
European Commission: “LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN DEVELOPMENT”, Baku, 11 February 2011 Seminar “Local Authorities in Development" Baku, 11 February 2011 Final Report This document was prepared by the Technical Assistance Team on behalf of the European Commission. FINAL REPORT REGIONAL SEMINAR “LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN DEVELOPOMENT” Baku, Azerbaijan, 11 February 2011

Seminar “Local Authorities in Development - Europa · Seminar “Local Authorities in Development" ... catalyst role in social and political transformations because of their

  • Upload
    trandan

  • View
    217

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

European Commission: “LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN DEVELOPMENT”, Baku, 11 February 2011

Seminar “Local Authorities in Development"

Baku, 11 February 2011

Final Report This document was prepared by the Technical Assistance Team on behalf of the European Commission.

FINAL REPORT REGIONAL SEMINAR “LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN DEVELOPOMENT”

Baku, Azerbaijan, 11 February 2011

European Commission: “LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN DEVELOPMENT”, Baku, 11 February 2011

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 3

2. Opening Ceremony ……………………………………………………………….…………………………………... 3

3. Case Studies to Illustrate the Working Groups …………………………..……………………………... 4

4. Outcomes of the Working Groups debates …………………………………..…………………………... 6

4.1 Working Group 1: Local Authorities in Development : programming and policy

aspects and roles in programming of European Commission aid ……………………………………..6

4.2 Working Group 2: Local Authorities and EC development cooperation

implementation: aid delivery and aid effectiveness agenda ………………………………………….. 9

5. Closing Ceremony ………………………………………………………………………….…………………………..11

Annex I: Agenda of the day………..…………………………………………….………………………………….…..12

European Commission: “LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN DEVELOPMENT”, Baku, 11 February 2011

3

1. Introduction

The Regional Seminal on Local Authorities in Development targeting European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) Countries1 is the fourth and final regional event programmed as part of the Local Authorities Supporting Initiative within the context of the Structured Dialogue (SD). The seminar was held in Baku, Azerbaijan on February 11th 2011 and brought together some 50 participants representing Local Authorities (LAs) from Eastern Europe, South Caucasus and the Mediterranean region2, representatives of the European Commission (EC), European Union (EU) Delegations in targeted ENP countries, European Parliament as well as the EU Member States (MS).

The programme of the seminar is provided in annex of this report

2. Opening Ceremony

The opening ceremony included addresses by representatives of the European Union, the European Commission, the host country Azerbaijan, the European Parliament, the Hungarian EU Rotating Presidency as well as a representative of Local Authorities who reported on the outcomes of the first two days of the Structured Dialogue that brought together LAs and Civil Society Organization (CSOs)

In his opening remarks, Mr. Roland Kobia, Head of EU Delegation in Azerbaijan, highlighted the importance of the Structured Dialogue in providing a platform for bottom-up dialogue and planning that meets half-way the top-down policy making and policy mainstreaming. Mr. Kobia urged the participants to conduct their discussion under the sign of constructivism, where not all parties necessarily agree on all viewpoints but are yet able to respect each other’s opinion and debate openly about it. Mr. Kobia observed that the dynamics of the current political situation across the ENP region proves that people have an urge to express themselves and that LAs can play an important catalyst role in social and political transformations because of their intermediary position between citizens and national/regional authorities. Mr. Kobia closed by thanking the Azeri authorities for their assistance and active involvement in enabling the SD to take place in Baku.

Mr. Arastun Mehdiyev representing the Azerbaijan President’s Office expressed the satisfaction of the host country in having representatives of 20 ENP countries meeting in Baku, which deepens the ties of Azerbaijan with Europe and the neighbourhood countries and enables the Azeri counterparts to learn from the experience of others. Mr. Mehdiyev recalled the history of LAs in Azerbaijan from independence till nowadays, and which culminated in the first municipal elections in 1999. He also reiterated the commitment of the Azeri government for more support to LAs and better sharing and learning from experiences. Mr. Mehdiyev closed by thanking the EU for choosing Baku to host the SD seminar and wished to consolidate the regional role of Azerbaijan by hosting more similar events in the future.

