ECOSOC ADOPTS RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AD HOC ADVISORY GROUP ON BURUNDI

21.07.03

Considers Issues Ranging from Sustainable Development, Human Settlements and Forests to Statistics, Public Administration and the Application of Sanctions


The Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) this afternoon adopted a resolution, without a vote, in which it decided to establish an Ad Hoc Advisory Group on Burundi, within the context of its discussion of African countries emerging from conflict.
The Council also resumed its consideration of issues related to science and technology for development and began its consideration of issues related to sustainable development, human settlements, the United Nations Forum on Forests and transport of dangerous goods.
Sarbuland Khan, Director of the Division for ECOSOC Support and Coordination of the Department for Economic and Social Affairs (DESA), introducing the consolidated report on the work of the functional commissions of ECOSOC in 2003, said that the report aimed to help the Council to take a bird’s eye view of the work undertaken so far. This current consolidated report focused on three issues: the contributions to country teams; policy issues that emanated from the work of the functional commissions, including information and communications technology and populations issues; and coordination issues.
Ryokichi Hirono, Chairman of the Committee for Development Policy, said the report of the Committee had been structured to respond to requests made by the Council, particularly in addressing the theme of the high-level segment on promoting an integrated approach to rural development in developing countries for poverty eradication and sustainable development and to take a triennial review of the list of least developed countries, and in that context to continue its re-examination of its earlier recommendation to graduate The Maldives from that list.
Axumite Gebre-Egziahber, Director of the New York Office for the United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (UN-Habitat), said that because of the recent elevation in the status of the Commission on Human Settlement, the nineteenth session of the Governing Council of UN-Habitat had been the first ever meeting of the Governing Council attended by Member States, parliamentarians, local authorities, non-governmental organisations and the private sector. The decisions made had reflected the overall commitment of Governments to the strengthening of UN-Habitat and also to implementing the Habitat Agenda, the Declaration of Cities and Other Human Settlements in the Millennium Development Goals.
The issue of the graduation of Cape Verde and the Maldives from the category of Least Developed Countries was referred to by a number of speakers. Both States requested that their prospective graduations be postponed, a view upheld by the majority of other delegations intervening in the discussion.
The representative of Cape Verde noted that although Cape Verde met two of the Committee for Development Policy’s criteria for graduation from the category of Least Developed Countries (LDCs), the Committee had refrained from explicitly recommending its graduation. This cautious position was justified by the fact that there had been no major improvement in Cape Verde’s general economic and social situation since the last review in 2000 and by the implicit recognition of the high risks posed by graduation to a country with such high economic vulnerability, as shown by the 2003 Vulnerability Profile established by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.
For his part, the representative of the Maldives noted that while the criteria for identifying Least Developed Countries (LDCs) had been continuously refined, there had been little need to examine the formula for graduation. If structural handicaps provided a convincing case for inclusion, then graduation should be based on some measure of structural change, yet the current third quartile rule had no relationship to structural change. Thus, he felt that no graduations should occur until the process of graduation was made consistent with the principles proclaimed by the Committee and ECOSOC.
Additionally, the Council began its consideration of issues related to statistics, public administration and development, assistance to third States affected by the application of sanctions and cartography.
Addressing the Council this afternoon were representatives of Morocco (on behalf of the Group of 77 and China), Italy (on behalf of the European Union), the United States, Jamaica, the Russian Federation, Ukraine, Switzerland, China, El Salvador, Kenya, Singapore, Argentina, Ethiopia, Bhutan, Nepal, Pakistan and Cuba. Representatives of the Institution for the use of Micro-Algae Spirulina Against Malnutrition and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies also took the floor.
The Economic and Social Council will meet again at 10 a.m. on Tuesday 22, July to continue its consideration of the above issues and to take action on the recommendations contained in the reports of its subsidiary bodies.
