German Polity Export a Critical Discourse Archaeology of the Political Objects of German Development Cooperation with Sub-Saharan Africa

Universiteit van Amsterdam Graduate School of Social Sciences Research Master International Development Studies

MSc Thesis German Polity Export A Critical Discourse Archaeology of the Political Objects of German Development Cooperation with Sub-Saharan Africa.

“We are not asked to export our way of life, our forms of production, our political or social structures, but to help others find their own.” Erhard Eppler, 1971, 33

Thesis supervisor: Dr. ir. Y.P.B. Yves Van Leynseele Second reader: Dr. T.A. Mieke Lopes Cardozo

Kolja Drescher 12784109 [email protected]

Submission: Hannover, 31st of May 2021

Abstract As any discourse affects the real world, political objects in development aid discourse affect the political reality determines the lives of countless people. This paper examines the discourse of Germany as a donor in development aid, focusing on the establishment of “good” political structures. The existing literature has addressed different concepts of political objects (e.g., democracy promotion), their implementation, and effectiveness. Still, no attention has been given to the process of producing these ideas in the context of donors through public discourse. The objective of this research is to verify the assumption that Germany’s domestic political development influences political objects of its development cooperation and to explore whether this imposition can be understood as export of German polity. This qualitative study encompasses examining documents and semi-structured expert interviews as part of a Critical Discourse Analysis. By making use of Foucault’s approaches of archaeology, the analysis serves to unpack the continuities and shifts in the German discourse formation on polity export to Sub-Saharan Africa. Firstly, the results of this research show that the political objects of German development aid are heavily influenced by values and Germany’s domestic political development. Secondly, even though German actors emphasise the impossibility of simply ‘exporting’ Germany’s political architecture, implications in the discourse suggest that it would be desirable. Thirdly, German actors most actively highlight the exportability of the ordoliberal understanding of state and market relation. Therefore, this paper concludes that the German development discourse constantly reproduces superiority as well as guiding values and determines the German model of political economy as exportable. Based on these findings, the study offers one of the first systematic illustrations of developmental political objects and their discursive origins. Polity export - as conceptual model - can be used for further studies and critique.

Keywords: Development Aid, Germany, Democracy Promotion, Foucauldian Discourse Analysis, Sub- Saharan Africa

Acknowledgements A Master's thesis with an obstinate and convoluted orientation such as this one would be impossible to implement and worthless without the degree of academic freedom and encouragement I received from my supervisor. Therefore, my sincere thanks go to my thesis supervisor Yves Van Leynseele, whose patient, comprehensive, critical, and tirelessly motivating guidance has significantly contributed to the preparation and realisation of this analysis. I would also like to thank my second reader Mieke Lopes Cardozo for her critical objections during the defence.

Special thanks go to the people who agreed to give me an interview upon their fields of work, impressions on the ground, and difficulties in implementing concepts. Furthermore, I would like to thank all the people in Federal information offices as well as the foundation offices and library staff in Amsterdam, Oldenburg, Hanover, and Bonn who, under the difficult circumstances of the global pandemic, nevertheless willingly provided me with works for this thesis (even via interlibrary loan).

Furthermore, I would like to express my gratitude to the staff of the International Development Programme of the Universiteit van Amsterdam, namely Eva van der Sleen and Courtney Vegelin, for their outstanding support and tireless willingness to help. Finally, I would like to thank my family and friends who have supported me at every stage of this work and have added value to it through their feedback.

Table of Contents

Abstract ...... i Acknowledgements ...... ii List of Figures ...... v List of Acronyms and Abbreviations...... vi 1. Introduction ...... 1 1.1. Relevance ...... 2 1.2. Thesis Setup ...... 3 2. Towards Polity Export – A Theoretical Frame ...... 3 2.1. Political Objects in The Academic Discourse ...... 4 2.1.1. Historical and Political Reasons ...... 6 2.1.2. Theoretical and Ideological Influences...... 8 2.1.3. Modes of Implementation ...... 10 2.2. Polity Export as Conceptual Scheme ...... 11 3. Research Context ...... 14 4. Methodological Procedure ...... 16 4.1. Critical Realism ...... 16 4.2. Discourse Archaeology ...... 16 4.3. Units of Analysis ...... 18 4.4. Units of Observation and Sampling ...... 18 4.5. Data Collection Methods ...... 19 4.6. Data Analysis ...... 19 4.7. Ethical Considerations ...... 20 4.8. Reflection on the Quality and Limitation of the Research ...... 21 5. Archaeology of Identities ...... 22 5.1. German Values...... 23 5.2. Reflection and Counter Constructions within the Discourse ...... 24 5.3. Superiority and Model ...... 26 5.4. Construction of the SSA Region as Bad Governance ...... 28 5.5. Interim Summary ...... 30 6. Archaeology of Direct Political Objects ...... 31 6.1. Democracy ...... 31 6.2. Democratic Concepts ...... 34 6.3. Good Governance ...... 37 6.4. The Rule of Law ...... 41 6.5. Administration and Management ...... 41 6.6. Interim Summary ...... 43 7. Archaeology of Implicit Political Objects ...... 45 7.1. Framework Conditions ...... 46 7.2. Liberal Statehood ...... 47 7.3. Ordoliberalism and Social Market Economy ...... 50 7.4. Interim Summary ...... 53 8. Conclusion ...... 54 8.1. Main Findings ...... 54 8.2. Suggestion for Further Research...... 55 8.3. Concluding Remarks ...... 56

iii

9. References ...... 57 9.1. Primary Sources ...... 57 9.1.1. Conducted Interview...... 57 9.1.2. Policy Papers, Annual Reports, Information Publications ...... 57 9.1.3. Parliamentary Protocols ...... 62 9.1.4. Parliamentary Printed Matter ...... 65 9.1.5. Professional Journal Issues ...... 74 9.2. Secondary Sources ...... 78 Appendices ...... 88 Appendix 1: Data Collection Procedure ...... 88 Appendix 2: Coding Books ...... 89 Appendix 3: Interview Questionnaire ...... 92

List of Figures

Figure 1 Conceptual Scheme - Polity Export ...... 12 Figure 2 Units of Observation ...... 18 Figure 3 Codes Identity-Building and Othering ...... 22 Figure 4 African Governments as Bad Governance...... 29 Figure 5 Direct Political Objects ...... 31 Figure 6 Democracy in the German Aid Discourse ...... 32 Figure 7 Democracy as Precondition and Mean ...... 32 Figure 8 Democracy Definitions ...... 34 Figure 9 Use of the Term Governance ...... 38 Figure 10 Good Governance Definitions ...... 38 Figure 11 Variations of Good Governance ...... 39 Figure 12 Good Governance as Precondition and Mean ...... 40 Figure 13 Codes Implicit Objects ...... 45

List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ABBR. ENGLISH GERMAN AA Federal Foreign Office Auswärtiges Amt AfD Alternative for Germany Alternative für Deutschland AU African Union Afrikanische Union AwZ Committee on Economic Cooperation and Ausschuss für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit Development und Entwicklung BMUB Federal Ministry of the Environment, Nature Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz Conservation and Nuclear Safety und nukleare Sicherheit BMF Federal Ministry of Finance Bundesministerium der Finanzen BMWi Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Energie Energy BMZ Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche and Development Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung BT German Federal Parliament Bundestag CDA Critical Discourse Analysis Kritische Diskursanaylse CDG Carl Duisberg Society Carl Duisberg Gesellschaft CDU Christian Democratic Union of Germany Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands CR Critical Realism CSU Christian Social Union in Bavaria Christlich-Soziale Union in Bayern DEval German Institute for Development Evaluation Deutsches Evaluierungsinstitut der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit DIE German Development Institute Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik DSE German Foundation for International Deutsche Stiftung für internationale Entwicklung Development E+Z Development and Cooperation Entwicklung und Zusammenarbeit FDP Free Democratic Party Freie Demokratische Partei FES Friedrich Ebert Foundation Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung FNS, FNF Friedrich Naumann Foundation (for Freedom) Friedrich-Naumann-Stiftung (für die Freiheit) GIGA German Institute for Leibniz-Institut für Globale und Regionale Global and Area Studies Studien GIZ German Corporation for International Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Cooperation Zusammenarbeit GTZ German Corporation for Technical Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Cooperation Zusammenarbeit hbs Heinrich Böll Foundation Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung HSS Hanns Seidel Foundation Hanns-Seidel-Stiftung IMF International Monetary Fund Internationaler Währungsfonds INEF Institute for Delevopment and Peace Institut für Entwicklung und Frieden KAS Konrad Adenauer Foundation Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung MDG Millennium Development Goals Millenniums-Entwicklungsziele NED National Endowment of Democracy NIE New Institutional Economics Neue Institutionenökonomik RLS Rosa Luxemburg Foundation Rosa-Luxemburg-Stiftung SAP Structural Adjustment Programmes Strukturanpassungsprogramm SDG Sustainable Development Goals Ziele für nachhaltige Entwicklung SPD Social Democratic Party of Germany Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands SSA Sub-Saharan Africa Subsahara-Afrika OACPS Organisation of African, Caribbean and Pacific Organisation Afrikanischer, Karibischer und States Pazifischer Staaten ODA Official Development Assistance Öffentliche Entwicklungszusammenarbeit OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Organisation für wirtschaftliche Development Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung US, USA United States (of America) Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika WBG World Bank Group Weltbank Gruppe ZEF Center for Development Research Zentrum für Entwicklungsforschung ZÖV Central Office for Public Administration Zentralstelle für öffentliche Verwaltung vi

1. Introduction During its G20 presidency in 2017, the German Federal Government set an emphasis on ‘Partnership with Africa’ introducing the ‘Compact with Africa’ initiative of the Federal Ministry of Finance and a strategy paper by the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) named ‘Africa and Europe – New Partnership for Development, Peace and Future’ (Kamp, 2017, 66). This particular document has been referred to as ‘Marshall plan with Africa.’ In Germany, the term evokes the collective memory of the financial and technical support provided by the US government after the end of World War II (European Recovery Program, ERP), which led to economic growth and social reconstruction in the years that followed. By making use of this iconic wording, the BMZ invokes the message of crafting a policy, which is capable of bringing about the same economic and social transformation on the African continent. The strategy paper issues this comparison as follows:

“Naturally, these challenges can only be compared to a limited extent with the situation in Europe after the Second World War. The necessary efforts, however, can be compared. At the same time, the Marshall Plan stands for the will and optimism for a successful path of peace and development in the cooperation between Europe and Africa” (BMZ, 2017a, 4).

Interesting is the attempt to duplicate or reuse a strategy of success in the development discourse. Here, the Federal Government utilises the German experience of domestic development as a discourse strategy for its development cooperation with the African continent. This research argues that states engaging in international development processes of aiding or assisting other states tend to draw from their own experience and understanding of social transformation, particularly domestic political development. That would mean that the historical political development of a donor country influences the object of the intentional development cooperation with third countries in the phenomenon called development aid.

The systematic examination of the central assumption of this research comes with the conceptual challenge of the confusing theoretical distinction and terminology of political objects (c. f. Hearn, 2000, 1; Zanger, 2000, 458; Kloss-Tulius, 2003, 320; Burnell, 2007, 1; Catón & Steltenmeier, 2008, 384; Muno, 2012, 396; Hobson, 2015). By political objects, the upcoming analysis encompasses all discourse actions and units of the German aid agenda that relate to the institutional shaping and transformation of public coexistence or the authoritarian allocation of material and immaterial values in society abroad (c.f. Easton, 1965 24). The term political object is not to be confused with the political objectives of development aid, which encompass the instrumentalisation of aid for different ambitions. Therefore, this research argues for the use of a new conceptional approach to examine the phenomenon systematically. To avoid the concepts already in place and enable a systematic verification of the guiding assumption, this study will develop and utilise a new conceptual model in the theoretical frame of Chapter 2. This model will be called polity export and be understood as practices and processes of transplantation and implementation of political culture and institutions of aid donor states in aid recipient states. Here, polity refers to the institutional (e.g., constitutionally created) norms and the resulting orders, political procedures (e.g., constitutional regulations), political system, and political culture and societal organisation. The conceptual model of polity export enables this research to explore the development discourse for political objects needed to pursue the hypothesis deductively. The German aid industry as ‘donor’ (present in Chapter 3) and the SSA region as ‘recipient’ serves as a case.

Therefore, the central research question of this study will be: How is the German discourse on polity export to Sub-Saharan Africa shaped by own political development and tradition? 1

In general, foreign aid practices create or extend a cultural, economic, and political relationship between donors and recipients, which may involve a form of power by which donors seek to inﬂuence recipients (Bindra, 2018, 127). Furthermore, as Western donor countries naturally differ in the specific institutional configurations of their representative democratic system of governance (Rothstein, 2012, 152), they also vary in the ways of concretising and implementing globally accepted objects of development cooperation (e.g., good governance). Hence, this research intends to unpack the national ‘aid industry’ Blackbox discourse while assuming the donor country’s political development as a factor behind the crafting of these policies. The pioneering works of discourse analysis with an aidnographic focus inspire this discourse focus (Escobar 1995; Mudimbe 1988; Abrahamsen, 2000, et al.). The research’s methodology is heavily oriented towards Ziai’s (2016) approach of using Foucault’s concepts of discourse archaeology to analyse the development discourse order. This procedure will be further explained in Chapter 4. Thus, this research explores the discourse order as consistent formations (archaeology) of the political objects of the German development discourse. In summary, it can be said that this research utilises the Foucauldian discourse analysis tool of archaeology in the empirical Chapters 5, 6, and 7 to verify the assumption that the German historical development influences its aid discourse over the polity export yet to be theoretically developed. 1.1. Relevance It is crucial to raise the relevance of investigating political objects in development aid discourses and their ideological roots. Development studies have always been about politics. One of the earliest standard references of the field ‘political development’ might be The Politics of the Developing Areas by Almond and Coleman from 1960 (Fischer et al., 2016, 6; Bates, 2018, 65). Herein, the authors use Comparative Politics methods to classify `non-Western political systems’ and define the character of ‘the modern political system’ (Coleman, 1960, 532). There have been numerous studies regarding the political inclusion and participation of people living in poverty (e.g., Hickey, 2005) or the de-politicisation effects of development aid projects (e.g., Ferguson 1994; Mosse 2005; Harriss 2001) analysing the demotion from governmental to the public, to the private sphere, etc. (c.f. Mishra, 2011, 165).

However, far less attention has been given to the content and the origin, creation, and transformation of development agendas and policy from the perspective of the donor country. Indeed, there are many calls for political science research on development policy as a policy field, which tend to receive less attention in academic debate and research (Hartmann, 2016, 816; Rokkan 1979; Kevenhörster, 2009, 15). Therefore, an interrelation of political science and development studies is demanded (Faust, 2016, 324), which this research attempts in its research emphasis and approach. Further, there is no denying that the system of governance has a vast influence on the life of the governed people and the development of states towards peace and sustainable growth (Tetzlaff & Jakobeit, 2005, 150; Stockmann et al., 2016, 408; Bridoux & Kurki, 2014, 1; Narayan et al., 2000, 265). Amartya Sen argued in Development as Freedom (1999) that a democratic system is an essential component of the development process because of its intrinsic importance, instrumental contribution, and constructive role (ibid. 157). The creation of a political system with legitimacy in the eyes of the majority has even been titled as the “main challenge facing Third World societies today” (Smith, 2003, 275). Gerring et al. (2012) empirically opposed the assumed relationship between a country’s current regime type and its subsequent human development but argued for a causal relationship if democracy is considered a long- run, historical phenomenon (ibid. 14). Therefore, it is crucial to consider the political dimension of development aid at all times. Thus, this research critically engages with the processes of formation of

2 these particular objects in political discourse. As any discourse1 affects the real world, the political objects in the discourse on German development aid affect the political reality determines the lives of countless people. 1.2. Thesis Setup In order to be able to pursue the research question systematically, the academic discourse on political objects will firstly be examined within a theoretical framework, and an applicable conceptual scheme will be developed. After the case of Germany was described in the research context, the methodological procedure will reveal the scientific approach of applying the developed conceptual scheme polity export to the German discourse order. Finally, three empirical chapters will derive from the explored discourse order and will be examined: the construction of Germanness and SSA in the Archaeology of Identity (Chapter 5), the illustration of direct political objects in Chapter 6, and the Archaeology of Implicit2 Political Objects (Chapter 7) within the discourse order.

2. Towards Polity Export – A Theoretical Frame The academic discourse on development aid and various aid agendas comprises several concepts and definitions for political objects, like the central units of interest for this research. Firstly, the theoretical frame will illustrate what political objects are carried in development aid, secondly why they are part of development aid, and, thirdly, what they are influenced by and how they are implemented. The objective of this chapter is to conclude with a conceptual scheme that encompasses all dimensions of the phenomenon of interest. With the research subject being the discourse practices of the Blackbox ‘aid industry’ and its inherent power relations, the research has an aidnographic emphasis. Not in its methods but in its research orientation and subject, this study aidnographically examines the vertical relation between ‘donor’ and ‘recipient,’ and pragmatically engages with the aid phenomenon (Mosse, 2013, 229; Gould, 2014, 1). The term ‘industry’ is used to focus on the basic description of aid practices: “(…) how they evolved, what they are, experiences, and debates around them” (Haan, 2009, ix). For the purpose of verifying the assumption of development experiences influencing the assistance provided abroad, the aidnographic research will describe and systematically analyse the discourse of a donor country’s aid industry.

While foreign aid is defined as a voluntary transfer of public resources between governments or other (international) organisations (Lancaster, 2007, 9), intentional development (aid) as part of foreign aid has been constructed as multiple means to multiple and continually varying ends. These ends comprise ‘nation’s development goals,’ ‘economic growth,’ ‘equity,’ ‘national self-reliance’ or even the process of enlarging people’s choices’ or of enhancing ‘participatory democratic processes’ (Morgenthau, 1962, 302; Cowen& Shenton, 1995, 2). Political objects of development aid3 shall not be mistaken with political development or the political nature of foreign aid, which is in Morgenthau’s understanding one weapon amongst many in the “political armour of the nation” (ibid, 1962, 309). On the other hand, in the sense of Comparative Political Science, political development can be understood as “the transformation of a political system from one type into another” (La Palombara, 1967, 4). Or, in its unintended nature,

1The conception of discourse is explained in more detail in Chapter 4.2. of the methodological procedure. 2 See Chapter 4.6. Data Analysis. 3 Concerning the translation: development aid (in German: Entwicklungshilfe) and development cooperation (Entwicklungszusammenarbeit) are in general synonymously united under the term Entwicklungspolitik (literally, development policy), even though all three terms are not interchangeable in their meaning. In this work, the attempt has been made not to distort their meaning and its context. 3 defined as “elaboration of new and more complex form of politics and government as societies restructure themselves so as to absorb progressively the stock and flow of the modern technology which is, essentially, uniform” (Rostow, 1971b, 3). The first theoretical attempt of this chapter is to identify and delineate objects viewed as being political means of intentional development, firstly distinguished from unintended political development as defined.

Once more, this study defines political objects as discourse units of a development aid agenda related to the institutional shaping and transformation of public coexistence or the authoritarian allocation of material and immaterial values in society abroad. As in other studies before, it is argued here that the political objects can be identified by the discourse that labels these actions and therefore creates them. Hence, development aid objects identified by the academic discourse as intentionally transforming the political or societal sphere will be illustrated in the following.

2.1. Political Objects in The Academic Discourse Traditionally, the North-South agenda of development aid and cooperation is focused on poverty reduction. From Truman’s ‘creation of the Third World’ (Escobar, 1995, 4) in 1949 until the 1980s, the main objects of this development aid of modernisation and industrialisation have been financial support, equipment (e.g., for agriculture) aid, infrastructure projects, vocational training (Doornbos, 2004, 373; Lancaster, 2007, 44; Williams, 2012, 3; Jakupec, 2018, 20; Resnick, 2018, 411; Bohnet, 2019, 50). These objects might be political in their high significances in terms of allocation and geopolitics but do not intend to alter the political structures of the recipient countries. As the objective of foreign aid in the international system was the economic development and growth of ‘developing states’ (Bindra, 2018, 139), the global development agenda was mainly dominated by economic problems and poverty, for example, in Africa (Cranenburgh, 2019, 1).

The historical origin of development aid object turned political is described differently within the reviewed literature. Most authors agree that development aid started serving the purpose of, for example, democracy promotion in the 1990s (Brown, 2005, 181; Crawford, 2007, 170; Haas, 2017, 3; Kloss-Tullius, 2003, 315; Spranger & Wolff 2003; Lancaster, 2007, 11). The end of the Cold War is also characterised as a turning point for Germany regarding democracy promotion in their aid agenda (Rüland & Werz, 2002, 78). Others identify the rise of political objects in the 1980s (Hearn, 2000, 815; Lazarus, 2013, 260; Cranenburgh, 2019, 1) or even in the 1920s (Lloyd, 2010, 548).

The most common and most frequently encountered objects in the aid agenda defined by the reviewed academic discourse are the promotion (or aiding) of democracy, human and civil rights and good governance, the rule of law, and civil servants (Cranenburgh, 2019, 2; Hackenesch, 2019, 1). These self- declared intentional forms of development aid encompass a variety of different concepts and definitions. Burnell (2007) acknowledges the confusing lexicon of terms, spanning from democracy promotion, democracy support, democracy assistance, democracy aid to political development aid (ibid. 1). But even when looking at only one concept like democracy promotion, it is still hard to clearly define it, partly because of scientific scattering across several academic disciplines, including development studies (Jahn, 2012, 687). Hence, these different terms should be briefly distinguished from each other.

Democracy promotion is not necessarily an object of development aid. Democracy promotion is, in its nature, a highly complex process (c.f. Axtmann, 2007, 131). As there are numerous definitions of democracy to be found, defining its intentional development is even more complex. Democracy

4 promotion needs to be differentiated from democratisation, democracy support and assistance (Bridoux & Kurki, 2014, 2). But there are also several ways of fostering democratic structures in international development. For example, as a diplomatic end of international relations, as coerced result of military intervention, as a political condition for receiving ODA, or as the central objective of foreign aid projects and knowledge transfer (Schraeder, 2002, 219-220). However, there can also be aid provided for democracy promotion (Lancaster, 2007, 48). Democracy promotion can be described as “practice of fostering the establishment, improvement and stabilization of democratic regimes from the outside” (Poppe, Leiniger, Wolff, 2019b, 777), or “those foreign policy activities which aim at fostering the transition to, consolidation of, or improvement of democracy in other states and their societies” (Huber, 2015, 23).

Democracy assistance in foreign aid can be described as democracy aid (Carothers, 2007, 112; Barkan, 2012). Democracy assistance might even be used synonymously for political development aid: “More commonly known as 'democracy assistance', political aid is targeted at governmental structures such as parliament, the judiciary and local government, as well as civil society organisations, with the aim of strengthening the institutions and culture of liberal democracy” (Hearn, 2000, 815). Further, democracy assistance is an ensemble of technical, financial, material, and symbolic instruments provided by democracy promotion agencies in non-or semi-democratic states and those are undergoing democratisation (Bridoux & Kurki, 2014, 3). It is also possible to distinguish democracy assistance between political and developmental approaches. In contrast, the developmental one is based on the conviction that basic features of democratic governance—such as transparency, accountability, and responsiveness—contribute to more equitable socioeconomic development overall, democracy here is rather a factor in the larger picture of social and national development (Carothers, 2009, 8).

This developmental notion of democratic governance leads to the next object, which is good governance. Aid donors claim that good governance and democracy share a synergistic relationship (Lazarus, 2013, 260). Inherent to the good governance concept are the rule of law, functioning bureaucracy, transparent and accountable administrative structures, fight against corruption, and the respect of human rights (Nuscheler, 2009, 13f.). It is “characterised by minimal, 'neutral', accountable, transparent and participatory government with an effective bureaucracy, and a pluralist, 'independent' civil society” (Ayers, 2006, 323). Despite the participatory notion, good governance is neither simply democracy nor merely the absence of corruption, the rule of law, efficient government, or administration (Rothstein, 2012, 152). Good governance should instead be characterised as a system of management and self-controlled improvement of “efficiency” and “transparency” (Anders, 2009, 2). Even though the promotion of good governance does not equal democracy, their presents in international aid discourses and relevance for examining political objects are undeniable. Abrahamsen (2000) concluded that the good governance discourse “reproduces the hierarchies and relationships that have been the hallmark of development ever since its inception in the post-war period. As ’regime of truth’, development discourse has produced a form of knowledge about the third world that still informs and underpins contemporary North-South relations.” (ibid. 139).

Even more than democracy, good governance can be viewed as a political object of development aid4 and as a guiding principle for many dimensions of the aid discourse. The concept of effectiveness as a principle of good governance is also to found in administrative law and effective implementation of the rule of law (c.f. Addink, 2019). Also, as part of the good governance that emerged in the 1990s issued

4 Especially, because it was designed for that purpose, see page 7. 5 later, human rights were incorporated in the discourse, after mostly being considered ‘right to develop’ (Uvin, 2007, 599).

Two other objects need to be shortly described here. The first one being civil society support in foreign aid. With this, the aid of the donor government is directly given to non-state actors working in the recipient country instead of the recipient government (Seng Tang, 2021, 10). The second object of the development debate is the state's role in transforming its economy and society. The theoretical line of conflict stretches particularly between the development theories of Keynesian economics, neo-classical marginalism/neoliberalism and the concept of the developmental state (Desai, 2017, 50). Here, it can be argued that the developmental state agenda with its Listian state management is interchangeable with the principle of good governance. But the developmental state is both less and more demanding than the good governance agenda because of its outcome-oriented emphasis, rather than good governance’s minimalistic setting of rules (Fritz & Menocal, 2007, 538).

In this first section of the theoretical frame, the political objects of the academic discourse regarding development aid have been illustrated. As mentioned above, the central conceptual problem and puzzle were affirmed that there are many different concepts and confusing terminologies. As a result, there is no conceptual consensus regarding the listed objects and further the dimension that the development objects of policy improvements and better governance can be seen as preconditions for development aid and development objectives themselves (Nanda, 2006, 275). Additionally, the multitude of concepts and meanings generally occurs with a pre-defined ideological package, as illustrated in the following.

2.1.1. Historical and Political Reasons This section will explore why the objects mentioned have found their way into the development discourse by looking at the historical origin and the political reasons behind them.

The promotion of democracy has existed since democracy itself. The case is even made that Ancient Athens recognised the uniqueness of this form of governance through democracy promotion (Huber, 2015, 7). Contemporary democracy promotion originates in the eighteenth- and nineteenth-century anti-imperialist foreign policy of the newly formed United States of America (Kurki, 2018, 429/Smith, 1994). Under Woodrow Wilson’s liberal internationalism, the USA started as a first-generation contemporary democracy promoter in the twentieth century, accompanied by the – largely rhetorical – triumph of the democratic ideal around the globe in this time (Ruschemeyer et al., 1992, 46; Huber, 2015, 11).

In the 1960s, democracy promotion became a part of the new “development aid” agenda. It underwent its so-called ‘golden ages’ in the 1980s, introducing the National Endowment of Democracy (NED) in the US (Carothers, 2007, 112). Especially in the 1990s, the confidence of liberal Western states for assistance equalled the demand of many regions to reform their governance structures (Kurki, 2018, 429). The US redirected their foreign policy towards democracy promotion in the 1980s due to the fade of the communist ‘threat’ (Demmers et al., 2004, 6). Democracy promotion in Africa became an increasingly important priority for Western donors in the late 1980s, with a growing normative consensus supporting democracy and human rights since that time (Cranenburgh, 2019, 1). Although democracy assistance also has a long history, its visibility became more prominent during the 1990s as much of the developing world experienced a wave of political liberalization. Several bilateral aid agencies began to establish democracy and governance units (Resnick, 2018, 412). The early 1990s might be a turning point of democracy promotion towards becoming an object of development aid due

6 to the ‘triumph’ of the Western liberal democracy (Jourde, 2017, 311; Bridoux & Kurki, 2014, 66). While Fukuyama postulated the ‘end of history’ and the “universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government” (Fukuyama, 1989, 4), Platter identified the “extraordinary worldwide momentum and prestige of democracy” (ibid. 1991, 42). The critical outcome of the global spread of Western democracy is the trend of speaking about democracy as a “universal value” whose “roots” can be nurtured in all regions of the world regardless of culture (Schraeder, 2002, 7; Sen, 1999, 5).

The titled “crisis of governance” rooted in the outcomes of Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAPs) during the 1970s and 1980s was mainly allocated towards the “weak” governance performance and institutional aberrations in SSA (Brown, 2005, 183; Hearn, 2000, 817; Nuscheler, 2009, 12). The persistent absence of economic growth seen as caused by a lack of government accountability opened the eyes for democracy and political stability with a neo-classical reform and conservative economic turn in the late 1980s (Rapley, 2007, 117f.; Nielinger, 1998, 28; Uvin, 2007, 597; Mokoena, 2018, 756). An early hallmark of this turn was the report Accelerated Development in Sub-Saharan Africa in 1981, also known as Berg report (Ziai, 2015, 128). Later, a product of the SAP reflection was the set of new conditions crafted by the Washington based international institutions, given the name Washington Consensus by John Williamson in 1989 (Kurer, 2017, 216). The move towards neo-liberal principles and the reorganisation of state bureaucracies can be considered a global phenomenon during the 1990s and the beginning of the 21st century (Anders, 2009, 141).

The long-term study Sub-Saharan Africa. From Crisis to Sustainable Growth (see World Bank 1989a), in which the World Bank evaluated the SAPs of the 1980s, is considered the birth of the good governance approach (Anders, 2009, 146; Stockmann et al., 2016, 398). In this study, poor governance and the alleged "failure" of public institutions are seen as the cause of Africa's weak economic situation (World Bank 1989a: xii). This poor governance includes allowing an unreliable legal system, inefficient public management, and a lack of the rule of law and transparency (ibid.: 60f.; Nuscheler 2009: 12). Therefore, good governance can be considered a specifically produced concept for the SSA region (Nanda, 2006, 271). The World Bank discovered that political institutions were crucial for development and introduced good governance, which rapidly spread and, since the early 1990s, can be regarded as a leitmotif in the development discourse (Beichelt et al., 2014, 69). Governance can be defined as “all the numerous ways in which individuals and public and private institutions manage their common affairs” (ibid.), or in the words of the World Bank as “building a pluralistic institutional structure' and creating intermediaries between the government and the people” (Ayer, 2006, 330).

One reason for good governance in the aid agenda might be the Western intention “to enable themselves to question aid-recipience countries policy structures and processes and get them according to the criteria and conditionalities of as set by the donors” (Doornbos, 2004, 382). As a result, the allocation of aid might be made on political grounds and justified under the rubric of good governance (ibid. 389; Nanda, 2006, 275). African policy makers themselves often consider governance as one more item on the list of aid conditionalities (Mkandawire, 2007). Aid conditionality is also a crucial instrument for democracy promotion of development aid (Bridoux & Kurki, 2014, 57). In the 1980s, the US foreign policy extended the ideological democracy promotion in broader pro-democratic principles (Bridoux & Kurki, 2014, 5). In terms of impact, research findings suggest that—under certain conditions— democracy aid and political conditionality have contributed to political reforms in Africa between 1990 and 2015 (Hackenesch, 2019, 12).

After all, the general change towards new conceptions like democracy, good governance, and human rights (and sustainable growth, globalisation, and ownership) began in the 1990s. Reasons for this 7 change were the end of the Cold War, the manifest failure of structural adjustment programmes in the crisis of development theory in the 1980s, and a re-definition of development as being about more than holistic economic growth (Uvin, 2007, 597; Ziai, 2015, 90). For Sen (1999), developing and strengthening democracy is an essential component of development due to its intrinsic importance, instrumental contribution, and constructive role (ibid. 157; Beichelt, 2014, 71). For Abrahamsen (2000), the democracy in the development discourse emerges as a “necessary political framework for successful economic reforms” (ibid. 139). Within this discourse, democracy and economic liberalisation are “conceptually linked in the one concept of ‘good governance’” (ibid).

Even more interesting might be why states are actively fostering democratic governance and no other forms of government. Particular when even non-Western or autocratic states formulate strategies for promoting democracy in the international system (c.f. Youngs, 2019). From an institutionalist standpoint, fostering democratic structures in the global system cultivates peace, earliest suggested by Kant’s democratic peace (Scott, 1999, 146). Promoting democracy abroad is also a prime example of identity dynamics, as it constructs an image of the self as democratic and the other as undemocratic (Huber, 2015, 37). Youngs also draw this conclusion in terms of non-Western actors: “Non-Western states’ commitment to democracy support is driven by a combination of country-specific, identity- related values and strategic interests (ibid. 4)”.

In sum, this brief historical review has highlighted the reasons and mechanisms behind the aid and development agenda. It suggests that political objects in development discourses do not follow neutral conceptions, nor are they purely objective conceptions in academic indexing. Instead, there is always a political agenda behind each object, which is why, like development aid in general, it is also seen as “a potent political symbol and signal” (Lancaster, 2007, 11). In addition to the genealogy of theoretical concepts, geopolitical reasons for introducing political objects into the development discourse were also mentioned. Furthermore - and of particular interest concerning the research question - is the dimension of self-definition through development aid, i.e., constructing one's own identity through development discourse.

2.1.2. Theoretical and Ideological Influences The ambition of identifying all conceptual influences might be extensive enough for research on its own. However, there are several secondary influences regarding the political objects illustrated above. Firstly, the rather technical approach to governing as management in good governance can be traced back to the Weberian understanding of (Western) bureaucratic modernity (Everatt, 2019, 32; Sundaram & Chowdhury, 2012, 11). Secondly, Sen’s freedom approach influenced the entering of human rights in the debate (Uvin, 2007, 601). Finally, the most significant conceptual influences on the political objects described by the academic discourse are the Modernisation Theory and its scientific debate over the nexus of democratisation and economic growth regarding democracy promotion and the impact of New Institutional Economy on good governance in recent history.

The debate about preconditions for democratisation is inevitably linked to the one of modernisation theory. Modernisation theorist viewed political development as linear statehood development of countries of the Global South towards becoming like the Western representative, parliamentarian democracies (c.f. Huntington, 1965; Pye, 1965; Corning et al. 1988; Bates, 2018, 65; Rapley, 2007, 25; Stockmann et al., 2016, 100). This linear development template applies through economic growth, meaning that economic growth fosters as precondition the establishment of democratic institutions.

In the post–World War II era, modernisation theory dominated5 the political and academic discourse over intentional economic and political development in the so-called ‘Third World’. Abramo F.K. Organski declared a historical pattern with four static steps (‘primitive’, industrial, national, abundance). Every nation must follow these steps to become a politically ‘modern’ one (Kihl, 1967, 1113). Besides the political implications of his stage model in The Stages of Economic Growth (Rostow 1971a), Walt Whitman Rostow further elaborates a political dimension in Politics and the Stages of Growth (Rostow 1971b). Here, the precondition for take-off also encompasses formal constitutional changes (ibid. 77). After the altering of political institution in the stage of preconditions, the take-off as a third stage can begin, where essentially the policy focus on growth serves the normal condition, and the process of industrialisation itself becomes the centre of politics (Rostow, 1971a, 8; 1971b, 176). Contrary, Barrington Moore Jr. argued that there is more than one path to modernity and that these paths do not always end in democracy (Cheibub & Vreeland, 2018, 6). For Moore, the earliest historical route to the modern world combined capitalism and parliamentary democracy after – in his words – a series of ‘bourgeois revolutions’6 (Moore, 1966, 413). Central to the debate whether growth determines democracy is the work of sociologist Seymour Martin Lipset (Jourde, 2017, 309; Cheibub & Vreeland, 2018, 4). Lipset empirically examined a correlation between national wealth and democratic development (Lipset, 1959, 84-85) and formulated based on his finding’s conditions for democratisation7. Even though the nexus of economic and income growth and democratisation was scientifically proven not to exist (Przeworski et al. 2000, 273), the assumption continued to influence the debate. Furthermore, other preconditions have been formulated. In terms of providing clear criteria for assessing democracies, Robert Dahl’s polyarchy definition8 and criteria have become paradigmatic in the debate (Huber, 2015, 24). Also, Rostow formulates additional conditions for democracy, including loyalty to democratic values (Rostow, 1971b, 271). Ruschemeyer identifies a contribution of capitalism to democracy, mainly because capitalism changed the balance of class power favouring subordinate interests (ibid. 1992, 302).