Taking the floor next was European MP Mr. Norbert Neuser from the Development Committee of the European Parliament who indicated that prior to joining the European Parliament, he was for more than 20 years an LA representative himself and is hence aware of both the challenges and the opportunities that LAs can bring to development cooperation. MP Neuser highlighted EU’s long engagement vis-à-vis LAs and that the presence of elected local and regional local governments is one of the cornerstones for achieving representative democracy. He also indicated that the 91,000 LAs of the European Union can be privileged interlocutors with their Southern and Eastern counterparts in combating poverty and

1 The European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) was conceived after the 2004 enlargement of the EU and supports political and economic reforms in sixteen of Europe’s neighbouring countries as a means of promoting peace, stability and economic prosperity in the whole region. 2 Participating countries: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Palestinian Territories, Syria, Russia, Ukraine.

European Commission: “LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN DEVELOPMENT”, Baku, 11 February 2011

4

improving social, cultural and environmental standards. MP Neuser closed by congratulating the EC and DEVCO F1 in particular for the organization of an initiative as important as the Structured Dialogue.

Ms. Lilla Makkay, Head of Development Cooperation at the Hungarian Ministry of Foreign Affairs took the floor next on behalf of the EU rotating Presidency. Ms. Makkay indicated that the challenges faced by the ENP countries resonate with Hungary’s experience in its social, economic and political transition process as a new EU member State from a soviet-style ruling to the consolidation of democracy and the rule of law. Ms Makkay indicated that the presence of a democratically elected body of LAs has been a pre-requisite and a powerful symbol of autonomy in the context of a reform towards democratic rule of law based on human rights, good governance and parliamentary democracy and which resulted in the creation of around 3,000 LAs for 10 million inhabitants in Hungary as compared to just 290 LAs for the same number of inhabitants in Sweden. Ms. Makkay proposed to establish a compendium of the experiences of Hungary and other new EU member States and which documents the social, economic and political transformations.

The conclusions of the first two days of the Structured Dialogue were then shared with the participants by Ms Zakia Mrini, President of the Municipal Council of the Gueliz District in Marrakesh-Morocco and who was one of the LA representatives to the Structured Dialogue sessions which took place on February 9-10 together with the representatives of Civil Society. According to Ms Mrini, the following main messages could be retained:

• Cooperation between European and partner country’s actors has to be strengthened in three areas comprising a) the development of local capacities, b) knowledge sharing and exchanges of experiences and c) a clear division of labour, responsibilities and prerogatives.

• A territorial approach is particularly suited to the integration of various actors and stakeholders in the aid cooperation arena as it enables to associate the “territory” to its actors, their visions and their projects in a spirit of synergy and mutual complementarity.

• A strong "appropriation" of the development process by local actors is crucial to foster coherence and complementarity, otherwise these remain as broad and vague principles without real effect.

• An “investment” by local actors is key to promote ownership and grow out of aid dependency, in particular: development of their own responsibility and visibility, sharing of recognition, promote innovation and taking risks, and ability to mobilize stakeholders' contributions and local resources.

• Local actors (civil society, local authorities, etc.) are urged to play roles going beyond the simple execution of aid projects, and to get involved very early and actively in the processes of definition of the policies and advocating for the principles of transparency and efficiency.

• Sustainability of aid cannot be achieved with short-term and ad-hoc interventions and requires a long-term approach by the various actors and donors. The EU and other stakeholders must thus be pragmatic in their approach and define progressive objectives rather than expecting changes to occur immediately.

3. Case Studies to Illustrate the Working Groups

Prior to the working group discussions, two EC cooperation experiences with local authorities were presented to introduce the topics related to the working groups.

