ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL BEGINS TRIENNIAL COMPREHENSIVE POLICY REVIEW OF OPERATIONAL ACTIVITIES FOR DEVELOPMENT

ECOSOC
5 July 2001
Morning





The Economic and Social Council took up this morning a triennial comprehensive policy review of operational activities of the United Nations for development, hearing from a series of national delegations contending, among other things, that greater funding was needed for development projects in the world's poorer nations and that further improvements could be made in the way such activities were conceived and managed.

The review came under the portion of the Council's annual substantive session dedicated to follow-up of its own policy recommendations and those of the General Assembly. The four-week Council session, which alternates each year between New York and Geneva, will conclude on 27 July.

Nitin Desai, Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs, introducing the topic, said the issue was how to connect high-level political activities such as the Millennium Summit and the Millennium Declaration with practical work at the field level, with national needs, and with country-defined, country-driven programmes.

A number of those contributing to the general debate said that despite years of reform of United Nations programmes aimed at improving their efficiency and effectiveness, resources had not increased. Iran, speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, said the gap between the rich and poor and income inequalities within and among countries had been increasing in this age of globalization, while official development assistance (ODA) had been declining in spite of the fiscal health of many donor countries.

Speakers also said the system for providing development aid needed further improvements so that projects were efficient and "country-driven". A representative of the Republic of Korea remarked that there were often gaps between concepts and practices.

Others addressing the session were representatives of Belgium (on behalf of the European Union), Japan, China, Croatia, Belarus, Brazil, Bahrain, Indonesia, Burkina Faso, Canada, India, Ukraine, and Peru.

The Council will reconvene at 3 p.m. to continue its general debate on United Nations development activities.


Operational activities segment

The Council had before it a report (document E/2001/66) on the triennial comprehensive policy review of operational activities of the United Nations system for development. The report is submitted in compliance with General Assembly resolution 53/192. In its conclusions, the report says that the greatest challenge to the United Nations development system at the present juncture is to enhance its capacity to adapt and respond with agility and flexibility to a rapidly changing global environment.

The United Nations cannot be an agent of change without itself changing, the report notes. It cannot confront new challenges without challenging itself. The UN development architecture and culture has evolved over 50 years incrementally in response to specific situations and as an extension of political choices of member Governments. It has proved remarkably resilient and has much to be proud of. The report says that the present triennial review provides an uncommon opportunity to initiate dialogue among member Governments on the complex of issues that will define the future of United Nations development cooperation.


Statements

NITIN DESAI, Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs, said past triennial policy reviews had been effective and had improved over time under the leadership of Fred Haemmerli, who regrettably had passed away a few months ago. The review before the Council would also be before the General Assembly in the fall, but the General Assembly depended heavily on ECOSOC's judgements in this matter. Many things had happened over the past three years, including the Millennium Summit and the Millennium Declaration which strongly endorsed certain key goals related to development. The issue was how to connect these high-level political activities with practical UN work at the field level, with national needs, and with country-defined and country-driven programmes. Global goals were one thing, but even when strongly supported and pronounced, they had to be achieved.

Countries also were deeply concerned about globalization, Mr. Desai said; they wanted to know how to link into the international economy, and how to have help in doing so. Monitoring of development projects was essential -- the United Nations had to know how well these projects were working, and what their impacts were. It was the Council's responsibility to offer policy guidance to decide what priorities should be assigned, and to take an overview of wide-ranging funds and programmes while also considering such matters as field-level coordination and levels of resources.


Unfortunately, despite years of reform and improved efficiency, there was no apparent increase in core resources available for development work carried out by various United Nations programmes, especially when regional variations were taken into account, Mr. Desai said. It was a serious problem, and greater commitment from the donor community was needed. This was the main issue the Council had to confront.

BRUNO VAN DER PLUIJM (Belgium), speaking on behalf of the European Union and the countries associated with it, said that the Union supported the efforts of the United Nations to improve the efficiency, consistency and coordination of operational activities for development. The Millennium Declaration and a series of conferences and special sessions of the General Assembly had defined a global agenda and goals to be achieved by 2015. The Union attached great importance to the achievement of those goals. The United Nations needed to be moulded into a more effective, efficient and accountable instrument.

The European Union would like to acknowledge the considerable progress which had been made since the creation of the United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF). The Union considered that the triennial review should be an opportunity to reaffirm its commitment to the programming instrument and to give it fresh impetus. The evaluation team had established that, despite its shortcomings, UNDAF remained an instrument rich in potential, particularly as regards implementation of all the international development goals. The Union saw UNDAF as a promising instrument, and the Member States should make efforts to ensure that its potential was realized.

