Why did the U.K. Merge DFID and FCO?
The pursuit of National Interests while Facing an Economic Crisis
On the 17th of June 2020, UK Prime Minister, Boris Jonson, announced the merger of the Department for International Development (DFID) and the Department for Foreign & Commonwealth Office (FCO). The new Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) was established in early September. Following the integration of the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) and the Australian Aid (AusAID) into the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, this move marks the end of the UK model, which is responsible for the planning and implementation of development cooperation policies. What does the integration of DFID and the change in UK’s development cooperation mean for global trends?
Ideas of a “Global Britain” after BREXIT
As many expected DFID to play a leading role in the COVID-19 crisis battle in developing countries, this merger announcement came as a surprise. However, the decision itself, apparently, was not out of the blue. PM Johnson had openly campaigned for this merger since 2016, when he was the Foreign Secretary in former PM Theresa May’s government. Thus, many considered the merger to be a matter of time since Johnson was elected Prime Minister in December, 2019. “When the Johnson government was inaugurated, it was thought that such integration would be a high possibility,” says Ryutaro Murotani, director of the International Assistance and Coordination Planning Office, Planning Department, Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA).
It is believed that now PM Johnson has achieved his long-time ambition, he is planning to channel the UK’s ODA to areas that are directly connected to the security and national interests of the UK through the new FCDO. Indeed, in announcing the integration, PM Johnson has posed the question: Why should the ODA size to maintain Ukrainian security, which is a key factor in peace and stability across Europe, be the same as the support for Zambia? This question suggests that the PM is likely to prioritize regions and sectors directly linked to UK security in future ODA projects.
Dr. Takashi Karasawa, an Emeritus Professor of Ritsumeikan University, observes this merger and domestic administrative reform as being a part of the UK government’s strategy to pursue the idea of a “Global Britain”. This idea was created by the former PM May’s government, after the referendum in 2016, which decided to leave the European Union (EU).The idea is a future concept of the UK once outside of the EU, rebuilding bilateral relationships with countries such as the US, Japan and the members of the former Commonwealth of Nations, and taking the lead in the rule-based international order not only in Europe, but also in the Asia Pacific and Northern America. Karasawa points out that the Johnson government intends to integrate the DFID’s budget, which was 4 times bigger than that of the FCO, toward diplomacy and national trading so that it will work efficiently in serving the UK’s national interests as well as covering the pursuit of the idea of a “Global Britain”.
This swing to a more national-interest-oriented aid policy has been met by many objections, including open criticisms from 3 former prime ministers. David Cameron has stated that this merger would only lead to “less respect for the UK’s overseas presence”. Many NGOs, think-tanks and research institutions have also expressed their concerns with this increased emphasis on the pursuit of national interests. However, it is questionable as to whether this “swing” could be stated as a recent phenomenon because there seems to have been a leaning towards national interests for some time.
National interest authorized GNI 0.7%
DFID, which used to be an external agency of the FCO, was established in 1997 as an independent ministry to take charge of policy planning and implementation for development cooperation. With the sole purpose of reducing poverty, it was committed to free and “flagless” financial support, and has set out its own innovative development cooperation policy, such as prohibiting any “tied-in programs”. This “British model” had a great impact on other Western countries and international organizations such as the World Bank, establishing a global trend. Under such circumstances, development cooperation methods that differed from this British model, such as Japan’s “face-to-face assistance” through infrastructure development, have been strongly criticized by Western donors, mainly in the UK.
However, since around 2010, the global development trend has once again taken on the appearance of pursuing national interests. Part of this is due to the global financial crisis of 2008, said Dr. David Harris, a senior lecturer at the University of Bradford in the UK. In fact, due to the financial crisis and the subsequent European debt crisis, total ODA spending in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Development Assistance Committee (DAC) member countries, which had been on the rise since 1997, decreased in 2011. In addition to this reduction, Harris believes that the rise of narrative in donor countries demanding the pursuit of national interests in development cooperation is also a major factor.
