ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL HOLDS DIALOGUE WITH EXECUTIVE HEADS

OF UNITED NATIONS FUNDS, PROGRAMMES

 

(Reissued as received.)

GENEVA, 11 July (UN Information Service) -- The Economic and Social Council this morning held a dialogue with the heads of four United Nations funds and programmes on the operational activities of the United Nations for international development cooperation, raising among others issues, national ownership and leadership in the development process, the support for national capacity development, measurement of results and progress in the regionalization of activities.

The panellists were Thoraya Ahmed Obaid, Executive Director of the United Nations Population’s Fund (UNFPA); Ad Melkert, Associate Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP); Ann Veneman, Executive Director of the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and Jean-Jacques Graisse, Senior Deputy Executive Director of the World Food Programme (WFP).

Ms. Obaid, speaking on behalf of the United Nations Development Group, said that the Group recognised that the ownership and full participation of national authorities in the preparation and development of the United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) was the most effective way of guaranteeing that it responded to the national development plans and poverty reduction strategies of programme countries.  In order to continue to strengthen national ownership among national stakeholders, strong national capacity was required to implement, sustain and monitor development programmes.  During the past few years, the United Nations had worked to develop a number of policies and instruments to strengthen ownership and support national capacity development.

Mr. Melkert, speaking on behalf of the Executive Committee of the United Nations Development Group, said that the issue and concerns of capacity development were no longer a matter of debate, nor were they limited to a conversation on concept and theory.  Capacity development gave primacy to national priorities, plans, policies and processes.  It underpinned a shift from a technical assistance supply driven approach to an endogenous led process of change, and gave a tangible form to the principle of national ownership.  Capacity development was much more than supporting training programmes and the use of national expertise -- these were necessary and on the rise, but response and support strategies for accountable leadership, investments in long term education and learning, strengthened public systems and voice mechanisms between citizens and state, and institutional reform that ensured a responsive public and private sector that managed and delivered services to those who needed them most, must be included. 

Ms. Veneman said that, although there was still some way to go before the Millennium Development Goals were achieved, there had been progress across a number of indicators.  It was important to help developing countries to build capacity in collecting and reporting national and sub-national statistical information -- this was a key area of capacity-building for developing countries.  Database reports and analysis helped to inform decisions.  Since 1995, an unprecedented 185 surveys had been conducted in 100 countries around the world, collecting data directly from households, which provided answers as the data was not tied to the service provider’s estimations.  To ensure that data was available to policy-makers, the Development Group was supporting the use of a particular statistics software around the world, which supported informed decision making.  For children, the first measure of health was survival.

Mr. Graisse said that, as a first step to identifying opportunities for better collaboration, the regional offices’ locations and country coverage were mapped out to facilitate discussion with one another about considerations on which these locations and coverage were based, and the links with other regional bodies.  Elements such as links with humanitarian operations or United Nations agencies’ links with regional commissions could be determining factors in location of regional offices and country coverage.  The United Nations Development Group had risen to the challenges in several regions by making the individual agency strengths and technical expertise more cohesive and coordinated, aiming for enhanced organizational efficiency and programme effectiveness to support national and regional policies.

In the course of the interactive dialogue subsequent to the panellists’ presentations, speakers raised a number of questions and comments, such as on the issue of national ownership both at the recipient country’s level and the donor’s side.  Concerns were expressed on the linkage between national ownership and capacity building.  With regard to the issue of national ownership, the theme of capacity building was a new focus and extremely complex.  Good capacity involved a quality level of education as well as of civil service.  On the issue of aid effectiveness, another speaker mentioned that there were more and more donors, contributing to an increased complexity of the aid donor architecture.  The introduction of the “One” United Nations concept should avoid fragmentation.  A speaker asked how the “One” United Nations model could maintain the comparative advantage at country level and how an inclusive nature could be ensured. 

