The Economic and Social Council this afternoon held a dialogue on United Nations system funding, in the context of its Operational Activities Segment. It then heard a presentation of the findings in the Joint Inspection unit report on the national execution of technical cooperation projects, after which it began its general debate under the Operational Activities Segment.

Carmen Maria Gallardo Hernandez, Vice-President of the Council, opening the dialogue, said the most recent General Assembly and Council resolutions on operational activities attached special importance to the issue of funding the United Nations system's operational activities. The current economic crisis placed the Official Development Aid budget under pressure. In spite of this challenging outlook, there were reasons for optimism: some donor countries had renewed commitment to the core budget of the United Nations system. Various innovative modalities were being experimented at both corporate and country levels with an aim to improve sustained flows of core resources and streamline the fragmented non-core funding.

Michel Goffin, Head, United Nations and Bretton Woods Institutions, Belgium Federal Public Service Foreign Affairs, Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation, keynote speaker, said Belgium was concerned about the practical and effective implementation of multilateral support. Too many conditions were linked to multilateral aid. Core resources of multilateral agencies and special funds made by donors totalled 28.8 per cent in 2007, thus earmarked contributions represented 70 per cent of all contributions. In support of the multilateral system they made the choice to invest in the core organizations, such as the United Nations Development Programme and the United Nations Children Fund, among others. The architecture of multilateral assistance had become so complex that it was now important to work on synergies and coherence.

Ramadhani M. Khijjah, Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs of Tanzania, keynote speaker, said there was comprehensive evidence for the extensive global engagement in debate on key issues around funding of the United Nations system. Throughout these engagement processes, there had been a convergence on the critical role that the United Nations played in supporting Member States' efforts to achieve national and internationally-agreed development goals including the Millennium Development Goals. Unlike donors, the United Nations acted as convener, capacity builder, policy advisor, and also as a norms and standards setting board. Fulfilling this responsibility had been constrained by the way the United Nations was funded.

Delegations then raised a number of issues, including that the United Nations development system was one of the largest development systems in the world, and therefore should play a bigger role in improving effectiveness of aid at the country level. More contributions should be made to core budgets. The fundamental characteristics of the United Nations system operational activities had to remain, inter alia, a universal grant multilateral organization, with the ability to respond to developing countries in a flexible manner. Innovative financing would be a critical source of financing in the future, as well as predictable and flexible sources of funding. While support for the United Nations was strong, this support should not be taken for granted.

Delegations speaking in the dialogue on UN system funding were Sweden on behalf of the European Union, Sudan on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, the United Kingdom and Norway. Also speaking was the representative of the Arab Commission for Human Rights.

Mounir Zahran, Inspector of the Joint Inspection Unit (JIU), speaking about the findings in the JIU report on the national execution of technical cooperation projects, said the JIU had included in its programme of work for 2008 the National Execution Projects in the United Nations system as a system-wide evaluation of this modality of execution of technical cooperation. More coherence was required for further simplification and harmonisation of national execution rules and procedures in order to ensure the necessary synergies and consistency of national execution implementation at the field level. The lessons learned and best practices identified in national execution should be widely shared and disseminated.

Speaking in the general debate under the Operational Activities Segment, speakers said the Millennium Development Goals were an ambitious agenda already before the crisis, and latest reports indicated that several of the eight globally-agreed goals were unlikely to be met. The United Nations development system would not alone change this reality, however, the system, working along with other development actors, could together play a larger role. A strengthened multilateral response could magnify the advantages and temper the downside risks of the economic crisis. The need for a strengthened global partnership for development, based on the recognition of national leadership and ownership of development strategies, should be a guiding principle of United Nations operational activities at the country level. This year's ECOSOC operations segment provided a valuable opportunity for all to work towards a more effective, efficient, and coherent United Nations development system.

Speaking in the general debate were Sudan on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, Sweden on behalf of the European Union, New Zealand on behalf of Canada, Australia and New Zealand, the United States, Russian Federation, Brazil, Switzerland, Brazil, the Netherlands on behalf of Malawi, Mozambique, Norway, Rwanda, Tanzania and the United Kingdom, India, El Salvador and Japan.

The next meeting of the Council will be on Thursday, 16 July at 10 a.m., when it will hold a dialogue with Executive Heads of United Nations funds and programmes. In the afternoon, it will continue the general debate.

