JOINT STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EU resilience policy framework for cooperation with partner countries and evaluation of related implementation actions Accompanying the document Joint Communication to the European Parliament and the Council A Strategic Approach to Resilience in the EU's external action - Main contents

Document date	09-06-2017
Publication date	13-06-2017
Reference	10184/17 ADD 2
From	Secretary-General of the European Commission, signed by Mr Jordi AYET PUIGARNAU, Director
External link	original article
Original document in PDF

Council of the European Union

Brussels, 9 June 2017 (OR. en)

10184/17 ADD 2

CFSP/PESC 509 CSDP/PSDC 312 CIVCOM 98 CYBER 96 CLIMA 182 DEVGEN 131 COAFR 176 ENER 283 COEST 135 ENV 603 COHOM 75 FIN 360 COMED 2 MIGR 101 CONUN 141 POLMIL 65 COPS 186 PROCIV 55 COTER 49 RELEX 516

COVER NOTE

From: Secretary-General of the European Commission, signed by Mr Jordi AYET PUIGARNAU, Director

date of receipt: 8 June 2017

To: Mr Jeppe TRANHOLM-MIKKELSEN, Secretary-General of the Council of the European Union

No. Cion doc.: SWD(2017) 227 final

Subject: JOINT STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EU resilience policy framework for cooperation with partner countries and evaluation of related

implementation actions Accompanying the document Joint Communication

to the European Parliament and the Council A Strategic Approach to

Resilience in the EU's external action

Delegations will find attached document SWD(2017) 227 final.

Encl.: SWD(2017) 227 final

HIGH REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNION FOR

EUROPEAN FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND COMMISSION SECURITY POLICY

Brussels, 7.6.2017 SWD(2017) 227 final

JOINT STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT

EU resilience policy framework for cooperation with partner countries and evaluation of related implementation actions

Accompanying the document

Joint Communication to the European Parliament and the Council

A Strategic Approach to Resilience in the EU's external action

{JOIN(2017) 21 final i} {SWD(2017) 226 final} 1. Introduction – Purpose of this Staff Working Document

This staff working document gives an overview of how resilience is addressed in the EU's development, humanitarian and neighbourhood policies and takes stock of the implementation of initiatives to promote and strengthen resilience. It highlights lessons learnt and draws conclusions that are relevant to accompany the new Joint Communication on "A Strategic approach to Resilience in the EU's external action."

The EU approach to resilience in development and humanitarian policy emerged from recurrent food crises in the Sahel and Horn of Africa. For the latter, the 2011 crisis illustrated the failures of the international community in effectively addressing "predictable" crises. With the resulting 2012 Commission Communication, "The EU approach to resilience: learning

from food security crises" 1 , the EU took a prominent role in placing resilience as a central

aim for humanitarian aid and development cooperation to reduce humanitarian needs and to achieve durable development outcomes. The Communication defines resilience as "the ability of an individual, a household, a community, a country or a region to withstand, to adapt, and to quickly recover from stresses and shocks"; and set the basis, through the 2013 subsequent

"Action Plan for Resilience in Crisis Prone Countries 2013-2020" 2 , to widen the scope of

the EU responses to other contexts of fragility, including insecurity, weak governance, economic shocks, natural hazards and the increasing impact of climate change.

This new Joint Communication benefits from, and builds on, lessons from the implementation of the 2013 EU Resilience Action Plan and is complemented by the experiences of DG NEAR

with European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP). 3

The findings of this assessment presented here are informed by monitoring of performance against the EU Resilience Action Plan, recent assessments such as the evaluation of the EU approach to resilience to withstand food crises in African dry lands (2007-2015), and DG ECHO's evaluation of Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and resilience in Latin America and the Caribbean.

• 2. 

  EU policy framework on resilience

2.1. An expanding development-humanitarian resilience policy framework

The EU resilience approach, set out in the 2012 Communication, subsequent 2013 Action

Plan and Council conclusions on EU approach to resilience 4 , has a clear purpose:

increasing resilience of the most vulnerable so that development gains can be preserved and humanitarian needs reduced and the cycle of poverty, crises and fragility broken. This intention is underpinned by two guiding but linked objectives to:

1 COM(2012) 586 final i

http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/policies/resilience/com_2012_586_resilience_en.pdf

2 SWD(2013) 227 final

http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/policies/resilience/com_2013_227_ap_crisis_prone_countries_en.pdf

3 The ENP was designed in 2003-2004 to develop closer relations between the EU and its neighbouring

countries with the principal objective of strengthening the prosperity, stability and security and preventing the emergence of new dividing lines between the EU and its neighbours. See more at: https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/neighbourhood/overview_en

4 3241st FOREIGN AFFAIRS Council meeting, Brussels, 28 May 2013

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/137319.pdf

• Address the root causes of people's vulnerability, fragility and their susceptibility to be affected by these (multiple) shocks and stresses, through more equitable and inclusive social, economic and political processes that build coping capacities. This requires co-ordinated action towards people-centred recovery and greater self-reliance, adaptability, learning and better preparation of individuals for future stress.

