Concluding Operational Activities Segment, Economic and Social Council Unanimously Adopts Quadrennial Comprehensive Policy Review Text
Under-Secretary-General Presents Global Sustainable Development Report to Forum
The Economic and Social Council today requested that the United Nations Development Group and the High-level Committee on Management fully align their efforts to monitor the implementation of the quadrennial comprehensive policy review, as it concluded the operational activities segment of its 2015 session.
Adopting by consensus draft resolution E/2015/L.16, titled “Progress in the implementation of General Assembly resolution 67/226 on the quadrennial comprehensive policy review of operational activities for development of the United Nations system”, the Council also requested the United Nations funds and programmes to continue to make every effort to improve monitoring and data collection methods with a view to contributing towards further enhancement of the analytical quality of the Secretary-General’s report on the Organization’s operational activities for development.
By the terms of the text, the Economic and Social Council called on United Nations country teams to adopt the use of common budgetary frameworks as a practice as soon as possible, which would not constitute a legal constraint on resource spending authority.
Through the text, the Council welcomed the integration of poverty eradication, as the overarching priority, into the strategic plans of some United Nations system organizations, and stressed that South-South cooperation is not a substitute for, but rather a complement to, North-South cooperation.
The Council also requested the Secretary-General, among other things, to make proposals to the Council at the operational activities segment of its substantive session of 2016 on ways to further develop the cost-sharing agreement for the resident coordinator system in order to address the effective needs of that mechanism.
Before action, South Africa’s representative, speaking on behalf of the “Group of 77” developing countries and China, urged the United Nations development system to strengthen its role in carrying out the Organization’s operational activities for development and scale up its capacity to assist developing countries in achieving their development goals. The United Nations development system must address poverty eradication — the greatest global challenge — through appropriately targeted and clearly focused programmes and projects.
On the implementation of the quadrennial comprehensive policy review, he underlined, among other items, the need to avoid the use of core/regular resources to subsidize non-core/extra-budgetary financed activities, and the importance of achieving diversification in the composition of the resident coordinator system in terms of geographical distribution and gender. He also highlighted the need to strengthen the Office on South-South Cooperation, including through the appointment of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General, and the importance of regular reporting from the United Nations development system at the country-level to ensure transparency.
The draft resolution was introduced by Marcela Ordoñez (Colombia), who said that negotiations were complex but delegates had found agreeable language. As a result, the previous draft “L.3” had been withdrawn.
The Council then took note of the following documentation: the report of the Executive Board of the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) for 2014 (document E/2014/34/Rev.1), the report of the Executive Board of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) and the United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS) on its work in 2014 (document E/2014/35); the report of the Executive Board of the World Food Programme (WFP) for 2014 (document E/2015/36); and the reports of the Executive Board of the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women (UN-Women) for 2014 (document E/2015/47).
Following those actions, the High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development met for the second day of its 2015 session under the auspices of the Economic and Social Council. The Forum heard the introduction of the Global Sustainable Development Report by Wu Hongbo, Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs, and held three panel discussions, respectively titled “Supporting national action through the high-level political forum outcomes”, “Keeping science involved in sustainable development goals’ implementation”, and “The Global Sustainable Development Report as a bridge between the sustainable development goals and the scientific communities”.
The Council will reconvene at a time and date to be announced, while the Forum will meet again at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, 30 June, to continue its annual session.
Panel I
The Forum began the day with a panel on “Supporting national action through High-level Political Forum outcomes”. Moderated by Aisa Kirabo Kacyira, Deputy Executive Director of United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat) and former Mayor of Kigali, Rwanda, the panel featured presentations by: Pio Wennubst, Assistant Director-General, Swiss Agency for Development Cooperation, Federal Department of Foreign Affairs; Gustavo Adolfo Meza-Cuadra Veláquez (Peru), Chair of the Committee of the Whole, Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean; and Manish Bapna, Executive Vice-President and Managing Director of World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C. Evelyn Ugbe, Women Environmental Programme, Nigeria, served as a lead discussant.
Opening the panel, Forum Vice-President María Emma Mejía Vélez (Colombia) said integrating the three dimensions of sustainable development included considering the interlinkages among policy areas during the formulation stage. However, integrated planning and implementation of national sustainable development strategies had been challenging for States, due to inadequacies with sector-based strategies. Integration was the foundation of overall policy coherence. Cross-sectoral linkages on multiple sustainable development goals allowed for identifying significant “co-benefits”, while highlighting trade-offs that were not necessarily identified from sectoral approaches. It also had implications for the financing of sustainable development objectives.
