Case Study 2: Improvements to the European Union’s co-financing arrangements through greater transparency, visibility and financial control.
Submitting Institution
University of LeedsUnit of Assessment
Politics and International StudiesSummary Impact Type
EconomicResearch Subject Area(s)
Economics: Applied Economics
Commerce, Management, Tourism and Services: Banking, Finance and Investment
Studies In Human Society: Policy and Administration
Summary of the impact
    The global financial crisis led the European Union (EU) to diversify its
      sources for the EU Budget, including co-financing instruments with
      multilateral development banks. Dr Robinson's research addressed key
      concerns about financial risk and the lack of transparency created through
      such partnerships. His research has been recognised as improving the
      understanding of these complex instruments within EU institutions and its
      impact may be measured through the implementation of several of its key
      recommendations. These include the creation of the `EBRD Representative
      for EU affairs' within a participating bank, the acceleration of EU
      co-financing strategy, and the unprecedented action of the EU Court of
      Auditors including the banks in their auditing process.
    Underpinning research
    The underpinning research for this case study has been undertaken by Nick
        Robinson (University of Leeds; Lecturer 2000-2012 Associate
      Professor 2013-present) at Leeds from 2004 onwards, and has resulted in a
      series of conference papers and articles published in SSCI ranked
      journals. This research sets out the case for a new understanding of
      European Union (EU) expenditure policy which takes into account the role
      of blended instruments and matched funding (where EU money works alongside
      money from the private sector, national governments, and loans from
      banks), and the important role played by the European Investment Bank
      (EIB).
    Robinson's research highlighted the inadequacy of existing
      accounts of EU expenditure policy, arguing that the focus of both policy
      makers and scholars on headline conflicts over the budget has led to
      fundamental flaws in the understanding of EU expenditure policy. Ignoring
      the importance of the additionality and matched funding principles, the
      pressures for increased spending caused by decisions on inter alia
      accession and foreign direct investment, and the impact of the EIB had
      resulted in a failure to account for over €150bn of additional spending
      per annum.
    These issues were first highlighted in the journal Comparative
        European Politics (2007) [1], where Robinson argued that
      despite the EIB's long history and its status as the largest multilateral
      development bank in the world (lending €61bn in 2011), its role in EU
      redistribution had been chronically under-emphasised. This argument for
      the importance of the EIB in any analysis of financial lending,
      transparency and accountability within the EU was developed more
      comprehensively in the Journal of Common Market Studies (2009)
      [2]. Specifically, this article identified (i) the need for systematic
      future research into the EIB's impact on EU strategic objectives and (ii)
      the importance of applying the EU lens of transparency, legitimacy and
      visibility to the workings of the EIB, a conclusion which is further
      underpinned by Robinson's study of informal power in the EU in the
      Journal of Power (2009) [3].
    Key findings of Robinson's research on the EIB highlighted
      concerns about financial risk, as well as the inevitable tension between a
      multilateral development bank making loans on a commercial basis that
      operates under terms of strict confidentiality and the need — and desire —
      of the EU to conduct activities in the spirit of transparency and
      visibility [1,2].
    With the European Parliament undergoing a wide-ranging and systematic
      review of the basis for future financing of the budget, in 2010 Robinson
      was commissioned by the EU Parliament's Committee on Budgets and funded
      with a grant of €56,000 to undertake a further research-led report to
      investigate the implications of co-financing for the EU budget, looking at
      transparency, visibility and financial control [4]. The report —
      co-authored with Bain, an independent researcher — focused on the EIB and
      another less well-known multilateral bank, the European Bank for
      Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) and was presented to the European
      Parliament in May 2011. Building on the insights from [1, 2 and 3], the
      findings of the report can be summarised as follows:
    Financial control of the EU budget:
    
      -  Co-financing presents few, if any, risks in terms of liability to the
        EU budget.
 
      -  The EIB's external lending poses little threat to the EU budget.
 
      -  There are adequate protection mechanisms in place in terms of loss
        provisioning.
 
      -  Co-financing presents the European Parliament with multiple
        challenges in terms of its ability to control programmes which are only
        part-funded by the EU budget.
 
    
    Governance and transparency
    
      -  Co-financing makes it more difficult for EU institutions to track how
        the budget is spent and to evaluate effectiveness.
 