• Accompanying these initiatives to address underlying diverse causes of fragility with risk management measures to protect populations from shocks and stresses, limit their impact through early response and assist a quick recovery.

As such, the EU agenda promotes the benefits of pre-emptive risk reduction and early action that minimises damage, loss and deterioration, instead of costly and too often avoidable response after the fact. A key aspect of this EU resilience approach is to address a diversity of risk, the shocks and stresses that people face or are affected by, be they large or more localised events, or the result of natural, economic, or political processes. Ecosystems' goods and services underpin food, water, energy and health security, and are the foundation for resilient communities to natural disasters and conflict.

The 2013 Council conclusions on resilience gave unequivocal guidance to how resilience should be organised, stating, inter alia, that: (i) It is national government’s primarily responsibility to build resilience including conflict sensitive approaches across humanitarian, development and political dialogue and engagement; (ii) analysis and solutions must be rooted in local ownership and the experience of affected communities, countries and regions. This requires working closely with local communities, civil society and local authorities; (iii) the EU’s commitment to build long-term resilience in partner countries through inclusive and sustainable management of natural resources and economic growth for human development should be re-iterated; and (iv) there should be a focus on the most vulnerable households and marginalised groups through comprehensive rights-based approaches and facilitating their access to basic social services.

Since then, the resilience policy framework has expanded. The concept of resilience is included in the following Communications and Staff Working Documents:

• 2015 Commission Communication: Towards the World Humanitarian Summit: A global partnership for principled and effective humanitarian (COM(2015) 419 final i) and accompanying Staff Working Document (SWD(2015) 166 final)

• 2016 Commission Communication: Lives in Dignity: from Aid-dependence to Selfreliance – Forced Displacement and Development (COM(2016) 234 final i) and accompanying Staff Working Document (SWD(2016) 142 final)

• 2016 Commission Staff Working Document Action Plan on the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 (SWD(2016) 205 final/2)

• 2016 Commission Communication on a proposal for a renewed European Consensus on Development: Our World, our Dignity, our Future (COM (2016) 740 final i)

• International agenda 2030: Commission Communication on Next steps for a sustainable European future (COM(2016) 739 final i)

• Communication (COM(2016) 110 final i) and ratification of the Paris Agreement by the European Parliament (04/10/2016).

Last but not least, the EU Global Strategy for the EU's Foreign and Security Policy

identifies “State and Societal Resilience" as one of the five priorities

for the EU’s external action.

2.2. A new European neighbourhood resilience policy framework

A Joint Communication "Review of the European Neighbourhood Policy" 5 was adopted in

2015, which prioritises four sectors with the overall aim of stabilising the neighbourhood and strengthening the resilience of the EU's partners:

• 1. 

  Good governance, democracy, rule of law and human rights 2. Economic development for stabilisation 3. Security 4. Migration and mobility

To achieve results under these priorities, the following tools were put forward in the review:

• Differentiation of partner countries based on their needs and preferences;

• Ownership of the policy by both Member States (through Joint Programming and

ongoing consultations) and partner countries (through new, refocused political

association and economic integration, such as jointly-agreed Partnership Priorities and

revised Association Agendas);

• The regional dimension both enhancing cooperation within the Eastern Partnership

and Union for the Mediterranean, and bringing on board regional partners beyond the

neighbourhood for cooperation on shared challenges such as migration, energy and security;

• Flexibility in financial assistance, enabling the EU to deliver on short-term needs

whilst balancing these with the long-term reform objectives of the policy;

• Visibility and better communication with an emphasis on working with youth and

increasing people-to-people contacts.

• 3. 

