Speakers Call for Reshaping Development System through New Policy Directions, as Economic and Social Council Concludes Operational Activities Segment
The Economic and Social Council concluded its three-day operational activities segment today, with Governments calling on the United Nations to “fundamentally reshape” its development system by outlining new policy directions and partnerships that increased the efficiency, coherence and funding of the Organization’s 27 programmes, funds and specialized agencies.
“This has been a highly successful segment by every measure,” Council Vice-President Alejandro Palma Cerna (Honduras) said in closing remarks. Discussions had revealed much common ground. Over the last year, the environment in which the United Nations operated had changed significantly with the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, among other global agreements. The Agenda, unprecedented in scope, challenged the system to strengthen its Resident Coordinator network and to fully implement its “delivering as one” approach.
Further, he said, participants agreed the system must transcend humanitarian, development and peacebuilding divides. It should adopt a flexible and cost-effective organizational presence in programme countries, reflecting the spectrum of services required in different national contexts. The United Nations participation in multi-stakeholder partnerships must be guided by the Organization’s values and standards and subject to oversight. The funding structure favoured voluntary earmarked resources over core resources, an imbalance that fostered competition and fragmentation within the development system.
Throughout the day, speakers in the general debate called for organizational renewal, with a development system “fit for purpose” and able to deliver on a universal agenda in an era of declining core funding. For some, that meant a change in behaviour, governance, cooperation and management of development efforts — at all levels. The 2030 Agenda would require new roles for the system, beyond coordination and information-sharing. Work should be aligned to each State’s development stage and national priorities. Overall, the system should be closer to people’s realities and adapted to their needs.
In that context, Switzerland’s delegate said that while the “delivering as one” approach had improved strategic positioning at the country level, there were limitations around the concept of “operating as one”. Cooperation had been hampered by different policies, procedures and agency-specific operational support units. He advocated a system-wide strategy for implementing the 2030 Agenda, which built on the comparative advantages of the United Nations.
Along similar lines, Burkina Faso’s representative supported an integrated coordination model that allowed for better collaboration. Reinforced partnerships with States would be needed for the exchange of statistical data.
With that in mind, the United States’ delegate said the 2016 quadrennial comprehensive policy review should be a strategic, high-level document that articulated what Member States wanted the development system to do and sketched the outline of a flexible structure that could help achieve that goal. Member States should not be micromanaging the agencies or overloading them with requirements so that they were unable to deliver development assistance.
Norway’s representative said the upcoming policy review should be more strategic than the current one. In defining future priorities, the international community should be guided by the United Nations comparative advantages in legitimacy, universality and country presence.
As the system re-thought its role, added India’s delegate, it was important that it did not slacken its focus on the needs of the poorest, which required “unrelenting” attention. “We clearly cannot talk of balanced implementation of an integrated agenda, and yet have funding structures and functional implementation that response to selective donor priorities,” he stressed.
The Council began the day with a panel discussion titled “Partnership approaches: How to ensure accountability, coherence and evaluation of impact?”, with panellists and participants alike exploring how to ensure that partnerships among United Nations entities augmented the Organization’s implementation of the 2030 Agenda and at the same time managed the risks.
Lead discussant Thomas Gass, Assistant Secretary-General for Policy Coordination and Inter-Agency Affairs, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, said the new development landscape was marked by global threats that required collective action. As such, the United Nations system must become “user-friendly”, and at the same time protect its values and brand. Creating safe spaces for learning from failure would be required in order to make progress.
In other business, the Council took note of the Secretary-General’s report on the implementation of General Assembly resolution 67/226 on the quadrennial comprehensive policy review of operational activities for development of the United Nations system (document A/71/63–E/2016/8); and the report of the Executive Board of the United Nations Development Programme, the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) and the United Nations Office for Project Services on its work during 2015 (document E/2015/35).
It also took note of the reports of the Executive Board of the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) on its work during 2015 (document E/2015/34/Rev.1); the report of the Executive Board of the World Food Programme (WFP) on its 2015 sessions (E/2016/36); the annual report of the WFP for 2015 (E/2016/14); and the Secretariat note transmitting the report of the Executive Board of the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women (UN-Women) on its 2015 sessions (document E/2016/4).
