1.10 Assessment

and others involved in cultural work. It should be noticed that it is easier for the Norwegian side to be flexible in the granting of money and do it on a short notice. The financing system is much more flexible on the Norwegian side since the MFA allocates funds that can be used for general purposes. There is no big need or relevance of charity actions from Norwegian groups any more and their – most probably unintended – paternalistic patterns of co-operation that went contrary to the core ideas of the Barents Secretariat’s grant programme .

The Barents Secretariat’s grant programme ’s niche is regionally initiated projects. The initiatives and project proposals may come from the Norwegian or the Russian regions of the BEAR, and activities can take in Russia and/or Norway. Another special feature of this grant programme is its readiness to fund small-scale projects, often with a people-to-people character. Both when it comes to the types of projects and their subject matter, there is great variation. The aim of the project funding is to boost RussianNorwegian cross-regional interaction in order to create trust and welfare.

The mechanisms that assumedly are set in motion through the project activities are more likely to function today than in the 1990’s. Today Russian and Norwegian partners meet on much more equal terms than earlier, and this encourages the reciprocal interaction that forms a core element in the underlying programme theory of the Barents co-operation. As a result of the improved private and public economy in Russia, it is reasonable to require a larger share of Russian financing. The Russian side already contributes considerably more than before. However, the budgetary system in Russia is less flexible than the one which applies for the Norwegian MFA’s funding of project activities. Sometimes, therefore, there is a long way to go for untraditional and innovative projects to get funds from relevant Russian authorities, while there is a considerably faster track to obtain Norwegian funds. In other words, there could be a possible

unintended effect of making substantial Russian contributions a requirement for all projects. The processing of project applications and the follow-up of project activities are taken care of by the Barents Secretariat staff in a qualified way. The staff in Kirkenes is relatively large and there have been local offices in four Russian towns in the period covered by this evaluation. The role of the Russian offices in terms of practical functions regarding project processing and follow-up remains somewhat unclear. Knowing how to prepare a good application requires great skill, and particularly so when applications are submitted abroad. Therefore, the offices in Murmansk, Arkhangelsk and Narian-Mar should have a more specific role serving potential project holders on the Russian side. As one experienced Russian interviewee put it: “We Russians do not have project mentality”. The circle of applicants and project holders has not changed much in the period covered by this evaluation. In particular, it has proved difficult to develop applications from regions far from the Russian-Norwegian border, Nordland and Komi region for instance. The fact that the individuals and institutions involved in project activities have been stable should not, however, only be seen as a problem. Continuity and long-term commitment are key factors for success, given the objectives of the Barents Secretariat’s grant programme . Project veterans should be taken well care of in combination with a constant search for new project holders. The Secretariat’s staff has a dual role. Partly, the advisors function as a competence centre, partly they administer the MFA’s project grant. This dual role is potentially sensitive, because at times the Barents Secretariat is invited by applicants to take part in projects. In some cases, the Barents Secretariat even appears in the applications. The two functions of being a competence centre on the one hand, and administrator of state grants on the other, are in the near future going to be split into two departments, according to the Barents Secretariat’s general secretary. The Barents Secretariat has operated under quite general guidelines, but on the recommendation of the Office of the Auditor General it will have to report results, not only activities, in more specific terms than what has been the case so far. Distinguishing between activities and results, and focusing on the

latter, is conducive to success. As shown in later parts of this evaluation, not all project reports meet the required demands. Nonetheless, there is reason to warn against spending too much effort on trying to identify results (outcomes) immediately after the activity has taken place. Results take time to develop. Contextual factors play a role on the way between the project activity and the result. Therefore, when results are searched for, they should not be sought on a very general level, but close to the project activities. In other words, there must be a link between the project activity and the result.