  State of play of implementation of the resilience policy framework

3.1. Resilience Action Plan 2013-2020 review

Overview

EU resilience policies are supported by evidence of good practice from the Sahel (AGIR initiative) and Horn of Africa (SHARE programme), from earlier action on linking relief, rehabilitation and development (LRRD), country and thematic programmes (e.g. food and nutrition security and sustainable agriculture, social protection, environment, climate adaptation and mitigation, DRR, forest, land, water and energy). At the institutional level, closer working relationships between DGs ECHO, DEVCO or NEAR have led to a number of collaborative initiatives on the ground, such as the first EU Trust Fund ("Bêkou") for Central African Republic (CAR) focussing on resilience, and Joint Humanitarian Development Frameworks (JHDF) in countries like Haiti, Jordan, Lebanon, Nigeria and Syria.

5 http://eeas.europa.eu/archives/docs/enp/documents/2015/151118_joint-communication_review-of-the

href="http://eeas.europa.eu/archives/docs/enp/documents/2015/151118_joint-communication_review-of-the-enp_en.pdf">enp_en.pdf

Resilience approaches are becoming more widely used, as evidenced by the 2015/2016 response to El Niño through complementary actions to the EU Resilience Building Programme in Ethiopia (RESET Plus) and the flexibilities that in 2016 allowed an early response to crises in Haiti and Nigeria. The 2016 EU policy to address protracted forced displacement, "Lives in Dignity" is organised around strengthening the resilience and selfreliance of displaced and host communities.

Reporting on the three priorities of the 2013 Resilience Action Plan

The Action Plan covers 18 actions to be implemented by EC services with a lead from DGs DEVCO and/or ECHO, and as far as possible with MS involvement. It is organised around three implementation priorities.

Overall, progress has been especially positive where objectives were part of, and strongly aligned to, existing programmes. There has been considerable advancement since 2013 in the thematic areas of Food and Nutrition Security and Sustainable Agriculture, DRR and Climate Change. There are also numerous examples where practice has gone beyond the targets set in the Action Plan – for example the more widespread use of crisis modifiers, i.e flexible financing, in humanitarian programmes for protracted crises. There are other areas, such as urban resilience, forced displacement, predictable and flexible financing, and social protection, where significant changes are underway. They do not have clear targets in the Action Plan but support the achievement of resilience objectives by addressing underlying causes of vulnerability, protecting people and programmes from shocks, stresses and change. Not captured in the Action Plan is the change in policies and in practice that the Action Plan has contributed to, aspects that it meant to catalyse, such as the closer collaboration between DGs DEVCO and ECHO, as demonstrated by the EU Trust Funds and in the EU

commitments on the "Grand Bargain" at the World Humanitarian Summit (WHS) 6 .

Implementation priority 1: EU support to the development and implementation of national and regional resilience approaches, capacities and partnerships

Progress includes:

• an increased co-operation of the EU, MS, other donors and stakeholders in support of national resilience strategies in the Sahel (AGIR) and Horn of Africa (SHARE). For instance, 11 out of 17 West African countries have adopted national resilience priorities under AGIR and another four others have drafted country resilience priorities under SHARE;

• the implementation of EU strategic resilience approach in a number of countries including Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Haiti, Jordan, Lebanon, Mali, Nepal, Niger, Sudan and Zimbabwe, with very close cooperation between DGs ECHO and DEVCO in their respective programming;

• a better co-ordination of food security, nutrition, sustainable agriculture, DRR and

climate change sectors with other development/humanitarian objectives including

mainstreaming across other sectors. For example, the GCCA initiative has supported

57 projects in Africa, Asia, Caribbean and Pacific regions, of which 34 are ongoing;

• a reinforcement of resilience in food and nutrition security and in sustainable agriculture within 60 development cooperation programmes;

• the EU Sendai Action plan, in support of SDG/Agenda 2030 requirements to address poverty, vulnerability, risk and crisis together in crisis prone and fragile contexts, calls for: "a disaster risk-informed approach to policy-making, offering a coherent agenda

across different EU policies to strengthen resilience to risks and shocks";

• resilience is a core objective of the EU Trust funds. DGs DEVCO, ECHO and the

EEAS are working closely together for the implementation of the Trust Fund in CAR

("Bêkou"), and with DG NEAR as well for the EU Emergency Trust Fund for Africa

and the EU Trust Fund for Syria ("Madad");

• collaboration, shared analyses and partnership and co-ordinated programming as core

components of the EU Facility for Refugees in Turkey as well as DGs NEAR and ECHO programming in Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and Ukraine through the JHDFs

(similar work between ECHO, DEVCO and Madad trust fund has been initiated

through a comprehensive action plan.