Within the context of the interactive dialogue, representatives of the following States took the floor: United States, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Philippines, Belgium, Russia, China, Sweden, Australia, South Africa, Iceland, Portugal, Canada, Switzerland, United Kingdom, Algeria, Norway and Barbados.

The Economic and Social Council will resume its meeting this afternoon at 3 p.m., when it will hold a panel discussion with a United Nations regional director’s team from Latin America and the Caribbean on the effectiveness of the United Nations development system at the regional level.

Documents

The Council has before it the report of the Executive Board of the United Nations Development Programme/United Nations Population Fund on its work during 2006 (E/2006/35), which sets out comprehensive reports of the Executive Board on its first regular session, its annual session, and its second regular session for 2006.  The report looks at overall organizational matters considered at each meeting, at the separate issues related to each body, and the joint UNDP/UNFPA segment of each meeting.  Among other topics considered in 2006 were the Human Development Report, South-South cooperation, the United Nations Development Fund for Women, the multi-year funding framework 2008-2011, country programmes, the programming process and field visits.

The Council has before it the second joint report of the Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme and the Executive Director of the United Nations Population Fund to ECOSOC (E/2007/5), which outlines progress towards implementing the request in General Assembly resolution 59/250 for greater harmonization and coordination.  UNDP and UNFPA also outline their cooperation both jointly and as part of the United Nations Development Group.  Section I of the report provides information on the joint implementation by UNDP and UNFPA of resolution 59/250; section II provides information on UNDP activities; and section III provides information on UNFPA activities.

The Council has before it the annual report to the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) (E/2007/6-E/ICEF/2007/3), which covers a range of issues arising from the decisions of the Economic and Social Council and the General Assembly, and provides the perspective of UNICEF on these topics of system-wide interest.  It describes UNICEF actions to contribute to the implementation of the Millennium Development Goals and to respond to the outcome of the 2005 World Summit.  It also provides information about the direction UNICEF is taking to work in closer partnership with other members of the United Nations system to ensure that development assistance produces sustainable results for children.

The Council has before it the note of the Secretary-General transmitting the annual report of the Executive Director of the World Food Programme for 2006 (E/2007/14), which focuses on progress made in implementing reform measures and the challenges the World Food Programme (WFP) faces in continuing the reform agenda.  WFP was the largest appealing agency in the 2006 Common Appeals Process, accounting for 42 per cent of all requirements. WFP intensified its participation in joint programmes in 27 countries on HIV/AIDS, education, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), nutrition, disaster management and the environment.  Furthermore, collaboration among the Rome agencies ensured that food security, hunger reduction, rural and social development, and safety nets became focus areas in the United Nations Development Group action plan for achieving the MDGs.

The Council has before it the report on the first, second and annual sessions of 2006 of the Executive Board of the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) (E/2006/34/Rev.1-E/ICEF/2006/5/Rev.1), which looks at, among other things, inter-country programmes; the UNICEF health and nutrition strategy; UNICEF humanitarian response to recent crises; the water, sanitation and hygiene strategy; the education strategy; capacity-building and capacity development; the transition from relief to development, focusing on natural disasters; HIV/AIDS: follow-up to the recommendations of the Global Task Team; simplification and harmonization; the UNICEF post-crisis transition strategy; the United Nations study on violence against children; and the Ending Child Hunger and Undernutrition Initiative.

The Council has before it the report of the Executive Board of the United Nations Children’s Fund on the work of its 2007 first regular session (16-19 and 22 January 2007) (E/2007/34 (Part I)-E/ICEF/2007/7 (Part I), and Add.1), which, in a first section, sets out the organization of that session, including the election of officers, opening statements and adoption of the agenda.  A second section gives an overview of the deliberations of the Executive Board, on issues including integrated approaches for achieving the Millennium Development Goals; an update on the "Unite for Children, Unite against AIDS" campaign; the Ending Child Hunger and Undernutrition Initiative; and proposals for UNICEF programme cooperation.  The joint meeting of the Executive Boards of UNDP/UNFPA, UNICEF and WFP is contained in an addendum to the report.  The joint report focuses on the issues of natural disaster preparedness; interlinked approaches to Millennium Development Goal 1 (poverty alleviation); United Nations reform; and the gender dimension of HIV/AIDS.