Opening Statement

Carmen Maria Gallardo Hernandez, Vice-President of the Economic and Social Council, opening the dialogue on UN system funding, said the most recent General Assembly and Council resolutions on operational activities attached special importance to the issue of funding the United Nations system's operational activities. The current economic crisis placed the Official Development Aid budget under pressure. Repeated calls had been made to maintain donor commitment to funding United Nations operational activities, in spite of the implications of the crisis. The performance and impact of the United Nations system was closely linked to the quality and quantity of its funding. In recent years, there had been slower growth of funding for United Nations operational activities for development; the share of core resources had been on continuous decline, mainly as a result of the exponential growth of non-core resources. These trends had increasingly led to incoherence and had weakened the United Nations' ability to implement the core mandate entrusted by Member States.

In spite of this challenging outlook, there were reasons for optimism: some donor countries had renewed commitment to the core budget of the United Nations system. Various innovative modalities were being experimented at both corporate and country levels with an aim to improve sustained flows of core resources and streamline the fragmented non-core funding. These included the core voluntary accounts used by the specialised agencies, as well as various pooled funds, such as thematic funds and multi-donor trust funds, including the One UN fund. The effectiveness of these funding modalities would be ultimately judged by their ability to help programme countries to respond adequately to the multiple development challenges. It was thus necessary to keep the Council informed of the experiences with these funding mechanisms at the country level in order to facilitate guidance in this connection.


Statements by Panellists

MICHEL GOFFIN, Head, United Nations and Bretton Woods Institutions, Belgium Federal Public Service Foreign Affairs, Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation, said with regard to the theme of effective multilateral aid, Belgium did not intend to reduce their contributions to the multilateral aid system, but to re-align their contributions as a donor country. This was Belgium’s approach because they were convinced that in light of the challenges presented today with three overlapping crises - economic and financial, food and climate change - a multilateral response was central, and they were convinced that the funds, current United Nations and related agencies programmes played a crucial role in the architecture of multilateral aid. Belgium was concerned about the practical and effective implementation of multilateral support. Too many conditions were linked to multilateral aid. Core resources of multilateral agencies and special funds made by donors totalled 28.8 per cent in 2007, thus earmarked contributions represented 70 per cent of all contributions. In support of the multilateral system they made the choice to invest in the core organizations, such as the United Nations Development Programme and the United Nations Children Fund, among others.

Belgium was working to strengthen bilateral cooperation, by giving these organizations the right to execute their activities as needed. Belgium was particularly committed to the quality of multilateral funding - a euro spent should directly benefit a population. The imbalance between core and non-core funding was to the determent of multilateral aid agencies. Earmarked funds were less predictable and less flexible than that of the core budget. Another key aspect of Belgium’s policy was the predictability of aid. The architecture of multilateral assistance had become so complex that it was now important to work on synergies and coherence. Around 242 international organizations were currently working in development; this was not effective both for donors and beneficiaries. United Nations agencies were less flexible, not committed to work in joint projects, and did not take a common approach, because they had to work within the ‘straight jacket’ of donors. Earmarked contributions should not be marked as non-earmarked funds in order to address this issue. Agencies had to show that they were working in an effective and high quality manner with proven results. The Government intended to give encouragement to those agencies that showed real results. A change in policy towards funding core budgets was also a challenge for them, stressed Mr. Goffin. They needed to make changes at headquarters and in the field as well as increasing awareness among the public. This would make cooperation more visible. One key element to this was the ownership of initiatives by Governments of host countries. It was crucial to invest in development of capacities before that of projects in this respect.

RAMADHANI M. KHIJJAH, Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs of Tanzania, said there was comprehensive evidence for the extensive global engagement in debate on key issues around funding of the United Nations system. Throughout these engagement processes, there had been a convergence on the critical role that the United Nations played in supporting Member States' efforts to achieve national and internationally-agreed development goals including the Millennium Development Goals. Unlike donors, the United Nations acted as convener, capacity builder, policy advisor, and also as a norms and standards setting board. Fulfilling this responsibility had been constrained by the way the United Nations was funded. While the departure from the traditional funding mechanisms was seen as a short to medium-term measure, the non-donor nature of the United Nations suggested that a long-term improved funding system was key to a more coherent and coordinated system-wide performance that would guarantee aid effectiveness at country level: striking a balance between these two dimensions had been a concern in the on-going protracted debate on United Nations system funding.