• environment and climate change are more systematically integrated across

development policies and assistance programmes and contribute to improving

resilience (e.g. regular social transfers combined with community-based land restoration and reforestation works in Ethiopia's Productive Safety Net Programme

benefitting 7.8 million people).

Priority intervention 2: Innovation, learning and advocacy

The EU is a major funder for supporting and investigating innovative risk financing solutions developed at regional, national and local levels. In addition, since the inception of the Action Plan a significant change is the expansion of social protection systems to address risks and/or meet people needs. Experiences from Ethiopia, Kenya, the Philippines, and Turkey demonstrate it is possible to establish shock responsive safety net systems able to assist large populations in need. Where appropriate, DG ECHO use of cash transfer has increased,

allowing for more direct funding and a regain of dignity for the recipients 7 . In most cases, this

more widespread use of cash has maintained or has established local markets.

The EU continues to make a valid contribution to developing good practice, learning such as

through the EC resilience compendium and the EC contribution to INFORM 8 ; and sharing

experiences including through the Capacity4dev platform. With INFORM, the EU is now investing in analysis of risks, taking a closer look at global risks and imbalances. According to the evaluation of EU’s resilience-building strategy to withstand food crises in Africa Drylands, the EU has played a critical role in strengthening Early Warning Systems (EWS) for conflict prevention notably via capacity building of relevant local organisations, hereby enhancing the availability, regularity and quality of information on the incidence of food insecurity and malnutrition.

On advocacy for resilience, major successes include EU contribution to coherence and integration of resilience principles into the SDGs, Sendai, the Grand Bargain and the WHS objectives, and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change to promote low-carbon and resilient development.

7 An evaluation of the use of transfer modalities in DG ECHO found that cash transfers are particularly effective

in flexibly and simultaneously meeting a range of beneficiary defined needs. See more at:

http://ec.europa.eu/echo/sites/echo-site/files/evaluation_transfer_modalities_final_report_012016_en.pdf

8 http://www.inform-index.org/

Implementation priority 3: Methodologies and tools to support resilience

Resilience factored in EC, EEAS and partners' guidance: Resilience is incorporated into all DG ECHO Humanitarian Implementation Plans (HIPs) as recommended by the 2012 Resilience Communication. This was practically introduced via a resilience marker for emergency projects. Developing tools, for example JHDFs and INFORM, to assist joint humanitarian and development analyses is a priority and is ongoing.

Improved methodologies and tools: Since 2016, the European Commission, FAO and the World Food Programme (joined by further partners in 2017) have jointly conducted an analysis of threats to food security. As a result of this joint venture, the "Global Network

against Food Crises" 9 was launched during the WHS. The Global Network is designed to

combat food insecurity from both humanitarian and development perspectives and tackles the root causes of these crises.

In 2015, the EU published the second edition of its staff handbook on "Operating in situations of conflict and fragility", which provides practical guidance on conflict sensitivity analysis, promoting resilience, programming flexibly and other relevant topics in situations of conflict

and fragility 10 .

Since 2013, numerous learning events directly linked to resilience have been organised including: workshops on resilience conducted twice in Brussels (July 2013 and June 2014), as well as for EU Delegations and ECHO staff at a country (Bangladesh, CAR, Yemen) and regional level (Caribbean, Central America, Latin America, South Asia). DGs DEVCO and ECHO also jointly developed material on DRR for training courses on climate change and environment mainstreaming; DG DEVCO and the EEAS co-delivered training courses on fragility and conflict sensitivity; DG DEVCO developed a conflict sensitivity on-line training course. DEVCO and ECHO co-hosted two "resilience forum" events in Brussels with high level representation from EC, the donor community and civil society.

In early 2016, the JRC and the EPSC founded a Commission-wide Research Network on Measuring Resilience (resil.net). In 2016, it worked towards a common framework for resilience in the EU policymaking context. Within its work, the JRC has published a

conceptual framework of resilience in 2017. 11

Flexible financing instruments and contingencies: The advantages of flexible financing, and contingency funds are being realised and acted on. New mechanisms were developed by DG DEVCO (e.g. PRO-ACT and the EU Trust Funds). There is also better use of existing mechanisms with increased use of flexible financing procedures.

