Blending Traditional, Innovative Financing Will Advance Gains of 2030 Agenda, Delegates Tell Economic and Social Council as Operational Segment Continues
Securing predictable, sustainable financing required traditional and innovative systems, involving partnerships to achieve the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, delegates in the Economic and Social Council said today, calling for burden sharing and resource mobilization at all levels.
Introducing the report of the Secretary-General on funding for operational activities for development, Wu Hongbo, Under-Secretary‐General for Economic and Social Affairs, said it consolidated financial data on the contributions and expenditures of 34 United Nations entities. Total funding in 2015 had amounted to $26.7 billion, an increase of some 4 per cent in real terms compared to the previous year.
He went on to say that in the 15-year span between the declaration of the Millennium Development Goals in 2000 and that of the Sustainable Development Goals at the end of 2015, the volume of funding had more than doubled, with non-core funding growing six times faster than core funding. However, that analysis indicated little evidence that the donor base of United Nations entities was broadening.
In 2015, he continued, about 80 per cent of total funding of organizational activities for development had come from Governments directly and 20 per cent from non-governmental organizations, public-private partnerships and other multilateral entities. Concerning transparency and accountability for funding flows, he said several entities had developed publicly accessible online systems that mapped data on donor contributions and expenditures.
He emphasized the critical importance of good governance and strong Member State ownership of the strategic plans and integrated budgets of United Nations entities. The report analysed the quantity and effectiveness of joint funding mechanisms, he said, stressing that well-designed pooling of interagency funds could address the negative effects of earmarked non-core contributions.
Some of those issues were debated in three related panel discussions held during the day-long meeting. The panels focused on improving the governance and coordination of the United Nations development system, moving the quadrennial comprehensive policy review forward at field level and rethinking the funding and financing strategies of the United Nations development system to deliver on the 2030 Agenda.
During the latter discussion, panellists and delegates debated how the system could incentivize more contributions to existing funding modalities and the role of financing strategies to deliver on the Sustainable Development Goals. Panellist Admasu Feyisa, interim Director of the United Nations Agencies and Regional Economic Cooperation Directorate at the Ministry of Finance and Economic Development of Ethiopia, said the very ambitious, cross-cutting Sustainable Development Goals required trillions of dollars to achieve and a comprehensive approach to financing, with the United Nations development system transforming itself accordingly. However, predictable financing would require both traditional and innovative financing systems, involving a range of partners, he said.
Echoing that sentiment, panellist Daovy Vongxay, Deputy Director‐General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Lao People’s Democratic Republic, emphasized that to achieve the 2030 Agenda, current funding trends must change. Noting that there had been dynamic changes and differences in financing among countries within a region, he said that leveraging development cooperation mattered more now than ever before. The crucial question was how cooperation could be used to address the real obstacles to development.
Speaking during the general debate were the Minister for Social Development of Chile and the representatives of Ecuador (for the “Group of 77” developing countries and China), Malta (for the European Union), Maldives (for the Alliance of Small Island States), El Salvador (for the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States), Trinidad and Tobago (for the Caribbean Community), Honduras (for Like-Minded Countries Supporters of Middle Income Countries), Nauru (for Pacific Small Island Developing States), Australia (also for Canada and New Zealand), Bangladesh (for least developed countries), Brazil, South Africa, Peru, China, Burkina Faso, Viet Nam, Tajikistan, Lebanon, Norway, Czech Republic, Sweden, United States and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines.
The Economic and Social Council will reconvene at 10 a.m. on Thursday, 2 March, to continue its operational activities segment.
Introduction of Report
WU HONGBO, Under-Secretary‐General for Economic and Social Affairs, introduced the report of the Secretary-General on funding for operational activities for development (document A/72/61–E/2017/4), saying it consolidated financial data on the contributions and expenditures of 34 United Nations entities. Total funding in 2015 had amounted to $26.7 billion, a decrease of nearly 7 per cent in nominal terms compared to 2014, due to the weakening of several major currencies relative to the United States dollar. In real terms, factoring in exchange-rate differences and inflation, total funding in 2015 had increased by some 4 per cent compared to the previous year, he said.