With the political influence of the neo-classical counter-revolution as the ideological profile of the 1980s came an essential shift of the modernisation theory belief (Leftwich, 1993, 608). The most critical turning point9 was democracy being no longer a final stage after economic ‘take off’ towards democracy. But rather a necessary prior or parallel condition of development, like good governance (Leftwich, 1993, 605). Thus, with their institutional capacity-building appraisal in 1990, the World Bank Group began incorporating institutional capacity-building in their policies. Here, the WBG was highly influenced by the New Institutional Economics (NIE) thought and its thinkers like Oliver Williamson, Douglas North and Ronald Coase (Ayers, 2006, 325; Muno, 2012, 396; Nuscheler, 2009, 8; Faust, 2016, 327; Oloruntoba & Falolain, 2018, 6; Sundaram & Chowdhury, 2012, 1; Rothstein, 2012, 145). The resulting good governance agenda has been critically defined as the “neoliberal hegemony for the effective state” (Demmers et al., 2004, 13f.).

5 Authors describe the assumptions of modernization theory as the starting point also of German development policy in the 1960s (Harnisch & Schmidt, 2012, 35; Adam, 2012, 38). 6 Moore names the Puritan and French Revolution as well as the American Civil War (ibid. 1966, 413) 7 The conditions encompass an open class system, economic wealth, equalitarian value system, capitalist economy, literacy, high participation in voluntary organisations (ibid. 105). 8 For Dahl, polyarchy cannot be used synonymously for democracy, which in his eyes must be distinguished as ideal system. A polyarchy embodies the institutional arrangements that have come to be regarded as a kind of imperfect approximation of this ideal (Dahl, 1971, 9). 9 For the examination of political objects, this would mean that a reversal of the modernisation theory has taken place, i.e., not economic growth leads to a "good" political system, but good (governance) systems lead to economic growth. 9

Towards the next section, the question should be raised what kind of democracy has been promoted. The general understanding of democracy as ‘government by the people’ in the aid context comes from Schumpeter’s definition (Tetzlaff, 1995, 5). Democracy can also be defined as a political form of government in a state carried out either directly by the people (direct democracy) or indirectly through elected representatives of the people (representative democracy) with the key features of accountability, transparency, and participation (Addink, 2019, 91-92). Fukuyama emphasises the need for a set of the necessary institution for functional liberal democracy: 1) state, 2) the rule of law, 3) accountable government (ibid. 2011, 16). Critics refer to the promotion of liberal democracy as the Neoliberal Democracy. This neoliberal form embodies “an individualist, formally egalitarian, capitalist, meliorist and universalist conception of self and society, (…) constituted by three domains – the neoliberal ‘minimal’ and ‘neutral’ state, the neoliberal public sphere (‘civil society’), and the neoliberal individual (‘self’)” (Ayer & Saad-Filho, 2014, 598).

Hence, it is crucial to keep the ideological dimension of the promoted concept in mind and actively scrutinise the justifications of their implementation for examining political objects. The section confirms the previous assumption that the identified political objects follow very strongly ideologically predetermined conceptions. The example of democracy promotion shows that the conception of democracy is a Western and Western (neoliberal) capitalist one. 2.1.3. Modes of Implementation Burmeier (2012) characterises democracy promotion as “value-export” with requirements of the rule of law, checks and balances, and a functional party system (ibid. 4). Exporting values incorporates its own understanding of democracy. The Western accounts of democracy - according to Ayers – are rooted in ancient Athenian concepts of democracy and culminate in European feudalism as well as liberal capitalism and pluralism (ibid. 2006, 334). Even though discussions have been made whether democracy is exportable (Salmon, 2019), political objects like democracy are no good that can simply be exported from one country to another, simply due to the complexity of its nature (Poppe, Leiniger, Wolff, 2019a, 759). Democracy assistance is generally provided by governments, by multilateral agencies, by (international) non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and political parties or party- afﬁliated foundations. (Cranenburgh, 2011, 443). One ‘aid technology for fixing the dysfunctional’ state- society relationship in Africa is, for example, the training of civil servants (Anders, 2009, 5). After the unsuccessful attempts to engineer democratic civil societies worldwide at the turn of the 21st century, democracy promoters turned their attention towards political parties, despite criticism regarding the implementation of party systems in post-colonial societies (Lazarus, 2012, 1925).

The most important aspects this theoretical discussion reveals are the complexity of the multidimensional phenomenon of political objects in development aid and the difficulty of approaching it. As the research interest lies in the political objects and their origin within the donor country, it is not expedient to engage with one of the described concepts. It would lead to a very one-dimensional and inchoated examination of the ideological pre-determined concepts. However, the political objects mentioned (democracy, good governance) remain largely unexplained. In the case of democracy, one might even struggle already in determining the political object of development aid by running into danger of dealing with the wrong subject matter (e.g., international promotion by multinational organisations). To 1) examine the political objective purposefully and in clear conceptual delineation, 2) including the assumption upon which states tend to incorporate their own political and societal development in their development agenda, and 3) approaching political objects through the development policy discourse of the specific donor country, a conceptual scheme is needed that is capable of considering all these requirements. 10

2.2. Polity Export as Conceptual Scheme The central hypothesis of this study is that donor states tend to influence their conceptions of development aid through their ideas of political frameworks and institutional tradition, in short: through their polity. To systematically engage with political objects and the accompanying complexities, which have been illustrated in this theoretical frame, polity export is introduced in this study as the conceptual scheme of this research. For this research, polity export must be understood as practices and processes of transplantation and implementation of institutions and political culture of aid donor states in aid recipient states. This conception encompasses the definition of political objects10 of development aid and extends it by three key features:

Firstly, polity export serves as a point of entry for examining the field of convoluted, biased, and predetermined theoretical concepts for political objects in development aid. As the theoretical examination has shown, there is no definitional frame encompassing all concepts, and the concepts existing are not only lacking uniform definitions but further is not neutral. In applying conceptual schemes of democracy promotion, assistance, human rights, or good governance in this study, the analysis would be limited to a very narrow perspective, already within a pre-defined mindset. For a systematically investigation of the given hypothesis, a more objective conceptual scheme is needed. Hence, polity export serves as a clear-conceptualised and neutral analytic frame for investigating the conception of political objectives in development discourses. This research assumes that the political objects can be identified through the discourse, as it labels those discourse units, thus creating them. This is the 'reverse' methodological approach (analysis of the structure and roots of political discourse) of polity export.

Secondly, polity export serves as an approach to focus on the creation and implantation process (within the discourse) of the donor aid agenda. In comparison to other empirical studies regarding e.g., external democracy promotion (c.f model by Tolstrup, 2013, 721), polity export is less interested in the external factors influencing the democratisation of recipient country Y. Instead, it seeks to analyse the influential factors of why and how donor country X is conceptualising and implementing the external promotion of political objects. This orientation serves the aidnographic focus of this research on the one hand. On the other hand, the rigour dichotomy of immanent (internal/unplanned) development and intentional (controlled/planned) Development11 is scrutinised. By utilizing polity export, it is now possible to argue against this very clear distinction and look at the concepts and proposition made by and the internal influences and agendas of the ‘exporting side’, e.g., democracy promotion (Salmon, 2019, 734). For one thing, historical and collective experiences and societal and political idiosyncrasy and tradition are included in polity export. For another, a discourse focused analysis with the conceptual scheme of polity export allows the researcher to make claims about the self-definition or affirmation of the donor country constructed through the political objects. As stated earlier, the promotion of democracy constructs an image of the self as democratic and the other as undemocratic (Huber, 2015, 37). Polity export allows the researcher to examine the influencing identity characteristics in reverse. Besides the revealed relations between abstract concepts and their academic roots, the analysis will show certain continuities in how German actors define their nation or society through their foreign policy, including their polity export practices in development discourses. Therefore, polity export allows this research to identify the specific – in this case German - interpretation of the abstract concepts within democracy or a good government. Since the mere use of the same terminology does not imply the same understanding of

10 Political objects as units of an aid agenda that relate to the institutional shaping and transformation of public coexistence or the authoritarian allocation of material and immaterial values in society abroad (see page 4). 11 For the theoretical distinction see Cowen & Shenton (1995, 416) and Lewis (2019). 11 such broad terms, the donor country's self-definition through its development policy is an additionally exciting aspect of this model. This could be summarised as follows: We stand for this object, so we promote this, and vice versa and even more interesting: We promote this object because we want to be associated with it. This assumption goes in line with the civil power (Zivilmacht) theory by Kirste & Maull (1996), which characterises states whose foreign policy role, concept, and behaviour is bound to values and principles as well as instrumentalising its influence on ‘civilising’ international relations (ibid. 300). The German Africa policy and its development aid have been characterised as civil power policy (Engel, 2000, 272; Harnisch & Schmidt, 2012, 146). In this context, the reasons given for the civilian power efforts within German foreign policy are the concept of German Sonderweg (separated path) and the Wiedergutmachung (reparation) of the National Socialist past (Brunner & Meyer, 2020, 103; Everett, 2015, 2; c.f. Hellmann, 2002). This study can provide further empirical evidence for these assumptions with the help of polity export.

Thirdly, polity export serves as a Weberian ideal type of the central hypothesis of this research. In the sense of the resulting abstracted conceptual model, the ideal kind of polity export would be a donor country X exporting its entire political structure of institutions without adjustments to a recipient country Y. The resulting conceptual scheme comprises all these dimensions of polity export. It further separates political objects into direct political objects, which are also defined as such in the discourse, and implicit political objects, which indirectly affect the change in the political structures of the recipient country12.

Figure 1 Conceptual Scheme - Polity Export

12 See page 20. 12

This conceptual scheme will now be applied to Germany's development discourse as a case for this study in order to answer the following research questions:

RQ: How is the German discourse on polity export to Sub-Saharan Africa shaped by own political development and tradition?

SRQ1: How is the German identity produced, and how is the SSA region constructed?

SRQ2: What political objects and concepts are detectable in the discourse?

SRQ3: What discourse strategies and continuities underlie this polity export?

Following a description of the German development policy landscape in the research context, these research questions will be examined using the following methodological approach.

3. Research Context Germany13 is an interesting case for this research. While being one of the biggest ODA donors in international comparison, Germany itself is frequently characterised by the literature as one of the few14 successful examples of external democracy promotion considering its political transformation after 1945 (Axtmann, 2007, 121; Brown, 2013, 2; Hobson, 2015, 457; Huber, 2015, 12). Some would even go so far as to announce Germany as the ‘potent symbol’ of success of Western-style democracy’ and international efforts of international promotion due to its own democratisation (Rüland & Werz 2002, 73). However, bearing in mind the reason for this democracy promotion with the massive financial and systematic effort by the United States were also of its security policy after World War II (Huber, 2015, 12).

The overall German objective of development cooperation has been relatively continuous over time: economic and social development through capacity building, or literally ‘self-help assistance’ (Hilfe zur Selbsthilfe) (Nielinger, 1998, 171). Gieler (2008) defines five historical periods of German development cooperation: 1) build-up phase 1961-1968, 2) phase of innovations 1968-1974, 3) phase of pragmatism 1974-1982, 4) phase of substantive innovation of liberal economic policy and conservative understanding of politics 1982-1991 and 5) phase of all-German responsibility from 1991-1998, replaced by the re-evaluation by Wieczorek-Zeul as global peace and structural policy from 1998 (ibid. 11). Significantly, BMZ Minister Warnke's (1982-1987) tenure led German development policy towards a re-politicisation of development aid, strongly influenced by the US Reagan administration (Harnisch & Schmidt, 2012, 117). Engel (2000), in turn, distinguishes between four identity and paradigm shifts in German Africa policy, 1) overall German policy in 1972, 2) peace policy in 1973-1982/83, 3) development policy in 1982/83-1990 and 4) the civil-legal and interventionist paradigm from 1989 onwards (ibid. 282-283). German democracy promotion policy was fragmented and indirect, without financial commitment and often reluctantly enforced without clear direction (Rüland & Werz, 2002, 87). In West German foreign policy, economic motives pushed democratic principles into the background (Rüland & Werz, 2002, 76), like the instrumentalisation of development policy. This instrumentalization was defined as a multidimensional subsystem (Nuscheler, 1996, 286, 362). Since the introduction of the 1991 development policy conditions and the 1993 Accra Guidelines, the enforcement of human rights has been defined as central to Africa policy, and Germany has also been characterised as a "democratiser" in Africa (Engel, 2000, 274; Nielinger, 1998, 172; Tetzlaff & Jakobeit, 2005, 221). Nuscheler (1996) described a phased strategy of the BMZ as an "export attempt of the Western model of democracy in the organisational form of German federalism" (ibid. 354). In this context, Adam (2012) identifies the conception of a German model as a developmental ideal. This conception was inspired by the idea that the success of rapid economic recovery as in Germany [in the 1950s, KD] could also be achieved in developing countries through technical and financial assistance (ibid. 38-39).

Even if this assertion is in line with the hypothesis, a systematic analysis first requires a description of the German actors that could take a relevant position for polity export. A conducted stakeholder analysis for this purpose has indicated the following actors as particularly relevant for the study of polity export discourse (c.f. Nielinger, 1998, 173; Catón & Steltemeier, 2008, 387). Germany’s aid industry is a prime example of institutional fragmentation (Nuscheler, 2009, 50). The orientation of the development

13 Herein, the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany) is implied. The development policy of the German Democratic Republic (GDR) is not part of this study. 14 Generally mentioned together with Japan. 14 policies is mainly set by the German Federal Government15, the parliament, Bundestag, and the parliamentary Committee for Economic Cooperation and Development (AwZ) (Stockmann et al., 2016, 520). In the first place, the BMZ is the organisational frame of the German development industry. It might not carry out any measures but coordinates many implementation agencies and distributes financial resources (Kebschull et al., 1976, 111; Kevenhörster & Boom, 2009, 56f.). Although the BMZ is the responsible ministry and holds the highest contribution to the overall ODA, it has no authority over certain important areas of responsibility regarding development aid. The control over trade- and resource-politics lies with the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy (BMWi), the international finances, depth and IMF affairs with the Federal Ministry of Finance (BMF), humanitarian aid with the Federal Foreign Office (AA), and issues of sustainability and even the Agenda 2030 are subjects to the Federal Ministry of the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMUB) (Nuscheler, 1996, 359; Stockmann, et al., 2016, 522). The AA is further responsible for electoral assistance and observation abroad (Nielinger, 1998, 175). The German Corporation for International Cooperation, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Interationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), is the key actor in terms of technical and personnel cooperation. The GIZ is a company that provides aid services in the form of consulting, international competence development, sustainable infrastructure, security, peace and reconstruction, social development, state and democracy, environment, and climate, as well as economy and employment (Stockmann et al., 2016, 530). Party-affiliated foundations, so-called Stiftungen, play an essential role in the German aid democracy promotion. Especially involved regarding political objects are: Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung (KAS), Hanns-Seidel-Stiftung (HSS), Friedrich-Ebert- Stiftung (FES), Friedrich-Naumann-Stiftung (FNF), Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung (hbs), Rosa-Luxenburg-Stiftung (RLS)16 (Bohnet, 2019, 32). The network and range of influence of the German party-affiliated foundations are unique. The main goal of the Stiftungen in countries of the Global South is to promote civic education towards democracy and pluralism by building and institutionalising democratic structures (Stockmann et al., 2016, 557). The KAS, for example, also emphasise the transfer of social market economy values (Thesing, 1997, 183). All foundations have foreign bureaux and – despite being entirely founded by publicly - high autonomy of planning (Kevenhörster & Boom, 2009, 61). The importance of the German Stiftungen is even more exemplified by the term of the “German Model”, showing the uniqueness of the strong involvement of party foundation in German democracy assistance that that was denoted as a model for the US’ and other EU countries’ democracy assistance (Hearn, 2010, 5; Lloyd, 2010, 549).

15 The German contribution to the EU-development policies is not considered in this analysis. 16 The foundation affiliated to the right-wing extremist party Alternative für Deutschland is the Desiderius-Erasmus-Stiftung. The foundation has no activities abroad listed at their website but intends to represent ‘Germen interest’ and to establish an ‘international order of peace and justice’, https://erasmus-stiftung.de/taetigkeitsbereiche/auslandsaktivitaeten/ - accessed on the 18-06-2020. 15

4. Methodological Procedure This chapter illustrates and justifies the methodological approach to verify the conceptional scheme polity export within the development discourse of German actors within it. Hereby, the research conceptualisation intends to understand and extract the order of the discourse on German polity export and move beyond the static discourse document analysis.

4.1. Critical Realism This thesis's ontological and epistemological stance follows the understanding of knowledge production of Critical Realism (CR). CR emerged as criticism of the Western positivist philosophy of science. In the late 1970s, Roy Bhaskar accused the positivist and structural-functionalist thinkers of assuming “(…) that science is monistic in its development and deductive in its structure” (Bhaskar & Lawson, 1998, 3). As an ontological and epistemological stance, CR differentiates between three strata of social reality, the experience, the event, and objects' structures and power. The latter can be considered ‘the real’ (Reed, 2011, 59). This implies a reality that is independent of the researcher’s perception and an ontology, in which entities are constituted entirely by epistemological discourse. Knowledge, in this sense, is relative to contextual time and culture and can never be pure and unmediated (Mingers, 2006, 19; Fleetwood, 2014, 182). The main impetus of a CR researcher is the explanation of how mechanisms produce events and how events occur in different cases, or in other words, to “contextualise causal understanding” (Robson & McCartan, 2016, 65; Feilzer, 2010, 7). In Social Science, particularly, Critical Realism identifies the primary task of scientific research in the critical uncovering of the thought and actions that lie behind the ‘false’ explanations of reality (Pawson, 2006, 19; Pawson & Tilley, 1997, 65). 4.2. Discourse Archaeology With this ambition in mind, the methodological challenge of this research is to uncover the relationship between arguments and interests as central objectives of the traditional political science approach to discourse (Keller, 2006, 225). Accordingly, to critically scrutinise the general narrative of the aid discourse on German polity export to SSA. The additional attempt to understand and explain the causal mechanism behind events - in this case, how domestic development influences planned development abroad – emerges through the preliminary examination and critically depicting.

Hence the methodological approach consists of two elements unified in a Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) in a Foucauldian tradition. The first element of the CDA encompasses an exploratory document analysis. In contrast, the second includes semi-structured expert interviews conducted to engage in the discourse of German polity export actively. This additional step allows the researcher to investigate the continuation of the discourse rules analysed in policy papers and engage in the discourse actively and indirectly become a part of it. Before explaining the procedure of discourse analysis used in this research, a short excursion on discourse and its scientific evaluation is needed. In a very general sense, ‘discourse’ can be characterised as a field of what can be said, meaning everything sayable in a particular society at a specific time. Including not only the empirical findings but also possibilities and strategies with which the field of what can be said is expanded or also narrowed (Blatter, Langer, Wagemann, 2018, 124).

One core aspect of discourse (and CDA) is the comprehension that we cannot extract the truth from reality, only construe it based on our knowledge. Thus, discourse is less language-focused than knowledge-focused (c.f. Jäger, 2015, 11). This very aspect is crucial for CDA and CR as an epistemological stance. CDA is not interested in finding ‘an objective truth’ but rather in practising criticism of such truth 16 claims and their production. Thus, CDA seeks to determine statements as atoms of the discourse (ibid. 8). The working definition for this research is that discourse is viewed as an “ensemble of ideas, concepts, and categories through which meaning is given to social and physical phenomena, and which is produced and reproduced through an identifiable set of practices” (Hajer, 2006, 67). The advantage of this definition for the research design is that it holds the implication of social phenomena established by the formation and shape of the discourse and detectable practices constructing it. In terms of examining the objects and continuities of the discourse on German polity export, Foucault’s archaeology will be used to identify those in the discourse.

An example of the applicability of Foucauldian archaeology (and genealogy) in development studies provides Aram Ziai in his Development Discourse and Global History. In contrast to Ziai, this research will only carry out an archaeological analysis of the German polity export due to the scope and relevance to the research question. Foucault defines the archaeology of a discourse as: “(…) the systematic description of a discourse as object” (Foucault, 1973, 200). Meaning, discourse is a system of statements that constructs an object (Parker, 1992, 5). The archaeology aims to unpack the coherence of discourse practices by analysing the rules of the discourse formation, which establish the ‘order of the discourse’, its ‘knowledge’ (Diaz-Bone & Weischer, 2015, 108). Hence, discourse is not examined as a document or sign representing something else, rather than in its very own degree of ‘monument’ (Foucault, 1973, 198). As Foucault elaborates in his Archaeology of Knowledge, the archaeology consists of a description of the rules for the formation of objects, modalities of the statement (enunciative modalities), concepts and theoretical choices or strategies (Webb, 2012, 78). The objects of the discourse differ in their occurrence in various societies and epochs (Foucault, 1973, 62) and can be identified in their essence by distinction to others (ibid. 63). This can be achieved through grouping and classifying concept types within the discourse (ibid. 64). As expounded and defined in the theoretical chapter, polity export will serve as a frame for identifying the central objects. The following chapters of archaeology will be deduced by it. The Foucauldian discourse objects are the equivalent of the political objects of the research interest.

The enunciative modalities incorporate for Foucault simply the question of who speaks (ibid 1973, 75), from which institutional position (ibid. 76), and through which position defined by the situation of the subject (ibid. 78). Besides the array and sequence of the discourse concepts17 (ibid. 83), Foucault finally notes the importance of discourse theme or strategies, which are characterised as points of incompatibilities (ibid. 94) and generally define the way the discourse negotiates a future through its relations with neighbouring discourses (Webb, 2012, 79). Discourses always embed, entail, and presuppose other discourses, meaning that it is nearly impossible to find a single-thematic discourse (Parker, 1992, 13). For this investigation of a discourse order, the neighbouring discourses can help to conclude strategies, concepts, or the origin of the political objects18. Following the Foucauldian understanding of discourse archaeology, the empirical chapters of this research attempts to provide the discourse formation of the German polity export by identifying the rules of its objects, concepts, and strategies.

In the following, the methodological procedure and the research design of this study will be illustrated.

17 Foucault's concepts must not be confused with scientific concepts. Foucault uses concept to encompass terms used in the discourse and their forms of succession and coexistence. 18 E.g., If the concept democracy in discourse with the non-developmental object of the German health insurance system the analysis could integrate this neighbouring discourse. 17

4.3. Units of Analysis By understanding discourse as ‘flow of knowledge’ or ‘social knowledge stocks through time’ in the sense of CDA (c.f. Jäger, 2015, 26), the unit of analysis regarding the given research interest would be the entire discourse of development. Due to the impossibility of capturing this entire flow of knowledge with all its associated discourses, the central unit of analysis for this research will be the discourse level of the political and expert sphere on development aid in Germany (Jäger, 2015, 84).

4.4. Units of Observation and Sampling

Figure 2 Units of Observation

For the document-centred part of the analysis, 4.583 transcripts of parliamentary debates of the German Federal Parliament (Bundestag, BT) from 1957-2020, and 3.692 reports, policies, strategy papers and other documents of the Federal Government and responsible ministries (BMZ, AA. BMWi), agencies (GIZ), or aid-related foundations (DES, FES, KAS, hss, FNF, hbs, RLS) were collected. Further, the journal E+Z (Entwicklung und Zusammenarbeit) was reviewed and issues dealing with political objects from 1965 -202019 digitalised. The E+Z is a journal and the central medium for development- related debates in Germany20. Additionally, eight expert interviews with six aid workers (5 of them belonged to party-affiliated foundations and 1 to the GIZ), one former BMZ director-general and one academic scholar were implemented. The interviews have been conducted in a semi-structured format and will serve as additional data for an in-depth lens. Most topic-related analyses influenced by Foucauldian ideas are exclusively focused on documents and policy papers and are therefore less concerned with empirical evidence (c.f. Anders, 2009, 144). This study attempts to address this shortcoming by incorporating interviews. While the general analysis is also strongly document-based, the interviews provide a unique insight into implementation aspects of the identified policy objects, open the view on neighbouring discourses, and further serve the direct testing of the hypothesis.

19 For reasons of inaccessibility, issues before 1960 and between 2000 and 2010 could not be included in the analysis. 20 Editor of the E+Z was from 1965 until 2002 the Deutsche Stiftung für internationale Entwicklung (DSE), which was founded in 1959 and merged with the Carl-Duisberg-Society (CDG) to InWent. InWent was later dissolved in the GIZ and E+Z published by the initiative Engagement Global. (Tetzlaff & Jakobeit, 2005, 219; Kevenhörster, 2009, 16-17). Bohnet (2019) titles the DSE as vanguard of the BMZ in the late 1950s (ibid. 44). 18

Complementary to the archaeological text analysis, the interviews asked the interviewees about their personal experiences with political objects of German development policy and their nature, i.e. what characteristics and unique features they have in the German context. Furthermore, all interview partners were presented with the findings based on the text-based analysis. The central hypothesis of the work was discussed in the respective institutional and regional context. Thus, the additional interviews enable the investigation to reconstruct the entire origin of the policy objects from the abstract parliamentary debates (macro-level) all steps of reifying down to their implementation (micro- level) in the interviews.

In terms of sampling, this research focuses on German polity export adds an additional case: SSA region states as recipient countries. This extra ‘case within a case’ serves to argue in line with certain contextualisation made in the discourse and limit the amount of data. Hence, data was included that dealt with the polity export of German development aid and not explicitly dealt with any region21 other than Sub-Saharan Africa.

4.5. Data Collection Methods The data collection22 began with all parliamentary documents containing the word ‘development aid’ (Entwicklungshilfe). The search on the website of the German parliamentary archives23 resulted in 4,583 results. The data collection ended on 23-09-2020. The other half of the documental data was collected on the websites of the Federal Government, of the party-affiliated foundations, and of the GIZ, and included all openly accessible strategy papers, annual reports, and website statements related to the research subject. Additionally, library-based hardcover editions of the E+Z from 1960 to 1999 were systematically perused, and content related to the research subject was scanned. The same procedure was conducted with the annual reports of the DSE from 1966 to 1972 and the BMZ from 1976 until 199724. In addition, an attempt was made to gain an overall view of the annual reports of the various foundations, which unfortunately was only possible in full for the FES and FNF.

In order to acquire interview25 partners, several of the institutions mentioned above were contacted. This encompassed the BMZ, the AwZ, the Governance department of the GIZ, all party-affiliated foundations (including the foreign bureaux in SSA). Three interviewees were reached by snowball sampling. The eight guided interviews conducted were from October 2020 to March 2021 and were held via digital media or phone.

4.6. Data Analysis All digitally available data were analysed with the scientific software Atlas.ti26. The coding method used was Descriptive Coding, in which the basic topic of a quote is summarised in a short word (Saldaña, 2013, 88). It was possible to examine and code all the documents entirely, except for the parliamentary documents due to their quantity and length. Therefore, the search tool was utilised to identify all passages with the term ‘development aid’ and identify the content in their closest proximity regarding

21 Thus, policies aimed at, for example, 'developing countries' or the 'Third World' can be included. 22 The detailed data collection protocol is attached in the Appendix 1. 23 https://pdok.bundestag.de/ 24 Unfortunately, these records were only available to a limited extent in the libraries or on request. 25 The Interview Questionnaire attached in the Appendix 3. 26 Due to the quantity of documents, two Atlas.ti projects had to be created and simultaneously coded. 19 political objects. Employing this inductive and exploratory coding method, polity export-related quotations could be identified, resulting in 2,624 quotes and 150 different codes27.

The codes were classified, and each quotation of every code was examined again. Thus, discourse objects and concepts were allocated and ordered for the analysis according to Foucault’s archaeology elements. The chapters and sub-chapters correspond to the codes obtained and their frequency. Thus, the first chapter of the analysis deals with the codes that mainly lead to identity construction and othering. Then, the two archaeological chapters on political objects were divided into direct political objects, which are also defined as such in the discourse, and implicit political objects, which indirectly affect the change in the political structures of the recipient country. This procedure created a discourse structure of knowledge formation, which was afterwards added with information from the interviews and secondary literature to clarify terms and neighbouring discourses mentioned. With the help of this explorative unfolding of the discourse order, the research questions can be approached deductively.

4.7. Ethical Considerations Before the conceptualisation of the research, there have been ethical struggles with the idea of investigating development studies issues as a white-male and Western European researcher by purely looking at the situation in the Global South. To evade any kind of reproduction of such superior thinking, this research attempts from the beginning to not only avoid the examination of ‘problems’ defined by Western actors in the Western defined Global South region but intentionally to emphasize the mechanisms and ideas of this asymmetric power relation and practices of the Blackbox ‘Aid Industry’. The German Aid Industry is the subject of research to be investigated and not political structures and their so-called ‘adjustment’ in, e.g., Sub-Saharan Africa. Instead of applying theories or concepts generated in a Western setting by Western scholars to a different context (c.f. Lund, 2014, 229f.), this research intends and is explicitly designed to investigate these very applications by the German Aid Industry. Hence, it endorses the idea of studying development related issues as global phenomena or focusing the research on activities of Western states (particularly aidnographic research). Thus, the research context is as described on German institutions, policies and actors. Of course, also while conducting scientific research on Western actors, ethical standards need to be met. Hence, it was ensured that: no participants were harmed; any lack of informed consent was avoided, e.g., by attaching a form of consent to the interview requests; no privacy was invaded; no deception of any kind was conducted (c.f. Bryman, 2012, 136). The five conducted interviews were based on voluntary participation, and the interviewees were transparently informed about the intentions and objectives of the overall research.

27 See Appendix 2: Coding Book. 20

4.8. Reflection on the Quality and Limitation of the Research The principles of ethnographic aidnography very much inspired the very first research idea regarding the question. The intention was to accompany and observe helpers in their work context during fieldwork. Unfortunately, this project had to be modified early on due to the global measures to contain the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in 2020/2021.

The heart of sufficient scientific research is the reliability and validity of its measurements. Hence, in the beginning, the idea was to analyse the number of codes gained quantitatively. However, this approach was rejected because it would not have provided any useful conclusions about the hypothesis, nor was the evaluation procedure used consistent with it. Qualitative research in social science is often confronted with the need for explaining and defending their approaches to research. Discourse analysis, for example, is in its approach of making claims based on the interpretation of written or spoken text (or images) far away from producing findings with high validity. The interpretation of semiotic communication structures is complex. There is no guarantee that the researcher can use the abstract tools of discourse analysis to measure what he or she intends to measure. Jaipal-Jamani (2014) suggest the following principle: “The credibility of interpretations made from discourse analysis approaches is enhanced when the researcher uses a common, shared set of rules, beliefs, or frame of reference to interpret the sign being analysed.” (ibid. 2014, 803). According to this principle, this analysis relies heavily on transparent and logical traceability of the conclusions drawn. However, in the scope of its included documents, the research covers at least a comprehensive share of the entire unit of analysis and, therefore, can make claims that can be generalised for rules.

After outlining the methodological use of Foucault’s discourse archaeology for the exploratory analysis of the political objects of an extensive collection of documents and the addition of guided interviews, the following empirical chapters will now present the archaeology of polity export in German development discourse.

5. Archaeology of Identities “What we will do for the Third World will be the measure of what we mean by democracy, freedom, human dignity and human rights.” Marie Schlei in 1977 (BT, 8/35, 2658)

In the archaeological chapters, the order of the discourse is depicted. This includes the constructed enunciative modalities, objects, concepts, and strategies contained therein. The following sub-chapters emerged from the patterns obtained in the explorative analysis. Firstly, the construction of themes and objects of identity-building is elaborated, expressed in the construction of superiority and underlying power relations. The sub-chapters emerge through code frequency, as can be seen in Figure 3.

To assess how Germany's political development influences the objects of its development cooperation, it is important to illustrate how roles of identity of Germanness and the identity of others are constructed in the discourse beforehand. Hereby, Foucault’s emphasis on power relations and the institutionalised position of speaking (enunciative modalities) is also served because the South-North hierarchy will be issued.

Germanness is no term used as a concept within the order of the given discourse, but it exists as an Figure 3 Codes Identity-Building and Othering object within it. It is the designation of specific attributes as German, like historical experiences, expertise, traditions, and values. In many statements of the discourse, the characteristics of German aid are linked to German history (e.g., E+Z, 16/3, 7). The annual report of the BMZ from 1979 refers to the historical experience of German political development in the 20th century: “However, no one should believe that social progress can be achieved without conflict. Our history teaches the opposite” (BMZ, 1979, 4). The discourse object of exporting a ‘Marshall-plan’ abroad (quoted 28 times) perfectly demonstrates a tendency to apply one's own experience to foreign political development goals. The objective of designing a Marshall plan for ‘developing’ countries exists in the German development aid discourse since 1977 when it was firstly demanded by SPD representative Holtz (BT, 8/587, 6; BT, 8/1182, 3; BT, 10/51, 3672; BT, 11/100, 6816; BT, 11/2020, 21; E+Z, 26/10, 9; BT, 10/171, 12853). Hence, BMZ minister Müller followed a long discourse tradition implementing a Marshall plan with Africa in 2017 (BT, 18/12300, 5). However, already BMZ minister Eppler criticised the “wrong analogy to the Marshall plan” (ibid. 1971, 26) and development aid. In two of the conducted interviews, the title ‘Marshall plan’ was scrutinised as well, although the need for a more concrete and redefined development policy with Africa was appreciated (V: 323-325; VI:172-175). In 1991, CDU/CSU representative Augustinowitz drew a historical comparison to the accompanying framework conditions of the Marshall plan from the post-war era to the development cooperation of the time (BT, 12/47, 3884f.). In contrast, SPD representative Reiche urged to bundle the European experience of two world wars in a development Marshall-plan and even supports a “Global Marshall Plan Initiative” (BT, 16/71, 7130) in 2006. The transplantation of the Marshall plan equals a German historical experience as development aid expertise. The research-initiating policy of the Marshall Plan with Africa28, as described

28 The experience transplantation exceeds the scope of the research: In 2015, the KAS organised an event together with a Lebanese think tank regarding the creation of an ‘Arabian Marshall Plan’ (KAS, 2/2015, 17). In 2016, BMZ minister Müller called for an Iraqi and Syrian ‘Marshall Plan’ (E+Z, 57/2, 18). 22 in the introduction, follows a tradition more deeply rooted in the discourse order than previously assumed.

5.1. German Values

“German development policy is guided by the model of globally sustainable development, which is expressed equally in terms of economic performance, social justice, ecological sustainability and political stability.” (BT, 16/10700, 77)

In the context of German identity construction within development discourse, values and principles take on an undeniably important role as self-defining attributes29. In many cases, showing which values are transported by development policy allows a reverse conclusion drawn about the Germanness formation produced with it. Due to the frequency of codes with values topics, it can be concluded that human rights (643) and human dignity (35) play a decisive role in the discourse order of development policy. Peace (191) and freedom (101) are also highly frequented, but they will reappear in various chapters of this thesis and are not discussed individually.

The overall German development aid is determined to be value-based (AA, 2017a, 45/BMZ, 2016a, 12) or a “value-oriented German development policy” (BT, 18/12300, 45f.). Value orientation also exists in the work of the party-affiliated foundations (I:6/III:186-191). BMZ Minister Schlei (SPD) stated that the German development cooperation is derived from the fundamental values of the Federal Republic in 1977 (BT, 8/52, 3988). Value-based engagement can be found in all German aid sectors, even in good financial management (BMZ, 2014b, 28). The very objective of German foreign cultural policy, for example, is described as followed in 2011:

“In its cultural work abroad, Germany presents itself as a liberal and tolerant country, open to the world and pluralistic, committed to the rule of law and democracy. Our culture is characterised by the ideals and values of European enlightenment, reason, honesty, the ability to criticise and self-criticism, innovation and a commitment to progress.” (AA, 2011a, 19).