Adapting budget support to fragile contexts: In 2012, the Commission introduced State Building Contracts (SBC), a flexible instrument which provides rapid support to maintain vital state functions, to contribute to macroeconomic stability and to ensure essential service delivery to the most vulnerable part of the population, often complemented with a longer term

9 Global Report on Food Crises 2017 at: https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/global-report-food-crises-2017_en

10 https://europa.eu/capacity4dev/public-fragility/minisite/support-and-guidance

11 Manca, Benczur and Giovannini, Building a scientific narrative towards a more resilient EU society, Part 1: a

conceptual framework, doi: 10.2760/635528

focus on the causes of structural fragility and on the transition towards sustainable

development and democratic governance 12 .

The Action plan and the EU approach has established resilience priorities

The recent evaluation of EU’s resilience-building strategy to withstand food crises in African Drylands (Sahel and Horn of Africa) concluded that the EU strategic approach to building resilience to food crises has prompted a strategic shift and commitment to a humanitariandevelopment common vision and shared responsibility in prioritising resilience to food crises at global, regional and country levels. It confirms the importance of causal analyses of the root causes of food insecurity and impact assessments as a basis for designing EU country strategies to build resilience to food crises. More generally it found that, despite the diversity of projects and programmes and lack of proper resilience instrument, at different scales across the horn of African and the Sahel, the resilience agenda has changed the way development operations and humanitarian aid are delivered.

Another evaluation, on "DG ECHO's action on building resilience in the Latin America and Caribbean region (LAC)" between 2012 and 2016, also highlights that the EU resilience approach has been an opportunity to strengthen the ties between DG ECHO and other EU delegations including a considerable improvement in LAC dialogue between DG ECHO, DG DEVCO at headquarters and in partner countries.

A clear indication of the change in place is the implementation of the EU resilience approach through the EU Trust Funds. For example, the 2015 Valletta Summit on Migration in launching the EU Emergency Trust Fund for Africa aims at tackling the root causes of irregular migration and forced displacement. One of the EU Trust Fund objectives is to strengthen "the resilience of communities and in particularly the most vulnerable, as well as refugees and displaced."

Further dynamism to resilience has been provided by other stakeholders' approaches to resilience (e.g. DFID, INGOs, SIDA, USAID, UN System,) but also from international processes, for example the strong resilience emphasis of the 17 SDGs behind Agenda 2030, the resilience approach set out in the Sendai framework for DRR (a multi-hazard, all of society approach to risk management) and the WHS priorities for effective humanitarian action, partnerships between development and humanitarian actors and the urgency of finding long term solutions to protracted crises.

Practice is changing. In many instances Governments are taking more responsibility to address chronic needs and predictable crises, and to build their competencies to manage risks, for example with investments in social protection systems and enhanced national disaster management capabilities. In response to the on-going drought (2017) Kenya and Ethiopia can be singled out as having functional structures in place to combat vulnerability and build resilience to drought.

The UN is reforming its development and humanitarian system to meet the demands of the SDGS, working more deliberately together towards longer term programmes and "collective

12 At the end of 2016, SBCs were under implementation in 21 countries, of which more than half in West- and

Central Africa, for a total commitment of € 2.4 billion. The study EU State Building Contracts: early lessons from the EU's new budget support instrument for fragile states by M. Bernardi, T.Hart and G. Rabinowitz (Overseas Development Institute, February 2015) shows that SBCs have delivered very positive results in terms of

macroeconomic and fiscal management, poverty reduction and improvements in health and education indicators.

outcomes," the World Bank is increasing their support to fragile countries and finance is more available to middle income countries hosting large scale population displacement. Collective action, at different levels and according to added value, is becoming the norm.

Consolidating progress while recognising challenges

Despite practical progress, more concerted efforts are required to apply and expand resilience approaches. The recent reviews and evaluations point out a number of areas where the added value of resilience approaches can be promoted by the new communication for better practice and results.

Humanitarian funds are increasingly being used for longer term recovery and to meet basic needs for extended periods. In 2015 two-thirds (66%) of humanitarian assistance from DAC donors alone continues to go to long-term-recipient countries – due to protracted or recurrent crises. Although total humanitarian funding is increasing, it is insufficient to meet exponential humanitarian needs worldwide and is absorbing funds that could be used to address longer term development and stability issues. Hence the need to implement fully-fledged resilience approaches.

Additionally, notwithstanding progress and momentum, there is still uncertainty and risk determining how humanitarians and development actors (local and international) can work together in situations of conflict and insecurity. There is a lack of integrating conflict sensitivity and "do no harm" principles into programming and not enough active consideration of how EU could contribute to conflict reduction.