The long-term trend in funding of United Nations activities for development was characterized by two clear traits: quantitative growth and qualitative change, he continued. In the 15-year span between the declaration of the Millennium Development Goals in 2000 and that of the Sustainable Development Goals at the end of 2015, the volume of funding had more than doubled, he said, adding that, from an qualitative aspect, non-core funding had grown roughly six times faster than core funding during those 15 years. However, that analysis indicated little evidence that the donor base of United Nations entities was broadening, he pointed out.
In 2015, he continued, about 80 per cent of total funding of organizational activities for development had come from Governments directly, with non-governmental organizations, public-private partnerships and other multilateral entities accounting for the remaining 20 per cent. In terms of the mandate to report on progress achieved on full cost recovery, the report indicated some recent improvements, but much work remained ahead for most United Nations entities. Concerning transparency and accountability for funding flows, he noted that several entities had developed publicly accessible online systems that mapped data on donor contributions and expenditures.
He went on to emphasize the critical importance of good governance and strong Member State ownership of the strategic plans and integrated budgets of United Nations entities, as well as the need to strengthen their transparent financial management and reporting. The report analysed the quantity and effectiveness of pooled, thematic and joint funding mechanisms, he said. Indeed, well-designed pooling of interagency funds could address many of the negative effects of strictly earmarked non-core contributions. On the geographic allocation of funds, he noted that 46 per cent of total country-level expenditures had been spent in Africa. The largest country-level expenditures on operational activities in 2015 had occurred in Afghanistan, South Sudan and Lebanon. Furthermore, the report stressed the need to explore innovative financing mechanisms to complement official development assistance (ODA), he said.
Panel Discussion I
A panel discussion on “rethinking the funding and financing strategies of the UN development system to deliver on the 2030 Agenda” was moderated by Bruce Jenks, Adjunct Professor, School of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University, and former Assistant Secretary-General of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). It featured Admasu Feyisa, interim Director, United Nations Agencies and Regional Economic Cooperation Directorate, Ministry of Finance and Economic Development, Ethiopia; Daovy Vongxay, Deputy Director‐General, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Lao People’s Democratic Republic; Gaudenz Silberschmidt, interim Director, Coordinated Resource Mobilization, World Health Organization (WHO); and Björn Gillsäter, Manager, World Bank Group.
Mr. JENKS said there now was an opportunity, even a responsibility, to go beyond bread-and-butter funding issues and analyse the transformative implications of financing. The transformative vision of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development could have significant implications with regard to financing. Examining options for aligning financing modalities with functions deserved serious consideration over time. Noting that the Secretary-General’s report on funding made the case for a shift towards an integrated funding strategy, he asked whether the United Nations development system was ready to embrace that challenge. A report by the World Bank and international financial institutions had captured the challenge of having a real-world impact that went beyond providing grants.
Mr. FEYISA said the very ambitious, cross-cutting Sustainable Development Goals required trillions of dollars to achieve and a comprehensive approach to financing, with the United Nations development system transforming itself accordingly. Predictable financing would require both traditional and innovating financing systems, involving a range of partners. From the point of view of developing countries, core contributions should be maintained, with increased accountability and transparency that would build trust among funding partners. But, the system must also mobilize additional core resources and look beyond aid to analyse all resource flows that could maintain investment in sustainable development.
Mr. VONGXAY said that, to achieve the 2030 Agenda, current funding trends must change. “We are not in favour of renaming the 2030 Agenda as the 2300 Agenda,” he said. There had been dynamic changes and differences in financing, with significant changes even among countries within a region. Asia was increasingly being seen as a middle-income region, yet for the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, ODA was still extremely important. Leveraging development cooperation mattered more now than ever before, he said, citing as an example a programme supported by the United Nations Capital Development Fund that gave nearly 50,000 people access to finance, in part through mobile banking. The United Nations development system was well positioned to address illicit flows of funds out of developing countries. For programme countries, he said, the crucial question was how cooperation could be leveraged to address the real obstacles to development.
Mr. SILBERSCHMIDT underscored the importance of the predictability of core and non-core resources. The World Health Organization continued to work with departments and ministries in each country to set priorities and improve coordination. They chose 10 out of 30 programme areas, he said, noting that while most countries had selected non-communicable diseases as a priority area, the funding continued to fall short.