Although the One UN Fund seemed to have reduced competition for resources among the United Nations agencies, in situations where not enough resources were mobilised through the Fund, United Nations agencies could approach donors bilaterally for resources mobilisation. There was a need for donors to devise a mechanism for ensuring that only limited or exceptional funding was provided parallel to the One UN Fund. There was also a challenge to manage donor preference. Developing a single budgetary framework was quite a labour-intensive process at the country-level, due to differences in United Nations Agencies' financial systems, nomenclatures and financial calendars. Also the lack of common definition of the sources of funds tended to complicate the analysis of United Nations funding. Evidence gathered and analysed in Tanzania clearly suggested that engagement of some United Nations agencies in Programme Based Approaches allowed the United Nations to reduce time required for project management, and permitted the reallocation of human resources to more critical technical assistance and policy advisory services. However, this engagement was constrained by restrictive rules, procedures and regulations of United Nations Agencies - the governing bodies thereof should review the rules, procedures and regulations to make them supportive of their agencies' desire to participate in Programme Based Approaches and use of national systems.

Discussion

Speakers during the interactive discussion said that the United Nations development system was one of the largest development systems in the world, and therefore should play a bigger role in improving effectiveness of aid at the country level. More contributions should be made to core budgets. The fundamental characteristics of the United Nations system operational activities had to remain, inter alia, a universal grant organization, with the ability to respond to developing countries in a flexible manner. Innovative financing would be a critical source of financing in the future, as well as predictable and flexible sources of funding. While support for the United Nations was strong, this support should not be taken for granted. There was need to show concrete results on the ground that funds were spent with transparency and accountability and were coherent. Was funding being used for a specific anti corruption project; how did this work in countries where this index was very high? With regard to the new approach mentioned about providing free funding to United Nations agencies, had there been much thought about problems that could arise, for example, funds being used to fund projects that had nothing to do with that of the organisation in question?

Concluding Remarks

Michel Goffin, Head, United Nations and Bretton Woods Institutions, Belgium Federal Public Service Foreign Affairs, Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation, responding to the questions and issues raised by Council Member States, said on the system-wide fund, for countries this was the best possible alternative to ear-marked funding. However, the reform could not be funded by this - United Nations mechanisms in the field should invest through core budgets in joint activities, in other words in the field the country appeals were necessary, and this could be used as a base for funding. On the One UN activities, this was a crucial element in the work of donors today - there was a need for a physical impact of the operational activities, the United Nations could no longer be taken for granted. Another important element was how to evaluate the effectiveness of activities - Belgium believed that there should not be too many nor special indicators related to each donor. The best indicators today were the ones with regards to 2015 and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. Belgium was committed to the Millennium Development Goals. The core policy should be translated into specific commitments to system-wide coherence. Currently the ratio of core and non-core budgeting was completely insufficient.

RAMADHANI M. KHIJJAH, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs of Tanzania, said with regard to the questions raised on the deliveries, costs were in various areas, and they were talking about transaction costs as well. The Government in the past had been dealing with 17 United Nations agencies in Tanzania, which made things very difficult. However, now with one leader and one programme things were much easier. The Government and the representative sat down to find agreement on what the Government wanted – satisfying the need for the Government to have an ownership and leadership role. In terms of financial costs for 2008, joint programmes were put forward for funding, and were now waiting. Previously with the 17 agencies it was not clear what the United Nations was doing with respect to various topics. The consolidation of these efforts was the most important benefit that the Government was able to achieve, despite the fact that they had not saved money for other initiatives. The Government hoped for savings in 2009, which would be spent on new initiatives.

Statement by the Joint Inspection Unit

MOUNIR ZAHRAN, Inspector of the Joint Inspection Unit (JIU), speaking about the findings in the JIU report on the national execution of technical cooperation projects (E/2009/103), said the JIU had included in its programme of work for 2008 the National Execution Projects in the United Nations system organisation as a system-wide evaluation of this modality of execution of technical cooperation. Fifteen years ago, the JIU had stressed the difficulties and problems encountered by national execution in practice, inter alia, the lack of cooperation and coordination between partners, and the low involvement of specialised agencies at all levels of the process. While there had been progress since 1994, there were still, however, areas that needed to be strengthened in order to implement national execution efficiently and effectively, with financial savings. By conducting the review of national execution, the JIU was confronted with different definitions in headquarters and the field, warranting a recommendation that the Chief Executives Board should clarify the definitions governing this modality and share it with all executive heads of the United Nations organizations and other national execution implementing partners.