As part of the European Union, the ‘German value’ export is also influenced by European values (AA, 2011a, 19). European or Western values are denoted as being human dignity, empathy, tolerance, equality, and a life in freedom (BMZ, 2016b, 19). As the world's largest donor, the EU is also asked in the discourse to “use its political weight to strengthen democracies and spread European values” (BT, 19/1141, 3). One of the highest frequented codes of the analysis has been the concept of human rights (643 quotations). Also, here, the emphasis on human rights is reasoned with “lessons from the darkest chapter of German history” (AA, 2011b, 4). As described by the discourse, the value-based essence of German development aid is linked with the German experience from two dictatorships in 2000 (BT, 14/90, 8313). The impact and the reflection of the National Socialist regime in Germany heavily influence the value-emphasis of the German development aid, as also issued in an interview (IV: 251- 257). BMZ minister Spranger linked values with the dimension of the Christian tradition in German history (BT, 14/90, 8313). Christian value tradition and the humanistic heritage of Europe can therefore be seen as ‘basic belief’ resulting in the “ethical obligation to stand up for human rights, freedom, solidarity, democracy, the rule of law and the integrity of creation.” (BMZ, 2017a, 7).

Closely related to human rights are the German value and developmental concept of human dignity (Menschenwürde). The first article of the German constitution (Grundgesetz) is about the adherence of human dignity. It is therefore not surprising that human dignity is also used as a pursuit for development aid. Often mentioned as equivalent to human rights, the preservation of human dignity is broad up as

29 Furthermore, values are part of Easton's definition of politics, which is used here, see page 1. 23 principle (BMZ, 2017a, 7; AA, 2011b, 4; BMZ, 2014d, 11) and aim of development aid and cooperation from 1970 onwards, particular regarding the rights of women (E+Z, 11/3, 11; BT, 10/1976, 2; BT, 10/91, 6703; BT, 8/4132, 5; BT, 11/74, 5035; BT, 12/924, 40; BT, 12/235, 20665*; BT, 13/6581, 14; BMZ, 2015a, 3; BMZ, 2014c, 4; BT, 8/1408, 10; BT, 11/64, 4431; BT, 12/165, 14243). Regarding the first constitutional article, the Federal Government further allocated the responsibility of ensuring human dignity in every country (BT, 18/12300, 5). But human dignity - or rather its violation - is also used as justification for political conditionality or other development-related disciplines. For example, foreign minister Genscher condemned the South African Apartheid regime due to the contempt for human rights and dignity in 1984 (BT, 10/54, 3878). Value orientation from the principles of the Grundgesetz and the democratic constitutional and social state is even influencing the merely technical cooperation (Akzente, 4.01, 37).

Regarding international politics, the MDGs are listed as a main orientational frame for German development aid (BT, 15/5815, XXI), like the ‘universal values’ of the SDGs (BT, 18/12300, 45f.). In contrast, in the geopolitical context of the Cold War, official development aid was seen as a mean of ‘materialised value and ideology export’ (E+Z, 22/7, 12). In general terms of a value-export, ‘European system of human rights’ is denoted as impossible to be imposed over non-European states “without obstacles” (BT, 10/3028, 37f.; BT, 11/2020, 39; BT, 11/2020, 39). Furthermore, in an E+Z issue from 1982, the question is raised whether the export of pluralistic principles is suitable for the ‘Third World’ (E+Z, 23/11, 8).

These aspects here firstly indicate a discourse phenomenon that will occur several times in this research. It is the strategy of clearly stating the impossibility of transferring (very context-specific) institutions abroad by simultaneously invoking a desire to do so. Thus, examining values associated with political objects provides a possible value export strategy of stating the impossibility30 but simultaneously aiming to establish these objects abroad. Besides the export intention of declared values, the self-attributed values determine the general direction of development aid. Here, the foreign policy discourse of development aid serves also as an identity-search and self-description of Germanness. In its value construction of representing and promoting human rights, dignity, freedom, peace, etc., Germany constructs itself through its aid discourse as a civil power31. Thus, Germany portrays itself as a peaceful and human rights-respecting international actor, utilising its historical experiences for global improvements. As the following chapters will show, all political objects feature constructions of Germanness.

5.2. Reflection and Counter Constructions within the Discourse Before examining explicit strategies of superiority and construction of SSA in the discourse order, it is of the utmost importance to present the many reflections of development cooperation and mindful critique of practices within the discourse structure. Because many concepts used in the discourse actively question and counter the common power relation and South-North institutionalised positionality. A good example here is the concept of partnership that already appears in the first Development Policy Report from 1973. It is stated that projects must be planned and implemented in cooperation with the ‘developing’ countries (BT, 7/1236, 31). Later, an efficient partnership is defined as depending on the approval and cooperation with broad sections of the population (BT, 7/4293, 43). The desire to create a real partnership (BT, 8/1185, 18) is expressed. In recent times, partnership is

30 While trying to contextualise the export of such values or institution, the discourse also contains discussions over the ‘problem’ of rejection of ‘Western values’ like democracy and human rights in Islamic countries (BT, 15/5815, 65). 31 See page 12. 24 described as cooperation between states and societies (economic and civil-society actors) (BT, 14/6496, XVIII). The awareness and emphasis on the wants and needs of the ‘partners’ are visible in the concepts of sovereignty and home rule in the discourse order (quoted 94 times). Ownership and sovereignty are also mentioned as guiding principles in an interview (I:15). Likewise, the independence of the countries in the Global South is a concept in the discourse, particularly independence as goal of development cooperation between 1976 and 1984. This concept is represented in the desire of archiving independence of ‘developing’ countries (BT, 7/234,16335; BT, 8/173, 13743) and in maintaining or expanding it (BT, 8/229, 18610; BT, 8/4132, 5; BT, 8/215, 17220; BT, 8/3582, 83; BT, 8/197, 15734; BT, 9/89, 5398; BT, 10/51, 3663,3669; BT, 10/73, 5260; BT, 10/91, 6691). In the 5th Development Policy Report, the ‘Third World’ countries were challenged to develop according to their image of progress under the prerequisites of the liberation of dependence, domination, and oppression (BT, 9/2411, 30). The discourse further contains a critique of colonial practices in the first Development Policy Report (BT, 7/1236, 8; BT, 8/1185, 48). The equalisation of development with colonial practices is rejected within the discourse (BT, 3/147, 8351; BT, 8/52, 4046). Caution is raised to colonialism as a cause for difficult state-building (E+Z, 10/2, 22, 25), and critique is issued over the colonial imposition of cultural or societal concepts, with alienation as consequences (BT, 9/2411, 9). Despite the statements to come in the next chapter, African solutions are demanded (BMZ, 2017a, 4), and descriptions of a positive development of the continent appear (BT, 14/6496, 22; BT, 15/5815, 124; BMZ, 2017a, 8/FNF, 2020).

In terms of the first parliamentary emphasis on the socio-cultural dimension of development cooperation in 1984, CDU/CSU representative Höffkes opposed the concept of a foreign cultural model for ‘developing’ countries and plead for these countries to find their own model in their own traditions and value conceptions (BT, 10/91, 6691). More examples are found in the discourse, where German actors acknowledge the quest for ‘developing countries to find their own path of development without foreign cultural, political or economic models (BT, 9/2411, 30, 34). Additionally, statements are made that no imposition of political or socio-political or economic ideas (BT, 7/4293, 43; BT, 8/1185, 58; BT, 3/118, 6839; BT, 7/1236, 16), or ‘Western’ values (BT, 6/115, 6774) shall take place (E+Z, 11/11, 12). In 2000, representative Hübner criticised the unreflective imposition of the ‘Western development model’ including market economy and deregulations in a liberal sense and scrutinised the disregarding of colonial and neo-colonial causes (BT, 14/88, 8189). Equally, the idea of merely imposing German concepts is rejected in several of the conducted interviews (II: 312/VII: 205; VIII: 33-34).

Furthermore, it is stated that every country must find its own way to democracy (BT, 16/10038, 41; BT, 9/79, 4720; III:221). In one interview conducted, an aid worker highlighted that Tanzanian ideas of democracy exist and should not be substituted by German interpretation (I:27-28). He stated: “it is rather the task to pick up the people where they are” (I:38). Another aid worker further develops this valuable argument of relativising the origin of ideas and institutions in an interview: “The institutions that have been established here [Benin, KD] have not been invented by us.” (III:143-42).

Overall, the scrutinising of (E+Z, 31/1, 18; Akzente, 2.12, 25; BT, 12/47, 3877; BT, 12/165, 14236) and critique on system export of German institutions (E+Z, 14/8, 35; E+Z, 37/12, 342) in the discourse must not be overlooked. Further reflections have been made. In 1983, representatives like Vohrer (FDP) pointed out that regimes lead by despots with human rights violations and no interest in a democracy are also found in industrial and not only in ‘developing’ countries (BT, 9/2422, 18). Indeed, it is issued whether ‘industrial’ countries have reached their developmental declared standards of good global governance (BT, 15/5815, XXXI) or whether Germany accomplished to become fully democratic (IV:273- 274). This chapter might be best summed up with Winfried Böll’s wise observation in the E+Z from 1965: “We all live in developing countries” (E+Z, 6/1).

5.3. Superiority and Model For the discourse underlying power relation, it is crucial to systematically illustrate the discourse strategy of creating an image of superiority and Germany as a role model. The notion of superiority occurs in general with the distinction to the constructed ‘other’32. In 1960, the Federal Government – while comparing the sizes of households in European and non-European countries - stated that many countries “… are still at a stage of development that corresponds to the conditions in Germany about a hundred years ago.” (BT, V/909, 4). An interesting and highly controversial concept used here is the one of ‘civilisation’. Concerning development aid, this term already appeared in the parliamentary debates in 1965, where places abroad are described with “unfavourable climatic and civilisational conditions” (BT, IV/3672, 4), later distinguishing between “highly civilised and developing countries” (BT, IV/3672, 45). In 1980, development was described as aiming at the economic or political level and regards culture, ecology, and civilisation (BT, 8/4132, 5). In 1996, SPD representative Tröscher called for more development aid as an ‘investment into the future’ and “(…) as a contribution to the civilisation of the one world.” (BT, 13/141, 12762). In a DSE report from 1965, a representative describes the rendition of the Western lifestyle - and its validity of which he is convinced of for practical reasons - as an essential task for the Western development aid. He defines ‘civilisation’ in addition to art and science as a “system of political, economic, and social institutions, an interplay of customs and traditions, ethics and religion” (E+Z, 6/5, 6). In 1994, the editor of the E+Z historically illustrated the European process of civilisation towards the contemporary understanding of the rule of law and civil rights, based on – in his words – ‘import’ by the Ancient Roman empire. He scrutinises the perception that every ‘civilisational’ development must arise internally of society (E+Z, 35/1, 3).

Similar to the opposing nature of the concept of "civilisation", the concept "healthy" is used in the discourse to describe the current or rather desirable state of a country's economy or even society. The discourse incorporates the “process of developing socially healthy communities in developing countries” (E+Z, 8/10, 13), and the “healthy development of the global economy” (BT, 1839, 3). The discourse further encompasses the German support in the “establishment of a healthy political, economic and social order” (BT, 4/18,614; BT, 4/90, 4198; BT, 5/33, 1496; BT, 5/43, 2041; BT, VI/2651, 61; BT, 7/1236, 82). While healthy invokes a notion of societal and political sickness, an abstract connection to the modernisation beliefs is visible in social progress (Sozialer Fortschritt). Without being defined once, the concept of social progress occurs in the German aid discourse from 1960 onwards (e.g., BT, 1839, 3; BT, V/1589, 4; BT, VI/2053, 11; BT, 7/3860, 32; BT, 9/2422, 23; BT, 7/4293; BT, 8/1185, 9; BT, 9/2411, 7; BT, 13/3342, 108; BT, 14/6496, XVIIf.). Social progress is once described as social and intellectual independence (E+Z, 11/10, 22) and as a mean “towards a lasting, structural improvement in the economic and living conditions of the entire population of the recipient country” (BT, 8/2155, 6). By constructing qualitative differences between ‘civilised’ and ‘uncivilised’, ‘healthy’ and ‘unhealthy’, and by defining social progress, German speakers construct an implicit superiority of their own. Walter Scheel stated in 1961 more explicitly:

“I think we all agree that we must help the developing countries quickly and effectively. We must prove the superiority (Überlegenheit) of our social and economic order, a superiority of which we are convinced because we have defended it in our own country against every other economic order.” (BT, 3/118, 6827)

Supplementary to this openly postulate superiority, Germany is also repeatedly constructed as the model or guiding ideal for other countries. For examples, as a political and technical role model (FES, 2008, 12). Notions of advantage even appear in the negation of imposition, like in the statement of CDU/CSU representative Hüsch in 1982:

32 For the discursive construction of SSA see Chapter 5.1. 26

“We do not want to set ourselves up as the teacher of all nations, but in future, we should have more self-confidence and more strength to represent offensively what we consider to be right: democracy and human rights. Just as every nation has the right to decide which path it wants to take, it is our right, and it is Parliament's duty, to decide whether we want to accompany the path freely chosen by every nation and by what means we want to do so.” (BT, 9/89, 5380)

Even though the German government does not actively present the German state and society as a role model or template for other states, the Federal Government uses the concept of Germany as ‘socio- political model’ (gesellschaftspolitisches Leitbild). For example, in 1965, the Federal Government stated:

“The [German, KD] private sector, trade unions, churches, cooperatives and social associations not only provide material assistance in developing countries but also make a decisive contribution to reshaping the country's own functioning economic and socio-political model.” (BT, IV/3772, 3).

A quite unexpected example of Germany as a socio-economic model might be found in its sports promotion abroad. First mentioned in 1973, the promotion of sports (Sportförderung) continues to be of high relevance for the German development cooperation in terms of socio-political education and transformation and social integration and societal communication (BT, 7/1236, 37). In the discourse, sport is described as a “state-building element” (E+Z, 11/10, 22; BT, 7/1040, 31; E+Z, 25/10, 9), as well as an amplifier of the civil society and peaceful coexistence and democratic development (BT, 15/95, 8538; AA, 2011a, 15; BMZ, 2015c, 17; BT, 9/1945, 70).

Another way this discourse strategy of superiority is generally produced is through the construction of German development processes and results as a success story, e.g., the German social state and social security (BT, 16/136, 14369). For example, the FES discussed national health insurance realisations in South Africa by orienting the German experience of introducing such policy (II:281-286). In 2018, a BMZ document suggested that a regional think tank should familiarise African initiatives like Smart Africa with “German and European good practices” (BMZ, 2018a, 33). In 1972, one proposal regarding the cooperation with ‘developing countries’ of Federal Chancellor Brandt was to introduce: “(…) colloquia to explain European experience in the field of trade, economics, social affairs, taxation, statistics, law, institutional set-ups, etc., in order to facilitate the choice of developing countries' government bodies.” (BT, VI/3203, 13). Minister for Economic Affairs, Ludwig Erhard described the task for ‘German people abroad’ to be ‘guides (Führer) or trainers’ and “in their human attitude and mindset, in the art of treating people, in the understanding of the mentality of these peoples, not only to win ‘good will’, but also to create the conditions for industrialisation in these countries to succeed better than is perhaps feared everywhere” (BT, 3/118, 6807) in 1960. In 2015, CDU/CSU representative Westermayer ascertained that German know-how is demanded worldwide (BT, 18/97, 9298).

Once again, the strategy of constructing expertise and superior knowledge over political and social development is visible. German know-how and expertise wording has also been used in the conducted interviews (III: 156-158). This strategy is even more deeply rooted in the discourse order. In 1974, the aid project of ‘counterparts’ is described as followed: “(…) idea of imparting the knowledge and experience of the German 'delegated specialist' (...) as extensively and directly as possible, in a kind of master-teacher relationship (Lehrherrenverhältnis), to the local specialist of the host country assigned to him” (E+Z, 15/10, 8). These concepts carry the difficult notion of the hierarchical relation between an infant ‘developing’ country and the ‘experts’ from Germany as their wise teachers. Sadly, the wording of ‘learning’ from Europe does not vanish in the 1970s (c.f. E+Z, 11/11, 11). In 2020, the GIZ owned magazine Akzente released an issue with the headline “Learning Democracy” (akzente, 1.20, 19). During the conducted interviews, the terms ‘teaching’ and ‘learning’ were also re-constructed (VIII:47) as well as the search by African countries for lessons to learn from the process that has brought Germany to

27 where it is now (II:307-308). In 1971, FDP representative Jung stated: “teaching countries democracy of the Western-type is a pleasant thought but remains a dream” (BT, 6/115, 6774). Also, here, the understanding of a polity export is defined to be impossible but created as desirable by the discourse.

Despite the counterarguments of the previous chapter, this chapter shows how different constructions of the superiority of Germanness run through the discourse order. Above all, it becomes clear that these constructions cannot only be assigned to a specific time, but that they continuously assert themselves as a strategy of discourse, like a tradition of superiority in addition to the expertise produced.

5.4. Construction of the SSA Region as Bad Governance In terms of identity-building in the given discourse, a trend is detectable. A trend of constructing the African continent33 and the SSA region as a site of ‘developing’ problems and lacking social structures, while Germany is portraited as guardian of freedom and democracy (e.g., BT, 8/4132, 5; BT, 16/10038, 6).

In the discourse order, political development problems described as characteristic for SSA are, among others, the lack of national unity (E+Z, 7/8, 34; E+Z, 11/10, 22), state-building (E+Z, 10/2, 22), and the prevailing of ‘crisis management’ instead of politics (E+Z, 28/4, 7). Another attribute connected to the African continent in the discourse is political instability (BT, 14/6496, 22; E+Z, 27/5, 4; E+Z, 28/4, 4), meaning an “image of a continent with ‘artificial nations’ without stability” (E+Z, 28/4, 4). Elsewhere, African societies are denoted as inherently democratic but lacking accountability (E+Z, 33/4, 13). In 1993, Green party representative Weiß considered the development of democracy and the rule of law in Southern Africa a failure and explained that these countries “have not yet found the forms of a modern polity that would be appropriate for Africa and in which social, economic and cultural traditions are combined with modern ideas of human rights and democracy” (BT, 12/131, 11313). In an E+Z article from 1965, a cult of personality in many African states is identified as an obstacle for many aid workers regarding political education (E+Z, 7/8, 33). Additionally, disinterest in political reforms (E+Z, 36/8, 194), as well as societal structures coined by patronage systems since pre-colonial times (E+Z, 36/12, 329), are listed as obstacles for political development in Africa. This strategy continues until 2017: “Large parts of the African population suffer from a political culture that understands ‘governing’ not as the duty to serve the common good, but as the right to serve oneself” (BMZ, 2017a, 8). A GIZ worker of the good financial governance programme based in Pretoria is quoted elsewhere: “Particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa, the performance of government, administration and control authorities is often inadequate, and this determines whether national development programmes are implemented successfully or not" (BMZ, 2019a, 22). Therefore, it is no surprise that African governments and the concept of corruption occur in the discourse order from 1961 onwards (BT, 4/6, 80; BMZ, 2020a, 10; E+Z, 26/6, 12; E+Z, 34/3, 59, 68).

33 While this research is making the distinction between the African and the SSA region as social constructs, this is generally not the case in the examined discourse. 28

While a general tendency is illustrated of Africa having enormous difficulties with good governance34 (E+Z, 37/2, 53), the concept of bad governance in African states occurs very frequently in the discourse order (BT, 13/3342, 15; E+Z, 28/4, 5; E+Z, 30/2,18; E+Z, 25/2, 3; E+Z, 36/5, 140).

Figure 4 African Governments as Bad Governance

This discourse concept is not uniformly defined. As the name suggests, it incorporates all characteristics of the opposite or lack of good governance (c.f. BT, 14/6496, XIIf.; BT, 16/10038, 12) and as such has various characteristics. First stated has been the physical intimidation and arbitrariness of the rulers over the ruled (BT, 8/3582, 5; BT, 9/2411, 7; BT, 10/3028, 38; BT, 11/2020, 39) or poorly developed statehood with a lack of development orientation and capacities of governmental actors (BMZ, 2013a, 10). More concrete, governments were critically depicted in terms of weak administrative structure and political instability (BMZ, 2015d, 33; E+Z, 27/5, 4) or state failure and state collapse (BT, 14/6496, 64; BT, 15/5815, 65, 70; E+Z, 26/12, 16; E+Z, 27/2, 9). Further, bad governance is frequently mentioned with corruption (BT, 14/6496, 78; BT, 16/10038, 42; BT, 18/12300, 113; BMZ, 2012b, 6, 14). Hence, corruption can be seen as a metaphor for bad governance (Stockmann et al., 2016, 402). The concept of bad governance has been summarised as: “insufficient development orientation of government action, lack of transparency in budget planning, implementation and control, insufficient participation of the population in the political process or serious corruption, programme financing is not possible” (BT, 15/5815, 101).

Herein, bad governance is described as a reason for underdevelopment in Africa (BT, 13/3342, 15). (Political) misguidance in the discourse is listed as causing severe economic policy failures, and over- ambitious development plans endanger political stability (BT, 10/3028, 11) or flight of capital (BMZ, 2017a, 21). In 1984, an E+Z article dealt with the lack of preconditions for democracy in Africa, which are causing the “degenerate democratic attempts to walk” (E+Z, 27/2, 4), ending up in one-party systems or military regimes (ibid.). The multitude of one-party systems in Africa is further issued (E+Z, 33/11, 4-5; E+Z, 34/4, 94; E+Z, 33/10, 13).

Self-responsibility (Eigenverantwortung) of the African states to establish framework conditions and capacity-building for growth are targeted measures in the discourse (BT, 10/3028, 16; BT, 11/2020, 104; BT, 18/12300, 5; BMZ, 2020a, 10; E+Z, 31/10, 26; E+Z, 38/4, 116; E+Z, 40/6, 184) to counter “Afro- pessimism” (BT, 13/3342, 49) of private investors. A key concept regarding these obstacles is the ‘education’ of leaders: “Africa requires experts for teachers, clerks and governments” (E+Z, 7/6, 24). This need was already issued in 1966: “The peoples of Asia, Africa and Latin America need ‘responsible leaders’ for a healthy economy and an efficient education and social system at all levels.” (BT, 5/33,

34 See Chapter 6.3. Good Governance 29

1496). It is also stated that African countries need strong, charismatic leaders for an effective state, with the call for a „strong man“ or – with direct reference to Rousseau – “legislator” (E+Z, 15/4, 20). In 1977, Franz Josef Strauß (CDU/CSU) stated with controversial wording:

„We must not forget that it took us Europeans more than 2,500 years to develop Greek culture, Roman civilisation, the achievements of Christianity, the Romanic, Slavic and Germanic peoples, that it took us 500 years to develop modern technology and that the Japanese, despite their undeniable qualities, took almost a century - since 1857 - to catch up. And the blacks are expected to be able to leap over centuries or millennia in a few years or decades - overnight, so to speak. The question here is not: Do we judge the blacks as less intelligent or as equally intelligent? In principle, they are just as intelligent as the whites. But you simply cannot leapfrog stages of development that took others dozens of generations to achieve by means of development aid, capital transfer or even the transmission of revolutionary ideas.” (BT, 8/52, 4046)

In sum, the German discourse creates a distorted and one-dimensional image of the SSA region and its various political developments and potential by attributing bad governance, lacking leadership and merely traditional beliefs and lifestyles to this diverse region.

5.5. Interim Summary Even before turning to the political objects, this chapter showed which power relations and self- construction were institutionalised and produced by speakers. This process creates a discourse strategy within which German institutions and values are determined as superior and desirable for the African continent, which is constructed as an icon for political development difficulties and bad governance.

6. Archaeology of Direct Political Objects In this section, discourse objects will be examined and illustrated that are constructed within the same as being directly aiming to change the political structures in recipient countries. From a systematic examination of the discourse, the main focal points here are democratic objects, (good) governance, the rule of law and development policy support for management and administration, which were not chosen randomly but resulted from the code frequency of the analysis.

Instead of simply pointing to overall agenda objectives like the building of state structures (BT, 18/12300, 32; BMZ, 2013b, 7), the concrete elements contained in the discourse will be systematically examined, e.g., decentral state-building from the bottom up (BMZ, 2007, 23, 31). For example, in 1998, the DSE organised a conference (together with WBG and BMZ) on the World Development Report 1997, debating upon the unity of political theory and praxis referring to Cicero’s credo of mandatory implementation theory in praxis (E+Z, 39/4, 100). Figure 5 Direct Political Objects 6.1. Democracy This section will first illustrate the roles of democracy determined by the discourse and elaborate upon the attributed elements and export of these. Democracy is part of the discourse since 1960 (BT, 3/127, 7306). The definitions of democracy and the neighbouring attributes will be the next chapter's (6.2.) subject. The term democracy has been thematically coded 622 times and serves various functions. The different modalities of this concept and object (as firstly visualised in Figure 6) will be illuminated in the following in their role in the discourse order. As already pointed out in the theoretical framework, the role of democracy within this development discourse is multi-layered, so are the justification for its presence. In 1982, CDU/CSU representative Hüsch formulated the German interest regarding its development aid in guaranteeing peace with states respecting human rights and having a democratic constitution – or at least work out one. He stated that history had proven this point (BT, 9/89, 5380). As mentioned earlier, the assumption of the Kantian peace, under which democratic states do not engage in wars against each other, also objects to the aid discourse (BT, 15/5815, 67; BT, 16/10038, 4). In the 11th Development Policy Report, it is stated that no form of government has proven more successful than democracy (BT, 14/6496, 65). This conviction is further revisited in one of the conducted interviews and justified as followed: “Democracy is not only the most successful form of government but also the most peace-building form of government” (VII:4-6). As the superior form of state and government it is constructed, democracy permeates various areas of the aid discourse, visualised here in Figure 6.

Figure 6 Democracy in the German Aid Discourse

In the 3rd Development Policy Report from 1977, the Federal Government stated their support of liberation movement activities aiming for the peaceful and democratic construction of still dependent societies (BT, 8/3582, 5). At the beginning of the 1990s, BMZ minister Spranger (CSU) focused development policy on democracy by establishing democracy as a framework condition for development cooperation (BT, 12/147, 12643; BT, 12/28, 2199*; BT, 12/217, 84; BT, 12/851, 2; BMZ, 2008a, 15; BMZ, 2016c, 26; E+Z, 33/5, 21; BT, 12/208, 18013). However, these are not political objects since these demands are not aimed at active change but merely at an endorsement of the German actors.

Figure 7 Democracy as Precondition and Mean

Also, by considering Figure 7, it can be concluded that democracy is frequently described as a mean for other ends in the discourse, and surprisingly rarely as an aim of development aid (BT, 4/9, 192; BT, 19/22493, 7; BT, 15/5815, 19; BMZ, 2014c, 4). This observation was further verified in one of the conducted interviews for this study (VI:277-279). The ambition signifies that the efforts of altering the political structures of the recipient countries as described below primarily do not serve the implementation of democracy as such. For example, the decentralisation of power, financial resources, and implementation authority, including transparency, freedom from corruption and democratic control, are described to be a favourable condition for development (BMZ, 2011b, 13). Whereas the term democracy is used in the citations mentioned above, and its existence or emergence in ‘developing’ countries is encouraged, it is not yet pursued. Regarding the defined political object of development aid, it is essential to examine the active promotion of democracy with its historical beginning with the transformation policy of 1993 (BT, 8/197, 15735; BT, 9/19, 857).

From the 1990s onwards, the promotion of democracy dominates the discourse (BT, 11/83, 5544; BT, 11/4174, 24; BT, 13/206, 18741; BT, 19/22493, 7; BT, 14/6496, XI, 24; BT, 15/5815, 65, 127; BT, 16/10038, 8, 33; BT, 18/12300, 45f.; BMZ, 2007, 31; BMZ, 2015h, 8; BR, 2016, 5; BMZ, 2019b, 30; BMZ, 2013b, 11; E+Z, 25/12, 20; E+Z, 33/8, 4; E+Z, 33/9, 4; E+Z, 33/10, 13; E+Z, 33/12, 13). Hereby, the Federal Government supported constitutional and democratic consultancy (BT, 13/3342, 69) and government advisory (BT, 14/6496, 71; BMZ, 1993, 37). ‘Democracy aid’ is firstly mentioned in the 9th Development Policy Report in 1993 (BT, 12/4096, 89). It generally encompasses consulting measures (BT, 12/8001, 29) and equipment assistance programmes (BT, 14/5898, 68). Further, legal and constitutional consulting (BT, 14/8487, 1), as well as the establishment of a multiparty system (BT, 14/90, 8405), civil society (BT, 14/35, 2851; BT, 14/8487, 1), and the “education and training of the democratic idea” (3007:1) are mentioned. The Federal Governments defined the results of democracy promotion as depending on the level of democratisation and the recipient’s government's will (BT, 16/10038, 41). In 1993, E+Z editorial Baum denoted democracy aid as a requirement for peacebuilding. He further stated that under the presumption that is guiding principles like democracy and human rights are learnable political consulting remains interfere but also necessary (E+Z, 34/4, 87).

Regarding the implementation of this ‘learnable political consulting’, the party-affiliated foundations are tasked within the discourse with the general promotion of democracy in German development aid (BT, 11/2020, 68; BT, 11/7313, 35, 68; BT, 15/5815, 167). Within the interviews, several concrete practices of this democracy aid are described. For the FES, democracy promotion includes the support of civil society, media and other institutions (III:50-52). The FES organises, for example, events like académie politique in Benin, Togo or Burkina Faso for young members of opposition parties to illustrate principles of democracy, e.g., checks and balances (III: 72-76), similar educational programmes for political communication are also conducted by the KAS (IV:78-81). ‘Indirect democracy promotion’ by the Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung aims to create framework conditions for good governance through capacity building, reforming the ministerial bureaucracy, and setting up essential institutions (hbs, 2016, 66).

Hence, in the discourse order, the possible uses and forms of implementation of democracy in development cooperation are as diverse as the definitions in the following chapter. However, it can be stated that the demands or active implementations of democracy are produced within the discourse less as an end in itself than a means to other objectives.

6.2. Democratic Concepts Even though the are several definitions of the term democracy within the discourse (see Figure 8), there is no uniform and standardised definition.

Figure 8 Democracy Definitions

In a BMZ strategy paper from 2009, foundational principles of democracy are described to be representation based on free and fair election, societal participation in the decision-making process, the rule of law and the respect of human rights, as well as social anchoring and institutionalisation of democratic procedures (BMZ, 2009a, 13). Democracy promotion is also part of the measures agreed with more than 30 ‘developing’ and transition countries in the development cooperation priority "Democracy, Civil Society and Public Administration". Here, legal and judicial reform, constitutional advice, decentralisation and municipal development are highlighted (BT, 16/3800, 33). The guidelines for crisis prevention and peacekeeping of the Federal Government from 2017 are the ones of the ‘free democratic order in Germany’ and encompasses: “human dignity, civil rights, democracy, the rule of law and the separation of powers, as well as social responsibility for one another” (AA, 2017a, 45). But the multitude of components of democracy goes further. There is also the talk about the democratic legitimised state's monopoly on the use of force (BMZ, 2013b, 14) and the ‘help’ with the establishment of democratic decision mechanisms (BMZ, 2019c, 90). In other parts of the discourse, democratic elections (BT, 18/112, 10795) and elections as such are defined as a crucial element of and for democracy (BT, 13/3342, 49; BMZ, 2014f, 13). Another section of the discourse defined democracy as pluralism (E+Z, 37/3, 82). Here, party pluralism is a necessary but not sufficient condition (E+Z, 34/4, 93). In general, the government obligated to be borne by the people and not imposed upon against their will in order to be legit (E+Z, 34/4, 97). So far, the German discourse demonstrates the same conceptual puzzlement as the theoretical chapter has already highlighted in advance. Furthermore, it is observable that the concept of democracy occurs in a variety of policy areas. e.g., digitalisation and democracy (BMZ, 2019b, 9, 20) the city and democracy (Akzente, 1.05, 26). Democracy in discourse is almost an obligatory postulate in all policy areas of the recipient countries, which is illustrated by the example of the fight against poaching in African countries, which undermines democratic principles and the rule of law (BMZ, 2018b, 2). Nevertheless, this analysis of the discourse order remains the task to penetrate the connections of the objects and concepts. Therefore, the discourse concepts that appear together with democracy in the discourse will now be illuminated. These ‘democratic’ discourse concepts are 34 participation, control of governmental action, civil society, freedom of speech and media, and social justice.

Participation or political involvement occurs not only in the connection with democracy (e.g., E+Z, 31/5, 19) but also as development concept in the discourse (e.g., BT, 11/2020, 106; BT, 11/7313, 68; BT, 12/4096, 32; BT, 15/5815, 66; BT, 16/10038, 41; BT, 17/13100, 63; AA, 2019a, 8; E+Z, 29/11, 23; E+Z, 22/3, 27; E+Z, 22/11, 12; E+Z, 31/5, 9; E+Z, 37/3, 72; Akzente, 4.01, 37) particular since 1983 as framework condition and its entitlement as one of the five Spranger aid criteria from 1991 (BT, 12/47, 3872; BT, 12/924, 1; BT, 12/4037, 4; BT, 12/230, 20079; BT, 13/4532, 19; BT, 16/3800, 22). In the 10th Development Policy Report, participation of the population in political decision-making is defined as incorporating democratic electoral practice, free expression of political opposition inside and outside parliament, freedom of association for parties, trade unions, associations, self-help organisations, etc., freedom of the press and information (BT, 13/3342, 48).

An objective of democratic endorsement in the discourse is the control of governmental action (BMZ, 2019d, 15). For example, the Federal Government stated the general support of parliaments “its bodies and legislative, control and representational functions” (BMZ, 2007, 27). In 2009, the strengthening of parliamentary control thus was linked to the democratic dimension of German good governance promotion. These general aspects of democracy are featured in policies and projects in development cooperation in countries like Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Ethiopia, Ghana, Malawi, Mauritania, Niger, Rwanda, Senegal, South Africa, South Sudan, Tanzania and Zambia (BT, 16/13572, 9). The support of parliaments in ‘young democracies’ also takes place in the form of parliamentary cooperation, whereby the German parliament consults and equips these parliaments abroad (AA, 2017a, 13). Further, the separation of powers or checks and balances (Gewaltenteilung) are mentioned as another principle of democracy in the discourse (E+Z, 35/11, 279; E+Z, 33/11, 5). The promotion of the separation of powers is explicitly assigned as one of the central aspects of the work of the GTZ regarding the independent control of governmental actions in 2009 (Akzente, 1.09, 43). Elsewhere, constitutional consultancy (BT, 14/6496, 78; AA, 2019e, 4) and the consultation of constitutional reforms (AA, 2019e, 20) are expressed as a way of implementing democracy. Thürer demanded in the E+Z in 1995 constitutions for the protection of minority and defines a state constitution: “as an expression of political will and the political consensus of the citizens” (E+Z, 36/3, 79). Highlighted within the in-depth interviews with the KAS and GIZ as an important additional dimension of democratic governmental control is the concept of accountability (here, Rechenschaft) (c.f., V:34-38). In Côte d’Ivoire, the KAS organises town hall meetings (face au peuple), where parliamentary and communal representatives ‘face their people’ and engage in conversation and have the opportunity to explain their role and work. Therefore, the representatives also redefine their role, not as a body of consent in a “toothless parliament” (IV:78-84). Accountability is, together with human rights and civil society, one core point of the GIZ work in Uganda (VIII: 6). Functional governmental action seems to acquire the assistance of efficient institutions. In the discourse, institutions as a term for different objects are present since the 1980s (BT, 10/42, 2986), particularly regarding the capacity building. In general, ‘democratic’ and ‘constitutional’ institutions are described as mean towards archiving democracy or good governance (BT, 14/5578, 2; BT, 14/6496, 27; BT, 14/8487, 1; BT, 19/15882, 13). One example of implementation is the cooperation of the KAS with the Chadema party in Tanzania to improve and democratise party structures (I:8). As described in the interviews, the revising of the Chadema party programme took a long process because the KAS aid works did not want to dictate the content but rather foster Tanzanian ideas (I:17).