The Council has before it the report on the first and second regular sessions and annual session of 2006 of the World Food Programme (E/2007/36), which is organized in four sections: section I looks at matters calling for action by the Economic and Social Council or brought to its attention; section II sets out decisions and recommendations of the first regular session of the Executive Board (Rome, 20-23 February 2006); section III contains decisions and recommendations of the annual session of the Executive Board (Rome, 12-16 June 2006; and section IV sets out the decisions and recommendations of the second regular session of the Executive Board (Rome, 6-9 November 2006).

The Council has before it an extract from the report of the Executive Board of the United Nations Children’s Fund on its 2007 annual session (4-8 June 2007) (E/2007/L.11), which contains decisions adopted by the Executive Board at its annual session of 2007.

The Council has before it the report by the Executive Board of the United Nations Development Programme and of the United Nations Population Fund, on decisions adopted by the Executive Board at its first regular session 2007 (19-26 January 2007) (DP/2007/16), setting out its decisions covering such areas as an evaluation of UNDP assistance to conflict-affected countries and a joint assessment of progress in the implementation of the cooperation agreement between the United Nations Industrial Development Organization and UNDP.

The Council has before it the report by the Executive Board of the United Nations Development Programme and of the United Nations Population Fund, decisions adopted by the Executive Board at its annual session 2007 (11 to 22 June 2007) (DP/2007/40), setting out its decisions covering such areas as multi-year funding framework cumulative report on UNDP performance and results for 2004-2006; the report on the implementation of the third cooperation framework for South-South cooperation, 2005-2007; and internal audit and oversight for UNDP, UNFPA and the United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS).

Opening Statements

IDRISS JAZAIRY ( Algeria), Vice-President of the Economic and Social Council, said the dialogue was traditional and provided an opportunity for the Council to exercise its supervisory role and to learn from the Executive Heads of the United Nations funds and programmes what their ideas were, what they were doing, and where they were going.  As the Council was preparing for the full triennial review of the development activities of the United Nations system, it was particularly important to hold this dialogue this year. 

SHA ZUKANG, Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs, in his role as moderator of the panel discussion, said that this was an excellent opportunity to have a dialogue with the Executive Heads of the United Nations funds and programmes.  It was now the midst of the timeframe set to reach the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).  There had been significant progress in the overall achievement of a number of goals.  This applied especially to the reduction of extreme poverty and to the areas of education and health.  However, all agreed that much had yet to be done to accelerate and scale up efforts ain these and other areas if they were to reach the goals by 2015.  In an increasing number of countries, national development strategies reflected and supported these Goals.

Four themes were key to the operational activities of the United Nations system, Mr. Sha said.  Firstly, the national ownership and leadership in the development process would be addressed by Thoraya Obaid, Executive Director of the United Nations Population Fund.  Secondly, the support for national capacity development would be presented by Ad Melkert, Associate Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme.  The challenge was how the United Nations system could provide its resources and expertise.  The measurement of the results in the achievement of the MDGs would be presented as the third theme by Ann Veneman, Executive Director of the United Nations Children’s Fund.  Finally, a presentation would be given on the progress in the regionalization of activities by Jean-Jacques Graisse, Senior Deputy Executive Director of the World Food Programme.

THORAYA AHMED OBAID, Executive Director of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), speaking also on behalf of the United Nations Development Programme, the United Nations Children’s Fund and the World Food Programme, said the United Nations Development Group had a long commitment to the principles of national ownership and alignment.  The efforts of the United Nations system in this area were shaped principally by the triennial comprehensive review process.   The Group recognised that the ownership and full participation of national authorities in the preparation and development of the United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) was the most effective way of guaranteeing that it responded to the national development plans and poverty reduction strategies of programme countries.  The full implementation of the review and related instruments to strengthen national ownership was a challenge that the Group continued to address in collaboration with all development partners. 

