The Assessing Democracy Assistance project includes a variety of country case studies carried our by FRIDE and an online survey of democracy assistance recipients about their experience with donors and processes. According to Joel Barkan, who has managed the online survey, democracy assistance recipients want more money with fewer strings attached, a hands-off approach from donors, political support when necessary, and a more experimental and less risk-averse attitude from funding organizations.  Most of the respondents to the online survey are well-educated urban elites who work in organizations that are highly financially dependent on foreign funders and who possess a realistic view on what democracy assistance can and cannot do.

 

The single “most potent message” that has emerged from some 600 interviews with activists and other stakeholders in connection with FRIDE’s country case studies is that democracy assistance should take a more holistic approach, according to FRIDE’s Richard Youngs.  Funding is great, they say, but it should be buttressed by other foreign policy instruments, such as aid, trade, and diplomacy.  There is no crisis in donor-grantee relations, Dr. Youngs assured the workshop participants, but alongside traditional concerns of short-term funding horizons, poor coordination, rigid funding requirements, and donor bias towards favored civil society organizations (CSOs), deeper issues emerged.  For instance, donors are missing the best access points to promote democratic reforms because they are reluctant to cede control of the agenda, activists claim.   

 

On the other hand, according to Joel Barkan, the online survey reveals that assistance recipients are realistic about the capacity of external actors to make a difference. Assistance can facilitate change, for example, by helping enable local actors and organizations, but it is ultimately local factors and forces that determine prospects for democratization.

 

According to Inna Pidluska, Ukraine’s experience reflects donor sensitivity to local ownership. The amount of funds is less important than the quality and strategic focus of a donor-recipient partnership, she said.  In his remarks, Paul Graham emphasized that the key is to create incentives for local actors to choose a democratic path and ensure a robust legacy of democratic institutions and entrenched values.  The ultimate aim must be to establish politically-rooted partnerships rather than financial transactions, that is, to “find friends, not financiers; companions, not contractors.”

 

 

Ensure that democracy assistance organizations break out of their “comfort zones” of dealing with urban, well-educated elites and alsoengage with popular or community-based groups in rural or peripheral areas and those in marginalized or impoverished communities.