A first case study highlighting the Programming & Policy aspects and roles of Local Authorities in programming European Commission aid was presented by Ms Anne de Maximy, Project Manager, GOSPEL project (Local Governance through Sports as a Social Link). The novelty of GOSPEL is that it brings together LAs from across the ENP zone: Yerevan (Armenia), Mahdia (Tunisia) and Marseille (France) with Associate Partners from Hamburg (Germany) and Split (Croatia) who work together under the Regional EU funded programme CIUDAD.

According to Ms de Maximy, GOSPEL helped in fostering a broader territorial approach at both the national and regional levels by involving different stakeholders working together around the same

European Commission: “LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN DEVELOPMENT”, Baku, 11 February 2011

5

theme (Local Governance through sports. It allowed Local Authorities to discuss, share experiences and implement best practices amongst themselves and without a direct input/supervision from the Central Government which is an important added value in the case of the Tunisian and Armenian partner cities, and although the effective implication of the relevant services of the Central Government was key to the success of the project. Ms de Maximy also highlighted the challenge of working along a decentralized cooperation model in relatively centralized states and pinpointed the importance of accommodating the technical and administrative constraints (which cannot be changed or over-ruled overnight), but observed an evident willingness from all stakeholders to learn and achieve a better ownership of the project through a two-way participatory and inclusive dialogue. Ms de Maximy also incited the EU to support the exchange of experiences and lessons learned from the different partnerships implemented under CIUDAD and other EU-funded programs targeting LAs (MED-PACT, NSLA, etc.) and to assist in the consolidation and the sustainability of these partnerships when the programme or the funding ends.

A second example illustrated the aid effectiveness principles and the complementarities between various EU initiatives in support of local development in Lebanon. Mr. Bruno Montariol, EU Delegation in Lebanon, presented the strategic approach adopted by the EU and its partners to achieve a well-articulated set of interventions from national, regional and thematic programmes (5 programmes, 28 M€, and approximately 50 municipalities/regions involved) that complement each other and cover a wide range of the identified needs. Based on these experiences, EU’s future strategic approach to support LAs will have a long-term perspective and privilege systemic reforms (local finances, inter-governmental financial relations, etc.).

According to Mr. Montariol, the keys to success when supporting initiatives for local and regional development ensuring coherence and complementarity, are: identifying and supporting the central level responsible institution (ministry, general directorate); reviewing the legal framework to properly define roles and responsibilities of each governmental entity and level; training, supporting and accompanying LA staff in all stages of the aid process; all interventions have to observe a territorial approach and be coherent with sector and local plans; avoiding big infrastructure works and recurrent costs; pushing for donor coordination (code of conduct, information exchanges, joint missions); guiding decentralised cooperation in the process; be transparent regarding the different budget lines and seek complementarities and synergies.

4. Outcomes of the Working Groups Debates

Building on the insights gained through the case studies, participants were then divided along the two working groups illustrated by the case studies. Participants in each of the working groups were further divided into two sub-groups in order to enable them to carry further in-depth discussions through a “World Café” methodology which fosters dynamic and high participation and enables participants to carry a deeper analysis in order to reach a set of generally agreed conclusions and recommendations.

Working Group 1

Local Authorities in Development: Programming & Policy Aspects and roles in

programming EC Aid

Working Group 2

Local Authorities and EC Development Cooperation Implementation: financial

instruments and aid implementation mechanisms for LA

European Commission: “LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN DEVELOPMENT”, Baku, 11 February 2011

6

Sub-themes

1. LA participation in multi-actor dialogue and contribution to policy formulation

Table Host: Genadi ARVELADZE

Note Taker: Olivier REISNER

2. Territorial Approaches to Development and Challenges of Local Governance

Table Host: Isam AKEL

Note Taker: Ziad MOUSSA

Sub-themes 1. Financing mechanisms and modalities Table Host: Gabriela CIUMAC Note Taker: Diego ESCALONA 2.Paris and Accra Aid Effectiveness Agendas: impact on LAs and LA’s role in their implementation Table Host: Roger ACHI Note taker: Dominique Steverlynck

The debates and discussions as well as the reporting of each sub-group were structured and articulated around four broad questions: i) identification of the main strengths and opportunities, ii) main challenges, iii) good practices and successful experiences and, iv) main messages and recommendations for further thought.

