Die Hauptseminarsarbeit (Englisch) versucht aus verschiedenen Blickwinkeln zu analysieren welche Vor- und Nachteile die strukturellen Veränderugen der implementing arganizations des BMZ, wie GTZ, DED und InWent haben.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Initial point and need of further restructuring
3. Advantages and Disadvantages of the merge
3.1. From the point of view of the BMZ
3.2. From the point of view of the implementing organizations
3.3. From the point of view of the developing countries
4. Conclusion
Objectives & Topics
This paper examines the organizational restructuring of German development cooperation, specifically focusing on the merger of GTZ, DED, and InWent into a single agency. The research aims to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of this transition from the perspectives of the BMZ, the implementing organizations themselves, and the partner developing countries, questioning whether such restructuring truly enhances efficacy or merely alters administrative structures.
- Analysis of the institutional structure of the German BMZ.
- Evaluation of the "one face to the customer" reform strategy.
- Assessment of cost-effectiveness and organizational efficiency.
- Comparison of perspectives between the government, implementing agencies, and partner nations.
- Investigation of the trade-off between centralized coordination and operational flexibility.
Excerpt from the Book
3.2. From the point of view of the implementing organizations
From the perspective of the implementing organizations it is quiet clear that through the reform and merge they will lose a lot of their sovereignity in terms of planning and especially in terms of evaluation. The GTZ for example evaluates until now itself but after the reform this will change because there will be an evaluation system of the BMZ for the new agency. This could be an advantage or a disadvantages for the implementing organizations, on the one hand when they evaluate their own they can influence which indicators are evaluated and how, on the other hand an independent evaluation gives a more realistic view on the work of the orgaization. After the fusion the new agency will be 100% in the hand of the state so government will be the only one to give order to the agency and there will not be any futher influences. The GTZ and also the other organizanions have a good reputation in the foreign countries and their name is well known with the fusion and the new name this could get lost. Each one of the organizations is a specialist in his field so for example is the DED well known for his exellent work in terms of promoting and strengthning the participation of civil society in the development process or GTZ for transfer of knowledge and technical assistance with another name the personal will maybe lose their status as experts in this field. The german implementing organizations are also known as more neutral than other key players in development coordination like China or the US, which are perceived to have vested and competing interests in some regions.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Provides an overview of the complex structures of German development cooperation and introduces the rationale behind the planned merger of implementing organizations.
2. Initial point and need of further restructuring: Reviews the historical background of organizational reforms, including the PWC report recommendations and previous coalition agreements.
3. Advantages and Disadvantages of the merge: Analyzes the restructuring from three distinct perspectives: the BMZ, the affected implementing organizations, and the developing nations.
4. Conclusion: Summarizes the findings and evaluates which actor stands to benefit most from the restructuring process.
Keywords
German Development Cooperation, BMZ, GTZ, DED, InWent, Organizational Reform, Aid Effectiveness, Development Policy, Institutional Merger, Public Administration, Partner Countries, Harmonization, Technical Cooperation, Financial Cooperation, Restructuring
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this paper?
The paper deals with the structural reorganization of German development cooperation, specifically the merger of the three major implementing organizations (GTZ, DED, and InWent) into a single entity.
What are the primary thematic fields addressed?
The themes include institutional efficiency, donor coordination, the political influence of the BMZ, and the impact of these changes on partner countries in the Global South.
What is the central research question?
The author investigates what the advantages and disadvantages of the planned fusion are, and determines which stakeholders (BMZ, organizations, or partner countries) profit the most from this reform.
Which scientific methods are employed?
The study utilizes a comparative perspective analysis, evaluating the planned changes from the standpoints of three different stakeholder groups based on policy reports and official agreements.
What does the main body of the text cover?
It covers the initial institutional fragmentation, the historical context of previous mergers, the internal motivations of the BMZ for reform, and the critical reactions from both implementing agencies and recipient countries.
What are the characterizing keywords of the study?
Key terms include "one face to the customer," aid effectiveness, organizational sovereignty, and institutional coherence.
How does the merger affect the sovereignty of the implementing organizations?
According to the text, organizations like the GTZ face a significant loss of sovereignty, particularly regarding planning autonomy and the previous practice of self-evaluation.
Why is the "neutrality" of the organizations considered a potential point of contention?
The organizations were previously perceived as relatively neutral actors; the closer link to the government through the merger risks exposing them to partisan political influence, which could diminish this perceived neutrality.
What is the main advantage for developing countries mentioned?
The primary benefit is the reduction of administrative burden, as a single agency implies unified documentation standards and a more coherent, transparent interface for project implementation.
- Quote paper
- Luisa Friederici (Author), 2010, Showing one face to the customer, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/180112