Also speaking in the general debate were representatives of Zambia (on behalf of the Group of Landlocked Developing Countries), Viet Nam, Costa Rica, Argentina, Panama, South Africa, Iraq, Russian Federation, Guatemala, Republic of Moldova, Mexico, India, Lebanon, Estonia, Serbia, Peru, Brazil, Republic of Korea, Czech Republic, Philippines, Nepal, China, Pakistan, Germany, El Salvador and Benin.
The Economic and Social Council will reconvene at a time and date to be announced.
Panel
The Economic and Social Council opened the day with a panel discussion on “Partnership approaches: How to ensure accountability, coherence and evaluation of impact?”. Moderated by Amir Dossal, Founder and Chairman of the Global Partnership Forum, it featured presentations by: Ibrahim Mayaki, Chief Executive Officer, New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), African Union; Sayed Aqa, Vice-President for Cooperation and Capacity Development, Islamic Development Bank (IDB); and Lise Kingo, Executive Director, United Nations Global Compact. Thomas Gass, Assistant Secretary-General for Policy Coordination and Inter-Agency Affairs, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, was the lead discussant.
Opening the panel, Mr. DOSSAL said today’s conversation was about actions. The challenges ahead in implementing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development would require renewed efforts, with some cost estimates reaching $2.4 trillion. As such, key questions centred on how to evaluate the impact of measures taken.
Mr. MAYAKI said after the creation of the African Union and NEPAD, in 2000, the regional dimension of partnerships had strengthened, common positions within the African context had been defined, and foreign direct investment (FDI) had increased. The coming decade would be uncertain, but it would be characterized by increased “regionality” and localism that would affect the State’s role. Decisions taken from the top-down would be increasingly contested by civil society and the private sector. An example of a successful partnership was the United Nations “Sustainable Energy for All” initiative, which allowed for alignment and coherence, by building country action plans into the plan’s agenda, with a role for the private sector. Its hub at the African Development Bank offered a platform for multidimensional planning and coordination among the Bank, NEPAD agencies, the African Union Commission and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), representing inclusive convening power. More broadly, African strategic partnerships — created through pan-African institutions — maintained robust relationships with India, China, the Republic of Korea, Turkey, the Arab League and the European Union. He advocated “learning by doing” and the inclusion of an array of stakeholders at an early stage.
Mr. AQA said cooperation was enshrined in the Bank’s organizational agreement. The IDB Group included the Bank, as well as a trade promotion and facilitation arm, a private-sector arm, a trade credit insurance arm, and a research and training institute. With the 2030 Agenda requiring “massive” resources, the Bank could help create efficiencies. Highlighting Islamic bonds in that context, he said “development endowments”, which had not been explored by other institutions, held “huge” potential for reducing poverty and unemployment. IDB would invest $150 billion in the next 15 years in Sustainable Development Goal-related targets. It had had recently launched an innovative financing partnership with the United Nations and World Bank Group for the Middle East North Africa Region, which required the private sector to invest in stability — investments that would be guaranteed by sovereign countries. Its partnership with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation addressed poverty, health, agriculture, employment and rural infrastructure in poor countries. The Bank had invested $100 million, while the Foundation would provide 20 per cent of the grant resources. Others would be asked to invest $300 million for countries that could not afford concessional loans. As such efforts were linked with the real economy, Islamic finance was more immune to shocks than others, and more connected to the concept of financial inclusion, as it did not require small farmers, for example, to provide guarantees. A key challenge was fragility — in terms of conflict, as well as of markets, institutions and economy. In 2030, 500 million people would still live below the $1.25 poverty line in conflict-affected countries. The Bank was engaged in that instability. Young people, who felt economically un-empowered, were the “golden thread”. Significant investment in them, and their entrepreneurship, was required to achieve the new Goals.
Ms. KINGO noted that to achieve the 2030 Agenda, the international community needed to increase partnership numbers and scale. For its part, the United Nations Global Compact intended to create a sustainable and inclusive global economy that delivered lasting benefits to people, communities and markets. To make that happen, the Global Compact supported companies to do business responsibly by aligning their strategies and operations with 10 principles on human rights, labour, environment and anti-corruption. Further, it supported them to take strategic actions to advance broader societal objectives, including the Sustainable Development Goals, with an emphasis on collaboration and innovation.
