Chapter 2. Greece’s policy vision and framework
This chapter assesses the extent to which clear political directives, policies and strategies shape Greece’s development co-operation and are in line with international commitments, including the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. While the 2030 Agenda and the European Consensus on Development frame Greece’s approach to development co-operation, it lacks a vision to guide its efforts. Once conditions improve, Greece should consider updating its legislation and introducing a strategy covering all actors in development co-operation, focusing on its comparative advantage in a few selected countries. Greece could draw on its domestic experience with environmental protection and gender equality to develop guidance on mainstreaming cross-cutting issues. Despite the lack of funding opportunities, the Directorate General of International Development Cooperation-Hellenic Aid could engage stakeholders in a regular dialogue about Greece’s development co-operation, and its approach to regional and global issues.
Framework
The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the European Consensus on Development frame Greece’s approach to development co-operation. Nevertheless, Greece lacks a vision or statement of purpose to guide its efforts. Once conditions improve, Greece should consider updating its legislation and introducing a strategy covering all actors in development co-operation, focusing on its comparative advantage in a few selected countries.
A vision is needed to guide Greece’s future development co-operation
Greece seeks to assist partner countries’ efforts to achieve sustainable development, fight poverty and engage in international trade (Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2018). The new European Consensus on Development endorsed by Greece in 2017 (European Commission, 2017), the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change frame Greece’s approach to development co-operation. Nevertheless, Greece does not possess a clear policy vision or top-level statement of purpose, and its development co-operation is not clearly positioned within the political and strategic context. Greece’s vision for development co-operation used to be formulated in a medium-term strategy. However, Greece has not adopted such a strategy since 2006 (OECD, 2008, 2013).
The legal framework (Law 2731/1999 and Presidential Decree 224/2000) establishes the Directorate General of International Development Cooperation-Hellenic Aid of the Hellenic Ministry of Foreign Affairs (DG Hellenic Aid); details the contractual requirements for personnel and service providers; and establishes Greece’s register for development non-governmental organisations (NGOs), determining their role in Greece’s development co-operation. It also creates the Inter-Ministerial Committee for the Organization and Coordination of International Economic Relations (EOSDOS), requires the establishment of inter-ministerial working groups to support the monitoring of development co-operation strategies, and directs that official development assistance (ODA) should follow OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) standards (Government of Greece, 1999, 2000).
The 2011 DAC peer review recommended that Greece refine the 2011 draft legislation and its proposed five-year programme to ensure planned reforms were specific, effective and followed international best practice (OECD, 2013). However, these documents were not progressed. Some stakeholders recognise the need to reform Greece’s legal framework. In the current situation – characterised by greater political priorities, a significant drop in ODA as a result of the economic crisis and the ongoing resolution of misuse of funds – such reforms seem unlikely. Once conditions improve, Greece should draw on DAC peer review recommendations, ensuring that the principles and policies outlined in a new law and five-year programme apply to all the actors involved in Greece’s development co-operation.
Greece’s development co-operation lacks a clear focus and priorities
The country’s legal framework does not specify the thematic and geographic scope of its development co-operation, and the absence of a draft programme or medium-term strategy means it lacks a clear focus and priorities.
Greek development co-operation has traditionally focused on poverty, hunger, health, education and culture, and peace and security. It has treated the environment and climate change, good governance and gender equality as cross-cutting issues (Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2018). The current economic and refugee crises have meant that Greece concentrates its ODA on multilateral assistance, in-donor refugee costs and scholarships (Chapter 3).
As circumstances improve and Greece considers the future content of its development and humanitarian programme, it should take the opportunity to select a few themes where it has a comparative advantage, as recommended in previous DAC peer reviews.
Principles and guidance
The Directorate General of International Development Cooperation-Hellenic Aid could draw on Greece’s domestic experience with environmental protection and gender equality to develop guidance on mainstreaming cross-cutting issues. Greece delivers its support to least-developed countries through European Union institutions.
Policy guidance on mainstreaming cross-cutting issues would enhance the impact of Greece’s ODA
Greece prioritises environmental protection, which is embedded in the Constitution and the dedicated Law 1650/1986 (Government of Greece, 1986). National priorities for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) include protecting the environment and safeguarding the country’s unique ecological wealth (Government of Greece, 2018). At the international level, Greece has signed memoranda of understanding with several countries, to co-operate on topics including clean cities, marine protection, and environmental monitoring and warning systems.