Considerable efforts have been made in the field of joint analysis, but a major hurdle is to determine how different mandates, priorities and instruments can be reconciled for coherent, context-based actions whilst maintaining core humanitarian principles. This challenge has not been sufficiently addressed by frameworks intended to guide implementation and monitor progress and results, leading to a lack of clarity over the division of labour. This is linked to an additional concern of DGs ECHO and DEVCO staff interviewed for resilience evaluations, that EU resilience direction placed an added burden on already stretched staffing at delegations and that the EU resilience agenda has not been sufficiently backed up implementation frameworks and guidance. The importance of causal analyses of the root causes of crises and vulnerability for designing EU country strategies is increasingly recognised, though in practice these analyses were not systematically conducted and were of

variable quality. Political Economy Analysis (PEA) 13 is one of the key analytical tools to

inform policy and political dialogue and to adjust EU projects and programmes so our actions remain relevant and effective over time. However, PEA and conflict analyses are not systematically conducted.

A recurrent demand from practitioners in fragile and conflict operations is for the awareness and assistance with applying methodologies to identify and address such risks within EU analysis and assistance programmes.

EU programming instruments were progressively improved over time (since 2012) with the introduction of notably with the introduction of flexible financial procedures that improved the timeliness of the support in times of crisis. Moreover, the EU introduced new financing

13 13 OECD DAC has defined 'Political Economy Analysis' as relating to "the interaction of political and economic

processes in a society: the distribution of power and wealth between different groups and individuals, and the processes that create, sustain and transform these relationships over time".

mechanisms more specifically devoted to financing resilience activities, such as PRO-ACT, SHARE and the EU Emergency Trust Fund for Africa. However, in some instances, noteworthy resilience intentions, e.g. those in the Emergency Trust Fund for Africa, have not received the same attention as other priorities.

3.2 European Neighbourhood Policy actions to strengthen state and societal resilience

The reviewed ENP focuses on the need to stabilise the neighbourhood and strengthen the resilience of the EU’s partners. This strengthening of both state and societal resilience highlights the importance of addressing sources of instability across all four priority sectors of the ENP review, not just in the security domain but also in the areas of governance and rule of law, economic development, energy and connectivity and in migration policy.

Good governance, democracy, rule of law and human rights

A vibrant civil society and public debate are essential to build up consent for socio-economic and political reform and to build up trust in governmental institutions and their ability to manage crises. Thus, support for civil society organisations and the promotion of human rights are core elements of the EU's relationships with all its neighbours.

The ENP review also emphasises the importance of independent, effective and transparent justice systems and accountable public administrations. The EU works extensively on public policy analysis, good governance, public administration reform, anti-corruption and rule of law issues in the neighbourhood.

Economic development for stabilisation

Economic development for stabilisation has a particular focus on better economic governance, strengthening fiscal stability and supporting structural reforms. Encouraging trade between the neighbourhood and the EU and between neighbours themselves will lead to approximation with EU and international standards and the gradual economic integration of partners in the EU internal market.

Commission proposals for an External Investment Plan will support investment in partner countries in the European Neighbourhood and throughout Africa. The goal is to harness private sector participation in investment in the region contributing to the achievement of the

SDGs and addressing the root causes of migration. A Joint Communication on Tunisia 14 was

adopted in September 2016 to promote resilience and stability, with EUR 300 million committed in 2017 to socio-economic development, good governance and cooperation on security.

Ensuring that the EU's neighbours have reliable and more diverse energy supplies and increasing cooperation with them on energy efficiency, renewable energy sources, demand management and climate change adaptation and mitigation will help to build up both partners’ resilience and the EU's. These efforts should focus not just on the neighbourhood itself, but also on building up wider regional partnerships into Central Asia and the Middle East.

The security dimension

14 Strengthening EU support to Tunisia, JOIN(2016) 47 final i

The EU is developing and enforcing security strategies in the Neighbourhood region by supporting Security Sector Reforms (SSR); working on the prevention of radicalisation leading to violent extremism; introducing hybrid threats and bolstering cybersecurity.

EU support to SSR in all partner countries is now framed by the recently adopted EU SSR

policy 15 . Effectiveness and good governance of the security apparatus are essential assets for

more resilient societies. As announced in the EU Joint Framework on Countering Hybrid

Threats 16 , country-specific hybrid risk surveys are being launched in the Neighbourhood. The

framework also calls for a closer EU-NATO cooperation. The EU has been supporting cyber capacity building in partner countries based on the Convention on Cybercrime of the Council of Europe (the Budapest Convention).

