EVALUATION OF THE CRISIS RESPONSE AND PREPAREDNESS COMPONENTS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION’S INSTRUMENT FOR STABILITY (IFS) OVERALL PROGRAMME-LEVEL EVALUATION Final Report 12 July 2011 Evaluation for the European Commission EVALUATION OF THE CRISIS RESPONSE AND PREPAREDNESS COMPONENTS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION’S INSTRUMENT FOR STABILITY (IFS) OVERALL PROGRAMME-LEVEL EVALUATION Final Report 12 July 2011 Prepared by International Conflict and Security (INCAS) Consulting Ltd. Prepared for the Service for Foreign Policy Instruments (FPI), European Commission Unit FPI.2, Stability Instrument Operations (Crisis response and peace-building) Disclaimer: This report presents the views and opinions of the authors only. It does not represent official European Commission positions or policy. TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS [03] ACRONYMS [03] GLOSSARY [03] EXECUTIVE SUMMARY [04] 1. INTRODUCTION [09] 1.1 SCOPE 09 1.2 METHODOLOGY 09 1.3 CAVEATS 10 1.4 REPORT STRUCTURE 10 2. OVERVIEW OF THE IFS [11] 2.1 THE IFS RATIONALE 11 2.2 REGULATION AND FOCUS 12 2.3 THE CRISIS RESPONSE COMPONENT 12 2.4 THE CRISIS PREPAREDNESS COMPONENT 14 2.5 TOTAL FINANCIAL COMMITMENTS TO DATE 14 2.6 IFS STAFF RESOURCES 14 3. RESULTS [16] 3.1 SUMMARY OF MAIN ACHIEVEMENTS 16 3.2 DISAGGREGATED PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT 18 3.3 SCORECARD — DESIGN OF IFS CRISIS RESPONSE INTERVENTIONS 20 3.4 CRITICAL ASPECTS OF IFS CRISIS RESPONSE IMPLEMENTATION 25 3.5 STRATEGIC AND CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES 29 4. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS [34] 4.1 SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS 34 4.2 RECOMMENDATIONS 34 ANNEX 1: INDIVIDUALS CONSULTED [38] ANNEX 2: DOCUMENTS [40] ANNEX 3: EVALUATION TEAM BIOGRAPHIES [43] [3] Evaluation of the Crisis Response and Preparedness Components of the European Union’s Instrument for Stability Prepared by INCAS Consulting Limited, July 2011 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The evaluation team would like to express its gratitude to all the Commission and EEAS personnel who gave freely of their valuable time and contributed ideas to guide the evaluation team. LOSSARY ACRONYMS G AU African Union Effectiveness CBRN Chemical, biological, radiological and The extent to which the intervention’s objectives were, or are nuclear expected to be achieved, taking into account their relative CFSP Common Foreign and Security Policy importance. CSDP Common Security and Defence Policy EAM Exceptional Assistance Measure (of IfS) Efficiency EDF European Development Fund A measure of how economically resources/inputs (funds, EEAS European External Action Service expertise, time, etc.) are converted into results. EPLO European Peace-building Liason Office EU European Union Evaluation EU-NAVFOR European Union Naval Force The systematic and objective assessment of the design, EUSR European Union Special Representative implementation and results of an ongoing or completed project, FPI European Union Service for Foreign programme or policy, which aims to determine relevance and Policy Instruments fulfillment of objectives, development efficiency, effectiveness, IfS Instrument for Stability impact and sustainability. IGO International Governmental Organisation JNA Joint Needs Assessment Impacts NGO Non-Governmental Organisation Positive and negative, primary and secondary long-term effects OECD Organisation for Economic Cooperation produced by an intervention, directly or indirectly, intended or and Development unintended. PAMF Facility for urgent action involving Policy Advice, Technical Assistance, Relevance Mediation and Reconciliation for the The extent to which the objectives of an intervention are benefit of third countries affected by crisis consistent with beneficiaries’ requirements, country needs, situations global priorities and partners’ and donors’ policies. PbP Peace-building Partnership (of IfS) PCNA Post Conflict Needs Assessment Reliability PDNA Post Disaster Needs Assessment Consistency or dependability of data and evaluation judgements, PSC Political and Security Committee with reference to the quality of the instruments, procedures and RCRPO Regional Crisis Response Planning analyses used to collect and interpret evaluation data. Officers RELEX Directorate-General for External Results Relations The output, outcome and impact (intended or unintended, RRM Rapid Reaction Mechanism positive and/or negative) of an intervention. SSR Security Sector Reform TOR Terms of Reference Sustainability UNDP United Nations Development Programme The continuation of benefits from an intervention after assistance WB World Bank has been completed. The probability of continued long-term benefits. The resilience to risk of the net benefit flows over time. [4] EXECUTIVE SUMMARY and support to