INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE NEEDS TO ADDRESS NATIONAL PRIORITIES, AS WELL AS DEVELOPMENT, DEMOGRAPHIC ISSUES, POPULATION COMMISSION TOLD
| Press Release POP/900 |
Commission on Population and Development
Thirty-seventh Session
7th Meeting (AM)
INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE NEEDS TO ADDRESS NATIONAL PRIORITIES, AS WELL AS
DEVELOPMENT, DEMOGRAPHIC ISSUES, POPULATION COMMISSION TOLD
A new phase of international population policies, in which assistance was better directed toward national priorities and other issues that had so far been sidelined, was called for this morning by Riad Tabbarah, Director of the Centre for Development Studies and Projects (MADMA) in Beirut, Lebanon, as the Commission on Population and Development heard its third keynote speaker and finished the debate on its future work programme.
Phase One, Mr. Tabbarah said, had been extremely successful in making the United Nations the leader in the development of formal demography in the lead-up to the first international population conference in Bucharest in 1974. Phase Two, following the 1994 Cairo Conference, had seen impressive accomplishments in important aspects of population policy, particularly reproductive health and the empowerment of women. Phase Two had also raised interest in population policy, along with subsequent funding, from the international community.
He stressed that a more balanced approach in Phase Three, if properly promoted, did not imply a reduction in resources available for reproductive health and the empowerment of women. On the contrary, it should eventually result in a substantial increase in donors’ contributions to population assistance, larger cost-sharing on the part of receiving countries and bilateral donors, and greater economies of scale.
Persisting in the narrower approach much longer, Mr. Tabbarah said, ran the risk of dangerously distorting national priorities and permanently marginalizing important areas of population concern, such as migration and population structure, which were not only important for most developing countries, but also important for sustainable development and international harmony.
He added that it also ran the risk of sidelining the use of indirect social and economic measures aimed at achieving population goals and thus isolating population policy from overall socio-economic development policies. There was a final risk of letting funding determine policy instead of the other way around.
During the ensuing discussion, moderated by Joseph Chamie, the Director of the Population Division -- who also introduced the speaker -- questions were asked by representatives of the Economic Commission for Europe, Syria, Mexico, Lebanon and Kenya. Speakers were very interested in how the new direction in population and development could be shaped, and how momentum in the area could be renewed. A clear way forward had not yet been agreed upon, Mr. Tabbarah said, but he hoped it would become the focus of current discussion.
Prior to Mr. Tabbarah’s presentation this morning, the Commission concluded its consideration of programme implementation and the future programme of work of the Secretariat in the field of population. It heard from three non-governmental organizations: Federation for Women and Family Planning; American Life League; and Population Action International.
In addition, the Vice-Minister for Family Welfare of India, Prasanna K. Hota, stressed that population policies should necessarily go beyond demographic statistics and advocacy of important rights – important as those foundation activities were. For them to become integrated with the development process, however, country-wide programme analyses, budget studies and resource advocacy based on result-based benchmarking for desirable activities had to be given their due importance.
At the end of that discussion, Mr. Chamie noted that HIV/AIDS had been a frequently recurrent topic this morning and yesterday afternoon. It was clear, he said, that it was crucial to take the necessary steps to tackle the epidemic.
Also today, the representative of the United States made a short announcement of related events.
The Commission for Population and Development will meet again tomorrow, 26 March, at 3 p.m. to conclude its work.
Background
The Commission on Population and Development continued its thirty-seventh session today, during which it concluded its consideration of programme implementation and future the programme of work of the Secretariat in the field of population, started yesterday [see Press Release POP/897 of 24 March for coverage].
The Commission then heard a keynote address by Riad Tabbarah, Director, Centre for Development Studies and Projects (Beirut), on “ICPD+10 or Bucharest+30? The Longer-term View”. “ICPD+10”, often called “Cairo +10” refers to the tenth anniversary of the Cairo Conference on Population and Development and the resulting Plan of Action. “Bucharest+30” refers to the thirtieth anniversary of the first World Conference on Population organized by the United Nations in Bucharest, Romania, in 1974.
[For more information, please see Press Release POP/892 of 17 March.]
Statements
WANDA NOVICKA, Federation for Women and Family Planning, speaking on behalf of the International Sexual and Reproductive Rights Coalition, said that since Cairo, people knew more about how to protect themselves against sexually transmitted infections. Also, contraceptive use had increased, and governments and international bodies were recognizing that reproductive rights were human rights. However, resources –- the political and financial commitments to empower individuals to make healthy responsible decisions about their lives –- were lacking.