4.1 Working Group 1: Local Authorities in Development: programming and policy aspects and roles in programming of European Commission aid.

The two tables of WG 1 focused on the following themes:

1. Local Authorities participation in multi-actor dialogue and contribution to policy formulation. The examination of the topic departed from the assumption and recognition that LAs are well positioned for building stronger ownership of policies and domestic accountability (by virtue of their representativeness and proximity of the grassroots levels) and hence their participation and input in multi-actor dialogue and policy formulation is instrumental for achieving both these dimensions. The exchanges were based on how LA can effectively be associate to ongoing dialogue processes with the EU at the political level (policy formulation, programme development, etc) and also at the operational level (financial support, capacity building, etc.) and what mechanisms are proposed which could enhance this participation.

2. EC contribution to territorial development and challenges of local governance. The Territorial Approach to Development puts the territory at the heart of local development & governance efforts. “Territory” extends well beyond the simple geographical or administrative boundaries of space to include all actors (stakeholders) interacting in this space, and harnesses the potential that these actors can bring to the development process from their own perspectives.

Considering its multi-stakeholder nature the approach requires bringing all relevant actors on-board, on the basis of the principle of “different visions but shared interests”. The exchanges among participants examined how the EU can help in strengthening the role, legitimacy and capacity of LAs as actors in development.

Working Group 1, subtheme 1: Local Authorities participation in multi-actor dialogue and contribution to policy formulation

The discussions in two rounds of World Café around the sub-theme led to the following conclusion:

With respect to Strengths and Opportunities, it was found that the participation of LAs in policy dialogue and formulation can be reinforced if they join forced through LA organisations and umbrella structures (like it is the case in Ukraine for example). It was noticed that there is an increasingly

favourable legal environment in various ENP countries, but the challenge is how to make this legal environment more participatory and inclusive (not only privileging LAs that gravitate in the orbit of the central government). It was noticed that LAs are developing their capacities for answering calls for proposals and invitations for decentralized

European Commission: “LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN DEVELOPMENT”, Baku, 11 February 2011

7

cooperation, and a better coordination with CSOs can be of particular benefit in that regard (like in NSA/LA calls for examples). The membership in international organisations or conventions (such as the Council of Europe or ARLEM for example) can also widen the horizons for an effective participation in policy formulation and draw more support to LAs.

With respect to Weaknesses and obstacles identified, participants deplored the lack of space or platforms for dialogue among LAs in the ENP region. The absence of true decentralization which makes LAs dependent on the support and subsidies of the central authorities often lead to a top-down instead of bottom-up decision making process and limits the participation of LAs in policy formulation. This is often coupled with the lack of a true will for decentralization by the central governments which tend to devolve services rather than decentralize decision-making, including authority over budgets and leads to competition among local and regional authorities for limited funds and decision-making competences. There is also an observed lack of institutionalisation and individualization of the policy making input, which is linked to the individual performance of persons rather than institutions, and stops when the person is not in power anymore. It was also noted that LAs are in most of the cases not sufficiently aware of EU applicable programmes (although these programmes exist) and do not have always the necessary capacity to benefit from these programs, especially the medium and small municipalities

Several Good Practices were also reported by the attendees such as the provision of capacity building and distance learning opportunities for LA members (Ukraine), the involvement of LAs in EU programming (such as the Annual Action Programme in Belarus, sector support on regional development in Georgia), dialogue with central authorities through a strong mayors’ Association in Armenia and Cooperation between national associations of LA within and outside the EU (PLATFORMA); EU Delegations are also actively supporting multi-stakeholder dialogue with civil society on local development at municipal level (Morocco was cited repeatedly as a best-practice model, but also Lebanon and Syria).

