|
In 2008, the Višegrad nations of Hungary, Slovakia, Poland and the Czech Republic, together gave just over 2m EUR to Serbia via the financing of various projects and schemes all designed to develop and expand Serbia’s vision of becoming a European state with the wealth and future to match.
The Višegrad four are new EU members themselves, and hold unique experience from the sometimes difficult path they took towards Brussels. They share a lot with Serbia, not least a shared history of living under recent communist regimes. When the Višegrad four state aid agencies fund projects in Serbia, they do this with the knowledge that they are helping a neighbour and a friend.
But the Višegrad countries are also at a disadvantage. They are not in the same league as established major international donors such as USAID, SIDA or DfID. They cannot compete with multi-lateral agencies such as UNDP, EBRD or the World Bank. They are small fish and they know it. With the exception of a massive influx of government money, which under the current financial situation seems most unlikely, what can these small donors do to help increase their effectiveness? One solution to this dilemma is to coordinate.
The workshop, co-organised by the Bratislava-based Pontis Foundation and Slovak Aid, and funded by the International Višegrad Fund and Central European Initiative, was designed to provide a forum for V4 official development agencies to discuss ways to coordinate their work towards Serbia. Participants came from around Central Europe and were joined by representatives of major donors such as SIDA, USAID and DfID, as well as V4 civil society delegates and officials from private foundations. But key to the discussions was the participation from Serbia. Gordana Lazarević, Assistant Minister for Finance and head of the Development Assistance Coordination Unit known as DACU, along with Srđan Majstorović, the deputy head of Serbia’s EU Integration Office, made up the backbone of Serbian advice for V4 agencies hoping improve their aid dissemination.
Although much was discussed, a number of key points came out. The importance of Serbia as a partner, rather than a recipient of aid was made early on in the workshop. This central theme of Serbian ownership re-occurred throughout the two days. Serbian has its own expertise and its own donor coordination unit. The V4 official development assistance agencies should tap into, make use of and support DACU in its efforts to coordinate aid dissemination. In the words of Ms Lazarević, “donor coordination is not just between donors, but between donors and the partner countries”. The plea to make more use of DACU was accompanied by a call for donors to look for Serbia’s needs in its National Program for the adoption of the acquis. This is in order to ensure that V4 assistance match the exact requirements of Serbia.
During an important discussion, V4 official development assistance agencies were recommended to coordinate efforts more in the field. USAID representatives called donor representation in country “critically important”. An inspired offer from the Hungarian Embassy in Belgrade to represent V4 at existing donor meetings in the Serbian capital was met with support and a decision to begin discussions on making this a reality. Tied in with this, was the argument to make V4 aid more visible in Serbia. Serbian participants stated their view that official V4 assistance visibility on the ground was very low, especially in the case of Hungary and the Czech Republic.
During two break-out groups, issues concerning exchanging know-how and making use of V4 experts in the field were discussed. On exchanging know-how and networking, the issue of knowledge management was identified. Knowing what is important and what is not is essential. But also important was the concept that knowledge itself is not enough. It is the communication of that knowledge which is key. In the second of the break-out groups, how to make use of V4 experts in the field was the question at hand.
The central points made include the importance of exchanging experts between partner countries, as well as the concept of twinning on various policy issues. The quality of expertise must be extremely high for any secondment to be valuable to the partner country. But challenges to this were also examined. The difficulties in recruitment and the payment of high consultancy fees were identified as barriers in the past. Interesting suggestions for ways to move forward included the greater use of UNDP Trust Funds for such secondments, plus the idea of constituting a V4 roster of experts. Real expertise transfer in the form of twinning or direct secondments to line ministries which need support in applying the acquis is what is needed.
The issue of civil society as a sector for coordination was also discussed. The workshop benefitted immensely from the presence of Sonja Licht, director of the Belgrade Fund for Political Excellence, and Hedvig Morvai-Horvat, head of the European Fund for the Balkans. Ms. Licht stated that civil society in Serbia was at a critical juncture in its development. Participants discussed the problems associated with coordination within the civil society sector, with many pointing to the challenge posed by the sector itself.
The workshop was the final part of a long-term project involving many organisations around Central Europe and Serbia, B92 being one. The event benefitted from a presentation of one of three films produced by B92 on the V4 experience of EU integration. Exchanging know-how, learning from each other, and recognising that Serbia is a partner of the V4, rather than just a recipient of its assistance, were central tenets of the debate. True V4 coordination on its efforts in Serbia can only be successful if directed through DACU, with ownership firmly in the hands of the Serbs. Through partnership and understanding of the exact needs and requirements of their partners, V4 agencies can make donor coordination work.
|
search b92.net
B92 live 
