Paper short abstract:

A comparative analysis between capacity development in the Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa (PIDA) and the African Peace Facility (APF).

Paper long abstract:

As the African Union is attempting to become a stronger player in African politics, it is becoming increasingly imbedded in large continental initiatives. But programmes of continental size require a lot of institutional capacity and political leverage to turn their policy plans into practice. Yet these are exactly the weak points of the AU, as it struggles with political legitimacy and financial independence. The article examines two on-going programmes in which the African Union is attempting to take the lead role: the Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa (PIDA) and the African Peace Facility (APF). Both programmes are labelled by the AU and its foreign donors as best practices in African regional integration. The APF, launched in 2007, has slowly reached a stage of maturity with its missions in Sudan and Somalia. The PIDA programme on the other hand is already seen as an example of best practice in African ownership by the AU and the AfDB, even though it was only accepted in January 2012 and is still in the very early phases of execution. Both programmes are however heavily financed by EU money, mainly through the EU-Africa partnership. With EU budgets under increasing pressure, the capacity of the AU and the commitment of its member states is being tested as they have to overcome a collective action problem and take up financial and institutional responsibility themselves or diversify funding. The paper combines theoretical insights about capacity building with information assembled through expert interviews with key informants.