The Group had continued to promote the aid effectiveness agenda and the first round of the Paris Declaration monitoring survey showed that United Nations country teams had made considerable progress on alignment with national priorities and increasing national ownership.  The monitoring survey further concluded that country teams were progressively more engaged in programme-based approaches, and capacity development initiatives had increasingly become a more systematised crosscutting theme.  However, comparatively little progress had been made with the use of national systems.  Overall, it was clear that United Nations working methods were increasingly stressing national leadership based on national development strategies. 

And yet, in order to continue to strengthen national ownership among national stakeholders, strong national capacity was required to implement, sustain and monitor development programmes, Ms. Obaid said.  During the past few years, the United Nations had worked to develop a number of policies and instruments to strengthen ownership and support national capacity development.  In promoting ownership of the development process by developing countries, efforts were being strengthened to ensure that South-South and triangular cooperation remained an important dimension.  From the UN Development Group’s perspective, it would be important to begin to judge the extent to which the coherence agenda emanating from the United Nations Conferences and Summits was yielding better development results.  Today, the United Nations was working differently at the country level, more focused in its support to national priorities and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals.

AD MELKERT, Associate Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), speaking on behalf of the Executive Committee of the United Nations Development Group, said that the issue and concerns of capacity development were no longer a matter of debate, nor were they limited to a conversation on concept and theory.  The background studies for the triennial comprehensive policy review of capacity development demonstrated that much had been accomplished, and that there lay a wealth of experience among the United Nations system in supporting and strengthening capacities in countries.  Capacity development gave primacy to national priorities, plans, policies and processes.  It underpinned a shift from a technical assistance supply driven approach to an endogenous led process of change, and gave a tangible form to the principle of national ownership.  Capacities to localize the Millennium Development Goals, as a part of more integrated local development, were being driven by many national and local governments around the world.

As expressed in the United Nations Development Group position statement of December 2006, capacity development was the business of all Governments, non-governmental organization entities, civil society and the United Nations development system, Mr. Melkert said.  This called for an increasingly collaborative engagement among all at the country level.  However, capacity development was much more than supporting training programmes and the use of national expertise – these were necessary and on the rise, but response and support strategies for accountable leadership, investments in long term education and learning, strengthened public systems and voice mechanisms between citizens and state, and institutional reform that ensured a responsive public and private sector that managed and delivered services to those who needed them most, must be included.  Fragile contexts, including crisis and post crisis situations, posed a particular challenge for capacity development.

The United Nations Development Group, together with the World Bank, provided a useful set of tools -- the post-conflict needs assessment and transitional results matrix -- to re-establish the basis for international engagement around national priorities in early post conflict settings, and for prioritising around different capacity challenges, he said.  Capacity assessments that led to more robust capacity development responses were now an integral part of what the United Nations Development Group offered.  There remained concrete measures to help UNDP deliver more to support capacity development results, such as sharing and managing capacity development knowledge, lessons and good practices across countries and regions, particularly south-south learning and exchange.  In addition, the United Nations Resident Coordinator must be a capacity development champion, and a capable and untiring advocate with Government and partners on this agenda.  Thirdly, the proof of effective support to capacity development lay at the country level. 

ANN VENEMAN, Executive Director of the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), said although there was still some way to go before the Millennium Development Goals were achieved, there had been progress across a number of indicators.  It was important to help developing countries to build capacity in collecting and reporting national and sub-national statistical information - this was a key area of capacity building for developing countries.  Database reports and analysis helped to inform decisions.  Good data made for better informed policy choices, and there had been considerable advances in data collection.  Real results depended on sound information as a basis for policy choices. 

