EUROPE in the WORLD the Future of the European Financial Architecture for Development
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Council of the European Union General Secretariat EUROPE IN THE WORLD The future of the European financial architecture for development An independent report by the High-Level Group of Wise Persons on the European financial architecture for development EUROPE IN THE WORLD The future of the European financial architecture for development An independent report by the High-Level Group of Wise Persons on the European financial architecture for development _______ October 2019 Thomas WIESER, Chair José Antonio ALONSO Monique BARBUT Erik BERGLÖF Jacek DOMINIK Nanno KLEITERP Norbert KLOPPENBURG Franco PASSACANTANDO Susan ULBÆK SECRETARIAT OF THE WISE PERSONS GROUP General Secretariat of the Council of the EU Economic and Financial Affairs Carsten Pillath, Director General Olaf Prüßmann, Acting Director Soledad Bernabe Casado Francesco Di Comite Kornelia Kozovska Administrative support was kindly provided by Susanne Lindström and Sophie Rugurika. CONTACT: Rue de la Loi 175 - B-1048 Brussels, Belgium E-mail: [email protected] Contents Executive summary ....................................................................................................... 3 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 6 2. Global challenges and the EU's development policy goals ................................ 8 3. Requirements for a system that delivers ........................................................... 12 4. Overview of the existing European system ....................................................... 16 4.1 Functional mapping of the current system .............................................................................. 16 4.2 Strengths and weaknesses .............................................................................................................. 19 4.3 Systemic gaps ...................................................................................................................................... 23 5. Options for improvement and way forward ...................................................... 26 5.1 Immediate steps to take .................................................................................................................. 26 5.2 Suggested institutional changes .................................................................................................. 29 5.3 The way forward ................................................................................................................................. 34 References .................................................................................................................... 36 Abbreviations .............................................................................................................. 37 Annex 1. Tasks and mandate of the Wise Persons Group ...................................... 38 Annex 2. Members of the Wise Persons Group ....................................................... 39 Annex 3. List of consulted parties and inputs received .......................................... 42 Annex 4. Overview of the main European development financing actors .......... 43 Annex 5. List of European Development Finance Institutions and National Development Banks .................................................................................................... 50 1 2 Executive summary The European Union (EU) and its Members States have historically been the largest development donors in the world, contributing to improvements in poverty reduction, decreasing child mortality and higher life expectancy around the globe. But the fight against poverty and inequalities is not yet won, and getting closer to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) requires further attention and financial resources. Climate change is without doubt the single most important global challenge. It has an increasingly large impact on communities, especially in developing countries, due to geographical vulnerability, a lesser ability to cope and political fragilities. Climate change also threatens biodiversity, causes natural resource degradation and depletion, and could lead to a higher probability of pandemics and forced dislocation. It is clear that Europe needs to engage more in Africa as well as to step up its efforts to address climate change, both in terms of adaptation and mitigation. A renewed focus and additional development finance resources will be necessary to support inclusive growth and job creation in Africa as well as a low-carbon transition. The European development financial architecture plays an important global role, but is also complex, composed of a multiplicity of actors at EU and national levels. There are overlaps, gaps and inefficiencies, sectoral and geographical, especially in terms of presence and experience in Africa, of the main European multilateral finance institutions, the European Investment Bank (EIB) and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). Strong and effective coordination is necessary to turn this situation into a strength rather than a liability. And while the system collectively has a comprehensive range of development financial instruments available, there is a not a single EU strategy to define how these should be used in synergy to tackle the top-priority global challenges. The present fragmentation of the system, especially between the EIB and the EBRD, is detrimental to the fulfilment of the EU's priority goals and the achievement of the desired development impact. This argues for the consolidation and streamlining of development finance and climate activities outside the EU into a single entity, a European Climate and Sustainable Development Bank, in order to avoid overlaps, and strengthen the EU's presence, role and long-term capacity to deliver on EU development priorities. This report considers three options for such consolidation. They all imply important institutional changes and require significant financial resources. The first is to turn the EBRD into such an institution by transferring the extra-EU activities of the EIB to the EBRD. The second is to create a new mixed-ownership bank with the EIB, the EBRD, Member States and the European Commission as shareholders. The third is to task the EIB with creating a subsidiary for its extra-EU activities and participating in it as a minority shareholder alongside Member States, the European Commission, and national development banks (NDBs). None of these options comes without important obstacles. They all have different strengths and require strong political ownership and will to act. The report has attempted to present these in an objective manner. Given their advantages and disadvantages, the Group suggests that in-depth feasibility studies be undertaken on all 3 three options, as their legal pre-conditions and the financial consequences need to be weighed against each other. In parallel, reflection is needed at the highest political level on the preferred way forward. Before such a discussion takes place, it would be strongly advisable not to extend the mandates of the EIB and the EBRD in a manner which could result in further overlaps or uncoordinated expansion. In addition, a series of steps need to be taken as a matter of urgency to make the European financial development architecture stronger and more responsive to development challenges. They fall into three main areas: (i) creating a strong policy centre in the EU, (ii) using the proposed Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation financial instrument (NDICI) as a catalyst for improvement and (iii) suggesting some concrete actions until a political decision is taken on the institutional restructuring. The new European institutional cycle and the new multi-annual financial framework (MFF) present a window of opportunity. It is a matter of political urgency for Europe to be able to ensure that external financial instruments are used strategically, that they contribute to our wider political aims, enhance Europe’s leadership and reinforce its influence in the world. The stakes are high, and our ambitions should rise to them. 4 INTRODUCTION 5 1. Introduction Old and new global challenges are rapidly shaping the political landscape and in responding to them, the European Union urgently needs to rethink its policy priorities for external action and development. The broad EU development agenda and its contribution to the global goals require adequate political leadership and an EU influence in the world proportionate to its contribution. With Decision (EU) 2019/597, the Council of the European Union established a High-level Group of Wise Persons on the European financial architecture for development with the task of producing an independent report on the challenges and opportunities for improving and rationalising the European financial architecture for development and possible scenarios for its evolution. Concerns about the effectiveness of the external development financing architecture of the European Union are not new. In evaluating the EIB's financing activities outside the EU, the 2010 Camdessus Report1 identified serious deficiencies in the broader system. To a certain extent they still remain, partly because there has been no decisive institutional follow-up on the recommendations of the report. But new development challenges and more ambitious international development goals are making the task more urgent. The review presented here has taken a system-wide perspective,