In Japan, the ODA budget, itself, has been sluggish since 2000 but the financial crisis did not reduce the amount as much as in Western countries. However, the “Development Cooperation Charter” decided by the Cabinet in 2015, clearly mentioned pursuing national interests.
The UK, exceptionally, is one of the few countries that did not reduce their ODA spending, despite the detrimental impact of the financial crisis. Moreover, they managed to increase it. In 2013, it achieved the international commitment agreed at the United Nations General Assembly in 1970 to “raise the amount of ODA expenditures of each country to 0.7% of the gross national income (GNI).”
On the other hand, the Conservative Party administration at that time advocated development cooperation that contributes to national interests in 2010. In 2015, they announced a new ODA strategy “UK aid: tackling global challenges in the national interest” that deviated from the original idea of establishing DFID by clearly stating “national interests” in the title. The strategy states throughout the text that “development cooperation in developing countries will strengthen the UK’s security and contribute to economic development.”
Interestingly, in the same year, the UK government was the only one in the world to legislate 0.7% of GNI for ODA budgets by law. It is said that there was no big opposition from the parliament and the public, but some take the view that the new policy of pursuing national interests justified and backed up this legislation.
“In the UK, the concept of ‘development cooperation’ is widely supported. But the form of development cooperation supported by the people and the government changes with social conditions,” says Harris. “Looking back on history, now we are suffering from the COVID-19 crisis, it is understandable that the tendency to pursue national interests would speed up. ”
As a post COVID-19 recession is expected that would even exceed the 2008 financial crisis, there is concern that the UK government will reduce its ODA budget to less than 0.7% of GNI. Still, those that have long observed the UKs aid strategies predict that the “0.7% standard” is most likely going to be adhered to, at least on record. This may include the negotiations concerning statistical methods with the UN and other multilateral programs to review UKs contributions of ODA spending.
A Chance to Respond to the Era of SDGs
Twenty-three years since DFID was established, the definition of aid has been constantly changing, and it is no longer the same as in 1997. Even so, this merger may be a turning point as it has been made clear that the UK has decided to let go of the symbol of “autonomy from national interests”, and thus, disappointment is understandable. However, it could be argued that this merger is an opportunity to open up new methods of aid implementation by the UK government.
Sir Paul Collier, an adviser to the current Foreign Minister, Dominic Raab, (the new FCDO Minister), is critical of traditional DFID aid implementation, concentrating on grant aid programs and funding through NGOs.
“These methods have not only been ineffective in fundamentally solving poverty but also extremely patronizing”, explains Collier. He also says, “new approaches are needed. We need to enable new forms of aid projects that are more timely and fitting”.
One of the better, more timely forms of development that Collier sees is the promotion of private investment. The setting of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015, has boosted the mobilization of private funds. The US establishing the United States International Development Finance Corporation (USDFC), which merged departments of the Overseas Private Investment Company (OPIC) and the Agency for International Development (USAID) in 2018, is also a part of this trend. Collier argues that the UK should also support development of new private companies through the Commonwealth Development Corporation (CDC) via development cooperation from the new ministry.
Dr. Karasawa also thinks that this merger is a chance for positive change. He believes it is an opportunity for the UK’s new, post-BREXIT diplomacy to incorporate “global interests” at its core, with the knowledge, networks, experience and, most importantly, the enthusiasm for common good brought in by the former DFID staff. He also points out that it is not only the UK but other countries. Japan included, is in need for change on how it conducts foreign policies and build new relationships with partner countries in the Post COVID-19 world. Thus, new departments such as the FCDO would be a good opportunity to collaborate and seek new methods and trends.