The sub-group also presented a set of main messages and recommendations for further thought which included the need to Strengthen LA as independent decision makers on the grass-roots level (e.g. by creating special support programmes/structures to empower LA staff); Enhancing the role of national association(s) of LA as important interlocutor between EU and central authorities (self organisation at the national level) and reinforcing the LA cooperation between EU member states and neighbouring countries (North-South, South-South, East-East and East-South); The need for more Cross Border Cooperation was also highlighted and which should be coupled with shorter procedures for selecting and contracting proposed projects, and a better information about the thematic programmes of the EU. The sub-group also recommended encouraging a trilateral political dialogue between EU, central and local authorities through setting-up competent, independent and sustainable structures (including civil society).

Working Group 1, subtheme 2: Territorial Approaches to Development and Challenges of Local Governance

The World Café discussions for sub-theme two led to the following conclusions:

In terms of Strengths and opportunities participants found that the territorial approach boosts multi-stakeholder participation and allows for an all-inclusive dialogue (although this dialogue needs to lead to concrete change ie

reaching and affecting the central level). The role of LAs in this regard is by no means a substitution to the role of the government but should be synergetic and complementary. Participants also observed that decentralization reforms are starting in various countries but are witnessing various blockages and difficulties (political, administrative, capacity, …). The EU could support the process from all angles. “Giving voice” to LAs is crucial for the sustainability and long-term impact of reforms. Local Economic development was also found to be a good entry point to achieve broader decentralization

European Commission: “LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN DEVELOPMENT”, Baku, 11 February 2011

8

With respect to Weaknesses and obstacles identified, ensuring a true and all-inclusive participation within the territorial development approach is both a challenge and an obstacle. Participants observed that there is no “history” of joint work between EU and Eastern countries (unlike the South) and hence the nascent initiatives with the East should be developed and nurtured. Participants also observed a tendency in some countries to rely on external assistance and funding for any kind of development approaches, which limits local initiative (in Yemen for example but also Lebanon). The challenge in making LAs and CSOs working together to achieve a common vision each from its own prerogatives and strong points was also pointed. Participants also noted that the ownership of the territorial development process is still a bit weak and the presence of the Ministry of Interior (or other “supervision” Ministries) is still domineering. There necessity of the emergence of new leadership was also mentioned since the same “old guard” seems to monopolize dialogue and policy making opportunities.

In terms of Good Practices participants identified the periodic training of municipal staff on emerging issues including territorial development to be particularly useful (such as in Armenia for example). The territorial approach can help recognize needs of special groups (especially those marginalized by the central government like it is the case of the Arab Minority in Israel). Another recommendation was to demonstrate the potential of the territorial approach on a pilot scale within a limited and well defined territory and then claim a broader outreach (as demonstrated by the experience of the EU Delegation to Russia). Along the same line the coordinated actions in one sector between LAs across the ENP region can lead to visible and sustainable results (France-Armenia cooperation in tourism)

With respect to Recommendations and Issues for further thoughts, participants proposed to overcome the “Beneficiaries” mentality (where LAs do not collaborate in the definition of the project and are simple recipients) and to create an exchange platform exclusively dedicated to decentralized cooperation. The lobbying to bring the voice of the local level to the central level (through the creation of LA Associations, developing lobbying tools, etc…) is also of particular importance as well as the support national minorities in developed countries in a “human territorial approach”. Participants also proposed to establish a new dedicated mechanism (by the EU) for supporting the territorial approach within a broader local development approach as well as more East and South sharing as problems and opportunities are similar as it was explicitly revealed during the Structured Dialogue discussions, with clear opportunities for LAs from both sides to learn from each other’s experience.