Documents
Before the Council there is a report of the Secretary-General entitled the consolidated report on the work of the functional commissions of ECOSOC in 2003 (E/2003/90). The report aims at assisting the Council in providing policy guidance to its functional commissions and in coordinating their work. It provides an analysis of selected major policy issues addressed by the commissions in 2003 and gives an overview of the main common themes that were covered by the commissions in 2003. This year’s report, for the first time, highlights the contributions of the commissions to the various segments of the 2003 substantive session of the Council. It also examines the follow-up action by functional commissions to policy guidance provided by the Council in 2002 and reviews key issues relating to coordination or procedural aspects of the work of the commissions in 2003.
There is a note by the Secretary-General on assistance to third States affected by the application of sanctions (E/2003/63), which states that the report of the Secretary-General on the implementation of the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations related to assistance to third States affected by the application of sanction will be made available to the Council at its substantive session 2003.
There is a report of the Secretary-General on coordination implementation of the Habitat Agenda (E/2003/76) which indicates that Governments have started to increase their support to the United Nations Habitat and Human Settlements Foundation and encourages Governments to increase the non-earmarked components of their contributions. It also shows that the United Nations Human Settlement Programme (UN-Habitat) has strengthened its cooperation and collaboration with the United Nations system and with local authorities and other Habitat Agenda partners.
There is the comprehensive report of the Statistical Commission on the work related to chapter VI, section E of its report on its thirty-third session and on basic indicators for the integrated and coordinated follow-up to major United Nations conferences and summits at all levels, including the report on indicators on means of implementation (E/2003/83).
There is a note verbale from the Permanent Mission of the Maldives to the United Nations transmitting a letter from the President of the Maldives addressed to the President of ECOSOC (E/2003/97) on the issue of graduating the Maldives from the list of the least developed countries.
There is a letter from the Permanent Representative of the Maldives to the President of ECOSOC (E/2003/98) outlining the concerns of his Government on the issue of its graduation from least developed country status.
There is the report of the fifth session of the Committee for Development Policy (E/2003/33) which contains information about the organisation of the session and aspects on promoting an integrated approach to rural development in developing countries for poverty eradication and sustainable development; a review of the list of least developed countries; and the future work of the Committee.
There is a letter dated 28 May 2003 from the Permanent Representative of Chile to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General (E/2003/86) transmitting the outcome the XVII Inter-American Conference on equity in health, road to development, held under the joint sponsorship of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and the Government of Chile in Santiago, Chile, from 23 to 26 April 2003.
Action on Resolution
In a resolution on an Ad Hoc Advisory Group on Burundi (E/2003/L.34/Rev.1), adopted without a vote, ECOSOC urged all donor countries to fulfil the commitments they made at the Paris and Geneva conferences on assistance to Burundi. Welcoming the convening of a donor round table organised by the Government of Burundi in collaboration with the United Nations Development Programme, scheduled for September 2003, decided to establish the Ad Hoc Advisory Group on Burundi. ECOSOC also decided to entrust the President of the Council with the task of holding consultations and making recommendations, within the framework outlined in its resolution 2002/1, on the composition, terms of reference and relevant modalities for the creation of the Group by the end of August 2003 so as to enable it to participate in the donor round table.
Statements
SARBULAND KHAN, Director of the Division for ECOSOC Support and Coordination, introduced the consolidated report on the work of the functional commissions of ECOSOC in 2003, noting that ECOSOC was engaged in the review of its functional commissions and subsidiary bodies. The report aimed to help ECOSOC take a bird’s eye view of the work undertaken so far. This year’s consolidated report had focused on three issues; the contributions to country teams; policy issues that emanated from the work of the functional commissions, including information and communications technology and population issues; and coordination issues. It was important that functional commissions avoid overlapping and focus instead on their respective key issues. The report was an important tool to guide ECOSOC’s work. He would welcome ECOSOC’s guidance on how this report should be prepared in future years in order for it to be of maximum use. This was all the more important given the new role of functional commissions, given to them by the General Assembly, in the examination and follow-up to major conferences and summits.