Locally, the Global Compact’s networks advanced corporate sustainability at the grassroots level by helping companies understand what responsible business meant within a national context, she said. At the same time, it helped the United Nations to make local connections. In ensuring system-wide cooperation, the United Nations could learn much from the private sector. However, before knowledge creation, the Organization should implement its existing framework.
Mr. GASS, drawing attention to the changing development landscape, noted that global threats required collective efforts as no Government could address them alone. The new landscape was also marked by the increased engagement of civil society and the private sector, which brought more strengths and resources as well as inevitable challenges. The Secretary-General’s initiatives, such as the Sustainable Energy for All, the Zero Hunger Challenge and Every Woman, Every Child, had shown the potential of strategic partnerships. There was a shared agreement that partnerships were a critical complement to United Nations efforts to support Governments in implementing the 2030 Agenda.
Turning to concerns, he noted that partnerships could not and should not replace the responsibilities of the development system, and they must uphold the standards. Further, the United Nations needed to transform itself into a user-friendly organization, while at the same time protecting its values and brand. Increased engagement with the private sector required upgraded standards and guidelines as well as a system-wide intergovernmental framework for accountability. In that regard, transparency would be of the essence. While partnerships had the potential to spur innovation, they entailed risks and the potential of failure. Creating safe spaces and learning from failure would be key to making progress.
In a second round of comments by panellists, Mr. AQA stressed the need to address the root causes of the problems, rather than the symptoms. It was there that each constituency could understand that “there is something for everyone”. “We are in it all together,” he said, which reinforced the social contract between people and Governments.
Mr. MAYAKI said there was no other actor with higher credibility on the development landscape than the United Nations. Its development system was synonymous with solutions, rather than problems. In Africa, there were differences in speed, related to the accountability of States to their people — differences between the capacities of States to respond to challenges, and the thinking of the private sector and civil society, which was more “advanced”. The United Nations had the ability to fill that accountability gap, which would allow for better policy design at the national level.
Ms. KINGO said implementing the 2030 Agenda required partnerships, cooperation and problem-solving between business and the United Nations. The Organization must move from experimenting with partnerships into a “mainstreaming phase”, entering into partnerships naturally and achieving results for all stakeholders. In such work, it must maintain the highest integrity.
In the ensuing questions and comments, Switzerland’s delegate said the United Nations was the universal “norm holder”, and as such, it was important to understand the differences among its various partnerships. In terms of operations, the Organization was in a “risk business”. There was a need to develop a culture of “learning from failure” and she supported allocating more resources to such endeavours. In addition, the Global Compact was a bridge between the United Nations and only one “partnership family”.
The representative of the Maldives, on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States, discussed the need to ensure to follow up to partnerships and manage their increasing number. “You can’t manage what you can’t measure,” she said, offering experiences from the Small Island Developing States Partnership Framework, launched in 2015. There was a need to establish common reporting templates.
Statements
MWABA PATRICIA KASESE-BOTA (Zambia), speaking on behalf of the Group of Landlocked Developing Countries, noted that many non-coastal countries were marginalized from the world economy, global flows of knowledge, technology, capital and innovations. To achieve sustainable development, they needed partnerships and development cooperation in addition to financial and technical assistance. Further, it was crucial to establish a secure, reliable and efficient transport system to reduce trade costs and increase competitiveness in the international market. Among other things, landlocked countries needed increased official development assistance (ODA), Aid for Trade, data capacity and foreign direct investment.
Mr. FAVRE (Switzerland) said that, while the “delivering as one” approach had improved United Nations strategic positioning at the country level, there were limitations around the concept of “operating as one”, as cooperation had been hampered by different policies, procedures and agency-specific operational support units. Also, the Resident Coordinator system and standard operating procedures had reached their limits in terms of impact, meaning that the next generation of measures should encompass Headquarters. Further, a system-wide strategy for implementing the 2030 Agenda should build on the United Nations normative, capacity-building and convening power comparative advantages. At the regional level, the 2030 Agenda would require new roles for the development system, beyond coordination and information sharing, work that could be reinforced at the country-level through an Assistance Framework. He also saw potential for enhanced local accountability and oversight of United Nations activities.