Further, the Union welcomed the considerable progress made over the past three years with regard to the system of resident coordinators. The recruitment process had become more transparent; selection and evaluation criteria had been developed; and thematic groups had burgeoned, auguring well for greater consistency in the operational activities of the United Nations system. However, one of the current problems in managing the resident coordinator system was the need to rationalize the demands on country teams by the headquarters of the various agencies. One of the major objectives of the reforms embarked on, including introduction of the assistance framework and improvements to the resident coordinator system, was to improve the quality of operational activities by strengthening coordination, consistency and synergies.

BAGHER ASADI (Iran), speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, said the gap between the rich and poor and income inequalities within and among countries had been increasing in this age of globalization, while overall official development assistance (ODA) had been declining in spite of the fiscal health of many donor countries. That was true even while a global consensus had emerged on setting objectives and timetables for achieving targets on various aspects of development -- it was regrettable that this consensus had not been translated into action. Poverty eradication should continue to be the major pillar of operational activities of the United Nations, but indications were that the major factor constraining such a UN role was declining financial resources for multilateral assistance and lack of resources at the domestic level; the situation needed to be addressed and redressed. Funding for development activities should be sufficient, secure and stable on a predictable, continuous and assured basis, and should be commensurate with the increasing needs of developing countries.

The Resident Coordinator System needed to be widened and ownership of the resident coordinator function strengthened; and monitoring, reporting and rules and regulations needed to be harmonized and simplified. In addition, evaluation and monitoring of operational activities was crucial.

CHA YOUNG-CHEOL (the Republic of Korea) said that while globalization and the information and communication technology revolution had given rise to a wealth of new opportunities, they had also exacerbated disparities among and within nations and regions. Indeed, one of the biggest challenges of the new millennium was the need to address the growing income and digital gaps stemming from those developments and to ensure that developing countries had an equal voice in global decision-making. The Republic of Korea fully agreed with the main principle of international operational activities for development -- that the global development agenda should be in line with the national agenda of the respective recipient country. It supported the efforts of the UN system to enhance national ownership and promote national execution.

One of the main concerns for operational activities for development was the downward tend in official development assistance (ODA) and, in particular, the declining core resources of the Fund and Programmes over the past decade. In that context, the Republic of Korea welcomed the recent introduction of the multi-year funding framework by major Funds and Programmes, and it was hoped that it would contribute to the predictable and sustainable mobilization of resources. In spite of the general downward trend of core resources among the agencies, UNFPA had had some success in its recent mobilization of resources, showing a modest increase for the second year in a row.

Regarding the programme management of the Funds and Programmes, the Republic of Korea appreciated the introduction of results-based management and the strengthening of field offices through expanded decentralization and the delegation of greater authority to the field. As mentioned in the report, recent evaluation studies showed that there were often gaps between concepts and practices, making it difficult to measure progress. In addition, it was noted that despite the emphasis on country ownership, in many cases, operational activities were still seen as externally driven.

KOICHIRO SEKI (Japan) said his country believed that aid coordination was important for the effective use of limited resources in programmes for development, and it welcomed efforts made to improve coordination through the common country assessment system, the development assistance framework, the resident coordinator system, harmonization and simplification of rules and procedures, and closer cooperation with the Bretton Woods Institutions. On the other hand, it should be recognized that coordination consumed time, energy and resources, and measures for it, therefore, should be pursued in such a manner that they did not cause counterproductive effects such as increased aid-delivery costs.

At the same time, UN agencies should maintain a variety of tools for development cooperation so that they were able to respond to the diversified needs of programme countries; harmonization and simplification should be pursued without limiting the capacity of UN agencies to choose the most suitable tool to meet the specific needs of programme countries. Coordination among UN agencies itself was not an objective, just a tool to maximize the impact of development programmes, and it was necessary to analyse the cost and benefits of each measure to improve coordination to make sure that it was justifiable.

TINGRONG GONG (China) said that UN development activities laudably focused on national capacity building and poverty elimination, and they had achieved many good results through being universal and neutral; UN programmes were irreplaceable. In China's view, such development activities should be country-driven and should conform with the priority policies of developing countries. Coordination and cooperation of programmes were important, and should have the aim of helping the capacities of specific countries. It was regrettable, however, that core resources had decreased, resulting in a serious lack of financing for development programmes, causing a crippling of aid programmes, compromising progress and effects, and weakening rather than strengthening development activities.

China hoped the UN system would make continuous efforts to resolve this situation. However, efforts to date to make funding predictable, multi-year in nature, and dependable had not borne fruit. It was necessary to do better in this regard. Formulation of the CCA and UNDAF, meanwhile, should be country-driven, and country concerns should play a dominant role so that development programmes fully reflected the needs of recipients, while development agencies should cooperate fully with each other to reduce costs and improve consistency.