Gender equality, and the empowerment of women and girls, are also Greek priorities (Government of Greece, 2018). The objectives of the National Action Plan on Gender Equality 2016-20201 include:
-
including a gender perspective in legislation and public policies for vulnerable social groups
-
providing holistic, multisectoral support of women who are victims of gender violence and/or multiple discriminations
-
integrating a gender perspective in healthcare policies
-
accelerating the equal participation of women in all areas of public and professional life, particularly in decision-making positions in the Greek Parliament and local/regional government.
Greece is also aware of the need to protect female migrants. In 2011, the General Secretariat for Gender Equality (GSGE) and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) developed guidelines to protect refugee women and girls during first-reception and asylum procedures (GSGE, 2011). In 2016, several ministries and government entities adopted a common framework for action providing refugee women victims of violence and their children with safe shelter, counselling, employment and health services, cultural activities and access to education (GSGE, 2016). The volume of migrants, and the resulting strain on reception facilities, means that implementation has been challenging.2 While Greece has yet to develop a national action plan for the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security, the experience gained integrating a gender perspective in its response to the refugee crisis could provide valuable lessons when it develops this plan.
Greece has endorsed the new European Consensus on Development, which highlights cross-cutting issues such as democracy, human rights, the rule of law, gender equality and climate change (Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2018). However, DG Hellenic Aid has yet to develop policy guidance on mainstreaming cross-cutting issues in its development co-operation. Such guidance could enhance both the present and future impact of Greece’s development co-operation. It could draw on Greece’s domestic experience, engaging experts from relevant ministries to provide advice on mainstreaming sustainability and environmental protection in its support for refugees. It could also consider how scholarships might better contribute to gender equality and women’s empowerment.
Greece delivers its support for least-developed countries through EU institutions
While Greece seeks to reduce poverty and recognises the importance of leaving no one behind, it has not clarified how it will achieve this objective in its development co-operation. Greece currently addresses these issues primarily through multilateral co-operation. It delivers its support to least-developed countries through its assessed contributions to the EU development budget and the European Development Fund: in 2016, 12.8% of Greece’s total ODA was channelled through multilateral organisations to support least-developed countries (Annex B, Table B.7).
Greece considers that its multilateral partners have adopted a leave-no-one-behind approach, for example by focusing on income inequalities, women and youth, or endeavouring to promote an equitable multilateral aid system (OECD, forthcoming).
Basis for decision making
Greece has had limited engagement with civil society and private-sector partners in recent years. Despite the lack of funding opportunities, DG Hellenic Aid could engage stakeholders in a regular dialogue about Greece’s development co-operation, and its approach to regional and global issues.
Greece has limited engagement with civil society and private-sector partners
Greece’s development co-operation has primarily targeted its neighbouring region. Bilateral co-operation focused on the Balkans, and had begun to expand to the Mediterranean and the Caucasus prior to the economic crisis. Previous DAC peer reviews recommended formalising these relationships through country strategies. However, Greece has not pursued this, as its bilateral ODA is limited to scholarships and in-donor refugee costs. An integrated and coherent approach to offering scholarships might enhance their developmental impact (Chapter 5).
Policy engagement with stakeholders outside of government – NGOs, the private sector and academics – has been limited to occasional events discussing SDG-related topics.
As bilateral funding has dropped significantly, and questions regarding misuse of funds by some NGOs in the 2000s remain unresolved, no calls for proposals have been issued since 2011. DG Hellenic Aid has not developed a policy outlining criteria for selecting NGOs to partner with, as recommended in the last peer review (OECD, 2013).
Despite the lack of funding, DG Hellenic Aid could engage other stakeholders in regular dialogue about Greece’s development co-operation policy. This would allow the country to build potentially beneficial relationships for the future and benefit from the expertise accumulated by NGOs through their engagement in the refugee crisis.
Greece might consider a co-ordinated approach to engaging with multilateral institutions
Greece’s support for multilateral and regional institutions is a significant component of its development co-operation. In 2016, Greece’s gross multilateral ODA comprised 57% of total ODA – twice the 27% DAC average. Greece currently contributes to over 27 regional institutions, development banks, UN agencies and multilateral organisations. It focuses first and foremost on meeting its assessed contributions and annual subscriptions to multilateral and regional institutions; beyond that, each ministry determines whether to provide voluntary contributions. Given the limited multilateral co-operation budget (the bulk of available funding goes to European institutions), Greece has had little opportunity to rationalise aid channelled through multilateral institutions, as recommended in the 2011 peer review (OECD, 2013) (Chapter 3). An assessment of the effectiveness and added value of Greece’s multilateral contributions, which commenced in June 2018, is a positive first step.