RYOKICHI HIRONO, Chairman of the Committee for Development Policy, said that the report of the Committee had been structured to respond to requests made by the Council, particularly in addressing the theme of the high-level segment on promoting an integrated approach to rural development in developing countries for poverty eradication and sustainable development, and to take a triennial review of the list of least developed countries, and in that context to continue its re-examination of its earlier recommendation to graduate the Maldives from that list. Thus, the first substantive section contained the Committee’s findings and recommendations on an integrated approach to rural development, while the second substantive section focused on Global Public Goods (GPGs) and innovative financial mechanisms in the pursuit of sustainable development.
In its third substantive section, he said the report summarized the outcome of the Committee’s triennial review of the list of least developed countries, including the re-examination of the case of the Maldives. In this context, he reiterated that the Committee’s task was to identify countries that could be considered least developed, not to address the characteristics or challenges faced by small island economies. Those countries qualifying for graduation from the category of least developed countries were to be commended on their successful escape from the “poverty trap.” However, the Committee also recognised that such countries continued to face major development challenges, in which regard it was critical that the international meeting on Small Island Developing States to be held in Mauritius in 2004 should make further substantial progress in agreeing on and implementing policies and actions to address the particular set of development challenges facing those countries.
AXUMITE GEBRE-EGZIAHBER, New York Office for the United Nations Centre for Human Settlement (UN-Habitat), in an introductory statement, said that because of the recent elevation in the status of the Commission on Human Settlement, the nineteenth session of the Governing Council of UN-Habitat had been the first ever meeting of the Governing Council being attended both by Member States, parliamentarians, local authorities, non-governmental organizations and the private sector. The decisions made had reflected the overall commitment of Governments to the strengthening of UN-Habitat and also to implementing the Habitat Agenda, the Declaration of Cities and Other Human Settlements in the Millennium Development Goals. Successful implementation of the Habitat Agenda required greater cooperation and collaboration between Governments, local authorities, non-governmental organisations, the private sector, civil society, the United Nations system and all Habitat Agenda partners. Concluding, she reiterated that UN-Habitat stood ready to play its expected role of assisting Member States in implementing the Human Settlements in the New Millennium and the Millennium Development Goals.
ABDELLAH BENMELLOUK (Morocco), speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, said technology was advancing at a very rapid pace, thus providing an immense potential for development through leapfrogging stages of technological development. However, the fact that such an immense potential was not being adequately harnessed threatened to further marginalize the economies and peoples of the majority of the developing countries. The urgent necessity for the transfer of technology and innovative ways to put this potential at the service of development for all must form the work of the United Nations in the area of science and technology for development. The importance of technology for the transition, development and competitiveness of countries was well recognised. However, many hurdles still remained, especially in developing countries. Therefore, without a greater policy focus on the transfer and absorption of technology and its link to foreign direct investment and international trade, and without a more determined strategic approach by Governments, the private sector, and regional and international organisations, advances in technology might exacerbate the development gaps between developed and developing countries. He therefore reiterated the readiness of the Group of 77 and China to work collectively with all partners for consensus action on issues related to science and technology, in order to meet the developing countries’ needs in this field.
VALENTINO SIMONETTI (Italy), speaking on behalf of the European Union (EU), said that the World Summit on the Information Society would aid the emergence of a broad, common consensus on the information society and would help all stakeholders to tackle the opportunities contained therein. The basic objectives of the Summit should therefore be to promote the freedom to seek and receive information and knowledge, and the need to promote universal access at affordable cost. A constructive preparatory meeting had just taken place in Paris last week, and two more would be held in the coming months. Therefore, the EU supported the adoption of the draft resolution on the World Summit on the Information Society.
ABDELLAH BENMELLOUK (Morocco), speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, said that the path to sustainability chosen by the international community implied the urgent need to make available durable, reliable and measurable means of implementation for achieving the objective of sustainable development. These should also be addressed as a crosscutting issue in every cycle and for every theme, action and commitment. By the adoption of a long-term programme of work, the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) would be in a position to fulfil its vitally important role and function within the United Nations system and to serve as a forum for the consideration of issues related to integration of the three dimensions of sustainable development. Moreover, while the primary focus of implementation remained at the national level, the Johannesburg Declaration and Plan of Implementation emphasized the importance of multilateral commitments and a focused, practical approach to the implementation of Agenda 21.