MARIAME FOFANA (Burkina Faso), associating herself with the “Group of 77” and China and the Group of Least Developed Countries, said creating a better world required a change in behaviour, governance, cooperation and management at the international, regional, national and local level. The role of the United Nations as guarantor of international development policy was now more decisive than ever. The Organization should have an integrated coordination model that allowed for increased collaboration among its various bodies. Reinforced partnerships with States would be needed for the exchange of statistical data, among other things. The development system should adapt its work to each State, or group of countries, and focus in particular on humanitarian crises, peacebuilding and combating insecurity. Such reforms should increase the effectiveness of capacity-building by promoting North-South, South-South and triangular cooperation. Overall, the system should be closer to people’s realities and adapted to their needs. Such reforms would allow it to meet the ambition of the 2030 Agenda.
SARAH MENDELSON (United States), focusing on the policy review, said the international community needed to have a different conversation in 2016 that reflected both the 2030 Agenda and the discussion taking place regarding new approaches to humanitarian assistance. In particular, it was crucial to fundamentally reshape and reform the development system to deliver on a universal agenda that occurred during an era of declining core funding. The policy review in 2016 should be a strategic, high-level document that articulated what Member States wanted the development system to do and sketched the outline of a flexible structure that could help achieve that goal. Further, Member States should not be micromanaging the agencies or overloading them with requirements so that they were unable to deliver development assistance.
PHAM THI KIM ANH (Viet Nam), associating herself with the Group of 77 and China, encouraged the United Nations development system to continue its focus on capacity-building, as that was crucial for poverty eradication. She expressed concern at the imbalance between core and non-core funding for operational activities, urging donors to honour their commitment to provide core funding. More must be done to speed up implementation of critical mass and cost recovery. Further, the strategic plans of United Nations funds and programmes should be aligned with national priorities. While welcoming progress in system-wide coherence at the country level, addressing the remaining challenges required a “vigorous” commitment by Headquarters.
JUAN CARLOS MENDOZA-GARCÍA (Costa Rica) said efficiency should be the guiding principle for the United Nations to adjusting the development system to realities. In making decisions, the international community needed to take into account economic, social and environmental dimensions, and more had to be done to break organizational silos. To move forward, special attention must be given to triangular and South-South cooperation as they provided all actors an opportunity to share knowledge and act in an efficient way.
MATEO ESTREME (Argentina) noted that the 2030 Agenda focused on promoting social and economic development to create a just and inclusive world. Expressing concern over resource imbalance, he noted that from 1998 to 2014, the percentage of non-core resources had increased from 50 to 76 per cent. As such, it was essential to improve the accountability and oversight system in order to give more confidence to donor countries. Among other things, he noted that the Executive Boards of the United Nations entities lacked equitable geographical representation.
BERIT FLADBY (Norway) said the changing development landscape and the 2030 Agenda provided an opportunity to transform the United Nations development system. Welcoming the increased emphasis on delivering as one, she appreciated the substantial cost-avoidance and the quality improvements documented in the United Nations Development Group Business Operations Strategy. In the first phase of the Council Dialogue on the longer-term positioning of the development system, there was an emerging common understanding of the challenges that the system was facing. To make progress, concrete proposals needed to be tabled during the next phase and in the Secretary-General’s forthcoming report. On the periodic review, she noted that the upcoming one should be more strategic. As the United Nations comparative advantages resided in its legitimacy and universality as well as its country presence, the international community must be guided by those advantages to define the future priorities of the development system.
MARÍA LUISA NAVARRO, Vice Minister for Multilateral Affairs and Multilateral Cooperation of Panama, urged “significant” change in agendas and structures. Operational activities must be flexible to meet the different needs of programme countries, which must benefit from such work, in line with their own strategies and priorities. The “delivering as one” approach must promote coordinated work in order to be effective. The purpose of the quadrennial comprehensive policy review was to provide coordination and oversight of the United Nations system, ensuring it had adequate means to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Its assistance to developing countries must be assessed and the United Nations transparency and consultations with States was important in that regard. Further, the imbalance between core and non-core resources must be corrected and she urged the system to align core funding with national priorities and needs, as well as with the United Nations Development Assistance Framework. South-South cooperation was a complement to, not a substitute for, North-South cooperation.