Mr. GILLSÄTER said the World Bank’s goals — poverty elimination and shared prosperity — were closely linked to the 2030 Agenda. The International Development Association, overseen by 173 shareholder nations, aimed at reducing poverty by providing loans and grants for programmes to boost economic growth, reduce inequalities and improve living conditions. The Association complemented the World Bank’s International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, which functioned as a self-sustaining business and provided loans and advice to middle-income and credit-worthy poor countries. As one of the largest sources of assistance for the world’s poorest 75 countries, the Association was the single largest source of donor funds for basic social services. The most recent replenishment of its resources had been finalized in December 2016, resulting in $75 billion to finance projects over the three-year period. The Association would double resources to address fragility, conflict and violence and would provide $2 billion to support refugees and their host communities.
In the ensuing discussion, the panel took questions and heard comments on such points as the decline in financing resources, burden sharing among Member States, interagency funding mechanisms, resource mobilization at the national and international levels, currency risks, best practices, financing for vaccination and immunization and the need to make a distinction between the Addis Ababa Action Agenda of the third International Conference on Financing for Development and financing the 2030 Agenda as a whole. The representative of Ecuador, on behalf of the “Group of 77” developing countries and China, expressed concern with an emphasis on rethinking the development funding architecture, saying funding the United Nations development system should be more flexible, not more fragmented.
Mr. SILBERSCHMIDT explained the difference in the way WHO financed vertical tasks, such as vaccination and immunization, and horizontal tasks, such as funding health systems, even though both were needed. As a Geneva-based agency, WHO funds were divided between United States dollars and Swiss francs, which provided a degree of control vis-à-vis current fluctuations.
Mr. FEYISA emphasized the need to establish strong and sustainable partnerships and for convincing donors to make use of the United Nations system.
Mr. VONGKAY said funding for implementation was falling behind and added that the United Nations development system should find a way to mobilize support.
Mr. GILLSÄTER highlighted the close collaboration between the United Nations and the World Bank, particularly with regard to States in conflict situations where the symbiosis was most obvious. The World Bank appreciated the leadership of the office of the previous Secretary-General in addressing individual crises, such as the Ebola and Zika virus outbreaks, and looked forward to dealing with the new Secretary-General in the same way in addressing the famine crisis.
Mr. JENKS drew attention to the strong commitment that was being given to the transformational vision of the 2030 Agenda. In that regard, robust debate was healthy and positive.
Participating in the discussion were the representatives of Honduras, China, Egypt, Norway, Algeria, Brazil, Republic of Korea and Australia, as well as a representative of a non-governmental organization.
Panel Discussion II
The Council then held a panel discussion on “improving the governance and coordination of the United Nations development system”, moderated by Douglas Lindores, former Senior Vice-President of the Canadian International Development Agency and former Chair, Executive Board, United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). It featured Ib Petersen (Denmark), President, Executive Board, UNDP, United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) and United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS); Walton Alfonso Webson (Antigua and Barbuda), President, Executive Board, United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF); Lana Zaki Nusseibeh (United Arab Emirates), President, Executive Board, United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women (UN‐Women); Helen Clark, Administrator, UNDP, and Chair, United Nations Development Group; and Alicia Barcena, Executive Secretary, United Nations Economic Commission for Latin American and the Caribbean (ECLAC).
Mr. PETERSEN, describing the meeting as a chance to align the United Nations development system to the 2030 Agenda, said Member States must engage in discussions at all levels. “We need to have permanent representatives at policy discussions for policy guidance,” he said, calling upon all to better use the executive boards of United Nations funds and programmes. “Let’s not underestimate the value of joint board meetings.”
Mr. WEBSON noted that the UNICEF Executive Board provided an important platform for oversight by Member States of strategic planning and budgetary process. It also gave insights about how agencies were working. “We need to take a bottom-up approach to achieve successful results,” he said, emphasizing the need to take a closer look at what was happening at the country level and how funds were spent.
Ms. NUSSEIBEH emphasized a need for the United Nations to reposition itself for the successful implementation of the 2030 Agenda. UN-Women played a central role in achieving gender equality and women’s empowerment worldwide. Delivering better for women and girls would have multiple effects on sustainable development. For its part, UN-Women had contributed to the quadrennial comprehensive policy review resolution through sharing important lessons learned and initiating a discussion on working methods. Highlighting the importance of financial stability and predictable funding of United Nations funds and programmes, she said that, without that baseline, many of the goals would not be achievable.