Recalling the important mission of the United Nations Forum on Forests, the main objective of which was to promote the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests, he said that the Forum’s future work should focus on the reinforcement of effective and coherent approaches to ensure the implementation of the IPF/IFF proposals for action as well as to promote the implementation of forest-related decisions made by various intergovernmental fora. In this context, it was important to note that effective implementation remained the major obstacle encountered by developing countries in attaining national plans for forest management, conservation and sustainable development, yet the promotion of sustainable forest management through private sector actions should not diminish intergovernmental partnership between developed and developing countries.
Finally, with regard to human settlements, he said that the lack of sustainable human settlements remained a serious challenge in developing countries, where at present one-third of the world’s urban population lived in slums. This situation required commitment to the provision of requisite resources, capacity building, technology transfers and the creation of an enabling international environment if the Millennium Development Goals of achieving a significant improvement in the lives of 100 million slum dwellers by 2020 was to be achieved. Developed countries should increase their contributions to the United Nations Habitat and Human Settlements Foundation, with emphasis on non-earmarked contributions on a multi-year basis.
VALENTINO SIMONETTI (Italy), speaking on behalf of the European Union (EU), said the report of the Committee for Development Policies needed to be commended for its quality and for bringing to ECOSOC’s attention issues that needed to be debated among the members. With regard to Global Public Goods and the Committee’s deliberations on this concept and its potential for generating better formulation of effective, efficient and equitable ways of development, he stressed the European Union’s interest in this context. The Committee’s suggestion in the report made a good contribution to the ongoing debate on this issue particularly with regard to the need for accelerated progress meeting the international development goals, including the Millennium Development Goals. On the review of the list of Least Developing Countries, the report contained a number of important findings and recommendations that must be part of an accurate debate and analysis. It was stressed that the recognition of least developed countries as qualified for graduation must be seen as a very positive, encouraging sign, that poverty could be defeated and development policies could be successful. The international community needed success stories and signs of hope. It was clear that these successes, as the report underlined, must be attributed to sound domestic policies supported by propitious external conditions. While rejoicing in the achievement of countries in a position to graduate, the European Union was at the same time conscious of the need to ensure a smooth transition. Graduating a country and only then tackling the issues related to the transition would not be logical. There was an urgent need to address these issues expeditiously. He added that the European Union was in favour of recommending the inclusion of East Timor in the list of least developed countries.
SICHAN SIV (United States) said that it was well recognised that the achievement of internationally agreed development goals was the shared responsibility of developed and developing countries and that all sectors needed to work together to mobilise development resources, especially in trade and domestic and foreign investment. Thus, the United States President had made support for sustainable development a major goal of his national security strategy. The Member States of the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) had committed the international community to catalyse sustainable development; the new two-year cycle had implications for terms of membership in the CSD bureau and the United States was willing to explore different options for ensuring continuity of leadership and action in each cycle. The United States was also proud to take part in more than two dozen partnership initiatives that brought governments, business and civil society together to promote implementation on the ground.
STAFFORD O. NEIL (Jamaica) said time did not give justice to the many issues before ECOSOC. He would therefore concentrate his remarks on the Committee on Development Policies. The report had comprehensively analysed the concept of rural development; however it lacked mention of the issue of water. Concerning the Global Public Goods initiative, it would become even more important as globalisation and interdependence increased. In the current circumstance, in order to advance the process, one needed to have a clearer definition of what constituted Global Public Goods. There was also a need to raise awareness of the issue and devise mechanisms and financing arrangements to cover the issue. It was important that the financing was not drawn from the official development assistance fund, he said. It was important to alert all development agencies on these issues to allow them to make a refinement of the issue. Concerning the issue of graduation, also mentioned in the report, he said there was scope for greater methodological criteria for graduation. This was particularly the case for small island developing States due to their innate vulnerability. There therefore needed to be a measure of flexibility when dealing with the graduation of small island developing States. Jamaica therefore supported the deferment of the graduation from the category of least developing countries of both Cape Verde and the Maldives. It was added that, within the process of graduation, more focus must be placed on the importance of smooth transitions.