      -  There is a tension between the EU's desire of transparency and the
        EIB and EBRD's desire for commercial confidentiality.
 
    
    Visibility
    
      -  Co-financing presents acute problems in terms of visibility, both at
        the level of stakeholder and beneficiary and between EU institutions
        themselves.
 
    
    References to the research
    
1. Robinson, N. (2007), `More than a Regulatory State: Bringing
      Expenditure (Back) into EU Research', Comparative European Politics,
      vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 179-204. Article in leading peer-reviewed SSCI ranked
      journal.
     
2. Robinson, N. (2009), `The European Investment Bank: the EU's
      Neglected Institution', Journal of Common Market Studies, vol. 47,
      no. 3, pp. 651-73. Article in leading peer-reviewed SSCI ranked journal in
      fields of both politics and international relations.
     
3. Robinson, N. (2009), `Informal Power in Regional
      Organisations: The Case of the EU', Journal of Power, vol. 2, no.
      1, pp. 111-135.
     
4. Robinson, N. and Bain, R. (2011), `The Implications of EIB and
      EBRD co-financing for the EU Budget', Brussels: European Union. 128pp.
      ISBN 13 978-92-823-3366-2. Available at:
      http://www.europarl.europa.eu/committees/en/studiesdownload.html?languageDocument=EN&file=37031.
      ISBN: 978-92-823-3366-2. Funding for the production of this research-led
      report was provided by Robinson, N. (2010) `The Implications of
      EIB and EBRD co-financing for the EU budget'. Tender No:
      IP/D/BUDG/IC/2010-153. Grant size: €56K. November 2010 to May 2011.
     
Details of the impact
    The research has had significant policy impact in terms of enhancing the
      visibility and policy role of the European Bank for Reconstruction and
      Development (EBRD); legitimating the financial viability of co-financing,
      and changing the operational practice of the European Court of Auditors.
      This impact can be attributed to the fact that Robinson's research was the
      first to explore in a systematic way the implications for the EU budget of
      working with the European Investment Bank (EIB) and the EBRD for the
      delivery of EU policy objectives.
    Enhanced policy role of European Bank for Reconstruction and
        Development (EBRD)
    The impact of Robinson's research can be clearly demonstrated
      through specific changes implemented by the EBRD — which lends €10bn per
      year to transition economies — to improve its visibility within the EU. As
      his research concluded that although many EU actors were familiar with the
      EIB, much less was known about the EBRD in terms of its capacity and
      capabilities, Robinson advocated the creation of a specific post
      to raise the EBRD's profile and liaise between the EU and the EBRD. As a
      direct result of his research, EBRD's vice president, Jan Fischer,
      announced they would be employing an EBRD Representative for EU Affairs,
      who has been in the post since May 2011:
    "as requested in the [Robinson] report, we are taking steps to
      enhance our visibility in Brussels, including through the appointment of
      the new special representative of the EBRD in Brussels, that is Madame
      Mandeep Bains who is sitting on my left-hand side here in this meeting"
      (speech to the European Parliament's Committee on Budgets, 2nd May 2011).
      [A. See also B; F]
    Members of the European Parliament Secretariat have corroborated
      Robinson's impact in terms of this policy recommendation as follows:
    "From the perspective of the European Parliament secretariat, we would
      argue that this appointment has significantly increased the visibility of
      the EBRD. In policy terms, this has resulted in a significant number of
      visits and policy exchanges between members of the EBRD and the European
      Parliament, with MEPs now more aware of the possibilities that exist from
      working with the EBRD. The implications of this have been extremely
      significant, with the EBRD now increasingly seen as a crucial policy
      partner for the EU, particularly in its lending operations outside the EU"
      [B].
    Following the success of the appointment of the EBRD Representative for
      EU Affairs, the EBRD is now establishing a permanent office in Brussels
      [F]. Directorial level staff from DG Development and Co-operation (DEVCO)
      described the legacy of the research's recommendations as having brought
      `significant added value' [C]:
    "The impact of the increase in visibility of the EBRD has been important
      in policy terms, serving to enhance the status of the EBRD in lending
      operations outside the EU [the EBRD lends approx. €10bn per annum] and
      increasing their role in policy discussions" [C].
    From the EBRD's point of view, the implications of this have been to
      `significantly raise the status of the EBRD ... making us a formal policy
      partner' [F]. For example, in the ongoing review of the Existing Blending
      Mechanism, the EBRD is now working alongside the EIB in the Technical
      Group of the EU Platform for Blending in External Co-operations `which are
      working on improving the quality and efficiency of EU blending mechanisms'
      [C]. Furthermore, Key EBRD staff have been seconded to DEVCO. This is
      unprecedented.
    Acceleration of co-financing strategy
    The impact of Robinson's work has been to vindicate and
      legitimise DG Economic and Financial Affairs' (ECFIN's) strategy in terms
      of co-financing, through his assessment of the extremely low risks
      presented by the instruments. Robinson's research — located
      outside the inter-institutional relationship between the European
      Parliament and the European Commission — demonstrated to the European
      Parliament the limited liability posed by the use of these financial
      instruments in an unequivocal fashion. This had significant policy
      implications:
    "Dr Robinson's research has had a considerable impact on the
      subject at stake...The confirmation through Dr. Robinson's
      research that these financial instruments did not pose any threats to the
      EU budget in terms of financial liability had significant policy
      implications. Had his study reached the opposite conclusion this would
      have been very problematic for us and would have affected the
      implementation of the Commission's proposals for financial instruments"
      [D].
    Changes to audit culture
     