Since 1995, an unprecedented 185 surveys had been conducted in 100 countries around the world, collecting data directly from households, which provided answers as the data was not tied to the service provider’s estimations.  It also provided important information that could otherwise get lost in administrative records, allowing Governments to determine what needed to be provided to the population. To ensure that data was available to policy-makers, the UN Development Group was supporting the use of a particular statistics software around the world which supported informed decision making.  For children, the first measure of health was survival.  In 1960, there were 20 million child deaths per year, which had fallen by 50 per cent by 2005.  The estimate for 2006 was expected to show that under-five mortality would fall below 10 million for the first time.  High-impact contributions had contributed to this, including the Measles Partnership.  When moving from survival to basic issues of health, an important correlation between malaria and poverty was seen, and controlling malaria spurred economic health and development, which had caused increased support for measures aimed at impeding the spread of malaria.

Ms. Veneman said school fee abolition was also important for increasing child attendance at school, as were child-friendly initiatives and back to school campaigns.  These were examples of how informed policy decisions could be taken to improve situations.  If the Millennium Development Goals were to be realised, these successes needed to be built on, and there was a need to maintain a collective sense of urgency in this regard in order to achieve the Goals. 

JEAN-JACQUES GRAISSE, Senior Deputy Executive Director of the World Food Programme (WFP), said that over the past decade, substantial programme results had been reaped through efficiencies linked to partnerships – reflected in the United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) results matrices, the development of country-level thematic groups, and increased focus on and support to national planning and policy processes.  Noting the progress achieved in the area of simplification and harmonization, the United Nations was requested to take further concrete steps including the alignment of regional technical support structures and regional offices at headquarters level, and their regional coverage.  Responding to the 2004 triennial comprehensive programme review regarding alignment, the funds and programmes had set up a senior-level mechanism at the Deputy Executive Director level to review regional alignment and co-location issues.  The United Nations Development Group’s Executive Committee members were meeting on a regular basis to develop a common understanding about its country-level activities as related to regional structures and issues and decide on immediate action to more closely align its agencies’ regional coverage, among other things.

As a first step to identifying opportunities for better collaboration, the regional offices’ locations and country coverage were mapped out to facilitate discussion with one another about considerations on which these locations and coverage were based, and the links with other regional bodies, Mr. Graisse said.  Elements such as links with humanitarian operations or United Nations agencies’ links with regional commissions could be determining factors in location of regional offices and country coverage.  Challenges and opportunities were now receiving a closer examination.  Taking all elements into consideration, the organization had made and was continuing to make progress.  In 2006, co-located regional hubs were in principle agreed for Dakar, Bangkok and Panama City.  In other regions, co-location feasibility studies and discussions with the Executive Boards were being undertaken. 

Regional Directors’ teams in all regions had been asked to complete similar studies and submit recommendations and challenges to the senior-level team for decision and guidance, all focused on greater support to national development processes, Mr. Graisse said.  The United Nations Development Group had risen to the challenges in several regions by making the individual agency strengths and technical expertise more cohesive and coordinated, aiming for enhanced organizational efficiency and programme effectiveness to support national and regional policies.  It was recognized that a regional perspective could lead to more effective delivery of results and South-South cooperation and aid transactions that would build capacities across country boundaries and within regions were supported.

Discussion

In the course of the discussion subsequent to the panellists’ presentations, speakers raised some questions and comments, such as on the issue of national ownership both at the recipient country’s level and the donor’s side.  Concerns were expressed on the linkage between national ownership and capacity building.  Good governance at the national level was essential to positive development results.  But good governance and strong governance were not the same things.  There were some positive linkages between good governance policies and development results.  Enhancing the transparency of the activities undertaken was important.  Another concern was raised concerning the trend of pushing for national ownership.  The operational effectiveness of the United Nations system should be preserved and enhanced.  It was not sure that the “One” United Nations would be more than the sum of its parts. 