Ms. CLARK said providing the best quality support to Member States for implementing the 2030 Agenda required a twenty-first-century approach. That meant collaborative and networked institutions and governance. Using the iPhone as a metaphor, she said the United Nations was a common platform and each of its entities apps. Those apps needed to be compatible with the common platform, which the United Nations Development Group had put great effort into building. Regarding the strengthening of the Council and revitalizing its operational activities segment, she said there could be more interactive strategic dialogues. “I would be happy to see all formal statements banned at [the Economic and Social Council] and other panels,” she said. Regarding the governance of individual entities, she said more consideration should be given to the way board meetings were spaced out during the year. From the development system’s perspective, coherence among Member States was not often seen.
Ms. BARCENA, speaking on behalf of the five United Nations regional economic commissions, discussed enhancing relationships with Member States at different levels. Improving governance meant supporting Member States in numerous ways, including the integration of the Sustainable Development Goals into national development plans and budgets, strengthening statistical capacities, defining means of implementation and changing the conversation between the State, the market and civil society around the 2030 Agenda.
During the ensuing dialogue, the panel took questions and heard comments on the efficiency and effectiveness of the resident coordinator system, operationalization of quadrennial review provisions on working methods, monitoring and evaluation of country programmes and the challenges facing joint executive board meetings. The representative of Ecuador, on behalf of the Group of 77, said the development system must respond better to countries. That required more systematic discussions at Headquarters. To deliver as one, the development system needed a strong follow up to the quadrennial review implementation by the Economic and Social Council and the General Assembly. Further, it was essential to pay closer attention to quadrennial review provisions on gender balance and equitable geographical representation regarding appointments and recruitment in the development system.
Ms. CLARK emphasized a need to build a strong horizontal platform. The development system was operating across many governmental structures, she said, and that was not going to change. She added that joint board meetings needed to be more interactive and strategic, with people from the field coming in and contributing. She thanked Brazil’s representative for making a useful point about reaching out to all missions as potential observers.
Ms. NUSSEIBEH agreed that more could be done to help smaller missions follow discussions and to be more transparent in disseminating information. She went on to quote the Secretary-General as saying that reform was not a one-off act, but a permanent attitude. That message was being heard today.
Mr. WEBSON said bringing in people from the field to participate in joint meetings might be useful. He added that entities probably collaborated more in the field than they did in New York.
Mr. PETERSEN said he was very inspired by the Deputy Secretary-General’s remarks to the Council yesterday about the need to address the United Nations development system’s trust deficit. Nobody wanted new bureaucratic structures, but there was a need for fairly strong governance guidance from the central level.
Ms. BARCENA emphasized a need to strengthen multilateralism with horizontal and vertical governance. She also identified a need for an intergovernmental place to discuss such issues as fiscal policy, adding that the Council was perhaps that place.
Delegates from Japan, Honduras, Colombia, Maldives, Brazil, Australia and China also participated in the discussion.
Panel Discussion III
A panel discussion on “moving the quadrennial comprehensive policy review forward at field level: creating a common back office to function as a system” was moderated by Thomas Gass, Assistant Secretary‐General for Policy Coordination and Inter‐agency Affairs, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. It featured Patrick Egli, Deputy Head, Division for Global Institutions, Swiss Agency for Development Cooperation; Jan Beagle, Vice‐Chair, High‐level Committee on Management and Deputy Executive Director, Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS); Jeremiah Kramer, Inspector and Chair, United Nations Joint Inspection Unit; and Sanaka Samarasinha, United Nations Resident Coordinator and UNDP Resident Representative, Belarus.
Mr. GASS said collaboration had resulted in precious savings, citing that, in 2015, UNICEF had managed to save $3 million through collaboration with other agencies. The session would be dedicated to moving the quadrennial review forward in the field, analysing the long-term position of the development system and the priorities across the United Nations entities.
Mr. EGLI said human rights, development and peace and security must go hand in hand, emphasizing the need to develop a real common back office at the system and entity level. “We need to shift away from an agency-specific system to an operational platform that provides high quality service,” he said, noting that such a system-wide strategy would harmonize business operations. Common service platforms, strong leadership and sustained communication were key success factors for change.
