Estonian E-Tiger Leaping to Georgia: Added Value of Estonian Development Cooperation
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Estonian e-Tiger Leaping to Georgia: Added Value of Estonian Development Cooperation Evelin Andrespok University of Helsinki Faculty of Social Sciences Development Studies Master‘s Thesis May 2014 Tiedekunta/Osast o – Fakultet/Sektion – Faculty Laitos – Institution – Department Faculty of Social Sciences Department of Political and Economic Studies Tekijä – Författare – Author Evelin Andrespok Työn nimi – Arbetets titel – Title Estonian e-Tiger Leaping to Georgia: Added Value of Estonian Development Cooperation Oppiaine – Läroämne – Subject Development Studies Työn laji – Arbetets art – Level Aika – Datum – Month and year Sivumäärä – Sidoantal – Number of pages Master’s May 2014 79 + references Tiivistelmä – Referat – Abstract Estonia became a donor of development assistance in 1998 as it was in the process of joining the EU. Since the early days of being a donor, the Estonian approach has been to share its transition experience with other countries that share a similar past with the country. This thesis explores why and how Estonia aspires to offer added value with its development cooperation through sharing its transition experience and to what is the impact of its assistance. More precisely, this thesis takes a qualitative project level look at the added value of Estonian development cooperation by examining how Estonia shared its experience of computerising schools with the Republic of Georgia though the educational reform titled Deer Leap. Conceptualising sharing transition experience as a tool for democratisation, and thereby development, it argues that the unique added value that Estonia offers to developing countries is the “transition experience” itself, because there is personal expertise gathered from implementing the very same reforms in Estonia. Also, Estonia the partner countries see Estonia as role model in moving towards the EU. These conclusions are helpful for understanding whether at all and to what extent a small donor like Estonia can support positive developments and democratisation in partner countries. Avainsanat – Nyckelord – Keywords transition experience, democratisation, added value, ICT in education, Tiger Leap, Deer Leap, Estonia, Republic of Georgia 1 Table of contents List of abbreviations .......................................................................................................... 3 I Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 4 1.1. Problem statement .......................................................................................... 4 1.2. Research questions ......................................................................................... 5 1.3. Estonia as a donor country ............................................................................. 7 1.4. Background of the case study ......................................................................... 9 1.5. Estonian logic of sharing transition experience ........................................... 13 1.6. Literature review .......................................................................................... 17 1.7. Significance of the thesis .............................................................................. 21 1.8. Limitations of the study ................................................................................ 22 1.9. Structure of the thesis ................................................................................... 23 II Description of the Georgian case ................................................................................ 24 2.1. Georgia as a recipient of development assistance ........................................ 24 2.2. Estonian- Georgian development cooperation ............................................. 28 III Democratisation through sharing transition experience ............................................. 31 3.1. Democracy and development ....................................................................... 31 3.2. Evaluating the transfer of experiences between countries ........................... 34 3.3.1. Relevance ...................................................................................... 37 3.3.2. Ownership ...................................................................................... 39 3.3.3. Sustainability ................................................................................. 41 3.3. Data collection and interviewees .................................................................. 43 IV From Tiger Leap to Deer Leap .................................................................................. 45 4.1. Developing the programme idea .................................................................. 45 4.2. Description of the programme ...................................................................... 48 4.3. Termination of the programme .................................................................... 54 V Impact of the programme ............................................................................................ 61 5.1. Effectiveness of the intervention .................................................................. 61 5.1.2. Relevance ...................................................................................... 61 5.1.3. Ownership ...................................................................................... 64 5.1.5. Sustainability ................................................................................. 68 5.2. Democratisation and development ............................................................... 71 5.3. Added value of Estonian assistance ............................................................. 74 VI Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 76 References ....................................................................................................................... 80 2 List of abbreviations DLF Deer Leap Foundation EaP EU Eastern Partnership eGA e-Governance Academy EMFA Estonian Ministry of Foreign Affairs EU European Union EU-12 12 countries that joined the EU between 2004-2007 (Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Romania) ESIDA Educational and Scientific Infrastructure Development Agency GDP gross domestic product GNI gross national income ICT information and communications technology IMF International Monetary Fund MFA Ministry of Foreign Affairs MoES Ministry of Education and Science ODA official development assistance OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development OSF Open Society Foundation TLF Tiger Leap Foundation UN United Nations UNDP United Nations Development Programme 3 “It's not the Tech, it's all about the Teach.” - Ewan McIntosh I Introduction 1.1. Problem statement Development is a complex process with several stakeholders and nuances. In fact, the concept is so puzzling that there is less and less agreement about what ―development‖ even means, what are the principles it is supposed to entail and the values it ought to carry. However, there seems to be increasingly more support to the idea that whatever the exact measure of development might be for anyone, the common notion is that those who have can share their material and immaterial resources with the have-nots to reach a better future. Estonia as a young development donor has decided that the most valuable resource it has to offer to other countries is its own experience of social transitions during the past 20 odd years. After restoring independence from the Soviet Union, Estonia has gone through enormous reforms in nearly all sectors, including tax policy, health care, education, judicial system and many more. Some of these reforms have been more successful than others, but based on the fact that the country has now joined the European Union (EU) and is an active member of other international organisations, it is clear that in general the developments have improved the country and taken it from the have-nots category to the haves category. By moving from an aid-recipient country to a donor of development assistance in the late 1990s, Estonia had to formulate its identity and guiding principles as a donor country. One of the foundations of the new identity is exactly the personal experience of transition over the past decades. My thesis will explore why and how such a policy choice has been made, and more importantly, what has been the impact of it. More precisely, this thesis takes a qualitative project level look at the added value of Estonian development cooperation by examining how Estonia shared its experience of computerising all schools with the Republic of Georgia. The educational reform programme titled Deer Leap was implemented by transferring Estonia‘s know- 4 how of its own transition process with incorporating ICT into education to Georgia. The programme was managed by the Georgian government and implemented in partnership with the e-Governance Academy (eGA), which at the time was the biggest Estonian non-governmental non-profit development organisation. My analysis is based on the empirical data of the people who participated in the programme as well as some secondary data from the programme documents. What is more, since the Estonian economy is very small compared to its European counterparts, and since Estonian living conditions for many people are much below the EU average, it has been quite