JEREMIAH NYAMANE KINGSLEY MAMABOLO (South Africa), associating himself with the Group of 77 and China, urged the United Nations development system to operate within the confines of national policies in programme countries to ensure shared delivery of results. The next quadrennial comprehensive policy review should improve upon the current one, which would be possible only if it redoubled efforts in its traditional mandate. The review’s priority focus on poverty eradication was of critical importance. A strengthened review, aligned with and responsive to internationally agreed development goals, must meet the expectations of all States. Further, the imbalance between core and non-core resources, and fragmentation caused by that gap, was of grave concern, he said, expressing disappointment that the Executive Board of funds and programmes had been unable to address the issue of “critical mass” of core funding, and the quality and quantity of funding for operational activities. He urged the early reform of governance structures.
MOHAMED ALI ALHAKIM (Iraq), drawing attention to the global promise of leaving no one behind, said the policy review reaffirmed that eradicating poverty was the greatest challenge in the world. On strengthening the development system, a broad partnership with civil society and the private sector should be created as that would contribute to the sustainable implementation of the 2030 Agenda. Further, the development system should create a global programme to identify needs and challenges in developing countries, and support them with national capacity-building.
SERGEY B. KONONUCHENKO (Russian Federation) said the adaptation of the development system to the new era must be carried in a balanced fashion, based on lessons-learned and best practices. Rather than creating a new system, joint efforts must focus on improving existing mechanisms While commending the work of the development system, he underlined that ensuring its effectiveness depended on adequate and flexible financing, as well as taking into account the national interests of programme countries.
OMAR CASTAÑEDA SOLARES (Guatemala) said the international community was expected to comply with expectations for the implementation of the 2030 Agenda and Sustainable Development Goals. The next policy review should improve upon the current one, with a greater focus on poverty eradication. Regarding partnerships, he stressed the need for United Nations entities to enhance coordination and cooperation at the local and regional level. Regional commissions could play a critical role in strengthening the development system.
VLAD LUPAN (Moldova) said the United Nations must help countries develop national policies to achieve globally agreed goals. The 2030 Agenda needed to be supported by upgraded, innovative and integrated institutions and capacities that were well-aligned with development priorities at the national and subregional level. Subsequently, consolidating national capacities and institutions for its effective implementation should be a continued focus of the Organization. The development system should help Governments create partnerships with civil society, academia, the private sector and other relevant actors.
JUAN SANDOVAL MENDIOLEA (Mexico), describing 2015 as a landmark year for global commitments, stressed that the international community needed greater efforts to ensure that nobody was left behind. Calling upon the United Nations to ensure effective coordination between entities, he expressed support for the “deliver as one” approach. On partnerships, he underlined that the development system must work with civil society, academia and the private sector to deliver results, particularly in the least developed countries.
AMIT NARANG (India), associating with the Group of 77 and China, said that from symptoms to drivers, from short-term fixes to long-term solutions, and from silos to integration, the new Agenda made a decisive break from the past, presenting a “meta-template” for development with implications for the delivery of United Nations interventions. Yet, it was unclear whether there was a common understanding of what the Agenda’s features — universality, differentiation and leaving no one behind — meant for the United Nations system. As the system re-thought its role, it was of utmost importance that it did not slacken its focus on the needs of the poorest, which required an “unrelenting” focus. Enhanced support to humanitarian activities should not come at the expense of a redoubled focus on promoting growth and ending poverty. On the imbalance between core and non-core funding, he said: “We clearly cannot talk of balanced implementation of an integrated agenda, and yet have funding structures and functional implementation that response to selective donor priorities.”
NAWAF SALAM (Lebanon) said funds, programmes and specialized agencies should enhance efforts to integrate poverty eradication, as the highest priority, into their strategic plans and report back to the Council on steps taken to address its root causes. He voiced concern at the growing imbalance between core and non-core funding for operational activities, which led to increased transaction costs, fragmentation and competition and overlap among United Nations agencies, restricting their alignment with national priorities. More efforts should be exerted to convince donors of the need to participate in pool funding mechanisms and to make non-core contributions less earmarked and more flexible. To integrate work at the country-level, the United Nations Development Assistance Framework should be aligned with national plans. Capacity-building and technology facilitation were also needed.