    Robinson's research concluded that co-financing posed problems for
      the EU in terms of transparency — a key concern of the European
      Parliament. Ivailo Kalfin (MEP appointed to follow the study) publicly
      identified that the study clearly raised critical issues which would need
      further investigation and explicitly states that the study had and would
      inform the nature of policy debate. [E]
    To this end, Robinson's research `prescribed a different type of
      evaluation for co-financing, strongly advocating an emphasis on asking
      difficult questions of instruments, rather than the existing pattern of
      audit that was focused on EU `success stories.'' [B] The impact of Robinson's
      work can be clearly illustrated by the European Parliament's decision to
      commission four subsequent studies (total cost approx. €250,000). MEPs
      have also responded directly to Robinson's research, authoring
      numerous reports on co-financing [B].
    Given that a central theme of Robinson's research was
      transparency, the report made an explicit recommendation for a more robust
      form of audit by the European Court of Auditors, which included a review
      of the contribution made by the EIB and EBRD:
    "Dr Robinson's research made specific recommendations in relation
      to the way in which the European Court of Auditors undertakes to audit
      co-financing. As officials from the European Parliament, we have seen a
      significant change in ECA audit culture following the publication of Dr.
      Robinson's research. The ECA now undertakes a much more wide-ranging form
      of audit, auditing all of the funds spent as part of the co-financed
      instrument rather than just the contribution from the EU budget, which was
      historically the pattern. This change reflects the recommendations made in
      Dr. Robinson's research" [B].
    Sources to corroborate the impact 
    Please note that file copies of the corroboratory letters/testimonials
      are held for auditing purposes
    A. Speech by the EBRD Executive Vice President, Jan Fischer to the
      European Parliament's Committee on Budgets, 2nd May 2011 announcing the
      creation of the post of EBRD Representative for EU Affairs. Available at:
      http://www.polis.leeds.ac.uk/impact
    B. Letter from Senior Official, Policy Department D — Budgetary Affairs,
      European Parliament, in relation to the importance of the EBRD's enhanced
      profile, how the research has shaped policy within the European Parliament
      and the role of the research in terms of changing the audit culture of the
      European Court of Auditors. Letter dated 8th May 2013.
    C. Letter from Senior Official, European Commission DG Development
      Cooperation - EuropeAid, in relation to the importance of the research for
      policy in relation to the EBRD and international development. Letter dated
      20th June 2013.
    D. Letter from Senior Official, Co-ordination with the EIB Group, EBRD
      and IFIs, European Commission DG Economic and Financial Affairs, in
      relation to the policy impact of the research on co-financing. Letter
      dated 13th May 2013.
    E. Speech by Ivailo Kalfin (MEP; then Vice Chair Committee on Budgets) to
      the European Parliament's Committee on Budgets, 2nd May 2011 stating the
      policy significance of the research for the European Parliament. Available
      at: Available at: http://www.polis.leeds.ac.uk/impact
    F. Letter from Senior Official, Donor Co-Financing Unit, European Bank
      for Reconstruction and Development in relation to the importance of the
      research in shaping policy in the EBRD. Letter dated 28th June 2013.