In addition, the earmarking of extra-budgetary resources had, in many occasions, limited the capacity of organizations in responding to the development priorities of the recipient countries, leading in some cases to a geographic imbalance in national execution expenditure. Furthermore, audit, monitoring and evaluation were areas that needed to be strengthened in the framework of implementation in the context of result-based management. More coherence was required for further simplification and harmonisation of national execution rules and procedures in order to ensure the necessary synergies and consistency of national execution implementation at the field level. The lessons learned and best practices identified in national execution should be widely shared and disseminated. The Economic and Social Council should include the regional perspective of national execution in order to ensure synergies between regional, subregional and national programmes, particularly by addressing cross-border national execution strategies.

General Discussion

JOHN UKEC (Sudan), speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, said they were of the view that enhancing the United Nations system’s capacity to improve its response to the development needs of countries was vital and spoke to the relevance of the Organization, in light of the many pressing development challenges the world faced today. The United Nations’ operational activities should be carried out for the benefit of recipient countries, at the request of those countries and in accordance with their own policies and priorities for development. The importance of the regional dimension of development was manifested in the mandates given to the regional commissions in the outcomes of the major United Nations conferences and summits. Improved coherence at the regional level would require strengthening existing United Nations regional mechanisms for horizontal coordination, and ensuring a vertical link-up and alignment in the United Nations development and coordination architecture at the global, regional and country levels. The need for a strengthened global partnership for development, based on the recognition of national leadership and ownership of development strategies, should be a guiding principle of United Nations operational activities at the country level. Partners should provide support for the realization of the objectives and goals of national development strategies.

HANS DAHLGREN (Sweden), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said this year the discussions were coloured by the unprecedented economic crisis that the world was currently facing. Poor people would suffer the most from this crisis, and the international community should continue to act to mitigate its impact. The Millennium Development Goals were an ambitious agenda already before the crisis, and latest reports indicated that several of the eight globally-agreed goals were unlikely to be met. The United Nations development system would not alone change this reality, however, the system, working along with other development actors, could together play a larger role. A strengthened multilateral response could magnify the advantages and temper the downside risks of the economic crisis. The Member States had the duty to ensure that the United Nations was fit for purpose, reinvigorated and strengthened to meet these challenges. The European Union would like to see a further focused support by the United Nations system to national development priorities. For this to happen, the United Nations would have to review its own capacity. If support to countries to achieve the Millennium Development Goals was what the system should do, Delivering as One was how it should be done. There were urgent calls from within the United Nations system at the country level to accelerate modernisation and reform. As the international community joined efforts and seized the opportunity from the economic crisis of today to enhance the relevance and effectiveness of the UN development system, it should remember the words of John Maynard Keynes, as the world was sliding into the Great Depression: "If we can continue in a larger task, as we have begun in this limited task, there is hope for the world".

SABVIELLE EMEVY (New Zealand), speaking on behalf of Canada, Australia and New Zealand, said they remained committed supporters of the operational activities in the United Nations development system. They had continuously supported a system that delivered real, measurable and measured results for the achievement of efficient and effective country-owned and country–led development objectives. The Comprehensive Policy Review remained a critical process in delivering such a system, and was all the more important in achieving the Millennium Development Goals as they approached the 2015 target date. They recognized that in the area of funding, that overall contributions to the development system reached their highest level ever in 2007. Achievements were also seen in the area of coordination. They commended the establishment of mechanisms to broaden the system’s support to provide more effective, inclusive and timely support to country teams. Much work was underway with a view to reducing transaction costs and increasing operational efficiency. The High Level Committee on Management’s work in the areas of business practices – a longstanding mandate dating back to the 1970s – was encouraging. Significant achievements were also seen in gender equality with the approval of the balance scorecard to support United Nations country teams in their reporting on gender equality results.

