FEMISE for a growing consensus on reforms

In order to facilitate the implementation of reforms, the European Union Delegation in Lebanon organized in 2007 with the help of FEMISE, or Euro-Mediterranean Forum of Institutes of Economic Sciences, four forums on several issues.

Julien Théron - Beirut, Eurojar

Originally, FEMISE is not a platform for political negotiations; instead, it is, according to Choghig Kasparian, Director of the Observatory on Socio-Economic Reality (OURSE) at Saint-Joseph University, an organization conducting “gatherings between the main specialists in the region to facilitate exchange of information and collaboration in activities, surveys, research work, etc.”

At OURSE, member of FEMISE, the unifying aspect of FEMISE is much appreciated, as it is a source of regularity and continuity in research work, even though OURSE did not benefit from any funding - inciting Kasparian to call for “some more flexibility”. She acknowledges:”In Lebanon, FEMISE was more famous for its roundtables of political parties and thinkers than in universities, except for academics of course.” In fact, FEMISE did not remain cocooned in the academic world; instead, it “gained much more importance in the eyes of governments.”

Four exceptional forums
Four forums have been held with exceptional results. Patricia Augier, co-author of the report that served as a base for negotiations on agriculture, says that FEMISE plays an intermediary role. Their goal is clear: to offer technical expertise and serve as a mediator without any interference in the national decision-making process.

Lecturer at the University of the Mediterranean and assistant manager at the research centre in Economic Development and International Finance, Augier underlines that the number of highly qualified economists in Lebanon is considerable, and they can do the job that FEMISE is doing. FEMISE is different only by its neutrality.

This technique was fruitful in the consensus it was able to make. While the report was highlighting the difficult situation that the agricultural sector in Lebanon was going through, a great development has been achieved, according to Augier. She thinks that things could have gone even further, but the importance of the forum resided in the consensus realized among the different parliamentary blocs.

Consensus has been achieved on the issue of cooperatives and on the creation of an independent chamber of agriculture. Normally, farmers are affiliated to the chamber of commerce and industry. Yet, the interests of the people in the chamber of commerce and industry do not necessarily coincide with the interests of farmers. This reflects for instance in the negative consequences resulting from the anarchic use of pesticides and from the lack of technical advice, etc. Moreover, the absence of an insurance system is dramatic by itself, as farmers can lose everything without getting reimbursed in any way.

Augier expressed her satisfaction towards the overall outcome of discussion. She goes on to say that she was enthusiastic about the solidarity and confidence that the participants showed, noting that they have clearly seen our commitment in solving the problems.

Beyond the forums
Despite the quadruple success, usually rare in Lebanon, the Delegation of the European Union does not seem to have the intention to organize more forums. However, the Commission seems ready to sponsor a new meeting under the request of the Lebanese authorities.

The Delegation was very pleased about the fact that some of its recommendations were taken into consideration in the ministerial declaration of the current government. However, it hopes that these recommendations will be implemented soon on the legislative level. Here resides the weak point: despite the consensus, the forums were not followed up by reforms.

Jean-Louis Reiffers, Honorary Dean of the Faculty of Economic Sciences at the University of the Mediterranean Aix-Marseille II, and President of the Mediterranean Institute (Marseille) was - assisted by Dr Ahmad Galal, president of Cairo Economic Research Forum - the moderator of the first forum (Global Economic strategy) and of the fourth forum (agriculture), the second (social politics) and third (SMEs) forums were moderated by Dr Galal, with the assistance of professor Reiffers. He underlines that he was delighted to participate in “the most interesting experiences” of his professional career, and stresses on the excellent results achieved. A great consensus was achieved on the results and on several important issues.

He points at one of the issues that got consensus, “a development strategy based on national capacities, a reconstitution of production bases, support to the health insurance system, a development of the performance of the Electricity of Lebanon, a support to the territorial equilibrium in the North, in the mountain, the Bekaa and Beirut. It seems, according to Reiffers, that all parties agreed on these points without further discussions.

Reiffers goes on to say that the outcomes of forums did not reflect well on the legislative level. It is not a matter of time, he thinks, it is rather more complicated: even after reaching a strategic accord or an unanimous agreement, the implementation is hard when it comes to the respect of the interests of all, especially with an administration governed by different political parties. He thinks that it is rather an organic problem in the constitution of the Lebanese system. Each faction is granted a different responsibility, and then the budget is allocated according to this division. However, it becomes more complicated when it comes to the implementation of the tasks. In the management of the Lebanese economy and of the Lebanese society, piloting the project is, in most cases, a fairly common problem. The problem does not reside in the calendar but in the fact that we lack a strong government in Lebanon, concludes Reiffers.

Although the forum played a positive role in the eyes of the Delegation, explains Reiffers, yet it did not succeed in transforming intentions into acts. This was not planned on the forum’s agenda anyway.

This is why a fifth forum was not planned, and the idea of organizing one was rejected by FEMISE itself. Reiffers thinks that a fifth forum would have had less importance than the four previous ones. Following the success of four forums, a fifth one would not have been fruitful enough. Regarding any modification in the essence of these forums, a different approach should be adopted: each institution should be dealt with separately, more money should be spent, further consultation efforts deployed; it would be a totally different experience.

Reiffers fears that the issue of the forum becomes a pretext to avoid dealing with difficult problems. He thinks that the efforts that he deployed with Ahmed Galal were fruitful and successful. Today, the problem that they are facing is a problem of contents and of institutions. They seem ready, however, to engage in further work.

Jean-Louis Reiffers insists on the fact that there is no disappointment from their part whatsoever, and reiterates that FEMISE is ready to work on more elaborate and less global actions, but not necessarily in the same conditions. He adds that there is no need to gather the heads of political parties, but rather the heads of institutions, in an effort to tackle the problems one by one: energy, land settlement… through a better analysis of the conclusions and a better evaluation of the results.

Finally, it is mandatory that the Lebanese government exerts more efforts to begin the implementation of the conclusions of the forums, with full respect to the Lebanese sovereignty in the decision-making process. Such efforts aim at supporting the process launched by the successful forums, which is an initiative that reached the level of consensus but not that of a real reform - to date, at least.

Voir le site: www.femise.org