Ms. BEAGLE said some progress had been made through joint efforts in addressing ongoing challenges. However, broader partnership of all stakeholders was necessary to break down silos. Having shared a common vision, United Nations entities were working together to simplify processes, she said, citing fostered interagency mobility. Moving forward also required ensuring the safety and security of staff and the accessibility of disaggregated data. Also important was sustainable funding and the creation of a better mechanism to monitor and measure outcomes at national, regional and international levels.
Mr. KRAMER discussed his review for the Joint Inspection Unit of the experience of United Nations system organizations in changing how they delivered administrative support services by developing centres that provided services more or less on a global basis. One key finding was that organizations had moved away from maintaining separate administrative support structures in favour of grouping services into centres situated in lower-cost locations. Another important finding was that embedding change and realizing benefits required investment and time. Focusing on short-term savings could be short-sighted and counterproductive. He also noted gaps in governance, adding that one lesson he took away from the review was how difficult it was to carry out change. For that reason, policy direction from legislative bodies and Member States needed to be reinforced with sustained engagement and practical support.
Mr. SAMARASINHA said the United Nations development system was far from the lean machine that Member States expected in order to implement the Sustainable Development Goals. However, no one wanted to be coordinated. Country teams managed services differently in different countries, he said, adding that pooled funding for operational services should be considered. At the Headquarters level, there was a need for stronger top-level political leadership, as well as coherence and consistent messaging from Member States and dependable system-wide resourcing. He also said it was possible for country teams to be more efficient if they were bold and innovative. However, they were not necessarily rewarded for doing so.
The panel then took questions and heard comments on such issues as country-level alignment of operational activities, knowledge management and what steps could be taken by Member States with regard to coherence, coordination and rewarding innovation.
Mr. KRAMER said radical surgery was not necessary in order to do better. It was important for executive boards to be used to flesh out themes that came out of the General Assembly. Clear measures of efficiency would be useful, as well.
Ms. BEAGLE emphasized the importance of political support for collaborative work and the role of leadership.
Mr. SAMARASINHA said governing bodies must speak in one voice. More could be done with regard to accountability at the country level. With regard to middle management, he doubted that promotions and reassignments were linked to the quality of back-office operations. Perhaps they should be, he said. He went on to say that, if the Goals were integrated and indivisible, it made no sense for operational support to be fragmented.
Participating in the interactive discussion were representatives of Ecuador (on behalf of the Group of 77), United Kingdom, Australia, Cuba, Belgium and Germany.
General Debate
HORACIO SEVILLA BORJA (Ecuador), speaking on behalf of the “Group of 77” developing countries and China, said the quadrennial review was a key element in ensuring the operational activities for development complemented the 2030 Agenda. “We must adopt effective, efficient and flexible models that are also cost effective,” he said, noting that operational activities must align with development plans while supporting efforts of national actors.
Strengthening national capacities was crucial, he continued, emphasizing that the quadrennial review resolution had requested that the development system coordinate its activities to support South–South and triangular cooperation. Expressing concern about the growing imbalance between core and non-core resources, he said that the international community must take necessary steps to address that negative trend. Also important was undertaking initiatives to design innovative and transparent funding mechanisms.
DAVID MANSFIELD (Malta), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said necessary reforms would allow the United Nations development system to adapt to new requirements and expectations, to face growing global challenges and work better to achieve sustainable development. Partnerships would be critical to deliver on 2030 Agenda objectives and make the United Nations development system work more effectively. Meeting the Goals would also require a system that was adequately resourced and more efficient. The quadrennial review mandates on pooled and innovative funding, full cost recovery and integrated country-level financing approaches constituted important steps for improving the financing architecture and making the system better equipped to support Member States in a more responsive, coherent manner over longer time frames.
The European Union, he said, looked forward to seeing a real change in the vital area of the resident coordinator system. Vital follow-up to the quadrennial review resolution included a more strengthened and more wide-spread implementation of the standard operating procedures and business operations strategies. Close attention must be paid to gender equality, the empowerment of women, human rights and a human-rights-based approach to sustainable development. Similar coordination would be needed between mutually reinforcing notions of sustainable development and sustaining peace. The United Nations development system had a central role in sustaining peace, particularly in the area of conflict prevention. Hence, the system should enhance its capacity to recognize and address the root causes and drivers of conflict, including by working together across agencies.
