ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL CONSIDERS ABILITY OF UNITED NATIONS SYSTEM TO SUPPORT CAPACITY-BUILDING

13 July 1998

Press Release
ECOSOC/5774

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL CONSIDERS ABILITY OF UNITED NATIONS SYSTEM TO SUPPORT CAPACITY-BUILDING

19980713 Panel Evaluates Organization's Support of Capacity-Building In Brazil, El Salvador, Mali, Pakistan, Uganda and Zimbabwe

Evaluating the ability of the United Nations system to support capacity- building was addressed during a panel discussion before the Economic and Social Council this afternoon. The panel discussion focusing on impact evaluation was undertaken as part of the Council review of operation activities for international development cooperation. Panellists discussed evaluations of the Organization's support of capacity-uilding in Brazil, El Salvador, Mali, Pakistan, Uganda and Zimbabwe, between 1980 and 1995.

Eduardo Wiesner, former Executive Director of the World Bank and former Minister for Finance of Colombia, said evaluations of United Nations programmes often focused too much on the merits achieved. The design of programmes rarely considered areas of public policy or interests that did not coincide with the United Nations objectives. Those obstacles should be built into programme design and evaluation.

The various instruments of the United Nations system must be linked in order to serve the object of national execution, said Jehan Raheem, adjunct professor at Brandeis University. Support for national programmes also should engender a greater capacity in the development of the indicators. There was a need to balance the ability to collect information and the analysis of information.

It had been hoped that the Secretariat's evaluations on operational activities would not be the only sources of information submitted to the Economic and Social Council and the General Assembly, said Roger Maconick, former Resident Coordinator in the Central African Republic. Recipient governments, donor countries and United Nations agencies all had been asked to carry out their own studies on aspects of interest to them. However, those efforts had been a total and abject failure.

Regarding capacity-building in Pakistan, Peter Morgan said the challenge that country faced was one of capacity liberation or utilization, rather than capacity-building. The United Nations had worked effectively in collaboration with local groups. It used its reputation for objectivity in

Economic and Social Council - 1a - Press Release ECOSOC/5774 25th Meeting (PM) 13 July 1998

order to work as a catalyst, both inside and outside government. Given the limited financial resources, the Organization's efforts had been quite successful, sustainable and still functioning today.

Alfred Haemmerli, of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs, participated in the panel.

Also this afternoon, the Council concluded its consideration of follow- up to policy recommendations of the General Assembly. Statements were made by the representatives of Norway, Viet Nam, Tunisia, Colombia and Belarus.

In addition, a representative of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) introduced the revised guidelines for the review of policies and procedures concerning technical cooperation among developing countries.

The Council will meet again at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, 14 July, to continue its segment on operational activities for international development cooperation by holding a dialogue with the United Nations country teams from Guatemala and Mozambique.

Council Work Programme

The Economic and Social Council met this afternoon to continue its segment on operational activities for international development cooperation by considering follow-up to policy recommendations of the General Assembly. (For further information on the session, see Press Release ECOSOC/5773 of 13 July.)

Also this afternoon, following the conclusion of its discussion on Assembly recommendations, the Council was scheduled to hold a panel discussion on impact evaluation, facilitated by Alfred Haemmerli, Chief of the Development Cooperation Policy Branch of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs.

Statements

OLE PETER KOLBY (Norway) said national ownership was one of the most important elements in securing the proper impact of operational activities. All members of the United Nations system should recognized the importance of combining efforts to support the development policies of the recipient countries. The planned establishment of United Nations houses in more than 50 countries was also a positive development. It was a symbol of a unified United Nations system and should facilitate further cooperation. The United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) had the potential to be further developed into a framework for joint programming for all United Nations development activities.

Norway welcomed efforts to establish a common programming framework at the country level, he said. It was crucial to strengthen the position of the resident coordinator as the leader of the United Nations country team. That would lead to a better dialogue between the recipient country and the entire United Nations system. The Organization also should improve cooperation among bilateral donors, specialized agencies, programmes and funds and the Bretton Woods institutions. All should work together to support and strengthen the national development policies in the recipient country. In addition, improved coordination was necessary to ensure the coherence in efforts in conflict prevention, humanitarian assistance and development cooperation.

LE LUONG MINH (Viet Nam) said development cooperation between the United Nations and his country had contributed to overcoming economic and social problems that had confronted the country since the late 1970s. The role Viet Nam played was a decisive factor in ensuring efficient development cooperation. It was the role of effecting sound macro socio-economic policies, appropriate aid utilization, and management strategies and mechanisms. It also enabled broad participation by society. To be effective, United Nations programmes should be based on national plans and priorities. Effective development programmes should have a mixture of technical assistance, material support, financing and technology transfer.

Economic and Social Council - 3 - Press Release ECOSOC/5774 25th Meeting (PM) 13 July 1998

He said lack of familiarity and knowledge of the United Nations development system, along with lack of knowledge of the specific circumstances of the partner country, had been some factors that hampered the use of resources and opportunities offered through cooperation, he said. He cautioned against the view that country strategy notes represented the demand side of development cooperation -- the Government's own expression of country requirements -- while UNDAF represented the supply-side response by the United Nations to identified needs. That view could lead to deviation from the foregoing principle and conditionality.