VASSILY NEBENZIA (Russian Federation) said that the Johannesburg Summit and the development of long-term prospects for the United Nations’ work on sustainable development had been important steps for the achievement of sustainable development. The activities of the Commission for Sustainable Development (CSD) would focus on implementation of commitments over the next few years; it was virtually the first Commission in the United Nations to have its primary focus on implementation. The degree of effectiveness of the Commission would depend upon the involvement and contributions of the United Nations funds and programmes. Thus, the further coordination of the implementation of the outcomes of the World Summit for Sustainable Development should be of continuing focus for the Economic and Social Council. On the issue of reforming the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), he said it was important to bring a clear focus to UNEP’s work.
ALESSANDRO MANINI (SPIRULINA-Institution for the use of Micro-Algae Spirulina Against Malnutrition), recalled that sustainable development meant that the use of natural resources must be equitable, while harmonised with historical, environmental, cultural, and anthropological grounds. Food Micro-Algae was a real objective in obtaining sustainable development, through their minimal use of water, carbon dioxide reduction, radioactivity reduction, great productivity and impact of food security enhancement, and capability in combating HIV/AIDS. Spirulina was therefore a real tool for sustainable development in countries in real need. The use of Micro-Algae Spirulina was a means to combat serious malnutrition and to support rural development. The Institution believed that Spirulina could be used as an important nutritional supplement in countries suffering from acute malnutrition or food emergencies as a result of humanitarian crises, drought, famine, and massive displacement.
M. SKURATOVSKYI (Ukraine) said that his country remained committed to the goals and principles of the multilateral instruments aimed at achieving stable economic growth, social progress and environmental protection and also recognized the necessity of balancing the interests of socio-economic development with natural resources and the need for environmental protection. Ukraine fully intended to speed up the implementation of provisions of multilateral international conventions, particularly in the area of environmental protection. Also, it was clear that the efforts of developing countries and countries with economies in transition to achieve Development Goals would fail without adequate international support, especially with regard to addressing the debt problems of these countries. In this context, the president of Ukraine had suggested “debt-for-sustainable-development swaps.”
In the area of public administration and development, he said the report of the Committee of Experts rightfully stressed the central role of governance systems and institutions in promoting sustainable development. Although many gains had been made in public administration recently, there had also been an erosion of the public sector in many countries. Thus, revitalizing and revalidating public administration to enable the State to perform its fundamental role in an integrated follow-up to international conferences was urgently important. Enhanced outreach and advocacy efforts were pivotal to reasserting the role of the State and increasing citizens' awareness of the important contribution of public service to the development process.
On the issue of assistance to third States affected by the application of sanctions, he said that Ukraine was one of the countries most seriously affected by the sanctions imposed against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The increased number of sanctions regimes and growing diversity of their forms and purposes made it important to review critically experiences in this area. On the whole, the views presented by States and international organisations and institutions with regard to practical proposals made by the expert group were positive and its recommendations were generally acceptable, while all General Assembly resolutions adopted on this subject in the past decade consistently reaffirmed the role of the Council in mobilizing and monitoring the economic assistance efforts of the international community and the United Nations system to third States confronting special economic problems, in which context it was encouraging that the work undertaken brought the international community closer to the expected results.
JEAN-MARC BOULGARIS (Switzerland) said the interdependence of economic, social and environmental factors were at the heart of sustainable development, including the protection of natural resources. Switzerland was satisfied with the reform of the work of the Commission on Sustainable Development, and believed that other functional commissions could learn from such methods. In this context, he stressed the need to extend the length of the Bureau mandates to two years in order to ensure continuity. Concerning the report of UNEP, Switzerland had noted the success of the Governing Council of UNEP. Finally, Switzerland had noted, with great satisfaction, the report on the transport of dangerous goods and the general harmonized system for such transfers. All members must participate in such important initiatives, he said.