Another speaker encouraged all United Nations representatives to keep up the activity and to carry on working to achieve the Millennium Development Goals.  On the issue of the United Nations reform, the active participation of many United Nations organizations at this panel was noted.  The principle of inclusion both at a national and an international level needed to be respected.  With regard to the issue of national ownership, the theme of capacity building was a new focus and extremely complex.  Good capacity involved a quality level of education as well as of civil service.  UNDP was called upon not to lose sight of the holistic view.  The importance of productive capacity was highlighted.  The links with the Bretton-Woods institutions should not be lost.  On the issue of aid effectiveness, another speaker mentioned that there were more and more donors, contributing to an increased complexity of the aid donor architecture.  In this complex environment, business as usual could not continue.  There were huge challenges with regard to national ownership, which should be strengthened.  The Paris Declaration should also be strengthened. 

On the issue of transition from relief to development, the United Nations system should improve its capacity to make a transition there, speakers said.  There was a big role for the United Nations Development Group as well in this context.  With regard to the progress made in the social sector, a speaker asked to what extent these achievements could be attributed to the United Nations system and so-called vertical actions like the fight against malaria and measles.  The introduction of the “One” United Nations concept should avoid fragmentation.  In this regard, the experience of the pilots showed that it was a non-inclusive progress.  A speaker asked how the “One” United Nations model could maintain the comparative advantage at country level and how an inclusive nature could be ensured.  There was the risk that by putting all into one programme, the results at the country-level would not be well reflected.  A speaker said that the United Nations were best placed for delivering results at the country level and that national ownership was essential to all the organization carried out there.

Concluding Remarks

Mr. MELKERT said he was very happy with the discussion, as on the one hand it showed a lot of in-house support for the joint efforts of the four organizations and more than these four.  In the questions there was encouragement to be specific and there were more accountable results achieved than could be explained.  The point was taken that a more systematic accountability based on information was required, in particular in relation to the Millennium Development Goals.  In September, a Millennium Development Goal monitor would be launched, showing the progress made and not made in countries and also in the system as a whole, and this would be very useful not only for countries but also for the bilateral and multilateral systems and the donor community.

The World Bank was very important, both at the policy and technical level, Mr. Melkert said.  Work with it was being stepped up, in particular in post-crisis situations.  On the Millennium Development Goals, UNDP was working with the World Bank on developing initiatives to scale up the support of the international community in certain African countries.  The cooperation between the implementing agencies and the World Bank was being stepped up, with more high-level meetings, and an attempt to show the synergy at the country level.  There was a need for the Peacebuilding Commission, and there should be more of these.  The work in support of judicial reform in many countries would go on, and had been analysed as a key piece to strengthen institutions for development purposes. 

With regard to the national experience and involvement to be part and parcel of capacity-building efforts, UNDP attempted to enhance national action and to step back from direct execution, Mr. Melkert said.  National execution should be the leading implementation modality, and the South-South agenda was of increasing importance in this regard.  The environmental sector would be important in the future, as there was high demand from poor and land-locked countries and small island developing States who required support to adapt to climate change and to adapt to the overall discussion on climate change.  The clean development mechanism was largely benefiting middle-income countries, and they wanted to also be part of the policy on climate change, and therefore the United Nations Development Group would step up activities in this regard. 

Ms. OBAID said that, on the issue of national ownership, the example of South Africa was hoped to be followed by the pilot countries.  All the ministries in the countries should be in line.  The United Nations had to be flexible to adjust the timeframe to enable each Government’s leadership.  There was a tension between ownership and inclusiveness.  This was coming out in some of the pilot countries.  There was a growing inclusiveness for the agencies.  A Memorandum of Understanding had been signed with all specialized agencies.  Non-resident United Nations agencies should be more involved in some of the pilot countries. 