Ms. KACYIRA said the biggest test was to implement sustainable development policies in a manner that was relevant to those serving the people. The Assembly had mandated the Forum to give political guidance, make recommendations, review progress and identify emerging issues. Seven years ago, while Mayor of Kigali, she had not dreamed of joining the United Nations, as she was focused on urgent local issues. The more she focused, she realized how integrated the world was. “I believe I am not alone in this story,” she said, urging open and frank debate.
Mr. WENNUBST stressed the importance of national implementation and the experiences of different countries, which would increasingly inform regional and global initiatives. The Forum hoped to achieve stronger cohesion, but it was not simple to achieve. Thus, the review mechanism must be used to integrate all aspects related to sustainable development. Cohesion required trust and clear rules of the game in order to create a culture of exchange. Cohesion, in turn, would lead to discussion of difficult political issues. He hoped to see a review mechanism that built in incentives to produce change, and opportunities to exchange views on what was functioning and what was not. Country reviews would be important in that context, particularly on the issue of technology innovation. Switzerland was in the process of developing a new sustainable development strategy and was working with statisticians to ensure efforts were integrated. Sustainable development initiatives were being tabled daily in Parliament.
Mr. MEZA-CUARDRA VELÁQUEZ said Peru had worked with the Group of Seven and others on implementation, and in its capacity as Community Chair, convened a meeting on establishing a regional sustainable development forum. In April, the Committee of the Whole had adopted resolution 695, launching a regional consultation process to ensure countries could address sustainable development matters. Development should be people-centred, and the review of the sustainable development goals should start at the local level with involvement by citizens. Also, there should be incentives for cooperation. Such mechanisms were essential, as relevant information existed at all levels. More broadly, States should develop national reports, with contributions from civil society, while countries should strengthen intergovernmental processes for development financing, a topic still being discussed.
Mr. BAPNA said that for the new agenda to be transformative and universal, it must be integrated. There were several types of integration: integration of sustainable development into national development plans; horizontal integration, which focused on how national agencies worked together; vertical integration, which involved national, provincial and other agencies; and stakeholder integration, which involved engagement by Government, civil society, the private sector and others. He cited the examples of Bangladesh, which had integrated disaster risk management into national development plans; New York City, which today used 40 per cent less electricity per capita and 25 per cent less water thanks to its 2007 “Plan NYC” campaign; and Costa Rica, which had integrated food, forests, energy and water issues in a way that had tripled gross domestic product (GDP), reduced poverty and doubled its forest size in 25 years. Common to all successes was political leadership at the highest level; a “whole of Government” approach by new institutions; engagement of local governments, communities and civil society; flexible funding mechanisms; and “quick, early wins” in delivering results.
Ms. UGBE said: “We need to do things differently,” as much of the needed change had not been actualized in terms of gender equality. In Nigeria, for example, the number of women involved in politics had dropped. When women were not nominated, that trickled down to the local level, reiterating the weakness of women’s political leadership. Conflict had impacted Nigeria for more than a decade, which meant that the Government would focus more on “Plan NYC” immediate needs — such food and shelter — possibly to the exclusion of sustainable development. She called for creating an integrated, multilevel architecture to support national implementation. She urged the Forum to be “time bound”, requiring State action plans to meet various goals within a set timeframe by holding regular national reviews and ensuring that the principle of “leave no person behind” was upheld within the Forum. Gender-sensitive and economically equitable access to technology was also essential.
In the ensuing discussion, speakers emphasized the importance of national efforts in domesticating global targets into society, as well as regional efforts and outcomes, which could inform the work of the Forum. Noting the role of parliaments in that context, the representative of the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) asked panellists about uniformity among countries in the design and monitoring of sustainable development plans.
To ensure that implementation was incentivizing change, the representative of Maldives, on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island Developing States, agreed that the review mechanism should be used as an avenue to share best practices, rather than to “name and shame”. Small island developing States had limited capacity for data collection and analysis, which should be a focus when considering how to support national implementation.
Rwanda’s representative said the role of citizens had to be recognized in the national reporting process, which would create room for accountability. Citizen-led assessments should be conducted to get a sense of the level of satisfaction among beneficiaries.
Also speaking was the representative of Germany.
Representatives of the Major Group for Children and Youth, and the Khan Foundation, a member of the Major Group on Women, also spoke.