Despite its limited funding, Greece could enhance its ability to influence its multilateral partners and in turn the global development agenda in two ways. First, it could establish a coherent and co-ordinated whole-of-government approach to engaging with multilateral institutions, based on predefined priorities for multilateral engagement and pre-agreed issues to be advocated within each institution. Second, it could work more closely with like-minded donors to influence the governance of its key multilateral partners. In this regard, Greece might draw on the experience of other DAC members and consider whether it might benefit from future membership in the Multilateral Organization Performance Assessment Network (MOPAN).3
References
Government sources
Government of Greece (2018), Voluntary National Review on the Implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: Greece, July 2018, General Secretariat of the Government, Office of Coordination, Institutional, International & European Affairs, Government of Greece, Athens, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/19378Greece_VNR_Greece_2018_pdf_FINAL_140618.pdf .
Government of Greece (2000), Presidential Decree 224/2000, Government of Greece, Athens
Government of Greece (1999), Law 2731/1999, Government of Greece, Athens.
Government of Greece (1986), Law 1650/1986, Government of Greece, Athens.
GSGE (2016), “Cooperation protocol on the adaptation of a common framework of procedures for refugee women, victims of violence”, General Secretariat for Gender Equality, Ministry of Interior, Athens, www.isotita.gr/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Protocol-on-Cooperation-for-Refugee-Women.pdf .
GSGE (2011), “Guidelines for Protecting Women and Girls during first entry and asylum procedures in Greece”, General Secretariat for Gender Equality, Ministry of Interior, Athens, www.isotita.gr/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Asylum_Guidelines_en_nov2011.pdf .
Ministry of Foreign Affairs (2018), “Memorandum submitted by the Greek Authorities to the Development Assistance Committee/DAC of the OECD”, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Athens.
Other sources
European Commission (2017), “The New European Consensus on Development: ‘Our World, Our Dignity, Our Future’: Joint Statement by the Council, and the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States meeting within the Council, the European Parliament and the European Commission”, 7 June 2017, European Commission, Brussels, https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/sites/devco/files/european-consensus-on-development-final-20170626_en.pdf.
Human Rights Watch (2018), “Misery for Women and Girls in Greece’s Island Paradise: Government Downplays Sexual Violence Risks in Migrant Hotspots”, Human Rights Watch, New York, https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/02/14/misery-women-and-girls-greeces-island-paradise.
OECD (forthcoming), Development Cooperation Report 2018: Joining Forces to Leave No One Behind, OECD Publishing, Paris.
OECD (2013), OECD Development Assistance Peer Reviews: Greece 2011, OECD Development Assistance Peer Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264117112-en.
OECD (2008), "DAC Peer Review of Greece", OECD Journal on Development, Vol. 7/4, OECD, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/journal_dev-v7-art40-en.
UNHCR (2018a), “Refugee women and children face heightened risk of sexual violence amid tensions and overcrowding at reception facilities on Greek islands”, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Geneva, http://www.unhcr.org/news/briefing/2018/2/5a7d67c4b/refugee-women-children-face-heightened-risk-sexual-violence-amid-tensions.html.
UNHCR (2018b), “Refugee women and children face heightened risk of sexual violence amid tensions and overcrowding at reception facilities on Greek islands”, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Geneva, http://www.unhcr.org/news/latest/2018/2/5a7d89374/women-report-sexual-abuse-fears-greek-reception-centres.html.
Notes
← 1. The plan was prepared by the GSGE: www.isotita.gr/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Greece-National-Action-Plan-on-Gender-Equality-2016-2020.pdf.
← 2. Overcrowding in island hotspots affects the implementation of the co-operation protocol. Due to insufficient capacity, many women remain in unsafe shelters, and strained staff miss identifying and helping victims of sexual and gender-based violence. Transfer to the mainland provides relief, but more needs to be done (UNHCR, 2018a, 2018b; Human Rights Watch, 2018).
← 3. MOPAN (www.mopanonline.org/) was launched in 2002 as a network of like-minded donor countries whose goal is to monitor the performance of multilateral development organisations at the country level. All members have a common interest in knowing more about the effectiveness of multilateral organisations through joint assessments, information exchange, and expertise in monitoring and evaluation.