TAN JIAN (China) said that the Government was greatly concerned about the situation of least developed countries (LDCs) and the question of graduation from that category. In spite of the difference in their respective situations, when viewed as a group, they were confronted with heavy challenges and they deserved special and differentiated treatment. Thus, although the early graduation out of the category of LDCs was desirable, it remained complex. The international community should act with caution, taking into account the specific situations of the countries concerned, especially in relation to their development needs in breaking free of the poverty trap. The international community should make sure graduating countries did not fall back into the category of LDCs. In the case of the Maldives and Cape Verde, the Chinese delegation was of the opinion that the graduation of these two countries should be postponed.
RAFAEL OLAYA (International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies) said there were six million people on earth who lived in poverty and struggled to survive on a daily basis. They were faced with innumerable hazards, including floods, droughts, violence, and insecurity, as well as infectious diseases. It was now well established that disasters were not stand-alone isolated events but that they occurred in the larger context of human development. It therefore stood to reason that interventions that addressed the vulnerability of communities to hazards must include a long-term perspective from the outset if they were to be sustainable. More than 180 National Societies of the Red Cross and the Red Crescent in virtually every country faced the underlying issues of sustainable development on a daily basis. Of particular importance were the specific vulnerabilities that faced small island developing States. Owing to their peculiar conditions coined as “poverty of opportunity", these States required special attention if sustainable development was to translate to reality.
LUIS DE MATOS MONTEIRO DA FONSECA (Cape Verde) said that although Cape Verde met two of the Committee for Development Policy’s criteria for graduation from the category of Least Developed Countries (LDCs), the Committee had refrained from explicitly recommending its graduation. This cautious position was justified by the fact that there had been no major improvement in Cape Verde’s general economic and social situation since the last review in 2000 and by the implicit recognition of the high risks posed by graduation to a country with such high economic vulnerability, as shown by the 2003 Vulnerability Profile established by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. The Profile drew attention to the many and deep structural constraints and vulnerabilities that heavily handicapped the country’s development process, such as the lack of a natural resource base, great environmental fragility, climatic vulnerability, prolonged droughts and desertification. Other limitations were inherent to the country’s situation as a small island developing State.
Cape Verde strove to mobilize and rationalize the use of its limited internal financial resources, he said, but its internal accumulation capacity was very low. Thus, the country continued to need external resources in order not to degrade the results achieved and to continue building the base of a viable and sustainable economy. As official development assistance and foreign direct investment were the only two sources for these external resources, it was important to note that early graduation would send the wrong message to donor countries, leading them to believe that the country had already achieved a level of economic development requiring less support from the international community. And while Cape Verde had made efforts to improve its business environment and to attract foreign direct investment (FDI), the loss of preferential and differentiated treatment would severely impact FDI. Thus, Cape Verde’s high economic vulnerability index should weigh heavier than the other criteria.
SANDRA MORALES DE DUJE (El Salvador) said that at present, during effects of globalisation on economic and social areas, one must not forget that one of the areas most affected was the environment. Central America was an area of biological diversity; however, the vulnerability of the region as a result of poverty was curbing development. Natural disasters added to the lack of development. However, at the same time, these natural disasters provided important lessons as to socio-economic policies, housing, prevention and preparedness. In this connection ECOSOC was informed about initiatives taken by the Government, including the increased participation of civil society, including representatives of farmers, traders, and industrial firm, in addressing environmental concerns. The year 2003 had been declared the International Year for Fresh Water. In this connection, she stressed the importance of water as a basis for sustainable development. Water was nature’s treasure house and the source for industry and production, but the lack of water could lead to tension, a lack of development and sanitation issues. She stressed that nature, including water, had an important impact on industry, agriculture and productivity. A commitment must therefore be made, through promoting the alliance of sectors, to ensure sustainable development.