ABDERRAZAK AZAIEZ (Tunisia) said the Secretary-General's report seemed to consider the choice of the resident coordinator to be an issue of great importance. Yet, Member States had not viewed that as a top priority. In- house wranglings about the organization of various bodies also were of little interest.

The report had analysed certain issues of importance to countries in a quick and superficial manner, he continued. The limited success of the country strategy note had only received a cursory mention in the report. Similarly, the section on the relations with the recipient country was vague. National execution was an important subject and should be stressed more than it had been. The report notes that resource flows had reached a critical stage. Tunisia was alarmed at that trend, which looked irreversible during the next few years.

NIKHIL CHANDAVARKAR, Director of the Division of External Relations, Bureau for Resources and External Affairs of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), introduced the UNDP report before the Council on revised guidelines for the review of policies and procedures concerning technical cooperation among developing countries.

MARTA INES GALINDO (Colombia) said that in development operations States were the chief players responsible for moving projects forward and acting on recommendations. The United Nations system, through resident coordinators, should act in the role of facilitator. That interrelationship made it important to develop specific guidelines, shared bench marks and to encourage the broad participation of civil society. Eradication of poverty, reform of public administration and increasing resource availability were all issues to be addressed.

VALERY ZHDANOVICH (Belarus) said his Government supported measures to strengthen the United Nations country teams. Recently, there had been more attention given to UNDP activities in European countries and the countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). Belarus supported shifting staff from Headquarters to the field, which would help to increase accountability and responsibility.

Economic and Social Council - 4 - Press Release ECOSOC/5774 25th Meeting (PM) 13 July 1998

His Government supported the activities of the resident coordinators in field, he said. The resident coordinator system should become part of the collective responsibility of the entire United Nations system. Greater attention should be given to relations between the resident coordinator and the host country. Periodic consultations by the resident coordinator with national partners could enhance the system. The practice of combining the resident coordinator system with the resident representatives should be maintained. Core resources should remain the main source of financing for the UNDP.

Panel Discussion

Opening the panel discussion on impact evaluation, ALFRED HAEMMERLI, Chief Development Cooperation Policy Branch, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, told the Council that a recent report on the impact of the United Nations system support to capacity building 1980-1995 detailed capacity- building by the Organization in six countries -- Brazil, El Salvador, Mali, Pakistan, Uganda and Zimbabwe.

Panel participant PETER MORGAN, author on capacity-building, addressed the Pakistan case study. He said ways in which outside intervention could help the development process in Pakistan were still being devised, and studies were still contributing to the knowledge of capacity issues. The total percentage of assistance that went to Pakistan was probably not more than 2 per cent, and the United Nations role in that country was very limited. The challenge in Pakistan was one of capacity liberation or utilization, rather than capacity-building. It meant using what was already present in the country in more effective way.

During the late 1980s, the United Nations had looked for a broader framework on the capacity side. It tried to form creative coalitions and went in for policy advocacy, both inside and outside government. It made great efforts to experiment with projects: what worked, where, when and why. There were very few organizations that could work effectively in Pakistan. The United Nations was one that could, and it did so in collaboration with local groups. The Organization used its legitimacy and reputation for objectivity to work as a catalyst. Given the limited financial resources, the United Nations efforts were quite successful, sustainable and still functioning today.

EDUARDO WIESNER, former Executive Director of the World Bank and former Minister for Finance of Colombia, said United Nations programmes focused too much on the merits achieved, while infrequently considered the impediments to their aim. Public policy or interests that might not coincide with the United Nations objectives were not taken into account. Those obstacles should be built into programme design and evaluation.

Economic and Social Council - 5 - Press Release ECOSOC/5774 25th Meeting (PM) 13 July 1998

During the period of study in Zimbabwe, there had been nearly 300 projects carried out, he said. Many ideas had been presented by various parties. In Brazil, during that time, the Government had a specific and focused interest in telecommunications, and the programme which reflected had been successful programme.

In all countries, outcomes were the result of existing incentive structures, he said. In Brazil, the incentive was the Government's interest in the field of telecommunications. When interests were more diffuse, efforts were less successful. While institutions mattered, processes were even more valuable.

JEHAN RAHEEM, adjunct professor at Brandeis University, said when providing support for building national capacity, it was important to assess the impact of United Nations operational activities. Support could be provided at a variety of levels, including making more transparent the questions the country had about the operational activities. Regarding the lack of cost effectiveness, he said it was difficult to assess that factor without a clear picture of the objectives of the programmes.

Support for national programmes should engender a greater capacity in the development of the evaluative indicators, he said. There was a need to balance the ability to collect information and to analyse information. Overall, support should be given to countries in the areas of response, participation, transparency, accountability, effectiveness and efficiency.

Exchange of Views

In response to a question about the country studies, Mr. HAEMMERLI said that, in addition to the conference room paper, there were efforts to issue the results of the six studies in the form of a small publication.