IVAN SIMONOVIC (Croatia) said that his country fully supported the Council's call for the heads of UN funds and programmes to include in their annual reports to the Council a thorough analysis of problems encountered and lessons learned so as to allow the Council to fulfil its coordinating role. Croatia welcomed the ongoing efforts of the United Nations Development Group (UNDG) to rationalize its architecture and promote greater knowledge management as a means of reducing meetings and realizing more effective coordination, and would encourage ongoing dialogue of UNDG members with the Bretton Woods institutions.

Croatia recognized that the UN Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) process and common country assessments played a valuable analytical role in planning activities for poverty reduction. It also recognized that even though cooperation with Governments remained essential for successful development cooperation, the role of autonomous governmental entities and non-governmental organizations was becoming more important. Croatia also believed that in addition to emergency relief, development should remain a priority.

IRINA ANANICH (Belarus) said the system of operational activities should be efficient, react quickly, take national needs and particularities into account, and make efficient use of the limited resources available. The United Nations Development Programme, in Belarus's view, was an effective and helpful agency in solving serious world problems relating to poverty and development. The unique system of resident coordinators was a good channel for linking the national and global levels of development programmes.

The downward trend in the core resources of UNDP required radical steps in response. Donors were appealed to in order to provide the necessary funding required by UNDP to carry out its valuable country programmes. Belarus hoped that management changes planned by UNDP would not lead to a drop in coordination between UNDP and recipient countries, but would lead to better efficiency and better effectiveness of country programmes. The minimum level of resources required should be guaranteed to enable UNDP to function effectively. Belarus also supported activities of the UN Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) in preventing HIV/AIDS; and UNICEF programmes in cooperation with countries to aid children.

OLYNTHO VIEIRA (Brazil) underlined that globalization posed great challenges to the international community. While global integration had shrunk distances and created new opportunities, driven to a great extent by the impact of information and communication technologies, globalization had also increased income inequalities within nations and between the developed and the developing world. The level of poverty had increased dramatically worldwide. In addition, regional conflicts and the AIDS pandemic had retracted development gains in numerous countries. Brazil had consistently stressed the importance of promoting coordination among UN organizations and welcomed progress made so far in that direction. However, much remained to be done.

Brazil favoured the focus placed by the UN system organizations in the mainstreaming of poverty eradication, capacity-building and gender equality in their activities in the developing world. Organizations with the size, neutrality, institutional framework, multilateral scope and cross-sectoral character of the United Nations Development Group (UNDG) had a fundamental role to play in the development process. Brazil welcomed the new focus place by UN programmes and funds on a culture of performance and accountability being build through a results-oriented management. Brazil shared the concern about the decline of core resources for the UN system.

FARROOQ A. ABDULLA (Bahrain) said international conferences such as this one should be aimed at meeting the most urgent needs of humanity: freeing the world from misery, disease, poverty and poverty's many causes. Over the last three decades, a greater understanding of poverty and how to reduce it had been achieved, and UN programmes to that end had been expanded; there had also been greater efforts to build infrastructure and improve health care and education to make development possible, to train the poor and to raise their incomes.

Some countries had been successful in reducing poverty and had moved from extreme poverty to being able to provide access to basic necessities such as drinking water and health care; these success stories showed other countries that such advances were possible. But despite these results, international development cooperation needed greater resources and attention -- the supply of help was far lower than the demand, and new problems had arisen, such as HIV/AIDS, which was having a devastating impact, for example, on many African countries and communities.

SALMAN AL FARISI (Indonesia) said that as a major recipient of operational activities, his country had always attached great importance to the critical and unique role that the UN development activities played in empowering the developing countries to drive their own development process. However, the lack of adequate financial resources for the operational activities had dominated the international community's agenda in recent years. Such resources were still a far cry from being put on a predictable, continuous and assured basis commensurate with the increasing needs of the developing countries. There was no doubt that an uncertain financial base hampered the capacity of the system's development cooperation to meet the challenge of viable development. Thus the issue of core resources had become an acute problem undermining the performance of the operational activities. Since the core resources remained the bedrock of those activities, it was urgently necessary to bring them up to the same level, if not higher, than the non-core resources. The reforms undertaken in development cooperation had anticipated more stable and substantial financial flows.

The introduction of the multi-year framework funding was one of the main innovations in financing for development. Its main purposes were to increase resources and to increase predictability; however, doubts had arisen as to the ability of that mechanism being able to halt and reverse the trends over the past decade. Those doubts pointed to the bigger picture that included globalization, liberalization and the retreat of multilateralism. With the major donors advocating more reliance on market forces and competition, multilateral financing for development had been greatly eroded.