Facing the changes brought up by the COVID-19 pandemic and other shifts in international politics, the world that we have known has been shaken to its very core. A new era may be dawning in which Japan, the UK and other countries are seeking new forms of international relationships, hand-in-hand, that incorporate global wellness in terms of both aid and diplomatic policies. (Natsu Kimura)
International Development Journal 2020 September edition
＊＊＊＊＊以下、日本語原文＊＊＊＊＊
日英の新たな「共創」関係へ
「国益との分離」の看板を下ろした英国の開発協力
英国のボリス・ジョンソン首相は6月16日、同国の政府開発援助（ODA）予算の約７割を管轄する英国国際開発省（DFID）を外務連邦省（FCO）に統合すると発表した。カナダ国際開発庁（CIDA）やオーストラリア国際開発庁（AusAID）などの外務省への統合に続くこの動きは、開発協力政策の立案から実施までを担う英国モデルの終焉を意味する。DFIDの統合、そして英国の開発協力の変化は、世界の潮流の中でどのように位置づけられるのか。
「国益との分離」の象徴への失望
統合に伴い、英国政府は９月中に外務連邦開発省（FCDO）を新設し、外交および開発協力政策の一体化を図るという。世界各地で深刻化するコロナ禍への対応に向けてDFIDの活躍が期待されていたさなかであり、その発表のタイミングに驚く声は多い。
ただ、統合自体は青天の霹靂ではない。2019年12月に英首相に就任したジョンソン氏は、外相時の16年よりこの統合を主張してきた。「ジョンソン政権が誕生した時点で、統合はあり得ると考えられていた」と、国際協力機構（JICA）企画部国際援助協調企画室の室谷龍太郎室長は言う。
ジョンソン首相は統合の発表にあたり、これまで英国のODAで欧州全域の平和と安定にも関わるウクライナの安全保障維持のための取り組みとアフリカのザンビアへの支援額が同じ水準であることに疑問を呈し、今後は英国の安全保障に直結する地域や分野への支出を増やすことを示唆している。
こうした動向を、世界経済と欧州の国際政治を追う立命館大学の唐沢敬名誉教授は、「DFIDとFCOの統合は『グローバル・ブリテン』構想と国内行政改革をつなぐ戦略の一環だ」と分析する。同構想は、欧州連合（EU）離脱を決定した2016年の国民投票後、当時のテリーザ・メイ政権が打ち出したものだ。米国、旧英連邦加盟国や日本などとの関係を強化し欧州、北米、アジア太平洋地域で広く存在感を示すことを目指している。唐沢教授は、「この構想実現への道程は平坦ではない」と指摘し、「英国政府は、FCOの4倍以上もあるDFIDの予算を用いて、構想実現に向けたより大規模な外交政策を展開したいと考えているのだろう」と語る。
だが、「国益と開発協力の分離」の象徴として見られてきた英国の開発協力が、「外交のための開発協力」となることには、英国国内でも賛否が分かれる。元英国首相のデイビット・キャメロン氏は、DFIDが開発協力の専門省庁として、内政面でも対外的にも大きな存在感を持っていたことを強調し、「統合は、英国の存在感を著しく弱める」と批判した。また、英国内外のNGOやシンクタンクなど多くの開発協力関係者も、ここ数年の開発協力における国益追求の世界的な潮流がさらに強まることに懸念を示す。
国益追求がGNI比0.7%を正当化
DFIDは1997年、FCOの外局だった海外開発庁が独立し、政策から実施を一手に担うことで外部要因に影響されない開発協力を軸に定めた省として誕生した。貧困削減を唯一の目的とし、無償かつ“顔の見えない”財政支援にこだわり、一切の「ひも付き援助」の禁止など、独自で革新的な開発協力方針を打ち出している。この「英国モデル」は欧米諸国や世界銀行などの国際機関にも大きな影響を与え、世界的な潮流を築いた。そうした中で、インフラ整備などを通した日本の“顔の見える援助”など、このモデルとは異なる開発協力手法は英国を中心とした欧米ドナーから強く批判されてきた。