The German development aid actors accentuate their involvement and targeted promotion of civil society (BT, 11/7313, 36; BT, 14/6496, XIII; BT, 17/13100, 8; AA, 2019a, 27; BMZ, 2007, 23; BMZ, 2009a, 10; hbs, 2016, 26; BT, 13/6773, 34; BT, 19/7730, 132). The democratic concept of civil society includes 35 the changed relationship between state and society (E+Z, 37/3, 78). This concept appears in forms of building civil society (BT, 13/3342, 69; BT, 14/35, 2851) and institutions of civil society (E+Z, 38/10, 262; BT, 14/8487, 1). Democracy promotion as such is frequently associated with the strengthening of civil society (BT, 13/12, 676; BT, 19/15882, 358; BT, 15/53, 4433; BT, 17/8241, 55), due to the denoted important role for democracy (BR, 2016, 5; AA, 2019e, 18; BMZ, 2013b, 14; BMZ, 2014c, 4; BMZ, 2019d, 15; E+Z, 37/3, 83). Hereby, the triad of state, economy, and civil society (BT, 17/207, 25315), support of civil society, private economic actors and “last but not least, of the commitment of each and every individual.” (BT, 18/2000, 2; BT, 19/1700, 2) is meant by this. Like with democracy, the understanding of civil society remains contested. At one point, civil society is understood in the sense of Jürgen Habermas’ ‘constitutional patriotism’ and John Rawls’ political justice (E+Z, 36/3, 79). A GIZ report recalls Antonio Gramsci’s understanding of civil society (Akzente, 1.12, 19). The discourse tendency in how to assist civil society abroad generally inclines towards civic education or political education. In this context, the FES tries to promote discussions about democracy and debates with people, for example, whether South Africa is an exemplary democracy (II:44-47). The GIZ pursues two dimensions of technical cooperation with the civil society in Uganda. Firstly, ensuring that the Ugandan state does not see the civil society as opposition but invites them into the decision-making process. Secondly, ensuring that the civil society is trained to make ‘qualified substantive contributions’ in the political processes (VIII: 13-17). Also, the FES engages in support of civil society groups to participate in the decision-making process (I:21-22). Socio-political adult education, trade union work, cooperative work, social structural aid, and cooperation in the field of mass media have been the fields of operation for the FES’ international work for centuries (c.f. FES, 1970, 34). Most notable here, party-affiliated foundations organised events to convey the German idea of civil society (VI: 218-219). As a vital dimension of civil society and therefore feature of democracy, independent media and press are described in the discourse (BT, 14/6496, 65; BT, 16/10038, 40; BMZ, 2007, 31; BMZ, 2009a, 14). The role of media in recipient countries are further viewed as feature of good governance (BMZ, 2013b, 14/BT, 18; 12300, 112) and as control body for human rights (BMZ, 2015b; BT, 9/17, 706; BT, 11/20, 1208; BT, 13/145, 13062; BT, 14/9323, 161; BT, 15/82, 7202). Same goes for the democratic concept of freedom of speech (BT, 8/224, 18109; BT, 12/3134, 1; BT, 13/3342, 43; BT, 13/113, 10102; BT, 14/5578, 2). The concrete implementation of these demands involves, e.g., media and civil society support in Ghana (BMZ, 2015b, 14). Civic rights, as in freedom of speech and press freedom, are also part of the work of the FES (III:27- 28). The KAS trains students in journalism (IV:189) in independent and technical dimensions and journalistic ethics (IV:192). The same goes for the KAS in Uganda (V:47) or party-affiliated foundations in general (VI:231-233).

Finally, a frequently mentioned (42) target of the German development discourse is the democratic concept of justice, in particular, social justice (Soziale Gerechtigkeit). In the discourse order, the concept justice occurs frequently in the combination with democracy (BT, 10/91, 6703; BT, 9/89, 5396f.; BT, 12/924, 1; BT, 12/2938, 13; BT, 13/213, 19433; BT, 16/10700, 77; BT, 18/112, 10795; E+Z, 34/4, 92; E+Z, 34/4, 93; E+Z, 39/12, 308; Akzente, 2.98, 3) but also freedom (BT, 7/240, 16881; BT, 7/204, 14143; BT, 8/52, 3990; BT, 8/100, 7990; BT, 13/213, 19421; BT, 15/5815, 17). It is also linked to human rights (BT, 8/67, 5255; BT, 12/2938, 13; BT, 13/213, 19433; E+Z, 19/8, 8; E+Z, 32/12, 7; E+Z, 33/3, 4) and human dignity (BT, 8/4132, 5; BT, 13/6581, 14). Social justice is targeted in the discourse to achieve equal opportunities and political participation (BT, 18/12300, 74). Here, social justice is a development aim (BT, 14/6496, 64; BT, 16/10038, 33) and guiding principle (BMZ, 2008b, 3) at the same time. In the conducted interviews, the argument was made that, like its affiliated party SPD, the FES advocates social democracy as the most suitable form of a welfare state for reaching a justice society (II:72-74; III:184- 186). This statement includes the conviction that values of social democracy are also valuable for Africa (c.f. III:192-193).

In the German development discourse, both transformation processes towards more democratic structures are supported, and the formation of democratic institutions is actively promoted. This is done mainly by promoting democratic concepts such as participation, government control, civil society, freedom of the press, freedom of expression and social justice. However, the exact meaning of democracy remains diverse, as does the interpretation of its role within development policy objectives. Again, the democratic discourse concepts reveal the colouring of German experience and expertise, for example, the German conception of civil society. 6.3. Good Governance Good governance nearly predominates the German aid discourse order as a political object since 1991 (366 quotations). As elaborated in the theoretical frame, the discourse contains several direct references to its document of origin, the WBG report from 1989 (E+Z, 31/4, 29; E+Z, 38/1, 13; E+Z, 31/7, 12; E+Z, 31/4, 29; BMZ, 2014f, 15). Even more than democracy, this political object is found in highly diverse constellations with the most varied development, application possibilities, and forms of implementation. Initially, an attempt will be made to define this object within the discourse order.

The concept of origin and most relevance within good governance is that of institutions. It comes in a variety of constellations with other terms, e.g., good institutional structures (AA, 2019e, 20), institution- building (BMZ, 1998, 60; E+Z, 36/7, 166), in combination with the promotion of human rights: Menschenrechtsinstitutionen (BT, 19/7730, 57), with governance: Governanceinstitutionen (BT, 19/15882, 225), and as a measure against corruption (BT, 16/3800, 33). The discourse frequently points out the existence of institutional challenges or problems in ‘developing’ countries (BT, 7/1236, 82; BT, 15/5815, 108; BT, 16/10038, 12; BMZ, 2020b, 9; E+Z, 36/5, 145; E+Z, 39/2, 38). Hence the promotion and strengthening of (efficient) institutions are also frequently claimed (BT, 11/7313, 30; BT, 15/5815, 108; BMZ, 2017f, 21; E+Z, 17/11, 3; E+Z, 31/2, 5; E+Z, 36/8, 188; E+Z, 34/4, 97; E+Z, 35/5, 132), encompassing the “establishment or improvement of the institutional framework and the social and political regulatory framework as well as promotion and safeguarding of economic growth (...)” (BT, 15/5815, 20). Stable institutions and a functioning public administration are determined as “the basic building blocks for a successful transformation” (BMZ, 2016e, 8). The same goes for the state institutions (BT, 15/5815, XXVIII; BT, 16/10038, 13; BT, 18/12300, 112; BMZ, 2007, 4, 13; BMZ, 2015f, 35; AA, 2019e, 20). Whereby the creation of institutions is defined as being able to enable the active participation of the poor population in the development process (E+Z, 19/12, 11). Institutions are further denoted as a tool for empowerment (E+Z, 37/5, 131) and capacity building (Akzente, 2.05, 17). Institutional preconditions are also depicted as crucial for general development successes (BT, 15/5815, XIV, XXVIII; BMZ, 2008c, 8; BMZ, 2016c, 26; E+Z, 39/2, 38; E+Z, 39/4, 104; AA, 2019c, 2-4). As illustrated in the theoretical frame, the academic school of NIE(Douglas North, et al.) and its demand that ‘institutions matter’ strongly influenced the conception of governance in development discourse. Therefore, it does not seem surprising that the term is echoed in German discourse. (BT, 18/12300, 45; E+Z, 36/5, 140; E+Z, 36/5, 141; E+Z, 35/5, 128). In 2007, the Federal Government defined the concept of governance as such:

The term "governance" refers to the way in which decisions are made, policies formulated and implemented in a state. It refers to institutions, mechanisms, processes and policies that regulate the actions of state and non-state actors (private sector and civil society). (BMZ, 2007, 13)

As governance was determined as an emphasis of the German development aid (BMZ, 2014f, 34; BMZ, 2015h, 15; BMZ, 2019e, 8), the concept invaded nearly all development discourse areas, as Figure 9 illustrates.

Further, there are several notions of political governance in the discourse: workable (tragfähig) governance (BMZ, 2017g, 101; BMZ, 2008b, 3), responsible governance (BT, 14/531, 2), good governmental action (BT, 12/131, 11339), democratic governance (BT, 14/6496, 48; BT, 15/5815, 108; BMZ, 2011b, 17; FES, 2020, 4; FES, 2013, 9), or bon gestion des affaires publique (III:19). Likewise, the demand for development-oriented (government) action (Entwicklungsorientiertes Handeln) in Figure 9 Use of the Term Governance ‘developing countries’ is there to be found (BT, 12/3300, 14; BT, 12/4037, 4; BT, 13/232, 21305; BT, 14/28, 2338; BT, 12/4096, 32; BT, 13/3342, 48; E+Z, 36/8, 187; E+Z, 36/10, 273). This concept follows state-building and administrational reforms with partner states with ‘developed statehood’ in accordance with the Paris declaration of 2009 (c.f. BMZ, 2009a, 3).

Good governance comprises all these political dimensions, even if, as Figure 10 visualises, there is no single definition to be traced in the discourse order.

With regard to Nobel peace prize winner Oskar Arias, good governance is defined as responsible handling of resources and respect of fundamental human rights (BT, 14/6496, 18), also in accordance with the EU-commission from March 1998 (BT, 14/6496, 18). Thereby, transparency of governmental action and administration is a key feature of the good governance conception of the parliament and the Federal Government (BT, 12/131, 11339; Figure 10 Good Governance Definitions BT, 13/114, 10284*; BT, 14/38, 3183; BT, 14/531, 2; BT, 16/1809, 31; BT, 16/3087, 3; BT, 16/99, 10092; BT, 16/10034, 26; BT, 17/117, 13551; BT, 17/165, 19604).

In the 12th Development Policy Report, elements of good governance are: 1. responsible use of political power by the state (at different levels - decentralisation), participation of the population (including ethnic minorities) in political processes, respect for political and civil human rights; 2. effective public institutions and responsible use of public resources (financial and natural) by the state (at different levels), transparency and accountability; 3. the rule of law and legal certainty; 4. reconstruction of governance structures in post-conflict countries. (BT, 15/5815, 65) And further, good governance is intended to be reached “through the fight against corruption, the rule of law, respect for human rights, a market economy-oriented economic policy and macroeconomic stability are explicitly identified as core elements of framework conditions conducive to development.” (BT, 15/5815, 7). Good governance also encompasses the rule of law and democracy promotion (BT, 15/5579, 6; BT, 16/35, 3007; BT, 16/5243, 4), and includes government budget discipline (BT, 14/3967, 23). 38

Figure 11 Variations of Good Governance

As part of its development policy, the Federal Government promotes good governance in numerous fields of action and through many different instruments, which are directed at state institutions such as parliaments, ministries, or local governments, as well as at organisations from civil society and the media (BT, 17/13100, 61). Good governance has been seen as a strengthening of civil society (BT, 19/7730, 134) or described as to be applied to all stakeholders involved (BT, 14/28, 2343). The promotion of good governance was also defined as the focus of GTZ's work, meaning participation by civil society, transparency of public decision-making and budgeting processes, and accountability of governments to democratically elected institutions and civil society (Akzente, 1.09, 43). Like in the theoretical frame35, the unclear relation of good governance to democracy is part of the German discourse. While democracy is defined in a simplified way as participation and good governance (E+Z, 33/4, 3), good governance and democratic economy have also been mentioned (BT, 15/5815, XIV; E+Z, 36/5, 140). Good governance is further described as decentralisation (BT, 17/13100, 62; BR, 2016, 23). The discourse also refers to ‘open government’, promoting a dialogue between government and civil society and private sector actors to contribute to governments' increased efficiency and helps establish democratic decision-making mechanisms (BMZ, 2019c, 90). The discourse not only rushes through all these dimensions and neighbouring objects but also allocates specific purposes to the good governance object.

Definitional, a trend towards institutional political structures can be discerned in good governance discourse order (compare Figure 10) with an important additional component of purposeful governance. What goals this corresponds to will now be explained. Predominated here is the construction of good governance as framework conditions in the discourse (BT, 12/94, 7735; BT, 14/163, 15873; BT, 19/14915, 7; BT, 14/225, 22344; BT, 15/5815, 11; BT, 18/35, 2969; BT, 13/3342, 68; BT, 14/6496, 110, 126; BT, 15/5815, 15; BMZ, 2008a, 15, 24; BMZ, 2014g, 11; BMZ, 2014h, 8; KAS, 2/2007, 14; E+Z, 32/12, 5; E+Z, 38/1, 3; E+Z, 34/3, 67; E+Z, 35/5, 129). For example, the framework conditions on the political level being decentralisation, participation, human rights, democracy, and good governance (E+Z, 40/7, 212). Good governance can equal market economic order and promote private initiatives (BT, 12/131, 11326). It also serves as additional component to framework conditions (BT, 13/5903, 1; BT, 14/3967, 4; BT, 15/114, 10495/BT, 18/88, 8299). For African countries, the premise of good governance is set to “improve the political, legal and administrative framework conditions for investors and companies” (BR, 2020, 25). Therefore, good governance serves as an end to private investment and economic growth. But there are other objectives for the establishment of good

35 See page 5. 39 governance, as visualised in Figure 12. It is also stated that good, responsible governance is a key prerequisite for sustainable development, better living conditions, respect for human rights and the preservation of peace and security (BT, 17/13100, 76).

Figure 12 Good Governance as Precondition and Mean

With such a range of concepts and ends, it can be concluded that good governance is established as a cross-cutting issue of German development cooperation (BT, 18/12300, 112) or being interpreted as the panacea of development aid. This miracle solution becomes visible when development cooperation is determined to be only efficient employing good governance (BT, 17/12, 988; BT, 17/58, 6129) or as an ‘innovative’ development cooperation approach of the future (BT, 16/16, 1134; BT, 15/5815, 17). As the ‘panacea of development aid’, good governance appears to be suitable for any developmental regard. It has been connected to the safety of the people (BT, 14/6496, 18), poaching (BMZ, 2018b, 2), cities (BMZ, 2014g, 3), as good urban governance (Akzente, 1.05, 3; Akzente, 1.09, 29), digitalisation (BMZ, 2019b, 20), mining in Democratic Republic of Congo (Akzente, 4.18, 50), water management as well as other sectors (AA, 2019f, 3/BMZ, 2019e, 31/BMZ, 2012b, 23; BMZ, 2017h, 14), or good financial governance (BT, 19/11009, 2; BT, 19/11418, 6; BT, 18/12300, 113; BMZ, 2012b, 14; BMZ, 2014b, 3; BMZ, 2014b, 9; BMZ, 2008a, 31; BT, 17/13100, 76).

Good governance programmes were described in the interviews as a lengthy process that requires a change in mentality and involves aspects that need to develop over generations (VIII:36-37). This is not surprising, considering the scope of application and impact promises found in the German discourse order. The (not only German) panacea of set development challenges remains a mystery in definitional terms. The influence of the political development or architecture of the donor country and thus of a particularly German good governance implementation could not be proven either. However, as far as its role in the discourse order of German development policy is concerned, it is above all institutional facilitating that can be identified.

6.4. The Rule of Law Having examined the two main objects that mainly determine how governmental actions in recipient countries should be arranged, the discourse order contains two more structural objects. The first one being the rule of law. This political object is closely related to the concepts of ‘Recht’36. Here, Recht occurs in the form of concrete political objects of the development cooperation, for example, the support of legal system (Rechtssystem) (BT, VI/3203, 13; BT, 13/6773, 34; BT, 14/6496, 27; BT, 16/564, 2), e.g., the assistance of democratic structures with legal (Rechts-) and constitutional counselling (BT, 14/8487, 1), as well as legal frame conditions (BT, 16/13276, 79). In 2009, the Federal Government exemplified their development support of legal frame conditions at the sector programme to reform the judicial system in Uganda and the Côte d’Ivoire (BT, 16/13572, 24). Additionally, the Byward law and order (Recht und Ordnung) is used as a guiding principle for the cooperation between governments and civil society (BT, 19/15882, 358). Furthermore, the rule of law (Rechtsstaatlichkeit), as well as constitutional (rechtsstaatlich) systems, are one of the most frequently coded direct political objects of the German discourse (217). In the 8th Human Rights Report by the Federal Government from 2008 regarding the rule of human rights in the Cotonou Agreement between the EU and the Organisation of African, Caribbean and Pacific States (OACPS), it is stated that:

“Rather, cooperation now became more political overall. Human rights and, alongside them, democratisation and the rule of law have become positive instruments of development policy. On the one hand, they are the basis and criterion for cooperation, but on the other hand, they are also the goal and yardstick for the success of the development of our partner states. This means that the explicit promotion of political and civil rights, civil society, elections, and judicial reforms to build a democratically legitimised state based on the rule of law has become the focus of attention.” (BT, 16/10037, 122)

The absence of functional legal institutions or the disrespect of - human or civil – rights is characterised by the discourse as an attribute of bad governance action (BT, 15/43, 3502; BT, 17/7185, 4). The German Federal Republic is portrayed as a ‘model for the rule of law’ (AA, 2019e, 4). The reason for this is the younger German history, which has created a specific awareness and expertise over the rule of law (AA, 2019e, 6). Once again, German actors justify the political objects in their development aid with a constructed expertise due to the German political history. Germany’s legal system is illustrated within the discourse as a positive example abroad, particular due to the historical experience of German National Socialism (BT, 14/3739, 32). The developmental support and improvement of legal systems, as well as the establishment of constitutional states and the rule of law in recipient countries, is therefore characterised on the one hand by the constructed German understanding of expertise. On the other hand, the concept of law and its accompanying political objects do not appear to be the inherent goal of German discourse, as will be explained later in this paper. 6.5. Administration and Management In 1961, SPD representative Kalbitzer described a ‘modernisation’ of public administration as crucial for the ‘developing countries’: “They have to learn to administer.” (BT, 3/159, 9205). This need of administration is primarily constructed through the description of lack of administration (E+Z, 12/8, 24; DSE, 1975, 26; BT, 9/67, 3925; BT, 10/3028, 52), which hinders the “evolution towards new societal forms” (DSE, 1975, 66). Thus, the discourse order creates a compelling necessity concerning political, institutional design. Administration is being identified as foundation of ‘modern’ or functional statehood (BT, 4/90, 4199; BT, 8/2832, 1; BT, 18/12300, 112; AA, 2017a, 80; BT, 16/10038, 40; E+Z, 34/4, 97) or being important for “increasing the efficiency of economic and political action” (BMZ, 1998, 60). The ideal used in the discourse is the model of a citizen-oriented, transparent and service-oriented

36 The linguistic differentiation must be made between the ‘right’ as legal or moral claim (Recht) and law (Recht) as system of rules. 41 administration that works effectively and efficiently (BMZ, 2014j, 15). With ‘modernisation’ of public administration, the discourse refers to efficiency, transparency, accountability, reducing bureaucracy, and recruitment of administrators according to qualification (c.f. BMZ, 2017a, 22). The strengthening of planning and organisational capacity of developing countries is described to be achieved through advice and management support for central agencies, organisations and business enterprises and training of highly qualified personnel (BT, 7/4293, 42). This also includes the building of tax administrations (BT, 18/12300, 113). On the other hand, the promotion of administration is defined as an obstacle and learning process due to its “centuries-old tradition in European, Ottoman, and Chinese cultures that produced a system of rules and procedures” (E+Z, 27/2, 5). By establishing a universal necessity of this political object (administration), it is also possible for the discourse order to legitimise its influence. Administration training and consultation by promoting: “(…) the development of administrative structures at various levels” is a central object of the discourse (BT, VI/2053, 20; BT, 7/1236, 69; BT, 7/4293, 45; BT, 8/1185, 60; BT, 7/1236, 42; BT, 8/1185, 60; BMZ, 1993, 37; BMZ, 2018e, 20). Here, the ZÖV is active since 1962 (BT, 7/1236, 42; E+Z, 40/7, 209). The DSE summarised the objectives of the ZÖV as such: “progress in economic and state-building depends not least on the initiative and prowess (Tüchtigkeit) of the public administration” (DSE, 1967, 17). According to this objective, the ZÖV organised administration workshops with African representatives in 1964 and 1965 (E+Z, 6/1), with Somalian civil servants in 1967 (E+Z, 8/7, 31), with clerks and ministers from the empire of Ethiopia in 1968 and 1969 (DSE, 1969, 26), or workshop with 25 communal politicians from the Democratic Republic of Congo in 1971 (E+Z, 12/10, 27). The already described discourse construct of the ‘teacher- student relationship’ thus also finds its place in the administration promotion. But also, party-affiliated foundations engaged in the training of administration personnel, for example, the FNS in 1969 (FNS, 1969, 15). The same goes for the BMZ’s emphasis on ‘democracy, civil society and public administration’ (BMZ, 2012b, 14).

Nevertheless, even the implementation of administrative assistance as a political object does not remain a stand-alone objective. Functional and effective administration is stated to be an instrument to achieve self-reliance and self-help (BT, 3/159, 9219; BT, 11/33, 2251; BT, 12/924, 99; BT, 11/2020, 40; E+Z, 31/7, 8), e.g., communal self-governance structures (Selbstverwaltungsstrukturen) (BT, 12/237, 20838) and an “engine for development” (Akzente, 3.98, 9). Hence, also administration functions in the discourse order as framework condition (BT, 19/14915, 7; BT, 14/225, 22344). It apparently serves for the set-up of efficient, economically advanced, and citizen-orientated public administration that “also sets the internal framework for democratic and constitutional development” (BMZ, 1993, 36). Elsewhere, the principle of local self-government, decentralisation of responsibility and the provision of local bodies is described as a signal for democracy, transparency, and citizen-oriented administration worldwide. (BT, 13/114, 10284*).

The assumption that German aid actors would export their administration model is rejected in the E+Z in 1971 (E+Z, 12/10, 27). However, the export of administrative system is advocated (E+Z, 8/7, 30; E+Z, 10/12, 12). Described as reason for this is that the “(…) European experience in the field of trade, economics, social affairs, taxation, statistics, law, institutional set-ups, etc. should be explained to facilitate the choice of developing countries' governmental bodies” (BT, VI/3203, 13). The new construction of German expertise shows a returning discourse ‘will to export’ of the administrative structures made in Germany. In 2016, SPD representative Engelmeier invoked that one could argue Germany would do in their development cooperation exactly what they are good at: “administer and bureaucratise more Prussian than any Prussian” (BT, 18/149, 14747). It is also stated that Germany (Prussia) has a 250-year-old experience with public administration as a qualification for its administrative aid abroad (DSE, 1975, 53). In the very same DSE report, the assumption is made that:

“Systems of administration in the world are generally oriented towards other models. Nevertheless, the German one might be of interest because Germany is apparently not burdened by the colonial epoch, and the economic and military successes suggest good administration to observers” (DSE, 1975, 46).

The construction of expertise is not only based on false historical references but also includes self- defining attributes of Germanness. The same discourse strategy of superior expertise can be found with the object of management (BT, 6/144, 8276; BT, VI/2053, 13; BT, 12/2602, 17; BT, 12/3380, 25). Management is denoted as a tool for the development process (E+Z, 27/8, 7). Like with administration aid, the need for management promotion originates from the negative theme in the discourse of management in ‘developing’ countries being depicted as ‘flawed’ or ‘inadequate’ (BT, 9/1158, 2; BT, 9/1592, 8; BT, 10/3028, 44; BT, 12/93, 7589). Elsewhere, African societies are recorded as being coined by solidarity and the “willingness to share joys and sorrows with extended family, friends and acquaintances” (E+Z, 31/7, 8) and therefore hardly compatible with ‘modern’ private-economical or state management and administration methods (ibid.). The private-economical management methods are seen in the discourse order as capacity building alternative to state structures (E+Z, 28/12, 10). Like good governance, management occurs in different sectors as a guiding principle for the political organisation, even on the micro-level, for example, in educational establishments (BMZ, 2015g, 9). In an issue of the akzente magazine from 2007, the Ethiopian the Ministry of Capacity Building is referenced for their attempt of ”achieving capacity development at the strategic, individual and institutional levels in management, organisational efficiency and good governance” (Akzente, 1.07, 10). Even though management and administration support have been demanded simultaneously (E+Z, 12/8, 24; E+Z, 15/7, 21; E+Z, 34/4, 97), management carries a stronger economic notion with it resembling more good governance as being administrative governance (BMZ, 2007, 13). The same goes for the demands in the discourse of aiding financial and budget management (BMZ, 2014j, 3, 11; BMZ, 2017h, 11) or orienting ‘development’ countries new public management (E+Z, 36/8, 187; E+Z, 36/8, 92; E+Z, 36/8, 199). Hereby, management – be it from abroad or from the very country – brings upon certain moral concepts, structures of domination, and social norms that originated in the industrial countries (E+Z, 13/1, 4). Therefore, management advice, support and training can be seen as an additional political object of aid (BT, 7/4293, 42; E+Z, 26/10, 15; BT, 11/2020, 49; E+Z, 29/11, 23; E+Z, 34/4, 97). The DSE, for example, organised seminars and workshops on management (E+Z, 13/5, 35; E+Z, 36/8, 187) in Nigeria in 1971 (E+Z, 13/1, 24) or in Kenya in 1978 (E+Z, 20/1, 24).

The German discourse order apparently creates its own demand. This becomes visible in the construction of administrative and management needs, which must be counteracted in terms of development policy by the alleged German expertise in these fields. At times, here too, the central objective does not seem to lie on the implementation of the objects as such, but rather a general discourse strategy is followed to create better market conditions.

6.6. Interim Summary What political objects are exported by Germany, and how can this discourse of polity export be characterized? This question upon an exportability of democratic system like Westminster (E+Z, 36/3, 80; BT, 9/2422, 20; BT, 12/208, 18017) or US presidential system (E+Z, 27/2, 4) was also raised in the discourse. One statement defines the irrelevance of the selection of any democratic model, even be it the ‘Bonner’ model (BT, 12/131, 11346). The question of a ‘democracy export’ was posed deliberately during the conducted in-depth interviews. Here, the FES’ democracy promotion in Western Africa was defined to be about ‘basics’: “the people do not care whether the D'Hondt election method can be fully implemented here (…) or whether we have a proportional or majority voting right” (III:229-234). BMZ Minister Offergeld already used a comparable formulation in 1981 (BT, 8/215, 706). The actual 43 irrelevance of the structural framework in the basic work of democratisation was also mentioned in an interview with the KAS (IV: 33). As for the KAS in Uganda, the German model of the parliamentary system is not to be imposed as a blueprint over the presidential system (V:202-204). The implementation of democracy promotion mainly consists of the vouching for a ‘multi-party system and a strong parliament’ (IV:75).

Might the German democratic system not be directly exported to SSA, the German democracy still serves as a point of reference (I:39), which means a “translation of the German system in the local context” (I:42) as described in an interview. In terms of power structures, this translation is again shaped by an asymmetrical relation. For example, the process of democracy promotion in Uganda has been described as dominated by Uganda having a “lower knowledge level” (Wissensniveau) (VIII: 49-50). The same goes for the call of accepting “that our partners are right to point to a different history, different traditions and a possible lack of development” (BT, 13/113, 10102). Elsewhere, Africa is denoted as having proven itself to be problematic to export institutions like civil society, too (E+Z, 33/4, 3). The excerpt from one of the first FES reports on democracy promotion seems to be more reflective, but still with the same strategy: “Securing democracy in our own society gives us the strength and only the right to develop democratic models in partnership with our friends outside our borders” (FES, 1967, 67).

Regardless of reflections, 'good' intentions, or the multitude of possible interpretations of the political object in terms of its definitions and areas of application, it remains the case that the German discourse order contains a strategy a technical superiority construction especially in democracy and administrative assistance such as management promotion and establishes with this created expertise a legitimation for possible polity exports.

7. Archaeology of Implicit Political Objects “We do not want to do this to conquer markets, nor do we want to pursue development policy, but to liberate fellow human beings in this world - to liberate: a truly liberal principle! - from hunger, need and misery, to bring them freedom and human dignity. The European citizen who comes from the liberal tradition must take a stand on this; he cannot avoid this question. Our idea has to prove itself in the countries of Asia and Africa.” Walter Scheel in 1960 (BT, 3/118, 6827)

After examining the objects in the development discourse, which clearly aim to transform public coexistence and the allocation of values, this second archaeology section will provide an overview of the objects that are not labelled as such but have been interpreted to affect the political structures in countries abroad. Hence, this section examines the ‘hidden’ political objects of German polity export. Figure 13 Codes Implicit Objects

Initial examples of these implicated objects are the transplantation of trade unions and cooperatives. The German trade unions (Gewerkschaften) are described by the Federal Government as an element but also components of democratising social structures in ‘developing’ countries, in 1965 (BT, IV/3772, 3) and 1973 (BT, VI/1690, 14). The FES particularly promotes the promotion of trade unions and the 'representation of workers' created by them as one of the most important elements of democratic procedures (III: 20-24). In 1977, for example, the Government of Botswana asked the FES for assistance in building a national trade union federation to ensure membership in ILO (Annual Report, 1977, 80). The FNS is also active in cooperation with trade unions very early, as mentioned in 1969 (FNS, 1968, 10). The same applies to the German model of cooperatives, Genossenschaften (E+Z, 8/5, 10; E+Z, 22/5, 16). In 1967, the establishment and growth of cooperatives were considered by the Federal Government as “one of the most important means of economic, social and cultural development and human progress (menschlicher Fortschritt) in developing countries” (BT, V/2422, 24). The ‘import of European cooperative models’ is further denoted as ineffective when it is being imposed from top-down (E+Z, 22/5, 16). In a parliamentary bulletin from 1973, the transfer of the cooperative model is considered to have failed due to the diverging cultural background in ‘developing’ countries (BT, 7/2314, 30). However, in 1988, the European model of cooperatives is constructed as the ideal approach to foster self-help and development in Africa (E+Z, 29/10, 18) as well as capacity building (E+Z, 29/12, 4). The ‘successful’ model of German cooperatives is also depicted as a tool for the African states to transform the “ancient balanced tribal cultures into a modern state system” (E+Z, 8/5, 12). The rather economical and secondary political entities of the trade union and the cooperative show how the discourse of development policy projects is aimed at changing the recipient countries' political systems and, once again, how many German (or European) institutions are considered predestined of export. Similar is the case with the framework conditions created by the development discourse.

7.1. Framework Conditions Firstly mentioned in the 6th Development Policy Report from 1985, framework conditions are demanded ever since for the promotion of self-effort and self-help (BT, 9/2411, 57; BT, 11/4381, 3, 8; BT, 11/233, 18533; BT, 12/802, 2; BT, 13/3342, 43; BT, 10/3028, 16f.; BT, 11/2020, 40; BT, 11/7313, 15; BT, 12/4096, 13; BMZ, 2016d, 9; E+Z, 27/5, 4; E+Z, 29/12, 5) as well as human-centred development (BT, 12/47, 3872; BT, 11/2020, 14). The creation (BT, 11/108, 7507; BT, 11/7313, 15) and improvement of successful, political, social, ecological and market economic framework conditions is defined to be crucial for ‘developing’ countries (BT, 10/198, 15335; BT, 11/2020, 38; BT, 16/12073, 58; BT, 10/3028, 36; BT, 13/3342, 15; BMZ, 2017a, 6; E+Z, 34/11, 281). Institutional framework conditions in particular (BT, 15/5815, 20; E+Z, 39/2, 38; E+Z, 36/5, 129). But why this need for framework conditions? As specified by BMZ strategy paper from 2011, functional institutional frame conditions foster the ‘stabilisation of democratic structures’ (BMZ, 2011b, 12). The creation and strengthening of framework conditions are described to be conducive to development (BT, 18/12300, 74). Hereby, democratic structure and constitutional order are especially desirable framework conditions (BT, 12/28, 2199*; BT, 12/47, 3868; BT, 12/924, 1) Likewise, a market-economic order (BT, 12/60, 5093; BT, 12/147, 12643; BT, 13/9, 428). In the discourse, framework conditions support the building of democratic and subsidiary structures and institutions (BT, 12/7603, 7). The development of democratic stability is declared to be important for Africa to reach sustainable development (BT, 15/53, 4433). Again, ‘bad’ framework conditions are located to exist in Africa (BT, 13/3342, 15). African countries are delineated to often “lack the internal conditions (effective institutions; financial and human resources capacities; know-how) to participate more intensively in world trade” (BT, 14/3967, 21). The lacking African framework conditions are also presented as a reason for the absent development of personal initiative and private entrepreneurship (BT, 13/3342, 49).

Within the concept of framework conditions lies another recognisable discourse strategy. It is one of the developing countries creating an economic and social order that focuses on people’s capacities and promotes private initiative within the framework of democracy and good governance (BT, 12/94, 7735). The strategy of market-oriented, private sector-friendly framework conditions and good governance as ‘right framework conditions for sustainable, democratic, constitutional and efficient structures in developing countries (BT, 13/5903, 1; BT, 15/91, 8081). This strategy occurs on multiple levels. Improving the framework conditions for civil society actors is an essential component of the German approach to promoting good governance. (BMZ, 2014h, 8). In 2001, the GTZ focused on the political framework encompassing a minimum of the rule of law, political participation and good governance (Akzente, 4.01, 37). The ‘political frame’ (BT, 12/56, 4673*; BT, 12/217, 84) is not only desirable for developing countries but also defined as conditionality in the five political criteria of 1991 (BT, 12/56, 4673*; BT, 13/3342, 48; E+Z, 33/7, 4; E+Z, 36/9, 237), meaning the respect for democracy and participation, the rule of law, the protection of human rights, development orientation of state action and fundamental freedoms as German criteria on economic and political framework conditions (BT, 12/3255, 82), in addition to legal certainty and market-friendly economic and social order (BT, 12/6854, 251). Therefore, the discourse includes the demand for regulatory frame conditions (E+Z, 35/4, 95; BT, 18/66, 6307), which equal democratic and constitutional social structures and market-economic frame (BT, 16/63, 6267). Overall, it can be demonstrated and concluded that the demanded framework conditions serve the promotion and facilitation of private investment (BT, 14/1869, 2; BT, 15/5815, 7; BMZ, 2017a, 21; BT, 10/198, 15335; BMZ, 2020a, 5, 10; BMZ, 2013a, 6, 20; BMZ, 2014d, 7; BMZ, 2018a, 33; E+Z, 11/12, 8; E+Z, 27/5, 18; E+Z, 28/7, 11; E+Z, 29/3, 21; E+Z, 36/5, 140). This includes German investments (BT, 19/48, 5125). The seemingly neutral need for framework conditions in recipient countries such as the African ones, where the framework conditions are apparently insufficient, do not seem to serve the participation of the population or the enforcement of human rights as the primary

46 objective, but rather in the general discourse strategy of favouring private economic investment and growth.

This strategy becomes even more apparent when considering the promotion of legal certainty (Rechtssicherheit), which is one of the conductive framework conditions for private investments. Even before 1985, legal certainty was viewed as precondition for development (BT, 4/49, 2202; BT, 4/94, 4324; BT, 7/3860, 32; BT, 7/3907, 3; BT, 8/1185, 57; BT, 8/1981, 5; BT, 16/3941, 18; BT, 7/4293, 43; BT, 11/2020, 40; BT, 15/5815, 109). After 1991, it was additionally denoted as part of the catalogue of framework conditions (e.g., BT, 12/28, 2199*; BT, 12/56, 4673*; BT, 12/4037, 4; BT, 13/145, 13062; BT, 13/4532, 19). Legal certainty and the rule of law are often used interchangeably as guarantors for human rights respect (E+Z, 32/10, 5; E+Z, 38/10, 263; BT, 15/5815, 70) and political participation (BT, 14/6496, 44). The citizens' confidence in their state is defined as comprehensive legal certainty (BMZ, 2016e, 8). Lack of the rule of law and legal certainty deprives recipient countries of the foundations for sustainable economic growth, according to a BMZ strategy paper from 2016 (ibid.). Therefore, the German discourse defines the state's task as ensuring legal certainty for a competitive system based upon the planning certainty of its participants (E+Z, 36/5, 129). Although it is not specifically demanded in the order of the German aid discourse, the understanding of statehood that is defined here is a very liberal-economic one. After recognising a general discourse strategy that uses political objects, this liberal understanding of statehood will be looked at in the sense of a comprehensive understanding of polity export.