Post Conflict Needs Assessment (PCNA) and Post Disaster Needs Assessment (PDNA) methodology development and training. EVALUATION OBJECTIVES AND PROCESS In order to refine findings, the evaluators elaborated a set of ‘qualifiers’ used to review findings as they In line with Article 21 of the Regulation of the emerged from the evaluation process. These include: European Union’s Instrument for Stability • Institutional opportunities/constraints, ranging (IfS), the European Commission authorised an from access to high quality information on crises, independent evaluation of the IfS’ crisis response and to a small team managing a large budget; preparedness components — Articles 3 and 4(3) of the IfS Regulation, respectively. As the first horizontal • The inherently political nature of the IfS, which appraisal of these components since the IfS inception enables the EU to play an enhanced role as a in 2007, this evaluation assesses the relevance of the foreign and security policy actor; two components across various dimensions, with a view to contributing to upcoming decision-making • The fact that the IfS operates across the security about the future of the IfS after its current legal basis and development nexus and is designed to expires in 2012. complement, and often to prepare the ground for the EU’s mainstream external action instruments; In line with the terms of reference, the main objective of the evaluation is “…to ascertain the results to • The high risk and highly volatile environments date of the Instrument for Stability crisis response in which crisis response instruments like the IfS and preparedness components and help enhance often operate; and IfS approaches towards future crisis response • The complex nature of the international crisis measures and strategies for future preparedness preparedness, response and peace-building programming.” architecture. The key legal and policy documents related to the IfS’ creation and functioning, as well as key policy documents of the European Union in the area of peace THE IFS AT A GLANCE and security, constitute the baseline of the evaluation. In addition, a range of programme documents related The IfS was launched one year after the 2006 reform to selected case studies were examined. of the European Commission’s external funding As this is an overall programme-level evaluation, its instruments. Its creation was intended to enhance scope and process did not include specific in-depth the EU’s capacity and tools to undertake both project-level reviews; hence this evaluation is not urgent short-term crisis response measures (Article meant to draw conclusions on the effectiveness and 3 of IfS) and more medium to longer term actions impact of specific IfS crisis actions on the ground, nor covering crisis preparedness (Article 4(3) of IfS) as on capacity-strengthening activities at project level. well as trans-regional threats and CBRN (chemical, However, documentation on five case studies was biological, radiological and nuclear weapons) non- reviewed to bolster the conclusions made here. These proliferation (Articles 4(1) and 4(2) of IfS)1. comprised four Exceptional Assistance Measures (EAMs) in Georgia, Sudan, Somalia and Indonesia, 1 Activities under Article 4(1) and Article 4(2) of the IfS are not included in the scope of this evaluation. [5] Evaluation of the Crisis Response and Preparedness Components of the European Union’s Instrument for Stability Prepared by INCAS Consulting Limited, July 2011 The IfS is governed by Regulation (EC) 1717/2006 typically very urgent nature, are not and indeed cannot of the European Parliament and by the Council be programmed on an annual basis. The IfS regulation of 15 November 2006 establishing an Instrument has envisaged a fair degree of flexibility in the use of for Stability.2 More than €350 million has been the Instrument and the capacity to address a range of committed so far under the IfS in approximately crisis factors. These include actions in response to a 100 crisis response actions spread over 48 countries crisis or emerging crisis, a situation posing a threat to worldwide. An additional €40 million has been democracy, law and order, the protection of human mobilised for crisis preparedness under Article 4(3) rights and fundamental freedoms, the security and of the IfS Regulation during 2007-2010. safety of individuals, or a situation threatening to escalate into armed conflict or severely destabilise a Substantively, the IfS has a three-pronged focus. First, third country or set of countries. it ensures rapid, flexible and adequately funded first responses to situations of political crisis or natural The preparedness activities are funded under Article disasters, including to initiatives that pre-empt them, 4(3) and constitute the Peace-building Partnership in line with Article 3. Second, its crisis preparedness (PbP). They are programmed on