SVEN JÜRGENSON (Estonia) noted that implementation of the 2030 Agenda required action at the national, regional and global level. The challenge was to improve the integration of development, humanitarian and peacebuilding activities, especially in fragile and conflict-affected countries. In that regard, it was essential to reconsider the mandate, functions, governance structures and financing of the development system while building on existing structures and practices that had already been proven to be effective. In delivering results, capacity-building for national development planning, data collection and analysis, and reporting could be the key functions of the development system’s work. Further, the system could play a key role in bringing various actors together and fostering triangular and South-South cooperation. On the Resident Coordinator’s authority, he noted that it should be further strengthened for developing appropriate methods that worked best in the local context.
BORIS HOLOVKA (Serbia) said the ambitious and transformative Sustainable Development Goals would not be achieved without a revitalized and enhanced global partnership. As such, the United Nations and its entities needed to be at the centre of global deliberations in their implementation and monitoring. His country was in the process of signing the new Partnership for Development Framework for the period 2016-2020 with the country team. The Framework consisted of five pillars and nine outcomes, including good governance, rule of law, development of social and human resources, economic development and employment.
GUSTAVO MEZA-CUADRA (Peru), associating with the Group of 77, said it was crucial to safeguard the United Nations efficiency and to align the development system with the 2030 Agenda. Fragmented approaches and bureaucratic inertia must be overcome. The upcoming review should fulfil the appeal to carry out strategic planning and presentation of reports that would allow for coherent support to countries. It was crucial to address the special challenges of middle–income countries. “Poverty is a multidimensional phenomenon”, he said, advocating a focus on the pockets of poverty in those countries and addressing structural causes. The Addis Ababa Action Agenda urged the United Nations to consult with international financial institutions and to address poverty in a way that went beyond per capita income calculations. It was important to promote multiparty and transparent approaches. The indivisible nature of the Sustainable Development Goals required finding innovative financing solutions.
CARLOS SERGIO SOBRAL DUARTE (Brazil) said the reform of the development system required a long-term vision. Creating synergies among the development, peace and security, and human rights pillars of the United Nations and breaking organizational silos were very important and long overdue. Development was a central goal, and it constituted a key element of the overarching framework of the United Nations operational activities for development. Those activities must focus on building resilience and addressing historical challenges in ensuring sustainable development, he stressed.
CHO YOUNG-MOO (Republic of Korea) said the United Nations development system was at a “critical juncture”, and that the 2030 Agenda demanded adaption and change from the Organization as a whole. The priority for United Nations operational activities was to ensure relevant, efficient and effective results for sustainable development, building on its unique comparative advantage. It was critical to break silos and step-up coherence and coordination within the system and alongside other development actors. To that end, the “delivering as one” approach needed to be further pursued and reinforced by implementing reforms at the country and Headquarters levels. The cross-cutting nature of the 2030 Agenda was echoed in the series of recent policy reviews such as the High-level Independent Panel on Peace Operations. While progress had been made in strengthening collaboration and planning in areas encompassing development, humanitarian and peace pillars, more remained to be done to strengthen collaboration and complementarities between United Nations entities and across existing joint programmes, mechanisms and structures.
Mr. MUCHKA (Czech Republic) said the adoption of the 2030 Agenda underscored the importance of creating a more strategic development system and revised periodic review. Fragmentation, duplication and overlap must be eliminated, and greater synergies should be explored towards the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals. On the imbalance between core and non-core resources, he underlined the need for predictable financing, calling for creating a new funding model. Describing the next cycle of the periodic review as a historic opportunity to ensure that the development system was fit for purpose, he noted that the international community should act swiftly to successfully implement the Goals.
IRENE SUSAN BARREIRO NATIVIDAD (Philippines), associating herself with the Group of 77, said that, as the international community embarked on the difficult task of translating recent agreements — including the 2030 Agenda — into action, it must always keep in mind that the overarching goal was the eradication of poverty. Addressing the special challenges faced by middle-income countries, where 70 per cent of the world’s poor lived, was a crucial step in the eradication of poverty. It was also relevant in the expansion of the donor base for the development system and South-South cooperation. The vertical and horizontal coherence of the United Nations development system and its funds and programmes was central to the implementation of the international community’s ambitions. “Indeed, they should ‘operate as one’ in order to effectively ‘deliver as one’”, she said.