7.2. Liberal Statehood A more liberal development policy is mainly pushed in the parliamentary debates by the FDP since 1976 (BT, 7/227, 15778; BT, 9/89, 5368; BT, 12/47, 3869; BT, 13/141, 12759; BT, 13/151, 13573). The party- affiliated foundation Friedrich Naumann Stiftung für die Freiheit (FNF) advocated on their webpage for Sub-Saharan Africa the strengthening of liberalism in the region and the dissemination of liberal ideas, including liberal democracy, the rule of law, and civil liberties and the promotion of social market economy (FNF, 2020). Liberal economic order (E+Z, 31/4, 29), as well as the economic liberalisation as key instrument for reducing the access of elites to social resources and promoting participatory systems, is encompassed in the discourse (E+Z, 31/5, 9). This includes political liberalisation and civil liberties (BT, 14/6496, XIII, 22). From 1980 onwards, statist bureaucracy is a central enemy stereotype in the discourse for the liberal and conservative voices. The dimensions and inefficient of bureaucracy in ‘developing’ countries are often criticised and characterised as an obstacle for economic and overall development (BT, 9/95, 5719; BT, 9/2411, 101; BT, 10/130, 9614; BT, 15/86, 7624; BT, 16/13312, 37). For example, FDP representative Heinrich postulated in 2003:

“Legal chaos and over-bureaucratic red tape are often a barrier to economic activity in developing countries. Where there is over-bureaucratism, sustainable development cannot thrive, regardless of the input we provide.” (BT, 15/43, 3502)

As a result of this negative depiction, the discourse concept of denationalisation (Entstaatlichung) is produced in the discourse order. First mentioned in 1986, Pinger equals denationalisation with capacity building (E+Z, 27/2, 9). Here, denationalisation is not understood as giving development aid without integrating the foreign governments, nor the abolishment of governmental development cooperation (E+Z, 27/2, 10). The claim for de-bureaucratisation and de-ideologization of development aid has already been made at an FNS international conference in 1968 (FNS, 1968, 11). In an E+Z article on Uganda, the lean administration is defined as being not only about reducing the public administration but also improving its quality, and the ideal would be a lean state (schlanker Staat) with “better service

47 for its ‘clients’” (E+Z, 36/8, 193). This neoliberal concept of the ‘minimal state’ with efficient administration and state apparatus is openly advertised, while the interventionist state is characterised as the cause of development problems (E+Z, 39/11, 236). The demand for less state over-control and administration in development aid goals is accompanied by the criticism of over-bureaucratisation (BT, 11/33, 2243; BT, 11/108, 7507; BT, 12/47, 3864; BT, 12/2218, 88). Pinger (CDU/CSU) summarises this in 1986 as follows:

“When we [CDU/CSU parliamentary group, KD] speak of denationalisation of development, we are not calling for the abolition of the state in its essential functions, but for the withdrawal of the state from those areas in which citizens are better able to solve their problems themselves and in which the state is inferior to private initiative.” (BT, 10/198, 15335)

Denationalisation is even defined as a framework condition for development (E+Z, 36/9, 217). However, it is also emphasised that good governance and the rule of law cannot prosper without a responsible state (BT, 13/6581, 2). Therefore, the demand for fostering functional administration abroad prevails in the discourse (E+Z, 29/6, 20). However, this only applies if the administration or the state does not intervene in the overall development, which in turn is exemplified by kleptocratic systems in SSA (E+Z, 36/8, 92). Mainly, the liberal statehood understanding calls for disentangling politics and administration, in which the state is “rowing instead of steering” (E+Z, 36/8, 199). In this conviction, performance enhancement of governmental actions is needed, like in the discourse concepts of governance and management (E+Z, 35/9, 217). Here, parallels can be drawn to the social market understanding of Ordoliberalism37, in which the state must minister for the guarantee of fair competition and civic freedom (Weißner, 2017, 362-63) and that the latter is not destroyed by bureaucracy, which Friedrich List already cautioned against (ibid. 364). Hence, in the German aid discourse are no demands for fewer state activities, but different, better ones (E+Z, 27/5, 18/Nielinger, 1998, 28). The ideal state is constructed as a ‘trailblazer’ of the private investments (E+Z, 10/10, 11) that “should not do anything that private organisations can do better” (E+Z, 35/9, 216).

This conception of the state illustrates and equals the elaborated discourse strategies regarding political objects in German development aid. The conviction that the ultimate end of development cooperation is economic independence, meaning capacity building. Therefore, as also the discourse shows, all political objects of development aid serve this end. Capacity-building occurs as anglicism in the discourse in the 1990s, particularly in the E+Z debates (E+Z, 36/9, 237; E+Z, 38/4, 116; E+Z, 39/4, 95; E+Z, 40/6, 184) and the magazine of the GTZ. The term is further adopted from the approach of social infrastructure and institutional development of the Millennium Development Goals from 2000 regarding good governance (Akzente, 2.05, 17). Later, the GTZ refers to ‘capacity development’ (Akzente, 1.07, 3, 10; Akzente, 2.07, 27; Akzente, 1.05, 3; Akzente, 2.08, 26), meaning to improve the framework conditions on a societal level and on an individual level to “improve performance processes and their organisational and leadership culture” (Akzente, 1.07, 29). But capacity-building is no a new concept in the German development aid discourse. Support of self-reliance (Selbsthilfe) or capacity building and self-effort are one of the most essential objective of the German aid discourse from 1961 onwards (e.g. BT, 7/1236, 9; BT, 7/4293, 38; BT, 8/1185, 9; BT, 9/2411, 32; BT, 10/3028, 26; BT, 11/2020, 53; BT, 11/7313, 36; BT, 12/4096, 77; BT, 13/3342, 47; BT, 15/5815, XXIX; BT, 17/13100, 42; BMZ, 1998, 60; KAS, 1/2008, 3; E+Z, 8/5, 11; E+Z, 26/2, 7; E+Z, 26/5, 4; E+Z, 21/9, 6; E+Z, 31/3, 22; E+Z, 37/5, 142; BT, 3/111, 6252; BT, 3/118, 6805; BT, 3/147, 8351; BT, 4/6, 80; BT, 7/842, 23; BT, 7/204, 14153; BT, 7/4293, 45; BT, 8/1185, 28; BT, 9/17, 709; BT, 9/89, 5401; BT, 9/2411, 32; BT, 10/3028, 36; BT, 11/2020, 39; BT, 11/4381, 3; BT, 12/924, 113; BT, 13/11460, 356; BT, 17/2300, 7; BT, 18/17, 1367).

37 See page 50. 48

For the German development cooperation, the one priority remained to help people help themselves (KAS, 1/2008, 3). As part of the debate on re-orientating the German development cooperation in 1988, the German Federal Government declares their effort to support capacity building and self- responsibility by promoting craft partnerships to boost the small and medium enterprises (BT, 11/2020, 40). This emphasis on self-administration and capacity building through the tradition of small and medium craft enterprises can also be found in a governmental strategy paper in 1993 (BT, 12/4096, 77). In 1982, Pinger (CDU/CSU) assigned the crafts an important position regarding democracy promotion. Elsewhere, the history of the craft has always been one against centralism and totalitarianism (BT, 9/128, 7880). Regarding the ‘developing’ countries, a parliamentary delegation describes the positive development of small and medium-sized enterprises as the struggle against the non-functioning economic centralisation as a socialist response to the colonial oppression in 1983 (BT, 10/105, 31). Promotion of the craft trades became a sector area of the BMZ in 1984 (BMZ, 1984, 51; BT, 9/128, 7879). Parliamentary secretary of state of the BMZ, Köhler (CDU/CSU), highlights the importance of the small-sized enterprises in ‘developing’ countries in 1982. He characterises the missing entrepreneurship (Unternehmertum) as a “basis for healthy, self-dynamic and broad-based economic growth. (…) They are an important preliminary stage for a path that can only result in industrialisation from within that develops in line with demand.” (BT, 9/128, 7886). He also identifies the absence of a middle class in ‘developing’ countries as a crucial problem for establishing a stable, pluralistic and liberal economic and social order (BT, 9/128, 7886). The importance of the middle class (Mittelschicht) for underpinning the state has already been made by former chancellor Erhard back in 1963 (BT, 4/90, 4199). Elsewhere, the political importance of the middle class lies in its contribution to decentralised administration (BT, 10/105, 31). In 1991, Walz (FDP) identified the formation of a middle class as essential to political stability with reference to the liberal philosophy (BT, 12/47, 3869). This relevance of the middle class for democratisation is even clearer underlined in a parliamentary commission report of 2002, where the middle class is characterised as the “godfather of democracy and human rights” (BT, 14/9200, 471). It reads:

“A self-confident, economically strong middle class has always been a decisive godfather in the cradle of democracy and human rights. Through the diversity of a self-confident middle class, clan formation, nepotism and oligarchy can be successfully and permanently broken through.” (BT, 14/9200, 471)

The consideration of achieving economic growth through middle-class enterprises and crafts is also listed in combination with management promotion in the 1970s and 1980s (E+Z, 17/3, 24; E+Z, 26/9, 6; E+Z, 26/9, 6; E+Z, 27/8, 7).

It can be recapitulated up to this point that several discourse concepts and objects have been identified, which at first sight appear non-political but serve political demands in the discourse order and therefore become political objects themselves. The order of discourse follows the goal of favouring economic factors with recourse to political objects, using German experience and self-created expertise. This is probably nowhere more evident than in the notion of a lean, market-friendly state in the liberal sense, whose democratic elements are particularly enhanced by the promotion of crafts and entrepreneurship.

7.3. Ordoliberalism and Social Market Economy In 1963, minister Erhard recalled: “As in our own state, the development of a healthy economic order as the foundation of democratic states is of great importance.” (BT, 4/90, 4198). The concept of ‘social order’ (Soziale Ordnung, or Sozialordnung) can be found throughout the early discourse from 1962- 1983 (BT, 4/18,614; BT, 4/45, 1971; BT, 4/92, 4271; BT, V/1882, 23; BT, V/1531, 24; BT, 5/169, 9029; BT, VI/1101, 17,79; BT, VI/2651, 61; BT, 7/1236, 79; BT, 8/215, 17223; BT, 9/2411, 7).

This concept relegates to the ideological foundation of German regulatory policies, the ordoliberal thinking38. Ordoliberal conceptions can be found throughout the entire development discourse. For example, as an ideal triad of state, self-administration, enterprise or as nexus of frame conditions, the rule of law, state, and order (BT, 12/4096, 108; BT, 14/1869, 2; BT, 14/6269, 45; BT, 14/9200, 145; E+Z, 11/3, 12).

Comparable to the neoliberal state, the state's role in an ordoliberal understanding is to establish regulatory framework conditions for private initiatives (BT, 10/198, 15334; E+Z, 27/5, 18). Like a referee in sports competitions, the ordoliberal state watches over the “laws of the game” (E+Z, 39/2, 38) in a market-economic order. The ordoliberal understanding of statehood and economic order is also constructed in the development discourse as demand for framework conditions, like legal certainty, good governance, et al. for private initiatives (E+Z, 10/6, 3; E+Z, 10/10, 10, 11; E+Z, 26/9, 6; E+Z, 36/5, 143; E+Z, 36/9, 217; E+Z, 32/10, 5). Here, sustainable development depends upon reliable framework conditions, the rule of law and responsible use of political power and public resources by the state (Akzente, 1.04, 28). But ordoliberal strategies are not only to be found in themes surrounding the development discourse. The discourse also includes links to this economic school by referring to its thinkers. Fritz (CDU/CSU) points out the economic critique of Wilhelm Röpke concerning development aid in 1963 (BT, 4/94, 4322). First SPD Federal minister for economic affairs Karl Schiller directly references Röpke in 1970 (BT, 6/29, 1254). Another ordoliberal thinker mentioned in the discourse is Walter Eucken. Regarding the elimination of monetary disturbance potential in the global economy, Hankel calls for a resurgence of Eucken's ‘constancy of planning data’ to boost economic growth in ‘developing’ countries in 1985 (E+Z, 26/10, 9). The E+Z editorial denoted the political debate upon the state-market relation as the universal one. In general, the German social market economy follows the conceptions of Walter Eucken, “who warned of the free unfolding of market economy until enterprises can extort democratic government by pure economic power. Eucken’s ideas of state interference to elicit the social purpose of the markets has been implemented under Erhard and Schiller” (E+Z, 31/7, 13; E+Z, 36/5, 137). Indeed, Eucken was not inclined by the idea of an active state in its Grundsätze der Wirtschaftspolitik: “The modern state is not a sufficient ordering power, but it could become one. The prerequisite for this is a specific, namely designated economic policy. (...) Both orders [state order and economic order, KD] are only parts of an overall order that has to be built up.” (Eucken, 2004, 338). Former minister for economic affairs and chancellor Ludwig Erhardt was an intellectual and pragmatic representative of ordoliberalism, influenced by Eucken's foundation of national economics (Weißner, 2017, 69). In Erhard's work Wohlstand für alle, he postulates regarding the future of democracy the need for the private initiative:

38 Ordoliberalism (or Freiburger Schule) is an economic schools and German variant of neoliberalism, which emerged from the politico economic climate of the 1930s and 1940s with Walter Eucken (1891–1950) and Wilhelm Röpke (1899–1966) being the central intellectual figures of this form of economic liberalism. Most essential components of their understanding of market- economy have been the dimension of order-based policy (Ordnungspolitik) with two components of economic order as being productive in economic terms (funktionsfähig) and humane (menschenwürdig). One central point of distinction to neoliberalism is the acknowledgement of multiple sources of power (private, collective, and governmental), whereby the private power can also threaten freedom in the same way then the state (Kolev, 2015, 425-427). 50

“(…) that we return to forms of human coexistence in which the citizen feels responsible for his or her own destiny and is no longer prepared to sink into a nebulous anonymity - which is why he or she does not unconditionally grant an institution the right to handle its mandate as it sees fit.” (Erhard, 1957, 200)

Eucken, Röpke, Alexander Rüstow, and Alfred Müller-Armack have been the intellectual pioneers of the social and ecological market economy, the social model and principles of the ‘old’ Europe’ as they are defined in the discourse (Akzente, 1.10, 24). Further, there is the concept of the dualistic theory of economic systems (E+Z, 31/7, 137). A duality regarding the question of state interventionism. Here, countries can choose between Friedrich von Hayek's neoliberal option and the ‘survival of the fittest’ or a ‘civilisation of capitalism’ as an alternative (E+Z, 38/1, 3). The ‘developing countries’ are, therefore, in a way, challenged by choice of designing their regulatory politics with a ‘fair’ state (Eucken) or by spontaneous market force (Hayek) (E+Z, 36/5, 139). The exportability of German regulatory politics has been an object in the development discourse (E+Z, 24/1, 15; E+Z, 35/9, 221). The KAS even organised training courses – in South America39 – on Walter Eucken, social market economy and order-based policy (KAS, 2/2014, 19).

Moreover, West Germany’s outperforming during the post-war period in the first twenty years of the Federal Republic’s development is often attributed to the explicitly ordoliberal economic policies (Kolev, 2015, 421). The crucial catchword for this economic "economic miracle" (“Wirtschaftswunder”) is also a political object of German development discourse. It is the social market economy (Soziale Marktwirtschaft). There are many quotations visible in the German development discourse upon the orientation of aid towards and promotion of social market economy (BMZ, 2017b, 11; KAS, 1/2008, 3; E+Z, 39/4, 100; BT, 11/178, 13722; BT, 12/28, 2199*; BT, 13/21, 1439; BT, 13/213, 19421; BT, 14/92, 8516). These demands exist on a national level abroad but also as an international social market economy (BT, 14/225, 22346; BT, 17/117, 13552). The demand for a social-oriented market order is part of the German aid discourse order (BT, 13/3342, 48; BT, 14/6496, 12; BT, 13/3342, 48; BT, 14/6496, 12). In recent times, it is stated that Germany is the “home of the social market economy (…) With the experience of this German and European success story, we want to support African countries in the implementation of Agenda 2063.” (BMZ, 2017a, 33). BMZ Minister Müller presented an ecological-social market economy as an alternative to the old Western growth model, Germany must argue for in Europe and the ‘developing countries’ (BMZ, 2017b, 11). To highlight the importance of dealing with social market economy as a political object, this statement from the KAS international report from 2009 might serve as an example:

The social market economy is more than an economic model; it is the foundation of our social system. People are at the centre, and this principle must be the starting point for the interlinking of politics, economy and society. (KAS, 1/2009, 2)

In 1961, FDP representative Mende praised the success of the German social market economy regarding the obstacles of development elsewhere (BT, 4/6, 80). Similar to the objects above, homages to the achievements and superiority of the social market economy are to be found (BT, 8/52, 3997; BT, 9/17, 698; KAS, 1/2009, 2; E+Z, 34/12, 313). In this context, the social market economy is attributed not only to an economic but also a social and socio-political significance through the protection of the person's dignity and personality (BT, 12/131, 11339). Democracy and social market economy are even delineated as two sides of the same medal40 (KAS, 3/2010, 3; Akzente, 4.05, 31).

39 There are numerous examples ordoliberal influences in the discourse with another regional focus than the one of this research (e.g., KAS, 3/2013, 1/HSS, 2013,45/E+Z, 39/4, 95/Akzente, 3.01, 11) 40 In a more abstract interpretation, in this particular liberal economic order equal the democratic principle of the voting citizens one of the voting consumers (Weißner, 2017, 45). 51

Due to the constructed supremacy, it is almost mandatory that social market economy also serves as a model for German aid (Akzente, 1.10, 23; BT, 7/45, 2647; BT, 9/46, 2588; BT, 9/423, 4). Supplementary, the option and need for the implementation of social market economy in ‘developing’ countries are described (E+Z, 24/1, 15; E+Z, 36/5, 128; E+Z, 37/4; Akzente, 2.08, 3; Akzente, 1.10, 20; BT, 13/89, 7934). Particularly in African ones (KAS, 2/2007, 14). In 1989, CDU/CSU representative Neuling demanded incorporating German knowledge and experience with the social market economy into the instruments of development aid (BT, 11/178, 13722). And indeed, examples of this can also be found. Dominate actor here has been the KAS (KAS, 1/2008, 3), with the founding father of the social market economy Konrad Adenauer serving as personification (KAS, 2020). For example, the KAS advocates the social market economy in Nigeria (KAS, 3/2007, 15) and Ghana (KAS, 3/2016, 10). As a new interpretation of the social market economy, the KAS promotes the startup scene in several countries (V:288-289). Further, social market economy promotion can also be found in the ambitions of FNF for SSA (FNF, 2020) and the international work of the HSS (HSS, 2020, 9). The GTZ admitted being guided by the principles of a social and ecological market economy (Akzente, 1.08, 56). Even German business consultants from private companies (Faber-Castell) were sent as experts for social market economic framework conditions (Akzente, 4.05, 31).

A reason for the promotion of the social market economy was named in the interviews. The reason being that social market economy provides a third way between the extreme poles of “state-controlled economy and turbo-capitalism” (IV: 175-176). Meaning, social market economy serves as an alternative system in the competition between China and the USA (V: 274-276). The other main reason for the social market economy to abroad (E+Z, 17/10, 3; BT, 13/3342, 121) in the discourse order appear to be the construction of the German model of the social market economy as ‘ideal response’ (E+Z, 31/10, 7) and the legitimacy to export this very “German recipe for success” (E+Z, 38/1, 18). No other political object in the given discourse is more directly considered regarding its suitability for foreign countries and its transferability than social market economy. The KAS held a regional conference for a social market economy in Western Africa (KAS, 3/2007, 4), the KAS bureau in Senegal organised events regarding the transferability of a social market economy (KAS, 2/2009, 16) even in terms of the transferability of this Christian-value based model to Islamic society (KAS, 2/2009, 16). Although an immediate export is also scrutinised, many exportable elements remain (E+Z, 28/7, 10; BT, 10/198, 15335), e.g., creating an African model of a social market economy (KAS, 3/2010, 3; Akzente, 2.08). In the conducted interviews, KAS actors position themselves to social market economy and its principles as “right and helpful for the economic development of a state” (V:264-268). In another KAS interview, the general argument that is also visible in the order of the German development discourse regarding the social market economy is summarised as such: “we want to be convinced of the system as we live it, of course, in a certain way” (IV: 171-172).

7.4. Interim Summary The critical presentation of implicit political objects in the German development discourse has revealed many different discourse concepts that can once again be classified as export-worthy objects through the construction of German expertise, such as trade unions, cooperatives, crafts, and entrepreneurship well as the middle class. In general, it is interesting to see that the implicit political objects are more clearly defined and more directly demanded and implemented than direct political objects.

However, the most important finding of this section is that in addition to the discourse strategy of superiority through expertise, there is another strategy in the discourse order. This second strategy constructs the developmental change in the political structures of the recipient country and thus the political objects sought here as mere framework conditions and thus to a means to an end for private- sector investment or economic growth, for example. Furthermore, it was shown that especially ordoliberal ideas and the social market economy system are seen as institutional templates for recipient countries and are not only export-worthy, as in the preceding, but their export is implemented very clearly.

8. Conclusion This thesis firstly utilised the specially designed concept of polity export to pursue the question of how political objects in the German aid discourse to Sub-Saharan Africa are shaped by the donor countries’ own political development and tradition. By making use of the Foucauldian approach of discourse archaeology, this study was able to analyse the continuities in German aid discourse from 1957 to 2020. After the detailed presentation and critical discussion of discourse order, conclusions will now be drawn on the central and secondary research questions. This synthesis is followed by suggestions for further research and concluding remarks.

8.1. Main Findings The first aim of this thesis is to understand the formation of identities within the discourse order. Here, Germany and Germanness are continuously constructed in diverse ways. On the one hand, this happens through self-definition through the attribution of values. In this process, German actors create an image of Germany as a civil power that stands up for freedom, human rights, democracy, the rule of law and a life in dignity by means of the development goals to be pursued and their implementation. Furthermore, the discourse order in each area is filled with references to German expertise on specialised knowledge and experience gained by its history. Therefore, Germany primarily constructs itself with its self-proclaimed expertise and export predestined institutions. Simultaneously, a one- dimensional image of the SSA region is constructed. Within all dimensions of the discourse order, the African continent is produced as backward, underdeveloped and an example of decline from all political and economic perspectives. In particular, the allocation of all negative models, antithesis or bad governance is directed towards the African continent. This construction creates a basis of legitimacy for development policy interventions of all kinds within the discourse order.

The elaboration of the discourse order has produced a variety of discourse units that can be described as political objects within the discourse due to their deliberate modification of the recipient country's political structures and the associated discourse concepts. Among the political objects, the promotion of democracy and democratic components and good governance dominate in frequency and scope. As the discourse order has shown, the inclusion of the concept of democracy in development almost gives the appearance of an obligatory postulate, as does the use of good governance as a developmental panacea. Aiding Participation, governmental control, civil society, freedom of the press, freedom of expression, and (social) justice were indexed as concepts associated with democratic components. The promotion of the rule of law as well as administrative structures and management skills also emerged from the discourse. At first glance, implicit, further and most strongly implemented policy objects were a liberal understanding of the state, ordoliberal framework conditions and social market economy.

Basically, four continuous and complementary discourse strategies can be identified in the context of polity export, which influences and complement each other and underlie the discourse order. The first is the construction of the African continent and the SSA region as a place of underdevelopment, tradition-ridden backwardness, and political development problems. Each of the direct and implied political objects mentioned is presented in the discourse as problematically implementable to the African context or referred to in terms of its negative examples and counterparts in this region (keeping in mind that good governance was conceptualised specifically for this region). The second strategy is the continous construction of German expertise and the predestined German institutions such as the social market economy, administrative structures or civil society. Only with the exception of good governance, German expertise are constructed for every political object. Thirdly, there is the strategy of the political means to the economic end, which is more focused on the implementation and targeting

54 of political objects. This discourse strategy was most evident when looking at the implicit political objects. Here it became clear that the political objects of German development policy do not represent the ultimate goals of cooperation but rather serve throughout as a means for primarily economic growth and private-sector investment. Interestingly, this diametrically contradicts the ideas of modernisation theory mentioned in the theoretical frame. Thus, there were very few demands for the pure realisation of democracy in the recipient countries for the sake of democracy alone. Instead, democratic concepts or the rule of law end up as framework conditions to favour economic ventures within a liberal understanding of the state. The fourth discourse strategy is the continuous assertion of the impossibility of exporting any political objects or the transferability of elements of political architecture, with the simultaneous and persistent implication that such export would, however, ideally be desired and pursued. This last strategy is of particular importance in answering the overall research question.

Despite the variety and quantity of statements in the discourse order, it is nevertheless possible to find a surprisingly large number of verifiable connections that do not result from the observer's interpretation but are established in the discourse itself. Except for the political object of good governance, no discourse objects or associated concepts can be named with not at least one German speaker establishing a connection to German history, to the values regarded as German or, in particular, to German expertise for this political object. Although, based on Chapter 5.4. and other evidence, it is not possible to speak of an ideal-typical polity or democracy export. The overall discourse, primarily through the constructed German expertise on the one hand and the created strategy of undermining African systems on the other, it is stated that a polity export is impossible in its pure form. But, at the same time is described as desirable and thus created as such. Moreover, the examples of administrative aid and social market economy show that there are political objects whose simple transplantation into development policy implementation is already conducted. However, the conceptual strength of polity export lies in identifying these discourse strategies and objects and the demonstrability of their genesis in the donor country Germany and the associated significance for the donor country itself. Thus, in the cross-discourse construction of political and social superiority, the constant creation of new, self- evident German expertise and the simultaneous process of identity formation, comprehensive conclusions can be drawn about the donor country's intended foreign policy impact and ongoing search for identity. Foremost, the ‘political development country Germany’ seems to be continuously searching itself and defining itself through its development aid. In the order of development discourse, Germany does not impose its political architecture on any country but instead tries to convince itself of its superiority by constantly reproducing German expertise.

8.2. Suggestion for Further Research The initial situation of this study was the conceptual puzzle of the political-scientific examination of development policy, which was almost inescapable due to a lack of definitional as well as disciplinary clarity. In order to overcome these conceptual challenges and disciplinary divides, a new theoretical conceptualisation of a new approach was necessary to access the research interest and answer the question. While in the theoretical framework, this research attempted to distance itself from predefined concepts such as democracy and good governance through the use of polity export, the adoption of these concepts through their presence in the documents and interviews in a way re-produced them. However, any scholar with a post-structuralist or critical realist orientation should be aware of the objective impossibility and should not strive to achieve it. Rather, this work was about questioning simple truths and 'innocent' concepts and intentions. The theoretical concept of polity export and the definitional delimitation of political objects of development aid originate from the theoretical 55 framework of this thesis. Not only has the independence from preconceived notions of academic discourse made the approach of this work possible, the systematic consideration of the transplantation or export of political architecture (polity) of a donor country opens up new possibilities for both political science considerations of the phenomenon of development aid, but also provides unique insights into the internal political dynamics of the donor country.

A general shift in the research focus to the origins and, beyond that, the implementation of (political) objects of development policy through political science and aidnographic observation would be of great importance for the critical scientific engagement with international development and general. Polity export can serve here to reorient the focus of research on donor states. For this reason, this work concludes with an explicit and encouraging call for the use of polity export in other cases.

8.3. Concluding Remarks Engaging critically with development discourses and their political objects is not to reject their existence completely or articulate a failure of the general attempt to promote democracy (cf. Abrahamsen, 2000, 138). The exact opposite is the case. Namely, to make the aspirations for better living conditions for all people above all more democratic, i.e. to make development cooperation more democratic. As the German discourse has taught, it is not enough to spread the word democracy in all areas, but much more to enable people to have a real stake and full participation in shaping the local, national, and global society in which they live.

9. References 9.1. Primary Sources

9.1.1. Conducted Interview I. semi-structured interview KAS aid worker 23-10-2020, 8am (MEZ) Tanzania (Zoom) Noted, transcribed II. semi-structured interview FES aid worker 06-11-2020, 10am (MEZ) South Africa (Zoom) Recorded, transcribed III. semi-structured interview FES aid worker 19-01-2021, 4pm (MEZ) Benin (Skype) Recorded, transcribed IV. semi-structured interview KAS aid worker 25-01-2021, 12pm (MEZ) Côte d'Ivoire (Zoom) Recorded, transcribed V. semi-structured interview KAS aid worker 03-02-2021, 2pm (MEZ) Uganda (Zoom) Recorded, transcribed VI. semi-structured interview scholar 11-02-2021, 11am (MEZ) Germany (phone) Recorded, transcribed VII. semi-structured interview (BMZ) scholar 25-02-2021, 17am (MEZ) Germany (phone) Recorded, transcribed VIII. semi-structured interview GIZ aid worker 19-03-2021, 14am (MEZ) Uganda (MS Teams) Noted, transcribed

9.1.2. Policy Papers, Annual Reports, Information Publications

AA (2011a). Auswärtige Kultur- und Bildungspolitik in Zeiten der Globalisierung Partner gewinnen, Werte vermitteln, Interessen vertreten. Auswärtiges Amt, Berlin

AA (2011b). Menschenrechte: Fundament deutscher Außenpolitik, Auswärtiges Amt, Berlin

AA (2017a). Krisen verhindern, Konflikte bewältigen, Frieden fördern. Leitlinien der Bundesregierung. Auswärtiges Amt, Berlin

AA (2017b). Nationaler Aktionsplan. Umsetzung der VN-Leitprinzipien für Wirtschaft und Menschenrechte 2016 – 2020. Auswärtiges Amt, Berlin

AA (2019a). Eine vertiefte Partnerschaft mit Afrika. Fortschreibung und Weiterentwicklung der Afrikapolitischen Leitlinien der Bundesregierung, Auswärtiges Amt, Berlin

AA (2019b). 13. Bericht der Bundesregierung über ihre Menschenrechtspolitik, Berichtszeitraum 1. Oktober 2016 bis 30. September 2018, Auswärtiges Amt, Berlin

AA (2019c). Diplomatie für Nachhaltigkeit. Bericht des Auswärtigen Amtes zur Umsetzung der Deutschen Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie und der SDGs, Auswärtiges Amt, Berlin

AA (2019d). Ressortgemeinsame Strategie zur Unterstützung der Sicherheitssektorreform (SSR) im Kontext von Krisenprävention, Konfliktbewältigung und Friedensförderung. Auswärtiges Amt, Berlin

AA (2019e). Ressortgemeinsame Strategie zur Rechtsstaatsförderung im Bereich Krisenprävention, Konfliktbewältigung und Friedensförderung. Auswärtiges Amt, Berlin

AA (2019f). Feature. Stabilisierung in Mali. Vol. 10, Auswärtiges Amt, Berlin.

AA (2020). Deutsch als Fremdsprache weltweit. Datenerhebung 2020. Auswärtiges Amt, Berlin

BMZ (1979). Entwicklungspolitik - Jahresbericht, Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (1984). Entwicklungspolitik - Jahresbericht, Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (1993). Jahresbericht. 1993, Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (1998). Jahresbericht. 1997, Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2007). Entwicklungsorientierte Transformation bei fragiler Staatlichkeit und schlechter Regierungsführung. BMZ Konzept 149, Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2008a). Konzept zur Budgetfinanzierung im Rahmen der Programmorientierten Gemeinschaftsfinanzierung (PGF). BMZ Konzept 146, Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2008b). Konzept zur Budgetfinanzierung im Rahmen der Programmorientierten Gemeinschaftsfinanzierung (PGF). BMZ Konzept 146, Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2008c). Biologische Vielfalt. BMZ Konzept 164, Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2009a). Förderung von Good Governance in der deutschen Entwicklungspolitik. BMZ Konzept 172, Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2009b). Sektorkonzept Soziale Sicherung. BMZ Konzept 180, Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2011a). Menschenrechte in der deutschen Entwicklungspolitik. BMZ-Strategiepapier 4. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2011b). Entwicklung ländlicher Räume und ihr Beitrag zur Ernährungssicherung. BMZ-Strategiepapier 1. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2012a). Armut wirksamer bekämpfen – weltweit! Übersektorales Konzept zur Armutsreduzierung. BMZ- Strategiepapier 6. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2012b). Antikorruption und Integrität in der deutschen Entwicklungspolitik. BMZ-Strategiepapier 4. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2013a). Sektorkonzept. Privatwirtschaftsförderung. BMZ Strategiepapier 9, Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2013b). Entwicklung für Frieden und Sicherheit. Entwicklungspolitisches Engagement im Kontext von Konflikt, Fragilität und Gewalt. BMZ-Strategiepapier 4, Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2014a). Die Menschenrechte in der deutschen Entwicklungspolitik. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Berlin

BMZ (2014b). Good Financial Governance in der deutschen Entwicklungszusammenarbeit. Die Förderung guter Regierungsführung im Bereich der öffentlichen Finanzen. BMZ-Sektorkonzept, BMZ•Strategiepapier 4. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2014c). Strategie zur Zusammenarbeit von Staat und Zivilgesellschaft in der Entwicklungspolitik der Post- 2015-Welt. BMZ-Strategiepapier 5, Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2014d). Die neue Afrika-Politik des BMZ. Afrika auf dem Weg vom Krisen- zum Chancenkontinent. BMZ- Strategiepapier 6, Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2014e). Die Deutsche Entwicklungszusammenarbeit EINEWELT – Unsere Verantwortung, Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn 58

BMZ (2014f). Kinder- und Jugendrechte konkret. Informationen zu den Rechten junger Menschen in der entwicklungspolitischen Zusammenarbeit, BMZ-Informationsbroschüre 4. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2014g). Perspektiven der Urbanisierung – Städte nachhaltig gestalten, BMZ-Informationsbroschüre 3. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2014h). Strategie zur Zusammenarbeit von Staat und Zivilgesellschaft in der Entwicklungspolitik der Post- 2015-Welt, BMZ-Strategiepapier 5. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2014i). Gleichberechtigung der Geschlechter in der deutschen Entwicklungspolitik. Übersektorales Konzept. BMZ-Strategiepapier 2. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2014j). Good Financial Governance in der deutschen Entwicklungszusammenarbeit. Die Förderung guter Regierungsführung im Bereich der öffentlichen Finanzen. BMZ•Strategiepapier 4. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2015a). Gleichberechtigung geht alle an. Was tut die deutsche Entwicklungspolitik. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2015b). Meinungsfreiheit und Medien in der deutschen Entwicklungspolitik. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2015c). Die Rolle des Sports in der deutschen Entwicklungszusammenarbeit. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2015d). EINEWELT ohne Hunger ist möglich. Lösungsansätze der deutschen Entwicklungspolitik. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2015e). Der Weg zur Zukunftscharta. Stimmen und Bilder zum Prozess. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2015f). Zukunftscharta. EINEWELT – Unsere Verantwortung. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2015g). BMZ-Bildungsstrategie: Gerechte Chancen auf hochwertige Bildung schaffen. BMZ-Strategiepapier 7. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2015h). Zukunftscharta „EINEWELT – Unsere Verantwortung“ Beiträge des BMZ zur Umsetzung. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2015i). BMZ-Positionspapier: Finanzsystementwicklung für umwelt- und klimaorientierte Investitionen (Green Finance). Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2015j). Aktualisierte Umwelterklärung 2015 des Bundesministeriums für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung für den Standort Bonn. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2016a). Religionen als Partner in der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2016b). Partner für den Wandel. Religionen und nachhaltige Entwicklung. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2016c). Entwicklungspolitischer Aktionsplan zur Gleichberechtigung der Geschlechter 2016 – 2020. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn 59

BMZ (2016d). Chancen nutzen, Zukunft fördern. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2016e). Fokus Europa. Krisen und Gräben überwinden, regionale und europäische Integration vorantreiben. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2016f). Aktualisierte Umwelterklärung 2016 des Bundesministeriums für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung für den Standort Bonn. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2017a). Afrika und Europa – Neue Partnerschaft für Entwicklung, Frieden und Zukunft. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2017b). Aus der Zukunft lernen. Unsere Welt 2030. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2017c). Umwelterklärung 2017 des Bundesministeriums für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung für den Standort Bonn, Dahlmannstraße 4. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2017d). Perspektiven für Flüchtlinge schaffen. Fluchtursachen mindern, Aufnahmeregionen stabilisieren, Flüchtlinge unterstützen. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2017e). Berufsbildung fördern – Zukunft gestalten Perspektiven der beruflichen Bildung in der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2017f). Der Zukunftsvertrag für die Welt. Die Agenda 2030 für nachhaltige Entwicklung. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2017g). EINEWELT ohne Hunger ist möglich. Die Zukunft des ländlichen Raums Internationale G20- Konferenz, 27./28. April 2017, Berlin. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2017h). BMZ Wasserstrategie. Schlüssel zur Umsetzung der Agenda 2030 und des Klimaabkommens. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2018a). Entwicklungspolitik ist Zukunftspolitik Ressortbericht zur Umsetzung der Deutschen Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie und der SDGs. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2018b). Wilderei stoppen – natürliche Lebensgrundlagen sichern. Der Beitrag der deutschen Entwicklungszusammenarbeit. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2018c). Biologische Vielfalt – unsere gemeinsame Verantwortung. Die deutsche Zusammenarbeit mit Entwicklungs- und Schwellenländern zur Umsetzung der Biodiversitätskonvention für eine nachhaltige Entwicklung. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2018d). Road Map 2018. Entwicklungspolitischer Aktionsplan zur Gleichberechtigung der Geschlechter 2016 – 2020. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2018e). Entwicklungspolitik 2030. Neue Herausforderungen – neue Antworten. BMZ Strategiepapier. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2019a). Nachhaltig in die Zukunft. Das Initiativprogramm Agenda 2030. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2019b). Digitalisierung für Entwicklung. Den digitalen Wandel gemeinsam gestalten. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2019c). Glossar – Digitalisierung in der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit. Fachbegriffe aus der digitalen Welt für die Entwicklungszusammenarbeit. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2019d). Glossar – Digitalisierung in der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit. Fachbegriffe aus der digitalen Welt für die Entwicklungszusammenarbeit. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2019e). Agenda 2030 konkret. Synergien und Konflikte zwischen Wasser (SDG 6) und weiteren Zielen. Sechs Leitlinien zur Umsetzung in der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2019f). Globale Gesundheit – Eine Investition in die Zukunft. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2019g). #eSkills4Girls – Eine Initiative zur Förderung digitaler Kompetenzen von Frauen und Mädchen Rückblick und Perspektiven. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2019h). Umfassendes Risikomanagement. Der Ansatz der deutschen Entwicklungszusammenarbeit im Umgang mit Katastrophen- und Klimarisiken. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2020a). Der Marshallplan mit Afrika in der Umsetzung. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BMZ (2020b). Strategie der strukturbildenden Übergangshilfe. Krisen bewältigen, Resilienz stärken, Perspektiven schaffen. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Bonn

BR, Bundesregierung (2016). Strategie für Migration und Entwicklung. Aktionsplan für die Außendimension der Migrations- und Flüchtlingspolitik. Presse- und Informationsamt der Bundesregierung, Berlin

BR, Bundesregierung (2020). Neue Wege in der deutschen Afrikapolitik. Zukunft gemeinsam gestalten, Presse- und Informationsamt der Bundesregierung, Berlin

DSE (1967). Jahresbericht 1966, Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer

DSE (1969). Jahresbericht 1968, Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer

DSE (1975). Jahresbericht 1975, Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer

FES (1967). Sicherung der Demokratie, Jahrestagung der FES, Kuratorium, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Düsseldorf 1967

FES (1970). Jahresbericht, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Bonn

FES (2008). info. 2008, Nr. 3, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Bonn

FES (2013). info. 2013, Nr. 1, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Bonn

FES (2020). What the EU Should Do for Democracy Support in Africa. Ten Proposals for a New Strategic Initiative in Times of Polarisation. Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, EU Office, Brussels

FNS (2017). Jahresbericht 2017, Friedrich Naumann Stiftung für die Freiheit.