CHARLES CHANG (United States) said this year's meeting came at a time when there were unprecedented demands on the international development cooperation system, and unprecedented efforts underway to improve and strengthen it. President Obama recognised that many countries around the world, especially the poorest and most vulnerable, were struggling to manage and respond effectively to the crisis, and to achieve the Millennium Development Goals. There were four areas that were critical to the future of Africa and the entire developing world: democracy, opportunity, health, and peaceful resolution of conflict. In this regard, it was important that all worked together to ensure that the United Nations organization functioned effectively in its efforts to help those in need. Transparency and accountability was one area where more could be done. The reports by United Nations agencies should emphasise the tangible achievements that United Nations assistance programmes were making in peoples' lives on the ground. The United States remained a committed partner of the United Nations. This year's ECOSOC operations segment provided a valuable opportunity for all to work towards a more effective, efficient, and coherent United Nations development system.

DIMITRY MAKSIMYCHEV (Russian Federation) said carrying out a review of the General Assembly resolution 62/208 on the triennial comprehensive policy review of the United Nations’ operational activities for development was essential. Russia stressed further the importance of this resolution as it guided and determined the parameters for reform of the United Nations operational activities. Russia was in favour of greater transparency and accountability of the resident coordinator system. At the same time a decision had to be taken on the organizational structure and practical aspects of the management and accountability framework of the resident coordinator system. The effectiveness of the management and accountability framework was still hidden from Member States. In light of the regular review of operational activities in 2012, it was important for the Secretary-General to present a report in 2012 on the management and accountability framework. The heads of United Nations agencies should report on the operational programmes and funds, specifically on their agencies contributions in this regard. This would increase accountability which would in turn strengthen the operational activities segment of ECOSOC. Simplifying rules and procedures in the area of human resources was also of importance to the Russian Federation.

ISABEL CRISTINA DE AZEVEDO HEYVAERT (Brazil) said in the present circumstances, the United Nations development system was further highlighted, given its central role in the fight against social injustice, poverty, and human suffering. Since such an enormous responsibility was deposited in the United Nations operational activities, it was mandatory that the development system itself, in particular after the strengthening of ECOSOC's role, be improved to correspond to the expectations of the international community. It was encouraging to see that the report of the Secretary-General on the implementation of the Quadrennial Policy Review, the first progress report on that issue, was based on the management process for the implementation of Resolution 62/208, submitted to last year's substantive session. Brazil welcomed the high priority attributed by the operational activities to the internationally-agreed development goals, including the Millennium Development Goals. In the efforts aiming at harmonisation and simplification, the role of the resident coordinator system could not be overemphasised - it was at the heart of the coordinating work of all operational activities, and was key to guarantee the participation of recipient countries and assuring national ownership and leadership. In times of crisis, international cooperation was fundamental to addressing global as well as national challenges. The great number of successful experiences of national capacity building and development carried out by developing countries deserved increased attention from the international development community.

BARBARA GONZENBACH (Switzerland), said that the United Nations operational system had to be responsive to the coordination and leadership role of host Governments, while firmly holding to the values and norms that shaped the United Nations. For this reason, the United Nations could not take a “one size fits all” approach to its operational activities. Further, the United Nations operational system, including its intergovernmental governing structure, had to answer to the calls of host Governments requiring more coherence, effectiveness and efficiency. Switzerland believed that the United Nations system had to offer to host Governments who expressed that wish, a coherent and coordinated package of development assistance comprising an United Nations Development Assistance Framework, a joint country programmes, a joint budget as well as an annual unified United Nations report. To a large extent, this could be offered in full compliance with the Triennial Comprehensive Policy Review. While the various agencies of the United Nations operational system were moving from planning and budgeting together towards truly delivering together, the stocktaking of the ‘One UN’ pilots experience had shown the need for further simplification and harmonization of business practices among them. The responsiveness of Headquarters to innovation at the country level was crucial for success and should be reflected in terms of procedural and regulatory policy changes.

ANDREI SAVINYKH (Belarus) said the strengthening of the potential of regional activities for development was the main tool of the United Nations system to respond to the need for development. The decision to increase the resources of the IMF and the World Bank to provide support for countries in need was fully supported. That many countries needed high-quality consultative assistance to overcome the consequences of the crises and to implement the measures in that context could not be ignored. The operational bodies of the United Nations system, especially in light of their regular presence and knowledge of the situation on the ground, could be reliable partners for Governments in implementing activities. Belarus approved the measures taken by the funds and programmes of the United Nations system to simplify measures that would reduce operating costs. Countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States countries had felt the impact of the crises in an especially severe manner, and the United Nations system should respond in a flexible manner to the changing needs of countries hit by the financial and economic crises. There should be mid-term reviews of the implementation of country programmes in recipient countries with the participation of ministries within those countries. The financial crisis made corrections in the needs of countries, and therefore required changes in the chronic work of the agencies of the United Nations system.