SEWA LAMSAL ADHIKARI (Nepal) associating with the Group of 77 and China, least developed countries and landlocked developing countries, said her country engaged in the making of the 2030 Agenda with a view to achieving national ownership and advocating efforts to ensure implementation without delay. Nepal had formulated a preliminary national report on the Sustainable Development Goals, with inputs from development partners. She expressed concern at the drop in core funding in 2014, a serious setback to the International Programme of Action and the nation’s aim to graduate from least developed country status by 2020. Non-core funding in humanitarian assistance required a more integrated approach. Development work for disasters should be done with a holistic approach among United Nations entities. She supported the “delivering as one” approach, which honoured inter-connectedness, and the alignment of the United Nations Development Assistance Framework with the national context. The Resident Coordinator system must be revamped according to geography and gender.
LUO JIN (China), associating with the Group of 77 and China, said the Sustainable Development Goals would not be achieved overnight, but rather, over time, with evolving priorities set through deliberation and planning. The United Nations main tasks were to provide support for health care and related work that affected peoples’ basic needs, as well as promote a balance among the social, economic and environmental pillars of sustainable development. Financing should be strengthened, as the recent imbalance of core and non-core and fragmentation had impeded the development system. States should fulfil their ODA commitments, and support flexible use of non-core resources. The development system should respect the different development levels, conditions and priorities of nations. System entities should better cooperate in programme countries, with the local and country teams coordinating policies and complementing the others’ comparative advantages.
NABEEL MUNIR (Pakistan), associating himself with the Group of 77 and China, said the United Nations development system was widely recognized as a trusted partner. Implementation of the 2030 Agenda meant that the system required a “significant” readjustment. Traditional cooperation methods would not work. The new Agenda required integration at all levels, and enhanced cooperation and coordination would complement that integration. Also, different needs required differentiated responses. The unique needs of least developed countries, landlocked developing countries and small island developing States required a response that accounted for their special circumstances, as did the challenges faced by middle-income countries. This year, the policy review resolution would offer an opportunity to “tune up” the development system. The Council’s dialogue on longer-term positioning, that would eventually feed the policy review, must take into account governance challenges and involve a scaling up of resources. Strengthening the Resident Coordinator system and the Assistance Framework was especially important, as was enhancement of the Office for South-South Cooperation.
Mr. EICHEN (Germany) said the Secretary-General’s report included valuable elements for the longer-term positioning of the development system in the context of the 2030 Agenda. The “business as usual” approach was no longer an option and the next policy review must build on lessons learned. While commending the greater coherence and coordination among the United Nations entities at the country level, he stressed that more must be done to make progress. Reforms must be fit for purpose and based on shared vision and strategy at all levels.
RUBÉN IGNACIO ZAMORA RIVAS (El Salvador), recalling the three landmark agreements adopted in 2015, stressed that the strengthening of the development system must be at the centre of efforts for their successful implementation. The classification of countries based on just one indicator — income — was not very scientific. Rather than inclusion, the classification led to exclusion of developing countries. In that regard, operational activities needed to focus on promoting and strengthening national capacities. While doing so, the United Nations should not take a “one size fits all” approach.
JEAN-FRANCIS RÉGIS ZINSOU (Benin) stressed the long-term positioning of the development system, and given the universal nature of the 2030 Agenda, said we must understand the functioning of the system. Countries’ ability to mobilize resources was also important. United Nations funds, agencies and programmes should help them adopt appropriate policies. The distribution of national revenue must be inclusive, which would require institutional reforms to reach all segments of the populations. The redistribution of aid was essential in that context. Indeed, the poorest countries did not have the capacity to mobilize resources. The policy review should offer response to every situation. Rather than push countries into a rivalry for resources, the system must encourage cooperation, with a priority on South-South cooperation. South-North cooperation was based on diverse forms of resource exchange, he said, citing “brain drain” in that context, a phenomenon which must be studied to re-establish balance.