13 April 2016: UN Member States discussed the functions and funding of the UN Development System (UNDS) during the fifth workshop of the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) Dialogue on the longer-term positioning of the UNDS in the context of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Participants also responded to recommendations from the Independent Team of Advisers to the ECOSOC Bureau (ITA).

The ITA was established in February 2016, with 14 members from all regions and various NGOs, to offer specific recommendations on the Dialogue process. Following its initial meeting on 25 February, the Team produced two background papers, on ‘Functions and Impact’ and on ‘Funding Practices,’ released on 29 March 2016.

On Functions and Impact, ITA recommended: re-branding the UNDS as the UN Sustainable Development System or the UN Universal Sustainable Development System; developing a strategic framework to integrate and link the operational activities of UNDS entities; providing thought leadership on substantive and operational dimensions of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs); and elevating its regional bureaus, locating them at regional headquarters, and empowering regional mechanisms and platforms to effectively realize common outcomes, among other recommendations.

At the national level, ITA suggested that UNDS assist countries in implementing the 2030 Agenda by providing support for: designing coherent nationally Determined Implementation Strategies; determining a baseline and modalities for a “prompt start;” identifying resource requirements and investment budgets for the 2030 Agenda; facilitating access to and development of science and technology; strengthening early-warning capacities for emergencies and risk; and other areas.

To address fragmentation, ITA said UNDS should: consider grouping its entities around the areas of collective and strategic cross-cutting outcomes in the 2030 Agenda; integrate programme implementation at the country level; and achieve greater coherence and synergies between its humanitarian assistance and development efforts. On partnerships and synergies, ITA recommended that UNDS: strengthen partnerships, particularly with the international financial institutions (IFIs), national and regional development banks and private sector, to deliver sustainable development outcomes; use its convening capacity to facilitate voluntary peer and partnership reviews at national, regional and global levels as well as among UNDS entities; and leverage its convening power and undertake policy advocacy functions, using core resources and under a “One UN” logo, to enhance its visibility, voice and leverage while forging stronger partnerships.

Juan Somavia, ITA Co-Chair, said the ITA will provide an overall paper at the end of the ECOSOC Dialogue. He suggested that the UN System Chief Executives Board for Coordination (CEB) take a decision on UNDS integration at its April meeting. Somavia stressed that the SDGs should be UNDS’s strategic framework.

At the Dialogue workshop on 13 April 2016, in New York, US, governments stressed the need for: clarifying “who exactly is UNDS;” clarity on current functions; reprioritization of development issues in humanitarian issues; an integrated system for compiling data, to channel funding and direct functions; looking at regional mechanisms beyond the UN; and short, medium and long-term recommendations. Many countries expressed support for a mapping exercise of the mandates of the UN funds and programs. Alejandro Palma Cerna, Vice-President of ECOSOC, announced that the request has been submitted to the UN Development Group (UNDG) and will be delivered to Member States when ready.

Thailand, for the Group of the G-77 and China (G-77 China), stressed the need for: UNDS’ functions be more demand-driven and drive funding, not vice versa; different accountings for humanitarian and development issues; and not rebranding but strengthening the core functions of UNDS. Nauru, for the Pacific Island Developing States (P-SIDS), said the function of the UNDS should be the implementation of the 2030 Agenda and ensuring its integration in national plans. Brazil highlighted that not all separations are silos approaches, but some are needed, and integration must not mean confusion of mandates. She further called for caution with regards to the role of the UNDS in preventing crisis as most humanitarian crises are conflict-related, and UN’s development pillar should not be held accountable for its security pillar. Finland called for hearing more about the system-wide approach and framework, as they are “key” but Member States “should not simply develop something for the sake of it.” Norway called on Member States to provide adequate and sufficient funding for the Resident Coordinator system.

On Funding Practices, the ITA paper recommended: mandating UNDS to engage in negotiated pledges to ensure that funding is predictable and flexible; adopting a common strategy to ensure alignment between intergovernmentally agreed objectives and development programmes funded with non-core resources at the country level; UNDS play the role of a “financial broker” to support the capacities of developing countries in matching funding opportunities (domestic/external) with local funding/investment needs; and enhancing cost efficiency and effectiveness to make additional resources available for core functions to support SDG implementation.

On addressing fragmentation, the ITA suggested that UNDS could: develop a consolidated balance sheet for its operations, measured against the 2030 Agenda, as a step towards a consolidated balance sheet for the whole UN; set a target for an increase in pooled resources to support the SDGs; and/or apply internal levies for longer-term development priorities (e.g. redirecting a portion of humanitarian funds to longer-term development). On partnerships and synergies, ITA said UNDS should work with IFIs on aligning and integrating multilateral processes, and adopt a common framework for public private partnerships (PPPs) and guidelines for public-private engagement that maximize benefits while protecting the UN against reputational risks.

Klaus Topfer, ITA Co-Chair, highlighted the importance of a consolidated budget as a management instrument for integration, as well as to back requests for funding. He said the UN’s role as broker is a competitive advantage, alongside its convening power.

At the workshop, Member States: expressed concern about the imbalance between core and non-core funding; stressed that core funding should be more predictable and earmarked funding more flexible; highlighted the need to broaden the donors’ base; called for making sure that non-core resources cover related administrative expenses, so core resources do not end up funding non-core resources; and called to avoid increasing the reporting burden, especially for countries in special situations.

Thailand, for the G-77/ China, said earmarking non-core resources needs to be done strategically at the international level and stressed the need for respecting official development assistance (ODA) commitments. Finland called for a better use of PPPs, but said it would be difficult to create a systematic framework for managing them. Norway said a levy on humanitarian contributions “will not fly,” and suggested creating a global financial mechanism to finance global goods. Colombia requested information on the accounting systems used by different UN entities, noting that the variety of systems causes problems for cost-sharing.

ECOSOC is expected to provide a briefing on the Dialogue process on 26 April 2016, followed by Workshop 6, on 6 May. [Functions and Impact of the UN Development System] [A new funding architecture of the UN Development System for the 2030 Agenda: Options and Challenges] [ECOSOC Dialogue Website] [IISD RS Story on ITA’s Establishment] [IISD RS Story on ITA’s First Meeting] [IISD RS Story on February 2016 Briefing on ECOSOC Dialogue Process]