Regarding the content of the studies, Mr. MORGAN said they were forced to be selective in considering which activities and which years were included. Some early projects were short on usable indicators for evaluation guidelines. As the system developed, the indicators were becoming more credible.

He said the main role of United Nations system in Pakistan was that of a balancing instrument, particularly in the social sector. The donor community in Pakistan was divided between the international financing institutions, which donated a large portion of the resources, and a large group of smaller donors, including the United Nations system.

Commenting on the World Bank evaluation, Mr. WIESNER said that the institution did a thorough and professional job. On the issue of resources, it was amazing how often countries spent huge amounts on projects that did not include an evaluation stage. The common response was often that it cost too much. Evaluations were integral to any project.

Economic and Social Council - 6 - Press Release ECOSOC/5774 25th Meeting (PM) 13 July 1998

Mr. RAHEEM said there had not been enough progress on the use of indicators. The problem was more one of absence of baselines than of indicators, since the former presented a problem in terms of cost effectiveness. Responding to whether impact evaluations were expendable, he said that many case studies did not complete the final stage and were, thus, nothing more than institution memory processes. However, once public institutions were involved and expenditure made, impact evaluations were impossible to avoid.

Responding to a question about gender and the studies, ROGER MACONICK, former Resident Coordinator in the Central African Republic, said specific terms of reference for gender were included in questionnaires. Responses on gender were not satisfying.

Regarding the cost effectiveness of impact evaluations, he said there was a value in asking questions, regardless of the answers received. The cost effectiveness might go beyond the strict limits of the exercise itself.

Mr. MORGAN said that one of the advantages the United Nations had in Pakistan was its tremendous technical capability in the field available through its many specialized agencies. It had the capacity to do small projects, to try different things, and to experiment and find out what worked in different situations. He stressed the difference between capacity and capacity development. Capacity could only be addressed through development performance, that is: how that capacity would lead to some form of development improvement. The more problematic issue was capacity development, the process by which some organizational or technical ability was induced to facilitate development, progress. While there were methods that could measure that at various levels in an economy, it was often difficult to do.

Mr. WIESNER said evaluations were carried out only when they acted as an incentive, and results were linked with policy changes and budget allocations. In some developing countries, vested interests provided linkages between evaluations and the budget and policy processes and, thus, the results were limited.

Mr. RAHEEM said it was not necessary to apply a system of measurement to advocacy and policy roles. One should be comfortable with making observations. Much of the transactions in human rights would escape measurement. The capacity- building evaluation system was new and deserved more refining before its effectiveness was judged.

In response to questions on participation and policy impact, he said people were beginning to look at the impact of capacity-building tentatively, since the six studies were undertaken. Concerning a statement about negative capacity- building in Zimbabwe, he said the UNDP had warned against the impact of negative capacity-building. He was not certain about the system-wide policy.

Economic and Social Council - 7 - Press Release ECOSOC/5774 25th Meeting (PM) 13 July 1998

Mr. MACONICK said that there was a resource aspect to the issue of scaling up. Regardless of where resources came from, there had to be sufficient resources in the system before anything could go forward. The issue of negativity in capacity-building was an issue that went beyond coordination, turf and national ownership. On national ownership, he said that it was surely possible for funds and programmes that had made progress to carry out their own development and management.

Regarding the process of the studies, Mr. HAEMMERLI said the United Nations was the focus of the evaluation process. It did not judge government's performance.

Mr. MACONICK said one way to take the evaluation process forward would be to have a fuller discussion during the next session of the General Assembly. It had been hoped that the Secretariat's evaluations would not be the only sources of information submitted to the Economic and Social Council and the Assembly. Recipient governments, donor countries, and United Nations agencies had been requested to carry out evaluations on aspects of operational activities that were of interest to them. Yet, efforts to encourage other parties to undertake evaluations on impact had failed.

Concerning local participation, he said governments in all cases were fully consulted by the resident coordinators and country teams. Governments were not directly involved because the studies were supposed to be independent exercises. In addition, there had been a balance of interest and experience on the evaluating teams. For the most part, indicators did not exist and baseline data was not available. Often, the judgements of experienced persons were consulted instead. It was up to Member States to judge if that approach had been successful.

In response to questions about the objectivity of the studies, Mr. RAHEEM said the evaluations could not exclude subjectivity, but the evaluators had ensured that the questions were discussed fully with all the participants. The basis for judgement was also recorded, and the process had been transparent. Questions were used rather than formal indicators, in order to respect each countries' uniqueness. In the next round of evaluations, it would be preferable to develop a common set of indicators.

Commenting on logistical issues, Mr. MORGAN said that an accumulated 90 years of experience between six agencies in Pakistan had produced the best that could be done with limited time and resources.

Mr. WIESNER said that in Colombia strategic evaluation was being attempted. Though it was less than perfect,it was working. Such attempts provided substance that could be built into policy making and then applied to budget allocation. Once people found out that evaluations could influence budget allocations, there would be more demand for them.

* *** *