AHMED SAREER (Maldives), speaking on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States, underlined the importance of finding ways to reiterate and ensure that the mandates and guidelines of the quadrennial review were embedded in the United Nations development system’s operational activities. The system must also consider the specific challenges of small island developing States and position itself to facilitate countries in implementing the 2030 Agenda. Moreover, the system must respond to country priorities in a transparent, coherent and coordinated manner.
The system, he said, must also strengthen synergies with international financial institutions, the private sector and other stakeholders to identify innovative financing options. Its re-evaluation must continue to ensure that mechanisms, guidelines and policies remained current and relevant. In that regard, he highlighted the General Assembly’s call for a review of multi-country offices. That was very important for small-island developing States, for whom having the right support on the ground was the key to successfully implementing the 2030 Agenda. Concluding, he called on developed States to meet their ODA commitments, to contribute more to core funding and to ensure that non-core contributions were more flexible.
RUBEN IGNACIO ZAMORA RIVAS (El Salvador), speaking on behalf of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, said the United Nations development system must act in harmony with national requirements while considering the 2030 Agenda. Flexible, cost-effective models were needed to achieve the Goals. He stressed the importance of allocating resources to support least developed countries, bearing in mind the universal and inclusive nature of the 2030 Agenda and ensuring a coherent emphasis on the various objectives and targets.
He emphasized the importance of capacity-building for CELAC member States, which were mostly middle-income countries confronting a range of challenges. Asking the United Nations development system, international and regional organizations, and other stakeholders to consider those challenges, he underscored the importance of South-South and triangular cooperation, adding that the United Nations development system could contribute to peacebuilding in those countries in post-conflict situations.
PENELOPE BECKLES (Trinidad and Tobago), speaking on behalf of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), said the United Nations system had moved to a common multi-State development framework embracing the priorities of countries in the region. The development system must be driven by a multidimensional approach based on priorities and country-specific needs, while ensuring and strengthening national ownership and leadership. “If we are to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals, we must avoid falling into the trap of a one-size-fits-for-all approach,” she said.
Operational activities for development, she said, must encourage national capacity-building by ensuring the promotion and transfer of new technologies to developing countries. Tracking the progress of implementing the Goals through data collection and analysis remained critical to the review and follow up of the 2030 Agenda. In that regard, the development system had a key role in strengthening national institutions in planning, management and evaluation capacities. Emphasizing the importance of adequate and predictable funding for United Nations operational activities, she expressed concern that the slow growth of core resources was being strictly earmarked for specific projects and depended on a small group of donors.
HECTOR ALEJANDRO PALMA CERNA (Honduras), speaking on behalf of the Like-Minded Group of Countries Supporters of Middle-Income Countries, said the quadrennial review had called upon the development system to support developing countries in their efforts to implement the 2030 Agenda. To leave no one behind, all relevant programmes and policies must target those most in need regardless of their geographical location.
The United Nations development system, he said, must also develop a system-wide action plan for sustainable development in middle-income countries. Emphasizing that such a plan must be evidence-based and objective, and supported by international financial institutions, he said those elements would foster efforts to eliminate poverty while bridging economic and structural gaps at all levels. Flexibility of the development system was also key, as it would enable United Nations entities to adapt to changes.
MARLENE MOSES (Nauru), speaking on behalf of the Pacific Small Island Developing States, associated herself with the Group of 77 and the Alliance of Small Island States. The system-wide guidance given by the quadrennial review would be critical in reorienting the work of the United Nations development system. There was a particular need for the guidance to be reflected at the country level to fulfil the promises of the 2030 Agenda. The Pacific was unique in that 10 of its countries relied on one multi-country office. The review resolution had called on those countries to tailor appropriately the role and operational activities of multi-country offices to ensure that they were fully supporting the policies and projects of the countries under their purview.
Country offices, she said, should include seasoned international civil servants to help build capacity of local staff and national institutions. Coherence within the Organization’s development system was crucial and required strengthened joint programming at the country level. Operational activities for development in the Pacific faced another set of specific challenges: natural disasters and climate change. Development efforts must continue to emphasize the importance of climate change adaptation, disaster risk reduction and national resilience-building. All resources must be scaled up and aligned with the priorities of the development framework.