4.2 Working Group 2: Local Authorities and EC development cooperation implementation: aid delivery and aid effectiveness agenda

The two “tables” focused on the following subjects :

1. Aid Delivery Approaches and Financing Modalities. Participants were invited to brain-storm and consider innovative and alternative procedures to allow for a more strategic approach for the EC to engage with LAs, and civil society, and support them to enhance their capacity to exercise their roles and responsibilities as drivers of societal change and governance actors. Currently, the most common funding modalities to assign financial means to LA are calls for proposals. But new approaches are gradually being adopted by donors such as pool funding, sector programmes, block grants. Participants were asked to consider these and identify challenges and opportunities presented by the various mechanisms to access the funds by LA, their impact and contribution to empowerment as well as ways through which they could support and reinforce LAs capacity to manage the external cooperation while strengthening their roles and responsibilities in development planning, delivery of services, and local governance.

2. Paris and Accra Agenda on Aid Effectiveness: Impact on Local Authorities and role of LA in the implementation of the commitments. Participants were asked to consider the changes in the relations between national and local authorities and civil society that the implementation of the aid effectiveness agenda causes, and examine potential challenges and new responsibilities that it would bring to LA. In the light of this, they were invited to suggest innovative mechanisms to

European Commission: “LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN DEVELOPMENT”, Baku, 11 February 2011

9

facilitate LA adaptation to the new aid modality and contribution to increase the effectiveness of aid and the new aid modality paradigm.

Working Group 2, subtheme 1: Aid delivery approaches and financing modalities

Discussions developed on the subject above resulted in the following:

Participants highlighted a number of weaknesses and obstacles encountered with the financial instruments in their present form. Morocco, for example, has difficulties to incorporate EC grants into its municipal budget due to internal procedures and conflicts between services in the national administration. With regards to decentralised cooperation and twinning, representatives of LA

expressed difficulties to identify adequate European partners that have the resources, knowhow and willingness to constitute a partnership beneficiary for all parties. Obstacles to access and participate in calls for proposals was also mentioned, particularly due to the language barriers, complexity of the procedure, and remoteness and scarce resources of small and medium municipalities.

A number of good examples and best practice was mentioned which included the creation of supporting mechanisms (helpdesks) to provide advice and accompany partners throughout the implementation of projects (ex. Ciudad). The cross border cooperation programme’s aims and results have been of great value, particularly for Belarus. The principle of ring-fencing as practiced in Lebanon was also considered a useful tool worth replicating.

To end, the participants in the working group made recommendations and identified issues requiring further thought which included a call to the EU to continue and strengthen cooperation between EU and ENP municipalities, as well as cooperation among municipalities within the same country (Moldova). Participants agreed that EU should have a multi-layered approach in its bilateral cooperation by targeting LA in all its projects and programmes from the early stages of the drafting of the CSP and NIP. The need for a simplification of procedures and adapting existing EC instruments (Twinning/TAIEX/budget support) was mentioned with the request to provide training, seminars, consultations before launching the CfP in order to increase participation in and absorption capacity of EC financing modalities by LAs, and to fairly give the chance to all municipalities to have access for funding instead of having only the well-connected or well-experienced municipalities access such funds. As regards to CfP, participants recommended that in kind contribution be accepted as a co-financing modality by LA and considered that the two-phased application is very demanding and prefer a one-time full application form system. Participants also agreed that budget support would be a useful instrument, very appreciated by LAs, if a decentralisation process is in place in the beneficiary’s country.

Working Group 2, subtheme 2: Aid effectiveness agenda: impact on local authorities and their role in the implementation of the commitments

Participants recognised as Strengths and Opportunities the harmonisation of donor’s aid cooperation for its potential to reduce demands on LA, particularly advantageous for small municipalities with scarce resources and low number of qualified staff. Large, urban municipalities are more likely to have the capacity to respond to various donor’s and complex procedures. It was also felt around the table that ownership is strengthened at local level when a

decentralisation process is in place that defines LA’s role and means to formulate policies and respond to local expectations.

European Commission: “LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN DEVELOPMENT”, Baku, 11 February 2011

10

As regards to weaknesses and obstacles identified, the lack of properly trained and skilled staff in municipalities remain an obstacles in dealing with donor’s agencies requirements (project management, reporting, monitoring, etc.). Participants agreed that aid cooperation for LA channelled through central governments risk to benefit mainly municipalities well connected with the central government, to the disadvantage of other remote municipalities and the low level of awareness of funding opportunities and CfP publications remains a major obstacle to access funding from donors.