JEROEN STEEGHS (Netherlands), speaking on behalf of Malawi, Mozambique, Norway, Rwanda, Tanzania and the United Kingdom, said United Nations reform was a process, not an event. The ongoing Delivering as One reforms were part of this natural progression. Evidence from the Delivering as One pilots in the last two years had demonstrated that Delivering as One reforms were helping to allow the United Nations to become more relevant and responsive to the needs of programme countries. In countries, United Nations entities were focusing on their comparative advantages and reducing overlap, while the speed of reforms at Headquarters was slow. Indeed, Headquarters had to continue mobilising additional efforts to allow for real gains. Structural reforms were urgently required to allow countries that chose to adopt a Delivering as One approach to have the ability to evaluate the viability and eventually adopt their common country programmes through a single decision. They urgently called on the membership to support the process. Member States would then be able to obtain empirical evidence of the suitability of the ongoing pilot process. They also looked forward to making progress on the independent evaluation. With regard to the report of the Secretary-General, it was their expectation that the resident coordinator system would be further strengthened in order to play a key role in the effective and efficient functioning of the United Nations at the country level.

RAJEEV KUMAR (India) said in exceptional times, when faced with the greatest financial and economic crises since the Great Depression, when millions were forced into poverty in the developing world, climate change and concerns for sustainable development required a global effort to solve. The requirement of enhanced official development aid was ever more important when developing countries were threatened by decreased budgets and economic slow-down. The progress on the Millennium Development Goals was likely to be reversed. The United Nations' operational activities for development must meet the needs of the developing countries, and their ownership should be a fact. They should plug into national development plans, steering clear of any conditionality. Exploring ways and means to enhance this type of funding for the United Nations was critical for making its delivery efficient and effective. The continuous decline in core resources and the preference for other multi- and bilateral roots posed a great challenge to developing countries in terms of conditionalities and high-transaction costs. There was a need for the United Nations system to be more coherent and effective, as well as transparent. The funds and programmes should move beyond roles confined to advocacy and monitoring. A one-size fits all approach should be eschewed.

MARIO ERNESTO CASTRO (El Salvador) said the reports of the Secretary-General gave them an opportunity to review and assess resolution 62/208 on operational activities of the United Nations development system. It was indeed known that the economic, food security and climate change crises were endangering development and posed a challenge for Member States. El Salvador welcomed the commitments set out in the final document of the United Nations Conference on the World Food Crisis as well as the Doha Declaration. They recalled the commitment to increase the effectiveness and credibility of the United Nations system for the timely fulfilment of resources. El Salvador reaffirmed the importance of the role of official development assistance, and continued support to developing countries with special characteristics, such as those with small economies and medium level income; this was essential to consolidate efforts made thus far, including the Millennium Development Goals. El Salvador expressed its appreciation to donors who had met and/ or went beyond their commitments, and called on those who had not yet adopted specific measures to make those commitments to do so. Furthermore, it was imperative that more support be given to country level United Nations teams in terms of capacity, South-South cooperation as a means of implementing programmes, and the strengthening of support structures.

MOTOYUKI ISHIZE (Japan) said Japan remained committed to engaging constructively in draft resolutions, based on its strong belief in the important role the United Nations development system played in caring for those people most in need. Since the adoption of the General Assembly resolution 62/208, the international community had been striving to improve operational activities for development throughout the Organization. Realising however, that it was faced with new challenges that it could not have even imagined a few years ago, Japan strongly believed that its constant and tireless efforts to meet those challenges were most needed to improve operational activities. The system should be as flexible as possible at all levels in terms of capacity to meet the demands of those in greatest need and deliver assistance in a most effective and efficient manner. With regards to the functioning of the system, the resident coordinator system played a key role in effective operations aimed at meeting multi-sectoral needs on the ground. With regard to funding, the current trend was while core resources were increasing, the percentage of overall contributions they represented was declining, and Japan was concerned over this. Recognising that the system was facing institutional, procedural, financial and operational challenges which were all interrelated in a complex manner, Japan believed that the Council should take enough time to consider various options to improve the delivery of the operational activities of the United Nations development system, and in doing so, Member States should not lose sight of the shared objective: delivering assistance to those who were most in need.



For use of the information media; not an official record


ECOSOC09017E