The EU as an actor in development: just another donor, European norm maker, or eclipsed by superpower temptations?

While the European Union’s (EU) capacities and impact in foreign and security policy have been extensively discussed among policy-makers and academics, the question of the EU’s role in development has caught less attention. Most observers would agree with the banner on each page of the European Commission’s development website that ‘Europe is the biggest provider of development aid in the world’. Nevertheless, beyond the simple observation that the EU member states and the Commission collectively provide 55 per cent of aid in the world, many questions remain unanswered. Does that mean that the EU is a powerful actor in development? Does it manage to act coherently in its relations with developing countries? Are EU aid budgets directed towards the Millennium Development Goals, or towards other (foreign) policy objectives? What, if anything, is distinctive about the EU’s development vision and approach? These questions are closely linked to broader debates on the EU’s international role as well as the internal European integration process. Therefore, this chapter explores the EU’s role in development within the wider discussion of its intra-EU and international role. Based on a brief historical overview, the first part of this contribution will discern three distinct EU roles in development. First, the EU has gradually become a full-fledged development donor. Second, besides being a development actor in its own right, the EU is increasingly acting as a coordinator of European development issues. Third, the EU even aspires to be a norm maker on the international development scene. We will argue that the recent coordinating and norm-setting roles are particularly relevant for the future of EU development policy. However, the second part of the chapter will show that despite the spectacular evolution of EU development policies over the past 10 years, the EU development sphere still faces a diversity of serious challenges which could jeopardize its recently acquired states as a mature development actor and its coordinating and norm-setting ambitions. On the one hand, the EU’s competence and added value in development cooperation are still being questioned from within and without. On the other, it has to deal with a mounting superpower temptation at the level of the EU whereby a new assertiveness on the trade and security fronts could eclipse the EU’s development objectives. Taken together, this lead to the paradoxical conclusion that the EU’s successfulness in consolidating its role in the development sphere may well depend on the extent to which it conforms to power ambitions in the trade and security realm and promotes a distinct European identity in the world. More power for the EU in development does not necessarily entails a more normative, development-friendly Europe.