FNF (2020). Subsahara-Afrika. Für die Freiheit auf dem Kontinent der Chancen und Möglichkeiten, www.freiheit.org/buero/subsahara-afrika – accessed on 06-10-2020 hbs (2007). Jahresbericht 2007, Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung hbs (2016). Für Demokratie. Vom Engagement der Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung in der Welt, Heinrich-Nöll-Stiftung

HSS (2013). Jahresbericht 2012. Eine Leistungsbilanz, Hanns-Seidel-Stiftung, München

HSS (2016). Hanns-Seidel-Stiftung. Im Dienst von Demokratie, Frieden und Entwicklung. Hanns-Seidel-Stiftung, München

HSS (2020). Die Arbeit der Hanns-Seidel-Stiftung. Im Dienst von Demokratie, Frieden und Entwicklung. Hanns- Seidel-Stiftung, München

KAS (2/2007). KAS International, Ausgabe 2, Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, Berlin

KAS (3/2007). KAS International, Ausgabe 3, Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, Berlin

KAS (1/2008). KAS International, Ausgabe 1, Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, Berlin

KAS (1/2009). KAS International, Ausgabe 1, Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, Berlin

KAS (2/2009). KAS International, Ausgabe 1, Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, Berlin

KAS (3/2010). KAS International, Ausgabe 3, Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, Berlin

KAS (3/2013). KAS International, Ausgabe 3, Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, Berlin

KAS (2/2014). KAS International, Ausgabe 2, Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, Berlin

KAS (2/2015). KAS International, Ausgabe 2, Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, Berlin

KAS (3/2016). KAS International, Ausgabe 3, Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, Berlin

KAS (2020). KAS Internet Auftritt Büro Abuja, www.kas.de/de/web/nigeria/ueber-uns, accessed on 03-10-2020

World Bank Group (1989a): Sub-Saharan Africa. From Crisis to Sustainable Growth, A Long-Term Study, Washington D.C.

9.1.3. Parliamentary Protocols

BT, Bundestag (2/200), Plenarprotokoll, 2. Wahlperiode, 200. Sitzung. Bonn, 21. März 1957 BT, Bundestag (3/70), Plenarprotokoll, 3. Wahlperiode, 70. Sitzung. Bonn, 3. Juni 1959 BT, Bundestag (3/109), Plenarprotokoll, 3. Wahlperiode, 109. Sitzung. Bonn, 7. April 1960 BT, Bundestag (3/111), Plenarprotokoll, 3. Wahlperiode, 111. Sitzung. Bonn, 4. Mai 1960 BT, Bundestag (3/118), Plenarprotokoll, 3. Wahlperiode, 118. Sitzung. Bonn, 22. Juni 1960 BT, Bundestag (3/119), Plenarprotokoll, 3. Wahlperiode, 119. Sitzung. Bonn, 23. Juni 1960 BT, Bundestag (3/122), Plenarprotokoll, 3. Wahlperiode, 122. Sitzung. Bonn, 30. Juni 1960 BT, Bundestag (3/127), Plenarprotokoll, 3. Wahlperiode, 127. Sitzung. Bonn, 5. Oktober 1960 BT, Bundestag (3/147), Plenarprotokoll, 3. Wahlperiode, 147. Sitzung. Bonn, 8. März 1961 BT, Bundestag (3/157), Plenarprotokoll, 3. Wahlperiode, 157. Sitzung. Bonn, 3. Mai 1961 BT, Bundestag (3/159), Plenarprotokoll, 3. Wahlperiode, 159. Sitzung. Bonn, 5. Mai 1961 BT, Bundestag (4/6), Plenarprotokoll, 4. Wahlperiode, 6. Sitzung. Bonn, 6. Dezember 1961 BT, Bundestag (4/9), Plenarprotokoll, 4. Wahlperiode, 9. Sitzung. Bonn, 7. Januar 1962 BT, Bundestag (4/15), Plenarprotokoll, 4. Wahlperiode, 15. Sitzung. Bonn, 6. Februar 1962 62

BT, Bundestag (4/18), Plenarprotokoll, 4. Wahlperiode, 18. Sitzung. Bonn, 13. März 1962 BT, Bundestag (4/40), Plenarprotokoll, 4. Wahlperiode, 40. Sitzung. Bonn, 11. Oktober 1962 BT, Bundestag (4/45), Plenarprotokoll, 4. Wahlperiode, 45. Sitzung. Bonn, 7. November 1962 BT, Bundestag (4/49), Plenarprotokoll, 4. Wahlperiode, 49. Sitzung. Bonn, 16. November 1962 BT, Bundestag (4/90), Plenarprotokoll, 4. Wahlperiode, 90. Sitzung. Bonn, 18. Oktober 1963 BT, Bundestag (4/92), Plenarprotokoll, 4. Wahlperiode, 92. Sitzung. Bonn, 24. Oktober 1963 BT, Bundestag (4/94), Plenarprotokoll, 4. Wahlperiode, 94. Sitzung. Bonn, 6. November 1963 BT, Bundestag (4/101), Plenarprotokoll, 4. Wahlperiode, 101. Sitzung. Bonn, 11. Dezember 1963 BT, Bundestag (5/23), Plenarprotokoll, 5. Wahlperiode, 23. Sitzung. Bonn, 8. Februar 1966 BT, Bundestag (5/33), Plenarprotokoll, 5. Wahlperiode, 33. Sitzung. Bonn, 24. März 1966 BT, Bundestag (5/43), Plenarprotokoll, 5. Wahlperiode, 43. Sitzung. Bonn, 5. Mai 1966 BT, Bundestag (5/111), Plenarprotokoll, 5. Wahlperiode, 111. Sitzung. Bonn, 7. Juni 1967 BT, Bundestag (5/124), Plenarprotokoll, 5. Wahlperiode, 124. Sitzung. Bonn, 11. Oktober 1967 BT, Bundestag (5/169), Plenarprotokoll, 5. Wahlperiode, 169. Sitzung. Bonn, 30. April 1968 BT, Bundestag (6/23), Plenarprotokoll, 6. Wahlperiode, 23. Sitzung. Bonn, 15. Januar 1970 BT, Bundestag (6/29), Plenarprotokoll, 6. Wahlperiode, 29. Sitzung. Bonn, 17. Februar 1970 BT, Bundestag (6/91), Plenarprotokoll, 6. Wahlperiode, 91. Sitzung. Bonn, 21. Januar 1971 BT, Bundestag (6/115), Plenarprotokoll, 6. Wahlperiode, 115. Sitzung. Bonn, 28. April 1971 BT, Bundestag (6/144), Plenarprotokoll, 6. Wahlperiode, 144. Sitzung. Bonn, 20. Oktober 1971 BT, Bundestag (6/181), Plenarprotokoll, 6. Wahlperiode, 181. Sitzung. Bonn, 14. April 1972 BT, Bundestag (7/9), Plenarprotokoll, 7. Wahlperiode, 9. Sitzung. Bonn, 5. Januar 1973 BT, Bundestag (7/30), Plenarprotokoll, 7. Wahlperiode, 30. Sitzung. Bonn, 10. Mai 1973 BT, Bundestag (7/45), Plenarprotokoll, 7. Wahlperiode, 45. Sitzung. Bonn, 19. Juni 1973 BT, Bundestag (7/55), Plenarprotokoll, 7. Wahlperiode, 55. Sitzung. Bonn, 5. Oktober 1973 BT, Bundestag (7/184), Plenarprotokoll, 7. Wahlperiode, 184. Sitzung. Bonn, 17. September 1975 BT, Bundestag (7/204), Plenarprotokoll, 7. Wahlperiode, 204. Sitzung. Bonn, 8. November 1975 BT, Bundestag (7/208), Plenarprotokoll, 7. Wahlperiode, 208. Sitzung. Bonn, 10. Dezember 1975 BT, Bundestag (7/227), Plenarprotokoll, 7. Wahlperiode, 227. Sitzung. Bonn, 11. März 1976 BT, Bundestag (7/234), Plenarprotokoll, 7. Wahlperiode, 234. Sitzung. Bonn, 7. April 1976 BT, Bundestag (7/239), Plenarprotokoll, 7. Wahlperiode, 239. Sitzung. Bonn, 7. Mai 1976 BT, Bundestag (7/240), Plenarprotokoll, 7. Wahlperiode, 240. Sitzung. Bonn, 11. Mai 1976 BT, Bundestag (8/35), Plenarprotokoll, 8. Wahlperiode, 35. Sitzung. Bonn, 22. Juni 1977 BT, Bundestag (8/52), Plenarprotokoll, 8. Wahlperiode, 52. Sitzung. Bonn, 27. Oktober 1977 BT, Bundestag (8/67), Plenarprotokoll, 8. Wahlperiode, 67. Sitzung. Bonn, 24. Januar 1978 BT, Bundestag (8/93), Plenarprotokoll, 8. Wahlperiode, 93. Sitzung. Bonn, 1. Juni 1978 BT, Bundestag (8/100), Plenarprotokoll, 8. Wahlperiode, 100. Sitzung. Bonn, 22. Juni 1978 BT, Bundestag (8/117), Plenarprotokoll, 8. Wahlperiode, 117. Sitzung. Bonn, 16. November 1978 BT, Bundestag (8/130), Plenarprotokoll, 8. Wahlperiode, 130. Sitzung. Bonn, 23. Januar 1979 BT, Bundestag (8/173), Plenarprotokoll, 8. Wahlperiode, 173. Sitzung. Bonn, 21. September 1979 BT, Bundestag (8/193), Plenarprotokoll, 8. Wahlperiode, 193. Sitzung. Bonn, 13. Dezember 1979 BT, Bundestag (8/197), Plenarprotokoll, 8. Wahlperiode, 197. Sitzung. Bonn, 18. Januar 1980 BT, Bundestag (8/208), Plenarprotokoll, 8. Wahlperiode, 208. Sitzung. Bonn, 20. März 1980 BT, Bundestag (8/215), Plenarprotokoll, 8. Wahlperiode, 215. Sitzung. Bonn, 25. April 1980 BT, Bundestag (8/224), Plenarprotokoll, 8. Wahlperiode, 224. Sitzung. Bonn, 19. Juni 1980 BT, Bundestag (8/226), Plenarprotokoll, 8. Wahlperiode, 226. Sitzung. Bonn, 26. Juni 1980 BT, Bundestag (8/229), Plenarprotokoll, 8. Wahlperiode, 229. Sitzung. Bonn, 3. Juli 1980 BT, Bundestag (9/6), Plenarprotokoll, 9. Wahlperiode, 6. Sitzung. Bonn, 26. November 1980 BT, Bundestag (9/17), Plenarprotokoll, 9. Wahlperiode, 17. Sitzung. Bonn, 28. Januar 1981 BT, Bundestag (9/19), Plenarprotokoll, 9. Wahlperiode, 19. Sitzung. Bonn, 30. Januar 1981 BT, Bundestag (9/37), Plenarprotokoll, 9. Wahlperiode, 37. Sitzung. Bonn, 14. Mai 1981 BT, Bundestag (9/46), Plenarprotokoll, 9. Wahlperiode, 46. Sitzung. Bonn, 25. Juni 1981 BT, Bundestag (9/67), Plenarprotokoll, 9. Wahlperiode, 67. Sitzung. Bonn, 26. November 1981 BT, Bundestag (9/79), Plenarprotokoll, 9. Wahlperiode, 79. Sitzung. Bonn, 20. Januar 1982 BT, Bundestag (9/89), Plenarprotokoll, 9. Wahlperiode, 89. Sitzung. Bonn, 5. März 1982 BT, Bundestag (9/95), Plenarprotokoll, 9. Wahlperiode, 95. Sitzung. Bonn, 26. März 1982 BT, Bundestag (9/114), Plenarprotokoll, 9. Wahlperiode, 114. Sitzung. Bonn, 16. September 1982 BT, Bundestag (9/128), Plenarprotokoll, 9. Wahlperiode, 128. Sitzung. Bonn, 12. November 1982 BT, Bundestag (10/31), Plenarprotokoll, 10. Wahlperiode, 31. Sitzung. Bonn, 27. Oktober 1983 63

BT, Bundestag (10/42), Plenarprotokoll, 10. Wahlperiode, 42. Sitzung. Bonn, 6. Dezember 1983 BT, Bundestag (10/51), Plenarprotokoll, 10. Wahlperiode, 51. Sitzung. Bonn, 27. Januar 1984 BT, Bundestag (10/54), Plenarprotokoll, 10. Wahlperiode, 54. Sitzung. Bonn, 10. Februar 1984 BT, Bundestag (10/73), Plenarprotokoll, 10. Wahlperiode, 73. Sitzung. Bonn, 6. Juni 1984 BT, Bundestag (10/91), Plenarprotokoll, 10. Wahlperiode, 91. Sitzung. Bonn, 18. Oktober 1984 BT, Bundestag (10/130), Plenarprotokoll, 10. Wahlperiode, 130. Sitzung. Bonn, 29. März 1985 BT, Bundestag (10/171), Plenarprotokoll, 10. Wahlperiode, 171. Sitzung. Bonn, 7. November 1985 BT, Bundestag (10/198), Plenarprotokoll, 10. Wahlperiode, 198. Sitzung. Bonn, 20. Februar 1986 BT, Bundestag (11/20), Plenarprotokoll, 11. Wahlperiode, 20. Sitzung. Bonn, 25. Juni 1987 BT, Bundestag (11/33), Plenarprotokoll, 11. Wahlperiode, 33. Sitzung. Bonn, 15. Oktober 1987 BT, Bundestag (11/64), Plenarprotokoll, 11. Wahlperiode, 64. Sitzung. Bonn, 3. März 1988 BT, Bundestag (11/74), Plenarprotokoll, 11. Wahlperiode, 74. Sitzung. Bonn, 21. April 1988 BT, Bundestag (11/83), Plenarprotokoll, 11. Wahlperiode, 83. Sitzung. Bonn, 9. Juni 1988 BT, Bundestag (11/100), Plenarprotokoll, 11. Wahlperiode, 100. Sitzung. Bonn, 13. Oktober 1988 BT, Bundestag (11/108), Plenarprotokoll, 11. Wahlperiode, 108. Sitzung. Bonn, 22. November 1988 BT, Bundestag (11/123), Plenarprotokoll, 11. Wahlperiode, 123. Sitzung. Bonn, 27. Januar 1989 BT, Bundestag (11/125), Plenarprotokoll, 11. Wahlperiode, 125. Sitzung. Bonn, 16. Februar 1989 BT, Bundestag (11/156), Plenarprotokoll, 11. Wahlperiode, 156. Sitzung. Bonn, 5. September 1989 BT, Bundestag (11/178), Plenarprotokoll, 11. Wahlperiode, 178. Sitzung. Bonn, 29. November 1989 BT, Bundestag (11/194), Plenarprotokoll, 11. Wahlperiode, 194. Sitzung. Bonn, 8. Februar 1990 BT, Bundestag (11/215), Plenarprotokoll, 11. Wahlperiode, 215. Sitzung. Bonn, 30. Oktober 1990 BT, Bundestag (11/233), Plenarprotokoll, 11. Wahlperiode, 233. Sitzung. Bonn, 1. Juni 1990 BT, Bundestag (12/28), Plenarprotokoll, 12. Wahlperiode, 28. Sitzung. Bonn, 6. Juni 1991 BT, Bundestag (12/31), Plenarprotokoll, 12. Wahlperiode, 31. Sitzung. Bonn, 13. Juni 1991 BT, Bundestag (12/35), Plenarprotokoll, 12. Wahlperiode, 35. Sitzung. Bonn, 21. Juni 1991 BT, Bundestag (12/47), Plenarprotokoll, 12. Wahlperiode, 47. Sitzung. Bonn, 10. Oktober 1991 BT, Bundestag (12/56), Plenarprotokoll, 12. Wahlperiode, 56. Sitzung. Bonn, 13. November 1991 BT, Bundestag (12/60), Plenarprotokoll, 12. Wahlperiode, 60. Sitzung. Bonn, 27. November 1991 BT, Bundestag (12/65), Plenarprotokoll, 12. Wahlperiode, 65. Sitzung. Bonn, 6. Dezember 1991 BT, Bundestag (12/82), Plenarprotokoll, 12. Wahlperiode, 82. Sitzung. Bonn, 12. März 1992 BT, Bundestag (12/93), Plenarprotokoll, 12. Wahlperiode, 93. Sitzung. Bonn, 20. Mai 1992 BT, Bundestag (12/94), Plenarprotokoll, 12. Wahlperiode, 94. Sitzung. Bonn, 3. Juni 1992 BT, Bundestag (12/131), Plenarprotokoll, 12. Wahlperiode, 131. Sitzung. Bonn, 14. Januar 1993 BT, Bundestag (12/147), Plenarprotokoll, 12. Wahlperiode, 147. Sitzung. Bonn, 12. März 1993 BT, Bundestag (12/165), Plenarprotokoll, 12. Wahlperiode, 165. Sitzung. Bonn, 23. Juni 1993 BT, Bundestag (12/208), Plenarprotokoll, 12. Wahlperiode, 208. Sitzung. Bonn, 3. Februar 1994 BT, Bundestag (12/230), Plenarprotokoll, 12. Wahlperiode, 230. Sitzung. Bonn, 26. Mai 1994 BT, Bundestag (12/235), Plenarprotokoll, 12. Wahlperiode, 235. Sitzung. Bonn, 23. Juni 1994 BT, Bundestag (12/237), Plenarprotokoll, 12. Wahlperiode, 237. Sitzung. Bonn, 29. Juni 1994 BT, Bundestag (12/242), Plenarprotokoll, 12. Wahlperiode, 242. Sitzung. Bonn, 7. September 1994 BT, Bundestag (13/9), Plenarprotokoll, 13. Wahlperiode, 9. Sitzung. Bonn, 15. Dezember 1994 BT, Bundestag (13/12), Plenarprotokoll, 13. Wahlperiode, 12. Sitzung. Bonn, 19. Januar 1995 BT, Bundestag (13/21), Plenarprotokoll, 13. Wahlperiode, 21. Sitzung. Bonn, 16. Februar 1995 BT, Bundestag (13/89), Plenarprotokoll, 13. Wahlperiode, 89. Sitzung. Bonn, 29. Februar 1996 BT, Bundestag (13/113), Plenarprotokoll, 13. Wahlperiode, 113. Sitzung. Bonn, 20. Juni 1996 BT, Bundestag (13/114), Plenarprotokoll, 13. Wahlperiode, 114. Sitzung. Bonn, 21. Juni 1996 BT, Bundestag (13/141), Plenarprotokoll, 13. Wahlperiode, 141. Sitzung. Bonn, 27. November 1996 BT, Bundestag (13/145), Plenarprotokoll, 13. Wahlperiode, 145. Sitzung. Bonn, 5. Dezember 1996 BT, Bundestag (13/151), Plenarprotokoll, 13. Wahlperiode, 151. Sitzung. Bonn, 16. Januar 1997 BT, Bundestag (13/188), Plenarprotokoll, 13. Wahlperiode, 188. Sitzung. Bonn, 10. September 1997 BT, Bundestag (13/191), Plenarprotokoll, 13. Wahlperiode, 191. Sitzung. Bonn, 24. September 1997 BT, Bundestag (13/206), Plenarprotokoll, 13. Wahlperiode, 206. Sitzung. Bonn, 26. November 1997 BT, Bundestag (13/213), Plenarprotokoll, 13. Wahlperiode, 213. Sitzung. Bonn, 15. Januar 1998 BT, Bundestag (13/232), Plenarprotokoll, 13. Wahlperiode, 232. Sitzung. Bonn, 29. April 1998 BT, Bundestag (13/240), Plenarprotokoll, 13. Wahlperiode, 240. Sitzung. Bonn, 17. Juni 1998 BT, Bundestag (14/28), Plenarprotokoll, 14. Wahlperiode, 28. Sitzung. Berlin, 19. März 1999 BT, Bundestag (14/35), Plenarprotokoll, 14. Wahlperiode, 35. Sitzung. Berlin, 22. April 1999 BT, Bundestag (14/38), Plenarprotokoll, 14. Wahlperiode, 38. Sitzung. Berlin, 5. Mai 1999 64

BT, Bundestag (14/55), Plenarprotokoll, 14. Wahlperiode, 55. Sitzung. Berlin, 16. September 1999 BT, Bundestag (14/72), Plenarprotokoll, 14. Wahlperiode, 72. Sitzung. Berlin, 24. November 1999 BT, Bundestag (14/88), Plenarprotokoll, 14. Wahlperiode, 88. Sitzung. Berlin, 18. Februar 2000 BT, Bundestag (14/90), Plenarprotokoll, 14. Wahlperiode, 90. Sitzung. Berlin, 24. Februar 2000 BT, Bundestag (14/92), Plenarprotokoll, 14. Wahlperiode, 92. Sitzung. Berlin, 15. März 2000 BT, Bundestag (14/163), Plenarprotokoll, 14. Wahlperiode, 163. Sitzung. Berlin, 4. April 2001 BT, Bundestag (14/202), Plenarprotokoll, 14. Wahlperiode, 202. Sitzung. Berlin, 16. November 2001 BT, Bundestag (14/225), Plenarprotokoll, 14. Wahlperiode, 225. Sitzung. Berlin, 15. März 2002 BT, Bundestag (14/243), Plenarprotokoll, 14. Wahlperiode, 243. Sitzung. Berlin, 14. Juni 2002 BT, Bundestag (15/43), Plenarprotokoll, 15. Wahlperiode, 43. Sitzung. Berlin, 8. Mai 2003 BT, Bundestag (15/53), Plenarprotokoll, 15. Wahlperiode, 53. Sitzung. Berlin, 26. Juni 2003 BT, Bundestag (15/82), Plenarprotokoll, 15. Wahlperiode, 82. Sitzung. Berlin, 11. Dezember 2003 BT, Bundestag (15/86), Plenarprotokoll, 15. Wahlperiode, 86. Sitzung. Berlin, 15. Januar 2004 BT, Bundestag (15/91), Plenarprotokoll, 15. Wahlperiode, 91. Sitzung. Berlin, 12. Februar 2004 BT, Bundestag (15/95), Plenarprotokoll, 15. Wahlperiode, 95. Sitzung. Berlin, 5. März 2004 BT, Bundestag (15/114), Plenarprotokoll, 15. Wahlperiode, 114. Sitzung. Berlin, 17. Juni 2004 BT, Bundestag (15/129), Plenarprotokoll, 15. Wahlperiode, 129. Sitzung. Berlin, 30. September 2004 BT, Bundestag (16/16), Plenarprotokoll, 16. Wahlperiode, 16. Sitzung. Berlin, 9. Februar 2006 BT, Bundestag (16/28), Plenarprotokoll, 16. Wahlperiode, 28. Sitzung. Berlin, 29. März 2006 BT, Bundestag (16/35), Plenarprotokoll, 16. Wahlperiode, 35. Sitzung. Berlin, 11. Mai 2006 BT, Bundestag (16/63), Plenarprotokoll, 16. Wahlperiode, 63. Sitzung. Berlin, 9. November 2006 BT, Bundestag (16/71), Plenarprotokoll, 16. Wahlperiode, 71. Sitzung. Berlin, 1. Dezember 2006 BT, Bundestag (16/73), Plenarprotokoll, 16. Wahlperiode, 73. Sitzung. Berlin, 14. Dezember 2006 BT, Bundestag (16/76), Plenarprotokoll, 16. Wahlperiode, 76. Sitzung. Berlin, 18. Januar 2007 BT, Bundestag (16/99), Plenarprotokoll, 16. Wahlperiode, 99. Sitzung. Berlin, 23. Mai 2007 BT, Bundestag (16/136), Plenarprotokoll, 16. Wahlperiode, 136. Sitzung. Berlin, 17. Januar 2008 BT, Bundestag (17/12), Plenarprotokoll, 17. Wahlperiode, 12. Sitzung. Berlin, 17. Dezember 2009 BT, Bundestag (17/58), Plenarprotokoll, 17. Wahlperiode, 58. Sitzung. Berlin, 15. September 2010 BT, Bundestag (17/93), Plenarprotokoll, 17. Wahlperiode, 93. Sitzung. Berlin, 24. Februar 2011 BT, Bundestag (17/117), Plenarprotokoll, 17. Wahlperiode, 117. Sitzung. Berlin, 30. Juni 2011 BT, Bundestag (17/165), Plenarprotokoll, 17. Wahlperiode, 165. Sitzung. Berlin, 8. März 2012 BT, Bundestag (17/172), Plenarprotokoll, 17. Wahlperiode, 172. Sitzung. Berlin, 29. März 2012 BT, Bundestag (17/207), Plenarprotokoll, 17. Wahlperiode, 207. Sitzung. Berlin, 21. November 2012 BT, Bundestag (18/17), Plenarprotokoll, 18. Wahlperiode, 17. Sitzung. Berlin, 20. Februar 2014 BT, Bundestag (18/28), Plenarprotokoll, 18. Wahlperiode, 28. Sitzung. Berlin, 8. April 2014 BT, Bundestag (18/35), Plenarprotokoll, 18. Wahlperiode, 35. Sitzung. Berlin, 21. Mai 2014 BT, Bundestag (18/66), Plenarprotokoll, 18. Wahlperiode, 66. Sitzung. Berlin, 13. November 2014 BT, Bundestag (18/88), Plenarprotokoll, 18. Wahlperiode, 88. Sitzung. Berlin, 26. Februar 2015 BT, Bundestag (18/97), Plenarprotokoll, 18. Wahlperiode, 97. Sitzung. Berlin, 26. März 2015 BT, Bundestag (18/112), Plenarprotokoll, 18. Wahlperiode, 112. Sitzung. Berlin, 18. Juni 2015 BT, Bundestag (18/149), Plenarprotokoll, 18. Wahlperiode, 149. Sitzung. Berlin, 14. Januar 2016 BT, Bundestag (18/236), Plenarprotokoll, 18. Wahlperiode, 236. Sitzung. Berlin, 31 Mai 2017 BT, Bundestag (19/48), Plenarprotokoll, 19. Wahlperiode, 48. Sitzung. Berlin, 12 September 2018 BT, Bundestag (19/61), Plenarprotokoll, 19. Wahlperiode, 61. Sitzung. Berlin, 8. November 2018 BT, Bundestag (19/64), Plenarprotokoll, 19. Wahlperiode, 64. Sitzung. Berlin, 21. November 2018 BT, Bundestag (19/74), Plenarprotokoll, 19. Wahlperiode, 74. Sitzung. Berlin, 17. Januar 2019 BT, Bundestag (19/83), Plenarprotokoll, 19. Wahlperiode, 83. Sitzung. Berlin, 21. Februar 2019 BT, Bundestag (19/89), Plenarprotokoll, 19. Wahlperiode, 89. Sitzung. Berlin, 21. März 2019 BT, Bundestag (19/162), Plenarprotokoll, 19. Wahlperiode, 162. Sitzung. Berlin, 27. Mai 2020

9.1.4. Parliamentary Printed Matter

BT, Bundestag (1839), Drucksache, Entwurf eines Gesetzes zu dem Abkommen vom 26. Januar 1960 über die Internationale Entwicklungs-Organisation, 10. Mai 1960

BT, Bundestag (2288), Drucksache, Entwurf eines Gesetzes über die Finanzierungshilfe für Entwicklungsländer aus Mitteln des ERP-Sondervermögens (Entwicklungshilfegesetz), 6. Dezember 1960

BT, Bundestag (2380), Drucksache, Entwurf eines Gesetzes über die Feststellung des Wirtschaftsplans des ERP- Sondervermögens für das Rechnungsjahr 1961 (ERP-Wirtschaftsplangesetz 1961), 12. Januar 1961

BT, Bundestag (IV/298), Drucksache, Schriftlicher Bericht des Ausschusses für wirtschaftlichen Besitz des Bundes (28. Ausschuß) 5. April 1962, 23. Juni 1965

BT, Bundestag (IV/3672), Drucksache, Lage und Stand des Ausbaus der deutschen Auslandsschulen Bezug: Beschluß des Deutschen Bundestages vom 24. Februar 1965

BT, Bundestag (IV/ 3772), Drucksache, Entwicklungspolitik der Bundesregierung, 20. Juli 1965

BT, Bundestag (V/909), Drucksache, Bericht der Bundesregierung über die Situation der Frauen in Beruf, Familie und Gesellschaft Bezug: Beschluß des Deutschen Bundestages vom 9. Dezember 1964, 14. September 1960

BT, Bundestag (V/1531), Drucksache, Entwurf eines Gesetzes über die Feststellung des Wirtschaftsplans des ERP- Sondervermögens für das Rechnungsjahr 1967 (ERP-Wirtschaftsplangesetz 1967), 14. März 1967

BT, Bundestag (V/1580), Drucksache, Bericht über den Stand der Maßnahmen auf dem Gebiet der individuellen Förderung von Ausbildung und Fortbildung, 20. März 1967

BT, Bundestag (V/1589), Drucksache, Übersetzung, NATO-PARLAMENTARIER-KONFERENZ Internationales Sekretariat 12, Rue du Bois de Bologne - Neuilly-sur-Seine, 17. Februar 1967

BT, Bundestag (V/1882), Drucksache, Schriftlicher Bericht des Ausschusses für das Bundesvermögen (23. Ausschuß) über den von der Bundesregierung eingebrachten Entwurf eines Gesetzes über die Feststellung des Wirtschaftsplans des ERP-Sondervermögens für das Rechnungsjahr 1967, 22.06.1967

BT, Bundestag (V/2422), Drucksache, Die Allgemeine Konferenz der Internationalen Arbeitsorganisation hat auf ihrer 50. Tagung (Juni 1966), 21. Dezember 1967

BT, Bundestag (VI/1101), Drucksache, Finanzplan des Bundes 1970 bis 1974, 13. September 1970

BT, Bundestag (VI/1690), Drucksache, Materialien zum Bericht zur Lage der Nation 1971, 15. Januar 1971

BT, Bundestag (VI/2053), Drucksache, Entwicklungspolitik der Bundesregierung, 31. März 1971

BT, Bundestag (VI/2651), Drucksache, Finanzplan des Bundes 1971 bis 1975. Federführend ist der Bundesminister für Wirtschaft und Finanzen, 8. Oktober 1971

BT, Bundestag, (VI/2863), Drucksache, An den Herrn Präsidenten des Deutschen Bundestages Betr.: Gründung der deutsch-rumänischen Consulting-Gesellschaft „Rodeco" Bezug: Kleine Anfrage der Abgeordneten Roser, Dr. Wulff und der Fraktion der CDU/CSU — Drucksache VI/2821 —, 25.11.1971

BT, Bundestag, (VI/3203), Drucksache, Unterrichtung der gesetzgebenden Körperschaften gemäß Artikel 2 des Gesetzes zu den Gründungsverträgen der Europäischen Gemeinschaften hier: Politik auf dem Gebiet der Entwicklungshilfe, 2. März 1972

BT, Bundestag (7/842), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die deutsche Delegation in der Beratenden Versammlung des Europarates über die Tagung der Beratenden Versammlung des Europarates vom 14. bis 18. Mai 1973 in Straßburg, 19.06.1973

BT, Bundestag (7/1040), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Sportbericht der Bundesregierung, 26.09.1973

BT, Bundestag (7/1236), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Bericht zur Entwicklungspolitik der Bundesregierung

BT, Bundestag (7/2314), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Deutsche Delegation in der Beratenden Versammlung des Europarates über die Tagung der Beratenden Versammlung des Europarates vom 6. bis 10. Mai 1974 in Straßburg, 25.06.1974

BT, Bundestag (7/3837), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die deutsche Delegation in der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarates, Bericht über die Tagung der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarates vom 21. bis 25. April 1975 in Straßburg, 30.06.1975

BT, Bundestag (7/3860), Drucksache, Fragen gemäß § 111 der Geschäftsordnung für Juli 1975 Teil I: Fragen 1 bis 62 mit den dazu erteilten Antworten, 16.07.1975

BT, Bundestag (7/3907), Drucksache, Berichtigung zur Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Große Anfrage der Fraktion der CDU/CSU - Drucksache 7/3656 - betr. Grundsätze der wirtschaftlichen Zusammenarbeit in der Entwicklungspolitik der Bundesregierung, 01.08.1975