To achieve lasting change, all individuals, especially women, must have the services and information to determine the number and spacing of their children, she said. Families, in their various forms, must be supported with full respect for gender equality and the rights of women and adolescents. Men and boys must have the information and services to address their sexual and reproductive health needs. In countries or communities where there was an inability or unwillingness to talk about sexuality openly and honestly, a fundamental aspect of human nature was neglected, and human rights were denied. To make those rights a reality, governments and donor agencies must fulfil and increase their financial commitments to implement the ICPD Plan of Action.
ROBERT SASSONE, American Life League, said there was a division among countries which had experience below 2.1 children per woman fertility for more than 10 years. About a dozen of those countries had never experienced fertility below 1.3, but rather had experienced increases and decreases. Those countries were all very high median-income countries. In contrast, however, about a dozen countries had experienced fertility declines below 1.3. Those countries had moderate or lower median income. That experience suggested that per capita income might be a major factor in determining whether a country’s fertility would decline so low as to threaten the very ability of its people to remain a majority in their own country.
Not many countries had very high income, he continued. If the experience of the countries with current fertility below 1.3 illustrated the future of other countries with similar or lower median income, most countries were at risk for very low fertility. Much was known about reducing fertility. In contrast, practically nothing was known about increasing a country’s fertility or alleviating the problem of too-low fertility. Research in that regard and better communication between experts from the various countries might be first steps to alleviate low fertility.
GEMMA HOBCRAFT, Population Action International, on behalf of the Youth Coalition, said it was urgent that actions were taken to lower high teenage pregnancy rates, the prevalence of sexual violence, and the number of young people being affected with HIV on a daily basis. She urged representatives to fully implement the commitments made in the 1994 Cairo Plan of Action related to: the right to education and information on sexual and reproductive health and rights, which must be secular, scientific and non-judgmental; youth participation and diversity in all processes that affected their lives; and youth-friendly sexual and reproductive health services that were confidential, affordable and accessible to all.
Choice was crucial, and enabling choice was key, she said. Time and delays in implementing Cairo had a very real cost: that of young people’s lives. Progress had been made, but targets had not been fully met. “Let’s not let 10 more years go by. What the world proposed in Cairo can only be achieved if we guarantee our sexual and reproductive rights”, she said in conclusion.
PRASANNA K. HOTA, Vice-Minister for Family Welfare of India, asked for a wider dissemination mechanism, saying that perhaps countrywide agencies could be appointed who could help disseminate the excellent work being done. Although discussion on rights, data and statistics was very valuable, more work needed to be done about programme management issues. More detailed work had to be done on how to give rights practical substance. If the system was not able to implement them in the field, an appeal for more funds would not be successful. There had been advocacy for more funds, but it was not so simple. A strong public health programme needed Government budgets, which had to be analysed to see if programmes were effective and if international assistance was needed.
Reacting to remarks made during yesterday’s and today’s discussion, JOSEPH CHAMIE, Director, Population Division, said HIV/AIDS had often come up during the discussion. I t was clear that it was crucial to take the necessary steps to tackle the epidemic. The Division had been studying the problem from the early 80s on, and those studies must continue. It had developed several scenarios. The best-case scenario for AIDS would occur if a vaccine preventing new cases became available. However, that still left many problems of care.
On dissemination, he said he had taken note of suggestions of the representative of the Russian Federation to have more publications available in the official United Nations languages. Summaries of all information in official languages already existed, and attempts were being made to make it available on a wider basis.
He said he had also taken note of the statement from the Vice-Minister from India. As India was the largest population contributor, what happened there affected the entire world. He recognized that India was doing a lot to lower fertility and was interested to know what impact a fertility decline would have on poverty reduction.
Mr. Chamie then introduced the keynote speaker, Riad Tabbarah.
Keynote Address
RIAD TABBARAH, Director of the Centre for Development Studies and Projects (MADMA) in Beirut, Lebanon, said that the first breakthrough in population issues, outside of formal demography, did not occur in Cairo 10 years ago; it actually occurred in Bucharest 20 years before that. The Population Division of the United Nations was the leading pioneer in formal demography before that, but didn’t have a population policy authorization.
He said that the first international intergovernmental conference on the issue was held in Bucharest in 1974 -- the World Population Conference -- negotiated by Population Division Chief Milos Macura, who also created the first Population Policy Section and brought Mr. Tabbarah in to head it. Up to that time, the United Nations had dealt with population policy issues “in bits and pieces and in a very timid fashion”.
In the lead-up to the Bucharest conference, he said, it became clear that population issues were closely related to development, in spite of initial resistance to that idea. By the time of the Cairo Conference, it had become almost taboo to mention population without following it immediately by the word development.