だが、2010年前後から世界的な開発潮流は再び国益追求の様相を呈している。その一因は2008年の世界的な金融危機にあると、英国ブラッドフォード大学で上級講師を務めるデイビッド・ハリス氏（本誌34～35ページにインタビュー記事を掲載）は指摘する。実際、金融危機とそれに続く欧州債務危機の影響で、1997年から増加傾向にあった経済協力開発機構（OECD）開発援助委員会（DAC）加盟国のODA支出総額は2011年に減少している。ハリス氏はこの減額に加え、各国内で開発協力に国益の追求を求める世論が台頭したことも、大きな要因になったとみている。日本でも、ODA予算自体は00年以降低迷していたこともあって金融危機では欧米諸国ほどの減額とはならなかったが、15年に閣議決定された「開発協力大綱」では国益の追求が明文化された。
英国は、金融危機では被害を受けながらもODA支出を維持・増額した数少ない国で、2013年には1970年の国連総会で合意された「各国のODAの支出額を国民総所得（GNI）比0.7％に引き上げる」とした国際公約を達成した。一方で、当時の保守党政権は10年に国益に資する開発協力を提唱し、2015年にはタイトルに「国益」を明記しDFID設立当初の理念と乖離する新たなODA戦略を発表した。戦略では本文の随所に「途上国における開発協力は英国の安全保障を強化し、経済発展に寄与する」と明示している。
興味深いのは、同年に英国政府はGNI比0.7％をODA予算に充てることを世界で唯一法令化したことだ。これに対して議会や国民から大きな反対は出なかったというだが、その背景には国益を追求する新方針がこの法制化を正当化したとの見方もある。ハリス氏は、「英国では広く『開発協力』の概念が支持されている。ただ、国民と政府が支持する開発協力の形は社会状況に伴い変わってきた」と語り、「歴史を振り返れば、コロナ禍で苦悩する今、国益追求の傾向がさらに強まることは十分理解可能だ」とした。
今後、金融危機を超えるコロナ不況が予想され、英国政府もGNI比0.7％を下回るほどODA予算を縮小させる懸念もある。それでも、こうしたこれまで英国のこだわりを振り返ると、国連への支出の統計方法を見直してでもこの基準を死守するとの見方もある。
SDGs時代に対応するチャンス
時代の要請を受けて「国益との分離」の看板を下ろした英国の開発協力だが、一方で新たな形で国際益に貢献する機会であるとの見方もある。
その一人が、FCDOの大臣に就任予定のドミニク・ラーブ現外相のアドバイザーを務める、国際政治学者のポール・コリアー氏だ。同氏は「従来の無償財政支援やNGOを通した取り組みは、根本的な貧困解決にはならず、途上国の自助努力を妨げてきた」との見解を示し、「財政支援などのイメージが強かったDFIDだが、新省として、より時代に沿った開発協力が可能になる。その一つは民間投資の促進だ」と語っている。
持続可能な開発目標（SDGs）の達成を含め、途上国への民間資金の動員は開発協力において大きな課題だ。ODAがそうした民間資金動員の“触媒”となることを目指す動きは日本でも活発化している。米国でも、2018年に海外民間投資公社（OPIC）と米国国際開発庁（USAID）を一部再編した米国国際開発金融公社（USDFC）が設立されている。「英国も新省の下、英連邦開発公社（CDC）を通した民間企業の途上国進出を今まで以上に支援していくべきだ」と、コリアー氏は主張する。
唐沢教授も「EUを離脱した英国には今後、他国と新しい関係を築いていく上で、DFIDに蓄積された知見やネットワーク、開発協力への熱意という普遍的な視点・理念を組み込んだ外交戦略を展開する余地が残されている」と語る。同氏はまた、「コロナ禍や国際環境の変化を受け、日本も長期的かつ地球規模の視点で開発協力のあり方について再考する必要性に直面している。
EU離脱後の外交戦略と省庁改革が模索段階にある英国にも積極的に働きかけ、共に世界的に開発協力の潮流をリードする存在になるべき」と付け加えた。新しい体制の構築を始めた英国と共に、日本はじめ各国がより良い開発協力とそれを組み込んだ外交戦略を「共創」していく時代が、到来しているのかもしれない。
（本誌編集部・木村夏）
『国際開発ジャーナル』2020年９月号掲載記事