BT, Bundestag (7/4121), Drucksache, Bericht der Enquete-Kommission Auswärtige Kulturpolitik gemäß Beschluß des Deutschen Bundestages vom 23. Februar 1973, 07.10.1975

BT, Bundestag (7/4293), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung. Bericht zur Entwicklungspolitik der Bundesregierung, 10.11.1975

BT, Bundestag (8/587), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die deutsche Delegation in der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarates über die Tagung der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarates vom 25. bis 29. April 1977 in Straßburg, 15.06.1977

BT, Bundestag (8/879), Drucksache, Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Große Anfrage der Fraktion der CDU/CSU - Drucksache 8/345 – Entwicklungspolitik, 07.09.1977

BT, Bundestag (8/1182), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Delegation der Bundesrepublik Deutschand in der Interparlamentarischen Union über die 64. Jahreskonferenz der IPU in Sofia vom 20. bis 30. September 1977, 14.11.1977

BT, Bundestag (8/1185), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung. Dritter Bericht zur Entwicklungspolitik der Bundesregierung, 14.11.1977

BT, Bundestag (8/1408), Drucksache, Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Große Anfrage der Fraktionen der SPD, FDP — Drucksache 8/685 — Mitwirkung der Bundesrepublik Deutschland in den Vereinten Nationen, 05.01.1978

BT, Bundestag (8/1981), Drucksache, Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Große Anfrage der Abgeordneten der Fraktion der CDU/CSU — Drucksache 8/1681 — Rohstoffpolitik der Bundesregierung, 07.07.1978

BT, Bundestag (8/2155), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung Bericht der Bundesregierung über die deutsche Humanitäre Hilfe im Ausland 1965 bis 1977, 03.10.1978

BT, Bundestag (8/2832), Drucksache, Kleine Anfrage der Abgeordneten Dr. Köhler (Wolfsburg), Dr. Todenhöfer, Frau Fischer, Dr. Hoffacker, Dr. Hüsch, Josten, Jäger (Wangen), Dr. Kunz (Weiden), Werner und der Fraktion der CDU/CSU Verwaltungshilfe der Bundesregierung, 09.05.1979

BT, Bundestag (8/3582), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Vierter Entwicklungspolitischer Bericht der Bundesregierung, 21.01.1980

BT, Bundestag (8/4132), Unterrichtung durch die deutsche Delegation in der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarates über die Tagung der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarates vom 21. bis 25. April 1980 in Straßburg, 29.05.1980

BT, Bundestag (8/4258), Drucksache, Antrag der Abgeordneten der Fraktion der CDU/CSU Verstärkung der personellen Hilfe im Konzept der Entwicklungspolitik der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, 19.06.1980

BT, Bundestag (8/4517), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Delegation der Bundesrepublik Deutschland in der Interparlamentarischen Union über die 67. Jahreskonferenz der IPU in Berlin (Ost) vom 15. bis 25. September 1980, 03.11.1980

BT, Bundestag (9/423), Antrag der Abgeordneten der Fraktion der CDU/CSU, Verstärkung der personellen Hilfe im Konzept der Entwicklungspolitik der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, 14.05.1981

BT, Bundestag (9/627), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Delegation der Bundesrepublik Deutschland in der Interparlamentarischen Union über die Frühjahrstagung der IPU in Manila vom 20. bis 25. April 1981, 29.06.1981

BT, Bundestag (9/1158), Drucksache, Große Anfrage der Abgeordneten der Fraktion der CDU/CSU Tendenzen globaler Entwicklung, 09.12.1981

BT, Bundestag (9/1474), Drucksache, Kleine Anfrage der Abgeordneten der Fraktion der CDU/CSU Entwicklungspolitik des Ostblocks, 16.03.1982

BT, Bundestag (9/1592), Drucksache, Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Große Anfrage der Abgeordneten der Fraktion der CDU/CSU — Drucksache 9/1158 — Tendenzen globaler Entwicklung, 23.04.1982

BT, Bundestag (9/1945), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Fünfter Sportbericht der Bundesregierung, 01.09.1982

BT, Bundestag (9/2105), Drucksache, Schriftliche Fragen mit den in der Woche vom 8. November 1982 eingegangenen Antworten der Bundesregierung, 12. 11. 1982

BT, Bundestag (9/2411), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Fünfter Entwicklungspolitischer Bericht der Bundesregierung, 23.02.1983

BT, Bundestag (9/2422), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Deutsche Delegation in der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarates über die Tagung der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarates vom 24. bis 28. Januar 1983 in Straßburg, 25.02.1983

BT, Bundestag (10/105), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die deutsche Delegation in der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarates über die Tagung der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarates vom 25. bis 29. April 1983 in Straßburg, 01.06.1983

BT, Bundestag (10/1976), Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Große Anfrage der Abgeordneten der Fraktion DIE GRÜNEN — Drucksache 10/1599 — Die Projektpolitik der Weltbankgruppe, 14.09.1984

BT, Bundestag (10/3028), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Sechster Bericht zur Entwicklungspolitik der Bundesregierung, 14.03.1985

BT, Bundestag (11/2020), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Siebenter Bericht zur Entwicklungspolitik der Bundesregierung, 16.03.1988

BT, Bundestag (11/4174), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die deutsche Delegation in der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarates über die Tagung der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarates vom 30. Januar bis 3. Februar 1989 in Straßburg, 13.03.1989

BT, Bundestag (11/4381), Drucksache, Beschlußempfehlung und Bericht des Ausschusses für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit (20. Ausschuß) zu der Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung - Drucksache 11/2020 - Siebenter Bericht zur Entwicklungspolitik der Bundesregierung, 19.04.1989

BT, Bundestag, (11/7313), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Achter Bericht zur Entwicklungspolitik der Bundesregierung, 31.05.1990 68

BT, Bundestag, (11/8533), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Delegation der Interparlamentarischen Gruppe der Bundesrepublik Deutschland über die 84. Interparlamentarische Konferenz vom 15. bis 20. Oktober 1990 in Punta del Este/Uruguay, 17.12.1990

BT, Bundestag (12/217), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung 47. Bericht der Bundesregierung über die Integration der Bundesrepublik Deutschland in die Europäischen Gemeinschaften (Berichtszeitraum 1. Juli bis 31. Dezember 1990), 11.03.1991

BT, Bundestag (12/802), Drucksache, Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Kleine Anfrage, Entwicklung von rüstungspolitischen Konditionen für die Vergabe von Mitteln des Bundesministeriums für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit, 19.06.1991

BT, Bundestag (12/851), Drucksache, Antrag der Abgeordneten der Fraktion der FDP Ein Beitrag zu Frieden und Entwicklung durch Regionalpolitik im südlichen Afrika, 25.06.1991

BT, Bundestag (12/924), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Bericht über die Armutsbekämpfung in der Dritten Welt durch Hilfe zur Selbsthilfe, 11.07.1991

BT, Bundestag (12/1669), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Delegation der Interparlamentarischen Gruppe der Bundesrepublik Deutschland über die 86. Interparlamentarische Konferenz vom 7. bis 12. Oktober 1991 in Santiago de Chile, 28.11.1991

BT, Bundestag (12/1995), Drucksache, Beschlußempfehlung und Bericht des Ausschusses für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit (20. Ausschuß) zu dem Antrag der Abgeordneten der Fraktion der FDP — Drucksache 12/851 — Ein Beitrag zu Frieden und Entwicklung durch Regionalpolitik im südlichen Afrika, 23.01.1992

BT, Bundestag (12/2218), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, 49. Bericht der Bundesregierung über die Integration der Bundesrepublik Deutschland in die Europäischen Gemeinschaften (Berichtszeitraum 1. Juli bis 31. Dezember 1991), 11.03.1992

BT, Bundestag (12/2602), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Delegation der Interparlamentarischen Gruppe der Bundesrepublik Deutschland über die 87. Interparlamentarische Konferenz vom 6. bis 11. April 1992 in Yaoundé/Kamerun, 14.05.1992

BT, Bundestag (12/3134), Drucksache, Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Kleine Anfrage der Abgeordneten Dr. Ursula Fischer und der Gruppe der PDS/Linke Liste — Drucksache 12/3034 — Schwerpunkte und Kriterien deutscher Entwicklungspolitik und der Internationale Kongreß „Für eine Welt ohne Hunger, Verfolgung, soziale Ungerechtigkeit und Krieg" in München vom 3. bis 5. Juli 1992, 04.08.1992

BT, Bundestag (12/3255), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, 50. Bericht der Bundesregierung über die Integration der Bundesrepublik Deutschland in die Europäischen Gemeinschaften (Berichtszeitraum 1. Januar bis 30. Juni 1992), 15.09.1992

BT, Bundestag (12/3300), Drucksache, Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Große Anfrage der Abgeordneten der Fraktion der SPD — Drucksache 12/2160 — Internationale Verschuldungskrise und wirtschaftliche Strukturanpassung in der Dritten Welt und in Osteuropa, 24.09.1992

BT, Bundestag (12/3370), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Delegation der Interparlamentarischen Gruppe der Bundesrepublik Deutschland über die 88. Interparlamentarische Konferenz vom 7. bis 12. September 1992 in Stockholm, 07.10.1992

BT, Bundestag (12/3380), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Bericht der Bundesregierung über die Konferenz der Vereinten Nationen für Umwelt und Entwicklung in Rio de Janero (3.-14. Juni 1992), 30.09.1992

BT, Bundestag (12/4096), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Neunter Bericht zur Entwicklungspolitik der Bundesregierung, 13.01.1993 69

BT, Bundestag (12/4037), Drucksache, Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Kleine Anfrage der Abgeordneten der Fraktion der SPD — Drucksache 12/3738 — Förderung von Menschenrechten, Pluralismus und Demokratie als Bestandteil deutscher Nah- und Mittelost-Politik, 22.12.1992

BT, Bundestag (12/5462), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch das Europäische Parlament Entschließung zu den Ergebnissen des Europäischen Rates vom 21. und 22. Juni 1993 in Kopenhagen, 21.07.1993

BT, Bundestag (12/6854), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Materialien zur Deutschen Einheit und zum Aufbau in den neuen Bundesländern, 08.02.1994

BT, Bundestag (12/7603), Drucksache, Beschlußempfehlung und Bericht des Ausschusses für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit (22. Ausschuß) zu dem Gesetzentwurf der Abgeordneten der Fraktion der SPD — Drucksache 12/5960 — Entwurf eines Gesetzes zur Entwicklungspolitik der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, 19.05.1994

BT, Bundestag (12/8001), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Der Finanzplan des Bundes 1994 bis 1998

BT, Bundestag (12/8260), Drucksache, Bericht der Enquete-Kommission „Schutz des Menschen und der Umwelt - Bewertungskriterien und Perspektiven für umweltverträgliche Stoffkreisläufe in der Industriegesellschaft"*) Die Industriegesellschaft gestalten - Perspektiven für einen nachhaltigen Umgang mit Stoff- und Materialströmen, 12.07.1994

BT, Bundestag (12/8302), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die deutsche Delegation in der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarates über die Tagung der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarates vom 28. Juni bis 1. Juli 1994 in Straßburg, 19. 07. 1994

BT, Bundestag (12/2938), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Delegation der Bundesrepublik Deutschland in der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarates über die Tagung der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarates vom 4. bis 8. Mai 1992 in Straßburg, 25.06.1992

BT, Bundestag (13/3342), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Zehnter Bericht zur Entwicklungspolitik der Bundesregierung, 14.12.1995

BT, Bundestag (13/4532), Drucksache, Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Großen Anfragen der Abgeordneten Dr. Uschi Eid und der Fraktion BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN — Drucksachen 13/1480, 13/1481 — Zur Lage in Afrika und zur Afrika-Politik der Bundesregierung (Teil I und Teil II), 07.05.1996

BT, Bundestag (13/5903), Drucksache, Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregierung, Entwurf eines Gesetzes zu dem Abkommen vom 4. November 1995, zur Änderung des Vierten AKP-EG-Abkommens von Lomé sowie zu den mit diesem Abkommen in Zusammenhang stehenden weiteren Übereinkünften, 28.10.1996

BT, Bundestag (13/6581), Drucksache, Antrag der Abgeordneten der Fraktion der SPD Deutschlands Verantwortung für Subsahara-Afrika, 15.01.1997

BT, Drucksache (13/6773), Drucksache, Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Große Anfrage der Fraktion der SPD — Drucksache 13/5055 — Reform der Vereinten Nationen, 15.01.1997

BT, Bundestag (13/8533), Drucksache, Fragen für die Fragestunde der Sitzung des Deutschen Bundestages am Mittwoch, dem 24. September 1997, 19.09.1997

BT, Bundestag (14/531), Drucksache, Antrag der Abgeordneten der Fraktion der F.D.P. Eigenverantwortlichkeit der AKP-Staaten fördern, 16.03.1999

BT, Bundestag (14/3166), Drucksache, Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Kleine Anfrage der Abgeordneten der Fraktion der CDU/CSU – Drucksache 14/3034 – Überprüfung der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit mit Simbabwe, 10.04.2000

BT, Bundestag (14/3739), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, 5. Bericht der Bundesregierung über ihre Menschenrechtspolitik in den Auswärtigen Beziehungen, 28. 06. 2000

BT, Bundestag (14/3967), Drucksache, Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Große Anfrage der Fraktion der CDU/CSU – Drucksache 14/1960 – Eine internationale Soziale Marktwirtschaft als Grundmodell für eine globale Struktur- und Ordnungspolitik – Chancen und Risiken der Globalisierung der Weltwirtschaft für die Entwicklungsländer, 02.08.2000

BT, Bundestag (13/11460), Drucksache, Zweiter Zwischenbericht der ENQUETE-KOMMISSION „Demographischer Wandel - Herausforderungen unserer älter werdenden Gesellschaft an den einzelnen und die Politik"*), 05.10.1998

BT, Bundestag (14/1869), Drucksache, Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Kleine Anfrage der Abgeordneten der Fraktion der F.D.P.– Drucksache 14/1704 – Stärkung des Wirtschaftsstandortes Deutschland durch Entwicklungszusammenarbeit, 26.10.1999

BT, Bundestag (14/5578), Drucksache, Antrag der Abgeordneten der F.D.P. Informationstechnologie in den Mittelpunkt der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit stellen, 14.03.2001

BT, Bundestag (14/5898), Drucksache, Schriftliche Fragen mit den in der Zeit vom 9. bis 20. April 2001 eingegangenen Antworten der Bundesregierung, 20.04.2001

BT, Bundestag (14/6269), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung Dritter Bericht über die Armutsbekämpfung in der Dritten Welt durch Hilfe zur Selbsthilfe, 06.06.2001

BT, Bundestag (14/6496), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Elfter Bericht zur Entwicklungspolitik der Bundesregierung, 07.06.2001

BT, Bundestag (14/6750), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Gesamtwaldbericht, 25.07.2001

BT, Bundestag (14/8417), Drucksache, Große Anfrage der Abgeordneten der Fraktion der CDU/CSU Umgang mit dem Zerfall staatlicher Autorität, 26.02.2002

BT, Bundestag (14/8487), Drucksache, Antrag der Abgeordneten der Fraktion BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN Entwicklungsfinanzierung international stärken – VN-Konferenz „Financing for Development“, 12.03.2002

BT, Bundestag (14/9025), Drucksache, Antrag der Abgeordneten Dr. Christian Ruck, Klaus-Jürgen Hedrich, Dr. Peter Paziorek, Kurt-Dieter Grill und der Fraktion der CDU/CSU, Die Schöpfung bewahren, entwicklungsorientiert handeln: Weltgipfel in Johannesburg muss neue Impulse für globale nachhaltige Entwicklung setzen, 14.05.2002

BT, Bundestag (14/9200), Drucksache, Schlussbericht der Enquete-Kommission*) Globalisierung der Weltwirtschaft – Herausforderungen und Antworten, 12.06.2002

BT, Bundestag (14/9323), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, 6. Bericht der Bundesregierung über ihre Menschenrechtspolitik in den Auswärtigen Beziehungen und in anderen Politikbereichen, 06.06.2002

BT, Bundestag (15/5579), Drucksache, Antrag der Abgeordneten der Fraktion der CDU/CSU, vor dem G8-Gipfel in Gleneagles und der VN-Generalversammlung zu den Millenniumszielen – Millenniumsentwicklungsziele realistisch umsetzen, 31.05.2005

BT, Bundestag (15/5800), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Siebter Bericht der Bundesregierung über ihre Menschenrechtspolitik in den auswärtigen Beziehungen und in anderen Politikbereichen, 17.06.2005

BT, Bundestag (15/5815), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Zwölfter Bericht zur Entwicklungspolitik der Bundesregierung, 23.06.2005

BT, Bundestag (15/5967), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Delegation der Bundesrepublik Deutschland in der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarates Tagung der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarates vom 20. bis 24. Juni 2005 in Straßburg, 24.08.2005

BT, Bundestag (16/564), Drucksache, Antrag der Abgeordneten der Fraktion der FDP Multilaterales Handelssystem retten – WTO stärken, 08.02.2006

BT, Bundestag (16/1809), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Erster Bericht der Bundesregierung über die Umsetzung des Aktionsplans zur zivilen Krisenprävention, Konfliktlösung und Friedenskonsolidierung - Sicherheit und Stabilität durch Krisenprävention gemeinsam stärken, 07.06.2006

BT, Bundestag (16/3087), Drucksache, Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Kleine Anfrage der Abgeordneten Dr. Karl Addicks, Hellmut Königshaus, Jens Ackermann, weiterer Abgeordneter und der Fraktion der FDP – Drucksache 16/2848 – Deutsche Entwicklungszusammenarbeit mit den ölproduzierenden Ländern, 25.10.2006

BT, Bundestag (16/3800), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Bericht der Bundesregierung zur Zusammenarbeit zwischen der Bundesrepublik Deutschland und den Vereinten Nationen in den Jahren 2004 und 2005, 07. 12. 2006, 20.12.2006

BT, Bundestag (16/3941), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Delegation der Bundesrepublik Deutschland in der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarates, Tagung der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarates vom 2. bis 6. Oktober 2006 in Straßburg und Debatte der Erweiterten Parlamentarischen Versammlung über die Aktivitäten der OECD am 4. Oktober 2006,

BT, Bundestag (16/5243), Antrag der Abgeordneten der Fraktion der FDP Neue Strategien für die deutsche Entwicklungszusammenarbeit mit Afrika erarbeiten und durchsetzen, 09.05.2007

BT, Bundestag (16/10034), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Zweiter Bericht der Bundesregierung über die Umsetzung des Aktionsplans „Zivile Krisenprävention, Konfliktlösung und Friedenskonsolidierung“ – Krisenprävention als gemeinsame Aufgabe, 16.07.2008

BT, Bundestag (16/10037), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Achter Bericht der Bundesregierung über ihre Menschenrechtspolitik in den auswärtigen Beziehungen und in anderen Politikbereichen, 16. 07. 2008

BT, Bundestag (16/10038), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Dreizehnter Bericht zur Entwicklungspolitik der Bundesregierung, 17.07.2008

BT, Bundestag (16/10700), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung Fortschrittsbericht 2008 zur nationalen Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie, 30.10.2008

BT, Bundestag (16/12073), Drucksache, Schriftliche Fragen mit den in der Woche vom 23. Februar 2009 eingegangenen Antworten der Bundesregierung, 27.02.2009

BT, Bundestag (16/12382), Drucksache, Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Kleine Anfrage der Abgeordneten der Fraktion der FDP – Drucksache 16/11939 – Stand der Umsetzung der Beschlüsse des Deutschen Bundestages in der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit in der 16. Wahlperiode, 19.03.2009

BT, Bundestag (16/13276), Drucksache, Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Große Anfrage der Abgeordneten der Fraktion BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN – Drucksache 16/10386 – Zur Energieaußenpolitik der Bundesregierung, 28.05.2009

BT, Bundestag (16/13312), Drucksache, Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Große Anfrage der Abgeordneten der Fraktion BÜNDNIS 90/ DIE GRÜNEN – Drucksache 16/11485 – Zur Indienpolitik der Bundesregierung, 05.06.2009

BT, Bundestag (16/13572), Drucksache, Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Große Anfrage der Abgeordneten Dr. Uschi Eid, Marieluise Beck (Bremen), Volker Beck (Köln), weiterer Abgeordneter und der Fraktion BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN – Drucksache 16/11808 – Zur Umsetzung des G8-Afrika-Aktionsplanes, beschlossen auf dem G8- Gipfel in Kananaskis, Kanada, Juni 2002, 25. 06. 2009

BT, Bundestag (17/2300), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Dritter Bericht der Bundesregierung über die Umsetzung des Aktionsplans „Zivile Krisenprävention, Konfliktlösung und Friedenskonsolidierung“, 25.06.2010

BT, Bundestag (17/7185), Drucksache, Antrag der Abgeordneten der Fraktion der FDP, Ländliche Entwicklung und Ernährungssicherheit weltweit verbessern, 28.09.2011

BT, Bundestag (17/8241), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Delegation der Bundesrepublik Deutschland in der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarates Tagung der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarates vom 25. bis 29. Januar 2010 in Straßburg, 21.12.2011

BT, Bundestag (17/13100), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Vierzehnter Bericht zur Entwicklungspolitik der Bundesregierung – Weißbuch –, 19.04.2013

BT, Bundestag (18/2000), Anlage zur Drucksache 18/2000 (Einzelplan 23), Entwurf zum Bundeshaushaltsplan 2015 Einzelplan 23 Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, 08.08.2014

BT, Bundestag (18/12300), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, 15. Entwicklungspolitischer Bericht der Bundesregierung, 27.04.2017

BT, Bundestag (19/1141), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die deutsche Delegation in der Interparlamentarischen Konferenz für die Gemeinsame Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik und die Gemeinsame Sicherheits- und Verteidigungspolitik Tagung der Interparlamentarischen Konferenz für die Gemeinsame Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik und die Gemeinsame Sicherheits- und Verteidigungspolitik vom 7. bis 9. September 2017 in Tallin (Estland), 09.03.2018

BT, Bundestag (19/1700), Anlage zur Drucksache 19/1700 (Einzelplan 23), Entwurf zum Bundeshaushaltsplan 2018 Einzelplan 23 Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, 04.05.2018

BT, Bundestag (19/3400), Anlage zur Drucksache, Einzelplan, Entwurf zum Bundeshaushaltsplan 2019 Einzelplan 23 Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung

BT, Bundestag (19/7730), Drucksache, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, 13. Bericht der Bundesregierung über ihre Menschenrechtspolitik (Berichtszeitraum 1. Oktober 2016 bis 30. September 2018), 13.02.2019

BT, Bundestag (19/11009), Drucksache, Kleine Anfrage der Abgeordneten der Fraktion der FDP, Good Financial Governance – Deutschlands Beitrag zur Sicherung von Solvenz und Unabhängigkeit von Entwicklungsländern, 19.06.2019

BT, Bundestag (19/11418), Drucksache, Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Kleine Anfrage der Abgeordneten der Fraktion der FDP – Drucksache 19/11009 – Good Financial Governance – Deutschlands Beitrag zur Sicherung von Solvenz und Unabhängigkeit von Entwicklungsländern, 05.07.2019

BT, Bundestag (19/14915), Drucksache, Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Kleine Anfrage der Abgeordneten der Fraktion der AfD – Drucksache 19/13075 – Ablehnung der Entwicklungshilfe durch die Regierung der Republik Ghana – Folgerungen für die Entwicklungszusammenarbeit, 07.11.2019

BT, Bundestag (19/15882), Drucksache, Beschlussempfehlung und Bericht des Ausschusses für Menschenrechte und humanitäre Hilfe (17. Ausschuss), 11.12.2019

BT, Bundestag (19/20379), Drucksache, Kleine Anfrage der Abgeordneten Markus Frohnmaier, Dietmar Friedhoff und der Fraktion der AfD Entwicklungsleistungen an die Republik Kongo, 25.06.2020

BT, Bundestag (19/22493), Drucksache, Antrag der Abgeordneten der FDP, Mehr Tempo für die Nachhaltigkeit – Mit Fortschritt und Innovation in die Zukunft, 15.09.2020

9.1.5. Professional Journal Issues

Akzente (2.98). akzente. aus der Arbeit der GTZ. Jahrgang 1998, Ausgabe 2. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn

Akzente (3.98). akzente. aus der Arbeit der GTZ. Jahrgang 1998, Ausgabe 3. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn

Akzente (3.01). akzente. aus der Arbeit der GTZ. Jahrgang 2001, Ausgabe 3. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn

Akzente (4.01). akzente. aus der Arbeit der GTZ. Jahrgang 2001, Ausgabe 4. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn

Akzente (1.04). akzente. aus der Arbeit der GTZ. Jahrgang 2004, Ausgabe 1. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn

Akzente (1.05). akzente. aus der Arbeit der GTZ. Jahrgang 2005, Ausgabe 1. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn

Akzente (2.05). akzente. aus der Arbeit der GTZ. Jahrgang 2005, Ausgabe 2. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn

Akzente (4.05). akzente. aus der Arbeit der GTZ. Jahrgang 2005, Ausgabe 4. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn

Akzente (1.07). akzente. aus der Arbeit der GTZ. Jahrgang 2007, Ausgabe 1. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn

Akzente (2.07). akzente. aus der Arbeit der GTZ. Jahrgang 2007, Ausgabe 2. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn

Akzente (1.08). akzente. aus der Arbeit der GTZ. Jahrgang 2008, Ausgabe 1. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn

Akzente (2.08). akzente. aus der Arbeit der GTZ. Jahrgang 2008, Ausgabe 2. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn

Akzente (1.09). akzente. aus der Arbeit der GTZ. Jahrgang 2009, Ausgabe 1. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn

Akzente (1.10). akzente. aus der Arbeit der GTZ. Jahrgang 2010, Ausgabe 1. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn

Akzente (4.11). akzente. Das Magazin der GIZ. Jahrgang 2011, Ausgabe 4. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn

Akzente (1.12). akzente. Das Magazin der GIZ. Jahrgang 2012, Ausgabe 1. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn

Akzente (2.12). akzente. Das Magazin der GIZ. Jahrgang 2012, Ausgabe 2. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn

Akzente (4.18). akzente. Das Magazin der GIZ. Jahrgang 2018, Ausgabe 4. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn

Akzente (1.20). akzente. Das Magazin der GIZ. Jahrgang 2020, Ausgabe 1. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn

E+Z (6/1), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 6, Nr. 1, 1965 E+Z (6/5), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 6, Nr. 5, 1965 E+Z (7/6), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 7, Nr. 6, 1966 E+Z (7/8), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 7, Nr. 8/9, 1966 E+Z (7/11), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 7, Nr. 11, 1966 E+Z (8/5), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 8, Nr. 5, 1967 E+Z (8/7), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 8, Nr. 7, 1967 E+Z (8/10), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 8, Nr. 10, 1967 E+Z (9/3), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 9, Nr. 3, 1968 E+Z (10/2), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 10, Nr. 2, 1969 E+Z (10/6), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 10, Nr. 6, 1969 E+Z (10/7), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 10, Nr. 7, 1969 E+Z (10/10), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 10, Nr. 10, 1969 E+Z (10/12), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 10, Nr. 12, 1969 E+Z (11/3), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 11, Nr. 3, 1970 E+Z (11/10), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 11, Nr. 10, 1970 E+Z (11/11), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 11, Nr. 11, 1970 E+Z (11/12), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 11, Nr. 12, 1970 E+Z (12/8), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 12, Nr. 8, 1971 E+Z (12/10), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 12, Nr. 10, 1971 E+Z (13/1), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 13, Nr. 1, 1972 E+Z (13/4), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 13, Nr. 4, 1972 E+Z (13/5), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 13, Nr. 5, 1972 E+Z (14/8), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 14, Nr. 8, 1973 E+Z (15/4), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 15, Nr. 4, 1974 E+Z (15/7), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 15, Nr. 7, 1974 E+Z (15/10), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 15, Nr. 10, 1974 E+Z (16/3), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 16, Nr. 3, 1975 E+Z (17/3), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 17, Nr. 3, 1976 E+Z (17/10), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 17, Nr. 10, 1976 E+Z (17/11), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 17, Nr. 11, 1976 E+Z (19/6), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 19, Nr. 6, 1978 E+Z (19/8), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 19, Nr. 8, 1978 E+Z (19/12), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 19, Nr. 12, 1978 E+Z (20/1), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 20, Nr. 1, 1979 E+Z (20/10), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 20, Nr. 10, 1979 E+Z (21/3), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 21, Nr. 3, 1980 E+Z (21/9), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 21, Nr. 9, 1980 E+Z (22/3), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 22, Nr. 3, 1981 E+Z (22/5), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 22, Nr. 5, 1981 E+Z (22/7), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 22, Nr. 7/8, 1981 E+Z (22/11), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 22, Nr. 11, 1981 E+Z (23/11), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 23, Nr. 11, 1982 E+Z (24/1), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 24, Nr. 1, 1983 E+Z (24/12), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 24, Nr. 12, 1983 E+Z (25/2), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 25, Nr. 2, 1984 E+Z (25/10), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 25, Nr. 10, 1984 E+Z (25/12), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 25, Nr. 12, 1984 E+Z (26/2), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 26, Nr. 2, 1985 E+Z (26/5), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 26, Nr. 5, 1985 E+Z (26/6), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 26, Nr. 6, 1985 E+Z (26/9), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 26, Nr. 9, 1985 75

E+Z (26/10), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 26, Nr. 10, 1985 E+Z (26/12), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 26, Nr. 12, 1985 E+Z (27/2), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 27, Nr. 2, 1986 E+Z (27/4), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 27, Nr. 4, 1986 E+Z (27/5), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 27, Nr. 5, 1986 E+Z (27/8), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 27, Nr. 8/9, 1986 E+Z (28/4), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 28, Nr. 4, 1987 E+Z (28/7), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 28, Nr. 7, 1987 E+Z (28/12), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 28, Nr. 12, 1987 E+Z (29/3), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 29, Nr. 3, 1988 E+Z (29/6), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 29, Nr. 6, 1988 E+Z (29/10), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 29, Nr. 10, 1988 E+Z (29/11), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 29, Nr. 11, 1988 E+Z (29/12), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 29, Nr. 12, 1988 E+Z (30/2), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 30, Nr. 2, 1989 E+Z (31/1), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 31, Nr. 1, 1990 E+Z (31/2), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 31, Nr. 2, 1990 E+Z (31/3), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 31, Nr. 3, 1990 E+Z (31/4), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 31, Nr. 4, 1990 E+Z (31/5), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 31, Nr. 5, 1990 E+Z (31/7), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 31, Nr. 7/8, 1990 E+Z (31/10), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 31, Nr. 10, 1990 E+Z (32/10), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 32, Nr. 10, 1991 E+Z (32/11), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 32, Nr. 11, 1991 E+Z (32/12), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 32, Nr. 12, 1991 E+Z (33/3), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 33, Nr. 3, 1992 E+Z (33/4), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 33, Nr. 4, 1992 E+Z (33/5), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 33, Nr. 5, 1992 E+Z (33/7), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 33, Nr. 7, 1992 E+Z (33/8), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 33, Nr. 8, 1992 E+Z (33/9), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 33, Nr. 9, 1992 E+Z (33/10), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 33, Nr. 10, 1992 E+Z (33/11), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 33, Nr. 11, 1992 E+Z (33/12), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 33, Nr. 12, 1992 E+Z (34/3), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 34, Nr. 3, 1993 E+Z (34/4), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 34, Nr. 4, 1993 E+Z (34/11), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 34, Nr. 11, 1993 E+Z (34/12), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 34, Nr. 12, 1993 E+Z (35/1), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 35, Nr. 1, 1994 E+Z (35/4), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 35, Nr. 4, 1994 E+Z (35/5), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 35, Nr. 5/6, 1994 E+Z (35/9), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 35, Nr. 9, 1994 E+Z (35/11), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 35, Nr. 11, 1994 E+Z (36/2), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 36, Nr. 2, 1995 E+Z (36/3), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 36, Nr. 3, 1995 E+Z (36/5), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 36, Nr. 5/6, 1995 E+Z (36/7), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 36, Nr. 7, 1995 E+Z (36/8), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 36, Nr. 8, 1995 E+Z (36/9), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 36, Nr. 9, 1995 E+Z (36/10), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 36, Nr. 10, 1995 E+Z (36/11), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 36, Nr. 11, 1995 E+Z (36/12), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 36, Nr. 12, 1995 E+Z (37/2), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 37, Nr. 2, 1996 E+Z (37/3), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 37, Nr. 3, 1996 E+Z (37/4), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 37, Nr. 4, 1996 E+Z (37/5), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 37, Nr. 5/6, 1996 E+Z (37/12), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 37, Nr. 12, 1996 E+Z (38/1), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 38, Nr. 1, 1997 76

E+Z (38/4), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 38, Nr. 4, 1997 E+Z (38/10), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 38, Nr. 10, 1997 E+Z (39/2), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 39, Nr. 2, 1998 E+Z (39/4), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 39, Nr. 4, 1998 E+Z (39/11), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 39, Nr. 11, 1998 E+Z (39/12), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 39, Nr. 12, 1998 E+Z (40/4), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 40, Nr. 4, 1999 E+Z (40/6), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 40, Nr. 6, 1999 E+Z (40/7), Deutsche Stiftung für Entwicklungsländer, Jahrgang 40, Nr. 7/8, 1999 E+Z (57/2), Engagement Global, e-Paper, Jahrgang 57, Nr. 2, 2016

9.2. Secondary Sources

Abrahamsen, Rita (2000). Disciplining Democracy: Development Discourse and Good Governance in Africa. London and New York: Zed Books.

Adam, Erfried (2012). Vom mühsamen Geschäft der Demokratieförderung: Die internationale Entwicklungszusammenarbeit der Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. Vol. 2 In: Bungarten, Pia; Dowe, Dieter; Kerbusch, Ernst J.; Optenhögel, Uwe (Eds.). Geschichte der internationalen Arbeit der Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. Bonn: Dietz.

Addink, Henk (2019). Good Governance: Concept and Context. Oxford et al.: Oxford University Press.

Anders, Gerhard (2009). In the Shadow of Good Governance: An Ethnography of Civil Service Reform in Africa. Brill: Afrika-Studiecentrum Series.

Axtmann, Roland (2007). The Globalisation of Democracy: The Right to Democratic Governance, in Axtmann, Roland (Ed.). Democracy. Problems and Perspectives, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Ayers, Alison J. (2006). Demystifying Democratisation: The Global Constitution of (Neo)Liberal Polities in Africa, Third World Quarterly, Vol. 27 (2): 321-338.

Ayers, Alison J. & Saad-Filho, Alfredo (2014). Democracy against Neoliberalism: Paradoxes, Limitations, Transcendence. Critical Sociology, Vol. 41(4-5): 597–618.

Barkan, Joel D. (2012). Democracy Assistance: What Recipients Think. Journal of Democracy, Vol. 23(1): 129-137.

Bates, Robert, H. (2018). Political Development in Lancaster, Carol & van de Walle, Nicolas (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of the Politics of Development, Oxford et al.: Oxford University Press, 65-73.

Bhaskar, Roy; Lawson, Tony (1998). Introduction: Basic Texts and Developments. In Archer, Margaret; Bhaskar, Roy; Collier, Andrew; Lawson; Tony; Norrie, Alan (Eds.). Critical Realism: Essential Readings. Oxon: Routledge, 3-15.

Bindra, Sukhwant S. (2018). Foreign Aid and Foreign Policy, World Affairs: The Journal of International Issues, Vol. 22(3): 126-141.

Blatter, Joachim K.; Langer, Phil C.; Wagemann, Claudius (2018). Qualitative Methoden in der Politikwissenschaft: Eine Einführung, Wiesbaden: Springer.

Bohnet, Michael (2019). Geschichte der deutschen Entwicklungspolitik: Strategien, Innenansicht, Erfolge, Misserfolge, Zeitzeugen, Herausforderungen. 2nd edition. München: UVK.

Booz, Rüdiger M. (1995). "Hallsteinzeit": deutsche Außenpolitik 1955 – 1972. Bouvier.

Bridoux, Jeff & Kurki, Milja (2014). Democracy Promotion: A Critical Introduction. Interventions. London: Routledge.

Brown, Stephen (2005). Foreign Aid and Democracy Promotion: Lessons from Africa. The European Journal of Development Research, Vol. 17(2): 179–198.