AMINA C. MOHAMED (Kenya) said that in Kenya, like other developing countries, about half the population in urban areas was sheltered in informal, poorly constructed settlements characterized by high unemployment and crime rates and increasing rates of HIV/AIDS and opportunistic disease infections. Domestic and industrial waste management posed serious environmental challenges in most urban settlements, a situation compounded by poor water and sanitation facilities, a poor road network and lack of access to cheap, durable and environmentally friendly energy sources. The Government had recently embarked upon an ambitious and elaborate programme to provide affordable housing to urban low-income groups, hand in hand with the private sector, yet in order to succeed, the requisite means of implementation and the creation of an enabling environment were needed. In this regard, the UN-Habitat Chief Executive was to be commended for UN-Habitat's efforts and achievements in the field of human settlements. While Kenya remained grateful to its development partners for their timely support, the growing imbalance between non-earmarked and ear-marked aid was of concern.
SOO CHUAN ONG (Singapore) said the least developed countries (LDCs) represented the weakest segment of the international community. These States faced extreme poverty, economic structural weaknesses, and lack of growth and development capacities. While Singapore recognized that the primary responsibility for LDC development rested with the LDCs themselves, their efforts needed to be supported by the rest of the international community. The fact that some LDCs qualified for graduation was recognition of that country’s economic and social achievements. In this respect, the issue of graduating an LDC was one which must be done only after thorough consideration. Possible external shocks arising from a country’s graduation from LDC status needed to be adequately addressed in order to minimize adverse effects to the LDC’s economy. Otherwise, the international community risked penalizing the country and possible undoing much of the progress that had been achieved.
HUSSAIN SHIHAB (the Maldives) welcomed the Committee for Development Policy’s recognition that, despite meeting technical criteria, the Maldives would face severe costs from graduation. Unless these costs were addressed, the conditions for graduation would not be met. Graduation without the emphasis on a smooth transition would lead to the reversal of the gains achieved thus far. While the criteria for identifying Least Developed Countries (LDCs) had been continuously refined, there had been little need to examine the formula for graduation. If structural handicaps provided a convincing case for inclusion, then graduation should be based on some measure of structural change, yet the current third quartile rule had no relationship to structural change.
When the LDC category was developed in 1971, the Committee had determined that the criteria should be applied with a high degree of automaticity, but not mechanically so as to have no flexibility in doubtful circumstances and that in the case of micro-countries, data could be hard to interpret. Both these still characterized the Maldives. The UNCTAD profile of the Maldives highlighted a number of circumstances not captured by the Committee’s criteria. Thus, the Maldives felt that no graduations should occur until the process of graduation was made consistent with the principles proclaimed by the Committee and ECOSOC.
NORMA NASCIMBENE DE DUMONT (Argentina) addressed the importance of follow-up to priorities identified by the Commission on Sustainable Development in order to fulfil the provisions of Agenda 21. Concerning the United Nations Forum on Forests, she expressed Argentina’s satisfaction with the holding of additional meetings, allowing it to conduct its important work. With regard to the transport of dangerous goods, she said that even though Argentina was a member, the lack of developing country participation had been noted. In this connection, she suggested that a trust fund be established to finance the participation of experts from developing countries. Their participation would be extremely important within the context of the transportation of dangerous goods.
ESAYAS GOTTA SEIFU (Ethiopia) said that the last three decades had witnessed the increase by over 100 per cent of the number of countries classified as Least Developed Countries (LDCs). It was clear that it was time to do something to halt this trend. Yet, in spite of the continuous improvements to criteria for inclusion in and graduation from this category, Ethiopia shared the serious concern over the proposed graduation of Cape Verde and the Maldives. The success achieved by these countries with respect to two criteria for graduation was largely attributable to external, not internal, factors. Given the structural weaknesses of their economies, there was no reason to suppose they would sustain their gains. Moreover, the sliding back of graduating countries should be avoided. And while there were no immediate financial implications to allowing them to remain LDCs, the preferability of this status to them was clear. Therefore, Ethiopia supported the position that the graduation of Cape Verde and the Maldives from the category of LDCs should be postponed.