GILLIAN BIRD (Australia), also speaking for Canada and New Zealand, said the international community had agreed to reform the United Nations development and humanitarian systems in the name of sustaining peace. As the Organization had been founded to create an environment where all States and all people might thrive, any reform must be based on a fundamental respect for human rights. “In undertaking reforms, we must always remember the ambition in our shared goals,” she said, noting that the 2030 Agenda was about changing the world, transforming economies, providing social safety nets and harnessing finance, innovation, technology and partnerships. While the United Nations was globally trusted, it needed partners to deliver on ambitious intergovernmental agendas. In reforming its systems and operations, the international community needed to ensure that the Organization harnessed the capacity of Governments, the private sector, international and national development banks, philanthropies, civil society, parliamentarians and citizens.
MARCOS BARRAZA GÓMEZ, Minister for Social Development of Chile, associating himself with the Group of 77 and CELAC, said Governments bore primary responsibility for implementing the 2030 Agenda, with the United Nations development system providing crucial leadership at regional and global levels. Setting out ways in which the Organization’s role could be enhanced, he said States themselves must evaluate the real needs of their citizens, with the United Nations adapting and tailoring its activities accordingly. Moreover, the various United Nations structures and forums involved with the 2030 Agenda must be aligned and coordinated, with improved communications between the different parts of the development system.
He pointed out that Chile, among other countries, had improved its transparency and accountability standards and that the United Nations system needed to so, as well. Welcoming the Secretary-General’s efforts in that regard, he said he hoped to see first results in 2017. Measuring development levels only by national per capita income did not promote the integrating, cross-cutting and inclusive vision of the 2030 Agenda, he said, emphasizing a need for parameters that incorporated other aspects of sustainable development.
SHANCHITA HAQUE (Bangladesh), speaking on behalf of least developed countries, said ODA was critical for those States. They also required targeted support upon graduation from the least-developed-country category. She called for the United Nations development system to reposition itself, saying “business as usual is no longer an option”. Current funding trends away from flexibility and predictability, as noted in the Secretary-General’s report, needed to be reversed.
She expressed grave concern that development-related support for least developed countries had fallen. Calling for innovative ways to be brought forward, she said the eradication of poverty and hunger, access to education and health care and addressing the impact of climate change should remain at the centre of United Nations development efforts. In addition, she underscored a need among least-developed countries for assistance in such areas as statistics, monitoring and reporting.
MAURO VIEIRA (Brazil) said that the quadrennial review resolution had called upon the development system to have a balanced approach. Each United Nations entity must translate its strategic plan into concrete country-level action. Further, closer attention must be paid to national development efforts alongside bolstered support for South-South and triangular cooperation. Other key elements included improving the governance and oversight of the development system and outlining gaps and duplications of the entities.
EPHRAIM LESHALA MMINELE (South Africa) emphasized that all operational activities for development must complement national efforts while helping relevant authorities to address challenges, including unemployment, inequality and poverty. Despite the adoption of the 2030 Agenda, some countries were not able to provide basic services, he said, noting that poverty eradication must be the development system’s primary focus. Equally concerning was the decline in core resources, which harmed the entities’ ability to fulfil their mandates.
GUSTAVO MEZA-CUADRA (Peru), associating himself with CELAC and the Group of 77, said that, from the point of view of middle-income countries, the legitimacy of the development system could be strengthened through greater efficiencies and overcoming structural gaps. The United Nations had a key role to play in facilitating partnerships between public and private protagonists. Eradicating poverty remained the overarching objective, he said, adding that the 2030 Agenda was a tool for addressing the structural causes of conflicts and humanitarian situations. He also welcomed the new Secretary-General’s emphasis on prevention.
JIN LUO (China), associating herself with the Group of 77, said the United Nations development system had entered a new historical period at a time when mankind faced a number of challenges. Underscoring how countries were interconnected and interdependent, she said the system should evolve with the times and improve its work. The system must also take poverty eradication as its primary task. Poverty remained the world’s biggest challenge, manifesting itself in numerous ways. Development assistance should be carried out with clearly defined goals, measures and institutional capacity. The development system must promote coordination between development, humanitarian assistance and peacebuilding work. China stood ready to play a constructive and active role in the development system, thus contributing to the 2030 Agenda objectives.
MARIAME FOFANA (Burkina Faso) said all States were fully aware of their responsibilities for the successful implementation of the 2030 Agenda. Eradicating poverty, protecting the planet and ensuring prosperity for all could be achieved if the United Nations supported Member States’ national efforts. Pointing to the imbalance between core and non-core funding resources, she said that more than two thirds of the budget was dedicated to financing short-term programmes. Non-core resources must be allocated to complement national priorities.