Brown, Stephen (2013). Ein steiniger Weg: Herausforderungen externer Demokratieförderung. Global Governance Spotlight, 2/2013. Bonn: Stiftung Entwicklung und Frieden (SEF).

Brunner, José & Meyer, Kristina (2020). Reputation, Integration, Diskretion: Wiedergutmachung und Demokratisierung in der frühen Bundesrepublik. In Schanetzky, Tim et al. (Ed.). Demokratisierung der Deutschen. Errungenschaften und Anfechtungen eines Projektes. Göttingen: Wallstein, 87- 101.

Bryman, A. (2012). Social Research Methods. 4th edition. Oxford et al.: Oxford University Press.

Burnell, Peter (2007). Does International Democracy Promotion Work? Discussion Paper. 17/2007. Bonn: Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE).

Burmeier, Patrick (2012). Demokratieförderung der Europäischen Union an der Côte d'Ivoire: Probleme, Ansätze und (falsche) Anknüpfungspunkte. Budapest: Andrássy Beiträge der Fakultät für Internationale Beziehungen.

Carothers, Thomas (2007). A Quarter-Century of Promoting Democracy. Journal of Democracy, Vol. 18(4): 112-126.

Carothers, Thomas (2009). Democracy Assistance: Political vs. Developmental? Journal of Democracy, Vol. 20(1): 5-19.

Catón, Matthias & Steltemeier, Rolf (2008). Deutsche Akteure in der internationalen Politikberatung: Funktionsmöglichkeiten und -grenzen bei Demokratisierung und Institutionenaufbau, Zeitschrift für Politikberatung (ZPB)/Policy Advice and Political Consulting, Vol. 1(3/4): 383-399.

Cheibub, José Antonio & Vreeland, James Raymond (2018). Modernization Theory: Does Economic Development Cause Democratization? In Lancaster, Carol; Walle, van de, Nicolas (Eds.). The Oxford Handbook of the Politics of Development. Oxford et al.: Oxford University Press, 4-22.

Coleman, James S. (1960). Conclusion: The Political Systems of the Developing Areas. In Almond, Gabriel A.; Coleman, James S. (Eds.). The Politics of the Developing Areas. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 532-576.

Corning, Peter A.; Hines, Jr., Samuel M.; Chilcote, Ronald H.; Packenham, Robert A.; Riggs, Fred W. (1988). Political Development and Political Evolution. Politics and the Life Sciences, Vol. 6(2): 141- 172.

Cowen, M.P. & Shenton R.W. (1995). Doctrines of Development. London: Routledge.

Cranenburgh, Oda van (2019). Democracy Promotion in Africa. In Cheeseman N. (Ed.). Oxford Encyclopedia of African Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1-21.

Cranenburgh, Oda van (2011). Democracy Promotion in Africa: The Institutional Context. Democratization, Vol. 18(2): 443-461.

Crawford, Gordon (2007). The EU and Democracy Promotion in Africa: High on Rhetoric, Low on Delivery? In Mold, Andrew (Ed.). EU Development Policy in a Changing World. Challenges for the 21st Century. Amsterdam University Press, 169-197.

Dahl, Robert A. (1971). Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. New Haven and London Yale: University Press.

Demmers, Jolle; Fernández Jilberto, Alex E.; Hogenboom, Barbara (2004). Good Governance and Democracy in a World of Neoliberal Regimes. In Demmers, Jolle; Fernández Jilberto, Alex E.; Hogenboom, Barbara (Eds.). Good Governance in the Era of Global Neoliberalism Conflict and Depolitisation in Latin America, Eastern Europe, Asia and Africa. 1-32.

Desai, Radhika (2017). Theories of Development, In Haslam, Paul A.; Schafer, Jessica; Beaudet, Pierre (Eds.). Introduction to International Development: Approaches, Actors, Issues, and Practices. 3rd edition. Oxford et al.: Oxford University Press. 43-64.

Doornbos, Martin R. (2004). ‘Good Governance’: The Pliability of a Policy Concept. TRAMES. 8(58/53): 372-387.

Easton, David (1965). A Systems Analysis of Political Life. New York et al. John Wiley & Sons.

Engel, Ulf (2000). Die Afrikapolitik der Bundesrepublik Deutschland 1949 – 1999: Rollen und Indentitäten. Hamburg: Lit.

Eppler, Erhard (1971). Weniger Zeit für die Dritte Welt. Stuttgart et al.: W. Kohlhammer.

Erhard, Ludwig (1957). Wohlstand für alle. Düsseldorf: Econ.

Escobar, Arturo (1995). Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Eucken, Walter (2004). Grundsätze der Wirtschaftspolitik. Stuttgart: UTB.

Everatt, David (2019). Governance: Notes Towards a Resurrection. In Everatt, David (Ed.). Governance and the Postcolony: Views from Africa. Wits University Press. 19-42.

Everett, Annie (2015). The Genesis of the Sonderweg. International Social Science Review, Vol. 91(2): 1-42.

Foucault, Michel (1973). Archäologie des Wissens, 1st edition. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Faust, Jörg (2016). Entwicklungstheorien und Entwicklungspolitik. In Lauth, Hans-Joachim & Wagner, Christian (Eds.). Politikwissenschaft. Eine Einführung. 8th revised edition. Paderborn: Ferdinand Schöningh. 322-351.

Feilzer, Martina Yvonne (2010). Doing Mixed Methods Research Pragmatically: Implications for the Rediscovery of Pragmatism as a Research Paradigm, Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol. 4(1): 6–16.

Ferguson, James (1994 [1990]). The Anti-Politics Machine: “Development”, Depoliticisation and Bureaucratic Power in Lesotho, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fischer, Karin; Hauck, Gerhard; Boatcă, Manuela (2016). Was ist Entwicklungsforschung? Entstehung, Gegenstand und Arbeitsweise einer jungen Disziplin. In Fischer, Karin; Hauck, Gerhard; Boatcă, Manuela (Eds.). Handbuch Entwicklungsforschung. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

Fleetwood, Steve (2014). Bhaskar and Critical Realism. In Adler, Paul; du Gay, Paul; Morgan, Glenn; Reed, Mike (Eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Sociology, Social Theory, and Organization Studies: Contemporary Currents. Oxford et al.: Oxford University Press.

Fritz, Verena & Menocal, Alina Rocha (2007). Developmental States in the New Millennium: Concepts and Challenges for a New Aid Agenda. Development Policy Review, Vol. 25(5): 531-552.

Fukuyama, Francis (2011). The Origins of Political Order: From Prehuman Times to the French Revolution. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Fukuyama, Francis (1989). The End of History? The National Interest, Vol. 16: 3-18.

Gerring, John; Thacker, Strom C.; Alfaro, Rodrigo (2012). Democracy and Human Development. The Journal of Politics, Vol. 74 (1): 1-17.

Gieler, Wolfgang (2008). Einleitung, in Gieler, Wolfgang (Ed.). Deutsche Entwicklungsminister von 1961-2008: Biographie, Konzeptionen und Einfluss auf nationale und internationale Entwicklungspolitik. Bonn: Scientia Bonnensis. 9-11.

Gould, Jeremy (2004). Introducing Aidnography. In Marcussen, Henrik S & Gould, Jeremy (Ed.). Ethnographies of Aid: Exploring Development Texts and Encounters. Roskilde Universitet. 1-14.

Haan, Arjan de (2009). How the Aid Industry Works: An Introduction to International Development. Boulder et al.: Lynne Rienner.

Haass, Felix (2017). Demokratie lässt sich nicht kaufen: Friedenskonsolidierung in Afrika. GIGA Focus Afrika, Vol. 5: 1-12.

Hackenesch, Christine (2019). Aid, Political Conditionality, and other International Efforts to Support Democracy in Africa. In Cheeseman, Nic (Ed.). Oxford Research Encyclopaedia of Politics. Oxford et al.: Oxford University Press. 1-18.

Hackenesch, Christine (2015). Not as Bad as it Seems. EU and US Democracy Promotion Faces China in Africa. Democratization, Vol. 22(3): 419-437.

Hajer, Maarten (2006). Doing Discourse Analysis: Coalitions, Practices, Meaning.

Nederlandse, Geografische Studies 344, Words Matter in Policy and Planning. Discourse Theory and Method in the Social Sciences: 65-76.

Harnisch, Sebastian & Schmidt, Siegmar (2012). Auf Augenhöhe: 50 Jahre Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung. Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung (Ed.). Baden-Baden: Nomos.

Harriss, John (2001). Depoliticizing Development: The World Bank and Social Capital. New Dehli: Leftword Books.

Hartmann, Christoph (2016). Entwicklungspolitik: In der Vergleichenden Politikwissenschaft. in Lauth, Hans-Joachim; Kneuer, Marianne; Pickel, Gert (Eds.). Handbuch Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. 815-824.

Hearn, Julie (2000). Aiding Democracy? Donors and Civil Society in South Africa. Third World Quarterly, Vol. 21(5): 815-830.

Hellmann, Gunther (2002). Der “deutsche Weg”: Eine außenpolitische Gratwanderung, Internationale Politik, Vol. 9: 1-8.

Hickey, S. (2005). “The Politics of Staying Poor: Exploring the Political Space for Poverty Reduction in Uganda”. World Development, Vol. 33(6): 995-1009.

Hobson, Christopher (2015). Democracy Promotion. In Isakhan, Benjamin & Stockwell, Stephen (Eds.). The Edinburgh Companion to the History of Democracy: From Pre-history to Future Possibilities. Hampshire and New York: Edinburgh University Press. 455-466.

Huber, Daniela (2015). Democracy Promotion and Foreign Policy Identity and Interests in US, EU and Non-Western Democracies. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Huntington, Samuel P. (1965). Political Development and Political Decay. World Politics, Vol. 17(3): 386-430.

Jahn, Beate (2012). Rethinking democracy promotion. Review of International Studies, Vol. 38: 685-705.

Jaipal-Jamani, K. (2014). Assessing the Validity of Discourse Analysis: Transdisciplinary Convergence. Cult Stud of Sci Educ, Vol. 9: 801–807.

Jakupec, Victor (2018). Development Aid: Populism and the End of the Neoliberal Agenda. Cham: Springer.

Jäger, Siegfried (2015). Kritische Diskursanalyse: Eine Einführung. 7th edition. Münster: Unrast.

Jourde. Cédric (2017). Democracy. In Haslam, Paul A.; Schafer, Jessica; Beaudet, Pierre (ed.). Introduction to International Development: Approaches, Actors, Issues, and Practices. 3rd edition. Oxford et al.: Oxford University Press. 302- 319.

Kamp, Mathias (2017). Young Continent, Old Rulers What Does the Future Hold for Democracy in Africa? In Wahlers, Gerhard (Ed.). The Fight for Democracy, Konrad Adenauer Stiftung 53-67.

Kebschull, Dietrich; Fasbender, Karl; Naini, Ahmad (1976). Entwicklungspolitik: Eine Einführung. 3rd edition. Düsseldorf: Bertelsmann.

Keller, Reiner (2006). Analysing Discourse. An Approach from the Sociology of Knowledge. Historical Social Research/Historische Sozialforschung, Vol. 31(2): 223-242.

Kevenhörster, Paul & Boom, Dirk van den (2009). Entwicklungspolitik. Wiesbaden; Springer VS.

Kihl, Young W. (1967). The Stages of Political Development. By A. F. K. Organski. (New York: Alfred A Knopf, 1965. Pp. xiii, 229.). American Political Science Review, Vol. 61(4): 1113.

Kirste, Knut & Maull, Hanns W. (1996). Zivilmacht und Rollentheorie, Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen, Vol. 3(2): 283-312.

Kloss-Tullius, Sabine (2003). Good Governance und Korruption in Kenia: Über den Versuch der Umsetzung von Good Governance in der Praxis. In Kaiser, Markus (Ed.). Weltwissen: Entwicklungszusammenarbeit in der Weltgesellschaft. Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag. 311-342.

Kolev, Stefan (2015). Ordoliberalism and the Austrian School. In Coyne, Christopher J.; Boettke, Peter (Eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Austrian Economics. Oxford et al.: Oxford University Press. 420-444.

Kurer, Oskar (2017). Entwicklungspolitik heute: Lassen sich Wohlstand und Wachstum planen? Wiesbaden: Springer.

Kurki, Milja (2018). The Contested Ethics of Democracy Promotion. In Brown, Chris & Eckersley, Robyn (Eds.). The Oxford Handbook of International Political Theory. Oxford et al.: Oxford University Press. 1-14.

La Palombara, Joseph (1967). An Overview of Bureaucracy and Political Development. In La Palombara, Joseph (Ed.). Bureaucracy and Political Development. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 3-33.

Lancaster, Carol (2007). Foreign Aid: Diplomacy, Development, Domestic Politics. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.

Lazarus, Joel (2012). Party Aid: Democracy Promotion's 'New Frontier' or its Final Frontier? Third World Quarterly, Vol. 33(10): 1925-1943.

Lazarus, Joel (2013). Democracy or Good Governance? Globalization, Transnational Capital, and Georgia's Neo-liberal Revolution. Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding, Vol. 7(3): 259-286.

Leftwich, Adrian (1993). Governance, Democracy and Development in the Third World. Third World Quarterly, Democratisation in the Third World, Vol. 14(3): 605-624.

Lewis, David (2019). ‘Big D’ and ‘little d’: Two Types of Twenty-first Century Development? Third World Quarterly, Vol. 40(11): 1957-1975.

Lipset, Seymour Martin (1959). Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy. The American Political Science Review, Vol. 53(1): 69-105.

Lloyd, Lindsay (2010). European Approaches to Democracy Promotion, International Journal, Vol. 65(3): 547-559.

Lund, C. (2014). Of What is This a Case? Analytical Movements in Qualitative Social Science Research. Human Organization, Vol. 73(3): 224-234.

Mingers, John (2006). Realising Systems Thinking. Knowledge and Action in Management Science. Boston: Springer.

Mishra, N. (2011). Unravelling Governance Networks in Development Projects: Depoliticization as an Analytical Framework. Environment and Urbanization ASIA, Vol. 2(2): 153-168.

Mkandawire, Thandike (2007). 'Good Governance': The Itinerary of an Idea. Development in Practice, Vol. 17(4/5): 679-681.

Mokoena, Dikeledi A. (2018). The Politics of Foreign Aid. In Oloruntoba, Samuel Ojo & Falola, Toyin (Eds.). The Palgrave Handbook of African Politics, Governance and Development. Palgrave Macmillan. 751-769.

Moore, Barrington Jr. (1966). Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy: Lord and Peasant in the Making of the Modern World. Harmondsworth et al.: Penguin Books.

Morgenthau, Hans (1962). A Political Theory of Foreign Aid. The American Political Science Review, Vol. 56 (2): 301-309.

Mosse, David (2013). The Anthropology of International Development. Annual Review of Anthropology, Vol. 42: 227–246.

Mosse, David (2005). Cultivating Development: An Ethnography of Aid Policy and Practice. London and Ann Arbor: Pluto Press.

Mudimbe, Valentin-Yves (1988). The Invention of Africa. Gnosis, Philosophy and the Order of Knowledge. Indiana University Press.

Muno, Wolfgang (2012). Good Governance und Entwicklung. Verfassung und Recht in Übersee/ Law and Politics in Africa, Asia and Latin America, Vol. 45(4): 394-411.

Nanda, Ved P. (2006). The "Good Governance" Concept Revisited. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Law, Society, and Democracy: Comparative Perspectives, Vol. 603: 269-283.

Narayan, Deepa; Chambers, Robert; Shah, Meera K.; Petesch, Patti (2000). Voices of the Poor: Crying Out for Change. Oxford et al.: Oxford University Press, World Bank.

Nielinger, Olaf (1998). Demokratie und Good Governance in Afrika: Internationale Demokratisierungshilfe als neues entwicklungspolitisches Paradigma? Hamburg: Lit.

Nuscheler, Franz (2009). Good Governance: Ein universelles Leitbild von Staatlichkeit und Entwicklung? Institut für Entwicklung und Frieden, INEF‐Report 96/2009, Duisburg: Universität Duisburg‐Essen.

Nuscheler, Franz (1996). Lern- und Arbeitsbuch Entwicklungspolitik. 4th edition. Bonn: Dietz.

Oloruntoba, Samuel Ojo; Falola, Toyin (2018). Introduction: Contextualizing the Debates on Politics, Governance and Development. In Oloruntoba, Samuel Ojo & Falola, Toyin (Eds.). The Palgrave Handbook of African Politics, Governance and Development, Palgrave Macmillan. 751-769.

Parker, Ian (1992). Discourse Dynamics. Critical analysis for social and individual psychology. Hove and New York. Routledge.

Pawson, Ray (2006). Evidence-Based Policy. A Realist Perspective. London et al.: Sage.

Pawson, Ray & Tilley, Nick (1997). Realistic Evaluation. London et al.: Sage.

Platter, Marc F. (1991). The Democratic Moment. Journal of Democracy, Vol. 2(4): 34-46.

Poppe, Annika E.; Leininger, Julia; Wolff, Jonas (2019a). Introduction: Negotiating the Promotion of Democracy. Democratization, Vol. 26(5): 759-776.

Poppe, Annika E.; Leininger, Julia; Wolff, Jonas (2019b). Beyond Contestation: Conceptualizing Negotiation in Democracy Promotion. Democratization, Vol. 26(5): 777-795.

Przeworski, Adam; Alvarez, Michael E.; Cheibub, José Antonio; Limongi, Fernando (2000). Democracy and Development: Political Institutions and Well-Being in the World, 1950–1990. Cambridge et al.: Cambrigde University Press.

Pye, Lucian W. (1965). The Concept of Political Development. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, New Nations: The Problem of Political Development, Vol. 358: 1-13.

Rapley, John (2007). Understanding Development: Theory and Practice in the Third World, 3rd Edition, Colorado et al.: Lynne Rienner.

Reed, Mike (2011). Critical Realism in Critical Management Studies. In Alvesson, Matts; Bridgman, Todd; Willmott, Hugh (ed.). The Oxford Handbook of Critical Management Studies, Oxford et al.: Oxford University Press. 53-75.

Resnick, Danielle (2018). Foreign Aid and Democratization in Developing Countries, in Lancaster, Carol & Walle, van de, Nicolas (Eds.). The Oxford Handbook of the Politics of Development. Oxford et al.: Oxford University Press. 410-428.

Robson, Colin; McCartan Kieran (2016). Approaches to Social Research. In C. Robson and K. McCartan (Eds.). Real World Research, 4th edition. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. 14-41.

Rokkan, Stein (1979). Die vergleichende Analyse der Staaten- und Nationenbildung: Modelle und Methoden. In Zapf, Wolfgang (Ed.). Theorien des sozialen Wandels. 4th edition. Königstein: Athenäum. 288-252.

Rostow, Walt W. (1971a). The Stages of Economic Growth. 2nd edition. Cambridge et al.: Cambridge University Press.

Rostow, Walt W. (1971b). Politics and the Stages of Growth. Cambridge et al.: Cambridge University Press.

Rothstein, Bo (2012). Good Governance. In Levi-Faur, David (Ed.). The Oxford Handbook of Governance. Oxford et al.: Oxford University Press. 143-154.

Rüland, Jürgen & Werz, Nikolaus (2002). Germany’s Hesitant Role in Promoting Democracy. In Schraeder, Peter J. (Ed.). Exporting Democracy: Rhetoric Vs. Reality. Lynne Rienner. 73-89.

Ruschemeyer, Dietrich; Stephens, Evelyne H.; Stephens, John D. (1992). Capitalist Development and Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Saldaña, Johnny (2012). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. London: Sage.

Salmon, Pierre (2019). Is Democracy Exportable? In Congleton, Roger D.; Grofman, Bernard; Voigt, Stefan (Eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Public Choice. Volume 2. Oxford et al.: Oxford University Press.

Schraeder, Peter J. (2002). Making the World Safe for Democracy? In Schraeder, Peter J. (Ed.). Exporting Democracy: Rhetoric Vs. Reality. Lynne Rienner. 217-269.

Scott, James M. (1999). Transnationalizing Democracy Promotion: The Role of Western Political Foundations and Think‐Tanks. Democratization, Vol. 6(3): 146-170.

Sen, Amartya (1999). Development as Freedom. Oxford et al.: Oxford University Press.

Seng Tan, Bann (2021). International Aid and Democracy Promotion: Liberalization at the Margins, Oxon and New York: Routledge.

Smith, B.C. (2003). Understanding Third World Politics. Theories of Political Change and Development. 2nd edition. Palgrave Macmillan: Hampshire and New York.

Smith, Tony (1994). America’s Mission: The United States and the Worldwide Struggle for Democracy in the Twentieth Century. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Spanger, Hans-Joachim & Wolff, Jonas (2003). Demokratieförderung und Armutsbekämpfung im Licht entwicklungspolitischer Konjunkturen. In Spanger, Hans-Joachim; Wolff, Jonas (Ed.). Armutsreduzierung durch Demokratisierung? PRSP: Chance und Widersprüche einer neuen entwicklungspolitischen Strategie, Peace Research Institute Frankfurt. 6-18.

Stockmann, Reinhard; Menzel, Ulrich; Nuscheler, Franz (2016). Entwicklungspolitik. Theorien, Probleme, Strategien, 2nd edition, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin et al.

Sundaram, Jomo Kwame & Chowdhury, Anis (2012). "Introduction: Governance and development." In Sundaram, Jomo Kwame & Chowdhury, Anis (Eds.). Is Good Governance Good for Development? London: Bloomsbury Academic. 1-28.

Tetzlaff, Rainer & Jakobeit, Cord (2005). Das nachkoloniale Afrika: Politik – Wirtschaft – Gesellschaft. Wiesbaden: VS.

Thesing, Josef (1997). Politische Stiftungen in der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit am Beispiel der Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung. Die Friedens-Warte, Vol. 72(2): 173-188.

Tolstrup, Jakob (2013). When can External Actors Influence Democratization? Leverage, Linkages, and Gatekeeper Elites, Democratization, Vol. 20(4): 716-742.

Uvin, Peter (2007). From the Right to Development to the Rights-Based Approach: How 'Human Rights' Entered Development, Development in Practice, Vol. 17(4/5): 597-606.

Webb, David (2012). Foucault’s Archaeology: Science and Transformation. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Weißer, Ulfried (2017). Erfolgsmodell Soziale Marktwirtschaft: Das System, die Akteure und ihre Interessen verstehen. Wiesbaden: Springer.

Williams, David (2012). International Development and Global Politics: History, Theory and Practice. Oxon and New York: Routledge.

Wolff, Jonas (2014). From the Unity of Goodness to Conflicting Objectives: The Inherent Tensions in the External Promotion of Democracy and Civil Society. In Beichelt, Timm; Hahn, Irene; Schimmelfennig, Frank; Worschech, Susann (Eds.). Civil Society and Democracy Promotion: Challenges to Democracy in the 21st Century. Hampshire & New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 67-85.

Youngs, Richard (2019). Overlooked Non-Western Democracy Support: Upholding Democracy in a Post-Western Order, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 2-4.

Zanger, Sabine C. (2000). Good Governance and European Aid: The Impact of Political Conditionality. European Union Politics, Vol. 1(3): 293-317.

Ziai, Aram (2016). Development Discourse and Global History. From Colonialism to the Sustainable Development Goals, Oxon: Routledge.

Appendices Appendix 1: Data Collection Procedure Data Collection Protocol Number of Phase Date Notes Documents* 1 06.09.2020 Bundestagsdebatten: parliamentary debates on (political) development aid, Search word 138 07.09.2020 “Entwicklungshilfe“ at https://pdok.bundestag.de/ (4583 results; 23.09.2020) 404 10.09.2020 Until 1974 301 Parliamentary 20.09.2020 Until 1987 1.114 Protocols 21.09.2020 Until 1992 446 22.09.2020 Until page 15 1.481 23.09.2020 705 2 28.09.2020 Publication of the Federal Ministry of economic Cooperation and Development: https://www.bmz.de/de/mediathek/publikationen/index.html Mail to AWZ, BMZ, 155 28.09.2020 assorting of theoretical articles on computer 01.10.2020 GIZ Corporate & Evaluation reports + Akzente 31

Publications by Federal Government & mail request to BMZ, GIZ, Publications by 02.10.2020 KAS international, IATI-list of BMZ 70

03.10.2020 Publications by KAS-African regional offices 34

Policy Papers, 06.10.2020 GIZ Akzente 2, FES, hss, FNF, hbs, RLS 197 Annual Reports, 07.10.2020 Request to hbs, FNF, hss, FES, KAS Information 14.10.2020 Jahresberichte BMZ Publications 16.10.2020 Bericht zur Entwicklungspolitik

17.10.2020 „Bericht zur Entwicklungspolitik“ auf https://pdok.bundestag.de/ 15 23.10.2020 Interview El-Noshokaty 27.10.2020 E+Z 1960s 190 02.11.2020 E+Z 1970s 786 03.11.2020 E+Z 1980s, FNF Jahresberichte 806 04.11.2020 E+Z 1990s, Beginning of Bundestag Analysis 1950s 1.253

3 23.10.2020, 8am 1 (MEZ) aid worker, Tanzania (Zoom) 06.11.2020, 1 10am (MEZ) aid worker, South Africa (Zoom) 19.01.2021, 1 4pm (MEZ) aid worker, Benin (Skype) 25.01.2021, 1 12pm (MEZ) aid worker, Côte d'Ivoire (Zoom) 03.02.2021, Interviews 1 2pm (MEZ) aid worker, Uganda (Zoom) 11.02.2021, 1 11am (MEZ) scholar, Germany (phone) 25.02.2021, 1 17am (MEZ) scholar, Germany (phone) 19.03.2021, 1 14am (MEZ) aid worker, Uganda (MS Teams) * only digitalised documents

Appendix 2: Coding Books Gesellschaftspolitisches Leitbild (socio- Code Book 1. Parliamentary Protocols political model) 6 Gesellschaftssystem (societal system) 14 1st development aid debate 1 Gesund (healthy) 8 1st mentioning of development aid in BT 2 Gewerkschaften (trade unions) 3 Abrüstung (disarmament) 15 Gute Regierungsführung (good Afrikanische Regierungen (African governance) 126 governments) 167 Außenpolitik/Entwicklungspolitik Hallstein-Doktrin (Hallstein-doctrine) 8 (foreign/development policy) 26 Handwerk (craft) 2 Beratungshilfe (consultancy assistance) 15 Institutionen (institutions) 19 Bildungshilfe (educational assistance) 18 Kalter Krieg (cold war) 34 Bürger (citizens) 16 Kolonialismus (colonialism) 25 Bürgerliche Freiheitsrechte (civic liberties) 9 Korruption (corruption) 63 Bürokratieabbau (bureaucracy reduction) 24 Kulturelle Leitbilder (cultural model) 1 Christentum (Christianity) 1 Kulturpolitik (cultural policy) 14 DDR Entwicklungspolitik (GDR Liberal (liberal) 9 development policy) 2 Liberale Tradition (liberal tradition) 1 Demokratie (democracy) 273 Deutsche Demokratisierung (German Management (management) 23 democratisation) 4 Mangel staatlcher Strukturen (lack of Deutschland in der Welt (Germany in the state structures) 26 world) 19 Marshallplan (Marshall-plan) 19 Deutschland und Afrika (Germany and Max Weber 2 Africa) 21 Medien (media) 15 Deutschtum (Germanness) 19 Meinungsfreiheit (freedom of speech) 6 Dezentraliisierung (decentralisation) 34 Menschenrechte (human rights) 294 Empowerment (empowerment) 1 Menschenwürde (human dignity) 18 Entwicklung des Menschen (human development) 5 Mittelstand (mittel stand/mid tier) 4 Entwicklungsbegriff (development Modernisierung (modernisation) 2 concept) 4 nicht-ökonomische Hilfe (non economical Entwicklungshelfende (aid worker) 10 aid) 11 Entwicklungshilfe (development aid) 5 NS Geschichte (NS history) 4 Entwicklungstufen (stages of Ordnung (order) 80 development) 4 Ordoliberalismus (ordoliberalism) 3 Erfahrungen (experiences) 2 Parlamentarismus (parliamentarianism) 17 Etatismus (statism) 2 Parteinahe Stiftungen (party-affiliated Europäische Integration (European foundations) 10 integration) 1 Partizipation (participation) 63 Fach- und Führungskräfte (specialists & leaders) 13 Partnerschaft (partnership) 24 Feministische Kritik (feminist critique) 12 Pluralistismus (pluralism) 9 Politisch Verantwortliche (political Fluchtursachen (causes of flight) 5 leaders) 17 Föderalismus (federalism) 1 Politisch wirksam (politically effective) 7 Freiheit (freedom) 75 Politische Bildung (political education) 1 Frieden (peace) 135 Politische Entwicklung (political geistiger Führerschaft (spiritual development) 16 leadership) 1 Politische Entwicklungshilfe (political Genossenschaften (cooperatives) 4 development aid) 49 Politische Entwicklungsprobleme (political Gerechtigkeit (justice) 24 developmental problems) 27 Gesellschaftlche Verantwortung (societal responsibility) 1 Politische Gründe (political reasons) 24 Gesellschaftspolitische Bildung (socio- Politische Interessen (political interest) 5 political education) 3

Politische Konditionalität (political Verwaltungsförderung (administration conditionality) 96 aid) 58 Politische Rechte (political rights) 1 Vorbild - Leitbild (model) 7 Politische Stabilisierung (political Wiedervereinigung (reunification) 2 stabilisation) 29 Wilhelm Röpke 2 Politische Struktur (political structure) 7 politischen Souveränität (political Willen zum Fortschritt (will to progress) 2 sovereignty) 1 Wirtschaftshilfen (economic aid) 3 Politisierung (politicisation) 2 Wirtschaftssystem und Staat (economic system and state) 15 Pressefreiheit (press freedom) 5 Zivilgesellschaft (civil society) 53 Private (nicht staatliche) Hilfe (private aid) 1 Rahmenbedingungen (framework Zivilisatorisch (civilising) 6 conditions) 93 Recht (law, right, justice) 22 Rechtssicherheit (legal certainty) 41 Code Book 2. Policy Papers, et al. Rechtsstaatlichkeit (the rule of law) 85 Regierungsberatung (government "Autozentrierte Entwicklung" 1 consultation) 9 "Counterpart" 3 Regierungsystem (governmental system) 4 "neo-strukturellen Ansatz" 1 Schlechte Regierungsführung (bad Abrüstung (disarmament) 8 governance) 64 Afrikanische Regierungen (African Schule der Nation (school of the nation) 1 governments) 258 Selbshilfe (self-help) 81 Amartya Sen 1 Selbstbestimmung (home rule) 45 Außenpolitik/Entwicklungspolitik (foreign/development policy) 8 Sicherheit (security) 17 Beratung (consultations) 23 Solidarität (solidarity) 12 Bildungshilfe (educational assistance) 19 Souveränität (sovereignty) 7 Bürgerliche Freiheit (civic liberties) 11 Sozialdemokratie (social democracy) 4 Soziale Marktwirtschaft (social market Bürokratieabbau (bureaucracy reduction) 11 economy) 77 Demokratie (democracy) 349 Soziale Ordnung (social order) 14 Deutschland und Afrika (Germany and Africa) 28 Sozialer Fortschritt (social progress) 35 Deutschtum (Germanness) 51 Sportförderung (sports promotion) 3 Dezentralisierung (decentralisation) 78 Staat (state) 26 Empowerment (empowerment) 5 Staatliche Einheit (state unity) 2 staatlicher Institutionen (state Entstaaatlichung (denationalisation) 16 institutions) 2 Entwicklungshelfende (aid worker) 1 Staatsaufbau (state-building) 26 Europäische Werte (European values) 32 staatsbürgerliche Informationen (civic Fach- und Führungskräfte (specialists & informations) 5 leaders) 13 Staatstragende Mittelschicht (state- Fluchtursachen (causes of flight) 6 bearing middle class) 2 Föderalismus (federalism) 6 Steuerwesen (tax system) 1 Strukturpolitische Maßnahmen Freie Wahlen (free elections) 5 (structural policy measures) 14 Freiheit (freedom) 26 System Export 85 Frieden (peace) 56 Technische Kooperation (technical Genossenschaften (cooperatives) 15 cooperation) 19 Gerechtigkeit (justice) 18 To be examined 50 Gesellschaftliche Entwicklungsfaktoren Transparenz (transparency) 10 (social development factors) 5 Überlegenheit (superiority) 2 Gesellschaftspolitisch (socio-political) 12 Unabhängigkeit (independence) 26 Gesellschaftspolitische Bildung (societal education) 4 Unternehmertum (entrepreneurship) 2 Gesund (healthy) 1 Verfassung (constitution) 4 Gewaltenteilung (separation of powers) 9 90

Gewerkschaften (trade unions) 7 Politische Struktur (political structure) 6 Governance 61 Politische Ursachen für Armut (political Gute Regierungsführung (good reasons for poverty) 9 governance) 240 Pressefreiheit - Meinungsfreiheit (freedom of press and speech) 22 Institutionen (institutions) 91 Rahmenbedingungen (framework Kalter Krieg (cold war) 14 conditions) 150 Kolonialismus (colonialism) 17 Rechtssicherheit (legal certainty) 25 Korruption (corruption) 67 Rechtsstaatlichkeit (the rule of law) 132 Kulturpolitik (cultural policy) 10 Regierung (government) 16 Laizismus (laicism) 3 Regierungssystem - Herrschaftsordnung (governmental system) 21 Leistungsfähigkeit (capacity) 11 Schlechte Regierungsführung (bad Liberalismus (liberalism) 12 governanve) 86 Management (management) 54 Selbstbestimmung - Souveränität (home rule) 49 Marshallplan (Marshall-plan) 9 Selbsthilfe (self-help) 85 Medien (media) 25 Sicherheit (security) 18 Mehrparteiensystem (multi-party system) 15 Soziale Marktwirtschaft (social market Menschenrechte (human rights) 184 economy) 107 Menschenwürde (human dignity) 17 Sozialer Fortschritt (social progress) 10 Mittelstand (mittel stand/mid tier) 7 Sportförderung (sport promotion) 10 Modernisierung (modernisation) 8 Staatsaufbau (statebuilding) 58 Ordnung (order) 58 Strukturpolitik (structural policy) 3 Ordoliberalismus (ordoliberalism) 23 System Export 142 Parlamentarismus (parliamentarism) 14 Technische Zusammenarbeit (technical cooperation) 16 Parteien (parties) 7 Parteinahe Stiftungen (party-affiliated To be examined 55 foundations) 24 Transparenz (transparency) 30 Partizipation (participation) 122 Verfassung (constitution) 10 Partnerschaft (partnership) 7 Verwaltungsförderung (administration aid) 189 Pluralismus (pluralism) 13 Vorbilder - Leitbilder (model) 32 Politische Bildung (political education) 1 Politische Entwicklung (political Walter Eucken 7 development) 23 Zivilgesellschaft (civil society) 86 Politische Entwicklungspolitik (political Zivilisatorisch (civilising) 7 developmental policy) 39 Politische Entwicklungsprobleme (political developmental problems) 28 Politische Konditionalität (political conditionality) 43 Politische Stabilität (political stabilisation) 26

Appendix 3: Interview Questionnaire

Interview Guidelines and Semi-Structured Questionnaire

1. Introduction 1.1. Greetings and Introduction to the Interview Context (UvA, Master’s Programme, Research Focus) 1.2. Question of Citation and Transparency 1.3. Consent to the recording of the session 2. Professional Background of the Interviewee 2.1. What is your professional background? 2.2. How did you end up at your position? 3. Current Position and Field of Activities 3.1. What is your current position? 3.2. How would you describe the role of your organisation for German democracy promotion abroad? 3.3. What activities regarding democracy promotion are you planning and implementing? 4. Understanding of Democracy Promotion 4.1. How does a project for democracy promotion look like? 4.2. What would you say is the most important aspect of German democracy promotion abroad? 4.3. What experience and expertise can Germans offer the country? 5. Own Understanding of Democracy or Good Governance 5.1. Which elements would you consider essential for democracy promotion? 5.2. Would you say that there is something particular German about your idea of democracy? 5.3. Do you find yourself comparing the democracy situation in your country context with Germany? 6. Concluding remarks