Factors such as discrimination and lack of educational and economic opportunities act as specific drivers in the radicalisation of young people. The EU is addressing this through targeted social and educational development and by increasing partner countries' abilities to work with European agencies on counter-terrorism measures and combatting organised crime.

Migration and mobility, Forced displacement

Europe's neighbourhood is a source, a transit point and a destination for migrants. Europe's neighbourhood also includes both countries hosting refugees as well as countries of origin of refugees. The EU approach aims at improving international protection of refugees. It also aims at reducing irregular migration; promoting legal migration and mobility; maximising the development impact of migration and effectively managing borders. An illustration of this approach is the EU Emergency Trust Fund for Africa.

Following on from the Syria Conference in London in February 2016, compacts were developed with Lebanon and Jordan to address the needs and promote the resilience and selfreliance of refugees and vulnerable host communities by providing education and employment opportunities.

The January 2017 Communication on Migration on the Central Mediterranean Route 17

focussed efforts on cooperation with Libya and other North African countries to tackle migration issues. EUR 200 million will be provided from the EU Trust Fund for Africa in 2017 with an emphasis on tackling migration issues in Libya.

Through regional projects, the EU has been assisting all Neighbourhood countries to enhance their ability to prevent, get prepared and respond to natural and man-made disasters, based on the principles and approach of the Union Civil Protection Mechanism.

• 4. 

  Conclusions and way forward

4.1 Validity of concept and meaning

The current global situation of fragility and crises, linked to a more coherent global agenda, as indicated by the SDGs and the call to leave "no –one behind", , and the realisation that change, uncertainty and risk is a normative part of societal functioning, has led broad agreement that resilience is relevant, and a pre-requisite for societal progress and stability.

4.2 Context analysis for better programming and implementation

15 JOIN(2016) 31 final i of 5 July 2016

16 JOIN(2016) 18 final i of 6 April 2016

17 Migration on the Central Mediterranean Route, managing flows, saving lives, JOIN(2017) 4 final i

In support of the collective approaches demanded by these above mentioned opportunities, further development of EU analytical and programming tools is recommended.

Joint and shared analysis – comprehensive and systematic

Work still needs to be done for various services of the EU to intervene according to mandate

and added value; this would allow greater efficiency and impact. A differentiated level of engagement in joint programming may be required. One option is for the EU, with the

engagement of MS, to establish requirements for systematic risk and resilience analyses that

identify differing drivers of vulnerability along with transparent linkages between these

analytical processes, programme objectives and EU country strategies.

According to the Evaluation on building resilience in the LAC region, EU staff request further

guidance on operationalising the resilience approach, including a division of responsibilities

and programming tools. The EU possesses a wide ranging number of tools to assist with 360

degree analysis. The next step is now to ensure capacity building and guidance to

systematically apply and share the relevant tools across programmes and services. Reaching an understanding of the local political, development and institutional context is a necessary

prerequisite for developing appropriate resilience strategies and programmes and to broaden

our analysis of risk. PEA 18 is one of the key analytical tools to inform policy and political

dialogue. Context analysis including the PEA tool should be regularly used to adjust EU

projects and programmes ensuring that our actions remain relevant and effective over time.

Integrating conflict sensitivity into planning and programmes

In fragile environments, existing conflict sensitivity tools should be more systematically used, to assist the prevention of potential conflicts, avoiding negative impacts and doing harm.

Integrating environmental resilience into programming and project design

Environment, climate change and DRR should be systematically integrated into programming

and project design.

Increasing multiyear, flexible programming

Working towards mutually agreed medium and longer term objectives necessitates multi-year

programming, also in humanitarian assistance. Longer-term programmes should be risk

informed, incorporating flexibility and contingencies.

Social protection and cash-based responses

Extensive evidence demonstrates that social protection helps reduce poverty and inequality,

enhances livelihoods, and has long-term positive impacts on human capital development.

While establishing effective social protection in the context of protracted instability and

displaced populations is more complex, responsive long-term systems that bridge the

18 18 OECD DAC has defined 'Political Economy Analysis' as relating to "the interaction of political and economic

processes in a society: the distribution of power and wealth between different groups and individuals, and the processes that create, sustain and transform these relationships over time".

humanitarian-developmental divide are needed to reach affected vulnerable populations consistently.

More widespread use of cash as a humanitarian response mechanism to allow beneficiaries to

meet basis needs, can be distributed using local systems, and can be used to maintain or

establish local markets. If the conditions are right, cash is more efficient and flexible.