DER KOGDA (Burkina Faso) said poverty was the most important challenge facing the international community; the global conferences held in the 1990s had provided a chance for setting the agenda for combatting poverty, ignorance and disease, as well as violence, terror and degradation of the environment. The United Nations was the unique organization best placed to tackle these important issues. The entire UN system and its country teams had come up with the current development assistance framework to produce increased efficiency; in Burkina Faso, the Bretton Woods Institutions were providing about 10 per cent of the official development assistance (ODA) received. Evaluations undertaken of various cooperation programmes in Burkina Faso had found that the focus of the programmes was accurate, but that in terms of execution there were sometimes problems, such as insufficient levels of national capacities and lack of coordination between agencies.

International goals related to poverty, education, health, and reproductive health should be the focus of serious emphasis; there should be no further waiting, but action to meet those goals.

GINETTE LACHANCE (Canada) said her delegation welcomed the focus on poverty eradication, the increased collaboration and synergies within the UN system, and the development of new partnerships, including with regional development banks, civil society organizations and the business sector. It was somewhat disappointing that only six impact evaluations had been funded in time for the current session of the Council. A very positive one was that the United Nations system could assist recipient countries to address successfully core problems such as poverty, and that the key to that success was strong leadership by the government and good interaction with the UN system.

Canada was pleased to note that the UN system had committed itself to a more explicit and consistent human rights approach. Many individual organizations were now internalizing that approach and Canada would continue to support those efforts through its participation in Executive Boards. The same could be said for its support for gender mainstreaming in the formation of programmes and projects. Canada also agreed that despite progress and achievements, the UN system should collaborate more closely, to explore the gender perspective in new and emerging areas such as gender and HIV/AIDS, gender, peace and security; gender and information and communications technology (ICT); and gender and financing for development. Close collaboration was required to ensure that scarce UN resources for gender issues were best utilized and to avoid duplication of efforts.

Further, Canada agreed that regular or core funding for operational activities remained short of the critical mass necessary for effective programme delivery. The multi-year funding framework might have raised expectations too high with regard to the rapidity of the reconvey and the level of resumed increases. But the decline had been arrested, with a large majority of donors increasing their contributions to core resources.

B. S. BISHNOI (India) said there had been a steady erosion of faith over the years in the operational activities of the UN system. The erosion among donor countries was apparent in the decline in funding provided, especially to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), which had seen, for example, a decline of some 30 per cent since 1995. But it was noteworthy to see that only a fraction, roughly 22 per cent, of UNDP's programme expenditures went to downstream activities which provided the poor with access to basic social services and productive resources, while some 42 per cent of UNDP resources went to upstream activities such as "good governance" -- programmes devoted to policy advice.

As donor countries saw it, UNDP took on mostly soft challenges and was not attuned to the real needs of programme countries. At the same time, this perception among donor nations eroded the faith of recipient countries, since donor countries more and more targeted their aid through cost sharing or trust funds, which, they felt, allowed them to determine more closely the activities which received funding and helped them to control how the money was spent. Hence recipient countries saw multilateral aid programmes as more and more a tool for advancing specific donor agendas.

SERKII YAMPOLSKYI (Ukraine) said that since the last Triennial policy review, the role of the UN funds and programmes in strengthening national capacity-building, carrying out the decisions of the UN global conferences and in assisting developing countries and countries in transition in their efforts to respond to the challenges of globalization had been improved. The Government of Ukraine had positively assessed the work of the UN office in the country, as well as of the respective regional bureau. It was the view of the delegation that UNDP should continue to play a central role in coordinating the activities of the UN agencies in Ukraine. That role was of particular importance with regard to implementation of such multifaceted and long-term projects as the Crimea Integration and Development Programme, and the UN-Chernobyl Programme, among other things.

Global problems facing the international community today were quite different from those of the past because of change in economic risks in the world. Globalization of the world economy, trade liberalization and technological changes, particularly in the field of information and communications technology (ICT), offered new opportunities and posed new challenges. Thus, it created new dimensions of cooperation between the UN system of operational activities and the governments, and demanded more comprehensive and integrated approaches to that end.

JORGE VOTO-BERNALES (Peru) said the UN system had the key role in international development programmes and hence should keep its eye on global economic developments that posed problems. In development programmes, cooperation should be founded on universality, neutrality, concessionality, and the absence of conditions that did not correspond to the purposes of projects and programmes; and they should be based on national perspectives and priorities. Cooperation could not be uncoupled from or take precedence over traditional development activities, and it was important that cooperation facilitate the resolution of structural problems of developing countries. Development programmes furthermore should seek to achieve the goals set by global conferences in the 1990s and also set out in the Millennium Declaration.

Core official development assistance (ODA) funding had declined dramatically since the end of the Cold War. A preference also had emerged among a small and influential group of donor countries for channelling funding outside the UN system and keeping funding arrangements short-term. It would be useful for the Council to have a report on this and other relevant developments. Meanwhile it was important to improve coordination of development programmes and to strive to limit the transaction costs involved in such programmes for developing countries.



* *** *