NGUYEN THI PHUONG NGA (Viet Nam) said her country had received tremendous support from the development system. Each United Nations entity must focus on its comparative advantage, she suggested, expressing hope for improved synergy as it would assist countries in implementing the 2030 Agenda based on their priorities. Expressing concern about the stagnant funding for core resources, she stressed that it severely affected system-wide responses to development challenges.
MAHMADAMIN MAHMADAMINOV (Tajikistan), associating himself with the Group of 77, underscored his country’s development focus on energy, food security, transport, communication and productive employment. It was imperative for United Nations entities to improve support for strengthening national capacities. Meeting official development assistance commitments would be critical, particularly for those States with the greatest need but the least capacities. He called on the United Nations development system to enhance its support for developing countries, emphasizing that the elimination of poverty in all its forms and dimensions remained the greatest global challenge. The long-term success of the Sustainable Development Goals would depend on how much they addressed the multiple dimensions of poverty.
NAWAF SALAM (Lebanon) said more effort should be made to convince donors, including non-State actors, to participate in pool funding mechanisms and to make non-core contributions less earmarked and more flexible and predictable. He described how, in Lebanon, peacebuilding, development, humanitarian and peacekeeping activities had run simultaneously for several decades, with an emphasis on coordination and coherence between the development and humanitarian activities of United Nations entities. That was reflected in the 2017‑2020 strategic framework signed by Lebanon and the Organization, recognizing a need for the United Nations to follow a “whole-of-Lebanon” approach. Concluding, he called for United Nations development system to reinvent itself in a more integrated and reinvigorated manner.
BERIT FLADBY (Norway), encouraging the Secretary-General to present “bold and analytically well-founded” proposals for further reform in 2017, said the marching order that had been set out in the quadrennial review resolution had been clear: support countries, at their request, in their efforts to implement the 2030 Agenda in a coherent and integrated manner. Underscoring the need for results-based management, she said all United Nations development system entities must enhance gender mainstreaming by fully implementing the System-wide Action Plan on Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women. Leadership and concerted action at Headquarters were another “must” and work should continue on harmonizing and simplifying policies and procedures. Spotlighting a mismatch between what Member States expected from the system and the way it was funded, she also expressed concern about the decreasing trend in core resources, uneven burden sharing among Member States and the increasing trend of strictly earmarked support.
MARIE CHATARDOVA (Czech Republic), associating herself with the European Union, emphasized that the United Nations development system must operate with the 2030 Agenda at the core of its efforts. The system should choose its interventions based on their added value and comparative advantages, while sufficient and strategic funding — as well as maximum efficiency — should be included in any mix of solutions. “The more the United Nations development system can tap the potential of innovative financing mechanisms, the better,” she said, adding that the system’s governance was another area in urgent need of attention and innovation.
SIGRÚN RAWET (Sweden), while acknowledging the United Nations’ role in achieving sustainable development, said the Organization must consider country-specific contexts. Differentiated business models would be a step in the right direction, she pointed out, emphasizing that United Nations entities must cooperate with other actors, including the private sector, donor community and international financial institutions. Resident coordinators must be provided with sufficient resources for the effective delivery of programmes.
STEFANIE AMADEO (United States) said the 2030 Agenda, the World Humanitarian Summit outcome document and the Addis Ababa Action Agenda all demonstrated a need for reform of the development system. Commending the Secretary-General’s commitment and efforts on that matter, she expressed her country’s readiness to support the development system. For successful outcomes, it was critical to link resources, collaborate in delivering assistance on the ground and make use of best practices.
SEHON MARSHALL (Saint Vincent and the Grenadines), associating himself with the Caribbean Community, Group of 77, Alliance of Small Island States and CELAC, said the United Nations development system must work with developing counties in a coordinated and cohesive manner in their quest to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals, which at times seemed very elusive. He expressed concern at the reduction of core funding for development and the disproportionate way funds were reallocated to humanitarian and peacekeeping projects. Underscoring how CARICOM member States were plagued by natural disasters that threatened their hard-fought development gains, he urged the development system to coordinate efforts with programme countries with a view to maximizing benefits.