Panel II
In the afternoon, the Forum held a panel on “Keeping science involved in sustainable development goals implementation”. Moderated by Paul Shrivastava, Executive Director of the Future Earth Secretariat, it featured presentations by Gabriel Vallejo López, Minister for Environment and Sustainable Development of Colombia; Lucilla Spini, Head of Science Programmes, International Council for Science; Luiz Augusto Galvão, Head of the Special Programme on Sustainable Development and Health Equity, Pan American Health Organization; and Maria Ivanova, Associate Professor, University of Massachusetts, Boston, and member of the Secretary-General’s Advisory Board. Wu Hongbo, Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs, was to present the 2015 edition of the Global Sustainable Development Report.
Opening the discussion, Martin Sajdik, President of the Economic and Social Council, said science was critical to realizing the post-2015 agenda. It opened new approaches and solutions to global problems, from improving understanding of poverty, to developing new vaccines and energy technologies. As such, the post-2015 agenda should strengthen both basic and applied science. Enhancing scientific capacity in developing, and least developed countries, was a matter of priority. Recalling that the Forum was mandated to consider the interface between science and policy, he said “Rio+20” also mandated the preparation of a global sustainable development report to support the Forum’s work in that regard.
Mr. LÓPEZ recalled that Colombia had in 2010 suffered the effects of El Niño, which had caused 12 billion pesos in damage. From a public policy perspective, science played a fundamental role in understanding how the country could have prevented some of the damage and better adapted in the aftermath. “The best way to make decisions is with scientific information”, he said. Without scientific criteria on research and development, the sustainable development goals “would only take us half way there”.
Mr. WU said the 2015 edition of the Global Sustainable Development Report contained scientific findings that were most relevant to the Forum’s political context. It highlighted trends and offered analysis, contributing to the Forum’s agenda-setting functions. It aimed to bridge the gap between science and policy, and to facilitate dialogue between those communities.
Noting that the report had drawn on inputs from some 500 scientists and 20 United Nations agencies, he said its recognition that sustainable development required an integrated approach in research and policymaking alike was among its most distinctive features. It called for interdisciplinary research across natural and social sciences. For policymakers, it called for working around institutional barriers, avoiding silos and collaborating with a range of stakeholders. He then highlighted key messages from the report, recalling that it had been prepared to support the Forum’s strengthened science-policy interface.
Mr. SHRIVASTAVA said “we need a much more sophisticated science-policy interface”, through policy relevant data and dialogue between scientists and policymakers. While the scientific voice had been fragmented, it was now coalescing in various areas. It was important to remember that the sustainable development goals would be implemented in the shadow of the 2008 financial crisis, which had not entirely worked itself out of the global system. Advanced countries were growing at 1 to 2 per cent, with developing countries at half the rate they had predicted five years ago. Science policies would not work without rethinking the financial realities that belied them. Against that backdrop, he also called for a better understanding of countries’ natural capital.
Ms. SPINI said keeping science involved in sustainable development goal implementation required dialogue in and among the scientific community, civil society and policymakers. Partnerships were also important and programmes carried out by global scientific organizations were guided by scientists, who volunteered their time to foster interdisciplinary approach. A recent conference for young scientists entitled “Future sustainability: the role of science in the sustainable development goals” had developed projects for that purpose. Enhanced dialogue should leave no one behind and the Forum should coordinate that discussion with the scientific community.
Mr. GALVÃO focused on sustainable development goal 3 (health), saying that among the biggest health challenges was to support research of vaccines and medicines for communicable and non-communicable diseases in developing countries. Focusing on health in that way would help achieve other targets. New technologies to understand big data would provide the “big evidence” needed to help local communities. Health was also an effective way to promote equity, opening windows for poor people to access medicines. “We need to measure this better,” he said, as the institutional capacity was not in place to evaluate where the biggest successes were being made through health interventions. “We need to set achievable equity goals and monitor social inequalities in health,” he added.
Ms. IVANOVA said science identified causes and effects in both human and natural systems. Scientists could assess implementation of the sustainable development goals, explain why one level of implementation had been achieved and the desired level not, and outline various alternatives. Her university had created an environmental convention index to measure the implementation of 10 global environmental conventions. To date, six had been studied and the results painted a counter-intuitive, yet positive, story: Countries were reporting even when reporting requirements were perceived as “onerous”. The convention with the highest number of questions that Governments answer — more than 400 — had the highest level of reporting at 90 per cent. As to why, she said institutional arrangements were in place that helped Governments report their performance, which in turn, enabled the convention write a report related to the country findings. The top performers were both developed and developing countries.