YESHEY DORJI (Bhutan) said his delegation supported the deferment of the graduation of the Maldives. He highlighted that the Committee for Development Policy had observed that the Maldives met the statistical criteria, and yet had not recommended its graduation. Due attention needed to be paid to the Committee’s further assertion that as a small and widely dispersed island economy, it faced “special difficulties and costs”, and that it would lose “important international benefits” if graduated. His delegation also supported the request by Cape Verde for a deferral of the question of its graduation from the list of LDCs until the conditions for its self-sustainable development were put in place. Despite considerable progress achieved at the economic and social levels, the country still remained largely dependent on external resources and had not yet accomplished the structural changes that would put it in the path of self-sustainable development. Bhutan therefore believed that the question of its graduation must be deferred until such time as those changes had been achieved.
GYAN CHANDRA ACHARYA (Nepal) said that in making its recommendation, the Committee on Development Policy had concluded that Cape Verde and the Maldives had met two out of three criteria for graduation in three consecutive reviews and thus qualified technically for graduation. However, Cape Verde’s economic vulnerability index remained high and the Maldives faced special difficulties and costs as a small, widely dispersed island economy. These countries deserved a favourable consideration until such time as a more practical mechanism to ensure the smooth transition and irreversibility of the transition process. Thus, there was a need to wait until the next report on these countries was presented before making a decision on graduation.
AIZAZ CHAUDRY (Pakistan) commented on the report of the Committee on Development Policy and extended his full support to the request of the representatives of the Maldives and Cape Verde to the effect that their graduation from the category of LDCs be deferred.
HASSAN ABOUTAHIR (Morocco), speaking on behalf of Group of 77 and China, said the Statistical Commission was the intergovernmental system-wide focal point to deal with the issue of indicators. In this regard, the Group of 77 and China supported further strengthening of this role within the United Nations system and expressed their satisfaction for the technical work that the Statistical Commission was undertaking in the field of development and use of indicators regarding the implementation of the international development goals. The Commission had stressed the need to pay particular attention to indicators monitoring the implementation of Millennium Development Goal number eight and had recommended that country level reports be prepared by developed countries with regard to the progress of their commitments. The Millennium Development Goals had not been adopted in a meeting of the Group of 77 but in an international summit which represented a global compact bringing together all member States, developed and developing. The global Millennium Development Goals campaign initiated by the Secretary-General could be truly global only if there was country-level reporting on fulfilment of pledges undertaken by developed countries as well. Such reports would help to foster public debate in developed countries, re-energize a broach political constituency in favour of development and create the necessary links between national priorities and targets assumed at the international level.
NORMA GOICOCHEA ESTENOZ (Cuba) said her country fully endorsed the request of Timor Leste to be included in the category of Least Developed Countries (LDCs), as well as the requests of Cape Verde and the Maldives regarding their proposed graduation from that category. On the subject of statistics, there was a need for better coordination and communication. National capacities needed to be evaluated to ensure the reliability of data and statistics. As to public administration and development, the Cuban delegation noted the recommendations contained therein and held the view that the proposal to organize annual sessions of groups of experts was appropriate and should be approved. Cuba also noted with disquiet the inclusion of a set of indicators without any intergovernmental terms of reference, which sought to avoid a public discussion as to what should be included in these sets of indicators. And on the subject of human settlements, Cuba endorsed the Governing Council’s proposals related to the Habitat Programme, whose budget should be increased.
HUA LI (China) said her delegation supported the statement made by Morocco, but wanted to add that regarding statistics, the Commission must be quicker in the formulation of these statistics and its work in formulating indicators. Realization that the Millennium Development Goals were the common responsibilities of both developed and developing countries, the efforts of developing countries could not be separated from a favourable international economic environment. In this context, she also stressed the need that developed countries produce progress reports on their financial and technical assistance. Using indicators to conduct policy analysis, the Chinese delegation hoped that the international community would strengthen its efforts to help developing countries achieve the Millennium Development Goals.
NORMA GOICOCHEA ESTENOZ (Cuba) said that she wished to emphasize the importance attached by her Government to correct steps taken in preparation for the Action Programme for the International Conference on Small Island Developing States to be held in Mauritius next year.
* *** *