In Bucharest, he said, there were strong pressures during the preparation of the draft plan of action to restrict its scope to population growth, fertility and family planning, because the major population problem facing the world was population growth and the main means of reducing it was seen as family planning. The era was, dominated by doomsday scenarios, such as those represented in the book The Population Bomb.
A broader view of the problem eventually won out, he said. In consequence, the Plan of Action said that population policy must not be restricted to family planning programmes and the distribution of contraceptives. While recognizing the diversity of situations, the Plan gave some guidelines as to the type of indirect measures that might be applied, such as the reduction of infant mortality, the full integration of women in the development process, the promotion of educational opportunities for both sexes, the elimination of child labour and child abuse and the promotion of social justice. Migration was treated as a complex socio-economic phenomenon.
At “Bucharest+10”, in 1984, the same approach was followed, but the Cairo Conference of 1994 placed more of an emphasis on reproduction, family formation and the status of women. Other innovations were introduced in other areas such as population structure and migration.
International funding since Bucharest became almost totally concentrated on one aspect: reproductive health, family formation and the status of women, with a small percentage devoted to data collection and research. No significant assistance was given in the areas of population movement and little in the area of population structure.
He said it might be argued that the concentration of funding on important issues that were both clear and direct and attractive to donors was correct, because the results have been quite impressive. The budget of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), for example, had grown from less than $1 million before Bucharest to some $400 million at present. The impact has been quite significant as well.
However, he said that persisting in that approach much longer ran the risk of dangerously distorting national priorities and permanently narrowing the field of assistance to population, thus marginalizing other important areas of population concern, such as migration and structure, which were not only important for most developing countries, but also important for sustainable development and international harmony.
It also ran the risk, he added, of sidelining the use of indirect social and economic measures aimed at achieving population goals and thus isolating population policy from overall socio-economic policies of development. There was a final risk of letting funding determine policy instead of the other way around.
He cited the example of his country, Lebanon, which was beset by large migration flows during and after its civil war. The flow of funds to population activities remained highly concentrated on reproductive health and family planning with practically no funding going to migration.
The Lebanon example showed, he said, that there should be a change of emphasis at the global level. Bucharest+30 should see the initiation of Phase Three in international population policies and population assistance. Phase One was extremely successful in making the United Nations the leader in the development of formal demography. Phase Two saw impressive accomplishments in important aspects of population policy, particularly reproductive health and the empowerment of women. In general, it raised the interest, and the funding, of the international community in population policy.
It was now important, he said, to direct attention toward a better alignment of population assistance with national priorities and to give due weight to population issues that had been sidelined thus far. That did not imply a reduction in resources available for reproductive health and the empowerment of women. A more even-handed emphasis, if properly promoted, should eventually result in a substantial increase in donors’ contributions to population assistance, larger cost-sharing on the part of receiving countries and bilateral donors and greater economies of scale.
Answering questions by representatives of the Economic Commission for Europe about ageing and from Syria about a 30-year long view, Mr. TABBARAH said ICPD+10 was very important, as one could see how much of Cairo had been implemented in 10 years. However, Bucharest had taken place 30 years ago, and a longer view could be taken, and trends in population could be seen. Ageing was an extremely important phenomenon, not only for Europe. It had also started in the developing world. That problem of developing countries must be addressed now; otherwise, there would be a reactive policy.
Addressing questions from Syria and Mexico about unemployment in developing countries, Mr. TABBARAH said unemployment there was almost a disease. A solution was not simple and could not be found on a national level. There were different categories of unemployment. Sometimes there were jobs and people, but because an absence of a real labour market, the two could not find each other. Sometimes there were no qualified people for available jobs, due to a rigid education system. However, the main cause of unemployment was often a lack of jobs. For that type of unemployment, development was important, but there had to be a labour-intensive development.
In response to a question by Mr. Chamie, Mr. Tabbarah said that a new direction in population policy for the next 10 or 20 years still must be figured out. The momentum that had started in Bucharest was waning, and United Nations attention at the regional level had shrunk. Regional exchange should be occurring at a much higher pitch, and much more attention should be paid to population movement and population structure. In addition, a major fundraising effort for those new issues should be undertaken.
Responding to a question by Lebanon’s representative about the integration of population and development policies, Mr. TABBARAH said that population policy-makers had to be activists for their cause within the development process at the national level. Regarding migration from Lebanon, he said that the country was not unusual in being both a providing and receiving country for migrants. The big problem there was the extent of migration.
The representative of Kenya supported a holistic perspective on population issues and said that the loss of momentum might have resulted from the unequal levels of progress in different countries. He asked what must be done to support everyone at the same level. It was a complex question, Mr. Tabbarah replied, saying that a lot of thinking remained to be done on how to involve everyone in the global development process.
* *** *