In the ensuing debate, speakers explored how to deepen the science-policy interface and improve the Forum’s ability to engage the science community throughout the lifecycle of the new goals. In that context, Brazil’s delegate said the Forum should not focus exclusively on the science-policy interface. Noting that various instruments were in place, such as the Council’s functional commission on science and technology for development, he asked whether panellists envisioned dialogue taking place as a structured discussion or in a less formal ongoing one.
“Science has to draw the boundaries of what we do politically,” said a representative of the major group on children and youth, calling for science-informed policies that ensured the participation of civil society. Shared principles and ethics also must be agreed and data disaggregated at all levels.
Focusing on cooperation, the representative of the Russian Federation said the proposed mechanisms in the report could facilitate cooperation. At the same time, the creation of expert groups on specific sciences could be considered. Also, it was important to create an information society that was not limited to simply developing technology.
Along similar lines, Colombia’s delegate asked how to ensure cooperation among scientific communities, bearing in mind their differences.
Also speaking were the representatives of Mexico and Switzerland.
Representatives of the major groups on women, and other stakeholders also spoke.
Panel Discussion III
The Forum held a panel discussion on “The Global Sustainable Development Report as a bridge between the sustainable development goals and the scientific communities” (document E/HLPF/2015/2).
Moderated by Patrick Paul Walsh, Chair of International Development Studies, University College Dublin, Ireland, and Visiting Scholar, Sustainable Development Solutions Network, Earth Institute, Columbia University, New York, it featured panellists William Colglazier, Visiting Scientist, Center for Science Diplomacy, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, D.C.; and Lucilla Spini, Head of Science Programmes, International Council for Science, France.
Mr. WALSH said this session would focus on lessons learned, drawing attention to Chapter VII of The Global Sustainable Development Report, which included the idea of bottom-up contribution. What was happening today was innovative in terms of policymakers and scientists sitting together, and that was something that should also happen at the national, regional and local levels. Science can be used in indicators and had the potential to energize global science-policy dialogue.
Mr. COLGLAZIER said the 2014 and 2015 reports were very useful as they provided insights for the science-policy interface between the High-level Political Forum and the scientific communities. Science could inform challenges, identify actions needed and be used to monitor implementation. The Report could serve as a platform for science-policy dialogue, highlight trends and policy-related analysis, and contribute to agenda-setting. The Report also contributed to the establishment of the “science advisory ecosystem” inside and outside the United Nations via outreach mechanisms such as crowd-sourced inputs and commissioning studies. He proposed that future reports should include more assessments of what science could contribute to each of the 17 sustainable development goals. Each country should create its national report along those goals. The Report could urge investment in research and technology to create new capabilities to address sustainable development challenges, thus leaving a legacy to the future.
Ms. SPINI said the Report was a tool for both scientists and policymakers. It provided a wealth of sustainability science thanks to the work of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs, which gathered knowledge and data via crowd-sourcing and by conducting expert workshops. Policymakers should have a copy of the Report on their desk as it would help them make decisions based on evidence, identify gaps and establish dialogue with the scientific communities. For instance, the first few pages of the document list all the scientists, institutions and other contributors to the Report. They could be policymakers’ contacts. The Report could also strengthen the science-policy-practice interface. An important element of the document was the identification of emerging issues. The Report was a team-building exercise involving scientists, policymakers and civil society to ensure monitoring of implementation.
In the ensuing interactive dialogue, some Member States commented on the scope and content of the document, with the representative of Sweden saying future reports would require further collaboration among agencies, which would be achieved through the establishment of an advisory committee of experts.
The representative of the major group for children and youth asked panellists how they could have better access to research papers and knowledge.
Several representatives, including those from Germany, Finland and Norway, said that the Report should be published every four years.
The representative of South Africa said future reports should avoid overlap and seek synergy with other such similar documents, including the Global Environmental Outlook Report.
The representative of China also spoke, as did the representative of the European Union Delegation.
Making concluding remarks, Mr. COLGLAZIER challenged advanced countries to lead by example by creating their own reports and by showing how to improve upon them.
Ms. SPINI stressed the importance of maintaining science-policy dialogue in establishing the table of content of the Report, and highlighted a need to seek ways to incorporate the Report in formal education.
MOHAMED KHALED KHIARI (Tunisia), Vice-President of the Economic and Social Council, opened and closed the meeting.