On the issue of productive capacity, a toolkit had been developed by the International Labour Organization on decent work, Ms. Obaid said.  With regard to the question on transaction costs, business practices were looked upon to be harmonized at the country level, such as in the fields of finance and security.  In terms of human resources, contracts were being harmonized.  Africa was mentioned as an example with the African Union.  These kinds of regional strategies were a form of regional ownership.

Ms. VENEMAN said it had been a very interesting discussion.  On data, and particularly on the link between data and the contribution of the United Nations system, and data and the improvement of Government results, as some of the issues she had mentioned earlier were examined, it showed that health data was indicative of how Government systems could be supported to get results.  UNICEF had in the past been very focused on getting immunisations to children, which had brought down the death rates, and it had incorporated immunisation as part of national health plans.  However, over time, although the high rates of immunisation had come down, it had become clear that there was a need to support health systems and to improve their results over the long term through support.  It was not always easy to measure outcomes. 

There were strong links between the data, and one of the things that were important about the Millennium Development Goals and other programmes that specified results were that they allowed people and organizations to come together with a collective focus on results, and to collectively work towards the goal of getting results.  When there were common goals, then resources could be more effectively targeted.  On education, there were higher rates, and education really was directly related to a country’s capacity-building, as there was a need for an educated workforce to build the economy.

On pilot country programmes, UNICEF had recently found that some of these pilots had gotten bogged down in process rather than on what issues required to be worked on and what could be done in that regards, Ms. Veneman said.  There were many issues going on in the pilot countries, and there were many different things coming out of them in terms of what they were doing, working on, and progressing on.  An important lesson was how the United Nations system could work in middle-income countries.  On working with the World Bank and international financial institutions generally, there were real variances between countries and organizations, and it was a great benefit for the whole team to be working together.  However, more and more it was being found that the World Bank was part of what the system was doing overall. 

Mr. GRAISSE said that he wanted to continue on the topic of agriculture.  The fact that the World Food Programme was based in Rome gave it a special position.  Luxembourg was the biggest donor of the World Food Programme.  Agriculture was left out for many years by big financing agencies.  The proportion granted to agriculture had been reduced over the years.  One could work together, keeping the individual capacities and being more efficient for the beneficiaries.  As an example, the school-feeding programme was mentioned.  The World Food Programme could only be effective there if the United Nations Children's Fund, the World Health Organization and the Food and Agricultural Organization were involved.

With regard to the need to do more on the subject of the transition from relief to development, it was mentioned that once peace was signed in some countries, donors moved on to other countries and resources were lacking to start development, he said.  WFP was not very active in South Africa, but had a very small programme funded by South Africa.  WFP opened its regional office in South Africa and would do some reshaping to match the other agencies better.  When speaking of drought, HIV/AIDS and governance as a triple threat, many problems in the region could be solved with other partner agencies.  WFP would continue its efforts at the regional level furthermore.  On the expectations on the triennial comprehensive policy review, the problem of resources was mentioned.  A perfect tool in terms of collaboration had been developed, but the resources of using it were lacking.

Mr. JAZAIRY ( Algeria), Vice-President of the Council, said in concluding remarks that, with regard to national ownership and the accountability of donors, it was a different kind of relationship, as ownership existed at the level of planning as well as of implementation.  It would not even be just the participation of national authorities in the preparation and development of the United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) - it would be the full participation of the United Nations country team with the national authorities in the adoption and implementation of UNDAF that would keep the concerned countries in the driver’s seat.

He said there was a need to examine the capacity-building conundrum in the context of post-emergency recovery and redevelopment, as the relationship changed here.  On whether capacity building was about just supporting Governments, this was not the case, it went beyond this.  The Secretary-General had given a tentative definition that capacity building was aimed at individuals, institutions and the enabling environment, but also included the relationships between these groups and society at large.  Capacity building was basically institutional development for the Government and also for the production sector and civil society. 

The 180 Degree Evaluation was a culture that should be further implemented, and data was very helpful in making sure that things got done.  It was important to maximise also impact that could or could not be counted.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record