Conclusion

Abstract

‘EEC aid was simply a sedimentation, logical up to a point, of the colonial history of certain Member States. It was the sedimentation of the francophonie, which was the first frame of reference, then the francophonie converted into a Community policy, with the Lomé Convention and the integration of the British. Then, the sedimentation of the colonial history of Portugal and of Spain. In reality, its management had more to do with psychology than with cooperation policy’ (Marín, interview, European Oral History, IUE). African representatives largely endorse Marín’s conclusion (Adedeji, 2013, p. 92; Sicurelli, 2010, p. 91). As one of them remarks with regret, ‘things have not changed so much since the 1960s. Today, the EDF’s principles and way of working are still roughly the same. How can you possibly build something new from such old stuff?’ (Interview X, African representative to the EU). This is precisely one of the questions explored in this book. And the response seems to confirm in part neo-institutionalist hypotheses that institutions ‘are remarkably durable, surviving environmental turbulence while preserving their identity’ (Boin and Christensen, 2008, p. 272).