Various positive experiences and best practices were reported, highlighting Twinning/”Peering” with other municipalities as a useful and appropriate instrument to respond to specific local needs and thereby ensuring proper ownership by parties. Ex. Twinning Amman-Toronto on urban planning. The creation of a Local Development Bureau (in Lebanon) was mentioned for its contribution to training staff and promoting greater communication and interactions between LA staff and civil society. Grouping of small municipalities within a Federation or Cluster can be very useful as every municipality can contribute to the group according to its know-how and resources. (Lebanon, Ukraine, ...)

In terms of recommendations and issues for further thought, participants reiterated that the elaboration of strategic plans at local level are a key tool to ensure that aid cooperation responds to the needs of the citizens and contribute to ownership by both LA and citizens. They further agreed that in order for aid to local authorities to be effective and translated into sustainable results should be part of a comprehensive decentralisation process and the EU should use its leverage with central governments to speed the process. Participants also recommended that LA and national associations of LA, be given a bigger participative role in the definition of donor’s strategies to counter central government’s favouritism for politically friendly regions/municipalities which creates pockets of power concentration and excludes less supportive regions.

5. Closing Ceremony

The closing session of the seminar was dedicated to the presentation of the results of the working groups by the four table hosts of each of the World Café discussion group (and which are detailed in the previous sections of this report)

The four nominated persons chosen by participants to represent them at the upcoming Structured Dialogue sessions in Brussels and Budapest were also announced and include Ms. Zakia MRINI from Morocco, Ms. Gabriela CIUMAC from Moldova, Mr. Zviad ARCHUADZE from Georgia and Mr. Roger ACHI from Lebanon.

Ambassador Roland Kobia concluded by expressing his satisfaction that the authorities of Azerbaijan accepted to host this event in Baku and indicated that there is an increased awareness among governmental officials of the need and importance to promote dialogue among different layers of government and civil society and that the EU is committed to continue advocating and supporting constructive dialogue. Mr. Angelo Baglio, Head of the F1 Unit (Relation with Civil Society) at the Directorate General for Development and Cooperation in EuropeAid thanked the attendees and all the technical and support staff who helped in organizing the seminar and in facilitating its activities.

European Commission: “LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN DEVELOPMENT”, Baku, 11 February 2011

11

SUPPORTING INITIATIVE "LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN DEVELOPMENT" Baku, 11 February 2011

11 February 2011

08.45 – 09.00 Registration of participants (previous day most of them)

09.00 – 10.00 Opening session: Guba room

Welcome by the European Commission, the European Parliament, the Presidency of the EU and the Azerbaijan Authorities

10.00 – 11.00

Update on the outcomes on the Structured Dialogue regional seminar (main conclusions and recommendations) 15 min

Panel discussion: Local Authorities and (EC) development cooperation: Setting the policy context and aid delivery mechanisms for LAs (20 min)

Presentation of the aid effectiveness agenda, the communication "LAs: Actors for development" and EC financial instruments of support to

Local Authorities

Questions / Answers 11.00– 11.15 Presentation of Working Groups and Methodology

11.15 – 11.30 Coffee break

11.30 – 13.00 Guba Room

Case Study (LA) Working Group 1: Local Authorities in policy and programming

Shamakhi Room Case Study (LA)

Working Group 2: Local Authorities in implementation 13.00 – 14.15 Lunch Baku Room

14.15 – 16.30 Working Group 1: Local Authorities in policy and programming Working Group 2: Local Authorities in implementation

16.30 – 17.30 Pause (preparation of WGs conclusions and recommendations)

17.30–18.30 Plenary session: Presentation of WGs conclusions and recommendations Guba Room

19.00 Cocktail dinner Amirov room, Park Hyatt

Working language: EN /FR