4.3 Risk management, early action and early response

The EU Sendai Action plan, in support of SDG/Agenda 2030, calls for a disaster riskinformed

approach across EU policies to strengthen resilience to risks and shocks.

Strengthening national and local competencies for risk management

Integrating contingencies and crisis modifiers is part of a deliberate process to promote early

action and response within EU programming but also to strengthen the local and national

capacities to do so. DG ECHO is one of the first donors to support an "anticipation fund" for

crisis response. In more stable environments, Governments, with support from development

partners, should be encouraged and assisted to take more responsibility for chronic vulnerably and strengthen local capabilities for risk management and an earlier, local response.

Environmental, climate and disaster risk assessments should be more systematically required

and applied to identify potential impacts of catastrophic sudden and slow onset risks, as well

as to identify and prioritise preventive and/or adaptive measures for risk informed

investments. More operational risk informed programming is needed to ensure effective joint approaches to build the resilience of people and ecosystems for adaptation and DRR, in

particular to strengthen capacities of community-based organisations, civil society

organisations and local authorities.

Advocacy and media outreach for resilience

The 2016 Communication for a new European Consensus on Development recommends joint

analysis of risk and vulnerabilities for an increased use of EU single response strategies and,

where appropriate, joint indicative programmes, recognising the EU's unique ability to

influence change, from a political perspective, through operational programmes and as a

convenor of MS in support of complementary outcomes.

Investing in risk management, promoting more inclusive societies and overall attaining

resilience objectives requires widespread public and political support. The EU should

continue to take the lead demonstrated in 2012 in building international and local support

through well organised initiatives such as the Political Champions for Resilience, the 2014 and 2016 Resilience Forums and the third World Reconstruction Conference (2017). The

New resilience commitments should be backed up by a robust communication strategy that

advocates and assists media awareness of critical resilience issues; for example, recurring low

level forced displacement that does not hit the headlines, or the value of risk management as

compared to the spectacle of response. Local and international media can be powerful agents for change starting with asking questions on the root causes before a next recurrent,

predicable and protracted crisis hit populations.

Monitoring tools for resilience

As recommended in evaluations, DG DEVCO, DG ECHO and EEAS (in relation to Instrument contributing to Stability and Peace – IcSP) to develop common monitoring and

evaluation tools, including the similar markers to that used by ECHO for monitoring progress

in integrating resilience perspectives into programming whilst, at the same time DG DEVCO,

DG ECHO and EEAS could implement a common learning strategy. Options include

introducing shared accountability frameworks, into programmes and country strategies that define monitoring and reporting indicators across EU services and Member States that

incorporate key elements of a strategic resilience approach.

Within the context of the Research Network on the Measurement of Resilience, the JRC has

just started working on creating a dashboard of resilience characteristics (observable, “usual”

statistical variables that prove to be meaningful and significant drivers/determinants of the

resilience of entities such as cities, regions, countries or individuals) for EU MS, regions and

cities. Lessons from this activity could be drawn also for the external dimension of the EU.

4.4 Delivering on international commitments, taking opportunities

In addition to the global commitments listed previously, further momentum is provided by the international context and EU operational commitments to deliver on policy priorities to address protracted crises and protracted forced displacement, including:

• The elaboration, across EU institutions, of medium to longer term strategies for protracted crisis (notably Syria and neighbouring countries) – with clarity of roles, expectations and matching budgetary commitments.

• The delivery of the explicit resilience objectives in the EU Trust Funds. • DGs DEVCO, ECHO and EU delegations collaboration in nexus/LRRD pilot

countries 19 as well as forced displacement focus countries for joint programming, for

better collective outcomes.

• Marked attention to forced displacement as a joint responsibility of political, economic, developmental and humanitarian actors, calling for a new developmentoriented

approach, supporting access to education, housing, land and productive assets, livelihoods, services and community interaction.

• Strengthening resilience must be locally owned and driven by national and local actors. Policies and programmes for state and societal resilience should be developed and implemented in partnership with local communities, civil society, national and local authorities, research institutions and the private sector.

The processes and approaches promoted by the Resilience Action Plan provide valuable experiences and lessons that will contribute to meeting these objectives and by doing so, further advancing the practicalities and benefits of integrating resilience principles into normative planning processes.

19 Kenya, Somalia, Uganda, Sudan, Tanzania, Ethiopia, South-Sudan, Nigeria, Niger, Chad, Afghanistan,

Myanmar, Iraq, Yemen